Home Blog

Bush-Era White House Ethics Lawyer Raises Impeachment Alarm Over Trump TV Ads

By
Madeleine Jackson
-
0
White House image via Wikimedia Commons

A former White House ethics lawyer says government-funded television ads promoting President Donald Trump could cross a line serious enough to warrant impeachment.

Richard Painter, who served as chief ethics lawyer in President George W. Bush’s White House, made the warning Sunday as ads featuring Trump aired ahead of the November midterms. “This could be an impeachable offense,” Painter wrote on X, referring to comments he made to The New York Times. He argued that a president has no right to use taxpayer money for campaign advertising.

The impeachment warning is Painter’s assessment. The White House disputes his description of the ads, calling them public service announcements.

The ads behind the fight

One 30-second spot flashes images of Trump while touting tax cuts, manufacturing and law enforcement. It uses audio of the president promising to defeat “communism, socialism and Marxism in America,” followed by praise from UFC CEO Dana White. The screen identifies it as “Paid for by the U.S. Government.” ABC News reported that the spot ran on Fox News and Newsmax in several markets; ad-tracking firm AdImpact estimated the buy at roughly $14,000 as of September 24.

A separate black-and-white spot features Trump’s 2024 campaign rhetoric about the “deep state,” “warmongers” and the news media. The New York Times reported that the footage had previously run as a campaign ad. Painter told the Times that using federal funds for the spots could constitute an abuse of power and an impeachable offense.

The dispute centers on whether the ads serve a government purpose or promote a political figure with public money. Painter contends that federal restrictions on government-funded political propaganda apply. His warning is not a legal finding or an announcement of impeachment proceedings.

Criticism reaches both parties

Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., criticized the spending after being shown one of the ads on CBS’s Face the Nation Sunday. He said public officials, including Trump, should not spend public money on ads for themselves. Kennedy acknowledged that the White House sees the spot differently and said he believed there probably was a rule against using public funds for self-promotion.

The watchdog group Public Citizen filed a complaint Friday with the Government Accountability Office and the Office of Special Counsel. It alleged that the ads violate restrictions on government propaganda and political activity, and called for them to be pulled. The complaint states the group’s allegations; it does not establish that a violation occurred.

The White House said Friday that Trump is not on the November ballot and that the ads contain no call to vote. It cited government-funded public information campaigns under previous presidents, including messages about Medicare, health insurance enrollment and COVID-19 vaccination. The administration says its spots promote patriotism and clearly disclose who paid for them.

Supreme Court Hands Trump A Major Election-Year Win

By
Madeleine Jackson
-
0
Duncan Lock, Dflock, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

The Supreme Court handed President Donald Trump a significant victory Friday, clearing the way for his administration to revive an expanded federal database that states can use to check voters’ citizenship ahead of the November midterms.

In a 6–3 order, the justices paused a lower court ruling that had shut down the administration’s overhaul of the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements program, known as SAVE. The move allows the Department of Homeland Security to operate the expanded system while the legal fight continues.

The decision gives Trump a boost in his push to tighten voter eligibility checks. It does not authorize a broad, last-minute purge of voter rolls, and the Court has yet to issue a final ruling on the program’s legality.

What the ruling changes

SAVE dates to 1986 and originally drew mainly on immigration records. Following a March 2025 executive order, the administration connected it to Social Security Administration records and added the ability to search multiple names at once. State and local election officials can use the expanded system to check whether people registering or already on voter rolls are citizens.

The League of Women Voters, several affiliates and a privacy group challenged those changes. A federal district judge in Washington set aside the overhaul in June, finding violations of the Social Security Act, the Privacy Act and the Administrative Procedure Act. A divided federal appeals court then refused to put that ruling on hold.

The Supreme Court took a different view. Its unsigned majority opinion said federal law likely permits the information sharing at issue and that the government would be harmed if it could not use the system it considers best suited to helping states verify citizenship. As ABC News reported, the ruling lifts the lower court’s block for now.

Federal law requires states to finish programs designed to systematically remove ineligible voters at least 90 days before a federal election. The majority acknowledged that the rule limits the immediate effect of its decision, but said election officials may still make individualized inquiries during that period. The Court left for a separate case the question of how the 90-day rule applies to programs targeting noncitizens.

A sharp dissent

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, warned that outdated citizenship information could put eligible voters at risk. The majority itself noted the case of a naturalized citizen whose Social Security records did not accurately reflect her citizenship, though it concluded the challengers’ legal claims were unlikely to succeed.

The administration argues the expanded tool helps states identify ineligible registrations. In its Supreme Court filing, it said the system had confirmed more than 65 million voters as citizens across 26 states and flagged 28,635 potential noncitizens. That latter figure is not a count of proven illegal votes. ABC News has reported that documented noncitizen voting is exceedingly rare.

Trump’s Arch Plan Pushes Ahead After Preservation Talks Break Down

By
Madeleine Jackson
-
0
Reflecting Pool

President Donald Trump’s planned triumphal arch has hit a new stage in its fight with preservation officials: A federal council is ending talks aimed at resolving objections to the 250-foot monument near Arlington National Cemetery.

The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation told the National Park Service Thursday that it was “terminating consultation” under the National Historic Preservation Act. The move follows months of disagreement over the arch’s effect on historic views around Memorial Circle, Arlington Memorial Bridge and the approach to the cemetery.

That does not give the project final approval. The council plans to send advisory comments to Interior Secretary Doug Burgum by October 7. Burgum must consider and respond to them before making a final decision under this preservation review. The public and consulting parties have until September 29 to submit their views.

A fight over historic views

The Park Service identified 42 historic properties that could be affected by the project, including six National Historic Landmarks. Its assessment found that the arch would have adverse effects on historic settings and sightlines by adding a prominent structure to the commemorative landscape.

In the council’s letter, the Park Service said further talks on the existing proposal were unlikely to produce an agreement. It also said alternatives that would avoid or reduce the adverse effects would change the project’s fundamental nature and prevent it from meeting its goals.

Virginia officials pushed back. In a letter described by ABC News, state preservation official Samantha Henderson argued that the proposed measures would “further highlight how this undertaking has marred rather than added to these spaces.” She said public and local-government concerns had not been directly addressed in a way that showed an effort to reach agreement.

The administration says the arch would celebrate American triumphs and beautify the capital. Opponents argue that its scale would overwhelm the solemn route between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington National Cemetery. The proposed site is Memorial Circle on Columbia Island, at the Washington, D.C., end of Arlington Memorial Bridge.

Trump adds a military twist

Trump has also given the project a new purpose. In a Sunday Truth Social post, he said that “at the strong request of the United States Military” he had agreed to turn the arch into a “top grade Military Complex/Triumphal Arch.” He said it would hold drones, provide positions for snipers and store sniper ammunition. The Pentagon declined to comment when ABC News asked about the announcement.

The National Capital Planning Commission approved preliminary site and building plans in July. It requested more information about the arch’s height, traffic effects and aviation-related lighting before final review. That final approval has yet to be granted.

The preservation dispute now moves from negotiations toward a decision at Interior.

Letitia James’ DOGE Lawsuit Against Trump Ends in Courtroom Defeat

By
Madeleine Jackson
-
0

New York Attorney General Letitia James took President Donald Trump to court over his DOGE team’s access to sensitive Treasury systems. This week, the judge closed the case — and James’s coalition walked away without the lasting order it sought.

U.S. District Judge Jeannette Vargas dismissed the 19-state lawsuit Wednesday, finding that the states’ challenge to DOGE personnel accessing Treasury data had become moot. The executive order that created the temporary DOGE organization expired July 4, and the Treasury DOGE team has since disbanded.

“There is no longer any action to enjoin,” Vargas wrote. She also rejected the states’ remaining claims over a system designed to flag federal payments for further review. Their complaint did not identify a specific payment owed to a state that the process had frozen or canceled.

For James, a longtime Trump adversary, it was a sharp turn from the early days of the case. When she and 18 other attorneys general filed suit in February 2025, James accused the administration of giving DOGE improper access to the federal payment system and warned that the team could interfere with funds for state programs.

At the time, she declared that Trump “does not have the power to give away Americans’ private information to anyone he chooses.” Her office celebrated an early court order restricting DOGE access as a “swift victory.”

An early win that did not settle the fight

James did win a preliminary injunction in February 2025. Vargas initially barred the Treasury DOGE team from Bureau of the Fiscal Service systems, which handle federal payments and hold sensitive financial data. The judge said the administration’s hurried process for granting access was likely arbitrary and capricious and raised serious security concerns.

But the restrictions changed as the administration supplied details about vetting, training and safeguards. In May 2025, Vargas allowed DOGE-affiliated Treasury personnel to access the systems if they followed the specified procedures. This week’s ruling ended the broader case altogether.

The judge did not rule that DOGE’s original access was lawful. She found that the access dispute no longer presented a live controversy because the team and its governing executive order had expired. Vargas noted that two former DOGE team members still work at Treasury in other roles, but the DOGE reporting structure no longer exists.

The states’ separate argument about an automated payment-review process survived that mootness question, only to fail on the allegations in their complaint. A system that flags payments for review, Vargas wrote, does not by itself establish that the administration unlawfully withheld money Congress appropriated. The states had not identified a payment to them that the system actually paused.

Tucker Carlson Calls on Trump’s Cabinet to Remove Him Under 25th Amendment

By
Madeleine Jackson
-
5
Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

Tucker Carlson’s break with President Donald Trump has reached a startling new point: The former Fox News host says Trump’s own Cabinet should have moved to strip him of presidential power over his threats against Iran.

In a Thursday interview with NPR’s Steve Inskeep, Carlson argued that Trump’s rhetoric about the war warranted action under the 25th Amendment. It was an extraordinary demand from a commentator who once championed Trump and spoke on his behalf at the 2024 Republican National Convention.

“He should have been removed from office by his own Cabinet secretaries the moment he threatened a nuclear attack,” Carlson said, according to Mediaite’s account of the interview.

When Inskeep asked whether he meant the 25th Amendment, Carlson confirmed it. He also described Trump’s remarks as a threat of a first-use nuclear strike. That is Carlson’s characterization: Trump’s quoted warning about Iran did not explicitly say he would use nuclear weapons.

The Iran warning behind the rupture

In his address to the United Nations on Tuesday, Trump presented Iran with a choice between a deal and possible destruction, asking whether he should “annihilate the Islamic Republic.” Mediaite quoted the fuller passage. The White House’s summary of the address emphasized his pledge to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and cast his approach as a show of American strength.

Carlson sees the war in sharply different terms. NPR reported that he questioned whether Trump had made the decision to begin it independently and alleged that Israel had effectively forced his hand. Those are Carlson’s assertions, not established facts. NPR said the White House, asked to comment, instead pointed to a Trump social media post attacking Carlson and others who oppose his Iran policy.

The public split carries political weight because Carlson was once among Trump’s most prominent defenders on the right. His call now goes beyond criticizing a military decision: He wants senior officials inside the administration to act against the president.

What the 25th Amendment would require

Section 4 of the 25th Amendment allows the vice president and a majority of the Cabinet’s principal officers to declare in writing that a president is unable to discharge the powers and duties of the office. The vice president would then become acting president. If the president contested the declaration and the officials persisted, two-thirds of both houses of Congress would have to agree for the vice president to continue acting in that role.

The provision is a process for presidential inability, not a finding of criminal guilt or a substitute for impeachment. Carlson’s accusation that Trump’s words constituted a crime does not, on its own, trigger it.

For now, Carlson’s remarks underscore how far one of Trump’s best-known former allies has moved over Iran. The unanswered question is whether his appeal resonates with anyone in an administration whose participation the constitutional process would require.

News Outlets Rush Back to Court After Reporters Turned Away Despite Judge’s Order

By
Madeleine Jackson
-
0
CNN Headquarters via Wikimedia Commons

CNN, MS NOW and Politico returned to federal court Thursday morning, saying their journalists were denied entry to the White House just hours after a judge ordered the Trump administration to restore their press credentials.

In an emergency filing, attorneys for the three outlets asked U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly for an immediate hearing. They said reporters from each organization had been turned away and that Secret Service agents confiscated some journalists’ hard passes that had not already been taken.

“Defendants have already repeatedly violated the Court’s Order,” the lawyers wrote. Kelly had not made a new finding on compliance when they filed that allegation.

The lawyers said CNN reporter Betsy Klein, whose pass was confiscated Saturday, was refused entry again Thursday after asking for it back. CNN reported that Klein and a photojournalist were denied access despite multiple attempts, while one CNN producer entered using a pass. Reporters for MS NOW and Politico also said they were blocked.

The reason for the uneven access was not immediately clear. The White House had not provided an explanation for the Thursday morning denials, according to CNN and Mediaite.

Xi Visit Raises the Stakes

The outlets’ attorneys urged quick action because CNN was scheduled to handle television pool coverage for Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit to the White House later Thursday. Pool journalists gather material that is shared with other news organizations when space or access is limited.

“Time is of the essence,” the lawyers wrote. They said they had contacted the administration’s attorneys that morning and asked to call the court together but had received no response at the time of the filing.

Kelly directed the Justice Department to respond to the request by 12:30 p.m. ET, CNN reported.

A Temporary Ruling, Then Another Court Fight

Kelly, whom President Donald Trump appointed to the federal bench during his first term, issued a 14-day temporary restraining order overnight. It directed White House officials and their agents to “immediately return, reinstate, and restore” hard passes revoked after Trump announced a ban on CNN, MS NOW and Politico last Friday.

The judge found that the outlets were likely to succeed on their claim that the passes were revoked without adequate due process. His order did not decide the lawsuit’s broader First Amendment claims or permanently settle the White House access dispute.

Administration lawyers had argued that reporting by the outlets raised national security concerns. Kelly wrote that the record lacked factual support showing that revoking the passes would protect national security while the case proceeds. He also questioned whether that concern had motivated the ban, noting that Trump’s initial announcement focused on what the president called false and negative coverage.

The new filing asks Kelly to address what happened at the White House gates after his order took effect. Whether the administration deliberately failed to comply, and what relief the judge might order next, remained unresolved Thursday morning.

Ari Emanuel Reveals Trump’s Private Talk About A 2028 GOP Ticket

By
Madeleine Jackson
-
0
White House image via Wikimedia Commons

Hollywood power agent Ari Emanuel says President Donald Trump dropped a revealing hint about the Republican Party’s possible 2028 ticket during a recent private phone call.

Emanuel disclosed the conversation Tuesday while appearing with MS NOW host Rachel Maddow at New York’s 92nd Street Y to promote his memoir, Roll the Calls.

According to Mediaite, Emanuel said he spoke with Trump by phone roughly three weeks earlier—and the president was already talking excitedly about Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio as a potential political team.

“He thought JD and Marco Rubio would be a formidable group,” Emanuel said.

The comment did not amount to an endorsement or reveal which man Trump envisioned at the top of the ticket. It did, however, add another piece of evidence that the president is thinking openly about who could carry the Republican Party into the post-Trump era.

Emanuel Pushes Back On Maddow

The private call surfaced during a sharp exchange over Maddow’s concern that Trump could try to remain in power after his second term ends.

Maddow described Trump as a “different kind of cat” and said she did not believe he would willingly leave office. Emanuel rejected that argument, pointing to Trump’s interest in a future Vance–Rubio pairing as evidence that the president is contemplating a successor.

Emanuel argued that the remarks did not sound like those of a “man trying to be in the White House forever,” according to Mediaite’s account of the event.

The Hollywood executive also compared the alarm surrounding Trump with fears voiced about President Richard Nixon decades ago. When members of the audience pushed back, Emanuel responded with a profane joke before continuing the discussion.

Emanuel is one of Hollywood’s most powerful dealmakers and the inspiration for the character Ari Gold on HBO’s Entourage. He currently serves as executive chairman of WME Group and executive chair and CEO of TKO Group Holdings, the company that owns UFC and WWE, according to CBS News.

Trump Has Floated The Pairing Before

Trump’s reported comments to Emanuel were consistent with ideas he has raised publicly.

During a White House event in May, Trump asked attendees whether they preferred Vance or Rubio before saying the two names “sound like a good ticket,” according to TIME.

Trump called the pair a “dream team” but immediately cautioned that the remark did not constitute an endorsement. He also left unanswered which official would run for president and which would seek the vice presidency.

Rubio, who ran against Trump for the 2016 Republican nomination, has previously signaled that he would support Vance if the vice president entered the 2028 race. Vance has described early campaign talk as premature while leaving open the possibility of considering his political future later in the administration.

Both men have become highly visible members of Trump’s second administration. Vance holds the office that has often served as a springboard to a presidential campaign, while Rubio has taken on overlapping responsibilities as secretary of state and national security adviser.

Third-Term Talk Meets A Constitutional Barrier

Trump has repeatedly joked about serving a third term and has sold “Trump 2028” merchandise, fueling speculation among supporters and critics alike. More recently, however, he acknowledged that “the law is very strong” and said he understood the legal restriction preventing another run.

The 22nd Amendment states that no person may be elected president more than twice. Changing that limit would require amending the Constitution.

Known Trump Rival Letitia James Sees Lead Shrink

By
Madeleine Jackson
-
0
Alec Perkins from Hoboken, USA, CC BY 2.0 via Wikimedia Commons

New York Attorney General Letitia James still holds a double-digit advantage in her bid for a third term, but a new poll shows the prominent Trump adversary losing ground to a Republican challenger whom most voters barely know.

James leads former federal prosecutor Saritha Komatireddy 52% to 39% among likely voters, according to a Siena University poll released Wednesday.

That 13-point margin is down from James’ 18-point advantage in August, when she led 54% to 36%. In the span of a month, James slipped two points while Komatireddy gained three.

The shift narrowed the gap in a heavily Democratic state, but it does not mean the race is suddenly tied. James remains above 50%, and the poll’s roughly four-point margin of error means the month-to-month change should be viewed cautiously.

Low Name Recognition Shapes The Race

Komatireddy’s biggest challenge may also be her clearest opportunity: 71% of likely voters said they had either never heard of her or did not know enough to form an opinion. Her favorability rating stood at just 17%, with 12% viewing her unfavorably—the same result Siena recorded in August.

James, by contrast, is one of the most recognizable figures in New York politics. Her favorability rating was 51% positive and 40% negative, a slight decline from 52% to 38% the previous month.

Siena pollster Steven Greenberg said both candidates have secured more than 80% of voters within their own parties. Independents leaned toward James by a narrow 43% to 40% margin.

The most dramatic regional movement came in New York City. James still held a commanding 62% to 26% lead there, but that was substantially smaller than her 71% to 20% advantage in August. Siena found James maintaining narrower leads upstate and in the downstate suburbs.

Greenberg said the results left James ahead among independents and in each major region of the state, while Komatireddy entered the final weeks of the campaign with low name recognition.

Trump Feud Shapes The Contest

James’ long-running feud with President Donald Trump has made the attorney general’s race a contest with national overtones.

Her office brought the civil fraud case against Trump, his company and several executives. A New York trial judge imposed a penalty that grew to nearly $500 million with interest. In 2025, a divided state appeals court vacated the financial penalty as excessive while leaving the fraud finding and other restrictions in place.

Trump has repeatedly accused James of pursuing him for political reasons. James has defended the case as a lawful enforcement action and pointed to the surviving fraud judgment as validation of her office’s work.

Komatireddy has made public safety a centerpiece of her campaign. The former Eastern District of New York prosecutor has handled terrorism, cybercrime, narcotics and fraud cases, later served as chief of staff at the Drug Enforcement Administration, and clerked for then-Judge Brett Kavanaugh on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, according to her campaign biography.

She has also proposed creating an Office of Civil Commitment to coordinate law-enforcement and medical responses involving people with severe mental illness who may pose a danger to themselves or others. James’ campaign called the plan “an empty proposal,” while defending the incumbent’s work on hospital discharge planning, supportive housing and treatment programs, according to the Times Union.

The same poll found Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul leading Republican Bruce Blakeman 50% to 41%, little changed from her 49% to 39% advantage in August.

Siena surveyed 1,144 likely New York voters from Sept. 11 through Sept. 17. The margin of error was plus or minus 3.9 percentage points for the core questions and plus or minus 4.2 points among the 991 respondents who completed the entire survey.

World Leader Skips Trump Reception — Meets With Key Rival Instead

By
Madeleine Jackson
-
3
By The White House - https://www.flickr.com/photos/202101414@N05/54581054338/, Public Domain,

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez skipped President Donald Trump’s reception for world leaders in New York on Tuesday, choosing instead to meet with California Gov. Gavin Newsom as tensions between Madrid and Washington continue to simmer.

Sánchez was invited to the reception, held during the United Nations General Assembly, but his government said the invitation arrived only after his schedule had already been set.

“He is not going to attend that dinner, but basically because the invitation arrived a few days ago, when the whole trip was already prepared,” Spanish government spokeswoman Elma Saiz said, according to El País.

The scheduling explanation did little to quiet speculation that the move carried a political message. El País reported that the meetings cited by Sánchez’s team — including sit-downs with Newsom and Apple CEO Tim Cook — were not listed on the prime minister’s public schedule. The newspaper characterized his absence as a political decision, although Sánchez’s office has not described it as a boycott.

Newsom Meeting Takes Aim At Trump Agenda

While Trump hosted foreign leaders, Sánchez met with Newsom and signed a memorandum expanding cooperation between Spain and California on clean energy, battery storage, methane reduction, carbon markets and climate resilience.

Newsom’s office announced the agreement in a sharply worded statement accusing Trump of undermining American alliances and energy security.

“At a moment of increasing global instability, California will continue building strong relationships with partners around the globe to build a cleaner, more prosperous, more secure future,” Newsom said.

The Democratic governor has emerged as one of Trump’s most visible political adversaries and is frequently discussed as a possible 2028 presidential contender. His office used the New York meeting to contrast California’s climate policies with the Trump administration’s approach to energy and the war in Iran.

Sánchez Blasts Trump’s U.N. Speech

Sánchez also criticized Trump’s address to the General Assembly, calling it “very ideological” and “not backed and supported by facts and data” during an appearance on Jon Stewart’s The Weekly Show podcast, according to EFE.

“When he speaks about climate change, or the war in Iran, or the things that are going on in the Middle East, his political positions are not, let’s say, largely supported by many countries worldwide,” Sánchez said.

Trump used his speech to defend his administration’s Iran policy, challenge international climate policies and press other nations to put their own interests first. Sánchez, by contrast, used his U.N. appearances to call for broader multilateral cooperation and defend international institutions, according to Spain’s official government account.

The two leaders were already at odds over NATO spending. Trump blasted Spain in 2025 after Sánchez resisted the alliance’s new defense-spending target, accusing Madrid of seeking a “free ride” and warning that Spain could pay more in trade negotiations, Fox Business reported.

Their relationship deteriorated further over the Iran war, which Sánchez has publicly opposed.

Sánchez also skipped Trump’s U.N. reception last year, when Spain’s King Felipe VI led the country’s delegation. He had attended receptions hosted by President Joe Biden in 2022 and 2023, according to El País.

This time, the contrast was difficult to miss: Sánchez passed on Trump’s gathering, criticized the president’s speech and spent part of his evening signing a climate agreement with a Democrat who has built a national profile by confronting the White House.

South Korean President Presses Trump To Ease North Korea Sanctions

By
Madeleine Jackson
-
0

South Korean President Lee Jae Myung is publicly pressing President Donald Trump to consider easing sanctions on North Korea — a high-stakes gamble aimed at stopping Kim Jong Un from adding more nuclear weapons to his growing arsenal.

Lee argued that demanding complete denuclearization before offering Pyongyang anything in return has produced a dangerous stalemate. In an interview with The New York Times, he proposed trading some sanctions relief for a verified halt to North Korea’s development of additional nuclear weapons and intercontinental ballistic missile technology, The Hill reported.

“Aiming for denuclearization under the current circumstances guarantees that nothing will be accomplished,” Lee told the Times.

The South Korean leader said a freeze could open the door to reciprocal concessions, build trust and eventually persuade the North to begin reducing its stockpile. His pitch amounts to a phased approach: stop the growth of the arsenal first, then seek reductions and, ultimately, dismantlement.

But it would also require Trump to decide whether sanctions relief could bring Kim back to the negotiating table — or merely reward a regime that has repeatedly advanced its weapons programs while talks remained frozen.

Lee Warns The Clock Is Ticking

Lee framed the proposal as a response to an increasingly urgent threat. He said South Korean estimates indicate North Korea may now be able to produce an additional 10 to 20 nuclear weapons each year.

“Once it believes it has accumulated enough nuclear weapons and missiles to guarantee its survival, it will be tempted to export them to make money,” Lee told the Times. “That will be a truly dangerous moment.”

The warning comes as Pyongyang continues to demonstrate new military capabilities. North Korea said this week that it tested a new hypersonic weapon designed to maneuver at low altitude and evade missile defenses, according to the Financial Times. The test added fresh pressure to diplomatic efforts by both Trump and Lee.

Kim has also hardened his public position. Earlier this year, he described North Korea’s nuclear force as an “irreversible” shield and tied it directly to the regime’s survival, the Financial Times reported. Pyongyang has meanwhile drawn closer to Russia and China, giving it economic and diplomatic alternatives that could blunt Washington’s leverage.

Trump’s Personal Diplomacy Faces A New Test

Trump met Kim three times during his first term, including summits in Singapore and Hanoi and a meeting at the Korean Demilitarized Zone. The diplomacy produced dramatic images and an exchange of personal letters, but it did not deliver a lasting agreement to dismantle North Korea’s nuclear program.

Trump has nevertheless signaled that he remains open to another meeting. Lee has embraced that possibility, saying earlier this month that South Korea should help create the conditions for renewed U.S.-North Korea talks. He credited Trump’s outreach with creating “at least some possibility for a change” on the peninsula, according to The Korea Herald.

Trump also ordered the annual U.S.-South Korean Ulchi Freedom Shield military exercise shortened in August, a move intended to reduce hostility and encourage diplomacy. North Korea did not respond by returning to talks and instead continued weapons tests and public criticism of the United States.

That history underscores the central risk in Lee’s proposal: sanctions could be relaxed before the United States has proof that Kim intends to move beyond a temporary freeze. Supporters of a phased deal argue that waiting for an all-at-once surrender allows the arsenal to grow unchecked. Skeptics warn that Pyongyang could pocket concessions, preserve its existing weapons and later abandon negotiations.

Washington And Seoul Still Demand Denuclearization

Lee’s push does not formally abandon the goal of a nuclear-free North Korea. His government describes the freeze as the first stage of a longer process, not the final destination.

That distinction was reinforced Monday, when Secretary of State Marco Rubio joined the foreign ministers of South Korea and Japan in reaffirming their “resolute commitment” to the complete denuclearization of North Korea. The three governments also called on Pyongyang to resume dialogue and backed continued efforts to block revenue supporting its nuclear and ballistic missile programs, according to Yonhap News Agency.

The result leaves Trump with a difficult choice. He can maintain maximum pressure in pursuit of complete denuclearization, or test Lee’s argument that a smaller interim deal is the only realistic way to stop North Korea’s arsenal from becoming even more dangerous.

For now, Kim has offered no sign that he is prepared to accept either path.

123...350Page 1 of 350
© Great America News Desk 2022