Americans living in France are asked about Donald Trump

When it comes to politics, the French appear to exercise free speech rights with more consistency than many Americans are comfortable with. I recall one visit to Paris when the husband of our hotel concierge identified my husband as an American who is fluent in French.  He got himself off of his couch potato position seated in the hotel's small lounge to give my husband a long lecture in French about why it was so stupid for Americans to fight in Vietnam....he talked on and on for over 20 minutes, while my husband, who is a Vietnam war veteran, patiently and politely listened.

This echo report was published in The Connexion newsletter by 

Sujena Soumyanath

Americans in France on being asked 'are you for Trump❓'

Democrats and Republicans tell of conversations ranging from rewarding to challenging.

Ruth Miller’s backpack is worth a thousand words.

This Brittany resident, 71, carries on her back a bag with a picture of US Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s face. Next to Ocasio-Cortez, in white letters, reads “a woman’s place is in the resistance.”

Miller, who moved to France from the US in 2015, has had the backpack for about two years and decorated it herself. Since then, she says more than half the time she goes out with it, someone comments on the bag’s display of American politics.

Miller is far from the only American in France to find themselves repeatedly unpacking US politics. Americans from both sides of the political spectrum say moving to France has sparked frequent, sometimes unexpected discussions about their home country.

The conversations come at a time when more Americans are moving to France. At the same time, according to an early 2026 poll, French respondents said they increasingly view the US under Trump as an enemy country. As a result, for some Americans in the Hexagon, sharing their nationality with a French person quickly sparks a discussion about everything from the electoral college and gerrymandering to New York mayor Zohran Mamdani. Or, their interlocutor may skip the chatter entirely, and ask, ‘you’re not for Trump, are you?’

At the heart of these interactions lies a key cultural difference. A 2025 Alliance Francaise article notes that while Americans prefer more casual small talk, the French enter quickly into deep, bold topics.

Members of the US Republican party in France find the French not only question their political affiliations, they sometimes challenge them, said Republicans Overseas France media director Paul Reen. The organization has about 200 members.

“Unfortunately, many French people think Trump is racist and fascist and sexist, so they just get angry and walk away,” Reen told The Connexion.

Despite this, there’s a growing number of French people willing to have an open dialogue and migrating to the right, he said.

Reen noted French people bring up a wide range of global-facing US policy issues, like tariffs, Ukraine, Palestine and, more recently, the Iran War. Most share similar opinions - from condemning the Iran War to supporting Palestine.

“The minority will stay and listen,” Reen said. “The majority just get angry.”

Leila Meresman, spokesperson for Democrats Abroad France, said American politics remain a fixture of French fascination: “I don't think a day goes by when I talk to French people [...] where somebody will not ask me once they figure out that I'm American, ‘what the heck is going on with Trump and the US administration❓’”

Democrats Abroad France does not publish membership numbers per country, spokesperson Amy Porter said.

Meresman noted that French people are “extremely well informed” and it's always a pleasure for her to talk about politics. However, that was not the case for one American who contacted The Connexion last June.

“I am fed up with having to be responsible for and explain my native country’s decisions to people in France,” the reader wrote.

A master’s student in Paris from the US, Micah Polsky said some people immediately ask them if they support Trump.

“That’s not how you start a conversation,” they said.

Still, Polsky told The Connexion that they enjoy discussing politics and explaining how the US government works. They have even developed some “canned responses” to explain concepts like the voting system that come up often.

Addressing the Trump question is particularly tricky for members of the Republican party.

“'Oh you’re American, you don’t like Trump I hope’ - that's how a Frenchman will start the conversation,” Reen said. “So you’re immediately on your backfoot.”

It is an experience Republicans coming from the States don’t expect at first, Reen said. He suggested joining groups like Republicans Overseas France and having some facts ready to share in a discussion.

From there usually sparks one of the many conversations she has had with French people over the years about the US. Sometimes it’s someone expressing support for Ocasio-Cortez. Other times, it’s a person asking her about the presidential election. She’s even discussed politics with her doctor and veterinarian here in France.

“I’m always happy to talk about it,” said Miller, who is active with Democrats Abroad Brittany. “I feel like it’s part of my responsibility.”

“Try to stay friendly and don't get confrontational,” he said. “Maybe you can change some hearts and minds.”

While in France political discussions spark frequently, in a 2024, survey by the American Psychology Association, 72％ of US adults polled said they hoped to avoid discussing politics with their family over the holidays. That was shortly after the divisive election that sealed Trump’s second term.

Christopher Davis, a Franco-American teacher in Lille, has integrated that election’s results into his teaching. He often explains the American political situation to his post graduate-level students and said they are curious about everything from immigration, to understanding the Republican voter base.

In the wake of Trump's re-election and his tariffs on Europe, some Americans worried about their safety when visiting France. A tourist interviewed by BBC last year said he covered the US flag logo on his hat before stepping out in Paris.

Most Americans The Connexion spoke to said they haven’t encountered any politics-related hostility.

“People have the ability to differentiate a citizen from the government,” Davis said. He added that making an effort to speak French and respecting the local culture greatly improves Americans’ perception in France.

As a word of advice for those less willing to discuss politics: “you’re allowed to say, this isn’t really my area of expertise,” Polsky said.

According to a recent analysis cited last year by BBC, the US expat community in France is overwhelmingly pessimistic about their home country’s future. But for Davis, like many others, the chance to talk about the US situation is more of an opportunity than a burden.

“I'm sad for my country, in a sense, where I don't recognize the direction we're taking,” he said. “That's why I feel that it's important to explain it, rather than to just let it by.”

Donald Trump created a war with Iran to remove the Epstein Files from headlines but he is stuck with the consequences

Donald Trump has failed to bring a peace agreement with Iran because he is stupid❗ He caused a war and cannot get out of it.

Trump’s reckless threats are sabotaging his own Iran negotiations

Echo opinion published in PennLiveLetters:

Donald Trump has as much self-restraint as a raging bull, and his tough talk may sabotage any possibility of a deal that would finally end his ill-advised war. The mouth that roared just can’t shut off the flow of vindictive threats that he will resume bombing even amid critical negotiations.

Does Trump not understand that the negotiations are, for the time being, keeping the Strait of Hormuz open❓ What possible 🥺good is he doing by running his mouth and messaging the world and Iran’s leaders that he is in charge—which he clearly is not. 

Is the growing criticism Republicans are giving our kingly dealmaker, whose reputation for reneging on promises is well documented, “seller’s remorse”❓

#ImpeachTrumpNOW❗

Maine Democrats support Mr. Graham Platner because we know how Senator Susan Collins is no longer representing Maine

This essay was published on the Facebook Page of Alan Caron:

Mr. Graham Platner and his wife Amy Gertner

Say what you will about Mr. Graham Platner, the Maine Democratic candidate for Senate, but here's what strikes me, as a longtime observer and participant in Maine elections. 

Obviously, the guy has been under-estimated since day one. He wasn't supposed to compete against a sitting Governor. He was too far left for Maine. He wasn't supposed to stir up the state with over 80 packed town meetings, the likes of which I've never seen in a primary in Maine.

Then he wasn't going to survive the tattoo and the angry online posts. He certainly wasn't going to survive the texting and the old girlfriends telling it all.

Tons of people with political experience, it seems, has misread this race. Mr. Platner actually pushed a sitting Governor out of the race in a Democratic primary. Try to find where that has happened before. How is it that all the insiders seemed to forget what an outsider campaign looks like? Or that having a party that is a 'big tent' means having a lot of different kinds of people in that tent, including ones that make you uncomfortable or don't look and sound like you?
Here's my take on why Platner seems to weather it all. 

In fact, the guy is SAYING SOMETHING. He's saying something that people are hungry for. Not policies and programs. Not bipartisan patty cake. Strong action aimed at the roots of our economic and political problems. And he says it better than just about anybody.
Platner's acceptance speech on election night should be studied in communications and politics schools for the next decade. It ran for 22 minutes on national news channels, which is unprecedented. They just couldn't turn it off because it was compelling.

Whether you like it or not or agree with his politics, the guy is a force of nature. And that's what too many people are missing and many more people are looking for. And the people who are responding to his call couldn't care less about someone not using approved language. Heck, that's part of what they like, because that's someone closer to who they are.

Here's another thing they like. Platner said in his acceptance speech that if you believe in transformative change for the country, you have to believe in transformative change in individuals, and the idea of redemption.

Now, Republicans will do the same thing that Democratic insiders have done. They'll, of course, want to destroy anyone who dares to challenge the status quo. They'll measure election chances by the old playbook. They'll think politics today is just like it's always been. And they'll underestimate the distress that people are feeling who don't live in enclaves of comfortable life. It's a distress, by the way, that they promised to reduce in the last election but that has actually gotten worse.

Obviously, greater problem for Republicans is that they don't have an answer to what Platner is saying about the billionaires taking over and enriching themselves at the expense of everyone else. They don't have a response to the corruption of politics or the vacuuming of wealth from the bottom and middle to the top.

A year ago, ironically, Republicans were arguing for Trump and for the outsiders. They were the change agents, raging at the elites in Washington and everywhere else. Now, with Collins, they have to sell the status quo when nobody wants to hear it.

I tell my Republican friends 'don't underestimate this guy'. The working class guys agree. They hear it and they see it around them. And they like what he's saying too, even if they're not ready to tell their Republican friends. It's not complicated: they want change. We keep saying they're moving Right or they're moving Left. They aren't really doing either. They're just voting for whoever they feel can bring a better deal for people like them.

Right or wrong, they felt that Democrats had become a party of educated know-it-alls who not only couldn't hear working class people but actually thought that working class people, and especially working class men, were not enlightened enough or too dangerous to be welcome among Democrats.

Mr. is the antidote. He's hit the bullseye, and the people who have drifted from the Democratic party since Obama are paying attention. Those people will decide the election in November.
So now they'll be a lot of handwringing by some Democrats who should spend their time and energy on something far more productive - fighting to defeat Collins. And they'll be bold predictions by Republican operatives about how Platner will be crushed or how Collins always wins. But in disruptive and restive moments like this, that stuff doesn't win elections.

Too many Democrats have been consumed with the dangers for Platner. How about we take a minute to tally the dangers for Collins❓ She's in the worst election cycle for Republicans since the Nixon impeachment. She has a party that isn't nearly as energized as Democrats and which includes a sizeable number of voters who don't like her much. And in a contest over where Republican-leaning men go, she will certainly lose some of the base.

Worse, this election will be a referendum on Trump and she can't distance herself from Trump without incurring the wrath of MAGA or Trump himself.
Her biggest problems aren't among Republicans, though. The key to Collins success, over the years, is that she has always had these three things in place:
1. Republicans who didn't like her because she wasn't conservative enough or she was a woman, always held their noses and voted for her anyway.
2. She could always count on at lease 15% of Democrats to support her.
3. She's always gotten more than her share of Independents.
This year, she can't count on any of that. The number of Republicans unhappy with Trump and MAGA is growing. Some will not vote and others will vote Democratic. She will certainly lose support among Democrats and Independents because of her votes on Supreme Court nominees, cuts to health care and support for wars.

Like it or not, this is a miserable year to be a Republican. There's a wave coming and it's going to sweep out a lot of Republicans whether they're MAGA or not, or whether they voted for Trump 100% of the time or a more 'courageous' 95%, like Collins.
In fact, 'd argue that these are the worst conditions that Collins has run in, and against the toughest opponent she's ever faced. Because Mr. Platner has energy, with a message and his finger on the pulse of today. 

And Senate Collins thinks talking about all the bridges she funded and how relevant she is in an irrelevant Congress is what people care most about. (Reality check, Maine property tax payers provided the base funding for all her pet projects, she has not provided sustainable revenue for any of what she throws federal money at.)

Strap yourself in, my friends. Maine is about the be The Show that people across the country will be watching and discussing. What happens here will help to answer not only who controls Congress next year, but also whether Democrats can stem the tide of working class drift toward Republicans. If they can, the country will have more confidence that Democrats should be given a chance, again, to lead the change that America has been asking for and so desperately needs. That will produce a Democratic President in 2028.

Donald Trump said he does not think about consumers! Yes, he said that!

Donald Trump Is Now the Un-Populist

Donald Trump, on May 12, 2026, while taking questions from reporters about the Iran conflict. When asked if he was considering Americans' financial situations during negotiations, he responded, "Not even a little bit."

Published in New York Magazine Intelligencer by Ed Kilgore

From the expensive and unnecessary ballroom to the illegal Iran war, to blatant self-dealing, Donald Trump is ignoring the will of the people — to his Growing Old Party's peril.

Less than four months from now, early voting begins in the 2026, midterm general elections. Political scientists differ on exactly when voting intentions are formed, but the consensus is that for the vast majority of the electorate, it happens well before the last-minute rush of campaigning. Most Republicans, whose control of Congress is at risk in November, are acutely aware that they are running out of time to convince swing voters that their sour perceptions of Donald Trump’s job performance — always the single most important variable affecting midterm outcomes — are erroneous. And at almost every turn, the president seems to be on a mission to make that as hard as possible.

While assessments of Trump’s handling of a broad range of issues have remained well underwater for over a year now, there are particularly and especially salient negative perceptions of how well he’s dealt with high living costs (arguably the issue that most determined his 2024 victory over Kamala Harris) and whether his strange and aimless war with Iran was a good idea. Trump’s two biggest problems are dangerously interactive, since the Iran war’s effect on global energy prices has clearly boosted domestic inflation, and his prosecution of this “war of choice” has come to symbolize his refusal to focus on the public’s actual concerns. For all the interminable discussion of a GOP “affordability agenda,” it’s getting very late in the year for that agenda to suddenly appear.

And, most recently, despite the intense loyalty congressional Republicans have consistently shown toward Trump, an unprecedented revolt has broken out, for the moment shutting down the legislative process. The growing GOP grievance is that Trump is continuing to elevate personal hobbyhorses (e.g., his White House ballroom project, which he now wants taxpayers to subsidize, and his bizarre new slush fund for alleged victims of Biden administration persecution) over the measures Republicans need to stay in office.


The implications of this revolt go beyond smooth executive-legislative relations or even the unity of the GOP. Whatever one thinks of Donald Trump from the perspective of ethics, policy, the U.S. Constitution, or the health of democratic institutions, his prowess as a gut-level politician has been universally, if grudgingly, respected. An essential ingredient of the loyalty he has inspired in the Republican ranks has been his ability to bend traditional conservatism to “populism,” a voter-friendly blend of themes and proposals that probably saved the GOP from the irrelevance it seemed to be courting before he came down the escalator in 2015. He famously convinced a party in love with “entitlement reform” to lay off trying to slaughter the sacred cows of Social Security and Medicare. He talked Republicans out of a near century of free-trade orthodoxy because culturally conservative blue-collar voters hated NAFTA. And he convinced the militarist wing of the GOP that massive defense spending didn’t require actually using it in unpopular “forever wars.”

Now comes the terrifying possibility that the man who made Republicans “populists” is himself becoming the ultimate un-populist. Trump is not just ignoring (or, because he can only acknowledge praise of himself, actively denying) public opinion; he seems to be courting unpopularity. Americans really dislike his beloved tariffs, and although Trump has the perfect legal excuses to stop pursuing them, he still persists. Trump can’t stop bashing Obamacare, even though he got badly burned on the subject in his first term and has no coherent replacement for it. His war in Iran was the rare U.S. war that was unpopular from the get-go, but he can’t seem to let go of it, and it’s an even bet he’ll start another war before suppertime. The political “outsider” who was too rich to bribe is now the consummate insider grabbing money with both hands to enrich his family and friends and the most disreputable of his supporters.

Most astonishing of all, the veteran entertainer who understood the intense resentment of working people for elites who seemed to mock them while fleecing them is now becoming the elitist-in-chief. He is explicitly annoyed that people struggling to make ends meet don’t appreciate they are living in a “golden age” in which stock markets climb dizzily upward on record corporate profits. He’s angry that Americans don’t just take his word for it that they need to pay higher prices for gasoline or light and heat so that he can win some more wars and peace prizes. And he is indifferent at best to how very bad it looks that he is devoting more time to his many tacky and self-glorifying vanity projects than to his day job. Many regular folk used to enjoy watching Trump thumb his nose at the powers that be. Now he’s the Man, the very opposite of a plucky underdog.

For Republicans who desperately need his help to retain their offices and their power, it increasingly appears that Trump has lost touch with the country. Yes, he’ll help them in the midterms by rigging congressional districts and perhaps interfering with the vote itself, but not by bending to adverse public opinion. It would be one thing if like some second-term presidents of the past, he drifted toward lame-duck status and began ceding power to his allies and successors. But no: Trump dominates news media and the political landscape more forcefully and ubiquitously than ever. (The more Trump talks, the more he contradicts himself and his advisors.)

He’s in danger not only of squandering his party’s midterm-election hopes, but of handing his putative heir J.D. Vance an anvil and the GOP an indelible MAGA brand — even as the idea that he has restored “American greatness” becomes ridiculous to all but his fiercest acolytes.

It’s possible, of course, that such assessments once again underestimate the 47th. Perhaps, against all expectations, he will snap out of his extended fugue state and begin listening to the public and his party leaders. But, Donald Trump would be well advised to make his 80th-birthday wish Make Trump popular again. In the meantime, the candle  he’s already🕯️ blowing out is his own.

Donald Trump and maga Republicans hurt middle class by enabling Iran war causing high gas prices

 Trump’s War Is Punishing the Poor, Starting at the Gas Pump

New York Times echo opinion by Jeff  D. Colgan

The cruelty of high fuel prices isn’t just about the cost, but also about the unequal burden it places on American households. 

Energy costs have been walloping the working class since the United States and Israel attacked Iran on February 28. And things could get a lot worse this summer, with prices rising ever higher the longer the Strait of Hormuz remains closed to shipping.

A research team at Brown University built a website to track the rising, real-time energy costs of the war with Iran. By mid-May, higher prices for just two energy products — gasoline and diesel fuel — added nearly 💲40 billion in costs to American consumers. That’s more than the Pentagon’s cost estimate of its military operations, now approaching $29 billion.

Before the attack, the average price for a gallon of gasoline in the United States was 💲2.98. Since then, the average price has soared to about $4.50 a gallon. That average smooths over a lot of regional variation. In California, prices have climbed past 💲6 per gallon. Colorado had an increase of more than 💲1.50 per gallon since February, lifting prices from below the national average to above it.

The rise in diesel fuel prices, critical to commerce, has been even sharper. Diesel is up by more than 50 percent. Even if you don’t purchase diesel directly, you’re paying a premium for other daily goods, because many of them are transported using trucks, locomotives and other engines that run on diesel fuel. If you buy a package online, you’re paying for diesel indirectly. Farmers are feeling it, too. There’s no escape in the air, either, with FedEx and UPS imposing surcharges as a result of rising jet fuel prices.

Americans watched campaign ads with Trump driving a garbage truck and serving fries at MacDonalds, but we never see his fake PR with a picture of him pumping gasoline! 

On average, each U.S. household has paid an extra 💲295 because of higher gasoline and diesel fuel prices since Trump's Iran war began. That’s more than a week’s worth of groceries for the average household. The burden falls hardest on poorer people, who are using less fuel than richer households, but whose costs make up a far larger portion of their budgets.

According to our analysis, Americans in the bottom 18 percent have had to spend at least half a week’s income to pay off the higher price of fuel since the end of February. As a result, they are cutting back on the gas they use, while households with incomes above 💲125,000 barely reduced their real gas consumption.

Fuel prices are likely to remain elevated for months, even if the fighting stops. Oil tanker traffic through the Strait of Hormuz will remain low until Iran grants passage, either explicitly through an agreement or simply in practice, without acknowledgment. 

But, even if the strait opens again, many insurers will be wary of allowing ships to transit it — just as the insurers were after the Houthis previously threatened shipping in the Red Sea.

Moreover, Iran might continue to charge a toll or tax on tankers for moving through the strait, which would get passed on to refiners. And don’t forget the physical damage already inflicted on the oil production equipment and processing facilities in the Persian Gulf, some of which will take years to repair or reconstruct. All these supply constraints push prices up.

Without a resolution soon, experts expect the fuel crisis to get much worse. Energy producers have been shielding the markets from the full impact of the conflict by drawing down their inventories, in hopes of refilling storage tanks when supply constraints ease. 

But, global inventories will reach critically low levels by the end of May, just as the summer driving season ramps up. That could drive oil prices higher — up to $200 per barrel, according to some analysts.

Suppose that gasoline prices rise to 💲5 per gallon across the United States. That would mean an extra 💲513 per household from Memorial Day to Labor Day, compared with what consumers were paying before the war began, bringing the total gas bill for a typical household to 💲1,558 over the course of the summer.

If gasoline prices top 💲6 per gallon on average — a real possibility if oil goes to 💲200 per barrel — that would mean an extra 💲825 per household. Just for gasoline. Other fuels, such as diesel and jet fuel, will skyrocket. Those prices will, in turn, affect the prices of everything else, from groceries to air travel. Tomato prices are already up nearly 40 percent.

Extra energy costs are bound to have a political effect. High gasoline prices are visible, posted on thousands of roadside signs nationwide. Americans saw them rising soon after Trump ordered the attack on Iran. That makes it difficult for Trump to avoid blame.

And it could spell trouble for the Republicans in the November midterm elections. No one should doubt Trump’s uncanny ability to shift the conversation away from potentially damaging topics, but even he may struggle with the anger voters feel every time they fill their tanks.

They’re not being unreasonable. Americans can and should hold  Trump accountable for the mess he has created in the Persian Gulf. Despite claiming to be the party of national security, the Republicans have proved to be poor shepherds of the national interest. 

In the case of Iran, their missteps are having direct, visible consequences for Americans’ pocketbooks.

"like telling Albert Einstein he doesn’t know physics", "Hillbilly" JD Vance a former Marine Corps corporal is saying whaaaaa?

Donald "Dump" Trump, "Hillbilly" JD Vance, His Holiness Pope Leo and the midterm elections.  Published in the Press Democrat in Santa Rosa, California.

Echo opinion letter to the editor: Donald Trump presides over a U.S. population of 348 million people. Pope Leo has a world following of more than 1.4 billion people. 

Trump’s approval rating is under 40%. Leo’s approval rating is around 84%.  Obviously, Donald Trump is jealous, so what does he do❓ He goes after the pope and tells him he’s “weak on crime” and “terrible for foreign policy.” (Maine Writer,🙄 laughable if it were not also pathetic, spoken by a man who thinks he is like god. Lucifer had 👿this same problem. (Book of Revelation 12:7-9 -war in heaven.)

In reality, it would be an understatement to say Trump is not only a convicted criminal, but he’s also terrible for foreign policy. 

Then "Hillbilly" JD Vance, who was also a Marine Corps corporal,  tells the pope that he doesn’t know the gospel❓ That’s like telling Albert Einstein he doesn’t know physics. 

And the "do nothing" Republicans, like Maine's Senator Susan Collins,  in Congress are saying and doing nothing about this Trump incoherence. We’re doomed if the Democrats can’t take over the House and Senate in November.

From Bill Krumbein, in Santa Rosa, California

Murders in Minneapolis by evil ICE are the result of Gestapo tactics deliberately targeting innocent American citizens

Echo opinion letter published in the Baltimore Sun, in Maryland:

Noting that courageous protesters in Minneapolis are tracking the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (evil ICE) activities and coordinating protests through online chats and databases, Vice President JD (Hillbilly) Vance said that the “engineered chaos … is the direct consequence of far left agitators” (“Report: Encrypted chats reveal protesters tracked ICE before Minnesota shooting,” Jan. 26).

That is false. 🤥IOW another lie.

The chaos is the direct consequence of the ruthless, blatantly unconstitutional and sometimes murderous actions of brutal ICE agents and their superiors. The protesters are well within their constitutional rights to organize by the best legal means available to call attention to the ICE horror show.

Protect peaceful protestors. Although a few protesters may have gone too far, it is evil ICE’s cruelty that prompts them, and ICE’s cruelty that now, finally, is becoming of concern even to true conservative Republicans - like Senator Susan Collins. ❗ Thank heaven for peaceful protestors 🙏❗

#WhereIsSenatorSusanCollins❓

From  Travers Nelson, in Baltimore, Maryland  #ICEGestapo

Let me get this? No one denies the purpose of Jeffrey Epstein's recruitment of young girls was sexual but is more intel beneath the service?

Opinion echo published in The New York Times by Ross Douthat:  

Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump were friends and neighbors in Manhattan where they lived only a few blocks away from each other.

Ross Douthat writes: For those of us with a sincere, nonpartisan interest (I swear😉😜😂) in the Jeffrey Epstein scandal, it was a good week:

• First the Democrats, with an eye to hammering Donald Trump, released a few redacted Epstein emails in which the president’s name featured prominently; 
• Then, the Republicans, presumably with an eye to burying the Democratic leak, released thousands more Epstein documents.
• Ho-ho-ho❗😮🎅With this kind of tag-team effort, we’ll have the whole story out in the open by 🎄Christmas❗

A word of caution, though, for those liberals who are relative newcomers to the tragic Epstein saga, for so long a mostly conservative (obsession❗) fixation. 

Instead, there is a dark conspiratorial thrill that comes with encountering the reality, amply displayed in the latest round of disclosures, that so many American elites were perfectly comfortable being buddy-buddy with a trafficker of teenage girls.😳 

And because both right and left have pivoted away from the Bill Clinton-era neoliberal center, the fact that Epstein had (to quote the left-wing writer Jeet Heer) “very banal centrist politics with the same gestalt as 90 percent of U.S. elite since 1990s” makes him an ideal symbol of elite perfidy  (i.e. deceitfulness) for both progressives and populists alike. (Maine Writer: IMO Bill Clinton has paid plenty for his "perfidy" regarding his history with women because the right wing "perfidy" won't allow him to forget about it. So, going back over this same old history is useless intelligence.)

But, it’s important not to let that conspiratorial thrill outrun the actual facts. The new tranche of information confirms, yet again, the moral squalor of various powerful Americans. 

Yet, it still leaves us short of definitive answers about the outstanding Epstein questions: Did other powerful men have sex with the underage girls that he trafficked❓ What were his connections, if any, to the world of intelligence❓ And what unrevealed details have made Trump so intent on preventing further disclosure❓

I thought we might be closer to answers to the last question when I read the first email that the Democrats released, a 2011, note from Epstein to (the evil😈) Ghislaine Maxwell, shortly after his release from prison: “I want you to realize that the dog that hasn’t barked is Trump … [VICTIM] spent hours at my house with him, he has never once been mentioned. Police chief, etc. I’m 75 percent there.”

With the name redacted, this email suggested there might well be an as-yet-unknown victim with whom Epstein assumed that Trump had a sexual encounter. 

But, the hidden name turned out to be the late Virginia Giuffre, the most famous of Epstein’s victims, who had worked for Trump at Mar-a-Lago and who specifically and repeatedly denied that the future president had sex with her or any other girl, even as she made allegations against many other powerful figures.

Just because she denied it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen, the suspicious reader might say, which is true. 

There are reasons to doubt the reliability of some of Giuffre’s accusations, so it’s possible she was also unreliable in her non-accusations. But still, those non-accusations mean that this email is not the smoking gun proving Trump’s complicity in sex crimes. 

And you could also read it as Epstein speculating that Trump was the person who ratted him out to the Palm Beach police, which would actually dovetail with a narrative some of Trump’s defenders have tried to spin up.

Meanwhile, the documents release also includes a much later email from Epstein, a stream-of-consciousness ramble sent to himself shortly before his last arrest in 2019, in which the financier seems to describe his operation (“200 dollars for a rub and tug … no sex … most in thier mid twenties …”) and then says Trump “came to my house many times in that period” but “never got a massage,” before turning to a long complaint about how Trump took advantage of him in a real estate deal (duh, ya' think❓). The emails suggest:

• First, that it was normal for Epstein’s friends to have sexual encounters (if not sexual intercourse); 
• Second, that Epstein at least wanted people to think the girls in involved were not minors; 
• And third, that Epstein had a longstanding grudge against Trump but probably did not have some secret tape of Trump getting a massage or more.

In which case the ultimate truth could be squalid (powerful men getting "hand jobs" from masseuses whom they thought were over 18) without being a Grand Guignol conspiracy (powerful men knowingly trafficking minors to facilitate some kind of “Eyes Wide Shut” scenario). And something similar could be the case with the intelligence-world questions: YES❕ There is evidence that Epstein used his connections to assist Israel intelligence on various projects, but nothing indicating that he was running a sex-and-blackmail operation on its behalf.

But then, the great question remains: Why doesn’t Trump want more disclosure❓

It’s possible that he just doesn’t like the embarrassment of having everyone reminded that he was one of the rich creeps in the Epstein circle. Or, it’s possible that there’s something truly sensitive related to Epstein and intelligence that has yet to be revealed.

Or, it’s possible that there is some thread remaining here, and not necessarily the obvious one, that the president really, really doesn’t want to see get pulled.

Ross Douthat has been an Opinion columnist for The Times since 2009.

Donald Trump cruelty is a disaster for hard working immigrant families: Big Ugly Bad Bill is punishment to innocent immigrants

Echo opinion published in the Boston Globe by Marcala Garcia

A ‘big, beautiful’ disaster for immigrant families

What this law enshrines is not reform but punishment — it’s criminalizing immigration to the fullest extent possible.

Donald Trump’s so-called Big Beautiful Bill, now law, promises sweeping changes to the country’s immigration system and safety net. But for millions of immigrant families, it spells a future of fear, hardship, and exclusion.

Touted as a win for border security and fiscal restraint, the law pours unprecedented resources into immigration enforcement and border security — to the tune of $170 billion — while stripping away critical health care and food assistance.

Legal experts and community advocates have warned that the law’s harsh provisions — massive detention expansions, steep new immigration fees, and deep cuts to social programs — will destabilize families, endanger children, and undermine the very communities that help drive the nation’s economy.

Among the law’s most alarming provisions: $45 billion to expand detention capacity to more than 100,000 beds — rivaling the entire federal prison system — and $31 billion to expand immigration enforcement and deportation activity, which could lead to the hiring of as many as 10,000 new ICE agents. The result? More raids, more arrests, more fear.

It doesn’t stop there. The bill imposes financial barriers and new fees on immigrant families. For instance, asylum applications, once free, will now cost $100 (after House Republicans originally proposed $1,000) and work permits, also once free, will now cost $550.

Appeals of immigration decisions now cost $900, up from $110. For many immigrants, these fees represent an “unaffordable price tag on due process,” Heidi Altman, vice president of policy at the National Immigration Law Center, told NPR.

Then there’s the new 1 percent tax levied on remittances sent abroad, which disproportionately affects low-income immigrants whose families back home rely on that financial support. The law also bars some legally present immigrants from accessing Medicaid and restricts food assistance (SNAP) eligibility for certain immigrants.

“The Big Ugly Bill is incredibly irresponsible,” Héctor Sánchez Barba, president and CEO of Mi Familia Vota, a Latino advocacy organization, said in a statement.

The sweeping law, which also includes massive tax cuts for rich individuals, carries a hefty cost: It’s estimated that it will add more than $3.4 trillion to the national debt over 10 years. “Our children and grandchildren will have to pay for its massive debt, while obscene amounts of money will go to ICE policies that punish families and the essential workers our economy needs for their hard work and tax dollars,” Barba said.

What this law enshrines is not reform but punishment 😞😭— it’s criminalizing immigration to the fullest extent possible, monetizing some legal rights, and prioritizing cruelty over common sense. It is a legislative embodiment of Trumpism: performative and punitive.

For immigrant families, the “big, beautiful” promise has revealed its true face, and it surely is an ugly one.

This is an excerpt from ¡Mira!, a Globe Opinion newsletter from columnist Marcela García.

Donld Trump incompetent cabinet includes wrestling diva Linda McMahon as - wait of it!- She is the "Education Secretary" OMG

Echo opinion and essay published in Medium

Linda McMahon had no idea.... by Allison Wiltz 

Tusla Race Massacre: In 1921, one of the nation’s worst race massacres destroyed the lives and livelihoods of hundreds of Black Tulsans, in Oklahoma. The tragic events took countless homes and businesses and led to the destruction of one of the largest, most affluent and prosperous Black communities in America.

Is The (fake❗) Educaiton Secretary Linda McMahon Really Ignorant of Tulsa Race Massacre❓

Linda McMahon, is known as the first lady of pro wrestling, but Donald Trump nominated her to be the Education Secretary❓

When it comes to anti-black racism, some White people claim they “see no evil, hear no evil,” and “speak no evil.” 

This state of incompetence shields them from the social expectation to participate in the conversation in earnest. 

Actually, it’s a strategy of evasion. Take, for instance, the congressional hearing in which U.S. Rep Summer Lee asked Education Secretary Linda McMahon whether lessons about historical events, such as the Tulsa Race Massacre, and figures, such as Ruby Bridges, would be considered “illegal,” given the administration’s anti-DEI mandate. 

Rather than providing clarity, her response only served to muddy waters. McMahon seemed to know very little, if anything, about black history. Were this an official quiz in a class setting, it’s safe to say she would have failed. But it remains unclear whether she was genuinely unfamiliar with the content or feigned ignorance to dodge a discussion about the inclusion of these historical narratives.

Some doubted the Republican Education Secretary was genuinely ignorant of black history. Markus Batchler, the political director for People for the American Way, said, “While pretending not to know who Ruby Bridges was, or the impact of the Tulsa Race Massacre, she is working every day to ban books and curriculum that acknowledge the existence of Ruby Bridges and the Tulsa Race Riots from libraries and classrooms across the nation,” Batchler warned.

In deed, (incompetent) McMahon's public testimony contradicted her actions. Also, if you are removing materials because you claim they’re improper, you should be able to articulate, for the public, the logic underpinning this decision.

And, if you are unaware of black historical events and figures, then it’s implausible for you to have just cause.

During congressional hearings, Lee suggested, “when [you] call for removing equity and inclusion and diversity and accessibility from schools in favor of ‘traditional American values,’ it’s indistinguishable from… post-civil war south advocating to rewrite history with the Lost Cause narrative.” The preference for a favorable narrative over an honest one isn’t new. And yet, modern-day efforts to whitewash history are just as harmful.

Michael Harriot, a columnist and author who typically covers the intersection of race, culture, and politics, asked in his Contraband Camp newsletter, “Are White people dumb?” in his initial response to Education Secretary McMahon’s testimony.


Harriot wasn’t buying into pseudoscience that portrays one race as more intelligent than another. Instead, he was shining a light on the absurdity of some White people’s convenient ignorance on the topic of race. With access to articles, books, films, TV series, and the World Wide Web, it’s difficult to fathom how White adults, particularly those in government leadership positions, can say with a straight face that they’ve never heard of The Tulsa (Oklahoma) Race Massacre.❓❗💥

There are numerous incidents like this, such as the 1898, Wilmington Massacre, the 1920, Ocoee Massacre, and the 1923, Rosewood Massacre, each involving racist-driven attacks on black communities. And yet, for some Americans sheltered from the nation’s legacy of systemic racialized violence, these events may sound foreign. One report found that White Republicans are less perceptive of racism compared to White Democrats (Zell & Lesick, 2022). Separate from their political affiliation, those with knowledge of historical racism were more likely to perceive individual racism in the modern era. One study found White Americans’ ignorance of critical race theory predicted their opposition to it (Richmond et al., 2024).

If we’re to take McMahon’s testimony at face value, that she doesn’t know enough about historical events, like the Tulsa Race Massacre, to comment, then it reveals how academically shallow her department’s resistance to these narratives is. 

How is it possible that someone is unaware of major historical events to somehow be qualified to determine which should be included in the curriculum❓ That would be like saying one car is more dangerous than another without identifying which safety features make it so. And whenever someone asks for more information, you claim you’ll have to get back to them. For instance, what makes a lesson about the 1780 Battle of Camden, where 1,050 American and 314 British soldiers died on the battlefield during the American Revolution, more appropriate for high school students than the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre, where historians estimate hundreds were killed during the Jim Crow era? If mass casualty events were deemed inappropriate for class discussions across the board, they’d both be excluded. But it’s clear their criteria are race-based. It determines which class materials receive a gold star of approval from the administration and which are tossed into the reject pile. Claiming not to know about the Tulsa Race Massacre ensures discussions of this nature never bubble up to the surface.

While people often think of ignorance as harmless, when it is weaponized, it can become a frightful weapon. Indeed, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. once said, “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” In this case, some White Americans oppose the inclusion of black history without taking the time to understand it. As a result, their resistance is rooted in faulty logic. How can you say a narrative is dangerous when you cannot describe it? To dispel misinformation, here’s a summary: In the summer of 1921, White Tulsa residents destroyed 35 blocks of Black Wall Street, leaving between 100 and 300 dead, at least 8,000 homeless, and many more injured. This tragedy began with a lie, that a Black teenager, 19-year-old Dick Rowland assaulted a White teenager, 17-year-old Sarah Page. 

During Jim Crow, it was common for lynchings to follow false accusations, often targeting Black men. In this case, local law enforcement deputized 500 White men and boys, enabling them to wreak havoc on an entire town of people. One reason this narrative should be discussed is so that history does not repeat itself. So citizens acknowledge the harm of racist presumptions.

At times, the denial of racism is a strategy to inflict harm by dampening resistance that would otherwise arise. In Ryan Coogler’s film, “Sinners,” a White character, Hogwood, sells property to the Black twin brothers, Elijah “Smoke” Moore and Elias “Stack” Moore. During their brief negotiation, the twins expressed concerns that members of the Klan would trespass on their property. Hogwood denied the existence of the organization in the region, referring to it in the past tense. Yet, he was the Grand Dragon, their local leader of the Ku Klux Klan. Hogwood’s goal was to make the new Black owners of the property feel comfortable making the sale and reassured that local racists wouldn’t attack them. Of course, this was a set-up, as the Klan planned to do just that. Not to give too much away, but luckily, the twins weren’t assuaged so easily. While this narrative is fictional, the phenomenon is all too real. White people who perpetrate racism often claim they do not know about the topic. They claim to see no evil, hear no evil, and speak no evil. And yet, their actions often reflect the racism and bias they swear isn’t there.

Ironically, McMahon, the Education Secretary’s lack of knowledge, whether genuine or not, highlights another reason why these narratives should be included in the classroom curriculum. The fact that some White people are unaware of the Tulsa Race Massacre of 1921 only affirms the relevance of such lessons. It’s a travesty that the persecution of Black Americans, while well-documented, may be considered inappropriate under the Trump administration’s anti-DEI mandate. Knowledge of historical racism is tied to racial attitudes in the modern era. So, if we want our future to be more equitable, it starts with the battle over what content makes it into the classroom. According to Yolanda Sealey-Ruiz of Columbia University, “racial literacy in English classrooms is the ability to read, discuss, and write about situations that involve race or racism.” However, laws and policies that discourage the inclusion of the topic impede efforts to expand this competency. For students and the public at large to enhance their racial literacy, they need to have safe spaces to develop these skills, to ask questions, and engage with others. Silencing this reflective process impedes social progress. As LaGarrett J. King noted in Social Education, “our teaching should center on how Black history improves our understanding of contemporary circumstances, and how it can stimulate us to improve our democracy.”

​​References

Bender, M. C. (2025, April 3). Trump administration threatens to withhold funds from public schools — The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/03/us/politics/public-school-funding-trump-dei.html

Gaynor, G. K. (2025, June 5). Education Secretary Linda McMahon doesn’t appear to know what the Tulsa Race Massacre is during the House hearing. TheGrio. https://thegrio.com/2025/06/04/education-secretary-linda-mcmahon-doesnt-appear-to-know-what-tulsa-race-massacre-is-during-house-hearing/

Harriot, M. (2025, June 6). Are white people dumb?. ContrabandCamp. https://www.contrabandcamp.com/p/are-white-people-dumb?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Jones, J. (2025, June 4). Education secretary Linda McMahon flubs basic facts in Senate hearing. MSNBC. https://www.msnbc.com/top-stories/latest/linda-mcmahon-senate-math-facts-kennedy-reed-murphy-rcna210946

King, L. J. (2016). Teaching black history as a racial literacy project. Race, Ethnicity, and Education, 19(6), 1303–1318. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2016.1150822

King, LaGarrett J. (2017). The status of Black History in U.S. schools and Society. https://www.socialstudies.org/system/files/publications/articles/se_810117014.pdf

Nelson, J. C., Adams, G., & Salter, P. S. (2013). The Marley hypothesis: denial of racism reflects ignorance of history. Psychological science, 24(2), 213–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612451466

Richmond, B. S., Toosi, N. R., Wellman, J. D., & Wilkins, C. L. (2024). Ignorance of critical race theory predicts White Americans’ opposition to it. Journal of Social Issues, 80(1), 240–271. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12601

Sealey-Ruiz, Y. (2020). Racial literacy. https://ncte.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/SquireOfficePolicyBrief_RacialLiteracy_April2021.pdf

Zell, E., & Lesick, T. L. (2022). Ignorance of History and Political Differences in Perception of Racism in the United States. Social Psychological and Personality Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506211056493

Just like the tariffs' burden: Cuts to Medicaid harm the voters who supported Donald Trump! Save Medicaid

Echo opinion published in The New York Times by Missouri's Republican Senator Josh Hawley.

(A broken clock award to Senator Hawley for this opinion. Sounds to me like he is listening to his constitutents about protecting Medicaid.) 

Even a broken clock is correct two times a day! 

Trump promised working-class tax cuts and protection for working-class social insurance, such as Medicaid. But now a noisy contingent of corporatist Republicans — call it the party’s Wall Street wing — is urging Congress to ignore all that and get back to the old-time religion: corporate giveaways, preferences for capital and deep cuts to social insurance.

This wing of the party wants Republicans to build our big, beautiful bill around slashing health insurance for the working poor. But that argument is both morally wrong and politically suicidal.

Let’s begin with the facts of the matter. Medicaid is a federal program that provides health care to low-income Americans in partnership with state governments. Today it serves over 70 million Americans, including well over one million residents of Missouri, the state I represent.

As for Missouri, it is one of 40 Medicaid expansion states — because our voters wanted it that way. 

In 2020, the same year Trump carried the Missouri popular vote by a decisive margin, voters mandated that the state expand Medicaid coverage to working-class individuals unable to afford health care elsewhere. Voters went so far as to inscribe that expansion in our state Constitution. Now some 21 percent of Missourians benefit from Medicaid or CHIP, the companion insurance program for lower-income children. And many of our rural hospitals and health providers depend on the funding from these programs to keep their doors open.

All of which means this: If Congress cuts funding for Medicaid benefits, Missouri workers and their children will lose their health care. And hospitals will close. It’s that simple. And that pattern will be replicated in states across the country.

One of my constituents, a married mother of five, contacted me to explain why Medicaid is vital to her 8-year-old daughter, who depends on a feeding tube to survive. Formula, pump rentals, feeding extensions and other treatments cost $1,500 a month; prescriptions nearly double that cost. These expenses aren’t covered by private insurance. The mother wrote to me, “Without Medicaid, we would lose everything — our home, our vehicles and, eventually, our daughter.”

Congress should be doing everything possible to aid these working families, to make their health care better and more affordable. We should cap prescription drug costs, as I recently proposed. We should give all families in America with children a hefty tax cut. What we should not do is eliminate their health care.

Trump himself has been crystal clear on this point. Since taking office, he has repeatedly rejected calls for Medicaid benefit cuts. Just the other week, he said: “We are doing absolutely nothing to hurt Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security. Nothing at all.”

And for good reason. The president understands who his voters are. Recent polling showed that 64 percent of Republicans held a favorable view of Medicaid. About one in six has been on the program. Meanwhile, more than 80 percent of Americans opposed significant cuts to Medicaid, and over half — half — had a personal or family connection to the Medicaid program.

It’s safe to say the Trump coalition was not pulling the lever for Medicaid cuts in November. Mike Johnson, the House speaker, finally woke up to this fact last week, when he withdrew his support from one of the most aggressive reductions to Medicaid on the table. 

Nevertheless, many of my House and Senate colleagues keep pushing for substantial cuts, and the House will begin to hash out its differences in negotiations this week.

My colleagues have cited the editorial board of The Wall Street Journal, which has been pushing that line for months, including in a recent editorial that inveighed against my opposition to Medicaid benefit cuts. But following The Journal’s prescriptions would represent the end of any chance of us becoming a working-class party. (Maine Writer- How many Medicaid beneficiaries read The Wall Street Journal?  How many employees who work at The Wall Street Journal receive Medicaid benefits?  How many elderly relatives who have family members who work at The Wall Street Journal have used access to Medicaid for long term care coverage?  Let me answer my own questions:  Medicaid beneficiaries cannot afford a subscription to The Wall Street Journal, people who work at The Wall Street Journal earn wages much higher than the poverty level prescribed in regulations and statute, so they cannot receive the benefit, but on the other hand, I suspect many employees who work for The Wall Street Journal have a relative in their family who have received Medicaid coverage for long term care.)

Republicans, says Senator Josh Hawley, need to open their (aka "our own") 👀 eyes: Our voters support social insurance programs (especially Social Security where we voters contribute to the benefit❗). More than that, our voters depend on those programs. And there’s a reason for this that Republicans would do well to ponder. Our economy is increasingly unfriendly to working people and their families.

For the better part of 50 years, working wages have been flat in real terms. Working people cannot afford to marry when they want to, have the number of children they want to or raise those children as they want to. These days, they can barely afford to put a roof over their kids’ heads, to say nothing of health care.

Both the Democrats and the Republicans share the blame for this state of economic affairs, which is one big reason Trump got elected. He promised to shake up the status quo. (HELLO❓ Trump also promised to bring down high grocery prices.....but then zapped Americans with the burdens caused by tariffs❗) 

Republicans in Congress must pay attention. Our voters not only want us to protect the social insurance they need to get by; they also want us to fight for a better life — for a better economy with the kinds of jobs and wages that allow working people to marry and start families, to buy homes and have a stake in their towns and neighborhoods.

That’s the promise of American life. If Republicans want to be a working-class party — if we want to be a majority party — we must ignore calls to cut Medicaid and start delivering on America’s promise for America’s working people.

Josh Hawley is a Republican senator from Missouri.