Leeja's Recap

Did you lie under oath, Mr Cohen?

Yes.

Why did you do that?

To protect Trump, and because I'm a self-serving little prick. Doing whatever it takes to serve Trump's corrupt interests is how you prove you're a good soldier, and stay in his good graces.

 

What happened?

I went to prison.

Are you lying now?

No.

Why should we believe you?

Because I'm not protecting Trump, I'm still a self-serving little prick, and I don't wanna go back to prison, so I'm never gonna lie under oath again.

Overheard

They all showed up in the basic Trump uniform - like they figured it was the swimsuit competition in the Mr Second Banana Pageant or some-goddamned-thing.

What the fuck is wrong with these idiots?

All Show - No Content

Everything he says

Everything he does

Everything he is

It's all a lie

It's A Long One

So Trump makes it onto the cover of Time, and of course, people have to fuck with it.

The one on the left is the actual cover, and on the right is what I imagine some MAGA freak thinks is a better rendition - because (and I think it should be obvious by now) they have to pretend Trump is "bigger than the fake news liberal media" etc.

But what I actually like about it is that it puts devil horns on that prick - as it should be.

Or maybe they're kitty cat ears. I dunno.

Eric Cortellessa - with reporting by Leslie Dickstein, Simmone Shah, and Julia Zorthian

Donald Trump thinks he’s identified a crucial mistake of his first term: He was too nice.

We’ve been talking for more than an hour on April 12 at his fever-dream palace in Palm Beach. Aides lurk around the perimeter of a gilded dining room overlooking the manicured lawn. When one nudges me to wrap up the interview, I bring up the many former Cabinet officials who refuse to endorse Trump this time. Some have publicly warned that he poses a danger to the Republic. Why should voters trust you, I ask, when some of the people who observed you most closely do not?

As always, Trump punches back, denigrating his former top advisers. But beneath the typical torrent of invective, there is a larger lesson he has taken away. “I let them quit because I have a heart. I don’t want to embarrass anybody,” Trump says. “I don’t think I’ll do that again. From now on, I’ll fire.”

Six months from the 2024 presidential election, Trump is better positioned to win the White House than at any point in either of his previous campaigns. He leads Joe Biden by slim margins in most polls, including in several of the seven swing states likely to determine the outcome. But I had not come to ask about the election, the disgrace that followed the last one, or how he has become the first former—and perhaps future—American President to face a criminal trial. I wanted to know what Trump would do if he wins a second term, to hear his vision for the nation, in his own words.

What emerged in two interviews with Trump, and conversations with more than a dozen of his closest advisers and confidants, were the outlines of an imperial presidency that would reshape America and its role in the world.

• To carry out a deportation operation designed to remove more than 11 million people from the country, Trump told me, he would be willing to build migrant detention camps and deploy the U.S. military, both at the border and inland.
• He would let red states monitor women’s pregnancies and prosecute those who violate abortion bans.
• He would, at his personal discretion, withhold funds appropriated by Congress, according to top advisers.
• He would be willing to fire a U.S. Attorney who doesn’t carry out his order to prosecute someone, breaking with a tradition of independent law enforcement that dates from America’s founding.
• He is weighing pardons for every one of his supporters accused of attacking the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, more than 800 of whom have pleaded guilty or been convicted by a jury.
• He might not come to the aid of an attacked ally in Europe or Asia if he felt that country wasn’t paying enough for its own defense.
• He would gut the U.S. civil service.
• He would deploy the National Guard to American cities as he sees fit.
• He would close the White House pandemic-preparedness office.
• He would staff his Administration with acolytes who back his false assertion that the 2020 election was stolen.

Trump remains the same guy, with the same goals and grievances. But in person, if anything, he appears more assertive and confident. “When I first got to Washington, I knew very few people,” he says. “I had to rely on people.” Now he is in charge. The arranged marriage with the timorous Republican Party stalwarts is over; the old guard is vanquished, and the people who remain are his people. Trump would enter a second term backed by a slew of policy shops staffed by loyalists who have drawn up detailed plans in service of his agenda, which would concentrate the powers of the state in the hands of a man whose appetite for power appears all but insatiable. “I don’t think it’s a big mystery what his agenda would be,” says his close adviser Kellyanne Conway. “But I think people will be surprised at the alacrity with which he will take action.”

And here comes some of the worst naive drivel any Press Poodle ever put in print.

The courts, the Constitution, and a Congress of unknown composition would all have a say in whether Trump’s objectives come to pass. The machinery of Washington has a range of defenses: leaks to a free press, whistle-blower protections, the oversight of inspectors general. The same deficiencies of temperament and judgment that hindered him in the past remain present. If he wins, Trump would be a lame duck—contrary to the suggestions of some supporters, he tells TIME he would not seek to overturn or ignore the Constitution’s prohibition on a third term. Public opinion would also be a powerful check. Amid a popular outcry, Trump was forced to scale back some of his most draconian first-term initiatives, including the policy of separating migrant families. As George Orwell wrote in 1945, the ability of governments to carry out their designs “depends on the general temper in the country.”

Did these idiots miss the part of their own article (a couple paragraphs up) where Trump all but says very clearly he'll sic the US Attorneys on whoever crosses him?

He's not fuckin' around. Under the "new plan", anybody trying to maintain roadblocks or guardrails to keep Trump in line will be bashed into pulp by a DOJ that he intends to use like a blackjack.

Every election is billed as a national turning point. This time that rings true. To supporters, the prospect of Trump 2.0, unconstrained and backed by a disciplined movement of true believers, offers revolutionary promise. To much of the rest of the nation and the world, it represents an alarming risk. A second Trump term could bring “the end of our democracy,” says presidential historian Douglas Brinkley, “and the birth of a new kind of authoritarian presidential order.”

Trump steps onto the patio at Mar-a-Lago near dusk. The well-heeled crowd eating Wagyu steaks and grilled branzino pauses to applaud as he takes his seat. On this gorgeous evening, the club is a MAGA mecca. Billionaire donor Steve Wynn is here. So is Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, who is dining with the former President after a joint press conference proposing legislation to prevent noncitizens from voting. Their voting in federal elections is already illegal, and extremely rare, but remains a Trumpian fixation that the embattled Speaker appeared happy to co-sign in exchange for the political cover that standing with Trump provides.

At the moment, though, Trump’s attention is elsewhere. With an index finger, he swipes through an iPad on the table to curate the restaurant’s soundtrack. The playlist veers from Sinead O’Connor to James Brown to The Phantom of the Opera. And there’s a uniquely Trump choice: a rendition of “The Star-Spangled Banner” sung by a choir of defendants imprisoned for attacking the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, interspersed with a recording of Trump reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. This has become a staple of his rallies, converting the ultimate symbol of national unity into a weapon of factional devotion.

The spectacle picks up where his first term left off. The events of Jan. 6, during which a pro-Trump mob attacked the center of American democracy in an effort to subvert the peaceful transfer of power, was a profound stain on his legacy. Trump has sought to recast an insurrectionist riot as an act of patriotism. “I call them the J-6 patriots,” he says. When I ask whether he would consider pardoning every one of them, he says, “Yes, absolutely.” As Trump faces dozens of felony charges, including for election interference, conspiracy to defraud the United States, willful retention of national-security secrets, and falsifying business records to conceal hush-money payments, he has tried to turn legal peril into a badge of honor.

Jan. 6th 2021

The Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol is a profound stain on Trump’s legacy, one that he has sought to recast as an act of patriotism.Victor J. Blue

In a second term, Trump’s influence on American democracy would extend far beyond pardoning powers. Allies are laying the groundwork to restructure the presidency in line with a doctrine called the unitary executive theory, which holds that many of the constraints imposed on the White House by legislators and the courts should be swept away in favor of a more powerful Commander in Chief.

Nowhere would that power be more momentous than at the Department of Justice. Since the nation’s earliest days, Presidents have generally kept a respectful distance from Senate-confirmed law-enforcement officials to avoid exploiting for personal ends their enormous ability to curtail Americans’ freedoms. But Trump, burned in his first term by multiple investigations directed by his own appointees, is ever more vocal about imposing his will directly on the department and its far-flung investigators and prosecutors.

In our Mar-a-Lago interview, Trump says he might fire U.S. Attorneys who refuse his orders to prosecute someone: “It would depend on the situation.” He’s told supporters he would seek retribution against his enemies in a second term. Would that include Fani Willis, the Atlanta-area district attorney who charged him with election interference, or Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan DA in the Stormy Daniels case, who Trump has previously said should be prosecuted? Trump demurs but offers no promises. “No, I don’t want to do that,” he says, before adding, “We’re gonna look at a lot of things. What they’ve done is a terrible thing.”

Trump has also vowed to appoint a “real special prosecutor” to go after Biden. “I wouldn’t want to hurt Biden,” he tells me. “I have too much respect for the office.” Seconds later, though, he suggests Biden’s fate may be tied to an upcoming Supreme Court ruling on whether Presidents can face criminal prosecution for acts committed in office. “If they said that a President doesn’t get immunity,” says Trump, “then Biden, I am sure, will be prosecuted for all of his crimes.” (Biden has not been charged with any, and a House Republican effort to impeach him has failed to unearth evidence of any crimes or misdemeanors, high or low.)

Such moves would be potentially catastrophic for the credibility of American law enforcement, scholars and former Justice Department leaders from both parties say. “If he ordered an improper prosecution, I would expect any respectable U.S. Attorney to say no,” says Michael McConnell, a former U.S. appellate judge appointed by President George W. Bush. “If the President fired the U.S. Attorney, it would be an enormous firestorm.” McConnell, now a Stanford law professor, says the dismissal could have a cascading effect similar to the Saturday Night Massacre, when President Richard Nixon ordered top DOJ officials to remove the special counsel investigating Watergate. Presidents have the constitutional right to fire U.S. Attorneys, and typically replace their predecessors’ appointees upon taking office. But discharging one specifically for refusing a President’s order would be all but unprecedented.

Trump’s radical designs for presidential power would be felt throughout the country. A main focus is the southern border. Trump says he plans to sign orders to reinstall many of the same policies from his first term, such as the Remain in Mexico program, which requires that non-Mexican asylum seekers be sent south of the border until their court dates, and Title 42, which allows border officials to expel migrants without letting them apply for asylum. Advisers say he plans to cite record border crossings and fentanyl- and child-trafficking as justification for reimposing the emergency measures. He would direct federal funding to resume construction of the border wall, likely by allocating money from the military budget without congressional approval. The capstone of this program, advisers say, would be a massive deportation operation that would target millions of people. Trump made similar pledges in his first term, but says he plans to be more aggressive in a second. “People need to be deported,” says Tom Homan, a top Trump adviser and former acting head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. “No one should be off the table.”

For an operation of that scale, Trump says he would rely mostly on the National Guard to round up and remove undocumented migrants throughout the country. “If they weren’t able to, then I’d use [other parts of] the military,” he says. When I ask if that means he would override the Posse Comitatus Act—an 1878 law that prohibits the use of military force on civilians—Trump seems unmoved by the weight of the statute. “Well, these aren’t civilians,” he says. “These are people that aren’t legally in our country.” He would also seek help from local police and says he would deny funding for jurisdictions that decline to adopt his policies. “There’s a possibility that some won’t want to participate,” Trump says, “and they won’t partake in the riches.”

As President, Trump nominated three Supreme Court Justices who voted to overturn Roe v. Wade, and he claims credit for his role in ending a constitutional right to an abortion. At the same time, he has sought to defuse a potent campaign issue for the Democrats by saying he wouldn’t sign a federal ban. In our interview at Mar-a-Lago, he declines to commit to vetoing any additional federal restrictions if they came to his desk. More than 20 states now have full or partial abortion bans, and Trump says those policies should be left to the states to do what they want, including monitoring women’s pregnancies. “I think they might do that,” he says. When I ask whether he would be comfortable with states prosecuting women for having abortions beyond the point the laws permit, he says, “It’s irrelevant whether I’m comfortable or not. It’s totally irrelevant, because the states are going to make those decisions.” President Biden has said he would fight state anti-abortion measures in court and with regulation.

Trump’s allies don’t plan to be passive on abortion if he returns to power. The Heritage Foundation has called for enforcement of a 19th century statute that would outlaw the mailing of abortion pills. The Republican Study Committee (RSC), which includes more than 80% of the House GOP conference, included in its 2025 budget proposal the Life at Conception Act, which says the right to life extends to “the moment of fertilization.” I ask Trump if he would veto that bill if it came to his desk. “I don’t have to do anything about vetoes,” Trump says, “because we now have it back in the states.”

Presidents typically have a narrow window to pass major legislation. Trump’s team is eyeing two bills to kick off a second term: a border-security and immigration package, and an extension of his 2017 tax cuts. Many of the latter’s provisions expire early in 2025: the tax cuts on individual income brackets, 100% business expensing, the doubling of the estate-tax deduction. Trump is planning to intensify his protectionist agenda, telling me he’s considering a tariff of more than 10% on all imports, and perhaps even a 100% tariff on some Chinese goods. Trump says the tariffs will liberate the U.S. economy from being at the mercy of foreign manufacturing and spur an industrial renaissance in the U.S. When I point out that independent analysts estimate Trump’s first term tariffs on thousands of products, including steel and aluminum, solar panels, and washing machines, may have cost the U.S. $316 billion and more than 300,000 jobs, by one account, he dismisses these experts out of hand. His advisers argue that the average yearly inflation rate in his first term—under 2%—is evidence that his tariffs won’t raise prices.

Since leaving office, Trump has tried to engineer a caucus of the compliant, clearing primary fields in Senate and House races. His hope is that GOP majorities replete with MAGA diehards could rubber-stamp his legislative agenda and nominees. Representative Jim Banks of Indiana, a former RSC chairman and the GOP nominee for the state’s open Senate seat, recalls an August 2022 RSC planning meeting with Trump at his residence in Bedminster, N.J. As the group arrived, Banks recalls, news broke that Mar-a-Lago had been raided by the FBI. Banks was sure the meeting would be canceled. Moments later, Trump walked through the doors, defiant and pledging to run again. “I need allies there when I’m elected,” Banks recalls Trump saying. The difference in a second Trump term, Banks says now, “is he’s going to have the backup in Congress that he didn’t have before.”

Trump’s intention to remake America’s relations abroad may be just as consequential. Since its founding, the U.S. has sought to build and sustain alliances based on the shared values of political and economic freedom. Trump takes a much more transactional approach to international relations than his predecessors, expressing disdain for what he views as free-riding friends and appreciation for authoritarian leaders like President Xi Jinping of China, Prime Minister Viktor Orban of Hungary, or former President Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil.

That’s one reason America’s traditional allies were horrified when Trump recently said at a campaign rally that Russia could “do whatever the hell they want” to a NATO country he believes doesn’t spend enough on collective defense. That wasn’t idle bluster, Trump tells me. “If you’re not going to pay, then you’re on your own,” he says. Trump has long said the alliance is ripping the U.S. off. Former NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg credited Trump’s first-term threat to pull out of the alliance with spurring other members to add more than $100 billion to their defense budgets.

But an insecure NATO is as likely to accrue to Russia’s benefit as it is to America’s. President Vladimir Putin’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine looks to many in Europe and the U.S. like a test of his broader vision to reconstruct the Soviet empire. Under Biden and a bipartisan Congress, the U.S. has sent more than $100 billion to Ukraine to defend itself. It’s unlikely Trump would extend the same support to Kyiv. After Orban visited Mar-a-Lago in March, he said Trump “wouldn’t give a penny” to Ukraine. “I wouldn’t give unless Europe starts equalizing,” Trump hedges in our interview. “If Europe is not going to pay, why should we pay? They’re much more greatly affected. We have an ocean in between us. They don’t.” (E.U. nations have given more than $100 billion in aid to Ukraine as well.)

Trump has historically been reluctant to criticize or confront Putin. He sided with the Russian autocrat over his own intelligence community when it asserted that Russia interfered in the 2016 election. Even now, Trump uses Putin as a foil for his own political purposes. When I asked Trump why he has not called for the release of Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich, who has been unjustly held on spurious charges in a Moscow prison for a year, Trump says, “I guess because I have so many other things I’m working on.” Gershkovich should be freed, he adds, but he doubts it will happen before the election. “The reporter should be released and he will be released,” Trump tells me. “I don’t know if he’s going to be released under Biden. I would get him released.”

America’s Asian allies, like its European ones, may be on their own under Trump. Taiwan’s Foreign Minister recently said aid to Ukraine was critical in deterring Xi from invading the island. Communist China’s leaders “have to understand that things like that can’t come easy,” Trump says, but he declines to say whether he would come to Taiwan’s defense.

Trump is less cryptic on current U.S. troop deployments in Asia. If South Korea doesn’t pay more to support U.S. troops there to deter Kim Jong Un’s increasingly belligerent regime to the north, Trump suggests the U.S. could withdraw its forces. “We have 40,000 troops that are in a precarious position,” he tells TIME. (The number is actually 28,500.) “Which doesn’t make any sense. Why would we defend somebody? And we’re talking about a very wealthy country.”

Transactional isolationism may be the main strain of Trump’s foreign policy, but there are limits. Trump says he would join Israel’s side in a confrontation with Iran. “If they attack Israel, yes, we would be there,” he tells me. He says he has come around to the now widespread belief in Israel that a Palestinian state existing side by side in peace is increasingly unlikely. “There was a time when I thought two-state could work,” he says. “Now I think two-state is going to be very, very tough.”

Yet even his support for Israel is not absolute. He’s criticized Israel’s handling of its war against Hamas, which has killed more than 30,000 Palestinians in Gaza, and has called for the nation to “get it over with.” When I ask whether he would consider withholding U.S. military aid to Israel to push it toward winding down the war, he doesn’t say yes, but he doesn’t rule it out, either. He is sharply critical of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, once a close ally. “I had a bad experience with Bibi,” Trump says. In his telling, a January 2020 U.S. operation to assassinate a top Iranian general was supposed to be a joint attack until Netanyahu backed out at the last moment. “That was something I never forgot,” he says. He blames Netanyahu for failing to prevent the Oct. 7 attack, when Hamas militants infiltrated southern Israel and killed nearly 1,200 people amid acts of brutality including burning entire families alive and raping women and girls. “It happened on his watch,” Trump says.

On the second day of Trump’s New York trial on April 17, I stand behind the packed counter of the Sanaa Convenience Store on 139th Street and Broadway, waiting for Trump to drop in for a postcourt campaign stop. He chose the bodega for its history. In 2022, one of the store’s clerks fatally stabbed a customer who attacked him. Bragg, the Manhattan DA, charged the clerk with second-degree murder. (The charges were later dropped amid public outrage over video footage that appeared to show the clerk acting in self-defense.) A baseball bat behind the counter alludes to lingering security concerns. When Trump arrives, he asks the store’s co-owner, Maad Ahmed, a Yemeni immigrant, about safety. “You should be allowed to have a gun,” Trump tells Ahmed. “If you had a gun, you’d never get robbed.”

On the campaign trail, Trump uses crime as a cudgel, painting urban America as a savage hell-scape even though violent crime has declined in recent years, with homicides sinking 6% in 2022 and 13% in 2023, according to the FBI. When I point this out, Trump tells me he thinks the data, which is collected by state and local police departments, is rigged. “It’s a lie,” he says. He has pledged to send the National Guard into cities struggling with crime in a second term—possibly without the request of governors—and plans to approve Justice Department grants only to cities that adopt his preferred policing methods like stop-and-frisk.

To critics, Trump’s preoccupation with crime is a racial dog whistle. In polls, large numbers of his supporters have expressed the view that antiwhite racism now represents a greater problem in the U.S. than the systemic racism that has long afflicted Black Americans. When I ask if he agrees, Trump does not dispute this position. “There is a definite antiwhite feeling in the country,” he tells TIME, “and that can’t be allowed either.” In a second term, advisers say, a Trump Administration would rescind Biden’s Executive Orders designed to boost diversity and racial equity.

Trump’s ability to campaign for the White House in the midst of an unprecedented criminal trial is the product of a more professional campaign operation that has avoided the infighting that plagued past versions. “He has a very disciplined team around him,” says Representative Elise Stefanik of New York. “That is an indicator of how disciplined and focused a second term will be.” That control now extends to the party writ large. In 2016, the GOP establishment, having failed to derail Trump’s campaign, surrounded him with staff who sought to temper him. Today the party’s permanent class have either devoted themselves to the gospel of MAGA or given up. Trump has cleaned house at the Republican National Committee, installing handpicked leaders—including his daughter-in-law—who have reportedly imposed loyalty tests on prospective job applicants, asking whether they believe the false assertion that the 2020 election was stolen. (The RNC has denied there is a litmus test.) Trump tells me he would have trouble hiring anyone who admits Biden won: “I wouldn’t feel good about it.”

Policy groups are creating a government-in-waiting full of true believers. The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 has drawn up plans for legislation and Executive Orders as it trains prospective personnel for a second Trump term. The Center for Renewing America, led by Russell Vought, Trump’s former director of the Office of Management and Budget, is dedicated to disempowering the so-called administrative state, the collection of bureaucrats with the power to control everything from drug-safety determinations to the contents of school lunches. The America First Policy Institute is a research haven of pro-Trump right-wing populists. America First Legal, led by Trump’s immigration adviser Stephen Miller, is mounting court battles against the Biden Administration.

The goal of these groups is to put Trump’s vision into action on day one. “The President never had a policy process that was designed to give him what he actually wanted and campaigned on,” says Vought. “[We are] sorting through the legal authorities, the mechanics, and providing the momentum for a future Administration.” That includes a litany of boundary-pushing right-wing policies, including slashing Department of Justice funding and cutting climate and environmental regulations.

Trump’s campaign says he would be the final decision-maker on which policies suggested by these organizations would get implemented. But at the least, these advisers could form the front lines of a planned march against what Trump dubs the Deep State, marrying bureaucratic savvy to their leader’s anti-bureaucratic zeal. One weapon in Trump’s second-term “War on Washington” is a wonky one: restoring the power of impoundment, which allowed Presidents to withhold congressionally appropriated funds. Impoundment was a favorite maneuver of Nixon, who used his authority to freeze funding for subsidized housing and the Environmental Protection Agency. Trump and his allies plan to challenge a 1974 law that prohibits use of the measure, according to campaign policy advisers.

Right about here, I started to get a little nauseous, and I had to stop.

Trump gets elected again and we're fucked.

Another inside move is the enforcement of Schedule F, which allows the President to fire nonpolitical government officials and which Trump says he would embrace. “You have some people that are protected that shouldn’t be protected,” he says. A senior U.S. judge offers an example of how consequential such a move could be. Suppose there’s another pandemic, and President Trump wants to push the use of an untested drug, much as he did with hydroxychloroquine during COVID-19. Under Schedule F, if the drug’s medical reviewer at the Food and Drug Administration refuses to sign off on its use, Trump could fire them, and anyone else who doesn’t approve it. The Trump team says the President needs the power to hold bureaucrats accountable to voters. “The mere mention of Schedule F,” says Vought, “ensures that the bureaucracy moves in your direction.”

It can be hard at times to discern Trump’s true intentions. In his interviews with TIME, he often sidestepped questions or answered them in contradictory ways. There’s no telling how his ego and self-destructive behavior might hinder his objectives. And for all his norm-breaking, there are lines he says he won’t cross. When asked if he would comply with all orders upheld by the Supreme Court, Trump says he would.

But his policy preoccupations are clear and consistent. If Trump is able to carry out a fraction of his goals, the impact could prove as transformative as any presidency in more than a century. “He’s in full war mode,” says his former adviser and occasional confidant Stephen Bannon. Trump’s sense of the state of the country is “quite apocalyptic,” Bannon says. “That’s where Trump’s heart is. That’s where his obsession is.”

These obsessions could once again push the nation to the brink of crisis. Trump does not dismiss the possibility of political violence around the election. “If we don’t win, you know, it depends,” he tells TIME. “It always depends on the fairness of the election.” When I ask what he meant when he baselessly claimed on Truth Social that a stolen election “allows for the termination of all rules, regulations and articles, even those found in the Constitution,” Trump responded by denying he had said it. He then complained about the “Biden-inspired” court case he faces in New York and suggested that the “fascists” in America’s government were its greatest threat. “I think the enemy from within, in many cases, is much more dangerous for our country than the outside enemies of China, Russia, and various others,” he tells me.

Toward the end of our conversation at Mar-a-Lago, I ask Trump to explain another troubling comment he made: that he wants to be dictator for a day. It came during a Fox News town hall with Sean Hannity, who gave Trump an opportunity to allay concerns that he would abuse power in office or seek retribution against political opponents. Trump said he would not be a dictator—“except for day one,” he added. “I want to close the border, and I want to drill, drill, drill.”

Trump says that the remark “was said in fun, in jest, sarcastically.” He compares it to an infamous moment from the 2016 campaign, when he encouraged the Russians to hack and leak Hillary Clinton’s emails. In Trump’s mind, the media sensationalized those remarks too. But the Russians weren’t joking: among many other efforts to influence the core exercise of American democracy that year, they hacked the Democratic National Committee’s servers and disseminated its emails through WikiLeaks.

Whether or not he was kidding about bringing a tyrannical end to our 248-year experiment in democracy, I ask him, "Don’t you see why many Americans see such talk of dictatorship as contrary to our most cherished principles?"

Trump says no. Quite the opposite, he insists. “I think a lot of people like it.”

Let's Review

Leeja Miller explains.

A Fraud In So Many Ways

If Trump had to back up his threats himself, the world would see what a whiny-butt pussy he really is.

Trump ‘Glared’ At Maggie Haberman for ‘Several Seconds’ After She Reported He Fell Asleep In Court

Former President Donald Trump reportedly spent “several seconds” glaring at New York Times political reporter Maggie Haberman as he exited his criminal trial in New York City on Monday. Trump is charged with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to hide hush money payments to cover up extramarital affairs. Jury selection began on Monday, marking the first time a former U.S. president has stood trial on criminal charges. He has pleaded not guilty.

Haberman apparently raised the former president’s ire by reporting from inside the courthouse that he fell asleep during the lengthy proceedings. “Former President Donald J. Trump seemed alternately irritated and exhausted Monday morning,” Haberman wrote on the Times liveblog, adding, “Mr. Trump appeared to nod off a few times, his mouth going slack and his head drooping onto his chest.”

“Trump has apparently jolted back awake, noticing the notes his lawyer passed him several minutes ago,” Haberman added a few minutes later.

Law360 court reporter Frank Runyeon detailed Trump’s exit from the courtroom, “After the thirty-some jurors remaining file out of the room for a brief afternoon break, Trump rises. After the jurors leave the courtroom, he stares over at DA Alvin Bragg. Then Trump turns his eyes to the press pool. As he exits, he glares at New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman for several seconds as he walks out.”

Haberman has had a famously up-and-down relationship with Trump as access to the former president during his 2016 campaign and first term in office landed her scoop after scoop. In recent years, however, she published a very critical book about his rise to power and has been a target of the former president’s anger – including being called “Maggot Hagerman” by the GOP’s presumptive nominee for president.

He'll Do Whatever He Wants

Today's Short

So, when Trump says he may decide to send a cruise missile or two into Mexico to blast some random drug cartel thing, is he telling us he intends to use the US military as his personal muscle to force the cartels to pay him tribute?

Do you think it's out of the question? Cuz, gee whiz, he's just not that kinda guy?

The Crack Up

I don't think you can live your life in a constant state of untruth and not suffer some emotional and intellectual damage.

And since it seems to be pretty widely understood that Trump's cheese is rapidly slipping off his cracker, it gets easier to understand why MAGA is trying so hard to project it onto Biden.

"Like someone pulled the metaphorical plug": Dr. John Gartner on Trump's "accelerating dementia"

"Trump looks blank, stops in mid-sentence (or mid-word), his jaw goes a little slack"

Since at least 2016, some of the world’s leading mental health professionals have been sounding the alarm that Donald Trump appears to be emotionally and psychologically unwell – and perhaps even a sociopath or a psychopath. Unfortunately, throughout Trump’s presidency, the COVID pandemic and his willfully negligent response to mass death and suffering, the Jan. 6 coup attempt and the attack on the Capitol by his MAGA forces, and now several years beyond, their warnings have repeatedly proven to be correct. Donald Trump only appears to be getting worse, not better, as he ages, and the pressures of his multiple criminal and civil trials and the 2024 presidential campaign grow heavier.

In a recent conversation with Dr. John Gartner, a prominent psychologist and contributor to the bestselling book "The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump: 27 Psychiatrists and Mental Health Experts Assess a President," the former faculty member at Johns Hopkins University told me that based on Trump's speech, memory, recall, and other behavior, he appears to be “hypomanic” and cognitively deteriorating at a rapid rate:

I had to speak out now because the 2024 election might turn on this issue of who is cognitively capable: Biden or Trump? It's a major issue that will affect some people's votes. Not enough people are sounding the alarm, that based on his behavior, and in my opinion, Donald Trump is dangerously demented. In fact, we are seeing the opposite among too many in the news media, the political leaders and among the public. There is also this focus on Biden's gaffes or other things that are well within the normal limits of aging. By comparison, Trump appears to be showing gross signs of dementia. This is a tale of two brains. Biden's brain is aging. Trump's brain is dementing.

Almost as if on cue, in a series of speeches and interviews at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) and elsewhere last week — which took place after my conversation with Dr. Gartner — Donald Trump again manifested these symptoms. So I spoke with Dr. Gartner again on Tuesday about Donald Trump’s recent behavior, what comes next if his apparent cognitive challenges and related maladies continue to worsen, the dilemma of having human sympathy and concern for a vile person like Donald Trump, and why so many medical professionals (and members of the news media, political class, and others with a public platform) are continuing to be silent about the corrupt ex-president’s very troubling and dangerous behavior.

This interview has been lightly edited for clarity and length:

We spoke last week about how Donald Trump's apparent mental and emotional challenges and pathologies appear to be getting much worse. That conversation was widely read and circulated — including by the British and other foreign news media. Why do you think your warnings gained so much traction?

Most of us have known someone, possibly in our own families, who’s had Alzheimer’s or some other form of dementia. The diagnostic signs are not subtle. My warnings and conclusions about Trump simply confirmed what many people had already observed and concluded for themselves but didn’t have the authority to assert. I was giving voice to what ordinary people see with their own eyes, and they were grateful for validation from a mental health professional.

Why do you think so many of your peers who also have expertise in psychology, the brain, aging, and related topics and subjects are remaining silent?

I've been reaching out to several colleagues who are real experts in this area. They were happy to share observations and diagnostic conclusions about Trump’s severe organic mental decline, privately, but even among colleagues who were once outspoken, there's a new high level of fear, not to mention exhaustion, that we didn’t see before. Each of these experts convinced me they weren’t being paranoid when they believed there was a good chance, they would lose their jobs if they went on the record, not to mention other forms of retaliation, especially for those who live in red states.

How are you processing the reality that if Trump wins, there is going to be retaliation against his critics and anyone else who has dared to oppose him and the MAGA movement and American fascists more broadly? Trump has repeatedly said this. Revenge and punishing “the enemies” of the regime are central to Project 2025 and Agenda 47, for example. They're going to get even; there's going to be score settling for the truth tellers.

Wow. That is a powerful way of putting it — yes, there is going to be score settling for the truth-tellers. We're really seeing in real time how a people can be beaten down. People who were enthusiastic members of "the resistance" against Trump and the MAGA movement are now saying, "I can't do it. I'm intimidated." The reality and potential for retaliation by Trump and his followers is extremely real. In 2016, what were my peers afraid of? The American Psychiatric Association? What was the worst that could have happened to us? We could have been expelled from the American Psychiatric Association. So what?! With Trump trying to come back to power, people are looking over their shoulders out of a reasonable fear of professional, social economic, and even criminal retaliation, as well as the threat of political violence from the right wing. We weren't making those risk assessments before.

Pathocracy is a term used to describe a government run by leaders with personality disorders.

Trump, who is a pathocrat, and what he symbolizes and has channeled and summoned, is impacting all of us.

It's taken a psychological toll on the population, both clinically and non-clinically. Exhaustion. Depression. Fear. Being detached and disengaged mentally and intellectually. The collective trauma of Trumpism has put many Americans in survival mode.

In our last conversation, you warned that Trump is suffering serious cognitive decline as shown by his speech, memory, and other behavior. Almost on cue, Trump manifests these symptoms at CPAC and at other events over the course of several days. Once you see this pattern of aberrant behavior you can't unsee or otherwise ignore it.

This weekend, Trump showed more evidence of his accelerating dementia. Trump named the wrong month for the primary, said that Putin would rather see Biden as president and he agreed with him, and that he made Israel the capital of Israel. But most important are the fundamental breakdowns in his ability to use language. Once you become aware of a symptom, you start to notice it, whereas before you might have overlooked it.

Trump manifested a number of phonemic paraphasias. He was trying to say evangelist, for example, but haltingly said "evangelish.” He was trying to say “three years later," but said, “three years, lady, lady, lady.” Trying to spit out the word “lately,” he sounded like a car with a bad battery struggling to turn over. When Trump can't find a word his whole demeanor changes. It’s almost like someone pulled the metaphorical plug. Trump looks blank, stops in mid-sentence (or mid-word), his jaw goes a little slack, and when he starts to talk again, he slurs, speaks haltingly, and often looks confused. Trying to get the word out, he shifts to a non-word that is easier to pronounce. When people are losing their ability to use language they use non-words. They start with the stem of the real word, and then they improvise from there.

In my family we call sandwiches “slamichs” because that’s what my stepson called them when he was three. It was cute then. It’s not cute watching an adult man regress to the mental age of a three-year-old. It can make you even feel sorry for Trump in those moments when he appears so vulnerable, confused, and disoriented. I asked several highly specialized experts about Trump's use of language, and they told me that what Trump is doing in total, but especially the phonemic paraphasias, were almost certain evidence of brain damage. This is not minor, or within normal limits, like forgetting who the president of Germany is, for example, as Biden has been pilloried for. Trump is evidencing formal thought disorder, where his basic ability to use language is breaking down.

Trump is also showing signs of "semantic aphasia" where he is using words in the wrong way. For example, when Trump talked about "the oranges of the investigation." We saw an example of that this weekend, as well. Trump said, “We’re going to protect pro-God….” In mid-sentence, he goes blank and looks at the ceiling. The words he uses to complete the sentence don’t really make sense: “…context and content.”

Trump is bragging about passing the MOCA, a screening test for dementia, as if it made him MENSA, when it’s a test any kindergartener should pass. Specialists tell me a patient can be in steep diagnosable organic decline for an extended period before they fail the MOCA. Someone with an advanced degree from an Ivy League school, for example, has a lot of IQ points to give before they hit kindergarten level. If you pass the MOCA it certainly does not mean you’re cognitively equipped to be President of the United States. Trump can’t even name the current president of the United States. Seven times he’s said he’s running against Obama. That’s not a gaffe or joke. That’s hard clinical evidence of serious organic brain damage.

When this is happening to Trump, how is he feeling? Does he know what's happening?

One of the things that's most notable is Trump's lack of awareness when he makes these mistakes. He very rarely corrects himself or goes back, typical for someone with this kind of organic decline. Ironically, Trump boasted that “If I were cognitively impaired, I’d know it,” but actually he wouldn’t, and he doesn’t. Sometimes a patient with organic brain damage will have what we call a "catastrophic reaction," where they suddenly realize "Oh, my God, I can't think!" They'll then have an anxiety attack or begin weeping because their denial has been broken through and suddenly, they realize just how serious their condition is.

As for Trump's MAGA people and other supporters, in a healthy relationship, they would become concerned for Trump and realize that what appears to be his worsening cognition and other behavior actually makes him not qualified for the presidency and that he should seek help. Instead, the worse Trump's behavior becomes the more they seem to adore him. This is textbook collective pathology.

Trump’s hypomanic energy gives him power and makes him charismatic to his followers. Trump's behavior has a type of primal appeal to his followers. As I warned in our conversation last week, whatever personality disorder someone has, it gets dramatically worse as their cognitive functions decline. All of Trump's viciousness, hostility, and unpredictable and other pathological behavior is only going to get worse. In the end, Trump and the MAGA movement are a cult, and he is the leader.

Does Donald Trump deserve pity if he is indeed struggling with these types of challenges?

In psychology, we often try to use our reactions to understand the patient and to develop a diagnostic workup. Trump is someone who many people despise because he is evil. Yet, when Trump acts in what appears to be a demented way, our reflexive reaction is actually sympathy. He seems vulnerable. He seems confused. He reminds you of your relatives. In a way, such a reaction to Trump is a type of confirmation that something may be seriously wrong with him. You're reacting to him in such a protective way, you feel sorry for Trump, and you want to help him because he's a doddering old man. Trump is confused. Seeing Trump or anyone else in such a state brings forth our normal human empathy.

Is there a social taboo, especially among the news media, that is limiting our much-needed discussions of these types of health issues as seen with politicians and other leaders?

I don’t want to say the mainstream media is covering up Trump’s cognitive disability, but they certainly aren’t covering it like the 5-alarm fire it is. The media will show Trump being combative and saying something outrageous and his audience reacting to it — but they are consistently not showing the parts of Trump’s speeches and interviews where his eyes go blank, his jaw goes slack, he looks confused, and slurs words, uses non-words, can't finish a sentence, rambles, perseverates, confabulates and babbles incoherently. That’s what should make the 6 o’clock news. Doesn’t the media have a duty to warn the public that the man who wants the nuclear codes back (not including the ones he probably stole) is publicly displaying unimpeachable evidence of a broken and deteriorating brain?

The obvious comparison here is Ronald Reagan. I am no fan of Reagan and do not understand the worship of that man. We now have confirmation that towards the end of his presidency that he was basically senile. The United States and the world were very lucky that Reagan was surrounded, mostly, by very serious people who were institutionalists. By comparison, Donald Trump is surrounded by fascists, white supremacists, Christian nationalists, plutocrats, corporatists, and other malign actors who are going to take advantage of the situation to get what they want. That possibility — if not outright certainty — should terrify any reasonable thinking person.

There will be no guardrails to Trump's absolute most primitive, impulsive, destructive, and insane actions. There will be no pushback from within his inner circle and regime. It is certainly very possible that a person in a state of cognitive decline is in a state where they are highly vulnerable to suggestions and being manipulated by others. I can easily imagine a scenario where Trump is a figurehead and there is a real power behind the throne pulling the strings.

What is the difference between someone being older and getting older, and someone being mentally and emotionally ill? Given how Biden is being unfairly maligned because of his age while Trump's obvious deficits, which are far more serious and dangerous, are being mostly ignored, that distinction needs to be emphasized — repeatedly.

They're not the same thing. I feel like older people should take offense to Trump's behavior being explained away by aging. There are natural things that happen with aging such as occasionally using the wrong word or calling someone the wrong name because they remind you of someone you worked with. President Biden is confusing names, not people. The Dementia Care Society says “mixing up people and generations” is a sign of dementia. Recently Trump confused Nikki Haley and Nancey Pelosi, for example. He also mixed up the generations in his own family when he said his father was born in Germany, when it was his grandfather. Michael Wolff said Trump frequently didn’t recognize old friends. And most importantly Biden isn’t showing a fundamental breakdown in his ability to use language. The whataboutism narrative is that this is a race between two old men. True but one has an aging brain, and the other a dementing brain. If Trump were your relative, you would be reaching out to doctors in a state of alarm. If Joe Biden were you’re relative, you might have to remind him of things from time to time.

How do you think Trump is going to respond to the experts and other such voices who are publicly sharing their concerns about his apparent worsening cognitive and other intellectual and emotional challenges?

As I said earlier, Donald Trump is going to make theater and spectacle out of it. But Trump will keep betraying his denials through his behavior. He has other symptoms as well. These physical symptoms include a wide base to his gait, his leaning posture, and his loss of fine motor control. A dementia diagnosis is not limited to an interview. To reach a firm conclusion one needs observations, reports from informants and other people around the person in question, and an MRI for example to see exactly what is going on with Trump's brain. In my opinion, Trump is showing a level of symptoms where no real expert would think that there is not something seriously wrong with his mind and brain.

- More -

• Dr. John Gartner on a tale of two brains: "Biden's brain is aging. Trump's brain is dementing"
• MAGA fatigue and the "exhaustion of outrage addiction"

That Trump Stink

 

This one just refuses to die.

Scorecard

Nikki Haley lost in South Carolina yesterday, but it wasn't the rout that Trump has been blustering about for weeks.

And some interesting numbers are emerging.

• Haley got 40% of the votes
• 60% of her voters say they won't vote for Trump if he's the nominee
• 60% of 40% is 25%
• 25% of Haley's share of the SC vote is 75,000
• Rough guess - taken countrywide, 3½ million GOP votes won't go to Trump

If we get a pretty fair turnout again this year, and if the split is roughly consistent across all the states, Trump will lose by 10,000,000 in the popular vote, and the electoral college could be something like 360-178.

And it could be a lot worse for him if he gets convicted of just about anything.

But, goddammit ...

DON'T GET COCKY

GET TOGETHER

GET TO WORK

GET SHIT DONE

Ramble Stander: a grandstander who frequently gets a little mixed up, doesn't recognize it, and just keeps talking. (a bit like Gish Gallop)

And this clip isn't of great import, but if you notice, Haley keeps giving victory speeches even as she acknowledges that she lost.

Uncle Vlad To The Rescue (?)

Have you been wondering how and when the Russian &/or Saudi money was going to show up and pull Trump's fat outa the fire?

I have nothing but my own suspicions and speculation on this, but we're talking Donald-fucking-Trump here, and that should be enough to throw the rosiest-thinking Pollyanna into a deep and dark purple funk.

Maybe Trump did a deal on some of those state secret thingies before the feds caught him (?)

The stock linked to Donald Trump's Truth Social platform is flying high.

Read this before you invest.

You know you're buying a quality stock when the prospectus reads like a police blotter

Donald J. Trump has a long record of business failures and bankruptcies.

But after getting kicked off Twitter in 2021 he launched Truth Social, a social-media site.

Truth Social, his would-be Twitter rival, is a high-risk, speculative operation with few hard numbers behind it. It's already the subject of subpoenas, from regulators and a grand jury, even though it's barely off the ground. Oh, and Trump is not required to use the social-media site much - if at all - to communicate with the public, notably if voters were to return him to the White House. You buy the stock at your own peril.

That's not me talking. That's ... er ... the new stock-market prospectus for Truth Social. It has just been filed here with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

In case you missed it, yes: Donald Trump is trying to come back to Wall Street.

He's in advanced talks to list Truth Social on the stock market by merging its parent company, Trump Media & Technology Group, with a publicly traded shell company, Digital World Acquisition Corp. (DWAC).

See: DWAC up over 15% as it moves to buy Trump Media & Technology Group - but here's a potential snag

Trump faces mounting legal woes, as well as having a presidential campaign to manage. Meanwhile, Digital World has been in trouble with the Securities and Exchange Commission, and recently agreed to pay $18 million to settle fraud charges relating to this potential merger.

But never mind all this. Digital World Acquisition Corp.'s stock is suddenly flying high, as Trump heads toward the presidential nomination for the Republican Party - for a third straight time. The stock has tripled in price since the Iowa caucuses in January to $48, potentially valuing the business at $6.5 billion.

Opinion: Cha-ching! Trump makes $4 billion from his election campaign

But the prospectus for the deal, which runs to nearly 600 pages, is a doozy.

It reveals all the reasons investors jumping on the MAGA train might want to think twice, or even three times, before taking the plunge.

"A number of companies that were associated with President Trump have filed for bankruptcy," the prospectus reminds investors. "There can be no assurances that TMTG will not also become bankrupt. ... A number of companies that had license agreements with President Trump have failed. There can be no assurances that TMTG will not also fail."

In case you've forgotten, "The Trump Taj Mahal, which was built and owned by President Trump, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 1991," recalls the stock-market prospectus. "The Trump Plaza, the Trump Castle, and the Plaza Hotel, all owned by President Trump at the time, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 1992."

Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts, founded by Trump in 1995, "filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2004," it continues. "Trump Entertainment Resorts, Inc., the new name given to Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts after its 2004 bankruptcy, declared bankruptcy in 2009."

You know what gamblers say, that the house always wins? Well, Donald Trump and his failed casino operation are your refutation.

Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts had trouble with the law on the way down, too. "On January 16, 2002, the SEC issued a cease and desist order against Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts, Inc. (THCR) for violations of the anti-fraud provisions of the Exchange Act," the prospectus reveals.

I've written about Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts before. Ordinary investors, drawn to the stock by the perceived, by them, allure of the Trump name, ended up relieved of their shirts, pants and shoes and were left standing on the Atlantic City boardwalk in their undergarments.

Yes, Trump himself pocketed millions. Stockholders pretty much lost everything.

From the archives (July 2015): Donald Trump was a stock-market disaster

Also read (March 2016): Donald Trump's business disaster is worse than you think

"Trump Shuttle, Inc., launched by President Trump in 1989, defaulted on its loans in 1990 and ceased to exist by 1992," the prospectus continues, referring to the short-haul airline. "Trump University, founded by President Trump in 2005, ceased operations in 2011 amid lawsuits and investigations regarding that company's business practices."

This, let me remind you, is not the fake-news liberal media talking. It's the stock-market prospectus for Trump's own, current business.

"Trump Vodka, a brand of vodka produced by Drinks Americas under license from The Trump Organization, was introduced in 2005 and discontinued in 2011," it goes on. "Trump Mortgage, LLC, a financial services company founded by President Trump in 2006, ceased operations in 2007. GoTrump.com, a travel site founded by President Trump in 2006, ceased operations in 2007. Trump Steaks, a brand of steak and other meats founded by President Trump in 2007, discontinued sales two months after its launch." Two months.

But Truth Social will be different, right?

There is also a long section in the prospectus listing all of the former president's current legal troubles (while eschewing that word, former). You always know you're buying a quality stock when the prospectus reads like a police blotter.

Then there's the Truth Social deal itself.

Trump Technology & Media Group "aspires to build a media and technology powerhouse to rival the liberal media consortium and promote free expression," the prospectus reads.

Total Truth Social sign-ups to date? Er... 8.9 million people.

In the nine months to September 2023, the business suffered a $10.6 million operating loss on just $3.4 million in sales.

Meanwhile, somehow. it racked up $37.7 million in interest expenses.

If you want more financial details about Truth Social before investing, you are not alone. The board of Digital World, the would-be merger partner, admits that it, too, would like more financial details.

Alas, Trump's business "did not provide the Digital World Board with TMTG's financial projections in connection with the Digital World Board's bring-down due diligence process," the board reveals.

Oh, well. Can't have everything.

Some of this may be because the people running Truth Social - led by CEO Devin Nunes, formerly a Trump-aligned member of the U.S. House of Representatives from rural south-central California - don't actually have too much data. "[I]nvestors should be aware that since its inception, TMTG has not relied on any specific key performance metric to make business or operating decisions," the prospectus reports. "Consequently, it has not been maintaining internal controls and procedures for periodically collecting such information, if any." My italics.

The Trump operation has chosen not to track these metrics. It reports: "At this juncture in its development, TMTG believes that adhering to traditional key performance indicators, such as signups, average revenue per user, ad impressions and pricing, or active user accounts including monthly and daily active users, could potentially divert its focus from strategic evaluation with respect to the progress and growth of its business."

Which is to say Truth Social didn't want numbers distracting it from the business. You could call this the Alternative Facts School of Business Administration.

But the real peach here is that, although investors are buying this stock in the hope that Donald Trump will do for Truth Social what he did for Twitter, there is actually no guarantee he will use it much, or at all. Even if he is elected president.

That's because, the prospectus reveals, Donald Trump's agreement with Truth Social is limited. Yes, he is required to post certain of his social-media messages there first. But only nonpolitical ones, made from his "personal (i.e., non-business)" accounts. And the Truth Social exclusivity on each post only lasts for six hours.

Oh, and Trump can even cancel this agreement with 30 days' notice, "at any time on or after February 2, 2025." In other words, shortly after Inauguration Day.

And even until then, who is to decide which social-media posts are political, and therefore exempt from the exclusivity agreement? Guess.

"President Trump ... may post social media communications from his personal profile that he deems, in his sole discretion, to be politically-related on any social media site at any time," the prospectus warns. My italics.

It adds: "As a candidate for president, most or all of President Trump's social media posts may be deemed by him to be politically related."

As a result, it warns, investors "may lack any meaningful remedy if President Trump minimizes his use of Truth Social."

Trump will own at least 58% of the stock in the new company, giving him total control and minority investors nothing but hope. What could possibly go wrong?

Retribution

What happened to Navalny is indicative of what happens in a country where the leader is not subject to the rule of law.

And why is Putin so sure he'll never be held to account for his murders?

Because he has absolute immunity

About That Retribution Thing

It never fails. People get behind a guy like Trump, and it's like they assume he's going to behave the way they would if the roles were reversed - at least giving them the benefit of the doubt, or keeping a scorecard so he can trade on favors later if he needs to.

But of course he doesn't. The man has no honor - and he demonstrates that almost daily - so it's more than a little stupid to expect honorable behavior from him.

🤪 duh 🤨

Republicans fear they will be targets in Trump’s ‘retribution’ campaign

The former president is already attacking those who have endorsed his GOP opponents or have crossed him in other ways

Donald Trump has promised a presidency of “retribution” if he wins another term in office. Many Republicans fear they might face the brunt of it.

The former president has threatened to have donors to his Republican opponent Nikki Haley “permanently barred” from his orbit. A top adviser has vowed to destroy the career of Rep. Bob Good (R-Va.), House Freedom Caucus chair, after he endorsed another Trump challenger, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. The Trump campaign has also attempted to condemn former aides who worked for his rivals during the GOP nomination fight and have twisted arms demanding endorsements, telling lawmakers that Trump will remember exactly when they backed him.

“MAGA disowns her and anyone else that associates/works with her,” read a recent Trump campaign social media message targeting the Trump campaign’s 2020 communications director for working last year to elect DeSantis. “TRAITOR!”

Even new House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has been dragged into the crossfire. One of his top political consultants, Jason Hebert, works for Axiom Strategies, a consulting company that advised the DeSantis presidential effort. A Trump adviser called Johnson after he won the speakership to warn him not to work with Axiom, according to multiple people familiar with the call, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity to disclose internal details. Hebert, a college friend of Johnson’s, is expected to start billing his work for Johnson through a company not tied to Axiom, one of the people said.

The high-dollar donor community, which has been told in various ways to rally quickly behind Trump, has taken notice.

“People took that as, ‘I am going to be president and I am going to investigate you,’” said Katon Dawson, a former South Carolina GOP chairman and Haley backer, when Trump threatened to punish her donors. “There is always a threat. If you are not for him he’s against you.”

Trump’s top advisers say the efforts to cajole and punish within the party are not a central part of their strategy, and some close to Trump point out that the former president can be quick to forgive when it is in his interest. Trump has long distinguished himself as both surprisingly vicious and disarmingly transactional, often willing to forgive intractable enmity for short-term gain.

Hours after DeSantis endorsed him, Trump dropped use of his vicious nicknames — saying he was retiring them — and praised the Florida governor. This past week, Trump’s top aide, Susie Wiles, addressed some of the country’s most affluent donors in Palm Beach, Fla. In her presentation, Wiles did not make threats, and instead shared data and attempted to woo the donors with a carrot-more-than-stick approach, people with knowledge of the meeting said.

“The campaign is singularly focused on one thing — beating Crooked Joe Biden and winning back the White House,” said Steven Cheung, a spokesman for the Trump campaign, in a statement.

Trump has complained repeatedly to advisers that Republicans are not loyal enough and often shares more anger for Republicans who buck or criticize him than for Democrats. In 2021 and 2022, he made it a near-singular mission to defeat Republican lawmakers who voted for his impeachment and who publicly disputed his claims of election fraud.

There are other signs that Trump’s team has used a heavy hand. His campaign sent word to other operatives that if they worked for DeSantis, they would no longer be able to work for Trump, according to people with knowledge of the comments. One message sent to former aide who did not heed the warnings read, “RIP,” according to a person familiar with the exchange.

The former president’s advisers have discussed trying to change personnel at the Republican National Committee to install people they view as more in line with Trump and controlled by Trump’s campaign, according to people familiar with the discussions. It is unclear exactly how they would do this, but Trump said in a Sunday morning interview with Fox Business that there would be changes at the RNC. The former president has discussed trying to immediately remove Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) from his Senate leadership post should he be reelected, and has told advisers that he would want to immediately fire Christopher A. Wray, who was appointed by Trump as FBI director, following multiple federal investigations since he left office.

Some allies have kept lists of Republicans who have been critical of Trump in a bid to block them from getting jobs in a second term, according to a person with knowledge of the list. “You have a lot of people who want to come back in, but we remember what people have said in the past,” one longtime Trump ally said.

During a grueling primary, Trump has told advisers that he wants to make sure Ron DeSantis is not the GOP presidential nominee in 2028 and that he wanted to make his 2024 loss painful, people who heard his comments said. He has floated attacking lesser-known senators for not immediately endorsing him, according to people who have spoken to Trump.

Trump’s team turned up the pressure on endorsement holdouts ahead of the Iowa caucuses, and the former president quickly embraced the January endorsement of Texas Sen. John Cornyn (R) just months after calling him “hopeless” in a social media post. Trump warned Texas Sen. Ted Cruz (R), who resisted calls to endorse Trump in 2021, that he “must be very careful” about his 2024 reelection race in a December social media post, while aides leaked word that Trump was talking of doing something more to punish his former 2016 rival. Cruz endorsed Trump after the Iowa caucuses, and Trump embraced the move as “wonderful.”

Texas House speaker Dade Phelan (R) led the impeachment effort against Texas attorney general Ken Paxton (R), a Trump ally, and later endorsed Trump’s presidential campaign. Just days later, Trump endorsed Phelan’s opponent, saying in a social media post that Phelan’s support did “not mitigate the Absolute Embarrassment Speaker Phelan inflicted upon the State of Texas and our Great Republican Party!”

He obliquely threatened Haley during his speech in New Hampshire, saying she would soon be under investigation for various things — without naming them — and allies of Trump have fanned rumors about her personal life.

Haley, as Trump’s last opponent for the nomination, has tried to make Trump’s efforts to punish fellow Republicans a central message of her campaign. She has said she represents a different, more unifying kind of politics.

“That’s a president who is supposed to serve every person in America, and you are deciding that you are going to have a club and actually ban people from being in and out of your club?” she said in a recent Fox News interview.

South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster (R), a major backer of Trump, joined the pressure game during an appearance in New Hampshire with Trump, when he took a jab at his own state education superintendent, Ellen Weaver, for being the only statewide elected official who has not yet endorsed the former president. Trump advisers and allies in South Carolina have pressured Weaver, who has demurred, saying she did not want to take a position in the race, people with knowledge of the talks said.

“She’s a rookie and she will figure it out before long,” McMaster said about Weaver. Since those comments, Weaver and McMaster spoke privately, according to people familiar with the call.

Other conflicts have been fueled in public by Trump’s staff, who made a point of attacking consultants and supporters of DeSantis last year as part of a campaign to create discord within his operations. Chris LaCivita, a top aide to Trump, repeatedly attacked Axiom strategist Jeff Roe, who had previously auditioned for a role in the Trump campaign.

Trump has told advisers that his opinion of Roe, who he once praised publicly as a formidable strategist, has changed after watching the now-shuttered DeSantis campaign because he now views him as a “loser,” in Trump’s words. Trump has nonetheless endorsed a number of candidates who have Axiom as a consultant.

Several Axiom employees who worked for Trump in 2020 went to work for DeSantis. When one of them, Erin Perrine, appeared on Fox Business in January she was immediately targeted by the Trump campaign’s social media account, which called her out after Fox chose to identify her as a former Trump adviser.

“She chose to side with DeSanctimonious and nothing can ever wash that foul stench,” the Team Trump post said, using a derogatory Trump nickname for the Florida governor.

LaCivita was also behind a recent attack on Good, a congressman from his home state of Virginia for endorsing DeSantis. Aides were upset by Good’s suggestion that DeSantis had a better chance than Trump of winning a general election.

“Bob Good won’t be electable when we get done with him,” LaCivita said in a text message to Cardinal News, a publication that covers politics in southern Virginia.

Such moves have cast a pall over the Republican caucus, quieting public challenges to Trump’s control of the Republican Party. One of the reasons more Senate Republicans have begun endorsing Trump, according to a strategist with knowledge of the talks, is they would prefer to avoid his wrath if he becomes the nominee. Trump’s endorsements in 2022 Senate races were decisive in multiple contested primaries, though several of those candidates later lost the general election.

Johnson has told people that he speaks to Trump regularly and tries to solicit Trump’s opinion.

People close to McConnell say he has assiduously avoided fighting with Trump even when goaded by others to do so — or even when Trump has attacked his wife, former transportation secretary Elaine Chao. After the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, McConnell held Trump responsible, calling his actions beforehand “a disgraceful dereliction of duty” and “unconscionable behavior.” McConnell described Trump’s political clout as “diminished” after the 2022 elections. The two men have not spoken since 2020, and McConnell has largely avoided even saying Trump’s name.

McConnell has yet to endorse Trump, but he has also refrained from making any recent critical statements. “I’ve stayed essentially out of it,” he told reporters on the day of the New Hampshire primary. “And when I change my mind about that, I’ll let you know.”

After Trump won the New Hampshire primary, McConnell began referring to the former president as “the nominee.”