Category: Unpresidential

Trump Calls Former FBI Agent ‘Dirty Cop’ During Rant in South Korea

President Donald Trump, during a rant on his Truth Social platform, labeled former FBI agent Walter Giardina as a “dirty cop.” Trump’s outburst came while he was in South Korea attending the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit. The comments were part of a broader tirade against various individuals he perceives as enemies, reflecting his ongoing grievances against them.

In his early morning post, Trump named Giardina and other figures including Deranged Jack Smith, and members of the DOJ team such as Lisa Monaco and Andrew Weissmann, calling for their immediate investigation. He claimed these individuals orchestrated what he termed the “corrupt J-6 Witch Hunt,” a reference to the investigation into the January 6 Capitol riot. Trump’s rhetoric emphasizes his belief that these officials are a “disgrace to our Nation.”

Giardina, who was among those who were fired during a wave of dismissals that critics have described as a “campaign of retribution,” reportedly resisted providing names of FBI agents involved in the January 6 inquiries. His termination along with others has raised significant questions about the implications of Trump’s actions on law enforcement and accountability.

At the APEC summit, Trump reportedly made headlines for mimicking Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, showcasing his ongoing controversial engagement with world leaders. The context of his rhetoric and its implications suggests a further entrenchment of divisive political narratives.

This latest tirade reinforces Trump’s pattern of targeting those he feels have opposed him, often utilizing social media to amplify his grievances against the government and judicial figures. The dynamics of his administration’s relationship with various law enforcement and justice entities remain contentious and fraught with accusations.

Trump Delivers Factually Incorrect Speech to US Troops in Japan

President Donald Trump delivered a speech to US Navy personnel aboard the USS George Washington in Yokosuka, Japan, and made several false claims during his address. One of the key assertions was that he won the 2020 presidential election, a claim that has been widely debunked as he lost to Joe Biden. Additionally, Trump inaccurately stated that grocery prices have decreased, while in reality, they have been rising. He also mischaracterized inflation, arguing it has been “defeated” despite evidence pointing to a recent increase in inflation rates.

In his remarks, Trump exaggerated his record on military and war claims, asserting he ended “eight wars” in just a few months and wrongly stated that no US president has ever ended any conflict, despite historical facts to the contrary. He fabricated a figure of “$17 trillion” in investments coming into the US, a blatant distortion of reality, as official reports cite significantly lower amounts that include vague pledges rather than actual funds.

Trump also made outlandish claims regarding alleged drug trafficking, insisting that each boat attacked by the military would “kill 25,000 people,” a figure unsupported by any evidence and which was characterized as absurd by experts. He further overstated the number of migrants entering the country under Biden’s administration, repeating the exaggerated claim of “25 million” while official data showed far fewer encounters with migrants.

Moreover, Trump inaccurately described President Biden’s past claims, confusing different statements Biden made. He again mentioned his intention to rename the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America, this time asserting that “we have 92% of the shoreline,” which specialists have confirmed as incorrect. Critically, Trump’s yarns about military prowess and foreign policy also misrepresented the achievements of previous presidents in these areas.

The speech exemplifies a pattern of fabricating narratives that support Trump’s claims of accomplishment while casting his predecessors in a negative light. His habitual dissemination of false information during public appearances raises significant questions regarding factual accuracy in political communication.

DOJ Places Two Prosecutors on Leave After Jan. 6 Memo Filing

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has placed two federal prosecutors, Carlos A. Valdivia and Samuel White, on administrative leave shortly after they submitted a sentencing memo for Taylor Taranto, a pardoned Jan. 6 rioter. Taranto, a Washington state resident, was convicted of illegal firearm possession and making bomb threats while livestreaming. In addition to the legal issues stemming from his recent convictions, the prosecutors’ sentencing memo included a description of Taranto’s participation in the January 6 Capitol riot, which has led to their suspension.

Taranto was convicted in May for carrying two firearms and possessing ammunition unlawfully. In June 2023, he livestreamed threats claiming to be working on a detonator with intentions to detonate a car bomb. His arrest revealed the bomb threat was a hoax but uncovered further serious offenses, including the possession of a machete and multiple firearms. Prosecutors recommended a 27-month sentence followed by supervised release.

In their sentencing memorandum, the prosecutors characterized the riot as a mob attack on the U.S. Capitol while Congress was certifying the results of the 2020 presidential election. The memo emphasized Taranto’s involvement in the riot, claiming it was a “flatly accurate description” of the events, which has since been highlighted by legal analysts.

Following the submission of the memo, both Valdivia and White were locked out of their governmental devices and informed of their administrative leave, which became effective after the conclusion of a government shutdown. While it remains unclear why the prosecutors were put on leave, their action aligns with a pattern of the DOJ taking significant measures regarding personnel connected to Jan. 6 cases during the Trump presidency.

Previous reports indicate that the Trump administration has dismissed various prosecutors involved with January 6-related investigations, raising questions regarding the potential political motivations behind such personnel decisions. The DOJ has not commented on this recent action or provided any rationale for placing the two prosecutors on leave.

Trump Purges ICE Leadership to Accelerate Deportations

The Trump administration is undergoing significant changes at the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), with reports indicating the ousting of key leadership figures aimed at amplifying the agency’s deportation efforts. Sources from within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) suggest a systematic removal of up to 12 ICE field office chiefs, which may lead to an increase in deportations executed by more aggressive Border Patrol operatives.

This restructuring, described as a “purge” by immigration expert Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, involves replacing traditional ICE leadership with officials from Border Patrol and Customs and Border Protection (CBP), particularly under the influence of controversial Border Patrol Commander Greg Bovino. The change signals a shift toward less targeted enforcement operations that focus broadly on undocumented immigrants rather than prioritizing those with criminal records.

Historically, ICE has operated with an emphasis on identifying and arresting specific criminal individuals through surveillance and planned enforcement actions. In contrast, the current Border Patrol strategy has been characterized by more indiscriminate sweeps, leading to conflicts and legal challenges across various states where their methods have drawn judicial scrutiny.

Reichlin-Melnick provided insight on social media, indicating that this move could lead to escalated enforcement tactics reminiscent of the ‘Midway Blitz’ operations employed under Trump’s previous administration, which were often criticized for their aggressive approach. This suggests that the already heightened tensions within immigration enforcement may worsen, affecting both immigrants and communities across the United States.

The announcement of these changes has raised alarms among advocates and policy experts who recognize the potential for increased deportations and a shift in deportation priorities that could bypass established protocols aimed at protecting vulnerable populations. As the landscape of U.S. immigration enforcement continues to evolve under Trump’s direction, the implications for law and order, as well as civil rights, remain a point of contention.

Trump’s Friend Timothy Mellon Donates $130 Million for Troops

The New York Times has identified Timothy Mellon, a reclusive billionaire and grandson of former Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon, as the anonymous benefactor who donated $130 million to support U.S. troops during the recent government shutdown. This unprecedented donation has raised ethical and legal questions regarding its implementation within the framework of Department of Defense funding.

According to NYT reporter Tyler Pager, Mellon has recently emerged as a significant political donor, pouring millions into Republican campaigns, notably contributing to a pro-Trump super PAC for the 2024 election. Despite his visibility as a donor, details about him remain scarce, suggesting a deliberate choice to maintain his privacy.

During a CNN Newsroom discussion, Pager highlighted the rarity of private citizens making such large contributions to military funding. He noted that while the Department of Defense accepted the donation based on a specific regulatory provision, the actual processes through which the money would be deployed are still unclear. This lack of transparency adds to the unusual nature of Mellon’s contribution.

Pager further explained that while the donation is substantial, it does not meet the extensive financial needs of the Defense Department, which manages over a million active-duty personnel. He emphasized that this funding cannot be seen as a long-term solution to military pay, underscoring the need for a sustainable budget approach.

The incident raises broader concerns over the implications of private donations to public military funding and the associated governance issues. As the Trump administration navigates financial challenges, the legality and ethics of such contributions will likely remain in focus among lawmakers and the public.

Hegseth Replaces Army’s Mingus Amid Pentagon Leadership Purge

The recent military reshuffling led by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has raised significant concerns within the Pentagon. Lt. Gen. Christopher LaNeve is set to replace Army Vice Chief of Staff Gen. James Mingus, marking a notable shift in military leadership structure. This selection is interpreted as a strong statement from Hegseth, as he places a close associate in a pivotal role, signaling an intent to consolidate control over the Army amidst ongoing purges in military leadership.

Reports indicate that this move is particularly impactful, with the Army feeling the effects of Hegseth’s leadership choices more intensely than other branches of the military. The swift nature of these appointments follows an alarming trend of retirements and dismissals, including high-profile individuals like Adm. Alvin Holsey and Gen. Thomas Bussiere, who have unexpectedly stepped down or announced early retirements for personal reasons.

The ongoing changes highlight a broader purge environment under Hegseth’s oversight, with multiple generals and admirals either being pushed out or opting for early retirement in recent months. This series of firings and resignations is contributing to a climate of apprehension and uncertainty within military ranks, which historically have seen less turnover at this level.

Hegseth’s recent actions appear to prioritize loyalty and alignment with his vision for military operations and governance, possibly altering the traditional balance and dynamics within the Pentagon. This could have long-term implications for military strategy and operations, especially as the Army braces for further internal changes.

The fallout from these decisions raises questions about the future leadership within the Pentagon and the potential for increased politicization of military appointments. As Hegseth continues to assert influence over military leadership, the ramifications of his choices are likely to resonate well beyond the immediate scope of the Army.

White House Confirms No October Inflation Data Release

The White House announced that there will likely be no release of inflation data in October due to the ongoing U.S. government shutdown, marking a historical first for a data report spanning over a century. The shutdown, now in its 24th day, has halted most economic data collection across federal agencies such as the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), raising concerns about the impact on economic surveillance.

In a statement, the White House indicated that the ongoing furloughs of approximately 700,000 federal workers have impeded data collection efforts. Only limited staff were recalled to process the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for September, which was released to assist the Social Security Administration in calculating adjustments for beneficiaries. Analysts suggest the October report will likely be missed entirely as BLS personnel are unable to gather the necessary data.

Erica Groshen, a former BLS commissioner, highlighted the challenges, stating that normally data collection would have started well before the month. Some economic experts argue that producing data based on limited inputs would compromise the accuracy of the report. Concerns over the shutdown’s extensive nature contrast with the previous shutdown from December 2018 to January 2019, during which many reports were still generated.

Despite the worries, some economists believe the delay in publishing inflation data, while inconvenient, will not lead to catastrophic economic consequences. Steven Englander, global head of G10 FX research at Standard Chartered, noted that U.S. economic data already has many flaws, and a gap in reporting is manageable when not accompanied by a financial crisis.

The suspension of inflation data collection exemplifies the broader repercussions of the government shutdown, with significant implications for economic monitoring. The BLS typically relies on a rolling basis to collect data throughout the month, making timely reporting particularly challenging without field staff on duty.

The Pentagon’s Illegal $130 Million Donation

The Pentagon has confirmed the acceptance of a $130 million anonymous donation aimed at supporting military pay during the current government shutdown. This unprecedented action falls under the Pentagon’s general gift acceptance authority, enabling private contributions for specific uses.

According to Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell, this donation is designated to offset costs associated with service members’ salaries and benefits. He expressed gratitude toward the donor, describing them as “a patriot” who wanted to assist troops amid funding shortages created by stalled negotiations in Congress.

However, this contribution addresses only a minor portion of the military pay needs. Recent reports indicate that typical military pay periods cost about $6.5 billion, which means the donation only represents a fraction of a day’s payroll for service members.

Trump, during a White House event, praised the donor as a “friend” who supports the military. The move also raises legal questions regarding compliance with the Antideficiency Act, which prohibits agencies from spending funds beyond congressional appropriations. Furthermore, any gifts over $10,000 that benefit military personnel require an ethics review.

As discussions continue around military funding, a Republican measure called the Shutdown Fairness Act of 2025, intended to protect pay for active-duty troops during this crisis, failed to pass in the Senate. The vote fell short at 54-45, reflecting a division along party lines.

Trump Plans to Name White House Ballroom After

President Donald Trump is expected to name a new ballroom at the White House after himself, with senior administration officials referring to it as “The President Donald J. Trump Ballroom.” The proposed name aligns with Trump’s history of branding his construction projects. Details indicate that the project will cost approximately $300 million.

The entire East Wing of the White House has been demolished to make way for the ballroom, which is set to cover 90,000 square feet. Imagery of the demolition shows some historic magnolia trees and elements of the Kennedy Garden removed from the site. Despite the extensive changes, Trump has not publicly confirmed what he will name the ballroom but has acknowledged ongoing discussions.

During a recent interaction with ABC News, Trump chose not to elaborate on the ballroom’s name but has expressed confidence in the project, stating he would contribute “millions of dollars” towards it. Trump’s commitment is underscored by reported fundraising efforts that have already raised about $350 million, with substantial support from contributors eager to see the project fulfilled.

Trumps’s focus on enhancing the White House with this ballroom has received mixed reactions amid ongoing discussions about budget allocations. Questions remain regarding the utilization of the surplus funds raised beyond the projected construction costs. Currently, the White House remains engaged in the ballroom’s construction, with further updates expected as the project progresses.

Construction activities are ongoing, despite criticisms regarding the historic significance of the buildings being altered. Trump’s renovation efforts, including this ballroom, highlight his broader vision for the White House, which appears closely tied to his personal branding.

Trump Ends U.S.-Canada Trade Talks Over Ontario Reagan Ad

President Donald Trump has halted all U.S. trade negotiations with Canada, citing an advertisement from Ontario that features former President Ronald Reagan criticizing tariffs. Trump described the ad as “fake” and claimed it misrepresented Reagan’s views on tariffs. The advertisement was part of Ontario’s campaign, which Ontario Premier Doug Ford emphasized was intended to demonstrate that friendship between the United States and Canada is beneficial.

The Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute criticized the ad, asserting it distorted Reagan’s original intent. The foundation indicated that the ad misled viewers by suggesting Reagan opposed tariffs, when he actually supported them at times. In response, Ford tweeted a link to Reagan’s unedited speech, where Reagan states that high tariffs can lead to retaliatory trade wars and artificially inflated prices.

Ford, who vowed to spend $75 million on advertisements, asserted the importance of U.S.-Canada relations. Following Trump’s announcement, he reiterated Reagan’s support for collaboration, stating, “Canada and the United States are friends, neighbours and allies.” Ford’s remarks included a sentiment that both nations are stronger together.

In a statement made on Truth Social, Trump reiterated his viewpoint that the Ontario advertisement did not accurately portray Reagan’s stance and claimed its intent was to influence an upcoming U.S. Supreme Court ruling concerning his tariffs. He further characterized the Canadian government’s actions as egregious enough to warrant the termination of trade negotiations.

This is not the first instance where Trump has called off trade discussions with Canada; earlier in June, he similarly announced the termination of negotiations in response to a digital services tax imposed by Canada, which was later rescinded. Trump’s decision has sparked a new wave of discussions regarding tariffs and their implications on trade relations between the two neighboring countries.

1 2 3 … 414