National Park Service Adds Trump’s Birthday as Fee-Free Day

The National Park Service (NPS) has eliminated Juneteenth and Martin Luther King Jr. Day as fee-free admission days, instead designating President Donald Trump’s birthday as a new fee-free day. This change affects over 11 sites managed by the NPS in Georgia, such as the Chattahoochee National Recreation Area and Kennesaw Mountain.

In addition to Trump’s birthday, other new dates for free admission in 2026 include Presidents’ Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day weekend, and special birthdays for the NPS and Theodore Roosevelt. Significant previously designated fee-free days like National Public Lands Day and anniversaries related to the Great American Outdoors Act have also been removed from the list.

Alongside these changes, nonresidents will face a new fee structure, including a $100 charge for each individual aged 16 and older, alongside standard entrance fees at several parks, though this does not apply to locations in Georgia. The directive has garnered criticism, emphasizing a shift in the NPS’s approach to commemorating important historical milestones and promoting inclusivity.

This decision, particularly the elevation of a controversial figure’s birthday while sidelining civil rights milestones, has sparked backlash from various communities advocating for the equitable representation of all Americans in national spaces.

(Source: https://www.wabe.org/national-park-service-removes-juneteenth-mlk-day-as-fee-free-days-adds-trumps-birthday/)

Trump Receives FIFA Peace Prize Amid Controversy and Criticism

Donald Trump has been awarded the inaugural FIFA Peace Prize, a development that many view as an effort by the soccer organization to boost his fragile ego. The prize was presented during the World Cup draw in Washington, an event that Trump had anticipated since FIFA’s announcement of the award just weeks prior. This prize comes after Trump’s previous disappointment at being overlooked for the Nobel Peace Prize.

FIFA President Gianni Infantino personally presented the award to Trump, expressing support for his supposed contributions to peace. Critics note the absurdity of a peace prize being awarded to a figure who has been widely criticized for his divisive rhetoric and policies.

Trump touted his acceptance of the award, but the timing and nature of it sparked further debate about his relationship with FIFA and Infantino. It raises questions about the validity of an award granted in part to satiate political ambitions and create positive media coverage for Trump as he prepares for the upcoming World Cup co-hosted by the U.S., Canada, and Mexico.

The ties between Trump and FIFA have been emphasized through Infantino’s regular appearances with Trump at public events, showcasing a concerning closeness that many fear undermines the integrity of the sports organization. The FIFA president has gone as far as to validate Trump’s leadership style, ignoring the broader implications of endorsing someone frequently linked to authoritarianism.

This decision to award Trump a peace prize, particularly given his controversial legacy, is not only seen as a farce but as a troubling reflection of modern political alignments within influential global institutions like FIFA. The implications of such an endorsement cannot be ignored as the world awaits the next chapter of international competition in the face of a divisive political landscape.

(Source: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/12/05/trump-fifa-peace-prize/87589592007/)

Trump Claims He’s Finding Money That Doesn’t Exist

President Donald Trump recently claimed that his administration is discovering previously unseen money, particularly from tariffs, during a bizarre press interaction. When asked about renegotiating the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), Trump misrepresented the expiration date, incorrectly stating that it would end in a year; in fact, it remains valid until 2036.

Trump went on to make unfounded assertions about “finding money” through tariffs he imposed, referencing an imaginary $30 billion that he claimed came from the “tariff shelf.” This chaotic narrative included Trump suggesting that officials confirmed to him that the tariffs were unexpectedly generating revenue, even though they were reportedly set to commence later.

The president expressed his hope that the Supreme Court would uphold the legality of his tariffs, despite skepticism from several justices regarding the extent of the president’s unilateral authority to impose them. Dismissing those who challenge his tariff policies, Trump labeled them as “bad people,” showcasing his typical incendiary rhetoric.

These comments reflect Trump’s continuing trend of misleading statements regarding economic policies and their implications, raising questions about the veracity of his claims amid increasing scrutiny of his administration’s economic practices.

As political observers note, Trump’s attempts to paint a rosy economic picture are at odds with the realities of national debt and the complex nature of trade agreements, further emphasizing the need for accountable governance.

(Source: https://www.mediaite.com/media/tv/trump-bizarrely-claims-his-administration-is-finding-money-that-nobody-realized-ever-existed/)

US Institute of Peace Renamed for Trump After Administrations

The United States Institute of Peace (USIP) has been renamed to honor President Donald Trump despite his administration’s earlier efforts to weaken the organization. This change comes just before a peace agreement signing ceremony involving Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo at the USIP’s Washington, D.C., headquarters. The State Department promoted this new naming as a reflection of what they termed Trump’s status as “the greatest dealmaker in our nation’s history.”

Prior to the renaming, Trump’s administration effectively dismantled the USIP, which was established by Congress in 1984 to facilitate conflict resolution. The administration proposed eliminating federal funding for the institute in its budget request and took actions to control its assets, leading to legal disputes. In a controversial move, they dismissed most of the USIP’s board, resulting in employee terminations and claims of an illegal armed takeover of the organization.

George Foote, representing former USIP leadership, criticized the renaming as “adding insult to injury,” highlighting that a federal judge deemed the government’s takeover illegal. He asserted that rightful ownership will eventually restore the USIP to its original mission. Another former official remarked on the irony of Trump attaching his name to an institution he had significantly harmed.

White House spokesperson Anna Kelly defended the name change, brandishing USIP as a “bloated, useless entity” prior to Trump’s involvement. In her statement, she lauded the new title as a symbol of effective leadership that purportedly led to significant global peace efforts during Trump’s presidency.

The controversial rename raises pressing questions about the integrity and future of the USIP, as those opposing Trump’s actions emphasize the dissonance between the institute’s mission and its current status under the administration’s influence.

(Source: https://www.cnn.com/2025/12/03/politics/us-institute-of-peace-renamed-trump)

Trump Administration Will Withhold SNAP Aid from Democratic States

The Trump administration has announced its intention to withhold SNAP food aid from 42 million Americans in predominantly Democratic states unless those states provide detailed recipient information, including names and immigration status. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins stated that this measure aims to combat fraud in the program, despite many Democratic governors challenging the requirement in court as an invasion of privacy.

This decision comes at a time when SNAP, which offers about $190 in monthly benefits per person, has recently been scrutinized amid broader political maneuvers. Supporters of the plan argue it is essential, while opponents emphasize the detrimental impact on low-income families who heavily rely on this assistance for their daily needs.

Most Republican-led states have complied with the request, while Democratic-led states have fought back, pushing back against what they view as an unfair imposition. The administration had initially sought this information back in February, framing it as a necessary step to ensure program integrity.

Legal disputes continue to evolve around the issue, particularly following the recent federal government shutdown, which resulted in temporary interruptions to SNAP benefits. The ongoing debates highlight the deeper political divides as states navigate their responsibilities to assist vulnerable populations while facing federal mandates.

This situation not only affects food security but raises critical questions about the federal government’s role in regulating state-level welfare programs and the privacy of those who benefit from them.

Trump’s Late Starts Expose Executive Time and Fatigue

President Donald Trump has become embroiled in controversy over revelations from “non-public official logs” discrediting claims he maintains a vigorous work schedule. The logs, revealed in a botched attempt by the White House to counter reports of Trump’s fatigue, indicate that official West Wing meetings are rarely scheduled before 10:30 a.m., with most starting between 10:12 a.m. and 11 a.m.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt criticized the New York Times for suggesting Trump’s age impacts his capability to fulfill presidential duties, labeling these assertions as “fake news.” Leavitt insists that Trump is diligently engaged and dispelled concerns regarding his declining health and reduced official appearances, despite evidence reflecting a nearly 40 percent decrease in engagements compared to his earlier presidency.

Critics remain focused on the deteriorating quality of Trump’s contributions, highlighting alarming cognitive issues including memory lapses, erratic outbursts, and a general decline in articulate communication. Some experts speculate these could point to dementia or other mental health concerns aggravated by Trump’s advanced age.

In the aftermath of the Times’ report, Trump has exhibited increasingly erratic behavior, such as endorsing self-impeachment calls and promoting debunked theories, coupled with a surge of posts on Truth Social. His actions have drawn further scrutiny regarding the alarming implications for a near-octogenarian holding the highest office in the nation.

The growing concerns about Trump’s mental acuity and work schedule come at a time when his presidency faces mounting criticism, further intensifying the debate around his fitness for office. As he heads into the next electoral cycle, the implications of this scrutiny mark a pivotal moment for the Trump administration.

Trump’s Unapologetic Bigotry Against Somali Immigrants

President Donald Trump recently launched a xenophobic tirade, labeling Somali immigrants as “garbage” and expressing his disdain for their presence in the United States. His comments were made during a cabinet meeting, where he voiced a sentiment that is increasingly indicative of the nativist rhetoric he employs regarding immigration. Trump’s history of insulting Black individuals, particularly from African nations, makes this outburst especially troubling.

While speaking on Somali immigrants, Trump declared, “When they come from hell and they complain and do nothing but bitch, we don’t want them in our country.” These remarks were particularly targeted at Representative Ilhan Omar, a Somali refugee and U.S. citizen, whom he derogatorily called “garbage.” This kind of language has been a hallmark of Trump’s political strategy, as he frequently associates immigrants with crime and societal decay.

Despite appearing disengaged during parts of the meeting, Trump fiercely reacted when immigration was brought up, indicating a strategic shift towards an anti-immigrant stance amid mounting pressures over his administration’s shortcomings. His comments followed a shooting incident linked to an Afghan national, which he exploited to intensify his criticism of immigrant communities, particularly in Minnesota.

Local leaders, including the mayors of Minneapolis and St. Paul, condemned Trump’s remarks as reckless and dangerous, invoking the principle of inclusion in America’s founding creed. Mayor Melvin Carter emphasized the importance of defining who is included in “We the People,” highlighting the need for a more equitable understanding of citizenship.

Trump’s attack on Somali immigrants aligns with broader patterns of dehumanizing language used by his administration, reflecting a dangerous normalization of hate. Experts caution that such rhetoric may incite violence against marginalized groups, further underscoring the immediate threat posed by Trump’s ongoing inflammatory discourse.

Noem Urges Trump for Nationwide Travel Ban on Immigrants

Kristi Noem, U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security, pressed President Donald Trump to implement a comprehensive travel ban targeting countries she labels as “flooding our nation with killers, leeches, and entitlement junkies.” In a post on social media, she expressed her view that America’s ancestors built the nation for its citizens, not for foreign individuals, stating, “WE DON’T WANT THEM. NOT ONE.”

Noem’s call for a travel ban reflects Trump’s recent promises to “permanently pause migration from all Third World Countries,” particularly following violent incidents attributed to immigrants, including a shooting involving a suspected Afghan national. Trump has criticized existing immigration policies, insisting they undermine American society and finance, stating that migrants benefit disproportionately from U.S. resources.

Noem’s focus on immigration policies aligns with Trump’s broader immigration agenda, which features extreme measures such as denaturalizing migrants deemed detrimental to national cohesion, ending federal benefits for non-citizens, and aggressive deportation policies. Both officials are vocal about viewing immigration as a central issue affecting national security and social stability.

This rhetoric from Noem and Trump echoes an intensifying trend in Republican politics, wherein immigration is depicted as a significant threat. Their comments play into a narrative that directly targets specific nationalities while advocating measures that many deem as xenophobic and divisive.

As their statements draw further attention, they contribute to an ongoing dialogue about the future of immigration in the U.S. amid rising tensions and increasing calls for stricter enforcement of immigration laws. Their extreme posturing reinforces a culture of fear and aggression toward immigrants in American political discourse.

Trump’s Cabinet Meeting Loaded with Debunked False Claims

President Donald Trump made multiple false claims during a recent Cabinet meeting, echoing many previously debunked statements. He inaccurately asserted that grocery prices were down, when in fact they had risen by 2.7% from the previous year. Trump also distorted figures related to prescription drug price cuts, suggesting reductions that are mathematically impossible, and falsely claimed inflation had been “stopped in its tracks,” ignoring the ongoing uptick in year-over-year inflation rates.

Trump erroneously claimed he inherited the “worst inflation in history,” despite the current rate being similar to that in January when he returned to office. He inflated investment figures, alleging over $18 trillion in commitments, when official sources reported significantly lower numbers. On gas prices, Trump mentioned prices around $2.50 per gallon, which may have been true in certain states but overall remained close to $3.00 nationally.

In foreign policy discussions, Trump repeated the false claim that President Biden had “given away $350 billion” in aid to Ukraine; actual figures show substantially lower amounts disbursed. He exaggerated his achievements by stating he had ended eight wars, including conflicts that don’t fit his categorization. Additionally, a claim about his military strikes on drug boats saving thousands of lives lacked credible evidence and was dismissed as “absurd” by experts.

In relation to environmental issues, Trump misleadingly stated that China “doesn’t have gasoline,” despite its significant oil production. He also misrepresented Biden’s electric vehicle policies, suggesting there were mandates to own electric cars when, in reality, there were only guidelines aiming to increase their production.

Finally, Trump perpetuated lies about the 2020 election being “fake” and “rigged,” despite having lost a legitimate election. He also made false claims regarding crime rates in Washington, D.C., and misrepresented tax implications associated with his latest domestic policy bill regarding Social Security.

Trump’s White House Launches Media Bias Tracker to Target Critics

The White House has initiated a controversial website aimed at calling out media outlets and reporters for alleged bias. This new platform highlights “media offenders,” including the Boston Globe, CBS News, and the Independent, labeling them as misleading for their coverage of President Donald Trump’s recent inflammatory suggestions regarding military orders and Congress members.

The site features a section that intends to publicly shame those who contradict the administration’s narrative. It comes in response to criticism over Trump’s alarming statements, including his remarks that could be interpreted as inciting violence against six Democratic lawmakers. This tactic has drawn heavy scrutiny from media experts who view it as an attack on press freedoms.

Critics, including seasoned journalists, believe this initiative undermines journalistic integrity and threatens the fabric of a free press by fostering an environment of fear and intimidation. They argue that it reflects a growing pattern of authoritarian behavior from Trump, who continues to weaponize the government against dissenting voices.

This ongoing assault on the media by the Trump administration is part of a broader strategy to consolidate power and suppress accountability. As the White House targets specific publications and journalists, the implications for independent reporting remain serious and concerning.

The White House’s actions may further polarize the relationship between the media and the government, as free press advocates warn against the dangerous precedent set by naming and shaming. These tactics echo historical instances of authoritarian regimes attempting to quell dissent and manipulate public perception.

1 2 3 4 152