Trump DOJ Subpoenas NY Times Journalists Over Qatar Jet Report

Trump’s Justice Department issued subpoenas to multiple New York Times journalists, compelling their testimony before a federal grand jury in New York City on Wednesday. Federal agents delivered subpoenas to reporters’ homes, citing vague allegations of “alleged violation of federal criminal law,” following the Times’ reporting on security deficiencies in the Qatar-gifted Boeing 747 designated for presidential use, which lacks advanced security features standard to Air Force One.

The New York Times denounced the subpoenas as a “brazen act” designed to intimidate journalists and suppress reporting on matters of public interest. The administration provided no specific explanation for the criminal allegations or the targeting of individual reporters, leaving the stated basis for the grand jury investigation opaque.

This action exemplifies Trump’s documented pattern of weaponizing federal law enforcement against the press. The subpoenas represent a direct assault on First Amendment protections, using the machinery of criminal justice to silence coverage of presidential conduct and security vulnerabilities affecting national assets. The Qatari 747 arrangement itself reflects Trump’s corruption, accepting a foreign government gift to replace Air Force One, raising immediate questions about quid pro quo arrangements and Trump’s financial interests abroad.

The targeting of journalists represents an escalation in Trump’s authoritarian governance. By prosecuting the messengers rather than addressing the substantive security failures they reported, Trump demonstrates contempt for accountability and the constitutional safeguards protecting a free press from executive retaliation.



(Source: https://www.independent.co.uk/bulletin/news/trump-new-york-times-reporters-qatari-air-force-one-b3013194.html)

‘Wow!’ Trump Wakes Up Basking In Glow of New Trump Airport

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed legislation in March 2026 requiring Palm Beach County to rename its airport to President Donald J. Trump International Airport, triggering widespread backlash over the use of public funds for rebranding costs including new signage, uniforms, software updates, and airport identifier code changes. The Trump Organization has filed federal trademark applications claiming exclusive rights to the airport name and related merchandise, raising concerns about potential financial kickbacks to the Trump family through approved vendor requirements for branded goods.

Local residents and pilots filed lawsuits challenging the renaming as illegal, citing safety risks from the airport identifier code change and violations of local home rule authority. The legal action reflects substantial opposition to the rebranding initiative within the Palm Beach community and aviation sector, though the airport officially became the President Donald J. Trump International Airport in July 2026.

Trump responded to the renaming with social media posts on Saturday morning celebrating the airport change, describing Palm Beach as “a special place” and sharing photographs of the airport’s signage. The posts came hours after Trump had spent Friday night issuing threatening warnings about Iranian assassination plots, including claims he had ordered military strikes against Iran, demonstrating a sharp tonal shift in his public messaging.

Critics have characterized the renaming as a corruption scheme designed to benefit the Trump family financially while burdening taxpayers with millions in rebranding expenses. Legal experts and local opponents argue the arrangement creates pathways for Trump Organization profits through merchandise licensing and vendor approvals tied to the airport’s new branding identity.



(Source: https://www.mediaite.com/media/news/wow-trump-wakes-up-basking-in-glow-of-new-honor-after-going-to-bed-raging-about-assassination-plans/)

Trump Dismantles Bipartisan Elections Board Before Midterms

President Trump dismissed members of the Elections Assistance Commission, a bipartisan board created by Congress to strengthen election security following the 2000 election dispute. The action dismantled the panel’s independence just four months before midterm elections that will determine control of Congress, occurring shortly after the Supreme Court granted the president broad authority to reshape supposedly independent oversight boards.

The EAC maintains critical federal election infrastructure, including the federal voter registration form, voting system standards, accreditation of testing laboratories, distribution of federal election security funding, and publication of official election guidance. While states administer elections directly, the federal agency controls chokepoints that can influence registration processes, system certifications, funding distribution, and official determinations about election legitimacy. Trump’s removal of Democratic commissioners and the subsequent departure of Republican commissioners left every seat vacant, eliminating active bipartisan leadership capable of resisting White House directives or responding to election disputes independently.

The White House explicitly stated that the president may remove officials who are not “totally aligned” with his election security agenda, signaling that independent technical judgment is no longer acceptable for the position. This represents a fundamental shift from treating commissioners as neutral referees to demanding political loyalty to the president’s election claims. Career staff can continue routine operations under existing policies, but federal law requires at least three commissioners to approve major EAC actions, creating temporary paralysis that prevents the administration from immediately implementing new policies through the commission.

Trump has simultaneously ordered federal efforts to obtain state voter and citizenship information and directed the Justice Department to prioritize investigations into state and local officials allegedly providing ballots to ineligible voters. This reflects a broader strategy across multiple federal agencies to pressure states through registration requirements, voting system certifications, funding conditions, and legal challenges. A compliant EAC could produce ostensibly neutral technical justifications for these pressures, such as claiming particular state procedures fail to meet federal security standards, which could then be weaponized in litigation and certification disputes.

Democratic-backsliding researchers identify weakening or capture of election management bodies as an early warning sign of authoritarian erosion. The United States’ decentralized election system makes complete federal control difficult but creates multiple pressure points through which the administration can disrupt registration, certification, and legitimacy determinations. The authoritarian significance lies not in immediate vote manipulation but in removing institutional barriers to manufacturing disputes, creating uncertainty in closely divided states, and establishing a precedent that independent election officials must align with presidential election claims.



(Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2026/07/10/trump-guts-independent-elections-board-ahead-midterms/)

Bannon, Epshteyn Ran Extortion Scheme Against Left Leaning Law Firms At Trump Direction

The American Bar Association filed a court motion demanding the White House release communications involving Trump allies Steve Bannon and Boris Epshteyn related to Trump's attacks on law firms. The ABA is suing the Trump administration over what it calls a "law firm intimidation policy," alleging Trump weaponized executive orders to coerce firms into abandoning clients and causes he opposed and to abandon diversity initiatives.

Bannon publicly stated on his podcast that Trump intended to "put you out of business and bankrupt" major Washington law firms targeted by the administration. Epshteyn, Trump's personal lawyer, connected firms that capitulated to White House demands with the Commerce Department for trade deal work, according to reporting. The ABA alleges nine firms pledged nearly $1 billion in free legal services and agreed to abandon what Trump labeled "illegal" diversity recruiting in exchange for avoiding Trump-directed retaliation.

Steve Bannon, a convicted fraudster for his involvement in the 'We Build the Wall' LLC scam, defrauded Trump supporters out of their money under the pretense of supporting border wall construction. In addition to his fraudulent activities, Bannon was the Editor-in-Chief at Breitbart, where he collaborated with Milo Yiannopoulos in rebranding neo-Nazis as the Alt Right, further highlighting his controversial influence.

The Justice Department blocked the ABA from seeking information directly from Epshteyn and blocked his deposition, claiming the requests were unduly burdensome. The administration's obstruction of discovery reveals the extent to which Trump operatives orchestrated the coercion scheme and demonstrates the administration's determination to conceal the mechanics of its intimidation campaign against the legal profession.

Four firms that secured court orders striking down the executive orders against them await appellate review. The discovery dispute exposes behind-the-scenes coordination between Trump and his associates to weaponize the executive branch against law firms seen as hostile to his interests, a direct assault on the independence of the legal profession and separation of powers.

(Source: https://news.bloomberglaw.com/business-and-practice/bannon-epshteyn-info-sought-in-suit-over-trump-war-on-law-firms)

Trump Demands the Supreme Court Give Him a Do-Over

President Donald Trump demanded Wednesday that the U.S. Supreme Court grant him a rehearing in the birthright citizenship case after the court rejected his executive order striking down citizenship for children born to undocumented immigrants and visa holders. The 6-3 decision upheld the 14th Amendment’s clear language granting citizenship to all persons born in the United States, with Chief Justice John Roberts writing for the majority that the constitutional text is unambiguous. Trump’s demand for immediate rehearing follows his loss in Trump v. Barbara, where four justices signaled they do not believe the Constitution necessarily bestows citizenship on people born in the U.S., exposing the court’s extremist drift.

On Truth Social, Trump falsely claimed that billboards at the southern border advertise “birthright citizenship with deliveries starting at $4000,” asserting this constitutes a crime that invalidates the court’s ruling. Trump’s false characterization contradicts his own administration’s policies: in April 2026, he introduced a “gold card” visa for foreign nationals paying at least $1 million, which explicitly fast-tracks citizenship pathways for wealthy immigrants. This hypocrisy demonstrates Trump weaponizes the courts to circumvent constitutional protections when they conflict with his authoritarian agenda.

Trump’s demand for immediate rehearing and his subsequent pressure on Congress to overturn the 14th Amendment reflect his systematic assault on constitutional limits and independent judicial authority. His attacks on the Supreme Court’s decision, combined with his demands to remake institutions through loyalty purges and judicial remaking, advance his model of permanent executive power unchecked by law or democratic processes.



(Source: https://www.mediaite.com/politics/trump/trump-demands-the-supreme-court-give-him-a-do-over-asks-for-a-rehearing-immediately/)its and independent judicial authority. His attacks on the Supreme Court’s decision, combined with his demands to remake institutions through loyalty purges and judicial remaking, advance his model of permanent executive power unchecked by law or democratic processes.

Trump Confuses Zelensky With Putin at NATO Summit

During a NATO summit press conference in Ankara, Turkey on Wednesday, President Trump directly confused Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky with Russian President Vladimir Putin while standing beside Zelensky. Trump gestured toward Zelensky and asked reporters, “You have a question for President Putin, please?” demonstrating a fundamental failure to distinguish between the leaders of a U.S. ally and an adversary engaged in active conflict.

When reporters reacted with visible confusion, Trump attempted to obscure his error by speaking in circles rather than acknowledging the mistake. He repeated the request multiple times, saying “Do you have a question for President Putin — not Zelensky — Putin,” while continuing to gesture in a manner that suggested disorientation about who stood before him. This verbal scrambling revealed an inability or unwillingness to admit a basic cognitive lapse about two of the world’s most consequential geopolitical figures.

Trump then claimed to speak frequently with Putin about ending the Ukraine war, stating “I talk to him a lot” and asserting that Putin “wants to end the war.” This remark underscored Trump’s documented alignment with Russia’s strategic interests, consistent with his Ukraine peace plan acknowledged as a Russian wish list by U.S. senators who reviewed it. Trump contrasted his frequent Putin contact with minimal engagement with Zelensky, the leader of an invaded nation requesting American support.

The Zelensky-Putin confusion followed another severe gaffe minutes earlier in the same press conference, where Trump referred to “the Islamic Republic of Japan” firing missiles at a U.S. aircraft carrier. These compounded errors at a NATO summit involving direct diplomatic engagement illustrated Trump’s erratic handling of critical international affairs and his apparent unfamiliarity with fundamental geopolitical facts, mirroring a pattern documented during previous NATO diplomatic engagements.



(Source: https://www.mediaite.com/media/news/trump-appears-to-mistake-zelensky-for-putin-then-scrambles-to-cover-it-in-bizarre-moment/)

Trump Dementia Gaffes On Full Display At NATO Summit

During a NATO summit in Ankara, Turkey on Wednesday, Trump committed multiple significant verbal errors that underscored both his cognitive fitness and his dangerous mishandling of international affairs. Trump falsely claimed to have destroyed “every single bridge in Iran” and threatened Iranian infrastructure including electric plants and desalination facilities, escalating threats against a nation without congressional authorization or clear strategic justification. These statements contradicted established rules of engagement and revealed reckless military posturing at a critical diplomatic moment.

Trump confused Japan with Iran when recounting a military incident, stating the “Islamic Republic of Japan” fired 111 missiles at the USS Abraham Lincoln. He also appeared to confuse Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky with Russian President Vladimir Putin during a press conference, asking Zelensky “You have a question for President Putin, please?” before correcting himself after media laughter. Both errors demonstrated alarming confusion about fundamental international relationships during active military conflict.

Trump misnamed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the Iran nuclear agreement, as the “JCPOC” while attacking it as the “Obama Nuclear Waste Deal.” He repeated a false claim about his TikTok prominence, asserting he was “number one” on the platform and more popular than Taylor Swift, when Trump has 16 million followers compared to Swift’s 30 million and neither ranks in the platform’s top 10. Trump also referred to TikTok as “Tic Tac” despite using the correct name multiple times in the same remarks.

These gaffes mirror Trump’s established pattern of attacking NATO spending while courting authoritarian leaders and abandoning U.S. allies to appease despots. At 80 years old, Trump’s cognitive lapses during high-stakes diplomacy represent a direct threat to American security and international stability, compounding his documented history of reckless military decisions and alliance sabotage.



(Source: https://www.mediaite.com/media/news/watch-4-most-embarrassing-gaffes-from-trumps-nato-visit/)

Trump Fabricates Rwanda-Congo War Settlement

Donald Trump claimed aboard Air Force One that he personally settled eight wars, including a Rwanda-Congo conflict in which he alleged 15 million people “had their heads chopped off.” Trump made the assertion after a reporter questioned him about reports that his administration discouraged Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado from returning to Venezuela, contradicting his earlier denial of involvement.

The Rwanda-Democratic Republic of Congo conflict began in 2022 when Rwanda started providing military support to a Congolese rebel group. Rwanda and the D.R.C. signed a ceasefire agreement in Washington, D.C. in 2025, yet fighting has continued and the pact is deteriorating, undermining Trump’s characterization of a settled conflict.

Trump’s claim that 15 million people were decapitated in the Rwanda-Congo war has no factual basis. The death toll and methods of killing he described are unsupported by any evidence or reporting on the conflict.

Trump credited Machado with awarding him a Nobel Peace Prize in January, occurring shortly after he ordered the U.S. raid that abducted Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro. Trump has since aligned himself with Maduro’s former vice president, Delcy Rodríguez, who has complied with his demands, contradicting the narrative of supporting democratic opposition to Maduro’s regime.

Trump’s pattern of falsely claiming credit for ending wars and fabricating casualty figures demonstrates his systematic use of the presidency to construct a fictional record of achievement while exercising direct control over foreign governments and their leadership succession.



(Source: https://www.mediaite.com/politics/trump/trump-claims-he-ended-war-in-which-15-million-people-had-their-heads-chopped-off/)

Trump DOJ agrees to new Michael Flynn payout as allies make bank without ‘slush fund’ – Raw Story

Trump's administration reached a second settlement with retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, agreeing to pay him approximately $38,557 that the Army had withheld from his retirement over a 2015 speaking fee from Russia Today, a Russian state-owned media outlet. Flynn had challenged the withholding, claiming the Pentagon's Defense Finance and Accounting Service violated his rights when it determined he violated the Emoluments Clause by receiving compensation from a foreign government without required approval. The settlement, reported below $75,000, follows Flynn's much larger $1.25 million payment in March to resolve claims of politically motivated prosecution, despite his 2017 guilty plea for lying to the FBI about contacts with a Russian diplomat.

The pattern of payouts to Trump allies continues despite the administration's abandonment of a proposed $1.8 billion "anti-weaponization" fund that would have systematized such payments. The fund, created from a settlement of Trump's personal IRS lawsuit, drew bipartisan opposition and was blocked by a federal judge. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer demanded legal bans on such payments, stating Trump's commitment to halt them was insufficient. Yet the Flynn settlement demonstrates the administration continues compensating allies through individual lawsuits rather than a centralized mechanism.

Flynn is not alone among Trump associates receiving government payouts under this administration. The family of Ashli Babbitt, killed by Capitol Police during the January 6 riot, was awarded $4.975 million in 2025. Former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page received $1.25 million in April for claims related to FBI surveillance. Each settlement compensates individuals the Trump administration frames as victims of government "weaponization," a characterization contradicted by documented facts including Flynn's guilty plea and Babbitt's participation in the Capitol breach.

Flynn's latest case is not concluded, with the parties required to file another status report by July 27, 2026, or abandon the suit according to court filings. The Justice Department stated it would comply with the federal judge's ruling blocking the broader fund, yet these individual settlements accomplish the same outcome without the transparency or statutory restrictions a formalized fund would require. The pattern reflects Trump's use of litigation settlements and direct payments to reward loyalists while circumventing legal oversight.

(Source: https://www.rawstory.com/michael-flynn-second-settlement/)

Trump Vows F-35 Sale to Turkey, Attacks NATO Spending

President Donald Trump attacked NATO during a meeting with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in Ankara on Tuesday, claiming the alliance failed to support the United States in an Iran military operation and questioning why America invests trillions defending European nations. Trump stated, "We've invested trillions of dollars in NATO. Why? To protect European countries and others, Canada, etc.," while accusing NATO members of refusing assistance despite his requests.

During the same meeting, Trump declared his willingness to sell F-35 fighter jets to Turkey despite explicit U.S. law prohibiting the sale until Turkey removes its Russian S-400 missile system. Trump told reporters, "We have a better relationship with Turkey, and Turkey has been more loyal than other countries that we think would be loyal. So yeah, it is something certainly we would consider," directly contradicting existing legal restrictions designed to prevent advanced weapons transfers to nations with Russian military equipment.

Trump's statements demonstrate his pattern of subordinating national security policy and legal constraints to personal relationships and transactional loyalty calculations. Trump has repeatedly demonstrated fundamental misunderstandings about F-35 capabilities, falsely claiming the jets are invisible to the naked eye when they are only radar-stealthy, undermining confidence in his judgment on weapons systems decisions.

Trump specifically criticized British Prime Minister Keir Starmer for NATO's lack of support during the Iran operation, personalizing geopolitical strategy rather than addressing structural alliance commitments. His trip to the NATO Summit in Ankara came only after initially refusing to attend, reversing course out of personal regard for Erdoğan, whom he repeatedly referred to as his "friend." The New York Times had reported Trump intended to signal willingness to sell F-35s to Turkey before the meeting occurred.

Trump's willingness to circumvent federal law governing weapons sales, his weaponization of alliance relationships based on personal loyalty, and his dismissal of collective security obligations in favor of transactional deals violate established foreign policy frameworks and subordinate institutional checks to executive preference. His pressure on NATO and simultaneous cultivation of authoritarian-friendly Turkey positions the U.S. strategic interests against democratic alliance structures.

(Source: https://www.mediaite.com/politics/trump-bashes-nato-debates-selling-fighter-jets-to-loyal-turkey-despite-restrictions/)

1 2 3 4 … 539