Chris Kelley

Trump's signing statements to the NDAA in his first term did not contain language like warfighting ethos. His statement to NDAA he signed last December reads that the Act will enable the "Department of War".

At some point in 2025, the White House titled bills sent from either the House or the Senate that we signed into law as "Congressional Bill...Signing into Law."

If you were running a professional messaging campaign, Trump's handling of the Epstein files is a case study in everything not to do. www.axios.com/2025/12/24/e...

In all, an unmitigated disaster that has cost this administration months, along with political capital, in an effort to protect Donald Trump from whatever is in those files. Rather than burying this story in one big dump, they have put it on the radar of everyone.

If you were running a professional messaging campaign, Trump's handling of the Epstein files is a case study in everything not to do. www.axios.com/2025/12/24/e...

It seems easy. They would have had some tough road for a short time, but given this presidency, they would have moved past it. Instead, they announce the release, then claim there are no files *in existence*, then claim there are files but a court needs to order their release...

If you were running a professional messaging campaign, Trump's handling of the Epstein files is a case study in everything not to do. www.axios.com/2025/12/24/e...

So the strategic thing for Trump would have been to release it all, and plan messaging around the worst parts ("Clinton is in there too", "The media is covering for the Democrats in the file" etc.). If they would have done that, this story could have been buried back in February.

If you were running a professional messaging campaign, Trump's handling of the Epstein files is a case study in everything not to do. www.axios.com/2025/12/24/e...

I am updating my signing statements database for Trump 2025, and it is really hard to grapple with how bonkers he is until you read the transcripts of his signing ceremonies.

In light of the SCOTUS oral arguments in Trump v Slaughter, a couple of things on the unitary executive theory, which is once again getting coverage.

The OMB's reign over regulatory decision-making, streamlining decisions compatible with the president's agenda and deep-sixing those that were not is an example. In this way, the ability to unilaterally make policy was away to deal with the polarized Congress, where nothing gets done.

In light of the SCOTUS oral arguments in Trump v Slaughter, a couple of things on the unitary executive theory, which is once again getting coverage.

The sledgehammer that Trump took to the Executive Branch by allowing Elon Musk to run wild has not appeared to have increased presidential power. It has led to administrative dysfunction, the feeble rehiring of people with institutional knowledge, and the cratering of public opinion.

In light of the SCOTUS oral arguments in Trump v Slaughter, a couple of things on the unitary executive theory, which is once again getting coverage.

In fact, his actions are likely to elicit substantial congressional backlash if and when party control changes that may extend into future presidencies--think the backlash after Watergate and Ford's whimper about the "imperiled presidency".

In light of the SCOTUS oral arguments in Trump v Slaughter, a couple of things on the unitary executive theory, which is once again getting coverage.

But we should separate the theory with Donald Trump, since whatever it is he is doing is not in line with the unitary executive theory. At its core, the theory is about the institution, and its occupants should take care to make it function better for their predecessors

In light of the SCOTUS oral arguments in Trump v Slaughter, a couple of things on the unitary executive theory, which is once again getting coverage.

I have spent a good part of my academic career talking about #DickCheney in one manner or the other. Every grad seminar on the presidency was (and still is) not complete without mentioning his warning about the "hub and spokes" of White House management.

A lot of the attention today will focus on how Cheney ended up outside of the MAGA Republican Party, and how he publicly criticized Donald Trump as an authoritarian thug.

I have spent a good part of my academic career talking about #DickCheney in one manner or the other. Every grad seminar on the presidency was (and still is) not complete without mentioning his warning about the "hub and spokes" of White House management.

Until the Trump administration, the Bush administration had exceeded all previous administrations *combined* in the number of separate provisions of law they refused to execute because it infringed upon the "unitary executive." thecre.com/pdf/20060119...

I have spent a good part of my academic career talking about #DickCheney in one manner or the other. Every grad seminar on the presidency was (and still is) not complete without mentioning his warning about the "hub and spokes" of White House management.

Or how he managed to get the hapless Joe Lieberman to agree on Meet the Press to accept *only* military ballots without a postmark after the election in Florida, and not all overseas ballots? You could feel victory slipping from Gore's hands as a result

I have spent a good part of my academic career talking about #DickCheney in one manner or the other. Every grad seminar on the presidency was (and still is) not complete without mentioning his warning about the "hub and spokes" of White House management.

And then in the lead up to the Iraq War in 2003, where he played Judith Miller of the @nytimes.com to become a tool for the public relations campaign to support invading Iraq. How many times did Cheney point to the Times as evidence of a weapons program in Iraq?

I have spent a good part of my academic career talking about #DickCheney in one manner or the other. Every grad seminar on the presidency was (and still is) not complete without mentioning his warning about the "hub and spokes" of White House management.

Or his willingness to throw the prerogatives of Congress under the bus to advance the cause of presidential power, as he did in his authorship of the House minority report on Iran Contra, where he made Congress the villain of the story. nsarchive.gwu.edu/document/182...