Take a minute to [un]wind with our Sunday morning newsletter. Grab a cup of coffee and catch up on what you may have missed from [un]Divided this week.

The CDC loosens COVID recommendations:

Marking a shift in the nation’s long battle against COVID-19, the CDC now says individuals should use the best available information to assess their own risk and act accordingly.

“Persons can use information about the current level of COVID-19 impact on their community to decide which prevention behaviors to use and when (at all times or at specific times), based on their own risk for severe illness and that of members of their household, their risk tolerance, and setting-specific factors,” the CDC wrote in updated guidance.

This line is perhaps the most significant:

“The CDC’s COVID-19 prevention recommendations no longer differentiate based on a person’s vaccination status because breakthrough infections occur, though they are generally mild, and persons who have had COVID-19 but are not vaccinated have some degree of protection against severe illness from their previous infection.”

The updated guidance seems to be in conflict with the continued need for vaccine mandates, which begs the question: Will politicians clinging to such mandates take the latest recommendations to heart? If they truly care about data and science, they should.

Watch Friday’s episode of [un]Divided for more on this subject (7:35 mark).

A tale of two realities:

Talking heads worked overtime this week, pontificating about what a raid on former President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate might mean for his political prospects – and perhaps his freedom. Casual news readers would have been hard pressed to find commentary or coverage of the FBI search that wasn’t dripping with assumptions or filled with disputed information from anonymous sources (like whether documents at Mar-a-Lago included pages related to nuclear weapons, as The Washington Post reported. Trump has denied that accusation and unsealed documents on the search warrant did not mention documents on nuclear programs, specifically).

Depending on what news network you watched, Americans were treated to two realities on the situation in Trumpland. Either the raid was a purely political act to thwart Trump from running again in 2024, or the raid was wholly justified and a step toward saving our country from a dangerous man.

Meanwhile, those of us who prefer our information complete, accurate, and without hyperbole are awaiting details of the exact content of the documents and whether they were indeed classified (Trump has claimed he declassified them, although experts say he could not have done so in a vacuum).

Watch Wednesday’s episode of [un]Divided for more on this subject (:20 mark).

Primary marks shift in GOP strategy on abortion:

After a lackluster primary in Washington state, some Republican candidates are taking a more direct approach on the touchy subject of reproductive rights.

If this month’s primary was any indication, abortion is a priority of voters and they want to know precisely where candidates stand. Last week on [un]Divided, Washington GOP Chair Caleb Heimlich acknowledged that messaging on the issue needed to be fine-tuned. Certainly, candidates need to be honest about their stance on the issue, but the key is communicating it in a way that doesn't turn off moderate voters.

On Wednesday's show, U.S. Senate candidate Tiffany Smiley offered what I think was one of the most clear, coherent, and convincing statements from a Republican candidate in the election cycle thus far. Smiley said she is pro-life but would vote against any effort to put national restrictions on abortion – underscoring that Washington state voters made a decision decades ago to allow access to abortions and, unlike Democrats, Republicans are not in the business of overturning the will of voters.

Watch my interview with Smiley on Wednesday's episode (20:00 mark).