Hegseth Mandates Approval for Military Leaders’ Contacts with Congress

The Pentagon has imposed new restrictions on Defense Department personnel, barring nearly all military leaders from engaging with Congress or state lawmakers without prior approval. This directive is outlined in a memo signed by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, dated October 15, and aims to consolidate communication within the Department. The memo states that unauthorized interactions could undermine critical legislative objectives.

The restrictions apply to senior military officials, including the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and all combatant commanders, while the Pentagon Inspector General’s office remains exempt. Chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell described the memo as a pragmatic step to enhance internal review processes for congressional communications while asserting that it does not change how information is shared with Congress.

The policy is part of Hegseth’s broader efforts to control communication within the Pentagon following a series of leaks. Recent measures have also included limiting military personnel’s engagement with think tanks and external events. Notably, the new memo follows a recent incident where reporters returned their badges in protest of purported restrictions imposed on their work.

A senior Pentagon official indicated that these directives align with longstanding policies that were previously unenforced. The official highlighted that internal protocols are necessary to ensure coherent messaging across the Department, suggesting that such coordination is vital to avoid contradictory statements and support budget requests. However, another defense official noted that the internal guidance would further centralize all communications with elected officials.

Despite the purpose of the memo being to improve coordination, some lawmakers have expressed concern that it stifles important dialogue between Congress and the Pentagon. Observers have noted that effective communication between the Department and elected representatives is critical for achieving shared legislative goals.

Trump Denounces WSJ Report on Ukraine Missile Use as Fake News

President Donald Trump strongly criticized the Wall Street Journal’s report claiming the Trump Administration had lifted a restriction allowing Ukraine to use long-range missiles against Russia, labeling the story as “FAKE NEWS.” He made this assertion shortly after the report’s publication, emphasizing that the U.S. has no involvement with missiles entering Ukraine.

The Wall Street Journal suggested that this unreported action would enable Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to enhance attacks on Russian territory and exert further pressure on President Vladimir Putin to conclude the ongoing conflict. According to the Journal, the missiles were supplied to Ukraine by Western allies.

As part of the report, it was noted that the authority for these military actions had shifted from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to General Alexus Grynkewich, the NATO commander in charge of U.S. military operations in Europe. This transition signifies a potential escalation of military capabilities extended to Ukraine.

Earlier this month, Trump indicated support for supplying Ukraine with Tomahawk missiles. However, reports emerged of a contentious discussion with Zelensky, where Trump allegedly urged him to consider negotiating terms with Russia to avoid destruction of Ukraine.

In addition to his remarks on this military support, Trump is currently pursuing a $10 billion lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal, citing defamation over an unrelated issue involving the publication’s coverage of a past letter to Jeffrey Epstein, which he denies authoring.

Trump Blasts Reporter Over East Wing Demolition Questions

President Donald Trump criticized Reuters White House correspondent Jeff Mason during a live press event at the White House, labeling him a “third-rate reporter.” Trump was addressing a question regarding his transparency on the demolition of the East Wing to construct a new ballroom. Mason pointed out that many viewers were surprised by the extent of the demolition, which Trump initially indicated would not be entirely destroyed.

Trump, responding to Mason’s inquiry, argued that he had been transparent, claiming that pictures of the project had been widely circulated and that he had provided answers to anyone who would listen. He defended the decision to demolish the East Wing, stating that extensive studies and consultations with top architects concluded that the current structure was not salvageable for the planned ballroom.

He also asserted that the new ballroom would not cost taxpayers, as it is being financed through private donations from companies, including major donors like Apple and Amazon. Trump was keen to emphasize his vision for the ballroom, asserting that it had garnered great public reviews and that the construction was a positive reflection of progress.

The White House renovation project has faced criticism from public figures like former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and California Governor Gavin Newsom, who have voiced concerns about the implications of such extensive changes to the iconic building. Clinton stated that Trump was “destroying” the White House, reflecting ongoing controversies related to the renovations.

Trump’s remarks underscore ongoing tensions between the administration and reporters, particularly regarding transparency in government operations and public sentiment toward the modernization efforts at the White House.

Trump Blames Cattle Ranchers Amid Calls for Imported Beef from Argentina

Donald Trump has recently criticized American cattle ranchers, stating they would be in a difficult situation without his administration’s support. During a recent post on Truth Social, Trump expressed that ranchers need to reduce prices to stay competitive within the beef market.

His remarks came after he suggested the U.S. might import beef from Argentina to help lower domestic prices. This statement has drawn backlash not only from ranchers but also from some of his congressional allies. Notably, conservative commentator Tomi Lahren questioned the decision, expressing that American ranchers are already struggling due to low-cost foreign beef imports.

In light of the controversy, eight House Republicans sent a letter to Trump seeking clarity on the proposed beef imports from Argentina. They emphasized the need for transparency and requested assurances regarding safety and inspection standards, reiterating their commitment to the U.S. cattle industry.

During follow-up comments, Trump defended his position by reminding ranchers of the protective tariffs he implemented on foreign cattle imports, including a significant 50% tariff on Brazilian beef. He indicated that, historically, ranchers have performed poorly before these tariffs were in place.

Trump concluded that his administration’s actions are crucial for ranchers’ profitability, urging them to reconsider their pricing strategies to better serve consumers while maintaining strong trade relationships.

Trump’s Ballroom Plans Spark Demolition Controversy at White House

The White House has initiated demolition work on the East Wing, aiming to make way for a new ballroom proposed by Donald Trump, although no official plans have been submitted yet to the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC), which oversees federal construction projects. Despite the ongoing demolition, the White House has assured that this action is permitted without prior approval from the commission.

Trump’s ambitious plans for the 90,000 square foot ballroom were disclosed earlier in the summer, with Trump pledging to personally fund the estimated $200 million project. However, criticism has emerged regarding the legality and regulatory adherence of the demolition process, particularly from the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which has emphasized that public review is necessary before such actions can occur.

Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, addressed the public backlash, framing it as exaggerated. She defended Trump’s proactive approach to construction, highlighting his reputation as “builder-in-chief” and suggesting that he had a mandate from the public to make these changes to the White House.

Concerns raised by preservationists include the potential overwhelming scale of the new structure and its impact on the classical design integrity of the White House. The critique was underscored by a recent letter from the National Trust for Historic Preservation urging Trump to cease demolition until a thorough review can be conducted.

During Trump’s first term, the NCPC was engaged for smaller projects, raising questions about the consistency of adhering to protocol for significantly larger developments like the proposed ballroom. Despite assurances from Trump that the new construction would respect the existing structure, the current state of the East Wing has led to skepticism among critics.

George Santos Avoids Restitution After Trump’s Clemency Order

Former Representative George Santos (R-N.Y.) will avoid any additional fines or restitution following his clemency order, released on Monday. The order came after President Donald Trump signed a commutation of Santos’s 87-month prison sentence, which he began serving three months ago.

The clemency order stipulates that Santos will serve no additional fines, restitution, probation, or supervised release conditions. Santos had previously pleaded guilty to wire fraud and aggravated identity theft, which resulted in a court sentence that included over $370,000 in restitution and two years of supervised release.

During an interview on CNN’s “State of the Union,” host Dana Bash questioned Santos regarding potential restitution payments. Santos expressed uncertainty about any obligations, stating he would comply with the law’s requirements. He emphasized his intention to act candidly and openly in the interview.

Initially sentenced to seven years for his offenses, Santos was expelled from Congress after reports surfaced revealing his fabricated résumé and misleading campaign finance disclosures. Trump took to Truth Social to commend Santos, commenting on his alleged mistreatment during incarceration and wishing him luck after signing the commutation.

Santos’s attorney, Joe Murray, confirmed that the former congressman was released from prison late Friday evening. This development adds to the ongoing narrative surrounding Santos’s legal troubles and his controversial relationship with higher political figures.

Trump Posts AI Video Depicting Feces Dropping on Protestors

On October 19, 2025, President Donald Trump shared an AI-generated video on his Truth Social account that portrayed him, adorned with a crown, in a fighter jet labeled “King Trump,” dropping what appeared to be feces on protesters. This video, which lasts 19 seconds, was released following nationwide “No Kings” rallies that protested against Trump and his administration.

The clip features left-wing influencer Harry Sisson among the protesters gathered in a setting resembling Times Square. In response to the video, Sisson tweeted asking reporters to pose the question of why Trump posted such content. Vice President JD Vance acknowledged Sisson’s request and said he would ask Trump on his behalf.

This recent video is part of a series of AI-produced content Trump has shared, particularly targeting his critics. A review by NBC News indicated that Trump has been active in posting these types of videos on his social media platform over the past months, with a noticeable frequency in August and September. Many of these videos originate from other accounts before being promoted by Trump.

The video utilizes the track “Danger Zone” by Kenny Loggins, who later requested that his music be removed from the video, condemning its use in a context designed to provoke division among the American public. Loggins expressed a desire for unity among Americans, emphasizing shared values over divisive narratives.

According to organizers of the “No Kings” protests, approximately 7 million people attended over 2,700 rallies across the U.S., marking a significant increase in participation compared to previous protests held in June. During a subsequent interview, Trump dismissed any claims that he is behaving as a monarch, asserting that he does not identify with the title.

Trump Calls for Investigation of Adam Schiff

President Donald Trump publicly urged authorities to investigate Senator Adam Schiff, claiming he violated numerous laws. His statement came in a post on Truth Social, where Trump characterized Schiff’s actions during the Ukraine impeachment process as a massive illegal scheme, likening it to Watergate.

Trump’s demand for an investigation of Schiff follows recent indictments of former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James. Comey faces charges for allegedly lying under oath, while James has been indicted for bank fraud and false statements. Both cases were presented to a grand jury by U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan, appointed to her position last month.

In a previous message intended for Attorney General Pam Bondi, Trump expressed frustration with inaction on cases against Comey, Schiff, and James, labeling them as “guilty as hell.” He criticized the legal system’s perceived delay in addressing these allegations, arguing that it has damaged his credibility and reputation.

Trump’s rhetoric continues to mirror his administration’s approach to political adversaries, where he accuses opponents of corruption even as he faces multiple legal challenges himself. The former president’s call for an investigation reflects an ongoing pattern of targeting political rivals through the judiciary.

The implications of Trump’s demand raise questions about the weaponization of justice against political opponents, as his commentary highlights a divisive climate in U.S. politics, affecting legal interpretations and actions.

Trump’s Fossil Fuel Favoritism

The Trump administration is offering exclusive assistance to fossil fuel companies, specifically oil and coal, described as a “concierge, white glove service,” to expedite project approvals. This new initiative starkly contrasts the administration’s treatment of renewable energy projects, which face significant slowdowns and blockades. Such preferential treatment raises concerns about the administration’s commitment to transitioning towards green energy and adhering to climate goals.

The “concierge service” was reportedly confirmed by an energy official, who highlighted how this initiative aims to streamline fossil fuel project approvals while renewable projects undergo rigorous scrutiny. This development reflects a troubling alignment with corporate interests, particularly evident under the influence of the Trump administration, known for its pro-fossil fuel stance.

This strategy targets established fossil fuel companies, likely jeopardizing future investments in solar and wind energy. The retreat from supporting clean energy initiatives echoes policies implemented during Trump’s tenure, suggesting a continued prioritization of fossil fuel profits over sustainable environmental policies.

Critics argue that this approach undermines the administration’s climate commitments and could lead to significant setbacks in reducing carbon emissions. The apparent favoritism towards fossil fuel firms showcases a broader trend of pandering to wealthy corporate interests, reminiscent of Trump’s dealings with oil executives, which included promises to act according to their demands.

As the Trump administration continues down this path, it risks alienating the very voters who supported a clean energy promise in exchange for political power. The implications of this fossil fuel favoritism extend beyond environmental concerns, potentially entrenching existing power dynamics that favor the wealthy and undermine equitable policies for the working class.

Trump Pledges National Guard Deployment to Chicago Amid Protests

President Donald Trump’s escalating confrontation with Chicago’s leadership reached a new level as he ordered the deployment of approximately 500 National Guard troops near the city. This controversial move came despite vocal opposition from both Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson and Illinois Governor JB Pritzker, who condemned the militarization of their city as an unwarranted provocation. In response to their resistance, Trump callously suggested that both officials should face jail time, underscoring his authoritarian tendencies as he targets political opponents.

The National Guard presence, which included soldiers from both Texas and Illinois, was characterized by Trump and his administration as necessary for protecting federal personnel and property, particularly in the context of his aggressive immigration enforcement policies. However, recent protests against immigration actions in Chicago have predominantly been peaceful, contrasting sharply with Trump’s alarmist rhetoric about “violence” and “lawlessness,” which lacks factual backing.

Large protests emerged in Chicago, with many residents expressing rage against the deployment of National Guard troops and the broader implications of Trump’s immigration policies. Protesters chanted in solidarity with a recent victim of ICE violence, signifying community anger towards federal enforcement actions perceived as unjust and harmful. Such demonstrations highlight the divide between Trump’s narrative and the experiences and sentiments of local communities, particularly within Latino neighborhoods.

In an alarming trend, the Constitution is being leveraged by Trump as he threatens to sidestep judicial oversight regarding the National Guard’s deployment, indicating a disregard for checks and balances that are fundamental to American democracy. Legal challenges against these actions are underway, emphasizing the delicate balance of power and the resistance against Trump’s increasingly aggressive tactics, which mimic authoritarian regimes.

The ongoing situation in Chicago is emblematic of Trump’s broader strategy against Democratic leaders who oppose his fascistic agenda. This pivot towards militarization and intimidation reflects a national trend of targeting opposition, indicating a dangerous shift away from democratic norms and a troubling embrace of coercive governance that threatens the very fabric of civil liberties in America.

1 2 3 4 5 … 471