Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills)

Wednesday, May 27, 2026

Linda Perry, Stevie Nicks, Caleb Shomo and Conor Oberst

Linda Perry doesn't know how to shut up. She's supposed to be promoting her new album. David Cifarelli (MASS LIVE) reports:

Linda Perry wants to help Madonna defend her title as the “Queen of Pop”

Perry has offered to help the pop icon regain her power after she claimed Madonna’s recent album releases have suffered from chasing current trends in the music industry.

“Of late, I feel she is a follower,” Perry said in a recent interview with Consequence. “She’s following the trends. She’s trying to compete with Charlie XCX and this and that. Everything about her seems weak to me and not powerful."

Linda, you've got one song performance to your name. Madonna's been out there publicly hit making since 1983. I don't think Madonna's been a follower. I haven't liked a lot of her stuff in the last 20 years but I haven't felt she was following. I also don't get where Linda Perry gets off thinking she's this hit maker. She's not Diane Warren or Jimmy Jam and Terry Lewis. She's not even David Foster. But keep trash talking and see how that sells your album.

David Chiu (FORBES) interviews Annie Zaleski who's got a book on Stevie Nicks which has just come out:

The first time that author Annie Zaleski truly became a Stevie Nicks fan was as a kid in the 1980s, a decade that saw the legendary singer-songwriter in the midst of a successful career as a solo artist and a member of Fleetwood Mac. Although Zaleski’s parents had Fleetwood Mac’s popular 1970s records in their collection, it was the band’s 1987 album Tango in the Night that stuck with her.

“I definitely remember hearing all that stuff on the radio and really loving it, "Everywhere" especially,” she says. “I’m pretty sure I have a tape [that I recorded from the radio] where I have that song in particular kind of fading out because I really like that. I was pretty young at that point. So Stevie and Fleetwood Mac have been with me through my entire life.”

Zaleski channeled her admiration for the music of Nicks, who turns 78 today, into her latest book Stevie Nicks in 50 Songs (published by Running Press), which tells the story of the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame artist through the songs that shaped her life and career, from the 1955 Red Sovine and Goldie Hill song “Are You Mine,” to the 2024 Taylor Swift track “Clara Bow.” In between are anecdotes about some of her key solo and Fleetwood Mac songs such as “Rhiannon,” “Dreams,” “Gold Dust Woman," “Sara,” “Leather and Lace,” “Gypsy,” “I Can’t Wait,” “Talk to Me” and “Planets of the Universe.”

In addition to the main text and many archival images of the singer throughout the years, this immersive book contains sidebars devoted to other aspects of Nicks’ career, including her fashions, collaborations and friendships, causes, and place in pop culture.

[. . .]

Chiu: “Silver Springs” has sort of attained a sense of legend in its own right because it was supposed to be on Rumours, but instead became a B-side for a single. And then it received renewed popularity through the band’s performance of the song for Fleetwood Mac’s 1997 live album The Dance.

Zaleski: They had too many songs [for Rumours], and they left it off. And Stevie always loved the song. This was basically a song that meant a lot to her. What was interesting was that I discovered that one of the things that precipitated her exit from Fleetwood Mac in the late '80s was that she wanted to have this song on a solo compilation. I think it was Mick [Fleetwood] who said, "Nope." And she was like, "All right. I'm quitting the band." So it was just one of these things that it was just that it meant absolutely so much to her.

What’s interesting is that I remember the performance [from The Dance]. But it wasn’t until later when it was on YouTube, and it got passed around, that it took on a lot more significance, where Stevie’s kind of singing the song directly to Lindsey — as I put it, like working things out on the remix, literally right there in real time.

Back to David Cifarelli who also reports on Caleb Shomo:

Beartooth frontman Caleb Shomo revealed that he is gay in an Instagram post on Saturday, May 23.

“There’s been a lot of speculation surrounding my personal life as of late and I feel compelled to set the record straight before it affects those I love any further,” Shomo, 33, wrote.

“I am a proudly gay man,” the singer continued. “This is something I’ve been unpacking and reckoning with in my life for quite some time now. It’s been difficult to navigate the feelings surrounding the subject and figure out what to do with this fact.”

Shomo went on to say he “spent a decade burying feelings with alcohol” and that he “decided to put it down and focus on exploring why I felt this way for so long.”

“It’s been a direct path to me reconciling with my sexuality in hopes that it will eventually lead to me experiencing self love,” Shomo wrote, adding that he made a vow to express himself “whole heartedly and fully” on his forthcoming album.

“Wherever it takes me I will follow and I refuse to water any part of it down, from the music, to the lyrical content, and way I portray myself,” he wrote.

Good for him. Lastly, Steven J. Horowitz (VARIETY) reports:

Conor Oberst was only on the third song of "I'm Wide Awake, It's Morning" at the Hollywood Bowl on Saturday evening when he came to reflect on how the world has - or, more pointedly, hasn't - changed in the 21 years since the album's release. "It's this much later and we're in a war in the Middle East for the sake of rich people getting richer," he told the audience as he cued up "Old Soul Song (for the New World Order)," a tune about attending a rally or protest in the Bush era, possibly about the Iraq war.

It's easy to remember Bright Eyes' earlier fare as dulcet and poetic; songs like "First Day of My Life" and "Lua" turned ruminations on love and heartbreak into resonant indie touchstones. But Bright Eyes' performance at the Bowl was a reminder that the more things change, the more they tend to stay the same. Alongside longtime collaborators, Oberst took over the iconic venue on Saturday to celebrate Bright Eyes' simultaneously-released albums "I'm Wide Awake, It's Morning" and "Digital Ash in a Digital Urn," commemorating the 21st anniversary of both records in a display of millennial nostalgia and a refreshed yet just-as-fiery condemnation of Trump's government, much in the way that they'd bemoaned the Bush administration two decades ago.

Oberst has, of course, been a frank and outspoken critic of the state of America dating back to his band's ascent in the early aughts. By the time Bright Eyes released the stylistically opposed albums in January 2005, he'd established himself as something of his generation's poet laureate, compared in reviews at the time to Bob Dylan and commended (or, as often, lambasted) for his loquacious lyrics dotted with two-dollar words. (Much of that generation, it should be noted, owes Oberst a debt of gratitude for adding "despondent" to their vocabulary.)

Closing with C.I.'s "The Snapshot:"

Wednesday, May 27, 2026. Chump continues to destroy the economy while his administration continues to lie about it, he wants to impose NDAs on all federal workers, and much more.

That's Ben breaking down the latest on Iran this morning for MEIDASTOUCH NEWS.

Chump's losing in Iran and his economy is losing as well. Steve Benen (MS NOW) notes:

For reasons that have never been altogether clear, Donald Trump has repeatedly boasted that he’s successfully lowered the price of groceries. American consumers know better, and their perceptions are bolstered by real-world data. The Hill reported last week, “Federal inflation data confirms what you may have been feeling already: Groceries are getting more expensive. Unfortunately, things may be about to get a whole lot worse, economists are warning.”

A few days later, a national CNN poll found that 61% of Americans said they’ve had to cut back on groceries due to price concerns.

Feeding a family currently may take some creativity. Cam Deal (THE COOL DOWN) reports:

A simple grocery-store habit is getting fresh attention online: buying soon-to-expire food at a discount and freezing it before it goes bad.

For budget-conscious shoppers, the appeal is straightforward. The strategy can turn markdown meat, deli items, and prepared foods into meals that cost a fraction of full price.

In a recent post on Reddit's r/Frugal forum, one shopper said they make "a lap around the grocery store" to look for foods nearing their sell-by date and stock up when markdowns are steep.

David Moadel (24/7 WALL ST.) notes:

Memorial Day is supposed to feel like a victory lap into summer: gas tank full, cooler packed, suitcase in the trunk. This year, it feels like sticker shock. A snapshot circulated by Ed Elson, host of the Prof G Markets podcast, on X on May 25, lined up seven everyday inflation categories against last year's holiday weekend and the numbers landed with a thud.

The headline movers: gas up 28%, flights up 21%, coffee up 18%, beef up 16%, hot dogs up 11%, hotels up 4%. The surprise sitting atop the pile is tomatoes. A pound of tomatoes costs 40% more than it did last Memorial Day, the largest single move in the data set and a number that's gotten very little airtime so far.

And Jessica Wong (MONEYWISE) reports:

Texas BBQ joints are getting smoked by skyrocketing beef prices, with some saying the iconic Texas brisket boom could be headed for a painful bust — forcing owners to consider raising prices, changing menus or even shutting down.

“This is as bad as it gets,” Houston pitmaster Russell Roegels told The Washington Post. (1)“Everybody’s at risk these days. You’re one bad week from closing.”

Roegels, owner of Roegels Barbecue Co., says in the past year, the wholesale price he pays for brisket has shot up by 28% to $5.56 per pound. He recently raised his menu prices for brisket by 6% to $35 per pound, but fears that could drive customers away.

And he’s not the only one who is worried. The meat-price crisis has already pushed several Texas barbecue spots out of business, including Brett’s BBQ Shop, Kirby’s BBQ, Sabar BBQ and Wright on Taco & BBQ.

In Portland, they're feeling it as well. Tim Cebula (PRESS HERALD) reports:

To explain the dilemma of setting menu prices in the current economic climate, Isaac MacDougal points to limes.

“A couple months ago, a case of limes was $50,” said MacDougal, founder of Cocktail Mary and co-owner of Supper Club Cocktail Lounge. Now, because of drought and supply chain kinks, it’s over $100. He figures when you factor in the labor cost to squeeze big batches, “the lime juice in a cocktail is more expensive, a lot of time, than the spirit that goes into it.”

But soaring food costs are just one piece of the puzzle for restaurant and bar owners struggling to keep their menu prices in check. Since the pandemic, they’ve been at the mercy of upsurges to practically all of their costs, including labor, rent, utilities, taxes, insurance, swipe fees and packaging.

Sky Chadde (INVESTIGATE MIDWEST) observes:

Since Trump regained office in January 2025, food inflation has increased 3.16%.

Trump ran on a platform to “defeat inflation,” but, as food prices climbed, he said affordability was a “con job.”

Part of the reason for higher food prices is the war Trump started with Iran, which predictably closed the Strait of Hormuz, a critical global oil shipping route. The war has led to high gas prices across the country, and food prices have followed suit.

Recently, Trump was asked whether “Americans’ financial situations” affected his decision-making when it came to ending the war in Iran, according to NBC News.

“Not even a little bit,” Trump replied.

Trump said the “only thing that matters” is stopping Iran from having a nuclear weapon. “I don’t think about Americans’ financial situation,” he added. “I don’t think about anybody.”

But Chump and his administration are thinking about it now and they're lying about it. Brendan Rascius (INDEPENDENT) reports:

As Americans grapple with rising prices at gas pumps and grocery stores, President Donald Trump's top economic adviser has framed elevated consumer spending as a sign of the country’s resilience.

During an interview with Fox Business on Tuesday, Director of the National Economic Council Kevin Hassett doubled down on his upbeat view of the economy, arguing that the knock-on effects of the Iran war are only a “temporary circumstance.”

“While people have been spending more money at gas stations, they’ve been spending more money on everything else, which means that they’re still very, very optimistic about the state of the economy, and they should be,” Hassett told Maria Bartiromo, while grinning outside the White House.

What a moron. What an idiot. Kevin Hassett is a fool if he thinks the American people are stupid enough to fall for that. They've been "spending more money on everything else" because "everything else" is also soaring. Ruth Igielnik (NEW YORK TIMES) reported Saturday:

Concern about rising prices has reached a fever pitch as Americans sit down to Memorial Day barbecues across the country. A majority of Democrats, Republicans and independents said that they had changed their purchases from grocery stores to stay within budget in the last several months, according to polling from CNN.

Another 59 percent of Americans said they had cut back on extras and entertainment.

More than three quarters of Americans, including 55 percent of Republicans, said President Trump’s policies had increased the cost of living in their community.

Survey after survey has found that Americans are feeling growing financial uncertainty. Nearly half of all voters gave the economy the lowest rating, “poor,” in the latest New York Times/Siena poll, up 11 percentage points since January.

And economic confidence has hit a four-year low, according to Gallup.

Kevin Hassett better accept the reality that the American people are not buying the lies that he is selling.

And things could get worse. Alexander Willis (RAW STORY) notes:

A growing number of CEOs suspect a market crash is imminent but have been “scared” to say so publicly out of fear of retaliation from President Donald Trump, and on Tuesday, one security expert warned that such a crash may not only be imminent, but “permanent.”

“If nothing is done about the current situation, Trump’s looming recession could blow a deep hole in the economy,” warned former Homeland Security senior official Miles Taylor in an analysis published Tuesday on his Substack. “So deep that – if it happens before we’re ready – many folks may never be able to crawl back out. That’s because two explosions could hit the U.S. economy at the same time.”

Chump doesn't care about the average American. He cares about building his ballroom and he cares about creating his slush fund.

He cares about his slush fund, he just doesn't care about the average American. He's too busy figuring out ways to enrich his own pocket to actually focus on the needs of the American people.

Harry J. Kazianis (NATIONAL SECURITY JOURNAL) reports:

“The GOP is in a silent state of panic.” That’s what a former 2016 and 2020 top Trump presidential campaign official told me this morning. And you don’t need a Princeton PhD in political science to understand why. The president's political position as of late May 2026 is the worst of his career, and the people inside his own party who track these numbers professionally have stopped pretending otherwise.

The most recent aggregate of Gallup, Reuters/Ipsos, YouGov, Quinnipiac, and Morning Consult places Trump's approval at 38.6 percent against 58.2 percent disapproval, a net rating of minus 19.6 that exceeds anything either of Trump's terms has produced before.

The New York Times/Siena College poll conducted between May 11 and May 15 recorded the highest disapproval figure in the survey's history at 59 percent.

An AP/NORC poll conducted between May 14 and May 18 registered a 22-point net increase in disapproval, with only 38 percent of respondents approving of the president's job performance compared to 60 percent disapproving.

These are not soft margins driven by sampling noise.

The Reuters/Ipsos, Marist, AP-NORC, and YouGov surveys are independently arriving at the same picture from different methodological positions, which is the polling pattern that tends to precede a genuine political crisis rather than the kind of temporary slump that recovers within a news cycle or two.

The American people get it Chump is corrupt and focused on enriching himself. Everything he does is about bringing in funds to himself. Michael Luciano (MEDIAITE) notes:

“Trump brought the NVIDIA CEO on his trip to China to lobby Xi Jinping to buy advanced AI chips, even though it would create a U.S. national security threat,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) tweeted on Friday, referring to the president’s trip to China, where he was accompanied by Jensen Huang and other U.S. business executives, as well as Eric Trump, who has business ties to the Chinese Communist Party. “It turns out Trump also bought millions in NVIDIA’s stock.”

Eric Trump responded to the post by saying all family assets are in a blind trust and are “in broad market indexes,” as opposed to individual stocks:

All of our assets are invested in a blind trust by the largest financial institutions in broad market indexes. To suggest that individual stocks are being bought or sold, at the discretion of any member of the Trump family, would be a lie and blatantly false. Using a silly example, if you buy the “Schwab 1000,” you will get some exposure to Nvidia – as well as a 1,000 other U.S. companies large- and mid-cap stocks. It’s completely disingenuous to represent anything to the contrary. Please be better than this…

Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA) responded by linking to the disclosure signed by Donald Trump himself.

“Outright lies,” Beyer said. “Trump’s assets aren’t in a blind trust, and he bought and sold individual Nvidia stock in 15 separate transactions totaling millions of dollars. That’s what Trump’s financial disclosure – which has his signature – says. See for yourself.”

The disclosure, which is 113 pages long, shows 2,345 purchases, mostly of individual stocks, and 1,296 sales, mostly of individual stocks.

According to Fortune, Donald Trump is the first president since at least Lyndon Johnson to trade individual securities. Since Johnson, every president has placed their assets in a blind trust managed by independent trustees. Trump claimed during his first term that his assets were kept in such an arrangement, but Fortune noted that Walter Shaub, the head of the Office of Government Ethics, resigned in July 2017 and concluded that the blind trust was “not even halfway blind.”

Chump is a con man and a liar. And both count on silence to get away with their actions. It's for that reason that Chump is now attempting to gag the federal workforce. Alex Woodward (INDEPENDENT) reports:

Donald Trump’s administration is proposing a government-wide mandate to require all federal workers to sign non-disclosure agreements to prevent the spread of “confidential government information” to journalists.

Tuesday’s draft notice of the proposal would require new and existing workers to sign an agreement to “safeguard” a broad range of government information from reaching the public after a series of high-profile “leaks” to news organizations.

The document broadly defines “confidential government information” to include a vast amount of information, documents and communications beyond typical classified and unclassified labels.

No. No, you piece of garbage, Chump. You're not going to do that to our federal workforce. You're not going to hide from sunshine laws. You are human garbage and you will remain in the sewer but you're not going to drag our government down with you. Brianna Tucker (HUFFINGTON POST) adds that the big exposures came from Chump's own people like Pete Hegseth::

The controversial form is a stark contrast to the way confidential information has been handled within the Trump administration, from contractors to cabinet officials.

Last year, cabinet officials accidentally texted the top editor of The Atlantic about active military strike plans on an app the Pentagon had just warned was being targeted by Russia.

Federal investigations and court filings earlier this year also revealed that DOGE operatives improperly accessed, shared, and stored sensitive personal data while working inside federal agencies.

David Edwards (RAW STORY) notes:

It's a tactic Trump has deployed for years. During his first term, he became the first president to require private sector-style NDAs from White House staff — senior aides and interns alike. Legal scholars at Cornell Law School called those agreements likely unconstitutional.

His most famous NDA battle came with former aide Omarosa Manigault Newman, who refused to sign a post-departure NDA tied to a $15,000-a-month campaign job offer — an agreement that would have barred her from disclosing details of her White House tenure. She wrote a tell-all book instead. An arbitrator later ruled the NDA "invalid" and its terms "vague and unenforceable."

Legal experts have long warned that the government cannot impose NDAs on federal employees for unclassified information, no matter how sensitive or embarrassing. Critics warn that the sweeping language in the new proposal could be weaponized to suppress whistleblowers and shield government misconduct from public scrutiny.

The public has 30 days to comment on the proposed rule before it can be finalized.

Adam Lynch informs on the social media reaction to Chump's latest nonsense:

Social media critics whaled on the proposal, with the Freedom of the Press Foundation calling it “not just absurd, it’s unnecessary and dangerously secretive.”

“This policy would kneecap whistleblower protections, undermine the First Amendment, and wrongly inhibit the public’s right to know,” the association added on Bluesky.

Washington D.C. attorney Bradley Moss also blasted the proposal on Bluesky: “Federal employees operate under an array of statutory, regulatory and policy restrictions on the unauthorized disclosure of unclassified information. The only reason to add this NDA would be to undercut lawful … disclosures to the media that SCOTUS approved.”

Former U.S. diplomat William Gill pointed out on X that “This obviously begs the question, what are they trying to hide now? Federal employees are barred from unauthorized disclosures of classified information but they’re also covered by whistleblower protections regarding waste, fraud and abuse. That’s the likely area being targeted.”

Chump is an anchor around the necks of the GOP going into the midterms and he's not their only problem. Their own mouths are getting them into trouble as well. For example, Troy Matthews (MEIDASTOUCH NEWS) reports:

Republican Senator Jon Husted voted for Trump's One Big Beautiful Budget bill which threw half-a-million people off of Medicaid in his state of Ohio, then he said those who lost their healthcare access didn't deserve to be on the program in the first place. He later reiterated his support for kicking people off their healthcare by saying on a radio interview, "I love doing that kind of stuff."

[. . .]

“Jon Husted is once again saying the quiet part out loud, claiming the half a million Ohioans he’s kicking off their health care are not people who deserve health care coverage," Ohio Democratic Party spokesperson Tony Wen said in a statement. "Jon Husted could not be more out of touch with the people of Ohio, and they will vote him out in November.”

Husted was appointed by Ohio Governor Mike DeWine to fill the Senate seat vacated in 2025 by JD Vance. He is running to be elected U.S. Senator from Ohio in his right in November.

Let's wind down with this from Senator Ron Wyden's office:

Washington, D.C. — U.S. Senator Ron Wyden, D-Ore., voted against advancing the 2027 Intelligence Authorization Act out of the Senate Intelligence Committee, he announced today.

“The bill is a dramatic retreat for congressional oversight, at precisely the moment when scrutiny of Intelligence Community activities is needed most,” Wyden said. “This bill would deny the U.S. Senate any opportunity to scrutinize and vet key Intelligence Community leaders. It also omits critical, bipartisan whistleblower protections that have been included in the Committee-reported bill for years. The Committee’s retreat from its long-standing bipartisan approach to whistleblower protection legislation is especially troubling during an administration that commits so many abuses.”

Wyden highlighted multiple troubling provisions in the bill:

Eliminates Senate confirmation for the general counsels of the CIA and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. At a time of rampant lawbreaking by the Trump Administration, it is especially troubling that the only Intelligence Community general counsels currently subject to Senate confirmation - the people responsible for offering legal advice on secret, potentially controversial intelligence activities - would be appointed without any congressional or public input or scrutiny.
Eliminates Senate confirmation for the Director of the National Counterterrorism Center at a time in which the Center is expanding its activities into the realm of domestic law enforcement, particularly through the NCTC Intelligence Fusion Center, in a manner that poses a real danger to Americans’ rights.
Eliminates Senate confirmation for the Director of the National Counterintelligence and Security Center, even as the bill puts the Director in charge of a new Intelligence Community Counterintelligence Office in the Department of Commerce, a wrongheaded and unnecessary expansion of the Intelligence Community.
The bill also excludes a critically important provision that was included in last year’s bill that stated that, if a company wants to be an Intelligence Community contractor, it can’t also be a data broker selling the location data of intelligence officers.

###

The following sites -- plus Ann's "The corrupt fish rots from the head," Ruth's "Chump The Miserable," Kat's "Linda Perry gets on my bad side" and Betty's "Crooked Clarence Thomas of the Crooked Court" -- updated:

Tuesday, May 26, 2026

Linda Perry gets on my bad side

I was thinking about a review of Linda Perry's new album. I've been listening to it and trying to figure out what I think of it. Now I'm not sure I care. Rachel DeSantis (PEOPLE) reports:

Linda Perry is reflecting on the time she was allegedly set to produce a Green Day album — only to end up on the chopping block after fans reacted negatively.

The singer-songwriter, 61, claimed in an interview with NME that Green Day frontman Billie Joe Armstrong ghosted her after recruiting her to produce the band's follow-up record to 2004's American Idiot.

[. . .]

She claimed that her plans with Green Day were derailed by Courtney Love, who revealed in a 2007 interview that Perry was going to produce the album — a reveal that drew “backlash” from Green Day fans due to Perry's work as a pop songwriter.

“And then those guys just stopped calling me. I would reach out to figure out what was going on. Nobody called,” Perry said. “I lost six months of scheduled work. That was f---ed up — all because Billie Joe's a little p**sy and got all this backlash from his fans and didn't like it.”

You know what, Linda, calling someone the p-word as an insult is an insult to women. I don't like it. The fact that you're a lesbian and I have to explain that to you? Mind boggling.

“Just balls up, man. Not returning my calls was such a p**sy move and I lost a lot of respect for Billie Joe.”

Linda, balls up? P**sy? I think you need to update your vocabulary. It's not 1983.

Add in that Billie Joe Armstrong is a great guy I know him through C.I. And Billie Joe is one of the people C.I. has an autographed photo of in her music room. So I really don't think the way to promote her new album is to go around trashing Billie Joe.

Closing with C.I.'s "The Snapshot:"

Tuesday, May 26, 2026. Chump claims deal with Tehran on Saturday and then bombs them last night, the Justice Dept has a credibility problem with judges, Chump's slush fund raises new concerns, and much, much more.

Ben (MEIDASTOUCH NEWS) observes, "So if Donald Trump thought that this targeting of Iranian sites in the middle of a negotiation was going to be helpful, it's having the exact opposite impact."

Saturday, Chump was announcing a peace deal. No one else was. The Iranian government wasn't. But liar Chump said he had brokered a peace deal between the US and Iran. Ian Swanson (THE HILL) notes:

Trump on Saturday said the deal would lead to the Strait of Hormuz being opened but did not mention Iranian management of the waterway. The Fars news agency, which is linked to Iran’s government, said Trump’s remarks about the Strait of Hormuz were “inconsistent with reality.”

Fars said that under the terms of the deal, Iran would allow the number of ships passing through the strait to return to “pre-war” levels, but that this would not “in any way mean ‘free passage’” through the strait, as Trump had contended.

So Chump lied? Again? That's what he's known for: Lying. For example, Satuday, Daniel Dale (CNN) published "Fact check: 28 separate false claims Trump made this week." Sunday, members of Chump's own party are complaining about the so-called 'deal.' Minho Kim (NEW YORK TIMES) reports:

Senate Republicans cast doubt on the viability of a potential peace deal between the United States and Iran over the weekend as President Trump doubled down in support of his administration’s negotiations to end the nearly three-month-old war.

U.S. and Iranian officials have described an emerging framework that would reopen the Strait of Hormuz and in which, U.S. officials say, Iran would commit to disposing of its highly enriched uranium. Iranian officials have also said that nuclear matters would be negotiated within 30 to 60 days.

“It doesn’t make too much sense to me,” Senator Thom Tillis, Republican of North Carolina, said Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union.” Mr. Tillis called the Iranians’ commitment to reopening the Strait of Hormuz “questionable” without a finalized peace deal, adding that “there are a lot of things that need to be explained.”

On Saturday, Senator Roger Wicker, the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, wrote on social media that a “60-day ceasefire — with the belief that Iran will ever engage in good faith — would be a disaster.”

Mr. Trump shot back on social media on Sunday afternoon, calling any deal he would negotiate “good and proper” and saying that such criticism was coming from “losers, who are critical about something they know nothing about.” He had announced on Saturday that the United States and Iran “largely negotiated” an agreement to end the war.

Democrats also criticized Chump. David McAfee (RAW STORY) reports:

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) delivered a scathing assessment of Donald Trump's Iran ceasefire Sunday, welcoming the end of the war while warning that the deal represents a humiliating capitulation to Tehran that leaves the United States weaker than when the conflict began.

"If this deal with Iran is real, I will welcome it because every day this insane war goes on, America gets weaker," Murphy wrote in a detailed thread on X. "But make no mistake: these are Iran's terms. Our nation emerges humiliated."

Murphy laid out his case methodically. The deal, as he understands it, gives Iran billions of dollars to return to essentially the same position it was in before the war started — while reports suggest it may also codify Iran's right to control the Strait of Hormuz, the critical waterway that has remained at the centerpiece of the violent conflict.

Chump claimed to have a peace deal on Saturday but events and comments have called that into question. Josh Marshall (TPM) notes, "With the latest “peace deal” now perhaps receding into what we might call the eternal “two weeks” I wanted to provide some mix of guidance or thoughts on what is going on. How do we go from a peace deal that is all but inked (despite only being a ceasefire and agreement to negotiate) to now where the deal is drifting off into the distance and Trump is adding new demands on Truth Social?" And last night? Another strike. Aaron Boxerman, Tyler Pager, Eric Schmitt, Ephrat Livni and Sanam Mahoozi (NEW YORK TIMES) report:

Hours after Iranian negotiators arrived in Qatar for talks on ending the war, U.S. forces struck missile launch sites in Iran and boats trying to emplace mines, American officials said Monday night.

U.S. Central Command characterized the strikes in southern Iran as defensive and said they had been intended “to protect our troops from threats posed by Iranian forces.”

The strikes came on a day when Israel signaled that it planned to intensify its fight against the Iranian-backed militant group Hezbollah in Lebanon.

Andre Damon (WSWS) points out, "The Trump administration confronts a deepening crisis over its failure to achieve its aims in the Iran war. It had hoped that murdering Iran’s leaders would trigger rapid regime change. When that failed, it turned to massive bombardment of the country, followed by an economic blockade. None of these methods have broken Iran’s resistance."

Euan Ward (NEW YORK TIMES) notes this morning:

Iran’s Revolutionary Guards warned on Tuesday that any violation of the cease-fire would justify a “decisive reciprocal response,” after the U.S. military said it had carried out strikes in southern Iran. The warning, carried by IRNA, Iran’s state news agency, underscored the fragility of diplomatic efforts to extend the truce.

IRNA also reported that the Guards said that they had shot down an U.S. military drone and fired on a U.S. fighter jet. The claims could not be independently verified.

Domestically, Chump's lying has influenced the government. Homeland Security, early into 2025, established itself as a non-stop liar. This is something judges learned. When you lie to a court, you make every statement suspect. If you've lied to them about one thing, there's no reason to believe that you wouldn't lie again. Sadly, it's not just Homeland Security that's been lying to the courts. Alan Feuer (NEW YORK TIMES) reports:

Grand juries are the heart of the criminal justice system, the inner sanctum where prosecutors, working unchecked and in secret, have enormous power to indict their fellow citizens.

But under President Trump, the Justice Department has had serious difficulties presenting cases to grand juries, running into problems that would have seemed unthinkable a year ago.

In the past several months, prosecutors have repeatedly failed to persuade grand juries that the cases they have brought warrant criminal charges. And if it were not unusual enough, they have also been admonished at least three times since last November by federal judges who have accused them of misconduct.

The latest setback came in Chicago, where a judge cited a remarkable list of grand jury errors as her reason for dismissing charges against four Democratic activists about to face trial for impeding the police during a protest last fall at a suburban immigration detention facility.

The blunders shocked the judge, April M. Perry, who recounted from the bench on Thursday how prosecutors had spoken to grand jurors outside the grand jury room — a major breach of protocol — and had improperly coached them that the evidence they had presented was particularly strong.

The prosecutors also stacked the deck in their own favor by removing from the panel some grand jurors who had voted against them when considering an earlier version of the charges. Making matters even worse, they tried to hide these maneuvers by redacting the grand jury transcripts — that is, until Judge Perry ordered them to give her the full copies.

The government’s missteps were bad enough to necessitate tossing out the case against the critics of the president’s immigration plan just days before it was supposed to go to trial.

But the mistakes also pointed to a more important problem: As Mr. Trump has demanded more and more charges against those he perceives as his opponents, prosecutors have felt pressure to push weak cases through grand juries. And that, in turn, has led to an erosion in faith in the Justice Department by both the grand jurors themselves and the judges considering the cases.

You can't lie to the courts. You can't. They won't believe you after you're caught lying. But Chump's lied his whole life about everything so he thinks he can get away with it. As he's learning, no, he cannot. He has degraded the integrity of various branches of the government.

Chump's slush fund.

David Horsey (SEATTLE TIMES) points out, "The Justice Department was virtually certain to prevail over Trump’s weak case, but, instead of going for the win before a judge, Blanche helpfully decided to just give Trump close to $2 billion of taxpayer money." US House Rep Jamie Raskin announced in THE NEW YORK TIMES, "This week I introduced legislation to put a stop to this. It would bar the federal government from paying out monetary settlements to sitting presidents. It would also prohibit settlement payments for claims involving investigations or prosecutions related to Jan. 6 or foreign interference in the 2016 presidential election." But will it be enough to stop the corruption of Chump?

So much is wrong about the slush fund. For those new to it, Patrick Reis and Ian Prasad Philbrick (SLATE's THE SURGE) review:

Last week, the Surge explained the sordid tale of Trump suing the IRS and Treasury Department for $10 billion over the leak of his tax returns, noting that the door was open to some sort of ridiculous settlement in which the president’s Department of Justice lackeys would shovel money to Trump and his allies. And wow did they waltz right through that open door.

This week, Trump (the administration) settled with Trump (the person), with the latter getting an apology and the former agreeing not to audit any of Trump’s past returns. Somehow more egregiously, the government is setting up a $1.776 billion fund (get it? Like the year 1776!) for “victims of lawfare and weaponization”—the administration’s term for people investigated or prosecuted for, you know, breaking a lot of laws during Trump’s first term and during Joe Biden’s. So who gets the cash? Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche gets to establish a five-member commission to decide who gets to feed from the trough. We don’t yet know to whom exactly the money will flow, but we do know when the flow will stop: The fund expires in December 2028, about a month before Trump’s term ends.

Across the political spectrum, people are aghast over the illegal move to create this slush fund. Patrick Martin (WSWS) offers this take:

The fund—approved by the Trump White House and the Trump Justice Department in negotiations conducted between Trump and his former personal lawyer Todd Blanche, the acting Attorney General—is an act of presidential usurpation of congressional authority without precedent in American history.

Trump agreed to drop his bogus $10 billion lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service for supposed negligence in the leak of his tax returns to the New York Times. In exchange, Blanche—who takes his orders from Trump and hopes to remove the “acting” from his title—agreed to set aside $1.776 billion in US government funds to pay compensation to individuals claiming to have been unfairly investigated or prosecuted by the administration of Democrat Joe Biden.

The establishment of the “Anti-Weaponization Fund” through the actions of the executive branch alone is a direct and brazen violation of the US Constitution. Article I, establishing Congress as the primary branch of government, declares: “No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law,” thus vesting the spending power in Congress, not the president.

A second feature of the Trump-Blanche deal is a one-page addendum, released by the Justice Department Wednesday, which, in the all-caps style favored by Trump in his incessant social media posts, “RELEASES, WAIVES, ACQUITS, and FOREVER DISCHARGES” Trump, his sons and his business entities from claims that “have been or could have been asserted” by federal defendants or “other agencies or departments.” This would include suppressing all ongoing reviews of their tax returns, which have become a byword for deception and fraud.

This addendum comes just short of two years since the US Supreme Court, in its notorious decision in Trump v. United States, held that Trump—and by extension any president—was immune from prosecution for any action he took, no matter how criminal, in the course of exercising his powers as chief of the executive branch.

In effect, Trump has now been immunized both for his public actions and his private actions.

Todd Blanche has demonstrated that he's incapable of being acting attorney general because he doesn't understand the law. Sabrina Haake outlines the wrongfulness with regards to Chump's attorney Todd Blanche and how he has distorted and broken the law with this slush fund

Because Blanche served as Trump’s personal criminal lawyer prior to assuming the AG role, he explicitly swore during his Senate confirmation hearing that he would recuse himself from any case relating to Trump personally, if advised to do so by government ethics lawyers. Blanche was, in fact, advised to recuse by government ethics lawyers, who presented Blanche a PowerPoint presentation on DOJ ethics that explicitly detailed his recusal requirement.

Blanche did not recuse. Instead he fired the lawyer who so advised him, and continued representing the DOJ in Trump’s personal lawsuit seeking a preposterous $10 billion from the IRS. Trump filed the suit in his personal capacity, after a contracted IRS employee embarrassed him by revealing that Trump paid only $750 in federal income taxes in 2016 and 2017, and paid zero in federal income taxes for ten years before that.

Blanche, who is legally required to represent the public interest on behalf of the federal government, engineered Trump’s $1.8 billion theft of the U.S. treasury before a judge could stop it.

Trump filed his IRS complaint in January 2026. By April, U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams had expressed obvious doubts about the merits of the case because Trump was both plaintiff and defendant. If a party sits on both sides of lawsuit, there’s no real case in controversy as required under Article III of the Constitution, and the court lacks jurisdiction to even hear the case. Seeing the obvious flaw, Judge Williams ordered both parties to file legal briefs addressing “whether a case and controversy” even existed by May 20.

Instead of submitting legally vacuous arguments, Blanche sought formal dismissal of the complaint, which was granted. Blanche then announced the “anti-weaponization fund” to “settle” a case that had already been dismissed on his request. It is important to understand that after a case is formally dismissed, there’s nothing left to settle. The court did not approve the ‘settlement,’ having never acceded to jurisdiction over the claim in the first place.

The $1.776 billion “resolution” was not authorized by any statute either. Blanche claims that 31 U.S.C. § 1304authorizes it, but the Judgment Fund is statutorily limited to paying legal settlements and judgments against the United States, which this was not, because there was no case in controversy, no jurisdiction, the complaint was dismissed with prejudice, there was no judgment, and no “settlement” was approved by any court. The $1.8 billion fund is simply untethered from the law or case, Blanche’s own legal invention to hold open the treasury cookie jar while Trump dug deep.

The deal Blanche approved in Trump’s IRS lawsuit also granted Trump Audit Immunity through a highly controversial addendum that forever seals and ends any IRS investigation or audit into Trump, his family members, and his businesses. Blanche signed the addendum on behalf of the citizens whose interests he is supposed to represent.

Blanche is licensed to practice law in New York. All practicing lawyers, including those employed by the government, are bound by ethics rules, standards, and commitments. Under the American Bar Association’s model Rules, a lawyer cannot assist a client in breaking the law, nor can they advise a client how to commit a crime or fraud with impunity. They can explain legal consequences, including the scope and application of laws, but they cannot help their client get around them.

In pursuing money on behalf of a former client at the expense of a current client, Blanche is not only violating long-standing conflict of interest rules, he is also concocting another violation of the 14th Amendment. Blanche is obviously planning illegal payments to white supremacists and J6 insurrectionists who attacked the US capital. When asked to deny that plan, Blanche refused, repeatedly.

The 14th Amendment could not be any clearer that the US shall not “assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States…” but Blanche appears to be helping Trump get around it. The only reason to openly violate the 14th Amendment by paying J6 insurrectionists up to $1 million each is to reward them and publicly inspire others to do it again at Trump’s behest. Blanche not only helped Trump break the law with this IRS heist, but also seems to be paving the way for Trump’s future criminality.

A lawsuit was filed last week. Nia Prater (NEW YORK) notes:

It also gave rapid rise to legal challenges. On Wednesday, officers who fended off rioters on January 6 filed the first lawsuit to block the fund. And 93 House Democrats, represented by former New Jersey attorney general Matt Platkin and his firm, Platkin LLP, filed an amicus brief challenging the settlement as unconstitutional. But will this be enough to block payments from going out? I spoke with Platkin about the legal recourse to the Trump administration’s brazen new plan.

You are representing 93 House Democrats in a brief challenging the settlement, arguing that the lawsuit runs afoul of Article III of the U.S. Constitution and that Trump’s “blatant self-dealing makes this matter a collusive suit.” Could you walk me through your position?

For people to get into court, there has to be an actual conflict between them. They actually have to disagree. Like, you can’t call somebody up and say, “Hey, I’m going to sue you. You’re going to settle this. Let’s go in and do it together and it’ll sort of work out for everyone.” That’s a collusive suit, which is illegal under our Constitution. So, in order for a court to have jurisdiction, there has to be actual adversity and, without that actual adversity, the Department of Justice can’t just settle a suit.

That prevents you from doing exactly what the president did, essentially somebody in a position of power or with connections calling up the government and saying, “Hey, I want you to pay me. I want you to do something. I’ll just sue you, you’ll settle it out, and we’ll be done.” That’s what happened here, and that’s why we weighed in. But the 93 members weighed in to say that the judge, even if they settled the case, could have asked some tough questions of the parties.

Allison Detzel (MS NOW) quotes legal analyst Andrew Weissmann who states, "I understand why people are concerned about how the money would be spent, but I really think it’s important for people to focus on this: The money should never be used at all in the first place." Because Chump and Blanche can't create a slush fund. Yes, the money shouldn't go to January 6ers but there is no money there to begin with. Congress is in charge of the purse. Congress has not created any funding for this slush fund. There's so much wrong with this.

And Dan Mangan and Kevin Breuninger (CNBC) noted that two more cases were filed on Friday:

Two new lawsuits challenging the creation of the controversial $1.8 billion ’lawfare” fund by the Department of Justice were filed Friday in federal courts in Washington, D.C. and Virginia.

The civil complaints come as several members of Congress have introduced legislation to block the fund, and as President Donald Trump and acting Attorney General Todd Blanche have defended it.

The two suits say the so-called Anti-Weaponization Fund, which was set up as part of a settlement of a $10 billion lawsuit by Trump against the Internal Revenue Service, violate the federal Administrative Procedure Act. One also alleges that it violates the U.S. Constitution, while the other says it violates the Freedom of Information Act.

It's all falling apart for Chump as Greg Sargent (THE NEW REPUBLIC) notes this morning:

GOP discomfort with Donald Trump is growing. Republicans have effectively blocked taxpayer money for his ballroom, revolted against his corrupt slush fund for insurrectionists, and turned against his war. GOP panic about the his cratering approval and the midterm elections has reportedly escalated amid the ballroom and slush fund dramas. Amid mounting GOP opposition, Trump let out a strange, self-pitying Truth Social rant about his ballroom. Then at a rally he unleashed a weird tirade about the stock market and another bizarrely manic-sounding one about affordability. The rants only underscored how disconnected he is from the reality of voters’ economic experiences. We talked to New Republic deputy editor Jason Linkins, who’s been writing well about Trump’s corruption as a major political vulnerability. We discuss Trump’s growing mania, why these stories are uniquely difficult for Republicans to defend, and why Americans’ experience of the economy poses a potentially unsolvable political problem for the GOP. Listen to this episode here. A transcript is here.

In other news, Steve Holland, Andy Sullivan, Richard Cowan and Nandita Bose (REUTERS) reported on Sunday:

Standing in front of the White House ballroom construction site, U.S. President Donald Trump appealed for patience from Americans struggling with soaring gas prices as he sought to justify the cost of a project critics call a vanity effort.

"This is peanuts," he said on Tuesday in an apparent reference to the economic damage inflicted on the U.S. by the Iran war. "I appreciate everybody putting up with it for a little while. It won't be much longer."

The moment crystallized concerns among some in his ‌Republican Party, who worry that the billionaire president's focus on the ballroom appears insensitive as Americans struggle to fill their gas tanks ahead of November's midterm elections.

A Reuters review of Trump's public comments shows he has mentioned the ballroom - either via speeches, social media posts, or in comments to reporters - at least 40 times this year, including nine times this month alone. By comparison, he mentioned it 35 times in all of 2025.

A billion dollars for his ballroom "is peanuts," he says. He says as Americans struggle to buy groceries. Ruth Igielnik (NEW YORK TIMES) reports:

Another 59 percent of Americans said they had cut back on extras and entertainment.

More than three quarters of Americans, including 55 percent of Republicans, said President Trump’s policies had increased the cost of living in their community.

And economic confidence has hit a four-year low, according to Gallup.

But Chump insists that a billion dollars spent on a ballroom would be "peanuts."

Let's wind down with this from Senator Elizabeth Warren's office:

New settlement terminates all pending audits of Trump, his family, and businesses, creates $1.8 billion taxpayer-funded slush fund for Trump allies

Senators open probe into whether agreement breaks federal laws or is consistent with IRS procedures

“(The settlement) essentially (makes) it official United States government policy that President Trump, his family, and many other allies are above the law.”

Text of Letter to Admin (PDF) / Text of Letter to TIGTA (PDF)

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), a member of the Senate Finance Committee, and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Ranking Member of the Senate Finance Committee, demanded answers from Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) CEO Frank Bisignano on the “outrageously corrupt settlement agreement” that the Treasury Department and IRS recently entered into with President Trump. The lawmakers also wrote to the U.S. Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA), requesting that the IG immediately open an investigation into this untrammeled corruption.

“Through this settlement, you and the President have created a nearly $1.8 billion taxpayer-funded slush fund for the President’s political allies, including potentially the January 6th insurrectionists…essentially making it official United States government policy that President Trump, his family, and many other allies are above the law,” wrote the lawmakers.

Earlier this year, President Trump sued Treasury and the IRS for $10 billion over leaks of his tax information which occurred during his first term, creating an unprecedented situation where the President acted as plaintiff while wielding authority over the defendants. This week, in exchange for President Trump dropping the lawsuit, the Department of Justice (DOJ) reached an agreement with Treasury and the IRS establishing a nearly $1.8 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund” for so-called victims of “weaponization” of the federal government. Multiple Trump administration officials have suggested that January 6th insurrectionists could be eligible for payouts from this fund.

“This agreement appears to be a brazen scheme to corruptly dole out taxpayer money to President Trump’s allies and violent insurrectionists,” wrote the lawmakers. “There appears to be no binding limitation that would prevent the President and his family from dipping into the settlement fund for as much money as they want.”

Just one day after the settlement agreement was announced, DOJ issued an addendum requiring the IRS to permanently drop all pending audits or other enforcement actions involving President Trump, his family, his businesses, and “related or affiliated individuals.”

“This is an astonishing abuse of presidential power and a corrupt giveaway of an unknown amount of taxpayer funds to the President,” wrote the lawmakers. “There is no conceivable rationale for this immunity agreement other than to personally enrich the President and his family by allowing them to get away with underpaying their taxes or violating tax law.”

The lawmakers also argue that the agreement appears to be illegal on its face, as DOJ lacks the legal authority to terminate audits unrelated to a case referred to DOJ, and federal law bars the President and Treasury Secretary from “directly or indirectly” requesting the IRS to terminate any ongoing audits.

The lawmakers pressed for more information on the circumstances surrounding the settlement agreement, including: whether any laws or IRS procedures were violated with this agreement, details of the agencies’ deliberations on how to respond to the lawsuit, the President and White House’s role in negotiating the settlement, the list of individuals and organizations covered by the audit exemption, and the enforcement actions and audits being dropped due to the agreement.

Senator Warren has led Congressional efforts to prevent President Trump and his family from corruptly profiting from their positions:

In April 2026, Senator Warren (D-Mass.) and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), along with Representatives Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) and Dave Min (D-Calif.)introduced the Ban Presidential Plunder of Taxpayer Funds Act, a new bill to ban the Presidents and Vice Presidents from abusing their power to steal taxpayer funds.
In March 2026, following the Trump sons’ investment in Powerus, a drone company, Senators Warren (D-Mass.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) sent follow-up questions to the Pentagon on potential conflicts of interest and corruption involving the President’s family and the defense contracting process.
In January 2026, Senators Warren (D-Mass.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), and Andy Kim (D-N.J.), opened an investigation into potential corruption related to the awarding of multiple lucrative defense contracts and loans to companies associated with President Donald Trump’s son, Donald Trump Jr.
In December 2025, Senator Warren (D-Mass.) and Representative Dave Min (D-Calif.) led their colleagues in questioning seven giant corporations on their reported donations to President Trump’s White House ballroom and whether there were any quid-pro-quo arrangements connected to them. The corporations — Amazon, Apple, Meta, Microsoft, Nvidia, Comcast, and Union Pacific Railroad — all have antitrust business pending in front of the Trump administration, raising concerns about influence-peddling and bribery.
In November 2025. Senator Warren (D-Mass.) and Representative Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) introduced the Stop Ballroom Bribery Act to root out apparent bribery and corruption involving President Trump’s ballroom, the first piece of legislation addressing the ballroom that would impose donation restrictions.
In July 2025, Senator 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.