"Trump’s opponents complain about the aggressive connotations of the new name."

"But the United States is protected by the most lethal and vigilant fighting force ever assembled, no matter what it’s called. The new name could prompt more focused debate about how to use it."

Writes the Editorial Board of The Washington Post, in "In defense of the War Department/Euphemisms such as 'defense' and 'security' have a tendency for bureaucratic mission-creep."

"The U.S. has entered a new era in which narcotraffickers are classified as terrorists — and Trump is claiming the right to kill them before they or their drugs reach this country."

From "'We've never seen this before': Trump's drug war looks like a real war" (Axios).

The attack marked the first time a suspected "go-fast" drug-running boat was destroyed by a military missile, according to officials and drug-war experts. "There's more where that came from," Trump said in announcing the strike. All other details of the shocking, caught-on-video missile attack are classified, officials said....

What happened Tuesday was "a murder anywhere in the world," Colombia's president, Gustavo Petro, wrote on X. "We have been capturing civilians who transport drugs for decades without killing them. Those who transport drugs are not the big narcos, but the very poor, young people from the Caribbean and the Pacific."...

ADDED: "Trump Claims the Power to Summarily Kill Suspected Drug Smugglers/The move to treat criminals as if they were wartime combatants escalated an administration pattern of using military force for law enforcement tasks at home and abroad" (NYT). 

"President Trump has secretly signed a directive to the Pentagon to begin using military force against certain Latin American drug cartels...."

"The decision to bring the American military into the fight is the most aggressive step so far in the administration’s escalating campaign against the cartels.... The order provides an official basis for the possibility of direct military operations at sea and on foreign soil against cartels.... [D]irecting the military to crack down on the illicit trade also raises legal issues, including whether it would count as 'murder' if U.S. forces acting outside of a congressionally authorized armed conflict were to kill civilians — even criminal suspects — who pose no imminent threat...."

The NYT reports.

Does a hot young actress really want President Trump approving of her? Poor Sydney Sweeney!

Trump, this morning, at Truth Social:

Sydney Sweeney, a registered Republican, has the “HOTTEST” ad out there. It’s for American Eagle, and the jeans are “flying off the shelves.” Go get ‘em Sydney!

Well, she's selling perfectly ordinary denim. Maybe she'll make being Republican the new thing.

That's from 60 years ago, but it's a line I've never forgotten: "The new thing is to care passionately and be right-wing." In context, of course, he's laughably wrong, and everyone watching that movie knew it. Didn't we? Or did we think watch out, some day that will be true. It's all a matter of time.

Trump's post continues:

On the other side of the ledger, Jaguar did a stupid, and seriously WOKE advertisement, THAT IS A TOTAL DISASTER! The CEO just resigned in disgrace, and the company is in absolute turmoil. Who wants to buy a Jaguar after looking at that disgraceful ad. Shouldn’t they have learned a lesson from Bud Lite, which went Woke and essentially destroyed, in a short campaign, the Company. The market cap destruction has been unprecedented, with BILLIONS OF DOLLARS SO FOOLISHLY LOST. Or just look at Woke singer Taylor Swift. Ever since I alerted the world as to what she was by saying on TRUTH that I can’t stand her (HATE!). She was booed out of the Super Bowl and became, NO LONGER HOT. The tide has seriously turned — Being WOKE is for losers, being Republican is what you want to be. Thank you for your attention to this matter!

And speaking of Trump on Truth Social, there's also this, which caught my eye...

.. because I thought I saw Bucky Badger. But yes, happy birthday to the Coast Guard.

"The Defense Department is withdrawing the nomination of Rear Adm. Michael 'Buzz' Donnelly... under whose command drag performances took place on board the USS Ronald Reagan."

The Daily Wire reports.

Donnelly served as commanding officer of the aircraft carrier from April 2016 to September 2018, during which time Yeoman 2nd Class Joshua Kelley performed as a drag queen under the name “Harpy Daniels” at a department-sanctioned “Morale, Welfare, and Recreation” event on the aircraft carrier.

Harpy Daniels? Is that like Stormy Daniels? Was it political commentary? Political commentary of the anti-Trump kind?

I don't know but drag in the Navy was right there in "South Pacific," the classic Rodgers & Hammerstein musical based on a James A. Michener's 1947 book "Tales of the South Pacific."

Who can forget "Honey Bun," the sailor with grass-skirt hair and a coconut bra, performing in front of a huge Navy audience?

America, when did you become so repressive?

'Cause we're a having so much fun with Honey Bun... not anymore.

The North Korea news reports on Trump's big Army parade.

On TikTok:

Make the best argument that yesterday's Army parade and yesterday's No Kings demonstrations were very similar and shared the same tone and spirit of America.

It's the position I'd like to take, but let's see if A.I. can sketch it out for me. Go to the links for the full elaboration of the bullet points.

The Grok answer:

First, both the Army parade and No Kings protests were vibrant displays of American identity, rooted in the celebration of freedom and self-determination.... 

Second, the tone of both events was unapologetically bold and assertive, reflecting America’s spirit of standing firm in its convictions.... 

Third, both events drew on America’s historical narrative to stake their claims.... 

Finally, despite their political differences, both events were inclusive in their appeal to broad swaths of Americans.... 

The Army parade and No Kings protests, held on Flag Day and the Army’s 250th birthday, were not just parallel events but complementary expressions of America’s soul: a country that honors its defenders while empowering its dissenters, all under the banner of freedom. Their shared tone—defiant, proud, and deeply patriotic—underscores a unified spirit, even in division.

The ChatGPT answer:

1. Both Were Public Rituals of Patriotism....

2. Both Emphasized Freedom and Individual Agency.... 

3. Both Reflected Deeply American Traditions.... 

4. Both Shared a Spirit of Hope and Determination...

5. Both Spoke in the Language of Symbols... 

The Army parade and No Kings demonstration, seemingly at odds, coexist in the American landscape precisely because freedom allows both. Their very presence, side by side in the same country on the same day, is evidence of a robust civic culture. That is the American spirit: unified not by conformity, but by the freedom to differ—loudly, visibly, and passionately.

I like the argument. I know I need to go back and prompt it with "Now, make the best argument against all that."

"Kate Middleton was effortlessly elegant as she attended Trooping the Colour to honour the King on June 14."

Tatler reports.

An interesting contrast to America, with our "No Kings!" rallies and critique of Trump's military parade and offense that it's happening on his birthday.

Wikipedia: "Trooping the Colour is a ceremonial event performed every year on Horse Guards Parade in London, United Kingdom, by regiments of Household Division, to celebrate the official birthday of the British sovereign, though the event is not necessarily held on that day. It is also known as the Sovereign's Birthday Parade. Similar events are held in other countries of the Commonwealth. In the UK, it is, with the State Opening of Parliament, the biggest event of the ceremonial calendar, and watched by millions on TV and on the streets of London."

"The uniformed body crystallizes all these associations we have. It makes your chest look broader, your posture straighter, your shoulders stronger. It becomes shorthand for words like manly, strong, brave, dominant."

Said Paul Achter, "an associate professor of rhetoric at the University of Richmond, who has written on 'military chic,'" quoted in "Why Trump Loves a Man in Uniform/As thousands of soldiers prepare to march in President Trump’s military parade, what exactly will we see?" (NYT).

The article is by Vanessa Friedman, who writes that, in a military parade, "the uniformed body is part of a mass — denatured and subsumed into a whole — and particularly when the parade in question does not signify the end of an actual conflict." "Instead of honoring the sacrifice of individuals... it becomes a moment of sheer pageantry dedicated to the glory of the state or the head of state...."

Quoting Achter again: "It’s difficult to see this and not see Leni Riefenstahl" (that is, Hitler, as presented in "Triumph of the Will").

When it comes to expression about the military, is there some reason to prefer the rhetoric of "sacrifice" over that of "glory"? A parade is a form of expression. It's visual speech, visual propaganda. Can you tell whether the theme is sacrifice or glory? Is it inherent in the nature of a military parade that it will say: glory?

"So this goes back to 2017 when President Trump was in Paris and watched France's Bastille Day military parade. There were tanks..."

"... there were troops, and they're marching down Champs d'Elysee. There were war planes, there were fighter jets. And he watched this with President Emmanuel Macron of France, and he loved it. So he came back and announced to the Pentagon that he wanted his own military parade. And the response he got from the Pentagon during his first term was: We don't do this, Sir. Jim Mattis, who was then his defense secretary, said he'd rather swallow acid. In a meeting in the Pentagon, Paul Selva, who was the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told Mr. Trump that Mr. President, he said, dictatorships do that. Democracies do not..... [D]ictators need to frighten their population... with this show of ostentatious military might. And they want to frighten their adversaries too and make them think that they're very strong. I don't really get the France part because France is a democracy...."

I'm listening to the new episode of the NYT "Daily" podcast, an interview with Helene Cooper about tomorrow's military parade. Audio and transcript at Podscribe, here. (I do listen to the audio and tweak the transcript. Otherwise, instead of of "Champs d'Elysee," you'd be seeing "Sean.")

I loved the line "I don't really get the France part because France is a democracy."

And by the way, Cooper goes on to describe the many military parades we've had in the United States over the years.

Maybe reexamine the premise:

Trump asserts that he "saved L.A."

At Truth Social:

The Appeals Court ruled last night that I can use the National Guard to keep our cities, in this case Los Angeles, safe. If I didn’t send the Military into Los Angeles, that city would be burning to the ground right now. We saved L.A. Thank you for the Decision!!!

You never get to find out what would have happened if what was done had not been done. When do courts choose to stop a President and find out what the alternative would look like? Depends on the judges, but I tend to think they don't want to know. It's scary, and Trump is trying to scare them.

"President Trump, during a speech at Fort Bragg, N.C., said on Tuesday that he would restore the names of all Army bases that were named for Confederate generals..."

"... but were ordered changed by Congress in the waning days of his first administration. His move skirts the law mandating the removal of Confederate symbols from the military through the same maneuver used to restore the name of Fort Bragg, which was briefly renamed Fort Liberty. In a statement, the Army said it would 'take immediate action' to restore the old names of the bases originally honoring Confederates, but the base names would instead honor other American soldiers with similar names and initials."

From "Trump Says Army Bases Will Revert to Confederate Names/The move would reverse a yearslong effort to remove names and symbols honoring the Confederacy from the military" (NYT).

Maybe you like the traditional names, not because you're wistful about the Confederacy but because the place was named long ago and feels familiar and seems to stand on its own as the name of the place, but do you approve of the law being treated that way, evaded with such a sneaky, snarky ploy?

Everybody's talking about L.A.

A glance at Real Clear Politics:

I love the way RCP just alternates pro- and anti-Trump headlines. I'll just check in on one of each:

"The Reason The Left Loves Riots/Is Because It Hates Civilization," asserts Michael Shellenberger: "It's 'inflammatory' to enforce migration laws, say Democrats. But it's not. It's essential for protecting the vulnerable. The reason the Left opposes law enforcement is that they take pleasure at the destruction of civilization, at least so long as it only hurts other people."

"We are witnessing the first stages of a Trump police state," warns Robert Reich: "As civilian control gives way to military control, the nation splits into those who are most vulnerable to it and those who support it. The dictatorship entrenches itself by fomenting fear and anger on both sides. These are frightening and depressing times. But remember: although it takes one authoritarian to establish a police state, it takes just 3.5% of a population to topple him and end it."

That link on "3.5%" goes to a definition "the 3.5% rule": "Nonviolent protests are twice as likely to succeed as armed conflicts – and those engaging a threshold of 3.5% of the population have never failed to bring about change." Reich is hoping 3.5% of Americans will take to the streets — peacefully and patriotically — and "topple" the duly elected President.

Both Shellenberger and Reich say they're for peace, and both also say that they believe the other side is out for violence.

"For at least two decades political leaders from both parties have dragged our military into missions — it was never meant to be— it wasn't meant to be."

"People would say 'Why are we doing this why are we wasting our time money and souls?' In some case they sent our warriors on nation-building crusades to nations that wanted nothing to do with us, led by leaders that didn't have a clue, in distant lands, while abusing our soldiers with absurd ideological experiments, here and at home. All of that's ended. You know that. All of it's ended. It's ended. Strongly ended. They're not even allowed to think about it anymore. They subjected the armed forces to all manner of social projects and political causes while leaving our borders undefended and depleting our arsenals to fight other countries' wars.... The job of the US armed forces is not to host drag shows, to transform foreign cultures, [or] to spread democracy to everybody around the world at the point of a gun. The military's job is to dominate any foe and annihilate any threat to America anywhere anytime and any place...."

Said Donald Trump, addressing the graduating class at West Point.

"Now, we love France, right? But I think we did a little more to win the war than France. Do we agree?"

"You know, I don’t want to be a wise guy, but when Hitler made his speech at the Eiffel Tower, I would say that wasn’t exactly exactly ideal. And I called up the president, Macron, good guy by the way, 'Donald, we are celebrating our victory over the Germans.' 'Oh, that’s wonderful.' No, we don’t take credit for what we do. And I said, what the hell every country I’ve spoken to in the last week is celebrating the war but us. Isn’t that terrible? So we’re gonna be doing holidays. But I said it has to be working holiday because you know you can only do so many of them. We have a lot of holidays. I’m not so sure we should have them, and you don’t have to go to work. Our country has to go to work. So we’re gonna have a working holiday for each one of those two dates and we’re gonna be celebrating too because we should celebrate more than anybody else...."

Said Donald Trump, quoted in a New York Magazine article, where they seem able to mind-read, "Trump Mocks France Because He’s Jealous of World War II Celebrations" (New York Magazine).

Bill Kristol wants you to know that he still hasn't read "I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings," but...

... he "recognize[s] the work’s stature as a significant and influential part of our literary and cultural history."

I'm reading "In a World of Pete Hegseths, Be a Maya Angelou."

I don't know if Kristol knows what he's telling us we need to "be," but he's upset that "pursuant to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s order to purge so-called DEI content from military libraries and classrooms, I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings was removed, along with 380 other books, from the U.S. Naval Academy’s Nimitz Library."

Kristol asserts, despite not having read the book, that "'I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings' is not 'DEI content.' It’s a quintessentially American autobiography—a popular and important one. It’s a book a student at the Academy might want to read for his or her education, or for pleasure."

Why would the story of a particular individual represent the promotion of the DEI agenda?

“I just hate bailing out the Europeans again"/"I fully share your loathing of European freeloading. It’s PATHETIC.”

Said JD Vance/Pete Hegseth, quoted in "Now Europe Knows What Trump’s Team Calls It Behind Its Back: 'Pathetic'/Trump officials have demanded more European military spending and questioned the continent’s values. Leaked messages show the depth of the rift" (NYT).

Wouldn't want that to get out, now, would you? 

Am I free not to talk about Jeffrey Goldberg?

I remember the time — 16 years ago — he got annoyed at me for objecting to his characterization of Dahlia Lithwick as a "haiku genius."

Now, there's something about his bizarre inclusion in a group chat about crushing the Houthis.

For the annals of Things I Asked Grok: When did Shakespeare use the plot device of a character who thinks he's secretly eavesdropping who is being deliberately fed false information to get him to do something? (The answer involves "Othello," "Much Ado About Nothing," and "Twelfth Night.")

I'll just say...

Whispers cloak the stage
Hidden ears catch crafted tales
Truth bends in the dark

"Today, I have ordered the United States Military to launch decisive and powerful Military action against the Houthi terrorists in Yemen."

Writes Trump, on Truth Social.

They have waged an unrelenting campaign of piracy, violence, and terrorism against American, and other, ships, aircraft, and drones. Joe Biden’s response was pathetically weak, so the unrestrained Houthis just kept going.

"Openly transgender service members will be disqualified from serving in the U.S. military and will soon be removed from the ranks..."

"... according to a Pentagon memo that marks a significant shift from previous Defense Department policy that prohibited discrimination based on gender identity. The memo was made public Wednesday as part of a lawsuit filed by LGBTQ+ rights groups against an executive order signed last month by President Donald Trump, which stated that the 'medical, surgical, and mental health constraints on individuals with gender dysphoria' were 'inconsistent' with the high standards expected of U.S. troops."

From "Transgender troops will be removed from U.S. military, Pentagon says/The previous Trump administration effectively banned transgender people from joining, but the new memo says currently serving transgender troops will be discharged" (WaPo).