The Trump Presidency Is Going Great

On a secretly recorded donor call, Ted Cruz helpfully confirmed what everyone already suspected: when confronted with basic political reality, Donald Trump’s presidential instinct is to scream “fuck you, Ted” and hang up. Cruz says he warned Trump in 2025 that his shiny new round of sweeping tariffs might turn the 2026 midterms into an economic “bloodbath” if 401(k)s tanked and prices kept climbing. In other words, the GOP’s big concern about Trump’s trade policy isn’t that it wrecks people’s lives — it’s that it might wreck their House majority.

Cruz reportedly told Trump that if voters hit election day with retirement accounts down 30% and grocery prices up 10–20%, Republicans would lose the House, lose the Senate, and Trump would spend “the next two years being impeached every single week.” Trump, noted master dealmaker and stable genius, responded by yelling and cursing at multiple GOP senators, because nothing says “serious steward of the economy” like throwing a profanity-laced fit when someone explains how math and inflation work.

The public, rudely failing to appreciate this 4D chess, currently gives Trump a 34% approval rating on the cost of living, with 64% disapproving — a fun number if you’re into watching your own coalition peel away in real time. Meanwhile, Cruz used the same recording to torch Vice-President JD Vance as Tucker Carlson’s puppet, accusing the Vance–Tucker tag team of ousting national security adviser Mike Waltz for wanting to bomb Iran. So the party of law and order now features a president running an economy into the ground with tariffs, a veep allegedly installed by a TV demagogue, and a senator live-commentating the implosion on hidden tape. But sure, tell us more about how this is all going according to plan.

In Minneapolis, 37-year-old U.S. citizen Alex Pretti was shot and killed by federal officers during an immigration enforcement protest, and the Trump administration’s response has been: shoot first, stonewall later. Minnesota Sen. Tina Smith says the feds are flat-out ignoring a court order that lets state investigators access the evidence. State investigators reportedly had to get a warrant just to see the basic facts of a killing in their own city, and even then federal agents still refused to hand anything over—because nothing says "we did nothing wrong" like hiding the evidence from everyone with a badge you don’t control.

DHS Secretary Kristi Noem helpfully announced that her own department will lead the investigation into the killing committed by…her own department. Meanwhile, Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara says he’s gotten zero cooperation or information from DHS. Even Senate Republicans like Thom Tillis and Bill Cassidy are nervously edging away from the crime scene, demanding a “thorough and impartial” joint investigation and warning the White House not to shut out local law enforcement—translation: this looks bad even to people who thought family separation was just tough love.

On TV, Trump’s Border Patrol czar Greg Bovino declared that the armed federal agents are actually "the victims" and insisted Pretti “perpetrated violence” and approached officers with a weapon. The problem: video and eyewitness accounts so far say that’s not what happened, and NPR hasn’t verified any evidence that Pretti ever brandished his handgun. Then Trump-appointed U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli chimed in on X to explain that if you approach law enforcement with a gun, officers are “legally justified” in shooting you—an exciting new doctrine that even the NRA and Rep. Thomas Massie think sounds like a constitutional tire fire. In other words, the same crowd that screams "shall not be infringed" is now watching Trump’s immigration machine argue that merely existing near cops with a firearm is a death sentence. But sure, tell us more about how this is all about law and order.

Donald Trump is running his usual playbook on the Federal Reserve: demand lower interest rates, insult the Fed chair as “stupid” when he doesn’t comply, and then unleash the Department of Justice to open a criminal investigation into Jerome Powell for the high crime of… talking about building renovations. In other words, it’s the same authoritarian power grab as everywhere else in his administration, just with more marble and fewer children in cages.

Trump also fired Fed governor Lisa Cook in August over mortgage-fraud allegations that first appeared on social media, with no investigation, no hearing, and no due process. A lower court called nonsense and temporarily reinstated her, so naturally the White House sprinted to the Supreme Court to ask the six-justice MAGA supermajority to bless Dear Leader’s right to purge independent officials at will. This is all part of the conservative legal movement’s beloved unitary executive fantasy, where the president can fire anyone, anytime, for any reason, and the only check is “elections” – which is very convenient if you’re also busy undermining elections.

The twist: the same court that cheerfully greenlit Trump’s firings at the NLRB and FTC suddenly got very concerned about statutory limits and independence once it was the Fed’s turn. The justices, who have been busy “making war on independent agencies”, are now carving out a special exception for the central bank, because nothing says principled constitutionalism like deciding the law means one thing for labor regulators and another for the people who set interest rates for JPMorgan. Amy Coney Barrett is suddenly fretting over economists’ warnings that firing Cook could trigger a recession, and Brett Kavanaugh is worried that if Trump can purge Fed officials at will, a future Democratic president might do the same to his team. What goes around comes around, and apparently that’s the one thing this Court won’t allow.

So the Court may actually slap Trump’s hand here – not because they’ve discovered a newfound love for checks and balances, but because destabilizing the Fed might tank markets and upset donors. Independent agencies that protect workers or consumers? Totally expendable under the new imperial presidency. But the Fed, the quasi-private temple of global finance? That gets wrapped in constitutional bubble wrap. The message from the Roberts Court is clear: Trump can centralize power and purge watchdogs all he wants, as long as he doesn’t mess with the interest-rate machine that keeps the oligarchy happy. But sure, tell us again about their neutral, principled jurisprudence.

The Trump justice department has discovered an exciting new way to be "tough on crime": stop funding the people who catch criminals. The DOJ has slashed money and training for law enforcement investigating child sex crimes, including canceling the 2025 National Law Enforcement Training on Child Exploitation because nothing says "protect the children" like pulling the plug on the one conference that teaches cops how to track predators using AI and new platforms. Prosecutors now have to beg to justify basic things like training, trial prep, and meeting with victims, and the answer is almost always no—because apparently the "core mission" of the justice department is not prosecuting child predators.

Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) taskforces are losing their annual grants, meetings between DOJ, ICAC commanders, NCMEC, and tech companies have been quietly killed off, and investigators are left to "beg and plead" other sources for money just to afford the software and staff needed to find abused kids. The work is already traumatizing and isolating, but sure, let's also cut off the professional support network that keeps people from burning out. Meanwhile, the department refuses to release the full investigative files on convicted child sex trafficker and Trump pal Jeffrey Epstein, but insists it can both protect children and use taxpayer dollars efficiently. In other words: we absolutely could go after child predators, we just choose not to—and please stop asking about Epstein.

Law enforcement who once thought this administration would be "pro-law enforcement" and serious about trafficking are now describing the situation as "disheartening"—a very polite way of saying "we're being kneecapped from above while they cosplay as defenders of children on TV." But hey, if you gut anti-trafficking programs, starve survivor support, and make it harder to prosecute child sex offenders, you can save a few bucks and keep some old friends comfortable. Law and order, Trump-style.