Thursday, May 07, 2026

The head of the Crooked Court (John Roberts) thinks he can fool us with lies

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. 


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. 





Daniel R. DePetris (MS NOW) explains why Chump's   Project Freedom was doomed from the start:

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. 


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.

 
###



In other news of Epstein, Mike Vulpo (US WEEKLY) reports:



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.
"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.


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.

###






Posted by at