Yes, it’s possible that Trump’s Summit Distraction will help him get past the media’s Epstein scandal reports. But no one should be deluded that it is not a deliberate attempt at distraction. According to Corbin Bolies’s article, “Trump Is Plotting This Desperate Move to Distract From Epstein” at The Daily Beast: “President Donald Trump is desperately seeking a “big thing” to distract from Jeffrey Epstein—and is willing to sacrifice Ukraine to achieve it, his biographer Michael Wolff has revealed…In the debut episode of the new Daily Beast podcast, Inside Trump’s Head, the best-selling author told co-host Joanna Coles that the president is making “relentless” calls to aides and allies to demand something to get past the unending questions over his links to the dead pedophile and his surviving lover-turned-sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell…Wolff disclosed, not only have successive plans failed or fallen flat, but Trump is now willing to give up Ukraine to Vladimir Putin when they meet in Alaska on Friday to achieve the distraction he needs…The firestorm began last month when the Department of Justice quietly announced at a weekend that there was nothing more to say about Epstein—despite Attorney General Pam Bondi claiming in February that the files were on her desk, and the White House handing MAGA influencers folders of “Epstein Files,” promising more to come. In the backlash, conservatives accused Trump and Bondi of a cover-up, prompting the most dramatic break between the president and his base to date…Wolff told Coles, “Let me go back about a week or so, or 10 days, when Trump started to say to everyone who would listen—and everyone listens to Donald Trump—to staffers and on the phone calls, the relentless phone calls that he’s constantly making, he said, ‘I need a big thing. I need a big thing.’…Wolff explained that Trump would likely pull the U.S. out of any involvement in the Russia-Ukraine conflict—something which would please, in his judgment, the MAGA base, which has been opposed to U.S. involvement and particularly to Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky…“He’s going to sacrifice Ukraine for Epstein,” Wolff said. “Essentially, this is, in his mind, a trade…Wolff’s tape of one of his interviews with Epstein—who asked the author to be his biographer—was first revealed by the Daily Beast in November and featured the pedophile financier describing himself as Trump’s “closest friend” and detailing their long relationship.”
What if Trump’s summit initiatives somehow help bring about peace in Ukraine? In that unlikely event, would Democrats lose some traction in their quest to win seats in the coming midterm election next year, or the presidential election in ’28? Of course, Democrats should avoid making ‘sour grapes’ comments that could make them look like they are putting political gain before peace. If a Ukraine peace agreement is negotiated during the coming months, Trump will claim exclusive credit for it. But it’s a big stretch from there to argue that Republican midterm candidates will benefit all that much. There is not much evidence that foreign policy achievements translate into votes for one party or another, regardless of domestic politics. There are arguments to the contrary, but not a lot of compelling evidence since WWII. Looking at presidential politics, Democrat Jimmy Carter secured an historic peace agreement between Egypt’s Anwar Sadat and Israel’s Menachem Begin in 1978. That, along with the peace-making leadership of the Carter Center, got him a richly-deserved 2002 Nobel Peace Prize after his presidency. But he nonetheless got badly whipped in his 1980 campaign for re-election. LBJ’s experience with the Vietnam War indicates that foreign policy blunders may affect re-election prospects more than achievements. One could also argue that Carter’s foreign policy achievements during his presidency were negated by the Iran Hostage crisis. But they were also overshadowed by rising inflation. High inflation may actually help the party out of the White House. It remains a significant threat to both Trump and the GOP, and it is not likely to be much overshadowed by a peace treaty in Ukraine. In a close election, however, anything can make the difference between victory and defeat.
“President Donald Trump’s announcement Monday that he will sign an executive order aimed at getting rid of mail-in ballots and voting machines seems unlikely to amount to much,” Aaron Blake writes in “Trump’s remarkable statement against states’ rights” at CNN Politics. He doesn’t appear to have any such authority, and legal challenges would surely follow…But it was instructive in one way: It made clear the president elected to lead the party of states’ rights has very little regard for states’ rights…Indeed, he almost seems to disdain them…It’s difficult to read his comments any other way, especially as he has spent much of his second term attempting to chip away at states’ rights — or at least, the ones he doesn’t like…While selling his new pitch to get rid of mail-in voting and voting machines, Trump included this remarkable pair of sentences…“Remember, the States are merely an ‘agent’ for the Federal Government in counting and tabulating the votes,” the president wrote on Truth Social. “They must do what the Federal Government, as represented by the President of the United States, tells them, FOR THE GOOD OF OUR COUNTRY, to do.”…He often claimed during his first term that the Constitution gave him absolute power. Even when out of office, he floated terminating portions of the Constitution, while repeating his false claims that the 2020 election was rigged. And earlier this year, he posted a quote often attributed to Napoleon Bonaparte suggesting his actions couldn’t be illegal as long as he was acting to “save” the country.”
This meme’s graphic could be better. But the message is excellent:
