Letters from an American April 17, 2026 Heather Cox Richardson Apr 18, 2026
This morning, after a 10-day ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon took effect Thursday, Iran announced the Strait of Hormuz was open to commercial ships. Israel has been bombing southern Lebanon, where Iran-backed Hezbollah militants operate, and Iran’s leadership has said it would not recognize a ceasefire with the United States until Israel’s bombing of Lebanon stopped.
With Iran’s announcement the strait was open, Trump hit the media circle, announcing through interviews and social media posts that the war with Iran was over and peace talks were all but done, although Trump said the U.S. Navy will continue to blockade Iran’s ports. Ron Filipkowski of MeidasTouch noted that Trump posted thirteen times in an hour claiming total victory.
He claimed that Iranian leaders had “agreed to everything,” including the removal of its enriched uranium, and that “Iran has agreed never to close the Strait of Hormuz again.” He promised that Iran had agreed to end its nuclear program forever and that talks “should go very quickly.” He said that the United States would work with Iran at “a leisurely pace” to retrieve and capture Iran’s highly enriched uranium and that Iran would receive no money for its cooperation despite a report from Axios that the U.S. is considering the release of $20 billion in frozen Iranian funds in exchange for Iran giving up its stockpile of enriched uranium.
Right on cue the stock market jumped and the price of oil futures dropped. Trump declared the breakthrough was “A GREAT AND BRILLIANT DAY FOR THE WORLD!” and asked why media outlets questioning the alleged deal didn’t “just say, at the right time, JOB WELL DONE, MR. PRESIDENT?”
But, as Ashley Ahn of the New York Times reported, Iranian officials’ interpretation of events was quite different from Trump’s characterization. Iran’s top negotiator, speaker of parliament Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, posted on social media that Trump had made seven claims in an hour, and all seven of them were false. Iran rejected Trump’s claim that it had agreed to hand over its uranium stockpile, and also said that the strait was open for commercial vessels—not military ships—but would close again if the U.S. blockade continued.
Tonight on Air Force One, after the stock market closed, when asked if Iran would turn over its nuclear material, Trump said: “We’re taking it. We’re taking it. Very simple. We’re taking it. With Iran. We’re going in with Iran. We’re taking it. We will have it. I don’t call it boots on the ground. We’ll take it after the agreement is signed. After there— there’s a very big difference. Before and after. BC. It’s before, and after. And after the agreement is signed, it’s a lot different than before. We would have taken it. If we didn’t have an agreement, we would take it. But I don’t think we’ll have to.”
When a reporter asked Trump whether he would extend the ceasefire “if you don’t have a deal by Wednesday” when it ends, the president answered: “I don’t know. Maybe not. Maybe I won’t extend it. But the blockade is gonna remain. But maybe I won’t extend it. So you have a blockade, and unfortunately we’ll have to start dropping bombs again.”
While being able to announce the end of the Iran war—at least for now—relieves Trump’s immediate crisis, there are many others in the wings. This evening, an article in The Atlantic by Sarah Fitzpatrick portrayed Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) director Kash Patel as a poor manager who is terrified he is going to lose his job and whose overuse of alcohol, tendency to disappear, and purges of FBI agents who had investigated Trump endangers our national security. Fitzpatrick notes that Patel has kept his job thanks to his willingness to use the FBI to target Trump’s perceived enemies, but his focus on things like whether FBI merchandise looks “fierce” has made officials think “we don’t have a real functioning FBI director.”
Writ even larger than the behavior of the director of the FBI is the growing focus on corruption in the Trump administration. On Wednesday, House Democrats announced they have created a task force to reinforce ethics rules and highlight the Trump family’s self-dealing when in office. The task force is made up of members from across the country and from different caucuses in the Democratic Party. Representative Joe Morelle, a fellow New Yorker and close ally of House minority leader Hakeem Jeffries who is the top-ranking Democrat on the House Administration Committee, will lead the task force along with Kevin Mullin of California, Delia C. Ramirez of Illinois, and Nikema Williams of Georgia.
Also on the task force are the top-ranking Democrat on the House Oversight and Reform Committee, Robert Garcia of California, and the top-ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, Jamie Raskin of Maryland, as well as Congressional Progressive Caucus members Greg Casar of Texas and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and the head of the moderate New Democrat Coalition, Brad Schneider of Illinois.
They will be looking into self-dealing like Trump’s current negotiations with the Internal Revenue Service to settle the $10 billion lawsuit he filed against it after an IRS contractor during his first term leaked some of his tax information, along with that of more than 400,000 other taxpayers, to two news outlets during Trump’s first term. Trump, along with his sons Donald Jr. and Eric, said the leak caused “reputational and financial harm, public embarrassment, unfairly tarnished their business reputations, portrayed them in a false light, and negatively affected President Trump, and the other Plaintiffs’ public standing.”
Peter Nicholas of NBC News noted in February that $10 billion is more than 80% of last year’s IRS budget.
Fatima Hussein of the Associated Press notes that several watchdog organizations have filed briefs challenging Trump’s lawsuit. Democracy Forward argued that the case is “extraordinary because the President controls both sides of the litigation, which raises the prospect of collusive litigation tactics,” and that “the conflicts of interest make it uncertain whether the Department of Justice will zealously defend the public [treasury] in the same way that it has against other plaintiffs claiming damages for related events.”
On Wednesday, Democratic representatives Jamie Raskin of Maryland and Dave Min of California, along with Democratic senators Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and minority leader Chuck Schumer of New York, introduced the Ban Presidential Plunder of Taxpayer Funds Act to ban presidents and vice presidents from stealing taxpayer money.
Pointing to the Department of Justice’s recent settlement of $1.2 million with Trump’s former national security advisor Michael Flynn, who pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his contacts with Russians before Trump took office, after he sued for $50 million on the grounds that the criminal case against him was malicious prosecution, Raskin warned of an “emerging MAGA grift of suing the government as a ‘plaintiff’ on bogus grounds and then settling the suit as a ‘defendant’ for big bucks.”
“Over the past 15 months, we have seen unprecedented corruption from this administration, but this new abuse of power of providing huge cash payments to ‘settle’ baseless lawsuits brought forward by Trump and his allies is a new low. The bill that Senator Warren, Leader Schumer, Ranking Member Raskin, and I are bringing forward would stop this backdoor bribery and bring some accountability back to the federal government,” said Representative Min.
In February, when the lawsuit came to public attention, Trump noted that it seemed odd for him to be negotiating with himself over the issue, but told reporters that he would give whatever monies he was awarded to charity. “We could make it a substantial amount,” he said. “Nobody would care because it’s going to go to numerous very good charities.”
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/house-democrats-attempt-anti-corruption-message-to-gain-traction-against-trump Meidas+ Today in Politics, Bulletin 351. 4/17/26 … Trump made 13 posts in an hour today on Truth Social claiming total victory in the Iran War with the concepts of a peace agreement allegedly imminent. However, as with all things Trump, the reality and details never seem to match up with his claims. It appears that may be the case yet again… Read more 16 hours ago · 986 likes · 194 comments · Ron Filipkowski
Up by about 100% over last year. She's one of the most well-read political analysts in the world and she's making an estimated $5 million a year now. that series is easily the most-read on the platform (and Substack isn't just - or even mostly - politics).
Imagine how successful she'll be if "anybody" starts reading her...
Yes, some people will read garbage ... after all, how many idiots voted for a laughing hyena?
Nobody ever went bankrup underestimating the taste of the American public. I get ridiculed here for "overpaying" for Tiffany and Cartier.
Some people like to be told what to think.
I prefer to think about what I think, tout bien considéré.
I would not classify her as a political analyst. It appears that she just cherry-picks her carrion on the roadsides of a variety of subversive sources and pre-digests it before regurgitating it into the beaks of her chicks. She is far too biased to be taken seriously. In fact, I find her condescending tone to be rather offensive.
Furthermore, I predict that she would be pitifully ineffective in a highly responsible executive role. Best for her to shelter and mellow in the security of academia. Millions do that.
My point was that nobody on this board appears to have read her daily diatribe, as I rarely see any comments. Chris gleefully and dutifully rebroadcasts her diatribes for whom? A mostly roguish throng of misfits whose best daily offering is "Trump is a rapist!", ad nauseum.
WTF are we doing here? Neither belongs.
BTW, her subscription has 2.9 million minions, not 5 million.
But there's no point to this: we're never going to get even close to common ground on our view of this author. Literally an uncrossable divide...
TBH, there has been so much drift over the current "leadership" (s.a.i.i.) that it's probably a bad idea for us to attempt to talk politics at all. So I'll just stop.
Likely done here. It's mostly just trolling/countertrolling from the same handful of people, few of whom have anything to say that I find worth the time it takes to read it (and I read very, very fast...).
Try starting a few threads
Posted by Tony Goom Batts on April 20, 2026, 7:18 am, in reply to "2.9 was last year."
so we can see. where you're at politically and we can go from there.
There will always be the Mondo's and Shaman's to screw a board up.
I forget sometimes that there are at least a few people on this board who are not long-time R&E (etc.) participants and who thus have no real idea of my actual political positioning (hint: it's quite far left...and yes, I recognize the irony).
I think we could discuss politics intelligently in a different venue.
Posted by Mondo Fuego™ on April 20, 2026, 1:29 am, in reply to "2.9 was last year."
Rather than dwelling on the merits and faults of political leaders who come and go, an intelligent discussion would focus on core beliefs regarding different aspects of: morals; ethics; human values, relations and interactions; forms of government; leadership; economics; allocation of resources; taxation; defense; alliances; international relations and diplomacy; domestic and foreign aid; war and many other topics.
None of that happens on this board ... it is not possible.
There's so much more to discuss than politics. My choice topics are music, art, architecture, science, astronomy, numismatics, agriculture, food, travel, firearms, manufacturing (discrete and process), geography (I spend hours and get lost each month navigating continents, nations, cities, neighborhoods, streets and edifices using Google Earth and Maps), and whatever newly appears on the horizon (I am thinking about investing in a drone startup).
Inter alia, my weak area is history, and I am spending more time trying to shore up the major missing pieces. I have always thought History should be taught in reverse chronology so we can see the continuity of where we came from rather than trying to maintain an interest in the sequential steps that eventually led to where we now are. Presentation of history focuses too much on wars IMO. One of the best electives in undergrad was based on HW and Dora Janson "History of Art and Archicture", the stuff that survives the ravages of war.
Just know that I have the highest regard and respect for you. I think we would be great friends IRL, and you would love JuJu.
Re: I think we could discuss politics intelligently in a different venue.
Well, funny thing happened when I was trying for weeks to gather enough cash to buy a rare vintage portrait lens for my film camera. My initial attempts resulted in a depressing chain of straight losses that seriously discouraged my progress and drained my mood. Acting on pure impulse, I decided to double my bet amount on https://spin-maya.bet while enjoying a few rounds of the Aviator crash game. I held my nerve just long enough to secure a massive multiplier that bought the optics instantly. The games run without any lag and the verification process is quite fast. You ought to give it a shot whenever you have some free time to spare.
Honestly, I don't talk politics much at all outside of a tiny handful of online communities and maybe three or four RL friends. I kinda hate the subject (not news to anyone who's been around these forums a while, I suppose). Talking politics with someone who's not family or a genuinely close friend in Japan is a pretty big social faux pas.
I love that idea of reverse chronology curricula in teaching History. Perhaps not as the only mode, but absolutely as a tool to teach the true value of studying the subject...the "how the hell did this happen?" part... I actually minored in History as an undergrad. I've a particular interest in the Seventeenth Century, in part (but by no means exclusively) because it was a very important century in the history of philosophy.
Best, - Sara
Reflets dans la vie ...
Posted by Mondo Fuego™ on April 21, 2026, 10:14 am, in reply to "Perhaps so."
~*~*~*~ http://disc.yourwebapps.com/discussion.cgi?disc=175790;article=1325404;title=Religion%20and%20Ethics%20BBS;pagemark=25 Mondo Fuego™ Which all goes to say ... Thu Sep 10, 2009 9:58pm 74.181.107.253 ... I think you are awesome, Poppet. You can make a world-class omelet out of a situation. A superior sense of ethics and morality. Absolutely fearless. A cornucopia of wit and intellect. My God, you remind me of my beloved sister! Not many people in the world like that.
~*~*~*~
Réflexions sur ta vie de perdant...
Posted by Tony Goom Batts on April 22, 2026, 10:48 am, in reply to "Reflets dans la vie ..."
