President Donald Trump said that Americans would see a de-escalation in Minnesota, and a “more relaxed” approach on the ground in Minneapolis after federal agents shot and killed two U.S. citizens in under three weeks. But Attorney General Pam Bondi’s messaging on Wednesday pointed in a different direction.

In a social media post Wednesday afternoon, the attorney general wrote:

"MINNESOTA ARRESTS — I am on the ground in Minneapolis today. Federal agents have arrested 16 Minnesota rioters for allegedly assaulting federal law enforcement — people who have been resisting and impeding our federal law enforcement agents."

"We expect more arrests to come," she added, appearing to suggest the arrests would target Americans who are protesting, rather than undocumented immigrants accused of crimes.

"I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: NOTHING will stop President Trump and this Department of Justice from enforcing the law."

Bondi then posted the names of the people who were arrested, and, in many cases, photos of them standing next to federal officers, who had their backs to the camera. It was unclear why they were identified as "rioters."

Critics slammed the attorney general.

"They’re not arresting the people responsible for the murders of Renée Nicole Good or Alex Pretti," wrote author and activist Lev Parnas. "No — they’re arresting Minnesota citizens and using them as props for a headline. Enough is enough. We need accountability. We need justice. And we are not backing down."

"No deal on ICE," political commentator Keith Olbermann wrote to U.S. Senator Brian Schatz (D-HI). "Bondi is boasting that they're rounding up protestors there now."

"It will be interesting to see if these actually hold up in court — DOJ track record under Bondi has not been good," noted The Independent's Andrew Feinberg.

CNN's Aaron Blake appeared to concur, writing, "the Trump admin has repeatedly accused people of assaulting law enforcement -- but then either not actually brought charges or seen the cases crumble."

"There ain’t no walk back," declared The Bulwark's Bill Kristol, appearing to invoke the president's call for de-escalation."They’re still all in on mass deportation and mass intimidation."

"Could we see some video of the 'assaults' you allege?" asked U.S. Rep. Daniel Goldman (D-NY). "Nobody believes you or your partisan DOJ — which is focused on protestors not ICE murderers."

Just two days after federal agents shot and killed a Minnesota VA ICU nurse, Alex Pretti, setting off massive protests and cementing Democrats to vote against funding for the Department of Homeland Security later this week, President Donald Trump appeared to double down on the administration's efforts, declaring he is now sending his border czar, Tom Homan, to Minneapolis — a move some suggest signals trouble for Secretary Kristi Noem.

Trump's announcement came barely hours after Fox News co-host Brian Kilmeade suggested it on "Fox & Friends."

"What I would do is just bring Tom Homan in," Kilmeade told his colleagues. "Tom Homan's been marginalized. Go in there, Tom Homan's got credibility on the left. He was Barack Obama and Jeh Johnson's main guy. He's got credibility, obviously, on the right."

Homan, Kilmeade suggested, "should go in there, meet with the mayor and governor, and go in there and take charge. He knows this stuff backwards and forwards. There's no more experienced person. He's got the president's trust, but for some reason, it's been marginalized in the Minneapolis operation."

Monday morning, around 8:30 AM, Trump wrote on Truth Social, "I am sending Tom Homan to Minnesota tonight."

"He has not been involved in that area, but knows and likes many of the people there," the president wrote. "Tom is tough but fair, and will report directly to me."

He continued, declaring that "a major investigation is going on with respect to the massive 20 Billion Dollar, Plus, Welfare Fraud that has taken place in Minnesota, and is at least partially responsible for the violent organized protests going on in the streets."

"Additionally," Trump added, "the DOJ and Congress are looking at 'Congresswoman' Illhan Omar, who left Somalia with NOTHING, and is now reportedly worth more than 44 Million Dollars. Time will tell all. Thank you for your attention to this matter!"

Punchbowl News' Jake Sherman reported that Trump sending in Tom Homan will be highly controversial for Senate Democrats, who are already preparing to fight DHS funding.

"As the Senate begins to consider how it may fund the government this week, the president is sending Tom Homan to Minnesota -- something that will not give any comfort to Senate Democrats," Sherman observed.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt appeared to suggest Homan will have an outsized role, extending past his "border czar" responsibilities.

"Homan will be managing ICE Operations on the ground in Minnesota to continue arresting the worst of the worst criminal illegal aliens," she wrote. "In addition, Tom will coordinate with those leading investigations into the massive, widespread fraud that has resulted in billions of taxpayer dollars being stolen from law-abiding citizens in Minnesota."

Some critics are suggesting that the Alex Pretti deadly shooting may signal the end of Secretary Kristi Noem's tenure at DHS.

"The thing for the W.H. to know here is that Senate Democrats are going to want/insist on significant policy changes on how the Trump administration conducts interior enforcement. Whether it's Homan or Noem at the wheel. Whether they are in Minneapolis or not," Sherman wrote.

Others added more insight.

Axios Trump White House reporter Marc Caputo wrote, "Homan & DHS Secretary Kristi Noem have been at odds."

Vox senior editor Benjy Sarlin noted, "Trump distancing Homan from everything that’s happened so far seems pretty relevant. Some on right have been trying to argue he’s the more competent person to empower over Noem/Bovino/Miller."

Journalist Ahmed Baba wrote, "Prepare for the Trump Admin to blame all this on Kristi Noem and oust her, while Stephen Miller and Trump try to insulate themselves in spite of the fact they’re the driving force behind ICE’s authoritarian escalation. Already seeing leaks from DHS showing anger at Noem."

The top conservative think tank in the United States has released a new policy paper, “Saving America by Saving the Family,” that a New York Times columnist has panned.

Opinion writer Jessica Grose wrote that the Heritage Foundation authors went all the way back to 1776 for their "inspiration." They are calling their report "A Foundation for the Next 250 Years."

“In understanding their crowning achievement, Americans must recognize that the founding fathers were, quite literally, fathers," the report stated. "Fifty-four of the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence married and had a total of 337 children among them — an average of six each.”

She commented, "I wondered: Are they counting the six children Thomas Jefferson had with Sally Hemings — whom he enslaved and who could not legally refuse unwanted sex — or not? What kind of example is that supposed to set?"

Grose continued, explaining, "That’s just the opening salvo of this confused, retrograde report, which leaves out a lot of important details from its rose-colored history of marriage and family in the United States."

She called the report "a curious set of guidelines for the future, since it seems mired in culture war battles from the 20th century, unable to face the past 60 years of change."

The Heritage Foundation is the right-wing think tank behind Project 2025, which, it could be argued, is focused on returning America to far more conservative and traditional social, cultural, and institutional beliefs.

Grose noted that Heritage "seems to want to take a time machine back to when women were financially dependent on men and gay marriage was not legal."

She also noted the discrepancies in Heritage's thesis.

"The report’s authors know they can’t tell all women to be stay-at-home mothers (returning the country to 1960s employment levels for women) because that would contradict their other goal, to dismantle the welfare state and put even more work conditions on parents receiving government aid," she wrote, noting that "the bulk of the paper is about ways to whittle down government support for anybody who isn’t part of a traditional married family, ideally with a male breadwinner."

Grose says that on the one hand, "I always marvel at how we agree on some of the problems American families face," yet on the other, can "have completely different solutions."

Other discrepancies Grose pointed to include a poll showing that young male Trump voters see having children as their top measure of success, and marriage as their fourth.

"Instead of looking at these stats and thinking that maybe there’s a deeper problem if only conservative men are bullish about having children," she wrote, "the authors look at the stats and think: If our government only pushed religion and traditional marriage harder legally and culturally, everyone else would fall in line."

Democratic strategist and pundit James Carville, responding to the international outcry and condemnation over President Donald Trump's failed efforts to acquire Greenland, predicted that he will likely lose big in the November midterm elections.

"I think the world wants to return, with the United States as being part of the world," Carville said on his podcast. "And I think the way that that happens is Trump has to be humiliated."

"He has to be electorally humiliated, and I think there's a good, good chance that's gonna happen this November in our elections," he said. "It's not enough that he just walk away, and the Democrats take over the presidency."

There has to be "a well laid plan and strategy to utterly humiliate him, to the point that everybody around the world says, 'This m — —, or no one like this m — —, is gonna ever come back and lead the United States,'" Carville declared.

"I think that's the possibility, and I think if that happens, I think we can renormalize the world a lot faster than most."

"And he's completely crazy," Carville also remarked. "He's going downhill."

According to the New York Post, Trump will be campaigning during the midterm elections as if he were on the ballot.

"President Trump will treat the November midterm election like a presidential campaign, his senior leadership team tells The Post — traveling like he’s on the ballot, flooding key races with cash and hammering home how his policies will help Americans with affordability," the Post reported.

Susie Wiles, Trump's White House Chief of Staff and his former campaign co-chair, told The Post, “He’s going to campaign like it’s 2024.”

President Donald Trump "miscalculated" his level of support — especially on the issues that won him re-election in 2024, and it has "backfired," according to an opinion columnist.

In "Why Trump is failing," Steven Roberts in the Columbia Missourian writes: "Trump has called 2025 'the greatest first year' of any president, but a majority of Americans strongly disagree."

"To hardcore MAGA loyalists, the president can do no wrong. But rabid Red Hats account for only about 35% of Americans," observes Roberts.

He identifies where the president is losing support: "since Trump received almost 50% of the popular vote, that means about 15% of his backers were not true believers, and they are the ones who are slipping away."

Roberts identifies why.

"The single biggest reason Trump won a second term was economic discontent with the Biden administration, and it's the single biggest reason so many voters are now disillusioned," he says, pointing to a CNN poll that, he writes, finds "55% say Trump's policies have actually made things worse and almost two-thirds say he has not done enough to reduce their cost of living."

But Roberts offers more.

He explains that Americans supported Trump's policies on immigration when it was about immigrants at the border.

"They were 'others': easy to demonize and dehumanize. They had no voice and no identity, and Trump and his media managers could control what voters knew and felt about them."

But, he continues, "Trump miscalculated, and his show backfired," because his targets are no longer "faceless hordes but real people with jobs and families, friends and neighbors."

Then came the shooting of a Minneapolis mother of three, Renee Good.

"The administration tried to brand her as a domestic terrorist who had caused her own demise by driving at the agent. But the videos — seen by more than 80% of Americans — told a different story," he writes. "Good simply did not look like a terrorist. Plus, independent news organizations analyzed the cellphone footage and concluded that it 'contradicted' the official line."

Trump "lost control of the narrative, and public opinion turned against him."

The president's other miscalculation: his stance on the affordability issue, an issue that arguably got him re-elected.

With just 36 percent of Americans saying Trump has the right priorities, Roberts surmises that is simply his "loyal MAGA base."

And he warns that if this trend continues, voters at the polls in November will "take it out on his party."

President Donald Trump on Thursday unleashed dozens of rapid-fire social media posts after what critics described as a difficult few days at Davos. His speech there reportedly further strained relations with U.S. allies, following his Greenland gambit, which produced few if any clear gains and drew criticism over its diplomatic costs. The rollout of Trump’s Board of Peace also struggled to gain traction, with a handful of European allies participating in the inaugural signing ceremony.

In spoke of the more recent posts, Trump went off on "Fake Polls," while admitting that they have his approval rating "in the low 40s," although The Economist shows his net approval rating currently at 37%.

"We have the Greatest Economy in the History of our Country, we have the Strongest Border in History, nobody has ever done a job like I have done, and they have me in the low 40s," he complained. "The Democrats destroyed Healthcare, I’m trying to fix it, and they give me FAKE low numbers. Fake Polls on the Economy, on the Border, on just about everything, are ridiculous and dangerous. The REAL Polls have been GREAT, but they refuse to print them.

"The Times Siena Poll, which is always tremendously negative to me, especially just before the Election of 2024, where I won in a Landslide, will be added to my lawsuit against The Failing New York Times," he wrote. "Our lawyers have demanded that they keep all Records, and how they 'computed' these fake results — Not just the fact that it was heavily skewed toward Democrats. They will be held fully responsible for all of their Radical Left lies and wrongdoing!"

Some posts promoted questionable claims, including suggesting that annualized U.S. GDP grew to more than 5 percent — while most expectations and Congressional Budget Office predictions are currently about half that number.

He promoted a claim that he "helped create 'The Martin Luther King Jr International Freedom Games' in 1966," when he would have been about 20 years old.

Other posts he promoted talked about the U.S. trade deficit, alleged illegal voting in the 2020 election, immigration, tariffs, globalism, Don Lemon, Supreme Court oral arguments for Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, and one declaring Trump the "greatest President in the world."

Another post offered the transcript and video of White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller allegedly claiming, and without evidence, that James Comey, Jim Clapper, John Brennan, Lisa Monaco, and President Barack Obama "all conspired and worked together to sabotage, undermine, unravel, and overthrow the United States government and the democratic institutions and structures of this country."

That post, as Raw Story reported, appeared to be in response to former Special Counsel Jack Smith's currently ongoing congressional public testimony.

Another post included video of Argentinian President Javier Milei attacking "wokeism" while praising the "Americas."

Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney drew a standing ovation at the World Economic Forum in Davos after warning that the global order has ruptured.

“Let me be direct: We are in the midst of a rupture, not a transition,” Carney said, as The New York Times reported.

“I will talk today about the breaking of the world order, the end of a pleasant fiction and the beginning of a brutal reality where the geopolitics of the great powers is not subject to any constraint,” he explained.

“Every day we are reminded that we live in an era of great power rivalry,” he said. “That the rules-based order is fading. That the strong do what they can, and the weak suffer what they must.”

Carney did not say President Donald Trump's name, but he did tell his audience, "recently, great powers began using economic integration as weapons. Tariffs as leverage. Financial infrastructure as coercion. Supply chains as vulnerabilities to be exploited."

"You cannot live within the lie of mutual benefit through integration, when integration becomes the source of your subordination."

He also said that "there is a strong tendency for countries to go along to get along. To accommodate. To avoid trouble. To hope that compliance will buy safety."

"It won’t," he warned.

Carney said that "intermediate powers like Canada, are not powerless. They have the capacity to build a new order that encompasses our values, such as respect for human rights, sustainable development, solidarity, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the various states."

And he warned that those powers "must act together, because if we're not at the table, we're on the menu."

The Times noted that Carney's speech came "not long after" President Donald Trump "posted an A.I. image on social media that included a map of American flags superimposed over both Canada and the United States," along with the U.S. flag on Greenland, Venezuela, and Cuba.

Very important and very well put remarks by 🇨🇦 PM Mark Carney. It’s time to take down the sign and speak up. pic.twitter.com/Ky00CNMYVM
— Carl Bildt (@carlbildt) January 20, 2026

The success of the TV show "Heated Rivalry," about two closeted hockey players who fall in love, may be masking the fact that anti-gay bias has "surged particularly sharply" since 2020, say two research psychologists in a New York Times opinion piece.

Five years after the U.S. Supreme Court's 2015 decision that found same-sex couples have the same rights and responsibilities to marriage as their different-sex peers, support for gay people began to "sharply reverse," according to Dr. Tessa E.S. Charlesworth and Dr. Eli J. Finkel.

Perhaps most "surprising" are the groups where anti-gay bias is surging.

Charlesworth and Finkel noted that anti-gay bias trends "were distinctly robust among the youngest American adults — those under 25. This group increased its animus against marginalized groups in general and gay people in particular at a faster rate than older Americans did."

"Also surprising is that although anti-gay bias has risen faster among conservatives, it has also risen among liberals," they noted.

A 2024 Gallup poll found that support for same-sex marriage was dropping, especially among Republicans.

When asked if marriage equality should be legal, Republicans’ support fell to 46% from a high of 55% in 2021 and 2022. But support also fell among Democratic and independent voters who were asked the same question.

The percentage of Americans who think homosexuality is morally acceptable had also fallen since 2022’s record high. In that year, 71% thought it was morally OK to be gay, but that fell to 64% in 2023.

Charlesworth and Finkel acknowledge that they are unsure of why support for gay people has reversed.

They speculate that social instability and anti-establishment sentiment could be to blame.

"Gay and lesbian people, newly woven into the fabric of mainstream society, may have been collateral damage in a broader revolt against a system that felt broken, especially among younger generations grappling most intensely with uncertainty about their future," the researchers wrote.

And they issued a warning.

"At a time when social advances can coexist with backlash, watching queer stories on television can feel comforting. But comfort on the couch is not the same thing as progress."

The December jobs report brought unwelcome news for many American households: the job market is cooling, and health care remains one of the few sectors still hiring — as medical costs continue to strain budgets.

“The US economy added just 50,000 jobs in December, capping off one of the weakest years of job gains in decades,” CNN explained.

New York Times economics reporter Ben Casselman noted it was “the slowest pace of growth since 2020.”

“This is pretty wild,” Casselman continued. “Health care & social assistance accounted for essentially ALL of private-sector job growth in 2025.”

Heather Long, chief economist at Navy Federal, reacted similarly.

“Wow,” she exclaimed. “2025 would have been a year of job LOSS without healthcare and social assistance.”

Larry Levitt, executive vice president for health care policy at KFF, suggested the report landed hard for American households, revealing that in the numbers Long cited is a “double whammy.”

Seeing almost all job growth was in the health care sector, Levitt wrote: “This is, in a sense, a double whammy for affordability.”

“Jobs are hard to come by for many,” he noted, “while job growth in health care is a sign of increasing health care costs.”

In other words, Americans are getting squeezed from two directions.

With fewer jobs, and Americans struggling to find jobs — or good-paying jobs — they may have less income, effectively making goods and services less affordable.

On top of that, there are increasingly higher health care costs to contend with, in part thanks to the increased funds flowing through the health care system, and the increased premiums many using the Obamacare exchanges are seeing.

President Donald Trump faces devastation and humiliation if former Special Counsel Jack Smith is successful with his bid to testify in public before Congress, says a prominent Democrat, U.S. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD).

Despite requesting a public hearing, Smith delivered a closed-doors deposition this week before the House Judiciary Committee. As Special Counsel, Smith oversaw two major indictments of Donald Trump, one involving alleged election interference and the other involving his alleged removal, retention, and refusal to return classified documents.

Smith's attorneys are petitioning Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan to allow their client to testify in an open forum, according to Politico.

“[We] reiterate our request for an open and public hearing,” Smith’s lawyers wrote to Jordan. “During the investigation of President Trump, Mr. Smith steadfastly followed Justice Department policies, observed all legal requirements, and took actions based on the facts and the law. He stands by his decisions.”

The attorneys also requested the full eight-hour video of Smith's sworn deposition be released to the public in full.

"According to portions of his statement shared with POLITICO, Smith argued the evidence in his office’s possession would have provided proof of the President’s criminal behavior 'beyond a reasonable doubt.'"

In his opening statement, Politico had reported, Smith "maintained that this team found evidence to prove 'beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election and to prevent the lawful transfer of power.'”

Democrats opposed holding Smith's deposition in private, and "have argued the decision to hold the private deposition deprived the American public of important information about the president and amounted to an effort to distort the record of Smith’s testimony."

Congressman Raskin, the Ranking Member on the House Judiciary Committee, remains hopeful Chairman Jordan will allow Smith to testify in public.

Speaking to Politico on Thursday, Raskin said, “I think somebody should prepare Donald Trump for it, because he will be devastated and humiliated by what he hears.”

Two top Trump advisers expect rulings from the conservative majority U.S. Supreme Court to help Republicans during next year's midterms — and for years to come.

Chris LaCivita and Tony Fabrizio, who are in charge of President Donald Trump's political operation, "told donors at a Republican National Committee retreat over the weekend that rulings on political contribution limits and congressional redistricting could be transformational for Republicans — if they go the GOP's way," Axios reported.

Despite President Trump's low approval rating and reports numerous House Republicans may be "running for the exits" after the new year, the two Trump advisers "told donors the decisions by the conservative-led high court 'have the ability to upend the political map,' a person in the session told Axios."

One of the two Supreme Court cases involves gutting the Voting Rights Act, which Chief Justice John Roberts's court has been slowly weakening.

The second involves Trump's efforts to push redistricting in red states, an effort to increase the GOP majority in the House of Representatives.

"Court watchers say a majority of the justices appeared poised to weaken the Voting Rights Act based on oral arguments in October," Axios noted. "For years, Republicans have sought to weaken the law, arguing that it's federal overreach and unfairly creates Democrat-friendly districts," while "Democrats say the law prevents discrimination and ensures that minority voters are represented in Congress."

In the redistricting case, oral arguments will be held Tuesday.

Calling it "the most consequential campaign finance-related dispute" since Citizens United, Axios explained that "the justices will decide whether to eliminate a federal law that limits the amount of money big-money party committees can spend in direct coordination with favored candidates."

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt suggested that Americans will receive tax "rebates" next year, and promised they will see "bigger paychecks and lower prices" in 2026, while attacking Democrats as "con artists."

"This is going to be President Trump's bread and butter issue: focused on the economy," Leavitt told "Fox & Friends" on Tuesday. "Nobody knows it better than him."

A recent poll found 77% of Americans say the president is not focused enough on the economy. The White House has been claiming Americans will see greater tax refunds next year, and Trump has been talking about tariff dividend checks but not tax rebates.

Previewing the speech on the economy President Trump will make Tuesday evening in Pennsylvania, Leavitt promised the president "is going to give a positive economic, a focused speech, where he talks about all that he and his team has done to provide bigger paychecks and lower prices for the American people."

Polls show Trump's approval rating is the lowest it's been this term, and voters disapprove of his handling of several key issues, including the economy.

Leavitt claimed that Trump "inherited the worst inflation crisis in modern American history from the Biden administration."

Inflation during President Joe Biden's last full month was 2.9%. It rose to 3% in January, about where it stands today.

"Within six months, President Trump signed the largest middle class tax cut in American history, no tax on tips. Overtime. Social Security. And you'll hear stories of everyday Americans tonight who will benefit directly from those tax rebates next year."

While Leavitt repeatedly used the term tax "rebates," it does not appear any such program currently exists.

Leavitt also told Fox News that "the Democrats are the greatest con artists in American politics. They are pretending to champion the issue of affordability when they themselves created the worst inflation crisis in a generation. You can't create a problem and then turn around and say, I'm the best person to fix it."

During President Biden's term, inflation rose to about 9%, largely due to issues surrounding the COVID pandemic, but inflation also fell faster in the U.S. than in many of the world's wealthiest countries.

Leavitt also had sharp criticism for congressional Republicans.

"So, as President Trump has been screaming from the rooftops, Republicans need to remain tough and smart, and they need to be more vocal about touting the accomplishments of this administration."

Leavitt: "As President Trump has been screaming from the rooftops, Republicans need to remain tough and smart, and they need to be more vocal about touting the accomplishments of this administration." pic.twitter.com/i5Ar3oR0fT
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) December 9, 2025

Several senior members of President Donald Trump’s Cabinet began the week Monday morning by denouncing the upcoming nationwide “No Kings” protests scheduled for Saturday. The demonstrations, first held in June to oppose authoritarianism and government corruption, drew millions of participants across the country and are expected to do so again.

As other Republicans last week, U.S. Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy implied on Monday that congressional Democrats are waiting until after the protests to try to reopen the government. Democrats have put forth multiple pieces of legislation to end the shutdown but Republicans have blocked them.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, who last week alleged the rallies are "hate America" protests, has stated repeatedly that he will not bring to the floor for a vote any bill from the Senate to end the shutdown that is not the continuing resolution the House passed weeks ago. Prior to the shutdown, President Trump told congressional Republicans to not negotiate with Democrats.

READ MORE: ‘Cornerstone of American Freedom’: National Security Group Blasts Johnson Attack

"The No Kings protests, Maria, really frustrating," Secretary Duffy told Fox Business host Maria Bartiromo.

"I mean, this is part of Antifa, paid protesters," he alleged.

President Donald Trump has attempted to designate "Antifa" as a domestic terrorist organization. Antifa is not an organized group.

"It begs the question, who's funding it, but, yeah, Democrats want to wait for a big rally of a No Kings protest, when the bottom line is, who's running the show in the Senate?" Duffy asked, attempting to pin the blame on Democrats.

"Chuck Schumer's not running the show," he said of the Democratic minority leader. "The No Kings protesters, or organizers, are running the show.

"Is AOC threatening a primary against Chuck Schumer. Is she running the show?" he said of U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY).

Duffy insisted, "You need a strong leader in the Senate to take control and make decisions, and Chuck Schumer's blowing in the breeze, he has no power, no authority, because he's given it up to his primary opponent, potentially an AOC, or to the No Kings protest organizers, and it's shameful."

Duffy was not alone.

U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent also blasted Democrats over the No Kings protests.

READ MORE: ‘I Know People. They Don’t Believe That’: Marjorie Taylor Greene Scorches Johnson

"If in fact, they are waiting for this 'No Kings' protest, you know, No Kings means no paychecks. No paychecks, and no government," Bessent also told Bartiromo. "And, Maria, I think the dirty secret here for why this has dragged on for so long is the Democratic friends in the mainstream media have been downplaying the shutdown."

"This is getting serious," Bessent warned, "it's starting to affect the real economy. It is starting to affect people's lives."

Critics blasted the White House.

The Bulwark's founder and publisher, Sarah Longwell, observed: "These guys seem very nervous about the upcoming No Kings protest."

Media Matters senior fellow Matthew Gertz added, "The administration’s target isn’t 'antifa,' it is dissent."

"Nobody is paying us, Sean," wrote Fred Wellman, a pro-democracy podcaster, Army veteran of 22 years who served four combat tours, and a candidate for the U.S. House from Missouri. "We are angry. Welcome to freedom of speech. You must have missed that part of the Constitution when you were partying on MTV."

Sean Duffy: "The No Kings protest, Maria, really frustrating. This is part of antifa, paid protesters. It begs the question who's funding it." pic.twitter.com/UJHsMKBzVM
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) October 13, 2025

READ MORE: ‘Unfolding Rapidly’: Trump Wants to ‘Stoke Violence’ to Invoke Insurrection Act Says Expert

Shortly after concluding his widely panned 57-minute speech to the United Nations, President Donald Trump declared it was "very well received," but members of the foreign diplomatic corps and others appeared to disagree.

Calling his address to the UN "meandering," The New York Times wrote: "Boasting about his record and assailing the U.N. as ineffective in a nearly hourlong address, he sought to portray himself as the only leader who could solve the world’s problems."

The headline at Axios tells the tale: "Trump's middle finger to the UN: 'Your countries are going to hell'."

"With a few exceptions, Trump garnered very little applause from the leaders and diplomats in the room," the news outlet reported.

READ MORE: ‘Delusional’: Trump Mocked for Nixing Dem Talks Over Bizarre ‘Transgender Operations’ Claim

Indeed, some diplomats reportedly were angered by the American President's remarks.

Washington Post global affairs columnist Ishaan Tharoor reported: "A senior foreign diplomat posted at the UN texts me: 'This man is stark, raving mad. Do Americans not see how embarrassing this is?'"

Former U.S. Ambassador to Jamaica, Luis Moreno, responded, writing: "I speak to a lot of foreign diplomats, journalists, officials and just plain folks. They are simply astounded and speechless on how one man has turned us into a punchline. A very dangerous and reckless one. Americans need to wake up."

Former U.S. Ambassador to Russia and professor of political science Michael McFaul remarked: "Trumps UN speech will appeal to his MAGA base, but no one else. Missed opportunity."

U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), who serves on the Foreign Relations Committee, observed: "Trump just embarrassed our country in front of the entire world at the UN. We heard America in Retreat. For all our partners who still believe in the rule of law, freedom, human rights, and democracy, we need you to step up and lead. It will demand all our collective action."

The Atlantic's Tom Nichols, a retired U.S. Naval War College professor and Russia expert, added: "I would say that it's a dangerous thing to show the world that the American president is clearly suffering from some kind of disordered emotional issue, but by this point, there's not a country on the planet that didn't already know it."

READ MORE: ‘Red Flag’: Stephen Miller Accused of ‘Reviving Fascist Rhetoric’ at Kirk Memorial

President Donald Trump was to meet with Democratic Minority Leaders from the House and Senate ahead of the impending September 30 deadline to avert a federal government shutdown, but minutes before his speech to the United Nations he announced he was putting those talks on hold based on what he claimed are the Democrats' "unserious and ridiculous" demands.

Despite the Republicans having majority control over the House and Senate, Trump claimed Democrats "are threatening to shut down the Government of the United States."

In a lengthy and rambling social media post, he falsely alleged their demands for votes to keep the government open include: "over $1 Trillion Dollars in new spending to continue free healthcare for Illegal Aliens," "force Taxpayers to fund Transgender surgery for minors," "have dead people on the Medicaid roles," "allow Illegal Alien Criminals to steal Billions of Dollars in American Taxpayer Benefits," "try to force our Country to again open our Borders to Criminals and to the World," "allow men to play in women’s sports," and, "essentially create Transgender operations for everybody."

READ MORE: Rubio: Trump to Berate ‘Feckless’ UN for Not Allowing Him to Redevelop Its Headquarters

Trump also claimed Democrats are trying to eliminate the $50 Billion Dollar Rural and Vulnerable Hospital Fund, a concession Republicans agreed to when the ramifications of their $1 trillion in cuts to Medicaid and Medicare became public.

After repeating his claims and making multiple attacks on them left, Trump concluded, "I’ll be happy to meet with them if they agree to the Principles in this Letter. They must do their job! Otherwise, it will just be another long and brutal slog through their radicalized quicksand."

Democrats are attempting to negotiate with their congressional Republican colleagues and President Trump to re-add healthcare subsidies back into the federal government funding legislation that had been stripped out by the GOP.

Earlier this month, CNBC reported that the enhanced subsidies for the Affordable Care Act's insurance premiums "are set to expire at the end of 2025 if Congress doesn’t intervene."

READ MORE: ‘Fight Like Hell Not to Take It’: Trump Tells Pregnant Women to Abstain From Tylenol

"The disappearance of these enhanced premium tax credits — a so-called 'subsidy cliff' — would cause average premiums to rise by about 75%, according to KFF, a nonpartisan health policy research group."

Critics blasted the President's remarks.

"This is delusional but you don’t have to read the whole thing," wrote U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT). "Boils down to: he’s shutting down the government because he thinks he’s a king."

House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries responded to Trump's message, writing: "Trump Always Chickens Out. Donald Trump just cancelled a high stakes meeting in the Oval Office with myself and Leader Schumer. The extremists want to shut down the government because they are unwilling to address the Republican healthcare crisis that is devastating America."

READ MORE: ‘Red Flag’: Stephen Miller Accused of ‘Reviving Fascist Rhetoric’ at Kirk Memorial

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, previewing President Donald Trump’s upcoming address to the United Nations on Tuesday, said the President’s remarks would be shaped by his lingering, long-standing resentment over the 80-year-old institution’s decision decades ago to reject him for the redevelopment of its Manhattan headquarters.

According to a 2017 CNN report, in 2001, Trump was "passed over for the job, which infuriated the billionaire developer, who’d by then made his name as New York’s most famous (and infamous) real estate magnate."

“Who is in charge at the United Nations?” Trump wrote in his book, "Think Like a Millionaire."

“Could they be as incompetent in world affairs as they are at simple numbers? Does anyone else find this situation as alarming as I do?” he asked.

READ MORE: ‘Fight Like Hell Not to Take It’: Trump Tells Pregnant Women to Abstain From Tylenol

Secretary Rubio on Tuesday told Fox News that President Trump "will point to his own history with the UN going back to his time here as a developer. Where he actually offered to fix the UN building, and instead, they chose to go in another direction, wasted a bunch of money, and really didn't achieve, on the building's perspective, what needed to happen."

"I think it's emblematic of how feckless the UN has become as an organization," Rubio said of the decades-old incident.

"It's just a place where once a year, a bunch of people meet and give speeches and write out a bunch of letters and statements, but not a lot of good, important action is happening," the secretary lamented. "So, again, the UN has a lot of potential, but it's not living up to it right now."

READ MORE: ‘Not Unifying’ and ‘Wrong’: GOP Congressman Questions ‘Moral Clarity’ of Trump White House

As he delivers his remarks, Trump may also remember his first address before the august body, in 2018 during his first term as president when the diplomats broke out in laughter over his self-congratulatory claim that his administration had "accomplished more than almost any administration in the history of our country.”

CNN reported that Trump' remarks were met with "mocking laughter."

On Tuesday, Trump is expected to share his "vision for the world", according to CNN.

Marco Rubio previews Trump's speech to the UN: "You can anticipate that the president will point to his own history with the UN going back to his time as a developer. He actually offered to fix the UN building and instead they decided to go in a different direction, wasted a… pic.twitter.com/fbILn2ABcI
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) September 23, 2025

READ MORE: ‘Fan the Flames’: White House Pushes Antifa Terror Label and ‘Transgender Violence’ Claim

President Donald Trump is facing criticism for his red-carpet welcome and public embrace of Russian President Vladimir Putin on the Alaska tarmac at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson — an event featuring a B-2 stealth bomber and F-35s flyover — though many are more alarmed by what happened next.

The Russian President, a former top KGB foreign intelligence officer — a Soviet spy — was invited into The Beast, the heavily armored limousine that is the official state car of the President of the United States.

"After President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin stood for a brief photo opp, Trump appeared to ask Putin if he would like to ride with him," The Wall Street Journal reported. "Trump then gestured toward the presidential limousine, 'The Beast,' and both proceeded to get inside."

The Journal noted that "Russian media reported Putin’s own presidential car was waiting nearby, suggesting the impromptu private car ride wasn’t part of the plan."

READ MORE: ‘Uphill Climb’? Fate of Trump’s D.C. Police Takeover in Judge’s Hands

As Trump and Putin rode off, alone, with no administration officials, no translators, and only Secret Service agents, critics and experts were aghast over the brewing national security and counterintelligence crisis.

Calling it an "appalling...White House decision to invite Putin into the beast," Ian Mellul, a former Biden White House Director of Presidential Production, wrote: "Giving Putin a 1-1 in the beast, off the record. No interpreters. No transcript. No witnesses. The beast will have to be swept for bugs and other devices after the summit ends by USSS [U.S. Secret Service]."

Sophia A. Nelson, an award-winning author and journalist, remarked: "Trump just allowed A known Russian KGB spy to get into his car—the Beast. Correction: our car. Smdh."

"As if this image wasn’t sickening enough," remarked John Ridge, who writes about national security, foreign policy, and the Ukraine war, pointing to Putin grinning in the back seat of The Beast, "now we are going to need to replace the Beast and tear out most of 11 ABN DIV HQ to decontaminate them of listening devices and other sensors. This is a genuine counterintelligence nightmare."

One MSNBC commentator called it "extraordinary" that anyone would be invited into the President's car.

MSNBC: ‘It is extraordinary that any president or prime minister gets into Trump's car. This is very rare for any allied leader, let alone a former KGB leader’
Did Putin bug 'The Beast'? pic.twitter.com/zOYssqJI5I
— Catch Up (@CatchUpFeed) August 15, 2025

READ MORE: ‘Attack on Democracy’: GOP Senator Slammed After Invoking Racist ‘Three Fifths Compromise’

Other events on the tarmac were disturbing to some experts, including the image of U.S. Armed Forces on their knees preparing the red carpet for Putin. Former U.S. Ambassador to Russia, Michael McFaul, weighed in:

Truly shocking. https://t.co/vWe8wviHlN
— Michael McFaul (@McFaul) August 15, 2025

"Clapping for the war criminal," wrote independent journalist Terry Moran. "What a disgrace to our country’s ideals."

Clapping for the war criminal. What a disgrace to our country’s ideals.
Trump always shows his true colors around Putin. And he always sells out America and our allies.
I remember when Republican presidents—Ike, Reagan, Bush—always stood up to tyrants. This is pathetic. pic.twitter.com/BOb5uC77jX
— Terry Moran 🇺🇸 (@TerryMoran) August 15, 2025

Former Tea Party Republican congressman turned podcaster and Democrat Joe Walsh wrote: "Disgusting. Despicable. Traitorous. He’s clapping for and smiling at a war criminal, a thuggish dictator who invaded a sovereign nation and killed & destroyed the lives of millions. Disgusting. Despicable. Traitorous."

Former Trump National Security Advisor John Bolton told CNN, "These are very sensitive stealth aircraft. Everybody on the Russian party is a suspected spy. This whole base is now is now available to them, at least to some extent. I don't think it should have been held on the base."

Watch the videos above or at this link.

READ MORE: Pentagon Ducks Questions on Hegseth’s Support for Christian Nationalist Pastor’s Beliefs

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security is under fire after posting a hostile and defensive social media statement late Wednesday afternoon, lashing out at damning CNN reporting that exposed FEMA’s delayed response to the deadly Texas floods. Intended as a rebuttal, the DHS post instead confirmed several of CNN’s alarming findings. At least 120 people are confirmed dead, and over 160 remain missing.

Central to FEMA’s late response: Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has instituted a new rule that contracts and grants over $100,000 require her personal signature. Under Noem, DHS’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency (ICE) as of last month was $1 billion over budget, leading some, including members of Congress, to question the legality of her actions.

CNN reported that “even as Texas rescue crews raced to save lives, FEMA officials realized they needed Noem’s approval before sending [in] additional assets. Noem didn’t authorize FEMA’s deployment of Urban Search and Rescue teams until Monday, more than 72 hours after the flooding began, multiple sources told CNN.”

READ MORE: Trump Dodges, Denies and Deflects Questions as Ukraine Weapons Scandal Grows

Sending in critical search and rescue teams days after the flooding began was not the only damaging finding.

CNN also reported that “the additional red tape required at FEMA added another hurdle to getting critical federal resources deployed when hours counted,” noting that “Texas did request aerial imagery from FEMA to aid search and rescue operations, a source told CNN, but that was delayed as it awaited Noem’s approval for the necessary contract.”

Also, “FEMA staff have also been answering phones at a disaster call center, where, according to one agency official, callers have faced longer wait times as the agency awaited Noem’s approval for a contract to bring in additional support staff.”

In its social media statement (below), DHS posted the CNN headline and wrote: “This is a FAKE NEWS LIE from CNN.” The headline read: “FEMA’s response to Texas flood slowed by Noem’s cost controls.”

“This reporting is an unapparelled display of activist journalism and distracts from the robust, coordinated federal response led by Secretary Noem that has saved over 900+ lives,” the DHS statement reads.

“President Trump approved a Major Disaster Declaration, hours after Governor Greg Abbott’s request. By Tuesday, FEMA had deployed 311 staffers, providing support and shelter for hundreds of people.”

The flooding started Friday. Tuesday is four days later.

CNN also reported facts that DHS’s statement called “fake news,” but then confirmed in its own statement.

“By Monday night, only 86 FEMA staffers had been deployed, according to internal FEMA data seen by CNN — a fraction of the typical response for a disaster of this scale,” the news network reported. “By Tuesday night, the federal response expanded to 311 staffers deployed, the data showed.”

DHS wrote: “By Tuesday, FEMA had deployed 311 staffers, providing support and shelter for hundreds of people.”

CNN also reported: “Multiple FEMA officials told CNN that they were taken aback by the agency’s relatively limited response in the immediate aftermath of the disaster.”

RELATED: ‘Secretary Chaos’: Hegseth Running ‘Absolute Clown Show’ Critics Say, Amid Calls to Resign

Noem’s “office has delegated little authority to acting FEMA Administrator David Richardson, who, as of Wednesday morning, has yet to visit Texas since the flooding began, multiple FEMA officials told CNN.”

A DHS spokesperson in a statement to CNN and other news outlets wrote: “DHS and its components have taken an all-hands-on-desk approach to respond to recovery efforts in Kerrville.”

Critics pushed back against DHS’s statement, at times mocking the department’s remarks.

CNN’s Aaron Blake, whose byline is not on the report, on social media wrote: “This statement doesn’t actually dispute the reporting. In fact, it says, ‘By Tuesday, FEMA had deployed 311 staffers …’ Tuesday is, quite notably, after the 72-hour window.”

“Again,” offered Jason Kinney, a public affairs consultant and political communications expert, “this is what happens when your Administration lives in an alternative reality where improv lying is standard operating procedure. No one believes you, even when it’s really important stuff.”

“NONE of this below responds to the problems & delays CNN reported in its detailed, sourced article,” wrote Robert Elisberg, a political commentator. “CNN did not say FEMA did nothing. But that they didn’t do some important things they usually do. DHS has long lost credibility, & sadly their note below doesn’t improve on that.”

Mediaite reported: “DHS’s over‑the‑top rebuttal underscores the power of CNN’s reporting. The statement reinforces — not refutes — the 72‑hour timeline. That leaves us with a rhetorical shell game: furious denials wrapped in the very narrative they aim to quash.”

Former Bloomberg Opinion economics writer Noah Smith wrote of the DHS post: “This is just absolute cringe.”

Read the DHS post below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘No Amnesty’ and No Plan: Trump Ag Sec Grilled on Farm Labor as Deportations Continue

U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) is under fire for remarks he made in the wake of deadly Texas flooding that has killed over 80 people, claiming that now is not the time to politicize—or even examine—the tragedy, while also defending President Donald Trump.

Some are asking if the Trump administration's staffing cuts to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and specifically, the National Weather Service (NWS), which provides local weather forecasts and warnings across the country, were to blame for a possibly stunted response to the flash flooding on the Guadalupe River.

"State and local officials are calling out federal forecasters amid deadly flooding in the Texas Hill Country over the extended Fourth of July weekend," Texas NBC affiliate KXAN reported on Friday. "The criticism comes, as funding cuts and staff shortages plague the National Weather Service and other emergency management agencies nationwide."

READ MORE: ‘Authoritarian’: Trump Treasury Chief Ripped for Call to Punish Private Citizen’s Speech

On Monday at Public Notice, Noah Berlatsky wrote: "Retired federal scientists warned that the cuts could hamstring forecasts and make extreme weather events less predictable and more dangerous."

"The New York Times reported that 'crucial positions at the local offices of the National Weather Service were unfilled as severe rainfall inundated parts of Central Texas … prompting some experts to question whether staffing shortages made it harder for the forecasting agency to coordinate with local emergency managers as floodwaters rose," Berlatsky added. "Did Trump’s cuts cause excess deaths in Texas? It will probably be some time before we have a definitive answer to that question, if we ever do at all."

Meanwhile, Senator Cruz on Monday told reporters (video below), "I think any time you're dealing with major rivers, there's a risk of flooding, and there's always been a risk of flooding, particularly on the Guadalupe River."

"One of the things that's predictable is that you see some people engaging in, I think partisan games, and trying to blame their political opponents for a natural disaster. And you see that with a hurricane, with a tornado, with a wildfire, with this flooding, where people immediately say, "Well, the hurricane is Donald Trump's fault."

Cruz also insisted that there's an "ordering of things," and that not until after the search and rescue and not until after rebuilding can there be a "retrospective" to determine what could have been done differently.

READ MORE: ‘What First Amendment?’: 140 EPA Workers Suspended After Opposing Trump Agenda

Critics blasted Cruz, with one noting that he "was asked a non-partisan question about a safety/warning system. His response was to be defensive and political in defending Trump."

Others noted that Americans aren't blaming the President for natural disasters, but for what some see as a hampered response given the drastic cuts made to the National Weather Service.

"No one is saying Trump caused the storm, Ted," wrote "On Democracy" podcaster Fred Wellman. "We are asking if more could have been done to warn people? They were literally relying on a system of upstream camps calling one’s further down. It’s 2025. They should have had sirens, cell coverage improvements, and more. The county posted the warning on Facebook. Your job is to ask those questions not gaslight."

"OK," wrote actress Morgan Fairchild, "but was it ever communicated to you that it was a priority to have [a] warning system? Especially since the area is called Flood Alley…"

"Ted Cruz slams people for 'engaging in partisan games' just minutes after he praised Donald Trump as in essence the greatest president and said Trump made it clear he would be there for Texas," observed SiriusXM host Dean Obeidallah.

Watch the videos below or at this link.

Q: Was it ever communicated to you that it was a priority to have a warning system, so people have a chance to escape something like this?
TED CRUZ: Any time you're dealing with major rivers, there's a risk of flooding ... you see people engaging in partisan games ... people… pic.twitter.com/bVEBEXBLnd
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) July 7, 2025

Ted Cruz: "Something went wrong ... we're got to have a better system of warning to get kids out of harm's way." pic.twitter.com/Ap3mc1pv1A
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) July 7, 2025

READ MORE: Democratic Strategist Warns Trump Could Try to Impose Martial Law Before 2026 Midterms

In what some critics describe as an example of “cancel culture,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent—a high profile official in the Trump administration—is calling for an apology or the firing of a private citizen: Larry Summers, a Democrat who, coincidentally, once held Bessent’s current position and later served as president of Harvard University.

In remarks he made over the weekend, Summers likened the horrific Texas flooding fatalities—now over 80, with dozens reportedly still missing and more rain expected—to what experts say will be the result of President Donald Trump's so-called "One Big, Beautiful Bill," the GOP budget projected to lead to the deaths of tens of thousands of Americans annually.

"A Yale and University of Pennsylvania study estimated that restricting Medicaid and Affordable Care Act coverage, the repeal of nursing home staffing regulations, and other adjustments in the bill could result in 51,000 preventable deaths each year across the country, making it a top 10 cause of death in the U.S.," The Daily Beast reported over the weekend.

READ MORE: ‘What First Amendment?’: 140 EPA Workers Suspended After Opposing Trump Agenda

Actually citing lower death projections, Summers on Sunday told ABC News' George Stephanopoulos (video below) that the GOP budget bill, signed into law in an Independence Day ceremony complete with fighter jets and B-2 bombers soaring overhead, "is the biggest cut in the American safety net in history."

He cited "estimates that it will kill, over 10 years, 100,000 people."

"That is 2,000 days of death like we've seen in Texas this weekend. In my 70 years, I’ve never been as embarrassed for my country on July 4th," Summers lamented.

He went on to call it "a shameful act by our Congress and by our president that is going to set our country back."

Secretary Bessent, reportedly under consideration to replace Jerome Powell as Trump calls for the Federal Reserve Chairman's exit, lashed out.

Calling Summers' appearance on ABC News' "This Week," a "shockingly callous interview," that portrayed "a lack of humanity and judgment," Bessent charged, "Using the horrifying situation in Texas for cheap political gain is unfathomable."

He offered no insight into what political advantage Summers hoped to gain, but alleged that Summers had "turned a human tragedy into a political cudgel," characterized his remarks as "feckless and deeply offensive," and demanded "a public apology for his toxic language."

At no point did Secretary Bessent dispute the numbers Summers cited.

READ MORE: Democratic Strategist Warns Trump Could Try to Impose Martial Law Before 2026 Midterms

But he did demand an apology, and absent that, said his remarks should be "grounds for dismissal."

"I hope the nonprofit and for-profit institutions with which he is affiliated will join me in this call. If he is unwilling or unable to acknowledge the cruelty of his remarks, they should consider Harvard's example and make his unacceptable rhetoric grounds for dismissal," the Treasury Secretary wrote.

Critics blasted Bessent.

"'Shockingly callous' isn't pointing out the reality that Medicaid cuts will kill tens of thousands. Shockingly callous is cutting Medicaid without knowing this, or worse, cutting it despite knowing this," wrote Professor of Economics and Brookings Institution Senior Fellow Justin Wolfers. "Notice something else: Not once does Bessent refute the numbers that Summers offers. He just finds the language offensive. Some may find the reality more offensive."

"Thank goodness we've gotten rid of cancel cult...," Wolfers also snarked. "oh, wait, the secretary of the treasury is pressuring a private university to strip a professor of tenure because he highlighted numbers in a way the regime never refuted, but found offensive."

"It's truly pathetic that a Treasury Sec is using a public account to launch ad hominem attacks on a former Treasury Sec," wrote Neera Tanden, former Biden Director of the Domestic Policy Council. "Clearly Bessent can't counter @LHSummers facts. Clearly the WH is so worried BBB is a political disaster they forced their toady Treasury Sec to attack."

"This is none of your business, Scott," charged writer and historian Joshua Decter. "Stop trying to interfere and meddle with independent academic institutions. These are neo-Stalinist or neo-Maoist tactics. This is not what should happen in America."

"Calling for a private citizen to be punished for disagreeing with the Administration from his official government account is classic authoritarianism," observed Fred Wellman, a graduate of West Point and the Harvard Kennedy School, a 22-year combat veteran who is now the host of the podcast “On Democracy.”

Civil liberties and national security journalist Marcy Wheeler charged: "Secretary: You ALL WERE WARNED. You were warned repeatedly about the deaths you were going to cause. You own them."

Watch Summers' remarks in the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: Trump Appeared Unaware His Budget Bill Cuts $1T From Medicaid: Report

California Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom chastised President Donald Trump for claiming he recently spoke with him to discuss his decision to deploy 700 Marines to Los Angeles, in addition to the 4,000 National Guard troops he is sending. A portion of L.A. has been besieged by anti-deportation protests.

Asked by reporters in the Oval Office when the last time was that he spoke to the Governor, Trump paused before replying, "A day ago, called him up to tell him, got to do a better job."

"He's doing a bad job, causing a lot of death and a lot of potential death," Trump alleged (video below). There do not appear to have been any deaths due to the Los Angeles protests.

"If we didn't send out the National Guard, and last time we gave him a little additional help, you would have Los Angeles would be burning right now. Los Angeles would be not a lot different than what you saw, take place in California, and Los Angeles, just a little while ago."

READ MORE: ‘Show. Us. The. Plan.’: Pentagon Chief Ripped for Dodging Budget Details in Heated Hearing

But the California Democrat disputed Trump's claim.

"There was no call. Not even a voicemail," he wrote on social media.

"Americans should be alarmed that a President deploying Marines onto our streets doesn’t even know who he’s talking to," said Newsom, leveling charges that appeared to reinforce claims—primarily from the left—that President Trump’s mental competence is in question.

Newsom did speak with Trump, he said over the weekend, but the two did not discuss the National Guard.

"Newsom said he and Trump spoke late on Friday night—about 1.30 a.m. Saturday in D.C.—but Trump never brought up the National Guard," The Daily Beast reported on Monday.

“We talked for almost 20 minutes and he barely, this issue never came up,” Newsom said on MSNBC. “I tried to talk about L.A., he wanted to talk about all these other issues. We had a very decent conversation.”

READ MORE: ‘Subterfuge’: Noem Push a ‘Prelude’ to Invoking Insurrection Act, Experts Warn

But "Newsom slammed Donald Trump as a 'stone-cold liar' in an MSNBC interview on Sunday, insisting the president’s angry public posturing doesn’t match the tone he struck during a Friday phone call."

Others also weighed in.

"This is concerning. Who did Trump think he was speaking to?" asked The Lincoln Project.

"Two very different stories here," observed NBC News Senior National Political Reporter Natasha Korecki.

Watch the video below or at this link.

Reporter: When is last time you spoke with Governor Newsom?
President Trump: A day ago. Called him up to tell him, got to do a better job, he's doing a bad job. Causing a lot of death and potential death pic.twitter.com/BXa7PUUZCk
— Acyn (@Acyn) June 10, 2025

READ MORE: ‘Looking for an Excuse’: Trump Under Fire for Violent Slogan as He Sends Marines to LA

U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem reportedly requested that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth grant law enforcement powers—including the authority to detain and arrest—to the thousands of military troops President Donald Trump deployed to Los Angeles to suppress anti-deportation protests. Such powers are typically barred under federal law, and experts warn the move marks another step toward the administration invoking the Insurrection Act.

In a memo, Secretary Noem alleged protestors included "invasive, violent, insurrectionist mobs that seek to protect invaders and military aged males belonging to identified foreign terrorist organizations, and who seek to prevent the deportation of criminal aliens,” as the San Francisco Chronicle first reported.

"The military is generally barred under federal laws from taking part in domestic law enforcement. Noem’s request may be a step toward the administration sidestepping those laws by invoking the Insurrection Act, two legal experts said in interviews," the Chronicle added.

RELATED: ‘Looking for an Excuse’: Trump Under Fire for Violent Slogan as He Sends Marines to LA

Syracuse University Professor of Law Emeritus William Banks told the Chronicle that Noem's move is "a grave escalation" that "may presage the invocation of the Insurrection Act.” Professor Banks is an internationally recognized scholar on constitutional law, national security and counterterrorism law, as well as emergency powers and government surveillance and privacy, according to his biography.

Secretary Noem also requested “drone surveillance support” and weapons and logistics assistance. President Donald Trump has ordered 700 U.S. Marines and federalized up to 4,000 National Guard troops to go to Los Angeles to help tamp down the protests.

The Associated Press on Monday suggested the protest area itself was small: “Protests over the president’s immigration crackdown spared much of Los Angeles from violence. Weekend clashes swept through several downtown blocks and a handful of other places.”

Other experts weighed in as well.

READ MORE: House Republicans Quietly Slip Anti-LGBTQ ‘Religious Freedom’ Clause Into Funding Bill

Vermont Law and Graduate School professor emeritus Stephen Dycus, an expert in national security law and the Insurrection Act, told the Chronicle that "this could be viewed as a preparation for invoking the Insurrection Act, or it could be viewed as part of a larger effort to frighten people who otherwise would exercise their first amendment guarantee of free speech and protest.”

California Democratic state Senator Tom Umberg, a retired Army colonel and JAG officer, "said he found the letter’s requests alarming."

“It looks like a preparation for a military assault,” Umberg said. “This looks like a subterfuge to create some sort of rationale for some sort of invocation of the Insurrection Act.”

Attorney Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, an immigration expert and senior fellow at the American Immigration Council explained that the "reason that there is civil unrest in multiple cities throughout the country is because the Trump administration ordered ICE to engage in near-indiscriminate arrests, rounding up otherwise law-abiding people with no criminal records."

Political scientist Dr. Norman Ornstein, a contributing editor for the Atlantic, wrote, "this is a prelude to invoking the insurrection act and declaring martial law."

READ MORE: ‘Completely Obliterated’: Trump Claims LA Saved From Ruin by His National Guard Action

President Donald Trump has unveiled a new slogan amid the ongoing protests in Los Angeles, warning critics of his deportation policies, “If you spit, we will hit”—a statement critics say could incite violence. As tensions rise, Trump is escalating the federal response, expanding the National Guard presence and now ordering U.S. Marines into the city.

Although Trump has not cited any specific incidents of protesters spitting, critics warn his rhetoric risks escalating tensions and could invite increased use of force by law enforcement and U.S. military personnel—who were deployed to Los Angeles over the objections of Governor Gavin Newsom.

In a Monday afternoon Truth Social post, Trump wrote:

“'If they spit, we will hit.' This is a statement from the President of the United States concerning the catastrophic Gavin Newscum inspired Riots going on in Los Angeles. The Insurrectionists have a tendency to spit in the face of the National Guardsmen/women, and others. These Patriots are told to accept this, it’s just the way life runs. But not in the Trump Administration. IF THEY SPIT, WE WILL HIT, and I promise you they will be hit harder than they have ever been hit before. Such disrespect will not be tolerated!"

READ MORE: ‘Completely Obliterated’: Trump Claims LA Saved From Ruin by His National Guard Action

The President tested out a version of the phrase on Sunday (video below).

Trump told reporters, "we're gonna be watching it very closely. And when they spit at people—you know, they spit, that's their new thing—they spit and worse. You know what they throw at 'em, right? And when that happens, I have a little statement, and they say, 'they spit, we hit.'"

"And I told them, nobody's gonna spit on our police officers. Nobody's gonna spit on our military, which they do as a common thing. They get up to 'em this far away, and then they start spitting in their face. That happens, they get hit very hard."

On Monday afternoon, Trump also ordered 500-700 Marines to the city, in addition to the 1,000 National Guard troops previously dispatched.

Fox News Chief National Security Correspondent Jenifer Griffin added, "Use of Force rules are unclear but the Marines will not be in a law enforcement role. Not clear the rules for response if someone throws bottles or rocks at them."

READ MORE: House Republicans Quietly Slip Anti-LGBTQ ‘Religious Freedom’ Clause Into Funding Bill

Critics blasted the President.

"Cruelty isn’t a policy, it’s a warning sign," wrote investment banker Evaristus Odinikaeze on Sunday, in response to Trump's remarks. "'They spit, we hit' isn’t leadership, it’s incitement. Brutality, dehumanization, and escalation are the ethos of authoritarian regimes. This is far from law and order. It’s about power through fear. And we must resist this evil."

"Be very clear," warned Lincoln Project co-founder Jennifer Horn. "The intentions of the President of the United States would be served by real violence erupting in the streets of LA. That's why he uses language like 'insurrection' and phrases like 'if they spit, we hit.' He's just looking for an excuse."

Watch the video below or at this link.

Trump: When they spit at people— they spit, that’s their new thing—when that happens, I have a little statement: they spit, we hit.., if that happens, they get hit very hard pic.twitter.com/gYpwNz3F9O
— Acyn (@Acyn) June 8, 2025

READ MORE: ‘Absolutely Incredible’: Dr. Oz Slammed for Telling Medicaid Users to ‘Prove You Matter’

President Donald Trump’s nearly-unprecedented deployment of the National Guard to Los Angeles—deemed unconstitutional by California’s governor—has further inflamed tensions, critics and state officials say, as masked ICE agents detained individuals, many of whom have committed no crime beyond being undocumented.

But now, the Commander-in-Chief is claiming that protestors would have "completely obliterated" Los Angeles, a city of nearly 4 million people, and 18.5 million in the Greater Los Angeles area, had he not deployed the National Guard.

"We made a great decision in sending the National Guard to deal with the violent, instigated riots in California," Trump claimed Monday afternoon. "If we had not done so, Los Angeles would have been completely obliterated. The very incompetent 'Governor,' Gavin Newscum, and 'Mayor,' Karen Bass, should be saying, 'THANK YOU, PRESIDENT TRUMP, YOU ARE SO WONDERFUL. WE WOULD BE NOTHING WITHOUT YOU, SIR.' Instead, they choose to lie to the People of California and America by saying that we weren’t needed, and that these are 'peaceful protests.' Just one look at the pictures and videos of the Violence and Destruction tells you all you have to know. We will always do what is needed to keep our Citizens SAFE, so we can, together, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!"

READ MORE: House Republicans Quietly Slip Anti-LGBTQ ‘Religious Freedom’ Clause Into Funding Bill

California Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom plans to sue the Trump administration over the deployment of the National Guard, calling it “an illegal act, an immoral act, an unconstitutional act,” the Associated Press reported.

But the AP suggested the protest area was small: "Protests over the president’s immigration crackdown spared much of Los Angeles from violence. Weekend clashes swept through several downtown blocks and a handful of other places."

Earlier in the day, Trump called the protestors "professional agitators," "insurrectionists," and "bad people who "should be in jail.”

The last time a U.S. president deployed the National Guard without a governor's permission was in 1965, to "protect a civil rights march in Alabama," the AP also reported, citing the Brennan Center for Justice.

Trump reportedly "invoked his Title 10 authority to federalize and deploy 2,000 National Guard in California and did not invoke the Insurrection Act," according to CBS News' Ed O'Keefe.

READ MORE: ‘Absolutely Incredible’: Dr. Oz Slammed for Telling Medicaid Users to ‘Prove You Matter’

Former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance, a professor of law, responded: "If accurate, this is almost certainly a conflict with the Posse Comitatus Act, which prohibits the use of the military for domestic law enforcement, including the National Guard if they are federalized."

On Sunday, Trump told reporters "we're going to have troops everywhere." Asked what the "bar" is on determining when the military should be deployed to a U.S. city, and if he would use legal authority, Trump declared, "The bar is what I think it is."

National security and civil liberties journalist Marcy Wheeler remarked in response, "he is creating the mob."

Watch the video below or at this link.

Trump: Well, we're going to have troops everywhere.
Reporter: What’s the bar for sending in the Marines
Trump: The bar is what I think it is. pic.twitter.com/XUBX9hEZJU
— Acyn (@Acyn) June 8, 2025

READ MORE: ‘He. Is. Lying.’: GOP Senator Ripped for Spinning Medicaid Cuts as ‘Transitioning’

House Republicans have inserted anti-LGBTQ language into a $66 billion must-pass funding bill for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, effectively granting civil immunity under federal law to individuals and organizations that discriminate against same-sex couples—by citing a religious or moral belief that marriage should be limited to one man and one woman. It also bans the federal government from taking a range of actions against those who hold and act on anti-same-sex marriage beliefs.

Section 544 bans the use of federal funds to take any "discriminatory action" against someone who cites their "sincerely held religious belief" or "moral conviction" that marriage is only "a union of one man and one woman."

A portion of the provision exactly matches language U.S. Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) urged the House Appropriations Committee to include in 2023 legislation. Rep. Roy cited praise from anti-LGBTQ hate group leader Tony Perkins and other anti-LGBTQ activists in his press release urging inclusion of the amendment in a 2023 bill. It is not known who drafted or approved the current 2025 provision.

READ MORE: ‘Absolutely Incredible’: Dr. Oz Slammed for Telling Medicaid Users to ‘Prove You Matter’

Journalist Jamie Dupree, who writes Regular Order at Substack, first reported on the provision in the DHS funding bill.

The language could prohibit the government from withholding federal funds from a federally-funded religious school that fired a teacher who supports same-sex marriage. It could block the IRS from revoking the tax-exempt status of organizations that promote the belief that marriage is only between one man and one woman. It could ban the federal government from taking action against a hospital that receives federal funds if it refused certain services in some cases.

While the language is not found in The Heritage Foundation's Project 2025, some of the core principles in Section 544 echo its recommendations.

Project 2025 calls on the federal government to "Protect faith-based grant recipients from religious liberty violations and maintain a biblically based, social science–reinforced definition of marriage and family," and "Provide robust protections for religious employers," while it denounces "the bullying LGBTQ+ agenda."

READ MORE: ‘He. Is. Lying.’: GOP Senator Ripped for Spinning Medicaid Cuts as ‘Transitioning’

On a day dominated by an all-out clash between the billionaire President and the world’s richest federal contractor—marked by personal insults, threats of contract cancellations, and even a call for impeachment—Vice President JD Vance was conspicuously absent. Until the very end.

Musk answered "Yes" when a right-wing influencer wrote, "Trump should be impeached and JD Vance should replace him."

Trump threatened he would cancel the federal government's billions of dollars in contracts with the man who spent much of the year literally by his side, Elon Musk:

“The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon’s Governmental Subsidies and Contracts."

READ MORE: ‘Absolutely Incredible’: Dr. Oz Slammed for Telling Medicaid Users to ‘Prove You Matter’

Musk charged that Trump was in the Epstein files:

"Time to drop the really big bomb: @realDonaldTrump is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public. Have a nice day, DJT!"

Trump alleged that "Elon was 'wearing thin,' I asked him to leave, I took away his EV Mandate that forced everyone to buy Electric Cars that nobody else wanted (that he knew for months I was going to do!), and he just went CRAZY!"

And so it went.

The Vice President was all but silent throughout.

Until 10:28 PM, when—as the battle had wound down and something of a “truce” was in the works, reportedly after an Oval Office meeting—Vance finally broke his silence.

READ MORE: ‘He. Is. Lying.’: GOP Senator Ripped for Spinning Medicaid Cuts as ‘Transitioning’

"President Trump has done more than any person in my lifetime to earn the trust of the movement he leads. I'm proud to stand beside him."

Political observers blasted and mocked the Vice President.

"Nothing says courage like tweeting support for your boss at 10pm after watching him get his a-- handed to him by a weirdo billionaire all day," wrote Democratic strategist and former Harris advisor Mike Nellis.

"Ooh, I can just feel the power of love here. It’s just overwhelming," snarked attorney George Conway.

"You know the s--- is hitting the fan when a Vice President has to send out something like this. It’s like we are watching an episode of Veep, just not as funny," said Washburn University School of Law Professor Joe Mastrosimone.

"LOL," mocked conservative Jonah Goldberg, editor-in-chief of The Dispatch. "Congrats to the team for coming up with this. Technically true if you define 'the movement that he leads' as the coterie of sycophants and cultists who trust Trump to be Trump. Otherwise this is a---covering gibberish."

But expert Latino GOP political consultant Mike Madrid had a different take on the Vance statement: "They’re scared," he wrote.

READ MORE: Trump’s DOT Is Spending Millions to Investigate If DEI Is to Blame for Plane Crashes

Image via Reuters

In late January, just hours after the deadliest U.S. aviation disaster in more than 20 years—and as families and the nation were still grieving—President Donald Trump, without evidence, blamed Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) for the crash that killed 67 people near Washington’s Reagan National Airport.

"Trump blamed former President Joe Biden’s administration for encouraging the Federal Aviation Administration to recruit workers 'who suffer severe intellectual disabilities, psychiatric problems and other mental and physical conditions under a diversity and inclusion hiring initiative,'" the Associated Press reported. "He added that the program allowed for the hiring of people with hearing and vision issues as well as paralysis, epilepsy and 'dwarfism.'"

The President provided no proof that unqualified air traffic controllers were to blame, or even that any air traffic controllers who were not qualified had been hired, although "he acknowledged that there was as yet no indication that air traffic controllers at Reagan National Airport made any mistakes."

READ MORE: ‘Made Government Newark Airport’: Moskowitz Mocks GOP, Trump Failures

On the first day of his second term in office, Trump signed numerous executive orders, some focused on DEI, including one titled, "Ending Radical And Wasteful Government DEI Programs And Preferencing."

Now, the Trump administration's Department of Transportation, under Secretary Sean Duffy, is spending over $2 million to investigate whether DEI causes plane crashes.

The Atlantic's Isaac Stanley-Becker reports he has "obtained the 'scope of work' document" for the multi-million dollar investigation. That document "is marked 'privileged' and 'confidential' and has not been previously reported. It shows how the president’s musings—his accusations, he said at the time, were based on 'very strong opinions and ideas'—translate into taxpayer-funded government action."

It appears that Trump's baseless allegations likely will be determined to be just that.

"Contrary to what Trump may hope," Stanley-Becker reveals, "it’s not expected to find that programs aimed at ensuring representation for women and people of color are responsible for this year’s string of aviation disasters, including the January crash at Reagan airport, which killed 67 people and prompted Trump’s tirade against DEI."

"That determination, several air-traffic controllers told me, hardly required a multimillion-dollar probe."

READ MORE: ‘Vindictive Erasure’: Hegseth Ripped for Pride Month Order to Rename USNS Harvey Milk

Image via Reuters

U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene is doubling down after admitting she didn’t fully read the House GOP’s sweeping budget bill—despite now emphatically opposing its AI provisions. The outspoken Georgia Republican faced widespread ridicule Tuesday, as House Democrats blasted her for ignoring their earlier warnings about controversial measures in the legislation strongly backed by President Donald Trump and Speaker Mike Johnson.

"Here's a lesson for us all," Greene declared in a speech on the House floor Wednesday. "No matter what political party holds office and is in charge, we should all watch carefully the bills that we pass."

Greene expressed strong disapproval over the provisions in the so-called "One Big Beautiful Bill" that bans states from regulating artificial intelligence for ten years, claiming such a regulation would "destroy federalism."

READ MORE: Young Men in Crisis Feel Ignored by ‘Weak’ Dems, See GOP As Stronger: New Study

"With this warning, I urge all of my colleagues that when the House gets to vote on the one big, beautiful bill again after it leaves the Senate, that we make sure we protect a federalism and at the same time urge our colleagues in the Senate to pull this clause out of the one big, beautiful bill."

In a TV spot on Wednesday, Greene also told NewsNation that she is being "very transparent and honest" about not reading that provision.

Some of Greene's Democratic colleagues continued to chastise her for discovering the importance of reading bills in full.

READ MORE: ‘Vindictive Erasure’: Hegseth Ripped for Pride Month Order to Rename USNS Harvey Milk

U.S. Rep. Sean Casten (D-IL) wrote up this scenario mocking Greene:

"Surgeon: 'In hindsight, I should have washed my hands' Pilot: 'In hindsight, I shouldn’t have put tape over all the dials' Olympian: 'In hindsight, the pre-race martinis were a bad idea.'"

Other critics blasted her as well.

"Did she not read the briefing docs; Or did her LD [legislative director] not provide any?" asked The Lincoln Project's communications director Gregory Minchak. "So it's either she runs a terrible office or she's a terrible member. Either way she's telling on herself."

Watch the video below or at this link.

Greene: Here's a lesson for us all, no matter what political party holds office and is in charge, we should all watch carefully the bills that we pass pic.twitter.com/uUoPmXRtIE
— Acyn (@Acyn) June 4, 2025

READ MORE: Trump Reportedly Furious at Amy Coney Barrett Ahead of Big Supreme Court Rulings

President Donald Trump is facing sharp criticism over his sweeping, multi-front attack on the U.S. Court of International Trade, an influential conservative legal activist who shaped his first-term judicial picks, and the Federalist Society — with one prominent law professor calling it a clash between “MAGA men” and conservatives.

"MAGA men and conservatives aren't the same. The food fight on the right is now in the open," wrote Professor Richard Painter, the former Bush 43 chief White House ethics lawyer who is now a political independent.

President Trump had attacked the three-judge panel on the International Trade Court, which blocked almost all of his "Liberation Day" tariffs, declaring that presidents cannot arbitrarily declare emergencies. That ruling, currently on hold, was decided by judges appointed by Ronald Reagan, Barack Obama, and Trump himself.

READ MORE: ‘We Are All Going to Die’: GOP Senator Shrugs Off Possible Deaths From Medicaid Cuts

"Where do these initial three Judges come from?" Trump asked. "How is it possible for them to have potentially done such damage to the United States of America? Is it purely a hatred of 'TRUMP?' What other reason could it be?"

"I was new to Washington," he continued in his rant, posted Thursday evening, "and it was suggested that I use The Federalist Society as a recommending source on Judges. I did so, openly and freely, but then realized that they were under the thumb of a real 'sleazebag' named Leonard Leo, a bad person who, in his own way, probably hates America, and obviously has his own separate ambitions."

Professor Painter observed that if President Trump "is angry that he can't impose tariffs (i.e. taxes) without consent of the legislature, instead of blaming Leonard Leo, he should blame the drafters of the Constitution (1789), or for that matter the drafters of Magna Carta (1215), which says essentially the same thing."

Painter also explained that this "dispute is over whether a 'conservative' judge should allow the President to impose tariffs, a form of taxation, without consent from Congress. Conservatives, and others who understand the Constitution, know that to impose taxes the President needs consent from Congress."

READ MORE: ‘No!’: GOP Rep. Repeatedly Booed and Shouted Down at Raucous Iowa Town Hall

Constituents at U.S. Senator Joni Ernst's town hall on Friday morning yelled that Americans will die if President Donald Trump's bill—which cuts $800 billion from Medicaid and SNAP and will force anther $500 billion in cuts to Medicaid—becomes law.

"People will die," an audience member yelled.

"People are not—" Ernst responded, before declaring, "Well, we all are going to die."

As the audience shouted down her response, Ernst did not retract but rather, replied: "For heaven's sakes, folks."

READ MORE: Major Shift in GOP Views on Same-Sex Marriage: Report

Ernst had just chastised her constituents, saying, "illegals that are receiving Medicaid benefits."

Clip's of her remarks flew across social media.

Critics blasted Senator Ernst's remarks.

"GOP 2026 slogan just dropped," mocked Justin Kanew, political activist and founder of the progressive media outlet The Tennessee Holler.

"This is a moment that will play over and over again through the next 17 months," remarked Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee communications director Maeve Coyle.

"Compelling midterm message!" snarked a Democratic National Committee Senior Advisor, Tim Hogan.

READ MORE: ‘Coup’: Trump Expected to Seek SCOTUS Block as Officials Attack Judicial Branch

"This is the Republican health care agenda: indifference to the lives of working families," wrote Protect Our Care, a healthcare advocacy nonprofit organization.

The liberal super PAC American Bridge was among those who posted a clip of Senator Ernst's comments.

Watch the video below or at this link:

"Well, we all are going to die"#IASen Joni Ernst shocks her own constituents, dismissing concerns that supporting deep cuts to Medicaid and other services will cause people to die if they can't get the care they need. pic.twitter.com/VqzY3Z1zYf
— American Bridge 21st Century (@American_Bridge) May 30, 2025

READ MORE: ‘Meltdown’: Trump Fumes When Confronted With ‘Always Chickens Out’ Claim