1) 40% of Republicans are open to a primary candidate besides Trump.
2) This fall's chief DC topic will be impeachment; Trump will likely be impeached. Whether there'll be a Senate trial is unclear.
3) By December, the GOP field could be:
Kasich
Sanford
Trump
Walsh
Weld
NOTE/ I'm not saying Trump won't be the GOP nominee. I'm saying an impeached Trump in the midst of a Senate trial that airs his crimes is a *damaged* Trump. There may well be a number of Republicans who make the case that the GOP can't afford the risk of a post-impeachment Trump.
NOTE2/ Mitch McConnell refusing to hold a Senate trial after Trump is impeached by the House is, to be clear, *illegal*. Moreover, the moment impeachment occurs Chief Justice John Roberts is the judge in the case; the House might well be able to successfully petition for a trial.
NOTE3/ Right now 40% of Republicans are open to a new primary candidate. Imagine the optics if impeachment and a Senate trial push that over 50% due to anxiety over whether Trump can win. The moment a *majority* of Republicans are open to a new candidate, many things will change.
NOTE4/ A vulnerable, post-impeachment Trump could widen the GOP field even more than we expect, perhaps even forcing televised debates; at any such event, GOP voters would *finally* see how easy it'll be to demolish Trump over his disloyalty to the country and gross incompetence.
NOTE5/ I've no doubt that Trump would refuse to debate, as he's fundamentally a grotesque coward; *and* I've no doubt Ronna Romney McDaniel and the RNC would refuse to in *any* way make room for primary challengers, as the RNC is enabling a criminal and has been for 3+ years now.
NOTE6/ But there's a question about what CNN/MSNBC would do if they saw the following field of high-profile Republicans attempting to challenge Trump and wanting a televised debate (even one Trump wouldn't attend):
NOTE7/ All this is hypothetical. The names in the prior tweet have all publicly proven themselves to be cowards in the face of Trump's autocratic nightmare. The question is whether impeachment, a trial and cable's willingness to televise debates without Trump could change things.
NOTE8/ But here's another way to look at it: the more candidates who join the GOP primary, the more likely it is that new candidates join because it begins to seem like a real primary, with a chance that donors open their purses and that cable news gives coverage to challengers.
NOTE9/ Now add another wrinkle: increasing signs of a coming recession. I think we underestimate how vulnerable Trump may come to seem to many viable Republican presidential candidates in the 120 days to come. But it's media that determines whether this story ever really emerges.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The manifesto of the Minnesota shooter has been translated—and it's all about his hatred of Jews, Blacks, Mexicans, illegal immigrants, Somalis... none of this had to do with him being trans and major media *knows* it.
So why won't it say so?
1/ The manifesto uses the most vile slurs imaginable to describe Jews and Blacks, groups MAGA is hostile to.
The manifesto uses the most vile rhetoric imaginable to speak of illegal immigrants, another group Maga is hostile to.
And it uses 4chan-speak. 4chan is a MAGA hotbed.
2/ Everyone in America knows at this point that MAGA is a fascist movement and that the first group it wants to start treating like the Nazis did Jews are transgender persons. So the second the possibility the shooter was trans arose, all of us should have apprehended the danger.
1/ I recognize that I often say this when I am speaking of extremely deep-dive curatorial research into Trump and two discrete topics—Jeffrey Epstein and January 6—but it is true: what is in this book will shock you even if you believe you cannot be shocked on these topics.
2/ I want to issue a warning to those with sensitivities surrounding the subject of sex crimes and pedophilia. It is almost certain that this epic work will be triggering for you so, do read with caution or decide whether it even makes sense for you to read this at all.
(🧵) Trump and his team are lying to MAGAs about what is going to happen with unhoused persons in DC—a thread.
1/ In case you doubted it, Karoline Leavitt confirmed today that the Trump administration knows nothing about unhoused persons or homelessness.
They don’t know how shelters work. They don’t understand mental health/addiction services intake.
They’re just going to jail everyone.
2/ She promised America unhoused persons would be given a choice: shelter, mental health/addiction services, or jail (apparently on a bogus charge that would lead to a long, unjustified pretrial incarceration at massive expense to taxpayers).
I studied Criminal Law at Harvard Law School under Alan Dershowitz and went on to be a criminal defense attorney.
The post below is one of the most ignorant posts I’ve ever seen about Criminal Justice and I only just now learned this man is faculty at Harvard Law.
How? No idea.
Crime is a key driver of public policy—almost always to the detriment of society—a fact that explains why everything tied to it is supposed to be described and defined in exact (and exacting) terms: e.g. statutes, crime data, Constitutional amendments as interpreted by precedent.
As it happens, I also have a background in Sociology—and even in the allegedly softer of the social sciences (including those, like Sociology, often affiliated with the study of Criminal Justice and the Law) the phrase “pervasive social disorder” would be considered preposterous.
This is the serial child rapist the Dear Leader is about to pardon to save himself.
Any MAGA providing rhetorical cover for Donald Trump as he seeks to cover up years of pimping teens—teens he'd fed booze and drugs—at the Plaza Hotel in the 1990s is as good as a pedo themselves.
Trump had his own teen rape victim procurer. He even turned his sex trafficking ring at the Plaza into a business that thereafter was accused of human rights violations by its workers—who deemed themselves slaves. What Epstein did in FL Trump not only allowed but mirrored in NYC.
All this is based on existing reporting. I've compiled hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of reliable major-media sources on these matters into PROOF OF DEVILRY, which will be published shortly as the seventh book in the NYT-bestselling Proof Series.
(1) Trump and Epstein became friends in 1987, not 1990. The New York Times inexplicably cuts 3 years off their 17-plus-year friendship.
(2) Their friendship did *not* end because Epstein was a creep. It ended over a Florida real estate deal. nytimes.com/2025/07/19/us/…
To the credit of the NYT, it does eventually clarify Point #2 in the report.
I do wish it spent more time on the fact that an anonymous person dimed out Epstein after Trump got angry at Epstein over the real estate deal in 2004—and that Trump has a history of diming people out.
That question alone could change everything.
If in fact Trump extended his long history of being a disgusting snitch only when it personally benefits him by reporting Epstein to the police in 2004—or having an agent do it—it would confirm he knew exactly what Epstein was up to.