Cromwell

President Trump signed an executive order banning all European men from the US Open today. According to Trump, the failure of American men to win the Open for over 20 years constituted a national emergency requiring immediate legal action. In addition, Trump noted that the European men had an unfair advantage in that Europe had been sheltering under the American nuclear umbrella and ripping us off for years. With a fair playing field, Trump argued, Americans would always win.

The executive order also replaced the names of the Billie Jean King National Tennis Center and Arthur Ashe Stadium with Jimmy Connors and John McEnroe, respectively. Trump maintained that the honoring of King and Ashe was only due to wokeness. He went on to add that Connors and McEnroe were appropriate honorees because they were brash, ill-tempered white American men who reminded him of, well, himself.

Readers of this blog will know that I am no admirer of John Bolton’s foreign policy views. Nevertheless, you have to give the man credit for standing up for what he thinks is right, even when he is completely wrong.

For that, the FBI has now raided his house and his office. The administration insists that these actions were not “political,” but it is hardly entitled to the benefit of the doubt. And this is just the beginning. Do you think Kash Patel and Pam Bondi are going to sit back and let an irresponsible majority of the American people put their jobs in jeopardy? Of course not! Expect lots of Democrats to be investigated before the 2026 and 2028 elections.

Obama’s investments in clean energy were largely successful and brought us benefits we are still enjoying today. Nobody remembers that, however, because the GOP ran a successful PR campaign attacking the failed investment in Solyndra. The government didn’t have the ability to pick winners in the market, we were told. Federal interventions in the economy were just a waste of taxpayer money.

That was then, and this is now. Trump is using CHIPS money to buy a federal stake in Intel. It is fair to assume that he will then provide Intel with a favorable regulatory climate; he may even go so far as to demand that American tech companies buy their chips from Intel. Then what? Will he use his regulatory power to strongarm an equity stake from the other tech companies? Will he use his eminent domain powers to become the CEO of America? The possibilities are endless.

American businessmen by and large supported Trump in 2024 because they thought he would give them more freedom and respect. Don’t say you weren’t warned, guys.

Finally, there is the economy. Here’s what Trump has done in his first seven months:

1. Pushed through the BBB, a regressive tax and spending bill with a few temporary shiny objects to fulfill campaign promises;
2. Jacked up tariffs in a completely madcap fashion;
3. Attempted to deregulate AI in spite of the dangers it presents;
4. Dramatically cut spending on clean energy in spite of the growing demand for electricity generated by data centers;
5. Started acquiring shares of companies he thinks are critical for national security;
6. Began the mass deportation of essential workers, including those in health care, agriculture, and construction, thereby creating labor shortages;
7. Demanded that the Fed reduce interest rates regardless of the evidence; and
8. Fired the individual responsible for collecting and publishing economic statistics.

As you would expect, we are already starting to see the effects of stagflation. Worse is to follow as companies either raise prices or go out of business.

The word “dilemma” is frequently used to mean a difficult choice. That is incorrect; a “dilemma” is a choice between two unsatisfactory options.

Trump has a dilemma, in the true sense of the word, with Ukraine. On the one hand, if he simply washes his hands of the country and the Russians roll into Kyiv, it will make him look like a loser, not the boss of the world. Of course, he will blame the Europeans, Putin, Biden, and the Ukrainians, not himself, but he knows most people will see it otherwise. On the other hand, the MAGA base is divided on why it hates American involvement with Ukraine, but not on the undesirability of the involvement itself. Any attempt by Trump to maintain anything like Biden’s level of support for Ukraine will consequently meet with an immediate backlash from his most valued supporters.

Trump seems to be playing it down the middle. Will that work in the end? Probably not.

Greg Abbott has been summoned to the White House. He thinks he is there to take a victory lap for his successful Trump-inspired House gerrymander. Boy, is he in for a surprise!

T: Welcome, Governor.

A: We delivered for you, Mr. President. We got you the extra five seats. It could be enough to keep control of the House next year.

T: Good work, Governor. I appreciate it. Now we need to get started on Phase II.

A: What do you mean? Our work is done. There’s nothing left to do.

T: You’ve only solved my problem with the House. We have to deal with the Senate, too.

A: But the Senate is elected by states. We can’t change state boundaries.

T: That’s where you’re wrong, Governor. Texas is way too big to be one state. We’re going to divide it into three different states–East, West, and Central Texas. That will give me four more senators. You can be the governor of whichever one you want.

A: But that’s ridiculous. Texas has always been one state. Lone star, one state. That’s our history.

T: What’s that to me? Don’t forget–it’s not about you or the people of Texas. It’s about me. It’s always about me. God saved me to make America great again. God wants Texas to be three states.

A: It can’t be done without public support, and this ask is impossible. Texans see themselves as one.

T: Listen, Hot Wheels. You’ll do as I say, or the base will destroy you, and Ken Paxton will wind up running all three Texas states.

A: Please don’t call me that. That’s a Democrat slur.

T: At least one of the Democrats has figured out how to sound like me. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. It’s kind of funny, too.

A: Anyway, I don’t see how I can make this work.

T: You’ll find a way, or the base will find you. Now go. (Abbott leaves)

So many “accomplishments” in only seven months! Here’s the list:

1. He threatened a NATO ally with the forced annexation of Greenland;
2. He also threatened to retake the Panama Canal;
3. He alienated the government and population of Canada with his tariffs and his jibes about the 51st state;
4. He similarly alienated the government and population of Mexico with his tariffs and threats of military action against the drug cartels;
5. He offended Brazil with his tariffs and attempts to intervene in domestic political and legal affairs;
6. He alienated India with an extremely high tariff;
7. He gave essentially unconditional support to Israel’s actions in Gaza;
8. He mostly abandoned America’s role as an indirect party in the Ukraine war and became a mediator or arbitrator, but none of it led to peace;
9. He bombed Iran in a brief and opportunistic attempt to put an end to the Iranian nuclear program, with limited success; and
10. He cut humanitarian aid to needy countries, thus reducing American soft power in the Third World.

It’s an impressive list of failures, no?

American efforts to induce our erstwhile allies to spend more on defense have had some positive impacts in Europe, but less in Asia. This is because the logical response is, or else what?

If you’re the leader of a European state that was previously dominated by the USSR, you already know what life in a Russian satellite state is like, so you have plenty of incentive to beef up the defense budget. If you live in Taiwan, you have a pretty good idea of what happens to you if the Chinese invade, so the American demand should resonate there, too. But if you live in Japan, India, Australia, or South Korea, the situation is different. Life in a Chinese vassal state probably wouldn’t be that bad on a day-to-day basis as long as you weren’t publicly critical of the Chinese regime. That means you have a plausible alternative if Trump’s demands start getting too obnoxious.

Has the Trump defense team figured this out, particularly with regard to India? Based on Trump’s actions on tariffs, I would say not.

Where to start on this one! Here is a list of Trump’s “accomplishments:”

1. Eliminating protections from refugees from countries with regimes that are clearly either despotic or incapable of governing;
2. Deporting people to third party countries that are clearly unsafe;
3. Equivocating on mass deportations for essential workers in fields in which the owners are Republicans;
4. Unleashing masked thugs on law-abiding undocumented immigrants in blue state cities;
5. Attempting to deport students who clearly represent no threat to American foreign policy for the exercise of their First Amendment rights;
6. Supporting the construction of Alligator Alcatraz;
7. Sending troops to blue cities to assist with immigration roundups; and
8. Denying any reasonable form of due process to deportees.

An article in the NYT tells us that Israeli officials have discussed the possibility of moving the Palestinians in Gaza to South Sudan. That’s not genocide; it’s merely ethnic cleansing.

I don’t know about you, but I can’t wait to see how Bret Stephens justifies this. Will he say removing the civilian population of Gaza is necessary to protect Israel from a handful of Hamas fighters? Will he say the Israeli officials involved in the discussions don’t really speak for the government? Or will he argue that the duly elected government doesn’t really reflect the views of the population?

Whatever he comes up with, I’m not buying it.

As I noted many times last year, Trump voters could be divided into two groups: those who believed his campaign promises; and those who thought he was lying. One of those groups was bound to be disappointed. As it turned out, Trump was telling the truth, and the lying group has already jumped ship.

If we do ultimately wind up with a Ukraine peace deal, it will be based on a similar misunderstanding; the Ukrainians will believe Trump’s security promises, and Putin will not. Who will turn out to be right on that occasion? TBD.

The outlines of a deal are starting to become clear, and they closely resemble what I predicted years ago. Ukraine will give up the land it has already lost, because it doesn’t have the ability to take it back. It will also be excluded from NATO. It will, however, receive security guarantees that resemble those in Article 5.

If this deal ultimately happens–and it will require the consent of the Ukrainian people in one way or another–it will not be another Munich as long as Ukraine’s new borders remain defensible and the security guarantees are ironclad. It is the latter requirement that would concern me if I were a Ukrainian. Can Ukraine trust Trump–a man who rewrites his own deals on a daily basis–to meet the obligations in such an agreement, even if they are put in writing and ratified by Congress, which seems unlikely to me? I would have grave concerns about that, to say the least.

It is worth noting that Hitler received the Sudetenland without having to fight for it, and that Czechoslovakia’s revised frontier was left indefensible. In the case of Ukraine, the first statement is not true; the second is TBD, and depends on further negotiation.

Here’s a list of Trump’s “accomplishments” to date in this field:

1. He pulled the security from foreign policy critics who have been threatened by the Iranians;
2. He also pulled the clearances from law firms connected in some way with his past legal problems, and managed to force some of them to enter into highly unfavorable legal settlements;
3. He fired everyone in the DOJ or the FBI who had any involvement in previous investigations of him; and
4. He has publicly directed that several of his critics be subjected to criminal investigation. We know that at least one of these critics–Letitia James–is actually being investigated. As to the others, we just don’t know.

Since we have passed the six month mark, it is time to provide a comprehensive list of Trump’s “accomplishments,” starting with the culture wars:

1. He attacked the Smithsonian and demanded changes to exhibits to make white men feel better about themselves;
2. He took over the Kennedy Center, cut the budget, changed the character of the entertainment, and chose the annual honorees himself;
3. He used antisemitism as a pretext to withhold large sums of money for valuable research at left-leaning Ivy League universities;
4. He put the names of loser Confederate generals back on our military bases;
5. He directed the NPS to change any park exhibits that could make straight white people feel guilty;
6. He threatened several left-wing musicians with prosecution;
7. He threw trans people out of the military; and
8. He eliminated billions of dollars in grant programs on the basis that they promoted woke ideology.

The interesting thing here is that there is nothing to report on the abortion front. Trump genuinely fears angering female voters.

Having opted for idealism over materialism as the source of ultimate reality, the next question in the sequence revolves around God. What do logic and experience tell me about the nature of the divine?

God is the creator of the universe. He (language fails me here–God transcends sexuality) is the source of matter, life, and love. He is immortal, universal, and unchanging.

This definition owes something to Greek philosophy and something to Deism. It doesn’t play well with the three major Western religions. More on that in my next post on metaphysics.