Like children, former presidents should be seen, but not heard. I say that with deep respect for the men who were privileged enough to serve as presidents of the United States and are alive today. Historically, we have not heard the repeated voices of former presidents during the term of another president, that is, until today. Call it respect for the position, the person, and yes, the American people.
We get one president at a time. It is not like a football game and the commentary shows after it, in which we can play the Monday morning quarterback and coach, constantly second-guessing decisions made by the team. The comments – “he should have done this” or “I would have done X” – are not needed or desired.
But there is much more that former presidents can do. In particular, they can work to strengthen their political party by raising money and sharing their insights and ideas. They could mentor rising talent within their party. But all of these things can be done where “they are seen, but not heard.”
Today, if they truly feel we are on the verge of losing our democracy and becoming a banana republic, they are best positioned to rally a movement to convene a constitutional convention. Article five of our Constitution states that “two-thirds of state legislatures can apply for a national convention to propose amendments.” Former presidents have the name recognition, clout, and ability to raise the money to make this a reality.
Once a convention has been convened to amend the Constitution, to make it better, make it stronger, make it “king proof,” then the former presidents would have truly helped our nation.
But for former presidents to just give “old and tired” speeches and throw rocks on occasion is beneath them and can be counterproductive. They should think “outside the box” instead, and create a new lane.
For example, they could put an end to future federal government shutdowns by pushing to adopt an amendment that would penalize the president, vice president and every member of Congress if they do not pass a budget on time and complete all government funding bills. We could fine them 25% of their adjusted gross income and we will never have another shutdown again.
Granted, it is tough to listen to President Donald Trump speaking and acting like a king. He often shows no respect for our institutions – including Congress and the federal courts as he easily holds the dubious distinction of being the most litigious president in U.S. history. He gives new meaning to the term “bully pulpit.” We have and probably never will see another president as brazen as Trump.
Heck, I remember then-candidate Trump saying, and I paraphrase, that he could “do harm” to someone in the middle of New York’s Fifth Avenue and get away with it. I saw it as hyperbole, but today… well, I do not know.
When a president relishes “just killing people” in reference to more than a dozen strikes on small defenseless boats near the coast of Venezuela and insisting that he can do so without seeking a declaration of war vote from Congress, it is more than disturbing. These boats may be running afoul of the law but instead of killing people, there is a justice system and international laws that we prize as Americans.
So, today it is killing people on small boats in the ocean who are allegedly involved in drug trafficking, and tomorrow it “could” be the random killing of Americans allegedly involved in drug trafficking in our cities, all without due process. That is not the America I know and love.
On the more mundane level, there is no doubt that there are many reasons for even dead presidents to be turning over in their graves. Many, if they could shed tears, would cry many due to any part of the White House being destroyed – like we have witnessed in recent days with Trump’s demolition of the East Wing, all done without any consultation with Congress.
Of grave concern are the following:
1. A president who can turn America’s neighbor to the North, Canada, one of the U.S.’s closest trading partners and prior best friend, into a foe due to his tariff demands, and Trump’s inane rhetoric about wanting to annex the country.
2. A president who travels the world while an impotent Congress is AWOL and while 42 million Americans are on the brink of losing food assistance.
Still, I say to the living former presidents that they should be seen (if they care to), but not heard.
There are numerous reasons for this, but I do not want to disparage any of the men who served honorably in the toughest job in the world. It would simply be a “cheap shot,” and I refused to stoop that low.
Suffice it to say, however, that I will repeat a familiar dictum that should hopefully suffice – “He who lives in glass houses should not throw any stones.”
None of the former presidents were universally loved and many were resented by nearly half, if not the majority, of Americans when they left office. Some of their acts as president only conjure up bad memories. Bad mouthing by former presidents also allows the incumbent to blame all the country’s woes on them, and allows the incumbent to make the case that he is the savior, the one cleaning up messes left by their predecessors. Nearly all former presidents over the decades have understood the aforementioned fact.
Lastly, as a former president you are uniquely qualified to know what would cause a president to change his behavior or direction on policy. My suggestion is a “no confidence” vote of the state legislatures which would cause a wayward president to “slow down” a bit. No president would like to hold this infamous and dubious distinction not given to any of his predecessors that X number of state houses and state senates would express the opinion of the people via a no confidence vote.
Thus, former presidents are not like children. They are far more knowledgeable, and some have admirable talents. On the other hand, children have former presidents beat in other areas. Children are much “cuter” than former presidents and far less likely to irritate half the country, just their parents from time to time.
Gary Franks served three terms as a congressman from Connecticut’s 5th District. He was the first Black conservative elected to Congress and first Black Republican elected to the House in nearly 60 years. Host: Podcast "We Speak Frankly" www.garyfranksphilanthropy.org
A golden tray sits on the Resolute Desk as President Donald Trump speaks during an announcement on American nuclear innovation in the Oval Office at the White House on July 24, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Trump is signing multiple executive orders targeting the nuclear energy sector and easing rules for new reactors and nuclear fuel supply chains.
Trump’s hubris rivals the fallen heroes of ancient Greek mythology
In January, the New York Times asked President Donald Trump if there were any limits on his global powers.
“Yeah,” the president responded, “there is one thing. My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.”
That was eight months ago, but fortunately Christopher Nolan’s blockbuster adaptation of “The Odyssey” has made ancient Greek literature newly relevant. Before that window closes, I’d like to talk about hubris.
Today, the term mostly means excessive pride or arrogance. That’s part of what the Greeks meant by it too, but the meaning was a bit richer and more specific. Hubris was an insolent or outrageous act that offended the gods, often because the transgressor was claiming abilities or authorities that solely belonged to supreme beings.
Nolan renamed and slightly modified the concept of xenia for the film, calling it “Zeus’ law.” In the director’s telling, mortals should follow the rules laid out by the gods, specifically the requirement to treat strangers with respect lest they be gods in disguise.
In a sense, hubris is the opposite, or at least the rejection, of xenia. The hubris of the suitors, and at times Odysseus himself, invites punishment by the gods and their mortal instruments.
Which brings me back to Donald Trump. His claim that there are no constraints on his personal power to dictate events on the global stage was one of the greatest expressions of hubris ever uttered by a political leader.
Trump’s claim was obviously false when he made it.
He vowed that he could end the Russia-Ukraine war in 24 hours. He’s proved powerless to make that happen. If he had divine powers to work his will, why would he have balked at implementing his tariffs so often that Wall Street adopted the “TACO trade” term for his deals? “TACO” stands for “Trump always chickens out.”
And why would Trump have made so many embarrassing concessions to China — from rescinding tariffs on Chinese goods to allowing them to buy crucial and incredibly valuable computer chips?
But Trump saw his success at capturing Venezuelan strongman Nicolas Maduro as proof of his ability to launch missiles to the same effect as Zeus’ lightning bolts. Trump believed he was the most powerful man who ever lived.
This is no exaggeration. In March, when the Iran invasion seemed successful, Trump gave a document penned by“Presidential Historian David King” to New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan purporting to prove that Trump was “the most powerful person to have EVER walked this planet.” King was, in fact, a businessman and occasional caddy for legendary golfer Gary Player.
King compared Trump favorably to many of history’s most powerful, and often heinous, figures: Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun, William the Conqueror, Napoleon Bonaparte, Joseph Stalin, Genghis Khan, Mao Tse Tung, Adolf Hitler and Vladimir Lenin. Many of these men thought they were the most powerful person in the world, too. And many were defeated precisely because they believed it.
At least Napoleon and Hitler had a string of truly impressive victories before they learned the folly of hubris. The limits on Trump’s power have been exposed by far less august forces than the combined might of the allies in World War II or the fearsome Russian winter.
Iran is a comparatively middling power. But the regime’s ability to absorb punishment while imposing its will on the Strait of Hormuz has proved to be a greater constraint on Trump’s power than his morality or mind. We should note that, at least rhetorically, his morality has not proved much of a constraint. He has repeatedly promised to destroy Iranian “civilization” if the regime refuses to capitulate.
But they haven’t — and won’t anytime soon — because the regime’s tolerance for pain far outstrips Trump’s. The combined fear of skyrocketing oil prices, outrage of Gulf state potentates, diminishing weapon supplies and domestic unpopularity is doing the work that international law, congressional oversight and the collective opinion of foreign policy experts can’t or won’t do.
If I considered Trump more heroic than reason and facts could allow, I would say his Sisyphean predicament has the whiff of Greek tragedy to it. Trump is vexed by the fact that the Iranians won’t honor deals or ratify his countless premature claims of victory — giving new meaning to his vow that his presidency would make people tired of winning. It’s almost like they’re out-Trumping Trump.
Things might have gone better if he’d heeded that great Greek tragedian Sophocles: “For Zeus utterly abhors the boasts of a proud tongue.”
____
Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.