Thirteen years ago today, Marco Rubio gave a cotton-mouthed GOP response to Barack Obama’s 2013 State of the Union address, at one point awkwardly breaking his flow to lean out of frame for a quick drink of water. Was this the moment we entered the dark timeline from which we have yet to escape? I guess we’ll never really know. Happy Thursday.
Coalition Crackupby Andrew Egger Who’s worse for the American right: its antisemites or its Zionists? This seemingly easy question has convulsed the online right for months, with old-school philosemite conservatives trying and mostly failing to exile the new coterie of antisemites, from Tucker Carlson to Candace Owens to Nick Fuentes, from the MAGA coalition. But the White House has largely steered clear of participating—until this week, when it found itself dragged into the fight largely by accident. The trouble started Monday, when the White House’s Religious Liberty Commission met in D.C. for a public discussion about the rise of antisemitism. For most of the hearing, the commission stuck to the safe conversational waters of left-wing antisemitism, of the college-campus variety. But commissioner Carrie Prejean Boller—a former beauty queen, right-wing Catholic activist and influencer, and staunch Owens ally—had other plans. What’s this business of calling people like me antisemitic, she repeatedly asked, just because we don’t like Israel? Throughout the hearing, Prejean Boller all but dared her fellow commissioners and other event participants to call her antisemitic to her face. “Is anti-Zionism antisemitism?” she asked. “If I don’t support the political state of Israel, am I an antisemite, yes or no?” When one participant asserted that Owens and Carlson were indeed antisemites, she scoffed: “There you go again. Everyone’s an antisemite, I guess.” Commissions like these exist to further the administration’s political messaging, and kicking up intra-MAGA fights wasn’t exactly on the agenda. So it came as little surprise Wednesday when commission Chairman Dan Patrick, the lieutenant governor of Texas, announced that Prejean Boller was no longer a member. His stated reasons were interesting. He steered totally clear of the substance of Prejean Boller’s remarks, saying only that “no member of the commission has the right to hijack a hearing for their own personal and political agenda on any issue.” He added: “This was my decision.” Prejean Boller wasn’t having it. “You did not appoint me to the Commission, and you lack authority to remove me from it,” she replied to Patrick. “This is a gross overstepping of your role and leads me to believe you are acting in alignment with a Zionist political framework that hijacked the hearing, rather than in defense of religious liberty.” “I look forward to next month’s hearing,” she added. “I refuse to bend the knee to Israel. I am no slave to a foreign nation, but to Christ our King.” It would take a lot more space than we’ve got here to fully unpack the beef over antisemitism here. Prejean Boller is actually correct about at least one thing: It’s true that Republican allies of Israel have often used accusations of antisemitism as a cheap rhetorical crutch to shut down all critiques of the way the state of Israel conducts its business—a phenomenon that was on particularly painful display during Israel’s most recent lengthy, brutal occupation of the Gaza Strip.¹ Still, it’s also true that genuine bigots and traffickers in the most noxious conspiracy theories often find it useful to claim that they’re really just critics of the state of Israel. Candace Owens is the poster child for this, and I’m not sure Prejean Boller is beating the allegations either: Yesterday, for instance, she retweeted an Owens post claiming that “Zionists are naturally hostile to Catholics because we refuse to bend the knee to revisionist history and support the mass slaughter and rape of innocent children for occult Baal worshipers.” But what’s more interesting—at least for our political-newsletter purposes—is the particular way the Trump administration has responded to all this. Patrick’s statement firing Prejean Boller, which declined to weigh in on the substance of the fight and specifically stressed that “this was my decision,” seemed like a last-ditch effort to shield the White House itself from the controversy. (When I reached out to the White House for comment, they wouldn’t even confirm on-record that Patrick’s statement had the president’s blessing—although they didn’t deny it either.) But Prejean Boller’s refusal to accept firing from anyone other than Trump himself seems to have closed off this strategic path. At some point, it seems, somebody’s going to have to say something. For months if not years now, the White House has faced a bizarre coalition problem: how to keep a bunch of philosemites and a bunch of antisemites both happy with the administration despite their open hatred for one another. As in Trump’s first term, the White House has pursued a foreign policy broadly favorable to Israel. Just as importantly, it has abstained from the sort of moral denunciations of Israel’s conduct in Gaza that so irked many pro-Israel types during Joe Biden’s presidency. At the same time, it has routinely opposed efforts to kick right-wing antisemites out of its political coalition—while pursuing a posture of maximum political retaliation against people it accuses of antisemitism on the left. White House employees who brag in leaked texts about having a “Nazi streak” don’t even lose their administration jobs; pro-Palestinian foreign students who support boycotting Israel see their student visas canceled and get snatched off the street. This “something for everybody” approach seems to be reaching its limit. MAGA’s philosemites and antisemites are unlikely to keep sharing a political coalition for long—and they seem unlikely to let Trump’s White House stay agnostic in their fight, either. “Only the President can remove me, since he appointed me,” Prejean Boller proclaimed. “What will Trump do? Stand for my Catholic Religious Freedom or remove me?” Every political coalition has its fault lines. What else could be internal weaknesses in the MAGA movement? Share your ideas. What’s Trump’s Shame Next to Lincoln’s Glory?by William Kristol These are challenging times. But they are also clarifying times. And they’ve provided remarkable examples of people who’ve risen to the occasion. One thinks of the intrepid Epstein survivors, of the determined citizens of Minneapolis, of the brave people of Ukraine. And today, on his birthday, one thinks of Abraham Lincoln. There’s so much to say about Lincoln, so many passages of his one could quote. Last year I quoted his extemporaneous remarks of August 22, 1864, to the 166th Ohio Regiment, whom he’d invited to the White House as they returned home from the battlefield. And that quote is just as apt today:
As it was said a year ago, so still it must be said: It can be dispiriting to see Trump temporarily occupying (and temporarily vulgarizing) that big White House. But it’s heartening to remember that when the Trump era is consigned to the ash heap of history, the example of Lincoln will remain.
AROUND THE BULWARK
Quick HitsWHAM BONDI RESURFACES: We’ve written before about Attorney General Pam Bondi’s astonishing demeanor during congressional testimony, her steadfast commitment to—as Stephanie McCrummen put it in the Atlantic last month—“a calculated performance that amounted to a giant middle finger to basic notions of decorum and accountability.” (Or as we put it in October: “Kash Patel is a twitchy little guy, but Bondi’s testimony made his appearances last month before a pair of congressional committees look downright professional.”) Well, she’s still at it. Yesterday Bondi went before the House Judiciary Committee—ostensibly to answer questions about her oversight of the Justice Department, really to get some more yelling at Democrats in. (Sample statement, to Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland: “You don’t tell me anything, you washed-up loser lawyer.” Pleasant!) The vitriol was, of course, mostly intended to try to mask the fact that Bondi has shockingly few good answers to a whole host of reasonable questions about her job performance. The Substack the Watchdog Report assembled a good list:
And that’s just the top five! Read the whole thing. GOOD TIMES AHEAD?: This week, the White House got one piece of good news and one piece of bad news on the jobs front. On the bright side, yesterday’s monthly jobs report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics popped well above expectations, with the economy adding a net 130,000 jobs in January as the unemployment rate dipped down to 4.3 percent. On the less pleasant side of things, BLS dramatically revised down its jobs numbers for the whole of 2025, estimating that the labor market added only 181,000 jobs in the entirety of the last calendar year. (It always bears repeating: Any time BLS revised job numbers down during the Biden years, Trump and his GOP allies accused them of deliberately cooking the earlier rounds of numbers for political gain.) With so much turmoil and disruption in the economy and in the world, nobody seems quite sure what good economic numbers look like anymore. In theory, continued productivity gains from AI and other factors could be keeping the economy growing at a healthy clip even if the labor force isn’t expanding much. The White House is even pitching this as a feature of the economy it’s trying to build: With the U.S. population expanding more slowly due to dramatically reduced levels of immigration, the economy doesn’t need as many new jobs to keep unemployment flat. We can’t know yet whether January’s strong jobs numbers are an indication that the economy is turning a corner after a year of tariff-induced turmoil, or just a momentary diversion on the way to a recession. If the numbers stay good, there’s one more upside-down wrinkle to consider: An economy that’s humming along well is one in which Trump’s pick for Fed chair, Kevin Warsh, will face strong headwinds if he tries to implement the dramatic interest-rate cuts Trump is counting on him to deliver. NO FLIGHTS ALLOWED: Some weird stuff has been going down in El Paso, where the Federal Aviation Administration announced—and then revoked—extraordinary airspace restrictions late Tuesday night amid an apparent communications breakdown between the Pentagon and the FAA. The AP reports:
Of the two former-TV-personality cabinet officials involved in the dispute, we’ve got to go with the Real World guy on this one. Cheap Shots
1 Prejean Boller is also correct that many Christians—and especially Catholics—recoil from theological Zionism, the eschatological belief popular among many American evangelicals that Israel’s political reestablishment in the Holy Land is a condition that must be fulfilled before the return of Christ and the end of the world. You’re a free subscriber to The Bulwark—the largest pro-democracy news and analysis bundle on Substack. For unfettered access to all our newsletters and to access ad-free and member-only shows, become a paying subscriber.We’re going to send you a lot of content—newsletters and alerts for shows so you can read and watch on your schedule. Don’t care for so much email? You can update your personal email preferences as often as you like. To update the list of newsletters or alerts you received from The Bulwark, click here. Having trouble with something related to your account? Check out our constantly-updated FAQ, which likely has an answer for you.
|
‘Zionism’ Is Splitting MAGA in Two
February 12, 2026
0
