Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

The true Trump threat

From left: Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Emmanuel Macron, Donald Trump

President-elect Donald Trump spoke with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and French President Emmanuel Macron on Dec. 7. No one will be able to restrain Trump's foreign policy efforts.

Many Americans fear what Donald Trump will do after assuming the presidency in January — and understandably so. Trump's pathological self-absorption has no place in American government, let alone at its very top.

But the specific type of threat Trump poses is often misunderstood. Like all presidents, his domestic powers are limited. He will face stiff resistance at the federal, state and local levels of government.


For instance, as we've already seen with Trump’s first choice for attorney general, Matt Gaetz, the Senate can and will reject some of his Cabinet nominees. The Republicans’ very slim House majority, moreover, means Democrats can stymie Trump's legislation with support from just a few Republicans. Federal and state courts, for their part, have ruled against Trump consistently — and will continue to do so. Even Trump's own executive branch departments, like the Department of Justice, will again resist his most brazen initiatives.

That's not to say Trump won’t score some wins. He will appoint conservative judges, roll back important regulations, knock the tax rate down a few percentage points, accelerate deportations (though not at the level he's promising) and so on. Elon Musk might even get some federal employees canned. And for those on the wrong side of these policies the consequences will matter.

But the limits on what Trump can achieve domestically are significant. And much that he does accomplish can be rolled back or neutralized by Democrats in the future.

Foreign policy, however, is a different story. This is where the potential consequences are biggest and where the bells often can't be unrung. This is where Trump, like all presidents, has the fewest checks on his power. This is where the true Trump threat resides.

Trump will soon be commander in chief of the military and America's head of state. In the foreign policy arena, he won't need Congress to pass legislation to make a major impact. Nor will he need thousands of federal bureaucrats to implement his biggest policies. With few exceptions, the courts won't be able to reverse a thing he does.

Even express constitutional restraints on the president in foreign policy no longer apply. The president has usurped the role of Congress in declaring war against other nations. While Article I of the Constitution says that Congress (not the president) has the power “to declare war,” presidents since Harry Truman have repeatedly waged war without congressional declaration.

Trump will, indeed, be largely unrestrained in the international sphere. Yet the world he inherits is as complicated as ever. The Middle East is fractured with war, blood is spilling in Russia and Ukraine, North Korea's weapons cast a shadow across the globe, populist unrest throbs globally and China's military gets stronger every day.

Having Trump's volatile hand stirring this pot — with few checks to restrain his impulses — is exponentially more dangerous than whatever legislation a razor-thin Republican majority can muster in Congress. As president, Trump can call Vladimir Putin any time. He can confront Xi Jinping on social media before breakfast. He can belittle Kim Jong Un publicly on a whim.

Trump's supporters like to highlight that there were fewer wars when he was president than there are today. This may be true. But it's quite a stretch to credit Trump for this outcome. His diplomatic unpredictability increases the likelihood of international conflict. That his first presidency avoided war bears little on what comes next.

Many Americans myopically follow the daily political drama in Washington. That's where the cameras focus and where retweets propel partisan spats into viral frenzies. This is a mistake. Trump's MAGA tentacles will reach far beyond our national borders. His stage will be the world.

America's domestic checks and balances neutralized Trump the first time he was president. They will again. With foreign policy, on the other hand, the Republicans’ volatile champion will once again be unrestrained.

Cooper is the author of “ How America Works … and Why it Doesn’t. ”


Read More

US America and China flags on chess king on a chessboard.

USA and China trade relations, cooperation strategy. US America and China flags on chess king on a chessboard.

Getty Images

America’s Gridlock Is Beijing’s Best Argument

Americans tend to treat democracy’s superiority as settled, and the long-run evidence backs them up. A major study by MIT economist Daron Acemoglu and colleagues found that countries that democratize end up about 20 percent richer per person within a generation. But most of the world does not grade governments on long-run studies. For billions of people outside the wealthy West, the test is simpler: does the power stay on, are food prices steady, is there work, and do the roads get built? When the stomach is empty, a ballot can feel like a luxury.

China understands this and sells its model on exactly those terms. Its GDP per capita has climbed from about $300 in 1980 to nearly $15,000 today, by IMF figures, and the World Bank credits it with lifting some 800 million people out of extreme poverty. India, the world’s largest democracy, started from a similar place and sits near $2,800. Beijing’s centralized system, paired with Deng Xiaoping’s market reforms, built power plants, factories and rail lines at a pace India’s more deliberative politics has not matched. Anyone who values liberty will find little to admire in that model. It does explain why the model sells.

Keep ReadingShow less
American soldier in headquarter control center

American soldier in headquarter control center

Getty Images

Why America Must Rethink Its Counterterrorism Strategy in Nigeria

When American forces conducted airstrikes against suspected Islamic State militants in northwest Nigeria on Christmas Day 2025, the operation signaled a renewal of security cooperation between Washington and Abuja. Yet for Nigerians living in communities plagued by terrorism, kidnapping, and armed attacks, a critical question remained: Will these strikes make their daily lives any safer?

That question demands serious consideration in Washington. The United States has spent decades helping Nigeria combat terrorism through military equipment, intelligence sharing, and tactical training. Yet, armed violence continues to disrupt daily life across northern Nigeria, raising doubts about how the effectiveness of American counterterrorism assistance should be measured.

Keep ReadingShow less
Pete Hegseth

US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth on October 28, 2026.

(Photo by Ezra Acayan/Getty Images)

Pete Hegseth and the High Price of Compromised Governance

Just days after a historic midterm election in which everyday Americans sent a clear, undeniable demand for political accountability and transparency, the halls of Congress have devolved into a new theater of crisis. Republican Representative Thomas Massie’s introduction of eight articles of impeachment against Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth has thrown the Department—and the nation’s fragile democratic norms—into uncharted territory.

Massie, a longtime Trump critic who plans to retire from Congress at the end of the year, accuses Hegseth of bypassing Congress and violating constitutional limits on war powers.

Keep ReadingShow less
Close up of pharmacist hand taking meds from drawer

New federal law already targets PBM pricing and rebate practices. An opinion on why state pharmacy ownership bans go too far, and the freight-rail lesson.

Cris Cantón/Getty Images

State Healthcare Reforms Have Gone Off the Rails

Government generally has two ways to address problems in a marketplace. It can establish clear rules, target harmful conduct and let competition produce better outcomes. Or it can design the market itself by controlling business decisions and dictating how companies must operate. That is the decision facing lawmakers in healthcare today.

America's freight-rail experience shows what is at stake. For decades, the Interstate Commerce Commission controlled railroad rates, restricted routes and made it hard for carriers to shed unprofitable lines. Intended to stabilize an essential industry, the rules instead contributed to bankruptcies and lagging investment.

Keep ReadingShow less