The Justice Department has been cut in half in President Donald Trump's first year in office, which explains why a growing crisis is unfolding.

The New Republic's Ellie Quinlan Houghtaling sounded the alarm that an exodus of DOJ layers and staff has caused a "huge backlog in work."

Independent journalist Scott MacFarlane recently uncovered a civil lawsuit in which a lawyer with the DOJ revealed, “the Appellate Section has lost over 40 percent of its attorneys since February 2025, due to retirement, resignation, or temporary transfer.”

“Therefore, at this time, it is not possible for me to assign this case to yet another attorney, who would need to devote time to learning the issues,” the attorney wrote in a filing which was dated February 19.

The Appellate Division is only part of the DOJ, however.

That wasn't the first cry for help from the department's staff that month. A few weeks prior, a Homeland Security lawyer was volunteering with the Minnesota prosecutor's office to help with ICE-related cases. At one point, the judge reprimanded her and threatened to hold her in contempt. The lawyer confessed she'd be grateful so she could "get 24 hours of sleep." She was suspended.

The Appellate lawyers are only part of the problem. The Office of Attorney Recruitment and Management for the Justice Department said on its website that the office employs "more than 10,000 attorneys nationwide." The advocacy group Justice Connection tracked that around 5,500 people have left the DOJ by Sept. 2025, either by choice, accepting a buyout, or being fired. Not all of those were attorneys, however.

The New Republic said that a mere fraction of those have been replaced. It's causing a backlog in work. Staffing shortages are only part of the backlog problem. Trump's mass deportation program is moving lawyers off of typical prosecutions to deal with immigration courts. It had already been under pressure, but Trump's policies resulted in a backlog of more than 3.3 million cases as of the end of Feb. 2026, said the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse. Those are only the immigration cases.

Meanwhile, the DOJ also has Trump's personal list of targets.

When he ran for office in 2024, Trump promised "retribution" and "revenge" against his political enemies and his DOJ has made good on that pledge, indicting New York Attorney General Letitia James, former FBI Director James Comey, twice, the Southern Poverty Law Center, journalist Don Lemon, activists who protested at a Minnesota church, Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, Democratic congressional candidate Kat Abughazaleh, former Trump National Security Advisor John Bolton, former Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-N.J.) and Judge Hannah Dugan.

Those are the individuals who have already faced indictments. There are many more who are under investigation or they were detained and ultimately released without charges. There is also a small list of people included in a formal Executive Order demanding the investigation of former aides who turned on him during the first administration, according to Protect Democracy's list of retaliatory arrests, prosecutions, and investigations by the Trump Justice Department.

The attorney general is considered the chief law enforcement officer of the United States, and Trump's "tough on crime" agenda pledges to lower crime, but without enough people to prosecute these crimes, it can mean justice delayed.

Reuters obtained records through a Freedom of Information Act request showing that about 4,000 federal law enforcement employees have been cut.

The FBI has lost 7 percent of its staff, 2,600 in all. The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) has lost about 6 percent of its employees. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) has lost 14 percent of its employees thus far.

Government contractor Aurelio Perez-Lugones, the person accused of leaking classified information to a Washington Post reporter, has been released by the judge.

Politico reported on Monday afternoon that the judge was willing to put Perez-Lugones on home detention while he awaits charges.

U.S. District Judge Michael Maddox commented that the alleged leaks were “extremely grave,” but that he isn't a danger to society. He's simply barred from using an internet-connected device.

Perez-Lugones was accused of sharing information on military movements related to Venezuela. Indicted in January by the Justice Department, the 61-year-old Navy veteran was accused of repeatedly accessing classified reports, printing or otherwise copying the information in these classified reports and removing the printouts and information from the sensitive compartmented information facility (SCIF) where he worked, the indictment said.

“The government has no way of knowing what he has retained and what he is able to provide to others,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Patricia McLane said during a hearing. “The person he was communicating with is still employed and has a willingness to accept classified and national defense information. … The receptacle of additional national defense information is still available to the defendant.”

“This was not old information. This was current information regarding military movement in the Caribbean, in the Gulf and specifically with Venezuela,” the prosecutor said, according to Politico. “We have a man who has thrown everything away in an attempt to get back at the administration.”

Perez-Lugones's attorney, Courtney Francik, argued that there was no evidence suggesting her client has “a historical Rolodex of classified information in his head.”

“Mr. Perez-Lugones has lost his job. He’s lost his clearance. He doesn’t have any access to any classified system,” she said.

Still, the judge ruled he must remain disconnected from internet devices.

President Donald Trump is sending Secretary of State Marco Rubio to the Vatican to meet with Pope Leo XIV this week, he announced over the weekend. Reports claimed that it's an effort to clean up Trump's feud with the popular pontiff.

On Monday, however, there is a new question about whether Rubio is going to court the Vatican as an ally for military action against Cuba.

"If true, it’s an absolutely wild gambit to try to preemptively silence Pope Leo XIV," wrote Christopher Hale, who writes the "Letters from Leo" Substack.

USA Today correspondent Francesca Chambers reported that Cuba is on the agenda for discussions.

Hale remarked that Rubio was a strange choice, but if the meeting is about more than repairing the relationship between Trump and the pope, it might explain why Rubio is being sent over Vance.

"Marco Rubio was raised Catholic, converted to Mormonism in his youth, left Mormonism, became Catholic again, regularly attends a Miami evangelical church for 23 years, he called 'his church,' and still identifies as a Mass-attending Catholic," Hale said on X.

Vice President JD Vance converted to Catholicism in 2019.

Vance and Rubio got an audience and a photo with the new pope, less than a month after he was chosen by the conclave in May 2025. They delivered a personal invitation from Trump to Pope Leo to visit the White House. Leo smiled politely and put it aside.

At one point, Vance said that the people of the United States are "extremely excited about you."

Pope Leo replied, "Humm. Okay."

Asked about whether he would accept the invitation, the pope politely declined.

Now, Leo is only meeting with Rubio after Vance told the pontiff to "be careful" when speaking about theology.

"The choice is a remarkable snub of the highest-ranking Catholic in the federal government — and it forces Rubio to defend an Iran war that is now his alone," said Hale. "That tells you how badly the rift inside this administration has fractured."

Hale confirmed that the White House specifically requested that Rubio meet with the pope.

He noted that the most recent iteration of the feud between the administration and Pope Leo manifested in an accusation by Vance’s allies that "the Vatican was coordinating with American journalists and operatives to wound the vice president."

It comes after an accredited Vatican correspondent confirmed that the Vatican ambassador had a tense exchange with a Pentagon official. Previous reports said that threats were issued by a U.S. official, though the Pentagon has denied that.

"From the chaplaincy of the U.S. armed forces, the military archbishop declared the Iran war unjust," wrote Hale. "The Vatican’s own secretary of state told Trump directly to put an end to it. Pope Leo XIV himself called for aerial bombing to be banned forever. Through all of it, Vance kept attacking. He has now been rebuked by two popes, and his response was to publish a book about finding God."

Hale noted that the encounter will likely be awkward, as Rubio will sit across from a man who has spent months championing a ceasefire.

If Rubio is being sent to court the Vatican's blessing on Cuba, Hale wrote, he isn't likely to succeed.

"There’s no doubt a military operation in Cuba would be publicly and vigorously opposed by the first U.S.-born pontiff," Hale said on X.

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche made an appearance on "Meet the Press" on Sunday, where he was forced to admit that the term "8647" wasn't worth indicting someone over.

Since the arrest of former FBI Director James Comey, clothing bearing the message "86-47" has appeared all over Etsy and Amazon. During the show, host Kristen Welker pulled up the search on Amazon for such clothing and asked Blanche whether everyday Americans should expect a visit from the FBI and Secret Service for wearing such a shirt or for posting the numbers anywhere online.

Blanche was clear, no one is being targeted over "86-47" unless there is a reason to believe they are specifically threatening the president.

“This is not just about a single Instagram post,” Blanche said. “This is about a body of evidence that [prosecutors] collected over the series of about 11 months. That evidence was presented to the grand jury.”

CNN legal analyst and former prosecutor Elie Honig explained that the filing from the Justice Department makes it clear that it's only about the Instagram photo that Comey posted.

"If you look at the indictment, if you look at the statute that DOJ has chosen to charge here, if you look at the wording of the indictment, it's quite clear that Jim Comey's Instagram post with the seashells, that is the case. And the case is that post. So I'm skeptical," said Honig.

The legal expert doesn't think that the DOJ will find much that would materially change the meaning of the phrase "86-47" to be more threatening than what Comey posted and said.

Former prosecutor and ex-law school professor Glenn Kirschner explained that the comments dealt a blow to the Justice Department's case.

Blanche's press conference made it clear that the photo was part of a larger case involving "threatening the life of the president."

After showing the clip of Blanche promising that every post of "8647" "does not result in indictments," Kirschner asked, "Really? Todd?"

"He just admitted that there are countless, maybe thousands, tens of thousands of people posting, saying, wearing t-shirts that display that very same thing, and what did he say? 'No! They're not prosecuted for that!'" recalled Kirschner. "Why? Well, they're not Donald Trump's perceived enemies, are they?"

"You don't have to be a career prosecutor, you don't have to be a lawyer, you don't have to be a professor to understand that this is a little something called 'Selective Prosecution.' And that is unconstitutional," he said. He recalled teaching undergraduate criminal justice and recalled the selective prosecution he did, showing the specifics in the law that block the Justice Department from being able to move forward in the case.

CNN host John Berman asked Honig about Blanche's comments, saying, "That these charges aren't just about this Instagram post, why might he be saying that?"

Honig said that he thinks this is a hat-top from Blanche, in legal terms, and that he knows it's not likely to result in a conviction.

"I think this apparent over-representation of the case by Todd Blanche is a reflection of the fact that he's a good enough prosecutor to recognize that this case is sorely lacking and deeply problematic," Honig said. "So the case is going to turn on the meaning of that phrase, 8647. No question, 47 means Donald Trump, the 47th president of the United States. But 86 is ambiguous at best for prosecutors. Are there instances where people have used 86 to mean kill? Sure, but those are few and far between. Clearly, in the minority."

The one example from the Supreme Court comes from a Vietnam protester who said that if he's ever called up for the draft to be sent to fight, once he's handed a rifle, he will set his sights on LBJ, meaning President Lyndon B. Johnson. In that case, the Supreme Court ruled it wasn't a criminal threat. They ruled it was protected speech.

That said, the court today is very different. Half of the six conservative judges were appointed by Trump. All of them were invited to the White House for the state dinner to rub elbows with King Charles III last week.

President Donald Trump, who turns 80 on June 14, disappeared on Saturday for what was described as a routine "scheduled dental appointment" that wasn't previously listed on the schedule.

It prompted speculation about his health, which has been questioned over the past year that he's spent in office. Then a cryptic note popped up from Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) asking her followers, "Pray for President Trump."

The Daily Beast then spotted that Trump's ankles were particularly noticeable. There have been many photos of the president over the past year showing his ankles swollen, but over the weekend, they looked rough.

The elderly president landed in Washington on Sunday, climbing down the steps of Air Force One, where videos showed his pant legs were slightly tighter around him than normal. But the photos taken of Trump as he walked off Marine One, onto the White House lawn, showed just how bad things were.

The president wasn't wearing his signature red tie, and his dress shirt was unbuttoned. He stooped as he walked.

Trump's son Don Jr. was in tow.

CNN medical analyst Jonathan Reiner questioned the "dental appointment" excuse on Saturday. In a post on X, he explained that the White House has a dental office on-site. Former President Joe Biden had a root canal while in office.

“There’s been such a lack of candor about the health of the president that even a visit to the dentist raises questions,” Reiner said, questioning why Trump would go.

He added, “Maybe he just likes this dentist.”

Indeed, Trump visited the same dentist in January of this year.

“President Trump is the sharpest, most accessible and energetic president in modern American history," White House spokesperson Davis Ingle told the Daily Beast "repeatedly."

Trump's first "annual physical" was on April 11, 2025, the Beast pointed out. But there was a second "annual physical" six months later, in October, which sparked questions from the press. It was there that Trump got an MRI, which became the topic of conversation for several weeks because the White House didn't release any information about it.

The president is overdue for his annual physical; his last one was on April 11, 2025, after which it was declared that he was in “excellent health.”

Photos captured Trump's swollen ankles last week while King Charles III was visiting, but they appeared far worse over the weekend.

Speaking to The Wall Street Journal in January, Trump confessed that he briefly wore compression socks to help treat the problem, but he "didn't like them" and stopped wearing them.

Headlines on Sunday described the president as looking "weary" and "exhausted."

Another health issue that has been noticed over the past several months is the giant bruise that popped up on Trump's hand. It was so noticeable that cable news began examining photos of the hand and now photographers look for it in each of his public appearances. It became such a huge question about Trump's health that he began wearing a kind of mismatched concealment on his hand to hide the bruise. He also appears to be reflexively covering it while in public.

In that case, the White House said that the president takes an incredibly high dose of aspirin (325 milligrams), high enough that his doctors recommended he lower the dosage by four times. Trump has refused to do it, saying he wants to keep his blood thin so he doesn't have a heart attack.

Questions have surfaced over the past year about the president's cognitive functioning, as he appears to have dozed off in meetings, made errant statements, and failed to hear or understand questions posed to him.

One person who purports to be a nurse said that she believes Trump is actually wearing a leg brace under his clothing. She added that the White House is lying about his health.

President Donald Trump's second term was supposed to leave behind an heir to the MAGA movement, but the vice president's chances for that may be slipping away.

According to MS NOW political analyst Matthew Bartlett, JD Vance is not winning supporters. The young, energetic ex-internet influencer is prompting "surprising" comments from MAGA: "JD Vance sucks."

Writing on Monday, Bartlett said that it isn't unusual to hear negative remarks from Democrats about Vance, but more and more, the sentiment is coming from conservative circles as well.

Behind the scenes, Trump is reportedly asking friends and advisers whether the heir should be Vance or Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

"That question alone is a telling admission about the president’s thoughts about his own vice president," wrote Bartlett.

Last week, Politico reported that “some of President Donald Trump’s closest confidantes increasingly see Marco Rubio as a serious 2028 contender," cited Bartlett. Meanwhile, Semafor published a story titled “Why it’s still JD Vance." The headline alone sparked questions about whether doubts and alarms are more widespread in Washington.

Bartlett said that prominent conservatives and state-based activists are "griping" that Vance isn't utilizing his position to prop himself up as the next guy.

"They bemoan that he should be hosting grassroots leaders across the country and keeping Trump’s winning MAGA coalition together. Even some leading Republican and MAGA activists do not have close relationships with the vice president. Some say that when you call the White House, Trump calls you back. When you call Vance’s office, however, it takes a while to get a response, if you get one at all," explained Bartlett.

Vance was chosen as a gift to the base, the column explained. He was "the next standard bearer of the president's new coalition." The problem is that he has become more of a candidate without any real political identity. It wasn't that long ago that Vance was calling Trump "America's Hitler.

"As a political journeyman, no one truly knows what beliefs he genuinely holds, absent Trump telling him," wrote Bartlett.

Bartlett explained that it's difficult to make a political career out of the VP spot when "your sole job is to follow."

In Trump's world, another barrier can also be not getting more attention or credit than the boss, which former top adviser Steve Bannon learned, as Frank Bruni described in the New York Times in 2017.

Bartlett noted that in previous administrations, losing party players meant a post in the Cabinet or a springboard into something larger. In the Trump era, anyone who opposes Trump is considered an enemy. Anyone who disagrees with his policy issues, like the Iran war or tariffs, can be destroyed by Trump on social media. It gives little oxygen for anyone to break away. It comes at a time when Trump's policies aren't popular and he's at a record-low approval rating.

"And while it is likely that Trump wants a wide-open primary where he gets to resume his 'Apprentice' persona and judge a big 2028 primary field, the reality of the race may be decided if Trump tells Vance to step aside for Rubio," Bartlett closed. "If that happens, not only will the MAGA base polling change overnight, but it will be virtually impossible for anyone else to mount a serious run for the nomination."

Apologists of President Donald Trump were losing their minds overnight after Justice Department lawyers were found to have misled the court by a presiding judge.

Politico's Kyle Cheney noted that Judge Ana C. Reyes, in the U.S. District Judge for the District of Columbia, told the DOJ to be on hand at an 8 a.m. hearing and wanted a written response from them at 7:30 a.m. in a case around "major redevelopment" of Washington, D.C. golf courses that Trump seized.

The National Links Trust was cast aside after Trump's administration seized control of the three public golf courses in Washington D.C. in December. Trump officially killed the 50-year lease between the National Park Service and the nonprofit Trust, which oversees Langston Golf Course, Rock Creek Park Golf and East Potomac Golf Links.

To legally break the contract, the government had to identify violations; however, the Interior Department’s Solicitor’s Office skipped that step. Instead, it issued a notice of default at the end of October. The Interior Department issued a letter on Tuesday, severing the contract.

The trust said in a statement that they are “fundamentally in disagreement with the administration’s characterization” and “devastated” by the decision. It had been working on a large-scale renovation project for Rock Creek Park, which has now been suspended.

The case has been in litigation ever since.

“The future of the courses — when there will be renovations, how much it will cost to golf on them, who will have access — is all now in limbo,” NOTUS reported in February. The golf nonprofit issued its own statement strongly contesting Trump’s claims.

Despite the litigation, there are allegations that Trump has continued construction projects on the land. Over the weekend, the Washington Post reported that the National Park Service would begin landscaping and clearing trees at the East Potomac Golf Links. Meanwhile, Trump would begin a complete redesign.

Lawyer and Trump nemesis, Norm Eisen, filed an emergency action asking the court to block all of Trump's work at the East Potomac golf course

"That reporting is corroborated by a fundraising brochure in which a nonprofit foundation, established for the purpose of leading the 'comprehensive redevelopment' of East Potomac, is soliciting contributions that 'will be used' pursuant to a 'binding agreement' toward that redevelopment," said the court filing on Sunday. "Artistic renderings of the new 'championship' golf course show it will replace the entire footprint of East Potomac Park, including Hains Point and the Golf Course's historic design. If continued unchecked, that plan (and its implementation) will destroy a National Register historic district..."

The Trump administration filed a document on Monday morning, adjusting the details of what would unfold on Monday, stating that there are no plans to overhaul the golf course.

Instead, they were set to survey which trees might need to be removed from the area. Trump has removed several trees from the White House grounds since the beginning of his second term. Two were deemed too old, and others disappeared amid the construction of his East Wing. The Jacqueline Kennedy Rose Garden was also demolished.

They'll only be working on "basic housekeeping and repairs that do not require any environmental compliance documentation like fence cleaning and debris cleanup activities."

The officials further told the judge that there are not "massive renovations" expected.

"I don't want to be the overseer of 'Parks & Rec.'. I'm no Amy Pohler," quipped Judge Reyes, according to reporter Scott MacFarlane, live-tweeting the hearing.

"We can't have bulldozers taking down trees... and no one has come to me first," the judge continued.

Plaintiffs explained, "Cutting down trees is the very first step in a golf course construction project."

The attorney for the D.C. Preservation League said that they expect the administration to "use this as an excuse for a hard-core construction." They noted that this is already unfolding with the Kennedy Center.

"The distrust is palpable at this court hearing Preservation group simply doesn't trust what Trump admin is claiming. ... They're suspicious this is a land grab by Trump to take over a public space," wrote MacFarlane.

He noticed that the administration attorneys were using a lot of passive voice when referring to what was unfolding on the golf course. Phrases such as, "No closure notice has been issued.

If more than 10 trees are going to be razed, the court wants to know about it and wants to see the plans. The judge also specifies what trees she's referring to: "By dying tree... I mean a tree that's on death's door."

As if it was scripted for television, the judge was handed a note in the middle of the proceeding.

"It looks like there were signs on the golf course that there were closures," said the judge. Someone else was then asked to check on the signs. That person said that there weren't any signs.

Trump's lawyers weren't aware that was the case. It prompted the judge to start complaining about "surprise" moves by the Trump administration. She said she doesn't want this.

"Maybe this fundraising is coming from the White House and not the agency. I want to find out what's happening. I don't want to get to a hearing date, order documents and it takes a month. Mr. Bardwell, you can subpoena," the judge said about the concerns about where the funds were coming from.

There was then a brief debate about the lead and chemicals in the debris placed on the course that is being used as filler to help renovate the course.

"Here, I feel there is a plan being developed through the White House. Here's what we want going forward. It goes beyond what's been disclosed. When I make a final decision, it will be based on that. I want communications," the judge said, adjourning the hearing.

"It’s entertaining watching all the Trump apologists lose their minds because a judge is actually judging and taking DOJ lawyers to task. If these lawyers didn’t want to spend their Sunday night working, they shouldn’t have misled the Court. This isn’t complicated," remarked the Cato Institute's Mike Fox.

The golf course was previously under construction by the Links Trust before Trump broke the 50-year contract that had been previously approved.

The Republican "wild card" that has become a foe of President Donald Trump has developed a new nickname that may trigger the GOP leader.

The Daily Beast noticed that Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) has flipped the idea of "Trump Derangement Syndrome" to something new. The term has been used by MAGA to mock those on the left for their opposition to Trump. Now, though, using “Trump Derangement Syndrome” against people who have long been loyal to MAGA is making it harder to separate them from the movement.

Greene coined "Trump Disappointment Syndrome."

“I don’t have Trump Derangement Syndrome, I have Trump Disappointment Syndrome," said Greene.

Greene was at the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity while giving the speech.

Greene was once a dedicated MAGA loyalist, but broke with the president over the scandal around trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. She has advocated releasing all of the investigation files, including the ones that mention the president.

She told the crowd that it's what broke her. According to the former congresswoman, Trump called her and demanded, “Marjorie, you’re gonna have to take your name off that discharge petition. It’s a Democrat hoax. My friends are going to get hurt.”

According to Greene, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) went further, trying to make the issue disappear into a Rules Committee matter and asking that former Attorney General Pam Bondi withhold everything.

Trump told Greene, "people in Palm Beach" and "people you know at Mar-a-Lago" would be harmed by the files. She said it was a stunning claim to hear from Trump since he has long called the files a Democrat "hoax." When she refused to back down, she said it was the beginning of the end of MAGA.

“That’s when MAGA died,” Greene said. “That’s when the entire thing shattered for me.”

She has spent the past several months speaking out on talk shows and giving some political commentary while telling her story about the Trump encounter and asking more questions about the Epstein files.

Bloomberg Law reported on Thursday that the Justice Department is looking at charging former FBI Director James Comey with leaking classified information, following his indictment on charges related to alleged threats against President Donald Trump.

Two people familiar with the DOJ's thinking told Bloomberg in an exclusive interview that the timing on that indictment appears to be up in the air.

Trump has long alleged that Comey was a "leaker," saying that he "sent" Columbia University Law Professor Daniel Richman classified information with the instructions to leak it to the New York Times for a 2017 article.

There is a statute of limitations on charging for leaking classified information in most cases, except in espionage cases, says Congress.gov.

If Comey is charged in this case, it would be the third attempt by the administration to charge him.

Last year, the DOJ failed to make charges of lying to Congress stick in the Eastern District of Virginia. It's unclear if the classified information charges would happen in EDVA or in a different location, such as New York, where Richman lives.

Todd Blanche recently took over the DOJ and part of his work has been to ensure the prosecutions of several Trump foes.

Comey's attorney, Patrick Fitzgerald, and the DOJ refused to comment to Bloomberg.

When Comey was charged earlier this week, he made a full statement on Instagram saying he wasn't worried or afraid and was eager to go up against the DOJ and beat the charges.

Many legal experts have commented in the days that followed that the charges for the threats against Trump likely won't even make it to trial.

President Donald Trump's latest revenge target may have his own 14th Amendment violations case, one national security expert wrote on Thursday.

Marcy Wheeler wrote that there is some interesting information in previous Justice Department lawsuits that could help former FBI Director James Comey in his case.

Kash Patel's FBI indicted MAGA Sal Russotto last year for threats he made to Alina Habba, including the "86" term that the DOJ alleges is an assassination threat.

Interestingly, the sentencing documents said that Russotto made similar threats "directed at other individuals and groups, including but not limited to: '86 [Victim 1],' '86 [Victim 2],' '86 [Victim 3],' and '86[Victim 4].'"

Wheeler noticed that when the DOJ filed an exhibit, it listed a number of Democrats were threatened using the "86" language.

During the hearing, the DOJ presented a different version of Russotto’s social media threats that used the "86" language. For the first time, documents showed that Comey was one of those Russotto used "86" with.

"Now I’m assuming that even though Russotto sent several 86 tweets to the then Deputy Director of the FBI, the FBI didn’t interview those victims, which would include Joe Biden," wrote Wheeler. "I assume, too, that the FBI didn’t interview Comey to find out [if] he felt the wave of 86 posts accompanied by much clearer death threats than he sent in a picture of shells were true threats."

Wheeler thinks that the DOJ was using this prosecution to set up the prosecution of Comey. In that case, however, the DOJ used the "proper intent standard for sending threats," which compares desire to objective reasonableness. A "true threat," requires the individual to make a serious expression of intent to commit an act of violence.

"But for most of a year, DOJ knew that Russotto had also issued death threats against Jim Comey, just as a guy named Spaceman Chuck issued threats against Jim Comey in response to events transpiring in his Eastern District of Virginia prosecution. And it wasn’t until the last minute that they admitted these death threats started by targeting Comey, not Habba," wrote Wheeler.

The "Equal Protection Clause" in the 14th Amendment means that if someone is in a similar situation to someone else — like being a student or a job applicant — states must apply the same rules to everyone fairly. Wheeler implies that the law is not being applied equally in these similar "86" cases.

Fox News' chief political analyst Brit Hume had a shocking wake up call for Republicans on Thursday.

There have been a few big boosts for the GOP over the past few days: The Supreme Court effectively eliminated a key aspect of the Voting Rights Act that could hand a district to Republicans in Louisiana and Florida Republican lawmakers passed new maps attempting to gerrymander congressional lines in the state.

But Hume argued that it still isn't enough.

“I think if the election were held today, given in the middle of this conflict, that the House would be obviously gone. And there’s a good chance that the Senate would go, too,” Hume said.

The one way that President Donald Trump could help his party, Hume added, is to give up on Iran.

“If it turns out well, I think the president would have a lot to run on, and the party would swing behind that because they’ve been behind this war,” Hume said while chatting with Bret Baier. He said that a successful outcome could provide a "reset" for both parties.

“If it turns out in a way that is unconvincing to people that it was worth it, woe be unto the Republicans,” Hume continued.

At issue is the affordability crisis. Trump spent the 2024 campaign claiming that he would fix the economy. That hasn't done much for the crisis, however. Trump's tariffs first raised the cost of goods, while his war with Iran has increased fuel costs.

Overnight, fuel prices spiked, prompting Republican House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) to falsely claim that gas wasn't that bad because it was over $6 under President Joe Biden. According to the AAA gas tracker, while there was a spike in 2022, the average U.S. price only barely touched $5.02.

"People are concerned about the economy and Republicans are likely to pay a price for that," Hume cautioned.

While the House GOP currently has a five-seat advantage, the Cook Political Report expects a shift of five House races to Democrats. The six-seat Republican majority in the Senate could shift four races to Democrats, Cook also said.

The U.S. Coast Guard will be out of money at the end of this week if Congress doesn't step in.

CBS News reported that the military branch is now 75 days into the longest government shutdown in U.S. history, which is impacting the Department of Homeland Security. Last year, DHS was given considerable budget for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). So, Republicans have fought to give them even more in the new budget. It has held up all DHS funding.

Now the Coast Guard owes over $300 million in unpaid contracts. There are thousands of utility bills overdue.

"It seems like a horror movie, but it's actually happening. It's almost unbelievable," said Coast Guard Commandant Adm. Kevin Lunday when speaking to CBS.

There have already been water outages at Port Huron, Michigan and Station Channel Islands, California.

"Air Station Barbers Point, Hawaii, had natural gas lines temporarily locked. A power outage at a recruiting station in St. Louis, Missouri, forced officers to operate by flashlight until electricity could be restored," the report said.

Meanwhile, the electricity was cut off "to the residence of a Coast Guard rear admiral in New Orleans, forcing his family to drive to a hotel until service was restored." There are about 1,000 more housing units with past due bills beyond 30 days, amounting to about 43 percent.

Adm. Kevin Lunday called it "unacceptable."

"I think the American people would be furious to know this is happening," he told CBS. "We have over 6,000 utility bills that have been unpaid because DHS is not funded. And so, now we're starting to see electricity, water, natural gas, other services shut off that are impacting not only our operational units and bases where our people work, but starting to impact where people live."

Several years ago, Congress passed a bill to protect military personnel from a shutdown. The Coast Guard doesn't enjoy that same protection, however.

"It's more than a breach of trust," the commandant explained to CNN. "Our Coast Guard men and women, whether they're active duty or reserve military civilians, they've stepped forward and taken an oath to support and defend the Constitution. What they expect in return is just to be paid and provide services."

They don't expect "to have to worry about whether their families are going to be taken care of," Lunday added.

One of President Donald Trump's administration aides is being attacked for allegedly blasting the boss last year and being a secret Democrat.

Rick Grenell, who serves Trump as his special presidential envoy for special missions of the United States, was previously the acting director/president of the Kennedy Center. He brought in Rick Canny to work with a group of people on remaking the memorial to the slain former president in Trump's image. While Grenell is gone, Canny remains.

Politico reported that Canny, who is now working as the artistic manager, allegedly made anti-Trump comments in private meetings and in conversations, three people who heard the remarks told the site. It's believable given some of the things Canny has said on social media.

At least two people said that they recall Canny telling them, "F—— Trump." Trump renamed the Kennedy Center in his own honor during his first year in office. It was another thing Canny took issue with, one of the sources told Politico.

The report said that it matches a similar post in which Canny "mocked former Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway and cautioned that killing environmental standards could lead to Americans being 'sickened/ poisoned.'” That post is no longer online, however.

Canny denies launching profanity about Trump or saying that he hated the president.

"I came here to help restore the grandeur, the majesty, the greatness of our nation’s premier performing arts center,” Canny promised in an email to Politico. “I was truly surprised at the scope of the problems.”

Canny is part of a tribe called "The Icks," The New Yorker reported. It includes Rick Loughery and Nick Meade, both of whom worked with Ric Grenell when he was at the helm of the Performing Arts Center. It also works as a double meaning, the report said that "The Icks" are so viewed because they have Grenell's leadership style.

The management of the Kennedy Center has been fraught since Trump decided to fire the full board and appoint his own people, prompting shows to pull out of performances at the center.

Gov. Janet Mills (D-Maine) has dropped out of the U.S. Senate race, reported Punchbowl News reporter Max Cohen on X.

Mills leaving the race paves an easier path for Graham Platner to challenge Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine).

“While I have the drive and passion, commitment and experience, and above all else – the fight – to continue on, I very simply do not have the one thing that political campaigns unfortunately require today: the financial resources,” Mills said in a statement released Thursday. “That is why today I have made the incredibly difficult decision to suspend my campaign for the United States Senate.”

Polls weren't great for Mills. As the Maine Beacon reported earlier in April, Platner held a 33-point advantage over her.

The matchup in the general election also wasn't as good for Mills as it was for Platner. That same report showed "Platner leading incumbent ... Collins in a general election matchup, 48 percent to 39 percent, with 12 percent undecided."

Democrats are hoping for a "blue wave" year in the 2026 midterms. While they are expected to take back the House, Republicans have done everything they can to stack the deck. Now some political experts are questioning whether the U.S. Senate could be in play as well. Former North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper (D) has a promising lead in his race, and Platner will now also have an opening.

"The latest results mark a significant shift from October 2025 polling, when results showed that the race was far tighter. At that point, Platner led Mills by just 2 points in the primary and held a narrow 3-point edge over Collins, while Mills still trailed Collins in a hypothetical matchup," the Beacon said.

As the New York Times reported, Mills leaving the race is a huge blow to Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), who recruited her.

"Schumer, the minority leader, has for almost two decades chosen his party’s Senate candidates with little internal opposition," the report said. "That era may be coming to an end — and Ms. Mills’s ill-fated campaign is not the only evidence."

A former federal prosecutor is warning that President Donald Trump's latest revenge plot is already going off the rails.

University of Michigan School of Law Professor Barb McQuade zeroed in on a specific piece of the Justice Department's case against former FBI Director James Comey: how incredibly long it took to "investigate."

"I know Todd Blanche and Kash Patel said that they’ve been investigating the case, but my gosh, they had the post in May and they interviewed Comey the next day," McQuade told The New Republic's Greg Sargent for the morning podcast. "I don’t know what more is necessary. Go out to sea and find the actual seashells? I don’t think so."

This is a charge she's personally prosecuted before and the barrier for the DOJ will be the requirement that the charge be for a "true threat."

"It’s not enough to say, I don’t like the president or even to say the president should die. You have to express a true threat," she explained.

However, as national security lawyer Bradley Moss explained to CNN, it isn't about the crime or even the charge, it's about Trump's revenge against Comey, his demand to indict someone in retaliation for his own indictment. What Trump wants is the "spectacle" and the "headline," he said.

Overnight, Trump took to Truth Social to spread the urban legend that the term "86" came from the mob term to "drive eight miles out" and put them "six feet under." There were a few mentions of the term associated with the film "Casino." The film's transcript shows that even in an infamous mob movie, the term was used to describe someone being thrown out. Not killed.

"I suppose Donald Trump thinks it’s used by the mafia — I guess he would know," she quipped.

The fact that Comey made it clear publicly that it wasn't his intent to threaten violence further undermines the case.

"There’s just no way a jury unanimously finds 12 people — beyond a reasonable doubt — that this was an effort to convey a serious threat of unlawful violence," said McQuade.

She went on to explain that the DOJ never brings charges "unless it is probable that they can obtain and sustain a conviction based on admissible evidence." In this administration, however, McQuade said that it's about making "a person’s life miserable by indicting them. They’ve got to undertake the expense of hiring a lawyer. There’s stress on them and their family. It’s disruptive of their lives. It can harm their reputation. All of those kinds of things will happen to Jim Comey, even if he ultimately is exonerated at trial, which is what I fully expect to happen."

They went on to discuss the efforts to by Trump's DOJ to go after the Southern Poverty Law Center, the group that ultimately brought down the KKK. There's also another battle from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which is going after ABC affiliates who aired Jimmy Kimmel's show the night before the shooting. The FCC claims Kimmel, too, was making a threat against Trump by saying his wife had the glow of a widow. It adds up to three major revenge cases that Trump officials have brought and that have little chance of succeeding.

It prompted Sargent to wonder whether acting Attorney General Todd Blanche knows that the cases won't result in a conviction, but is using them as an audition to be the permanent AG.

The problem Blanche will run into, McQuade explained, is "DOJ lawyers are constrained by two things. One is the principles of federal prosecution, which say partisan politics may never factor into a charging decision and a prosecutor should bring a case only if they believe that the evidence makes it probable that they will obtain and sustain a conviction. That means a trial jury will convict them, and on appeal, your legal theory is sound and it will be affirmed."

Blanche also has a good-faith constraint. In most states, ethics rules require a "good faith" prosecution.

Sargent closed by asking if there's any kind of accountability that can come, but McQuade suspects that Trump will pardon everyone on his final days in office. There are possible civil lawsuits and monetary damages. Typically, immunity protects prosecutors, but McQuade warned that not operating in good faith could result in an exception.

President Donald Trump welcomed the Artemis II astronauts to the White House after their incredible trip farther than any other human has traveled. He didn't want to talk about that, however.

CNN host Brianna Keilar noted that Trump talked about former FBI Director James Comey, crime in Washington, D.C. It was anything but a conversation about the Artemis II crew standing beside him.

"I think we should just also point out what a tough spot for these incredibly accomplished astronauts who have just renewed so much interest in space travel with their incredible achievement of this Artemis II mission," said Keilar. "You know, two of them are active duty military, one of them Canadian, by the way. So, you can understand being in the middle of a situation like this, where some of this is getting politicized. It's just it's extraordinary. It's bizarre."

She noted that the whole purpose of the Artemis crew being at the White House was to celebrate their accomplishments.

After a short conversation about Trump's latest threats on Iran, the anchors returned to the awkward astronauts.

Co-host Boris Sanchez said the president appeared to recognize the position he was putting the astronauts in by turning to complain about politics, among other issues.

"I don't want to get you guys involved. I can't imagine what you're thinking," Trump told the astronauts.

When Trump did get a question about NASA and moving the headquarters, Trump didn't appear to understand the question and asked the reporter to "rephrase" it. After she asked it again, he called on the NASA administrator and then made fun of his ears.

"Yeah, he said, I know [they're] in a tough spot. And then he made it tougher by kind of saying ... I know what you're thinking. Which also can be read as, 'you agree with me. I'm not going to have you speak about that," said longtime CNN broadcaster Tom Foreman.

Foreman mentioned the astronauts' accomplishments again, saying that what they did was a big deal for the United States, but the win-hungry president glossed over it.

"This flight of Artemis II is, honestly, I think, one of the few things that we can point to in a big way in this country in the past several months or whatever, where a lot of people left and right would agree, this was an amazing accomplishment," Foreman said. "And isn't it great that they went out there. This was an accomplishment that was built over many years, not just Donald Trump's years."

He explained that they were there to be honored, but Trump spent no time honoring them.

"He talked to the astronauts much longer in space than he did when they were in the room with him!" said Foreman.

Meanwhile, the Trump administration is making drastic cuts to NASA programs that made the Artemis II mission possible. Foreman called it, embracing his guests at the party while having their cars towed.

Republicans and Democrats have tried to convey to the White House that the U.S. will lose the space race to Chinese dominance and they will beat the U.S. to building a moon base and landing on Mars.

Foreman said that it could have very easily been a normal photo-op with a handshake and a wave, " But it turned into something very different."

Republicans have said that they will not allow Trump to make the 25 percent cuts to NASA that were proposed.

Science.org reported that the draft of the budget bill "is an early sign that Congress again thinks Trump has gone too far in cutting research."

- YouTube youtu.be

Rep. Jason Crow (D-Col.) confronted Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth on Wednesday during a hearing on the Pentagon budget about the secretary's decision to hire his personal lawyer to a top role while the lawyer is still working with clients on the side.

Hegseth quickly jumped on Crow's questioning as the Democrat led him through a cross-examination about his hire of Tim Parlatore.

Hegseth began by saying that Parlatore did serve as his private attorney and for President Donald Trump's campaign.

"And you appointed Mr. Parlatore as your senior advisor, correct?" Crow asked.

"He does reserve duty on behalf of the Navy," Hegseth said.

"His title is senior advisor. You gave him that title, correct?" Crow asked.

"And I would count him as very much an advisor of mine," Hegseth responded.

"Yep. He travels with you, correct?" Crow asked.

Hegseth simply insisted that Parlatore was a "long-term friend" and "a great patriot" before later conceding that Parlatore does travel with him. Crow asked if he had a desk in the Pentagon, which Hegseth said he didn't know.

"You don't know?" Crow asked.

"It's a big Pentagon," said Hegseth.

Crow walked through the fact that Parlatore was commissioned as a Navy commander so he never had to go through the proper vetting at the White House Presidential Personnel office. Crow pointed out he also wasn't confirmed by the U.S. Senate. Promotions of all commissioned military officers are made by the president, but the Senate votes on whether to confirm those promotions. Parlatore was never voted on by the Senate.

That's when Hegseth snapped, "I don't know what you're getting to, but Tim is fantastic."

Crow continued his line of questioning, asking about Parlatore's security clearance, which caused Hegseth to snap again.

"You're playing a gotcha game like you do on TV. Everywhere else you're trying to thread together details," he complained.

"Clearly you're concerned about my line of questioning," Crow said. "You know where it's going."

The congressman then pivoted to asking about whether Parlatore was still practicing law under his own private practice while also working at the Pentagon.

"Does he represent foreign governments or foreign persons in that private law practice?" asked Crow. Hegseth didn't know, which Crow found shocking given that Parlatore sits in classified meetings as Hegseth's "special advisor." Hegseth said he also didn't know whether Parletore was representing any senior military officers who were up for promotion to his office.

Crow noted that Parlatore, during the 2024 campaign, quit Trump's legal team, saying the infighting made the group a mess. At one point, Trump's campaign came out and called Parlatore a liar.

The quote came from a 2023 Politico report: "Trump’s campaign disputed his former lawyer’s assertions. 'Mr. Parlatore is no longer a member of the legal team. His statements regarding current members of the legal team are unfounded and categorically false,' a spokesperson said."

Crow's line of questioning culminated in a back-and-forth where Hegseth snapped at the Democrat, calling his line of questioning a "cute waste of your five minutes."

Crow previously served as an Army Ranger and in the elite 82nd Airborne in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

The 200-year-old White House mansion has among its lower-level rooms the "China Room," which features a place setting chosen by first families of past administrations. It appears that one of President Donald Trump's favorites is the exquisitely gilded china with an architectural elegance that former Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton chose in 2000.

When former First Lady Caroline Harrison arrived at the White House in 1889 with her husband, President Benjamin Harrison, she began an effort to locate some of the lost artifacts of previous administrations to preserve American history.

The White House Historical Association website describes her project to find as much furniture, tableware and artifacts from the occupants of the previous 90 years.

She found it “distressing, to go through this mansion of nearly a century... [and] to find not even a piece of furniture or china or anything else of value associated with the home, habits or comforts of the domestic circle of the early executives," press clippings from the time quoted Mrs. Harrison saying.

But even after her work, there wasn't much presidential china left. Journalist Abby Gunn Baker was inspired by Colonel Theodore A. Bingham, the officer in charge of public buildings and grounds, to write a piece on the topic in 1901. The goal was to raise awareness about the need for preservation.

Baker warned, “If somebody does not do that pretty soon, there won’t be any left to preserve.” She spent four months studying Treasury Department records and other government agencies in an effort to find the lost White House china, the Historical Association explained. By the time first lady Edith Roosevelt came into office, “The White House China Collection” was officially launched.

Since then, each first lady, representing the first family, has chosen her own signature collection. There are only a few administrations that did not contribute their own china pattern, and one of those was the first lady Melania Trump. The endeavor of creating the place-settlements "takes significant time," CNN reported in 2021, the day after President Joe Biden was inaugurated. Former first lady Michelle Obama began the project in 2011, and it was finally delivered in 2015. So, it isn't a project that can be launched at the last minute without adding high costs.

When the Trumps welcomed King Charles III to the White House on Tuesday evening for a state dinner, the dishes chosen came from the Clintons. Newsmax CEO Chris Ruddy appeared to be among those invited as a guest to attend the state dinner. He took a photo of the opulently framed in creamy gold filigree before him to post on X.

It was the same tableware that Mrs. Clinton held up to show the press in 2000.

According to CNN, the Trumps appear to favor the aesthetics of his political foe, using it for two Trump-hosted state dinners in his first administration. Tuesday's event was the first of the second term for the Trumps to deploy the china.

"The service was made by Lenox China of Trenton, New Jersey," the archival photos explain. She was commemorating the 200th birthday of the White House. It was former President John Adams who was the first to move into the mansion in 1800. The Clintons welcomed all previous presidents and first ladies for a special dinner in the East Room to "honor the house and reflect on their contributions to its history."

Photo: Screen capture

Former first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton displays the Clinton china from the East Room of the White House, Nov. 9, 2000. (Photo: White House Historical Association)

Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.) isn't happy about the waste and abuse of taxpayer dollars spent promoting President Donald Trump's image across the federal government.

The White House revealed this week that a limited U.S. Passports will be printed with a special Trump page, the administration claims, to celebrate the 250th birthday of the United States.

A State Department official said Tuesday that the passport “will be the default passport out of the Washington Passport Agency when available” for those renewing in person at that location. It comes as Trump is putting his face on a massive coin, also to celebrate America's birthday.

When asked about it, Bacon called the idea of the Trump-branded passport "a little silly" and compared Trump to Russian communist dictators.

"We laughed at Russia when they had pictures of Lenin and Stalin everywhere. Go to China, they had pictures of Mao everywhere. You go to North Korea, pictures of Kim Il Sung, Kim Jong-il, Kim Jong-un. We're America, and I think we do less of that," Bacon said.

He attributes it to overzealous staff trying to suck up to Trump.

"I just think there's a little bit of overreach by some of the subordinates of the president who are trying to cater, uh, for his attention. Uh, it's not really American to do this," he added.

Trump's name will also appear on all U.S. currency, The Conversation reported this month. Since 1914, dollar bills have carried the signatures of the Treasury secretary and the U.S. treasurer. Earlier this year, Trump tried to rename Washington's Dulles Airport and New York's Penn Station so it would include his name, but it wasn't successful. Trump has also put his name on a prescription drug website that was supposed to help people save money. TrumpRx launched in February. A new "Golden Fleet" of military ships will be henceforth named a "Trump-class," Trump proclaimed. However, it isn't slated to begin in the early 2030s, so it's unclear whether that name will remain.

Trump has also put his name atop the John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts and the U.S. Institute of Peace. His face also appears on all National Park passes.

A U.S. federal judge is questioning which side the Justice Department is on in the era of President Donald Trump.

New York Times reporter Andrew Duehren wrote on Wednesday that U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams probed the DOJ on something legal analysts have wondered for a year: who exactly is the client of the department?

Bloomberg Law previously reported that when all 93 US attorneys’ offices met for their weekly video chat in January, a 33-year-old Justice Department aide, Aakash Singh, announced that Trump is their “chief client."

Trump sued the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), claiming that it leaked his tax returns to the New York Times in 2019 and that the department should have done more to protect him.

Under a 1924 federal tax law, § 6103 of title 26, Congress can request anyone's tax returns, and the Secretary of the Treasury Department is legally obligated to hand them over. Trump fought that demand in 2019, setting up a legal battle he ultimately lost. Six years of Trump's tax returns were turned over to the House Ways and Means Committee.

But before the Supreme Court ordered the returns, Trump alleged that the IRS leaked his tax returns to the press, revealing that he hadn't paid any taxes in 10 of 15 years after 2000. In 2016 and 2017, Trump only paid $750 in federal income taxes. It also exposed that he wasn't the business genius that he purported to be.

The returns were actually leaked by a third-party contractor for Booz Allen, not by the department or a department employee.

Trump is now suing the IRS for $10 billion, claiming that the government was at fault for the individual who leaked the documents.

Generally, the IRS would be defended in court by the Justice Department. But in the era of Trump, when a top DOJ appointee claims Trump is the "chief client," the presiding judge is wondering whether the IRS has legitimate representation.

“Although President Trump avers that he is bringing this lawsuit in his personal capacity, he is the sitting president and his named adversaries are entities whose decisions are subject to his direction,” the judge wrote in an order released last week. “Accordingly, it is unclear to this court whether the parties are sufficiently adverse to each other.”

Judge Williams then ordered the government and Trump's personal lawyers to submit a brief to answer that question. It forces the DOJ to go on the record about where it stands. That puts them in the awkward position of either telling Trump the DOJ is not his personal law firm or they risk the judge ruling that the IRS doesn't have adequate representation. If the judge finds that the two sides aren't opposed, "lawsuit is void and the judge must dismiss it," the Times said.

“There’s a requirement of adverseness,” Northwestern University School of Law Professor James E. Pfander told the Times. “If the opponents are, in fact, obligated to follow the president’s assessment of the law, and if the president says, ‘It’s this way and it’s got to be this way,’ there can be no space for a dispute.”

The contractor who leaked the tax returns also revealed returns of other famous people who have sued the IRS, demanding damages. In each case, the Justice Department has argued that because the person who leaked the documents was an independent contractor, the government was not responsible for the leak.

"Those arguments may or may not actually prevail in court. But for the government to not even raise them in Mr. Trump’s case would be a glaring change of course. Gilbert S. Rothenberg, a former tax lawyer at the Justice Department who signed the amicus brief, said he was hopeful that the judge would dismiss the suit, or delay it until Mr. Trump left office," wrote Duehren.

“That would hopefully be the result, because there would not be a case or controversy,” Rothenberg said. “The new DOJ is not independent of the president in the way it used to be.”

Another problem is that the DOJ could also simply settle the lawsuit with Trump and have taxpayers hand over billions of dollars to the president. There is an "uncapped pot of money" that Trump's acting attorney general has access to. Thus far it has already agreed to pay off Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, agreeing that he was unfairly targeted. Flynn admitted he lied to the FBI, pleaded guilty twice in open court and became a cooperating witness. He was ultimately pardoned by President Donald Trump.

“If this judge finds there’s no legitimate case before the court at this time, that doesn’t mean that a settlement would be illegal,” said former DOJ official Paul Figley, who worked on torts. “If the Department of Justice settles the claim, then the Judgment Fund would pay it.”

Trump claimed in January that if the government handed over $10 billion the public wouldn't care "because it’s going to go to numerous, very good charities."

President Donald Trump posted threats against Iran early Wednesday morning. This comes as multiple reports this week indicate the war could end through a U.S.-Iran proposal.

Over the past several months, Trump has posted threats including bombing Iran back into "the stone age" and threatening "a whole civilization will die tonight." In an early-morning post, Trump, who will turn 80 on June 14, posted an AI photo of himself clutching a large military-like gun as bombs fall in the desert behind him. "No more Mr. Nice Guy," the caption read.

"Iran can't get their act together. They don't know how to sign a nonnuclear deal. They better get smart soon! President DJT" he wrote.

This week, the New York Times reported that Trump is "dissatisfied" with the proposal that the U.S. has reached with Iran that could end the war. The report said the concern is "accepting it could appear to deny Mr. Trump a victory."

U.S. negotiations are on pause while discussions continue over how to frame a potential resolution. Sources told CBS News last week that Iran is far more capable than U.S. leaders are publicly acknowledging.

Dr. Robert Pape, a professor of political science at the University of Chicago who studies military strategy and international security, wrote for the New York Times earlier this month that the longer the war continues, the more influential and powerful Iran becomes.

"A fourth center of global power is quickly emerging — Iran — that does not rival those three nations economically or militarily. Instead, its newfound power derives from its control over the most important energy choke point in the global economy, the Strait of Hormuz," he said.

Pape warned, "If Iranian control over the strait persists for months or years, as I believe it may, it will drastically reshape the global order to the detriment of the United States."

The New Republic's Greg Sargent spoke with Paul Krugman for "The Daily Blast" on Wednesday morning, in which the American economist said, "for most of us, by about a week into the war it was obvious that basically America lost. But Trump cannot bring himself to acknowledge that."

Krugman noted that the barrage of threats from the White House "all seem to be because he cannot accept that he screwed up badly. There is no good outcome for the United States here. All we can do is accept something that actually leaves Iran stronger than it was. But he won't do it."

Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) remains under the microscope over his appearance in a video that reminded military members they can "refuse illegal orders." The government has now officially filed an appeal after its loss in the lower courts.

While the filing tries to adjust what Kelly said to justify the case, the prosecutors attempt to appeal it by saying that it should be put in military court rather than a federal court.

U.S. military members have not only a legal right but a duty to refuse illegal orders under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The issue also falls under 10 U.S. Code § 892 - Article 92.

While Kelly is no longer an active-duty member of the military, he is receiving a pension, and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth attempted to demote his rank and then cut the amount of that pension. Kelly took the Pentagon to court and won. President Donald Trump's administration appealed and there is a court date on May 7.

In his ruling, U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon, a Republican appointee, said in the decision that veterans like Kelly do not forefit his constitutional rights even when it comes to matters of the military.

Trump called the video "seditious," though no one in the video has been charged with sedition.

In the appeal documents, the Pentagon is seeking to move the case out of federal court and into a military administrative process.

The court filing alleges, “The district court here held that the military has no ability to restrict the speech of retired officers — not even speech that counsels disobedience to lawful orders,” the government wrote. Kelly didn't counsel disobedience to lawful orders.

As CNN reported last November, "The administration has argued that by emphasizing service members’ duty to disobey unlawful orders, Kelly and the other lawmakers were inciting troops to disobey lawful orders."

The court filing describes Judge Leon's ruling as “plainly wrong” and again demands that Kelly be treated as "anyone else currently serving," the Arizona Republic reported. Although Kelly is retired, the rules require him to continue to follow the UCMJ. The distinction is different from a discharged veteran.

The problem, however, is that Article 90 of the UCMJ makes it clear, "Orders must be specific, personal, and lawful; service members have an obligation to disobey patently illegal orders. Unlawful orders include those violating constitutional rights, crimes against humanity, or personal, non-military tasks."

The court filing again misstates what Kelly said by claiming, "he does not disagree that these are the very reasons that the Supreme Court and this Court have rejected First Amendment claims by other servicemembers who counseled disobedience to lawful orders."

Further, Hegseth made the same comment as Kelly during a podcast on Nov. 7, 2024. Hegseth was appearing on “The Shawn Ryan Show” to promote his book, reported Politico in January 2026.

The appeal information comes just after news broke that the DOJ was indicting former FBI Director James Comey for a second time.

CNN reported on Tuesday that the Justice Department has indicted former FBI Director James Comey for the second time, two sources confirmed to the network.

The DOJ attempted to bring a similar case in the Eastern District of Virginia last year, but the effort failed as the interim U.S. attorney refused to put his name on it. Instead, he resigned, and a new one was appointed. She then indicted Comey.

CNN noted that the actual indictment isn't online yet, so it's unclear what charges they intend to use to go after Comey. Reporters noted there were allegations of an assassination threat because Comey posted a photo of sea shells he saw on the beach on May 15, 2025, that spelled out numbers that President Donald Trump allies claimed were a threat. The other possible charge relates to a comment Comey made in 2017 in testimony before the U.S. Senate over Zoom about who he told about issues related to Trump.

National security lawyer Bradley P. Moss told CNN that he doubts that the indictment will stick, but explained that it isn't the purpose. He said that what Trump wants is the "spectacle" and the "headline."

"It's going to look terrible for the Justice Department and its reputation, no doubt," he said.

CNN's Boris Sanchez added that these retaliatory lawsuits also cost the target a lot of money to defend themselves.

Crime and Justice reporter Katelyn Polantz said the major legal question will be where these charges originate. The Eastern District of Virginia may not be willing to go there again, while other jurisdictions in conservative areas might. When Comey posted the image to his Instagram with the shells, it was unclear what beach he and his wife were walking on.

Polantz also said that there has been an investigation going on in South Florida "around a broad swath of the Russia investigation many years ago, starting back in 2016, an investigation Comey had worked on until Donald Trump fired him as his FBI director." So, it's entirely possible that they are using that case.

"If at first you don't succeed, try, try again, Donald," Moss mocked Trump. "Eventually you'll get him."

When addressing the possible charges that Polantz suggested, Moss implied that they were absurd.

"Those would be a joke. You know, the pretrial motions write themselves. A third-year law student can get those tossed, let alone the, you know, the top team he'll have defending him," said Moss.

He also acknowledged that this could be the "first shot" coming out of the grand jury in South Florida where the DOJ is trying to connect "some sort of grand conspiracy charge" out of the Russia probe.

" It will be fascinating to see if they are. It's riddled with legal problems, waiting to see what the indictment shows. But I am not by any means impressed by this maneuver," Moss continued.

The other thing he said will be interesting to see is whether former Attorney General Pam Bondi previously refused to bring these charges and if Blanche is the reason that they're being brought now.

President Donald Trump's administration is going after the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), a legal advocacy organization that tracks extremism, on what many think are trumped-up charges. Now one Trump ally is trying to make a link between the SPLC and the gunman who rushed Secret Service officers outside of the White House Correspondents' Association dinner on Saturday.

Jordan, who wants to have a hearing to go after the SPLC through Congress, tried to connect the two by insisting it "shouldn't be lost on anyone" that the Department of Justice indictment against the SPLC dropped the same week as an assassination attempt against Trump and top administration officials.

"And it's no accident, I don't think, and it shouldn't be lost on anyone that the same week that there's a third assassination attempt on the president, the Southern Poverty Law Center gets indicted for all this baloney they were doing, dividing the country," said Jordan.

The CNN host fact-checked Jordan to make it clear that there was no connection between the gunman and the SPLC. Jordan conceded that point, but then repeated the same line.

"There's no connection, I'm not saying that, but it shouldn't be lost on anyone that they happened the same week. I think that sort of tells us, you know, what's — what's going on out there that contributes to these, you know, three assassination attempts on President Trump," Jordan stuttered.

The allegations against the SPLC are that the group paid informants who were either part of,or spying on, the hate groups the government flagged. The charges allege the SPLC is a funder of domestic terrorism.

The SPLC then coordinated with law enforcement, including the FBI, to ensure that any information they had in advance of possible terrorist attacks, public acts of violence or violence against the U.S. government went to the proper law enforcement channels.

Joyce Vance, who previously served as the federal prosecutor for the Northern District of Alabama from 2009 to 2017, wrote last week about the charges filed in Montgomery, AL.

"The Justice Department wants us to believe that one of the nation’s leading civil rights groups, the people who broke the Klan and continue to expose the white supremacist groups that crop up in its wake, is actually supporting racism and domestic terror, that they’re in fact responsible for whipping up the frenzy," Vance wrote. "This indictment tells a story, and the story is that SPLC engaged in material support for domestic terrorist groups."

The problem, she said, is that the case relies on one major "faulty premise: that you should look only at one piece of SPLC’s work to infiltrate these dangerous groups, not at their overall efforts to dismantle them."

Jordan and the DOJ assume that donors to the SPLC wouldn't want their money going to pay informants who gathered inside information about white supremacist and hate groups that were then handed over to law enforcement.

Vance noted that the indictment goes on to suggest that somehow the SPLC is responsible for the "Unite The Right" in Charlottesville, VA, during Trump's first term.

As Vance explained, "If you want to learn about white supremacists, you have to go and talk to them."

Jordan believes that the real hate group is the SPLC because its money contributed to people who may have contributed to such groups.

Former Politico editor Garrett Graff on Tuesday noted the degree to which the Department of Justice is avoiding questions about the Secret Service agent shot Saturday night during the White House Correspondents' Association dinner in Washington D.C. As Graff notes, none of the videos available appear to show the gunman firing at anyone.

Writing for his Substack "Dooms Day Scenario," Graff was clear to say that he's not trying to claim there is some sort of "false flag" operation. What he does have questions about is how many shots were fired and who fired them.

"If you read my quick analysis Sunday morning, you might have seen that I had immediate questions about the number of gunshots — six — we heard on the ballroom audio. It was way more gunshots than had been explained at that point," he wrote.

The Justice Department filed official charges against the gunman on Monday afternoon and hinted the may not have fired his weapon at all.

"In fact, it’s not clear from what we know that this was a 'shooting' at all," said Graff.

According to reports, the only person injured in the incident appeared to be a uniformed Secret Service officer, who was included in the criminal charges as a witness/participant. He is among those who pulled his weapon and fired.

The three charges that acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said the DOJ would charge the gunman with are: (1) attempt to assassinate the President of the United States, (2) transportation of a firearm and ammunition in interstate commerce with intent to commit a felony and (3) discharge of a firearm during a crime of violence.

The third charge would require proof that the gunman fired one of the two guns he had on him at the time. Videos show him racing down the hallway, clutching a 12-gauge pump-action shotgun with both hands. He also had a Rock Island Armory 1911 .38-caliber pistol on him.

There's no supporting evidence that he fired the shotgun, however.

Graff noted the New York Times wrote on Monday, “Mr. Blanche said investigators believed the suspect fired his weapon because a spent shotgun shell was found inside its chamber, but he noted that more forensic examination would be done to determine exactly what happened.”

Graff finds it "very hard to believe" that after 24 hours, the FBI and Secret Service can't conclude anything about whether the gunman fired.

There's no real information about what kind of ammunition the shotgun had, but Graff said that he would have to have used "some strange custom shell" rather than the typical two-shells that a shotgun fires off. So, it would mean he'd have a "large solid shot primarily used for hunting big game, or buckshot, a shell loaded with somewhere between eight and twenty smaller rounds."

He explained that buckshot would be the. most common option.

"... One pull of the trigger is essentially the same as shooting eight or nine 9mm ball rounds all simultaneously. Buckshot produces some serious wound channels," he explained.

An audio analysis by the Wall Street Journal heard six shots while Blanche and the Secret Service claim they fired five. The Secret Service officer was shot in his bulletproof vest by a single shot.

"Authorities had previously used the word 'bullet' to describe what shot him, which is what one would call something fired by a handgun or rifle, not a shotgun," explained Graff.

Ultimately, if the gunman had used buckshot and that's what hit the officer, it also would have sprayed bullets in other places. It would have been very clear if the officer had one bullet in the vest from a handgun, compared to a shotgun burst. The vest would also make that clear.

Graff observed that Blanche made a "strange" comment, saying, “When you fire a bullet, the bullet ends up somewhere. Sometimes you find it, sometimes you don’t.”

Graff was confounded by that remark.

"Solid slugs come with enormous stopping power and would be what you’d expect to use to try to take down a feral hog or a black bear; if it hit a human at close range, one would expect some serious blunt force injuries, perhaps even fatal blunt force trauma, even if the officer was hit in a bullet-resistant (they’re never really bullet-'proof'!) vest," wrote Graff.

He also noticed that in the retelling of the incident in the court documents, "it uses a strange passive voice to indicate the gunfire." The text says the officer "was shot once in the chest." It never says the gunman shot the officer in the chest.

Graff goes into considerably more detail, including videos, and ultimately conclude that the shot that hit the officer was likely a friendly fire accident.

What he believes happened, according to the audio and videos, is that the gunman raced through the area, an officer pulled his gun and fired, missing the man and hitting a fellow officer. That officer then had his weapon drawn and fired off five shots, missing the gunman with all of them.

The DOJ isn't making any of that information accessible to the public, though it is likely to come out in court.

President Donald Trump is doubling down on his ballroom as supporters rally around the idea that life outside the White House could be too dangerous for him. So, a Trump lawyer filed a brief that at least one legal reporter is calling "embarrassing" for reading like a TruthSocial post.

A Bloomberg Law and Washington Post report detailed the court filing submitted Sunday by Trump appointee Brett Shumate, saying that the National Trust for Historic Preservation should drop its lawsuit to stop the ballroom because of the incident.

Republicans have since lined up behind Trump, with several now supporting using taxpayer funds to pay for the $400 million project Trump claimed would be paid for by donations. The new GOP bill would fully fund it, despite Trump insisting millions of donations have already rolled in from corporate America and billionaire pals.

"Stan Woodward's name appears at the bottom of this filing, but this appears to have been dictated by Trump himself," said Politico legal reporter Kyle Cheney. "Hard to read it any other way."

The filing was submitted just before midnight on Monday.

The National Trust made it clear on Monday that it would not be dropping its suit.

Among the allegations in the filing is that "Trump Derangement Syndrome" has made it far too difficult for him to leave the White House.

"The nine-page brief adopts a tone and grammatical style that recalls Trump’s own writing style on social media and is unusual for a federal government brief," said the Bloomberg report. "It is signed by three political appointees, and no career attorneys."

The court filing alleges that the "name is FAKE because they add the words in the United States' to the National Trust for Historic Preservation, it makes it sound like a Governmental Agency, which it is not.”

President Harry Truman signed legislation creating the National Trust on October 26, 1949 (16 U.S.C. §§ 468-468d), the group's website says.

Trump is known for randomly capitalizing words for emphasis in his social media posts.

“They are very bad for our Country. They stop many projects that are worthy, and hurt many others,” the officials wrote about the nonprofit.

The lawsuit also attacked the National Trust's lawyer, Gregory Craig, of Foley Hoang LLP, who previously served as White House Counsel under President Barack Obama's administration. The filing falsely characterized him as “the lawyer for Barack Hussein Obama.” Craig was targeted by Trump during the first administration, but was ultimately acquitted by a jury.

Bloomberg also pointed out the "superlative language" that "gushes over Trump's brilliance."

“If any other President had the ability, foresight, or talents necessary, to build this ballroom, which will be one of the greatest, safest, and most secure structures of its kind anywhere in the World, there would never have been a lawsuit,” the filing said. “But, because it is DONALD J. TRUMP, a highly successful real estate developer, who has abilities that others don’t, especially those who assume the Office of President, this frivolous and meritless lawsuit was filed. Again, it’s called TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME.”

Judge Richard Leon of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted a pause on the building of the ballroom, finding that Trump never had the authority to rip apart the East Wing of the White House to begin with. Trump has appealed the ruling,

The White House argued at the time of the filing that, because the construction was for a secure facility, the ballroom itself was about national security. That didn't fly, and Judge Leon issued a clarification stating that the administration itself had separated the project into the below-ground bunker, a national security area, and the above-ground ballroom.

Shumate said "nothing prevents" Trump from asking Congress for the approval and funds to build his ballroom, and the judge agreed.

One person commented, "This completely unserious DOJ motion about the ballroom is signed by none other than Todd Blanche and Stanley Woodward, the Number 1 and Number 2 officials at the DOJ. Both are former personal defense attorneys for the President. I cannot believe this is real. Citing 'Trump Derangement Syndrome' in a federal filing is so freaking embarrassing it's not even funny."

One of the loudest Republican supporters of the survivors of trafficker Jeffrey Epstein is facing off against President Donald Trump's revenge campaign, but it doesn't appear to be working.

Politico reported on Tuesday that Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) is in the race for his political life. The six-term Republican faced off against the Trump political revenge machine

“In my heart of hearts, I think Massie may win,” said Steve Frank, who previously served as the commissioner of Covington, which is a major Cincinnati suburb. Frank has grown increasingly annoyed with Massie over Israel and other local issues.

“And if he can withstand this, who’s coming after him?” Frank asked.

Massie faces off against Ed Gallrein, who has been endorsed by Trump, on May 19.

Third-party money topping $10 million has been thrown at Massie, but that might not be enough.

"The few public polls of the race show Massie with a small lead over Gallrein, suggesting Trump’s imprimatur has some limits," said Politico. "Gallrein, a farmer and former state Senate candidate, has never run a federal race and has comparatively low name ID across the district. It’s all left some Massie detractors worried they won’t be able to unseat him now — or ever."

Massie is confident, telling Politico, “I’m actually glad everybody’s in with both feet, and the chips are all pushed in. For me, it means they tried me and they couldn’t do it.”

Massie has long been part of the libertarian-leaning wing of the GOP, in the vein of Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and others. He was radicalized by the tea party movement, Politico said, but wasn't elected until 2012, after an election year after the tea party ushered in dozens of new GOP lawmakers. He bucks the establishment and remains a fiscal conservative with a hands-off-my-liberty social philosophy.

Trump formed MAGA KY, a super PAC specifically crafted to pour money into attacks against Massie. They've spent over $3 million claiming that Massie opposes Trump's immigration priorities and tax cuts. Meanwhile, pro-Israel groups have dumped even more money against Massie.

Former GOP Secretary of State Trey Grayson considers the race an indication "if it is possible to build a winning coalition consisting of voters that think Massie doesn’t sufficiently support Trump and those who think he doesn’t sufficiently support northern Kentucky.”

Frank attacked Massie's constituent services, claiming that when he tried to renew his Global Entry pass through Massie's office, he encountered difficulties. The Global Entry pass is administered by U.S. Customs and Border Protection, which is part of the Department of Homeland Security.

Adam Koenig, a former state senator, said that while in office, people were directed from Massie's office to his office for constituent services. Then, Koenig was voted out of office thanks to one of Massie's protégés, who ran against him in the primary.

“I lost track of the number of times that [Massie’s] office sent people to me,” he complained, even when it comes to fixing federal issues. That said, Koenig conceded, “We live in a world where constituent services don’t matter as much as they used to. It obviously hasn’t hurt him so far.”

Massie said that Koenig is still bitter about losing his seat.

Politico spoke to one woman for whom Massie's help was the tipping point in getting her support. His office ensured her disabled brother was able to get insurance through Social Security.

Another problem is that Massie's opponent has been MIA on the campaign trail.

“We’ve heard Massie speak. And the other guy, honest and true, has never showed up to anything,” said Newport Republican Kerri Cadd. Gallrein declined to attend a GOP forum the Campbell County GOP hosted.

“I can’t even remember his name,” she said of Gallrein. So, she's leaning toward Massie as a result.

President Donald Trump's team is starting to panic.

The Daily Beast reported on Tuesday that his war against Iran could turn into a long and drawn-out quagmire that economically trashes the United States and pulls down the president politically. It could ultimately be such a huge miscalculation that the rest of his administration is marred by the war for the remainder of his term.

In a leaked comment to Axios, one Trump advisor said that Trump told them, "All [Iran's leaders] understand is bombs."

The advisor said that Trump was "frustrated but realistic. He doesn’t want to use force. But he’s not backing down.”

The problem is that aides fear Trump is approaching a Cold War-like scenario where he can't score a deal but instead remains in a paused conflict with Iran. Such a stalemate could leave U.S. troops stuck in the Strait of Hormuz, blockading cargo ships with desperately needed goods and oil tankers from delivering affordable fuel.

"Both sides want to see who caves first," the Beast said.

Meanwhile, gas prices could continue to spike as the November election draws closer and closer.

“A frozen conflict is the worst thing for Trump politically and economically,” a source told Axios.

Trump's "red line" is that Iran cannot have nuclear weapons. But peace talks with Trump's son-in-law and Middle East envoy aren't working.

So, Trump is waiting to see whether Iran will eventually agree to negotiate and end its nuclear program or continue striking Iran.

On Monday, Trump met with his national security team. According to one official who spoke to The New York Times, taking a deal from Iran that doesn't include denuclearization would prevent a "victory" for Trump.

“The United States will not negotiate through the press — we have been clear about our red lines and the president will only make a deal that’s good for the American people and the world,” White House spokesperson Olivia Wales told the Times when asked for comment.