Trump’s attack on Iran was bullshit from the start . . .

Last night, exactly a week after his military parade fizzled and more than five million Americans turned out to protest his administration, President Donald J. Trump announced that the U.S. had bombed three Iranian nuclear sites: Fordo, Natanz, and Esfahan. He assured the American people that the strikes “were a spectacular military success” and that “Iran’s key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated.” “Iran,” he said, “must now make peace.”

For the first time in history, the United States dropped its 30,000-pound Massive Ordnance Penetrators (MOPs)—twelve of them—on another country.

It was a triumphant moment for the president, but as reporter James Fallows noted, the bombing of Iran would never seem as “successful” as it did when Trump could still say the nuclear sites were obliterated and Iran and its allies had not yet made a move.

Today administration officials began to walk back Trump’s boast. The Wall Street Journal reported that Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Dan Caine said it was “way too early” to assess the amount of damage. International Atomic Energy Agency chief Rafael Grossi said that “no one, no one, neither us, nobody else, could be able to tell you how much it has been damaged.”

Tonight David E. Sanger of the New York Times reported that there is evidence to suggest that Iran had moved both uranium and equipment from the Fordo site before the strikes.

In last night’s speech to the nation, Trump appeared to reach out to the evangelical wing of MAGA that wanted the U.S. to intervene on Israel’s side in its fight against Iran. Trump said: “And I want to just thank everybody and in particular, God, I want to just say we love you, God, and we love our great military, protect them. God bless the Middle East. God bless Israel, and God bless America. Thank you very much. Thank you.”

But while the evangelicals in MAGA liked Trump’s bombing of Iran, the isolationist “America First” wing had staunchly opposed it and are adamant that they don’t want to see U.S. involvement in another foreign war. So today, administration officials were on the Sunday talk shows promising that Trump was interested only in stopping Iran’s nuclear ambitions, not in regime change. On ABC’s This Week, Vice President J.D. Vance said explicitly: “We don’t want to achieve regime change.” On X, poster after poster, using the same script, tried to bring America Firsters behind the attack on Iran by posting some version of “If you are upset that Trump took out Obama’s nuclear facilities in Iran, you were never MAGA.”

This afternoon, Trump posted: “It’s not politically correct to use the term “Regime Change,” but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn’t there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!”

On ABC’s This Week, Representative Jim Himes (D-CT) said: “It’s way too early to tell what the actual effect on the nuclear program is, and of course, it’s way too early to tell how this plays out, right? I mean, we’ve seen this movie before. Every conflict in the Middle East has its Senator Tom Cottons who promise us mushroom clouds. In the Iraq war it was Condoleezza Rice promising us a mushroom cloud. And initially—and this is true of every one of these wars in Libya, in Iraq, and Afghanistan—initially, things looked pretty good. Saddam Hussein is gone. Muammar Qaddafi is gone. The Afghan Taliban are gone. And then, over time, we start to learn what the cost is. Four thousand, four hundred Americans dead in Iraq. The Taliban back in power. So bottom line, the president has taken a massive, massive gamble here.”

There are already questions about why Trump felt obliged to bomb Iran’s nuclear sites right now. In March, Trump’s director of national intelligence, who oversees all U.S. intelligence, told Congress that the intelligence community assessed that Iran was not building a nuclear weapon. The U.S. and Iran have been negotiating over Iran’s nuclear program since April, and when Israel attacked Iran on June 12, a sixth round of negotiations between the U.S. and Iran was scheduled to begin just two days later, in Oman.

After Trump announced the strikes, Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) posted: “I was briefed on the intelligence last week. Iran posed no imminent threat of attack to the United States. Iran was not close to building a deliverable nuclear weapon. The negotiations Israel scuttled with their strikes held the potential for success.” He added: “We know—for certain—there is a diplomatic path to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. The Obama agreement was working. And as late as a week ago, Iran was back at the table again. Which makes this attack—with all its enormous risks—so reckless.”

On Friday a reporter asked Trump, “What intelligence do you have that Iran is building a nuclear weapon? Your intelligence community had said they have no evidence that they are at this point.” Trump answered: “Well then, my intelligence community is wrong.” He added: “Who in the intelligence community said that?” The reporter responded: “Your director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard.” Trump answered: “She’s wrong.”

At the end of May, Courtney Kube, Carol E. Lee, Gordon Lubold, Dan De Luce, and Elyse Perlmutter-Gumbiner of NBC News reported that Gabbard was considering turning the President’s Daily Brief (PDB) into a video that looked like a broadcast from the Fox News Channel to try to capture Trump’s attention. At the time, he had taken only 14 PDBs, or fewer than one a week (in the same number of days, President Joe Biden took 90). One person with direct knowledge of the discussions said: “The problem with Trump is that he doesn’t read.”

On June 17, Katie Bo Lillis and Zachary Cohen of CNN noted that while U.S. intelligence says Iran was years away from developing a nuclear weapon, Israel has insisted Iran was on the brink of one. A week ago, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu told the Fox News Channel: “The intel we got and we shared with the United States was absolutely clear, was absolutely clear that they were working, in a secret plan to weaponize the uranium. They were marching very quickly.”

What will happen next is anyone’s guess. Iran’s parliament says it will close the Strait of Hormuz, through which about 20% of the world’s oil travels, sending oil prices upward, but that decision can be overruled by the country’s Supreme National Security Council. Iran’s foreign minister announced today he was on his way to Moscow for urgent talks with Russian president Vladimir Putin. Former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev wrote this afternoon that “A number of countries are ready to directly supply Iran with their own nuclear warheads.”

The Department of Homeland Security has warned that “[t]he ongoing Iran conflict is causing a heightened threat environment in the United States.” It linked those threats to the antisemitism the Trump administration has used as justification for cracking down on civil liberties in the United States.

One pattern is clear from yesterday’s events: Trump’s determination to act without check by the Constitution.

Democrats as well as some Republicans are concerned about Trump’s unilateral decision to insert the United States into a war. The Constitution gives to Congress alone the power to declare war, but Congress has not actually done so since 1942, permitting significant power to flow to the president. In the 1973 War Powers Resolution, Congress limited the president’s power as commander in chief to times when Congress has declared war, Congress has passed a law giving the president that power, or there is “a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.”

That same resolution also says: “The President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances.” If an emergency appears to require military action without congressional input, the president must brief the Gang of Eight—both party leaders in each chamber of Congress, and both party leaders of each chambers’ intelligence committee—within 48 hours.

Democrats and some Republicans maintain that while no one wants Iran to have nuclear capabilities, the strikes on Iran were not an emergency and the president had no right to involve the U.S. in a war unilaterally. Administration officials’ insistence that the attack was a one-shot deal is designed to undercut the idea that the U.S. is at war; Trump’s call for regime change undermined their efforts.

Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) said in a statement: “Trump said he would end wars; now he has dragged America into one. His actions are a clear violation of our Constitution—ignoring the requirement that only the Congress has the authority to declare war. While we all agree that Iran must not have a nuclear weapon, Trump abandoned diplomatic efforts to achieve that goal and instead chose to unnecessarily endanger American lives, further threaten our armed forces in the region, and risk pulling America into another long conflict in the Middle East. The U.S. intelligence community has repeatedly assessed that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon. There was more time for diplomacy to work.

“The war in Iraq was also started under false pretenses. It’s clear that President Trump has been outmaneuvered by Prime Minister Netanyahu, who opposed the JCPOA negotiated by President Obama and has long favored drawing America into a war against Iran. The United States has rightly supported Israel’s defense, but it should not have joined Netanyahu in waging this war of choice. Instead of living up to his claim that he’d bring all wars to an end, Trump is yet again betraying Americans by embroiling the United States directly in this conflict.”

Representative Sean Casten (D-IL) posted on social media: “​​This is not about the merits of Iran’s nuclear program. No president has the authority to bomb another country that does not pose an imminent threat to the US without the approval of Congress. This is an unambiguous impeachable offense. I’m not saying we have the votes to impeach,” he added. “I’m saying that you DO NOT do this without Congressional approval and if [Speaker Mike] Johnson [R-LA] doesn’t grow a spine and learn to be a real boy tomorrow we have a BFing problem that puts our very Republic at risk.”

But Representative Ronny Jackson (R-TX) told Maria Bartiromo of the Fox News Channel that Trump did not have to notify Congress because “[w]e do not have trustworthy people in Congress especially on the left side of the aisle.” If you give information to Democrats and those Republicans who oppose the president, he said, “you might as well put the [ayatollah] on the phone as well.” There is no basis for this statement.

In a quirk of timing, the satirical media outlet The Onion took out a full-page ad in the New York Times today that looks like a newspaper with the headline: “Congress, now more than ever, our nation needs your cowardice.” Journalist Marisa Kabas of The Handbasket got an exclusive look at the insert and reproduced its front page. It read in part: “Our republic is a birthright, an exceedingly rare treasure passed down from generation to generation of Americans. It was gained through hard years of bloody resistance and can too easily be lost. Our Founding Fathers in their abundant wisdom, understood that all it would take was men and women of little courage sitting in the corridors of power and taking zero actions as this precious inheritance was stripped away—and that is where we have finally arrived.”

Congress members will have a copy of the ad in their mailboxes tomorrow when they get back to work on the Republicans’ enormously unpopular budget reconciliation bill.

Someone will shoot a few of these masked muthahfukahs . . . and soon

Masked men in U.S. Border Patrol vests take Santa Ana father after repeatedly hitting him

Source: KTLA-TV

LOCAL NEWS
Masked men in U.S. Border Patrol vests take Santa Ana father after repeatedly hitting him

by: Lily Dallow
Posted: Jun 22, 2025 / 03:31 PM PDT
Updated: Jun 22, 2025 / 04:23 PM PDT

In a graphic video that has since gone viral on social media, about seven or more masked men wearing U.S. Border Patrol vests are seen violently detaining a father in Santa Ana before forcing him into the back of an unmarked car on Saturday.

The violent incident sparked protests in the following hours, and an online fundraiser was started through GoFundMe, where family members identified the victim as Tustin resident Narciso Barranco, a father to three sons who are all U.S. Marines.

One of his sons, 25-year-old Alejandro Barranco, told KTLA that his father was pepper-sprayed in addition to repeatedly being punched in the face during his detention. According to Alejandro, Narciso was picked up by alleged federal immigration officers while he was working as a landscaper at the IHOP on Edinger Avenue and Ritchey Street.

The video shared by the Instagram account @SantaAnaProblems shows a group of men wearing hats and face coverings and police vests converge on Narciso, holding him down while one man repeatedly hits him on the head. Some men are standing guard around the scene before the group again seizes Narciso, with one man holding a baton at the back of Narciso’s neck to push him into the backseat of a silver SUV.

{snip}

Read more: https://ktla.com/news/local-news/masked-men-in-u-s-border-patrol-vests-brutally-beat-take-santa-ana-father/


Reposted by Completely and Totally Obliterated Hat
https://bsky.app/profile/kenwhite.bsky.social

>>>>>>
The Tennessee Holler
‪@thetnholler.bsky.social‬

Follow
“family members identified the victim as Narciso Barranco, a father to three sons who are all U.S. Marines”

https://ktla.com/news/local-news/masked-men-in-u-s-border-patrol-vests-brutally-beat-take-santa-ana-father/

Will TACO attend the NATO summit?

President Volodymyr Zelensky is set to attend a NATO summit in The Hague next week, the European Council confirmed on June 20, while TACO may not show up.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte are set to meet Zelensky on June 24.

Zelensky was reportedly reconsidering attending the NATO summit, as questions remain over U.S. President Donald Trump’s participation, the Guardian reported on June 17, citing unnamed Ukrainian officials.

A schedule released by the European Council on June 20 confirms Zelensky’s planned participation at the event.

A Ukrainian official told the Guardian that Kyiv is in a “permanent hazard” of becoming a victim of “Trump’s short attention span,” adding that Russia has exploited this uncertainty with fresh aerial attacks.

There were “all sorts of promises for this summit,” including U.S. arms, the source said.

Zelensky was scheduled to meet U.S. President Donald Trump at the Group of Seven (G7) Summit, held June 15-17.

Trump left that multilateral event early claiming he needed to deal with the renewed conflict between Israel and Iran.  IN FACT Trump was getting his ass kicked by every other member of the G7 so, in true Trump fashion, he CHICKENED OUT – TACO – “TRUMP ALWAYS CHICKENS OUT.”

 

DHS, ICE: Today’s KKK

Face-hidden goons in plain clothes claiming to be “federal officers” terrorizing American cities and towns — reminiscent of the KKK

Individuals in plain clothes with their faces covered and without badges or name tags are snatching people off the streets and taking them away. Todd Lyons, the acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which is housed within the Department of Homeland Security, claimed that such measures for anonymity are imperative because “ICE officers have seen a staggering 413 percent increase in assaults against them.”

Philip Bump of the Washington Post looked into that claim and noted that by using a percentage, ICE avoids the question of just how many assaults there have actually been. He points out that year-to-date assaults against Customs and Border Protection are currently 20% lower than they were in 2024 and that at least one ICE news release blurred the distinction between “threatening to assault” and “assaulting.” ICE would not provide evidence for their claims.

Bump concludes: “[W]e should not and cannot take ICE’s representations about the need for its officers to obscure their identities at face value.” After Bump’s article appeared yesterday, the Department of Homeland Security posted on social media: “New data reveals that ICE law enforcement is now facing a 500% increase in assaults while carrying out enforcement operations.”

Bump noted that ICE “has been eager to level dubious charges against Democratic legislators,” and the message from Homeland Security bears that claim out. After claiming a 500% increase in assaults, it continued: “Make no mistake, sanctuary politicians are contributing to the surge in assaults of our ICE officers through their repeated vilification and demonization of ICE. This violence against ICE must end.”

The Department of Homeland Security appears to be trying to convince Americans that their agents must cover their faces because their opponents, especially Democrats, are dangerous.

On Tuesday, masked, plainclothes ICE agents assaulted and arrested New York City comptroller and mayoral candidate Brad Lander, the city’s chief financial officer. Lander was accompanying an immigrant to a scheduled court hearing to try to protect him from arrest in one of ICE’s sweeps of those showing up for their court hearings. Lander asked the agents to produce an arrest warrant for the man they were arresting, and was himself arrested.

Homeland Security said it would charge him with impeding a federal officer and “assaulting law enforcement.” As Bump notes, a video of the incident shows that Lander “assaulted the officers in the sense that a bully might accuse you of having gotten in the way of his fist.” Lander was later released, and New York governor Kathy Hochul said the charges against him had been dropped.

The same pattern occurred last month, when federal prosecutors charged Newark, New Jersey, mayor Ras Baraka with trespassing and interim U.S. attorney for the District of New Jersey, Alina Habba, broke the Department of Justice rule that it would not comment on ongoing investigations by posting that Baraka had “committed trespass and ignored multiple warnings from Homeland Security Investigations to remove himself from the ICE detention center in Newark, New Jersey this afternoon. He has willingly chosen to disregard the law. That will not stand in this state. He has been taken into custody. NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW.”

Ten days later, Habba quietly dropped the case and announced another one, this time against U.S. Representative LaMonica McIver (D-NJ), charging her with “assaulting, impeding and interfering with law enforcement” during Baraka’s arrest.

U.S. Magistrate Judge André Espinosa, a federal judge, rebuked the officials who had charged Baraka, warning them that their rush to charge the mayor suggests “a failure to adequately investigate, to carefully gather facts, and to thoughtfully consider the implications of your actions before wielding your immense power.”

The point is to spread the Big Lie

But the point of these arrests is almost certainly not an attempt to see justice done. They continue the longstanding Republican policy of seeding the media with a false narrative of bad behavior by their opponents—voter fraud, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s emails, and so on—in order to convince voters that their opponents are dangerous to America.

President Donald J. Trump relied on this political technique so thoroughly that in 2019 he tried to discredit his primary challenger for the 2020 presidential election, then former vice president Joe Biden, by getting Ukraine president Volodymyr Zelensky to announce an investigation into the Ukrainian company for which Biden’s son Hunter had worked.

Trump didn’t want an actual investigation; he wanted an announcement that an investigation was being launched. He could trust that media reports would carry the story and its suggestion of corruption from there, even in the absence of evidence, leaving behind his own administration’s deep involvement with Russia. Similarly, during Biden’s presidency, Republicans launched a sprawling investigation of what they insisted on calling the “Biden Crime Family” although there was never a Biden family business, their star witness went to prison after confessing to lying to the FBI, and they never produced any evidence that the president had taken foreign bribes. Now, though, with the Trump Organization—a family business—openly making deals with foreign governments, Republicans are silent.

Today, after a week of embarrassing news, Trump continued this pattern by announcing that he is calling for a special prosecutor to investigate claims that the Democrats stole the 2020 presidential election. There has never been any evidence of this Big Lie, and courts dismissed the many cases brought over it. But raising it now, when MAGA is deeply divided over U.S. involvement in the Israel-Iran conflict, could create a distraction and reinforce his loyalists’ support.

There was, of course, a special counsel appointed to look into Trump’s attempt to stay in power despite losing the 2020 presidential election. His name was Jack Smith, and after his investigation, in 2023 a grand jury, made up of American citizens, indicted Trump for engaging in “dishonesty, fraud and conceit” to obstruct American democracy by stopping the counting of votes by which citizens choose their government officials. “Despite having lost,” the indictment reads, Trump “was determined to remain in power.”

Trump — who barely won the 2024 election — sees his popularity disappearing

Now he is back in office, but he remains unpopular. A new Fox News poll released yesterday shows that only 38% of registered voters like the Republicans’ budget reconciliation omnibus bill, while 59% oppose it, a difference of 21 points. The poll also showed that 55% of registered voters are worried about the economy, 84% are worried about inflation, and 57% think tariffs hurt the economy. Only 46% of respondents approve of Trump’s job performance, while 54% disapprove.

This week’s Economist/YouGov poll shows that 52% of Americans disapprove of how Trump is handling deportations, while only 42% approve, and that Trump’s job approval rating among those from 18 to 29 years old has dropped 44 points since he took office. Many of Trump’s supporters believed he would be deporting only undocumented immigrants who had committed violent crimes, but an investigation by CNN reporters published on Monday showed that fewer than 10% of those taken into custody since October have been convicted of violent crimes.

So members of his administration are centering power in the White House while obscuring who, exactly, is giving orders that either are or might be violating the law. Administration lawyers are still hiding who was actually the head of the Department of Government Efficiency in its first months and who gave the order to send Maryland resident Kilmar Abrego Garcia to prison in El Salvador. Making lawbreaking opaque makes it harder to prosecute those doing the breaking. It is possible at least some of the drive to hide agents’ faces comes from that impulse, just as members of the Ku Klux Klan hid their faces in the 1860s and 1870s.

There is another important parallel to the Klan in the administration’s defense of masked agents who are terrorizing Americans even as they insist they are the ones under attack by dangerous Democrats. The Klan set out to “reform” governments elected by a majority of voters and take control themselves, permanently. In Wilmington, North Carolina, in 1898, about two thousand armed white Democrats overthrew a government of black Republicans and white Populists. The Democrats agreed that the town officials had been elected fairly, but they rejected the outcome of the election nonetheless, insisting that such people were “socialists” and had no idea how to run a government.

On June 12, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said in Los Angeles, “We are not going away. We are staying here to liberate the city from the socialists and the burdensome leadership that this governor and that this mayor have placed on this country and what they have tried to insert into the city.”

When California senator Alex Padilla, the senior Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee’s subcommittee on immigration, citizenship and border safety, tried to ask Noem a question, he was assaulted and handcuffed by agents from the Department of Homeland Security. Yesterday, he noted in a New York Times op-ed that “public safety is not the point; the spectacle is.” Trump “is testing the boundaries of his power,” Padilla wrote, “[a]nd he’s using the theatrics around his immigration policies to do it.”

“If federal troops can deploy to Los Angeles against the wishes of the governor, the mayor and even local law enforcement, they can do the same tomorrow in your hometown,” he wrote. “This is a fundamental threat to the rule of law nationwide.”

But Padilla noted that the attempt to force minority rule on the U.S. through violence shows that the administration is weak. “If the Trump administration was this afraid of one senator with a question,” he wrote, “imagine what the voices of tens of millions of Americans organizing will do.”

Today, at a news conference in Los Angeles, a reporter asked Vice President J.D. Vance if Trump’s administration is “cracking down on Democrats.” Vance, who served with Alex Padilla in the Senate, called his former colleague by the wrong name. Once again seeding the idea that a Democratic lawmaker must be a criminal, Vance called the California senator “José Padilla,” using the name of a man convicted in 2007 of conspiring to commit murder and fund terrorism.

The vice president’s press secretary said the vice president “must have mixed up two people who have broken the law.”

Trump admits it: Harvard kicked his ass and he hopes no one noticed

CNN — President Donald Trump said Friday that Harvard has “acted extremely appropriately” during negotiations that could soon result in a deal, signaling a possible major shift in his administration’s efforts to target the university.

“Many people have been asking what is going on with Harvard University and their largescale improprieties that we have been addressing, looking for a solution. We have been working closely with Harvard, and it is very possible that a Deal will be announced over the next week or so,” Trump said in a late afternoon post to social media.

“They have acted extremely appropriately during these negotiations, and appear to be committed to doing what is right. If a Settlement is made on the basis that is currently being discussed, it will be ‘mindbogglingly’ HISTORIC, and very good for our Country,” he added.

The White House, the Department of Education and Harvard did not immediately respond to CNN’s requests for comment.

TRANSLATION:  “Harvard kicked my ass so I’m going to slink away and hope no one notices.”

VP Vance met secretly with Fox to plan their lies in support of Trump’s preparations to declare martial law

Vice President JD Vance secretly met with the owners of the right-wing Fox News channel on Tuesday, right as the network has been pushing lies and propaganda about the protests against abusive immigration raids in Los Angeles.

The Associated Press reports that Vance flew to Montana and met with media mogul Rupert Murdoch, his son Lachlan Murdoch (who runs Fox News and the Fox Corporation media empire day-to-day), and other Fox News executives.

 

The meeting was not on a publicly released schedule for Vance, and his office did not give the press advance notice that the meeting would occur.

The White House hasn’t acknowledged the meeting, let alone revealed what was discussed, such as whether the Trump administration is coordinating messaging and talking points, but history shows that has long been the trend.

Rupert Murdoch founded and launched Fox News in 1996 alongside Republican operative and sexual predator Roger Ailes. For the entirety of its existence Fox has attacked Democrats and the left, regularly promoting racism, homophobia, misogyny, and outright lies and misinformation.

The meeting with Vance occurred while President Donald Trump has deployed military forces to Los Angeles in an attempt to silence protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids. The administration ratcheted up those raids after senior officials like Stephen Miller reportedly expressed outrage that mass deportation efforts are failing to find massive quantities of criminal undocumented immigrants that Trump promoted during the 2024 election.

Fox News has for years been at the forefront of right-wing propaganda popularizing false narratives of crimes caused by migrants. In recent days, the network has promoted lies meant to justify Trump’s military action while misleadingly emphasizing the level of violence at protests in LA.

For instance, Fox promoted Trump’s false narrative about the content of his phone call last Friday with California Gov. Gavin Newsom. Newsom made it clear that Trump never brought up deploying the National Guard, but then Fox and Trump both pushed the lie alleging that Newsom said there was never a phone call between the two men.

Fox is also pushing hate and conspiracies about protesters, with hosts describing them as “ungrateful children of immigrants.” When Newsom addressed the nation to call out Trump’s invasion, Fox led the right-wing media response, lambasting the governor.

Trump owes much of his political career to Fox, who transitioned him from reality TV host to political pundit by giving him a slot on “Fox & Friends” during the Obama administration. The network has been at his side all along, providing ideas and personnel for both of his administrations while defending him and attacking his political enemies.

His current leadership is packed to the gills with ex-Fox News staffers, from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, to Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, and most recently in the guise of interim U.S. attorney Jeanine Pirro. Trump administration figures like Attorney General Pam Bondi (a former Fox News employee as well) appears more often on Fox News than in any other setting, constantly pushing pro-administration falsehoods and narratives.

From time to time, the Murdoch-owned Wall Street Journal has offered slight criticisms of Trump, particularly in relation to his destructive tariff policies. In response, he called the paper “rotten” and “China-oriented,” and even called for the editorial staff to be replaced.

But the meeting with Vance shows that there are still close bonds at the highest levels between the two camps. Fox has shown time and time again that it is willing to go to bat for Trump, and Trump rewards the network with his attention and praise—a testimony to how intertwined they both are.

Fox even paid out a settlement of $787 million to Dominion Voting Systems after they pushed pro-Trump lies after the 2020 election, and it hasn’t seriously shaken their unholy alliance. Fox and Trump are in this together for the long haul, and Vance’s conveniently timed junket is a reminder of that.

Trump desperately trying to make his 34 felony convictions go away. Will not happen.

In Donald Trump’s role as president, he’s busy trying to turn the military into his own personal police force, which seems like it should take up most of one’s attention. But since his personal role still includes “man convicted of 34 felonies in New York State court,” he’s made sure to carve out time to beg a federal appeals court to let him move that case to their more friendly confines. Truly a master of multitasking.

On Wednesday, Trump’s brand-new personal legal team—necessary because Trump gave government jobs to his previous one—argued to the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that because Trump is a special boy, he should get special toys.

Since Trump’s criminal convictions were in state court, he can’t make them go away with a self-pardon or by having his Department of Justice work some magic on his behalf. But if he can get it into federal court, if all else fails, he always has his friends on the Supreme Court.

In fact, Trump’s argument here relies almost entirely on the greatest gift his friends on the Supreme Court ever gave him: presidential immunity. Yes, the argument is that since the Supreme Court ruled on July 1, 2024, that Trump was immune from prosecution for “official” acts, that should be applied backward to Trump’s criminal conviction.

Oh, and a brief reminder that Trump is also still appealing his conviction up through the New York state courts while also trying to get it into federal court. It’s good to take a belt-and-suspenders approach, and apparently, Trump has nothing but time these days.

There’s a big obstacle here that would normally stop this dead in its tracks. The Supreme Court cannot review a state court’s case until it is fully litigated to the highest court in the state and has a final ruling.

Trump’s legal team’s argument to the federal appellate court is basically Let us skip the line, bro. Come on. He’s friends with the owners, and he’s gonna call your boss if you don’t let him.

This legal team also unsubtly telegraphed that their goal was to get this in front of the Supreme Court. It should be there because the scope of Trump’s federal constitutional immunity should be decided “by this court and the Supreme Court, not by New York State courts.”

Even if Trump succeeds in getting this to federal court, his conviction occurred in state court. Theoretically, that would mean he can’t pardon himself, but hey, who knows what the Supreme Court would do for Trump on this one. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh seem to appear inclined to give it a whirl.

In something that flew under the radar at the time—because who can keep up?—former federal prosecutor Andrew Weissmann reported Thursday that the Department of Justice filed a brief on Trump’s behalf. There, they argue that the federal officer removal statute allows this to be sent to federal court. And since there was evidence introduced in the state case that relied on things that occurred while Trump was president, it is improper since his presidential immunity should work backward and make that go away.

FILE - Attorney Emil Bove sits on the day of a sentencing hearing in the criminal case in which President-elect Donald Trump was convicted in 2024 on charges involving hush money paid to a porn star, outside of New York Criminal Court in Manhattan in New York City, Jan. 10, 2025. (Brendan McDermid, Pool Photo via AP, File)
Attorney Emil Bove sits on the day of a sentencing hearing in the criminal case in which Donald Trump was convicted in 2024 on charges involving hush money paid to a porn star, outside of New York Criminal Court in Manhattan in New York City, on Jan. 10.

Weissmann also noted another fun fact: There’s no evidence that Trump’s two former defense attorneys, Emil Bove and Todd Blanche, recused themselves from the DOJ filing. So Trump’s previous personal criminal defense legal team possibly got to shape the argument made on behalf of the federal government, on Trump’s behalf. This is even scuzzier then when former Interim U.S. Attorney Ed Martin, in his prosecutor role, dismissed a case against a Jan. 6 rioter in which he was still the defense attorney of record.

As with nearly everything right now, it seems depressingly likely that Trump’s fate will somehow end up back at the Supreme Court if that court wants it there bad enough. That’s not meant as an implication that Trump could back-channel the court to take it, though his effusive “Thank you again, I won’t forget it” moment with Roberts sure looked a lot like Trump was thanking the chief justice for doing him a solid. Trump’s story is that he was thanking him for how great a job Roberts did at swearing him into office in January.

And Roberts owns this. This is the obvious and predictable fallout from the immunity decision. Roberts made Trump a king, and kings can’t be touched.