Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
LetMyPeopleVote
LetMyPeopleVote's Journal
LetMyPeopleVote's Journal
March 20, 2026
https://www.borowitzreport.com/p/hegseth-bans-microphones-at-pentagon
The Borowitz Report-Hegseth Bans Microphones at Pentagon After Press Briefings Make Him Sound Like Idiot
Hegseth Bans Microphones at Pentagon After Press Briefings Make Him Sound Like Idiot
— eugene (@eugene290390.bsky.social) 2026-03-20T08:26:42.266Z
open.substack.com/pub/borowitz...
https://www.borowitzreport.com/p/hegseth-bans-microphones-at-pentagon
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth imposed a total ban on microphones at the Pentagon on Friday, complaining that press briefings were making him sound “like a giant idiot.”
“I’ve been watching so-called news coverage of me and every word out of my mouth sounds stupider than the last,” he said. “I blame microphones.”
After expelling all sound-capturing equipment from the Pentagon media room, Hegseth proceeded to conduct an hourlong briefing entirely in mime.
According to a new poll, Americans strongly support Hegseth’s new policy since it saves them the trouble of muting him.
“I’ve been watching so-called news coverage of me and every word out of my mouth sounds stupider than the last,” he said. “I blame microphones.”
After expelling all sound-capturing equipment from the Pentagon media room, Hegseth proceeded to conduct an hourlong briefing entirely in mime.
According to a new poll, Americans strongly support Hegseth’s new policy since it saves them the trouble of muting him.
March 20, 2026
https://www.rawstory.com/nicolle-wallace-trump-japan/
'Profound idiot': Nicolle Wallace struggles to process Trump's shock joke to Japanese PM
trump does not have a sense of humor and is a major league sexist asshole
'Profound idiot': Nicolle Wallace struggles to process Trump's shock joke to Japanese PM www.rawstory.com/nicolle-wall...
— Ray Bannatyne (@mrfoo123.bsky.social) 2026-03-19T22:56:15.128Z
Oh man! No joking about Nagasaki and Hiroshima being the double tap that ended WW2?
He's obtuse. And acutely moronic.
https://www.rawstory.com/nicolle-wallace-trump-japan/
MS NOW host Nicolle Wallace had a frank reaction on Thursday after President Donald Trump made a jaw-dropping comment that shocked people inside the Oval Office during a White House meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi.
Wallace was visibly stunned after discussing Trump's attempted joke that clearly left the room uncomfortable when a reporter asked why Trump hadn't warned his allies that the U.S.-Israeli military strikes were coming.
"One thing, you don't want to signal too much when we go in," Trump said. "We went in very hard and we didn't tell anyone about it because we wanted surprise. Who knows better about surprise than Japan? Why didn't you tell me about Pearl Harbor?"
Wallace watched the video playback and commented on Trump, asking her panel to share their thoughts.
"I struggle every minute of every day with platforming him, one, I should do it all day because it shows what a profound idiot he is," Wallace said. "But but two, we were on other sides. This is a question about why didn't you read in your allies? And he says, we didn't know what our adversary was going to do. I mean, David Frum, what do you even, how's your brain doing?"
Wallace was visibly stunned after discussing Trump's attempted joke that clearly left the room uncomfortable when a reporter asked why Trump hadn't warned his allies that the U.S.-Israeli military strikes were coming.
"One thing, you don't want to signal too much when we go in," Trump said. "We went in very hard and we didn't tell anyone about it because we wanted surprise. Who knows better about surprise than Japan? Why didn't you tell me about Pearl Harbor?"
Wallace watched the video playback and commented on Trump, asking her panel to share their thoughts.
"I struggle every minute of every day with platforming him, one, I should do it all day because it shows what a profound idiot he is," Wallace said. "But but two, we were on other sides. This is a question about why didn't you read in your allies? And he says, we didn't know what our adversary was going to do. I mean, David Frum, what do you even, how's your brain doing?"
March 19, 2026
https://www.ms.now/opinion/doj-hire-law-school-graduates
MS NOW- Pam Bondi will take whomever she can get in courtrooms
Being willing to hire applicants fresh from law school speaks to how rough it’s been to recruit qualified attorneys to Trump’s Justice Department.
Opinion | Pam Bondi will take whomever she can get in courtrooms - MS NOW apple.news/AFBhy2pxZRNu...
— (@oc88.bsky.social) 2026-03-19T21:30:37.356Z
https://www.ms.now/opinion/doj-hire-law-school-graduates
There are a lot of empty desks in the Justice Department’s offices compared to this time two years ago. Attorney General Pam Bondi has been struggling to restock the much-depleted ranks of federal attorneys after last year’s flood of firings, resignations and buyouts. Now, in the interest of quickly getting bodies in courtrooms, the DOJ has reportedly shifted its policies to allow U.S. attorneys’ offices to hire lawyers straight out of law school.
According to Bloomberg Law, a memo from DOJ headquarters last week said the typical one-year minimum experience requirement can be waived when posting job openings. Bloomberg Law quotes the memo as saying, “This suspension is in effect until February 28, 2027, and was implemented due to an exigent hiring need for attorneys across the Department.” (The memo and its contents have not been reviewed or independently confirmed by MS NOW.)
The “exigent need” for fresh hires that the Justice Department cites is a relatively recent development. Burgeoning lawyers used to leap at the chance to add a DOJ credential to their resumes. But that credential has lost some of its appeal since the start of President Donald Trump’s second term. Bondi’s day-one demand that federal lawyers “zealously advance, protect, and defend their client’s interests” — with almost no room for dissent — hasn’t made it easy to replace the thousands of staffers who have left the department since last January.....
There’s no indication of how this new initiative fits with the Trump administration’s ongoing war on elite universities. The Ivy League’s law schools used to be a pipeline for the Justice Department’s ranks, albeit not as immediately as the current policy allows. But last year, the Trump administration revoked offers to students from top schools under the previous exception to the rule, the Attorney General’s Honors Program, which allowed for entry-level hires. The spigot has dried up since then, as The Washington Post noted last year, with many graduates turning to state government work instead.
https://x.com/PaulBlume_FOX9/status/2018785125857902645
There’s a world where this shift toward hiring newly graduated lawyers could be a good thing. If this project were truly about meritocracy, seeing more slots available for lawyers who didn’t all go to the same handful of schools could be admirable. But the administration’s screenings for ideological purity and loyalty to the MAGA agenda would undercut any claim that the department is truly trying to hire the best attorneys possible.
According to Bloomberg Law, a memo from DOJ headquarters last week said the typical one-year minimum experience requirement can be waived when posting job openings. Bloomberg Law quotes the memo as saying, “This suspension is in effect until February 28, 2027, and was implemented due to an exigent hiring need for attorneys across the Department.” (The memo and its contents have not been reviewed or independently confirmed by MS NOW.)
The “exigent need” for fresh hires that the Justice Department cites is a relatively recent development. Burgeoning lawyers used to leap at the chance to add a DOJ credential to their resumes. But that credential has lost some of its appeal since the start of President Donald Trump’s second term. Bondi’s day-one demand that federal lawyers “zealously advance, protect, and defend their client’s interests” — with almost no room for dissent — hasn’t made it easy to replace the thousands of staffers who have left the department since last January.....
There’s no indication of how this new initiative fits with the Trump administration’s ongoing war on elite universities. The Ivy League’s law schools used to be a pipeline for the Justice Department’s ranks, albeit not as immediately as the current policy allows. But last year, the Trump administration revoked offers to students from top schools under the previous exception to the rule, the Attorney General’s Honors Program, which allowed for entry-level hires. The spigot has dried up since then, as The Washington Post noted last year, with many graduates turning to state government work instead.
https://x.com/PaulBlume_FOX9/status/2018785125857902645
There’s a world where this shift toward hiring newly graduated lawyers could be a good thing. If this project were truly about meritocracy, seeing more slots available for lawyers who didn’t all go to the same handful of schools could be admirable. But the administration’s screenings for ideological purity and loyalty to the MAGA agenda would undercut any claim that the department is truly trying to hire the best attorneys possible.
March 19, 2026
https://www.ms.now/opinion/judge-boasberg-jerome-powell-doj-subpoena-fed-chair
Several courts have suspended the presumption of regularity with respect to lawsuits brought by the DOJ. See https://www.democraticunderground.com/100221015053 and https://www.democraticunderground.com/100221027542 The presumption of regularity is the concept that the courts will presume that lawyers representing the DOJ/government are acting in good faith and are telling the truth. A good number of courts have rejected this presumption. The ruling by Judge Boasberg is an extension of the rejection of the presumption of regularity. Now courts are no longer required to assume that the DOJ/government are acting in the ordinary course of business and that the courts can rely on the truth of the facts asserted but now the court can look at the statements of trump to ascertain the true motives.
MS NOW- Why Judge Boasberg's ruling on DOJ's Jerome Powell investigation is bigger than one case
The judge treated Trump’s own words as evidence of motive — and may signal a broader judicial willingness to scrutinize politicized legal process.
Why Judge Boasberg’s ruling on DOJ’s Jerome Powell investigation is bigger than one case www.ms.now/opinion/judg...
— Skeptical Brotha ðŸ³ï¸â€ðŸŒˆ (@skepticalbrotha.bsky.social) 2026-03-19T00:52:58.247Z
https://www.ms.now/opinion/judge-boasberg-jerome-powell-doj-subpoena-fed-chair
The most important part of Chief Judge James Boasberg’s ruling quashing Justice Department subpoenas served on the Federal Reserve was not simply that he blocked them.
It was that he refused to suspend common sense. He read the subpoenas against the public record that produced them. He took President Donald Trump at his word. That is what made the opinion so important.
Judge Boasberg did not begin with dry procedural throat-clearing. He began with Trump’s own attacks on Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell and the broader campaign of presidential and White House pressure on the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates.
He quoted Trump calling Powell “TOO ANGRY, TOO STUPID, & TOO POLITICAL, to have the job of Fed Chair.” He cited another post calling Powell “one of the dumbest, and most destructive, people in Government.” He noted Trump’s statement that “Powell’s termination cannot come fast enough!” and his threat that if the Fed did not cut rates, “I may have to force something.”....
Judge Boasberg wrote that there was “abundant evidence” that the dominant, if not sole, purpose of the subpoenas was to harass and pressure Powell either to yield to the president or resign and make way for someone who would. On the other side of the scale, he said the government had offered “no evidence whatsoever” that Powell committed any crime other than displeasing the president. By the end of the opinion, that judgment hardened even further: The government had produced “essentially zero evidence” of criminality, and its stated justifications looked like “a convenient pretext” for another unstated purpose......
When a president has repeatedly identified the official he wants pressured or removed, made his desired outcome unmistakable and then his Justice Department shows up with a paper-thin theory aimed at that same target, a court does not have to pretend those events are unrelated. Judge Boasberg’s opinion suggested that at least some courts may be losing patience with that formalism.
What made the opinion important was not just that Judge Boasberg drew that inference here. It was that he did so openly, in a way that may signal a broader judicial willingness to read executive motive more realistically in politically saturated cases.
That is not judicial activism. It is common sense......
When a president has repeatedly identified the official he wants pressured or removed, made his desired outcome unmistakable and then his Justice Department shows up with a paper-thin theory aimed at that same target, a court does not have to pretend those events are unrelated. Judge Boasberg’s opinion suggested that at least some courts may be losing patience with that formalism.
What made the opinion important was not just that Judge Boasberg drew that inference here. It was that he did so openly, in a way that may signal a broader judicial willingness to read executive motive more realistically in politically saturated cases.
That is not judicial activism. It is common sense.
It was that he refused to suspend common sense. He read the subpoenas against the public record that produced them. He took President Donald Trump at his word. That is what made the opinion so important.
Judge Boasberg did not begin with dry procedural throat-clearing. He began with Trump’s own attacks on Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell and the broader campaign of presidential and White House pressure on the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates.
He quoted Trump calling Powell “TOO ANGRY, TOO STUPID, & TOO POLITICAL, to have the job of Fed Chair.” He cited another post calling Powell “one of the dumbest, and most destructive, people in Government.” He noted Trump’s statement that “Powell’s termination cannot come fast enough!” and his threat that if the Fed did not cut rates, “I may have to force something.”....
Judge Boasberg wrote that there was “abundant evidence” that the dominant, if not sole, purpose of the subpoenas was to harass and pressure Powell either to yield to the president or resign and make way for someone who would. On the other side of the scale, he said the government had offered “no evidence whatsoever” that Powell committed any crime other than displeasing the president. By the end of the opinion, that judgment hardened even further: The government had produced “essentially zero evidence” of criminality, and its stated justifications looked like “a convenient pretext” for another unstated purpose......
When a president has repeatedly identified the official he wants pressured or removed, made his desired outcome unmistakable and then his Justice Department shows up with a paper-thin theory aimed at that same target, a court does not have to pretend those events are unrelated. Judge Boasberg’s opinion suggested that at least some courts may be losing patience with that formalism.
What made the opinion important was not just that Judge Boasberg drew that inference here. It was that he did so openly, in a way that may signal a broader judicial willingness to read executive motive more realistically in politically saturated cases.
That is not judicial activism. It is common sense......
When a president has repeatedly identified the official he wants pressured or removed, made his desired outcome unmistakable and then his Justice Department shows up with a paper-thin theory aimed at that same target, a court does not have to pretend those events are unrelated. Judge Boasberg’s opinion suggested that at least some courts may be losing patience with that formalism.
What made the opinion important was not just that Judge Boasberg drew that inference here. It was that he did so openly, in a way that may signal a broader judicial willingness to read executive motive more realistically in politically saturated cases.
That is not judicial activism. It is common sense.
Several courts have suspended the presumption of regularity with respect to lawsuits brought by the DOJ. See https://www.democraticunderground.com/100221015053 and https://www.democraticunderground.com/100221027542 The presumption of regularity is the concept that the courts will presume that lawyers representing the DOJ/government are acting in good faith and are telling the truth. A good number of courts have rejected this presumption. The ruling by Judge Boasberg is an extension of the rejection of the presumption of regularity. Now courts are no longer required to assume that the DOJ/government are acting in the ordinary course of business and that the courts can rely on the truth of the facts asserted but now the court can look at the statements of trump to ascertain the true motives.
March 19, 2026
Powell has 'no intention of leaving' the Fed until Trump's DOJ probe is closed
A federal judge blocked subpoenas served to Fed Chair Jerome Powell and the bank because he found they had "essentially zero evidence" to back them up.
https://x.com/NBCNews/status/2034495165650391351
https://www.nbcnews.com/business/economy/powell-fed-trump-doj-probe-rcna264173
Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell says he will not step down from the central bank's board until an investigation launched by President Donald Trump's Justice Department into Powell's congressional testimony last year is fully put to rest.
"I have no intention of leaving the board until the investigation is well and truly over with transparency and finality," Powell said Wednesday at a news conference in Washington, D.C.
Powell also left the door open to remaining on the board even if the probe ends and Trump's nominee to succeed him as chair, economist Kevin Warsh, is confirmed by the Senate.
"On the question of whether I will then continue to serve as a governor after my term ends and after the investigation is over, I have not made that decision yet," Powell told reporters at the Fed's headquarters. "I will make that decision based on what I think is best for the institution and for the people we serve."
Powell's announcement underscores the failure of a yearlong campaign led by Trump and his allies to push Powell out of the Federal Reserve and replace him with someone who is more closely allied with the president......
For more than a year now, Trump and his top allies have pressured Powell and other members of the central bank to cut interest rates more often. They have deployed a combination of social media bullying, tirades on cable news and allegations of wrongdoing, but they have little to show for their efforts.
On Wednesday, the Fed's Open Market Committee voted 11-1 to hold interest rates steady. The only dissenting vote in favor of a rate cut was Trump's nominee and former White House official, Stephen Miran.
"I have no intention of leaving the board until the investigation is well and truly over with transparency and finality," Powell said Wednesday at a news conference in Washington, D.C.
Powell also left the door open to remaining on the board even if the probe ends and Trump's nominee to succeed him as chair, economist Kevin Warsh, is confirmed by the Senate.
"On the question of whether I will then continue to serve as a governor after my term ends and after the investigation is over, I have not made that decision yet," Powell told reporters at the Fed's headquarters. "I will make that decision based on what I think is best for the institution and for the people we serve."
Powell's announcement underscores the failure of a yearlong campaign led by Trump and his allies to push Powell out of the Federal Reserve and replace him with someone who is more closely allied with the president......
For more than a year now, Trump and his top allies have pressured Powell and other members of the central bank to cut interest rates more often. They have deployed a combination of social media bullying, tirades on cable news and allegations of wrongdoing, but they have little to show for their efforts.
On Wednesday, the Fed's Open Market Committee voted 11-1 to hold interest rates steady. The only dissenting vote in favor of a rate cut was Trump's nominee and former White House official, Stephen Miran.
March 19, 2026
https://www.rawstory.com/white-house-2676268560
Disbelief as Trump's big DHS 'concession' is he may agree to follow the law
There are a number of lawsuits on ICE's breaking and entering without a judicial warrant. I suspect that there will be judgments or rulings holding ICE liable for breaking and entering without a judicial warrant. Basically trump/DHS is offering nothing right now to resolve the issues raised by the Democrats.
Political analysts and observers bristled on Tuesday at the White House's latest concessions in its bid to reopen the Department of Homeland Security.
— Raw Story (@rawstory.com) 2026-03-18T13:40:09Z
https://www.rawstory.com/white-house-2676268560
Political analysts and observers bristled on Tuesday at the White House's latest concessions in its bid to reopen the Department of Homeland Security.
President Donald Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, and James Braid, director of the Office of Legal Affairs, wrote a letter to Sens. Susan Collins (R-ME) and Katie Britt (R-AL) updating them on the latest negotiations with Democrats on Capitol Hill. The two parties have been negotiating funding for the Department of Homeland Security, which was shut down on Feb. 13 when Democrats refused to support an appropriations bill.
Some of the concessions that the two Trump officials offered include requiring DHS to "follow current law" regarding Congressional visits to detention centers, expanding the use of body-worn cameras, and "codifying" the practice of not detaining American citizens, according to a copy of the letter obtained by Politico.
Analysts and observers bristled at the list on social media.
"So basically nothing," Josh Breisblatt, a Democratic attorney on the Senate Judiciary Committee's immigration subcommittee, posted on X.
"Aside from sensitive locations, there’s little here addressing the tactics that caused the most chaos in Minneapolis. It’s sad that simply adhering to the law is even considered a concession from the White House in order to fund DHS," Andrea Flores, a former White House staffer, posted on X.
President Donald Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, and James Braid, director of the Office of Legal Affairs, wrote a letter to Sens. Susan Collins (R-ME) and Katie Britt (R-AL) updating them on the latest negotiations with Democrats on Capitol Hill. The two parties have been negotiating funding for the Department of Homeland Security, which was shut down on Feb. 13 when Democrats refused to support an appropriations bill.
Some of the concessions that the two Trump officials offered include requiring DHS to "follow current law" regarding Congressional visits to detention centers, expanding the use of body-worn cameras, and "codifying" the practice of not detaining American citizens, according to a copy of the letter obtained by Politico.
Analysts and observers bristled at the list on social media.
"So basically nothing," Josh Breisblatt, a Democratic attorney on the Senate Judiciary Committee's immigration subcommittee, posted on X.
"Aside from sensitive locations, there’s little here addressing the tactics that caused the most chaos in Minneapolis. It’s sad that simply adhering to the law is even considered a concession from the White House in order to fund DHS," Andrea Flores, a former White House staffer, posted on X.
March 19, 2026
The Borowitz Report-Markwayne Mullin Says Anyone Who Claims He Has Anger Issues Will Get Kicked in the Face
Markwayne Mullin Says Anyone Who Claims He Has Anger Issues Will Get Kicked in the Face
— eugene (@eugene290390.bsky.social) 2026-03-18T23:15:50.088Z
open.substack.com/pub/borowitz...
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Portraying himself as a staunch pacifist at his Senate confirmation hearing on Wednesday, DHS nominee Markwayne Mullin said that anyone who claimed he had anger-management issues would get “kicked in the face.”
“I believe that every dispute should be settled peacefully,” Mullin said. “And if anyone questions my sincerity about that, I’ll shove my fist down their throat and tear out their lungs.”
He took issue with Sen. Rand Paul’s characterization of him as someone who advocates political violence, stating, “Say that again, Four Eyes, and I’ll rip off your stupid goggles, grind them under my shoe, and make you eat the glass.”
In a boost for the nominee, outgoing DHS Secretary Kristi Noem endorsed the Oklahoma senator, asserting, “Markwayne Mullin has what it takes to fulfill all my duties, including killing defenseless pets.”
“I believe that every dispute should be settled peacefully,” Mullin said. “And if anyone questions my sincerity about that, I’ll shove my fist down their throat and tear out their lungs.”
He took issue with Sen. Rand Paul’s characterization of him as someone who advocates political violence, stating, “Say that again, Four Eyes, and I’ll rip off your stupid goggles, grind them under my shoe, and make you eat the glass.”
In a boost for the nominee, outgoing DHS Secretary Kristi Noem endorsed the Oklahoma senator, asserting, “Markwayne Mullin has what it takes to fulfill all my duties, including killing defenseless pets.”
March 19, 2026
https://www.rawstory.com/trump-big-lie-cnn-appeal/
Appeals court rules Trump cannot revive 'Big Lie' lawsuit against CNN
trump's big lie lawsuit was a joke. Not one judge on the court of appeals agreed to rehear this case in the en banc motion
Appeals court rules Trump cannot revive 'Big Lie' lawsuit against CNN
— Lee (@5newmanl.bsky.social) 2026-03-17T16:19:37.165Z
www.rawstory.com/trump-big-li...
https://www.rawstory.com/trump-big-lie-cnn-appeal/
The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that President Donald Trump cannot revive his defamation lawsuit against CNN for using the term "Big Lie" to describe his view that he won the 2020 presidential election.
Trump could next appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Last November, a panel of three federal judges found that Trump failed to prove "falsity" in his lawsuit against CNN.
Trump filed the defamation lawsuit against the network after it repeatedly used the term "Big Lie" to describe his false claims about the 2020 presidential election, and seeking $475 million in damages.
Trump's legal team argued that CNN's repeated use of the phrase — in reference to Trump's baseless allegations that the election was stolen — constituted defamation and caused harm to his reputation and business interests. CNN defended its coverage as accurate reporting on Trump's false election claims, arguing that the network was engaged in protected speech and opinion commentary when characterizing Trump's statements.
Legal experts noted that Trump faced a steep legal burden under U.S. defamation law, which requires public figures to prove that media outlets acted with "actual malice" by knowingly publishing false information or with reckless disregard for the truth.
Trump could next appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Last November, a panel of three federal judges found that Trump failed to prove "falsity" in his lawsuit against CNN.
Trump filed the defamation lawsuit against the network after it repeatedly used the term "Big Lie" to describe his false claims about the 2020 presidential election, and seeking $475 million in damages.
Trump's legal team argued that CNN's repeated use of the phrase — in reference to Trump's baseless allegations that the election was stolen — constituted defamation and caused harm to his reputation and business interests. CNN defended its coverage as accurate reporting on Trump's false election claims, arguing that the network was engaged in protected speech and opinion commentary when characterizing Trump's statements.
Legal experts noted that Trump faced a steep legal burden under U.S. defamation law, which requires public figures to prove that media outlets acted with "actual malice" by knowingly publishing false information or with reckless disregard for the truth.
March 18, 2026
Hegseth-"ALL HE CAN DO IS READ A SCRIPT!
Hegseth is in way above his head and has to read a script
https://x.com/OccupyDemocrats/status/2034011126946844829
Congressman James Walkinshaw, a Virginia Democrat, just confirmed our worst fears about Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth in scathing terms after being asked about his embarrassing performances in recent press conferences.
"It's not just the press conferences,” Walkinshaw said without hesitation. “I’ve seen him in classified briefings, and I’m embarrassed for him. He can do nothing beyond read the script that’s been given to him. He can’t answer detailed questions. He doesn’t understand the strategy – not that there is one. He is way in over his head."
This brutal insider assessment paints Hegseth just like we all suspect – completely out of his depth, unable to handle anything beyond scripted talking points, clueless on actual military strategy (or the lack thereof), and embarrassing to the country in high-stakes classified sessions.
While Trump brags about "Epic Fury" and shrugs off casualties as a "little excursion," his handpicked Defense Secretary can't even field basic questions in secure briefings.
This comes as the unauthorized Iran war Hegseth is attempting to manage drags into its third week: the dead U.S. soldiers, massacred Iranian children, economic impacts, and terror threats already manifest at home, and international allies like France saying “non” to helping defend shipping lanes.
"It's not just the press conferences,” Walkinshaw said without hesitation. “I’ve seen him in classified briefings, and I’m embarrassed for him. He can do nothing beyond read the script that’s been given to him. He can’t answer detailed questions. He doesn’t understand the strategy – not that there is one. He is way in over his head."
This brutal insider assessment paints Hegseth just like we all suspect – completely out of his depth, unable to handle anything beyond scripted talking points, clueless on actual military strategy (or the lack thereof), and embarrassing to the country in high-stakes classified sessions.
While Trump brags about "Epic Fury" and shrugs off casualties as a "little excursion," his handpicked Defense Secretary can't even field basic questions in secure briefings.
This comes as the unauthorized Iran war Hegseth is attempting to manage drags into its third week: the dead U.S. soldiers, massacred Iranian children, economic impacts, and terror threats already manifest at home, and international allies like France saying “non” to helping defend shipping lanes.
March 18, 2026
SCOOP: Trump's DOJ Is Helping a Convicted FBI Informant Tied to Russian Intelligence
trump is obeying the orders of Putin and is working to release one of Putin's agents. This is the same asshole who lied about President Biden being bribed
https://x.com/DavidCornDC/status/2032871942877741218
https://link.motherjones.com/public/44694709
For a year, the Trump Justice Department has been on an odd mission: to assist a mysterious former FBI informant with ties to Russian intelligence who ended up in prison for passing disinformation about Joe Biden to the bureau. His crime deeply affected American politics. The false claim he slipped to the FBI—that Biden and his son Hunter each were paid a $5 million bribe by a Ukrainian energy company—became the main evidence in the House Republicans’ reckless and ill-fated impeachment drive against the 46th president.
For pushing this phony tale, Alexander Smirnov, who pleaded guilty of lying to the FBI, was sentenced a year ago to six years of incarceration. (The punishment also covered failing to pay taxes on more than $2 million in income.) But for some strange reason, Trump’s DOJ has been helping him to get out of prison. On March 4, in a move that has drawn no media attention, the department quietly filed an unusual brief—submitted by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche—supporting Smirnov's attempt to throw out his sentence and withdraw his guilty plea.
This was not the first time the Trump Justice Department sided with Smirnov in his ongoing legal battle. It has forged a curious alliance with this convicted Russia-connected fabricator whose lies were embraced by Trump, MAGA Republicans, and right-wing media and cited as smoking-gun evidence for Biden’s impeachment.....
I asked the Justice Department why it decided to back Smirnov’s appeal. A spokesperson replied, “We have no comment.” I also asked if the DOJ would renew its prosecution of Smirnov if he wins his appeal. I received the same response.
Trump’s Justice Department has shown an unusual amount of consideration for Smirnov, a confessed criminal tied to Russian intelligence who betrayed the FBI and who perpetuated a fraud that roiled American politics. But he did make trouble for Biden and the Democrats. This case warrants scrutiny as Smirnov’s appeal proceeds.
For pushing this phony tale, Alexander Smirnov, who pleaded guilty of lying to the FBI, was sentenced a year ago to six years of incarceration. (The punishment also covered failing to pay taxes on more than $2 million in income.) But for some strange reason, Trump’s DOJ has been helping him to get out of prison. On March 4, in a move that has drawn no media attention, the department quietly filed an unusual brief—submitted by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche—supporting Smirnov's attempt to throw out his sentence and withdraw his guilty plea.
This was not the first time the Trump Justice Department sided with Smirnov in his ongoing legal battle. It has forged a curious alliance with this convicted Russia-connected fabricator whose lies were embraced by Trump, MAGA Republicans, and right-wing media and cited as smoking-gun evidence for Biden’s impeachment.....
I asked the Justice Department why it decided to back Smirnov’s appeal. A spokesperson replied, “We have no comment.” I also asked if the DOJ would renew its prosecution of Smirnov if he wins his appeal. I received the same response.
Trump’s Justice Department has shown an unusual amount of consideration for Smirnov, a confessed criminal tied to Russian intelligence who betrayed the FBI and who perpetuated a fraud that roiled American politics. But he did make trouble for Biden and the Democrats. This case warrants scrutiny as Smirnov’s appeal proceeds.
Profile Information
Member since: Mon Apr 5, 2004, 04:58 PMNumber of posts: 179,187