Category: Authoritarian

Trump Claims Dokoupil Owes CBS Job to Harris Election Loss

During an exclusive interview at a Ford plant in Detroit, President Donald Trump told CBS Evening News anchor Tony Dokoupil that his new anchor position exists only because Harris lost the 2024 election. Trump claimed Dokoupil would be unemployed had Harris won, suggesting Paramount Skydance CEO David Ellison—whom Trump praised as "an amazing guy"—might lack the financial resources to hire him under a Democratic administration.

Trump repeatedly emphasized Dokoupil's salary during the exchange, stating "you wouldn't have this job, you wouldn't have this job, certainly whatever the hell they're paying you" if Harris had prevailed. The Skydance-Paramount merger, which enabled Dokoupil's hiring, was approved under the Trump administration. Dokoupil was named to replace the CBS Evening News anchor role last month under new network editor-in-chief Bari Weiss.

Dokoupil pushed back on Trump's assertion, stating he believed he would hold the anchor position regardless of election outcome. Trump countered by suggesting Dokoupil's salary would be substantially lower under a Harris presidency, implying financial constraints would limit compensation even if the position existed.

Trump used the interview to declare the country had transformed from "dead" under the previous administration to the world's "hottest" under his leadership. He framed Dokoupil's employment as direct evidence of his administration's success, linking the broadcaster's career advancement to his electoral victory and the resulting corporate merger approval.

Viktor Orbán's Hungary provides a troubling blueprint that some argue Republican operatives are actively implementing in the United States. Rather than direct state control, Orbán uses wealthy business allies to acquire independent media outlets, which are then consolidated under organizations like the Central European Press and Media Foundation (KESMA), effectively controlling approximately 80% of Hungary's media landscape. Key figures such as Lőrinc Mészáros, Miklós Vaszily, and Andy Vajna purchased major news outlets and donated them to create a unified, pro-government editorial voice. Critics contend that similar dynamics are now emerging in America, with Trump-aligned billionaires strategically acquiring major news organizations like CBS to shift editorial direction toward favorable coverage. This model replaces transparent state propaganda with the appearance of independent media while systematically silencing opposition voices, withdrawing advertising from critical outlets, and using government-friendly platforms to attack opponents. If this pattern continues unchecked in the U.S., observers warn it could fundamentally undermine democratic discourse by concentrating control over information in the hands of ideologically aligned wealthy elites, mirroring the erosion of press freedom witnessed in Orbán's Hungary.

(Source: https://www.mediaite.com/media/tv/trump-tells-tony-dokoupil-you-wouldnt-have-a-job-right-now-if-harris-won/)

Trump Halts Federal Funding to States Harboring Sanctuary

President Donald Trump announced on Tuesday that beginning February 1, he will withhold federal funding from states that contain local governments limiting cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Trump made the declaration during a speech at the Detroit Economic Club, stating that sanctuary jurisdictions “protect criminals at the expense of American citizens” and that the administration would cease payments to “anybody that supports sanctuary cities.” When pressed by reporters on which funding programs would be affected, Trump declined specifics, saying only “You’ll see. It’ll be significant.”

This represents an expansion of Trump’s previous threats, which targeted sanctuary cities directly rather than entire states housing them. The Justice Department published a list identifying roughly three dozen states, cities, and counties as sanctuary jurisdictions—a list dominated by Democratic-controlled areas including California, Connecticut, New York, Boston, and Cook County, Illinois. No strict legal definition of “sanctuary city” exists, though the term generally refers to jurisdictions that limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement.

Courts have blocked Trump’s funding cutoff attempts twice before. In 2017, during his first term, federal judges rejected similar efforts. Last year, a California-based federal judge struck down an executive order directing federal officials to withhold money from sanctuary jurisdictions, despite government arguments that it was premature to halt the plan when no concrete action had been taken. The administration has already begun targeting specific states through other agencies, with the Department of Health and Human Services halting childcare subsidies to five Democratic-led states over unspecified fraud allegations—a decision a court has placed on hold.

The Trump administration is simultaneously executing broader funding freezes across multiple programs. The Justice Department’s sanctuary cities working group lost all members amid Trump pressure, and the Department of Agriculture has threatened to reduce administrative funds for states refusing to provide Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program data. Minnesota faces particularly aggressive action, including a threat to withhold $515 million quarterly—equivalent to one-fourth of federal Medicaid funding—for fourteen programs labeled “high risk” after the state rejected the administration’s corrective action plan.

Border Patrol operations continue under Trump’s aggressive immigration policies, with the administration weaponizing federal agencies to coerce compliance from state and local governments. State officials are mounting legal challenges to these actions, though the cumulative effect of simultaneous funding threats across healthcare, nutrition assistance, and childcare programs creates immediate pressure on Democratic-controlled jurisdictions.

(Source: https://abc7.com/post/trump-threatens-halt-federal-money-next-month-sanctuary-cities-states/18398676/)

Trump DOJ Memo Claims President Above International Law

A classified 20-30 page Justice Department legal opinion presented to Congress on Tuesday argues that President Trump faced no constitutional or international legal constraints when he ordered the military operation to capture Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. The Office of Legal Counsel memo asserts Trump’s authority as commander-in-chief under Article II of the Constitution permitted the operation, codenamed Absolute Resolve, without prior congressional approval.

The opinion builds directly on a 1989 legal memo authored by William Barr, Trump’s current Attorney General, which claimed presidents possess “inherent constitutional authority” to order law enforcement operations in foreign countries even when doing so violates international law. The new memo treats that premise as settled and argues the Maduro operation did not constitute war in the constitutional sense, therefore bypassing the War Powers Act requirement for congressional authorization. An unclassified version released simultaneously states that international law “does not restrict the president as a matter of domestic law” regarding rendition operations.

The memo conceded that Trump personally justified the operation by stating control of Venezuelan oil reserves was the objective, though the administration maintains it was solely a law enforcement action targeting Maduro as the leader of a narco-trafficking organization. A White House official stated the operation was lawful and that “the Department of Justice routinely executes federal arrest warrants abroad,” framing the military-backed seizure as standard law enforcement practice.

Democratic lawmakers directly contradicted this characterization, arguing that removing a foreign head of state by military force constitutes an act of war regardless of law enforcement justifications. The administration has also used success in the Maduro operation to embolden plans for military actions against other targets, with officials accelerating preparations that extend beyond Venezuela.

The memo stipulated that any military support must remain proportional to the law enforcement objective and acknowledged that military commanders had not assessed Maduro’s actions as a direct or imminent threat to U.S. forces. Nevertheless, the opinion concluded the likelihood of armed resistance justified deploying U.S. military assets. The opinion was provided to lawmakers after the operation had already been executed, establishing legal justification retroactively rather than constraining executive action beforehand.

(Source: https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/13/politics/memo-maduro-capture-olc)

Trump Admin Posts Echo White Supremacist Rhetoric

The Trump administration is deploying recruitment campaigns and official posts across federal departments that incorporate imagery, slogans, and rhetoric linked to white supremacist and extremist movements, according to PBS reporting and analysis by Cynthia Miller-Idriss of American University’s Polarization and Extremism Research Innovation Lab. An ICE recruitment advertisement features the phrase “We will have our home again,” a direct reference to a white supremacist anthem favored by the Proud Boys, while the Department of Labor distributed messaging stating “One homeland, one people, one heritage” alongside heroic depictions of white men. Administration posts also invoke “Trust the plan,” the QAnon conspiracy theory slogan tied to the January 6 Capitol attack, which posits a global cabal of pedophiles and deep state actors that Trump is fighting.

Extremist symbols have surfaced across multiple federal agencies, including the “An Appeal to Heaven” flag, which was carried by January 6 rioters and adopted by evangelical Christian nationalist groups and neo-Nazi organizations. Miller-Idriss identified this pattern as part of a propaganda campaign to reposition ICE operations as serving the public interest while employing dog whistles and explicit racist and conspiratorial messaging. The administration is simultaneously rewriting January 6 history on a newly published website, blaming Democrats for security failures and justifying pardons for over 1,500 defendants involved in the insurrection.

President Trump stated in a New York Times interview that the civil rights movement “hurt a lot of people” and constituted “reverse discrimination” against whites denied college admission or jobs. Billionaire Elon Musk endorsed this framing by endorsing a post claiming “If white men become a minority, we will be slaughtered. White solidarity is the only way to survive”—the Great Replacement Theory, a white nationalist conspiracy falsely asserting intentional replacement of the white population. Miller-Idriss connected this conspiracy theory to terrorist attacks in Pittsburgh, El Paso, Buffalo, Christchurch, and Oslo, resulting in hundreds of deaths.

Miller-Idriss characterized the shift as a “turning point in the propaganda campaign,” driven by ICE’s 57 percent disapproval rating and public awareness of agency abuses circulated through cell phone video. She identified Trump’s statements as an “unedited version” of a longstanding belief system that white men are losing ground, now openly expressed without prior hedging. The administration simultaneously withdrew U.S. support from extremism prevention organizations, cementing its alignment with extremist ideological frameworks.

Miller-Idriss noted that undemocratic leaders employ confusion and propaganda simultaneously to undermine journalism, expertise, and shared truth, citing Hannah Arendt’s analysis of Nazi propaganda: once people stop knowing what is true and false, “it’s very easy for them to stop knowing what’s right and wrong.” The administration’s strategy combines coordinated messaging across departments with high-profile policy actions including ICE deployments, foreign intervention, and territorial threats, designed to normalize extremist rhetoric while obscuring its authoritarian implications through saturation messaging.

(Source: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/trump-administration-posts-echo-rhetoric-linked-to-extremist-groups?fbclid=IwdGRleAPSxIFleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZAo2NjI4NTY4Mzc5AAEegXa-oSnnonxrbxD0HIm8ZOScqBnslIjqqgO-WisqCCJBydQdzzodouEcCt0_aem_45dHLtlY5pgg0gPw_BA6LA)

Military Disguised Civilian Aircraft in Caribbean Drug Strike

The U.S. military deployed a disguised aircraft painted to resemble a civilian plane to conduct its first strike against an alleged drug boat in the Caribbean in September, according to officials briefed on the operation. The craft lacked visible weapons and military markings, tactics that retired Maj. Gen. Steven J. Lepper, former deputy judge advocate general for the U.S. Air Force, stated could constitute “perfidy”—a war crimes violation prohibiting combatants from impersonating civilians to deceive enemies. Lepper told The New York Times that an unidentifiable aircraft should not engage in combat operations.

The Pentagon defended the practice, stating aircraft undergo “rigorous procurement processes” to ensure compliance with domestic law, department policies, and international standards including laws of armed conflict. However, the September 2 strike that killed 11 people previously generated controversy over orders to eliminate two survivors clinging to wreckage—a “double-tap strike” that critics said violated war laws. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said a Navy admiral, not he directly, ordered the follow-up strike under his general authorization, though Hegseth stated he fully supported the decision.

The Trump administration’s anti-drug campaign has killed at least 123 people across 35 strikes in the Caribbean region, yet the military has not released extensive evidence identifying individuals on targeted boats or establishing their drug-trafficking connections. Legal scholars and critics argue these strikes constitute illegal extrajudicial killings against non-combatants outside conventional war zones, challenging the administration’s claim of valid “armed conflict” with non-state drug groups. Hegseth announced in December that the Pentagon would withhold unedited video of the September strike.

The campaign expanded significantly when U.S. forces entered Venezuela and captured leader Nicolas Maduro, whom the U.S. accuses of collaborating with drug organizations. Lawmakers stated they received no advance briefing on the Venezuela operation, and a bipartisan Senate group voted last week to block Trump from authorizing further military force in or against Venezuela without Congressional approval.

(Source: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-caribbean-drug-boat-venezuela-b2899245.html)

Trump Imposes 25% Tariff on Iran Trading Nations

President Trump announced a 25 percent tariff on all nations conducting business with Iran, declaring the measure “final and conclusive” via Truth Social without providing legal justification or implementation details. The White House offered no official documentation of the policy, declined to clarify its legal authority, and did not respond to requests for comment regarding scope or enforcement mechanisms.

Iran’s major trading partners—including China, Turkey, Iraq, the United Arab Emirates, and India—would face the tariffs under Trump’s declaration. China’s embassy immediately rejected the measure, stating it opposes “indiscriminate imposition of tariffs” and warning it would take “all necessary measures” to protect its interests, noting that “tariff wars and trade wars have no winners.”

The announcement coincides with Iran’s largest anti-government demonstrations since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, driven by economic collapse and calls for systemic change. The U.S.-based rights group HRANA documented 599 deaths—510 protesters and 89 security personnel—since protests began on December 28, with Iran experiencing its gravest challenge to clerical rule in decades.

Trump has threatened military action against Iran while claiming to maintain diplomatic channels with opposition figures and Tehran’s leadership. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt stated diplomacy remains “the first option,” though Trump authorized U.S. military airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities in June and supported Israeli military strikes on Iran in 2025.

Trump’s tariff authority faces legal scrutiny as the U.S. Supreme Court considers whether to overturn broad sections of his existing tariffs. Iran exported goods to 147 trading partners in 2022 according to World Bank data, suggesting the tariff threat would disrupt extensive global commerce networks.

(Source: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-iran-tariffs-china-trade-b2899268.html)

ICE Deploys Warrantless Phone Tracking System

ICE acquired access to Tangles and Webloc, surveillance systems capable of monitoring mobile phones across entire neighborhoods without warrants, according to material obtained by 404 Media. The systems track device movements over time and follow individuals from workplaces to homes and other locations by querying commercial location data acquired from hundreds of millions of phones through Penlink.

An internal ICE legal analysis confirms that this location data can be accessed without judicial authorization. The purchase occurs during the Trump administration’s mass deportation campaign and intensified suppression of protected speech, according to civil liberties organizations tracking the deployment.

Nathan Freed Wessler, deputy project director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, characterized the tool as dangerous when deployed by an agency without adequate oversight. He stated the granular location information creates detailed profiles of individuals’ movements, associations, and routines.

The surveillance capability directly enables ICE enforcement operations by identifying and tracking undocumented immigrants and their networks at scale. The warrantless access to commercial location data extracted from hundreds of millions of phones demonstrates mass surveillance infrastructure operating without individualized probable cause or judicial review.

This deployment reflects the Trump administration’s expansion of interior immigration enforcement capabilities while simultaneously restricting Americans’ freedom of association and movement through dragnet surveillance practices.

(Source: https://www.404media.co/inside-ices-tool-to-monitor-phones-in-entire-neighborhoods/)

Trump DOJ Fires Prosecutor Who Rejected Comey Prosecution

The Trump administration’s Justice Department fired Robert McBride, the second-ranking official in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia, after he declined to lead the prosecution of former FBI Director James Comey. McBride, a 64-year-old career prosecutor and former Navy lawyer, was serving as first assistant to U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan and had been asked to take charge of the Comey case while also managing office operations.

McBride told senior Justice Department officials that leading the Comey prosecution while simultaneously running the office presented an untenable conflict, according to sources briefed on the matter. His removal came after he held private meetings with federal judges in the Eastern District of Virginia without Halligan’s knowledge—meetings that administration officials viewed as undermining their authority.

The timing of McBride’s firing directly follows a judge’s November ruling that Halligan was not legally appointed to her position, which led to the dismissal of both the Comey indictment and charges against New York Attorney General Letitia James. The Attorney General’s and Deputy Attorney General’s offices, along with the Executive Office of U.S. Attorneys, supported McBride’s removal and signed the termination paperwork.

McBride’s firing exemplifies the systematic weaponization of the DOJ against perceived enemies, as the administration continues pursuing charges against Comey despite judicial rejection of the case. This action against a prosecutor unwilling to serve as a tool for the administration’s political agenda demonstrates the purge of officials who refuse absolute compliance with Trump’s directives.

(Source: https://www.ms.now/news/trump-doj-fires-prosecutor-who-declined-to-pursue-james-comey-case)

Trump Regrets Not Ordering Guard Seize Voting Machines

President Donald Trump told the New York Times he regretted not ordering the National Guard to seize voting machines after the 2020 presidential election to overturn the result, which he continues to claim without evidence was rigged. Trump stated directly, “Well, I should have,” when asked about the proposal during a recent interview with the Times. During his first term, Trump pressed then-Attorney General Bill Barr and personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani about the legality of seizing machines, but Barr rejected involvement and Giuliani was rebuffed by the Department of Homeland Security.

When questioned whether using the military to impound voting machines would have been viable, Trump expressed doubt about the National Guard’s capability, saying, “I don’t know that they are sophisticated enough.” He added that while “they’re good warriors,” he was uncertain whether they possessed the sophistication to counter what he described as Democratic cheating methods. These comments reveal Trump’s intent to deploy federal military forces against civilian election infrastructure based on unsubstantiated fraud allegations.

Trump’s admission that he considered but abandoned plans to seize voting machines demonstrates a documented pattern of weaponizing federal power for political objectives. The statement confirms he actively sought methods to overturn an election he lost and viewed the failure to execute such a seizure as a strategic error rather than an unconstitutional act he should have rejected outright. His regret signals willingness to pursue similar extra-legal measures in future elections.

Trump’s remarks triggered immediate political concern over whether his administration will attempt to disrupt the 2026 midterm elections, particularly given ongoing unprecedented mid-decade gerrymandering efforts already underway. The explicit acknowledgment that he contemplated military seizure of voting machines contradicts any pretense that election interference concerns are speculative or exaggerated. His public regret normalizes the concept of using federal forces to nullify democratic processes when outcomes displease him.

(Source: https://www.mediaite.com/politics/i-should-have-trump-says-he-regrets-not-seizing-voting-machines-in-2020-to-overturn-election/)

Leavitt Defends ICE Shooting, Dismisses Renee Good Protesters

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt dismissed Minneapolis protesters demonstrating against the fatal shooting of 37-year-old poet and mother Renee Good by ICE officer Jonathan Ross, questioning their grievances during a Monday press gaggle. Leavitt framed the killing as justified self-defense, claiming Good rammed Ross with her vehicle during what she characterized as an organized effort to impede law enforcement operations. Vice President JD Vance has falsely claimed the officer is protected by absolute immunity, a legal assertion that contradicts established law.

Leavitt attacked protesters by asserting they opposed ICE’s removal of individuals she described as “heinous murderers and rapists and criminals,” framing opposition to the agency as protection of “illegal alien pedophiles” rather than engagement with the specific circumstances of Good’s death. She declared ICE performs a critical national security function and pledged the administration’s full support for “the brave men and women of ice, including the officer in Minneapolis.” This rhetorical strategy conflated general immigration enforcement with the narrow question of whether Ross’s use of lethal force was proportional and lawful.

Protesters have explicitly demanded ICE’s removal from their communities, justice for Good, and state involvement in the shooting investigation—specific demands grounded in accountability for the killing itself. President Trump has blocked Minnesota state investigators from the probe, citing the state’s purportedly “corrupt” government, centralizing control over the investigation in federal hands where the Trump administration exercises direct authority over the Department of Justice.

Video evidence of the incident has been widely described as a “Rorschach Test” reflecting observers’ preexisting political positions rather than settling disputed facts about whether Good’s actions constituted a lethal threat requiring deadly force in response. Leavitt’s dismissal of protesters’ concerns sidestepped the substantive questions surrounding the shooting itself, instead reframing the event within an immigration enforcement narrative designed to delegitimize dissent.

(Source: https://www.mediaite.com/media/news/protesting-what-exactly-karoline-leavitt-rages-at-protesters-angry-over-renee-good-shooting/)

1 2 3 … 156