The Dictatorship

Bob Weir and the Grateful Dead’s music will endure for generations

Published

2 months ago

January 12, 2026

Jan. 11, 2026, 4:08 PM EST

Bob Weir, rhythm guitarist, co-lead vocalist and one of the primary songwriters for the Grateful Dead, died Saturday at the age of 78. His passing leaves only two surviving founding members of the band, drummers Mickey Hart and Bill Kreutzmann, both of whom performed with Weir as part of what is likely the last “official” Dead offshoot band, Dead and Company.

Often seen as the little brother figure to the larger-than-life Dead co-founder Jerry Garcia, Weir was the subject of a documentary appropriately titled, “The Other One” — which was also the name of a Dead song known for its particularly freaky jams when played live.

The mystery and the adventure and the promise of the new — even now, that’s the draw of a Dead show.

Weir, who was only 16 when he first started playing with Garcia, was known for rocking his signature short jean shorts on stage, and for being the relative sex symbol among a comparatively motley-looking group of hairy hippies. Among the band’s best-loved songs, Weir had a primary hand in tunes like “Sugar Magnolia,” “Cassidy,” “Jack Straw,” Estimated Prophet,” and “The Music Never Stopped.”

Never heard of any of those? You’re not alone. That’s one of the most curious (and to the band’s critics, infuriating) things about the Dead: They’re a titan of classic rock-and-roll, and basically had no hits.

The Grateful Dead’s one hit single, “Touch of Grey,” reached No. 9 on the Billboard charts in 1987. They had only a handful of radio-friendly studio tracks, and yet they’re one of the most enduring, iconic and highest-grossing live acts of all time. And they still draw, as evidenced by eight years of stadium tours by Dead and Company, followed by several residencies at the Sphere in Las Vegas and a run of shows in San Francisco’s Golden Gate Park last summer to commemorate the Dead’s 60th anniversary. Even Dead cover bands, like Joe Russo’s Almost Dead (JRAD) and Dark Star Orchestra, regularly fill huge venues like Red Rocks.

Despite its unconventional path to superstardom, of any rock band born in the 1960s — with the exception of the Beatles — I’d argue the Grateful Dead’s music stands the best chance of enduring among future generations.

As “kids these days” stop buying guitars as a right of passage, and as rock-and-roll continues its terminal descent from being the dominant genre of popular music, there are a number of reasons for why young people continue to gravitate toward the Dead. Among them is the fact that although the band stopped releasing original music decades ago, the ways the songbook is performed have continued to evolve radically over the years, in keeping with the Dead’s spirit of improvisation, collaboration and generosity toward young musicians.

The Grateful Dead’s first gig (billed as the Warlocks) took place in a Northern California pizza parlour in May 1965. For the next three decades they would play thousands of shows — including Woodstock and its evil twin, Altamont. They would evolve from their early bluegrass and blues-heavy sound into something more psychedelic, heavy on jams — many of them a gormless mess, but still more of them capturing an ecstatic and transcendent musical kaleidoscope.

They’d incorporate jazz, funk, even disco into their sound (again, with various degrees of success, but never inhibited by a fear of failure). But they were always a dance band. People came to Dead shows to dance. And they still do.

When Garcia, the group’s de facto leader, died of a heart attack in a rehabilitation center in August 1995, the Grateful Dead never performed under that name again. But there were many Dead side projects, mostly led by Weir or bassist Phil Lesh, who died in 2024.

They were always a dance band. People came to Dead shows to dance. And they still do.

Deadheads are fond of touting the fact that no two Dead shows are the same — setlists are never duplicated — and it’s rare for the band to play the same song twice during a particular run of shows. To that end, no two Dead side-project bands are the same, either. Whether under names like Furthur, Rat Dog, Wolf Bros, etc., Weir’s bands typically played at a slower tempo, while Lesh’s virtuoso “Phil and Friends” pickup bands changed so often that the audience not only didn’t know what songs would be played, they didn’t even know what style the band would play in.

The mystery and the adventure and the promise of the new — even now, that’s the draw of a Dead show. And the Dead not only continues to bring in younger fans, grumpy Gen Xers like myself — who formerly made a show of their disdain for the hippies like the Dead — have come around in recent years as “mid-life Deadheads,” a phenomenon I wrote about in 2023.

The music writer Steven Hyden noted in his book, “Twilight of the Gods: A Journey to the Center of Classic Rock,” that Weir and Lesh, in particular, took “a lead role in handpicking the people who will carry their music forward once they’re gone.” I was one of the delighted — and stunned — audience members who saw Weir join Joe Russo’s Almost Dead on stage for their 10th anniversary show at Brooklyn Bowl in 2023, and I was also in the audience for Lesh’s last New York area show at the Capital Theater in 2024, when he performed his entire final encore with JRAD as his backing band.

Next weekend, JRAD is coming back to the Cap for a run of sold-out shows, and I’ll be there with a few thousand friends, laughing and dancing and maybe crying a little bit, but all in joyful remembrance of Bobby — listening to the music evolve some more.

Weir, who was reportedly diagnosed with cancer in July, leaves behind his wife Natascha and daughters, Monet and Chloe.

It’s the Dead’s anarchic spirit of freedom that places no limits on what the music could become. And it’s the generosity and humility of guys like Bobby Weir who gave the gift of the Dead to generations he’ll never get to see.

Anthony L. Fisher is a senior editor and opinion columnist for MS NOW.

The Dictatorship

TENSIONS FLARE ON HILL

Published

7 hours ago

March 5, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

WASHINGTON (AP) — Tensions flared as questions mounted at the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday over the Trump administration’s shifting rationale for war with Iran as lawmakers demand answers over the strategy, exit plan and costs to Americans in lives and dollars for what is quickly becoming a widening Middle East conflict.

Trump officials made their case at the Capitol during a second day of closed-door briefings, this time with all members of the House and Senate ahead of a looming war powers resolution vote intended to restrict Trump’s ability to continue the joint U.S.-Israel campaign against Iran.

“The president determined we were not going to get hit first. It’s that simple,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a testy exchange with reporters at the Capitol.

Rubio pushed back on his own suggestion a day earlier that Trump decided to strike Iran because Israel was ready to act first. Instead, he said Trump made the decision to attack this past weekend because it presented a unique opportunity with maximum chance for success.

“There is no way in the world that this terroristic regime was going to get nuclear weapons, not under Donald Trump’s watch,” he said.

The sudden pivot to a U.S. wartime footing has disrupted the political and policy agenda on Capitol Hill and raised uneasy questions about the risks ahead for a prolonged conflict and regime change after the killing of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. At least six U.S. military service personnel have died so far.

The situation has intensified the push in Congress for the war powers resolution — among the most consequential votes a lawmaker can take, with the war well underway — as administration officials are telling lawmakers they will likely need supplemental funds to pay for the conflict. It comes at the start of a highly competitive midterm election season that will test Trump’s slim GOP control of Congress.

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer left the closed hearing, saying he was concerned about “mission creep” in a long war.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth arrives for a briefing for lawmakers on Iran at a secure room in the basement of the Capitol in Washington, Tuesday, March 3, 2026. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

Senators demand answers, and some cheer Trump on

Senators spent the morning grilling Trump officials during an Armed Services Committee hearing over Rubio’s claim Monday that the president, believing that Israel was ready to act, decided it was better for the U.S. to launch a preemptive strike to prevent Iran’s potential retaliation on American military bases and interests abroad.

Sen. Angus King, the independent from Maine, said it’s “very disturbing” that Trump took the U.S. to war because Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wanted to bomb Iran. Past U.S. presidents, he said, “have consistently said, ‘No.’”

Defense official Elbridge Colby told senators the president directed the military campaign to destroy Iranian missiles and deny the country nuclear weapons.

Trump himself disputed the idea that Israel had forced his hand. In his own Oval Office remarks, he said, “I might might have forced their hand.”

Sen. Markwayne Mullin, a Trump ally from Oklahoma, said the president “did the world a favor.”

“How about we say, ‘Thank you, Mr. President, for finally getting rid of this nuisance,’” he said.

But Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., demanded to know how this fits into Trump’s “America First” campaign promise not to commit U.S. troops to protracted military campaigns abroad.

Trump has suggested the war could drag on, and has not ruled out sending American troops into Iran.

“’America First’ and ‘peace through strength’ are served by rolling back — as the military campaign is designed to do — the threats posed,” Colby responded. “This is certainly not nation-building. This is not going to be endless.”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., arrives for a briefing for Senators on Iran at a secure room in the basement of the Capitol in Washington, Tuesday, March 3, 2026. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

Senate Intelligence Committee Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., speaks to reporters following a House and Senate Intelligence Committees briefing about the war in Iran at the Capitol in Washington, Monday, March 2, 2026. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)

What’s next for the Iranian regime and its people

Questions are growing over who will lead Iran after the death of Khamenei, who has ruled the country for decades, and worries of a leadership vacuum that creates unrest.

Democrats warned against sending U.S. military troops into Iran after more than two decades of war in Iraq and Afghanistan in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

“I am more fearful than ever we may be putting boots on the ground,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., after the closed briefing.

And while House Republicans applauded in support of the Trump administration’s operations, warning signs flared.

Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, said he supports the operation, for now. “My flag starts going up, the longer this goes, my flag starts going up, the more there’s boots on the ground,” he said.

Many lawmakers expressed concern over the number of Americans calling their offices seeking help evacuating from the region as the war spreads. “It’s getting worse, not better,” said Rep. Jason Crow, D-Colo., a former Army Ranger.

Trump, in calling for Iranians to seize this opportunity to take back their country, has acknowledged the uncertainty.

“Most of the people we had in mind are dead,” Trump said Tuesday. He also panned the idea of elevating Reza Pahlavi, the exiled crown prince of Iran’s last shah, to take over in Iran.

Republicans insist it’s not for the Americans to decide the future of Iran.

“That’s going to be largely up to the Iranian people,” said Senate Majority Leader John Thune, a Republican.

House Speaker Mike Johnson said flatly, “We have no ability to get into the nation-building business.”

President Donald Trump departs after a Medal of Honor ceremony in the East Room of the White House, Monday, March 2, 2026, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

War powers resolutions become a consequential vote

Both the House and Senate are preparing to vote on war powers resolutions that would restrain Trump’s ability to continue waging war on Iran without approval from Congress.

Under the U.S. Constitution, it’s up to Congress, not the president, to decide when the country goes to war. But lawmakers often shirk that duty, enabling the executive branch to amass more power to send the military into combat without congressional approval.

“Why are we spending billions of dollars to bomb Iran?” said House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, who said there would be strong support from Democrats for the resolution.

But Johnson has said it would be “frightening” and “dangerous” to tie the president’s hands at this time, when the U.S. is already engaged in combat.

Other lawmakers have suggested that if Congress does not vote to restrain Trump, it should next consider an Authorization of the Use of Military Force, which would require lawmakers to go on record with affirmative support for the Iran operation.

“The reason why there’s so much consternation on our side is because President Trump has not given us a clear reason why he is in Iran,” said Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y. “If he wants to declare war on Iran, that is the job and responsibility of Congress under the Constitution.”

Former President George W. Bush sought, and received, authorization from Congress to launch the post-9/11 wars.

___

Associated Press writers Stephen Groves and Mary Clare Jalonick contributed to this report.

The Dictatorship

Trump threatens to cut off trade with Spain

Published

17 hours ago

March 4, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Trump threatens to cut off trade with Spain

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump on Tuesday threatened to end trade with Spainciting a lack of support over the U.S. and Israeli attacks on Iran and the European nation’s resistance to increasing its NATO spending.

“We’re going to cut off all trade with Spain,” Trump told reporters during an Oval Office meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. “We don’t want anything to do with Spain.”

The U.S. president’s comments came a day after Spanish Foreign Minister José Manuel Albares said his country would not allow the U.S. to use jointly operated bases in southern Spain in any strikes not covered by the United Nations’ charter. Albares noted that the military bases in Spain were not used in the weekend attack on Iran.

Trump said despite Spain’s refusal “we could use their base if we want. We could just fly in and use it. Nobody’s going to tell us not to use it, but we don’t have to.”

It is unclear how Trump would cut off trade with Spain, given that Spain is under the umbrella of the European Union. The EU negotiates trade deals on behalf of all 27 member countries.

“If the U.S. administration wishes to review the trade agreement, it must do so respecting the autonomy of private companies, international law, and bilateral agreements between the European Union and the United States,” a spokesperson from Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez’s office said Tuesday.

The EU said it expects the Trump administration to honor a trade deal struck with the 27-nation bloc in Scotland last year after months of economic uncertainty over Trump’s tariff blitzkrieg.

“The Commission will always ensure that the interests of the European Union are fully protected,” said European Commission spokesperson Olof Gill.

It was just the latest instance of the president wielding the threat of tariffs or trade embargoes as a punishment and came on the heels of a Supreme Court decision that struck down Trump’s far-reaching global tariffs. While the court said that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not authorize the president to unilaterally impose sweeping tariffs, Trump now maintains that the court allows him to instead impose full-scale embargoes on other nations of his choosing.

Trump also complained anew Tuesday about Spain’s decision last year to back out of NATO’s 5% defense spending target. At the time, Spain said it could reach its military capabilities by spending 2.1% of its GDP, a move that Trump roundly criticized and responded to with tariff threats as well.

Spain, Trump said, is “the only country that in NATO would not agree to go up to 5%” in NATO spending. “I don’t think they agreed to go up to anything. They wanted to keep it at 2% and they don’t pay the 2%.”

Merz noted that Trump was correct and said, “We are trying to convince them that this is a part of our common security, that we all have to comply with this.”

Spain defended its position Tuesday, saying it is “a key member of NATO, fulfilling its commitments and making a significant contribution to the defense of European territory,” the spokesperson in Sánchez’s office said.

During the Oval Office meeting, Trump turned to U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent for his opinion on the president’s embargo authority.

Bessent said, “I agree that the Supreme Court reaffirmed your ability to implement an embargo.” Bessent added that the U.S. Trade Representative and Commerce Department would “begin investigations and we’ll move forward with those.”

A representative from the U.S. Treasury Department did not respond to a request from The Associated Press for additional comment.

Sánchez has been critical of the U.S. and Israeli attacks on Iran, calling it an “unjustifiable” and “dangerous” military intervention. His government has demanded an immediate de-escalation and dialogue and also condemned Iran’s strikes across the region.

Trump said, “Spain has absolutely nothing that we need other than great people. They have great people, but they don’t have great leadership.”

Spain’s position on the use of U.S. bases in its territory marks the latest flare-up in its relationship with the Trump administration. Under Sánchez, Europe’s last major progressive leader, Spain was also an outspoken critic of Israel’s war in Gaza.

___

Naishadham reported from Madrid. AP journalist Sam McNeil in Brussels contributed.