Micaela Montaña wrote a piece on washed up celebs.
No link to garbage. Among the 20 she chose? OJ Simpson. Uh, idiot, OJ
died in 2024. Idiot. Her number one pick? Madonna. I don't think
Madonna's washed up. Mark Eglon (THE FASHION SPOT) notes:
Personalities
from the world of fashion, entertainment, and beyond continue to flock
to the cover of Interview magazine. Names like Demi Moore, Jennifer
Lopez, Lily-Rose Depp, Selena Gomez, Natalie Portman, SZA, Sabrina
Carpenter, Jeremy Allen White, Ariana Grande, Zendaya (alongside Robert
Pattinson), and Hailey Bieber have fronted the New York-based Crystal
Ball Media-owned publication. Mel Otttenberg (who has served as EIC
since 2021) secures none other than Madonna as an Interview magazine
cover star, via the Summer 2026 issue. Shot by Nadia Lee Cohen and
styled by Ottenberg himself, the shoot marks Madonna’s 10th Interview
cover story (the most of any star in this magazine's 57-year history).
Dressed in Gucci, the American icon is “transformed into Dee Dee, a
vivacious, hard-living broad with big hair, endless prosecco, and The
Stooges turned way up”.
“I
genuinely appreciate the fact that the team tried something new with
regard to the styling and character, and pleasantly surprised that
Madonna was up for it,” remarked WinstonH20.
“Love
it! The legendary Madonna front and center on Interview. I am glad that
Nadia Lee Cohen captured the artist for the cover story, as the results
are very good, in my opinion. A must-have for me,” MModa shared.
Someone
cue "Like a Virgin," because Madonna is transporting fans back to the
1980s by way of a rockstar-coded hair transformation. The queen of pop
swapped her Confessions II-era shiny golden doll-like curls for a
high-to-the-heavens mullet.
The
67-year-old unveiled her new 'do on the cover of Interview. In several
snaps, she looked fierce while debuting a voluminous, shoulder-length
mullet with cascading layers and wispy bangs. Madonna oozed cool,
pairing her haircut with dewy glam, complete with shimmery eyeshadow,
slightly flushed cheeks, glossy lips, and long pearl-hued nails.
For
one ensemble, she suited up in a satin white skirt set, composed of a
tailored blazer layered over a semi-sheer pussybow blouse and a pencil
skirt that she hiked up to reveal her black garter beneath. A
beige-colored crocodile-embossed purse, white sling-back heels, and an
eye-popping diamond ring finished off look 1.
For
a second outfit, she went bold in a bright red skin-tight long sleeve
shirt, tucked into matching curve-hugging pants, accessorized with
leather gloves and huge pearl stud earrings.
Debbie
Harry rose to fame in the '70s and '80s as the frontwoman of Blondie,
and over five decades later, she still knows how to rock a red carpet.
The 80-year-old looked every bit the blonde bombshell she did in her heyday at the NYC premiere of Supergirl on Monday, June 22.
Debbie
appears to have barely aged a day as she made a rare red carpet
appearance alongside her ex and fellow bandmate Chris Stein.
The
"Heart of Glass" singer looked stylish in a black, waist-cinching
jumpsuit worn over a shimmery, semi-sheer green top, completing her look
with a black purse and white-and-green platform sneakers.
It's
one of Carly Simon and James Taylor's most beloved duets, but this 1974
soft-rock hit was originally performed by another duo during the '60s.
"Mockingbird"
was a massive chart success for Simon and Taylor, but the song first
was introduced to listeners in 1963 by the R&B duo Inez and Charlie
Foxx.
Inspired
by the "Hush, Little Baby" lullaby, the 1963 version of the song gave
"Mockingbird" its first run on the charts. It spent a total of 18 weeks
on the Billboard Hot 100, peaking at No. 7 in September 1963. It also
reached No. 2 on the Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs chart that summer.
A
decade later, Simon and Taylor brought the song back to the charts when
they recorded their playful, upbeat version of "Mockingbird." It was
released as the lead single on Simon's fourth studio album, Hotcakes.
Simon
and Taylor's rendition ended up hitting No. 5 on the Billboard Hot 100
in March 1974, and it reached No. 10 on the Adult Contemporary Chart the
following month. It outperformed another one of the pair's iconic
duets, the 1978 hit "Devoted to You," which peaked at No. 36 on the Hot
100.
Beyoncé
has narrated a new documentary-style video for her haircare brand
CÉCRED that details Jay-Z’s transformation from locs to a full afro.
Titled “The Blueprint,” the video was released on June 21 in direct
response to widespread speculation that Jay-Z’s new hairstyle was a wig
following his May 30 appearance at the Roots Picnic.
The
footage shows the authentic, multi-day process of detangling, washing,
conditioning, and combing out his locs using CÉCRED products. It was a
family affair that includes hands-on participation from Beyoncé and Blue
Ivy. Beyoncé’s voiceover narration explains the personal motivations
behind the change. Meanwhile, the video provides clear visual proof of
the real transformation and shutting down the rumors.
Keith
Richards has suggested that The Rolling Stones may shift away from
traditional touring in favour of residencies, revealing that the
physical demands of travel have become the biggest obstacle to the band
performing live.
"I don't know if tours are
possible," Richards told Uncut Magazine. "It's the travelling that takes
it out of you. But I do see the possibility of us doing residency
somewhere. Wherever it is, London, New York, Paris, anywhere. I'll play
Rome! But I don't see why they shouldn't be able to throw some shows
together in a new format."
Lastly, "Clive Davis" passed and that goes to Elaine's post about it.
Tuesday, June 23, 2026. Chump's 'deal' with Iran continues to falter,
he continues to resist oversight and attempts to kill every attempt at
oversight, Americans are not praising him s the midterms approach, he's
trying to take Church land in New Mexico, and much more.
ABC
is once again fighting back against the FCC’s targeting of The View.
This time, the network has issued an urgent call for audiences of the
daytime talk show to weigh in with their thoughts on the agency’s
decision to question whether the show’s political interviews are exempt
from the equal time rule and potentially affect the broadcast licensing
renewal.
Beginning Monday (June
22), the network is running a TV spot that invites viewer comments to
the FCC with the message, “The View has welcomed your favorite guests
for nearly 30 years. Now the FCC wants to control who is allowed to
appear on the show. Tell the FCC to let the viewers decide. You have
until July 6th.”
The ad also features a QR code linking to the FCC’s comments portal,
which reads, “FCC’s Media Bureau Seeks Comment on Petition by Disney’s
ABC Asking the FCC to Declare that The View Qualifies as a Bona Fide
News Interview Program and Thus is Exempt from the Statutory Equal
Opportunities Requirements.”
Make
a point to weigh in. I have and have made it clear that I support THE
VIEW. This FCC is a joke and it attacking ABC. Good for ABC for
fighting back.
As Vice President JD Vance entered the
fifth hour of negotiations with Iranian leaders over the weekend,
President Trump weighed in with an ill-timed threat to start bombing
again.
If the Iranians closed the Strait of Hormuz, Mr. Trump told a Fox News reporter,
the negotiators talking to Mr. Vance would never make it back to their
country — in fact, they would have no country to return to at all.
For
Mr. Vance, this was the latest example of his increasingly tricky role
as the frontman in the U.S. negotiations with Iran, as Mr. Trump
repeatedly creates disruptions in his path.
On
Monday, Mr. Vance said the first round of talks had laid “a successful
foundation” for peace. But now, Mr. Vance will have to find a way to end
a war that he opposed at the start, while navigating his boss’s whims
and an adversary that has proved itself, at least in part, immune to Mr.
Trump’s threats.
This morning, MS NOW notes that an $80 billion supplemental will be requested.
Iran said on Tuesday that it has no plans to open its damaged nuclear sites
to U.N. inspectors, a day after Vice President JD Vance claimed “a
major milestone” in talks on the country’s nuclear program aimed at
securing a lasting peace agreement.
Iran’s
foreign ministry spokesman, Esmail Baghaei, responded “no” when asked
at a news briefing on Tuesday whether Iran intended to grant access to
any of its war-damaged nuclear sites to inspectors from the United
Nations’ International Atomic Energy Agency.
“We had no detailed discussions on the nuclear issue,” he later said, according to Iranian state media.
In other news, midterms are months away and Chump has alienated so many Americans. Alex Henderson reports that swing voters are still bothered by Republicans:
Four
years have passed since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade
with its June 2022 ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health
Organization — a ruling that, according to conservative GOP consultant
Sarah Longwell, continues to be a political liability for Republicans.
Writing
in the conservative website The Bulwark, Longwell — founder of
Republican Accountability (RA), formerly Republican Voters Against Trump
— explains, "Amid all the talk of inflation, war, and artificial
intelligence, people are underestimating just how important abortion
could still be to this fall's elections. That seems like an insane
sentence to type because, after all, abortion proved decisive in 2022,
when Democrats dramatically overperformed expectations. The consensus
quickly formed that the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade
was the key contributor. But when the Democratic Party put a heavy
emphasis on abortion in the 2024 elections, it didn't pan out. That's
because voters were more motivated by economic issues."
Longwell
adds, "Fights around abortion moved to the states — where Republican-
controlled legislatures were passing sweeping bans — and receded from
the federal level. Today, Dems may have over-learned the lesson of
2024."
Republicans
have signs of trouble ahead of the midterm elections after President
Donald Trump has "failed to deliver on his economic promises," an
analyst argued on Monday.
In a column for The Guardian,
journalist and author Steven Greenhouse pointed out how the GOP will
have to face this growing problem among white, blue-collar voters in the
fall.
"If any demographic group
was key to Donald Trump’s election victories in 2016 and 2024, it was
white, blue-collar voters," Greenhouse wrote. "But in perhaps perilous
news for Republicans, Trump’s support from that group has plummeted – as
many white, working-class voters have grown upset about everything from
increased inflation and gas prices to Trump’s war against Iran. These
glaring cracks in Trump’s blue-collar base point to big trouble for
Republicans in this November’s midterm elections."
The
disappointment among GOP voters is "bad news" for Republicans,
Greenhouse argued. And polls point to that mounting dissatisfaction — a
new CBS poll revealed
that 54 percent of white voters without a college degree disapprove of
Trump's performance as president. Trump won 66 percent of white voters
without a four-year degree in the 2024 presidential election.
Senate Republicans started last week with a plan. Just days after Donald Trump announced his plan to nominate Jay Clayton
to succeed Tulsi Gabbard as the next director of national intelligence,
GOP leaders said the federal prosecutor was so uncontroversial that
they hoped to confirm him by the end of the week, which would have been a
rare example of remarkable congressional efficiency.
He
didn’t go into a lot of detail as to why Pulte’s appointment was such a
priority, though Trump did recently declare that he expects Pulte to
use his new office to perhaps “find out some things about the rigged
elections,” reinforcing obvious concerns about the unqualified housing
official playing the role of a partisan weapon in pursuit of Trump’s
conspiracy theories.
It was against this backdrop that Politico reported
late last week that Pulte had already directed staffers “to pull
together a list of about 300 candidates to be fired from the National
Counterterrorism Center in the coming weeks.” CNN published a related report about Pulte “raising alarm bells among intelligence officials” before his first day even began.
While
the reports have not been independently verified by MS NOW, they did
generate attention on Capitol Hill. Rep. Jim Jimes of Connecticut, the
top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said in a written
statement, “If the reports of Bill Pulte’s arrival at ODNI [the Office
of the Director of National Intelligence] are true, they demonstrate why
he should never spend a minute as Director of National Intelligence, a
role he is legally not qualified to perform. I am particularly concerned
by reporting that he may undertake a sweeping firing of intelligence
professionals, following on major cuts already undertaken last year.”
Intelligence Democrats are warning acting Director of National
Intelligence (DNI) Bill Pulte against carrying out sweeping firings or
improperly declassifying intelligence as Congress braces for the
controversial new intelligence chief’s full first week on the job.
[. . .]
“Given
your lack of experience within the Intelligence Community, it is
difficult to imagine that in such a short amount of time you have
already developed fully informed views as to how to shrink ODNI without
incurring risks to national security,” Rep. Jim Himes (Conn.), the top
Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee and his counterpart in the
Senate, Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) wrote to Pulte.
“Making
significant structural changes to ODNI, to include a reduction in
force, is not an appropriate course of action for anyone in an acting
capacity, let alone without consultation with Congress, and you should
refrain from doing so.”
[. . .]
“We
are concerned that your record as Director of the Federal Housing
Finance Agency demonstrates a willingness to misuse your position,
including your access to sensitive information, to pursue President
Trump’s perceived political enemies and further his retributive
political agenda,” they wrote.
“Given the
extremely sensitive nature of intelligence, we expect that you will not
declassify properly classified information that would compromise
intelligence sources and methods, or weaponize the declassification
process for partisan political purposes.”
A
federal judge on Monday blocked the Justice Department from forcing
Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and other officials to turn over records in its
probe of Democratic resistance to the Trump administration’s immigration
crackdown, calling the move retaliatory.
In a 30-page ruling,
district Judge Patrick Schiltz found that subpoenas were “part of an
unconstitutional effort to coerce Minnesota officials into assisting the
federal government with enforcing civil immigration laws and to harass
and retaliate against them for failing to do so.”
“The
Department is not conducting a criminal investigation, but is instead
using the grand jury process for other (unlawful) purposes,” wrote
Schiltz, an appointee of former President George W. Bush.
“Initiating
a criminal investigation in order to harass political opponents or to
coerce them into taking official action-particularly official action
that the federal government cannot directly require those political
opponents to take-is a blatantly unlawful and unethical use the
grand-jury process,” the ruling reads.
The
document goes on: “The only question, then, is whether the challenged
subpoenas were issued for one of these forbidden purposes. The Court has
no doubt that they were.”
The
courts have caught on. They know this administration cannot be
trusted. When not trying to destroy the justice system, Chump tries to
grease the wheels for corruption. Casey Michel (THE NEW REPUBLIC) explains:
It goes without saying that Trump now oversees the most corrupt White House
the U.S. has ever seen. But it would be a mistake to say that he and
his White House are acting alone. Indeed, in the latest assault on
America’s anti-corruption edifice—perhaps the most destructive effort
yet—the White House is taking a back seat, and is instead looking to
Republican allies in Congress to undo the single most important
anti-corruption step the U.S. has taken in years.
First, a bit of history. For decades, until the early 2020s, the United States stood at the center of the world of offshore finance.
While places like Switzerland, Panama, the Cayman Islands, and other
smaller locales got most of the headlines regarding offshore secrecy, in
reality it was the U.S. that dominated the world of laundering illicit
wealth, attracting billions (and potentially more) from
narco-traffickers, arms dealers, kleptocrats, and others looking to wash
their wealth clean.
Many industries
accelerated America’s transformation into an offshore behemoth,
including real estate and private equity, both of which enjoyed
decades-long loopholes in basic anti–money laundering provisions. But
there was one industry in particular that served as the bedrock for all
of these laundering networks: shell companies. Thanks to America’s
fractured corporate formation landscape, the federal government had no
say in how U.S. shell companies were formed—or what kind of information
was needed when setting up a shell company.
As a
result, states like Delaware, Wyoming, Nevada, and others provided all
of the secrecy and legal protections that cartel heads, dictators, human
smugglers, and others needed to hide their financial tracks. In a
matter of minutes, anyone around the world could set up a U.S. shell
company and immediately access their own bespoke U.S. money-laundering
network—all of it perfectly legally. Time and again, investigators both
domestic and foreign could track a dirty money trail, only to watch
their efforts collapse in the face of a Delaware or Nevada shell
company.
It wasn’t simply autocrats and their
oligarchic proxies who benefited from these anonymous shells. Wealthy
Americans, those looking to secretly influence American politics, those
searching for ways to covertly inject finance into U.S. elections—all of
them profited from this rank secrecy.
Efforts
to bring the barest transparency to U.S. shell companies stretch back to
at least 2008. But it wasn’t until the early 2020s that legislators
finally passed something called the Corporate Transparency Act. The bill
was hardly partisan; remarkably, a slate of legislators from both sides
of the aisle passed the bill over President Trump’s veto. Nor was the
bill onerous. Instead of a public registry of corporate owners, as seen
in places like the United Kingdom, America’s new shell company database
would remain private, accessible only to federal authorities and other
officials tracking illicit and looted wealth.
It’s
difficult to overstate just how momentous this new legislation was. For
the first time in decades, the U.S. was no longer the leading font of
anonymous shell companies. The best days of U.S. offshoring appeared
behind us.
How much can change in just a few
short years. Unsurprisingly, the opening salvo against the Corporate
Transparency Act came from the politician who’s benefited from anonymous
shells perhaps more than anyone else: Trump. Barely a month into his
second term, Trump announced
that the Corporate Transparency Act was an “absolute disaster,” an
“economic menace” that would “soon be no more.” He announced that his
administration would no longer be enforcing the law for U.S. shell
companies—and that no one would need to worry about prosecution for
breaking the law. A few months later, Trump’s Treasury Department announced that it was destroying all of the filings the registry had compiled thus far, torching the database entirely.
A
federal appeals court on Friday blocked the Trump administration's
plans to immediately slash the workforce at the U.S. Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau by about two-thirds, delivering a setback to the White
House's protracted efforts to shrink the consumer watchdog.
The
order from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit came in response to a revised plan the Justice Department
submitted in late March following repeated legal defeats over its plans
to decimate if not eliminate the CFPB.
The
appeals court had been reviewing the administration's appeal of a March
2025 injunction by a federal district court judge which temporarily
barred the mass terminations.
The Justice
Department, which previously tried to cut up to 90% of employees, had
argued that it should be permitted to carry out its new plan
immediately.
Yes, he
wants to increase corruption and Chump knows that will also require
shrinking the US Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. He is highly allergic to oversight and always has been.
It was just last week that US president Donald Trump’s name was removed
from the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts following a court order
to do so, but when it came to taking the 80-year-old Republican’s name
off the building, tarpaulin was erected to cover up the humiliating
moment – tarpaulin which is yet to be taken down.
And with Trump already being branded a “snowflake”
over the move, a group known as The Lincoln Project Advocacy (part of
the wider anti-Trump Lincoln Project) took advantage of the tarpaulin
still being up to beam a projection onto it – one highly critical of the
president.
In one video captured of the projection, the animation shows clips of Trump and the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein; a man climbing up a ladder to rip off letters from the Kennedy Center; Trump scrunching up pages marked ‘Epstein Files’ and eating them; and text which reads “no one bends the knee like the GOP”.
The
Kennedy Center is being accused of “gamesmanship” by fighting a court
order that required the removal of President Donald Trump’s name from
the building’s facade, and of keeping up tarps that block the sign in
“petulant defiance,” according to new court documents filed Monday
afternoon.
Lawyers
representing Rep. Joyce Beatty, D-Ohio, who sued Trump and the Kennedy
Center in December over Trump’s legally dubious bid to rename the center
after himself, filed an opposition Monday to the Kennedy Center’s
motion to pause the court’s prior order requiring the removal of Trump’s
name.
In the filing,
Beatty’s lawyers accuse the Kennedy Center of running a “posion-pill
gambit” to block the court order through legal maneuvers, including a
last-minute request to pause the court order before the June 12 deadline
to remove Trump’s name, which failed.
The
filing also accused the center of hanging a tarp that obscures the
Kennedy Center’s sign—which has stood for 10 days—in “petulant defiance”
and to “frustrate the restoration of the status quo as it existed prior
to the renaming.”
President
Trump poured out his frustrations with the problems plaguing the
Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, saying that multiple people had been
arrested and it would likely need to be drained for repairs.
The reflecting pool on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., has been plagued by algae and a coating that is sloughing off
after a recently completed $14.7 million renovation that was part of
the president’s project to beautify the nation’s capital. On Saturday,
Trump blamed the problems on vandals, who he said cut and poured
corrosive chemicals into the pool.
[. . .]
It
wasn’t immediately clear what the president meant by this. The new
surface isn’t plastic like a typical pool lining, which is easier to
cut, but is more like a coarse coat of paint. The Interior Department
and the U.S. Park Police, which help oversee the pool, didn’t
immediately return requests to provide additional details.
Trump
said on social media on Sunday that he inspected the pool himself.
“Work will begin immediately on fixing the seriously vandalized
Reflecting Pool,” he said.
The reflecting pool
was resurfaced this spring with an “American flag blue” coating. Within
days of the pool’s reopening this month, algae blooms coated the floor
and colored the surface, drawing spectators and online mockery. Some
have taken pieces of the blue coating that has been floating in the
water.
President
Donald Trump has accused his critics of vandalizing the recently
renovated Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool as online images reveal the
landmark's blue paint peeling and algae accumulating.
The
president turned to Truth Social to express his fury over what he
characterized as a vandalized pool. However, no evidence exists that the
landmark has been deliberately sabotaged.
"Of
the MANY Statues and Fountains that we rebuilt, renovated, cleaned, and
fixed, the only one that was Vandalized was the Reflecting Pool, which
is being taken care of, ASAP! It has been given a 300 foot long gash,
chemicals have been illegally placed in the water, and the beautiful new
grass field has been destroyed with a gigantic 86 47 chemically carved
into it (Probably inspired by Dirty Cop, James Comey! )" Trump stated.
MS NOW's MORNING JOE today addressed the reflecting pool.
Referring
to the Reflecting Pool on the National Mall, Minnesota governor Tim
Walz commented on X: “Found an imaginary problem, said only they could
fix it, didn’t listen to experts, hired buddies who grifted millions,
failed miserably, bragged how great it went. The entire Trump presidency
in a nutshell.” (Walz could have added: “blamed others for his failure,
conjured up a conspiracy, then prosecuted them.”)
Last night, Rachel Maddow noted the reflecting pool and other failed 'improvements' Chump has made.
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth has tattoos
all over his body — including a Jerusalem cross and the phrase Deus
Vult (“God wills it”). Tattoos tell us a story about a person’s life and
beliefs.
“God wills it” was a battle cry of
Christian crusaders during the Middle Ages. Today it is used by violent
right-wing extremist groups and other hate organizations – including
those who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6.
Hegseth
has defended his tattoos as expressions of his deeply held Christian
faith. He claimed that he was persecuted for his religion and outspoken
“conservative” beliefs. Yet, under current regulations, such tattoos
could disqualify recruits and subject active-duty personnel to
discipline.
Hegseth now oversees the United
States military — one of the largest and most diverse organizations in
the country, if not the world. He has made it his personal crusade to restore “warrior culture” by stomping out “woke” values, “diversity,” “DEI,” and “political correctness” in the military.
What
Hegseth is really eradicating is the principle that the military should
reflect and serve all Americans. His “warrior culture” is a mask for a
21st-century Jim Crow — one that uses colorblind language like “merit”
and “fairness” to do the work of racism and other forms of prejudice,
bigotry and intolerance.
And it
mirrors the Trump administration’s larger authoritarian project: a
version of American history, national greatness and daily life where
white men are the only agents who really matter.
Black
and brown people, women, LGBTQ people, and other marginalized
communities are pushed aside — cast as supporting players, villains or
erased entirely.
Military service is about much
more than a uniform. It is a claim on citizenship, national belonging,
and who counts as a “real American” and a patriot.
As
Frederick Douglass observed during the Civil War, “Once let the black
man get upon his person the brass letters U.S., let him get an eagle on
his button, and a musket on his shoulder and bullets in his pocket,
there is no power on earth that can deny that he has earned the right to
citizenship.”
Trump, Hegseth, Stephen Miller
and the other architects of the MAGA movement know this is true, which
is why they’re pushing back so hard.
A
Catholic diocese in New Mexico is waging a legal holy war against the
Trump administration's plan to use 14 acres of church land for a new
border wall — saying the plan would desecrate a 25-foot-tall,
mountaintop statue of Jesus nearby.
In court
papers filed Friday, lawyers for the Roman Catholic Diocese of Las
Cruces said the church would fight the administration in court before it
“surrenders even a square inch of its sacred land.”
“The
law, including cases cited by the Government, is clear that the Diocese
is allowed to present its defenses before the Government possesses and
irreparably desecrates the holy site at Mount Cristo Rey,” they wrote.
“This Court should not bless this affront to religious liberty.”
The
court filing also called President Donald Trump’s U.S.-Mexico border
wall a “physical manifestation of this Government’s attitude toward
migrants,” adding that “nothing could be less Catholic.”
Chump's Homeland Security is attempting to seize the land via eminent domain.
Let's wind down with this from Senator Adam Schiff's office:
Seattle, WA – In case you missed it, U.S. Senator Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), joined CNN’s One Thing podcast with
host David Rind at the 2026 Cascade PBS Ideas Festival to
discuss the brazen and rampant corruption schemes of President Trump and
his administration, and how the cost of that corruption is coming at
the expense of the American people.
During the conversation, Senator Schiff also discussed
the opportunities and challenges posed by AI, emphasizing that we must
make sure Americans have access to and are able to live with dignity
amid the technological transformation our society is undergoing.
Schiff also spoke about the Democratic Party’s agenda heading into
midterm elections, including lowering costs, building back an economy
that works for everyone, and making the American dream feasible again.
On the rampant corruption in President Trump’s Justice Department:
[…] It is so transformed and ruinous right now. And in my old
office, I think about a third of the officers quit. We see mass
defections throughout the country. And for me, the canary in the coal
mine happened very early in this iteration of the Trump administration,
when something absolutely unthinkable happened to anyone that had ever
served in the Justice Department. It was beyond comprehension, and that
is the Justice Department sought to dismiss a corruption case against a
major public official, the Mayor of New York, in order to secure his
help in something completely unrelated, and that was enforcement of the
immigration policies of the president. That
was unimaginable prior to this administration, and as much as there are
dark and bleak things to see every day with the kind of corruption of
this administration, we can’t ignore and shouldn’t look away from the
heroes that are also being revealed. And one of my favorites was
one of the attorneys on that case, who had been, I think he was a Scalia
clerk, very conservative, Federalist Society type, wrote to the Justice
Department and said that ‘I’m sure you can find some coward or some
fool to dismiss this case, but it was never going to be me.’
On the cost of the president’s corruption to the American people:
[…] You’ve got the billion-dollar ballroom, you’ve got the triumphal
arch, which violates the law, by the way,
because there’s no Congressional approval. You’ve got all of the no-bid
contracts around the fountains and the pools, they’re spending $5
million to gild, literally gild horses on a statue. You’ve got the
president buying Boeing stock before going to China and announcing a 200
aircraft deal with China, and you’ve got the president
buying Oracle before the TikTok deal, you’ve got the president buying
Nvidia before deciding that Nvidia can export its some of its advanced
chips. This is just stuff we
learned in May, and I do think it’s important to not allow ourselves to
be numb to this, this pillaging. But at the same time, the primary
focus has to be on the fact that while the president is enriching
himself and his family, he is doing nothing to address the
problems of the American people.
[…] And the cost of
corruption is, the president could care less about bringing down the
cost of your food or your housing or your gas, he’s too busy focused on
improving his own economy. His personal economy is doing great. He’s made
more money in the first year of his administration than the rest of his
life put together 10 times, and he can’t be bothered to worry about
your cost of living, and he tells you so. I mean, look how he’s spending
his time. He was out there again on the grounds of the construction of
the ballroom, talking about the ballroom. If
he spent half as much time on trying to help people afford the cost of
living and bring prices down as he spends on that stupid ballroom. I
mean, imagine this: we’re in the midst of an economy that’s simply not
working for millions of Americans, and the president of the United
States is building a golden ballroom. It’s really incomprehensible.
On the opportunities and challenges that AI will bring:
There’s certainly profound
challenges, both with the data centers, and I’ve introduced a bill to
ensure that these large data centers bring their own energy, that they
don’t socialize the costs of improvements that need to be made to the
grid or regional infrastructure or transformers or other technologies. That
they build in an excess capacity, so they can actually put power into
the grid during surge times. This is obviously just one facet of the
problem, you mentioned another, that is the environmental impacts.
[…] There are some new technologies that are mitigating the need for
water, which is, I think, encouraging, but the broader concerns are
still dominating. And in addition to the data center issue, you have the
fact that these models are so advanced now they have far outpaced our
cyber defenses. And you have the additional growing impact on the nature
of work. I’m most particularly concerned about that impact.
[…] I think that AI and the
transformation it will bring, presents both a danger and an
opportunity, and the opportunity is to think anew about how our society
works and how we make sure that people who are working and trying
are able to enjoy a good quality of life. And that there is good and
dignified work for people.
On Democrats’ midterm agenda:
[…] And it is a failure of both parties that housing is unaffordable,
that college is unaffordable, that young people need to get a mortgage
on their education to go to school, that’s on both parties. So, I
totally understand the frustration, and I think there are people in our
party who are speaking to that and speaking eloquently to that, but we
need to do more than speak eloquently to it. We need to attack it
with big ideas, with bold ideas, with non-incremental ideas. I think the
reason we lost the last presidential election was because the
Democratic Party became seen as the party of a deeply, deeply
unsatisfactory status quo.
And we damn well better, when we take the majority, and even more so
when we take the White House, be ready to move dramatically to move this
country in a different direction, of making it possible for people to
work hard and enjoy a good life and provide for themselves and their
family. In a world that is now global, it is automated and is
increasingly driven by AI, and we have absolutely got to meet that
moment. And if we don’t, there
is nothing we can do that will put our democracy on solid ground. If
the democracy isn’t working for people, if people see the quality of
life their parents had as better than what they have. Then all too many
are going to entertain any demagogue who comes along promising they
alone can fix it.
"I've
Made Up My Mind to Give Myself to You," Bob Dylan sings every night on
his recently begun "Long Hot Summer '26" tour, keeping a song from his
most recent album, 2020's "Rough and Rowdy Ways," in play as a staple of
his setlist. It's a beautiful affirmation, as one of the purest love
songs in his recent catalog, and an outlier in that regard. But it does
raise a question: Can you make up your mind to give yourself to Bob
Dylan?
It's a
question to keep in mind because this outing, like a lot of the touring
that preceded it, does ask you to meet him halfway, without a lot of
hand-holding, and certainly no verbal assurances, as he remains as mute
between songs as ever. Bluntly put, this is a fantastic show that he's
taken on the road, but appreciating it as such perhaps may require a
willingness to surrender to a vibe. With dim lighting, a setlist
featuring a lot more deep cuts than world-famous classics, and a hooded
central figure who seems to grow more mysterious right before our eyes,
the mood is somewhere between "the after-hours roadhouse of your dreams"
and "eternity's waiting room."
Saturday
night, I caught up with the tour at the Acrisure Arena in Palm Desert,
California, the third of four stops he is making in Southern California
(none of which are actually in L.A. County, because that's Dylan for
you). I spotted a few quiet walkouts in my section of the floor halfway
or two-thirds of the way through his Tight Ninety, from folks who were
presumably realizing that this was not for them. I also intuited that
more attendees around me than not were fully in their bliss. They had
made up their minds to… well, you know… and their faith was rewarded
with as rich of an experience, in its fashion, as any of the more easily
encapsulated performances Dylan has done in his long day.
But
I did have to chuckle on the way in, checking out the merch stand for
"Long Hot Summer '26" tour, gear and seeing a T-shirt that sported
scrawled lyrics from "The Times They Are A-Changin'." No shame in buying
a shirt with a verse from one of the most significant songs of the 20th
century, as long as you don't imagine that might count as a promise
you'll hear it in the show. He's only done it on a regular tour date one
time since 2009; statistically, the odds that he'd perform that, or any
of his protest-era tunes, are not that much greater than the chances
that he'd bust out "Wiggle Wiggle."
Bob Dylan, like Diana Ross, has been steady touring since 2021. He's not doing LA this swing through? Because he's done several times already. Again, he and Diana have been everywhere in their tours.
Joan
Jett has said that she won’t let disgraced singer Gary Glitter’s child
sexual abuse claims stop her from performing her cover of his hit “Do
You Wanna Touch Me (Oh Yeah)”.
Jett
– who rose to fame as a member of the Runaways in the Seventies –
covered the 1973 hit on her solo album Bad Reputation, seven years after
Glitter wrote and released it.
Glitter’s
career ended in 1999, when he was convicted of downloading child sexual
abuse material. Seven years later, he was found guilty of committing
obscene acts with two girls, aged 10 and 11, and in 2015, he was
convicted of attempted rape, four counts of indecent assault and one of
having sex with a girl under the age of 13.
That
liar Joan Jett. She's always been scum of the earth. When Jackie Fox
was being raped -- back during the Runaways days -- Joan and Cherrie
Currie just watched as it happened. And Joan came out when? Uh, the
'00s. In the 80s and 90s she was just a girl focusing on her music and
living with her 'dad' manager and his wife. She's never done a brave
thing in her life and she's a nothing. I don't like it when people try
to pretend like her Suzi Quatro rip-off influenced anyone.
There are no truths to be found in the so-called documentary BAD
REPUTATION. Watching it (you can rent on AMAZON, HULU subscribers can
watch it for free), it's hard to tell who's a bigger liar: Joan Jett,
director Kevin Kerslake or writer Joel Marcus.
At one point, the film talks about how the little nothing -- that's what
she was, though the so-called 'documentary' pretends otherwise -- was
trying to interest labels with a five song submission tape. The songs
were "I Love Rock 'N' Roll," "Crimson and Clover," "Do You Wanna Touch
Me," "You Don't Own Me" and "Bad Reputation." Joan marvels to the
camera that it was turned down, "These people heard five songs, four of
which were top twenty hits."
Lie. Only three were top twenty hits ("I Love Rock 'N Roll," the Tommy
James and the Shondell's cover "Crimson and Clover" and the barely
scraped the top twenty "Do You Wanna Touch Me").
Everything about Joan is a lie. Lately, she's a feminist but when she
had real power (briefly in 1982) and for years after, she wouldn't use
the term. Only long after her brief career as a charting artist ended
did she begin using the term. And what kind of a feminist hangs out
with Iggy Pop anyway? He brags about statutory rape, writes songs about
it (such as "Look Away" where he sings, "I slept with Sable when she
was thirteen" about Sable Starr). What kind of a feminist hangs out
with Iggy Pop?
She's the woman who had an affair with Cherrie Curry when they were both in The Runaways
-- a minor punk band of the seventies that was rightly ridiculed
because they dressed like "pud teasers." They let a man mold them (Kim
Fowley) and were trying to be pin ups. If you use sex to advance your
career, fine, just don't lie about it and whine, years later, about how
you weren't taken seriously. And while they were letting Kim Fowley
pimp them out, Cheryl Ladd, then starring in CHARLIE'S ANGELS, noted
that it was okay to be sexy but she wasn't going to be a sex object so
don't play like people didn't understand the difference 'all those years
ago.'
Listening to Billie Joe Armstrong and Kathleen Hanna, who don't know
s**t, blather on about the importance of Joan Jett goes to how good of a
liar Joan is. She's hyped herself for so long that what she actually
is has no resemblance at all to how the uninformed actually see her.
Kathleen, for example, is blown away that, in 1982, Joan covered
"Crimson & Clover" and didn't change the gender. Here's a shocker
for you, Kathleen, in 1980, Carole King covered the hit she and Gerry
Goffin wrote, "Hey Girl," and didn't change it to "Hey Boy." If
Kathleen wants to be even more shocked, she might try listening to
Cher's top ten hit from 1972 "The Way Of Love" or her 1967 top ten hit
"You Better Sit Down Kids." Kathleen, even Kurt Cobain covered Cher
("Gypsies, Tramps and Thieves") so maybe you should be a little more
aware of musical history.
Joan? She had three top ten hits her entire career. "Well, she was a
rock artist." Want to go to the US rock chart then? She had two top
ten hits her entire career.
She's nothing. She didn't write "I Love Rock 'N' Roll" and, despite lying to NPR ("With the
help of Laguna, Jett formed another band, The Blackhearts. In 1982, the
band recorded a cover of the Arrows' song "I Love Rock 'n' Roll" which catapulted to the top of the charts. That year, the song peaked at No. 1 on
the Billboard Hot 100 and stayed there for seven weeks. And yet, the
band still couldn't get a record deal."), the hit was made by Neil
Bogart and his record label -- as Bogart had made hits for Donna Summer,
Cher and so many others.
Joan's lies are so complex, they're practically cinematic which makes it
all the stranger that BAD REPUTATION sidesteps them. How often do you
get a chance to tell a rock and roll ALL ABOUT EVE after all? Joan Jett
had a sexual crush on Suzi Quatro and, after failing to get it on with
Suzi, stole Suzi's act and brought it back to the US. Suzi was a UK
artist who had 8 top twenty hits there -- including two number one hits.
By all accounts from people at the time, Joan basically stalked Suzi
Quatro. As late as 1987, she was admitting to THE WASHINGTON POST that
Suzi was a huge influence ("And I thought, if she can do it, I can do
it. And then I saw her a few times and that's where I got the idea for
The Runaways"). So how do you make a film about Joan Jett without even
mentioning Suzi?
The same way you do a so-called 'documentary' about her without noting that her career was born in the 80s and also died there.
More to the point, if you don't buy into the lie, that Joan Jett, in
1982, broke the ground and women in rock followed through the path she
blazed, you don't have a documentary.
She's a copy-cat performer without any original ideas. Even her
so-called unique eye make up look is just a steal from Cher's 60s
folk-rock solo look.
Joan didn't break down any walls. Even before The Runaways, there were
the Wilson sisters. No, not Carnie and Wendy. They come later. We
mean Ann and Nancy Wilson. Heart. Before The Runaways recorded their
first album, Heart had already released DREAMBOAT ANNIE with the rock
classics "Magic Man" and "Crazy On You." In addition, Fleetwood Mac had
already recorded "Rhiannon" (the song Stevie Nicks wrote and sang lead
on -- and the Mac had two women in the group: Stevie and Christine).
Maybe, like nut case Iggy Pop, you want to disown Joni Mitchell. Even
if you do, other women still predate Joan Jett. There's Tina Turner,
for example, who not only played the Acid Queen before Joan ever
recorded one note, but Tina also hit with "Come Together," "Honky Tonk
Women" and other rock songs. There's a reason she's the Queen of Rock.
And it takes a lot of racism on the part of Joan Jett, director Kevin
Kerslake and writer Joel Marcus to pretend otherwise.
It's an interesting world that writes out Tina or Etta James or Grace
Slick or Michelle Phillips or Cass Elliot or Ruth Brown or Cher or
Carole King or Odetta or Ronnie Gilbert or Janis Ian or Buffy
Sainte-Marie or Laura Nyro or the Pleasure Seekers (Suzi Quatro's first
band) or Judy Henske or Wanda Jackson or Goldie and the Gingerbreads or
Carolyn Hester or Bonnie Raitt or Janis Joplin or Fanny or Jean Ritchie
or Joy of Cooking (2 female members: pianist Toni Brown and guitarist
Terry Garthwaite) or Moe Tucker or Hedy West or The Go-Gos (who hite
number one on the album charts a year before Joan Jett hit with "I Love
Rock 'N' Roll") or Chrissie Hynde (whose group Pretenders also hit the
charts before Joan Jett) or Tina Weymouth or Sister Rosetta Tharpe or
Patti Smith or . . .
On
June 22, 1971, Joni Mitchell released the LP Blue and changed the
landscape for singer-songwriters, setting a new standard for emotional
honesty and lyrical storytelling in popular music.
The
album’s raw vulnerability and stripped-down sound stood out in an era
dominated by more polished productions. Over time, it has come to be
regarded as one of the most influential records of its generation.
Decades
later, Blue still resonates with listeners for the way it captures
heartbreak, love, and self-reflection. Its influence can be heard in
artists who followed, including Prince, Taylor Swift, Bob Dylan, and
Jewel.
Jewel
told Rolling Stone, "I remember a friend in high school playing me 'A
Case of You,' from Blue. I could tell that Joni was a painter by the way
she wrote lyrics. She describes smells and sounds and uses fewer words
to transmit more feeling. Her melodies are about shapes. The singing
lines are slow, steep plateaus."
Swift
added, "She wrote it about her deepest pains and most haunting demons.
Songs like 'River,' which is just about her regrets and doubts about
herself. I think this album is my favorite because it explores
somebody's soul so deeply."
Apple
Music named Blue as one of its 100 Best Albums. It came in at No. 16,
ranked between Adele's 21 and Marvin Gaye's What's Going On.
Sometimes
an album can be successful upon release, but still not be fully
appreciated until years later. Such is the case with Blue, Joni
Mitchell's 1971 classic, released 55 years ago today.
Blue
cracked the top 10 of Canada's top albums chart, and climbed all the
way to No. 3 in the United Kingdom. In America, it peaked at No. 14 on
Cash Box's Top 100 Albums and No. 15 on the Billboard 200.
Impressive,
but only a preview of what was to come. In the ensuing decades, Blue
came to be regarded as one of the best albums ever, and has been named
by multiple publications as the top album of all time by a female
artist.
[. . .]
Mitchell
herself has acknowledged the quality and impact of Blue, telling
Rolling Stone in 1979 that "there’s hardly a dishonest note in the
vocals."
“At that
period of my life, I had no personal defenses. I felt like a cellophane
wrapper on a pack of cigarettes. I felt like I had absolutely no
secrets from the world, and I couldn’t pretend in my life to be strong.
Or to be happy. But the advantage of it in the music was that there were
no defenses there either," Mitchell added.
Monday, June 22, 2026. Chump's deal remains in limbo, Tulsi Gabbard
took orders from guru Chris, Chump continues attempting to kill foreign
aid and much more.
Ben (MEIDASTOUCH NEWS) explains there's still no deal and that Iran is making the US prove itself in the talks.
MS NOW's Ali Vitali notes talk of JD Vance being snubbed at the meetings.
Today
on MS NOW's MORNING JOE, Joe noted that deal being discussed is far
less than what Barack Obama negotiated in July of 2015.
In igniting a war against Iran on Feb.
28, President Trump billed the U.S. campaign as an unprecedented step
toward transforming the Middle East and terminating the threat from what
he called a “wicked, radical dictatorship.”
Roughly
100 days later, as the United States and Iran have reached a somewhat
vague memorandum of understanding to end the war, skeptics are
expressing bafflement over what exactly has transformed.
Neither
the war nor the agreement ended what U.S. and Israeli officials regard
as the main threats emanating from Iran. The country’s nuclear program,
while heavily damaged, was not eliminated — its fate punted to future
negotiation.
The same goes for its
ballistic missiles, which the deal does not address. Iran’s
authoritarian regime endured, albeit with new leaders. Its proxies
remain a threat to the region. Israel and Hezbollah, the Iran-backed
militia in Lebanon, persisted in attacking each other.
Chump
wrongly started a war and now as he keeps faltering at ending it, he
has nothing to show for it. He doesn't even have a signed deal. He is a
loser. THE ART OF THE LOSS is his autobiography. He's a loser who
posed as some master deal maker. But he's not and he's never been. He
was always just a con artist. A liar. And now the world sees that.
By the way, Ashleigh Fields (THE HILL) notes Chump's had a meltdown over this NYT report and insists he's adding it his lawsuit against THE NEW YORK TIMES.
U.S. President Donald Trump was forced to backtrack on a previous claim that the U.S. doesn't "need" oil from the Middle East.
An
embarrassing video clip montage created by MediasTouch shows Trump
making remarks on at least two occasions amid the Iran war that the U.S.
has "so much oil and gas" and is "totally independent of the Middle
East." However, while speaking at length about the Iran deal struck earlier this week, Trump admitted that global oil reserves were running low, which put pressure on the White House to strike a deal with Iran to reopen the Hormuz Strait.
CBS
News’s Margaret Brennan began her interview with UN Ambassador Mike
Waltz Sunday by citing some uncomfortable statistics on American
attitudes toward the Iran war.
“Our CBS News poll out this morning shows that more than three-quarters of Americans want to end the conflict now,”
Brennan said of the war with Iran — as a graphic on screen showed the
exact number to be 78%. “With 69% saying the conflict with Iran was not
worth the costs for the U.S. More than half — 57% — say the president’s
war with Iran created more problems than it solved. And two in three say
the administration reached agreement with Iran mainly because it wanted
the conflict to be over.”
Brennan turned to Waltz saying, “Ambassador, the war is unpopular, as you just heard, but how it ends matters, as you know.”
She
continued, “CBS’s Olivia Gazis is reporting that senior members of
Trump’s national security team, including Secretary [Marco] Rubio,
remain doubtful Iran will comply with this deal’s terms. The CIA
director presented [President Donald] Trump
with intelligence indicating inconsistencies with Iran’s commitments.
So, if even the president’s own team doubts this is a win, how do you
sell this to the public?”
But
Chump is no where near ending the war. Despite promising two weekends
ago that he was ending it. It continues and doesn't stop. He said it
would be brief, two weeks. Its now over 100 days. And he doesn't
appear to know how to end it.
This morning, Vice
President JD Vance touched down in Switzerland for the first round of
talks with Iran. The stated goal: extending last week’s interim mediated
ceasefire and the Memorandum of Understanding signed by President
Donald Trump into a more permanent peace in the 110-day US-Israeli war
on Iran. But as those talks continued, Trump lost no time in taking to
social media and Fox News to threaten Iran.
“Iran must immediately stop their highly
paid PROXIES in Lebanon from causing trouble,” Trump wrote on his
platform Truth Social Sunday morning. “Iran must immediately stop their
highly paid PROXIES in Lebanon from causing trouble. If they don’t,
we’ll hit Iran very hard again, just like we did last week, only
harder!!!”
Lebanon’s civil defense reported that Israeli strikes had killed at least 16 people on Saturday morning, and the country’s health ministry said at least 47 people were killed on Friday. In response, Iran once again closed the Strait of Hormuz
shipping pathway, which before the war carried a fifth of the world’s
oil and gas, saying the US violated its deal to end the war by allowing
Israel to continue to bomb Lebanon.
Meanwhile, in the Bürgenstock resort
near Lake Lucerne where the talks are being held, Vance said
that “great progress” was being made, without being explicit about the
steps that had been taken. He noted that the gathering would “allow us
to sit together as teams for the first time in history,” with the goal
of turning “over a new leaf to transform our relationship with the
people of Iran, and to extend an outstretched hand.”
Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher
Ghalibaf, a lead negotiator, said Iran’s military is prepared to react
to Trump’s verbal aggression. “They better be careful with their
statements; our armed forces are ready to respond in a different way,”
he wrote on X. Iranian officials reportedly walked out of Sunday’s talks, protesting Trump’s threats.
A Washington Post report today reveals the devastating human toll of the war.
“Months after the war began with a wave of US and Israeli airstrikes on
February 28, the scale of civilian casualties and destruction in Iran
remains difficult to measure,” Post reporters Dylan Moriarty and N. Kirkpatrick wrote.
In a single airstrike, 100 buildings were
damaged in one civilian neighborhood in Tehran. Almost a third of the
city has been hit by US and Israeli missiles. One report on civilian harm
puts the death toll from late February to mid-April at 1,701 civilians,
including 307 children. Across both Iran and Lebanon, over 7,000 people
have been killed since mid-February, according to official casualty
figures.
Agricultural
workers historically form a massive pillar of Republican support. That
traditional loyalty is cracking ahead of the midterm elections.
According to The Washington Post, more than 300 farms filed for bankruptcy last year. Agricultural debt will likely hit a staggering $624.7 billion.
Rural approval for President Donald Trump fell to 50 percent in a recent
Reuters-Ipsos poll. High fertilizer prices linked to the conflict in
Iran have left families struggling.
Nebraska farmer Scott Thomsen shared his shifting views with the newspaper.
“I’m
pretty disenfranchised as a voter right now, and I think I’m not the
only one,” Thomsen said. “Either I’m going to completely sit these
elections out, or I’m going to vote down the line, incumbents out.”
Midterms
are the start of November. Basically four months from now, people will
be voting. And Chump's not giving them reasons to vote for
Republicans. His actions have annoyed and pushed away voters. John Stoehr observes:
White working-class voters who supported Donald Trump are probably going to stay home.
“I don’t even want to vote for anybody in the next election,” Annette Dombrowski told the Post last month.
The 64-year-old janitor in rural Ohio voted for the president three
times. She used to vote in the midterms, but not this time. “I don’t
care, because they’re all crap.”
Dombrowski represents an "extraordinary swing,"
as the Times
put it last week. Though his unpopularity, especially among affluent
white women, hurt the GOP in the 2018 midterms, white working-class
voters stood by their man. They approved of Trump's "management of the
economy by margins of 30 percentage points or even more," the Times
said. Now, however, as inflation climbs ever higher, his base is falling
out from beneath him. The Times: "Now, recent polls show them
disapproving by anywhere from 14 to more than 30 points."
That's
why a GOP pollster who has worked with Trump is sounding downright
panicked. “It’s working-class voters who are not happy with the
Republican Party, and they may not come out and vote,” John McLaughlin
told the Times. The day before the 2018 midterms,
Trump's approval rating on the economy among white working-class voters
was 66 percent, according to a CNN poll. Now, his disapproval is 57 percent, a recent CNN poll said. If the Republicans fail to mobilize them, McLaughlin said, "we lose the House and the Senate.”
Donald Trump has been dealt a humiliating blow by a new poll about his Iran peace deal.
Trump announced the long-awaited peace deal during his trip to the G7 conference in France last week.
The
14-point memorandum of understanding, which halts the fighting for 60
days, follows months of negotiations, with Washington and Tehran
struggling to reach agreement on such key issues as the reopening of the
Strait of Hormuz and the future of Iran’s nuclear program.
But
his opponents have blasted the arrangement for containing significant
concessions to the Iranian regime while deferring U.S. demands to later
negotiations.
New polling shows that most Americans do not believe the deal has accomplished its primary objective.
According to a CBS News/YouGov survey conducted
June 17-19, 2026, among 2,519 U.S. adults, 69 percent of Americans
believe Iran’s nuclear program has not been stopped, undermining one of
the central justifications for the military campaign.
After the Trump administration upended the world’s largest foreign
aid provider last year, terminating thousands of programs and firing
nearly all of its staff, its plan for the agency was clear: Eliminate it
entirely.
But because it is a congressionally created agency, President Donald
Trump needed lawmakers’ permission to do so. So this year, Trump
officials asked Congress for permission to shutter the U.S. Agency for
International Development and dramatically reduce federal spending on
food, medicine and lifesaving work around the world.
Congress said no. Lawmakers, who hold the government’s purse strings
and have oversight of federal agencies, wanted USAID to remain, even in
its diminished form. They detailed precisely how much the State
Department should spend on foreign aid and for what, including $9.4
billion on global health to treat and prevent maladies like HIV,
tuberculosis and malaria, and more than $5 billion on emergency
humanitarian aid. They also insisted on regular, detailed reports about
how the administration was spending the money.
Trump signed the bill, enshrining their orders into law.
Now, eight months into the fiscal year, Trump officials are failing
to follow many of those orders, ProPublica has found. Officials have
delayed spending on global health, have not issued funds for some
projects and have labeled money destined for humanitarian aid as
“unallocated” to control how it can be spent, according to a ProPublica
review of government records and interviews with legal experts, current
and former government employees, and members of Congress. And when
lawmakers have asked about their actions, officials often have not
responded.
The White House and Congress have been battling over federal spending
since Day 1 of the Trump administration, setting up a constitutional
crisis — a breakdown of the division of power among the three branches
of the federal government, according to several legal scholars.
Nowhere has that crisis been more visible than with foreign aid. Last
year, the administration took the unprecedented step of gutting USAID,
terminating thousands of aid programs and letting funding expire, all
without permission from Congress. Lawmakers did little to stop it.
Now, in defying Congress on foreign aid that Trump himself agreed to spend, the administration is quietly escalating the battle.
“It is a huge grab of power from the president, taking powers away
from Congress,” said David Super, a professor of law and economics at
Georgetown University and a leading scholar on administrative and
constitutional law.
USAID was created by Congress decades ago as a means of promoting American diplomacy and soft power around the world. As ProPublica previously reported,
when Trump officials dismantled the agency last year, stopping payments
on thousands of lifesaving programs that provided food, medicine and
other supplies to impoverished nations, many people died, including
children.
Even with USAID in shambles, Congress has made clear that it expects
the administration to continue providing foreign aid — in some cases, at
nearly the level it did in previous years.
“It’s proof that there is still broad, bipartisan support for America
showing up in the world, helping people and working with our allies and
partners on shared challenges, not just because it’s the right thing to
do, but because it directly benefits us,” said Sen. Brian Schatz,
D-Hawaii, the ranking member of the Senate committee with oversight of
foreign aid funds. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., the committee’s chair,
did not respond to multiple requests for comment.
In other news, Trina and I both warned repeatedly ahead of Tulsi's confirmation
hearing and vote that Trashy Garbage's relationship with Guru Chris
should prevent her from being named head of DNI. Well . . . Jennifer Bowers Bahney (MEDIAITE) notes:
A wild new story
on former Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and her Hare
Krishna guru’s influence on her policy actions has sent shockwaves
through social media.
Sunday’s Washington Postarticle by investigative journalist Jon Swaine comes just days after Gabbard stepped down to manage her husband’s cancer treatments.
Swaine wrote that Gabbard grew up in “eccentric religious leader” Chris Butler’s
breakaway Hare Krishna group that has been described by some ex-members
as a “cult,” although the group denies that characterization.
Swaine set out on a year-long investigation to learn whether the
“reclusive guru been secretly trying to steer Gabbard’s actions as a
public official.” He reviewed tends of thousands of documents, declaring
that “Their content was extraordinary.”
“Dozens of attached memos appeared to document directives and advice
for Gabbard from her time in Congress. Some contained instructions on
what legislation she should propose, which policies she should embrace
and how she should conduct herself on television. They had an air of
authority,” Swaine wrote.
Research fellow Kareem Rifai
wrote on social media, “This is an utterly insane story: 25,000
documents reviewed by WaPo indicate that throughout Tulsi’s career, her
political moves were controlled by her guru, cult leader Chris Butler.
This woman was leading the world’s largest intelligence apparatus.”
For example, November 26, 2024, we noted:
"So while holding the office of Director of National Intelligence, she
would be serving 'guru' Chris? And that's acceptable how?" We noted
this repeatedly -- Trina and I both. It's a shame people didn't wish to
pay attention. Here for Trina's posts covering the guru.
The Washington Post obtained more than 25,000 memos and other
documents exchanged between Gabbard and Butler that appeared to reveal
instances in which Butler gave Gabbard direction on several issues,
according to the report. There were other instances in which Butler sharply criticized the former Representative from Hawaii as "mealymouthed" over one bill she introduced.
"Dozens
of attached memos appeared to document directives and advice for
Gabbard from her time in Congress," the report reads in part. "Some
contained instructions on what legislation she should propose, which
policies she should embrace, and how she should conduct herself on
television. They had an air of authority. A memo about a proposal to
partition war-torn Iraq into three states quoted an unnamed person as
saying it was 'time for TG to come up with this idea.'"
Let's note John Oliver.
Let's wind down with this from Senator Elizabeth Warren:
Democrats’ new report exposes how Trump and Republicans have driven up costs and broken promises to American families
“While Donald Trump and
Republicans dream up new ways to line their billionaire buddies’ pockets
and give giant corporations even bigger tax breaks, Democrats are
united in the fight to lower families’ costs and deliver universal child
care.”
Washington, D.C. - Senator Elizabeth Warren
(D-Mass.) joined Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and
Senator Patty Murray (D-Wash.) in announcing the next pillar of Senate
Democrats’ affordability agenda: a new Senate Democratic vision to make
child care more affordable, more available, and higher quality for
families across the country. Democrats’ policy framework stands in stark
contrast to Republicans’ policies, which have led to skyrocketing costs
and exacerbated the child care crisis.
“Universal child care is the best investment we can make in bolstering the middle class,” said Senator Warren.
While Donald Trump and Republicans dream up new ways to line their
billionaire buddies’ pockets and give giant corporations even bigger tax
breaks, Democrats are united in the fight to lower families’ costs and
deliver universal child care. Together, we’ll get it done.”
“Trump and Republicans have made finding reliable and affordable child care an impossible feat," said Leader Schumer.
“They have waged an all-out war on the child care sector, hurting those
who are the most vulnerable among us: children. Senate Democrats are
focused on a Day One solution to the child care crisis that includes
affordable child care that meets parents’ needs while investing in the
infrastructure, workforce, and early childhood programs. As Republicans
continue to fund tax cuts for their billionaire buddies, Democrats are
laser-focused on the issues that Americans actually care about —
affordability.”
“When I go back home there is not a single parent saying, ‘What I
really want—is higher prices and more war mongering.’ That may seem fine
to an out-of-touch billionaire like Trump but working families don’t
‘love’ inflation. Instead, the issue that comes up the most is no
surprise to any parent: It’s child care. Trump’s latest budget short
changes child care, while blowing up war spending,” said Senator Murray.
“Trump says we can’t afford child care. The truth is we can’t afford to
ignore child care. This year, Senator Warren and I announced our Child
Care for America Working Group—a coalition dedicated to lowering costs
and delivering affordable and accessible high quality child care for all
families across the country. Now, we’re making this a central focus of
our caucus’s long-term affordability agenda with Leader Schumer. This is
a priority for families—so Democrats will make it a priority in
Congress.”
Child care costs are one of the largest financial burdens facing
American families today. President Trump and Republicans have abandoned
American families, leaving many unable to find affordable, high-quality
child care. In the wake of this crisis, the senators released the
Democrats’ vision to lower child care costs and expand access to
high-quality care for American families across the country, helping
parents, children, and child care workers alike.
Earlier this week, the senators released a new “Broken Promises” report
exposing how Republicans' policies have wreaked havoc on child care and
harmed families across the country. The report detailed how families
cannot afford child care, how it’s hard to find affordable high-quality
child care, how Trump is attacking our federal child care and early
childhood education experts, and how Republicans are actively
undermining the child care sector. This new report is part of Senate
Democrats’ year-long initiative to address the cost of living crisis
Trump and Republicans have created. So far, Democrats have focused on
the rising cost of housing, historic food and grocery prices, skyrocketing energy costs, and slashes to health care.
Senator Warren has led the fight to make child care available and affordable for working families:
In May 2026, U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) joined the Center for American Progress’ IDEAS Conference to deliver a speech on the need for universal child care.
In March 2026, U.S. Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Patty
Murray (D-Wash.), longtime leaders on child care, along with
Representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Bobby Scott
(D-Va.), established a new working group as the latest major push in Democrats’ fight to lower costs and deliver child care for every American family.
In March 2026, U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani published an op-ed in USA Today calling for the Democratic party to commit to making universal child care a central part of its platform.
In February 2026, at a hearing of the Senate Armed Services
Subcommittee on Personnel, Ranking Member of the Committee Senator
Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) questioned military leaders on the impact of poor barrack conditions and inadequate child care on service member morale and readiness.
In February 2026, U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) teamed up in the fight to deliver universal child care for American families.
In February 2026, at a hearing of the Senate Armed Services
Subcommittee on Personnel, Ranking Member Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)
delivered opening remarks
calling for improving the quality of military barracks, better pay for
child care workers so military families can have the child care support
they need, and tracking the impact of Republicans’ health care cuts for
service members and their families.
In January 2026, U.S. Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and
Reverend Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.) led Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Ben Ray
Luján (D-N.M.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), and Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) in announcing a new investigation into how the Trump administration’s cuts to affordable child care programs are affecting rural families.
In September 2025, U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and
Representative Mikie Sherrill (D-N.J.) led over forty lawmakers in
reintroducing the Child Care for Every Community Act,
legislation that would expand access to affordable child care to every
American family, offer high-quality early education to every child, and
create good jobs for our early educators.
In May 2025, In a response to U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren’s (D-Mass.) letter to the Department of Defense (DoD)
demanding clarity on the department’s plans to address allegations of
child abuse in its Child Development Centers (CDCs), the DoD revealed a
pattern of incompetence in its oversight of child care services.
