The Crooked Court. No one's
done more to make it crooked than 'Charlie Brown' John Roberts. He got
on there lying and he's lied ever since. Lawrence Hurley (NBC NEWS) reports:
Chief
Justice John Roberts on Wednesday defended the Supreme Court from what
he believes are misconceptions held by the American people that he and
his colleagues are “political actors” who are making decisions based on
policy, not law.
Speaking at a conference for
lawyers and judges in Hershey, Roberts said the Supreme Court is
required to make decisions that are not popular and bemoaned that there
is not a better understanding among the public of how the court
operates.
“I think at a very basic
level, people think we’re making policy decisions, [that] we’re saying
we think this is what things should be as opposed to this is what the
law provides,” Roberts said. “I think they view us as truly political
actors, which I don’t think is an accurate understanding of what we do. I
would say that’s the main difficulty.”
You
damn liar. You threw precedent out the window to overturn ROE V WADE.
You have made LGBTQ+ rights dependent upon pleasing everyone's
religious varieties. You are destroying Civil Rights.
Shut up, you damn liar. You're not fooling anyone.
Some comments on the article:
Luke Johnston
14 hours ago
The
Roberts Court is primarily motivated by politics rather than impartial
law. The Court has become considerably less independent of the
administrative and legislative branches and is seen as a political body
rather than a neutral arbiter. Judicial independence has been actively
threatened by political litmus tests and national leaders' attacks on
the judiciary. Roberts has failed America.
dave moeller
11 hours ago
Every
Supreme Court Chief Justice has had a legacy. From Marshall to Burger
and continuing till today. Robert's court will go down in history as the
one that sold out democracy.
user-bwkcnx2jy
13 hours ago
When
they each stated at their confirmation hearing that Roe vs Wade is
settled law, then overturned it when they had the majority...When they
overturn the Voter's Rights Act because "racism is over"...they ARE
political actors. The Robert's Court has conned the American people.
There is no other way to view it.
Ira Cohen
1 hour ago
Good to see almost every commentor on this article sees the total mendacity of Roberts statement.
The Court is hugely political with obvious proof on most rulings. Then there's all that grift, especially Thomas and the gifts.
Sorry, John, this SCOTUS is flamingly political and has created huge damage to the basic foundations of the constitution.
Roberts’ remarks came just days after the court handed down a blockbuster decision gutting a key provision of the Voting Rights Act
— a ruling that lawmakers in several southern states have used to
justify a chaotic push to redraw their congressional boundaries to help
Republicans in this year’s midterm elections. That decision, handed down
with the six-justice conservative wing aligned against the
three-justice liberal bloc, has drawn sharp criticism from Democrats and
voting rights groups, some of whom have reupped calls for court
reforms.
The decision last week also led to a fiery exchange of opinions between three conservative justices — Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch
— and liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson days later. Jackson wrote
that the court should have stayed on the sidelines of a technical
dispute that followed the Voting Rights Act decision in order “to avoid
the appearance of partiality.”
Some comments on the article:
Jean Lynn
12 hours ago
Ridiculous
Sir, the ties to the Heritage Foundation of the conservative justices
should automatically disqualify them. The authors of Project2025 sit in
the white house as well. They are clearly voting to enact that agenda
which in summation is shifting the power to the executive branch which
is contrary to having 3 co-equal branches of government. It truly is the
most anti-American thing you can do!
"The
Heritage Foundation holds significant influence over the Supreme Court
through judicial selection, lobbying, and ideological support,
particularly with conservative justices. The foundation helped create
the list of potential conservative nominees used during the Trump
administration, supported the confirmations of Justices Kavanaugh and
Barrett, and maintains close ties to Justice Clarence Thomas."
Just in case anybody doubts Justice Thomas' ties:
"Yes,
it is true that Ginni Thomas was paid nearly $700,000 by the Heritage
Foundation between 2003 and 2007, and Justice Clarence Thomas did not
disclose this income on his financial disclosure forms for those years,
according to reports. Thomas later amended his reports, citing a
"misunderstanding of the filing instructions"."
mikey c
12 hours ago
Between
rejudging settled Supreme Court law (Roe v Wade), tying themselves in
knots trying to justify 2nd amendment (text, history, tradition
garbage), inconsistencies (the latest Voting Rights Act "modification
was rushed to judgement while Jack Smith's request to expedite Trump's
indictments was denied and ruling on some gerrymandering cases and not
ruling on others), and just the plethora of 6-3 decisions . . . Roberts
can protest all he wants but if it acts, sounds, looks, smells, feels,
and tastes like partisanship, it probably is.
Kenneth Dailey Jr
6 hours ago
The
public sees him for exactly and precisely what his actions clearly
demonstrate. Perhaps, and I'm just spit-balling, stop being a gaggle of
ravenous political power grabbers and people will stop seeing you that
way. Oh, and take heart, we don't just see you as clearly biased
hypocrites undermining the very fabric of our Republic for power; we
also see you as highly corrupt, because your actions suggest that as
well.
The
high court struck down a majority-Black congressional district in
Louisiana, finding it was an unconstitutional gerrymander based on race.
The decision weakened the Civil Rights era law that has increased
minority representation in Congress, and it opened the door for more
redistricting across the country that could aid Republican efforts to
control the House.
In
recent years, the conservative majority court has also handed down
landmark rulings overturning the constitutional right to abortion,
expanding gun rights and ending affirmative action in higher education.
Some comments on the article:
Jason Dragon
1 hour ago
The
Supreme Court is very much political today. You just can't overturn
items that have been found perfectly legal for 50 years and say that
political viewpoints aren't involved. Given this, it is time for a law
for Supreme Court term limits to be passed, such as the proposed 18-year
limit. This would give every president 2 appointment per term and avoid
justices timing their departures to perpetuate a conservative majority.
Cman
3 hours ago
This
interview is an abject embarrassment for Roberts. It just illustrates
how much he will lie to justify his decisions. He's been after the
voting rights act for his entire career as a lawyer. And if these six
justices don't believe these red states are using race to redraw their
maps and dilute minority votes they are full on delusional.
Skizzy in the Middle
11 hours ago
Ginni
Thomas openly flying flags affiliated with Q-Anon and other far-right
conspiracies outside the home she shares with Clarence screams political
bias, otherwise Clarence would've taken them down in a heartbeat.
Brenda Eyre
6 hours ago
He
has been gunning for the Voting Rights Act since he first became a
lawyer. Look at his history when he was a lawyer and his history of
decisions on the Supreme Court. The Court might not be political, but
he certainly is.
Roberts
can lie all he wants, the people see the truth. We know he is Crooked
and that he has destroyed our Supreme Court and its reputation.
"The Snapshot" (THE COMMON ILLS):
Thursday, May 7, 2026. Saudi Arabia and Kuwait tell Chump "NO!" forcing
him to shut down Project Freedom, his war of choice continues to
destroy the US economy, James Comer makes nice with liar Howard Lutnick,
Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer respond to Chump, Time Square sees a
new billboard of Chump and Epstein with the tagline “What are these two
hiding?" and much more.
"Happy Cinco de
Mayo, @WhiteHouse!" Schumer captioned the X post. House Minority Leader
Jeffreies seemingly approved of the message when he shared his
colleague's photo on his own profile.
Yesterday, Democrats on the House Oversight Committee issued the following:
Washington,
D.C. — Today, Rep. Robert Garcia, Ranking Member of the House Committee
on Oversight and Government Reform, Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., Ranking
Member of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Rep. Angie Craig,
Ranking Member of the House Committee on Agriculture, Rep. Jared
Huffman, Ranking Member of the House Committee on Natural Resources, and
Rep. Don Beyer Jr., Senior House Democrat on the Joint Economic
Committee, sent a letter to President Trump demanding answers
on how his illegal war with Iran is driving up the cost of living for
everyday Americans. Consumer prices have reached their fastest growth in
almost two years as a spike in oil costs feeds into our economy, and
the war has already cost taxpayers approximately $2 billion per day
during the initial phase of attacks.
In the
letter to President Trump, the Members wrote, “As your illegal war with
Iran continues into its third month with on and off again negotiations
and naval blockade, you have unleashed chaos, undermined our national
security, and escalated the conflict by threatening war crimes including
wiping out an entire civilization and destroying civilian
infrastructure. It is clear that you chose to start your war without
coherent or realistic strategic objectives, and with no plan to prevent
Iran from expanding its strategic control over the Strait of Hormuz. The
impacts of your war will be felt for years, and the consequences of
your reckless decision to drag America into war are increasingly falling
on the American public.”
###
Can't argue with that. Kenneth Rapoza (MARKET WATCH) notes:
America is not starving. There’s plenty of beef, wheat and eggs.
At the moment, food inflation is lower than core inflation, but
Americans are still living with higher prices, up around 20% since 2022.
President
Donald Trump is right when he says the U.S. doesn’t rely on the Strait
of Hormuz for its agriculture needs. But Europe and Asia do — and so
they will outbid American farmers for fuel and fertilizer, forcing food
prices higher for everyone, including Americans.
Anyone
who knows a farmer has heard stories of the “worst year ever” — but now
American farmers are facing their most serious crisis since the 1980s.
Production costs
were already rising before the Iran war and the closure of the Strait
of Hormuz. Many farmers are still waiting on loans, unable to lock in
fertilizer prices before they spiked.
A newly released Farm Bureau survey
of 5,700 U.S. farmers said 70% of farmers won’t be able to afford all
the fertilizer they need this year. Many are reducing planted acres.
This potentially means less food moving through the supply chain — and
higher prices for what does make it to market.
While
U.S. consumers are already navigating the household budget impacts of
the Iran war at the gas pumps, they could also be facing a year or more
of steadily increasing grocery costs if the Middle East conflict drags
on.
That was among the findings of a Purdue
University analysis that predicts the broad energy shock precipitated by
a sustained war could add three to six percentage points to grocery
inflation over the coming 12-18 months.
Cathy Bussewitz (INDEPENDENT) notes, "The
price of a gallon of regular gasoline in the U.S. climbed 31 cents in
the past week, spiking to an average of $4.54 per gallon Wednesday, a
price 52% higher than before the war with Iran began, according to AAA
data. The main reason drivers are paying more at the pump is because the
war has stranded oil tankers near the Strait of Hormuz, a narrow
passage through which a fifth of the world’s crude oil normally
passes." And Leroy Marion (AUTOBLOG) explains, "The
Iran conflict is now hitting the auto industry far beyond fuel prices.
According to a report from Nikkei Asia, aluminum prices in Japan have
jumped more than 20 percent since late February amid major disruptions
to supply chains across the Middle East. The Strait of Hormuz remains
heavily affected, making exports difficult, while some regional smelters
have reportedly suffered damage during attacks."
The gas situation? Joe Perticone (THE BULWARK) has noticed a curious situation wherein rising gas prcies are causing smaller responses from certain politicians:
Rising
gas prices often provide a convenient index for dissatisfaction with
the current president, even if the increases have little to do with the
administration’s policies.1 When a war breaks out in major oil- and
gas-producing regions, prices go up. When gas prices rise, so do the
anxieties of political candidates who belong to the party in power. And
this year, that includes many Republicans whose campaigns are crucial to
maintaining a GOP Senate majority.
At
the onset of the Trump administration’s unilateral military action
(war) against Iran, gas prices in the United States skyrocketed, which
immediately spooked Republicans concerned with holding on to their
Senate majority. In the two months since the opening of hostilities,
prices have fluctuated in some states while continuing to climb in
others, with those around the Great Lakes seeing particularly
challenging increases.
“We’re gonna be fine, we
got plenty of oil,” Mike Rogers, a Republican candidate for Senate in
Michigan, said in March. “You’ll get your oil, because we’re going to
pump our oil right here in America, and we got plenty.”
Six
weeks later, though, GasBuddy’s Patrick De Haan reported gas prices
leaping upward in several middle-American states. In Rogers’s Michigan,
they went up 88 cents. In Ohio, they climbed 94 cents. In Wisconsin, 33
cents. And in Indiana, prices grew by a calamitous dollar and nine
cents.2
On Thursday, Rogers addressed the issue
once again. When Newsmax host Ed Henry asked the candidate, “Are you
nervous . . . about these stubbornly high gas prices?” Rogers finally
acknowledged the reality of higher costs at the pump:
Listen,
high prices of anything hurt people in Michigan. . . . Iran is about
stopping their nuclear program, stopping their ballistic missile program
so they can’t hurt others. I think most Americans are there. We all
want this to come to a quick end—I think including the president of the
United States. The president’s also taking really direct actions to try
to bring those prices down and I support those actions to bring those
prices down. I’ll tell you this, Ed. I get around and talk to voters all
around this state. The main thing about affordability is they do not
trust Democrats.
Well,
Rogers sure doesn’t trust Democrats on affordability, at least. That
might be why he framed the situation so differently when gas prices
surged to four dollars per gallon during the Joe Biden administration.
“I’m
not sure we can survive $3.99 a gallon going forward,” Rogers said in a
2024 video campaigning against Democrat Elissa Slotkin. “Listen, the
[Democratic] agenda moving forward on gas prices is only gonna make that
worse. We must get America back on track.”
Along with rising prices, another thing Americans are agreeing on with regards to Chump's war of choice is rhetoric. Conor Murray (FORBES) notes:
Most
Americans disapprove of an image President Donald Trump posted that
appeared to depict himself as Jesus, while many more had a favorable
view of Pope Leo XIV’s calls for peace amid the Iran war, a Washington
Post-ABC News-Ipsos poll found, as Washington and the Vatican continue
to fracture over the conflict.
The
poll found 87% of Americans disapproved of the post Trump made on Truth
Social last month that appeared to depict himself as Jesus, which
sparked criticism and allegations of blasphemy, even from some on the
right, though Trump said he thought the picture depicted him as a
doctor.
Eighty percent of Trump
2024 voters and 79% of Republicans surveyed had a negative reaction to
Trump’s Jesus post, the poll found.
Sixty-nine
percent of Americans disapproved of Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth
praying for U.S. troops to inflict “overwhelming violence of action
against those who deserve no mercy.”
But Pope
Leo’s call for Americans to contact their representatives and urge them
to find a peaceful solution to the war in Iran earned a more positive
reception, with 66% of poll respondents having a positive reaction.
87%
disproved? Yeah and that number may climb higher. I said when the
post was in the news that this was one of those things that people think
about and in a week or two get angry about. You're just not used to
seeing that kind of blasphemy and certainly from a president of the
United States.
Yet Chump has not learned from this and continues to antagonize Pope Leo. Rhian Lubin (INDEPENDENT) recaps the latest:
In
the latest saga between the president and the pontiff, Trump baselessly
accused Leo of “endangering Catholics” by supporting Iran’s nuclear
weapons program.
“I think he’s endangering a
lot of Catholics and a lot of people, but I guess, if it’s up to the
Pope,” Trump said Sunday. “He thinks it's just fine for Iran to have a
nuclear weapon.”
The Pope hit back at the
claim Wednesday without directly referencing the president. “The mission
of the Church is to proclaim the Gospel, to preach peace,” he said. “If
someone wants to criticise me for proclaiming the Gospel, let them do
so truthfully. For years, the Church has spoken out against all nuclear
weapons, so there is no doubt on that point.”
Pope
Leo XIV said Tuesday that people are free to criticise him but the flak
should be based on the truth after President Donald Trump launched a
new attack on him, saying his opposition to the United States and
Israel's war against Iran was putting Catholics in danger. Trump, who
last month said the pope "weak on crime" and "terrible for foreign
policy" following his criticism of the war, said at the weekend that Leo
was "endangering a lot of Catholics and a lot of people" because "he
thinks it's just fine for Iran to have a nuclear weapon". The American
pontiff, on the other hand, said the Catholic Church has been opposed to
nuclear weapons under his leadership and long before. "The mission of
the Church is to proclaim the Gospel, to preach peace," Leo said outside
the papal residence at Castel Gandolfo. "If someone wants to criticize
me for proclaiming the Gospel, let them do so truthfully.
On the topic of Chump's ongoing war, Simon Walters (INDEPENDENT) observes:
Not for nothing is Donald Trump known as the “TACO (Trump Always Chickens Out)
President”. He announces major decisions and issues dire threats on
impulse or whim – and occasionally out of pure spite – and then scraps
them.
But even by this own shameless standards Trump’s abandonment of his so-called Project Freedom to reopen the Strait of Hormuz is the granddaddy of all TACO somersaults.
The
official White House version is that Project Freedom is being “paused”
for “a short period of time” to see if a peace deal with Iran can be
reached. “Great progress” has been made towards that end, claimed Trump,
without a shred of evidence.
The president has performed so many U-turns and flip-flops he makes Sir Keir Starmer, criticised for more than a dozen policy climb downs, look like a model of constancy and resolution by comparison.
A
more likely explanation is that he was told that Project Freedom never
had a hope of working and was almost guaranteed to make the war much
worse not end it. Experts were near unanimous in warning that it was
likely to end the fragile ceasefire between the US and America and renew
the ‘hot war’ between them.
Ben
(MEIDASTOUCH NEWS) explained this morning that Kuwait and Saudi Arabia
responded to Chump's Project Freedom by announcing that the US could no
longer use their airspace or airbases.
Unfortunately for Trump, it’s easier for the Iranians to keep the choke
point closed than it is for the Americans to force it open. This is not
because the Iranian navy is stronger or more capable than what the U.S.
can field, or that Tehran’s coastal defenses are indefatigable, but
rather because corporations tend to be risk-averse
creatures that are sensitive to the threat environment. Most shipping
companies are not going to risk their reputations, their very expensive
wares and the lives of their employees if there is a decent possibility
of getting hit by a missile or stopped by the Islamic Revolutionary
Guard Corps. The numbers bear this out — weekly passages through the
strait reportedly dropped 11% over the past week, and only two U.S. merchant ships transited the area in the 24 hours Project Freedom was in effect.
In other news,
Every
week brings fresh disaster for the Tr*mp administration, but this week
is already off to a galloping start in that area. We dealt with Pentagon Pete’s fury at being next on the chopping block, unless fellow screw-up Kash Patel beats him to the punch, and that’s to say nothing of RFK Jr.’s imminent departure from Tr*mpland, along with his MAHA base.
But
that’s nothing compared to what just happened in Tr*mp’s home turf,
where a massive billboard was just erected to once again draw attention
to Tr*mp’s Epstein ties. The people haven’t forgotten, and Tr*mp’s
Epstein problem is not going away despite his constant distractions,
from Greenland to Venezuela to Iran.
The
billboard features images of Tr*mp and Epstein appearing to look at each
other with shifty eyes, accompanied by the text “What are these two
hiding? Eyes on Epstein.”
But the real kicker?
The ad is placed smack in the middle of Times Square.
For
all to see. Just like the friendship between Donald Chump and the late
Jeffrey Epstein was out there for all to see for decades and decades.
Going back to the 80s, the two were roll dogs, partners in crime, thick
as thieves. And then they had a falling out. For years, Jeffrey
Epstein abused and assaulted and trafficked people of age and underage.
And it is people. Girls, women, boys, men. New Mexico findings in the
last months have made that clear. Though some of the names of Epstein
Island visitors made that clear before hand and there were at least four
adult males who had stated that they were survivors. One of those, of
course, has stated Chump assaulting him when he was a child.
Yesterday,
Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick appeared before the House
Oversight Committee. How well Lutnick knew Epstein has been in dispute
because of the cute and self-serving narrative Lutnick told Miranda Devine
last fall was contradicted by the release of some documents in The
Epstein Files. Joe Sommerlad (INDEPENDENT) explains:
The
secretary told Pod Force One presenter Miranda Devine in October last
year that he had been a neighbor of Epstein’s in New York and once
visited his Upper East Side brownstone in 2005 but was appalled when his
host made a creepy comment about receiving “the right kind of massages”
during a tour of the property.
“In the six to
eight steps it takes to get from his house to my house, my wife and I
decided that I will never be in the room with that disgusting person
ever again,” Lutnick said.
However, the release
of the Epstein files by the Department of Justice in late December and
January revealed that the men had remained in contact and appeared to
have been in communication until at least 2018. Inclusion in the files
is not an indication of wrongdoing.
Lutnick
subsequently told the Senate Appropriations Committee on February 10
that he and his family had had lunch with the billionaire on Little St
James, his private Caribbean island, in December 2012.
They were also revealed to have been in business together. Alison Durkee (FORBES) notes:
The
government’s January release of the Epstein files intensified scrutiny
on Lutnick and led to some calls for him to resign, as documents showed
communications and business deals between the two continuing as late as
2018—long after Epstein had pleaded guilty to soliciting prostitution in
2008, and one year before his indictment and subsequent death in
prison.
Those documents contradicted previous
claims Lutnick had made, as the Commerce secretary said in October 2025
that after touring Epstein’s penthouse in 2005, he “decided that I will
never be in the room with that disgusting person ever again.”
Lutnick's response when discovered was to lie. January 30th, Mike Baker and Michael Rothfeld (NEW YORK TIMES) reported:
Prominent
people who were close to Mr. Epstein have been scrutinized in recent
years for their visits to Little St. James, but Mr. Lutnick’s planned
visit had not been previously disclosed. Reached by phone on Friday, Mr.
Lutnick said he could not comment about the island visit because he had
not seen the latest Epstein documents.
“I spent zero time with him,” Mr. Lutnick said. He then hung up.
The documents suggest the visit did occur.
On February 10th, Lutnick would admit before the Senate Appropriations Committee that he had stayed on the island with Epstein.
Despite that history of lying, he was treated like a Queen by the Committee Chair James Comer. For example, Stephen Groves (INDEPENDENT) reveals,
"The interview was not being recorded on video, as the committee has
done with depositions for others, including former President Bill
Clinton and Hillary Clinton, a former secretary of state. Comer said the
decision not to video the interview, for which Lutnick volunteered, was
keeping with the committee's practice." Per David Edwards (RAW STORY), it's worse:
House
Oversight Chair James Comer (R-KY) was peppered with questions about
why he let a member of President Donald Trump's cabinet give a
deposition on Jeffrey Epstein without video recording it, while refusing
the same opportunity to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and
former President Bill Clinton.
Comer Pyle refused to allow Bill and Hillary to appear without being recorded. Edwards report continues:
"Why just a transcript?" Pergram demanded to know.
"Do
you have any concerns about the secretary's conflicting statements and
why not do this as a videotape?" a second reporter pressed.
"Well,
this is, you know, with this transcript, he's coming in voluntarily,
first of all," Comer said in defense of the process. "So we didn't
video, we don't video people that come in to volunteer."
In addition, he was not under oath and he was not deposed, he was interviewed.
Ana Swanson and Michael Gold (NEW YORK TIMES) report on the questioning:
According
to two people familiar with his testimony, Mr. Lutnick said in his
opening statement that he had met Mr. Epstein only three times: once for
coffee and a tour of Mr. Epstein’s home in New York after they became
neighbors, once when Mr. Lutnick and his family were invited to Mr.
Epstein’s island and once to discuss a construction project on Epstein’s
home in New York that might have had an impact on Mr. Lutnick’s
residence.
After hours of questioning,
Democrats told reporters that Mr. Lutnick did not admit to misleading
Americans about his ties to Mr. Epstein, including when he said on a
podcast last year that he was never in the room with Mr. Epstein again
after their first meeting.
Speaking with
reporters in the hallway outside the closed session, Representative
Yassamin Ansari, Democrat of Arizona, said that Mr. Lutnick repeatedly
characterized their interactions as “meaningless and inconsequential.”
But, she added, she was not satisfied with his explanation as to why he
visited Mr. Epstein’s island, particularly years after their first
interaction, which Mr. Lutnick said made him and his wife uncomfortable.
[. . .]
The
documents released by the Justice Department suggest Mr. Lutnick had
another encounter with Mr. Epstein at his house in 2011, years after Mr.
Lutnick claimed to have cut ties with him. The records also indicated
that the men invested in the same privately held company together and
dealt with each other on neighborhood and philanthropic issues.
Following closed-door testimony from Howard Lutnick before the House oversight committee on his ties to Jeffrey Epstein, Democrats called the commerce secretary’s performance “embarrassing”.
“If Donald Trump had seen the video transcript, he would have fired Howard Lutnick,” said congressman Ro Khanna, a progressive Democrat from California.
[. . .]
According to Suhas Subramanyam, a Democratic representative of Virginia, the commerce secretary said “he could remember nothing about the visit to the island. Couldn’t remember why he was there. Couldn’t remember anything he saw.”
Oversight Democrats also said that Lutnick did not answer their questions about whether he spoke with Donald Trump ahead of giving testimony before the panel today.
“I feel very comfortable saying that Howard Lutnick is a pathological liar who is enabling the most egregious cover-up in American history,” congresswoman Yassamin Ansari told reporters, while noting that the commerce secretary told lawmakers it was “inexplicable” that he visited Epstein’s private island. Lutnick described his encounters with Epstein as “meaningless and inconsequential,” Ansari added.
May
29th, Pam da Bimbo Bondi is scheduled to appear before the House
Oversight Committee after blowing them off in April. Monday, Democrats
on the Committee issued the following statement:
Washington, D.C. — Today, Rep. Robert Garcia, Ranking Member of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, wrote
to Chairman James Comer after Oversight Republicans finally announced
that Pam Bondi would testify in a transcribed interview before the
Oversight Committee, just minutes after Oversight Democrats took action
to hold Bondi in contempt. The letter raises concerns to Comer that
Bondi’s testimony must be filmed and made available to the American
people in the interest of transparency, that Oversight Republicans must
enforce the Committee’s subpoena if Bondi refuses to fully cooperate,
and raises concerns about the participation of Assistant Attorney
General Harmeet Dhillon as Bondi’s attorney. In March, the Oversight
Committee secured a bipartisan subpoena forcing Bondi to sit for a
deposition, which she skipped on April 14, 2026.
“Oversight
Democrats kept the pressure on Oversight Republicans, and now we
finally have a date for Pam Bondi to testify in front of the Committee.
Republicans must make sure Bondi’s testimony is transparent and
videotaped with a timely public release of the video, and we must
enforce the subpoena if Bondi does not fully cooperate. Oversight
Democrats refuse to let Bondi off the hook,” said Ranking Member Robert
Garcia.
In the letter to Chairman James Comer,
Ranking Member Garcia wrote, “We understand that you have agreed to hold
this as a transcribed interview, rather than a deposition. While we
believe a deposition is the best available forum, as Chairman, this is
your decision. However, if you choose to move forward with a transcribed
interview, I am concerned with three aspects:
1. The videotaping of Ms. Bondi’s testimony. Ms. Bondi’s testimony must be filmed and made available to the American people.
2.
Ms. Bondi’s willingness to provide substantive and complete testimony.
If Ms. Bondi refuses to answer questions, we must compel her testimony.
Ms. Bondi has been subpoenaed, and all questions posed by Members must
be answered.
3. Harmeet Dhillon’s participation
as Ms. Bondi’s attorney. Ms. Dhillon is a current DOJ employee, and her
representation raises serious ethical concerns and conflicts of
interest.”
On April 29, 2026, Rep. Robert
Garcia, Ranking Member of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform,
and all Democratic Members of the Committee filed a resolution
to hold former Attorney General Pam Bondi in civil contempt of Congress
after she failed to appear for her legally-binding, bipartisan subpoena
to be deposed on the Epstein investigation and the White House’s
cover-up of the Epstein files. The resolution instructs the chairman of
the Oversight Committee to file a lawsuit to compel Bondi’s testimony.
In
March, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform secured a
bipartisan subpoena for then-Attorney General Pam Bondi following a
motion by Congresswoman Nancy Mace supported by all Committee Democrats,
joined by Republican Rep. Nancy Mace, Rep. Lauren Boebert, Rep. Michael
Cloud, Rep. Scott Perry, and Rep. Tim Burchett. The bipartisan subpoena
passed the House Oversight Committee 24 to 19. On April 14, 2026, Pam
Bondi refused to appear for her deposition before the Oversight
Committee, despite the lawful bipartisan subpoena the Committee issued.
The subpoena remains legally binding, even after Bondi was fired. The
subpoena followed the Department of Justice’s botched release of the
Epstein files and the continued White House cover-up.
###
Senator
Chuck Schumer and House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries have
responded to another AI image shared by President Donald Trump's White
House.
On Tuesday, May 5, the official White
House X account shared an AI photo featuring Schumer, 75, and Jeffries,
55, wearing sombreros and drinking margaritas near the United
States–Mexico border. As part of the AI image, fake Schumer and Jeffries
were seen smiling in front of a faux sign that said, "I love illegal
immigrants."
"Happy Cinco de Mayo to all who celebrate!" the White House wrote via X on Tuesday.
Schumer
responded with his own image of Trump, 79, posing next to convicted sex
offender Jeffrey Epstein. While the OG image is real, it was doctored
to show both men wearing sombreros.
Let's wind down with this from Senator Elizabeth Warren's office:
Questions come as Trump sons’ drone company Powerus receives new Air Force contract
Questions for Secretary Hegseth (PDF)
Washington, D.C. — In new Questions for the Record following last week’s Senate Armed Services Committee Hearing, U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), pressed Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth about President Trump’s sons’ ties to defense contractors and how the DoD is handling these financial conflicts of interest. The questions come as a follow-up to last week’s hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and days after reports indicated that Powerus, a drone company backed by the Trump sons, had recently obtained a new Air Force contract.
Shortly after President Trump was elected to his second term, his son, Donald Trump Jr., announced he was joining venture capital firm 1789 Capital. After Trump Jr. joined the firm, the firm’s portfolio companies reportedly won more than $70 million worth of contracts from the Trump Administration, including:
- $45 million awarded to Cerebras Systems in April 2025 to improve artificial intelligence chip connections;
- $10.8 million awarded to PsiQuantum in April 2025 for quantum chips;
- $4.9 million awarded to Firehawk Aerospace in August 2025 to develop rocket engines; and
- $10 million to Vulcan Elements for magnets in 2025.
Several of the Trump Jr.-connected companies had never received such large DoD contracts prior to 2025. In early March, reports revealed that the Trump brothers are also investing in drone company Powerus, which is “vying to meet fresh demand from the Pentagon and fill a hole left by the administration’s ban on new Chinese drones in the U.S.”
In March, Senators Warren and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) released answers from the Defense Department revealing that the Department seems to have no effective process in place to prevent conflicts of interest and corruption involving President Trump’s family and the Pentagon’s awarding of defense contracts. To date, Hegseth has not detailed any plan to protect the military’s contracting process against conflicts of interest.
These instances highlight Secretary Hegseth’s unwillingness to protect the military’s budget and contracting process from potential corruption. Senator Warren’s new Questions for the Record will require Secretary Hegseth to address these failures in writing.
Senator Warren’s questions for Secretary Hegseth include:
- Justifications for loans and contracts offered to several companies in which the Trump family is financially invested;
- Whether Donald Trump Jr. has held any role in vetting candidates for top Pentagon positions; and
- Details of any conversations Secretary Hegseth had with the Trump family or their representatives regarding military contracts leading up to his confirmation.
Senator Warren has led the fight to root out corruption at the Defense Department:
- In April 2026, at a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Senator Warren (D-Mass.) pressed Secretary Hegseth on allegations that Trump administration officials are engaging in possible insider trading by placing bets on the Iran War through prediction markets.
- In April 2026, Senator Warren questioned Deputy Secretary of Defense Stephen Feinberg on his conflicts of interest, which may be enabling him, his immediate family, and his network of associates to benefit from secretive DoD contracting decisions related to its Golden Dome missile defense program. Senator Warren urged Feinberg to take immediate action to mitigate the conflicts.
- In March 2026, Senator Warren (D-Mass.) released a new response from DoD indicating that there are no effective processes in place to prevent possible conflicts of interest and corruption involving President Donald Trump’s family and the Department’s awarding of defense contracts. In a new letter, Senators Warren and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) pressed Secretary Hegseth on this failure and pushed for answers regarding Trump’s sons’ latest investment in Powerus, a drone company.
- In January 2026, Senators Warren (D-Mass.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), and Andy Kim (D-N.J.), pressed Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth on potential conflicts of interest surrounding the awarding of multiple lucrative Department of Defense (DoD) contracts and loans to companies associated with President Donald Trump’s son, Donald Trump Jr.
- In July 2025, Senators Warren (D-Mass.) and Rick Scott (R-Fla.), wrote to former Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin seeking an explanation and further information on his recent decision to start a strategic advisory firm. Austin had publicly promised Senator Warren during his 2021 confirmation process that he would not become a lobbyist after his government service ended.
- In July 2023, Senator Warren (D-Mass) wrote to then-Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, Heidi Shyu, following reporting that DoD’s new Office of Strategic Capital (OSC) is relying on consultants who will continue to work for private defense consultants and defense investment companies. Senator Warren raised concerns that DoD lacked the necessary safeguards to prevent conflicts of interest in the OSC.
- In June 2023, Senator Warren and then-representative Andy Kim (D-N.J.) reintroduced the Department of Defense Ethics and Anti-Corruption Act to limit the influence of contractors on the military and increase transparency over contractors and their interaction with DoD.
- In December 2020, Senator Warren (D-Mass.) and Representative Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) reintroduced the Anti-Corruption & Public Integrity Act, to strengthen ethics laws and crack down on government officials’ conflicts of interest across the government.
###
The following sites -- plus Ruth's "The country's awakened to the corruption and destruction carried out by Chump," Ann's "A mini-Kristi Noem grifter got rejected by the voters," Marcia's "Chump's latest delusion" and Betty's "Thomas and Alito" -- updated:
-
-
-
Ted Turner7 hours ago
-
-
Chump can't own his screw ups7 hours ago
-
-
The Rolling Stones7 hours ago
-
-
-
-
-
