MSN

Critics troubled by 'slurring' Trump's plan to 'run' Venezuela

President Donald Trump was big on boast and short on details when he committed the U.S. to running the whole nation of Venezuela on Saturday.

“We’re going to run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition,” Trump told reporters in the hours following his administration’s invasion and seizure of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife.

But Trump ran on an “America First” campaign of keeping the nation out of expensive international campaigns and foreign wars, and social media called him out for his dramatic about-face.

“I don't think there are many Trump supporters who voted to have the United States run Venezuela for an indefinite period of time,” said Attorney Aaron Parnas on X.

“I have a lot of questions,” posted Decatur Daily News Editor Franklin Harris on X.

“He can’t even run the U.S.: skyrocketing inflation, healthcare premiums doubling for millions, and the unemployment rate at a four-year high,” said U.S. Rep Teresa Leger Fernandez (D-N.M.). “Remember, running a country for oil was the same excuse that cost trillions and too many lives in Iraq. Congress must vote on a war powers resolution immediately.”

Retired general Mark Hertling blasted Trump’s Saturday presentation, which was punctuated by fawning praise from Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. On a Bulwark podcast, Hertling warned the Trump administration was failing to learn from the bad decisions of past Republican administrations.

“The tragedy wasn’t that Iraq was hard,” said Hertling, speaking of a commemorative box containing photos and cards of 253 soldiers lost under his command in Iraq. “The tragedy was that we acted as if it wouldn’t be, that it would be really easy. And that’s what I’m hearing with this group of two between Hegseth and Rubio. And those are the last two people I would want running a post conflict operation in a country that’s just been bombed.”

“This is Bushism with less of a plan. It’s the Iraq and Afghanistan thing with less of a plan,” said Bulwark Publisher Sarah Longwell, who added that Trump clearly is not doing well mentally even as he prepares to send the world’s most expensive military into a South American country.

“Trump was slurring,” Longwell said of the press conference. “He was going off on wild tangents at a critical moment of information … Trump gives this slurring, meandering thing — then you’ve got Hegseth doing an ass-kissing session on Trump, and then he points to Rubio — who wasn’t even prepared to speak, so basically he says ‘everybody put your big boy pants on because Donald Trump means what he says.”

America's biggest enemy is not Venezuela

The only United States President in history to violently attack his own country, and attempt a coup to stay in power was always going to be a threat to illegally attack other countries like Venezuela, and destabilize the entire world.

This was the greatest fear when Donald J. Trump was recklessly reelected in 2024 by a slim majority of voters in a battered country that is split apart at the seams, and gasping for air.

Trump, of course, promised these people he’d fix 90 percent of our problems on Day One, and has instead doubled and tripled them, while officially becoming the most dangerous problem the United States has ever had to grapple with.

He is a madman with the most powerful military in the world under his fat little thumb, a blank check from a Republican Congress which has surrendered its powers, and a bought-off Conservative Supreme Court that has lost its honor.

To be clear, Trump’s continued attacks on Venezuela have been illegal from the start, violate our Constitution, and have been an affront to the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

We told the people who voted for Trump this was going to happen, and while I’d like to sit here and used 225 choice words to rub their faces in it, that will accomplish nothing except blowing an old, functioning fuse.

This morning is a time for resolve, and a clear-eyed vision of the scary road ahead. We are in uncharted territory, but not because we have unilaterally and illegally attacked a sovereign nation. Lord knows there’s been far too much of that in our checkered history.

No, we are in this new, terrible place, because this time a man who has made it clear how little respect he has for the United States and its institutions is behind this latest illegal attack.

I say again: A man who will attack his own, has long since proven he is incapable of defending us and our Democracy.

In fact, he is our enemy.

So now what?

The answer is simple, and the execution will be hard: America has a dangerous dictator entrenched in its White House, who must be removed.

Starting right now, I am suggesting Congress move immediately to assemble a coalition of the willing, and announce their intent to work feverishly toward Trump’s removal.

We simply will not survive three more years of this, or even three more weeks or months at this frenetic, bloody pace, and that must be clearly articulated. Trump’s “presidency” thus far has been chaotic, brutal, and has accomplished nothing but weakening our standing in the world, and making our day-to-day lives far more challenging, expensive, and stressful.

Building consensus for Trump’s removal will be key, and cannot be done politically unilaterally. I doubt highly many Independents who voted for Trump to drop their egg prices voted for illegal, murderous foreign attacks, or Marines in our streets. I am also dubious that many in MAGA are good with Trump’s fixation on everything but addressing our skyrocketing cost of living.

This case for his removal must be taken to the public, begin apace, and the stakes must be laid out clearly: Donald J. Trump is a morally busted, mentally unstable tyrant who won’t stop until he is stopped cold.

This is classic fascism.

He is clearly unfit for the job, and the most dangerous man on Earth.

I am also suggesting the Democratic leaders throughout the world condemn these attacks and lay out the necessary sanctions against us for our illegal acts. The majority of the people in this country would support this during this time of war.

What Trump has done to Venezuela is no different than what Vladimir Putin has done to Ukraine.

Listen to me, friends around the world: We need your damn help.

When another murdering fascist, Adolph Hitler, attacked Poland in 1939 in the run-up to World War II, he justified it with lies and propaganda, which is exactly what Trump has been doing during his drumbeat for war with Venezuela and attacks inside his own country.

Already Trump’s propaganda channels at places like Fox are working feverishly to support this illegal incursion into Venezuela. These must be immediately countered with facts and vigor, and you can count this piece as but a spark that will lead to the raging fire for truth that must be kindled right now.

The only significant difference between 1939 and 2026, is that Hitler was far more popular in Germany than Trump is in America. This is problematic for Trump, of course, but will only make him that much more dangerous as he lashes out, and listens to the unhinged voices in his head, while grotesque men like Stephen Miller and Pete Hegseth tug at his sleeves.

Trump’s illegal attack on Venezuela is only the beginning if we don’t put an end to it right now. It’s not a matter of if he’ll attack again, but simply when and where.

And if we won’t do everything we can to stop this now, he will have successfully conquered the United States of America, because we will have surrendered to a traitor.

D. Earl Stephens is the author of “Toxic Tales: A Caustic Collection of Donald J. Trump’s Very Important Letters” and finished up a 30-year career in journalism as the Managing Editor of Stars and Stripes. You can find all his work here.

'Crazy and disproven' MAGA conspiracy likely fueling Venezuela invasion: analysis

Bulwark Managing Editor Sam Stein and Publisher Sarah Longwell say Donald Trump’s inconsistent reasoning for invading Venezuela and kidnapping its president suggests other ulterior motives behind the attack.

“He said in his Fox interview,” said Stein, speaking on a live podcast of the president’s Saturday morning press conference on the invasion. “… This gets to motivations and obviously there’s a question of [Venezuela’s] oil or is it the drugs. He did notably compare Maduro’s election to his own 2020 loss. … It seems wild but there’s … been this longstanding election conspiracy in MAGA circles that Venezuela was involved in rigging the election in 2020. It's crazy and disproven but could it be a motivation?”

Last November, Trump’s federal investigators began interviewing people pushing unfounded claims that Venezuela helped steal the 2020 election from Trump. Two conspiracy theorists, according to the Guardian, briefed the U.S. attorney for the district of Puerto Rico, W Stephen Muldrow, and shared witnesses and documents with officials, according to multiple sources.

Critics said the bogus investigation revealed the willingness of Trump’s justice department to make itself a major weapon in Trump’s efforts to rewrite the history of his 2020 failure, while also buttressing arguments to take military action against Venezuela.

“If that is part of Trump’s calculus then that is Trump’s addled, insane, conspiracy mind making it up,” answered Longwell. “It’s funny because it’s Jan. 3. We are up on the anniversary of the Jan. 6 attacks resulting from Trump’s taking that [stolen election] lie and shoving that conspiracy theory to his supporters and the Republican Party.”

Longwell added that Trump offers “no consistent position for taking Maduro out,” while also pardoning proven drug kingpins including Honduran president Juan Orlando Hernández just a few months ago.

“[Since] there [is no] direct American benefit from this then what you have left is Trump’s weird grievance over his belief that Venezuela interfered in his reelection and the cosplaying he loves to do looking like a tough guy on the international stage,” Longwell said. “Who can make sense of what’s going on in Trump’s head?”

Watch the Bulwark podcast at this link.

Trump now warns 'something' must be done with Mexico

After the U.S. bombed Venezuela in the middle of the night and abducted President Nicolas Maduro, President Donald Trump was quick to threaten legitimately-elected governments in the region. In particular, Trump implied a hazy future conflict with Mexico in an interview with Fox News Saturday morning.

“So, was this operation a message that you’re sending to Mexico, to Claudia Sheinbaum, the president there?” Fox’s Griff Jenkins asked.

“Well, it wasn’t meant to be, we’re very friendly with her, she’s a good woman,” Trump said, “but the cartels are running Mexico. She’s not running Mexico. We could be politically correct and be nice and say, ‘Oh, yes, she is.’ No, no. She’s very, you know, she’s very frightened of the cartels. They’re running Mexico. And I’ve asked her numerous times, ‘Would you like us to take out the cartels?’ ... Something is gonna have to be done with Mexico.”

Social media wasted no time reacting to Trump’s proposition of interfering with the government of a U.S. ally.

“The atmosphere in which The World Cup will be held in less than 6 months' time in Mexico, USA & Canada. Is he going to 'capture' her too??!” said BAFTA-winning filmmaker Sara Afshar on X.

“Polls showed Americans were already quite uncertain about invading Venezuela,” said CNN reporter Aaron Blake on X. “Just hours later, Trump is talking about strikes in Mexico, too.”

Democratic candidate Fred Wellman slammed the Republican-dominated Congress for making Trump’s unilateral moves possible in the first place.

“This is what happens when the Executive is unchecked by Congress,” Wellman said on X. “He is empowered to do whatever he wants. He knows the Doormat Congress will do whatever he wants so now he is talking about attacking our ally and neighbor because no one will say ‘no.’"

New York Health Executive Director Melanie D’Arrigo questioned the president’s motivations, arguing, “if Trump cared about drugs he wouldn’t have pardoned the Silk Road founder whose online platform let drug dealers sell more than $200 million in illegal drugs … or the former President of Honduras, convicted of conspiring to import over 400 tons of cocaine into the U.S. … and dozens of other drug traffickers.”

Other critics were more nihilistic, with one posting “Mexico is next on the list. They don’t have oil, but they do have avocados.”

Trump lies again about 2020 election 'rigging'

Mediaite reports President Donald Trump could not stop raging about his 2020 election defeat on Fox News, even while thumping his chest over his attack and kidnapping of Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro and his wife Saturday morning.

Trump announced on Truth Social that Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores were captured and flown to the United States at 4:21 a.m. Saturday. Later, Trump called in to the Saturday edition of Fox & Friends Saturday for a long interview, during which the president revived the bogus claim that the 2020 election was “rigged.”

The baloney rolled fast after host Griff Jenkins asked Trump if he would support Maduro’s opposition party leader Maria Corina Machado, who won a Nobel Peace Prize for her efforts in pressuring the incumbent dictator.

“Well, we’re going to have to look at it right now. They have a vice president, as you know, I mean, I don’t know about what kind of an election that was. But you know the election of Maduro was a disgrace, just like my election was a disgrace — 2020 was a disgrace! And, you know, a real disgrace!”

Trump went on to claim Maduro’s rigged election “wasn’t a hell of a lot worse than what they did to us in 2020,” despite show company owner Fox paying a $787.5 million settlement to Dominion Voting Systems for spreading the same lie.

“It was our election was a disgrace in 2020 and everyone knows it. And now it’s come out and it’s come up even in the legal forum,” Trump continued. “But it was disgraceful. He had an election — there was a rigged election and the people have no love for him. That’s for sure. He had very little loyalty, if any loyalty. He was a dictator, who was a tough cookie, and he ran it tough, and the people can’t believe they got so lucky.”

Former President Biden’s defeat of Trump has been confirmed repeatedly by state officials from Trump’s own party and dozens of court decisions.

Read the Mediaite report at this link.

Trump books 'struggling' as public fatigue sets in

The Atlantic reports a once-reliable moneymaking subgenre of nonfiction is no longer making money.

Books pertaining to “Trump-the-conqueror volumes, designed to appeal to his base,” have “lost its juice,” reports the Atlantic.

“After 10 years of Trump the politician, even readers who were once hungry to learn about the man they’d voted for seem to have had their fill. Newt Gingrich’s Trump’s Triumph lasted only two weeks on the nonfiction chart in June,” writes former Washington Post reporter Paul Farhi. “Despite cable-news attention, The Greatest Comeback Ever, by the Fox News commentator Joe Concha, was a one-week wonder in May. So was the CNN pundit Scott Jennings’s A Revolution of Common Sense, published in November. Eric Trump’s Under Siege: My Family’s Fight to Save Our Nation landed in the top spot in November, but lasted only three weeks on the list. The one certifiable hit has been Melania Trump’s eponymous memoir.”

“These are some really terrific books with important reporting in them, but it just seems like the public is exhausted at the moment,” New York Times White House reporter Peter Baker told Farhi. “They’re inundated with Trump at every hour of the day, and they may want to use their personal reading time for something more escapist.”

Baker and his wife, New Yorker columnist Susan Glasser, co-wrote The Divider: Trump in the White House 2017–2021, which was a top-seller — but that was in 2022.

ABC News journalist and author Jonathan Karl told Farhi that “coming out cold with a Trump book right now would probably be a tougher sell than it was five years ago. The world is not obsessing about Trump’s actions today the way they were during his first term.”

Karl is the author of several best-selling books about Trump’s two terms. Despite heavy investment from the publisher, Karl admitted his most recent volume — Retribution: Donald Trump and the Campaign That Changed America — lasted only a week on the Times nonfiction list in November.

“The hot topic in political publishing over the past year seems to have been Trump’s 2024 opponents, not Trump,” said Farhi, as public attention appears to turn instead to Trump’s Democratic enemies.

“Original Sin, Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson’s account of Joe Biden’s physical and cognitive decline, was a best seller for much of the summer,” said Farhi. “Kamala Harris’s memoir about the 2024 election, 107 Days, is still on the chart after three months. No recent book about Trump has approached those numbers.”

Read the Atlantic report at this link.

Bondi fired her ethics trainer with misspelled email — after accepting international gifts

The Guardian reports incoming Attorney General Pam Bondi had no place for ethics training while taking the reins at the Department of Justice.

“I think the reason to fire the senior ethics attorney at DOJ is pretty clear. It’s to send a message,” said Joseph Tirrell, an attorney responsible for overseeing ethics compliance across the agency and training top officers in their obligation. “The message is: ‘Do what we tell you to do, or you’ll lose your job.’”

Tirrell was nearing the end of a July vacation when he got an email from the Department of Justice on his personal account. The notice, signed by Bondi, misspelled his name as “Jospeh W Tirrell,” and did not give a reason for his firing. The Guardian reports Tirrell bosses initially seemed as surprised as he was before confirming that he had indeed been removed from the payroll.

Tirrell, 51, joined the FBI as an ethics lawyer in 2006 before moving to the justice department in 2018. During that time, he fielded requests about whether or not employees could accept certain gifts or attend certain events and other conflicts of interests. He notes that Bondi and her chief of staff appeared focused on questions of whether the attorney general could accept commemorative challenge coins from subordinates in the department during training.

“There seemed to be a lot of importance by these officials placed on [the] appearance of them getting stuff, on the appearance of them showing their willingness to accept that gift,” Tirrell said.

Tirrell recalls telling Bondi: “We’ve pretty much said you can’t accept gifts from employees unless it’s your birthday or Christmas or Hanukkah or a similar kind of holiday where people give gifts,” and added that “We spent more time than I thought was warranted on … whether or not you could accept a challenge coin from whomever.”

The attorney said he caught his first whiff of Bondi’s ethical failings when she received a box of cigars from the mixed martial artist Conor McGregor. The value of the gift, he said, exceeded what Bondi could accept under the department’s ethics rules, so he spelled out three options for her: reimburse McGregor for the gift, send it back, or destroy it.

“Immediately I got the sense they were reluctant to send things back or destroy stuff,” said Tirrell.

“’No, we can’t send it back,’” the administration told him. “’I mean what does that say?’”

Later, Bondi received gifts from FIFA, which is set to host the World Cup in the US, Canada, and Mexico this year. Only 10 years ago, the Department of Justice launched a 47-count indictment against 14 FIFA officials over racketeering, wire fraud and money laundering conspiracies.

Tirrell said Bondi received a scarf and a 2025 World Cup soccer ball from the organization. He later received word that Bondi was likely to be invited to a FIFA club World Cup final in July, and he advised her that ethics rules prohibited her and her staff from accepting tickets to attend the event.

A week later he was fired. Two days after that, Bondi was photographed at the game with Trump.

“Maybe the attorney general paid for that ticket or a ticket of her spouse, right?” Tirrell said. “… But, you know, come on, I know that’s not the case.”

Read the full Guardian report at this link.

Trump hiding his 'murky' arguments for invading Venezuela from Congress: analysis

MS NOW reports President Donlad Trump is keeping his legal arguments hidden even as his administration escalates a months-long campaign against Venezuela to a Saturday strike in Caracas and the capture of President Nicolás Maduro.

Trump announced the raid and kidnapping operation in a 4:21 a.m. Truth Social post, but MS NOW reports Trump did not seek congressional authorization for neither this nor a series of deadly boat strikes in the Caribbean.

“The administration has cited a Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel memo to justify strikes against 35 vessels in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific. But the memo — whose existence has been reported by the Washington Post, but not independently verified by MS NOW — and its arguments remain classified, leaving Congress and the public without clarity about the administration’s legal reasoning,” reports MS NOW.

While not addressing subsequent attacks, a White House official told MS NOW that all boat strikes have are in full compliance with the Law of Armed Conflict. “In each case, the vessel was assessed by the U.S. intelligence community to be affiliated with a designated terrorist organization engaged at that time in trafficking illicit drugs, which could ultimately be used to kill Americans.”

But critics are calling foul on the secrecy.

“The legal basis for the strike inside Venezuela is very murky, including because covert action is used when the U.S. government intends to keep its hand hidden, not boast about it publicly,” said Matthew Waxman, a Columbia Law professor specializing in constitutional war powers.

Saturday’s operation upped concerns of transparency to new heights, with Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) posting on X that there had been no congressional approval or authorization for use of military force prior to the Venezuelan aggression.

Lee said Secretary of State Marco Rubio told him Maduro had been arrested after the fact “to stand trial on criminal charges in the United States,” and that the military action “was deployed to protect and defend those executing the arrest warrant.” That, according to the administration, falls under the president’s “inherent authority” under Article II of the Constitution to protect American personnel.

Democratic critics like Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) claim, however, that “the illegality of Trump’s insane war in Venezuela is out of control.”

“Remember, this has NOTHING to do with stopping drugs from entering America,” said Murphy, who sits on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. “Venezuela produces cocaine bound for Europe. This is war mongering distraction.”

Read the full MS NOW report at this link.

'What am I waking up to now?' Critics weary of Trump’s international chaos

Social media appears to have had enough of over-the-top behavior from the nation’s unpopular president.

“It's time to play America's favorite new game, 'what the f—— am I waking up to now,’” posted political gadfly Jeff Tiedrich, speaking of President Donald Trump’s unexpected invasion and kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife and flying them out of the country amid a volley of explosions and smoke.

International reaction to the aggressive move was hostile, with British parliament member Jeremy Corbyn calling the kidnapping “an unprovoked and illegal attack on Venezuela.”

“This is a brazen attempt to secure control over Venezuelan natural resources,” said Corbyn on Bluesky. “It is an act of war that puts the lives of millions of people at risk, and should be condemned by anyone who believes in sovereignty & international law.”

“Kidnapping the leader of a foreign state without any declaration of war and announcing it via social media is full-on rogue state stuff. From the world’s number one superpower,” posted iPaper columnist James Ball on Bluesky. “I think it’s probably safe to say the Nobel is off the cards for another year.”

“Still, I’m sure destabilizing Venezuela and likely all of its neighbors will work wonders for refugee flows from that region. Genius,” Ball added.

BBC writer Adam Schwarz argued that “even if Trump’s attack on Venezuela and kidnapping of Maduro somehow led to a positive impact on Venezuela’s future, it would not make these actions by the United States legal, moral or wise.”

“Normalizing and legitimizing this behavior endangers all countries—democracies and dictatorships alike,” Schwarz said.

Other critics complained on Bluesky that “no one supports a war in Venezuela, by the way,” with a Marquette poll showing 76 percent of US respondents opposing war, and 70 percent of respondents in a YouGov\CBS poll opposing. In fact, no polls in multiple surveys showed a majority of surveyed participants eager to invade Venezuela.

Trump's Venezuelan invasion a 'risky political gambit': retired general

Ret. Gen. Barry McCaffrey warned that regime change is risky business — even for a competent president.

President Donald Trump announced in a social media post early Saturday morning that the United States has carried out a “large scale strike” on Venezuela, capturing President Nicolás Maduro and his wife and flying them out of the country. The Washington Post reports “explosions were heard and smoke could be seen rising in multiple locations across Caracas in the early morning, including at key military facilities, and aircraft were seen flying over the Venezuelan capital.”

McCaffrey called the military operation “audacious and complex and successful” in that the U.S. successfully seized the head of state and his wife in the middle of a city of 3 million people and flew them out.”

He added that Maduro was already an indicted drug cartel member along with 14 of his senior associates, but he reasoned there was no indication the nation was on its way to democracy.

“There’s no question he was a repressive despot,” McCaffrey said. “Seven million Venezuelans have walked out of the country, literally starving, even though it’s one of the most wealthy nations on the planet in terms of resources. Did they have to kill a bunch of Cuban intel guys who undoubtedly were guarding Maduro? More to come. But the larger question is … the president of Venezuela now is Vice President [Delcy] Rodríguez. The minister of defense has been seen in public. The minister of the interior has been seen in public, but there’s no indication yet of some wholescale march to democracy.”

“That’s not to say that the CIA may not indeed be now in the process of organizing the Venezuelan armed forces to turn against a regime of political leadership. I imagine they’re in there with bribery and offers and potential rewards in the next government so it may turn out well, but no one knows how this is gonna end up. So, it’s a very risky political gambit the president has embarked on.”

Republicans like Trump have experience with failed regime change, most notably the failed nation building of Iraq and Afghanistan in the aftermath of the U.S. War on Terror initiated by former president George W. Bush. That 20-year campaign has so far cost he U.S. upwards of $8 trillion, according to researchers at Brown University.

- YouTube youtu.be

Republicans set to pay the price for playing hardball

Earlier this week, I published an article about how Republicans have spent millions funding the Green Party since 2016 to bleed votes away from Democrats, and how useful idiots on the left have enthusiastically participated because they don’t understand the difference between a first-past-the-post versus a parliamentary electoral system.

The responses have been enlightening: there are still progressives who think the solution is to complain about the Democratic National Committee, trash people who point out these simple political realities, and promote Green and Working Families Party candidates even more aggressively to “scare” Democrats.

As if any of that would work.

The simple reality is that progressives shouldn’t just be fighting the hard right that’s captured the GOP: we should be learning from them. They had this come-to-Jesus moment back in 2008 when, to their shock and horror, America elected our first Black president.

Instead of just complaining, they got active and in just one short decade “conservative” activists completely took over the RNC, purged it of its “moderates,” and now are transforming America into something entirely new based on the models of Russia and Hungary.

I’m not suggesting that we should be learning from the GOP’s bizarro economics; we shouldn't be discovering their selfish morality, misogyny, or racism; or selling ourselves out to the world’s richest men and women.

But there is a vital lesson progressives must learn, which is how the far right took control of the Republican Party in the wake of that 2008 election and forced the entire conservative establishment to lurch so far to the right that they’ve even dumped people like Liz Cheney and George W. Bush.

If progressives hope to have any shot at transforming today’s Democratic Party, kicking out the corporate sellout Democrats and replacing them with real-deal progressives, then we need to get to work right now to do exactly what the Tea Party successfully did a decade and a half ago to take power within the GOP and then nationally.

And it starts in our own backyards.

Let me introduce you to the now-defunct Concord Project, a right-wing organization that, in 2009, was in charge of the Tea Party taking over the GOP.

The Concord Project expanded their get-out-the-vote strategy beyond just traditional phone banking, canvassing, and putting up “vote Republican” signs. Instead, they decided to infiltrate local politics by encouraging Tea Partiers and hard right conservatives more generally to become “Precinct Committee Members.”

Here’s their pitch in their own words from one of their Obama-era YouTube training videos:

“What’s the most powerful political office in the world? It is not the President of the United States. It’s Precinct Committeeman.”

So why is a Precinct Committeeman (or person) so important?

“First, because precinct committeemen and only precinct committeemen get to elect the leaders of the political parties; if you want to elect the leadership of one of the two major political parties in this country, then you have to become a precinct committeeman.”

As in the oldest and most basic governing reality in a republic: political power flows up from the bottom.

It starts with local Precinct Committeemen and women — people who are either appointed or win local elections with very few votes at stake, in some cases only 10 or 20 votes — to gain positions that pretty much anyone can hold but which wield enormous power. (Typically they’re voluntary, but in some states or cities they even carry a small salary.)

It’s Precinct Committee Persons who elect district, county, and state party officials and delegates, who choose primary nominees who then go on to hold elected office, and who draft a party's platform.

They’re also generally the first people elected officials meet with when they come back into the district. And those officials listen carefully to what Precinct Committee persons have to say. As a result, they’re massively more influential than average citizens.

So, the Concord folks told their people, if far right Tea Partiers moved in and took over Precinct Committee seats then they’d also be able to nominate a slew of Tea Partiers to hold higher offices within the Republican Party primaries.

And those Tea Party Republican Party primary candidates would then be winnowed down in the primary to one Tea Party Republican to run against the Democrat in the general election. This way, Tea Partiers would end up dominating the GOP.

That was their pitch: take over the Republican Party from the inside, from the bottom up. And it worked.

Control the primaries — as the Precinct Committee Members do — and you control the ultimate candidate, the election, and ultimately the nation, as we’ve seen repeatedly since the Tea Party era.

This is from a video they posted in January of 2010, with the same Concord Project Representative encouraging people in the Tea Party to do exactly what I just described:

“This video is for all the people out there in the Tea Party movement, the 9/12ers, just good decent people who are really fearful of what’s going on in the country and want to do something to fix things and they’re not sure what to do. Well, I’ve got a solution for you. The best way to ensure that conservatives win that all-important primary election is to become a real ball player in the ball game of politics. And that ball game is called party politics.“And this is a secret, they don’t want the party establishments, any incumbents don’t want you to know about this and that’s why I’m telling you about it. Only precinct committeemen get to vote for, to elect party leaders. Only precinct committeemen can vote to endorse candidates.”

Again, that was in 2010, 11 months before that November’s elections.

In 2008, half of the Republican Party’s Precinct Committeemen positions around the country were vacant.

But by 2011, motivated by the efforts of the Concord Project, the Tea Party (which has now mostly morphed into MAGA) had swept in to fill the gaps: they’d filled up the Republican Party and there were no empty GOP precinct committee-person seats anywhere in the country.

And we saw the results of that Precinct Committee takeover first with big Republican victories in 2012 and most recently in the 2024 election: the GOP is now being driven largely from the bottom up by hard-core rightwing activists who’ve taken over the party and are also seizing control of school boards and other local offices.

In 2012, just three years after this campaign to get movement conservatives into the inner workings of the GOP, Tea Party candidates got onto nearly every ballot around the country and Tea Partiers picked up 87 new seats in the US House of Representatives and nine new seats in the Senate.

And even though the Tea Party didn’t then control a majority within the GOP in Congress like MAGA does now, they did control the Republican Party’s platform because they had control of the Precinct Committees.

Progressives need to do the same thing, only within the Democratic Party.

The rules about how to become a Precinct Committee Person vary from state to state, so step one is to show up at your local Democratic Party, sign up, and find out who the players are and what the rules are.

Even the names of these positions vary, as former Ohio Democratic Party Chairman David Pepper notes on his excellent Substack newsletter Pepperspectives:

“In Cincinnati, we call them ‘precinct executives.’ Elsewhere, they are called ‘committeemen’ or ‘committeewomen.’ In other places, ‘ward chairs.’ Whatever they’re called, they are the basic unit of each city or county party structure in the country.”

If we’ve learned one thing over the last few years, it’s that the Democratic Party shifted to the corporate/neoliberal “center” with Clinton and Obama and its establishment has been highly resistant to moving back to its FDR roots by adopting real progressive change or elevating genuine progressives (like AOC) to senior/leadership positions.

And as we see right now in Trump and his parade of horribles, this unwillingness to stand up and fight is leading to the dismantling of programs that progressives fought so hard for over the entire last century.

We’ve been too often losing these fights, and to win them takes more than union protests in Wisconsin, No Kings marches, or even voting, although those are all important.

But to really take power, like the Tea Party did in three short years, it will take an infiltration of the Democratic Party itself through claiming Precinct Committee positions, as well as simply showing up regularly at the meetings.

If this year, starting now, we execute the same strategy the Tea Party did when the billionaires funding it first set out to take over the GOP, then we can move the Democratic Party back to its progressive roots and finally see the progressive reforms — and election victories — that we’ve been fighting for.

So, in response to the skeptics and cynics who responded to my article yesterday, I’d add the favorite line of my dear friend the late talkshow host Joe Madison. Whenever people would call into his SiriusXM show to complain about Democrats, he’d always say: “So, what are you going to do about it?”

We have 11 months before the next national elections and your mission is to show up at your local Democratic Party headquarters and begin the infiltration.

'There's no way': Legendary composer backs out of hosting Kennedy Center gala due to Trump

One of the most iconic living composers of Broadway musicals is now no longer hosting a gala to support the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts — and he's pinning the blame squarely on President Donald Trump.

The New York Times reported Friday that Stephen Schwartz, who is the composer for the Broadway musical and hit film Wicked, has now backed out of hosting the gala in response to Trump adding his name to the vaunted institution. Schwartz said he has long been a supporter of and collaborator with the Kennedy Center as it "was founded to be an apolitical home for free artistic expression for artists of all nationalities and ideologies."

"It is no longer apolitical and appearing there has now become an ideological statement," Schwartz told the Times. "As long as that remains the case, I will not appear there."

"There’s no way I would set foot in it now," he added in a separate statement to Newsday.

Schwartz — who has won three Oscars for his composing work on the Disney films Pocahontas (1996) and The Prince of Egypt (1999) and who is also known for composing music for the Broadway musicals Godspell and Pippin — said Washington National Opera artistic director Francesca Zambello asked him in late 2024 to host a gala for the opera at the Kennedy Center on May 16 of this year. While Schwartz agreed at the time, he told the Times it had been more than a year since he had spoken with anyone at the Kennedy Center. In February of last year, Trump appointed himself chairman of the Kennedy Center and replaced its board with political loyalists.

In a statement to the Times, Kennedy Center vice president for public relations Roma Daravi said: "Stephen Schwartz was never discussed nor confirmed and never had a contract by current Trump Kennedy Center leadership." Kennedy Center president Richard Grenell (who was acting director of national intelligence during Trump's first term) wrote on his X account: "The Stephen Schwartz reports are totally bogus."

"He was never signed and I’ve never had a single conversation on him since arriving," Grenell added. "He himself said last February he hadn’t heard anything on it."

Schwartz is the latest high-profile artist to distance himself from the Kennedy Center in the wake of Trump's takeover. Jazz group The Cookers recently pulled out of a New Years' Eve concert, and guitarist Chuck Redd cancelled a Christmas Eve performance. In addition to Redd and The Cookers, dance company Doug Varone and Dancers canceled two performances in April that would have generated $40,000 in income for the group.

Click here to read the Times' report in its entirety (subscription required).

Trump's high doses of aspirin could lead to 'stomach ulcers and brain bleeds': experts

Medical specialists warn President Donald Trump is risking "stomach ulcers and brain bleeds" with his unprescribed regimen of daily aspirin, reports the iPaper.

Trump told The Wall Street Journal that he takes a higher than recommended daily dose of aspirin because he wants “thin blood” to protect his heart.

“They say aspirin is good for thinning out the blood, and I don’t want thick blood pouring through my heart,” said Trump. “I want nice, thin blood pouring through my heart.”

But while aspirin can be used in a preventive manner, it is generally taken at a lower dose — and even then, only if the patient has already suffered heart-related injury such as stroke.

“If we’re using a drug for prevention, we want to use the minimum dose that gives the benefit without increasing the side effects,” said Professor Beverley Hunt, head of the charity Thrombosis UK.

“The risks from aspirin are not minor,” reports the iPaper. “In the stomach, aspirin irritates the lining, leading to stomach ulcers. It can also cause minor bleeds elsewhere in the gut, which can lead to anemia and fatigue in older people.”

In addition, aspirin can cause bleeding in the brain if the victim whacks their head, with Hunt saying “if you’re on aspirin and you hit your head and you have an intracranial bleed, it will be bigger on aspirin.”

People on aspirin are also more prone to bruises, as suggested by the unrelenting bruise on Trump’s hand, which he admits is caused by taking aspirin.

Another controversial aspect of the treatment is whether Trump should be taking it at all, say experts. Doctors in the UK and the U.S. know the risk and generally recommend it only for people who have already had a heart attack or stroke, particularly elderly people like the president. Hunt says the nation is “sort of moving away from it.”

In the U.S., guidelines even recommend against starting preventive aspirin for people who are 60 or over because of the high bleeding risk it presents to older people.

But, of course, Trump is the same president who in 2020 claimed to be taking hydroxychloroquine to prevent Covid despite the lack of evidence showing it worked. Years later, trials confirmed that it did not in fact do anything for the Covid-19 virus.

Read the full iPaper report at this link.

'Trump knows he's in trouble': Expert says 'jobs recession' could cost GOP in midterms

One expert says President Donald Trump "knows he's in trouble" given how voters are perceiving his management of the economy, and that Republicans in Congress are fighting an uphill battle to stay in power after this fall's midterm elections.

In a Friday segment on MS NOW, former CNN host John Harwood – who is now a distinguished fellow at Duke University — said Americans connect the poor economy "directly" to Trump's tariffs on U.S. trade partners. He noted that despite Trump campaigning to undo economic conditions under former President Joe Biden "on day one," most Americans' conditions "have gotten a little worse" since Trump's second term began. He added that Trump's lack of focus on kitchen-table issues has only built up more resentment among the public.

"People can see that they've gotten worse because of things he has done. He has done including these tariff policies. And they also see that he's not focused on their issues," Harwood said. "... He's focused on pardons, on starting a war with Venezuela, on renaming the Kennedy Center and doing all sorts of things that are not about the pocketbook of the average person."

Currently, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is weighing whether to uphold Trump's tariffs that he imposed under the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977. Harwood predicted that Republicans would secretly "be delighted" if SCOTUS invalidated Trump's tariffs, as it would improve the economy and " reduce some of the crazy uncertainty that businesses have to deal with." Still, Harwood observed that the jobs market would likely remain difficult for Americans looking for full-time employment in 2026, and that those Americans would hold that against the GOP majority in November.

"Americans know that jobs are harder to get now than they were a year ago. The labor market has cooled down considerably. There hasn't been much job creation lately," he said. "You can't talk people out of that, just like you can't talk them into thinking that their grocery costs have gone down."

"We're not in a what economists call a recession because the GDP is still growing," he continued. "But for all practical purposes, a jobs recession is what ordinary Americans think of as a recession, right? ... It's going in the wrong direction and it's going in the wrong direction as they head into an election year. Republicans know it. This is one of the reasons why Democrats are headed for a strong midterm election unless things change."

Watch Harwood's segment below:


- YouTube www.youtube.com

Republicans worry Trump's fundraising will 'siphon money from' midterm efforts: report

The New York Times reports President Donald Trump’s MAGA Inc. super PAC raised more than $100 million in the second half of 2025, with much of the money coming from wealthy donors looking for political favors. But the sheer size of Trump’s apparent pay-to-play scheme may be draining GOP coffers.

“The haul by MAGA Inc., detailed in a campaign finance report filed on Thursday night, reveals how aggressive fundraising has continued for a political operation that revolves around Mr. Trump, giving the organization over $300 million ahead of this year’s midterms,” reports the Times. “… The biggest donations were $12.5 million each from Greg Brockman, a co-founder of the artificial intelligence firm OpenAI, and his wife, Anna Brockman; and contributions totaling $20 million from the parent company of Crypto.com, a cryptocurrency trading platform that has lobbied the administration. Leaders of the fast-growing A.I. and crypto industries have courted Mr. Trump and gotten favorable treatment.”

Other donors, said the Times, included a nursing home magnate seeking an ambassadorship, a vape-maker and a woman whose father was begging a deal from federal prosecutors to settle charges that he bribed Puerto Rico’s governor.

In addition to MAGA Inc., Trump is making money for political nonprofit group Securing American Greatness and funding the construction of an new White House ballroom whose expense keeps growing larger with each month.

But the Times is reporting that some Republicans are expressing concern that “Trump’s continued fundraising will siphon money from party campaign spending vehicles and give his allies too much sway.”

And while White House spokeswoman Liz Huston rejects any suggestion that Trump’s decisions are shaped by donations, donors whose contributions to MAGA Inc. “have benefited from actions of either Trump or his administration” or are in industries that have benefitted.

The New York Times reports many donors have received invitations to exclusive events and meetings with Trump, including official White House functions. Several have also donated to the inauguration or to Trump’s ever-growing ballroom.

The e-cigarette company Juul, for example, donated $1 million to MAGA Inc. in early November, “less than four months after the Food and Drug Administration authorized the company’s vapes for the U.S. market,” reports the Times. “The move ended a lengthy standoff with regulators and lawmakers who accused the company of spurring an epidemic of e-cigarette use among youths.”

Read the New York Times report at this link.

'We could push him': Republican calls on his colleagues to stop being 'a bunch of lackeys'

One member of the House Republican Conference is hoping his GOP colleagues will stop ceding their constitutional powers to President Donald Trump.

The New York Times' Carl Hulse reported Friday that as Trump prepares to enter year two of his second term later this month, some lawmakers are calling for Congress to re-assert its Article I powers as a co-equal branch of government. This includes Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), who told the Times that he hoped Republicans in 2026 would stop being a rubber stamp for the term-limited commander-in-chief.

"The president would be better off if the Republican House pushed back more," said Bacon, who is not running for another term in November. "I think his tariff policy would be better. I think it would be better on Ukraine. I think we could push him in a much better direction if he was open to it."

"But if you feel like you have a bunch of lackeys that are going to do whatever you say, then he doesn’t feel constrained," he added.

Hulse observed that during Trump's first year back in office, he "mostly ignored the legislative branch on matters great and small." This even included federal spending, with Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought carrying out an agenda of aggressively "impounding" federal money already appropriated by Congress by refusing to allow that money to be disbursed. Trump has also bypassed Congress in matters of war, with his Department of Defense carrying out strikes in the Caribbean Sea and even off the Venezuelan coast without first seeking Congressional approval.

"With this Republican majority in the Senate, Donald Trump has basically walked all over Congress," Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) told the Times. He noted that Republicans would likely revolt if a future Democratic president chose to minimize Congress' role in a manner similar to Trump.

"It is absolutely outrageous, and the Senate Republicans know it is outrageous too,” Bennet said. “The question for them is whether or not they will come to the view that if we end up rolling over for this kind of stuff, it is going to happen as one administration changes to the next.”

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

Doctor says Trump may have revealed he's being treated for 'cognitive impairment'

A physician and pulmonologist said President Donald Trump may have accidentally let it slip that White House doctors could be treating him for "cognitive impairment" based on one of the president's recent social media posts.

During a Friday posting spree to his Truth Social account, Trump announced that doctors declared him to be "in 'PERFECT HEALTH,' and that I 'ACED' (Meaning, was correct on 100% of the questions asked!), for the third straight time, my Cognitive Examination, something which no other President, or previous Vice President, was willing to take." According to Dr. Vin Gupta, Trump was boasting taking the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (or MoCA), which doctors use when they're concerned a patient may have "age-related cognitive decline, so-called mild cognitive impairment or early stage dementia."

"Maybe people are forgetting linear thinking. They lose their train of thought," Gupta explained. "So we do something called a MoCA test, Montreal Cognitive Assessment tool, to to see is there issues with recall."

Gupta said the frequency Trump brags about passing cognitive tests suggests that the White House's medical team is likely so concerned about Trump's cognitive health that they're administering far more than the standard number of tests given to a typical elderly patient.

"It's OK to do that once or twice a year, perhaps," Gupta said. "But he talks about doing it maybe weekly, or almost every single time he does a truth ... Maybe he's not listening to his physicians. It seems like they're trying to give him some good advice, but it's a mixed bag. But this is not the flex that he thinks it is ... you don't do this every other day and somehow use that as evidence that you're cognitively there."

"Those that tend to do Montreal tests with that level of frequency usually are worried about the presence of early stage dementia or cognitive impairment," he added. "So he might be ruling himself into something that he doesn't want to rule himself into."

At the age of 78 years and seven months, Trump was the oldest person to ever be administered the presidential oath of office beating out former President Joe Biden, who was 78 years and 61 days old as of his inauguration in 2021. Trump will turn 80 years old in June.

Watch Gupta's segment below:

- YouTube www.youtube.com

'Hands-on' Trump likely knew Epstein was preying on girls at Mar-a-Lago: ex-US attorney

A former prosecutor says there is reason to suspect President Donald Trump knew convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein was recruiting victims out of his Mar-a-Lago estate.

Former U.S. Attorney Barbara McQuade made her claim after a bombshell The Wall Street Journal report suggested Trump ignored allegations involving a teenage spa worker and a broader pattern of recruitment and abuse linked to Ghislaine Maxwell, the infamous groomer of young women for deceased child predator Jeffrey Epstein.

The Journal's report lays additional suspicion on the long-scrutinized relationship between Trump and his Mar-a-Lago resort’s connections to Epstein’s sex-trafficking ring. The paper reported that a spa employee reportedly disclosed the house call and Epstein’s abuse to Mar-a-Lago human resources, but that it wasn't reported to police in Palm Beach at the time of the accusation.

“What information was provided to the human resources department at Mar-a-Lago? What did they decide to do with that information? And who participated in that decision about whether it should go any further?”McQuade said Friday on MS NOW. “You know, Donald Trump likes to portray himself as a very hands-on manager. Was he made aware of this allegation? Did he have anything to do with declining to share that information with the police?”

“Because if so, of course it could be that he is responsible for additional abuse that was done at the hands of Jeffrey Epstein when there had been an opportunity to nip it in the bud,” McQuade added.

The Journal’s account is buttressed by interviews with former Mar-a-Lago employees and contemporaneous records suggesting Epstein and Maxwell’s overtures with Mar-A-Lago staff produced “years” of internal unease, staff warnings — even going so far as to prompt warnings from Trump’s then-wife Marla Maples. According to the Journal, Mar-a-Lago’s spa routinely sent “young women” to Epstein’s nearby Palm Beach mansion for massages, manicures, and various “services,” with former employees claiming the house calls went on for years.

Even though Epstein was not a dues-paying member of the club, Trump instructed staff to treat him as a member in good standing who could book house calls.

The Journal reports Epstein cultivated a reputation among Mar-a-Lago spa workers for sexual misconduct during those calls.

Watch McQuade's segment below:

- YouTube youtu.be

'It's going to come out': Ex-RNC spokesman says Jack Smith's testimony too damning to hide

Bulwark podcaster and former Republican National Committee spokesperson Tim Miller asserted Republicans chose New Year’s Eve to release damning testimony from former special prosecutor Jack Smith in order to "bury" it — but argued that their ploy won’t work.

“They're obviously trying to bury this,” Miller told MS NOW. “It doesn't take a political communications expert to let you know that. … But, look, this is the kind of thing that can't really be buried. It's going to come out no matter what day of the week, no matter what hour of the day. You can try all you want, but I mean, this was … the special prosecutor who hasn't spoken much at all publicly: Jack Smith. And anything that he says will be newsworthy. He was prosecuting, and he believes he was going to be able to indict and convict the current sitting president of the United States.”

Miller said the nation will likely be eager to hear Smith lay the details of the case out for the public to see, especially considering most Americans saw the crime underway as it happened in on January 6.

“We all watched the crime, so this isn't like watching Law and Order SVU where you're, like, waiting for the big reveal around the corner, and I think that's the thing that a lot of us are frustrated with, with regards to former [U.S. Attorney] Merrick Garland and the Biden administration: It's affirming what we all knew. And that's validating. It's important that it's out there. … This prosecution should have started the day Joe Biden got into office.”

The former George W. Bush speechwriter said the likely be the new round of faces that Smith name-checks who verified the facts of Trump’s attempted theft of the U.S. election in 2020 will be doubly intriguing for many American voters. This list will include people who voted for Trump, as well as his close political allies.

“One of the clips … that was interesting to me was when [Smith] says bluntly that [Trump advisor] Rudy Giuliani admitted that he knew it [Trump’s claims] were fake. And I think that that was going to be a big group of people that [Smith] relied on — not the folks who totally flipped on Trump, like [former White House aide] Cassidy Hutchinson, but people who were advisers to his campaign who have to, by law, testify honestly."

"And they were going to testify honestly and say, ‘hey, [Trump] asked me to provide evidence that this election was stolen, and I told him it wasn't.’”

Watch the segment below:

- YouTube youtu.be

GOP senator admits Republicans' messaging is 'not resonating with a lot of voters'

One member of the Senate Republican Conference is now publicly fretting about his party's ability to connect to voters ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.

NOTUS reported Friday that Republicans remain divided on how to sell their agenda to voters who will decide which party controls Congress this coming fall. The GOP's lone legislative victory of 2025 was the so-called "One Big Beautiful Bill Act," (OBBB) which President Donald Trump and Congressional Republicans have since tried to rebrand as the "Working Families Tax Cut" with mixed results. House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) insisted that "there’s so many things that are in that bill that you could talk about that nobody’s ever heard about."

According to Scalise, some of the lesser-known elements of the OBBB Republicans could tout on the campaign trail include the modernization of U.S. air traffic control systems and the stabilization of tax rates for the next decade. He also pointed to the conservative goal of increased "school choice" programs, in which money for public schools is allocated for alternative K-12 education, like charter schools and private school vouchers.

"Obviously, as we’re doing all these things, you got to go back home and talk about them," he said.

However, some Republicans are less optimistic about how the OBBB is gone over with the American public. Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Calif.) told NOTUS that he believed rebranding the legislation was a political blunder, and its messaging was "mishandled, sort of from the beginning."

"It should have been framed in a way that communicated what we were trying to do, which is to prevent a massive tax increase to provide targeted tax relief in a way that will stimulate economic growth and increase wages and purchasing power for American families," the California Republican said.

Sen. Jim Justice (R-W.Va.) was more blunt, telling NOTUS that Democrats' string of lopsided electoral victories in November of 2025 didn't bode well for his party's chances in November. He maintained that he felt the GOP was winning the policy battle but losing on the messaging front.

"Republicans have done so much good and everything, but the messaging is not resonating with a lot of voters that we need it to resonate with," he said. "If you’re not concerned then you’re living in a cave."

Click here to read NOTUS' report in full.

Trump DOJ's 'bush league' bungling of Epstein files is intentional: ex-prosecutor

Former Department of Justice (DOJ) prosecutor Elie Honig says the “first sign of trouble” that Trump’s DOJ was not serious about releasing the Epstein files was the way it blew off the due date mandated by Congress.

“The Epstein Files Transparency Act … required that the DoJ ‘shall’ (not ‘may’) produce ‘all’ (not ‘some’) documents within 30 days of the law’s November 19 enactment. Yet when the December 19 deadline hit, Justice Department leadership channeled the Fast Times at Ridgemont High stoner Jeff Spicoli to explain its unlawful delinquency: Just couldn’t make it on time.”

Things “spiraled from there,” said Honig, with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche (who is also President Donald Trump's former personal attorney) assuring the DOJ would complete the release “over the next two weeks.” Yet Blanche announced that prosecutors had “uncovered” over a million additional documents despite the documents sitting in the DOJ’s own internal files.

“We currently have no idea where the overall production stands. Has the DOJ released, say, 95 percent of the Epstein files? Fifty percent? Twenty-two percent? The Justice Department itself seems not quite sure,” said Honig, adding that the rollout of the files was itself riddled with “bush-league errors.”

The word-search function required by the act initially floundered with searches for "Trump" and "Clinton" originally producing no results. Documents relating to Trump vanished and returned without explanation. And the Justice Department “apparently used a paint roller to black out entire hundred-plus-page documents” while failing to redact victim-identifying information as required by the act, according to Honig.

“But the Justice Department’s bungled rollout shouldn’t distract from an even more serious problem: its open disregard of the law’s substantive commands,” Honig said. “… If they’re truly concerned with shedding meaningful light, they would focus on two overarching questions. First, why did federal prosecutors in the Southern District of Florida give Epstein an outrageous state-level sweetheart plea deal in Florida in 2007, when they had ample basis to prosecute him federally and lock him up for decades? And, second, who else beyond Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell participated in this massive child-sex-trafficking conspiracy?

Honig said the Transparency Act is intentionally framed to answer these two questions, but DOJ leaders “have simply reinterpreted the law to their own preference and convenience and have left victims and the public largely in the dark.” He accused Blanche of defying the Act by declaring that the Justice Department will not release documents pertaining to internal prosecutorial communications that could explain why Epstein got such a light deal in Florida during Trump’s first term.

“As long as Justice Department leadership refuses to follow the law as written, we’ll never learn what really happened inside the Southern District of Florida in 2007,” said Honig. “How much evidence did prosecutors have? Why did then-U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta let Epstein plead out to piddly state-level charges? Why did prosecutors ignore and at times mislead Epstein’s victims? Did anyone inside the Justice Department object?”

Worse, Honig said Trump’s DOJ is redacting the names of ten individuals labeled “co-conspirators” by FBI agents working the Epstein case as well as the names of others who, according to documents, allegedly had or sought sexual contact with minors. Yet the act demands “no record shall be withheld, delayed, or redacted on the basis of embarrassment, reputational harm or political sensitivity.”

“No sentient human being actually believes that only two people — Epstein and Maxwell — were entirely responsible for the trafficking ring that victimized hundreds of underage girls. Yet nobody else has been charged and we’ll never learn the identities of other culpable facilitators and participants so long as the Justice Department refuses to follow the law’s plain language,” Honig said.

Read Honig's Intelligencer column at this link.

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