Trump Says No Iran Deal Needed, Turns Vance to Blue States Trump said the United States does not need a deal with Iran and pointed his vice president at Democratic-run states. The right heard resolve. The left heard a reversal. The Gap: On the right, a Fox opinion writer warns against a paper deal, and Pence says the administration stopped short. Fox News reported Trump gave no examples of the billions he says are stolen each month. The left sees a contradiction; three days earlier Trump said he hoped for a deal. Gulf allies asked Trump to hold off. The next day, Central Command reported Iranian drones aimed at Bahrain. What the left said: MS NOW's MaddowBlog said Trump appeared to have benched his own vice president. “So, which is it? Does he want a deal or not?” (Steve Benen, MS NOW MaddowBlog, November 13) “Look, Iran, I hope we're going to be able to make a deal with them.” (President Trump, November 9 remarks, via MS NOW MaddowBlog, November 13) “It's worth emphasizing that Trump's statements often bear no resemblance to reality” (Steve Benen, MS NOW MaddowBlog, November 13) What the right said: The Daily Caller headlined that Trump pulled Vance from the Iran negotiations. “CORRUPTION is in the Democrat Leadership's blood!” (President Trump, Truth Social, via Fox News, November 12) “We cannot afford to confuse a diplomatic document with a durable security arrangement.” (Gordon Sondland, former ambassador to the EU, Fox News opinion, November 12) “It's because we stopped short and didn't finish it” (Former Vice President Mike Pence, Fox News Digital, November 12) The Record: On November 12 President Trump wrote on Truth Social that the United States does not need a deal with Iran. He asked Vice President JD Vance, a lead negotiator with Iran, to focus on corruption and crime in Democrat-run cities and states. Vance already chairs a fraud task force created in March. Trump said five Gulf states had asked him to postpone broader attacks. On November 13 the U.S. rejected a Revolutionary Guard claim that it destroyed a radar in Bahrain. Central Command said it shot down two drones, with no damage. White House Warns Incoming Oversight Chair on Subpoenas The White House counsel told the incoming Oversight chair that Democrats' subpoena threats may be criminal. The right saw a warning to a party with a hit list. The left saw a threat. The Gap: The right calls Democrats' plans a hit list and a witch hunt. Fox itself noted no wrongdoing has been established for the officials named. The left calls it a threat of criminal investigation. The attorney general says no lawmaker is under criminal investigation. Democrats take the gavels in January. What the left said: HuffPost called the letter a shocking threat. “The letter is a signal that the Trump administration will be maximally hostile to the deluge of investigations” (HuffPost, November 11) “Congress' authority comes from Article I of the Constitution, not from the permission of the White House.” (Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), CBS News, November 12) What the right said: Fox News headlined the top Trump officials on Democrats' investigation hit list. “Left-wing lawmakers are signaling that their oversight ambitions extend well beyond War Secretary Pete Hegseth” (Fox News, November 12) “Compulsory process is a power Congress has for oversight functions, and only for oversight functions.” (White House counsel Will Scharf, Letter, via Fox News, November 11) “Their focus is on making life miserable for the other side.” (Jordan Sekulow, columnist, Townhall, November 13) The Record: White House counsel Will Scharf wrote to Rep. Robert Garcia, the incoming Oversight Committee chair, in a letter dated November 9. He wrote that Democrats' subpoena threats may cross the line into blatant criminality, and that subpoenas could prompt executive branch probes. Garcia plans to examine Trump family business dealings, including crypto ventures. Trump directed the Justice Department to look into the oversight push. Attorney General Todd Blanche said the department has no open criminal investigations into members of Congress. Alito Warns Congress Could Defund the Supreme Court A week after Democrats won Congress, Justice Alito said lawmakers could turn off the Court's lights. The right heard a warning about Democrats. The left asked about the White House. The Gap: The right reads a warning about Democrats into remarks that did not directly refer to the midterms. The Gateway Pundit cites no Democratic plan to defund the Court. The left notes Alito skipped Trump's calls to impeach judges, yet he did criticize lower courts for blocking presidential policies. What the left said: Politico Playbook, relayed by The Daily Beast, pointed to what Alito left out. “he made no mention of direct threats to the courts from the White House” (Politico Playbook, via The Daily Beast (Yahoo News), November 13) “the timing was hard to miss after Democrats won control of the House and Senate” (Raw Story, November 13) What the right said: The Gateway Pundit headlined that Alito sounded the alarm about incoming Democrats. “Of course, Democrats didn't campaign for the midterms on blowing up the Supreme Court, but they will probably try.” (The Gateway Pundit, November 13) “And there are many, many, many other things that they can do, or at least try to do,” (Justice Samuel Alito, Federalist Society remarks, via The Gateway Pundit, November 13) The Record: On November 12 Justice Samuel Alito spoke at a Federalist Society event in Washington. He said Congress can turn off the lights at the Supreme Court by defunding it. He called the judiciary vulnerable to Congress and the executive. He said some lower-court judges have gone far astray with orders blocking presidential policies. NBC News reported that he did not directly refer to the midterms. Democrats take control of both chambers in January. The Constitution protects justices' pay.