Tag Archives: President Donald Trump

MSNBC: Pam [Bimbo #3] Bondi’s cynical, misleading attack on Judge Boasberg

Posted on by
Reply

Another crack in the foundation of American democracy.

Earlier this week, the Justice Department escalated its fight with the judiciary by filing an ethics complaint against Judge James Boasberg, the chief U.S. district judge in Washington, D.C. Boasberg is overseeing the case challenging the Trump administration’s deportation of alleged Venezuelan gang members to a Salvadoran prison without due process. The new complaint, signed by Attorney General Pam [Bimbo #3] Bondi’s chief of staff, accuses Boasberg of making improper comments about President Donald Trump.

Only those wearing MAGA-tinted glasses could fail to see this complaint for what it is: another brazen attack on the rule of law and the constitutional separation of powers, and another crack in the foundation of American democracy.

The controversy began March 15, when five Venezuelans sued Trump and other administration officials to block their imminent deportation under a 2025 presidential proclamation invoking the Alien Enemies Act. That 1798 law allows the removal of foreign citizens when there is a “declared war … or any invasion or predatory incursion” by a foreign nation against the United States. The plaintiffs were among hundreds being deported to a country other than their homeland. They were not given an opportunity to challenge the legality of their deportation, or even to contest the government’s allegations that they were gang members. Comparing the situation to a Kafka-esque nightmare, Boasberg ordered the administration to stop the deportations.

In April, the case went to the Supreme Court, which ruled for the administration on a legal technicality regarding the proper mechanism and jurisdiction for the suit. At the same time, the court unanimously affirmed that those facing deportation must be allowed to bring a legal challenge before removal. The case was sent back to Boasberg and remains ongoing.

Shortly after the Supreme Court’s ruling, Boasberg also found that the government had likely committed criminal contempt of court by willfully disobeying his order to stop deportations. He offered the government a chance to correct its contempt before referring the case for prosecution, but in April a three-judge panel from the D.C. appellate court paused the contempt proceedings without addressing the merits. Curiously, the pause has lasted for months, leaving the contempt action in limbo.

Then came Monday. The Justice Department formally accused Boasberg of committing misconduct during a national judicial conference held March 11 — before the deportation case began. The complaint alleges Boasberg “attempted to improperly influence Chief Justice [John] Roberts and roughly two dozen other federal judges” by expressing “his belief that the Trump Administration would ‘disregard rulings of federal courts’ and trigger ‘a constitutional crisis.’” In the AEA case, then, Boasberg “began acting on his preconceived belief that the Trump Administration would not follow court orders.” The DOJ argues that Boasberg’s “words and deeds” harmed “public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.”

To begin with, the DOJ’s complaint is misleading: The memo it cites, summarizing the conference, says Boasberg “raised his colleagues’ concerns,” not his own. But no matter who raised the concerns, they would be right on the mark. Trump’s record of contempt for the judiciary is well established. Throughout his first term, he repeatedly criticized judges who ruled against the administration. While out of office, Trump repeatedly leveled personal attacks against not only the judges presiding over his criminal and civil cases, but even court staff and their family members. And Trump specifically called for Boasberg’s impeachment in March after the judge ordered a temporary pause in deportations.

Although Trump has publicly said that he would follow court orders, his administration’s track record on respecting judicial authority suggests otherwise. For example, in early July, the Justice Department filed an unprecedented lawsuit against the entire bench of federal judges in Maryland, challenging an administrative order issued by their chief judge regarding deportation cases. Disturbingly, there is also evidence that Emil Bove, whom the Senate confirmed Tuesday to an appellate judgeship, told DOJ prosecutors that, if necessary, they should ignore court orders that stop deportations.

Given this track record, for the Trump administration to accuse Boasberg of undermining public confidence in the judiciary is the pinnacle of hypocrisy. In truth, the complaint against Boasberg is an obvious stunt. The administration is following the old legal adage: When the facts and the law are against you, “pound the table and yell like hell.”

No matter where this complaint goes from here, it is likely to have a chilling effect on judicial independence. Judges routinely discuss their constitutional approach or emerging legal trends in public, including during Senate confirmation hearings. This complaint puts a target on the backs of judges who speak out against executive overreach or comment on other broad legal issues that could be perceived as contrary to administration policy.

It will threaten judicial independence, undermine judicial legitimacy, and ultimately show that, for this administration, legal authority depends on political loyalty rather than adherence to the rule of law.

The justices of the Supreme Court appear to at least understand this in principle. Speaking at a judicial ceremony in May, Chief Justice John Roberts emphasized judicial independence is “crucial” to “check the excesses of the Congress or the executive.” Against the backdrop of Trump’s attacks on the federal judiciary, Roberts reiterated the familiar simile that judges are like umpires, responsible for calling balls and strikes fairly and impartially.

It’s less clear whether Roberts and his colleagues are prepared to fight for that ideal. After all, when a manager’s antics — like kicking dirt at the umpire’s feet or screaming in his face — begin to undermine the integrity of the game itself, eventually even the most restrained umpire must be prepared to eject him. Without that implicit threat, the game will collapse under the bullying of any manager who is unwilling to follow the rules everyone else plays by.

No one should tolerate that: not in a sporting event and certainly not in an arena when our nation and democracy are at stake.

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/justice-department-pam-bondi-judge-boasberg-rcna222067

Newsweek: Trump admin warns DACA recipients to self-deport

Posted on by
Reply

The Trump administration advised Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients to self-deport and warned that they are “not automatically protected from deportation.”

Tricia McLaughlin, assistant secretary of Homeland Security, told Newsweek the warning is “not new or news.”

“Illegal aliens who claim to be recipients of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals [DACA] are not automatically protected from deportations,” she said. “DACA does not confer any form of legal status in this country. Any illegal alien who is a DACA recipient may be subject to arrest and deportation for a number of reasons, including if they’ve committed a crime.”

Diana Crofts-Pelayo, a spokesperson for California Governor Gavin Newsom, whose state contains the highest number of DACA recipients, told Newsweek the move “highlights the Trump administration’s hypocrisy” and shows that “they do not want to detain and deport the worst of the worst.”

“Their chaos campaign is all about detaining and deporting as many people as possible without a regard to people’s legal rights, including intercepting Americans, Dreamers, kids, people with legal protections and those following immigration rules and even U.S.-born citizens into their indiscriminate dragnet.,” she said. “It’s dangerous precedent when deportations matter more than basic rights or a functional U.S. immigration system.”

Why It Matters

President Donald Trump pledged to undertake the largest mass deportation effort in U.S. history on the campaign trail and quickly moved to increase immigration enforcement upon his return to the White House. However, he has offered mixed signals on DACA.

Although Trump sought to end DACA during his first term, he told NBC News’ Meet the Press last December that he wanted to find a way to allow DACA recipients to stay in the United States.

Former President Barack Obama introduced the DACA program in 2012. It offered protections and work authorization for undocumented immigrants who arrived in the U.S. as children. But its legal status has remained in limbo for years, and the latest comments from the administration reflect the challenges faced by DACA recipients, commonly referred to as “Dreamers.”

What To Know

McLaughlin first warned that DACA recipients should self-deport in a statement provided to NPR earlier this week.

She told Newsweek on Thursday that undocumented migrants can “take control of their departure with the CBP Home App.”

“The United States is offering illegal aliens $1,000 and a free flight to self-deport now,” she said. “We encourage every person here illegally to take advantage of this offer and reserve the chance to come back to the U.S. the right legal way to live American dream.”

The administration has not outright ended DACA, but the statement reflects a shift in policy toward these migrants from President Joe Biden‘s administration, which was more supportive of protections for Dreamers.

Reports have emerged of DACA recipients being detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents.

Erick Hernandez Rodriguez, 34, is among the DACA recipients facing deportation. DHS said he was arrested for allegedly trying to illegally cross the southern border after allegedly self-deporting. His attorney, Valerie Sigamani, said he did not self-deport and made a wrong turn while completing a ride-share trip in San Ysidro, just north of the U.S.-Mexico border.

He has been in the U.S. for 20 years. His wife, Nancy Rivera, is a U.S. citizen, and the couple has a daughter together and is expecting a son. He had begun the process for permanent legal resident status.

DACA recipients are required to receive advance parole before leaving the U.S. to avoid loss of protection and deportation risk. There are more than 500,000 DACA recipients living in the U.S., according to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).

What People Are Saying

President Donald Trump told Meet the Press in December: “The Democrats have made it very, very difficult to do anything. Republicans are very open to the dreamers. The dreamers, we’re talking many years ago, they were brought into this country. Many years ago. Some of them are no longer young people. And in many cases, they’ve become successful. They have great jobs. In some cases, they have small businesses. Some cases they might have large businesses. And we’re going to have to do something with them.”

Anabel Mendoza, communications director for United We Dream, told NPR: “We’ve known that DACA remains a program that has been temporary. We’ve sounded the alarms over that. What we are seeing now is that DACA is being chipped away at.”

What Happens Next

DACA’s future remains in limbo, with legal challenges ongoing in federal courts and the administration continuing to enforce strict immigration statutes.

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-admin-daca-recipients-self-deport-2106991

Raw Story: Trump may have accidentally ‘admitted knowledge of a grotesque crime’: legal expert

Posted on by
Reply

A legal expert was taken aback Thursday night after watching President Donald Trump admit he knew of a “grotesque crime” when he talked about his falling out with Jeffrey Epstein.

Ryan Goodman, founding co-editor-in-chief of the legal and policy website Just Security, joined Erin Burnett on CNN’s “OutFront” to weigh in on Trump’s shocking remarks regarding his relationship with Epstein, who died in prison while awaiting trial on sex trafficking allegations.

Burnett noted the White House has offered multiple explanations about the falling out, including over a real estate deal. Trump, however, has instead said their friendship blew up because Epstein hired his spa workers — a claim that, she said, “doesn’t add up, because the hiring-away was two years before Trump was continuing to say wonderful things about Epstein—and seven years before he kicked him out of the club.

“Now they’re saying, and Trump has used this word before, that Epstein was a ‘creep,’ and that the White House says, quote, ‘Trump kicked Jeffrey Epstein out of his club for being a creep to his female employees.’ I mean, does any of this add up legally?

Goodman was floored by the remarks.

“So I think they’ve gotten themselves in more trouble by these references, that the reason for it was that he was a creep or that he was a creep to the —

“It’s hard to say he’s a creep if you said you didn’t know what he was doing,” Burnett interjected.

“Exactly,” replied Goodman. “So if he kicked him out because of sexual predation toward the employees, then it means he had knowledge.”

Goodman said Trump’s timeline “doesn’t make sense.” A Trump Organization attorney has said Epstein was booted from Mar-a-Lago in 2007 due to an arrest a year earlier in Florida. Now, the White House is claiming he took that action over what he knew.

“A year after the arrest for pedophilia. Seven years after Virginia Giuffre is hired—is stolen—seven years after that?” asked Burnett.

“Seven years after that. So it’s not a good look for them, at the least. And that’s about, in some sense, moral culpability, not legal culpability. There would have to be more for that. But it does seem as though he’s admitting to knowledge of a grotesque crime against minors. That’s the problem.”

When Burnett asked whether any recourse is possible for Trump over what he knew at the time, Goodman poured cold water on the idea.

“If it’s just knowledge, there’s only one situation in which there would actually be legal obligations. And that’s if somebody is a mandatory reporter. But to be a mandatory reporter, they’d have to be like a schoolteacher or a medical doctor,” he said.

“Not a rich friend?” Burnett clarified.

“No, not just a friend or anything like that. And that would also be under state law. And there would probably also be a statute of limitations problem for that particular offense. But otherwise, that would chalk up to moral culpability.”

Trump may have accidentally ‘admitted knowledge of a grotesque crime’: legal expert

https://www.rawstory.com/trump-epstein-2673797390

Bradenton Herald: Trump Suffers Legal Blow — Judge Sides with Blue State

Posted on by
Reply

District Judge Lindsay Jenkins has dismissed a lawsuit from the Trump administration regarding sanctuary policies in Illinois and Chicago, affirming that local governments have retained the right to refuse cooperation with federal immigration enforcement under the Tenth Amendment. The ruling marks a major setback for the administration’s efforts to challenge state and city-level protections for undocumented immigrants. It upholds laws such as Chicago’s Welcoming City Ordinance, reinforcing local authority in guiding immigration-related policies.

The Trump administration had sued sanctuary cities in California and New York. The Department of Justice (DOJ) targeted laws such as Illinois’ Way Forward Act and Chicago’s Welcoming City Ordinance.

The court rejected DOJ claims that state laws violated federal authority and dismissed Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker from the case. Meanwhile, some local governments like Louisville have expressed a willingness to work with federal agencies.

Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson and Pritzker praised the ruling, claiming it upholds local laws that protect public safety and resist harmful immigration policies.

Pritzker wrote, “Illinois just beat the Trump Administration in federal court.”

Johnson stated, “This ruling affirms what we have long known: that Chicago’s Welcoming City Ordinance is lawful and supports public safety. The City cannot be compelled to cooperate with the Trump Administration’s reckless and inhumane immigration agenda.”

Trump Suffers Legal Blow — Judge Sides with Blue State

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-suffers-legal-blow-judge-sides-with-blue-state/ss-AA1JFoTb

Newsweek: Kids of Afghan translator taken at green-card check living in fear—brother

Posted on by
Reply

The children of an Afghan man who served with U.S. troops and entered the U.S legally are terrified to play outside after their father was detained at a green-card appointment, the man’s brother said.

Zia S., a 35-year-old father of five and former interpreter for the U.S. military, was apprehended by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents outside a United States Citizenship and Immigration Services office in East Hartford, Connecticut, on July 16, his lawyer told reporters on a press call.

The brothers requested that their names be withheld over safety concerns.

“His kids don’t even go out to play because they’re scared. And I didn’t even go out to work because I’m watching his kids,” Zia’s brother, who also served as interpreter, told Newsweek in an exclusive interview on July 30.

Why It Matters

Following the end of the U.S. military’s 20-year presence in Afghanistan in 2021, many Afghans who had assisted American forces were allowed entry into the United States through refugee programs, Special Immigrant Visas (SIVs) or Temporary Protected Status (TPS). However, policy changes under the Trump administration resulted in the termination of TPS for some people, raising concerns about potential deportations.

The U.S. ended TPS for Afghans effective July 14, 2025, according to a Department of Homeland Security notice published in May. President Donald Trump has vowed to remove millions of migrants without legal status. The White House said in January that anyone living in the country unlawfully is considered to be a “criminal.”

What To Know

Zia arrived in the U.S. on humanitarian parole in October 2024 and had been living in Connecticut, his lawyer told reporters during a press call.

He assisted U.S. troops in Afghanistan for about five years and fled the country with his family in 2021. Although they had received Special Immigrant Visa approvals and were pursuing permanent residency, Zia was placed in expedited removal proceedings.

A federal judge has issued a temporary stay on his deportation. After his initial detention in Connecticut, Zia was transferred to an immigration detention center in Plymouth, Massachusetts.

A senior Department of Homeland Security official told Newsweek on July 23 that the Zia “is currently under investigation for a serious criminal allegation.” Newsweek has requested more details from DHS surrounding the alleged wrongdoing.

Zia’s brother denied that he was involved in any criminality and said the allegations are “baseless.”

Both brothers served the U.S. military as interpreters. Zia’s brother came to the U.S. more than a decade ago through the same SIV program and eventually obtained U.S. citizenship, he said.

The detention has taken a toll on his wife, Zia’s brother said.

“His wife is suffering anxiety since he’s been detained,” he said. “And nobody sleeps. The family is awake all night.”

In a message to Trump, Zia’s brother said the family followed all legal procedures and expected the U.S. to honor commitments to its Afghan allies.

“We were promised wartime allies,” he said. “For our job, like when we have served with the U.S. and we helped the U.S. Army and our home country, and we were promised that you all would be going to the U.S. on legal pathways.

“They should stand on their promise. They should not betray us. They should not betray those who put their lives at risk and their families’ lives at risk for them.”

What People Are Saying

Senator Chris Murphy, a Connecticut Democrat, previously told Newsweek: “The Trump administration’s decision to turn its back on our Afghan allies who risked their lives and the lives of their families to support American troops in Afghanistan is unconscionable.”

A senior DHS Official told Newsweek: Zia is “a national of Afghanistan, entered the U.S. on October 8, 2024, and paroled by the Biden administration into our country.”

Zia’s attorney, Lauren Cundick Petersen, told reporters on a press call on July 22: “Following the rules are supposed to protect you. It’s not supposed to land you in detention. If he is deported, as so many of the people have articulated today, he faces death.”

What Happens Next

Zia is being held in a Massachusetts detention center and will remain in ICE custody, pending further investigation by DHS.

Kids of Afghan translator taken at green-card check living in fear—brother
“His kids don’t even go out to play because they’re scared,” the man’s brother told Newsweek.

https://www.newsweek.com/afghan-translator-ice-immigration-green-card-2107104

MSNBC: Maddow Blog | Trump prefers to play make-believe amid discouraging news on inflation

Posted on by
Reply

As inflation inches higher and consumer prices climb, the president is resorting to a familiar tactic: He’s making stuff up.

For Americans concerned about inflation and consumer costs, recent developments have been discouraging. Two weeks ago, for example, the public learned that the Consumer Price Index climbed unexpectedly in June, amid signs that Donald Trump’s trade tariffs were pushing prices higher.

This week, the disappointing news continued as the Commerce Department reported the Personal Consumption Expenditures price index — a metric that’s closely watched by the Federal Reserve for evidence of inflation — is also climbing, and as The New York Times reported, the data represented “the latest sign that President Trump’s tariffs are starting to bleed through into consumer prices.”

Then Trump sat down with New York Post columnist Miranda Devine and made a rather specific claim, not only about the key economic issue, but about his perceived successes.

“You know, if you think, inflation, I’ve already taken care of,” the president claimed. “Prices are way down for everything — groceries, everything.”

Certainly this is the official White House line, with a variety of administration officials pushing nearly identical rhetoric.

But reality won’t budge. As the Trump administration’s own data shows, grocery costs have gone up since the president returned to the Oval Office, not down.

A couple of weeks ago at a White House event for a Republican audience, Trump said Democrats “lie” when they say the prices of food and groceries have gone up, but as a CNN report noted soon after, “Nonsense. It’s correct, not a lie, to say overall prices, grocery prices and food prices in general are up during this presidency.”

This was one of the critical issues of the 2024 race, and the Republican president is clearly failing — both to deliver the results he promised and to tell the truth about reality.

Throughout last year, then-candidate Trump was repeatedly asked about his plan to lower consumer prices. Common sense suggested he would’ve prepared at least some kind of coherent answer, but that never happened. He simply said it would all work out wonderfully once he returned to power.

As prices climb, the president could acknowledge the facts and perhaps even accept some responsibility, but he prefers to play make-believe.

Trump prefers to play make-believe amid discouraging news on inflation
As inflation inches higher and consumer prices climb, the president is resorting to a familiar tactic: He’s making stuff up.

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/trump-prefers-play-make-believe-discouraging-news-inflation-rcna222243

Law & Crime: Trump doubles down on claim he has ‘absolute immunity’ from Central Park 5 defamation lawsuit

Posted on by
Reply

President Donald Trump is doubling down on his claim that he has “absolute immunity” from a defamation lawsuit filed against him by members of the exonerated Central Park Five over false statements he made about them during a televised debate with then-Vice President Kamala Harris.

In an 11-page reply filed Wednesday, the president asserted he is entitled to an automatic stay in the case as an appellate court decides whether he is protected from litigation under Pennsylvania law. The filing argues that the state’s Uniform Public Expression Protection Act (UPEPA) — an anti-SLAPP law aimed at preventing defendants from being intimidated or silenced by the threat of expensive lawsuits — applies to the lawsuit and immunizes him against the plaintiffs’ claims.

Trump is appealing an earlier ruling by U.S. District Judge Wendy Beetlestone in which she refused to dismiss the defamation suit, holding that the Central Park Five’s claims were not barred by UPEPA, which is Pennsylvania’s version of an anti-SLAPP law.

“In enacting the [UPEPA], the Pennsylvania General Assembly explicitly recognized the severe chilling effect that lawsuits which target public participation have on constitutionally protected speech. To combat these abuses of the judicial process, the legislature provided defendants with substantive immunity from suit to spare them the burdens and expenses associated with meritless litigation,” Wednesday’s filing states. “Because the record demonstrates UPEPA immunity was intended to protect defendants from the burdens of litigation, and President Trump’s appeal presents a non-frivolous question, this Court should order an immediate stay.”

Beetlestone last month ruled that UPEPA does not apply in federal court. In his appeal, Trump asserted that the law must be applied in federal court, thereby making him immune from the plaintiffs’ suit. The appeal further argued that because Trump is allegedly entitled to immunity, it is “mandatory” that the court grant his request for a stay pending appeal.

Attorneys for the Central Park Five pushed back on Trump’s claim that a stay in the case is mandatory, claiming the president “does not cite any relevant case for this proposition” and is conflating absolute immunity — being immune from litigation — with being statutorily immune from liability.

For example, a sitting president would be immune from litigation if a lawsuit were based on any official acts taken within the scope of presidential duties, regardless of the merits. On the other hand, immunity based on anti-SLAPP statutes typically requires courts to address the merits of the plaintiff’s claims.

Trump on Wednesday argued that plaintiffs’ position “fundamentally misconstrues the statute,” claiming UPEPA “grants defendants an immediate entitlement to avoid the litigation process itself, which cannot be vindicated once Defendant is subjected to the burdens of litigation.”

“UPEPA immunity is, therefore, like that afforded to defendants under the doctrines of absolute and qualified immunity, and the Court should stay the proceedings in this case as it would in cases where such immunities are invoked,” the filing says.

The president further asserted that refusing his request to stay the proceedings while the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals would establish a precedent allowing lawsuits to be filed against citizens “for merely voicing their opinions in quintessentially political discussions.”

The wrongly accused quintet sued Trump for false statements he made during last year’s presidential debate with Kamala Harris in which he said the plaintiffs “pled guilty” to the horrific 1989 attack on a Manhattan jogger and “ultimately killed a person.”

Antron McCray, Korey Wise, Kevin Richardson, and Raymond Santana gave police coerced confessions, but never pleaded guilty while Yusef Salaam did not confess or plead guilty. Additionally, no one died in the attack, which was later conclusively proven to have been committed by a man named Matias Reyes.

Crybaby Trump claims no responsibility for defamation of others during a political debate.

Trump doubles down on claiming ‘absolute immunity’ from Central Park 5 defamation lawsuit
Donald Trump is doubling down on the claim that he is immune from a defamation lawsuit filed by members of the Central Park Five in Pennsylvania.
Trump doubles down on claim he has ‘absolute immunity’ from Central Park 5 defamation lawsuit

CNBC: Trump was told his name was in Jeffrey Epstein files before DOJ withheld documents: WSJ

Posted on by
Reply
  • President Donald Trump was told in May by Attorney General Pam Bondi that his name appeared multiple times in Department of Justice documents about sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, The Wall Street Journal reported.
  • Trump’s meeting with [Bimbo #3] Bondi at the White House as reported by the Journal occurred weeks before the DOJ said it would not release the Epstein files to the public, despite the attorney general’s earlier promises to do so.
  • Trump has directed [Bimbo #3] Bondi to seek the unsealing of transcripts for grand jury proceedings related to federal probes of Epstein and his convicted procurer, Ghislaine Maxwell.

Attorney General Pam [Bimbo #3] Bondi told President Donald Trump at a meeting in May that his name appeared multiple times in Department of Justice documents about sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday.

The May date reported by the Journal was weeks before the DOJ‘s July 7 announcement that it would not release the Epstein files despite earlier promises by the attorney general, who leads the DOJ, and others in the president’s orbit that the material would be disclosed to the public.

The DOJ said Wednesday in a statement that Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche discussed the Epstein files with Trump as part of their “routine briefing” but did not specify the timing of the briefing.

The Journal reported that the president was also told at the meeting that “many other high-profile figures were also named” in the Epstein files and that the “files contained what officials felt was unverified hearsay about many people, including Trump, who had socialized with Epstein in the past.” 

Being mentioned in the Epstein records is not a sign of wrongdoing, the Journal noted.

The DOJ’s decision not to release the Epstein files sparked backlash from Trump’s MAGA supporters, who have obsessed over conspiracies related to the Epstein case for years.

In the face of that criticism from his political base, Trump last week directed [Bimbo #3] Bondi to seek the unsealing of transcripts for grand jury proceedings related to federal probes of Epstein and his convicted procurer, Ghislaine Maxwell.

Trump had been friends with Epstein for years, but the two men fell out long before Epstein killed himself in jail in August 2019, weeks after being arrested on federal child sex trafficking charges. Epstein also had many other wealthy, high-profile friends, including Britain’s Prince Andrew.

Reached for comment on the Journal’s new reporting, White House Communications Director Steven Cheung told CNBC, “The fact is that The President kicked [Epstein] out of his [Mar-a-Lago] club for being a creep.”

“This is nothing more than a continuation of the fake news stories concocted by the Democrats and the liberal media, just like the Obama Russiagate scandal, which President Trump was right about,” Cheung said.

In a joint statement Wednesday on the Journal’s reporting, Bondi and Blanche said, “The DOJ and FBI reviewed the Epstein Files and reached the conclusion set out in the July 6 memo. Nothing in the files warranted further investigation or prosecution, and we have filed a motion in court to unseal the underlying grand jury transcripts.”

“As part of our routine briefing, we made the President aware of the findings,” Blanche and [Bimbo #3] Bondi said.

Trump was asked last week by an ABC News journalist if [Bimbo #3] Bondi had told him “your name appeared in the files.”

“No, no,” Trump replied. “She’s given us just a very quick briefing, and in terms of the credibility of the different things that they’ve seen.”

Trump went on to say he believed that “these files were made up by” former FBI director James Comey and by the administrations of former Democratic Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden.

The DOJ last week fired Manhattan federal prosecutor Maurene Comey, the daughter of James Comey, whose past cases had included the federal prosecutions of Epstein and Maxwell.

The Journal last week published an article reporting that Trump in 2003 sent Epstein a “bawdy” letter to mark his 50th birthday, at Maxwell’s request.

The letter “contains several lines of typewritten text framed by the outline of a naked woman, which appears to be hand-drawn with a heavy marker,” the Journal reported.

“A pair of small arcs denotes the woman’s breasts, and the future president’s signature is a squiggly ‘Donald’ below her waist, mimicking pubic hair,” according to the newspaper.

“The letter concludes: ‘Happy Birthday — and may every day be another wonderful secret,'” the Journal wrote.

Trump has angrily denied writing the letter.

“This is not me. This is a fake thing. It’s a fake Wall Street Journal story,” he said Thursday. “I never wrote a picture in my life. I don’t draw pictures of women,” he said. “It’s not my language. It’s not my words.”

On Friday, the president filed a defamation lawsuit related to the story against media mogul Rupert Murdoch; News Corp, which Murdoch’s family controls; News Corp’s CEO, Robert Thomson; the Journal’s publisher, Dow Jones & Co.; and the two reporters who wrote the article, which was published Thursday evening. News Corp owns the Journal.

Trump’s lawsuit seeks at least $10 billion in damages.

A Dow Jones spokesperson told CNBC: “We have full confidence in the rigor and accuracy of our reporting, and will vigorously defend against any lawsuit.”

Trump was told his name was in Jeffrey Epstein files before DOJ withheld documents: WSJ
President Donald Trump was friends with Jeffrey Epstein for years before the two men had a falling-out.

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/23/trump-jeffrey-epstein-files-wsj.html

Irish Star: Trump gives himself gloating new nickname…before immediately contradicting himself

Posted on by
Reply

Donald Trump gave himself a new namesake on his Truth Social platform, but just three minutes later he backtracked over a country’s pledge to recognize Palestine as a state

President Donald Trump declared he was a dealmaker on Truth Social today before immediately contradicting himself by saying he would find it hard to make a trade tariff deal with Canada.

Thursday morning saw Trump share an image of himself with a fist in the air that had the words “Donald Trump dealmaker in-chief” emblazoned across it. Then, just three minutes later, he wrote in another post that it will be “very hard” to make a trade deal with Canada in light of its Prime Minister Mark Carney announcing plans to recognise a Palestinian state.

Trump’s trade threat comes a day before higher tariffs are slapped on countries without a US trade deal. Canada is set to face a 35% tariffs on most goods it sells to the US from Friday, if a deal is not reached today. It comes as Trump makes ‘disturbing remarks’ about his 1-year-old daughter in resurfaced clip.

On the trade deals, Trump wrote, “Wow! Canada has just announced that it is backing statehood for Palestine. That will make it very hard for us to make a Trade Deal with them. Oh’ Canada!!!”

Canada’s move to recognize a Palestinian state comes after UK and France made similar announcements. Their pledge comes as a hunger in Gaza continues. On Wednesday, the Hamas-run health ministry reported seven more deaths from malnutrition.

Earlier this week, Trump said there was “real starvation” in Gaza. He also told how he was working with Israel to “get things straightened out”..

Earlier this month, Trump posted an angry letter to Carney on Truth Social, in which he accused him of having “financially retaliated against the United States.” Canada, the second-largest trading partner of the U.S. behind Mexico, failed to deal adequately with fentanyl crossing into the northern U.S. border, Trump claimed, “Instead of working with the United States, Canada retaliated with its own Tariffs.”

Fentanyl seizures by the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol at the Canada-U.S. border reportedly representing less than 0.1% of U.S. fentanyl seizures between 2022 and 2024.

Carney responded to Trump’s post on X, saying that he would continue his country’s commitment to cooperating with Washington, including battling the fentanyl crisis.

“Throughout the current trade negotiations with the United States, the Canadian government has steadfastly defended our workers and businesses,” Carney wrote on X in reply to Trump. “We will continue to do so as we work towards the revised deadline of August 1. Canada has made vital progress to stop the scourge of fentanyl in North America.”

“We are building Canada strong,” he continued. “The federal government, provinces and territories are making significant progress in building one Canadian economy. We are poised to build a series of major new projects in the national interest. We are strengthening our trading partnerships throughout the world.”

It comes after a Trump family member revealed his body is “rotting inside” as she delivered a terrifying update on the president’s health.

As the U.S.A. insults and abuses one former friend after another, we are slowly being left behind as the rest of the world moves on, asking, “Is the U.S.A. really necessary?”

Trump gives himself gloating nickname…before immediately contradicting himself
Donald Trump gave himself a new namesake on his Truth Social platform, but just three minutes later he backtracked over a country’s pledge to recognize Palestine as a state

https://www.irishstar.com/news/us-news/donald-trump-nickname-canada-35650698?int_source=nba