0:00
/
0:00
Transcript

Talking Politics with Elliott Morris

How unpopular is Donald Trump? Very

If you are a free subscriber and you like what you’re reading, maybe it’s time to upgrade to a paid subscription.

This newsletter is 100% reader-supported, and your subscription helps me continue publishing.

When you become a paid subscriber, you gain access to all my posts, the ability to comment and engage with the Truth and Consequences community, and, above all, the warm and fuzzy feeling that comes with supporting independent journalism.

Share Truth and Consequences

Share

Give a gift subscription

Yesterday morning, I sat down with Elliott Morris to talk about what’s happening these days in American politics.

We focused on President Trump’s growing and historic unpopularity, the Democratic Party’s declining approval numbers, and why they likely don’t matter. We also explored why the Democratic Party is unlikely to compete effectively in red-state America, the current era of anti-incumbency politics, and why Republicans are facing a post-Trump identity crisis.

This was a meaty discussion with one of the better data journalists in the business, so I’ve no doubt you’ll enjoy the conversation!

For those of you who haven’t signed up for Elliott’s excellent substack newsletter, “Strength in Numbers,” he’s offering a special 25% off discount for Truth and Consequences readers. Check it out here!

  • Additionally, I’ll be speaking with Brian Rosenwald later this week, so please keep an eye out for the details on that.

Is Donald Trump A Restrainer?

Since President Trump took office in January, there’s been a recurrent argument in international affairs circles that Donald Trump is an anti-war restrainer. Trump has picked up this mantle by repeatedly lobbying to win the Nobel Peace Prize.

For MSNBC, I demolish that argument.

In only eight months in office, Trump is on pace to launch more airstrikes than Joe Biden did during his entire presidency. He reversed a Biden-era policy and ramped up U.S. military operations in Yemen, leading to a dramatic increase in civilian casualties. Over the summer, he ordered the U.S. military to bomb three of Iran’s nuclear facilities. And for all his bluster about acting as a peacemaker, he’s largely backed Israeli military operations in Gaza and has made zero progress in ending the war in Ukraine.

Yet, as I argue in the piece, there is no better example of Trump’s less-than-peaceful instincts than what’s been taking place recently in the Caribbean.

Since early September, the US military has, on three separate occasions, conducted strikes on suspected drug smugglers and what Trump claims are members of the Venezuelan criminal organization, Tren de Aragua. Seventeen people have died in these attacks.

By all accounts, these attacks are illegal under both international and domestic law — and violate the once sacrosanct notion that the US military would not target civilians. Indeed, the military strikes against suspected drug smugglers are so patently illegal that even former Bush administration lawyer John Yoo says the attacks risk “crossing the line between crime-fighting and war.”

In case you don’t remember, Yoo, after 9/11, he created the legal basis for the use of torture during the global war on terrorism. In addition, he once publicly argued that the president had legal authority to “crush the testicles” of a terrorist’s child.

The Trump administration's attitude about the strikes is so cavalier that Secretary of State Marco Rubio has unintentionally admitted they violate international law. Rubio has said publicly that military officials could have interdicted the drug boats but chose instead to kill those on board because the administration wanted to “send a message.”

No provision of international or domestic law allows the US government to murder people to send a message.

As I argue in the piece, the claims that Trump is a restrainer and anti-war are magical thinking.

Being a “president of peace” is about more than just not starting wars or using military force — though Trump is hardly batting 1,000 on that front. It also requires a president to respect and adhere to international laws and norms. For much of the past 80 years, these rules have helped keep the peace, albeit imperfectly. Employing the military in the pursuit of criminals and violating not just international law, but also domestic law are not the actions of a restrained president who is committed to preventing future wars. If Trump wants to win a Nobel Peace Prize, he could start by not shooting first and asking questions later.

One More Thing …

Along these same lines, the New York Times is reporting this week that the Trump administration — led by Rubio — is pushing for regime change in Venezuela.

The push by top aides to President Trump to remove Nicolás Maduro as the leader of Venezuela has intensified in recent days, with administration officials discussing a broad campaign that would escalate military pressure to try to force him out, U.S. officials say.

It is being led by Marco Rubio, the secretary of state and national security adviser. Mr. Rubio argues that Mr. Maduro is an illegitimate leader who oversees the export of drugs to the United States, which he says poses an “imminent threat.”

In recent weeks, the U.S. military has launched lethal attacks on civilian boats that the administration said were smuggling drugs for Venezuelan gangs. But Mr. Rubio is shaping a more aggressive strategy, using intelligence provided by the C.I.A., the officials said. The Pentagon has built up a force of more than 6,500 troops in the region.

… The U.S. military has been planning potential military operations targeting drug trafficking suspects in Venezuela itself as a next phase, although the White House has not yet approved such a step, current and former officials say.

Those operations would be aimed at interfering with drug production and trafficking in Venezuela as well as tightening a vise around Mr. Maduro.

That ‘70s Movie Podcast …

The Parallax View | Screen Slate

This week, Jonathan Kirshner and I took the plunge on the 1974 paranoid thriller, "The Parallax View.”

We discussed the brilliance of the movie’s look and feel, its expert direction and cinematography, but also its occasionally glaring plot holes. We critiqued Warren Beatty’s performance in the lead role, talked about whether we’re more unsettled by the Parallax Corporation’s personality test or its film montages, and asked if the film’s hired killers are trying to get caught.

Check it out below!

Musical Interlude

Discussion about this video

User's avatar