The stories you want. The opinions that matter.
No, thanks
{{ site.specific_data.Twitter }}
'I Know A Lot About Grass': Trump Meanders In Bizarre Kennedy Center Remarks

'I Know A Lot About Grass': Trump Meanders In Bizarre Kennedy Center Remarks

President Donald Trump wandered through a litany of grievances and a long list of concerns during his announcement of the Kennedy Center honorees at the iconic Washington, D.C., venue on Wednesday.

During his lengthy remarks, Trump falsely claimed once again that he won the “rigged” 2020 election that he actually lost, he spoke about renovations to the White House and the Kennedy Center, he gave a lesson about the importance of grass, he praised U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) for newly-released favorable poll numbers, he repeatedly attacked Democrats, talked about purchasing new seats rather than refurbishing the ones at the Kennedy Center, claimed trillions of dollars in tariffs are coming in from foreign countries all over the world, acknowledged accusations of being a “dictator” after taking over Washington, D.C.’s police force, claimed D.C.’s crime statistics are fraudulent, and warned that he may do the same to top Democratic cities across the nation that he did to the nation’s capital city — all before taking questions from reporters.

As he took questions, the President continued to veer off topic. He told reporters that Congressional Democrats are led by “insane” and “crazy” people, he called the Democratic nominee for Mayor of New York a “communist,” he claimed that there are no taxes on Social Security payments, he complained about “potholes” in D.C.’s roads, called for a “very talented asphalt-type person” to repave the roads, and brushed off news Russia had hacked into U.S. federal court computer systems.

Trump continued talking to reporters, saying that he turned down “a couple of wokesters” who were nominated, talked about viewership for his Apprentice TV series, claimed he “finished” building the wall at the Southern border during his first term, complained about Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell’s building renovations, talked about his nicknames for Powell — “Too Late” and for U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) — “Pocahontas,” U.S. Senator Adam Schiff (D-CA) — “Shifty Schiff,” and Hillary Clinton — “Crooked Hillary.”

Some excerpts:

“The bones are so good,” Trump said of the Kennedy Center. “The bones of a building, you don’t have good bones, you might as well forget it. I’m working in another building, a thing, called the White House. We’re fixing it up so beautifully. It needed it.”

He also said, “we’re going to also fix up a place called Washington, D.C. We’re going to make it so beautiful again, we’re going to be redoing the parks, redoing the grass. You know, grass isn’t a lifetime like people have a lifetime, and a lifetime of this grass is long been gone when you look at the parks where the grass is all tired, exhausted, we’re going to redo the grass with the finest grasses. I know a lot about grass because I own a lot of golf courses, and if you don’t have good grass, you’re not in business very long.”

“Lindsey Graham. By the way, you have very good poll numbers. Lindsey, I just saw congratulations.”

“We ended the woke political programming, and we’re restoring the Kennedy Center as the premier venue for performing arts anywhere in the country, anywhere in the world.”

Trump also said, “we secured the critical funding necessary to rebuild the building and we’re gonna get all brand new, highest level seats magnificent seats, and it’s gonna be all new. We could have taken the existing ones and do it a little paint job, a little fabric, but it’s not the same thing. So we’ll be taking out next season, all of the seats will be taken out.”

“If we say, ‘We want to stop crime in this country, or, as an example, bail, we want to make it so that people if they murder somebody, they’re in jail, they don’t get out on no bail,” Democrats “say, ‘We don’t want that. We want people to murder somebody, and they immediately are released, and they go out and murder somebody else.”

Crime in Washington, D.C. “is the worst that’s ever been, but it started as of about yesterday. It started, you see a big change, and people are feeling safe already. I’ve had so many calls. ‘Thank you, sir, thank you.’ They were afraid to walk out. They’re not afraid anymore.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

- YouTube www.youtube.com


Reprinted with permission from Alternet

Reckless Gabbard Published CIA's Most Closely Guarded Secrets

Reckless Gabbard Published CIA's Most Closely Guarded Secrets

The minimally redacted classified report on Russia’s interference in the 2016 election that Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard released late last month contains information so sensitive that it could allow America’s enemies to detect top-secret spying techniques and human sources, and could result in America’s allies reconsidering the trust they place in the U.S. Intelligence Community, one top Democrat is warning.

The CIA and other intelligence agencies opposed the release of the 46-page report, according to The Washington Post, but Director Gabbard released it “with the blessing of President Donald Trump.”

“The document contains multiple references to CIA human sources reporting on Putin’s plans. Such sources are among the agency’s most closely guarded secrets,” the Post reported.

“Gabbard, CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Attorney General Pam Bondi have released a slew of intelligence and law enforcement reports over the last month that they claim — without evidence — prove that spy agencies’ finding that Moscow intervened in the 2016 presidential contest to help Trump is a ‘hoax’ concocted by the Obama administration,” according to the Post.

Indeed, the report Gabbard released, stemming from a 2017 Republican majority House Intelligence Committee review, disputes U.S. intelligence agencies’ findings that Russian President Vladimir Putin preferred the Republican nominee for president, Donald Trump in 2016, over Democrat Hillary Clinton, and made efforts to help him get elected.

A Republican majority U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee report confirmed that Russian President Putin endeavored to help get now-President Donald Trump elected in 2016:

“The Committee found that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered the Russian effort to hack computer networks and accounts affiliated with the Democratic Party and leak information damaging to Hillary Clinton and her campaign for president. Moscow’s intent was to harm the Clinton Campaign, tarnish an expected Clinton presidential administration, help the Trump Campaign after Trump became the presumptive Republican nominee, and undermine the U.S. democratic process.”

Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, blasted Gabbard’s release of the 46-page House report.

“The desperate and irresponsible release of the partisan House Intelligence report puts at risk some of the most sensitive sources and methods our Intelligence Community uses to spy on Russia and keep Americans safe,” Senator Warner said in a statement, according to the Post. “And in doing so, Director Gabbard is sending a chilling message to our allies and assets around the world: the United States can no longer be trusted to protect the intelligence you share with us.”

Separately, on Tuesday, Sen. Warner wrote on social media, “Tulsi Gabbard is a threat to our national security and should be fired.”

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

Kristi Noem

Leaked DHS Memo: Trump Officials Plan Domestic 'Forever War' On Migrants

A leaked Department of Homeland Security memo reveals a plan to dramatically increase the use of the U.S. armed forces on American streets in domestic law enforcement roles, especially in immigration, for “years.”

The memo “provides a glimpse into the thinking of top officials as they seek to involve the Defense Department more deeply in these domestic operations, and it has unnerved experts who believe it portends a frightening escalation,” The New Republic reported.

“The memo is alarming, because it speaks to the intent to use the military within the United States at a level not seen since Japanese internment,” Carrie Lee, a senior fellow at the German Marshall Fund, told TNR’s Greg Sargent. “The military is the most powerful, coercive tool our country has. We don’t want the military doing law enforcement. It absolutely undermines the rule of law.”

TNR reports that the “administration seems to be supercharging immigration ‘invasion’ agitprop to manufacture a sense of national trauma similar to the one that arose after the September 11 attacks. That led to another type of ‘war on terror’ hyper-militarization at home (as well as abroad). The administration seems determined to outdo that—this time against the new internal enemy.”

Joseph Nunn, counsel for the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center told Sargent, “Normalizing routine military support to law enforcement could create a kind of domestic ‘forever war,’ but one that is uniquely dangerous.”

The memo was written by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s brother, Philip Hegseth, who works for the Department of Homeland Security as a liaison officer to the Pentagon, as well as a senior advisor to Secretary Kristi Noem.

Philip Hegseth’s memo included an itinerary, and attendees for a July 21 meeting, “including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and several of his top advisers, Joint Chiefs Chairman Dan Caine, and NORTHCOM Commander Gregory Guillot. Staff include Phil Hegseth and acting ICE Commissioner Todd Lyons.”

The Daily Beast, reporting on the Hegseth memo, called it a “secret plan for years of troops on U.S. streets.”

Prominent attorney George Conway commented on Sargent’s reporting on social media, writing: “And here we go.” He said the plan seems to be “to turn the nation into a military police state. They’re telling each other to be careful what they write down, but they’ve already written down too much.”

“The point of calling illegal immigration an ‘invasion’ is to justify using the military domestically,” noted Cato Institute vice president Alex Nowrasteh.

“Things are going from bad to worse at terrifying speed,” wrote Matt Bennett, co-founder of the moderate think tank Third Way, calling the report “very alarming,”

“Fake the invasion to seize unprecedented power,” added the Cato Institute’s David J. Bier.

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

Raging Musk Now Threatens Members Of Congress Who Support Trump Budget

Raging Musk Now Threatens Members Of Congress Who Support Trump Budget

Billionaire Elon Musk is threatening to target members of Congress for defeat if they support President Donald Trump’s “One Big, Beautiful Bill” after campaigning on promises to cut government spending. Although Musk did not specifically name a party, no Democrat is expected to back the budget measure.

“Every member of Congress who campaigned on reducing government spending and then immediately voted for the biggest debt increase in history should hang their head in shame!” Musk wrote late Monday afternoon, as the Senate began voting on the legislation. “And they will lose their primary next year if it is the last thing I do on this Earth.”

Musk’s threat comes after his numerous attacks on the bill—which is critical to Trump’s agenda—based largely on its massive increases to the federal debt.

“It is obvious with the insane spending of this bill, which increases the debt ceiling by a record FIVE TRILLION DOLLARS that we live in a one-party country – the PORKY PIG PARTY!!” Musk declared one hour earlier. “Time for a new political party that actually cares about the people.”

New York magazine’s Intelligencer reported on Monday that Musk is “not done” fighting Trump.

“How can you call yourself the Freedom Caucus if you vote for a DEBT SLAVERY bill with the biggest debt ceiling increase in history?” Musk also wrote, lashing out at the far-right caucus, and mentioning two Members by name: Reps. Andy Harris of Maryland, the group’s chairman, and Chip Roy of Texas.

On Saturday, Musk had warned, “The latest Senate draft bill will destroy millions of jobs in America and cause immense strategic harm to our country! Utterly insane and destructive. It gives handouts to industries of the past while severely damaging industries of the future.”

“Polls show that this bill is political suicide for the Republican Party,” he also warned.

New York noted that “Trump, presumably, isn’t thrilled about Musk’s last-minute attempt to sink his signature legislative package. But so far he’s refrained from hitting back.”

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

'Nothing Is Sacred': Trump Vandalizes White House Rose Garden

'Nothing Is Sacred': Trump Vandalizes White House Rose Garden

First Lady Melania Trump’s renovation of Jackie Kennedy’s iconic Rose Garden during Donald Trump’s first term drew widespread criticism. Now, President Trump is renovating that space once again—this time transforming it into a Mar-a-Lago-style patio—sparking a fresh wave of backlash from critics.

President Trump defended what Newsweek described as “bulldozing” part of the Rose Garden, saying the change was intended to make the space more accessible for women wearing high heels, according to The Daily Beast. The renovations also involve removing several trees, including a saucer magnolia reportedly planted to honor President John F. Kennedy.

“It’s supposed to have events,” Trump said of the Rose Garden. “Every event you have it’s soaking wet,” he complained.

“The women with the high heels, it’s just too much… the grass, it doesn’t work. We use it for press conferences. It doesn’t work.”

The White House has done little to inform the American people about the construction, leaving critics to ask questions including who is paying for the construction, and is there a federal agency or commission that approves changes to the White House, given its centuries-long history.

“The White House is a national symbol and not the personal property of any president. Permanent changes should be reviewed by preservation experts and consider public sentiment, not be made unilaterally for vanity or political messaging,” wrote Molly Ploofkins, a social media user whose bio says she is a retired Army medic.

“We’ve got money to bulldoze the White House Rose Garden and turn it into a Mar-a-Lago-style patio, but we can’t pay for cancer research for kids or make sure veterans aren’t living off food stamps,” remarked Democratic strategist and former Harris senior advisor Mike Nellis.

“I love how people keep pointing out that private donations paid for it—not the government. I don’t give a s—,” Nellis added later. “The issue is this administration’s priorities. Trump thinks it’s fine to bulldoze the Rose Garden to build a patio so he can relax outside, while doing nothing to improve your life. That’s the criticism. He’s enriching himself, screwing everyone else, and not lifting a g------ finger to help you. That’s the problem.”

Journalist Jane Coaston remarked, “I am increasingly of the view that Trump wants to ‘be president’ so he can watch musicals and manage the rose garden and he just lets other people be co-president for periods of time so he has more time for musicals and rose garden management.”

“RIP to the White House Rose Garden,” observed former Obama White House photographer Pete Souza. “Today the Rose Garden is being ripped apart as construction begins to pave over the entire grass area. A sad, and unnecessary, day for what used to be the People’s House.”

“The White House rose garden was established in 1913,” noted WAMU’s Esther Ciammachilli, before lamenting, “Trump has just paved paradise and put up a parking lot. This is not his house. It belongs to the American people. He is just a tenant. Nothing is sacred anymore.”

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

'Changes Are Coming!': Trump Abruptly Admits Farms Rely On Migrant Workers

'Changes Are Coming!': Trump Abruptly Admits Farms Rely On Migrant Workers

President Donald Trump acknowledged on Thursday that his aggressive and controversial immigration policies are stripping undocumented immigrants from the farming and agriculture workforce. Now, he declares, “Changes are coming!”

Trump’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents, reportedly at the direction of White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, have been specifically targeting farms to detain and deport undocumented workers.

“The border is no longer the focus,” Reason maazine reported Wednesday. “Now, the administration seemingly believes that the [immigration] crisis extends to nail salons, hardware stores, farms, and restaurants across the country, where undocumented immigrants who are peacefully exchanging labor for dollars are being targeted.”

The Trump administration “is ramping up immigration raids across the country, and farm workers are no longer being spared. Almost half of the more than 850,000 crop workers in the US are undocumented, the Department of Agriculture estimates,” according to Bloomberg News.

One raid at an Omaha, Nebraska, meat plant reportedly netted 70 detentions this week, and now the facility is operating with just one-third of its staff, Bloomberg reported.

President Trump may be hearing some of the many stories.

In a cryptic message on Thursday, he wrote: “Our great Farmers and people in the Hotel and Leisure business have been stating that our very aggressive policy on immigration is taking very good, long time workers away from them, with those jobs being almost impossible to replace. In many cases the Criminals allowed into our Country by the VERY Stupid Biden Open Borders Policy are applying for those jobs. This is not good. We must protect our Farmers, but get the CRIMINALS OUT OF THE USA. Changes are coming!”

He did not provide any details.

Critics mocked Trump.

“The president of the United States is seemingly unaware that his administration recently ordered ICE to round up and deport immigrants who haven’t committed crimes … like those who work in tourism and agriculture,” observed MSNBC columnist Michael A. Cohen, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic Studies.

“Breaking News,” snarked Spencer Hakimian, a hedge fund chief investment officer. “The guy that spent the first 70 years of his life in construction, hospitality, and entertainment, accidentally finds out that our entire labor force runs off of illegal immigration. Oops!”

“Turns out,” California Governor Gavin Newsom wrote, “chasing hard working people through ranches and farms and snatching women and children off the streets is not good policy.”

But The New Republic’s Greg Sargent took a wider view.

“Trump just admitted that his mass deportations are bad for farmers and the economy, and crucially, also admitted that workers who are getting deported are ‘almost impossible to replace.’ That’s a massive repudiation of MAGA ideology,” Sargent wrote.

“It’s an enormous admission, both that his deportation policies are terrible *and* that he knows they’re awful politics for him,” he added.

“Every prominent Democrat in the country should jump on this immediately,” Sargent urged. “Enough b——- cowering on this issue. Get on this! Trump just handed you a massive weapon. Use it!”

Reprinted with permission from Alternet

Rambling Incoherently On War, Trump Threatens Protesters With 'Very Big Force'

Rambling Incoherently On War, Trump Threatens Protesters With 'Very Big Force'

President Donald Trump made a series of inaccurate claims in his remarks on Tuesday, conflating World War I and World War II, incorrectly suggesting he spoke with the governor of California on Monday when it was just after midnight Saturday morning, and asserting—contrary to the First Amendment—that protests, even peaceful ones, can be shut down with “heavy force.”

During remarks to reporters in the Oval Office, Trump was asked when he last spoke with California Governor Gavin Newsom. “

A day ago,” he said Tuesday afternoon, which was three and a half days after the governor confirmed his phone call. Trump also confirmed the call by sending a screenshot to a Fox News reporter. The screenshot read June 7, 1:23 AM.

“Recently, other countries celebrated the victory of World War I, France was celebrating, really,” Trump told troops at Fort Bragg on Tuesday afternoon. “They were all celebrating. The only one that doesn’t celebrate is the USA and we’re the ones that won the war. Without us, you’d all be speaking German right now. Maybe a little Japanese thrown in. But we won the war.”

The United States was part of a coalition during both WWI and WWII. Trump was speaking about WWI, but then claimed, “Without us, you’d all be speaking German right now. Maybe a little Japanese.”

That’s a reference to World War II—Japan was on the side of the Allies, with the U.S., in WWI.

Also on Tuesday, Trump declared that anyone caught protesting his controversial military parade on Saturday will be met with “very heavy force,” despite the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution clearly protecting political protests.

“We won the war, and we’re the only country that didn’t celebrate it, and we’re going to be celebrating big on Saturday,” Trump claimed. Veterans Day was initially created as Armistice Day to honor those who died in World War I.

“And if there’s any protestor that wants to come out, they will be met with very big force. By the way, for those people that want to protest, they’re gonna be met with very big force. And I haven’t even heard about a protest, but, you know, this is people that hate our country, but they will be met with very heavy force.”

The First Amendment protects both political speech and the right to “petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

Trump did not state “violent protestors,” or “rioters.” He said “any protestor.”

Watch the videos above or at this link.

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

U.S. Senator Jon Ossoff (D-GA).

Senators Roast Trump's FDA Chief Over Fired Scientists

The Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, Marty Makary, came under strong criticism for his inconsistent remarks before a Senate Appropriations subcommittee after the accuracy of his claims related to terminated scientists and others was called into question by Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-GA).

"You were asked on April 17th whether any of the personnel reductions had included personnel responsible for food safety or infant formula safety," Ossoff told Makary. "You said, quote, 'There were no cuts to scientists or reviewers or inspectors—absolutely none'. You were asked on April 23rd on CNN, and said, quote, 'Again, there were no cuts to scientists or inspectors'."

"But then just two days later, an HHS spokesperson confirmed that in fact, scientists had been fired, and that you were scrambling to rehire them," Ossoff continued. "Did you, in fact, say on April 23d, there were no cuts to scientists or inspectors? Just before we get into the details, is that an accurate quote?"

"No scientific reviewer was cut as part of the reduction in force," replied Makary.

"You said there were no cuts to scientists or inspectors. Didn't you say that?" Ossoff pressed.

"My understanding," Makary replied, "was that there were no cuts to the scientific staff, but specifically the scientific reviewers is what I was referring to."

"But you said there were," Ossoff responded.

A similar back and forth continued for several minutes, then Ossoff asked, "Had, in fact, scientists who study outbreaks of food related illnesses and the safety of infant formula been fired?"

"The reason it's not accurate, Senator, is that people were not fired, they were scheduled for the reduction in force, and when that was before I got there. When I got there, we did an assessment, and so some of those individuals out of the 19,000 were restored," Makary replied.

"Have all scientists responsible for food safety and infant formula safety, been rehired or reinstated?" Ossoff asked.

"Look, we have not reduced in force the scientific review staff. I know where you're going with this," Makary replied.

"You said there were no cuts to scientists, and then the HHS spokesperson said, actually, there were cuts to scientists, and now we're trying to rehire them. I mean, so it gives the impression you're not sure about the personnel actions ongoing in your own agency," said Ossoff.

After more back-and-forth, Ossoff wrapped it up: "You were very specific. You said there were no cuts to scientists. And then five days later, there were cuts to scientists. Those are your direct quotes. There were no cuts to scientists, but there were cuts to scientists."

Again, more back-and-forth and then Makary appeared to grow frustrated.

"I mean, this is the problem in government. Somebody has a fancy sounding name like, 'Infant Formula Safety,' and no one can ever touch them, even if they're not doing their job."

During his testimony, Makary also declared to another Senator, "By the way, America doesn't want COVID boosters."

And a third chastised him, saying: "You're prepared for a question that I didn't ask ... I'm asking you what are you doing about bird flu! Just answer that. Please. Don't give me a runaround about other stuff."

Watch the video below or at this link.

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

Pete Hegseth

Hegseth Promotes Pentagon Religious Service Preaching God 'Anointed' Trump

U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, an Evangelical Christian whose religious tattoos drew scrutiny during his confirmation hearings, led a Christian prayer service in the Pentagon auditorium during official working hours on Wednesday. The event featured Secretary Hegseth's personal pastor from Tennessee, Brooks Potteiger, and included remarks describing President Donald Trump as “sovereignly appointed," according to The New York Times.

"This morning at 9:00 AM the Office of the Secretary of Defense sent out what appears to be a building wide email to the entire Pentagon inviting everyone to a 'Christian prayer service and worship' in the Pentagon auditorium," wrote Fred Wellman, who writes "On Democracy" at Substack. Wellman is a graduate of West Point and the Harvard Kennedy School, an Army veteran of 22 years who served four combat tours, and a political consultant. "Not the chapel. The auditorium."

"This is a clear and direct violation by a Cabinet member of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment and is a direct violation of military norms, traditions, and regulations by the senior official of the entire military," Wellman alleged.

"The defense secretary said that attendance at the prayer service was voluntary," the Times added, "but encouraged the uniformed military personnel and civilian employees there to tell their co-workers about it."

Politico Pentagon and national security reporter Paul McLeary noted that there was even an official government email address on the invitation, "to RSVP to this 30 minute event in the middle of a workday."

The Atlantic's Tom Nichols, a retired U.S. Naval War College professor and expert on national security, added: "The RSVP is a nice touch, so that they know who's on board."

He also weighed in more broadly:

"Not sure of the constitutionality here - not a lawyer! - but years ago, one of the War Colleges used to do this with 'voluntary' Bible study opportunities that had the same kind of roster-taking, and that went away pronto after complaints and an investigation," Nichols wrote.

Last week, the Freedom From Religion Foundation published a report stating that Pastor Potteiger is "known for promoting Christian nationalist views," and claimed that Wednesday's event "is expected to be a monthly prayer gathering. According to Potteiger, the event will include Christian preaching, proselytizing and the recitation of the Lord’s Prayer — all within one of the most powerful institutions of the U.S. government."

“This is a blatant violation of the First Amendment and its proscription of religion in government,” FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor said in a statement. “Assuming the pastor’s boast is true, these prayer meetings would not only exclude and marginalize the significant number of nonreligious and non-Christian service members, they will send the impermissible message that Christianity is the Pentagon’s preferred faith.”

"Turning the Pentagon into a church service during duty hours isn’t just inappropriate — it’s unconstitutional," FFRF also said. "We’ve sent a letter demanding an end to this blatant breach of the First Amendment."

In January, before he was confirmed, The Guardian reported that in "a series of newly unearthed podcasts, Pete Hegseth, Donald Trump’s pick for defense secretary, appears to endorse the theocratic and authoritarian doctrine of 'sphere sovereignty', a worldview derived from the extremist beliefs of Christian reconstructionism (CR) and espoused by churches aligned with far-right Idaho pastor Douglas Wilson."

Others are also blasting the decision to hold a Christian prayer service inside the Pentagon.

"Hegseth continues to propagate christian white nationalism, while undermining the separation of church and state and the norms of civil-military relations," wrote retired U.S. Army Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman, the former Director of European Affairs for the U.S. National Security Council, whose whistleblower efforts led to the first impeachment of Donald Trump.

"This is what Christian nationalism looks like: the government using its power to push religion from the top down, said Max Flugrath, Communications Director for Fair Fight Action.

In February, author Brian Kaylor, a Baptist minister with a Ph.D. in political communication, posted a video from a Pentagon town hall where Secretary Hegseth began his remarks by declaring, “All glory to God.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

Chief U.S. District Judge James Boasberg

Judge Threatens White House With Contempt Over Deportation Order

Citing a “willful disregard,” Chief U.S. District Judge James Boasberg has found probable cause that the Trump administration could be held in criminal contempt of court after officials defied his order to not remove Venezuelan migrants from the country based on a centuries-old wartime law.

Boasberg, first appointed to the federal bench by President George W. Bush, on Wednesday “said he would launch proceedings to determine whether to hold Trump administration officials in criminal contempt,” The Washington Post reported.

Pointing to the “broader showdown between the Trump administration and the federal judiciary,” the Post reported that Boasberg “[said] the Trump administration’s actions on March 15, as the removal flights proceeded despite his order to the contrary, ‘demonstrate a willful disregard … sufficient for the Court to conclude that probable cause exists to find the Government in criminal contempt.'”

The judge wrote: “The Court does not reach such conclusion lightly or hastily; indeed, it has given Defendants ample opportunity to rectify or explain their actions. None of their responses has been satisfactory.”

But Boasberg also offered the administration some options: essentially, file “a declaration explaining the steps they have taken and will take to do so,” or, file “declaration(s) identifying the individual(s) who, with knowledge of the Court’s classwide Temporary Restraining Order, made the decision not to halt the transfer of class members out of U.S. custody on March 15 and 16, 2025.”

Attorney Aaron Reichlin-Melnick explains that Boasberg ordered “them either to fix their mistake, or identify who made those decisions (presumably for further sanctions).”

“The Constitution,” Boasberg also wrote, citing previous rulings, “does not tolerate willful disobedience of judicial orders — especially by officials of a coordinate branch who have sworn an oath to uphold it. To permit such officials to freely ‘annul the judgments of the courts of the United States’ would not just ‘destroy the rights acquired under those judgments’; it would make ‘a solemn mockery’ of ‘the constitution itself.’

Watch CNN’s report below or at this link.

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

Stephen Miller

Trump And Miller Brazenly Lie About Unanimous Supreme Court Order

Backing up the Trump administration, the President of El Salvador, Nayib Bukele, says he has no intention or ability to return an unlawfully removed Maryland legal resident, Kilmar Abrego García, to the United States. Abrego García was wrongly deported to a notorious maximum security “mega-prison” for terrorists in El Salvador.

“How can I return him to the United States?” President Bukele said to reporters on Monday, during a meeting with President Donald Trump and his top officials in the Oval Office, as reported by The Washington Post. “I smuggle him into the United States? Of course I’m not going to do it.”

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court in an apparent unanimous opinion ordered the Trump administration to “facilitate” the return of Abrego García to the United States.

Minutes before President Bukele’s remarks, White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy Stephen Miller, on-camera in the Oval Office, delivered what is being called an “outrageous misinterpretation” of the Supreme Court’s opinion, which was quickly condemned.

“I promise you, if he was your neighbor, you would move right away,” Miller, who was the architect of the first Trump administration’s child separation policy, told reporters.

“What was the ruling in the Supreme Court, Steve, was it nine to nothing?” President Trump interjected.

“Yes, it was a 9-0, in our favor,” Miller wrongly claimed. “against the district court ruling, saying that no district court has the power to compel the foreign policy function of the United States.”

“As Pam said,” Miller continued, referring to Attorney General Pam Bondi, “the ruling solely stated that if this individual—at El Salvador’s sole discretion—was sent back to our country, that we could deport him a second time.”

“No version of this legally ends up with him ever living here, because he is a citizen of El Salvador,” Miller claimed, before pointing reporters to Bukele.

“That is the president of El Salvador. Your questions about it per the court can only be directed to him,” said Miller.

Attorney Michael Kasdan responded to Miller’s remarks: “We have reached the point where the White House openly lies on television about what a unanimous Supreme Court ruling against them says. The stuff of dystopian novels.”

“This is a blatant lie. The Supreme Court ruled 9-0 AGAINST Trump,” wrote the progressive nonprofit People For the American Way.

“This is deeply Orwellian. The Court ruled against the Trump administration 9-0,” observed the MeidasTouch Network.

Conservative legal activist and political commentator Ed Whelan, who clerked for U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, weighed in.

“Outrageous misrepresentation of Supreme Court ruling,” Whelan declared, serving up a somewhat technical legal analysis. “The unanimous Court ruled that the district-court order ‘properly requires the Government to ‘facilitate’ Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador.’ Yes, the Court also stated that the “intended scope of the term ‘effectuate’ in the District Court’s order is, however, unclear, and may exceed the District Court’s authority,” and it told the district court to ‘clarify its directive, with due regard for the deference owed to the Executive Branch in the conduct of foreign affairs.’ But: (1) ‘due regard’ doesn’t mean that the district court couldn’t give any teeth to ‘effectuate’; (2) in any event, the district court dropped ‘effectuate’ from its revised order, so this is all irrelevant. Duty to ‘facilitate’ continues.”

Commenting on the video, immigration attorney Allen Orr Jr. Esq. wrote: “When you tell yourself the story you want to believe even when it is fiction.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

Donald Trump

As Stocks Spike Upward, Rumors Surge Over Insider Trading

After one of the best days on Wall Street since World War II, fueled by President Donald Trump and his team's conflicting messages and actions on tariffs, questions are swirling over possible insider trading, market manipulation, and "pump and dump" schemes.

President Trump's announcement that he is pausing most of the increased tariffs that went into effect at midnight was met with glee by investors but with questions by critics who note that the President, just minutes after the markets opened Wednesday morning, had declared it a "great time to buy." Less than four hours later, upon news breaking of his "pause" announcement, stock prices surged.

The Dow closed up almost 3000 points, and the S&P 500 surged 9.5 percent, its biggest increase since 2008.

Some critics say the optics are even worse given that Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, following the President’s market-shaking “pause” announcement, reportedly told reporters it had been the plan all along.

“Is this market manipulation?" asked Rep. Steven Horsford (D-NV), in a hearing Thursday afternoon, questioning Trump Trade Representative Jamieson Greer.

"No," Greer replied.

"Why not? If it was a plan, if it was always a plan, how is this not market manipulation?" Horsford insisted, appearing to refer to Secretary Bessent's prior remarks.

"It's not market manipulation, sir," Greer added.

"Well, then what is it?" an angered Horsford demanded. "'Cause it sure is not a strategy."

"We're trying to reset the global trade system," Greer continued.

"What has that done?" Horsford interjected. "How have you achieved any of that? But to enact enormous harm on the American people, which was our concern from the very beginning, Tariffs are a tool. It can be used in the appropriate way to protect U.S. jobs and small businesses. But that's not what this does. So, if it's not market manipulation, what is it? Who's benefiting? What billionaire just got richer?"

"But meanwhile, the Speaker is rushing to the floor to pass a budget reconciliation to screw America by passing the biggest tax cut in history — on the backs of the American people? W.T.F.! Who's in charge? Because it's sure doesn't look like it's the trade representative. You just got the rug pulled out from under you."

Journalist Ahmed Eldin writes, "Trump tells followers to buy when market opens, then hours later, he pauses tariffs — stocks surge. Totally normal! Just your average day of legal-ish insider trading and market manipulation. Corruption is trading at an all-time high."

On Wednesday afternoon, Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) announced that he will be "writing to the White House to demand who knew in advance that the president was once again going to flip flop on tariffs —and are people cashing in?"

"There is just all too much opportunity for people in the White House and the administration to be insider trading and you can't put it past them for a minute," he said. "I think Congress should do an investigation into this, but we're gonna demand answers from the administration."'

"This will come out," Schiff vowed, "but an administration that has their own meme coins and has already engaged in self interested dealing with Elon is 'DOGEing' agencies that are doing oversight in his own businesses, and that kind of corrupt climate, you have to assume the worst, and we're gonna try to find out."

Attorney Jackie Singh, a cybersecurity, privacy, and cybercrime expert, posted a CNBC screenshot with the headline: "White House insists Trump's tariff reversal was his strategy all along."

"Yes," she writes, "pump & dump schemes were previously an exclusive realm of fraudsters, and considered prosecutable criminal activity–Now neatly employed by the President of the United States (also a fraudster)."

Political strategist Chris D. Jackson writes, "So he caved after he said he wouldn't. Was this all a big market manipulation scheme?"

International security analyst Matthew VanDyke insisted the Trump administration "is going to be investigated for market manipulation."

"Somebody just made BILLIONS off this tariff-based manipulation of the markets," noted attorney Tristan Snell, who prosecuted the Trump University case for the State of New York. "And it wasn’t any of us."

"Historian here," writes Professor of history Manisha Sinha, "while they are tanking the U.S. economy the White House and Trumps cronies are making millions from market manipulation and speculation."

SiriusXM host John Fugelsang wrote: "This isn't The Art of the Deal. It's insider trading with a bad comb-over."

Watch the videos above or at this link.

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

Worse Than Signalgate? New Security Lapse Bombshell Hits White House

Worse Than Signalgate? New Security Lapse Bombshell Hits White House

Less than two weeks ago there was SignalGate, the Trump administration’s national security scandal that potentially endangered the lives of U.S. service members, and risked exposing military plans, by using an insecure channel to discuss, map out, and announce progress of an attack in Yemen. Then there was the Trump administration’s passwords scandal, where passwords, email addresses, and phone numbers of top Trump national security officials were easily found online. And just yesterday, GmailGate, the Trump administration’s use of the even less-secure commercial email app, to conduct government business.

All three crises involved President Donald Trump’s national security team, including White House national security adviser Mike Waltz, who admitted to setting up the insecure Signal chat.

On Wednesday afternoon, Politico reported that Waltz’s team actually had set up 20 or more different Signal group chats, for national security crises.

“National security adviser Mike Waltz’s team regularly set up chats on Signal to coordinate official work on issues including Ukraine, China, Gaza, Middle East policy, Africa and Europe, according to four people who have been personally added to Signal chats,” according to Politico. “Two of the people said they were in or have direct knowledge of at least 20 such chats. All four said they saw instances of sensitive information being discussed.”

“Waltz built the entire NSC communications process on Signal,” said one of the four sources.

Experts have warned that the use of Signal in certain circumstances may violate national security regulations, as well as federal law surrounding retention of government communications.

The use of Signal on personal cell phones is also problematic because those mobile devices can easily be compromised, experts say. CISA, the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, has recommended the use of Signal instead of less secure platforms, but not for classified or sensitive communications.

“None of the four individuals said they were aware of whether any classified information was shared, but all said that posts in group chats did include sensitive details of national security work,” Politico noted.

Additionally, on Sunday, The Wall Street Journal reported more concerning national security lapses.

“Two U.S. officials also said that Waltz has created and hosted multiple other sensitive national-security conversations on Signal with cabinet members, including separate threads on how to broker peace between Russia and Ukraine as well as military operations. They declined to address if any classified information was posted in those chats,” the Journal reported. It was not clear if these were among the 20 or more chats Politico reported on Wednesday.

“In under 10 days, we’ve heard about journalists added to unclassified chats and sensitive data being shot around on personal emails,” lamented Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), the vice-chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee. “And now we’re hearing there’s dozens more chats. It’s a never-ending parade of sloppy, reckless incompetence.”

Rep. Brad Schneider (D-IL), also responding to the latest news from Politico, wrote: “President Trump must put our troops and national security first. Waltz must step down. If he won’t, President Trump should fire him.”

Democratic congressional candidate Cait Conley is a former National Security Council official who “spent nearly 20 years in the military, including a stint working on counterterrorism for the National Security Council under former President Biden,” The New York Times has reported. She also worked at CISA, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency.

“This is not an Administration that’s serious about protecting America. Every person on those (20!) group chats should have known better,” Conley observed.

“The national security advisor continues to put our country at risk by using chats to discuss sensitive issues, allowing our adversaries to potentially intercept these messages,” commented Sabrina Singh, former deputy Pentagon press secretary and former special assistant to the president. “This is not putting America First – it’s the opposite.”

Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA), a former Air Force JAG officer, wrote: “National Security Adviser Waltz should resign for repeatedly playing fast and loose with OpSec. Signal should not be used to discuss sensitive information. The Pentagon warned against using Signal even for unclassified information.”

MSNBC host Symone Sanders Townsend snarked, “Amateur hour at the OK Corral and that’s even offensive to the amateurs.”

“This is Trump’s CLOWN CAR CABINET!,” charged CNN commentator Maria Cardona. “Incompetent, unqualified, unserious. AND these massive national security blunders, put US all is SERIOUS danger! They need to go!!”

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

Bill Cassidy

'You Own This': Top GOP Senator Burned As Kennedy Wrecks Health Services

As the Trump administration’s Secretary of Health and Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., presses forward with a mass firing in a sweeping effort to downsize the agency tasked with safeguarding the nation’s well-being—including removing top leaders from key programs, including from the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention—a Republican Senator who cast the pivotal vote that enabled the controversial anti-vaccine activist to take the helm of the massive public health agency is facing scrutiny and backlash.

During Kennedy’s confirmation process U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy of Louisiana became an important voice and crucial vote in persuading his fellow Republicans to support what many saw as an extreme candidate. Cassidy, who chairs the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, is a medical doctor who worked for decades in public hospitals, and is an active vaccine advocate.

Senator Cassidy “ultimately provided the one-vote margin needed to advance Kennedy’s nomination to the full Senate,” as the Los Angeles Times had reported.

Defending his vote to confirm Kennedy, Senator Cassidy said the scion of the American political family had made assurances to him that convinced him to support his nomination.

Cassidy “said he was swayed by Kennedy’s commitments to support the immunization schedules recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, maintain systems used to vet new vaccines and monitor their safety, preserve statements on the CDC website assuring the public that vaccines don’t cause autism, and meet with Cassidy ‘multiple times a month,’ among other things.”

“I will watch carefully for any effort to wrongfully sow public fear about vaccines,” Cassidy said.

STAT News reported that Senator Cassidy “said he would be Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s keeper.”

Over the weekend, Cassidy was sharply criticized—and blamed—when HHS forced out Dr. Peter Marks, the head of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration division responsible for assuring the safety and effectiveness of vaccines, as CNN reported. Dr. Marks resigned but was “given the choice to resign or be fired.”

On Tuesday, The Hill reported that Kennedy “won’t acknowledge the scientific consensus that childhood vaccines do not cause autism.”

“That skepticism over seemingly settled science appeared to come to a head over the weekend when the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) top vaccine official was forced out and issued a fiery public letter blasting Kennedy.”

That official was Dr. Marks.

Cassidy appeared to express concern, but nothing more.

“I thank Dr. Marks for his dedicated service to the health of our country,” the Senator wrote. “His departure is a loss to the FDA. Commissioner Makary and Secretary Kennedy should replace him with someone of similar stature and credibility amongst the scientific community, who will lead without bias.”

Tuesday afternoon, CNN’s Manu Raju reported that he asked Cassidy about the firings of 10,000 HHS employees.

“I’m trying to understand it,” Cassidy said. “They say that they are consolidating duplicative agencies.”

Asked if he supports the firings, Cassidy replied: ‘Like I said I’m investigating.”

Back in January, Cassidy had asked RFK Jr. if he could “trust” him, as Politico reported.

Asked “if he thinks RFK Jr is backsliding on his commitments,” Raju reported, Cassidy said: “We’re in dialogue about that.”

Kennedy had told Cassidy that he was “not going to go into HHS and impose my preordained opinions on anybody at HHS. I’m going to empower the scientists to do their job.”

Many of those scientists were fired on Tuesday at 5 AM.

MSNBC analyst and Mother Jones Washington Bureau Chief David Corn blasted Cassidy, writing: “Sen. Bill Cassidy, you violated the Hippocratic oath when you supported RFK Jr.’s nomination and you own this—and all the horrific consequences to come.”

Corn added a screenshot of a post from a popular epidemiologist, Katelyn Jetelina, detailing a few of the consequences of Tuesday’s firings.

Cassidy also came under fire on Tuesday for telling CNBC, “Is there some way that we can cut Medicare—excuse me—reform Medicare—so that benefits stay the same, but that it’s less expensive, more efficient?”

Watch the video below or at this link.

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

Published Texts Of Hegseth Signal Chat Shatter 'Bungled' Coverup

Published Texts Of Hegseth Signal Chat Shatter 'Bungled' Coverup

In response to the Trump administration’s disinformation-and-discredit campaign, The Atlantic’s editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, has released the full Signal chat at the center of the growing national security scandal. National security experts and other analysts and experts, after reviewing the exchange, are sharply rejecting the administration’s efforts to downplay the severity of the breach. Many assert that, contrary to official claims, classified information was clearly shared by unsecured means—violating established protocols, internal policy, and potentially federal law.

The Trump administration and its Republican allies have been waging a disinformation campaign and pushing back against the credibility of The Atlantic and its editor-in-chief, after he revealed on Monday that he had been inadvertently added to a group text chat on Signal that took place over a number of days and involved the planning of a military strike against a terrorist group in Yemen.

The use of what has been called an unsecured chat on the messaging app Signal, likely on private, not government phones, while various members of the 18-person group were traveling overseas, including in Moscow, constitutes extreme violations of accepted national security practices, experts say. The conversations should have been held via secure communications, inside a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF).

The president, the White House press secretary, the director of national intelligence, the director of the Central Intelligence Agency, the secretary of defense, and other officials — along with top Republican lawmakers and right wing media outlets—have all claimed that information in the Signal chat was not classified.

In sworn testimony on Tuesday before the Senate Intelligence Committee, the Director of National Intelligence and the Director of the CIA both insisted none of the information shared in the Signal chat was classified.

Experts disagree.

“The information Secretary of Defense Hegseth disclosed in the Signal chat was classified at the time he wrote it, especially because the operation had not even started yet, according to a US defense official and another source who was briefed on the operation,” CNN Pentagon and national security correspondent Natasha Bertrand reported.

“It is safe to say that anybody in uniform would be court martialed for this,” the official said, according to Bertrand. “We don’t provide that level of information on unclassified systems, in order to protect the lives and safety of the servicemembers carrying out these strikes. If we did, it would be wholly irresponsible. My most junior analysts know not to do this.”

Barbara Starr, the iconic correspondent who covered the Pentagon on CNN for two decades, focused on National Security Advisor Michael Waltz, who admitted he set up the chat and inadvertently included Goldberg. She wrote:

“Waltz revealed an extraordinary detail when he said there was intel showing the top Houthi missile guy walked into a building. You only know that if you have overhead surveillance, comms intercepts, or an operative on the ground. It means the US had ‘pattern of life’ surveillance. How is that not classified?”

NBC News senior congressional reporter Scott Wong reports that two House Armed Services Committee (HASC) Republicans are denouncing the Trump administration’s handling of Signalgate.

“The White House is in denial that this was not classified or sensitive data. They should just own up to it and preserve credibility,” Rep. Don Bacon (R-NE) said.

After reviewing the Signal text chain, Rep. Scott DesJarlais (R-TN) “said he is concerned about Hegseth sending this detailed information over the messaging app,” Wong also reported.

DesJarlais, chairman of the HASC subcommittee on strategic forces said: “It should have never happened and must not happen again.”

Joseph J. Collins is a retired U.S. Army colonel, professor of national security strategy at the National War College, and former deputy assistant secretary of defense for stability operations. He currently leads the Center for Complex Operations at the National Defense University.

Dr. Collins, responding to Starr’s remarks, wrote: “Important point … this fiasco compromised or potentially compromised sources and methods, possibly including our agents and stringers on the ground.”

Veteran, activist, and Amherst College political science lecturer Paul Rieckhoff declared: “Hegseth must step down or be removed. Any member of the Department of Defense that did this would be in prison. There is no way someone that did this can lead our military as SecDef. And even he knows it.”

“Everyone on this chat probably has to go. Everyone. They all know the rules,” he continued. “Loose lips sink ships. Everyone who’s ever served knows that line. It’s OPSEC 101 that every Private learns in Basic Training. And a f— up like this could have cost American lives. There is no spinning it. Hegseth’s got to go.”

“We can’t have a SecDef who doesn’t follow the same rules and standard he’s expected to hold for millions at DoD,” Rieckhoff added. “There’s no wiggle room. Stakes are too high. Our troops lives depend on it. And our enemies are celebrating.”

Former Transportation Secretary and veteran Pete Buttigieg is one of a handful of top Democrats who have been vociferously contesting the administration’s claims. Based on his extensive military and high-level of government service, late Wednesday he simply wrote: “Well, they lied. Obviously.”

Former CIA lawyer Brian Greer posted screenshots from The Atlantic’s report, and the regulations surrounding what is classified information. He wrote: “This is all very plainly classified at the SECRET level. They all lied. They should all lose their jobs.”

Apparently referencing Tuesday’s Senate Intelligence Committee hearing during which the Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, and CIA Director John Ratcliffe testified, claiming there was no classified information shared, Greer wrote: “There was quite a bit of perjury yesterday.”

See his social media posts below or at this link.

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

Tulsi Gabbard

'Putin Is Giddy': National Security Agency Knew Russians Could Hack Signal

The National Security Agency was reportedly aware of vulnerabilities in the messaging app Signal weeks before 18 top Trump administration national security and defense officials used the app in a group chat to plan the recent bombing of Yemen. Those vulnerabilities, an NSA memo warned, were being exploited by Russian hackers. Details have also emerged that at least two top administration officials who were in the chat were overseas, including one in Moscow — where he met with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The use of the Signal app by the upper echelon of Donald Trump’s national security and defense team has rocked the nation, fueling concerns over the mishandling of sensitive—and potentially classified—information in ways that may be unlawful. These fears are seemingly compounded by Trump’s alleged mishandling of hundreds of classified documents, which led to criminal charges that were ultimately dropped after the U.S. Supreme Court granted presidents broad immunity from prosecution for official acts.

CBS News reports that the National Security Agency (NSA), an arm of the Pentagon, had “sent out an operational security special bulletin to its employees in February 2025 warning them of vulnerabilities in using the encrypted messaging application Signal.”

The NSA operates under the authority of the Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard.

The Pentagon also sent out a memo warning of Signal’s vulnerabilities and use by Russian hackers, just days after that group chat.

“Several days after top national security officials accidentally included a reporter in a Signal chat about bombing the Houthi sites in Yemen, a Pentagon-wide advisory warned against using the messaging app, even for unclassified information,” NPR reported Tuesday.

“Russian professional hacking groups are employing the ‘linked devices’ features to spy on encrypted conversations,” the Pentagon’s memo warned.

It also notes that Google has identified Russian hacking groups who are “targeting Signal Messenger to spy on persons of interest.”

The Pentagon memo reminded users that “third-party messaging apps (e.g. Signal) are permitted by policy for unclassified accountability/recall exercises but are not approved to process or store non-public unclassified information.”

NPR’s Quil Lawrence noted that “NPR has seen DoD memo as far back as 2023 prohibiting mobile apps for discussing even much less sensitive info like ‘controlled unclassified information.'”

Last month, a Google Threat Intelligence memo warned of the use of apps like Signal by “military personnel, politicians, journalists, activists, and other at-risk communities.”

Critics argue that the use of Signal for “war plans” was against policy. During Tuesday’s Senate Intelligence Committee hearing CIA Director John Ratcliffe had insisted Signal was approved for use.

National security experts, including at least one former Trump administration official, have been highly critical of the use of the app by the 18-members in a chat.

President Trump’s Ukraine and Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff “was in Moscow, where he met with Russian President Vladimir Putin, when he was included in a group chat with more than a dozen other top administration officials — and inadvertently, one journalist — on the messaging app Signal,” CBS News reported on Tuesday. “Russia has repeatedly tried to compromise Signal, a popular commercial messaging platform that many were shocked to learn senior Trump administration officials had used to discuss sensitive military planning.”

Trump’s Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, acknowledged on Tuesday during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing that she was overseas during the Signal chat. The Associated Press reported the DNI “wouldn’t say whether she was using her personal or government-issued phone because the matter is under review by the White House National Security Council.”

The Wall Street Journal’s chief foreign-affairs correspondent Yaroslav Trofimov appears to be one of the first to note that Witkoff had been in Moscow during the time the chat had been organized. He notes: “The Signal app itself has high encryption. But if your phone is inside Russia, and especially if your WiFi and Bluetooth are not disabled, Russia can see what is inside your phone pretty easily.”

On Tuesday morning, Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY) noted: “Not a single person out of 18 of the very most senior officials in this Admin — including the Director of National Intelligence and the CIA Director — voiced any concern with highly classified military plans circulated on Signal. You also can be sure this is not the only time.”

The Atlantic’s Dr. Norman Ornstein, a political scientist and scholar, responded to Rep. Goldman, writing: “Putin is giddy. He has compromised the phones of every top national security official in the Trump administration. No doubt has enough juicy information from what is likely to be multiple Signal chats to deeply damage American security. And possibly to blackmail some of them.”

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

Donald Trump

'I Don't Know Anything': Trump's War Plans Leak Denial Backfires

President Donald Trump’s claim that he was unaware of a cabinet-level breach of classified information—an incident reportedly involving up to 18 top national security officials discussing sensitive details of a planned military strike—appears to have backfired, raising questions about his knowledge of the actions of his top officials, and, as Commander-in-Chief, his knowledge of U.S. national security and military operations.

The Atlantic’s editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, revealed Monday afternoon that he inadvertently had been included in the 18-person group chat on the unclassified messaging app Signal. Experts say those discussions should never have been held over the app, but rather inside a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility, or inside multiple SCIFs.

On Monday afternoon at a press conference, a reporter asked the commander-in-chief for his reaction to the story in The Atlantic.

“I don’t know anything about it,” was Trump’s immediate response. His next response was to attack the media outlet.

“I’m not a big fan of The Atlantic, it’s, to me it’s a magazine that’s going out of business,” the president declared. “I think it’s not much of a magazine, but I know nothing about it.”

He then asked the reporter to explain to him what had been reported in The Atlantic.

“You’re saying that they had what?” “Having to do with what?” he asked twice. “What were they talking about?”

After the reporter gave him more information, Trump, seemingly still not understanding all the details, declared that the leak “couldn’t have been very effective because the attack was very effective, I can tell you that.”

He again denied any knowledge of the leak.

“I don’t know anything about it,” Trump repeated. “You, you’re telling me about it for the first time.”

The White House has acknowledged the leak occurred. Axios called it a “mind-boggling security breach.” The Washington Post reported that “the disclosure raises questions about how the administration has discussed classified issues and whether anyone will be disciplined.”

“As the bombing campaign moved ahead, Hegseth’s [Signal] account shared details that Goldberg said he believed could put at risk the safety of U.S. troops or intelligence officials, especially those deployed in the Middle East,” the Post reported. “Those details, the Atlantic article says, allegedly included the specific weapons to be used and in which sequence the Houthi targets would be hit.”

Military and national security experts are stunned — not only that this massive leak occurred, but that the President was not informed until a reporter asked him about it on Monday.

“If the President is telling the truth and no one’s briefed him about this yet, that’s another story in itself. In any other administration, CoS would have been in the Oval within nanoseconds of learning about something like this, wrote The Atlantic’s Tom Nichols via social media, referring to the White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles. Nichols is a retired U.S. Naval War College professor who is an expert on national security, international affairs, Russia, and nuclear weapons.

“Heads need to roll for this. They have broken laws and endangered the lives of our service members with this idiocy,” commented Army veteran of 22 years, Fred Wellman, a graduate of West Point and the Harvard Kennedy School.

Journalist Wajahat Ali wrote, “What’s worse is that he HAS no idea, allegedly, about the story, which makes it even worse and more terrifying. Like, bro, why don’t you know?”

“One wild thing about Trump,” observed journalist Isaac Saul, “is that he is notoriously insulated from certain information streams by his team. Absolutely believable that he went out to the podium having not been informed of this massive story bc the people who brief him on info were culpable in the leaks.”

“Here’s some insight,” offered Sophia Kinzinger, a former press secretary for the Department of Homeland Security. “The White House has an entire department, staffed by military professionals, dedicated to facilitating secure communications. They travel with staff, provide devices, and set up SCIFs (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities) whenever and wherever needed, operating 24/7. There is absolutely no excuse for mishandling classified information, especially for someone leading the National Security Council at the White House. Their actions clearly demonstrate a lack of qualification for such a critical role. we deserve better!”

Rep. Veronica Escobar (D-TX) added: “If it’s true that the President of the United States had no idea that his war cabinet and VP were discussing war plans on a Signal chat that included a journalist, that is astounding ignorance and profound incompetence.”

Derek Martin, who conducted supply chain counterintelligence at the National Security Agency (NSA), asked: “If Trump doesn’t know about a major incident involving his VP, Chief of Staff, NatSec Advisor, Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, Director of National Intelligence, and CIA Director, then who exactly is running the government?”

Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE), according to Deadline, wrote: “Every single one of the government officials on this text chain have now committed a crime – even if accidentally – that would normally involve a jail sentence. We can’t trust anyone in this dangerous administration to keep Americans safe.”

In his report at The Atlantic, Goldberg noted that “coordinating a national-security-related action over Signal, may have violated several provisions of the Espionage Act, which governs the handling of ‘national defense’ information, according to several national-security lawyers interviewed by my colleague Shane Harris for this story.”

Goldberg also explained that he chose to not publish all of the texts, noting that, “if [some] had been read by an adversary of the United States, [they] could conceivably have been used to harm American military and intelligence personnel, particularly in the broader Middle East, Central Command’s area of responsibility. What I will say, in order to illustrate the shocking recklessness of this Signal conversation, is that the Hegseth post contained operational details of forthcoming strikes on Yemen, including information about targets, weapons the U.S. would be deploying, and attack sequencing.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

Reprinted with permission from Alternet