The Dictatorship
Trump and Bukele must think Americans are either ignorant or incredibly gullible
Late Thursday, a unanimous Supreme Court ordered the Trump administration to “facilitate” the return of Kilmar Abrego Garciathe Salvadoran citizen who was in the United States legally but illegally rendered to a Salvadoran prison over what the administration admits was an “administrative error.” Now the same administration that claims the U.S. can take over Greenland and Canada is pretending it can’t dictate policy to another country. “If they want to return him, we would facilitate it, meaning provide a plane,” Attorney General Pam Bondi said Monday during an Oval Office meeting between Trump and Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele. “That’s up for El Salvador if they want to return him,” she argued.
Bukele, for his part, completed the shell game: “I don’t have the power to return him to the United States,” he insisted. But the U.S. can do far more than “provide a plane” to “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s return. When the White House asserts it is out of ideas for how to bring him back, don’t believe it.
The White House has deployed a wide range of tactics to secure the compliance of those over which it has little direct or legitimate authority.
The Trump administration has attempted — not very successfully — to use on-again-off-again tariffs to try to bend foreign governments to its will. It has attacked law firms to punish them for past perceived slights of the president, to get them to refrain from suing the administration in the future and to force them to serve the policy goals of the administration. It has slashed billions of dollars in contracts with and grants to America’s most prestigious research universities for not serving the Trump administration’s interests.
In other words, the White House has deployed a wide range of tactics — mostly on dubious legal grounds — to secure the compliance of those over which it has little direct or legitimate authority. As the Trump administration suddenly draws a blank on how it could pressure the Salvadoran government to return Abrego Garcia, then, no one should take such claims seriously.
If the administration’s position is that once anyone is outside U.S. territory and custody, courts cannot order their return — no matter how illegal or unconstitutional that rendition — what would stop the federal government from sending anyone, citizen and noncitizen alike, to a prison camp in some other part of the world without recourse? To put it bluntly: nothing. Under this logic, if the administration could do this to this individual, literally no one is safe, provided they are whisked out of U.S. government custody and control.
With its ruling Thursday, the Supreme Court rejected this sort of race-to-the-border logic. Now that the Supreme Court has stepped in and ordered Abrego Garcia’s return, it is up to the Trump administration to comply. But the court’s unanimous order also leaves the White House a little wiggle room. The court found that one aspect of the lower court’s directive, that the administration “effectuate” Abrego Garcia’s return, was “unclear, and may exceed the District Court’s authority.” It directed the lower court to “clarify” that directive, “with due regard for the deference owed to the Executive Branch in the conduct of foreign affairs.” At the same time, it also found that the administration “should be prepared to share what it can concerning the steps it has taken and the prospect of further steps.”
If the administration, and the trial court, are looking for some guidance on what steps the government could take to “effectuate” Abrego Garcia’s return, they need not look past the free-wheeling actions of the administration over the last month for some tactics for achieving that goal. The playbook from which it is drawing its current tactics is full of ways to bring Abrego Garcia home. And it won’t take much.
The U.S. government could pressure the Salvadoran government in any number of ways, like it has other nations and institutions.
The U.S. pays El Salvador to detain deported migrants like Abrego Garcia. The administration could threaten to cut those funds or suspend future transfers unless he is returned. It could increase tariffs. It could assert the power to increase tariffs on other countries that do business with El Salvador. It could cut foreign aid to the country. Indeed, the U.S. government could pressure the Salvadoran government in any number of ways, like it has other nations and institutions. If it even hinted that it might consider any of these tactics, Abrego Garcia would be on the next flight home. That it refused to even try speaks volumes.
In the long run, as at least some members of the court recognize, any judicial ruling short of ordering the Trump administration to secure the return of Abrego Garcia will simply encourage the federal government to deport individuals — noncitizens and citizens alike — and place them in the hands of a foreign power as quickly as possible, putting them out of the supposed reach of the law and the Constitution. In a statement appended to the court’s order, Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson warned of this possibility: “The Government’s argument, moreover, implies that it could deport and incarcerate any person, including U. S. citizens, without legal consequence, so long as it does so before a court can intervene.”
For now, the Supreme Court did not say exactly how the Trump administration should comply with its orders, but the justices at least did what they had to do in this setting: declare these actions illegal. If the Trump administration does not move to bring Abrego Garcia home, it will only raise the stakes. The courts should not tolerate the White House’s feigned powerlessness, especially when it has tried to stretch the bounds of its own power in so many other contexts.
Ray Brescia
Ray Brescia is a professor of law at Albany Law School and author of the forthcoming book “The Private Is Political: Identity and Democracy in the Age of Surveillance Capitalism.”
BEIJING (AP) — For three days in China, President Donald Trump was unusually quiet, not speaking to reporters much and even mostly staying off social media. Then he got on his plane home and unloaded.
Trump’s trip was unexpectedly dominated by discussions about Taiwan and the notion that Washington and Beijing could adopt a new framework for managing their complicated relationship.
Chinese President Xi Jinping kicked off the whirlwind visit with a warning: If Washington mishandles its relations with the self-governing island of Taiwan, the U.S. and China could end up clashing or even in open conflict.
Trump did not respond publicly, refraining from mentioning Taiwan while in Beijing. But he suggested aboard Air Force One on his way home that Xi’s staunch opposition might make him rethink a planned U.S. arms sale to Taipei.
Among the other topics of discussion were trade and the U.S. and Israel’s war in Iranwhich had been expected to take up most of the attention. Trump spent the trip overtly flattering China’s leader, despite Xi not reciprocating.
And the president did not push back publicly on China’s characterization that he and Xi had agreed to a “constructive” new vision for dealing with their relationship issues.
Here are key takeaways from Trump’s trip:
Trump held his tongue on Taiwan — until he was headed home
Before the trip, Trump demonstrated greater ambivalence toward Taiwan in his second term, raising questions about whether he might be open to dialing back support for the island democracy that Beijing views as its breakaway province.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio insisted there was no change in the U.S. approach to Taiwan. But there was always a risk that Trump — not known for diplomatic nuance — might make an off-the-cuff remark that could have mammoth ramifications for Taiwan.
In the end, Trump said nothing publicly about Taiwan, even as his Chinese counterpart suggested the island was the most important aspect of U.S.-China relations.
But then, pressed by reporters after leaving China, Trump said he had not yet made a decision on whether to carry through with a major arms package sale he previously approved for Taiwan after hearing Xi’s objections.
Trump’s Republican administration in December authorized an $11 billion weapons package for Taipei, but it has yet to move forward. Lawmakers also approved a $14 billion arms sale to Taiwan in January, but the sale cannot advance until Trump formally sends it to Congress.
“President Xi and I talked a lot about Taiwan,” Trump told reporters on the presidential plane. He said China’s leader “does not want to see a fight for independence because that would be a very strong confrontation.”
“I heard him out,” Trump said. But “I didn’t make a comment.”
Trump appeared to struggle to recall the name of Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te and noted of Washington’s policy toward the island, “The last thing we need right now is a war that’s 9,500 miles away.”
Asked if he would consider intervening militarily if China were to attack Taiwan, Trump said he did not want to say — a nonanswer that is consistent with long-standing U.S. policy that has become known as strategic ambiguity.
The policy says the U.S. has agreed to ensure Taiwan has the resources to defend itself if China attempts to force a unilateral change, but it does not expressly say how far Washington will go militarily to counter Beijing, should it come to that.
Trump and Xi still talked about Iran
It appears the leaders had substantive talks about the U.S.-spurred conflict in Iran that has led to a surge in global oil prices and that — if extended — could push the world toward recession.
Trump said Xi agrees with him that a nuclear-armed Iran is a bad idea and that the Strait of Hormuz must be reopened. He said Xi even offered to help find an endgame to the war.
Xi and Chinese officials have not confirmed that such an offer was made. China has publicly said the solution should “take into account the concerns of all parties on the Iran nuclear issue.”
In Trump’s view, China should be more involved in the resolution to the conflictgiven its dependence on oil and liquefied natural gas coming from the Middle East.
If Trump successfully persuaded Xi to get more engaged, that could be significant for the U.S. effort to find a credible exit from the Iran war.
Xi hailed a new relationship status: strategic stability
China, meanwhile, said the two leaders agreed to a new vision for “a constructive China-U.S. relationship of strategic stability.”
The Chinese Foreign Ministry said the framework would shape ties for at least three years — the rest of Trump’s term — and focus on cooperation, competition within limits and managing differences.
The idea is “to keep the relationship on an even keel,” said Helena Legarda of the Mercator Institute for China Studies in Berlin.
George Chen, a partner at The Asia Group consultancy, said the approach can be seen as progress following the era of Trump’s Democratic predecessor, Joe Biden, when the relationship was framed as a strategic competition.
Trump says big trade deals are coming but offers few details
Trump brought a large group of top CEOs with him to China, including the head of aircraft maker Boeing; Jensen Huang, chief of semiconductor giant Nvidia; and Elon Muskthe SpaceX boss who once led Trump’s effort to slash the federal workforce.
Trump said major deals had been struck and that China could buy some 200 planes from Boeingbut he left Beijing without announcing anything concrete. Previous suggestions that Xi would commit to big orders of U.S. soybeans and beef were also pending.
Speaking to reporters on Air Force One, Trump suggested that China could eventually buy as many as 750 planes from Boeing if the initial order goes well, and that 450 engines produced by General Electric would be included in such a future purchase if it happens.
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said the two sides had agreed to establish boards on trade and on investments, to address each other’s concerns on agricultural goods’ market access and to promote expanded trade under a framework of reciprocal tariff reductions.
More details on trade agreements might emerge eventually, but as with all major bilateral accords, the fine print is what matters.
During his first term, Trump used an elaborate signing ceremony before leaving Beijing to cement dozens of deals worth around $250 billion. But not all of what was pledged came to fruition.
Trump repeatedly praised Xi
From the moment Trump opened his mouth in Beijing, he offered nothing but praise for Xi. And it sometimes felt a bit over the top, considering that Xi said nothing similar in return.
Trump called Xi a “great leader” and said they were going to have a “fantastic future together.”
It was an “honor” to be with Xi and to be his friend, Trump said, describing his counterpart as “warm.”
China’s president isn’t known for effusiveness. Trump himself said in a Fox News interview that Xi is “all business.”
Xi did say Trump’s “landmark visit” had deepened mutual trust. But he found more subtle ways to charm Trump. He promised to send seeds to grow roses at the White House like the ones in the garden at Xi’s residence where Trump had tea on Friday.
Xi said he hosted Trump there to reciprocate the hospitality Trump showed him when he visited Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida in 2017.
___
Leung reported from Hong Kong, Mistreanu and Wu from Bangkok, and Superville from Washington.
Sen. Thom Tillis issued a harsh critique of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and his “mediocre yes-men” on Saturday for what the North Carolina Republican called a “careless decision” to force out and downgrade U.S. general officers.
“Hegseth continues to surprise and disrespect our greatest allies and some of our best military professionals with impulsive decisions not grounded in reality or good judgment,” Tillis wrote in a post on X.
Tillis posted his comments in response to new reporting from NOTUS that the Pentagon is planning on downgrading the Army’s top command overseeing Europe and Africa, which the publication attributed to five people familiar with the decision. The Pentagon has not confirmed such plans and did not immediately respond to a request for comment from MS NOW regarding the NOTUS report and Tillis’s rebuke of Hegseth.
The move would come amid a larger restructuring of U.S. forces in Europe, including the halting of troop deployments to Germany and Poland, and reverse the merger of the Army’s European and African commands that was ordered during Trump’s first term.
Tillis also called out Hegseth for his planned replacement of Gen. Christopher Donahue, which was also first reported by NOTUS. The senator called the reported move to replace Donahue, a four-star general best known as the last U.S. servicemember to exit Afghanistan in 2021, “a step that is not in the best interests of our nation or our servicemembers.”
“If the rumors are true that Hegseth is trying to sideline Gen. Christopher Donahue, one of our nation’s finest warfighters, by downgrading U.S. Army Europe-Africa to a 3-star command, he is taking another step down a dangerous path,” Tillis said.
Last month, Hegseth fired Army Chief of Staff Gen. Randy George — the Army’s top uniformed officer — and two other generals following a purge of other senior military leaders. Tillis said Donahue has “dedicated his entire career to upholding the high standards and warrior ethos that Hegseth claims he is restoring to our ranks.”
Since the North Carolinian announced he would retire from the Senate when his term is up in January, he has become the rare outspoken GOP critic of the Trump administration. He recently held up Kevin Warsh’s nomination to chair the Federal Reserve, only voting to confirm the former financier once the Department of Justice ended its investigation into outgoing Fed chair Jerome Powell.
Tillis was initially a holdout for Hegeth’s Senate confirmation but ultimately supported him, though he became a vocal critic of the defense secretary, telling BLN last summer that Hegseth appeared “out of his depth” atop the department.
“Hegseth would do well to surround himself with more patriots like General Donahue and to get his henchmen, who are not qualified to carry Donahue’s bag, out of the Pentagon,” Tillis said at the end of his post. “Keep your word, Mr. Secretary: choose meritocracy over your mediocre yes-men.”
Adam Hudacek is a desk associate for MS NOW covering national politics in Washington, D.C.
“Bill Cassidy is a sleazebag, a terrible guy, who is BAD FOR LOUISIANA.”
And so began President Donald Trump’s social media rant on Saturday, fresh off his trip to Chinaback in Washington and waging his revenge tour in full force on a day when fealty to the president is on the ballot in the Bayou State.
“Now he’s going to get CLOBBERED, hopefully, in today’s BIG election, by two great people!!!” the president continued in his Truth Social postasking GOP voters in Louisiana to cast their ballots for Rep. Julia Letlow, R-La., the candidate Trump is backing to win the high-profile Senate GOP primary contest in a key test of his strength within the Republican Party as he seeks to punish Cassidy for his betrayal.
In his first Truth Social post aimed at Cassidy since returning to U.S. soil, Trump pointed to the two-term senator’s biggest sin: His 2021 vote to convict Trump on impeachment charges related to the Jan. 6 Capitol riots.
“Senator Bill Cassidy of Louisiana is a disloyal disaster. His entire past campaign for the Senate was about ‘TRUMP,’ how he’s with me all the way, and then, after winning, he turned around and voted to IMPEACH me for something that has now proven to be total ‘bullshit!’” Trump wrote.
A third candidate, Louisiana state treasurer John Fleming is also seeking the GOP Senate nomination, and recent polling from Emerson College shows both challengers ahead of Cassidy.
Still, Cassidy has continued to reach out to MAGA voters, saying Friday that the race “is not me versus Donald Trump.”
“If somebody wants someone who can work with President Trump for the good of our country and the good of our state, I’m your candidate,” Cassidy told MS NOW. He did not comment on whether the Republican party has room for those that cross Trump. When asked for comment on the president’s criticism posted Saturday, Cassidy’s campaign responded with a video of Letlow referring to herself as a “progressive leader.”
Cassidy’s battle for political survival illustrates the stark divide within the Republican Party between the establishment and true believers in the MAGA movement.
Richard Logis, a former MAGA activist who defected from Trump’s movement, said Saturday that he believes the MAGA wing of the GOP, which prides itself on being a big-tent party, will continue to splinter as the president’s popularity sinks.
“I do believe that the cracks are there right now,” Logis said on MS NOW’s “The Weekend,” adding, “I think the schisms and the chasms are widening.”
Logis and members of his organization, called Leaving MAGA, are part of a small but vocal community of Republicans mounting an effort to redirect the future of the GOP away from the MAGA movement that Trump created, but their mission faces long odds.
According to polling by YouGov63% of Republicans today identify as MAGA, up from 53% in 2025 and 38% back in 2023, a year after Logis left the movement. However, MAGA identification among registered independent voters remains low in the latest polling data — just 12% — and overall, only one in four voters in the U.S. identifies as MAGA.
Trump has spent much of his second term punishing those within his party who broke with his agenda, including a handful of state senators in Indiana who rejected his push to redraw the state’s congressional map. Of the seven state senators who were challenged by Trump-backed candidates, five lost their reelection bids.
The ideological battle within the GOP came into focus early in Trump’s second term. Multiple Republican lawmakers, including onetime MAGA firebrand former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., and Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., either resigned or announced their retirement after breaking with the president.
Greene, who publicly fell out with the president over his ties to Jeffrey Epstein, said in January that “MAGA purity tests and loyalty demands are going to cost the Republican Party votes.” She left Congress after Trump labeled her a “traitor” for criticizing his administration’s handling of the Epstein files and backed a GOP primary challenger in her district.
The president’s pattern of political retribution began in force following his departure from the White House in 2021, when he used his influence to oust prominent GOP incumbents who voted for his impeachment or conviction, including former Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming.
On Saturday night in Louisiana after the polls have closed and the counting is done, Cassidy, one of three Republican senators remaining who voted to convict Trump, may find out whether he’s joining Cheney in early retirement.
Mychael Schnell and Syedah Asghar contributed to this report.
Adam Hudacek is a desk associate for MS NOW covering national politics in Washington, D.C.
- Ebola risk in US remains low amid Congo outbreak, CDC says
- How Cassidy’s loss could turn into an even bigger win for RFK Jr.
- Hospitals are taking the fall for high health care costs
- Takeaways from Trump’s trip to China
- USS Ford returns home after 11-month deployment supporting the Iran war and Maduro’s capture
- Trump pushes to attach his SAVE act to must-pass bipartisan bills
- Republicans revise ballroom security funding after parliamentarian meeting
- White House, Senate skeptical about House’s amended housing bill
- Ways and Means chief says he’s focused on bipartisanship
- Senators discuss tweaks to $1B request
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
The Dictatorship8 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words