For daily news updates and analysis, be sure to follow us on Instagram.
On Monday, I wrote about what I called Trump’s Instability Doctrine — governance through threat, chaos, and manufactured brinkmanship.
Today, we watched it unfold in real time.
After days of escalating rhetoric about taking Greenland, Trump arrived in Davos demanding the territory — only to declare hours later that he had reached a “framework” that made taking it unnecessary. Crisis on. Crisis off. For now.
Trump’s reversal hinges on a deal that appears to exist mainly in Trump’s telling. As we’ve seen before, the same words are being interpreted very differently by the parties involved. NATO says one thing. Trump says another. Denmark is clear about its red lines. Everyone is congratulating themselves for surviving the day.
The pattern**:** Create maximum alarm. Declare victory. Leave everyone else to figure out what just happened — and whether it will happen again tomorrow.
For now, the temperature has dropped. Markets exhaled. Allies unclenched.
But if the Instability Doctrine teaches us anything, it’s this: today’s de-escalation is not a resolution. It’s an intermission.
In today’s newsletter: Trump declares victory on a Greenland deal that may not exist. Stocks rally after Trump backs off, but Europe remains wary. Newsom disses Trump speech as "remarkably boring."
Also: ICE claims new power to enter homes without judicial warrants. Congress goes weak on ICE funding. The latest on Iran, Ukraine, Trump's assault on the Fed.
And Freedom Cities: The experiment Trump backers want next.
In the Green: Trump on Wednesdayannounceda “framework of a future deal” over Greenland with NATO,which he claimed“gets us everything we needed to get” and will last “forever.” Hesaid he’d explainthe details of his “concept of a deal … down the line.”Senior US officialsare leaking their version of the concept;they claim NATO agreed to grant the US sovereignty over small pockets of land in Greenland. The US, they say, would use these to build military bases. There’s one problem:𝕏NATO’s Secretary General seems to think he agreed to something entirely different.In a statement NATO said the framework will simply ensure “Arctic security through the collective efforts of Allies” and that negotiations will focus on “ensuring that Russia and China never gain a foothold” in Greenland. No mention of US sovereignty in Greenland at all. Translation: Trump may have declared victory on a deal that doesn’t actually exist yet—or that NATO and Denmark think means something completely different. Also, Denmark’sforeign minister reiteratedthat US ownership of Greenland is a “red line.” Who here thinks the “concept of a deal” could change at any moment? At least, for now, the feeling is one of relief; asone Danish official (under)stated, “the day ended better than it started.”Master Market: What changed Trump’s mind? Perhaps it was the markets, whichsuffered their worst day since Octoberon Tuesday in the face of Trump’s renewed threats to take Greenland, andplunged once againwhen the EU formally voted to suspend its trade deal with the US. But this deal, and Trump’s decision to back off threatened tariffs against countries opposing US ownership of Greenland, relieved investors,sending markets soaringhigher than they have in months. European officials may take more convincing, however; onesenior official warnedthey would “have to look at what this so-called solution would mean” before deciding whether to move forward with the trade deal, “so this will take some time.”Instability Doctrine: Trump’s supposed deal came after a long, rambling speech to world leaders in which he said for the first time thathe would, but repeated his argument that total ownership was necessary. “We probably won’t get anything,”not use force to take GreenlandTrump said, “unless I decide to use excessive strength and force, where we would be, frankly, unstoppable. But I won’t do that.” Former NATO supreme Allied Commander James Stavridis told CNN he’s “relieved” force “appears to be off the table,” but said the relationship is damaged and this could lead to a Europe that “builds its own defense industry and goes its own way in the world,” in association with Canada. (He also said they might be open to more partnership with China.)Different Approach: California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who was in the audience for Trump’s speech (and received abizarre shoutout from the president), dismissed it as “remarkably boring” and “insignificant.” “He was never going to invade Greenland,”Newsom said. “Everybody here has been willing to negotiate for a year.” Then Newsom said he wasdenied entryto the “US pavilion” at Davos, where he was scheduled to hold a fireside chat with Fortune. His team alleged this was due to pressure from Trump’s State Department.**Lies, Threats, and Leverage:**Trump’s speech was built on multiple falsehoods. To take just one example, he claimed the US “gave Greenland back” to Denmark after World War II. In reality, the US never owned it. Denmark signed a1941 defense agreementallowing US bases during the war, but never ceded sovereignty. In 1951, Washingtonformally recognized“the sovereignty of the Kingdom of Denmark over Greenland.” Trump also falsely claimed NATO has never helped the US in return for American support. “We never asked for anything and we never got anything,” he said, after congratulating himself for successfully asking NATO members to increase defense spending. “It’s always a one-way street…. So [Denmark and Greenland] have a choice. You can say yes, and we will be very appreciative. Or you can say no, and we will remember.” Fact-check: NATO’s Article 5 has only ever been activated once — by the US, after 9/11. Denmarkanswered the callbysending almost 10,000 troops to Afghanistan, where it suffered one of the highest per-capita casualty rates of all allied nations.
Looking the Wrong Way:TheTrump— including Gov. Tim Walz— for allegedly obstructing federal immigration enforcement. As of Wednesday,DOJ is now investigatingsix Minnesota Democratic leaderssubpoenas went to: Gov. Tim Walz, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, Attorney General Keith Ellison, St. Paul Mayor Kaohly Her, Ramsey County Attorney John Choi, and Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty.𝕏Ellison warnedthat “everything about this is highly irregular,” accused Trump of “coming after the people of Minnesota,” and insisted he “will not be intimidated.” Mayor Hersimilarly describedthe subpoena as “retribution” and said she is “unfazed by these tactics.”No Good Motive: The timing and targets of these subpoenas are important. County Attorney Moriarty, for example, hasargued her office has jurisdictionto investigate the killing of Renee Good by ICE agent Jonathan Ross. She called on the public to submit any evidence related to the killing. “The only person not being investigated for the shooting of Renee Good,””Gov. Walz noted, “is the federal agent who shot her.𝕏Attorney General Ellisonsaid his subpoena arrived “shortly after” his office “sued the Trump administration to challenge their illegal actions within Minnesota.” Noted.What Constitution: An internal ICE memoobtained by the APasserts that agents can forcibly enter people’s homes with only administrative warrants — a shocking reversal from years of precedent holding that forced entry isonly permitted with a judicial warrant. For context: administrative warrants are issued by ICE itself. Judicial warrants require a judge to review evidence and find probable cause. The difference matters — a lot. According to a whistleblower complaint, the memo is being used to train new ICE officers, despite written training materials explicitly contradicting it. So officers are being told one thing in writing and another thing in practice.
**Would You Like ICE With That?**House Democratic leaderstold colleagues on Wednesdaythat they will vote against abill to fund DHSthat wouldkeep ICE funding steadyat $10 billion. But that threat is without teeth. There are no apparent plans to organize support to block the bill, so it will almost certainly pass — with some moderate Democrats, including Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-TX),actively supportingit. He and other supporters of the bill are touting small wins, like $20 million for body cameras, arule forcing DHSto “ensure that all agents and officers are appropriately trained on the rights of individuals,” andthe fact the bill“encourages” DHS to implement a new uniform policy to make officers clearly identifiable. (Thatdoesn’t mean forcing them to reveal their faces, by the way.)Many Democratssay this simply isn’t enough. Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA)slammed itas a “surrender to Trump’s lawlessness.” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT)warned the proposed bill“puts no meaningful constraints on the growing lawlessness of ICE and increases funding for detention.… Democrats have no obligation to support a bill that not only funds the dystopian scenes we are seeing in Minneapolis but will allow DHS to replicate that playbook of brutality in cities all over this country.”
**Gone Dark:**Russian strikes overnightleft more than one million residentsin Kyiv without power. In recent weeks, Ukraine has suffered some of the worst electricity outages of the entire war as Russia hasintensified its targetingofelectrical and heating infrastructureduring the frigid winter. “It’s emotionally very difficult,” one Kyiv resident,told Reuters. His young son contracted pneumonia after their apartment’s temperature dropped to the 40s during a previous blackout. “There is constant worry. This winter is the hardest.”Repression: Iran hascontinued its brutal crackdownon people involved in recent protests, arresting thousands, launching lawsuits, and seizing properties. In addition to the thousands killed,new reportsclaim the regime injured hundreds of thousands of protesters. Now families are left to pick up the pieces,searching through hundreds of body bagsto find missing loved ones andcoughing up thousands of dollarsin “bullet money” demanded by security forces in exchange for bodies. Hundreds of horrifying photos of people killed by those security forces wererecently leaked to the BBC, many of them too disfigured to be identified.**Let Them Cook:**The US Supreme Courtseemed deeply skepticalof the Trump administration’s arguments in favor of Trump’s removal of Lisa Cook from the Federal Reserve. After hours of arguments, the Justices sounded inclined to rule in Cook’s favor — and quickly.
No More Rulez: Trump on Wednesday insisted he isn’t intereste…
