THURSDAY: Once the witticisms end...

THURSDAY, JULY 16, 2026

...they turn to the evasions: We employ the moment to offer a gripe about the weekly Bruni/Stephens colloquy at the New York Times. 

This week's colloquy starts as shown. Our gripe concerns the rollicking, tongue-in-cheek, humorous back-and-forth style

Trump Is at His Wit’s End

Bret Stephens: Hi, Frank. We seem to be sliding back into war with Iran. Do you see any good outcome? Or, at least, a least-bad outcome?

Frank Bruni: Yeesh, Bret, you really know how to perk up a guy’s day, don’t you?

Bret: Would you rather discuss interest-rate policy?

Frank: In honor of “The Odyssey”—Christopher Nolan’s new movie adaptation opens this weekend—I’m going to describe that as a Scylla-and-Charybdis choice.

Bret: Listen, Penelope, your suitor is waiting for his answer.

Frank: Fine. I’ll abandon my loom long enough to give you a response. No, I don’t see any good outcome, because whatever happens over the next weeks or months can’t erase or rewrite the, um, odyssey that brought us to this wretched juncture. 

Witty opinion scribes, please! 

Do Times readers really need to be humored this way before they'll read an analysis of the claim that the sitting president is somehow "at his wit's end?"

In fairness, no one can blame Bruni for this feature's rollicking style. It came into being during the earlier weekly "Conversations" between Stephens and Gail Collins. The rollicking style was simply held over when Bruni was subbed in.

At any rate, is the president at his wit's end? And what might that whimsical claim even mean? 

Once the early joshing (largely) ends, it sounds like things are substantially worse than that! Stephens soon unloads in this straightforward manner:   

Bret: ...What isn’t solvable is an erratic president who issues threats he withdraws, signs cease-fire agreements he doesn’t appear to have read, claims he’s indifferent to political and economic considerations until he caves to both, and lacks not only a coherent strategic concept but an elementary understanding of what strategy is.   

Oof! Bruni is no less unimpressed with the sitting presidentbut an intriguing refusal lurks in this presentation:  

Frank: ...Never in the past 50 years have we seen anything from an American president like Trump’s determination to undermine voters’ faith in democracy itself, which is fine with him if it’s the only way to hold on to power and get what he wants. It’s a degree of ruthlessness and a magnitude of narcissism that add up to a kind of political sociopathy. I’ve written this before and stand by it: He’ll burn the whole thing down if that’s best for him. He’ll gladly rule over ashes, just as long as he’s the one ruling. 

Bruni is deeply unflattering too. Our comment would go like this:   

"Narcissism" is a clinical term. So is "sociopathy." 

Like Stephens, Bruni's an excellent writer. That said, has it ever occurred to him that this isn't a kind of political sociopathythat it's straight-up clinical sociopathy, a dangerous "personality disorder" the president's niece attributes to him in her best-selling 2020 book?   

These high-end scribes today! They've agreed that they'll never speak directly about any such possibility. 

They've agreed that they'll never speak directly. Promises made, promises wittily kept!


NO PEOPLE: No people are uninteresting?

THURSDAY, JULY 16, 2026

Can this possibly be what he meant? Friend, did Candidate Trump actually win the 2020 election? 

Did President Biden spend four years in the White House only because that 2020 presidential election was "rigged?"  

For the record, Candidate Trump was also President Trump at the time of the election in question. If that election was somehow "rigged," that massive fraud occurred at a time when Complainant Trump was in charge of the federal government.   

Needless to say, that doesn't mean that the election couldn't have been rigged. And as we noted in last Friday's report, many people seem to believe that it actually was.  

"No people are uninteresting?" Here's the overview of the recent survey we linked you to that day:   

Half of Republicans say the 2020 election was rigged   

This week's Economist/YouGov Poll finds sharp divides in public confidence in U.S. elections, with Democrats and Republicans holding vastly different views on the legitimacy of the 2020 election, the credibility of Donald Trump's recent election-rigging claims, and expectations for the fairness of future elections.

28% of Americans—including half (50%) of Republicans and only 9% of Democrats—believe that the 2020 presidential election was "rigged." Republicans who identify as MAGA supporters are about twice as likely as non-MAGA Republicans to think the election was rigged (66% vs. 32%). 

Many respondents told Economist/YouGov that they believe the election was rigged. According to the published internal data, that includes 53% of respondents who said that they voted for Trump.  

A nation wracked by such widespread belief comes close to no longer being a nationmight be thought of as "failed state-adjacent." In the past, we've advanced the comparison to the Oscar-nominated film, The Sixth Sense:   

A nation like that may already have ceased to exist. It just doesn't know it yet.    

Tonight, the sitting president of that nation is apparently going to go on TV and advance some form of that claim all over again. For MS NOW's report on what he's likely going to say, you can just click here.  

President Trump has been insisting that the election was rigged for almost six years now. He's never made any attempt to offer evidence in support of that claim, but he just keeps making the claimand by this time, he seems to have persuaded something like half of all Republicans.

We're prepared to believe that the sitting president may even believe his claim! That's because we assume that his niece is probably right. As we showed you yesterday, here's what she told CNN's Erin Burnett earlier in the year:

BURNETT (2/26/26): You've known him your whole life. Do you actually see a decline?

MARY TRUMP: I do, but I think it's important to remember that Donald has never been fit in any capacity. Obviously, what we're dealing with now are age-related cognitive declines. We're dealing with physical issues that the White House tries to cover over.

But this is somebody who for decades now has had serious, undiagnosed and untreated psychiatric disorders, which are only going to worsen, especially given the pressure he's under and given the cognitive and physical declines.  

"He has never been fit in any capacity," the president's niece told Burnett.

For the record, a serious, untreated "psychiatric disorder" is a serious, untreated "mental illness." And Mary L. Trump, the president's niece, is a doctorate-holding clinical therapist.  

That doesn't mean that her assessment has to be correct. But we'll guess that it most likely is.   

(We also believe that a serious mental illness is in fact a serious illness. We believe that any such serious illness is a human tragedy. Ideally, we believe the current situation should be regarded that way. That would take us well beyond the limited capacity of our mainstream press corps and of our pre-existing American discourse.)

Yesterday, in a high-profile Senate hearing, Jay Clayton couldn't quite bring himself to say that Candidate Biden won the 2020 election. Everyone within the Trump administration understands that such a thing can simply never be said.

Clayton clammed before the Senate panel. Here's another place it will never be said:    

The Five is our failing nation's most-watched "cable news" show. Its daily viewership is roughly three times as large as that of MS NOW's daily shows.

None of the panelists on The Five believe that Candidate Trump won the 2020 election. That said, Jessica Tarlov will never ask the four pro-MAGA co-hosts if they think that election was rigged. 

She will never ask them why President Trump keeps saying that the election was rigged, in the absence of any evidence in support of that claim. The Fox News Channel's very large audience will never be asked to see that question asked.

Very good salaries are slipped into pockets in service to such deceptive behaviors. On MS NOW, very good salaries are slipped into pockets as everyone agrees not to report or discuss what Mary L. Trump once again said and meant.

"No people are uninteresting?" Can any of this possibly be what Yevtushenko meant?   

Tomorrow: What Yevtushenko presumably meant


WEDNESDAY: He had permission to work in this country!

WEDNESDAY, JULY 15, 2026

But he didn't have legal status? Tomorrow, we expect to discuss the second person who recently lost his life.   

For today, we return to a bit of a technical question from this morning's report. It's a question about Johan Sebastian Guerrero, 25 years old, "always so happy and so polite," late of Biddeford, Maine.  

The question: 

Did this young man "have legal status?" That's the way the question was framed in the headline of this New York Times report.   

Did this young man "have legal status?" In this newer report in the Washington Post, it starts to look like he did:

Man killed by ICE came to Maine seeking better life for young daughter   

The woman stood in a hallway of her apartment building, pressing her hands up against a window as she took in a scene of unfathomable violence: The white Kia her partner had been driving was angled against a curb, its windshield pierced with bullets.

“Mi amor, mi amor,” she cried. His lifeless body was lying in the street. When she and her 3-year-old daughter went outside, she dropped to her knees and sobbed, witnesses said.

Her partner, 25-year-old Johan Sebastián Durán Guerrero, a Colombian citizen, was fatally shot by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer Monday morning on the block where the couple lives in this small city in southern Maine, the second deadly shooting by ICE in less than a week.

Durán entered the United States via the southern border in September 2023, a Department of Homeland Security spokesperson said in a statement, and received work authorization in May 2025. 

According to the DHS, he received authorization to work in this country as of May of last year. Forgive us for being simple-minded, but if the federal government has conferred that status on someone, it's hard to see how the recipient can be said to be in the country illegally.   

That's how it seems to us! But thanks to the phenomenon we've described as "the complexification of everything," there was room in the Post's report for this additional copy:

ICE enforcement and removal officers appeared to be looking for someone else. They were conducting surveillance at the last known address of an undocumented immigrant who was subject to a final deportation order, an agency spokesperson said. 

But Durán was not the person they were looking for, Sen. Angus King (I-Maine) said in several interviews.

[...]

In a statement, a DHS spokesperson said that Durán did not have legal status in the U.S. Durán likely received work authorization while seeking asylum, an immigration lawyer who reviewed the DHS statement said.  

Say what? Speaking directly to the language which appeared in the New York Times headline, a DHS spokesperson is now quoted saying that he didn't "have legal status." The Post then repeats the fact that he did have permission to work!

He'd been given permission to work in this country. (Also, it seems, to seek formal asylum.) But that certainly doesn't mean that he was in southern Maine legally!

Should the Post have tried to straighten this out? Yes, we think they should have. But so it goes in tongue-tied modern cultures driven by an instinct for various forms of mumble-mouthed verbal complexification.   

We humans! Within the modern American context, discussion of almost every major issue is clouded by this instinct. 

A wide array of murky formulations may seem to clash with each other. Attention doesn't get paid. Tribal propagandists may repeat only the formulations which support the political outcomes preferred by their own infernal tribe.   

He had permission to work, but not to be here! As we've noted in the past:

We humans are skilled at building tall buildings, less skilled at everything else.

With apologies, this: "Philosophical problems arise when language goes on holiday." 

This case isn't really the sort of thing the later Wittgenstein was talking about, bit it almost comes somewhat close.

NO PEOPLE...: "They were always so happy and so polite!"

WEDNESDAY, JULY 15, 2026

What the neighbor said: "They were always so happy and so polite," their neighbor in Biddeford, Maine has now said.   

They were a husband and wife and a 3-year-old child. The New York Times is reporting the neighbor's recollection in yesterday's news report:   

Colombian Immigrant Killed by ICE in Maine Had Legal Status, Father Says

The father of a Colombian immigrant shot and killed by a federal agent in Maine on Monday described him as “a good person raised with strong values,” who worked two jobs to support his wife and 3-year-old daughter.

“He had a great vision for getting ahead, so many dreams to fulfill,” Omar Duran, the father of Joan Sebastian Guerrero, told Noticias Caracol, a Colombian news outlet, on Tuesday, speaking in Spanish. “My son is a wonderful son—I don’t know why they did that to him.”

Mr. Guerrero, 25, lived in Biddeford, a small city south of Portland, where he worked as a food delivery driver and a late-night cleaner at a veterinary clinic. Mr. Duran said his son was in the United States legally.

[...]

“They were always so happy and so polite,” Don Gregoire, 69, a hairstylist, said of Mr. Guerrero and his wife. “I’d be watering my flowers in front of the house, and they would stop and say, ‘Very nice flowers.’ And their little girl would wave.”  

Did the deceased "have legal status?" As far as we know, that still isn't clear. It's also true that many people seem to have learned, in the past eighteen months, that "legal status" under one president may suddenly be something different under the subsequent president.   

“They were always so happy and so polite,” their neighbor has told the Times. Polite may often follow from happy, and it's good to be happy and young. 

Hemingway wrote about happy and young in his beautiful recollection, A Moveable Feast. In its original version, the memoir ends with this:  

A Moveable Feast

[...] 

This is never any ending to Paris and the memory of each person who has lived in it differs from that of any other. We always returned to it no matter who we were or how it was changed or with what difficulties, or ease, it could be reached. Paris was always worth it and you received return for whatever you brought to it. But this is how Paris was in the early days when we were very poor and very happy.   

That's the memoir's final paragraph. Until the sudden astonishing end of the story, he and Hadley were poor and happy, and they were very young.   

No people are uninteresting, Yevtushenko said. We came upon his poem in a book, way back when we ourselves were somewhat younger. When we first read it, we found it deeply moving in a way we still do, though we still can't begin to say why.   

No people are uninteresting! We'll change one word in the translation as we recall the way the poem starts:

People   

No people are uninteresting.
Their fate is like the chronicle of planets
Nothing in them is not particular,
and planet is dissimilar from planet.
And if a [person] lived in obscurity
making his friends in that obscurity
obscurity is not uninteresting.

Or if a person lived "in obscurity" complimenting his neighbor's flowers as he walked down the street with his wife and his 3-year-old child.  

(Many people in southern Maine grow flowers in their shorter, cooler summers. We've seen it with our own eyes.)   

No people are uninteresting! Presumably, Yevtushenko was thinking of the millions lost under Stalin, or of the tens of thousands of men, women and childrennone of them uninterestingmassacred at Babi Yar.   

Presumably, that's who he mainly had in mind. Presumably, though, he was also thinking of this young couple in Maine, and of their 3-year-old child.   

That said:   

Can it possibly be true? In the simplest colloquial sense, can it be true that no people are uninteresting? None of us people at all?

How about the furious fellow whose video rant was recently reposted by the sitting president? As we noted yesterday afternoon, the 49-minute rant started off like this:   

DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISM MUST BE CRIMINALIZED; LEADERS DEPORTED  

Right now in America, politically, we are in the late stage of the disease of Communism. The smirking con man from Uganda had the audacity to sit behind George Washington's desk in New York City the other day, basically declaring a revolution on America, surrounded by no Americans, none of them were citizens. 

These were all invaders.  

I'm going to tell you a story today about a little man, just like this smirking bastard in New York City, named Pol Pot...  

And so on from there. For the record, this man chose "Savage" as his pen name. Over the weekend, the sitting president chose to report his 49-minute rant on his own Truth Social site.

At this site, we're willing to wait to see how Mayor Mamdani's tenure turns out. According to the furious Michael Savage, the mayor is a "smirking bastard"a smirking con man from Ugandawho is planning to oversee the slaughter of millions of people, just as Pol Pot did.  

No people are uninteresting? Does Michael Savage count? And how about the high official who chose to repost that rant?  

Regarding the high official in question, we've suggested that it would be effective politics, and more accurate on the merits, to pity him for his "mental disorders." 

We've suggested that a (serious) mental illness is, in fact, an illness. We've also said that we would guess that his niece's assessment is right:   

BURNETT (2/26/26): You've known him your whole life. Do you actually see a decline?

MARY TRUMP: I do, but I think it's important to remember that Donald has never been fit in any capacity. Obviously, what we're dealing with now are age-related cognitive declines. We're dealing with physical issues that the White House tries to cover over.

But this is somebody who for decades now has had serious, undiagnosed and untreated psychiatric disorders, which are only going to worsen, especially given the pressure he's under and given the cognitive and physical declines.   

For the longer exchange with CNN's Erin Burnett, you can just click here.

In the passage posted above, Mary Trump said her uncle is experiencing an obvious cognitive decline, layered atop decades of untreated psychiatric disorders. She went into much more detail in her best-selling 2020 family memoir, Too Much and Never Enough

"No people are uninteresting?" As he blusters and keeps changing his mind, does her uncle count?    

The so-called democratization of mediathe rise in technologies which Jeffrey Rosen has now discussedhas brought many savage voices into the public square. At present, we'd say that most of these voices come from Red America, but those of us in Blue America have our own decidedly mixed track record.   

Is there a way to get out of this messa way "back out of all this now too much for us?" For today, we'll return to what one Maine resident said:   

"They were always so happy and so polite." 

They were always so happy and so polite! So how do we deal with this mess?

Tomorrow: Additional people

TUESDAY: Nutball calls for deportations!

TUESDAY, JULY 14, 2026

President follows suit: With respect to calls to arms by the sitting president, it just was another day ending a Y. 

That said, we'd describe the Truth Social post in question as the fruit of normalization. 

When the sitting president floats suggestions like the one described below, no one says a word about it at this point in time. No one bats an eye. 

A society like that has given up. Somewhat imprecisely, Mediaite's Sean James starts to explain:

Trump Boosts Right-Wing Pundit Calling for ‘Hardcore Communist Bastards’ Like Mamdani to Be Deported

President Donald Trump shared a video on Sunday from conservative pundit Michael Savage calling for the U.S. to criminalize and deport “hardcore communist bastards” like New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani (D).

Trump posted the video on Truth Social as he has been ripping socialism and communism over the last month. The president continued that trend this weekend with a few posts on Truth Social where he warned Democrats they were stupidly letting “unattractive” socialists like Mamdani—and several other democratic socialist candidates who won primaries recently—“take over” the party.

Savage went even further in the searing 49-minute rant that Trump posted on Sunday.  

Say what? The president posted a videotape calling for the mayor of New York City to be deported? 

At present, we're forced to say that it seems that he did! But here's the way the Savage podcast starts, title included:   

DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISM MUST BE CRIMINALIZED; LEADERS DEPORTED  

Right now in America, politically, we are in the late stage of the disease of Communism. The smirking con man from Uganda had the audacity to sit behind George Washington's desk in New York City the other day, basically declaring a revolution on America, surrounded by no Americans, none of them were citizens. 

These were all invaders.  

 I'm going to tell you a story today about a little man just like this smirking bastard in New York City named Pol Pot...  

That's the start of a 49-minute podcast. The tape was reposted by the sitting president on his Truth Social site. 

Savage was talking about Mayor Mamdani's July 4 address. As he starts, he refers to Mamdani as "the smirking bastard in New York City." He also says that Mamdani is "just like Pol Pot."   

For what it's worth, we thought the tone of the mayor's July 4 address was perhaps a bit off-putting. Opinions will differ on that.

Opinions will differ about the tone of the holiday address. But just to establish the factual record, Mamdani was "flanked by [ten] newly naturalized US citizens" as he spokeand that's the New York Post we're quoting, not some "lunatic lefty" rag.   

The New York Post (correctly) described the onlookers as citizens. To Savage, they were something different. To Savage, they were "invaders."   

In what world has it ceased to be news when a sitting president posts something like that on an official site? It has ceased to be news in the world in which we all fitfully dwell, waiting for the president's formal address to the nation this Thursday night.

As he continues his report for Mediaite, James offers a further account of the podcast the president chose to repost:

[continuing directly from Mediaite report]
The veteran radio host said Americans should not be fooled by Mamdani—whom he called a “smirking bastard”—and the other democratic socialists who are rising through the Democratic ranks.

Savage argued those candidates may talk about turning the U.S. into a socialist utopia by launching a bunch of “free” programs, but in reality they are more like Pol Pot—the communist leader who engineered the Cambodian genocide that killed 1.5 million to 2 million people.

“That is exactly what Mamdani and the Democratic Socialists will do to you,” Savage said. “Forget the smirks, forget the smiles, forget the b*llshit that it’s like Denmark and Norway. These are hardcore communist bastards who must be stopped, criminalized and deported. I’m clear as a bell on this.”   

We haven't watched the full tape yet. Based on what we've seen, we'll guess that James's account of the material Trump will turn out to be all too accurate.   

The sitting president reposted the Savage tape. "Nothing to look at," our Blue news orgs said.  

Conduct like this on the part of the president was normalized a long time ago. This is a note about a land which has possibly, without even knowing it, already become a failed state.


NO PEOPLE...: Flipped on Biden, fell in with Trump!

TUESDAY, JULY 14, 2026

Of whom, what did we know? "No people are uninteresting," Yevtushenko said (in translation). 

The poem in question starts off like this:  

People   

No people are uninteresting.
Their fate is like the chronicle of planets.

Nothing in them is not particular,
and planet is dissimilar from planet.
And if a man lived in obscurity
making his friends in that obscurity
obscurity is not uninteresting.
To each his world is private,
and in that world one excellent minute.
And in that world one tragic minute.
These are private.   

To this day, we don't know why we find those lines so moving. But they hit us that way every time.

For each person, those moments are private! Then too, there are the people who largely live their lives in in the public sphere. Of whom, what do we really know?  

[continuing from above]  
In any man who dies there dies with him
his first snow and kiss and fight.
It goes with him.
There are left books and bridges
and painted canvas and machinery.
Whose fate is to survive.
But what has gone is also not nothing:
by the rule of the game something has gone.
Not people die but worlds die in them.
Whom we knew as faulty, the earth’s creatures
Of whom, essentially, what did we know?  

Of whom, what did we know?   

In the first hour of today's Morning Joe, Mike Barnicle expressed a bit of puzzlement about the late Lindsey Graham. He referred to Graham's videotaped statement about Joe Biden, the remarkable statement we quoted in full in yesterday's report.

At the time, Biden was sitting vice president. This morning, here's what Barnicle said:  

BARNICLE (7/14/26): He once said, about Joe Biden, that if you could meet a personthat God never created a better person than Joe Biden. And yet he said some horrible things about Biden during Biden's presidency, and just quite recently. And I've never been able to juggle that. 

What went on in Lindsey's head?   

"Access to power," Joe Scarborough saidand he said that Graham would admit it. 

Scarborough knew Graham better than most. That dated to their entry into the House in 1995, following the 1994 wave election which gave the GOP control of the chamber for the first time in forty years.

Speaking this morning to Barnicle, Scarborough said he could never understand Graham's decision to be "a shapeshifter" (Scarborough's term). But he also said this:

"You can trace the fall of the Republican Party" to Graham's peregrination from a feisty opponent of Speaker Gingrich to an admiring sidekick to John McCain, then on to his role as a prime supporter of President Trump, who he had once denounced.   

For the record, that "fall of the party" leaves President Trump in place in the White House. No one has the slightest idea what may be planned for this fall's elections There will be more than two years of his presidency left after that, and no one has the slightest idea what those years might hold.

"No people are uninteresting?" We're going to guess that what you see in this report isn't what Yevtushenko meant:   

Trump Will Use Primetime Speech to Claim Newly-Declassified Intel Reveals Foreign Plot...

President Donald Trump will reportedly use his primetime address on Thursday night to push specific new claims that the 2020 election was stolen from him.

On Monday afternoon, Trump announced on Truth Social that he’d be giving a Thursday speech... 

On Deadline: White House, MS NOW’s Nicolle Wallace revealed Trump’s speech would focus on the six-year-old election—citing a report from the network’s Jake Traylor. Specifically, the president will reportedly point to newly-declassified reports he claims will show foreign interference in the 2020 election.   

That isn't quite what Traylor's report actually said, but it's in the ballpark. Traylor's report came in the form of a tweet. You can read it here.  

"No people are uninteresting?" Some people are dangerousyou might say potentially menacing. 

If Traylor's report is correct, the sitting president is gathering the nation on Thursday night to advance his obsessive belief about the 2020 election again. 

No people are uninteresting? On this campus, we're inclined to assume that the sitting president is (clinically) delusional. We further assume that we're describing a tragic but dangerous state of affairs.  

Back in 2015, Lindsey Graham said that God never made a better person than Biden. He also said this, near the end of that year, during an appearance on CNN:  

GRAHAM (12/16/15): I want to talk to the Trump supporters for a minute. I don’t know who you are, and I don't know why you like this guy....

Here’s what you’re buying: He’s a race-baiting, xenophobic religious bigot. He doesn’t represent my party. He doesn't represent the values that the men and women who wear the uniform are fighting for.  

"Yet scarcely two months after Mr. Trump’s inauguration [for his first term], a grinning Mr. Graham could be found in the office of the White House press secretary, Sean Spicer, chatting with Kellyanne Conway, one of the president’s top advisers," the New York Times later reported.  

In November 2020, he was on the phone to Brad Raffensperger in Georgia, assisting Trump in questioning Candidate Biden's win in the state. On January 6, 2021, there was his instant denunciation of that day's attack, followed by a fairly speedy reversal.

Thursday night, the president's delusion may be back, at the heart of a national address. No one knows what may be planned for the days and years to come.

Senator Graham died this weekend. Of whom, what did we know?