Hegseth in turmoil, Trump’s sinking polls

Summary

Post Reports Podcast Summary

Episode: Hegseth in Turmoil, Trump’s Sinking Polls
Release Date: April 25, 2025
Hosts: Martine Powers and Elahe Izadi
Guests: Aaron Blake (Senior Politics Reporter), Abigail House (National Security Reporter), Dan Balz (Chief Correspondent)

1. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's Mounting Challenges

The episode opens with a deep dive into the escalating issues surrounding Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. Less than three months into his tenure, Hegseth faces significant criticism regarding his qualifications and management style.

Use of Signal App: Aaron Blake kicks off the discussion by highlighting recent revelations about Hegseth’s use of the Signal app to share sensitive military information. This marks the second instance where Hegseth has been implicated in improper communication practices.

• Abigail House (02:47):
  “Signal is an unclassified messaging app. Senior officials, especially in national security, are supposed to use secure government-approved channels to prevent leaks and eavesdropping by foreign powers.”

The primary concern is that Signal is not part of the approved communication protocols for handling classified information, posing a security risk.

Administration's Response: The administration has attempted to downplay the severity of these breaches by claiming that the information shared was unclassified and arguing that no harm resulted from the leaks.

• Abigail House (04:21):
  “They say no harm was done and that hitting the Houthis was a success, trying to minimize the breach. However, claiming the information was unclassified contradicts standard handling of military operations.”

Op-Ed Revelation: A significant development was an op-ed by John Oliott, a former State Department spokesperson and Hegseth loyalist, who described “total chaos” at the Pentagon. This internal criticism underscores the turmoil within the Defense Department.

• Abigail House (07:05):
  “There is quite a bit of disarray at the Pentagon and Capitol Hill. Republicans involved in national security find these scandals embarrassing and distracting.”

Removal of Top Aides: Several of Hegseth’s top aides have been dismissed or have left their positions amid allegations of leaks and mismanagement, further exacerbating the perception of instability.

• Abigail House (08:24):
  “Individuals like Dan Caldwell, Darren Selnick, and Colin Carroll were fired without clear reasons, raising concerns about internal governance.”

2. Trump's Sinking Polls on Immigration

The conversation shifts to President Donald Trump’s immigration policies, particularly focusing on deportations and their impact on public opinion.

Kilmar Abrego Garcia Case: The wrongful deportation of Kilmar Abrego Garcia to El Salvador has become a focal point, highlighting the administration’s aggressive deportation tactics that clash with legal protections.

• Dan Balz (21:24):
  “They went ahead and deported him despite an order preventing his removal to El Salvador due to credible threats to his safety.”

Public Opinion and Polling: Recent polls reveal a downturn in Trump’s support on immigration, contrasting with earlier approval ratings.

• Aaron Blake (23:04):
  “A Washington Post poll showed 46% approval and 53% disapproval of Trump on immigration, indicating growing public dissatisfaction.”

Political Implications: The administration’s hardline stance is eroding support even within the Republican base, as some lawmakers like Congressman Don Bacon advocate for accountability.

• Aaron Blake (24:09):
  “Rep. Don Bacon stated, ‘I wouldn’t tolerate it. I would hold accountable, and I’d fire him.’”

Democrats' Dilemma: Democrats face a strategic challenge in addressing immigration without alienating voters who favor strong border policies.

• Dan Balz (25:48):
  “Democrats have struggled to provide a clear stance on illegal immigration, risking political backlash if they overly align with cases like Garcia’s.”

3. Trump’s Efforts to End the War in Ukraine

Trump’s initiative to mediate peace in the Ukraine conflict is examined, revealing significant setbacks and limited prospects for success.

Peace Proposal and Russian Aggression: The administration introduced a peace plan that Russia soon undermined with an attack on Kiev, demonstrating the fragile nature of the proposed negotiations.

• Abigail House (27:56):
  “Prospects for peace are not looking good. Russia’s actions have shown that the administration is struggling to achieve its objectives.”

Trump’s Position and Challenges: Trump’s unique approach to foreign policy, particularly his relationship with Vladimir Putin, complicates the peace efforts. Despite initial optimism, recent events have dampened his prospects.

• Abigail House (28:23):
  “Trump expressed frustration that Putin’s actions were undermining his peace efforts, highlighting the administration’s challenges.”

Political Ramifications: Trump’s inability to secure a viable peace deal not only affects international relations but also hinders his domestic agenda, undermining his image as a decisive leader.

• Dan Balz (12:47):
  “Trump expended so much political capital to get Hegseth confirmed with thin credentials, and now he has to prove his capability to manage crises like the war in Ukraine.”

4. Additional Developments

Towards the end of the episode, the hosts briefly mention a developing story involving the prosecution of a Milwaukee judge for obstructing an immigration arrest, reflecting the ongoing tensions within the immigration enforcement framework.

• Aaron Blake (32:25):
  “Federal prosecutors charged Judge Hannah Dugan with obstruction for misdirecting federal agents during an immigration arrest operation.”

Conclusion

The episode of Post Reports provides an in-depth analysis of the current turmoil within the Pentagon under Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, the declining public support for President Trump’s immigration policies, and the setbacks in his efforts to broker peace in Ukraine. Through insightful discussions and expert reporting, Aaron Blake, Abigail House, and Dan Balz shed light on the complexities and repercussions of these critical national issues.

Notable Quotes:

• Abigail House (02:47): “Signal is an unclassified messaging app. Senior officials, especially in national security, are supposed to use secure government-approved channels to prevent leaks and eavesdropping by foreign powers.”
• Dan Balz (21:24): “They went ahead and deported him despite an order preventing his removal to El Salvador due to credible threats to his safety.”
• Aaron Blake (23:04): “A Washington Post poll showed 46% approval and 53% disapproval of Trump on immigration, indicating growing public dissatisfaction.”
• Dan Balz (25:48): “Democrats have struggled to provide a clear stance on illegal immigration, risking political backlash if they overly align with cases like Garcia’s.”

---

This summary is based on the transcript provided and aims to encapsulate the key discussions, insights, and conclusions presented in the April 25, 2025 episode of Post Reports by The Washington Post.

Transcript

[Aaron Blake]

So, guys, I think if we learned anything this week, it's that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth likes the app Signal. Guys, we'll talk a little bit later about the problems with this, but I just wondered, is there an app that you have this kind of devotion to that you would go to such lengths to make sure that you have at all times?

[Abigail House]

Duolingo would like me to have that kind of devotion. They, they really harass me. Like, I mean, I think that's, this is an Internet meme. They harass everyone. They make you really guilty for not practicing Spanish.

[Aaron Blake]

But I can't you just turn off the notifications?

[Abigail House]

You know, you probably can, but I have not.

[Aaron Blake]

Okay, maybe just a recommendation, you could do that.

[Abigail House]

Yeah, maybe there's some weird self conscious sort of punishment going on there. But in short, no, I can't imagine being that devoted to an app.

[Aaron Blake]

Dan, what do you think?

[Dan Balz]

Aren't we supposed to say Washington Post?

[Aaron Blake]

The Washington Post app is a great app and I hope that people are also addicted to that.

[Abigail House]

Danmans foreign.

[Aaron Blake]

Of the Washington Post, this is Post Reports. I'm Aaron Blake, senior politics reporter and host of our weekly Politics Roundtable. It is Friday, April 25th. I'm joined this week by national security reporter Abigail House, loner. Hey, Abby.

[Abigail House]

Hello.

[Aaron Blake]

And we're also here with the chief. That would be Dan Balz, the Post chief correspondent. Hey, Dan.

[Dan Balz]

Hi, Aaron.

[Aaron Blake]

So today we're going to be digging into Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's mounting problems and the quote, unquote, total chaos at the Pentagon, less than three months into a job that many critics said the former Fox News host was not qualified for. We'll talk about whether his days are numbered and what happens next. We're also going to be talking about the politics of immigration, an issue that is really setting the tone for Donald Trump's feuds with the courts. There are some signs that the American people are cooling on his handling of deportations. And later in the show, we'll touch on the latest on Trump's efforts to fill a major campaign promise, which is to end the war in Ukraine. So, guys, it feels like Pete Hegseth has been in the news every day this week. It's kind of been a steady drip, drip, drip of new revelations about what's happening. The big news is that we're learning about the second instance where Pete Hegseth used Signal and shared highly sensitive information about strikes in Yemen, this time not with Trump administration officials, but with his family members and a lawyer. He also had the Signal app installed on his computer in the Pentagon. Abby, can you just tell us, for people who aren't following this too closely, what's the problem with this? I mean, lots of people use signal, right? Like it's supposed to be somewhat more secure than your usual apps.

[Abigail House]

So originally this was a twofold problem. First, signal is an unclassified messaging app. So the military, senior administration officials, especially in the national security space, normally, you know, if they're exchanging sensitive or classified information, there are specific guidelines for how they do that. They're supposed to gather in a skiff, that's a secure room that has been specially designed for the handling of classified information, or they're supposed to use a secure government approved and set up server or phone line. And so signal inherently is not part of that. And that means that is already going outside of preset guidelines and communication lines that are set up to prevent, you know, the eavesdropping of a foreign power or to prevent leaks and so on. The other, you know, sort of big problem with Hegseth's signal use was that in this, this first sort of scandal that came to light, he accidentally, or. Or someone on the chat accidentally copied a journalist from the Atlantic on it, Jeffrey Goldberg. You know, we likely would never have even learned about his use of signal to share these secretive military plans had National Security Advisor Mike Waltz not included inadvertently, a journalist on the chat.

[Aaron Blake]

And what is the White House and what our Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, saying about this?

[Abigail House]

So the administration's line really or approach has been to try to minimize this through multiple arguments. One, they say, you know, no harm done. This was the sort of the early response, you know, so what? Okay, so they shared some information about a planned strike. It got out. But you know what? Nothing, nothing bad happened. We, we hit the Houthis. The Houthi militant group is who they were targeting in Yemen. And, you know, that was a success. So how can you possibly complain about, you know, what got out and we won't make this mistake again, which obviously is now kind of called into question again with the revelation that there were more signal chats that Hegseth shared information about these strikes on. They've also said they've claimed somewhat implausibly to national security experts that this information was unclassified. That sort of flies in the face of everything that we know about how, you know, impending military operations or information about that is handled. Most people think it's very highly unlikely that this was unclassified. But Hegseth has the authority to declassify Defense Department information. And then the other tactic that they've really leaned into this past week is to just blame the media to. To wrap this entire thing. These multiple reports about Signal use, all of this they've tried to wrap up, as you know, this is liberal media, biased fake news media that is just trying to undermine the Trump administration, trying to paint Hegseth in this negative light. And so, you know, we can just push all of that aside because that's what's really going on here, right?

[Aaron Blake]

This is a pretty familiar tactic from them when there's reporting on these things. But I think it's important to note that it's not just the reporting on Pete Hegseth's use of Signal, and it's not just the media who is talking about things that are problems for him right now. The other big revelation this week was an op ed that dropped over the weekend from a recent former State Department spokesperson who was a top aide to Pete Hegseth. And this is a spokesman named John Oliott. I believe I'm pronouncing that correctly. He wrote in Politico about how there has been, quote, unquote, total chaos at the Pentagon in recent weeks. This ties to the removals of several of Hegseth's top aides who he had suggested might have leaked against him. But it was really striking to me that this guy came forward a loyalist, a Trump loyalist, a Hegseth loyalist, somebody who has been close to the MAGA movement, decided to write this op ed proactively and come forward with this stuff. What does that tell you about the situation that we're in right now?

[Abigail House]

Well, I think it points to quite a bit of disarray at the Pentagon and certainly on Capitol Hill. I'm hearing privately, not publicly, for the most part, a lot of frustration among Republicans involved in the national security space who find all of this to be quite a bit embarrassing and distracting and would really wish that the scandals emanating from the Pentagon would just kind of stop. But all of these things taken together, I think, point to a really tumultuous situation and management system going on there. I mean, the administration obviously has not appreciated this, former employees speaking out. They've tried to sort of cast him as and others as disgruntled former employees and, you know, presumptive leakers who are just trying to get back at Hegseth and the administration for being fired.

[Aaron Blake]

So, Abby, we've touched on the removals of several top aides at the Pentagon. Just to be clear, these are not Biden administration holdovers These are people who were hired to work with Pete Hegseth, and they're very high ranking people. Can you talk about who these people are, why they were removed, and what this says about the situation at the Pentagon?

[Abigail House]

The people who have been fired, as you said, these are people who were brought in by the administration, by Hegseth, and that's what makes it all the more striking. They included former senior advisor Dan Caldwell, former deputy chief of staff Darren Selnick, and Colin Carroll, the deputy Defense secretary's former chief of staff.

[Aaron Blake]

Yeah, and then Oly and his chief of staff, Joe Casper have also left. They were not fired, but they have left their positions.

[Abigail House]

Exactly. And Olyt and the three I just mentioned have all kind of spoken out, you know, questioning their dismissal. Olyat has talked about this atmosphere of chaos in the Pentagon under Hegseth. The other three said that they were dismissed without being told why they were being dismissed or if there was any investigation into their involvement in any leaks. And they have categorically denied that they leaked anything. But, you know, as our colleague Dan Lamoth reported, defense officials have described Hegseth becoming increasingly paranoid. He has a diminishingly small group of people around him who he trusts. He pays a lot of attention, just like President Trump does, to his portrayal on television, on Fox News and so on. Other people are saying about him. He is certainly aware that members of the GOP on the Hill, if not publicly, privately. I mean, I had Republican lawmakers and aides tell me just this week, yeah, this, this latest signal stuff, it speaks to what we've always known about him, that, you know, we never had faith in his competence. You know, he's, he's not qualified for this job. We're not going to come out and say it publicly at this point, point, but, you know, no one really has faith in this guy. And you sort of see that really bothering him in his defensiveness publicly.

[Aaron Blake]

Dan, I think it's clear that Trump's approach these days is to dig in when something like this happened. That was certainly the case when the first signal reports came out and Jeffrey Goldberg from the Atlantic was included on them. There's been very little indication, at least publicly, that the administration is looking at replacing Hegseth. But I kind of wonder from somebody with your view of history, how tenable of a situation is this for the administration right now? Aren't they looking at this and thinking there's just gonna be so many more problems and maybe it's time to cut bait and avoid those things that are coming down the pike later on?

[Dan Balz]

Well, in the traditional sense, yes, but there's nothing traditional about this administration or this president. And so I think we have to always stipulate to that that he sees the world differently, he acts differently. But in your formulation of it and Abby's description of it, I mean, this is a kind of a classic Washington story that we're seeing play out. I mean, an official under attack, often for reasons of their own making, who attempts to dig in.

[Aaron Blake]

Yeah, just to be clear, he said this information is not classified, but he's not denying these reports about his use of signal broadly.

[Dan Balz]

No, no, he's just saying SIGNAL is something that is an acceptable platform for us to communicate with one another, et cetera, et cetera. You know, you would assume that at some point he will be gone. You know, this notion of him complaining that there are disgruntled employees. They are disgruntled employees, and they are disgruntled for the reasons that they've been describing, which is that they see the top of the Pentagon in total disarray and infighting, and an agency of that significance and that size cannot operate indefinitely with that happening at the top. So the question is, how do they clean that up? If Hegseth is capable of bringing in a new team who can stabilize things and get him stabilized, then maybe they can survive it and maybe Trump will stick with him. Trump expended so much political capital to get him confirmed. His credentials were so thin for this job and so many people did not think he was qualified for it. He's played in to that criticism of him. So he's going to have to do something to suggest that he is capable of bringing this to a close. And so far, there's no evidence that he's able to do that.

[Aaron Blake]

Yeah, Dan, I wanted to dig into that a little bit because I think to some extent the problem here is that everything that is happening with Hegseth right now is playing into this kind of pre existing notion that he just wasn't qualified for this job. You know, Hegseth is a former weekend host on Fox News. He did run some veterans advocacy organizations, but those organizations, according to reporting, had financial problems. There was allegations of mismanagement, and the Pentagon is just a huge bureaucracy. And I wondered if the stakes of this and the idea that somebody who's running this organization is just not up to the task could lead people who are reluctant to act and try to push him out to maybe be a little bit bolder in trying to do that, even if not publicly Maybe privately and saying to the White House, maybe it's time to move this guy along.

[Dan Balz]

I would say that the problem that the Republicans have, which is not unique to this situation, is their unwillingness or their fear of doing anything to cross the president. And as long as the president is sending out the signals that the White House is sending out that he's standing strongly behind Hegseth, it's going to be very difficult for them to do that. Until the White House feels that this is causing them great problems. They may believe that this is kind of an inside the Beltway issue, that this is not something that the American people are focused on or care that much about. And the question is, has that changed? Is there a wider group of people who think he is unqualified and therefore demanding that he be dismissed? So far, we're not seeing that. Doesn't mean it won't happen.

[Aaron Blake]

Right. We should note that when Hegseth was confirmed, the vote was actually tied, 50 to 50. It was a tie that was broken by Vice President J.D. vance. The three Republican senators who voted against him all cited his lack of experience and expertise. I should also note that we have seen at least one congressional Republican come forward and say that Hegseth should be pushed out. This is Congressman Don Bacon, who represents a swing district in Nebraska. I think we have a clip of that here. Well, I wouldn't tolerate it. I would hold accountable, and I fire him. You can't put classified information, and I guarantee it. If you're talking about when you're launching aircraft to attack Yemen and you do that two hours before the missions, that is classified. That's operational details, I guess. Abby, what are you looking for next in this situation? What are the next shoes to drop, and what are the big questions here?

[Abigail House]

Well, I think you and Dan outlined it perfectly. The bar is very high for Republicans. A lot of them feel that way. As to what they would actually speak up and challenge Trump on. National security, the economy. These are the two traditional things where people are willing to draw their lines. But, you know, reelection is a. Is a really important thing to a lot of these people or all of them. And where we have seen some Republicans speak up is where we saw the tariffs start to really piss people off in their home districts, you know, freak out farmers, for example. But to the question of, you know, how badly do you have to run the Defense Department or just American national security writ large to get Republicans to come out and really stand up and try to stop something for the sake of, say, American national security and a functional government as opposed to for the sake of their next reelection. I think the jury's still out and we have no idea what that line is.

[Aaron Blake]

Right. And especially these days, Republicans are really going to pick their spots in objecting to what Trump does. And it's a matter of prioritization. Which brings us to what we're going to talk about after the break, which is another big issue that has been roiling this week, immigration. We'll be right back.

[Abigail House]

I'm Sally Jenkins and I'm a sports columnist and feature writer for the Washington Post. My job entails pulling the curtain on really big sports events at what is going on in locker rooms, what's going on in the stadium tunnel, Most importantly, what's going on in the minds of the athletes that I cover. I think that we have an instinct that sports are really important in some primal way. We pay a lot of money for them, we build really big stadiums for them. And I think that athletics really gets us in touch with aspiration and teach something very, very important about accountability, about self determination. And so my job is to really make those links explicit for readers and users. Subscriptions support this work and the people behind it. Find out [e-mail] hi, I'm Sally Jenkins and I'm one of the people behind the Post.

[Aaron Blake]

Allergy season can be a pretty rough time of year, but now you can stop allergy season in its tracks. With big savings from Goodrx, you and.

[Abigail House]

Your family can kick those itchy eyes, stuffy noses and scratchy throats straight to the curb with seasonal allergy medication.

[Aaron Blake]

Starting at just $15, GoodRx is free and easy to use, and it helps millions of Americans get the medications they need at a price they can afford every single month. In some cases, you can save up to 80%.

[Abigail House]

GoodRx doesn't require any personal information. Just search your prescription on the GoodRx app or website, compare prices at pharmacies near you, and show the best one to your pharmacist.

[Aaron Blake]

GoodRx is accepted at over 70,000 pharmacies nationwide, including CVS, Walgreens, Rite Aid and more. And even if you have insurance, GoodRx could actually beat your co pay, so it's always worth checking.

[Abigail House]

Don't let allergies slow you down. Save big on allergy medications this season with goodrx go to goodrx.com reports. That's goodrx.com reports.

[Aaron Blake]

The last thing you want to hear when you need your auto insurance most is a robot with countless irrelevant Menu options, which is why with USAA auto insurance, you'll get great service that is easy and reliable, all at the touch of a button. Get a quote today, restrictions apply. Usaa. So, Dan, I want to shift gears to talk about another issue that has been building for weeks, really, and that's President Trump's deportations. Of course, he has long focused on this as a winning issue for him. It was something that the American people seemed to like and voted for him accordingly in the 2024 election. But I think it's safe to say their tolerance for what they're seeing is being tested right now. The administration has taken a number of efforts that, at the very least, challenge the legal guardrails that are around what they can do when it comes to deporting people. And the most significant case where this has come to the forefront is, of course, Kilmar Abrego Garcia. This is a man who was wrongly deported to El Salvador. The administration has acknowledged he was wrongly deported, at least in legal filings. And I know that you've written some about this clash over deportations and what it says about the rule of law. Can you just kind of catch us up on the stakes of what this is about? Because this isn't just about Kilmar Abrego Garcia or even deportations more broadly. Right. This is a bigger issue about Trump and the courts.

[Dan Balz]

Yeah. Let's step back for just one second. As you alluded to, one of the reasons that Donald Trump won the election was over the issue of immigration and this sense on the part of a lot of Americans that things had gotten completely out of control on the border and that the Biden administration had completely fumbled that issue.

[Aaron Blake]

Right. There was an influx of migrants, huge influx over the last four years.

[Dan Balz]

Yes. Now, that began to come down in the final months of the Biden administration. But nonetheless, the perception was there, and Trump promised to do something about that. And on that front, they've been successful. They also had support for the broad policy of deporting people who are here illegally, particularly if they have a criminal record. There was broad support for that. But in practice, what the Trump administration has done is gone beyond, I think, where the public thought they would go in doing things that have gotten them into a clash with the courts. And Kilmar Abrego Garcia is the kind of the prime case of that. Mistakenly deported. The administration has to be clear that.

[Aaron Blake]

He could be deported, but not to El Salvador, which is his home country.

[Dan Balz]

Yes.

[Aaron Blake]

He had an order in place that said he could not be deported. There because he faced a credible threat of danger in his home country.

[Dan Balz]

Correct. And they went ahead and did it anyway. So now it's in the courts, and the judge has ordered them repeatedly. The federal district court judge in Maryland has ordered them repeatedly to make efforts to try to bring him back. This went to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court agreed with the federal district judge, but also said the judge has to in some way clarify exactly what they want the administration to do because the administration is owed deference in the conduct of foreign policy. The White House and the administration has taken that and flipped the meaning of the court case and said the Supreme Court completely agrees with us. We can do basically whatever we want because it's foreign policy. The administration is under orders to produce evidence of what they have done. They have continually refused to do that. They've been given a little bit more time to produce some evidence of what they have tried to do. But this does go to the question of the rule of law. What can an administration do? Can they defy the courts? And so far, they would say they are not defying the courts. They are simply using the legal machinery to drag this out. But the evidence is that they are unwilling to comply with the judge's orders to bring back Abrego. Garcia, how this plays out, we don't know. But what this has started to do in public opinion is erode the support that the administration has had for the broader policy of deportations.

[Aaron Blake]

Yeah, I'm really glad that you brought that up, because we actually just had a new poll from the Washington Post, from ABC News and Ipsos that came out just today. It tested Trump on immigration and found 46% approved, but 53%, a majority, disapproved. So pretty much every poll that I've seen now this week actually shows Trump in the negative on immigration. And just to underscore this, you know, this was like his best issue early on as other numbers have fallen away. The other thing I was struck by is there's another poll this week from Fox News which did its first big look at 100 days of the Trump administration. It tested Trump on both border security and immigration. Now, those are two issues that we generally talk about as being synonymous. But While Trump was plus 15 on border security, he was actually minus 1 on the broader topic of immigration. And so I think that really speaks to the idea that people really see what's happening with these deportations, and it is rubbing them the wrong way to some degree. Do you think that's a fair assessment?

[Dan Balz]

Yeah, I do think that's a fair assessment. And you're right. I mean, as long as he was able to keep the focus on border security, he had high ground. But the minute he begins to implement a policy to undo things that have happened over many, many years, I mean, the arrival of people who've come here undocumented didn't start during the Biden administration. I mean, it's been here for decades. And as we've looked at polling over the years, there's been general support for people who have been here for a very long time and are assimilated into their communities that they should be provided a path to at least legalization, if not citizenship. But Trump tried to flip that whole debate with a very hard line attitude. And frankly, it was successful for him in 2016, it was successful for him in 2024. But once he went as far as he's done in office in this term, it's reversing on him. And so they've kind of gotten themselves into a difficult box that they're struggling to get out of.

[Aaron Blake]

I think the polling is really interesting, and we have seen some movement, but we also saw, I think starting about last week, some Democrats start to worry a little bit that they were aligning too much with the cause of Kilmar Abrego Garcia. And we saw people like California Governor Gavin Newsom come out and say, you know, Democrats, maybe we should be a little bit careful here that we're giving the administration the issues that they want, that we're lining up with undocumented immigrants. Is there something to this caution that Democrats were feeling? And has that gone away now that we've seen some of these surveys that suggest that the American people don't like what they're seeing with these kinds of deportations, or is this still kind of a live issue?

[Dan Balz]

I do think it's a live issue, and I think it's one that the Democrats have to be very mindful of and not get lost in the moment when they see the case of Mr. Roberto Garcia and ignore the larger problem, which is that over time, the voters have not trusted Democrats on immigration. I recall a conversation I had with somebody who served in the Biden administration before they went into the Biden administration. This was back in 2018 who said Democrats have a basic problem on the immigration issue. We don't know how to answer the entry question, which is, if someone comes across the border illegally, what do you do? And he said, we don't have a clear answer. I had a conversation this week with somebody who had worked in the Biden administration and is familiar with some of the policies that they were doing on homeland security. His concern is that Democrats cannot win a debate if it is all about the rule of law. He said, once you are in a debate about the rule of law, as important as that is, it is something that only a portion of the American people really lock into and think about and talk about, whereas the question of who's here illegally and whose side are you on is a different question. And his concern is that if you go too far in the defense of Abrego Garcia and lose sight of the broader question of legal or illegal immigration, there is a political price that can be paid for that, and that's what the Democrats have to reckon with also.

[Aaron Blake]

So, Abby, before we go, I wanted to check in on another major issue this week, something we're seeing a lot of movement on, especially late in the week, which is Donald Trump's efforts to end the war in Ukraine. This is, of course, something that he said he would do on day one of his administration. He has since said that that was a joke, but clearly this has been a major initiative. The administration came forward with a major plan this week that was basically a proposal for two sides. Then we saw Russia launch a major attack on Kiev. We also saw some major news on Friday morning involving an attack on a Russian official. Can you just catch us up on where this stands and what the prospects for peace are right now?

[Abigail House]

The prospects for peace are not looking good. Trump has talked about a couple times about coming in and being the great peacemaker, not just between Ukraine and Russia, but in the Middle east as well. And he has not been able to accomplish what he suggested he would be able to. We've seen this sort of tough talk towards Ukraine. You know, initially it seemed like maybe it was having some impact.

[Aaron Blake]

He sort of, yeah, we had the Oval Office blow up with Volodymyr Zelensky, the Ukrainian president.

[Abigail House]

That's right. Where, you know, that marked a major shift in the US Approach towards this ally, Ukraine, who has been receiving US Military support in its war since against Russia, which invaded Ukraine in 2022. And it seemed like maybe that toughness might have some impact. It seemed like Zelensky, the Ukrainian president, was potentially open to some sort of deal to allow the US Access to critical minerals in Ukraine. It seemed like he was interested in coming to the negotiating table even after Trump had and Vice President Vance had largely humiliated him in the Oval Office. Trump has also sort of boasted throughout this process, you know, that he can get this a deal Done a peace deal, done. Because he has such a good relationship with Vladimir Putin, the Russian president. And then we see Putin's regime sort of publicly go and bomb Ukraine. Obviously, these actions sort of speak louder than words, and it puts the administration in a really tough spot. And you saw this very rather rare rebuke from Trump where he. He actually posted on social media, vladimir, stop after the latest Russian bombardment.

[Aaron Blake]

Yeah, I was really struck by that, too, because I'm somebody who's written often about Trump's kind of weird posture towards Russia. It's very much not in line with traditional American policy, which regards Putin as a thug and somebody who you really can't deal with or trust. But Trump has, over the years, been a lot more critical of Volodymyr Zelenskyy than Vladimir Putin. I was struck by this because, yes, it was a criticism of Putin. He was saying, stop, but it was also kind of, like, couched in strategic terms, like he was blowing up a deal. You know, Vladimir, you're kind of undercutting me in this effort to end this war. So I thought it was kind of interesting in that way. It wasn't a complete departure from how he's talked about this before. Is that a fair reading?

[Abigail House]

Yeah, I think so. I mean, I think that's where it really irks him, is if people who he thinks he is making headway with are then not appearing to not play along with his agenda. And that is frustrating because I think he would like to be the peacemaker or to have these big accomplishments that he can hold up and say, see, look what I did, particularly to contrast it with Joe Biden.

[Aaron Blake]

The other thing that I was really struck by this week was, I believe it was Vice President J.D. vance coming out when they debuted this peace deal, notably involved Russia getting Ukraine territory. You know, Crimea would officially be Russian under this deal, or at least recognized as such, generally viewed as a pretty favorable deal for Russia. But JD Vance came out and suggested that this was the administration's final offer, I believe. Is that where we're at right now? Are they really ready to pull away from these negotiations? Or do you view that as a negotiating tactic of, like, kind of take it or leave it, and then if that doesn't work out, they'll just come back to the table?

[Abigail House]

I think everything's a negotiating tactic, as we've seen. I mean, nothing ever seems final with the Trump administration or often with politicians in general. You know, we've seen them go back and forth, you know, make threats, and then completely walk back in the realm of tariffs and in other policies. You know, I can't imagine that this actually would be the final offer, but I think it speaks again to the administration's frustration that they are not where they thought they might be at this point.

[Aaron Blake]

Yeah. And it's one thing not to get the war ended on day one, as Trump talked about on the campaign trail. It's another to fail to do that altogether, which would be a pretty big setback for his agenda. But that's all we have time for in today's episode. Thank you so much, Abby and Dan, thank you.

[Abigail House]

Thank you.

[Aaron Blake]

After we recorded this conversation on Friday morning, we got some major immigration news breaking that we feel is important to share. Federal prosecutors charged a local Milwaukee judge with obstructing an immigration arrest operation. In court documents, they accused Judge Hannah Dugan of, quote, intentionally misdirecting federal agents who wanted to detain an immigrant who was set to appear before her in an unrelated proceeding last Friday. After the arrest, US Attorney General Pam Bondi went on FOX News and connected the situation to the administration's broader criticisms of judges. Bondi said, quote, it doesn't matter who you are, you're going to be prosecuted. The judge faces felony counts of obstruction and concealing a person from arrest. Dugan's attorney said she protests her arrest and that it was not made in the interest of public safety. This is a developing story and you can read more about it and find [e-mail] Today's episode was produced by Laura Benshoff with help from Rennie Svirnofsky. It was mixed by Sean Carter and edited by Lucy Perkins with help from Rachel Van Dongen. Our team also includes Maggie Penman, Rena Flores, Ted Muldoon, Alana Gordon, Ariel Plotnick, Sabi Robinson, Emma Talkoff, Peter Bresnan, Renita Jablonski, Colby Itkowicz, Lahe Izadi and Martine Power. I'm Aaron Blake. We'll be back Monday with more stories from the Washington Post. The last thing you want to hear when you need your auto insurance most is a robot with countless irrelevant menu options, which is why with USAA Auto Insur, you'll get great service that is easy and reliable, all at the touch of a button. Get a quote today, restrictions apply.