(C) Daily Kos
This story was originally published by Daily Kos and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .
Abbreviated Pundit Roundup: Which one is Frankenstein and which one is The Monster? [1]
['This Content Is Not Subject To Review Daily Kos Staff Prior To Publication.']
Date: 2025-07-15
We begin today with Heather Digby Parton of Salon and her commentary on the schism between Trump and his MAGA base over the Epstein files.
The appointment of Patel and Bongino — as well as Bondi, who jumped into pursuing the scandal with both feet, promising far-right influencers that she was personally overseeing the investigation — made MAGA true believers believe they were about to get their hands on what Glenn Beck called “the Rosetta Stone of public trust.” These new appointees were the very ones who had been chasing this scandal for years, and they were now in a position to blow the lid off the whole thing. All those who had mocked the MAGA movement as kooks would soon be proven fools. The Justice Department’s memo was a slap in the face to the MAGA faithful. They were stunned. And when Trump rudely dismissed their concerns in a cabinet meeting and then admonished them on Truth Social in a long rant blaming former President Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, demanding that his followers focus on the scandals he wants them to focus on, the crushing betrayal was personal. Never before has a Trump post received such a massive negative response on his own platform. Even his most loyal influencers, including popular MAGA commentator Benny Johnson and Fox News, were hostile. Trump’s loyal base has taken all that heat for so long, defending Trump through everything, and now it appears their Dear Leader is just another deep state operative covering up the crimes of his accomplices — and possibly his own. They are confused and angry and inconsolable. Have they had a mass epiphany and collectively awakened to the fundamental dishonesty and corruption of the man they worshipped for the past ten years? It’s hard to believe.
Chris Geidner of LawDork is outraged at the sheer hypocrisy of yesterday’s ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court allowing the dismantling of the U.S. Department of Education.
On Monday afternoon, the U.S. Supreme Court’s Republican appointees allowed the Republican Trump administration to gut the Education Department, a lawless ruling that laid bare the empty politics of the Roberts court. The was no reasoning provided by the majority, and yet, with their action, as Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in dissent for the Democratic appointees, the majority “hands the Executive the power to repeal statutes by firing all those necessary to carry them out.” When it’s a Republican president, at least. [...] Monday’s ruling would be offensive to the rule of law in any scenario, but for Chief Justice John Roberts, in particular, to do so in a case involving the Education Department, in particular, it is little more than the Chief Justice of the United States laughing in the face of Americans and the rule of law.
Shefali Luthra of The 19th News notes that under a new federal law “defunding” Planned Parenthood, even clinics in states that allow abortions and provide other vital medical services may have to close.
A new federal law that would “defund” Planned Parenthood could gut the system people have used to obtain abortions since the fall of Roe v. Wade, disproportionately closing the clinics in states that have become abortion havens for people living under bans. Backed by President Donald Trump, the spending law prohibits reproductive health clinics from billing services to Medicaid if they provide or are part of health networks that perform abortions, are nonprofits and receive over $800,000 per year from the federal government. Although that part of the law is blocked for now, Planned Parenthood is gearing up for major financial losses that, unless new funds emerge, could shutter health centers across the country, particularly in states where abortion is legal and Medicaid programs more robust. [...] Currently, about one-third of all of Planned Parenthood’s revenue comes from federal and state funding; Medicaid, the health insurance program for low-income Americans, is the biggest single source. Medicaid insures 1 in 5 Americans, and it does not cover abortion unless states allot their own specific funds to do so. But the program remains a major source of income for Planned Parenthood because it covers other services patients might get at clinics such as testing for sexually transmitted infections, breast exams and contraception. If clinics can’t bill any of those services to Medicaid, patients covered through the program will have to go elsewhere for health care — or simply go without.
Gary O’Donoghue of BBC News conducted an interview with the tacky shoe salesman, mostly about the decision to supply Ukraine with weaponry and Trump’s now-frosty relations with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The president made the phone call, which lasted 20 minutes, to the BBC after conversations about a potential interview to mark one year on since the attempt on his life at a campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania. Asked about whether surviving the assassination attempt had changed him, Trump said he liked to think about it as little as possible. "I don't like to think about if it did change me," Trump said. Dwelling on it, he added, "could be life-changing". [...] Trump said that he had thought a deal was on the cards with Russia four different times. When asked by the BBC if he was done with Putin, the president replied: "I'm disappointed in him, but I'm not done with him. But I'm disappointed in him." Pressed on how Trump would get Putin to "stop the bloodshed" the US president said: "We're working it, Gary." x x YouTube Video
Jonathan Lemire of The Atlantic thinks even with the ”U-turn” vis-a-vis supplying Ukraine with arms, Putin has humiliated Trump.
Trump came into office believing that he could deliver a lasting truce between Ukraine and Russia within 24 hours, banking on his relationship with Putin, which he considered good. For months, he largely sided with Moscow in its war against Ukraine, absolving Russia for having started the conflict and threatening to abandon Kyiv as it mounted a desperate defense. He upbraided Zelensky in the Oval Office in February and briefly stopped sharing intelligence with Ukraine. He believed that he could, in addition to working with his Russian counterpart to end the war, reset relations and forge new economic ties between the two countries. He even envisioned a grand summitto announce a peace deal. But Putin rejected repeated American calls to stop his attacks. Russia’s talks with Trump’s emissary, Steve Witkoff, went nowhere. Trump pulled backdiplomatic efforts. In recent weeks, Trump has grown angrier with Putin and ended a brief pause by the Pentagon in sending weapons to Ukraine. Zelensky, meanwhile, has worked on repairing his relationship with Trump and agreed to a U.S. cease-fire proposal. In Trump’s own words, Putin began “tapping him along” by spurning that same deal while unleashing some of the biggest bombardments of the war. Trump and Putin have spoken a half dozen times in the past six months, and Trump has grown steadily more frustrated, the four people told me. He told advisers this spring that he was beginning to think Putin didn’t want the war to end, an assessment that U.S. intelligence agencies reached more than a year ago.
No, Donald, you can’t see into Putin’s soul simply because he doesn’t have one.
Brazil’s Attorney General Jorge Messias writes an oped for The New York Times with the hope that Brazil and the United Staes can maintain good relations but refuses to budge an inch on the Trump regime’s attempted extortion.
Brazil and the United States have long cultivated a mature, diverse and strategic relationship. Last year we celebrated 200 years of diplomatic ties, dating back to when President James Monroe received José Silvestre Rebello in Washington as the first envoy of the newly independent Empire of Brazil. Our partnership has withstood global conflicts, economic crises and political transitions because of our shared values: democracy, respect for the rule of law and a general commitment to peaceful international cooperation. These principles are not mere abstractions. They are the foundation upon which our societies are built, and they require constant vigilance and mutual respect, especially in times of disagreement. Mr. Trump’s assertion that the United States suffers from an unfair and unreciprocated trade relationship with Brazil is contradicted by the facts. According to U.S. government data, in 2024 alone, the U.S. trade surplus with Brazil reached $7.4 billion. When services are included, according to the Brazilian government’s calculations of U.S. data, it rises to $28.6 billion, making Brazil the third-largest contributor to the U.S. global trade surplus when goods and services are combined. Over the past 15 years, the United States has accumulated recurring and significant surpluses in goods and services with Brazil totaling $410 billion. [...] Mr. Trump’s other allegations last week regarding censorship of U.S. tech companies and attacks on freedom of expression in Brazil are equally unfounded. In Brazil, the right to freedom of speech is protected, but it is not to be confused with the right to incite violence, commit fraud or undermine the rule of law — limitations that are broadly recognized in democratic societies. Last month our Supreme Court recognized that under certain circumstances, digital platforms can be held liable for third-party content that violates our rule of law, such as those involving child pornography or other illicit content, including inciting anti-democratic actions or hate speech. All companies, domestic and foreign, operating in Brazil are subject to our laws, just as Brazilian companies comply with U.S. regulations when operating in the United States.
Finally today, Dang Yuan writes for Deutsche Welle about the delicate balance of relations between China, the United States, and the European Union,
While the US still remains the sole global superpower, the gap with China is narrowing. [...] A study published by the consulting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) at the start of 2025 projected that China would overtake the US and become the world's top economy over the next three decades. The US-China competition is already shaping the global economy and politics today, including trade wars, a global arms race and rising geopolitical tension. [...] Against this backdrop, the question arises as to whom the EU can rely upon — on the US, an old ally which is now throwing obstacles in the way of globalization, or on the communist party-led China, which is now seeking closer ties with Europe and Germany despite ideological differences. Is a Trump-led US, like China, now seen seen as a "partner, competitor and rival" for Brussels? This is the question asked by China experts Paula Oliver Llorente and Miguel Otero-Iglesias in a new paper issued by Spanish think tank Elcano Royal Institute. The phrasing is borrowed from EU documents defining its relations with China, with the words also being included in the German government's China strategy in 2023.
I did my due diligence and, as far as I can tell, Dang Yuan is an editor of DW bylined under a pseudonym for the protection of Yuan’s family.
Everyone have the best possible day that you can!
[END]
---
[1] Url:
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2025/7/15/2333468/-Abbreviated-Pundit-Roundup-Which-one-is-Frankenstein-and-which-one-is-The-Monster?pm_campaign=front_page&pm_source=trending&pm_medium=web
Published and (C) by Daily Kos
Content appears here under this condition or license: Site content may be used for any purpose without permission unless otherwise specified.
via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/dailykos/
