Monday Reads: Still No News Fit to Print

“Trump’s imaginary negotiations with Iran are going well…. for some.” John Buss, @repeat 1968

Good Day, Sky Dancers!

Today’s headlines about the series of ongoing crises created by Orange Caligula and his Cabinet of Imbeciles continue. It’s hard to miss the chaos surrounding the Iran War. This headline from The Bulwark says it all. “Trump’s Not Paying Attention to His Own War. But then again, do we want him to be?” There’s a good explanation for that, too.

As the Iran crisis spirals back out of control, it’s a big day for the president of the United States: His official schedule suggests he will have “Executive Time” all morning until 1:30 p.m., followed by a ninety-minute policy meeting and a closed-press session to sign executive orders. Heavy is the head.

Of course, these leaves Pete Hegseth pretty much on his own. That’s not a good thing either. This is from The New Republic today.  “Does the SEC Care Whether Hegseth Is Killing Iranians To Get Rich? Senator Elizabeth Warren has requested an insider-trading probe of the defense secretary.” Timothy Noah has the lede.

Last month, I considered whether Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth used what he knew about the imminence of the Iran war to expand his stock portfolio with a little blood money (“Is Pete Hegseth Killing Iranians To Get Rich?”). That was the thrust of a shocking Financial Times report, based on three anonymous sources, that said Hegseth’s Morgan Stanley broker approached BlackRock in February about making a “multimillion-dollar investment in the asset manager’s Defense Industrials Active ETF.” An ETF, or exchange-traded fund, is a financial instrument comprised of multiple stocks and/or bonds that are bundled together and sold as a single stock.

According to the FT, Hegseth’s broker’s request was flagged internally at BlackRock, presumably because it so obviously threatened to trigger an insider-trading investigation. (I’m guessing the FT’s three sources all worked at BlackRock.) Ultimately, BlackRock denied the request on the technicality that its Defense Industrials Active ETF was not yet available to Morgan Stanley clients. Whether Hegseth found some other way to profit from the Iran war remains an open question. (A Pentagon spokesperson called the FT report “entirely false and fabricated” and denied that Hegseth or any Hegseth representative approached BlackRock.)

This is a matter that demands immediate investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission, and this morning Senator Elizabeth Warren, Democrat of Massachusetts, sent SEC chair Paul Atkins a letter requesting him to do just that.

It says a lot about our current scandal-rich environment that the FT story hasn’t dominated the news these past three weeks. But congressional Democrats certainly didn’t forget it. The day after the story broke, the House Committee on Government and Oversight Reform’s ranking member, Representative Robert Garcia of California, and the ranking member of its Subcommittee on Military and Foreign Affairs, Representative Suhas Subramanyam of Virginia, sent Hegseth a letter instructing him to preserve “all documents, records, and communications” on his financial transactions back to November 1, 2024. Regrettably, no investigation by their committee is likely, because its chair, James Comer of Kentucky, is perhaps the most shamelessly partisan hack in the entire Republican House majority. As I write, Comer is trying to justify Pam Bondi’s evading a committee subpoena in its Jeffrey Epstein investigation despite the fact he previously voted to hold the Clintons in contempt for defying committee subpoenas in the same investigation.

Two days after the FT story broke, Warren and three other Democratic members of the Senate Armed Services Committee pointed out, in a letter to Hegseth, that even in peacetime Hegseth would be prohibited by federal law “from owning any stock in Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics, Huntington Ingalls, Boeing, RTX Corporation, and L3Harris Technologies.” Stakes in all of these companies were bundled into the ETF his broker reportedly tried to buy. It would be illegal for Hegseth to buy a Defense Industrials Active ETF because—duh—these are defense companies, and Hegseth is the Secretary of Defense.

He just is naturally stupid as well as drunk stupid.  I think we all should now that now. NPR’s Liz Landers has this headline today. “Trump tells PBS News that ‘lots of bombs start going off’ if Iran ceasefire expires.”

President Donald Trump told PBS News on Monday morning that if the ceasefire with Iran expires Tuesday, “then lots of bombs start going off.”

The statement came during a phone call with White House correspondent Liz Landers focused on the Iran war, as a U.S. delegation is preparing for more peace talks.

Here are highlights from the call.

PBS News: What happens if the ceasefire expires tomorrow evening?

Trump: Then lots of bombs start going off.

Is Iran still participating in the talks that will be happening in Islamabad? Will they still be there?

I don’t know. I mean, they’re supposed to be there. We agreed to be there, although they say we didn’t. But no, it was set up. And we’ll see whether or not it’s there. If they’re not there, that’s fine too.

What do you want from the negotiating team in Islamabad?

No nuclear weapons. Very simple. Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. Very simple.

[Jared] Kushner has a lot of business and financial interests in the Middle East region, from Saudi Arabia and other countries. Is it appropriate for him to be negotiating there, do you think?

Well, he was there before, long time before, and he’s purely negotiating for the fact that they’re not going to have a nuclear weapon. Whether you have business or not, everybody knows that’s the right thing. He’s a very good negotiator …

So you see no …

No, I mean, we’re not negotiating anything other than the fact that they will not have a nuclear weapon. And that’s pretty basic when you get right down to it. So you know, that’s it. I sent an A-team. I sent my A-Team, he’s done an excellent job. He doesn’t participate with Saudi now, as you know. He’s taken… He doesn’t do that. He has a business but he doesn’t participate now.

Today’s Trump Toady meltdown goes to Kash Patel.  This report at Politico is by Cheyanne M. Daniels. “Kash Patel files defamation lawsuit against The Atlantic. Patel is seeking $250 million in damages for an article that alleges he has a drinking problem.” The photos that accompany these articles are pretty damning so I can’t figure out what he thinks he’s doing with lawsuit other than follow his leader’s examples of frivolous losing lawsuits. “Kash Patel files defamation lawsuit against The Atlantic. Patel is seeking $250 million in damages for an article that alleges he has a drinking problem.”

Kash Patel has filed a defamation lawsuit against The Atlantic, accusing the magazine and its reporter Sarah Fitzpatrick of defamation over an article that alleged the FBI director has a drinking problem.

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Monday, refers to an article published April 17 that claims Patel has a habit of “excessive drinking and unexplained absences,” among other recurring behavioral patterns.

The suit argues that Fitzpatrick’s reporting is part of an ongoing pattern from The Atlantic to “damage Director Patel’s reputation and force him from office.”

The Atlantic on Monday defended its reporting.

“We stand by our reporting on Kash Patel, and we will vigorously defend The Atlantic and our journalists against this meritless lawsuit,” The Atlantic said.

The article, citing about two dozen anonymous sources, details Patel’s alleged “conspicuous inebriation and unexplained absences;” claims the director is often “away or unreachable, delaying time-sensitive decisions needed to advance investigations;” and that Patel is “deeply concerned that his job is in jeopardy.”

POLITICO has not independently corroborated The Atlantic’s reporting.

Patel’s lawsuit states that the unnamed sources had “obvious axes to grind,” and highlights that the White House, Department of Justice and Patel himself all denied the allegations in the article. It also alleges that a pre-publication letter sent to The Atlantic went “ignored.”

This headline in The Nation by Jeet Heer gave me the giggles. “We Could Do Worse Than Kash Patel Being a Drunken Buffoon. If the FBI director’s alleged intoxication prevents him from carrying out Trump’s agenda, that might not be such a bad thing.

Normally, SWAT teams rely on specialized “breaching equipment” to break down the doors in an emergency where criminals are hunkered down in a heavily fortified bunker. But last year, FBI agents reportedly almost used breaching equipment not to capture a dangerous lawbreaker but to try to wake up their boss, Kash Patel.

On Friday, Sarah Fitzpatrick, writing in The Atlantic, reported that the FBI director has frequently been so incapacitated by heavy drinking that he has been unable to do his job. According to Fitzpatrick, “On multiple occasions in the past year, members of his security detail had difficulty waking Patel because he was seemingly intoxicated…. A request for ‘breaching equipment’…was made last year because Patel had been unreachable behind locked doors.”

Fitzpatrick’s article, which is based on interviews with numerous government officials who were granted anonymity, paints a detailed and troubling portrait of a senior public official prone to “conspicuous inebriation and unexplained absences.” Fitzpatrick notes,

Several officials told me that Patel’s drinking has been a recurring source of concern across the government. They said that he is known to drink to the point of obvious intoxication, in many cases at the private club Ned’s in Washington, D.C., while in the presence of White House and other administration staff. He is also known to drink to excess at the Poodle Room, in Las Vegas, where he frequently spends parts of his weekends. Early in his tenure, meetings and briefings had to be rescheduled for later in the day as a result of his alcohol-fueled nights, six current and former officials and others familiar with Patel’s schedule told me.

Both the White House and Patel have disputed the entirety of Fitzpatrick’s reporting, and on Monday morning, Patel filed a $250 million defamation lawsuit against The Atlantic over her piece. But even before the Atlantic story, there was already ample public evidence that Patel is wildly unfit for the job. He has repeatedly damaged high-profile cases, such as the Charlie Kirk murder investigation, by making premature and false statements in an attempt to hog the media spotlight. He has also been accused of using a FBI jet for private business, including meetings with his girlfriend.

There is no question that Patel is a buffoon. The only factual uncertainty is whether he is an often-soused buffoon or a largely sober one.

“As we await further escalation of Trump’s forever war, one of the members of his Liquor Cabinet hits the news circuit to defend his beseeched honorable service to our nation.” John Buss, @repeat1968

I leave this post on a hopeful note. This is from the New York Times‘ Nate Cohen. “Why a Democratic Senate, Once Unthinkable, Is a Real Possibility. Helped by a favorable national environment and strong candidate recruitment, Democrats are tied or ahead in four Republican-held seats, polls show.”  It’s all in the numbers

At the start of the 2026 election cycle, the Senate looked far out of reach for the Democrats. The House always seemed competitive, but retaking the Senate would require flipping at least four Republican-held seats — including at least two seats in states that President Trump won by double digits in 2024. In today’s polarized era, Democrats would need everything to break their way.

So far, everything is breaking the Democrats’ way. With Mr. Trump’s approval rating falling and inflation rising, along with the uncertainty of a war in the Middle East, it’s not hard to imagine a Democratic tsunami in November. A blue wave is not guaranteed, of course, and Democrats would not be assured to flip two reliably Republican states even if it were. But a feasible path for the party to win the Senate is coming into focus.

In recent polls, Democrats appear tied or ahead in four Republican-controlled seats — the number they would need to take the Senate. These include Maine and North Carolina, where the likely Democratic nominees hold clear leads, as well as Ohio and Alaska, where Democrats have recruited strong candidates in states Mr. Trump won by double digits in 2024. There are also signs that Republicans could be in danger in two more states where Mr. Trump won by double digits: Iowa and Texas.

Over the last few weeks, the betting markets have shifted to make the Senate a tossup, though some analysts haven’t gone quite so far. Whether the Senate is a tossup or not, it’s clearly competitive — and that’s something that might have been hard to imagine a year ago.

In the Trump era, Democratic Senate candidates haven’t had much success at winning in red states. They failed to flip vigorously contested seats in Texas, Tennessee and Montana in 2018 and 2020. And most Democratic red-state incumbents — including those in Florida, Indiana, North Dakota and Missouri — lost re-election. Today, every Democrat in the Senate represents a state that voted for Joe Biden in 2020.

Looking even further back, no party has managed to flip two states that leaned so much toward the other party since 2008. Only one such seat (Illinois in 2010) was flipped in a regularly scheduled election; two more flipped in memorable special elections (Massachusetts 2010 and Alabama 2017). Most of these victories took extraordinary circumstances, like a criminal conviction, a child molestation allegation or a bank seizure.

This time, Democrats aren’t benefiting from anything as unusual as a criminal conviction.

Instead, they’re counting on a favorable national political environment, strong candidates and the possibility that several of these states may not be quite as Republican-leaning as they seem.

Read more on all of these items on the links. My top suggestion is the Heer article on Hegseth. It would be nice to get an actual hearing on that during the midterms, especially combined with high gas prices.

What’s on your Reading, Action, and Blogging list today?

I’m adding this and basically speechless. WTF does this mean? Bibi is running our country now?

Screenshot