It was an accident committed by a member of the United States delegation that paralyzed the United Nations (UN) escalator last week during the General Assembly, the organization concluded. The mishap happened just as President Donald Trump and his wife Melania were beginning to ascend the stairs. But this coincidence didn’t stop the White House press secretary and Trump supporters on Fox News from claiming it was an international conspiracy to embarrass the US president. Nor was there any need to explain the malfunctioning teleprompter, which was blamed on a supposed plan to sabotage Trump’s speech before nearly 150 heads of state and senior diplomats.
None of the possible justifications for these events prevented Trump from once again assuming the role of victim and attacking the United Nations. And, later, from complaining that, many years ago, he had lost the bid to renovate the UN complex.
Beyond these unfortunate coincidences, Trump’s speech was also filled with allegations leveled against countries, including Brazil.
He made a statement about the country based on the false information that Eduardo Bolsonaro and Paulo Figueiredo have been feeding the White House: “Brazil now faces heavy tariffs in response to its unprecedented efforts to interfere with the rights and freedoms of American citizens and other countries, with censorship, repression, arming, judicial corruption, and attacks on political critics in the United States.”
Ironically, everything that Trump accused Brazil of doing was precisely what he had been carrying out the very same week in the United States. But as Trump learned long ago, the best defense is a good offense.
Then, suddenly, going off script, he demurred to Lula who he had just met before beginning his speech. All that Trump needed was a warm smile and a friendly Brazilian embrace. Suddenly there were best friends. A possible meeting between the two in the coming week may render a reduction in tariffs that the United States has imposed on Brazil because Trump suddenly thinks he is starting a new bromance. But I’m not holding my breath.
Trump might honestly feel the chemistry between Lula and himself. After all, Lula is a tremendously charismatic, warm, and effusive person. But that would signal that Trump was giving up on his campaign to force Brazil to grant Bolsonaro amnesty or reduce his sentence. It would mean abandoning an “old friend.”
The U.S. president is famous for distancing himself from or cutting off former allies at a moment’s notice, when that person no longer serves his interests. But Trump, and at least some of the advisors surrounding him, still have a stake in supporting the far right in Latin America.
One reflection of that policy concern was Trump’s first greetings to his authoritarian soulmate President Nayib Bukele of El Salvador during his UN speech.
The same week, U.S. government offered support to Argentine President Jabier Milei, a far-right libertarian. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced that the United States would extend a $20 billion swap line to Argentina, exchanging U.S. dollars for pesos to stabilize the economy on the eve of important October legislative elections.
Given these geopolitical considerations, and Trumps escalating aggression against Venezuela, it seems highly unlikely that there will be a lasting “romance” between the two most important leaders of the Americas.
Trump attacks comedians and hosts: the MAGA cancellation
Trump’s debacle at the United Nations gave late night TV comedians a large amount of material to make fun of the president. It came while a rather spontaneous national campaign criticized the White House’s frontal attack on free speech in the entertainment world.
The assault began in July when CBS announced next year’s cancellation of late-night host and comedian Stephen Colbert after he had criticized a $16 million legal settlement between CBS’s parent company Paramount Global and Donald Trump. In his successful lawsuit, Trump claimed that CBS had unfavorably edited an interview with Kamala Harris during the 2024 presidential electoral campaign.
At the time, media critics observed that Trump had a weak case, and it would have been difficult for Trump to win the case. Colbert concurred and called it a “big fat bribe” because Paramount Global needed federal government approval for a $8.4 billion merger with Skydance Media.
Less than a week after the decision to cancel Colbert’s show, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) approved the merger. For his part, Trump celebrated the demise of Colbert.
Comedian Jimmy Kimmel was the next head on the chopping block. Almost immediately after the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, Kimmell suggested that the far right would use his death to attack the left. Throughout the country conservatives blasted Kimmel’s remarks as yet another anti-American campaign of the “fake” mainstream media. Trump clamored for Kimmel’s removal. FCC chairman Brendan Carr also weighed in calling for Kimmel to be suspended. “We can do this the easy way or the hard way,” he threatened. Within hours, ABC announced Kimmel’s suspension.
The irony of the Trump admiration’s actions was all too evident. After years of Republican complaints about leftwing censorship and cancel culture, Trump and his MAGA allies were doing the same.
Significantly, there was immediate reaction by a handful of Trump supporters in the Senate in defense of Kimmel’s free speech rights. Ultra-conservative Texas senator Ted Cruz vehemently spoke out against the government’s effort to silence a Trump critic, comparing its actions to those of a mafia boss. Libertarian Senator Rand Paul also criticized the move. Even former Senate leader Mitch McConnell weighed in against the government’s heavy-handed attack on free speech.
This small cluster of senate voices, rare to be heard from the Republican majority in Congress, marks the second split among Trump supporters, as a handful of Republicans have also joined Democrats in backing a petition that would force the Congress to vote on demanding the release of the Epstein files.
More importantly, public outcry was almost immediate against ABC’s parent company, Disney. The Writers’ Guild of America organized a protest outside of the Disney Studios in Burbank, California. Prominent entertains threated to boycott the media giant. Thousands of subscribers to Disney-owned streaming services canceled their subscriptions.
Suddenly, Disney reversed its suspension, and Kimmel was once again on the air, defending free speech and criticizing the government’s campaign. Once again, Trump could not contain himself from blasting his enemies. He sent out a message condemning ABC’s decision and threated to press legal charges against the company for bringing Kimmel back.
It that weren’t enough, this last week Trump also targeted three other political enemies. When Trump-appointed U.S. Attorney Erik Siebert failed to find enough evidence to press alleged mortgage fraud charges against New York State Attorney Leticia James, who had successfully prosecuted Trump for fraudulent business practices, Trump demanded his resignation.
He then issued a social media message demanding that James, along with former FBI Director James Comey and California U.S. Senator Adam Schiff, be immediately brought to justice, claiming they were “guilty as hell” for unspecified crimes.
Trump also handpicked Lindsey Halligan, a former White House aide whose only legal experiences has been with insurance-related issues, as the new Attorney General for the Virigina district to replace Seibert. She immediately obtained an indictment against Comey for allegedly lying to Congress during a 2020 hearing about government leaks of information about on-going FBI investigations.
Legal specialists consider that it will be very hard for the new federal prosecutor, who has little experience outside of insurance cases, to successfully conduct the case. But that is not the point.
Retribution can come from forcing an enemy to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to defend themselves in court. Trump can use these cases to reinforce the narrative that he is constantly being unjustly attacked by his enemies.
These attacks on free speech have three main objectives: (1) silence Trump’s critics who might fear prosecution and costly lawsuits; (2) shore up his support among sectors of his base who are clamoring for the release of the Epstein files; and (3) seek petty and infantile revenge on those who have slighted him and wounded his fragile ego.
All of this is happening when Trump’s popular support continues to wane. Both Quinnipiac University and Reuters/Ipos polls show a slight increase in the dissatisfaction with the president’s job performance. A majority of those polled also feared that freedom of speech was not being sufficiently protected.
In one poll between 53% and 56% of those questioned opposed seven of Trump’s major policy initiatives: immigration, foreign policy, the economy, gun violence, the Russia-Ukraine War, and the Israel-Hamas conflict. Public support for Trump’s performance on these issues remains in the 30s.
Popular pushback is increasing. Both Trump and the Democrats next big test will be whether the government shuts down because the Republicans refuse to negotiate a budget deal with Democrats.
Trump has refused to meet with the opposition in Congress. Instead, he has threatened to fire tens of thousands of workers if they are temporary laid off while Congress battles over an agreement. For their part Democrats are demanding a negotiated proposal that would reverse severe cuts to federally funded medical coverage for the poor, disabled and the elderly.
Should Democrats force Republicans to the bargaining take to cut a deal, it will be a sign that they are gaining strength and momentum in their opposition to the Trump’s on-going assaults on democracy.
PayPal 
