Recent Reading

Music Database

Artist Search:

Browse

Website Search

Google:

Blog Entries [0 - 9]

Monday, March 23, 2026

March archive (in progress).

Music: Current count 45700 [45655] rated (+45), 26 [39] unrated (-13).

After last week's Music Week, I decided I really should publish a new Loose Tabs before the week was out. I had published my previous one on February 27, just hours before Trump started bombing Iran. I've been running about one Loose Tabs post per month, but the war news was coming so fast and furious I didn't want to wait a whole month. (Even so, the gap this time stretched out to 23 days.)

In the meantime I wrote about the war in my Substack feed, Notes on Everyday Life, in a piece called Days of Infamy. Since then, I've decided to follow up with a second piece, which will try to reduce all the complexity and nuance of the war to four questions:

1. Why did Netanyahu want to attack Iran?
2. Why did Trump go along with the attack?
3. Why didn't Iran surrender once it was attacked?
4. And how and when and under what conditions is this war likely to end?

I'll probably take a more serious tone, but it's tempting to answer the first three flippantly:

1. Because he's a hammer looking for a nail (he's been obsessed with crippling Iran for 44 years, and with a gullible blowhard as president of the US, this is his best chance ever).
2. Because he was given an opportunity to kill a devil (or so he was told), and it made him feel awesome. (What's the point of being president if you can't kill whomsoever you want?)
3. Because, well, would you surrender to these megalomaniacs when you still had even the slightest power to fight back and make them feel at least some of the pain they're senselessly causing you?

Actually, each of those three could get very long and involved if I got into the history and how it has influenced what passes for thinking in these conservative/crypto-fascist political and military leaders and their coterie of advisers and operatives. (I should perhaps be more tentative in my views of the Iranians, both because I don't follow them as closely, and because I have less feel for their history and philosophical views, but it's a pretty safe bet I understand them better than Trump and Netanyahu do.)

While I meant to post last night, the time got away from me, and I decided to wait until this afternoon: not to collect more links, but simply to add my table of contents, flesh out the section introductions a bit, and correct whatever typos I could find. But when I got up, my wife told me that Trump had called a pause in the bombing, citing productive diplomatic talks. That turned out to be not half what it was cracked up to be, but Trump did shelve his threat to start bombing Iranian power plants, causing blackouts and widespread damage and hardship. His hesitation probably saves retaliation against vulnerable infrastructure in the Persian Gulf states. Or it may signal a final recognition on Trump's part that Iran isn't going to be moved by ultimatums, no matter how deranged. I'm skeptical that Iran is going to "win" this war (to the extent that any war can be "won"), but the US is much more vulnerable, and more fragile, on many fronts that Trump was led to believe. And as these stresses interact and multiple, one shouldn't assume that the previous world order will hold. In my "Days of Infamy" piece, I spent a whole section on what I called "worser case scenarios." A week later, I find myself coming up with even worser cases.

My plan is to come up with a set of equations, each modeling a key consideration. One needs to look at what concessions Iran can and cannot make, and figure out what among the former might satisfy Trump. What Trump did was as inexcusable as, say, Putin in Ukraine (or Bush in Iraq), yet still as long as he's the guy, savvy diplomats need to figure out how to save him some face, even as they pressure him into unwanted compromises. Accordingly, a big part of the question is what sort of pressures can be brought to bear on Trump. (I have various ideas there, but Arab money is one that seems to particularly appeal to him, or at least to his craven son-in-law.) Still, I don't need to figure this out, as I'll be way out of the inner circle. Some rough sketches should suffice.

I wasn't only thinking about Iran last week. A while back, I went to the library, to return a couple books I hadn't found interesting enough to read, and see if I can pick up anything more appealing. I didn't really find anything other than Laura Field's Furious Minds, which I had just finished, but I checked out a couple of cookbooks for the hell of it. One was The Complete America's Test Kitchen TV Show Cookbook, which seemed to have definitive recipes for pretty much anything one might want to cook. I've never watched their shows, but I have a bunch of their cookbooks, and I especially use them for baking. I figured I might look it over, but would wind up ordering a copy, and using it as a fallback reference. Glancing through it today, I see some of what looks like excess complication: their matzo brei recipe calls for sauteeing onions, which I've never considered; the dumplings in their chicken & dumplings look right (I've always used shortening, but I could see using schmaltz if I had it handy), but their stock is basically chicken pot pie filler, lots of extras that detract from the dumplings. I just boil a chicken, strip off the meat, cook the dumplings in the stock, fold the chicken back in, check the seasoning.

The other book I picked up was Pyet DeSpain's Rooted in Fire: A Celebration of Native American and Mexican Cooking. I've barely dabbled in Mexican — I have a Diana Kennedy guide, but found it much less helpful than ATK's The Best Mexican Recipes — and know nothing of Native American cooking other than corn-beans-squash plus the latter-day addition of fry bread. But a couple recipes piqued my interest, so I figured I'd check it out, and make a dinner. After I got my "Days of Infamy" piece up, I figured I was due some fun, so I went shopping. We have some pretty good Mexican grocers here, but I still had a tough time coming up with ingredients (especially on the salad front, which called for dandelion greens, purslane, and/or water cress), as well as things like maple sugar and prickly pear syrup (which I've now found on Amazon). You can find a pic and brief write up here.

DeSpain is Potawatomi, living in northeast Kansas, and was "Winner of Gordon Ramsay's Next Level Chef season one," so the aim here is less authenticity than roots-inspired fusion. Unlike my ventures into national cuisines like Burmese or Cuban or Moroccan, where I could run through a broad range of traditional dishes, I doubt there is any single Native American cuisine, nor that this even captures one facet of it, but it is an interesting concept, and none of these were dishes I had ever attempted before. The menu is long enough for a birthday dinner:

1. Deer chili: I had a pound of ground venison in the freezer, just waiting for this; add two cans of pinto beans, and a cup of corn; in general I cut the chile quantities in half.
2. Steamed white fish in corn husks: I had a pound of rainbow trout filets in the freezer; this included a tomato-based salsa, but I made a couple extra salsa batches below.
3. Raspberry mezcal BBQ quail: I couldn't find quail, so I substituted cornish game hens, which I quartered; they are marinated, sauteed, marinated again, then roasted.
4. Tomatillo salad: With jicama, red onion, corn, apple, mango, and cilantro-lime dressing; I didn't get this done in time, but made it later.
5. Dandelion greens and pickled berry salad: I didn't get this done in time either, but had pickled the blueberries, so served them on the side; I made the salad later, using arugula, with julienned jicama, my leftover berries, and sunflower seeds.
6. Honey and habanero roasted butternut squash: I used a milder Indian dried chili.
7. Cilantro, honey, and lime grilled corn.
8. Roasted sage and maple sweet potatoes.
9. Fry bread.
10. Strawberry salsa.
11. Charred pineapple salsa.
12. Mezcal and Mexican chocolate cake: topped with a ganache made with coconut cream; served with vanila ice cream on the side.

I bought more stuff than I used, including big chunk of bison (the book has three bison recipes: jerky, meatballs, braised), and various greens thinking I might substitute for use in the salads. I ran late, but a guest rescued the grill dishes while I fried the bread. I wound up using pre-shredded cheddar instead of shredding a block of cotijo I had ready. By the time I served dinner, the kitchen was as messed up as it had ever been. I was so exhausted I took a rare nap afterwards. Cleaned up in the middle of the night, and found more the next day.

I thought everything came out very good. I should write some of the recipes down, but I might as well just buy the book. Not a lot more in the book I want to try. And although Laura has suggested a couple of these dishes should be in my "rotation," I don't really have such a thing. A quick check at Amazon shows several dozen other Native American cookbooks. As I suspected, there is a good deal of regional variation.

A lot of records below. I've made a significant dent in the demo queue, picking them off in release date order until I moved well into next week. The reissues are old items that Blue Note recently reissued in their Tone Poet vinyl series. All of them are streamed, but I counted them as 2026 reissues, having initially listed them as such in my tracking file. I've cut back on tracking new releases quite a bit this year: aside from tracking my own reviews, I'm only adding things that come to me with specific recommendations. I may have to open this up later if/when we get into jazz critics polling, but I don't need to get into that now.

New records reviewed this week:

David Adewumi: The Flame Beneath the Silence (2024 [2026], Giant Step Arts): Trumpet player, first album, side-credits since 2020, label touts this "modern masters and new horizons series," offering him a live venue and major league support: Joel Ross (vibes), Linda May Han Oh (bass), and Marcus Gilmore (drums). He's off to a strong start? B+(***) [cd] [03-27]

Tyrone Allen II: Upward (2024 [2026], Dreams and Fears): Bassist, based in Brooklyn, first album, a dozen side-credits back to 2018, with several notable younger players: Neta Raanan (tenor sax), Lex Korten (keys), Samantha Feliciano (harp), Aidan Lombard (trumpet), Kayvon Gordon (drums), Abe Nouri (live effects). B+(*) [cd]

Aymeric Avice/Luke Stewart/Chad Taylor: Deep in the Earth High in the Sky (2025 [2026], RogueArt): I've seen every permutation of artist credit order for this, with my CD listing the Taylor (drums) first above the title, then last under the title, while Bandcamp lists Stewart (bass) first, with a cover scan that seems to favor Avice (trumpet). Discogs, with the same cover scan (I just got a CD with no packaging) credits Stewart first. I initially listed Taylor, but on second thought, let's give it to the French trumpeter (evidently his first album). Free jazz bash, with mbiras. B+(***) [cdr]

Anthony Branker & Other Ways of Knowing: Manifestations of a Diasporic Groove & Spirit (2025 [2026], Origin): Composer and arranger, eleventh album since 2004, previous groups called Ascent and Imagine, this one well stocked with name talent: Steve Wilson (alto/soprano sax, flute), Pete McCann (guitars), Simona Premazzi (piano), John Hébert (bass), Rudy Royston (drums), and Aimée Allen (vocals). [cd]

Carl Clements and the Real Jazz Trio: Retrospective (2024 [2026], Greydisc): Saxophonist (tenor/soprano, also bansuri), based in Massachusetts, half-dozen albums since 2004, all original pieces, backed by a European trio: piano (Jean-Yves Jung), bass (Johannes Schaedlich), and drums (Jes Biehl). B+(**) [cd]

Daphni: Butterfly (2026, Jiaolong): British house producer Daniel Snaith, fourth album, label named for his 2012 debut. Nice bounce to it. B+(***) [sp]

Dave Douglas: Four Freedoms (2025 [2026], Greenleaf Music): Trumpet player, many albums since 1993, live set from the Getxo Kultura Jazz Festival in Spain, quartet with Marta Warelis (piano), Nick Dunston (bass), and Joey Baron (drums). Tricky music. B+(**) [sp]

Matt Dwonszyk: Live at the Sidedoor (2024 [2026], self-released): Bassist, third release as leader, eight originals, two covers, no musician credits on the packaging but per hype sheet: Josh Bruneau (trumpet), Matt Knoegel (tenor sax), Taber Gable (piano), Jonathan Barber (drums). The venue is located in Old Lyme, CT, and the musicians evidently have some kind of relationship to Jackie McLean. It comes through, and maybe a bit of Mingus too. B+(***) [cd]

Kim Gordon: Play Me (2026, Matador): Sonic Youth's better half, third solo studio album, "relies primarily on Gordon's trap vocals, [producer Justin] Raisen's industrial textures, and trip hop beats." Short (29:55) and rather cryptic. B+(***) [sp]

Simon Hanes: Gargantua (2024 [2026], Pyroclastic): California-born, Brooklyn-based composer/arranger, has a couple previous albums, draws inspiration from Rabelais for this "audacious new album," featuring three soprano voices, backed by three each on French horns, trombones, basses, and drum sets. The voices are the sticking point with me. B+(**) [cd] [03-27]

Alexander Hawkins/Taylor Ho Bynum: A Near Permanent State of Wonder (2024 [2025], RogueArt): Piano and trumpet (well, actually cornet and flugelhorn) duo, free jazz players of repute, and considerable rapport. B+(***) [cdr]

Steven Husted and Friends: Two Nights - "Live!" (2025 [2026], self-released): Bassist, worked in Bay Area before moving to Austin, website has two previous albums but none in Discogs. With sax (Grant Teeple) on the first half, guitar (Matt Berger) picking up the slack on the second, backed by keys (Milo Hehmsoth), and drums (Israel Yanez), playing eight originals plus standards by Irving Berlin, Clifford Brown, and Hank Mobley. Nice mainstream jazz. Runs over 77 minutes. B+(*) [cd]

The Interplay Jazz Orchestra: Bite Your Tongue (2025 [2026], Bigtime): Big band, directed by Joey Devassy (trombone) and Gary Henderson (trumpet), formed in 2013 but this is the only album I've found, three Devassy originals plus six standards, some sharp solo work, especially in the saxophone section. B+(***) [cd]

Javon Jackson: Jackson Plays Dylan (2025 [2026], Solid Jackson/Palmetto): Tenor saxophonist, has done impressive work since his 1991 debut, but hasn't always made the best choices. Plays ten Bob Dylan tunes here (after an original intro), backed by keyboards (Jeremy Manasia), bass, and drums, with two guest vocalists (Lisa Fischer and Nicole Zuraitis), singing the two canon songs I least want to ever hear the lyrics to ever again. I've heard a lot of Dylan over the years, and almost never want to hear him again these days. I've often been out of sync with other critics, which may have led to some bad feelings. But I was surprised by the three Jewels & Binoculars albums, where his melodies proved fruitful for a purely instrumental jazz trio. But this isn't that. B+(*) [cd] [03-27]

Anna Kolchina: Reach for Tomorrow (2021-25 [2026], OA2): Standards singer from "the Soviet Union about 18 hours from Moscow" (an odd measurement that could mean dozens or thousands of miles, but evidently someplace with horses), moved to New York City in 2017, "a place where you can become friends with your heroes." At least one previous album, as well as a connection to Sheila Jordan. Twelve songs recorded over several years, each backed by a sole guitarist: Paul Bollenback, Peter Bernstein, Ilya Lushtak, Romero Lubambo, Russell Malone, Yotam Silberstein. I couldn't sort out the guitarists, but they might make an interesting blindfold test. They are all fine, and the singer shines with such minimal support. A- [cd]

Ladytron: Paradises (2026, Nettwerk): English electropop band, eighth studio album since 2001, a long one with 16 songs running 71:31, Daniel Hunt the composer, Helen Marnie the lead vocalist. B+(*) [sp]

Julian Lage: Scenes From Above (2025 [2026], Blue Note): Well-regarded guitarist, debut 2009, sixth Blue Note album, featuring credits for John Medeski (organ/piano), Jorge Roeder (bass), and Kenny Wolleson (drums), with a couple credits for Patrick Waren (dulcitone, strings). He often strikes me as a bit languid, but on occasion, Medeski kicks this up a notch. B+(*) [sp]

Brian Landrus: Just When You Think You Know (2025 [2026], BlueLand/Palmetto): Baritone saxophonist, albums since 2007, also plays some tenor, bass clarinet, and flutes (down to bass flute), along with Zaccai Curtis (keyboards), Dave Stryker (guitars), Lonnie Plaxico (basses), and Rudy Royston (drums). Veers a bit toward easy listening. B+(*) [cd]

Tom Lippincott: Ode to the Possible (2025 [2026], self-released): Guitarist, plays an 8-string model with electronics, first album under his own name although he has scattered credits back to 1990. Qfuartet with David Fernandez (strong tenor/soprano sax), bass, and drums, plus a Camila Meza vocal on one track. B+(**) [cd]

Lisanne Lyons: May I Come In (2022-24 [2026], OA2): Standards singer, started in the Air Force, has sung in ghost bands (Harry James, Maynard Ferguson), first album, backed by a big band plus strings, produced by Mike Lewis. B+(**) [cd]

Luke Norris: Moment From the Past (2023 [2026], self-released): Saxophonist, also plays clarinet and synths, has a previous album from 2020, here with Dabin Ryu (keyboards), Tyrone Allen (basses), and Kayvon Gordon (drums), with Abe Nouri adding some "wildly inventive post-production." B+(***) [cd]

Adam O'Farrill: Elephant (2024 [2025], Out of Your Head): Trumpet player, son of Afro-Cuban Jazz majordomo Arturo O'Farrill (himself the son of famed Cuban bandleader Chico O'Farrill), has the chops to ply the family trade but on his own plays uninflected but often brilliant postbop. Quartet with Yvonne Rogers (piano), Walter Stinson (bass), and Russell Holzman (drums), with some electronics. A- [cd]

Meg Okura/Pan Asian Chamber Jazz Ensemble: Isaiah (2022 [2026], Adhyâropa): Violinist, born in Japan, makes a point in the notes of being an outsider ("an immigrant, a Jew by choice in an interracial marriage, and as a musician moving from classical to jazz"), but finding "solace" in composing, and in leading this twenty-year group with prominent names that don't strike me as conspicuously Asian. It's a terrific group, augmented by guests like Randy Brecker and Sam Newsome, playing scores that come from and go to pretty much everywhere. A- [cd]

Chenxi Pan: This Very Moment (2025 [2026], Origin): Jazz singer-songwriter, from China, moved to New York 2021, debut album, with tenor sax/clarinet, piano, guitar, bass, drums, violin, and cello. Matt Wilson produced. B [cd]

Poppy: Empty Hands (2026, Sumerian): Singer-songwriter Moriah Rose Pereira, tenth album since 2016, opens in pop mode, but follows up with metal thrash, which I'm surprised to enjoy more. B+(*) [sp]

Benjie Porecki: Faster Than We Know (2026, Funklove Productions): Pianist, also plays organ and other keyboards, from the DC area, eighth album sice 1996, eight original pieces plus a cover of "Superstar" (which I'm told was "famously covered by the Carpenters," but I associate with songwriters Bonnie Bramlett and Leon Russell). I prefer the piano to the organ. B+(*) [cd]

Reverso: Between Two Silences (2024 [2026], Alternate Side): Trombonist Ryan Keberle, his name no longer up front in this chamber jazz trio, with Frank Woeste (piano) and Vincent Courtois (cello), in what is at least their fifth album together (back to a Ravel-inspired 2017 album), this one original material from all three (3-5-2), this time inspired by Satie. B+(***) [cd] [03-27]

Joel Ross: Gospel Music (2026, Blue Note): Vibraphonist, grew up in Chicago, based in Brooklyn, fifth Blue Note album since 2019 (or 7th if you cound Out Of/Into, the "supergroup" I file under his name). Mostly original pieces (two exceptions), mostly quintet with Josh Johnson (alto sax), Maria Grand (tenor sax), Jeremy Corren (piano), Kanoa Mendenhall (bass), and Jeremy Dutton (drums), with a couple of guest spots for vocals and others (like Brandee Younger on harp). B+(**) [sp]

Harvie S: Bright Dawn (2024 [2026], Origin): Bassist, originally Swartz, shortened his name because so many people (including me) misspelled it, side-credit since 1973, has a couple dozen albums as leader or in duos (notably with Sheila Jordan). Quartet here with Peter Bernstein (guitar), Miki Hayama (piano), and Matt Wilson (drums). B+(**) [cd]

Walter Smith III: Twio Vol. 2 (2026, Blue Note): Tenor saxophonist, from Houston, studied at Berklee and now chairs the woodwind department there, debut 2006, third album on Blue Note, revisits the concept of his 2018 album Twio, with a trio playing standards supplemented by two "eminent elders" (this time Ron Carter and Branford Marsalis; the bassist and drummer are also new this time, Joe Sanders and Kendrick Scott). B+(***) [sp]

Yuyo Sotashe & Chris Pattishall: Invocation (2022 [2026], self-released, EP): Singer and piano (or synths or sound design), four songs, 20:35, makes an impression. B+(**) [cd]

Harriet Tubman & Georgia Muldrow: Electrical Field of Love (2026, Pi): Avant-fusion trio of Brandon Ross (guitar/banjo), Melvin Gibbs (electric bass), and JT Lewis (drums), sixth album since 1998, with Muldrow added for vocals and keyboards (more than a dozen albums on her own since 2006). Heavy. B+(***) [cd] [03-27]

Immanuel Wilkins Quartet: Live at the Village Vanguard Vol. 1 (2025 [2026], Blue Note): Alto saxophonist, became an instant star when Blue Note released his Omega in 2020, has made the rounds as well as keynoting the Out Of/Into label all-star group. First live album, with Micah Thomas (piano), Ryoma Takenaga (bass), and Kweku Sumbry (drums); is being rolled out in bits, with this on CD and LP, and later digital-only releases for Vol. 2 (April 17) and Vol. 3 (May 15). I imagine that at some point I'll have to treat the combination as a single album, at least for polling purposes. I'm underwhelmed so far, but I've upgraded him in the past. B+(**) [sp]

Winged Wheel: Desert So Green (2025 [2026], 12XU): Discogs calls then "an indie supergroup," although I recognize just one name (Steve Shelley, from Sonic Youth), and two more bands (Circuit des Yeux, Tyvek), and never ran across their two previous albums. Does have a little Sonic Youth background sound. B+(**) [sp]

Jack Wood: For Every Man There's a Woman (2026, Jazz Hang): Standards crooner, "long a fixture in Southern California," has connections to Las Vegas and Utah (where most of this was recorded, cover cites special guests: The Lenore Raphael Trio with guitarist Doug MacDonald. Also strings. I have something of a soft spot for this sort of thing. B+(***) [cd] [03-24]

Recent reissues, compilations, and vault discoveries:

Hank Mobley Sextet: Hank (1957 [2026], Blue Note): Tenor saxophonist, Leonard Feather called him the "middleweight champion of the tenor saxophone," which suggested that he couldn't compete with Coltrane and Rollins, but was masterful under any other light. This is pretty early, but one of seven albums from 1957 that Wikipedia lists, most with redundant or unimaginative titles, some tied to his membership in the Jazz Messengers. With John Jenkins (alto sax), Donald Byrd (trumpet), Bobby Timmons (piano), Wilbur Ware (bass), and Philly Joe Jones (drums). Reissued in Blue Note's Tone Poet series. B+(***) [yt]

Lee Morgan: City Lights (1957 [2026], Blue Note): Trumpet player, a key player in Art Blakey's Jazz Messengers, off to a very solid solo career. With George Coleman (tenor/alto sax), Ray Bryant (piano), Paul Chambers (bass), and Art Taylor (drums). Superb when he goes in hot, less so with a ballad. B+(**) [sp]

Tyrone Washington: Natural Essence (1967 [2026], Blue Note): Tenor saxophonist, b. 1944, recorded three albums 1968-74, leaving music for religious reasons, and eventually becoming a Sunni Muslim minister (as Mohammad Bilal Abdullah). He joined Horace Silver for The Jody Grind in 1966, and Larry Young for Contrasts in 1967. This was his first as leader, with Woody Shaw (trumpet), James Spaulding (alto sax/flute), Kenny Barron (piano), Reggie Workman (bass), and Joe Chambers (drums). This is pretty exciting, especially Shaw. Evidently a second Blue Note session was recorded but never released. A- [sp]

Old music:

Hank Mobley: With Donald Byrd and Lee Morgan (1956 [1957], Blue Note): Tenor saxophonist, one of seven albums he released in 1957, a four-song hard bop blowing session with the two trumpet players, piano (Horace Silver), bass (Paul Chambers), and drums (Charlie Persip). B+(**) [sp]

Hank Mobley: A Caddy for Daddy (1965 [1966], Blue Note): One of the few 1960s albums I missed by the tenor saxophonist, a sextet with Lee Morgan (trumpet), Curtis Fuller (trombone), McCoy Tyner (piano), Bob Cranshaw (bass), and Billy Higgins (drums), playing four originals and one Wayne Shorter piece. B+(*) [sp]

Barbara Rosene With Vince Giordano & the Nighthawks: Deep Night (2000-01 [2001], Stomp Off): Trad/swing jazz singer, Michael Steinman raved about a recent performance so I thought I'd look her up. Nothing new since 2013's Nice & Naughty, but I had missed this first album, and I felt like a break from the new stuff. Discogs doesn't list musicians, but Giordano plays tuba and bass, and his band recorded from 1984-2006 (also backing Loudon Wainwright III on his 2020 I'd Rather Lead a Band). AI suggests Conal Fowkes (piano), Dan Levinson (sax/clarinet), Jon-Erik Kellso (trumpet), and Andy Stein (violin). B+(**) [sp]

Barbara Rosene & Her New Yorkers: Ev'rything's Made for Love (2003, Stomp Off): Another generous batch of old-timey songs (25, 73:40), backed by a nine-piece band where Jon-Erik Kellso (trumpet) and John Gill (drums) are probably the best known, with notable contributions by Conal Fowkes (piano), Matt Munisteri (guitar/banjo), and Meg Okura (violin). B+(***) [sp]

Unpacking: Found in the mail last week:

• Atlantic Road Trip: Watch as the Echo Falls (Calligram) [04-03]
• Ryan Blotnick: The Woods (Fishkill) [04-17]
• Chicago Soul Jazz Collective: No Wind & No Rain (Calligram) [04-10]
• Paul Citro: Keep Moving (Home) (Calligram) [05-01]
• Caleb Wheeler Curtis: Ritual (Chill Tone) [04-10]
• Cyger & Butterworth: Plaid Pants (Outrageous8) [03-11]
• Bill Evans: At the BBC (1965, Elemental Music) [04-18]
• Robert Jospé Quartet: The Night Sky (self-released) [01-11]
• The Paul Keller Orchestra: Thank You Notes: The Music of Gregg Hill (Cold Plunge) [03-27]
• Freddie King: Feeling Alright: The Complete 1975 Nancy Pulsations Concert (Elemental Music, 2CD) [04-18]
• Michel Petrucciani: Kuumbwa (1987, Elemental Music, 2CD) [04-18]
• Ted Rosenthal Trio: The Good Old Days (TMR Music) [05-01]
• Paul Silbergleit Trio: The Stillness of July (Calligram) [05-01]
• Alister Spence: Always Ever (Alister Spence Music) [04-24]
• Cecil Taylor Unit: Fragments: The Complete 1969 Salle Pleyel Concerts (Elemental Music, 2CD) [04-18]

Ask a question, or send a comment.

Sunday, March 22, 2026

After I posted my initial take on Trump's Iran war in my Days of Infamy Substack piece, and followed that with a Music Week, I figured I should go ahead and publish whatever I had in Loose Tabs before the next Music Week comes around. So I set the date for Sunday, March 22, and, well, this is it: very incomplete, with several usual sections completely missing, but pretty long nonetheless. I could work the rest of the night on it, then tomorrow, then the rest of next week. I probably will make some adds when I do get around to Music Week. I'm also thinking I should do a synopsis on Substack, possibly before I do my planned follow-up piece where I try to cut through all the noise and explain the Iran war by answering four basic questions:

1. Why did Netanyahu want to attack Iran?
2. Why did Trump go along with the attack?
3. Why didn't Iran surrender once it was attacked?
4. And how and when and under what conditions is this war likely to end?

You can probably find answers to these questions in the previous piece, and scattered here and there below, but I think it will help to organize them thusly. Of course, the first three answers are pretty simple, at least if I don't go into much historical detail. I don't know the precise answer to the fourth, but the basic point is simple enough: when Trump (or one of his successors) decides he's had enough, and is willing to negotiate a deal. This will depend on variables, including how much Iran is willing to concede, how little Trump is willing to settle for, and how long Israel will be able to muck up any possible deal. Those factors will vary over time, so the best we can do is to lay out a model. That will take some thought, but the factors aren't too complicated.

Meanwhile, there is nothing below on Cuba, which is heating up, and dominating my X feed tonight. Trump has said that Cuba's next, and it's not like he has the patience to do things in considered order. Most leaders dread two-front (never mind multi-front) wars, but for Trump each one distracts from the other. The conditions in Cuba are different, as are the motives — other than the absolute supremacy of American power, which seems to have become an obsession with Trump.

PS: I added a few more links on [03-25]. I'm not really trying to keep up with the news, although some creeps in. Most are actually tabs I had open but hadn't picked up. I use Firefox as a browser, running under Xbuntu with six workspaces to split out my work, with Firefox typically running 6-8 windows with well over 100 tabs, so it's easy to overlook something I meant to circle back to.

This is an occasional collection of newsworthy links and comments, much less systematic than what I attempted in my late Speaking of Which posts. The new name comes from my extensive use of browser tabs. When I get around to cleaning up, I often find tabs opened to old articles I might want to comment on and/or refer back to. So these posts are mostly housecleaning, but may also serve as a very limited but persistent record of what 20+ years ago I started calling "the end of the American empire" and nowadays feels more like "the end of civilization." I collect these bits in a draft file, and flush them out when periodically (12 times from April-December 2025). My previous one appeared 23 days ago, on February 27.

I have a little-used option of selecting bits of text highlighted with a background color, for emphasis a bit more subtle than bold or ALL CAPS. (I saw this on Medium. I started with their greenish color [#bbdbba] and lightened it a bit [#dbfbda].) I'll try to use it sparingly.

Table of Contents:

• Trump Bombs Iran
• Epsteinmania
• SAVE America Act
• The Oscars
• Israel
• Elsewhere Around the World
• Trump Threatens the World
• Trump Attacks America: Law, lawlessness, and the courts.
• Trump Administration: What they're doing while you're worried about the news flak.
• Donald Trump, Himself
• Economists and the Economy
• Dean Baker
• Jeet Heer
• Paul Krugman
• Heather Digby Parton
• Jeffrey St Clair
• Nick Turse
• Joel Gouveia: The death of Spotify.
• John Herrman: On betting on war.
• Chris Dalla Riva: On a documentary about Robert Christgau.
• Harold Meyerson: On Cesar Chavez.
• Some Notable Deaths
• Tweets

Topical Stories

Sometimes stuff happens, and it dominates the news/opinion cycle for a few days or possibly several weeks. We might as well lead with it, because it's where attention is most concentrated. But eventually these stories will fold into the broader, more persistent themes of the following section.

Last time: Epsteinmania, Melania, Washington Post, Super Bowl LX, DHS shutdown, Tariffs at the Supreme Court.

Trump Bombs Iran: On Feb. 28, Trump and Netanyahu launched a massive wave of airstrikes against Iran, opening what Wikipedia is calling 2026 Iran war. The bombing appears to have been originally designed to kill Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and thus to decapitate the Islamic Republic of Iran, but it was expanded to attack the whole nation's security structure. The bombing has continued. Iran has responded with missile and drone attacks aimed at Israel, US bases in the region, and other infrastructure related to the US and its allies. Israel has ramped up its war in Lebanon, nominally targeting Hezbollah. The following are various pieces collected on the fly, including several that I added to my previous Loose Tabs, which starts on February 19 with a link to a piece by Joshua Keating: It really looks like we're about to bomb Iran again.

• Iran War Cost Tracker: "Based on the Pantagon's preliminary estimate of $1 billion per day." Also note: "Independent analyses suggest the true cost may be significantly higher."

• Al Jazeera [2025-06-18]: The history of Netanyahu's rhetoric on Iran's nuclear ambitions: He "has warned of an imminent threat from a Iranian nuclear bomb for more than 30 years."

• Richard Silverstein

  • [02-28]: Iran: Trump's war of annihilation: One key point here, not widely reported elsewhere, is that Ayatollah Khamenei "reportedly prepares leadership plan if killed."

  • [03-03]: Iran's massive retaliation hits targets throughout Middle East.

  • [03-12]: Israeli cultural and environmental genocide in Iran.

  • [03-14]: Beirut: 1,000 dead as Israel threatens Gaza-style genocide.

  • [03-19]: Iran: Trump's fatal miscalculation.

• Andrew O'Hehir:

  • [02-28]: Trump's war on Iran: America's shame, and the world's failure: "Trump's attack on Iran is an act of vanity and desperation, fueled by America's collective moral blindness."

  • [03-08]: Behind Trump's war fever lies profound weakness: "US wages fast-escalating war, with no clear motivation and no realistic plan. It isn't fooling anyone." I'm not sure "weakness" is the right word, but it's the sort of taunt that flies in the faces of people who value power above all else. The US always seemed more powerful when it advanced policies that were best for all, and much weaker when it tried to strong arm others into doing its self-centered will. While it is likely that the US has lost power steadily since peaking at the end of WWII, no US president has tried to flex its power to anywhere near the same degree as Trump. That he comes up short seems inevitable. That he finds this mystifying is no surprise, either.

• Craig Mokhiber [03-01]: Understanding the US and Israel's illegal war on Iran: "The illegal US-Israeli war on Iran continues a rampage that has devastated countries and international institutions to eliminate all obstacles to US hegemony. The US-Israeli Axis has not succeeded yet, and it is up to the world to stop them." The world, on the other hand, is hoping this war just collapses under the dead weight of its instigators' stupidity, as no one else is in a position to do anything significant about it.

• Trita Parsi: Has a long track record of writing about Iran and how Israel and the US have attempted to deal with it, most notably in his books: Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran, and the United States (2007); A Single Roll of the Dice: Obama's Diplomacy With Iran (2012); Losing an Enemy: Obama, Iran, and the Triumph of Diplomacy (2017). The first book I regard as essential, as it makes clear that Israel's alliance with Iran survived the fever days of the 1979 Revolution, when Khomeini solidified control of a much broader-based revolt, to no small extent by building on pent-up resentment against the United States (the hostage crisis was a reflection of this) and by challenging Saudi Arabia's leadership of the Islamic World (given control of Mecca and Medina, and the annual Hajj). The US and Saudi Arabia never got over those affronts, but Israel had no problem with Iran until the 1990s, when Iraq ceased to be a credible existential threat to Israel, and Hezbollah developed in opposition to Israel's occupation of southern Lebanon. From that point, it was fairly easy to manipulate American resentment into designating Iran as part of "the axis of evil." Parsi has a critical but nuanced view of Iran that is much more credible than most of the rote (or simply regurgitated) propaganda elsewhere. I haven't read his later books (on Obama and the JCPOA negotiations), which should help update the story. Nor have I read Vali Nasr's 2025 book, Iran's Grand Strategy: A Political History, but he seems to have a similar understanding of Iran's political leadership and military strategy.

  • [03-01]: Some observations and comments on Trump and Israel's war on Iran: I scraped this off Facebook, so might best just quote it here:

    1. Tehran is not looking for a ceasefire and has rejected outreach from Trump. The reason is that they believe they committed a mistake by agreeing to the ceasefire in June - it only enabled the US and Israel to restock and remobilize to launch war again. If they agree to a ceasefire now, they will only be attacked again in a few months.

    2. For a ceasefire to be acceptable, it appears difficult for Tehran to agree to it until the cost to the US has become much higher than it currently is. Otherwise, the US will restart the war at a later point, the calculation reads.

    3. Accordingly, Iran has shifted its strategy. It is striking Israel, but very differently from the June war. There is a constant level of attack throughout the day rather than a salvo of 50 missiles at once. Damage will be less, but that isn't a problem because Tehran has concluded that Israel's pain tolerance is very high - as long as the US stays in the war. So the focus shifts to the US.

    4. From the outset, and perhaps surprisingly, Iran has been targeting US bases in the region, including against friendly states. Tehran calculates that the war can only end durably if the cost for the US rises dramatically, including American casualties. After the assassination of Ayatollah Khamenei, Iran says it has no red lines left and will go all out in seeking the destruction of these bases and high American casualties.

    5. Iran understands that many in the American security establishment had been convinced that Iran's past restraint reflected weakness and an inability or unwillingness to face the US in a direct war. Tehran is now doing everything it can to demonstrate the opposite - despite the massive cost it itself will pay. Ironically, the assassination of Khamenei facilitated this shift.

    6. One aspect of this is that Iran has now also struck bases in Cyprus, which have been used for attacks against Iran. Iran is well aware that this is an attack on a EU state. But that seems to be the point. Tehran appears intent on not only expanding the war into Persian Gulf states but also into Europe. Note the attack on the French base in the UAE. For the war to be able to end, Europe too has to pay a cost, the reasoning appears to be.

    7. There appears to be only limited concern about the internal situation. The announcement of Khamenei's death opened a window for people to pour onto the streets and seek to overthrow the regime. Though expressions of joy were widespread, no real mobilization was seen. That window is now closing, as the theocratic system closes ranks and establishes new formal leadership.

  • [02-20]: No, even a 'small attack' on Iran will lead to war: "The deal Trump wants is a no-go for Tehran, which is resigned to retaliating if bombed again, limited or otherwise." This was written a week before Trump's "decapitation" strike, so nothing here should have caught Trump or his advisers by surprise. The key thing is that after last year's "12 day war" Iran's internal strategic arguments shifted from calculated appeasement to the realization that they would have to fight back to establish any kind of deterrence:

    Third, since the U.S. strategy, according to the WSJ, is to escalate until Tehran caves, and since capitulation is a non-option for Iran, the Iranians are incentivized to strike back right away at the U.S. The only exit Tehran sees is to fight back, inflict as much pain as possible on the U.S., and hope that this causes Trump to back off or accept a more equitable deal.

    In this calculation, Iran would not need to win the war (militarily, it can't); it would only have to get close to destroying Trump's presidency before it loses the war by: 1) closing the Strait of Hormuz and strike oil installations in the region in the hope of driving oil prices to record levels and by that inflation in the U.S.; and 2) strike at U.S. bases, ships, or other regional assets and make Trump choose between compromise or a forever war in the region, rather than the quick glorious victory he is looking for.

    This is an extremely risky option for Iran, but one that Tehran sees as less risky than the capitulation "deal" Trump is seeking to force on Iran.

    By not giving Iran's leaders a choice they can live with, Trump backed them into a corner, from which they had no choice but to fight back. Now the question becomes how painful that war is to Trump, and what sort of resolution can he live with? Trump may hate the idea of backing down in any respect, but Iran isn't threatening America (or even Israel) like the US is threatening Iran. The US will suffer some losses, but nothing remotely existential. Iran is not demanding that the US give up its own ability to defend itself. Iran is not even remotely a threat to the US homeland. So how much is it worth for Americans to "stay the course" just to shore up Trump's battered ego? If anyone other than Trump could make this decision, it wouldn't take a minute's thought. But this egomaniacal moron was made president, and the presidency was vested with the power to wage war without any checks and balances, so we're stuck in this situation which no one (except for Netanyahu and a few diehard hawks like Lindsey Graham) really wanted.

  • [02-28]: How does this war with Iran end? Or does it? "Trump certainly doesn't want this to turn into a civil war, though Israel has different designs." I think anything that attributes forethought and/or concern to Trump is cutting him too much slack, but Israel is another matter (and by Israel I mean Netanyahu, his coalition partners, and upper security echelons).

  • [03-09]: Trump press conference reveals a man who wants out of war: "He may be preparing the ground for a face saving declaration of victory, but I don't think Iran is going to concede that easily without something in return." A change of leader might have been enough of a cosmetic change in Venezuela to save face and avoid further polarizing warfare, the long and cruel build up to war against Iran has foreclosed those options. Trump's ambitions are higher here, Israel has veto power, and at this point the regime in Iran would be jeopardized more by surrender than by fighting back.

  • [03-17]: Larijani's killing will destroy Iran war off-ramps for Trump: That, of course, is Israel's point: kill off anyone with the temperament and authority to make and sell a deal. Parsi offers three possible explanations, including "opportunity," which was probably decisive, but the idea of making negotiations impossible is so deeply ingrained in Israeli politico-military culture that it was always assumed. If Israel wanted to make a deal with the Palestinians that would allow for peaceful coexistence and shared prosperity, they could have done it 50-60 years ago. The only thing they really needed was credible Palestinian leadership, but they've systematically killed off everyone, all the while whining about having "no partner for peace."

  • [03-17]: Trump's window for face-saving exit may be closing now: "Escalation is only putting him in a lose-lose situation, so negotiating is the only option. However, Iran's growing leverage could prevent an easy off-ramp." Sure, the leverage is reason for searching out an off-ramp. But finding one is going to be hard for Trump to swallow. First he needs to throw Netanyahu under the bus: this was was all his idea, based on faulty intelligence and bad analysis, and to make this credible he needs to radically cut back military aid to Israel, including anything that could give Israel range to attack Iran. And he needs an intermediary to cut a deal with Iran, which the US could then agree to. I initially thought about neutrals like Turkey and India, but better still would be a separate peace with Saudi Arabia and the Perisan Gulf states which ultimately calls for demilitarization of the Persian Gulf (i.e., removal of US bases, in exchange for which Iran will limit rearmament fully normalize relations, and end all sanctions).

  • [03-19]: Facebook post: I won't quote this one in whole, but it starts:

    The developments of the past 24h may prove a turning point in this war: Israel and the US's escalation by striking the Qatari-Iranian Pars field, the strikes against Asaluyeh, Iran's massive retaliation against oil and gas installations in Saudi, Qatar and beyond, which shot up oil prices, the near downing of a F35 by Iran and Secretary Bessent's revelations that the US may unsanction Iranian oil on the waters to bring down oil prices.

    Some grasping at straws here, as it feels more to me like all sides are digging in.

• Joshua Keating: Vox's foreign policy "expert," I've rarely been impressed by him, but I cited his pre-war piece in the introduction, and early on wrote up a comment on his [03-09] piece. I wound up deciding his whole series of articles is worth citing, partly to show evolving thinking from someone who drinks too much of the Kool-Aid but doesn't always swallow it, and because they raise interesting tangents.

  • [02-28]: Why did the US strike Iran? "And five other questions about the latest conflict in the Middle East, answered." Some useful background, but not many answers. One section starts "In fairness to Trump," then notes that he's done stupid things before and gotten away with them, so he may be feeling excessively confident, but then he both sides Iran, concluding "The confidence on both sides may end up getting a lot of people killed." What he fails to note is that over-confidence explains action, which Trump initiated, and not reaction, which is something the aggressor forces you into. Iran may have overestimated their ability to resist and strike back, but once Trump broke off negotiations and ordered the strike, what other option did they have?

  • [03-01]: How Khamenei transformed Iran: "And what could come next." Interview with Alex Vatanka ("a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute and author of the book The Battle of the Ayatollahs in Iran, which examines how the Islamic Republic's backroom rivalries and leadership struggles have shaped its approach to the world"). MEI is mostly funded by the US and Arab governments. Vatanka offers little here, although this seems peculiar:

    I don't know what to make of Khamenei meeting senior folks in his office. That almost seems like he was asking for death. He had been talking a lot about martyrdom in recent speeches.

  • [03-02]: World leaders are almost never killed in war. Why did it happen to Iran's supreme leader? "The killing of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei could usher in a new age of assassination." He ventures that "The nearest precedent for the killing of a head of state may be the KGB assassination of Afghan Communist leader Hafizullah Amin in 1979," although that was more like the US coup that killed their Vietnamese puppet Ngo Dinh Diem in 1963, shortly after the killing of Patrice Lumumba in 1961. More relevant here, Israel has a long history of assassination, going back to the killing of UN mediator Count Folke Bernadotte in 1948, and extending through scores of prominent Palestinians and various others. Also Trump's killing of Qasem Soleimani, not even mentioned here. So his headline is already dated, if ever true. The bigger problem is that the only way to end wars is through negotiation, and for that to work, both sides have to have credible leaders. It would be much easier for Khamenei to sell an unpalatable deal than it will be for some unproven substitute. Even though the US had insisted on Japan's unconditional surrender, MacArthur saw the utility of leaving Hirohito in office.

  • [03-04]: Iran had a plan to fight Israel and the US. It all collapsed after October 7. "The rise and fall of the 'axis of resistance.'" One thing that's always bothered me: if "axis of resistance" really was Iran's masterplan for fighting Israel, why did they give it such a stupid (and inflammatory) name? The whole notion seems like an Israeli psych op. Perhaps Iran should have worked harder to dispel the allegations, but Israel's aggression and intimidation campaign was pushing all of them into common cause and sympathy. And given that Iran was already largely sanctioned by the West, they may have gotten an ego boost by appearing to be the ringleader. But Keating's notion that Iran's own defense was weakened by Israel's wars against Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis is imaginary — albeit of the kind that gave Israel and Trump more confidence to attack.

  • [03-09]: The dangerous lesson countries may take from the Iran war: "Having a nuclear weapon has never looked more appealing." The main reason Iran never developed nuclear weapons, despite having all the building blocks, was the conscience and/or shrewd political judgment of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Trump may have "set back" Iran's nuclear capabilities, but he definitely removed the one real roadblock. The result is that anyone in the regime who advised to go ahead ("just in case") is looking prescient these days, which makes them more likely to accede to power and redouble their efforts. Of course, it may be hard for Iran to progress under the current barrage, but unless the US and Israel relent and can be viewed by Iranians as benign — hard to imagine right now — sooner or later Iranians will regroup and vow to never let this happen again. (Just imagine what we would do under the same circumstances.) But the same lesson, that you actually have to have nuclear weapons ready to fire in order to deter foreign attacks, will also be learned by others, with more leeway to act. (This is, of course, the lesson North Korea drew after the US convinced Iraq and Libya to give up their nuclear programs, then toppled up their regimes.) The surprise here is that the first nation to feel the need to step up its nuclear efforts is France. But others are mentioned here, including Poland, South Korea, and Taiwan. None of those nations are likely to use their weapons against the US, but having them could give them considerable more autonomy, especially the more Trump is viewed as unreliable and unstable.

  • [03-09]: Trump might want "boots on the ground" in Iran. Just not American ones. "An Iranian Kurdish leader says his people are ready to rise up, but need more US support." Easy enough to find some Kurds willing to take American money as mercenaries, but their prospects of success are very slim. Moreover, other countries with Kurdish minorities are likely to take a very dim view of this — especially Turkey, which has intervened against American-armed Kurds in Iraq and Syria. On the other hand, Iran is the one country in the region which has never had a serious Kurdish independence movement (at least as far as I know). Perhaps because Kurdish is more closely related to Persian. Or, more likely, because Iran is a holdover from the era of multi-ethnic empires, and has never had a strong nationalist movement (unlike Turkey and Iraq).

  • [03-11]: The world doesn't have enough ammo for the Iran war: "How long can Iran keep shooting missiles? How long can everyone else keep shooting them down?" That's a good question, but Iran doesn't need a lot of weapons to tie up the Strait and frustrate Trump, nor is the US and Israel likely to compel surrender (if indeed any side has any real idea what that might entail). So this could be a long and pointless war.

  • [03-17]: How Trump's war with Iran is helping Putin: "The spiraling conflict is a lifeline for Russia's leader." I don't think Putin needed a lifeline, but this war gives him a lot of options.

  • [03-20]: Here's how Iran could become a "forever war": "'Mowing the grass,' explained." That's the term Israel has used for its periodic sieges on Gaza, which brutal as they were failed to prevent the uprising of Oct. 7, 2023, but it establishes two salient points: one is that the war never ends; the other is that the approach is fundamentally dehumanizing and sadistic. One should note that this affects both sides: the victims obviously, but also the tormentors, who must continue to live in fear that their crimes will catch up with them. The power of this fear is what ultimately turned Israelis from fear to genocide. As noted here, "the limiting factor of this strategy is the White House's tolerance for war." That's been increasing ever since Bush launched his GWOT (or maybe since WWII), but still is far from Israeli levels. I'm reminded of a story of Ben Gurion talking to DeGaulle, and offering him help with Algeria. DeGaulle replied with something like, "you mean you want us to turn into you?" DeGaulle thought better, and gave up Algeria. Israelis may feel like they're on top of the world right now, but they're up there alone, not just hated by their victims, but increasingly viewed with shame by everyone else. That's not a good way to live.

  • [03-20]: Why the US wants to protect Iran's oil and gas: "The Mideast energy truce is breaking down." Trump has some very deranged ideas about energy, which includes vastly overrating the importance of oil and underrating the fragility of an economic system which he wants to make even more dependent on oil. One weird thing is that his sanction wars (with Russia, Venezuela, and Iran until he blew it up) mostly had the effect of inflating gas prices, which also benefited his Saudi and American donors, without unduly disturbing American voters, who had no idea how cheap gas would be if all the spigots were flowing. Yet having worked so hard to prop up prices, now he's panicking that they're suddenly too high. Plus, he's a greedy bastard, so his ideal solution to Venezuela and Iran is to steal all the oil he thinks is so valuable. Yet, here both his allies and his enemies are busy blowing up the resources he wants to corner — resources that his advisers, no doubt, promised he could capture when they signed him up for the war. This is the only part of the war that's actually funny, not least because it's going to drive everyone else to renewables, while the US turns into a technological backwater.

• Al Jazeera [03-02]: Rubio suggests US strikes on Iran were influenced by Israeli plans: This makes it pretty clear that Israel is directing US foreign policy:

  US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has suggested that a planned Israeli attack on Iran determined the timing of Washington's assault on the government in Tehran.

  The top diplomat told reporters on Monday that Washington was aware Israel was going to attack Iran, and that Tehran would retaliate against US interests in the region, so US forces struck pre-emptively.

  "We knew that there was going to be an Israeli action," Rubio said after a briefing with congressional leaders.

  "We knew that that would precipitate an attack against American forces, and we knew that if we didn't pre-emptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties."

• Michael Hudson [03-02]: The US/Israeli attack was to prevent peace, not advance it.

• Jonathan Larsen [03-02]: US troops were told Iran War is for "Armageddon," return of Jesus: "Advocacy group reports commanders giving similar messages at more than 30 installations in every branch of the military." This story is also reported by:

  • Oscar Rickett [03-03]: US troops were told Iran war 'anointed by Jesus' to bring on Armageddon, watchdog says.

• Vijay Prashad [03-03]: A war that cannot be won: Israel and the United States bomb Iran: Of course, I agree with this conclusion, but that's largely because I subscribe to the broader assertion, that no war can ever be won. The best you can do is to lose a bit less than the other guys, but that does little to redeem your losses. I think this is true even when you downgrade your ambitions: instead of regime destruction and regeneration, which happened in Germany and Japan after WWII, or the occupation and propping up of quisling governments that the US attempted in Afghanistan and Iraq, Trump seems to have adopted Israel's Gaza model which is that of periodically "mowing the grass," hitting Iran repeatedly in a forever war that ultimately points toward genocide.

• Michael Arria:

  • [03-03]: The US media goes to war on Iran: "The US media is predictably spreading government propaganda and ignoring Israel's role as it cheers on the war against Iran and pushes for regime change."

  • [03-05]: War Powers resolution fails in Senate as Democrats scramble to figure out position on Iran war: Vote in favor of establishing some limits was 47-53, with only Rand Paul and John Fetterman breaking party lines.

• Philip Weiss [03-03]: Rubio confirms the heresy: the US went to war in Iran because of Israel: "The heresy of Walt and Mearsheimer's Israel lobby theory was the claim that Israel and its supporters pushed the US into war. Marco Rubio has not confirmed this analysis when he admitted that Trump went to war with Iran because of Israel."

• Zach Beauchamp

  • [03-03]: How does the Iran war end? "Regime change isn't likely. Here's what is." Early speculation, which inevitably leans toward optimism (hence "will end"), although the author eventually mentions "tail risk," which is a subtle way of saying "who fucking knows?"

  • [03-13]: The Iran war is not a video game: "Based memes, real blood." This starts with examples (see the article for links):

    On Wednesday, the New York Times published the preliminary findings of a US investigation into the recent airstrike on Shajarah Tayyebeh, an elementary school for girls in the Iranian city of Minab. The investigation confirmed what all public evidence had pointed to: that an American Tomahawk missile destroyed the school, killing roughly 175 people per Iranian estimates — most of whom were children. . . .

    The day after this damning news report, the White House released a video depicting the Iran war as a Nintendo game.

    The video, set to jaunty childlike music, depicts the United States as a player in various Wii Sports games — tennis, golf, bowling, etc. When the player character hits a hole in one, or bowls a strike, it cuts to real-life footage of a US bomb hitting an Iranian target. "Hole in one!" the Nintendo announcer declares, as we watch human lives being erased. . . .

    Various official X accounts have posted videos intercutting real bombings in Iran with clips from more violent video games, war films like Braveheart, sports highlights, and speeches from Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth set to movie-trailer-style epic music.

    War is not hell, for this White House — it is fun.

    Beauchamp goes on to unpack this at some length, even citing Baudrillard, and concluding:

    The wartime sizzle reels are another manifestation of this ethos. Built not to persuade a neutral audience, but rather to appeal to those already-bought in, their primary service is thought-deadening: replacing any serious consideration of consequences with collective reveling in memes. "When you didn't want the US involved with Iran but the submarine kill videos are sick," one popular right-wing X account tweeted, with a GIF of an ambivalent Larry David posted below the text.

    It thus is not just collective self-deception at work for the administration and its very online supporters: It is collective exculpation. The crimes at Minab, and anywhere else, pale in comparison to sick kills.

  • [03-17]: A top Trump aide resigned over Iran. Liberals should stay away from him. "Antiwar antisemitism is still antisemitism." Well sure, don't pretend that he's a great guy — I mean, he was working for Trump, and got that job out of some kind of ideological loyalty to Trump — but why not except his gift for what it is: even Joe Kent says that Trump had no grounds for going to war, and lied when he said he did. How hard is that?

• Mitchell Plitnick:

  • [03-04]: Debunking the lies of the Iran War. Lies include: "Iran nuclear weapons program"; "imminent threat"; "underground missiles"; Pahlavi ("a marker for the general lack of any vision of what happens as a result of this criminal attack").

  • [03-06]: The war on Iran is forcing Gulf states to reconsider regional strategy as the US and Israel lead the region into uncertainty: "Iran's retaliatory attacks on its neighbors, and the US failure to plan for them, are forcing the Gulf Cooperation Council states to reconsider their regional strategies and their relationship with Washington." The Gulf states are by far the most vulnerable targets for Iranian retaliation, which can be justified by their allowance of US bases and other military and economic ties. They have to start wondering whether their alliance is worth the costs — especially given that they have no control or influence over what the US and Israel do.

  • [03-14]: How aligned are the US and Israel's goals in Iran? That's a good question, and I suspect the answer is not very close. Israel realizes that Iran has never been a serious threat, although the token support they've provided for Hizbullah and Hamas has been good for propaganda, especially with the Americans. They'd like nothing more than for the US to fight Iran, while they focus on Lebanon and the Palestinians (especially in the West Bank). The US, on the other hand, does have interests, especially around the Persian Gulf, that are threatened, and which will make it hard to sustain a long war, or even tolerate a short one. The US also has interests in Europe and Asia, perhaps elsewhere, that will be stressed by this war. And Trump, even more than Netanyahu, is starting off with little popular support, even for war. Trump never expected a long, debilitating war. He was told this would be quick and clean, that Iran would topple, and that he'd be seen as a great liberator. He was conned by people with ulterior motives, and those aren't Trump's motives (which mostly are to make money, which means keeping his Arab allies happy, and inflating his tortured ego). It remains to be seen whether he can figure out a way to act on his doubts, but he did corner Netanyahu into a ceasefire in Gaza.

• Robert Malley/Stephen Wertheim [03-05]: Of course Trump bombed Iran. They rightly accuse Trump, then let him off the hook:

  President Trump's attack on Iran is astonishing in its audacity, aggression and lawlessness. Mr. Trump ordered strikes in the midst of negotiations with a nation that posed no remotely imminent threat to the United States. He did nothing to prepare his country for war. Now he's offering a dizzying array of rationales and objectives, caught in a maelstrom of his own making.

  Beyond breaking with precedent, Mr. Trump also broke with himself. In three straight presidential campaigns, he criticized American military adventures in the Middle East, relying on this stance to distinguish his "America First" mantra from rival Republicans and Democrats alike. "I'm not going to start wars," he vowed on election night in 2024. "I'm going to stop wars."

  Yet for all its Trumpian characteristics, this war is the logical conclusion of how the United States has long dealt with Iran. For decades, presidents have depicted the Islamic Republic not just as a pernicious presence in the Middle East but also as an intolerable danger to the United States that no diplomatic deal could redress. When politicians inflate a threat and stigmatize peaceful means of handling it, an enterprising leader will one day reach for a radical solution.

  Trump could simply have said no, and no one would have criticized him. Attacking Iran was always bad policy, for many reasons. But while his predecessors didn't make that same mistake, they did so little to prevent it from happening that Trump figured he not only had a green light, but attacking Iran would just prove that he's the one president who has the guts to do the deed. Biden could at the very least have revived the JCPOA deal, ending Netanyahu's hysteria about Iranian nukes. Obama could have negotiated a better deal, one that Trump would have found harder to break. Bush and Clinton and/or Bush could simply have buried the hatchet — especially if they had delivered on reasonable peace proposals at the time. Carter and Reagan could have acknowledged that US support for the Shah had harmed most Iranians, and made some amends to keep the situation from deteriorating. War is always the end result of diplomatic failures, and everyone share blame for that aspect of the war on Iran. But only Trump was wacko enough to pull the trigger.

• James North [03-05]: Lies, distortions, and propaganda: how the US mainstream media coverage on Iran hides the truth: "Even those familiar with the biased US mainstream covers of the Middle East are shocked at how bad the reporting on the US-Israel war on Iran has been."

• Peter Beinart [03-06]: Iran is not an existential threat: "Iran poses no significant danger to Israel, let alone [to the] the US." I think that's what he meant in the subhed. The question of whether the US could undermine Israel is a different one, and even more hypothetical. One might as well ask whether Israel could destroy the US. (If so, Trump seems to be their Trojan Horse.)

• Brian Karem:

  • [03-06]: With Iran, confusion is the point: "The Trump administration's jumbled reasoning for war with Iran is part of the strategy."

  • [03-20]: Who still stop Trump on Iran? "As the war escalates and the president digs in, the White House says 'Nobody tells him what to do.'" Much of what I think is based on models of how I have observed people functioning. One thing I've noticed with presidents is that they usually start out cautious and tentative: the job is overwhelming, there is so much they don't understand about it, and they're worried about screwing up, so they look for consensus among their aides, and avoid moves that seem risky. On the other hand, as they settle in, they figure out what they can and cannot get away with, and everyone around them is so flattering they build up ever increasing confidence. Trump fits this model, to a rather extreme degree. Consequently, he has no aides who can question let alone challenge him, and he has many who are full or shit ideas, often ones that he is partial to. So it's hard to imagine anyone in a position to stop him, or even to nudge him into any slightly less self-destructive orbit. It's even becoming hard to see how our damaged democracy stop him. On the other hand, wars tend to impact regardless of how you try to spin them.

• Faris Giacaman [03-06]: Israel is using the 'Gaza doctrine' in Lebanon and Iran: The "old doctrine" was simply an extension of the British version of collective punishment for any transgressions against Israeli power: each and every offense would be met by an overwhelming reprisal, not necessarily directed against whoever was responsible. (During the 2nd Intifade, Israel made a habit of demolishing parts of Arafat's headquarters every time Hamas unleashed a suicide bomber. Needless to say, that wasn't much of a deterrent to Hamas.)

  October 7 changed this equation. "Mowing the lawn" was no longer enough, and neither was keeping the population blockaded in an open-air prison. The new stage of the Dahiya doctrine became the Gaza genocide. After two years of catastrophic civilian punishment, sustained by American financial and military largesse, Israel is now seeking to apply elements of its conduct in Gaza outside of Palestine's borders. We now see this new doctrine, characterized by protracted wholesale annihilation, playing out in Lebanon and Iran.

  Whether this will be recognized as genocide remains to be seen, but the intent is largely the same. While applying the same level of destruction to Iran is probably impossible (at least without resorting to nuclear weapons), Israel sees Iran as a job for the Americans, and for now is focusing on Lebanon.

• Layla Yammine [03-06]: Millions at risk of displacement as Israel bombards Lebanon: "After 15 months of a fragile ceasefire, Lebanon woke up on March 2 to the familiar sounds of Israeli bombs. As the violence escalates and tens of thousands are displaced, Lebanon's social divisions threaten to worsen an already dire situation."

• Umair Irfan [03-06]: The false promise of energy independence: "The Iran war shows yet again that US oil is still vulnerable to foreign shocks."

• Daniel Bush/Olivia Ireland [03-06]: Trump demands 'unconditional surrender' from Iran: The phrase had rarely been used before FDR adopted it as a policy goal in 1943. It was at the time widely noted that conditions were almost always terms of surrender, and were frequently necessary to gain any sort of agreement. In 1945, Japan was allowed the substantial condition of sparing and keeping its emperor. So when Trump says this, he is not only mocking American history, he is exalting himself to a level of power no Iranian leader is likely to recognize:

  Writing on his Truth Social platform, Trump said: "There will be no deal with Iran except UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!

  "After that, and the selection of a GREAT & ACCEPTABLE Leader(s), we, and many of our wonderful and very brave allies and partners, will work tirelessly to bring Iran back from the brink of destruction, making it economically bigger, better, and stronger than ever before.

  "IRAN WILL HAVE A GREAT FUTURE. MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN (MIGA!)."

  Trump is saying, "don't even think of trying to negotiate with me." The point was probably unnecessary, not just because he lacked the power to impose his will, but because he had proved that he couldn't be trusted to follow through on anything he agreed to. [PS: The article also reports on a phone call from Putin to Iran's president Pezeshkian, but not much on details.]

• Benjamin Hart [03-06]: A political-risk guru's biggest worry about Iran: Interview with Ian Bremmer ("founder of the Eurasia Group," a consultancy group that "has been helping the corporate and financial worlds understand and integrate political risk into their decision making"). He doesn't strike me as all that bright, or clear — at least I have no idea what he thinks that "biggest risk" is. But he does offer this:

  I think the fundamental challenge here is that Trump really believed that this could be Venezuela redux, and Venezuela went exceptionally well on a bunch of vectors. First of all, they got the guy they were trying to get. They brought him to justice, and they didn't kill him. Now he's going to face a trial. There were no American servicemembers killed. There were Venezuelan civilians killed, but the numbers were comparatively pretty small, especially compared to the numbers the Venezuelans have killed themselves. And it was popular, not just in the U.S. but across the region. Trump has now gotten a whole bunch of support from the Mexicans, more support on going after their narco-terrorists. And the same thing with Ecuador, which we saw in the last 48 hours. The Americans now have a better regime to work with in Venezuela, with the potential for private-sector investment and support from the IMF, and an economy that might actually work for the Venezuelan people. Literally on every front, this went about as well as you could expect. So Trump was like, Great, let's do that again. And this is not going to work that way on any front.

  I think he's way too quick to count Trump wins here. Is it really true that any time Mexico or Ecuador make a move against a drug kingpin, they're doing it at Trump's behest? Or because they were so impressed by Trump's snatching of Maduro? And just because they captured or killed someone, that's a success that will stand the test of time? I don't doubt that Trump's arrogance was boosted by the Maduro escapade — just like I don't doubt that Hitler's resolve to invade Poland got a boost from Chamberlain's cave-in at Munich. But that doesn't mean that Trump, any more than Hitler, drew the right lesson.

• Ted Snider [03-09]: US and Iran were close to a deal before Trump chose war: This story has been fairly widely reported, and makes some sense, but with war plans clearly in the works, one doubts that Trump would have made any concessions to allow Iran to save face, and perhaps also that Israel was so much in control that any agreement would have been rendered impossible. What is certainly true is that an agreement to end Iran's uranium enrichment, which was the essential component for a nuclear weapons, could have been achieved, had the US and Israel shown the slightest interest in a peaceful resolution. But they had other points to make, and frankly weren't worried about uranium in the first place.

• Max Boot [03-09]: There are two winners in Iran. Neither one is America. "Oil disruption benefits Russia, as does less US aid for Ukraine. And Iran distracts from China." The point about Russia and oil prices is pretty obvious. The one about China is mostly neocon fever dream. It is unlikely that China will take advantage of American distraction in Iran to attempt to seize Taiwan, because they probably realize that the real problem there isn't US deterrence but the unreadiness of the people to rejoin the mainland. Perhaps they could force the issue, but as long as reunification remains a future possibility, they have little reason to be impatient. The only thing likely to force their hand is if the US gets overly aggressive in securing independence for Taiwan — which seems to be the goal of the anti-China hawks, spoiling for a fantastical display of American omnipotence, oblivious to the risks of actual war. But note that there is nothing here about Israel as a winner. While the war certainly adds to Netanyahu's reputation as someone who can wrap Trump around his finger, it doesn't objectively help Israel at all. It just plunges them deeper into a wider war, which beyond providing cover for further "ethnic cleansing" creates more risk than reward.

• Douglas J Feith [03-09]: Trump is trying something new in Iran. Hold on tight. "Critics demanding a 'day after' plan are confusing this presidency with that of George W Bush." Cited here in case you want to hear the latest thoughts from the guy Iraq War Gen. Tommy Franks called the "stupidest fucking guy on the planet," and who was later lampooned by Philip Weiss in [2008-07-30]: How did Doug Feith become a ridiculous figure?. Feith actually does a fairly good job of highlighting how Trump is different from Bush, and what the design is of his lose-lose-lost logic. He fails to note what the two have in common, which is a belief that they can kill their way to peace, and that God always smiles on America, so wars just always work out for the best. And he chides Democrats:

  Ironically, critics from the Democratic Party and elsewhere who are demanding to know the "day after" plan are implying that Trump should adopt Bush's outlook.

  That remark might have been clever, but he forgets that Bush didn't have a "day after" plan either. All he had was the "stupidest fucking guy on the planet" assigned to the job.

• Kate McMahon [03-09]: Israel's goal in Iran is not just regime change, but complete collapse: "For Israel, a failed Iranian state fractured by civil war is preferable to any other outcome." That's largely because they can't imagine any better outcome. That's because they don't want peace. They just want an enemy they can strike with impunity.

• Ron Paul [03-10]: Will the dollar be a casualty of the Iran war? I'm always curious about unseen risks of war, and don't doubt that this one will have hitherto unimagined impacts on world finance and trade. I'd be more worried if I thought Paul had the slightest idea how these things work, but he still hasn't gotten past the idea that you need enough gold to match the value of everything else.

• Jonathan Cook [03-10]: Israel planned war on Iran for 40 years. Everything else is a smoke screen: I don't doubt that there are documents supporting this, as well as Netanyahu's testimony of dreaming of war with Iran for over 40 years, but I've long thought that Iran was the smokescreen, and that Israel's real interests scarcely extended beyond the occupied territories, specifically their eternal quest to create "a land without [Palestinian] people" for a people who wants it all."

• Michael T Klare [03-10]: America's Gaza: "The bombing of Tehran." The population of the Tehran metropolitan area is 16.8 million, about 18% of Iran's total population of 93 million.

• Benjamin Hart [03-11]: Israel doesn't want to beat Iran. It wants to break it. Interview with Danny Citrinowicz ("senior researcher in the Iran and Shi'ite Axis Program at Israel's Institute for National Security Studies"), who previously summed up Israel's position as:

  If we can have a coup, great. If we can have people in the streets, great. If we can have a civil war, great. Israel couldn't care less about the future . . . [or] the stability of Iran.

  He also adds, "In Israel, there is no opposition on the Iranian issue. . . . But people think Iran is the country that wants to destroy us, and you can always justify war with Iran regardless of the price we're going to pay." And Netanyahu is loving this:

  He's considering pushing the election a little bit earlier because he thinks he can build on this. You don't hear the opposition leaders talking about the war. Politically, it's a win-win situation from all sides: He's working with the U.S., so there are amazing operational opportunities. Nobody's challenging him, nobody can counter him, and he's not going to trial because there's a war. And none of this will hurt him in a very close and tight election.

  So look, as long as President Trump will continue this war, whether Trump is there a week, a month, a year — it doesn't matter. We will be there.

• Eli Clifton/Ian S Lustick [03-12]: How the Israeli tail wags the American dog: "The US attack on Iran may be less about American security than about the priorities of Israel's government." Objectively that's certainly true. The only real security is in having others have no reason to attack you, which is the opposite of what one would expect after you attack them. Note also that we're not talking about security for Israel here, just interests. Israel's (or Netanyahu's) is to keep American military and financial aid flowing so Israel can keep operating their war machine, and using the threats they generate as cover for dispossessing Palestinians in their occupied lands.

• Sasan Fayazmanesh [03-13]: It's Israel, stupid!:

  As I have written in my academic works, and in CounterPunch, Netanyahu, Israel's chief devil incarnate and the butcher of Gaza, did not take no for an answer and kept pushing every US administration to attack Iran. He had no success, until a deranged man, surrounded by conduits for Israel, including his son-in-law and a real estate friend, took control of the US government.

  A man who to this day, cannot even pronounce the name of the Iranian general he ordered to be assassinated in 2020, or the name of the "supreme leader" of Iran whom he helped to be murdered in 2026, finally did what Netanyahu wanted to be done: attack Iran on behalf of Israel. The first attack, as I wrote in my July 2025 essay for this journal, did not accomplish Netanyahu's goal of a "regime change" and restoration of monarchy in Iran. So, Netanyahu kept up the pressure. He visited the White House multiple times since July 2025 to plan death and destruction in Iran.

• Mike Lofgren [03-14]: Why the Iran was was inevitable: "There were many reasons behind Trump's decision to attack — but none of them were about US national security."

• Deepa Parent [03-14]: 'You are all worse than each other': anti-regime Iranians turn on Trump: "Mood among some in Iran shifts from hope of being rescued to dismay at destruction of infrastructure, culture and lives." I doubt if anyone in Iran ever looked to outsiders for "hope of being rescued. The best thing outsiders can do for the beleaguered people under a regime they despise is to leave them alone, or short of that limit their efforts to peripheral issues, like limiting trade and foreign investments, while reporting on human rights abuses. That is roughly what happened in the ending of the regimes in the Soviet Union and its East European satellites. On the other hand, vigorous sanctions against Cuba and North Korea, and Iraq before the invasion, only strengthened harsh regimes. This piece quotes someone foolish enough to think that Trump's strikes might help topple the regime, but that person's already disillusioned. It shouldn't have taken actual strikes to realize that Trump and Israel have their own reasons for war, and the welfare of the people of Iran has nothing to do with them.

• Alfred W McCoy [03-15]: How the past whispers to the present in Iran: Good historical review of US mishandling of Iran, comparing this new war to the 1956 Suez Crisis, what he calls an instance of "micro-militarism," which is really just a vote for violence without thinking through how much you are risking.

• Bassam Haddad [03-15]: How might the US-Israeli war on Iran fail?: "Every week the US-Israeli war grinds on without a decisive conclusion becomes a lesson in the limits of US power. A campaign initially meant to reinforce US and Israeli supremacy may instead signal its decline." This doesn't go beyond the obvious, other than to stress that the attacks have only consolidated the regime's power in Iran.

• Richard Florida [03-16]: Could this be the end of Dubai?

• Lauren Aratani [03-18]: Trump waives US shipping law for oil and gas in bid to lower prices: "Trump issued a 60-day waiver of the Jones Act, a law passed in 1920 as a way to protect the US shipping industry. The law prevents foreign-flagged ships that carry commodities like oil and gas from traveling through US waterways."

• Michelle Goldberg

  • [03-18]: Joe Kent's resignation letter is dangerous because it's half true: Kent was Trump's director of the National Counterterrorism Center. He resigned, admitting that there was no imminent threat from Iran, and blaming Israel for spreading misinformation that led to Trump's decision to attack. Kent is a former Green Beret, who moved into counterterrorism (and politics) after his wife was killed by an ISIS suicide bomber. He could be called a right-wing nut case, but he's also "half-right," which Goldberg admits while worrying that "it taps into old antisemitic tropes about occult Jewish control," and "the more [the war] drags on, the more I worry about a full-blown American 'dolchstoßlegende,' a modern version of the stab-in-the-back myth that German nationalists used to blame Jews for their humiliation in World War I." I'd note that those tropes only persist on the right, where they are outnumbered by neocons and Christian Zionists who envy and/or worship Israeli power. Still, dispelling them will be difficult given how Netanyahu brags about his manipulation of Trump, the obvious dissembling of Israel lobbyists (Jonathan Greenblatt, head of ADL, is quoted here), and their insistence that opposition to Israel's caste system and genocide equates to antisemitism (let's call this the power of suggestion to otherwise naive people). Also that no matter how bad the Iran war goes for the US, it won't result in the degree of defeat Germany suffered in 1918 (or France in 1871, where a similar myth led to the Dreyfuss Affair).

  • [03-16]: Trump is trying to bully America into supporting his war. It won't work.

• Eldar Mamedov [03-18]: Israel's assassination game: Take all the pragmatists off the board: "The killing of Ali Larijani paves the way for more hardliners to fill the void, and conveniently for some, less chance to end the war peacefully."

• Naman Karl-Thomas Habtom [03-18]: Iran war shows perils of America's Mideast bases: "US outposts are sitting targets for Iranian strikes." I imagine they are fairly well protected, but they open their host countries up for attacks against softer targets. Iran is going to be looking for some kind of assurance that they won't be attacked again. The most reassuring proof I can think of would be the the US to remove its bases. This would have to be initiated by the host countries, who should be having second thoughts about allowing aggressive militarists to camp on their lawns. This could be combined with normalized relations and armament limits that would build trust and benefit all. And if this happened, Trump could hardly refuse to leave.

• Kelley Beaucar Vlahos [03-18]: Vast number of Trump voters want him to declare victory and get out: "A new poll showing cracks in MAGA support and no interest in boots on the ground."

• Arron Reza Merat [03-18]: Israel has nuclear weapons. It may use them. Worse, Netanyahu may trick Trump into using them. The prospect I can imagine is that Iran can resist conventional bombing indefinitely, while keeping the Strait of Hormuz closed, inflicting sporadic damage on Gulf targets, while Trump (not Israel) grows frustrated and impatient. Iran tries to hide its arms factories, moving most of them deep underground. This includes its stockpiles of uranium, any centrifuges that have survived, and parts for repairing or making more ones. The US supply of conventional "bunker buster" bombs proves inadequate, but they've developed nuclear warheads specifically as "bunker busters." They may feel that aiming them at remote targets can be justified, and go ahead. Global opinion condemns them, but doesn't stop them from launching another, and another, by which point someone proposes that they threaten a small city if Iran doesn't surrender. (My first thought was the holy city of Qom, but I was surprised to find it has amassed 1.2 million people, so they might want to pick somewhere a bit smaller for a demonstration.) Of course, if/when Iran develops their own nuke, the shoe will be on the other foot, at which point US and/or Israeli panic could very well ensue (and this is where Israeli panic could race ahead of American).

• Robert Kuttner [03-18]: Israel's manipulation of Trump on Iran: "The worse the Iran war goes, the more blame is likely to be directed at Israel, and by association the Jews."

• Blaise Malley [03-19]: Tulsi Gabbard distances US war goals further from Israel's: "In the congressional hot seat Thursday, the DNI and CIA director John Ratcliffe insisted Tel Aviv was focused on regime change but Washington was not."

• Jason Wilson [03-19]: West Point analysis warns that strait of Hormuz blockade will strangle US defense industry: "Report shows how minerals critical to defense readiness have seen 'near total' disruption in seaborne trade." Take sulphur, for instance, which is used to extract copper and cobalt from low-grade ores. "The current sulfur shock is becoming a copper problem, and that copper problem risks quickly becoming a readiness and resilience problem." They call this a "prelogistical crisis," which is to say a crisis which will be ignored until it's too late.

• Alex Shephard [03-19]: This is how forever wars begin: "First, with lies and bombs. Then, with a request for hundreds of billions in taxpayer dollars. Will Congress cave to the White House yet again?"

• Ryan Cooper [03-20]: Ol' Donny Trump has really stepped in it this time: "In Iran, he finally created a jam for himself it will not be easy to wriggle out of." There's a reference here to an interesting piece from 2024 called Revisiting the tanker war, which Cooper sums up here:

  The Pentagon has filing cabinets stuffed with war plans dealing with this possibility. The U.S. might take out most of Iran's formal military, but even back in the 1980s during the Tanker War, when Iran was much less developed than it is today, the Navy found it very difficult to stop irregular forces from laying mines at night, or planting limpet bombs, conducting missile attacks from speedboats, and so on. Operation Earnest Will, an escort mission to keep the strait open, required more than two dozen ships operating simultaneously (including support from both the British and the French), went on for more than a year, and saw significant casualties.

  Today, not only do we have drone technology making these types of attacks much more dangerous and effective, but also the U.S. Navy is much smaller than it was at the end of the Cold War. In particular, it has almost none of the frigates and minesweepers that were core to the Tanker War's escort mission.

  Cooper also gets into the "how will this end" question, suggesting that "the easiest and least painful way to end Trump's war is likely just to give up and let Iran seize the strait" — assuming they would be content to collect tolls to allow ships to pass, but he doubts that would satisfy them (and obviously it wouldn't satisfy Trump or Netanyahu).

  Making everything worse is Trump's alliance with Israel, whose government is evidently bent on turning Iran into a stygian nightmare of death and suffering. As noted above, the destruction of Ras Laffan was touched off by an Israeli strike — and it happened after Trump asked Israel not to. Iran struggles to hit back at Israel, but it can hit at the allies of Israel's most important ally, and increase the pressure on the global economy.

  What Trump usually does when one of his dotard plots backfires is to retreat — chicken out, as Wall Street has called it — and pretend it never happened. That sort of works with something like tariffs, where long-term damage takes a long time to appear. But it likely won't be possible here. . . .

  So if Trump tries to cut and run, he will face one of the few things he reacts to — a storm of criticism on television — plus fierce pushback from the D.C. blob. Even if he were to try to do it, Israel almost certainly would bait him back into the conflict by inciting more tit-for-tat bombing.

  If Trump doesn't cut and run, he faces a hole in global energy needs that grows by about 20 million barrels of oil and 20 billion cubic feet of natural gas every day, with steadily increasing damage to the delicate energy infrastructure all around the Persian Gulf that will take months or years to repair, and more and more American soldiers wounded or killed.

  It would be a thorny situation even for the wisest statesmen in world history. Alas, all we have is an elderly idiot whose primary method of diplomacy is posting barely literate screeds on his personal social media site. Folks, it isn't looking good.

• Yumna Patel [03-20]: Anger in the GCC spreads as Iran retaliates over US-Israeli strikes: "These are signs of the growing impatience of Iran's Arab neighbors with Iran's tactic of striking at them in response to Israeli or American attacks. But the anger of the Gulf states isn't only reserved for Iran." A lot of stress here, which could crack up several ways.

• Bryan Walsh [03-20]: The pain from the Strait of Hormuz crisis will be felt far beyond the pump: "Four billion people are fed by fossil fuels. The Iran war is showing just how fragile that is." There's a chart here that argues that about half of the world's current population (8 billion) wouldn't be able to live today without synthetic fertilizers, which are mostly made with oil, with about 30% normally shipped through the now closed Strait of Hormuz. This production and distribution has developed with little thought from political leaders, especially ones as stupid and careless as Trump and Netanyahu, who have now endangered the entire world.

• Caitlin Dewey [03-20]: What everyday life is like for Iranians right now: "Iranians are still trying to work, study, and parent under the constant threat of both airstrikes and regime violence." This is a good question, but to answer it they're interviewing Roya Rastegar, a co-founder of Iranian Diaspora Collective, which is to say someone not in Iran, claiming only to be "in touch with a network of people on the ground in Iran," and even so "the blackout makes it almost impossible to hear about conditions on the ground in real time." So cue to say whatever you think is happening.

• Ian Welsh [03-20]: This is the end of the American empire. Period. Opens with:

  My friends, this is it. America isn't going to win this war, unless they use nukes, but even if I'm wrong and they squeeze out their .01% chance of success, it is over. The army is exhausted and can't be re-armed in less than a decade, with Chinese help. The Middle East will be in ruins. The AI bubble will crash out without money and resources from the Gulf. Everyone's going to turn hard from hydrocarbons to renewables, especially solar, and that means China is going to make absolute bank.

  I'm a little confused when he demotes this to "the second stupidest war decision I've seen in my entire life" ("the first was Ukraine refusing a very generous peace deal," something I somehow missed, but I don't doubt that Ukraine was solvable had Obama, Trump, and Biden shown any actual concern for the country they were arming), and it's probable that his life is a good deal shorter a period of time than mine. I also doubt that "the Israelis almost certainly have video of Trump raping kids," but in the same sentence he hits on a truism: "Americans can't admit they're losing." So caveat lector here, please do your own thinking. My thinking is divided between: yes, the empire may not be finished, but it is bound to be severely diminished; and, well, it wasn't really an empire in the first place, just a network of bases and arms placed at the service of global capitalism, which probably doesn't need them anymore (not least because countries like China and Russia are already part of that global capitalism, and others like Iran and Venezuela want to be, just not on America's terms).

• Brian McGlinchey [03-20]: Jion the US military — kill and die for Israel: This seems like a fair and useful debunking of many of the propaganda points used to indict Iran, turning them into a suitable target for US-Israeli aggression. Whether the US is doing its part for Israel or for its own reasons can be debated.

• Robert Wright [03-21]: War isn't a zero-sum game. I happen to be reading Wright's 2000 book Nonzero, so I'm deep into this sort of logic:

  But, that inconvenience aside, the fact that war is non-zero-sum seems like potentially good news. If nations rationally pursue their self-interest, shouldn't the knowledge that war often makes both sides worse off discourage them from starting wars?

  In theory, maybe. But, back in the real world, there's a massively destructive war going on in the Middle East.

  Well, we might as well put it to good use! I think viewing the Iran War in game theoretical terms can shed light on the question of why humankind seems so bad at respecting the logic of game theory — why nations keep getting into wars that, history tells us, may inflict huge costs on all concerned.

  While I don't want to distract from the very enlightening discussion that follows, I already have two points to make. One is that the weights get distorted when you absolutely don't care for how much harm is done to the other side (or even more if you regard that harm as a positive for your side). This is unfortunately common. Even countries that see themselves as liberators struggle to act in ways that show concern. Then there are countries that are totally self-concerned, like Israel. Second, some countries give themselves a handicap, by assuming that they will be attacked, and counting the losses they could suffer in that event as gains when they attack first.

  Well, I also have a third, which is that hardly anyone thinks to anticipate the long-range costs of seeming to win. Israel's stunning "win" in 1967 led directly to the 1970-71 and 1973 wars, and indirectly to dozens more, including the current war with Iran. Japan's big wins in 1895 and 1905 led to their massive defeat in WWII. Even before such a final reckoning, the arrogance and belligerence took a psychic toll, on the warriors as well as their victims. It's been said that the worst thing that ever happened to the US was "winning" WWII. The US became a very different country after that, much to the woe of the world and to ourselves.

  And maybe there's a fourth point, which is that the people who decide to go to war simply aren't very good at figuring out why. Wright finally gets around to this:

  I listen to a lot of podcasts, and some of them are what you could call foreign policy establishment podcasts — they're produced by, say, the Council on Foreign Relations or some very buttoned up DC think tank, or they feature conversations among the kinds of people who work at such places. And, almost invariably, the people on these podcasts, in gravely assessing the motivations that start and then steer wars, stay at the level of geopolitics and national interest and assiduously avoid the level of domestic politics. To hear them talk you'd think that Trump was Metternich — or at least a dimmer version of Metternich — rather than a former Reality TV star who is just trying to keep his ratings up by staging a new spectacle that's more eye-catching than the last one.

  This kind of credulous discourse is a disservice to the nation. It sustains the myth that the people who steer American foreign policy are by and large worth taking seriously. They're not. The politicians who steer it are for the most part just trying to get re-elected — and will serve whichever cluster of special interests can further that cause. And the "experts" who help steer it, including many of the voices on these podcasts, are people who managed to get hired by think tanks that, for the most part, are funded by the same special interests that are corrupting those politicians.

• Karim Sadjadpour [03-23]: Iran is trying to defeat America in the living room: "The regime knows that its best ally against American power is American public opinion."

  Although opinion polls, oil prices, and the number of projectiles remaining are measurable, the fate of the war will be determined in part by the resolve of both parties, something far more difficult to measure. A democratic president's will to fight is constrained by elections, polls, gas prices, and the news cycle. An authoritarian regime fighting for its survival answers to none of those pressures. Reagan had resolve until Congress didn't. Bush had resolve until six in 10 Americans called his war a mistake. This asymmetry of resolve is Iran's greatest structural advantage. Tehran wins by not losing; Trump loses by not winning.

• Kelly Grieco [03-23]: The "Iran is losing" narrative is tracking the wrong number: "Yes, missile and drone launch rates are down 90%+. But hit rate (or confirmed impacts per projectile fired) has been climbing steadily since Day 1." The thread provides more numbers. "And on the metric that matters (cost imposed per missile fired) Iran may actually be getting more effective as the war goes on, not less."

• Yun Li [03-23]: Volume in stock and oil futures surged minutes before Trump's market-turning post.

  • Paul Krugman [03-24]: Treason in the futures markets: Takes a closer look at this event. I hate the word "treason," and wouldn't use it here, but this sure looks suspicious, even compared to the level of graft we've come to expect. As I recall, back during the Bush admin, some genius wanted to create a futures market on terror attacks, purely as a way to harness the genius of markets as an intelligence source. The idea suffered a crib death, as the prospect of betting on terrorism was hard even for neocons to swallow. New "prediction markets" raise the same concerns about moral hazard, but they're run by the private sector, so nobody asked permission, and this administration won't lift a finger, possibly because ideologically they want rackets unregulated, or perhaps just because they want to use their insider knowledge to play?

    This "sharp and isolated jump in volume" — which you can see for the oil futures market in the chart at the top of this post — was especially bizarre because there were no major news items — no major publicly available news items — to drive sudden big market transactions. The story would be baffling, except that there's an obvious explanation: Somebody close to Trump knew what he was about to do, and exploited that inside information to make huge, instant profits.

    This wasn't the first time something like this has happened under Trump. There were large, suspicious moves in the prediction market Polymarket before previous attacks on Iran and Venezuela. But this front-running of U.S. policy was really large: the Financial Times estimates the sales of oil futures in that magic minute Monday morning at about $580 million, and that doesn't count the purchases of stock futures.

• Katherine Doyle/Courtney Kube/Dan DeLuce [03-25]: Inside Trump's daily video montage briefing on the Iran war: "The montage, which typically runs for about two minutes, has raised concerns among some of the president's allies that he may not be receiving the complete picture of the war."

• Dave DeCamp: He writes short news items for Antiwar.com. These are merely the most recent:

  • [03-25]: Suspected US airstrike kills seven Iraqi soldiers.

  • [03-25]: Iranian official suggests Yemen's Houthis could close Bab el-Mandeb Strait if US launches ground attacks.

Epsteinmania: As Steven Colbert noted right after Trump started the war: "Fun fact: 'Epic Fury' [the name given to the "operation"] is an anagram for 'Forget Epstein.'" This abbreviated section suggests it's working (but I've never pushed the story hard).

• Elie Honig [03-06]: The Clintons have testified about Epstein. Will Trump be next? No. Nor an I sure he should, but I can't blame folks for asking. The Republicans opened up this can of worms, in one of their few efforts at bipartisanship. As noted, Hilary had nothing to offer, and the only reason for subpoenaing her was to put on the record something we already knew: that Bill sometimes operated on his own. As for Bill, after admitting "some truth of Clinton's claim that he 'did nothing wrong,' Honig continues:

  But the "saw nothing" part of his testimony is open to reasonable questioning. Consider, first, that Clinton's friendship with Epstein peaked in the early 2000s — right as Epstein was running his massive international child-sex-trafficking ring, according to the Justice Department's indictment of Epstein, which charged criminal conduct up until 2005. And this wasn't some passing relationship, some casual glad-handing of a potential donor. Clinton flew on Epstein's plane at least 16 times, sent a warm note to Epstein on his 50th birthday in 2003, and gave a glowing quote to New York Magazine for a 2002 Epstein profile. He also shows up in many photographs partying and swimming and hot-tubbing and receiving massages while with Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, and others — including women whose identities have been redacted. (Clinton testified that he did not know and did not have sex with his hot-tub partner.) Yet, through it all, Clinton — a Yale-trained lawyer, reputed possessor of a genius-level IQ, two-term former president — had no idea at all that anything might have been awry, not even an "inkling."

SAVE America Act: "Republicans are pushing to get historically restrictive voter ID bill to the president's desk." Evidently "SAVE" stands for Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements, a program "initially made to check if non-citizens were using government benefits." But the proposed law reportedly is much more restrictive, requiring a "birth certificate or passport," something which "half of Americans don't have." People who have changed their names, especially married women, face further obstacles. (I have an expired passport and a "REAL ID" drivers license. Unclear whether either would work, although both are based on a valid birth certificate.) The bill also adds burdens to mail in ballots. (Trump wants to completely ban them.) The bill passed the House on Feb. 11, and is being debated in the Senate.

• Eliza Sweren-Becker/Owen Backskai [03-20]: New SAVE Act bills would still block millions of American from voting.

• Jelinda Montes [03-18]: Trump is going all in on the SAVE America Act. It could make voting harder for millions.

• Jamelle Bouie [03-18]: This is what the president is fixated on right now? He points out that the bill could backfire against Republicans, as it most clearly discriminates against several groups that broke for Trump last time, like women who changed their name for marriage, and uneducated people who never got a passport. I'd throw in older folk who lost track of their documentation (I may be one: I have an expired passport, which should still prove my citizenship, but does it?). Perhaps the biggest question is who has enough motivation to fight the bureaucracy just to vote? Still, Trump and his party cling to the notion that the fewer people who can vote, the better:

  The point of the SAVE Act, for them, is to use a ginned-up panic over noncitizen voting to disenfranchise the tens of millions of Americans who oppose the president and who have, as a result, been placed outside the political community. The SAVE Act embodies Trump and the Republican Party's astonishing contempt for the idea that a fair election is one in which you can vote without being hassled by the state.

The Oscars: Prodded on by my wife, I managed to watch most of the nominated pictures (without, sorry to say, enjoying them much), so I was better informed than usual. I also watched the whole show (on a delay from fixing dinner, so we could fast-forward through the commercials). In last week's Music Week, I wrote a bit about the movies in advance of the show. Maybe I'll follow up in the next Music Week?

• Adam Nayman [03-16]: The last human Oscars?: "This year's show was both steeped in nostalgia for what the Oscars used to mean and bristling with ambivalence about the shape of things to come."

• Margaret Hartmann [03-16]: All the Trump insults at the 2026 Oscars: Including the following:

• Eileen Jones [03-16]: Javier Bardem was a bright spot at the Oscars last night.

• Brandon Harris [03-10]: What can an Oscar mean for Palestinian stories? "This year's international feature category became a test of what narratives the Academy is willing to recognize." A look at The Voice of Hind Rajab.

• Glenn Kenny [03-16]: Never won an Oscar pool: "Hollywood's biggest night, which is why they snubbed Brigitte Bardot in death, I suppose." I too kept waiting for Bardot to get a mention in their quite long and generally good memorial segment.

Major Threads

Israel: Netanyahu finally got his war against Iran, which is mostly reported in the long Trump Bombs Iran section. Hezbollah offered enough of a reaction for Israel to renew its assault on Lebanon (not that, despite a "ceasefire," it had ever halted). But more importantly, the Iran war distracts the US from Israel's violations of the "Gaza Peace Plan," and provides cover for more aggression against Palestinians in the West Bank.

• Yakov Hirsch [03-04]: The War to Erase October 7: What 'The Atlantic' leaves out about Netanyahu and the US-Israeli assault on Iran: "The Atlantic's Yair Rosenberg recasts Benjamin Netanyahu as a tragic figure forced to take radical action after October 7, ignoring his long history of fomenting war and exploiting Jewish trauma to further himself and his Zionist ideology." The section on "Weaponizing Holocaust memory" is useful for understanding the psychology that underlies Israeli politics:

  This silence is not just personal to Rosenberg. It flows from a broader Hasbara Culture that treats Netanyahu's worldview as sacred. A certain cluster of "Never Again" journalists — Jeffrey Goldberg, Rosenberg, Kirchick, and others — have spent decades telling American readers that Israel's enemies should be read through Holocaust categories. Iran is not just a hostile state; it is Amalek. Hamas is not just a brutal, rejectionist movement; they are, as Rosenberg himself argues, the new Nazis who simply want to kill Jews. Anyone who doubts that framework is portrayed as naive at best, or dangerously indulgent of genocidal antisemitism at worst. . . .

  In Hasbara Culture's world, Netanyahu is not just another politician; he is the man who sees 1938 coming again. His constant talk of "existential threats" is treated not as rhetoric but as revelation. Once you accept that frame, questioning his motives becomes almost taboo. If you say he is exaggerating or exploiting the threat, you are implicitly saying Jews should not take existential danger seriously. If you suggest he is using Holocaust memory for political gain, you risk being lumped with the people who accuse "the Jews" of "using" the Holocaust.

  That is why, when Netanyahu throws around Amalek and Holocaust analogies, these journalists nod along. It is why they treated his Gaza campaign and now his Iran war primarily as responses to October 7, rather than as the culmination of a long political and ideological project. And the long political and ideological project is the revisionist Zionist program he inherited and perfected: a maximalist claim to the land between the river and the sea; permanent rejection of Palestinian sovereignty; and an "iron wall" ethic that treats overwhelming, exemplary violence as the only reliable guarantee of Jewish safety and supremacy. Read this way, his invocations of Amalek and the Holocaust are not just panic or trauma, but the moral vocabulary of a worldview that prefers endless war-management, de facto annexation, and regional work-arounds to any settlement that would concede equal rights to Palestinians — and that is exactly how Gaza, and now Iran, end up looking like destiny rather than choice.

  Rosenberg's article is here:

  • Yair Rosenberg [03-02]: The Israel of October 6 is never coming back: Wherein "a senior Obama official" described Netanyahu as "a chickenshit" ("too timid to pull the trigger").

• Tareq S Hajjaj:

  • [03-04]: Palestinians in Gaza fear famine returning as Israel cuts off food amid Iran war: "Once Israel and the US launched their war on Iran, Israel closed the crossings into Gaza and cut off all aid. Palestinians in the Strip now fear a return to famine amid food shortages and soaring prices."

  • [03-19]: Food shortages return to Gaza as Israel tightens aid restrictions under the cover of its war on Iran: "Israel's tightened restrictions on the entry of aid into Gaza since the US-Israeli war on Iran have led to shortages of basic necessities and an astronomical rise in prices, raising fears of a return to famine."

• Ross Barkan [03-06]: The day Israel lost America: "The Iran war sure looks like a breaking point."

• Qassam Muaddi:

  • [03-07]: Israel 'strangles' West Bank amid war on Iran: "With the world's attention focused on the US-Israeli war on Iran, Israel is making conditions unlivable for Palestinians in the West Bank. Residents say that every Israeli measures to 'strangle' Palestinians feels like it's 'irreversible.'"

  • [03-11]: Why is Israel trying to cause an 'explosion' in the West Bank? "Israel is cracking down on Palestinians in the West Bank and pushing the territory to the brink of a major conflagration."

• Mohammed R Mhawish [03-09]: The Iran war is a disaster for Gaza: "How the crisis leaves Gaza's 2 million people more friendless, isolated, and vulnerable than ever before."

• Ahmed Dremly/Ibtisam Mahdi [03-10]: 'The war is between Israel and Iran. Why should people in Gaza pay the price?': "After closures of Gaza's crossings drove up food casts and stalled medical evacuations, ongoing Israeli strikes raise fears of a renewed large-scale assault." One could also wonder why Iran should pay the price of Israel's war against Gaza. I fear it's reached the point where it no longer matters to Israel who they are hitting, as long as they are hitting someone else, showing the world that this is what they can and will do.

• Michael Arria [03-10]: US support for Israel continues to plummet, despite media's best efforts. "Last month, a Gallup poll found that 41% Americans now sympathize more with Palestinians, compared to 36% who say they sympathize more with Israelis." Further down, I saw a term I hadn't heard before: "Holocaust inversion," which is a new code for people who think Israel is guilty of genocide. This tries to force an analogy with "Holocaust denial," which is not uncommon (but probably exaggerated) among old-school antisemites. But the new charge is very different: those who are so charged not only acknowledge the Holocaust, they are consistent in applying the standard definition of genocide, regardless of who's doing the killing, and who's being killed.

• Elia Ayoub [03-11]: Israel's renewed war on Lebanon is about more than just Hezbollah: "After violating the 'ceasefire' 10,000 times, Israel is once again pounding Lebanon as its enduring thirst for war drives ever expanding ambitions."

• Oren Ziv [03-13]: 'Our coverage is not truthful': How Israel is censoring reporting on the war: "Barred from publishing details of Iranian missile impacts or interceptions, local and international journalists are struggling to tell the full story."

• Janet Abou-Elias [03-18]: US policy toward Lebanon is badly broken: "Washington has stoked a cycle of violence by prizing Israeli security over Lebanese stability." Sane people would realize that stability is essential for security, and focus on the basics. Israel has proven repeatedly that security must be mutual, and cannot be attained by one side repeatedly bombing the other.

• Mayssoun Sukarieh [03-20]: The Gods must be cruel: Inside Israel's psychological warfare campaign in Lebanon: "Israel is waging a campaign of psychological warfare in Beirut by projecting godlike power from the skies, raining down bombs that mete out death and dropping leaflets vowing that Beirut and Gaza will share in the same fate."

• Michael Sfard [03-21]: From Sde Teiman, the truth about Israel's military justice system has been set free: "By dropping all charges against the soldiers filmed abusing a Palestinian detainee, Israel has abandoned the whole masquerade of accountability."

• Oren Ziv/Ariel Caine [03-24]: "Erasing the l ines": How settlers are seizing new regions of the West Bank: "After decades consolidating their control over Area C, Israeli settlers are expanding into Areas B and A — nominally under Palestinian Authority jurisdiction — and displacing communities."

Elsewhere Around the World: With Ukraine turning into something of a forgotten war, I thought I'd extend this section to pick up bits on how the rest of the world is reacting to Trump's adventurism. As far as I can tell, slowly and cautiously, which doesn't make for a lot of news, but I suspect there is more going on than I'm noticing.

• Alan Rappeport [03-12]: Trump removes sanctions on Russia to help oil flow amid Iran conflict: "Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said it was 'unfortunate' that the move could benefit Russia, but maintained that it was only for the short term." Here I was thinking this was a hypothetical, until I saw this story. What about the Russian tankers headed to Cuba?

• Anatol Lieven

  • [03-18]: A Euro leader cursed for calling for peace — with Russia: "Belgian Prime Minister Bart de Wever said what he 'no one dares to say out loud' about Moscow, oil, and Ukraine."

  • [03-04]: Europe's weakness on Iran, Gaza has radicalized politics at home: "Israeli actions and the continent's complicity in them have destabilized the center, while the far left and far right become stronger"

Trump Threatens the World: I originally set this section up to deal with Trump's threats of war. We're obviously beyond that now, so see the section on Iran for more on that. Nothing much on Cuba here, but that front seems to be heating up. But there is a fair amount here on Trump's newfound militarist mentality. For a while, I thought Trump had an aversion to war — while appreciating the military's usefulness for graft — that distinguished him from classic fascists, but once again we find that fascist power fetishism inevitably ends in war.

• Leah Schroeder [02-17]: Further US intervention in Haiti would be worst Trump move of all: "Washington sent warships this month to deploy 'gunboat diplomacy' while the island nation continues its frefall of violence and corruption." Note date, 11 days before Iran. Never say never.

• David French [03-01]: War and peace cannot be left to one man — especially not this man. I disagree with much of this, but he tries hard to make "a case for striking Iran":

  As my colleague Bret Stephens has argued, the Iranian regime is evil, hostile to the United States and militarily aggressive. It has engaged in a decades-long conflict with the United States. Beginning with the hostage crisis in 1979 — when Iranians seized and held American diplomats and Embassy employees for 444 days — Iran has conducted countless direct and indirect attacks against the United States.

  Iranian-backed terrorists are responsible for the Marine barracks bombing in Lebanon in 1983 that killed 241 Americans. Iranian-backed terrorists killed 19 Americans in the Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia in 1996. Iran-backed militias killed hundreds of American soldiers in Iraq.

  Since the second Iraq war, Iranian-backed militias have continued their attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq. In fact, it's fair to say that Iran's efforts to attack and kill Americans have been relentless for decades.

  Beyond its attacks on Americans, Iran is one of the most aggressive and destabilizing regimes in the world. It has supported Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis — three of the world's most powerful terrorist militias — it has attacked Israel with ballistic missiles, and it has supplied Russia with drones to use in its illegal invasion of Ukraine.

  Iran is deeply repressive at home. It stifles dissent, deprives women of their most basic human rights and massacres its own people by the thousands when they protest against the regime.

  If you're going to list foreign countries that should not obtain access to nuclear weapons, Iran should be at or close to the very top. Blocking Iran's ability to develop and deploy nuclear weapons is among our most vital national interests.

  This omits a lot of context, and also ignores the counterargument that if these constitute a casus belli for attacking Iran, one could construct a much longer list of similar reasons striking the US. Reasonable people should object to strikes on either, not based on the historical facts but because the attacks won't solve the problem, and will only lead to more problems. (By the way, I don't mean to justify the attitudes and behavior of Iran's rulers. I am critical of them, but one of my main complaints is the extent to which they have embraced their enemies' views on deterrence, subversion, and ultimately war. I also object to what I take to be the arrogant belief that they are a great country and deserve to have influence over lesser countries in the region.)

  French also offers a "case against an attack," which sad to say is even lamer than his case for. It starts with the worry that in attacking Iran, Trump is wasting missiles needed to deter China from attacking Taiwan. More sensible are his worries that Iran will fight back effectively, that the regime might not fall or collapse, and that its new leaders will emerge even more determined than ever to develop the nuclear weapons, especially since those Iranians who favored a path of caution have been killed off.

• Mark Mazzetti, et al. [03-02]: How Trump decided to go to war: "President Trump's embrace of military action in Iran was spurred by an Israeli leader determined to end diplomatic negotiations. Few of the president's advisers voiced opposition." The "paper of record" explains the semi-official story, which mostly makes sense, even if the reporters have little sense of just how extraordinarily deranged Trump's decision is. The essential elements are: Netanyahu's long, determined campaign to ensnare Trump in a war with Iran; the staffing of the White House and Pentagon with action-first figures, fitting Trump's own instincts; and "a remarkable piece of intelligence," an opportunity for decapitation which spurred Trump to act immediately. The assassination strike is reported here:

  • Julian E Barnes, et al. [03-01]: The CIA helped pinpoint a gathering of Iranian leaders. Then Israel struck.: "The killing of Iran's supreme leader and other top Iranian officials came after close intelligence sharing between the United States and Israel, according to people familiar with the operation."

• Michelle Goldberg [03-02]: The idea that Trump was antiwar was always delusional: "Trump's foreign policy has often been less a repudiation of neoconservatism than a mutation of it." Also: "This has always been the real Trump doctrine. Not no wars, but no rules."

• Ben Rhodes [03-02]: Trump may come to regret this: I doubt it, but that may be because whenever I see Trump's smiling mug, I immediately flash to the face of Alfred E Neumann, whose motto was "what, me worry?" I'm also reminded of the line in the Fog of War movie, where someone comments that "everyone's having Bob's ulcer but Bob." ("Bob" is Vietnam-era Defense Secretary Robert McNamara, the guy who famously saw the "light at the end of the tunnel." What I do wonder is whether Rhodes regrets his own not inconsiderable role in the long "real men go to Tehran" march to this war? He doesn't say, nor does he mention his old boss, Barack Obama.

• Ross Barkan [03-02]: Republican Warmongers are back in control: Especially Marco Rubio, who Trump in 2016 "mocked for being a neocon . . . a 'perfect little puppet' of hawkish megadonor Sheldon Adelson." Adelson's widow has since become Trump's top donor (or maybe 2nd to Elon Musk).

  There is a dark political logic to this administration's military adventures in Venezuela and Iran and the aborted threat to seize Greenland. As Trump's popularity plummets at home, his immigration and economic policies largely judged a failure by the American people, he has turned to sowing chaos abroad. Overseas, American presidents can act more like sultans than democratic leaders. Military operations can be launched without congressional oversight. Trump, increasingly emboldened, has indicated he might topple Cuba next. All of this is easier and more enjoyable for him than addressing the plight of the American people.

  Barkan notes that "killing a brutal dictator is easy — even Barack Obama did it in Libya"; but "power vacuums are dangerous, and old regime hands don't simply vanish into smoke." Also:

  Little of this new conflict in Iran makes sense other than as a wish-fulfillment scheme for Israel and frothing American neoconservative warriors. The U.S. already claimed to obliterate Iran's sites that were aimed at building nuclear-weapons capacity. The Iranian regime, hobbled before the air strikes, posed little threat to the U.S. Its proxies Hezbollah and Hamas have already been crushed by Israel, the latter in the de facto genocide in Gaza.

  An unsettling reality is that the current crop of neoconservatives in the Trump administration, beginning with Rubio, do not seem to believe in the need to make a popular case for what they do. When Bush invaded Iraq and Afghanistan, he had the American people, misguided as they were, at his back. He had Republicans and Democrats. In apparently starting a war with Iran, the Trump administration has won over the minuscule slice of hawks in the electorate (and the much larger contingent in Washington), but that's about it. Younger Americans on the left and right are weary of what feels like America's constant capitulation to Israel.

• Aaron Pellish/Eric Bazail-Eimil [03-03]: US launches military operations in Ecuador: "The joint military operation with Ecuador targeted what the US called 'designated terrorist organizations' in the country."

• Jordan Michael Smith [03-06] Donald Trump has lit a global match: "Trump and his aides think the United States has global leverage that his predecessors refused to use. He seems to forget that other countries have leverage, too — and they're intent on using it to stop him." It's long bothered me to hear the US presidency described as "the most powerful job in the world," probably because it implied what Trump was the first to clearly hear: that the president can do anything, shake anyone else down, and they will have no choice but to submit.

• Andrew O'Hehir [03-08]: Behind Trump's war fever lies profound weakness: "US wages fast-escalating war, with no clear motivation and no realistic plan. It isn't fooling anyone." Well, they seem to be fooling themselves. Was the problem with Obama really just "no drama"? Is it possible he just didn't know how to get credit for being rational, predictable, and boring?

• Thomas B Edsall [03-08]: The smash-and-grab presidency reaches its apex.

  But it isn't just in foreign countries. The willingness to adopt policies that will result in increased deaths among Americans, particularly within Trump's loyal MAGA electorate, pervades administration decision making, from the Environmental Protection Agency to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, as I wrote in two previous essays, "What Can't Trump Wreck?" and "The MAHA Pipe Dream Is Going to Hurt MAGA the Most."

  Even so, Trump's war against Iran stands apart from past policies adopted on impulse. In this case, preliminary developments suggest Trump will pay a political price for his lack of careful planning and impetuous behavior. In fact, he may be forced to take responsibility for lost lives, damage to U.S. facilities and allies' cities, economic setbacks and the failure to anticipate predictable adverse events.

• Casey Ryan Kelly [03-10]: Why Pete Hegseth talks like he's in an action movie: "Many observers were taken aback by his haughty tone, hypermasculine preoccupation with domination, giddiness about violence and casual attitude toward death." This notes that speaking "in a manner that is bombastic, outrageous and perverse" isn't unusual in Trump's cabinet (cf. Kash Patel, Sean Duffy, Mehmet Oz), but Hegseth more than any other has made a role out of it. (Meanwhile, Trump himself seems to be becoming terminally blasé.)

Trump Attacks America: Law, lawlessness, and the courts.

• Sophia Tesfaye [03-17]: Trump wants to punish media for his unpopular war: "The president and FCC Chair Brendan Carr are threatening journalists and broadcasters for their coverage of Iran." "Carr's threat is a grotesque distortion of the FCC's mandate."

  • CK Smith [03-15]: FCC warns broadcasters over Iran war coverage.

• Elie Honig [03-20]: Trump's losing war against the Federal Reserve: "The thing is, if he'd gone about it more smartly, he would have gotten his way."

• Robert Kuttner [03-20]: How Trump lost the courts: "With every passing day, another federal judge issues a scathing order to contain Trump's autocracy and Trump keeps alienating the Supreme Court." Don't get excited too soon. But one thing you can expect judges to do is to defend their own authority, which Trump's megalomania is threatening to run roughshod over. If Republicans do manage to pass the "SAVE" act, I think it's going to have a rough time in the courts, and not just because it's blatantly unconstitutional, but because it is corrosive of the idea that the government (including the courts) reflects the will of the people.

Trump's Administration: What they're up to while you're distracted by the flood of shit emanating from the White House.

• Joah E Bromwich/Michael S Schmidt [03-02]: Trump Administration abandons efforts to impose orders on law firms: "The move amounts to a surrender in a clash that has led many law firms to submit to the president rather than face the threat of his executive orders." For starters, this makes the firms that surrendered in cases that could easily have been defended and won look cowardly and probably complicit in Trump's outrageous shakedowns.

• Sarah Jones [03-05]: The myth of the root cause: Meet "Dr." Casey Means, Trump's quack nominee for Surgeon General.

• David Dayen [03-19]: The quietest government shutdown: "It's been almost imperceptible, but the Department of Homeland Security hasn't been funded since February. Avenues to resolve the standoff keep getting cut off." Last month I had this as a separate story, but it barely qualifies for a mention this time — just long lines and other concerns at airports (here's a summary of How a DHS shutdown affects different components and employees). PS: Okay, here's some news on the shutdown:

  • Emily Davies [03-21]: Trump threatens to deploy ICE to airports as TSA shortages drive delays. As scabs? Or just as goons? Is he assuming that because they aren't competent at their own jobs, they might be at another one they weren't trained for? Or does he simply not care. Or does he think that another stupid threat will force his opponents to cave in?

• Maxine Joselow/Brad Plumer [03-23]: Trump admistration to pay $1 billion to energy giant to cancel wind farms: And, in case you didn't think the title was outrageous enough: "In exchange, the French company TotalEnergies would inest in oil and natural gas projects in Texas and elsewhere."

Donald Trump, Himself: Up close and personal, or blown up into some kind of cosmic enigma.

• Margaret Hartmann:

  • [03-02]: Trump is workshopping Iran War plan in weird calls to press: "Why did Trump go to war with Iran? You'll have to piece that together from his brief and contradictory remarks to a dozen reporters."

  • [03-05]: Trump fires Kristi Noem, but not for the reason you think: "The final straw wasn't DHS's cruel and chaotic tactics, her alleged affair, or various other scandals, but trying to use Trump himself as a cover."

  • [03-10]: Does Trump know his favorite shoe company is suing him? "Presumably he wouldn't be pushing $145 Florsheim oxfords on all his pals if he knew the company sued his administration over tariffs."

  • [03-12]: 8 scarily stupid moments from Trump's Kentucky rally: "Featuring Jake Paul, Trump's stair phobia, and an update on the Iran war — which we must keep fighting, though it's also 'over' and 'we won.'"

  • [03-13]: Trump boasts killing Iranian 'scumbags' is his 'great honor': "He's reveling in military fantasies on Truth Social, issuing threats to Iran's leaders and showing off photos of himself in uniform (as a teen)."

  • [03-18]: Judge isn't buying White House's 'brazen' ballroom defense: "He blasted the Trump administration for offering 'shifting' requirements and describing the East Wing destruction as a little 'alteration.'"

• Robert Reich [03-19]: Dear allies of America, please don't confuse our president with us: "We are trying our best to resist him, contain him and remove him from office as quickly as we possibly can. Thank you for your patience." This is really dumb. In the first place, our efforts aren't really working, nor are them likely to work until his term expires in 2029, if then. Sure, inside the US, there are lots of things that we are doing, or trying to do, to reduce the damage Trump is causing, but outside the US, for all intents and purposes Trump is the US, and you need to adjust your thinking to that simple fact. Just because you used to have an alliance with the US government (which was never the same as the American people), and thought that worthwhile, doesn't mean that Trump is still your ally, or won't fuck you over on some arbitrary whim. You have to do what's best for you, then reevaluate and adjust in 2029, if things change. Reich writes (my numbers, for future reference):

  In point of fact, we the people of the United States do need your help.

  1. We need your help fighting the global climate crisis.
  2. We need your help heading off pandemics.
  3. We need your help countering global criminal gangs that are trafficking people and dangerous drugs and weapons.
  4. We need your help fighting global poverty, hunger and disease.
  5. We need your help safeguarding freedom and democracy from authoritarian regimes intent on extinguishing freedom and democracy around the world.

  These are all things (and the list is far from exhaustive) that all people in all nations should want to work together on. In olden days, the US could help its "allies" on these (and vice versa), but Trump has changed that: He's said that 1 & 2 aren't problems, so you're on your own; 4 may still be a problem, but it isn't ours; 3 is something we're going to address with arbitrary violence, which you can join in on but have no authority over; and for 5, we want more authoritarian regimes, not more democracy. In short, these are areas where other nations, to the extent they realize these are real international problems, need to find their own solutions for, and that may (and probably should) involve breaking with the US. They don't have to become enemies. They can't really threaten us, and it won't do any good to interfere domestically. They may still find it possible to work with American companies (which aren't even all that American these days). But they shouldn't pretend that the US is their ally, when clearly Trump is not. Maybe when Trump is gone, the US will want to work with their organizations, and help with their solutions. But if the US is a lost cause, as currently it is, they shouldn't sacrifice their future for our ego.

  A lot of liberals, like Reich, are stuck on this idea that the US is, and should always remain, the natural leader of a network of global alliances dedicated to solving the world's problems. US foreign policy has always (but especially since WWII) been directed by financial and military interests, offering a little bit of altruism (and high-minded but often hollow rhetoric) as bait. All Trump has really changed has been to get rid of the nice-guy act. Restoring the act isn't going to wash. The world distribution of power has changed since 1945, even if the American ego has not. Moving forward needs to reflect this change, but also to recognize that power itself no longer suffices, and that cooperation has to be built on mutual respect. Trump is the antithesis of that.

• Henry Giroux [03-20]: Trump's Crusade: Christian Nationalism and the making of a holy war: This starts with a photo of Trump at his desk, surrounded by Christian clergy, many with their hands on Trump's slumped shoulders, blessing his divinely inspired war.

  In this register, Operation Epic Fury becomes barbarism refashioned as spectacle, draped in an aesthetic of impunity and moral annihilation. War is transformed into a form of public pedagogy, a daily lesson in domination delivered through media images, political rhetoric, and state policy, teaching that cruelty signals strength and that enemies, both foreign and domestic, are rendered disposable, unworthy of recognition or justice and instead subjected to humiliation, repression, and violence. Under such conditions, violence no longer hides behind the worn language of necessity or of making the world safe for democracy. It exposes what it has long been in American foreign policy, a ruthless instrument of imperial power. . . .

  This normalization of lawless violence feeds the broader war culture shaping the political imagination of the MAGA movement. Military force is framed not as a tragic last resort but as proof of national vitality. Violence becomes a measure of masculinity and patriotism, while reflection or restraint is dismissed as cowardice. War is imagined as a cleansing force capable of restoring national greatness. . . .

  When militarism fuses with apocalyptic religion, the consequences are deeply troubling. War ceases to be a tragic failure of diplomacy and becomes a sacred drama instead. Violence is sanctified as the instrument through which divine destiny is said to unfold.

• Chauncey DeVega [03-19]: Laugh at Trump's shoe gifts all you want — it's a loyalty test: "The Florsheim presents aren't about style — they reveal the mechanics of MAGA authoritarianism and if it can endure."

• Matt Ford [03-19]: There will be no post-presidential peace for Donald Trump: "The president and his allies will face impeachments, lawsuits, and maybe even The Hague." Shortly after Trump took office in 2025, I gave this some thought, and concluded that whoever follows him should grant him a blanket pardon from criminal prosecution (or maybe just advance clemency against jail time should he be convicted), but should let him fend for himself against civil suits (which are as common to him as eating). For one thing, this would settle the question of whether Secret Service should protect him in jail. (In theory, jail should be the safest place in America, but it doesn't seem to be.) I didn't consider the question of international law, as there seems to be no support for that even from Democrats. As for state laws, that's outside the jurisdiction of the next president, but short of shooting someone on Fifth Avenue, that's unlikely to be a problem. Since then, I find myself caring less and less. The main reason for the clemency, aside from the Secret Service issue (and one could argue that a convicted felon safe in jail doesn't merit that service), is that it helps bury the hatchet, or at least is a gesture in that direction. On the other hand, we already have tons of things that need to be publicly examined. It might be better to do so in a commission, especially one that can subpoena and grant immunity for revealing testimony. It's more important to expose what happened than it is to lock a few people up. As for Trump, I still like my idea of exiling him to St. Helena, where he would be free to build a luxury golf resort no one in their right mind would ever visit. But short of that, Eddie Murphy's advice in Trading Places still seems right: "the best way to hurt rich people is by turning 'em into poor people."

• Brian Karem [03-20]: Who will stop Trump on Iran? "As the war escalates and the president digs in, the White House says 'nobody tells him what to do.'"

• Cameron Peters [03-20]: Trump's new coin, briefly explained: "How Trump is celebrating his favorite things: gold and himself."

• Michael Tomasky [03-20]: Yes, Trump Derangement Syndrome exists; but it's among his supporters: "That Pearl Harbor comment: Aside from being a fascist, the man is a national embarrassment. The deranged Americans are those who still support this charlatan."

  Am I overstating things? Do I suffer — gasp — from Trump Derangement Syndrome? Elsewhere today on this site, Simon Lazarus issues a sharp and necessary reminder to liberals not to get overly obsessed with Trump himself — to bear in mind the movement and the intellectuals that support him.

  He's right about that. At the same time, though, I'd say that we shouldn't even accept the presumption that Trump Derangement Syndrome applies to people like us. It does not. The people who suffer from TDS in this country are the ones who support him. And it's getting worse: This week, Nate Silver found Trump's approval slipping into uncharted territory, and approval of the war generally polls in the 30s — but at the same time, an NBC News poll discovered that among self-identified MAGAs, Trump's approval stood literally at 100 percent to zero.

  They're the ones with TDS. You and I have Trump Awareness Syndrome. We see his un-thought-out war — and by the way, if it's almost over, why is he asking Congress for $200 billion? — and we hear him utter vacuous and offensive statements like the Pearl Harbor remark, and we know all too well what he's doing to this country. Awareness is a far heavier burden than derangement.

  The Lazarus piece is here:

  • Simon Lazarus [03-20]: Trump Derangement Syndrome is a self-destructive distraction: "Liberals aren't wrong to excoriate the president for his misdeeds, but they mustn't lose sight of the fact that Trumpism isn't about one man." As someone who's also recently read Laura Field's Furious Minds: The Making of the MAGA New Right, I recognize the names of the so-called "MAGA intellectuals" mentioned here, but I want to point out that a lot of Trump's worst ideas derive not from them (or their gurus like Carl Schmitt and Harry Jaffa) but from more conventional Republican sources (paleocons, neocons, libertarians, Buckleyites, theocrats, and/or unprincipled weasels like Roy Cohn, and that's far from exhaustive, as the same irritable mental gestures and rabid defense of the elite go back centuries, when the same sort waxed eloquent about the virtues of slaveholding and monarchy. But Trump doesn't wax eloquent about anything. He may pick up thoughts on occasion because he swims in their same sewer, but thoughts don't stick to him, because he doesn't think them, he just spouts along with all the rest of his incoherent mish-mash. That leaves us in a quandary: he's too important, and too symbolic, to ignore, but he's too slippery to pin down, or maybe too sticky to escape ("tarbaby" comes to mind)?

    By the way, some more on Field's book:

  • Alexandre Lefebvre [2025-11-14]: A mole in MAGA's midst.

    What unites the New Right? One fear and one hope. The fear is that liberalism is everywhere, its tentacles wrapped around the public sphere and even the most intimate details of private life. Whichever MAGA faction you turn to, there is a shared conviction, as Field puts it, that "for all its pretensions to neutrality, liberal, pluralistic, modern constitutionalism has normative tendencies and implicit preferences and inevitably shapes the liberal democratic psyche in specific ways." Liberalism is right there on dating apps with every left or right swipe, in the empowerment slogans of multinationals, and in the endless Netflix scroll of choose-your-own-identity mush. And so, while MAGA strategies diverge on how to respond — from tactical retreat (the so-called "Benedict Option") to co-opting the liberal machine (Catholic integralists) to burning it all down (the chronically online Hard Right) — there is consensus on the enemy.

    That's the negative. What about the positive? Field credits Anton — author of the galvanizing 2016 essay "The Flight 93 Election" and now a senior Trump administration figure — with distilling MAGA's three-point creed: "secure borders, economic nationalism, and America-first foreign policy." But this, she shows, is only surface politics. The deeper point of Furious Minds is to reveal a near-consensus on a social vision and a set of moral ideals for what a postliberal United States should look like.

    Denoting these "moral ideals" as "the good, the true, and the beautiful" doesn't help explain them, because those are not concepts that liberals (or most people) lack, but ones they define differently (and less absolutely). The key thing is that the New Right wants their state (which is not your state, or any form of democratic state) to tell you what to believe, and to force you into believing it. They believe that if everyone thought the same things (the same things they think) all our problems would vanish and we'd have heaven on earth. And one of the things they think is that anyone who derides Trump is deranged?

  • Adam Gopnik [2024-03-18]: The forgotten history of Hitler's establishment enables: "The Nazi leader didn't seize power; he was given it." A review of Timothy Ryback's book, Takeover: Hitler's Final Rise to Power. This book, like the following review, was cited in the Lazarus piece.

  • Casey Schwartz [2025-11-11]: What could have stopped Hitler — and didn't: "In Fateful Hours, the road map to authoritarian disaster is laid out in gleamingly sinister detail by the German historian Volker Ullrich."

  • John Ganz [03-20]: Grand delusion: "The Trumpist intellectuals wake up." I'm having some trouble digesting this retort to Sohrab Ahmari, but I like the comparison of Trump to Napoleon III and the Marx quote (not the farce that follows tragedy one), but this seemed like as good a place as any to file it for further reference. Intellectuals try very hard to rationalize their world view, even if it has no rational basis at all, which is doubly difficult when your world view is bound to a leader [Trump] who has no sensible grounding at all. Oh, the Marx:

    An old, crafty roué, [who] conceives the historical life of the nations and their performances of state as comedy in the most vulgar sense, as a masquerade in which the grand costumes, words, and postures merely serve to mask the pettiest knavery.

Economists and the Economy: Note that I've moved Dean Baker into his own section.

• Richard Bookstaber [03-16]: I predicted the 2008 financial crisis. What is coming may be worse. One of the comments mentions how Trump "has bombed himself into a no-exit with the oil market," then concludes: "combine this behavior with our crumbled infrastructure, collapsing job market, rising prices, etc., and it's hard not to see a market meltdown."

Regular Columnists

Sometimes an interesting columnist writes often enough that it makes sense to collect their work in one place, rather than scatter it about.

Dean Baker: For more look here.

• [03-20]: Are the Biden and Trump economies the same? "While short-term economic data may appear similar, key differences in inflation, labor market strength, affordability pressures, and long-term poicy choices suggest the Trump and Biden economies are meaningfully different."

  Key takeaways:

  • Presidential impact on the economy is often overstated, but policy differences still matter.
  • Claims that Democrats overstated economic success overlook efforts to address affordability concerns.
  • Inflation was trending downward before policy shifts like tariffs disrupted progress.
  • Labor market indicators, especially quit rates and wage growth, point to weakening conditions.
  • Affordability concerns may stem from rising real household costs, especially healthcare and student debt.
  • Trump-era policy changes on energy, immigration, and research could harm long-term growth.
  • Short-term differences are modest, but long-term economic outlook under Trump appears weaker.

  I think the last point should be made much stronger. We're only one year into the Trump economy, and what has happened as a policy level is only starting to impact. Moreover, while the Iran war did quickly signal higher gas prices, it's real impact is still in the future. I don't think we'll actually see the worst-case scenarios that can be projected from Trump's governing principles, because I expect businesses to be more resilient and more resistant to Trump's worst excesses, but best-case is going to be pretty bad, especially as businesses trying to save themselves aren't likely to care much about anyone else.

  I might also note here that I was surprised to see a whole section on "Harris did not cheerlead the Biden economy":

  First, I think he [Jason Furman] is very unfair in saying that former VP Kamala Harris was running around touting that the US economy was the envy of the world. This claim was in fact true, but that was hardly the main story of her campaign.

  Harris went around everywhere saying that she knew people were hurting and outlined proposals, especially on housing, on how she would make things more affordable. We can debate the merits of these proposals, but she was quite explicitly trying to address what she said were major problems in the economy.

  Baker is still far more committed than Harris was to touting the Biden economy, while Harris seemed to be more sensitive to its shortcomings — something she got no credit for during the campaign. The question is why didn't her concerns and proposals get much if any airing in the media? Possible reasons include: that she didn't convey either much outrage or empathy; that her proposals were couched in terms meant to appeal to business and donors; and that she blame the obvious culprits (Biden would have been the easiest mark, as Trump proved). But shouldn't the media have at least tried to sort this out, or are they just totally incapable of reporting on wonky policy matters? I'm reminded here of Hilary Clinton's 2016 gaffe about "baskets of deplorables," which is the only thing the media reported, ignoring the context, which included a fairly detailed and generous plan to revive the economy of areas like West Virginia which had been left behind (something her husband had more than a little to do with). What Clinton proposed would have been much better for the people than Trump's bullshit about "clean coal," but Trump saw his biggest vote gains in areas that Clinton wanted to help, and could have. But who reported that?

• [03-18]: The "fraud" fraud: "The new anti-fraud push led by JD Vance is portrayed as politically driven, relying on exaggerated claims that don't align with the actual scale of the federal budget or national debt." Opens with:

  Fans of pet-eating migrant stories are thrilled to hear that JD Vance is heading up an anti-fraud task force operating out of the White House. As best anyone cal tell, the purpose is to drum up absurd allegations of fraud against prominent Democrats, like California Governor Gavin Newsom and Illinois Governor JB Pritzker.

  If the reference to pet-eating migrant stories is too obscure, let me remind everyone. During the presidential campaign, Vance admitted that he invented stories about Haitian immigrants eating people's pets in Springfield, Ohio, to advance the Trump ticket's anti-immigrant political agenda. This is important background when considering the sincerity of his new anti-fraud crusade.

  The other important background item is that Trump just gave us an anti-fraud crusade last year. Doesn't anyone remember Elon Musk running around with his chainsaw and his "super-high IQ" DOGE boys? He was supposed to find trillions of dollars of fraud, and send us all $5k dividend checks.

  Baker is right that Vance's interest here is crassly political, and that the sort of blatantly illegal fraud that such a task force could conceivably find is small potatoes compared to the economy as a whole. But fraud is something people do care about, and Democrats would be smart to expose some on their own. They could, of course, start with Trump, and all the money coming in and favors handed out, which will make Reagan's "welfare queens" and whatever it was that Tim Walz got tangled up with in Minnesota look truly microscopic. Moreover, they could start looking at the broader picture of what is supposedly legal but creates a culture which allows fraud to operate and profit. For instance, every day I fend off dozens of phone calls and emails, some from legit businesses I have no desire to hear from, some surely more disreputable. How hard would it be to shut them all down? I'm sure there's a long list of things that could be done, that would in the end make business and government more respectable and trustworthy. But we live in a world where the politicians seem to accept an ethic of everyone having to struggle to screw everyone else, with our best advice being caveat emptor? We're approaching the point where vigilance against fraud is more than a full time job. It's certainly more than one can stand. And one of the worst long-term effects of Trump is that he's poisoning the entire culture by wrapping it up in his graft. Yet somehow he managed to convince lots of voters in 2016 and 2024 that he was the one who wasn't "crooked"!

• [03-17]: The AI bubble, like the housing bubble, is a big problem and it's not complicated: "Like the housing crash, today's AI bubble driven by inflated expectations and stock valuations poses a major risk to the broader economy when it bursts." I don't doubt that there is a large AI bubble, at least as far as stock prices are concerned, and that it's based on assumptions that won't pan out, but that probably follows 2001 more closely than 2008. On the other hand, I suspect that we're also in a real estate bubble. (My evidence: my tax assessment went up by about 15% this year, and 25% over two years ago.) Both AI stocks and real estate are largely driven to speculative capital, leveraged on a house of cards. The underlying problem is increasing inequality (specifically the ability of the rich to avoid taxation by various schemes).

• [03-16]: Trump agrees with Mark Carney: the old order is very dead: "Trump's unilateral war on Iran signals the end of the US-led world order and forces allies to reconsider security, trade, and global partnerships."

• [03-13]: When Pete Hegseth says "lethality" he's talking about killing Iranian school girls: "Relaxed rules of engagement under Pete Hegseth are blamed for increasing civilian casualties, including a deadly strike on a Iranian girls' school."

• [03-09]: The winning and losing countries from high oil prices: it's not just who has the oil: "Rising oil and gas prices function like a tax on consumers, and despite strong domestic production, US households still face major costs from higher energy prices."

• [03-05]: Little boy Trump goes to war: "Those of us in the United States who lied through Donald Trump's first presidency know that he is not a person who thinks carefully about his actions and their long-term consequences." For instance, Trump's war is going to accelerate the spread of renewable energy and electric cars. It should also accelerate the realignment of much of the world away from the US: "This war without reason removes any doubt that Trump is a threat to world peace and economic stability. The world needs to move away from any dependence on the United States as quickly as possible and now they all know this."

• [03-03]: A real abundance agenda starts by rolling back patent and copyright monopolies: "Genuine economic abundance requires weakening monopoly protections and financial rents that enrich the wealthy while driving up costs for everyone else."

• [02-28]: Trump's stock market is headed down!

• [02-27]: The Ellisons taking over Warner is pants on fire stuff, but team progressive just whines.

  And this is where progressives are far behind the curve. The fact that the Ellisons can put right-wing hacks like Bari Weiss in charge of the news that people see between the campaign ads is a far greater threat to democracy than the 30-second campaign ads that the rich can buy in abundance.

Heather Digby Parton:

• [03-02]: Trump's foreign policy has no rules.

• [03-05]: Trump's new plan for Iran doomed to backfire: "As the administration reportedly prepares to arm Kurds, history shows the risks of using militias for regime change." Aside from the general history of the CIA trying to arm ethnic minorities as guerrillas against supposed foes, is there anything specific about Kurds in Iran that makes them more likely to pay off? I can't think of anything, other than that Mossad may have used some Kurds as spies, but that's not a formula that scales up.

• [03-07]: Trump and Hegseth are writing their own rules of war: "As the Iran war widens, the president and defense secretary's long support of carnage matters a lot." Make that Secretary of War. Weren't you paying attention?

• [03-10]: Lindsey Graham is the little war devil on Trump's shoulder: "Now he says 'Cuba is next.'"

• [03-12]: Trump's threats against "radical left" echo a long history: "Conservatives have often used the federal government to go after protesters and dissenters."

• [03-15]: Trump's Strait of Hormuz problem: "Oil prices surge as the Trump administration shows no clear plan for the world's most critical shipping lane."

• [03-16]: How Iran is exposing Vance and Rubio's 2028 rivalry: Understatement to say that Rubio "has always been something of a hawk." His case to succeed Trump in 2028 is clearly tied to his wars, where he's even more enthusiastic about the next one in Cuba than this one in Iran or last months's in Venezuela (not that he's done there). Vance has a pretty checkered record himself, but shouldn't have any problem pinning the quagmire on Rubio.

• [03-19]: Trump's "America First" becomes America alone: "The nation's allies are refusing to help in Iran, leaving the president increasingly isolated on the world stage."

Jeffrey St Clair:

• [03-02]: Preliminary notes on a planned decapitation. The keyword here is "whacked": for Trump, that's all it comes down to, the solution to all problems. And if it doesn't work, just whack again.

  Trump has done the world a service. He has abandoned pretense and clarified the true nature of American power. There is no longer any need to manufacture a case for war, to make an attack seem conform to international law and treaties or to demonstrate its righteousness by acting as part of an international coalition. Now America can do what it wants to whomever it wants solely because the people who run its government want to. This has, of course, almost always been the case behind the curtain of diplomatic niceties. But Trump has ripped those curtains down and now the world is seeing American power in the raw: brazen, arrogant and mindless of the consequences, which will be borne by others and if they complain, they might be whacked, too.

• [03-06]: Roaming Charges: Calling all angels! Opens with "the shifting rationales (all fictitious) for Trump/Netanyahu's criminal attack on Iran." Let's give a prize to Mario Rubio for the most ironically unselfconscious explanation: "Iran is run by lunatics." This is followed by a video of Paula White ("the spiritual advisor to Trump and head of the White House Faith Office"). Further down, we get to Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) explaining, "Iran has been an imminent threat to the United States for 47 years." Some other notes:

  • More than 70 percent of American public school teachers hold at least one side job, according to a new Gallup survey released this week.

  • On Monday, state officials in Ohio approved a $4.5 million sales tax exemption for a $136 million data center expansion in Northeast Ohio. The plant is expected to create a total of 10 new full-time jobs.

  • The number of US adults who feel optimistic about their future life has dropped to 59.2%, the lowest number ever, according to Gallup.

• [03-13]: Kill, lie, and cover up: The shooting of Ruben Martinez. Like Renee Good, he was a US citizen killed in his car by ICE. "Over the last 14 months, ICE has shot at more than 16 people, hitting 12, including 5 US citizens."

• [03-20]: Roaming Charges: Trump's little excursion hits the Straits:

  • Meme: "Republican support for war with Iran jumped from 23% to 85% the moment Trump started the war." Comment: "Yet more proof that the Republican Party has turned in to a Jonestown-like cult."

Miscellaneous Pieces

The following articles are more/less in order published, although some authors have collected pieces, and some entries have related articles underneath.

Joel Gouveia [02-25]: The death of Spotify: Why streaming is minutes away from being obsolete: Or so says Jimmy Iovine ("arguably the most important living bridge between music and tech": co-founded Interscope, built Beats by Dre, sold it to Apple for $3 billion). Some interesting points here, but none impress me much one way or the other, at least to the point of convincing me that what came before and/or what might come after is any better or worse.

John Herrman [03-05]: Is it really illegal to bet on inside information about the Iran war? How about MrBeast?: "Kalshi and Polymarket are creating a new kind of dilemma." There are few things in this world I find more offensive than gambling, for lots of reasons, but this kind of thing goes orders of magnitude beyond the ordinary.

Chris Dalla Riva [03-06]: Long live Robert Christgau: A conversation with Matty Wishnow: Wishnow has produced a documentary film about the long-time rock critic, The Last Critic, and talks about that here. Also see:

• Robert Christgau [03-18]: Film comment: "Notes from the premiere of the documentary The Last Critic at SXSW."

• David Fear [03-15]: Robert Christgau is the 'Last Critic' standing: "A new doc pays tribute to the legendary dean of rock criticism. But it also reminds you what critics do, and why we need them — now more than ever."

• Jason Gross [03-21]: on Facebook.

• Mike Hilleary [03-13]: Matty Wishnow on capturing Robert Christgau, one of the greatest to give a grade, with The Last Critic: An interview.

Harold Meyerson [03-19]: Cesar falls: "With the horror of the revelations of his sexual predations, an already tarnished icon collapses." I'm surprised to see this recent spate of stories, as I thought this was already old news. Related here:

• Timothy Noah [03-19]: The shame of Cesar Chavez: "We shouldn't forget the reasons he has come to be revered, but his legacy was tarnished long before this."

Some notable deaths: Mostly from the New York Times listings. Last time I did such a trawl was on February 27, so we'll look that far back (although some names have appeared since):

• [03-21]: Robert S Mueller III, 81, dies; rebuilt FBI and led Trump inquiry: "He imposed the most significant overhaul of the FBI in its history. After concluding that Russia had interfered in the 2016 election, ,he became a target of the president's anger."

  • Erica L Green [03-21]: Trump's reaction to Mueller's death: 'Good, I'm glad.'

  • Jeet Heer [03-22]: Robert Mueller never should have been a liberal hero: "The cult of Mueller foolishly prioritized legal prosecution over political organizing."

  I had heard of Mueller, but first got some insight into him during a ridiculous, pointless sedition case he prosecuted. One of the defense attorneys was our friend Elizabeth Fink. I wish I could quote her assessment of him verbatim, but the net effect was that I never for a moment expected anything but the toothless whitewash of Trump he handed in.

• [03-20]: Chuck Norris, black-belt action star of movies and television, dies at 86.

• [03-17]: Len Deighton, author of espionage best-sellers, dies at 97.

• [03-15]: Paul R Ehrlich, who alarmed the world with The Population Bomb, dies at 93: "His best-selling 1968 book, which forecast global famines, made him a leader of the environmental movement. but he faced criticism when his predictions proved premature." I read his book shortly after it came out, and at the time I thought it made sense. It turned out that, like Richard Malthus' theory, it was incomplete, but not wrong.

  • Bryan Walsh [03-21]: The man who bet against humanity — and lost: "Paul Ehrlich predicted hundreds of millions would starve thanks to overpopulation. Here's what actually happened." Some cautionary notes about doomsaying here, but I still prefer Ehrlich's gloom to Julian Simon's whatever, and note that Walsh's continued worry about declining birth rates is wrong-headed under any scenario. Also note Walsh's piece on the Iran war's affect on fertilizer manufacture and distribution (under Iran war) shows that with war all bets are off.

• [03-14]: Jürgen Habermas dies at 96; one of postwar Germany's most influential thinkers: "In dozens of books, he rejected postmodern cynicism about truth and reason, arguing that rational communication was the best way to redeem democratic society." I was very interested in the Frankfurt School before I left college, but while I had learned much, I never really returned to critical theory. I read one of Habermas' early books (Knowledge and Human Interests), but in a speed reading experiment that yielded so little I gave up the approach, without giving him another chance.

  • Eric Alterman [03-19]: Jürgen Habermas has died. Will democratic optimism die with him? "The great German philosopher both robustly defended the public sphere — and for seven decades never stopped participating in it."

• [03-13]: John F Burns, prize-winning foreign correspondent for The Times, dies at 81.

• [03-12]: Walid Khalidi, scholar called father of Palestinian studies, dies at 100: "As a historian and diplomat, he gave intellectual shape to his people and made sure that they played a role in negotiating their future."

• [03-09]: Monti Rock III, gleefully untalented 'Tonight Show' favorite, dies at 86.

• [03-09]: Bo Gritz, Vietnam veteran called a real-life Rambo, dies at 87.

• [03-08]: Country Joe McDonald, whose antiwar song became an anthem: "Whoopee, we're all gonna die!"

• [03-04]: Bob Power, 73, hip-hop engineer and Tribe Called Quest collaborator, dies.

• [03-04]: John P Hammond, pioneer in 1960s blues renaissance, dies at 83.

• [02-28]: Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, autocratic cleric who made Iran a regional power, is dead at 86: As Iran's supreme leader, he brutally crushed dissent at home and expanded Iran's footprint abroad, challenging Saudi Arabia for dominance in the Middle East." Note that Wikipedia also lists 12 more prominent Iranians killed in the same strikes (another article lists 9 of those 12, plus several Iranian officials killed later).

• [02-28]: Joe Randall, chef who celebrated black cooking traditions, dies at 79: "He helped bring the African American cooking of the Carolina Lowcountry to the world and became known as the 'dean of Southern Cuisine.'"

Also, not [yet] noted in New York Times:

• Calvin Tomkins, 100, American author and art critic (The New Yorker) [03-20]; also see David Remnick [03-20]: Remembering Calvin Tomkins, a master of the profile.
• Ali Larijani, 67, Iranian politician, twice secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, speaker of the Parliament (2008-2020), and minister of culture (1992-1994) [03-17]; The New York Times reported on Larijani's death, but not in the Obituary section: Ali Larijani, a top Iranian politician and emissary, is dead at 67.

  • Yeganeh Torbati [03-24]: Iran's new security chief is a hard-line former Guards commander: "Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr replaces Ali Larijani, who is was killed last week in an Israeli strike. He has a history fo expanding the Guards' reach into Iran's politics." Once again, Israel promotes ever more militant opponents.

• Roy Book Binder, 82, American blues musician [03-03]

Tweets: I've usually used this section for highlighting clever responses and/or interesting ideas.

• Alon Mizrahi: "So basically the US is at war, its president is making one deranged statement after another, and the whole world ignores him like he is a crazy person on a bus."

• Corey Robin [03-19]: Starts with: "If you haven't seen this yet, you have to take one and a half minutes — that's all it takes — to listen to Marc Andreessen, one of the most powerful people in Silicon Valley, talk about the evils of introspection. He claims that he doesn't do introspection, and I believe him." You can follow the link to six points Robin makes, including "can you think without introspection? Silicon Valley says yes." More on this:

  • David Futrelle [03-23]: Marc Andreessen's Dangerously Unexamined Life: "The tech mogul has declared himself an enemy of introspection, and that conveniently erases considerations of conscience from his amoral investment empire." Includes a Sun Tzu quote that seems to have escaped Trump: "Know your enemy and know yourself and you can fight a thousand battles without disaster."

    We should note that Marc Andreessen does in fact have an inner life, because we all do. As a result, his declaration of zero introspection is either a weird and extreme failure of self-knowledge or (more likely) a performance, a brand identity so thoroughly constructed and maintained that it functions like an authentic account of the brander's experience. Either way, the practical effect is identical: a man with enormous influence over the technologies of war and surveillance, over the political direction of the country, over the infrastructure of violence that his firm has spent a decade funding, has, in effect, announced that he has no interest in examining his conscience.

    Andreessen has built the perfect ideology for Silicon Valley in the Trump age: Move fast, break people, and don't devote even a moment to self-examination.

• Cory Robin [03-21]:

  Ten headlines from today's New York Times:

  1. You've Lost Your Health Insurance. It Shouldn't Have Been a Surprise.
  2. Trump's Reaction to Mueller's Death: 'Good, I'm Glad.'
  3. I Predicted the 2008 Financial Crisis. What Is Coming May Be Worse.
  4. The 'Hunger Games,' Hamptons-Style: Hiring a Private Chef for Summer
  5. No Pills or Needles, Just Paper: How Deadly Drugs Are Changing
  6. Student Freed From ICE Detention Worries About Those Left Behind
  7. Across the West, Record Heat Is Colliding With a Snow Drought
  8. Unclogging a Hairy Drain Is Gross. This $15 Stopper Makes It Less So.
  9. The Future of the Democratic Party Is Emerging
  10. Here's what happened in the war in the Middle East on Saturday.

Current count: 308 links, 25719 words (30766 total)

Ask a question, or send a comment.

Saturday, March 14, 2026

March archive (in progress).

Music: Current count 45655 [45603] rated (+52), 39 [11] unrated (+28).

This is indeed the first Music Week of March. I've been slow all year, and I'm not very optimistic about ever catching up, but I do keep plugging away at it. Last Music Week actually appeared around March 2, but was backdated to February 28, which was a fairly honest cutoff date. I had been held back trying to wrap up an overgrown and unruly Loose Tabs, which barely made it just before Trump's decapitation strike against Iran, and then got sidelined by a minor illness. The squeeze kept me from sending anything to my Substack newsletter, Notes on Everyday Life, although I had a draft piece on comfort cooking in the works, and several more ideas.

Those all got shelved by the Iran war. I was shocked and appalled the moment I heard the news, although the shock wore off as soon as I replaced the initial hypothetical (why would any rational leader do something as obviously stupid and counterproductive?) with the names of the actual leaders: Trump and Netanyahu. It's not that they are incapable of reason, although each is trapped in his own matrix of myths (some self-generated, especially for the exceptionally vain and gullible Trump), but their judgment is perverted by enchantment with power and a genuine lack of care for their victims, let alone any longer-term consequences.

I felt the need to write something, if only to clarify my own thoughts. I remembered what I had written on March 18, 2003, the day after Bush started his full-scale war on Iraq. I started out:

Yesterday, March 17, 2003, is another date that will live in infamy. On this date, U.S. President George W. Bush rejected the efforts and council of the United Nations, and the expressed concerns of overwhelming numbers of people throughout the U.S. and all around the world, and committed the U.S. to attack, invade, and occupy Iraq, to prosecute or kill Iraq's government leaders, and to install a new government favorable to U.S. interests.

At the time, the effort to sell Americans on the war didn't seem remarkable: it had started with the neocon Project for the New American Century in 1997, and went into hard sell, no-lie-left-unturned mode in September 2002. In the end, it's fair to say that the snow job failed, with Bush arbitrarily starting the war and palming it off as fait accompli (PR, much like his later "mission accomplished" moment). But as I started thinking about the "day of infamy" quote, it occurred to me that the word belonged more to the ones attacked. A more accurate word for the attackers would be "ignominy": the dictionary starts with "deep personal humiliation, public shame, or total disgrace," then adds "dishonorable actions or loss of reputation." While both wars started in fits of arrogance, Trump's is unique in his disregard for any sense of democracy. I'm not much impressed by Democrats who would like to support this war but who balk on procedural grounds, but they do have a point: this is not just a war against Iran, but one against whatever's left of democracy in America. It seeks not just to engage in war, but to deprive the people of any say in when or why the US goes to war. And while Democrats have often contributed to exalting presidential power — e.g., Obama's bombing of Libya and Syria — this time it feels different, because Trump's ambitions are domestic as much as foreign.

The rest of the Iraq war posts are interesting enough I'm tempted to dust them off as a "Big Lookback." On March 25, 2003, one week after the war started in earnest, I wrote:

The war grinds on. The fantasy that expected the Iraqis to roll out the red carpet for their American liberators has been dashed. Nobody expects that Iraq will be able to repulse the U.S. invasion, but the level and form of resistance pretty much guarantees that eventually the U.S. will leave Iraq without having accomplished anything more notable than the perverse satisfaction of serving up Saddam's head on some platter.

As I said earlier, the level of resistance will be telling. If you want a rule of thumb for neocolonialist wars of occupation, it's that once you can't tell your friends from your enemies in the native population, you're fucked. At its simplest level, that's because the occupiers get nervous and make mistakes. The mistakes, in turn, compound, pushing more and more people from the friendly side to the hostile side. That in turn reinforces the nervousness, the mistakes, the alienation. In turn, the resistance gets bolder; as this happens, the occupation digs in, becoming more brutal, vicious, capricious. The high-minded rhetoric is exposed as pure hypocrisy, and the occupation becomes more nakedly about nothing more than power. Such wars become vastly unpopular, and eventually the occupier has to cut their losses and go home. This is pretty much what happened in Vietnam, and we're going to be hearing a lot more about the similarity as this war bogs down. . . .

So, let's face it, the U.S. war against Iraq is a colossal failure. The only question remaining is how long it will take the U.S. to give up and get out, and how much destruction the U.S. will leave in its wake. So remember this: This war did not have to happen.

I also wrote this on April 11, 2003:

There was a period back in the Afghanistan war when the Northern Alliance started reeling off a quick series of victories — not so much that they were defeating the Taliban in confrontations as that the Taliban was high-tailing it out of the cities, allowing Herat, Kabul, and Kandahar to fall in quick succession. The hawks then made haste to trumpet their victory and to dump on anyone who had doubted the US in this war. Back then, I referred to those few weeks as "the feel good days of the war." Well, we had something like that in Iraq, too, except that use of the plural now seems unwarranted. So mark it on your calendar, Wednesday, April 9, 2003, was the feel good day of the Iraq war.

I mentioned the looting, the killing of shi'ite collaborators, and mob reprisals against Ba'ath leaders. I could have mentioned Rumsfeld's blasé "stuff happens" quote. I ended with "So happy last Wednesday. That's very likely to be the last one for a long time now." It was.

Anyhow, it took longer than I expected (what else doesn't these days?), but I finally sent out my Days of Infamy piece on March 13. Reaction so far has been underwhelming: three likes, no comments. A notice on Facebook got one like, no comments. (I've rather arbitrarily limited my Facebook "friends" list to people I know personally, but that's still over 100. By the way, I just enabled "Professional Mode," which I think will allow non-Friends to follow me. I don't really know a lot about this, but settings are pretty open, and we'll see how that goes.) Probably a lot of "TL;DR." It could have been longer, even beyond the earlier draft of a final section I cut (but it's still in the archive file, along with two more attached footnotes. I'll have more to say as I collect links for Loose Tabs (if you're interested, the draft file has a couple dozen already, as well as a few extras). I'll try to wrap that up fairly quickly (perhaps before next Music Week, which is likely to skip next week).

I'm also thinking about following up the Iran piece with a second, hopefully more succinct one. I'm thining the format there should be questions and answers. Here's my first stab at a list:

1. Why did Netanyahu want a war with Iran?
2. Why did Trump go along with the war?
3. Why didn't Iran surrender once the Supreme Leader has killed?
4. How long can Iran continue to fight back?
5. Is there any chance of regime change (anywhere)?
6. Will world opinion of the US and Israel change? And will it matter?
7. If the US and Israel aren't stopped, will they go on and attack more countries?
8. Will the war end democracy?
9. Is there any chance for a revival of international law?

Most of these questions are addressed in my piece, but not in a very well organized way. I could be more explicit about the political prospects for Trump and Netanyahu, but I thought I'd slip that in under "regime change" (since those are the regimes that really need to change). I could also break out the question of terrorism and other economic impacts. Important stuff, but I think secondarily (even through they're already receiving a lot of attention). Or I could just stop with the first four, and let the rest of the chips fall where they may. Maybe ask readers for questions. I do have a little-used question form.

Oscars tomorrow night. My wife has been plotting to see all the nominated movies (except some rejected out of hand). We watch a couple hours of TV every night every night, which sometimes she wants to use for a movie. I have only rarely enjoyed movies for quite some time now. My most obvious complaint is the need to fit a whole story into allotted time, either compressing it or stretching it out, with a story arc that grows ever more clichéd, essentialist, and/or dreary. Still, given that I have a moment here, and I like to be reasonably well informed, I thought I'd run down the nominee films. No reviews, or even grades (which I've been known to do, but long ago). No real criticism (but some griping). Just notes. The best film nominees, as far as I know:

• Bugonia: We watched it tonight. I don't have much to say about it.
• F1: We watched 10 minutes last night. Full of shit, over the hill driver hitches a fast ride, probably to glory. I followed F1 closely in my teens, and I can tell you a lot about everyone from Tazio Nuvolari up to whoever preceded Niki Lauda (whose name I had to check spelling on). I'd watch it. I don't regret having watched Ford vs. Ferrari, which was history I knew, even if the focus had changed. Wasn't great, but watchable.
• Frankenstein: L liked, but I didn't see.
• Hamnet: L had no interest.
• Marty Supreme: I don't even remember hearing about it. Something about table tennis.
• One Battle After Another: L turned it off after a minute, but was talked into giving it another try. We watched it. I thought the politics were absurdly cartoonish. Only at the end did I see that it was based on Thomas Pynchon's Vineland. I've long been a huge fan of V., but only made it half-way through Gravity's Rainbow, and haven't tried his later books. Still, I wonder whether knowing it was based on Pynchon might have let me accept the premise and run with it.
• The Secret Agent: Brazilian film set in the 1970s. We watched it. I thought it was awful slow and I struggled to follow it — I didn't get that the tape-monitoring scenes were distant future (now-ish) until the end, which helped make sense. So I remember it better than I experienced it.
• Sentimental Value: Norwegian film. We saw it. I thought it was fine, but mostly after the fact.
• Sinners: We saw it. I hated the vampire shit, but otherwise it could have been good.
• Train Dreams: Didn't see. I don't think L did either.

Other films with prominent nominees:

• Blue Moon: Richard Linklater film about Lorenz Hart. We saw it. Dialogue reads better than it sounds, but I rarely mind that.
• If I Had Legs I'd Kick You: Didn't see, or hear of it.
• It Was Just an Accident: Set in Iran. We saw it. I found it tedious and uncomfortable. Settled better after it ended, not that I actually liked the ending.
• Song Sung Blue: We saw it. About a Neil Diamond tribute duo, which was bound to be hokey, but we enjoyed it.
• Weapons: I don't recall hearing about it, but as a "supernatural mystery horror film" I wouldn't. [PS: Turns out that L watched this. Liked it, but didn't think I would.]

I skipped over several films in the song, makeup, sound, and visual effects categories. In international features, we didn't see: Sirat; The Voice of Hind Rajab. We didn't see any of the documentary features. I didn't see any of the animated features, although L may have.

Almost two weeks of records below. Robert Christgau's Consumer Guide got me to reevaluate Buck 65 and Gogol Bordello. Phil Overeem's February list was also useful. I've done some minor updating to the EOY Aggregate. I doubt I'll be doing much more of that, but hard to say for sure. I did save off my frozen 2025 file as of March 1, which is a month earlier than last year, but typical of previous years. Seemed like a good enough breaking point, as my appetite for more 2025 releases has sunk down to my level of interest in 2026 releases. I will continue adding late 2025 releases to that file, marked in color, as well as to the year-end lists for jazz and non-jazz.

Aside from the Streamnotes bookkeeping, I've finally caught up with my unpacking, hence this week's oversized list. I'll work on knocking that down.

New records reviewed this week:

Melissa Aldana: Filin (2025 [2026], Blue Note): Tenor saxophonist from Chile, debut 2010, third album on Blue Note, a quartet with Gonzalo Rubalcaba (piano), Peter Washington (bass), and Kush Abadey (drums), mostly playing Cuban ballads arranged by Rubalcaba. Cécile McLorin Salvant sings two of them. B+(**) [sp]

Kal Banx: Rhoda (2026, Top Dawg Entertainment): Rapper Kalon Berry, Discogs credits him with a couple of singles, also seems to have some production experience, first solo album a sprawling 25 tracks, 81 minutes. First half consistently solid; second slipped in and out. B+(**) [sp]

Julianna Barwick & Mary Lattimore: Tragic Magic (2026, In Finé): The former is known for wrapping choral vocals in electronic loops, with four solo (and now three collaborative) albums since 2011. The latter, with solo albums back to 2013, adds harp. B+(*) [sp]

By Storm: My Ghosts Go Ghost (2026, Dead Air/By(e) Storm): Two-thirds of Arizona hip-hop trio Injury Reserve (rapper Nathaniel Ritchie and producer Parker Corey), carrying on after rapper Steppa J. Groggs died in 2020. Working through some pain, somewhat short of voice. B+(*) [sp]

Ron Carter & Ricky Dillard: Sweet, Sweet Spirit (2026, Blue Note): Bassist, best known as part of the Miles Davis Quartet (1963-68), nearing 90 he probably holds the record for most recording sessions ever (per Wikipedia: 2,221). Dillard is a gospel choirmaster, starting with his New Generation Chorale in 1990, and out in force here. Standards arranged around bass lines composed by Carter, it's fun to focus on the bass, although the rest is overkill. B+(*) [sp]

Charli XCX: Wuthering Heights (2026, Atlantic): An unlikely follow up to the huge Brat, a slim (34:34) batch of 12 songs tied to a new movie version of Emily Bronte's 1847 novel. Strings for soundtrack ambiance, and the ambiance is thick, but some songs are striking. B+(***) [sp]

Steve Cohn/Billy Stein: Up From the Soil (2021-24 [2025], Hathor Music): Cohn plays piano, shakuhachi, trombone, drums, and Fender Rhodes in four duets with the guitarist. B+(**) [cd]

The Cucumbers: As You Heard Me: Songs From "Hello George" (2026, Life Force): New Jersey group, formed by Deena Shoskes (vocals) and Jon Fried (guitar), released a good EP in 1983 and a great LP in 1987, with various stops and restarts ever since. This is a collection of 16 very fetching songs, based on the novella Hello George by Fried (who has several more short story collections). [PS: I have the novella, but haven't read it yet. Too much war in the way.] A- [cd]

Daggerboard: The Skipper and Mike Clark (2022 [2026], Wide Hive): Group led by Erik Jekabson (trumpet) and Gregory Howe (percussion), has a handful of albums since 2021. Skipper (bassist Henry Franklin) was a guest last time, joined here by keyboardist Mike Clark, Dave McNab (guitar), Dave Ellis (tenor/soprano sax), Mads Tolling (violin), and Babatunde (congas). B+(**) [cd]

Dead Pioneers: Po$t American (2025, Hassle): Indigenous punk rock band from Denver, second album, spoken word, so no compromising he messages by searching for rhymes. The music is as pointed as the critique of settler colonialism, with lines like "the audacity (no the caucasity)," "there will always be another settler to take your place," and an Indian name I can't transcribe which means "white person who talks too much, presumes too much, and has no boundaries, which is a mouthful." A- [sp]

DJ Eprom: We Are the Biobots (2026, JuNouMi): Polish electronica producer Michal Baj ("who has ties to Silesia") has synthesized the perfect Kraftwerk album, built from turntable scratch samples and electronically processed vocals. Thankfully, the robot world is one we can still laugh at. A- [sp]

Art Edmaiston & Chad Fowler: Memphis Mandala (2024 [2026], Mahakala Music): Tenor/soprano saxophonist from Tennessee, based in Memphis since 1990, has quite a few side credits since 1997, mostly with blues groups like JJ Grey & Mofro. Gets a shot at a free jazz album, with label head Fowler playing strich and flute, backed by bass (Damon Smith) and two drummer/percussionists (Ra Kalam Bob Moses and Clifford "Pee Wee" Jackson). Seems a little subdued. B+(*) [sp]

John Ellis & Double Wide: Fireball (2019 [2026], Sunnyside): Saxophonist from North Carolina, albums since 1997, band connected to New Orleans with Jason Marsalis (drums), Alan Ferber (trombone), Matt Perrine (sousaphone), and Gary Versace (keyboards; one track also with Rogerio Boccato on percussion). Recording date inferred from doc. The low brass is delightful. B+(**) [sp]

Fakemink: The Boy Who Cried Terrified (2026, EtnaVeraVela, EP): British rapper, has a previous album (21:17) as 9090gate, this one runs 7 songs, 14:39. B+(*) [sp]

The Femcels: I Have to Get Hotter (2026, Getting Hotter): British group, first album, sketchy punk-pop, often slips off the beat and sometimes out of tune, which is both appeal and some kind of limit. 16 songs, 32:31. B+(**) [sp]

Bill Frisell: In My Dreams (2025 [2026], Blue Note): Jazz guitarist, major figure since 1980, one frequent theme is his use of folk materials (including "Hard Times" and "Home on the Range" here). Group with strings — Jenny Scheinman (violin), Eyvind Kang (viola), Hank Roberts (cello), Thomas Morgan (double bass) — and drums (Rudy Royston). B+(**) [sp]

Peter Furlan: The Peter Furlan Project Live at Maureen's Jazz Cellar (2025 [2026], Beany Bops): Tenor/soprano saxophonist, composer and arranger, Discogs credits him for this and two other albums (1981-83). Fairly large group (nine pieces), allowing for some interesting solo textures. B+(*) [cd]

Heavenly: Highway to Heavenly (2026, Skep Wax): British twee pop band, released four albums and an EP 1991-96, Amelia Fletcher the singer, first album since reuniting in 2023. B+(*) [sp]

Imarhan: Essam (2026, City Slang): Tuareg desert rock band from the Algerian side of the Sahara. Reports are that earlier albums distinguished themselves by rocking harder than their similar-sounding contemporaries, but this one starts out leisurely, and hardly suffers from doing so. B+(***) [sp]

Jon Irabagon: Focus Out (2022 [2026], Irrabagast): Saxophonist, alto here, a star in Moppa Elliott's Mostly Other People Do the Killing, has a substantial discography on his own. Quartet with Matt Mitchell (keyboards), Chris Lightcap (bass), and Dan Weiss (drums), plus guest spots, including two Kokayi raps, and spots for trumpet, guitar, and tenor sax (two at once). B+(***) [cd] [03-13]

Jon Irabagon and Dan Oestreicher: Saturday's Child (2023 [2026], Irrabagast): Instruments not listed, but Oestreicher is a New Orleans-based baritone saxophonist who likely goes even lower here, giving this a delightfully jaunty oom-pah feel. Just the two of them, as far as I can tell. B+(***) [cd]

Lazy Californians: Back to San Francisco (2026, Angel Island): Group led by Cameron Washington, plays trumpet and vocals, based in San Francisco, patterned on New Orleans brass bands but supplements trad jazz with rap and funk organ and more. B+(***) [cd]

Shawn Lovato: Biotic (2024 [2026], Endectomorph Music): Bassist, has a couple previous albums, this one a trio with Ingrid Laubrock (tenor sax) and Henry Mermer (drums), a fine example of the form. B+(***) [cd]

Mandy, Indiana: Urgh (2026, Sacred Bones): French singer-songwriter Valentine Caulfield, mostly in French, organized the band in Manchester, although they also have a toehold in Berlin. Second album, with Scott Fair (guitar, production), Simon Catling (synthesizer), and Alex Macdougall (drums) sharing writing credits. Mostly going off sound here, which is dense but hard to parse. B+(**) [sp]

The Messthetics and James Brandon Lewis: Deface the Currency (2026, Impulse!): Guitar-bass-drums trio had a couple albums (2018-19) before they joined up with the powerhouse tenor saxophonist. I filed the early albums under rock as the bassist (Joe Lally) and drummer (Brendan Canty) came from Fugazi, although guitarist Anthony Pirog had a fringe-jazz resume (two albums with Henry Kaiser, one a conduction of Terry Riley, a couple more I've heard but don't particularly recall). Time to move them into the jazz file, but I'm not all that pleased. The saxophonist makes a strong effort, but it's hard to sort him out. B [sp]

Pat Metheny: Side-Eye III+ (2026, Ubiquity Music): Jazz guitarist, long career, exceptionally popular, second Side-Eye recording (after 2021's Side-Eye NYC (V1.IV)), but a different group — the trio with Chris Fishman (keyboards) and Joe Dyson (drums) gets cover billing, plus guests including a vocal ensemble. B+(*) [sp]

Van Morrison: Somebody Tried to Sell Me a Bridge (2026, Townsend Music/Orangefield): He turned 80 last year, has developed a reputation as a sociopolitical crank, and he's writing fewer songs (4 of 20 here, not sure how many are new), but keeps active, here with his 48th studio album, mostly blues covers that get a fresh dose of swing. He's in good voice, and plays a little saxophone, some harmonica, a bit of guitar, while entertaining guests like Elvin Bishop, Taj Mahal, and Buddy Guy. Sounds good, but wears a bit thin before ending strong. B+(*) [sp]

Quinsin Nachoff: Patterns From Nature (2023 [2026], Whirlwind): Canadian saxophonist, based in New York, albums since 2006, some earlier side credits (especially with Michael Bates). Two long, complex pieces (one dubbed a concerto), played by a large ensemble with extra strings, a bit much for my taste. B+(***) [cd]

Negative Press Project: Friction Quartet (2025 [2026], Envelopmental Music): Bay Area chamber jazz octet led by Ruthie Dineen (piano) and Andrew Lion (bass), debuted in 2017 with an album called Eternal Life: Jeff Buckley Songs and Sounds, this their fifth album (although Discogs only lists their first), supplemented here by the Friction Quartet ("a cutting-edge string ensemble"). B+(*) [cd]

Angelika Niescier: Chicago Tapes (2025 [2026], Intakt): Alto saxophonist, born in Poland, debut album 2000, with a fairly well known pick up band in Chicago, names on the cover: Jason Adasiewicz (vibes), Nicole Mitchell (flute), Mike Reed (drums), Dave Rempis (alto/tenor sax), and Luke Stewart (bass). B+(***) [sp]

PVA: No More Like This (2026, It's All for Fun): British electropop, or perhaps trip-hop, group; second album, has a striking sound. B+(***) [sp]

Ratboys: Singin' to an Empty Chair (2026, New West): Chicago indie rock band, Julia Steiner the singer, guitarist David Sagan the other principal, sixth studio album since 2015. B+(**) [sp]

Ron Rieder: Compositions in Blue and Other Hues (2024 [2026], Meson): Composer, based in Boston, has a couple of recent Latin jazz albums, this a collection of more conventionally postbop pieces, played by a quintet I scarcely recognize — Yaure Muñiz (trumpet) is on some Cuban albums I've heard, and Mark Lockwood (bass) was in the Fringe. B+(**) [cd]

Brandon Seabrook: Hellbent Daydream (2026, Pyroclastic): Guitarist, also plays banjo, albums since 2014, many credits, has leaned toward metal noise, does some kind of chamber jazz experiment here, with bass (Henry Fraser), violin (Erica Dicker), and keyboards (Elias Stemeseder). Has some interest, but not much appeal. B+(*) [cd]

Shabaka: Of the Earth (2026, Shabaka): Last name Hutchings, British saxophonist, has been a major figure in groups like Sons of Kemet and The Comet Is Coming, his own Ancestors, has a couple solo albums, at one point swore off sax in favor of flute, but seems to have recovered. Solo, with rhythm tracks and some rap. Still a lot of flute. B+(*) [sp]

Sleaford Mods: The Demise of Planet X (2026, Rough Trade): British post-punk duo, started in 2007 with raw rap vocals, has evolved into something slightly more sung, like Psychedelic Furs. Lyrics matter, but so far I'm mostly taking theirs on faith. B+(**) [sp]

Squirrel Nut Zippers: Squirrel Nut Zippers Starring in "Fat City" (The Ballad of Lil' Tony) (2026, Music Maker): Swing revival band from North Carolina, first appeared in 1995, five albums up through 2000, after which Jimbo Mathis recorded as a solo, and others scattered. A couple revivals later, he returns with a suite of songs based on his grandfather, Tony Malvezzi, "a bootlegger and juke joint operator" who moved on to promoting big bands in New Orleans. B+(**) [sp]

Karen Stachel, Norbert Stachel & LehCats: Live @ the Breakroom With Giovanni Hidalgo (2024 [2025], Purple Room Productions, 2CD): Wife and husband, she sings and plays flutes, he plays soprano and tenor sax (and more flutes), the band includes Matt Clark on keyboards, Dan Feiszli on bass, and Dan Gonzalez on drums, with guest percussion for more than a little Latin tinge. B+(*) [cd] [03-20]

Teen Jesus & the Jean Teasers: Glory (2025, Mom + Pop Music): Australian riot grrrl-inspired quartet, second album after a couple EPs, 10 snappy songs in 29:16, songcraft up, energy down. B+(**) [sp]

They Might Be Giants: Eyeball (2026, Idlewild, EP): John Flansburgh and John Linnell, their 1986 debut was my favorite album of the year, although I've never again been so taken by their musical and lyrical wit. Four songs, 8:31, one a remix. B- [sp]

Zu: Ferrum Sidereum (2026, House of Mythology): Italian group, founded 1999, came to my attention in jazz but always had a fondness for noise and lately have gravitated toward metal. Principally Luca T Mai (sax) and Massimo Pupillo (bass), both also on keyboards, plus new drummer Paolo Mongardi. I have this tagged as "avant-metal," but it's instrumental, and as tricky as ever. B+(**) [sp]

Recent reissues, compilations, and vault discoveries:

Kelan Phil Cohran & Legacy: African Skies (1993 [2025], Listening Position): Trumpet player (1927-2017), in Sun Ra Arkestra 1959-61, recorded several albums, leading Hypnotic Brass Ensemble. Plays various instruments here (congas, flute, guitar, harp, trumpet, violin uke, and his own invention of an electrified kalimba, the frankiphone). Starts uncertain, with some vocals, but finds its groove, highlighted by a blues. A- [bc]

Marty Ehrlich/Julius Hemphill: Circle the Heart (1982 [2026], Relative Pitch): Hemphill (1938-95) founded the Black Artists Group in St. Louis, which Ehrlich joined before moving to New York. Duets, both playing soprano and alto sax, and flute, with Ehrlich also on bass clarinet. B+(**) [sp]

Grupo Um: Nineteen Seventy Seven (1977 [2026], Far Out): Brazilian jazz group, with Roberto Sion (soprano sax/clarinet), Lelo Nazario (keyboards), Zeca Assumpção (electric bass), and Zé Eduardo Nazario (drums), released three albums 1979-82, this find dating from a bit earlier. B+(**) [sp]

Abdallah Oumbadougou: Amghar: The Godfather of Tuareg Music Vol. 1 ([2024], Petaluma): Tuareg guitarist-singer from Niger (1962-2020), a pioneer in the Saharan rock style practiced by many later bands from Niger and Mali. No info on when this well-selected classic material was recorded, but Sahel Sounds released another good album from 1995, Anou Malane. A- [sp]

Ranil Y Su Conjunto Tropical: Galaxia Tropical ([2026], Analog Africa): Cumbia group, from Iquitos deep in the Pervian Amazon, led by singer Ranil (Raúl Llena Vásquez, 1935-2020). Dates are hard to come by, but he/they released a dozen albums starting in the 1970s (Discogs only has dates on three 1974-77 singles, plus some later compilations). This German label came up with a previous compilation in 2020 (plus a digital-only supplement called Stay Safe and Sound Rail Selection!!). A- [sp]

Old music:

Dead Pioneers: Dead Pioneers (2023, self-released): Indigenous punk-rap group from Denver, Gregg Deal the vocalist, with two guitars, bass, and drums, racing through 12 songs in 22:01. Starts with: "America's a pyramid scheme, and you ain't at the top." Continues: "The foundation of this country is rooted in slavery and genocide, born in the bosom of colonialism," then after noting capitalism adds "this structure is a rigged game." He goes on to admit to being a "Bad Indian" and a "Doom Indian" ("doom sustains me; it's no longer a description so much as a solid indigenous character; doom is angry and real and could care less about how it makes you feel." A- [sp]

Madonna: Madame X: Music From the Theater Xperience (2020 [2021], Warner): As the pace of her studio albums has slowed, she's gotten into the habit of punctuating them with live megatour albums — the tours being the main point of the albums. Thus we have The Confessions Tour (2007), Sticky & Sweet Tour (2010), MDNA World Tour (2013), Rebel Heart Tour (2017), and now this, following her excellent Madame X album (2019). This one was recorded in Lisbon, where Madonna moved in 2019, and incorporates a fado segment, among the new songs that mix in with the always welcome hits. In between, her banter is more sharply political than ever. Good. B+(***) [sp]

Madonna: MDNA World Tour (2012 [2013], Interscope): Her fourth live album, following MDNA, her twelfth studio album (2012), one of her better ones. The new album contributes 9 songs ("Turn Up the Radio" is one of the best), in a 114-minute, 24-song program. Sound is a bit thin, but the music is terrific, as ever. B+(***) [sp]

Madonna: Rebel Heart Tour (2016 [2017], Eagle): Another megatour, behind her thirteenth studio album, Rebel Heart (2016), a concert from Sydney, originally released as a 138:16 video, later reduced by a 22-track, 99:01 album. Eight songs from a good but not great album, plus many more. B+(**) [sp]

Masaka Kids Africana: Greatful (2021, Masaka Kids Africana): Group of Ugandan teens (more or less), under the name of a nonprofit that helps "orphaned, vulnerable and abandoned children," in this specific case to become YouTube dancing and musical stars. Second album after a 2019 debut, one more since plus several EPs, including some Xmas music. Several sources misread the album title as "Grateful," which they may well be, but they're also pretty great. A- [sp]

Range Rats: Range Rats (1986 [2010], Mississippi): Ragged-but-right country-rock band led by Fred and Toody Cole, "some sad lilting ballads & some punk as hell," seems to be their only album under this name but the Coles have other credits, including the Rats (1980-83, before their country turn) and Dead Moon (1988-2004; I have two of their albums at A-). A- [sp]

Michael Hurley/The Range Rats: Dead Moon Night (1986-2017 [2024], Mississippi, EP): "Limited one time edition," consists of the folksinger covering a Dead Moon song from Portland's first Dead Moon Day (in honor of the band, after Freddy Cole's death), followed by a previously unreleased Range Rats song. Curios at best. B [bc]

Grade (or other) changes:

Buck 65: Do Not Bend (2026, Vertices): Rapper/beatmaker Richard Terfly, from Nova Scotia, seems to be in Toronto these days, called his 1988-96 juvenilia compilation Weirdo Magnet, has released many albums since, with a 2014-22 break, but he's been superb ever since. Short one (14 tracks, 26:43), snappy, as exceptional as ever. Noted: "I don't like this universe, let's move on to another one." [Label unspecified, but Christgau used Buck 65's Substack title. Lyrics here.] [was: B+(***)] A- [bc]

Gogol Bordello: We Mean It, Man! (2026, Casa Gogol): New York-based punk band, principally Eugene Hütz, the one constant since 1999, draws heavily on his Ukrainian background. Strong album. [was: B+(***)] A- [sp]

Unpacking: Found in the mail last week (actually last several, as I had fallen way behind):

• David Adewumi: The Flame Beneath the Silence (Giant Step Arts) [03-27]
• Tyrone Allen II: Upward (Dreams and Fears) [03-16]
• Anthony Branker & Other Ways of Knowing: Manifestations of a Diasporic Groove & Spirit (Origin) [03-20]
• Asher Brinson: Midnight Hurricane (AsherBrin) [04-03]
• Owen Chen: Eternal Wind: The Ghibli Collection (OA2) [04-03]
• Steve Cohn/Billy Stein: Up From the Soil (Hathor Music) [2025-10-03]
• Matt Dwonsyk: Live at the Sidedoor (self-released) [03-06]
• Simon Hanes: Gargantua (Pyroclastic) [03-27]
• Alexander Hawkins/Taylor Ho Bynum: A Near Permanent State of Wonder (RogueArt) [2025-09-12]
• Steven Husted and Friends: Two Nights - "Live!" (self-released) [02-16]
• The Interplay Jazz Orchestra: Bite Your Tongue (self-released) [02-26]
• Jon Irabagon: Focus Out (Irrabagast) [03-13]
• Jon Irabagon and Dan Oestreicher: Saturday's Child (Irrabagast) [03-13]
• Javon Jackson: Jackson Plays Dylan (Solid Jackson/Palmetto) [03-27]
• Jamile/Vinicius Gomes: Boundless Species (La Reserve) [04-03]
• DeYeon Kim: Wellspring (TAO Forms) [05-01]
• Erica von Kleist: Picc Pocket (self-released) [04-23]
• Anna Kolchina: Reach for Tomorrow (OA2) [02-27]
• Steve Kovalcheck: Buckshot Blues (OA2) [04-03]
• Brian Landrus: Just When You Think You Know (BlueLand/Palmetto) [03-20]
• Scott Lee: Greetings From Florida: Postcards From Paradise (Sunnyside) [04-16]
• Tom Lippincott: Ode to the Possible (self-released) [03-02]
• Lisanne Lyons: May I Come In (OA2) [02-27]
• Quinsin Nachoff: Patterns From Nature (Whirlwind) [02-27]
• Luke Norris: Moment From the Past (self-released) [03-20]
• Adam O'Farrill: Elephant (Out of Your Head) [03-20]
• Meg Okura: Isaiah (Adhyâropa) [02-20]
• Beto Paciello: The Stoic Suite (Moons Arts) [04-17]
• Chenxi Pan: This Very Moment (Origin) [03-20]
• Benjie Porecki: Faster Than We Know (Funklove Productions) [03-02]
• Reverso: Between Two Silences (Alternate Side) [03-27]
• Harvie S: Bright Dawn (Origin) [03-20]
• Marta Sanchez: For the Space You Left (Out of Your Head) [04-17]
• Dave Schumacher & Cubeye: Agua Con Gas (Cubeye Music) [04-17]
• Yuyo Sotashe & Chris Pattishall: Invocation (self-released) [03-20]
• Chad Taylor/Aymeric Avice/Luke Stewart: Deep in the Earth High in the Sky (RogueArt) [02-09] *
• Harriet Tubman & Georgia Muldrow: Electrical Field of Love (Pi) [03-27]
• Jack Wood: For Every Man There's a Woman (Jazz Hang) [03-24]

Ask a question, or send a comment.

Saturday, February 28, 2026

February archive (finished).

Music: Current count 45603 [45565] rated (+38), 11 [27] unrated (-16).

I'm writing this introduction on March 2, but it seems fair to backdate this one. Not that I'm not happy to be done with February, but the shortfall of days messed up my schedule (or would have, if I had followed a normal schedule in February). Besides, the cutoff is honest. All of these reviews were logged by Feb. 28, and I haven't written any more since. Saturday was disrupted by having someone come over to trim the giant elm tree in the backyard. Then I picked up some kind of stomach bug, and I spent most of Sunday in bed. I'm feeling somewhat better today, but remain in a bad mood, and I don't expect that to alleviate any time soon.

I published a rather massive Loose Tabs on Friday, where I obviously didn't pay enough attention to the likelihood that Trump would be so befuddled as to launch a war against Iran. I did a minor update last night, where I noted that Franklin Roosevelt's designation of Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor as "a day in infamy" applies equally well to Trump's attack on Iran and to Bush's 2003 attack on Iraq. I also wrote:

That Trump and Netanyahu have blindly thrust us into a new state of the world is undeniable. The things we should be absolutely clear on are: the "crisis" that precipitated this action was totally fabricated, the result of Israel hyping Iran as some kind of supreme existential enemy, for no reason beyond their desire to provide cover for their ongoing displacement of the Palestinian people; that the US has gone along with demonizing Iran because the CIA installation of the Shah in 1953 and the subsequent support of the Shah's terror campaign against his people is something Americans have never acknowledged and made any sort of amends for; and that several generations of American politicians, including Biden and Trump, have allowed themselves to be manipulated and dictated to by Israelis, Netanyahu in particular. There was never any need to go to war with Iran, and even a week ago an agreement could have been negotiated, at least had the US shown any decent respect for the Iranian regime and people.

I wasn't able to follow the news as the attack unfolded, and thus far I've barely skimmed a couple of reports. As far as I've been able to glean, Trump wants to continue bombing for several more weeks. As such, he's wasting the opportunity caused by killing Khamenei: a pause would allow cooler heads to regroup, while keeping up the attack will only increase Iran's resolve to fight back — as they are doing, but thus far to limited effect. I wouldn't dismiss the possibility that Iran could make their attackers feel real (if not commensurate) pain, but what worries me more at the moment is the extraordinary exhilaration and hubris Trump and Netanyahu are feeling in flexing their power to destroy and wreak havoc, especially given how unpopular their warmaking is. I doubt either of them will meet the justice they deserve. I just fear that they're on a path that will only get worse until someone finally stops them (as if anyone could or would).

In old age, I often reflect back on maxims I learned when I was a child. One of the most enduring is: power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Sure, Trump was pretty corrupt long before he had the absolute power to kill thousands or millions of people. I don't know how people couldn't have seen through Trump, but for all of my lifetime, we've been brought up to adore and trust American power, despite constant reminders that we cannot and should not.

I finally cracked into the 2026 promo queue last week (or two), so that's much of what you'll find below. I have more that I haven't unpacked yet. Main thing that's slowed me down is that my office space has descended into a horrible mess. I'll try to straighten that out next week. Meanwhile, my main source for new non-jazz picks this week is RiotRiot. I also looked up some Neil Sedaka after his death — I've been playing The Brill Building Box, where Stairway to Heaven is a favorite (here's a live take, in a medley) — and I also sampled a couple of this year's Rock & Roll Hall of Fame nominees that I had nothing rated by (still missing for me are Inxs and Iron Maiden).

I'm not invited to vote, and almost certainly never will be, but Chuck Eddy is, so I followed his link as a checklist, then I compiled a table of the 17 nominees' graded albums: only 4 had A/A- graded albums (Joy Division/New Order, Pink, Shakira, Wu-Tang Clan), so I would have been very hard-pressed to meet their minimum of 7 votes: I wouldn't begrudge Vandross, and admit that lots of (almost exclusively British?) people like Oasis to a HOF degree, and I'm somewhat into the post-New Edition solo/trio albums. But it feels to me like in their rush to induct everyone they've started scraping the bottom of the barrel — although I'm pretty sure that if I did a bit of research I could find many much better individuals and/or bands they've overlooked (e.g., Pere Ubu, Pet Shop Boys, Kid Creole & the Coconuts, Pavement).

New records reviewed this week:

Michael Aadal: Aggressive Hymns, Energetic Ballads (2025 [2026], Losen): Norwegian guitarist, tenth album since 2009, cover lists last name only, quartet with André Kassen (tenor/baritone sax), Audun Ramo (acoustic/electric bass), Gunnar Sæter (drums), all original pieces, most pretty strong. B+(***) [cd]

Joshua Achiron: Climbing (2026, Calligram): Young guitarist, from Chicago, first album, playing original pieces (plus one Ellington), backed by veteran who elevate his game: Geof Bradfield (tenor sax), Clark Sommers (bass), and Dana Hall (drums). B+(**) [cd]

Naseem Alatrash: Bright Colors on a Dark Canvas (2025 [2026], Levantine Music): Cellist, Arabic heritage, teaches in Boston, is a member of Turtle Island Quartet, has credits with Danilo Perez and Simon Shaheen. Seven original compositions, 32:03, backed by piano, bass, string quartet, and drums. Zips right along. B+(***) [cd] [02-27]

Eddie Allen's Push: Rhythm People (2023 [2026], Origin): Trumpet player, originally from Milwaukee, based in New York, credits back to 1987 (Lester Bowie, Mongo Santamaria), albums from 1993, one called Push from 2014. Sextet here, plus "special guest" Steve Turre (trombone). B+(**) [cd]

Courtney Marie Andrews: Valentine (2026, Loose Future): Country singer-songwriter, ninth album since 2008. B+(*) [sp]

Kris Davis and the Lutoslawski Quartet: The Solastalgia Suite (2024 [2026], Pyroclastic): Pianist, originally from Canada, put together a series of impressive albums in the 2000s, then moved to the forefront when she set up a label that is much more than just herself. Now she's making moves, this one with a scratchy Polish string quartet that doesn't allow you the option of not listening. A bit too "classical" for my taste, but those not similarly prejudiced are likely to be impressed. B+(***) [cd]

Hilary Duff: Luck . . . or Something (2026, Atlantic): Pop singer-songwriter, sixth album since 2002 (when she was 15), only second album since 2007 (when she was 20), started as a Disney "teen idol," has a fairly long (if not all that distinguished) list of acting credits, and has written a trilogy of "young adult" novels. B+(**) [sp]

Gaudi: Jazz Gone Dub (2025, Dubmission): Italian producer Daniele Cenacchi, plays keyboards, has been dabbling in jazz, electronica, and especially dub since the late 1980s, moving to London in 1995. B+(**) [sp]

Gogol Bordello: We Mean It, Man! (2026, Gogol): New York-based punk band, principally Eugene Hütz, the one constant since 1999, draws heavily on his Ukrainian background. Strong album. B+(***) [sp]

Andy Haas: In Praise of Insomnia (2025 [2026], Resonant Music): Saxophonist, career goes back to the 1980s, including the notable group Radio I-Ching. Solo exercises, credit "saxophone, circular breath, nano pulsar"). This format is inevitably limited, but revelatory if you pay close attention. Helps that it is varied but short: 12 tracks, 29:24. B+(**) [cd]

Hemlocke Springs: The Apple Tree Under the Sea (2026, AWAL): Pop singer-songwriter Isimeme Udu, has degrees in biology and medical informatics, released a well-regarded EP in 2023, first album (10 songs, 33:22). B+(***) [sp]

Joyce Manor: I Used to Go to This Bar (2026, Epitaph, EP): Punk band from California, Barry Johnson the singer-songwriter, Chase Knobbe on guitar, Matt Ebert on bass, various drummers since 2011, seventh album, but at 7 songs, 19:03 I'm inclined to treat it as an EP. B+(*) [sp]

Gil Livni: All In (2024-25 [2026], OA2): Guitarist from Israel, seems to be his second album, a quartet with Amit Friedman (sax), Yonatan Riklis (organ), and Yonatan Rosen (drums), so soul jazz? Three covers (including a Lennon-McCartney), seven originals, pretty lively. B+(**) [cd]

Chris Madsen/Dana Hall/Clark Sommers: Threefold (2025 [2026], Calligram): Tenor/soprano saxophonist, name listed last but type suggests crediting him first. If so (he produced and wrote 4/8 songs, the others by bassist Sommers), this may be his first, although he has side credits back to 2000. This is very solid. B+(***) [cd] [03-06]

Luke Marantz/Simon Jermyn: Echoes (2025 [2026], Chill Tone): Presented as duets (although a drummer is also credited), Marantz plays piano/keyboards, Jermyn electric guitar and bass. Marantz has a fair number of side credits since 2011. Jermyn, from Ireland but based in New York, had a debut album in 2010 (solo electric bass). B+(**) [cd]

Bruno Mars: The Romantic (2026, Atlantic): Pop genius Peter Gene Hernandez, broke through with Doo-Wops and Hooligans in 2010, and since then has shown occasional flashes of brilliance without putting together another compelling album. But this is only his fourth, with a 10-year gap since 2016's lame 24K Magic. This isn't lame, but the overproduction is pretty severe. B+(*) [sp]

Megan Moroney: Cloud 9 (2026, Columbia Nashville): Country singer-songwriter from Georgia, third album. B+(***) [sp]

Lord Jah-Monte Ogbon: As of Now (2026, Lex): Rapper Jamonte Lyde, from Charlotte but he's been around, Discogs lists 15 albums since 2019 but this is his big step forward. A- [sp]

Kate Olson: So It Goes (2025 [2026], OA2): Soprano saxophonist, from Seattle, has a previous (2009) album of "improvised duets" I wouldn't hold against calling this a debut, and side work with Wayne Horvitz, who appears as a guest here (3 tracks). Mostly quartet with Conner Eisenmenger (trombone), Tim Carey (electric bass/guitar), and Evan Woodle (drums), with extra double bass (Geoff Harper) on three tracks. B+(***) [cd]

The Paranoid Style: Known Associates (2026, Bar/None): Singer-songwriter Elizabeth Nelson, with husband Timothy Bracy, fifth album, pens historico-politico-philosophical tracts set to conventional, guitar-heavy but far from sludgy rock and roll. As someone who is slow to grasp lyrics, I tend to be less than impressed at first, then start to notice phrases and appreciate the clarity of the music. Main thing I've noted so far is that these songs are all hooked to their titles, which are somewhat more oblique than usual ("Tearing the Ticket," "A Barrier to Entry," "Shark Eyes," "Elegant Bachelors," the title song). A- [sp]

Pony: Clearly Cursed (2026, Take This to Heart): Toronto indie-pop group, Sam Bielanski the singer-songwriter, third album, with Matty Morand now the exclusive guitarist. Ten songs, 30:45. B+(**) [sp]

Brad Schrader: Late Nights With Brad Schrader (2025, self-released): Standards singer, been plying his trade for 25 years, nothing under Discogs, this seems to be his first. Seven standards (23:50, including the all-but-obligatory Jobim), backed nicely by piano (music director Jerry Vezza), bass, drums, and sax. B [cd]

Noé Sécula/Jorge Rossy: A Sphere Between Other Obsessions (2023 [2026], Fresh Sound New Talent): French pianist, second album, mostly duo with vibraphone (7/10 cuts), mostly playing Monk tunes. B+(*) [bc]

Dave Stryker: Blue Fire: The Van Gelder Session (2025 [2026], Strikezone): Guitarist, from Nebraska, called his first album First Strike (1988), co-led a long-running group with saxophonist Steve Slagle, has lately been in the habit of releasing something new every January. This year's offering is a back-to-roots session with organ (Jon Gold) and drums (McClenty Hunter). B+(**) [cd]

Mattias Svensson: Embrace (2022 [2026], Origin): Swedish bassist, studied in New York but returned to Sweden, has a couple previous albums under his own name, plus several dozen side-credits (especially with Jan Lundgren and Viktoria Tolstoy). Wrote all the pieces here, performed with Bill Mays (piano) and Morten Lund (drums). Nice outing. B+(**) [cd]

Craig Taborn: Dream Archives (2024 [2026], ECM): Pianist, first came to my attention in James Carter's 1990s quartet, has a wide-ranging solo career with several dozen albums and many more side-credits, ultimately leading to a MacArthur grant in 2024. Trio with Tomeka Reid (cello) and Ches Smith (drums). Talented group, but doesn't really take off (unlike, say, 2025's Trio of Bloom). B+(*) [sp]

Vance Thompson: Lost and Found (2024 [2026], Moondo): Trumpet player, founder/director of the Knoxville Jazz Orchestra, lost his ability to play due to focal dystonia, but has returned to music here, playing the vibraphone in a quintet with piano, guitar, bass, and drums. B+(*) [cd]

Recent reissues, compilations, and vault discoveries:

John Vanore & Abstract Truth: Easter Island Suite (1989-2024 [2026], Acoustical Concepts): Trumpet player, several albums since 1991, started composing this suite in the 1980s and recorded the first movement in 1989, returning to the studio for the middle sections in 2012, then the final movement in 2024. The groups evolved, but all are deep in brass. B+(*) [cd]

Old music:

Phil Collins: Face Value (1981, Virgin): First solo album by the former Genesis drummer, started a string of eight gold/platinum albums (up to 2010), none I've heard so far, which is unusual for someone being given serious consideration for the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame (but not the only 2026 nominee I have nothing in the database for: also INXS, Iron Maiden, and New Edition). Seems like an agreeable pop album, but the only whole song that caught my attention was the Beatles cover ("Tomorrow Never Knows"), and the only other bits I was impressed by were drum breaks. B [sp]

The Damned: Damned Damned Damned (1977, Stiff): English punk rock group, first album, Dave Vanian the singer, backed by guitar (Brian James), bass (Captain Sensible), and drums (Rat Scabies), produced by Nick Lowe. I recall the group getting a lot of hype at the time, but little respect. Sounds pretty good at first, a little short of material toward the final rave up. B+(**) [yt]

New Edition: New Edition (1984, MCA): Another RRHOF nominee I totally missed, released 7 studio albums 1983-2004, selling over 20 million copies. Boy group, conceived as successor to the Jackson 5, updated with some rap to coin the term "new jack swing," the five members on this second album went on to solo acts for Bobby Brown and Ralph Tresvant as well as the trio known as Bell Biv Devoe. (Later member was/is Johnny Gill.) B+(**) [sp]

The OKeh Rhythm & Blues Story: 1949-1957 (1949-57 [1993], Epic/Legacy, 3CD): Label founded 1918 by Otto Karl Erich Heinemann (1876-1965), recorded early "race" records including Louis Armstrong's Hot Fives and Sevens. The label was sold to Columbia in 1926, sold off in 1934 and bought back by CBS in 1938, which periodically shut it down and revived it. This was their prime R&B period, with plenty of hot jump blues, but nothing I recognize from standard compilations (like Rhino's fabulous The R&B Box), and a shortage of star power (the "big" names here are Big Maybelle, Chuck Willis, Hadda Brooks, and Screamin' Jay Hawkins). B+(***) [sp]

Rosé: Rosie (2024, The Black Label/Atlantic): Born in New Zealand, raised in Australia, moved to South Korea (where her parents had emigrated from) and joined the bestselling girl group Blackpink, released a solo "single album" in 2021 (6:15, expanded on CD to 12:30), then this studio album, which belatedly came to my attention thanks to the Bruno Mars feature "APT." That single sound pretty good, but it's hardly helped by an overload of ballads, even if they're not bad. B+(*) [sp]

Neil Sedaka: Sings His Greatest Hits (1958-62 [1963], RCA): Brill Building songwriter, an original member of the Tokens (which had a 1961 hit with "The Lion Sleeps Tonight"), recorded a half-dozen top-ten singles 1959-62, which loom large here. Seems like he should have a memorable period compilation. This comes close. B+(***) [yt]

Neil Sedaka: Neil Sedaka and the Tokens (1956-57 [1963], Guest Star): Short compilation (10 songs, 21:54), unclear exactly when recorded (Google says that Sedaka left to go solo in 1958), but 6 songs are credited to Sedaka alone, 2 with the Tokens, and 2 (twisters) to Joe Martin and His Orchestra. B [sp]

Neil Sedaka: Sedaka's Back (1972-73 [1974], Rocket): Elton John's label compiled this from three UK-only LPs, including songs that were hits for others, and one that became his first since 1962, and set him up for years to come. B+(*) [sp]

Unpacking: I have stuff but haven't logged it yet.

Ask a question, or send a comment.

Friday, February 27, 2026

This is an occasional collection of newsworthy links and comments, much less systematic than what I attempted in my late Speaking of Which posts. The new name comes from my extensive use of browser tabs. When I get around to cleaning up, I often find tabs opened to old articles I might want to comment on and/or refer back to. So these posts are mostly housecleaning, but may also serve as a very limited but persistent record of what 20+ years ago I started calling "the end of the American empire" and nowadays feels more like "the end of civilization." I collect these bits in a draft file, and flush them out when periodically (12 times from April-December 2025). My previous one appeared 34 days ago, on January 24.

I have a little-used option of selecting bits of text highlighted with a background color, for emphasis a bit more subtle than bold or ALL CAPS. (I saw this on Medium. I started with their greenish color [#bbdbba] and lightened it a bit [#dbfbda].) I'll try to use it sparingly.

Table of Contents:

• Epsteinmania
• Melania
• The Washington Post
• Super Bowl LX
• The DHS Shutdown
• The Supreme Court rules on tariffs
• Threatening/Attacking Iran
• Trump's State of the Union speech
• Israel
• Around the world: Ukraine, Europe, Africa
• Trump goes to war (international edition)
• Trump goes to war (domestic edition)
• Trump regime
• Trump
• David Klion: The war on the liberal class.
• Eric Levitz: Why politics is broken.
• Jonquilyn Hill: Are we getting stupider?
• Jeffrey St Clair: Roaming Charges
• Stefano Tortorici/R Trebor Scholz: Socialist co-ops against Silicon Valley.
• Dolly Li/Jordan Winters: The House of Representatives is too small.
• Alfred McCoy: Accelerating Amerian (and planetary) decline
• Zach Beauchamp: How to stop a dictator
• Books
• Other media/arts
• Obituaries

Topical Stories

Sometimes stuff happens, and it dominates the news/opinion cycle for a few days or possibly several weeks. We might as well lead with it, because it's where attention is most concentrated. But eventually these stories will fold into the broader, more persistent themes of the following section.

Last time: Thanksgiving; Epsteinmania; Zohran Mamdani; ICE Stories; Venezuela; Iran; Jerome Powell.

Epsteinmania: After numerous delays, the Department of Justice finally released a "large cache" of documents and media related to its investigation of Jeffrey Epstein: this one an overwhelming dump of 3 million pages and 180,000 images.

• Philip Weiss [12-19]: The New York Times ignores an essential part of the Jeffrey Epstein story — Israel.

• Cameron Peters [02-02]: 3 million new Epstein files, briefly explained.

• Nia Prater [02-03]: DoJ makes appalling mistakes in release of new Epstein files.

• Michael Arria [02-03]: Newly released Epstein files reveal further ties to Israel: "Further connections between the late, convicted sex criminal and the state of Israel."

• Branko Marcetic [02-06]: Ehud Barak had a very close friendship with Jeffrey Epstein.

• Jeet Heer [02-06]: From Epstein to Bezos, the ruling class is rotten to the core: "Let this week be yet another reminder that plutocrats are a threat to democracy, not its saviors." But doesn't "threat" imply future peril. Plutocrats already exist, and their existence demonstrates that democracy isn't working for nearly everyone it's supposed to. Part of the problem is that people keep making excuses for billionaires as if their wealth is independent of the world it's been derived from. For example:

  • Matthew Yglesias [2025-12-29]: Let's all practice billionaire positivity: While he's right that "it's not a zero-sum world," and for that matter his implication that you can't change anything important by just singling out a few "bad apple" billionaires, his habit of sucking up to the rich leaves him no critical ground to stand on, however profitable it may be for him personally (perhaps even beyond his main gig of writing for Bloomberg).

• Caitlin Dewey [02-04]: Epstein gave America a common enemy: "His case has become a vehicle for a strain of anti-elite populism that's growing across the political spectrum."

• David Futrelle [02-11]: What Peter Thiel saw in Jeffrey Epstein: "In the extensive correspondence between the Silicon Valley venture capitalist and the late pedophile, both men expressed a deep aversion to democracy."

• Zachary Clifton [02-12]: The Yale professor who e-mailed Epstein about a "small goodlooking blonde" student is no longer teaching: "After outcry from students over e-mails showing David Gelernter's relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, the computer science professor is under review by the university." Before jumping to the conclusion that Gelernter is a victim of "cancel culture," you might want to consider reports that he was the lowest-regarded professor of all at Yale. Gelernter is one of the more interesting cases to have gotten caught up in the Epstein tarbaby. It's not clear to me whether his work in computer science is notable or not, but it gave him academic standing and business contacts (like Epstein and Peter Thiel) that allowed him to spin off dubious socio-political theories, and paved his way toward becoming a Trump prop. He's written a couple books that seem to raise big questions, like Americanism: The Fourth Great Western Religion (his notion there is not just that Americanism has taken on the air of religious dogma, but that it is a form of "secular zionism"), and the more jaundiced America-Lite: How Imperial Academia Dismantled Our Culture (and Ushered in the Obamacrats), which Russell Jacoby reviewed as Dreaming of a world with no intellectuals.

  • Isaac Chotiner [2018-10-23]: "The idea that he's racist is absurd": Interview with David Gelernter on why a rich guy with a Jewish son-in-law can't be a racist. Trump's just an exaggerated version of an average American. He has a slippery excuse for any charge you might lob at Trump, but he doesn't shy away from generalizing about the left, who hate Trump because they hate average Americans, and indeed the whole idea of America.

• Dave Zirin [02-13]: The NFL owners and Olympic organizers in Epstein's inbox: "The sports media is ignoring the story, but wealthy sports figures are all over the Epstein files."

• Melinda Cooper [02-14]: Epstein family values: "The billionaire patriarchs of the American far-right want to rule an economy of masters and servants."

• Elie Honig [02-20]: The new Epstein list: celebrities named; predators redacted. "The lesson, as always, is that Bondi and this Justice Department are simply not to be trusted."

• Ana Marie Cox [02-22]: The paranoid style of Jeffrey Epstein has come for us all: "The pedophile plutocrat has some peculiar predilections — especially for academics and thinkers who showed a potential to further his grand experiments in inhumanity."

  There's a pattern to Epstein's consumption of ideas and to the kinds of people he found compatible. It wasn't a wish to brush shoulders with the famous and well-regarded — generic star-fucking. Epstein didn't collect people for status; he identified and aligned himself with the intellectual machinery now justifying our current dystopia, including the academic rationalizations and motivated reasoning that hover behind the most terrible excesses of the Trump administration: glorified phrenology, violent misogyny, genetic determinism, and elite impunity.

  It is not a coincidence that Epstein was also interested in crypto, in AI, in right-wing populism, in trad Cath extremists, and anti-trans ideology, in addition to creepy experiments in pain tolerance, psychopathology, and advantageous genetics. Epstein gravitated toward fields and figures that rank humans, explain away cruelty, or biologize inequality. He did not forge connections with these people: He saw they were already in alignment.

• H Scott Prosterman [02-24]: Former Israeli PM, in Epstein files, dreamed of Israeli eugenics and pretty converts.

• Dan Mangan [02-24]: DOJ withheld documents about claim that Trump sexually abused minor. [Weird how this story vanishes under creeping Javascript. Probably a better source elsewhere?]

• Jelinda Montes [02-24]: DOJ withheld Trump-related documents in Epstein files.

• Maureen Tkacik [02-26]: Newspapers did not kill themselves: "New docs say Jeffrey Epstein collaborated with the Russian mob to loot the New York Daily News, then tried to help Mort Zuckerman discard it when reporting became inconvenient."

• Elie Honig [02-27]: The British are putting Trump's DoJ to shame on Epstein accountability: "While the UK makes arrests, the US Justice Department offers weak explanations for inaction."

• Noam Chomsky: The famous linguist and anti-war intellectual, a consistent critic of American and Israeli foreign policy, got caught up in Epstein's web, and so got singled out for concern.

  • Vijay Prashad [02-03]: On the emails between Jeffrey Epstein and Noam Chomsky.

  • Christ Knight [02-06]: The Chomsky/Epstein puzzle.

  • Valéria Chomsky [02-09]: "Ensnared" and "manipulated": Official statement by Valéria Chomsky regarding Jeffrey Epstein.

Melania: The movie Jeff Bezos spent $75 million on to flatter the Trumps. This is, of course, a lightning rod for critical ridicule — which, sure, is a big part of why I'm reporting on it at all. Given the subject and circumstances, I'm not surprised that at Rotten Tomatoes the average of scores given by recognized critics is 8% (50 reviews). It's likely that most film critics are anti-Trump to start with, but even if there is a bit of selection bias, that's a pretty low score, suggesting that the film isn't very good, at least by common critical standards. (The sample size is pretty decent: it may be slightly inflated by critics out to slam Trump, but not much. Moreover, one shoudn't assume that anti-Trump means anti-Melania, as a lot of people like to think that Melania is secretly anti-Trump too.) What's much more suspect is that the viewer ratings appear to be ecstatic at 99% (1000+ verified ratings), for a largest-ever discrepancy between the ratings of 91 points. I don't know how to prove this, but intuitively the self-selection bias here must be huge. Who, after all, would buy a ticket to this particular movie? No one I know, except perhaps to write a nasty review, and those people would show up in the critics column. But I find it hard to understand how anyone would pay money to see Melania. It's not unusual for right-wingers to mass-purchase books to plant them on the New York Times bestseller list. Same thing could be happening here. Indeed 1000 tickets for party operatives promising to follow up on Rotten Tomatoes would be a drop in the Bezos bucket.

• Margaret Hartmann:

  • [01-31]: Movie review: Does Melania dream of AI-generated sheep? "The First Lady's weirdly soulless MAGA lullaby is going to put a lot of Amazon Prime viewers to sleep."

  • [02-02]: The Melania movie, explained: box office, reviews, & what she made. "Why did the notoriously private First Lady film a Brett Ratner-directed documentary? It might have something to do with the $28 million paycheck." When asked why Amazon is paying $40 million, when the second highest bidder topped out at $14 million, a "person close to Bezos" said: "He is doing a deal, offering money to buy the Trump Family's affection and flattering the president. If you think about it in terms of costs versus benefit, it is pretty low. It's a smart investment."

• Nick Hilton [01-30]: First Lady is a preening, scowling void of pure nothingness in this ghastly bit of propaganda.

• Maureen Dowd [01-31]: Slovenian sphinx flick nixed! "It turns out there is no riddle, no enigma, no mystery, no dark anguish, Melania is not Rapunzel in the tower, pining to be saved from the ogre imprisoning her. She is comfortable in the frosty vertical solitude of the tower, swaddled in luxury."

• Monica Hesse [01-31]: Melania promises to take us behind the scenes. There's nothing to see: Anyone searching for hidden layers will be disappointed: "we were dealing with a situation that was not an onion but a potato. Yes, there's a thin protective skin. But after you breach that, no matter how many times you go after it with a peeler, you're dealing with pretty much the same pulp."

• Sophia Tesfaye [01-31]: Why MAGA won't rally for Melania documentary.

• Matt Labash [02-01]: Is Melania the worst film ever made? "It's no small wonder it's taking such a drubbing. Melania is a personality-study of a person who doesn't actually have one."

• Tom Brueggemann [02-01]: Five box office results this weekend more important than expensive vanity doc Melania.

• Coleman Spilde [02-01]: The "Melania" movie is empty, foul and worse than we imagined.

• Chas Danner [02-02]: What critics are saying about the Melania documentary: "Here are the highlights of their lowlights." This pointed me to several other pieces cited here, but has much more (and is being "continuously updated"). Some more sample quotes:

  • Lauren Collins [The New Yorker]: "For his comeback, [Brett Ratner] has summoned all the artistic ambition of a local Realtor who just got a drone." Also revealing:

    We are told, for instance, that Melania's father, Viktor Knavs, is an avid videographer, but the film is devoid of baby pictures, family mementos, or any of the other low-hanging archival materials that typically serve to humanize a distant subject. She is a woman without a past, effacing biography just as her husband erases national history. (As I noted in 2016, their four-hundred-and-fifty-person wedding included all of three guests from Melania's homeland: her mother, her father, and her sister.) Melania says that everything she does is for "the children," but no actual children appear in Melania. Nor do pets, friends, hobbies, or music, except in a sad little scene in which she struggles to sing along to "Billie Jean," supposedly her favorite song. You almost wince when her towering adult son, Barron, brushes her off without so much as a peck on the cheek.

  • Rick Perlstein "recommends watching the film (if, like him, you are endlessly fascinated with how the pageantry of the American presidency is staged)."

  • Alexandra Petri [The Atlantic]: "The movie reveals how well insulated she is from anything resembling human life, like a cheetah in the house of a Russian oligarch."

  • Heather Schwedel [Slate]: "I'm not sure anyone else could have made a movie that taught me so remarkably little about its main subject."

  • Sonny Bunch [The Bulwark]: "The target audience seemed to enjoy it fine; the 12:40 p.m. showing at the AMC NorthPark in Dallas was 80 percent full and laughed in all the right places. It preaches to the faithful with great reverence and they were thrilled to bask in the golden glow of Trump Tower. But it's fascinating to see so pure and naked an instrument of graft and propaganda deployed to great effect on an audience happy to lap it up."

  • Michael Clark [The Epoch Times]: "In a few days, it's possible I could be the only U.S.-based critic on RottenTomatoes.com with a positive review of Melania. As of Saturday morning, the 31st, the film's critical consensus sits at 6 percent. Under normal circumstances, this would suggest that I was out of touch and don't know how to do my job. However, the audience rating is 98 percent, making Melania the biggest ratings-gap title in Rotten Tomatoes history."

• David Yearsley [02-06]: Melania's music: A view from Berlin, thinking of Bach . . . and Leni Riefenstahl.

• Eboni Boykin-Patterson [02-06]: Rotten Tomatoes desperately claims 'impossible' rating for 'Melania' is real.

• Katie Rosseinsky [02-07]: Rotten Tomatoes addresses 'fake' user score claims for Melania movie after documentary sets new record.

• Catherine Bouris [02-09]: Melania box office plummets in second weekend.

• Daniel Parris [2025-08-20]: Is Rotten Tomatoes still reliable? A statistical analysis. This predates Melania, but offers some context, and some hints as to the underlying business models.

The Washington Post:

• Garrett Owen [02-04]: Washington Post lays off a third of its staff in "bloodbath": "The sweeping layoffs come amid a steep decline in readership under the leadership of Jeff Bezos."

• Chris Lehmann [02-04]: Jeff Bezos's destruction of The Washington Post is a disgraceful plutocratic crime: "It turns out that democracy doesn't die in darkness at all — it succumbs to repeated group meetings at the hands of the moneyed power elite."

• Brian Karem [02-06]: What happens when democracy loses its watchdogs: "Layoffs at the Washington Post under Jeff Bezos are a dire warning for journalism and government accountability."

• Brian Faler [02-06]: Amazon's tax bill plunges after GOP tax cuts: The 87 percent drop is largely due to a more generous depreciation break in the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act.' This occurred "even as its profits jumped by 45 percent to nearly $90 billion."

Super Bowl LX: For the first time in several decades, I watched (and mostly enjoyed) the game, was perplexed by the half-time show, and suffered through enough commercials to fill a new screed like Guy Debord's Society of the Spectacle, but no time for that now.

• Marissa Martinez [02-06]: Bad Bunny is taking over the US. Does he want Puerto Rico to leave it?

• Sean Illing [02-07]: Enjoy the Super Bowl while you can. Football won't last forever: "The sport feels unstoppable — yet also doomed." Interview with Chuck Klosterman.

• Izzie Ramirez [02-08]: Bad Bunny's knockout halftime show, explained by a Puerto Rican: "All of the cultural Easter eggs you might have missed."

• Ophell Garcia-Lawler [02-09]: How Bad Bunny shut down his haters at Super Bowl.

• Cruz Bonlarron Martínez [02-09]: Bad Bunny's Super Bowl show was political art at its best.

• Alfred Soto [02-09]: The boricua quotidian: Bad Bunny.

  When MAGA has to coax a barely functional Kid Rock into alternative Superbowl programming, then you know Bunny is lucky to have such feeble adversaries. The show itself? Wobbly at first. Bunny looked like he'd realized several hundred million spectators were learning about him. Then, as he played subject and object for a staged recreation of life in a blighted U.S. territory, his confidence swelled; the recent tracks that nodded towards the boricua quotidian gained resonance. Pedro Pascal and Gaga came across as eager fellow travelers. Past and future Billboard chart toppers Ricky Martin and Cardi B served as reminders of the scope of Puerto Rican popular music. "I appreciate Bad Bunny for bringing the Telemundo Saturday afternoon variety show ethos (dancers, inapt sets, let's-try-this attitude) to global TV," I wrote on Bluesky. The dancers, for many watchers the show's kitschiest part, come straight from the twilight zone that is Spanish language television on a weekend at 4 p.m. Hell yeah. The last two minutes played as much as an elegy to an endangered hemispheric comity as an Epcot parade.

• Josh Fiallo [02-09]: Kid Rock's lip-synced halftime show brings MAGA pundit to tears.

• Constance Grady [02-10]: Woke isn't dead. Bad Bunny's halftime show proved it. "Maybe the right didn't capture the culture as much as they thought."

• Addy Bink [02-08]: Trump calls out this 'sissy' NFL rule a lot. Why? I hadn't watched football for decades, but had little trouble following the game. I didn't notice anything on the initial kickoff, except that the the ball was spotted on the 35-yard-line after the end-zone touchback. I looked up this one after Trump complained about the "sissy" rule. Seems OK to me, but some assholes are primed to complain about anything. Kickoff returns always seemed like a randomizing function to me: a possible (but unlikely) lucky break as opposed to the usual methodical grind. In addition to reducing injuries, it also seems likely that the rule reduces flags away from the play, and good riddance to them.

• Aaron Ross Coleman [02-13]: The only solution capitalism has is to sell us more useless junk: "Ad makers will never say the quiet part loud, but they increasingly know that we're unhappy and looking for solutions." I've long regarded advertising as one of the fundamental sins of modern life, and I've worked hard to arrange my life so I hardly ever have to face it. So I was far from prepared to watch the Super Bowl, in real time, with full state-of-the-art ads. I was overwhelmed, so I've been hoping to find some clear analysis. This barely glances the surface, but does suggest an explanation for the how hard I found it to figure out who's selling what: if the selling is always implicit, perhaps the best you can do is to just lodge an indelible image. Over the course of the show, I probably recognized 50+ actors in cameo bits, paid just to register their faces in some context. Beyond that, there were dozens (maybe hundreds) of pop culture references, many of which I couldn't pin down. It would take a whole new volume of Cultural Literacy to decipher all the references advertisers assume we know (or perhaps just hope we recognize).

The DHS shutdown: Funding for the Department of Homeland Security, which includes ICE, ended on February 14, causing a "shutdown" of the Department (which doesn't seem to include ICE). As of Feb. 24, the shutdown remain in effect. Seems like this should have been a bigger story, but I've seen very little mention of it (at least that I care to include here). It doesn't even seem to have its own Wikipedia article, although some basic info is available under 2026 United States federal government shutdowns.

• Ed Kilgore:

  • [02-11]: DHS shutdown will spare ICE, punish everyone else.

  • [02-13]: The DHS shutdown is on. Don't expect it to end anytime soon.

The Supreme Court rules on tariffs: Or some of them, some of the time, using some definition of "ruling." The days of the Court doing us favors by clarifying the rule of law seems to be long past.

• Cameron Peters [02-20]: Trump's tariff defeat, briefly explained.

• Elie Honig [02-20]: Trump's tariff fantasy just exploded.

• Ian Millhiser [02-20]: Why a Republican Supreme Court struck down Trump's tariffs: "Trump loses, and the Democratic justices didn't need to concede anything." In particular, the Democratic justices didn't endorse the "major questions" doctrine that Roberts tried invoking, pace Honig above.

• Eric Levitz [02-20]: The Supreme Court's tariff decision could save you $1,000: "The Court just did Trump a huge favor. Will he take it?" The assumption is that everyone but Trump understands that tariffs are bad, so the Court ruling is saving Trump from self-harm. But it's possible that Trump's focus was always more about enhancing presidential power than anything economic. That's certainly why he's fighting the ruling. Moreover, the whole refund angle is a mess, not least because you can't roll back every consequence of the tariff decision.

• Greg Sargent [02-20]: Trump's epic loss on tariffs is even worse for him than you think: "The Supreme Court's stunning invalidation of most of the president's tariffs is another sign that Trumpist populist nationalism is in crisis." That's not my take at all. It reduces a bit of the drag that tariffs are taking on the economy, while creating a messy problem of restitution that isn't likely to be handled at all well. (Personally, while I agree that Trump abused the law in implementing his tariffs, I'd write the losses off, except for purposes of blaming Trump.) But more importantly, it gives Trump an excuse for his failed policies, and turns the Supreme Court back into part of the deep state swamp conspiracy that is dead set on stopping Trump from saving the nation. That's a political argument he can, and will, run with. My main hope here is that by stressing the nefariously political nature of the Court, it bites him back.

• Joshua Keating [02-20]: The Supreme Court just blew up Trump's foreign policy: "How will Trump get countries to do what he wants without tariffs?" Trump has regularly threatened countries to tariffs, demanding "policy concessions on a host of issues that often had little to do with trade." Tariffs were his "big stick," and pretty much the only tool he had, since "soft power" and good will were beneath him.

• Karthik Sankaran [02-20]: Why SCOTUS won't deter Trump's desire to weaponize trade: "Today's Supreme Court decision only closes one avenue for the president to unilaterally impose tariffs."

• Harold Meyerson [02-23]: Trump's tariffs weren't really about trade policy: "They were about his nostalgia, his ego, his bigotry, and his greed." Sure, but more than all that, he discovered in them a source of instant presidential power, which he could use for its own sake, as well as to shake down bribes.

• David Sirota [02-23]: On tariffs, Neil Gorsuch is hardly apolitical.

• Matt Ford [02-24]: Clarence Thomas has lost the plot: "The associate justice's dissent in the tariffs case deserves some extra attention, because it is hopelessly uncoupled from law, history, and the Constitution."

• Elie Mystal [02-24]: The giant mess behind the Supreme Court's tariffs ruling: "The 6-3 decision was a rare victory, but it was crafted out of conflicts that leave almost nothing certain — including future tariff rulings."

Threatening/Attacking Iran: As has been standard policy since 1991 — for how and why this happened see Trita Parsi's book, Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran, and the United States (2007) — Israel is once again pushing the US into war with Iran. Reminds me of the Iraq War-era quip about how "real men go to Tehran."

• Joshua Keating [02-19]: It really looks like we're about to bomb Iran again.

• Kelley Beaucar Vlahos [02-19]: Military tankers for Iran attack deploying near Iraq War levels: "'Strikes could occur any time now,' say experts who explain what id-air refuelers mean for sustained operations."

• Nick Turse [02-19]: Trump menaces Iran with massive armada capable of prolonged war: "The amount of military forces gathering near Iran dwarfs even the monthslong build-up before the US coup in Venezuela."

• Trita Parsi [02-20]: No, even a 'small attack' on Iran will lead to war: "The deal Trump wants is a no-go for Tehran, which is resigned to retaliating if bombed again, limited or otherwise."

• Ryan Grim/Jeremy Scahill/Murtaza Hussain

  • [02-20]: Trump privately dreams of Iran regime change glory as Democrats cynically weigh political benefits of war: "Trump says he wants to be the president who takes down the Islamic Republic. Democratic leaders see him walking into a political trap of his own making ahead of the midterms."

  • [02-23]: Iranian officials to Drop Site: Tehran is showing "unbelievable level of flexibility" in talks to prevent US war: "Iran understand it is dealing with an erratic US president, but its negotiators still believe they can thread the needle with Trump." Two probably unsurmountable problems with a possible deal: Trump cannot be trusted to honor even his own deal; and Israel still has effective veto over any deal (even if they give in for the moment, they know they can kill it later).

• Eldar Mamedov [02-21]: Why Arab states are terrified of US war with Iran: "They see the military build-up and now that bombing and regime change can have consequences, especially geopolitical ones." Especially because they are much more vulnerable to Iranian reprisals than Israel or the US is.

• Chris Hedges [02-21]: The suicidal folly of a war with Iran: While I agree that attacking Iran would be complete and uttery folly, I don't quite buy the word "suicidal." It's folly because the only way to achieve the stated goals is to get Iran to agree to something satisfactory, which probably means the US has to give up some points that don't really hurt and may even be for the better. And there's no real scenario where bombing Iran gets one closer to such an agreement. Indeed, the more you attack Iran, the more insistent you are on dictating a change of government and power, the more resistant you are to treating Iran with any degree of respect, the harder negotiation becomes. Given all the effort the US and Israel have already put into backing Iran into a corner from which they can only lash out in spite, it's remarkable how level-headed their leaders have remained. And that's why another attack doesn't seem likely to be provoke Iran into a response which inflicts serious harm on its attackers. It's not really clear how much harm Iran could inflict, but it's not something that should be dismissed out of hand. US bases and ships in the region are vulnerable, as is a lot of US-friendly oil infrastructure (and the latter is pretty conspicuously vulnerable, as is any shipping going through the Straits of Hormuz). And while Iran has consistently denied any desire to develop let alone use nuclear weapons, it's pretty widely agreed that they could if they wanted to. That mere fact should act as a powerful deterrent, but the US seems determined to push Iran into a corner where they have no other option. A sufficiently large attack could tip that balance. Also, while Iran's leaders clearly want to avoid provoking the US into a massive attack — that's probably why their responses to previous attacks have been muted and advertised — at some point the leaders may decide that their own survival matters more than their people, and risk the latter to save their own skins. (Iraq, Syria, and Libya offer recent examples of regimes that turned on their own people rather than giving up power.) So while the assumption so far has been that Iran's leadership is too responsible to respond to attacks irrationally, is that really something the US wants to depend on in the future? And if it is a dependable assumption, why all the fearmongering about a useless Iranian nuke?

• James A Russell [02-22]: All aboard America's strategic blunder train. Next stop: Iran: "Our stumbling into war with Tehran would be the latest in a self-inflicted 30-year road to nowhere."

• Dave DeCamp:

  • [02-22]: Witkoff says Trump is 'curious' why Iran hasn't 'capitulated': "Curious" implies that he would like to find out. I think the word they're looking for is "dumbfounded."

  • [02-23]: Joint Chiefs Chairman warns Trump of significant risks if US attacks Iran.

• Sajjad Safaei [02-23]: What if today's Iran is resigned to a long, hellish war with the US? "Tehran learned from the June attack and its comparative advantage now is to drag Washington into a protracted regional conflict."

• Sina Azodi [02-24]: History tells us coercion through airpower alone won't work: "Donald Trump won't commit troops because he knows it would hurt him politically. But that's what it would take if he wants Iran to capitulate." Iraq and Afghanistan are examples where air power alone failed, and ground troops were needed to seize the capitals. Whether ground troops worked is arguable: temporarily perhaps, but the US struggled to remain in control, and ultimately lost. The Nazi Blitz of England in 1940-45 and the US bombing of North Vietnam are also examples of air power failing to win. Still, Iran is roughly three times the size and population of Iraq. And while the regime has been weakened by sanctions, there is no reason to believe that the legacy of supporting the Shah, imposing sanctions, and sporadic attacks and subversion has made many Iranians long for a US-imposed, Israeli-directed puppet regime. Maybe Lindsey Graham still thinks that "real men go to Tehran," but I doubt that Trump could line up anyone in the actual Army leadership to sign up for a ground invasion. Even in Venezuela, they made no effort to occupy anything: that was just a snatch and grab operation, leaving the old system in place and hoping they can extort some slightly better deals. I could see Trump thinking he'd like to do something like that, but it's going to be much harder, for lots of reasons. The thing is, he could have cut a deal with Iran (and for that matter with Venezuela) if he only showed them some respect and allowed them to settle differences with dignity. He didn't do that, because he wants to show the world he's really a leg-breaking mobster, someone who can reduce his enemies to ash and dictate terms. The world doesn't work like that. (Although Netanyahu also thinks it does, and with America backstopping his every move and funding his perpetual war machine, he's been able to get away with it so far.)

• Blaise Malley [02-25]: Who are the Dems giving tacit green light to Iran attack and why? Schumer and Jeffries, for instance.

• Ori Goldberg [02-26]: Israel's lonely push for war with Iran: "Internationally isolated, restrained in Gaza, and unraveling at home, Israel sees another escalation as the only way to maintain its aggressive regional agenda." Iran doesn't want war with the US. Neither do the great majority of Americans. The only one who wants this war is Israel: they need an enemy to justify their permanent war machine (which provides cover for their continued usurpation of the West Bank), they fear that their right-wing political order will collapse without continued war, and they believe that trapping the US in conflict with Iran will keep American support coming.

Trump's State of the Union speech: The Constitutionally-mandated annual speech is scheduled for Tuesday, Feb. 24. That's approximately when I hoped to post this, so the section starts with speculation, including much Trump is unlikely to say anything honest about, and will be added to if need be.

• Michael Tomasky [02-23]: The real state of the union: millions of Americans are just disgusted: "Yes, we're angry about what Donald Trump is doing to our country. But even more than that, we're heartsick over the countless ways in which he is destroying this nation."

• Jeet Heer [02-24]: The state of the union will be even worse than Trump's polling numbers: "What's a flopping demagogue to do?"

• John Nichols [02-24]: Summer Lee knows the real state of the union: "The progressive representative from Pennsylvania will speak truth to Trump's power tonight." I gather the Democrats' "official" state of the union response will be from centrist Abigail Spanberger, but this one should be more interesting.

• Alex Galbraith:

  • [02-24]: "These people are crazy": Trump uses State of the Union to attack Democrats, SCOTUS. "I'm not sure this word is the dagger to the heart Trump thinks it is. It's rather like "weird," in that it not only attacks one party, it also shows the attacker to be an elitist, thin-skinned and super judgmental, a prig. I think that Walz calling Trump (and his supporters) "weird" backfired, for many reasons, including that it made Trump look like a possible alternative to a system that was being choked by the dictums of what respectable politicians can say. I doubt Democrats will try to play this by embracing the charge, but one can at least look askance at who's making the charge.

  • [02-24]: "Is the president working for you?": Spanberger hammers Trump on affordability. While Trump mocks them, Democrats have finally found a word which consolidates inflation, debt, wages, and costs into a single concept that better fits one's lived experience. The following is a useful primer:

    • Dylan Gyauch-Lewis [02-11]: What is affordability? "It's more than just prices." It's also more complicated, but perhaps not complicated enough. It's hard to factor in increasing precarity, partly because it strikes so hard in individual but rather random cases. Also the sense of powerlessness more and more people are feeling (because those in power are always pressing their advantages: that alone is enough for a "vibecession"). Quality also factors into affordability: while tech is generally improving, the transition is rarely smooth, creating losers as well as unintended consequences; on the other hand, business is always looking to cut corners, and shirking on quality is one way to do that.

• Zack Beauchamp [02-24]: The most important line from Trump's State of the Union.

  It came during a discussion of the SAVE Act, a Republican bill designed to combat the fictitious scourge of noncitizen voting. Democrats, Trump claimed, only opposed the bill because "they want to cheat." And then he took it much further.

  "Their policy is so bad that the only way they can get elected is to cheat," Trump said on Tuesday night. "We're going to stop it. We have to stop it."

  Think about that for a second. This is the president of the United States, speaking to the country in a ritualized national address, claiming that the opposition party is not only wrong on policy but fundamentally illegitimate, so much so that if they win an election it must be because they cheated.

  Taken literally, that is the president announcing that the stated policy of his administration is preventing the opposition from winning any future election.

  Of course, the odd thing here is that most of the actual instances we can think of where a party tries to rig elections for their own advantage occur on the right-wing side: today's Republicans, or for white Democrats during the Jim Crow era. The purpose of the SAVE Act is to make it harder for poor people to vote. What Trump really wants is a system where Democrats can never win an election, no matter how unpopular Republican policies are. That's because, well:

  But Trump doesn't see Democrats as opponents. He sees them as enemies. . . . And indeed, this was how Trump talked about Democrats in the State of the Union.

  "These people are crazy. I'm telling you, they're crazy. Boy, we're lucky we have a country with people like this," he said. "Democrats are destroying our country, but we've stopped it, just in the nick of time."

  Beauchamp relates this to Nazi legal theorist Carl Schmitt, but the Nazis studied America's Jim Crow laws for precedents. It's tiring to have to keep talking about democratic principles, but that's the line Republicans insist on drawing. The problem for Democrats is not that they lack moral high ground, but that a great many Americans simply dismiss the notion of moral high ground (except inasmuch as they claim it themselves, ideally as a grant from God), but also the principle allows for either side to win, and leaves it to the people to decide which. In defending that principle, which the other side flat-out rejects, Democrats tend to undermine what should be their real mission, which is to show that it is the Republicans who are the enemies not just of the political system but of the people the system is supposed to represent.

• Ed Kilgore [02-25]: Trump's State of the Union was a bloated awards show. Much discussion before the speech about Trump's record low approval numbers, and how he desperately needs to turn a corner. No one seems to think that he did with this particular speech. Kilgore thinks it at least "thrilled his base," even if it convinced or much impressed anyone else. I'm left with two thoughts: that for someone who claims to love America, he sure hates an awful lot of actual Americans; yet he seems to sincerely believe in not just the righteousness but the inevitable success of his program. As Kilgore put it: "It appears he will go into difficult midterm elections standing pat on his record, his message, and his unshakable belief in his own greatness." I'm not really sure how Trump could rig the 2026 (and 2028) elections, but as long as he thinks he's winning, he's unlikely to try (at least beyond his habitual complaining about mail-in ballots, voter id, etc.).

• Meagan Day [02-25]: Pay close attention to Trump's affordability rhetoric: "Donald Trump's State of the Union was mostly lies and grievances. But his aggressive play for economic populism — borrowing progressive ideas and branding them as his own — should be a warning for Democrats to get serious about affordability."

• Paul Heideman [02-25]: Donald Trump is staying the course: "Donald Trump's inane self-aggrandizement made listening to his State of the Union speech an exercise in endurance. It was also a reminder of how lucky the nation is that Trump's pathologies prevent him from more ably seizing his historical moment."

• Christian Paz [02-26]: How Democrats reorganized their State of the Union resistance: "The Democrats tried something new to rebut Trump's address." Aside from the "official" response by Abigail Spanbarger, there were others, plus two counter-programming events, one dubbed the "People's State of the Union," the other the "State of the Swamp."

• Alec Hernandez/Dasha Burns [02-26]: The SOTU moment that Republicans hope saves the midterms: "Americans have soured on the White House immigration enforcement tactics, but the president's speech has the GOP strategizing on how to regain momentum on a favorite issue." Their initial is this 30-second ad, which shows Trump saying: "If you agree with this statement, then stand up and show your support. The first duty of the American government is to protect American citizens, not illegal aliens." It then shows Republicans applauding en masse, and pans to various Democrats who look bored out of their minds. Given Trump's lackadaisical delivery, buried deep within a speech that rambled on for nearly two hours, who wouldn't be bored? Even had they been hanging on every word, Trump's challenge scarcely makes any sense — if you asked me, I'd say that the first job is to ensure equal justice for all, which no one would say ICE is doing. (Then I'd add a few more things, like regulating the economy, protecting the environment, and making war unthinkable. Granted, do those things and American citizens would be safer — most likely "illegal aliens" would neither be illegal nor aliens.) Trump then points to the Democrats, and says "These people are crazy." Really sick burn.

• Harold Meyerson [02-26]: The SOTU clips that should prove disastrous for Trump and the GOP: "Democrats should stream and broadcast the president's odes to our economy over and over again." Jimmy Kimmel's 60-second edit gives you a taste, but jumps around too much.

• Corey Robin [02-26]: On the Democratic Party style: Just focusing on style/rhetoric:

  I don't think I've ever encountered, outside academia, people with such a bottomless appetite for mountainous piles of meaningless, unnecessary, empty words and phrases, each genetically engineered, in whole or in part, to make any sentient being stop paying attention. Reading this speech, that is the only conclusion I can come to: that the sole purpose of this speech is to make people stop paying attention.

• Sasha Abramsky [02-27]: For 108 minutes, Trump gives a tedious Mussolini impersonation. I've never listened to Mussolini, but I'm skeptical that he was ever so offhandedly wry and lackadaisical.

Major Threads

Israel: Enter "stage two" of Trump's Gaza War Peace Plan, which we can now safely say that Trump is implementing in the worst way possible, through his so-called Board of Peace. It is worth recalling my [10-21] piece on Making Peace in Gaza and Beyond, which lays out a different approach (one which cuts Israel considerable slack, arguably much more than they deserve, but which could be tolerated if the Trump and other key Americans decided the war had to end). As I noted last time, the minimal requirements for any serious peace plan are:

1. Israel has to leave Gaza, and cannot be allowed any role in its reconstruction.
2. The people who still live in Gaza must have political control of their own destiny.
3. The UN is the only organization that be widely trusted to guide Gaza toward self-government, with security for all concerned.

Trump's Board of Peace not only bypasses the UN — forget that it's theoretically sanction by UN Security Council Resolution 2803, because Trump already has — it suggests a new alignment under Trump's personal control, excluding any nation not willing to bow and scrape up tribute money. This is reminiscent of Bush's "Coalition of the Willing," but where Bush's ad hoc club was mere propaganda, this is styled as a plot to control the world. Not even Ian Flemming has managed to concoct a villain as megalomaniacal as Trump.

• Omar H Rahman [01-13]: Israel's Somaliland gambit reflects a doctrine of endless escalation: "By projecting power into the Horn of Africa, Israel aims to increase pressure on rivals, undermine regional stability, and narrow the space for diplomacy." Somaliland is region in northern Somalia, along the coast of the Gulf of Aden, that has broken away from the beleaguered Somali Republic (which Trump has bombed over 100 times). Israel is the only country to recognize Somaliland's independence. One speculation is that Somaliland could be used as dumping grounds for exiling Palestinians from Gaza.

• Sam Kimball [01-27]: Zionist expansion: a first-hand account of Israel's illegal occupation of southwestern Syria.

• Muhammad Shehada [01-29]: How Netanyahu is sabotaging phase two of the Gaza ceasefire: "By undermining a new Palestinian technocratic body, Israel is trying to make Gaza appear ungovernable — and prove the need for its sustained military rule." Many details loom large, especially the return of the spectacularly corrupt Mohammad Dahlan masquerading as a neutral "technocratic" functionary.

• Basel Adra [01-30]: Inside a coordinated, multi-village settler-soldier pogrom in Masafer Yatta: "As settlers set homes ablaze and looted livestock across three villages for over five hours, Israeli soldiers blocked ambulances, arrested victims, and even took part in beatings. This is how it unfolded."

• Jamal Kanj [02-02]: Weaponizing America's economy in service of Israel: Not only does the US subsidize Israel's wars, especially against "their own people"[*], but the US uses its financial power to punish dissent around the world. Thus, the US has "sanctioned international courts, punished UN officials, pressured humanitarian organizations and national leaders who dared to insist that Israeli crimes be judged by the same standards applied to all nations." In this context, US sanctions against states like Iran, Venezuela, Russia, and North Korea are not just acts of war "by other means," but are threats to other countries of what could happen to them should they stray too far from US dictates in support of Israel.

  [*] One of the most effective propaganda lines used against Saddam Hussein was that he had "gassed his own people": Kurds resident in Iraq, suspected of sympathies with Iran during the ongoing war, and later in open rebellion against Iraq's regime, but still counted as "his own people." Israel bears at least as much responsibility for its Palestinian residents, some nominally citizens but most denied legal rights and standing. Israel is the only nation in the world where we accept that the political elite can divide the people who live there into a favored group of "citizens" and others that can be discriminated against.

• Deema Hattab [02-03]: A catalog of Gaza's loss: "Recording what has been erased — and making sense of what remains." Part of a series on "A Day for Gaza."

• Ramzy Baroud [02-06]: On the menu: how the Middle Powers sacrificed Gaza to save themselves.

• Neve Gordon [02-09]: Demographic engineering connects record murder rates in its Palestinian towns and the weaponisation of antisemitism.

• Qassam Muaddi [02-11]: Israel just started legalizing its annexation of the West Bank. Here's what that means.

• Abdaljawad Omar [02-13]: How Israel is eroding life for Palestinians in the West Bank: "Israeli violence in the West Bank isn't as dramatic as in Gaza, but it is methodical, durable, and sometimes harder to understand. Here's how Israel is using settler terror, financial policies, and legal tactics to suffocate Palestinian life." One problem with focusing on the clear cut genocide charge in Gaza is that as far as Smotrich and Ben Gvir (and quite possibly Netanyahu) are concerned, Gaza is just a side show: the real battlefront is the West Bank. Gaza is a test of how much violence Israel can get away with (which has turned out to be quite a lot). Israel clings onto Gaza because no one that matters has told them the obvious, which is that they have to give it up and leave. If the US did make such a demand, I suspect that Israel would have no choice other than to accept the loss. Israel has, after all, already turned the strip into a wasteland. But Israel is unlikely ever to consider withdrawing from the West Bank. Their project there is to make so burdensome for Palestinians that they eventually give up, leaving Israel with the "land without a people" they've always longed for.

• Mira Al Hussein [02-19]: In widening Saudi-UAE rift, Israel is at the heart of a narrative war: "Saudi accusations that Abu Dhabi acts as Israel's proxy have ignited a media firestorm. But similar anti-Israel sentiments circulate within the UAE itself."

• Tom Perkins [02-23]: How data on the crackdown on Gaza protests reflects the increasing repression of activist movements in the US: "Data shows Gaza protesters faced harsher punishments than Black Lives Matter protesters did just a few years ago. Experts tell Mondoweiss this is the result of pro-Israel bias and a backlash against protest movements that has been building for years."

• Farid Hafez [02-24]: Why Israel is joining hands with Europe's far right: "Tel Aviv is courting the same movements that once peddled lies about a global Jewish conspiracy — only now their target has shifted to Islam."

• Brett Wilkins [02-24]: Huckabee accused of inciting murder after Israeli settlers kill Palestinian-American teen: "The US ambassador to Israel is engaging in empowering and allowing for actions that lead to the targeted lynching and killing of US citizens."

• Nicholas Liu [02-25]: How the Gaza war changed America: Interview with Bruce Robbins, who "argues Gaza has shifted the debate over how and when the label is used." The label he focuses on is "atrocity," which is the subject of his recent book, Atrocity: A Literary History.

• Michael Arria [02-26]: International outcry over Huckabee claim that Israel can control from Egypt to Iraq: "The Trump administration is in damage control mode after Mike Huckabee claimed Israeli has the biblically mandated right to stretch from the Nile River in Egypt to the Euphrates River in Iraq." Fallout from a Tucker Carlson interview of Trump's Ambassador to Israel — a Baptist minister and an especially devout and belligerent Christian Zionist.

  • Yousef Munayyer [02-26]: Did Mike Huckabee just green-light Israel to invade half the Levant? "A remark in an interview with Tucker Carlson has set off a firestorm in the Middle East."

  • Jonathan Ofir [02-24]: Israeli 'liberal' opposition leader agrees with Mike Huckabee that the bible gives Israel the right to land from Egypt to Iraq: "Israel supporters tried to dismiss the idea as nonsense, but Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid says he agrees." This just reminds us that there is no serious political opposition to the genocidal ruling bloc in Israel. By the way, the comments here include some interesting bits of biblical study, not that any ancient scripture should have any bearing on who is entitled to live where, or how the people living there should be treated.

• Trump's Board of Peace: The coalition of the willing to pay has had their first meeting, and the coalition of the vulture capitalists are licking their chops. Everyone understands that Israel's destruction of Gaza has been so total that the world community will have to chip in billions of dollars to restore even the bare necessities for modern life today. The purpose of the Board is to raise this money, and to make sure that as little as possible goes to the Palestinians, who remain (as Israel has long insisted) unwanted and unnecessary people. The obvious way to do this is to imagine Gaza as a blank slate for profitable real estate scams, where most of the money will ultimately be siphoned off by the insiders who control the purse strings. Chief among these is "chairman for life" Donald Trump, but the real brains behind this appears to be son-in-law Jared Kushner, whose Saudi-financed investment fund turned out to be the single biggest grift of Trump's first term.

  • Mohammed Haddad/Mohammad Mansour [01-27]: Map shows what would happen to Gaza under the US 'master plan': "The plan treats Gaza as vacant beachfront property, proposing glass towers and industrial zones over historic sites." The "plan" was unveiled at Davos, which was kind of like addressing the Balfour Declaration to the Rothschilds.

  • Tariq Kenney-Shawa [01-30]: Jared Kushner's "plan" for Gaza is an abomination: "Kushner is pitching a 'new,' gleaming resort hub. But scratch the surface, and you find nothing less than a blueprint for ethnic cleansing."

  • Ellen Ioanes [02-09]: Board of Peace is a Board of Profits.

  Thomas Cavanna [02-19]: How Trump's Board of Peace is set up for a multibillion dollar fail: "A vague mandate and pay-to-play model suggest it'll become a bloated boondoggle in search of an expanded ission lacking full international legitimacy."

  • Dave DeCamp [02-19]: US plans to build a 5,000-person military base in Gaza for international force.

  • Nick Cleveland-Stout [02-20]: Board of Peace will be a bonanza for wealthy board members: "Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner downplayed the potential for profiteering but that's not exactly the case." This is worth quoting at some length, although this only hints at the extent of the coruption.

    Companies are already jockeying for contracts. This week, The Guardian reported that the Board of Peace issued a contract to build a 5,000-person military base for an international force tasked with protecting civilians and training "vetted Palestinian police forces." It's not clear who the contractor is.

    In December, a leaked document revealed that U.S. officials were searching for a "Master Contractor" that would "earn a fair return" for trucking. A U.S. disaster response firm, Gothams LLC, submitted a plan to the White House that would guarantee the company 300% profits for work in Gaza. The company would move goods into Gaza in exchange for a fee, as well as a seven-year monopoly over trucking and logistics for the Board of Peace.

    Administration officials and businesspeople affiliated with the Board have also promoted a new "Gaza supply system" which, according to a January slide deck, offers sovereign investors between 46% and 175% returns in the first year of investment.

    "Everybody and their brother is trying to get a piece of this," one long-time contractor told The Guardian. "People are treating this like another Iraq or Afghanistan. And they're trying to get, you know, rich off of it."

    Israel's representative on the Board of Peace, billionaire Yakir Gabay, said that Gaza's coastline should be "developed as a new Mediterranean Riviera with 200 hotels and potential islands." Gabay made his money largely through real estate, though he claims he will refrain from building hotels in Gaza himself.

    Another member of the Executive Board, Marc Rowan, runs one of the world's largest private equity firms, Apollo Global Management. Rowan touted the money to be made during yesterday's meeting. "The coastline alone? 50 billion in value on a conservative basis," he said. "The housing stock — more than $30 billion . . . The infrastructure — more than $30 billion." Altogether, Rowan said, Gaza contains some $115 billion in real estate value, but "it just needs to be unlocked and financed."

    The dominance of private equity and real estate moguls on the Board, combined with a lack of transparency surrounding policies and timetables for Gaza's reconstruction, raise concerns about abuse. Hugh Lovatt, a Senior Policy Fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, said that the role of businesspeople such as Rowan and Kushner is "completely at odds with what the Palestinians in Gaza need."

    I'd edit that last line to change "need" for "want." This notion that other people (Americans, Israelis, Saudis), qualified exclusively by their wealth and hubris, are entitled to decide what Gazans need is profoundly not only disrespectful, it is a recipe for class war (even assuming the ethnic and religious "deradialization" proceeds according to plan, which I wouldn't bet on). Let's say, for the sake of argument, that some of this gets built, and some Palestinians are hired to work in these foreign-owned palaces and factories. Workers could strike for better wages and working conditions, but the Board is also running its own private police (think of the 19th century US Pinkertons), and many of the Board members (especially the Saudis and Israelis) are quite comfortable with the idea of importing foreign scab labor, which will further imiserate the Palestinians and kindle new conflicts (on top of the old). This probably ends in Israel leveling Gaza once more, hoping to drive the Palestinians out. And while this might seem like a setback for the war profiteers, they're taking their cut up front, and can always resurrect their graft with a new Board promising another new Peace. I may still be of the opinion that the Trump Plan is better than the naked genocide that preceded it, and perhaps is the best one can hope for given the unchallenged power of Netanyahu and Trump, but it it still far short of the very modest proposals I made back in October.

  • Ishaan Tharoor [02-21]: Donald Trump's pantomime United Nations: "The Board of Peace might be destined to fail, but it still threatens to undermine an international system in which the US was once the linchpin." First paragraph begins: "It didn't take long for the flattery to begin."

  • Michael Arria [02-25]: Meet the companies and billionaires looking to make a massive profit off Trump's plans in Gaza: "U.S. companies are aiming to make huge profits from the Gaza reconstruction plan, with several billionaires on Trump's Board of Peace openly discussing the opportunity to make billions."

  • Matt Wolfson [02-25]: The Gaza Plan's 'sick kind of detachment' and its dangers for America.

  • Ben Armbruster [02-26]: The White House wants Iran to attack Americans: "Trump officials are searching for ways to get into a war with Tehran.">

  • Jehad Abusalim [02-26]: Gaza does not need new overlords: "The U.S. plan for Gaza is the final stage of Israel's genocide. Bombs and bulldozers obliterated Gaza's landscape, and now skyscrapers and data centers aim to dismantle its social fabric and capacity to resist."

Around the World: Formerly "Russia/Ukraine," and that's still going on, but Trump seems to think the US is enjoying a unipolar moment like some Americans fantasized about after the Soviet Union dissolved, and that's having repercussions around the world. For Trump's own activities, see the next section. This one will look at the world is reacting, or sometimes just minding its own business.

• David Broder [12-18]: The new Europeans, Trump-style: "Donald Trump is sowing division in the European Union, even as he calls on it to spend more on defense." He's probably confusing several different trends, in part because Trump's own foreign policy is so incoherent. I expect his threat to Greenland will spur the re-armament crowd, but not to buy more American arms. (If they're going to buy arms, they shouldn't they build up their own arms industries?) Moreover, the far right, which he has clear sympathies with, is more likely to turn against the US than nearly anyone in the despised center.

• Dan M Ford [2025-12-31]: 6 stories that defined Trump's approach to Africa in 2025: "Minerals, peace deals, and a complete dissolution of relations with at least one country."

  1. Diplomatic scuffle with South Africa: This doesn't mention Israel, but does mention "genocide," which Trump claimed "was being perpetrated by the country's black population against white farmers."
  2. Massad Boulos' role as Senior Africa Advisor: Boulos is the father-in-law of Trump daughter Tiffany.
  3. Peace agreement between Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Rwanda: all the better to tap into the region's "vast mineral wealth."
  4. Effort to end the war in Sudan: ineffectively so far, but Trump has some leverage with outside forces (UAE, Egypt, Saudi Arabia) and, well, there's oil at stake.
  5. Economic engagement with Africa: Where he "secured a record $2.5 billion in business deals."
  6. The US bombs Nigeria: Merry Christmas!

• Robert Skidelsky [01-30]: Much ado about a Chinese 'mega-embassy' in London: "British newspapers and politicians have taken to fighting an imaginary war with Beijing."

• Joshua Keating [02-03]: Is a new US-Russia arms race about to begin? "We're about to lose our last nuclear arms control treaty with Russia. What does that mean?" New START, the last of several arms control treaties the US and Soviet Union negotiated, expires on Feb. 5. The treaty limited the US and Russia to 1,550 deployed warheads. As both already have many more warheads in storage, the arms race could be rapid, if either side count think of a rationale for deploying more. I can't think of one, but the US nuke industry has been pushing a multi-trillion-dollar "modernization" for some time.

  • Garrett Owen [02-05]: US-Russian nuclear arms treaty expires.

  • Eric Ross [02-08]: Eight decades later, it remains one world or none: "The end of New START and the enduring nuclear nightmare."

• Evan Robins [02-13]: Keir Starmer's failure is nearly complete: "The wildly unpopular UK prime minister is likely doomed in the wake of an Epstein-related scandal entirely of his own making. He deserves every bit of hell he's in." The Epstein connection was through Peter Mandelson ("a longtime Labour power broker and Starmer's handpicked former ambassador to the United States"). Starmer's takeover of the party from Jeremy Corbyn seemed doomed from the start: he purged Corbyn and jettisoned the last vestiges of democratic socialism, leaving the party with no principles other than corrupt compromise with financial power and US militarism. Not only couldn't he make it work, he had no defense when it failed.

• Johnny Ryan [02-17]: Europeans are dangerously reliant on US tech. Now is a good time to build our own: Actually, now is the time to go open source, and not let any country or company tell you what you can or cannot do, let alone how much tribute you have to pay to keep the lights on.

• Laura Wittebroek [02-20]: Profit over people: How the world fuels Sudan's war. Since 2019, Sudan has been torn apart by a civil war between two militia factions, each supported by an array of outside opportunists (especially the UAE, but everyone in the international arms trade seems to be involved), although this follows decades of conflict between whoever controlled Khartoum and the outer provinces.

• Tanya Goudsouzian/Ibrahim Al-Marashi [02-20]: How Pakistan is busting the Great Power monopoly on air power: "The industry here is showing how emerging states are gaining leverage through the democratization . . . of weapons." Long dependent on the US for F-16 aircraft, Pakistan is now building its own fighter-bombers, dubbed the JF-17, co-developed with China, and available for export.

• Anatol Lieven [02-23]: Ukraine marks biggest evolution in military tactics since WWII: "The transformation in weapons and conventional warfare has resulted in the bloodiest stalemate in generations." This, by the way, led me to a couple of earlier articles, also on futility:

  • Alex Vershinin [2025-06-18]: How NATO military doctrine failed Ukraine on the battlefield: "in part, because these forces were trained to wage the Cold War, and Russia has evolved." But wasn't the Cold War designed to never be fought anyway?

  • Ian Proud [05-30]: The 2026 bill for the Ukraine war is already in the mail: "With talks stalled, Zelensky says he needs more money for next year."

• Martin Di Caro [02-23]: What does Putin really want? "Four Russia-Ukraine experts tell us if aything has changed as the war enters its fifth year without resolve." Nikolai Petro, Sergey Radchenko, Sumantra Maitra, Nikolas Gvosdev. I have little confidence that any of them know. This is part of an anniversary series, along with the already cited Lieven piece, and:

  • Mark Episkopos [02-20]: After four years, Russian inflation may be key to ending the war: "The prospect of lifting sanctions and sustained economic cooperation is one of the most powerful levers the West has right now."

  • George Beebe [2025-10-16]: Trump risks going full Biden by giving Tomahawks to Ukraine: "He needs to follow his old diplomatic instincts for ending the war, no matter how unpopular with Kyiv and the Europeans."

  • Marcus Stanley [02-24]: Ukraine War at 3: The victory we demanded and the attrition we got: "Our maximalist goals have led to a high cost in human life and economic destruction, with no clear gain."

  • William Hartung [02-24]: 'Arsenal of democracy'? Arms makers the only winners in Ukraine.

• Peter Rutland [02-24]: Ukraine's dilemma: "The nation has fought bravely but will it have the support to keep going, externally and internally, for a fifth year?" The problem is under Biden you had a president who refused to negotiate. Under Trump you have a president who cannot negotiate. Zelensky and Putin are just following their assigned roles, especially given that neither leader can afford to look like a loser, both can sustain what they're doing indefinitely (although Ukraine is in much more precarious shape, with limited resources and dependent on outside help), and outsiders aren't ready to sweeten the pot (end sanctions, offer reconstruction funds, take some steps toward disarmament). I've long believed this would be easy to solve, but the US and Europe have to value peace and cooperation more than division and war. Russia needs to meet them part way, too, but until the West is willing to settle this dispute, it matters little what Putin does.

• Jason Ditz [02-26]: US demands Iraq end Maliki nomination by Friday: Iraq is another country where Trump feels he should be able to dictate its leader.

Trump Goes to War (International Edition): Formerly "Trump's War & Peace," but not much of the latter anymore. On opening this file, this includes actual or threatened wars in Venezuela, Iran, and Greenland.

• Heather Digby Parton [01-08]: War has become fashionable again for the GOP: "The right's detour into pacifism under Trump was never going to stick."

• Pavel Devyatkin [01-13]: Tech billionaires behind Greenland bid want to build 'freedom cities': "As Europeans try to redirect Trump, his Silicon Valley supporters have ideas of their own, involving low-regulated communities and access to rare earths."

• Sara Herschander [01-30]: America's culture wars are killing people overseas: "When 'pro-life' foreign aid hurts women and children the most."

• Martin Di Caro [02-02]: Geo-kleptocracy and the rise of 'global mafia politics': "Expert Alex de Waal explains how the capture of Maduro, leaving his corrupt regime in place, is a 'crystalline example' of regime change in the new era."

• Rachel Janfaza [02-03]: The quiet reason why Trump is losing Gen Z: "They wanted fewer wars. He didn't deliver." Pull quote from a 22-year-old woman in Ohio: "The 'no new wars' thing is now the biggest joke of my life." But why is this just a "quiet reason"? Probably because Democrats don't talk about it. Harris blew the 2024 election by expressing no qualms about the major wars Biden (Gaza, Ukraine) boosted, let alone the piddly strikes that had become so routine they're rarely reported. Clinton blew the 2016 election by trying to come off as the tougher, more belligerent commander-in-chief. Democrats desperately need to find a way to stop looking like warmongers. They could start by relentlessly attacking Trump's tantrums. They could expand on that by developing a broad vision that puts American interests firmly on a foundation of peace and human rights.

• Tara Copp/David Ovalle [02-03]: Pentagon warns Scouts to restore 'core values' or lose military support: "The relationship dates back decades, but Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has criticized the organization for allowing girls to join and changing its name from Boy Scouts." The new name is Scouting America. I haven't paid any attention to them, and had no idea that they were supported by the military. (Evidently, the military provides "medical, security and logistical support" for their National Jamboree, which I only recall due to a spectacularly off-color speech Trump gave them a few years back. Article includes a photo of Trump after his 2017 speech.) I joined the Cub and Boy Scouts in my youth, and some of what I learned there has stuck with me (as well as some trauma). In my annual music lists, I routinely note: "As the proto-fascist organization of my youth insisted, one should always be prepared."

• Leah Schroeder [02-04]: Hegseth to take control of Stars & Stripes for 'warfighter' makeover: "Critics, including veterans and First Amendment advocates, say the proposed overhaul would usurp the storied military newspaper's independence." I suspect its "independence" has always been a mere "story." Still, Hegseth's vision for the "War Department" is uniquely disturbing.

• Joshua Keating [02-13]: Trump's biggest war is one he almost never talks about: "Why did the US bomb Somalia more than 100 times last year?" The bombing started under Bush, increased under Obama, much more so in Trump's first term, continued at a lower pace under Biden, and accelerated under Trump II.

• Rubio Goes to Munich: The Secretary of State gave an address to the Munich Security Conference:

  • Eldar Mamedov [02-14]: Rubio's spoonful of sugar helps hard medicine go down in Munich: "The Secretary of State' message on civilizational renewal and self-reliance wasn't too different than Vance's the year before, but it landed much softer." Author agrees that Rubio delivered "a peculiar mix of primacist nostalgia and civilizational foreboding," echoing Vance's more confrontational message a year back, but his "spoonful of sugar" was appealing to Europe's own post-imperial chauvinism, instead of writing it off.

  • AlJazeera [02-14]: Rubio slams European policies on climate, migration as he calls for unity.

  • Mehdi Hasan [02-17]: Forget Maga. Welcome to Mega: Make Empire Great Again: "Marco Rubio arrived at the Munich security conference with a disturbing message for European governments: empire is great." Quotes Rubio as saying: "We do not want our allies to be shackled by guilt and shame. We want allies who are proud of their culture and of their heritage, who understand that we are heirs to the same great and noble civilization, and who, together with us, are willing and able to defend it."

  • Carol Schaeffer [02-17]: The Munich Security Conference marks the end of the US-led order: "US politicians flooded the summit — but Europe no longer sees the United States as a reliable partner."

  • Nick Turse [02-19]: More US troops are headed to Nigeria: "The Trump administration is sending more troops to a region where US military presence has coincided with increased violence."

  • Zak Cheney-Rice [02-19]: Heirs to plunder: "Marco Rubio's Munich speech made a sinister case for shameless western imperialism."

  • Jonathan Cook [02-19]: Rubio declared a return to brutal western colonialism — and Europe applauded: "Old-school, white-man's burden colonialism is unapologetically back." Not the way I would put it, but while they are unapologetic about their moral and military superiority, their divine right to lead a world that exists only to serve them.

  • John Quiggin:

    • [02-21]: The US state has proved itself dispensable: I doubt that the US was ever indispensable to its allies. At most, it was a convenient crutch, simple-minded enough in its initial anti-communism and later megalomania that it was easier (and more profitable) to humor it than to risk displeasure. But the net value of NATO security was never much, at least as concerned the Russians — more important was that it kept France, Germany, Britain, and maybe Italy from rearming against each other, which would have been a dangerous waste. The dollar, capital and trade flows weren't worth much either, but as long as the US was generous enough to pay for its primacy, it was easier to just go along. But "America First," with Trump's shakedowns and extortions, served notice that such a game couldn't last long. We're seeing some of that now, and will see more over time. One big change Quiggin notes is that Europe has already made great strides in arms development and production, as they've largely taken over supply to Ukraine. Trump's erratic tariff policy has further undermined their interest in America. As Quiggin notes, Rubio's ovation in Munich was mostly polite. But it also came from people who are tightly integrated into the decomposing alliance. Outside the room, the speech wasn't nearly as well received.

    • [2025-02-01]: The dispensable nation: Quiggin refers back to this piece he wrote a year ago. One thing I'd add is that while the notion that the US is uniquely virtuous has obvious attraction to the people who nominally run it, and through it imagine themselves as the natural rulers of the world, this conceit has little practical value to the overwhelming majority of Americans, and is at best humored by the leaders of other nations.

  • Steve Howell [02-24]: Rubio, rodeo, and tall tales of empire: "The secretary of state has provoked the ire of Britain's first black woman lawmaker and put the spotlight once again on how the US has historically treated people of his own heritage."

Trump Goes to War (Domestic Edition): This will carry on from "ICE Stories," and will also pick up skirmishes in the courts. It isn't a stretch to say Trump's waging war against his own people, except inasmuch as he doesn't consider most of us to be his own people.

• Andi Zeisler [01-12]: in Renee Good's killing, ICE's misogyny isn't a side note — it's the point: "The words of the man who shot Renée Good speak to the Trump administration's fixation on masculinity."

• Robert Willis [01-27]: ICE's terror campaign is part of a long American tradition: "As a Black man, I know firsthand how often state violence is used to perpetuate white supremacy in this country."

• Nicholas Liu [01-28]: Private prisons are cashing in on Trump's ICE crackdown. They're just getting started: "Over 90 percent of detained immigrants languish in prisons that aren't actually run by the government."

• Connor Echols [01-29]: Why Israeli counterterrorism tactics are showing up in Minnesota: "A decades-long partnership has included resource sharing and a lot of joint training for ICE and CBP with their counterparts in Israel."

• Chas Danner [01-30]: How the Trump Team's botched shooting response and blame game played out: Useful time line here.

  • Saturday, 10:05 AM: Alex Pretti is shot by CBP agents
  • 10:10: Bovino texts DHS and White House officials
  • 10:59: DHS says suspect was armed
  • 11:30: first draft of DHS statement circulates internally
  • 12:31 PM: DHS suggests Pretti sought to 'massacre law enforcement'
  • 1:22: Stephen Miller calls Pretty a domestic terrorist and assassin
  • 2:06: Trump shares photo of gun and asks, 'what is that all about?'
  • 2:12: Bovino repeats 'massacre' claim
  • 5:35: Noem calls Pretti a terrorist who was 'brandishing' a gun and attacked agents
  • Sunday, 9:13 AM: Bovino says the CBP agents are victims
  • 10:11: Patel claims Pretti broke the law by bringing a gun to a protest
  • 11:10: Noem changes her tune
  • 6:54 PM: Trump says 'at some point we will leave' Minnesota
  • Monday, 8:31 AM: Trump says he's sending in Homan
  • 9:07: Noem praises Homan
  • 1:32 PM: White House distances itself
  • 3:24: Bovino is out
  • 6:36: The Atlantic reports Noem and Lewandowski could be next
  • 10:16: report says Trump pivoted because he didn't like what he saw on television
  • 10:48: news of Trump-Noem meeting emerges
  • Tuesday, 9:22 AM: McLaughlin dodges questions about domestic terrorist claim
  • 12:30 PM: Trump says Pretti was not an assassin
  • 3:34: Noem camp throws Miller under the bus
  • 4:18: Trump announces de-escalation, calls Bovino 'pretty out there'
  • before 5: Miller throws CBP and Bovino under the bus
  • 5:13: Miller's wife promotes his defense
  • 11:19: report details internal war between Noem/Lewandowski and Miller
  • Wednesday, 7:29 PM: White House officials try to dismiss reports of internal turmoil
  • Thursday, 8:28 AM: Homan announces 'drawdown plan' for Minnesota
  • 7:12 PM: Trump denies there's a pullback
  • 9:24: Noem says 'we were using the best information we had at the time'
  • Friday, 1:26 AM: Trump attacks Pretti

• Elie Mystal [01-30]: The Trump administration arrested Don Lemon like he was a fugitive slave. They also arrested a second journalist and two demonstration organizers, charging them with "conspiracy to deprive the congregants of the church of their rights and to interfere with religious freedom in a house of worship."

• Ian Millhiser:

  • [02-04]: Trump's occupation of Minneapolis has broken the Justice Department: "The DOJ is no longer capable of doing its job."

  • [02-09]: The MAGA court decision that just supercharged ICE: "America's Trumpiest court just gave Trump a dangerous new weapon." The Fifth Circuit decision "encourages ICE to round up immigrants and ship them off to Texas."

  • [12-24]: The Republican justices are fighting over who should really run the government: "There are three camps: The judicial supremacists, the GOP partisans, and Amy Coney Barrett."

• George Payne [02-06]: Arresting the witness: Don Lemon, the DOJ, and the chilling of press freedom.

• Sophia Goodfriend [02-12]: ICE operations increasingly resemble Israeli occupation. That's no coincidence: "US immigration enforcement has long cultivated ties with Israel. Now it adapts algorithmic surveillance tactics from Gaza for use on American streets."

• Nick Turse:

  • [02-12]: Pam Bondi admits DOJ has a secret domestic terrorist list: "After the DOJ dodged questions for months, Bondi acknowledged in a House Judiciary Committee hearing that she had a list of targets under NSPM-7."

  • [02-23]: Kristi Noem repeatedly claimed ICE deported a cannibal: It was "completely made up."

  • [02-24]: Donald Trump's death cards: ICE brings the war home: "Immigration agents mimic past US dealers of death."

• Elie Honig [02-13]: The Georgia election raid was even worse than it seemed: "The answer to all the above questions in a word: Politics. (Or, in another word: Ego.) . . . If we endlessly insist there was major fraud, perhaps we can make it so."

• Eric Levitz [02-13]: The real lesson of Trump's failed prosecution of 6 Democrats. The Trump administration sought indictments against Democrats including senators Mark Kelly and Elissa Slotkin for releasing a video where they advised active soldiers and intelligence operatives that they "must refuse illegal orders."

• Nia Prater [02-13]: The 5 wildest anecdotes from the WSJ report on Kristi Noem and DHS.

  1. Noem, Lewandowski had a pilot fired over . . . a blanket?
  2. Trump "uncomfortable" with Lewandowski and Noem's rumored relationship
  3. Noem vs. everybody
  4. ICE officials punished for ignoring Lewandowski's badge quest
  5. DHS slow to get money to states for disaster relief, other projects

• James D Zirin

  • [02-19]: Bail for all, except undocumented immigrants: "The Fifth Circuit embraces a radical vision of endless detention, as does the Trump administration. Will it be too much even for the Roberts Court?" The ruling only applies to Texas-Louisiana-Mississippi, so ICE has tried to funnel detainees into those states.

  • [02-05]: Trump's 2020 election obsession enters new phase: "The president's denial that he lost to Joe Biden now turns to a Tulsi Gabbard-led fishing expedition." This got me wondering whether there is some way we could concede the point, declare Trump the rightful 2020 winner, pay him his lost salary, and declare his third term unconstitutional? Of course, back salary wouldn't satisfy a person who makes most of his money on the side, and he did miss out on four years where he could further destroy the country and possibly launch WWIII, which would have been much more fun for him than fending off indictments.

• Hady Mawajdeh/Noel King [02-21]: The mess that Kristi Noem made: "The drama at the Department of Homeland Security, explained." Interview with Michelle Hackman ("one of the authors behind a viral story detailing the firing of a Coast Guard pilot").

• Zak Cheney-Rice [02-26]: Why Trump put a clown in charge of the FBI: "Kash Patel's beer-soaked ineptitude shows how a lack of standards for top law enforcement has insidious consequences."

Trump Regime: This is for stories about what the supplicants and minions in the Trump administration are doing day-in, day-out to make America less enjoyable and livable. This includes bad policies as well as bad actors, but some of the worst are dealt with in other sections. Trump himself merits his own section, a bit further down.

• Kenny Stancil [01-26]: The Trump regime is making disasters worse: "DHS Secretary Kristi Noem sat atop millions of dollars in flood prevention grants while the West Coast was being inundated. Now she's slashing FEMA disaster response staff."

• Jelinda Montes [01-29]: South Carolina measles outbreak hits record high: "This is the largest measles outbreak since the United States declared measles eliminated in 2000."

• Kenny Stancil/Julian Schoffield/Chris Lewis [02-05]: DOGE lives on through Russell Vought: "Trump's White House OMB director has quietly institutionalized the government demolition agenda set in motion by Elon Musk's wrecking crew."

• Annie Levin [02-10]: How the far right won the food wars: "RFK's MAHA spectacle offers an object lesson in how the left cedes fertile political territory." I'm not sure I'm buying any aspect of this argument.

• Umair Irfan [02-12]: Trump just blew up a load-bearing pillar of climate regulation in the US. What happens now?

• Matt Stieb [02-12]: The prediction-market scandals are getting bleaker: I'm not sure where to file this. If people can bet on anything anytime, it's very near certain that those with insider knowledge will try to take advantage. In high-class casinos like the stock market, the SEC at least tries to punish gross instances of insider trading, not that the last 50 years give us much confidence in their ability.

• Hannah Story Brown/Toni Agular Rosenthal [02-13]: Doug Burgum, the regime today of our time: "Dashing the hopes of establishment Democrats, Trump's interior secretary and 'energy czar' has adopted his boss's excesses as his own."

• Clyde McGrady [02-13]: Trump nominates an apostle of 'white erasure' for the State Department: "Jeremy Carl, President Trump's nominee to lead the State Department's outreach to international organizations, had a rough confirmation hearing, but he stood by his views on 'whiteness.'" Last section offered a list of "who opposes his nomination?" But then the piece ended by noting:

  Others appointees have weathered the storm, including Darren Beattie, a senior State Department official who was fired from the first Trump administration after speaking at a conference attended by white nationalists.

  "Competent white men must be in charge if you want things to work. Unfortunately, our entire national ideology is predicated on coddling the feelings of women and minorities and demoralizing competent white men," Mr. Beattie once wrote on social media.

  Still, some on the right are rallying to Mr. Carl's side.

  The conservative activist Christopher Rufo defended Mr. Carl, writing that Americans have been bullied into believing that "white culture" is "inherently shameful or evil," which leads them to "pretend that it doesn't exist."

  Actually, "competent white men" would be an improvement over many of the Trump nominees, including some who are not men and/or not white (not that I'm recalling many of the latter). As for Rufo, it's fool's errand — an act of deliberate self-crippling — to try to separate "white culture" out of American culture. While the result may not be "inherently shameful or evil," the parts that are shameful and evil will be much concentrated.

• Nia Prater [02-13]: USAID's remaining funds are paying for Vought's security detail.

• Ed Kilgore [02-14]: Revoking climate-change regulation may be the worst thing Trump has done.

• Hayley Brown [02-20]: The Trump administration's catastrophic census proposal.

• Abdullah Shihipar [02-23]: The staggering costs of Trump's war on public service: "The administration's steep cuts to public service jobs and research opportunities are saving Americans very little money — but they're having a detrimental impact on society." While I share the headline alarm, the stats here about career choices have me wondering if the ideological campaign to deprecate pubic service won out 20-30 years before the mass firings. One factor here is education debt, which has pushed graduates toward more lucrative careers in predatory finance, and away careers in public service. (The military is the exception that proves the point. It has long featured education credits as compensation, and is widely seen as a way relatively poor people can get an education. However, it is nearly useless as public service.) Rekindling the notion of public service, and making it an attractive and fulfilling career choice, is essential for any decent post-Trump recovery. It's going to take more than just rehiring people Trump fired.

• Emmett Hopkins [02-26]: Trump is threatening to cut transit left and right. This is totally in character:

  Taking away transit funding will also increase congestion and deliver chaos to the streets. It will not only hit people's household budgets but also ripple through small businesses, medical facilities, schools, and grocery stores, all of whom rely on functioning transportation systems — including transit — to move goods, customers, and employees smoothly. Drivers and nondrivers alike will feel the impacts. Transportation is also the largest sectoral source of US greenhouse gas emissions, and reducing public transit would make that even worse, adding further fuel to the climate crisis.

Donald Trump: As for Il Duce, we need a separate bin for stories on his personal peccadillos -- which often seem like mere diversions, although as with all madness, it can be difficult sorting the serious from the fanciful.

• Sophia Tesfaye:

  • [12-13]: Jared Kushner is at the center of Trump's corruption: "From media mergers to foreign policy, Trump's son-in-law is consolidating power — and making millions." Thanks to his Middle East portfolio, he bagged much more graft in Trump's first term than anyone else. Now he's back as part of Trump's Board of Peace. And he's involved in "the biggest media merger in years."

    After leaving the first Trump administration, Kushner raised over $3 billion for Affinity Partners, including $2 billion from the Saudi government's Public Investment Fund. The Saudis' own advisers reportedly warned Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman that Kushner's record did not justify such an investment, but the crown prince overruled them. The UAE and Qatar soon followed, adding another $1.5 billion to the pot. As of late 2024, Kushner had still not produced meaningful returns for these foreign governments, yet he had paid himself at least $157 million in fees. Forbes now calls him a billionaire.

  • [02-11]: MAGA blame game shows Trump in retreat: "Trump and Vance back down and blame unnamed staffers for controversial posts." The buck always stops . . . somewhere else.

• Toby Buckle [2025-12-18]: The Americans who saw all this coming — but were ignored and maligned: "Call them Cassandra: the people — mostly not white and male — who smelled the fascism all over Trump from jump street. Why were they 'alarmists,' and how did 'anti-alarmism' become cool?" Minor point, but even some elderly white blokes saw this coming. I could measure this not just by what I wrote before the event, but how literally sick I felt on election night, 2024. Sure, I advised against using the word "fascism" during the campaign, but only because I didn't see the practical utility beyond people who already sensed what Trump was planning. I'm reminded here of the term "premature-antifascists," which was applied to leftists in the late 1930s, who in mainstream eyes were only vindicated with the war declarations of 1941. We'll be hearing much more about Trump the Fascist. For example:

  • Robert J Shapiro [02-17]: Hannah Arendt understood the forces behind Donald Trump: "The late scholar of mass movements, charismatic leaders, and government violence foreshadowed the president's rise and the MAGA movement in The Origins of Totalitarianism. Recent polling proves her prescience."

• Bill Scher [01-19]: The ephemeral presidency: "Except for the damage, nothing Trump is doing will last." That's a pretty big exception, but it seems almost flippant to assume that executive orders can be rescinded at will, or that Democrats will find the will. The courts that helped Trump seize power won't be equally disposed to reversing him. And the world will have changed: mostly for the worse, but those who benefited from the changes will resist giving them up. Then there are the things that shouldn't be reversed. Scher is particularly keen on reverting to a Biden-Obama foreign policy, but they didn't have one worth saving, and their fumbling was a big part of the theory that even Trump couldn't do worse.

• Jonathan Rauch [01-25]: Yes, it's Fascism: "Until recently, I thought it a term best avoided. But now, the resemblances are too many and too strong to deny." Mostly buried under the paywall, but I take his point. Before the 2024 election, I cautioned against using the F-word for two reasons: one is that it only resonates with people who understand the history but don't need the word to clarify why they oppose (or in rare instances support) Trump; the other is that historically-minded leftists are so sensitive to tones of fascism they tend to overuse the word, sometimes reducing its insight to a mere indictment, and that tends to be taken as too much "crying wolf." On the other hand, our ability to understand what's happening is strongly influenced (or simply limited) by our command of historical precedents. And what the Trumpists have done since the election has been so extreme that the only historical antecedents that come close to having the same impact are the fascists. We have, in short, moved from a state where associating something with "fascist" could suggest a dire future to one where it broadens out understanding of what's actually happening. One effect of this is that it no longer matters if the signs and analogies are precise. It only matters that the tone matches, and that the gravity is comparable. And the current tone and gravity is incomparable to damn near anything else that humans are experienced.

• Andrew O'Hehir [01-25]: A fake presidency, but real tyranny: "Trump'slazy, crumbling regime values viral AI memes more than actual policy. But the brutality is real." Or as Marie Antoinette would have put it, "let them eat memes."

  By now it's become clear that content creation — feeding the beast, in an all-too-literal sense — is a principal driving force behind all this Nazi-cosplay street theater. The memes will continue, as indeed they must: Over and over again, we see ICE officers stage unnecessary confrontations, smashing car windows or pepper-spraying unarmed demonstrators in front of liberal observers and camera crews.

  Viral videos and meme-worthy images, whether they thrill the loyalists or outrage the libtards or both at once, are not byproducts of these blue-city occupations. They are not incidental to this moment of fascist terror but among its most significant instruments. They are deliberate injections of ideological poison meant to sow division, spread misinformation and render the truth valueless or irrelevant. . . .

  Hateful and stupid social media memes can serve to justify or excuse despicable acts of political violence. Just as important, they also serve to conceal them, as in the "King Trump" video, beneath an unstoppable downpour of crap. When millions of people have persuaded themselves that elementary-school shootings are staged by "crisis actors," the Jan. 6 insurrection was an FBI false-flag operation and the COVID pandemic was the work of a vast global conspiracy, the distinction between verifiable real-world information — an imperfect standard, but in my profession, the only one we've got — and paranoid or narcissistic delusion has become unsustainable. . . .

  I'm not sure any of that is meant to be convincing. It's the blatantly fake ideological wrapping of a crumbling regime built around a rapidly failing con man. His only actionable agenda is nihilistic rage, acted out as a brutal but incompetent reign of terror directed at his own people. Trump's version of fascism barely made it off the couch, and is still more comfortable there. Its vision of the past is imaginary and it has no future, but its destructive energy has changed the world.

• Chauncey DeVega [01-29]: Vice signaling explains Trump's enduring appeal: "Minneapolis reveals why outrage alone fails to loose Trump's grip." This is a play on the notion of "virtue signaling," where people do good deeds just to appear more virtuous — a charge typically leveled at liberals by people who can't imagine anyone acting altruistically. Vice signalers want to impress on others how bad they are, often to intimidate others into submission as well as to elicit approval from people who yearn to see power used against their supposed enemies. A big part of Trump's popularity owes to his credibility as someone who's willing and eager to abuse his power.

• Garrett Owen [01-30]: Trump and sons seek $10 billion taxpayer-funded payday in IRS lawsuit: "Leaked tax returns caused the Trumps 'public embarrassment' and reputational harm, lawsuit says."

• Elie Mystal [01-30]: Want to support the fight against fascism? Boycott Trump's World Cup. Not much of a sacrifice for me, but I know people this would be a big ask of. The difference makes me think this would be a bad idea, but I should note that he's talking about teams boycotting (and even then, just US-hosted events, as opposed to events in Canada or Mexico).

  • Dave Zirin [01-27]: A call is rising for nations to boycott the Trump World Cup.

• Heather Digby Parton [02-03]: Trump is openly cashing in on the presidency.

• Cameron Peters [02-06]: Trump's racist post, briefly explained: More specifically, since this isn't the only time, the one "depicting Barack and Michelle Obama's faces superimposed on apes."

  • Jelinda Montes [02-06]: Trump posts and deletes racist Obama video, sparking outrage across the political spectrum: "Multiple Republican lawmakers denounced the post on social media."

• Algernon Austin [02-06]: Trump get spectacularly richer, while putting the country on a path to poverty. The graft you know about, even if the numbers are hard to fathom. Also unsurprising is Fred Wertheimer's assertion that in terms of monetizing power, "the president most similar to Trump is Russian President Vladimir Putin." As for future poverty, there are many points, including:

  About 25,000 scientists have been cut from government agencies. Joel Wilkins of Futurism concluded that the administration's actions have resulted in a "colossal exodus of specialized expertise from institutions important to public health, environmental protection, and scientific research" and that "[t]he effects are likely to be catastrophic — and the reverberations could be felt for decades."

• Eric Levitz [02-09]: Trump has a plan to steal the midterms. It will probably fail. "The nightmare scenario for American democracy is no longer unthinkable." Sure, he would if he could, but what I'm seeing here looks less like a plan than a set up for a rationalization for a probable loss.

• Kelli Wessinger/Astead Herndon [02-09]: Just how healthy is Donald Trump, really?: "Why it's so hard to know whether the president is okay." Well, it took almost 200 years to figure out that George III had porphyria, although even that seems to be doubted these days. That he was a narcissistic asshole should have been more obvious at the time. Not that knowing helps much with Trump.

• Toni Aguilar Rosenthal [02-13]: The antidemocratic zelots presiding over Trump's makeover of US history: "The administration's sketchily funded Freedom 250 project, which will oversee the celebration of America's semiquincentennial, is a pageant of right-wing extremism." This is going to be hugely embarrassing:

  This makeover has mostly been the handiwork of Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, who serves as ex-officio director of the NPF board. Burgum swiftly set about stacking the board with Trump loyalists, including top Trump fundraiser Meredith O'Rourke and Chris LaCivita, Trump's 2024 campaign co-manager. As a 501(c)3 nonprofit, NPF isn't required under federal tax law to disclose its donors and is even empowered to grant donors anonymity. Donations to the foundation are also tax-deductible — an added bonus for anyone seeking access to Trump's fundraising ecosystem.

  If that sounds like a recipe for grift dressed up as a charitable donation, that's because it is. The New York Times recently unearthed documents showing that Freedom 250 is a clearing house for donor perks. A cool $1 million gift offers photo opportunities with the president; $2.5 million can land you a speaking slot at the marquee July 4 celebration in Washington. And because of the NPF's opaque standing as a 501(c)3, the public may never know who its well-heeled benefactors are.

  There's also a wave of federal funding sluicing into the NPF's coffers. The Trump administration has redirected a $10 million grant initially earmarked for America250.org to the NPF. Another $5 million grant was shuffled out of the National Park Service and to the National Park Foundation to fund "A250 events."

  But these events are more than just vessels for influxes of cash — they're promoting a right-wing bid to whitewash the history of the country, and promote the dogmatic worldview of Christian nationalism.

• Cameron Peters [02-19]: Trump's ballroom blitz, briefly explained: "How Trump is signing off on his own new ballroom."

• Shawn McCreesh [02-19]: Why is Trump dumping East Wing rubble in a public park? "The East Potomac Golf Links is a municipal course that has been a fixture in Washington for decades. President Trump is turning it into something else."

• Tad DeHaven [02-20]: Trump's dream is a giant slush fund Congress can't touch: "From Venezuelan oil to the Board of Pece, Trump is constantly looking for new sources of cash he can control."

  But the long-term risk is not just that Trump might be doing something illegal. The long-term risk is that his presidency is normalizing treating the receipt and disbursement of money as instruments of personal power.

  This is followed by a rhetorical hypothetical about the bloody murder Republicans would scream if a Democratic president was doing this sort of thing, but that misses the point. Democrats may be corrupt, but in the sense of doing favors for donors, possibly with some eventual kickbacks. In short, Democrats are servants of corruption. But what Trump is doing is trying to control the whole casino, so he gets a piece of every transaction, and that only adds to his future power.

• Naomi Bethune [02-23]: Whitening American history: "Trump's efforts to remove Black people from America's story have been countered by scholars, activists, judges — and history itself." And yet the continue, a relentless effort to hide history that discomfits a few racist fabulists like Trump. There's a link here back to Robert Kuttner [2025-04-15]: Trump's Orwellian assault on Black history.

• CK Smith [02-22]: Armed intruder shot dead at Mar-a-Lago: "An armed an was killed by Secret Service agents after entering a restricted area of Mar-a-Lago, officials say." Trump was in DC, far away from the site, so it's hard to credit this as an assassination attempt.

• Alex Galbraith [02-23]: Friends, family of man killed at Mar-a-Lago say he was engrossed by Epstein files.

• Margaret Hartmann: This month in Trump trivia (aside from the Melania movie, op. cit., and some Epstein bits):

  • [01-28]: Trump responds to Ilhan Omar attack with admittedly evidence-free smear: "After a man sprayed liquid on the Minnesota Democrat, Trump accused her of staging the attack — while acknowledging he hadn't watched the video."

  • [02-06]: White House defends Trump's wildly racist Obamas post before deleting it: "Karoline Leavitt slammed the 'fake outrage' over depicting Barack and Michelle Obama as monkeys in Trump's now-deleted post."

  • [02-09]: Trump's Bad Bunny halftime review: 'absolutely terrible': "So much for watching his pal Kid Rock at the Turning Point halftime show."

  • [02-09]: Turning Point halftime got big ratings (if you round way up): "TPUSA is proudly touting its 20 million-plus viewers across various social channels. It's just a tad shy of Bad Bunny's estimated 135 million viewers."

  • [02-17]: Trump uses Jesse Jackson's death to insist he's not racist: "And attack Barack Obama."

  • [02-19]: Is Trump going to get into Heaven? Live updates: "The president can't stop publicly musing the afterlife. Here are the latest odds on Trump going to Heaven, according to Trump."

  • [02-22]: All about the White House UFC fight on Trump's birthday: "The UFC is holding a cage match to celebrate America's 250th birthday (or maybe Trump). Here's what we know about plans, tickets, and the fight card."

  • [02-23]: Trump gets back at 'supreme court' by revoking capital letters: "Trump's latest Truth Social rant suggests the justices should brace themselves for juvenile antics at the State of the Union."

  • [02-25]: Trump calls his foes 'deranged' in rant on deporting Robert De Niro.

Republicans: As bad as Trump is, I worry more about the party he's unleashed on America. Here are some examples, both bad actors and dangerous and despicable ideas.

• Sasha Abramsky:

  • [01-30]: An open letter to Congressional Republicans of conscience: "For the good of the country, it's time to cross the aisle." I have no doubt this plea is falling on deaf ears, even among the very short list he mentions. "Conscience" is a dead letter among Republicans. The last one to claim such a thing was Barry Goldwater, and he was just striking a pose in defense of the indefensible.

  • [02-13]: The Republican crack-up has begun: "Even conservatives are fleeing the GOP as more and more Americans turn against Trump's authoritarian project." Don't get too excited here. His poster boy is "Gary Kendrick, a GOP council member in the red town of El Cajon, on San Diego's eastern outskirts." What we've seen repeatedly is that the few Republicans who have broken ranks have dissolved into nothingness almost immediately. Few of them have even dared run for reelection.

• Jake Lahut [02-02]: Nancy Mace is not okay: "Something's broken. The motherboard is fried. We're short-circuiting somewhere."

• Ian Millhiser [02-02]: Republicans are normalizing the one reform they should fear most: "The Supreme Court is the GOP's most durable power center. It makes no sense for them to endanger that source of power." He's referring to efforts at the state level to go to extraordinary legal means to pack courts in their favor: one example is adding two seats to the Utah Supreme Court, which has "sided with plaintiffs challenging Utah's GOP-friendly congressional maps," and "blocked Utah's ban on most abortions, temporarily stopped a law banning transgender girls from playing high school sports, and found the state's school voucher program unconstitutional." He could have mentioned efforts in Kansas, which thus far have been less successful. Republicans seem convinced that any power they grab will be permanent.

• Ed Kilgore [02-25]: Cornyn's nasty attack on Paxton may haunt Texas Republicans.

Democrats: In theory the people we trust to protect us from Republicans. In practice, they're not doing a very good job, so I tend to latch onto stories about how to do better (then scoff at them).

• Amanda Marcotte [02-06]: Shock Democratic upset in Texas shows voters still hate book bans: "Running against Moms for Liberty is a winning 2026 strategy." Democrat Taylor Rehmet won a state senate district that Trump carried by 17% in 2024, a "eye-popping swing of 31%."

• Norman Solomon [02-06]: The actual Gavin Newsom is much worse than you think.

• Michael Tomasky [02-12]: What the Democrats need to do now: "To win back working-class voters, then need to signal ore clearly to working people that they are on their side. That means picking fights on their behalf with the bad actors who are making their lives harder — and the democracy-hating billionaires." This is a long article which raises a lot of important questions regarding political strategy. As I've given these same issues considerable thought, I could see writing a whole Substack essay on the subject. I've read Tomasky's 2022 book, The Middle Out: The Rise of Progressive Economics and a Return to Shared Prosperity, and some of his earlier work, including many essays. The book is a strong defense of Biden's economic agenda, or what it could have been had Biden not been hobbled (by Republicans, by retro-Democrats, by his own advisers, by the media, and by his own incoherence — a personalized spin on problems that pervade the Democratic Party). Tomasky starts with "four core problems":

  1. Why don't the Democrats fight more? Meaning, against Republicans.
  2. Why do the Democrats fight so much? Among themselves.
  3. What the center gets wrong
  4. What the left gets wrong

  That's followed by sections on:

  1. Stories — and Villains
  2. What Biden Did — and Didn't — Do
  3. Targets
  4. An Economic Bill of Rights
  5. Conclusion: The Democrats' Third Great Challenge

  This is all pretty good, but doesn't quite get out of the mental ruts, especially between center and left. As Tomasky notes, "the left has become the chief source of energy and creativity in the party." The center needs to understand and appreciate that, but also they need to understand that the principles that drive the left are principles that they can and should also subscribe to (more equality; less corruption; peace and broader cooperation; less prejudice and discrimination; more personal freedom; public service; a more robust safety net; opportunity for all). And they need to let the left be itself, committed to principles regardless of consequences, and not demand conformity to the compromises that the center regards as pragmatically necessary. The left needs to think of itself not as an advocate for certain interest groups, but rather as the aspirations for virtually everyone. To do that, the left has to break a bad habit, which is the tendency to dismiss and disparage people they disagree with. This is wrong in principle and self-defeating in practice.

• Perry Bacon [02-13]: Instead of pandering, Democrats should try changing voters' minds: "How can the party of liberalism make liberal ideas more popular? By creating a more liberal electorate. Yes, it can be done. Here are five ways how." Chapter heads:

  1. Use their bully pulpits
  2. Align with movements
  3. Work the refs — and seed new ones
  4. Become a more civic party
  5. Get more young people voting

• Ross Barkan:

  • [02-17]: AOC's Munich stumble is a warning to the left: Her "stumble" seems to have been that she "stalled for about 20 seconds" when asked whether "the US should send troops to defend Taiwan in the event of a Chinese invasion." As she later explained, making a point that most Democrats as well as Republicans find hard to grasp, "we want to make sure we never get to that point." I've tried to make this point before: that war should ever break out testifies to a catastrophic failure of diplomacy, and an even more fundamental misunderstanding of world politics. Democrats need to totally rethink foreign policy: the first point is that war is never an option (a stronger statement than that it is a "last resort," but not one that refuses to fight if one really does have no choice — I'm not personally disagreeing with the pacifist position, but I'm not insisting on it as policy, not least because I recognize that some people will take defenselessness as an invitation to rape and pillage); the second is that we need to build international cooperation through voluntary (not coerced by the dictates or leverages of power). I take these two points to be obvious, but they run counter to virtually every respected voice in US foreign policy — a bipartisan claque constantly spouting nonsense, including such leading questions as "would you commit to sending troops to defend Taiwan against China?" Even Barkan, who is a long-time critic of US foreign policy, gets sucked in to the logic of deterrence (which only deters those disinclined to war in the first place; otherwise the policy aggravates and provokes).

  • [02-23]: The Democratic Party's breakup with AIPAC is almost complete.

• Jason Linkins [02-21]: There's only one way to eradicate Trumpism for good: His keyword is "accountability," but what does that mean? The examples here are all negative, like Obama's disinterest in holding the Bush administration accountable for its wars and economic disasters. I'm not particularly keen on putting people in jail, but we need to be very clear about what Trump has done, including his extraordinary personal enrichment. Otherwise, Democrats will continue to be punished for sins of their predecessors, as happened to Obama and Biden.

• Conor Lynch [02-22]: Zohran Mamdani wants to reclaim efficiency from the right.

• Hafiz Rashid [02-23]: DNC's 2024 election autopsy blames Kamala Harris's stance on Gaza: I've said all along that if Trump won in 2024, the main reason would be Biden's wars. Still, it's surprising to see the DNC admitting to any such error. By the way, the author previously wrote [2024-08-23]: The black mark on the Democrats' big party.

The Economy: Another old section, brought back recently as I needed to talk about the AI bubble. Now it occurs to me that I should split that section in two, so tech gets its own following section, and this deals with the rest of the economy, and what economists have to say about it.

• Ryan Cooper [12-15]: America can't build homes anymore: "Cities stopped building not by accident but by design. Our housing system is constructed on scarcity, speculation, and private veto power."

• Vivek Chibber [12-23]: Power, not economic theory, created neoliberalism: Interview: "Ideas become influential when they're latched to the correct constellation of interests. Without that, they remain in the wilderness forever."

• Eric Levitz

  • [01-23]: Wall Street buying up houses is good, actually: "The surprising truth about corporate investment in housing." Really? First he argues that mega-investors are insignificant so have little effect on prices, then he changes the subject and argues that they're better because they discriminate less ("corporate investment in single-family homes is good for integration"). Levitz has been struggling for some time trying to get a handle on housing costs — e.g., see [2025-08-26]: What far-left cranks get right about the housing crisis, which is a defense of YIMBY-ism that admits it doesn't solve everything. There are lots of problems with housing and its unaffordability, but one of the deepest, and most politically intractable, is the idea that houses should function as long-term investments, indeed that for most people they represent most of their savings. If we get to where we have a housing surplus, the immediate effect will be not just to drive rents down but to reduce the nominal wealth of a big slice of the middle class. That's going to be a tough sell, and it's going to require much deeper thinking than YIMBY considers. (Side point: because Democrats spend nearly all of their time with donors and lobbyists, they only look for fixes that open up more profits, and they never consider savings that are too widely dispersed to organize their own lobbies. Thus, for instance, they subsidize more green power, but pay little attention to reducing energy use.)

  • [02-18]: Why voters hate Trump's (pretty decent) economy: "The data is solid. The vibes are atrocious. What gives?" Perhaps because even better data did so little to enamor voters to the Biden economy?

• Heather Long [02-03]: We're in an economic boom. Where are the jobs? "AI is sending stocks soaring, rich people are spending big, and hiring is at a crawl."

• Caitlin Dewey [02-12]: 2025 was a dismal year for jobs.

• Joseph Stiglitz/Mike Konczal [02-13]: Trump's tariff fantasy collides with economic reality: "The president claims an 'economic miracle.' The data tell a different story." The article is paywalled, but a synopsis notes that "the administration's policies are based on a fundamental misunderstanding of economics, specifically regarding trade, and are leading to higher costs for Americans and long-term structural harm." Key points:

  • Tariffs as a Tax on Consumers: Stiglitz and Konczal argue that tariffs are not a strategic tool paid by foreign countries, but rather a "blunt tool" that functions as a roughly $1,000 tax on the average American family, fueling inflation.
  • Persistent Inflation: Despite claims of an "economic miracle," they note that inflation in early 2025 remained high (around 2.7%) rather than meeting targets, with tariffs contributing significantly to increased consumer prices.
  • Squandering Economic Advantages: They argue that the administration is "squandering" long-term competitive advantages by cutting funding for research, education, and public institutions while simultaneously damaging key trade alliances.
  • Uncertainty and Reduced Investment: Stiglitz notes that the erratic, "on-off" nature of tariff policies, combined with a disregard for the rule of law, creates a "scary place to invest," increasing volatility and decreasing confidence in the U.S. economy.
  • Missed Growth Targets: Stiglitz previously highlighted that, despite large deficits and low interest rates, the economic performance under these policies has failed to deliver the high growth rates promised, falling short of previous administration averages.

• Ryan Cummings/Jared Bernstein [02-26]: Crypto is pointless. Not even the White House can fix that. "Nearly $2 trillion of wealth has evaporated from the global crypto market since October." But was it ever real in the first place? This also led to an older article:

  • Finn Brunton [2025-10-24]: How a fringe movement of gun nuts, backwoodsmen and free marketers paved the way for autocracy.

• Paul Krugman [02-27]: The economics of faltering fascism: "Unfortunately for Trump, and fortunately for us, he didn't inherit an economic crisis." Charts compare unemployment rates for Hitler, Putin, and Trump, showing how the first two came to power against a dire economic backdrop, whereas despite much bitching the Obama and Biden economies were relatively solid and stable.

  In the end, if Trumpist fascism is indeed defeated, I believe that there will be three sources of that defeat. First is the courage and basic decency of the American people, who refuse to bow down. Second is the egomania and malign incompetence of Trump, who tried to bludgeon and gaslight Americans into submission. And last is the weakness of a fascist movement that just can't deliver the goods.

Technology: Big boomlet here is AI. Some of this will be on business, and some on the technology itself, not that it's easy to separate the two.

• Sophie McBain [10-18]: Are we living in a golden age of stupidity?: "From brain-rotting videos to AI creep, every technological advance seems to make it harder to work, remember, think and function independently." I've seen cascades of short videos that qualify as brain rot and found it very hard to pull away from them, but eventually I did, probably because I have some deeply embedded protestant ethic which keeps me forever working, allowing entertainment only if it adds to my store of knowledge and reason. Maybe the problem is that my sort of work ethic has gone out of most people's groundings. While the traditional explanation for this is the temptation of sin, I think there's also a pragmatic consideration: why pursue knowledge if there's nothing you can do with it? People don't keep up with technology because it's hard, but also because it's been black-boxed and trade-secreted and esotericized to the point where you have no control over it, even if you do mostly understand it. Same with politics, business, law, even medicine. These, and much more, are dedicated not just to shaking you down but to keeping you powerless. After all, powerlessness begets indifference and incuriosity, which is the secret formula for stupid.

  If brains need friction but also instinctively avoid it, it's interesting that the promise of technology has been to create a "frictionless" user experience, to ensure that, provided we slide from app to app or screen to screen, we will meet no resistance. The frictionless user experience is why we unthinkingly offload ever more information and work to our digital devices; it's why internet rabbit holes are so easy to fall down and so hard to climb out of; it's why generative AI has already integrated itself so completely into most people's lives.

  We know, from our collective experience, that once you become accustomed to the hyperefficient cybersphere, the friction-filled real world feels harder to deal with. . . .

  Human intelligence is too broad and varied to be reduced to words such as "stupid," but there are worrying signs that all this digital convenience is costing us dearly. . . . In the ever-expanding, frictionless online world, you are first and foremost a user: passive, dependent. In the dawning era of AI-generated misinformation and deepfakes, how will we maintain the scepticism and intellectual independence we'll need? By the time we agree that our minds are no longer our own, that we simply cannot think clearly without tech assistance, how much of us will be left to resist?

• Eric Levitz [02-11]: AI's threat to white-collar jobs just got more real: "You've become increasingly replaceable."

• John Herrman [02-13]: Oops! The singularity is going viral. "Insiders and outsiders are both feeling helpless about the same thing."

• Russell Payne [02-26]: Hegseth threatens Anthropic over killer AI limits: I'm not sure which is more troubling: that the War Department has a $200 million contract for AI, or that Hegseth wants the software stripped of any "safeguards." I doubt if he even knows what the technical term means, but wimpy and nonlethal to him, so it's gotta go.

  • Bryan Walsh [02-26]: The Pentagon's battle with Anthropic is really a war over who controls AI. Evidently the points of contention are described here:

    Anthropic's policies allow its models to be used as part of targeted military strikes, foreign surveillance, or even drone strikes when a human approves the final call. But it has maintained two specific "red lines" it won't cross: fully autonomous weapons, meaning AI systems that select and engage targets without a human involved, and mass domestic surveillance of American citizens. Amodei said in his statement that "AI-driven mass surveillance presents serious, novel risks to our fundamental liberties," while frontier AI systems were "simply not reliable enough to power fully autonomous weapons."

  • Maria Curi/Dave Lawler [02-26]: Anthropic rejects Pentagon's "final offer" in AI safeguards fight.

The Free Press (for lack of a better term): Note that the recent sacking of the Washington Post has its own section this time.

• Chris Lehmann [01-30]: The smug and vacuous David Brooks is perfect for The Atlantic: "The former New York Times columnist is a one-man cottage industry of lazy cultural stereotyping." I haven't read him in so many years I may not have noticed the move, and the new paywall is just one more reason to not care.

Miscellaneous Pieces

The following articles are more/less in order published, although some authors have collected pieces, and some entries have related articles underneath.

David Klion [2025-04-17]: The war on the liberal class: As the author tweeted: "Seems like a fine time to re-up this piece I wrote a year ago, about how the Trump Administration and its Silicon Valley oligarch allies are murdering liberalism as a class along with the cultural and intellectual institutions that sustain it." Back in the late-1960s, I grew up to be very critical of the era's liberal nostrums, but lately my views have softened and sentimentalized, now that we risk losing even their last few saving graces. I can now admit that, like the Stalinists of the 1930s they so loathed, they started with fairly decent intentions, before they allowed themselves to be adled and corrupted by power. Astra Taylor had a similar idea when she wrote Democracy May Not Exist, but We'll Miss It When It's Gone.

Klion locates liberalism in a "new class" (borrowing from Djilas, although one could also refer to Reich's "symbolic manipulators"), which gives the "war on liberalism" targets which can be attacked without having to grapple with concepts: universities, nonprofits, bureaucracies, publications — organizations that can be starved of funds and denied audiences. Klion provides numerous examples, including the promotion of right-wing alternatives, which help suck the oxygen out of the atmosphere sustaining independent thought. What isn't clear is why these fabulously wealthy individuals want to live in a world where most people are denied even the basic idea of freedom.

The crisis facing liberalism begins with the crisis of basic literacy. It was the expansion of literacy after World War II that made the ascent of the New Class possible in the first place, and it's only slightly hyperbolic to say that liberals today confront a society in which no one under 30 reads serious books or newspapers. A much-discussed article in the Atlantic last fall flagged that even undergraduates at the most elite universities struggle to read whole books that their counterparts a decade ago were able to handle. Their attention spans have been eroded since childhood by social media addiction, and now the social media they consume is no longer text-based.

In the 2000s and 2010s, the dominant social media platforms were Facebook and Twitter, both of which, whatever their faults (including Facebook's central role in bankrupting traditional news media), primarily circulated the written word. Both of these platforms are currently controlled by Silicon Valley billionaires in hock to Trump, and both have become increasingly degraded, poorly functioning, and saturated with scammers and hatemongers. Even more salient, both are losing market share to the Chinese social media platform TikTok, which prioritizes short-form videos that obviate any need for more than nominal literacy, much less for the critical-thinking skills that liberals have always regarded as essential to a healthy democratic polity. Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, is increasingly copying TikTok's approach.

Meanwhile, tech firms in both China and the U.S. aggressively compete to develop AI, which functions in part by plagiarizing, synthesizing, and undercutting the reliability of original written work while promising to render human-generated writing redundant and unmarketable. The combination of video-based platforms, AI, and algorithmically "enshittified" text-based social networks that suppress links to actual writing has rendered the internet fundamentally hostile to anyone who crafts words for a living. This is a threat not just to the basic finances of professional writers but also to their ability to socially reproduce a receptive public for what they're selling.

The same tech oligarchs who bankrolled Trump's victory have been using their unprecedented fortunes to fund alternative institutions to compete with, and ultimately sideline, the established ones. As Eoin Higgins documents in his recent book Owned: How Tech Billionaires on the Right Bought the Loudest Voices on the Left, venture capital-backed platforms like Substack have been instrumental in creating lucrative new career opportunities for veterans of mainstream media, especially those who parrot the reactionary views of their funders. While these platforms are available to writers of any political persuasion, it is reactionaries who disproportionately get the most lucrative deals: Independent blogging doesn't tend to reward robust newsroom cultures and traditional editorial standards as much as invective and audience capture.

Eric Levitz [01-20]: A very simple explanation for why politics is broken: "Entertainment got too good." That's a bit too simple, but covers the right, which as long as Republicans still receive a competitive share of votes suffices to break the whole system. But it's only entertainment on the right. The center-left has its own fissures and chasms, but the only time we get entertainment is on the late-night comic shows, which serve as a palliative against the everyday horrors of the Trump mob. I took a break from Kimmel-Colbert-Myers after the election, and have only recently returned. It is comforting to know that not just these hosts but also their crowds are staunchly on our side. As for the right, I'm simply immune to their "entertainment": I can't recognize it as true, as honest, even as just sincerely misguided. It's based on an instinct for self-flattery, cult-worship, dominance, and cruelty I never acquired (not that I didn't notice its appeal to quite a few folks around me). But the entertainment didn't win over anyone who wasn't prepared in the first place. And the preparation was simple cynicism: first show that no one can be trusted, admitting everyone is crooked, even your own guys; but their guys are even worse, often working not just to feather their own pockets but as supplicants to even more diabolical conspiracies. To fight such people, you need your own fighters, willing to get dirty and bloody.

By the way, this opens with a series of charts showing the split of white presidential vote by income quintiles going back to 1948, each normalized to the national margin. Republicans won the upper two quintiles every year up through 2012, but lost it three times with Trump (small Democratic edge on 2nd quintile in 1956, 1960, 1968, 2000, and maybe 2012, but in each of those cases the top quintile broke strongly R). On the other hand, Democrats won the bottom two quintiles in all of the pre-Trump races except 1960 and 1968 — where the far-from-patrician Nixon was aided by some unusual splits. As for 2016-24, Levitz says:

This development surely reflects Trump's personal imprint on American life. Yet it was also made possible by long-term, structural shifts in our politics.

Aside from the somewhat muddled Eisenhower and Nixon elections, the pattern of Democrats winning the poorer quintiles and Republicans the richer ones has been pretty consistent. The clearest examples were from 1976-88, with 1984 the strongest correlation, but 2008 is nearly as strong. The pattern still held for 2012, but the divide was reduced, partly because right-wing media fanned white racial backlash, but also because the Obama recovery worked much better for the rich than for the poor. Not coincidentally, Obama seemed to identify (or at least socialize) much more with the rich than with the poor. I wouldn't call this a "structural shift," but it did offer Trump an opening that someone like Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio would have had trouble navigating. But Trump also had the advantage of running against Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris, who spent all of their energies cultivating the rich and famous. Even so, Trump was a dumb choice, but Democrats had squandered whatever credibility they once had to point such things out.

When I think of "structural shifts," I think of things that are beyond individual conscious control: technology, capitalism, mass culture, aspirations for freedom and self-determination. Even so, many of them are consequences of political decisions, as when the Democrats decided not to restore let alone expand support for labor unions after Taft-Hartley weakened them, or their decisions to cut taxes on the rich and loosen up regulations constraining finance, or their wrong-headed and mendacious war in Vietnam.

Those structural shifts have blighted the lives of many whites, stranding them in stagnant areas, with limited skills and vanishing opportunities. That many such people would turn against a Democratic Party that seemed to care little and offer less isn't surprising. Unfortunately, in Trump they've found a "savior" who will only make their lot worse, at most giving them hollow flattery, some kind of emotional release at seeing their supposed enemies attacked and/or ridiculed.

Jonquilyn Hill [01-26]: Are we getting stupider? "Technology is rotting our brains — but there are ways to stop it." Interview with neurologist Andrew Budson, "who specializes in and researches memory disorders." Title is broad enough we probably all already have answers, which will be seen to have little bearing on the very narrow subject broached here. Budson focuses on mental decline among individuals, and his main take is "use it or lose it." His main insight is that brains are meant for social networking, not compiling facts or computing results, so he sees isolation and loneliness as major contributing factors. He also notes that watching more than one hour of TV per day "rots your brain," but that's because it's a solitary activity — content seems to be irrelevant, but I'd guess that most people who see this headline will be expecting yet another critique of mind-devastating content. As I read along, I found myself thinking about assisted-care living, and how to better structure those organizations for sustained mental health. I think it's safe to say that's not a high criterion for our current mix of providers and customers, where economics rules, making quality of life an option few can afford. But that's a subject for a future essay.

It's commonly understood that people learn voraciously when they are young, a rate that slows down over time (although accumulated knowledge and insight may still produce qualitative breakthroughs), then usually declines in advanced age, sometimes catastrophically. Plot this out on a line and you'll find that most people most of the time are in decline. A different question is to compare generations using common sample points: how to 30-year-olds today compare to 30-year-olds in 2000 or 1980 or 1960 or 1940? I don't know, maybe because I'm skeptical of metrics (like IQ[*]). But my impression is that the totality of knowledge has only increased, and continues to do so, which makes it impossible for individuals to keep up. We depend on an ever-increasing division of labor to manage all this knowledge, but our inability to keep up with the whole falls ever farther behind, making us feel stupider, or at least less in charge. So it's possible to be smarter than ever before, yet less and less competent to check the intelligence of others. That would be less of a problem if we could trust the experts not just to know their stuff but to do the right thing with their knowledge. Unfortunately, the last 40-50 years has witnessed a boom in fraud and greed with little or no moral or political checks. When those people screw up, as happens pretty often these days, it's often unclear whether it was because they were crooked, or stupid.

[*] The data for IQ suggests that it increased steadily from 1900 to 2000, correlating with broad gains in education and science, but has since declined, which is often blamed on automation, although I could see the same correlation with inequality (time-shifted a bit).

Jeffrey St Clair:

• [01-30]: Roaming Charges: Bored of Peace: Eventually gets to Trump's insane counter-UN racket, but first half deals with ICE, Minnesota, and other instances of Trump fascism.

• [02-06]: The story of Juan Hernández.

• [02-09]: Roaming Charges: If you're not a scumbag, you're a nobody: "One of the world's richest jerks is gutting the once-storied newspaper he bought as a vanity project, used to promote his own narcissistic and predatory brand, ran editorial interference for Trump, eventually grew bored with the shredded like yesterday's news."

• [02-13]: The Nazi origins of the South American drug trade: Klaus Barbie, cocaine and the CIA.

• [02-16]: Roaming Charges: Trick or retreat in the Twin Cities?

  • On a chart of "% who are extremely/very confident that Donald Trump acts ethically in office," the score among white evangelical protestants has dropped from 55 to 40%; for white non-evangelical protestants, the drop is from 38 to 26%. The only group not showing a decline is black protestants, who have held steady at 7%.
  • Quotes Kristi Noem: "When it gets to Election Day, we've been proactive to make sure we have the right people voting, electing the right leaders to lead this country."
  • After "CBS Evening News loses nearly a quarter of its audience after editorial takeover": "Bari Weiss buries CBS News, which, like the emasculation of the WaPost, was probably the goal."

• [02-27]: Roaming Charges: State of the empire in extremis. Just found this as I was trying to wrap up, so I didn't initially cite anything here, but there are various items on Trump's war threat. The one I was most struck by was a tweet from Robert A Pape: "This represents 40-50% of the deployable US air power in the world. Think air power on the order of the 1991 and 2003 Iraq war. And growing. Never has the US deployed this much force against a potential eney and not launched strikes." I'm reminded of the WWI story about how even if mobilization was meant as a threat, none of the powers could back away from war once they did. Also of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, which the US anticipated on much the same evidence. Still, even with repeated evidence of how wrong people are to enter into war, I find it hard to expect that they would consciously blunder like that. Until it happened, I was skeptical that Russia would invade Ukraine, and suspected that the reports were just a taunt by the Biden administration hoping that Putin would fall into their trap. Trump's attack on Iran wasn't unannounced: it was repeaed so often that at some point he may have backed himself into a corner where no other option seemed possible. Still, it was a very stupid and careless maneuver, but it's only the last in a long string of totally avoidable mistakes.

• [03-02]: Preliminary notes on a planned decapitation. The keyword here is "whacked": for Trump, that's all it comes down to, the solution to all problems. And if it doesn't work, just whack again.

  Trump has done the world a service. He has abandoned pretense and clarified the true nature of American power. There is no longer any need to manufacture a case for war, to make an attack seem conform to international law and treaties or to demonstrate its righteousness by acting as part of an international coalition. Now America can do what it wants to whomever it wants solely because the people who run its government want to. This has, of course, almost always been the case behind the curtain of diplomatic niceties. But Trump has ripped those curtains down and now the world is seeing American power in the raw: brazen, arrogant and mindless of the consequences, which will be borne by others and if they complain, they might be whacked, too.

Stefano Tortorici/R Trebor Scholz [02-11]: Socialist co-ops against Silicon Valley empires: While there is much to be said for cooperatives in general, they could be developed as an alternative to the big tech companies, where the fundamental flaw is that the services they offer are merely bait for their main purpose, which is collecting and exploiting user data.

Matt McManus [02-07]: Thomas Mann and the temptations of Fascism: "The resurgence of right-wing populism has set the table for the far right's renewed fortunes. Published in 1947, Thomas Mann's Doctor Faustus offers a guide to the mythmaking and rejection of reason that continues to animate authoritarian politics today." My wife read (or possibly re-read) Mann's book recently, and was so struck by the timeliness of his description of the onset of Nazism that she posted an excerpt, which I logged in my drafts file (and might as well move here):

No, surely I did not want it, and yet — I have been driven to want it, I wish for it today and will welcome it, out of hatred for the outrageous contempt of reason, the vicious violation of the truth, the cheap, filthy backstairs mythology, the criminal degradation and confusion of standards; the abuse, corruption, and blackmail of all that was good, genuine, trusting, and trustworthy in our old Germany. For liars and lickspittles mixed us a poison draught and took away out senses. We drank — for we Germans perennially yearn for intoxication — and under its spell, through years of deluded high living, we committed a superfluity of shameful deeds, which must now be paid for. With what? I have already used the word, together with the word "despair" I wrote it. I will not repeat it: not twice could I control my horror or my trembling fingers to set it down again.

McManus notes:

A well observed feature of the far right is its strange tendency to combine indifference to factual accuracy, or even honesty, with soaring rhetoric about truth, beauty, and greatness. Beyond just a well-documented willingness to obfuscate, bullsh*t, and lie, many of the far right's core ideological convictions seem like bloviated imaginaries and outright fabrications. Often figures on the far right openly acknowledge this tendency, as in a 1922 speech where Benito Mussolini admitted his adulation of the rejuvenated Italian nation was a manufactured myth:

We have created our myth. The myth is a faith, a passion. It is not necessary for it to be a reality. It is a reality in the sense that it is a stimulus, is hope, is faith, is courage. Our myth is the nation, our myth is the greatness of the nation! And it is to this myth, this greatness, which we want to translate into a total reality, that we subordinate everything else.

This willingness to conjure patently artificial values into being, while still insisting all else be subordinated to the products of one's fantasy, is hardly unique to the early twentieth century right. In 2004, a George W. Bush administration official widely believed to be Karl Rove dismissed the "reality based community" for failing to realize that, as an empire, "we create our own reality." In The Art of the Deal, Donald Trump anticipated his political style by admitting he engaged in "truthful hyperbole" that "plays to people's fantasies" and desire to "believe that something is the biggest and the greatest and the most spectacular." More recently J. D. Vance, himself well-versed in far-right thought, has insisted that if he has to fabricate stories to attract people to his cause, then by God, he'll do so.

Dolly Li/Jordan Winters [02-19]: The House of Representatives is too small: The size has been fixed at 435 for more than a century, during which US population tripled. The "one way to fix it" seems to be simply adding more members, each with more compact districts. I have alternative proposal, which I call "Representative Democracy," where districts of whatever size (larger, smaller, doesn't matter, nor do they even have to be all the same size) each elect two or more representatives, where each representative wields a vote weighted by the number of voters who backed he candidate (the weights could be 1-for-each-vote). Typically, this means that each district would have both a Republican and a Democratic representative. If the winner got 60% of the vote, and the runner-up got 40%, both would go to Washington, but when they voted, the winner would cast a vote of 60%, and the runner-up of 40%. This could get more complicated with third parties, and it is an open question whether one wants to promote or retard such things. But this solves several big problems. For starters, it takes away the incentives for gerrymandering. Also, by ending "winner take all" this should dampen the amount of money poured into competitive races. It also, perhaps most importantly, means that everyone will have a representative dependent on one's vote. Elections will still matter, as they will shift relative power, but they will be less susceptible to landslides, as well as other machinations.

Alfred McCoy [02-22]: Accelerating American (and planetary) decline: I'm starting to tire of stories about how America is in long-term decline, and how Trump is only accelerating that decline. But here it is again, in broad outlines. Even before Trump:

While the U.S. was pouring its blood and treasure (an estimated $4.7 trillion worth) into those desert sands, China was enjoying a decade of warless economic growth. By June 2014, in fact, it had accumulated $4 trillion in foreign currency reserves — and in a major strategic miscalculation, Washington had even lent a hand. In deciding to admit Beijing into the World Trade Organization in 2001, Washington's leaders proved bizarrely confident that China, home to a fifth of humanity, would somehow join the world economy without changing the global balance of power in any significant way.

In 2013, as Beijing's annual exports to the U.S. grew nearly fivefold to $462 billion and its foreign currency reserves approached that $4 trillion mark, President Xi Jinping announced his historic "Belt and Road Initiative." Thanks to that initiative and the lending of a trillion dollars to developing nations, within a decade China would become the dominant economic player on three continents — Asia, Africa, and, yes, even Latin America.

While Trump has personally skimmed extraordinary profits from his America First/Make America Great Again racket, tangible benefits to ordinary Americans are less than zero. More troublesome has been his stifling of innovation within the US economy, which not only means that the US is falling behind its old rivals, but crippling its ability to ever catch up. Even the much vaunted US military is nothing more than overpriced, faulty-performing high-tech crap that is useless for any practical purposes but which risks war and moral hazard, while wasting talent and money that could be used for something actually useful. McCoy is especially damning on how "Trump has essentially smothered America's infant green-energy economy in its cradle (and ceded a future green-powered global economy to China). But he has no way of reckoning the final costs of Trump's fossil fuel gambits. Another variation on this:

• Richard D Wolff [02-25]: An empire (and economy) in decline.

Zack Beauchamp [02-23]: How to stop a dictator: Compares case studies from Brazil, South Korea, Poland, and Trumpist America. This piece is part of a series Vox is running on America After Trump. Seems like premature optimism, but it's not much fun considering the alternative, which is how much worse things could get if "after Trump" turns out to be just more of the same. Some pieces in this series:

• Zach Beauchamp [02-18]: How one country stopped a Trump-style authoritarian in his tracks: "What Brazil got right that America got wrong."

• Julie Myers [02-18]: The Brazilian playbook for defending democracy: "The fall of Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil and what it proves about Trump-style authoritarians."

• Jolie Myers/Noel King [02-24]: You got your democracy back. Now what? "What the United States can learn from Poland's experience with autocracy." One lesson: "once democratic norms are broken, they're hard to rebuild — and the temptation to stretch those norms doesn't disappear when power changes hands." Interview with Ben Stanley, who's written a book about Poland and the challenges of undoing the illiberal "Law and Justice" regime. He points to a "trilemma": "Voters want you to reform quickly, legally, and effectively, but it's almost always impossible to achieve all three at the same time." Democrats are gaining political ground by emphasizing the illegality and unconstitutionality of many Trump initiatives, but restoring norms, guard rails, checks and balances won't suffice to undo the damage, and may make it harder to show any effectiveness.

• Zack Beauchamp [02-25]: Did the Constitution doom American democracy: "In 2015, Matt Yglesias predicted America's political system would collapse. Did Trump prove him right?" The Yglesias essay referred to is here: American democracy is doomed. Interview with Yglesias. I'd be more inclined to argue that the Constitution, with its snarl of checks and balances, was intended to keep democracy safe for the propertied interests (which initially, conspicuously and infamously, included slaveholders). But just because America was never able to develop as a democracy doesn't mean that what passed for democracy was doomed, except perhaps to disappointment. I attribute Trump's ascendancy to frustration: as the system precluded real reform, why not try to break the logjam by investing the guy who promised to break the rules? That the people made a rash and ill-advised choice should be obvious by now. But what better choice were they allowed?

• Lee Drutman [02-26]: US democracy has repaired itself before. Here's how we can do it again. His argument "why the Progressive Era is the most like our own" has some resonance, in that systemic problems of oligarchy were treated with top-down reforms meant to prevent any major shifts of power (stifling the challenges of populists and socialists). The analogy to the 1960s is less clear, but maybe that's a cautionary tale. By the way, while I've always admired the progressive era reformers, I'm not very happy with many leftist's habit of calling themselves progressives. While I'm more up than down on progress, I don't like the idea that it is inevitable and necessarily good, and I suspect that we're losing votes by not acknowledging the need to limit or at least tone down its excesses. Right now, my preferred self-description is small-d democrats: its distinction from capital-R Republicans is crystal clear, and it reminds us that everything we propose should be aimed at majority support. On the other hand, the alternative of populists has been spoiled by right-wing demagoguery.

Books:

• Laura K Field: FuriousMinds: The Making of the MAGA New Right:

  • Jennifer Szalai [2025-12-17]: The intellectuals fueling the MAGA movement: "Furious Minds, by Laura K Field, traces the ascendancy of hard-right thinkers whose contempt for liberal democracy is shaping American politics."

• David Harvey: The Story of Capital: What Everyone Should Know About How Capital Works:

  • David Harvey [02-24]: David Harvey on Marxism for the 21st Century: An excerpt from the book.

• Chris Jennings: End of Days: Ruby Ridge, the Apocalypse, and the Unmaking of America:

  Sarah Jones [02-19]: Why is the right so obsessed with the apocalypse? I understand that there are people who believe that the future was literally foretold in the Book of Revelation, and who spend much of their waking lives deep in research on the subject. I understand this because my grandfather was one, as evidently was his father. My own father continued this old family tradition, albeit in his own idiosyncratic way, which I never attempted to understand, because the whole thing always struck me as completely fucking nuts (even, I'm quite sure, when I was still a faithful member in good standing of the Disciples of Christ, which had long been the family church). While my ancestors are long dead, I understand this because I still know otherwise decent people who still seem to believe such things. They, too, are nuts, at least in this one respect, but I try to politely ignore that, because there's simply no way I can wrap my brain around the notion that hastening the end of the world we know could be a good thing. I believe that it is important to try to respect different ideas, even in such shady domains as cosmology. Jones does a pretty good job of explicating this one — at least her story aligns with a dozen other versions I have read — but there's still this unbreachable gap between recognition and belief.

• Clyde W Barrow [02-05]: Reading C Wright Mills in the Age of Trump: "Seventy years ago C Wright Mills published The Power Elite, a scathing indictment of corporate executives, state officials, and their academic apologists. His analysis has lost none of its bite as we confront an increasingly degenerate US power elite."

Other media/arts:

• Anis Shivani [2017-05-29]: Four years later, Breaking Bad remains the boldest indictment of modern American capitalism in TV history: "The show's visual style is the greatest-ever rebuke to the gory hold neoliberalism has over our minds and bodies." Stumbled across this piece, not out of any particular curiosity about the 2008-13 Vince Gilligan series (five seasons, which I hated at first, broke with early on, but my wife persevered, and I wound up watching he end of; we also watched Better Call Saul, and have started Pluribus and will probably return to it, but with little enthusiasm, at least from me). While my disgust is undiminished, I'm likely to use its title as the second chapter of my "weird" political book: a brief sketch of how America "broke bad" from WWII to Trump. I don't much care whether the show works as critique or example, but I thought I should flag this for future reference. It also turns out that Shivani, who has also written novels and poetry, wrote a 2017 book called Why Did Trump Win? Chronicling the Stages of Neoliberal Reactionism During America's Most Turbulent Election Cycle, which I hadn't noticed, but looks sharp enough to order.

Some notable deaths: Mostly from the New York Times listings. Last time I did such a trawl was on January 24, so we'll look that far back (although some names have appeared since):

• [02-27]: Neil Sedaka, singing craftsman of memorable pop songs, dies at 86: Brill Building songwriter, recorded a half-dozen classic hits 1959-62, staged a minor comeback in the 1970s with Sedaka's Back, and never really left.

• [02-24]: Éliane Radigue, composer of time, silence and space, dies at 94: "Her Tibetan Buddhist spiritual practice and her experiments with synthesizers came together in vast, slow-moving works that drew wide acclaim."

• [02-21]: Bill Mazeroski, 89, whose 9th-inning blast made Pirates champs, is dead: One of the all-time great defensive second basemen. Hero of the 1960 World Series, a gruesome affair still indelibly etched in my memory.

• [02-17]: Anna Akhmatova, leading Soviet poet, is dead: "She was a towering figure in Soviet literature who was once silenced in a Stalinist literary purge."

• [02-17]: Jesse Jackson: "An impassioned orator, he was a moral and political force, forming a 'rainbow coalition' of poor and working-class people and seeking the presidency. His mission, he said, was 'to transform the mind of America.'"

  • Robert L Borosage [02-18]: Jesse Jackson still provides light in these dark times.

  • David Masciotra [02-20]: The poetic symmetry of Jesse Jackson's life: love, rage, and leadership. Author has a previous book, I Am Somebody: Why Jesse Jackson Matters (2023). He makes a good case here.

  • Jeffrey St Clair [02-20]: Up, down and around with Jesse Jackson: "Jesse Jackson's two runs, in 1984 and 1988, were the last Democratic presidential campaigns I had any interest in joining." He goes on:

    Those campaigns, which, among other things, warned about the coming neoliberal takeover of the Democratic Party, spawned dozens of great activists, including my late buddy Kevin Alexander Gray, who would later play vital roles in the movements that followed Jackson's political campaign: anti-World Bank and WTO protests, the Nader campaigns, the Occupy Movement, the Sanders campaign, BLM, and the migrant rights movement.

    The Democratic Party, in league with the Israel lobby, deployed every trick in the book, and some found only the apocrypha, to not only destroy his campaigns but to try to destroy Jackson both as a force in the Party and personally. (RFK and J. Edgar Hoover conspired to do the same with MLK.) Yet, even with the entire party apparatus working viciously against him, Jesse still crushed party stalwarts Joe Biden, Al Gore and Dick Gephardt. His ultimate loss to Michael Dukakis was preordained.

    To watch Jesse Jackson speak in 1984 was to be struck, and often mesmerized, by a voice few Americans had heard before: the fluid, rolling cadences, the urgent tone, the piercing anecdotes, a voice that didn't shout but summoned, that didn't sermonize but called for action. His speeches gave voice to the voiceless, to the destitute, the abandoned and stigmatized, the oppressed and the imprisoned.

    He then cites PJ O'Rourke as "an unlikely admirer of Jackson's oratorical skills," to quote:

    I did, however, want to hear Jesse Jackson speak. He's the only living American politician with a mastery of classical rhetoric. Assonance, alliteration, litotes, pleonasm, parallelism, exclamation, climax and epigram — to listen to Jesse Jackson is to hear everything mankind has learned about public speaking since Demosthenes. Thus, Jackson, the advocate for people who believe themselves to be excluded from Western culture, was the only 1988 presidential candidate to exhibit any of it.

    St Clair details much of the Democratic Party's demonization of Jackson. Some of this is familiar, but much slipped by me. I've often thought that had Jackson run again in 1992, he could have captured the Democratic Party nomination. But he probably would have lost in the fall, and didn't want to be blamed as the spoiler resulting in four more years of Reagan-Bush. Bill Clinton should have owed him a large debt for such circumspection, but never showed any signs of honoring much less recompensing Jackson.

• [02-16]: Robert Duvall, a chameleon of an actor onscreen and onstage, dies at 95.

• [02-14]: Roy Medvedev, Soviet era historian and dissident, is dead at 100: "His score of books and hundreds of essays documented Stalinist executions, Communist repressions, and the transition to post-Soviet Russia."

• [02-11]: Ken Peplowski, who helped revive the jazz clarinet, dies at 66: "Also a saxophone standout, he served as stylistic bridge between the Benny Goodman swing era and the genre-blurring present"

• [02-03]: Michael Parenti, unapologetic Marxist theorist and author, dies at 92: "A prolific writer and lecturer, he viewed US history through the lens of class struggle."

• [01-30]: Catherine O'Hara, 'Home Alone' and 'Schitt's Creek' actress, dies at 71: "An Emmy-winning comedian with oddball charm, she got her start with the influential Canadian sketch comedy series 'SCTV.'" I would have led with films like Best in Show, A Mighty Wind, and Waiting for Guffman. Not sure why I gave up on Schitt's Creek, but it probably wasn't her.

• [01-28]: Sly Dunbar, whose drumming brought complex beats to reggae, dies at 72: "As one half of the famed rhythm duo Sly and Robbie, he played with some of the biggest names in music, including Bob Dylan and Mick Jagger." What about Bob Marley?

  • Kory Grow [01-26]: Sly and Robbie: 11 songs you didn't now they played on. Mostly true, although I certainly knew of "Warm Leatherette" and "Future Shock."

• [01-21]: Rifaat al-Assad, paramilitary leader and 'Butcher of Hama,' dies at 88: "The brother and uncle of Syrian tyrants, he commanded a unit that killed up to 40,000 civilians in a 1982 uprising against his family's rule."

Some other names I recognize: Edward Hoagland (nature writer), Willie Colón (salsa musician), Richard Ottinger (D-NY), ElRoy Face (baseball relief pitcher), Ebo Taylor (highlife musician), Mickey Lolich (baseball pitcher), Lee H Hamilton (34-year representative, D-IN).

Note that the New York Times also offered overlooked no more obituaries for (mostly interesting people I wasn't familiar with, but these two are glaring omissions[*]):

• Clifford Brown, trumpeter whose brief life left a lasting mark: "He was one of the most talked-about jazz musicians in the 1950s. After he died in a car accident at 25, his influence grew." Brown was already DownBeat's "New Star of the Year" in 1954, by which point he was probably more accomplished and regarded more highly than any other trumpet player in his cohort (he was slightly younger than Miles Davis, Kenny Dorham, Art Farmer, Thad Jones, Chet Baker, Blue Mitchell — they were all b. 1924-30). I have 2 A and 4 A- albums by Brown, and I'm in a distinct minority as a non-fan of his With Strings or his featured collaboration on Sarah Vaughan (a Penguin Guide crown album).

• Jimmy Reed, the bluesman everyone covered, then forgot (1925-76): "His most enduring hits were recorded by Elvis Presley, Aretha Franklin, the Rolling Stones and the Grateful Dead. But his own career faded from view." I'd question who (beyond the NYT) forgot him. The year after he died, GNP/Crescendo released The Best of Jimmy Reed, which Robert Santelli ranked 11 of the best 100 blues albums ever. I have it and two later best-ofs (a Rhino from 2000, and Shout! Factory from 2007) as full A albums (all three focus on 1953-63), and a 6-CD box of The Vee-Jay Years (1994), as well as a compilation of his 1966-71 Paula records, just a notch behind.

[*] More typical are entries like: Frances B Johnston (photographer), Ruth Polsky (NYC music booker), Louise Blanchard Bethune (architect in Buffalo), Kim Hak-soon (who exposed Japan's "comfort women" program), and Remedios Varo (Spanish painter).

Current count: 400 links, 26903 words (33369 total)

Ask a question, or send a comment.

Saturday, February 21, 2026

February archive (in progress).

Music: Current count 45565 [45523] rated (+42), 27 [29] unrated (-2).

The usual plan is to publish Music Week on Mondays (often late). It shouldn't matter how many records I have reviewed. Most weeks I come up with about 30 albums. Last time I came up short with 5. I had been hobbled by a cold, and was way down in mid-winter dumps. A week later (Monday, Feb. 16) I felt even less like publishing, but had started to write up some albums. My main boost was from Robert Christgau's February 2026 Consumer Guide, which came out on the 11th. I also, for the first time this year, started to play new albums from my demo queue. I was running thin on 2025 albums, and it was just easier to go with what I had sitting around. By mid-week, I was starting to feel like I had enough to go with. I did the cut over Friday morning, but didn't start writing this introduction until today.

The reason for the delay is that I wanted to answer a couple of questions. One was about my relationship to Christgau, and how we differ in taste. The other was about all my bitching since . . . well, there's no clear cut starting date (unless you want to blame the world, in which case 2024-11-08 is an obvious candidate, and 2023-09-07 another). But as an engineer, I know that catastrophic ruptures are always preceded by stress fractures, and I've been attuned to those particular ones for a long time now. My disappointment and dismay isn't just because they happened, but because they had seemed so totally foreordained, and because the people we trusted to solve our problems have been so clueless for so long.

I don't have much in the way of future plans. I do have enough Loose Tabs for a post, so that will be next, Music Week will be pushed back until I have that squared away. I haven't found any time to work on Notes on Everyday Life letters. I have several ideas, but just haven't been able to concentrate. I organized some book outline materials for a dinner a week or two ago, but haven't followed up on that. The best I can say is that I keep reading, thinking.

After several lean weeks, a lot of good records this time around. Thomas Anderson, Grant Peeples, and Tommy Womack were my initial finds from the Christgau Consumer Guide, and I wound up looking into Peeples' back catalog. The extra day gave me a chance to reevaluate Zach Bryan and Nandipha808, so I nudged them over the line as well. Phil Overeem suggested Mark Lomax II and Ren, as well as several others. I've done a bit of extra work on the EOY Aggregate, which pointed me at a couple more albums (most notably Gasper Nali). Tomeka Reid came from my demo queue (also in Overeem). I noticed that Spotify has most of the old Yazoo blues compilations, so I started looking for a few I had noted but missed.

Not clear how much effort I'm going to put into finding new stuff going forward, but I do expect to continue reviewing whatever comes my way. (By the way, I have a couple recent shipments not yet logged in "Unpacking.") Still, old habits are hard to break, so my guess is that future Music Weeks will be more like this one than than the last one. But they probably won't sync up to Mondays for a while. And I'm way behind on bookkeeping work, which will continue to lag.

New records reviewed this week:

Idris Ackamoor Ankhestra/Rhodessa Jones/Danny Glover: Artistic Being (2024 [2025], Strut): Originally Bruce Baker, from Chicago, plays alto sax, several albums since 1973, mostly with an Afrocentric group he called the Pyramids. He leads a 14-piece group here, joined by spoken word poets — Jones recorded with him in 1985, Glover is the famous actor. B+(*) [sp]

Thomas Anderson: Letters From the Hermit Kingdom (2026, Out There): Singer-songwriter from Oklahoma, debut 1988, Spotify says he gets 61 plays monthly, which is dishearteningly low for a guy with a dozen-plus albums worth your attention. This is another one, done a bit lighter than usual. A- [sp]

Eric Bibb: One Mississippi (2026, Repute): Blues singer-songwriter, started in the 1970s, has been a reliable producer of easy-going, engaging albums since 1997. B+(**) [sp]

Zach Bryan: With Heaven on Top (2026, Belting Bronco/Warner): Country singer-songwriter, sixth album since 2019, bestsellers since his 2022 breakthrough, runs 25 songs, 78:16. Clearly a prodigious talent. I'm not sure he's worth the trouble, but also not sure he isn't (and note that I've underrated his records before). [PS: Gave this another play, and bumped this up a bit. One line that struck me was "but what if I don't want children, to grow up like their father."] A- [sp]

Buck 65: Do Not Bend (2026, Handsmade): Rapper/beatmaker Richard Terfly, from Nova Scotia, seems to be in Toronto these days, called his 1988-96 juvenilia compilation Weirdo Magnet, has released many albums since, with a 2014-22 break, but he's been superb ever since. Short one (14 tracks, 26:43), snappy but not all that exceptional. Noted: "I don't like this universe, let's move on to another one." B+(***) [bc]

Cat Clyde: Live at Rare Bird Farm: A Benefit Album for Western North Carolina (2024 [2025], Socan Canada): Folkie singer-songwriter from Canada, half-dozen albums since 2017, had an attachment to Appalachia, explored here following her tour of hurricane wreckage. B+(**) [bc]

Michael Dease With the MSU Jazz Trombones: Spartan Strong (2024 [2026], Origin): Trombonist, has twenty-some albums since 2007, teaches at Michigan State, rounded up a couple dozen students here, backed by piano-bass-drums, with guest spots for Benny Benack III (vocals) and Sharel Cassity (alto sax), one track each. Rather fun, but can wear thin. B+(**) [cd]

Dry Cleaning: Secret Love (2025, 4AD): English group, Florence Shaw spoken lyrics over a vaguely post-punk hum and strum, attractive as far as it goes. B+(***) [sp]

EsDeeKid: Rebel (2025, Lizzy/XV): UK rapper, first album, wears a mask but compositions are credited to Harley Riecansky. Sharp, goes fast through eleven songs, 20:50. B+(*) [sp]

Michael Hampton: Into the Public Domain (2025, Sound Mind): Funkadelic guitarist, sometimes appeared as "Kidd Funkadelic," secure slot in Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, but limited discography under his own name, with a 1998 album in Japan and a collection of P-Funk Guitar Riffs for DJ's. Instrumental album, some nifty guitar pyrotechnics. B+(**) [sp]

Haley Heynderickx/Max García Conover: What of Our Nature (2025, Fat Possum): Folkie singer-songwriters from Portland, each with a couple of previous solo albums, second album together, reading and thinking about Woody Guthrie here, partly to up their political game. One line I noted, about "brilliant minds to to college, just to study marketing." More here worth quoting, and probably more I missed. (Like: "The terrorists look like my mother, and do most of the same kind of stuff.") B+(***) [sp]

Jackzebra: Hunched Jack Mixtape (2025, Surf Gang): Chinese plugg rapper, Zhang Zhengkai, from Chengdu, has a couple previous albums. B [sp]

Liquid Mike: Hell Is an Airport (2025, AWAL): Indie rock group from Marquette, in Michigan's Upper Peninsula, principally singer-songwriter Mike Maple, sixth album since 2021. Fourteen songs, 27:20. B+(*) [sp]

Mark Lomax II & the Urban Art Ensemble: The Unity Suite (2025 [2026], CFG Multimedia): Drummer, based in Columbus, Ohio, has a remarkable run of album since 1999, not least thanks to powerhouse tenor saxophonist Edwin Bayard, but has been little noticed — I initially noticed his 2010 album The State of Black America, which may have been the only album of his to get any promotion at all. Here he expands beyond his usual trio (with Dean Hullett on bass) and quartet (add William Menefield on piano) to include trumpet (Kenyatta Beasley) and alto sax (Rob Dixon). Sometimes sounds (perhaps a bit too much) like the second coming of Saint John Coltrane. A- [os]

Michael Moody: The Ecstasy of Love (2025 [2026], self-released): Standards singer, based in New York, has a couple of previous albums, this one fairly minimalist with just guitar (Paul Bollenback) and bass (Neil "Sugar Caine"). Starts not bad, but pretty useless. Ends with "Old Rugged Cross," a mistake B- [cd] [03-20]

Gasper Nali: Chule Chule Iwe (2025, Spare Dog): From Malawi, has a couple previous albums, plays a babatoni ("a 3 meter, one-stringed home-made bass guitar - with an empty bottle and a stick"), although there's more to the band, and vocals. One reviewer I've seen calls it unique, but for me it's reminiscent of the classic township jive that spread in exile to Zimbabwe and Zambia — I'm thinking especially of Mzwakhe Mbuli. A- [sp]

Nandipha808: No Vocal Album (2025, Stena Academy): South African amapiano album, 20 songs, 130 minutes. Nice array of beats, with minimal chants. Hype suggested this would blow me away, but reality is pretty subtle, something that just sneaks up on you. Looks like he has a lot of recent back catalog to consider. A- [sp]

Grant Peeples: Code to Live By (2025, Ping): Singer-songwriter from Florida, dozen or so albums since 2008, I've only heard a couple of them, but he's overdue for a Wikipedia page, and maybe some catalog research. Christgau dubbed this "the most explicitly leftist album I've come across in far too long" based largely on his spoken word screed "The Ledger." I demurred a bit over the Putin reference, but adding "kleptocrat" and the state "operating like a Mafia syndicate" to "the stink of tyranny" was too much to argue with. Besides, he already hooked me with the sharpest song I've heard lately on the "Sunshine State." And he adds some nice sax behind his second spoken word rant, where among much more he notes that "if you feed a poor man, a Fascist is going to call you a Marxist." A- [sp]

Kojey Radical: Don't Look Down (2025, Warner/Asylum/Bellyempty): London-born British rapper, parents from Ghana, original name Kwadwo Abu Genfi Amponsah, fourth album since 2014. B+(**) [sp]

The Tomeka Reid Quartet: Dance! Skip! Hop! (2025 [2026], Out of Your Head): Cellist, grew up around DC, made her name in Chicago, connected with AACM, worked extensively with Nicole Mitchell and Mike Reed, also with Anthony Braxton and his students, released several impressive albums as leader, ultimately winning a MacArthur in 2022. Quartet here with Jason Roebke (bass), Tomas Fujiwara (drums), and Mary Halvorson (guitar): the latter's power runs first got my attention, but the more intricate segments hold up equally well. A- [cd]

Ren: Vincent's Tale (2026, Freckled Angels/Rebel Creator Services): Welsh singer-songwriter, often raps, last name Gill, his struggle with Lyme Disease led to his remarkable 2023 album Sick Boi. This short album (11 songs, 25:38) is only slightly less remarkable, with two interleaved tales, words that hit hard, beats too. ("Democracy isn't choosing between herpes and chlamydia.") A- [bc]

Ben Rosenblum Nebula Project: The Longest Way Round (2025 [2026], One Trick Dog): Pianist, also plays accordion, nothing much on Discogs although I have two previous Nebula Project albums in my database. Fancy postbop, the accordion picking up folk signals and whipping them into a frenzy. B+(***) [cd] [02-27]

Sault: Chapter 1 (2026, Forever Living Originals): London-based funk collective, many confusingly titled (or "untitled") albums since 2019, this their 13th. When they first impressed me, they seemed like the second coming of Chic. That comparison seemed to have passed, but this rekindles it somewhat. B+(**) [bc]

Slut Intent: Slutworld (2026, self-released, EP): Minneapolis hardcore group, Katy Kelly the singer, one of several lyricists, backed by two guitars, bass, and drums. Nine hard hitting songs, 18:11. B+(*) [bc]

Time Cow: Scaring 1100 Chickens to Death (2025, Kullijhan): Jamaican dancehall producer Jordan Chung, could count as his first album, although there are EPs, mixtapes, possibly other aliases. B+(*) [sp]

Eri Yamamoto/Matthew Shipp: Horizon (2025, Mahakala Music): Piano duets, the former moved from Japan to New York in 1995, working extensively with William Parker. She wrote the songs here, so Shipp, who started in the 1980s, again often working with Parker, is just here to help out. B+(**) [bc]

Recent reissues, compilations, and vault discoveries:

Dub Syndicate: Obscured by Version (1989-96 [2025], On-U Sound): British dub producer Adrian Sherwood, formed this group in 1982 with Style Scott (d. 2014). A collection of remixes from what they reckon was the band's "classic period." This does seem perfect for their limited take. B+(***) [sp]

Doug MacDonald Trio: Live in Beverly Hills (2012 [2026], DMAC Music): Jazz guitarist, albums go back to 1981, pulled this trio with Lou Shoch (bass, plus a vocal) and Billy Paul (drums) off the shelf. Two original pieces, plus standards from Luis Bonfa to Louis Jordan to Jerome Kern. B+(**) [cd]

Paul Ricci: The Path (1996-2021 [2026], Origin): Guitarist, has some side credits back to 1995, mostly Brazilian. This seems to be his first album, drawing on sessions from 1996-97, completed in 2021, so he has a long list of scattered musicians to credit. Notable vocal by Abdoulaye Diabate. B+(**) [cd]

Old music:

Bo Carter: Banana in Your Fruit Basket: Red Hot Blues, 1931-1936 (1931-36 [1991], Yazoo): Mississippi bluesman Armenter Chatmon (1894-1964), first recorded 1928 (he did the original "Corrine, Corrina"), recorded 110 sides. Yazoo's third LP compilation, appearing in 1979 following Greatest Hits (1968) and Twist It Babe (1972), many double entendres. B+(**) [sp]

Bo Carter: Twist It Babe 1931-1940 (1931-40 [1992], Yazoo): Fourteen more songs, released in 1973 after Greatest Hits in 1969 (which I still haven't heard). B+(**) [sp]

Nanook: Ilutsinniit Apuussilluta (2022, Atlantic Music): Group from Greenland, fifth album, first ever recorded in Nuuk, with "wellknown produer Theodor Kapnas from The Faroe Islands." Sounds somewhat prog, or maybe just MOR, except in a language I can't begin to fathom, but has some appeal. B+(*) [sp]

Grant Peeples: It's Later Than You Think (2008, self-released): Folkie singer-songwriter, first album, starts with the touching, fiddle-enhanced "Pitiful Little Town," includes a couple of "talking blues," one a political rant alled "Patriot Act . . . for Dave Hickey" that is even more timely today. Also, that song that so impressed me on the new album, "Sunshine State," turns out to have originated here. A- [sp]

Grant Peeples: Pawnshop (2009, GatorBone): Second album, builds slowly, saving "Jesus Was a Revolutionary" for the end ("and he pissed off the rich with things that he said"). B+(***) [sp]

Grant Peeples: Okra and Ecclesiastes (2011, GatorBone): Third album, good title, which pops up in a song called "My People Come From the Dirt." B+(**) [sp]

Grant Peeples: Prior Convictions (2012, GatorBone): Fourth album, produced by Gurf Morlix, features a duet with Ruthie Foster on a Dylan song, followed by a new version of "Patriot Act (For Dave Hickey)." "Digital Edition" (on Spotify) drops one song, "Nigger Lover," which refers to one (actually several) names he had been called. B+(**) [bc]

Grant Peeples and the Peeples Republik: Punishing the Myth (2014, GatorBone): Produced by Gurf Morlix, with enough of a regular band for a co-credit, featuring duets with Sara Mac on two tracks. Good as they are, also consider their Live at Mockingbird. B+(***) [sp]

Sarah Mac and Grant Peeples: Live at Mockingbird (2013, self-released): Duets, her given name McElhaney, seems to be her only album (she also has two guest spots on Peeples' 2014 album), mostly his songs with a couple covers but the opener, "I'm Not Scared," seems to be hers: "I'm not scared of anything but falling in love and wasting away" which changes to "but dying and being lonely." Ends with a bitter song about his craft: "all you want to do is make a name for yourself, sucking up to owners and promoters, could it be any god if it's something you sell?" A- [bc]

Grant Peeples: A Congress of Treasons (2016, Gatorbone): Another album, more spoken word, more duets, more stuff that largely escaped my grasp. B+(*) [sp]

The Roots of Rap: Classic Recordings from the 1920's and 30's (1926-36 [1996], Yazoo): Not really, but easy enough to assemble a collection of little noticed r&b records that are more talked than sung, some flirting with the notion of jive. B+(***) [sp]

Charlie Spand: Dreaming the Blues: The Best of Charlie Spand (1929-31 [2002], Yazoo): Barrelhouse pianist, blues singer-songwriter, recorded 22 songs 1929-31, 8 more in 1940. This collects all the songs from the earlier sets. (He repeated some titles in 1940, so it is possible that some slipped in, but seems unlikely.) B+(**) [sp]

St. Louis Town 1927-1932 (1927-32 [1991], Yazoo): Fourteen tracks from obscure eight St. Louis bluesmen: one each from Jim Jackson, Henry Spaulding, Joe Stone, and Henry Townsend; two from Hi Henry Brown, Teddy Darby, and Jelly Jaw Short; and four from Charley Jordan. (Townsend had a notable second act in the 1960s, as did J.D. Short; Jackson I think of as a Memphis guy, but he got in here with a twist on "St. Louis Blues"; Jordan was the most prolific, with three volumes on Document, and two 2-CD comps.) B+(**) [sp]

Grade (or other) changes:

Tommy Womack: Live a Little (2025, Schoolkids): Singer-songwriter from Kentucky, long based on Nashville, ninth album since 1998, good ones, some exceptional. Just needed an extra play. [was: B+(***)] A- [sp]

Unpacking: Found in the mail last week:

• Joshua Achiron: Climbing (Calligram) [03-06]
• Daggerboard: The Skipper and Mike Clark (Wide Hive) [03-06]
• Andy Haas: In Praise of Insomnia (Resonant Music) []
• Peter Furlan: The Peter Furlan Project Live at Maureen's Jazz Cellar (Beany Bops) [01-26]
• Chris Madsen/Dana Hall/Clark Sommers: Threefold (Calligram) [03-06]
• Karen Stachel, Norbert Stachel & LehCats: Live @ the Breakroom With Giovanni Hidalgo (Purple Room Productions, 2CD): [03-20]

Ask a question, or send a comment.

Monday, February 9, 2026

February archive (in progress).

Music: Current count 45523 [45518] rated (+5), 29 [27] unrated (+2).

It was tempting to simply declare "No Music Week" this week, but just as easy to show you what I have. It's virtually nothing, which is about the only point I have to make. I've had a very rough January. While the weather has gotten markedly better the last couple days, I'm still struggling. I've been hobbled by a cold, which is showing no signs of clearing up. But on top of all the other disappointments, I've felt like doing nothing, constructive or otherwise. I've been logging incoming music, but I've only been playing old music, moving beyond the well-worn travel cases to pick out oldies I haven't heard in years. I could see doing that for years to come. I'm not seeing much reason for doing anything else. I still plan to listen to, and write about, everything that actually comes in, but I'm in no hurry.

I do feel bad about never properly wrapping up the 20th Annual Francis Davis Jazz Critics Poll. I had every intention of adding a dozen or more comments to the published essays. I also knew that I had a fair amount of website work to do, especially at top level. I update the website piecemeal, which makes it harder to keep everything in sync. I have, for instance, made some local changes in the annual sections that haven't been propagated. I was still shocked to look at it today and find the top almost totally devoid of mention of the 2025 poll. I made some quick repairs today, and updated. I also killed off the forwarders for "25votes" and "25comments": the idea behind them was to be able to shut them down as they get spammed. I've been getting troubling reports about the latter, it what is pretty clearly some kind of scam.

I have no concrete plans about the poll moving forward. While most of the participants this year were pleased to see it still active, and many were quite flattering in their thanks for my work, I have serious doubts about my ability to keep it going. Still, at present the big problem is my almost total lack of energy or enthusiasm, which applies to pretty much every other aspect of my life. I finished January with only one Substack post. I have 90 subscribers, which is +9 since 2025-11-13. I have 134 followers on Bluesky. Sure, my bad for not posting more often. (And maybe for not using their apps? I've never gotten the point — aside from the obvious one that they want to own your phone.)

The only plan I do have this week is to re-open the "weird" book file. I've been reading books on the growing madness on the right, most recently Paul Heideman's Rogue Elephant and John Ganz's When the Clock Broke, and I've ordered Laura K Field's Furious Minds and Paul Starr's American Contradiction. Field's book is about the so-called "MAGA intellectuals," who are trying to derive a coherent political philosophy out of the movement's mass of irritable mental gestures. Starr is offering a broader history which goes back to the 1950s, which aligns it perfectly with my memories.

I've read much more along these lines. The one book I was most impressed by was Kurt Andersen's Evil Geniuses: The Unmaking of America. In the introduction to the latter book (2020), Andersen wrote:

I'd noticed that in so many ways, as Stephen Colbert joked on the first episode of his old nightly show, America had become increasingly "divided between those who think with their head and those who know with their heart." From the 1960s and '70s on, I realized, America had really changed in this regard. Belief in every sort of make-believe had spun out of control — in religion, science, politics, and lifestyle, all of them merging with entertainment in what I called the fantasy-industrial complex. In that book, I explained the deep, centuries-long history of this American knack for creating and believing the excitingly untrue. As soon as I finished writing Fantasyland, we elected a president who was the single most florid and consequential expression ever, a poster boy embodying all its themes.

While this broad outline has long been obvious — back in the 1980s, I liked to tell people that the only boom industry in America was fraud, but I don't recall ever trying to explain how it came about, why it was so seductive, and how defenseless ordinary people had become to its pervasive rot. Recognizing the evil geniuses is only one part of the battle. The other part is understanding how the Democrats had detached themselves from the left and its principles, and how the left had disconnected from the majority of the people. I hope to make some small contribution to better understanding the democratic fumbles. I could add some suggestions on how to fix it, but doesn't everyone claim that?

It's not even midnight, and I'm too tired to write any more. So I might as well let it be. Writing about music is so much a part of my routine I doubt I'll stop anytime soon. I suppose I should note that lacking any new A- records this week, I picked up covers of two better compilations I reviewed way back: Kokomo Arnold: Original Kokomo Blues 1934-1938 ([1998], EPM/Blues Collection); and Shave 'Em Dry: The Best of Lucille Bogan (1933-35 [2004], Columbia/Legacy).

PS: I watched the Super Bowl, for the first time in probably 30 years. (Laura usually tunes in for the hyped half-time shows, but never learned to follow the game. I watched the first dozen Super Bowls, and was an AFL fan back when that made a difference, but it's been decades since I had any interest in the sport, the business, or the spectacle.) The game itself was easy enough to follow. Both offenses seemed inept compared by my memories, but I learned early on (thanks to Alex Karras) to focus on the line play, and both sides put on tremendous pass rush pressure. The secondaries also seemed exceptional, with New England's Christian Gonzalez singled out for praise, but that was largely because Seattle's quarterback was the more accurate passer. New England's Drake Maye struggled all game long. Nothing here is likely to bring me back to watch more, but I felt like doing nothing for the day, and the game was good for that. But I'm left with the sense that football is sinking into pure gladiatorialism.

Aside from the game, the big points were the half-time show, and the commercials. I have nothing to say about Bad Bunny, but I'll look into the political reaction and see if I can make any sense of that. For what little it's worth, I've heard six of his albums, enjoying them enough for various shades of B+, but nothing higher. I don't doubt that he's earned his stardom, but much of it (and not just the language) sails right past me. I didn't get the symbolism or iconography. As for the commercials, I found them rather disturbing, but there was so much happening so fast that I never got a handle on it. Again, a subject for further research. If I understand the AI pitches correctly, they say we'll be able to get all of our work done instantly, spending the rest of our (still employed?) time at the beach. I doubt it's going to work out like that.

New records reviewed this week:

Al Green: To Love Somebody (2026, Fat Possum, EP): Classic, near-perfect string of hit albums from 1971 (Gets Next to You) through 1978 (The Belle Album), gospel with some exceptions from then up to 2008. Four covers (16:40): title from Bee Gees, closer from R.E.M., two Lou Reed in the middle ("Perfect Day" the single, with Raye). B+(**) [sp]

Recent reissues, compilations, and vault discoveries:

None.

Old music:

Lucille Bogan/Walter Roland: (1927-1935) (1927-35 [1992], Yazoo): Classic female blues singer (1897-1948), original name Lucille Anderson, married a Bogan in 1914, later divorced him, also released songs as Bessie Jackson, the name that appears on the earliest Yazoo LP of this material (1969). Vocals divided here, with Roland playing piano or guitar, but sometimes others. Bogan's best-known songs are missing. B+(**) [sp]

CeDell Davis: Feel Like Doin' Something Wrong (1993 [1994], Fat Possum): Blues guitarist-singer-songwriter (1926-2017), from Arkansas, developed a distinctive variation on slide guitar after polio, active since 1953, but it wasn't until 1993 when this first album was released (on Demon in UK; picked up by Fat Possum in US B+(***) [sp]

CeDell Davis: The Best of CeDell Davis (1994, Fat Possum): Actually a new session, backed by Col. Bruce Hampton and the Aquarium Rescue Unit, but they may have guessed that a newly discovered bluesman well into his 60s could sell a back story. B+(**) [sp]

Casey Bill Weldon/Kokomo Arnold: Bottleneck Guitar Trendsetters of the 1930's (1927-38 [1992], Yazoo): Seven tracks by each, although either could have filled a compilation: Blues Collection has a CD by each, Classic Blues as 2-CD sets, and Document has 3-4 CDs of completism, nearly all from 1934-38. They're pretty easy to tell apart, with Weldon the more genteel songster, Arnold with a darker disposition. Both have disputed birth dates (per Wikipedia), and both quit in 1938. I'm not sure that the balance particularly works (although originally intended for separate LP sides), but both could merit further research. B+(***) [sp]

Ask a question, or send a comment.

Friday, January 31, 2025

January archive (in progress).

Music: Current count 45518 [45484] rated (+34), 27 [23] unrated (+4).

I lost my mind last night. The closest I can come to a rational explanation is that a fairly ordinary cold disrupted my schedule, and I lost all sense of time. I went to bed early, perhaps just looking for warmth, and fell asleep. I slept poorly. Laura, for whom sleeping is always difficult, expressed concern, which I had trouble processing. I woke up once, expecting it to be morning, and found the world outside unaccountably dark gray. A couple hours later, the clock registered 2:30, which I decided was enough sleep. I came downstairs, found it dark outside, noticed that I missed last night's pills. I had some breakfast, and only later I noticed that the computer clock was registering 3AM. I worked on some stuff until 6AM, then figured I might as well try bed again. I slept until noon, fitfully, but I logged over nine hours. This time when I awoke it was bright and sunny, and had warmed from 16 to 32F (and later to 40).

Yesterday I started writing up a Substack post, mindful that if I didn't send another one out by the end of January my monthly stats would be wretched. I got about one paragraph into it, something about the inexorability of time, although the main subject was to be home cooking. I failed, and now in terms of monthly stats, no rush. I've signed up for a half-dozen Substacks recently, which is starting to give me a fair sampling of strategies. Michael Steinman is putting out a short piece on most days. Chuck Eddy may be even more prolific, but all I receive in the mail is a weekly index of things only his paid subscribers can read. Allen Lowe has been more erratic lately: maybe he figures he's done enough baiting and time has come to switch. Dan Weiss is the only one who has comped me a paid subscription, so I'm seeing everything there, and enjoying most of it. (I rarely bother with the interviews, but Peter Stampfel is exceptional.)

I've been ambivalent about when I would post another Music Week. I wasn't ready to write off January even though it was soon enough done with me. But in my dilapidated state, I figured this is exactly the sort of brainless busy work I could handle. The hard work, which is the reviews, are already done, and while the week is short they're still of respectable quantity. No A-list albums, which is unusual but not unheard of. (I rechecked a couple albums later, and promoted one.) Besides, it clears the deck for a fresh start in February.

Every year, I expect to recalibrate and possibly change direction. Usually, I'm thinking about focusing more on non-music writing. Before I took ill, I spent a week trying to catch up with the news, writing up 34,000 words in Loose Tabs. I found that easy and satisfying to write, although I have little evidence that anyone else got anything out of it. But feeling as I do, I don't much care. As far as I'm concerned, it could all grind to a halt.

New records reviewed this week:

Justin Bieber: Swag (2025, Def Jam): Canadian pop singer-songwriter, much-hyped debut sold millions in 2010 (when he was 16), sales have trailed off but this 7th album still went platinum, US chart peak at 2 (his first to miss the top spot). He has never gotten critical respect: I've only heard one previous album, and didn't bother with this until it appeared as the only album in the Grammy Album of the Year list I hadn't heard. Played it once. Didn't notice much, but seems like a fairly typical piece of contemporary high-budget popcraft. B [sp]

Justin Bieber: Swag II (2025, Def Jam): Counted as his eighth studio album, for 23 new songs, but CD and digital also packaged with the 21-track Swag. Adds nothing much. B- [sp]

Caitlin Cannon: Love Addict (2025, self-released): Country singer-songwriter, second album. Rather torchy. B+(*) [sp]

Cardiacs: LSD (2025, The Alphabet Business Concern): English prog rock band, formed as Cardiac Arrest in 1977 by brothers Tim and Jim Smith, produced a demo in 1977 and a cassette in 1981, five albums 1988-99, released some new material in 2007, but disbanded after songwriter Tim Smith suffered a stroke in 2008. He eventually recovered enough to work on a new album, LSD, before he died in 2020. This is supposedly that, built around 2007 recordings with Tim Smith credited with guitar and keyboards on all tracks, vocals on five, bass on "some tracks." Fast, fanciful, "psychedelic" if you must, lost (80:11), not quite awful but certainly exhausting. C+ [sp]

The Castellows: A Little Goes a Long Way (2024, Warner Music Nashvile, EP): Country sisters act, last name Balkcom, Lily the lead singer (guitar, bass, harmonica), with backing vocals from Eleanor (guitar, piano) and Powell (banjo). First EP after a couple singles: 7 songs, 22:14, several memorable. B+(***) [sp]

The Castellows: Homecoming (2025, Warner Music Nashville, EP): Second EP, 7 more songs, less memorable, but they're still pretty appealing. B+(**) [sp]

Brittany Davis/Evan Flory-Barnes/D'Vonne Lewis: Black Thunder (2025, Loosegroove): Singer, plays keyboards, second album, an improv thing backed by bass and drums. B+(***) [sp]

For Living Lovers: Natural Name (2024 [2025], Sunnyside): Duo of Brandon Ross (guitar) and Stomu Takeishi (bass guitar), both playing acoustic, second album together. B+(*) [sp]

For Those I Love: Carving the Stone (2025, September): Irish spoken word artist David Balfe, second album, holds up musically so well I find myself letting the words slip past. B+(***) [sp]

Fust: Big Ugly (2025, Dear Life): Alt-country band from Durham, North Carolina, third album, lots of fiddle. B+(*) [sp]

Vinny Golia/Ken Filiano/Michael TA Thompson: Catastasis (2025, Nine Winds): "Multi-reed virtuoso" ("piccolo, C-flute, Bb clarinte, sopranino, soprano, alto and tenor saxophones"), many albums since 1977, backed by bass and drums, with three set-sized pieces (115:38). B+(**) [bc]

Vinny Golia Quintet: Can You Outrun Them? (2024, Nine Winds): Plays four saxophones and alto flute. Opens with strong trumpet from Kris Tiner, and the pianist (Cathlene Pineda) is impressive throughout. Also with bass (Miller Wrenn) and drums (Clint Dodson). B+(***) [bc]

The Vinny Golia Quintet: Out for Blood (2025, Nine Winds): Golia plays four saxophones, panpipes and shakuhachi. Different quintet, although these are names more likely to have previous quintet albums: Michael Vlatkovich (trombone), Wayne Peet (piano), Ken Filiano (bass), and Alex Cline (drums). B+(*) [bc]

Buddy Guy: Ain't Done With the Blues 2025, Silvertone/RCA): Old-timer, left Louisiana for Chicago in the 1960s, quickly established himself as a guitar virtuoso, especially when accompanying Junior Wells (1934-98). He's recorded plenty on his own, and is still going strong at 90. B+(***) [sp]

Kat Hasty: Time of Your Life (2025, Jackie Java/Thirty Tigers): Country singer-songwriter, from West Texas, first album, after some singles (and a compilation). B+(**) [sp]

Hvalfugl: Bag Vore Øjne Strømmer Drømme Sagte Forbi (2025, self-released): Danish trio, "Scandinavian folk meets tranquil Nordic jazz," fourth album since 2018, with keyboards (Jonathan Fjord Bredholt), guitar (Jeppe Lavsen), and bass (Anders Juel Bomholt), plus many guests, extra long (25 songs, 81 minutes). B+(*) [sp]

Keefe Jackson/Jakob Heinemann/Adam Shead: Stinger (2023 [2025], Irritable Mystic): Tenor sax/bass clarinet, bass, and drums, from two live sets in Chicago. B+(**) [bc]

K. Curtis Lyle/Alex Cunningham: Quantum Nursery Rhymes of the Divine Horseman (2025, Storm Cellar): Spoken word artist, a founder of the Watts Writers Workshop, recorded an album in 1971, appeared on a couple more, but didn't return as leader until 2024, and now has two more albums. This has two long pieces (15:19 + 40:21), backed by violin, for better or worse. B+(**) [bc]

Miffle: Goodbye, World (self-released): Tape loops and sound collage, out of Warsaw, first album. B+(*) [sp]

Kelly Moran: Don't Trust Mirrors (2025, Warp): Originally a pianist, seven albums since 2010, last three on this electronica-oriented label, but genre is unclear: Discogs offers "electronic, classical" and "experimental, modern classical," while Wikipedia throws in jazz, dream pop, and black metal. Piano sounds prepared at first, mixes with electronics, wanders around fourth world territory, winds up in ambient (a bit of a letdown). B+(***) [sp]

Mehmet Polat Quartet: Roots in Motion (2025, Aftab): Turkish "ud" player (think of an oud with two extra bass strings), based in Amsterdam, several albums since 2014, this a quartet with piano (Franz von Chossy), bass (Daniel van Huffelen), and drums (Martin Hafizi). B+(**) [bc]

Cleo Reed: Cuntry (2025, self-released): Singer-songwriter, based in New York, studied at Berklee, second album, hard to speak of any genre. B+(*) [sp]

Jane Remover: Revengeseekerz (2025, DeadAir): Chicago hyperpop producer, latest (since 2021) of a series of aliases going back to Leroy in 2011. A lot of intense clanking, although that's not always such a bad thing. B+(*) [sp]

Rio Da Yung OG: F.L.I.N.T. (Feeling Like I'm Not Through) (2025, MINE Enertainment/Empire): Detroit rapper, hit the ground running with five albums in 2019, second this year, missed a couple years in between (prison?). Aging fast. B+(***) [sp]

Sharp Pins: Balloon Balloon Balloon (2025, K/Perennial): Chicago lo-fi power pop group led by Kai Slater, who also records as Lifeguard, somewhat reminiscent of Big Star. Third album. Second was Radio DDR, which AOTY lists as a 2024 release, but Discogs has in 2025. I've made a mess of these two records in my EOY Aggregate, not that it makes much practical difference. B+(*) [sp]

Shrunken Elvis: Shrunken Elvis (2025, Western Vinyl): Nashville-based instrumental trio, first album, consists of Sean Thompson (guitars), Rich Ruth (guitar/synth/bass), and Spencer Collum (pedal steel guitar). B+(**) [sp]

They Are Gutting a Body of Water: Lotto (Julia's War/ATO): Shoegaze band from Philadelphia, started as a solo project by Douglas Dulgarian, fourth studio album since 2018. Short (10 songs, 27:49), which seems about right. B+(*) [sp]

Colter Wall: Memories and Empties (2025, La Honda): Canadian country singer-songwriter, fifth album since 2017, has an easy-going western air. B+(**) [sp]

Jennifer Walton: Daughters (2025, Local Action): British singer-songwriter, first album after a couple of EPs. Doesn't really connect. B [sp]

The Westerlies: Paradise (2025, Westerlies): New York-based brass quartet, first record (2013) a collaboration with keyboardist-composer Wayne Horvitz, fourth album since on their own (plus a couple more collaborations), retains founders Riley Mulherkar (trumpet) and Andy Clausen (trombone), picked up Chloe Rowlands (trumpet, 2019) and Addison Maye-Saxon (trombone, here). B+(**) [bc]

Lola Young: I'm Only F**king Myself (2025, Island/Day One): British singer-songwriter, third album after My Mind Wanders and Sometimes Leaves Completely and This Wasn't Meant for You Anyway, suggesting a SFFR, although my grasp of her lyrics here is so sketchy I have no idea what's tongue and what's cheek. B+(**) [sp]

Recent reissues, compilations, and vault discoveries:

The Bill Evans Trio: Moon Beams (1962 [2025], Craft): First piano trio release after Scott LaFaro's death, with Chuck Israels taking over on bass, along with Paul Motian on drums. Originals to open and close (including his first "Very Early"), along with six standards. [earlier edition was: B+] B+(***) [sp]

Lee Morgan: Here's Lee Morgan (1960 [2025], Craft): Hard bop trumpet player (1938-72), played with Art Blakey 1958-65, but led about 30 albums from 1956 on, most on Blue Note. This was a rare exception, one of two on Vee-Jay, later expanded with extra takes to make a 70:54 CD, but here cut back to its original 6 songs, 37:47. Quintet with Clifford Jordan (tenor sax), Wynton Kelly (piano), Paul Chambers (bass), and Blakey (drums). B+(**) [sp]

Lee Morgan: The Procrastinator (1967 [2025], Blue Note): Six tracks 40:29, from a sextet session with Wayne Shorter (tenor sax), Bobby Hutcherson (vibes), Herbie Hancock (piano), Ron Carter (bass), and Billy Higgins (drums) that was released in Japan under this title in 1978 (a US edition from 1978 combined this on 2-LP with another set, but the 1995 CD, as well as this latest vinyl release, just contains the one set). B+(*) [sp]

Those Poor Bastards: Songs of Desperation [20th Anniversary Edition] (2005 [2025], Tribulation): Country gothic band, from Madison, Wisconsin, first album, 13 total through 2024 (plus 7 EPs), mostly with titles like Satan Is Watching, Behold the Abyss, Inhuman Nature, and Old Time Suffering. B+(*) [sp]

Tony Williams: Civilization (1986 [2025], Blue Note): Drummer (1945-97), joined Miles Davis when he was 17, by which time he had already worked with Sam Rivers and Jackie McLean. Like Shorter and Hancock, he went on to lead a major fusion band in the 1970s, but he also anchored the Great Jazz Trio (with Hank Jones and Ron Carter), and picked up many notable side credits. Rather flashy postbop, not that interesting although Mulgrew Miller is impressive on piano. With Wallace Roney (trumpet), Billy Pierce (tenor/soprano sax), and Charnett Moffett (bass). B+(*) [sp]

Old music:

None.

Grade (or other) changes:

Danny Brown: Stardust (2025, Warp): Detroit rapper, sixth album since 2010. Hyperrap: too fast to follow, too glitzy to dismiss. [was: B+(***)] A- [sp]

Rechecked with no grade change:

Ale Hop & Titi Bakorta: Mapambazuko (2025, Nyege Nyege Tapes): Berlin-based Peruvian electronica with Congolese guitar. B+(***) [sp]

Rosalía: Lux (2025, Columbia): Coming off an album I did like, winning polls, still sounds like opera to me. B+(*) [sp]

Unpacking: Found in the mail last week:

• Michael Aadal: Aggressive Hymns, Energetic Ballads (Losen) [02-20]
• Christopher Hoffman: Rex (Out of Your Head) [01-16]
• The Tomeka Reid Quartet: Dance! Skip! Hop! (Out of Your Head) [02-13]

Ask a question, or send a comment.

Wednesday, January 28, 2026

January archive (in progress).

Music: Current count 45484 [45431] rated (+53), 23 [14] unrated (+9).

Last Music Week came out 14 days ago, on January 12. That was the day that the 20th Annual Francis Davis Jazz Critics Poll appeared, with fewer notes than I had expected. I was disappointed that I hadn't done a better job of pulling it all together, but I was also worn down, and glad to put it aside. I expected to add some more — if nothing else, in response to whatever flack the poll kicked up — but I had precious little time, or perhaps desire, to carry on.

Besides, I hadn't done one of my Loose Tabs compilations since November 24. I had stashed some 4200 words away for another column, but I had collected very little since December 1, and, well, "stuff happens." So I decided I'd take the week and fill that draft file out a bit. I have a system which serializes blog posts, so once I committed to a Loose Tabs, Music Week would have to wait. And so it did.

I finally posted Loose Tabs on January 24. By then it came up to 459 links, 31382 words. That's a lot of "stuff" that happened. I've since added a bit more, with red change bars indicating the adds. I just barely alluded to the ICE murder of Alex Pretti on Saturday. I also mentioned Trump's Davos debacle, but missed several aspects of it.

I had little trouble finding and commenting on important pieces the last two weeks, but today I find myself all but paralyzed. Music Week should be easy, given that the reviews are already written, and the introduction hardly matters.

I can say that aside from the Poll and Loose Tabs and notes on the music below, I've had to deal with three fairly big things:

1. We finally got our new roof done (or almost done). A section of flat roof that was supposed to be a reflective light gray was done up in black. As this also serves as patio flooring, the summer heat will make this painful to walk on. The roofer suggested adding a coating to change the color. I need to do some research on this. I asked for a week to look into this, but other things got in the way. That still leaves reinstalling the air conditioner and the railing, which can't be done until the surface is fixed. I also have attic work to do to make sure the new ventilation works right.

2. A cousin, Max Brown, died. He had a ranch near Douglas, southeast of Wichita, where he bred Black Angus cattle. But after his wife, Doris, died in 2022, he had increasing trouble, and spent his last couple years in a nursing home in Derby. I spent a couple days with his family, before and after the funeral. We go back a long ways.

3. Then it turned cold, with lows near zero and snow on Saturday and Sunday (during most of which it was 4-5°F). Got up to about 15°F today, and maybe 33°F tomorrow, but now they're predicting back to 0°F on Friday. In recent years, we've usually gotten one cold snap like this each year. This isn't the worst we've had, but the older I get, the more painful and debilitating cold weather becomes. I'm hurting to the point where everything I think I should be doing just opens up more pain and depression.

The cold isn't ending any time soon, but we may manage to get out to the grocery store tomorrow. The one thing I still seem to be good at is cooking. I made a pan of brownies and two batches of cookies (oatmeal-raisin, chocolate chip) for the visiting cousins. Then when the deep freeze settled in, for us I went for comfort food, making my mother's chicken & dumplings one night, and meatloaf another.

Records below are all from 2025. Probably the first batch since the poll picked up in November that's mostly non-jazz. I've done a very poor job of tending to my EOY aggregate this year, so I'm often short of things to listen to — not short of albums (which far exceed anyone's capacity) but short of names I recognize as promising. And then I'm short of time to properly digest the things I do hear. It's not a very satisfactory way of working, guaranteed to come up short both on quantity and quality.

I wrote most of this, but didn't quite get it up on Monday. Since then I've been torn, even considering the possibility of holding the whole thing back until the end of the month (as I'm not ready to open a February archive, despite next Monday falling on February 2. Actually, I'm not up to much of anything. It's possible I'll update this later when I decide to close out the month. Or I could push whatever's left over back into February. I'm reluctant to announce any plans for the coming year, as the prospects all look too glum, and I'm not sure I'm up to any of them.

New records reviewed this week:

Algernon Cadwallader: Trying Not to Have a Thought (2025, Saddle Creek): Emo band from Pennsylvania, band's namesake was first mayor of their home town, released two studio albums 2008-11, first album since they regrouped in 2023. B+(**) [sp]

ALT BLK ERA: Rave Immortal (2025, Earache): British electropop duo, sisters Nyrobi and Chaya Beckett-Messam, first album after a 2023 EP. Starts in dance pop territory, but midway starts rocking out, especially on "Come Fight Me for It" and "Rabbit Run." A- [sp]

Leon Anderson: Live at Snug Harbor (2023 [2025], Outside In Music): Drummer, from Louisiana, teaches at Florida State, has some side credits back to 1998 but first album, a hard bop quintet with John Michael Bradford (trumpet), Ricardo Pascal (sax), Oscar Rossignoli (piano), and Rodney Jordan (bass). Nothing here that Art Blakey couldn't have done 60 years ago, but a pretty lively example of that era, with an enthusiastic crowd, is impossible to resist. B+(**) [sp]

Sonya Belaya: Dacha (2025, Ropeadope): First-generation Russian-American pianist/singer, based in Brooklyn, first album, after side credits with Lesley Mok and David Leon. A song cycle, presumably in Russian, "rooted in themes of loss, cultural memory, and resilience, drawing from Soviet feminist poetry, bard traditions, and Eastern European folk songs." Most of that is lost on me, but the music is haunting. B+(**) [bc]

Blawan: SickElixir (2025, XL): British DJ Jamie Roberts, based in Berlin, second album, after lots of EPs going back to 2011. Terms like "post-dubstep" and "industrial techno" crop up. B+(*) [sp]

The Bug: Implosion (2025, Pressure): British dubstep producer Kevin Martin, early projects included GOD (1991-94), Techno Animal (1991-2001), and Ice (1993-99), has 10+ albums and many singles as the Bug since 1997. Fairly minimal. B+(*) [sp]

Laura De Jongh: Fundus (2025, Klankhaven, EP): Belgian harpist, solo, 7 tracks, 24:55, "rooted in the strict, classical formation," "seeks a balance between the natural acoustics of her instrument and the amplified, distorted sound." B+(*) [sp]

Olivia Dean: The Art of Loving (2025, Capitol/Polydor): British pop/r&b singer-songwriter, second album. B+(*) [sp]

Deftones: Private Music (2025, Reprise): Alt-metal (or shoegaze?) band from Sacramento, 10th studio album since 1995, first seven albums sold well enough to collect some kind of metal, last three have charted about as well (2-5-5 in US, 5-5-2 in UK, similar elsewhere). Seemed tolerable to start, but albums like this turn into endurance tests. By the time I got to the last cut, for lack of anything more interesting to say, I added up the Spotify track plays and came up with 168 million, which is 168 million more than the next album I queued up (just using the millions; add the thousands together and the latter barely topped 1 million, but Deftones would probably pick up at least that much). B- [sp]

DJ K: Radio Libertadora! (2025, Nyege Nyege Tapes): Brazilian funk producer Kaique Vieira, second album on Uganda's farthest reaching label. "In his bruxaria universe, the beats are hard, vocals are screamed and bass is explosive, creating an overwhelming, apocalyptic sound." I'd say hyperkinetic, possibly too much, but I'm sure that's the point. B+(**) [sp]

DJ Love/DJ Danz/DJ Ericnem: Budots World: 3-Hit Combo! (2025, Eastern Margins): Budots is a electronic dance music style ("slacker" in Bisaya), originating in the Philippines (Davao City). None of these three have Discogs entries I can find (DJ Love also seems to go as Sherwin Tuna, but no joy there either). They split the songs 5/4/4. A- [sp]

Florence + the Machine: Everybody Scream (2025, Polydor/Republic): British singer-songwriter Florence Welch, sixth group album since 2009, two more long-term members of the band (Isabella Summers, Robert Ackroyd) but her principal co-writers are "additional musicians" Mark Bowen and Aaron Dessner. This sees pretty solid. B+(*) [sp]

Alex G: Headlights (2025, RCA): Singer-songwriter Alex Giannascoli, from Pennsylvania, tenth album since 2011, slightly skewed approach to songs reminds some people of Pavement, a comparison that would carry more weight if he had any songs I liked. B- [sp]

Alison Goldfrapp: Flux (2025, A.G.): British electropop singer, previously the namesake for the duo Goldfrapp (7 albums 2000-17), second solo album. B+(**) [sp]

Saya Gray: Saya (2025, Dirty Hit): Canadian pop singer-songwriter, second album with a couple of EPs. B+(*) [sp]

Gwenno: Utopia (2025, Heavenly): Singer-songwriter from Wales, father is Cornish poet Tim Saunders, grew up fluent in Cornish and Welsh, sings in both but slips in some English in this, her fourth album. B+(*) [sp]

Heartworms: Glutton for Punishment (2025, Speedy Wunderground): British singer-songwriter Josephine (Jojo) Orme, father Afghan-Pakistani, mother Chinese-Danish, first album after a 2023 EP. Pretty good. B+(***) [sp]

Heems: A Hundred Alibis (2025, Veena, EP): Das Racist rapper, solo albums since 2012 (initially as Himanshu). Six songs, 19:32. Mostly sung, draws on some Indian music, but doesn't really work. B- [sp]

The High Society New Orleans Jazz Band: Live at Birdland (2025, Turtle Bay): Seven piece trad jazz band, led by Simon Wettenhall (trumpet) and Conal Fowkes (piano), "New Orleans" is inspiration, but this was recorded in New York City, which seems to be home — the band is known for playing with Woody Allen. B+(**) [sp]

Nyron Higor: Nyron Higor (2025, Far Out, EP): Brazilian multi-instrumentalist (keyboards, guitar, bass, drums, percussion), sings some, first album, short (10 tracks, 23:51). B+(*) [sp]

Steve Hirsh: Root Causes (2023 [2025], Mahakala Music): Drummer, from New York City, based in northern Minnesota, started recording on this label in 2021, with Joel Futterman, Chad Fowler, and George Cartwright. Trio here with Eri Yamamoto (piano) and William Parker (bass). B+(***) [sp]

Hotline TNT: Raspberry Moon (2025, Third Man): New York indie/shoegaze band, fronted by singer-songwriter Will Anderson, third album. B [bc]

Hannah Jadagu: Describe (2025, Sub Pop): Singer-songwriter born in Texas, parents from Zimbabwe, moved to New York in 2020, released an EP in 2021, an album in 2023, and now this second album. B+(*) [sp]

Vladimir Kostadinovic: Iris (2024 [2025], Criss Cross Jazz): Drummer, originally from Serbia, based in Austria, debut album 2011, recorded this in New York, with Ben Wendel (tenor sax; also Chris Potter on two tracks), Alex Sipiagin (trumpet), Joe Locke (vibes), Geoffrey Keezer (piano), and Matt Brewer (bass). Nice romp for Locke. B+(**) [sp]

The Last Dinner Party: From the Pyre (2025, Island): British art rock/baroque pop group, second album, lead singer Abigail Morris, songs jointly credited. B- [sp]

Leikeli47: Lei Keli Ft. 47/For Promotional Use Only (2025, Acrylic/Hardcover): Rapper, started with mixtapes (2010-15), fourth album since 2017, title seems tentative (as does length: 11 songs, 29:56). B+(***) [sp]

MC BF & DJ Yuzak: Bebeto E Romário (2025, Mandelão, EP): Brazilian electrofunk duo, 13 songs, 24:30. B+(**) [sp]

Monaleo: Who Did the Body (2025, Stomp Down/Columbia): Houston rapper Leondra Gay, second album, sharp in spots. B+(**) [sp]

Christy Moore: A Terrible Beauty (2024, Claddagh): Irish folksinger-songwriter (b. 1945), couple dozen solo studio albums since 1969, plus live albums and group work with Planxty (1972-83). I noted a number of his albums in my database, but my interest in Anglo-Celtic folk music — from my vantage the distinctions are insignificant — this is the first I've managed to check out. Not my thing, but this pulls me in. B+(***) [sp]

Navy Blue: The Sword & the Soaring (2025, Freedom Sounds): Underground rapper Sage Elsesser, from Brooklyn, ninth album since 2020. I was somewhat taken aback when I saw this genrefied as "Christian hip-hop." It doesn't hip or hop much, but does keep returning to themes of faith with heavenly airs. B+(***) [sp]

Nazar: Demilitarize (2025, Hyperdub): Angolan producer Alcides Simoes, second album (after Guerrilla), coined the term "rough kiduro," "translating the normally upbeat style to expose the uglier side of what he saw in Angola." B+(*) [sp]

NMIXX: Blue Valentine (2025, JYP Entertainment): K-pop girl group, singles in 2022, three albums (with variants) since 2023. Huge Spotify plays, with the title track topping 36 million. B+(**) [sp]

Robert Plant: Saving Grace (2025, Nonesuch): Former singer for mega arena rock band Led Zeppelin (1969-80), not sure why I've had so little interest in his solo career, with a half-dozen gold records 1982-93, as well as considerable success with his 1998 Jimmy Page duo and his collaborations with bluegrass singer-violinist Alison Krauss (2007, 2021). He formed this acoustic folk band in 2019 with singer Suzi Dian (credited on front cover), covering mostly blues and folk songs. B+(*) [sp]

Noah Preminger: Dark Days (2024 [2025], Criss Cross Jazz): Tenor saxophonist, was our Debut winner in 2008, has a solid mainstream career with 20+ albums since. Quartet with Ely Perlman (guitar), Kim Cass (bass), and Terreon Gully (drums), mostly playing originals (one by Perlman), with two covers (Don Cherry, Nando Michelin). B+(***) [sp]

Juana Rozas: Tanya (2025, Sony Music Argentina): Argentinian singer-songwriter, second album, "a clubby tribute to the chameleonic sounds of the Latin rave underground." B+(**) [sp]

Saint Etienne: International (2025, Heavenly): British electropop band, 13th album since 1991, Sarah Cracknell the singer, also keyboardists Pete Wiggs and Bob Stanley — the latter also fairly well known as a music journalist. This is fairly delightful, but nothing quite compelled me to upgrade. B+(***) [sp]

Ternion Q Expanded: Marbles (2025, Bju'ecords): Danish bassist, long part of Brooklyn Jazz Underground, released a Ternion Quartet album in 2017, with Silke Eberhard (alto sax), Geoffroy De Masure (trombones), and Roland Schneider (drums); returns here as a septet, adding Percy Pursglove (trumpet), Julius Gawlik (clarinets/tenor sax), and Morris Kiphuis (french horn). B+(**) [sp]

Jesse Welles: Hells Welles (2024, self-released): Folk singer-songwriter from Ozark, Arkansas, initially recorded as Jeh Sea Wells, with eight albums 2012-18, five more as Welles, then eight more starting with this one in 2024, under his almost real name (actually Wells). Starts with "War Isn't Murder," then "Payola" and "Cancer" ("so if you aren't expecting peace, why expect a cure?"). Double LP, 21 songs, just guitar and voice, and conscience. B+(***) [sp]

Jesse Welles: Patchwork (2024, self-released): A dozen more songs, opening with a nod toward Dylan. B+(**) [sp]

Jesse Welles: Pilgrim (2025, self-released): Second album of the year, after The Middle, making four in twelve months, with more to come. The songs keep coming, with the short "Philannthropist" perhaps the most pointed. B+(**) [sp]

Jesse Welles: Devil's Den (2025, self-released): Eleven more songs, something of a band, starts with "The Great Caucasian God." B+(*) [sp]

Jesse Welles: With the Devil (2025, self-released): Alternate version of the 11 songs on Devil's Den. Band seems looser, the extra space opening up for a more graceful singer, and perhaps easier focus on the words. B+(**) [sp]

Jesse Welles: Under the Powerlines (April '24-September '24) (2024 [2025], self-released): I don't quite understand what this is, let alone the rationalization, but this rolls up 63 songs (195 minutes), presumably live, starts solo reprising songs from Hells Welles, only I'm picking up more lyrics this time around. Opens with "War Isn't Murder": "The dead don't feel honor; They don't feel that brave; They don't feel avenged; They're lucky if they got graves; Try not to think about the dead, and have a nice day." Then "Cancer": "Cancer is as lucrative a business as war; So if you ain't expecting peace, then why expect a cure?" Then "Fentanyl": "Makes Johnson Johnson oxys look like little beers; Send dough tot he enforcement, they build another jail; Give money to a hammer, they're gonna buy a nail." Later: "I like to complain; You like to complain; We can all complain together." Covers Dylan and Prine, and does a fair impression of both. Also covers Jagger & Richard. A- [sp]

Jesse Welles: Under the Powerlines (October '24-December '24) (2024 [2025], self-released): 25 songs (67 minutes). B+(***) [sp]

Wolf Alice: The Clearing (2025, Columbia/RCA): British alt-rock band, originally a duo of singer Ellie Rowsell and guitarist Joff Oddie, added bass and drums, fourth album since 2015. B+(*) [sp]

Tommy Womack: Live a Little (2025, Schoolkids): Singer-songwriter from Kentucky, long based on Nashville, ninth album since 1998, most of them good-to-better. B+(***) [sp]

Recent reissues, compilations, and vault discoveries:

Herb Geller Quartet: Barcelona Session (1990, Fresh Sound): Alto saxophonist, one of the key players in the West Coast Cool Jazz scene of the 1950s, moved to Germany in 1962, playing and arranging for big bands in Berlin (RIAS) and Hamburg (NDR), resuming his own albums around 1990. This is the rest of the session that produced Birdland Stomp, with piano (Kenny Drew), bass (Niels-Henning Ørsted Pedersen) and drums (Mark Taylor), with two guest spots each for young trumpet players Roy Hargrove and Gerard Presencer. B+(***) [sp]

Dizzy Gillespie/Sonny Stitt/Sonny Rollins: Sonny Side Up (1957 [2025], Verve): Pretty much the cutting contest you'd expect, backed by a rhythm section of Ray Bryant (piano), Tom Bryant (bass), and Charlie Persip (drums). B+(***) [sp]

Billy Harper: Trying to Make Heaven My Home (1979 [2025], MPS): Tenor saxophonist, from Houston, debut 1973, his 1975 album Black Saint keynoted an Italian label that was one of the following decade's most important. Quintet with trumpet (Everett Hollins), piano (Armen Donelian), bass (Wayne Dockery), and drums (Malcolm Pinson). He's a tower of strength here, as he usually is. B+(***) [sp]

Hüsker Dü: 1985: The Miracle Year (1985 [2025], Numero Group): Hardcore trio from Minnesota, six studio albums 1983-87, notable live albums to start and end, exceptional power and occasional pop hooks, had such a reputation at the time that I followed them, despite never really getting with the program. Label has been trawling through their live tapes recently, with this 4-LP (or 2-CD) box a big deal. Opens with a Jan. 30, 1985 set, following New Day Rising, that was reduced to an EP earlier this year, then jumps around many other shows. I recognize a bunch of songs, but doubt any are improved live. A couple covers do help. But the length wears thin. B+(*) [sp]

Agustin Pereyra Lucena: Puertos De Alternativa (1988 [2025], Far Out): Argentinian guitarist (1948-2019), albums from 1970 on, this with a mix of solo, duo, and small group tracks. B+(*) [sp]

Edison Machado: Edison Machado & Boa Nova (1978 [2025], Far Out): Brazilian drummer (1934-90), regarded as a samba pioneer, only a few albums as leader and in Bossa Três. Previously unreleased sextet session. B+(*) [sp]

The Lost Secret Dave Wells' Trombone City Band: Live at Carmelo's (1983 [2025], Fresh Sound): Trombonist (1931-2003), not much under his name but he started with Harry James in 1952, played in varios ubig bands (Woody Herman, Marty Paich, Russell Garcia, Jimmy Hamilton, Billy May, Pat Longo, Henry Mancini, Don Ellis), while spinning off groups like Trombones Unlimited and side-credits like Bobby Darin and Frank Zappa. Previously unreleased tape, group with six trombones, piano, guitar, bass, and drums, with 9 tracks stretching out to 80 minutes. B+(*) [sp]

Old music:

Cliff Jordan: Cliff Jordan [Blue Note 1565] (1957, Blue Note): Tenor saxophonist (1931-93), second album (after Blowin' in From Chicago, with John Gilmore), cover shows his name in red, six more names in black, and the label and number in red again. The others: Lee Morgan (trumpet), Curtis Fuller (trombone), John Jenkins (alto sax), Ray Bryant (piano), Paul Chambers (bass), Art Taylor (drums). B+(***) [sp]

Clifford Jordan: Starting Time (1961, Jazzland): Tenor saxophonist, as cover notes with Kenny Dorham (trumpet), Cedar Walton (piano), Wilbur Ware (bass), and Albert Heath (drums). Three Jordan originals, two each from Dorham and Walton, plus an Ellington cover. B+(**) [yt]

Clifford Jordan Quartet: Bearcat (1961-62 [1990], Jazzland/OJC): Tenor saxophonist, plays five originals, two overs (including "How Deep Is the Ocean?"), backed by Cedar Walton (piano), Teddy Smith (bass), and J.C. Moses (drums). B+(**) [sp]

Unpacking: Found in the mail last week:

• Carl Clements and the Real Jazz Trio: Retrospective (Greydisc) [03-01]
• The Cucumbers: As You Heard Me (self-released) [02-14]
• Lazy Californians: Back to San Francisco (Angel Island) [02-13]
• Shawn Lovato: Biotic (Endectomorph Music) [02-13]
• Doug MacDonald Trio: Live in Beverly Hills (DMAC Music) [01-01]
• Michael Moody: The Ecstasy of Love (self-released) [03-20]
• Ron Rieder: Compositions in Blue and Other Hues (Meson) [01-01]
• Ben Rosenblum: The Longest Way Round (One Trick Dog) [02-27]
• Brandon Seabrook: Hellbent Daydream (Pyroclastic) [02-20]

Ask a question, or send a comment.

Saturday, January 24, 2026

Note: I accidentally dated this ahead a day. It was initially posted on Saturday, January 24, and not 25. I will add a few items, denoted by red change bars, mostly when they update pieces already here, but will save up other items in my Loose Tabs [Draft File].

This is an occasional collection of newsworthy links and comments, much less systematic than what I attempted in my late Speaking of Which posts. The new name comes from my extensive use of browser tabs. When I get around to cleaning up, I often find tabs opened to old articles I might want to comment on and/or refer back to. So these posts are mostly housecleaning, but may also serve as a very limited but persistent record of what 20+ years ago I started calling "the end of the American empire" and nowadays feels more like "the end of civilization." I collect these bits in a draft file, and flush them out when periodically. My previous one appeared ? days ago, on November 24.

I have a little-used option of selecting bits of text highlighted with a background color, for emphasis a bit more subtle than bold or ALL CAPS. (I saw this on Medium. I started with their greenish color [#bbdbba] and lightened it a bit [#dbfbda].) I'll try to use it sparingly.

I pretty much put this file on hold while I was working on the Francis Davis Jazz Critics Poll, only returning to it on January 13. Jimmy Kimmel opened his first January monologue by explaining that "we have a lot to cover," but he had only been off the air for a week. Only a couple pieces in my draft file were dated after December 5, so I've missed more than a month (actually, 7 Music Week posts have appeared in the interim). So this will be even more hit-and-miss than usual.

I was at 57 links, 4207 words when I started my catch up and wrap up. I initially pegged Friday, January 16 at my target posting date, then backed it up to Sunday, and now I'm just letting it chew up as much of the following week as it takes. I'm not in any hury to get back to Music Week, or anything else.

Finally wrapping this up on Saturday, January 25. I may add some more stuff later, but I'm basically caught up, and there is more than enough here to chew on.

I'm reposting this on January 28, along with my much delayed Music Week.

Table of Contents:

• Thanksgiving
• Epsteinmania
• Zohran Mamdani
• ICE stories
• Venezuela
• Iran
• Jerome Powell
• Israel
• Russia/Ukraine
• Trump's War and Peace
• Trump Regime
• Trummp (Himself)
• Democrats
• Republicans
• Economy and technology (especially AI)
• Spencer Kornhaber: Is this the worst-ever era of pop culture?
• Current Affairs: Rent control is fine
• Alex Skopic: on Argentina
• Dean Baker
• Ray Moulton: Children and helical time
• Ian Millhiser: on courts and law
• Pete Rucker: How the game is played
• Jeffrey St Clair: Roaming Charges
• Matt McManus: Why Fascists always come for the Socialists first
• Eric Levitz: The fiction at the heart of America's political divide
• Robert P Baird: on Adam Tooze
• Kate Wagner: The Line is dead
• Music end-of-year lists
• Books
• Some notable deaths
• Tweets

Let's start with this quote from Senator Roger Marshall's newsletter [01-21]:

President Trump's first year back in the White House has been nothing short of historic. From the moment he took office on January 20, 2025, the President set an unprecedented pace — operating under what I like to call "Trump time." Promises made, promises kept have defined this administration, starting with decisive action to secure the border, restore law and order, and put the safety of American families first. By enforcing our laws and backing those who protect us, President Trump has brought order where there was chaos and made our communities safer.

That same results-driven leadership has strengthened our economy and put working families back on solid ground. Through pro-growth policies like the Working Families Tax Cuts, fair trade, and a renewed commitment to American energy and manufacturing, the economy is moving in the right direction — creating jobs, attracting investment, and lowering costs. At the same time, the President has put us on a realistic path to healthier living, worked to bring down prescription drug prices, and restored peace through strength abroad. It has been a truly transformative year, and this is just the beginning, with the wins only continuing to pile up for the American people.

In my notebook, I originally just pulled a few select lines from this, but rather than chop it up with ellipses, I figured I should just give you the whole spiel. It's hard to find anything in this quote that is true, but it's noteworthy that this is what Republicans are telling themselves.

Topical Stories

Sometimes stuff happens, and it dominates the news/opinion cycle for a few days or possibly several weeks. We might as well lead with it, because it's where attention is most concentrated. But eventually these stories will fold into the broader, more persistent thmes of the following section.

Thanksgiving:

• Jane Borden [11-26]: The Pilgrims were doomsday cultists: "The settlers who arrived in Plymouth were not escaping religious persecution. They left on the Mayflower to establish a theocracy in the Americas."

• Kali Holloway [11-27]: Make Thanksgiving radical again: "The holiday's real roots lie in abolition, liberation, and anti-racism. Let's reconnect to that legacy."

Epsteinmania: Back by popular demand, as Republicans caved in and passed a law to "release all the files," leaving the cover up to the so-called Justice Department (which is a bigger oxymoron these days than the Defense Department used to be, not that renaming it the War Department is a good idea). But so far, nothing much has been revealed, and "Epstein" has mostly occurred as the reason for Trump's "wag the dog" warmaking.

• Philip Weiss [12-19]: The New York Times ignores an essential part of the Jeffrey Epstein story — Israel: The Times article in question is The untold story of how Jeffrey Epstein got rich, which argues that "Epstein was the greatest conman and swindler that ever lived, and charmed the pants off of every powerful man he met."

  Epstein did numerous chores for Israel that investigative sites have documented and the Times does not touch: he helped Israel broker financial deals with neighbors, he had an Israeli spy living in his house for a time, and he had a close relationship with former Israeli PM Ehud Barak that included business ventures and politics in Israel.

• Amanda Marcotte [12-21]: Epstein continues to explain everything about Trump: "From Greenland to Minneapolis, it's all rooted in his predatory ways." I don't quite buy this, but: "Like his friend Epstein — who enjoyed targeting small, helpless teenage girls — the most important thread throughout Trump's life is that he tries to feel big by harassing those who he feels can't fight back."

• Kathleen Wallace [12-25]: Redacting our reality, one Epstein at a time.

• Elie Honig [01-24]: How Bill and Hillary Clinton could soon become criminal defendants: This reviews their past brushes with possible criminal prosecution, but this time they may feel they're innocent and should stand on principle, as conscientious objectors.

  The Clintons almost certainly aren't going to prison, or even getting convicted. But with characteristic hubris, Bill and Hillary have walked themselves to the brink of federal charges by defying bipartisan congressional subpoenas on the Jeffrey Epstein investigation. And it's a good bet that our current Justice Department — which apparently makes critical decisions by a sophisticated litmus test that asks, "Do we like you, or not?" — will pursue criminal contempt charges.

Zohran Mamdani:

• Nate Weisberg [11-24]: The freakout over cheaper beer at Yankee Stadium: "Mamdani and Khan's plan to end monopolistic pricing at NYC stadiums is good policy and good politics."

• Astead Herndon [12-29]: Zohran Mamdani on his mayoral transition and what comes next: An interview.

• Miles Bryan/Astead Herndon [12-26]: America's other populist, socialist big-city mayor: "What Katie Wilson thinks national Democrats should learn from her win." Interview with the newly elected mayor of Seattle. Like Mamdani, "she won by focusing on affordability, particularly around housing." Also like Mamdani:

  She says many of the abundance movement's ideas have been popular on the left in Seattle for years, and are useful — but that the movement is missing a few ideas about what's necessary to realize its vision.

• DD Guttenplan [01-15]: Mamdani starts governing by getting the imagery right: "Early signs suggest that the Mamdani era in New York is off to an encouraging start — beginning with the mayor's continued mastery of political spectacle."

• Anna North [01-15]: Why universal child care is closer than ever in New York: "One of Zohran Mamdani's most expensive ideas has surprising early momentum."

ICE stories: The last couple weeks is the point where Trump's goon squad has turned the corner from being overzealous civil servants rooting out unwanted immigrants to becoming an armed force that freely attacks ordinary Americans. They've been unleashed, with the full-throated support of Trump, Vance, and Kristi Noem, who all understand that their real problem isn't immigrants. It's Americans, especially ones that are guilty of the treason of living in cities that voted against Trump.

• Cameron Peters [01-07]: Trump's immigration crackdown turns deadly in Minneapolis: "The fatal ICE shooting in Minneapolis, briefly explained."

• Eric Levitz [01-08]: Trump's menacingly dishonest response to the Minnesota ICE shooting: "Trump is telling us he doesn't care why Renee Good died."

  All this is both appalling and frightening. If ICE agents know that they can kill US citizens on video — and still count on the president to lie in support of their freedom — Americans' most basic liberties will be imperiled.

  Trump's response is also politically mindless. The administration could have declined to take a position on the killing until all facts were known. It could have left itself the option of declaring Good's killer one bad apple, whose recklessness undermined ICE's fundamental mission: to keep Americans safe.

  Instead, it has chosen to identify its broader ideological project with contempt for the lives of any Americans who gets in its way.

• Alex Skopic [01-08]: The only "domestic terrorists" on our streets are ICE.

• Caitlin Dewey [01-09]: How right-wing creaetors bend reality to their will: "How a scandal about day cares run by Somali Americans led to an ICE surge in Minneapolis."

• Christian Paz [01-12]: The violent "randomness" of ICE's deportation campaign: "What ICE is doing in American cities is very distinct." Interview with David Hausman.

  ICE, specifically, is operating in a completely different way to how it has historically worked — with big shows of force in neighborhoods, seemingly indiscriminate arrests of immigrants (and citizens), and its careless treatment of bystanders and protesters.

• Laura Jedeed [01-13]: You've heard about who ICE is recruting. The truth is far worse. I'm the proof. "What happens when you do minimal screening before hiring agents, arming them, and sending them into the streets? We're all finding out." For an update, see:

  • Laura Jeded [01-16]: The Trump Administration is calling my viral story a lie. Good thing I kept the receipts. "The administration that lies all the time is lying about me. And I can prove it."

• Christian Paz [01-15]: How right-wing influencers are bending reality in Minneapois: "The MAGA media system is going into overdrive." They're always in overdrive. At some point you just have to shut them off, and give them no respect at all.

• Noah Hurowitz [01-14]: Federal agents keep invoking killing of Renee Good to threaten protesters in Minnesota.

• Eric Levitz [01-14]: The Trump administration can't stop winking at white nationalists: "The government is recruiting ICE agents with (literal) neo-Nazi propaganda."

• Ryan Cooper [01-15]: Trump's ethnic cleansing campaign in Minneapolis: "Every part of this illegal, violent occupation is based on lies."

• Gillen Tener Martin [01-16]: Another way Republicans are overplaying their hand on immigration: "Now they're going after Americans who are also citizens of another country — like me, and Melania and Barron Trump."

• Alain Stephens [01-16]: ICE agents are even worse at being cops than you think: "Videos of agents falling down and dropping their guns feel beyond parody. But under-trained law enforcement officers are a real danger to the public."

• Nia Prater [01-19]: The Minneapolis siege is even worse than the videos show: Interview with Will Stancil ("over the past week, Stancil has become a mainstay of citizen patrols, tracking ICE agents around the city in his Honda Fit and sharing his experiences with his 100,000-plus followers").

• Jacob Fuller [01-21]: We don't know how many people have been harmed by ICE: "How decades of inaction on police reform paved the road for ICE's lack of transparency."

• Ed Kilgore [01-21]: Should Democrats try to abolish ICE or radically change it? I'm surprised to see such a notoriously middling liberal pundit even raising the possibility of abolishing ICE. I can certainly understand the impulse to abolish, and I doubt that much actual harm would ensue if it actually happened, but I've always been in the reform camp, and probably always will be. (There are, of course, things I would be happy to see abolished, like NATO, and Microsoft, but even there I could see ways of salvaging grams of value from the tons of destruction.) I certainly don't see this as a political fight I'm up for. While I have no particular beef with immigrants, I see them as tangential to what matters most, which is treating both citizens here and foreigners elsewhere much better than the US has been doing. I think it's extremely important that we treat all people decently, but that doesn't mean we should indulge them completely. Of course, Kilgore winds up on the reform side:

  There's no evidence that Americans actually want the "open borders" stance that Republicans have falsely accused Democrats of embracing in the past. Embracing it now makes little sense. The broadest and strongest position for Democrats right now is the abolition of both mass deportation and ICE terror tactics, alongside a new path to citizenship for noncriminal immigrants and fairer and more uniform enforcement of immigration laws without the sort of violence and cruelty perpetrated and celebrated by Trump, J.D. Vance, Kristi Noem, and Stephen Miller. Anyone who thinks such a position represents a surrender to MAGA needs to remember how and why these terrible people rose to power in the first place.

  On the other hand, if you do manage to abolish ICE, I could go along with that too. Kilgore cites Bunch here:

  • Will Bunch [01-20]: Yo, Dems: You can't 'reform' fascism': Further down: "Dems, stop trying to make ICE better. Make them go away."

• Maximillian Alvarez [01-22]: "No work. No spending": Minnesota workers will strike tomorrow to protest ICE: "A critical conversation with Minnesota union leaders on the eve of a massive general strike."

• Garrett Owen [01-22]: "Gas is coming!": Border Patrol commander Bovino throws gas cannister at protesters in Minneapolis.

• Jason Linkins [01-24]: This year's first big stupid idea: "retrain ICE": "Some things get so evil that they forfeit their right to exist. Trump's rogue paramilitary gangs are one of them."

• CK Smith [01-24]: Another Minneapolis resident shot and killed by ICE agent: "Deadly encounters in just a few weeks, residents and officials demand accountability for ICE operations."

  I picked up this story as I was rushing to wrap up, and spent much of Saturday ignoring further reports, including a lot of video. The victim was Alex Pretti, 37, an intensive care nurse at the Minneapolis VA Health Care System. The shooter was a Border Patrol agent (not ICE, but part of the same Trump-ordered operation). I'm not going to report on this at length, but this has become a very big story, and needs a bit more than I initially provided.

  • CK Smith [01-25]: A MN nurse is dead as the government's story falls apart: "Again, officials say ICE agent acted in self-defense, but video evidence and witnesses contradict their narrative."

  • Intelligencer Staff []: Is Alex Pretti's death the breaking point? "Here are the latest developments."

  • Cameron Peters

    • [01-24]: The Trump administration's unchecked abuses in Minnesota.

    • [01-26]: Trump's plan to extort Minnesota, briefly explained: "Trump to Minnesota: Give me your voter data, or else."

  • Zack Beauchamp

    • [01-25]: The killing of Alex Pretti is a grim turning point: "Trump's authoritarianism is becoming less subtle — and more vicious." Groping for words, but I don't think "subtle" was ever in play. But Beauchamp wants to contrast the "subtle" arts of a Viktor Orbán vs. pure brutes like Stalin. But all right-wingers want to be brutes. The difference between Orbán and Stalin is that the latter had deep power that the head of a nominally democratic state lacked. Trump may wish he had that sort of power, but he probably doesn't — how much he does have is being tested right now.

    • [01-26]: So what if Alex Pretti had a gun? "The unbearable hypocrisy of pro-gun conservatives defending the Minneapolis killing." This isn't an angle I care much about, probably because I've long ago understood that gun advocates don't care about logical consequences of so many people having so many guns. Part of this goes back to the general conservative belief that rights are something for themselves and not for other people. (Slavery is a pretty clear cut example.) But it does seem fair to ask law enforcement how they are able to tell, in real time and under less than ideal circumstances, when and how to respect one person's right to bear arms, when not to, and what to do about it.

  • Ross Barkan [01-26]: Trump's losing war on Minneapolis.

  • Eric Levitz [01-23]: You don't need to be a liberal to oppose Trump's ICE: "You just need to care about your own constitutional rights." But you may need to be at least a little bit of a liberal to understand that your and other people's rights are connected, so that denying rights to others also affects you. That's not a concern for conservatives, who believe different groups can and should be treated differently.

  • Jeffrey St Clair [01-26]: Where the sidewalk ends, the lies begin: on the execution of Alex Pretti.

    We live in a country where you can be charged with resisting arrest without having committed a crime to be arrested for. We live in a country where even the most passive acts of defiance and resistance are an excuse to kill you. . . . Americans of conscience also find themselves in the crosshairs of their own government.

    We also live in a country where people, ordinary people, are so revolted by what's happening that they are willing to go out every day in Arctic temperatures to confront and resist the paramilitary-style forces that are terrorizing their neighborhoods, knowing the kind of violence that might be visited against them.

    Alex Pretti was one of those "ordinary" Americans. He didn't do anything to deserve being assaulted, never mind shot. He did what nurses are trained to do: help someone who had been hurt, a woman gratuitously shoved to the ground and pepper-sprayed by a CBP agent, a woman who had also done nothing to deserve this brutal treatment. Alex Pretti wasn't the "worst of the worst." He was the best of the best.

  • Branko Marcetic [01-27]: Even law enforcement officers think this has gone too far: "The impunity with which ICE and other DHS agents are carrying out violence and murders in cities like Minneapolis is so awful that now scores of law enforcement officials themselves are speaking out against it."

  • Aziz Huq [01-27]: Where is the off-ramp from all this state violence? "It's hard to think of a parallel effort in US history to build a domestic agency of violence specialists at the scale of ICE."

  • Eric Levitz [01-27]: Trump's deportation forces finally went too far. Not his opinion, mind you. He's taking his cues from "many Republican senators, governors, and influencers [who] called for a thorough investigation into Pretti's killing, as did the NRA."

• Jelinda Montes [01-28]: Rep. Ilham Omar attacked at town hall. And Trump applauded, tweeting "She probably had herself sprayed, knowing her."

Venezuela: Marco Rubio's 2016 presidential campaign was a pretty lacklustre affair — I was tempted to say "sad," but he had no substance to feel regrets over. But later, I found there was one topic that really animated him, and that is overthrowing the Chavez/Maduro government in Venezuela. I was surprised when he appeared on Trump's short list of VP prospects, along with JD Vance and Doug Burgum. I figured Trump was sniffing for money: Burgum had his own, and Vance belonged to Peter Thiel. I wasn't sure who Rubio's sugar daddy was, but he undoubtedly had one. Nobody makes a serious run for the Republican nomination without at least one billionaire backer. (Newt Gingrich famously complained that Romney beat him 5-to-1 on that critical score.) That Rubio wound up with the Secretary of State post pretty much guaranteed that Trump would make war on Venezuela. That's just happened.

• Paul R Pillar [11-10]: Dick Cheney's ghost has a playbook for war in Venezuela: "Trump flirting with regime change in Caracas carries eerie similarities to the run-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq."

• Joshua Keating [12-12]: The global shadow economy behind Trump's latest move on Venezuela: "A black market has been growing for years. The escalation puts a new spotlight on it."

• Vijay Prashad/Taroa Zúñiga Silva [01-03]: The US attacks Venezuela and seizes its president.

• Cameron Peters [01-03]: How Trump went from boat strikes to regime change in Venezuela: "The US just attacked Venezela. How did we get here?"

• Caitlin Dewey [01-05]: America's century-long interest in Venezuelan oil: "The long, fascinating history of US entanglement with the Venezuelan industry." Seems to me this piece is missing a lot of detail, both on the rise and fall of Venezuelan oil; e.g., how much light oil can Venezuela still produce? Or, is the decline due to political factors, including lost skills, or are they just running out of easy oil? I'm inclined to believe that Chavez and Maduro have mismanaged the industry, but that doesn't explain that much decline. Another thing I'd stress is that Trump's understanding of the oil industry is almost nil, so his motivations needn't have anything to do with reality.

• Eric Levitz [01-05]: Did Trump really invade Venezuela for oil? "No. Also, maybe." If he's a rational actor: "no." But he's not, so: "maybe." At least he's not making up any cockamamie stories about "restoring democracy," ridding the people autocrats, etc. Those aren't reasons he in any way cares about. "Taking the oil," on the other hand, is a reason he can get behind. But, as Levitz notes, the American oil industry doesn't need or even particularly want Venezuela's crude (especially the heavy/expensive stuff in the Orinoco reserves). Oil prices are fairly depressed at present, so the last thing the industry wants is more supply from countries like Venezuela and Iran (and for that matter, Russia).

• Elie Honig [01-07]: Why Nicolás Maduro is facing trial in lower Manhattan.

• Terry Lynn Karl [01-16]: Trump's petrostate dilemma in Venezuela: "By capturing his Venezuelan counterpart Nicolás Maduro, US President Donald Trump sought to project power abroad but instead exposed his own political vulnerability. Despite his promise to restore Venezuela's oil industry, his overt resource grab is far more likely to fuel regional turmoil."

• Francisco Rodriguez [01-16]: In what world would Trump's oil play actually help Venezuelans? "It would take major systematic changes both commercially and in government, and it's unclear whether any of that is in the works yet."

• Benjamin Fogel [01-17]: We're now in the Sopranos stage of imperialism: "the transformation of US hegemony into naked extortion. As with the Mafia, loyalty may ultimately buy nothing, and deals can be broken at gunpoint."

• Chas Danner [01-18]: How is Trump's Venezuela takeover going? Not as badly as it would be had the US actually invaded and tried to run things directly. The big question is whether Trump will be satisfied with Delcy Rodríguez as "acting president," and whether Rodríguez will be able to satisfy Trump without having the still intact Chavista power base turn against her. Thus far she's mostly conceding things that Maduro wouldn't have had any problem conceding. One could imagine a very different outcome in Iraq had Bush allowed a more amenable Ba'athist leader like Tariq Aziz to remain in power, rather than allowing Paul Bremer to push the entire Ba'athist elite into opposition. Similarly, the US could have tried to negotiate some form of power-sharing agreement with the Taliban in 2001 instead of driving them into a civil war they won 20 years later. This type of "occupation" would have been a novelty for the US, but the concept goes way back. When Alexander destroyed an enemy army, he usually converted the previous king into a satrap, paying him tribute but depending on him to maintain order, as his own army moved on to conquer other lands. The obvious problem with Trump in Venezuela is that his greed and power lust will overshoot, putting US forces into another quagmire.

  The strange thing is that I could see Trump's smash-and-grab foreign policy becoming very popular: the idea is to act brashly, demonstrating his dynamic leadership, then behave sensibly and even generously afterwards, avoiding the usual consequences and blowback. Of course, he didn't have to snatch Maduro to get a pretty decent deal from Venezuela. He could get similarly good deals from Iran and North Korea. He could have had a big win on Gaza, but there the problem wasn't a regime he refused to deal with, but one (Netanyahu's) that didn't take his threat seriously. His failure in Ukraine is due to the same problem: Putin has no reason to doubt that he can just string Trump along. Sure, most of these conflicts can be traced back to Trump's earlier failures, but few people would notice that, or hold him accountable. The whole "peace through strength" line is an old con that still holds many weak minds in its thrall. Hence strong moves impress, if only one can make them without paying a price for hubris.

• William D Hartung [01-22]: Trump's doubling down on imperialism in Latin America is a formula for decline.

When war breaks out, my first instinct is to find a good history book, to help put it into context. I could use one on Venezuela, preferably by a critical thinker with leftist instincts. I always start out hopeful and sympathetic to leftist political movements, even if they often disappoint. And I distrust their right-wing opponents, who may be right on specifics but remain fundamentally committed to oligarchy and repression. Here's a list of books I've noticed, omitting earlier (often more optimistic) books on Chávez (Tariq Ali, Rory Carroll, Nikolas Kozloff, Miguel Tinker Salas, etc.).

• Raúl Gallegos: Crude Nation: How Oil Riches Ruined Venezuela (2016, Potomac Books): WSJ reporter on "how Maduro inherited a mess and made it worse."
• Richard Hausmann/Francisco R Rodriguez, eds: Venezuela Before Chávez: Anatomy of an Economic Collapse (2015, Penn State University Press).
• Carlos Lizarralde: Venezuela's Collapse: The Long Story of How Things Fell Apart (2024, independent): Goes deep into history, but works backward, where the first chapter covers 1999-2019 (Chavez/Maduro), then 1922-1998 (oil), then 1498-1821 (colonial period, Columbus to Bolivar), then he returns to Chavez. Some of the missing 19th century shows up in an epilogue on "Politics Without a State, 1834-1837."
• Carlos Lizarralde: One in Four: The Exodus that Emptied Venezuela, 2019-2024 (2025, independent).
• William Neuman: Things Are Never So Bad That They Can't Get Worse: Inside the Collapse of Venezuela (2022, St Martin's Press): New York Times reporter, did a stint in Caracas 2012-16, critical of Trump.
• Anya Parampil: Corporate Coup: Venezuela and the End of US Empire (2024, OR Books): Grayzone journalist, so very critical of US.
• Joe Emersberger/Justin Podur: Extraordinary Threat: The US Empire, the Media, and Twenty Years of Coup Attempts in Venezuela (2021, Monthly Review Press).
• Timothy M Gill: Encountering US Empire in Socialist Venezuela: The Legacy of Race, Neocolonialism and Democracy Promotion (2022, University of Pittsburgh Press).
• Dan Kovalik: The Plot to Overthrow Venezuela (2019, Hot Books): Also wrote The Plot to Scapegoat Russia (2017), The Plot to Attack Iran (2018), and The Plot to Control the World: How the US Spent Billions to Change the Outcome of Elections Around the World (2018).
• Francisco Rodríguez: The Collapse of Venezuela: Scorched Earth Politics and Economic Decline, 2012-2020 (2025, University of Notre Dame Press).
• Kike Jiménez Vidal: The Collapse of Venezuela: The Untold Story of How a Rich Country Became a Failed State (2025, independent): Sees 1958-78 as a Golden Age, 1979-1998 as the Great Illusion, followed by Initial Demolition, Totalitarian Offensive, Economic Collapse, and Diaspora and Deinstitutionalization. This looks very polemical, but what I've read makes sense.
• Javier Corrales: Autocracy Rising: How Venezuela Transitioned to Authoritarianism (2023, Brookings Institution Press): The two most reliable common code words for organizing American liberals against a foreign foe. Previously co-wrote (with Michael Penfold) Dragon in the Tropics: Venezuela and the Legacy of Hugo Chavez (2015, Brookings Institution Press).
• Alistair Pemberton: On the Precipice: The Trump Administration and the Escalating Path Toward War With Venezuela (2025, independent): Short (45 pp), published in November.
• Pedro Santos: USA Vs Venezuela War: What Could Possibly Go Wrong? (2025, independent).
• Anderson M Bean, ed: Venezuela in Crisis: Socialist Perspectives (2026, Haymarket): "Writing from an anticapitalist, anti-imperialist, and anti-authoritarian perspective, this volume never loses sight of the need to stand with the Venezuelan people rather than their government — even when it claims to be struggling to build socialism." [Scheduled for 02-17]

Here's an excerpt from Gallego's Crude Nation:

Politicians, like regular Venezuelans, spend oil money generously while they still have it, because oil prices will fall eventually. And when that happens, Venezuela is usually left with little to show for it, with no savings to speak of. It soon dawned on me that Chávez and his leftist movement were really just a blip in a long history of larger-than-life leaders who promised to use oil to quickly turn Venezuela into a modern, powerful nation, only to disappoint voters in the end. For the better part of the twentieth century, Venezuela served as a cautionary tale for other nations and regions rich in natural resources, an example of the fate they must avoid.

Venezuela's troubles go beyond left and right political ideas: the world's largest oil patch hasn't learned how to properly manage its wealth. Venezuela is a country that has played and will play an important role in the global energy industry, as long as cars still run on gasoline and not on electricity, water, or cow manure. Three centuries from now, when most of the world's oil is gone, Venezuela could still be pumping crude, if no other energy source has rendered oil obsolete. Venezuela's reality is a tale of how hubris, oil dependence, spendthrift ways, and economic ignorance can drive a country to ruin. Venezuela can teach us all an important lesson: too much money poorly managed can be worse than not having any money at all.

And here's an excerpt from Vidal's The Collapse of Venezuela:

Before oil, Venezuela was a poor nation, yes, but with a real productive structure. An economy based on coffee, cocoa, and livestock farming, where value was created by labor, capital, and land. It was a country of producers, not of parasitic rentiers. Exchange was voluntary, private property was respected — the the clear limitations of the time — and the currency, though weak, was backed by the tangible production of goods.

The arrival of the oil companies wasn't a "blessing." It was the beginning of a curse. It was the equivalent of injecting a healthy but poor patient with a miracle drug that generates instant euphoria while destroying vital organs. This is what serious economists call the Resource Curse or the Dutch Disease. And what did the state do? Instead of creating the conditions for oil wealth to strengthen the private sector, it instead siphoned off revenue through concessions and centralized it in the hands of the elite in power, first under the rule of Gómez and then the military.

And then, no doubt, Chávez and Maduro. It's interesting how often revolutionaries return to the form of those they overthrew, as Stalin became another Tsar, and the Ayatollah became another Shah. I suspect the worst cases are where external pressure puts the revolutionaries on the defensive, and emboldens the old class. That's been a big part of the story in Venezuela. It also reminds us that no matter how unsavory the Chavistas are, their opponents are worse.

Iran: I haven't been following news, but my X feed blew up with tweets on Iran (protests and/or war threats) to which I ascribe very little credibility. Trying to catch up, I checked out this Wikipedia article, which tells me that anti-government protests began on December 28, spreading to many cities, and that they were met with a stiff government crackdown, including "a massacre that left tens of thousands of protesters dead." There have also been counter-protests, defending the regime. While few people doubt that the Iranian people have grievances with their government, these events are occurring against a backdrop of severe sanctions and war threats coming from Israel and the US, who are believed to support violent subversive groups within Iran, and who have long promoted propaganda against the regime. Iran has also responded by shutting down the internet. Thus we have ample reason to doubt pretty much everything we hear from anyone about what is going on. I'll pick out some representative articles below, but I don't expect to get much credible information.

• Behrooz Ghamari Tabrizi [12-25]: Iran and the price of sovereignty: what it takes not to be a client.

  Now, the so-called 12-day war is over. Iranians have returned to the devastating perpetual violence of U.S. led sanctions and targeted assassinations by the Mossad. The Trump administration and its European allies have called on Iran to accept its defeat, surrender unconditionally, and "return" to the negotiating table. They ask Iran to dismantle its nuclear technology, halt the production of its advance missile program, cease its support of the Palestinian cause, and terminate its network of what is known as the "axis of resistance" against the Israeli and American expansionism. In other words, become a client state. Iran is one of the few remaining fronts of defiance against the American extortionist posture and the Israeli carnage that has engulfed the Middle East. That defiance comes with a very hefty price.

• Cameron Peters [01-13]: The scariest thing about Iran's crackdown:

• Hamid Dabashi [01-13]: How Israel and the US are exploiting Iranian protests

  : "Genuine rage over economic stagnation is being manipulated to serve western political ends."

• Sina Toosi [01-16]: This is not solidarity. It is predation. "The Iranian people are caught between severe domestic repression and external powers that exploit their suffering."

• Robert Wright [01-16]: The Iranian blood on Trump's (and Biden's) hands. Everything here is important and worth reading, but one could add more, especially on Israel's malign influence.

  We'll never know if the hopes for Iran that Obama's nuclear deal fostered would have been realized had Trump not intervened. Maybe commercial engagement with the world wouldn't have had any internally liberalizing effect, politically or even economically. And maybe more economic interdependence with other countries wouldn't have moderated Iran's policies toward them.

  But even if things didn't pan out on those fronts, it seems safe to say that Iran's people would be much better off economically and no worse off politically, and some now-dead protesters would still be alive. And as of today — with another war in the Middle East one distinct near-term possibility and the violent and chaotic implosion of Iran another one — that scenario doesn't sound so bad.

  It now seems pretty clear that Biden's failure to restore the Iran deal was evidence of his more subservient posture toward Israel: his failure on Iran presaged his failure on Gaza. But Obama doesn't merit much acclaim either. His rationale for negotiating the deal was that he took Israel's fears of a nuclear Iran seriously, recognizing that the only way to stop a determined Iran was to negotiate restrictions that could be enforced. On the other hand, he was careful not to resolve any other issues, let alone normalize relations, which had the effect of preserving decades of kneejerk hostility. That attitude was what made it possible for Trump to break the deal, and it gave Biden cover to keep from reversing Trump's damage.

  Three more charts of interest here: Global AI Computing Capacity (increasing quite rapidly); President Trump's Approval Rating (down markedly since the ICE shooting of Renee Good); Evening News Estimates of Iran Protest Deaths (CBS, since Bari Weiss took over, is claiming 5-24 [or 40?] times as many deaths as CNN/ABC/NBC). Also see Wright's earlier post:

  • [01-09]: Some useful Trump-Hitler comparisons (in light of Minneapolis and Venezuela).

    The joy Trump takes in the use of intimidating force extends from the domestic arena into the international arena. Indeed, it's hard to explain the escalating holiday-season campaign against Venezuela — boat bombings, then a port bombing, and finally invasion — without invoking this kind of visceral motivation. After all, Venezuela isn't the country you'd go after if drugs were your real concern. And as for oil: The basics of the administration's current plan for Venezuela — leave an authoritarian regime in place but profit from its petroleum — didn't require invading the country and snatching Nicolas Maduro; Maduro himself had agreed to that kind of deal. And, though Trump can presumably get somewhat better terms now than he'd have gotten from Maduro, there seems to be a consensus among oil experts that the foreseeable benefits are meager; with oil prices low, and Venezuela still a shaky place, US companies won't want to make the big investments required to extract oil in large quantities.

    I doubt I'll ever see a man more evidently full of pride and self-satisfaction than Trump is when he's talking about his various unprovoked international assaults — the assassination via missile strike of Iran's top general during his first term, the bombing of Iran last year, the attack on Venezuela last week. But I'm guessing that if I spoke German and combed through some recordings of Hitler in the wake of the Poland invasion I'd come close.

• Orly Noy [01-16]: On Iran's protests, Israeli hypocrisy knows no limits: "Only moments ago, Israelis were cheering on a holocaust in Gaza — and now they dare to celebrate the valiant uprising of the Iranian people."

• Farshad Askari [01-22]: Iran's protests have gone quiet. But the revolution isn't over. This feels like a bit of a stretch, but to the extent that the protests were real, a news blackout isn't likely to keep them away forever.

• MEE [01-23]: Trump says US 'armada' moving towards Iran: "President warns Washington is watching Tehran closely as US naval forces move into region."

Jerome Powell: Trump, who originally appointed Powell to the post of Fed Chair, is unhappy with him, ostensibly because Trump wants him to lower interest rates, which Powell had raised as the conventional antidote to inflation. So Trump is threatening to prosecute Powell, which isn't going over well with the Fed Chair, or with the bankers who effectively have captured the Fed.

• Cameron Peters [01-12]: Trump vs. the Fed, briefly explained: "Why Trump is making a bid to control the US economy." This is somewhat misleading. The Fed doesn't control the economy. The Fed controls the money supply. This has bearing on some important aspects of the economy, like inflation and employment. And those aspects are important enough to people who have a lot of money (especially banks) that they've long insisted on keeping the Fed free of "political interference," which is to say to keep it captured by a higher power: themselves. Thus, for instance, Bill Clinton ditched his entire economic platform after being elected in 1992, because Alan Greenspan convinced him it would unsettle the bond market, probably by threatening to wreck Clinton's economy. Clinton was the first of the last three Democratic presidents to reappoint a Republican Fed chair (as Obama did Bernanke, and Biden did Powell). Like all good Democrats, they recognize that there are higher powers in America, and behave accordingly. So sure, Trump's move is a power grab, but we shouldn't fool ourselves into thinking that Powell is on our side, or think that the "independent Fed" is really a good idea. Trump's beef with Powell is supposedly about interest rates, but also about power. The thing to understand about interest rates is that high interest rates can throttle a booming economy, and very high interest rates can strangle it; but while lower interest rates can stimulate the economy, and increase employment (especially when recovering from a recession induced by high interest rates), low interest rates can also cause inflation. So Trump's move here is exactly wrong for fighting inflation. But when the Fed makes it cheaper to borrow, not everyone benefits equally. The Fed loans money to banks, who loan money to rich people, who sometimes use it to build things, but more often (especially when it's cheap) they use it for speculation, pushing up the price of assets so as to make themselves feel even richer. And that, of course, is exactly what Trump wants to see: an asset bubble.

• Ian Millhiser

  • [01-12]: Trump's war on the Federal Reserve heads to the Supreme Court next week: "Trump picked the worst possible time to go after Jerome Powell."

  • [01-12]: The Supreme Court made Trump's attack on Jerome Powell possible.

• Mike Konczal [01-13]: The enormous stakes of Donald Trump's fight with Jerome Powell: "The Fed is the final frontier of his quest to dominate every economic institution."

• Thomas L Friedman [01-13] Trump's scheming to sack Powell paves the road to constitutional ruin: Sure, Friedman's an idiot, and there are hundreds of other things that he could have recognized as "the road to constitutional ruin," but this (unlike, say, genocide in Gaza) seems to be his red line.

• Ryan Cooper [01-14]: Trump's prosecution of Jerome Powell is even crazier than it looks: "Messing with Federal Reserve independence might spark inflation, and everyone hates that." That seems like something people might say, but I'm less and less convinced that the Fed's rate control is a very practical tool for controlling inflation. The belief is largely based on memory of the Volcker recession (1979-82), based on some pretty sketchy economic theories (like NAIRU), and employed like a wrecking ball to the entire economy.

• Robert Kuttner [01-21]: The high court sinks Trump's Federal Reserve ploy: "The administration's clumsy effort to oust Fed governor Lisa Cook is stymied again."

Major Threads

Israel: I collected a bunch of articles early on, in the immediate aftermath of the ceasefire/hostage swap. Since then, well . . . Israel has regularly violated the cease fire they had "agreed" to, and their violations haven't bothered Trump in the least. I don't have time to seriously update this section, so the few additions are at best a random sampling.

• Jonah Valdez [11-25]: Gaza humanitarian foundation calls it quits after thousands die seeking its aid: "The aid group oversaw relief in Gaza during a period defined by the killings of Palestinians seeking food during famine." This is "the U.S. and Israel-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation." When I saw this headline, I assumed that the foundation was legit, and the headline reflected some sort of Israeli win against the world's humanitarian impulses. Now it looks like "aid" was really just bait. And sure, not just to kill Palestinians, which Israel was already doing regularly and could have escalated without resorting to such tactics. Rather, the point was to psychologically bind seeking food to the experience of terror. With the ceasefire, the need for aid is undiminished. If aid was GHF's purpose, it would still have much to do. That they're quitting suggests that their real purpose was something else.

  Rather than maintain the existing model of bringing food and supplies to individuals with most need by delivering goods directly to communities, GHF established four distribution sites. The foundation also hired two American logistics and security firms — UG Solutions and Safe Reach Solutions, led by a Green Beret veteran and former CIA officer, respectively — to oversee distribution. The result was the funneling of thousands of desperate people who traveled long distances into aid sites where long lines often devolved into stampedes. Gunfire from Israeli soldiers, or private American contractors, largely former U.S. special forces, was a near-daily reality. While some of those who survived the deadly queues managed to bring home boxes of food, the supplies failed to slow the famine conditions across Gaza which only worsened. The food provided by GHF was widely criticized by nutritional experts and aid groups as inadequate to prevent hunger and difficult to prepare (most items needed water to boil, itself a scarce resource in the territory).

• Marianne Dhenin [11-27]: International tribunal finds Israel guilty of genocide, ecocide, and the forced starvation of the Palestinians in Gaza: "The International People's Tribunal on Palestine held in Barcelona presented striking evidence of Israel's forced starvation of the Palestinian people and the deliberate destruction of food security in Gaza." The tribunal is sponsored by ILPS (International League of Peoples' Struggle), which of course would find that, not that the evidence can really be interpreted any other way.

• Mitchell Plitnick [11-27]: Israel is violating ceasefires in Gaza and Lebanon, and Trump is allowing it: "Israel's goals are clear enough: endless war." The Trump administration's goals, to the extent one can speak of them coherently, were to win a couple immediate news cycles, free the hostages, and set up negotions to make amends to Qatar and sell more arms to Saudia Arabia. Netanyahu, as he has so many times before, chose to bend to America's will rather than risk a break, confident that he will soon enough rebound, because Trump is just another fickle American fool.

  Israel had never heeded the ceasefire to begin with. More than 340 overwhelmingly non-combatant Palestinians have been killed since the ceasefire was put in place, and over 15,000 more structures in Gaza have been destroyed, just as flooding, overflowing sewage, rains, and the cold weather of approaching winter start to hit the already battered population.

  In just the past few days, though, Israel has killed more than 60 Palestinians in Gaza, a sign of escalation. It is no coincidence that this uptick comes on the heels of Saudi Crown Prince Muhammad Bin Salman's (MBS) visit to Washington where he once again insisted, much to Trump's annoyance, that if Donald Trump wanted to see a normalization deal between his kingdom and Israel, there would need to be a clear, committed path to a Palestinian state with a timeline. Whether MBS was sincere about that or not, Netanyahu has no intention of making even the slightest gesture in that direction, and the escalation in Gaza was, at least in part, his response to that part of the Trump-MBS confab.

• Qassam Muaddi

  • [11-28]: Israel is violating all its ceasefire agreements and escalating on all fronts: "projecting itself as the regional hegemon by launching attacks on Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, and the West Bank."

  • [11-28]: Outrage after footage of Israeli soldiers executing two Palestinians in Jenin goes viral.

  • [01-18]: The past year has seen an unprecedented displacement of Palestinian communities in the West Bank: "In 2025, Israeli settlers, backed by the army, displaced rural Palestinian communities in the West Bank at unprecedented rates. It is part of Israel's escalating strategy to take control of as much of the territory as possible."

• Huda Skaik [11-28]: Gaza's civil defense forces keep digging for 10,000 missing bodies: "Members of Gaza's Civil Defense force describe pulling decomposing bodies from collapsed buildings, and digging in hopes that someone remains alive."

• Connor Echols:

  • [11-28]: Are private American soldiers surging into new Gaza aid sites? "Whistleblower Anthony Aguilar claims that a new company is already hoping to take over where the notorious Gaza Humanitarian Foundation left off."

  • [12-02]: Inside Israel's shadow campaign to win over American media: "Leaked emails show how Act for Israel, led by Noa Tishby, worked on behalf of Israel to advance its interests in the United States."

• Craig Mokhiber [12-01]: How the world can resist the UN Security Council's rogue colonial mandate in Gaza. This offers "several ways that states and individuals worldwide can challenge its illegality." I'm far less concerned about the legal issues, which get an airing here, or even the political ones. The resolution is inadequate, and probably doomed to failure, but do we really want to "block the implementation"? The pre-resolution baseline was genocide. The only path away was to get Israel and the US to agree to stop, which could only happen on terms favorable to those powers, and therefore far short of justice. While a better resolution would ultimately be better for all concerned, the immediate need is to hold Israel and America to the terms they've agreed to — starting with recognition of Israel's violations of the ceasefire, and Israel's continued aggression elsewhere (beyond the scope of the Gaza resolution). Moreover, even if Israel relents and honors the ceasefire, the delivery of aid, etc., Israel still merits BDS due to its treatment of Palestinians in the West Bank and within the Green Line.

• Philip Weiss [12-02]: The Israel lobby is melting down before our eyes: "The American Newish community is in open crisis over its support for Israel after two years of genocide in Gaza. A key issue in this crisis is a topic once considered too taboo to criticize the Israel lobby."

• Ramzy Baroud [12-02]: The US-Israeli scheme to partition Gaza and break Palestinian will: "United Nations Security Council Resolution 2803 is destined to fail. That failure will come at a price: more Palestinian deaths, extensive destruction, and the expansion of Israeli violence to the West Bank and elsewhere in the Middle East."

• Matt Seriff-Cullick [12-02]: Stop calling right-wing criticism of Israel 'anti-Zionism': "Recent comments by Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens have drawn more attention to right-wing critiques of US support for Israel., However, it is a serious mistake for those on the left to see this anti-Israel criticism as 'anti-Zionist.'" Response to pieces like Jeet Heer [11-07]: The return of right-wing anti-Zionism — and antisemitism. While it's generally the case that antisemites support, or at least endorse, Israel — it's local Jews they hate, and Israel offers a convenient option to rid themselves of Jews — while leftist critics of Israel are almost never antisemitic (we see diaspora Jews as our natural allies, and indeed many are among us). The primary motivators here are domestic politics, although the more Israel acts like a fascist state, the more consistent the left-right differences become. The subject here is the small schism of right-wing critics of Israel, who may well be antisemitic, but could just as well be driven by something else: especially the notion that Israel has been dragging the US into wars and/or globalization that impinges on their "America-first" fetishism. In this it helps to distinguish between pro-Israel (which is mostly about military dominance and alliance) and Zionist (which is about Jewish immigration to Israel). Right-wingers can favor Zionism while rejecting the notion that we need to send arms to Israel.

• Joe Sommerlad [12-03]: Hilary Clinton claims TikTok misinformation is influencing young people's views on the Israel-Palestine conflict: "unreliable media on TikTok, making it difficult to have a 'reasonable discussion' about events in the Middle East." This is pretty short on details, but Clinton's remarks were delivered at "Israeli newspaper Israel Hayom's New York City summit," so her complaint seems to have less to do with "pure propaganda" than with whose "a lot of young Jewish Americans who don't know the history and don't understand" are exposed to.

• Michael Arria:

  • [12-04]: Hillary Clinton says young people are turning on Israel because of 'made up videos'.

  • [12-11]: Clinton doubles down on the claim that young people are being duped on Israel. If anyone's being duped on Israel, it's the politicians who are still in denial (and they're mostly Americans and Europeans, because Israeli politicians by and large are proud of what they've done to Gaza and are doing all around the region).

  • Jeremy Ben-Ami [12-07]: How can I get my kids to love Israel?

  • Sharon Zhang [12-09]: Genocide experts slam Hillary Clinton for "genocide denial" in Gaza remark.

• Michael Leonardi [12-12]: The criminalization of solidarity: The global war on Palestinian voices and their supporters, from Israel to Italy and across the western world.

• Eve Ottenberg [01-09]: By suspending 37 aid orgs is Israel pushing toward a final expulsion? "At the very least, the decision to cut loose every major Gaza humanitarian group could led to the utter collapse of Trump's peace plan."

• Ramzy Baroud [01-18]: A war without headlines: Israel's shock-and-awe campaign in the west bank. I've always been skeptical of "shock and awe" as a military tactic: in order to be shocked, you have to survive, in which case whatever awe there may have been has been dissipated by the fact that it's now something you have survived. However, while a single blow dissipates, multiple poundings accumulate:

  In her book The Shock Doctrine, Naomi Klein defines "shock and awe" not merely as a military tactic, but as a political and economic strategy that exploits moments of collective trauma — whether caused by war, natural disaster, or economic collapse — to impose radical policies that would otherwise be resisted. According to Klein, societies in a state of shock are rendered disoriented and vulnerable, allowing those in power to push through sweeping transformations while opposition is fragmented or overwhelmed.

  Though the policy is often discussed in the context of US foreign policy — from Iraq to Haiti — Israel has employed shock-and-awe tactics with greater frequency, consistency, and refinement. Unlike the US, which has applied the doctrine episodically across distant theaters, Israel has used it continuously against a captive population living under its direct military control.

  Indeed, the Israeli version of shock and awe has long been a default policy for suppressing Palestinians. It has been applied across decades in the occupied Palestinian territory and extended to neighboring Arab countries whenever it suited Israeli strategic objectives.

  In Lebanon, this approach became known as the Dahiya Doctrine, named after the Dahiya neighborhood in Beirut that was systematically destroyed by Israel during its 2006 war on Lebanon. The doctrine advocates the use of disproportionate force against civilian areas, the deliberate targeting of infrastructure, and the transformation of entire neighborhoods into rubble in order to deter resistance through collective punishment.

  Gaza has been the epicenter of Israel's application of this tactic. In the years preceding the genocide, Israeli officials increasingly framed their assaults on Gaza as limited, "managed" wars designed to periodically weaken Palestinian resistance.

There's no way to catch up on what's been happening in Israel, so let's just jump ahead to the last week or so, where we find the genocide little inconvenienced by Trump's so-called peace plan. For what little it's worth, I don't think Trump and Netanyahu are on the same page regarding Gaza: the former is fitfully pushing his peace/corruption agenda forward, while the latter sabotages it wherever possible, knowing that even when he has to bend a bit he can outlast his dullard opponent. And while it would be nice for the world to reject them both, it's easy to think that the US is the only party capable of influencing Israel, so the best we can possibly do is to go along with Trump. Given the people involved, it's a lose-lose proposition, but one hopes that not every loss is equal. And nobody's willing to risk bucking the trend. Russia, China, and Europe have their own problems with Trump, as do lesser powers like Iran, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia. None of them care enough about the Palestinians to make a stink. Nor are they inclined to risk anything for the principle of a more rational, more just world order.

• Paul R Pillar [01-19]: Phase farce: No way 'Board of Peace' replaces reality in Gaza: "There is no ceasefire, no aid, no Hamas disarmament, IDF withdrawal or stabilization force. Just a lot of talk about Trump-run panels with little buy-in." According to Steve Witkoff, we are already in Phase Two of Trump's 20-Point Plan.

• Davie Hearst [01-20]: 'Board of Peace': Trump is running Gaza, and the world, like a mafia boss.

• Michael Arria [01-22]: Trump unveils so-called 'Board of Peace': "On Thursday, Donald Trump formally announced his so-called 'Board of Peace' during the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. The body has been widely criticized as an attempt by Trump to undermine the UN and 'takeover the world order.'"

• Craig Mokhiber [01-22]: A world on its knees: Trump's 'Board of Peace' and the darkness it promises: "Donald Trump's 'Board of Peace' is the result of the world bowing before the global rampage of the US-Israel Axis. Once again, the Palestinian people are being offered as sacrifices, and along with them, the entire global system of international law."

• Qassam Muaddi [01-22]: How Israel and the US are using the 'shock doctrine' to impose a new administration in Gaza.

• Mitchell Plitnick [01-24]: The Middle East is at a tipping point as the US fuels crisis across the region: "Long-standing crises in Palestine, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, Sudan, Iraq, and Iran are deepening as the U.S. imprint on the Middle East shows no signs of weakening."

• Michael Arria:

  • [01-22]: The Shift: Israeli-American Council summit was the latest reflection of Israel's failing brand.

  • [01-22]: Trump unveils so-called 'Board of Peace': Announced at Davos — kind of like the Balfour Declaration first appeared as a letter to the Rothschilds — "the body has been widely criticized as an attempt by Trump to undermine the UN and 'takeover the world order.'" While this article is as negative as you'd expect, you really need to read the "facts only" report in Wikipedia to get a sense of how truly deranged this organization is. Some of this was prefigured by Trump's Gaza peace plan, which led to the prisoner exchanges and Israel's half-hearted (and since oft-violated) agreement to a ceasefire and resumption of humanitarian aid to Gaza. That plan had some serious flaws, but it put the genocide on pause, and the fixes were obvious. My key points were:

    1. Israel has to leave Gaza, and cannot be allowed any role in its reconstruction.
    2. The people who still live in Gaza must have political control of their own destiny.
    3. The UN is the only organization that be widely trusted to guide Gaza toward self-government, with security for all concerned.

    I had some more points, especially on refugees, a right to exile, and reconstruction aid, but they concerned details. These three points are fundamental, and the only people who still dispute them are those who want the wars and injustices to continue. Unfortunately, their names are Netanyahu and Trump, and they are deeply invested in their atrocities and corruption. Trump's vision included a Gaza Executive Board, designed to bypass the UN, ignore the Palestinians, and keep Netanyahu and Trump involved. The Board of Peace adds additional layers: a superior Executive Board ("with a focus on diplomacy and investment"), the Board itself ("mainly leaders of countries": 60 were invited, to form an alternative to the UN, and finally its permanent chairman:

    Trump is explicitly named in the charter as the chairman of the Board of Peace. He is not subject to term limits and holds the sole authority to nominate his designated successor. Only he may invite countries to join the Board, according to the charter's delegation of the right to the chairman alone. As chairman, he also has the exclusive authority to create, modify, or dissolve subsidiary entities of the Board of Peace. All revisions to the charter, as well as administrative directives issued by the Board of Peace, are subject to his approval. Trump's chairmanship of the Board of Peace is independent of his presidency of the United States, and he has indicated that he wants to remain chairman for life.

    Also note that:

    Countries that wish to be permanent members of the Board of Peace must pay US$1 billion into a fund controlled by Trump; otherwise, each country serves a three-year term which may be renewed at his discretion.

    Trump has already withdrawn the invitation to Canada, after Prime Minister Mark Carney crossed him at Davos. The 7 initial members of the BoP Executive Board include Tony Blair and six Americans (Marco Rubio, Steve Witkoff, and Jared Kushner, along with billionaire Marc Rowan, Trump adviser Robert Gabriel Jr., and the India-born president of the World Bank, Ajay Banga). Four of them are also on the Gaza Executive Board (Witkoff, Kushner, Blair, and Rowan), along with representatives of several states (Egypt, Qatar, Turkey, UAE), two token UN representatives, and Israeli billionaire businessman Yakir Gabay.

    This is off-the-charts hubris even for Trump. It's hard to see how anyone else with an iota of intelligence and/or self-respect can even entertain such a notion. While hardly anyone is optimistic about this organization, it's also hard to find anyone who fully gets just how totally fucking insane the proposition is. This is just a quick sampling:

    • Jonathan Cook [01-23]: Trump's 'Board of Peace' is the nail in Gaza's coffin.

    • Giorgio Cafiero [01-27]: Gaza as a post-UN experiment: Inside Trump's Board of Peace.

    • Ghada Karmi [01-27]: Trump's Board of Peace: A humiliating insult to Palestinians.

    • Aaron Boxerman/Isabel Kershner [01-23]: What to know about Trump's 'Board of Peace': "President Trump's new organization was established to oversee a cease-fire in Gaza but has expanded its mandate to other conflicts. Critics say it could undermine the United Nations."

    • Dario Sabaghi [01-26]: No collapse, no reform: What's next for Iran's regime.

    • Tareq S Hajjaj [01-27]: As Trump's 'Board of Peace' presses forward, Palestinians in Gaza fear what lies ahead.

    • Louis Charbonneau [01-27]: Trump's 'Board of Peace' puts rights abusers in charge of global order: "By sidelining the UN and human rights, the US president is proposing a club of impunity, not peace."

    • IMEU:

      • [01-27]: 4 question for an expert: Trump's plan for Gaza & so-called "Board of Peace": Interview with Diana Buttu.

      • [06-26]: 7 things to remember when covering Trump's plan for Gaza & "Board of Peace".

    • Katarzyna Sidlo [European Union Institute for Security Studies] [01-18]: The Board of Peace, Gaza, and the cost of being inside the room: The title hints at the key point, which is that no nation is going to be allowed any say over how Gaza is handled without first becoming complicit with America's coddling of Israel's genocide. The UN went along with Trump's "peace plan" because it saw no other alternative: only the US has sufficient leverage to moderate Israel, so what other choice do you have than to give the US whatever it wants? The Board of Peace charter makes it clear that Trump's ambitions are even more monstrous than Netanyahu's. Europe is so used to being led around by America that the current generation of leadership cannot imagine reasserting their own sovereignty, even with the costs of failure spelled out so explicitly. But there is an alternative, which is to break first with Israel — starting with implementation of BDS — and then if necessary extend those sanctions to the US, including a break with NATO, and a reassertion of the primacy of international institutions, like the UN and the ICC (which at this point would have little trouble charging Netanyahu and Trump).

    • Fred Kaplan [01-28]: A seat on Trump's "Board of Peace" costs $1 billion. Guess who gets the money. Is it a scam or a delusion? Well, both, and remarkably brazen in both dimensions.

      In his gushing invitation letter, Trump declared that his goal is to "bring together a distinguished group of nations ready to shoulder the noble responsibility of building LASTING PEACE." In his snitty retraction letter to Prime Minister Carney, he brayed that Canada would thereby be excluded from "what will be the most prestigious Board of Leaders ever assembled at any time."

      If Trump believes his own hype (always an uncertainty), he reveals here once again that he has no idea what peace, especially "LASTING PEACE," requires. To the extent Trump currently has the power to elicit feigned respect and sometimes reluctant obedience from other world leaders, it's because he is president of the United States — meaning that he can exert the tremendous leverage of the world's main currency and most powerful military.

      Once his term in the Oval Office ends in three years, no leader would have any reason to pay him the slightest attention or courtesy. No leaders embroiled in conflict would welcome the mediation of his so-called Board of Peace, much less follow its orders.

Russia/Ukraine: This has become the forgotten war. It's been a stalemate for several years, prolonged initially because Biden had no desire to negotiate, continued because Trump has no "art of the deal," and because Putin isn't losing enough to cut his losses. One thing that isn't clear to me is how intense the war has been in 2025. It does seem to have been much less intensely reported, perhaps because Trump sees less value in demonizing Russia so has cut back the propaganda effort, perhaps because an exhausted media has had to turn to many other conflicts.

• Jackie Abramian/Artin Dersimonian [01-01]: Listening to what regular Ukrainians are saying about the war: "A number share their views on how to end what they are calling the 'conveyor belt of death.'"

• MarkEpiskopos [01-06]: Despite the blob's teeth gnashing, realists got Ukraine right: "As usual, critics are still trying to launder their abysmal policy records by projecting their failures and conceits onto others." On this evidence, I'm not very impressed by the "realists" either.

• Stavroula Pabst [01-07]: US capture of Russian-flagged ship could derail Ukraine War talks: "Experts say this could also give Europeans permission to seize Moscow's ships and kill relations." Refers to this, which suggests the target wasn't Russia but Venezuela:

  • Nic Robertson/Natasha Bertrand [01-07]: US seizes Russian-flagged oil tanker linked to Venezuela.

• Tamar Jacoby [01-07]: Germany's rearmament is stunning: "The country is determined to strengthen its armed forces in the wake of Moscow's aggression and Washington's volatility, but doing so doesn't come easily to a nation chastened by its past." I'm old enough to think that rearming Germany and Japan is backsliding of the worst sort, but the US has pursued both for decades now, and has customarily been indulged, mostly as a form of tribute. The US has few worries, given continued occupation of bases and control of the supply chain: US weapons are fragile and inefficient, which makes them both lucrative and harmless. But it's also a stupid waste on the part of the countries that indulge us, and it could easily become worse if/when Germany and Japan find they can no longer trust the US (which is certainly true with Trump). By the way, Jacoby's main beat is Ukraine, where Europe tends to be more hawkish than Trump (if not more hawkish than Biden). Recent pieces:

  • [10-23]: Can Europe turn tough talk on Russia into action? "Facing the Russian threat with less help from America, the continent forges closer ties to beef up defense."

  • [11-25]: Three lessons from Trump's latest plan for Ukraine: "Whatever emerges from US-Ukrainian talks in Geneva, nothing good is likely to come from this recipe for appeasing Moscow." But paranoia over "appeasement" is a recipe for perpetual war. This derives from the notion that the conflict is purely a power contest between Russia and NATO, both of which are unlikely to be phased by costs which are largely suffered by Ukrainians. We need to refocus this on finding a better outcome for the people involved.

• Anatol Lieven [01-15]: If Europe starts attacking Russian cargo ships, all bets are off: "The consequences will be negative, from shattering the order it claims to defend all the way up to a possible nuclear confrontation."

Trump's War and Peace: We might as well admit that Trump's foreign policy focus has shifted from trade and isolation to war and terror.

• Pavel Devyatkin [10-30]: Reckless posturing: Trump says he wants to resume nuke testing: "The president thinks he is signaling power to Russia and China but this could be the most dangerous gambit yet."

• Jack Hunter [12-31]: 4 ways Team Trump reminded us of Bush-Cheney in 2025: "From WMDs to bombing Iran, the president who consistently mocked the GWOT is now pushing the same old buttons."

• Vijay Prashad [12-02]: The angry tide of the Latin American far right. I know little about this, but the news, especially from nations that had leaned left of late (like Bolivia and Chile) seems grim. Popular anger against the establishment should favor the left, but periods of ineffective power only seem to revitalize right-wing politicians whose own period of power should have thoroughly discredited them.

• Joshua Keating:

  • [12-02]: Why is Trump suddenly so obsessed with Honduras? "As the US considers strikes on Venezuela, another Latin American country has caught the president's attention."

  • [12-27]: Why is the US bombing Nigeria? "Humanitarian intervention, MAGA-style."

  • [01-06]: What is the "Donroe Doctrine"? "Trump's new approach to Latin America is a lot like America's old one." Evidently the New York Post coined the term "Donroe," which is where it should have died. My own coinage, which I haven't seen elsewhere (even though it's pretty obvious) is Bad Neighbor Policy — a reversion to the pre-FDR era that at the time was most often referred to as "Gunboat Diplomacy," or as Smedley Butler put it, "a racket." Of course, you can't exactly go back. America's old attitude toward Latin America was formed from a sense of racist superiority. Trump's is tinged with envy, especially for caudillos like Bolsonaro, Millei, and Nayib Bukele, who exemplify the abuse of power Trump aspires to. If Maduro really was the "narco-terrorist" of his indictments, Trump would probably love him.

• Elie Mystal [12-03]: Pete Hegseth should be charged with murder: "Nop matter how you look at the strikes on alleged 'drug boats' — as acts of war or attacks on civilians — Hegseth has committed a crime and should be prosecuted."

• Eric Levitz [12-03]: The twisted reason why Trump is bombing Venezuelan boats: "For this administration, war crimes are a feature, not a bug."

• Blaise Malley [12-04]: Trump's USIP [United States Institute of Peace] rebrand wields an olive branch as a weapon: "Trump's name was added to the independent institute after his administration purged staff." It's now the "Donald J. Trump United States Institute of Peace," in honor of "the greatest dealmaker in our nation's history."

• Andrew Ancheta [12-04]: Washington's gallery of puppets: "From Venezuela to Iran, the United States can always find ambitious would-be leaders willing to advocate regime change. But they don't have their countries best interests in mind."

• Cameron Peters [12-04]: Trump's war crimes scandal, briefly explained: "War crimes allegations are engulfing the Pentagon after a deadly strike in the Caribbean."

• Eldar Mamedov [12-30]: Five restraint successes — and five absolute fails — in 2025: "Trump's promise of an 'America First' realism in foreign policy has delivered not a clean break, but a deeply contradictory picture." I will note that the "successes" are relative and marginal, while the failures are Iran, Venezuela, Syria, Israel (which they soft-pedal, but is really much worse), and "Congressional derelict in of duty on War Powers."

• Zack Beauchamp [01-05]: Donald Trump was never a dove: "How critics of American interventionism fell for a myth." These are all important points. I'd add several points. One is that while some "critics of American interventionism" defected to Trump (e.g., Tulsi Gabbard), in some ways the bigger problem was how so many supporters of American interventionism fell for the myth and flocked to support Harris (e.g., the Cheneys), and the welcome she showed them cemented her credentials as a warmonger (relatively speaking). My second point is that while Trump might not be as enthusiastic about war as some conservatives (e.g., Hitler, Netanyahu), he shares with virtually every other conservative a lust for violence in the support of power, and this is what in a pinch predisposes him to start wars that people with more democratic instincts would wish to avoid. My third point is that it was his opponents (Harris and Hillary Clinton, who both felt more need than Biden felt to signal "commander-in-chief toughness") who let Trump get away with his "man of peace" con. It shouldn't have been hard to expose Trump, but they didn't know how or dare try.

  The truth is that an unconstrained Trump, acting on his longstanding hawkish impulses, could cause all sorts of chaos in his remaining three years. While US military interventionism is very precedented, Trump's particular brand of it — naked pre-modern imperialism backed by a modern globe-spanning military — is not.

  Americans should be prepared for things to go very, very wrong.

• Eric Levitz [01-06]: The one line that Trump's foreign policy still hasn't crossed: "After Venezuela, how far could Trump really go?" He's referring to sending large numbers of American troops into a hostile country. That may be a matter of time — the argument that he can't control a nation like Venezuela without putting troops in is hard to resist once you've decided that control you must — but for now it is also a matter of design. Trump is basically just a gangster, seeking tribute, employing extortion to get it. He will break any nation that resists. He won't promise to rebuild the nations he breaks. If they don't fall in line he'll just break them again. This, by the way, isn't an original idea. The neocons c. 2000 were very big on this idea, which like much of their mindset was based on Israel. Rumsfeld pushed this line viz. Iraq, but Bush couldn't let all that oil go to waste, so he set up a crony government and spent a debilitating decade trying to defend it, to little avail. I'm not going to argue that Trump is too smart to make that mistake again, but his basic attitudes — favoring hard power over soft, never making amends, complete disregard for however his acts impact other people — are consistent with Israel's ultra-nationalism writ large, on a global scale.

• Ben Freeman/William Hartung [01-08]: The reality of Trump's cartoonish $1.5 trillion DOD budget proposal: "This dramatic escalation in military spending is a recipe for more waste, fraud, and abuse." While promoting "waste, fraud, and abuse" is by far the most likely rationale between any Trump increase in spending, one shouldn't overlook the name change from Department of Defense to Department of War, which would seem to imply a mission change way beyond ordering new stationery.

• Michael Klare [01-08]: Plunging into the abyss: "Will the US and Russia abandon all nuclear restraints?" The New START treaty lapses on February 6, which is the last of the historic arms reduction treaties that Reagan and Bush negotiated with the Soviet Union in the 1980s. I don't know to what (if any) extent Putin wants to unshackle Russia from the agreements of the Soviet era, but several times during the Ukraine conflict he's threatened to use nuclear weapons should the US/Europe/Ukraine overstep imaginary "red lines." A sane US president would take this as a signal to tone conflict down, settle disagreements, and restore peaceful coexistence, but Trump isn't one, and in this regard I can't say much better of Biden and Obama. The neocons have been chafing at any sort of restrictions on American power since the 1990s, and they have a powerful lobbying ally in the nuclear industry, which has been pushing a $1.5 trillion "modernization" of an arsenal the only purpose of which is apocalypse. Not only is Trump's sanity open to question here, he is blatantly using the threat of US military and economic power to extort submissive behavior, including tribute, from friends and foes alike. He has crossed the fine line between legitimate business sharks and gangsters. And nowhere is that more dangerous than in unleashing an unbridled nuclear arms race.

• Cameron Peters [01-09]: Trump's Greenland push, briefly explained: "Is Trump really serious about Greenland?" I doubt it, but we suffer from this cognitive limit, where we find it hard to comprehend that other people believe things that make no sense whatsoever. The real question with Trump isn't is he serious? It's can he get away with it? And he's getting away with a lot of crazy shit no one took seriously when he first broached it. Sometimes he does it as distraction — it's probably no accident that Greenland is back in the news after Venezuela. But once he floats an idea, it then becomes a test of his power, and he's always up for that. He certainly doesn't want or need Greenland for bases or business, as the US already has free access to all that. There's no reason to think he wants the people. The only reason I can come up with is that he looked at a Mercator map, which shows Greenland as huge, but also it would add a bit of visual symmetry with Alaska, like a pair of huge Mickey Mouse ears floating above the face of America. Maybe he also thinks that Canada will surrender once it sees itself surrounded on three sides. Or maybe he's just recycling 19th century fantasies of ever-expanding American imperialism? Is he really that stupid? Well, he's also embraced the idea of tariffs, which comes from the same period, and is every bit as discredited as colonialism and slavery — another old idea he's disconcertingly fond of.

  Other pieces on Greenland, some taking this seriously:

  • Fred Kaplan [01-08]: Trump is talking about taking over Greenland. The world is taking him seriously. He dismisses security concerns, and minerals, but does bring up an idea that has occurred to me: that Trump is easily fooled by the distortion of Mercator projection maps, which make Greenland look much larger and more strategic than it actually is. He notes alarm about US reliability, not just in Europe but in South Korea and Japan. "The world is very worried, and we should be too."

  • Ryan Cooper [01-08]: Donald Trump's degenerate plans for Greenland: "The worst president in history wants conquest for its own sake, even if it opens America up to nuclear attack."

  • Joshua Keating [01-08]: Can anyone stop Trump from seizing Greenland? "Europeans and Greenlanders are strongly opposed to an American land grab. But their options are limited." I can think of a few options if anyone wants to take this seriously:

    1. Expel the US from NATO. Cancel all existing US arms orders, and replace them (if needed) with European products (reverse engineering US ones if that helps, but most US weapons, like the F-35, are crap). Free from NATO, Europe could probably cut a better deal with Russia over Ukraine, etc., which might save them from having to re-arm. (I suspect that Russia fears independent European re-armament more than they do US global adventurism, which in any case is more focused on China.)
    2. Sanction the Trump family personally, including seizing their properties in Europe, and impounding their funds. This could be selectively extended, but they don't need to sanction all American businesses, or boycott American companies.
    3. Have the ICC file charges against Trump and his chief operatives, and not just over Greenland.
    4. Pull the plug on Israel. This can involve sanctions and trade restrictions.
    5. Overhaul intellectual property laws, to phase out American claims in Europe, or at least to tax exported royalties. I'm pretty certain that Europe would come out ahead if most or even all such laws were abolished. [PS: See Dean Baker [01-19]: Time for Europe to use the nuclear option: Attack US patent and copyright monopolies.]
    6. Shut down US bases in Europe, as well as agreements that allow US vessels to dock, planes to land or overfly, etc.

    It's time for Europeans to realize that the US isn't their friend, and that Trump in particular cannot be trusted and should not be appeased. Literally fighting to defend Greenland may be out of the question. And fueling a guerrilla operation to drive the Americans out, like happened in Afghanistan and Vietnam, could be a lot more trouble than it's worth. So sure, "options to stop it are limited," but so is America's desire to paint the map with its colors. And note that most of what I just suggested would be worth doing even without Trump's provocation in Greenland. The main thing that Trump is doing here is to drive home the point that after so many years of "going along to get along" America has led Europe into a dark and dreary cul de sac. Realization of that was bound to happen sooner or later. Trump will be remembered as the accelerant in the great bonfire of the Americas.

  • Pavel Devyatkin:

    • [01-13]: Tech billionaires behind Greenland bid want to build 'freedom cities': "As Europeans try to redirect Trump, his Silicon Valley supporters have ideas of their own, involving low-regulated communities and access to rare earths."

    • [01-16]: Trump digs in as Europe sends troops to Greenland. First named are Peter Thiel and Marc Andreessen.

  • Lois Parshley [01-16]: The tech billionaires behind Trump's Greenland push.

  • Sam Fraser [01-17]: On Greenland, Trump wants to be like Polk: "The president's motivation isn't security or money, it's manifest destiny."

  • Kevin Breuninger/Luke Fountain [01-17]: Trump says 8 European nations face tariffs rising to 25% if Greenland isn't sold to the US.

  • Anatol Lieven [01-18]: Trump's new 'gangster' threats against Greenland, allies, cross line: "The president declares that he will tariff the life out of countries if they do not obey him."

  • Jeffrey Gettleman [01-19]: Read the texts between Trump and Norway's Prime Minister about Greenland: "In the exchange on Sunday, Norway's leader sought to 'de-escalate' the growing conflict over Greenland and Trump's latest tariff threat."

  • Jonathan Alter [01-21]: Greenland and the Benjamins: "There's a method behind Trump's madness and it's colored green." Greenland has lots of physical assets, and very few people to claim them, which makes the land ideal for Trump's kind of graft. Sure, this fits roughly into "an 19th and 18th century imperialism tradition, where big countries and big businessmen use these smaller and weaker countries to extract resources." But that's only part of the hustle:

    The new way they want to do this, ultimately, is through what are called crypto-states. The reason that Trump pardoned the former president of Honduras, who was a drug dealer, was because he and other conservatives in Honduras, plus Peter Thiel (JD Vance's mentor) and like-minded free-enterprise authoritarians (no longer a contradiction in terms) in the U.S., favor the establishment of an island state off the coast of Honduras that would be backed by non-transparent crypto and free of any regulation by the Honduran government.

    The goal now is to do the same with other countries, to create crypto-states attached to the Marshall Islands, Nigeria, Panama (one of the reasons Trump is going after the canal) and Greenland.

    These crypto-states would be unregulated, yielding huge profits not just for crypto bros, but for companies trying to extract resources, and for the politicians (and their families) who helped them do so.

  • Pavel Devyatkin [01-21]: Trump's threats against Greenland: When "national security" becomes imperial expansion: "America has become the threat its own allies need protection from."

  • Lukas Slothuus [01-21]: Trump's Greenland push is about global power, not resources: Interesting info here on mining on Greenland, which seems like a very long-term proposition at best. I don't really buy the "global power" argument either, at least beyond the matter of Trump ego.

  • Matt Stieb [01-25]: Will Trump's Greenland deal come with any actual benefits: Evidently, on his way home from Davos, Trump backed down from his Greenland threats and claimed victory with some kind of nebulous deal. Malte Humpert tries to explain.

  PS: An old friend of mine wrote on Facebook:

  I don't always agree with what President Trump says, but I trust him to do the right thing. As a 20 year military veteran, I know that Greenland is a vital part of our global defense. This share shows a long history of our involvement in Greenland. I believe Trump wants some form of alliance, treaty or more to secure our defense as well as the citizens of Greenland.

  I wrote a comment on this, but when I returned to Facebook, the post had disappeared:

  I never trust Trump to do the right thing. Even when he gets boxed in and forced to make a decent gesture, as when he finally told the Jan. 6 rioters to go home, he makes plain his discomfort. But the argument that there is some defense necessity for seizing Greenland is a flat out lie. The US already has all the alliances and treaties needed to build any imaginable defense network in Greenland. Moreover, the way he's going about this threatens to break NATO apart, which if you buy any of the US "defense" dogma is a much bigger risk than any possible gain in Greenland. I don't know what Trump's real reason for his aggressive pressure on Greenland is, because nothing I can think of makes much sense (even given his clearly deranged mind), but one thing I am sure of is that it has nothing to do with defense.

• Peter Kornbluh [01-13]: Trump's predatory danger to Latin America: "The United States is now a superpower predator on the prowl in its "backyard."

• Leah Schroeder [01-14]: Trump's quest to kick America's 'Iraq War Syndrome': "Experts say the 'easy' Venezuela operation is reminiscent of George H.W. Bush's 1989 invasion of Panama, which in part served to bury the ghosts of Vietnam." Not a very precise analogy, not least because it involves forgetting that the Panama operation wasn't as fast and easy as they'd like to remember. But even there, the key to success was getting out quickly — a lesson they ignored in invading Afghanistan and Iraq. But thus far, Venezuela is a far more limited operation than Panama was. It's more akin to the "butcher and bolt" small wars Max Boot writes about in his 2002 book, The Savage Wars of Peace, which was meant to affirm that "small wars" always work out fin, so don't worry, just fly off the handle and let the chips fly. Of course, at that point Afghanistan was still a "small war" in its "feel good" days, and Iraq was just another hypothetical cakewalk. Thus far, there is a big gap between what the US has done in Venezuela and Trump's talk about running the country. If he's serious, and with him it's impossible to tell, he's not going to kick anti-war syndrome, but revive it.

• Edward Markey [01-15]: Donald Trump's nuclear delusions: "The president wants to resume nuclear testing. Is he a warmonger or just an idiot?"

• Valerie Insinna [01-16]: First Trump-class battleship could cost over $20 billion: That's the CBO estimate, with follow-on ships in the $9-13 billion range.

  • Alfred McCoy [01-20]: Trump's foreign policy, the comic book edition: "How to read Scrooge McDuck in the age of Donald Trump." Refes back to Ariel Dorman's famous Marxist critique of capitalism, How to Read Donald Duck (1971). Plus ça change, . . .

  • Mike Lofgren [01-21]: The Trump-class battleship: Worst idea ever: "It's not just ruinously expensive; it would weaken the Navy." This opening is pretty amusing, but it's also rather sad to see critics resort to Bush-Obama-Biden madness to argue against Trump madness:

    It is virtually impossible to name a single initiative of Donald Trump's that isn't either supremely stupid or downright satanic. From dismantling public health to pardoning criminals who ransacked the U.S. Capitol to brazen international aggression, Trump and his toadies seem hell-bent on destroying the country. With help from Pete Hegseth and other Trump lackeys in the Pentagon, the president has set his sights on weakening the military that Republicans claim to love so fervently.

    I agree that they're "hell-bent on destroying the country," but I'd caution against confusing the country with the Navy. What I see in the battleship is a probably futile attempt to take a real and inevitable decline in strength and dress it up as egomaniacal bluster, especially as the latter's existence will surely tempt the egomaniac-in-chief to use it.

• Peter Kornbluh [01-21]: Is Cuba next? "As the US attempts to reassert its imperial hegemony across the hemisphere, Havana is clearly in its crosshairs."

Trump Regime: Practically every day I run across disturbing, often shocking stories of various misdeeds proposed and quite often implemented by the Trump Administration -- which in its bare embrace of executive authority we might start referring to as the Regime. Collecting them together declutters everything else, and emphasizes the pattern of intense and possibly insane politicization of everything. Pieces on the administration.

• Matt Sledge [11-26]: This commission that regulates crypto could be just one guy: an industry lawyer: "Mike Selig had dozens of crypto clients. Now he will be a key industry regulator."

• Zack Beauchamp [12-03]: The dark reality behind Trump's new anti-immigrant policies: "His administration is now openly advancing a worldview built by white nationalists in the 2010s."

• Umair Irfan [12-04]: Trump's anti-climate agenda is making it more expensive to own a car: "The president hates EVs. But is policies are making gas cars more expensive too."

• Dylan Scott [12-05]: RFK Jr.'s anti-vax committee is recklessly overhauling childhood vaccine policy: "America's vaccine playbook is being written by people who don't believe in them."

• Sara Herschander [12-05]: 200,000 additional children under 5 will die this year — thanks to aid cuts: "The historic increase in global child deaths, explained in one chart."

• Cameron Peters [12-10]: The "Trump Gold Card," briefly explained: "A fast-tracked green card — for $1 million." Of course, where there's gold, platinum is sure to follow.

• Merrill Goozner [12-17]: Trump's concepts of a non-plan on health care: "The so-called Great Health Care Plan would do next to nothing to lower overall costs or premiums paid by individuals, families, and employers."

• Christian Paz [12-18]: Is the Trump administration just a reality TV show? "What influencers can tell us about Trump's second term." Inerview with Danielle Lindemann

• Avishay Artsy/Noel King [12-21]: What does Trump's AI czar want? "David Sacks, Trump's go-to adviser on all things tech, may help decide who wins the AI race between the US and China." I seriously doubt there is an actual race, except perhaps to determine which vision of the future bottoms out first. A race implies a set of common goals. In America, the goal is what it always is: to build shareholder value for the companies that control the technology. In China, that may be part of it, but they may also have other factors to consider. Sacks is also "crypto czar," so he's no doubt up on all kinds of scams.

• Dylan Scott [12-29]: The year measles came back.

• Sophia Tesfaye [12-31]: Project 2025 has been a success — with the help of the press: "Too often, mainstream journalists treated Project 2025 as a claim to be adjudicated rather than a document to be analyzed. They asked whether it was 'Trump's plan' instead of examining how likely its proposals were to be implemented by a Trump administration staffed with its authors." Related here:

  • Amanda Becker/Orion Rummler/Mariel Padilla [12-22]: How much of Project 2025 has actually been accomplished this year? Quite a bit, but I think the key thing was how quickly and forcefully Trump seized control of and politicized the federal bureaucracy — something that conventional rules should have made very difficult. The key thing here was not just the policies being defined, but the personnel being lined up for a blitzkrieg. I don't think that DOGE was part of the Project 2025 plan, but it built on the model of seizing executive control, including the power to fire people and impound funds, thereby gaining an unprecedented amount of political control. So even if the media had recognized that Project 2025 was the master plan, and debunked Trump's denials of relationship or interest, they still would have come up short in anticipating the threat. I think that's because they had little insight into just who the Republicans were, and how committed they were to what they saw as their mission to save America and remold it in their own image. They knew full well that had Harris won, a good 80% of the issues she campaigned on would never have gotten off the ground — as indeed had been the case with Clinton, Obama, and Biden. Democratic campaign failures are not just due to the perfidy of the politicians. It's also because to change anything significant, they have to buck a lot of established but well hidden power centers (especially business lobbies). Republicans don't have that problem, and can easily ignore countervailing forces like unions, so they're able to move much more forcefully than Democrats or the media could ever imagine.

• Miles Bryan [01-02]: How the US shut the door on asylum-seekers: "One of the most consequential changes to immigration in the US under Trump, explained." Interview with Mica Rosenberg, of ProPublica. I have several thoughts on this, including a certain amount of sympathy with the feeling that the US should limit the number of people it gives asylum to. But sure, I disapprove of the callousness and cruelty that Trump is campaigning on. There should be a universally recognized right to exile. One thing this would do is provide a firmer standard of applicability than the notion that anyone who has fears should be eligible for asylum. Also, from the exile's viewpoint, it shouldn't matter where they move, as long as the conditions that led to exile no longer exist. A right to exile doesn't mean a right to move to the US, or any other specific country. You could come up with a formula to make the distribution more equitable. You could also allow rich countries to pay other countries to fulfill their obligations. But this also sets up some criteria for rich countries to calibrate aid in ways that generate fewer exiles. That could include reducing gang crime, overhauling justice systems, promoting civil liberties, reducing group strife, restricting guns, better economic policies with wider distribution of wealth. The main forces driving people to emigrate are war, repression, economics, and climate change. Asylum policy, for better or worse, only treats the symptoms, not the problems. If Trump was serious about reducing the number of asylum seekers, he'd change his foreign policy (especially viz. Venezuela, but Somalia is another glaring example) to help people stay where they are.

• Cameron Peters [01-05]: Trump's big change to childhood vaccines, briefly explained.

• Arwa Mahdawi [01-13]: Stephen Miller wants us to fear him. Speaking of Miller:

  • Bill Scher [01-13]: Stephen Miller's worldview is straight out of Starship Troopers: "The Trump advisor declared the world is 'governed by force,' not 'international niceties.' Director Paul Verhoeven's sci-fi classic showed us what that world looks like."

• Umair Irfan [01-14]: Trump's EPA is setting the value of human health to $0: "The agency's new math to favor polluters, explained." The whole idea of trying to run a cost-benefit analysis on public health hazards has always been fraught with moral hazard: who can, or should, say how much government or business should spend to save a life, or one's heath? There's no valid answer, and much room for debate in adjusting the cost-benefit models, there are two answers that are certainly wrong: infinity, which would make it impossible to do anything, no matter how unlikely the risks, and $0, which would allow everything, no matter how grave the risks. Trump's cronies just picked one of the wrong answers — the one that best fits their model of corruption. This is one of the worst things Trump has done to date. Moreover, this is going to have longer term consequences beyond the Trump administration: any project approved under these rules will be all that much harder, and more expensive, to kill in the future, and the sunk costs will be unrecoverable.

• Cameron Peters [01-14]: The latest on Trump's weaponization of the DOJ, briefly explained: "A big week for Trump's DOJ doing what he wants."

• Emma Janssen [01-16]: The student loan report the Trump administration didn't want published: "CFPB's whitewash of the report comes on the heels of repeated attempts to fire virtually the entire staff and defund the agency. . . . The bulk of the deleted content from Barnard's report focuses on the struggles borrowers face and the private student loan companies that exacerbate them."

• Ryan Cooper [01-20]: How Trump doomed the American auto industry: "Ford and GM made a big bet on electrification. Then Trump plunged a knife into their backs."

  Almost all of the EV subsidies in the IRA were repealed, as part of Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Now, thanks to that betrayal, plus Trump's lunatic trade and foreign policy in general, the American auto industry is bleeding out. . . .

  Contrary to the triumphalism of various EV critics, all this horrendous waste does not mean that the global EV transition is now in question. As I have previously detailed, in 2025 a quarter of global car sales were EVs, led by Southeast Asia, where the EV share of new car sales in several nations has soared past the 40 percent mark, with many more nations just behind. China, the largest car market in the world, went from almost zero to more than half in just five years. America's failure to gain a serious toehold in EV production — particularly very cheap models — is a major reason why the Big Three's share of the global auto market has fallen from nearly 30 percent in 2000 to about 12 percent today, while China's share has risen from 2 percent to 42 percent.

• Brandon Novick [01-23]: Encouraging crime: settlement rewards Medicare Advantage fraud.

• Spencer Overton [01-23]: 12 ways the Trump administration dismantled civil rights law and the foundations of inclusive democracy in its first year.

• Corey G Johnson [01-24]: Complaint accuses Trump's criminal attorney of "blatant" crypto conflict in his role at DOJ: "Todd Blanche ordered changes to crypto prosecutions while owning more than $150,000 in digital assets."

Donald Trump (Himself): As for Il Duce, we need a separate bin for stories on his personal peccadillos -- which often seem like mere diversions, although as with true madness, it can still be difficult sorting serious incidents from more fanciful ones.

• David Dayen [10-28]: Here's what Trump's ballroom donors want: "A comprehensive rundown of Prospect reporting on the companies that gave to Trump's monument to himself on the White House grounds."

• Cameron Peters [12-02]: Trump's confounding pardon of a drug lord, briefly explained: "The former president of Honduras was convicted of trafficking cocaine. Why did Trump pardon him?"

• Rebecca Crosby & Noel Sims [12-04]: Trump Jr.-backed startup receives $620 million Pentagon loan. This is followed by a related piece, "Trump family crypto scheme runs into trouble."

• Jason Linkins [12-06]: Hey, does anyone want to talk about Donald Trump's infirmities? "He's clearly slipping, mentally and physically, but the political press suddenly finds it less newsworthy that we have a woefully aging president."

• Constance Grady [12-08]: The Kennedy Center Honors continue Trump's vengeance on liberal Hollywood.

• John G Russell [12-12]: Sgt. Trump: The art of implausible deniability: Starts by quoting Sgt. Schultz from Hogan's Heroes ("I know nothing"), a claim I've heard Trump saying many times.

  One would think Americans would have had enough of Trump's falsehoods. Credited with telling 30,573 lies during his first term, he repeats them so relentlessly that the media, numbed by their frequency, no longer bothers to keep count.

  Lies may endure forever, but liars themselves are mortal. At 79, Trump's days in political power are numbered, yet the damage he has wrought will outlast him. We must brace ourselves for a post-Trump America, one that, I fear, may prove as corrosive as his current reign. The Pandora's box he has opened has unleashed a flood of white supremacism, misogyny, xenophobia, and transphobia, leaving Hope to cower meekly inside. Whether that pestilence can ever be contained again remains uncertain, particularly as it thrives on post-Obama white racial resentment and dreams of restored hegemony.

  I'm less concerned about the "Pandora's box," which I believe remains long-term decline even without the inhibitions that before Trump made it less visible, than by how difficult it's going to be to restore any measure of public trust. It is for this reason that Democrats along Clinton-Obama-Biden lines have been shown to be total failures. Most of what Trump has been able to do has been made possible by the view that Democrats cannot be trusted. One result is that it will be even harder for Democrats to regain that trust.

• Christian Paz:

  • [12-12]: Trump's support is collapsing — but why? "How Trump's winning coalition is unraveling in real time." This is mostly theories, with three offered to explain parts of the "coalition" that have gone wobbly:

    1. Low-propensity voters
    2. Affordability voters
    3. "New entrant" voters

    But aren't these all just variants on the theme of people who simply didn't know any better? That such voters exist at all is an indictment of the Harris messaging campaign, and the conflicted, confusing, and apparently corrupt stances of many Democrats. For Democrats to regain a chance, they're going to have to campaign for votes, and not just expect Republicans to drive voters into their arms, while they raise cash and spend it on ads nobody can relate to. One more point here: "affordability" isn't the only issue that Trump misled voters on and has since proven them to be naive at best and more likely stupid: what about all the folks who thought they wee voting against the Biden-Harris war machine?

  • [12-29]: The most volatile group of voters is turning on Trump: "There's a new line dividing young Americans." New polling shows: "Younger Gen Z men are more pessimistic about the state of the nation." They're also "slightly less likely to disapprove of Donald Trump," but the numbers there are from 64% to 66% for their 23-29 elders.

• Garrett Owen [12-18]: Kennedy Center board vote to rename venue after Trump: "The president's hand-picked board voted to add his name to the performing arts venue."

• Heather Digby Parton

  • [12-18]: Trump's primetime speech was a master class in gaslighting: "The president's false claims about economic conditions are the latest indication that he's in serious trouble."

  • [12-21]: Trump's crackdown on the left has decades of precedent: "The Justice Department's plans to target leftist organizations is taking alarming shape." This was in response to Trump's NSPM-7 (a presidential memorandum on "Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence"), targeting the phantom "antifa organization" or maybe just the general idea that fascism — or Trump, since he's the prime example of fascism these days — should be opposed. (For more, see Trump's orders targeting anti-fascism aim to criminalize opposition.) The "decades of precedent" reflects how easy it's always been to red-bait supporters of labor unions, civil rights, world peace, and freedom of speech, but is that still the case? Trump repeats the magic words about "radical leftists" endlessly, but who still listens to them? His true believers, and a few shell-shocked liberals whose cowardice and lack of principles helped the red-baiters run roughshod over decent, reform-minded people.

  • [01-01]: Trump's cultural coup is doomed to fail: "Artists are protesting Trump's Kennedy Center takeover — and creating art in defiance of his repression."

  • [01-08]: War has become fashionable again for the GOP: "The right's detour into pacifism under Trump was never going to stick."

  • [01-15]: Trump is something worse than a fascist: She's pushing for "tyrant": "an ancient word that should nonetheless be familiar to anyone who recalls the founding ideals of this country." But finding the perfect epithet is not the real point: each one illuminates (or doesn't) some facet of a more complex and fractious whole. The question is whether it helps you understand the problem Trump presents. But once you do understand, they're all pretty much interchangeable.

• Ron Flipkowski:

  • [12-26]: 25 worst villains of the Trump admin: "The most difficult part of this exercise was only picking 25." Nonetheless, your favorites are here, with Stephen Miller at 1 ("the easiest selection"), followed by Howard Lutnick, Pete Hegseth, Russ Vought, and Todd Blanche, with Kristi Noem and Tom Homan down at 8 and 9.

  • [12-27]: 500 worst things Trump did in 2025: "A comprehensive list": This is just the first 100, which still leaves us in February, with more than 300 employees of the National Nuclear Security Admin fired then reinstated after they realized "no one has taken any time to understand what we do and the importance of our work to the nation's national security. Also: "After JD Vance met with the co-leader of Germany's far-AfD party, one German expert here in Munich said: 'First, America de-Nazified Germany. Now, America is re-Nazifying Germany.'"

• Zack Beauchamp [12-16]: Trump's war on democracy is failing: "And it's his own fault." Author diagnoses something he calls "haphazardism." I think he's trying to impose reason on madness. Trump doesn't really care whether he kills democracy as a concept, as long as it falls into place and does whatever he wants. Maybe if he did have a master plan to destroy democracy, he'd do a more effective job of it. But actually, he's pretty much succeeding, even if he suffers occasional setbacks by making it look inept and, well, haphazard. And while haphazardism isn't as ruthlessly efficient as, well, Hitler, its incoherence offers a bit of deniability that lets people so inclined to cut him some slack. One can say something similar about Israel and genocide. Ineptness and inefficiency seems to be part of the plan, but both in terms of intent and practice, that's exactly what they're doing. Just not as efficiently as, well, Hitler.

  Beauchamp spends a lot of time quoting the following piece, which I'd argue is a good example how focusing on ideological terms like "democracy" and "authoritarianism" misses the mark:

  • Steven Levitsky/Lucan A Way/Daniel Ziblatt [12-11]: The price of American authoritarianism. Levitsky splits hairs arguing that Trump is running an "authoritarian government" but not an "authoritarian regime," because Trump's "systematic and regular abuse of power" is "likely to be 'reversed' in the near future." That's a novel definition of "regime," the only purpose being to posit a hypothetical system even worse than Trump's. I tend to use "regime" to describe any government, however stable or fleeting, that flaunts and abuses its power. Trump may not do that 100% of the time, but he's gone way beyond any previous norms, which is why I'm more inclined to say "regime" than "administration." What's new with Trump isn't ideology but an opportunism that is rooted in a gangster mentality: the power has long been there when presidents want to abuse it, but Trump has done so to an unprecedented degree. That's because gangsters believe in force, don't believe in limits, and pursue wealth and power until someone stops them.

• Cameron Peters [01-06]: Trump's January 6 victory lap: "Five years later, the White House is still rewriting January 6."

• Dustin DeSoto/Astead Herndon [01-07]: How Trump brought the World Cup to America: "The Trump-FIFA connection, explained."

• Moustafa Bayoumi [01-13]: 2026 is already pure chaos. Is that Trump's electoral strategy? The key argument here is that Trump wants to take the challenge of making himself the central issue in the 2026 Congressional elections. This shows a degree of partisan commitment that recent Democratic presidents never even hinted at. Trump understands that he needs loyal Republicans to implement his extremist programs, whereas the Democrats rarely tried to do anything Republicans didn't buy into. It also expresses confidence that Trump's charisma is so strong he can motivate his most clueless voters to come out and vote as he directs. That's a big ask given that Democrats have been much more motivated in midterms where Republican presidents were the issue (e.g., in 2006 and 2018). It also depends on Trump being much more popular in November 2026 than he is now, or ever has been.

• Sasha Abramsky [01-16]: The week of colonial fever dreams from a sundowning fascist: "The news was a firehose of stories of authoritarian behavior. We can't let ourselves drown."

• New York Times Editorial Board [01-17]: For Trump, justice means vengeance: Well, where do you think he ever got such a stupid idea? It's almost impossible to watch a cop or law and order show and not be told that the good guy's chief motivation is "to get justice" for someone. And that almost always boils down to vengeance. I've never managed to read John Rawls' much-admired A Theory of Justice, which evidently ties justice to a concept of fairness, but I'm probably fairly close in asserting that the point of justice is to restore one's faith in the fair ordering of society. That suggests to me that the pursuit of justice can never be attained by simply balancing off injustices. Any punishment the state metes out must make the state appear to be more just than it appeared before. Vengeance doesn't do that. Vengeance just compounds injustice, in the vain hope that somehow two wrongs can make a right. Ergo, Trump's pursuit of vengeance (or redemption, as he often calls it), is anti-justice.

  PS: In looking up Rawls, I see that Robert Paul Wolff wrote Understanding Rawls: A Reconstruction and Critique of A Theory of Justice (1977). That's out of print, but probably the place to start. I read several of Wolff's books early on — A Critique of Pure Tolerance, The Poverty of Liberalism, In Defense of Anarchism — probably before I went to college. Those books showed me that it was possible to derive intuitively correct moral postulates from reason alone, and that in turn convinced me to use reason to try to find my way out of schizophrenia (at least as Bateson defined it). More than anything else, I owe those books my life, and what little I have accomplished in the 55 years since I read them.

  By the way, here's a brief quote from Wolff's A Credo for Progressives:

  The foundation of my politics is the recognition of our collective interdependence. In the complex world that we have inherited from our forebears, it is often difficult to see just how to translate that fundamental interdependence into laws or public policies, but we must always begin from the acknowledgement that we are a community of men and women who must care for one another, work with one another, and treat the needs of each as the concern of all.

  In my formulation of this, "complex" is of critical importance, as the more complex life becomes, the more trust matters, and that in turn depends on justice, in the sense of confirming that the world is ordered in a fair and reasonable manner.

• Melvin Goodman [01-19]: Donald Trump, poster child for megalomania:

  Megalomaniac: Someone with an extreme obsession for power, wealth, and self-importance, characterized by grandiose delusions of being more significant or powerful than they are, often linked to a tenuous grip on reality.

  "The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed — and hence clamorous to be led to safety — by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." H.L. Mencken, "Baltimore Evening Sun," 1920.

  The mainstream media continues to describe Donald Trump as an "isolationist," or a "neo-conservative," or more recently as an "imperialist." These terms are irrelevant; the term that should be applied is "megalomaniac" or "narcissist." These terms fit Trump and help to understand the threat he poses to the peace and security of the United States and much of the global community.

  As he notes, "Trump's narcissism has been on display for decades. What turns narcissism into megalomania is power.

• Harold Meyerson [01-20]: 25th Amendment time for Mad King Donald: "His narcissism has become psychotically megalomaniacal." I expect a regular stream of 25th Amendment pieces, but the chances of his hand-picked cabinet of cronies taking his keys away are extremely slim, even if he was basically a good sport, which he isn't. His staff are even less likely to move against him (as we saw with Biden). And sure, this article mentions Mad King George III, but not that he ruled for 43 years after he lost the American colonies in 1776.

• Ed Kilgore [01-22]: Trump only accepts polls that proclaim his greatness. Trump polls seem to be part of Kilgore's beat:

  • [01-22]: Trump is losing the swing voters he won in 2024: Well, what do you expect when "low-information" voters start to wake up?

  • [01-16]: Trump's job-approval ratings are plummeting: "The president's modest gains on the economy aren't enough to counter a huge public backl;ash to his imperial threats and ICE's brutal tactics."

  • [01-15]: Polls show Trump on thin ice with interventionist threats: "Support for Trump's Venezuela raid is mixed. But surveys show little enthusiasm for deeper involvement or military strikes on Iran and Greenland."

  • [01-12]: A majority of young voters now reject both parties: "Record numbers of millennial and Gen-Z voters identify as independents. They're not pining for moderation; they're disaffected from the system."

  • [01-07]: Trump bets impeachment threat will boost midterms turnout: "He warned that Democrats will impeach him a third time if they win the House. His low approval ratings suggest this won't motivate many voters."

  • [12-28]: Why history points to huge 2026 losses for Trump's GOP: "A few presidents have pulled off what Trump is trying to do in the 2026 midterms. None had much in common with Trump or his party."

  • [12-24]: Trump started 2025 strong, then his approval rating crashed: "The president's back in the polling doldrums where he spent most of his first term, with particularly bad numbers on the economy."

• Trump in Davos:

  • Sasha Abramsky [01-23]: At Davos, the world watched the rantings of a despot: "President Donald Trump has turned his back on the liberal world order — and Europe is unlikely to follow." While I don't doubt that Europe would be wise to break with Trump, I'm not optimistic, either that they will, or that they'll opt for something better. Right now, Europe is much more hawkish over Ukraine than the US is. While Obama did most of the dirty work in Libya, it was largely at Europe's behest — Libya meant little to the US (or Israel), but much to France and Italy. More generally, while Europe is more "social democratic" than the US, in theory at least, the EU is pretty completely in thrall to neoliberal ideologists, and the continent is chock full of revanchist right-wing parties, making it more likely that an anti-US backlash will come from the right than from the left.

  • Heather Souvaine Horn [01-23]: Trump's terrifying Davos speech is a wake-up call to the global elite: "The World Economic Forum has long suggested that its annual lavish party is about saving the world. Trump just shredded that myth."

  • Sasha Abramsky [01-23]: At Davos, the world watched the rantings of a despot: "President Donald Trump has turned his back on the liberal world order — and Europe is unlikely to follow."

  • Margaret Hartmann [01-21]: The 12 stupidest moments from Trump's Davos speech.

• Margaret Hartmann: She's been busy of late, as her main theme is "Trump's stupidest moments":

  • [01-20]: Trump leaks world leaders' private texts in Greenland bullying fit: "Humiliating foes by sharing their private messages is a common Trump tactic, but Emmanuel Macron is the first world leader to get this treatment."

  • [01-16]: All of Trump's tacky and trollish White House renovations: "From demolishing the East Wing to build a ballroom to paving the Rose Garden, the changes reflect Trump's second-term quest for dominance and revenge."

  • [01-16]: Trump gets Nobel Peace Prize in saddest way possible: "Machado 'presented' her award to Trump . . . but there was no dramatic made-for-TV reveal, and the Nobel Institute said he's still no winner." Reminds me of the time Whitey Bulger won the lottery.

  • [01-14]: White House calls Trump flip-off an 'appropriate' response: "To be fair, Emily Post doesn't cover what to do when you're called a 'pedophile protector.'"

  • [01-09]: Nobel Institute: Trump can't just take Machado's Peace Prize.

  • [01-06]: Trump upset that Maduro and Melania don't respect his dancing: "Trump does a lot of childish things, but he didn't launch air strikes because Maduro imitated his dancing — right?"

  • [01-05]: The wildest things Trump said about the Venezuela attack: "From declaring 'nobody can stop us' to coining the term 'Donroe Doctrine,' Trump's remarks on the attack were staggeringly dumb and brazen."

  • [12-23]: MLK Day out, Christmas Eve in? All Trump's holiday changes. "While Trump can't unilaterally create permanent federal holidays, he did give federal workers Christmas Eve and December 26 off tis year."

  • [12-18]: White House congratulates JFK on 'Trump-Kennedy Center' renaming: "Karoline Leavitt announced the possibly illegal move by saying Trump and the deceased JFK will be a 'truly great team.'"

  • [12-18]: Trump plaques make White House wall ex-president burn book: "He made his 'Presidential Walk of FAme' even more stunningly stupid by adding plaques insulting Biden, Obama, and his other predecessors."

  • [12-15]: Trump's post on Rob Reiner's death is truly deranged: "He falsely and disrespectfully suggested that the director was murdered due to his dislike of the president."

  • [12-13]: Donald and Melania Trump have themselves an awkward little Christmas: "Melania shared an unflattering party video after Donald reminisced about her décor debacles and admitted he's clueless about her next project."

  • [12-10]: 10 stupid moments from Trump's Pennsylvania rally: "His 'affordability' speech devolved into racist musings on 'shithole' countries."

  • [12-03]: Trump sleeps in Cabinet meeting, rants online all night: "Maybe Trump should cut back on the 1:30 a.m. Truth Social posts and prioritize keeping his eyes open during important White House events."

  • [12-02]: Trump TikTok challenge: Watch the most awful White House posts: "Can you make it through these incompetently executed memes, Wicked deportation jokes, and Trump's thirst traps without scrolling away?"

We should also make brief mention of Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney's Davos speech, which provided a stark contrast and a rare moment of opposition to Trump:

• Gabrielle Gurley [01-23]: The Davos challenge: "Canada's leader steps out to redefine the global order in the face of American expansionism." As he noted, "the middle powers must act together, because if we're not at the table, we're on the menu."

• Cameron Peters [01-23]: The week the US and Canada broke up: "What Mark Carney said in Switzerland, briefly explained."

Caitlin Dewey [01-21]: Canada's prime minister just declared the end of the world as we know it: "Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney's historic speech, explained."

Ray Acheson [01-23]: Carney's hot air at Davos as cover for western barbarism: Reminds us that before Carney's "break" from Trump Canada had been pretty complicit in serving US interests.

Democrats:

• Timothy Shenk [09-29]: Democrats are in crisis. Eat-the-rich populism is the only answer. Much here on Dan Osborn, whose independent campaign for a Senate seat from Nebraska in 2024 fell 7 points short, in a state where Trump beat Harris by 20. His pitch: "a blistering assault on economic elites, a moderate stance on cultural issues and the rejection of politics as usual." But he also talks about Mamdani, and what they have in common. This is the first piece in a series, which doesn't look all that promising — devoted Israel war hawk Josh Shapiro is "the future of the Democrats"?

  • Michelle Goldberg [10-01]: He's young, talented and openly religious. Is he the savior Democrats have been waiting for? James Talarico, a Texas Democrat running for the Senate.

  • Chris Hayes [10-19]: The Democrats main problem isn't their message.

  • Binyamin Appelbaum [11-09]: Mamdani isn't the future of the Democrats. This guy is. Josh Shapiro. "Shapiro's version of the Democratic Party is more patriotic than the GOP and, in some sense, more conservative."

  • James Pogue [01-12]: This rural congresswoman things Democrats have lost their minds. She has a point. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (D-WA). By the way, she also has a primary opponent, Brent Hennrich, who came to my attention after Gluesenkamp Perez was "one of the seven Democrats who just voted to fund ICE." The others were: Jared Golden (ME-02), Don Davis (NC-01), Tom Suozzi (NY-03), Laura Gillen (NY-04), Henry Cuellar (TX-28), and Vicente Gonzalez (TX-34). Elsewhere I see that one Republican, Thomas Massie, voted no.

• Zach Marcus [11-12]: Draining the online swamp: "Instead of accepting the existing digital political battlefield as inevitable, Democrats should challenge it as a root cause of our dysfunctional politics, and vow to be the party that cleans it up." When I saw this article, I was hoping for something rather different, but this is a big subject, with many components, and eventually some things that I would focus on do show up in the fine print. But the key points are: (1) the online cybersphere is indeed a swamp, where money functions like water in physical swamps, and could just as well be drained; (2) Democrats should see draining this swamp as a political opportunity, not with a view toward biasing politics in their direction, but because the swamp is imposing hardships on literally everyone. A large book could be written about this: abuse comes in many forms, but it mostly comes down to attempts to profit: to sell or solicit, directly or through by exploiting information. One should take care, as few politicians do, not to impose their own moral and political stances. But any serious effort to cut back the scams and fraud is bound to be popular, and how hard can it be to have a significant impact? What is hard is getting Democrats to see that they need to do a much better job of serving their voters than their current focus, which is raising money from the exploiters.

• Virginia Heffernan [12-05]: No, progressives don't want "purity." They just want some courage. "When left-leaning Democrats complain about corporate influence, it's not a 'purity test.' It's a demand for a better politics."

• Elizabeth Warren [01-12]: Elizabeth Warren's Plan for a Revived Democratic Party: "The Massachusetts senator argues that, in order to prevail in the midterms, the party needs to recover its populist roots — and fighting spirit."

• Erica Etelson [01-15]: Democrats really can compete in rural America: "The results for the 2025 election cycle send a powerful message regarding strategies that connect outside of urban centers." Given who they're running against, Democrats should be able to compete in literally every district in America.

• Perry Bacon [01-21]: Abigail Spanberger's first move as Virginia Gov. was a masterstroke: "Even moderate Democrats can be boldly anti-MAGA. Other centrist Democrats should follow her example." What she did was move to force the resignation of several Republican appointees to university boards. That's the sort of thing Trump has done like crazy, and the people she's replacing are the sort of partisan hacks Trump has been appointing.

Republicans: A late addition, back by popular demand, because it isn't just Trump, we also have to deal with the moral swamp he crawled out of:

• Roger Sollenberger [12-04]: 'George Santos with a gun': The untold story of Cory Mills, a mercenary in Congress: "The Florida Republican has tried to leverage his legislative role to the benefit of his arms business. With that business now in foreclosure proceedings, Mills has little to show for it."

• Christian Paz:

  • [12-05]: Marjorie Taylor Greene's requiem for MAGA: "Why an 'America First' true believer is giving up." This follows up on:

  • [11-22]: What Marjorie Taylor Greene's feud with Trump is really about: "MTG isn't turning against MAGA. She's trying to save it."

• Sarah Jones [12-06]: The right's post-Trump civil war is already underway: "And Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts is betting on the extremists." He's defending Tucker Carlson, who is promoting Nick Fuentes, who is "king of the groypers" — I had to look it up, too; journalistic shorthand, close enough for practical purposes, is "nazis," mostly because Jews feature prominently among the many people they hate. Other right-wingers draw the line just short of gross Judeophobia, especially since they can whitewash their antisemitism by expressing support and admiration for their fellow right-wingers in Israel. One phrase that crops up among those who tolerate ideologues like Fuentes is "no enemies to the right." I'm actually pretty sympathetic to the notion of "no enemies to the left," but I can be picky about who's actually on the left.

• Ed Kilgore

  • [01-14]: GOP may squeeze in second Big Beautiful Bill before midterms: Makes sense. They still have the numbers in the House, and they'll be ok in the Senate with a "budget-reconciliation bill." It will be a grab bag, but nearly everything they want is odious to count, and however much they can agree on will be big enough to recycle the brand name.

  • [12-22]: Vance rebrands MAGA revenge as a Christian Crusade: From his speech at Turning Point USA's AmericaFest 2025 conference, where he promoted "a strange sort of Christian vengeance for the death of Charlie Kirk."

• Kelli Wessinger/Noel King [12-16]: Republican woen in Congress are tired of Mike Johnson.

• Constance Grady [01-09]: Erika Kirk and Marjorie Taylor Greene are playing with the same archetype: "How ambitious is a MAGA woman allowed to be?"

• Clarence Lusane [01-15]: Just as dangerous: Vance and the 2028 election. Even though Vance offered some memorable quotes dissing Trump, it's quite a stretch to title a section "A time when Vance was truthful." The case against such a claim includes nearly all of Hillbilly Elegy.

Economy and technology (especially AI): I used to have a section on the economy, which mostly surveyed political economics. Lately, I run across pieces on AI pretty often, both in terms of what the technology means and is likely to do and in terms of its outsized role in the speculative economy. I suspect that if not now then soon we will recognize that we are in a bubble driven by AI speculation, which is somewhat masking a small recession driven largely by Trump's shutdown, tariffs, and inflation. In such a scenario, there are many ways to lose.

• Robert Wright [01-23]: Which AI Titan should you root for? He makes something of a case for Demis Hassabis ("head of Google's DeepMind"). While the technology is difficult enough to understand, the business models are even harder to grasp, because they are based on very large bets on very strange fantasies of world domination. In this world, even a tiny bit of self-conscious scruples seems to count for a lot. Still, this is shaping up as a race to the bottom, where even tiny scruples will be quickly discarded as signs of weakness.

• Jez Corden [11-29]: OpenAI is a loss-making machine, with estimates that it has no road to profitability by 2030 — and will need a further $207 billion in funding even if it gets there. I'm not even trying to follow things like this, but somehow found the tab open, and decided to note before closing. My impression is that most tech companies over the last 30-40 years have been overvalued without a realistic profit path, but a small number of survivors seem to be reaping the monopoly rents the speculators hoped for. Still, it wouldn't be hard to deflate them if we had the insight and political will.

• Robert Kuttner [12-01]: Sources of America's hidden inflation: "How market power jacks up prices, and how Trump's policies add to the pressure." I've been alluding to this often of late, so it's nice to see so many of these points being made.

• Ronald Purser [12-01]: AI is destroying the university and learning itself: "Students use AI to write papers, professors use AI to grade them, degrees become meaningless, and tech companies make fortunes. Welcome to the death of higher education." I'm not sure this is the right analysis, and not just because I don't have much love for the old meritocracy that is being wrecked, and not just becuase it never secured much merit in the first place. The "system" has always been crooked, which is something folks with the right skills or hunches have always been able to take advantage of. AI changes the rules, which means that different strategies and different people will win, and some of that will seem unjust. I personally know of a recent case in Arkansas where an AI program was used by a school to detect possible AI use and falsely accused the bright daughter of a friend of cheating. We had a long and fruitless discussion after this on how can someone so charged prove that the AI program is wrong, but the more important question is why does it matter? Which gets us back to politics: in your hypothetical meritocracy, do you want the "merit" (for more people) or the "ocracy" (to empower and enrich the few)? The stock bubble behind the AI companies assumes that AI can be monopolized (kept artificially scarce) allowing its masters extraordinary powers over everyone else. Does anyone but a few monomaniacal entrepreneurs actually want that? Much more that can be unpacked here.

  As for the death of higher education, Jane Jacobs analyzed that in her 2004 book, Dark Age Ahead, where higher education was one of the five "pillars of civilization" she identified decay in (the others were: community and family; science; government; and culture. In education, she blamed the focus shifting from learning to credentialism. I think that shift largely happened in the 1980s, when conservatives decided that education should be reserved for elites, and enforced that by jacking up the costs to ordinary people, creating scarcity and desperation, while the rewards for avarice became ever greater. While AI may be useful as a tool for learning, its applicability to scamming credentialism is much more obvious. I'm not someone who believes that technology is "value neutral," but the values of the politico-socio-economic system do have profound effects on how any given technology is used.

• Eric Levitz [12-17]: Can money buy Americans happiness? "The real cause of America's 'vibecession.'" Part of a series on The case for growth ("supported by a grant from Arnold Ventures"), the point of which is that the "degrowth movement" is wrong, because, well, "more is more." These arguments seem shallow to me. Sure, there are areas where growth would still help. But there are other areas where all you really need is better distribution. And there are other areas where we already have too much, and would be better off slowing down, or even reversing course. To my mind, "degrowth" is a useful conceptual tool, one that moves beyond the kneejerk notion that growth fixes everything. Some (not all) more pieces in the series:

  • Andrew Prokop [12-12]: Why America gave up on economists: "Both parties have turned their backs on traditional economic advice. Is the country paying the price?" Seems like a lot of false equivalence here. Republicans use economists to ratify their schemes, and sometimes applaud a crackpot idea that they can use (e.g., the Laffer Curve), but they make little pretense of following economics, and will readily dispose of any arguments that question their pet projects (like Trump's tariffs). Clinton and Obama, on the other hand, sought out neoliberal economists and gave them a lot of power, because they start from shared pro-business principles. Biden too, except that a few past figures (like Larry Summers) have been discredited. Prokop offers an example where Democrats supposedly have broken with economic orthodoxy, but I've never seen any evidence of it: price controls. (Unless he means rent control, which is a way to address certain market failures?)

  • Bryan Walsh [12-06]: Breaking free of zero-sum thinking will make America a wealthier country: "The affordability crisis is a growth crisis." Title is true. Subtitle is false, stuck in a mindset that sees growth as a panacea. That so much is unaffordable is only partly due to scarcity (which in many cases is deliberately imposed). It's mostly due to systematic maldistribution.

  • Marina Bolotnikova [12-19]: We need to grow the economy. We need to stop torching the planet. Here's how we do both. "Let's fix the two massive efficiency sinks in American life." She identifies those two "sinks" as "animal agriculture" and cars, and spends most of the article attacking them (and implicitly those of us who like and want them), all the while insisting that vital growth would be much better elsewhere.

• Ryan Cooper [12-23]: Bari Weiss is the propagandist Donald Trump deserves: "The would-be dictator would get a much better class of censor if his regime didn't hoist the biggest morons in the country in to leadership positions." I'm reminded of an old adage attributed to David Ogilvy: "First-rate people hire first-rate people. Second-rate people hire third-rate people." That's far enough down the slope to make the point, although with Trump and his flunkies, perhaps you should denote inferior classes. Trump seems to hire people who are unfit for any other job. Sure, Weiss only indirectly works for Trump, but his worldview infects his supporters.

• James Baratta [01-08]: Ransomware recovery firms share in the hacking spoils: "Incident response firms negotiate with hackers while also processing payments to them, leading to potential betrayals of their clients' trust." Sounds like the principal-agent problem, or more specifically the risks of trusting agents who are also paid by other sources (which is most of them these days, even without considering self-interest conflicts). Needless to say, the problem is worse in high-inequality societies, especially where marginal variations take on considerable importance. The greater the inequality, the harder it is to trust anyone. America is more inequal now than ever before, which is reflected in the dissolution of trust.

• Adam Clark Estes [01-10]: AI's ultimate test: Making it easier to complain to companies: "Imagine actually enjoying a customer service experience." Sure, it could work, sometimes. I like the idea of being able to get answers without having to interact with workers, but I've rarely connected with something the robots could actually answer or handle, so we spend a lot of time thrashing, which is aggravating to me, but of course neither the machine nor the company care. AI is mostly used these days to insulate companies from human contact with customers, and to train customers into expecting less service. Perhaps if we had competitive companies, such tactics would be self-limiting, but more and more we don't.

• Constance Grady [01-10]: Grok's nonconsensual porn proble is part of a long, gross legacy: "Elon Musk claims tech needs a 'spicy mode' to dominate. Is he right?"

• Harold Meyerson [01-19]: A new low for American workers: "The share of American income going to labor is at its lowest level since measurements began."

• Jeffrey Selingo [01-20]: The campus AI crisis: "Young graduates can't find jobs. Colleges know they have to do something. But what?" Starts with a young college graduate who applied to 150 jobs, to no avail. "How much AI is to blame for the fragile entry-level job market is unclear." The author sees an analogy to his own college years, 1991-94, when the Internet suddenly became a big thing, causing disruptions as colleges had to scramble to seem relevant — as they are doing now with programs like "AI Fluency." I'm afraid I don't have any insight here. AI still strikes me as a lot of hype wrapped around a few parlor tricks, most of which have very little relevance to the core economy of goods and services. But then no one can see the future, or even the present. All we can do is look back, and try to imagine what that portends. But the 1990s analogy reminds me of Robert Reich's 1991 book The Work of Nations: Preparing Ourselves for 21st Century Capitalism, where he came up the the idiotic idea that we didn't need manufacturing jobs anymore, because we'd just get high-paying jobs as "symbolic manipulators" and everything would be wonderful. His buddy Bill Clinton read that and saw it as a green light to implement NAFTA. We're still reeling from the consequences of Reich's fantasy. (Clinton may have realized what would happen to US manufacturing, and simply not cared, but was he prescient enough to anticipate the damage to Mexican agriculture, the subsequent explosion of emigration to the US, and the repercussions for American jobs and politics?) About the only thing I'm sure of viz. AI is that if Reich's cornucopia of "symbolic manipulator" jobs had occurred, AI would devastate them, because symbolic manipulation is literally all that AI does and can ever do. Sure, it may, like all stages since the dawn of computing, contribute some productivity, but we'll still depend on real people doing real work for everything we need to sustain life.

Miscellaneous Pieces

The following articles are more/less in order published, although some authors have collected pieces, and some entries have related articles underneath.

Spencer Kornhaber [05-05]: Is this the worst-ever era of American pop culture? "An emerging critical consensus argues that we've entered a cultural dark age. I'm not so sure." I don't recall why I opened this loose tab — possibly because the article opens with a quote from Ted Gioia, who used to be a reliable Jazz Critics Poll voter but abandoned us as he became a Substack star. So, unable to read the piece, I asked Google to summarize it, and got this gibberish back:

Spencer Kornhaber's "Is This the Worst-Ever Era of American Pop Culture?" argues that modern pop culture suffers from stagnation, cynicism, isolation, and attention rot, driven by nostalgia-focused economics (IP, old music catalogs), identity politics stifling creativity, technology fostering loneliness, and algorithmic distractions eroding focus, leading to a "gilded age" of superficially polished but shallow content. While acknowledging real problems like AI and pandemic disruptions, Kornhaber explores this "narrative of decay" in music, film, and art, but also discusses potential counter-narratives and signs of hope. . . .

Kornhaber suggests these issues create a paradox: a Gilded Age where prestigious shows look amazing but lack substance, and where technological abundance paradoxically leads to cultural scarcity and decline. He questions if it's truly the worst era, but details the significant challenges facing creators and consumers, pointing to a breakdown in cultural progress and originality.

Google also offered a link to:

• Derek Thompson [05-09]: Is pop culture worse than ever?

• Spencer Kornhaber [10-17]: Traditional criticism is in trouble. Here's what's replacing it. "Demand for cultural commentary is higher than it's ever been — but now that commentary is coming from unconventional new sources."

• Josh Spilker [11-28]: Your cultural stagnation starter pack. This collects links to Gioia ("basically the spirit animal of the 'culture is dying' movement"), Kornhaber, Adam Mastroianni ("the decline of deviance"), Thompson (the piece above plus an interview with Mastroianni — A unified theory of cultural stagnation — and several more.

My own thought on this is that culture increasingly became wedded to big business over the 20th century, but the bindings have started to fall apart, as artists are becoming less dependent on capital, and capital is less able to profit from art. As a consumer, or just as a person with the luxury of some leisure time beyond what it takes to satisfy baser needs, I don't see this as, on balance, a particularly bad thing. While capitalism promoted art in the 20th century, there is every reason to expect art to continue being created even without the profit motive. The art will be different: it will be smaller, less flashy, more personal, more in tune with people's feelings, as opposed to the ubiquitous sales schemes of the culture industry. I can think of numerous examples, especially in jazz — which is much more vital as an art than as a business.

On the other hand, I'm pretty vigilant about picking the music I listen to, the video I see, the links I follow, and so on. So I'm inclined to think I'm relatively immune to the effects found in Kyle Chayka: Filterworld: How Algorithms Flattened Culture, but it's hard to be sure, and they've certainly warped the size and shape of everyday culture. It's hard to maintain any semblance of control when you're constantly bombarded by too any options: a state which reduces both creators and consumers while extracting maximal shares for the platform.

Lulu Garcia-Navarro [10-18]: The culture wars came for Wikipedia. Jimmy Wales is staying the course. Interview, airs out numerous political attacks on Wikipedia, mostly from people who don't understand facts, or who understand them all too well. Kurt Andersen linked to this, and commented: "Reading this Jimmy Wales interview reminded me in our Fantasyland age what a remarkable and important creation it is. True pillar of civilization. Runs on only $200 million a year. Requires out support. So I'm finally donating." By the way, Wales has a book, The Seven Rules of Trust: A Blueprint for Building Things That Last.

Current Affairs [07-16]: Rent control is fine, actually: "Regulating rent prices is often called 'bad economics.' But it isn't. The effects of rent control are complex." Unsigned, but substantial article, covering most of the bases. A still more obvious point is in the very name: although "rent" is a word most often used regarding housing, the word itself has more general economic significance, in that it represents any profits in excess of free competition. It is, in other words, a market failure, which can only be constrained by regulation.

Alex Skopic [10-09]: This is why you don't let libertarians run your country: "In Argentina, President Javier Milei has screwed the economy up so badly he needs a $20 billion bailout. That's because his 'free market' economics don't actually work."

Even more so than Donald Trump to his north, Milei was the kind of erratic crackpot you can see coming a mile off. This was a man who dressed up in a superhero suit to sing sad ballads about fiscal policy, "floated legalizing the sale of human organs" on the campaign trail, and told reporters he takes telepathic advice from his dogs, who are clones of his previous dog. You didn't need any special insight to know he wasn't leadership material. But even those personal foibles would be inoffensive, even charming, if Milei had a sound economic agenda. More than the psychic dogs or the yellow cape, the really unhinged thing about him was that he took libertarianism seriously, aiming to slash the functions of the Argentinian state wherever he could. Now, Milei is facing a spiraling series of crises, from unemployment to homelessness to the basic ability to manufacture anything. He should serve as a big, red alarm bell for people far beyond Argentina's shores — because right-wing leaders in the U.S. and Britain are explicitly modeling their economics on his, and if they're not stopped, they'll lead us to the same disastrous end point.

Bad as this sounds:

• Ione Wells:

  • [10-27]: Argentina's Milei wins big in midterms with 'chainsaw' austerity.

  • [10-14]: Trump says US will not 'waste our time' helping Argentina if Milei loses: Part of the reason appears to be that the Trump bailout was conditional on Milei winning.

Dean Baker: This is mostly catching up, but doesn't include every post, especially in December, but most are worth noting:

• [12-08]: In search of Donald Trump's booming economy: "Trump's claims of historic economic success collapse under data showing rising costs, declining manufacturing, and no evidence of his imagined investment boom."

• [12-13]: Jeff Bezos uses the Washington Post to promote inequality: "The Washington Post's defense of massive CEO pay illustrates how billionaire-owned media justify inequality despite weak evidence that it benefits workers, shareholders, or society." Refers to a column by Dominic Pino [12-11]: Starbucks's CEO was paid $95 million. It could be worth every cent. The rationale is: "Brian Niccol's compensation history reflects a turnaround skill that can mean billions of dollars."

• [12-21]: How many manufacturing jobs has Trump actually lost? "More comprehensive employment data show manufacturing job losses under Trump may be worse than standard monthly reports suggest."

• [12-23]: Donald Trump wants us to pay more for electricity because he is angry at windmills: "Trump's move to cancel wind projects will increase power costs, kill jobs, and slow the clean energy transition."

• [12-27]: Washington Post's Trumpian ideology boils over: "A critique of Washington Post editorials that distort healthcare and EV economics to align with Trump-style ideology."

• [12-28]: Did Mark Zuckerberg throw $77 billion of our money into the toilet? "Mark Zuckerberg's $77 billion Metaverse gamble wasn't just a corporate misstep, but a massive diversion of talent and resources with real economic costs as Big Tech now pours even more money into AI." I think what he's saying here is that when a company blows a huge amount of money, that's not just a book loss for the investors, it's also an opportunity loss for everyone. I'm not sure where he wants to go with this, but I'm tempted to say that tech companies aren't necessarily good judges, especially as so many of their schemes are little better than scams.

• [01-05]: Venezuela will pay for its own reconstruction: "Comparing Iraq in 2003 to Venezuela today shows that Trump's claims of an easy, self-financing intervention are far less believable than Bush's already-failed promises." While the analogies are too obvious to ignore, the differences may matter more. In 2003, there were real fears of running low on oil, so bringing more oil to market could be seen as a general economic gain, even if the oil companies would prefer to just drive the prices up. But we have a glut of oil right now, and that's with Venezuela, Iran, and Russia largely out of the market. So I wouldn't bet on Trump wanting to reconstruct Venezuela, regardless of who plays for it.

• [01-05]: Walz pulls out: chalk up another one for racism, coupled with Democratic Party and media ineptitude: "Tim Walz's exit shows how exaggerated fraud claims, media failure, and racialized politics can end Democratic careers."

• [01-07]: Trump's United States as number three: "Trump's threats and economic bluster ignore the reality that the US is now only the world's third-largest economy and increasingly isolated from larger democratic blocs." Behind China and Europe (EU + United Kingdom, Switzerland, and Norway). Lots of smaller economies are also gaining ground: add them together and the US could slip a notch. Baker cites several examples where Trump's tariffs failed because the US simply didn't have the economic muscle to enforce them. That leaves American superiority in arms, which may explain why Trump is becoming increasingly trigger-happy, but converting that to genuine economic power may be difficult:

  Ordinarily, the old line about herding cats would apply here, but a government that claims it can do anything it has the military force to do can help focus minds. Hitler managed to bring together Churchill, Roosevelt, and Stalin. Trump may have a comparable effect in uniting the world today.

• [01-08]: Donald Trump's $6 trillion tax hike and increase in military spending: "Trump's $600 billion military plan would be financed by higher tariffs that raise prices for US consumers." But surely it wouldn't just be tariffs paying for this. Income taxes are a more practical option. If that's impossible, and it goes straight to the deficit, won't it ultimately be paid for with inflation? And what about opportunity costs? Imagine spending that kind of money on something actually useful. Then, of course, there are risks: the chance that some of these extra weapons will be used in wars, and everything that entails. Risks on that level cannot even be hedged against.

• [01-09]: Jobs report and remembering Renee Good "The official response to the killing of Renee Good — marked by falsehoods from Trump administration figures — signals a dangerous erosion of accountability for state violence."

• [01-12]: Three bad items and three good items in the December jobs report: "The December jobs report shows a softening labor market, with higher underemployment offset by lower unemployment and slightly faster wage growth."

• [01-12]: Donald Trump, Mineral Man, vs. sodium batteries: "Trump's mineral strategy is undermined by China's move toward sodium batteries that make lithium less critical."

• [01-13]: The billionaires and the November election: "Markets barely reacted after Trump moved to threaten the independence of the Federal Reserve."

• [01-14]: Trump takes responsibility for post-pandemic inflation: Trump's attempt to blame Biden for inflation nearly a year into his term undercuts his own record and exposes the lagged effects of Trump-era policies."

• [01-15]: Can the AI folks save democracy? "The AI stock bubble is sustaining Trump's political support — and its collapse could change US politics fast."

• [01-16]: We're paying the tariffs #53,464: "Import price data confirm that Trump's tariffs are largely a tax on Americans, not foreign countries.

• [01-19]: Trump wants to hit us with a huge tax hike for his demented Greenland dreams: "Trump's Greenland fixation would hit Americans with a massive tariff tax while serving no real security or economic purpose."

• [01-19]: Time for Europe to use the nuclear option: Attack US patent and copyright monopolies: "Trump's Greenland obsession would raise prices for Americans, while Europe has a far more effective response by suspending US patent and copyright protections." As I noted under Greenland above, this is the kind of medicine that's actually good for you.

[01-21]: Patent applications drop 9.0 percent in 2025: not good news: I doubt the signal here is as strong as Baker thinks, but that Trump is having a negative impact on research and development is almost certainly true, and only likely to get worse. The obvious one is that many (most?) engineers in America are immigrants, and Trump is trying to drive them away. He's also undermining education, and any sort of culture of innovation. His tariffs help companies profit without having to compete, and amnesty for criminals will only make fraud more attractive. But I don't feel sad here, because I think patents are bad in general. By the way, Baker also has a section on "The Imagined Crisis: China Running Out of People." This is, of course, wrong on many levels.

[01-23]: Spending under Trump: drugs up, factories down. Trump claims "he lowered drug prices 1,500 percent and we're bringing in $18 trillion in foreign investment." The former is mathematically impossible, and the latter is nearly as absurd. And that's without even going into the question of what foreign investment does to a country: mostly it means that they own it, and now you're working for them.

[01-24]: Mark Carney: world hero: a take on the Canadian Prime Minister's Davos speech, also noted elsewhere.

[01-25]: When it comes to the stock market, Trump is a loser.

[01-26]: Doing well by doing good: dump your American stocks.

[01-27]: Donald Trump's $300 billion temper tantrum over Canada: "Feel like paying another $2,400 a year in taxes because an old man suffering from dementia got humiliated? . . . Donald Trump is threatening to impose a 100 percent tax (tariff) on items we import from Canada.".

Ray Moulton [12-30]: Children and helical time: Starts with a chart which asserts that half of your subjective experience of life occurs in childhood, between age 5 ("start of long term memory") and 20 ("midpoint of subjective life"). The math is just a log function. The question is whether this intuitively makes sense. I'm not sure it does, and not sure it doesn't. Perhaps that's because most of the story is focused on kids, and I only know about being one, not about having them, or even much about living vicariously through other folks' kids. But I do feel that, in thinking about memory, I feel an intensity of focus between ages 5-20 that I lack for anything that came after then

Ian Millhiser: Vox's legal beat reporter, author of Injustices (2015). If he writes a sequel, it will be twice as long and only cover 10 years. Some more pieces filed elsewhere.

• [12-01]: Congress is the Supreme Court's favorite punching bag, and it's about to get decked: "The GOP justices are about to hand Trump a victory they have been dreaming about since he was married to Ivana." The case is Trump v. Slaughter. Scroll down for the "preordained result." Trump wants to be able to fire at will government officials whose jobs are supposed to be independent, and therefore protected from presidential dictates. Rebecca Slaughter is a member of the Federal Trade Commission.

• [12-02]: Republicans want the Supreme Court to save them from their own inept mistake: "Meanwhile, Texas Republicans want to immunize their gerrymander from constitutional review."

• [12-03]: Republicans ask the Supreme Court to gut one of the last limits on money in politics: "The Court already killed most US campaign finance law. NRSC v. FEC is likely to give big donors even more influence."

• [12-04]: The Supreme Court case that could redefine "cruel and unusual," explained: "Hamm v. Smith is a death penalty case, but it could have big implications for anyone acused of a crime."

• [12-05]: The Supreme Court just made gerrymandering nearly untouchable: "The Court's Texas decision is a victory for Republicans, and it is a terrible blow to all gerrymandering plaintiffs."

• [12-05] The Supreme Court takes up the most unconstitutional thing Trump has done: "There is no plausible argument that Trump's attack on birthright citizenship is constitutional."

• [12-08] How the Supreme Court is using Trump to grab more power for itself: "The Court's GOP majority wants to grow Trump's authority, but also give itself a veto power over the president."

• [12-10] The Supreme Court sounds surprisingly open to a case against a death sentence: "The justices seemed to reject Justice Neil Gorsuch's earlier call for major changes to the rules governing punishment."

• [12-19] The case against releasing the Epstein files: "DOJ has strong norms against releasing information outside of a criminal trial, and for good reasons."

• [12-23] The culture war is consuming the Supreme Court: "The Court's overall docket is shrinking, even as it hears more and more cases dealing with Republican cultural grievances."

• [12-23] The Supreme Court just handed Trump a rare — and very significant — loss: "Even some of the Court's Republicans ruled that his attempt to use troops against US citizens went too far."

• [01-06] Republicans accidentally protected abortion while trying to kill Obamacare: To thwart Obamacare, Wyoming passed a state constitutional amendment which says: "each competent adult shall have the right to make his or her own health care decisions." Oops.

• [01-07] The Supreme Court confronts the trans rights movement's toughest legal battle: "Trans advocates would face a difficult road in the sports cases, even if the Court weren't dominated by Republicans."

• [01-07] Trump's revenge campaign is now putting the entire Justice Department at risk: "One of Trump's most high-profile DOJ appointments faces a rare disciplinary threat from the bench." Lindsey Halligan, one of Trump's personal lawyers, and one of several dubious temporary prosecutor appointments, noted for filing charges against James Comey and Letitia James that her predecessor had declined.

• [01-07] Can Minnesota prosecute the federal immigration officer who just killed a woman? "The short answer is that it is unclear."

• [01-13] The Supreme Court is about to confront its most embarrassing decision: "The Court must deal with the chaos it created around guns."

• [01-13] The Supreme Court seems poised to deliver another blow to trans rights.

Pete Tucker [12-04]: How the game is played: Pull quote talks about how the Koch network put Antonin Scalia's name on the George Mason law school, and added something called "the Global Antitrust Institute" ("which works to ensure that Big Tech isn't broken apart like the monopoists of over a century ago"). But the article itself starts with a long prelude on Stephen Fuller, a Washington Post-favored pundit whose "quotes came cloaked in academic objectivity, owing to his dual titles as an economics professor at George Mason University and leader of the school's Center for Regional Analysis" (later renamed the Stephen S. Fuller Institute).

Jeffrey St Clair:

• [12-12]: Gaza Diary: They bulldozed mass graves and called it peace. The only things that are dated here are the number of Palestinians killed since the "cease fire," and the amount of money the US has spent in aid to Israel, including military operations in Yemen, Iran, and the wider region (then pegged at $31.35-$33.77 billion since 2023-10-07).

• [12-19]: Roaming Charges: The politics of crudity and cruelty: Starts with a story about Rob Reiner, which leads into his murder, followed by Trump's tweet, where Reiner "passed away, together with his wife," after long suffering from "the anger he caused others through his massive, unyielding, and incurable affliction with a mind crippling disease known as TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME." As St Clair notes:

  This is evidence of a sick mind: petty, petulant, crude and sadistic . . . but but also one that likely needed help writing this depraved attack on two people whose blood was still wet from having their throats slit by their own tormented son, since the words "tortured" "unyielding" and "affliction" don't come naturally to Trump's limited lexicon.

  Some more notes (and I'm writing this nearly a month after the fact):

  • In the last five years, the wealthiest 20 Americans increased their net worth from $1.3 trillion to $3 trillion. Whether the economic policies are those of the neoliberals or the Trump Republicans, the same people keep making out.

  • David Mamet has always been a jackass, but whatever's below rock bottom, he just hit it . . . [Reference to Mamet's piece, "Why Dr King, Malcolm X and Charlie Kirk were modern prophets."]

  • Erika Kirk, already a millionaire before the Lord Almighty claimed her husband, has raked in another $10 million+ since Charlie ascended to the heavens, according to a report in the Daily Mail. It really is the prosperity gospel!

  • John Cassidy, writing in the New Yorker, on how the Trump family ventures have cashed in on his presidency:

    As the anniversary of Donald Trump's return to the White House approaches, keeping up with his family's efforts to cash in is a mighty challenge. It seems like there is a fresh deal, or revelation, every week. Since many of the Trump or Trump-affiliated ventures are privately owned, we don't have a complete account of their finances. But in tracking company announcements, official filings, and the assiduous reporting of several media outlets, a clear picture emerges: enrichment of the First Family on a scale that is unprecedented in American history . . . in terms of the money involved, the geographic reach, and the explicit ties to Presidential actions — particularly Trump's efforts to turn the United States into the "crypto capital of the world" — there has never been anything like the second term of Trump, Inc.

• [12-25]: Goodbye to language: the year in Trumpspeak. The earth's atmosphere is divided into various layers — troposphere, stratosphere, ionosphere (which now seems to be subsumed into the mesosphere) — as the density of air changes various physical properties. Perhaps we could subdivide the media into analogous layers. One would be the Trumposphere: the fantasy realm where only what Trump says — and to some extent what others say about Trump, although that's reported mostly to keep the focus on Trump — and this seems to account for at least a third of all "national" news. This is a long piece which offers pretty comprehensive documentation of 2025 in the Trumposphere. It is horrifying, or would be if you weren't so used to it by now.

• [12-05]: Roaming Charges: Kill, kill again, kill them all: Starts with this:

  Pete Hegseth is a producer of snuff films. The media-obsessed, if not media-savvy, Hegseth has produced 21 of these mass murder documentary shorts in the last three months, featuring the killings of 83 people — if you take his word for it. Hegseth introduces these kill shots like Alfred Hitchcock presenting an episode of his old TV show — without the irony, of course. There's no irony to Pete Hegseth. No intentional irony, that is. It's all bluster and protein-powder bravado to titillate the Prime-time Fox audience as they nibbled at their TV dinners. . . .

  The irony, lost on Hegseth, is that these are the precise kinds of videos that ethical whistleblowers like Chelsea Manning used to scrape from the secret vaults of the Pentagon and ship to Wikileaks. Videos of crimes committed by US forces. In his dipsomaniacal mind, Hegseth seems to believe these snuff films are proof of the power and virility of the War Department under his leadership. In fact, each video is a confession. The question is: will he be held to account and who will have the guts to do it?

• [01-09]: Roaming Charges: An ICE cold blood. Opens with:

  Many of the people who have spent the last five years denouncing the killing of Ashli Babbitt for raiding the Capitol in an attempt to overturn an election are celebrating the murder of Renee Nichole Good, a terrified mother killed by masked men from unmarked cars who chased her down a neighborhood street and shot her in the face. . . .

  These kinds of raids, while shocking to most Americans, are familiar to many immigrants from Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador, countries still haunted by the death squads funded, armed and trained by the CIA. Horrors that they fled and have now reappeared like ghosts from the past here on the streets of Chicago and Minneapolis and Los Angeles. They know all too well that collateral damage is a feature of all paramilitaries.

  With the murder of Renee Good, ICE has now advanced from scaring the hell out of American citizens to killing them.

  Also lots of good information here on Venezuela, including "The New York Times interviews Beelzebub [Elliott Abrams] on Venezuela, who, surprise!, wants more kidnappings and bloodshed." He also notes that Israel has violated the ceasefire 969 times over 80 days, "including the killing of 420 Palestinians, the wounding of 1,141 and allowing only 40% of the aid tracks mandated by the truce into Gaza." Also: "Israel has killed more than 700 relatives of Palestinian journalists in Gaza." Also:

  • Stephen Miller: "We live in a world, in the real world, Jake, that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power. These are the iron laws of the world since the beginning of time." Almost invariably, people who have lived by this "iron law" have tended to come to rather unpleasant ends. [I would have unpacked this view rather differently. One of the maxims I learned early was "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Even if one starts with good intentions, the resort to power perverts them, and ultimately becomes an obsession with obtaining and defending ever more power. And that, of course, produces a backlash, which if unsuccessful drives the powerful to ever greater atrocities. Whether such people die in a bunker like Hitler or in bed like Stalin isn't really the issue. Either way, their memory is cursed by our wish to have stopped them earlier. Of course, if you don't start with good intentions, you descend faster, as Miller has done.]

  • Of course, there was something deeply wrong with this country long before Donald Trump came to power. Imagine playing a New Year's Day football game just down the road from Ground Zero in Nagasaki, as a celebration of an atomic blast that killed 70,000 people only five months earlier?

• [01-16]: Roaming Charges: What a fool believes:

  • It's revolting, but hardly surprising, that a woman (Kristi Noem) who thought bragging about the time she shot her puppy in the head for disobeying a command and dumped its body in a gravel quarry would advance her political career, also thinks it's entirely justified to shoot a mother of three in the head for "disobeying" confusing commands from her ICE agents.

  • Trump has sent 13.6% of all ICE agents to Minneapolis, a city that represents .13% of the population of the United States.

• [01-23]: Roaming Charges: Are we not men? No, we are DAVOS: "But a funny thing happened on the way to Davos":

  The stock market collapsed. The Prime Minister of Canada cut a trade pact with China and urged other countries to do the same. Denmark told Trump to fuck off (literally). Unhelpfully for Trump, the Russians chose this week to publicly endorse his scheme to snatch Greenland from the Danes. The European Union, usually so timid and fractious, resisted his impetuous bullying and threatened to join military exercises in defense of Greenland and levy retaliatory tariffs of their own against the increasingly frail US economy.

  Trump landed a deflated man. During his nearly incoherent speech at the World Economic Forum, Trump looked morose and sounded peevish. The words slurred, the fraying sentences trailing off into the ether. His insults lacked fire and punch. He rambled aimlessly. His cognitive decline, never a fall from alpine heights to begin with, was on full public display.

  Was this the fearsome tyrant, so many had trembled in obeisance before? He looked like an old man, frail in body, infirm in mind. Not the new Sun King of his cult-stoked fantasies, but a patriarch deep into his autumn, struggling to find the words for retreat. Trump's strategy (if you can call it that) for cultivating more enemies than friends was always doomed to backfire on him. The only question was how long it would take and how many he'd drag down with him.

  So, Trump backed down. The intemperate bombast was spent, replaced by wheezing and stammering. He backed down on invading Greenland. He backed down on imposing new tariffs against European nations. He backed down in front of the elites he both despises and envies.

  Bullet points:

  Bari Weiss memo to CBS News reporters and anchors: "Yes, Trump referred to Greenland as Iceland 7 times in his speech, but make clear that he referred to Greenland as Greenland 13 times."

  This week, there was another death in ICE custody. That's 6 in the last 18 days, one every 72 hours — not counting the people they shoot in their cars.

Matt McManus [01-02]: Why Fascists always come for the Socialists first: "Here's why the left poses such a threat to them." This is a long and very well researched and thought out piece. I've long been skeptical of the usefulness of labeling anyone fascist, but I've changed my thinking somewhat over the past year. I think the key thing is that we mostly understand events through historical analogy. Those of us on the left were quick to pick up the early warning signs of fascism, but as long as alternative explanations were possible, most people resisted the diagnosis. What's different now is that we've reached the point where fascism is the only close historical analogy. Sure, there are minor minor deviations, but no other historical analogy comes close. The point of identifying Trump as a fascist is less to check off a list of similarities than an assertion that we take him very seriously as a threat to our world. While many other comparisons may occur to us, none quite match our fear of fascism.

Eric Levitz [01-12]: The fiction at the heart of America's political divide: I don't quite understand why someone who recognizes and basic difference between left and right can twist himself in such knots of nonsense as the Hyrum and Verlan Lewis book The Myth of Left and Right. Levitz shows he understands the difference when he writes:

The ideological spectrum was born in France about 237 years ago. At the revolutionary National Assembly in 1789, radicals sat on the left side of the chamber and monarchists on the right, thereby lending Western politics its defining metaphor: a one-dimensional continuum between egalitarian revolution and hierarchical conservation. The more a faction (or policy) promoted change in service of equality, the farther left its place on this imaginary line; the more it defended existing hierarchies in the name of order, the farther right its spot.

There are some corollaries, but that's it: hierarchy on the right, equality on the left. Perhaps the most obvious corollary is that the right's defense of hierarchy is inherently unpopular, so they are quick to defend it with violence. The left, on the other hand, has become increasingly opposed to violence. This should be simple, but Levitz, like most political analysts, likes to muddy the waters by saddling left and right with arbitrary positions on other issues that don't intrinsically divide between hierarchy and equality. He doesn't fully accept the Lewis case that parties are just competing interest groups whose policy differences follow group rather than ideological dynamics, but he readily assumes that all Democrats are leftist and all Republicans are on the right.

Robert P Baird [01-15]: The crisis whisperer: how Adam Tooze makes sense of our bewildering age: "Whether it's the financial crash, the climate emergency or the breakdown of the international order, historian Adam Tooze has become the go-to guide to the radical new world we've entered." There's more here — Tooze has moved from academia into the public intelligentsia racket as impressively as anyone else I can think of, and that includes Jill Lepore, Paul Krugman, and Stephen J Gould — but let's start with the section on Biden Democrats that Jeffrey St Clair pointed me to:

It was notable, then, that after joining the Brussels panel, Tooze didn't waste much time before stating flatly that the Biden team had "failed in its absolutely central mission, which was to prevent a second Trump administration". Not only that, he argued, but the dismantling of the liberal world order — something discussed with much rueful lamentation at the conference — had been hastened, not hindered, by the Biden veterans on stage. As he'd written a few months earlier, Tooze saw Biden no less than Trump aiming "to ensure by any means necessary" — including strong-arming allies — "that China is held back and the US preserves its decisive edge".

"I feel the need to say something," [Katherine] Tai said, when Tooze was finished. She recalled a parable Martin Sheen had delivered in front of the White House during the 25th anniversary celebration of The West Wing, the haute-liberal political fantasia that remains a touchstone for professional Democrats. Sheen's story concerned a man who shows up at the gates of heaven and earns an admonishment from St Peter for his lack of scars. "Was there nothing worth fighting for?" St Peter asked the man. Tai turned the question on Tooze: "Where are your scars, Adam? I can show you mine."

Recalling this exchange several months later, Tooze was still flabbergasted. "I'd be silly if I didn't admit that it was a bruising encounter," he told me recently, in one of three long conversations we had over the past year. Nevertheless, he said, "it confirmed my underlying theory about what was going on. These were a group of entirely self-satisfied American liberal elites who were enacting a morality tale in which Sheen and The West Wing and that whole highly sentimental vision of power and politics is a central device. She says this, I think, meaning to sound tough, like, 'I'm the warrior. Who are you? You're just some desktop guy.' Which just shows how little she understands what I'm saying, which is: 'You people are a bunch of sentimental schmucks who don't understand that you lost. If you had any self-respect, you would not be on any podium again, ever, sounding off about anything. Because comrades, if we were in the 30s, I would have taken you out and shot you. You fail like this, you don't get to come back and show off your wounds.'"

That's a bit extreme for me: the 30s aren't exactly remembered for best political practices, and even as a lapsed Christian I'm still inclined to forgive sins that are sincerely repented. But Tai and her other Biden hands not only haven't repented for their failures, they're still in denial, blind-sided by events they thought they were handling just fine. (In this, the Queen Bee of denial remains Hillary Clinton, which is why she has absolutely nothing to contribute to the party she once led.) The piece has much more on Tooze — enough to convince me to order his book Crashed. It also summarizes a critique of him by Perry Anderson.

Kate Wagner [01-21]: The Line, a Saudi megaproject, is dead: "It was always doomed to unravel, but the firms who lent their name to this folly should be held accounable." I knew nothing about this project, so found the Wikipedia entry to be helpful background. Also see the longer List of Saudi Vision 2023 projects, of which NEOM (including The Line and Trojena) was by far the most expensive. This reminds me of some of the Shah's extravagant projects shortly before the revolution overthrew his regime. I've been thinking a bit about Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf states in relationship to the "resource curse" theory, which explains so much of what went wrong with Venezuela. Saudi Arabia doesn't look like the economic basket case we find in Venezuela and Iran, but perhaps that's just because they've been able to keep selling oil, and thereby able to keep their own bubble economies from collapsing. They've managed this by being very submissive to the US and western capitalism, while they've managed political stability at home through a generous welfare state for their citizens, combined with the large-scale import of "guest" workers. Still, their oil wells generate so much money that they wind up investing in a lot of extravagant schemes — the Line is relatively benign, at least compared to the jihad-fanning, gun-running, war-mongering adventurism in Yemen, Syria, Sudan, Libya, Afghanistan, etc. In terms of GDP, these petrostates are among the richest in the world, but one can't help but feel that there is rot and mold just under the surface, and that whole edifices could suddenly collapse (as they did in Iran, Iraq, Libya, and Venezuela). Also that the risk of that happening is much sharper with megalomaniacs in charge like Mohammed Bin Salman, and especially as Trump turns the US into a pure gangster state.

Chas Danner [01-24]: All the terms you need to know for the big winter storm: "From frost crack to Arctic blast to thunder ice."

Music end-of-year lists: I started collecting these when they were few and far between, and didn't keep it up. See the AOTY Lists for more. Also the Legend for my EOY Aggregate. While substantial (2776 albums), I've done a very poor job of keeping this file up to date, as is obvious when you compare this year's legend (116 sources) to the one from 2024 (610 sources). While I'm likely to add more data to this year's EOY aggregate, I'm unlikely ever again to match the 2024 total.

• Albumism: The 50 best albums of 2025

• Pitchfork: Pitchfork's 50 best albums of 2025

• Rolling Stone: Rolling Stone's 100 best albums of 2025

• Tris McCall: Pop music abstract 2025: Not a best-of list, as this starts with disses of Addison Rae and Alex G. Interesting to read so much detail on records that simply sailed past me without a serious thought. Geese, for instance, or FKA Twigs. Or Rosalía ("your guess is as good as mine about how she gets away with this shit").

• Dave Moore:

  • [12-04]: Best of 2025, pt. 1 - best words: "You might be unsurprised to learn that Taylor Swift has put out another Taylor Swift album."

  • [12-18]: Best of 2025, pt. 3 - albums and EPs.

• Phil Overeem [Living to Listen] [01-01]: It will not end here: My 25 favorite records of 2025 (if you don't give me any more time to think about it)

• Chuck Eddy [Poplar Mucilage] [01-15]: 150 best albums of 2025: Chuck Eddy's Substack, message says "Continue reading this post for free, courtesy of Chuck Eddy," but when I click on "Claim my free post" I get "Get the free Substack app to unlock this post," with a QR code. The email link is to the app, not to the article. I've never used the app, and don't want to, although having a Substack of my own I'm not incurious about how this crap works.

• Brad Luen [Semipop Life] [01-24]: The 15th Annual Expert Witness Poll: Results

• Brooklyn Vegan: Thurston Moore picks the "350 Best Records of 2025": Article includes top-50, which is good because Moore's own list has vanished. A lot of very obscure jazz albums there.

Of course, the most important EOY list [for me, anyhow] is: The 20th Annual Francis Davis Jazz Critics Poll: See the essays on ArtsFuse, by yours truly except as noted:

• The Institution Continues: My original title was "Francis Davis, His Poll & Community," but I meant to write more about those things, and wound up just using this as a table of contents piece. Instead of "The Insitution" we also considered "The Floating Crap Game" (read it to see why), but somehow that got lost.
• New Jazz Albums
• Rara Avis
• Vocal Jazz Albums
• Latin Jazz Albums
• Debut Jazz Albums
• Jazz Notables We Lost in 2025, by Andrey Henkin
• Meet the Voters

On listmaking:

• Album of the Year: 2025 music year end list aggregate: Rosalia edging out Geese (413-404) was a surprise, especially as a late-breaker among two albums I didn't especially are for, but both the landslide wins over two of my A- records — Wednesday (203) and CMAT (187) — and a following mixed bag: my A- records were by Clipse (6), Lily Allen (11), Billy Woods (14), Water From Your Eyes (27), Big Thief (29), Sudan Archives (32), Tyler Childers (43), and Rochelle Jordan (50). One interesting note here is that they systematically devalue unranked lists, allowing 5 points each if the list is 10 albums or less, 3 for 25 or less, and 1 for ore than 25 albums; ranked lists are given 10 points for 1st place, 8 for 2nd, 6 for 3rd, 5 for top 10, 3 for top 25, 1 for other. That's a bit more generous to unranked lists than my own scheme for my EOY aggregate, and also offers a bit more spread for 1-2-3 albums, but the basic logic is similar.

Some miscellaneous music links:

• Tom Lane [01-20]: 2026 Rock Hall Nominee Predictions: Something I have no opinion about, not least because I have no idea who's in or out, what the eligibility rules are, and therefore who's missing, even though hall of fames are something that has always fascinated me. My rough impression is that the R&R HOF has always been too lax in its selections, unlike virtually every other HOF. (In jazz, DownBeat's HOF is hopelessly backlogged, and their peculiar Veterans Commitee rules have actually made the missing seem to be more glaring.) Only one on this list I'd be tempted to vote for is B-52s, although Beck had a couple of very good albums, my early dislike of De La Soul may have been misguided, and I wouldn't scoff at Oasis or Luther Vandross (although I wouldn't pick them either). Speaking of B-52s, I wonder whether Pere Ubu is in, and if not why not? [Not: eligible in 2001.] They're linked in my mind because I saw both bands at Max's Kansas City in the late 1970s, back when they both only had singles (and really great ones at that).

• RiotRiot [01-28]: RIOTRIOT's official 2026 Grammys predictions: I'm not sure I ever took the Grammys seriously, but certainly not after Robert Christgau skewered them in 2001's Forever Old. But this suggests they're not a total wasteland, for someone who knows where to look.

• Nathan J Robinson [01-20]: Jesse Welles is the antidote to everything that sucks about our time. I was tipped off to the folksinger-songwriter recently, and will review albums in the next Music Week.

Books:

• Sasha Abramsky: American Carnage: How Trump, Musk, and DOGE Butchered the US Government: "follows eleven federal workers, in eight government agencies, from the time they were told they were fired in the early weeks of Donald Trump's second presidential administration through to the summer of 2025. . . . Their stories, which show a country in a profound moment of crisis and dislocation, are America's stories. What happened to them — the bullying, the intimidation, the deliberate removal of financial stability — also happened to hundreds of thousands of other employees."

  • Sasha Abramsky [2025-02-14]: A profoundly un-American moment: "Trump and his enablers have launched an unprecedented assault on American society and values."

• Sven Beckert: Capitalism: A Global History:

  • Nelson Lichtenstein [12-04]: Sven Beckert's chronicle of capitalism's long rise. Review provides what looks like a good summary of the book, which is huge and sprawling. Most interesting point to me is that he starts early and looks everywhere:

    "There is no French capitalism or American capitalism," writes Beckert, "but only capitalism in France or America." And there is also capitalism in Arabia, India, China, Africa, and even among the Aztecs. In his narrative of merchants and traders in the first half of the second millennium, Beckert puts Europe on the margins, offering instead a rich and, except for specialists, unknown account of how the institutions vital to commerce and markets, including credit, accounting, limited partnerships, insurance, and banking flourished, in Aden, Cambay, Mombasa, Guangzhou, Cairo, and Samarkand. These are all "islands of capital," a recurrent metaphor in Beckert's book. For example, in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, Aden was host to a dense network of merchants who played a pivotal role in the trade between the Arabian world and India. It was a fortified, cosmopolitan city of Jews, Hindu, Muslims, and even a few Christians.

    Capitalism spread from these "islands of capital," initially through trade but increasingly through war, especially where forced labor proved advantageous for producing fungible goods.

  • Seven Beckert [11-04]: The old order is dead. Do not resuscitate. The "old order" he is referring to is what is commonly alled "the neoliberal order" ("and that held sway until very recently"):

    Capitalism is a series of regime changes. Thinking about what unites them will help us better navigate the current reverberations and think more productively about the future. All these transitions, and perhaps the present one as well, were characterized by the inability of the old regime, in the face of economic crisis and rebellions, to reproduce itself. All featured disorientation, and an elite belief that a few tweaks to the old order would allow it to continue. All confronted a world in which the previous economic regime felt like the natural order of things — slavery in the mid-19th century, laissez faire in the 1920s, Keynesian interventionism in the 1960s and market fundamentalism in the 2000s.

    Not once was the old regime resurrected. Instead, capitalism forged ahead in entirely new directions. We had better accept this about today, as well.

    Unclear what his answer is here, or even whether he has one. He sees critiques of neoliberalism both on the left and on the right. He notes that "China was never beholden to the neoliberal agenda." Also that "the politicization of markets is rapidly making a comeback," for which he offers both Trump and Biden examples.

• Marc J Dunkelman: Why Nothing Works: Who Killed Progress — and How to Bring It Back:

  • Sean Illing [01-12]: How America made it impossible to build: "A system built to stop government from doing harm stopped it from doing anything." An interview with Dunkelman. I'm someone who's strongly oriented toward building things, so I should be sympathetic to books like this (the more famous one is Abundance), but I often choke when I see actual project proposals (especially things like new sports stadia). One thing I agree with here is "the trust problem is enormous." That's largely because projects are being driven by private greed-or-glory-heads, and depend on public finance from politicians beholden to their sponsors. What we need instead are more projects driven by consumer/user groups, with compensation for anyone adversely affected, and some clear criteria for when the downside exceeds the benefits. If you could do that in a system that most people could trust, ticking off the checkboxes could go much quicker (and if they don't tick off, the reasons will be clear, and not just a game of who bribes whom).

  • Miles Bryan/Astead Herndon [12-28]: Ezra Klein's year of Abundance: We've kicked this around before, so might as well file it here. Klein notes in here that his original title was "Supply-Side Progressivism," which makes more explicit that this is a pitch to business that at best hopes to trickle down some more general value.

• Eoin Higgins: Owned: How Tech Billionaires on the Right Bought the Loudest Voices on the Left:

  • Ed Meek [08-02]: How to buy left-wing journalists: Review of Owned, where the most prominent journalists mentioned are Matt Taibbi and Glen Greenwald.

    Higgins follows Taibbi's investigation into Hunter Biden's laptop (a favorite target of MAGA supporters). The Biden administration, with Twitter's cooperation, may have suppressed information about wrongdoing in these files, but Taibbi never really found anything substantial. Meanwhile, he was critiqued by the left, relentlessly, for investigating what partisans saw as a trivial distraction. This led to Taibbi's move to Substack, where he has a big following. Higgins points out that Substack was funded by Andreessen (founder of Netscape) as a way to move liberal journalists out of mainstream publications. Along with creating a space for independent voices, Owned posits that the right wing has been very effective at manipulating and creating new media to influence Americans to support Republicans. Substack was part of that divide-and-conquer strategy.

    I read Greenwald's initial 2006 book, How Would a Patriot Act?, but didn't follow up with later books, and haven't tried since he bowed out of The Intercept. I read Taibbi as long as he was in Rolling Stone (but Rolling Stone itself is paywalled these days), then followed him on Twitter. I read most of his books up through 2019's Hate Inc.. He's always had a weakness for both-sidesing (e.g., singling out "9-11 Truthers" as a left-equivalent of the right's paranoid tendencies), but his critical views of the right remained sharp. If he was still freely available, I'd check him out. I don't consider him to be a traitor/enemy, like David Horowitz.

    I hadn't read that point about Substack before, but there is considerable logic to it. Yglesias and Krugman are prime examples, although their former publications are also paywalled these days. I've rarely looked at their Substacks, but so far have managed to see everything I've looked at. The bigger point is that they're trying to price any sort of critical commentary out of the reach of most folks. This follows the same general logic as the move to quell student demonstrations in the 1980s by making college much more expensive: on the one hand, you exclude the riff-raff; on the other, you saddle those who survive the gauntlet with a lifetime of debt, forcing them to keep their nose to the grindstone, which is to say work for the increasingly dominant rich. They probably didn't plan on Google and Facebook sucking up all of the advertising revenue, but that's what's given them the chance to starve out any sort of free press.

  • Will Solomon [2025-01-05]: How tech billionaires bought the loudest voices on the left and right: An early review of Eoin Higgins: Owned.

  • Eoin Higgins [12-27]: Yes, I'm being sued by Matt Taibbi: This is the story that got me looking at Higgins' book, so that's why I'm digging up links from a year ago. I don't see a lot more, at least recent, on his Substack (and sure, he has one) to stick around, but a couple titles are Marjorie Taylor Greene makes her move and Weasel World comes to Minnesota.

• Gene Ludwig: The Mismeasurement of America: How Outdated Government Statistics Mask the Economic Struggle of Everyday Americans: Former Treasury official under Clinton, a connection that gets him a nice blurb from Hillary here, set up a nonprofit in 2019 "dedicated to improving the economic well-being of low- and middle-income Americans through research and education," starting with his 2020 book, The Vanishing American Dream: A Frank Look at the Economic Realities Facing Middle- and Lower-Income Americans.

  • Jared Bernstein [10-03]: Measuring the Vibecession: "Why top-line federal statistics miss the economic pain average Americans feel." Biden's best economic adviser reviews Ludwig's book, quibbling that the standard measures aren't "mismeasurement" but merely incomplete. For instance, the Consumer Price Index is an average, which masks different impacts among various groups. Unemployment understates underemployment and other precarity.

• Harriet Malinowitz: Selling Israel: Zionism, Propaganda, and the Uses of Hasbara:

  • Eleanor J Bader [11-29]: How Zionism was sold to the world: Interview.

• Olivia Nuzzi: American Canto: A journalist of some fame and ill repute, wrote a memoir, teasing dirt on an affair with RFK Jr.

  • Scaachi Koul [12-02]: Olivia Nuzzi's book has the audacity to be boring: "Never mind the dogshit writing, the self-mythologizing, the embarrassing metaphors. How can you make this story so incredibly dull?"

    Historians will study how bad this book is. English teachers will hold this book aloft at their students to remind them that literally anyone can write a book: Look at this, it's just not that hard to do. Three hundred pages with no chapter breaks, it swerves back and forth through time, from Nuzzi's interviews with Donald Trump over the years to her combustible relationship with fellow annoying journalist Ryan Lizza to her alleged affair with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as he was running for president himself. Reading it is like spending time with a delusional fortune cookie: platitudes that feel like they were run through a translation service three times.

• Tim Wu, The Age of Extraction: How Tech Platforms Conquered the Economy and Threaten Our Future Prosperity:

  • Rhoda Feng [12-10]: The internet's tollbooth operators: "Tim Wu's The Age of Extraction chronicles the way Big Tech platforms have turned against their users."

    The process by which companies metastasize from creators into extractors goes something like this: First, they make their platform "essential to transactions"; next, they hobble or buy rivals; then, they clone winners, lock partners in, and finally ratchet up fees for both buyers and sellers. The convenience we prize — our one-click orders, our autoplay queues — becomes, in Wu's mordant phrase, "a long slow bet on laziness": a wager that users will tolerate almost any indignity rather than face the costs of leaving.

    If the platform extraction model has become the dominant template of 21st-century capitalism, Wu emphasizes that it is by no means confined to technology. Since the 2008 financial crisis, investors have begun platformizing entire industries and reorganizing them around centralized ownership and predictable revenue streams.

    He offers examples from health care and housing, showing that this is not just a high-tech issue. But right now, big future bets are being placed on tech monopolists:

    According to a recent report by Public Citizen, Trump's return to power has brought a bonanza for Big Tech. Of the 142 federal investigations and enforcement actions against technology corporations inherited from the previous administration, at least 45 have already been withdrawn or halted. The beneficiaries read like a who's who of Silicon Valley: Meta, Tesla, SpaceX, PayPal, eBay, and a constellation of cryptocurrency and financial technology firms.

    Since the 2024 election cycle began, tech corporations and their executives have spent an estimated $1.2 billion on political influence — $863 million in political spending, $76 million in lobbying, and a further $222 million in payments to Trump's own businesses. The return on investment has been immediate: a sweeping "AI Action Plan" directing the Federal Trade Commission to review and, where possible, rescind consent decrees that "unduly burden AI innovation." Among the cases at risk are investigations into OpenAI and Snap for generative AI harms and antitrust cases against Microsoft.

  • Tim Wu [10-25]: Big Tech's predatory platform model doesn't have to be our future.

A few end-of-year books lists:

• Connor Echols [12-26]: The 8 best foreign policy books of 2025:

  • Seth Harp: The Fort Bragg Cartel: Drug Trafficking and Murder in the Special Forces
  • Francisco Rodriguez: The Collapse of Venezuela: Scorched Earth Politics and Economic Decline, 2012-2020
  • William D Hartung/Ben Freeman: The Trillion Dollar War Machine: How Runaway Military Spending Drives America into Foreign Wars and Bankrupts Us at Home
  • Emma Ashford: First Among Equals: US Foreign Policy in a Multipolar World
  • Michael Schaeffer Omer-Man/Sarah Leah Whitson: From Apartheid to Democracy: A Blueprint for Peace in Israel-Palestine
  • Kenneth P Vogel: Devils' Advocates: The Hidden Story of Rudy Giuliani, Hunter Biden, and the Washington Insiders on the Payrolls of Corrupt Foreign Interests
  • Charles L Glaser: Retrench, Defend, Compete: Securing America's Future Against a Rising China
  • Hussein Agha/Robert Malley: Tomorrow Is Yesterday: Life, Death, and the Pursuit of Pece in Israel/Palestine

• Constance Grady [12-16]: The 10 best books of 2025: In addition to The 9 best books of the year so far (from back in July).

Some notable deaths: Mostly from the New York Times listings. Last time I did such a trawl was on November 24, so we'll look that far back (although some names have appeared since):

• [11-29]: Tom Stoppard, award-winning playwright of witty drama, dies at 88.

• [12-03]: Steve Cropper, guitarist, songwriter and shaper of Memphis soul music, dies at 84: "As a member of Booker T. & the MG's and as a producer, he played a pivotal role in the rise of Stax Records, a storied force in R&B in the 1960s and '70s." Discogs credits him with 12 albums, 473 performances, 405 production, and 4437 writing & arrangement. The former includes a 2011 tribute to the Five Royales I recommend. His side-credits include Otis Redding, Wilson Pickett, and many more.

• [12-12]: Joseph Byrd, who shook up psychedelic rock, dies at 87: "A veteran of the Fluxus art movement, he brought an anarchic spirit to the California acid-rock scene with his band, the United States of America." I remember him mostly for The American Metaphysical Circus, by Joe Byrd and the Field Hippies, a 1969 album I bought at a time when I had less than two dozen LPs. I don't recall it as being very good, but it was a concept I was easily attracted to at the time.

• [12-15]: Rob Reiner, actor who went on to direct classic films, dies at 78: "After finding fame in All in the Family, he directed winning films like This Is Spinal Tap, When Harry Met Sally . . . , and The Princess Bride and got involved in liberal politics." I guess this is showing my age, but he'll always be "Meathead" to me, and he'll never be as famous as his father.

  • Alex Galbraith

    • [12-15]: Trump bashes Rob Reiner in memorial post: "The president pinned the 'once very talented' director's murder on 'Trump Derangement Syndrome.'"

    • [12-15]: Trump doubles down on Reiner criticism.

  • Sasha Abramsky [12-16]: Trump's vile Rob Reiner comments show how much he has debased his office: "Every day, Trump is saying and going things that would get most elementary school children suspended."

  • Kyndall Cunningham [12-16]: Everything is a mockumentary now, thanks to Rob Reiner.

• [12-15]: Robert J Samuelson, award-winning economics columnist, dies at 79: Washington Post columnist, one of the worst economics writers I've ever encountered, both in his columns and in his book The Great Inflation and Its Aftermath: The Past and Future of American Affluence, where he tries to argue that the inflation of the 1970s was worse than the Great Depression of the 1930s. But he likes recessions, figuring they're a natural part of the business cycle. What he can't stand is anything that might give workers a leg up: government spending, low unemployment, labor rights. I don't know whether he was personally miserable, but misery is what he prescribed for the rest of us.

• [12-15]: Joe Ely, Texas-born troubadour of the open road, dies at 78: "Thanks to his eclectic style and tireless touring, he was among the most influential artists in the early days of Americana alt alt-country music." One of the Flatlanders out of Lubbock, his 1978 album Honky Tonk Masquerade is one of my all-time favorite albums, a perfect sequence of songs which circulates through my mind for weeks every time I replay it.

• [12-16]: Norman Podhoretz, literary lion of neoconservatism, dies at 95: "A New York intellectual and onetime liberal stalwart, his Commentary magazine became his platform as his political and social views turned sharply rightward." I read him a bit back when Commentary was regarded as a serious liberal magazine, enough of a connection so that his later turn to the extreme far right felt like a betrayal, one I've never found any substance in, just paranoia and chauvinism.

• [12-26]: Michal Urbaniak, pioneering jazz fusion violinist, dies at 82: "One of the first jazz musicians from Poland to gain an international following, he recorded more than 60 albums and played with stars like Miles Davis." His following was aided by a move to New York in 1973, while others who stayed home remained more obscure.

• [12-28]: Brigitte Bardot, movie idol who renounced stardom, dies at 91: Iconic, unforgettable in my youth, although I'm not sure how many of her movies I ever saw. I knew next to nothing about these:

  • Elisabeth Vincentelli [12-28]: From sex appeal to the far right, Brigitte Bardot symbolized a changing France.

  • Adam Nossiter [12-31]: Brigitte Bardot's legacy of racist rhetoric.

• [01-03]: Asad Haider, leftist critic of identity politics, dies at 38: "In Mistaken Identity: Race and Class in the Age of Trump, he argued that focusing on identity obscured a more fundamental injustice: economic inequality." I haven't read the book, but it sounds like an analysis I share.

• [01-13]: Daniel Walker Howe, 88, revisionist historian of Jackson's America, dies: "In a Pulitzer-winning book, he saw modern America's origins not so much in one president's policies as in the sweeping social and technological changes wrought in the years 1815-48." His big book was What Hath God Wrought: The Transformation of America, 1815-1848. I read the book, and credit it with much of what I know about an important period of transformation.

• [01-13]: Scott Adams, creator of the satirical 'Dilbert' comic strip, dies at 68: "His chronicles of a corporate cubicle dweller was widely distributed until racist comments on his podcast led newspapers to cut their ties with him." As I recall, he was funnier before he became successful enough to quit his office job, after which he had to make shit up. Still, I've experienced instances of "Mordac, Preventer of Information Services." He used to say he more resembled the megalomaniac Dogbert than the nerdy Dilbert. Worse than his racist blurting was his embrace of Trump, leading to his 2017 book, Win Bigly: Persuasion in a World Where Facts Don't Matter. It's not impossible that he was onto something there.

  • Joel Stein [01-16]: 'Dilbert' was always MAGA.

• [01-14] Rebecca Kilgore, 76, dies; acclaimed interpreter of American songbook: Last heard with Dave Frishberg, reprising an older relationship. Often sang in swing/trad jazz groups, memorably including Hal Smith and Harry Allen.

• [01-18]: Ralph Towner, eclectic guitarist with the ensemble Oregon, dies at 85: Also many albums on ECM.

• Some other names I recognize:

  • Frank Gehry
  • Robert Mnuchin
  • Don Bryant
  • Ben Nighthorse Campbell
  • Aldrich Ames
  • Michael Reagan
  • Bob Weir
  • Wilbur Wood

Tweets: I've usually used this section for highlighting clever responses and/or interesting ideas, but maybe I should just use it to bookmark some of our leading horribles.

• Molly Jong-Fast [11-29]: Cites quote from OpenAI is a loss-making machine, with estimates that it has no road to profitability by 2030 — and will need a further $207 billion in funding even if it gets there: "All of this falls apart if humans don't adopt the tech. This is why you've seen Meta cram its lame chatbots into WhatsApp and Instagram. This is why Notepad and Paint now have useless Copilot buttons on Windows. This is why Goodle Gemini wants to 'help you' read and reply to your emails."

  Imagine if they just subsidized newspapers and magazines the way they're subsidizing this slop

• Doug Henwood [01-06]: Recalls a Michael Ledeen quote, from 1992:

  "Every 10 years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business."

• Tom Carson:

  [01-16]: Minneapolis or no Minneapolis, it's ridiculous and insulting to say MAGA supporters are a bunch of Nazis. A good many of them, perhaps a majority, are innocuous Nazi sympathizers, Nazi enablers, Nazi-neutral in a Too Soon To Tell kinda way, Nazi-curious thanks to The Night Porter or Ilsa, She-Wolf of The SS, or else plain dimwits who used to go into daily comas during history classes back when they still had 'em at good old Lowenbrau High. There, does that clear everything up? We may be angry, but that doesn't give us a license to be unfair.
  • [01-18]: Some of you stunned people have caught on over the years I'm not the world's biggest Trump fan. I know, I know, strange but true. But that's not the most urgent business at hand. The bottom line is that he's gone drooling loco, stone crazy, beyond barking mad, Old Yeller would sue for plagiarism AND libel if they hadn't shot him and Rin Tin Tin's gone MAGA and won't take the case, pretty soon Merriam-Webster will redefine "white as a sheet" as the penultimate step in the Republican Party before canonization. He's beyond Renee Good and Evel Knievel, I stole that from Nietzsche but never trust a Kraut who can't even take charge of his own mustache, let alone Poland, at least Hitler knew how to dress for success. He's beyond delusional and so deep in transactional the last man up his butt will have to bring along a comb to tart up the President's hair. Arse brevis but hair longa as Mussolini only wished with his drying Fred Trumpth I mean dying breath, chump. Siri where's the nearest gas station he's all hung up on learning to fly and you alone can fix it. He's as goofy as the Black Plaque his dentist can't find a final ablution for, probably a Jew ya know, you'd be getting long in the tooth yourself if we hadn't taken care of those with the pliers, Dr. Rosenfeld. He's non compos Mentos (he needs candy), looney as Looney iTunes, more gaga than a gag order shutting Kristi Noem up for Christ's sake, just plain nuts as the 101st Airborne used to say at Bastogne only this time we'll get creamed, no sugar. He's got so many screws loose a whorehouse madam would go bankrupt. And none of the earthworms in baggy boxcar suits and red ties overrunning the WH, the Capitol, and SCOTUS are going to do a blessed thing about it, so you can rest easy in this green land, Mr. President. With love to Allen Ginsberg, your fellow citizen, Tom.

  • [01-22]: The interview I'm hoping to see, and who knows but I may get my wish. Q: "General Spackleheimer, are you concerned about the President's mental state?" SPACKLEHEIMER: "Well, I'm not a psychiatrist, so I don't have any standing to attest to that as a licensed mental-health expert, of course. That said, it's kind of jazzy to remember I DO have standing as a professional soldier who's got so many medals the Army had to tailor a special jacket that currently reaches to my knees, and I'm as tall as Fred Gwynne on stilts. So yeah, he's fucking nuts. I mean loco, [gestures with his former saluting hand], zoom!, you know? I mean, we're so deep in the shithouse all the cows are on strike."

  • [01-25]: I'm a government/Washington D. C. brat and I'd like to think I can recognize what a well-run Federal agency answerable to the public looks like. So if anybody out there thinks ICE agents are a) only hired if they meet rigorous standards qualifying them for law-enforcement and public-safety duties, b) adequately supervised by competent professionals who understand the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, c) adequately overseen by a Congress alert to its responsibilities as the public's watchdog and ready to restrict or deny taxpayer dollars to ICE unless the agency submits to agreed-on guardrails that protect citizens' rights and safety, d) adequately backstopped by a rough popular, legislative and judicial consensus regarding said agency's purpose and necessity, e) adequately restrained by the consequences they'll face if they go rogue, and f) adequately trained in any field other than brutality, street brawling, and terrorizing their fellow Americans with threats of harassment, sanctioned violence, and Mob-style murders of absolutely anyone who gets in their way or just bugs the shit out of them, lemme know.

Memes noted:

• A felon who married an immigrant is telling a lot of y'all that the problems in this country all stem from felons and immigrants. But keep buying that stupid red hat that's made in China.

Original count: 459 links, 31382 words (38692 total)

Current count: 502 links, 34126 words (42166 total)

Ask a question, or send a comment.

-- next