Latest news with #TheInsider'sTrack
Newsweek
17-07-2025
- Politics
- Newsweek
The 1600: Is Trump Losing a Step?
The Insider's Track Good morning, 🎶Thursday Listening: Gordon Lightfoot - Sundown Let's start this disgustingly hot and humid day off with a little thought experiment. The 79-year-old president of the United States is asked in the Oval Office if he has plans to fire the chairman of the Federal Reserve. He responds, "I was surprised he was appointed" and then goes on to blame his predecessor for something he did in his first term. Would you be asking questions about the president's mental acuity after that exchange? Because that exact sequence of events happened yesterday—on camera—and nobody in the room corrected Trump or gently reminded him that it was he who appointed Jerome Powell in 2017, and that Biden merely reappointed him in the middle of Covid in the name of stability. Trump's misremembering of this relatively important piece of information didn't really get picked up in the press. Would that have been the case if it was anyone else? If Joe Biden threatened to fire someone he appointed, and then when asked about it blamed Trump for appointing him, people would rightly be asking questions about whether ol' Joe was still with the ballgame. One of the many contradictions of the Trump era is that he is both pilloried in the media, but also given a pass and graded on a curve at the same time. He gets away with 10 things a day that would have sunk other presidencies. It's always been his political superpower. That back-and-forth in the Oval yesterday didn't happen in isolation. There's a handful of recent examples that raise the legitimate question of whether Trump is losing a bit of his fastball. His messaging on the Smeffrey Smepstein saga has been nothing short of a disaster. Like, I've never actually seen him so ill-equipped to spin a story that's bad for him. He is the king of that! Literally nobody on earth is better at shifting the national conversation by sheer force of their own personality. But look at how he's been handling this growing crisis, which has now jumped containment from the world of politics to pop culture with Shane Gillis' (very funny) monologue at the ESPYs last night. It started with the lame attempt to change the conversation by attacking Rosie O'Donnell. That didn't work and now he can't seem to stop tweeting about it, yesterday referring to his own supporters who have questions about the case... questions members of his own administration have been fanning... as "weaklings" and disowning their support. That came after he said he didn't "understand why the Jeffrey Epstein case would be of interest to anybody. It's pretty boring stuff. I think really only pretty bad people, including fake news, want to keep something like that going." This is new for him. I've covered this man for a decade now, and he has never been so dismissive toward his own base before. It's worth asking why this story has taken him so off kilter. And I haven't even mentioned Trump's recent bizarre off-hand remark about how his uncle taught the Unabomber at MIT, which did not happen, or that Obama and Hillary "made up" the Epstein files, despite the fact that Epstein "killed himself" while in the custody of Trump's DOJ! There have also been a number of instances lately of Trump just appearing to be completely out of the loop with major aspects of his own admin. Not once, but three times this year the Pentagon has paused military aid to Ukraine, only to have to restart it once Trump got wind. A couple weeks ago, the president seemed to have no idea what a reporter was talking about when they asked him whether the new tariff deadline was July 9 or August 1. On the Big, Beautiful Bill negotiations, Trump was by all accounts unaware of the extent of the Medicaid cuts, which came after he told GOP lawmakers they could not cut Medicaid, Medicare or Social Security if they wanted to win their next election. Look, Trump has always governed in a chaotic way and he's never been known to be a micro-manager. No POTUS can be abreast of everything happening in the federal government in realtime, and to Trump's credit he is 100x more available than Biden ever was, so that creates more opportunities for him to misspeak or appear out of the loop. And he also has this crazy lifeforce that, combined with the costume makeup, makes him seem younger than his 79 years. But the president is old, and he's getting older. Not even Donald J. Trump can win a battle against Father Time. My suggestion is that we pass a constitutional amendment so Trump can run again in 2028, and then convince the Dems to run Biden against him. I just want to see that debate rematch with both of these guys well into their 80s. The matchup America deserves. The Rundown It was Donald Trump who, back in 2017, stood in the White House Rose Garden and introduced his pick for Federal Reserve chair as a "wise steward of the economy." But the relationship between Trump and Jerome Powell quickly soured, culminating this week with Trump floating the idea of firing Powell—before saying on Wednesday that he was unlikely to do so. Read more. Also happening: Senate vote: The Senate has approved a Trump administration request to cut $9 billion in foreign aid and public broadcasting funding in a victory for the president. The vote, early Thursday morning, was passed 51 to 48 following 12 hours of amendment votes, despite two Republicans objecting to the surrender of congressional control over federal funding. Here's the latest. The Senate has approved a Trump administration request to cut $9 billion in foreign aid and public broadcasting funding in a victory for the president. The vote, early Thursday morning, was passed 51 to 48 following 12 hours of amendment votes, despite two Republicans objecting to the surrender of congressional control over federal funding. Trump allies split over Epstein: A number of President Donald Trump's biggest allies in the House of Representatives have split with him and called for the complete release of the Jeffrey Epstein files. Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren Boebert co-sponsored a discharge petition announced by Republican Rep. Thomas Massie and Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna to force a vote in the House to release the complete files. Read more. This is a preview of The 1600—Tap here to get this newsletter delivered straight to your inbox.
Newsweek
11-07-2025
- Politics
- Newsweek
The 1600: Reflections on the Near Assassination of Donald Trump
The Insider's Track Good morning, 🎶Friday Listening: Johnny Cash - God's Gonna Cut You Down I've been in meetings this week planning our coverage for the anniversary of Trump's near-assassination in Butler, Pennsylvania on Sunday. Can you believe that was only a year ago? What a wild period in American history that was: the CNN debate, Trump gets shot, Biden drops out, Kamala swaps in... all in the span of, like, a month. It's worth taking a beat to remember what happened on that fairground in western Pennsylvania, because there are still so many unanswered—maybe unanswerable—questions about a moment that came within a quarter-inch of changing the course of history. In fact, it probably did change the course of history in terms of being the moment that solidified Donald Trump's political comeback. Would he have won had he not been shot? Perhaps, but his victory was a foregone conclusion in my mind as soon as he put his fist in the air, as captured in that iconic photo by the AP's Evan Vucci (one of the greatest pieces of photojournalism of my lifetime. Still in awe when I look at it). Because even if you loathe Trump, as so many do, you must admit that his handling of that moment in Butler... jumping up from a pile of Secret Service agents, blood smeared on his face, fist raised, "Fight!".... was both politically brilliant and incredibly, badass cool. And yet, despite the fact that we came so close to watching the former and future American president murdered on live television, it doesn't feel like Butler was this momentous event, does it? Part of that, I think, is just how the news cycle plays these days. Part of it is an anti-Trump bias in the media, probably. Part of it is how little we still know about the motives of the kid who almost became the Gavrilo Princip of the 21st century. But it's notable how the near assassination of the Republican candidate for president did not really lead to a moment of national unity or reflection that, I think, so many of us were hoping for. I remember watching the RNC the following week, when Trump came out on the last night to deliver his convention speech. I remember thinking about how he looked different: older, more vulnerable than we were used to seeing him with that big bandage on his injured ear. He started his speech in this really reflective tone—very unusual for him—talking about how painful it was to discuss what had happened the prior Saturday and how "you'll never hear it from me a second time, because it's actually too painful to tell." It was an absolutely gripping moment. I thought, fleetingly, that not only was he going to win regardless of who the Dems were about to swap in for Joe, but that maybe he really was saved by some kind of divine intervention, and that we were about to see a new side of Donald Trump. It didn't really work out that way. By the halfway point of the RNC speech he was back to his laundry list of grievances interspersed with random asides about Kid Rock and his poll numbers. Trump did go on to win decisively, helped along by Kamala Harris being an awful opponent, but he hasn't really even tried to capitalize on that moment of national relief after Butler by trying to unify the country during his second term. It's a shame, really. It feels like a lost opportunity. As for the shooter, quick... can you remember his name off the top of your head? I didn't think so. Thomas Crooks, the 20-year-old weirdo who somehow managed to crawl onto that roof and get a clean line of sight to the biggest target in the world, left virtually no trace. No social media footprint, no friends, no apparent motive. A registered Republican who donated to the Democrats and had no obvious beef with Trump? What? It's no wonder there have been so many conspiracy theories about what him. I think as humans, we have a very hard time comprehending when trivial people are able to have such an outsized impact on history. Oswald, Sirhan Sirhan, Chapman, Ray, the dude who almost killed Reagan to make Jodie Foster fall in love with him (didn't work). These guys were all stone cold losers who just got lucky, or almost lucky. Thankfully for the country, Crooks' joins their company in the "almost lucky" column. The Rundown When Donald Trump campaigned for the presidency in 2016, 2020 and 2024, he made one overarching promise to voters: no more costly overseas entanglements. In a video rolling out his foreign policy agenda during the 2024 campaign, Trump called himself "the only president who rejected the catastrophic advice of many of Washington's generals, bureaucrats, and the so-called diplomats who only know how to get us into conflict, but they don't know how to get us out." Now, approaching six months into his second term, Trump has publicly toyed with the idea of annexing Canada and invading Greenland; ordered a series of missile strikes on Iran; and mused about the possibility of regime change in Tehran (he later backed off that threat), while also engaging in an on-again, off-again trade war with much of the world. Read more. Also happening: US military: Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has ordered a sweeping overhaul of the military's drone strategy, calling for accelerated modernization, expanded production and the elimination of regulations that could hinder innovation, according to a video released by the Pentagon. Read more. Musk's new party: A new poll revealed that Elon Musk's recently-announced America Party has garnered significant support from Republican voters, which could raise concern among GOP lawmakers ahead of the 2026 midterms. Read more. This is a preview of The 1600—Tap here to get this newsletter delivered straight to your inbox.
Newsweek
02-07-2025
- Politics
- Newsweek
The 1600: R.I.P. U.S.A.I.D.
x Mandel NGAN / AFP/Getty Images The Insider's Track Good morning, How is it these short weeks always feel longer than normal weeks? Just think... under my administration, we'd all be on the back nine of our federally mandated Freedom Weeks holiday right now... So nearly 100 emails later, I think I have responded to everyone who wrote in to boo/cheer my rant against the Boomers. The emails were actually not as bad as I feared. Thank you guys for mixing it up with me. Keeps things interesting. Today I was going to discuss the latest developments with the tax bill, which has somehow managed to balloon by hundreds of billions of dollars in the hands of the Senate. They're supposed to be the fiscally responsible chamber of Congress! Politico has a good read this morning examining how this legislation has changed, if you're interested. But something else happened yesterday that got virtually no attention which I wanted to highlight. U.S.A.I.D. is officially D.E.A.D. As of July 1, the international aid organization has ceased its job of doling out foreign assistance, and whatever remains of the gutted agency is being folded into State. Marco Rubio made the announcement by way of a post on Substack. Yes, the State Department is on Substack. (Aside: this White House is putting on a masterclass in political communications strategy. The media doesn't like to talk about it because it reminds people how irrelevant we've become when the administration can get out its message without needing to go through us. But Trump has rewritten the playbook for presidential comms, and whoever comes next will have to operate under the rules of this new world). Back to Marco. His post on the end of U.S.A.I.D., titled Making Foreign Aid Great Again, is worth the quick read. His thesis is essentially that the agency got too bloated, with a "near-infinite taxpayer budget" and little to show for it. The piece is very revealing for how the admin thinks America's role in the developing world should be. Here's the line that really stuck out to me: On the global stage, the countries that benefit the most from our generosity usually fail to reciprocate. For example, in 2023, sub-Saharan African nations voted with the United States only 29 percent of the time on essential resolutions at the UN despite receiving $165 billion in outlays since 1991. That's the lowest rate in the world. Over the same period, more than $89 billion invested in the Middle East and North Africa left the U.S. with lower favorability ratings than China in every nation but Morocco. This idea that our generosity needs to be "reciprocated" in the form of UN votes is new. Where the hell did that come from? Seriously? And could it be that the reason the US has such unfavorables in the Middle East and North Africa is less about the aid we give them and more about the wars we can't stop involving ourselves in? As a normal person, I don't look at every way my tax dollars are spent as a zero-sum "what did I get in return" proposition. I don't sit around counting how many times Botswana voted differently from the US to determine whether we should provide them with HIV meds they wouldn't otherwise get. It's just a very cold, Randian way of looking at the world. Having a robust foreign aid operation is about soft power and influence. But it's also just morally the right thing to do when you're the richest, most powerful country to ever exist. Is there waste and abuse? Sure, there always is. Did U.S.A.I.D. suffer from mission creep? Sure. We joked back when they first started gutting it about all the ridiculous programs the agency was funding (promoting financial literacy for women in Afghanistan was my personal favorite). But terminating the entirety of America's foreign humanitarian workforce, as the shuttering of U.S.A.I.D. effectively does, is a moral abomination in my opinion. Most Americans won't even notice, but it will have real-world impacts. A former U.S.A.I.D. executive wrote in the NYT this week about how we spent $2B in 2022 to respond to the drought and famine in the Horn of Africa, and in doing so probably saved 2 or 3 million lives. Our aid there translated to $6 a year in taxes for the average US household—or less than I paid for that iced coffee over the weekend, which I didn't even finish. The WaPo has a devastating piece of reporting about how doctors in Sudan are already seeing children—babies!—die because they can't get antibiotics that were coming from the US. You can hem and haw about why other countries in Africa aren't helping their neighbors, or why other big developed nations are so much less generous than us. But the fact is we always have been. And we did it without asking for anything in return or trying to justify it as an expenditure. That means something. Or at least it did. The Rundown With only days remaining before the 90-day pause on President Donald Trump's Liberation Day tariffs expires, the administration has yet to unveil even a fraction of the trade deals that were promised at the outset. Members of his cabinet initially aimed to secure "90 deals in 90 days," but are now poised to fall short of this goal, having only secured one bona fide deal, a single set of preliminary agreements, while hinting that a handful more are on their way. Read more. Also happening: Trump-Musk: Elon Musk has appeared to ease his feud with President Trump after praising his foreign policy achievements. The Tesla and SpaceX CEO said Trump should get "credit where credit is due" after the White House announced that Israel had agreed to a 60-day ceasefire in Gaza. Here's the latest. Iran nuclear decision: Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian signed a law suspending his country's cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog, state media reported. "We are aware of these reports," an IAEA spokesman told Newsweek. "The IAEA is awaiting further official information from Iran." Read more. This is a preview of The 1600—Tap here to get this newsletter delivered straight to your inbox.
Newsweek
27-06-2025
- Politics
- Newsweek
The 1600: The Birthright Question
The Insider's Track Good morning, 🎶 Friday Listening: Third Eye Blind - Semi-Charmed Life. I've been going down a 3EB YouTube-hole that has reminded me how underrated this band was in its time. This whole record is like a sonic distillation of what it was like to be alive in the waning days of the 20th century... the last of the Good Times. Today is the last day of the Supreme Court's term, and it's still got six decisions to issue before the justices can head home for summer break. The big one we're expecting this morning is their ruling on President Trump's attempt to end automatic birthright citizenship. The actual case at hand is a bit convoluted. It's less about whether BC is constitutional, and more about this issue of nationwide injunctions; whether federal judges can block executive orders on a national basis. The drama here is that SCOTUS could do any number of things: the justices could rule narrowly on the injunction issue, or they could turn down the administration's request to get involved and instead rule on the constitutionality of BC. We'll find out around 10aET, before many of you have read this—but stick with me anyway here. The issue of "activist" judges trying to sabotage the Trump admin's agenda feels, to me, wildly overblown. It's pretty much the only guardrail left against unfettered executive power, and it's holding up pretty well. The White House generally abides by what these judges say, then the issue gets kicked upstairs and eventually to an appeals court or even SCOTUS for a final judgment. Every POTUS complains about how they're being stymied by some activist lower-court judge, but it happens more with Trump because of his far more encompassing view of executive power. Or put another way, he does a lot more stuff that's legally questionable. But to whine about this the way they do—all while having the Supreme Court firmly in their pocket—is very lame. The more interesting legal precedent at hand is the birthright question. From the oral arguments in this case, it seems highly unlikely the court will outright repeal BC because it's pretty clearly in the Constitution. The 14th Amendment has long been interpreted by scholars on both the left and right that if you're born on US soil, you are automatically an American citizen (with a couple exceptions, like if you're the kid of a foreign diplomat). If this is an issue that MAGA feels so strongly about, then Trump should use his considerable bully pulpit to make the case for a constitutional amendment. But that's hard. Here's how I think about BC. It's tough to get data on this because hospitals don't typically ask about your citizenship status, but the best estimates are there's about 250K people born in the US every year to parents who are not here legally, or on visas. Some number of those (I'd wager the majority) are born into families who have been here without legal status for a long time, working, paying taxes, contributing to their communities. As far as I am concerned, these folks are American. And another good chunk are college kids on student visas who fall in love, get pregnant and overstay, things like that. If a baby is born in those situations, to loving parents who live/study/work in the US, who the hell am I to say that baby isn't as American as me? But let's assume for argument's sake that all 250K of those births are "anchor babies" born to moms from China on birth tourism excursions or whatever. They have the baby, baby gets American passport, they go back home. Presto, one new American citizen living as an expat. If all quarter-million of those births were basically a scam to get American citizenship, that would be 14% of U.S. births annually. It's just not the huge deal that the right makes it out to be. And even so, I've yet to read a substantive argument about why it's so bad to have more Americans out there. The left uses the cloying language about how "immigrants make America great." But I'd flip it: America makes immigrants great. The magic dust that we have that very few other Western nations do is that we are really, really good at assimilating our immigrants. Think about your own life: the guy who owns the store downtown whose parents came from Africa and who is a bigger football fan than you. The Chinese couple who made a living washing dishes and whose kids are now software engineers sending them to an early retirement. These people love this country more than most so-called "natives" because they understand inherently something us "real Americans" take for granted: How special and rare it is to live somewhere with that kind of opportunity. So that's my argument in favor of birthright citizenship. The more Americans, the merrier, I say. We'll see if Roberts, Gorsuch, et al. agree. Have a nice weekend. The Rundown Zohran Mamdani's decisive win in the first round of the New York City Democratic mayoral primary Tuesday has become more than a local political upset—it's a new frontline in the battle over the soul of the Democratic Party and a gift to Republicans eager for a fresh national target. President Donald Trump mocked Mamdani, a proud democratic socialist, as a "Communist lunatic," adding, "If this is the future of the Democrats, they don't have one." Vice President JD Vance congratulated him as "the new leader of the Democratic Party." Within hours, the National Republican Congressional Committee branded him an "antisemitic socialist radical," tying him to frontline Democrats in suburban swing districts. Read more from Newsweek's Jesus Mesa. Also happening: Congress: Democrats are moving to rein in President Trump's authority to launch military action against Iran, citing concerns over transparency and constitutional limits following recent U.S. airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities. The push comes as lawmakers prepare to vote on a war powers resolution requiring congressional approval for future strikes. Follow the latest. NATO summit: One big question was left unanswered at NATO's biggest summit of the year, and only America's delegation could answer it. But the U.S. did not discuss with its allies any plans to roll back the American troop presence in Europe, according to two European officials at The Hague gathering. Read more. This is a preview of The 1600—Tap here to get this newsletter delivered straight to your inbox.
Newsweek
13-06-2025
- Politics
- Newsweek
The 1600: Weeks When Decades Happen
The Insider's Track 🎶Friday Listening: Beach Boys - God Only Knows. In memory of Brian Wilson, one of the all-time greats. Paul McCartney says this is the most beautiful song ever written, off one of the greatest albums ever recorded. Hard to argue with Sir Paul on that. Perhaps the smooth sounds of the Beach Boys aren't the appropriate soundtrack for this morning, given the crush of very serious news since we last met here. The famous Lenin quote about there being "weeks where decades happen" seems to be apropos once again. President Trump is warning Iran that it needs to make a deal now—"BEFORE ITS TOO LATE"—after Israel launched a preemptive strike on Iran's nuclear capabilities last night. We had hints this was coming, with US embassy staff in the region being shuffled around this week. But I thought there was a near-zero chance the Israelis would do this before Trump's big military parade this weekend, which was also when a new round of nuclear talks between the US and Iran were scheduled in Oman. It is possible Trump lulled Tehran into thinking nothing was imminent by continuing to push for negotiations even as his self-imposed 60-day deadline approached its end. Marco Rubio said last night the US was "not involved" in the strikes 😉, which were carried out unilaterally by Israel as "necessary for its self-defense." The Israelis have been leaking to the international media that their intelligence suggested Tehran was approaching an imminent breakthrough in its capacity to build a nuclear bomb. Maybe that's true, though we've been hearing it for years now. Iran always seems to be "two weeks away" from breakout capability. In any event, the strikes appear to have been highly precise and effective, much as the pager attack on Hezbollah last year was. Major figures in the Iranian regime were wiped out, including the head of the Revolutionary Guard. Nuclear facilities severely damaged. Nuclear scientists killed in their homes. Mossad apparently had smuggled in agents to destroy Iranian air defenses from the inside. We probably won't know how much this actually set back the Iranian nuclear program for a while. A year? Longer? How hard is it to recruit new nuke scientists to work in Iran? Where do you even find them, LinkedIn? I'm still trying to wrap my head around the domestic political implications here. Iran is clearly more diminished than we thought, but it does have a real military and extensive proxy network—and it is going to retaliate. What happens if the retaliation kills Israeli civilians? What about American soldiers in the region? American civilians? The intel community's latest threat assessment explicitly notes Iran "remains committed to its decade-long effort to develop surrogate networks inside the United States." Are there Iran-directed Shia terror cells already in the US waiting to be activated? If you were the Ayatollah and wanted to send Iranian sleeper agents into the US over the last few years, how hard could it have been to just fly to Mexico and walk over the southern border? And then there's the wild card of Trump. He promised no wars. That he's allowing our ally/client state in the Middle East to, for all intents and purposes, start a new one is already going to be a tough pill for MAGA to swallow. What is America First about going to war with Iran, even without American boots on the ground? What does he say to those of his supporters who argue he keeps letting Netanyahu act in a way that does nothing to benefit American interests and, in fact, makes much of the world hate us by association? What exactly is Bibi's plan re: Iran, and don't we deserve to know? Especially since there still doesn't seem to be much of a plan for Gaza, the other big war the Israelis are fighting with no sign of an end? And if the perception in the media starts to gel that Trump is being taken for a ride by Bibi, how does Trump then respond to appearing weak? Lots of tinder out there waiting for a match. Try to unplug this weekend. The worst thing you can do during news cycles like this is stay glued to your phone... leave that to me. And to all my fellow dads, may your ungrateful children recognize all that you do for them—at least for one day. Happy Father's Day, all. The Rundown President Donald Trump has issued a new warning to Iran following Israel's strikes on their nuclear facilities and staff, saying the nation's leaders need to strike a nuclear deal "BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE. God Bless You All!" The statement comes after Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the U.S. was "not involved" after Israeli forces struck Iranian nuclear targets overnight on June 12. Read more. Also happening: Anti-ICE protests: President Donald Trump has welcomed a decision made on Thursday by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which allows him to maintain control of California National Guard troops he dispatched to LA following unrest, against the wishes of Gov. Gavin Newsom. Here's the latest. President Donald Trump has welcomed a decision made on Thursday by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which allows him to maintain control of California National Guard troops he dispatched to LA following unrest, against the wishes of Gov. Gavin Newsom. Here's the latest. Padilla removed from event: Democrats and Republicans alike were stunned on Thursday when California Sen. Alex Padilla was forcibly removed from Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem's news conference in Los Angeles. "Watching this video sickened my stomach, the manhandling of a United States Senator, Senator Padilla," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said. Read more. This is a preview of The 1600—Tap here to get this newsletter delivered straight to your inbox.
