I know there has been a lot of bad press about Crockett but when you look into them it is drummed up fake news stuff. Maybe because as this video hints at because she is a black woman running for office in Texas. I agree with him about her and I have watched her at hearing. I would love her to win. Learn facts over the noise so we can move to a progressive future. Hugs
As I said if they pass this I an a ton of other married people cannot vote. There is no time to get a passport, and there is no provision in either law for a maded marriage license acceptance so you can vote. Well unlike the federal bill this one allows a driver’s license as proof, and as I have one of those I might still get to vote. But if they strip it out to mirror the federal bill I lose the right to vote again. It is republicans showing how desperate they are to win when they are so unpopular that they need to rig and steal the elections. However there was voter fraud in Florida in the 2024 election, all citizens republicans who voted more than once for tRump, stole mail in ballots to vote for tRump, or ass one mail man did he threw away mail in voting from known democratic areas. Hugs
The Florida vote comes two weeks after the U.S. House of Representatives passed the SAVE America Act, a landmark bill that would require Americans to provide proof of citizenship to register to vote and photo ID to cast their vote. If adopted, the bill would likely prevent millions of Americans from voting.
“What this legislation actually does is to prevent eligible U.S. citizens from voting,” Kanter Cohen said, “and that’s really the key issue.”
a current Florida driver’s license
In lockstep with the Trump administration, Florida Republicans say they are pushing the legislation to crack down on voting by noncitizens – despite the fact that election audits have repeatedly shown that illegal noncitizen voting is extremely rare. But the party continues to ignore those findings, using the myth of noncitizen voting as a tool to pass restrictive legislation aimed at creating more barriers to voting.
In other states, similar proof of citizenship laws have prevented tens of thousands of citizens from voting. But in Florida, with 13 million voters on the rolls, the scale could turn out to be even greater.
The Florida House of Representatives voted 83-31 Wednesday to move forward with a sweeping voter suppression bill that could disenfranchise tens of thousands of Floridians, at least, by creating new requirements for citizenship checks.
The alarming legislation represents the state-level component of a national Republican effort to make voting more difficult for American citizens.
Under the Florida House bill, residents wouldn’t be able to register to vote unless the state Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles database can verify their citizenship, or until the applicant provides proof of citizenship. The bill would also require the state to verify the citizenship status of all existing registered voters whose legal status has not already been verified.
State Rep. RaShon Young (D) said the legislation would have serious consequences for Floridians.
“This is fearmongering and disenfranchisement and voter suppression dressed up as security,” he said. “This is modern day gatekeeping and bureaucratic obstruction, administrative overreach and poll tax by paperwork.”
The Florida vote comes two weeks after the U.S. House of Representatives passed the SAVE America Act, a landmark bill that would require Americans to provide proof of citizenship to register to vote and photo ID to cast their vote. If adopted, the bill would likely prevent millions of Americans from voting.
But the SAVE America Act is expected to face an uphill battle in the Senate, leading some state legislatures to attempt to pass their own versions.
Florida could be the latest to join other GOP-controlled states that have enacted similar state-level proof of citizenship laws like Arizona, New Hampshire, Louisiana, Wyoming, Indiana and Ohio. More states are currently considering similar legislation, including Utah, South Dakota and Missouri.
But the bills haven’t been successful everywhere. Texas failed to pass a proof of citizenship bill last year.
The Florida legislation closely mirrors the federal measure, according to Michelle Kanter Cohen, policy director and senior counsel for the national voting rights group Fair Elections Center.
“This would do a lot of the same things, in terms of preventing American citizens from voting who don’t have access to documentary proof of citizenship documents,” Kanter Cohen said.
The Florida House version of the bill would only go into effect in January 2027. But under a similar bill set for consideration in the Florida Senate, the new rules would take effect this July, before the November midterm elections. A House committee already gave preliminary approval to the bill earlier this month.
“What this legislation actually does is to prevent eligible U.S. citizens from voting,” Kanter Cohen said, “and that’s really the key issue.”
The timing of the proposal – as Congress considers a similar federal measure – is no coincidence. The Florida bill could be an effort to align state policies with the proposed federal restrictions to provide consistent rules for running elections, she said.
Under the bill approved by the House, Floridians whose citizenship status cannot be verified by the state would need to provide evidence of U.S. citizenship, including: a current U.S. passport, a U.S. birth certificate, a consular report of birth abroad, a current Florida driver’s license or Florida identification card that indicates U.S. citizenship, a naturalization certificate, a current photo identification issued by the federal or state government that indicates U.S. citizenship, or a federal court order granting U.S. citizenship.
In lockstep with the Trump administration, Florida Republicans say they are pushing the legislation to crack down on voting by noncitizens – despite the fact that election audits have repeatedly shown that illegal noncitizen voting is extremely rare. But the party continues to ignore those findings, using the myth of noncitizen voting as a tool to pass restrictive legislation aimed at creating more barriers to voting.
“The last thing someone who is on a path to citizenship would want to do is to jeopardize their naturalization by voting illegally,” Kanter Cohen said. “And so people don’t do that. That’s not something that’s happening because it has such dire consequences.”
Florida already has systems in place for investigating and prosecuting the small number of noncitizens who register to vote in the state. Last year, Florida found 198 “likely noncitizens who illegally registered and/or voted in Florida” out of the more than 13 million people on its voter rolls, according to a report from the state’s Office of Election Crimes and Security. The office referred 170 of them to law enforcement.
The Florida measure could disenfranchise tens of thousands of voters — including Republicans — to combat these miniscule amounts of possible illegal voting.
Married women of all political affiliations who have changed their last names could be among the most impacted by the legislation. If the voter’s legal name is different from the name on their citizenship document – such as their birth certificate – then the voter would need to provide official documentation providing proof of a legal name change.
The bill also would eliminate some identification documents voters can use to verify their identity at the polls. Floridians would no longer be able to use a debit or credit card, student identification, or retirement center, neighborhood association or public assistance identification.
In other states, similar proof of citizenship laws have prevented tens of thousands of citizens from voting. But in Florida, with 13 million voters on the rolls, the scale could turn out to be even greater.
‘The Special Relationship only exists when the Americans want something,’ a former Downing Street aide observed after Donald Trump rejected the Chagos Islands deal. There are profound differences between London and Washington over military action against Iran while the fourth anniversary of the war in Ukraine this week has exposed further fault lines. The result is that Anglo-American relations are at their worst point since the general election.
Starmer’s team argues he should not be ousted at a time of huge international instability. But the reality of the Anglo-American relationship raises three questions. Where did things go wrong? Does the PM still have some kind of relationship with Trump? And would it matter if he were replaced by Angela Rayner, Wes Streeting or anyone else?
The PM apparently hates the way Trump calls him at random when he is with his family
During the first 18 months of his premiership, it became accepted, correctly I think, that one of the few areas where Starmer excelled was foreign affairs. He seemed particularly good at handling the often capricious President. But it is also true that the two great cleavages of recent weeks – Iran and Chagos – are intimately tied to Starmer’s personal fetish for subordinating the sovereignty of parliament to international law.
If the Prime Minister believes in anything, it is that the web of international treaties constructed to constrain rogue states after the second world war overrides domestic law. His appointment of Richard Hermer as his Attorney General was proof that this would form the backbone of his premiership.
Hermer’s numerous legal opinions flow from this belief in the primacy of international law: that Britain must not support an American attack on Tehran and must not allow America to use British air bases for the attacks. This is what prompted Trump to change his mind on the Chagos deal, by which Britain would cede control of the islands to Mauritius and then lease back British airbases which America also uses.
My understanding is that the US has not made a specific request to use the base for an Iranian operation, nor has the UK explicitly rejected the idea. However, ‘general soundings’ have made clear what the answer would be. Insiders say that Starmer and Hermer’s approach is no different from what any other PM would do. The belief in government is that allowing the US to use our bases without legal backing ‘smells like Iraq’.
This has outraged Team Trump. ‘It’s just not how they roll,’ says one insider who has dealt with the Americans. ‘Their risk spectrum is significantly different. International law, due legal process – they don’t give a shit about that.’ Privately there have been threats that the US will not be there in Britain’s hour of need. The Iran decision led directly to Trump pulling the plug on Chagos. Those who deal with the Trumpies say there is no point ‘continually making the same argument’ and the deal is now ‘in the medium-length grass’.
However, by far the bigger issue is Ukraine and that is where Starmer has deployed most of his capital with Trump. The President and his envoy Steve Witkoff began with a fundamentally misguided understanding of the conflict. ‘All of them basically come back to this belief that it’s about territory, that peace is a real estate deal,’ one insider said. On calls with British officials, Witkoff openly ridiculed the French for saying ‘root causes’ were behind Vladimir Putin’s invasion. ‘He would mock the idea that if there’s peace, the Russians will just rearm and be a threat to Europe.’
The view of Britain’s political and military leaders is quite different after four years of working closely with the Ukrainians. ‘There is a whole generation of Europeans who have made the trip to Kyiv and it feels like the most meaningful thing they’re doing in their political careers,’ a diplomat says.
The key achievement of the Starmer government, in this telling, is that ‘we have persuaded the Americans to listen to us’. A senior adviser says: ‘People are saying that Starmer’s foreign policy is a failure because of Chagos. But if you look at Ukraine, it’s been a success.’
Intercepted phone calls and messages from senior Russians ridiculing Trump have been shared by the British with the Americans. ‘We have continually shown them intelligence that shows the Russians are lying,’ a senior security source revealed. ‘The Russians are privately mocking Trump over his naivety about Putin’s intentions. Putin doesn’t want to end the war.’
‘Of course, he’s always denied any wrongdoing.’
Yvette Cooper, the new Foreign Secretary, spent an hour last week with Marco Rubio, US Secretary of State. But the four key relationships that have moved the dial are Starmer and Trump; David Lammy and Vice President J.D. Vance; the US embassy in Washington, which enjoys closer ties to the White House than any other D.C. diplomats; and, most important, Jonathan Powell, the national security adviser, and Witkoff.
Henry Kissinger is said to have asked: ‘Who do I call if I want to call Europe?’ Now a senior member of the Trump administration refers to Powell as ‘dean of the European national security advisers’. A Foreign Office source concludes that if there is regime change in London: ‘The one relationship I fear might be irreplaceable is Jonathan Powell and Witkoff.’
Opinions are divided about whether Starmer’s departure would make any difference. The PM apparently hates the way Trump calls him at random when he is with his family but he has built a ‘load-bearing relationship’ with the President. This is based, in part, on the fact that both have lost brothers. In their first meal together, Trump interrupted a conversation about tariffs to ask if Starmer’s brother had ‘a good death’, genuinely troubled by his loss.
But those who want Starmer gone will agree with the official who says: ‘Trump’s mum was British. He loves the UK and he views having a great relationship with the PM as part of his job.’
Diplomats doubt that any new leader would be given the same space by Labour MPs to develop ties with Trump. But that is another reason why foreign policy will not save Starmer. As one MP puts it: ‘If Keir thinks sucking up to Trump is the argument which saves him, he is going to be in for a rude shock.’
The SAVE Act appears to be dead, at least for now.
Trump wanted his party to enact the SAVE Act because it was supposed to make it more difficult for citizens he thinks are Democrats to vote: Its strict ID requirements would have impacted poor people, elderly people, students, married women, and others.
Although Trump pushed hard for its passage, most recently during the State of the Union address, enough Senate Republicans defected to make passage a possibility too remote to pursue. Republicans attempted a “talking filibuster” to get the bill across the finish line, but the procedural unity that would have required failed to materialize. Per Punchbowl News, North Carolina’s Thom Tillis, Utah’s John Curtis, Kentucky’s Mitch McConnell, Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski, and possibly others who weren’t named broke ranks.
It’s a major loss for the president.
There is also good news out of Fulton County, Georgia.
Instead of the hearing we were expecting on the County officials’ request to have their 600 boxes of election records restored to them this Friday, we got an order from Judge J.P. Boulee.
The County officials asked the Judge to use Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41 to restore their property to them. That rule permits: “A person aggrieved by an unlawful search and seizure of property or by the deprivation of property may move for the property’s return.” Judge Boulee set forth the four requirements for establishing that the moving party is entitled to have their items returned:
(1) the government displayed a “callous disregard” for the plaintiff’s constitutional rights;
(2) the plaintiff has an individual interest in and need for the material whose return he seeks;
(3) the plaintiff would be irreparably injured by denial of the return of the property; and
(4) the plaintiff does not have an adequate remedy at law absent the Rule 41 proceeding.
The Judge pointed out that a successful Rule 41 proceeding would not deprive the government of the use of evidence for lawful purposes. If returned, the County would be required to preserve the documents for the government’s later use—a requirement that it is already subject to, because these are election records that must be maintained.
The Judge noted his obligation to hear testimony and take evidence if he was ultimately called upon to decide the dispute. That’s something that DOJ might be eager to avoid, given the apparent irregularities in their process, which saw the head of the Atlanta FBI office step aside and a U.S. Attorney from Missouri, instead of the one in Atlanta, handle the matter. He then gave the government an out: “the Court believes it is best for the parties to work toward a mutually agreeable resolution before receiving additional evidence.” He gave them until March 4 to agree on a mediator and until the 18th to report back on whether the mediation succeeds.
It’s a strong move from the Judge. He declines to rule on whether the County officials can meet the high standard for proof under Rule 41. But the fact that he hasn’t denied their request out of hand and is treating it this seriously strongly suggests to the government where this is headed if they don’t reach a deal to return the records to the County. Rule 41 proceedings don’t usually make it this far, and the government has to be concerned that’s a very bad sign for them. The risk that they will still have to return the items they seized pursuant to a court order, and that all of their maneuvering will be publicly exposed in the process, is substantial.
There’s a subtle additional benefit here. The subtext has always been that this process, designed to cast doubt on election officials in the County (even though recounts and court cases confirmed the outcome), was designed to permit Republicans who control the state legislature to take over elections. It will be much more difficult for them to proceed while this process lingers, so a delay of even a couple of weeks, with the elections drawing ever closer, isn’t a bad thing.
And finally, a caution.
The Washington Post reported this morning that “Pro-Trump activists who say they are in coordination with the White House are circulating a 17-page draft executive order that claims China interfered in the 2020 election as a basis to declare a national emergency that would unlock extraordinary presidential power over voting.”
Of course, at the time, and with Trump officials in place running cybersecurity, there was a different message. In a Joint Statement, the National Coordinator for Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience CISA, the Election Infrastructure Government Coordinating Council (GCC), and the Election Infrastructure Sector Coordinating Council (SCC), reported that “The November 3rd election was the most secure in American history . … There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised … While we know there are many unfounded claims and opportunities for misinformation about the process of our elections … we have the utmost confidence in the security and integrity of our elections, and you should too.” Chris Krebs, Trump’s Director at CISA, told 60 Minutes that “[Election] Day was quiet. There was no indication or evidence that there was any evidence of hacking or compromise of election systems on, before, or after November 3 … We did a good job. I would do it one thousand times over.”
Beyond that, a 2021 intelligence review concluded that China did not engage in efforts to influence the 2020 election. There were multiple audits and recounts, court rulings, and investigations without any finding of widespread fraud. There was no evidence of coordinated foreign interference.
So we all get it. It’s another ginned-up emergency. There wasn’t an outbreak of irrepressible crime on American streets that necessitated the federalization and deployment of the National Guard. Trump made that up. A Venezuelan gang, Tren de Aragua, wasn’t invading the United States. Trump made that up. There wasn’t a balance of payments problem that warranted the imposition of exceptional tariffs. Trump made that up. And there’s not an emergency involving our elections that means Trump should take control of them. He’s making that up too—to the extent that there’s an emergency, he’s the cause of it.
The order Trump’s election denier buddies are pushing would use the supposed China emergency as the reason to declare yet another national emergency. The Post’s reporting suggests they will claim that permits them to “mandate voter ID, ban mail ballots, and change voting machines in November’s midterm elections.” How convenient—all the stuff they want to do, but can’t, because the law doesn’t permit it or Congress won’t pass laws authorizing it, tied up with a nice, neat bow into another one of those “uh oh—emergency, so I can claim extraordinary powers” executive orders Trump has become so fond of using.
The reality is that the president lacks constitutional authority to control elections. The Constitution gives that authority to the states. Even if Trump declared another national emergency, there is no basis for the assertion it would permit him to seize control of the elections. All this plot shows is that Trump lacks confidence in his party’s ability to win the midterm elections.
The election deniers are back in the White House and hard at work, as they were in 2020, to try and prevent American voters from determining the outcome of this year’s elections. Just like it did in 2020, the rule of law will prevail here.
Pro-voter lawyers will go to court if Trump tries to implement this kind of desperate attempt to rig the election. And they will win. Even the Supreme Court has ruled against Trump, now in both the National Guard and in the tariffs cases, when he attempted to drum up fake emergencies to justify his assumption of exceptional powers. Nothing is certain with this Court, but district court judges who are increasingly taking this administration to task and holding it to account are likely to pave a smooth path. And working against the administration is the clear fact that the greatest threat to free and fair elections isn’t China, non-citizens, or Democrats—it’s this president and his cronies.
For years, I’ve been working to educate the public on the fact that voter fraud isn’t the problem—all of the evidence is to the contrary. The real issue is Republicans who use false or dramatically overblown claims of fraud to suppress the vote, and keep eligible citizens from voting. Let’s stay informed and make sure they don’t get away with that this year.
Donald Trump’s ICE is doing exactly what he wants. And now they are holding a political prisoner for nearly a year in an ICE detention camp simply because 33-year-old Leqaa Kordia dared to champion views the Trump regime opposes. This should concern all Americans especially given the recent warning from concentration camp expert Andrea Pitzer—who explained on my SiriusXM show that history tells the Trump regime building massive ICE detention camps will ultimately be used to imprison political prisoners.
That should not be a surprise to anyone who follows the history of fascist and other right wing regimes. Trump is following the fascist playbook, complete with his own secret police that has terrorized and even killed Americans who defy him. The most glaring example being the murder of Renee Good and Alex Pretti—who were then smeared by Trump officials as “domestic terrorists.”
Shockingly, we just learned that Trump’s ICE shot and killed another US citizen, 23 year old Ruben Ray Martinez, almost a year ago in March of 2025. However, Trump’s secret police covered up their involvement until recent media reports broke the story open. The details surrounding the murder of Martinez–who worked at Amazon–are simply unbelievable with ICE claiming that for some unknown reason this young man with no criminal record suddenly used his car to attack ICE officers.
Beyond that ICE has terrorized American citizens who dared film them—which they are legally entitled to—assaulted protesters and engaged in conduct consistent with an occupying army, not federal agents.
But it’s not ICE acting as a rogue agency—Trump wants them to do this. Trump—like Putin– wants to silence dissent as we’ve seen with his regime targeting all who oppose him from comedians like Jimmy Kimmel to seeking to criminally charge and imprison six Democratic members of Congress for warning members of the military to not follow illegal orders. A grand jury blocked that–at least for now.
That is why the case Leqaa Kordia demands far more attention given it’s a sneak preview of what we can expect from Trump for not just immigrants–but also U.S. citizens. Leqaa is a 33-year-old Palestinian woman with family in Gaza and the United States. Her mother is a US citizen living in Paterson, New Jersey—which is where Leqaa was staying and working as a waitress until she taken by ICE.
Leqaa Kordia
Kordia—who came to the US in 2016 on a student visa and was in the process of seeking permanent residence status via her mother –has no criminal record. The diminutive woman poses no threat to anyone. But to the Trump regime she is dangerous because she participated in peaceful protests advocating for Palestinian humanity. In the case, of Leqaa this issue is very personal in that she has lost nearly 200 relatives in Gaza.
But Leqaa’s case is not about Palestine—nor it is about Israel. Rather, it’s about freedom of speech—and the Trump’s regime targeting those who dare defy them.
How this case began was that in March of 2025, ICE informed Leqaa they wanted to speak to her. In response, she voluntarily appeared at the ICE office in Newark, New Jersey–where she was quickly arrested, thrown into an unmarked van and sent 1,500 miles away to the Prairieland Detention Facility in Texas far from her lawyer and family.
Since then, she has been detained in horrific conditions. As Leqaa detailed in a recent op-ed, the ICE facility she has been held in for nearly a year “is filthy, overcrowded and inhumane.” She slept in a plastic shell “surrounded by cockroaches and only a thin blanket.” And the food quality is so atrocious, it has caused her to vomit resulting in significant weight loss.
Worse, just a few weeks ago she experienced the first seizure of her life, collapsing to the floor. From there, ICE transported her to a hospital where her wrists and legs shackled to her bed for the three days. As she put it, “The entire time I was chained…I felt like an animal.” And simply to be cruel, ICE refused to tell her lawyers or family where she was or her medical condition.
None of this should be happening. As her lawyer Amal Thabateh explained to me, two different immigration judges ruled that Leqaa should be released on bond. But the Trump regime instead invoked a little used procedure to keep her in detention open ended.
To do that, serial liar DHS Secretary Kristi Noem smeared Leqaa as being a “terrorist” sympathizer for expressing concern for Palestinians in Gaza. They even claimed that releasing Leqaa—who again has no criminal record and was living with her US citizen mother in New Jersey–was somehow a threat to our nation. Of course, this is the same Noem who smeared with lies Renee Good and Alex Pretti as “terrorists” to justify their murders so we know she will say anything to defend the Trump regime’s crimes against humanity.
The idea Leqaa is a political prisoner is not just my view. Amnesty International lists her on their website demanding that the US government “release detained protester.” Her case is in the same section on the Amnesty website where they are calling for the release of dissidents in Russia, Belarus and other authoritarian regimes. This is where our nation is now viewed by human rights organizations.
Deeply alarming is that these ICE dentition centers are increasingly become death camps. At least 32 people died in ICE custody in 2025—the highest number in two decades. And in the past six weeks, six people have died in ICE custody including one man killed by ICE agents as they were restraining him. Will anyone be held accountable for this man’s death? That is like asking will anyone be held accountable for the death of Russian dissident Alexei Navalny killed in a Russian prison two years ago. We know that no one will be prosecuted because Russia is an authoritarian nation. As disturbing as it sounds, so is the United States under Trump.
But for those who refuse to submit to Trump and want to stand up for freedom of speech, I hope you will sign the Amnesty International petition calling for the US government to release Leqaa. Other ways to help this young woman include calling on your members of Congress to demand her release. You can also consider making a donation to her online fundraising page to help her and her family. Finally, you can follow Leqaa’s campaign for freedom on Instagram and amplify the updates.
As Andrea Pitzer repeatedly warned in our conversation on concentration camps, it does not end with people like Leqaa. It begins with people like Leqaa being held with in a camp for as long as the regime wants to keep her–in horrific conditions–simply because they want to silence her political views. They then continue until they reach people like us. But as the famous poem goes, by then it’s too late because when “they came for me…there was no one left to speak out.”
——
Below is my recent interview about Leqaa’s wrongful detention with her lawyer Amal Thabateh, who is with Creating Law Enforcement Accountability & Responsibility (CLEAR) Project and Laila El-Haddad, an award-winning Palestinian author, social activist, policy analyst and journalist.
The Dean’s Report by Dean Obeidallah is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
I really don’t care to dignify or even acknowledge that last night’s spectacle was an actual State Of The Union address, but it was what we get. I thought I’d simply ignore all of it and all surrounding it, but of course I read this article in The Guardian because old civic duties habits die hard (this one’s not dead yet!), and I thought I’d bring it here because it’s not sharp or negative. It’s simply what happened. (And what, no doubt, we all expected, though I’m certain some expected far less from the Democrats in attendance.)
Amid Trump’s lies and xenophobic rants, people struggling to pay bills and make ends meet are unlikely to be moved
He wanted to give the king’s speech. Donald Trump entered the US House chamber on Tuesday like a medieval monarch, with Republicans lined up eager to touch his royal robes (or, in two cases, grab a selfie with him). But within moments, the illusion was shattered.
As the US president strolled by, soaking up adulation, Democratic representative Al Green of Texas held aloft a handwritten sign: “Black people aren’t apes!” – a reference to Trump recently sharing a racist video depiction of Barack and Michelle Obama.
When the first State of the Union address of Trump’s second term got under way, Republicans moved in on Green menacingly and tried to tear the sign away. But he persisted until being escorted out for the second year in a row. As he departed, there were more acrimonious exchanges with Republicans, a few of whom tried to start a chant of “USA! USA!”
(snip-embedded 3 minute video, on the page: “Donald Trump’s two-hour State of the Union address in 3 minutes – video”)
It was the first but not the last time that a person of color would take a stand during the wannabe autocrat’s record 107-minute speech while others remained silent or raucously egged him on. It was a night where Trump again sought to poison US politics and divide Americans along various fault lines, none more inflammatory than race.
The great salesman, sporting his familiar red tie and orange hue, began with a predictable pitch: “Our nation is back – bigger, better, richer and stronger than ever before.” In his telling, inflation, mortgage rates and gas prices are falling, while the stock market, oil production and foreign direct investment are booming along with construction and factory jobs.
Luckily for Trump’s speechwriter, the US men’s hockey team won Olympic gold two days earlier. The reality TV president hailed them in the press gallery, prompting applause and roars from both Democrats and Republicans. But while Republicans chanted “USA! USA!” with gusto, barely any Democrats did.
“We’re winning so much that we really don’t know what to do about it,” Trump declared. While he didn’t mention his gilded ballroom, it was still a Pollyannish version of America that will not be recognized by people struggling to pay bills and make ends meet. Trump is not the man to offer: “I feel your pain.”
Republicans ritually stood and clapped and cheered all the same. Democrats, who last year waved protest signs that looked like Marty Supreme’s table tennis paddle, this time remained bolted to their seats and grunted, rolled their eyes, dropped their jaws, shook their heads, waved their hands or got bored and studied their phones.
Trump moved on to his beloved tariffs, calling the supreme court decision to kill his pet project “very unfortunate” and “disappointing” as four black-robed justices wore inscrutable expressions on the front row. Compared with last week’s White House tantrum, when he threw all toys and decorum out of the pram, this was Trump showing self-restraint worthy of a child refusing a second ice cream.
It didn’t last. As Trump riffed on crime, election integrity and transgender issues, he turned his fire on Democrats: “These people are crazy, I’m telling ya, they’re crazy. Boy, oh, boy, we’re lucky we have a country with people like this. Democrats are destroying our country, but we’ve stopped it just in the nick of time.”
He soon reminded everyone that, since the day he came down the golden escalator a decade ago and ranted about immigrants, race has always been at the heart of the Trumpist project. He gazed out at a chamber where Democrats – including the late Jesse Jackson’s son, Jonathan Jackson – somewhat resembled America in their diversity while Republicans presented a sea of white faces with only a handful of exceptions.
Trump announced a “war on fraud” led by vice-president JD Vance, citing a social services scam in Minnesota that he mendaciously and absurdly estimated to have cost $19bn. Ilhan Omar, a Somali-born representative from Minnesota, and Rashida Tlaib, a Palestinian American from Michigan, shouted: “That’s a lie!” and “You’re a liar!”
The president was just warming up. He went on a xenophobic rant: “The Somali pirates who ransacked Minnesota remind us that there are large parts of the world where bribery, corruption and lawlessness are the norm, not the exception. Importing these cultures through unrestricted immigration and open borders brings those problems right here, to the USA.”
Omar shook her head, perhaps more in sorrow than in anger.
Trump challenged Democrats: “If you agree with this statement, then stand up and show your support: the first duty of the American government is to protect American citizens, not illegal aliens.” Democrats remained seated. Trump retorted: “You should be ashamed of yourself, not standing up.”
It was rich from the man who sent a goon squad into Minneapolis that resulted in the needless deaths of two US citizens, Renee Good and Alex Pretti, who went unmentioned by the president (as did survivors of abuse by Jeffrey Epstein).
Omar, raising a hand to the side of her mouth to project her voice, yelled with piercing moral clarity: “You have killed Americans! You have killed Americans! You have killed Americans! You have killed Americans!”
Helpfully, Omar and Tlaib had set up a real-time factchecking service for the chamber. Trump boasted that he ended eight wars. Tlaib shouted: “It’s a lie! What are you talking about?”
Trump said: “No one cares more about protecting America’s youth – .” Tlaib interjected: “Then release the Epstein files!”
Trump vowed to halt insider trading by members of Congress. Mark Takano of California yelled: “How about you first!” Tlaib called out: “You’re the most corrupt president!”
The more Trump talked, the less he said. He had gone into the address with an approval rating of 39% positive and 60% negative, according to a Washington Post-ABC News-Ipsos poll, lower than any past president delivering his first State of the Union address. Over an hour and 47 minutes, he offered little to change that equation. The longest State of the Union speech in history was also one of the most inconsequential.
It was small wonder that Omar, Tlaib and several other Democrats walked out before the end. As for Green, his seat remained empty too save for a handwritten cardboard sign that simply and defiantly said: “Al Green.”
Florida State Capitol building
Scottie's Playtime 