logo
Trump to Washington: Drop dead

Trump to Washington: Drop dead

Yahoo4 days ago
Disdain for Washington is the birthright of every American, indeed the entire English-speaking world.
In his two-volume travelogue, 'North America,' English novelist Anthony Trollope described the still-incomplete city he found in 1861 'as melancholy and miserable a town as the mind of man can conceive.' He paints a picture of a transient, small city with neither robust commerce nor gracious society, and it didn't get any better from there.
'So men ate, and drank, and laughed, waiting till chaos should come,' he wrote. 'Secure in the belief that the atoms into which their world would resolve itself would connect themselves again in some other form without trouble on their part.' Mark Leibovich could lift that whole and use it in his next book.
Which all makes sense, because no city of any significant size would have ever sprung up on the marshy banks of the Potomac and Anacostia rivers. Denied a great harbor, like nearby Baltimore, in order to be built inland and sheltered from invasion — which didn't even work — neither was Washington afforded a pleasant climate like the nearby foothills of the Blue Ridge.
But Washington, born of a compromise between Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton, wasn't supposed to be a marvelous place to live and work. It was supposed to belong to no other region, a geographic leftover to which the unlovely work of government could be relegated. Like putting a power plant downriver from a city, Washington was supposed to do important, dirty work, not be beloved.
Add in the very American tendency to resent those with pretenses to authority, especially when they use that authority to take people's money to spend poorly and devise rules that they do not follow themselves, and Washington was born to be disdained.
But there is no class of people in the world with a more robust contempt for Washington than New Yorkers, the city that had the capital when it was traded away in 1790. It is congenital for them.
Archetypal New Yorker Nora Ephron, who lived in Washington during her brief marriage to celebrity journalist Carl Bernstein, called it a city 'where ideas went to die.' Indeed, there is a whole journalistic subgenre of New Yorkers dumping on Washington. Once, in a pool report about then-President-elect Barack Obama visiting The Washington Post in 2009, a New York Times reporter even got in a jab at 'the nondescript soviet-style building at 15th and L.'
A fair swipe at a city the architecture of which juxtaposes neoclassical grandeur with what appears to be a collection of Hampton Inns with metal detectors.
New Yorkers particularly resent Washington's pretensions. A twelfth the size of the Big Apple — smaller than flyover places like Oklahoma City and Indianapolis that would never dare to rival New York — where does Washington, some middling city full of bureaucrats, hack pols, nerds and sticky-faced middle schoolers gawking at lunar capsules, get off?
So, Donald Trump, a person who could have been produced by no city other than New York, is being very true to his roots as he declares a kind of summer-weight martial law for Washington.
Citing a statute that allows the president to nationalize the city's police when 'special conditions of an emergency nature exist,' Trump has taken command of the cops and called out the National Guard. The emergency, Trump says with a New Yorker's gift for restraint, is 'crime, bloodshed, bedlam and squalor and worse.'
There is less violent crime in Washington than when he started his first term eight years ago, but as presidents have learned too well, an emergency is in the eye of the declarer. Congress, which is actually responsible for D.C. according to the Constitution, will no doubt assert its rightful authority here and push back against this unprecedented overreach. Right after they get done stopping the emergency tariff powers, the emergency immigration powers, the emergency energy powers and the drug emergency powers.
No, we know that Washington is still Trollope's Washington. But now, they don't even eat, drink and laugh as they wait for the atoms of their world 'to connect themselves again in some other form without trouble on their part.' It's all joyless livestreams, lukewarm, protein-rich quinoa bowls and 6 a.m. cold plunges. There isn't even any smoke in the smoke-filled rooms.
If Republicans love to hate Washington, though, the Democrats have the opposite problem: They hate to love it.
Dems have spent nearly 40 years committed to the cause of statehood for the District, a constitutional no-no that is still irresistible to them for the promise of three Electoral College votes, two new senators and another seat in the House that would all be blue in perpetuity.
The party line is that Washingtonians are some kind of American Gazans, denied self-governance by colonizers. But getting Americans to care so much about a place that is known as 'Hollywood for ugly people' is a tough pull, especially when it's a company town where the company never has a recession.
And so, Washington lives out its destiny as 'someplace else,' a city whose character is defined by its transience — a place where all the most notable residents are from someplace else.
Chris Stirewalt is the politics editor for The Hill, veteran campaign and elections journalist and best-selling author of books about American political history.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Solve the daily Crossword
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

How a unique California law puts the Menendez brothers' fate into the hands of one politician
How a unique California law puts the Menendez brothers' fate into the hands of one politician

CNN

time11 minutes ago

  • CNN

How a unique California law puts the Menendez brothers' fate into the hands of one politician

After serving several decades in prison, Erik and Lyle Menendez are facing the possibility of freedom as the California Board of Parole Hearings this week considers whether they've adequately atoned for the 1989 murder of their parents. While this may seem like the final moment in the long and captivating saga, refueled by several attempts by the brothers' lawyers and the former district attorney to achieve what they say is a more modern version of justice, the brothers have one more potential roadblock – California Gov. Gavin Newsom. The governor holds an unusual power that allows him to 'affirm, modify, or reverse the decision of the parole authority on the basis of the same factors which the parole authority is required to consider' for someone convicted of murder and sentenced to an indeterminate term, according to state law. While the governor is required to follow certain parameters, he is given broad oversight on the decision. The little-known and rare ability, established in the 1980s, looms large over the brothers as they prepare to explain to a parole panel why they should be released. It's not clear how Newsom is leaning, and his office did not answer a question from CNN about his potential decision, but here's what we know about the power that gives him ultimate authority to decide on the brothers' freedom. The governor's ability to veto the parole board's decision dates to the 1980s, when public reaction toward a now-forgotten case grabbed headlines – as well as the attention of voters. William Archie Fain, convicted of the 1967 killing of a teenage boy and rape of two teenage girls, was released on parole in 1983 to much outrage from the public, according to the Los Angeles Times. After getting parole, he continued to be accused and found guilty of other crimes, ranging from assault to peeping. Then-Gov. George Deukmejian tried to prevent his release, but state courts ruled Fain had to be freed. In response, the California legislature passed Proposition 89, which gave voters the option to allow the governor power to modify the parole board's decision. While there were concerns it would unjustly give a politician too much power, many were more worried about the potential for violence during a tough-on-crime era. 'Proposition 89 will not politicize the parole process, but it will provide an extra measure of safety to law-abiding citizens by giving the Governor the authority to block the parole of criminals who still pose a significant threat to society,' Deukmejian and a state senator wrote in a 1988 voter information guide arguing for the proposition. 'Prop 89 will correct a weakness in the state's parole system and further strengthen California's system of justice.' The proposition ended up passing with 55% of the vote, according to the UC Law San Francisco Repository. The only other state that gives its governor the power to veto parole grants is Oklahoma, according to the American Civil Liberties Union. The proposition does limit the window of reversal to 30 days, meaning if the parole board votes to release the brothers, Newsom has 30 days from when the decision is released to change it. Since the proposition's passing, the power bestowed on the California governor has been curbed slightly by court rulings over the past two decades, said Christopher Hawthorne, clinical professor of law and director of the Juvenile Innocence & Fair Sentencing Clinic at Loyola Law School. In one, the California Supreme Court ruled the governor must reasonably assess the defendant's risk against public safety, Hawthorne said. Another ruling several years later allowed the governor to consider whether the defendant had insight into their crime, he added. While the power has been modified, the governor still has room to a make a decision in the Menendez case as long as it follows these guidelines. Since the proposition was added to the California state constitution, governors have often used it to deny parole in cases during the 1990s and early 2000s, when tough-on-crime policies were more popular, according to Hawthorne. 'In the mid-'80s, California passed law after law after law, frequently by initiative, that made it much harder to get anyone out of prison. And that flow only reversed in about 2012 or 2013 when Gov. (Jerry) Brown was in office,' he said. 'For a long, long time, it was almost impossible to get parole, get found suitable for parole, and if you did get found suitable, the governor reversed a lot of parole grants at that time.' Hawthorne cited the case of Leslie Van Houten, a former Charles Manson follower and convicted murderer, as an illustration of when governors repeatedly denied parole despite the board approving it. Newsom also denied parole for Sirhan Sirhan, who assassinated US Sen. Robert F. Kennedy in 1968, with the governor citing Sirhan's 'refusal to accept responsibility for his crime' and 'lack of insight and accountability,' among other reasons. 'He does not understand, let alone have the skills to manage, the complex risks of his self-created notoriety. He cannot be safely released from prison because he has not mitigated his risk of fomenting further political violence,' Newsom wrote in a 2022 Los Angeles Times op-ed explaining his decision. 'Every governor is fairly allergic to releasing high-profile defendants,' Hawthorne said, though 'California has done really well in the last 10 years or so' in increasing the availability of parole overall. 'It was something that was not available, essentially, during the (Pete) Wilson, (Gray) Davis or (Arnold) Schwarzenegger administration, with very, very few exceptions,' he said. The three governors served successively from 1991, but starting in 2011, 'Jerry Brown's administration and Gavin Newsom's administration have done infinitely better,' he said. While the Menendez brothers have some elements working in their favor, such as family and public support, as well as encouraging recommendations from prison and corrections officials, some have passionately argued against their release. Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman hotly contested their potential resentencing earlier this year, despite his predecessor, George Gascón, requesting it. The previous district attorney, Hochman said in a statement, 'did not examine or consider whether the Menendez brothers have exhibited full insight and taken complete responsibility for their crimes.' His statement also cites the two points Newsom can consider in a potential reversal of a parole board decision. To help make his case, Hochman created a chart comparing factors considered by the parole board for Sirhan and each Menendez brother. Some of the factors include time served in prison, their education level before and during incarceration, and the gravity of the offense. Since Newsom denied Sirhan's parole based on the factors laid out in the chart, Hochman argued, the Menendez brothers definitely don't qualify for release as the they have more prison rules violations and haven't exhibited full insight into their crimes. Hochman has said the brothers lied when they claimed the motive for killing their parents was due to abuse they faced from their father. He has previously said he believes evidence to corroborate the abuse allegations is 'extremely lacking;' earlier this year he said his review of the case showed the killings were premeditated and not the result of a threat from their parents. Although a judge ultimately ruled to resentence the brothers earlier this year – which is why they now have a parole hearing – the positions taken by Hochman's office could still factor into the governor's decision on parole. The situation is definitely a 'political hot potato,' Hawthorne said, though the overwhelming support for release from family members could heavily weigh the decision. More than 20 Menendez relatives have banded together over the past year to advocate for release, saying they believe the brothers' abuse claims and that society's understanding of childhood sexual abuse has changed dramatically since their conviction in 1996. They also say the brothers have grown and tried to help others through rehabilitative programs in prison. Anamaria Baralt, a cousin of the Menendez brothers and leader of the coalition, told reporters last October that 'If Lyle and Erik's case were heard today, with the understanding we now have about abuse and PTSD, there is no doubt in my mind that their sentencing would have been very different.' She also read a statement from Terry Baralt, Jose Menendez's sister: 'I implore the district attorney's office to end our prolonged suffering and release Lyle and Erik back to our family. Thirty-five years is such a long time. My prayer is that I live long enough to see my nephews again and to hug them once more.' Oftentimes, a victim's family opposes release, Hawthorne said, making this a unique situation. 'It's interesting in this case, given that Jose and Kitty Menendez's family are largely in favor of both Eric and Lyle getting out – those voices will matter, and they will be brought to bear in that 30-day window when the governor has the case,' he said. The family will be able to express their opinions to the governor's office through calls, letters and other documents, in an attempt to sway his opinion. 'I can't think of a governor who wouldn't be sensitive to that,' Hawthorne said.

Ukraine's Zelenskyy to meet Trump on Monday after US-Russia summit secured no peace agreement
Ukraine's Zelenskyy to meet Trump on Monday after US-Russia summit secured no peace agreement

Yahoo

time27 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Ukraine's Zelenskyy to meet Trump on Monday after US-Russia summit secured no peace agreement

KYIV, Ukraine (AP) — Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Saturday that he plans to meet U.S. President Donald Trump in Washington next week after Trump's summit with Russia's Vladimir Putin secured no agreement to end the war in Ukraine. Zelenskyy said he held a 'long and substantive' conversation with Trump on Saturday after the U.S. leader met Putin in Alaska. He thanked Trump for an invitation to meet in person in Washington on Monday and said they would 'discuss all of the details regarding ending the killing and the war.' Zelenskyy reiterated the importance of involving Europe. 'It is important that Europeans are involved at every stage to ensure reliable security guarantees together with America," he said. "We also discussed positive signals from the American side regarding participation in guaranteeing Ukraine's security.' Zelenskyy said he spoke to Trump one-on-one and then in a call with other European leaders. In total the conversations lasted an hour and a half. Trump rolled out the red carpet for Putin in Alaska, but Friday's summit appeared to end without concrete progress on bringing an end to the war. Trump said that 'there's no deal until there's a deal,' after Putin claimed the two leaders had hammered out an 'understanding' on Ukraine and warned Europe not to 'torpedo the nascent progress.' During an interview with Fox News Channel before leaving Alaska, Trump insisted that the onus going forward might be on Zelenskyy 'to get it done,' but said there would also be some involvement from European nations. Trump did not speak to reporters on his flight back to Washington. When his plane landed, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters that Trump was on the phone with NATO leaders after a lengthy call with Zelenskyy. Trump then disembarked Air Force One without speaking to reporters. He didn't respond to shouted questions about the phone calls as he climbed into his limousine. Trump spoke with Zelenskyy, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, French President Emmanuel Macron, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, Italian Premier Giorgia Meloni, Finnish President Alexander Stubb, Polish President Karol Nawrocki, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, European Commission spokesperson Arianna Podesta said. She gave no details of the conversation. There was no immediate comment Saturday from European leaders who, like Zelenskyy, didn't have a place at the table at Friday's summit. Putin's foreign affairs adviser, Yuri Ushakov, said on Russian state television Saturday that a potential trilateral meeting between Trump, Putin and Zelenskyy has not been raised in U.S.-Russia discussions. 'The topic has not been touched upon yet,' Ushakov said, according to Russian state news agency RIA Novosti. Russian attacks on Ukraine continued overnight, using one ballistic missile and 85 Shahed drones, 61 of which were shot down, Ukraine's Air Force said. Front-line areas of Sumy, Dnipropetrovsk, Donetsk and Chernihiv were attacked.

U-turn as Trump administration agrees to keep Washington police chief in place
U-turn as Trump administration agrees to keep Washington police chief in place

Yahoo

time38 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

U-turn as Trump administration agrees to keep Washington police chief in place

The Trump administration has reversed course and agreed to leave the Washington DC police chief in control of the department. Meanwhile, attorney general Pam Bondi, in a new memo, directed the district's police to co-operate with federal immigration enforcement regardless of any city law. The order came after officials in the nation's capital sued on Friday to block President Donald Trump's takeover of the capital's police. The night before, his administration had escalated its intervention into the city's law enforcement by naming a federal official as the new emergency head of the department, essentially placing the police force under full control of the federal government. The attorney general's new order represents a partial retreat for the Trump administration in the face of intense scepticism from a judge over the legality of Ms Bondi's earlier directive, but she also signalled the administration would continue to pressure DC leaders to help federal authorities aggressively pursue immigrants in the country illegally, despite city laws that limit co-operation between police and immigration authorities. In a social media post on Friday evening, Ms Bondi criticised DC attorney general Brian Schwalb, saying he 'continues to oppose our efforts to improve public safety', but she added: 'We remain committed to working closely with Mayor Bowser.' Mayor Muriel Bowser's office said late on Friday that it was still evaluating how it can comply with the new Bondi order on immigration enforcement operations. The police department had already eased some restrictions on co-operating with federal officials facilitating Mr Trump's mass deportation campaign but reaffirmed that it would follow the district's sanctuary city laws. In a letter sent on Friday night to DC citizens, Ms Bowser wrote: 'It has been an unsettling and unprecedented week in our city. Over the course of a week, the surge in federal law enforcement across DC has created waves of anxiety.' She added that 'our limited self-government has never faced the type of test we are facing right now', but added that if Washingtonians stick together, 'we will show the entire nation what it looks like to fight for American democracy – even when we don't have full access to it'. The legal battle was the latest evidence of the escalating tensions in a mostly Democratic city that now has its police department largely under the control of the Republican president's administration. Mr Trump's takeover is historic, yet it had played out with a slow ramp-up in federal law enforcement officials and National Guard troops to start the week. As the weekend approached, signs across the city — from the streets to the legal system — suggested a deepening crisis over who controls the city's immigration and policing policies, the district's right to govern itself and daily life for the millions of people who live and work in the metro area. The two sides sparred in court for hours Friday before US District Judge Ana Reyes, who is overseeing the district's lawsuit. She indicated the law is not likely to grant the Trump administration power to fully take over city police, but it probably gives the president more power than the city might like. 'The way I read the statute, the president can ask, the mayor must provide, but the president can't control,' said Judge Reyes, who was nominated to the bench by Joe Biden. The judge pushed the two sides to make a compromise. A lawyer for the Trump administration, Yaakov Roth, said the move to sideline Metropolitan Police Department Chief Pamela Smith came after an immigration order that still held back some aid to federal authorities. He argued that the president has broad authority to determine what kind of help police in Washington must provide. The police takeover is the latest move by Trump to test the limits of his legal authorities to carry out his agenda, relying on obscure statutes and a supposed state of emergency to bolster his tough-on-crime message and his plans to speed up the mass deportation of people in the United States illegally. It also marks one of the most sweeping assertions of federal authority over a local government in modern times. While Washington has grappled with spikes in violence and visible homelessness, the city's homicide rate ranks below those of several other major US cities, and the capital is not in the throes of the public safety collapse the Trump administration has portrayed. The president has more power over the nation's capital than other cities, but DC has elected its own mayor and city council since the Home Rule Act was signed in 1973. Mr Trump is the first president to exert control over the city's police force since it was passed. The law limits that control to 30 days without congressional approval, though Mr Trump has suggested he would seek to extend it. Ms Bondi's Thursday night directive to place the head of the Drug Enforcement Administration, Terry Cole, in charge of the police department came after Ms Smith had told officers to share information with immigration agencies regarding people not in custody, such as someone involved in a traffic stop. The Justice Department said Ms Bondi disagreed with the police chief's instructions because they allowed for continued practice of 'sanctuary policies', which generally limit co-operation by local law enforcement with federal immigration officers.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store