Tuesday, May 19, 2026. Chump's been enriching himself via the stock market, Arab leaders ordered him to stand down on Iran, he's creating a slush fund for his militia, Homeland Security caught in another lie, and much more.
President
Donald Trump declared he was hitting pause on a planned military attack
against Iran on Monday, but his Truth Social post was also the first
time the operation was revealed.
Fresh off his visit to China last week, Trump, 79, is back to dealing with the ongoing war he started in Iran.
The
fragile ceasefire remains in place as the president struggles to reach a
deal, but the president is now claiming there was an operation ready to
go.
Trump wrote that he had been asked by the
leaders of Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates to “hold
off on our planned Military attack of the Islamic Republic of Iran,
which was scheduled for tomorrow.”
[. . .]
In
the hours leading up to Trump’s social media announcement Monday
afternoon, he fired off 36 posts not about the war, but Tuesday’s
primaries and his political endorsements.
However, before that, he did rattle off one post about the war in which he whined about the coverage he was getting.
President Trump said Monday that he had
authorized a new wave of attacks against Iran this week but that he was
holding off to make room for “serious negotiations,” after he said three
Gulf leaders requested more time to work out a nuclear deal.
Mr.
Trump has repeatedly threatened to launch new strikes, only to pull
back at the last minute from plunging the United States back into an
unpopular, expensive war. On Monday, he confirmed plans to strike and
canceled them at the same time.
“We
were getting ready to do a very major attack tomorrow, and I put it off
for a little while, hopefully maybe forever, but possibly for a little
while, because we’ve had very big discussions with Iran, and we’ll see
what they amount to,” Mr. Trump told reporters.
When
Mr. Trump launched the war alongside Israel on Feb. 28, he estimated
that it would end in four to five weeks. The conflict is now in its
third month, and Mr. Trump is caught between dueling impulses: to force
Iran into submission, and to declare victory and move on.
He's also caught between Arab leaders. Arab leaders told Chump to back down and that's why he did yesterday as Ben (MEIDASTOUCH NEWS) notes in the video below.
Wondering why your monthly grocery bill
suddenly feels like a second rent? The sticker shock is real. According
to new data from the Labor Department, food prices skyrocketed in
April, bringing the annual inflation rate for the category up to 2.9%.
Translation: Your weekly grocery run is more expensive than it’s been in years…and it’s still climbing. AP News reports
that Americans have not even seen the full impact of rising energy
costs on their retail food pricing yet—which, yes, likely means the
worst is yet to come.
“Most of what we’re
seeing now in the food price chain probably predates the conflict,”
Purdue University economist Ken Foster told the outlet. “We’re
cautiously waiting to see what the June numbers and the May numbers
might show as they come out in terms of...the extent to which energy
shocks in the Strait of Hormuz and shipping blockades and so forth are
going to impact food prices.”
For
three consecutive years, American workers held a thin but meaningful
edge over rising prices: their earnings were growing faster than
inflation. That streak ended in April 2026, and the consequences are
about to ripple through household budgets in ways that are difficult to
ignore.
The latest Consumer Price Index report
from the Bureau of Labor Statistics showed prices accelerating at a pace
that Wall Street underestimated, and that the Federal Reserve cannot
easily fix.
Behind the numbers is a collision
of geopolitical conflict, a data correction from last year’s government
shutdown, and persistent cost pressures on the essentials you buy most
often.
Prices are rising fast. And top economists expect things to get worse before they get better.
Annual
inflation is expected to hit 6% this quarter, according to the Federal
Reserve Bank of Philadelphia's Survey of Professional Forecasters. Three
months ago, the same group predicted 2.7%. That's a massive jump in a
short time.
On
the morning of Monday, March 23, President Trump pulled his first
“TACO” of the Iran war. After four weeks of fighting, with oil prices
already up 55%, Trump had given Iran an ultimatum on Friday: make a deal
within 48 hours, or the U.S. would strike its power plants and energy
infrastructure.
But on Monday morning, Trump
reversed course. In an all-caps Truth Social post, he announced the U.S.
and Iran had been having “very good and productive conversations” and
that he would extend the deadline for a deal by five days.
Wall
Street, for the first time since the war began, exhaled. Stocks rose.
Brent crude plunged nearly 11%. Energy stocks — one of the few reliable
winners of the conflict — sold off with oil.
The brokerage account in Trump’s name spent the day buying them.
According
to the 113-page periodic transaction report released by the Office of
Government Ethics on May 14, Trump’s brokerage account spent that same
day buying a sweep of petroleum and gas stocks, including Phillips 66,
Exxon Mobil, and Chevron, along with defense and aerospace names like
Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics: the companies that stood to profit
if the war dragged on.
The day wasn’t an
outlier. The filing, which covers January through March, shows a
consistent posture through the Iran conflict: as Trump prosecuted the
war and told Americans it would end “soon,” the account in his name was
hedging it, buying gold, Treasuries, and cash.
A
spokesperson for the Trump Organization, the family’s privately held
conglomerate, told Fortune the brokerage accounts are operated by
third-party financial institutions that have “sole and exclusive
authority over all investment decisions.” Trades, the spokesperson wrote
in a statement, are executed through “automated investment processes
and systems administered by those institutions,” and neither Trump, his
family, nor the Trump Organization “plays any role in selecting,
directing, or approving specific investments.”
[. . .]
The
accumulation began the same day the war did. The disclosure reports
trades only in ranges, not exact dollar figures, with purchases falling
between $50,000 and $5 million depending on the position.
Markets
generally divided into two camps: the risk-on assets—U.S. stocks,
growth, tech—that investors buy when they’re confident the economy will
grow , and the safe havens—gold, Treasuries, cash—they retreat to when
they’re not. Through the Iran war, the account moved steadily from the
first camp to the second, even as Trump told Americans the conflict was
nearly over.
On March 2, the first trading day
of the war, the account bought Newmont, the gold miner, for $50,000 to
$100,000. On March 4, the day Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz, it
bought the iShares US Treasury Bond ETF for $250,000 to $500,000. The
next day, it bought $500,000 to $1 million of the iShares Gold Trust.
The buying continued even as Trump publicly insisted the war was under control.
Last night on MS NOW, Rachel Maddow addressed Chump's stock buys and the ways he then manipulated the stock.
Immigration is Chump's signature
policy and how's that worked out for America? It's given us a very bad
name and image on the international stage. Tourism to the US is down
and it's Chump's immigration policies that have led to the decrease.
It's ripped families apart. It's destroyed neighborhoods. And Brendan Rascius (INDEPENDENT) reports it's cost a lot of money as well:
President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown could cost the federal government nearly half a trillion dollars in lost tax revenue over the next decade, according to economists.
Undocumented immigrants
currently pay about $66 billion each year in payroll and federal income
taxes. But policy changes introduced by the Trump administration may
deter many from filing returns, potentially reducing federal revenue by
between $147 billion and $479 billion over 10 years, an analysis by the
Yale Budget Lab concluded.
Trump,
who pledged to carry out the largest deportation effort in U.S.
history, has taken a number of steps in furtherance of that goal,
including strengthening enforcement measures, promoting self-deportation
and significantly boosting funding for ICE.
One
key development came last April, when the Internal Revenue Service
agreed to share taxpayer data with Immigration and Customs Enforcement
for individuals with final removal orders. Under the arrangement, ICE
submitted names and addresses, which the IRS matched against its records
before returning confirmed identities. By August, the agency had handed
over tens of thousands of records.
Although a
federal court found the agreement unlawful in November, the policy shift
may have already had a chilling effect, discouraging some immigrants
from filing taxes.
The Trump administration has long claimed
that mass deportations would deliver more jobs and higher wages to
American-born workers. But a new study casts doubt on that assertion,
undermining a central tenet of the president’s immigration policy.
Recent
surges in deportations have led to job losses for both immigrant and
American-born workers, while wages have stayed flat, according to the study,
published by the National Bureau of Economic Research, a nonpartisan
research organization. Construction, which depends heavily on immigrant
labor, was impacted more than any other industry studied, with
American-born workers losing more jobs as a result of the deportations
than the undocumented workers who remained.
The
study offers the first national analysis of the effects of the Trump
administration’s aggressive deportation operations on the labor market,
comparing communities that experienced surges in deportations between
January 2025 and October 2025 with those that did not.
Analyzing federal labor data, researchers focused on four industries
that rely heavily on undocumented immigrant workers: agriculture,
construction, manufacturing and wholesale. Deportations had a chilling
effect on each of those industries, disproportionately affecting men,
who accounted for more than 90 percent of the immigration arrests. Taken
together, the affected industries saw a 5 percent drop in employment
for male undocumented workers and a 1.3 percent drop for male
American-born workers without a college degree.
A new report
from the Brookings Institution found that more than 145,000 U.S.
citizen children have likely been separated from at least one parent due
to detention over their immigration status in the second Trump
administration.
The information released on
Monday by Brookings indicated that more than 22,000 children have
experienced having all of their co-resident parents detained. The
nonprofit public policy organization says only 5 percent — or around
1,100 — of these children have received services from the child welfare
system based on information collected from interviews with community
organizations and child welfare agencies.
Other
minors are living with family or friends for the time being, while some
have left the country alongside their deported parents.
“The
bottom line is that there is no systematic approach to protecting the
children of those detained by ICE [Immigration and Customs
Enforcement],” the Brookings report says.
“ICE
does not directly involve itself in safeguarding the well-being of a
detainee’s children and only refers to child protection if children are
present at an arrest and no alternative care is immediately available,”
it adds.
We
know surprisingly little about what happens to children of detainees.
Children who are themselves unauthorized may face detention or
deportation, but most children of detainees are U.S. citizens. In some
cases, the child may travel to the parent’s origin country with a
deported parent, but the government does not publish systematic data on
its transportation of U.S. citizen children to foreign countries and we
do not know how commonly this happens.
Parents
wishing their children to remain in the United States are encouraged by
community partners to have a family preparedness plan, specifying a
close friend or relative who will care for the child if the parent
cannot. In many of these cases, the government is unaware of children
left behind, and most parents prefer to avoid contact with the child
welfare system even if they have only substandard care options.
Caregivers
are sometimes able to access supports through the child welfare system.
Sometimes supports may be available without a formal child welfare case
being opened—e.g., when prevention resources are available. The child
welfare system typically becomes more deeply involved only when a care
arrangement becomes unsustainable or the abuse or neglect of a child
comes to the attention of authorities. Some children, a small minority
of those with detained parents, will end up in foster care. Even when a
child welfare case is opened, or a child enters foster care, the case
may not be identified or documented as immigration-related.
And the report concludes:
Most
children affected by parental detention and deportation are U.S.
citizens. As immigration enforcement expands, ensuring that affected
children have access to basic supports and protections should be
understood not as optional, but as a necessary governmental
responsibility tied to the foreseeable consequences of family separation
and displacement. When we detain or deport a child’s parents, the
nation has a clear obligation to recognize, account for, and safeguard
the child’s well-being.
A
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent has been charged with
assault for allegedly shooting a Venezuelan immigrant during Operation Metro Surge
in Minneapolis, the second time local prosecutors have leveled criminal
charges against federal officers for their conduct in the city this
winter.
Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty
said ICE agent Christian Castro in January fired several shots through
the front door, one of which struck Julio Sosa-Celis in the thigh before
tearing through a wall in a child’s bedroom. Moriarty said Castro had
lied about being attacked before the shooting.
“Mr.
Castro fired his service weapon at the front door of the home, knowing
there were people who had just run inside that presented absolutely no
threat to him or anyone else,” Moriarty said Monday at a press
conference.
Moriarty said a nationwide warrant
had been issued for Castro’s arrest. He is facing four counts of assault
in the second degree and one count of falsely reporting a crime.
Neither ICE nor the Department of Homeland Security immediately
responded to a request for comment.
Gregory Donnell Morgan Jr.
was charged in April with two counts of second-degree assault after
prosecutors said he pointed a gun at two people during an apparent road
rage incident on Highway 62 in the Twin Cities.
During
the initial investigation, Morgan told authorities he was an ICE agent
assigned to the Minneapolis area and was returning to a federal facility
at the end of his shift on Feb. 5 when another driver allegedly tried
to block him while he was driving on the shoulder.
Morgan said
he displayed his weapon and yelled, “Police, stop,” because he feared
for his safety. Authorities said Morgan acknowledged he was not
responding to an emergency or conducting an active law enforcement
operation at the time.
And when not content just to separate a family, ICE prevents a parent from seeing their child born. Billal Rahman (NEWSWEEK) reports:
A
Guatemalan man missed the birth of his first child after Immigration
and Customs Enforcement (ICE) held him for several days despite a
federal court order requiring his “immediate release,” according to
legal filings and his family.
On May 1, U.S.
Magistrate Judge Karen E. Scott of the U.S. District Court for the
Central District of California ruled that ICE had violated procedural
due‑process protections when it re‑detained Freddy Cortez Lugos—who was
in the U.S. on humanitarian parole—during a routine check‑in and ordered
the agency to free him without delay. Instead, Cortez Lugos remained in
custody until the evening of May 4, his relatives said, adding that
amid the delay, his partner went into labor and gave birth to their son,
Izaan, on May 1.
The case highlights the ongoing
tension between federal courts and the Trump administration’s mass
deportation policy, as judges continue to scrutinize ICE’s authority to
re‑detain people who were previously released under parole or
supervision. At stake is not only whether ICE is complying promptly with
court orders but also whether constitutional due‑process protections
have real force during the government’s aggressive push to expand
immigration enforcement.
The
Justice Department confirmed on Monday that it is creating a $1.776
billion fund to send taxpayer money to "victims of lawfare and
weaponization."
According to a statement from the DOJ to MeidasTouch,
the fund would "consist of a Commission of five members appointed by
the Attorney General. One Member will be chosen in consultation with
congressional leadership" and "the President can remove any member."
Hours
before the announcement, President Donald Trump withdrew a $10 billion
lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service, paving the way for the
creation of the fund in an attempt to skirt concerns about the
president's attempts to use taxpayer funds to compensate himself. Last
week, ABC News and CNN reported
on internal White House discussions regarding the president's desire to
drop the lawsuit in exchange for the massive fund to compensate allies
and other individuals he feels have been wronged by past administrations
- particularly former President Joe Biden. According to CNN, the
settlement would also kill any existing IRS audits on Trump, members of
his family, or associated businesses.
ABC News
reported that the fund could potentially respond to claims made by
individuals who believe they were the victim of overreach or
"weaponization" by the Biden administration. This could include the
roughly 1,600 Jan. 6 defendants, whom Trump pardoned soon after taking
office last year. While sources claim the agreement might include a
provision barring Trump from directly pocketing the money, his
businesses or other enterprises and associations may not be placed under
such a restriction.
Last night, Rachel Maddow addressed this topic with US House Rep Jamie Raskin.
Other coverage includes . . .
Let's wind down with this from Senato Elizabeth Warren's office:
“Free File cannot
efficiently, effectively, and securely serve the taxpayers who are
statutorily entitled to free tax filing services.”
Washington, DC - U.S. Senators Elizabeth Warren
(D-Mass.), a member of the Senate Finance Committee, Angus King
(I-Maine), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Ranking Member of the Senate Finance
Committee, asked the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to launch a
new probe into the Free File program, a partnership with private tax
prep companies. The request comes after the Trump administration killed
the Direct File program, instead touting its failed Free File program,
which has a nearly two-decade-long record of underperformance.
“We have serious concerns that Free File cannot efficiently,
effectively, and securely serve the taxpayers who are statutorily
entitled to free tax filing services,” wrote the lawmakers.
In April 2022, GAO released a report entitled “IRS Should Develop
Additional Options for Taxpayers to File for Free,” highlighting the
need for the government to develop new ways for low- and middle-income
Americans to file their taxes for free. In response, the Biden
administration created the Direct File program, which allowed Americans
to file their tax returns online, for free, and directly with the IRS.
Last October, the Trump administration killed the Direct File
program, asserting that the Free File program, which is operated by
for-profit tax preparation firms and has a lengthy track record of
underperformance, could meet taxpayers’ needs.
In addition to GAO’s earlier report, numerous reports by
Congressional committees, nonpartisan watchdogs, and media outlets have
identified serious problems with Free File. Free File partners have
deliberately misled taxpayers into paying for assistance when they are
eligible to file for free. Additionally, an investigation by Senator
Warren found that Free File partners have leaked sensitive taxpayer data
to private tech companies, putting taxpayers’ most sensitive
information at risk.
To address concerns surrounding Free File’s underperformance and the
lack of options for Americans to truly file their taxes for free, the
senators requested that GAO initiate an investigation to evaluate the
program’s user experience, accessibility, accuracy, and costs.
Senator Warren is a leading voice in advocating for taxpayers and for improved IRS resources:
In April 2026, Senator Warren introduced
the Stop Corporations and High Earners from Avoiding Taxes and Enforce
the Rules Strictly (Stop CHEATERS) Act, a bill to restore and revitalize
the IRS with additional funding for tax enforcement, technology
operations support, systems modernization, and taxpayer services like
free taxpayer assistance.
In April 2026, Senator Warren took to the Senate floor
to seek unanimous consent to pass the Direct File Act. The bill would
reverse the Trump administration’s decision to end the highly successful
Direct File program—which allowed Americans to file their taxes online,
for free, and directly with the government—and make the program
permanent.
In February 2026, Senator Warren led over 150 lawmakers in introducing the Direct File Act,
new legislation that would reverse the Trump administration’s decision
to end the highly successful Direct File program — which allowed
taxpayers to file their taxes online, for free, and directly with the
government — and make the program permanent.
In February 2026, Senator Warren led her colleagues in pressing
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Internal Revenue Service (IRS)
Chief of Taxpayer Services Ken Corbin on the Treasury Department’s
decision to end Direct File and instead promote Free File.
