Dick Cheney’s Wet Dream

MAGA is dialing the “unitary executive” to 11.

(Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

There are many ways in which Trump represents a sharp break from his Republican predecessors: his embrace of tariffs and enforcement of serious immigration control; his loathing of democracy-building abroad; his aversion to war; his contempt for the rule of law (if ever applied to him); his “America First” treatment of allies.

But there is one area where he actually represents real continuity with the past: his administration’s belief in executive power largely untrammeled by the legislative. The term of art for this is the “unitary executive theory,” which has gripped the imagination of Republicans since, well, Watergate, if we’re being candid, but it’s been knocking around since Wilson. In its most recent incarnation in office, it was Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld who pushed the theory furthest: claiming, for example, that a president could launch an invasion of Iraq without Senate authorization; or that a president can overrule the rule law and enable a president to torture even an American citizen if he wanted to. And they did just that — with Jose Padilla.

You can see this in Bush’s record; in signing statements attached to laws between 2001 and 2005, Bush used the phrase “unitary executive” over a hundred times, compared with Reagan (one), HW Bush (six), and Clinton (zero). (That’s why when you see Bill Kristol declaring a constitutional crisis because of Trump’s recent executive power grabs — well, the only response is to laugh. It’s of a piece with his lamenting the end of Roe.) The conservative ambition to return the presidency to its pre-Watergate parameters — or more — can be seen from Iran-Contra through the illegal torture and rendition policies of Bush-Cheney to the deputizing of a deranged ketamine-addicted billionaire to shut down government agencies with no Congressional authorization in 2025.

Unlike Bill Kristol, and like George Will, I have long held, in fact, that Article 1 is first for a reason. The branch of government with the most democratic legitimacy is the Congress, representing all of us, in our varied, complicated ways. The role of the president is merely to enforce the laws made by Congress in institutions created and funded by the legislature. If Congress has funded a government agency for certain reasons, for example, only the Congress can defund it. So a huge amount of Elon Musk’s manic destruction of the administrative state is thereby illegal on its face. Which means it almost certainly cannot last.

This is not to say that Musk hasn’t exposed predictable waste. Why are we surprised that our enlightened elites would use USAID for their pet ideological projects: $3.9 million to promote critical gender and queer theory in — checks notes — the western Balkans; $2.1 million to help the BBC “value the diversity of Libyan society” (is the British government funding insufficient?); $8.3 million for “USAID Education: Equity and Inclusion,” and $7.9 million to teach Sri Lankan journalists how to avoid “binary-gendered language.” Exposing this is fantastic — and could lead to real reform; but instantly shutting down whole agencies, freezing funding for others, laying off thousands and thousands, without any congressional approval, is the path to nowhere.

Part of me attributes this to the usual Trump shit-show. But part is also quite obviously an attempt to get these issues before the courts. The goal is to dramatically enhance even further the executive branch’s power, and to cede to it effective control of the federal purse. This would fundamentally alter the shape of American governance — and turn us into a fully illiberal democracy. Richard Hanania suggests an interesting analogy between what conservatives are currently trying to do with the executive branch and what liberals, beginning with the Warren court, tried to do with the judiciary: take one branch of government to overrule the rest on key policy matters, like abortion.

It’s worth noting, however, that, over time, both attempts failed. Roe eventually fell. Cheney’s grotesque power-grabs for the purpose of wiretapping, torture, and rendition were struck down; so too was Clinton’s claim of executive privilege during the Lewinsky affair. So beneath the chaotic theater this week, there is very little legal foundation. If I were a Trump enthusiast, I’d see this as a path to failure.

We’ll get a better grip on how the new administration is going to continue this lawless strategy when the new OMB director settles in. And he is what one might safely call a spittle-flecked fanatic. Russell Vought believes that the Constitution is “a revered document that is no longer in effect.” He views himself as a “dissident of the current regime.” My italics. Vought believes that “the Right needs to throw off the precedents and legal paradigms that have wrongly developed over the last two hundred years.” My italics again. This isn’t just taking the executive to pre-Watergate, or even pre-Wilson days. It’s pointing us to pre-Marbury days.

This is not entirely new. Obama decided he could ignore Congress’ immigration laws, for example, and few of those now hyperventilating about Trump objected. And it’s not yet a Constitutional crisis. That would come if SCOTUS strikes down Trump’s executive overreach and he refuses to obey. But it is a huge Constitutional challenge.

Donald Trump has always viewed his office as an elected monarch, and he has a mass movement that has explicitly declared and supported him as such. Musk sees himself as the monarch’s aide, and has no understanding of the Constitution at all, as far as I can tell. The role of the legislature, in this worldview, is to do whatever the president wants; and the role of the Court is to buttress presidential power. This has, alas, been the trend now for decades, with Democratic and Republican presidents, facilitated by the Congress’s sad abdication of so many of its inherent powers. But Trump and his Claremonsters want to take this to a whole new level of an elected dictatorship. There is nothing that would make Trump and Vance happier.

Until, of course, a Democrat is elected president.

Back On The Dishcast: Ross Douthat

Ross is a writer and a dear old colleague, back when we were both bloggers at The Atlantic. Since then he’s become the best columnist in the country at the New York Times. The author of many books, including Grand New Party and The Decadent Society, his new one is Believe: Why Everyone Should Be Religious. So in this podcast, I play — literally — Devil’s advocate. Forgive me for getting stuck on the meaning of the universe in the first 20 minutes or so. It picks up after that.

Listen to the episode here. There you can find two clips of our convo — on the difference between proselytizing and evangelizing, and the “hallucinations of the sane.” That link also takes you to commentary on our episodes with Sebastian Junger on near-death experiences and John Gray on the state of liberalism. We also air more of your dissents over DOGE and a variety of other emails. Plus, a personal vent over CVS.

The Trans Lash And Backlash

There is a lot to digest on the transgender front this week — some of it welcome, in my view, and some of it vile. And this discomfiting admixture is something we have to get used to on a variety of fronts. One of the features of an illiberal democracy is that the extremes dictate everything because obvious compromises are continuously ruled out by negative polarization.

So here we are. Among obvious steps forward: a return to fairness in athletics; and an end in sight to irreversible medical experiments on gay, lesbian, autistic, and trans children. Among the lamentable: a pointless reversal of the successful integration of many trans servicemembers in the US military; and a revival of the bathroom controversies.

Take athletics as a symptom of our dysfunction. There are ways to craft a policy of fair competition in sports, while re-emphasizing this is only about fairness, not about transgender equality and dignity. Transmen, for example, should be welcomed in sports at all levels (unless it’s unsafe for them), and participation of transwomen in non-competitive sports encouraged.

Or take sex reassignment for children. There was a way to test new and experimental medical procedures: strict safeguards and lengthy mental health assessments in a clinical trial over a period of time. If the treatments were shown to be effective, they could be carefully rolled out. Instead, we got the removal of all safeguards, very low-quality studies, countless mistakes, a removal of all lower-age limits, a cascade of lies (the suicide claim, for example), and a campaign to bully journalists not to investigate one of the biggest medical scandals in decades.

That’s why these crude bans happened. Not just because the right wanted them, but because the left refused to offer any moderate alternative, or even engage good-faith critics. Children now caught in the middle are once again the victims. It’s an urgent task to make sure they have much more expansive mental health care and attention.

I also need to say this as clearly as I can: Trump’s executive orders contained a tone about trans people that was despicable. A president should represent every American, and in a public document respect every American. Yet the White House official statement describes the failure of basic due diligence in medicine as “maiming and sterilizing a growing number of impressionable children.” Strictly speaking, that’s true. On Twitter, fine. But it is hell of an ugly way for a president to say it.

Much worse is how the commander-in-chief described some trans people who have served their country with distinction. He says their gender identity

conflicts with a soldier’s commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle, even in one’s personal life. A man’s assertion that he is a woman, and his requirement that others honor this falsehood, is not consistent with the humility and selflessness required of a service member.

What an ugly, deplorable, and untrue thing to say. People who have come to terms with their gender identity — and I don’t mean the gender woo-woo babies and po-mo nutters who have done so much to muddy the waters, but actual grownup trans men and women — are telling the truth of their lives. How dare anyone — let alone a president — call that selfish or dishonorable?

This needless sneer is a reminder, if we needed one, that there has never been anyone as depraved or dishonorable as Donald Trump in the White House. I may agree with him on a few issues, and I’m not afraid to say so. That doesn’t mean he isn’t still every bit the monster he always has been.

The View From Your Window

Sandpoint, Idaho, 4.23 pm

Money Quotes For The Week

“So, no, I will not get excited about a couple billion in DOGE savings on one hand while Trump pushes Congress to add $8 trillion over the decade in tax cuts and spending with the other hand. I’m not that gullible,” – Jessica Riedl, an actual principled fiscal conservative, seeing through the BS this week.

“I assure you: Trump, with his character, with his persistence, he will restore order [in Europe] quite quickly. And all of them, you will see — it will happen quickly, soon — they will all stand at the feet of the master and will wag their tails a little. Everything will fall into place,” – Vladimir Putin.

“[Mexico and Canada] literally made the same promises to Joe Biden, but Biden never took them up on them. Trump is, if nothing else, taking advantage of all the balls the Biden team dropped or refused to grab because they were fundamentally unserious about border security,” – Erick Erickson.

“People in Denmark now see the United States as a bigger threat than North Korea and Iran. Denmark has until now been one of the most pro-American countries in the world and one the longest standing allies of the United States,” – Rasmus Jarlov, a Danish MP, on new polling.

“Nothing against David Hogg one way or another, but I would humbly submit that an Ivy League educated nice-hair guy who is most famous for being America’s leading gun control advocate is probably not the person best equipped to help Dems win back working-class men in swing states,” – Tyler Austin Harper on the new DNC vice-chair.

“I’m one of the most politically toxic people in the country and I’m too radical for American politics. No, I’m not running for office. We have enough straight white men in power. It’d be nice to see some people who actually look like our country and not privilege,” – David Hogg in April 2022.

“Elon is surprised some federal workers don’t work weekends. Well, Elon, some federal workers are good dads. There may be a lesson in there somewhere,” – Zaid Jilani.

Dissents Of The Week: You Want Calm?!?

A reader responds to my latest column, “Keep Calm, Carry On … And Wait”:

Quit trying to gaslight your readers into thinking this is all is normal. You increasingly sound like Kevin Bacon in Animal House screaming “All Is Well” as the chaos envelopes us. Elon Musk — a man with a laundry list of security concerns and conflicts of interest — has access to our most sensitive financial systems. DOGE, OPM, the DOJ, and more are illegally firing career federal employees — hardworking patriots and often veterans — for merely doing their jobs. Trump’s minions are shutting down congressionally appropriated and congressionally funded offices without even a pretense of legality.

And this is just the start; massive illegal firings are on the way, the shuttering of DOE, the FDIC, and more I’m sure. The government will be paying MASSIVE settlements to all of those affected and will be swamped in litigation for years. And just last night, Trump promised reentering the Middle East explicitly for the purpose of colonization and ethnic cleansing.

This is NOT the first Trump administration. This is the time to hit the alarm bells, and hit it as loud as possible. We do not have time to wait until the next election; people must act NOW.

I have to say I resent the term “gaslight”. I don’t do that, as publishing your email proves. But if you want to read commentary that repeats all the crazed hysteria of Trump 1.0 — which worked so well, didn’t it? — you have an endless vista of MSM panic. I’ve written how and why I intend to avoid that this time around, without ignoring real abuses — which are, of course, legion.

Here’s another reader on DOGE:

Just when I think I’m ready to celebrate the end of DEI and its illiberal foundations, a friend of mine who works at DOT gets a letter noting that the White House has established a hotline for employees to report on other colleagues, bosses, and practices that might be covert or “obscured” (that word is literally used in the letter) DEI hiring practices. I’m sorry, but this is nothing other than a snitch line with no consequence for making an allegation. What could go wrong?

Do you not see the issues here of monitoring your colleagues and encouraging them to report on banned practices? A colleague gets a promotion I wanted? Must be DEI! A black woman is hired? DEI! I hate my boss. .. sounds like it’s time to report that evil DEI cabal. From my perspective, this makes something bad somehow worse. That is vintage Trump.

There is no decent cause that Trump cannot make indecent. Another dissent:

You indicated you are no better than the ultra-right-wing echo chamber when you cited Madonna (!!!) as representative of anti-Trump America. What a straw-woman! It’s like bringing in Hannity’s foil Combs to represent a caricatured “left” through poor, shrill arguments. It’s like Bill O’Reilly bringing in someone from NAMBLA to represent the “gay perspective.”

You’re deliberately glossing over Trump’s outrages and selecting opposing views from idiots to give off the sense that there is no rational, reasonable horror felt by intelligent, well-informed, even conservative-minded people about the onslaught of horrors coming out of the Trump White House. A friend at the NIH is being warned that his HIV research is going to be re-evaluated to ensure it conforms to this administration’s “ideology” — shades of Galileo and the Inquisition, no? Scientific research that is only funded if it conforms to a government’s ideology?

Where were you when the Biden administration was insisting that “equity” be insinuated into every branch of government, including NIH? Maybe you were protesting the politicization of science, and violations of civil rights law. Maybe not. But, sure, as I’ve made abundantly clear, I oppose the current illegal madness under Trump. But he was just re-elected, and democracy requires some respect for that. If you cannot grapple with this reality, and how Biden all but made it inevitable, you’re missing a lot of context.

One more dissent for now:

Regarding your piece on immigration, I agree that since we are a nation of laws, there is nothing inherently wrong with Trump enforcing them. However, my concern is how these laws are upheld and the broader implications for our society. In my home state of Missouri, for example, there is currently a $1,000 bounty for anyone who reports an undocumented immigrant. This sets a dangerous and troubling precedent. Policies like this erode trust and create a society where people are incentivized to turn on one another. That is not the kind of country we should strive for.

I am an immigrant from Iraq, and during the early years of my life, I lived under Saddam Hussein’s regime. Back then, everyone was afraid to say anything critical of the government, even within their own homes, for fear of being reported. Now, as a public high school teacher, I have seen reports of students — natural-born citizens — avoiding school because they fear being turned in.

Enforcing immigration laws is one thing — Obama did so in record numbers — but this kind of climate of fear was not the norm. When policies tear at the social fabric and make people afraid of one another, we find ourselves on very shaky ground. I’ve been trying to adopt your philosophy of not reacting to everything and trusting that judges, Congress, and the system will keep things in check. But at times, it’s hard.

More dissents are on the pod page, arriving in your in-tray shortly. As always, please keep the criticism coming: dish@andrewsullivan.com.

Mental Health Break

The latest mind-bending video from OK Go:

In The ‘Stacks

• Foreign aid is consistently unpopular with the American public.
• Magatte Wade, a Senegalese entrepreneur, asks, “Why is Africa poor?”
• Ben Ryan worries about the fate of PEPFAR.
• Nate Silver unpacks “the game theory of Trump’s tariff threats.” Noah Smith addresses the question, “When are tariffs good?”
• “The way to think about Trump 2.0 is as the New Deal reversed,” writes Niall Ferguson.
• Is CIA recruitment screwed now?
• Joe Klein says that today’s “Dems in Disarray syndrome” is “the worst I’ve ever seen.” Here’s some advice from Ruy Teixeira.
• Ibram X Kendi’s con finally comes to a close. But Howard embraces him.
• “Sovereignist” is a new way to describe Trump on foreign policy.
• Another new term: “Dark Woke.”
• Helen Pluckrose defines a term that’s increasingly misused: gaslighting.
• Michael Thomas updates us on the growing promise of geothermal energy.
• Governor Wes Moore speaks out for men and boys.
• How did Orwell distinguish between patriotism and nationalism?
• The free-speech crisis in the UK gets even worse.
• Benny Morris, the Israeli historian, launches a ‘stack — and dismantles Coates. Brian Riedel, the deficit hawk, comes out as Jessica Riedel. Subscribe to both! Their principles and moderation are needed more than ever.

The View From Your Window Contest

Where do you think? Email your entry to contest@andrewsullivan.com. Please put the location — city and/or state first, then country — in the subject line. Bonus points for fun facts and stories. Proximity counts. The deadline for entries is Wednesday night at midnight (PST). The winner gets the choice of a View From Your Window book or two annual Dish subscriptions.

See you next Friday.

Invite your friends and earn rewards

If you enjoy The Weekly Dish, share it with your friends and earn rewards when they subscribe.

Invite Friends