GYEONGJU, South Korea — President Trump said Wednesday that “it’s too bad” he’s not allowed to run for a third term, conceding the constitutional reality even as he expressed interest in continuing to serve.
“If you read it, it’s pretty clear,” Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One enroute from Japan to South Korea. “I’m not allowed to run. It’s too bad.”
The president’s comments, which continue his on-again, off-again musings about a third term, came a day after House Speaker Mike Johnson said it would be impossible for Trump to stay in the White House.
“I don’t see the path for that,” he told reporters at the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday.
Johnson, the Republican leader who has built his career by drawing closer to Trump, said he discussed the issue with the president, and he thinks Trump understands the situation.
“He and I have talked about the constrictions of the Constitution,” he said.
The speaker described how the Constitution’s 22nd Amendment does not allow for a third presidential term and changing that, with a new amendment, would be a cumbersome, decade-long process winning over states and votes in Congress.
“But I can tell you that we are not going to take our foot off the gas pedal,” he said. “We’re going to deliver for the American people, and we’ve got a great run ahead of us — he’ll have four strong years.”
Trump stopped short of characterizing his conversation with Johnson, and his description of the prohibition on third terms was somewhat less definitive.
“Based on what I read, I guess I’m not allowed to run,” he said Wednesday. “So we’ll see what happens.”
Trump has repeatedly raised the idea of trying to stay in power. Hats saying “Trump 2028” are passed out as souvenir keepsakes to lawmakers and others visiting the White House, and Trump’s former 2016 campaign chief-turned-podcaster Stephen Bannon has revived the idea of a third Trump term.
Trump told reporters Monday on Air Force One on his trip to Japan that “I would love to do it.”
He went on to say that his Republican Party has great options for the next presidential election — in Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who was traveling with him, and Vice President JD Vance, who visited with senators at the Capitol on Tuesday.
“All I can tell you is that we have a great group of people,” Trump said.
Pressed if he was ruling out a third-term bid, Trump demurred. Asked about a strategy where he could run as vice president, which could be allowed under the laws, and then work himself in the presidency, he dismissed the idea as “too cute.”
“You’d be allowed to do that, but I wouldn’t do that,” he said.
The chit chat comes as Trump, in his words and actions, is showing just how far he can push the presidency — and daring anyone to stop him.
He is sending National Guard troops to cities over the objections of several state governors; accepting untold millions in private donations to pay the military and fund the new White House ballroom, picking winners and losers in the government shutdown.
Johnson, the Louisiana Republican who rose swiftly to become House speaker with Trump’s blessing, dismissed worries about a potential third term by the president’s critics whose “hair is on fire.”
“He has a good time with that, trolling the Democrats,” Johnson said.
Megerian and Mascaro write for the Associated Press.
Mnangagwa allies push for a term extension to 2030 as ZANU-PF factions split and opposition promises a legal fight.
Published On 18 Oct 202518 Oct 2025
Share
Zimbabwe’s governing ZANU-PF has said it will begin a process to extend President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s term by two years, potentially keeping him in power until 2030.
The plan was endorsed on Saturday at the movement’s annual conference in the eastern city of Mutare, where delegates instructed the government to begin drafting legislation to amend the Constitution, Justice Minister and ZANU-PF legal secretary Ziyambi Ziyambi said.
Recommended Stories
list of 3 itemsend of list
Mnangagwa, 83, is constitutionally required to leave office in 2028 after serving two elected terms. Any change would require a constitutional amendment – and potentially referendums – legal experts say.
Delegates erupted in applause after the motion passed, reinforcing ZANU-PF’s pattern of securitised rule since independence in 1980. The party controls parliament, giving it significant leverage, though some insiders warn that a legal challenge would be likely.
Mnangagwa has previously insisted he is a “constitutionalist” with no interest in clinging to power. But loyalists have quietly pushed for a prolonged stay since last year’s disputed election, while rivals inside the party – aligned with Vice President Constantino Chiwenga – are openly resisting an extension.
Blessed Geza, a veteran fighter from the liberation war and a Chiwenga ally, has been using YouTube livestreams to condemn the push, drawing thousands of viewers. Calls for mass protests have gained little traction amid a heavy police deployment in Harare and other cities.
The president made no mention of the extension during his closing remarks at the conference. Chiwenga has not commented on Mnangagwa’s term extension bid or the protests.
Dire economic situation
Mnangagwa came to power in 2017 amid promises of democratic and economic reforms following the toppling of the longtime President Robert Mugabe.
Mnangagwa has presided over a dire economic collapse marked by hyperinflation, mass unemployment, and allegations of corruption. Critics accuse ZANU-PF of crushing dissent, weakening the judiciary, and turning elections into a managed ritual rather than a democratic contest.
Legal opposition figures have warned that any attempt to rewrite the Constitution will face resistance in court.
“We will defend the Constitution against its capture and manipulation to advance a dangerous unconstitutional anti-people agenda,” opposition lawyer Tendai Biti said in a statement on X.
Ten elderly activists – most in their 60s and 70s – were arrested in Harare on Friday for allegedly planning a protest demanding Mnangagwa’s resignation.
They were charged with attempting to incite “public violence” and remain in custody pending a bail hearing on Monday. Earlier this year, authorities detained nearly 100 young people in similar circumstances.
The renewed manoeuvring has exposed an accelerating power struggle inside ZANU-PF. One faction wants Mnangagwa to remain until 2030; another is preparing the ground for Chiwenga, the former army general who helped topple Robert Mugabe in the 2017 coup.
Mayer, the son of former McLaren team principal Teddy Mayer and a long-time steward for the FIA before being fired by Ben Sulayem last year, said he had submitted a number of ethics complaints to the governing body about the election process.
“We strongly believe a series of ethics violations have been committed in this election process,” he said. “And we have now submitted numerous ethics complaints.
“Assuming the Ethics Committee finds validity to our complaints, who does this go to for action? The president of the FIA or the senate president – both conflicted parties. The statutes don’t provide for any other method or for any appeal. Where is the accountability? This is how institutions fail.
“I am not a revolutionary. I do want to evolve the FIA to a better place so I intend to use the processes of the FIA as much as is don’t believe they are independent or free and open.”
He also questioned the appointment of Daniel Coen as a representative for the world council from Costa Rica when the country has no motorsport events listed, which is a requirement of membership.
Mayer quoted from a report into the FIA produced by the Utrecht School of Governance, which studies public organisations in their interaction with the developments in politics and society.
Its report said the FIA score on the sports governance observer index was 45% which places it “among federations that have adopted the formal trappings of modern governance but lack robust institutional policies and safeguards”.
The report continued: “The FIA’s governance structurally concentrates power in the office of the president, and accountability remains confined within a system over which the president exercises decisive control.”
An FIA spokesperson said: “The FIA presidential election is a structured and democratic process, to ensure fairness and integrity at every stage.
“The requirements for the 2025 FIA elections, including the relevant deadlines and eligibility criteria for the presidential list and World Councils, are defined in the FIA statutes and internal regulations, which are publicly available on the FIA’s website.
“Detailed information regarding these elections has also been made available on a dedicated page on the FIA’s website since 13 June 2025 and communicated to all FIA members.
“The requirements related to the regional representation of the vice-presidents for sport, and to select them from the World Motor Sport Council in order to draw up a presidential list, are not new. These criteria applied to previous elections.
“As to be expected, preparing a candidature for a presidential list or the World Councils requires certain steps to be taken. Prospective candidates have had since the publication of the detailed information on 13 June to prepare their applications.”
Responding to the Utrecht report cited by Mayer, the FIA spokesperson said: “The report commissioned by Tim Mayer’s team finds the FIA’s governance practices to be in line with other federations, particularly those ‘that have made progress in formalising governance structures’.
“The benchmarking process outlined within the report does not find the FIA to be behind the curve. This reflects the fact that the FIA has taken several steps to strengthen its corporate governance policies.
“The FIA was not contacted to confirm any of the statements or assumptions made about its processes, policies and administration within the report.”
Some troops joined protesters in the capital on Saturday
The office of Madagascar’s President Andry Rajoelina has said an attempt to seize power illegally and by force is under way in the country.
Hours later, an army unit known as CAPSAT claimed that it had taken over the leadership of the military command, and was now in control of all the armed forces – land, air, and naval.
This is the same unit that played a crucial role in the 2009 Malagasy political crisis, which helped Rajoelina rise to power.
Madagascar was first hit by youth-led protests on 25 September against water and power cuts, but they have escalated to reflect wider dissatisfaction with Rajoelina’s government over high unemployment, corruption, and the cost-of-living crisis.
Rajoelina’s statement said “there is an attempt to seize power at this time in the territory of the Republic, in complete violation of the Constitution and democratic principles,” in a translation.
He condemned “in the strongest possible terms” what he called an attempt to destabilise the country. He also called on all of the nation’s key forces to unite in defending the constitutional order and national sovereignty.
CAPSAT said it had appointed a new army chief of staff, Gen Demosthene Pikulas, according to a statement issued on its Facebook page.
AFP news agency reports armed forces minister Manantsoa Deramasinjaka Rakotoarivelo has accepted the appointment.
“I give him my blessing,” the minister was quoted as saying at a ceremony to install Gen Pikulas to the post.
Protesters have gathered at the main square in the capital, Antananarivo, for the second consecutive day.
This is a significant development, as they had failed to reach May 13 Square, the focal point of previous uprisings, until now.
A protester told the BBC that they had “finally conquered May 13 Square – the Square of Democracy”.
“We’re happy and relieved. It’s a great victory. We won’t stop the struggle until President Rajoelina resigns,” the protester added.
Protesters have been celebrating their success in reaching the main square in Antananarivo
The success of the demonstrators came after they received unexpected support from CAPSAT on Saturday, when some of its troops left their barracks to join the demonstration.
CAPSAT had condemned the use of force against protesters by other security units.
There were reports of a shoot-out at a CAPSAT camp on Sunday, following similar reports on Saturday.
CAPSAT said one soldier was shot by gendarmes on Saturday, and died.
Air France said it had suspended its flights to Antananarivo until at least Tuesday because of the security situation.
The protest movement, known as Gen Z Mada, has been rallying support mainly through social media, posing the biggest challenge to Rajoelina since his re-election in 2023.
On Saturday, a statement from the presidency had assured the nation that Rajoelina and the new prime minister – an army general he appointed last week – were in control of the situation.
AFP via Getty Images
Some soldiers left their barracks to throw their weight behind the protest movement
UN human rights chief Volker Türk previously urged security forces to stop using “unnecessary and disproportionate force” to quell the unrest. He said at least 22 people were killed and 100 others injured.
Rajoelina disputed the figure last week, saying there were 12 confirmed deaths and “all of these individuals were looters and vandals”.
Madagascar has been rocked by multiple uprisings since it gained independence in 1960, including mass protests in 2009 that forced then-President Marc Ravalomanana to step down and saw Rajoelina come to power.
Rajoelina governed for four years and then returned to power after the 2018 election.
Despite its natural resources, Madagascar is one of the poorest countries in the world, with 75% of people living below the poverty line, according to the World Bank.
Only about one-third of Madagascar’s 30 million people have access to electricity, according to the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
EPA / Shutterstock
The security forces have been accused of using excessive force against protesters
BOSTON — Joan B. Kennedy, the former wife of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy who endured a long and troubled marriage marked by family tragedies, her husband’s infidelities and her own struggles with alcoholism and mental health, died on Wednesday. She was 89.
The former Joan Bennett was a model and classically-trained pianist when she married Ted Kennedy in 1958. Their lives would change unimaginably over the next decade and a half. Brother-in-law John F. Kennedy was elected president in 1960 and assassinated three years later. Brother-in-law Robert F. Kennedy served as attorney general under JFK, was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1964 and assassinated while seeking the presidency.
Her husband was elected to the U.S. Senate and became among the country’s most respected legislators despite initial misgivings that he was capitalizing on his family connections. But Ted Kennedy also lived through scandals of his own making. In 1969, the car he was driving plunged off a bridge on Chappaquiddick Island, killing his young female passenger, Mary Jo Kopechne.
Kennedy, who swam to safety and waited hours before alerting police, later pleaded guilty to leaving the scene of an accident. Chappaquiddick shadowed him for the rest of his life, weighing against his own chances for the presidency.
Joan Kennedy had three children with her husband, but also had miscarriages, including one shortly after the Chappaquiddick accident. She stood by her husband through the scandal, but their estrangement was nearly impossible to hide by the time of his unsuccessful effort to defeat President Jimmy Carter in the 1980 Democratic primaries. They had been separated by then, and would later divorce. One bumper sticker from the campaign read “Vote for Jimmy Carter, Free Joan Kennedy.”
Her love of piano would be a trademark for much of her life. She was known for opening her husband’s campaign rallies with a piano serenade and, after they divorced, touring with orchestras around the world. Her family said she would combine her masterful playing with a message about the transformational potential of the arts and the need for equitable arts education.
In a 1992 Associated Press interview, she recalled playing piano for brother-in-law Bobby when he ran for president in 1968. “He took me with him and encouraged me,” she said. “He had a theme, ‘This Land Is Your Land,’ the Woody Guthrie song. I’d play that on the piano and everybody would come in, feeling really great about everything.”
“It seems like a long time ago, but it’s part of my memories,” she said softly.
In a statement, former Rep. Patrick Kennedy of Rhode Island praised his mother for her courage and talent.
“Besides being a loving mother, talented musician, and instrumental partner to my father as he launched his successful political career, Mom was a power of example to millions of people with mental health conditions,” his statement said. “She will be missed not just by the entire Kennedy Family, but by the arts community in the City of Boston and the many people whose lives that she touched.”
She also became one of the first women to publicly acknowledge her struggles with alcoholism and depression.
“I will always admire my mother for the way that she faced up to her challenges with grace, courage, humility, and honesty,” Ted Kennedy Jr. said in a statement. “She taught me how to be more truthful with myself and how careful listening is a more powerful communication skill than public speaking.”
At a recent news conference, President Trump touched on questions about tariffs, Gaza and vaccines before zeroing in on one of his favorite subjects: TV and radio ratings. A journalist, referring to an unconfirmed report that Howard Stern’s SiriusXM radio show was being canceled, handed Trump a sugar-coated softball: “Is the Hate Trump business model going out of business because it’s not popular with the American people?”
The president was primed and ready to take a swipe at late-night television, namely Paramount’s recent cancellation of “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert” and other types of hosted programs he perceives as The Enemy. Anything to distract from his broken promises around IVF funding, a tepid jobs report and his failure in producing the Epstein files.
“Colbert has no talent,” said the president. “I mean, I could take anybody here. I could go outside in the beautiful streets and pick a couple of people that do just as well or better. They’d get higher ratings than he did. He’s got no talent. Fallon has no talent. Kimmel has no talent. They’re next. They’re going to be going. I hear they’re going to be going. I don’t know, but I would imagine because they’d get — you know, Colbert has better ratings than Kimmel or Fallon.”
Ratings are important to Trump. It’s data he’s fond of weaponizing. Just ask his “Celebrity Apprentice” successor Arnold Schwarzenegger. But what about the president’s ratings?
According to a Gallup poll, six months into Trump’s second term, his job approval rating has dipped to 37%, the lowest of this term and just slightly higher than his all-time worst rating of 34% at the end of his first term.
In comparison to other two-term presidents at the same point in their presidency, he’s well below the 59% average, second-quarter rating set by all post-World War II presidents elected from 1952 to 2020. Bill Clinton (44%) came the closest as the only other president to have a sub-majority approval rating during his second quarter.
So Trump and Clinton do have something in common other than their association with the late sex trafficker Jeffery Epstein. Which brings us to polling numbers about Trump’s handling of those files.
A recent YouGov poll shows 46% of Americans think Trump was involved in crimes allegedly committed by Epstein. A whooping 82% of Americans — including 91% of Democrats and 76% of Republicans — believe that the government should release all documents it has on the Epstein case. And only 4% of those polled are in favor of Trump pardoning Epstein’s co-conspirator, Ghislaine Maxwell.
There are no major polls yet on how folks feel about Maxwell being quietly moved from a Florida prison to a minimum-security federal prison camp in Texas where the majority of inmates are serving time for nonviolent offenses and white-collar crimes. Maxwell’s role in a violent crime — the recruiting and trafficking of minors for sex — led to her 20-year sentence.
Trump’s public obsession with ratings date back to his time hosting the television reality competition “The Apprentice.” It was a genuine hit in that first season, rounding out the year 2004 as the seventh-most-watched TV show of the year.
But its ratings declined steadily each year after that, according to the Chicago Tribune, from 11th place overall in its second season, to 15th, then 38th. By its sixth season, it finished as the 75th-most-watched show. If Trump’s presidency were a reality TV show, he’d be headed into his sixth season.
Enough about TV shows. Let’s look at a quantifiable way to apply television ratings to the presidency: inaugurations. According to Nielsen, Trump’s first swearing-in ceremony drew 30.6 million total viewers — 19% less than Barack Obama’s in 2009, when 37.8 million tuned in.
Trump’s 2025 swearing-in ceremony had 6 million fewer U.S. viewers than his first-term inauguration. Even worse, that’s 9 million fewer viewers than Biden attracted for his big day in 2021.
Here’s where the art of distraction comes in handy. Focus on other people’s faults to cover your own. Enter the Clintons, again. At Wednesday’s news conference, Trump said that shock jock Stern’s ratings “went down when he endorsed Hillary Clinton [in 2016].” What’s Trump’s excuse?
President Trump’s fourth week in office got off to a rough start with the resignation of his national security advisor. Michael Flynn resigned late Monday in the wake of revelations about conversations he had with a Russian official during the transition between the Obama and Trump administrations. Here’s a look at what’s happened so far:
Last weekend
While Trump was dining with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe at Mar-a-lago Club in Palm Beach, Fla., the world leaders got word of a ballistic missile test in North Korea. Photos of the men discussing the situation in the dining room left many wondering if cybersecurity procedures were in place.
Again with the (debunked) voter fraud claim. Trump’s senior policy advisor Stephen Miller said that “the noncitizen voting issue is pervasive and widespread,” but offered no evidence.
Monday, Feb. 13
Mr. Unpopular. A new Gallup poll found that Trump’s approval rating has already dropped. (While we’re on the subject, take a look at our “Grade the president” project to see how people are judging his leadership.)
Back to the immigration ban: The Trump administration will not take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court … yet.
Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau stopped by the White House for a joint-presser with Trump. There was a stark difference in their delivery, eh?
Wall Street executive Steven Mnuchin is taking over as Treasury secretary. The Senate narrowly voted to confirm him 53 to 47.
Kellyanne Conway said Trump has utmost confidence in Flynn after reports surfaced that the national security advisor had misled the White House administration on previous contact he’d had with a Russian diplomat. Hours later, Flynn resigned, which brings us to:
The Flynn controversy
Nov. 18: Trump names Flynn as his choice for national security advisor. The decision was controversial from the start. Flynn had attended a lavish dinner in Moscow in 2015 at which he sat next to president Vladimir Putin and also received a speaking fee from a Russian television network that U.S. officials consider a propaganda outlet.
Dec. 6: Trump’s transition team cuts ties with Flynn’s son, who had spread false stories on Twitter.
Dec. 29: The Obama administration imposes sanctions on Russia in retaliation for Russia’s hacking of the Democratic National Committee in the summer. Flynn contacts Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak several times that day and the day before, including more than one telephone call.
Dec. 30: Putin says he will not retaliate against the U.S. sanctions, surprising the Obama administration. Trump praises Putin.
Early January: Intelligence officials, looking for clues to why Putin decided not to retaliate, discover Flynn’s conversations with Kislyak, whose communications the U.S. government routinely monitors.
Jan. 11: At a news conference, Trump denies that he has ties with Russia.
Jan. 12: Washington Post columnist David Ignatius first reports on Flynn’s contacts with Kislyak.
Jan. 13: White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer denies that Flynn and Kislyak discussed sanctions.
Jan. 15: Vice President Mike Pence, in a television interview, denies that Flynn discussed sanctions.
Jan. 20: Trump is inaugurated.
Jan. 22: Flynn is sworn in as national security advisor.
Jan. 26: Acting Atty. Gen. Sally Yates tells White House officials that Flynn and Kislyak had discussed the sanctions and that Flynn, having misled Pence and others, might be subject to Russian blackmail.
Feb. 8: Flynn, responding to questions from the Washington Post, once again flatly denies any discussions with Kislyak about sanctions.
Feb. 9: A spokesperson for Flynn retracts that denial, saying he does not remember talking about the sanctions, but “can’t be 100% sure.”
Feb. 10: Trump, asked by reporters on Air Force One, says he is not familiar with the Post report.
Feb 10: White House officials say Flynn has called Pence to apologize for misleading him.
Feb. 12 : White House official Stephen Miller, dispatched by the administration to appear on several Sunday TV interview programs, declines to say if Trump has confidence in Flynn.
Feb. 13, about 4 p.m. EST: Trump advisor Kellyanne Conway says Flynn has Trump’s full confidence.
Feb. 13, about 5: p.m. EST: Spicer says Trump is “evaluating the situation.”
Feb. 13, about 9:30 p.m. EST: The Post and the New York Times disclose that Yates had warned the White House about Flynn’s conversations.
Feb. 13, 11 p.m.: White House announces Flynn’s resignation. Officials say he chose to step down.
Tuesday, Feb. 14
Don’t you love politics? Spicer says the White House has been investigating Flynn’s conduct for more than two weeks and that he had been fired because of an “eroding level of trust.”
Several hours after Spicer’s briefing, Pence’s spokesman, Marc Lotter, says that the vice president “became aware of incomplete information that he’d received on Feb. 9 — last Thursday night — based on media accounts. He did an inquiry based on those media accounts.”
Back to the Flynn saga. Trump blamed the media and leaks for Flynn’s dismissal from office. “Gen. Flynn is a wonderful man. I think he’s been treated very, very unfairly by the media,” Trump said.
And another one bites the dust. Amid growing opposition from Republicans, Trump’s pick for Labor secretary, Andy Puzder, withdrew his nomination just one day before his confirmation hearing.
Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu held a joint news conference at the White House. Neither leader committed to a two-state solution for peace between Israelis and Palestinians, marking a major change from decades of U.S. policy.
Thursday, Feb. 16
Now that’s the Trump we remember from the campaign trail. The president held his first solo news conference. At times, he was combative, aggrieved, funny and nostalgic. He also had his puzzling moments.
Puzder is out and Alexander Acosta is in. Trump nominates a new Labor secretary. If confirmed, he would be the first Latino in Trump’s Cabinet.
No, thank you. Navy Vice Adm. Robert Harward turned down Trump’s offer to be his new national security advisor.
The 9th Circuit Court’s latest word on the travel ban? Your move, Mr. President. They’re taking no further action while the White House prepares a new executive order that addresses the legal objections.
Trump may show sympathy for ‘Dreamers,’ but his aides have quietly found ways to end protection for the hundreds of thousands of immigrants brought to the U.S. illegally as children.
More confusion on our Mideast policy: Contrary to Trump’s comments, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N. said the U.S. “absolutely” supports a two-state solution.
Now that you’re all caught up, here’s your chance to tell us what you think of Trump as we track his major moves in the first 100 days.
Grading opens every Friday and closes at the end of Monday. We’ll be posting your responses, so subscribe to our newsletter to get notified when they go up.
Donald Trump has now thoroughly sullied the office of the presidency.
I’m not talking about the Oval Office, with its new, gaudy gilt trappings that seem to spread by the day, as if the famously nocturnal president multitasks there while others sleep, tapping out his nasty late-night social media screeds between applying more layers of the gold leaf fit for a king. Those golden geegaws are simply Trump’s literal stain on the Oval Office.
I’m talking about the figurative taint: What Trump does and says there by day, in full view of the media cameras, reporters and fawning retainers invited for his performances. With that behavior he besmirches not just the actual Oval Office but the very idea of the office of the president of the United States.
Who can forget, as much as one would like to, Trump’s bullying humiliation of Ukraine’s war-hero President Volodymyr Zelensky in February, and, in May, his premeditated attack on President Cyril Ramaphosa of South Africa, with false claims of that nation’s genocide against white Afrikaner farmers?
But Trump’s performative power play on Tuesday arguably tops them all for shame. Alas, this time his target — President Obama — wasn’t present to push back. The bully wouldn’t dare get in Obama’s face, knowing his predecessor’s counterpunch against the lies could be a knockout. (In Obama’s presence, in fact, Trump is all cringey banter and bonhomie, as at Jimmy Carter’s funeral earlier this year, when the other former presidents snubbed him.)
The word “unprecedented” is used a lot, justifiably, to describe Trump’s actions, but never was it more apt: The sitting president baselessly alleged that the former president was “treasonous” — a crime punishable by death — and all but ordered his law-enforcement minions to arrest, prosecute and imprison the man.
(Apparently Trump, convicted fraudster and adjudicated sexual abuser, forgot that last year — to avoid pre-election trials tied to his alleged crimes involving Jan. 6 and classified documents — he’d persuaded a deferential Supreme Court to give presidents virtual immunity from criminal prosecution. Narcissist that he is, perhaps Trump thinks the egregious ruling only applied to him, not to Obama and every other president past and future.)
“He’s guilty. This was treason,” Trump pronounced of Obama, falsely reviving conspiracies that the then-president and his inner circle lied about Russia’s pro-Trump meddling in the 2016 campaign as a way of undermining Trump’s legitimacy. But for eight years, Vladimir Putin’s 2016 election interference has been a well-established fact, documented by multiple investigations, including one led by then-Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Marco Rubio, the Florida Republican who’s now Trump’s secretary of State.
As Trump fulminated against Obama, seated beside him in the Oval Office’s familiar wingback chairs was yet another foreign dignitary, Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., making him just the latest witness to how fully Trump has extinguished the United States’ beacon as a global exemplar of democratic norms and peaceful transfers of power.
Yes, Trump’s rant against Obama as well as Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton and other Democrats was yet another of his manic attempts over the past three weeks to distract from the morass of his handling of what’s known as the Jeffrey Epstein files — files in which his name appears, the Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday. The administration’s refusal to release federal records of the pedophilia and sex-trafficking investigation of the late billionaire and Trump friend — despite past promises from Trump, Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi, FBI Director Kash Patel and Patel deputy Dan Bongino — is a mess of their own making, and the first to draw condemnation from Trump’s otherwise loyal base. That’s what’s so unnerved the president.
And yes, we should avoid taking the bait of Trump’s distractions.
But… For a president in power to falsely allege that a former president is a traitor, and to suggest that his lickspittles at the Justice Department and FBI should act against that former president, is a distraction that must command Americans’ attention.
Certainly Obama, who’s long frustrated Democrats by his reticence about criticizing Trump, thinks so. On Tuesday he had a spokesman issue a stinger of a statement.
“Out of respect for the office of the presidency,” it began, “our office does not normally dignify the constant nonsense and misinformation flowing out of this White House with a response. But these claims are outrageous enough to merit one.” It pointedly alluded to Rubio’s supportive and bipartisan 2020 report to mock the “bizarre allegations” Trump is lodging.
The basis of Trump’s claims of Obama’s treason is a report released Friday by his Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, the conspiracy-minded former Democratic congresswoman. Not coincidentally, Gabbard lately has been desperate to get back in Trump’s good graces, having fallen from favor in recent months. Her report, along with her criminal referral to the Justice Department against Obama and others, seems to have done the trick, at least for now. Trump is singing her praises.
Gabbard outlined what she calls a “treasonous conspiracy” by Obama and Democrats to bury findings that Russia did nothing to alter the 2016 result — Trump’s victory — and to promote the “hoax” that Trump owed his election to Russia. But Obama and his aides repeatedly assured Americans that Russia did not manipulate the actual 2016 vote by hacking election machinery. Instead, Obama and his team consistently held, along with subsequent investigators, that Russia’s interference was limited to an internet-based campaign of trolls and bots promoting Trump and denigrating Clinton to U.S. voters. They never claimed that meddling determined the election outcome.
Here’s the irony: Trump is building a false case against Obama to distract his restive base from the very real case involving his pal and fellow playboy Epstein, one in which he may or may not be implicated in wrongdoing, and from his failure to bring Epstein’s elite accomplices to justice. Yet by doing so, Trump is again setting up his followers for disappointment and disillusionment. Because there is no Obama case, and so no “justice” for the salivating base.
It’s a sordid quandary that Trump deserves. Too bad he’s brought it into the presidency.
ATLANTA — It’s been six months since Joe Biden left the Oval Office. Republicans, including President Trump, can’t stop talking about him.
The House has launched investigations asserting that Biden’s closest advisers covered up a physical and mental decline during the 82-year-old Democrat’s presidency. The Senate has started a series of hearings focused on his mental fitness. And Trump’s White House has opened its own investigation into the Biden administration’s use of the presidential autopen, which Trump has called “one of the biggest scandals in the history of our country.”
It all fits with Trump’s practice of blaming his predecessors for the nation’s ills. Just last week, he tried to deflect criticism of his administration’s handling of the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking case by casting blame on others, including Biden.
Turning the spotlight back on the former president carries risks for both parties heading into the 2026 midterms. The more Republicans or Democrats talk about Biden, the less they can make arguments about the impact of Trump’s presidency — positive or negative — especially his sweeping new tax cut and spending law that is reshaping the federal government.
“Most Americans consider Joe Biden to be yesterday’s news,” Republican pollster Whit Ayres said.
Republicans want Biden’s autopen to become a flashpoint
Seeking to avenge his 2020 loss to Biden, Trump mocked his rival’s age and fitness incessantly in 2024, even after Biden dropped his reelection bid and yielded to then-Vice President Kamala Harris.
He and other Republicans seemed poised to spend the summer touting their new tax, spending and policy package. But Trump, now 79 and facing his own health challenges, has refused to let up on Biden, and his allies in the party have followed suit.
Republican Rep. Derrick Van Orden of Wisconsin called the Biden White House’s use of the autopen “a massive scandal,” while Republican Rep. Nick Lalota insists his New York constituents “are curious as to what was happening during President Biden’s days.”
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt recently confirmed the administration would pursue an investigation of the Biden administration’s use of the presidential autopen. Trump and other Republicans have questioned whether Biden was actually running the country and suggested aides abused a tool that has long been a routine part of signing presidentially approved actions.
“We deserve to get to the bottom of it,” Leavitt said.
Biden has responded to the criticism by issuing a statement saying he was, in fact, making the decisions during his presidency and that any suggestion otherwise “is ridiculous and false.”
Congressional committees investigate
On Capitol Hill, the House Oversight Committee has convened hearings on use of the autopen and Biden’s fitness for office. Van Orden cited the Constitution’s Article II vesting authority solely with the president.
“It doesn’t say chief of staff. It doesn’t say an autopen,” he said.
The House panel subpoenaed Biden’s physician and a top aide to former first lady Jill Biden. Both invoked Fifth Amendment protections that prevent people from being forced to testify against themselves in government proceedings.
“There was no there there,” said Democratic Rep. Wesley Bell of Missouri, a member of the committee who called the effort “an extraordinary waste of time.”
The committee’s chairman, Rep. James Comer, wants to hear from former White House chiefs of staff Ron Klain and Jeff Zients; former senior advisers Mike Donilon and Anita Dunn; and other former top aides Bruce Reed, Steve Ricchetti and Annie Tomasini, among others. Republicans confirmed multiple dates for the sessions through late September, ensuring it will remain in the headlines.
Investigations could crowd out GOP efforts to define Trump positively
That GOP schedule comes as both parties work feverishly to define Trump’s start to his second term.
His so-called “One Big Beautiful Bill” is a mix of tax cuts, border security measures and cuts to safety net programs such as Medicaid, a joint state-federal insurance program for lower-income Americans. Polls suggest some individual measures are popular while others are not and that the GOP faces headwinds on tilting the public in favor of the overall effort.
A recent poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found that about two-thirds of U.S. adults view the bill as a win for the wealthy and another found that only about one-quarter of U.S. adults felt Trump’s policies have helped them. In the policy survey, he failed to earn majority support on any of the major issues, including the economy, immigration, government spending and health care. Immigration, especially, had been considered a major strength for Trump politically.
It is “rather tone deaf,” said Bell, for Republicans to go after Biden given those circumstances.
“Americans want us to deal with the issues that are plaguing our country now … the high cost of living, cost of food, the cost of housing, health care,” Bell said, as he blasted the GOP for a deliberate “distraction” from what challenges most U.S. households.
The effort also comes with Trump battling his own supporters over the Justice Department’s decision not to publicly release additional records related to the Epstein case.
“The Epstein saga is more important to his base than whatever happened to Joe Biden,” said Ayres, the GOP pollster.
Even Lalota, the New York congressman, acknowledged a balancing act with the Biden inquiries.
“My constituents care most about affordability and public safety,” Lalota said. “But this is an important issue nonetheless.”
Democrats don’t want to talk about Biden
With Republicans protecting a narrow House majority, every hotly contested issue could be seen as determinative in the 2026 midterm elections.
That puts added pressure on Republicans to retain Trump’s expanded 2024 coalition, when he increased support among Black and Hispanic voters, especially men, over the usual Republican levels. But that’s considerably harder without Trump himself on the ballot. That could explain Republican efforts to keep going after Biden given how unpopular he is with Trump’s core supporters.
Democrats, meanwhile, point to their success in the 2018 midterms during Trump’s first presidency, when they reclaimed the House majority on the strength of moderate voters, including disaffected Republicans. They seem confident that Republicans’ aggressiveness about Biden does not appeal to that swath of the electorate.
But even as they praise Biden’s accomplishments as president, Democrats quietly admit they don’t want to spend time talking about a figure who left office with lagging approval ratings and forced his party into a late, difficult change at the top of the ticket.
Democratic Rep. Don Beyer of Virginia said Biden was productive while acknowledging he “was not at the top of his game because of his age.” He said Democrats want to look forward, most immediately on trying to win control of the House and make gains in the Senate.
“And then who’s our standard bearer in 2028?” Beyer said. “And how do we minimize the Trump damage with what we have right now?”
Barrow and Brown write for the Associated Press. Brown reported from Washington.
Washington Post reporter and columnist Lou Cannon has covered Ronald Reagan for more than 25 years. This article is adapted from his book, “President Reagan: The Role of a Lifetime (Simon & Schuster)
President Ronald Reagan’s aides became accustomed to figuring out things for themselves, for he managed by indirection when he managed at all. Aides who had worked for more directive presidents found this disconcerting.
“He made no demands, and gave almost no instructions,” said Martin Anderson, a veteran of the Nixon Administration. Anderson thought Reagan’s management style odd but rationalized that it was “a small thing, an eccentricity that was dwarfed by his multiple, stunning qualities.”
And yet Anderson was bothered more by this “small thing” than he let on in his useful book “Revolution,” or maybe even more than he realized. It was Anderson who told me that when he returned to the campaign in 1980, after a long absence, he was not quite sure if Reagan realized he had ever been away. Others less self-secure than Anderson or less convinced of Reagan’s greatness were bothered even more by the way their leader distanced himself.
By keeping his emotional distance from the lives and struggles of his subordinates, Reagan was less affected by what happened to them than were presidents with closer relationships. It did not matter all that much to him who was in the supporting cast. Actors came and went in Washington as they had done in Hollywood and Sacramento, without altering his purposes or changing his conception of himself. Reagan remained serene in the center of his universe, awaiting his next performance.
While his distancing of himself from others may have been useful or even necessary for Reagan, it took a heavy toll among the entourage. Principal members of the Reagan team were misled by his manner or misled themselves into an expectation of friendship. They competed to be Reagan’s favorite person.
“Here he was, enormously successful in things that he had done, very confident, comfortable with himself, and a very likable man,” said White House aide Robert B. Sims. “And he had these other people who were mature adults, most of them successful in their own right–the George Shultzes, the Caspar Weinbergers, the Bill Clarks–who had done things on their own and been successful, but Reagan was always up there at a level above these advisers and they all seemed to want to get his favor.” Reagan did not consciously play these subordinates off against one another, as Franklin D. Roosevelt might have done. Instead, he bestowed approval in a general sense on all “the fellas” or “the boys,” as he was wont to describe his inner circle, while withholding his approval from any one of them in particular.
Republican congressional leaders found Reagan uninterested in political strategy, although he was always willing to place a call to a wavering congressman if provided with the script of what he ought to say.
What animated Reagan was a public performance. He knew how to edit a script and measure an audience. He also knew that the screenplay of his presidency, however complicated it became on the margins, was rooted in the fundamental themes of lower taxes, deregulation and “peace through strength” that he had expounded in the anti-government speech he had given in 1964 for Republican presidential candidate Barry M. Goldwater.
The Speech was his bible, and Reagan never tired of giving it. Its themes and Reagan’s approach to government were, as his friend William F. Buckley put it, “inherently anti-statist.”
But on other issues, especially when the discussion was over his head, Reagan’s participation was usually limited to jokes and cinematic illustrations. This is not surprising, as Reagan spent more time at the movies during his presidency than at anything else.
He went to Camp David on 183 weekends, usually watching two films on each of these trips. He saw movies in the White House family theater, on television in the family quarters and in the villas and lavish guest quarters accorded presidents when they travel.
On the afternoon before the 1983 economic summit of the world’s industrialized democracies in colonial Williamsburg, White House Chief of Staff James A. Baker III stopped off at Providence Hall, where the Reagans were staying, bringing with him a thick briefing book on the upcoming meetings. Baker, then on his way to a tennis game, had carefully checked through the book to see that it contained everything Reagan needed to know without going into too much detail. He was concerned about Reagan’s performance at the summit, which had attracted hundreds of journalists from around the world and been advertised in advance by the White House as an Administration triumph.
But when Baker returned to Providence Hall the next morning, he found the briefing book unopened on the table where he had deposited it. He knew immediately that Reagan hadn’t even glanced at it, and he couldn’t believe it. In an hour Reagan would be presiding over the first meeting of the economic summit, the only one held in the United States during his presidency. Uncharacteristically, Baker asked Reagan why he hadn’t cracked the briefing book, “Well, Jim, ‘The Sound of Music’ was on last night,” Reagan said calmly.
Nonetheless, Reagan’s charm and cue cards carried him through the summit without incident. By the third year of his presidency the leaders of the democracies were also growing accustomed to Reagan’s anecdotes and to his cheerful sermons about the wonders of the market system and lower taxes. They were awed at what they saw as his hold on the American people.
In the halcyon days of his presidency, Reagan seemed to have no need of briefing books. And even on those occasions when he read them, he was more apt to find solutions in the movies he watched religiously each weekend.
Sometimes the movies and the briefing books pointed in the same direction. By mid-1983, the U.S. and Soviet governments were beginning to emerge from the mutual acrimony that prevailed between them since the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in Christmas week of 1979. Guided by Reagan’s impulses and George P. Shultz’s diplomacy, the U.S. government was beginning to explore what would ultimately become, after the ascension of Mikhail S. Gorbachev, a more optimistic and productive era in U.S.-Soviet relations.
But arms-control enthusiasts on Capitol Hill were skeptical about Reagan’s intentions toward the nation he had called “the evil empire.” The Administration had been able to persuade a swing group of moderate Democrats to join with Republicans in supporting limited deployment of the MX missile only after Reagan pledged that he would also diligently pursue arms-control opportunities.
On the first weekend in June, 1983, while Democratic support for the MX remained much in question, Reagan went to Camp David with a briefcase full of option papers on arms control. He made a few personal phone calls, scanned the material in the folders and put them aside. After dinner, Reagan was in the mood for a movie, as he usually was on Saturday night. The film that evening was “War Games,” in which Matthew Broderick stars as a teen-age computer whiz who accidentally accesses the North American Aerospace Defense Command–NORAD–and almost launches World War III. It was an entertaining anti-war film with a clear message, intoned in the movie by an advanced computer: The only way to win the “game” of thermonuclear war is not to play it.
Two days later, Reagan met at the White House with several Democratic congressmen who had backed the MX in exchange for the President’s arms-control commitment. He began the meeting by reading from cue cards tailored to congressional concerns. “I just can’t believe that if the Soviets think long and hard about the arms race, they won’t be interested in getting a sensible agreement,” Reagan said.
Then he put the cue cards aside and his face lit up. He asked the congressmen if any of them had seen “War Games,” and when no one volunteered an answer launched into an animated account of the plot. The congressmen were fascinated with Reagan’s change of mood and his obvious interest in the film. He said, “I don’t understand these computers very well, but this young man obviously did. He had tied into NORAD!”
Rally legend Carlos Sainz has decided not to run for the presidency of motorsport’s governing body the FIA in December’s election.
The 63-year-old, who said in May he was considering the idea, explained that “the present circumstances are not ideal to set the grounds for my candidacy”.
Sainz said in a statement on social media, external that he believed the FIA “still needs important changes, which I remain genuinely hopeful will be tackled in the upcoming years”.
He added that a campaign would interfere with his preparations for next year’s Dakar Rally.
Sainz won the Dakar for the fourth time in 2024 and will compete in the desert event in Saudi Arabia next January with Ford.
His son – also named Carlos Sainz – drives for Williams in Formula 1.
Sainz Snr said: “I have realised that properly running for president would notably compromise my preparation for the Dakar and I do not wish to weaken my commitment to Ford and my team.
“These concerns have therefore inclined me to be realistic and desist from my FIA endeavour for now.”
The only declared candidate for the election is the current president, Mohammed Ben Sulayem, whose time in office has been beset by controversies.
The FIA is currently the subject of a lawsuit from Susie Wolff, the head of the F1 Academy for aspiring female drivers and wife of Mercedes motorsport head Toto Wolff.
NEW YORK — Speaking out 20 years after his daughter drowned in Sen. Edward M. Kennedy’s car at Chappaquiddick, the father of Mary Jo Kopechne says she did not die in vain because her death “kept the senator from becoming President.”
“He was worried about himself, not Mary Jo,” Joseph Kopechne said in an interview in the July issue of Ladies Home Journal.
Miss Kopechne, 28, died July 19, 1969, when a car driven by Kennedy ran off a bridge at night and plunged into a pond on Massachusetts’ Chappaquiddick Island. She had been a campaign worker for Kennedy’s brother, Robert.
Kennedy said he freed himself from the car and tried to rescue his passenger. But it took him 10 hours to report the accident. He pleaded guilty to leaving the scene of an accident and lost his license for a year.
In the interview, Miss Kopechne’s mother, Gwen Kopechne, 71, said other women who attended a party with Kennedy and Miss Kopechne before the accident “were shut up.”
“I think there was a big cover-up and that everybody was paid off,” she said.
The Kopechnes received a settlement of $140,904, of which $90,904 came from the senator and $50,000 from his insurance company.
The couple had two brief meetings with Kennedy after the accident, Mrs. Kopechne said. “I don’t think he seemed upset either time we saw him,” she said, “and I don’t remember him saying he was sorry.”
Kennedy has expressed regret for Miss Kopechne’s death on numerous occasions.
Mrs. Kopechne said Kennedy has telephoned the couple periodically.
SEONGNAM, South Korea — South Korean President-elect Lee Jae-myung has always described his politics as deeply personal, born of the “wretchedness” of his youth.
In his last presidential run three years ago, when his conservative opponent Yoon Suk Yeol, a former prosecutor, appealed to the rule of law, Lee told a story from his childhood: how his family’s poverty pushed him into factory assembly lines while his peers were entering middle school — and how his mother would walk him to work every morning, holding his hand.
“Behind every policy that I implemented was my own impoverished and abject life, the everyday struggles of ordinary South Koreans,” he said in March 2022. “The reason I am in politics today is because I want to create … a world of hope for those who are still suffering in the same puddle of poverty and despair that I managed to escape.”
Lee Jae-myung, foreground center, joins a rally against then-President Yoon Suk Yeol at the National Assembly in Seoul in December 2024.
(Ahn Young-joon / Associated Press)
Although Lee lost that race by 0.73 of a percentage point — or 247,077 votes — it was Yoon who set the stage for Lee’s comeback. Impeached halfway into his term for his declaration of martial law in December, the former president is now on trial for insurrection.
In the snap presidential election that took place Tuesday, the liberal Lee emerged the winner, with South Korea’s three major television broadcasters calling the race just before midnight here.
On the campaign trail, Lee framed his run as a mission to restore the country’s democratic norms. But he also returned to the theme that has, over the years, evolved from childhood yearning into his signature political brand: the promise of a society that offers its most vulnerable a “thick safety mat” — a way out of the puddle.
Born in December 1963, the fifth of seven siblings, Lee grew up in Seongnam, a city near the southeastern edge of Seoul that, by the time his family settled there in 1976, was known as a neighborhood for those who had been evicted from the capital’s shantytowns.
The family rented a single semi-basement room by a local market, where his father made a living as a cleaner. At times his family lived on discarded fruit he picked up along his route. Lee’s mother worked as a bathroom attendant just around the corner.
Lee spent his teenage years hopping from one factory to another to help. His first job, at 13, was soldering lead at a jewelry maker for 12 hours a day, breathing in the acrid fumes. At another job, the owner skipped out without paying Lee three months’ worth of wages.
A few years later, while operating a press machine at a baseball glove factory, Lee suffered an accident that permanently disfigured his left arm.
Banners featuring ruling and opposition presidential candidates hang over a street in Seoul days before an election in March 2022.
(Ahn Young-joon / Associated Press)
Lee then began studying for middle school and high school at night after getting off work. He proved to be a gifted student, earning himself a full ride to Chung-Ang University to study law.
After passing South Korea’s bar exam in 1986, he was moved by a lecture given by Roh Moo-hyun, a human rights lawyer who went on to become president in 2003, and the 26-year-old Lee opened up his own legal practice to do the same.
Seongnam by then was rapidly developing, becoming the site of several projects, and Lee threw himself into local watchdog activism.
Ha Dong-geun, 73, who spent a decade organizing in the city with Lee, recalled the day they met: The latter wore an expression of great urgency — “like something bad would happen if he didn’t immediately hit the ground running.”
He added: “He wasn’t afraid of what others thought of him.”
Ha remembered Lee as a keen strategic mind, with a knack for “finding out his opponent’s weaknesses.” Yet despite the noise they made, substantive change proved harder to achieve, leading to Lee’s political awakening in 2004.
A year earlier, two of the city’s major hospitals had shut down, threatening the accessibility of emergency care in its poorest neighborhoods. But though Lee’s campaign had gathered nearly 20,000 signatures from residents to build a public hospital in their place, the proposal was struck down almost immediately by the city council.
“Those in power do not care about the health and lives of people unless there are profits to be made,” Lee wrote in 2021 of his reaction then. “If they won’t do it, let’s do it ourselves. Instead of asking for it from someone else, I will become mayor and do it with my own hands.”
Lee Jae-myung was attacked and injured during a January 2024 visit to the city of Busan in South Korea.
(Sohn Hyung-joo / Yonhap / AP)
Lee was mayor of Seongnam from 2010 to 2018. During that time, he repaid over $400 million in municipal debt left behind by his predecessor. He moved his office down from the ninth to the second floor, frequently appearing in person to field questions or complaints from citizens.
But he was best known for his welfare policies, which he rolled out despite intense opposition from the then-conservative central government: free school lunches, free school uniforms for middle-schoolers and financial support for new mothers seeking postpartum care. For all 24-year-old citizens, the city also provided an annual basic income of around $720 in the form of cash vouchers that could be used at local businesses.
In 2016, when the plight of a high school student who couldn’t afford sanitary pads using a shoe insole instead made national headlines, the city also added a program that gave underprivileged teenage girls cash for female hygiene products. A few years later, Lee also made good on his campaign promise to build the public hospital that had first propelled him into politics.
“My personal experiences made me aware of how cruel this world can be to those who have nothing,” he said in 2021.
Though it has been years since Lee left the city to become the governor of Gyeonggi province and to stage three presidential runs, his track record still inspires fierce loyalty in Seongnam’s working-class neighborhoods, where Lee is remembered as a doer who looked after even the little things.
“His openness and willingness to communicate resonated with a lot of people,” said Kim Seung-man, 67, a shop owner in Sangdaewon Market, where Lee’s family eked out a living in the 1970s. “Working-class people identify with him because he had such a difficult childhood.”
People shout slogans during a rally on April 4, 2025, to celebrate impeached South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol’s removal from office by the Constitutional Court.
(Lee Jin-man / Associated Press)
And while the Seongnam Citizens Medical Center — which opened in 2020 — is deep in the red and has become a target for Lee’s critics who dismiss his welfare policies as cheap populism, Kim says it is a lifeline to this working-class neighborhood.
“It was a treatment hub for COVID patients during the pandemic,” he said. “Serving the public good means doing so regardless of whether it is profitable or not.”
Beyond Seongnam’s working-class neighborhoods, Lee has provoked in many an equally intense dislike — a fact that cannot be explained by his policies alone.
Some have attributed this to his brusque, sometimes confrontational demeanor, others to classist prejudice. Lee has pointed to his status as an “outsider” in the world of South Korean establishment politics, where the paths of most ambitious young politicians follow a script he has eschewed: getting in line behind a party heavyweight who will open doors to favorable legislative seats.
“I have never become indebted to anyone during my time in politics,” Lee said at a news conference last month.
He has faced attacks from within his own party, and conservatives have cast him as a tyrant and a criminal, noting allegations against him in legal cases. Former President Yoon cited the “legislative tyranny” of the Lee-led liberal opposition as justification for declaring martial law in December.
“There are still controversies over character or ethics trailing Lee,” said Cho Jin-man, a political scientist at Duksung Women’s University. “He doesn’t have a squeaky clean image.”
Since losing the 2022 election, Lee has faced trial on numerous charges, including election law violations and the mishandling of a real estate development project as mayor of Seongnam — indictments which Lee has decried as politically motivated attacks by Yoon and his allies.
Lee Jae-myung speaks during a Dec. 15 news conference about the impeachment of President Yoon Suk Yeol.
(Lee Jin-man / Associated Press)
Few of the allegations against Lee have stuck. Others, like an election law clause that prohibits candidates from lying during their campaigns, is an oft-abused technicality that would leave few politicians standing were it consistently enforced.
“On the contrary, these have only led to perceptions that there are problems with the prosecution service,” Cho said.
In recent months, Lee has tried to smooth the rougher edges of his public persona, vowing to mend the country’s increasingly combustible partisan rifts.
Last year, after he survived an assassination attempt in which the assailant’s blade nicked a major vein in his neck, Lee denounced the “politics of hate” that had taken root in the country, calling for a new era of mutual respect and coexistence.
In his recent campaign, Lee has billed his welfare agenda, which includes pledges for better labor protections as well as more public housing and public healthcare, not as class warfare but as commonsense pragmatism, reflecting his efforts to win over moderate conservatives.
But there are still questions whether Lee, whose party now controls both the executive and legislative branches, will be successful.
”He now has a clear path to push through what he wants very efficiently,” Cho said. “But the nature of power is such that those who hold it don’t necessarily exercise restraint.”
Although Lee has promised to not seek retribution against his political enemies as president, he has also made it clear that those who collaborated with former President Yoon’s illegal power grab will be held accountable — a move that will inevitably inflame partisan discord.
His working-class background has not staved off criticisms from labor activists, who say his proposal to boost the domestic semiconductor industry would walk back the rights of its workers.
That background will also do little for Lee’s first and most pressing agenda item: dealing with President Trump, whose tariffs on South Korean cars, steel and aluminum are set to fully go into effect in July.
“I don’t think Lee and Trump will have good chemistry,” Cho said.
“They both have such strong personalities, but they are so different in terms of political ideology and personal upbringing.”
Once more we’re litigating Joe Biden’s catatonic debate performance, his lumbering gait, his moth-eaten memory and his selfish delusion he deserved a second term in the White House while shuffling through his ninth decade on earth.
“Original Sin,” a book by journalists Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson, published this week, is chock-full of anecdotes illustrating the lengths to which Biden’s family and palace guard worked to shield his mental and physical lapses from voters.
John Robert Greene is not at all surprised.
“It’s old news, hiding presidential illness,” said Greene, who’s written a shelf full of books on presidents and the presidency. “I can’t think of too many … who’ve been the picture of health.”
Before we go further, let’s state for the record this in no way condones the actions of Biden and his political enablers. To be clear, let’s repeat it in capital letters: WHAT BIDEN AND HIS HANDLERS DID WAS WRONG.
But, as Greene states, it was not unprecedented or terribly unusual. History abounds with examples of presidential maladies being minimized, or kept secret.
Grover Cleveland underwent surgery for oral cancer on a yacht in New York Harbor to keep his condition from being widely known. Woodrow Wilson suffered a debilitating stroke, a fact covered up by his wife and confidants, who exercised extraordinary power in his stead.
Franklin D. Roosevelt and John F. Kennedy both suffered serious, chronic ailments that were kept well away from the public eye.
Those surrounding Ronald Reagan downplayed his injuries after a 1981 assassination attempt, and the Trump administration misled the public about the seriousness of the president’s condition after he was diagnosed with COVID-19 a month before the 2020 election.
The capacity to misdirect, in Biden’s case, or mislead, as happened under Trump, illustrates one of the magical features of the White House: the ability of a president to conceal himself in plain sight.
“When you’re in the presidency, there is nothing that you can’t hide for awhile,” Greene, an emeritus history professor at Cazenovia College, said from his home in upstate New York. “You’ve got everything at your disposal to live a completely hidden double life, if you want. Everything from the Secret Service to the bubble of the White House.”
Greene likened the Neoclassical mansion at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. to a giant fish bowl — one that is painted from the inside. It’s highly visible, but you can’t really see what’s happening in the interior.
That deflates the notion there was some grand media conspiracy to prop Biden up. (Sorry, haters.)
Yes, detractors will say it was plain as the dawning day that Biden was demented, diminished and obviously not up to the job of the presidency. Today, Trump’s critics say the same sort of thing about him; from their armchairs, they even deliver quite specific diagnoses: He suffers dementia, or Alzheimer’s or Parkinson’s disease.
That doesn’t make it so.
“It’s a very politicized process. People see what they want to see,” said Jacob Appel, a professor of psychiatry and medical education at the Icahn School of Medicine in New York City, who’s writing a book on presidential health.
“You can watch videotapes of Ronald Reagan in 1987,” Appel said, “and, depending on your view of him. you can see him as sharp and funny as ever, or being on the cusp of dementia.” (Five years after leaving the White House, Reagan — then 83 — announced he was in the early stages of Alzheimer’s disease.)
To an uncomfortable degree, those covering the White House — and, by extension, the public they serve — are forced to rely on whatever the White House chooses to reveal.
“I don’t have subpoena power,” Tapper told The Times’ Stephen Battaglio, saying he would have eagerly published the details contained in his new book had sources been willing to come forth while Biden was still in power. “We were just lied to over and over again.”
It hasn’t always been that way.
In September 1955, during his first term, President Dwight D. Eisenhower suffered a heart attack while on a golf vacation in Denver. “”It was sudden,” said Jim Newton, an Eisenhower biographer. “One minute he’s fine and the next minute he was flat on his back, quite literally.”
The details surrounding Eisenhower’s immediate treatment remain a mystery, though Newton suggests that may have had more do with protecting his personal physician, who misdiagnosed the heart attack as a bout of indigestion, than a purposeful attempt to mislead the public.
From then on, the White House was forthcoming — offering daily reports on what Eisenhower ate, his blood pressure, the results of various tests — to a point that it embarrassed the president. (Among the information released was an accounting of Ike’s bowel movements.)
“They were self-consciously transparent,” Newton said. “The White House looked to the Wilson example as something not to emulate.”
Less than 14 months later, Eisenhower had sufficiently recovered — and voters had enough faith in his well-being — that he won his second term in a landslide.
But that 70-year-old example is a notable exception.
As long as there are White House staffers, campaign advisers, political strategists and family members, presidents will be surrounded by people with an incentive to downplay, minimize or obfuscate any physical or mental maladies they face while in office.
All we can do is wait — years, decades — for the truth to come out. And, in the meantime, hope for the best.
