Fresh reports are fueling speculation that Donald Trump is preparing to oust Attorney General Pam Bondi, with some accounts claiming he has already signaled his intent to replace her. While rumors of friction between the two have circulated for months, the latest chatter suggests that the situation may be reaching a breaking point.
Much of the reported tension centers on Bondi’s handling of matters tied to Jeffrey Epstein, an issue that continues to carry political and legal sensitivity across both parties. However, the Epstein angle appears to be only part of a broader frustration. There is also growing belief that Trump has become increasingly dissatisfied with what he sees as Bondi’s reluctance to fully embrace a more aggressive, retribution-focused approach toward his political adversaries. For a figure who has openly framed the justice system as a battleground, anything short of full alignment may be viewed as disloyalty.
At the same time, it’s important to ground this narrative in reality. As of now, there has been no official confirmation of Bondi’s imminent firing, and reports remain largely speculative. Bondi herself, a seasoned political figure and former Florida attorney general, has long demonstrated an understanding of the legal boundaries that come with the role. That experience likely informs a more cautious approach—one that prioritizes institutional guardrails over political demands. If tensions do exist, they may stem less from outright opposition and more from her unwillingness to cross lines that could carry serious legal consequences down the road.
Whether Trump ultimately follows through with a dismissal remains to be seen. But the implications would be significant. A shakeup at the top of the Justice Department—especially under these circumstances—would raise immediate questions about independence, intent, and the direction of any ongoing or future investigations. And if Bondi were to exit under strained conditions rather than on good terms, it could open the door to a far more unpredictable aftermath, including the possibility that she speaks out in ways that complicate the narrative Trump is trying to control.
For now, this remains a developing story driven more by insider reports than confirmed action. But even the possibility of such a move offers a revealing glimpse into the balancing act between political loyalty and legal constraint—and how quickly that balance can tip
A Pentagon press briefing on the escalating war with Iran took an unexpected turn when Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth veered off script and lashed out at the press—specifically CNN—after being pressed about reports that the Trump administration had underestimated Iran’s response to U.S. strikes. What began as a routine question about strategy in the Strait of Hormuz quickly turned into a remarkable moment of political commentary from a sitting defense secretary.
The exchange centered on a CNN report citing sources who said U.S. officials had not fully anticipated how aggressively Iran might move to disrupt shipping through the Strait of Hormuz following American military action. The waterway is one of the world’s most critical energy chokepoints, carrying a large share of global oil shipments, and any disruption has immediate implications for international markets and regional stability. CNN reported that planners in Washington may have underestimated Tehran’s willingness to escalate by threatening maritime traffic, a claim administration officials have strongly rejected.
Hegseth dismissed the reporting outright as “fake news,” accusing the network of sensationalizing the conflict and misrepresenting the administration’s preparedness. But instead of stopping there, he added a comment that immediately drew attention across political and media circles. Referring to entertainment executive David Ellison—whose company has been linked to a massive media acquisition that could affect CNN’s corporate ownership—Hegseth remarked that “the sooner David Ellison takes over that network, the better.”
The remark stunned many observers not only because of its tone but also because it appeared to cross an informal line traditionally observed by defense secretaries, who generally avoid commenting on the ownership or editorial direction of major news organizations. Critics immediately pointed out that the comment could be interpreted as signaling a preference for a more politically friendly media landscape—an unusual position for the head of the Pentagon to articulate publicly. Others viewed it as a continuation of the Trump administration’s broader pattern of attacking outlets that publish unfavorable coverage.
Until that moment, speculation about Ellison’s potential influence over CNN had largely remained the subject of media industry analysis rather than open discussion by senior government officials. Ellison, the CEO of Skydance Media and the son of Oracle founder Larry Ellison, has been associated with a sweeping media consolidation deal that could place major news assets under new corporate leadership. Supporters of the transaction say Ellison has pledged to maintain editorial independence, though skeptics worry that the shift could reshape the network’s tone or priorities.
Hegseth’s off-the-cuff endorsement effectively injected the Pentagon into that debate. For critics, the comment sounded less like a passing remark and more like an acknowledgment—intentional or not—that some figures within the administration expect or hope for a friendlier editorial posture from major news organizations once ownership changes hands. That perception alone has already intensified scrutiny of the proposed deal and raised fresh questions about how political power and media ownership intersect in the current environment.
The broader context makes the moment even more striking. Since the start of the Iran conflict, administration officials have repeatedly accused major media outlets of undermining public confidence in the war effort by focusing on intelligence assessments, civilian impacts, or strategic miscalculations. Hegseth himself has frequently clashed with reporters at briefings, often framing critical coverage as evidence of institutional bias rather than legitimate scrutiny. This latest episode appeared to follow the same pattern but escalated it by introducing the issue of media ownership.
It also underscores the unusual political style that Hegseth has brought to the Pentagon. A former television commentator before entering government, he has often used press conferences not only to deliver updates on military operations but also to wage rhetorical battles with reporters and news organizations. That approach has energized supporters who see him as pushing back against hostile media coverage, while critics argue it blurs the line between military leadership and partisan messaging.
Whether the remark will have consequences remains unclear. In previous administrations, a defense secretary publicly cheering for a specific corporate owner of a major news network might have prompted swift internal reprimand. But the Trump administration has often embraced confrontation with the press as a political strategy, meaning the comment could just as easily be dismissed as part of the ongoing media war between the White House and major outlets.
Still, the episode has already achieved one undeniable effect: it has drawn far more attention to Ellison’s potential influence over CNN than industry analysts alone ever could. What had previously been an inside-baseball discussion about corporate mergers and media consolidation is now part of the broader political narrative surrounding the war with Iran and the administration’s relationship with the press.
If anything, Hegseth’s brief aside ensured that the question many observers were quietly asking—what a change in ownership might mean for CNN’s editorial direction—will now be examined far more closely. And whether intentional or not, the defense secretary’s comment has turned that speculation into a matter of national political conversation.
Please consider $upporting GDPolitics by scanning the QR code below or clicking on this link
On the 11/12/25 edition of The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell, host Lawrence O’Donnell made a striking observation: current Vice President J.D. Vance’s near-silence on the swirling Jeffrey Epstein files scandal mirrors the posture then-Vice President Gerald Ford assumed as Richard Nixon’s presidency was collapsing under the weight of Watergate. O’Donnell pointed out that Ford, sensing the sinking of Nixon’s Presidency, deliberately kept his head down—he knew the ghosts of Nixon would dog his tenure if he didn’t distance himself.
I did two media interviews literally today, one of which is airing in a few hours. https://t.co/xsldmacKe4
By the same logic, O’Donnell argued, Vance appears to be doing exactly that: he knows the Epstein files may blow up and run Donald Trump out of office, and thus is doing everything he can to not get sucked into the scandal, to avoid becoming the next Ford.
As expected, social media erupted following O’Donnell’s segment. I posted a clip of the show, and to my surprise the reaction came from none other than the Vice President himself. That’s how provocative the comparison proved.
In his response, Vance strongly objected to O’Donnell’s suggestion that he was intentionally silent about the Epstein scandal. Vance pointed out that he had addressed the issue in prior TV appearances—citing his interview on Hannity scheduled for 11/13/25, which coincided with the date I posted the segment.
Interestingly, in that very 11/13/25 show O’Donnell claimed Vance had in fact ignored the Epstein issue entirely—and reaffirmed: “He’s still Gerald Ford.”
Now that the “Gerald Ford” comparison has caught Vance’s attention—and by implication, the President’s—it will be fascinating to watch how it plays out going forward.
U.S. President Donald Trump sat down with Fox News’ Maria Bartiromo on 06/29/25 for a wide ranging interview that covered the recent U.S. bombing of Iran’s nuclear facilities, the Big Beautiful Bill, immigration, tariffs and many other topics.
#BREAKING: Maria: "I saw reports that there were 400 kgs [of enriched uranium] that they [#Iran] moved, but I wonder if it's traceable…"
One very interesting exchange happened when host Maria Bartiromo asked President Trump how his administration intends to tackle the massive layoffs/job losses that will assuredly happen as a result of developments in artificial intelligence. Trump responded that he will solve that by “bringing in more companies”–a strange answer that appeared to shock Maria.
It wasn’t clear whether the president meant bringing in more AI companies to hire more people, or whether he meant bringing in other companies to offset the job losses caused by AI. What’s clear is that neither option adequately addresses the core question raised by Maria.
I was left wondering whether Fox News, or any other media outlet for that matter, would have let former President Biden off the hook with such an inadequate answer to real and present concerns surrounding AI? My guess is they would would have found a way to tie such an inadequate response to his “mental unfitness for office.”
Interesting report on CNN News Central says (06/17/24) says that after weeks of treading carefully around the subject of former President Trump’s recent felony convictions, Team Biden has finally decided to take the gloves off, and make the convictions a key part of their 2024 campaign message.
Some, including Yours Truly, will translate this CNN report thus: “Team Biden has finally decided it wants to win the 2024 presidential election.” Make no mistake about it, this is Team Biden’s strongest message from now until the November election day, which will effectively boil down to a fight for independent voters.
CNN’s Sara Sidner(0:22): “Today, the Biden campaign escalating its attacks against Donald Trump with a new $50 million ad push rolling out in battleground states, taking on the former President’s character and felony convictions.”
Part of the ad says: “In the courtroom, we see Donald Trump for who he is. He’s been convicted of 34 felonies, found liable for sexual assault, and he committed financial fraud. Meanwhile, Joe Biden’s been working…”
CNN’s Arlette Saenz(1:10): “This new ad is significant, as it marks the first time the Biden campaign is using former President Donald Trump’s legal woes in television advertisements…In this ad, they [Team Biden] are trying to frame this election as a choice between a convicted criminal who is looking out for himself, with President Biden who in his words, ‘works for the American people.’ This ad will run as part of a $50 million ad push in key battleground states…”
Bottom line folks, this is the best move Team Biden has made thus far, regarding the upcoming November 2024 presidential election. Simply put, if they preach this message steadily–the other guy is a convicted felon–Biden wins reelection easily, thanks in large part to the independent vote. It’s really that simple.
For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App
Email author at admin@grassrootsdempolitics.com
Become an Octapharma Plasma donor. Make up to $200 in one week and help save lives too! Learn More
A segment on Fox and Friends Show(04/11/23) delved into a bombshell new report that the FBI launched a domestic terrorism investigation into Catholic Churches in Virginia, with an aim to root out “radical traditionalist Catholic ideology”. As expected, this, as was the case with the counterterrorism investigation into conservative parents protesting at their local school boards, has led to valid questions as to who else gets wrongfully caught up in these counterterrorism dragnets?
Fox and Friends host Ainsley Earhardt put it best when she posed this question(1:24): “How many other memos are out there? How many other investigations that we don’t know about?”
The question Ainsley raises is one that has been raised since the Patriot Act’s passage(2001), and reasonable people will agree that after more than two decades of unanswered questions, the national security establishment needs to be compelled to shed some light on this issue. Simply put, there is no longer any excuse for Congress looking the other way, when there is overwhelming evidence that there are indeed a lot of Americans caught up in the counterterrorism dragnet, even though they have nothing to do with terrorism. Abusing counterterrorism resources is in itself, a national security problem–leads to loss of confidence from the public.
For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App
Email author at admin@grassrootsdempolitics.com
Become an Octapharma Plasma donor. Make up to $200 in one week and help save lives too! Learn More
Eric Trump appeared on Fox News’ Hannity show (03/30/23) moments after the bombshell revelation that a Manhattan grand jury had indicted his father for crimes related to the hush money payments he made to adult film star Stormy Daniels.
A visibly angry Eric Trump accused the Manhattan DA of among other things, abusing his power, telling host Hannity that he is neglecting rampant crime in New York to go after his father. He also cast his father as the target of an elaborate political witch hunt by both the Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg and the New York Attorney General Leticia James.
Eric Trump specifically told host Hannity(2:08 ): “My father’s only crime was winning the 2016 election…From the time my father went down that escalator, we got subpoena after subpoena. We would have people like Alvin Bragg, Leticia James, and so many others, go out and campaign on the promise that they would take down a person, not knowing anything about them…These people are evil, they’re wicked, and is why people have lost trust in the system in the U.S. This is third world tactics.”
Eric Trump then threw in the political bias allegation saying(2:43 ): “You have Hunter Biden who has crack pictures on his laptop, you have Bill Clinton who is paying Paula Jones $850,000, you have Bill Clinton who is diddling interns in the White House in the Oval Office, you have Hillary Clinton who’s deleting 33,000 emails while under congressional subpoena, and no one says a damn thing about any of those people, but when my father’s leading by 35% in the polls, and they know he’s going to be the guy that Joe Biden…will ultimately…run against…that’s who they go after, right up against the statute of limitations…They will do anything to take the man out of the race…”
Interestingly, Eric Trump also alleged that his father’s prosecution was somehow orchestrated by billionaire Democratic super donor George Soros. He specifically said(5:40): “Americans see people like [George] Soros paying $1 million to get Alvin Bragg elected, and then this guy’s going out and doing this guy’s dirty work. People get it…That was their calling card. This was a mission. This is what they promised their donors. This is what they promised Soros that they would do. It’s why they received the big checks.”
He strangely concluded by saying his father “needed a pass”, which is interesting because it would appear to suggest that he is conceding his dad’s criminal conduct, but only lamenting the fact that he is not getting a break like DOJ presumably gave Hillary Clinton over the email saga. Hmm, very interesting argument indeed.
Bottom line folks, it is perfectly normal for Eric Trump to come out guns blazing in defense of his father over the newly disclosed indictments. The problem he might find himself in however, is that neither he, nor the public, currently knows exactly what allegations are laid out in the indictment(sealed). Eric’s reaction is perfectly understandable, but the wise option would be to wait for his dad’s court arraignment in a few days, where the allegations against him will be laid out in detail.
Maybe, just maybe, the indictment will lay out very serious allegations against his father, which will justify the DA’s/ grand jury’s actions, even in the eyes of Republicans.
For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash Ap
Email the author at admin@grassrootsdempolitics.com
Become an Octapharma Plasma donor. Make up to $200 in one week and help save lives too! Learn More
The 2022 midterm election will not only go down in history as one which produced the most unlikely outcome for the party in power, but also, one where the pollsters got it totally wrong. As a matter of fact, the pollsters got it so wrong, that the public is convinced, they were deliberately misled with the “red wave/tsunami” predictions. It’s therefore only fair that the mainstream media journalists who got sucked into the red wave mass hysteria be named and shamed, and their actions memorialized for future reference–sort of a handy list, if you will.
MSNBC did an interesting, and quite frankly, hilarious mashup of the “red wave” mass hysteria that appeared to suck up even some well respected journalists from reputable networks. This shows how these faulty/fake polls can affect mainstream media coverage of elections, which can then have negative consequences, up to and including depressing voter turnout. This is therefore an issue that needs to be addressed head on as we approach the 2024 general elections.
Politicians are known to exaggerate, so they are not the subject of this naming and shaming. Our interest here is only on journalists, who ought to know better.
Fox News’ Steve Doocey(1:39): “You know, your predictions of a red wave are accurate.”
Unidentified Fox News Reporter(1:42):”…a red wave is coming.”
Fox News star Anchor Laura Ingraham(1:44): “Red Wave Rising.” This is the title of a whole segment Ingraham dedicated on the “red wave” on 10/18/22. Not a good look, Laura, not a good look.
Unidentified Reporter on NewsMax(1:51): “Sleepy Joe just guaranteed a red wave in Pennsylvania.”
Fox News’ Dana Perino(2:01): “Democrats are bracing for the worst case scenario, a red Tsunami.”
Fox News’ Greg Gutfeld(2:04): “We are officially on a red Tsunami watch.” He was apparently referring to an Axios piece by Josh Kraushaar titled “RED TSUNAMI WATCH.” Not a good look Josh, not a good look.
Fox News’ Clay Travis(2:09): “Red Tsunami grows…that means red Tsunami.”
Fox News’ Stephen Miller(2:16): “Poverty, joblessness, critical race theory, crazy gender ideology in our schools, we are going to see a red Tsunami.”
Unidentified host of Fox News’ The Five show(2:34): “Up next, Elon Musk ready to ride the big red wave.”
Fox News’ Steve Doocey(2:37): “Elon Musk tweeted massive red wave.” For the record, Musk did indeed tweet about a red wave. Other Fox News personalities who used this Elon Musk tweet to proclaim a “red wave” were Tucker Carlson(biggest star on Fox), Maria Bartiromo, among others. Not a good look, Elon, not a good look.
Daily Wire’s Ben Shapiro(2:43): “You’re about to see a red wave, that makes ‘Day After Tomorrow’ [the popular movie] look like nothing.”
Leading Podcaster Joe Rogan(2:47): “That’s going to be responsible for the red wave. I think the red wave that’s coming is going to be like the elevator doors opening up in ‘The Shining'[popular 80’s movie]”
Daily Wire’s Ben Shapiro(2:55): “Rogan said that the red wave is going to look like the elevator doors opening, and the blood pouring out of the elevator in ‘The Shining’, that is correct, except it’s not going to be an elevator, it’s going to look more like ‘Deep Impact ‘[popular movie], the tsunami at the end, but colored red.” Good Lord have mercy!!
Fox News Contributor Dan Bongino(3:10): “Remember that Teo Leone ‘Deep Impact’ disaster movie? That’s the red wave tsunami that will come ashore.”
Daily Wire’s Ben Shapiro(3:17): “It’s going to be a brutal week for the Democrats beginning on Tuesday.”
Fox News’ Clay Travis(3:21): “Frankly, I’ve already DVR-ed CNN and MSNBC for election night, not because I’m going to watch, but just because I want to enjoy the tears post-red tsumami.” Hope you’re enjoying those DVRs, Clay.
Fox News’ Jesse Watters(0:05): “It’s going to be a wave election, and you [Democrats] gonna lose the Senate, I’ll bet you $1,000 now.”
Fox News’ Lisa Boothe(0:12): “Democrats are going to be crushed on November 8th because a red wave is coming.”
Fox News’ Greg Gutfeld(0:16): “Betting that Joy will learn two new words on Tuesday, red wave.”
Unidentified Fox Business host(0:21): “How big could that looming red wave get?”
Fox Business’ Maria Bartiromo(0:23): “We begin this Sunday morning with expectations of a red wave this Tuesday.”
Fox News Contributor Marc Thiessen(0:39): “We’ve been hearing, ‘is it going to be a red wave?’, ‘is it going to be a red tsunami?’, I think it’s going to be a red hurricane.”
Fox News’ Pete Hegseth(0:43): “When the red wave comes, and it is coming, Joe Biden’s political utility is over.”
Fox News’ John Roberts(0:48): “Are we in for a red wind here, or a red wave?”
Fox News’ Martha MacCallum(0:51): “Red wave or red tsunami, what are you feeling today?”
Fox News’ Jesse Watters(0:54): “And don’t listen to the lies they are spewing, that this could take days…to know who won. This is total bs. A wave like this, we should know that night, basically, who won the Senate and the House, and even if it happens Wednesday into Thursday, it’s gravy.”
Unidentified Fox News Reporter reporting on an actual tropical storm approaching Florida(1:09): “Right out the back door, I’ve got a tropical storm brewing right now. I think they’re saying it could be a category one by the end of the day. However, let me tell you what is the storm, that red wave…” Oh boy!!
There’s also this clip from MSNBC’s The Beat with Ari Melber which shows even journalists from CNN sucked into the “red wave” mass hysteria. Not a good look, CNN, not a good look.
CNN & ABC’s Alyssa Farah Griffin(7:28): “A red wave is coming. Republicans are going to win the midterms…”
New York Post’s Karol Markowicz(7:32): “Forget red wave, I’m rooting for a red tsunami. “
CNN’s Jake Tapper(7:34): “Politicos with whom I spoke today all agree, as of now, a modest red wave at the very least, seems to be building.”
Fox News’ Dana Perino(7:49): “Signs of a red wave are kind of getting bigger than ever, but not everybody in the media wants to hear that.” Dana is a former White House Press Secretary.
Fox News’ Jesse Watters(7:55): “It wasn’t looking like a red wave earlier in August, and now it looks like a tsunami.”
As MSNBC host Ari Melber aptly summarized it (8:00): “The point there is not that multiple news channels over there echo Fox and sound similar, as they make those predictions that have been proven false…It’s bigger than the media or polls. This is a larger effort to hack your mind, and the discourse, and shape the ultimate turnout for the results in our democracy itself…It is legal to be sure, but it’s also misleading with real consequences…If you really have a huge bankable lead, you don’t need to hype it. You just turn your voters out and win, but so many Republican leaders know their slate of MAGA candidates lately, is very weak…So Republicans concluded they needed to inflate their perceived support in the hopes that that might then create more support than they have actually have…”
Bottom line folks, this stuff is serious. New York Governor Kathy Hochul also addressed this fake poll issue, which featured prominently in her race. What Gov Hochul said about this serious issue lines up with the assessment by MSNBC’s Ari Melber.
Voters have a right to know which polling firms are credible, and those with a history of manipulating polls to aid campaigns. This will prevent reputable news channels from getting sucked into these “wave” hoaxes, as they report on elections.
For the record, Yours Truly never fell for the “red wave/tsunami” mass hysteria for one minute.
Can’t wait for doom & gloom MSMers with their “polls” next week.I know my Dems will kick @GOP’s a$$, especially in Senate races
A very interesting segment on Fox News’ Tucker Carlson show(10/31/22) featured a bombshell Pulitzer-worthy report by The Intercept’s Lee Fang, which revealed that the Department of Homeland Security(DHS), has for five years now, been collaborating with Twitter, Facebook, and other social media companies, in determining whose speech needs to be suppressed. This of course flies in the face of the “private company” defense usually used to justify questionable speech infringement practices by the social media giants.
More importantly, Lee Fang’s bombshell also touched on the apparent “mission creep”(his words) of DHS, where over the last five years, the powerful agency had unilaterally(without congressional approval) shifted from its stated focus of combating terrorism and terrorist groups like Al-Qaida, to combating disinformation online.
Asked whether the Biden administration was working with tech companies to censor people, Lee Fang responded (1:10): “Yeah, that’s right Tucker. We looked at really hundreds of documents that paint a vivid picture of the FBI, the DHS, closely collaborating with top social media platforms, Twitter and Facebook, to censor various forms of content under the banner of fighting disinformation, and the story shows a couple of things, one, it shows what you just mentioned, a very cozy relationship between the government and these tech giants. There’s those monthly meetings that you just mentioned, but also, just very cozy emails and texts, not a very adversarial relationship. We looked at one text where a Microsoft executive texts Jen Easterly, the top disinfo director at DHS, appointed by[President]Biden, basically saying that the private sector needs to get more comfortable with the government closely collaborating on reports, talking about the expanded role for DHS in censoring a really broad collection of topic areas of policy and political topics.”
Lee Fang then touched on what I believe is by far, the biggest bombshell from his piece, and that is, the “mission creep” aspect. Fang said(2:11): “Just broadly speaking, the story also just looks at the mission creep of DHS. This is an agency that was founded in the aftermath of 9/11 to combat foreign terror threats of Al-Qaeda and the like, but over the last five years, it’s kind of evolved in its mission, its move towards fighting disinfo, and their justification is disinfo radicalizes the homeland, it can lead to disruptions in public health, or political violence…”
Even given DHS’ understandable explanation for going after online disinformation, no reasonable person can ever conclude that Congress would have approved the same powerful tools/tactics used to counter terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda, to be applied against U.S. residents for basically saying the “wrong things” on social media. Sadly however, this is exactly where we find ourselves today, with DHS’ speech police designating people they deem “misinformers” as terrorists, and then mercilessly destroying their lives and livelihoods using among other things, the military. This is shameful conduct which most Americans have always associated with third world dictatorships.
It is because of DHS’ mission creep, that Yours Truly believes Lee Fang’s bombshell piece deserves a Pulitzer. Simply put, DHS’ mission creep, which at the very least should have been run through Congress for approval prior to enforcement, has not only seriously impacted the lives and livelihoods of many U.S. residents who have nothing to do with terrorism, but has also robbed them of their rights under the first amendment.
Congress needs to immediately step in to not only address DHS’ mission creep, but also to hold the officials involved accountable, preferably, via referral for criminal prosecution given the way their unconstitutional actions upend innocent people’s lives
It’s also important to point out here what history has taught us, and that is, not everything the government labels “misinformation” is necessarily so. Often times, there are topics the government simply doesn’t want out there, being discussed in public. One recent classic example is directed energy weapons. For decades, government agents, and their surrogates in the mainstream media, went out of their way to label people who expressed concerns about these weapons as delusional conspiracy theorists. In 2022 however, we not only have the same directed energy weapons being openly discussed by the same mainstream media channels who denied their existence, but also, the government considers the threat so serious, that Congress swiftly enacted a handsome compensation scheme for victims of such attacks.
Bottom line folks, as host Tucker Carlson correctly stated, this bombshell piece by The Intercept is not only a great story, it’s also a huge public service for which Lee Fang deserves a lot of praise and reward. The only question now is whether Congress will do its job, and rein in Mission Creep DHS, and its unconstitutional speech police.
For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App
Email author at admin@grassrootsdempolitics.com
Become an Octapharma Plasma donor. Make up to $200 in one week and help save lives too! Learn More
Terry Strada, the National Chair of 9/11 Families United On MSNBC’s Alex Witt Reports(07/30/22)
MSNBC’s Liz McLaughlin reported on Alex Witt Reports show(07/30/22) that outraged families of the victims of the September 11th attacks(2001) are protesting the Saudi-backed LIV Golf Tournament currently being held at former President Trump’s Bedminster Golf Club in New Jersey. The protesters are essentially accusing former President Trump and the participating golfers, of “sports washing” Saudi Arabia’s role in the horrific 9/11 attacks, and their atrocious human rights record generally.
Asked by host Alex Witt, how the families were responding to the tournament, Liz McLaughlin responded (video at 0:31):“The families say they are disgusted, disappointed, that it feels like a gut punch after losing a loved one in that horrible act, to see a former President of the United States, who by the way, has the presidential seal emblazoned on golf carts, embroidered in golf towels at this tournament, which is less than 50 miles from ground zero, to have him take what they call blood money. LIV is bankrolled by Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund, investing an estimated 2 billion in LIV Golf so far, and this new pro golf circuit is set to try to dethrone the PGA, but it has come with a lot of controversy, and Trump is set to host another one of these, later in the year.”
Trump has defended his actions saying, “nobody has gotten to the bottom of 9/11 unfortunately, and they should have”–essentially arguing that it’s unfair/inaccurate to place the 9/11 blame on Saudi Arabia. He also added that all the proceeds from the golf tournament will be going to charity, so he was not profiting from it.
As Liz McLaughlin correctly pointed out however, even though the U.S. government has never singled out Saudi Arabia as the masterminds of the 9/11 attacks, it is a fact that 15 of the 19 hijackers were from the Kingdom, and the mastermind of the attacks, Osama bin Laden, was also born there. It has also been established that a lot of the funding for bin Laden’s Al Qaeda terrorist network, came from Saudi nationals. So any reasonable person would suspect that the Saudis were behind the 9/11 attacks. And even if one gives Saudi Arabia a pass over 9/11, it is impossible to ignore the Kingdom’s atrocious human rights record, which includes the brutal murder of American journalist Jamal Khashoggi.
Terry Strada, the National Chair of 9/11 Families United, slammed Trump’s assertion that nobody has gotten to the bottom of the 9/11 attacks, telling host Alex Witt(3:02): “He sounds foolish saying anything like that. He met with the families. He met with me in the White House and we went there for the sole purpose of asking him to declassify FBI documents that were the investigative reports into this…so he sounds completely foolish when he says that nobody has looked into it. We asked him to look into it. It was his job as President to look into it. He failed us miserably back then.”
Bottom line folks, the pundits on Fox News recently made a big deal out of President Biden’s fist bump with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman(MBS) on his official visit to Saudi Arabia. It will be interesting to see if the same pundits also make a big deal out of former President Trump’s “sports washing” of Saudi’s atrocious human rights record and involvement in the 9/11 attacks.
For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App
Email author at admin@grassrootsdempolitics.com
Become an Octapharma Plasma donor. Make up to $200 in one week and help save lives too! Learn More
