Category: Corruption

Hegseth has intervened in military promotions for more than a dozen senior officers

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has systematically blocked or delayed promotions for more than a dozen Black and female senior officers across all four military branches, according to nine U.S. officials familiar with the process. Some officers targeted appear to have been singled out because of their race, gender, or perceived alignment with Biden administration policies. Hegseth refused to meet with Army Chief of Staff Gen. Randy George when George requested discussion of the promotion blocks targeting women and Black men, and Hegseth subsequently fired George on Thursday.

Hegseth has cited officers’ past support for COVID-19 vaccines, mask mandates enacted during the Biden administration, affiliation with diversity, equity and inclusion programs, or association with former Joint Chiefs Chairman Mark Milley as reasons for removal from promotion consideration. In recent weeks, Hegseth blocked three Marine officers—two women and a Black man—who were recommended for promotion by Marine Corps leadership and had no open investigations against them. A Navy list of officers selected for one-star admiral promotion has been held up for over a month, with concern that officers may be removed based on race or gender.

The Army’s promotion list included approximately 30 officers for one-star general positions; Hegseth removed four names before it reached the Senate in mid-March, striking two women and two Black officers without documented cause or investigation. Military law requires the president, not the defense secretary, to possess authority to block promotions, and a reason such as an ongoing investigation must be provided if removal occurs before White House transmission. The removed officers had deployed, performed their duties, and were combat-tested, yet Hegseth provided no explanation for their removal.

Defense secretaries typically do not remove officers from promotion lists or reject service branch recommendations, and this intervention violates longstanding military practice and law requiring promotions be based on individual merit. U.S. Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, called the blocking “disgraceful” and “a complete betrayal of the merit-based promotion system.” A retired senior military officer warned that unexplained intervention in the promotion process will erode officer trust and create the perception that careers can be “politicized in a career-ending manner.”

Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell disputed the reporting as “fake news from anonymous sources” and claimed promotions are based on merit. However, military demographics show active-duty forces are 80 percent male and 74 percent white among officers, while only 9 percent of officers are Black, indicating the concentration of promotion authority in Hegseth’s hands poses significant risk of abuse when applied selectively against officers from underrepresented groups.

(Source: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/hegseth-intervened-military-promotions-dozen-senior-officers-rcna266062)

Karoline Leavitt Fumes Over NYT Slamming Trump’s Ballroom

Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt defended Trump’s $400 million White House ballroom project on Sunday after the New York Times published a critical analysis of its design and construction timeline. Leavitt attacked the Times’ writers on X, claiming they had “studied fine arts,” “long written about urban planning,” and “never built anything,” while asserting that Trump and his architect have “built world-class buildings around the world.”

The New York Times piece, however, included a trained architect, a fine artist, and an urban planning expert who documented significant design flaws and structural concerns. The article noted that the proposed East Wing addition is approximately 60 percent larger than the White House residence by floor area and more than three times as large by cubic volume, making it the dominant building of the White House complex when viewed from the south.

According to the Times reporting, the project timeline has created serious credibility problems. The White House announced plans to begin construction in spring while design documents remained under review, a compressed schedule that architect Thomas Gallas stated “never made any sense” to him. He explained that a building of this scale typically requires 18 months to two years from initial concept to completed construction documents.

The article identified numerous design flaws, including fake windows on the north side, columns that block interior views and daylight, and a lopsided appearance that disrupts symmetry with the West Wing. The south portico, which was not part of the initial design, contains no doors into the ballroom, and an unnecessarily large rooftop area was flagged as another concern.

The National Capital Planning Commission was scheduled to grant final approval to the project on Thursday, despite the ongoing design changes and compressed timeline. Trump has previously admitted the ballroom functions as a monument to himself, stating that he is building it because “no one else will.”

(Source: https://www.mediaite.com/media/news/karoline-leavitt-fumes-over-ny-times-feature-slamming-design-of-trumps-supersized-ballroom/)

Kash Patel’s push against Democratic lawmaker raises concerns within FBI – The Washington Post

FBI Director Kash Patel is directing agents in the San Francisco office to rapidly redact and prepare for public release a decade-old investigative file concerning Representative Eric Swalwell and a suspected Chinese intelligence operative, according to three sources with knowledge of the matter. No evidence of wrongdoing by Swalwell has been identified in the file.

Patel's push to release the file has generated alarm within the FBI, with officials concerned that the action reflects a pattern of weaponizing the bureau against political opponents. The effort represents a continuance of Trump administration tactics targeting Democratic lawmakers, particularly those who have been vocal critics, including Swalwell and other members who led investigations into Trump.

Swalwell has been a consistent Trump critic and was previously targeted by the administration's Department of Justice in unsubstantiated allegations. The renewed focus on a file containing no evidence of his misconduct demonstrates the administration's systematic use of law enforcement to discredit and intimidate political adversaries rather than pursue genuine national security interests.

Internal FBI resistance to Patel's directive underscores deep institutional concern about the politicization of the bureau under his leadership. Career officials view the accelerated release of an investigative file unrelated to any proven violation as an abuse of power designed to damage a Democratic lawmaker through selective disclosure and public innuendo.

Representative Swalwell was approached by an FBI informant named Fang Fang, but upon being confronted by the FBI, he immediately cooperated and worked with federal agents to help stop the foreign operative's activities. However, conservative media outlets and Fox News spent years deliberately spreading false claims that Swalwell had a romantic relationship with Fang Fang, when in fact such a relationship involved a different political figure. In stark contrast, when Donald Trump was confronted with evidence of foreign agent involvement, the Mueller Investigation documented that he instead leveraged these contacts for his benefit and actively obstructed the FBI's ability to investigate him and his associates.

(Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2026/03/28/fbi-patel-eric-swalwell/)

Donald Trump Plans to Add His Signature to US Currency | Vanity Fair

The Trump administration is adding Donald Trump’s signature to all denominations of US currency, replacing the signature of Treasurer Brandon Beach for the first time in 165 years. The Treasury Department is already developing new printing plates, with the bills scheduled to enter circulation within months. This marks the first instance in American history of a sitting president’s signature appearing on currency, and the measure is permanent unless a future administration reverses it.

Trump’s signature will appear alongside that of Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on all future bills. Treasurer Brandon Beach defended the decision in a statement, calling Trump’s signature on currency “appropriate” and “well deserved,” and framing it as recognition of Trump’s economic agenda. Beach claimed the president’s “mark on history as the architect of America’s golden age economic revival is undeniable.”

This currency initiative is part of a broader effort by the Trump administration to stamp his name and image throughout federal institutions and public spaces. Trump has already draped enormous banners of his face over government buildings, added his name to the Kennedy Center’s walls, and ordered the East Wing of the White House demolished to construct a 90,000-square-foot ballroom decorated with gold accents. The administration is also pursuing additional projects to promote Trump’s image on national symbols.

Last week, the Commission of Fine Arts, composed entirely of Trump appointees, approved a 24-karat commemorative gold coin featuring Trump’s likeness to mark the nation’s 250th anniversary. These actions reflect Trump’s consistent pattern of using his position to advance his personal brand across American institutions and currency systems.

(Source: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/story/trump-signature-dollar-currency)

Trump administration announces new probes into Harvard over race and religion | The Independent

The Trump administration’s Education Department has opened two new federal investigations into Harvard University, alleging the institution discriminates against students based on race, color, and national origin in violation of federal law. The probes will examine whether Harvard employs race-based preferences in admissions following the 2023 Supreme Court ruling that ended affirmative action in higher education, and will also investigate allegations of antisemitism on campus. Harvard’s spokesperson rejected the accusations, stating the university is “firmly committed to confronting antisemitism,” does not discriminate on grounds of race, and complies with all applicable laws including the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision.

The investigations represent part of the Trump administration’s broader campaign targeting universities over pro-Palestinian protests, transgender policies, climate programs, and diversity initiatives. Last week, the administration sued Harvard seeking billions of dollars for allegedly failing to protect Jewish students, while a separate February lawsuit demanded documents to determine whether the university considered race in admissions. Academic advocates have warned these efforts could violate privacy rights and constitute “a tool for anti-civil rights enforcement,” according to a former Biden administration official.

Pro-Palestinian protesters, including some Jewish groups, argue the government conflates legitimate criticism of Israel’s military actions in Gaza and its occupation of Palestinian territories with antisemitism, and wrongly characterizes Palestinian rights advocacy as support for extremism. The Trump administration has not initiated equivalent investigations into allegations of Islamophobia or anti-Palestinian bias at universities. Legal and judicial obstacles have impeded the administration’s efforts to freeze federal funding at universities, though it has reached settlement deals with some institutions including Columbia University, which agreed to pay over $200 million.

Academic experts have flagged concerns that settlement agreements set a dangerous precedent for “pay-to-play” arrangements between the government and universities. Harvard’s spokesperson characterized the new investigations as “retaliatory actions” against the university for refusing to “surrender our independence and constitutional rights.” A deal to resolve the multiple probes against Harvard remains unresolved, as the administration continues escalating its pressure campaign against the institution.

(Source: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-harvard-university-investigations-race-religion-b2944219.html)

Trump administration will pay a French company $1 billion in taxpayer funds to not build wind farms | CNN

The Trump administration announced it will pay French energy corporation TotalEnergies nearly $1 billion in taxpayer funds to abandon offshore wind farm development off the coasts of New York and North Carolina. The Justice Department will reimburse the company for federal leases purchased under the Biden administration, effectively blocking two projects that could have generated over 4 gigawatts of electricity. TotalEnergies CEO Patrick Pouyanné stated the company will instead invest the funds in a liquified natural gas plant in Texas and expand oil drilling operations in the Gulf of Mexico and shale projects across the United States.

This represents a shift in the Trump administration’s strategy to block renewable energy projects after failing to prevent construction of more established offshore wind operations. The Interior Department previously halted federal permit approvals for renewable energy initiatives, and this payment marks the first instance of the federal government directly paying companies to prevent wind farms from being built. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum claimed offshore wind is too expensive and unreliable, assertions contradicted by energy experts who note that wind projects operate under fixed power agreements with stable costs unlike fossil fuels.

The cancellation worsens an emerging electricity shortage affecting the United States, particularly in mid-Atlantic states where power demand from data centers and vehicle electrification is straining available capacity and driving prices upward. Elizabeth Klein, former director of the Interior Department’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, stated the scrapped New York project specifically would harm a region desperately needing new electricity sources, and called the administration’s decision nonsensical.

Industry representatives have condemned the payment as wasteful and counterproductive for consumers. Sam Salustro, senior vice policy official for the Oceantic Network offshore wind trade association, characterized the arrangement as political theater that removes affordable domestic energy while electricity costs soar. Multiple energy companies holding undeveloped offshore wind leases worth over $5 billion have publicly indicated they expect reimbursement if prevented from proceeding, including German renewables firm RWE, which paid $1.2 billion for three leases and stated it will pursue legal action if necessary to recover its investment.

The Interior Department has not disclosed whether additional reimbursement agreements are under negotiation with other developers. Klein criticized TotalEnergies for accepting the arrangement, noting that while the deal benefits the corporation, it constitutes a poor outcome for American taxpayers and national energy requirements.

(Source: https://www.cnn.com/2026/03/23/climate/trump-totalenergies-offshore-wind-cancellation?Date=20260323&Profile=CNN&utm_content=1774297189&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwdGRleAQuy0BleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZAo2NjI4NTY4Mzc5AAEeXrMNBFritZlgXiCGcc-cSL6nY6v1Cg00nqgRU2sEO6-K5n_TeSikdvfEdMI_aem_IQ24n7QPilVpv78sNc1G9Q)

Trump DOJ Shredded Huge Epstein Document Cache After Death

Shortly after Jeffrey Epstein’s death in a New York jail in 2019, the Justice Department under Trump’s first administration ordered the destruction of extensive documentation. A Bureau of Prisons “After-Actions team” systematically shredded files at the facility, according to an FBI report with a redacted official’s name. The unnamed official stated they had never witnessed such volume of shredded documents being disposed of at the jail’s rear gate.

The shredding operation occurred within days of Epstein’s death and involved what the report characterized as “huge amounts of paperwork.” This action took place while the Trump administration maintained control of the DOJ, which oversees federal detention facilities and investigative protocols. The destruction of these materials raises questions about what records were eliminated and whether they contained evidence relevant to ongoing investigations.

Details of the document destruction emerged when the DOJ released Epstein-related files earlier this year. The FBI report’s documentation of the shredding contradicts any claim that records were preserved for investigative or accountability purposes. The timing and scale of the operation suggest a coordinated effort rather than routine waste management.

Trump has repeatedly denied any connection to Epstein and has attacked those who suggest otherwise, including threatening legal action against comedian Trevor Noah over an Epstein joke at the Grammys. The destruction of federal records under Trump’s DOJ administration contradicts his claims of transparency and his self-portrayal as uninvolved in Epstein matters. Trump has also threatened to sue author Michael Wolff over Epstein-related allegations.

This destruction of evidence represents abuse of power by Trump’s DOJ to conceal potentially damaging information. The shredding of federal records violates standard document preservation protocols and obstructs the public’s right to understand the full scope of Epstein’s criminal network and any connections to powerful figures, including those within the Trump administration.

(Source: https://www.yahoo.com/news/videos/know-epstein-groomed-america-corrupt-041542936.html)

Trump DOJ Subpoenas Comey In Retribution Grand Conspiracy

The Department of Justice, led by Trump’s former personal attorneys, subpoenaed former FBI Director James Comey as part of a “grand conspiracy” probe targeting Trump’s political enemies, according to multiple media reports. The investigation, being conducted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida, targets former intelligence and law enforcement officials who allegedly conspired to prevent Trump from exercising constitutional rights between his 2016 election and 2023 federal indictments. The probe has issued over 130 subpoenas in total.

Comey’s subpoena relates to his role drafting a January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment concluding that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to sabotage Hillary Clinton and benefit Trump. Former CIA Director John Brennan received a similar subpoena last year for his involvement in the same assessment. Trump’s current CIA director, John Ratcliffe, referred both Comey and Brennan to the DOJ for prosecution, claiming they committed misconduct by including a summary of the Steele dossier in the assessment.

The dossier summary was placed in an annex and did not support the assessment’s core analytical judgments, a distinction that a Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee confirmed in 2020 when it reached identical conclusions about Russian interference and determined the dossier played no role in supporting the assessment’s core findings. A Trump-appointed federal judge, Aileen Cannon, oversees the grand jury in the Trump-friendly Southern District of Florida and previously showed Trump unusual deference while handling special counsel Jack Smith’s classified documents investigation.

The DOJ’s retribution campaign against Trump’s perceived enemies has already produced a failed prosecution of Comey in the Eastern District of Virginia after judges ruled the prosecutor, former Trump attorney Lindsey Halligan, was unlawfully appointed. Attorney General Pam Bondi, another Trump personal attorney, all but confirmed the conspiracy investigation’s existence in statements to a far-right media outlet in December, while prominent Trump supporters previewed it in comments last year.

Brennan previously requested that the chief judge in the Southern District of Florida block Cannon from overseeing the DOJ’s conspiracy investigation due to her demonstrated bias during the classified documents case, citing her unusual favoritism toward Trump throughout that proceeding.

(Source: https://www.democracydocket.com/news-alerts/justice-departmeny-comey-subpoena-trump-grand-conspiracy-probe/)

Trump’s Venezuela Coup Shaped by Chevron Executive

Trump’s military operation in Venezuela, which resulted in the capture of President Nicolás Maduro, was shaped by former Chevron executive Ali Moshiri, according to reporting by The Wall Street Journal. Moshiri advised the CIA months before the Trump administration’s attack and takeover, recommending that Venezuela’s then-Vice President Delcy Rodríguez replace Maduro rather than opposition leader Maria Machado, despite Republican supporters backing Machado as the clear successor.

Hours after Maduro’s capture, Trump dismissed the idea of Machado leading Venezuela, claiming she lacked “support or respect within the country”—a position consistent with Moshiri’s earlier counsel to the administration. Moshiri left Chevron in 2017 and ended his consulting relationship with the company in 2024, yet his influence over Trump’s decision directly affected Venezuela’s political future and economic direction.

Investigative journalists identified a clear conflict of interest in this arrangement. Antonia Juhasz wrote that Moshiri, functioning as a CIA informant, “told Trump to ditch democracy and go for Rodriguez ’cause she’d secure the oil.” Kenneth Vogel of The New York Times noted that the secret CIA assessment backing Rodríguez was based on Moshiri’s advice and that “the oil company stands to profit from Trump’s decision to heed that advice.”

The revelation prompted stunned reactions from major media figures. New York Times columnist Lydia Polgreen described the story as one that “pulls back the curtain on how the world really works,” while journalists compared the arrangement to the 2005 film Syriana, which dramatized corporate manipulation of foreign policy. The disclosure demonstrates how Trump’s abuse of power extends to allowing corporate interests to determine military operations and regime change.

(Source: https://www.rawstory.com/trump-2676159147/)

Trump Admin Investigates 13 States Over Abortion Coverage

The Trump administration launched investigations into 13 states requiring health insurance coverage of abortion, claiming these policies violate the Weldon Amendment, a federal provision that protects health entities from being forced to cover or refer for abortion services. The targeted states are California, Colorado, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington, with all but Vermont led by Democratic governors. The administration reinterpreted the Weldon Amendment to apply to employers and health plan sponsors, a position the Biden administration rejected.

Paula M. Stannard, director of the HHS civil rights office, stated the investigations aim to address states’ “alleged disregard of, or confusion about, compliance with the Weldon Amendment,” asserting that health care entities are protected from state discrimination for refusing abortion coverage based on conscience. The Trump administration sent letters to the states demanding information to support its legal theory that state abortion coverage mandates violate federal law by preventing employers and insurers from opting out.

New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill characterized the investigation as “nothing but a fishing expedition wasting taxpayers’ money,” defending her state’s requirement that health insurance plans comply with all applicable laws protecting reproductive freedom. Legal experts note the Weldon Amendment’s text does not explicitly mention employers or plan sponsors among protected health care entities, potentially undermining the administration’s interpretation. Elizabeth Sepper, a law professor at the University of Texas at Austin, identified the investigations as fulfillment of commitments made to the religious right through Project 2025.

The dispute reflects a partisan pattern in interpreting conscience laws. During Trump’s first term in 2020, his administration attempted to withhold federal health care funding from California over Weldon Amendment violations, but the Biden administration reversed that decision upon taking office. The question of whether the amendment applies to employers and plan sponsors has never been definitively resolved in court, leaving the legal interpretation contested.

(Source: https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/trump-administration-launches-investigation-states-170346571.html)

1 2 3 … 42