Dear Weekend Jolter,

Audrey Fahlberg here, filling in for Judd this week.

One week after the July 4 holiday, Donald Trump and congressional GOP leaders are still reveling in their impressive political achievement — passing the president’s divisive reconciliation bill six months before many provisions of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act were set to expire. Now comes the next step: selling the legislation to the American people.

National Review’s Mark Wright is skeptical that American people should really be celebrating tax-cut permanency given our nation’s deficit crisis:

The GOP may be celebrating the fact today that it has avoided tax increases by renewing the 2017 tax cuts — and that it has even extended additional tax favors to certain interest groups in “no tax on tips,” “no tax on overtime,” the increased SALT deduction, and the larger standard deduction for seniors (already America’s wealthiest demographic).
But by not even attempting to significantly alter the downward trajectory of our federal fiscal ledgers by addressing runaway entitlement spending in Social Security and Medicare, what Republicans in Congress and this administration have done in the real world is pass on future tax increases to our children (or our older selves a few years down the line) either via draconian tax increases at the point of national fiscal crisis or by means of reduced purchasing power through the back-door tax hike of monetizing the debt.

(Mark’s piece kick-started a wonky debate in the Corner about our nation’s debt crisis. Check out the Capital Matters section of this newsletter to get caught up on the “free lunch” debate.)

Now that Republicans succeeded in passing what’s expected to be the signature legislative achievement of Trump’s second term, the challenge for congressional Republicans is to overcome Democrats’ entitlement-focused attacks that the bill slashes Medicaid for the needy to offset massive tax cuts for the rich. Expect to hear that line on repeat in Democrats’ 2026 midterm TV ads.

House Republican leaders are urging their members to sell the bill by hitting Democrats for voting against a 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act extension, Medicaid work requirements for able-bodied adults without kids, Trump’s popular (though temporary) tax exemptions for tips and overtime pay, and the bill’s border-security funding boost. Centrist House Republicans are nervous that this explanation will land with their constituents, especially considering Medicaid is popular, and many Americans are confused about what’s really in the bill.

Senate Republicans, buoyed by their 53-seat majority thanks to a banger 2024 cycle, face an easier map in 2026.

I sat down with Senate Majority Leader John Thune on Thursday to chat about the reconciliation bill and how he views the 2026 Senate map. Thune told National Review that he spoke with Trump this week about how the president can be a “difference maker” in 2026 Senate races like in Texas, where incumbent Senator John Cornyn (who challenged Thune unsuccessfully last year for the Senate GOP leader job) is facing a tough primary from controversial Attorney General Ken Paxton.

“We should do well, but we’re probably going to be looking at at least a handful of primaries,” Thune told me.

NAME. RANK. LINK.

EDITORIALS

On the Texas floods: Don’t Blame DOGE for Texas Flood Tragedy

On the Argentine econonomy: The Milei ‘Miracle’ Is a Vindication of Free Markets

The president’s not-so-free trade crusade continues: Trump’s Reckless New Tariffs

Trump changes his tune on Ukraine: A Welcome Reversal on Weapons to Ukraine

ARTICLES

Rich Lowry: Don’t Blame Donald Trump for Floods

Dan McLaughlin: Yes, the Press Should Tell Voters When Elected Officials Are Senile

Noah Rothman: The Left Finally Finds a Mamdani Scandal Worth Caring About

Jim Geraghty: Are Defense Department Officials Freelancing on Major Policy Decisions?

Jeff Blehar: Elon Musk Accidentally Unleashes MechaHitler

Andy McCarthy: Trump DOJ Walks Back Its Epstein Blather

Jimmy Quinn: Hochul Aide Cultivated Tight Relationship with CCP-Backed Hong Kong Government, Emails Show

Phil Klein: Q&A: Salena Zito Tells the Inside Story of the Butler Assassination Attempt and Donald Trump’s 2024 Political Comeback

Jack Butler: Freedom Conservatism Has Found God

Haley Strack: The Christian Music Idol Who Wasn’t

CAPITAL MATTERS

Dominic Pino: Spending Till Kingdom Come While Raising Taxes Would Also End Badly

Mark Antonio Wright: Dominic Pino’s Free Lunch

Dominic Pino: I Paid for My Lunch

LIGHTS. CAMERA. REVIEW.

Armond White on the Hollywood resistance’s latest remake: Superman Under the Gunn

Brian T. Allen had a ball at the Garden State’s Montclair Art Museum: My Day in Jersey

GET YOUR FRESH EXCERPTS HERE

Charlie explains Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s misunderstanding of her own job description:

In an interview at the Global Black Economic Forum on Tuesday, Jackson enthusiastically submitted that her role accords her an opportunity “to explain my views about the way our government does and should work” and “to tell people, in my opinions, how I feel about the issues.”
I wonder: Has Justice Jackson considered starting a Substack instead?
There are a number of words in Jackson’s answers that do not belong. “Feel” is one. The other is “should.” “Should,” in particular, does not tally with Jackson’s role. “Should” is the preserve of the voters, of Congress, and, within its limited realm, of the presidency. It is not the job of a judge who, properly construed, must be confined to “is.” Our Constitution tells us how our government works, and the statutes passed by Congress and the states fill in the rest. If one disagrees with the fruits of either, one may lobby for an amendment under Article V, or, at the legislative level, one may push for a change to the law. One cannot, under any circumstances, demand that a friendly judge substitute what is for what she believes ought to be. . . .
I am an originalist in constitutional law and a textualist in statutory interpretation, and, in consequence, I am not primed to admire Justice Jackson. In my estimation, there is only one way of squaring our democratic system of government with the awesome power of judicial review, and that is for the judges who wield that power to subordinate their own preferences and stick steadfastly to the meanings that obtained when our laws were passed. At present, we have six — sometimes five — Supreme Court justices who attempt to do this, and we have three who do not. In my view, those three present a serious challenge to the stability of our constitutional order, and, in an ideal world, they would be nowhere near the reins of power. Nevertheless, in the short amount of time that she has spent on the Court, Justice Jackson has managed to set herself apart within that trio by declining even to pretend that she understands the purpose of her job. Justice Elena Kagan’s opinions are the work of an intellectually brilliant apparatchik. Justice Sotomayor’s are the product of a quotidian political hack who is not savvy enough to comprehend that we can all see through the ruse. Justice Jackson’s are . . . well, she put it superbly herself: They are the merchandise of a figure whose desire is to “tell people, in my opinions, how I feel about the issues.” Subscribe today, for just $6/month, plus tax.

Jeff Blehar explains how Elon Musk “accidentally unleashes MechaHitler” with X’s Grok AI bot:

Whence this madness? Did Elon’s pet AI really go rogue, or was it taking secret marching orders when it decided to start goose-stepping? If all of this feels like a twist out of a Crichton novel or perhaps a James Cameron film, then the one reassurance I can offer you is that Grok’s sudden turn toward a racialist understanding of human history may have a lot more to do with its creators and owner than the inherent malevolence of the AI itself. This is clear enough from the peculiar signaling language that Grok had been using, redolent with catchphrases common among so-called “race realists” and alt-right internet types like “every damn time” or “noticing” (a coinage taken directly from Steve Sailer).
You don’t chance upon locutions and arguments like that by accident; it’s rather clear that someone has added to Grok’s “reading library.” This is where my lack of any true knowledge of the mechanics of artificial intelligence consigns me to guessing. I don’t know how any of this works, so I choose to envision an anonymous engineer rotating a giant dial marked “ANTI-WOKENESS” all the way to its maximum setting on some enormous central console deep within Musk’s mountain lair. Or maybe Musk’s newest tweaks to the algorithm unlocked a secret informational annex that Grok is now happily exploring, and it’s just in the middle of a big 4chan phase.
I can tell you what effect this Grok turn has had, however, aside from the massive embarrassment to Musk and his platform: Every antisemitic lunatic in the world now has now been gifted a priceless new talking point to employ in their ongoing discourse. Legions of racist loons now feel utterly confirmed in their belief that Grok briefly ripped back the curtain to expose the real truth about who secretly runs the world. And now “they” have suppressed that truth once more. Let a thousand insane conspiracy theories bloom!

CODA

Thanks for reading and enjoy your weekend!