Another observation on Trump’s attack on Iran. Each of these regime attacks clearly emboldens him. To him, the Venezuelan adventure went great. Where was the blowback — in terms he recognizes? So why not do it again? Sure he hasn’t actually seized Greenland, yet. Beneath the headlines the intensity of European resistance clearly mattered a lot. But this Iran attack almost certainly doesn’t happen without the Venezuela one.
But remember to see this whole escalating series of military adventures in the proper light. Trump is very unpopular and growing more so every day. He now faces what seems close to the certainty of losing at least one House of Congress. As his public support ebbs his power and the power to dominate ebb as well. For Trump that is akin to a psychic death. So, as a matter of psychological balancing and self-care more than strategy, he is leaning heavily into the presidential prerogative powers where his power is most untrammeled, where the loss of political power doesn’t really matter. Almost no presidential power is more clearly in that character as the president’s control over the military. Put simply, he’s leaning into those powers as a matter of psychological compensation.
Two things occur to me about President Trump’s overnight attack on Iran. The first is one we’ve discussed many times. The issue with this attack or war isn’t just the lack of consultation with Congress or any congressional authorization. The issue is more global: The White House hasn’t given any explanation of why any of this is even happening. This is very much a presidential war in a way we’ve seldom seen before. It’s personal to him. Again, not surprising: I suspect the lack of a public domestic campaign is because it is none of our business. To him, his country, his army. He’s in charge.
The other point is that we’re hearing that the president means to overthrow the Iranian regime. But he’s encouraging the civilian population to rise up and overthrow the government. Those two facts say very different things.
Immediately giving lie to Vice President JD Vance’s statement earlier this week that there is “no chance” any war with Iran would inspire “a Middle Eastern war for years with no end in sight,” President Trump overnight announced a massive operation in the region and encouraged the Iranian people to overthrow their government amid the attack. Israel and the U.S. have attacked, and Iran has retaliated against Israel and U.S. bases in the region.
It’s a cliché and more or less true that the Constitution’s “high crimes and misdemeanors” language can mean whatever Congress wants it to mean. That is not only because in this area Congress’ decision-making is certainly un-reviewable. It is because the Constitution’s writers were intentionally expansive in their definition. They were most focused not on statutory crimes but misrule. I wanted to take a moment to note that what we have unfolding in Minnesota is really a definitional impeachable offense.
I say this with no expectation that he will be charged with it, let alone convicted and removed from office, certainly not under Republican rule. But these are precisely the kinds of abuses of power, unconstitutional actions, that are most squarely within the impeachment mechanism’s meaning.
News came today that Warner Bros Discovery decided that Paramount-Skydance’s bid ($111 billion) to acquire the company was superior to that from Netflix ($82.7 billion). WBD told Netflix it had four days to up its offer. Little more than an hour later Netflix said it didn’t need four days. It was bowing out. The deal was no longer economic at the price Paramount was offering. An additional fact is that Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos was at the White House while these things were happening, apparently trying to see whether Netflix had the thing any major company needs for a merger in 2026: the personal approval of Donald Trump. Apparently they didn’t have it. That’s the autocracy playbook. And at the federal level, that’s the game we’re playing right now.
TPM’s David Kurtz has been covering, in person, a hearing in Nashville in which the Trump administration sought to prove it did not pursue a vindictive prosecution against Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the man it erroneously imprisoned in El Salvador last year. Immediately upon leaving the courtroom, David sat down with me to record a Substack Live on what happened. Watch that here:
Kate and Josh discuss Trump’s extremely lengthy State of the Union, new information about an allegation against him in the Epstein files, and the dark scandal engulfing Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-TX).
