Hi, Margaret (and all). I'm an American journalist based in Paris, and French TV often asks me to go on panel shows to "explain" Trump. I used to try to do so as though he had an old-school strategic vision of pursuing broad goals like preserving America's place in the world or doing good for the US economy. I've decided that this way lies madness. Now I just view whatever he says through one filter: Is it good for him, his family, and his friends? All these "deal" announcements and threats to seize or bomb other countries - they bolster his image as a tough guy, which helps with his base, then he moves on. Destroying the White House and the Kennedy Center - distractions (that, thankfully, can be undone). I don't take any of it at face value, and I certainly don't compare it to what previous presidents have done or would do except to point out that, until Trump, we never had a president who was so obviously unconstrained by norms and conventions. But this is what we have now. It's all upsetting but - and I say this every time I have a chance - the most important thing we in the press can do is keep focused on the real threat of this presidency, which is the undermining of our electoral system. Free and fair elections are the goal that gets us every other goal. As a Russian dissident put it in 2017, you may not like your president now, but as long as you don't know who the next president will be, you're OK.
I live in France a half-dozen years. What about Macron and his need to force austerity to prop up the market value of government debt that the Rothschild bankers and other globalists own? As a PhD in Macroeconomics, I think the interest payments should be defaulted (usury was illegal throughout much of the Middle Ages), but France can slowly pay back the principal on the loans. If the ECB or the banks don't want to lend France more money--so be it. France can go back to the French franc and print up what they need, else quit overspending. I had no trouble traveling about Europe back when I was a model, changing from English pounds to French francs to Swiss francs to Italian lire.
I did help Macron in 2020 with a solution to the migrant crisis, and he was polite to thank me by email. More recently, I emailed him about the corruption of the French lawyers and judges, so much so that France won't grant me permanent residence status because I refuse to hire a lawyer. By contrast, George and Amal Clooney bribed their way to an early citizenship, paying over $100,000 euros, and maybe closer to $200,000 euros, in legal fees and other frivolous charges, concurrent with the very expensive property they purchased.
Jordan Bardella is almost a "sure thing" for president in 2027. Corruption in the higher courts resulted in Marine Le Pen being denied a chance to be president in 2027, which violates the 1789 Declaration of Rights of Man and the Citizen, all because the Rothschild handlers are furious that National Rally is pro-Christian. This backfired, as the young voters didn't really like Marine Le Pen, but they really like Jordan Bardella, and that cohort is planning on turning out in record numbers in 2027 election.
My first reaction to the substitution of Homan for Bovino was that Trump was trying a new technique: Bad Cop, Worse Cop. Then I realized I was being too generous. An apter comparison would be if Don Corleone, having received complaints from his loan sharks in the Bronx about Clemenza's high-handed tactics, announced that he was sending in Luca Brasi to diffuse the situation.
In all fairness, Byron York knows a thing or two about hyperbolic gushing. He recognized it in the Vogue piece because he himself gushes over Trump to no end. The York-Hewett-Thiessen Triple Play of Trump Fanboys.
He tells the truth sometimes. Like how he wants to do away with free and fair elections. He has bastardized the process 3 times, and now he is outright stealing the ballots and threatening governors if they don’t hand over our voter roles.
So many people use that phrase "free and fair elections" as if they're a real, verifiable thing across the country. Most of my life they haven't been. Black people in the South (and elsewhere) only got the right to vote in 1965, the year I turned 14. Gerrymandering was real long before that -- it was named after Elbridge Gerry, from my home state of Massachusetts, who was, among other things, James Monroe's vice president. It's been described as "elected officials choosing their voters rather than the other way round."
In recent decades, Republicans in particular have done their damndest to suppress by various means the vote of demographics likely to vote against them. In the Trump era they've become ever more blatant about it. I also can't help noting that in less than 10 minutes, I can breeze in and out of my easily accessible polling place in small-town Massachusetts while in too many places voters have to wait hours in line before they can cast their ballots.
The mail brings me state issued voters pamphlets where candidates get to write their own unedited statements. A few weeks later my ballot shows up in the mail as does the ballot of every registered voter in the state. I vote, sign, and return my ballot, then track it on line to insure it is counted, no stamp required. No waiting in line. No threats or coercion. Initial registration and change of address processes are clear and simple.
My state considers voting to be my right that they are constitutionally bound to honor.
I can see why people who want to commit fraud would be extremely unhappy with this system.
I hope the Minnesota Star Tribune is rewarded with multiple Pulitzers for their coverage of the invasion of Minneapolis. It would be well-deserved!
Meanwhile, I have a few more days to make a decision about renewing my WaPo subscription & this is heartbreaking. I began reading the paper in college as a freshman & have continued for many years. Almost cancelled after last year’s presidential endorsement decision but continued because of the reporting. But if the heart of the paper, its strong journalist team, is gutted along with the appalling editorial change in direction, not sure I want to continue. Watching the dissolution of this icon of journalism is painful. Saw something similar with our local Orlando Sentinel after first Sam Zell & then Alden stripped it to bare bones. Not sure I’m up for seeing the same happen with the Post.
Thank you, as always, Maureen for speaking the truth about the reality we’re presently living through. May we be at a tipping point where a change in voters’ hearts is occurring.
Yes, I was a paperboy for the Post (a word no one understands now) as a kid back in the 70's. I learned so much reading their coverage on Watergate. My subscription, started by my mother, ends on February 22nd after 60 years.
I live in Australia but understand exactly how you feel. When you read a paper created with a group of committed journalists who work for a leadership they admire, seeing it being slowly destroyed is sinister and heartbreaking. Watching your democracy simultaneously being torn down brick by brick is a nightmare.
The Baltimore Banner has more reporters in Montgomery County than the Washington Post (9 vs 0.5) and them entering the local market has actually improved the game of all local reporting outside of the Post. So I subscribe to that and the Financial Times for international coverage, which is also cheaper than the Post ($200 per year). It pains me what has happened to the Post, but this decline has been going on for a while.
I wish, too, that the press would stop purporting to know how Trump thinks or feels, e.g., “Trump believes,” “Trump fears.” We only know what he says, what he performs.
The media continues to be ineffective and delusional. The questions are so ridiculous when they act surprised or have any expectation of honesty. How do we have a fair election? That is the only question.
With the breathless whack-a-mole coverage of Trump, it seems that basic questions aren’t being asked: why are ice agents masked? Who are they? And how many of them took part in the January 6 act of terrorism masked as patriotism?
"But the news media doesn’t seem to know how to bring anything other than wide-eyed credulity to his utterances, even after all the lies and deceit of the past decade."
Forgive me if I've said this here before, but for years I've been calling this media trick 'feigned credulity' or 'feigned naiveite'. It's a cop-out that doesn't serve the public but a conformity that the media will never relinquish. Like all of their conformities, it's simply a shield, a pretense that makes them feel safe from right-wing criticism.
Yesterday the Times was at it again with this headline and sub-head; "Trump Announces Trade Deal With India", "President Trump said India would stop buying Russian oil and would buy more U.S products for a reduction on tariffs."
This isn't a trade deal or even "an initial trade deal", it's simply Trump saying stuff. But that's enough for our lazy, feckless, ossified political media.
Part of the country is turning against Trump: a few independents and libertarians have done so, at least for the purposes of responding to polls. On the other hand, it's clear that approximately 35% of the population are fully-hypnotized MAGA die-hards who would cheer if Trump shot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue. There is a vast silent majority who hope that all this turmoil will pass and--in the mean-time--will ignore the noise, root for their football team, take cruises or trips to Disney World, and buy things on Amazon. We Americans are addicted to entertaining ourselves and, in the spirit of go along to get along, many are blinded to the very real danger of losing our democracy to oligarchy and totalitarianism. Which is sad, because by the time we open our eyes, it may be too late.
I am continually gobsmacked at how corporate media still treats Trump & his minions. They accept his lies, do NOT push back on those lies, run with his unhinged rants as if they were gospel, dissect his nutty Truthy rants as if they were factual. Interviewers on TV still are NOT prepared. Trump or his minions LIE, the interviewer glosses over it & moves to the next question.
When the HELL is a reporter or interviewer going to flat out ask him “WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU?”. “WHY DO YOU CONTINUE TO LIE TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE?”
As far as the mid-terms go, IF we make it to November - we will yet again be sucked down into the fever swamp of the Elite Strike Force™️, the Kraken, and all the nutty conspiracies pushed by Powell, Frooty Rudy G, the Overstock guy, the My Pillow Guy, Epstein buddy Steve Bannon, et al. I submit that Maduro will testify that he, the Ghost of Hugo Chavez & China had engineered Trump’s 2020 loss, and in exchange he’ll be given his freedom and set up nicely courtesy of the American taxpayer.
You are right Wendy, they are going to use Maduro, they are just softening him up right now, once he’s nice and tender he’ll be happy to say whatever they want him to say about election interference. A few months in a cold jail cell will focus his mind.
One of the little-noted tics in our media is the use of passive voice. In your example, note the construction “unless asked to do so”.
Asked by whom?
In my college days, I remember learning to avoid the passive voice whenever possible. Same in my career that involved a lot of technical writing for lay audiences.
So why do people who write for a living use it so often?
Your article in The Guardian was excellent, Margaret, as is this one. Retired middle school teacher here asking, Where Are The Critical Thinking Skills ? We desperately need more civics and more Thinking skills!
Hi, Margaret (and all). I'm an American journalist based in Paris, and French TV often asks me to go on panel shows to "explain" Trump. I used to try to do so as though he had an old-school strategic vision of pursuing broad goals like preserving America's place in the world or doing good for the US economy. I've decided that this way lies madness. Now I just view whatever he says through one filter: Is it good for him, his family, and his friends? All these "deal" announcements and threats to seize or bomb other countries - they bolster his image as a tough guy, which helps with his base, then he moves on. Destroying the White House and the Kennedy Center - distractions (that, thankfully, can be undone). I don't take any of it at face value, and I certainly don't compare it to what previous presidents have done or would do except to point out that, until Trump, we never had a president who was so obviously unconstrained by norms and conventions. But this is what we have now. It's all upsetting but - and I say this every time I have a chance - the most important thing we in the press can do is keep focused on the real threat of this presidency, which is the undermining of our electoral system. Free and fair elections are the goal that gets us every other goal. As a Russian dissident put it in 2017, you may not like your president now, but as long as you don't know who the next president will be, you're OK.
“ Now I just view whatever he says through one filter: Is it good for him, his family, and his friends?”
Yes, that is exactly how one should evaluate the actions of a malignant narcissist. If only the American public would do the same as you!
I live in France a half-dozen years. What about Macron and his need to force austerity to prop up the market value of government debt that the Rothschild bankers and other globalists own? As a PhD in Macroeconomics, I think the interest payments should be defaulted (usury was illegal throughout much of the Middle Ages), but France can slowly pay back the principal on the loans. If the ECB or the banks don't want to lend France more money--so be it. France can go back to the French franc and print up what they need, else quit overspending. I had no trouble traveling about Europe back when I was a model, changing from English pounds to French francs to Swiss francs to Italian lire.
I did help Macron in 2020 with a solution to the migrant crisis, and he was polite to thank me by email. More recently, I emailed him about the corruption of the French lawyers and judges, so much so that France won't grant me permanent residence status because I refuse to hire a lawyer. By contrast, George and Amal Clooney bribed their way to an early citizenship, paying over $100,000 euros, and maybe closer to $200,000 euros, in legal fees and other frivolous charges, concurrent with the very expensive property they purchased.
Jordan Bardella is almost a "sure thing" for president in 2027. Corruption in the higher courts resulted in Marine Le Pen being denied a chance to be president in 2027, which violates the 1789 Declaration of Rights of Man and the Citizen, all because the Rothschild handlers are furious that National Rally is pro-Christian. This backfired, as the young voters didn't really like Marine Le Pen, but they really like Jordan Bardella, and that cohort is planning on turning out in record numbers in 2027 election.
My first reaction to the substitution of Homan for Bovino was that Trump was trying a new technique: Bad Cop, Worse Cop. Then I realized I was being too generous. An apter comparison would be if Don Corleone, having received complaints from his loan sharks in the Bronx about Clemenza's high-handed tactics, announced that he was sending in Luca Brasi to diffuse the situation.
Stacy, I thought Andy Borowitz had the perfect take: one "ass-hole" taking the place of the demoted "ass-hole"!
In all fairness, Byron York knows a thing or two about hyperbolic gushing. He recognized it in the Vogue piece because he himself gushes over Trump to no end. The York-Hewett-Thiessen Triple Play of Trump Fanboys.
Thanks for sharing this info. Plus, do we expect journalism from Vogue?
Maybe not, but Teen Vogue was doing such good journalism on Trump that the owners shut it down.
It's not credulity. It's complicity.
As I wrote in my comment, I call this 'feigned credulity'. It's a pretense and a cop-out and, you're absolutely correct, complicity.
Feigned credulity is a great phrase.
Definitely AGREE 👍
Thank you.
He tells the truth sometimes. Like how he wants to do away with free and fair elections. He has bastardized the process 3 times, and now he is outright stealing the ballots and threatening governors if they don’t hand over our voter roles.
So many people use that phrase "free and fair elections" as if they're a real, verifiable thing across the country. Most of my life they haven't been. Black people in the South (and elsewhere) only got the right to vote in 1965, the year I turned 14. Gerrymandering was real long before that -- it was named after Elbridge Gerry, from my home state of Massachusetts, who was, among other things, James Monroe's vice president. It's been described as "elected officials choosing their voters rather than the other way round."
In recent decades, Republicans in particular have done their damndest to suppress by various means the vote of demographics likely to vote against them. In the Trump era they've become ever more blatant about it. I also can't help noting that in less than 10 minutes, I can breeze in and out of my easily accessible polling place in small-town Massachusetts while in too many places voters have to wait hours in line before they can cast their ballots.
The mail brings me state issued voters pamphlets where candidates get to write their own unedited statements. A few weeks later my ballot shows up in the mail as does the ballot of every registered voter in the state. I vote, sign, and return my ballot, then track it on line to insure it is counted, no stamp required. No waiting in line. No threats or coercion. Initial registration and change of address processes are clear and simple.
My state considers voting to be my right that they are constitutionally bound to honor.
I can see why people who want to commit fraud would be extremely unhappy with this system.
Sounds like my state! Are you in MA? I'd bet good money you're in a blue (i.e., pro-democracy) state.
I hope the Minnesota Star Tribune is rewarded with multiple Pulitzers for their coverage of the invasion of Minneapolis. It would be well-deserved!
Meanwhile, I have a few more days to make a decision about renewing my WaPo subscription & this is heartbreaking. I began reading the paper in college as a freshman & have continued for many years. Almost cancelled after last year’s presidential endorsement decision but continued because of the reporting. But if the heart of the paper, its strong journalist team, is gutted along with the appalling editorial change in direction, not sure I want to continue. Watching the dissolution of this icon of journalism is painful. Saw something similar with our local Orlando Sentinel after first Sam Zell & then Alden stripped it to bare bones. Not sure I’m up for seeing the same happen with the Post.
Thank you, as always, Maureen for speaking the truth about the reality we’re presently living through. May we be at a tipping point where a change in voters’ hearts is occurring.
Yes, I was a paperboy for the Post (a word no one understands now) as a kid back in the 70's. I learned so much reading their coverage on Watergate. My subscription, started by my mother, ends on February 22nd after 60 years.
I live in Australia but understand exactly how you feel. When you read a paper created with a group of committed journalists who work for a leadership they admire, seeing it being slowly destroyed is sinister and heartbreaking. Watching your democracy simultaneously being torn down brick by brick is a nightmare.
The Baltimore Banner has more reporters in Montgomery County than the Washington Post (9 vs 0.5) and them entering the local market has actually improved the game of all local reporting outside of the Post. So I subscribe to that and the Financial Times for international coverage, which is also cheaper than the Post ($200 per year). It pains me what has happened to the Post, but this decline has been going on for a while.
The irony of that sorry masthead. 😓
What’s the difference between how the news media treats pronouncements of Trump and Punxsutawney Phil?
None.
I wish, too, that the press would stop purporting to know how Trump thinks or feels, e.g., “Trump believes,” “Trump fears.” We only know what he says, what he performs.
The media continues to be ineffective and delusional. The questions are so ridiculous when they act surprised or have any expectation of honesty. How do we have a fair election? That is the only question.
With the breathless whack-a-mole coverage of Trump, it seems that basic questions aren’t being asked: why are ice agents masked? Who are they? And how many of them took part in the January 6 act of terrorism masked as patriotism?
"But the news media doesn’t seem to know how to bring anything other than wide-eyed credulity to his utterances, even after all the lies and deceit of the past decade."
Forgive me if I've said this here before, but for years I've been calling this media trick 'feigned credulity' or 'feigned naiveite'. It's a cop-out that doesn't serve the public but a conformity that the media will never relinquish. Like all of their conformities, it's simply a shield, a pretense that makes them feel safe from right-wing criticism.
Yesterday the Times was at it again with this headline and sub-head; "Trump Announces Trade Deal With India", "President Trump said India would stop buying Russian oil and would buy more U.S products for a reduction on tariffs."
This isn't a trade deal or even "an initial trade deal", it's simply Trump saying stuff. But that's enough for our lazy, feckless, ossified political media.
Part of the country is turning against Trump: a few independents and libertarians have done so, at least for the purposes of responding to polls. On the other hand, it's clear that approximately 35% of the population are fully-hypnotized MAGA die-hards who would cheer if Trump shot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue. There is a vast silent majority who hope that all this turmoil will pass and--in the mean-time--will ignore the noise, root for their football team, take cruises or trips to Disney World, and buy things on Amazon. We Americans are addicted to entertaining ourselves and, in the spirit of go along to get along, many are blinded to the very real danger of losing our democracy to oligarchy and totalitarianism. Which is sad, because by the time we open our eyes, it may be too late.
"fully hypnotized" is a perfect description.
I am continually gobsmacked at how corporate media still treats Trump & his minions. They accept his lies, do NOT push back on those lies, run with his unhinged rants as if they were gospel, dissect his nutty Truthy rants as if they were factual. Interviewers on TV still are NOT prepared. Trump or his minions LIE, the interviewer glosses over it & moves to the next question.
When the HELL is a reporter or interviewer going to flat out ask him “WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU?”. “WHY DO YOU CONTINUE TO LIE TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE?”
As far as the mid-terms go, IF we make it to November - we will yet again be sucked down into the fever swamp of the Elite Strike Force™️, the Kraken, and all the nutty conspiracies pushed by Powell, Frooty Rudy G, the Overstock guy, the My Pillow Guy, Epstein buddy Steve Bannon, et al. I submit that Maduro will testify that he, the Ghost of Hugo Chavez & China had engineered Trump’s 2020 loss, and in exchange he’ll be given his freedom and set up nicely courtesy of the American taxpayer.
JFC, these people 🤬
You are right Wendy, they are going to use Maduro, they are just softening him up right now, once he’s nice and tender he’ll be happy to say whatever they want him to say about election interference. A few months in a cold jail cell will focus his mind.
One of the little-noted tics in our media is the use of passive voice. In your example, note the construction “unless asked to do so”.
Asked by whom?
In my college days, I remember learning to avoid the passive voice whenever possible. Same in my career that involved a lot of technical writing for lay audiences.
So why do people who write for a living use it so often?
The passive voice leaves out the actor in a sentence. That’s why they use it. It obscures whodunit.
It’s as if a headline writer at the Times read this issue of your newsletter and said, “Let me give Margaret more fodder.”
NYT Headline: “Trump, in an Escalation, Calls for Republicans to ‘Nationalize’ Elections
The comments, made on a conservative podcast, follow a string of moves from his administration to try to exert more control over American elections.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/02/us/politics/trump-nationalize-elections.html
The article clearly points out - far down in the story - that The Constitution gives the role of running elections to states.
My Headline: Trump, in a Constitutional Challenge, Calls for Republicans to ‘Nationalize’ Elections”
Yep!
Your article in The Guardian was excellent, Margaret, as is this one. Retired middle school teacher here asking, Where Are The Critical Thinking Skills ? We desperately need more civics and more Thinking skills!