The Dictatorship
The fundamental flaw in Trump’s ‘major combat operations’ against Iran
Now we’ve done it. The United States, under the leadership of President Donald Trump, has launched “major combat operations” in Irancould be sending us right back into the quagmire of regime change in the Middle East. Simply because he wants to and he can.
Unlike the “Coalition of the Willing,” which put ground troops into Iraq, or the NATO coalition that invaded Afghanistan after 9/11 — instances for which U.S. leaders built campaigns to get the buy-in of allies and the public — Trump has unilaterally and erratically led the U.S. into conflict. The “concept of a plan” and being “locked and loaded” — both phrases Trump has used to describe his policies — is not a strategy for toppling the regime or keeping the U.S. from being mired in foreign wars.
The “concept of a plan” and being “locked and loaded” — both phrases Trump has used to describe his policies — is not a strategy for toppling the regime or keeping the U.S. from being mired in foreign wars.
We’ve been waiting for weeks to see if Trump’s threat of strikes would become real. In January, Trump suggested he would act in support of Iranian protesters, who, despite these threats from the U.S. president, are still being jailed and killed by the Iranian regime. More recently, Trump said that targeted strikes would gain concessions from Iran in nuclear negotiations. But at no point has the American public heard their commander in chief explain why now, and to what end?
Forcing change in Iran is not a one-strike-and-done endeavor. Look no further than this past June, when the U.S. launched dramatic strikes on Iran’s Fordow nuclear facilityan act that did not end Iran’s ability to enrich uranium. While Trump said Iran’s program was obliteratedinternational inspectors have not been allowed into the country to verify such claims.
The people of Iran have certainly wanted change. Two significant protest movements have erupted in Iran in recent years: the 2022 national uprising of women across generations demanding basic freedom and the more recent protests against corruption and economic hardship. In both instances, thousands of people demanded change from a regime that remains intransigent and violent toward its own people. None of this is new or unexpected.
In some corners, Trump’s bluster has reignited a long-standing belief that the U.S. military can be a force for good in the world. The idea of a noble U.S. military intervening to save women or to free a community is not new: Women’s groups were part of the drumbeat toward U.S. strikes in Afghanistan.
On Saturday, Trump announced on Truth Social that Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei had been killed in the strikes, an announcement later confirmed by Iranian state media. But the idea of “regime change” led by the U.S. military has two potent, cautionary tales for this generation of Americans: ISIS grew out of the devastation of the Iraq war and after 20 years, Afghanistan returned to Taliban brutality. And that was when the U.S. had massive support of allies and the American public.
Political solutions, negotiated by diplomats of multiple parties, is how global policy solutions have advanced in recent years. The U.N. climate change negotiations brought together more than 130 countries to reduce carbon emissions. The original Iran nuclear deal brought together European countries and Russia in a system that constrained and verified Iran’s nuclear ambitions. But Trump does not like diplomatic solutions, at least not those developed by other presidents, and has removed the United States from a variety of international agreements.
And the Trump administration was back at the negotiating table only briefly — weighed down by past broken agreements and failed military interventions. Negotiators prefer to be in the position of holding an “or else” card in their back pocket, which is the looming threat of a capable military. In Iran, though, the U.S. alone does not have the obvious military advantage; even American war hawks concede that Iran runs a very capable militaryas well as a network of terrorist assets that threatens U.S. bases and civilians across the Middle East, and has the ability to cause economic and digital havoc. So U.S. strikes necessitate coordinating with Israel and other allies, automatically making this a regional conflict.
The idea of “regime change” led by the U.S. military has two potent, cautionary tales for this generation of Americans: the failure to establish safety in Iraq and the return of Afghanistan to Taliban brutality.
Although tempers seemed to cool a few weeks agowhen negotiations toward a new nuclear deal restarted in earnest, the progress did not meet Trump’s preferred pace. Iran’s foreign minister blamed the U.S. negotiating teamsaying on Feb. 20 that the U.S. “has not asked for zero enrichment.” With the basic contours of a diplomatic discussion still under debate, strikes of this magnitude make compromise impossible. No one who gets attacked with missiles turns to negotiation as the next step; they usually want to save face and hit back hard. This means Trump’s military intervention has likely disrupted any hope of talks moving forward and instead gives Iran the excuse it’s long wanted to attack U.S. military bases and its allies, Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Which brings us to the continued challenge of Trump’s approach to Iran: While the regime in Tehran has patience, strategic coordination and zero tolerance for dissent, Trump has been impulsive and inconsistent, and has yet to settle on a long-term goal. The most immediate outcome of this strike could be to rally the Iranian people around their flag, while upping America’s economic uncertainty and moral isolation across the board.
Nayyera Haq is a global affairs journalist.
The Dictatorship
Monday’s Campaign Round-Up, 6.22.26: Why Trump backed both Republicans in a key S.C. race
Today’s installment of campaign-related news items from across the country.
* In South Carolina’s gubernatorial raceDonald Trump endorsed Lt. Gov. Pam Evette last month. Last week, however, ahead of this week’s primary runoff election in the race, the president published an online item telling voters that “you can’t go wrong” with either Evette or state Attorney General Alan Wilson.
If this sounds at all familiar, it’s because Trump has done this before. Around this time two years ago, for example, he endorsed both Republicans running in a congressional primary in Arizona. And two years before that, he endorsed two leading contenders in a Senate primary in Missouri.
Only the president can say for sure why he ended up endorsing Evette and Wilson in the South Carolina race, though it’s worth emphasizing for context that GOP primary voters have already ignored his direction into two gubernatorial primaries this month, and it stands to reason that he hoped to avoid a third.
* We’re one day away from a variety of notable racesincluding but not limited to South Carolina’s gubernatorial race. There are also some congressional primaries in a handful of statesincluding Maryland, New York and Utah.
* In took a while, but the ballots have been tallied under Maine’s ranked-choice systemand we now know that Democrat Hannah Pingree, the former state House speaker, will face off against Republican Bobby Charles, who worked at the State Department during the Bush-Cheney era.
* As for Maine’s closely watched congressional racestate Auditor Matt Dunlap won the Democratic nomination in the battleground 2nd District, defeating state Sen. Joe Baldacci, who enjoyed the backing of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. Dunlap will run in the fall against a familiar figure: former Republican Gov. Paul LePage, who had moved to Florida a few years ago, but who returned to run for Congress.
* In California’s congressional special electiontwo Democratic candidates — state Sen. Aisha Wahab and Melissa Hernandez, a Bay Area Rapid Transit director — have advanced to an Aug. 18 special general election. The winner will fill the vacancy left by disgraced former Rep. Eric Swalwell, who resigned in April.
* In a new commercial shared first with MS NOWDemocrat James Talarico has launched his campaign’s first multimillion-dollar ad buy in Texas’ gubernatorial race. In the 30-second spot, Talarico focuses on affordability and the cost of living. The state lawmaker will face scandal-plagued state Attorney General Ken Paxton in the fall.
* And in New Jersey, Republican Rep. Tom Kean Jr.who has been missing from Capitol Hill since early March, will reportedly return to work on June 30according to a statement from his spokesperson. Neither Kean nor his office have offered any public information about why he has been away.
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
Trump tries dual endorsement in South Carolina as his pick for governor flounders in polls
After President Donald Trump’s pick for governor in Iowa lost in the Republican primary earlier this month, the president argued that he “would have endorsed the other person” if he had “the proper information.”
Trump is taking no chances in the South Carolina gubernatorial primary. Over the weekend he rescinded his exclusive endorsement of Pamela Evette, the lieutenant governor, announcing instead that he would support both Evette and her runoff opponent, Alan Wilson, the state’s attorney general.
The move put Evette’s political future in jeopardy: Even before Trump’s dual endorsement, she trailed in limited public polling and was seen by political observers in South Carolina as a weak candidate with little to show besides the president’s coveted endorsement.
“Her chief distinction from Alan Wilson was that Trump endorsed her,” said Dr. Dubose Kapeluck, a professor of political science at the Citadel Military College of South Carolina.
Trump’s dual endorsement “was a kiss of death,” he told MS NOW.
Evette, who moved to South Carolina from Ohio to found a successful payroll and HR company in 2000, has been lieutenant governor since 2019, serving under Gov. Henry McMaster, who is term-limited.
In office, she has pursued meaningful but little-celebrated policies, like a key tort reform bill, according to Gil Gatch, a Republican member of the South Carolina state House and an Evette supporter.
But voters could be forgiven for knowing little about Evette besides the fact that Trump endorsed her, which he did just days before the June 9 primary. Visitors to her campaign website are greeted with a full-screen message labeling Evette as “Trump-endorsed.” The first line in her X bio states the same. Pro-Evette television ads are quick to tout the endorsement.
An accomplishment like tort reform, while noted on Evette’s website, “maybe could have been something that was highlighted more heavily,” Gatch told MS NOW.
The political makeup of South Carolina nearly guarantees the next governor will be whoever emerges on Tuesday between Evette and Wilson. They survived a crowded primary field on June 9, and nearly every challenger who fell short of the runoff publicly endorsed the attorney general.
“She’s just not a good candidate,” Josh Kimbrell, a state senator who failed to make the runoff and has since said he’d back Wilson, said of Evette.
“She kind of assumed this was a coronation, and that was never going to go over that well,” he added.
Even some pro-Trump voters were confused by the president’s initial endorsement of Evette, whom he called “a good friend, fighter, and WINNER” in a social media post in May.
“I have no clue why Trump would endorse Pamela Evette,” Leland Lemmons, a 30-year-old Trump supporter told MS NOW as he exited a polling site in the Greenville suburb of Easley on June 9.
“She’s served, you know, a decent time. I just haven’t seen much fruition of what she’s done in office,” he added.
In a post on Truth Social Friday announcing his dual endorsement, Trump wrote, “I can’t hurt one of them by only Endorsing the other, so, therefore, I am going to Endorse, for Governor of South Carolina, both Pam Evette and Alan Wilson!”
In a subsequent statement on X, Evette said, “I was proud to come in first as [Trump’s] endorsed candidate for Governor on June 9th. Looking forward to doing it again on June 23rd.”
After The Washington Post foreshadowed the dual endorsement last Tuesday, allies of Evette were quick to denounce the possibility.
“I would guess that’s fake news,” Suzanne Pucci, a member of Evette’s finance committee, told MS NOW of the chance Trump would also endorse Wilson. “She’s probably not real worried about it.”
Another close ally and supporter told MS NOW at the time the report was “a total, fabricated lie.”
“[Trump] is invested in Pamela Evette because she invested in him. He’s a loyal guy. That kind of stuff is important to him,” added the supporter, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
“With or without Trump, I think she is going to win,” they said.
On Thursday, a senior campaign aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity, brushed off the idea of a dual endorsement, telling MS NOW in a statement, “Pamela Evette has earned the complete and total endorsement of President Trump. She is the only Trump-endorsed candidate in this race and we look forward to delivering a big win for the president on Tuesday.”
Roughly 24 hours later, Trump retracted the exclusive endorsement.
Will McDuffie is a reporter for MS NOW.
As last week’s G7 summit in France got underway, a reporter asked Donald Trump whether his purported deal with Iran was final. “No, it’s not final,” the president replied. Later that day — during a visit to Versaillesof all places — he signed the framework anyway.
But moments after signing his name to the memorandum of understanding, Trump offered an unsubtle hint about what he was thinking at the time. Amid applause from those around him, the American president pointed down and then up while saying“Oil down, stocks up.”
In other words, Trump’s focus had nothing to do with natural security and everything to do with the economy. What’s more, the four-word phrase was part of a larger and underappreciated pattern. The Washington Post reported:
In the more than 100 days since President Donald Trump launched a war with Iran, he has offered a shifting list of reasons for why he started the conflict. But in explaining his push for peace, he named a priority much closer to home: protecting the stock market.
“I didn’t want to see economic catastrophe,” Trump told reporters gathered in the Alpine spa town of Évian-les-Bains, France, after the Group of Seven summit.
As the summit wrapped up, the Republican similarly said“I’ve studied presidents, some good, some bad, some great. Not too many are great and some really bad. … And the one president I did not want to be was the late, great Herbert Hoover. I didn’t want that and who knows what would have happened.”
He pushed the same point in an interview with Axios, which was released over the weekend.
“If I went further, the stock market would be much lower,” the president said. “Now think of this: I have one primary wish as president, in terms of people: I never want to be the late, great Herbert Hoover.”
The comments came days after Trump similarly argued“The alternative to this deal was a global recession. There are stupid people who want to see a global recession. They are just stupid people.”
Whether the president fully appreciates the implications of his own rhetoric, this string of comments doesn’t just shed light on his motivations for accepting a defeat, it also suggests he saw his failed policy in Iran as pushing the global economy toward a dangerous cliff.
In other words, based on Trump’s own comments, the war he started was poised to create an “economic catastrophe,” which he was desperate to avoid — and which led him to accept a framework that empowered Iran to get what it wanted in exchange for effectively no concessions at all.
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.”
- Lawmakers, companies tread carefully on data center energy bill
- Capitol agenda: Jeffries gets preview of his future headaches
- OMB nominee ‘can’t commit’ to forgoing ‘pocket rescissions’ funding gambit this year
- Turek leads Hinson in Iowa Senate poll of likely general election voters
- Capitol agenda: House GOP races to make Recon 3.0 real
- A rising populist tide is threatening New York’s powerful incumbents
- Senate Judiciary schedules confirmation hearing for Todd Blanche
- OMB nominee ‘can’t commit’ to forgoing ‘pocket rescissions’ funding gambit this year
- Senate Republicans say it’s time to give Trump a reality check
- Senate Republicans exclude Democrats’ food aid demand from farm bill
-
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
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship10 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words