Thursday, April 16, 2026

The Snapshot

Thursday, April 16, 2026.  Chump's lies continue and continue to weaken him in the eyes of the people, Senator Elizabeth Warren calls out his tax policy that shields the wealthy from paying their share, Kristi Noem's make-work job that Chump invented was invented to sideline her, The Epstein Scandal continues, and much more. 



Ewan Gleadow (RAW STORY) reports on David Pakman's observations about the war on Iran and the Chump administration: 

Speaking on the Strait of Hormuz reopening and closing again, Pakman claimed that how long it takes to reopen the trade channel and broker peace with Iran would determine just how difficult the remainder of Trump's time in office will be for the US.

Pakman said, "Think about where we are right now and where I want to go is how long do you believe this is going to last? We had the initial timeline of three to four weeks, that became four to six weeks, we are now in week seven.

"We currently, as we stand today, just had, and this changes so quickly, but as of right now we had failed negotiations with Iran led by JD Vance, Donald Trump saying the Strait, which so desperately needed to be open, we are now going to close it, and no clear plan as to what even would mean victory at this point."
Pakman went on to suggest that Trump may not have been briefed on the Iran war before he joined Israel in striking the Middle Eastern country. He asked, "Was Trump actually briefed on the risks of this operation?"

The war could extend further than the already extended seven-week period, with Pakman suggesting the rest of the year could still be affected by the war in Iran.

"Will it go to the summer when the gas prices tend to go up anyway? Will it go into the fall when oil heating becomes more relevant in a lot of the United States? And by the way, there's an election. Gas prices could be higher in November for the election than they are today.

"Is it going to go into the final two years of Donald Trump's presidency? My best guess right now is that in a public-facing way, Trump will say it's over sometime before the summer. Blows the original timeline completely out of the water.


It could end tomorrow and Chump would still appear out of it and totally unprepared.  That's what he's been.  He pretapes a video announcing the war that he drops in the early morning hours while people are sleeping -- drops on his own social media -- and after that?  A constantly changing reason for the war.  It has been a disaster.  

And "disaster" is the only term for Chump's administration.  Max Burns (THE HILL) observes:

President Trump’s second term has been nothing if not a laundry list of broken promises. But few Americans have suffered more from Trump’s deceptions than the nation’s struggling farmers.  

It’s no secret that family farms have had a rough go of it over the past decade. An average of 373 farms have failed every year since 2015. The stress of simply surviving has led to a nationwide mental health crisis in resource-starved farming communities.
Trump captured 62 percent of the rural vote in 2024, 4 points better than his performance in 2020, based largely on promises to lavish prosperity (and federal money) on small farms on the verge of collapse. 

Like so many Trump promises, the help never arrived. The suicide rate in rural communities is now 3.5 times the national average and climbing. Farmers buckle under the financial strain of crippling agricultural tariffs, rising input costs and a president who didn’t bother to mention them once in his most recent State of the Union address.


Ben (MEIDASTOUCH NEWS) notes Chump's continued fumbles in the Iran War.





Aaron Blake (CNN) notes the toll the war Chump chose to start has had on his polling:

While Trump has declared the war is close to being over and a success, Americans don’t see it that way. And they certainly don’t see it as a strategic success.

A CBS News-YouGov poll over the weekend showed 36% said the military operations were successful. Another 31% said it was too soon to say, while 33% said they were not successful.
But Americans were even less sold on the strategic side of things. Just 25% said the war was a strategic success — far less than the 42% who deemed it a failure.

And when it comes to key objectives, Americans overwhelmingly don’t see them being met:

Just 7% said Iran’s leaders are more pro-US now (despite Trump claiming that Iran has a “new regime” that is “pretty reasonable.”)
Just 8% said the war has prevented Tehran from threatening other countries (despite Trump saying the war “stopped” Iran from taking over or taking out the Middle East.)
And just 11% said it has permanently stopped Iran’s nuclear program (despite Trump saying that’s the No. 1 goal and having said his June strikes in Iran “obliterated” its nuclear facilities.)
Even Trump might concede that last one is a work in progress. But the other key point is that Americans just don’t think the war is going to accomplish it.

In fact, they don’t even think the war has been a net positive on that front.

A recent Pew Research Center poll showed only 27% of Americans said the war would ultimately make Iran’s development of a nuke “less likely.” That’s the same as the 27% who viewed it as “more likely.” (Another 4 in 10 were neutral.)

That's just an excerpt of his analysis but, spoiler, it doesn't get better for Chump -- read Aaron's analysis in full. 

He can't justify the war -- not to the American people's satisfaction.  He's offered too many differing reasons and rationales.  He's been all over the map.  And the war has cost him supporters because he ran against these wars -- he was going to focus on America and Americans and no foreign wars.  That was what he campaigned on, yes.  But don't forget that as late as a year into the office, he was still whining about not winning a Nobel Peace Prize.  He didn't deserve one but declaring war on Iran sort of nixed that prize for him.  And it made people -- especially his supporters -- ask, "Who is he?"  He's not who he presented as.  


And they see him lying.  Ashleigh Fields (THE HILL) reports:

President Trump on Tuesday doubled down on the fact that he thought oil prices would be “much worse” than they are now amid the Iran war.

“I mean, honestly, I thought there’d be much worse. And I was willing to do that to stop a nuclear weapon to be used against this country or the Middle East. Anybody in the Middle East, they were going to take out the Middle East to stop that,” Trump said during his interview that aired Wednesday on Fox Business’s “Mornings with Maria.”
“It was certainly worthwhile being much higher than it is right now. If you told me that we were going to be at only 92 a barrel, $92 a barrel, I would have been very surprised,” he added.


The American people aren't persuaded.  And now that he's offering that he knew prices would go  up?  


Inflation has surged to its highest levels in nearly two years, with higher diesel and gas prices as the major reason why.

The economic strain has resulted in Americans feeling less confident about the economy. The University of Michigan has been tracking consumer sentiment for over 70 years, and this month reported its lowest levels ever recorded.

Chump could really use an "I feel your pain" Bill Clinton type of moment now.  But the problem isn't just that he doesn't feel your pain but you wouldn't believe him saying that he did.  This is the man who personifies The Epstein Class.  This is the man who sues outlets.  This is the man who has put a price tag on the public commons.  He's greedy and his avarice has been stoked repeatedly in the last year despite the fact that he is the president of the United States, a public servant, and should not be receiving gifts (a plane, for example).  

Feel your pain?

He'd be more believable stating, "I caused your pain." 


As a member of The Epstein Class, that's what he did.  Sarah K. Burris notes:

House Republicans will vote this week on a bill expressing support for their "One Big Beautiful Bill" Act passed last summer. The measure will not only cheer the law, but it will attempt to rebrand the unpopular budget measure to the "Working Families Tax Cut."

There's a reason for both of those things, a CNN data analyst explained on Wednesday. Data shows Americans don't like the "One Big Beautiful Bill," and they don't believe it did anything to help their affordability crisis.
The GOP's flagship budget bill, which Trump called the "big, beautiful bill," delivered many tax perks to the wealthy and corporations, but it has been a bust for many others. Even after it passed, there wasn't much fanfare. Mere months after it passed, Trump announced he was rebranding it to the "Working Families Tax Cut."


The tax cuts went to the elite.  Klaus Marre (WHO WHAT WHY) explains:

According to the IRS, the average refund has increased by $350. That isn’t nothing, especially at a time when so many American families are having trouble making ends meet.

But therein lies the real problem for Republicans who want to get credit for making life easier for regular people: People are really struggling, and that extra money is a drop in the bucket in light of the different ways in which Donald Trump has exacerbated the affordability crisis.
Contrary to the president’s claims, inflation is up to the highest level in nearly two years, and gas prices are skyrocketing because of the war he started with Iran.

When will they come back down? Trump has no idea.

According to Brown University’s Watson School of International and Public Affairs, the average US household has been forced to pay an extra $150 just for gasoline and diesel since the start of the conflict.

But it’s not just fuel. The closure of the Strait of Hormuz will lead to higher prices for many different goods later this year. Among them is US-grown food because farmers have to pay a premium for fertilizer right now.

Even if the war ended today, its effects would still be felt for months.

In addition, contrary to Trump’s claims, Americans have realized that they, as well as the businesses they work for and buy from, are the ones paying for the president’s tariffs.

Let's note this from Senator Elizabeth Warren's office:

Under Trump administration, corporations paid $65 billion less in taxes in 2025 than 2024

American taxpayers forced to deal with twice as long wait times when calling the IRS to get help 

Warren: “While the Trump administration is making it harder for regular folks to get help from the IRS, the rich are having a field day”

Video of Exchange (YouTube)

Washington, D.C. — At a hearing of the Senate Finance Committee, U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) blasted the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) performance under CEO Frank Bisignano’s leadership, questioning whether the Trump administration is focused on serving the American public or just delivering for the rich. Bisignano is currently responsible for leading both Trump’s IRS and the Social Security Administration.

Despite Bisignano's claims that as IRS CEO, he is delivering a "really good outcome for the American public,” data show that the IRS was extremely understaffed during the peak of tax season thanks to DOGE dismissing thousands of customer service employees last year and the Trump administration’s failure to hire them back after attempting to backtrack. Senator Warren noted that under Bisignano, American taxpayers are facing increased barriers to getting help this filing season, with those who attempt to call into the IRS experiencing double the wait time before reaching an IRS representative.

“While the Trump administration is making it harder for regular folks to get help from the IRS, the rich are having a field day,” said Senator Warren.

Senator Warren criticized the tax cuts enacted by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which handed out billions of dollars to giant companies like Meta and Amazon and reduced the amount of federal taxes that corporations paid last year by $65 billion compared to 2024. That $65 billion would have been enough to extend the Obamacare tax credits three times over.

Senator Warren pressed Bisignano on whether he supports cutting health care for families so that giant corporations could receive tax cuts under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Bisignano responded, “It is a really good outcome for the American public here.”

Senator Warren concluded the hearing with a sharp rebuke of Bisignano's statement: “I think we’ve just seen the values of the Trump administration, loud and clear.”

Transcript: Hearings to examine the IRS 2026 filing season and IRS operations.
Senate Finance Committee
April 15, 2026

Senator Elizabeth Warren: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So, Mr. Bisignano, you've claimed that as CEO of the IRS, you are “getting a really good outcome for the American public.” And I just have some questions about what that really means.

Last year, DOGE pushed out about 4,400 IRS employees whose specific job was to take calls and answer questions for millions of taxpayers. And then after you pushed them out, you discovered you actually needed those people to do that work. So, you tried to hire a lot of them back, but you did such a bad job at that that you were still short of your own hiring targets by about a thousand people as you got to tax filing season. And now, taxpayers who call in are waiting, literally, twice as long on hold, to get help.

So, Mr. Bisignano, which part is the “really good outcome” for the American people? Is it pushing out thousands of employees who are needed to help answer taxpayers' questions? Or is it unsuccessfully scrambling to rehire those workers? Or is it forcing millions of taxpayers to spend literally twice as much time waiting on the phone to get help? Where is the really good outcome?

Mr. Frank Bisignano: The really good outcome is the fact that we executed against the One Big Beautiful Bill. We have 54 million Americans who filed a form 1A. We have 80 million Americans who received refunds.

Senator Warren: I’m sorry. Mr. Bisignano, could I ask you just to answer my question? I gave you three facts that are verified. I take it you don't dispute any of those. I want to understand—

Mr. Bisignano: Well, here's the actual facts, ma'am.

Senator Warren: I want to understand how any of those are really good outcomes for the American people.

Mr. Bisignano: Here are the really good outcomes. We committed to single-digit wait times on the phones.

Senator Warren: I’m sorry, the data from your own inspector general—

Mr. Bisignano: Well, actually, what the data from the Inspector General report, the data from the inspector general says—

Senator Warren: Mr. Bisignano, can you let me ask my question?

Mr. Bisignano: Take the developed level of access. Increased 45%.

Senator Warren: Mr. Bisignano, that same report, I have now seen it, says wait times on the phone doubled for people asking questions.

Mr. Bisignano: I mean, IVR usage and chatbots all exceeded—

Senator Warren: So, the question I’m asking you is, where are those really good outcomes that you bragged about? And I take it they’re not there. Because let’s understand: while the Trump administration is making it harder for regular folks to get help from the IRS, the rich are having a field day.

Mr. Bisignano: How about 90, over 90% of people—

Senator Warren: Thanks to Donald Trump, corporations paid $65 billion less in taxes last year compared with 2024. Meta alone saved $3 billion. Amazon saved over $4 billion. And just for context, that $65 billion would have been enough money to extend the Obamacare tax credits three times over and still had money left over, saving health care for millions of Americans.

So, Mr. Bisignano, I just want to understand how slashing health care for families so that Meta gets a $3 billion tax cut is a really good outcome for the American public?

Mr. Bisignano: Well, a really good outcome for the American public is getting their checks, their direct deposits, within 21 days. What you're talking about isn't part of what the IRS is working on.

Senator Warren: So you think it is a good outcome that Meta gets to save $3 billion? Amazon gets $4 billion. And to pay for it, millions of Americans lose their health care? That's your view as the CEO of the IRS.

Mr. Bisignano: I don't see the two of them correlated, ma’am.

Senator Warren: They're correlated in terms of those tax cuts were paid for by pushing people off their health care. Did you not follow that?

Mr. Bisignano: Those tax cuts, 30 million seniors, your seniors—

Senator Warren: I’m talking about $3 billion for Meta paid for by people being pushed off their health care. And you're the one who said, “really good outcome.”

Mr. Bisignano: It is a really good outcome for the American public here. The tax, what was enacted in the Working Family Tax Act—

Senator Warren: That’s a terrific outcome for the American people? I think we’ve just seen the values of the Trump administration, loud and clear.

Chair Mike Crapo: Well, we still argue over whether the refusal to increase taxes is a tax cut.

Senator Warren: What we don’t argue over is whether Meta is paying $3 billion less under the One Big Beautiful Bill than they paid the year before under taxes. They got $3 billion, they got to keep it. It was paid for by millions of people who got pushed off their health care. Those are just the numbers.

###




Kristi Noem.  A liar to the people and to the courts.  A disgraced person engaged in an extra-marital affair of many, many years.  A disgraced person trying to play dumb regarding her husband's now exposed fetish.  And fired as Homeland Security Secretary.  But given a faux post.  Why?  Well it wasn't to save face, it turns out.  Tom Latchem (DAILY BEAST) explains:


The Trump administration invented a senior government role for Kristi Noem specifically to prevent her from entering the Senate, according to a new report by PunchUp.

The title of “Special Envoy for the Shield of the Americas”—announced on March 5 when Trump publicly fired Noem as DHS secretary—was effectively invented to ensure she missed the March 31 filing deadline for the South Dakota Republican primary, multiple administration sources have told our sister investigative Substack outlet.
This meant that Noem, 54—the first Cabinet secretary ousted in Trump’s second term—could not challenge incumbent Sen. Mike Rounds, 71, whom Trump, 79, had already endorsed.

“It was made up to keep her busy,” one source close to the administration told PunchUp, adding that the White House had privately concluded Noem was such a liability that it needed to “put her out to the glue factory”—inventing a title that kept her on the government payroll and nominally occupied, but stripped of any real power.

Put her out to the glue factory?  

It gets worse for Kristi:

The plan began to unravel quickly. Sources told PunchUp that the White House panicked when it realized Noem was treating the position as substantive rather than symbolic.

“They didn’t expect her to take it so seriously,” one administration source said.

By March 25, the State Department had made clear that her chain of command ran to Deputy Secretary of State Chris Landau—not Rubio—a humiliating reduction in standing that the Beast reported at the time. “Landau has now nuked the whole thing,” a source told PunchUp, in a development confirmed by one of Noem’s close allies.
Noem had brought 10 loyalists with her to her new role, according to an administration official cited by Politico. But within weeks, three of the group—former deputy chief of staff Troup Hemenway, Josh King, and Octavian Miller—were placed on paid leave and then fired. A source told the New York Post the dismissals were tied to their connections to Lewandowski: “They didn’t want any people that would be tentacles for Lewandowski.”
The Daily Mail reported last Friday that her time in the role was likely drawing to a close. “This post was intended as a soft landing so it didn’t look like Noem was immediately being fired,” sources told the Mail. “But no one really thinks she should have this job. The State Department was not happy to have her here, and the understanding is that she’s not going to be here for much longer.”


She did so much for Chump, helped him destroy our country.  And it wasn't enough to save her.  A lesson Pam Bondi's learning the hard way as well.  Kristi Noem is a disgrace.  


As is Pam Bondi who will never live down The Epstein Scandal.  



Yesterday, Jim Acosta spoke with Liz Oyer about The Epstein Scandal.  



They discussed Pam Bondi and Todd Blanche.  Pam's refusal to be deposed by the House Oversight Committee calls for her to be held in contempt.  She was being called to testify about what she saw and what she did.  The subpoena did not go away because she got fired. 

"He just lies," Liz observes of Todd and his claims that all the Epstein files have been released. "He keeps thinking he can wish it away," she observed of Todd's refusal to embrace transparency.



And people are not buying Todd's lie that all the files have been released.  On MS NOW yesterday, Chris Jansing spoke with Epstein survivor Danielle Bensky.



Excerpt:

Danielle Bensky: In 1996, Maria Farmer gave a report.  And we were able to find that first page of her report.  We know there is a second page.  She has confirmed this and we have yet to find it.  So we know that there are more documents, that's just one.  I believe that we have given a list of documents, that have been missing, as survivors and so for him to say -- it's just a complete farce for him to say that there are no more documents.  Not to mention, it's so contradictory to what has been said in the past.  And it just goes back to the only thing that we can bank on with this administration is uncertainty because they say -- you know, Pam Bondi says, 'The files are on my desk,' and then there are no files and then 'we've released them all,' 'no we still have some,' 'now we've really released them all' and it's just like this beam of -- it's just a chase. 

Chris Jansing: Do you believe that some of these files that have not been released -- I'll ask you point blank -- point fingers at powerful people?

Danielle Bensky: Definitely.  Yes, I do.  



Tara Palmeria addressed the scandal yesterday.





Tara Palmeri: At the same time, The Epstein Story is being hijacked.  It's being shifted away from victims and being turned into a spectacle by the manosphere.  They are so upset with the elite men and the kind of power games they were playing that they have forgotten the victims all together and, in fact, are debating the definition of pedophilia and questioning whether in fact the victims are victims.  That's right.  That is how the Epstein narrative is being changed.  They're completely stripping the gendered reality of this story out of it. 


The following sites updated:




Posted by at