The Dictatorship

Stephen Miller laid bare the White House’s religious hypocrisy

Published

2 hours ago

July 26, 2026

Christmas. 25, 2026, 6:00 AM EDT

ByLuke Russert

The State Department recently convened a high-level diplomatic meeting with representatives from 66 nations to discuss the resurgence of what they term political terrorism. But some Trump administration officials who spoke at the event employed the same kinds of dehumanizing and inflammatory rhetoric that experts say can fuel the political violence the conference was meant to address.

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller’s speech at the event could have served as a case study in the very kind of rhetoric the conference should have been discouraging.

“It’s not a coincidence that when you look at these violent antifa demonstrations and you see any photograph of those who were assembled — to be blunt, not one of the people that is demonstrating looks like a normal person,” he said. “Not one looks normal. They’re all deformed in some way — in their appearance, in their dress, in their mannerism.”

At other points, he described protesters against the administration’s immigration sweeps as “radical leftists,” “political terrorists” and a “cancer” on civilization (three times); argued that “left-wing terrorism” would lead to gulags, “mass imprisonment of political enemies” and “the stripping of their rights and freedoms”; and said the protesters had “scarred their body and their appearance” to the point that “in many different ways, to the point in which “their outer appearance becomes a manifestation of their inner hatred.”

In just a few minutes, Miller’s speech employed many of the rhetorical patterns that scholars of political violence and authoritarianism have long identified as warning signs: portraying opponents as an existential threat, equating dissent with terrorism, using dehumanizing and disease-based language, making apocalyptic predictions and suggesting that people’s physical appearance reflects their inner moral depravity.

But the most jarring moment came when Miller tried to claim the religious high ground.

“The leftist looks at what is beautiful and what is good and what is natural and is filled with envy and hatred,” he said. “The leftist looks at a perfect family with the perfect life and a perfect job and perfect kids that go to church every Sunday and is filled with a feeling of inadequacy and jealousy. They covet, and they turn those emotions ultimately into a desire to subjugate, oppress, and inflict pain and suffering.”

At this point, the speech transcended mere political hypocrisy. Because while Miller repeatedly — and falsely — claims that the United States is a Judeo-Christian country, both the Old and the New Testaments call for people of faith to do the opposite of almost everything that Miller celebrates through the prism of white Christian Nationalism.

His suggestion that people’s physical appearance reveals their moral character runs contrary to themes repeated throught the Bible. Genesis says that all people are created in God’s image. Leviticus instructs believers not to exploit or demean people with disabilities. In 1 Samuel, God reminds Samuel that while human beings see appearances, “the lord looks into the heart,” while in John, Jesus says, “Stop judging by appearances, but judge justly.”

His treatment of political opponents also runs counter to biblical teachings. Proverbs condemns “one who sows discord among kindred.” James warns against giving speeches that “curse human beings who are made in the likeness of God,” while Ephesians warns that “no foul language should come out of your mouths.” And in Matthew, Jesus preaches to “love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you.”

Perhaps most importantly, his speech repeatedly sought to divide the country into the virtuous and the depraved, the normal and the abnormal. The Bible repeatedly seeks to break down these kinds of divisions. Acts says that “God shows no partiality,” while Galatians says “there is neither Jew nor Greek” among believers. And in Matthew 25, Jesus identifies not with the powerful or the “normal,” but with the least of these, saying, “Whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.”

Nor is the contradiction confined to rhetoric. The Trump administration’s actions often stand in similar tension with the biblical values its officials invoke.

Social justice in the name of faith, is acted out every Sunday by people who did not vote for Miller’s boss. They care for the sick, help the needy, counsel the sad, suffering and alone.

Proverbs tells us that “whoever oppresses the poor reviles their Maker, but whoever is kind to the needy honors him.” Meanwhile, the Trump administration has touted cuts to USAID – an agency formed to combat global hunger. Those cuts also slash funding for Christian organizations carrying out humanitarian work inspired by the very biblical teachings administration officials claim to champion. A study from the Lancet estimates it could result in the deaths of more than four million toddlers by 2030.

Matthew says that “You cannot serve God and mammon.” The gospel of Trumpism, by contrast, treats wealth as a virtue in itself, as the president rakes in billions while supposedly serving the people. His obsession with earthly riches has literally covered the Oval Office in gold leaf.

The same Bible Trump hawks for $69.99 teaches believers to care for the sick, even as his administration cuts Medicaid. It condemns idolatry, even as Trump shares images depicting himself as a divine figure and builds monuments extolling himself. And it commands, “You shall not kill,” even as he threatens to wipe out entire civilizations.

It’s no wonder Trump repeatedly finds himself at odds with religious leaders. It’s easy to see why he melts down at an Episcopalian bishop for reminding him the value of mercy. And it makes sense that he would carry on a one-sided feud with the first American popewho has been outspoken against the Iran war.

Officials like Miller often invoke religion to justify their words and actions. But judged by the very Judeo-Christian teachings they invoke, they fall dramatically short.

Evan Brechtel contributed to this report.

For more thought-provoking insights from Michael Steele, Symone Sanders Townsend and Luke Russert, watch “The Weeknight” every Monday-Friday at 7 p.m. ET on MS NOW.

Luke Russert

Luke Russert is a co-host of “The Weeknight,” which airs Monday through Friday at 7 p.m. ET on MS NOW. He is a New York Times and Wall Street Journal bestselling author and a former longtime congressional correspondent for NBC News, where he won an Emmy Award.

The Dictatorship

Trump orders signs warning of ‘inaccurate information’ at Smithsonian museum

Published

2 hours ago

July 26, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Trump orders signs warning of ‘inaccurate information’ at Smithsonian museum

Christmas. 25, 2026, 4:21 PM EDT

If President Donald Trump gets his way, the first thing visitors to the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History will be greeted with are signs warning them that because of “inaccurate information presented in the Museum” they should seek “accurate information” elsewhere.

The president on Friday ordered the installation of temporary “warning” signs on the museum’s sidewalks, marking a major escalation in his campaign to pressure the Smithsonian Institution to rewrite American history to better align with his administration’s ideology.

The executive order directs Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought and several other Cabinet officials to utilize “all available authorities to encourage” the Smithsonian Institution to “correct the issues found” in a scathing White House reportreleased on July 4 that accused the museum of “extreme political activism” and claimed it “cannot be trusted to tell America’s story honestly and in a way that is inspiring, unifying, and worthy of our great republic.”

The sidewalks and walkways outside of the popular museum, which welcomes just shy of two million visitors annually, are federal property controlled by the National Park Service. The signs would “notify visitors that the Museum exhibits should be renovated consistent” with the findings of the July 4 report. They would also “direct visitors to locations and resources for accurate information regarding America’s history.”

Trump also accused the museum of failing to “to appropriately honor the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence during this 250th anniversary year of the founding of our country,” and instructed Burgum to install “temporary exhibits” on Smithsonian walkways to correct “inaccurate information presented in the Museum.”

“The Report demonstrates that the Smithsonian leadership does not present American history as a shared national inheritance to be taught and celebrated, but instead views American history as a ‘prime tool’ to advance ideas of social justice and the radical transformation of our society,”according to the newly signed executive order.

The signage order followed a week of congressional testimony by Smithsonian officials in hearings called by House Republicans in response to the White House report. Anthea Hartig, head of the National Museum of American History, was grilled over her patriotism and dedication to country.

Hartig said the White House report “does not fairly characterize the full body of work of this museum.” And under questioning from GOP lawmakers she reaffirmed her allegiance to her country multiple times, at one point answering, “I love this country unconditionally.”

The report, oversight hearings and signage demand compound more than a year of the Trump administration’s pressure campaign against the world’s largest museum, education and research complex. In March 2025, Trump signed an executive order that vowed to strip federal funding from Smithsonian programs that present what he viewed as “improper, divisive, or anti-American” ideology.

The Trump administration has since threatened to withhold federal funding from the Smithsonian Institution unless a number of its museums submit documentation for an expansive content review.

Sydney Carruth is a breaking news reporter covering national politics and policy for MS NOW. You can send her tips from a non-work device on Signal at SydneyCarruth.46 or follow her work on X and Bluesky.

The Dictatorship

Trump threatens full-scale war as his tariffs take hold and gas prices soar

Published

2 hours ago

July 26, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Christmas. 25, 2026, 2:30 PM EDT

As his new tariffs went into effect and gas prices climbed on Saturday, President Donald Trump said he’s not ruling out a full-scale war.

In a phone interview with French journalist Sonia Dridi, Trump said he’s “absolutely” considering resuming full-scale war with Iran if the U.S. doesn’t “get 100% of what we want.”

The president told reporters in the Oval Office on Friday the U.S. is “talking” to Iran, adding that he believes Iran is “getting more and more serious as the days go by” but “that doesn’t mean we get there.” Friday night was the first in 13 consecutive nights that the U.S. did not strike Iran.

The national average gas price rose slightly Saturday to $4.11 a gallon as Trump’s newly imposed tariffs on goods from more than 80 countries threatened to heap further financial strain on Americans ahead of the midterms. The reporter said when she asked Trump whether he would follow through with his threat to levy “substantial” new tariffs on the European Union, which he has accused of “robbing” American tech companies, he declined to comment.

The tariffs, which took effect Friday and have already been challenged in court, could cost American households an extra $1,100 annually, according to an analysis by The Budget Lab at Yale University. That comes at a time when consumers are already shelling out more for necessities, including gas and groceries, as the Iran war drives inflation and energy prices upward.

Gas price averages in the United States surpassed $4 a gallon on July 20 for the first time in more than a month as fighting in the Iran war escalated following the collapse of a temporary ceasefire agreement between the U.S. and Iran, which the White House billed as a significant step toward substantial nuclear negotiations and a permanent peace deal.

With the war soon to enter its sixth month, there has been little public progress on an agreement between Washington and Tehran to open the Strait of Hormuzthe vital trade waterway that has become a major source of contention since the war began on Feb. 28. Iran declared the strait closed “until further notice” earlier this month, and the U.S. military’s bid to forge an alternate route for shipping oil and other goods along Oman’s coast has been hamstrung by new threats.

In the middle of it all, Americans are feeling the pain.

More than half of Americans reported feeling more stressed about their finances than they were one year ago in a quarterly CNBC and SurveyMonkey survey released last week. Optimism for a better financial outlook was low, too, with half of Americans reporting they believe the U.S. economy will worsen over the next year because of international turmoil, government policy and the rising cost of living.

Patience with the economic cost of the president’s military campaign in Iran has slipped in recent polling, even among Trump’s most ardent supporters, with 37% of self-identified MAGA Trump voters saying the U.S. should only continue the war if it does not further increase costs, according to a POLITICO poll published on July 22. In May, half of Trump’s base thought the war was worth its economic costs.

While the White House has taken steps to address the prices at the pump as the midterms approach, Trump himself has so far done little to publicly address the financial pain Americans are feeling.

And his latest effort to resurrect his global tariff regime following the Supreme Court’s February strike down of his “liberation” day tariffs threatens to add insult to injury. The latest tariffs apply to countries that make up 99.4% of U.S. trading partners. Brought under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which enables the government to levy import taxes in response to unfair trade practices, the tariffs range from 10% to 12.5%.

The Liberty Justice Center, the legal nonprofit that represented the plaintiffs in the successful challenge of Trump’s International Emergency Economic Powers Act tariffs, is leading a new lawsuit challenging his authority to levy the Section 301 tariffs.

Emily Hung contributed to this report.

The Dictatorship

Troy Jackson wins Maine nomination, kicking off sprint to beat — or lose to — Susan Collins in 101 days

Published

2 hours ago

July 26, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Christmas. 25, 2026, 2:20 PM EDT

Maine Democrats on Saturday swapped out a scandal-ridden candidate in a critical Senate race for a replacement that gives them a chance to win in November.

That was the easy part.

This fall’s midterm elections will give Democrats potentially their best window yet at unseating Republican Sen. Susan Collins, a moderate lawmaker who defied expectations six years ago when she won her seat once again. Now whether or not Democrats can defeat her could be the difference between the party having a chance taking back the Senate for the final two years of Donald Trump’s presidency, or struggling to make a dent in his agenda.

“In November, we will defeat Susan Collins and win a Senate majority,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chair Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand said in a joint statement after Maine Democrats chose their replacement candidate.

Concerns about Graham Platner, the man Maine Democrat primary voters had picked to run against Collins, were apparent even before a woman accused him of sexual assault earlier this month. While Platner issued a denial, he soon left the race which led to a frantic and hastily assembled campaign to find a replacement.

That alternative is former state Senate President Troy Jackson, who won over the necessary support needed to become the party’s chosen candidate. Schumer and Gillibrand said Jackson has “harnessed the grassroots energy in Maine and is well-positioned to defeat Susan Collins, who is more vulnerable than she has ever been.”

At Saturday’s event, Jackson railed against Collins as he highlighted the plight of working Mainers crushed by rising costs while “billionaires and corporations rigging this economy keep getting richer.”

“Collins has told Maine that she is concerned,” Jackson said in his victory speech, telling the Democrats who rallied around him that “concern does not restore all the rights that she’s taken away. Maine does not need another six years of concern. We need someone with courage. We need a fighter.”

Work to keep Collins in office however, has been underway for months, leaving Democrats with an element of catching-up to do.

“I don’t think they have enough time to put together a coherent campaign. I really don’t. And the candidate who now is in that driver’s seat is maybe not as flawed, but has many flaws,” said Jim Deyermond, chairman of the Maine GOP.

The GOP’s Senate Leadership Fund on Saturday detailed a six-figure ad campaign against Jackson, whom the super PAC labeled a “deranged and scandal-plagued political insider.”

A spokesperson for the Republican National Committee issued a statement calling Jackson a “Platner apologist, a radical Bernie Bro, and a walking red flag displaying all the warning signs of the early days of the Platner campaign.”

Collins is something of an enigma in her party. She’s the only New England Republican in Congress, someone who can be viewed as both a moderate lawmaker and a reliable Republican when needed. She’s one of the few Republicans left in Congress who voted to hold Trump accountable after the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, and possibly the only member of the GOP that could hold on to this seat in this cycle’s partisan environment.

And in politics, sometimes forces other than a candidate’s campaign messaging are what makes the difference.

“Even though we’ve got only a few days with this new candidate, the momentum was there. The education of the voters about why this is about the majority in the Senate and stopping Donald Trump and all those kind of things, has already been happening,” Maine Democratic Rep. Chellie Pingree said. “I think because they’re such central themes to this particular campaign, it’s less about, do you know the candidates, in a way.”

Platner’s initial success in the primary could be a challenge as well. In his Bernie Sanders-backed campaign, Platner attempted to strike an everyman political tone that helped him stand out and chase the favored pick of Democratic leadership, Gov. Janet Mills, from being viable well before last month’s primary.

While Jackson is politically aligned with Platner and has a legislative record he also carries a less polished approach that saw him finish third in June’s primary for governor. He also has a patchwork record in terms of political leanings over his decades-long career in public life, yet has the union bonafides and experience as a logger that helped him quickly stand out in the rush to replace Platner, which could make all the difference in November against Collins.

There’s also a level of past embarrassment in Maine for Democrats after they failed to capitalize on national momentum during the 2020 cycle. While Democrats won back the Senate by the thinnest of control, it wasn’t with Maine’s help. Collins, running for re-election during the pandemic, was able to defeat Democratic challenger Sara Gideon by more than 8 points to win a fifth term even when many polls showed her losing up until the real test of election day.

Republicans have a candidate in Collins who has shown the ability to defy normal partisan trends, even if this year proves to be the toughest re-election race of her career.

“I don’t know that I can give you a prediction on exactly how much it’s going to cost, but it’s going to be over a $200 million race, and Republicans are going to win it. Probably still get outspent,” said Jason Savage, senior political adviser with Maine’s Republican Party.

Democrats are hoping that the political anger toward the incumbent president’s party that typically encapsulates a midterm will help make the difference this time around. But losing the Senate race here remains a real possibility for the party, especially given the Platner debacle. Maine is a unique place, with a makeup of people that hasn’t minded defying leading Democrats logic as of late.

That’s shown by Democratic congressman Jared Golden, a moderate who made a name for himself by siding against his own party during his time in office. It’s an approach that helped him hold on to his district despite Republicans eagerly trying to see him lose.

Golden’s not running this time around. He likely would have been a formidable Senate candidate had he chosen to enter the fray. Jackson, and his allies in Maine, have a tight window to both endear him to the party’s Democratic coalitions, and try to win over the voters who have sided with Collins in the past but could be open to going against her this fall.

That’s the complexity within the challenges of a campaign with roughly 100 days to make its case.

“I guess they could just look back at my last four campaigns,” said Golden, who won his competitive seat four times despite national Republican attention. “There’s a nice little roadmap there.”

Mychael Schnell and Olympia Sonnier contributed to this report.

Hunter Woodall covers politics for MS NOW. He’s reported on politics and presidential campaigns for The Associated Press and CBS News and reported on Congress for The Minnesota Star Tribune.