The Dictatorship
Some of Trump’s most loyal voters are now feeling the sting of his betrayal
Cattle producers are shocked — betrayed, even. How could Donald Trump sell them out just as they’re finally making good profits on their beef? Doesn’t he love farmers and ranchers and everyone in rural America? In recent days, the president has made clear the answer — his feelings toward ranchers aren’t “love.”
Last week, the president floated the idea of buying more beef from Argentina, and within days the administration released a plan to quadruple Argentinian beef imports. The goal, Trump said, was to “bring our beef prices down,” but the plan neatly dovetails with Trump and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s efforts to boost the political fortunes of Trump ally Javier Milei, the president of Argentina, an effort that includes $40 billion in financial assistance to bail out Argentina’s financial markets.
Everyone who buys beef has noticed how dramatically prices have risen in the last few years.
Not surprisingly, America’s cattle ranchers didn’t react too well; some recorded videos from their ranches, saying that even though they love Trump, this plan will hurt them at a critical moment for their industry. Even some Republicans from farm states, so wary of crossing the president on anything, have raised objections.
We all know how well Trump reacts to being told he’s wrong. In response to the criticism, he scolded them on Truth Social, posting, “The Cattle Ranchers, who I love, don’t understand that the only reason they are doing so well, for the first time in decades, is because I put Tariffs on cattle coming into the United States, including a 50% Tariff on Brazil. If it weren’t for me, they would be doing just as they’ve done for the past 20 years — Terrible! It would be nice if they would understand that, but they also have to get their prices down, because the consumer is a very big factor in my thinking, also!”
The ranchers are like Lando Calrissian in “The Empire Strikes Back,” protesting that he had a deal with Darth Vader. “I am altering the deal,” Vader responds. “Pray I do not alter it any further.” At that point, Lando knows he’s been played. It’s unclear if the ranchers have been clued in.

Everyone who buys beef has noticed how dramatically prices have risen in the last few years. Just since Trump took office in January, the price of ground chuck is up by 20%. The reasons why are not complicated: It’s a simple matter of supply and demand. After years of drought, the size of the national cattle herd fell. Then, as Trump admits in the Truth Social post, “because I put Tariffs on cattle coming into the United States,” foreign imports fell. Imports from Mexico were also suspended entirely earlier this year after an infestation of screwworm.
Yet Americans keep buying more beef. Higher demand plus lower supply equals higher prices. That’s great for cattle ranchers, who say they’re finally making good profits after several lean years. But it’s not so great for consumers.
The ranchers ought to ask themselves why they ever thought Trump cared about them in the first place.
If the price of beef were all that’s going up, it wouldn’t be such a political problem. But inflation data released on Friday showed the annual rate of inflation increasing to 3%. Electricity bills are rising. Millions of Americans are about to see dramatic spikes in their health insurance premiums, both those who buy their insurance on the Affordable Care Act exchanges and those with employer-provided insurance. More car owners are struggling to make their payments. Consumer sentiment is positively dreadful.
You can bet Trump knows this, especially because during the 2024 campaign he repeatedly promised that as soon as he was elected, prices would plummet (“When I win, I will immediately bring prices down, starting on Day 1”). Within the last month, as BLN’s Steve Benen noted Friday, Trump has claimed to have “successfully ‘defeated,’ ‘cured’ and ‘solved’ inflation.” He probably also knows that Americans give him lower ratings on handling the cost of living than on any other issue. If you want to know how quickly inflation can torpedo a presidency, just ask Joe Biden.
To be fair to Trump, there’s no way he can simultaneously satisfy the ranchers, who want beef prices to stay high, and the rest of us, who want to spend as little as possible at the grocery store. But the ranchers ought to ask themselves why they ever thought Trump cared about them in the first place.

It’s the same issue that farmers are now confronting, after Trump’s ruinous trade war has — just as anyone who knows anything about agricultural trade predicted — devastated the soybean industry. Now farmers are left waiting for a bailout.
Given all that, one would think there’s an opening for Democrats to make a case to ranchers, farmers and everyone else in rural America. If Democrats had the guts (which they probably don’t), they could start by telling those rural folk an uncomfortable truth: You thought Trump loved you, and you gave him your votes. But you got nothing in return, as surely as any enrollee in Trump University. He was always going to sell you out the moment it was in his interest, and that’s just what’s happening now.
The question isn’t how many farmers and ranchers will vote for Democrats, because they’re a tiny portion of the population. According to government datafewer than a million and a half Americans farm as their primary occupation, or less than one-half of 1% of the population. But rural America writ large is central to Trump’s coalition, and Democrats tiptoe around those voters, desperate to show they’re listening and they care. They’d get a lot farther if they began their argument by saying “the Republicans you’ve been voting for up and down the ballot, starting with Trump? They take your votes for granted and make your lives worse in return.”
Last week, Trump posted an AI-generated video on social media portraying himself dumping excrement on Americans who live in cities. He didn’t post another one showing him doing the same to ranchers and farmers, but he might as well have, for all he actually cares about them. And his opponents shouldn’t be shy about reminding rural Americans exactly what Trump thinks of them.
The Dictatorship
Justice Jackson keeps calling out what she sees as needless Supreme Court interventions
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson continues to speak out when she believes her colleagues are misusing their power. The latest example came Monday, when the Biden appointee dissented from a Supreme Court ruling in favor of law enforcement in a Fourth Amendment case.
In District of Columbia v. R.W.the high court majority disagreed with a ruling from D.C.’s appeals court that said a police officer violated the amendment by stopping a person without reasonable suspicion. In an unsigned through the court opinion, the justices said the D.C. court failed to properly consider the “totality of the circumstances.” The justices summarily reversed the lower court.
Jackson, however, saw the maneuver by her colleagues as heavy-handed.
In her dissent, she wrote that if the court’s intervention “reflects disapproval” of the D.C. court’s “assessment of which particular facts to weigh and to what extent, I cannot fathom why that kind of factbound determination warranted correction by this Court.” She deemed the move “not a worthy accomplishment for the unusual step of summary reversal.”
A notation at the end of the majority’s opinion said that Justice Sonia Sotomayor would have denied D.C.’s petition for high court review, but she didn’t join Jackson’s dissent or write her own to elaborate.
Jackson’s dissent follows a lecture she gave last week at Yale Law School in which she criticized what she saw as her colleagues’ disrespect of lower courts’ work.
Monday’s ruling appeared among several high court actions on a 25-page order lista routine document containing the latest action on pending appeals. The list is mostly unexplained denials of petitions for review, but sometimes it contains opinions and justices writing separately to explain themselves.
In another case on the list, Sotomayor, Jackson and the court’s third Democratic-appointed justice, Elena Kagan, all noted their dissent from the majority’s unexplained summary reversal in favor of law enforcement in a qualified immunity case.
It takes four justices to grant review of a petition. That simple math underscores the lack of power wielded by the three Democratic appointees, especially on the most contentious issues.
On that note, one of the new cases the court took up on Monday involves its latest foray into religion in public life, which the religious side has been winning at the court. The new case is an appeal from Catholic preschools in Colorado that want public funding while still admitting, as they wrote in their petition“only families who support Catholic beliefs, including on sex and gender.” The case will be heard in the next court term that starts in October.
Jordan Rubin is the Deadline: Legal Blog writer. He was a prosecutor for the New York County District Attorney’s Office in Manhattan and is the author of “Bizarro,” a book about the secret war on synthetic drugs. Before he joined MS NOW, he was a legal reporter for Bloomberg Law.
The Dictatorship
The White House’s personal, financial and diplomatic lines keep blurring
About a month ago, when Donald Trump spoke at a conference for Saudi Arabia’s sovereign investment fund, it was hard not to notice the complexities of the circumstances. On the one hand, Riyadh has helped steer the White House’s policy in Iran. On the other hand, the president’s son-in-law, having already received billions of dollars from Saudi Arabia, recently turned to the Middle Eastern country for more money for his private investment firm.
All the while, Saudi officials remain focused on private dealings with Trump’s family business, as the Republican extended his public support to the sovereign investment fund, ignored Pentagon concerns about selling F-35 fighter jets to Saudi Arabia and designated Saudi Arabia a “major non-NATO ally” as part of a new security agreement.
The trouble is, it’s not just the Saudis.
The New York Times reported on wealthy interests in Syria with ambitions plans for the nation’s future who needed the U.S. to drop the economic sanctions that crippled the country during Bashar al-Assad’s reign. One Syrian-born businessman, Mohamad Al-Khayyat, secured a meeting with Republican Rep. Joe Wilson of South Carolina, who recommended that plans for a luxury golf course carry the Trump Organization brand as a way of getting the American president’s attention.
The Times’ report, which has not been independently verified by MS NOW, added that the businessman was way ahead of the congressman. He’d already planned to propose a Trump-branded resort. The same businessman’s brothers, who enjoy the backing of Thomas Barrack, the American president’s special envoy to Syria, were also negotiating a real estate partnership with Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner.
The Times summarized the broader context nicely:
Such a mixing of personal and diplomatic affairs has long been the norm in Middle Eastern nations, where a small set of players have historically run, and profited from, their dominant role in society. But it has become the way Washington operates in Mr. Trump’s second term, too.
Business discussions involving the president’s family … are consistently blurred with important policy decisions or consequential nation-to-nation negotiations.
Not to put too fine a point on this, but developments like these aren’t supposed to happen in the U.S. If a foreign country wants a change in federal economic sanctions, it’s supposed to go through proper diplomatic and economic channels as part of a formal process to prevent corruption and potential conflicts of interests.
In 2026, that model has been torn down — and replaced with what the Times described as “a warped system of executive patronage,” which is awfully tough to defend.
The article added:
Mohamad Al-Khayyat returned to Washington late last year toting a special stone celebrating the proposed golf course, carved with the Trump family emblem. He presented it to Mr. Wilson in his Capitol Hill office to deliver to the White House. Mr. Al-Khayyat then joined meetings with other lawmakers to push the sanctions repeal.
Weeks later, legislation for a permanent repeal won approval in Congress and was signed into law by Mr. Trump in late December.
This was no doubt noticed by officials and monied interests elsewhere, sending a clear signal about how to interact with the U.S. government (at least until January 2029).
Steve Benen is a producer for “The Rachel Maddow Show,” the editor of MaddowBlog and an MS NOW political contributor. He’s also the bestselling author of “Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans’ War on the Recent Past.”
The Dictatorship
Monday’s Campaign Round-Up, 4.20.26: Obama makes one last pitch ahead of Virginia race
Today’s installment of campaign-related news items from across the country.
* This week’s biggest election is in Virginia, where voters will decide whether to advance a Democratic redistricting effort. Ahead of Tuesday’s balloting, Barack Obama filmed one last pitch to the electorate in the commonwealth.
* With former Rep. Eric Swalwell out of California’s gubernatorial race, billionaire Tom Steyer is spending heavily to claim the front-runner slot. The Associated Press reported“Data compiled by advertising tracker AdImpact show Steyer has spent or booked over $115 million in ads for broadcast TV, cable and radio — nearly 30 times the amount of his nearest Democratic rival.”
* On a related note, the California Teachers Association, which had backed Swalwell, threw its support behind Steyer’s bid last week.
* When Donald Trump held an event in Nevada last week, many watched to see whether Joe Lombardo, the state’s Republican governor who is facing a tough re-election fight in the fall, appeared at the gathering. He did notthough Lt. Gov. Stavros Anthony spoke at the event.
* In Pennsylvania, Democratic Sen. John Fetterman isn’t up for re-election until 2028, but Punchbowl News asked every other Democratic member of the state’s congressional delegation whether the incumbent senator should run for a second term as a Democrat. Not one said he should.
* Jack Daly, a political operative who pleaded guilty in 2023 to defrauding thousands of conservative political donors, has lost some Republican clients of late, but the National Republican Senatorial Committee has continued to use the services of Daly’s firm.
* And in Tennessee, Republican Rep. Andy Ogles appears to be running for re-election, though his fundraising is badly lacking: As of the end of March, the far-right incumbent only had around $85,000 cash on handwhich lags his GOP primary opponent, former Tennessee Agriculture Commissioner Charlie Hatcher, who has around $150,000 in his campaign account.
Steve Benen is a producer for “The Rachel Maddow Show,” the editor of MaddowBlog and an MS NOW political contributor. He’s also the bestselling author of “Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans’ War on the Recent Past.”
-
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
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Uncategorized1 year ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship7 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words
-
The Josh Fourrier Show1 year agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?




