President Donald Trump told the world what he really thinks about several Deep State operatives that he's upset haven't been prosecuted by U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi.
According to the Daily Mail, in a Truth Social post that was later deleted, the president let loose, even momentarily slamming Bondi for not bringing charges against several individuals, including James Comey, Letitia James and other political foes.
The message, which the outlet suggested was a "leak" of a "private message" he intended to send to Bondi, complained of her being "all talk, no action," sparking immediate interest by media outlets and those who report on the president.
President Trump listed Sen. Adam Schiff in addition to the previous names mentioned, claiming that "they're all guilty as hell," demanding that prosecutorial action be taken against them.
In the message to Bondi, Trump wrote, "We can't delay any longer, it's killing our reputation and credibility."
But many believe Trump's frustrations were geared toward someone else.
The Daily Mail noted:
Much of his fury was directed at the outgoing US attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Erik Siebert, who declined to prosecute James for mortgage fraud over what he said was a lack of evidence.
Siebert also failed to prosecute Comey after Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard accused him of threatening Trump in a social media post.
Even though Siebert resigned last week and said he quit his position, the president insisted that he fired him.
"He even lied to the media and said he quit, and that we had no case. No, I fired him, and there is a GREAT CASE, and many lawyers, and legal pundits, say so," Trump said at the time.
Lindsey Halligan, a member of the White House counsel, is who Trump wants to take Siebert's place.
Roughly 30 minutes after the original post was made, Trump announced that he had nominated Halligan to the US Attorney position in Virginia's eastern district.
Not long after, Trump also seemed to walk back his frustrations with Bondi.
The outlet noted:
Trump also walked back his prior exasperated tone with Bondi, saying she is 'doing a GREAT job.'
It'll be interesting to see what might come of Trump's message and if it spurs Bondi into taking action on some of it.
The fallout from the assassination of conservative activist and commentator Charlie Kirk has continued apace, now prompting the indefinite suspension of late-night comedian Jimmy Kimmel from his ABC television show for his characterization of the accused shooter and of MAGA supporters more broadly.
Former President Barack Obama decided to weigh in on the network’s decision, pointing a finger of blame at the Trump administration and implying its involvement in First Amendment violations, but, as Fox News reports, he drew a swift rebuke from White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt.
As Newsweek explains, Obama took to X in the aftermath of Kimmel’s suspension, sharing an article written by David French for the New York Times, which warned of the purported First Amendment dangers it represented.
That post followed additional online commentary from the former president in which he implored media moguls to resist what he described as pressure from the Trump administration to engage in censorship.
Obama wrote, “After years of complaining about cancel culture, the current administration has taken it to a new and dangerous level by routinely threatening regulatory action against media companies unless they muzzle or fire reporters and commentators it doesn’t like.”
He continued, “This is precisely the kind of government coercion that the First Amendment was designed to prevent – and media companies need to start standing up rather than capitulating to it.”
In response to Obama’s comments, Leavitt fired back swiftly and surely, countering the former president’s implication that the Trump White House forced the issue on Kimmel’s suspension.
The press secretary’s response came during an appearance on Fox News’ Saturday in America, hosted by Kayleigh McEnany
“With all due respect to former President Barack Obama, he has no idea what he’s talking about.” Leavitt declared.
Stating emphatically that Trump had no role in Kimmel’s temporary removal from the airwaves, Leavitt added, “And how do I know that, Kayleigh? Because I was with the president when this news broke in the United Kingdom,” adding that the commander in chief “had no idea this was happening.”
Leavitt did not stop there, stating, “It was a decision that was made by ABC because Jimmy Kimmel chose to knowingly like to his audience on his program about the death of a highly respected man when our country is in a state of mourning. That was a decision that he made, and he is now facing a consequence for that decision and for that lie.”
Bolstering the assertion that Kimmel’s suspension was a corporate-driven decision and not the coerced government action Obama claimed was a statement issued by Nexstar Media Group, owner of hundreds of ABC affiliates across the country.
“Mr. Kimmel’s comments about the death of Mr. Kirk are offensive and insensitive at a critical time in our national political discourse, and we do not believe they reflect the spectrum of opinions, views, or values of the local communities in which we are located,” the company declared.
Sinclair, the country’s largest ABC affiliate group, took things a step further by not just declaring its intent to preempt Kimmel’s program but also demanding that the host issue a formal apology to the Kirk family and make a substantial financial contribution to Turning Point USA.
The subject of H1-B visas has long been a controversial one, particularly amid the Trump administration’s efforts to prioritize American workers and realign the country’s immigration system.
To that end, on Friday, Trump signed a proclamation requiring an annual visa fee of $100,000 for high-skill foreign workers, as Breitbart reports, sparking criticism from former Biden-era officials and near panic from tech industry giants.
The president’s proclamation is set to bring about a noteworthy increase in visa fees for this category of worker, taking it from $215 to $100,000.
H1-B visas are designed to facilitate entry for high-skilled foreign workers suited for jobs American employers suggest are difficult to fill.
Detractors of the program argue that it is a conduit for overseas job seekers who are willing to work for wages well below those otherwise commanded by American workers.
Trump Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick stated that the Friday move will almost certainly result in the issuance of significantly fewer such visas, because the economics of the proposition for employers are now dramatically changed, and it will not make financial sense for many companies in the way it once did.
Lutnick explained, “If you’re going to train people, you’re going to train Americans. If you have a very sophisticated engineer, and you want to bring them in …then you can pay $100,000 a year for your H1-B visa.”
Though Trump’s move has garnered support from those who have fought against the widespread use of H1-B visas in recent years, others, including Doug Rand, a Biden-era U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services official, vehemently disagreed.
Declaring the increased fee “ludicrously lawless,” Rand added, “This isn’t real policy – it’s fan service for immigration restrictionists.”
“Trump gets his headlines, and inflicts a jolt of panic, and doesn’t care whether this survives first contact with the courts,” Rand stated.
Immigration lawyers and representatives from tech companies jumped into panicked action on Friday, as Politico noted, advising clients and workers traveling abroad to return stateside ahead of midnight on Sunday, when the new policy was slated to take effect.
The White House, for its part, took action to tamp down the hyperbole, assuring all parties involved that the proclamation does not impact those with a current visa and will only apply to future applicants in the February visa lottery who are currently outside the country.
As has been the case with virtually every headline-making order issued by Trump thus far in his second term, lawsuits opposing the H1-B changes are already reportedly in the works.
With some complaining that ambiguities in the order have left many open questions regarding implementation, it seems clear that the emergence of additional administration guidance – not to mention litigation – is almost certainly on the horizon.
A Florida federal judge tossed out a $15 billion defamation lawsuit filed by President Donald Trump against The New York Times in a stunning decision on Friday.
U.S. District Judge Steven Merryday made the bizarre declaration that Trump's lawsuit was overly long and full of “tedious and burdensome” language, which seems like an odd judgment considering the inherently long and tedious nature of litigation.
Judge Merryday gave Trump's legal team 28 days to file an amended complaint that should not exceed 40 pages. The option to amend the complaint seems to further reinforce suspicions that this is an attempt to undermine justice and delay Trump's case.
Judge Merryday didn't rule on the merits of Trump's defamation case, but instead is kicking the can down the road.
In his decision, Judge Merryday wrote, "A complaint is not a megaphone for public relations or a podium for a passionate oration at a political rally. This action will begin, will continue, and will end in accord with the rules of procedure and in a professional and dignified manner.”
Defamation Case Lives On
A spokesman for Trump's legal team, Aaron Harison, confirmed that the lawsuit would continue “in accordance with the judge’s direction on logistics."
The lawsuit is pointed at four New York Times journalists and cited a book and three articles published within a two-month period prior to the 2024 election that Trump's team argue defamed Trump and attempted to influence the outcome of the election.
A book written by Times reporters Russ Buettner and Susanne Craig focused on Trump’s finances and his pre-presidency role in “The Apprentice," which was partly but far from entirely responsible for Trump's nationally recognizable profile.
Trump's lawsuit posits that Buettner and Craig “maliciously peddled the fact-free narrative” that "The Apprentice" was what made Trump a national celebrity. The article also included defamatory claims about Trump’s early business dealings and his father, Fred.
This lawsuit is one of many lawsuits filed against major media organizations, including ABC News, CBS News’ “60 Minutes,” and the Wall Street Journal.
Trump has already scored out of court settlements but the New York Times has chosen to go to court and is banking on a friendly anti-Trump judge to protect them from a serious financial hit.
Winning a defamation case is extremely difficult but Trump has already secured major wins in his settlements with ABC and CBS. Should he succeed against the New York Times, it will usher in an era where individuals have more power to hold the media accountable.
The media claims that these defamation lawsuits are an attack on the 1st Amendment but the media has held the power to ruin lives and dominate political discourse for decades.
The media's monopoly on public discourse has been to the detriment of the nation and the fundamental Constitutional freedoms of the average American. America's journalist class has gotten away with lying for years, and it's time for consequences.
President Donald Trump has unexpectedly pulled his pick for U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia, a move that has stirred fresh political debate in Washington, JustTheNews reported.
Trump's decision to withdraw Erik Siebert, originally nominated in May, came after Siebert received bipartisan backing from Virginia’s Democratic senators amidst a stalled Senate confirmation process and his possible oversight of a high-profile mortgage fraud investigation.
Trump selected Siebert for the federal post earlier this year, aiming to fill a significant position responsible for prosecuting federal crimes in one of the nation’s busiest judicial districts.
Unexpectedly, Siebert attracted vocal support from Virginia Senators Mark Warner and Tim Kaine, both Democrats, who are known for their partisan opposition to many of the Trump administration's nominees.
This bipartisan approval initially appeared to offer Siebert a rare path through a Senate confirmation process that has been slowed by sharp political conflict.
However, as the Senate continued to delay action on most nominations through procedural roadblocks, Siebert’s confirmation never came to a vote.
If confirmed, Siebert would have overseen a sensitive investigation involving New York Attorney General Letitia James, who was accused by a federal housing agency of mortgage fraud.
The case centered on allegations that James had improperly listed two properties, including one in Virginia, as her primary residence when applying for home loans.
Letitia James has denied the mortgage fraud claims and insisted that her niece resides at the Virginia address in question, seeking to clarify the circumstances surrounding the property’s status.
According to President Trump, Siebert’s confirmation support from Warner and Kaine was the primary reason for his change of heart.
"I want him out," the president told reporters in the Oval Office on Friday, openly expressing distrust in the bipartisan endorsement Siebert received.
Trump elaborated further, saying he directed the withdrawal after seeing Siebert approved by "two gentlemen that are bad news, as far as I'm concerned."
Critics of the mortgage fraud investigation into James suggest political motivations are in play, noting James’ history of opposition to Trump’s administration and her high-profile legal disputes involving Trump interests.
Despite these claims, the accusation against James remains based on her housing loan filings, not on political actions or statements.
As of now, Siebert’s nomination has been formally withdrawn, and Trump’s decision leaves the post for U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia vacant as the administration weighs its next steps.
All sorts of new information is coming out regarding the background of Tyler Robinson, the accused assassin who took the life of conservative activist and loving father Charlie Kirk.
According to the New York Post, newly released police bodycam footage of Robinson surfaced this week. The footage was from an incident that happened three years prior to shooting Kirk at a Utah university earlier this month.
What was especially interesting about the footage was the fact that Robinson was wearing essentially the same attire he wore on the day he shot Kirk.
At the time of the incident, which included Robinson talking to local police about a car accident he was in, he was only 19 years old.
The bodycam footage was mostly Robinson discussing with police the car accident he was in with a Ford sedan.
The Post noted:
The video, obtained by Scripps News, shows the then-19-year-old Robinson calmly speaking with police after crashing his silver Audi into a Ford sedan making a left turn at an intersection in St. George, Utah.
“As I was coming through, he turned in, and I T-boned into the side of him," Robinson said in the nearly eight-minute video, which has never before been released.
The outlet added:
Robinson, wearing a gray shirt, black shades and a gray hat, was driving with his brother in the passenger seat; both, along with the other driver, walked away uninjured.
The luxury car, leaking oil, was shown in the footage with its front hood smashed in.
"Just as I left the house, I put oil in it, just topped it off," he said, joking with the responding police officer. The video also showed Robinson's mother showing up with insurance documents in the wake of the crash.
🚨 WATCH VERY CLOSELY🚨
New police bodycam footage just released of Charlie Kirk’s alleged assassin, Tyler Robinson.
We finally hear him speak.
What does his demeanor tell you? pic.twitter.com/HerfHYgSif— HustleBitch (@HustleBitch_) September 20, 2025
Users across social media weighed in on the video, which is the first time the public has heard Robinson's voice.
"I thought it was weird that his response when the cop said his car was leaking was that he had just topped off his oil before leaving his house? Is that a thing? Genuinely asking," one X user wrote.
Another X user wrote, "He was a normie before he went to college an a full academic scholarship. Within a semester he was radicalized."
It'll be interesting to see if any additional footage of Robinson emerges in the coming days and weeks.
While most of President Donald Trump's major picks for top administration gigs are already in the books, a massive one was confirmed this week by the GOP-led Senate.
According to the Daily Caller, Mike Waltz, President Trump's former National Security Advisor, was confirmed by the Senate to be the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations (UN).
The confirmation, which happened based on a party line vote, was just in time for the UN General Assembly gathering in New York City next week.
Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul was the only GOP member of the upper chamber to vote against Waltz's confirmation.
Notably, three Senate Democrats crossed the aisle to vote in favor of confirming Waltz to the top job. Those senators included John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire and Mark Kelly of Arizona.
Waltz's confirmation process has been a bit rocky, as he had to wait after some initial turmoil in the process.
The Daily Caller noted:
Waltz was approved by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on July 24, but was one of numerous nominees to be sent back to committee in early September due to Democrats’ complaints over the initial panel votes. He again passed the committee’s muster on Wednesday, with Shaheen, the panel’s top Democrat, voting yes, and only one Republican, Paul, voting no.
During his interview process, Waltz said that there's “good and meaningful work to be done," after saying that he believes the United Nations needs a "major reform."
Congratulations, Mr. Ambassador! Saturday morning at the U.S. Department of State in Washington, Mike Waltz was sworn in as the 32nd U.S. Representative to the United Nations. pic.twitter.com/SbWT8Bqkhg
— U.S. Mission to the UN (@USUN) September 20, 2025
"Congratulations - may you have great success in straightening that horrifically crooked organization, the UN," one X user wrote.
Waltz has been a major player in the Trump administration, but found himself embroiled in controversy early on as the national security advisor.
The Daily Caller recalled:
Waltz became entangled in controversy during his just over three-month tenure as national security advisor after adding Jeffrey Goldberg, the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic and longtime Trump critic, to an 18-person group chat on the messaging app Signal in March 2025. The messages, published by the outlet, were discussing pending strikes on Houthi rebels in Yemen.
Waltz ultimately left his position, but it was quickly confirmed that Waltz still had the full confidence of the president and the White House.
That must have been true, as Trump nominated him for the UN ambassador gig on the same day he left his post as national security adviser.
President Donald Trump is cracking down on all types of crime that affects American citizens, including the elimination of major narcoterrorists who aim to fill our streets with illegal drugs.
According to the New York Post, the Trump administration announced that as a result of its third strike against drug traffickers, three "narcoterrorists" were killed, marking yet another successful mission for America.
The U.S. military carried out a strike against the drug traffickers -- a mission that Secretary of War Pete Hegseth greenlighted.
While President Trump left out some of the details of the mission presumably for operational security, he touted the successful kill mission in a Truth Social post this week.
The president held nothing back in announcing the mission's results, warning others who might be considering moving drugs into the USA to rethink their life choices.
"On my Orders, the Secretary of War ordered a lethal kinetic strike on a vessel affiliated with a Designated Terrorist Organization conducting narcotrafficking in the USSOUTHCOM area of responsibility. Intelligence confirmed the vessel was trafficking illicit narcotics, and was transiting along a known narcotrafficking passage enroute to poison Americans," Trump wrote.
"The strike killed 3 male narcoterrorists aboard the vessel, which was in international waters. No U.S. Forces were harmed in this strike."
"STOP SELLING FENTANYL, NARCOTICS, AND ILLEGAL DRUGS IN AMERICA, AND COMMITTING VIOLENCE AND TERRORISM AGAINST AMERICANS!!!
The administration also provided high-quality video footage of the strike, which showed the boat carrying the drugs being blown to smithereens in an instant. It quickly went viral.
BREAKING 🚨 Donald Trump confirms ANOTHER military strike on narcoterrorist vessels. HUGE
I PRAY Trump keeps doing these every week
I VOTED FOR THIS pic.twitter.com/kMv47sfSs3
— MAGA Voice (@MAGAVoice) September 20, 2025
Users across social media cheered the Trump administration for taking the shot on the boat and blowing it up.
"I am glad someone finally has the testicular fortitude to go after the cartels," one X user wrote.
Another X user wrote, "I love this. It’s absolutely perfect. They make so much money that they will risk. Humans lives to get that poison into our country."
It'll be interesting to see how far the Trump administration will go in its efforts to cut down on narco traffic.
Pennsylvania Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro said former Vice President Kamala Harris is "going to have to answer for" her silence when then-President Joe Biden's mental decline became apparent, NBC News reported. Harris's forthcoming book, 107 Days, about her short-lived run as the Democratic presidential nominee, revealed how she stood by as Biden decided to run again despite his apparent issues.
Shapiro appeared on Stephen A. Smith's Straight Shooter on Sirius XM on Thursday and was asked about it by the host. The Pennsylvania Democrat said that Harris should have come clean" about her concerns rather than waiting until her tell-all book.
In the book, Harris asked herself, "Was it grace, or was it recklessness? In retrospect, I think it was recklessness," she admitted about her decision to stay quiet. "The stakes were simply too high. This wasn’t a choice that should have been left to an individual’s ego, an individual’s ambition. It should have been more than a personal decision."
The Pennsylvania governor was angry that Harris kept mum while such a vital fact went unsaid until after the election, when it no longer mattered. "I haven't read the former vice president's book, and she's going to have to answer to how she was in the room and yet never said anything publicly," Shapiro told the host.
"I can tell you that I wasn’t in the room, but when I was confronted with engaging with the former president, in looking at it simply from the perspective of, how is he doing in Pennsylvania? Could he win Pennsylvania?" Shapiro said.
"Because, I think, Stephen, you understand, if you can’t win Pennsylvania, it’s pretty darn hard to win the national election. And I was very vocal with him, privately, and extremely vocal with his staff about my concerns about his fitness to be able to run for another term," Shapiro continued.
"I was direct with them. I told them my concerns," he added. Smith also asked the governor, who was the odds-on favorite to be Harris's running mate, whether he would consider a 2028 presidential run. Shapiro said he was happy to be where he is for Pennsylvanians, but that "we are at an inflection point, and I am troubled by what I'm seeing in this country, and I'm concerned about what I'm seeing in my party and I know that I have a voice that needs to be heard in that process," the governor said.
"How that voice ultimately gets heard, how it manifests itself, what I ultimately do, well we'll see," Shapiro went on. "I don't think that's a decision that one can make sitting here right now," he added. The governor said he loves America, but that he wants to see it move in more of a "common sense direction" than it is now.
Shapiro sounds like an excellent choice for vice president, but Harris ultimately went with the very oddball and unlikeable Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, who admitted to being a "knucklehead" during the vice presidential debate. According to Fox News, the choice came down to Harris's decision to go "with her gut," which once again proved that her instincts were all wrong.
The choices were Shapiro, Walz, and Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly. Ultimately, Shapiro was eliminated because he might outshine Harris, as noted in the book "2024: How Trump Retook the White House and the Democrats Lost America" by Wall Street Journal reporter Josh Dawsey, The New York Times reporter Tyler Pager, and The Washington Post's Isaac Arnsdorff. Fox News shared an excerpt of the book outlining the decision.
When Harris interviewed Shapiro, she thought "the two were not a perfect match" as running mates. "He came across as overly ambitious, pushing Harris to define what his role would be. He also conceded it would not be natural for him to serve as someone’s number two, leaving Harris with a bad impression," the book claimed.
Meanwhile, Walz had the "deferential" attitude that Harris sought while also "showing no interest in himself" and "flatly denied any interest in running for president." This was a mistake for a myriad of reasons, but especially because Walz was meant to appeal to the male voters.
Harris and the rest who were around Biden knew that something was wrong with him, but let it slide for way too long. Harris is finally owning up to the truth, but Shapiro is correct that her credibility has been tarnished over this, and it has likely doomed her political career.
The Supreme Court will hear an appeal from the Trump administration regarding whether President Donald Trump had the authority to remove Lisa Cook from the board of governors of the Federal Reserve, Bloomberg reported. The high court was petitioned in an emergency order filed Thursday to determine the validity of the unprecedented action.
Some see the Republicans' eagerness to remove Cook as a form of tinkering with the Federal Reserve. In the 112-year history of America's central bank, this is the first time a president has initiated such a move to the governing board, and a lower appeals court refused to uphold Trump's decision.
However, it's more than just a power play from Trump. Cook has claimed two homes in different states as her "primary residence" to allegedly reap the benefits of a lower interest rate on her mortgage. Conservative attorney James Burnham said in a post Thursday to X, formerly Twitter,outlining the case that it was "no surprise" that the matter ended up at the high court.
No surprise but @TheJusticeDept has just arrived at the Supreme Court seeking emergency relief in the ongoing battle over whether the President can remove Lisa Cook as a Federal Reserve Governor based on seemingly credible evidence of mortgage fraud. Lets unpack. 1/ pic.twitter.com/OdAIU6ORA1
— James Burnham (@BurnhamDC) September 18, 2025
While the issue continues to be hashed out in the courts, Cook has dug her heels in, saying she refused to be "bullied" by Trump into leaving, the Associated Press reported. Abbe Lowell, a high-profile attorney representing Cook, said her client "will continue to carry out her sworn duties as a Senate-confirmed Board Governor."
Meanwhile, Trump nominated Stephen Miran to replace Cook on the Federal Reserve Board. Senate Republicans confirmed Miran to the position on Monday, and now both Cook and her replacement voted to cut interest rates at the Fed on Wednesday.
If she remains on the board, Cook will be able to vote on the interest rate setting committee's vote at the end of next month. However, it's still remains to be seen whether she'll stay as Trump first sought to get rid of Cook on Aug. 25 after alleging that she committed mortgage fraud, Fox News reported.
Bill Pulte, whom Trump appointed to the Federal Housing Finance Agency, which oversees Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, filed two referrals to the Justice Department after uncovering problems with her mortgage documents, which listed at least two homes as her primary residences in Michigan and Georgia. These purchases were made before then-President Joe Biden appointed her to the Fed, but the recent Justice Department referrals led to Trump firing Cook.
Cook sued Trump in federal court on August 28, also naming Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System in the lawsuit. Notably, Cook's lawsuit did not dispute or even address the allegations against her.
Cook isn't the only official to have a problem with her mortgage documents. As the New York Post reported, Pulte's investigation also found that Trump's nemesis, New York State Attorney General Letitia James, allegedly played games with disclosing her living situation to obtain a favorable mortgage rate.
In 2023, James purchased a home in Virginia and one in Brooklyn while serving as the state's attorney in New York. She allegedly "falsified records" stating that the property in Norfolk, Virginia would be her "principal residence." Jamees has denied the claims, calling the charges "baseless" and a stunt from Trump's "revenge tour" against her.
She's right that Trump has reason to go after her, considering the civil fraud case against him and his company, but that doesn't mean he shouldn't pursue justice against her for something she allegedly did wrong. When asked about the case, Trump made it seem like it wasn't on his radar as a priority.
"We’re going to see what happens. I am not following it very closely. It looks to me like she’s very guilty of something, but I really don’t know," Trump said of the grand jury investigation. US Attorney Erik Siebert, who has yet to bring charges, resigned after Trump made it clear he wanted him out over his inaction.
Trump should have a say in who he fires, especially if it involves the person in charge of setting mortgage interest rates, who allegedly conducts herself in a way that circumvents the rules. The high court will weigh in, but the lower court has already blocked his action, signaling a reluctance to allow it.