Who Needs Allies?, Part I: South Korea

Until somewhat recently, the "honor" of being the worst foreign policy president belonged to either Lyndon B. Johnson or George W. Bush. However, those two men are out of the cellar for good, as they have most certainly been overtaken (undertaken?) by Donald Trump.

With both of the earlier presidents, at least they had a foreign policy. That foreign policy may have been ill-advised, and may have worked out poorly, but there was at least a philosophy in play that each man's administration basically stuck to. With Trump, there is no foreign policy. Or, at least, there's no foreign policy that lasts for more than a few days before he moves on to a new one. He's isolationist, then he's interventionist. He's pro-Russia, then he's sympathetic to Ukraine. He wants NATO to be shut down, then he wants to work with NATO. He wants to focus on the Western Hemisphere, then he starts a war in the Middle East.

The latest development, as many readers will have heard by now, is that Trump has decided he wants to (partly) turn his back on one of the United States' most important and most stalwart allies, namely South Korea. Yesterday, that nation and the U.S. commenced an annual series of military exercises called Ulchi Freedom Shield. This is part of a defense treaty between the South Koreans and the United States, and it serves not only to give soldiers on both sides some useful experience, but also to demonstrate to North Korea that it better not get frisky because the U.S. has South Korea's back.

Late Sunday, just before the exercises were set to commence, Trump got on his social media platform for the easily flattered to make this announcement:

Based on my very good relationship with Kim Jong Un, of North Korea, I am not happy with the fact that the United States has, long ago, agreed to participate in Joint Military Exercises with South Korea. These exercises are not only costly, with much of these costs paid for by the United States of America (as usual!), but send a signal that is totally inappropriate and hostile, to a Country that, as long as Donald J. Trump has been President, has been unthreatening and respectful. Therefore, and based on the fact that it is too late to cancel, I have instructed Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, to substantially reduce the Joint Military Exercises! While somewhat unrelated (?), I recently asked the President of South Korea if they would like to join us in the Denuclearization of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and they said, "No thanks!" Thank you for your attention to this matter. President DONALD J. TRUMP

Because if you can't trust a power-mad authoritarian with sociopathic tendencies, who can you trust? Oh, and Kim Jong-Un isn't very trustworthy, either.

What, exactly, drove this last-minute hissy fit? There are many possibilities:

Corruption: We don't actually know what opportunities exist for grift, since North Korea is a poor, economically backwards nation. However, if there is an opportunity somewhere, you can be certain that Trump and the two caporegimes he fathered have found it. Trump Tower Pyongyang, perhaps?

Anger, Part I: South Korea, readers will recall, is one of the many nations that agreed to invest billions of dollars in the U.S. so as to avoid tariffs. In their case, the figure was $350 billion. Who knows how much of that was new investment (probably close to zero), how much of it was investment they were going to do anyhow, and how much of it was pure vapor. Certainly, everyone expected Trump to declare his "win," which he did, and then to forget about it, which he probably also did. But now, he's apparently angry that the $350 billion is not being spent fast enough (despite the fact that South Korea did not commit to a timeline). It would not surprise us if it comes to light that, say, Newsmax did a segment this weekend titled "Where's the South Korea money?" Certainly, someone put a bee in Trump's bonnet.

Anger, Part II and Iran, Part I: Trump asked South Korea to join the alleged alliance against Iran, and the South Koreans politely said "no." This apparently infuriated the President. It is true that other close allies of the U.S. also said "no, thank you," but those nations—the U.K., France, Germany, Australia, etc.—are predominantly white, and South Korea is not.

Iran, Part II: The United States aids in South Korea's defense, partly with personnel, but mostly with missile batteries. Many of those missiles have now been withdrawn, so that they may be used against Iran. One day soon, Trump was facing the possibility of an embarrassing admission that the U.S. can't live up to its commitments right now, and won't be able to do so again anytime soon. By throwing a tantrum, however, he converts that from "an embarrassing misstep" to "a deliberate choice."

Iran, Part III: Similarly, and see below for more, the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln situation has become a huge black eye for the administration. The only carrier that is close-by, apparently, is the U.S.S. George Washington, as we noted last week. The problem is that the George Washington is currently supporting operations in southeast Asia, including Ulchi Freedom Shield. And there's no carrier available to relieve the George Washington as it departs to relieve the Abraham Lincoln, leaving the Pacific Rim carrier-less. So, we have another circumstance where throwing a tantrum converts "an embarrassing misstep" into "a deliberate choice."

Oneul-eul Jeulgiseyo: According to Google Translate, that is the Korean equivalent of "carpe diem." In any event, Kim Jong-Un might be a vile person, but he's also a very clever person. He knows a mark when he sees one, and he's now had more than a decade to take the measure of Trump. Though there's been no reporting along these lines yet, it would not surprise us to learn that Kim sensed an opportunity here and got Trump on the phone this weekend for some shallow flattery. Note that Trump once before railed against Ulchi Freedom Shield, and that was in 2018, shortly after one of the Trump-Kim summits.

We would guess we are on the right scent here, probably with more than one of these. Indeed, it could be all of them.

Whatever is going on, it illustrates that Trump is either a liar or a buffoon when it comes to foreign policy (and possibly both). The primary reason for the Iran War was to keep them from becoming a nuclear power. Well, North Korea is closer to being a nuclear power than Iran is, and is also considerably more likely to lob a nuke than the Iranians are. If Trump truly is concerned about nuclear war, then doing everything he can to support South Korea should be his top priority.

It has also grown tiresome that he can only think in dollars and cents. Yes, he's a second-tier real estate developer who thinks he was hired by the American people to run USA, Inc. However, the U.S. rarely, if ever, gives out money and aid solely out of the goodness of its heart. It's buying something—in this case, and in most cases, soft power—with that money. Should a war break out on the Korean peninsula, it will lead to vastly greater financial costs for the United States than the (relatively minimal) cost of a 10-day training exercise. Should that war become a regional conflict, or should it commence World War III, then multiply that by fifty, or a hundred. Why can't anyone in the White House make Trump understand that? Dan Caine, that should be your job. Or yours, Marco Rubio.

And what makes it even more galling is that Trump is not only being ignorant, he then has to lie to make his (very weak) point of view look stronger than it is. He told reporters that, during his first term, he got South Korea to increase its financial commitment to the U.S. military presence in that country from $0/year to $3 billion/year, and that Joe Biden canceled the whole $3 billion. In fact, Trump inherited a commitment of $800 million (so, not $0) from Barack Obama, got the South Koreans to increase that to $1 billion, and then was unable to increase it any further. When Biden took office, he got a 13.9% increase in 2021 and an 8.3% increase in 2024. That means that, far from canceling the expenditure, Biden actually got the Koreans to kick in more additional money ($233,537,000/year) than Trump did ($200,000,000/year). Inflation probably cancels out most of the difference between the two figures, but the point remains that "Barack Obama and Joe Biden charged the South Koreans nothing, while I, Donald Trump, laid down the law" is pure fantasy.

At this point, there cannot be a single ally that has any confidence in Trump. He doesn't understand geopolitics at all. More importantly, he's incredibly mercurial, and can't be trusted to honor his commitments. The real question is how much that will bleed over into the next presidency. There is no plausible presidential candidate right now, Democratic or Republican, who is as ignorant as Trump or as unreliable as Trump. So, will the allies just dismiss Trump as an anomaly once January 20, 2029, rolls around? Or will they conclude that Trump has exposed the flaws in a now-broken system, that the Pax Americana is over, and that they need to hold the U.S. at arm's length from now on? We suspect it's going to be more the latter than the former, which will even more thoroughly cement Trump as the worst foreign-policy president ever. One European diplomat summarized the situation very succinctly when he said: "We can't trust the security of Europe to 5,000 voters in Wisconsin every 4 years." South Korea and other countries also understand this. (Z)

Who Needs Allies?, Part II: Oman

Things just keep getting worse on the Iran front. There are at least three distinct issues that are clearly causing headaches for Donald Trump right now:

The Abraham Lincoln: When a war is going badly, you never know what incident or story will become a flashpoint, but it's a guarantee that one will eventually. With the Korean War, it was the endless bickering over trivial details of the peace process (should the table we negotiate at be square or round?). With the Vietnam War, it was the Tet Offensive. And with the Iran War, at least at the moment, it is the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln.

What has happened to the crew of that ship is shameful, though one day a historian will try to figure out why that story in particular caught fire. Because of the (alleged) attempted suicides? Because it's one of the mightiest ships in the fleet? Because it ironically bears the name of someone who actually knew how to prosecute a war? We have absolutely no doubt there are other sailors and soldiers out there in equally deplorable circumstances (for example, the various ships in the Lincoln's carrier group), but at the moment, it's that ship that is on everyone's lips.

The administration is trying to get the ship out of there as fast as it can, though rotating carrier groups is no small feat. In the interim, Trump & Co. are trying their best to downplay the reporting about the Lincoln. On Friday, Trump had the gall to declare that not only has the ship not been deployed too long, but that it hasn't been deployed long enough. He said that the story was "fake reporting" from CNN, despite the fact that it was actually broken by Natalie Oliverio of the Military Times. He and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth keep insisting that things are great onboard that ship, that the sailors have the best of everything, and they are living the high life. The families of the sailors are furious that the administration is downplaying their concerns and is effectively accusing them of lying. With the midterm election less than 3 months away, allow us to take this opportunity to remind everyone of how very much American voters love a politician or a political party that disrespects America's service members.

In case you are trying to figure out which side is telling the truth, the administration or the sailors' families, Adm. Brad Cooper, who leads the U.S. Central Command, paid an emergency visit to the Abraham Lincoln over the weekend to assess the situation. The Admiral's office then released a largely upbeat press release in which the sailors were thanked for their service. There is nary a word in there, however, pushing back against the claims that the ship has become a hell on water. Also, in our experience, flag officers do not make unscheduled, emergency visits to ships unless there is some very good reason for it.

The Memorandum of Understanding: Trump has declared victory, a great American triumph, an inevitable end to the war, blah, blah, blah so many times that we have stopped even bothering to mention the latest "breakthrough." Even much bigger media concerns barely even pay attention at this point. At best, the administration will sometimes get sign-off on some things from one interested party. However, it never comes close to reaching agreement with all of the key players, among them Israel, Iran, Lebanon/Hezbollah and Saudi Arabia. Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner are in over their heads, and have made clear they have no business trying to negotiate a peace agreement.

The closest that the White House and its team have come to producing something of substance is the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), which was signed on June 17, and which gave Iran and the U.S. a 2-month period to essentially cool off and to try to figure out a way forward that would lead to a permanent peace. The MoU ostensibly imposed a ceasefire, though it was really more like a less-fire, since both sides have been shooting at each other throughout most of the 60 days. And now, as of yesterday, the MoU has expired. So, the only slightly meaningful diplomatic breakthrough is no more, and the odds of a new breakthrough appear slim.

Iran's Plans: And that brings us to the next problem. It's unclear whether the leadership of Iran really ever wanted peace (or, if they did, for how long). Whatever the case might be, the Wall Street Journal was the first to report yesterday that the current thinking of the regime is that they want to drag this conflict out for as long as possible, and to inflict as much suffering on the U.S. and on the world as they can.

The Iranians' reasoning is... understandable, let's say. They are weary of being a punching bag for the U.S. and suspect, not unreasonably, that "peace" really just means "the U.S. and Israel and maybe Saudi Arabia have time to re-load for a larger and more devastating assault." The Iranians want to make the costs of this war so substantial that any president, PM, king or other leader who considers an attack in the future will think twice about whether it's worth it. It's also worth noting that Iran has already weathered the worst of the air assault, and has reason to believe that the air strikes will become fewer and further in between (due to lack of armaments), while a land invasion appears to be off the table.

What it boils down to, according to the WSJ, is that the conduct of the war has fallen into the hands of much more militant people than was previously the case, and their current mantra is "The main war has not even begun." That is a very scary thought.

We have spent this entire item, so far, talking about Iran. And yet, the headline is about Oman. They do both have four letters, ending in a-n, but that is not a typo. As everyone knows, when Trump starts to feel the heat, he lashes out. And that is what he did yesterday. Oman (sort of) borders the western side of the Strait of Hormuz, which it would like to see reopened. It has also been hit by several volleys from Iran. Oh and, like everyone else, they have no faith in Trump (or Kushner, or Witkoff). So, the Omanis have been conducting their own negotiations with Iran, so as to reopen the Strait to shipping traffic.

It is not entirely clear what the nature of the proposed agreement would be (should it even come to pass, which seems unlikely). However, when Trump got wind of it, he was furious. It could be that he thinks Oman will get the Strait opened to traffic from some nations, but not the U.S. Or, it could be that Oman is trying to get the Strait open for everyone, but Trump doesn't want that unless he gets the credit. Whichever it is, during a phone interview with Fox's Trey Yingst, the President decreed: "If Oman gets in the way, we'll bomb the shit out of them."

So, in the span of 24 hours, Trump betrayed a commitment to one ally, in South Korea, and threatened to begin bombing another, in Oman. With "friends" like him, who needs enemies? Even if the leaders of these allied nations are (somewhat) willing to bide their time until normalcy returns to the White House, what do they do for the 2+ years between now and then? Flatter Trump and give him fake trophies and try to manipulate him, the way that Kim Jong-Un does? Work around the U.S. as best as is possible? Try to find people within the U.S. to work with on the down-low; people like Marco Rubio and Dan Caine? Whatever the approach, this is not good for global stability. And if ever a Russia or a China or a North Korea was going to take their shot, whatever that shot might be, sometime before Trump leaves office would be the time to do it. (Z)

Trump Is a Hypocrite, Part #408: Voting By Mail

Today's posting reads like one long harangue against Donald Trump. We really, really don't like it when it works out that way. However, we are also unwilling to override our judgment of which news is most important and instructive, just in the name of performing "balance theater." We're telling you, everything in the news yesterday was related to reckless, incompetent or unethical behavior by Trump. Sometimes, all three at the same time.

At least the last three items, unlike the first two, will be on the short side. For this one, we begin by reminding readers that Trump has been very outspoken in his opposition to voting by mail, as he says it facilitates fraud. The SAVE Act, which he's been pushing so hard for, is substantially a "no more voting by mail" bill. Just last month, as part of a speech meant to rally support for the SAVE Act, he decreed that "mail-in ballots are inherently corrupt."

Given the headline, you know where this is headed. Trump is now a resident of Florida, which will be holding its primary today. He requested his mail-in ballot sometime in July, mailed it in late last month, and it was formally acknowledged last Thursday. He has voted by mail in every election since he first became president in 2017.

What does this reveal about what's going on in Trump's head? Certainly, that he's a hypocrite, but beyond that, is he letting slip that he doesn't really believe mail-in voting is bad? Or, is he making clear that he thinks he's better than everyone else, and so is entitled to play by different rules? Alternatively, this could be his way of announcing to the world that he is "inherently corrupt," to use his own words. If so, then we have news for you, Mr. President: The world already knows.

Once news of Trump's latest vote-by-mail became public, reporters demanded to know how Trump can keep a straight face while lambasting the practice and pushing for the SAVE Act. White House spokesperson Olivia Wales explained:

As President Trump has said, the SAVE America Act has commonsense exceptions for Americans to use mail-in ballots for illness, disability, military, or travel—but universal mail-in voting should not be allowed because it's highly susceptible to fraud.

We will, first of all, include the obligatory note that there is no meaningful amount of fraud. About 0.000043% of ballots are fraudulent, which works out to about 1 in every 2.5 million. Beyond that, we will point out that the White House is apparently hoping people won't notice that Trump is not, in fact, ill, disabled, in the military or traveling, and so should not qualify for one of the "acceptable" exceptions. It is true that he currently lives somewhere other than the state where he votes, but that's not because he's "traveling." In other words, if the SAVE Act became law, it would prohibit people in Trump's situation from voting. So, he is definitely a hypocrite, despite the spokesperson's attempts to argue otherwise.

The good news is that the SAVE Act isn't going to become law before the election. Congress isn't even in session right now, and even if they were to pass it the moment they get back to Washington (which, it should be noted, would require a filibuster carve-out), there just isn't time to implement it. Will Trump push hard for the SAVE Act before the 2028 election—an election that, unlike this one, won't affect him personally? The answer to that question should be instructive in terms of what his real agenda is here. (Z)

Trump Is Corrupt, Part #639: World Liberty Bank...

The griftwatch is eternal with this president. We could easily write an item about grifty behavior from him and/or his kids every single day, and not run out of things to cover. The only reason we don't is that it quickly moves into beating-a-dead-horse territory. Everyone should know he's on the take, at this point, and that the powers that might hold him accountable (outside the court system, sometimes) are not currently doing so.

This story is sleazy enough, however, that we just could not let it pass. World Liberty Financial (WLF) is, of course, the Trump family's crypto business. However, it cannot legally issue its own stablecoins (bitcoins tied to reserves of some commodity, commonly U.S. dollars) because it is not a bank. Instead, it has to rely on a middleman and, of course, the middleman ends up with some of the profits and a lot of the power.

The owners of WLF (including the Trumps, who hold 38% of the company in their own names) do not want to give up their profits or power. So, they have come up with a solution: World Liberty Bank. WLF applied for a charter with the Treasury Department's Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and yesterday federal officials who work for Donald Trump gave preliminary approval to Donald Trump to open his own bank.

It is not a done deal yet. There are still hoops to be jumped through, and maybe the Trumps won't be able to jump through them all. Or maybe it will take long enough that by the time final approvals roll around, the Department of Treasury will no longer be under the control of Trump, and will say "no." These are possibilities, though we are not at all confident in them.

If the Trumps do get to run their own bank, particularly if Trump is still president (and Todd Blanche is still AG), the possibilities for grift are endless. Trump was already bandying about ideas for a third Trump-branded cryptocurrency. Imagine how many different coins they might issue, and how much they might fleece the rubes the base for, especially if the wolf is guarding the henhouse. Trump also has a habit of ordering his businesses to transfer funds to his personal accounts, and then having the businesses declare bankruptcy. This is what happened with his casinos and it could happen here. Perhaps most obviously, a Trump-run bank would allow for money laundering on an industrial scale. The first 50 accountholders would all be Russian oligarchs.

It is clear, at this point, that Trump does not give a damn about hiding his corruption. He was more subtle during Trump v1.0, but now all bets are off. Maybe this is a variant of his usual strategy of muddying the waters with so much crap, it's hard to focus on any one bad act. Or maybe he's just gotten more desperate, since his time as president (and maybe his time on Earth) will soon run out. The Democrats are going to try hard to make this stick to the President and his Party in 2026. We do not know if they will be successful, but we do know that Trump has given them an embarrassment of (purloined) riches to work with. (Z)

Trump Paid the Lady, and She's Going to Remain Paid

When the Supreme Court declined to hear Donald Trump's appeal of the verdict awarding $5 million in damages to E. Jean Carroll for her defamation claims against Trump, the district judge overseeing the case ordered the money that had been held in escrow distributed to her. She's had access to the money, which had grown to $5.6 million, since that time.

Meanwhile, Trump continued to whine to the Supreme Court and asked it to reconsider his case. Yesterday, the Court rejected his request to rehear their earlier rejection. So this case, which was based on statements Trump made in 2022 after he left office the first time, is officially over.

There's still the matter of the second case, though, which was based on statements Trump made in 2019 while he was president. A jury awarded Carroll $83 million in that case, and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that verdict as well. Trump appealed to the Supremes, who have yet to decide whether to hear it. Trump's petition claims that: (1) He is immune from suit because the statements were official acts as president and (2) As a government employee, he can't be sued personally for doing his job.

Interestingly, Trump didn't claim immunity until late in the appeal process, so arguably he has waived that claim. Also, this is a civil case, and the broad standard for immunity articulated by the Court in the criminal case of Trump v. U.S. doesn't apply here, though there is some overlap. But more importantly, does the Court really want to delve into any remaining issues regarding presidential immunity in a case where a jury found that the president sexually assaulted the defendant? Our guess is they will take a pass. Carroll hasn't gotten the $83 million yet, but that interest is accruing, too. One of these days, her cat is going to eat good. (L)

Today's Senate Polls

The last time Massachusetts elected a Republican to the U.S. Senate in a regular election was 1972. That streak won't be ending this year. The presumptive GOP nominee is John Deaton, the only Republican who filed to run. He got thrashed by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) two years ago, losing by 20 points. This poll is a bit presumptive because Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) hasn't won his primary yet, but since he is 30 points ahead of challenger Rep. Seth Moulton (D-MA), it's almost certain to be Markey vs. Deaton. (Z)

State	Democrat	D %	Republican	R %	Start	End	Pollster
Massachusetts	Ed Markey*	51%	John Deaton	30%	Aug 05	Aug 12	U. of Massachusetts

* Denotes incumbent

---

Previous report         Next report

---

If you wish to contact us, please use one of these addresses. For the first two, please include your initials and city.

• questions@electoral-vote.com    For questions about politics, civics, history, etc. to be answered on a Saturday
• comments@electoral-vote.com   For "letters to the editor" for possible publication on a Sunday
• corrections@electoral-vote.com To tell us about typos or factual errors we should fix
• items@electoral-vote.com            For general suggestions, ideas, etc.
• Guidelines for questions (Saturdays) and letters (Sundays)

To download a poster about the site to hang up, please click here.

---

Email a link to a friend.

---The Votemaster and Zenger