As I am writing this, I am watching Fauci take the 5th on every question asked of him, and Paul is accusing him of obstruction.

This is going to be a long day for Fauci.

Let’s get into the news.

In today’s Read:

• Anthony Fauci testifies under subpoena at 8:30 this morning. Monday’s edition laid out the diary. Today he has to answer for it, and the question is one sentence long.

• Mamdani’s finance department posted the full names and home addresses of nearly a million property owners in a searchable tool, then hid behind “state law requires it.”

• ICE took its enforcement to airport check-in counters and arrival gates. The coverage lives or dies on whether an expired visa still counts as expired.

• Quick Rundown: Washington buried Lindsey Graham while two war leaders worked the room, Iran took another swing at a base in Jordan, a 16-year-old got a White House invite, and Bari Weiss raided the Times.

Fauci Is Under Oath This Morning. After Two Years of “The Science Is Settled.”

The Story.

Anthony Fauci testifies publicly before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee at 8:30 a.m. ET today, under a subpoena Chairman Rand Paul issued after Fauci backed out of a voluntary appearance.

Monday’s Read walked through the 1,141 pages of his private diary that Paul released this week, so I won’t re-run all of it here. The two threads that matter for this morning: a January 31, 2020 entry in which, per the released notes, top virologists flagged the virus’s furin cleavage site and roughly half the scientists on the call called it “constructed,” after which Fauci spent two years publicly branding the lab-leak theory a conspiracy; and the pages showing him feeding questions to friendly anchors, Jake Tapper’s name turning up 41 times. Today is the first time he answers any of it out loud, under oath, on camera.

The Left’s read. A grudge hearing. Where the mainstream desks cover it at all, the framing is Fauci the exhausted public servant hauled back by a longtime antagonist, his denial that he ever suppressed the lab-leak theory taken at face value, the diary waved off as private notes ripped out of context. The entries with reporters’ names in them stay off the screen almost entirely.

The Right’s read. Accountability, finally. The Federalist calls the diary a media scandal the press won’t touch precisely because the press is in it, and outlets that ran the Tapper texts and the January 2020 call want to know whether a single senator will make him read the page aloud.

What both sides are skipping. The hearing is being previewed as a referendum on Fauci’s temperament, and it isn’t. It’s a referendum on one dated document. Strip out the personality war and the question a committee can actually answer is narrow and checkable: did a federal official tell the country the origin was settled while his own contemporaneous notes recorded that it wasn’t?

For once, the man can’t refer the question to a communications team.

That’s what makes this morning different from the last six years of Fauci appearances. No op-ed cleanup, no friendly booking, no Jake Tapper waking up furious on his behalf. It took a subpoena and Rand Paul releasing the diary. Today, Fauci has to respond to his own words, which were never meant for public viewing.

Quick reminder of the science. A furin cleavage site is a little feature on the spike that helps the virus pry into your cells, and the closest relatives of this virus in nature don’t have one. That’s why, on a call on January 31, 2020, some of the sharpest virologists alive looked at it and said out loud that it looked engineered. He wrote that down. Then he went out and, for two years, told the world the opposite, and it led to a shutdown of our country.

So watch three things today. Watch whether any senator makes Fauci read the January 31 entry into the record, word for word, instead of talking around it. Watch whether the Post and the Times cover the lab-leak page tomorrow or find something else pressing. And watch whether Jake Tapper, whose name is in that diary 41 times, says one syllable on air about being in it. The hearing tests Fauci. The coverage of the hearing tests everyone who built the halo.

Mamdani’s City Published 960,000 Names and Home Addresses in a Searchable Database. They’re Calling It Transparency.

The Story.

Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s Department of Finance published a searchable database tied to the state’s new pied-à-terre tax, listing the full names and home addresses of property owners across the five boroughs. The tax was sold to voters as a levy on luxury second homes worth more than $1 million. The published roll runs to more than 960,000 residences, far past the roughly 31,000 homes the city first said would be hit, and it sweeps in a shopping center and modest houses in working-class neighborhoods. The Department of Finance says state law requires publishing the roll and that landing on the list isn’t the same as owing the tax; that inclusion just flags a property for further review.

The Left’s read. Routine transparency. The assessment roll is a public document, publication is mandated by statute, and the alarm is manufactured by wealthy owners who don’t want to pay. Coverage, where it appears, frames the critics as rich people frightened of a spreadsheet.

The Right’s read. Doxxing with a government letterhead. Fox and Legal Insurrection note the list is searchable, name-and-address specific, and vastly wider than advertised, published in a city that has already watched political violence against the wealthy play out on its own sidewalks. One critic called it “outright dangerous.”

What both sides are skipping. Two things, and they’re the whole story. First, “state law requires it” is doing enormous work in that sentence. Rolls have technically been public records for years, buried where you had to go ask for them. A slick, searchable, type-in-a-name-and-get-an-address tool is a choice the city made on top of the legal minimum, and nobody on the left is asking why it built the deluxe version. Second, the number moved. Sold as 31,000 luxury pieds-à-terre, delivered as 960,000 residences including primary homes. When the sales pitch says “the ultra-rich” and the product covers a third of the city, that gap is the story, and the transparency crowd has nothing to say about it.

It’s just public record.”

Quick context, because the mechanics matter here. A pied-à-terre tax is a surcharge on non-primary homes, the second apartment the out-of-towner keeps for weekends. To levy it, the city compiles an assessment roll, a list of properties it thinks might qualify. That roll has always been a public record in the dry, technical sense. What changed this week is the packaging. The Mamdani administration didn’t quietly file a list. It set up a database anyone can search by name and pull a home address from, and it stuffed that database with nearly a million entries, including primary residences, then shrugged that the law made them do it.

The law did not make them build a search bar. If this were the nothingburger they claim it is, they wouldn’t have bothered.

And here is the most jacked up part. Landing on the list is the default. Getting off it is your responsibility. The city flagged nearly a million properties as maybe-taxable, then mailed the owners a clock: prove this is your primary residence by August 21, or the surcharge is yours. The whole burden of proof got flipped. A tax pitched at $5 million for out-of-town pieds-à-terre now relies on ordinary owners filing paperwork to prove they already live where they say they do. Miss the letter, miss the deadline, and a levy built for the ultra-rich lands on regular New Yorkers in their primary home. “It’s only potential” is a lot less comforting when the potential is yours to disprove on a deadline.

A government that campaigned on soaking millionaires, then published a searchable map of where those millionaires sleep, in a city that watched a health-insurance CEO shot dead on a public street to a chorus of online applause, does not get to act shocked when people call it a target list.

And here’s where I part ways with the “sunlight is good” crowd, because they’re running a swap on you. Transparency in taxation means the government opens its own books. How much this surcharge rakes in, who set the rate, where the money goes. I’m all for that. The city can publish every dollar it collects and every dollar it spends without printing a single resident’s name and home address next to it. Those are two different things, and Mamdani’s people are betting you won’t notice the difference.

Someone will reach for the campaign-donor comparison. We publish who gives to candidates, so why not who owns what? Because a donation is money aimed at elections, and the public has an actual stake in seeing who’s funding the people about to govern them. Your home is not a campaign contribution. Where you sleep isn’t a bid for power the rest of us need to audit. The government owes you its numbers. You don’t owe the internet your front door.

So watch a few things. Watch whether the Department of Finance ever explains how “31,000 luxury second homes” became “960,000 residences,” or whether it just lets the number sit there. Watch whether that August 21 exemption deadline quietly slips once the pile of wrongly-listed primary homes gets loud enough. And watch whether the primary homes get scrubbed from the public tool now that people have noticed, because a quiet edit is a confession.

They campaigned on eating the rich and then handed the city a menu.

ICE Started Arresting Expired-Visa Travelers at the Airport. Whether That’s an Outrage Depends on What “Expired” Means to You.

The Story.

ICE has widened airport enforcement to foreign nationals whose visas have expired, arresting people at check-in counters and arrival gates across at least 15 airports in recent weeks. The move opens a large new pool: visa overstays who weren’t previously an enforcement priority, among them spouses of citizens and workers with applications still pending. New reporting ties the surge to tips from the federal airport-security agency, with more than 800 arrests logged. The case getting the most airtime is Chantal Morales Rojas, a 27-year-old former au pair who entered legally on a J-1 exchange visa in 2023 and was detained July 20 while boarding a Southwest flight in Denver, after she had applied to stay.

The Left’s read. A cruel new front. CNN and others lead with the sympathetic profiles: plainclothes agents, spouses of Americans, people with paperwork in the pipeline, framed as enforcement creep against immigrants who “did it the right way.”

The Right’s read. Overstays are the single largest slice of illegal presence in the country, and an expired visa is a removable status by the plain text of the law. Newsmax and others frame it as ICE finally enforcing the half of immigration law everyone agreed to ignore.

What both sides are skipping. The right is content to let “overstay” carry the whole argument and skip the one hard case buried in the profiles. The left is doing something sneakier: letting “entered legally” stand in for “here legally now,” as if the first phrase settles the second. It doesn’t. There is exactly one genuine wrinkle in this story, and neither side is naming it cleanly: whether a person with a filed, not-yet-decided application to remain has lawful status while they wait. That’s a real legal question. “Spouse of a citizen” is not. Sympathy is not a visa.

If your visa expired, you’re here illegally. This is not a difficult concept.

Quick context, because the left is playing word games. “Entered legally” and “here legally now” are not the same. A visa is permission with an expiration date on it. When the date passes, and you haven’t left or renewed, the permission is gone, and you are now in the country illegally. A former au pair who came on a 2023 exchange visa and was still here two years later, boarding a domestic flight, is not a legal resident who got ambushed. She’s an overstay.

Now the one spot I’ll give the other side something, and I’m keeping it on a short leash. There’s exactly one clean category worth protecting: the person who files to extend or change status before the old one runs out. File on time, while you’re still legal, and the law generally holds you in an authorized stay while it decides. That person shouldn’t be pulled off a jetway before an officer even opens the file. But that goes out the window the second your status lapses. Apply after you’re already out of status, and it’s too late. You were here illegally the day your visa expired.

Which is exactly why the au pair’s story is shakier than the headline makes it look. Her own fundraiser says she “applied when her visa expired.” That isn’t the shield they think it is. That sounds like an admission to me. ICE says she overstayed; her lawyer says she filed on time. Both can’t be true, and the entire tearjerker rides on which one it is. Watch that fact, not the GoFundMe total.

And here's why the date matters in the first place: the left treats it like a parking ticket. Overstays are a security risk, and it only takes one. Did you know that at least two of the 9/11 hijackers had overstayed their visas with nobody sent to find them, and Hani Hanjour, who flew Flight 77 into the Pentagon, was in the country illegally because he never enrolled in the school his student visa was issued for. A decade later, Amine El-Khalifi, a Moroccan who had overstayed a visitor visa by more than ten years, was arrested walking toward the U.S. Capitol in what he believed was a suicide vest. "He'd overstayed his visa" keeps turning up in the timeline right before the part nobody wants to read. Enforcing the expiration isn't cruelty. It’s a matter of national security.

It may seem harsh, but the sympathy plea doesn’t move me. “She was married to an American.” “She’d built a life here.” “She did it the right way.” None of those is legal status. They’re all to make you have “the feels” and walk past the only question that decides the case: was the visa still valid, and if she filed, did she file in time?

So watch how the framing sorts these cases, because it tells you who’s being honest. Watch whether the outlets running the tearful profiles separate the people who filed on time, who have a real claim, from the ones who applied only after they’d already overstayed, who don’t. Watch whether “detained at the airport” ever comes with the expiration date attached, or whether that detail stays conveniently offscreen. And watch whether anyone asks the obvious follow-up: if the visa was still good, why is that not the headline?

• Washington buried Lindsey Graham while two war leaders worked the room. The four-term senator, who died suddenly at 71 on July 11, lay in the Capitol Rotunda on Tuesday before a National Cathedral service where President Trump spoke. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky both attended, met separately with Trump at the White House the same day, and shook hands in person for the first time in nearly three years. Graham’s South Carolina funeral is today in Columbia.

• Iran took another swing at a US base in Jordan, and this time it missed. The IRGC launched ballistic missiles at US forces early Wednesday, July 28, in what CENTCOM called a surprise attack; Jordan’s army shot down five projectiles at dawn and reported no casualties. That’s a different outcome from the July 18 strike that killed two US service members, and it lands amid a month in which nearly 100 Americans have been wounded in Iranian attacks across the region.

• A 16-year-old lifeguard is headed to the White House. Ryder Williams, a rookie with California State Parks, held a drowning 10-year-old through two minutes of 10-foot surf at Seabright State Beach in Santa Cruz on July 25 until a second guard reached them. After the video went viral, Trump said Tuesday he wants Williams and his family at the White House for a high civilian honor. The boy is fine.

• Bari Weiss’s 60 Minutes poached a New York Times columnist. CBS announced its correspondent slate for the 59th season, headlined by conservative Times opinion columnist Ross Douthat, alongside Norah O’Donnell, Sebastian Junger, Trevor Phillips, and Gianna Toboni. New executive producer Nick Bilton made the call, two months after Weiss took over as editor-in-chief and replaced 30-year veteran Tanya Simon. The talent is moving, and it isn’t moving toward the Times.

That’s The Read.

See you Friday.

If The Read is doing the cross-check work for you, send it to a friend who’s still chasing the framing instead of the facts.

Today’s a double feature. Two of the questions that hit my inbox the most: oil smoke points, and how to keep a cast iron pan alive. They’re more connected than they look, so I’m putting them in one place.

Read more

Sorry, I am late. It was an exhausting weekend, and the day has started slowly. But The Read is here, and the weekend news was busy.

So, let’s get into it!

In today’s Read:

• Rand Paul released 1,141 pages of Fauci’s private diary. The clout-chasing is a sideshow. The January 31, 2020 entry is the story, and he’s under oath Wednesday.

• The DSA’s co-chair confirmed the whole platform on Fox: abolish the Senate, ICE, borders, prisons. The party that runs them on its own ballot line pretended not to know her.

• Berlin gave a convicted ISIS propagandist a suspended sentence. Ten weeks later he killed a woman at Pride. Tolerance, they called it.

• Quick Rundown: the EU trade deal, a shootout at the Bite of Seattle, Mamdani’s grocery price tag, Maine’s third-try Senate nominee, and a correspondents’ dinner with no comedian.

Fauci Kept a Private Diary Through the Pandemic.

The Story.

Senate Homeland Security Chairman Rand Paul released roughly 1,141 pages of Anthony Fauci’s private diary this week, covering late 2019 through his December 2022 retirement, along with about 136 pages of internal correspondence about awards and prize money.

Two threads run through it. One is vanity: Fauci tracking his own press, calling the coverage “hot and heavy,” describing his fame as “explosive,” logging an invitation to Dancing with the Stars, and fretting that he was starting to “outshine” the president. The other is the one that matters. According to the released entries, as early as January 31, 2020, top virologists told Fauci on a call that the virus’s furin cleavage site raised real doubts about a natural origin, with roughly half the scientists on the line saying it looked “constructed.” He then spent the next two years publicly ruling out the lab-leak theory and treating anyone who raised it as an enemy of science. Paul subpoenaed Fauci after he backed out of a voluntary appearance; he testifies publicly before the committee Wednesday, July 29.

The Left’s read. A personality quirk, not a scandal. Mediaite ran the “press is going wild with me” entries as a fun character detail. The mainstream desks that spent 2020 through 2022 building the Fauci halo have mostly gone quiet on the lab-leak contradiction, and where the framing appears at all, it’s that these are private musings, not proof of anything, and Paul is a longtime antagonist running an oversight grudge before a hearing.

The Right’s read. Vindication, and a receipt. Townhall, the Daily Caller, and Power Line ran it two ways: the man was a brand manager who watched his own coverage like a stock ticker, and, more seriously, his own contemporaneous notes show he entertained the lab-leak possibility in private while ruling it out in public.

What both sides are skipping. The right is having too much fun with the Dancing with the Stars entry, and the left is using the vanity to avoid the science. The checkable question is not whether Fauci was vain. It’s whether a public official told the country the origin question was settled while his own diary recorded that it wasn’t.

Skip the Dancing with the Stars entry. I know, it’s fun. Can you imagine this old man’s little legs fox-trotting on the dance floor? Also, the audacity of the most powerful doctor in America penciling in a fame diary while the death count climbed is gross. It’s also the least important thing in 1,141 pages, and the people waving it around are doing Fauci a favor by keeping your eyes on it.

Quick context on the science, before we dive in. A furin cleavage site is a little feature on the spike protein that helps the virus break into your cells. The thing about this one is that its closest relatives in nature don’t have it, which is exactly why, on a call on January 31, 2020, some of the best virologists in the world looked at it and said out loud that it looked engineered. Half the room, per Fauci’s own notes. He wrote it down. And then he spent two years telling you that “lab leak” was a racist conspiracy theory and that attacking him was attacking Science itself.

To be clear, Fauci expressed doubts privately in January and spent the next two years calling that same doubt a conspiracy in front of Congress.

The diary doesn't only catch Fauci shading the science. It catches the press carrying his water. In the diary, Fauci wrote that CBS's chief medical correspondent, Dr. Jon LaPook, emailed him to get prepped for LaPook's own on-air segment, then went on TV and name-checked Fauci several times. He wrote that when the Washington Post's Lena Sun called to check a tip that China pressured the head of the WHO, he told her it was nonsense and "probably stopped her from writing the story." He logged George Stephanopoulos texting "Thank you, Tony. So impressive" after an interview, and NBC's Andrea Mitchell calling him "very apologetic" for not booking him.

Then there’s Jake Tapper. Fauci had the CNN anchor and his wife over for dinner and wrote it down: “Terrific couple. Friendship building.” Before one interview, per the diary, “Jake wanted to make sure the interview did not cause me any problems.” A network anchor, checking that his own questions wouldn’t inconvenience his source. And when CNN sat a Trump testing official, Brett Giroir, down for a grilling, Fauci wrote the line that should retire the word “journalist” anywhere near Tapper’s name: “I gave Jake some questions to ask him.” The source wrote the interview. The next morning, per the diary, Tapper woke Fauci up “furious at POTUS” for tweeting about how hard Tapper had gone at Giroir.

So when the same outlets now tell you a private diary is sacred ground and Rand Paul has an agenda, remember they had Tony over for dinner and let him write the questions. Sure, everyone has an agenda. Theirs came with a place setting in the middle of a pandemic.

He’s under subpoena. He’s on the stand Wednesday at 8:30 in the morning. For once the man can’t refer the question to a communications team, and the question is one sentence: on January 31, 2020, what did they tell you, and when did “constructed” become a conspiracy theory?

Watch whether a single senator makes him read his own January 31 entry into the record. Watch whether the Post and the Times cover the lab-leak page or the dinner-party pages, or neither. And watch whether Jake Tapper says one word, on air, about his own name turning up in the diary of the man he was taking questions from.

Some Housekeeping

The Read is free. Three mornings a week, the cross-check lands in your inbox, free. I want to keep it that way, and the readers who upgrade are what make that possible.

A paid subscription opens everything on the other side of the wall. That’s Kitchen Sense, my year-long highly requested cooking curriculum, plus the long-form articles and essays I keep out of the free feed. Here’s this week’s, so you can taste what you’re missing:

Heads up, though: the price goes up on August 3 for new subscribers. Right now it’s $7 a month, or $65 for the whole year, which is the better deal. On August 3 both move up, to $8 and $75. If you’ve been on the fence, lock in today’s rate before then, keep The Read free for everyone who reads it, and here’s what comes with it:

• Kitchen Sense, one real cooking skill a month, taught from scratch

• Every long-form article and essay, no paywall on your end

• The full archive and the subscriber chat

Subscribe now

Thank you to everyone for your support. ❤️

The DSA’s Co-Chair Went on Fox and Confirmed the Whole Platform.

The Story.

DSA national co-chair Megan Romer went on Fox News Sunday with Shannon Bream on July 26 and confirmed the group’s platform on camera, answering a run of “yes” and “true” as Bream read the planks back to her: abolish the Senate, abolish ICE, abolish borders, abolish prisons, defund the Pentagon, and move most large corporations into public ownership.

She called the Senate “an anachronistic institution” built to blunt the influence of ordinary people, and described open borders as “part of a longer-term international plan” tied to the United States ceasing to destabilize other countries. It’s the on-record position of the group whose written platform, “Workers Deserve More!”, says the same thing in print, and whose candidates run on the Democratic ballot line.

The Left’s read. An off-message rounding error. Mediaite called the hit “wild.” AOC, the highest-ranking DSA member in Congress, poured cold water on the Senate plank: “we’re working with the institutions that we have, this is a constitutional question,” and “I don’t have the power or ability to do that.” Former DNC chair Jaime Harrison went further: “if you hate the Democratic Party, then please don’t run for our nomination.” The frame is that Romer speaks for a faction, not the party, and that Republicans are inflating one TV appearance.

The Right’s read. They said it out loud, finally. Breitbart, Townhall, and Newsbusters ran it as the DSA confirming on national television what conservatives have said it believes all along, with Speaker Mike Johnson labeling it “Common Sense vs. COMMUNISM.” The angle: this is not a pamphlet anymore, it’s the co-chair on the record, refusing to dodge.

What both sides are skipping. The interesting fight isn’t left versus right. It’s inside the Democratic tent, and both sides keep flattening it. The right wants the DSA to be the Democratic Party. The establishment wants it to be a stranger it’s never met. Neither will say the actual arrangement out loud: the DSA runs its candidates on the Democratic line, by Romer’s own admission, because it can’t win as a third party, so the party keeps absorbing a wing whose stated goal is to dismantle the institutions the party’s own members are sworn to uphold.

Give Romer credit for the one thing she didn’t dodge. Bream read the list, abolish the Senate, ICE, borders, prisons, defund the Pentagon, seize the corporations, and Romer just said “true.” No “that’s taken out of context.” No pivot to health care. She said the quiet part at full volume, on Fox, on a Sunday.

Then watch the hour after. AOC, a card-carrying DSA member, abruptly discovered the Constitution. Jaime Harrison told people who “hate the Democratic Party” to stop running as Democrats, which is a fascinating thing to say about people who keep winning Democratic primaries. If they’re such strangers, why do they keep getting the party’s nomination? Because that’s the whole play. “Democratic socialism” is branding, the word “democratic” bolted onto the front of socialism to make it sound like a book club. The DSA isn’t a wing of the Democratic Party. It’s using the Democratic Party as a ballot-access vehicle, a costume rack, a way to win under a label voters already trust, and then run its own program from the inside.

And look at what AOC's newfound caution is actually made of. Asked whether this DSA push is a slide from socialism toward communism, she laughed and waved it off. Asked about abolishing the Senate, she suddenly reveres "the institutions that we have." This is the same woman who called the Electoral College a "scam" and a tool of "racial injustice" in 2019, who wants the filibuster gone and the Supreme Court packed, who keeps calling the Senate a relic "founded on Jim Crow" earlier last week.

Her respect for the Constitution shows up right when a camera is rolling, and 2028 is on the calendar. That isn't a principle. It's the same costume the rest of them wear, pressed for a general election.

And the Electoral College is the one to keep your eye on, because it's the quiet threat that makes every other item on Romer's list possible. Kill the Electoral College, move to a straight national popular vote, and you have not made the country more democratic. You have handed a few dense metros permanent power over everyone else, which is the exact mob rule the Founders built the system to stop. The Electoral College is a load-bearing wall. Pull it, and the filibuster, the Senate, the Court's independence, everything else that slows a bare majority down comes out easier, because the line that knocked the first one down works on all of them: it's old, it's unfair, one person one vote. A country that quit teaching its own founding is buying that line in bigger numbers every year, and most of the people cheering couldn't tell you what the Electoral College is for. It's for this exact moment.

So put it together. If that wall ever comes down while this wing is holding real power, the rest of Romer’s list stops being a Sunday-show gotcha and becomes a to-do list. That’s not a scare story; it’s the sequence. AOC can soften her voice for the general all she likes. Remember where she comes from, what she is on the record wanting, and that the DSA is not a guest in the Democratic Party. It’s moving in.

And here’s the part the “they’ll fizzle” crowd gets exactly backward. They will fracture. Every socialist project sits on the same fault line between the reformers who want to work the system and the revolutionaries who want to burn it, and that crack is what killed Eugene Debs’s Socialist Party a century ago. The DSA will hit it too. The only question is when. Debs at least built his own party, so when it split, it took down Debs and nobody else. The DSA is running the other playbook, taking over one of the two parties we’ve actually got. So when they crack, they don’t go down alone. They take the host with them. Which is why you should want that break to come now, while they’re small and out of power, and not later, after they’re the ones holding it.

The media’s job in all this is to keep you from noticing. Rebrand them “progressive Democrats,” never dig into who they praise or what they’ve read, and file Romer under “wild interview” instead of “confirmed agenda.” Romer just did the reporters’ work for them and confirmed it herself. The least the rest of us can do is believe her.

You don’t get to host the wing and disown the wing in the same news cycle. Romer made them pick, and most of them picked “please stop talking.”

Related

Berlin Let a Convicted ISIS Propagandist Walk. Ten Weeks Later He Drove a Van Into a Pride Crowd.

The Story.

On the evening of July 25, a van plowed into a crowd at Berlin’s Christopher Street Day, the city’s Pride celebration, in the Tiergarten. One woman was killed and 29 people were injured, several critically. The driver kept going on foot with a machete and wounded more before fleeing. Police tracked the suspect, Abdul Ballout, a 21-year-old German citizen of Lebanese origin, to an allotment garden in Spandau and shot him dead on July 26 after he charged officers with a knife.

Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt called it a suspected Islamist terrorist attack and said Ballout was known to authorities and part of Berlin’s “Islamist scene.” Here are the important details: in May 2026, a Berlin juvenile court convicted Ballout of preparing a serious act of violence, publishing Islamic State propaganda on Instagram, and related offenses, and handed him a suspended sentence of one year and ten months. The court credited time he’d spent in a Lebanese jail and in pre-trial detention, plus his claim that he had admitted the crimes and “distanced himself” from ISIS. Prosecutors appealed. He was free, appeal pending, when he did this.

The Left’s read. Grief and a manhunt, with the ideology kept at arm’s length. CNN and Bloomberg led on the search and the police shooting of the suspect, with the ISIS conviction and the “Islamist scene” description lower in the story and hedged behind “what we know so far.” The reflex is to center the Pride community’s mourning and the security-response questions and treat the suspended terror sentence as a detail.

The Right’s read. The system let a known jihadist walk. Outlets ran the blunt version, “Islamist Terror Convict Freed Before Attack Near Berlin Pride Event,” foregrounding the two facts the establishment flinches at: this was Islamist terror, and a German court chose not to jail a man it had already convicted of spreading ISIS propaganda.

What both sides are skipping. The suspended sentence is the whole story, and it’s the part the sympathetic coverage keeps smallest. A court had this man dead to rights months ago and sent him home on the strength of his word that he’d changed. He hadn’t. The fact is that the political movement most devoted to defending open-door leniency is what produced the man who drove into it.

Start with the woman, because a life ended here and that comes before any argument. She was somebody’s daughter, and she was murdered on a public street by a man who drove a van into a crowd and then pulled a blade on the people who survived it. That is a horror. It would be a horror at a farmers market, a soccer match, or a church picnic. A person who should be alive is dead, and her family is living the worst week of their lives. It didn’t need to happen.

Ten weeks before this, a court in Berlin looked at a young man convicted of posting ISIS propaganda and preparing an act of violence, and decided a suspended sentence would do it. Why? Because he said he’d distanced himself from ISIS. He told them he was done; they believed him, and they wrote it down and opened the door. This is the tolerance they keep lecturing the rest of us about. Somewhere along the way the West decided that the real danger to social peace wasn’t the man posting jihadist content, it was the person impolite enough to point at him and say the words “Islamist radicalization” out loud. So they hand out suspended sentences and call it compassion, and someone else always pays the price.

This is the most frustrating part. Germany didn’t get stuck with this man. He’d already left. He flew off chasing ISIS, landed in a jail cell in Lebanon, and Berlin had him extradited back home and then set him loose on probation. He was another country’s problem, on another continent, behind bars, and the German state went and brought him back. Bringing him home was a choice. Freeing him was a second one. Both belonged to Berlin.

My thoughts? If you leave the country whose passport you carry to train or plot with a group at war with that country, the passport should leave with you. Born there, naturalized there, it makes no difference. The minute you cross a border to join people who want your countrymen dead, you are a national security threat, and a serious country treats you like one instead of booking your flight back. If the law wants a hearing first, fine, hold it. Hold it on a base outside the border, where he stays a problem over there instead of a probation case over here. What you do not do is fly him home, seat him in a juvenile court, and hand him the street.

Here’s the actual sickness, and it isn’t confined to one Berlin courtroom. It’s a brain worm the whole Western left is running, and there’s a name for it now: suicidal empathy. Compassion metastasized past the point of self-preservation, the reflex that keeps extending the benefit of the doubt to the exact people who have told you, out loud, on Instagram, that they want you gone. A man posts ISIS propaganda and prepares an act of violence, and the system’s instinct isn’t to lock the door. It’s to workshop his feelings and believe him when he says “I’m all good now.” Naming the threat feels cruel to them, so they don’t. Jailing the threat feels intolerant, so they won’t. And the people who pay the consequences. This weekend it was a woman on a Berlin sidewalk.

A government that refuses to jail a convicted ISIS propagandist isn’t being generous. It’s choosing the next victim. And it was Berlin’s choice. Same weekend, a man knifed three women in northern Paris, motive “not immediately clear,” the phrase Europe now reaches for on reflex. Forget that following the stabbing he said: “It’s Allah who made me do it.”

Watch whether the German press runs the suspended sentence in the headline or keeps it in paragraph nine. Watch whether the appeal that was already pending turns into a review of how a convicted extremist walked. And watch how many outlets over here call this “terror” versus “motive unclear.”

Mamdani’s city-owned grocery stores got a price tag and still no open date. The mayor’s office rolled out the pricing model: 30% off a core basket of staples like meat, produce, bread, and cheese, market rate on everything else, and the discount is capped on essentials specifically so the stores don’t undercut nearby businesses. The city pitches about $1,000 a year in savings. What it doesn’t have is a store. The first location, in the South Bronx, isn’t slated to open until the end of 2027, with East Harlem’s around 2029.

The Bite of Seattle turned into a shootout. Three people were killed and four wounded, including a toddler, when gunfire erupted at the food festival near the Space Needle on July 26. Police believe two people were shooting at each other and bystanders were caught in the crossfire; two guns were recovered, one suspect was taken into custody, and a second fled and was still being sought late Sunday. The dead were a 19-year-old man, a 44-year-old man, and a 56-year-old woman.

Maine Democrats found a Senate nominee on the third try. Former state Senate president Troy Jackson won the Democratic nomination to challenge Susan Collins, stepping in after Graham Platner exited the race. Jackson had finished third in June’s gubernatorial primary, so the party’s marquee Senate shot goes to a labor-left candidate who lost his last race two months ago.

Trump got his EU trade deal, and it’s 15% across the board. After meeting Ursula von der Leyen in Scotland over the weekend, Trump announced a framework days ahead of his August 1 deadline: a 15% tariff on most European goods including cars, steel and aluminum held at 50%, plus $600 billion in EU investment in the U.S. and $750 billion in American energy purchases. It’s higher than the 10% Europe wanted and lower than the 30% he’d threatened.

The correspondents skipped the comedian and let the president host. The White House Correspondents’ Association held its rescheduled dinner Friday night, the makeup for the April event that ended when a gunman opened fire in the Washington Hilton lobby. Trump gave a rambling hourlong speech, took shots at journalists and political rivals, and closed by pulling on a “Trump 2028” cap. The association booked no comedian this year, hiring mentalist Oz Pearlman instead.

That’s The Read.

See you Wednesday.

If The Read is doing the cross-check work for you, send it to a friend who’s still chasing the framing instead of the facts.

This will be my first weekend in four weekends without any guests in the house. So if you need me don’t bother I am busy doing nothing. ;)

Let’s get into the news!

In Today’s Read

• New York’s new law orders nuns to refer dying patients for assisted suicide. Four orders are suing. California left them an out. New York didn’t.

• Trump signed a Saudi nuclear deal and posted “no enrichment.” The text reportedly says otherwise. Read the paper, not the tweet.

• A man yelled “Allahu Akbar” and stabbed two men, one Jewish. The press reached for “possible” and “mental health.” Run the test.

• In the Rundown: oil past $100, the House votes to leave Iran, a judge blocks the work-permit purge, 130 hours of ICE bodycam, Missouri undoes its abortion ban, Trump’s name in the Epstein files, and a jobs number that isn’t what it looks like.

New York Wants to Fine Nuns for Refusing to Talk Patients Into Dying

The Story.

Four orders of Catholic nuns and a group of Catholic health providers sued New York in federal court to block the Medical Aid in Dying Act before it takes effect August 5. Who are these groups: the Dominican Sisters of Hawthorne, the Carmelite Sisters for the Aged and Infirm, the Little Sisters of the Poor, the Diocese of Rockville Centre, and Catholic Health. Gov. Kathy Hochul signed the law in February. It lets an adult with a prognosis of six months or less request lethal medication, and it requires health providers to tell qualifying patients the option exists and to refer them for it. Refuse, and you’re looking at fines, professional sanctions, and criminal exposure. The case is Carmelite Sisters for the Aged and Infirm v. James, brought by the religious-liberty firm Becket.

New York says no provider is required to participate in assisted suicide, which is what is framed as a full conscience protection. It isn't. The exemption covers exactly one step, the last one. A physician doesn't have to write the lethal prescription or hand over the drugs. Everything before that final act stays mandatory. Under the law a provider still has to tell a qualifying patient assisted suicide is a legal option, counsel them on it, help work through whether they meet the eligibility rules, and refer or transfer them to someone who will finish it. A provider who declines the prescription still has to arrange the transfer. Becket's complaint puts it flat: individual physicians are exempt "only from the very last step."

The religious home-hospice carve-out is just as thin. It lets an order decline to offer the program, but it can't stop a home-hospice patient from accessing it, and Becket says the sisters are still required to build and run an assisted-suicide information system inside their own home. So the honest description isn't "nuns can opt out." It's "nuns must inform, counsel, qualify, and refer, and are excused only from pushing the plunger."

The right’s read. Fox, Townhall, PJ Media, and LifeNews ran it straight as a religious-liberty fight the state picked on purpose. The framing keeps the women front and center: sisters who minister to the dying, ordered to participate in a death their faith calls a grave wrong. The Post Millennial put the coercion in the headline, a law “forcing them to assist patients in getting gov-assisted suicide.”

The left’s read. Mostly a shrug. When the mainstream covered the bill back in February, it was a compassion win, terminally ill New Yorkers finally getting autonomy over their own deaths, with the religious objection filed under footnote. The lawsuit itself has drawn little straight coverage. Nobody on that side is walking readers through the inform-and-refer mandate, because the mandate is the part that makes “it’s just an option” stop being true.

What both sides skip. The width of the exemption. New York’s opt-out covers religious home-hospice and stops there. California, the state everybody points to as proof these laws work fine, wrote its End of Life Option Act so that a provider can decline to participate entirely if it conflicts with their conscience. Same policy, two very different conscience protections. So when comparisons are made to California they are leaving out one very important detail.

Start with what the exemption actually exempts. New York keeps saying nobody’s forced to participate. True only if “participate” means one thing: writing the final prescription. That is the only carve-out. A nun who has spent forty years at the bedside of the dying still has to tell a qualifying patient the lethal option exists, counsel them on it, confirm they’re eligible, and route them to a doctor who’ll sign for the drugs. In other words they are compelled to assist a suicide.

And New York had an the example but chose to violate religious freedom. California’s End of Life Option Act lets a religious provider decline to take part at all. But Albany to write the narrow version instead, the one that reaches past religious freedom and reaches al the way to compelled speech.

Because that’s the second violation here that I see few talking about. This isn’t only a free-exercise of religion problem. It’s compelled speech. The state is ordering these women to deliver a message they reject, that ending your life is a valid medical choice and here’s how to get it done, inside their own hospice, in their own voice, to a patient who trusts them. Government doesn’t get to script what you profess. Justice Robert Jackson settled that in 1943 in Barnette: no official, high or petty, can force a citizen to confess a belief that isn’t theirs. Making a Catholic sister recite the availability of assisted suicide to a dying person is that confession, forced on to her under threat of a fine.

We’ve run this exact play before. In 2018, California passed a law forcing pro-life pregnancy centers to post notices advertising the state’s free abortions and to hand patients a referral number. NIFLA v. Becerra. The Supreme Court struck it down as compelled speech, because the government cannot draft objectors into promoting the thing they exist to oppose. New York copied California’s homework and swapped abortion for assisted suicide. Same coercion, new lethal service.

The fact is that the left treats religious freedom as an obstacle, a loophole they think Christians hide behind to dodge policy. So they reach for “separation of church and state,” a phrase that appears nowhere in the Constitution, and stretch it to mean faith has to stay private, walled off from any room the government funds or touches. That’s backwards. The Establishment Clause stops the state from imposing a religion on you. It was never a gag order on the believer. What this law does is take one creed, that personal autonomy is absolute and the body answers to no one, and forces it onto people who believe the opposite, in the homes they run for the dying. That is an establishment of religion. The religion of secularism, and it wants the nuns to say its grace.

Here’s the good news. They keep losing this fight. The Little Sisters of the Poor are on this very complaint, and they already beat the Obama administration’s contraceptive mandate at the Supreme Court, 7-2, after Hobby Lobby cleared the path in 2014. 303 Creative, 2023: the state couldn’t force a web designer to build messages she rejected. Fulton, 2021: Philadelphia couldn’t force a Catholic agency to place children against its faith. Every time the government tries to conscript conscience, the Court says no. New York knows the record. It passed the law anyway, betting the fines land before the injunction does.

Watch whether the court blocks the law before August 5, because if it doesn’t, the penalties start on day one. Watch whether Attorney General Letitia James defends the narrow opt-out on the merits or quietly moves to widen it once NIFLA lands in the briefs. And watch whether one outlet that called this “compassion” in February will print the sentence that orders a nun to advertise a lethal prescription.

Everyone's Spinning the Saudi Nuclear Deal. Here's What It Actually Says.

The Story.

Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Saudi Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman signed a “123 agreement” for civilian nuclear cooperation, a 30-year pact worth tens of billions to U.S. firms like Westinghouse. Trump posted that Saudi Arabia will not enrich uranium under the deal and that the final terms hinge on Riyadh joining the Abraham Accords and normalizing with Israel.

Allow me to clarify what is happening because everyone keeps leaving out key details. The deal doesn’t hand Saudi Arabia the right to enrich, and it doesn’t flatly ban it either. It sets up a two-year joint U.S.-Saudi study to decide whether enrichment on Saudi soil is warranted and commercially viable. If Washington says no at the end of it, the Saudis are barred from enriching on their own or with any other foreign partner for ten years. Riyadh did refuse the “gold standard,” the 2009 UAE deal where the Emirates gave up enrichment for good, and Congress can still review or block the agreement.

Quick context on the “123 agreement.” It’s the section of the Atomic Energy Act that governs how the U.S. shares civilian nuclear technology abroad. The gold-standard version, which the UAE accepted in 2009, bars the partner from enriching uranium or reprocessing plutonium, the two roads to a weapon. Saudi Arabia wouldn’t sign that. What it signed instead kicks the enrichment question to that joint study, with a U.S. veto on the back end and a ten-year lockout if we walk. So “no enrichment” and “the Saudis get to enrich” are both wrong. The accurate version is “not now, maybe later, and only if Washington signs off.”

The right’s read. A jobs-and-oversight win, and a bargaining chip on Iran. Rubio’s pitch: the deal keeps the Saudis building with American firms instead of “competitors,” meaning Russia or China, who would sell the same technology with none of the guardrails. Tie it to the Abraham Accords and you might pull the biggest Arab state into normalizing with Israel, which is the real prize.

The left’s read. Proliferation risk and hypocrisy. Sen. Ed Markey did the heavy lifting, charging the administration is “allowing Saudi Arabia, a belligerent and authoritarian nation, to develop nuclear weapons technologies while starting a war with Iran under the guise of preventing an Iranian nuclear bomb.” PBS and the JTA led with the enrichment “loophole” and mostly skipped the two-year study and the U.S. veto that gates it.

What both sides skip. The gates. The left reports an open door and forgets it locks from Washington’s side. The right waves “no enrichment” and skips that Saudi refused the gold standard and kept the study door open at all. The real terms are more restrictive than the left says and less airtight than the right says. The answer is in the text, and everyone is picking and choosing.

Read the deal before you panic about it, because the version going around isn’t the one on paper. The left is telling you Saudi Arabia just got a green light to enrich uranium on its own soil. It didn’t. What it got is a two-year joint study, and if that study doesn’t satisfy the United States, the Saudis are locked out of enrichment, alone or with any other partner, for a decade. That’s not a blank check. It’s a maybe with an American veto stapled to it.

A detail that the right glosses over is that Saudi Arabia wouldn’t accept the gold standard, the no-enrichment pledge the UAE signed in 2009. But it isn’t the alarm the left is sounding, because 2026 barely resembles the world that produced that pledge.

When they wave the comparison at you, “the Emirates gave it up, why won’t the Saudis,” start with who’s holding the pen. Back in 2009 the kingdom was run by King Abdullah, an old-guard, go-slow monarch. He died in 2015. The man running it now is Mohammed bin Salman, who wasn’t in charge of anything in 2009 and didn’t become crown prince until 2017. And MBS said it flat out, on CBS in 2018: if Iran builds a bomb, Saudi Arabia will “follow suit as soon as possible.” The 2009 benchmark predates the man who runs Saudi Arabia now, and it predates the war with Iran now underway. His nuclear hedge against Tehran isn't hypothetical anymore. Holding it up as the standard ignores the difference 17 years makes when the leadership and the threat both flipped underneath it. Different country, different decade. Not a fair comparison.

And MBS being on tape promising to match Iran is the strongest reason to keep this program on an American leash, not proof the deal is reckless. “Left ajar under U.S. supervision” and “the Saudis are enriching” are not the same sentence, and only one of them is true today.

Here’s what the proliferation panic buries. The alternative isn’t a Saudi Arabia with no nuclear program. Riyadh has told anyone who’ll listen it’s building one, and if America won’t help, Russia’s Rosatom and China’s CNNC are already in the lobby with a pen and zero interest in inspections or a ten-year lockout. Better the thing gets built by American firms, under an American 123 agreement, with Congress able to look, than by Moscow or Beijing on terms nobody outside the room ever sees.

And the Abraham Accords piece is the actual point. Getting Saudi Arabia to normalize with Israel is the biggest prize in Middle East diplomacy, period. This is the custodian of Mecca and Medina and the heavyweight of the Arab world. Its recognition pulls the other holdouts toward Israel and isolates Iran, which has spent decades funding Hezbollah and the Houthis to keep exactly this peace from happening. Normalization also opens the door to integrated air and missile defense between Israel and the Gulf, the precise shield you’d want with Iranian missiles and Houthi drones already in the air. The Houthi strikes on Saudi tankers this week (see the Rundown) are the argument for it, not against it. Using civilian nuclear cooperation to get there is a bargaining chip, not recklessness.

So where do I land. The deal is a reasonable bet as long as the guardrails hold, and the guardrails are real: an American veto on enrichment and a ten-year bar if we walk, with Congress able to block the whole thing. The thing to actually watch isn’t Markey’s press release. It’s whether that two-year study turns into a rubber stamp, and whether Saudi Arabia ever signs the normalization the deal is built to buy.

Watch whether the administration hands Congress the full 123 text or keeps summarizing it for us. Watch whether Riyadh takes one concrete step toward recognizing Israel or just pockets the nuclear cooperation and stalls. And watch who gets named to that two-year enrichment study, because that panel, not a Truth Social post, is what decides whether “no enrichment” holds.

A quick, honest ask.

The Read is free. Three mornings a week, the cross-check lands in your inbox, free. I want to keep it that way, and the readers who upgrade are what make that possible.

A paid subscription opens everything on the other side of the wall. That’s Kitchen Sense, my year-long highly requested cooking curriculum, plus the long-form articles and essays I keep out of the free feed. Here’s this week’s, so you can taste what you’re missing:

Heads up, though: the price goes up on August 3 for new subscribers. Right now it's $7 a month, or $65 for the whole year, which is the better deal. On August 3 both move up, to $8 and $75. If you've been on the fence, lock in today's rate before then, keep The Read free for everyone who reads it, and here's what comes with it:

• Kitchen Sense, one real cooking skill a month, taught from scratch

• Every long-form article and essay, no paywall on your end

• The full archive and the subscriber chat

Subscribe now

Thank you to every one for your support. ❤️

A Man Yelled “Allahu Akbar,” Stabbed Two New Yorkers, and the Press Reached for “Possible”

The Story.

Two men were stabbed in broad daylight on the Upper West Side Thursday afternoon. Around 1:31 p.m., a 57-year-old Asian man was stabbed in the torso near West 84th and Central Park West. Minutes later, a 50-year-old Jewish man was stabbed in the chest and abdomen near West 86th. Witnesses and both victims said the attacker yelled “Allahu Akbar” during the attacks. Police arrested 51-year-old Raul Morales. Both victims were hospitalized in stable condition and are expected to survive. The NYPD said Morales has no known mental-health history with the department, but that mental health “may have been a factor,” and it’s evaluating the stabbings as possible hate crimes. The mean are alive and are being treated at Mount Sinai Morningside.

The right’s read. Fox, RedState, Newsweek, and the Times of Israel led with the shout and the target: an antisemitic attack the city is soft-pedaling, the Jewish victim and “Allahu Akbar” up top, not buried. Fox ran a second angle hard, that Mayor Zohran Mamdani was “slow to respond” while Hochul and other officials condemned it faster, and Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar accused Mamdani of helping create “a climate in which Jews are targeted.”

The left’s read. CNN, ABC, and NY1 led with “unprovoked” and “possible hate crime,” foregrounding the mental-health line and the lack of any known link between the suspect and either victim. The randomness and the first victim’s ethnicity got used to suggest the motive is unsettled, not clearly antisemitic.

What both sides skip. Each side keeps the fact that flatters it and drops the other. The right leans on “Allahu Akbar” and the Jewish victim and skips that the first man stabbed was a 57-year-old Asian man with no obvious connection to the second, which muddies a clean terror story. The left leans on “mental health may have been a factor” and “possible,” technically accurate and also the exact hedge that never seems to surface when a suspect’s politics cut the other way. Nobody holds both facts at once.

A man shouts “Allahu Akbar,” stabs two people including a Jewish man, and the wire copy reaches for “possible hate crime” and “mental health may have been a factor.” Now change the shout to something a MAGA hat might yell and count how many outlets hold the word “possible” that gently. You already know. Don’t you love selective reporting?

But, let’s be honest. The motive isn’t airtight. I mean the “Allahu Akbar” gives us a sense of motive, my sense is he is not a fan of America, but the question is was it anti-semitism? The first victim was a 57-year-old Asian man with no clear tie to the second a block away, and that scrambles the tidy “targeted the Jew” version. If you’re going to demand the press hold its hedges, hold your own. A man screaming a jihadist phrase mid-stabbing and a messy victim pattern are both true at the same time, and the story is that tension, not whichever half you find more convenient.

But the media reflex was“mental health may have been a factor” before any diagnosis, before any known psychiatric history, on the same day the NYPD said Morales had no mental-health record with them. That instinct to reach for “troubled loner” the second the phrase is Arabic, while other attacks get called terror before the blood dries, is a pattern, and pretending it isn’t insults everyone who can read a chyron.

And then there’s City Hall. Mamdani’s statement quoted the “Allahu Akbar” detail and pivoted to praising NYPD’s fast arrest, careful not to name what the attack looked like. Gidion Sa’ar, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the State of Israel, didn’t bother with careful. He called out the climate outright. “This violence did not happen in a vacuum. Months of incitement against the Jewish state from Mamdani have helped create a climate in which Jews are targeted.”

Watch whether the Manhattan DA charges this as a hate crime or lets it ride as assault. Watch how the wires headline it 72 hours from now, once “Allahu Akbar” has had time to fade from the lede. And watch whether Mamdani says the word “antisemitism” without a reporter dragging it out of him first.

Oil blew past $100 a barrel for the first time since May. Houthi rebels struck two Saudi oil tankers, the Encelia and the Layla, in the Red Sea on Thursday, setting the Encelia on fire (crew safe) to enforce a self-declared blockade of Saudi ports. Brent jumped more than 6% to roughly $101, up over 30% on the month, with the Strait of Hormuz already choked. Goldman Sachs says $120 by the fourth quarter if the disruptions hold.

The House voted to pull U.S. forces out of the Iran fight. The Senate wouldn’t. On Thursday the House passed H.Con.Res.89, directing the president to remove American forces from hostilities with Iran, 214 to 208. Hours later the Senate rejected Sen. Chris Van Hollen’s parallel war-powers resolution 47 to 49, with Susan Collins voting yes and John Fetterman voting no. Two chambers, two answers. Watch Sen. Sheehy speech on Iran.

A judge temporarily paused the penalties for skipping the new asylum fee. District Judge Nathaniel Gorton on Monday blocked USCIS from terminating work permits or rejecting asylum applications over nonpayment of a fee created by the 2025 reconciliation law, while leaving the fee itself in place. The suit, from Democracy Forward, argues USCIS imposed those penalties without the notice-and-comment rulemaking the law requires, a procedural claim, not a ruling that the policy is illegal. He decides on a longer pause by August 5.

Vermont Public reviewed 130 hours of bodycam from a March ICE raid that went sideways. Agents in South Burlington were after Deyvi Daniel Corona-Sanchez, a Mexican national deported in 2022 who illegally reentered, but ICE admitted it tailed the wrong man and detained three people who weren’t on any warrant, all since released. The footage shows agents using flash-bangs and chemical spray on the crowd that surrounded the building, and local Vermont officers openly skeptical of ICE’s conduct in real time. National right-side coverage has been close to nonexistent.

A Missouri court struck down the state’s abortion ban, and voters could reinstate it in November. On June 18 a Jackson County judge ruled the restrictions violated the Right to Reproductive Freedom Amendment that Missouri voters passed in 2024, the first time a state has undone a total post-Dobbs ban through the courts. Access is back for now, but a measure on the November 2026 ballot would ban abortion again except for life, rape, or incest up to 12 weeks. Same week, South Dakota Gov. Larry Rhoden signed a law making it a felony to sell or distribute abortion pills.

A judge found the DOJ likely broke the Epstein transparency law by withholding files that mention Trump. After releasing 3.5 million pages and holding back 2.5 million, the department withheld dozens of Trump-mentioning items, including, per MS NOW (the former MSNBC), FBI interview memos carrying an accuser’s unproven abuse allegation against Trump. U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan ordered DOJ to turn the documents over or justify the redactions, finding it likely violated the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is demanding an all-Senate briefing.

The unemployment rate dropped to 4.2%, and it’s not the good kind of drop. The rate hit its lowest in years in June, but the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows the decline came because roughly 720,000 people left the labor force, pushing participation to its lowest in more than five years. Payrolls added just 57,000 jobs. The July report lands August 7. A rate falls two ways, and people quitting the search is the worse one.

That’s The Read.

If The Read is doing the cross-check work for you, send it to a friend who’s still chasing the framing instead of the facts.

I have a headache, so let’s get straight into the news.

In Today’s Read

• A Democratic governor confirmed 6,600 non-citizens got auto-registered in New Jersey and 400 voted. The left calls it a “software error.”

• The Smithsonian’s own director couldn’t defend her museum’s “objectivity is white supremacy” toolkit on camera. The left calls it an attack on scholarship. It isn’t scholarship.

• The State Department named 43 Americans and groups, the DSA among them, in a report on Cuba's decades-long network here. The press called it a blacklist and never opened it. Being named isn't being silenced.

• In the Rundown: 3.5 million Epstein pages out and 2.5 million held back, the Maine ICE agent’s record, a 50% tariff on Canada, a $37.5 billion Iran war, a ceasefire Trump’s not interested in, and a teenager who turned $3.07 into $89,600.

A Democratic Governor Just Confirmed the “Myth”

The Story.

New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill, a Democrat, announced Tuesday that a software error in the state’s Motor Vehicle Commission system automatically registered roughly 6,600 non-citizens to vote between June 2023 and June 2024. These were people who pressed “No” when the DMV keypad asked whether they were U.S. citizens. The system registered them anyway. Fewer than 400 of them actually cast ballots in elections since 2023. The state has scrubbed them from the rolls and says it’s protecting their identities so their immigration status isn’t put at risk.

Sherrill framed the disclosure as election protection and used the same breath to accuse the White House of trying to “weaponize elections for political gain.” Hours later, the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division moved. Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon sent Sherrill a formal letter demanding, within five business days, the full names, dates of birth, nationalities, and home addresses of all 6,600 individuals, plus when and where the 400 voted. The letter tells Sherrill to preserve every record tied to the disclosure and notifies a federal court in United States v. Caldwell that DOJ will use it to obtain New Jersey’s entire statewide voter registration list, which the state has so far refused to hand over.

Harmeet K. Dhillon @AAGDhillon Today, NJ Gov. Sherrill stated that 400 non-citizens voted in elections. This is unacceptable and illegal! The @CivilRights Division @TheJusticeDept is investigating this unlawful dilution of American votes.

Quick context: let’s talk about how this happens. New Jersey registers voters through the DMV. You apply for a license or a state ID, you answer a citizenship question on a keypad, and the system moves you onto the voter rolls from there. There is no outside verification at that moment. Nobody runs your answer against immigration or Social Security records before you're registered. It's one button press on the honor system, and this time the system failed even for the people who allegedly pressed "No." I say allegedly because New Jersey isn't releasing the underlying data, so nobody outside the state can confirm who answered what. Someone could also just hit the wrong button. That's the level of security we're dealing with.

The left’s read. CNN, NBC, and Axios led with the mechanism and the mercy. “Software error.” “Through no fault of their own.” NBC’s headline put the glitch first and the non-citizens second. Every version stressed there’s “no evidence any election was swayed” and that the state is shielding the people who got registered so their status doesn’t come back to bite them.

The right’s read. Townhall, PJ Media, and the Washington Times ran it as a receipt. “Trump Was Right.” The angle is that a Democratic governor just confirmed the exact thing the administration has been saying, days after DHS claimed 250,000 non-citizens are registered across New Jersey, California, Nevada, and Pennsylvania. Even the Washington Post conceded the disclosure “validates some of Trump’s assertions.”

What both sides skip. The registration mechanism. Nobody's asking how many other states run the same DMV setup, where an unverified keypad answer is the only citizenship check, and how many have ever gone back to audit it. New Jersey found this because someone finally looked. That's the uncomfortable part neither side wants to hold.

You know, we’ve been assured repeatedly that elections are totes secure. For years, anytime someone raised non-citizens getting registered to vote, the response was a pat on the head. Doesn’t happen. “It’s illegal for them to vote.” Mikie Sherrill, a Democratic governor, just confirmed it happened: 6,600 registered, nearly 400 voted. But it’s not “widespread” according to the talking heads, so no biggie.

While Sherrill disclosed she scrubbed the rolls, she is sitting on the evidence and protecting 400 people who voted illegally.

Granted, four hundred votes across two years did not flip a New Jersey race. And the state’s own account is that these people answered “No” but were registered anyway, which would make this a state failure rather than a fraud ring. Would. But this cannot be confirmed, because the only people holding the data are the ones who broke it. Their primary cited reason for not sharing the information is to protect the identity of the non-citizens from DHS.

What has been exposed is a significant security risk to voter rolls and voter registration integrity. A single unverified keypad answer decides whether a non-citizen lands on the voter rolls, and the software in this case failed and went undetected for a year. And when the system is working, it hinges on the person answering honestly. That’s the problem, and it’s a design problem, not a 6,600-criminals problem.

And the DOJ didn’t wait a day. Dhillon demanded the names, birthdates, and addresses of all 6,600 people on a five-day clock, then told a court she wants the entire voter roll. An hour earlier, Sherrill said she’s shielding those identities so nobody’s immigration status blows up.

Let me be clear. No governor should be harboring people who are in this country illegally, and shielding these names from DHS is what that is. At a minimum, hand over the 400. Those people answered a citizenship question with “No,” put on the record that they were not citizens, and then went and voted. Maybe some of them figured a registration card in the mail meant they’d been cleared. Doesn’t matter. Ignorance has never been a defense for breaking the law, and it isn’t one here.

And then there’s “not widespread,” the phrase carrying the entire left side of this story right now. It’s a joke. These are the same people who treat one voter allegedly turned away at one precinct as a civil rights emergency worth a week of coverage. Fine. Then follow your own logic. When a non-citizen casts a ballot, an American citizen’s vote gets diluted. That is disenfranchisement. It just runs in the direction they’ve never cared about. You don’t get to spend a decade calling every single vote sacred and then wave off 400 illegal ones we know of as a rounding error.

New Jersey found this because somebody finally looked. How many other states register voters off the same unverified keypad answer? How would anyone know? We’re trusting that people press the right button, and in New Jersey the software didn’t even honor the button they pressed.

Watch whether New Jersey meets Dhillon’s five-day deadline or fights it out in Caldwell, because how hard they fight tells you how bad the data is. Watch whether Sherrill’s office ever names which elections those 400 ballots landed in. And watch whether one other DMV-registration state runs its own audit before November, or whether everybody agrees not to look.

Turns out “secure” meant nobody had checked.

The Smithsonian Sent Its Director to Defend the Museum. She Couldn’t Defend the Materials.

The Story.

Anthea Hartig, director of the Smithsonian's National Museum of American History, testified Tuesday before a House DOGE subcommittee at a hearing titled "Rewriting American History." A second hearing, before the full House Administration Committee, happens Wednesday.

The hearings follow a July 4 White House report, "Saving America's Story," that accused the Smithsonian of "extreme political activism" and pointed out the museum has no major exhibit on the Founding Era, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, or the Revolution. Republicans pressed Hartig on a staff training document the museum promoted starting in 2020 that described objectivity and politeness as features of "white supremacy culture," and on a "Girlhood" exhibit that displayed a 13-year-old girl's diary entries about gender identity. Hartig said the museum "does not take sides."

The left’s read. Two layers. On the hearing itself, the Washington Post and ArtNews framed it as a GOP loyalty test aimed at independent scholarship, with Democrats defending Hartig on the dais and a Republican asking her “Do you love America?” Underneath it runs the bigger charge the left has pushed since Trump’s March 2025 “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History” order: that the administration is erasing Black, women’s, and LGBTQ history to whitewash the country and slip a white-supremacist story of America in through the back. Rep. Ayanna Pressley called it a “crusade to whitewash history.” Examples that they cite: The Park Service cut the “T” off the Stonewall monument’s webpage, and agencies were told to strip content “emphasizing slavery and racial injustice” by September 17.

The right’s read. Townhall, the Daily Signal, and Fox ran it as a rout. Rep. Brandon Gill got Hartig to agree that politeness matters, then read her own toolkit back to her, the one calling politeness a marker of white supremacy, and asked whether she was promoting a white supremacy culture at the Smithsonian. Fox highlighted Rep. Nancy Mace pressing her on gender displays, with the director “stumbling” on basic questions about sex.

What both sides skip. Both sides are curating, and both call the other one propaganda. The left won't admit the museum walked away from neutrality years ago. The right won't admit its own side has nudged exhibits toward the president's comfort, like the Trump impeachment label that came down during a White House-pressured review. The honest fight isn't whether history is being shaped. It's in which direction, and from what baseline.

A congressman asked the director of the National Museum of American History whether she promotes a white supremacy culture, and she couldn’t say no without contradicting her own museum’s training documents.

The left cries “independent scholarship under attack.” But what does this “scholarship” include? A training toolkit telling staff that objectivity itself is a tool of white supremacy. That is not scholarship; it’s a worldview, and a specific one, handed to the people who decide what a taxpayer-funded museum tells 4 million visitors a year about their own country. Hartig says the museum “does not take sides,” but this document, the displays, and the lack of displays, especially as it comes to the founding fathers, say otherwise.

The charge the left has run since Trump's March 2025 history order is that this administration is erasing Black history, women's history, and LGBTQ history to whitewash the country. It's a heavy accusation. It also falls apart the second you walk the National Mall. Nobody is bulldozing the National Museum of African American History and Culture. It opened in 2016, it's one of the most visited museums in the country, and it isn't moving. Slavery, Jim Crow, the civil rights marches, the whole arc, still told, in a dedicated Smithsonian building the size of a city block. "Erasing Black history" is a funny way to describe a country that built a national museum for it and lines people up out the door.

So what’s the fight really about? Framing. And the museum’s framing has a paper trail. In 2020, that same African American History museum posted a chart titled “Aspects and Assumptions of Whiteness” that informed visitors hard work, rational thinking, being on time, and politeness are traits of “white culture.” Those are the museum’s words, not mine. It got pulled after the backlash, with staff admitting it wasn’t “working in the way we intended.” Six years later, Gill stands at a hearing and reads a staff toolkit carrying the identical worldview, objectivity and politeness recast as white supremacy. So they took it out of public view and instilled it behind the scenes. There is a word for that: ideology.

Here’s the turn nobody on that side wants to take. The accusation is that Trump weaponizes history for propaganda. Okay. Look in the mirror. A museum that teaches you America IS its slavery and its sins, then goes quiet on the part where the same country wrote slavery out of its Constitution and bled to end it, is running propaganda too. Just the self-flagellating kind. History flattened into a permanent struggle session, where the only lesson is guilt, and the only posture is apology. Slavery is real American history and it gets taught, no asterisk. So does abolition. So does the country that produced both the wound and the cure. A museum that lingers on the wound and mumbles through the healing isn’t handing you history. It’s handing you a grievance. But make sure you stop at the gift shop for a “Latina Power” hat.

And look at what the administration actually flagged as "improper ideology." One target was an American Women's History Museum exhibit built to celebrate biological men who compete in women's sports. The left files that under "erasing women's history." Putting men in the women's museum is the erasure.

The administration doesn’t get a halo, and neither does the coverage of it. Last summer the museum pulled the references to Trump’s two impeachments from its “Limits of Presidential Power” display and restored that section to its 2008 appearance. The headlines said the Smithsonian “erased” impeachment history. So I went and checked what’s still on the wall. Andrew Johnson, Nixon, and Clinton are all still there. The Trump material was a temporary label put up in 2021 for what was then current events, and the Smithsonian says a future update will cover every impeachment. “They erased impeachment history” is flatly wrong.

The one removal that happens to benefit the sitting president got made during a content review the Smithsonian agreed to under White House pressure, and “we’re restoring it to 2008” is a convenient road to that destination. Grant that one.

Now take the other example the left keeps waving, the Park Service putting “LGB” on the Stonewall page. That was reported as erasure. It’s accuracy. Stonewall was 1969. The word then was “gay.” The community became LGB across the mid-to-late 1980s, and the T didn’t hitch a ride until the 1990s and after. Britain’s National Union of Students didn’t adopt “LGBT” until 2004, thirty-five years after the riot. Writing a 2020s acronym onto a 1969 event isn’t preserving history, it’s editing it, which is supposedly the sin under discussion.

And the argument over whether the T belongs there at all is happening inside the gay and lesbian world, not on the right. The LGB Alliance formed in 2019 on exactly that premise, LGB International launched in 2025 saying the same thing, and their position is straightforward: sexual orientation is who you’re attracted to, gender identity is a claim about what you are, and those are different subjects that got welded together for political convenience.

So yes, Congress should be asking what these directors are doing with taxpayer money. Asking a federally funded institution to account for the story it tells is not a threat to scholarship. It’s the job, and it’s overdue. Nobody is raiding the archives or arresting a curator. A committee asked a director to explain her own museum’s documents and she couldn’t.

The wounded act coming from the left isn’t about scholarship either. It’s what it sounds like when a political project gets questioned out loud for the first time and has no answer ready. Their agenda got called subjective, which it is, and the response was to reach for the word “scholarship” like a badge. Reframing a country’s history to install a worldview is propaganda. Being paid by the taxpayers to do it is the part they’d rather you not think about.

Watch whether Wednesday’s full-committee hearing produces an actual funding condition or just another viral exchange. Watch whether the Smithsonian quietly pulls the staff toolkit now that it’s in the congressional record. And watch whether anyone fills the Founding Era gap without deleting a hard chapter to make room.

The country can hold its sins and its progress in the same room. A museum that can only manage one of them is the one rewriting history.

ICYMI

The State Department Named 43 Americans. The Press Called It a Blacklist Instead of Reading It.

The Story.

The State Department published a roughly 100-page report Monday titled “Cuba: The Capital of 21st Century Communism,” accusing Havana of a decades-long “campaign of subversion” that “infiltrated the highest reaches of the U.S. government, recruited and cultivated generations of American activists” and served as a force multiplier for China, Russia, and Iran. It names about 43 Americans and organizations, including the Democratic Socialists of America, Code Pink, The People’s Forum, the National Lawyers Guild, and the National Network on Cuba, alongside individuals like streamer Hasan Piker, New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani, Amazon union organizer Chris Smalls, Isra Hirsi, and Amy Goodman. It traces the lineage from the Black Panthers, the Weather Underground, the Black Liberation Army, and Puerto Rican militant groups forward to Antifa and anti-ICE collectives. Secretary Rubio separately alleged Cuba has been infiltrating U.S. politics through the DSA. It lands while Trump is threatening to invade Cuba, with a fuel blockade and more than 240 sanctions since January leaving the island nearly out of diesel.

It documents solidarity trips to the island, ideological alignment, institutional relationships, and Cuba-backed nonprofits and travel outfits that coordinate the visits, alongside documented espionage cases with convictions attached. In most cases it stops short of alleging Havana directs these people. Hold onto that, because we're coming back to whether direction is even the right test.

The right’s read. Fox, the Daily Signal, and the Washington Times ran it as documentation of something conservatives have argued for years. The Daily Signal’s framing was “How Cuba Became the Nerve Center of the Anti-American Left.” Fox emphasized the spy penetrations and the campus and nonprofit pipelines.

The left’s read. Blacklist. The Guardian, the New Republic, and Truthout skipped past the substance to the naming, calling it a “modern-day blacklist” of private citizens and a document published to manufacture a pretext for invasion. The New Republic’s headline made the individuals the story: “State Department Targets Hasan Piker, Ilhan Omar’s Daughter, and DSA.”

What both sides skip. The right is running with “infiltration” language. The left is calling it a blacklist to avoid discussing what’s in it. And neither is connecting it to the thing sitting right there: the DSA publishes its own platform in eight days at its Chicago convention, and you can just read it.

Let’s separate two questions, because the media has them welded together on purpose. Question one: is it appropriate for the State Department to name American citizens in a report like this? Question two: is what the report describes actually happening?

On the first one. Yes, these people have free speech. They can say whatever they want, and nobody is arresting them for it. But the State Department also has a duty to bring threats to light and inform the public. If Americans are aligned with and supporting a government and an ideology that openly advocates tearing down the West and this country, telling citizens about it is the job. That’s not a blacklist. That’s a briefing. And it is not crazy for these folks to be on somebody’s radar.

Here’s the distinction the “blacklist” crowd is hoping you won’t make. Being silenced and being identified are not the same thing. Nobody pulled Hasan Piker’s stream. Nobody padlocked The People’s Forum. What happened is that a government report described things these people did in the open: the trips, the speeches, the partnerships, the public admiration for the regime. You don’t get to build a decade of public identity around solidarity with Havana and then call it persecution when somebody writes it down. “We got named for things we did on camera” is a worse headline than “blacklist,” so they went with blacklist.

Which brings me to the part that should embarrass the newsrooms. The Guardian, the New Republic, and Truthout all had the same option I had. Open the report. Check the claims. Tell readers which parts hold and which are stretched, because some of them are stretched. Instead, they made the naming the entire story and never got around to the contents. Typical and predictable.

Now let me stress test the word everyone is fighting over, because “infiltration” is carrying a lot of weight in this report. Infiltration does not require a directive. That’s the wrong test. Intelligence services have run influence operations through people who never took an order for as long as intelligence services have existed, and the Soviets had an entire vocabulary for the useful believer who thinks the idea was his own. “Useful idiot.” The question isn’t whether Havana issued marching orders. It’s whether a foreign government worked its way into American institutions. Yes, yes it did.

Ana Montes was recruited out of Johns Hopkins as a graduate student in 1984 and spent sixteen years as the Defense Intelligence Agency’s top Cuba analyst while handing Havana what she saw. She took no money. She did it because she believed it. Walter Kendall Myers fed State Department material to Cuba for three decades and is serving life. So when the report says Cuba “infiltrated the highest reaches of the U.S. government,” that isn’t a rhetorical flourish. That’s a case file.

So no, I’m not going to pretend State is out of line for keeping an eye on these people. Take Hasan Piker, who is named in the report. In March he went to Havana with CodePink’s Nuestra América Convoy, and CodePink is named in the report too. Fox reported the convoy was organized by a Rhodes Scholar with ties to Cuba’s president. He has called Mao Zedong “one of the great leaders of this world” and said flatly that he would never criticize him. Eight days ago he stood in front of the College Democrats of America convention in a Mao suit and called for an ideological purge of the Democratic Party.

And who cares whose credit card paid for the flight? Montes never took a dime. Payment was never the point. An intelligence service does not need to hand a directive to someone already doing the work for free and streaming it. They aren’t recruiting opponents. They’re finding people who already agree, and then being welcoming and helpful, which is precisely what the report describes.

Treasury has since subpoenaed Piker over the trip, part of a review of roughly 40 Americans who joined the 2026 convoys. Whatever you think of the man, that’s not a speech case. That’s a sanctions question about travel to an embargoed country, and it’s a fair one.

But do you hear that? “They published this to justify a war!” Maybe the timing is political. Both things can be true. A report can be released at a self-serving moment and still contain accurate information, and the way you find out which parts are which is by reading it, not by yelling “blacklist” and going home.

Now let's talk about my current fixation. The DSA is on that list, and the DSA hands you its own case in eight days. Its platform, "Workers Deserve More," is posted publicly ahead of the Chicago convention running July 31 to August 2: abolish the Senate, extend the vote to non-citizens, strip the courts of the power to strike down laws, write a new constitution, put major corporations under public ownership. Nobody needed a State Department report to find that. It's on their website.

Related

Watch whether any outlet that cried blacklist publishes an actual fact-check of the report’s claims. Watch whether Treasury’s OFAC review of the roughly 40 convoy participants produces actual findings or quietly goes away. And watch the Chicago convention floor for the reformer-versus-revolutionary fight, because that’s the crack forming in real time.

Being named isn’t being silenced. Read the report, then read their platform, and decide for yourself.

The ICE agent who killed a man in Maine has a documented head injury and a domestic-violence record. David Brouillette, who shot and killed 25-year-old Colombian national Joan Sebastián Durán Guerrero during a July 13 traffic stop in Biddeford, said in a 2023 lawsuit that a steel beam left him with “impaired memory” and “cognitive deficits.” Maine family-court records also document a history of alleged abuse against two ex-wives and his daughters, including an allegation he threw boiling water at a pregnant ex-wife. ICE hired him with both records on file.

Trump imposed a 50% tariff on most Canadian goods. The order, signed Monday, uses Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930, an obscure Depression-era law that lets a president tariff countries deemed to discriminate against U.S. commerce. It hits wine, dairy, furniture, and hockey gear while sparing energy, potash, and critical minerals, and takes effect in 30 days. PM Mark Carney called it unjustified but said Canada will “intensify” trade talks.

Hegseth put the Iran war at $37.5 billion and asked for $67 billion more. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told the Senate Appropriations Committee Tuesday that the war has cost $37.5 billion so far, then requested a supplemental to cover it and replenish supplies, at a hearing protesters interrupted. The Pentagon now puts the U.S. death toll at 17, with more than 100 injured since early July. Congress still has not voted to authorize the war.

Iran floated a ceasefire. Trump says he isn’t interested yet. Mediators passed Tehran a proposal for a 10-day pause to try to revive last month’s interim deal. Trump’s response Tuesday: Iran “desperately” wants to meet, but the U.S. won’t engage until Tehran is ready for “meaningful” talks, and the earlier memorandum of understanding is “over.”

The DOJ published 3.5 million pages of Epstein records and held back another 2.5 million. The release under the Epstein Files Transparency Act includes more than 2,000 videos and 180,000 images, much of it heavily redacted, with the department citing exemptions for victim identities and open investigations. The law’s two lead sponsors, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), wrote jointly to Deputy AG Todd Blanche that victim privacy “cannot be used as a blanket excuse to withhold records Congress required to be released.” A separate lawsuit is pushing for an unredacted release.

A teenager turned a $3.07 thrift store find into $89,600. Quinn Brown was digging through a clothing bin at a Goodwill outside Portland, Oregon, in January when another shopper tossed a Lakers jacket back onto the pile. Brown, who resells used clothes online, grabbed it. It turned out to be Wilt Chamberlain's warmup jacket from the 1972 NBA Finals, the series the Lakers won over the Knicks, and Sotheby's sold it Monday for $89,600 on 48 bids, under its $150,000 to $250,000 estimate.

That’s The Read.

See you Friday.

If The Read is doing the cross-check work for you, send it to a friend who’s still chasing the framing instead of the facts.

She sat up dramatically, “This is the guy!” and showed Dan. She handed him the phone to finish watching the video while she ran his FEC history on her laptop and saw he’d given Bernie Sanders $300. Done deal, they had a future Senator.

“That was enough information to know that we had the best prospect that we’d maybe ever had.”

There was no candidate interviewed. No question on his ability to run, advocate, or even policy positions. He’s a grizzled, white dude who voted for Bernie. Winner, winner, chicken dinner, a prospect found. The seat was Maine, the one Democrats needed to take back the Senate, and what better way to flip the seat than to put an “oyster farmer” who can read a script?

Blinded by their checklist of identity criteria, they had no idea it was due to fall apart.

Graham Platner didn’t climb a ladder. He got discovered. It was like one of those stories you would hear in the 90s of the high school girl discovered while walking through the mall. Except this time the model scouts were two activists from out of state, engaged to each other and running campaigns between a law-school final and a sociology seminar. They pictured a working-class hero in their mind and went scrolling for a face that fit. He also checked a few more boxes: a Marine veteran, a documented oyster farm that existed on paper. Never mind he was “making a living on the sea” subsidized by his mother, or bought a house thanks to his father, or that nobody had checked who he was under the beard, or that the people doing the casting particularly cared to.

These are the same people who swore off hand-picked candidates, then hand-picked one.

The casting directors

Matt Yglesias named it over on the New York Times, and he meant it as praise. Dan Moraff, he wrote, “approaches his job like a casting director,” hunting a particular type: military veterans with blue-collar jobs and no electoral experience. Moraff didn’t run from the description. He leaned into it. “We want people who didn’t run for student council,” he told the Wall Street Journal. “We want people who have not been spending their entire lives planning their ascent to political power.”

They both believe they’ve stumbled onto a new genius strategy for finding candidates. “We went through thousands and thousands of prospects,” Moraff says. What they’re actually doing is one more tired round of identity politics.

Moraff has a house style, too. “A healthy contempt for existing Democratic Party infrastructure is really essential,” he said, because the establishment builds campaigns where “a normal person can look at it and say, this looks and sounds like shit.” He’s not entirely wrong about that. He’s just describing a problem he then made worse.

The costume

They liked what they saw. The beard and the forearm tattoos. A sweatshirt, and an oyster farm that photographs like a Carhartt catalog. And the ad Morris Katz cut, where Platner stares down the lens and says Maine has become “essentially unlivable for working class people, and it makes me deeply angry.” Slate and the Free Beacon both clocked it early as working-class cosplay, markers picked for what they signal.

Watch the ad, and you can see the hands of young elitists all over it. Platner chops wood. He swings a kettlebell. The military service gets its beat, the guitars come up loud, and somewhere in there he drops an F-bomb, because nothing says regular guy to the Democratic Party like a well-placed F-bomb. All of it manufactured as a real person being himself. Then the script slips. The ad reaches for the word “oligarchy,” not a word you hear at the boat launch or the transfer station. It’s a word you hear in a DSA reading group. The costume is Maine; the vocabulary is Brooklyn.

Katz will tell you what he built. “I wouldn’t say it’s a progressive agenda as much as a populist agenda,” he said, “a common sense approach.”

“Common sense” is the exact language Yglesias pins on Daniel Lurie, the moderate San Francisco mayor and Levi Strauss heir. On Lurie it fits. Katz reaches for the same phrase to disarm his socialist agenda, to make it sound as reasonable as the blue blood’s when it’s nothing of the kind. That’s the costume. The socialist trying on the centrist’s clothes.

Everything a voter could see about Graham Platner was chosen to read a certain way to a certain Mainer. And the plan worked, until it didn’t.

The osyterman with no clothes

We already know the vetting was thin, because the candidate imploded. Moraff will even walk you through it. “We paid a nice firm a whole chunk of money and got some stuff back,” he said. “Some of what you’ve seen on the news we got back, other stuff we didn’t.” Some they caught, some they missed, and all of it was sitting in public for anyone who bothered: an SS-style tattoo, a trail of racist Reddit posts under the handle “P. Hussle,” explicit texts to other women, and a sexual assault allegation he denies. Nobody looked hard, because looking hard wasn’t the assignment. All that mattered was that he looked the part.

Then comes the line that should end a career in campaign management. Knowing at least some of what was there, Moraff decided, in his words, “none of this will or should stop him from becoming a US Senator.”

The PTSD is real. He’s a combat veteran who came home from Afghanistan carrying what a lot of them carry. He also uses it as a crutch, a blanket excuse to skate responsibility for the rest. “A bad stretch I’ve grown past” is bogus. He didn’t own the Reddit posts; he deleted them. The tattoo didn’t get explained; he first played dumb and then got it covered. That’s what you do with things you’re hiding, not things you’ve squared with.

This was no surprise; they knew early on. Graham didn’t confess to the texts of his own accord. His wife, Amy Gertner, brought them to the campaign herself, not long after the launch, handing them to Platner’s political director, Genevieve McDonald, who resigned that fall as the revelations kept coming. And when McDonald became inconvenient, Katz leaned on her — pressuring her to lie about the texts and warning she’d be branded a liar and a saboteur if she cooperated with reporters. They knew, and they tried to silence and discredit her. This isn’t a flawed man who slipped through the cracks. It’s a crew that kept building and covering for Platner after they’d been told.

Moraff’s whole pitch is that voters “do not want their candidates grown in vats.” They want a real human being, he says, not the establishment’s focus-grouped android. Bro, that is what you built, and you chose the worst foundation based on your girlfriend’s scroll. The country is full of real, decent people who chop their own wood and mean it, and they don’t have a Nazi tattoo or a racist Reddit history even after suffering PTSD. There are plenty of people with authenticity and without the baggage. But who cared? The guy was in Carhartt, driving an oyster boat.

Back in early June, when asked point-blank whether they’d vetted him enough, Moraff shrugged: “We will let the people of Maine decide.” Which, to me, read as a no, and he was deflecting any responsibility onto Maine voters.

The line they finally wouldn’t cross was a 2021 rape allegation from Jenny Racicot, a Democrat. Telling, given how fast they’d waved off the abuse allegations from Fifield, a Republican ex. Platner calls the allegations false. Racicot’s account is what finally led them to pull the plug, conveniently as Platner was already sinking in the polls. He suspended on July 9 and withdrew the next day; Maine Democrats have until July 27 to name a replacement.

When Katz finally spoke, his statement said he was “deeply disappointed.” In Platner. Not in the method that pulled a stranger off a video and bet a must-win Senate seat on him. The only line they wouldn’t cross turned out to be rape. Everything short of it, they’d already signed. That’s not a mistake anyone’s learning from. That’s a business model.

The people with the plan

So who cast this?

Dan Moraff went to Brown and then Yale Law, and he runs a shop called Dark Forest. His grandfather was Seymour Ginsburg, a president at Toys “R” Us. Leanne Fan is a sociology PhD student at the CUNY Graduate Center, where she studies labor and social movements, which is a polite way of saying she studies the working class she then packages. She’s also Moraff’s fiancée; they met on the Sanders campaign in 2020.

Morris Katz, the ad-man, is the son of a children’s-book author and a screenwriter, and he’s the guy who took Zohran Mamdani from one percent name recognition to the mayor’s office of New York.

You can hear the disconnect from the start. Fan talks in a rising question-mark lilt; Moraff has a flat, effortful vocal fry; both of them sound like the faculty lounge, not the boat launch. That’s not a cheap shot, it’s a fact. These are the “champagne socialists” the label was invented for, professional-class credentials deployed to sell a hard hat to people who actually own one. And the money is real for most of them. Platner’s own casters knew the type, because they are the type.

The best line about them came from the WSJ reporter, not from me. He called Moraff and Fan “itinerant activists who came from out of state.”

Then Fan, on camera, complained about exactly that sin in other people:

“It astounds me how many Democratic candidates are recent transplants to their districts and that they have appointed themselves the right kind of person to run in that district.”

She said this about a race she flew into from New York, about a nominee she and her fiancé handpicked and appointed the right kind of person for Maine. You couldn’t script it tighter if you tried.

And the candidate came from the same world as the crew. The “working Mainer” is the grandson of the celebrated architect Warren Platner, son of a lawyer, sent for a stretch to Hotchkiss. His federal disclosure tells a truer story than the ads did. The oyster company reported no income at all. He drew a three-thousand-dollar stipend as harbormaster and cleared roughly five thousand selling oysters to his mother’s upscale restaurant, his main customer. What the household actually lived on was a VA disability benefit of about forty-eight hundred dollars a month, plus a two-hundred-thousand-dollar loan from his father to buy the house he falsely chalked up to veterans’ benefits.

The man is a fraud: the working-class hero was a part he played. Every detail checks out one at a time and still adds up to a lie, because the lie is in how you frame the true things. He is quick to point out that he attended Hotchkiss, fine, but the point is that he was there at all, a kid with access most working families never get near. The architect grandfather and the lawyer father. The loan that allowed him to buy the house he lives in. All of it comes from a family that did well precisely by not being “working class,” while scooting around selling oysters to his mom.

He built his campaign attacking the politics that built the privilege he benefited from, bankrolled in part by the family that climbed it, and told Maine he wasn’t just working class but of it. He is not of it. The story he sold and the story his records tell don’t match, and the crew that sold it came from money and credentials just like his. Same shop, same class, one roster: Summer Lee, then Dan Osborn in Nebraska, then Nathan Sage in Iowa, then Platner, with Mamdani’s ads on the wall as the trophy. A casting agency for the working-class everyman, run entirely by people who have never once been him.

Why they never learn

The Democrats have more than one bad oyster farmer. Yes, this is a socialist operation; we all know my thoughts about that. Let’s talk about the other issue, identity politics, the party’s familiar fallback, and this is the third cycle running they’ve played it and gotten burned. But they keep chugging.

It’s always the same. Find the demographic you’re bleeding, cast someone who looks like them, put them on a loop, and hope the costume covers all sins, personal and policy. 2020 was all about the identity checkbox. Then came 2024 and the white working-class everyman Tim Walz, bolted onto a losing ticket to win back the men who’d walked. Now it’s Platner. Same instinct, three cycles, nothing learned.

Even Yglesias admits this is what the party does. He rattles off the roster like it’s a defense: Lurie the Levi Strauss heir, a firefighter here, a sheriff’s deputy there, a Tejano music star. He’s right; he just doesn’t say it straight. The party stopped building candidates who can carry a state and started casting characters who look like “you.” Left and center both.

Let’s see who has been cast. Platner in Maine, the white working-class vet, costume over Hotchkiss. James Talarico in Texas, the “nice young Christian,” seminary student with the good clips, cast to talk to a conservative state with the hope that they don’t pay close attention to what he says or his policies. Tim Walz in 2024, the Midwest football-coach-and-soldier everyman, pulled up to patch the party’s problem with white men who’d decided the Democrats had become the party for everyone but them. Dig into Walz, and the image frayed fast, over an embellished line about carrying weapons “in war” and a viral clip of a man who couldn’t handle a shotgun. He served twenty-four years; later years of mismanagement and fraud forced him to cancel his bid for reelection as governor. The point isn’t that he’s a phony; it’s that all they cared about was white man and camo hat.

Then there’s Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan, the casting theory inside out. The bet was that a candidate of color consolidates voters of color. Why? Because to choose a white woman over a man of color would be unforgivable. However, a Detroit News poll this month said the opposite: among Black voters, Haley Stevens, a white woman, leads him 67 to 21, while his own base skews white, young, and college-educated.

That’s the point. Look at who actually buys these candidates, and it’s the professional class that cast them, white and diplomaed, most likely driven by their own white guilt; it’s not the working people they hope to attract. When the only customers for the authentic-worker product are the people who manufactured it, “authentic” is just the latest buzzword to make them feel good.

The one honest counter is the Intercept’s, and it’s worth taking seriously: socialists do win, including with voters of color, in New York primaries. True, and beside the point. Winning a deep-blue, low-turnout primary is not the same as flipping Maine or Texas, or a nationwide election, with a cast everyman. The primary is where the costume plays to the base. The general is where the candidate is tested.

What it means for you

There are occasions that the story that is told is exposed by the receipts it produces. In this case, a class that calls itself scrappy and insurgent and working-class turns out to be credentialed strangers who have never held a “working class” job ordering a hero off a video.

Now that the costume caught fire, you’d think the fix would be obvious: run a real one this time, someone who logged the hours instead of posing for them. Troy Jackson looks the part on paper, a North Woods logger and former state Senate President. But the replacement is manufactured too.

Jackson didn’t well up from the grassroots. He lobbied for the seat, publicly pushing Platner to drop out and calling himself the best person to replace him. Platner’s own machine lined up behind him. And the party is handing him the nomination by convention, 601 delegates in Bangor on July 25, no primary and no voters, the same top-down anointment that gave Democrats Harris and Walz once Biden got pushed aside. He’s the candidate the Platner operation wanted next, installed the way the establishment installs people, with a Sanders-insurgent label stapled on top.

And he’s a weak hand. He came third in this spring’s governor’s primary and lost, then got waved into a Senate race against Susan Collins, an institution Maine has sent back five times since 1996. He’ll spend the fall answering for every day he stood by Platner through the tattoo and the Reddit posts, and CNN and the Bangor Daily News are already digging into his temper, which involves throwing a water bottle at a fellow legislator. Whether Maine buys an insurgent over Collins is a real question, and nobody has the answer. The insurgents didn’t find a better candidate. They found their candidate, the way the establishment always has.

That is what makes me chuckle. This new class of operatives is sure it cracked the code, sure it reads the country better than the tired old party ever did. It’s running the identical play: pick the person you think wins, then sell him. The only thing they added is the identity politics like a cherry on top, the costume the establishment never bothered with. Manufactured is manufactured. Nobody wanted it from the party bosses, and nobody wants it from the wunderkinds either.

And Maine is its own animal. Susan Collins has held the seat since 1997, and the state loves to say it wants a change right up until the moment it has to make one. Jackson is younger than Collins and older than Platner, a lifer in Maine politics without the viral charisma the shop manufactured for its oyster farmer. Whether voters who’ve sent Collins back five times will turn out for a Sanders Democrat is the whole question, and nobody has the answer yet.

Here’s what I do know. The DSA base is motivated, organized, and votes in every low-turnout race the rest of us skip, and right now they’re working overtime to look palatable to normie Democrats. Unpopular ideas still win when they’re the only ones in the room. So spread the word on the crew really running this operation, and do the one thing that settles it either way. Get off the couch and vote.

Read more

This is one of my favorite things I saw on X this weekend. I also miss QT hot dogs and Braum’s. IYKYN

BTW, I got some news and changes coming, so keep an eye on your inbox!

Let’s get into the news.

In today’s Read:

• Two soldiers dead at Muwaffaq Salti, one missing, nine straight nights of U.S. strikes on Iran. Congress passed a war powers resolution in June that it never sent to the White House, because it couldn’t.

• Iraq and Syria signed a $4.5 billion deal in Washington to route oil around the Strait of Hormuz. The war closed the strait. Chevron is building the detour.

• Bodycam footage caught Sunny Hostin listing her credentials to police while her son got a trespassing ticket. The right ran it everywhere. The left didn’t run it at all.

• Quick Rundown: Trump wants to tariff Canadian smoke, a secret deportation court woke up after 30 years, the Tate brothers face 59 UK charges, a body turned up at a house owned by Ayanna Pressley’s husband, the Vances had a baby, and Spain won the World Cup.

Iran Struck a U.S. Air Base in Jordan and Killed Two American Soldiers.

The Story.

On Friday, Iranian ballistic missiles struck Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan, hitting a cluster of containerized housing units where U.S. troops were sleeping. The Pentagon identified the dead this morning: Pvt. Isabella Gonzales, 19, of Carrollton, Texas, and 1st Lt. Tyler James Feehan, 25, of Ewa Beach, Hawaii. Both were air defense artillery. One service member is still missing and four were medevaced.

The IRGC claimed the attack. A separate American death was reported in northern Iraq during a controlled detonation of an Iranian drone. The U.S. answered the same night and has now run nine consecutive nights of strikes on Iran. Back in June, the Senate passed a war powers resolution 50 to 48 with Cassidy, Collins, Paul, and Murkowski crossing over, after the House passed its version. The resolution is not legally binding, and it was never sent to the White House for a signature.

The Left’s read. A war spiraling with nobody holding the wheel. NPR led on the deaths and the missing soldier, and Time collected the bipartisan criticism. Senator Tim Kaine: “Congress has definitively said this war is illegal.” Chris Murphy is calling the NDAA a backdoor authorization, and a coalition of antiwar and civil liberties groups is pushing lawmakers toward the appropriations route.

The Right’s read. The cost of stopping a nuclear Iran. Fox and Breitbart led with the sacrifice and the retaliation, and the Washington Examiner reported the strikes on the IRGC units behind the attack. On authorization, the administration's position hasn't moved since spring: the president has what he needs under Article II.

What both sides are skipping. That June vote. The left keeps describing it as Congress declaring the war illegal, which is doing a spectacular amount of work for a concurrent resolution that carries no force of law and never went to the president’s desk. The right keeps waving it off as noise, which lets it skip the fact that ten of its own members thought the mission needed a limit. And neither side will touch the only question a mother reading this actually needs answered: what the objective is, and how anyone knows when it’s met? Nine nights in, nobody has said.

A 19-year-old from Carrollton is dead. A 25-year-old from Ewa Beach is dead. They were asleep in a housing container when the missiles came in; one is still unaccounted for, and four more went out on medevac. Whatever you think about this war, this is a devastating loss. Pray for these families.

Now, the legality fight. Quick context, because the language is doing a lot of lying. The War Powers Resolution is a 1973 statute, and presidents of both parties have treated it as advisory since the ink dried, because Article II hands the commander in chief real authority and every White House since Nixon has said so out loud. Obama ran Libya past the clock. Clinton ran Kosovo past the clock. Neither one got called a constitutional crisis by the people running that phrase now. And this administration is making the identical argument, not a new one: back on May 12, Hegseth told Lisa Murkowski at a Senate Appropriations hearing that the president doesn't need Congress to keep going, because Trump "has all the authorities he needs under Article 2." Same position, different jersey. So when Kaine says Congress "definitively said this war is illegal," what he means is that both chambers passed a resolution that has no legal force, that nobody sent to the White House, and that couldn't survive a veto if they had. That isn't a law. It's a press release with a roll call attached. Congress is basically Michael Scott declaring bankruptcy.

I’m not defending the war. I’m refusing the frame. There’s a difference, and it matters, because the frame is what lets everybody off the hook.

Here’s the part the antiwar caucus doesn’t want to say into a microphone. Congress has exactly one lever that has ever worked, and it isn’t a resolution. It’s money. Cut the funding line for Central Command operations against Iran and this ends in a week. That’s not a theory, that’s how the Boland Amendment worked, that’s how Congress finally shut off Vietnam in 1973 and Somalia in 1994. Every member who voted for that June resolution knows it. So why the resolution instead of the appropriation? Because a resolution is free. You get the floor speech, the C-SPAN clip, the fundraising email, and zero fingerprints if it turns out three months from now that the strikes worked. Voting to defund a shooting war while Americans are in the field means owning what happens next. Nobody wants that one on their record.

So where does that leave a busy reader trying to figure out whether to be alarmed? Not at “the president is acting illegally.” Iran put ballistic missiles into a building full of sleeping Americans. Of course we hit back. Any president of either party is ordering that strike by Saturday morning, and the people pretending there was a version of this week where we didn’t are not being serious.

The harder question is the one nobody in either party has answered in nine nights. What ends this? We have run this exact loop before. Negotiate, sign, watch it come apart, act shocked, start over. So is a deal actually available here, or are we buying the next intermission? Nobody will say. And there are no benchmarks anywhere on the table, nothing a voter can point at and say, okay, that part’s finished, bring them home.

Here’s where my head is, and I’m still turning it over. Hormuz is the only card Iran has left. Not the enrichment, not the proxies, the strait. And the strait is the exact thing an American consortium started building around on Friday, one story down in this issue. Which makes me wonder whether this doesn’t end at a negotiating table at all. It ends when the oil no longer has to sail past them, and every night between now and then is a waiting room. That’s a long wait to spend in a housing container at an air base most Americans couldn’t find on a map.

Watch whether Kaine or Murphy actually files a defunding amendment on the NDAA, or whether the resolution stays the whole strategy. Watch whether any of those four Senate Republicans put their names on an appropriations rider. And watch whether the White House ever gives the country a stated objective, or keeps running the war on nightly strike counts.

Two soldiers came home in flag-draped cases this weekend. Congress answered with a document it never mailed.

Iraq and Syria Signed a Pipeline to Route Oil Around Iran. They Signed the Same One in 2007. And Again in 2010.

The Story.

On Friday, Iraq and Syria signed a memorandum in Washington to rebuild the Kirkuk-Baniyas oil pipeline, which would carry crude from northern Iraq to Syria's Mediterranean coast and skip the Strait of Hormuz entirely. The line runs about 800 kilometers, was built in 1952, moved up to 300,000 barrels a day, and has been dead since the 2003 invasion.

Projected capacity now: 2 million barrels a day. Rebuild cost: somewhere between $4.5 billion and $8 billion. Officials put the build at two to three years, roughly 36 months for a wholesale replacement. Chevron is implementing it as part of a U.S.-led consortium, and the pipeline was one piece of roughly 50 agreements Iraq signed with American companies during the prime minister's visit, valued near $60 billion. Energy Secretary Chris Wright presided. The context: Iraqi production has fallen from 4.2 million barrels a day in February to 1.9 million in June, and traffic through Hormuz has collapsed to about three vessels a day against a normal count near 110.

The Left’s read. A war-driven scramble. CNBC and Axios covered it as an emergency workaround for a shipping crisis, with Bloomberg framing the U.S. backing as a play to weaken Iran’s grip on the strait. The unspoken half: we broke the market, now we’re selling the repair.

The Right’s read. Strategy working as designed. The Washington Examiner ran it as a straightforward win against Iran’s chokehold on the strait, and Townhall treated Chevron’s involvement as proof American industry is lined up behind it.

What both sides are skipping. The clock, and the last two times somebody signed this exact deal. Iraq and Syria agreed to rehabilitate this pipeline in December 2007 and handed the job to Stroytransgaz, a Gazprom subsidiary, which never turned a shovel; the contract was voided in April 2009. They agreed again in 2010. Nothing was built. Add a route running through a Syria whose government is barely three years old, across terrain that was an active war zone inside the last decade, and the honest description of Friday is a signing, not a pipeline. Neither side will say who eats the loss if the bet goes bad: Chevron, the U.S. taxpayer, or the Iraqis.

Let me lay the sequence out, because nobody covering it will put the dates in one paragraph. The U.S. starts bombing Iran. Iran squeezes Hormuz. Iraqi exports crater by more than half. And then the Energy Secretary stands at a signing ceremony in Washington while Chevron picks up a $4.5 billion contract to build the road around the problem.

Here’s my concession, and it’s a real one. A pipeline is the best call. Routing Gulf crude around a strait that one hostile navy can plug is sound policy on any day of any administration, and this idea has been kicking around for years. If it gets built, gas gets cheaper and Tehran loses its best hostage.

Here is the issue. Two to three years is the estimate. Thirty-six months, at somewhere between four and eight billion dollars, laid across a country that had a civil war going in this decade. And the last two crews who signed up for this job never broke ground. In 2007 Iraq and Syria handed it to a Gazprom outfit that sat on it until the contract was voided in 2009.

They tried again in 2010. The pipe is still empty. So when the coverage tells you a Hormuz workaround got solved Friday afternoon, what actually happened Friday afternoon is TBD. Ask me in 2029.

That timeline should change how you read the war, too. If the strait is the only card Iran holds and the workaround is three years out, and Iran’s word cannot be trusted, then anybody selling you a quick resolution is doing arithmetic that’s not mathing.

So currently we stand at. Fifty agreements. Sixty billion dollars. Chevron at the table. That’s the largest transfer of reconstruction money in the region since Iraq itself, and it happened in one afternoon while the country was watching casualty coverage. The right is calling it strength, which skips that our own bombs created the opening. The left is calling it opportunism, which skips that they’d have taken the same deal in a heartbeat. Both of them are burying the actual reader question, which is who eats the loss if a pipeline running through post-civil-war Syria gets blown up in year two.

Watch for a groundbreaking date, because a signed memorandum with no start date is what 2007 looked like too. Watch whether the consortium’s full membership gets disclosed or stays behind “U.S.-led.” And watch the Hormuz traffic count, because if shipping recovers fast, the urgency argument that justified all this in one afternoon evaporates and the contracts are still standing.

We closed the road, then sold the detour. Least we could do is print the receipt.

Sunny Hostin Says Cops Endanger Her Son and Privilege Shouldn't Save Anyone. Then the Bodycam Rolled.

The Story.

On June 16, MTA police stopped Gabriel Hostin, 24, on active Metro-North railroad property near Station Plaza in New Rochelle, New York. He told officers he'd been running, saw a hill, and headed up it. Bodycam footage published by the New York Post on July 17 captures his mother, "The View" co-host Sunny Hostin, on the phone during the stop, identifying herself as a co-host of the show and a former federal prosecutor, and telling officers her son is a Harvard graduate, a Yale researcher with no criminal record who teaches fourth-grade geometry.

Officers said the offense could have supported an arrest but they reduced it to a violation because he cooperated and wasn't standing between the rails. Hostin later wrote the district attorney asking that the case be dropped, saying there was no visible "no trespassing" sign at the incline and that her son made an "honest mistake." She is also listed as his attorney on the court docket.

Gabriel is due in New Rochelle City Court on July 31. Timing worth holding onto: the footage published Friday, "The View" airs at 11 a.m. Eastern, and the show's last new episode before summer hiatus is Friday, July 25.

The Left’s read. Nothing so far. TMZ ran the footage as celebrity filler and the tabloids picked it up over the weekend, but no major left-leaning outlet has touched it as a media-credibility story. "The View" has not addressed it, though in fairness the tape landed after Friday's show. Today is the first episode where it can come up.

The Right’s read. Do you know who I am. The Daily Caller put “I’m A Former Federal Prosecutor” in the headline, Breitbart ran the video, and PJ Media went straight at the privilege angle given how much airtime she’s spent on the subject.

What both sides are skipping. The officers. The right is running a hypocrisy clip and the left is running nothing, so neither one is describing what’s actually on the tape: professionals doing a de-escalation by the book, downgrading a chargeable offense because the kid was polite. That’s the footage. And it will never air on the show that lectures eight million viewers a week about what a traffic stop does to a Black family.

Start with what’s actually on the tape, because it’s the part everyone is treating as background and it’s the entire point. A young man is somewhere he isn’t supposed to be. Officers stop him. He’s polite, he answers the questions, he has no record. They could have arrested him. They wrote him a violation instead and sent him home. That’s the encounter. And it is how these encounters go, every day, all over this country, for people who cooperate. Which is the precise claim Sunny Hostin has spent a decade telling millions of women is a lie.

She has said on that stage that she fears for her son because he is Black. That the system treats him as a threat before it treats him as a person. That a stop like this one is where boys who look like him get hurt. Then the stop happened, on camera, with a timestamp. Patient officers. A downgraded charge. A kid driven home.

Now the phone call, and this is the last generous thing I have. Any mother makes it. When “police” and “your son” land in the same sentence, something ancient takes the wheel and you dial. Nobody has to apologize for that.

But she didn’t call and ask them to be fair. She called and told them who she was. The View. Former federal prosecutor. Harvard. Yale. Fourth-grade geometry in the South Bronx. That is not a mother pleading, that’s a résumé being deployed, and then she followed it with a letter to the district attorney asking him to make the whole thing go away. This is a woman who has lectured this country for years about people who believe their money and their title should buy them a different set of rules. She reached for hers in under two minutes.

So the hypocrisy runs on two tracks and she laid both of them herself. Track one: the system is rigged against her son. Well, the bodycam says otherwise. Track two: nobody should get a pass for who they are or who they know. Yet, she asked for one, in writing, on letterhead.

Hostin is one of the most divisive people on television right now, and the divisiveness makes her money. Race is the lens she runs every story through, whether it fits or not, and the whole operation runs on convincing a daytime audience that their country is hunting their children. It’s a race hustle with a hair and makeup budget. Then a camera on an officer’s chest in New Rochelle recorded twenty minutes of the opposite, and the hustle has nothing to say.

And in case you are wondering, here is the clock. The footage went up Friday, after that morning’s episode. Nobody at that table has ducked anything yet. Today is the first chance.

So let’s make it a test instead of an accusation. Did CNN cover it over the weekend? Did MSNBC? Did any outlet that ran a solid week of policing segments this spring find sixty seconds for a tape of an actual stop? No. That’s four days of quiet from every newsroom that treats this subject as a calling.

Which leaves the table itself, and a countdown. Five new episodes remain before “The View” goes on summer hiatus July 28. Gabriel’s court date is July 31, three days into the blackout. So there is a real window, it’s short, and it closes right before the part with legal consequences. If it doesn’t come up by Friday, it isn’t going to come up at all, and the hiatus does the work an apology would have.

That’s the real story here. One ticket in Westchester is nothing. A daytime program that shapes how millions of women understand cops, courts, and their own kids’ risk, running a narrative that its own host’s bodycam demolishes, is not nothing. Nobody at that table will have to say “I was wrong.” They’ll just have to run out the week.

Now to those who have been saying “Great, this proves the FCC should strip The View of its news designation.” No. I said it Friday, and I’ll say it again. A government that gets to decide which shows count as journalism is a weapon, and the people cheering it today will be crying about it in four years when somebody else is holding it. Distrust the show all you want. Don’t hand the government a dial.

The fix for a program that won’t show you the tape is you, watching the tape. Lucky for you, that’s the entire business model of this newsletter, and it’s cheaper than a regulator.

Watch this week’s five episodes, because after Friday the show is dark until September and the question expires. Watch whether the DA quietly drops the citation after a letter from a television host who is also counsel of record, because that outcome is its own story. And watch which conservative outlets running the clip this week say anything about the FCC’s Disney investigation, since the two land in the same building.

The tape shows the system working exactly the way she’s paid to insist it never does. She has five shows to mention it. I’d bet the hiatus gets there first.

• The Vances had a baby, the first born to a sitting vice president in about 150 years. Alec Neel Vance was born July 19 at Walter Reed to JD and Usha Vance. He joins Ewan, 9, Vivek, 6, and Mirabel, 4. The last child born to a sitting VP was in the 1870s.

• Trump wants to tariff Canadian smoke. With more than 100 million Americans under air quality advisories for the second straight summer, the president accused Canada of "willful negligence" and said the pollution cost would be added to the tariffs Ottawa already pays. He called Prime Minister Mark Carney, who said both countries share responsibility. The U.S. Forest Service confirmed this week that at least two fires in Minnesota's Superior National Forest crossed north into Canada, and U.S. acreage burned in 2026 stands at 3.7 million against a ten-year average of 2.7 million. Both men then spent Sunday afternoon in the same box at the World Cup final at MetLife, with Claudia Sheinbaum and Gianni Infantino, under an air quality advisory. Apparently the topic came up.

• Spain won the World Cup. Ferran Torres scored in the 106th minute to beat Argentina 1-0 in extra time at MetLife Stadium, Spain’s second title after 2010. They conceded one goal the entire tournament, the stingiest defensive run in World Cup history. Trump attended. Messi’s last World Cup ended without a shot on target.

• Taco Bell's lettuce carried a parasite, and the recall is much bigger than the headline. The CDC and FDA named shredded iceberg lettuce served at Taco Bell as the source of a cyclospora outbreak in Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and West Virginia: 1,644 infections, 94 hospitalizations, no deaths, with onset dates running from May 13 to July 13. Cyclospora is a parasite that causes weeks of watery diarrhea and relapses if left untreated, which is why the case count kept climbing for two months before anyone identified a source. Taylor Farms de México pulled the lettuce July 17 and Taco Bell dropped the supplier nationwide. The part the coverage keeps burying: the company's own recall notice covers 27 states, not five, and includes bagged lettuce sold in grocery stores. More than 30 states have logged cyclospora infections this year, on pace to pass the 2019 record of roughly 4,700. Go check your crisper drawer; eat more beef.

• A secret deportation court woke up after 30 years. The Justice Department filed the first-ever petition to the Alien Terrorist Removal Court, a classified-procedure federal court created in 1996 that had never heard a case. The single-page filing doesn’t name the respondent. At a hearing Thursday, Chief Judge Joan Ericksen questioned “the nexus that the government alleges between the actions of the respondent and the specific sections and subsections it invokes.” The court limits a subject’s access to the evidence against him.

• The Tate brothers were arrested in Miami on 59 UK charges. U.S. Marshals took Andrew and Tristan Tate into custody July 18 on a sealed extradition warrant. The Crown Prosecution Service charged Andrew with 42 counts including rape, human trafficking, indecent images of a child, and assault, and Tristan with 17 including sexual assault and trafficking. The alleged conduct spans 2010 to 2017 across seven complainants. Both deny the charges and say the arrests are political.\

• A body was found at a rental property owned by Rep. Ayanna Pressley’s husband. Boston homicide detectives are investigating after an unresponsive person was found Saturday at a seven-bedroom house on Malta Street in Mattapan owned by Conan Harris. The property is listed for sale at $1.15 million. Pressley and Harris do not live there, no cause of death has been released, and no arrests have been made. Pressley’s office offered condolences.

That’s The Read!

If The Read is doing the cross-check work for you, send it to a friend who’s still chasing the framing instead of the facts.

We are going to a ballgame tonight. So I will be sweating, yay for me.

Anyway, in case you went to bed early, the president made an address last night about election vulnerabilities. Everyone has a take. I did my best to break it all down for you because these takes are going in all directions, especially from the legacy media. It's almost by design.

If you have a friend that needs a breakdown on his speech without the meltdown, share this newsletter. It's the best way to support my work and help this little newsletter grow.

Have a great weekend! Let’s get into the news.

In today’s Read:

• Trump’s election speech: 278,000 noncitizens flagged, 220 million voter files grabbed by China, a “deep state” coverup. The press said “zero new facts.” Catherine Herridge found the email that says otherwise.

• Three networks sent the speech to streaming. Trump wants their licenses pulled. I don’t like the networks’ move, and I like the government’s answer less.

• Graham Platner was the guy to beat Collins, until he wasn’t. Maine Democrats have ten days to find a new one.

• Quick Rundown: Blanche’s AG hearing, the Iran war at six straight nights, a teleprompter operator betting on his own boss, Hegseth’s press leash back on, and the DNC’s NDAs.

The Press Called It “Zero New Facts.” Then Catherine Herridge Went and Read the Facts.

The Story.

On Thursday, July 16, President Trump addressed the nation from the East Room for 26 minutes sound the alarm about American elections. DHS says it flagged roughly 278,000 noncitizens registered to vote across California, New Jersey, Nevada, and Pennsylvania. China, he said, pulled off the "largest compromise of election data in history," acquiring 220 million U.S. voter files starting in 2020.

He said voting systems are vulnerable to hacking, that a six-year-old Michigan registration-fraud case got "buried," and that a "deep state" hid China's data grab from him and the public while calling 2020 the most secure election in history. He unveiled a government website with the declassified documents (it crashed under the traffic), ordered DHS to notify states to clean their rolls, and renewed his push for the SAVE Act. One thing he never said: that a single vote was flipped, in any election.

The Left’s read. Nothing to see here. CNN filed it under Trump “claims declassified documents show US election vulnerabilities,” and Votebeat ran the headline “Zero new facts,” quoting Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes: “I have seen zero new facts. I have seen zero evidence backing any of these claims.” The supporting points: voter data is mostly public and China can buy it like anyone else, the 278,000 number can’t be reproduced by the states it names, and the DHS citizenship tool has a habit of flagging actual citizens.

The Right’s read. Vindication. The Federalist led with the 278,000 and noted blue states blocked DHS from checking their rolls, so the real figure runs higher. Breitbart and the Daily Signal ran the China intelligence and the cover-up as the headline. The frame: they told you the wall was solid, and here are the holes.

What both sides are skipping. The document, and the dishonesty on both ends of the number. The right waves the raw 278,000 around without mentioning that audits historically knock most flags off after verification. The left points to that attrition and pretends nothing's left, without ever running the residual, which still lands in the tens of thousands, in states where recent races were decided by a few thousand votes. And both walk right past the part that isn't a talking point: a Biden appointee already declassified a piece of this, and a reporter nobody can call a MAGA shill went and read the rest.

Start with what he actually claimed, because the coverage won’t. He did not say votes were switched. He said the rolls are dirty, the systems are exposed, China spent years hoovering up voter data, and somebody inside the government worked to keep that quiet. Agree or disagree with each. What you can’t honestly do is collapse all of it into “he’s re-litigating 2020” and call it a night. That’s what the press did, because the 2020 rematch is a fight they know how to win.

The substance of his speech wasn’t radical. Biden’s own people said much of this out loud, and he didn’t claim he won 2020, which is the trap half his party was terrified he’d walk into. The serious part is China, and the lazy dismissal is already everywhere: it’s just voter data, it’s public, anyone can buy it. Read Catherine Herridge’s reporting and that line falls apart. It’s not all public. This data gets bought, sold, or hacked, and the president alleged all three were used to pull 220 million voter files. And the raw rolls were never the point. China is one of the biggest data collectors on the planet. Stack those 220 million files on the 22 million security-clearance applications it hacked out of OPM in 2015 and the health records it’s swiped over the years, and you can assemble a digital composite of a real American: name, birthdate, phone, voting history, home address, military status, party. That composite runs voter-registration fraud and identity theft, and the part that should stop you cold, it lets a foreign government spot and recruit U.S. citizens as assets. That’s not public data. That’s a dossier on you.

So the case was real. The delivery is where it fell apart. He had the biggest audience he’ll get all year actually watching, and he made a serious argument at half volume. Restrained, almost muted. No crescendo. A thin crawl on whitehouse.gov with nothing behind it, and no cavalry teed up with the receipts and examples that would let a viewer back him up. Even Fox cut to the Middle East inside five minutes. The fix he offered, the SAVE Act, is a citizenship bill that doesn’t touch the foreign hacking he’d just spent twenty minutes describing, and the one domestic number he leaned on, the 278,000 noncitizens, is still soft until DHS shows its work. When the moment came to make the case, he didn’t. Which hands the job of explaining it to the country over to the pundits, and they will not do it justice. Half of them called it nothing before he opened his mouth. The other half had already moved on.

And “zero evidence” was never honest to start with. In 2022, Biden’s own director of national intelligence, Avril Haines, declassified an assessment warning that “Chinese intelligence officials analyzed multiple US states’ election voter registration data” to run public-opinion analysis on the 2020 election. That’s not Trump’s document. That’s the last administration’s, sitting in the public record for years, and the same outlets calling it old news this week never made it news when they had the chance. The real disenfranchisement isn’t a stolen vote. It’s a press that tells legal voters to stop worrying about the holes in the wall, until enough of them stop showing up because they’ve decided it doesn’t matter.

So here’s where it lands, and it’s annoying. Both problems are real. China built the dossier, the intelligence agencies buried the warning, and both are documented, not vibes. And this is probably how they die anyway. Not debunked. Under-sold by the one man who could have made them land, waved off by a press that never wanted to look, and starved of the follow-through that turns a primetime address into a movement. No sustained push from his own side, no drumbeat, no next-day case built on the documents. By the weekend it’s likely background noise. Maybe not even enough to get the SAVE Act across the finish line.

Watch what he actually does about China now that a Xi meeting is reportedly on the calendar, or whether the data grab was only a talking point. Watch whether anyone on his side mounts a real follow-up or lets the whole thing evaporate. And watch the inspector general’s investigation into the suppression complaint, because that’s the thread that outlives the news cycle.

He had the goods and mumbled them. They had the evidence and sat on it. By next week it’s a story that never happened. That’s how the serious stuff dies. Quietly, and on schedule.

Worth flagging: go read Catherine Herridge.

The strongest reason not to swallow “zero new facts” is her, precisely because she isn’t on the team. Herridge is the reporter who lost her CBS job and ate an $800-a-day contempt fine rather than burn a source, and the left spent last year calling her a press-freedom martyr. On Katie Pavlich’s NewsNation show she made the point everyone else skipped: declassifying the files means you can finally check the president’s math instead of taking anyone’s word for it.

Then she read them on air, flagging a November 2020 email among intelligence officials who said they’d “deliberately massaged one of our pending PDBs” (the President’s Daily Brief) “to avoid any direct links to the election.” Her pinned reporting is the substance: a whistleblower complaint alleging the CIA under Gina Haspel wouldn’t formally document China’s 2020 influence operation out of concern Trump would use it, senior officials taking “pen to paper” to strike assessments because they “would help Trump,” and the whistleblower reassigned and downgraded for saying so. The CIA’s on-record answer doesn’t deny the tradecraft problem. It pivots to Director Ratcliffe, who cited the agency’s own “violations of analytic tradecraft standards.”

An influence operation is not a flipped vote, and she says so. But “we deliberately massaged the PDB” is a sentence in a government email, and the “nothing to see here” crowd never touched it.

Three Networks Wouldn’t Air It. Then the President Reached for Their Licenses. Both Moves Stink.

The Story.

ABC, NBC, and CNN declined to carry Trump's election address on their broadcast networks, sending it to streaming instead. Trump called for the FCC to revoke their licenses. Separately, the FCC is moving to rule that ABC's "The View" isn't a bona fide news program, which would drag it under equal-time rules, and it's escalating an investigation into Disney's broadcast licenses that could reach ABC-owned stations in New York, Los Angeles, and other major markets. Disney answered with an on-air campaign asking viewers to back "The View."

The Left’s read. Retaliation. The Washington Post centered the license threat as an attack on press freedom, and Snopes ran a fact-check noting the networks did offer the speech on streaming, so “refused to air it” isn’t quite right.

The Right’s read. The networks did it to themselves. Fox framed it as the networks “avoiding” the speech to protect the left, and the Federalist quoted FCC Chair Brendan Carr: “The legacy media has really done this to itself.”

What both sides are skipping. The left won’t say plainly that shunting a presidential address to streaming is an editorial choice with a political point, not a neutral scheduling call. The right won’t grapple with a president using federal licensing power to punish coverage he doesn’t like. And the bigger story, the FCC pressure on Disney’s actual licenses, is sitting under the “did they air it or not” squabble, which is the part that’ll still matter after the speech is forgotten.

Ugh, I don’t like this one. Yes, the networks look like cowards. CNN’s Kaitlan Collins put it all out there, telling viewers the network wasn’t carrying the speech live because the president has “a well-documented history of saying blatantly false things about elections.”

That’s a brand-new standard, and a convenient one. Presidents have shaded the truth in primetime and blown past the facts at the podium for as long as there have been cameras, and the networks carried them live and fact-checked after, which is the job. Deciding this president alone is too dishonest to broadcast unfiltered is a rule they invented exclusive to Trump. If the findings were as flimsy as they say, air the thing and let your anchors take it apart live. Burying it on a streaming app and fact-checking the clips after midnight tells the audience you’d rather manage what they see than trust them with it. Bad look, and it earned the mockery.

But the answer is not the FCC. We just spent years watching the last crowd lean on the platforms to throttle right-leaning outlets, and fund the “fact-checking” and brand-safety operations that got conservative media flagged as not advertiser-friendly, which is a polite way of saying “starve them.” That was censorship wearing a corporate lanyard. Pulling broadcast licenses and ruling that “The View” isn’t real news — which I agree it is not — is the same instinct with a government stamp on it. Different tools. Same move.

And here’s the part the people cheering it always forget. When the jerseys swap, and they always swap, every one of these levers is sitting right there for whoever grabs the gavel next. The FCC that can decide your show isn’t “news” this year can decide it about a conservative outlet in four. You do not want to be holding the machine when the other side inherits the keys.

Watch whether the FCC actually moves on a Disney-owned station license or just rattles the saber. Watch whether a single Republican who screamed about GARM and NewsGuard says a word about this. And watch which conservative outlets cheer the licensing threat now and pretend they didn’t later.

Different tools, same move. Don’t build the weapon you don’t want pointed back at you.

Eight Democrats Debated to Replace Graham Platner. They Spent Two Hours Running as Him.

The Story.

Thursday night, eight Democrats took the stage at the News Center Maine studio in Portland for the first debate in the race to replace Graham Platner and take on Susan Collins in November. Platner won the June primary, then dropped out July 10 after a former girlfriend accused him of sexual assault, which he denies, the last in a run of controversies that also included a tattoo of a Nazi symbol. Because the primary winner is gone, state law hands the pick to the party. County caucuses elect delegates July 18 and 19, and 601 delegates vote at a nominating convention in Bangor on July 25, with the nominee’s name due on the ballot by July 27. A second debate, hosted by CNN and the Bangor Daily News, runs July 23. The field of eight is led by Secretary of State Shenna Bellows, former state Senate President Troy Jackson, former Maine CDC director Nirav Shah, and former congressional staffer Jordan Wood.

The Left’s read. Underwhelming, even to the friendly press. CNN’s takeaways said the night “laid bare their difficulty” replacing Platner, the Hill said the crowded field struggled to stand out, and the Boston Globe ran four takeaways in the same key. The through-line: nobody clashed, and none of them could reproduce the viral energy that let Platner elbow a two-term governor out of the race and poll even with Collins.

The Right’s read. A backroom scramble. Fox and PJ Media framed it as a “mad dash,” a party that torched its own primary winner and now hands a Senate seat to 601 delegates in a convention hall, with a bench too thin to take down a five-term incumbent.

What both sides are skipping. The platform didn’t withdraw. Platner’s out, but the first question of the night asked each candidate which of his ideas they’d carry forward, and they lined up to answer:

Medicare for All, get ICE out of Maine, conditions on aid to Israel, money out of politics. On immigration, it turned into a contest over who’d go furthest, days after an ICE agent killed a man in Biddeford. Jackson wants ICE “dismantled.” Shah wants masks banned and body cameras required. Wood wants a brand-new agency. And whoever inherits all of it won’t be picked by the voters who chose Platner in June. It’ll be 601 delegates, 101 of them party-committee members seated automatically. The coverage asked whether anyone could “stand out.” It skipped that they were all standing in the same spot.

The man imploded. The movement didn’t, and last night proved it. Eight Democrats spent two hours auditioning to inherit Graham Platner’s campaign, and the very first thing the moderators asked was which piece of his platform they’d keep. Not whether to keep it. That tells you what this race actually is now. A tribute act looking for a new frontman.

Now the part the “who stood out” coverage strolled past. This debate landed the same week an ICE agent shot and killed a man in Biddeford, and the candidates used it to compete over who would abolish ICE the hardest. “Dismantled,” said Jackson, because the agency gives us “nothing in this country but heartache and racism.” On that stage, that wasn’t the fringe answer. It was the median one. The only candidate who’d say a discouraging word about Platner was Jordan Wood, who noted he’d called for him to drop out last year because “he was not being truthful about his past.” One man out of eight willing to say the guy with the Nazi-ish tattoo and the assault allegation maybe shouldn’t have been the pick. The other seven are running to be him.

And here’s the part that should bug you whatever your party. Maine voters chose Platner in June. Platner’s gone. His replacement gets picked July 25 by 601 delegates in Bangor, a fifth of them insiders who were seated without anyone casting a ballot for them. The voters don’t get a redo. The party does. Call it what it is. The primary was a suggestion. The convention is the decision.

Watch the July 23 debate for whether one candidate breaks from the abolish-ICE consensus now that it’s the whole field’s position. Watch which way those 101 automatic delegates lean, because they are the ballgame. And watch whether anyone gets filed by the July 27 deadline or the sprint runs out of road.

They lost the candidate and kept the costume. The frontman changes. The show doesn’t.

• Todd Blanche’s attorney general hearing went sideways. Trump’s acting AG sat before the Senate Judiciary Committee on July 15 and took fire from both sides, pressed on the $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund, the handling of the Epstein files, and the DOJ subpoenas aimed at reporters. With the GOP now down a vote after Lindsey Graham’s death, Republicans can’t afford a single defection, and Blanche’s confirmation is no longer a sure thing. NPR

• The Iran war hit six straight nights. As of July 16, U.S. strikes on Iran ran six consecutive nights, Kuwait intercepted 32 drones in a single day, and Qatar came under fire for a second time. Shipping through the Strait of Hormuz collapsed to three vessels in 24 hours, against a normal count near 110 a day. Trump says Iran “wants to meet.” Iran hasn’t confirmed it. CNN

• Trump’s teleprompter operator got caught betting on his own speeches. Gabriel Perez, a White House technical assistant since 2016, allegedly wagered on Kalshi’s “mention markets” using advance knowledge of Trump’s scripted remarks. Kalshi’s own surveillance flagged the trades, froze about $90,000 in profits, and referred the case to the CFTC. Perez is on paid leave, the White House called it “a disgrace,” and House Oversight Chair James Comer opened a broader look at prediction-market insider trading. Washington Examiner

• A court snapped Hegseth’s press leash back on. A federal appeals court on July 16 stayed a lower-court order and reinstated the Pentagon rule requiring reporters to keep an official escort at all times inside the building. Judge Paul Friedman had killed it on July 1 as a likely First Amendment violation, quoting Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s own “endless stream of garbage” line about the press back at him. The New York Times is still fighting it. AP via WHTC

• The DNC made its own officers sign NDAs to see the books. Axios reported July 16 that Chair Ken Martin had senior DNC officers, elected leaders and not staff, sign non-disclosure agreements before a late-June meeting on party finances. The backdrop: roughly $15 million on hand against $18 million in debt heading into the November midterms. The right read it as a party scrambling to hide something; the DNC calls the NDAs “a non-issue” and “standard corporate practice.” A party is not a corporation, and imagine the coverage if the RNC had done it. Axios

That’s The Read. See you Monday.

If The Read is doing the cross-check work for you, send it to a friend who’s still chasing the framing instead of the facts.

It’s Wednesday, and you are warned I get a little in the weeds on this one. It happens sometimes.

The biggest challenge with a fast-moving news cycle is remembering what happened just two weeks ago, let alone months or years ago, especially when it is highly relevant to today’s news stories. That is just one of the reasons for The Read, especially My Read of each story. I go digging not only for the cross-check but also the details that are omitted or forgotten, and we have plenty of that in today’s edition.

Let’s get into the news.

In today’s Read:

• ICE killed two men who weren’t the target, no body cameras on either agent. The left wants “abolish ICE.” The real scandal: they had the funding for the cameras and the cameras were off.

• Ro Khanna says settlers and soldiers detained him in the West Bank, then fundraised off it within hours. The buried story: Tucker Carlson wants the GOP ambassador fired for siding against a Democrat.

• Texas put commercial surrogacy on the record. The right called it exploitation, the press made it a birthright-citizenship squabble, and everyone skipped the women.

• Quick Rundown: the Navy re-blockades Iran, Graham’s sister takes his seat, the Russia sanctions bill gets his name, the DOJ loses its 13th straight voter-roll case, a Cox heir is arrested in Spain, and two justices go to Congress for security money.

Two Men Are Dead, and Neither ICE Agent Had a Camera Rolling

The Story.

On Monday morning, July 13, an ICE officer shot and killed Joan Sebastian Durán Guerrero in Biddeford, Maine. Agents were running surveillance on someone with a final removal order. Guerrero wasn't that someone. According to DHS, he left the residence in a vehicle, tried to flee when officers moved to stop him, and an officer opened fire while "fearing for public safety." His wife and 3-year-old daughter were with him, the girl still in her pajamas, and the witness accounts split: one heard Guerrero say "I tried to stop," another heard an agent say the driver tried to run him over. DHS confirmed Guerrero had a work permit issued in May 2025, a Social Security number, and a pending asylum claim, while noting he entered illegally in 2023 and that a work permit "does not confer legal status." Days earlier, agents killed Lorenzo Salgado Araujo in Houston. He wasn't the target either. In both shootings, the agents weren't wearing body cameras. That brings the count to roughly seven people killed during immigration enforcement since January 2025. On Tuesday, DHS paused most vehicle stops nationwide except for the most serious criminal targets, and said it's moving to expand body cameras. By Wednesday, Trump reversed the pause, telling ICE agents to go back to work and keep making traffic stops.

The Left’s read. Reign of terror. The Intercept ran “How ICE Arrests Went Quiet, and Got Even More Deadly,” the Boston Globe called them “gangster tactics,” and every Democrat in the Maine Senate scramble is now calling for ICE to leave the state or be dismantled. The frame is an agency so reckless it’s killing bystanders and hiding it.

The Right’s read. Nothing to see here. Border czar Tom Homan went on Fox and called the vehicle-stop halt “not a policy change, it’s a temporary pause,” predicting agents would be “back up and running” in a couple of weeks. The drivers fled, the agents feared for their safety, the pause is caution.

What both sides are skipping. The cameras, and the money. Congress appropriated $20 million for ICE body cameras in fiscal 2026. DHS pledged rapid rollout back in February. Five months later, the officers who killed two men still didn’t have them, and DHS’s explanation is that “back-to-back Democrat shutdowns” interrupted the purchase. The money was allocated. Cameras have reached half the field offices, with the rest promised in 60 days, and the two that ended in dead civilians weren’t among them. The left wants the whole agency abolished and skips right past a fix this concrete. The right wants to call it a two-week timeout and skips that there’s no footage of either killing because the equipment Congress paid for wasn’t on.

A man is dead who wasn’t the man they came for. Start there, because it’s true and it’s terrible, and no amount of policy argument makes Joan Sebastian Durán Guerrero less dead. His family is planning a funeral this week. That’s the first fact, and anyone who races past it to score a point has already lost the thread.

Now watch what the left does with it. The language went straight to “reign of terror” and “gangster tactics” and “abolish ICE” inside a news cycle, and the details doing the heaviest lifting are the ones built to gut you: the 3-year-old in the back seat, the Bluey pajamas, the pink backpack. I won’t pretend that little girl is a prop. She’s real; she saw something no child should, and her being in that car is a fact the investigation actually has to weigh, because a father driving his daughter to daycare is not a man who typically floors it at a federal agent. But it also raises the questions the pajamas are deployed to bury. Did the agents even know she was in the back seat, which they almost certainly didn’t? And why is the image running laps around the internet while the investigation hasn’t returned a single finding? Look at where the left landed anyway. Not "fix the stops," not "turn the cameras on," but "abolish," which is the same open-border finish line it wanted long before. The demands showed up before the investigation had even started.

There are still many unanswered questions. Was he fleeing? Did he turn the vehicle toward the officer? What was in the officer’s head in the half-second before he fired? That’s what an investigation is for, and it’s barely started. And it matters who runs it. Every agency has an inspector general for exactly this, the same way police departments have internal affairs, and here that’s the DHS Inspector General plus the FBI. That structure isn’t new and it isn’t a scandal. What’s new is who suddenly distrusts it. The same left that called Trump firing 21 inspectors general “a purge of independent watchdogs” and swore the IG was the one independent check we couldn’t afford to lose has decided, this week, that a DHS IG investigation is a coverup. Pick one.

I'll grant the honest half, and it cuts both ways. Trump did spend 2025 gutting the IG corps and stacking replacements with his own people, so the "independent" label is thinner than it used to be. The distrust didn't start this year, though. It traces to term one, when watchdogs like Michael Atkinson, the intelligence IG who forwarded the whistleblower complaint that got Trump impeached, looked to him like opponents with badges, and he fired five of them in six weeks in 2020. The left screamed "purge" then too, and swore Atkinson only did his job. Both sides have been sanding down the watchdog's independence for years, from opposite ends. But you don't get to canonize the inspector general in January and torch him in July because the target changed. And the outside check is sitting right there anyway.

Maine’s attorney general opened a separate state investigation, with the state police evidence team and the medical examiner on scene, and a Democratic-run state has no reason to cover for ICE. Maine’s delegation, Susan Collins included, is already pressing DHS on how much it’ll cooperate. Distrust the federal watchdog if you want. The state is watching too. And whether ICE had the right guy or the wrong guy, this part doesn’t change: when an armed officer tells you to stop, you stop. You do not run, you do not point two tons of car at him, and you fight it out later in court, where you can actually win. That’s not me carrying water for the agency. That’s how you stay alive to make your case.

So where’s the real problem? The cameras.

Congress put $20 million toward ICE body cameras this fiscal year, and the agency promised a fast rollout in February. Two men are dead in July and the officers who shot them didn’t have cameras on. DHS blames the back-to-back government shutdowns for stalling the purchase, and that tracks. The Democrats’ shutdown fights froze a pile of federal spending, and buying and issuing cameras across a department this size isn’t a weekend job. It’s also not a permanent pass. Half the field offices have them now, the rest are promised inside 60 days, and after this week that clock has to hold. Because the footage is the only thing that settles a story like this for anyone, the officer included. A clean shoot is the agent’s best defense. No camera just leaves everybody guessing, which is the last thing you want when a civilian is dead.

I’ll give the administration real credit here, because it earned some. This response looks nothing like the Noem and Bovino era, when the answer to every ugly encounter was to circle the wagons and dare you to complain. Pausing the vehicle stops, pushing the cameras out faster, retraining the agents on how these stops go, that’s the right instinct. A reevaluation and more training is always good. You don’t fix a bad stop by pretending it went fine.

Then, less than a day after DHS announced the pause, the President stepped on it, posting that ICE “CANNOT give up” the traffic stop. DHS shared it out.

Here’s where I actually land, because it cuts both ways. Trump isn’t wrong that the traffic stop is a real enforcement tool, not a courtesy ICE can just retire, and a blanket “never pull anyone over” rule would hand the criminals he’s talking about a free pass. But defending the tool and yanking the pause are two different things. He reversed the one move that looked like a correction before it corrected anything: the cameras still weren’t out and the retrain hadn’t happened. Keep the traffic stop. Just don’t torch the timeout before the fix it was buying has a chance to land.

And here’s the line the “abolish ICE” crowd needs you to forget. You can be critical of how it was done and still think it needed doing. Being angry that two men who weren’t the target are dead does not mean signing up for the DSA program where enforcement itself disappears and the border becomes a suggestion. Those are two different arguments, and the left is betting you can’t hold both. You can. Fix the tactics, keep the mission, put the cameras on.

Watch whether the cameras actually reach every field office in the 60 days DHS promised, or whether that timeline quietly slips. Watch whether the Maine and Houston investigations get released in full or get buried in “ongoing.” And watch whether a single outlet running “reign of terror” this week reports the $20 million camera line, because that’s the fact that indicts the rollout without abolishing anything.

The scandal isn’t that ICE exists. It’s that we paid for the cameras and they were off.

ICYMI

Ro Khanna Got Stopped in the West Bank, Then Fundraised Off It. Watch the Right Eat Itself.

The Story.

Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), who’s openly weighing a 2028 presidential run, spent part of the congressional recess on a three-day West Bank tour led by Breaking the Silence, an activist group that opposes the Israeli military’s presence in the territories. On July 8 he says masked armed settlers blocked his van outside Khirbet Zanuta, a demolished Bedouin village in an area soldiers believed was a closed military zone, and that IDF soldiers then joined and kept the road shut for over an hour, until he called the U.S. embassy in Jerusalem. The IDF disputes the key detail: it says its soldiers didn’t block anyone, that troops were sent to disperse the Israeli civilians blocking the road and reopened it. U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee called the trip a “stunt,” said Khanna entered a restricted military zone without coordinating, that the armed men were a civilian patrol, and that Khanna didn’t identify himself as a congressman until late in the encounter. Khanna’s answer: “the IDF is lying,” and he’s more disturbed by Israel’s lies than the detention. Within hours of posting about it, he sent a fundraising email. Then Tucker Carlson called for Huckabee to be fired for failing to defend a fellow American. Khanna also co-sponsors a bipartisan push to strip $3.3 billion in U.S. military aid to Israel, a version of which hits the House floor this week.

The Left’s read. Exhibit A. Al Jazeera, Haaretz, and J Street run it as exactly the settler intimidation Palestinians live with daily, with the twist that when the army finally showed up it chased the visitors off instead of the men with guns. Khanna’s the American who got a taste of it on camera.

The Right’s read. Split down the middle, which is the point. The Israel-hawk lane (Huckabee, National Review, The Free Press) calls it a dishonest stunt staged by a presidential hopeful who wandered into a military zone with activist handlers. The Tucker lane calls it a national humiliation, an American congressman detained by armed men while the U.S. ambassador shrugged, and wants Huckabee gone.

What both sides are skipping. Two tells. First, the fundraising email. A member of Congress turned a roadblock into a donation ask before the dust settled, which is the best evidence going for the “stunt” read, and the left won’t touch it. Second, settler roadblocks in the West Bank are a real, documented pattern whether or not this particular hour was staged, which is the part the “it’s all theater” right skips. And the bigger thing sitting under both: the right’s Israel coalition is coming apart in public, and the press is covering Tucker-versus-Huckabee like a celebrity beef.

Let’s be honest about Ro Khanna first. The man is running for president in 2028 and he knows a good visual when he builds one. You don’t tour a demolished village with a camera crew and activist guides, get stopped, and have a fundraising email out the door the same day by accident. That’s not a congressman caught in a bad moment. That’s a candidate collecting footage. And he’s barely hiding it.

In his first interview on the ground he branded himself “probably the first American politician [who has] been detained by the IDF and Israeli settlers,” and said the trip left him “more resolved” to consider a 2028 run. The donation ask is the tell. His own mouth is the confirmation.

Yes, settler harassment in the West Bank is real. Grant it and move on, because Khanna didn’t wander into this blind. He’s been to Israel three times. He’s met Israeli prime ministers and sat with President Abbas in Ramallah, so he knows how combustible that ground is, and he knows congressional trips get coordinated with the Israeli government and the IDF for exactly that reason, which is how other delegations meet Palestinians without ending up in a 90-minute standoff. Khanna skipped the coordination on purpose. A first-timer might not know better. He does.

But look at how this play got built. His guide was Breaking the Silence, an activist group whose entire purpose is opposing the Israeli military in the territories. The spot he picked was a patch the soldiers on the ground believed was a closed military zone, and the Free Press reports the closure had lapsed, though nobody there knew it. He gets briefly stopped, fires off a fundraising email the same day, and two days later he’s on Hasan Piker’s stream, the socialist streamer, cashing the whole thing in:

Ro Khanna, on Hasan Piker’s show: “Israel is acting in a rogue way, with an apartheid state in the West Bank, and is committing genocide in Gaza. We need to end all aid... We have a vote on the Massie Amendment coming up next week. Are they really gonna vote for aid after Israel’s foreign government just detained an American congressman and four American citizens?”

That vote is real, and it’s this week. The Massie Amendment to strip $3.3 billion in U.S. military aid to Israel is on the House floor, and Khanna is one of its sponsors. So walk the sequence back. Tour a flashpoint with an anti-IDF group as your guide, get stopped in what the soldiers think is a closed zone, fundraise off it by dinner, then go on a far-left show and turn “they detained a congressman” into the closing argument for the aid cut you were already pushing. That’s not a man who stumbled into a moment. He went shopping for one.

Now the detail that actually matters, and it’s where Israel gets its due. Khanna’s headline claim is that the Israeli military detained him. The IDF says its soldiers didn’t block the road, they came to clear the civilians who were. That’s not a small distinction. “Settlers stopped my van” and “the army detained a U.S. congressman” are two very different sentences, and Khanna keeps reaching for the bigger one. When the disputed fact cuts against the guy with the fundraising email already sent, I lean toward the account that isn’t selling merch off the moment. And then the footage turned up, from Khanna’s own side, and made it worse for him.

An activist traveling with him posted his body-cam video to prove the detention:

@weimanadav (on the ground with Khanna) The IDF is lying about the detention of Rep. Khanna. I was on the ground with him that day, and my body camera captured us being detained by both settlers and Israeli soldiers. The IDF did not disperse the violent settlers, as they claim. They explicitly sided with them.

Watch what people found in that same tape. Mark Zlochin went back through it and says nobody was detained at all, that they were stopped from entering a closed military zone Khanna had already been warned about:

Mark Zlochin @MarkZlochin The most remarkable thing about this footage is that it completely debunks the whole “detainment” narrative. His body camera shows that nobody was “detained” - they were simply prevented from entering a closed military area, which he had previously been warned he could not enter. But words - whether “detained,” “genocide,” or “apartheid” - have no meaning for these propagandists.

And here’s the tell inside the tell. The video’s English subtitles translate every part except the one line that sinks the story:

Mark Zlochin @MarkZlochin Something I missed when I first watched the video two days ago: they added English subtitles for everything except the very last part, where a member of the local security team says: “The police have already come across you here, right, buddy? And what did they tell you? That you’re not allowed to be here, right? It’s a closed military zone. Right?” Funny how that’s precisely the segment they chose not to translate into English.

A closed military zone he’d already been warned off, and a translation that drops the guard saying exactly that. That isn’t documentation. It’s staging.

Here’s the story the coverage is burying under the he-said, IDF-said. The right just fractured on Israel in public, and it wasn’t close. Tucker Carlson, the loudest voice in the post-Trump right, called for a Republican ambassador to be fired for not defending a progressive Democrat.

Watch whether Khanna releases the full footage or only the cut that sells the detention. Watch whether the IDF’s “our soldiers didn’t block the road” account holds or quietly shifts. And watch how many more MAGA voices line up behind Tucker against Huckabee this week, because the count is the story, not the stunt.

Khanna got the ad he came for. The right handed him a bigger one for free.

Texas Put the Womb Trade on the Record. The Press Made It About Passports.

The Story.

On Wednesday, July 8, the Texas Senate Committee on Health and Human Services, chaired by Sen. Lois Kolkhorst, held an interim hearing on foreign nationals contracting with Texas surrogates to have children. It came out of an interim charge from Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick to examine "the unethical and foreign interests exploiting the surrogacy and fertility industries in Texas." Witnesses testified that there's no federal oversight of surrogacy and no background-check requirement for the people commissioning a baby, which leaves the door open to child abuse and foreign exploitation. Jennifer Lahl of the Center for Bioethics and Culture told lawmakers to "close all commercial international surrogacy arrangements." The testimony feeds legislation when Texas reconvenes in January 2027, and the state GOP platform already backs banning commercial surrogacy for foreign nationals.

The Left’s read. Immigration story. Where the mainstream showed up at all, it framed the hearing around birthright citizenship, Texas Tribune’s headline was “Texas to explore banning foreign surrogacy,” pinned to the fight over who gets a passport after the birthright ruling. The women renting out their bodies were a footnote, and there was no wall-to-wall national pickup.

The Right’s read. Exploitation, plainly. The Daily Signal, Texas Scorecard, and First Things centered the surrogate mothers, the “build-a-baby” arrangements, and a pipeline that lets foreign nationals order an American-born child with nobody checking who they are.

What both sides are skipping. The women, still. The mainstream frame is citizenship and the conservative frame is the marketplace, and the surrogates keep getting reduced to a step in somebody else’s argument. Take the woman who actually testified at this hearing. Christian Ross told the committee she contracted with a California agency, was misled about the foreign couple she was carrying for, and watched the baby end up in England’s foster system, while the pregnancy left her with preeclampsia, multiple blood transfusions, an emergency C-section, and no ability to have children of her own. “If I could go back and redo this all over again, I never would have done this,” she said. That’s the story hiding inside the abstraction, and almost nobody’s telling it as what it is.

Watch how fast a hearing about renting wombs turns into an argument about passports.

The bones of this are ugly and simple. You can commission a baby in Texas from a woman you will never meet, using an egg from a third woman and a clinic that runs it like a supply chain, and at no point does anyone run a background check on the person buying the child. Foreign or domestic, no vetting. If that arrangement existed for adoption, we’d call it what it is and shut it down by Friday. Slap the word “surrogacy” on it and suddenly it’s a fertility service with a nice website.

The birthright and immigration piece is real and important. Foreign nationals commissioning American babies to plant a citizenship anchor deserves a hearing and a law, and I’m not waving it off. But it’s the easier play. Who gets to be an American is a fight the political class already knows how to have, well-lit and clean for a headline. The harder thing, the one almost nobody is working, is women and children treated as a commodity: surrogates carrying babies for strangers with no background check on the buyer and no protection for themselves, newborns handed off under contract like inventory. That got skipped, and it got skipped precisely because birthright is the easier political win, at the expense of the very women and children the hearing was supposed to protect.

Related

Look at the Arcadia case if you want the thing without the euphemism. California authorities pulled 21 children from a mansion owned by a former Chinese official and his partner, most of them born to American women recruited online through an agency the couple secretly owned, several of those women carrying embryos for the same buyers at the same time without knowing it, and a batch of the babies now sitting in foster care. That is the market working exactly as designed. The product is the baby. The woman is the machine. And the only reason any of this is finally getting a hearing is that somebody in Texas noticed the babies come with U.S. citizenship attached, which tells you it took a passport to make the exploitation worth anyone’s attention.

I don’t need the immigration angle resolved to see the plainer thing. We built an industry where a human being can be commissioned, gestated, and handed off under contract, and we dressed it in soft language so nobody has to look at it straight. Texas at least made someone look.

Watch whether Kolkhorst’s committee actually produces a bill for the January session or lets it die in the interim. Watch whether a single national outlet covers the American women in the Arcadia case as a labor-and-trafficking story instead of a true-crime curiosity. And watch which fertility-industry groups show up to lobby against background checks, because that’s the tell.

You can’t buy a puppy without a screening. You can order a baby without one.

• The Navy went back to blockading Iran, and Trump floated a tollbooth. The U.S. naval blockade of Iranian ports went into effect Tuesday, July 14, backed by a third straight night of strikes, and the White House told Congress the war is back on to start a fresh 60-day War Powers window, after filing a notice the same week that hostilities had ended. Trump also announced, then walked back within a day, the Washington Times reported, a 20% “reimbursement” fee on all cargo through the Strait of Hormuz, swapping it for promised Gulf-state investment. The criticism came from Republicans and Democrats both.

• Graham’s sister took Graham’s seat, and got sworn in Tuesday. On Trump’s personal recommendation, Gov. Henry McMaster appointed Darline Graham Nordone, the late senator’s sister, who was sworn in Tuesday per the Washington Times, becoming South Carolina’s first female senator. The 62-year-old commissioner for the state Commission for the Blind has never held elected office. The seat’s on November’s ballot regardless, so it’s a four-month placeholder that keeps a fragile GOP majority intact.

• The Russia sanctions bill now carries the name of the man who died pushing it. Bipartisan senators unveiled the Sanctioning Russia Act on Tuesday, one of Graham’s top priorities before his death, mandating sanctions on Putin, Russian oligarchs, and state firms, with a 100% tariff (cut from Graham’s original 500%) on the top buyers of Russian oil, China and India among them. Trump said the bill has “a good chance,” RFE/RL reported, and floated bolting Iran and Hezbollah onto it.

• The DOJ’s voter-roll hunt is now 0 for 13. A federal judge in West Virginia, a George W. Bush appointee, dismissed the Justice Department’s suit for the state’s unredacted voter rolls, WV MetroNews reported, the 13th straight loss in the push to seize voter data. West Virginia’s Republican secretary of state cheered the ruling, and the judge openly wondered “what the real purpose was.” It’s the backdrop to Trump’s Thursday primetime speech on “free and fair elections.”

• A Cox media heir was arrested in Spain for bankrolling militants. Fergie Chambers, who walked away from the Cox Enterprises fortune with a reported $250 million payout in 2023 and poured it into pro-Palestinian and radical-left groups, was arrested in Spain on a U.S. extradition request, Fox News reported. The federal indictment charges him with money laundering to provide material support to foreign terrorist organizations, and he faces up to 30 years. His allies call it political repression.

• Two Supreme Court justices went to Capitol Hill for security money. Justices Elena Kagan and Amy Coney Barrett made a rare appearance before Congress as the Court seeks millions to harden judicial security, the AP reported. The U.S. Marshals logged 564 threats against federal judges last fiscal year; Barrett’s detail defused a fake 911 call at her home, and a would-be assassin was arrested near Justice Kavanaugh’s house.

That’s The Read. See you Friday.

If The Read is doing the cross-check work for you, send it to a friend who’s still chasing the framing instead of the facts.

“On July 4, 2026, Democratic Socialists of America passed 120,000 members, making us the largest socialist organization in United States history and surpassing the Socialist Party of America under Eugene Debs, which reached its peak dues-paying membership in 1912.”

Take note that this announcement was not made on some random Tuesday. Nope. They saved it for the country’s 250th birthday. And not a vague benchmark, either. They picked Eugene Debs, the patron saint of American socialism, as the ruler they wanted to be measured against. The announcement went out on their own account. A week earlier, their tally stood at “over 95,000,” per the Washington Examiner; they credit the jump to a run of primary wins.

Fine. No surprise they featured their growth along with Debs' image. But who is Debs?

Who Debs actually was

Start with how alive he still is for these people. On the night he won City Hall, Zohran Mamdani closed his victory speech not with his own words, but with Debs’s.

Here’s the part the confetti left off. Debs said, “I can see the dawn of a better day for humanity,” in 1918, standing in a federal courtroom, right before a judge sent him away for 10 years under the Espionage Act for a single speech against the First World War. Mamdani’s victory line was a condemned man’s line.

And here's a wrinkle the modern left never brings up: the man who kept Debs behind bars was the Democrat, Woodrow Wilson, who called him a traitor and refused him a pardon to the last. The one who finally set him free, over that same speech conviction, was a Republican, Warren Harding.

So who earns that kind of reverence? Debs was a railroad worker out of Terre Haute, Indiana. He built the American Railway Union and led the great Pullman Strike of 1894, and he did six months in jail for it, where he read Marx and came out a socialist. He co-founded the Socialist Party of America and helped launch the radical Industrial Workers of the World. He ran for president five times. And here’s the part that gets quietly sanded off. Debs didn’t want to regulate capitalism. He wanted to end it. “The Socialist Party is not a reform party,” he told a crowd of miners in 1902; its aim was “to abolish the capitalist system” and “transfer from private hands all the means of production and distribution” to “the people in their collective capacity.” Not tax the railroads. Own them. Not cushion the wage system. Abolish it — he called wage labor “wage-slavery” and the American worker a “twentieth century slave.” He backed the eight-hour day and the end of child labor and votes for women too, but those were down payments, not the purchase. The purchase was the whole economy. He put it plainest running for president in 1904:

“The overthrow of capitalism is the object of the Socialist party. It will not fuse with any other party and it would rather die than compromise.”

And he meant it down to the ground. His most quoted words come from that same 1918 courtroom:

“while there is a lower class, I am in it; while there is a criminal element, I am of it; while there is a soul in prison, I am not free.”

Say what you want about where the politics lead. The man was no fraud. He believed every syllable, and he went to prison rather than swallow it.

That’s who they picked. Not a mascot. A revolutionary who wanted the whole thing torn down and paid for saying so.

They wanted Debs. So let’s use all of Debs.

So let’s stay with the record they’re waving. Of his five runs, 1912 was the peak: about 6% of the national vote, roughly 901,000 ballots, and the Socialist Party at its high-water mark of around 118,000 members. The DSA’s own announcement puts Debs’s peak at 113,000 “dues-paying.” Small gap, and it doesn’t matter which figure you use, because the story ends the same place.

Take note that 1912 wasn't the launch. It was the ceiling. Debs's biggest year was, more or less, his last good one. Look at his 1920 run, waged from that prison cell eight years later. He pulled about 914,000 votes, a hair more than the 901,000 he got in 1912. Sounds like he held steady. He didn't. The country had grown, and women had won the vote, so that same raw number was now 3.4% of the electorate instead of 6%. Flat vote, half the share. No new ground, the same true believers he already had. And weigh what he pulled that number under. By 1920 he was a jailed martyr, handed the kind of story that's built to make a country rally. Nearly a million people voted for him from outside a federal prison, and it moved nothing. The sympathy was real, but the conversion never came. That's what a hard ceiling looks like.

What the banner leaves off

The announcement stops the clock at the peak. Keep reading and the rest of the decade shows up fast.

World War I split the party over whether to back the war. Then the government came down hard, the Red Scare hit, and in 1919 the party fractured, spinning the Communist parties off from the socialist trunk. By 1919 the Socialist Party reported 77,647 members, down from that 118,000 peak, and the slide kept going. Debs was in prison. Within a few years the Communist Party had passed the party he built, and American socialism spent the next half-century out at the margins of national politics.

And notice what actually broke it. Debs’s Socialist Party was never one thing. It was a coalition, reformers who wanted to win elections sharing a roof with revolutionaries who wanted the whole system gone, and when the Bolshevik question forced everyone to choose, it split right along that seam. The DSA is built the same way. It’s not a monolith; it’s a truce between tendencies: reformist caucuses content to work inside the Democratic Party sitting alongside openly Marxist-Leninist ones like Red Star and the Marxist Unity Group, whose stated endpoint is communism, full stop. Last year’s convention even repealed the party’s old ban on “democratic centralism,” the Leninist model for running an organization. That’s a lot of conviction under one banner, and conviction like that doesn’t share power quietly. People who agree on tearing a system down rarely agree on what replaces it, and the faction that wins that argument is usually the one least willing to compromise. Winning is what keeps the peace. Victories paper over the doctrine. So watch what happens if these candidates keep running up the score in safe blue primaries but can’t break through at the federal level, because nothing sharpens the knives inside a movement like the sense that it has stalled.

This is history, not a prophecy, and I’m not going to pretend it’s one. I’m not saying the DSA is booked for the same collapse. I’m saying the comparison they reached for carries its own warning, and they cut it off right before the warning starts. “Surpassing Debs” sounds like a finish line. Debs’s own movement tells you it can just as easily be a peak.

Related

The one thing that actually changed: the ballot line

Let’s evaluate this claim that “socialism is suddenly popular.” The real difference between the DSA and Debs isn’t the head count, and it isn’t the ideas. It’s the line on the ballot.

Debs ran as a Socialist. He built his own party, stood outside the two-party system, and stayed outside it, and the party he built broke apart. The DSA runs its people as Democrats. They win Democratic primaries, take the party’s ballot line, and inherit safe blue seats that were never in doubt in November. That’s why 120,000 members in 2026 buys something 113,000 in 1912 never could: actual offices, with actual gavels.

Look at Colorado. Melat Kiros, a 29-year-old democratic socialist, just ended Diana DeGette’s 30-year career in the state’s first district, running on the Democratic line, and said the quiet part into the microphone on primary night: “We are taking back our party and our country.” Not joining. Taking. And this isn’t one lucky race. The Intercept, no one’s idea of a right-wing outlet, counts 305 DSA-backed lawmakers elected since 2018, with chapters spread across a majority of states.

Debs built a party, and it broke. The DSA borrowed one that already works. That’s a significant difference, and it’s why the “big tent” talk you hear from Democratic leadership misses the point completely. A tent assumes everyone inside is pitching the same tent. Debs pitched his own, on his own lot, in the open. The DSA moved into somebody else’s, like a parasite. And in its own documents, it’s honest about its intent to keep the lot.

The number that should worry you isn’t 120,000. It’s 58 percent.

Let me not hand myself a cheap win. A membership record is not proof that socialism went mainstream. 120,000 people in a country of 340 million is a rounding error, and anyone waving the raw count as evidence of a national tide is doing the same lazy thing I keep calling out in the press.

The softening is real, though, and it doesn’t show up in the member rolls. It shows up in the polling. An Economist/YouGov survey from late June found 58% of Democrats hold a favorable view of socialism. Other national polls land lower, so don’t build a cathedral on that one figure. But the direction is concerning. And “socialism” here isn’t my label pinned on them from the outside. It’s theirs. Their 2025 platform, “Workers Deserve More!,” calls for collective ownership of “the key economic drivers” and to “abolish the carceral forces of the capitalist state.” Sounds a lot like “abolish the police.” The 120,000 is a headline. The 58% is the water table underneath it.

The bigger mistake runs the other way

I’m not going to pretend Trump picked the wrong word. RedState’s headline, “the DSA just proved him right,” is closer to the mark than the people sneering at it want to admit. I don’t need Trump to be a prophet, though. I have something better. History has run this experiment before, and it keeps ending up in the same place.

Here’s who actually needs to hear that, and it isn’t the people already paying attention. It’s the normie Democrat who reads the Times and MSNow, trusts them, and is being told, gently, that this is just a healthcare plan with a bolder name. They’re the whole ballgame. And right now the outlets they trust are selling them the friendly version.

Socialism has a history, and it’s not the one being handed to young Democrats right now. Every time it’s been tried at scale, the pitch was gentle, and the ending wasn’t. The romanticizing always comes first and the downplaying second. The shortages and the secret police come after. The people who warned early got called hysterics, right up until they got called correct. I’m not saying the DSA is the Soviet Union. I’m saying it is openly working to remake one of the two parties that run this country; it is honest in its own platform about wanting to end the system that built the richest economy on earth, and the only thing standing between “fringe curiosity” and “governing faction” is whether anyone says so plainly while it’s still small enough to matter.

So I’m not going to soften it to sound measured. The measured-sounding version is the trap.

They picked the ruler

They wanted to be measured against Debs. Good. Measure away. But understand what that choice gives away. You don’t reach for Eugene Debs if you’re a party of tinkerers. You reach for the man who ran five times to pull the system out by the roots. They told you what they are by whose name they put on the banner — and they told you how it usually ends, because Debs ran on his own line and lost, and the party he built cracked apart and drifted to the margins.

The catch is that I can’t promise the ending repeats, because the game is different now. Debs built his own party, out in the open, and it withered on the fringe where it couldn’t take anyone with it. The DSA isn’t building a party. It’s moving into one that already exists, and the Democrats are holding the door.

So here’s the only comfort I’ve got, and it might be naive. Every movement that set out to replace the system instead of fix it has failed in the end. Every one. The DSA will too. The banner says they passed Eugene Debs; it doesn’t say what passed him next. The only question left is whether they fail early, out on the fringe the way Debs did, or late, from the inside, after the rest of us have gone down with them.

The skin grabs onto the pan like a clingy girlfriend. You wait 90 seconds, try to peek by lifting one corner with a fish spatula, and the skin tears in half. By the time you flipped the now-mangled pieces, the flesh was overcooked at the edges and just barely warm in the middle. But you eat it because it was edible. But it was not a good piece of fish.

Three things went wrong, all of them on the heat-pan checklist from this month’s lesson. We are revisiting this because I bet they’re the same three you’re getting wrong on a random Tuesday.

Read more

I just want to thank everyone who’s stuck around and subscribed since I changed up the format. And I’m grateful for all the sweet notes of encouragement and appreciation that have landed in my inbox since the switch. They mean more than you know.

In a time when people are this divided, and the news gets drilled down to simple talking points, I’m proud to run a newsletter that steps back and looks at the bigger picture, so you come away actually understanding what’s happening in the cycle instead of a soundbite someone handed you.

And I want this to be a conversation, not a monologue. If there’s a point you agree with, disagree with, or just see from a different angle, leave it in the comments. I read them, and some of the sharpest perspectives around here come from you.

Let’s get into the news.

In today’s Read:

• Lindsey Graham died Saturday at 71. You’re about to read two completely different obituaries of the same man, and the real news is the seat.

• Armed agents showed up at reporters’ front doors over a story about the Qatari jet Trump’s own Secret Service won’t fully trust. I have no love for the Times. This is still the authoritarian move.

• The New York Times Magazine and the Washington Post spent last weekend sanding “we want to replace capitalism” down to childcare and free buses. The socialists themselves are the ones telling you the truth.

• Quick Rundown: the FBI fires the analysts who wouldn’t work Georgia 2020, Walz’s pardoned child rapist gets deported anyway, Democratic governors yank their Guard out of D.C., Trump calls the Iran ceasefire “over,” Missouri drowns, and more.

Lindsey Graham Is Dead at 71.

The Story.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., died Saturday night at 71, hours after returning from a trip to Ukraine. His office said the preliminary cause was an aortic dissection, a rupture of the aorta tied to hardened arteries.

Graham won his Senate seat in 2002, chaired Judiciary and then Armed Services, was John McCain’s closest friend in the chamber, and traveled the globe for two decades pushing a hawkish foreign policy. He also went from calling Trump a “kook” in 2016 to one of his most reliable allies. Under South Carolina law, GOP Gov. Henry McMaster appoints a replacement to serve until a special election, which now lands on this November’s ballot.

The Left's read. Two lanes. The mainstream obituaries are measured but lead with the same frame: NBC's runs "his evolution from a fiery critic of President Donald Trump to one of his staunchest allies," the flip from McCain maverick to MAGA loyalist. The blog left skips the politesse. Crooks and Liars ran a piece titled "A Proper Obituary for Lindsey Graham" saying he leaves "no great accomplishments, only a legacy of cruelty and cowardice," and Mock Paper Scissors ran a matching hit the same day.

The Right’s read. Tributes. Trump called him “a true American Patriot.” Zelensky called him “a true defender of freedom.” The right-side obituaries center the statesman, the Judiciary chairman who helped seat three Supreme Court justices, the friend who carried McCain’s torch into war zones.

What both sides are skipping. Two things get buried under the eulogy fight. First, the seat. McMaster hands it to an appointee within days, and a special election gets stacked onto an already-loaded November ballot in a state nobody was watching. Second, the honest middle nobody wants on the day a man dies: Graham genuinely was both men. The one who called Trump a kook and the one who golfed with him a year later. Pretending he was only the patriot or only the coward misses the thing that actually made him effective, which was always knowing which way the wind was blowing.

Lindsey Graham grew up in one room behind his parents’ bar and pool hall in Central, South Carolina. He lost his mother at 20 and his father fifteen months later, and at an age when most of us are stressing over a class schedule, he became the guardian of his 13-year-old sister, adopted her, and put himself through school. Whatever you think of the senator, the man built himself from a back room in a bar to one of the leading foreign-policy voices in the country, and carried his little sister the whole way. That’s not nothing. That’s most of everything.

Now the honest appraisal, because I’m not going to canonize him. Graham earned a lot of the criticism he got, and I’ll name the one that’s mine: he was too war-happy, too quick to want American troops nearer to every fire on the map. That instinct is a big piece of why a chunk of us on the right stopped trusting the McCain wing years ago.

And hold this right next to it, because it’s just as true. The man was a dog with a bone on American strength and national security, and in a Senate that’s gone tribal to the point of uselessness, he was one of the last people in it who could actually move a bill. He’d fight you on the floor at noon and share a meal with you at seven, and mean both. His relationship with Trump is the example: he called the guy a kook, then found a way to work with him, and the sanctions bill he finally muscled through two days before he died is what that skill produces. He was also willing to shift his positions as his constituents shifted theirs, which the tribal crowd calls flip-flopping and the rest of us usually call listening.

And when Brett Kavanaugh was getting torched in that 2018 hearing, Graham stood up and threw the punch nobody else on that committee had the spine to throw. People still remember where they were for that one.

Here’s the part the obituaries keep leaving out: the man was actually funny, which is rarer in that building than competence. Back in 2015, Graham called Trump a “jackass,” and Trump read his personal cell number out to a crowd in Bluffton. Graham didn’t sulk. He put out a video calmly executing the phone every way a person can, meat cleaver, blender, golf club, a toaster oven with Bagel Bites, then tossed the wreckage and deadpanned that “if all else fails, you can always give your number to The Donald.” He’d grin for a selfie next to a protester screaming after him. Self-deprecation is a survival skill, and he had it in a party that mostly forgot how to laugh at itself.

Most outlets are going with a signal framing. Open Crooks and Liars and Graham is “cruelty and cowardice.” Open a conservative site, and he’s a patriot and a statesman. Like with every human, it’s not that simple. He was McCain’s shadow and Trump’s ally, a hawk who wanted every war and a legislator who could still cut a deal in a building that’s forgotten how. The progressive version calls his Trump turn cowardice. I’d call it the rarest skill left in that chamber. The press doesn’t invent a lie about Lindsey Graham. It picks which true half to run, based on what its readers already want to feel, and hands you that half as the whole man.

The actual news, the part that changes something this week, is the seat. Henry McMaster is about to appoint a United States senator, and a special election just dropped onto November’s ballot out of a clear sky. The fight over who fills that chair is the story that outlives the news cycle.

Watch who McMaster names, because an appointee running as a quasi-incumbent reshapes the whole board. And watch the calendar, because a surprise Senate race in a red state in a midterm year tends to get decided before most people notice it started.

Rest in peace to the man who raised his sister and never stopped picking fights.

Worth flagging.

The minute the news broke, social media did what it does now: half the internet decided he was assassinated. Israel did it. Iran did it. Russia did it. Ukraine did it. The theories wrote themselves, because he’d just come back from Kyiv and was about to pass a sanctions bill Moscow hated.

Then the FBI turned up at his house to assist local police, which is normal process on the sudden death of a sitting senator with no indication of foul play, and Kash Patel’s clumsy public comment about it poured gas on the fire. Here are the facts. The man was 71. He died of an aortic dissection, the same sudden killer that took John Ritter at 54. Toxicology is still pending, which is routine, so anybody telling you it’s confirmed one way or the other is guessing. These things happen, they happen fast, and they feel even more shocking because you’re always in the middle of “about to do something” when they hit. He was about to pass a bill. That’s not a plot. That’s how sudden death works.

And a smaller one. Nancy Mace marked the man’s death by posting a Godfather clip, “Just when I thought I was out… they pull me back in,” floating herself for his seat before the funeral had a date. Nancy, nobody is pulling you back in. You came fifth in your own governor’s primary last month, at about 12%. Sit down. This one isn’t about you.

The Feds Turned Up at Four Reporters’ Doors. We Need to Talk About the Plane.

The Story.

On Friday, July 10, federal agents delivered grand jury subpoenas to four New York Times journalists, Eric Lipton, Julian Barnes, Tyler Pager, and Eric Schmitt, ordering them to testify before a grand jury in the Southern District of New York. They're witnesses in a leak investigation into how the information got out. Not one of them is charged, indicted, or arrested. What set it off: the Times reported, citing multiple briefed officials and two named former Air Force officials, that the new $400 million Qatari-donated Boeing 747-8 lacks the antimissile countermeasures the old Air Force One carried, that the defensive systems aren't even visible on the new jet, and that the Secret Service was worried enough to make Trump swap back to the old plane leaving Turkey, which shares a border with Iran. CBS, CNN, and Forbes have all since confirmed the swap.

The Left’s read. The free-press line. Times lawyer David McCraw calls agents on a reporter’s doorstep something that “should shock the conscience of any American who believes in the Constitution,” and PBS and CNN frame the home deliveries as intimidation aimed at newsgathering itself. The Times says it will fight.

The Right’s read. The national-security line. Fox and the pro-administration sites frame it as a serious breach: somebody inside the government handed the defensive gaps of the president’s plane to a newspaper during live strikes on Iran, and a grand jury is exactly the tool to find out who.

What both sides are skipping. Two things. First, the plane really is a hole, and that stops being arguable once you read the actual reporting, which is stuffed with detail: no visible countermeasures, former Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall on the record saying he’s “surprised to see this plane used outside the U.S.” with Iran in the picture. Second, subpoenaing reporters in a leak case is not some Trump invention. It’s a bipartisan, decades-old practice, and the “press freedom is dying” alarm arrives selectively. Obama’s DOJ secretly seized two months of AP phone records across 20 reporters and labeled Fox’s James Rosen a “possible co-conspirator,” and the Supreme Court’s Branzburg ruling says reporters get no special pass to skip a grand jury. Both “lines” skip that these reporters are witnesses, not defendants.

Let me start where the story actually starts, and it isn’t a reporter’s doorbell. It’s the plane. Get it together, Don.

Here’s the honest part Republicans need to hear. Trump wanted a flashier ride, said so out loud, called the old plane not impressive enough for international trips, and pushed to rush a donated Qatari 747 into service before the retrofit could give it the defenses a real Air Force One carries. Then he flew it to Turkey, which borders the country we were bombing that same week. You can maybe make a case for flying the less-armored plane from D.C. to a rally in Wisconsin. You cannot make it for a trip that parks you next door to Iran, and his own Secret Service agreed, because they made him switch planes to get out of there. Like it or not, that jet is a security problem. And a hole in the president’s plane isn’t only his risk. It’s the staff, the agents, the press pool, and the office itself. That’s a national security problem for the whole country.

So is it also a problem that the Times printed a detailed inventory of what the plane can’t defend against? Yes. I read the piece. It names the missing countermeasures, quotes former Air Force brass, walks through where the defensive systems sit on the old jet and where they’re gone on this one. That’s a lot of sensitive material to hand an enemy in the middle of a shooting war, and wanting to know who inside the government spilled it is fair.

Now the part the press really wants you to skip. Is any of this an attack on the freedom of the press? No. Not close.

Nobody at the Times is charged. Nobody’s indicted. Nobody’s arrested. Four reporters got subpoenas to testify to a grand jury in the Southern District of New York about how national security information got out, and a subpoena is a subpoena whether it comes by mail or in an agent’s hand. The target is the source, not the byline. And this play is old, and it’s bipartisan, which is the receipt the “democracy dies in darkness” crowd never wants pulled out. Obama’s Justice Department secretly grabbed two months of phone records from 20 Associated Press reporters and tagged Fox’s James Rosen a possible criminal co-conspirator for doing his job. James Risen fought a leak subpoena for years. Judith Miller, of this same New York Times, sat in a cell for 85 days rather than give a grand jury a name. The Supreme Court settled the law itself back in 1972: reporters get no special pass to ignore a grand jury. So spare me the fainting couch. Where was the shock to the conscience when a Democratic DOJ ran this exact play, quietly, with gag orders so the reporters didn’t even know their records were gone?

Here’s the media lesson, and it’s the whole reason this newsletter exists. The press had two lines loaded before the facts landed, “attack on the free press” or “national security breach,” and it grabbed the one that flatters it. Both lines skip the two things that are true at the same time: the plane is a genuine hole that never should have flown overseas, and the subpoena is a routine, bipartisan leak tool aimed at the leaker, not the reporters. You’re allowed to be annoyed at all of it. Just don’t let anyone sell you a witness subpoena as a tank rolling into the newsroom.

Watch whether the DOJ ever actually names a leaker, or whether this stays aimed at the reporters and quietly dies the way the Washington Post and Wall Street Journal versions just did when those papers pushed back. Watch whether one outlet running the “press freedom” line today so much as mentions that Obama’s DOJ did worse. And watch the plane, because the question that started all of this, whether the thing is safe to fly the president abroad, still doesn’t have an answer.

The jet is the story. The subpoena is the distraction. Get a plane that can defend itself, Don, and there’s nothing to leak.

The Press Spent the Weekend Turning “Abolish Capitalism” Into a Vibe.

The Story.

As DSA-backed candidates swept 2026 primaries and Zohran Mamdani turned the New York mayor’s office into a national launchpad, the big outlets rolled out a wave of “what is a democratic socialist, really?” coverage. The New York Times Magazine ran the marquee version last weekend: Jia Lynn Yang’s “How American Socialism Changed, and Stormed the Democratic Party.” The Washington Post’s business desk ran “What’s the difference between Democrats and democratic socialists?” TIME, MSNBC, and Semafor ran their own. Meanwhile, the DSA itself hit 120,000-plus members on July 4, up from around 6,000 in 2015, and its own platform, “Workers Deserve More!”, says the goal in plain text: “we fight for the abolition of capitalism,” social ownership of all major industry.

The Left’s read. Two moves, one soft and one softer. The Times Magazine aestheticizes: Yang casts socialism as “more of a spirit than a single ideology,” a movement of “astute critics” who are “always imagining other ways to live,” historically “better at critiquing the system than reshaping it.” The Post concedes the goal in a single sentence, Democrats want to “reform” capitalism while the DSA wants to “replace it,” then spends the rest of the piece softening what “replace” means, a 32-hour workweek and social housing framed as the same direction as Democrats, “the socialists just want to go further.”

The Right’s read. City Journal, the Daily Signal, and RealClearPolitics read the same platform and take it at its word: this is an anti-capitalist program, the “democratic” is packaging, and the friendly explainers are laundering it. HotAir even ran a mocking headline crediting the Post for admitting, once, that the DSA wants to destroy capitalism.

What both sides are skipping. Here’s the cleanest fact in the whole story: the socialists are more honest about the goal than the liberal outlets explaining them to you. The Intercept titles its coverage “There’s a New Democratic Machine. It’s Unabashedly Socialist.” Jacobin says the ambition to end capitalism runs straight through the group’s founders. The DSA’s own homepage calls capitalism a system “designed by the owning class to exploit the rest of us.” The Post reduces that to policy. The Times reduces it to poetry. And Yang hands you the rebuttal to her own frame without flagging it, reporting a record 38% of Americans now want to move away from capitalism, membership up twentyfold in a decade, roughly 150 DSA candidates this cycle. People aren’t flooding into a spirit.

I’ve been saying this one for months: Democratic socialism is branding. You put the word “democratic” in front of “socialism” to soft-pedal where the whole thing is actually headed, which is socialism sliding toward the centralized control of the means of production, and that last part has a different name. It’s not a slur to say it. It’s the platform. Go read it.

Here’s a tip for reading any movement. Skip the explainer written to make you comfortable and go straight to the group’s own website. The DSA says, on its own homepage, that it “fights for the abolition of capitalism.” The Intercept, cheerfully, calls the project “unabashedly socialist.” Then open the New York Times Magazine and watch Jia Lynn Yang turn all of that into a “spirit,” a movement of gentle “astute critics” who are “always imagining other ways to live.” Lovely. It’s also the recruiting pitch with the word “abolition” quietly removed.

I told you a while back that not a single major outlet was digging into the roots, the sources, the actual beliefs of the DSA, that the legacy press would rather rebrand them as plain “progressive Democrats” than report what they’ve said out loud. The move is to explain it away. The Post gets closest, it prints “replace it” in one sentence. Then it spends the next thousand words assuring you “replace” mostly means a shorter workweek and some public housing, and it passes along the DSA’s own repositioning, from “firebrands” to “independent-minded public servants,” like that’s a neutral observation instead of the spin it is.

Let me be fair, because the cross-check requires it. Not every liberal outlet did this. Jonathan Chait wrote a whole Atlantic essay warning that the DSA had become illiberal and dogmatic, and Jacobin lit him up for it.

So when I say the press is downplaying this, I mean a specific genre, the reassuring explainer, not every writer with a byline. Name Chait. He did the work.

And understand what I’m actually mad about, because it isn’t the DSA being honest. When the DSA tells me it wants to abolish capitalism, that’s them being straight, and I can argue with straight all day long. Mamdani is a political snake and hack, and he’ll tell you it’s all “pragmatic delivery,” free buses and childcare, but at least his own party’s platform says the quiet part in writing. What I mind is the friendly press insisting they don’t mean the thing they’ve printed, in black and white; that is what really ticks me off.

Watch whether a single legacy outlet quotes the DSA’s own “abolition of capitalism” line instead of a candidate’s softer paraphrase. Watch the races that tell you how far past blue cities this reaches, Oliver Larkin against Jared Moskowitz in Florida, Francesca Hong for governor in Wisconsin. And watch the rebrand language, “public servants,” “pragmatic,” “sewer socialists,” migrate from the candidates’ mouths into the reporters’ own copy.

Believe the socialists. On this one, they’re the only people in the room telling you the truth.

The FBI fired the two analysts who wouldn’t work the Georgia 2020 probe. Two Atlanta-based intelligence analysts, a married couple, were escorted out last week after refusing to join the bureau’s reopened investigation of Georgia’s 2020 election, saying it didn’t meet FBI and DOJ policy. It sits on top of a bigger move: the FBI has directed roughly 260 analysts nationwide to the Fulton County probe, each assigned an estimated 708 records checks on a July 17 deadline, described in memos as a priority for Director Kash Patel.

Walz pardoned a man who raped a 10-year-old. ICE deported him anyway. DHS announced Friday it removed Tou Lue Vang to Laos, weeks after Minnesota’s Clemency Review Commission pardoned him, a move that had cleared his path to stay. Vang was convicted in 2006 of first-degree criminal sexual conduct for repeatedly assaulting a girl starting when she was 10, and once offered her $10 to stay quiet.

Democratic governors are pulling their National Guard out of D.C. Minnesota’s Tim Walz withdrew his roughly 100 troops early on Saturday after they were spotted on “presence patrols” in neighborhoods far from the National Mall, and Maryland’s Wes Moore is bringing his home this week. Pressure is building on Michigan’s Gretchen Whitmer, whose 162 troops are slated to stay through Aug. 31.

Trump says the Iran ceasefire is “over.” After Iran’s Revolutionary Guard attacked a Cyprus-flagged container ship in the Strait of Hormuz, Trump declared the truce dead and the U.S. hit roughly 90 targets across Iran, a third round of strikes in a week. The same day, the White House formally told Congress, under the War Powers Resolution, that it considers hostilities to have ended. Both messages went out inside 24 hours.

Missouri drowned over the weekend. Catastrophic flash flooding forced a state of emergency and hundreds of water rescues, including more than 160 teenagers pulled from Camp Taum Sauk in Reynolds County, and a woman, Faith Gregory, was found dead two miles downstream from her home. Flood watches spread Sunday from Tennessee into the Carolinas while the Intermountain West baked past 110 degrees.

Trump gave Ukraine a Patriot license and threatened Russia’s economy. At the NATO summit in Ankara, Trump said the U.S. will grant Ukraine a production license to build its own Patriot interceptors and threatened 100% secondary tariffs on Russia absent a deal. The catch: standing up domestic production takes months, and Ukraine needs the interceptors now.

The Charlie Kirk case won’t get a ruling until September. Tyler Robinson’s five-day preliminary hearing wrapped, and rather than rule on whether the case goes to trial, Judge Tony Graf set oral arguments for Sept. 1. The defense spent the final day attacking the ballistics rather than the confession.

DOJ is appealing rather than unredacting the Epstein files. After a federal judge ordered the department to unredact more documents or explain why it can’t, Acting AG Todd Blanche declined, said releasing more would harm victims, offered to show a judge material privately, and said the department will appeal. It has published 3.5 million pages and is still holding back roughly 2.5 million more.

Gunfire tore through a Toronto street festival. Two men were killed and four people wounded Saturday evening when shooting broke out near the Salsa on St. Clair festival, in what police describe as a targeted exchange between two people rather than an attack on the crowd.

Did you learn something? Understand something better? If so, share this one with a friend who needs the cross-check.

Share

That’s The Read. See you Wednesday.

If The Read is doing the cross-check work for you, send it to a friend who’s still chasing the framing instead of the facts.

I don’t know about you, but I am ready for the weekend! My plan is recovery. Last weekend was Independence Day weekend, and I have yet to catch up on regular life tasks this week. So an exciting weekend of laundry and cleaning ahead, and I am actually cool with that.

In today’s Read:

• Robinson’s own boyfriend read the confession into the record. Candace Owens keeps moving the goalposts. Get off her train.

• McConnell’s been hospitalized since June 14, and his party will only say “he’s improving.” A Democratic governor is the one asking questions.

• Trump emptied the election commission the day after his DOJ threatened election officials with prison. Same campaign, two moves.

• Quick Rundown: Spencer Pratt’s fraud video, Carroll’s $5.8 million, another strike on Iran, the ICE-obstruction judge walks, Platner quits, Trump’s Arlington arch, and the Smithsonian report.

The “Total Patsy” Theory Died This Week. His Boyfriend Killed It on the Stand.

The Story.

Tyler Robinson, 23, is charged with aggravated murder in the September 10 assassination of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University, and prosecutors are seeking the death penalty. Since the last edition, the preliminary hearing ran several more days in Provo and the evidence got a lot heavier.

Prosecutors played a recorded interview with Lance Twiggs, Robinson’s romantic partner, who told investigators Robinson confessed in several ways: face to face, by text, and in a handwritten note. One message read, “I had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk, and I took it.” Twiggs said Robinson asked to borrow a Dremel tool about a month earlier to engrave bullets “for a hunting trip,” and forensics matched that exact Dremel to the engravings on casings found in the rifle and in Robinson’s home.

The engravings included “hey fascist, catch” and “bella ciao.” The court also, by accident, put Robinson’s handwritten confession note on the screen. Utah’s highest court declined to hear the defense’s appeal of Judge Tony Graf’s rulings on cameras and hearsay. Graf decides at the close of the hearing whether the case goes to trial.

The Left read. A careful evidence build. PBS, CNN, and the wires cover the confession texts, the Dremel match, the DNA, the boyfriend on the stand, with the defense’s DNA objection noted and moved past. Straight true-crime procedural.

The Right’s read. Fox and the smaller sites lead with the confession and the “hey fascist, catch” casings. What went missing this round is louder than what got said: the “Tyler Robinson never set foot on that campus, he’s a patsy” faction that ran hot in June has mostly gone silent as the confession texts landed, except Candace of course.

What both sides are skipping. The defense’s live fight isn’t the confession. It’s the DNA. Lawyer Michael Burt is hammering the analyst on whether the sample can be pinned to Robinson at all, and that’s the only real challenge going down right now. But it is also the defense's job.

I am not about to be polite. For almost a year Owens has run a "just asking questions" operation on this murder, and the questions keep changing because the last batch got demolished. "Total patsy." "Tyler Robinson was never even on campus." Then the state put his Dodge Challenger on UVU's cameras four times on September 10, the footage flatly contradicting her, and this week his own boyfriend read the confession texts into the record. So watch the pivot happen in real time. On her feed this week it's not "never on campus" anymore.

Now it’s the phone screen was doctored, the ballistics don’t add up, Twiggs testified Tyler “wasn’t political,” and my personal favorite, the whole hearing is a “Zionist PR” operation against her personally. “He wasn’t there” collapses and the answer isn’t “I was wrong.” It’s a fresh theory by dinner.

Notice what she is not doing. She isn’t sitting down for the obvious move, the hours-long livestream taking the hearing apart exhibit by exhibit, in real time, the way you would if you actually had the goods and could dismantle the state’s case on camera. That would mean holding a year of contradictory claims still long enough for people to line them up next to each other. So instead you get one-liners and quote-tweets of anonymous accounts about phone glass. The drip lets her keep moving. A livestream would pin her.

Here’s the tell inside the tell. Candace offered to help Robinson’s defense. They never called. And the defense hasn’t floated a single one of her theories as grounds for reasonable doubt. Not the “never on campus” line, not the doctored phone screen. None of it. Their actual argument is a narrow, technical fight over whether the DNA analyst can pin the sample to Robinson, and nothing more than that. So run her logic all the way to the end. You can’t say the defense is in on some plot to hang Robinson out as a patsy, because then why would Candace, his loudest booster, offer to work with them? But when they pass on her help, the pass itself gets spun into proof of something. Heads she’s right, tails she’s still right. Goalpost moved, again.

Then the part I won’t dress up. This week Owens called the hearing a “show trial,” took a swipe at Erika Kirk’s tears, and posted that “science has no place in a discussion about men made of steel and grieving widows. In fact, it’s demonic.”

A widow buried her husband. Candace turned it into content and a subscriber drive.

So let me say it plainly. I don’t file Candace Owens under “the right” anymore. She’s in it for Candace. Her numbers are climbing because a chunk of the left now cheers her for kicking TPUSA and the president, and grief-farming Erika Kirk pays the bills. If you’re still on her train after this week, after the footage, after the confession, after the goalposts sprinted down the field one more time, get off. This isn’t questioning a case. It’s selling a story she can’t keep straight to an audience that stopped checking.

Watch whether Graf binds the case over (he will). Watch whether Owens ever does the real-time, evidence-by-evidence livestream, or just keeps drip-posting theories with a 24-hour shelf life. And watch her follower count, because it tells you exactly who she’s performing for now.

She keeps moving the goalposts. The hearing keeps not caring.

Mitch McConnell Has Been in a Hospital for a Month. Republican Won’t Tell You Why.

The Story.

Sen. Mitch McConnell, 84, has been hospitalized since June 14 and hasn’t appeared in public or said a word in nearly a month. His office offers one sentence on repeat: he “continues to improve” and is “working closely with his staff.” No diagnosis. No prognosis. Emergency dispatch recordings reported by multiple outlets say responders were sent to his Washington home for an unconscious person in cardiac arrest, with CPR in progress. He chairs the Senate Rules Committee and a defense appropriations panel, and the Senate is back to a full calendar. Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, a Democrat, published a letter asking McConnell for a real update, writing that “allowing speculation to continue in the media is not fair to the Senator or to Kentuckians.”

The Left’s read. A transparency failure and a governance problem. Beshear presses, former Sen. Barbara Boxer says she’s “stunned” at the silence, and The Hill runs the broader “what does a lawmaker owe voters” debate.

The Right’s read. Split, and the split is the story. GOP leaders rolled out near-identical statements that they’ve “spoken with” McConnell, and he’s recovering. And a big piece of the right isn’t buying the choreography: conservatives who spent years demanding transparency are calling the coordinated messaging its own cover-up. CNN’s own conservative commentator flagged the matching talking points as “weird.”

What both sides are skipping. The vacancy math, which is the part that actually decides things. In 2024 Kentucky’s Republican legislature passed a law, over Beshear’s veto, that strips the governor of the power to appoint a replacement senator. So a McConnell exit doesn’t hand a Democratic governor a pick. It triggers a special election on a tight clock. And the cardiac-arrest detail sits in the “rumor” pile only because the office won’t confirm or deny it, which is exactly how a silence turns into a conspiracy generator.

Quick context, because this is the part that changes the stakes. Everybody assumes a senator leaving mid-term means the governor picks the next one. Not here. Kentucky’s own GOP wrote that power out of Beshear’s hands in 2024. If the seat opens, Beshear issues a proclamation, and the state runs a special election it has never actually run before, with a practical September 1 deadline to line it up with November’s vote. So the “what happens next” isn’t a backroom appointment. It’s an untested law and a calendar nobody’s tested against a real vacancy.

Look, I don’t wish the man ill, and I’m not going to pretend a health event at 84 is a scandal by itself. Both parties do this, and they all do it badly. Dianne Feinstein’s staff ran her Senate office while she was visibly gone. Fetterman’s early weeks were a fog nobody would describe. This is a bipartisan bad habit, and it’s insulting every single time.

The line we are being fed, “He’s improving,” is not reassuring and, coming from his press aide, does not meet the threshold for informing the public. A sitting United States senator has been in a hospital for four weeks, reportedly went into cardiac arrest, and his party’s answer is a group text of identical reassurances. We can’t keep doing this. The people asking for real answers are a Democratic governor and a chunk of the online right, and the people running interference are McConnell’s own leadership team reading from the same script. When the reassurance is that coordinated, start asking what it’s hiding.

Watch whether the office ever puts a diagnosis on paper. Watch whether Beshear moves toward a proclamation, because that’s the moment this stops being gossip and becomes a Senate seat in play. And watch that September 1 date, because Kentucky’s untested vacancy law is about to get a live trial nobody planned for.

A month is a long time to say nothing. Somebody owes Kentucky a straight sentence.

Trump Fired the Whole Election Commission. The Day Before, His DOJ Threatened to Jail Election Officials.

The Story.

On Thursday, July 9, the White House removed all three remaining members of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, the only federal agency built solely for election administration. The two Democrats, Thomas Hicks and Benjamin Hovland, were fired by email. The lone Republican, Christy McCormick, was allowed to resign. All three were Senate-confirmed. With zero commissioners, the agency has no quorum, so it can’t act. It can’t certify voting systems or update the federal voter-registration form, four months before the November midterms. Many states require that federal certification before they’ll buy or use voting machines. The firing leans on the Supreme Court’s Slaughter ruling expanding a president’s power to remove independent officials.

Now rewind one day. On July 7 and 8, Assistant AG Harmeet Dhillon, who runs the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, sent letters to all 50 states warning that any election officer who “knowingly retains noncitizens” on the rolls “could be subject to criminal liability,” and gave states five days to explain their compliance. Michigan’s Secretary of State was named directly. Here’s the piece that recasts the whole thing: the DOJ has been suing states for voter data and losing, 11 times in district court, with the Sixth Circuit becoming the first appeals court to affirm one of those losses, siding with Michigan. The criminal-threat letters showed up after the courtroom strategy collapsed.

The Left’s read. Seizing the machinery. Schumer calls the EAC firing “a brazen attempt to seize control of our elections before a single vote is cast,” and the Brennan Center ties it to a pattern of election interference. The Dhillon letters get filed as an intimidation campaign against blue-state officials.

The Right’s read. Lawful housekeeping. Townhall and the pro-administration read frame the firing as a president using the removal power the Court just handed him and staffing a commission with people “aligned” on election security. Noncitizens shouldn’t be on the rolls, the argument goes, and officials who won’t clean them off can answer for it.

What both sides are skipping. The EAC doesn’t run elections; states do. So “seizing election control” oversells what one gutted commission can do. The durable move is quieter: strip the agency of a quorum and it can’t be captured by anyone, but it also can’t do its normal certification job at the exact moment states need it. And nobody’s connecting the dots the administration is drawing in plain sight. The Slaughter removal ruling, the Dhillon prosecution letters, the mail-voting executive order, and now the EAC firing aren’t four separate “Trump fires people” stories. They’re one campaign aimed at the election machinery, and the press keeps covering the pieces one at a time. One more thing both sides skip: the Dhillon letters threaten the officials personally, not any actual illegal votes, and they came after eleven courtroom losses. As election-law expert David Becker put it, if the DOJ believed officials had committed crimes, it would indict them, not issue warnings by mail.

This one isn’t cut and dry, and I won’t pretend it is.

Start with what’s real, because my side is right about the underlying worry. There might not be proof of noncitizens voting in numbers that swing an election. But “we haven’t caught it” is not the same as “the door is locked,” and in a lot of states the door is propped wide open. California and plenty of blue states run elections loose enough that there’s no real check on a ballot before it hits the processing center to be counted. Ballot harvesting is legal. Signature rules are a formality in places, a mark that’s supposed to have a witness, except the witness never has to give their name. You don’t have to film someone casting a fraudulent vote to see the hole. You don’t leave a loophole open just because nobody’s proven it’s being climbed through, and anyone who’s ever locked a door they weren’t sure would get tried understands that instinct fine.

And here’s the part both parties talk around. The doubt itself is the damage. When a big chunk of the country isn’t sure the count is clean, that’s a real injury to the system whether or not one illegal ballot exists, and restoring that confidence takes actual changes, not a press release. So on the goal, tighten the rules, close the gaps, make people trust the number again, I’m here for it.

Now the execution, because this is where I get dicey. The DOJ has gone 0-for-11 in district court trying to force states to hand over their full voter files, and just lost its first appeal when the Sixth Circuit sided with Michigan. Before you write that off as liberal judges covering for a scam, look closer. Some of the reddest states in the country, Utah and Idaho among them, refused the exact same demand, on the grounds that handing Washington unredacted rolls full of Social Security and driver’s license numbers breaks their own state privacy laws. Only two states signed the full agreement. When Idaho and a federal appeals court end up in the same spot, “activist courts” doesn’t cover it.

So let’s run the test. If a Democratic administration emptied the entire election commission and had its DOJ threaten red-state clerks with prison four months before a midterm, the right would lose its mind, and it would be right to. The only reason Democrats aren’t running this exact play is that the current setup already tilts their way, so they don’t have to. That’s not a moral high ground. It’s just whose turn it is.

Does Trump get to act surprised anyone’s upset? No. He ran on election integrity, this is the brand, and the base wanted teeth. Do I think emptying the EAC and mailing prosecution threats after eleven straight courtroom losses is his smartest move? Also no. The optics are bad, and the legal record is worse. And the precedent is the part that bites, because the removal power he’s using and the “fire the referees” move he’s modeling don’t retire when he does. They are there for the next president, and someday that’s the one you didn’t vote for.

Watch which states actually get their rolls cleaned versus just threatened. Watch whether the EAC gets restaffed before November or stays frozen through the vote. And watch whether one Republican cheering today remembers this the first time a Democrat reaches for the same tool.

Fix the locks. Just don’t hand the next guy a key to the whole building.

Graham Platner quit the Maine Senate race. The Democratic nominee suspended his campaign July 8 after Jenny Racicot told CNN and Politico that he raped her nearly five years ago, which he denies. Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and Ro Khanna pulled their endorsements, and Maine Democrats have until July 27 to name a replacement to run against Susan Collins.

Spencer Pratt says the LA mayor’s race was stolen, and Elon Musk ran with it. The former mayoral candidate posted a roughly 10-minute video July 9 alleging fraud cost him a runoff spot: homeless residents paid to vote, NGOs “hoarding ballots,” dead and out-of-state names on the rolls, and harvesters filling in mail-in ballots. Pratt led Nithya Raman on election night before finishing third behind Mayor Karen Bass and Raman. Musk amplified it as “legalized election fraud,” and U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli says his office has fraud investigations open with the FBI.

E. Jean Carroll can finally collect her $5.8 million. A federal judge ordered the jury award, grown from $5 million to $5.8 million with interest, released to Carroll from escrow after the Supreme Court declined to hear Trump’s underlying appeal in the sexual-abuse and defamation case. Trump’s lawyers appealed the release order within the hour.

The U.S. bombed Iran again. American forces struck southern Iran early July 9, a second night of strikes as the June ceasefire falls apart and days after Trump declared the deal “over” from the NATO summit in Turkey.

The judge who helped a migrant dodge ICE got a $5,000 fine and no jail. Former Milwaukee County judge Hannah Dugan was fined $5,000 and spared prison this week after a federal jury convicted her of felony obstruction for steering an undocumented man out a back door while ICE agents waited. She faced up to five years, and prosecutors had asked for 15 to 21 months. Judge Lynn Adelman called her “an otherwise good person” who “made a bad decision in the moment.”

A federal commission advanced Trump’s 250-foot arch near Arlington. The National Capital Planning Commission gave preliminary approval July 9 to the “Triumphal Arch,” after nearly three hours of public opposition, including a Gold Star mother who said it would block the sightline between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington National Cemetery. The structure violates a 1910 height law, and a final vote could come in September. Washington Post

The White House graded the Smithsonian and flunked it. A 162-page report titled “Saving America’s Story” accuses the National Museum of American History of “extreme political activism” and of trying to “divide, dispirit, and discourage our citizens,” with complaints running from a slavery placard to a monarch-butterfly sculpture symbolizing DREAMers. It follows Trump’s executive order to strip “improper, divisive, or anti-American” ideology from the Smithsonian. Washington Post

That’s The Read!

If The Read is doing the cross-check work for you, send it to a friend who’s still chasing the framing instead of the facts.

“…those are part of folks who are being elected, and they’re going to come and join the caucus…. my job, our job, is to make sure we have those gavels so we can do the work of the American people.”

This is significant because DelBene is chair of the DCCC, and during her interview on Chuck Todd's "Sunday Night with Chuck Todd" on June 28, her primary concern was counting gavels. Not the platform. Not what these socialists ran on. Not one word about the thing they're promising to do once they get inside. To her, success is simply about the majority. Whether that majority is worth handing the party to people who mean to replace it, she never says. The silence is the answer.

Who she is, and why that quote is different

If you’ve never heard of DelBene, here’s why she matters. The DCCC is the money. It recruits House Democrats, funds them, and plugs them into the national fundraising machine. Without it, a campaign is virtually unwinnable, especially in a competitive race. It’s like bringing a garden hose to a wildfire. She holds the purse strings for the entire House Democratic operation.

A Fox host warning about a socialist takeover is one thing. It can be dismissed as overreacting. But the DCCC chair describing those winners as folks who’ll “come and join the caucus” is another, because she signs the checks and controls the coffers. She isn’t guessing at the trend from the outside. She’s the one holding the door open.

Same week, different vantage point

Now listen to one of the people she’s welcoming. Melat Kiros, the 29-year-old democratic socialist who just ended Diana DeGette’s 30-year career in Colorado, gave her victory speech on June 30. Here’s how she framed the night:

“We are taking back our party and our country.”

Taking back. Not joining. Not adding a chair to the big tent. Taking. And she was specific about the agenda she’s taking it toward:

“We will not wait to abolish ICE and pass Medicare for All… We will not wait to reject corporate PACs and AIPAC. And no, we will not wait to end the genocide in Palestine.”

These two are not speaking the same language. DelBene sounds like a host describing a guest. DelBene is saying “you can sit with us.” Meanwhile, Kiros sounds like she wants to flip the table. Same event, two accounts of who’s really in charge. Only one of them is being straight with you about where this ends.

“Big tent” is a category error

DelBene’s defense, echoed by Pramila Jayapal, is that Democrats are a “big tent.” Her own words gave away what the tent is for: “We’re a big tent. I want to make sure that our big tent is a tent that is in the majority and that we have the gavels.” The point of the tent is the majority, not the principles.

Jayapal told CNN the welcome has to run both ways: “If we are a big tent party, we have to have both sides of the big tent included.” And she framed the double standard like this:

“Every time a moderate wins an election, people are like, ‘That’s the new blueprint for the Democratic party.’ But if a progressive or a Democratic Socialist wins, ‘Oh, the whole party’s falling to hell in a handbasket.’”

She wants that treated as ordinary factional sorting, the kind of thing that resolves itself once everybody calms down.

Here’s why the big-tent argument with socialists falls apart, and is a very bad idea. A real big tent works when people share the fundamentals and fight over the approach. Republicans agree on limited government, capitalism, and constitutional liberty. We brawl over how to protect them, not whether to. It’s an argument among family.

Democrats versus the DSA isn’t a family argument. It’s a fight over the foundation itself: capitalism or socialism. And the DSA doesn’t hide where the road ends. Their own caucuses put it on letterhead. Red Star’s stated goal is “to abolish capitalism and, ultimately, to achieve communism.” The Marxist Unity Group describes a world “free of the market, borders, classes… in a word, communism.” You can’t big-tent a faction whose stated plan is to replace the ground the tent is pitched on.

And the "democratic" in democratic socialism doesn't soften the landing. Socialism achieved through a democratic process instead of a revolutionary one ends the same way.

Venezuela is the case study the socialists downplay. Hugo Chávez won an election in 1998 on promises that should ring a bell: end corruption, lift the poor, redistribute the wealth, break the grip of the oligarchy, and — his signature pledge — convene an assembly to rewrite the constitution.

In office, he rolled out the feel-good programs to match: free neighborhood health clinics, state-run groceries selling food far below cost, a national literacy drive.

Sound familiar? Medicare for All, "get big money out of politics," a fight Gustavo Gordillo, NYC-DSA co-chair, frames as "the billionaire class" against "the working class," and a DSA platform — "Workers Deserve More!" — that puts it in writing: its goal is to put workers in charge of government "through a new democratic constitution" and to "build a socialist society" where "the largest corporations are put under public ownership." Chávez's exact opening move, a generation later.

Then came the gradual part, the socialist part: control the economy, control the food, choke the opposition, and one free election at a time the country stopped having them. More than 7 million people have since fled, the largest displacement in the history of the Western Hemisphere. Call it a scare story if you want. It's really just the record of where "we'll do it through the ballot" goes once one faction owns the machinery.

The one time someone pressed, she looked away

A welcome this eager doesn’t stop to ask who’s walking in. Todd tried to make her ask, pressing DelBene, more than once, on Jewish Democrats’ concerns about the incoming bloc. She kept moving the subject. She pointed to Texas, where the party worked to defeat an openly antisemitic candidate, as proof Democrats take this seriously.

Then Todd asked about Darializa Avila Chevalier, the DSA candidate who just unseated Rep. Adriano Espaillat in New York — someone who went to an anti-Israel rally the day after the October 7 massacre, shared a post rejecting Israel’s right to exist, and co-founded Columbia University Apartheid Divest (CUAD), the campus group that posted it was fighting for “the total eradication of Western civilization.” DelBene’s reply: “that’s not representative of where other candidates land.”

One candidate, don’t read too much into her. Except it isn’t one candidate. Melat Kiros called October 7 “the inevitable consequence of apartheid,” wrote in a 2023 letter about Israel’s “weaponization of anti-Semitism,” and wouldn’t call the Boulder firebombing that killed Karen Diamond, a Holocaust survivor, an antisemitic act: “I don’t know what was in the heart of the perpetrator.” The Democrat who did call it antisemitic was Phil Weiser, the party’s Jewish nominee for Colorado governor: “Karen Diamond’s life mattered. You don’t put a comma, an ‘and’ or a ‘but.’ Period.” When the plainest rebuke of a DSA nominee’s antisemitism comes from inside your own party, “that’s not representative” stops being an answer.

Why won’t DelBene look? She already told you. She wants the votes, and some of those voters hold exactly the positions a real denouncement would cost her. That’s the price of this tent.

The DSA takeover, in their own words

Strategist Matt Klink told the Washington Examiner the DSA is "no longer a fringe annoyance… It is becoming an open revolt within the party." The scale backs him up: 305 DSA-backed candidates have won office since 2018.

And here’s the part that should end the debate about who’s using whom. Gustavo Gordillo, co-chair of NYC-DSA, said it flat out to Spectrum News:

“We’re on the Democratic Party ballot line. We contest the primaries… but we don’t agree with the way the Democratic Party establishment organizes or runs its party apparatus.”

And notice the word people like Kiros still reach for: our party. She’s DSA. Gordillo just admitted they don’t share the Democrats’ aims. So “our” is the tell — the softener that lets a socialist pass for a Democrat who wants a few more social programs, right up until you read the platform. The possessive is doing PR the policy can’t.

The strategy even has a name in their own literature — the “dirty break” — run on the Democratic line, use their infrastructure to build their own, to eventually walk away with the base. They’re not hiding it. People simply do not inform themselves.

So you’ve got two people describing the same door. DelBene, from the inside, calls it a welcome. Gordillo and Kiros, from the other side, call it a vehicle. When the host describes the guest and the guest describes a takeover, believe the guest.

The Senate is the next rung

Treat this as a House problem, and you’ve already missed it. The DSA didn’t start in Congress, and it has no plans to stop there. This is all about a climb to power: city councils and school boards, then state legislatures, then the House. Each rung sets up the next, and the Senate is simply the one they haven’t reached yet. They’re already spending to get there. In Michigan, the DSA has poured organizers, volunteers, and money into Abdul El-Sayed’s Senate primary, boosting the Sanders- and AOC-backed challenger against the establishment’s Haley Stevens.

And the person running Senate Democrats’ campaign arm is making DelBene’s case for her. Kirsten Gillibrand chairs the DSCC, the Senate version of DelBene’s committee, and when she looked at the socialist primary wave she called it “a very good trend for nationwide elections.” Same welcome, one chamber up. Two of the people whose entire job is building Democratic majorities have looked at a movement that means to replace their party and pronounced it good news.

The voters didn’t order socialism

Here’s the part that complicates the story instead of simplifying it: most of the people casting these votes aren’t socialists. They’re furious. Matt McDermott, a Democratic pollster, said the strongest signal from Democratic voters right now “isn’t ideological, it’s entirely performance-based.” They want a fighter, someone who’ll do something about rent and groceries and a system that feels rigged. DSA candidates read that mood and sold themselves as the fighters. The socialism came stapled to the back.

The numbers say the same thing. A New York Times–Siena poll found just 25% of Democratic voters want the party to move further left. Fifty-two percent said they don’t. That isn’t an electorate demanding a democratic socialist republic. It’s an electorate demanding results, handed a movement that wants something else entirely.

Related

Let me be honest about my own side here. The economy is bad, and a bad economy lands on whoever holds power, which right now is Republicans. Plenty of these same voters have spent a decade being told the GOP wants to “destroy democracy,” that “cruelty is the point,” that every policy difference is really hate or racism dressed up. Tell people the other side is evil long enough and some of them start to believe only something radical can save them. That’s emotion, not analysis. Most of what actually separates the parties is economics and how you run a police department, not good against evil. But emotion is the soil socialism has always grown in. It sprouts in hard times, when the old establishment looks broken, and a charismatic outsider promises to tear the whole thing down and start over. Chávez ran that exact play. So have plenty of others, and the con almost always ends the same way, with foundational damage that takes a generation to undo.

So no, this isn’t the lazy game of calling Democrats socialists because they want a bigger safety net. Expanding Medicare is not the same as printing “abolish capitalism” on your caucus letterhead. The DSA draws that line itself: these candidates are the real thing — Mamdani, Chevalier, Kiros — part of a movement with communism named as the endpoint in its own documents. The voters didn’t order that. They’re being served it anyway by candidates who won’t say it out loud and by a leadership that counts gavels instead of taking a stand and exposing what these people believe.

DelBene’s whole job was to win House majorities. She just told you how she plans to do it and what she’s willing not to look at to get there. Kiros already told you where it goes.

While DelBene wants a big tent, the DSA is running a hostile takeover — and only one of them is saying so out loud.

In today’s Read:

• Platner’s accusers went on camera, and underneath it is a New York Times “could not corroborate” line one of them calls misleading “by design.”

• Robinson’s hearing put his car on campus four times on video, a real problem for the “he’s a patsy” theory the online right has run for months.

• The U.S. hit 80-plus Iranian targets, Trump declared the ceasefire “over” from the summit, and the press is calling it “unprecedented.” It isn’t, and I’ll show you why.

• Quick Rundown: the Epstein revolt eats MAGA, ICE kills a man in Houston, a Midtown high-rise nearly buckles, and Texas moves to ban foreign wombs-for-hire.

The Part of the Platner Scandal That is Being Ignored

The Story.

Maine Senate nominee Graham Platner is now facing multiple accusers. Jenny Racicot told CNN’s Jake Tapper that a 2021 encounter was “by definition” rape.

And Lyndsey Fifield, whose earlier allegations the New York Times had reported it “could not corroborate,” went on camera with Tapper July 7 describing Platner repeatedly grabbing her hard enough to leave bruises and once blocking her inside a bedroom, comparing his look to “a pit bull” with “dead eyes.”

Fifield says the Times’ “could not corroborate” framing was misleading “by design”: she gave reporters the names of former roommates who remembered Platner waiting outside her home, plus her former fiancé and the priest she’d told during premarital counseling years earlier, and says the reporters declined to interview any of them.

Platner calls the claims “categorically false.” Democratic leaders (Schumer, Gillibrand, Warren, Gallego) have called for him to quit. He’s refusing, and he has until July 13 for Maine Democrats to nominate a replacement.

The Left’s read. The coverage now centers the accusers and the party scramble, but the Times is on defense about its own reporting. Fifield’s “by design” charge, that the “could not corroborate” line left readers thinking there was nothing there, is being covered as a media story in its own right, separate from the campaign fallout.

The Right’s read. A clean case study in how the paper of record buries a story that’s inconvenient for a Democrat. National Review and Fox run Fifield’s account of naming corroborating witnesses the Times wouldn’t call, then printing “could not corroborate” anyway.

What both sides are skipping. The right is enjoying the New York Times beating, but mostly as “liberal bias,” the usual shorthand, without naming the specific breach for what it is. Fifield says she handed the Times five people who could speak to the relationship and the abuse. The reporters called two, the two who could only confirm she and Platner dated, and skipped the three who could speak to what he actually did. Then the paper printed “could not corroborate.” When Fifield went public, the Times doubled down, saying it “stands by” the reporting.

A spokesperson for The New York Times also offered a statement.

“We published accounts provided by several women who were in romantic relationships with Graham Platner. Our story accurately presents each of these accounts as told to our reporters and according to our standards. We stand by our reporting of the accounts from Ms. Fifield and the other women, who provided a revealing look at the behavior of a major candidate for the U.S. Senate.”

That’s not bias as a vibe. That’s a documented decision not to make the calls, then a refusal to revisit it once the decision blew up. And it won’t get corrected, because the one force that could correct it, the rest of the industry holding the paper of record to the standard it holds everyone else, isn’t showing up. Meanwhile, the progressive left is running the opposite story: that these revelations are the establishment’s move to take Platner down, “this is not your opening.” The most establishment institution in American media did everything it could to soften the story for him. Both can’t be true. Only one has receipts.

Forget the horse race for a second. The story here is how the New York Times handled Lyndsey Fifield.

She handed them a list. Former roommates who remembered Platner waiting outside her house. Her former fiancé. The priest she confided in during premarital counseling, years before any of this was political. She says the reporters called none of them, and then the paper published “could not corroborate.”

To any normal human reading over coffee, “we could not corroborate it” means “we looked hard and found nothing to back it up.” That’s the whole power of the phrase. Fifield’s word for what actually happened is “by design,” and I don’t think she’s wrong.

“We couldn’t corroborate it” and “we didn’t try very hard to” are two completely different sentences. The Times printed the first one while Fifield says the second one is the truth. That gap is the entire story, and it’s exactly the product The Read exists to point at: the framing did the work the facts wouldn’t.

And don’t lose the tattoo thread while everyone’s distracted by the campaign math. Fifield is the same ex who flagged Platner’s chest Totenkopf as a Nazi SS symbol back in 2025, before he claims he figured out what it was. So this is a firsthand source the paper leaned on quietly, then waved off when her account got inconvenient, twice. That her story is now being told in full on CNN, by her and by a second accuser, tells you what the Times left sitting on the table.

I’ll grant the Democratic side its own circus, because it’s earned it. Platner won’t step down. Maine Democrats have flatly ruled out giving him any role in choosing his replacement, and the state party’s executive director says his team keeps “reaching out to us in an attempt to put their thumb on the scale.” There’s loud online chatter that more allegations are staged to drop before the 13th. Whether or not that pans out, a nominee digging in and demanding a say in his own succession is not a man who thinks this is over.

Watch whether the Times runs a single editor’s note. Watch whether Platner walks by July 13 or forces a convention fight. And watch whether the paper that “could not corroborate” ever explains why it didn’t call the priest.

The accusation is the campaign story. The “could not corroborate” is the media story. Guess which one your paper would rather you focus on.

The Kirk Hearing Is Dismantling the Conspiracy Theories.

The Story.

Tyler Robinson, 23, is charged with aggravated murder in the September 10 assassination of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University, and prosecutors are seeking the death penalty. His preliminary hearing entered its second day July 7 in Provo, and prosecutors walked the courtroom through campus surveillance: Robinson's Dodge Challenger, plate visible, entering the UVU campus roughly four times the day of the shooting, twice before, at the time of, and again after. Lead investigator David Hull traced the alleged shooter arriving about four hours early, moving through campus, stopping to eat, accessing the roof of the Losee Center, then escaping. FBI testing found a two-person mix of DNA on the towel wrapped around a bolt-action rifle recovered in the woods nearby and on a screwdriver from the roof; analyst Amanda Bakker testified Robinson was the major contributor on both and his roommate and alleged partner Lance Twiggs the minor contributor (under 20 percent), and pegged the mixture as "30 quintillion times more likely" to have come from the two of them than from Twiggs and an unrelated stranger. Robinson's lawyers are disputing it.

The Left’s read. A methodical evidence dump. CNN, CBS, and the Washington Post cover the surveillance timeline, the DNA, the rooftop “sniper position,” with Kirk’s widow in the courtroom facing the accused for the first time. Straight true-crime procedural.

The Right’s read. Split, and the split is the story. Outlets like HotAir walked the DNA and video day by day. But a loud online faction, Candace Owens most prominently, spent months insisting “Tyler Robinson has never even set foot on UVU’s campus” and that he was “a total patsy.” The Philadelphia Inquirer notes the conspiracy theories are still swirling even with the accused sitting in court.

What both sides are skipping. Two things. Because this is a probable-cause hearing, the defense hasn’t really swung yet, so treating the state’s timeline as the settled whole truth is its own mistake. And almost nobody covering the “conspiracy versus evidence” fight will confess that the loudest patsy theories came from inside the movement Kirk built, and are being quietly abandoned as the surveillance lands, except Candace, of course; she keeps running the ball.

A man was murdered in front of a crowd for the crime of talking. Charlie Kirk is dead, and his widow sat in that Provo courtroom this week looking at the person accused of pulling the trigger. Start there, because everything else is downstream of a real person who is really gone.

Now, quick context, because it changes how you should read every headline this week and every conspiracy grifter. This is a preliminary hearing. It is not a trial. No jury, no verdict, nobody gets sentenced. Judge Tony Graf has exactly one job: decide whether there’s enough here to send the case forward. The bar is probable cause, not “beyond a reasonable doubt.” Prosecutors do not have to prove Robinson was definitely the man in that Challenger or definitely the figure on that roof. They only have to show it’s probable enough that a reasonable judge binds the case over to trial. What you’re watching is the floor of the evidence, the state’s opening hand, not the finished case.

The theory that Tyler Robinson was never on campus, that he’s a patsy, that somebody else did this, did not come from MSNBC. It came from Candace Owens and fellow conspiracy pushers who have only speculated and attempted to present their opinions as evidence. Their claims are now getting taken apart, not by a fact-checker, not by CNN, but by a Dodge Challenger with a readable license plate driving onto UVU four times on the day Kirk was killed.

That’s a law enforcement witness narrating Robinson on the campus a big slice of the internet swore he never set foot on. The limp, per the testimony, is a rifle down his pant leg.

Then there’s the DNA. Robinson is the major contributor to the mixed DNA on the towel wrapped around the rifle and on the screwdriver from the roof, with Twiggs the minor contributor under 20 percent, and the state pegged the mixture as 30 quintillion times likelier to have come from the two of them than from Twiggs and some random stranger. That is not “he was never there.” That is his DNA on the murder weapon. The patsy crowd already has its answer, of course. Planted. It’s always planted. Once the tape, the plate, and the lab all point the same direction, the only move left is to accuse the FBI of framing a 22-year-old nobody had heard of before September, which is a lot of machinery to invent on the fly.

Brian Entin’s debrief runs the towel, the screwdriver, and the motive prosecutors floated in open court. This is the DNA the defense is now fighting, and the part worth watching.

I’ll hold the honest caveat, because the cross-check requires it. This is probable cause, not a conviction, and Robinson’s defense hasn’t had its turn. Bakker first thought the samples might have three contributors, and she was clear that DNA on an object can’t tell you when it got there or that anyone even touched it. Robinson’s lawyers are hammering exactly that, and they’re allowed to. Presumption of innocence is real, and I’m not going to pretend a preliminary hearing is a verdict just because the evidence looks heavy. Keep that.

But “he was never there” isn’t a defense theory. It’s a claim the surveillance already ran over. “Contested by the defense” and “he was framed by the FBI” are not the same sentence, and only one of them is a real legal argument. When your own side spins up a conspiracy and then the discovery quietly buries it, the grown move is to say so, out loud, not to change the subject or roll straight into the next theory before the first one’s body is cold.

Watch whether Graf binds the case over, which legal analysts say is likely. Watch whether the “patsy” crowd issues a single correction or just pivots to a fresh narrative. And watch what the defense does with that DNA, because the three-contributor question is the one thread they’re actually pulling.

The evidence is doing to the conspiracy what a year of arguing couldn’t. It’d be nice if the people who spread it noticed.

Trump Restarted the Iran War From Turkey. Slow Your Roll On the “He Defied Congress” Panic.

The Story.

Iran fired on three commercial tankers near the Strait of Hormuz on July 7. CENTCOM answered with strikes on more than 80 targets inside Iran, air defenses, radar, anti-ship missile sites, and dozens of IRGC small boats, and Treasury reimposed the oil sanctions it had lifted under the June 17 Islamabad Memorandum. Iran claims it hit more than 80 U.S. facilities in Bahrain and Kuwait in return. Trump ordered all of it from Ankara, where he was at the NATO summit.

Then, asked whether the ceasefire and the memorandum still hold, he told reporters “I think it’s over. I don’t want to deal with them anymore,” called the deal “a waste of time,” and called the Iranians “liars,” even as his own lead negotiators, Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, reportedly still want to talk. The backdrop: back in June, the House (215-208) and the Senate (50-48) both passed a War Powers resolution directing him to stop striking Iran without congressional authorization.

The Left’s read. A constitutional crisis. Rep. Ro Khanna calls the new strikes “a blatant violation” of the resolution Congress already passed and says he’s ready to take Trump to court. The framing across NPR and CNN: a president waging an unauthorized war, told to stop by both chambers, widening it anyway. The word doing the heavy lifting everywhere is “unprecedented.”

The Right’s read. A clean retaliation. Fox leads with the fact Iran shot at civilian tankers in an international shipping lane and the U.S. hit the military sites responsible. Sen. Jim Risch’s earlier warning gets recycled: tie the president’s hands mid-negotiation and Tehran just walks away from the table.

What both sides are skipping. The left skips that this War Powers fight is 50 years old and every modern president has been on Trump’s side of it. The right skips that Trump oversold the June deal to your face, called it a win, and is now calling the same deal a “waste of time” six weeks later.

Let me be clear about where I actually am, because I’m about to defend a framing, not a war. I’m skeptical Iran ever complies with anything. I said in June that the memorandum was a rumor until somebody showed you the signatures, and I said Trump oversells. Well. He’s standing in Ankara calling the deal he bragged about a “waste of time” and the other side “liars” while Kushner apparently didn’t get the memo that negotiations are off. Yes, that’s his negotiation style, and yes, it’s still frustrating to watch a “win” curdle this fast. Hold that thought.

Now the part the press is counting on you not knowing. Quick context: let’s talk about this War Powers thing everyone’s calling a crisis.

The War Powers Resolution is a law. Congress passed it in 1973, over Nixon’s veto. It’s a statute, not a line in the Constitution. And here’s what the “he defied Congress” coverage conveniently leaves out: presidents of both parties have treated that statute as advisory and questioned whether it’s even constitutional, because Article II makes the president commander in chief and hands the executive the national security lane. Obama ran the Libya campaign straight past it. Clinton did Kosovo past it. Reagan, both Bushes, same posture. A president using force without a War Powers permission slip isn’t a new abuse. It’s been the standard operating position of the office for half a century.

So when the coverage reaches for “unprecedented” and “overstepping” and “constitutional crisis,” shut it. That word is doing a lot of work for people who had zero problem with the exact same executive power when their guy was the one giving the order. This is a genuine, decades-old fight between two branches over a contested statute. It is not Trump inventing a new way to break the government.

That’s not a blank check, and it’s not me pretending the war is going well. It’s the cross-check: the thing you’re being handed as a five-alarm scandal is a constitutional argument older than I am, and the people ringing the alarm skipped the entire history of their own side doing it.

Watch whether Khanna actually files that lawsuit, and whether any court touches it, because judges have tossed War Powers challenges as “political questions” for 50 straight years. Watch whether Witkoff and Kushner keep quietly negotiating after Trump told a bank of cameras it’s “over.” And watch whether a single outlet running “unprecedented” today ever mentions Libya.

The strikes deserve scrutiny. The scary word attached to them is borrowed.

The Epstein files revolt is coming from inside MAGA. Acting AG Todd Blanche defied a July 2 court deadline to unredact a set of Epstein documents, announced an appeal, and called Judge Emmet Sullivan’s order a “perverse interpretation” meant to drive “misleading headlines.” Trump then defended Pam Bondi on Truth Social, told his base to stop wasting time on “somebody that nobody cares about,” and got “ratioed” on his own platform, reportedly for the first time. The loudest anger is coming from activists who were promised a full release.

An ICE officer killed a man in Houston. Lorenzo Salgado Araujo was fatally shot July 7 during a “targeted enforcement operation” in the East End. DHS says he rammed an ICE vehicle and tried to run over an agent, who fired in self-defense; his son says his father lived here nearly 35 years, worked construction, and was picking up his crew for work. It’s at least the sixth fatal shooting by immigration officers since the enforcement surge. The DHS Inspector General is investigating.

A Midtown Manhattan high-rise nearly buckled. The 37-story former Pfizer headquarters near Grand Central was evacuated July 7 after two structural support columns on the 21st floor began buckling around 8 a.m., triggering warnings of a possible partial collapse. Four nearby buildings stayed under evacuation orders. No injuries; officials say emergency shoring and new steel supports have stabilized the tower, which is being converted into luxury rentals.

Trump floated taking Greenland again. In Ankara, Trump said Greenland “should be controlled by the U.S.,” floated pulling American troops out of Europe, and posted that the U.S. gets no benefit from the alliance. Relations soured further after allies refused to let U.S. forces use joint bases for the Iran strikes. He meets Zelensky on Wednesday, who is coming to ask for Patriot interceptors as Russian strikes intensify.

A Chicago judge blew open 1,000-plus cases after catching prosecutors rigging a grand jury. U.S. District Judge April Perry unsealed grand jury transcripts in the “Broadview Six” case and found a prosecutor had “vouched” for the evidence, dismissed jurors who pushed back, and contacted one outside official proceedings. The top federal prosecutor in Chicago now says more than 1,000 cases are under review. Broadview is the ICE facility that’s been a flashpoint all year.

Texas is moving to ban foreign nationals from using its surrogates. The Texas Senate health committee heard testimony July 7 on prohibiting foreign nationals from contracting with Texas surrogates, an interim charge Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick set ahead of January’s session. The state GOP already put a foreign-national surrogacy ban in its platform. Florida beat them to it, barring surrogacy contracts with residents of China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, and Syria.

The trans-sports fight is headed to the ballot. After the Supreme Court’s June 30 ruling upholding state bans on biological males in girls’ sports, November ballot measures are set in Colorado, Washington, and Arizona. Organizers say the ruling put wind behind the effort. Twenty-seven states currently bar biological males from girls’ athletics.

That’s The Read.

See you Friday.

If The Read is doing the cross-check work for you, send it to a friend who’s still chasing the framing instead of the facts.

250 years of freedom, baby, and I need about 250 years of sleep and recovery.

The news never sleeps!

America turned 250, Trump got on the phone with FIFA, the State Fair cooked on the National Mall, and ICE ran up the numbers while New York’s socialist mayor gave a speech from George Washington’s desk.

Let’s get into the news!

In Today’s Read

• FIFA suspended Balogun’s red card after Trump called its president. The press screamed “unprecedented.” It wasn’t. The rule’s been on the books since 2023, and Ronaldo got the same treatment in November.

• The State Fair was a planning mess in triple-digit heat. The bigger tell was a press corps rooting for America’s 250th birthday party to fail.

• ICE hit 10,000 arrests in five days on a White House quota. The enforcement doesn’t bother me. The quota does, and so does what it hands the “abolish ICE” crowd before the midterms.

• In the Rundown: the preliminary hearing opens for Charlie Kirk’s accused killer with Erika Kirk in the room, Trump heads to a NATO summit in Turkey, an audit reopens the Puerto Rico grid-funds fight, a Spider-Man-masked fireworks threat, a guilty plea in the Nancy Guthrie case, and China thins its own military.

The Red Card “Unprecedented” Everyone’s Selling You Wasn’t

The Story.

Folarin Balogun scored the U.S.'s opener against Bosnia-Herzegovina Wednesday, then got sent off in the 64th minute for stepping on Tarik Muharemović's ankle, a foul that looked a lot worse in FIFA's slow-motion replay than at full speed. Thierry Henry, watching as a Fox analyst, said it plainly: "You need to have some common sense." FIFA suspended the automatic one-game ban Sunday, clearing Balogun to play Belgium in the round of 16. Trump called FIFA president Gianni Infantino directly, and confirmed it himself at a press conference Monday morning, saying he'd phoned FIFA and asked them to review the call. According to a FIFA official, the U.S. government also submitted "additional evidence" that the Disciplinary Committee weighed in making its decision, which is a meaningfully different thing than a president leaning on a phone until someone folds.

Quick context, because everyone's throwing around "unprecedented" like it means what they think it means. FIFA used Chapter 4, Article 27 of its Disciplinary Code, the rule that lets a judicial body suspend a punishment and put the player on probation instead. That rule has existed since 2023. FIFA already used it in November on Cristiano Ronaldo, who elbowed an Irish defender in a qualifier and got a three-match ban knocked down to one, with the other two deferred a full year.

Two more players, Otamendi and Caicedo, got their pre-tournament cards wiped by a separate rule change entirely. So no, Article 27 isn't new, and it isn't Trump's invention. What's actually first here is applying it mid-tournament, to a card from a knockout match that had already started. That's a real precedent. It's just not the one anybody's reporting.

The left’s read. CNN and the international-press desk treat the reversal as an integrity problem: a sitting president got a global sports body to bend its own written rules with a phone call. UEFA went furthest, calling the decision "unprecedented, incomprehensible and unjustifiable." Belgium's federation says it's "astonished," and Sepp Blatter, of all people, said red cards shouldn't get overturned by political phone calls.

The right’s read. Rubio told reporters the U.S. “got screwed.” Fox’s OutKick argued the reversal was correct on the merits, Trump’s call notwithstanding, and leaned on the fact that damn near everyone watching, Henry included, thought the card was excessive from the jump.

What both sides skip. The original card was bad for a boring, specific reason: FIFA’s own VAR crew used slow-motion replay to judge “intensity,” which its own protocol says you’re not supposed to do. The politics story ate the officiating story whole.

The original card was bad. Not “bad because Americans are biased” bad, bad because FIFA’s own VAR crew judged “intensity” off slow-motion replay, which its own protocol flatly says you don’t do. Henry saw it. UEFA’s angriest critics saw it. The sending-off was excessive, full stop, and Article 27 is the exact rule sitting on the books to undo it. That’s not a scandal. That’s the mechanism doing what it’s there for.

So spare me “unprecedented.” It isn’t. Ronaldo got the same rule eight months ago and nobody reached for the fainting couch. The only new wrinkle is FIFA using Article 27 mid-tournament instead of before kickoff, and “mid-tournament procedure” doesn’t move papers the way “Trump broke soccer” does.

And Trump isn’t hiding the call. He said it out loud Monday morning: he phoned FIFA and asked them to review the card. Take him at his word, then, because it doesn’t change the math. He asked for a review. The review found what everyone already saw, a bad card, and Article 27 undid it. The card was wrong before Trump dialed and it’d be wrong if he never did.

Which leaves Belgium, and Belgium is being a bunch of whiners. The consensus, theirs included if they’re honest, is that the card never should have stood. They got their appeal. The process rolls on. I doubt they win it, and I suspect they know it, which is why this reads like procedural theater more than a real grievance. A good sport looks at a bad call getting corrected and says fine, see you Saturday. Belgium looked at it and filed a complaint, because “astonished” is a nicer word than “we’d rather not face a full-strength USMNT.”

Here’s the tell. If you’re actually the better team, you want Balogun on the field. You want the win with no asterisk hanging off it. The American instinct is to want the best version of the other guy across from you and beat him anyway. Belgium’s instinct is to lawyer the roster down first. That’s not confidence. That’s a hedge in cleats.

Watch whether the appeals committee rules before kickoff, whether UEFA’s “red line” talk becomes an actual move to change Article 27 or just stays a press quote, and whether the sports desks finally connect this to the Ronaldo case that’s been sitting right there since 2023.

The card was wrong. The rule fixed it. Play ball, boys.

The Great American State Fair Was a Planning Mess. The Coverage Was the Real Embarrassment.

The Story.

The Great American State Fair opened on the National Mall June 25, a 16-day, 56-state exposition anchoring the 250th anniversary. At least 10 mostly Democrat-led states skipped it after learning they'd owe $100,000 to $500,000 out of pocket with zero federal funding attached. House Democrats then put out a 55-page report alleging the nonpartisan America250 committee asked for $150 million with an understanding that $100 million would fund nonpartisan events and $50 million would go to White House programming, but the nonpartisan side only saw $50 million while the White House allegedly sat on the rest. Then the weather showed up: 102 degrees, the hottest July Fourth on record for D.C., a full fair closure on safety grounds, and a storm evacuation Saturday night that pushed Trump's speech back nearly four hours.

The left’s read. Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey called the funding structure “ridiculous,” saying Trump “invited all the states to participate and wants to charge us.” Independent-left outlets went further: The New Republic ran “Trump’s Melting State Fair” and a follow-up on the White House allegedly deleting photos after “Trump Threw a Tantrum.” The Mirror’s headline was “Trump Caught Faking Huge Crowds.”

The right’s read. Fox ran with Rep. Chuck Edwards calling out NC Gov. Josh Stein for “choosing partisanship over patriotism,” and covered Republican officials scrambling to staff empty blue-state booths. Ohio’s Republican governor, Mike DeWine, showed up on opening day, paid the same bill every state did, and told reporters “nobody’s talking politics,” adding “every governor has to make their own choice.”

What both sides skip. Nobody wants to reckon with the fact that the fair drew thin daytime crowds in 102-degree heat regardless of who boycotted. A fringe MAGA corner also claimed the heat wave was “geoengineered” by liberals with weather machines, so credit where it’s due, the left doesn’t have a monopoly on unhinged this week.

Yes, the planning was a mess. The bill structure was clumsy, the heat was brutal, and no amount of spin makes a half-empty afternoon look full. Grant all of that up front, because it’s true, and pretending otherwise is how you lose people. But that’s the setup, not the story.

The story is the coverage, and the coverage told on itself. “Trump’s Melting State Fair.” “Trump Threw a Tantrum.” “Trump Caught Faking Huge Crowds.” That’s not reporting a flop. That’s savoring one. You can cover a rough opening honestly, low RSVPs, thin daytime crowds, real numbers, and plenty of outlets did. What a chunk of the left-leaning press did instead was root, out loud, for America’s 250th birthday party to belly-flop because of whose name was on the invitation. That’s the tell, and it bothers me more than the ticket price or the Ferris wheel ever could.

The boycott is the same move in a governor’s suit. Every state owed the same $100,000 to $500,000, red and blue alike. DeWine wrote the check. Ohio showed up. So “we couldn’t afford it” collapses the second a red state pays the identical bill without a peep. The honest version isn’t budget. It’s “we didn’t want to hand Trump a win.” That’s a real political calculation, and I’d respect it more if one of them said it out loud instead of hiding behind an invoice.

Now the one thing I won’t wave off, because fair is fair: Healey’s funding complaint. She alleges the White House redirected $50 million meant for the nonpartisan celebration into its own programming. If that’s true, it’s a real problem, and it deserves an actual answer instead of a shrug from either team. I’m not taking her word for it. I’m also not dismissing it. Show me the ledger.

And can we sit with Saturday night for a second? After a storm evacuation, in triple-digit heat, roughly 150,000 people came back out for the fireworks. That’s not a failed event. That’s a stubborn crowd. It got a sentence, maybe, once “humiliating flop” was already the filed headline. Funny how the inconvenient number always shows up late.

Watch whether the White House ever answers the $50 million allegation or just runs out the clock. Watch whether a red-state governor publishes their own bill so we can compare costs honestly instead of taking Healey’s word for it. And watch the final attendance count when the fair closes July 10 against that “million-plus visitors” projection everyone quoted on day one.

The planning was sloppy. Fine. Sloppy isn’t the same as what half the press was openly hoping for, which was the whole country’s birthday failing on camera.

ICE’s Quota Doesn’t Bother Me. What It Could Cost Republicans This Fall Does.

The Story.

ICE arrested more than 10,000 people nationwide between last Friday and Tuesday, north of 2,000 a day, roughly double the earlier pace. DHS sources say the number came straight from the White House, which set 2,000 arrests a day as the new baseline after the Supreme Court’s birthright citizenship ruling went against the administration. Karoline Leavitt confirmed the figures July 2. The same weekend, NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani used a July 4 “America 250” address, delivered from George Washington’s desk, flanked by newly naturalized citizens, to say: “We see masked agents terrorizing our streets, eating food cooked by our undocumented neighbors before spiriting them away in unmarked vans.”

The left’s read. Truthout and Common Dreams call the surge “lawless and rogue,” running on a “new slush fund,” a top-down order tied to the court loss rather than organic enforcement.

The right’s read. PJ Media and Fox frame the 10,000 figure as enforcement finally matching the mandate voters gave the administration. Elon Musk’s response to Mamdani was blunt: “He is a taker, never a maker.” Ron DeSantis called Mamdani’s framing “regressive,” not progressive, and invoked the founders directly.

What both sides skip. The framing fight is all about whether the surge is “lawless” or “overdue.” Almost nobody is asking the actual policy question: whether a White House-set daily arrest quota, independent of caseload or evidence, is a sound way to run federal law enforcement, no matter who’s in the Oval Office.

I have no issue with ICE doing its job. Enforcing immigration law is not the scandal here.

Here’s what actually concerns me: a White House ordering agents to hit 2,000 arrests a day, like a sales floor with a quota board, is a morale and pressure problem regardless of your politics. Agents chasing a number instead of working actual cases make worse calls at the margins, rushed stops, sloppier target selection, the kind of thing that doesn’t show up in a press release until it shows up on video.

And here’s the part I’ll put my political hat on for: that pressure is a gift to exactly the people trying to abolish ICE outright. Every viral image of a rough arrest, every protest that turns into a news cycle, hands the DSA wing a recruiting poster heading into the midterms, right as “abolish ICE” moves from fringe slogan to actual primary platform. Republicans don’t need a self-inflicted PR wound six months out. You can support the mission and still think a quota is a dumb way to run it. Those aren’t in tension.

Which brings me to Mamdani, because I need to say this plainly too: he’s a political snake and hack. He reaches for the most emotive language available, “masked agents,” “unmarked vans,” “terrorizing our streets,” not because it’s the most accurate description of federal law enforcement, but because it’s the most useful description for selling a socialist agenda whose actual goal is undoing the country as it currently exists. Illegal immigration staying unresolved and ugly serves that project. A chaotic, viral, “look what they’re doing to your neighbors” ICE image is worth more to Mamdani’s politics than a quiet, well-run enforcement operation ever would be.

So no, I’m not running cover for ICE going soft, and I’m not running cover for Mamdani’s framing either. Enforce the law. Just don’t let a quota write the headlines for you, because somebody’s counting on exactly that.

Watch whether arrest-footage virality picks up as the 2,000-a-day baseline holds through the summer. Watch whether any Republicans start quietly distancing from the raw numbers as midterm ads get cut. And watch whether “abolish ICE” stays a DSA-primary talking point or actually starts polling as a mainstream Democratic position, because that’s the real fight underneath this one.

The preliminary hearing for Charlie Kirk's accused killer opened Monday in Utah. Tyler Robinson, 23, faces aggravated murder and six other counts in the September 10 assassination of Kirk at Utah Valley University, and prosecutors are using the five-day hearing to lay out their case for trial and the death penalty: DNA tying Robinson to the rifle, surveillance video, and a note that read "I had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk and I'm going to take it." Erika Kirk, who took over Turning Point USA after her husband's death and publicly forgave Robinson at his memorial, sat in the courtroom with Charlie's parents, the family's first time in the room with the accused. Robinson has not entered a plea. AP via WSLS

Trump heads to Turkey for a two-day NATO summit. He leaves for Ankara Monday night, with Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky and Syria’s Ahmed al-Sharaa both on the calendar. The White House says he’ll press Zelensky on ending the war and push al-Sharaa to take on Hezbollah rather than leave that fight to Israel. Al-Sharaa has already said he isn’t interested. The Hill

Democratic lawmakers released a federal audit faulting the slow pace of Puerto Rico's grid rebuild, noting only about a quarter of the roughly $14 billion obligated after Hurricane Maria has been disbursed. The GAO ties the roughly $3.5 billion pace less to Washington than to conditions on the island itself: a power authority (PREPA) still buried under more than $10 billion in debt, a private grid operator (LUMA) locked in dueling lawsuits with the Puerto Rico government, staff turnover, and review processes it calls "onerous." DHS told auditors the government of Puerto Rico is "ultimately responsible" for rebuilding its own grid. The report stops short of any finding that the island misspent the money already released. US News

A 19-year-old California man was arrested for threatening to blow up generators at Sacramento federal buildings. Trevon McDaniel of Elk Grove posted a TikTok in a Spider-Man mask telling the city to “hold onto your fireworks” ahead of the Fourth. Prosecutors say he’s also tied to an earlier plot targeting a White House UFC event. DOJ

A California man pleaded guilty to sending a fake ransom note in the Nancy Guthrie disappearance. Savannah Guthrie’s 84-year-old mother has been missing from her Tucson home since February. The FBI says some of the notes demanding cryptocurrency were extortion attempts with “no legitimacy,” while others may still be real. NBC News

China promoted two new generals after purging more than 100 senior officers since 2022. The latest round hit the military’s second-highest-ranking officer. Analysts say a 10-week “loyalty” training program was built to sever the officer corps from a recently purged vice chairman and re-pledge them straight to Xi Jinping. NPR

That’s The Read.

See you Wednesday.

If The Read is doing the cross-check work for you, send it to a friend who’s still chasing the framing instead of the facts.

Special Edition. Two hundred fifty years on, near enough, and I still want to know what happened this week before anyone tells me how to feel about it. So tonight, by candlelight and against my better judgment, The Read files from Philadelphia.

In today’s Read:

• Congress voted for independence yesterday, the second of July, not tomorrow, whatever the almanacs end up telling your grandchildren. Mr. Adams already wrote his wife that history got the date wrong before history even happened.

• The delegates have spent three days taking a blade to Mr. Jefferson’s draft, and the cut that should trouble you most isn’t about the King.

• General Howe’s fleet is putting men ashore on Staten Island by the boatload, the largest force the Crown has ever sent across an ocean, and New-York is watching it happen from its own harbor.

• Quick Rundown: a hanged bodyguard, a fleet still swelling, an empty Loyalist press with its type melted into musket balls, and a pamphlet still outselling everything in the colonies.

On the second day of July, twelve colonies voted for Mr. Lee’s resolution, that these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States. New-York alone abstained, its delegates still awaiting instruction from home, expected within the week. The vote came only after a night’s worth of arranging: Mr. Caesar Rodney rode near eighty miles through a thunderstorm to break Delaware’s tie, South Carolina’s delegates set aside their objections for the sake of one voice, and two of Pennsylvania’s dissenters simply did not appear, leaving that colony’s remaining men to carry it three to two. Mr. John Adams, writing his wife Abigail the following morning, declared the second of July “the most memorable epoch in the history of America,” one he expected “celebrated by succeeding generations” with “pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations, from one end of this continent to the other, from this time forward forever more.”

The Patriot printers say. A deliverance, plain and simple, the thing every broadside from Boston to Charleston has been building toward since Mr. Paine’s pamphlet first put the word “independence” into common speech back in January. The vote itself is being treated as the whole of the matter, the paperwork to follow being a formality Congress will surely settle within days.

What the Crown claims. His Majesty settled this question himself last August, when the royal proclamation declared the colonies in “open and avowed rebellion” and charged every loyal subject to “withstand and suppress” it. By that reading, yesterday’s vote changed nothing legally, twelve colonies of subjects cannot vote themselves out of a kingdom any more than a tenant votes himself out of his lease. There is little more argument than that on offer, and less appetite in New-York to print it since the Sons of Liberty wrecked Mr. Rivington’s press last November and melted his type into musket balls. A newspaper is difficult to publish without any letters left to set.

What neither side will print. Mr. Adams bet on the wrong date, and everyone reading this two hundred fifty years hence already knows it. He picked the vote. History picked the document. Neither the Patriot broadsides nor the Crown’s proclamations spend much ink on the plainer truth underneath both: a vote taken in a closed room in Philadelphia changes nothing on the ground until an army makes it stick, and that army is presently digging trenches in New-York with a much larger one arriving by ship as this is written.

Mr. Adams wrote to his wife with more confidence about a date than I would give to most weather forecasts, and I say that with real affection for the man. He picked the second of July. You will mark the fourth. Off by two days and two hundred fifty years of habit, and there is something delicious about a Founder this certain getting the anniversary wrong while getting everything else right.

Here is what I will not do: pretend this vote was some safe, symbolic gesture. Twelve colonies just told the most powerful empire on earth, in writing, with their names attached, that they no longer recognize its authority. That is not a petition. That is a declaration of war, and every man who voted for it knew it. A resolution on paper doesn't fight anybody. It is, however, the only thing that turns a scattered rebellion into a country with a reason to win.

I am not interested in pretending both sides of this have an equal claim. The Crown’s argument, dressed up in a royal proclamation, amounts to: subjects don’t get a say, ever, full stop. Twelve colonies just said otherwise, out loud, at the cost of their own necks if this goes wrong. That is the bravest thing printed on this continent all year, and I will take that trade over royal parchment every single time.

So yes, plainly: to vote for independence is to vote for war, the real kind, with real ships already sitting in the harbor. I think it was worth it then. I think two hundred fifty years of receipts prove it was worth it. Watch whether New-York’s delegates fall in line. Watch whether the other colonies ratify what their men already voted. And watch a King learn, the hard way, that a people who have decided they are free do not need his permission to mean it.

General Washington is standing on Manhattan this week, watching the largest invasion fleet Britain has ever assembled sail into his harbor. Here is what the marble statues leave out: he has never won a stand-up fight..

His record, honestly read, is thin. Fort Necessity, 1754: his only formal surrender, terms signed in French he could not read. Braddock’s defeat, 1755: an ambush that killed or wounded nearly nine hundred of thirteen hundred men, Washington one of the few who rode out alive. Boston, this past March, was not even a battle. Mr. Knox’s cannon, hauled from Ticonderoga in the dead of winter, simply made the harbor impossible to hold, and the British left.

That is the man Congress has entrusted with stopping what is anchoring off Staten Island. And within the week, word is he will have the Declaration Congress is still fighting over read aloud to the assembled army right here in New-York City, on the same ground Howe’s fleet is bearing down on now.

I do not count his record against him. A general who has already surrendered once, and watched men die beside him at Braddock's side, has no illusions left about what this costs. A man with a cleaner record might read his troops a declaration of independence for the applause. This one does it already knowing better than to expect an easy win.

Mr. Jefferson presented his draft declaration to Congress on the twenty-eighth of June. In the days since, the assembled delegates have taken their own pens to it, by Mr. Jefferson’s private account cutting nearly a quarter of what he wrote. Most of the trims are matters of tone, softening his harsher words against the English people themselves rather than only their king. One cut runs deeper.

Mr. Jefferson’s draft accused the King of waging “cruel war against human nature itself” by keeping open “a market where MEN should be bought & sold,” language aimed squarely at the slave trade. South Carolina and Georgia’s delegates would not sit for it, and, by Mr. Jefferson’s own telling, certain Northern delegates whose ships carry that same cargo were not eager to press the point either. The passage is gone. The institution it named is not.

The Patriot printers say. Not a word on this particular cut, which tells you something on its own. The broadsides are occupied entirely with the vote and the coming document’s language on liberty, tyranny, and the rights of man, all of it stirring, none of it inclined to dwell on what got left on Mr. Jefferson’s floor.

What the Crown claims. Even less interest here. A Crown that has spent a decade extracting revenue from these same colonies, slave-trading ports very much included, has no standing to lecture anyone on the point, and to its credit, or perhaps its silence, it has not tried.

What neither side will print. This is the one worth sitting with. A document about to declare that all men are created equal is being edited, this week, specifically to avoid saying anything uncomfortable about the men currently held as property. That is not a footnote. That is the fault line this country will be standing on again in another eighty-some years, and no amount of pomp and illumination changes what got quietly struck from the page to keep two colonies at the table.

I am about as pro-rebel as a woman writing from two hundred fifty years in the future can be, and I still think you should sit with this one rather than skip past it for the fireworks.

A room full of men who are, this very week, writing that all men are created equal, took a blade to the one passage that tried to say the quiet part out loud about slavery. Not because the accusation was false. Because South Carolina and Georgia would not sign a document that named the trade plainly, and because, per Mr. Jefferson's own account, some of the Northern delegates in that room were not exactly neutral parties either. Unity purchased at that price is still unity. I am not going to pretend the arithmetic wasn't real: without those votes, there may be no unanimous declaration at all. But I am also not going to call a wound clean just because it closed the room.

Here is the plain contradiction nobody in Philadelphia this week wants printed: the document argues from a truth it will not fully apply. That does not make the argument wrong. It makes the men making it human, which is a different thing from making them right about where they drew the line.

None of that touches whether independence itself is right. It is. It is the same document’s failure to live up to its own words that will need finishing later, by other Americans, willing to fight for it the same way this room is about to. Watch whether that cut passage ever resurfaces in a future generation’s argument for finishing what this one started. Watch which colonies keep buying and selling human beings long after they’ve finished declaring all men equal. History, so I am reliably informed by people living in it, keeps receipts.

Ships under General William Howe began putting troops ashore on Staten Island this week, part of what will be, once his brother Admiral Richard Howe’s fleet and the reinforcements behind it are fully assembled, the largest expeditionary force the Crown has ever sent across the Atlantic. General Washington’s Continental Army, encamped in New-York City and across the harbor’s approaches since spring, has spent these same weeks digging works at Brooklyn Heights and along Manhattan’s shore, in expectation of exactly this. The city that will, within days, be reading of a vote for independence is simultaneously watching the King’s answer to that vote arrive under sail, in plain sight, from its own rooftops.

The Patriot printers say. Grim resolve, mostly, and a fair amount of bravado layered over real fear. The broadsides frame Howe’s arrival as proof the Crown fears what a free people can accomplish, else why send so many men against so young an army. There is truth buried in the bravado. There is also an awful lot of bravado.

What the Crown claims. This is the argument that requires no ink at all, only ships, and the Crown has sent a great many of those. The message from Staten Island is the plainest one in this entire dispatch: however Congress votes, however elegantly Mr. Jefferson writes, the King intends to settle this with soldiers, not sentences.

What neither side will print. Neither the broadsides crowing about resolve nor the Crown’s silent armada wants to say plainly what any soldier standing watch in Brooklyn already knows: this is an extraordinarily young army, thin on powder and thinner on training, about to meet the largest force Britain has ever floated, and a vote taken in a room in Philadelphia will not stop a single musket ball.

Here is the part that should make your stomach drop a little, two hundred fifty years of hindsight or not. Congress voted for independence with a British invasion fleet already visible from the harbor. Not a threat on paper. Ships, men, guns, arriving by the boatload while the ink on Mr. Jefferson's edits was still wet.

I don't think that's a coincidence worth glossing over for the sake of a tidy anniversary story, and I'm not going to dress it up as some grim accident either. A vote for independence was always a vote for this. You don't get to declare yourself free of the largest empire on earth and expect that empire to shrug and wish you well. A free people doesn't get the freedom part first and the fighting part later, as a treat. Every man in that Congress knew what he was signing meant a King's army on his doorstep, and they signed anyway. That is not recklessness. That is knowing exactly what a thing costs and deciding it is worth paying.

I know how this particular chapter ends, because I have the benefit of living on the other side of it. Washington loses New-York before he wins much of anything, and that is not a spoiler that should comfort anyone standing in Brooklyn this week. But I will say this plainly, because two hundred fifty years buys me the right to: it was worth it. Every bit of it. The men on those Staten Island beaches represent the largest, best-equipped force their king can throw at the idea that people get to govern themselves, and I would take that fight again a hundred times over rather than stay a subject of a crown three thousand miles away that never once asked what the colonies wanted. The fact that the idea eventually wins anyway is the whole point of printing this at all.

Watch how many ships keep arriving after this week’s first landings. Watch whether Washington’s works at Brooklyn Heights hold. And watch what happens when the best-funded army on earth meets an idea it cannot actually kill with cannon fire.

• A bodyguard hanged for plotting against his own general. Thomas Hickey, one of General Washington’s own Life Guards, was hanged on the twenty-eighth of June before a crowd of thousands, convicted of conspiring with New-York’s Loyalist mayor, David Mathews, in a plot against the Continental Army’s officers. The city’s mood has not fully settled since.

• The fleet keeps growing. More sail arrive in New-York’s outer harbor by the day, and word from correspondents in London holds that German princes have let out their own soldiers for hire to the Crown, to be shipped over once terms are settled. A king fighting his own subjects with rented foreign troops is not, even by 1776 standards, a flattering look.

• Mr. Rivington’s press sits silent. The loudest Loyalist voice in New-York has printed nothing since the Sons of Liberty smashed his shop last November and melted his type for musket balls. Whatever argument the Crown has left to make in print, it is not being made from this city.

• Powder remains short. Congress and the Army continue to scrape for gunpowder and shot from any willing merchant, foreign or domestic. An army can vote itself into existence considerably faster than it can arm itself.

• Mr. Paine’s pamphlet still will not stop selling. Common Sense, in print since January, has by most estimates reached well past a hundred thousand copies across colonies that together hold perhaps two and a half million souls. Rarely has so much of a population read the same argument for its own government at the same time.

  

That’s The Read, filed from Philadelphia.

Back to 2026 on Friday, America is 250 years old! Go celebrate the greatest country on earth. Make a founding father proud!

If a resolution passed in a closed room two hundred fifty years ago is still worth arguing about today, forward this to someone who thinks history is settled.

Today’s Read is SCOTUS and another DSA win, and I HAVE THOUGHTS. So make sure you read My Read.

Also for Friday, I have a special edition of The Read planned specifically for the eve of America’s 250th birthday. It’s going to be fun, so even if you are busy getting ready to celebrate, keep an eye on your inbox.

I have family arriving over the next few days for July 4th, so it’s going to be a little quiet over here.

I will see you Friday with a special edition of The Read. Go celebrate AMERICA!

Let’s get into the news.

In today’s Read:

• The Court told Trump he can’t end birthright citizenship, and the “6-3” every outlet is running is actually 5-4 once you strip out Kavanaugh’s separate vote.

• Same morning, the Court ruled 9-0 that Title IX doesn’t require girls’ sports to include biological males, buried under a louder 6-3 headline about the constitutional question.

• A DSA-backed candidate ousted her third House incumbent in eight days in Colorado. Two hours earlier, the identical playbook got demolished by 14 points in that state’s Senate primary.

• Quick Rundown: Carroll wants her money, the Epstein files hit a deadline, Venezuela’s toll passed 1,900, and the Court also blew up campaign finance law while nobody was looking.

The Supreme Court Just Told Trump He Can’t End Birthright Citizenship.

The Story.

On June 30, the Supreme Court ruled in Trump v. Barbara that Executive Order 14160, Trump’s January 2025 order denying citizenship to children born here to undocumented or temporary-status parents, violates the 14th Amendment. Chief Justice Roberts wrote for the majority, joined by Sotomayor, Kagan, Barrett, and Jackson on the constitutional question, a five-justice bloc. Kavanaugh supplied a sixth vote against Trump on narrower federal-law grounds, not the constitutional one, which means the real constitutional vote was 5-4, not the “6-3” most headlines are running. Thomas dissented for 91 pages; Alito called it “one of the most important decisions in the history of the court.” Hours later, Deputy AG Colin McDonald sent a memo directing every U.S. Attorney’s office to prioritize prosecuting “birth tourism” schemes under visa fraud and wire fraud statutes.

The Left’s read. The Constitution held, full stop. The ACLU’s Cecillia Wang called it “a victory that belongs to all of us,” and CBS, PBS, and CNN centered the 14th Amendment beating back an order that tried to rewrite it by decree, leaning on Alito’s and Thomas’s marathon dissents as proof of how big a swing this was.

The Right's read. A loss, but a survivable one. JD Vance told Laura Ingraham it was a "major, major mistake" while pointing to the "silver lining": pull Kavanaugh's statutory vote out and the constitutional question was 5-4, which is why Vance says birthright citizenship is "hanging by a thread." Sen. Eric Schmitt called it "wrong, dangerous, and disastrous" and is already floating a constitutional amendmen

What both sides are skipping. Everyone's reporting "6-3" because it's the cleaner number and it flatters both storylines. Neither wants to explain that Kavanaugh carved his own lane, and almost nobody outside CNN's own analysis mentioned the loss came bundled with a same-day enforcement consolation prize. And nobody in the mainstream coverage, left or right, went back to the actual 1866 floor debate to ask what "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" was written to mean.

“significant illegal immigration into the United States is a new circumstance that was largely unknown as of 1868 and that the Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment could not have fully anticipated. And the Framers likely would not have anticipated (and presumably would not have intended) the odd result of granting a substantial birthright citizenship benefit to (i) those foreign citizens who violate U. S. immigration law and illegally enter or overstay and then have children in the United States over (ii) those foreign citizens who follow U. S. immigration law and have children in their home countries while seeking to lawfully immigrate to the United States. Nor presumably would they have wanted to grant constitutional birthright citizenship to children of foreign citizens unlawfully in the country while simultaneously denying constitutional birthright citizenship to children of tribal American Indians.”

“Consistent with the Fourteenth Amendment, Congress could amend §1401(a) or otherwise enact new legislation establishing exceptions to birthright citizenship for children born to foreign citizens unlawfully or temporarily in the country. But Congress has not yet done so.”

A baby is not a product. A womb is not for rent. I wrote that back in April, knee-deep in a Wall Street Journal investigation about a Chinese gaming executive with over a hundred American-born children, and Monday’s ruling is exactly the reading that let that industry exist in the first place.

I think the Court got this one 100% wrong. Go read Senator Jacob Howard’s own floor speech introducing the Citizenship Clause, May 30, 1866: “This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons.” People keep running that quote with the ellipsis cut right before “every other class of persons.” I won’t do that to you. Read it as the list it is: foreigners, aliens, and people who belong to ambassador or foreign-minister families are the excluded classes. The “every other class” Howard swept in was the entire point of the amendment, freed slaves and their children, the people Dred Scott said could never be citizens. That’s who the 14th Amendment was written for.

Howard wasn’t the only one saying it. Senator Trumbull, the amendment’s chief architect, said “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” meant “not owing allegiance to anybody else” and being under the “complete jurisdiction” of the United States, which is exactly why that same debate excluded tribal Indians who owed their allegiance elsewhere. Allegiance was the test. Not GPS coordinates at the moment of delivery.

A woman who flies to Los Angeles specifically to give birth doesn’t owe this country allegiance. A Chinese billionaire renting a California womb because his own government won’t let him have this many kids doesn’t owe this country allegiance. Their children weren’t accidentally born on American soil, they were shipped here on purpose, through an industry built for exactly this. That’s not the “every other class of persons” Howard meant. That’s a loophole nobody in 1866 was debating, because nobody in 1866 had invented commercial surrogacy.

I’ve spent two long pieces on how far that loophole has grown (part one, part two, paid subscribers, no apologies for the length): Xu Bo, a Chinese billionaire who wants sons because they’re “superior to girls,” legally fathered over a hundred children through American surrogates. Margaret Wang, who runs Rhea Fertility on Peter Thiel money, calls the U.S. the destination for “regulatory arbitrage,” her words. That’s not an accident of a 158-year-old amendment. That’s a national security vulnerability built on a reading of “subject to the jurisdiction” the men who wrote the clause never intended.

DOJ’s same-day birth tourism memo is the tell that even this administration knows something’s broken. It’s still too small. “Birth tourism,” as DOJ uses it, means visa fraud and lying to customs agents, a real crime. It says nothing about the legal surrogacy pipeline moving foreign elites’ children through American wombs by the hundreds, no fraud required, because nobody wrote a law around the actual loophole. One is fraud. The other is Tuesday.

Rick Scott’s SAFE KIDS Act doesn’t fix it either. It voids surrogacy contracts involving adversary-nation nationals, hits brokers with a misdemeanor, and has stalled in committee since November with zero Democratic cosponsors. No cap on children commissioned. No transparency across agencies. No protection for the woman whose body is the actual product. It’s a national security bill wearing family-values clothing, aimed at the wrong century’s problem.

Watch whether a single justice, in a future case, revisits what “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” actually meant to the men who wrote it. Watch whether Congress ever legislates the loophole instead of leaving it to DOJ memos. And watch whether anyone in Washington, either party, proposes something that closes the door on manufactured citizenship instead of chasing fraud around its edges.

The 14th Amendment was written to make freed slaves citizens. Monday, the Court used it to guarantee citizenship to a child conceived in a lab, gestated for a fee, and shipped home to a country that already has a father. Those are not the same amendment. A total travesty.

The Court Also Ruled 9-0 on Trans Athletes. You Wouldn’t Know It From the Headlines.

The Story.

Also on June 30, the Court ruled 6-3 in West Virginia v. B.P.J. and Little v. Hecox that states may bar biological males from girls' and women's school sports. Justice Kavanaugh wrote the majority opinion. All nine justices, including the three liberal ones, agreed the laws don't violate Title IX; the 6-3 split was only on a separate equal protection question, where Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson dissented. Kavanaugh wrote the ruling doesn't "require an overhaul of women's and girls' sports throughout America," while also writing a biological male who identifies as female deserves "respect" and shouldn't be "ostracized or vilified." Trump posted: "BIG WIN: The United States Supreme Court just RULED AGAINST MEN PLAYING IN WOMEN'S SPORTS."

The Left’s read. A devastating loss dressed in soft language. The Human Rights Campaign said it comes “at the expense of all women and girls.” CNN’s Steve Vladeck called it “a significant loss for equality advocates,” though he flagged the ruling also cracks a door for future challenges, a nuance mostly missing from the louder coverage.

The Right’s read. Common sense, finally codified. Fox led with Trump’s own post and framed the ruling as restoring biological reality after years of lower courts second-guessing state legislatures. The unanimous Title IX holding gets top billing as proof this was never actually close.

What both sides are skipping. This ruling doesn’t ban anything; it only permits. States that already let biological males compete in girls’ sports can keep doing exactly that; this just gives cover to the states that want to say no. That’s a green light for state-by-state sorting, not a national resolution, and it’s likely to reshape where recruits, families, and entire athletic programs land depending on which state they’re in. Neither side’s coverage frames it that way. The left doesn’t want to admit the ruling leaves its preferred states untouched, and the right doesn’t want to admit this is nowhere near over.

Nine justices, not six, agreed Title IX doesn’t require a school to let a biological male compete on the girls’ team. Sit with that, because almost none of the coverage wants you to. Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson, cast as the ruling’s losing side, signed onto the exact same statutory reading conservatives have wanted since West Virginia and Idaho passed these laws. Not a 6-3 culture war outcome. Unanimous.

The 6-3 split was on the narrower constitutional question. Kavanaugh also wrote that a biological male who identifies as female deserves “respect” and shouldn’t be “ostracized or vilified,” and I don’t disagree, I’ll just say it in my own words instead of his. Nobody should be bullied or treated cruelly for struggling with gender dysphoria. That’s compassion for a real mental health condition. What it doesn’t buy is a spot on the girls’ team or a key to the locker room. Compassion for the person and access to women’s sports and women’s spaces are two different questions, and collapsing them is how we got here.

The left's version has its own gap. Robinson warning that any girl could be branded "the wrong kind of girl" buries the part where three liberal justices just told you the statute was never on their side to begin with. That's the text of Title IX, and pretending it's a partisan bloodbath is its own kind of laundering.

My line hasn’t moved: girls’ sports get to mean biological girls, a 1972 statute doing what it was always supposed to do. Biology is a fact. It doesn’t get set aside because a man believes he’s a woman. Period. And per the skip above, this is a floor, not a ceiling. Watch which states go the other way, and whether the equal protection theory Sotomayor’s dissent left open ever gets tested by one of them.

A Third Colorado Democrat Just Got Primaried by the DSA.

The Story.

On June 30, Melat Kiros, a 29-year-old DSA-backed democratic socialist, defeated 15-term Rep. Diana DeGette in Colorado's 1st District primary, the third House Democrat toppled by a DSA insurgent in eight days, following last week's New York sweep. Kiros's platform includes abolishing ICE and ending U.S. military aid to Israel; she's drawn scrutiny for calling 9/11 and October 7 "inevitable" results of U.S. and Israeli foreign policy. Nearly three hours earlier, state Sen. Julie Gonzales, a former DSA member running an "insurgent progressive" campaign against Sen. Hickenlooper, lost by 14 points after being outraised roughly twelve to one.

The Left’s read. Real, but precise, not a takeover. NPR framed Kiros’s win as “the progressive wing’s deepening influence,” while treating Gonzales’s loss as proof the model doesn’t travel statewide.

The Right’s read. “Socialism goes west,” and the specifics are the point. Fox and Breitbart led with Kiros’s 9/11 comments and noted over $1 million in AIPAC-linked spending failed to stop her.

What both sides are skipping. Almost nobody put the two Colorado results in the same sentence. A DSA win in a safe urban seat and a DSA-adjacent blowout loss in a real statewide race are two different data points, and each side only cites the one that fits its story. Neither side is breaking down who actually cast these votes by income or education, which is where the “working class” branding falls apart.

Two Colorado Democrats went home Tuesday night, and only one fits the story the press wants to tell. Melat Kiros, on record calling 9/11 and October 7 “inevitable,” just knocked out a fifteen-term incumbent in Denver, her movement’s third scalp in eight days. I’ll say what I said about the New York sweep: “democratic socialist” is branding. Put “democratic” in front of “socialism” and it sounds like a debate club. The actual project is centralizing the means of production, which has a different name, and the people cheering Kiros know it.

Here’s the part almost nobody’s reporting. Two hours before Kiros’s race got called, Julie Gonzales ran the identical insurgent playbook statewide against Hickenlooper and got beaten by 14 points after being outraised twelve to one. Same night, same state, same lane. NPR is framing Kiros’s win as “the progressive wing’s deepening influence” while filing Gonzales’s blowout under fundraising math. Convenient. A DSA-aligned candidate wins where the district is safely blue enough to survive comments about terror attacks being “inevitable.” It gets crushed the second it needs an actual swing voter.

Now watch who’s actually doing the electing, because this is where “working class” stops meaning anything. In last week’s New York sweep, Darializa Avila Chevalier won higher-income precincts by 5.1 points and lost lower-income precincts by 9.1. Claire Valdez won higher-income areas by 33.7 points and college-educated areas by 36.4. Brad Lander’s best precinct, Park Slope, has a median household income of $202,310 and a plurality with a master’s degree, and he won it by 40.6 points over the guy who actually carried the lower-income vote.

Every DSA-aligned winner ran up the score with young, college-educated, higher-income voters. Every one of them lost the actual working-class precincts to the more moderate Democrat. Kiros herself is a doctoral student and former lawyer. Say “working class” one more time.

And here’s the part small business owners should sit up for. DSA’s own Labor 101 curriculum defines “working class” as anyone who has to sell their labor to survive, full stop, no income cutoff, no job-type cutoff. Jacobin’s companion explainer spells out what that means in practice: a New York City train conductor pulling $70,000 a year is “working class,” while a Bronx bodega owner earning far less is not, because he’s “charged with his own exploitation, as well as that of others, even if few in number.” Their example, not mine.

Own a bodega with one employee and their model puts you on the same side of the line as a hedge fund manager. The labor economists Jacobin cites for the numbers put the “corporate elite” at 2 percent of the country and the working class at 63 percent. On the stump, they’ll sell you Bernie’s “millionaires and billionaires” line. Their own curriculum says the actual target is anyone who signs a paycheck, and that’s every small business owner in America, not just the ones with private jets.

That’s not an accident, and it’s not new. I’ve written before about how the DSA actually operates once its people win (full piece here, free), and the model isn’t “represent your district.” It’s “co-govern.” Mamdani said it himself on stage at the 2023 DSA convention: “We are special as DSA electeds not because of ourselves; we are special because of our organization.” Nithya Raman found out what happens when you forget that, censured in writing by her own chapter in 2024 for accepting an endorsement from a mainstream Jewish Democratic club, with members privately told to stay quiet to preserve the chapter’s “leverage” over her.

So no, this isn’t a working-class movement being run by working people. It’s academics, activists, and nonprofit lifers, career activism and NGO work instead of manual labor, entrepreneurship, or the kind of innovation that actually creates a job, getting elected by the most comfortable, most educated, most insulated voters in the Democratic coalition, then answering to a private committee instead of the constituents who thought they voted for a Democrat.

That’s the trajectory worth watching, more than any single Colorado race. A party that keeps letting its safest seats get captured by an organization whose own bylaws call for overcoming capitalism isn’t managing an insurgency. It’s being eaten from the inside. Keep going and there won’t be a Democratic Party left to argue about. There will be a Socialist Party wearing the Democratic Party’s name, and those are not the same thing.

Watch whether Hakeem Jeffries treats Kiros the way he treated the New York winners, welcome in, no pushback, whether a vulnerable House Democrat in a genuinely competitive seat starts distancing publicly, and the AIPAC-linked money that spent over a million trying to stop her and failed. Somebody’s going to have to explain that one to their donors.

E. Jean Carroll wants her money now. After the Supreme Court refused Monday to hear Trump’s appeal of the 2023 verdict, Carroll asked a judge to release the roughly $5.8 million he owes her, with interest. His lawyers want a delay; Carroll’s team says every prior delay has already been denied.

The Epstein files hit a deadline Thursday. Judge Emmet Sullivan ordered the DOJ to release less-redacted records by July 2 or explain why it can’t. DOJ is appealing, calling the order a bid to drive “misleading headlines.” Fox’s own headline called Sullivan the “Clinton judge,” which tells you where that defense is headed.

Trump’s yelling at gas stations instead of Iran. Days after two nights of U.S. strikes on Iranian sites and Iranian retaliation against American bases in Kuwait and Bahrain, Trump posted that “Gasoline Retailers must get their Prices down, IMMEDIATELY,” targeting $2.50 a gallon. Iran denied requesting the Doha talks Trump announced, calling it “fake news.”

Venezuela’s earthquake death toll just passed 1,900. The confirmed toll has climbed past 1,900 six days after the twin quakes, with more than 10,500 injured and rescue crews warning the survival window is closing.

The Court also gutted campaign finance limits, same morning, different headline. In NRSC v. FEC, the Court ruled 6-3 that a 1974 cap on party-candidate coordinated spending violates the First Amendment, overturning its own 2001 precedent. Kagan dissented, warning “the party can serve as the candidate’s checking account.” A real midterm advantage for the GOP, and almost nobody noticed.

That’s The Read.

See you Friday.

If The Read is doing the cross-check work for you, send it to a friend who’s still chasing the framing instead of the facts.

I was offline for a few days. I was under the weather and prepping for visitors. Great combo.

What happened while I was offline? A socialist sweep, a Buttigieg “swatting” story, and a Supreme Court speed-run. Let’s get into the read.

In Today’s Read

• Mamdani’s whole slate swept New York’s House primaries. Two winners trashed America online. Jeffries said welcome aboard.

• Buttigieg’s “swatting” story is a post on his own blog. The press ran it as fact. The receipts are still locked up.

• The Court ended TPS and shut the asylum door 6-3. The polls say nobody asked. Read the question.

• In the Rundown: the Iran ceasefire is a shooting war again, 1,450 dead in Venezuela, a new ICE pick, and AOC warns her own side.

The "Death to America" Caucus Just Won in New York. Hakeem Jeffries Held the Door Open.

The Story.

On June 23, every candidate New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani endorsed in the Democratic House primaries won. State Assemblywoman Claire Valdez, a member of the Democratic Socialists of America, took the open NY-7 seat replacing retiring Rep. Nydia Velázquez. Darializa Avila Chevalier, also DSA, knocked off five-term Rep. Adriano Espaillat in NY-13, who happened to be the sitting chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. Brad Lander, Mamdani’s old mayoral rival, beat two-term Rep. Dan Goldman in NY-10. Espaillat and Goldman were both backed by Hakeem Jeffries and Gov. Kathy Hochul, so the party establishment lost its own incumbents on its own turf.

Here’s the part the celebration skips. Avila Chevalier co-founded Columbia University Apartheid Divest, the campus group that later posted “Death to America” in Farsi and named eradicating Western civilization as a goal. Her own now-deleted posts include calling the United States “a f---ing disgrace” and bragging, “I forgot to get napkins so I just wiped my hand on the American flag behind me.” On primary day, she walked out of a live interview with Spanish-language station La Mega when the host pressed her on the posts. Then she won. She’s since told MS NOW’s Ali Velshi she “regrets” them.

Two days later, Mamdani sat with ABC’s Jon Karl, called democratic socialism the future of the party, said a democratic socialist “can get elected anywhere across this country for any position,” and when Karl asked whether Democrats could disagree on something as basic as whether prisons should exist, answered: “There are prisons.” Asked how he felt about Republicans making him the face of the Democratic Party, he said, “Let them.”

The Left’s read. A working-class realignment, not a warning. The Washington Post framed it as democratic socialists “expanding their voting base”; NPR as Mamdani’s gamble paying off; The Intercept as the left “setting the agenda” in the city. On social media posts, the move was to soften: MS NOW carried the “she regrets it” walk-back, and Snopes published a fact-check parsing the flagged tweet. Jeffries welcomed the new nominees into the fold and waved off any worry that it hurts Democrats in November.

The Right’s read. The mask is off, and the leadership likes it that way. Fox profiled the winners as “rising socialist stars,” led with the candidate “whose goal is to eradicate Western civilization,” and ran the storm-out-of-the-interview clip as the tell. The frame on Jeffries opening the door: the party isn’t being hijacked against its will, it’s showing you exactly who it is. Even Bill Maher called Avila Chevalier “patient zero” of the woke mind virus over the abolish-prisons stuff, which lands differently coming from inside the tent.

What both sides are skipping. The left’s “expanding the base” line skips the actual content of what got elected. “I regret the posts” is doing heroic work for someone who co-founded a “Death to America” group and is now headed for a seat she’ll hold for as long as she wants. The right has its own skip: these are the bluest districts in America, not Ohio, and three primary wins in Manhattan and the Bronx don’t prove the whole country went socialist overnight. The thing nobody quite says out loud is the Jeffries piece. He didn’t get rolled. He made a choice, accommodation over a fight, and a leader owns his choices.

Start with the word doing all the heavy lifting: “democratic.” Stick it in front of “socialism” and the whole thing suddenly sounds like a food co-op with a newsletter. That’s the branding, and the branding is the trick. It soft-pedals where this actually goes, which is socialism on its way to communism. The giveaway is the means of production. Once you’re talking about centralizing those, you left “socialism” behind a while ago. That’s the communist part. And these aren’t people hiding their reading list. They speak warmly about Lenin, about Marx, about Mao. Go watch what Hasan Piker says straight into a camera if you think I’m reaching.

Now watch what the leadership did with all of that, because that’s the real story, not the candidates. Two of the three winners have a documented history of trashing the country they’re about to swear an oath to. One co-founded the group that posted “Death to America.” And the most powerful Democrat in the House looked at it and said, welcome in. Not “answer for the posts first.” Not “this is a problem.” Welcome in.

Here’s what gets me about the “regret.” When a candidate wipes her hand on the flag, calls America a disgrace, and then locates her remorse the same week she wins a primary, that’s not a change of heart. That’s a press release with a deadline. Nobody discovers principle on Election Day by accident.

And Mamdani isn’t hiding the ball, to his credit. Karl handed him an off-ramp, asked whether reasonable Democrats could at least agree prisons should exist, and the best he could manage was “There are prisons.” That’s not a man dodging a gotcha. That’s a man telling you the abolish-it wing isn’t some fringe he’s quietly managing in the back room. It’s the base he’s courting. “Let them,” he said, about being made the face of the party. Fine by me. Let’s.

Here’s the part that should end the “they’re just progressive Democrats” spin, because they said it themselves, out loud, on camera. Gustavo Gordillo, a co-chair of NYC-DSA, went on Spectrum News on primary night and laid out the arrangement in plain English: “We’re on the Democratic Party ballot line. We contest the primaries, and when they’re in the legislature, they’re part of the Democratic Party caucus, but we don’t agree with the way the Democratic Party establishment organizes or runs its party apparatus.”

Translate the polite version: the Democratic Party is a ballot-access vehicle, nothing more. A set of keys to a car they fully intend to drive somewhere the owner never agreed to go. They are not Democrats. They’re using the Democrats. Leeches.

Now my honest caveat, because the cross-check cuts both ways. These are New York City seats, the bluest of the blue, and anyone on the right promising you a socialist Congress by next Tuesday is selling the same overhype the left peddles in reverse. Contained, most likely. But don’t tell me it can’t travel. Bernie Sanders nearly took the 2016 nomination, and the only reason he didn’t is the establishment took it from him. They stole it. The ceiling on this whole movement is the economy, and that’s the warning for our side, not theirs. If this administration doesn’t get prices and wages to where regular people feel like they can actually get ahead, you are handing the socialists their best recruiting pitch ever written, and it stops being a blue-city story in a hurry.

And the establishment Democrats won’t be the thing that stops it, because the establishment is too scared of losing the room to fight for it. So they get dragged left, an inch at a time, until there’s nothing of the old party left to recognize. They eat their own. The DSA is counting on exactly that, and so far it’s working.

One more thing, and it’s the media-criticism heart of all this. Not a single major outlet is doing the obvious work. Read the DSA’s own documents. Pull the archive. Ask these candidates what “democratic socialism” actually cashes out to when you take the adjective off. Instead the press rebrands them “progressive Democrats” and moves along. The reporting that would tell you who you just elected is the reporting nobody will file.

So watch the specifics. Watch whether one network anchor reads the CUAD “Death to America” post on air, or whether it stays a “Fox thing” to wave off. Watch whether a single major outlet digs into the DSA’s actual platform and what it says about who owns what. And watch AOC, who just told her own colleagues the same energy is coming for them next, because the call is coming from inside the house.

They told you who they are. The only people pretending otherwise are the ones who already agree with them.

Pete Buttigieg Says His Family Got "Swatted." I'm Pumping the Brakes on Everybody.

The Story.

On June 26, former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, widely floated as a 2028 contender, published a Substack post titled “A Terrible Thing Happened to My Family.” He wrote that a police officer and a Child Protective Services worker came to his Traverse City, Michigan home over an anonymous report, that he was told not to be alone with his 4-year-old twins until they’d been interviewed, and that the kids stayed with their grandparents for about 24 hours. Per his account, the allegation was that an anonymous caller claimed a woman said she’d met Buttigieg at a conference in Alabama years ago, where he supposedly confessed to “unspeakable violent crimes.”

Pete Buttigieg's Substack

A Terrible Thing Happened to My Family

Someone decided to hurt our family this week. I’m furious, and I want to share what happened…

Read more

a month ago · 38303 likes · 9232 comments · Pete Buttigieg

He says he told the officer he’d never been to the town, the officer said it looked politically motivated and wouldn’t go to a prosecutor, and CPS found nothing to substantiate it. He called it a “swatting” by other means and tied the timing to Father’s Day photos and Pride Month. The Michigan State Police confirmed to outlets that a report was made and “determined the report was false,” adding that “false reports are dangerous.” Per the New York Times, the state police did not respond to requests for the actual report, audio of the anonymous call, or the status of any investigation into who made it.

The Left’s read. A chilling political hoax and a new low. NPR, CBS, ABC, NBC, and the Times ran it straight off his post, leading with the 24-hour separation, the “sleepless night,” and his line that this was the “ugliest thing” in his career. The Advocate and MS NOW foregrounded the Pride Month and Father’s Day timing and the homophobia angle. The dominant frame: swatting is escalating, this is a frightening new variant aimed at a gay couple’s kids, and the only decent response is solidarity. Even Republican Rep. Derrick Van Orden chimed in that it had happened to his family too.

The Right’s read. Hold on, who confirmed any of this? The skepticism started on X and runs on a few stubborn points the gushing coverage skips. The entire narrative is Buttigieg’s own Substack post. The Michigan State Police confirmed a report existed and was deemed false, but won’t release the report, the call audio, or any case status. “Swatting” is the wrong word, because a CPS welfare check is not a SWAT team breaching your door, and the conflation does work. And the timing is awfully convenient for a man laying 2028 groundwork who needs both a sympathetic story and a villain.

What both sides are skipping. The left’s skip is basic sourcing discipline. A false CPS report is a real and ugly thing, and if it went down the way he describes, it deserves condemning without anyone checking a party registration first. But “the subject described it on his blog and the press printed it” is not the same as “verified,” and the same outlets that demand receipts from people they dislike asked this potential presidential candidate for exactly none. The right’s skip is the flip side: skepticism slides fast into “he made the whole thing up,” and there’s no evidence for that either, because the police did confirm a false report occurred. The honest middle is the part nobody’s holding.

Start with the part that isn’t complicated. If someone really did sic Child Protective Services on a man’s four-year-olds to score a political point, that’s vile, full stop, and I don’t care whose kids they are or who their dads voted for. Kids do not belong anywhere near our politics. Find the person who did it and charge them. That’s not a partisan take. That’s just being a human being.

Now the part that’s going to annoy some people, because I’m going to do what I usually do and pump the brakes. On everybody.

Start with the skeptics, because I’m one of them and I’ll defend the instinct. It’s fair to question a story that comes almost entirely from one side, and right now this one comes from Pete Buttigieg’s Substack. We haven’t seen the report. We haven’t heard the call. Asking for the documentation before you carve it in stone isn’t cruelty, it’s due diligence, and the thread that flagged this for me is asking fair questions.

But here’s where I split from the people treating the coverage itself as the scandal. What were the outlets supposed to do? He’s a high-profile guy who made a serious accusation. That’s news, and reporting what he said is the job. They went to the Michigan State Police, who confirmed a report was made and ruled it false. They asked for the records and didn’t get them. And I honestly don’t know how often Michigan CPS hands over paperwork on a case involving a minor, my guess is close to never. So “the press ran his account and noted the documents aren’t available” isn’t laundering. It’s about all you can do with what exists.

So skepticism, yes. Writing the whole thing off as a political stunt, no. A false report did happen; the state confirmed that much. And the motive he floated is at least as plausible as the cynical one. He posted family photos, it’s Pride Month, and someone targeting him over exactly that is a real timeline on its own. He didn’t have to invent it.

Where I do dig in is the word “swatting.” That comparison is doing work it hasn’t earned. Swatting is armed officers at your door over a fake hostage call, guns out, and people have died in the confusion. What happened here was a CPS worker and an officer, a forensic interview, and the kids spending a night at their grandparents’ house. Ugly and probably traumatizing? Sure. The same category of physical danger as a SWAT team breaching your home? No. The two can share a motive, hateful, political, take your pick, without sharing a body count. Collapsing them flatters the story, and a false child-abuse report is bad enough that it doesn’t need the upgrade.

And one more thing worth saying out loud, because it’s the media-criticism heart of this. Legacy media has locked hard onto the hate-motivated-attack frame, and they’re probably right, though nobody actually knows yet. Hold that next to the last two years. Real swatting, the armed-officers-at-your-door kind, hit conservatives over and over, and the same press barely blinked. Marjorie Taylor Greene got swatted something like eight times, once on Christmas with her family in the house. Tommy Tuberville, Brandon Williams, Nikki Haley, Ken and Angela Paxton, all hit in the same wave. I don’t recall the wall-to-wall sympathy tour then. The alarm about a rising, dangerous tactic shows up right on cue when it finally lands on one of their own.

And none of that minimizes the report itself. Filing a fake child-abuse claim to torment someone is egregious, it should be prosecuted every single time, whoever the target is.

So watch the specifics. Watch whether the state police or Buttigieg ever produce the report or the call audio. Watch whether he files the charges he swore he would (”so help me God,” he wrote), or whether the vow fades with the news cycle. And watch which commentators locked in a verdict on day one and never moved it, on either side.

Everybody’s already sprinting for a conclusion. I’ll be the boring one standing in the middle, conclusion TBD.

The Supreme Court Handed Trump Two Immigration Wins in One Morning. The Poll Everyone's Citing Says Less Than the Headline.

The Story.

On June 25, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3, along the usual ideological lines, in two immigration cases. In the first, the Court held the administration can end Temporary Protected Status for Haiti and Syria, directly affecting roughly 350,000 Haitians and about 6,000 Syrians, with ripple effects for nationals of eleven other countries. In the second, it held that someone standing in Mexico who tries and fails to set foot on U.S. soil has not "arrived in the United States," and so isn't entitled to apply for asylum, reviving the administration's authority to physically turn people back at the line. Justice Alito wrote both majority opinions. Justice Sotomayor read her dissent aloud from the bench, a rare move reserved for deep disagreement, and there was open back-and-forth between her and Alito in the courtroom. DHS called the rulings "victories for the rule of law and common sense." The Haitian plaintiffs' lawyers said the decision would "directly result in thousands of innocent people dying violent, needless deaths."

Running underneath the coverage is the poll everyone keeps reaching for: the NPR/PBS News/Marist survey in which 65% of U.S. adults say ICE has "gone too far" enforcing immigration law, against 22% who say its actions are "about right" and 12% who say it hasn't gone far enough. It was conducted January 27–30 (n=1,462 adults, margin of error ±2.9 points), up from 54% last June. The four days it was in the field matter: it opened three days after federal agents killed Alex Pretti at a Minneapolis protest and three weeks after an ICE agent killed Renée Good, a U.S. citizen, in her car, both during Operation Metro Surge, the largest immigration operation the country had ever mounted.

The Left’s read. A humanitarian catastrophe, greenlit by a partisan Court and rejected by the public. CNN led with more than a million immigrants facing a scramble to stay. The plaintiffs’ “thousands will die” warning ran as the headline emotion, Sotomayor’s bench dissent as the moral center, and the “two-thirds say too far” poll as proof that even voters have turned against the whole crackdown.

The Right’s read. The Court read the statute and the executive won. DHS emphasized that TPS was designed to be temporary (the word is right there in the name), that an asylum claim was never meant to trigger by failing to cross a border illegally, and that the rulings restore presidential authority lower courts had been second-guessing for months. On the poll, where the right engages it at all, the answer is that it’s a partisan artifact, 93% of Democrats against 27% of Republicans, dressed up as the voice of “America.” The system worked, the angle goes. That’s the story.

What both sides are skipping. Quick context, let’s talk procedure, because the screaming on both ends skips what the Court actually decided. TPS is a temporary humanitarian status the executive grants to people from countries hit by war or disaster. It is renewed at the executive’s discretion, and the ruling says the executive who grants it can also end it. That’s it. It does not mean 350,000 people get deported tomorrow; there are timelines and processes. The asylum ruling is even narrower, a statutory question about what the words “arrived in the United States” mean. Neither opinion is a referendum on whether immigrants are good people. The “thousands will die” line is an advocacy projection presented as a finding, and the coverage almost never labels it that way. And that poll deserves better than either side gives it. The question is actually fair, three balanced options including “not gone far enough,” so the “rigged wording” brush-off on the right doesn’t hold. What the left’s “America has turned” framing buries is the split underneath: 93% of Democrats say “gone too far,” 27% of Republicans do, and the honest swing group, independents, sits at 71%. That gap is the story, and the topline erases it.

Strip the melodrama and read what the Court actually said, because both sides want you reacting to the trailer instead of the movie.

The TPS ruling says temporary means temporary. That is a genuinely hard thing to argue with, given “temporary” is the literal first word of the program’s name. The asylum ruling says you can’t claim asylum by standing in Mexico and not making it across. Also not exactly a wild reading of the law. This is the Court doing the boring thing, reading the text, and the boring thing keeps getting narrated as a massacre.

Is it disruptive? Of course it is. There are real families inside that 350,000, people who’ve been here a decade-plus, holding jobs, paying mortgages, raising American-born kids under a status everyone quietly pretended was permanent. I’m not going to wave that away to score a point. It’s a mess, and it’s a mess with human beings in it. It’s a mess because past administrations, mainly through executive action, have been playing fast and loose with the definitions of “temporary” and “arrived.”

But here’s the question the catastrophe coverage skips: whose fault is the mess? If a “temporary” program runs fifteen years, the scandal isn’t the Court finally calling it temporary. The scandal is that Congress, for fifteen years, never had the spine to decide what these people’s actual status should be. They left them dangling on an executive renewal that flips every time the White House changes hands, and now everyone’s shocked the rug moved. Blame the branch that writes the laws, not the one that read this one.

And about that poll, because I had to eat a little crow here. My first instinct was that “gone too far” is a rigged question, and then I went and read the thing. It isn’t. Marist gave people three real options, including “not gone far enough,” and 65% still picked “gone too far,” up eleven points since last June. Fair question, real result. Credit where it’s due.

But the headline strips two things. First, the crosstabs: 93% of Democrats say “too far” against 27% of Republicans, Trump voters down at 25%. That’s not “America has turned on ICE.” That’s the country split exactly where it splits on everything, with the press stapling “two-thirds of Americans” over a 66-point partisan canyon. The figure that should actually worry the administration is independents at 71%, because independents decide November.

Second, and this is the one that bugs me, look at when Marist was in the field. January 27 through 30. Three days after federal agents killed Alex Pretti at a Minneapolis protest, three weeks after an ICE agent put three rounds into Renée Good’s car and killed her, a U.S. citizen, in the middle of the largest immigration sweep we’d ever run. You could not script a higher-outrage week to take the country’s temperature. Quoting that number today with no mention of the bodies it was measured next to is like running a hurricane-week poll on FEMA and calling it the national mood.

Now the part that keeps me honest, and it cuts both ways. The administration did course-correct after Minneapolis. Bovino got pulled. The surge ended in February. Trump allowed they could use “a softer touch.” Noem is gone. So the worst of what people were reacting to got dialed back, and I haven’t found a clean ICE poll since to tell us where the number sits now that the dust has settled. But the drift wasn’t only a Minnesota thing either. Gallup had Americans warming to immigration well before the surge ever started, a record 79% calling it good for the country and Republican demand to cut it falling from 88% to 48% by the summer of 2025. So the right can’t write the whole thing off as one bad week of footage, and the left can’t pass a number taken next to two fresh killings off as the resting pulse. The honest version is that anybody waving “two-thirds” around today doesn’t actually know if it still holds.

And here’s the question none of these polls bother to ask, because the answer would muddy the headline. Immigration is the issue Trump has won on, more than once. Plenty of people can look at Minneapolis, decide the enforcement went too far, and still not want what’s on the other menu, which right now is a Democratic Party drifting toward the DSA’s “abolish ICE.” “Too far” is a verdict on how it was done. It is not a vote for open borders, and it is not nostalgia for catch-and-release. You can be sick over three rounds fired into Renée Good’s car and still want the border enforced. Most people live right there. But “do you want it done, just not like that?” is the question Marist never put on the card, because a clean 65% reads better than an honest split.

So watch the actual text of the asylum opinion, not the cable summary of it. Watch whether Congress lifts a finger to settle TPS now that the Court tossed it back in their lap (they won’t). And watch whether a single outlet citing “two-thirds” ever tells you it was taken the week of the Minneapolis killings, or shows you the 93-to-27 party split underneath, or just runs the topline that hides both.

The justices didn’t write a death warrant. They read a statute Congress was too cowardly to fix. The mess was always yours, Congress. The Court just stopped covering for you.

The Iran “ceasefire” is a shooting war again. Two months after the signed MOU, Iran allegedly hit the Singapore-flagged Ever Lovely and then the M/T Kiku with drones in the Strait of Hormuz. Trump called the strike “foolish” and blamed Tehran, and U.S. forces ran two straight nights of retaliatory strikes (June 26–27) on Iranian missile, drone, radar, and minelayer sites. Iran’s IRGC then fired ballistic missiles and drones at the U.S. Ali Al Salem base in Kuwait and the Fifth Fleet headquarters in Bahrain, and Qatar reported a citizen killed by shrapnel.

Amanda Talks

Hormuz Fighting Pauses, Iraq Purges Pro-Iranian Officials, and Venezuela's Earthquake Death Toll Climbs

📰 THIS WEEK’S BIG STORY: The US and Iran traded strikes around the Strait of Hormuz before agreeing to stand down and resume talks in Doha Tuesday. While the West argues over whether the Iran MOU is a “capitulation,” two pro-Iranian outposts got gutted in the same 72 hours — Iraq arrested 47 pro-Iranian officials, and Israel and Lebanon signed a framew…

Read more

a month ago · Amanda Peterson

At least 1,450 are dead in Venezuela after twin earthquakes. A 7.2 and a 7.5 hit the coast seconds apart on June 27, flattening buildings in Caracas and the La Guaira region, with more than 1,450 killed, around 3,150 injured, and tens of thousands unaccounted for as rescue crews dig through rubble. Washington moved $150 million in relief, including two urban search-and-rescue teams. ABC News

Trump named a new pick to run ICE. The President nominated Lance Schroyer, a former Oklahoma state trooper, to direct Immigration and Customs Enforcement, filling the seat left by Todd Lyons, who resigned at the end of May. The nomination lands in the middle of the detention-surge fight and the “gone too far” polling covered above. NPR

Birthright citizenship is sitting at the Supreme Court, due any morning. The justices are expected to rule this week, possibly June 30, in Trump v. Barbara, on the executive order denying birthright citizenship to children unless a parent is a citizen or lawful permanent resident. Even conservative justices sounded skeptical of the administration at argument, and Trump himself said he isn’t optimistic. SCOTUSblog

AOC told her own colleagues to watch their backs. In the wake of the DSA primary sweep, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez issued a public warning to fellow Democratic incumbents: the energy that took out Espaillat and Goldman is coming for the comfortable, and complacency is a death sentence. Yahoo News

That’s The Read.

If The Read is doing the cross-check work for you, send it to a friend who’s still chasing the framing instead of the facts.