The Emmys? Judging by your e-mails you weren't too enthused either. Jordan noted Rebecca Ford and John Ross (VANITY FAIR) which
she found interesting (it notes some omissions from the nominees). I
don't think THE PITT needed all those nominations. Let me note this from Casey Loving (THE WRAP):
Representation
for actors of color at the 2026 Emmys continued to decline sharply,
with only 18 performers from Asian, Black and Latino communities
represented among the 91 nominees.
That's a
sizable decline from 2025, when 24 people of color were among the 92
nominated performers. The year before that was a landmark year, with 30
actors of color among the nominees. (There was also a massive uptick in
Indigenous recognition in 2024, thanks to nominations for Lily Gladstone
and the FX series "Reservation Dogs.")
Now, for the second year in a row, the 2026 class of Emmy nominees has gone down by six actors of color.
This
year had one more nomination slot than the year prior, with 95 total
spaces available for lead, supporting and guest actors and actresses
across comedies, dramas and limited series/TV movies. However, four
actors (Matthew Rhys, Nick Offerman, Jason Bateman and Colman Domingo)
each picked up two nominations, reducing the pool of nominated
performers to 91.
Several of this year's acting
categories are filled entirely with white performers: Outstanding Lead
Actress in a Limited or Anthology Series or Movie, Outstanding Guest
Actor in a Comedy Series and Outstanding Guest Actress in a Comedy
Series.
LGBTQ+ representation also seemingly
faltered at the 2026 Emmy nominations, with several acting divisions --
including all three Lead Actor categories and Supporting Actress (Drama)
-- lacking an openly queer nominee.
And MATLOCK? Kathy Bates didn't get a nomination this year (she did last year) and Skye P. Marshall was overlooked last year and we were told she'd b nominated this year for sure. But she wasn't.
Thursday, July 9, 2026. Chump takes to the world stage to play a
blithering idiot, th 'cease-fire' is off, he's declared Spain to be
persona non grata, his supporters are losing faith in him, the courts
are ruling against him, ICE shot and killed another person, and much
more.
President
Donald Trump’s declaration Wednesday that the U.S.-Iran ceasefire was
“over” thrusts him and his administration back into a familiar corner:
mired in an unpopular war that Trump cannot seem to end, with midterm
elections less than four months away.
Republicans were cautiously optimistic after Trump and Iran signed a memorandum of understanding
last month to end the war — the latest in a string of fragile and
ultimately unsuccessful ceasefires since the war started in February.
GOP leaders had warned the White House that rising gas prices
exacerbated by the conflict could cost them in November’s midterms.
Now,
with that deal in tatters, Republicans face those elections tied to a
war most voters oppose, unable to end it but also, for the most part,
unwilling to break with the president who started it.
More
war is a definite headache for Republicans on November’s ballot, said
Sarah Chamberlain, president of the Republican Main Street Partnership,
which supports GOP lawmakers in competitive congressional districts.
Republican
voters were stomaching higher gas prices for a few months to support
Trump, Chamberlain said, but now the summer driving season is here and
there may not be any relief.
Representative Greg Casar, Democrat of
Texas, called the move “outrageous” and criticized President Trump for
“extending his disastrous, illegal war with Iran.” A number of
Democratic lawmakers noted recent votes to call for an end to the war unless approved by Congress.
Republican
leaders of the Armed Services and Foreign Affairs committees in both
chambers were silent on the latest strikes and Trump’s declaration that
cease-fire talks with Tehran were a “waste of time.”
Senator
Chuck Schumer of New York, the minority leader, said in a social media
post that his party remained united in their “efforts to end this
illegal war immediately and permanently.”
The political consequences of Donald Trump’s policy mayhem are now coming into view: “Maga” America is getting pissed.
It has been a sight to see how every one of the president’s policy initiatives has sabotaged
some core constituency or other. From farmers and rural Americans to
manufacturing workers and every American struggling to make ends meet,
Trump has torched pretty much his entire political base. For all his
efforts to rig the midterm elections in his favor, it’s as if he is daring the Maga faithful to drop him.
And now, according to the most recent survey by Harris for the Guardian,
even voters who identify as foot soldiers of the president’s political
army are becoming impatient with the state of affairs, increasingly
willing to blame the government for their economic troubles.
About
56% of respondents who identified as members of the Maga coalition said
they were either having trouble meeting their debt payments or worried
they would be struggling soon. The same share admitted similar troubles
meeting housing payments. Fifty-seven per cent said the same about
affording healthcare costs. Fifty-eight per cent claimed the same about
their utility bills, 61% about affording groceries, 63% about paying for
gas.
Many of these stressors stem from Trump’s
policy preferences. Trump’s decision to end government subsidies is
largely at fault for the rising cost of health insurance. The rise in
energy costs and rebound of inflation since March are direct
consequences of Iran’s throttling of the strait of Hormuz. Resurgent
inflation interrupted the Federal Reserve’s campaign to ease monetary
policy and interrupted the gradual decline
in mortgage rates. Manufacturers have culled nearly 100,000 jobs since
Trump took office, in part due to Trump’s tariffs. Farmers have been
whacked by higher costs of energy, fertilizer and machinery.
In a blow for Chump's Dept of 'Justice,' a judge has ruled against their demand for a lengthy prison term. Chris Perez (LAW & CRIME) reports:
Hannah
Dugan — the former Wisconsin judge who was found guilty last year of
impeding ICE during a courthouse arrest — has been ordered to pay a
$5,000 fine, rather than serve any prison time or probation for
obstructing federal agents.
"For several
reasons, prison is not necessary to satisfy the statutory purposes for
sentencing," U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman said before sentencing
Dugan on Wednesday, according to local ABC affiliate WISN.
"This
is a defendant who made a bad decision in the moment," Adelman said.
"She appreciated the wrongfulness of her conduct, but this is
nevertheless a few minutes of conduct for a person that has dedicated
her life in service to the needy."
Dugan, 67,
was indicted last year for helping an immigrant named Eduardo
Flores-Ruiz evade ICE officers shortly after he appeared in her
Milwaukee County Circuit courtroom in connection with a domestic abuse
case. Federal prosecutors alleged during her trial that Dugan impeded
ICE agents during the attempted courthouse immigration bust by helping
Flores-Ruiz, a Mexican national who was facing misdemeanor battery
charges, leave through a jury door after a hearing.
A
federal judge has ruled that the Department of Justice cannot obtain
the names and personal contact information for every individual who
worked during the 2020 election in Georgia’s Fulton County. The
decision, handed down on Tuesday, blocks a grand jury subpoena issued by
the Justice Department in April.
The
subpoena had sought the personal details of county employees and
volunteer poll workers. This request came amid persistent,
unsubstantiated claims by Donald Trump of widespread voter fraud in
Fulton County, a Democratic stronghold, which he alleges cost him
victory in the state in 2020.
Fulton County had
moved to quash the subpoena, arguing it was designed to "target, harass
and punish the President’s perceived political opponents" and was
"grossly over broad and untethered to any reasonable need."
U.S.
District Judge William Ray, who was nominated to the bench by Trump,
sided with the county. In his ruling, he stated, "Given the low need for
the subpoenaed information and the highly burdensome nature of the
disclosure of the same, the Subpoena is unreasonable and must be
quashed," describing the scope of the request as "staggering."
A
New York federal judge on Wednesday ordered that E. Jean Carroll be
paid $5 million plus interest for damages from a jury verdict that held
President Donald Trump civilly liable for sexually abusing and defaming
the writer.
The order came a day after Trump's lawyers urged
Judge Lewis Kaplan not to disburse nearly $5.8 million to Carroll from
funds that president deposited three years ago with the court to satisfy
the May 2023 jury award.
Kaplan, in
his order Wednesday directing the money to be disbursed to Carroll,
pointed to the language of an agreement between her and Trump that
called for the money to be given her if the Supreme Court denied his
request that it hear his appeal of the verdict in her favor.
The Supreme Court rejected Trump's request on June 29.
Kaplan's
order brushed aside arguments by Trump's attorneys that Carroll cannot
be paid the money unless the Supreme Court rejects the president's new,
long-shot bid for reconsideration of his petition that the high court
take his appeal.
Chump loves to steal money from others but he loathes having to pay his own bills. Leigh Kimmins (DAILY BEAST) notes another personal legal defeat for Chump:
A
federal judge has tossed a $3.8 billion defamation lawsuit filed by
President Donald Trump’s social media company against the Washington
Post, dealing a sharp defeat to Trump Media and Technology Group.
U.S.
District Judge Thomas Barber, based in Tampa, ruled that Trump Media
“failed to present evidence that would allow a jury to find by clear and
convincing evidence” that the Post “published the allegedly defamatory
statements with actual malice.” He granted the Post’s motion for summary
judgment and denied Trump Media’s. A full written opinion is
forthcoming.
Chump's a con artist, a
grifter. And the thing about those types is for them to steal money
they need a mark. And a lot of marks are starting to speak. Chris Morris (MONEYWISE) reports:
Donald
Trump and his family generated at least $2.2 billion in income last
year (1), which is nearly four times more than he reported in 2024. Much
of that money came from his supporters who invested in his businesses,
such as Trump Media and Technology Group, or bought his $TRUMP meme
coin.
Their fortunes, however,
didn’t fare nearly as well. In fact, Trump’s supporters are reportedly
down an estimated $7 billion after investing in the president’s business
ventures.
Trump Media shares have
lost 56% of their value in the past year (2) , while the Trump coin’s
value also tumbled about 81% in that time (3). Many of the retail
investors who sunk their savings into those ventures — often as a sign
of loyalty to Trump — have seen the money vanish right as economic
volatility began to spike. And they’re not happy with Trump, or the
members of his inner circle.
“We’re
just poor cattle to them,” Chad Nedohin, who was once the unofficial
captain of Trump Media’s shareholders, told Forbes (4). “He doesn’t care
about anyone.”
Nedohin is one
of many investors who are vocally criticizing Trump and his ventures.
Another, Vadim Fistikan, invested $205,000 in Trump Media in the days,
weeks and months after it went public via SPAC (5). He invested the
money he and his family had planned to use to buy a waterfront property
in Florida.
Today, that investment is worth just $30,000. When
he voiced his frustrations on Truth Social, Fistikan (a three-time
Trump voter) was lambasted by Trump supporters on the social media site.
“I’m
like, ‘Hey, this is a scam,’” he posted, according to Forbes. “And a
lot of people were like, ‘No, you’re just a Trump hater.’ I’m like, ‘No.
I was on board since day one. … I’m now broke. Pretty much my whole
life savings [was] in this one stock. This is the greatest theft, con
job he has ever done.”
Kristi Noem may be out as Secretary of Homeland Security but her destruction remains. As does her attempts to cover it up. Henry Giardina (QUEERTY) notes:
This
year, Kristi Noem went from high-level Tr*mp official to tabloid fodder
in the space of about three seconds. After ICE Barbie was fired in
March, she was hit with a fresh wave of scandal
when news broke that her faithful Christian husband Bryon had been
secretly spending thousands on his crossdressing “bimbofication” fetish.
Things got even worse when the sex workers servicing Bryon’s kink
started speaking to the press.
Honestly,
as comeuppance goes, that’s a pretty solid dose. But this is Kristi
Noem we’re talking about, so her chances of continuing to step in it
even in her post-Tr*mp era are still quite high. Consider her most
recent scandal, an infidelity breach that’s followed her from her ICE
days to the present.
While Bryon was exploring
his kinky side with several OF workers, Noem was allegedly engaged in
her own pretty openly-discussed cheating scandal concerning her close
relationship with fellow Tr*mp enabler Corey Lewandowski.
Rumors
about an affair between Noem and Lewandowski are nothing new, but new
court documents just revealed the potential extent of some juicy
communication between the two.
Joseph
Guy, Noem’s former DHS deputy chief of staff, apparently wiped a Signal
group chat including texts from Lewandowski, Noem, and other DHS
officials earlier this year. Considering that DHS contractors claimed
they were coached to pay Lewandowski for his help during the Homeland
Security transition that put Noem in charge of Tr*mp’s mass deportation rollout just a week before the deleted messages, the timing is a little bit suss.
This
move also happened on Guy’s final day in office. As you can imagine,
none of this looks great for Lewandowski, or for Noem. We don’t know the
content or context of the group chat, but the fact that Guy wiped his
phone weeks after a probe threatened to expose the nature of Noem and
Lewandoski’s relationship (and their DHS and FEMA-related contract
scandal definitely isn’t the least guilty move you could make.
The
Signal wipe also happened shortly after Noem swore to Congress that
Lewandowski had absolutely nothing, zero, zilch to do with contract
approval. On March 18, the team was warned that if they shredded
sensitive documents concerning the matter, they would be breaking the
law.
Technically deleting isn’t shredding, but
Guy, whose wife works for the anti-LGBTQ+ Heritage Foundation and is
considered to be one of the many authors of Project 2025, went ahead and
did it anyway. He came clean about deleting the group chat files during
a deposition in early May.
A
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent fatally shot a man
during an arrest operation in Houston on Tuesday after authorities said
he ignored commands to stop and drove his vehicle toward federal
officers.
The Department of Homeland Security
said the shooting happened after the man, identified as 39-year-old
Mexican national Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, allegedly tried to flee and
attempted to ram an ICE agent with his vehicle.
ICE
has repeatedly falsely claimed that someone tried to ram them with a
vehicle. While ICE is under new management with Secretary of Homeland
Security Markwayne Mullen, it's too soon to give them the benefit of the
doubt. They're going to need to earn trust with the public and with
the courts. They're going to have to demonstrate that they can follow
the law before they'll be seen as lawful. Dan Gooding (NEWSWEEK) notes, "Congresswoman
Sylvia Garcia, who represents the Magnolia Park neighborhood where the
incident took place, shared a statement on X calling for a full
investigation."
Family members and local officials are calling for a full
investigation into the shooting death of a man killed by ICE agents in
Houston.
Lorenzo Salgado Araujo was shot yesterday as ICE agents
tried to arrest him. Federal officials say he tried to flee and -- quote
-- "weaponized his vehicle toward an ICE officer who opened fire in
self-defense." Salgado Araujo was shot in the abdomen and taken to a
hospital, where he later died.
ICE says he was a Mexican national
living in the U.S. without legal status. His family and immigration
advocates are questioning the official account, saying ICE has yet to
provide evidence to support their claims.
One of his sons spoke at a news conference today.
Ronaldo Salgado:
I am calling for a full investigation into the events
that transpired yesterday -- yesterday, July 7. He did not deserve to
die. He did not deserve to be reduced to a headline of Mexican man shot
and killed by ICE. He deserved to live a quiet life as Lorenzo Salgado
Araujo, a husband, a father, and a job creator for dozens of men who
also wanted the American dream.
Geoff Bennett:
Colleen DeGuzman joins us now. She's a reporter for The Texas Tribune.
So, Colleen, thank you for being with us.
So,
DHS says Salgado Araujo rammed an ICE vehicle, that he ignored repeated
commands and that he tried to run over an ICE officer. What evidence,
if any, have they provided to support their accounts?
Colleen DeGuzman, The Texas Tribune:
We have received very little evidence and very little
explanation. What we do know is that ICE was in unmarked vehicles when
they stopped Salgado Araujo.
And what we heard from -- today from
the brother -- from the son, Ronaldo, is that his dad -- he believed
that his dad would not have tried to flee from ICE, let alone run over
an agent with his vehicle. The vehicles that ICE were using were
unmarked, which is the reason why his son Ronaldo believes that his dad
did not know that he was being pulled over by ICE.
His dad was a
construction worker and was always worried that his tools were going to
be stolen. So that's why he thinks his dad thought he was going to get
robbed and why he tried to escape.
Geoff Bennett:
Were there eyewitnesses? And, if so, what are they saying about what transpired?
Colleen DeGuzman:
We have not been able to contact any eyewitnesses or receive any video footage yet.
But,
today, at a press conference with a lot of Houston local leaders, they
are pressing for body footage camera and any camera footage that there
is out there on what happened in Houston's East End, which is a very
Latino neighborhood.
Geoff Bennett:
What more have you pieced together about Salgado Araujo,
his life, his life in Houston, and what brought ICE agents to arrest
him?
Colleen DeGuzman:
Those are the same questions that we have right now. We
are unsure of whether this was targeted, whether this was just a normal
traffic stop.
I was at that intersection yesterday, and there was a
lot of construction in that area. And so we're wondering if this was
targeted or if this was random. But what we do know is that Salgado
Araujo had three sons. And, today, we heard from Ronaldo, who is a
teacher who is a proud University of Houston graduate.
His second
son is 27 years old. He's also named Lorenzo, Lorenzo Lorenzo Jr., and
he went to Tufts University, and is an engineer. And he has at least one
grandson. He moved to Houston 35 years ago and has built a construction
company here in Houston, and he's very proud of it.
He builds
homes in North Houston. And he, according to his son, was a very simple
man who had a routine in the morning to get up really early. He would
pet the dog goodbye and kiss his wife, who was his high school
sweetheart, goodbye before work. And every day, when the day ended, he
would sit by his porch outside to soak up the sunset.
He was a very simple man with a very strict routine. So that's what we know about him.
Again,
ICE has blown to the benefit of the doubt. They lied repeatedly to the
people and to the courts. They have not followed the law. Another
example of their not following the law? Nicole Charky-Chami (RAW STORY) reports:
A
federal judge appointed by President Donald Trump on Tuesday ordered
ICE to release the nursing mother of a 6-month-old from ICE custody,
according to reports.
Judge David C. Joseph of
the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana
ruled that Karina Alvarez San Juan, who has three other minor children
who are U.S. citizens, was detained in violation of ICE's policy against
detaining most pregnant or postpartum mothers.
It’s
“Constitution-free” because ICE has decided that the Fourth Amendment,
which reads, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons,
houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures,
shall not be violated…” is just a suggestion, rather than one of the
foundational guarantees of American liberty; just an obstacle standing
between the Trump administration and the police state it’s steadily but
relentlessly building.
In
Washington, D.C., for example, a construction worker got waved over by
the Park Police for a minor traffic matter, and within a minute ICE agents had surrounded his truck,
asking where everyone was from and whether they were in the country
illegally. Two of his passengers were taken away, and nobody would tell
him where.
ICE is also now paying
state and local police to help, and the money is staggering. One
estimate says the total could hit two billion dollars this year alone.
In Florida, police departments pocketed nearly forty million dollars for
vehicles and gear. In the Florida Keys, agents threw up a checkpoint on the only highway in and out, a tourist route, and made more than three hundred arrests.
They’re
stationed at courthouses, bus stations, train terminals, and airports
too, snaring domestic travelers who never came near a border. The ACLU’s
Naureen Shah put it plainly. “We’ve never seen this financial incentive
scheme exist.”
Let's wind down with this from Senator Elizabeth Warren's office:
Pentagon’s independent
watchdog found that Trump administration defunded and blocked reforms to
protect civilians during war, potentially violating federal law
Washington, D.C. — U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren
(D-Mass.) led nine members of Congress in pressing Secretary of Defense
Pete Hegseth on the Department of Defense’s (DoD) defunding and
deprioritizing of programs that prevent and respond to civilian harm in
war. The letter follows a new report by
the DoD Inspector General (DoD IG), which found that under Hegseth’s
leadership, DoD has put service members and civilians at risk and has
potentially violated federal law. It also follows the recent U.S.
military strikes on Iranian water treatment facilities, which damaged
thousands of civilians’ access to drinking water.
“The Trump administration’s military adventurism overseas, combined
with its obvious disregard for civilians, do not make the American
people or our service members safer. We () request clarification about
the steps the Department is taking to address these deficiencies and to
protect civilians in line with the Department’s strategic, legal, and
moral obligations,” wrote the lawmakers.
Senators Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Mazie
Hirono (D-Hawaii), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Patty
Murray (D-Wash.), and Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined in signing the
letter.
Representatives Jason Crow (D-Colo.) and Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.) also joined in signing the letter.
In May, the DoD IG released a review of DoD’s implementation of its Civilian Harm Mitigation and Response (CHMR) Action Plan (CHMR-AP),
which outlined critical steps to prevent, mitigate, and respond to
civilian harm. The DoD IG’s report found that the Trump administration
may have violated federal law by defunding and blocked civilian
protection efforts.
The DoD IG report confirms that all of the objectives of the plan –
including training for assessing and investigating civilian harm – are
“at risk” under Hegseth’s leadership. The report also found that the
Trump administration’s failure to implement the plan means DoD is
failing to comply with congressionally-mandated obligations to protect
civilians during armed conflict.
“These revelations make real the concerns that we have previously
raised about your complete ‘disregard for the strategic, legal, and
moral imperative to minimize civilian harm,’” the lawmakers said.
During the DoD IG’s investigation, staff and combatant commands
warned that eliminating CHMR funding and personnel “harms readiness” and
“increases risk to military personnel and objectives and mission
success.”
“The Department’s failure to implement the CHMR-AP has profound
consequences for civilians in conflict zones and makes service members’
jobs harder and riskier,” the lawmakers continued.
DoD officials, veteran and family organizations, and other national
security experts have repeatedly emphasized the importance of civilian
protection. In their confirmation hearings, CENTCOM Commander Admiral
Brad Cooper said that civilian harm “risks degrading our credibility and trust and puts troops at risk,” and SOCOM Commander Frank Bradley called protecting civilians “critical to our success.” Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Dan Caine, has also touted the positive impacts of the DoD CHMR programs at combatant commands.
The report also revealed that DoD failed to cooperate with the
office’s investigation, including by blocking investigators’ attempts to
observe an implementation meeting and withholding access to DoD’s
implementation tracking tools.
The lawmakers pressed Secretary Hegseth to explain DoD’s failure to
implement civilian protection policies, account for changes in
resourcing and staffing for civilian protection efforts, explain what
DoD is doing to comply with federal law requiring civilian protection
policies and institutions, and provide any analysis DoD has done on the
impact of recent strikes on civilian infrastructure in Iran by July 19,
2026.
Senator Warren is a long-time champion of civilian harm prevention reforms for the U.S. military:
In April 2026, Senators Warren (D-Mass.) and Van Hollen (D-Md.) led nine senators in opening a new investigation into
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth’s role in weakening civilian harm
prevention programs and the catastrophic civilian impacts of President
Trump’s war in Iran.
In March 2026, at a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Senator Warren (D-Mass.) raised her concerns to
the commanders of United States Northern Command (NORTHCOM) and United
States Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) about the Trump administration’s
sidelining of the military’s Judge Advocate General Corps (JAGs), who
are responsible for providing independent legal advice to commanders.
This sidelining risks increasing the chances of civilian harm as the war
against Iran continues.
In March 2026, Senator Warren (D-Mass.), a member of the Armed
Services Committee, along with Senators Van Hollen (D-Md.), Kaine
(D-Va.), Schatz (D-Hawaii), Senate Democratic Leader Schumer (D-N.Y.)
and 41 colleagues, pressed Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth for
a full investigation on the airstrikes on a school in Minab, Iran, and
other civilian casualties in the Trump administration’s war on Iran. The
senators are also calling for accountability for those responsible.
In March 2026, Senator Warren (D-Mass.), a member of the Senate
Armed Services Committee (SASC), spoke on the floor of the Senate, calling on Congress to end President Donald Trump’s reckless war in Iran and investigate civilian harm in Iran.
In December 2025, Senators Warren (D-Mass.) and Schatz (D-Hawaii) led 10 senators in launching an investigation into the role of the U.S. military in distributing humanitarian assistance to Gaza following the October ceasefire.
In July 2025, At a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee,
Senator Warren (D-Mass.), Ranking Member of the Personnel Subcommittee, secured commitments from
the nominees to be Commander of U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM)
and Commander of U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM), on integrating and
protecting reforms from Republican and Democratic administrations on
civilian harm prevention. Senator Warren also secured support from Vice
Admiral Bradley to partner with outside experts to conduct a
longitudinal study of blast overpressure.
In March 2025, at a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee,
Senator Warren (D-Mass.), Ranking Member of the Senate Armed Services
Subcommittee on Personnel, questioned the nominee for Under Secretary of Defense for Policy (USD(P)) about his vision to prioritize civilian harm prevention.
In December 2024, Senators Warren (D-Mass.), Van Hollen (D-Md.), and Representative Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.) sent a letter requesting the
Department of Defense Inspector General investigate reports that the
DoD mishandled a case involving U.S. Marines killing civilians in
Haditha, Iraq, and DoD’s continued efforts to cover up the alleged war
crimes.
In March 2024, at a hearing of the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC), Senator Warren (D-Mass.) questioned the
Commander of the United States Central Command and Commander of the
United States Africa Command about measures needed to prevent and
respond to civilian harm caused by weapons and assistance provided by
the United States to its military partners.
In December 2023, following reports that Israel was using explosive
weapons against civilian targets, Senators Warren (D-Mass.) and Kaine
(D-Va.), Sanders (I-Vt.), Merkley (D-Ore.), and Heinrich (D-N.M.), wrote
to President Joe Biden, pushing for closer oversight of Israel’s use of U.S. weapons to ensure the weapons will not be used to cause preventable civilian harm.
In September 2023, at a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Senator Warren (D-Mass.) called on the Department of Defense to improve investigations into civilian harm by collaborating with civil society organizations on the ground.
In July 2023, Senators Warren (D-Mass.),and Van Hollen (D-Maryland),
along with Representative Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.), sent a letter to
then-Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III, with concerns that a May
2023 U.S. airstrike in Syria may have killed a civilian. The lawmakers pushed the Defense Department to publicly release as much of their internal investigation into the airstrike as possible.
In December 2022, Senator Warren (D-Mass.) and Representative Sara
Jacobs (D-Calif.) sent a letter to Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin
III, raising concerns that the Department of Defense’s (DoD)
September 2022 report to Congress on civilian casualties appeared to
undercount civilian casualties from U.S. military operations and that
DoD was not exercising its authority to make amends to civilian victims
and survivors.
In September 2022, Senator Warren (D-Mass.), Sanders (I-Vt.) and Lee
(R-Utah) sent letters to the Department of Defense and the Department
of State, calling on the Departments to
thoroughly investigate how U.S. military support to the Saudi-led
coalition fighting in Yemen may have led to civilian harm and analyze to
the effectiveness of civilian harm reduction efforts by the Saudi and
Emirati governments.
In April 2022, Senators Warren (D-Mass.), Markey (D-Mass.), Leahy
(D-Vt.), Durbin (D-Ill.), Merkley (D-Ore.), Sanders (I-Vt.), and Van
Hollen (D-Md.) sent a letter to Secretary Lloyd J. Austin, III, urging the Department of Defense to
brief Congress on its progress in preventing civilian harm and
highlights a series of issues and priorities that the DoD should focus
on in the CHMR-AP.
In March 2022, during a hearing of the Senate Committee on Armed Services, Senator Warren (D-Mass.) questioned the
Commanders of the United States Central Command and United States
Africa Command on the steps they are taking to prevent civilian harm,
following the release of Defense Secretary Austin’s directive to the
Department of Defense (DOD) to develop an action plan to prevent and
investigate civilian harm.
In February 2022, during a Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) hearing, Senator Warren (D-Mass.), questioned LTG
Michael “Erik” Kurilla’s, then-nominee to be General and Commander of
United States Central Command, about civilian casualties that have
resulted from U.S. operations.
In November 2021, Senator Warren (D-Mass.) sent a letter to Senator
Jack Reed (D-R.I.), then-Chairman of the Senate Armed Services
Committee, requesting that the Committee launch a
formal inquiry to review the findings and implications of a recent New
York Times report detailing how the U.S. military hid an airstrike in
Baghuz, Syria that killed dozens of civilians and was flagged as a
potential war crime by legal analysts.
Michelle Pfeiffer got an Emmy
nomination for MARGOT'S GOT MONEY TROUBLES, Jon Hamm got one for YOUR
FRIENDS AND NEIGHBORS, Sally Field got one for REMARKABLY BRIGHT
CREATURES and Sterling K. Brown got one for PARADISE. That's the good
news. The Emmys were announced today. I'll share this breakdown from DEADLINE:
Nominations by Program
(5 or more)
The Pitt — 25
Hacks — 24
Widow’s Bay — 19
Pluribus — 18
Beef — 16
DTF St. Louis — 13
Saturday Night Live — 11
Spider-Noir — 11
The Apple Music Super Bowl LX Halftime Show Starring Bad Bunny — 9
The Beast In Me — 9
Fallout — 9
A Knight Of The Seven Kingdoms — 9
The Late Show With Stephen Colbert — 9
The Oscars — 9
RuPaul’s Drag Race — 9
Shrinking — 9
Slow Horses — 9
The Bear — 8
The Gilded Age — 8
Margo’s Got Money Troubles — 8
Palm Royale — 8
Abbott Elementary — 7
All Her Fault — 7
Black Rabbit — 7
The Diplomat — 7
Euphoria — 7
Monster: The Ed Gein Story — 7
Paradise — 7
Stranger Things — 7
Jimmy Kimmel Live! — 6
Love Story: John F. Kennedy Jr. & Carolyn Bessette — 6
Wednesday, July 8, 2026. Chump announces the cease-fire with Iran is
over, the markets react, Chump's done nothing to help with jobs and more
and more employers are closing doors, he's back on his quest to steal
and colonize Greenland, he's getting cozy with War Criminal Erdogan, and
much more.
Oil prices spiked on Wednesday to the
highest level in weeks and stocks dropped after President Trump said
that he thought the Iran cease-fire was “over” amid a volatile 24 hours
in the Persian Gulf region.
The Trump administration launched a series of strikes on Iran and revoked a waiver that had allowed Iran to sell oil. The actions against Iran on Tuesday were in retaliation for attacks on tankers this week in the Strait of Hormuz, a crucial conduit for the world’s energy.
U.S.
Central Command said that it hit over 80 targets in Iran, including
dozens of small boats used by the Iranian military, “to degrade Iran’s
ability to continue attacking international commerce.” Iran’s military
responded by targeting 85 U.S. military sites in Bahrain and Kuwait,
prolonging a retaliatory cycle that could impede the nascent recovery in
shipping traffic in the region.
This morning's WAY TOO EARLY (MS NOW) noted the developments.
And today MORNING JOE (MS NOW) addressed the crumbling cease fire.
As this takes place, Convicted Felon Donald Chump continues to bleed supporters. Nick Hilden notes:
According
to a new poll, President Donald Trump is losing the support of his most
essential voting bloc fast, as his net approval among men has plunged
from -13 to -19 in just one month.
The six-point decline was revealed in a Focaldata/Financial Times survey, and it represents a dramatic loss of ground among the very voters who put Trump in office in 2024. According to Newsweek,
“He won male voters by 12 percent over then-Vice President Kamala
Harris, making them a cornerstone of his electoral coalition, data from
Pew Research Center shows…It also fits into a broader pattern of
slipping approval for the president.”
What’s
more, the new poll “found Trump's overall approval at 34 percent versus
a 57 percent disapproval rating, while recent polling has shown growing
voter dissatisfaction over the economy, inflation and the cost of
living, issues that consistently rank among Americans' top concerns
ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.” As the survey itself notes,
“President Trump's net approval rating has reached an all-time low of
-23, with the share of Americans disapproving of his performance rising
for the fourth consecutive month to 57 percent.”
We are now in July. The midterms are Tuesday, November 3rd. When does Chump plan to stop dragging his political party down?
An affordability crisis is now in effect, according to 95 percent of Americans, as high gas and grocery prices hammer people’s wallets.
The new Harris Poll
revealed that just 27 percent of Republicans think the economy is
traveling in a positive direction, down from 49 percent in February.
In
February, just 22 percent of Republicans thought the economy was
getting worse, but that number has now shot up 16 points to 38 percent
in the latest poll, conducted for The Guardian.
Democrats
have become further entrenched in their belief that the economy is not
moving in the right direction, up to 71 percent from 62 percent in
February.
Independents, meanwhile, aligned far
more closely with Democrats than Republicans, swinging 10 points since
February up to 63 percent.
Check
my math, but I believe November 3rd is 118 days from now. 118 days.
Chump seems to be pinning a lot of hope on his party's September
convention in Dallas.
Affordability
is back at the center of the economic debate, with Elizabeth Warren
arguing that American families are still feeling squeezed by rising
everyday costs.
In recent remarks, Warren said
Donald Trump's policies have pushed up prices on essentials like gas,
groceries, and housing, leaving many households increasingly reliant on
credit cards just to keep up as they try to cope with increasing bills.
Speaking
during a Senate committee hearing on affordability, Warren laid out a
broad critique of the current economic landscape, focusing on how
multiple cost pressures are hitting households at once.
"Our
housing bill is an affordability accomplishment that everyone on this
committee can all be proud of," she said. "But it is not nearly enough
to offset the economic policies of President Trump—and the devastating
impacts they have had on American families."
She
argued that while some policy wins have helped on the margins, they are
being outweighed by rising costs across key categories that matter most
to consumers.
Must
have been the dementia speaking, right? December 5th, US House Rep
Hillary Scholten issued a press release on Chump's lies. She noted, "Make
no mistake: the affordability crisis is real, and it is crippling the
American dream. The only people who don't realize that are the out of
touch billionaires that the president continues to put before American
families." US House Rep Greg Landsman was quoted in the press release
stating, "The affordability crisis didn’t start 10 months ago --
families have been feeling this for years. But this administration has
made it worse, from cutting healthcare to pushing sweeping tariffs that
drive up prices." And US House Rep Derek Tran was quoted declaring,
"President Trump’s claim that ‘affordability doesn’t mean anything to
anybody’ is an insult to the millions of American families who are
struggling to pay their bills and keep food on the table. Affordability
means everything to the parents working multiple jobs, seniors living on
fixed incomes, and young people trying to build their future."
That
was December 5th. What's Chump done in the months since? Well, he's
started the Iran War. He's destroyed the economy further with the Iran
War. Steve Kopack (NBC NEWS) reports:
Oil
prices jumped Tuesday to their highest level since late last week after
reports that two tankers transiting the Strait of Hormuz had been hit
by unknown projectiles.
U.S. crude oil rose
more than 3% to above $70 per barrel for the first time since July 1.
International Brent crude oil also rose 3% to more than $74 per barrel.
America’s
unemployment rate is holding relatively steady at 4.2 percent, but a
Newsweek analysis found the number of Americans who are giving up
looking for jobs because they’re discouraged about finding one is higher
than it was at the beginning of the year, which economists say may be
masking a looming problem in the labor market.
“The
June jobs report has some eyebrow raising data, especially the big drop
in the labor force,” Heather Long, chief economist at Navy Federal
Credit Union, told Newsweek, adding the caveat that one month doesn’t
make a trend.
A key concern is the rising
number of Americans who have stopped actively searching for work and
therefore are no longer counted as unemployed. Economists say an
increase in discouraged and marginally attached workers often signals
weakening labor demand and suggests the labor market may be softer than
headline employment figures indicate.
According
to recent labor force data, roughly 1.83 million workers were
classified as marginally attached to the labor force in June, including
about 499,000 discouraged workers who said they had stopped looking
because they believed no jobs were available for them.
More
than 300 employees at Levi Strauss & Co. are expected to lose their
jobs due to the closure of the denim giant's Hebron, Ky. distribution
center.
Employment separations are expected to
begin on Aug. 30. The company first indicated last June that it was
closing the 772,150-square-foot Kentucky facility. At the time, the
closure was expected to impact 346 employees, but the building was kept
open for another year to fulfill high demand as it transitioned products
to other warehouses slower than initially expected.
Levi's
associate general counsel Emily Knoles filed the Worker Adjustment and
Retraining Notification (WARN) Act Notice on June 30.
Some of the 303 employees affected will be able to apply to another company location, according to the WARN notice.
In
July 2026, several big chains say they'll continue with downsizing
plans as they adapt to changing consumer spending, increased costs, and
more.
[. . .]
Kroger
closing stores has become one of the most talked-about retail stories
of the summer, and at least one Kroger location is closing in July in
Atlanta (at 2452 Morosgo Way), though that's likely far from the only
store on its way out. Kroger announced that 60 locations were on the
chopping block in a June conference call with investors.
The
closures will happen over an 18-month period and are being attributed
to declining profits. The company says it's working to find solutions
for impacted workers.
Burgers
and fries are as American as apple pie, but "financial hardship" has
caused Five Guys Burgers and Fries to shutter locations from Florida to
California, as reported in May of 2026.
Additional
locations will close on the West Coast during the summer months,
including in Hanford, California, on July 2, 2026. While the restaurant
appears to be decreasing its presence domestically, internationally, it
appears to be growing.
Torrid
has been on the decline for several years now and has announced plans to
close up to 180 locations. So far, 171 stores have already turned off
the lights. The plus-size retailer cites the growing use of GLP-1s like
Ozempic as a reason for the drop in sales.
For
now, Torrid says it will maintain its brick-and-mortar locations while
expanding web sales, though you may see more store closures in July.
July
of 2026 will be the last full month you can enjoy picking up all of
your Ulta favorites while on your Target run, as the brands revealed
their partnership is coming to a permanent close the following month.
This
means that over 600 Ulta stores will close, a hefty share of the
market. Target will instead sell a "curated" selection of beauty
products at "affordable prices."
Luxury
brands are typically considered recession-resistant. Yet recent store
closures suggest that luxury is not always enough to keep a business
afloat amid shifting consumer habits and economic challenges.
McKinsey
& Company reveals an important shift in consumer behavior:
Emotional connection is now a top driver of purchasing decisions, ahead
of traditional luxury markers such as craftsmanship, heritage, and
exclusivity.
[. . .]
On
May 27, Capri Holdings, the parent company behind fashion icons such as
Michael Kors, Versace (recently sold), and Jimmy Choo, disclosed its
financial results for the fourth quarter and full year Fiscal 2026 ended
March 28, 2026.
The fashion giant reported
fourth-quarter total revenue of $796 million, down from $827 million in
the same period of fiscal 2025.
The
document further revealed that as of March 28, 2026, Capri Holdings
owned 673 Michael Kors and 211 Jimmy Choo stores, while on March 29,
2025, there were 711 Michael Kors and 219 Jimmy Choo stores.
The data reveals that in 12 months, Capri Holdings has closed 38 Michael Kors stores.
While
there are occasional headlines in local outlets about sporadic Save A
Lot closures, an exclusive data analysis by TheStreet comparing U.S.
location datasets revealed that the discount supermarket giant has
quietly shuttered roughly 100 stores.
In its official Save A Lot 2025 Business and Social Impact Report published on May 28, 2026, the company reported operating approximately 650 stores in 29 states. However, an earlier report published in January 2025, reveals the discount chain owned around 750 stores across 32 states.
The numbers reveal that in a span of only 16 months, the discount
retailer has completely transformed its retail footprint, shedding
roughly 100 stores.
President
Donald Trump on Tuesday resurrected his push for the U.S. to acquire
Greenland, and suggested the U.S. could pull all of its armed services
members out of Europe in response to the Continent's continued pushback
on the issue.
The island territory "should be
controlled by the United States," Trump said shortly after he arrived in
Ankara, Turkey, for a NATO summit.
The
32-member alliance — which includes Denmark, of which Greenland is a
part — fell into a crisis in January, as Trump demanded that the U.S.
must take control of the island territory on national security grounds.
A
stunning report in The Wall Street Journal described a marathon meeting
of U.S. European allies who had come to view the country as a security
risk under President Donald Trump.
Citing
national security, Trump has repeatedly insisted that the U.S. must
acquire Greenland, an autonomous Danish territory in the North Atlantic
and Arctic Circle. The U.S. already maintains one military base on the
island and, under an agreement, may increase its military presence
there. However, Trump has indicated he wants Greenland to become a U.S.
territory.
On Jan. 3, the U.S. military raided
Venezuela and abducted then-President Nicolas Maduro before bringing him
to the U.S. to face drug trafficking charges. Shortly after the raid,
Trump reiterated his desire for Greenland. So concerned were U.S. allies
in Europe, they met to discuss how to approach the president, according
to a report published by the Journal on Sunday.
The
leaders met at the European Council headquarters in Brussels. Cameras
and phones were not allowed, and each head of government had been told
to come alone. French President Emmanuel Macron was blunt in his
assessment. He had just deployed
French soldiers to Greenland to participate in Denmark’s Operation
Arctic Endurance, in which Canada, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands,
and Sweden also participated. The Journal reported that the forces there
– or at least the French and Danish ones – were prepared for a hot war
with the U.S. Around the five-hour mark of the meeting, Macron addressed
his counterparts:
“We are drawing a line here,”
began Emmanuel Macron, president of France, according to several leaders
present and their most senior aides. For a year, America’s closest
allies had tried to placate Trump with a mix of flattery and concessions
on mutual-defense and trade issues, hoping to buy time. Now, French
soldiers were in Greenland, alongside Danish special forces equipped for
a shooting war with America. The French president repeated an argument
he’d been pressing for years, with mounting urgency: that Europe’s
overreliance on America was a security risk. “There is no going back,”
he said.
The report highlighted that European nations are accelerating their divestment from U.S. technology.
Donald
Chump is a deranged and demented threat to the world. The United
States and France should never be on the verge of war. They are one of
this country's strongest allies
And
that bond didn't start yesterday. As America celebrates its 250th year, it
worth noting that France was a critical ally during the Revolutionary
War.
You don't try to shake a mutual bond like that. Unless you're suffering from dementia like Donald Chump is.
NATO leaders, including President
Trump, arrived in Turkey's capital, Ankara, today. Most European and
other allies are spending more on defense and expanding their military
capabilities, but President Trump's increasingly confrontational
approach toward many NATO countries has forced a debate into the open -
how NATO projects unity despite uncertainty about the U.S.'s commitment
to the alliance. NPR's Hadeel Al-Shalchi reports from Ankara.
HADEEL AL-SHALCHI, BYLINE: At this year's summit in Ankara, there was one arrival everyone was bracing for.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: (Speaking Turkish).
UNIDENTIFIED PEOPLE: (Yelling, inaudible).
(SOUNDBITE OF MILITARY BAND MUSIC)
AL-SHALCHI: President Trump opened his visit with a few words of Turkish.
(SOUNDBITE OF FIGHTER JETS PASSING OVERHEAD)
AL-SHALCHI:
He's the only leader who got the full ceremonial welcome, a flyover, a
military band and a personal greeting from host President Erdogan. And
as anticipated, it didn't take long before he showed his disquiet to his
NATO alliance partners.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
TRUMP:
I was very disappointed with NATO. And frankly, if it weren't held in
Turkey, where my friend happens to be a very strong leader, a very
strong person, it's possible that I wouldn't have attended.
AL-SHALCHI:
Trump has long argued that NATO allies rely too heavily on the U.S. He
says Europe isn't doing enough to help in his war in Iran. Allies have
been reluctant to take part in efforts to secure shipping through the
Strait of Hormuz or provide military support to the U.S.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
TRUMP:
Italy turned us down. And Germany turned us down, and France turned us
down. And it's OK. But, you know, why are we spending hundreds of
billions of dollars and they're not there for us? We've always been
there for them.
President
Trump said Tuesday that he would consider selling the F-35 jet fighter
to Turkey, signaling his embrace of Turkish President Recep Tayyip
Erdogan and setting up a potential showdown with U.S. lawmakers who have
long opposed such a deal.
Trump spoke
alongside Erdogan at the presidential complex in the Turkish capital,
where he landed on Tuesday for a summit of the leaders of the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization.
“We have a better
relationship with Turkey, and Turkey has been in many ways much more
loyal than other countries that we think would be loyal,” Trump said
when asked about the program by reporters.
“So
yeah, it’s something certainly we’d consider. It’s a great plane. It’s
the best, currently the best plane by far, and certainly something we
will consider,” he said.
The U.S. and Turkey
have been stuck in a yearslong diplomatic impasse over weapons sales
since Erdogan in 2017 approved Turkey’s import of a Russian air-defense
system called the S-400. The move triggered American sanctions, and the
first Trump administration removed Turkey from the F-35 fighter program
in response.
Ishan Jain (MEAWW) notes, "President
Donald Trump said that he would not have attended the upcoming NATO
summit in Ankara for most world leaders, but that a personal appeal from
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan changed his mind, offering one
of his warmest recent endorsements of any foreign leader as he heads
into a summit where he has clashed with several European allies."
The clashes were decried as a Turkish attack on American protesters exercising their First Amendment rights, which guarantees freedom of speech and assembly.[5][6] Turkey declined to apologize for the incident, blaming the protestors for provoking the response.
Of the 24 men who were filmed attacking protesters, nearly a month passed before any were charged with a crime.[7]
However, on June 6, a U.S. House resolution unanimously passed calling
for all Turkish security guards involved to be charged and prosecuted
under United States law.[8]
On June 14, two men were arrested for assault in connection to the
attacks, while arrest warrants were issued for the bodyguards.[9] The charges were dropped in March 2018, days before high level meetings between US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Erdoğan.[10]
[. . .]
United States
Immediately following the events, U.S. lawmakers condemned Turkey's actions during the clashes. Republican Senator John McCain called for the expulsion of the Turkish ambassador.[20] Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill agreed, saying "They were assaulting these people on US soil. Turkish Ambassador should be kicked out of country."[20] A group of nearly 30 Democratic lawmakers, led by Representative Carolyn Maloney, wrote a letter to Secretary of StateRex Tillerson demanding that the Turkish guards be "arrested, prosecuted and jailed."[21] Tillerson said that he was going to wait for the findings from a State Department investigation before taking any action.[22]Peter Newsham, the Chief of the Metropolitan police announced that nine people had to be taken to hospital due to the clashes.[12]
D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser
called the clashes a "violent attack on a peaceful demonstration," and
said it "is an affront to DC values and our rights as Americans."[23]
On May 17, the D.C. Police Department announced that two individuals had been arrested in connection with the clashes,[12] and stated "The actions seen outside the Turkish Embassy yesterday in Washington, D.C. stand in contrast to the First Amendment rights and principles we work tirelessly to protect each and every day." The department announced further cooperation with the United States State Department and United States Secret Service "to identify and hold all subjects accountable for their involvement in the altercation."[23]
[. . .]
On June 6, 2017, the U.S. House of Representatives called for the members of the security detail who were involved in the melee to be brought to justice.[27]
The resolution, which passed in a unanimous 397–0 vote, called for "any
Turkish security official who directed or participated in efforts by
Turkish security forces to suppress peaceful protests outside of the
Turkish ambassador's residence" to be charged and prosecuted under U.S.
law.[8] The measure was similar to a Senate demand to waive diplomatic immunity for security forces involved in the assault.[27]
Congressman Steny Hoyer called the incident an outrage that the U.S. cannot tolerate.[27] Congressman Ed Royce called the violence an "act of suppression on American soil".[27]Speaker of the HousePaul Ryan
called for the Turkish government to "finally accept responsibility for
this egregious incident and apologise to those who were harmed".[8]
The day following the vote, Turkey dismissed the
resolution saying that it would "distort and politicize" matters and
that the measure was "against the spirit of alliance and partnership"
between the two countries.[28]
[. . .]
Arrests and warrants
On June 14, 2017, two men, Sinan Narin of Virginia and Eyup Yildirim of New Jersey, were arrested for aggravated assault in connection to the clashes.[9]
On June 15, the United States issued 16 arrest warrants,
12 of which were for presidential security guards involved in the
clashes. President Erdoğan criticized the United States for issuing the
arrest warrants, saying "They have issued arrest warrants for 12 of my
bodyguards. What kind of law is this? If my bodyguards cannot protect me
then why am I bringing them to America with me?". Erdoğan also claimed
that D.C. police failed to intervene during the clashes.[30] Turkey summoned Ambassador John R. Bass
and stated that Turkish citizens cannot be held responsible for the
clashes since U.S. and local security authorities failed to take the
proper measures during Erdoğan's state visit.[31]
In August 2017, a grand jury
indicted 19 defendants in connection with the clashes. The 19
defendants included the 16 individuals criminally charged in June.
Fifteen of the defendants are Turkish security officials. All the
defendants were indicted on a charge of conspiracy to commit a crime of violence. Additionally, many of the defendants were indicted on charges such as assault with a dangerous weapon and aggravated assault.[32]
September phone call between Erdoğan and Trump
In a PBS NewsHour interview with Judy Woodruff
on September 19, 2017, Erdoğan said that Trump had called him the
previous week to apologize for the incident, and promised to follow up
on it during future talks with the Turkish government.[33]
A spokesperson for the White House said that while many issues were
discussed during the call, Trump had not offered an apology.[34][33]
That's
who Chump is making nice with now. Who he's calling a friend.
Erodgan. The man who has been either the prime minister of Turkey or the
country's president for the last 23 years. He's not a leader, he's a
dictator and Chump loves him for it.
He is in Turkey, cozying up to Erdogan while threatening to take Greenland.
Equally as disgusting as Chump is Graham Platner -- the hopefully soon to be former US senate candidate out of Maine.
But Potts is wrong to state it was just men. Michelle Goldberg was right there with the bros pimping Platner -- October 31st and May 8th being only two examples. She was not the only female fanboy of Platner.
Let's wind down with this from Senator Patty Murray's office:
Washington, D.C. — Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Vice
Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee and Ranking Member of the
Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development, and Congresswoman Marcy
Kaptur (D-OH-09), Ranking Member of the House Appropriations
Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development, sent a letter
to White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Russ
Vought calling on him to rescind OMB’s proposed rule governing all
federal grants and financial assistance.
In the letter, the top Democratic energy appropriators underscore how
OMB’s proposed rule would politicize grants and loans made by the
Department of Energy (DOE) and enable political appointees to terminate
grants for virtually any reason they please, which will put critical
energy projects on the chopping block and scare private investment away
from projects that lower Americans’ costs. Moody’s recently warned
that the proposed rule would be “credit negative for entities with high
dependence on competitive federal funding because it would materially
weaken the reliability of multi-year discretionary funding commitments.”
“We write to express our unequivocal and strong opposition to
the Office of Management and Budget’s proposed changes to the rules
governing the Federal grants system,” write Murray and Kaptur. “We
urge immediate withdrawal of this proposed rule. This proposal
represents dangerous executive overreach designed to usurp Congress’s
constitutional power of the purse and replace objective, merit-based
grantmaking with a system highly vulnerable to government corruption and
political cronyism.”
“By allowing an Administration to arbitrarily terminate or
withhold awarded grant funds based on shifting political whims, this
proposed rule would freeze critical energy and water investments needed
to lower everyday costs for Americans and improve affordability for
working families,” they continue. “Furthermore, turning
grant funding meant to support reliable Federal partnerships into a
political ‘slush fund’ will drive away private capital, stifle domestic
innovation, and severely undermine America’s global
competitiveness—ceding our Nation’s technological leadership to foreign
adversaries at the worst possible time.”
Murray and Kaptur underscore that the proposed changes will
significantly impact DOE programs and undermine congressional intent.
“These concerns are particularly acute at the Department of
Energy, which administers billions of dollars in grants, cooperative
agreements, and formula funding enacted through annual appropriations
acts and major energy-related statutes,” they write.
“DOE award recipients often make long-term hiring, contracting, and
investment decisions based on Federal awards. If recipients cannot rely
on those awards being administered according to congressional intent,
participation in DOE programs will decline and Congress’s objectives
will be frustrated.”
We write to express our unequivocal and strong opposition to the
Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) proposed changes to the rules
governing the Federal grants system as printed in the Federal Register
on May 29, 2026 (91 FR 32198; “Regulation for Federal Financial
Assistance”). We urge immediate withdrawal of this proposed rule. This
proposal represents dangerous executive overreach designed to usurp
Congress’s constitutional power of the purse and replace objective,
merit-based grantmaking with a system highly vulnerable to government
corruption and political cronyism.
By allowing an Administration to arbitrarily terminate or withhold
awarded grant funds based on shifting political whims, this proposed
rule would freeze critical energy and water investments needed to lower
everyday costs for Americans and improve affordability for working
families. Furthermore, turning grant funding meant to support reliable
Federal partnerships into a political “slush fund” will drive away
private capital, stifle domestic innovation, and severely undermine
America’s global competitiveness – ceding our Nation’s technological
leadership to foreign adversaries at the worst possible time.
Under our constitutional system of government, Congress appropriates
funds for specific purposes and directs agencies to carry out those
programs consistent with statute. Appropriations laws are deliberately
written to provide clear direction regarding how taxpayer funds are to
be used and are intended to be administered according to law, not
according to the political preferences of any particular Administration.
The Federal grant process works because applicants can rely on the
expectation that once Congress has enacted funding and established
eligibility requirements, awards will be made and administered by the
Executive Branch based on those statutory criteria as a matter of public
law rather than shifting political considerations. For the system to
work well and Federal grants to have the maximum impact possible,
recipients must be able to trust that they will receive funds based on
fair and transparent criteria and that their grants will not be ripped
up suddenly because an Administration has a political disagreement.
The proposed rule would dismantle this system and breaks faith with
the American people. It would provide agencies broad discretion to
terminate, condition, or otherwise withhold grants and cooperative
agreements based on ever-changing Executive Branch priorities rather
than Congressional direction. The practical effect of this change would
be to create uncertainty for States, local governments, universities,
nonprofits, utilities, and private-sector entities considering whether
to apply for Federal assistance. Organizations are far less likely to
invest the time and resources required to pursue Federal funding if they
believe an award can be terminated at any time for reasons unrelated to
organizational integrity, program performance, or statutory
requirements, and without required justification.
These concerns are particularly acute at the Department of Energy
(DOE), which administers billions of dollars in grants, cooperative
agreements, and formula funding enacted through annual appropriations
acts and major energy-related statutes. DOE award recipients often make
long-term hiring, contracting, and investment decisions based on Federal
awards. If recipients cannot rely on those awards being administered
according to congressional intent, participation in DOE programs will
decline and Congress’s objectives will be frustrated.
The proposal raises serious concerns that agencies would violate the
Impoundment Control Act (ICA). Congress enacted the ICA to prevent the
Executive Branch from unilaterally withholding appropriated funds. Yet
OMB’s proposal appears designed to expand agencies’ ability to
accomplish indirectly what they cannot do directly: prevent
congressionally appropriated funds from reaching recipients through
broad termination authorities and subjective policy-based conditions.
Agencies should not be given tools that effectively allow them to
substitute presidential priorities for enacted spending laws. DOE has
previously been found to have withheld congressionally appropriated
funds in violation of the ICA, as determined by a US Government
Accountability Office legal decision issued in July 2025.
We are particularly concerned by OMB’s proposed revisions to Federal
regulations codified in Section 200.340 of Title 2 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (2 C.F.R. §200.340), which significantly expand
agencies’ ability to terminate Federal awards for just about any reason
they like. OMB, under the current Administration, has repeatedly pointed
to this provision to justify widespread politically motivated grant
cancellations and funding freezes across the Federal Government. The
proposed changes would further broaden this authority and make it easier
for agencies to terminate awards based on vague and subjective policy
considerations rather than clear statutory requirements. Such an
approach undermines funding certainty, discourages participation in
Federal programs, and weakens Congress’s constitutional power of the
purse. Several courts have ruled DOE’s prior attempt to terminate
projects on political grounds by targeting “blue” States, Cities, and
Congressional Districts to be illegal and ordered Federal funding to be
reinstated.
The proposed rule raises additional concerns about due process and
fair competition in Federal funding allocation. Under current rules, DOE
discretionary grants must be awarded through a merit-based competitive
selection process unless a formal Determination for Noncompetitive
Financial Assistance (DNFA) is provided. The proposed 2 C.F.R. §200.204
revision would carve out a “national interest” exception to public
posting of funding opportunities on Grants.gov, effectively removing the
requirement of formal justification for non-competitive award
selections. Additionally, OMB’s proposed revisions to 2 C.F.R. §200.205
would require pre-issuance review of all discretionary awards by senior
political appointees to ensure that awards advance the President’s
policy priorities in line with Executive Order 14332. The insertion of
such a political filter compromises the merit-based foundation of award
selection.
The proposed rule would also drive-up costs for the businesses,
investors, and startups that help build America’s energy future. These
companies rely on Federal awards to secure financing, bring in private
investment, and commit to projects that take years to complete. When the
government can pull an award at any moment for political reasons,
lenders and investors have no choice but to treat every dollar as if it
could disappear. That makes capital more expensive, discourages private
partners, and can leave high-quality, strategic energy projects unbuilt.
The Federal award recipients that do move forward will have to track
and comply with vague, shifting conditions – a burden that lands hardest
on the small firms and new companies least able to afford it. The
result is less private money behind every Federal dollar and fewer
energy projects coming online, which ultimately means higher energy
costs for American families.
Federal grants should not be transformed from effective vehicles for
implementing laws enacted by Congress into mechanisms for advancing or
withholding funding based on political preferences and priorities. The
certainty, predictability, and technical, merit-based governance of
Federal assistance programs is essential to ensuring that qualified
applicants continue to seek Federal funding and carry out activities
consistent with the laws enacted by Congress.
For these reasons, we urge OMB to withdraw the proposal.
