Melania Trump was never going to abandon husband Donald – despite the legal turmoil that engulfed the president last year.
That's
according to her former press secretary and close aide, Stephanie
Grisham, who provided rare insight into the former First Lady's mindset
during a CNN interview at the time. Grisham appeared on Erin Burnett
OutFront just hours after Donald Trump's ex-lawyer and longtime fixer
Michael Cohen took the stand in a dramatic courtroom session.
Cohen's
testimony addressed Trump's personal affairs and Melania's responses to
the scandals that shook their marriage, including alleged hush money
payments. But Grisham maintained Melania has always been cognizant of
who she married. It comes after Melania exposed Trump's one infuriating
habit that has only got worse over time.
It comes after Melania's alarming confession on a Donald relationship change where she admitted 'it's over.'
"She
knew what she was getting into," Grisham told CNN. "She may have been
concerned about how it affected his future image, but she wasn't going
anywhere."
She
was fine being humiliated with the Stormy Daniels affair while she
herself was pregnant. Gold diggers don't want or expect respect, they
only want money. And Melanie is the gold digger supreme. She has no
self-respect and she can't return to her home country because guys and
gals with her reputation can never go home again -- or anymore -- the
Shangri-Las told us all about that "
Wednesday, October 22, 2025. The non-stop lies of the crooks -- Chump, Bondi, Kristi and so many more.
All
Donald Chump has ever known is how to lie. It remains his only skill
to this day. Here's MEIDASTOUCH NEWS' Ben this morning with realities
that beat down Chump's lies.
Love
him waiving around those English language Bibles -- the ones printed
and made in Hangzhou. Hangzhou? What an interesting name. Is it next
to Kalamazoo in Michigan. No. No, it's in China. Any job Chump
creates is overseas. He's tanked our economy.
President
Trump is demanding that the Justice Department pay him about $230
million in compensation for the federal investigations into him,
according to people familiar with the matter, who added that any
settlement might ultimately be approved by senior department officials
who defended him or those in his orbit.
The
situation has no parallel in American history, as Mr. Trump, a
presidential candidate, was pursued by federal law enforcement and
eventually won the election, taking over the very government that must
now review his claims. It is also the starkest example yet of potential
ethical conflicts created by installing the president’s former lawyers
atop the Justice Department.
Mr. Trump
submitted complaints through an administrative claim process that often
is the precursor to lawsuits. The first claim, lodged in late 2023,
seeks damages for a number of purported violations of his rights,
including the F.B.I. and special counsel investigation into Russian
election tampering and possible connections to the 2016 Trump campaign,
according to people familiar with the matter. They spoke on the
condition of anonymity because the claim has not been made public.
The
second complaint, filed in the summer of 2024, accuses the F.B.I. of
violating Mr. Trump’s privacy by searching Mar-a-Lago, his club and
residence in Florida, in 2022 for classified documents. It also accuses
the Justice Department of malicious prosecution in charging him with
mishandling sensitive records after he left office.
The
litigious liar is aware that any settlements would actually be paid by
the US citizens with the money they send to the government for taxes.
Stephanie Ruhle addressed Chump's attempted theft of American dollars last night on THE 11TH HOUR WITH STEPHANIE RUHLE.
Donald Trump is reportedly trying to loot the federal
government to the tune of $230 million. That’s how much he’s demanding
from the Department of Justice in compensation for past federal probes
of his misdeeds, according to a Tuesday report in The New York Times.
The Times’
sources say that before he returned to the White House, Trump filed
administrative claims, or formal requests for relief from a government
agency, which often precede a lawsuit. One 2023 claim seeks damages for
investigations into Russian election interference and ties to the Trump
2016 campaign—another, filed in 2024, for the 2022 FBI search of
Mar-a-Lago for classified documents.
The president reportedly expects to be paid a settlement but, so far, has not gotten his nine-figure payday.
The
potential settlement, being for an administrative claim, would not need
to be publicly announced, and would simply need the approval of one of
two Trump-friendly officials: Todd Blanche, who is the deputy attorney
general and Trump’s former criminal defense attorney, or DOJ civil
division chief Stanley Woodward Jr., who has represented many of the
president’s aides and allies—from Trump’s co-defendant in the classified
documents case to participants in the January 6 Capitol attack.
Compensation in such cases is “typically covered by taxpayers,” the Times reports.
Does
anyone want to try to connect this to DOGE? That was the attack on the
safety net that some fools cheered on -- not just the right-wing but
radical con artists on the left like Ben Cohen who didn't just root for
DOGE, he also set up a website celebrating it. We were told -- by Chump
and his minions like Ben Cohen -- that DOGE was needed. To save
money. The same person supposedly interested in saving the taxpayer
money now wants to stick them with a bill for over $200 million? It was
never bout saving money. It was about destroying our way of life
Shame on liars like Donald Chump and Ben Cohen and everyone who willing
participated in the attack on We The People, in the attack on our
commons and our public square. Liars who spread lies.
The
U.S. military has killed at least 32 people in seven strikes off the
coast of Venezuela without telling Congress or the American people who
was killed, or on what evidence.
The big picture: The U.S. is eight weeks into a military campaign in the Caribbean Sea with the twin aims of stopping drugs and, potentially, toppling Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro.
"Officially,
our position is we're there to stop narco-terrorists. We're going to
blow up their boats. And we're going to be patient about it. No one is
in any rush," a senior administration official said.
The scene:
The Trump administration has deployed an unprecedented number of
warships, spy planes, fighter jets, bombers, drones, and U.S. Marines
off the coast of Venezuela.
"It's
not just the CIA, it's all of our intelligence capabilities," said an
insider involved in discussions about the operation." The U.S. knows
where Maduro is, where he stays, where he goes. If we wanted to kill him
with a missile, we could have done it by now."
Since Sept. 1, the United States has been blowing up boats
in the Caribbean Sea and killing people on board with apparent
impunity. The current known death toll stands at 32. According to
President Donald Trump,
the dead — and those the Navy continues to target — are Venezuelan
“unlawful combatants” and “narco-terrorist” members of the Tren de
Aragua gang and are alleged to be transporting drugs bound for America.
This amounts to war on drug cartels, Trump has said, allowing the U.S. to act in self-defense.
As Salon’s Andrew O’Hehir has written,
this “phony war” is indicative of the twisted pathology of Trump’s
worldview. Reporting over the last week has made it clear: The danger of
this situation going sideways becomes greater every day. And
considering America’s history in the region, such an outcome almost
seems pre-ordained.
Last
week, Adm. Alvin Holsey, who heads the U.S. Southern Command, which
oversees operations in Central and South America, resigned less than one
year into his three-year term. Although the Pentagon did not give a
reason for his departure, the New York Times reported that he had raised concerns about the boat attacks, as well as the larger drug counter-mission.
Holsey’s
is a high-ranking resignation, but he is not the first to resign or be
forced out over the strikes against Venezuelan boats. On Oct. 15, CNN’s
Natasha Bertrand reported
on Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s destruction of the Judge Advocate
General’s Corps, with “multiple current and former JAGs telling CNN that
the strikes do not appear lawful.” Doubts have also been raised within
the defense department’s Office of General Counsel. The Pentagon has
denied these reports, saying there is unanimous agreement that the
strikes are lawful.
They are not. As Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said on “Meet The Press”
on Sunday, “[W]hen you kill someone, if you’re not in a declared war,
you really need to know someone’s name at least. You have to accuse them
of something. You have to present evidence. So all of these people have
been blown up without any evidence of a crime.”
The
president, though, does not seem to feel any moral obligation — or
pressure — to produce any evidence, and over the weekend he inadvertently revealed
the vacuity of the administration’s arguments. “It was my greatest
honor to destroy a very large DRUG-CARRYING SUBMARINE that was
navigating towards the United States on a well known narcotrafficking
transit route,” he said in a social media post. While two were killed,
Trump announced that the “two surviving terrorists are being returned to
their Countries of origin, Ecuador and Colombia, for detention and
prosecution.”
Can
we see the problem here? He killed two people because they were
allegedly unlawful combatant terrorists with whom we are at war. But
then he sent their two compatriots back to their home countries for
prosecution? How does that make any sense?
On Saturday night, Colombian President Gustavo Petro, went public with an accusation that in September, the U.S. murdered an innocent Colombian fisherman
whose boat was in distress. Trump responded that Petro is an “illegal
drug dealer” with “a fresh mouth toward America.” He announced that he
would immediately halt all counter-narcotics aid payments to Colombia —
which seems counterproductive — and, needless to say, he also vowed to
raise tariffs.
It's one wrong adventure after
another with the Convicted Felon back in the White House. Some may
wonder what you have to do in order to get fired from the Chump
administration?
Since
the Trump administration ramped up its hardline immigration agenda,
dozens of cases have emerged across the United States involving alleged
violations of due process and human rights.
One
of the most prominent is that of Kilmar Abrego García, a Salvadoran man
who was wrongfully deported to El Salvador in March. Since being
returned to the country, he has been entangled in a prolonged legal
fight with federal immigration authorities who want to deport him as
soon as the case is solved.
As that legal battle
continues, a new CBS News report reveals that a former Department of
Justice attorney claims he was fired for refusing to support what he
describes as a false narrative in Abrego García's case. The attorney,
Erez Reuveni, told the outlet that he declined to sign a legal brief
describing Abrego García as a member of the MS-13 gang and a terrorist,
an accusation he says was used in an effort to prevent the man from
returning to the United States.
Reuveni, who
once received praise from Trump administration officials for defending
the president's immigration policies during his first term, said what he
witnessed inside the DOJ violated basic legal principles.
"I
took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution," Reuveni said. "And
my view of that oath is that I need to speak up and draw attention to
what has happened to the department, what is happening to the rule of
law. I would not be faithfully abiding by my oath if I stayed silent
right now."
He also described the moment when a
supervisor called to pressure him into signing off on the brief that
labeled Abrego García as a gang member.
"I
respond up the chain of command, no way. That is not correct. That is
not factually correct. It is not legally correct. That is a lie. And I
cannot sign my name to that brief," Reuveni recounted.
Erez Reuveni was on his way up. He was an attorney in the
Department of Justice who was so effective defending President Trump's
first-term immigration policy, that he was promoted right away in
Trump's second term. But Reuveni's 15-year Justice Department career
ended suddenly after, he says, he witnessed government lawyers lying in
court and evading orders of a judge. These last few months have been a
time of upheaval in the Justice Department. Now, Reuveni's claims are
raising concern in courtrooms across the country. The administration has
called Reuveni a leaker seeking five minutes of fame. But in his first
television interview, Erez Reuveni told us, he's paid a price: speaking
up cost him his dream.
Erez Reuveni: Even before I went to law
school, I understood what I wanted to do as a lawyer was to be involved
in public service. And everyone understood at the time. You do it at the
Department of Justice in Washington, D.C. There's no better place as a
young attorney to just do the sorts of cases where you're standing up in
court as a first-chair attorney on behalf of the United States, doing
things that law firm partners don't do.
Scott Pelley: And that meant what to you?
Erez
Reuveni: That meant I was there on behalf of the American people, on
behalf of the millions of citizens of this country to make sure that
justice was done.
Erez Reuveni started in 2010 as a so-called
"career" attorney. Most lawyers at the Justice Department stay for
years, even decades, defending the policies of one president after
another. Reuveni specialized in immigration law. And in the first Trump
term he defended the controversial ban on travelers from Muslim countries, among many other cases.
Again, lie and you keep your job, tell the truth and you get fired. After her appearance before the Senate Judiciary
Committee (here, here and here), we all know Attorney General Pam
daBimbo Bondi lies. And if you work under her, you better lie too. Robert Alexander (NEWSWEEK) explains:
A
growing number of federal judges are expressing frustration with the
Department of Justice (DOJ) under Attorney General Pam Bondi, citing
repeated incidents in which government lawyers have been accused of
misleading the courts or ignoring judicial orders.
The
concerns have intensified following a whistleblower’s account aired on
60 Minutes and a comprehensive review of federal cases by legal
scholars.
The growing conflict between federal
judges and Bondi’s Justice Department goes beyond one whistleblower’s
account. It strikes at the core of the rule of law—whether courts can
still rely on the government’s word.
Allegations
that department lawyers misled judges, ignored orders, and punished
internal dissent have prompted rulings from both Republican- and
Democratic-appointed judges questioning the government’s honesty in
court.
If the Justice Department loses its
hard-earned presumption of good faith, the damage could outlast any
administration and weaken the integrity of the nation’s judicial system
itself.
daBimbo
doesn't care about the Justice Dept or about justice, she only wants to
lie in service of the Convicted Felon. That makes her like everyone
else in the Cabinet.
Again, tell a lie and you're a
made person in the Chump mob and they don't fire you. Look at Kristi
Noem and the people under her. Farrah Tomazin (DAILY BEAST) notes:
Homeland
Security Secretary Kristi Noem and her department have been accused of
lying to the public after being caught passing off an old photo of a
drug boat to promote Trump’s war on narco-terrorists.
On
Monday, the DHS News account posted a photo on X designed to discredit
Colombian President Gustavo Petro, who had accused Trump of murdering an
innocent fisherman in an attack on a boat the U.S. claimed was run by
drug smugglers.
“Colombian President claims one of the
Narco boats destroyed by the US Naval Task Force was ‘just a poor
Colombian fisherman’. Does this look like a fishing boat? It looks like
he had tons of bait (cocaine, attracts lots of fish). Colombian
president is a liar!!” the post said.
The photo featured the rear of a motorboat, with what appeared to be numerous bags of drugs.
However,
the post was deleted after social media users pointed out that it came
from a 2024 operation that took place about 1000 kilometers south of the
Canary Islands, which was reported at the time by Spanish newspaper El
País.
“This photo is from a drug bust that
occurred in 2024, zero ties to the current situation,” said a community
note that was added to the post as a consumer-based fact check.
“Photo is taken from the video attached in the article below.”
The
Department of Homeland Security has purchased two Gulfstream private
jets for Kristi Noem, the secretary, and other top department officials
at a cost of $172 million, according to documents reviewed by The New
York Times.
The jets, which a department
official said were needed for safety, are the latest expenditures on
behalf of Ms. Noem to draw scrutiny from Democrats and other critics who
have noted her lavish spending on living and other expenses during her
time in public life.
The Coast Guard put in its
budget earlier this year a request to purchase a new long-range
Gulfstream V jet, estimated to cost $50 million, to replace an aging one
used by Ms. Noem.
Kristi Noem’s lavish spending on the taxpayer’s dime is reaching atmospheric heights.
The
glammed up DHS Secretary will be traveling on not one but two new
private jets worth $172 million, reports the New York Times. The Coast
Guard bought the two crafts, which will be used by other DHS officials
as well.
Only the best for “ICE Barbie” and her cosplaying minions!
[. . .]
Meanwhile,
when it comes to actually serving American citizens–you know, the saps
paying for Noem’s cross-jetting lifestyle–Noem orders austerity. She’s
implemented a requirement that any department purchase over $100,000
needs her personal approval. The onerous process has been blamed for
FEMA failing to answer calls from thousands of survivors in the
immediate aftermath of the Texas floods last summer.
One
year later, FEMA still hasn’t approved any homeowner buyouts for
individuals in western North Carolina who lost their houses due to
Hurricane Helene.
But when it comes to
replacing private jets for $172 million, Noem finds the funds. Keep in
mind, the planes were purchased in the midst of a shutdown, when most
government employees aren’t getting paid.
Notable exceptions are ICE and Border Patrol agents. They’ve got immigrants to brutalize, and photo shoots to take part in.
Saturday, US House Reps Rosa DeLauro and Lauren Underwood's offices issued the following:
WASHINGTON
— Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem is
spending $200 million of taxpayer money on a pair of top-of-the-line
luxury Gulfstream G700 private jets during a government shutdown.
House
Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Rosa DeLauro (CT-03) and
Homeland Security Subcommittee Ranking Member Lauren Underwood (IL-14)
requested more information from the Secretary regarding the purchase,
which does not align with earlier funding requests for the Department.
“It
has come to our attention that, in the midst of a government shutdown,
the United States Coast Guard (USCG) entered into a sole source contract
with Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation to procure two new G700 luxury
jets to support travel for you and the Deputy Secretary, at a cost to
the taxpayer of $200 million,” write DeLauro and Underwood. “Based on
the Department’s public statement that you personally sign off on all
DHS contracts that exceed $100,000 in value, and prior solicitations
indicating that you are a primary user of these aircraft, we assume that
you are involved in the approval of this contract.”
The
lawmakers write that Noem appears to prioritize herself over
servicemembers: “Indeed, from choosing to live rent-free in the
Commandant’s quarters, to defending Mr. Lewandowski’s refusal to provide
basic information about his special government employee status, to your
frequent appearances at ongoing operations which require a diversion of
resources to focus on your security, it appears you are routinely
prioritizing yourself and those closest to you over the needs of the
USCG servicemembers who protect this nation.”
In their letter to the Department of Homeland Security, DeLauro and Underwood requested, in part, the following information:
This
contract announcement reflects a substantially different LRCCA
acquisition strategy compared to what was provided in the Fiscal Year
2025 spend plan. Why did DHS not update the Committees on the changing
strategy and changing use of taxpayer funds?
What operational
requirements have changed since the Department’s submission of USCG’s
Fiscal Year 2025 spend plan in May? When did these requirements change
and why were the Committees not notified of any change requirements?
If
the Coast Guard intends to use funds other than regular Fiscal Year
2025 appropriations to execute this contract, please explain the amount
and from which account(s) and why LRCCA procurement is a better use of
taxpayer funds than the original purpose of any such funds.
Please
provide the name and title of each person in the Department, including
any special government employees and senior advisors who reviewed or
approved this contract.
The full text of the letter is available here and below:
The Honorable Kristi Noem
Secretary
Department of Homeland Security
1790 Ash Street, SE
Washington, DC 20032
Dear Secretary Noem:
It
has come to our attention that, in the midst of a government shutdown,
the United States Coast Guard (USCG) entered into a sole source contract
with Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation to procure two new G700 luxury
jets to support travel for you and the Deputy Secretary, at a cost to
the taxpayer of $200 million. Based on the Department’s public statement
that you personally sign off on all DHS contracts that exceed $100,000
in value, and prior solicitations indicating that you are a primary user
of these aircraft, we assume that you are involved in the approval of
this contract.
This contract award directly
contradicts the acquisition strategy and operational needs for the
USCG’s Long Range Command and Control Aircraft (LRCCA) fleet, as
outlined by your Department to the Committee in May and again in
September. Worse, it reflects a continuing trend of self-aggrandizement
in your tenure as Secretary. Your first priority should be to organize,
train and equip a Coast Guard that is strong enough to meet today's
mission requirements. Instead, it appears your first priority is your
own comfort.
Indeed, from choosing to live
rent-free in the Commandant’s quarters, to defending Mr. Lewandowski’s
refusal to provide basic information about his special government
employee status, to your frequent appearances at ongoing operations
which require a diversion of resources to focus on your security, it
appears you are routinely prioritizing yourself and those closest to you
over the needs of the USCG servicemembers who protect this nation. In
addition to raising serious questions about your ability to effectively
lead an agency whose procurement strategies appear to vary on a whim,
the procurement of new luxury jets for your use suggests that the USCG
has been directed to prioritize your own comfort above the USCG’s
operational needs, even during a government shutdown. We are deeply
concerned about your judgment, leadership priorities, and responsibility
as a steward of taxpayer dollars.
In light of
this abrupt change in procurement strategy, we request answers to the
following questions as soon as possible, but no later than 12:00pm (EDT)
October 30, 2025.
This contract announcement
reflects a substantially different LRCCA acquisition strategy compared
to what was provided in the Fiscal Year 2025 spend plan. Why did DHS not
update the Committees on the changing strategy and changing use of
taxpayer funds?
What operational requirements have changed
since the Department’s submission of USCG’s Fiscal Year 2025 spend plan
in May? When did these requirements change and why were the Committees
not notified of any change in requirements?
What is the timeline for delivery of the two aircraft contemplated in the award announcement?
If
USCG conducted an Analysis of Alternatives or similar exercise
comparing the procurement of two G700s to the strategy of purchasing one
used G550 (as the Department proposed in May), please provide that
document to the Committee. If it did not conduct such analysis, please
explain why not and why in the absence of such data the Coast Guard
believes this strategy is in the best interests of the taxpayer and the
Coast Guard.
Please clarify the funding source used to pay for
this contract. If the Fiscal Year 2025 spend plan has changed as a
consequence of this decision, please provide an updated plan reflecting
changes related to this procurement.
If the Coast Guard
intends to use funds other than regular Fiscal Year 2025 appropriations
to execute this contract, please explain the amount and from which
account(s) and why LRCCA procurement is a better use of taxpayer funds
than the original purpose of any such funds.
Please provide
the name and title of each person in the Department, including any
special government employees and senior advisors, who reviewed or
approved this contract.
Did any DHS component submit a
justification and approval (J&A) document to support a sole-source
award for this contract? If so, please provide that documentation. If
not, please explain how DHS met statutory competition requirements under
the Federal Acquisition Regulation.
Finally, we remind you to
preserve any and all documents related to this procurement should the
Committee or other Congressional committee engage in further oversight
of this matter.
A
senior ICE official is under fire after publicly sharing a 13-year-old
child's information — and an expert warns it "could lead to serious
consequences."
DHS spokesperson Tricia
McLaughlin, 31, who is the most senior public affairs official under
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, revealed the identity, alleged
criminal history and a photo of the child detained by ICE, The Daily
Beast reported Monday.
McLaughlin is accused of sharing children's information not just once, but multiple times.
Her
social media post and the DHS actions “could lead to serious
consequences inside the government, such as an Inspector General
investigation, disciplinary action, or even congressional scrutiny," Los
Angeles-based criminal defense attorney Arash Hashemi told The Beast.
Public
anger was rising after a Brazilian-born seventh-grader in Massachusetts
was reportedly taken by federal agents to a juvenile detention center
more than 500 miles away from his family.
In an attempt to stop the public criticism, McLaughlin and DHS tried to use social media.
"They
claimed that the boy had an 'extensive rap sheet,' while listing some
of his apparent past offenses. They also stated—falsely, it
transpired—that he had been in possession of a firearm," The Beast
reports.
It's illegal for DHS or law enforcement to share a child's information.
McLaughlin lied about him having a gun? See, they lie and then they lie again.
Truth
always matters but it especially matters when Chump and his
administration spew lies constantly. That's why Senator Jeff Merkley
took to the floor of the Senate last night and entered truth into the
record for 13 hours.
On FACEBOOK, he noted:
THIS IS NOT NORMAL. I’m holding the floor to protest Trump dragging us further into authoritarianism.
New
Jersey Democratic Rep. LaMonica McIver will ask the court on Tuesday to
dismiss assault charges against her regarding a clash with U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.
McIver
is accused of three counts of assaulting or impeding federal agents in
connection with an incident outside a Newark immigration center in May,
according to Politico. She faces up to 17 years in prison, if convicted
at a scheduled trial next month.
She argues the
Justice Department's case against her should be thrown out on grounds of
selective and vindictive prosecution by President Trump and his
administration.
McIver's lawyers have also
filed to have the case thrown out on grounds of "legislative immunity" –
that members of Congress should have broad legal protection as they
carry out oversight duties.
A rally is expected outside the courthouse before the hearing, according to local news outlet PIX11.
A rally took place Max Pizarro (INSIDER NJ) reports, "The
allies of U.S. Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-10) assembled outside the
federal building here, demanding the feds drop all charges against the
congresswoman and dismiss the case against her." The allies rallying
included US House Reps Jasmine Crockett, Ilhan Abdullah, Sara Jacobs and
Yvette Clark. .
A federal judge
overseeing a case involving a New Jersey congresswoman accused of
assaulting immigration agents ordered the Justice Department on Tuesday
to turn over additional videos as he reviews a defense request to
dismiss the charges altogether.
The
judge, Jamel K. Semper, also told federal prosecutors to encourage the
Department of Homeland Security to take down social media posts about
the case that he described as prejudicial and “fact free.”
“Make
sure they are removed,” Judge Semper said, noting that lawyers for the
congresswoman, LaMonica McIver, should “not be in a position to play
Whac-a-Mole when there are government officials who are saying things
that are not factual.”
We have to stand together and stand with Monica. Chump thinks he can get away with this crap. No, he can't. We're the United States, we won't be ruled by a tyrant.
Tuesday, October 21, 2025. Chump and his never ending lies.
Last night, at the top of her MSNBC show, Rachel Maddow reported on Saturday's NO KINGS protests.
Now let's move over to the Epstein-Maxwell
scandal since it's been a couple of days since we covered it. Both
Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell were friends of Donald Chump.
Back then, the two were active pedophiles and sex traffickers. Just
Donald's type of people, right? Epstein and Maxwell were both convicted
of their crimes at separate times. Epstein is said to have killed
himself in prison. Maxwell went on the run but was eventually caught,
tried and sentenced to 20 years. Amanda Marcotte (SALON) notes how Speaker of the Closet Mike Johnson continues to run interference for Chump (at the expense of the country):
Speaker
of the House Mike Johnson is lying. Yes, I know. Writing that is like
writing “cats are furry” or “it’s pumpkin spice season.” But the current
purpose of the lie is even more depraved than we usually get from this self-proclaimed beacon of Christian morality.
The purpose is silencing the victims of infamous child sex predator
Jeffrey Epstein and his alleged fellow abusers. Worse, it’s all done to
protect President Donald Trump, a man who was already found by a civil
jury in New York to have sexually abused journalist E. Jean Carroll in a
department store dressing room.
The
Louisiana Republican has already gone to great lengths to make sure FBI
files chronicling the alleged misdeeds of Epstein and his associates
never see the light of day. In July, Johnson started the House’s summer recess early to avoid Democrats bringing up a bill
that would force the Justice Department to release the voluminous files
on convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, who died by suicide in jail
in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. The reason for
Johnson’s action wasn’t mysterious. Trump, whom Epstein called his
“closest friend,” is reportedly in the files. According to a lewd
birthday message attributed to Trump by the Wall Street Journal — that
was leaked by House Democrats — Trump wrote to his longtime buddy, “We
have certain things in common, Jeffrey.”
Now
Johnson has found another excuse to block a House vote to release the
Epstein files: The government shutdown. The speaker has adjourned the
House and refused to seat Rep.-Elect Adelita Grijalva, D-Ariz.,
blaming the shutdown — despite the fact that the Senate is still open
and holding votes. Grijalva has pledged to be the deciding vote on a
discharge petition to release the Epstein files. In comments to the Arizona Republic, Sen. Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., was blunt in assessing the situation: “Speaker Johnson is protecting pedophiles. That’s what this is all about.”
Johnson
has denied the charge, but his pattern of behavior is clear. He knows
that if Trump turns against him, he would likely lose the speakership.
Hiding the Epstein files appears to be Johnson’s first priority, even
above reopening the government so federal employees can be paid.
The
whole country knows that Johnson is covering for Chump. He's never
been interested in serving the people of his state, let alone the people
of the country. Katie Francis (DAILY BEAST) notes:
The
House Speaker was grilled on This Week Sunday about why Arizona
Rep.-elect Adelita Grijalva has waited weeks to be sworn in—with some
suggesting the delay is because the Democrat plans to force a vote on
the Epstein files.
After first
saying that Chuck Schumer and the government shutdown were responsible
for the slowness, the House Speaker then blamed Nancy Pelosi.
“This is the way the institution works. I’m following the Pelosi precedent, by the way,” he said.
“When
my dear friend from Louisiana, Julia Letlow, was elected to fill the
seat of her deceased husband because of Covid, Nancy Pelosi took 25 days
to swear her in.”
“Are you saying that Nancy
Pelosi refused to swear her in earlier?” host Jonathan Karl asked, as
Johnson insisted that the long wait was normal.
The
ABC host added: “Because my understanding is that was the date that
actually the representative-elect, Letlow at the time, requested—”
Johnson tried to divert the conversation to “some more examples” of delayed ceremonies, but Karl remained focused on logistics.
After
Johnson doubled down on his claim that the so-called “Pelosi precedent”
justified the delay, Karl pressed him on what some might see as a
Republican double standard.
“And what about the Johnson precedent?” he asked. “You swore in two Republicans the day after their election—”
Johnson
didn’t address GOP Reps. Randy Fine and Jimmy Patronis, who were both
sworn in while the House was out of session in April. Instead, he
deflected back to Pelosi, citing his own examples.
“Pat
Ryan, Joe Sempolinski. They were elected during an August recess, so 21
days later when the house returned to legislative session, they were
administered the oath. That’s what we’re doing,” he said, adding that
Grijalva would be sworn in “as the Democrats decide to turn the lights
back on.”
MSNBC last night. found Jonathan Capehart sitting in for Lawrence O'Donnell on THE LAST WORD.
Though Chump has dismissed
those people preyed upon by Epstein and Maxwell (there's at least one man who is known to have been
targeted but there are said to be at least 19 more) as a "hoax," they
are not a hoax. They are real. In Virginia Giuffre's case, she was
real. And though she has passed away, her book is released in the US
today. Becca Longmire (PEOPLE) notes:
Virginia
Giuffre said she believed she might "die a sex slave" as she opened up
about her alleged sexual encounters with Jeffrey Epstein and his circle
in her forthcoming posthumous memoir.
In
an excerpt published by the BBC from her forthcoming memoir Nobody’s
Girl: A Memoir of Surviving Abuse and Fighting for Justice, Giuffre —
who died by suicide on April 25 of this year at age 41 — spoke in detail
about having sex with Epstein and his alleged sex trafficking.
Giuffre
wrote that the girls were required to look "childlike," alleging that
her childhood eating disorder was "only encouraged" under Epstein's
roof, per the BBC.
"In my years with them, they
lent me out to scores of wealthy, powerful people," she said, adding,
"I was habitually used and humiliated - and in some instances, choked,
beaten and bloodied."
"I believed that I might die a sex slave," Giuffre wrote.
Giuffre,
before her tragic suicide in April, had been trying to speak out for
years about the horrors she’d experienced at the hands of the late
paedophile and financier Jeffrey Epstein, who “sold” her to powerful men
when she was just a teenager. We witnessed her long, difficult fight
for justice against the establishment – including the settling in 2022
of a sexual assault lawsuit against Prince Andrew, whom she said had had
sex with her when she was just 17 (and on two other occasions), though
he has always vehemently denied having done anything wrong.
We
saw her fight for other women, too – for fellow survivors of sex
trafficking. And we watched her get torn down, every single time. We
heard the men who spoke about her with such contempt deny ever having
met her, before dismissing her testimony out of hand; we read the
painful details shared by her family, as they described how she’d faced
financial ruin and received death threats for working with the
authorities against Epstein and his accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell, who
hired her as a masseuse when she was only 16. Giuffre later alleged in a
lawsuit that she was first abused by Epstein and Maxwell together
before being “lent out to other powerful men”, including Prince Andrew.
To
get her to comply and never reveal these horrors, all Epstein had to do
was let her know he knew where her little brother went to school. (And
he showed her a photo proving it.)
I find this
claim believable because someone I know recounted a story from one of
his attorneys in a business-related lawsuit against Epstein. He
described how during a phone conversation, Epstein mentioned having seen
the attorney’s children crossing the street, and warned him to be extra
careful so nothing would happen to them.
Back
to Giuffre’’s claims: Epstein also bragged that he “owned the Palm Beach
police department.” (Manipulating Giuffre was easy: At the age of
seven, she had already been molested by a family friend.) Giuffre sued
Maxwell and Epstein and became an advocate for other survivors. She
committed suicide in April, at the age of 41.
Nobody’s
Girl: A Memoir of Surviving Abuse and Fighting for Justice seems to be
mentioned all over the place — The New York Times, The Washington Post,
Vanity Fair, PBS, CBS, etc. — and it has got to be one of Donald Trump’s
worst nightmares, assuming he can even fall asleep.
From
the grave, Giuffre powerfully challenges the idea that all those famous
people hanging out with Epstein had no inkling what he was up to:
Don’t
be fooled by those in Epstein’s circle who say they didn’t know what he
was doing. Epstein not only didn’t hide what was happening, he took a
certain glee in making people watch. And people did watch — scientists,
fundraisers from the Ivy League and other heralded institutions, titans
of industry. They watched and they didn’t care.
Epstein
and Maxwell are human trash (Epstein was, of course, thankfully dead
now) and so are those around him including Chump, including Alex Acosta
who created the original sweethear deal in 2007 along with human trash
Matthew Menchel. TAMPA BAY TIMES reports:
Jeffrey
Epstein had multiple appointments, phone calls and dinners with Matthew
Menchel — the Miami U.S. Attorney’s office chief criminal prosecutor
who spearheaded Epstein’s sweetheart deal in 2007, newly released
documents show.
A tranche of over 8,500 pages
of records from Epstein’s estate — released by the House Oversight
Committee Friday — show that Epstein’s calendars and emails reflect that
Menchel, who left the DOJ in 2007, had multiple meetings or dinners
with Epstein in 2011, 2013 and 2017. Lawmakers also referred to a
photograph of Menchel on a ski trip with Epstein sometime in the 2000s,
but didn’t produce the photo.
Seems like Matthew Menchel needs to lose his license. Disagree? Here's another detail from the report:
In
its coverage of the case, the Herald raised questions about Menchel’s
role in negotiating the deal. Besides Acosta and Menchel, the case was
overseen by prosecutors Jeffrey Sloman, Andrew Lourie and Ann Marie
Villafaña.
The
Herald found that Villafaña, the lead line prosecutor, drafted an
82-page prosecution memo directed to Acosta, his deputy, Sloman, and
Menchel, who was then head of the criminal division. In the memo, she
proposed a 60-count indictment of Epstein on sex trafficking charges.
A
subsequent probe by the Justice Department’s Office of Professional
Responsibility (OPR) later found that its child exploitation division in
Washington reviewed Villafana’s materials, offered to work with her and
called the memo “exhaustive” and “well done.”
Acosta
would later tell federal investigators he could not recall ever reading
her memo, and that he relied on Menchel and others to know the details
of the case. Acosta testified that he never met Epstein or his
accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell, who is now serving a 20-year sentence for
child sex trafficking and abuse. In his comments before the committee,
Acosta also reiterated that he trusted Menchel, who proposed the plea
deal with Epstein’s lawyers.
An OPR report issued in 2020
describes how Villafaña became angry in July 2007, when Menchel
explained to her in an email that he had offered the deal to Epstein
lawyer Lilly Sanchez, the only woman involved in Epstein’s defense.
Villafaña felt it was an end-run around her, the report said.
The
report also noted that Menchel had dated Sanchez, should have informed
his bosses about it and probably should have been recused from the case.
Acosta
was asked about Menchel at least 17 times during his testimony before
the House Oversight Committee. He indicated that he had not been aware
that Menchel had a prior romantic relationship with one of Epstein’s
lawyers and that Menchel should have told him so that they could have
discussed whether there was a conflict of interest.
They cover up for their own. Just like Mike Johnson and Donald Chump are doing today.
Let's move on to another topic. We know Chump lies, the entire administration is, in fact, incapable of telling the truth. Idrees Ali and Phil Stewart (REUTERS) write,
"The U.S. last month started a campaign of attacks in the Caribbean
that the Trump administration has described as 'a non-international
armed conflict' against narco-terrorism. Yet legal experts aren't
surprised that the U.S. government opted against using the term
'prisoners of war' to describe the two survivors of a Thursday attack by
the U.S. military on a semi-submersible vessel. Rather than holding
them, the United States sent them back to their home countries, U.S.
President Donald Trump said Saturday. The move, which was first reported
by Reuters, suggests that for now U.S. officials don't want to grapple
with legal issues surrounding military detention for any alleged drug
traffickers captured during the Caribbean operations, legal experts
said."
Two
family members of the 11 men killed in September in the first attack
acknowledged by Trump did not deny that the men aboard had been taking
marijuana and cocaine from Venezuela to Trinidad. But they said Trump’s
allegation in his announcement was inaccurate that they’d worked for the
Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua.
The
Trump administration’s justification for blowing up suspected drug
traffickers off the Venezuelan coast has been clear and consistent:
These people aren’t just criminals; they’re “narco-terrorists” smuggling
a “deadly weapon poisoning Americans” at the behest of terrorist
organizations.
“We take them out,” Trump
told the nation’s three- and four-star generals and admirals last month.
“Every boat kills 25,000 on average — some people say more. You see
these boats, they’re stacked up with bags of white powder that’s mostly
fentanyl and other drugs, too.”
Claiming the
power to summarily kill traffickers as though they’re enemy troops,
Trump has authorized the U.S. military to strike at least six speedboats
the administration has deemed suspicious, killing dozens of people
since the beginning of September. At least half of the strikes and 21 of
the killings, locals say, have transpired in the waters between
Venezuela and Trinidad and Tobago — nations so close that on clear days
they’re within eyesight of each other.
But
records and interviews with 20 people familiar with the route or the
strikes, including current and former U.S. and international officials,
contradict the administration’s claims. The passage, they said, is not
ordinarily used to traffic synthetic opioids such as fentanyl, present
in 69 percent of drug overdose deaths last year. Nor are the drugs
typically headed for the United States.
Lies is all Chump ever serves up. Back to the article:
“I
knew them all,” said one of the family members, who spoke on the
condition of anonymity for fear of retribution. “None of them had
anything to do with Tren de Aragua. They were fishermen who were looking
for a better life” by smuggling contraband.
On
Tuesday, Trump said, a new strike had killed “six male
narco-terrorists” off the Venezuelan coast. That afternoon, one mother
in the Trinidadian community of Las Cuevas received a call from her
brother, a fisherman. Her son Chad Joseph, the second of her six
children, had been killed in the explosion.
Speaking
by phone Thursday morning, Leonore Burnley was furious. Her son had
been deprived a trial. And she’d been deprived of any chance of closure.
“You can’t get the body to bury it,” she said.
Joseph
had spent the last three months in Venezuela working odd jobs, Burnley
said. He had written her recently to say he would be returning home.
She called Trump’s claim he had been involved in trafficking drugs a lie.
Sen.
Rand Paul on Sunday questioned the wisdom and legality of President
Donald Trump's policies toward Venezuela and suspected drug dealers
coming from its coast.
Speaking on NBC's "Meet
the Press," the Kentucky Republican again raised concerns about the
legality of the Trump administration's strikes on boats that it claims
are carrying drug traffickers, as well as the president's statement that
the United States might conduct direct attacks on Venezuela's
territory.
"When
you kill someone, you should know, if you're not at war, not in a
declared war, you really need to know someone's name at least," Paul
said. "You have to accuse them of something. You have to present
evidence. So all of these people have been blown up without us knowing
their name, without any evidence of a crime."
He
said that given the distance these boats are from the United States,
it's more likely that if there are indeed drug smugglers, they are
bringing them to nearby islands such as Trinidad and Tobago, instead of
the U.S.
Paul added: "For decades, if not
centuries, when you stop people at sea in international waters or in
your own waters, you announce that you're going to board the ship and
you're looking for contraband, smuggling, or drugs. This happens every
day off of Miami. But we know from Coast Guard statistics that about 25
percent of the time the Coast Guard boards a ship there are no drugs. So
if our policy now is to blow up every ship we suspect or accuse of drug
running, that would be a bizarre world in which 25 percent of the
people might be innocent."
Last week, Senator Adam Schiff's office issued the following:
Washington, D.C. — U.S. Senator Adam Schiff
(D-Calif.) joined Senators Tim Kaine (D-Va.), and Rand Paul (R-Ky.) to
introduce a War Powers Resolution that would block the use of U.S. Armed
Forces to engage in hostilities within or against Venezuela, following
reporting that the Trump administration is considering land strikes inside that country.
“The Trump administration has made it clear they may launch military
action inside Venezuela’s borders, and won’t stop at boat strikes in the
Caribbean,”said Senator Schiff. “In recent weeks we
have seen increasingly concerning movements and reporting that undermine
claims that this is merely about stopping drug smugglers. Congress has
not authorized military force against Venezuela. And we must assert our
authority to stop the United States from being dragged—intentionally or
accidentally—into full-fledged war in South America.”
“I’m extremely troubled that the Trump administration is considering
launching illegal military strikes inside Venezuela without a specific
authorization by Congress. Americans don’t want to send their sons and
daughters into more wars—especially wars that carry a serious risk of
significant destabilization and massive new waves of migration in our
hemisphere,” said Senator Kaine. “If my colleagues
disagree and think a war with Venezuela is a good idea, they need to
meet their constitutional obligations by making their case to the
American people and passing an Authorization for Use of Military Force. I
urge every senator to join us in stopping this administration from
dragging our country into an unauthorized and escalating military
conflict.”
“The American people do not want to be dragged into endless war with
Venezuela without public debate or a vote. We ought to defend what the
Constitution demands: deliberation before war,” said Senator Paul.
War Powers Resolutions are privileged, meaning that the Senate will
be required to promptly consider and vote upon the resolution.
Today’s resolution comes shortly after Schiff and Kaine introduced a
similar measure focused on repeated and ongoing strikes in the southern
Caribbean Sea that the Trump administration has carried out without
congressional authorization, killing dozens of unknown individuals. That
measure gained bipartisan support but fell two votes short of passage.
Chump's
lying. He's so desperate to lie as Ben (MEIDASTOUCH NEWS) notes in the
video above, he's pimping photos of another drug bust from over a year
ago as photos of a ship attacked in the last weeks. He's a liar.
