Frontpage news and politics

'Terrible judgment': Conservative slams Trump-appointed judge for attending his rally

President Donald Trump's rally in Mount Pocono, Pennsylvania on Tuesday had one notable guest in attendance — Third Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Emil Bove. Now, multiple legal experts are questioning why a member of the judiciary was in the audience for a rabidly partisan event.

The New York Times reported Wednesday that Bove – who was one of Trump's personal attorneys before ascending to a top position in Trump's Department of Justice and eventually a judicial post – has been subjected to an official ethics complaint for attending the rally. While Bove didn't speak or stand behind Trump during his speech, he was spotted in the crowd by an MS NOW reporter, and told them he was "just here as a citizen coming to watch the president speak."

However, Trump's rally pivoted sharply from its stated topic of addressing the high cost of living to the president's typical rally fare, like railing against immigrants from underdeveloped countries. During one part of the speech, Trump attacked Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and repeated a debunked conspiracy theory while suggesting the four-term congresswoman and naturalized U.S. citizen should be deported.

In the complaint, which was filed by activist Gabe Roth of the group Save The Court, Bove is accused of violating rules all judges are bound to follow, which includes a prohibition on anything that could be seen as an "appearance of impropriety," and a ban on "political activity." Third Circuit Chief Judge Michael A. Chagares (an appointee of George W. Bush) will now decide whether to dismiss the complaint or appoint a committee to investigate it further, which could potentially result in Bove being formally censured or not being assigned to any new cases for a period of time.

"This was a highly charged, highly political event that no federal judge should have been within shouting distance of," Roth's complaint read.

Retired U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel (an appointee of Bill Clinton) told the Times he agreed with the assessment of the rally as a "political event." He added that Bove being in the crowd gave "at least the appearance of partiality, particularly given what the president said."

"I can’t understand how he could possibly think it appropriate to go there," conservative legal commentator Edward Whelan told the Times. "You can argue about whether the rules clearly prohibit what he did, but he showed terrible judgment."

Click here to read the Times' full report (subscription required).

Trump actively undermining GOP's efforts to tout his health by napping in public: analysis

MS NOW Producer Steve Benen recently observed that despite the Republican Party's effort to tout President Donald Trump’s supposed health and vigor, the elderly president is doing his best to undermine his own party.

“Two weeks ago, the [New York] Times published a report on the Republican’s effort to ‘project round-the-clock energy, virility and physical stamina,’ which is starting to give way to an awkward new reality,” Benen said. “In the days that followed, the president appeared to fall asleep in a variety of official settings. This is, to put it lightly, an unusually sensitive subject for Trump, and given his online harangue, it seems the Times touched a nerve.”

It did not help that the Times wrote that Trump, 79, “is the oldest person to be elected to the presidency, and he is aging,” followed by an analysis of Trump’s schedule proving that nearly a year into his second term, Americans see Trump less than they used to.

“Trump has fewer public events on his schedule and is traveling domestically much less than he did by this point during his first year in office, in 2017, although he is taking more foreign trips. He also keeps a shorter public schedule than he used to. Most of his public appearances fall between noon and 5 p.m., on average,” the Times reported.

This put the Times at the top of Trump’s media enemies list, said Benen, adding that the president even went so far as to claim that broadcasters who air evening news programs “are doing something “illegal” if the White House disapproves of their coverage.”

Trump now says on Truth Social that reports about his own aging are ‘seditious, perhaps even treasonous.’

“After all of the work I have done with Medical Exams, Cognitive Exams, and everything else, I actually believe it’s seditious, perhaps even treasonous, for The New York Times, and others, to consistently do FAKE reports in order to libel and demean ‘THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES,’” Trump wrote.

“It’s insane for a sitting American president to equate journalism with sedition,” said Benen, but he added that he’s “also struck by the broader context” of Trump undermining his party’s messaging on health and virility by grabbing naps in very public places.

Read the MS NOW report at this link.

Federal grand jury keeps rejecting Trump's Justice Department

U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro is no stranger to losing grand jury cases, but now that federal agents have moved into Chicago, prosecutors there are being blocked from prosecutions, too.

The Chicago Sun-Times reported Wednesday that a federal grand jury has turned down another case connected to the so-called "Midway Blitz."

The first time it happened in November, a magistrate judge said that until recently, he'd only ever heard of a grand jury rejecting a prosecution once in the "early part of this century." Now it's happened three times in the past few months.

Nathan Griffin, who is a manager of the Lake View comedy club, the Laugh Factory, was accused of assaulting a U.S. Border Patrol agent who was involved in the operation. He was accused of trying to shut a car door when the agent was getting out of the car.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Snell confirmed his loss, but blamed it on U.S. Magistrate Judge Keri Holleb Hotaling, saying that she urged them to vote "no bill." During the Wednesday hearing, she dismissed the charges against Griffin "without prejudice." It means that prosecutors could continue to go after the man, but Snell said he was backing down.

While grand juries have cleared three people, at least 13 defendants have had charges against them dropped that are connected to the "Operation Midway Blitz" efforts.

Thus far, prosecutors have not secured a single conviction of individuals arrested for charges connected to "Midway Blitz," the report said.

Read the full report here.

Lauren Boebert accused of violating campaign finance laws to go on date with Kid Rock

Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo) is now in hot water after her latest campaign finance filings show questionable expenditures that are believed to be unrelated to official campaign business.

According to a Wednesday report in the Daily Beast, the 38 year-old Colorado Republican is accused of spending campaign money to see 54 year-old Kid Rock (whose real name is Robert James Ritchie) at his Rock N Rodeo in May of this year at the Professional Bull Riding Championship World Finals at AT&T Stadium in Arlington, Texas. Federal Election Commission filings show that three days after the event, Boebert spent $2,455.83 at "Live by Loews," which is an Arlington hotel. She also spent $925 on "event tickets" at AT&T Stadium.

If Boebert did spend campaign money at Kid Rock's event, that would be illegal under federal campaign finance laws, which prohibit the use of donor funds for personal use. Trisha Calvarese, a Democrat running against Boebert in 2026, told the Daily Mail that the expenditures are "even more proof she needs a new job."

"Americans are tired of the circus they’re seeing from Washington, with politicians spending more time focusing on flying around going to concerts than passing solutions to lower costs," Eileen Laubacher, another Democratic candidate in Boebert's district, told the outlet.

Boebert stoked rumors that she was dating the singer earlier this year after the two were seen talking at one of President Donald Trump's second inauguration parties. The two were also seen getting into a cab together at approximately 2:30 AM.

"Lauren was totally transfixed by the rock star, yapping away, doing a little dance, and clapping like she was front row at his concert — basically giving Kid Rock all the hype he needed," gossip outlet TMZ reported at the time.

Both Boebert and Kid Rock are recently out of long relationships, with the Colorado congresswoman having finalized her divorce in October of 2023, and Kid Rock ending his engagement to fiancee Audrey Berry in February of this year — roughly a month after he was seen in Boebert''s company.

Click here to read the Beast's article in its entirety (subscription required).


Pentagon insiders say his war threats have no teeth

In his interview with Politico on Monday, President Donald Trump threatened Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and wouldn't rule out sending American soldiers to fight in a ground war in the country. But according to six GOP lawmakers, Pentagon officials and White House advisers, the threats are empty.

According to a Wednesday report, the lawmakers and top officials told Politico that for all of Trump's tough talk, there's no real action behind it.

One person close to the White House and familiar with Trump's thinking said that it's nothing more than "a designed strategy to pressure Maduro to leave."

“This has a 99.9 percent chance of not happening,” said a second person close to the White House. “But leaving that .01 percent chance on the table will bring people to the table.”

“This is not the Monroe Doctrine 2.0, this is like the Monroe Doctrine 5.0,” claimed Steve Bannon, who worked briefly for Trump's first administration but remains an ally and influencer.

Trump recently moved the USS Gerald Ford, a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, to the Caribbean, where it sat off the coast of the U.S. Virgin Islands for a week. It has since left the island of St. Thomas and headed southeast.

Bannon said that this naval buildup puts “additional pressure on Maduro to surrender and do what Trump wants him to do, which is to go to Turkey, leave the country. Because I think the negotiations are kind of down to that — where this guy ends up [and] most of the stuff there now is for pressure.”

Politico reported that the Ford is "capable of launching nearly 200 Tomahawk missiles at targets on land in the region, according to a recent Center for Strategic and International Studies analysis."

But putting troops on the ground is another matter entirely.

“The United States does not have the ground forces needed for an invasion,” retired Marine Col. Mark Cancian told Politico. "The Venezuelan ground forces number some 90,000 including the army, marines and National Guard. The United States has only 2,200 Marines [nearby], and there’s no movement to reinforce them.”

"I don’t think we need them right now,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) of ground troops.

“I’m not a supporter of ground troops,” Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) agreed in an interview on Tuesday. “I’m not a supporter of regime change forced by the United States. I mean, if Maduro decides to go of his own accord, fine. But I’ve never been a supporter of regime change.”

One Defense Department official explained, “This isn’t something you can just dial up and go.”

“The Trump administration was hoping to scare Maduro into departing Venezuela, but if that doesn’t work, the remaining military options are unappealing,” a second former defense official agreed. “And if Maduro does indeed depart, by choice or by force, then it leaves open the question of whether U.S. forces will be needed to secure the country, and for how long.”

Trump spent years campaigning by promising "America First" policies and pledging "We are ending the era of endless wars."

Trump announced in June that he believed it was not the job of Americans “to solve ancient conflicts in faraway lands that many people have not even heard of."

Read the full report here.

New email trove reveals Epstein’s ruthless 'handbook' to stay in Wall Street’s good graces

Many of the documents from trafficker Jeffrey Epstein's estate have revealed shocking ties to top Wall Street executives previously unknown. However, a new collection of documents shows that Epstein's hands reached much further than initially thought.

Five reporters authored a detailed piece for Bloomberg digging through the recent trove of emails that provide a glimpse inside Epstein's work as an investor and financial adviser. The piece is the seventh in a series of stories as the team at Bloomberg sorts its way through the release of emails.

Max Abelson, Harry Wilson, Jason Leopold, Jeff Kao and Surya Mattu revealed that the Epstein didn't only used his leverage over people when his financial gambles flopped. He also used it to score relationships with some of the most "sought-after hedge funds" like Renaissance Technologies, "whose reputation for success is almost mythical," wrote Leopold in an X thread.

Once Epstein’s abuse of teenage girls became public, Wall Street tycoons still stayed close to him. He kept ties to big names in global finance, including billionaire Carl Icahn’s firm, and while he pushed prosecutors for a lenient plea deal, he was also threatening to sue Bear Stearns and its top executives over heavy financial losses, Leopold continued in the thread.

The one observation he had is that "the email cache doesn’t solve a central Epstein enigma: How did a former math teacher without a college degree turn himself into a globetrotting money manager with his own island?"

What it does show, however, is that he was friendly when it suited him, aggressive when needed, and it was often effective enough to score influence and make money.

Epstein "found the right doors to banks, brokerages, billionaires and investments. When something went wrong, he had a playbook to handle it, often ruthlessly," wrote Leopold.

When things took a turn legally, the emails show that many of his elite Wall Street pals rushed to help jumped to help keep the cash flowing.

Thanks to Epstein, Bear's investment fund scored "tens of millions of dollars."

Epstein also "helped oversee one of Bear CEO Jimmy Cayne’s trusts," Leopold said of the documents. "When Bear’s stock hit $100 for the first time, Epstein bought 100 shares and presented them to Cayne as a gift."

When the subprime mortgage market crashed and Bear’s hedge funds — where Epstein had money — collapsed, a lawyer representing other wealthy investors invited Epstein to join a quiet plan to vote out the funds’ directors, install an ally, and investigate the debacle to claw back losses.

After Bear Stearns fell apart the following March, Epstein prepared to sue the firm and several top executives, casting himself as a victim in a June 2008 draft lawsuit.

In any given week, a deal sent Epstein’s way might be for him personally or for billionaire Les Wexner, the force behind Victoria’s Secret — and even Epstein was sometimes "hesitated to say what went where," characterized Leopold.

Read the full report of the documents.

'Even Fox News can’t spin' Trump’s economic flop: analysis

It's no coincidence that President Donald Trump chose Mount Pocono, Pennsylvania for a MAGA rally on Tuesday, December 9. Pennsylvania, as Democratic strategist James Carville famously noted back in the late 1980s, is a complex and volatile swing state that can go either Democrat or Republican. And Trump has a history of both winning and losing in the Keystone State, which he carried in 2016 and 2024 but lost to Democrat Joe Biden in 2020.

The Mount Pocono event marked Trump's return to MAGA rallies after putting them on the backburner during his second presidency. But Salon's Sophia Tesfaye, in a biting article published on December 10, attacks the Mount Pocono gathering as a "flop."

"Donald Trump's midterm reboot was supposed to be the triumphant return of a political heavyweight," Tesfaye explains. "After Democrats saw impressive gains in off-year elections across the country in November, White House advisers promised the president would return to the campaign trail to storm the 2026 midterms with the same 'fire and dominance' he claimed to wield in 2024 — infamous weave and all. But if his Mount Pocono, Pennsylvania rally is any preview of what the GOP should expect, Trump's promise should be read as a threat. Far from a comeback, his return rally was a flop."

Trump aggressively defended his economic policy during the December 9 rally, which, Tesfaye emphasizes, suffered from both poor attendance and bad messaging.

"Trump's team clearly hoped the blue-collar community in one of the country's most important swing states would give him a friendly launchpad," the Salon journalist writes. "While I expected a crowd of a few thousand with the nostalgic sound of MAGA chants echoing off metal bleachers, I tuned into Fox News Tuesday evening to find the president in a conference center ballroom inside a local casino that appeared to hold, generously, 200 people. And even that small crowd seemed hesitant, almost resigned, as Trump ranted for nearly an hour."

Tesfaye adds, "Fox News, of course, dutifully avoided any wide shots. But the truth was clear on screen: The MAGA magic had vanished."

According to Tesfaye, Trump's "gaslighting" on the economy during his Pennsylvania rally did nothing to persuade swing voters.

"The Trump of 2026 is not the Trump of 2024," Tesfaye observes. "The president is clearly tired, angry, confused and incapable of adjusting to a country in economic crisis. Even Fox News can’t spin this."

Sophia Tesfaye's full article for Salon is available at this link.


GOP strategist: Trump’s 'meandering' PA speech reveals 'confusion and mental weakness'

President Donald Trump made a rare appearance at a Pennsylvania event on Tuesday to convince voters of his economic agenda, but according to one Republican strategist, his "meandering" speech only showed that his "confusion and mental weakness" are getting worse.

Trump's Pennsylvania speech was part of an effort by the GOP to have Trump campaign more for the party ahead of the 2026 midterms, where they face strong headwinds from Democrats over voter discontent over affordability. Trump is also attempting to convince voters that his economic agenda remains sound, and that concerns about the cost of living are a "con job" against him by his political enemies.

The speech on Tuesday might have done more damage, according to GOP insider and Hacks on Tap podcast co-host Mike Murphy, by highlighting another major issue turning voters away from him: his advanced age.

"A few hours after we discussed on [Hacks on Tap] why Trump has cut back rallies so much, it was pretty evident at his event today in PA just why,” Murphy wrote in a post to X on Wednesday. “Meandering, more confusion and mental weakness than usual,” he went on. “Even a bit shall we say, low-energy. Weaker optics too. He’s clearing [sic] fading.”

Murphy previously worked as a strategist for prominent Republicans like John McCain, Jeb Bush and Arnold Schwarzenegger.

In a report about the Tuesday speech, The Daily Beast observed that "Trump suffered from slowed speech, trouble finding his words, repetition and veering off on wild tangents — all signs that mental health experts have lately pointed to as evidence he is clearly feeling his age."

Trump has lashed out against the increasing press coverage of his seemingly deteriorating physical state. In a late-night Truth Social posting spree after his Pennsylvania visit, he accused a New York Times article on the topic of being "seditious" and potentially "treasonous." He also claimed to have passed more cognitive tests than any other president, and also seemed to describe a recent test as being monitored by a roomful of doctors at Walter Reed Medical Center, all of which raised more alarms than it quieted.

"I guess the president just announced he recently took his latest in a series of cognitive tests, this one in front of a room full of medical personnel observing him?" MS NOW host Chris Hayes wrote in a post to social media.

White House official admits Trump was wrong on Putin — and says he knows it

When President Donald Trump came into office, Secretary of State Marco Rubio counseled him not to believe Vladimir Putin. Now, according to Semafor,Trump realizes Rubio was right all along.

Semafor reported Wednesday that a top official to the White House said that Trump may not admit it, but he knows he was wrong.

“A lot of that has obviously turned out to be true,” the official said of Rubio’s doubts about Putin, Semafor said. “And the president has recognized that … ‘[Putin will] talk nicely to me on the phone, but then he’ll go bomb the shit out of Ukraine that very same night.’”

During his 2024 campaign, Trump promised Americans he would end the war between Ukraine and Russia, perhaps even before taking the oath of office.

“Before I even arrive at the Oval Office, I will have the disastrous war between Russia and Ukraine settled. It will be settled quickly. Quickly. I will get the problem solved and I will get it solved in rapid order and it will take me no longer than one day. I know exactly what to say to each of them," Trump proclaimed in a March 4, 2023 speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference.

The rhetoric continued as he repeated it again just a few weeks before the election.

“I had a lot of people from, very religious people, come up to me tonight, from Ukraine, and they’re asking me for help. So, so sad to see so many people have been killed in Ukraine, and we’re going to get it — we’re going to get it settled up if we win. As I’m president-elect, I’m going to get that done. I’m going to do it before we ever get there," Trump said at the Al Smith charity dinner in New York on October 17, 2024.

CNN captured 53 similar comments Trump made while running for office between Nov. 2022 and Nov. 2024.

Despite Trump realizing Rubio was right about Putin, the president pushed forward with a peace plan that would deliver on many elements Russia wanted, Reuters reported last month.

As of this week, Trump is still attacking Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, alleging that he hadn't even read the peace plan proposal. On Tuesday, the pressure campaign continued as the U.S. tried to convince Zelenskyy to approve the proposal, Axios reported.

Zelenskyy is now slated to release his edits to the peace plan on Wednesday.

Rubio, Semafor explained, may have been right, but he must tread carefully.

"So, even as MAGA descends into an identity crisis, he’s managing to stay mostly on its good side," the report said.

Read the full piece here.

Judge issues sharp warning as feds claim 'shocking' right to 'a perpetual police force'

In a court ruling posted on Wednesday, U.S. District Court Judge Charles Breyer ruled that the National Guard soldiers must leave Los Angeles. But his comments on the ruling include a sharp warning.

Ryan Goodman, a legal scholar and editor-in-chief of JustSecurity.org, highlighted a key excerpt on page 10:

"Indeed, at the motion hearing, Defendants confirmed their position that, after an initial federalization, all extensions of federalization orders are utterly unreviewable, forever. That is shocking. Adopting Defendants’ interpretation of Section 12406 would permit a president to create a perpetual police force comprised of state troops, so long as they were first federalized lawfully. Such a scenario would validate the Founders’ 'widespread fear [of] a national standing Army,' which they believed 'posed an intolerable threat to individual liberty and to the sovereignty of the separate States,'" the judge wrote.

Goodman said that the case has "national implications."

The Atlantic's ‪Quinta Jurecic called it a "drops mic" ruling.

Sorting through the ruling, legal analyst Joyce Vance also highlighted key points in the judge's decision.

Alarm as Trump admits to 3 cognitive tests monitored by room of doctors in late-night screed

During a lengthy Tuesday night, December 9 post on his Truth Social platform, President Donald Trump bragged that "There has never been a President that has worked as hard as me" — noting that he has undergone three cognitive tests.

Trump's post comes at a time when his physical and mental well being are the subject of countless media reports. During former President Joe Biden's four years in the White House, Trump relentlessly mocked him as "Sleepy Joe." Now, Trump is being bombarded with reports that he is falling asleep during Cabinet meetings.

Trump pushed back against those reports in his Truth Social post, writing, "I go out of my way to do long, thorough and very boring Medical Examinations at the Great Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, seen and supervised by top doctors, all of whom have given me PERFECT Marks. — Some have even said they have never seen such Strong Results. I do these Tests because I owe it to our Country. In addition to the Medical, I have done something that no other President has done, on three separate occasions, the last one being recently, by taking what is known as a Cognitive Examination, something which few people would be able to do very well, including those working at The New York Times, and I ACED all three of them in front of large numbers of doctors and experts, most of whom I do not know."

Trump's post is receiving a lot of scrutiny on X.com, formerly Twitter.

MS NOW's Chris Hayes tweeted, "I guess the president just announced he recently took his latest in a series of cognitive tests, this one in front of a room full of medical personnel observing him?"

Other journalists weighed in as well.

Roger Sollenberger, formerly of the Daily Beast, tweeted, "Wonder what kind of conversation we’d be having if everyone in America were forced to read every word of this post out loud, all the way through."

The 74's Jim Roberts wrote, #25A."

TikTok News' John Aravosi commented, "This pretty much confirms Trump is having serious health problems. The first part of the tweet is a feint. The main purpose was to counter the rumors of his failing health. And mentioning that he had to go for three cognitive tests? What healthy senior has to go for three cognitive tests? I don’t think my parents ever went for one, and they lived to be 87 and 94. Everything Trump says is a lie. This is a confession."

Former Rep. Justin Amash (R-Michigan), a libertarian/conservative Never Trumper, posted, "If anyone else wrote something like this, it would be universally acknowledged that the person is mentally unstable."

Economist Paul Krugman torches fatal flaws of Trump’s losing 'message'

President Donald Trump is angrily lashing out at Democrats for their heavy focus on inflation, insisting that "affordability" is a Democratic "hoax." Trump is also saying that voters should be thanking him because of how much he has improved the economy.

But liberal economist Paul Krugman, in a Substack column posted on December 10, argues that Trump has a losing message on the economy.

"Trump and his minions seem to have come around to admitting that Americans are, in fact, unhappy with the state of the economy," Krugman writes. "But if the economy is A+++++, why don't people see it? The problem can't possibly lie with him — so it must lie with you. 'The American people don't know how good they have it'…. Anyway, I may not be a political strategist, but I don't think 'You're all a bunch of ingrates' is a winning message. It was, however, really the only message Trump could deliver, given his utter lack of empathy or humility."

Krugman adds, "At this point, I could bombard you with a lot of data showing that the economy is not, in fact, A+++++. But it isn't a disaster area, at least not yet. So why are Americans feeling so down? The main culprit is Trump himself."

The economist and former New York Times columnist notes that Trump aggressively campaigned on lowering prices in 2024 — only to chastise voters for being worried about inflation now.

"First, during the 2024 campaign, Trump repeatedly promised to bring consumer prices way down beginning on 'Day 1,'" Krugman writes. "We're now 11 months in, prices are still rising, and voters who believed him feel, with reason, that they were lied to…. Second, Trump would be in much better political shape right now if he had basically continued (former President Joe) Biden's policies, with only a few cosmetic changes…. Instead, he brought chaos: Massive and massively unpopular tariffs, DOGE disruptions, masked ICE agents grabbing people off the street, saber-rattling and war crimes in the Caribbean."

Krugman continues, "Many swing voters, I believe, supported Trump out of nostalgia for the relative calm that prevailed before COVID struck. They didn't think they were voting for nonstop political PTSD. And there's more to come. Health insurance costs are about to spike, because Republicans refuse to extend Biden-era subsidies."

Paul Krugman's full Substack column is available at this link.

US ally’s intel service says country now a 'security risk' over Trump’s Greenland fixation

For the first time, a close European ally of the US has called it a "security risk" in response to President Donald Trump's insistence that Greenland should become an American territory, according to Bloomberg.

Trump first began expressing his desire to take control of Greenland during his first term, but his rhetoric escalated from the start of his second, falsely claiming that Greenland's residents were in favor of the idea and refusing to rule out the use of economic or military means to accomplish it.

Greenland is, however, an autonomous territory of Denmark, with Danish leaders repeatedly stressing that the island is "not for sale." Now, per a new report from Bloomberg, the Danish government has deemed the US to be a "security risk," both for its posturing about Greenland, and for its general efforts to use its global power to try and influence other nations. It represents a notable shift in strategy for a country considered a close ally of the US.

"The Danish Defense Intelligence Service — one of the two key espionage agencies in the Nordic nation — said the US is increasingly prioritizing its own interests and 'Now using its economic and technological strength as a tool of power, also toward allies and partners,' according to its 2025 intelligence outlook published Wednesday," Bloomberg's report explained. "The annual threat assessment of DDIS follows Donald Trump’s repeated suggestions he’d want to take control of Greenland, triggering diplomatic tensions between Copenhagen and Washington."

In the security report itself, Danish authorities said "the United States uses economic power, including threats of high tariffs, to enforce its will, and no longer rules out the use of military force, even against allies."

Despite this historic shift in concern over threats from the US, the report nonetheless said that China and Russia remain the primary threats to Denmark's security. However, it also stressed that "uncertainty about the US’ role as a guarantor of Europe’s security" made these threats, particularly from Moscow, even greater, per Bloomberg.

Additionally, the Danish government in the last year created a new "night watch" program, enlisting agents to monitor statements from the US and Trump for any mentions of Denmark or Greenland. These statements are compiled into a report and presented to Danish officials in the morning, allowing the country to keep tabs on the situation while accounting for timezone differences.

Report reveals Trump’s 'Achilles’ heel'

Americans — it is becoming increasingly clear — are struggling to pay for basic necessities, like groceries, utility bills, health care, housing, and transportation. This is President Donald Trump’s “blind spot” and “Achilles heel,” according to Politico Playbook, based on a just-released Politico poll which calls its findings “a grim portrait of spending constraints.”

“Half of those surveyed said they find it difficult to pay for food. And a majority, 55 percent, blame the Trump administration for the high prices — even as the White House emphasizes its focus on affordability and the economy ahead of the midterm,” Politico noted.

On health care — one of the top concerns along with food and housing — nearly half of American adults find it “difficult” to afford. About one quarter of Americans (27%) have skipped a doctor’s visit or a prescription dose (23%) because of cost.

Pointing to Trump’s Tuesday night Pennsylvania rally, where he read the script and ad libbed his thoughts — “calling affordability a ‘hoax’ — before admitting he’s no longer ‘allowed’ to use the phrase,” Playbook reported that the president “made clear his lack of conviction in the whole premise.”

He mocked the word “affordability,” his own price charts, his pre-prepared speech, and “admitted he was only on tour at the urging of chief of staff Susie Wiles.”

“Trump revived his ill-advised line that it’s fine if parents can’t afford so many toys and pencils for their kids now prices are higher due to tariffs. ‘You don’t need 37 dolls for your daughter,’ he told the crowd. ‘Two or three is nice.'”

This speech was supposed to be — according to the White House — “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.”

After detailing many other off-script remarks, Playbook reported, “None of this should be surprising. We all know Trump likes to ramble. ‘I love the weave,’ he mused at one point. ‘If I read what’s on the teleprompter, you would all be falling asleep right now.’ On this topic, his heart just ain’t in it.”

“How much does all this matter?” Playbook asked. “Potentially, quite a lot. In theory, this was the first date of a multi-leg tour running right through 2026. If Trump doesn’t hone his messaging on affordability, it’s going to create a lot more ammunition for opponents over the next 11 months.”

Must-pass legislation in limbo as conservatives fume over House speaker’s flip-flop

Republican lawmakers are fuming at Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) over the national defense reauthorization bill. Axios reported late Tuesday that the defense funding measure is now at risk after Johnson allegedly reneged on promises to conservatives.

Congress separates its budget so that military funding is handled apart from the regular government budget. Members of the House Freedom Caucus were assured that if they supported the GENIUS Act — a bill that created a regulatory framework for digital currency stablecoins — their priorities would be addressed in the defense legislation.

Johnson even claimed that Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) was on board.

“The Anti-CBDC bill was in the House-passed NDAA, but now it’s not in the bill that will come to the House floor Wednesday,” Axios reported. “Leadership needs to fix this bill IMMEDIATELY,” Rep. Keith Self (R-Texas) posted on X.

Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) told Axios he will grant “some amount of grace” on this week’s rule vote but will not vote for final passage. “[I]t is frustrating, you know, but that does not all fully fall on the speaker. There are a lot of parties involved with that,” Roy said.

Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), Michael Cloud (R-Texas), and Greg Steube (R-Fla.) have also said they will vote against the bill. Given the GOP’s narrow majority, that could mean Johnson cannot pass the legislation on his own.

“Broken promises” was a frequent complaint against former Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), who was accused of cutting deals with Democrats over his own conference. Axios reports that GOP leaders now worry Wednesday’s vote may not go their way, noting that House Republicans have increasingly tanked procedural rules votes to register opposition to leadership.

If the rule vote fails, leaders may be forced to bring the bill up “under suspension,” which requires a two-thirds vote to pass. There are dozens of Democrats who support the underlying defense legislation, making that path a possible fallback if Republican defections mount.

Read the full report here.

DC insider: It’s one thing to read about Trump's deterioration — and another to see it

His fantastical claims have become more unhinged. This is especially troubling given that he is the oldest president ever to be sworn in and has a family history of Alzheimer’s.

Trump even seems to be confused about when he was president. And he keeps claiming that the Epstein files were a hoax created by his predecessors, even though the arrest and demise of Trump’s close friend Jeffrey Epstein happened during Trump’s own first term.

Paranoia and anger are common symptoms of dementia; so is a loss of impulse control. All have become cornerstones of Trump’s second term.

Trump’s Cabinet could invoke the 25th Amendment to remove him from office. Instead, Stephen Miller, Russell Vought, JD Vance, and RFK Jr. seem to be feeding into Trump’s paranoid delusions to increase their own power and advance their own fanatical agendas.

A person suffering dementia can be a danger to themselves and others. In the most tragic cases, they can be manipulated and taken advantage of by unscrupulous relatives or caretakers. Is this what’s happening in the White House?

It’s one thing to read about Trump’s mental decline — quite another to see it, which is why this week’s video is particularly important.

- YouTube youtu.be

Robert Reich is a professor of public policy at Berkeley and former secretary of labor. His writings can be found at https://robertreich.substack.com/.

Newly leaked memo targets 'anyone who isn’t a Trump supporter': investigator

A leaked memo by U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi directs the Justice Department and FBI to compile a list of groups that may be labeled “domestic terrorism” organizations based on political views related to immigration, gender and U.S. policy. The memo was obtained by independent investigative journalist Ken Klippenstein, who joins us to discuss how it expands on President Donald Trump’s NSPM-7 directive following the assassination of Charlie Kirk, which ordered a national strategy to investigate and disrupt groups the administration claims could incite political violence. Bondi’s effort targets “not just the left,” but “anyone who isn’t a Trump supporter,” says Klippenstein of the sweeping order, which identifies targets as entities expressing “opposition to law and immigration enforcement,” support for “mass migration and open borders,” “radical gender ideology,” or views described as anti-American, anti-capitalist or anti-Christian, as well as “hostility towards traditional views on family, religion, and morality.” People who report extremists may be financially rewarded, and the FBI is reviewing records from the past five years, as well as the present.

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman.

Attorney General Pam Bondi has ordered the FBI to compile a list of what the Justice Department is calling “domestic terrorist” organizations. Last week, Bondi sent a memo to all federal prosecutors and law enforcement agencies targeting a wide range of people, including those who hold what she calls, quote, “extreme views in favor of mass migration and open borders; adherence to radical gender ideology,” “anti-Americanism,” “anti-capitalism” or “anti-Christianity,” unquote. The memo also targets people who show, quote, “hostility towards traditional views on family, religion, and morality,” unquote.

The investigative journalist Ken Klippenstein published a copy of Bondi’s memo on his Substack page on Saturday. Klippenstein notes Bondi’s language echoes a National Security Presidential Memorandum issued by President Trump, known as NSPM-7, to target nonprofits and activists. Trump signed the directive in September in the wake of the murder of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk.

Ken Klippenstein, thanks so much for being with us from Madison, Wisconsin. Why don’t you tell us how you got a hold of this memo?

KEN KLIPPENSTEIN: Well, it was provided to me by somebody who — I can’t really say much more than — had access to it. And what it was was an implementation order for that NSPM-7 directive from President Trump, which essentially targets anyone who isn’t MAGA. At first, I looked at it and thought, “Oh, this is targeting the left.” But then you see these so-called indicators of terrorism, things like anti-Christian sentiment, anti-American sentiment, and I realized that’s not just the left. That’s anyone who isn’t a Trump supporter.

AMY GOODMAN: So, explain the significance of this, Ken Klippenstein.

KEN KLIPPENSTEIN: It essentially takes NSPM-7, which advances the view that the major threat of terrorism is coming from these anti-Trump sentiments, and it puts it into effect. It uses tools available to the federal government, and federal law enforcement in particular. For example, it directs the FBI to go through its past half-decade or so of intelligence on antifa and on some of these other groups that I’ve been talking about, and tells them to make criminal cases around those and to circulate intelligence about it.

And part of that intelligence production effort involves soliciting tips from the public, getting people to narc on their fellow citizens who are evincing this anti-Trump sentiment. So, in one case, it tells the FBI to upgrade and kind of supercharge its tip system so that they can get this flow of information coming in from informants all over the country reporting on threats like these.

AMY GOODMAN: [inaudible] do you believe?

KEN KLIPPENSTEIN: I’m sorry. Could you repeat that again? It cut out for just a second.

AMY GOODMAN: Who is the architect of this memo, do you believe, of the NSPM-7?

KEN KLIPPENSTEIN: I would say it’s not a person so much as an incident, which was the murder of Charlie Kirk. As national security officials described to me shortly after the murder, the very next day there was a war room convened by the White House. And I think kind of unofficially taking point on this was President Trump’s homeland security adviser, Stephen Miller, and he kind of orchestrated, along with all these other national security appointees: How are we going to respond to this? And the decision was made that we would make anti-Trump tantamount to this terrorist threat, and we were going to prosecute it as such. So, I guess I would say, if I was to point to one single person, I would say Stephen Miller.

But this is really an attitude held by a lot of people in the administration, which I think is genuine fear in the wake of that shooting that something like that might happen to them, and so we have to create a response. And what that is is, essentially, the same sort of response to 9/11, but in this case it’s in — it’s directed at Americans, who the —

AMY GOODMAN: Ken, is money involved with this?

KEN KLIPPENSTEIN: Yeah, absolutely. So, it directs the Treasury Department to audit taxes and try to find — the administration seems convinced that there’s some shadowy foreign group or financiers for a lot of the sentiments I was describing before, and antifa in particular. And so, it authorizes them to go through nonprofits’ taxes and to try to find evidence of something which there’s no public evidence exists in any sort of significant way.

AMY GOODMAN: But is there a reward being offered, like if someone calls an FBI tip line?

KEN KLIPPENSTEIN: Yeah, absolutely. So, that’s another thing that this implementation order directs. It provides for a funding system to reward people that provide these tips that I was describing before. It’s basically a bounty system for anti-Trump thought and reporting on it.

AMY GOODMAN: And it goes back retroactively five years?

KEN KLIPPENSTEIN: Yeah, the FBI right now, pursuant to this order, is digging through all of its intelligence to find whatever they can, going back to the Biden administration, that can be used to help make these cases.

AMY GOODMAN: So, the memo targets organizations, not only, what, formal NGOs, but also book clubs, community mutual networks, mutual aid networks, online forums?

KEN KLIPPENSTEIN: Yeah, that’s exactly right. And it uses the phrase “organizations and entities,” which can mean individuals. So, again, it can’t be overstated how sweeping a directive like this is. This isn’t targeted. And to the extent that it’s being reported as directed at antifa, I think it’s important to remember, you know, antifa may not exist as such, but it includes a lot more than that. It also describes people opposed to immigration enforcement, which, if you look at polling, is like — you know, the way in which immigration enforcement has been rolled out under this administration, that could describe half the country or more of it. So, this is really much bigger than just antifa. And to the extent that antifa means anything, the administration defines it in its own way, which is different than how a lot of people would define antifa. So, it’s really important to understand that.

AMY GOODMAN: I mean, we just did a segment on the Pentagon bombing boats without evidence of them being, as the Trump administration calls them, narcoterrorists. They’re talking about foreign terrorists, so-called. So, here you’re talking about a domestic terrorist network. Are we talking about no trial, no — paid-for accusations? How does this work?

KEN KLIPPENSTEIN: Yeah, I mean, the business of counterterrorism is a very ugly business. It is essentially pre-crime, in the sense that you are authorized to go and make investigations without the usual predicate that you would need of someone having committed a crime or finding evidence that suggests someone committed a crime. In counterterrorism, the theory behind it is that the threat is so great that we need to suspend those ordinary evidentiary standards for premising an investigation, and instead, all you need are these so-called indicators. And the Trump administration is defining those indicators as a lot of these groups we’ve just been describing, which can apply to millions and millions of Americans. These are very mainstream views, opposition to immigration enforcement and the way in which it’s been carried out this year.

So, the dragnet has gotten far wider. I mean, after 9/11, these tools were pointed at groups like al-Qaeda and ISIS, and, unfortunately, to some extent, just American Muslims caught up in this dragnet. But they’ve widened this to include far larger sets of people. And so, what we’re really seeing is the global war on terror coming home and becoming a domestic war on terror.

AMY GOODMAN: Ken Klippenstein, I want to thank you for being with us, investigative reporter. We’ll link to your latest piece, ”FBI Making List of American 'Extremists,' Leaked Memo Reveals.”

'This is not America First': MAGA slams Trump for sending $45 million to Taliban

President Donald Trump's administration is being sharply criticized by conservatives in both government and media for reportedly sending tens of millions of dollars to the Taliban-controlled government in Afghanistan.

Newsweek reported Tuesday that, according to Amrullah Saleh, (who leads the anti-Taliban political party Afghanistan Green Trend) the Trump administration flew $45 million in cash to Afghanistan on Monday. Saleh's group alleged that the money was "flown in via a chartered flight by Moalem Airlines," which is based in Kyrgyzstan.

The post caught the attention of conservative commentator Ann Vandersteel, who said of the cash payment "this is not America First" but rather "America deceived." Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.), who is a member of the far-right House Freedom Caucus, responded to Vandersteel's post by adding that the massive cash shipments to the Taliban are happening "every week." He then called on the U.S. Senate to "pass my bill."

Burchett's legislation — the "No Tax Dollars for Terrorists Act" — passed the House of Representatives in June, and would empower the U.S. State Department to identify and publish the names of every organization providing financial support to the Taliban-controlled government.

"The United States has sent over $5 billion in cash to Kabul. It is the duty of the State Department to ensure that any aid from the United States is kept out of the hands of terrorists in Afghanistan. The terrorists can hate us for free," Burchett stated after the bill was passed.

Burchett has been a vocal proponent of cutting off U.S. cash shipments to Afghanistan ever since U.S. troops withdrew from the war-torn country in 2021. The issue has also attracted interest from MAGA influencers in close proximity to Trump, like unofficial "loyalty enforcer" Laura Loomer.

"Why is the United States still funding the Taliban?" Loomer wrote on Tuesday. "What the hell do our reps do all day aside from ruin our country and the world?"

"Because we are crooked Laura," Burchett responded.

Click here to read Newsweek's full article.

'Really dangerous stuff': Trump's new 'disturbing' surge shattered by expert

When I heard the news about two National Guard troops who were shot in Washington over the Thanksgiving holiday, the first person I thought of was Radley Balko. He’s the author of The Rise of the Warrior Cop and publisher of The Watch, a newsletter. If anyone knows about the complex intersection of criminal justice and civil liberties, it’s him.

I wanted to ask what he thought. See the interview below.

West Virginia Governor Patrick Morrisey, a Republican, had deployed a number of his state’s guardsmen to Washington as part of the president’s scheme to send military forces to US cities. Donald Trump has suggested that local police departments are failing to fight crime.

But it was Washington police that not only caught the shooter. They shot him. And now, in the wake of that crime, DC police are escorting Guard troops for their own protection. (Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser said the guardsmen were targeted. One of them is dead, the other remains gravely injured. Meanwhile, the shooter, Rahmanullah Lakanwal, is hospitalized. He was charged with murder last week.)

So the gambit was never about crime-fighting, Radley told me. It was about an administration putting on a show of force. “That's really what we've seen in DC. Guard troops have been patrolling in low-crime, tourist areas, not in parts of the city with higher crime rates.”

But it would be a mistake to see this effort as part of a larger, decades’ long pattern of militarizing American police departments, Radley said.

The old debate was underscored by a shared understanding, he said – that democracies don’t use the military for law enforcement. “What's happening now in some ways supersedes that debate. Trump wants to use the military itself for domestic policing. He's obliterating that shared understanding that this isn't something free societies do.”

The president has always wanted a paramilitary that’s loyal to him. In many ways, he now has one, not in the state National Guard but in ICE and Border Patrol. They are acting as if answerable only to him.

Therefore, accountability is going to be hard to come by, Radley said.

State and local authorities that have tried have faced daunting odds.

Even so, Radley said, “I think local prosecutors should try anyway.”

“The administration is encouraging a culture of aggression, lawlessness and racism,” Radley told me. “It's really dangerous stuff. So accountability has to come at the state and local level. Even if it's ultimately futile, I think it sends an important message that they don't get to just rampage through these cities with impunity.”

Washington cops are now patrolling alongside National guardsmen in Washington. Weren't the cops doing such a poor job that the National Guard had to get involved to fight crime? What is going on?

DC’s crime rate has always been higher than that of other cities its size. There are lots of possible explanations for that. But when Trump deployed the National Guard, crime was going down in the city, after a surge during the pandemic (a surge that hit most of the rest of the country, too). Moreover, Guard troops aren't cops. They aren't trained to conduct policing patrols, respond to emergencies or threats, or to solve crimes. There's really no reason to deploy the National Guard other than as a show of force. And that's really what we've seen in DC. Guard troops have been patrolling in low-crime, tourist areas, not in parts of the city with higher crime rates.

The two victims were targeted, Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser said. The shooter’s motive is still unclear. What's your best guess?

From what I've read, he was part of an elite, CIA-trained unit in Afghanistan who undertook extremely dangerous missions to aid the US war effort [the “war on terror”]. And also from what I've read, other members of that unit have felt abandoned by the US government — as have other Afghans who assisted US troops during the war.

It looks like the Democrats are not arguing over crime rates and whether the president is justified in ordering troops to DC and other cities. They seemed to be focused on blaming Donald Trump for the attack. Are they right? The news today, about the shooter being CIA-trained, suggests there's more to blame the president for.

I won't claim to be a political operative. So while I don't know what would be most persuasive to the public, in terms of fostering public understanding, I think it's important to point out all of these things.

The crime rate is down in every city to which Trump has tried to send the National Guard to "fight crime." But also, he has zero authority to send the National Guard to fight crime. The National Guard isn't trained to fight crime. And Trump has offered different justifications for sending the National Guard depending on whether his audience is the federal courts, Fox News, the press, or someone else.

(In addition to "fighting crime," he has claimed it's necessary to send in the military and National Guard to carry out deportations, to put down protests, and because protests have inhibited the ability of federal law enforcement to carry out mass deportations.)

It's all been rooted in shameless lies and distortions of reality.

The truth is that Trump has always

  • wanted a paramilitary force answerable only to him, and which he could deploy anywhere in the country for any reason
  • expressed his admiration for strongmen and dictators who had such a force and used it to suppress dissent and put down their enemies, and
  • he neither understands nor cares much for the norms and laws that restrict a president's ability to deploy the military domestically.

The government has militarized civil society for many years now, especially since 9/11. Police departments, as you have written, are more or less small armies. Is a president sending troops to cities the end point of that process or more of the same with no end in sight?

It's really a new, disturbing, and in some ways ambiguous escalation.

The discussion about police militarization has always been grounded in a shared understanding that using the military for domestic law enforcement is a dangerous idea that free societies avoid. It isn't what soldiers are trained to do. And democracies that go down that road tend to not remain democracies for long.

The debate had been about whether the police were becoming too influenced by the military -- whether the use of military weapons, uniforms, gear, and lingo was fostering in police an aggressive "us versus them" mindset that's inappropriate for domestic policing.

What's happening now in some ways supersedes that debate. Trump wants to use the military itself for domestic policing. He's obliterating that shared understanding that this isn't something free societies do.

Yet in some ways, police in the US have become more "militarized" (for lack of a better term) than the military. I've often had police officials who agree with me on these issues tell me that officers who are ex-military tend to have a positive influence on other cops, because the military instills more discipline and accountability than modern police agencies do. We're seeing this play out right now.

The way ICE and Border Patrol have behaved in Chicago, LA, Charlotte and other cities is as aggressive, confrontational, and ugly as it gets.

It's actually hard to imagine the National Guard doing worse. It is made up of part-time citizens who tend to live in the communities where they're deployed (though Trump is changing that, too). They aren't immersed in toxic police culture. We saw this on display during Trump's first term, after the violent clearing of Lafayette Park in DC. It was the National Guard troops and commanders who came forward to dispute the White House narrative about what happened.

That said, I do think what Trump wants to do with the military is dangerous. And as we've seen in other areas, if he encounters National Guard commanders and troops who aren't as aggressive and loyal as he wants, he'll remove them and replace them with people who are.

The president already has a paramilitary in ICE and Border Patrol. Democratic leaders like Illinois Governor JB Pritzker have ramped up their rhetoric. Are we seeing the makings of conflict, perhaps armed conflict, between state authorities and ICE and Border Patrol? Or is there a plan to keep a paper trail on ICE agents for future investigation by state prosecutors? What are you seeing?

It will be very difficult to prosecute ICE or Border Patrol officers in state courts. On the few occasions state prosecutors have tried, the DOJ has just had the case removed to federal court, then dropped the charges (this has been true in administrations from both parties). I think there's a real worry that submitting federal agents to local authority will diminish federal policing powers.

That said, I think local prosecutors should try anyway. Currently there's no accountability for these officers. They can't really be sued. Trump's DOJ won't prosecute them in federal court. And he's likely to pardon them from any prosecution in a future administration.

Meanwhile, the administration is encouraging a culture of aggression, lawlessness and racism. It's really dangerous stuff. So accountability has to come at the state and local level. Even if it's ultimately futile, I think it sends an important message that they don't get to just rampage through these cities with impunity.

Expert analysis predicts Trump pardon backfire in Texas

President Donald Trump was furious after Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas) was pardoned but didn't switch parties to be a Republican. Now "The Cook Political Report" is predicting that the congressional seat will likely stay in his control.

Cuellar was set to face bribery charges until Trump stepped in. Despite the pardon, however, Cuellar remains with his own party.

“Such a lack of LOYALTY, something that Texas Voters, and Henry’s daughters, will not like,” the president ranted in a lengthy Truth Social post Sunday. “Oh, well, next time, no more Mr. Nice guy!”

"President Donald Trump has gone to extreme lengths to shore up Republicans’ tenuous hold on the House — going as far as pressuring state legislators to redraw their congressional maps to net their party a single seat," wrote Cook's Erin Covey.

Trump had demanded red states do mid-decade redistricting in an effort to redraw congressional district lines to eliminate Democratic seats and hold onto power. However, his efforts with Cuellar didn't pan out.

Trump even went so far as to accuse President Joe Biden administration of targeting Cuellar for “speaking the truth” about border security with the Justice Department probe.

Covey noted that last week there was speculation that Trump cut a deal with Cuellar and that he would switch parties for the pardon or retire altogether.

Now, "The Cook Political Reporter" has moved the seat from a toss-up to "likely Democrat."

Read the full report here.

Democrats look to block $1 Trump coin

President Donald Trump's administration announced in October that to celebrate the 250th Anniversary of the adoption of the Declaration of Independence, the president's face would appear on a one-dollar coin. Now Democrats are moving to block it.

“No fake news here,” U.S. Treasurer Brandon Beach post on X. “These first drafts honoring America’s 250th Birthday and @POTUS are real. Looking forward to sharing more soon, once the obstructionist shutdown of the United States government is over.”

One of the key barriers to Trump's coin, other than Democrats, is that U.S. law requires that a president must be dead for two or more years.

Congress has passed another bill to create a special collectible coin for the 250th anniversary, but that law specifies, “No head and shoulders portrait or bust of any person, living or dead, and no portrait of a living person may be included in the design on the reverse of specified coins.”

The Trump coin would violate both laws.

Sens. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) and Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) announced a bill Tuesday that would block Trump from the coin by restating the existing laws, the Independent reported.

“No United States currency may feature the likeness of a living or sitting President," the bill says.

“President Trump’s self-celebrating maneuvers are authoritarian actions worthy of dictators like North Korea’s Kim Jong Un, not the United States of America,” Merkely said in a statement.

“We must reject his efforts to dismantle our ‘We, The People’ republic and replace it with a strongman state by demanding strong accountability to prevent further abuse of taxpayer dollars,” he added.

Cortez Masto pointed out that “while monarchs put their faces on coins, America has never had and never will have a king.”

“Our legislation would codify this country’s long-standing tradition of not putting living presidents on American coins. Congress must pass it without delay,” she continued.

However, the bill will not come up for a vote unless it's allowed by Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.), and that isn't likely.

@2025 - AlterNet Media Inc. All Rights Reserved. - "Poynter" fonts provided by fontsempire.com.