2016 presidential campaign and media bias

A prominent political analyst argued on Monday that President Donald Trump’s administration is falling apart because of the one thing he cannot change — his aging body.

“He’s 80!” political analyst David Rothkopf told The Daily Beast’s Joanna Coles on Monday. “He’s had a good life, and he should be at Mar-a-Lago sitting by the pool, having a margarita, talking to his friends about things he used to do.”

He added, “Unfortunately, he is a disturbed, sick lunatic who holds the most powerful job in the world and is at a stage of his existence where, because he’s a narcissist, the only thing he cares about is himself. And if every single one of us ceased to exist, he wouldn’t care, because the world is him.”

In addition to Trump’s advancing age, Rothkopf also pointed to the president’s weight, an issue he raised because obesity can harm one’s physical and mental health. Trump claimed that he is 6’3” and 230 pounds, although as MS NOW commentator Michael Steele recently observed, that would give him roughly the same physique as professional American football players Sam Darnold (6'3" 225 lbs) and DK Metcalf (6'4" 229 lbs).

“When they say he’s 6′3″ and 230 pounds, all you have to do is Google what a 6′3″, 230-pound athlete looks like,” Rothkopf argued. ”Trump does not look like that.”

He also observed that “we know that the assertion that he has bruises on his hands because of handshaking is ludicrous. And we know that Trump’s assertion that he is the only guy who’s had to go through all these cognitive tests and he passed them with flying colors is silly because you don’t get cognitive tests unless the doctor thinks you’ve got a problem with your cognition.”

In terms of Trump’s behavior, Rothkopf described it as “erratic,” saying that the president does “irrational things” and is “ignoring rational advice.”

“Look, you don’t have to be a psychiatrist to know that this guy is behaving in an erratic, irrational way for whatever the organic reason is,” Rothkopf said. “You don’t have to be a doctor to know that this guy is physically unwell.”

In response to Rothkopf’s remarks, the Trump White House told The Daily Beast that “David Rothkopf is a far-left loser who clearly suffers from a severe and debilitating disease known as Trump Derangement Syndrome that has rotted his peanut-sized brain.”

Yet Rothkopf is not alone in expressing concern about Trump’s fitness. Earlier this month psychiatrist Dr. Henry Abraham — who formerly taught psychiatry at Tufts University — told AlterNet that he co-authored a letter to Congress with dozens of other medical professionals for that exact reason.

“It’s a red flag,” Dr. Abraham told AlterNet. “People perseverate because they can’t think of anything else to say, because they’re cognitively impaired, or they perseverate because their emotional motor is stuck in high gear. In the last five to 10 years, he has planted red flags of concern again and again and again, and they’ve clustered.”

He particularly identified what appears to be Trump’s struggle to “internalize certain control over his language,” such as mixing up Iceland and Greenland in a recent speech.

“Not only did he have these kinds of linguistic failings, but he began to exhibit more and more signs of really rage and poor impulse control, and at night, what appeared to be manic kinds of episodes where he would tweet, you know, 100, 200 times a night,” Abraham said.

President Donald Trump has often been accused of starting the Iran war to help Israel — and yet now one of America’s major conservative newspapers is blasting him for not being pro-Israel enough.

“Iran’s regime began Monday by throwing a wrench into negotiations with the U.S., and President Trump spent the rest of the day scrambling to satisfy Iran’s demand,” The Wall Street Journal editorial board wrote on Monday. “The result is a new cease-fire in Lebanon, rescuing Hezbollah for the moment, though the terrorists didn’t abide by the first cease-fire for even a day.”

The Journal proceeded to argue that “Hezbollah began this war with Israel on March 2, firing on soldiers and civilian targets on the orders of its Iranian patrons. The first Lebanon cease-fire was announced April 17 after Iran’s regime had said Israeli retaliation against Hezbollah was preventing the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. Mr. Trump pressured Israel and delivered the cease-fire, but Iran reneged on Hormuz—and its Hezbollah proxy kept firing.”

After adding that Israel refrained from attacking Hezbollah’s Dahiyeh stronghold in Beirut until Monday, after the attacks averaged 125 rockets and 49 drones every day for a week, the Journal described the next events as involving Iran’s state media reporting they had stopped exchanging messages with Trump because of Israel’s retaliation.

“The shamelessness is always striking,” the Journal opined. “Iran has repeatedly violated its April 7 cease-fire with the U.S. by firing drones and missiles at commercial vessels, U.S. forces and Gulf states. In recent days it has downed a U.S. drone over international waters and fired ballistic missiles at U.S. forces in Kuwait. Through it all, Mr. Trump has limited the U.S. responses to self-defense and insisted the cease-fire still obtains.”

Yet instead of recognizing these facts, the Journal concluded, Trump had blamed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and pressured him into agreeing to a ceasefire against Lebanon.

“Lebanon and Israel suggested the deal is only partial,” the Journal continued. “As long as Hezbollah doesn’t attack Israeli territory, Israel won’t attack the terrorists in Dahiyeh, Mr. Netanyahu said. This is a recipe for managing the conflict, limiting it to southern Lebanon, where both sides expect to continue the fight.”

While this status quo is currently adequate for Israel, since they won the high ground in Lebanon and need time to protect themselves against fiber-optic drones, the Journal declared that “Hezbollah’s capital again has been spared the consequences of the group’s own actions. Iran is winning its proxy a refuge. Anytime it wants, Iran could tell Hezbollah to stop shooting and end the war, which Israel has no desire to wage. Instead it encouraged Hezbollah’s fire, so it could cut off U.S. talks when Israel inevitably responded in force.”

Expanding the critique beyond Israel’s war against Lebanon, the Journal expressed concern that Trump may take the same approach in his war against Iran.

“If it fires on U.S. forces in the Strait or Gulf, will he still try to salvage the cease-fire?” the Journal asked. “How about stepped-up attacks on Israel? How about claiming to quit negotiations? In each case, Mr. Trump has chosen to avoid escalation and keep talking. If he won’t send a different message, it will be difficult to get the regime to comply with a deal, no matter what it promises now.”

Despite being criticized for his recent policy toward Israel, Trump has actually been accused by some elements in his party of being too pro-Israel. Indeed, both the Democratic and Republican parties have seen a massive surge in anti-Israel sentiment since the Oct. 7th terrorist attacks. When it comes to Trump’s Republican base, this includes far right voters who are motivated by opposition to Israel’s alleged human rights violations, a desire to limit foreign spending in general, a belief in anti-Semitic conspiracy theories about Jewish control of government and the anti-Semitic opinion that all Jews and/or Israelis should be blamed for the Israeli government’s actions.

Speaking with AlterNet in March about the issue of American anti-Semitism, Brandeis University historian Jonathan Sarna argued that one can criticize Israeli government policy without being anti-Semitic. He added that it can easily become anti-Semitic, however.

“If you go back to ‘The Protocols of the Elders of Zion’ — the great antisemitic forgery of the turn of the last century — that really began this sense that Jews are all-powerful, that they operate behind the scenes, and that whatever happens is ultimately their fault,” Sarna told AlterNet. “Before then, for centuries, the prevailing view was that Jews were persecuted and lowly because they had killed Christ, and that was what they deserved — they were powerless. That was their punishment. But ‘The Protocols’ flipped that.”

Sarna continued that “especially as Jews in modernity have begun to succeed economically, it doesn't much matter what the issue is — whether it is 9/11, which some blame on the Jews, or the crash of 2008, or now the war with Iran. You can predict before it happens that people will blame Jews, because as The Protocols taught people, it's always the Jews. It's the great conspiracy theory. And even many people who have never read The Protocols believe many of the things in it — just as many people have never read Darwin, but they know the word ‘evolution.’ This is simply the latest iteration.”

He concluded that “I can be critical of President Trump without being un-American. Most people who criticize President Trump or the Republicans would assure you how much they love America and hold a fundamentally positive view of it. It seems to me that it's deeply important for us to do the same with Israel — that is, to make clear that there is a huge difference between disliking the policies of the Prime Minister of Israel and hating Israel itself. If you wouldn't equate criticism of the President with hating America, there is no reason — and indeed it is wrong and wicked — to do so with regard to Israel.”

President Donald Trump recently announced that he is pausing his pursuing of a $1.8 billion slush fund for supporters who claim to have been attacked by the government — and yet many in his own party do not believe him.

That is the attitude in Washington amidst the news of his pause, reported MS NOW Jack Fitzpatrick and Mychael Schnell on Monday. Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., told MS NOW that ““They have to follow the law. ‘We all have to follow the law. That’s why God made jails. Yeah, if you don’t follow the law, you go to jail. It doesn’t tell me much.”

Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, similarly told reporters that “the only thing that’s going to solve this problem to get immigration funded and law enforced is for the president to do away with the weaponization fund.”

Meanwhile Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, asked if the Justice Department plan following the roughly two-week order is to then abandon the fund altogether. Similarly Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., told reporters that “I need to be convinced” that the fund is really gone altogether.

The Senate Majority Leader, John Thune, R-S.D., also said that “I’m sure the Democrats are going to give us an opportunity to vote on lots of different amendment ideas, but I think if the administration effectively shuts it down, and makes that very, very clear, then that to me should answer the question.” He left open the possibility of votes this week on the reconciliation bill.

“For five minutes,” Sen. Patty Murray scoffed when asked about her level of belief to Trump saying he has dropped the fund. “I don’t believe that.”

Trump reportedly decided to pause his planned $1.8 billion slush fund after significant pushback from both Republicans and Democrats.

"The Trump administration plans to drop its controversial $1.8 billion 'weaponization' fund the president sought to compensate alleged victims of prosecutorial conduct under his predecessor," Axios' Marc Caputo reported on Monday. He added that one source told him, "It's dead for now." The $1.8 billion slush fund was created by Trump as a rushed settlement to his $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS after an independent contractor leaked his tax returns during his first term. Because Trump was suing an agency he controls (the IRS) and controlled the agency intended to defend the one he was suing (the Department of Justice), critics argued that there was a clear conflict of interest in the settlement. Even more controversial was the apparent likelihood that much of the money would go to Jan. 6th insurrectionists. Finally, when presiding Judge Kathleen M. Williams ordered the parties involved to appear before her court by May 20th to make sure the lawsuit was legal, they rushed to a conclusion before her deadline.

When President Donald Trump or his supporters begin denouncing a product as “woke,” it can devastate the company that creates it — and now a conservative believe that accusation is being weaponized against a corporation that has not even done anything progressive.

“The conservative influencers have spoken: Harley-Davidson—whose motorcycles helped create the paradigm of American masculinity—is in fact woke and gay,” wrote The Bulwark’s Will Sommer on Monday. Observing the numerous MAGA personalities and meme accounts denouncing the company, including actor Kevin Sorbo and meme account Prison Mitch, Sommer observed that “this campaign against the motorcycle giant stands out for the fact that Harley-Davidson doesn’t appear to have done anything terribly ‘woke.’”

Indeed, instead of including any corroborated details to buttress the accusation leveled against Harley-Davidson, Sommer speculated that the personalities are promoting a different brand, Indian Motorcycle. To illustrate his point, he noted that many of the same accounts blasting Harley-Davidson are also pushing Indian Motorcycle.

“Further raising questions about the authenticity of the MAGA influencerverse’s newfound affection for Indian Motorcycle is their striking knowledge of its corporate talking points,” Sommer added. “Many of the posts attacking Harley-Davidson remember to mention that Indian’s 125th anniversary is coming up, and awkwardly shoehorn the date into the upcoming celebrations of America’s 250th birthday.”

The irony here is that Harley-Davidson motorcycles are an American-manufactured product, one often touted by conservative figures who wish to boost their American-made and supposedly masculine bona fides.

“The apparent campaign to trash Harley-Davidson is extra awkward in part because many conservative politicians enjoy their Harleys,” Sommer wrote. “Among prominent Republicans, Rep. Derrick Van Orden (R-Wis.) drives his Harley around Washington. (It even has a sidecar.) Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) rides, as does former Wisconsin governor Scott Walker, whose state is home to Harley-Davidson’s headquarters.”

Sommer continued, “President Trump himself has had an up-and-down relationship with the company, praising it as an American icon early in his first term before angrily tweeting about its decision to move some production overseas in 2018. He went on to support a boycott of the company before running to its defense amid trade strife with Europe in 2019.”

Even though the Trump administration and its supporters claim that America is being taken over by “wokeness,” in fact the administration has rolled back many of the policies that increased diversity in American life. Per Project 2025, the administration has purged ideas and studies that they are described as “woke,” particularly those that study racism, sexism and other forms of bigotry. Similarly, the Supreme Court has supported Trump in his 6-3 decision to reinstate a federal district court decision guaranteeing parents the right to know if their child identified as transgender or wishes to transition, as well as not allowing school districts to prohibit parents from opting their kids out of LGBTQ storybooks.

An esteemed historian and foreign policy scholar argued that President Donald Trump’s Secretary of Defense is trying to walk back his boss’ geopolitical mistakes — but it’s too little, too late.

“Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth stunned U.S. adversaries and allies at this year’s Shangri-La Dialogue of defense officials in Singapore,” The Wall Street Journal’s Walter Russell Mead wrote on Monday. “He did it in the most unexpected way: by delivering a thoughtful and sensible speech on the future of American defense policy in Asia.”

After praising Hegseth for giving “coherent and well-informed answers to questioners from large and small powers across the region,” he added that Trump’s hostile rhetoric toward Asian countries has undermined the effectiveness of Hegeth’s message. Even as the Defense Secretary urged a balance of powers and increased military spending in part to promote stability in the region.

“Conceptually at least, this approach is significantly more useful than Joe Biden’s emphasis on human rights and democracy promotion,” Mead argued. “The Trump administration’s approach to the region has its problems, some severe, but an approach incorporating moralistic posturing at the expense of important allies, aggressive rhetoric toward Beijing, and a steadfast refusal to match China’s steady military buildup was unlikely to end well.”

Yet despite these efforts to shore up the administration’s popularity in Asia, Mead pointed out that Hegseth has not addressed a serious problem.

“Many Asian allies were left wondering how far Washington will back Mr. Hegseth’s soothing words with serious deeds,” Mead wrote. “How does the secretary reconcile the value of speaking softly with his boss’s social-media presence? Does introducing uncertainty into American arms sales to Taiwan increase stability in the region? How does a mercurial trade policy contribute to the stable prosperity the Trump administration ostensibly seeks? Is America under Mr. Trump’s leadership the farseeing custodian of the international balance of power or the bull in the china shop of a precarious world order?”

He added, “Mr. Hegseth’s speech was silent on the subject on most of his audience’s minds: the U.S.-Iran war, which has closed the Strait of Hormuz to the sea traffic on which most of the region’s economies depend. Fuel and fertilizer price hikes are creating political and economic stress across the region. Remittances from Gulf-based workers in countries ranging from the Philippines to Pakistan provide vital support to families and economies. Asian views of the Trump administration will be shaped far more by the outcome of the conflict in the Gulf than by anything Mr. Hegseth or any other American official says in forums.”

Mead’s position is a contrast to that taken last month by the conservative commentator Will Saletan from The Bulwark. Saletan argued that Hegseth is literally the “dumbest person in the Trump administration.”

“Who do you think is the dumbest person in the Trump administration?” Saletan said. "Now, I know it's a tough contest, but I think the answer might be Pete Hegseth. I want to show you just how petty and incompetent and stupid this guy is.” As one example, he noted that Hegseth seems more focused on fighting domestic political wars than on the Iran war, even failing to name either the current or former head of Iran half an hour into his briefing on the war.

“American troops are out there fighting the enemy, but Pete Hegseth is back here fighting a domestic political war,” Saletan wrote, describing the Iran war as having “delivered twice the air power of shock and awe of Iraq in 2003, minus Paul Bremer and the nation building.”

He added, “Okay, we are in a war, we're literally in a war, and this guy is trying to have a size contest with the last Republican administration.”

Vivek Ramaswamy, the 2026 Republican candidate for governor in Ohio, is facing heavy criticism after a clip resurfaced on Monday of him making a racist comment to explain his opposition to abortion.

“A Black baby is probably safer…in the inner city of Chicago, than in the womb of his own Black mother,” Ramaswamy said in a clip shared by the Democratic National Committee, the Democratic Governors Association and the group Headquarters. The story was first reported by theGrio.

In the clip Ramaswamy added, “And I think that that’s actually a problem, and it’s directly the product of what Margaret Sanger envisioned years ago when setting Planned Parenthood into motion.”

Ramaswamy made these remarks during a 2023 podcast with commentator Adam Coleman. In that conversation, Ramaswamy echoed the unfounded right-wing conspiracy theory which holds Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger created the reproductive rights organization to reduce Black population growth.

“She was handing out birth control pamphlets to women, because she was tired of women dying in childbirth, and when she started doing that work in Lower Manhattan, there were Black leaders in Harlem who were like, ‘Well, wait a minute, Black women up here also need access to care, including contraception,'” Alencia Johnson, a Democratic strategist who worked at Planned Parenthood, told theGrio’s Gerren Keith Gaynor. “The Harlem clinic that the Right likes to weaponize against Planned Parenthood was actually started in partnership with the National Urban League. So, the formation of Planned Parenthood has actually been in partnership with a lot of Black leaders.”

Ramaswamy has himself faced racism, with Salon’s Sophia Tesfaye writing in October that he had been targeted by Trump supporters because of his Indian heritage.

"MAGA-aligned Vivek Ramaswamy, the Republican candidate for governor in Ohio, faced similar attacks from the right," Tesfaye wrote. "On Monday, disparaging comments targeting Ramaswamy resurfaced from Paul Ingrassia, Trump's controversial nominee to lead the White House Office of the Special Counsel, who said in January 2024, 'Never trust a chinaman or Indian. NEVER.' After Ingrassia's comments were revealed, at least four Republican senators, including Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota, yanked their support for the nominee, whose confirmation hearing was scheduled for Thursday. Ingrassia withdrew his nomination late Tuesday."

Tesfaye continued, "Ingrassia's messages were part of thousands of leaked texts from over 350 Young Republican operatives in a Telegram group chat that was exposed by Politico, revealing a culture steeped in racist, antisemitic and misogynistic language."

Tesfaye also added that the Young Republicans caught on Telegram making racist comments like those directed against Ramaswamy "weren't anonymous trolls," but instead "held official roles in campaigns, government offices and influential conservative organizations."

She concluded, "Republicans like to pretend that so-called woke liberals are the real racists, but this rhetoric and behavior undermines that notion…. For Indian-Americans in the MAGA movement, even their conservative identity will not shield them."

The brewing battle to succeed President Donald Trump in the White House is shaping up to be anything but simple, and according to a new breakdown from The i Paper, Trump himself is meddling in the process because it makes for "good television."

Vice President JD Vance has long been considered the default favorite for the 2028 GOP presidential nomination, but a number of factors, including his own historic unpopularity, are complicating the easy trajectory. As columnist and reporter James Ball noted in a Monday piece for The i Paper, "cracks" are starting to show in the already "weird" relationship between Trump and Vance, just as party strategists are getting ready to put the search for the 2028 nominee into high gear. While the vice president "clearly wants to be that man," Trump "is hardly trying to make that easier."

"He is fond of 'joking,' in a way where no one is quite sure if he is serious, that he would like to stand for a third term, even though the Constitution bars it," Ball wrote. He is also fond of making belittling comments about Vance. Asked, shortly after picking Vance as his running mate in 2024, whether he would be ready 'on day one,' Trump instead answered that the choice of VP 'makes no difference' in the election. 'You’re voting for the president,' he answered. Hardly a ringing endorsement."

He added later: "Behind closed doors, Trump reportedly expresses doubts over Vance’s suitability as his heir even more clearly. Vance has hardly always been on the Trump train, of course – famously, he once likened Trump to Adolf Hitler, before changing course after realising his own political future relied on siding with the President."

Trump later added that there are "a lot of capable people" who could be president after him, which Ball chalked up to his fondness for "belittling his subordinates and playing them off against each other."

Ultimately, Ball wrote, Trump is a "reality television president," and he is motivated primarily by what sorts of narratives and decisions would pull good ratings. While the easiest path would be to set Vance up as his successor, given that he is "surrounded by people who are trying to use the President to further their political agendas" or careers, he cannot help but make them battle for the position — a battle that makes for "good television."

"He knows that the battle to succeed him is box office," Ball wrote. "He knows that playing favourites off against each other is good television. He loves a spectacle, and he loves people fighting for his approval. Vance was never going to get the President to change that. If Vance wants the Trump endorsement, he’s going to have to work for it – and he should prepare himself for a long, long battle."

President Donald Trump's long-running obsession with annexing Greenland is not about to get any closer to reality, per Politico, as the Danish leader who consistently snubbed his demands has retained power going forward.

On Monday, Politico reported that Mette Frederiksen will remain prime minister of Denmark for the foreseeable future. This came after "drawn-out negotiations lasting more than two months" for the creation of a new government, culminating in the creation of "center-left coalition government."

"The four-party coalition is expected to bring together Frederiksen’s Social Democrats, the Moderates, Green Left and the Social Liberals, according to the DR public broadcaster," Politico detailed. "The incoming PM met King Frederik X Monday evening to inform him."

“I think everyone will be surprised by how much we want to do. It is a government platform that is good both for the people in Denmark, for the generations to come, and for animals,” Frederiksen said in a statement.

Greenland is an autonomous territory belonging to Denmark, and throughout Trump's pressure campaign to take control of the massive Arctic island, Frederiksen and her government have been staunch in their opposition. The prime minister has repeatedly asserted that Greenland is not for sale under any circumstances, with the government forming a task force to monitor mentions of the territory in the U.S. and bulking up security forces on it.

Trump renewed his efforts to try and take Greenland upon his return to the White House, asserting that his first-term musings about the idea were entirely serious. Reports from earlier this year suggested that his obsession with the territory might be largely to do with how big it tends to look on maps, an issue skewed by the Mercator Projection. As he pressed harder on the idea, he came close to setting off a major international incident when he refused to rule out using military force to seize Greenland, a nearly unthinkable idea for many experts, given that Denmark is a longtime member of NATO.

Speaking about Trump's threats, Frederiksen herself warned that an invasion of Greenland by the U.S. would effectively mark the end of NATO and the entire post-WWII global order.

"One should take the American president seriously when he says that he wants Greenland," Fredriksen said in a January interview with Danish broadcaster TV2. "If the US chooses to attack another NATO country militarily, then everything stops, including NATO and thus the security that has been established since the end of the Second World War."

The Department of Defense is facing sharp criticism over its latest policy that bans reporters from the Pentagon press office, which it has now designated as a classified space.

“The change creates a new barrier compared with previous administrations, under which the office was an open room where reporters could stop by the desks of military public affairs officials without escorts,” The Washington Post reports.

“The Pentagon Press Office has been redesignated as a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility due to speechwriters from the Office of the Secretary of War sharing the facility,” acting Pentagon press secretary Joel Valdez said in a statement to The Washington Post, the paper reported.

“These speechwriters routinely handle classified material and require SIPRNet access,” Valdez added. “As a result, journalists will no longer be permitted to enter the office space.”

This “latest designation,” the Post also reported, “creates a scenario in which even if journalists are able to access the Pentagon, their ability to interact with the department’s spokespeople will be reduced.”

Critics blasted the move.

“The administration seems very committed to setting itself up to continue losing in court,” wrote legal analyst Joyce Vance, a former U.S. Attorney. Vance appeared to be suggesting the Pentagon would face another court battle over its move to ban reporters.

Rhetoric professor Matthew Boedy simply called the move “Orwellian.”

Some of the most targeted criticism came from journalists themselves.

Kevin Baron, a longtime defense reporter and the founding executive editor of Defense One, explained that the Pentagon press office is a “giant, open-plan office space, that was specifically designed 20+ years ago to facilitate informing the public by locating Department of Defense public affairs officers and media together.”

“Is it really a press office without the press?” asked WFMY editor Jeremy Vernon.

“Banning journalists from the *press office* in the Pentagon, where they worked professionally in previous administrations, is simply a sign that current DOD leadership fears accountability,” charged The New York Times’ Trip Gabriel.

“The leaders of the ‘biggest, most badass military on the planet,’ in Pete Hegseth’s words, want a safe space from basic public questioning,” observed the Washington Post’s Drew Harwell.

“That Pete Hegseth, what a tough guy. He can do push-ups in photo ops but can’t handle questions from real reporters,” wrote Chris Bury, a DePaul University journalist in residence.

“Taking steps to further restrict press access in the Pentagon during the midst of a war strikes me as a bad thing,” noted The Bulwark’s Sam Stein.