Trump Aides Discussed Asylum in Israel Before Midterm Elections
Translated & summarized from Hamal by baba
Top strategists for then-President Donald Trump held a private call discussing potential asylum in Israel due to grim election prospects before the 2022 midterms. Internal documents revealed a link between the war in Iran and declining Republican support, with fighting exacerbating economic woes like high fuel prices. A prior deal with Iran, which could have boosted Republicans, collapsed due to pressure from figures like Senator Ted Cruz. Trump himself reportedly questioned the political impact of the Iran war on the midterm results, as Democrats highlighted the contrast between the conflict and citizens' economic struggles.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Trump strategists discussed asylum in Israel during a private call before the 2022 midterm elections.
- Internal documents linked the war in Iran to declining Republican support and rising fuel prices.
- A potential deal with Iran, which could have aided Republicans, collapsed due to internal pressure.
- Trump reportedly questioned the political impact of the Iran war on the midterm election outcome.
- Democrats used the war to highlight economic struggles and contrast with Republican priorities.
Top strategists for then-President Donald Trump held a private video call six days before the 2022 midterm elections, where the mood was somber. Pollster Tony Fabrizio asked if attendees preferred a "white or black pill," a reference to cyanide, while James Blair, who managed Trump's election efforts, joked about settling affairs and preparing for prison. The discussion, lasting about 30 minutes, touched on funeral preparations, prison food, presidential pardons, and fleeing the U.S. Israel was mentioned when Blair sarcastically noted, "At least Bibi won. He will protect us," referring to the Israeli elections held the day before, despite Netanyahu's bloc not securing a Knesset majority. Fabrizio responded, "Maybe we can get political asylum in Israel."
Earlier in the summer, Blair had circulated an internal White House presentation linking developments in the war with Iran to declining Republican support. The data indicated that active fighting widened the Democratic lead in polls, while negotiations narrowed it, and a ceasefire collapse expanded it again. By late July, Democrats held a 10-point lead, with a warning that a reduction to a 4-point lead might still allow Republicans to hold the House, but only with a permanent ceasefire, the opening of the Strait of Hormuz, and lower fuel prices. A 10-point Democratic lead could also cost Republicans Senate control. The actual outcome was one of the worst Republican defeats in 50 years.
In June, Vice President J.D. Vance had brokered a memorandum of understanding with Iran, which initially raised hopes among Republicans. Fabrizio's polling showed that among voters aware of the deal, support exceeded opposition by 41 points, with 67% believing it would lower fuel prices. However, this opportunity dissolved when Republican figures, including Senator Ted Cruz, pressured Trump to maintain pressure on Tehran. The agreement collapsed, and the war continued. Trump's advisors were aware that the public did not understand why he initiated the war, with focus groups in March revealing voters saw it as a violation of his promise to avoid new wars and a direct cause of the rising cost of living. Fuel prices surpassed $4 per gallon, fertilizer prices soared, and the impact on trade through the Strait of Hormuz worsened.
Publicly, Trump boasted about his military achievements, but privately received briefings on energy prices, the Strait of Hormuz closure, and dwindling U.S. munitions. The investigation suggests Trump himself began to consider the political cost of his decision. In a private conversation before polls closed, he reportedly asked, "If we had never entered Iran, what do you think would have happened in the midterm elections?" His staff understood that the war had turned a key campaign promise into a vulnerability: the candidate who pledged to avoid new wars led America into a prolonged conflict, and the candidate who promised lower prices faced rising energy costs. Democrats capitalized on this, portraying the administration as focused on wars and corporate interests while citizens struggled with bills. House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries told The Times that the Iran war significantly amplified the contrast between the parties.
Mentioned