Donald
Trump left many people scratching their heads on Wednesday when he
announced that he had just spoken face-to-face with former President
Theodore Roosevelt. This unusual moment happened while Trump was giving a
speech at the grand opening ceremony of the Theodore Roosevelt
Presidential Library in North Dakota.
Trump
told the crowd he had just spoken with the 26th president, who actually
died more than 100 years ago. He even shared the questions he said he
asked the former president. He told the crowd, “I even had a
conversation with Theodore Roosevelt. I said, ‘What did you think about
the Panama Canal? Do you consider that your greatest achievement? How do
you feel about the fact that the Democrats gave the Panama Canal away
to Panama for $1?’”
The brain is completely gone. Some comments on the article:
Jay American
46 minutes ago
And
defense of Trump continues because here is what the writer says "In the
video, the president can be seen listening with absolute focus as the
digital version of Roosevelt reminded him that a leader must always put
the country above everything else.
(Something Trump NEVER does)
Trump appeared to enjoy the interaction and responded to the digital screen as if a real person were standing there.
He
said, “Well, I appreciate those words, those words are fantastic,”
Trump said. “I just want to say it was an honor to be with you today, we
are taking a little bit of a tour of some of the fantastic things
you’ve done.”.
I'd bet a plug nickel that Trump in his
infinite stupidity really thinks he spoke to "Teddy". Just like he
claimed that Hannibal Lector was a great guy, & like he said we need
to reopen Alcatraz. He is such a (un)stable genius.
extinct planet
44 minutes ago
He
lives in a fantasy world with his MAGA cult. Reality or AI it doesn't
matter. None of it has to be real. He's fleecing the government. And the
MAGA cult couldn't be happier to listen to his deranged rantings.
Because somehow Biden or Obama or Hillary or the radical left. The
reflecting pool is a perfect example. Normally the maintenance would
fall to the parks department or whoever. But, no, only Trump can fix it.
So, he calls a guy, a donor--it's a kickback--that has had no
experience on a project that size, that person rushes it, cuts corners,
it turns out to be a complete disaster, then suddenly the radical left
sabotaged it, cut a 350-foot slit with a box cutter. Now the MAGA cult
doesn't have to endure the pain of accepting Trump is completely corrupt
and incompetent. It was the left! It's happened again and again.
Trump's perfect call with Zelensky, his handling of the pandemic, 1/6,
his tariffs, his war with Iran, the disaster that is his "state fair".
Proud American
1 hour ago
He
is insane! When are you people going to wake up to his criminal ways
that have hurt America. Grow a brain and realize he is a danger to all.
A bruise on President Donald Trump's hand has been described as appearing to be "rotting" by a prominent online journalist.
Aaron
Rupar commented on the latest photograph of Trump, stating: "Oh my
goodness — it looks like the rot on Trump's hand is now rotting," which
triggered numerous responses echoing his concern. The observation has
reignited worries about Trump's health.
One
X user remarked: "Almost looks deformed now." Another observed: "His
fingers appear to be slightly swollen." Trump has previously confirmed
that the dark, discolored marks on his hands are hematomas - a typical
form of deep tissue bruising worsened by his daily intake of
blood-thinning aspirin.
Th
Some comments on the article:
j wesley
12 hours ago
what
is hilarious is their terrible attempt to hide it. Just more lies,
lost in a sea of lies. Why not just say they are from IV medication?
anyone that's ever heard of medical care knows that is what the bruises
are from. Why the unnecessary lies? it just makes no sense. But it's
all we're gonna get from this administration.
Thursday, July 2, 2026. Chump's greed is on full display as Americans
struggle with the economy he broke, Republicans struggle for voters,
Democrats struggle to explain some basics, and much more.
"The American people realize how badly this administration is screwing them over," Ben notes on this morning's MEIDASTOUCH.
President Trump reaped a stunning
windfall in his first year back in the White House, including about $1.4
billion from his family’s cryptocurrency businesses, a new filing
shows.
All told, the president
pulled in at least $2.2 billion, a figure that includes other parts of
his vast holdings, such as his real estate assets. That compares to a
minimum of $622 million his enterprises pulled in for all of 2024,
before he returned to the presidency.
One of his biggest hauls in 2025 came when an investment firm tied to the United Arab Emirates bought nearly half
of the Trump family’s main crypto company, World Liberty Financial, a
transaction that blurred the line between foreign policy and private
enterprise.
President Lyndon B. Johnson’s wife owned a profitable radio station. George W. Bush was on the board of an oil company while his father was in the White House. And Hunter Biden was paid by a Ukrainian natural gas company while his father was vice president.
But
never before in American history has there been anything like Donald J.
Trump, a president who in his first year back in office has collected
about $1.4 billion in new revenues from cryptocurrency businesses that
directly benefited from his actions as president, a financial disclosure
report made public on Tuesday shows.
Overall, Mr. Trump’s revenue in 2025 jumped to at least $2.2 billion, compared with a minimum of $622 million in 2024 before he returned to office.
“It is completely unprecedented,” said Megan Gorman, a tax attorney and the author of a recent book, “All the Presidents’ Money,” that studied the history of presidential wealth dating back 250 years.
Generally, throughout history, Ms.
Gorman and other historians said, American presidents have taken actions
to try to separate themselves from corporate entanglements that might
create conflicts.
“Public office, if
anything, was a source of debt, not a source of revenue,” said Lindsay
M. Chervinsky, a historian and the executive director of the George
Washington Presidential Library at Mount Vernon.
Mr.
Trump and his family have done the opposite, creating new business
ventures that are profiting from actions Mr. Trump has taken since he
returned to the White House.
Those include the pardon
Mr. Trump issued in October to Changpeng Zhao, the richest man in
crypto, who founded the company Binance, which has been a critical
business partner to the Trump family’s own crypto venture. They also
include legislation that Mr. Trump signed last July to promote a form of cryptocurrency called stablecoins, four months after his family-backed firm introduced its own stablecoin.
Donald
Trump has taken a maiden flight on his new Qatari-gifted luxury jet
while brushing aside questions about how much taxpayers spent converting
the Boeing 747 into the new Air Force One.
The president
showed off the new plane before boarding it to North Dakota for his
latest America 250 celebration at the dedication of the Theodore
Roosevelt Library.
However, when
asked directly about the cost to American taxpayers, Trump avoided
offering a figure, insisting the cost was “very little relative to what
it would cost if we did it a different way” while emphasizing that the
aircraft itself had been “a gift.”
[. . .]
The
Air Force has previously said it spent less than $400 million modifying
the plane for presidential use, including installing secure
communications and defensive systems, though officials have declined to
provide a full public accounting of the classified security upgrades.
Critics have argued the true long-term cost could be significantly
higher.
President
Donald Trump on Tuesday announced a first-ever “midterm convention” for
the Republican Party, which will be held in September in Dallas.
But
critics on social media said it sounded like a desperate move given his
plunging popularity in the polls and growing signs that the GOP will
lose their majorities in the House and possibly even the Senate.
Even
states once considered safe red territory now appear to be in play,
with a New York Times/Siena poll this week showing the race for a U.S.
Senate seat in Texas is a dead heat. Democratic candidate James Talarico
and Trump’s hand-picked Republican candidate, scandal-plagued state
Attorney General Ken Paxton are both at 47%.
Chump and
his planners have been woefully out of touch with the country. And with
midterms in November, minutes away, that's not a good sign. What else
isn't a good sign? GOP reps in Congress who live to appear out of
touch. Max Rego (THE HILL) reports:
Despite a sizeable number of Americans expressing financial concerns, Rep. Troy Nehls (R-Texas) boasted Tuesday of his plans to eat lobster tails and rib-eye steak this Fourth of July weekend.
“Affordability — what are you talking about?” Nehls told reporter Pablo Manríquez on the Capitol steps, when the latter asked him how House Republicans can convince their constituents they are fighting to make life more affordable.
“Over
the fourth, I’m going to get me a couple of big lobster tails, I’m
going to get me some nice rib-eyes. I’m going to sit in my backyard with
my family [and] my neighbors, and we’re going to be enjoying the
fourth, celebrating 250 years, the birthday [of America],” the Texas
Republican added.
[. . .]
When another reporter
asked him whether Americans living “paycheck to paycheck” can afford to
eat the same food he plans to, Nehls wondered if those people “work as
hard as I do.”
Don't worry about
voting him out of office, he's not seeking re-election. For obvious
reasons. And Chump's there helping to tank his own party as well. Stephanie Kaloi (MEDIAITE) reports:
Former
White House spokesperson Sarah Matthews, who worked for President
Donald Trump from June 2020 to January 2021, says it “seems” her former
employer “is doing everything in his power to tank Republican chances in
the midterms.”
In a segment on MS NOW, Matthews explained to
correspondent Antonia Hylton that Trump’s fixation on the SAVE America
Act could cost him, and the Republican Party, dearly this fall.
“I
think that if President Trump was doing everything in his power to tank
Republicans’ chances in the midterms, he wouldn’t be doing anything
differently,” she said. “That’s what it seems like. It seems like he
does not care about the party, which he never has, to be fair. He has
never cared about what is good for the betterment of the Republican
Party. He has only ever cared about himself and accumulating as much
power as possible.”
And, you could argue, he's never cared about the American people, only about himself. That would explain a new poll. Anna Commander (NEWSWEEK) reports:
A
majority of Americans say President Donald Trump has not paid attention
to the issues that matter most to them, according to a new poll from
The Economist/YouGov released Tuesday, as the president promoted a new
Republican midterm convention aimed at energizing GOP supporters ahead
of the 2026 elections.
On
Tuesday, Trump announced on Truth Social that Republicans will hold
what he called the party’s first-ever national midterm convention in
Dallas on September 9 and 10. He described the gathering as a “truly
Historic Event” celebrating the “Great American Comeback” and said it
would showcase achievements under the America First agenda, while
promising “lots of Great Entertainment” and “a RALLY like none other!”
Meanwhile,
the survey released on Tuesday found that 60 percent of respondents
believe Trump “hasn’t paid attention to the most important problems”
facing the country, underscoring persistent concerns about his
priorities as his administration pushes ahead with a slate of
initiatives, including foreign affairs decisions amid turmoil with Iran
and as the country prepares to celebrate its 250th anniversary.
The
findings come as Trump has drawn criticism this week for seemingly
dismissing the nation’s housing bill. Speaking to reporters Monday, the
president brushed aside legislation aimed at addressing soaring housing
costs, calling it “a big yawn.”
And
yesterday's NEW YORK TIMES report by about the 2.2 billion Chump's
raked in throughout 2025 via grifting and corruption isn't helping
people see him as a friend who understands their economic struggles. Marco Margaritoff (HUFFINGTON POST) notes some criticism of Chump over that grifting:
Former
Trump White House attorney Ty Cobb on Tuesday called out President
Donald Trump over his $1.2 billion in earnings from cryptocurrency
ventures since returning to the White House in 2025, calling it “the
greatest onslaught of corruption in the history of mankind.”
Cobb appeared on CNN following the release of a financial disclosure document
showing Trump earned $594,263,944 from his family’s World Liberty
Financial cryptocurrency firm and $635,068,835 from the CIC Digital LLC
company that marketed his $TRUMP meme coin.
“I don’t believe so,” Cobb told “OutFront” host Erin Burnett when asked if he thinks it’s legal.
He
continued, “Certainly, I don’t think it was contemplated by the
Founders when they created the emoluments clause. I do think that one of
the line items, of course, is the commemorative coins, several hundred
million dollars of income related to those coins.”
Americans
under Chump are starving for the truth -- one of the many things Chump
cannot provide. That's among the reasons why REGIME CHANGE is a huge
hit. Bill Barrow (AP) reports
It turns out readers still want to learn more about President Donald Trump after all.
They’re
the kind of sales that numerous works about Trump reached during his
first term, but had been rare during his second term. Publishers had
speculated that the public had tired of Trump books, believing there was
little left to know.
The total figures include preorders,
print book sales, ebooks, and e-audiobooks and orders that have yet to
be fulfilled because of demand, the publishing house said. Simon &
Schuster said the book is into its third hard copy printing, with
200,000 copies on order, after it sold out quickly in bookstores and on
Amazon. It's the best first-week clip of any hardcover nonfiction book
in 2026.
Democrats
and Republicans are engaged in a close race for control of the Senate
in the 2026 midterm elections, according to a new poll from The New York
Times, which showed single-digit races in six GOP-held states Democrats
must win in November to flip the chamber.
Historically, the
party in the White House loses seats in the midterms, so Democrats are
optimistic about their chances of reclaiming a House majority. But their
Senate map is tougher. Republicans currently hold a 53-47 majority in
the Senate, and Democrats have few easy targets this year and must win
seats in states that backed President Donald Trump by double digits to
flip the Senate.
The poll from the Times, Siena
University and the Portland Press Herald suggested that several key
Senate races are close, about four months out from the election. Other
polls and prediction markets similarly show a tight race.
Ed Kilgore (THE INTELLIGENCER) reports:
Last month, there was immense excitement
on the left when outspoken progressives (two of them members of the
Democratic Socialists of America) won three congressional primaries and a
host of down-ballot races in New York. Losers included two entrenched
incumbents, one of them the chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus,
and their backers, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and
AIPAC-aligned donors. While some activists immediately leaped to
predictions that the uprising would go national, others noted New York’s
unique political culture and emphasized the local influence of Mayor
Zohran Mamdani, who is a national celebrity but not yet a national power
broker.
But after Colorado’s
June 30 primaries, there’s evidence that the ideological and
generational ferment that was so evident in New York is bubbling up
elsewhere. Most strikingly, 29-year-old DSA member Melat Kiros knocked
off 15-term incumbent congresswoman Diana DeGuette in Denver’s deep-blue
First Congressional District. Kiros first received national attention
in 2023 when a law firm fired her for publishing an open letter
questioning Israel’s legitimacy as a Zionist state. She overcame heavy
late spending on DeGuette’s behalf by AIPAC-funded and Silicon Valley
groups. The incumbent wasn’t exactly a “centrist”; she’s a long-time
co-sponsor of Medicare for All legislation and is best known for her
fiery defense of reproductive rights. So to some extent, Kiros’s win
represented a generic “change” sentiment; she wasn’t even born when
DeGuette first went to Congress. But at her victory celebration, where
celebrity socialist influencer Hasan Piker appeared, Kiros was quick to
claim affiliation with a national movement, PBS reported:
“We
are winning from coast to coast,” Kiros said to an ecstatic audience
and the blast of air horns. “We are taking back our party and our
country!”
Though it was clearly a less ideological contest,
Colorado progressives also cheered state attorney general Phil Weiser’s
landslide win over three-term U.S. Senator Michael Bennet in the state’s
gubernatorial primary (incumbent Democrat Jared Polis was
term-limited). Weiser shrewdly played the anti-Trump resistance card,
citing his many lawsuits against the Trump administration in contrast to
Bennet’s relatively conciliatory record in the Senate, as NBC News noted:
Weiser,
who is in his second term as attorney general, gained traction as the
two candidates traded attacks over their anti-Trump credentials in a
race in which there was little daylight between them on policy. Both
have pushed affordability, housing and environmental issues as top
priorities, as well as fighting Trump’s immigration agenda.
Weiser
has attacked Bennet for having voted to confirm several of Trump’s
Cabinet nominees as a member of the Senate and has cast him as a
Washington insider.
Notice, though, where the left won and where it did not.
Every one of those victories came in a safe Democratic seat, where the November election is likely a formality.
The
one genuinely competitive race on the board—Colorado’s 8th, the state’s
only toss-up—went to Manny Rutinel, a more conventional Democrat backed
by Latino-outreach groups and tech donors.
That
seat has flipped in each of its two elections; a Democrat won it by
around 1,600 votes in 2022, and Republican Gabe Evans took it by fewer
than 2,500 in 2024.
It is exactly the kind of district that decides House majorities, and it did not reward a factional candidate.
The
progressive left has proved it can beat Democratic incumbents. The open
question is whether it can produce politicians who become national
figures, their reach and reputation growing beyond the districts that
elected them.
Attorney
General Phil Weiser won comfortably in the gubernatorial primary over
Bennet, who had been considered the heavy frontrunner until recently.
Weiser isn’t much more liberal than Bennet but positioned himself as
more anti-Trump. He hammered Bennet for his votes to confirm several of
Trump’s executive branch nominees last year and won the backing of the
state’s Indivisible chapter.
It’s
normal to have multiple candidates seeking an open governorship
(incumbent Jared Polis is term-limited), so Weiser’s decision to take on
Bennet wasn’t unusual or surprising. But House Democratic incumbents
rarely face strong primary challenges, and Democratic senators almost
never do. And it’s not as if Hickenlooper or DeGette are Joe
Manchin–style centrists. They strongly backed Joe Biden’s agenda and
have opposed most of Trump’s. DeGette is a member of the Congressional
Progressive Caucus. While neither of them has been a leading critic of
Israel, they haven’t been vocally pro-Israel like Representative Dan
Goldman, who was defeated last week in New York.
So why did
DeGette and Hickenlooper get primary challengers, and why were those
challenges so popular with voters? How did a man (Bennet) who has voted
against nearly all of Trump’s proposals in Washington lose a contest
over who would be the most anti-Trump?
For the same
reasons Mamdani won the Democratic primary in New York last year, Graham
Platner won in Maine earlier this year, Abdul El-Sayed has surged in
Michigan Senate polls, and other progressive candidates are gaining
ground and winning around the country. Democratic voters are mad at
party leaders for not defeating Trump in 2024 and then last year having
to be coaxed by the base into aggressively opposing him. They are also
curious if newer politicians will do a better job than those from the
party establishment in fighting MAGA. Those two factors provide an
opening for challenges to incumbents and frontrunners, even those with
fairly liberal voting records.
Perry
writes that. He appears to forget that Janet Mills repeatedly stood up
to Chump -- even to his face.
You
can't just throw junk together in an essay and ignore facts and expect
anyone to be impressed with your 'hot' take. Enough on thought pieces
that are half-thought out -- if that. Eric Garcia (INDEPENDENT) puts some actual thought into the election results:
There are plenty of parallels to that era and
today, and not just because Kiros, a barista and attorney, beat a
long-time entrenched incumbent in much the same way that AOC, a
democratic socialist and bartender, took out the chairman of the House
Democratic caucus in 2018.
She came to
Washington flanked by Reps. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.), Ilhan Omar
(D-Minn.) and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), who formed what would become “the
Squad” of progressives in Congress.
And just
like back then, Republicans hope to paint Democrats in swing districts
with the same socialist brush from these deep-blue districts.
Rep.
Richard Hudson (R-N.C.), chairman of the National Republican
Congressional Committee, told The Independent that the most important
quality for any race is candidate quality and whether someone fits their
district.
“And that's why we have the
advantage, because we have really good candidates that fit their
districts, and the Democrats have had these crazy primaries where
they've all tried to out-Mamdani each other, and they’ve ended up with
extreme candidates,” he said.
The
race, however, has broader implications for the future of left-wing
politics in the U.S., with Kiros’ victory putting to rest any notion
that the progressive wave sweeping across the country might be limited
to New York City.
The progressive
victory in Denver, however, also means that a potential Democratic
majority in the House is likely to feature a majority-making coalition
of left-wing progressives. As it stands, there are two DSA-endorsed
members of Congress, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-NY, and Rep.
Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich. After this year’s election, there is almost
certain to be five, due to the wins in Colorado and New York alone. The
coalition on the Democratic Party’s left wing, however, will be
significantly larger, though its exact size depends on how the group is
counted.
We've noted that Socialist doesn't need to be
treated like a dirty word. We've noted that if AOC has any hope of a
presidential campaign in the Democratic Party primary in 2028, people
need to stop hiding. Ave and I called out the very bad book by which
refused to note Socialists. On the right, it could and did name
Libertarians and MAGAs and GOPers and you name it. But everyone on the
left was a Democrat or else not noted. It's like how Amy Goodman
brought on all those Democratic Socialists to trash Kamala Harris when
Kamala was running for the presidency but never noted that these guests
weren't Democrats, they were the word that the left would not mention back then . . . socialists.
There are all these characters in the book which is another problem.
You encounter Republicans and Libertarians and MAGA and even the Tea Party.
And then?
And
then you have the left. Such as, on page 134, when he writes of being
part of "a group of lefty writers." Socialists. That's what he's
talking about on that page. He notes a left "environmentalist" in the
book -- a Socialist. He writes of the genocide in Gaza insisting that
the "left" was all basically on the same side ("The left was more or
less opposed to the war, but the conflict quickly exposed a split on the
right.")
Is that what he heard in the echo chamber
bubble he lives in? For the record, we are opposed to the ongoing
genocide and have been throughout. But we're not so stupid that we
think that is the uniform opinion on our side. For example, October
30th -- days before the US presidential election -- Linley Sanders (AP) reported on the latest AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll:
But
there’s a big partisan split on whether the Israeli government bears “a
lot” of responsibility for the war’s escalation. About 6 in 10
Democrats say they do — similar to the share of Democrats who say Hamas
bears “a lot” of responsibility — while only about one-quarter of
Republicans say the Israeli government bears “a lot” of responsibility.
Six in ten is not 100%, it's barely over half.
But
damned if the media ecosystem that Eoin hails from -- FAIR, THE NATION,
COMMON DREAMS, etc, etc -- hasn't misled everyone on that reality.
In
a really poorly written section about leftists brought on FOX "NEWS"
(made even worse by his desperation to name check another friend), he
notes that the network brings on two types -- the ineffectual (think
Alan Colmes) who is seen as ridiculous and then the Glenn Greenwald
types who are there to insult the left.
We wish it
would have been better written book but we also wish he had the nerve
to go beyond finger pointing at the other side. What he's describing --
the fake assery of FOX "NEWS" when it comes to the left -- is what the
media eco-system he hails from does over and over. In fact, that's
what DEMOCRACY NOW! did every day from the start of August through
October 30th when covering Kamala Harris.
They brought
on Socialists to lie and attack. And the biggest lie there was that
they were Democrats. Even Democrats don't like Kamala, they insisted
with their coverage thereby achieving Amy Goodman's intent to suppress
turnout for Kamala.
That lie also helped them attack
Kamala constantly regarding Gaza. Again, the lie was -- and continues
to be in Higgins' book -- that the left was of one mind on Gaza. But,
as polling demonstrated, that was never the case for the Democratic
Party's members. Kamala had to navigate a tight rope but that reality
was ignored as Amy Goodman repeatedly brought on Uncommitted to tell
their lies -- frequently, the biggest one being that they were
Democrats. They were, in fact, Socialists (and one Communist). Long
before Eoin finished his book, we were pointing out here that DN! was
using the FOX "NEWS" model.
It takes a lot of nerve
and a lot of hypocrisy to rightly attack Glenn Greenwald for his lies,
distortions and FOX-ification while you not only refuse to do the same
with your own peers but, in fact, also applaud them in the book -- Naomi
Klein (a Socialist whose pro-Kamala message on DN! was hold your nose
and vote for her -- again, the messaging from DN! was that even
Democrats did not support Kamala), Adam H. Johnson, Branko Marcetic and
so many more Socialists.
We don't like Glenn, we have
called him out here for years. But when the left does what we call out
in Glenn, we call out the left. And when we say that we call out the
left, we mean we call out Democrats, we call out Socialists, we call out
Communists and we call out Greens.
Not only does Eoin
refuse to do that, he can't even type the word "Socialist." Political
closets run deep. And political closet cases worked overtime to defeat
Kamala so we're in no mood to play and pretend this is some deep and
important book.
It's trite and superficial. The scope
is beyond the page length. It's 'finding' are generic and
self-fulfilling. Doesn't make them necessarily wrong but does reduce
this allegedly important book to nothing more than a basic primer good
only for someone brand new to the topic.
There are all these characters in the book which is another problem.
You encounter Republicans and Libertarians and MAGA and even the Tea Party.
And then?
And
then you have the left. Such as, on page 134, when he writes of being
part of "a group of lefty writers." Socialists. That's what he's
talking about on that page. He notes a left "environmentalist" in the
book -- a Socialist. He writes of the genocide in Gaza insisting that
the "left" was all basically on the same side ("The left was more or
less opposed to the war, but the conflict quickly exposed a split on the
right.")
Is that what he heard in the echo chamber
bubble he lives in? For the record, we are opposed to the ongoing
genocide and have been throughout. But we're not so stupid that we
think that is the uniform opinion on our side. For example, October
30th -- days before the US presidential election -- Linley Sanders (AP) reported on the latest AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll:
But
there’s a big partisan split on whether the Israeli government bears “a
lot” of responsibility for the war’s escalation. About 6 in 10
Democrats say they do — similar to the share of Democrats who say Hamas
bears “a lot” of responsibility — while only about one-quarter of
Republicans say the Israeli government bears “a lot” of responsibility.
Six in ten is not 100%, it's barely over half.
But
damned if the media ecosystem that Eoin hails from -- FAIR, THE NATION,
COMMON DREAMS, etc, etc -- hasn't misled everyone on that reality.
In
a really poorly written section about leftists brought on FOX "NEWS"
(made even worse by his desperation to name check another friend), he
notes that the network brings on two types -- the ineffectual (think
Alan Colmes) who is seen as ridiculous and then the Glenn Greenwald
types who are there to insult the left.
We wish it
would have been better written book but we also wish he had the nerve
to go beyond finger pointing at the other side. What he's describing --
the fake assery of FOX "NEWS" when it comes to the left -- is what the
media eco-system he hails from does over and over. In fact, that's
what DEMOCRACY NOW! did every day from the start of August through
October 30th when covering Kamala Harris.
They brought
on Socialists to lie and attack. And the biggest lie there was that
they were Democrats. Even Democrats don't like Kamala, they insisted
with their coverage thereby achieving Amy Goodman's intent to suppress
turnout for Kamala.
That lie also helped them attack
Kamala constantly regarding Gaza. Again, the lie was -- and continues
to be in Higgins' book -- that the left was of one mind on Gaza. But,
as polling demonstrated, that was never the case for the Democratic
Party's members. Kamala had to navigate a tight rope but that reality
was ignored as Amy Goodman repeatedly brought on Uncommitted to tell
their lies -- frequently, the biggest one being that they were
Democrats. They were, in fact, Socialists (and one Communist). Long
before Eoin finished his book, we were pointing out here that DN! was
using the FOX "NEWS" model.
It takes a lot of nerve
and a lot of hypocrisy to rightly attack Glenn Greenwald for his lies,
distortions and FOX-ification while you not only refuse to do the same
with your own peers but, in fact, also applaud them in the book -- Naomi
Klein (a Socialist whose pro-Kamala message on DN! was hold your nose
and vote for her -- again, the messaging from DN! was that even
Democrats did not support Kamala), Adam H. Johnson, Branko Marcetic and
so many more Socialists.
We don't like Glenn, we have
called him out here for years. But when the left does what we call out
in Glenn, we call out the left. And when we say that we call out the
left, we mean we call out Democrats, we call out Socialists, we call out
Communists and we call out Greens.
Not only does Eoin
refuse to do that, he can't even type the word "Socialist." Political
closets run deep. And political closet cases worked overtime to defeat
Kamala so we're in no mood to play and pretend this is some deep and
important book.
It's trite and superficial. The scope
is beyond the page length. It's 'finding' are generic and
self-fulfilling. Doesn't make them necessarily wrong but does reduce
this allegedly important book to nothing more than a basic primer good
only for someone brand new to the topic.
It's
a year later and the MSM can now use the term "Socialist." However,
lefty media remains skittish. More to the point, the point we made
repeatedly was that AOC may run for president. If she does, we should
have a working knowledge of Democratic Socialism in place before she
announces her run. To educate the country on DS and AOC at the same
time is expecting a bit much.
But where are the articles from the left about Democratic Socialism?
The
nationwide group consists of chapters in all 50 states and counts more
than 100,000 members. The group, which is often referred to as the DSA,
says that it thinks “working people should run both the economy and
society democratically to meet human needs, not to make profits for a
few.” It describes itself as a political and activist organization, but
not a party.
The DSA’s origins date to the
1970s, but its membership grew by the thousands when the group mobilized
around the 2016 presidential campaign of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders.
While Sanders lost that campaign and a subsequent 2020 bid, his movement
was the first warning sign to a Democratic establishment that voters
were looking for change.
Over the past decade, the
DSA has continued to gain members to varying degrees around the country,
though its biggest strides have been in urban areas. The New York City
chapter has been one of the most successful in growing membership and
cultivating viable candidates.
After Kiros’s victory Tuesday, chants of, “DSA, DSA!” could be heard at her watch party.
While
Sanders has long called himself a Democratic socialist and in many ways
is seen as the leader of the new progressive movement, he isn’t an
actual member of DSA, according to a spokesman.
Sanders
spent much of his career as a gadfly within the Democratic Party, which
he caucuses with despite being an independent. But following his 2016
bid, the progressive movement has grown—taking along many who consider
themselves Democratic socialists, for whom Sanders has become a
philosophical chieftain.
In 2019, Reps. Alexandria
Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, both Democratic
socialists, were part of a small group of progressives who came into
Congress with much fanfare, while also triggering panic from Democratic
leadership. Both had been inspired by Sanders. In the next Congress, the
group of socialists or progressives who are ideologically aligned is
expected to be much bigger.
Many
of its candidates have called for or Palestinian self-determination,
pushed for increased taxes on the wealthy and universal healthcare.
Mamdani
focused his mayoral run on the high cost of living in New York City,
saying he wanted to expand free universal child care, make city buses
free and freeze rents for cash-strapped New Yorkers. After taking
office, he urged state lawmakers to increase tax rates on high-income
earners and businesses. While he didn’t get those levies, his advocacy
had an impact: Democratic New York Gov. Kathy Hochul and the state
legislature recently approved a pied-à-terre tax on luxury second homes
in New York City.
In the recent primaries, DSA
candidates have also attacked incumbents over their ties to the powerful
pro-Israel lobbying group the American Israel Public Affairs Committee,
a strategy that resonated with voters who have grown disaffected by the
war in Gaza.
Are we going to do our
job and address Democratic Socialism or not? If AOC is the nominee in
2028, that's going to be a little late to start addressing the topic.
Let's wind down with this from Senator Elizabeth Warren's office:
Cloud of corruption surrounds Trump’s fundraising for library, ballroom, and other projects
Softbank reportedly made
largest publicly disclosed contribution to Trump Presidential Library
just before President Trump weakened an executive order regulating the
AI industry
Washington, D.C. — U.S. Senators Elizabeth Warren
(D-Mass.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), along with Representative
Melanie Stansbury (D-N.M.), opened an investigation into reports that
Softbank Group’s (Softbank) recently donated $50 million to the Trump
Presidential Library — the largest publicly disclosed contribution to
the Library and a possible attempt to curry political favor.
“The Trump Administration is the most corrupt in the nation’s
history, and one apparent nexus of that corruption has been tens of
millions of dollars that have been given by corporate interests to the
President’s pet projects including his gold-encrusted ballroom,” wrote the lawmakers.
On May 22, 2026, Politico reported that
SoftBank Group had donated $50 million to President Trump’s
Presidential Library project, making it the largest publicly reported
contribution to the Library. The donation followed a December 2024 Softbank announcement that
it would invest $100 billion in the United States during President
Trump’s second term. On March 11, 2026, the Federal Trade Commission also greenlit Softbank’s $4 billion acquisition of DigitalBridge, a data center investment firm.
The $50 million donation came before President Trump weakened an executive order regulating the AI industry. Softbank is “one of the largest AI investors in
the world,” raising questions as to whether the donation was an attempt
to buy political favors. The reported donation is the largest publicly
disclosed contribution to the Trump Presidential Library to date.
Softbank has previously contributed to the Presidential Libraries of
Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, but only after the Presidents had left
office. This time, reports indicated that Softbank quietly made the
contribution while President Trump is in office, and before any
presidential library has been constructed.
“These circumstances [under which the donation was made] raise
concerns about the potential for bribery and whether donors are seeking
favorable treatment from the Trump Administration through contributions
that personally benefit a sitting President,” wrote the lawmakers.
The lawmakers asked the Softbank CEO, Mr. Masayoshi Son, to explain
the company’s decision to contribute and whether it was made in exchange
for any promises by the Trump administration.
Senator Warren has led the fight to prevent the Trump family from
using the Trump Presidential Library for corrupt pay-to-play deals:
In April 2026, Senators Warren (D-Mass.) and Blumenthal (D-Conn.), along with Representative Stansbury (D-N.M.), released new responses from
Big Tech CEOs indicating that they have no public explanation for where
as much as $63 million in settlement money to Donald Trump’s
now-dissolved Presidential Library fund has gone. The lawmakers followed
up with a new letter to President Donald Trump pressing for answers to
solve the ongoing mystery of the missing millions.
In March 2026, Senators Warren (D-Mass.) and Blumenthal (D-Conn.), along with Representative Melanie Stansbury (D-N.M.), pressed ABC, Meta, X, and Paramount on
their settlements with President Donald Trump, in which the companies
promised to donate as much as $63 million to President Trump’s future
Presidential Library.
In July 2025, Senators Warren (D-Mass.) and Blumenthal (D-Conn.),
along with Representatives Moskowitz (D-Fla.), Raskin (D-Md.), and
Stansbury (D-N.M.) unveiled the Presidential Library Anti-Corruption Act to close loopholes that allow presidential libraries to be used as tools for corruption and bribery.
In July 2025, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) released a new report exposing
how companies, special interests, and foreign governments may be
pledging donations to President Trump’s future Presidential Library as a
corrupt tool to secure favorable outcomes from his administration.
Illinois
Governor JB Pritzker said President Donald Trump is “suffering from
dementia” and incapable of understanding his own words during an
appearance on CNN’s ‘The Source’ with host Kaitlan Collins on Tuesday,
June 30.
The sparring was sparked by comments
Trump made Monday in the Oval Office, where the president said that
communism is a bigger threat to the United States in 2026 than all World
Wars, the attack on Pearl Harbor, and the September 11 terrorist
attacks combined. Collins passed the remarks on to Pritzker and asked
for his reaction.
"Look, the man is continually suffering from dementia," Pritzker said. "I don't think he really understands what he's saying."
Some comments on the article:
Pherd Berphal
56 minutes ago
the dementia is obvious
Dro Man
2 hours ago
Trump
is just sick in the damn head and needs to step down, article 25 or
Impeached and the Republicans are to afraid to put the people of our
nation nation before Trump.
Truth Is
54 minutes ago
That seems to be true. JB is a good public servant, unlike the Cheetos king.
Wednesday, July 1, 2026. Chump's grift brings in over two billion
dollas for himself, the wr in Irn continues, Chump's state fair
continues to be n embarrassment, Clarence Thomas attacks trns people,
and much more.
President Trump reaped a stunning
windfall in his first year back in the White House, including about $1.4
billion from his family’s cryptocurrency businesses, a new filing
shows.
All told, the president
pulled in at least $2.2 billion, a figure that includes other parts of
his vast holdings, such as his real estate assets. That compares to a
minimum of $622 million his enterprises pulled in for all of 2024,
before he returned to the presidency.
One of his biggest hauls in 2025 came when an investment firm tied to the United Arab Emirates bought nearly half
of the Trump family’s main crypto company, World Liberty Financial, a
transaction that blurred the line between foreign policy and private
enterprise.
President Lyndon B. Johnson’s wife owned a profitable radio station. George W. Bush was on the board of an oil company while his father was in the White House. And Hunter Biden was paid by a Ukrainian natural gas company while his father was vice president.
But
never before in American history has there been anything like Donald J.
Trump, a president who in his first year back in office has collected
about $1.4 billion in new revenues from cryptocurrency businesses that
directly benefited from his actions as president, a financial disclosure
report made public on Tuesday shows.
Overall, Mr. Trump’s revenue in 2025 jumped to at least $2.2 billion, compared with a minimum of $622 million in 2024 before he returned to office.
“It is completely unprecedented,” said Megan Gorman, a tax attorney and the author of a recent book, “All the Presidents’ Money,” that studied the history of presidential wealth dating back 250 years.
Generally, throughout history, Ms.
Gorman and other historians said, American presidents have taken actions
to try to separate themselves from corporate entanglements that might
create conflicts.
“Public office, if
anything, was a source of debt, not a source of revenue,” said Lindsay
M. Chervinsky, a historian and the executive director of the George
Washington Presidential Library at Mount Vernon.
Mr.
Trump and his family have done the opposite, creating new business
ventures that are profiting from actions Mr. Trump has taken since he
returned to the White House.
Those include the pardon
Mr. Trump issued in October to Changpeng Zhao, the richest man in
crypto, who founded the company Binance, which has been a critical
business partner to the Trump family’s own crypto venture. They also
include legislation that Mr. Trump signed last July to promote a form of cryptocurrency called stablecoins, four months after his family-backed firm introduced its own stablecoin.
The
Strait of Hormuz is without a doubt one of the world’s most important
waterways. Nearly 20 percent of the world’s oil flows through there,
another nearly 20 percent of the world’s natural gas, one-third of the
world’s agricultural goods, and countless critical industrial inputs
that make the modern world work every day.
Since
US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
started their regime change war of choice against the Islamic Republic
of Iran, the Strait has been closed. Each day–every hour–that the Strait
remains obstructed due to the war, the world comes closer to economic
ruin.
There have, throughout the more than 120-day war, been instances where the Iranians allowed ships to pass through the Strait.
The
United States and Iran have attempted to create some off-ramps to the
war in the form of temporary ceasefires. But those ceasefires have been
fleeting.
Because of the
untenable nature of those ceasefires, the Iranians have generally kept
the flow of ships and their goods tamped down well below the prewar
average of trade through the Strait.
Contrary to what many believe,
this reality does not harm the Iranians as much as it hurts the United
States and the rest of the world. After all, Iran is one of the most
heavily sanctioned countries in the world. Due to this, the Iranians
have been made to become increasingly self-reliant–and to establish
alternative modes of trade (via Chinese-run Belt-and-Road railways and
Russian routes in the Caspian Sea).
Meanwhile, ironically, it is the Americans and their allies globally who are disproportionately suffering through the lockdown.
[. . .]
Even if we do somehow succeed
in maintaining the MoU ceasefire, there will be serious second-order
inflationary effects. Whereas before the war began, roughly 120 to 140
ships passed through the Strait per day, little more than 100 have been
allowed to pass since the MoU was signed a week ago. There has simply
been too much time that has been allowed to pass since the volume of the
flow of goods was far greater than what it is now.
In other
words, inflation is coming. And with inflation will necessarily come
increased interest rates. That will, in turn, lead to a deteriorating
economic situation. If we’re lucky and the ceasefire holds beyond what
it has so far, the Iranians might let more ships out, and we can
ameliorate this crisis over time.
At this rate, though, it
does look as though the US president cannot accept the conditions of a
longer-term ceasefire with Iran, and Iran fully understands how
vulnerable the Americans are to the disruptions occurring in the Strait.
Fear
of a big energy market disruption, when daily oil demand increasingly
exceeds available supply, was a main reason Trump surrendered to Iran in
the first place. At the G7 summit on June 17, Trump said, “We run out
of reserves at about four weeks.” That would put the deadline in
mid-July.
Maybe it’s more like August or
September, but whatever the deadline, big economic problems will come if
oil reserves run out and ships from the Gulf aren’t on the way bringing
more. The markets did react positively when shipping began to pick up
after the MOU, with oil futures dropping to around pre-war levels. But
that won’t last if conditions stagnate or worsen.
Either
way, Trump messed up this war so badly that the U.S. aim now is just to
get back to something like the pre-war status quo. And at this point,
even that looks unachievable.
Oman has proposed a joint mechanism with Iran to collect fees from ships passing through the Strait of Hormuz, opening a new chapter in negotiations over one of the world's most strategically important waterways.
According to The New York Times report, Oman submitted a formal proposal
to the US and other Western partners outlining a framework under which
Iran and Oman would jointly collect payments from ships using the Strait
of Hormuz.
Before the conflict, commercial vessels
transited the strait without paying any charges. That changed after
Iran effectively blockaded the route during the war, sending crude oil
prices sharply higher and disrupting global shipping.
Since
then, Iranian officials have repeatedly signalled that they intend to
introduce a payment mechanism for ships using the passage.
Diplomatic
sources cited in the report say Oman's proposal attempts to create a
structured arrangement rather than allowing unilateral Iranian action.
A
summer travel paradox has emerged: Even though international flights
use considerably more jet fuel than domestic travel, the cost to fly
within the U.S. has skyrocketed at rates far beyond that of flying
abroad.
According to data from airfare search
engine Skiplagged, domestic flight price growth has increased 23.2% from
March 2025 to this month, while international flight costs have
increased 11.5% in the same time period. This summer marks the highest
domestic passenger prices for the season since 2022.
Compared
to international flights, which consume 15,000 to 30,000 gallons of
fuel—about 1,500 to 3,000 per hour as a result of larger aircraft and
long-haul routes—domestic flights use about 1,800 to 2,7000 gallons per
trip, or about 750 to 900 gallons per hour.
Jet
fuel costs nearly doubled during the Iran war, with supplies dwindling
in some parts of the world as a result of halted traffic at the Strait
of Hormuz, the chokepoint through which 20% of global oil usually flows.
Rising fuel costs caused panic in the airline industry: Willie Walsh,
the outgoing director general of the International Air Transport
Association (IATA), warned this month the global airline industry’s
profits would be cut in half as a result of tepid demand, culminating in
the worst financial year for aviation since the pandemic.
The
anxieties, however, did not meaningfully materialize. Instead, the
rising airfare costs indicate high demand for summer travel, combined
with airlines successfully making a series of moves that effectively
protected them from supply chain uncertainty from the war, such as
leaning into premiumization and slashing certain routes.
“It’s
kind of a glass half full kind of scenario, where I think the outcome
was not as bad as many predicted,” Christopher Anderson, a Cornell
University professor of services management who studies the airline
industry, told Fortune. “Because it wasn’t as bad, and the capacity is
not there…we’re seeing elevated prices.”
The
resilience is good news for the airline industry—but the pattern of
increased prices ahead of a busy summer travel season also exposes the
large portion of the American population who is now facing high travel
costs, even to fly within the country. It’s yet another example of the
K-shaped economy in action, where the wealthy can splurge on expensive
airfare while most other households weigh tough travel decisions.
“Here
in the U.S., we have a very bifurcated economy,” Anderson said. “And a
lot of this turmoil that we’re seeing is the effects more on one segment
of that economy than the other.”
While Chump's corruption brought him 2.2 billion last year, Aimee Picchi (CBS NEWS) notes the average worker is doing worse in 2026 than they did in 2025:
American
workers' share of the economic pie has fallen to its lowest level since
at least 1947, when the federal government began tracking the data,
according to an analysis by Federal Reserve economists.
The
measure, known as "labor share of income," tracks how much of the
nation's economic output flows to workers in the form of wages and
salaries, as opposed to the share that goes to investors and
corporations through profits, dividends and other capital income. A
shrinking labor share of income indicates that more economic gains are
flowing to shareholders and business owners, rather than to workers.
As of early 2026, American workers received 54.1% of national income, according to research
from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. By comparison, that figure
topped 65% almost 80 years ago, when the government began tracking the
data following World War II. In early 2020, it stood at 57.7%,
indicating that workers have continued to lose ground since the
pandemic.
Roughly 48% of Americans said their financial situation was worse in May than a year ago, the highest share since January 2023, according to a recent survey by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
Three-quarters of Americans said their incomes aren't keeping up with inflation, according to a May CBS News poll. Roughly 29% of respondents said the economy was in good shape.
A
110-foot Ferris wheel is the centerpiece of the Great American State
Fair currently come to town in our nation’s capital, which is not a
state the last time I checked. It is the brainchild of Freedom 250, an
organization overseeing—or, rather, botching—the president’s $60 million
marquee celebration of America’s 250th birthday.
On opening day, the Ferris wheel
stalled. It lurched. It stopped. It started. Then stopped again.
Freedom 250’s spokesperson Julia Friedland called it a “power hiccup.”
She didn’t know how right she was.
You could not have planned this level of epic and symbolic failure if you tried.
On opening night, Trump told another truly Trumpian whopper, claiming the fair drew 45,000 people.
He also said everybody stayed until the end of his speech and “loved
hearing about a truly successful America,” even as photographs showed
dozens of attendees walking out while he was still talking.
Independent estimates placed opening night attendance at somewhere just north of 1,000, and days later, even the most frothy MAGA-loyal coverage from the scene couldn’t obscure the fact that crowds simply have not materialized.
When
critical coverage rolled in, Trump did what Trump does: He woke up at
6:27 a.m. (likely, earlier still; it’ll surely take some time to massage
those bruised sausage fingers into a state ready to rage-tweet) and
fired off a Truth Social meltdown.
“Do you think people appreciate what a fantastic job we did in building
and operating the Great American State Fair at the National Mall, packed with happy people, and everybody loving it?” he wrote, before questioning, in full caps, whether Obama or Biden could have pulled it off.
The answer, Donald, is that they probably could have kept the lights on.
Because,
you see, there has been dairy drama. On the fair’s first full operating
day, its food hall lost power. Must have been another hiccup? Vendors
stood in the dark. The entire ice cream supply melted.
Would this have been an issue with raw milk? Raw milk from Melania the
cow, perhaps? Well, it was MAHA day at the fair yesterday, so maybe RFK
found out.
Workers
were still waiting for a replacement shipment of the sweet treat the
following morning. This is not a minor logistical calamity since ice
cream, along with butter sculptures and dunk tanks, is at the heart of
state fairs nationwide. Has anyone signed up for the Natalie Harp butter sculpture contest? And has anyone confirmed what hours the Don Jr. dunk tank will be operating?
Donald Chump and Jeffrey Epstein were best buddies from the late 80s going forward. They were two of a kind. Which is why Ewan Palmer's reporting for THE DAILY BEAST isn't surprising:
A
woman who alleges she was sexually assaulted by Donald Trump when she
was 13 years old has gone into hiding over fears of retaliation.
A family member of the woman, identified only as Jane Doe 4, told The Guardian that she is “staying off the grid” and away from the Trump administration amid the fallout from allegations that resurfaced in the Jeffrey Epstein files.
Jane
Doe 4 alleges she was abused and trafficked by Epstein, and that the
disgraced financier took her to New York or New Jersey and introduced
her to Trump when she was about 13 years old in 1984. The White House
has described the allegations as “total baselessness,” a view it says is
supported by the fact that the Biden administration was aware of the
claims but did “nothing with them.”
A
federal judge has put the Justice Department on a deadline in the
latest fight over the Epstein files, ordering the agency to release
unredacted records tied to FBI interviews with a woman who accused
Donald Trump of sexually assaulting her when she was 13, or explain why
the documents should remain withheld.
U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan sided with investigative journalist Katie Phang, who sued acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and accused him of violating the Epstein Files Transparency Act by failing to publish all government-held documents related to Jeffrey Epstein and by improperly redacting released material.
The order gives the DOJ until July 2 to comply.
Sullivan’s
decision covers FBI notes from interviews with a South Carolina woman
who said Epstein introduced her to Trump in 1984, when she was about 13,
and that Trump forced her to perform a sexual act. Trump has denied the allegation, and the White House has denied the woman’s story.
The
woman’s claims surfaced in documents released as part of the DOJ’s
Epstein files disclosure, including redacted FBI interview summaries,
but dozens of pages related to the interviews have reportedly not yet
been released.
Lesley
Groff’s name appears more than 160,000 times in the Epstein files
released by the Justice Department. For comparison, most people who
crossed Epstein’s social orbit show up in tens of thousands of mentions,
if at all. Groff shows up everywhere because for 18 years, she was
everywhere. She booked the calls, scheduled the massages, and kept the
calendar of one of the most prolific sex offenders in modern American
history.
On June 9,
2026, that woman sat down for a transcribed interview behind closed
doors before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.
Jeffrey Epstein’s longtime assistant said she personally arranged
multiple phone calls between the disgraced financier and Donald Trump in
the years before he became president. According to a transcript
released by the House Oversight Committee,
Groff told lawmakers she set up phone calls between her boss and
President Donald Trump several times a year for at least a decade.
The
Epstein Trump secretary connection raised immediate questions on
Capitol Hill – and put a specific, calendar-level detail onto a
relationship the White House has consistently described as brief and
long-dead.
Groff, who worked for
Epstein in New York for more than 18 years, was previously described by
her boss as an “extension of my brain.” She appeared voluntarily for the
June 9 interview, which was not under oath and not recorded. It marked
the first time she faced questions since speaking to the FBI in New York
in 2021, two years after Epstein’s death.
I
first realized my participation in athletics as a trans girl was a
question when I was going into sixth grade, at 11 years old. I was
getting ready to sign up for my first season of track when my mom told
me a West Virginia bill could mean I wouldn’t be allowed to play. I’m
from a family of runners, but in junior high, my track coach encouraged
me to try shot put and discus. She brought me over to the practice area
and everybody was just super-friendly. It felt like a really nice
community.
It’s very hard to learn that some people think it’s
wrong for you to do the things you love. When the legislation passed, I
instantly wanted to know what I could do. I wanted to keep playing, so
it was a relief when we decided to take legal action. Now, I’ve been a
part of this case for five years, and there have been some definite lows
and highs. Ahead of my seventh-grade season, the initial injunction
that let me play was dissolved by a district court. At that time, track
was starting in two weeks. I was worried. I couldn’t miss tryouts, or I
wouldn’t be on the team. Luckily, an emergency appeal was granted. When I
found out, my mom and I hugged, and I gave my three dogs some love. We
celebrated with mint chocolate-chip ice cream and rainbow sprinkles. I
was ecstatic because I knew I could play with my friends again.
The
2024 Harrison County Middle School Championship was also a tough
moment. Some girls from another school protested my participation in the
event by scratching, or refusing to throw the shot put. It felt weird
to know that people I’ve never met, who are my age, are protesting me
when all I’m trying to do is have fun with my teammates — to be a kid
like them. It feels targeted, because it is. My teammates were what
helped me that day. They wanted to make sure it didn’t get to my head
and affect my throwing or affect me on a deeper level. Everybody is
really supportive; we want to see each other succeed. All the throwers
stay close. At practice, we share tips. On the bus, we’ll double up in
the seats. We’ll try to keep each other’s spirits up and beat the
nerves. We talk and talk to take our minds off of the competition.
Yesterday's ruling attacks her rights. And Tom Boggioni (RAW STORY notes
that (In)Justice Clarence Thomas howled one filthy attack on trans
people after another in his concurrence and that Thomas was being
(rightly) called out:
According to Balls & Strikes Editor in Chief Jay Willis, Thomas' comments are reprehensible.
The
legal analyst wrote on Bluesky, “Clarence Thomas's concurring opinion
in the trans sports ban case in West Virginia contains some of the
ugliest transphobic stuff I have ever seen in a legal opinion.
Straight-up gleeful. Vile man.”
“Thomas simply
couldn't join the opinion, this corrupt, misanthropic bigot had to throw
in his two cents and put his bigotry into the record,” New York Times
columnist Jamelle Bouie concurred.
He
elaborated, “… also this is a great example of how Clarence Thomas's
self-satisfaction cannot hide the fact that he is not that bright. ‘man
and woman,’ ‘boy and girl’ are social terms that categorize gender
presentation, not descriptions of ‘biological’ sex. nor are they binary!
this guy has spent the last 30 years of his life huffing his own farts
and being surrounded by people who tell him that his farts smell like
chanel #5 and it shows.”
The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld state bans on transgender girls and women competing in girls’ and women’s school sports, delivering a major victory to Republican-led
states and a devastating defeat to trans students who had asked the
justices to let them participate in public school life as themselves.
In
a 6-3 decision written by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the court ruled that
Idaho and West Virginia’s laws do not violate the Equal Protection
Clause or Title IX. The cases, Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B.P.J., centered on two transgender
students: Lindsay Hecox, who sought to run track and cross country at
Boise State University, and Becky Pepper-Jackson, a West Virginia girl
who wanted to compete on girls’ teams at school.
For years, conservative lawmakers have positioned transgender girls’
participation in sports as an emergency, even as the number of students
affected remains small. But the legal campaign was never only about who
gets to run a race or join a team. It was about whether transgender
people can be carved out of public life by category.
The majority rejected arguments that the laws discriminate against
transgender students, relying on the court’s recent decision in United States v. Skrmetti to
say the bans classify students by sex, not by gender identity or
transgender status. Writing for the majority, Kavanaugh said the court
would not require states or schools to make athlete-by-athlete
determinations about whether a transgender girl who has taken puberty
blockers or hormones has retained any athletic advantage.
“Particularly
in the sports context, determining the effects of the puberty blockers
and hormones taken by transgender athletes — and then comparing each of
those transgender athletes’ abilities to those of other individual
biological males and individual biological females in the relevant sport
— would be an almost impossible task for a judge to perform on an
equitable basis,” Kavanaugh wrote.
Let's
note the sexism that's been involved in this issue from day one.
"Protect girls and women!" From? Males? No. That's not it at all.
Read the decisions from the Court which reflect the narrow and perverse
stance of transphobes. A trans girl born male is the transgressor. And
that's because society disowns and attacks males who do not live up to
the notion of manly. There's no concern about protecting those born
girls who are trans boys. No where in the ruling am I seeing anything
about that. 'It's unfair!' I hear that from transphobes -- unfair for
girls to compete against trans girls. But no where in the verdicts did I
see anything about trans boys -- born female -- being not allowed to
compete on boys teams.
Let's wind down with this from Senator Patty Murray's office:
As part of Trump Admin’s push to
shut down the Department of Education, Trump is illegally kicking out
special education programs, civil rights enforcement from Department
Washington, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senators Patty Murray
(D-WA), Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee; Tammy
Baldwin (D-WI), Ranking Member of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee
on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Appropriations; and
Bernie Sanders, Ranking Member on the Senate Health, Education, Labor
and Pensions Committee, led the entire Senate Democratic Caucus in demanding
the Trump administration put students first, follow the law, and
immediately reverse course on transferring special education programs
and civil rights enforcement out of the Department of Education (ED).
These latest moves are part of the Trump administration’s explicit
effort to dismantle ED, threatening key funding, support and services
for students, schools, and families nationwide.
“The administration’s latest attempts to dismantle the
Department of Education through the four Interagency Agreements (IAA)
announced June 16, 2026 are outrageous and put the educational outcomes
of students and their rights in the classroom at risk,” wrote the senators in a letter to Education Secretary McMahon.
On June 16, 2026, the Trump administration announced four Interagency
Agreements (IAA) that would illegally move the administration of
special education programs under the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (IDEA), and vocational rehabilitation programs authorized
under the Rehabilitation Act from the ED to the Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS). They also transfer fundamental civil rights
enforcement responsibility away from ED to the Department of Justice
(DOJ). In their letter to ED Secretary Linda McMahon, Senators Murray,
Baldwin, and Sanders demand that the Trump administration follow the law
in which Congress authorized these programs to be carried out by ED,
including most recently in annual bipartisan funding legislation for
Fiscal Year 2026.
Despite announcing this illegal transfer of programs, this
Administration has refused to provide information regarding what office
within HHS will carry out special education programs, leaving teachers,
students, and families with even greater uncertainty about where to turn
to ensure their rights are protected. Burying special education
programs in a sprawling HHS with significant other responsibilities,
instead of at a Department of Education a fraction of the size solely
focused on education, will jeopardize outcomes for students with
disabilities.
The most recent reauthorization of IDEA passed by Congress reiterates
that the responsibility for administering the law is clearly vested
with ED, along with various duties vested in the Secretary of Education,
including allotting funds to States and carrying out oversight among
other activities. However, the law does not contain any provisions that
would permit ED to offload its responsibilities for special education or
vocational rehabilitation programs to another agency.
“Special education and vocational rehabilitation are
education programs. Any attempt to move these programs to HHS would
fundamentally alter the purposes of these services, upending fifty years
of work that took place at the federal, state, and local level to
improve educational and employment outcomes for people with
disabilities,” wrote the senators. “It appears the
administration values its backward goal of dismantling ED over the
faithful execution of the law and improving opportunities and outcomes
for children, youth, and students with disabilities.”
These transfers come as the administration has successfully worked to
undermine core functions and statutory responsibilities of ED,
following sweeping and unlawful firings, workforce reductions, and
reorganization last year that have already undermined the very goals of
the Education Department. At the same time, ED moved almost all programs
supporting elementary and secondary education to multiple agencies with
limited capacity and expertise administering similar programs. Wasting
time and resources to scatter education programs all over the federal
government does nothing to help children and families while only making
it more complicated for states and school districts to administer
important federal funding. Further, isolating special education programs
away from all other federal K-12 programs risks isolating students with
disabilities themselves.
Meanwhile, the transfer of the Office of Civil Rights (OCR) out of ED
also comes as the Trump Administration has failed to uphold the federal
government’s obligations to protect students from unlawful
discrimination. In 2025, ED’s OCR reached the fewest resolution
agreements in over 12 years and failed to reach a single resolution
agreement related to sexual harassment, sexual violence, racial
harassment, discriminatory school discipline, or the seclusion and
restraint of children with disabilities, with over 12,000 pending cases
that were under investigation by OCR at the start of this
Administration.
Despite this backlog, the administration is attempting to illegally
transfer OCR’s functions to the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights
Division (CRT), which has lost an estimated 75% of its civil rights
staff attorneys since January 2025, making it wholly unequipped to
handle the over 23,000 complaints OCR receives and evaluates annually.
The Senators also raised concerns that while OCR is currently required
to evaluate every single complaint it receives, DOJ CRT can pick and
choose the cases it takes to court. Under this IAA, students whose
complaints are not prioritized by DOJ CRT may never see their rights
vindicated.
The senators reiterated that Congress appropriates annual funding to
ED to help States and local educational agencies carry out programs and
ensure children, youth, students, and families are served in accordance
with federal law. The annual bipartisan appropriation bills approved by
Congress do not provide affirmative authority to ED to transfer special
education funding or vocational rehabilitation services to HHS, nor ED’s
civil rights enforcement responsibilities to DOJ CRT.
“We have a simple demand: follow our nation’s education and
appropriations laws as Congress wrote them to protect students’ most
basic right to a quality education. More than 80 education, disability,
parent, and civil rights groups have vocally opposed the recent IAAs and
other departmental changes. We call on this administration to
immediately cease implementing these IAAs, fully implement IDEA and the
Rehabilitation Act as Congressionally directed, and take immediate
action to strengthen civil rights enforcement—instead of burying
students’ cases behind more bureaucracy. Our students and their families
deserve nothing less,” concluded the senators.
This letter was led by Senators Murray, Baldwin, and Sanders and
co-signed by Senators Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD),
Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Kirsten Gillibrand
(D-NY), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Jack Reed (D-RI), Angus King (I-ME), Tim
Kaine (D-VA), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Chris Coons (D-DE), John Hickenlooper
(D-CO), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Adam Schiff (D-CA),
Ed Markey (D-MA), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Andy Kim
(D-NJ), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Ben Ray Luján (D-NM), Mark Warner
(D-VA), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Peter Welch (D-VT), Angela Alsobrooks
(D-MD), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Cory Booker (D-NJ),
Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Raphael Warnock (D-GA), Martin Heinrich
(D-NM), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Jon
Ossoff (D-GA), Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), Tina Smith (D-MN), Maria Cantwell
(D-WA), Mark Kelly (D-AZ), Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), Sheldon Whitehouse
(D-RI), John Fetterman (D-PA), Gary Peters (D-MI), and Michael Bennet
(D-CO).
The administration’s latest attempts to dismantle the Department of
Education (“ED”) through the four Interagency Agreements (IAA) announced
June 16, 2026 are outrageous and put the educational outcomes of
students and their rights in the classroom at risk. These actions
illegally move the administration of special education programs
authorized under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA),
vocational rehabilitation programs authorized under the Rehabilitation
Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), and the Workforce Innovation and
Opportunity Act (WIOA) from ED to the Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS). They also transfer fundamental civil rights enforcement
responsibility away from ED’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) to the
Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division (DOJ CRT). Congress
authorized these programs to be carried out by ED, and Congress annually
appropriates funding to ED to carry out these authorized programs,
including most recently in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026.
The administration’s actions fly in the face of what Congress has
required, directly undermine every child’s right to a quality public
education in this country, and must be immediately reversed.
Since ED was established, Congress charged it with the responsibility
of carrying out special education and vocational rehabilitation
programs and authorized the administration of these programs under the
Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS).
Similarly, Congress assigned civil rights enforcement responsibilities
to the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights at OCR. The Department of
Education Organization Act of 1979 explicitly prohibits the Secretary
from abolishing any offices established under ED and from altering any
assigned delegation of functions. You have also acknowledged in
congressional testimony that only Congress can determine whether to
dismantle ED and its programs. Make no mistake – the IAAs rolled out by
this administration dismantle ED and illegally circumvent Congress.
While ED’s purported position is that these are “proofs of concept” for
Congress to codify, other statements from ED and White House staff
contradict the alleged “temporary” nature of these moves. Last year, the
White House even claimed that ED was “abolished.” ED has not been
abolished, and it is not within the administration’s authority to move
the administration of these programs to any other agency. In fact,
Congress affirmed on a bipartisan, bicameral basis earlier this year,
“that no authorities exist for the Department of Education to transfer
its fundamental responsibilities under numerous authorizing and
appropriations laws, including through procuring services from other
Federal agencies…” and that these agreements will “create
inefficiencies, result in additional costs to the American taxpayer, and
cause delays and administration challenges in Federal funding reaching
States, school districts, and schools.”
Special education and vocational rehabilitation are education
programs. Any attempt to move these programs to HHS would fundamentally
alter the purposes of these services, upending fifty years of work that
took place at the federal, state, and local level to improve educational
and employment outcomes for people with disabilities. It appears the
administration values its backward goal of dismantling ED over the
faithful execution of the law and improving opportunities and outcomes
for children, youth, and students with disabilities. This administration
has refused to provide information regarding what office within HHS
will carry out these weighty responsibilities under this agreement
because it has not been determined. This lack of forethought
demonstrates how little concern it has for students with disabilities
and their learning. The administration couldn’t possibly know that this
will be in the best interest of children and families because it doesn’t
even know where and how these programs will be administered in the
future.
The most recent reauthorization of IDEA passed by Congress, the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004,
reiterates that the responsibility for administering the law is clearly
vested with ED. The law also vests the Secretary of Education with
various duties, including allotting funds to States; carrying out
monitoring and oversight of States’ implementation; reviewing and
approving State performance plans required under the law; subsequently
reviewing and making annual determinations of State compliance under
law; and furnishing technical assistance to States; among other
activities. However, the law does not contain any provisions that would
permit ED to offload its responsibilities to another agency.
Congress created a clear federal oversight role for ED because of our
nation’s ugly history of denying children with disabilities a free
appropriate public education. This critical federal enforcement has
allowed ED to maintain accountability and find States in violation of
IDEA, such as when Texas set an illegal cap on special education
identification leading to a deliberate under-identification of children
with disabilities and when New Mexico failed to maintain appropriate
state special education funding. Clearly, federal oversight is a
necessary component of our nation’s special education system. Without
it, families and children with disabilities are left to fight alone to
secure services they are entitled to when schools and states fail to
meet their obligations.
Additionally, Congress authorized the Secretary of Education to carry
out vocational rehabilitation programs in Titles I, III, V, and VI of
the Rehabilitation Act. Congress directed the Secretary to undertake
various responsibilities in administering the vocational rehabilitation
programs, including awarding grants to designated State agencies;
approving unified State plans; establishing performance standards and
indicators required under the law; and supporting designated State
agencies in the provision of preemployment transition services including
highlighting best state practices and consulting with other federal
agencies; among other activities. Unsurprisingly, the Rehabilitation Act
does not contain any provisions that would permit ED to offload its
responsibilities to another agency.
These important responsibilities support nearly ten million
individuals with disabilities and their families throughout our nation.
ED’s actions have already caused them significant harm and uncertainty.
This arrangement is the latest callous attack on Americans with
disabilities who need quality services and rely on federal support. It
follows the sweeping and unlawful firing of 121 employees at OSERS
during the government shutdown—an action Congress ultimately had to
reverse. This administration’s workforce reductions and reorganization
last year also eviscerated ED’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR), costing
taxpayers up to $38 million, as mounting backlogs in OCR’s critical work
left parents of students with disabilities in the dark about the status
of their civil rights complaints. At the same time, ED moved almost all
programs supporting elementary and secondary education to multiple
agencies with limited capacity and expertise administering similar
programs, segregating these programs from those supporting our youth
with disabilities and compromising decades of progress toward inclusive
education. Each of these actions has undermined ED’s ability to fulfill
its obligations under IDEA and the Rehabilitation Act. ED is now
illegally transferring responsibilities to HHS—an agency undergoing
major disruptions and whose principal subagency charged with supporting
individuals with disabilities was proposed for elimination by the
administration—and DOJ—an agency that this administration is weaponizing
against the American people. This is in addition to the
responsibilities unlawfully assigned to other agencies through
interagency agreements for which this administration still has not
explained full costs, potential benefits, and operational details.
Under this administration, OCR has failed to uphold the federal
government’s obligations to protect students from unlawful
discrimination. ED’s decision to transfer fundamental civil rights
enforcement responsibilities to DOJ CRT will only make things worse. In
2025, ED’s OCR reached the fewest resolution agreements in over 12 years
and failed to reach a single resolution agreement related to sexual
harassment, sexual violence, racial harassment, discriminatory school
discipline, or the seclusion and restraint of children with
disabilities. ED has repeatedly refused to answer basic questions
regarding the status of over 12,000 pending cases that were under
investigation by OCR at the start of this Administration.
Instead of correcting OCR’s disastrous track record under this
administration and working to rebuild OCR after taking a hatchet to it,
this administration has chosen to waste taxpayer funds attempting to
illegally transfer OCR’s functions to DOJ CRT. Under this
administration, DOJ CRT has lost an estimated 75% of its civil rights
staff attorneys since January 2025. DOJ CRT is not equipped nor designed
to handle the over 23,000 complaints OCR receives and evaluates
annually. While OCR is required to evaluate every single complaint it
receives, DOJ CRT uses prosecutorial discretion to pick and choose the
cases it takes to court. Under this IAA, students whose complaints are
not prioritized by DOJ CRT may never see their rights vindicated,
meaning thousands of students facing discrimination are likely to be
ignored by the federal government. This is an unacceptable outcome for
the millions of students and families across the country.
Congress appropriates annual funding to ED to help States and local
educational agencies carry out programs and ensure children, youth,
students, and families are served in accordance with federal law. The
annual bipartisan appropriation bills approved by Congress do not
provide affirmative authority to ED to transfer special education
funding or vocational rehabilitation services to HHS, nor ED’s civil
rights enforcement responsibilities to DOJ CRT. In fact, the only
transfer authority provided to ED by the annual appropriations bill is
the authority to transfer one percent of discretionary funds between
education appropriations accounts, so long as no such appropriation is
increased by more than three percent by any such transfer. Such a
limited transfer within ED is not what is contemplated here. Moreover,
transfers of any other type, including the type contemplated by this
IAA, are prohibited by section 512 of Division B of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2026, which states, “None of the funds made
available in this Act may be transferred to any department, agency, or
instrumentality of the United States Government, except pursuant to a
transfer made by, or transfer authority provided in, this Act or any
other appropriation Act.”
As with the authorizing statutes, the annual appropriations process
clearly requires ED to carry out both IDEA and Rehabilitation Act
programs and to operate OCR at ED. ED has the expertise in working with
state educational agencies, state vocational rehabilitation agencies,
and local school districts in the administration of special education
and vocational rehabilitation programs and for resources and oversight
in complying with federal civil rights laws. Schools in local
communities and state educational agencies rely on the guidance and
technical expertise from the educational experts at ED to carry out
these programs. Congress recognizes the expertise that specific agencies
provide and deliberately decides which agency to vest authority with
when passing laws. Congress was clear when it vested ED with the
authority to carry out special education programs in 2004, and
vocational rehabilitation programs in 2014, and did not provide any
mechanism in the law for ED to transfer that authority to another
agency. The June 16th IAAs fly in the face of laws enacted by Congress,
annual appropriations requirements, and practice in states.
We have a simple demand: follow our nation’s education and
appropriations laws as Congress wrote them to protect students’ most
basic right to a quality education. More than 80 education, disability,
parent, and civil rights groups have vocally opposed the recent IAAs and
other departmental changes. We call on this administration to
immediately cease implementing these IAAs, fully implement IDEA and the
Rehabilitation Act as Congressionally directed, and take immediate
action to strengthen civil rights enforcement—instead of burying
students’ cases behind more bureaucracy. Our students and their families
deserve nothing less.
