We could use a few more reader comments on the possibility of Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) as a presidential candidate. If you've got 'em, send 'em to comments@electoral-vote.com.

Operation Shakedown Aborted

Donald Trump's "plan" to charge oil carriers a 20% fee to be escorted through the Strait of Hormuz is no more. Less than 24 hours after announcing the highly implausible initiative, the President got on his divorced-from-reality social media platform to share this announcement:

Oil is flowing like never before, thanks to the awesome Power of the United States Military. A special salute to Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Dan Caine, and Commander of the United States Central Command, Admiral Brad Cooper. Because of them, and all members of the Most Powerful Military anywhere in the World, BY FAR, the Strait of Hormuz is open to ALL Ship traffic except for Iran — and that is because of their lying, violent, malicious leadership, which is taking them down the path of TOTAL DESTRUCTION. We will therefore have a FULL Blockade, but only on Ships coming to and from Iranian ports, or carrying anything have to do with Iranian cargo. Based on highly productive conversations with Middle East leadership, I have decided to replace the 20% United States Reimbursement Fee with Trade and Investment Deals that the various Gulf States will be making into the United States. Those Investments will be MASSIVE but, at the same time, extraordinarily good for them, and their future. As everyone is aware, we have the largest Dollar Investment into the United States, of any Country in History, but these new Investments will make that Number even larger, and we will see Factories, Plants, and Equipment pour into the United States at Historic levels, which will create additional millions of High Paying AMERICAN Jobs! America is WINNING again, winning like never before. The days of Iran killing hundreds of thousands of people, including 52,000 protestors, are OVER and, most importantly, IRAN WILL NEVER HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON! Thank you for your attention to this matter. President DONALD J. TRUMP

You would think that, after more than a decade of writing about this man, we would be completely inured to his propensity for peddling blatant falsehoods. And yet, sometimes he still manages to surprise us. It would seem that the new plan is that only the Gulf States are going to pay. But the payment will be in the form of massive investments! In the United States! And yet, the Gulf States will also benefit! And there will be prosperity! And jobs! And winning! And Iran will never have a nuclear weapon! The only thing Trump forgot to add is that everyone involved also gets their very own pony.

On a similar note, we know full well that Trump is a terrible businessman and a lousy negotiator, making The Art of the Deal the most ironic work of literature in the Western canon. But again, he still manages to surprise us on occasion with how utterly inept he is. (Z) has given lectures on negotiating, and one of the very first precepts is that you have to get inside the other side's head, and try to understand what they are thinking. The mess in the Strait of Hormuz is entirely Trump's fault. Did he REALLY think that the other industrial powers, who are in a position to tell him to pound sand, were going to reward the United States for that by paying a 20% "protection" fee for their oil shipments? It's really no different from a mafia racket: "That's some nice oil ya got there. Shame if anything happened to it." The difference is that the power differential between the mafia and Ma and Pa Shopkeeper is enormous, while the power differential between the U.S. and, say, Japan or Australia or China is not.

At this point, when it comes to the Iran War, is there anything that comes out of Trump's mouth that you can believe? OK, we suppose that when he says there will be bombing, you can believe that. And indeed, he said that yesterday, and the bombing is definitely underway.

Trump also spent much oxygen yesterday making clear that his "strategy" is the same as it's always been: The U.S. is going to bomb the Iranians back to the Stone Age, and he won't be negotiating with them until they come crawling on their knees to beg for mercy. But do you really believe that last part? Do you really believe he's not going to TACO once the Iranians have held out for a week or so? At that point, he'll send J.D. Vance or some other sycophant to try to work out another ceasefire that doesn't actually lead to a cessation of fire. And can you believe any new idea, initiative, policy or other "change" Trump announces, since he always changes course (usually in a day or two, once he learns that even the Fox people think his plans are stupid)? Can you believe anything he says about peace, negotiations, ceasefires, concessions being given to Iran, concessions being demanded from Iran, or anything else? The post above is the utterly delusional product of an utterly deluded mind. We don't know if the delusions are limited to just Iran, or if Trump is generally delusional these days (for what it's worth, Sen. Jon Ossoff, D-GA, said yesterday that even many of his Republican colleagues believe Trump has "lost it"). Whatever is going on, Trump and his stupid social media account are the only source for information on the prosecution of the Iran War, and he is an utterly unreliable and untrustworthy source. We really are living through a postmodern presidency, one in which nothing has any meaning.

What we do know is that this war is extracting a heavy price on America, despite Trump's pretensions to the contrary. To start, the death toll is now up to 14, as the Navy pilot who crashed his helicopter into the Arabian Sea suffered serious brain injuries, and now has succumbed to those injuries. Truth be told, we're a bit surprised the total is only 14. If one Iranian drone sneaks through the U.S. defenses, and scores just the right hit, the death total could easily multiply by double or triple or tenfold. It is fortunate that the people who man U.S. Navy ships, and are responsible for making sure that doesn't happen, are more capable at their jobs than Trump is at his.

The financial costs of the war are also going to be quite substantial. CNN took a look, and ballparked the cost of the war at $40 billion. However, that number comes with some huge caveats. First, CNN crunched the numbers at a time when the war was supposedly "over." And so, that counter is still counting up, day by day, hour by hour. Second, the $40 billion only covers the direct costs of the war, in terms of bases that were damaged, munitions that were expended, etc. It does not cover operational costs, since those were somewhat baked into the annual Defense Department budget—after all, whether a soldier is in the Middle East or is at Fort Dix, they still have to be paid. This said, it does cost more to transport a soldier to the Middle East and to feed and shelter them there, than it would cost if they just stayed in New Jersey (home to Fort Dix). Based on the DoD's ask for next year, it looks like the additional operational costs imposed by the war are already at $80 billion and counting. Also, there are many future costs, including ongoing medical care for those who are injured, and interest on the money that will be borrowed to pay for all of this.

There will also be a cost imposed on Americans. When the war was hot, gas prices shot up, and inflation came along for the ride. When the war started to cool, gas prices dropped, and June actually saw a slight drop in inflation, from 4.2% to 3.5%. Of course, the extra money spent in March/April/May is still gone, but lower prices (well, technically, smaller increases in prices) would be great news for people who are having trouble making ends meet. But now that the war is hot again, oil prices are going right back up. A barrel of Brent crude was trading for between $76 and $80 all last week. It jumped to $85/barrel on Monday, and has yo-yo'ed between $84/barrel and $87/barrel since.

Naturally, the war is going to deprive the United States of some of its soft power, as governments and peoples around the world downgrade their opinions of the United States as a moral actor and a reliable partner. Each year, the think tank Nira Data talks to 50,000 or so people around the world, and asks them if they have a positive or negative view of 50 or so prominent nations. A couple of weeks ago, Nira released the results of its latest survey, conducted mostly after the U.S. started bombing Iran (and entirely after the U.S. invaded Venezuela).

Here's a quick pop quiz. How many of these 12 nations did the United States do better than?

1. Belarus
2. China
3. Ethiopia
4. France
5. Iraq
6. Myanmar
7. The Philippines
8. Qatar
9. Russia
10. Turkey
11. Venezuela
12. Vietnam

Having trouble deciding? We listed them in alphabetical order, but how about we give them to you in order of net approval?

1. France: +11
2. The Philippines: +9
3. Vietnam: +9
4. Turkey: +8
5. China: +7
6. Qatar: +6
7. Ethiopia: EVEN
8. Belarus: -5
9. Myanmar: -5
10. Venezuela: -5
11. Russia: -11
12. Iraq: -13

For context, the most highly regarded nations in the world are Switzerland and Canada, at +36. That said, it's clearly possible to be a less-than-perfect global citizen, and pull a moderately OK score (see China, Qatar, etc.). Anyhow, the U.S. is currently at -16, which means it doesn't beat ANY of these nations. In fact, the only four nations that did worse than the U.S. are Iran (-17), Afghanistan (-19), North Korea (-19) and Israel (-24). Ostensibly, the survey is focused particularly on how well various nations are living up to democratic ideals. That means that, if you believe the numbers, communist China is technically doing better on democracy than the U.S. is. Now, there's clearly some amount of projection going on here, with factors other than "commitment to democracy" factoring into some respondents' opinions. But whatever the basis for evaluation really is in the minds of those who were surveyed, one cannot deny that the reputation of the U.S. (and that of Israel) is dropping like a stone, which again, means a loss of soft power. That's not completely the doing of the current conflicts in the Middle East, but those conflicts are a big part of it.

Each day that passes, the Iran War bears more and more resemblance to Vietnam. True, there is no draft right now, and there are no American "boots on the ground," and those are good things. Still, in both cases you had a president who could not win, and yet could not afford to cut his losses and exit the conflict. And both Lyndon B. Johnson and Donald Trump had/have many words about how negotiations were ongoing, or would be ongoing, or were going well, and also many big words about how the war was almost over and American victory would be complete. It was a lie (or a delusion) for Johnson and, by all appearances, it's a lie AND a delusion for Trump.

And you know how these endless wars tend to end these days? The president who is all-in just can't do it, politically, and so it's up to the next guy (or one of the guys AFTER the next guy), who has not spent all his political capital and who has not made promises of victory. Harry S. Truman started the Korean War; Dwight D. Eisenhower ended it. LBJ started (well, escalated) Vietnam, Richard Nixon ended it. George W. Bush started the Iraq War; Barack Obama ended it. Bush started the Afghanistan War, Joe Biden ended it. At this point, would you be surprised if the Iran War is still underway when Trump leaves office, and it's up to the next president to clean up the mess? We certainly wouldn't. If so, it would be a real shame, because the U.S. just can't afford this war, on so many levels. (Z)

P.S.: We are aware that the nation of Turkey has updated the preferred spelling of its name. However, we generally follow AP style, and the AP is sticking with "Turkey." The reason is that the updated spelling uses special, non-English characters, and some outlets are not equipped to handle that. So, the AP's general approach, which they are applying here, is to accommodate preferences for different English-language renderings, but not to accommodate preferences that involve the use of foreign characters. In other words, if the Turks wanted to be Turkiye, AP would bow to that. But AP does not accommodate Türkiye. We are not alone in this decision. The New York Times, CNN, and many other media outlets also use "Turkey."

ICE Enters a Cooling-Off Period

Back in January, ICE officers shot and killed two people, and the political blowback forced the agency to dial it down for a while. Now, in July, ICE officers have shot and killed two more people, and the political blowback is forcing them to dial it down again.

To be specific, "Border Czar" Tom Homan announced yesterday that ICE would stop making "most" traffic stops, and that agents would be instructed not to pursue fleeing vehicles. He also said that body and dashboard cameras would be used more widely, though we'll believe that when we see it. Homan characterized all of this as a "short pause" and not a permanent change in policy. The number of days that lapsed between the shooting of Alex Pretti (January 24) and the shooting of Lorenzo Salgado Araujo (July 7) was 165. So, we can estimate that the next two fatal shootings will take place... well, as chance would have it, 165 days from today is Christmas.

Even if ICE agents finally learn to properly holster their weapons, however, plenty of other damage is being done. Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) and the Human Rights Center at the University of California, Berkeley (HRC) have painstakingly documented the harms being done by ICE officers, and have just produced a report that covers June 2025 through May 2026 and that summarizes their findings. While the four fatal shootings and the sixteen non-fatal shootings have gotten the lion's share of the attention, HRC and PHR identified a staggering 412 incidents where misuse of crowd control equipment and techniques (a.k.a. "less-lethal force"), like pepper spray and rubber bullets, led to serious injuries, up to and including blinding and brain damage. ProPublica also did a study, covering roughly the same timeframe, and found that at least 70 children were among the people seriously injured by ICE officers.

We are not in a position to review every single incident, of course. But we have no doubt that at least some ICE targets did things that were ill-advised when dealing with law-enforcement personnel, particularly when those personnel are under-qualified, under-trained and on edge. Still, in politics, perception is reality. And the shootings and the other injuries, given there are so many of them, and in such a short timeframe, creates the perception that ICE is out of control. In particular, it is hard to piece together a hypothetical circumstance where ICE was justified in taking actions that led to children being injured.

We remain uncertain whether ICE will be an important part of the conversation this election season. But we can at least offer three salient observations. The first, which we noted yesterday, is that the four fatal shootings all took place in states with key U.S. Senate races. The second is that the Democrats appear to be making corruption their central theme this cycle, and police overreach is a significant element of government corruption.

The third is that polls continue to show that Latino voters are furious. The latest, from the U.S. Hispanic Business Council, reveals that virtually all Latino business owners have been hurt by the tariffs, or by the immigration enforcement, or both, and that even though the majority identify as Republican, they favor state Rep. James Talarico (D) over AG Ken Paxton (R) in the race for Texas' U.S. Senate seat by 7 points, 43% to 36%. Meanwhile a New York Times/Siena poll of all Latinos in Texas (so, not just business owners) indicates that demographic has swung dramatically away from the GOP. Though Texas Latinos went for Donald Trump by 10 points in 2024, they now favor Talarico by 32 points. That, of course, is a 42-point swing, which would be a little hard to believe, except that the NYT/Siena poll tends to be a little right-leaning, and so is not likely to err dramatically in the Democrats' direction. If the polls have the right of it, then the House is probably lost to Republicans (just based on what will happen in Texas and other southwestern states), the Senate is perilous, and Gov. Joe Lombardo (R-NV) might not want to sign any long-term leases or service contracts. (Z)

Fraud on the Court

When Donald Trump and Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche cooked up a scheme to file a "lawsuit" against the IRS in the Southern District of Florida to extract taxpayer money and other perks for Trump and his family, they no doubt hoped to draw Trump minion Aileen Cannon as the judge. But Cannon, who has never met a Trump scam she couldn't give a legal-sounding stamp of approval, was not assigned this particular grift (it's random). Instead, it was given to U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams, who had some rather pointed questions about its legitimacy, given that Trump appeared to be on both sides of the case. She wanted to know whether the parties were actually adverse to one another, since Trump essentially controlled the agency he was allegedly litigating against.

Seeing the writing on the wall, Blanche tried to side-step those inconvenient questions by coming up with a "settlement" and then quickly dismissing the case before even filing a response to the complaint. The so-called "settlement" had two parts: (1) a $1.8 billion slush fund to reward the Jan. 6 insurrectionists and (2) an immunity deal for Trump's family and businesses from any investigations by any governmental agency, including, but not limited to, the IRS. The judge smelled a rat, but determined she had no choice but to dismiss the suit.

Enter 35 former federal judges, appointed by presidents of both parties, who filed a motion asking the judge to reopen the case and examine whether the case and its settlement were a product of collusion and a "fraud on the court." Williams agreed to look at those claims and on Monday, she issued her ruling.

And so it is that another federal judge has let Trump have it with both barrels. Here are a few salient quotes: "The nature of the suit itself and the conduct of the Parties and counsel from its filing make plain that this was an attempt to use the Court to provide some legitimacy to an agreement to confer immunity to people and entities affiliated with the President and to earmark billions of dollars from American taxpayers to redress grievances not defined in the law." "The DOJ seems to have purposefully adopted the strategy of creating a slush fund disguised as a settlement, and then doling the money out to whatever constituency the Executive wants bankrolled." And "This lawsuit was not brought to vindicate rights; it was brought to manipulate the judicial process to pursue benefits unavailable in litigation because the Parties were not adverse."

Williams reminded the parties of the defenses to these types of suits that the IRS has normally raised to get these cases dismissed, like the 2-year statute of limitations, and the vigorous defense by the DOJ in every case. "That is," the Judge added, "every case until the instant litigation."

In finding that Trump controls both sides of the litigation, Williams cleverly referred to the Supreme Court's recent decision in Trump v. Slaughter, "Article II requires that the President control all executive power—especially the authority wielded by agency heads, who are the most important of the President's subordinates and who must be the President's alter ego in their agencies." She also cited Trump's Executive Order No. 14215 issued on February 18, 2025, which explicitly gives Trump sole authority over legal interpretations and "positions advanced in litigation." So much for the independence of the DOJ or any other agency. Williams wrote, "Not surprisingly then, no attorney appeared on Defendants' behalf, challenged Plaintiffs' actions, or justified the United States' position in any way."

The Court concluded that "this matter was brought for an improper purpose—to gain the imprimatur of judicial legitimacy for a 'settlement' that had no viable basis in law or fact." At this stage, the judge has limited tools at her disposal to hold the parties accountable. But she can impose what's called Rule 11 sanctions, and boy, did she. She referred Blanche, Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward and attorney Alejandro Brito to their respective state bars for disciplinary action. She also essentially prohibited Daniel Epstein, one of Trump's lawyers on the "plaintiffs" side, from practicing law in Florida for one year.

As for the purported "settlement agreement," the judge's order prohibits the parties from calling it a "settlement agreement" and prohibits them from using it or citing it in any official proceeding. As a practical matter, this means that when the next administration restarts the tax audit or investigates Trump for illegally profiting from the presidency or stealing classified documents, he can't raise this document as a defense in court. So, this ruling effectively means the alleged agreement is illegitimate and can't be relied on to prevent future accountability.

Finally, Williams ordered the plaintiffs to pay the attorneys' fees of the Court-appointed amici and invited the 35 former federal judges to also file a motion seeking attorneys' fees. While the Court-appointed amici apparently declined any reimbursement, our guess is that the former judges won't be so generous. At the end of the day, this could become an expensive exercise for Trump and his family. It should be noted that the judge took the time to lavish praise on the amici and their "uncompromising commitment to the rule of law [that] are hallmarks of a vigorous, independent legal profession critical to sustaining a vigorous, independent judiciary." Take that, Todd Blanche.

The timing of this ruling could prove to be inconvenient for Blanche, whose confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee is today. The judge had some pretty choice words regarding Blanche's improper behavior that just may come up. He violated ethics rules and laws regarding conflicts of interest in putting his former client's interests ahead of his obligations on behalf of the public. He violated the statute that prohibits agreeing to terminate IRS audits. She also noted that even though Blanche signed the alleged settlement and was presumably bound by it, he testified before Congress that the slush fund was not moving forward, without getting anything in writing from the plaintiffs. According to the Court, this testimony "demonstrates his confidence that he could speak for, and bind, both sides of this matter. This certitude supports the conclusion that the Parties worked in tandem and were never actually adverse."

The Attorney General represents the interests of the American people; Blanche represents only Trump's interests. It will be very interesting to see how the Republican votes line up for yet another wholly unqualified and dangerous Trump nominee. Perhaps the Republicans will again meekly fall in line to allow Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) to vote "no" so she can claim she's independent while not actually making any difference. That said, one of Blanche's staunchest defenders on the Judiciary Committee was one Lindsey Graham, whose passing may prove to be a fatal blow to the wannabe AG's candidacy. (L)

Maine Senate Race Is Getting Interesting

Speaking of Susan Collins, she's got some reasons to be "concerned" these days when it comes to continuing her political career beyond January 3, 2027.

To start with, the exit of Graham Platner (and he did formally drop out on Monday) has reset the themes of the race. It had been shaping up to be a contest centered on Totenkopfs and sexual misconduct. Now, it's shifting toward issues that work to Collins' detriment, rather than her advantage. Specifically, as the various wannabe Democratic U.S. Senators search for delegates, they have begun hammering Collins on abortion. Presumably, most Mainers know that Collins' vote was key to confirming Brett Kavanaugh, and that Kavanaugh's vote was key to overturning Roe v. Wade. And by the end of this Senate campaign, every Mainer is going to know it. They are also going to know that Collins said that Kavanaugh cross-his-heart, hope-to-die promised that he would NOT overturn Roe, which makes her look either dishonest or stupid.

And abortion isn't the only issue that Democratic candidates are using against Collins, at least not as of Monday. They are also hitting her hard on her votes to fund ICE, in particular the $70 billion in funding passed without Democratic votes. Every Democrat in the running (and there are eight candidates so far) has said that at least some of Joan Sebastian Guerrero's blood is on the Senator's hands. Collins has responded by... co-signing a letter that was also signed by the rest of Maine's congressional delegation, and that contains such remarks as, "The facts surrounding this tragedy remain a matter of significant local concern and necessitate thorough, objective accounting." Was that written by AI? Whoever or whatever wrote it, it certainly doesn't convey much depth of feeling on the part of Collins or her colleagues.

Another issue that is rounding into form is the ongoing quagmire in Iran. Collins thrice voted no on resolutions to curb Trump's war, before changing course and twice voting yes. As per usual, and Collins' Democratic opponents are making certain to point this out, her votes against Trump are rarely decisive.

More broadly, Maine is a state where Trump is currently 14 points underwater (42% to 56%) according to Morning Consult, 21 points underwater (38% to 59%) according to The Portland Press Herald/NYT/Siena, and 23 points underwater (36% to 59%) according to Civiqs. Collins' eventual opponent is sure to point out that during Trump v1.0, she voted with the President 90% of the time. And during Trump v2.0, with an insurrection, several invasions of foreign nations, the cruelty of ICE and a mountain of grift under his belt, Collins has voted with him... 94.6% of the time. She must like what she's seeing. At least, that's the observation the Democratic nominee is going to make. Collins actually does vote against Trump more than any Republican senator not named Murkowski or Paul, but that's probably not enough for her to argue she's not in lockstep with the President, especially since her "I voted against the Donald" votes are so often, and so famously, strategically timed.

Speaking of the Democratic nominee, the Maine Democratic Party is partnering with News Center Maine to stage a candidates' debate tomorrow night at 7:00 p.m. ET (whether there will be more debates is unclear at this point). The state party does not want to appear to be putting its thumb on the scale for anyone, and so every person who has qualified for the mini-primary is invited to attend. Here's the list of invitees:

1. Secretary of State Shenna Bellows
2. Former U.S. Senate candidate David Costello
3. Former state lawmaker Elizabeth Dickerson
4. Former state Senate President Troy Jackson
5. Brewer Dan Kleban
6. Former ME-02 candidate Paige Loud
7. Former gubernatorial candidate Dr. Nirav Shah
8. Former congressional aide and current progressive activist Jordan Wood

Candidates whose names are in bold have accepted the debate invitation. The deadline to declare an intent to run is today, so if anyone else is going to get in, time is short for them to do so.

Not only is the state Democratic Party bending over backwards to keep thumbs off the scale, so too is the national Democratic Party. In particular, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) knows full well that the eventual nominee can't even have the faintest whiff of being "his" candidate, at risk of alienating the populist Platner voters the blue team is trying to get back inside the tent. So, Schumer will say nothing and do nothing until a nominee is chosen, and THEN will back that person with all the money and logistical support he can muster.

There has been surprisingly little polling of the race thus far. It is possible that polling just takes time, particularly when you're dealing with a fairly small state, population-wise. It's also possible that the folks who pay for polls are holding off until the field is set and/or the debate is held. The only poll we've seen is an internal poll from the Shah campaign. It says that Shah (47% to 46%), Bellows (47% to 47%) and Jackson (47% to 48%) would all be in a statistical dead heat with Collins. If that's true, and it could very well be, that's pretty good news for the Democrats, as lesser-known candidates usually have more potential to grow their support than universally-known candidates like Collins.

One other data point, for what it is worth. Here's the graph of betting odds on the prediction site Kalshi:

Betting odds are not the most reliable indicator, as much as those of us who are nervous about the efficacy of polls wish otherwise. However, it's certainly fair to conclude that the allegations against Graham Platner wrecked his campaign, and that his departure has breathed new life into the Democrats' hopes. Whether the blue team is really 2-to-1 to win right now is the questionable part.

The debate is set for 7:00 ET Thursday, and is scheduled to last 90 minutes. So, if you were concerned you might miss Donald Trump's speech, don't worry, you'll be able to catch both (he's speaking at 9:00). We assume the debate will stream on the website of News Center Maine and also on their YouTube Channel. (Z)

---

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.

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

---

Email a link to a friend.

---The Votemaster and Zenger