Why Republicans Are Losing While Trump Wins
PDS Published 05/06/2026
-
Republicans may have lost yesterday's elections, but Donald Trump despite his horrible polling like this man owns the Republican or be getting into specifics, if you weren't paying attention, you might not have known that there were midterm primaries in special elections in Ohio, Michigan and Indiana and you had a lot of people paying very close attention, not just to see who but also to see if it could give us a hint as to what to expect from the electoral battle later this and so starting with Indiana. One of the big issues on the ballot was gerrymandering, because Indiana it's one of the states that Trump pressured to redraw its congressional districts last year making phone calls, sending JD Vance their twice, and even inviting its lawmakers to the white but despite Trump laying it on thick pushing Indiana State Senate rejected the gerrymandered map in December, with 21 of 40 GOP lawmakers joining Democrats.
and so then in yesterday's primaries, you had seven of those Republicans who voted no facing challenges from Trump backed candidates. these races were crazy. You had conservative groups, including Charlie Kirk's Turning Point USA, pouring millions of dollars into attack ads, way more money than the same races would have attracted years opposing Trump's policies.
We don't have to be stuck with Rhino Greg Walker.
And then also after Trump got on Truth Social and started naming names, the incumbent Republicans got flooded with death threats, bomb scares, even swatting The cops busted down one lawmakers door and pointed guns at him after they got a false report claiming he had killed his and then when it got to the actual polls, the votes yesterday, Trump's guys, they mostly them or with them beating five out of the seven incumbents and actually, as of recording one race, is still too close to and so one of the easy conclusions to draw from all this is that Trump is still the boss of the Republican even today, despite his crumbling support, he can still credibly threaten Republicans who cross him, even in races that traditionally focus on more local then.
Jumping to Ohio's governor's race. Trump's guy also won there, though he did so against a very different are you at Vivek Ramaswami who Trump and doors running in the GOP primary against Casey Pooch who is a complete political outsider.
and a big thing here is that he wasn't some like anti gerrymandering moderate that was going after Trump's he's been described as far right. He's mocked Ramaswami. He's ethnicity and religion. He's cast himself as the true American.
the VEC is disgusting. It's disgusting. He's here. It's disgusting that he's running to be the governor.
he's also been accused of anti-Semitism, especially for clips like this one where he asks Gronk give me a list of all the good things Adolf Hitler did or was responsible for creating in his life.
and so with that, while many might expect white nationalist Nick wants to really endorse this guy, especially because he does not like Ramaswami. what you ended up seeing is went is actually running in the opposite direction and endorsing the Democratic candidate for governor, Amy Acton.
We are Democrats now. So you gave us Vivek. We're going to give you Amy Acton. It is a middle finger It is a protest vote. It is a fuck Let's be the villain. Let's be the villain because we hate the Republican Party right now more than we hate the Democrats. You're damn right. I'll take an enemy over a traitor. The Republican Party put up a pharmaceutical billionaire Hindu Indian who wants more H-1b to run for governor of a rust belt state. That is a betrayal. That is an insult. They have spit in the face of every Republican in the state of Ohio. Do better next time.
if you keep tabs on Nick, this is really not he and others who are unhappy with a number of Republican things, oftentimes for not being far right they've been actually arguing to not vote or to vote Democrats or that the Republicans feel the most pain then. And then they kind of have to come crawling whether it be this November or in the future, we'll have to see if there's any meaningful difference in the especially because Ramos Swamy is explicitly taking a stance against the far right represented by Fuentes, though he is also still very Trumpian.
So do it that what you If you believe in normalizing hatred towards any ethnic group, toward whites, towards blacks, towards Hispanics, towards Jews, towards Indians, you have no place in the future of the conservative movement, period. And I will not apologize for you believe, and you will forgive me for giving you an exact quote from our online commentator, Nick Fury says, if you believe that Hitler was pretty fucking cool, you have no place in the future of the conservative movement.
meanwhile, in the Democratic primary for the Ohio seat vacated by JD Vance, the political veteran Sherrod Brown defeated the first time candidate, Ron so that sets up Brown to go against sitting GOP Senator Jon Husted, which is going to shape up to be one of the most closely watched races in the right.
And then in a Republican primary for one of Ohio's House seats, you had Trump's former deputy director of ice medicine, Sheahan, actually and so there. You have a number of analysts believing that might signal that an immigration heavy message just might not be popular this November, since that was the focus of her whole In less than one year at Ice, I've stopped more illegal immigration than Marcy Kaptur has in her 43 years in Washington. I'm Madison Sheehan.
and then lastly in Michigan, you have Democrats hanging on to the majority just by a thread in the state Senate, after shed, Rick Greene defeated Republican Jason Tony and a special Well, Michigan, 35th in the district, has spoken. And they said loudly and clearly that they want this marine veteran. This retired fire captain. And proud union member to be there next day sooner because we want.
the wiki thing with this one is that this election is only going to let him serve out the remaining eight months of the current term. So he basically has to start campaigning again immediately for the next race in and since it'll be the general not a special election, there might be a higher turnout, which Tony is counting on to close that 20 point gap that he lost but either way.
And kind of the final thing I'll hit on here is that yesterday was very good but also bad for Right. As I've said, he is the boss of the Republican one of the reasons I commend the Republicans that are brave enough to speak up, because if you do that very soon, you become former representative. but how those Trump backed candidates do in non gerrymandered districts. how they do, where Trump's not able to scare away or suppress the that remains to be seen because right now it looks like it's going to be an uphill battle for the Republicans all across the country in each time we take a look at the polls, it just looks like it gets worse and worse for just last week had another one asking people which party they'd vote for in the midterms if they were held today. And Democrats led by ten points.
No one likes Democrats that much. Not even Democrats. that's as Democrats are also eight points more likely than Republicans to say they're very enthusiastic to vote, 61% to but again, a lot can change from now to Election In addition to whatever voter suppression tactics he's going to try and use, he's most likely going to try and wind down is deeply unpopular. Things you'd think, at right. It's infinitely harder for him to distract people with bullshit culture war things so that they don't pay attention to all the ways that he's failing them. When you have just right in your face the war with Iran, which is his war of choice being gas costs so much more and making everything else caused so much But for now, we'll have to wait to see how all of this plays out. And in the meantime, I'd love to know your thoughts, especially if you were in any of the places I voted yesterday. and then also, as you know, we're talking about the future of America.
-
We should then talk about what RFK Jr is trying to because he just rolled out what Health and Human Services is calling a maha action plan to curb so-called psychiatric overprescribing. and that includes SSRIs that you've probably heard of like Zoloft, Lexapro and Prozac.
And in his rollout statement, you had Kennedy saying that he wants to shift the standard of care toward prevention, transparency and a more holistic approach to mental and he also said that this isn't about taking medication away from people who currently rely on it, but he wants to reduce what he called unnecessary dependance.
the actual plan, at least so far, does look to be pretty right. Has we'll put out a report on prescribing trends. They'll roll out provider education around what they're calling inappropriate prescribing. And they'll push what they're calling non-pharmacological interventions therapy, sleep exercise and here's the thing. Like on its face not really any of that is Therapy is underused in this country. Sleep matters. Exercise helps. Most psychiatrists would tell you the same.
But the problem isn't the bullet for many. Part of the problem is what RFK keeps saying around right because making his case for this Kennedy is now multiple times including this week compared SSRI withdrawal to coming off of saying that a family members experience tapering off of an SSRI was, in his telling, comparable to his own well-documented past withdrawal from it's in the past, he's gone even further and claimed that antidepressants are actually harder to quit than and so.
You know, with this I want to say I want to be thoughtful. I want to be careful because this is a very real s I withdrawal. It is real. People genuinely experience withdrawal symptoms when coming off of antidepressants. For some, it can be very rough. The medical community at times I think is underplayed. How that is a conversation that is worth having, but also heroin withdrawal, which can land people in the hospital which carries one of the the highest relapse rates of any substance which is driven. The worst overdose crisis in modern history is not in the same universe.
and so. You have people, including experts, saying when the person setting us health policy keeps reaching for that comparison anyway, it stops being like a medical argument, and it's more of a rhetorical also with this we should talk about the numbers, right?
A recent survey found about 16% of adults are currently taking an antidepressant, with actually the people behind this plan. Pointing to that number is evidence of overuse. but there's also numbers missing from the rollout, right? Only 40% of adults and adolescents with diagnosed depression have actually received counseling or therapy at and depression rates in this country, according to Gallup's most recent polling. They're sitting at historic
some of the people who actually treat mental illness, they look at that same data, they don't see overprescribing as the central problem. They see massive under treatment as a massive they see millions of people who can't find a therapist, can't afford one, don't live near one, or waited months for an opening and gave up. They see medication often as the only piece of mental health care that a lot of Americans can actually and so it ends up not being that surprising when you have the American Psychiatric Association.
Well, welcoming a national focus on mental directly objecting the framing we're seeing saying we strongly object to framing the nation's mental health crisis is primarily a problem of over medicalization or overprescribing. saying that characterization oversimplifies a complex crisis and ignores the larger reality Too many patients cannot access timely, comprehensive care. While care remains unevenly distributed across our health with them going on to argue that the solution is not stigmatizing psychiatric medication. The solution is making sure that patients have access to the full range of evidence based writing, to be guided by the best available science and the patient's actual
and so actually with that, we then have to flag that major medical organizations were notably absent from Kennedy's that's why you're seeing them respond from the outside. They weren't on stage. They weren't quoted in the press you've some saying that Kennedy has a track record here. He's previously suggested, with no supporting evidence, a link between antidepressants and school shootings. a claim that actually mental health professionals have spent years pushing back on because it stigmatizes the people most likely to be in crisis and least likely to be you know, with this whole situation, you can sort of see how and why some people might get skeptical about how psychiatric medication is prescribed in this You've got kids sometimes prescribed multiple medications by providers who aren't psychiatrists. Long term SSRI use. It's not always reevaluated and withdrawal. It's not always explained clearly to patients before they there are very real conversations that need to be had about how prescribing happens and who's doing that's largely a conversation for clinicians and patients.
not a federal action plan built on the framing that an entire class medications the because the larger mental health crisis in this country, the rising depression rates, the loneliness, the suicide numbers, the kids in waiting rooms and towns that don't have a therapist. That crisis is about access. also of course cost. Right. We have a health care system where the cheapest mental health intervention is a 15 minute appointment and a Because among other things, the alternative actually ongoing therapy is something that most insurance still won't fully and it's why you're seeing so many people saying, hey, the energy's right. The, the thinking of helping people is right. But telling people that their medications, basically heroin doesn't get them therapy, it just gets them hey.
And I'm actually I'm finding myself saying this multiple times today because I'm actually very interested in your thoughts. What are your thoughts with this especially if you're on or have been on this medication in the past. and then there's more we got to dive into in just a minute. But first, let me thank a sponsor and say, you know,
-
imagine if your dinner was advertised as mystery meat flavored crunch you'd probably ask Alexa to queue up some sad violin that it's basically what most dog food is. It's ultra processed filler with a side of that's why today's sponsor, sundaes for dogs exists real food for dogs who deserve better than whatever is left on the factory this stuff.
It was greeted by a vet who got tired of seeing garbage marketed as Sundays is made with real meat, organs and superfoods. so translation. Actual food, not meat powder. Number It's air dried jerky style. So it keeps all the nutrients and flavor while ditching the fridge freezer and prep scoop it, serve it. Bask in the look that your dog gives you like you just invented electricity.
the difference. Better digestion, shinier coats fresh your breath. And yes, the zoomies that your carpet Right. No sketchy byproducts, preservatives or chemicals with names longer than your Wi-Fi even the picky eaters love it. The recipes. They're packed with human great ingredients and actually smell like food, not So treat your dog like family because you wouldn't hand your kid a bowl labeled Meat Filler scan the QR code, or go to Sundays for dogs for 50% off your first that's half off. To finally upgrade your dog's bowl to something then diving right back into the news. The U.S.
SUNDAYS FOR DOGS
Go to https://sundaysfordogs.com/phil to get 50% off your first order of Sundays for Dogs!
-
and Iran have almost reached an agreement to end the war in reopen the Strait of Hormuz. and apparently, because of that, Trump is pausing Project Freedom, the operation he announced to reopen the waterway on Sunday. which Pete Hegseth claimed yesterday had already cleared the way for commercial ships to pass through.
because two American naval destroyers, followed by two merchant vessels were able to transit the strait on Monday, you had headset saying that hundreds more ships from nations around the world were lining up to go. never mind that those American ships had to fight off multiple Iranian attacks, which also targeted other ships and tankers. Residential building in Oman and an oil facility in the UAE.
that's while hundreds of other vessels carrying up to 23,000 crew members remain stranded in the Persian Gulf and in fact, didn't seem all that interested in following. Or with Iran continuing to claim control over the Strait and announcing a new mechanism to oversee maritime traffic through the waterway. throughout all that, insisting the cease fire remained in effect, with General Dan Kane arguing that Iranian attacks had not met the threshold for restarting major combat operations.
then it was only hours later that you had Trump writing on social media that great progress had been made toward a complete and final agreement with Iran. announcing that the operation would be paused for a short period of time to see whether that agreement could be finalized and signed.
then you had Axios later reporting that the administration believed it was nearing an agreement with Iran regarding a one page memorandum of understanding, which would also apparently not really be a complete and final agreement like Trump said, but would provide a framework for further negotiations focused on the nuclear issue. but in any case, the memorandum would reportedly declare an end to the war and open a three day window for negotiating a detailed agreement, among other issues, that deal would involve Iran committing to a moratorium on nuclear enrichment, the US agreeing to lift its sanctions and release billions in frozen Iranian funds, and both the U.S. and Iran, lifting restrictions around transit through the Strait of Hormuz.
also say regarding the strait, both sides would begin gradually lifting restrictions during the 30 day period. and that's a key point, because every single day that remains closed as a huge impact.
though, it all stands out because Iran previously suggested reopening the strait, negotiating the nuclear issue afterward. Brian Trump rejected that offer, saying the nuclear issue had to be addressed. the with that, the administration has reportedly made clear that it would be able to resume military action if talks collapsed. So he's not necessarily fully backing down on that issue. but also maybe he is.
And then also with everything, the duration of the moratorium on uranium enrichment reportedly remains one of the most significant points of contention. you had Iran previously proposing a five year ban. The US demanded 20, but now you have three sources telling Axios that it would be at least 12 years, with one saying 15 is the likely landing spot.
Which again is something that stands out because 15 years was also the length of time of the nuclear deal negotiated under Obama. the also in that case, it wasn't a full ban on enrichment. instead, enrichment was capped at 3.67%, which is enough for civilian purposes, but far below the 90% needed for a nuclear weapon.
the Trump administration, they're reportedly pushing for a provision that would have any Iranian violation extend the timeline with enrichment capped at 3.67% even after its end. also, according to some of Axios, the sources, Iran would commit to never seek a nuclear weapon or conduct weaponization related activities. It would remove its current stockpile of highly enriched uranium from the country, and it would agree to an enhanced inspections regime, including Snap inspections by U.N. inspectors.
then finally of the two sides reportedly discussing a clause whereby Iran would commit not to operate underground nuclear facilities. well, it's definitely far too soon to see if this is going to work out.
The markets, I'll say, reacted very positively. Right. Oil prices fell roughly 11% back under $100 a barrel. still way up from before the war. But definitely a huge change.
so also with all this, you had some sources saying that the U.S was expecting Iranian responses on some several key points within the next 48 hours. also claiming that it was the closest of the two sides have been to an agreement since this war began.
then also you have the white House reportedly believing that the Iranian leadership is divided and may not be able to reach a consensus. And some American officials remain unconvinced that even this initial one page memorandum is going to get finalized.
as far as Iran publicly so far, they've only said that they were reviewing a new U.S. proposal and would give it an answer soon via Pakistan. there, there. You had an Iranian news agency saying the text contained unacceptable clauses and was just propaganda, quote, aimed at justifying Trump's retreat from his recent hostile action.
that as you're the spokesperson for the country's parliamentary national security committee, describing it as more of an American wish list than a reality, saying the Americans will not gain anything in a war they are losing that they have not gained in face to face negotiations.
the again, we'll have to wait to see a lot of people on both sides. I've been saying a lot of things. We'll have to see what the official response is like. Does it match the rhetoric?
there also in the meantime, you had Trump trying to apply pressure, writing another post this morning, assuming Iran agrees to give what has been agreed to, which is perhaps a big assumption. The already legendary epic Fury will be at an end, and the highly effective blockade will allow the Hormuz Strait to be open to all, including Iran.
but adding if they don't agree, the bombing starts and it will be, sadly at a much higher level in intensity than it was before.
then with all that, despite talk of an imminent deal, he later told the New York Post that it was still too soon to consider face to face meetings with Iran. But then he told PBS that the war had a very good chance of ending, while also adding if they agree, it's over. If they don't agree, we bomb.
and that option is something that a number of his supporters would prefer, supporters like Senator Lindsey Graham, who has been a staunch supporter of the war, arguing that Iran's recent attacks on the UAE and ships in the Gulf more than justifies a big, strong and short response to inflict further damage on Iran's war machine.
and that is his other great idea, which he told Fox News about yesterday, is what he calls a Second Amendment solution. I love the idea of a Second Amendment solution for the Iranian people. So if I were President Trump and our Israel, I would load the Iranian people up with weapons, so they could go to the streets armed and turned the tide of battle inside Iran. We don't need American boots on the ground. We've got millions of boots on the ground in Iran. They just don't have any weapons. Give them the weapons so they can rise up like we did to destroy this regime.
so with that, it's only kind of recently that he's seemingly changing his stance on putting American boots on the ground, having done kind of a total 180 on his prior call for the U.S. to take Kharg Island. though Lindsey still says that he thinks that we ought to tell the Iranians we will destroy it from the air.
then also beyond politicians while we, you know, talked a lot about MAGA backlash to this war, other Trump supporters, they remain on board with further military action.
The easiest move for the United States to make right now would be to just blow up our island, our island, and you could do an amphibious operation there. It's a lot riskier, or it could just blow it up. we could blow up the island, we could hit other energy resources inside the country, could take down another layer of the IRGC. We'll probably have to do at some point or another kinetic action against missile facilities that have been uncovered. Over the course of the last few weeks, now, if the U.S. does attack Iran again, it's unclear whether the administration will have to come up with another new name for the mission.
because yes, you had Trump saying in that post this morning that Operation Epic Fury could soon be, quote, at an end. but you also had Secretary of State Marco Rubio telling reporters yesterday. the Operation Epic Fury is concluded. We achieved the objectives of that operation.
and Rubio said that to justify the administration's claim that they haven't violated the 60 day time limit for engaging in hostilities without permission from Congress. the many experts say that's kind of a load of crap.
but to focus on the second part of that statement for a second, it is far from clear that the administration's objectives have actually been accomplished. Trump himself described the goals of this war as including Iran never having a nuclear program, the destruction of the country's ballistic missiles, and creating the conditions for the Iranian people to rise up and overthrow the regime.
U.S. intelligence reportedly says that Iran could still probably have a nuclear weapon in a year if it wanted, assessments also appear to show that more than half of the country's missiles and launchers have survived. And it's not clear that the current proposal makes any mention of that issue.
hardline elements of the Iranian regime may have even more power now as it cracks down dissent, executes protesters and restricts internet access. then, of course, on top of everything, a problem that didn't exist before the Strait of Hormuz is effectively closed.
and while the administration has overstated its own accomplishments, it may have also downplayed Iran's. now have The Washington Post reporting that based on satellite imagery, Iran has had far more U.S. military assets than has been publicly acknowledged by the white House.
But apparently, Iranian airstrikes have damaged or destroyed at least 228 structures or pieces of equipment at American military sites across the Middle East. Since this war began hitting hangars, barracks, fuel depots, aircraft and key radar, communications and air defense equipment.
one expert told them the Iranian attacks were precise. There are no random craters indicating misses.
that we also noted that he and other experts don't believe that the attacks have significantly limited the military's ability to conduct its bombing campaign in Iran. and they also noted that some of the damage may have occurred after U.S. troops already left the bases, making protection of the structures less vital.
those still we're talking about Trump's actions that have left 13 U.S. troops killed and several hundred more injured over the course of this war.
well, there's a version of events where, you know, that is the end of all this, there's a version where this is just still kind of the beginning. it's for now, we're going to have to wait to see what happens with the current negotiations. And in the meantime, I really would love to know your thoughts. love to hear from you in those comments down below.
-
And then there's more you got to dive into in just a minute. But let me thank a sponsor and say, you know, so there's a there's a real chance that you've killed something that had no business because you're playing a game, it might be weak and fast growing trees.
It fixes plug in your location and you let it guide you as to what actually survives where you whatever sad situation you've got going on in your yard right now. Don't worry. Like there's Fast growing trees is America's largest online nursery with over 2 million happy customers.
And that's because picking the right plant is weirdly complicated. You've got climates, soil, sunlight, watering, and actual survival to think fast. Growing trees makes the whole process They've got everything from fruit trees, privacy trees, flowering trees, shrubs. Whether you're looking for more shade, better curb appeal, or you just want your place to look a little more and every plant it's backed by, they're alive and Thrive guarantee. So it arrives healthy and ready to No clue what you're doing. They've got plant experts that you can reach out to for right now is definitely the time to act.
They've got spring planting essentials up to half off on select and yo, you can get 20% off your first purchase when using code DeFranco at that's an additional 20% off better plants and better growing and fast growing trees. Comcast DeFranco code to again. That's fast. Franco, use code and just remember use code DeFranco.
FAST GROWING TREES
Go to https://fastgrowingtrees.com/DEFRANCO use code DEFRANCO to get 20% off your first order!
-
Because now is the perfect time to but then diving. Right back into the news, it's actually the final thing that I want to talk about today.
It starts with how the FBI has reportedly opened a criminal investigation into a magazine reporter. and that reporter is Sarah Fitzpatrick of The Atlantic. And if that name sounds familiar, it's because last month she wrote a story where she cited more than two dozen anonymous sources including people inside the Bureau on the Hill and the lobbying world, even people who'd worked in the hospitality industry around him, alleging that FBI Director Cash Patel has a drinking problem, has gone missing during work hours and has on occasion been hard to wake up in the morning by his own security.
and according to Ms.. Now the bureau's insider threat unit at a Huntsville, Alabama, is now running a leak probe. Right in the part that has a lot of former DOJ people kind of raising their eyebrows. Is that the leak in question? It does not appear to involve actually classified information. or which historically has been the bar, before the federal government starts pulling a journalist phone records and checking them out in bureau but also the FBI denies that this investigation even exists.
though the Atlantic said in chief Jeffrey Goldberg said if it is true it would be a, quote, outrageous, illegal and dangerous attack on the free But what we do know for sure is that Patel sued the Atlantic for over $250 million just two weeks ago.
almost every legal expert who's taken a look at it says that he's definitely going to lose this case. You're the nation calling it a giant cell phone. there are typos in this complaint that have become memes online.
and when we're also going to dive into like winning this case probably not actually being the point. wanted to dive into the one reason that it's even possible for the Atlantic to walk away from this. because at the center of this, you have a Supreme Court case from 1964, the two current sitting Supreme Court justices have seemingly publicly said that they want to overturn.
and there are organized, well-funded efforts that are still going on right now that are going to give them a chance.
and a lot of this, it's connected to how Patel in his lawsuit said that The Atlantic published a, quote, sweeping, malicious and defamatory hit piece, the men specifically going after 17 statements in the article, including the claims about drinking at private clubs in DC in Las Vegas, alleging inability to perform his duties and being just a national security risk.
and Patel, he has a very high bar to clear because when you are a public figure, a politician, a celebrity, a high ranking government official, when you sue a journalist for defamation, they don't just have to prove that the story was wrong, have to prove what the law calls actual malice. that doesn't mean like the reporter was mean to them. That is a specific legal term.
it means the reporter either knew that the story was false when they published it, or that they had what's called a reckless disregard for whether it was true. that's a really hard thing to prove. because essentially to win, you have to get inside of the reporters head and prove that they didn't believe what they were writing.
and actually one of the ways we've seen this play out was with Sarah Palin, Sarah Palin lost her case against the New York Times, Right. Because the times, they actually ran a false editorial connecting her to a mass shooting. The editor who oversaw it testified in court that, yes, he made a mistake. And yes, he tried to fix it as fast as he and so the court said, oh, okay. Well, that's a mistake. That's not malice. Palin loses.
and it's also why you had Fox News paying Dominion $787.5 million. Because in discovery internal Fox tax came out, were on air talent and executives were privately admitting that they thought the election fraud claims that they were broadcasting on air were nonsense, that is a textbook case of actual malice. they knew it, and they aired it anyway.
and so with that going back to Patel, he's claiming actual malice, and his main arguments are the Atlantic gave the FBI less than two hours to respond before publication. They buried the FBI's denial, and they later edited the headline.
None of that is even close to actual mouths. Right? To our response. Windows are aggressive but legal. Burying a denial in your eyes, that's not the same as ignoring evidence.
And most importantly, the reporter cited more than two dozen sources. whole structure of this story is like people who know this guy are worried about that is not a claim that the reporter is making about Patel personally. It is a report on what colleagues are reportedly saying and also speaking to that many people on a story is pretty much the opposite of recklessly disregarding the truth.
so again, most people, including a number of commentators on the right, they think that Patel is going to lose, but the winning might not even be the goal. right, the lawsuit, the legal fees that come with it, the hours that the Atlantic's lawyers and reporters are having to spend pulling documents for discovery instead of doing journalism.
chilling effect it might have on others that have the audacity to report news on the administration. That's probably the goal. even a name for people who study press freedom. Call it lawfare, right. Using the legal system just to make it expensive to do journalism. and it works whether you win the case or not, though really, the only reason it doesn't work even better is because of a Supreme Court case.
because in 1964 you have the New York Times vs Sullivan. if you're not familiar with this case, that's normal. Most people kind of go, the, the thing with the actual malice and they point backwards vaguely. but it's very interesting to dive into, right.
Because in 1960, Martin Luther King Jr had been arrested in Alabama on what most Assyrians considered trumped up tax fraud so a group of his supporters, they bought a full page ad in the New York Times asking for donations for his legal when the ad ran, it accused Alabama police and various officials of brutality and harassment of civil rights protesters.
but the ad, it had some factual things like it got the number of times that King had been arrested wrong. It said that the protesters saying one song when they actually sang a different and while the Montgomery, Alabama police commissioner, a guy by the name of L.B. Sullivan was named in the ad, he wasn't described in the ad. He sued the times anyway, claiming that any criticism of the police implicitly meant the setup of this trial.
It was wild, It happened in Montgomery. The judge. This is Spent the day before the trial reenacting the swearing in of Jefferson Davis as the president of the Confederacy. And some of the people who showed up in that courtroom were even wearing Confederate and the jury, unsurprisingly, was all white, all male.
And they awarded Sullivan $500,000, which in today's money is roughly 5 And this wasn't like some random outlier officials all across the South, they had figured out that you could weaponize libel law to try to bankrupt any northern newspaper that sent reporters down to cover the civil rights By 1961, the times alone was facing more than $6 million in libel claims over its civil rights had the legal director saying that those lawsuits nearly bankrupted also when you add up all the northern papers, the recovering the movement, the total ran to nearly $300 million in libel claims, and that's in 1960s
but then what you see is the Supreme Court takes up this case. And in March of 1964, they ruled unanimously. right. Nine to nothing that this whole approach was unconstitutional. and it's there that the actual malice standard comes right. The Supreme Court said that if you are a public official and you want to sue a newspaper for defamation, you have to prove that the newspaper either knew the story was false or recklessly disregarded the
and then three years later, in 1967, they extended the rule to public figures in general. So celebrities, business leaders, anyone who's voluntarily in public and their reasoning was if the threat of a libel suit is just hanging over every reporter who might criticize a powerful person, no one's ever going to criticize potential cost of being wrong. It's just too and a press that can't criticize the powerful. That's not a free press, that's just PR.
so it's actually this ruling that's been holding up press freedom in this country for 62 but that also makes it a ruling that a number of people want to take
like I said at the beginning, there is an organized, well-funded legal effort going on right now to find the right Supreme Court case that lets them overturn New York Times v and as far as where some of the potential votes come from, you're not going to be surprised by at least one of the Justice Clarence Thomas is written publicly starting in 2019 that he believes Sullivan was wrongly he's argued that it lets the press make false statements about public figures with, quote, near impunity.
also Neil Gorsuch might be there as well. Right, because Gorsuch joined Thomas in a 2021 case, though his angle, I will say, is because Gorsuch's argument is basically that the media landscape that Sullivan was decided and doesn't exist that was 1964. There were three networks, a handful of major papers with actual fact checking departments.
in 2026, there's Twitter AI generated misinformation, 12,000 random YouTube channels also. and so he appears to think that the standard that made sense for The New York Times in 1964 might not make sense for whatever this no two votes. That obviously doesn't get you there to to changing precedent.
You have to have but one we don't know where a number of the other conservative justices would stand on this. And two, A lot of this might depend on the case that they use as a and so with that, I'll note that you had Steve Wynn, the casino owner, asking the court last February to overturn Sullivan as part of a defamation suit against the Associated With that one, the Supreme Court refused to take that up in March of 2025.
also, you have Coral Ridge Ministries, a Christian organization that sued the Southern Poverty Law Center for being put on a hate group list. They also and there, the court actually asked SPLC to file a response to that petition, even though SPLC had already won at the lower court and so that one could actually be a small but very real
and actually right now there's a pending petition from Alan Dershowitz against CNN and that one specifically asked the court to consider whether the actual malice standard should be discarded. Altogether, or at least as private citizens who are public and there. We'll find out later this spring whether the court takes it
that's while we've seen some state activity as with Florida being the most active example, spending recent years actively introducing bills basically engineered to be Sullivan vehicles. laws that appear to conflict with the actual malice standard and was designed to force a federal court to say which one
But for now, I'll kind of leave it with two last standard right now it Sullivan set up. It is currently working as understandably the settlements they get a lot of press. Trump himself has been losing his own defamation suit against CNN over the phrase the big lion. He's been losing it on actual malice but also to Sullivan is not invincible.
Democrats often think in days and quarterly cycles. Republicans think in decades. there has been is and will continue to be a steady push of well-funded petition specifically engineered to try and fight against this and that's as this Patel lawsuit is a prime example of even trying to win might not be the if you make actual journalism expensive, slow, exhausting, scary. Maybe stories in the future don't get
and ultimately, I wanted to dive through all this with you, because I think it's worth understanding what we have and how we got it before. We have to find out what happens when we hopefully we won't have to find out But that my friends.
You beautiful bastards, is the end of your Wednesday Philip DeFranco but you can also continue to get filled in on your hump day. Because I also just uploaded the brand new episode this week of Crashing we dive into Spirit Airlines and it's just a ton of craziness. Definitely recommend the watch. I have it on screen for you, but also links in the but hey, no matter what you do, let me just say thank you for watching. I love yo faces and I'll see you right back here tomorrow.
A friend of the show passed away and that is our good friend Spirit Airlines. Now, the only way to take a spirit flight the afterlife. The Rogue One died. That is fucking DC comics rules. That is Batman not killing the Joker. Okay. I think the only way that Newsome passes is if people look at him and they're like, we want a demon of our own. Tucker Carlson looked directly into the camera and said, I lie. It was almost like they were trying to craft a narrative. It's weird. I want those days of my life back. Stay angry. Crashing out. New episodes every Wednesday.
