Zelenskyy Is Seeking Help Elsewhere

Maybe Volodymyr Zelenskyy won the Battle of the Potomac on Friday, after all. He probably knew no number of thank yous would mollify Donald Trump, and may have wanted a public fight to solidify European support. To the extent that was his goal, he won bigly, but still had the grace to thank the American people once again for their support after he arrived in London for a summit with European leaders. The summit was organized by U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer, so it was not strictly an E.U. affair, and also included leaders from Turkey and Norway—which are in Europe (partly, in the case of Turkey), but not in the E.U. All the leaders welcomed Zelenskyy with open arms:

Also present were NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte and President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen. Rutte was Prime Minister of the Netherlands for 14 years, the longest term in Dutch history. He knows a thing or two about politics. In an interview with the BBC, he thanked Trump effusively for all that he had done to help Ukraine. Then he added that he "knew as a fact that the American administration is extremely invested in making sure that Ukraine gets to a durable peace." When talking to Trump, no matter how indirectly, flattery beats facts every time. Rutte has this down pat.

Yesterday, Von der Leyen said that Europe urgently needs to rearm to show the U.S. that Europe is ready to defend democracy.

Host Starmer said that Ukraine has the full backing of the U.K. He offered a $2.84 billion loan as the first step. What's next? Offensive weapons that can hit Moscow? British boots on the ground? We'll see.

French President Emmanuel Macron spoke to Zelenskyy before the meeting and called for calm. He understands that much as the Ukrainian might want to dump on Trump for ambushing him, he has to continue flattering him to avoid making a bad situation worse. That could be important if Senate Republicans begin to openly side with Ukraine. Remember, it takes only four Republican senators to tank Trump's legislative plans. It is not unthinkable that four Republican senators might introduce some amendment to a bill Trump wants and announce that if it is stripped, they will vote "no" on the bill. Maybe Republican Sens. Lisa Murkowski (AK), Susan Collins (ME), Mitch McConnell (KY) and John Curtis (UT) can sign a legislative suicide pact with each other, or something. Collins is the only one up next year and she needs Democratic votes to win. Then Trump might be forced into reversing himself on Ukraine.

Not all European leaders were supportive of Zelenskyy. Prime Minister Robert Fico of Slovakia, a pro-Russia hardliner, said that his country will not provide any military or financial aid to Ukraine. He also said he wants Ukraine to reopen the transit of Russian gas to Europe and threatened to veto any action at the European Council meeting on Thursday. On the other hand, Polish President Andrzej Duda, who is friendly with Trump, is a strong supporter of Ukraine and reiterated that. (V)

The Pax Americana Is Over

The Pax Romana lasted 200 years, during which time there was peace and prosperity throughout Europe. The Pax Americana lasted 80 years, during which time there was peace, prosperity, and even democracy throughout Europe and most of the Western World (most of the time, anyway). Under the (somewhat) benevolent guidance from the U.S., there were no major wars among America's allies around the world and trade flourished, to (almost) every country's benefit (especially America's). It was based on mutual respect and cooperation (independent of geography) and a tacit agreement that big countries would not try to bully small countries, even if they could. Soft power and gentle persuasion usually kept everyone on the right path. It wasn't perfect, but it largely worked.

The reason it worked is that smaller countries knew that if they were attacked, they could feel confident that America had their backs. This made them somewhat complacent, but it also deterred aggression from big countries. Russia (pop. 143.8 million) knew that invading Estonia (pop. 1.4 million) meant that it would have to fight off the U.S. (pop. 340.1 million), which had a larger and infinitely more capable army, navy, and air force. Successive Soviet and Russian leaders fully understood that. The American nuclear umbrella also made it unnecessary for smaller countries to develop their own nuclear weapons.

That era is now finished. Gone. Probably for generations, if not forever. Donald Trump hated it, even though it benefited America enormously. Yes, there were some costs for defense and foreign aid, but using soft power, America usually got what it wanted, such as cheap imports that benefited American consumers and export markets for products America produced in such abundance (like food) that the domestic market wasn't big enough to absorb all the production.

The new era might well be one of spheres of influence in which big countries get to dictate their will to their smaller neighbors. Roughly speaking, China gets to dominate Asia, Russia gets to dominate Europe, and America gets to dominate the Western Hemisphere (with a belated thank you to James Monroe). This is something Vladimir Putin surely loves. No doubt he mentioned the idea to Donald Trump, whose ears perked up when he heard it. "Vlad, buddy, you're a genius. Why didn't I think of that? Thank you, thank you."

This new model would explain why Trump wants Canada, Greenland, and the Panama Canal: They are in his sphere of influence and thus rightly his for the taking. It all makes sense if you see the world divided into three mutually exclusive spheres of influence. As long as each of the three dominant countries sticks to its sphere, there will be peace. There are a couple of sticking points, like the Middle East and Africa, but they can be left to their own devices for the most part without disturbing the New Global Order. What happens there is of little concern to the big players.

Many Americans are (initially) going to cheer on this new order—until they eventually realize that they have been handed a monkey's paw. The assumption of peace and access to resources will suddenly be wrong. For example, if China decides to take Taiwan, it will probably succeed if America stays out of it. Then Americans will discover that the 1,000-3,000 semiconductor chips in a car that comprise 40% of the total price of the car have tripled in cost, simply because China wants to destroy the U.S. car industry, which could cripple the U.S. economy. It would take years for Micron Technology and Texas Instruments (which are more focused on small, cheap chips than Intel) to ramp up production to replace Taiwan. In due course, Americans will discover that the world (including America) is a poorer and more dangerous place, but there is no UNDO button. (V)

Russia and China Are Recruiting Disgruntled Federal Employees

Many Americans are enraged by co-president Elon Musk firing people left and right, including federal employees who, until recently, were working in national security. Also throw in people still working in national security, but fearful of losing their jobs on account of some 22-year-old Muskrat who has an itchy DEL-key finger. Russia and China have taken notice.

In particular, these people are not only angry or nervous, but possibly in acute need of some funds. One study shows that 40% of Americans wouldn't be able to survive on their savings for more than 4 months. Imagine a situation where a Russian or Chinese operative offers someone in dire need a sign-up bonus of $10,000 right now and a promise of more later. There could be takers.

In fact, both Russia and China are actively trying to recruit assets among recently fired government workers, especially those with security clearances. They have even set up websites to help in recruitment. They are also targeting people on LinkedIn. Imagine the reaction of a recently fired worker to an ad on LinkedIn from some "company" offering immediate well-paid employment to people with experience in national security and a security clearance. The "company" could pose as some kind of think tank or government contractor and might be able to fool the target for a while and maybe indefinitely if the pay was good enough and the target didn't ask too many questions while making a steady income.

The intelligence community has said with "high confidence" that foreign adversaries are already actively trying to capitalize on the mass firings. It is known for a fact that at least one foreign handler directed an asset to create a fake profile on LinkedIn to do recruitment. There are probably many more.

Will DNI Tulsi Gabbard help here? She has already made it clear that she sees the problem as disloyal (former) employees and is focused on finding and punishing them. Gabbard went on Fox to declare that "their loyalty is not at all to America. It is not to the American people or the Constitution. It is to themselves." She wants to root out people she can't trust and replace them with "patriots." Snitch on your coworker and get a small bonus. That will sure help morale. She does not see the random firings of critical personnel as the problem and has no interest in doing anything about it.

Holden Triplett, who served as director of counterintelligence in the NSC in Trump v1.0, and was a former FBI attaché in the U.S. embassies in Moscow and Beijing, said: "We may be creating, albeit somewhat unintentionally, the perfect recruitment environment." Nevertheless, the CIA and DoD are actively looking at significant staff cuts. The "win" (a smaller government) comes now; the "loss" (Russia and China gaining critical national security information and acting on it) comes later. Some people in high places like it that way. (V)

Trump Signs Executive Order Making English the Official Language of the U.S.

Donald Trump is going to issue an XO to make English the only official language of the United States. More than 30 states have already done this. Here is the map.

Note the loose correlation between red states and English states. The XO takes this to a new level. It means that all official government business will be conducted only in English. It will also rescind a federal mandate for the government to provide language assistance to people who do not speak English.

In total, over 300 languages are spoken in the U.S., but Trump sees this as a weakness that needs to be addressed. Needless to say, it is tied to his dislike of immigrants, many of whom speak some language other than English. Trump's dislike of other languages goes back a ways. In 2016, Trump criticized Jeb Bush for speaking Spanish at some of his campaign stops. On the other hand, Trump's campaign ran Spanish-language ads in 2024.

One study showed that in 2019, 68 million people spoke another language besides English at home. These languages included Spanish, Mandarin Chinese, Tagalog, Vietnamese, Arabic, and many more. The data also show that 8% of the population speak English less than "very well." The XO is undoubtedly intended just to punish immigrants. If the goal were to improve their English, that would be in there somewhere.

Trump is not the first politician to try to make English the official language. In 1982, then-Sen. S.I. Hayakawa, a California Republican, introduced an amendment to an immigration bill to make English the official language. He took a lot of flak for that.

An estimated 170 countries have multiple official languages. Interestingly enough, England does not have an official language. Neither does Mexico, though Canada has two of them. (V)

Trump Fast Tracks Deportations

The Trump administration has directed federal officers to locate immigrants who can be deported quickly, without a court hearing. Anyone who entered illegally and who has not formally completed all the paperwork to apply for asylum can be deported without further ado. Immigrants who came through a proper port of entry but lacked the correct paperwork can also be deported immediately. Donald Trump wants to make a show of deporting large numbers of people quickly to get a "win," and these are the lowest hanging fruit.

Joe Biden created a program in which people from Nicaragua and Venezuela could enter the country via a parole program. If they have not applied for and received some other legal status, deporting them would be a twofer: (1) getting rid of more immigrants and (2) sticking it to Biden. Expedited deportation for immigrants without the correct paperwork is allowed by a 1996 law signed by Bill Clinton.

One defense immigrants could throw up is that they convinced a judge to rule that if returned to their country of origin, they would be persecuted or tortured. Trump wants to make an end run here by deporting them to a different country. For example, a citizen of Guatemala could be deported to El Salvador, which is willing to take anyone (for a modest fee). It even has a prison with a capacity of 40,000 inmates that could handle the incoming stream. The prison is called by its Spanish acronym CECOT. Here are photos of some of the prisoners in it. It is currently only about one-third full.

Incarceration could become a major source of income for the country and Donald Trump just loves to make deals. It could be win-win for El Salvador and Trump, just not for the deportees. In case you haven't heard Woody Guthrie's famous song "Deportee" in a while, here is a link to it. For the record, Guthrie didn't actually write it as a song although he is generally credited for it. He wrote the lyrics as a poem and Martin Hoffman later set it to music. Pete Seeger, a friend of Guthrie, began singing it at concerts, which made it famous. (V)

Democrats Don't Like... Democrats

A new CNN poll asking Democrats whether Democrats in Congress were doing enough to resist Donald Trump showed that 22% thought they were doing enough and 73% wanted more resistance. Earlier polls have shown a similar result, but not as extreme as now. Such disgust with the party's leaders may result in members retiring rather than facing the wrath of the voters, and might also result in Democrats being primaried from the left in 2026. It could be the 2010 tea-party election in reverse.

For years, Democratic politicians have called Trump a unique threat to democracy, yet now that he is back in office, they are as quiet as mice. Rank-and-file Democrats don't like that. They want opposition now.

From the viewpoint of the Democratic politicians on the federal level, things look different. Other than the Senate filibuster, they have no power, especially if Trump puts his entire program into one bill passed by the reconciliation process. Going on television to denounce Trump is pointless. Trump couldn't care less. What the Democratic politicians are waiting/hoping for is that Trump overreaches and does something that most voters really dislike, like allowing Elon and the Muskrats to halve the staff at the Social Security Administration, so that payments can't be sent out on time (or at all). Or maybe deleting mifepristone and misoprostol from the database of approved drugs, thus de facto banning medical abortions. Also, Democratic leaders are peppering the courts with lawsuits and there is a chance that Trump will lose a biggie in the Supreme Court and then defy the Court, turning the country against him. But many Democratic voters are impatient with their politicians and don't want to wait for a screw-up. Tension is building. (V)

Federal Judge: Trump Can't Fire Agency Head without Cause

On Saturday, U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson (a Barack Obama appointee) ruled that Donald Trump's firing of Hampton Dellinger, who heads the Office of Special Counsel, was illegal. The law states that the president may remove special counsels "only for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office." Trump did not claim that Dellinger did any of these things. So Jackson reversed the firing. Dellinger's job is to protect federal whistleblowers. The judge said that if he could be fired on a presidential whim, he could not do his job running an office Congress created to protect whistleblowers. The DoJ will naturally appeal. As usual, this will eventually end up in John Roberts' lap. Everything does. In practice, there are three co-presidents (in alphabetical order): Elon Musk, John Roberts, and Donald Trump.

This case could be enormously important. If Trump can't fire the head of this agency, can he fire the head of any agency? Is this agency different from all the others? This case could be a direct challenge to the "Unitary Executive Theory" that Republicans love (currently). This theory states that the president controls the entire Executive Branch and can fire anyone at any time for any reason. De facto, it says that Congress has no power to create agencies whose head serves a fixed term and is immune to being fired absent fairly gross malfeasance. In other words, this theory greatly limits the power of Congress to set up agencies in such a way as to protect them against a president who wants to subvert them. It is a separation of powers issue that pits the powers of Congress against the powers of the president. Only the Supreme Court can handle this. While the Republican appointees' first thought may be to give Trump what he wants, surely during the justices' meeting, one of the liberals is going to point out that if they side with Trump, the next Democratic president will fire every Trump-appointed agency head on Day 1 and do they want that? (V)

Kennedy Doesn't Want to Hear from the Public on Rule Changes

For over 50 years, the Dept. of HHS has had a policy of putting out rule changes for public comment before adopting them. This allows the secretary to see how the public feels about a new rule before it goes into effect. In the event of a very negative reaction, the secretary could withdraw or modify the rule before it goes into effect. However, HHS Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr. does not give a hoot what the public thinks of his new rules, so he has canceled the policy of putting out rules for public comment. After all, he knows what is best for the nation's health, not a bunch of people that might even include a doctor or two. After all, what do doctors know about health?

Lawrence Gostin, a professor of law at Georgetown University, has said that Kennedy intends to radically transform health policy and wants to insulate himself from the consequences. Gostin said Kennedy clearly wants to ram through major policy changes to Medicaid, NIH and other areas without anyone noticing. For example, Kennedy could impose work requirements on all Medicaid recipients without telling anyone in advance of cutting off benefits for not working. Or he could radically change how NIH funds research and do it on the sly. The president of the Council on Governmental Relations, which represents research universities, criticized the change, saying that it "flies in the face of the Trump Administration's professed mandate for greater transparency." He apparently doesn't understand what transparency means. It means you can look directly at something and not see it at all because it is transparent. Needless to say, this, too, will end up in John Roberts' lap eventually. (V)

Politics Trumps Policy

With ongoing wars in Ukraine and Gaza and trouble in other hotspots, it might be useful if the U.S. had someone over at the United Nations minding the store. Donald Trump did nominate someone as ambassador to the U.N., namely Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY), but the Senate has not yet confirmed her. Do the senators doubt her qualifications? Not really. She knows nothing about foreign policy but you can see Canada from her district, and Canada is still a foreign country, for the time being. Besides, she can be counted on to hew to the Trump line unfailingly on everything.

Isn't that enough? Technically, yes. She is reasonably sane and was originally elected to the House as a normie Republican, but when Trump came along, she saw her chance and drank a gallon of the Kool-Aid. When the Senate finally gets around to voting, she will get every Republican vote and probably some Democratic votes from those Democrats who need to prove that they don't reflexively oppose everything Trump does.

So why is the Senate sitting on its collective rear end when the U.S. badly needs an ambassador to the U.N.? The answer is simple: politics. Right now the House has 218 Republicans and 215 Democrats. Two seats are vacant—those of Matt Gaetz, who was reelected but decided not to show up to be sworn in (because then the Ethics Committee would release a report on him he doesn't want released), and Michael Waltz, who resigned to be Donald Trump's NSA. This means that if any two Republicans vote no on a bill it fails. If the Senate confirms Stefanik, the score becomes 217R, 215D, so any one Republican defection would kill the measure (because the House does not have tiebreakers). That would give every one of the 217 Republicans veto power over everything. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) does not want that, so Stefanik remains in limbo and the U.S. does not have an ambassador to the U.N.

But surely, a Republican would be elected in the special election resulting from the empty seat in NY-21, an R+9 district, after Stefanik resigns? Yes, but the New York State legislature is working on a bill that could allow the governor to delay the special election until November, thus keeping Stefanik's seat vacant for months. Needless to say, Republicans are screaming bloody murder about the bill giving the governor more leeway about when to schedule the special election, but Democrats are claiming it would save the taxpayers money. The fate of the bill is still uncertain, but Senate Republicans don't want to take their chances. Consequently, Stefanik is still a representative and there is no U.S. ambassador to the U.N. (V)

Poor Texas Latinos Who Voted for Trump Have No Regrets

A week ago, we noted that at town halls, voters in some districts are unloading on Republican members of Congress in no uncertain terms. That remains true, but there are also Trump voters who don't have remorse about their votes. Politico asked a political reporter, David Siders, to travel around the country to talk to voters. One of the places he visited was Starr County, TX, on the Mexican border, which is 98% Latino, the most of any county in the country. It hadn't voted for a Republican presidential candidate since it went for Benjamin Harrison in 1892. That's the longest Democratic streak of any county in the country. Barack Obama got 85% and 86% of the vote on his two runs and Hillary Clinton got 79% in 2016. In 2024, Donald Trump carried the county with 58% of the vote. Politico naturally wanted to know what the hell was going on there, so it sent Siders down there to talk to the voters.

He got a shock. They welcomed the way Elon Musk was disemboweling the federal government. Most said that the system wasn't working, so it needed to be shaken up. One said: "DOGE is eliminating the B.S." Siders didn't press him, but our guess is that the voter doesn't have a clue who is being cut or what the consequences are. He probably also doesn't know that Texas has 130,000 civilian federal employees. He might know that a quarter of the county's population is living in poverty (under $15,000 for a single person and under $31,000 for a family of four) and thinks firing government employees will somehow fix that. Another voter said: "I don't qualify for Medicaid, so fine with me. Now they are going to feel how I feel." Many Trump supporters had not expected such an aggressive effort to dismantle the government, but they are embracing it now, partly for fiscal conservatism and partly for the ruthlessness. There was little to no remorse. They are very much hoping for the $5,000 DOGE checks Co-President Elon Musk promised them.

Trump's support, then and now, was due to rising prices and Biden's immigration policies—not the size of the federal bureaucracy. The only one of Trump's policies everyone objected to was his plan to house immigrants on the way out at Guantánamo Bay. But that is not because they have any sympathy for the immigrants. It is because Texas Land Commissioner Dawn Buckingham offered Trump 1,400 acres of land in Starr County to build a holding pen for the immigrants. That would have created jobs for construction workers at first and for guards later. Trump declined the offer. That's what angered them. (V)

---

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