Chump is reeling from the beating he took in the midterms. He keeps insisting his name was not on the ballot when he spent over six weeks insisting to the American people that they should pretend his name was on the ballot. As Jimmy Kimmel noted the day after the midterms. "You were on the ballot. You're like dog hair, you're on everything. You've infected every nook and cranny of our lives. You divided this country like no one else ever has. The only time you ever brought us together was yesterday, when we all teamed up to get rid of you!" Chump is humiliated and when he's humiliated? He's at his most irrational. Which is why he is accusing Democrats of breaking the law for their plans to seek oversight and accountability. Attorney General Toad Blanche has already fallen in line behind Chump is attempting to bully and threaten members of Congress.
Jacob Sullum (the Libertarian publication REASON) notes Blanche is a little shaky on the actual law:
Blanche himself has repeatedly defended an indictment charging former FBI Director James Comey with threatening to assassinate Trump by posting a photo of seashells arranged to form the numerical slogan "86 47"—a ubiquitous expression of opposition to the president that does not even come close to the Supreme Court's definition of a "true threat." In light of that precedent, it is not exactly reassuring when Blanche says the viability of prosecuting lawmakers for "threatening" members of the Trump administration "depends on what the crime is and what they have done."
Blanche nevertheless may have a hard time finding a crime to pin on Trump's congressional critics. The "criminal act[s]" that Trump perceives include trying to impeach federal officials when "there have been no impeachable acts committed," which he describes as an "illegal process" and "extortion at the highest level," saying legislators "should be held accountable" for attempting it. But the Constitution gives Congress complete discretion in identifying "high crimes and misdemeanors," which need not include conduct that would qualify as a criminal violation.
Trump also averred that Democrats are "threatening our Donors, some of the most respected people anywhere in the World, with imprisonment, and many other levels of punishment, just because they happen to be Republicans, or Republican supporters," which he described as "Weaponization and Lawfare at another level." Trump amplified that complaint in a subsequent post: "The threats being made by the Democrat Party against innocent Republican Donors and Party Members are absolutely unprecedented, and totally illegal. Please report them to the Department of Justice, IMMEDIATELY!"
What is Trump talking about? As Reason's Tosin Akintola notes, some Democrats have suggested that their investigations will "extend to the actions of private companies and industries they perceive as allies of the president." Last week, for example, Sen. Ron Wyden (D–Ore.) said he was "putting the special interests that have worked hand-in-hand with Trump to rip off American families for the last year and a half on notice." When he is chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, Wyden warned, they "will be forced to answer" for "their role in hurting the American people and enabling Trump's corruption."
Whatever you think of that plan, it does not qualify as a threat of "imprisonment," unlike Trump's response. While Wyden is promising to conduct congressional hearings, Trump is threatening criminal prosecution, and his attorney general does not seem inclined to refuse his marching orders.
Steve Benen (MS NOW) boils it down thusly, "In other words, one day after the president condemned congressional oversight as “weaponization and lawfare,” the attorney general, taking his marching orders from Trump, told a national television audience he’s open to prosecuting members of Congress — or at least trying to — for asking questions the White House and its allies don’t want to answer." And it's moments like these that explain why Harry Litman (THE NEW REPUBLIC) argues that the most impeachable official in the administration is Blanche:
For the last 20 months, the Justice Department hasn’t been flirting with authoritarianism. It has been an antidemocratic stronghold, embracing practices that don’t happen in a democracy, and that in fact define authoritarian rule.
Democratic Representative Hank Johnson of Georgia has stated the umbrella case for impeaching and removing Blanche. The menu of possible articles runs long: illegal firings, including Maurene Comey’s, as a federal judge ruled last week; an early push, with his deputy Emil Bove—now, incredibly, a federal appellate judge—to ship immigrants out of the country whether or not the law allowed it; a sit-down with Ghislaine Maxwell not long before she landed in a minimum-security camp.
Yet if I were drafting the articles, I’d opt to set aside for the time being all those horrendous abuses in the sycophantic service of Donald Trump and advance a single count: that Blanche has wielded the power of federal prosecution to punish the president’s enemies.
As Vladimir Putin’s persecution of Alexei Navalny shows, a single instance tells you everything about a regime, and a single instance would justify impeachment and removal. With Blanche, we have a long and growing list: Jim Comey, three times over. Letitia James. Cassidy Hutchinson. Six Democratic lawmakers, for making a video about illegal orders.
A one-count article of impeachment reduces the overall firepower of the case against Blanche, but it trains Congress’s and the nation’s focus on reprisal prosecutions, the practice of Trump 2.0 that is the singular paradigm of authoritarianism. Three reasons make the reprisal count the right one.
First, reprisal prosecutions don’t merely abuse power; they violate the Constitution in and of themselves. The Supreme Court has called punishing someone for doing what the law allows “a due process violation of the most basic sort.” When the charges are brought in retaliation for protected speech, as with Comey or the six Democratic lawmakers, the prosecution violates the First Amendment as well.
Second, reprisal prosecutions are designed to cow dissent more broadly. Blanche’s prominent targets—a former FBI director, a witness who testified to Congress, lawmakers who reminded troops of their duty—cast a broad shadow over other political critics. Along with intimidating political adversaries, that is the point. Each case warns every potential critic, witness, and whistleblower to keep quiet or face criminal prosecution. And because a reprisal prosecution does its damage before any judge rules, and prosecutors enjoy absolute immunity from damages, the courts can’t undo it. Impeachment is the one remedy that reaches the official responsible.
Third, and most important, prosecuting the leader’s enemies on manufactured or nonexistent charges is the bright line between democracy and autocracy. It’s the unmistakable mark of authoritarianism.
Meanwhile Ashlyn Walker (OK) reports:
Todd Blanche has been ordered to answer questions from Jeffrey Epstein‘s alleged victims after a federal judge ruled that the Trump administration’s top law enforcement official could not completely avoid scrutiny over explosive remarks he allegedly made about the FBI’s handling of the disgraced financier’s s– abuse investigation, OK! can reveal.
According to court documents obtained by OK!, U.S. Magistrate Judge Ryon McCabe issued a November 5 ruling allowing Epstein survivors to submit up to 10 written questions to Blanche, despite granting the government’s request to block his deposition for now.
The legal battle stems from a July 16, 2026, meeting in Washington, D.C., where Blanche allegedly acknowledged serious failures in the FBI’s investigation of Epstein.
According to a November 3 court filing, attorneys representing Epstein survivors claim Blanche told those attending that the FBI’s case against Epstein “was handled improperly before 2007.”
The filing also alleges Blanche delivered an even more startling admission to the victims.
“You got screwed over by the FBI, but I cannot fix the FBI’s lack of investigation,” Blanche allegedly said.
Turning to Priss Pot Pete Hegseth. Stephen Collinson (CNN) reports:
But the first confrontation, over a potential House of Representatives vote to impeach Hegseth, will do more to test how the midterm wipeout has hurt Trump’s authority among Republicans than Democrats’ capacity to restrain him.
Republican Rep. Thomas Massie plans to bring articles of impeachment against Hegseth this week as the Pentagon chief intensifies a vehement campaign to keep his job despite criticism of his conduct of the Iran war.
There are growing suggestions that even many Republicans would like the combative Hegseth gone, especially after Rep. James Comer expressed reservations about him last week. Comer, unlike his fellow Kentuckian Massie, who was beaten by a pro-Trump rival in his primary, remains loyal to the president.
The White House is standing by Hegseth, so far. Trump told reporters last week his defense secretary was doing “a very good job.” And Hegseth reacted to Miller’s promotion by portraying him as a fellow fighter against the president’s enemies with a social media post reading “Stand. Fight.”
Hegseth’s viability, however, could be undermined by a strong vote against him by GOP members. Those who’ve lost their jobs amid public fury over Iran may have little incentive to stand strong with him and the president. It seems unlikely that there will be the two-thirds majority in the Senate needed to convict and remove Hegseth from office in an impeachment trial. But he’s made few friends in the Senate, and these are volatile political days.
The Hegseth impeachment drama will unfold against the last rites of the lame-duck Republican-led Congress, which must pass a funding bill by December 11 to keep the government open. The defense secretary’s controversial presence may also complicate the Senate passage of a critical defense spending bill.
Robert Jimison (NEW YORK TIMES) notes the charges US House Rep Thomas Massie is bringing in his articles of impeachment:
Mr. Massie, who lost his primary in May to a challenger backed by President Trump, has introduced eight articles of impeachment against Mr. Hegseth, three of them focused on his conduct of the war with Iran.
The articles accuse the defense secretary of waging war without congressional authorization and continuing the military campaign after Congress voted to direct the president to terminate the conflict or seek authorization to continue it. The resolution also accuses Mr. Hegseth of violating deadlines under the War Powers Resolution, which requires the withdrawal of American forces from unauthorized hostilities after 60 days, with a possible 30-day extension.
The remaining charges accuse Mr. Hegseth of carrying out unlawful military strikes against suspected drug traffickers; unlawfully capturing Venezuela’s president, Nicolás Maduro; conducting unauthorized military operations in Yemen; disregarding laws intended to minimize civilian casualties; and abusing his power by retaliating against Senator Mark Kelly for protected speech.
It is up to Speaker Mike Johnson to decide whether the chamber will vote on each of the eight articles or if they will be considered as a package.
Priss Pot Pete is a joke and a fool. He has been involved in one scandal after another since being confirmed by the Senate (and JD Vance in the tie breaking vote) to be Secretary of Defense. The scandals continue. Brendan Rascius (INDEPENDENT) reported yesterday:
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth blocked promotions for military officers who supported Covid-19 vaccines and diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, according to a new report.
Citing three military officials, MS NOW reported that Hegseth sidestepped the Pentagon’s merit-based promotion process in favor of new criteria that disproportionately affected women and people of color.
“I was like ‘you gotta be kidding me’,” a senior official said. A Pentagon spokesperson, meanwhile, told The Independent that the department remains “committed to ensuring that all advancement is merit-based.”
Throughout his 21-month tenure, Hegseth has reshaped the Pentagon’s senior leadership, ousting dozens of generals and admirals. In September, he announced plans to reduce their ranks by 20 percent, adding that “no beardos, no weirdos, no wimps” would be tolerated.
Directions on how this would be done were given over the phone to avoid a paper trail. This leak is part of a series of leaks that will be rolling out from the man enemies Hegseth has made since becoming Secretary of Defense. Travis Gettys (RAW STORY) adds:
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth’s office kept secret paper files of internet search printouts and used them to block the promotions of senior Navy officers, most of them women and people of color, and that process may have violated federal law, according to a new report.
A senior official with in-depth knowledge of flag and general officer selection told MS NOW that Hegseth’s executive office built “paper-only files” filled with internet search results that the officers under consideration couldn’t see. Instructions about the new criteria came over the phone instead of in writing. Two officers whose promotions were withheld confirmed the official’s account.
The officers had already been chosen by the Navy’s selection boards, which by law weigh performance, experience and education. Hegseth’s office then went after the officers over things like allowing a celebration with rainbow flags, speaking at a Hispanic Heritage Month event, joining an International Women’s Day panel, or encouraging sailors to get COVID-19 vaccines.
Of 31 officers selected for one-star rank, about 15 got reports, and nine were withheld. Every woman and minority on that list except one was removed. On the two-star list, the only woman selected and every person of color were taken off.
[. . .]
Legal experts say the way it was done could be a serious problem. Under federal law, only the president can remove individual names from one- and two-star promotion lists. The defense secretary can approve or reject a list only as a whole. Officers facing a delayed promotion are entitled to written notice and a chance to respond. The officers told MS NOW they got neither.
“If ‘professionally unqualified’ can mean ‘executed a lawful program the current Secretary opposes,’ the promotion system and law has no function left,” said Cody Harnish, a military defense attorney and former Army judge advocate general, who called the removals “illegal.”
Illegal. And yet Priss Pot Pete is trying to play the victim. He spoke to the press yesterday and plans a press conference today to plead for his job. Konstantin Toropin (AP) notes it would be his first press conference "in over 180 days." On Monday, Priss Pot Pete got prissy and tried to hide behind the troops declaring, "If you want to take issue with what we did in Epic Fury or Rough Rider or nabbing Nicolas Maduro, you're taking issue with the troops and what they accomplished, which is historic." No, Prissy, we're taking issue with your plans and conclusions. And, check the polls, the American people can't stand you. Laura Esposito (DAILY BEAST) notes:
Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro ripped the secretary of defense Sunday morning, accusing him of making America “less safe.”
“I would just tell you, from my perspective, he is completely incompetent. He’s like an eight-year-old playing with toy soldiers every day,” Shapiro, 53, said on NBC’s Meet the Press on Sunday.
“He is someone who I think is making America less safe, and there has to be real accountability.”
Pete's day of reckoning is approaching. This day was actually supposed to have come in September. That's when US House Rep Thomas Massie first introduced articles of impeachment against Prissy. But Speaker of the Closet Mike Johnson immediately sent House Republicans home to avoid a vote being taken. That was known in real time but for those who need a Republican to declare it to be true, Maria Villarroel (IRISH STAR) reports:
Republican Texas Sen. Ted Cruz claimed the House of Representatives has been in recess for months because Republicans did not have enough votes to prevent an impeachment of Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth. His comments come as an impeachment vote on the controversial Cabinet member looms.
During a recent podcast appearance, the Republican senator claimed that the House has been out of session to prevent a vote on Hegseth’s impeachment. Those claims, however, have not been verified.
“One of the reasons the House has been out of session for a couple of months,” Cruz said. “The reason they’ve been out of session is that they didn’t have the votes to stop a Hegseth impeachment back in September.”
Moving over to Congress, Boe-Boe may not be returning. That's per CNN's Ellis Kim and Jennifer Nehrer:
Retired Rear Adm. Eileen Laubacher, a Democrat, will flip Colorado’s 4th District, CNN’s Decision Desk projects, ending conservative firebrand Rep. Lauren Boebert’s tenure in Congress.
Boebert’s loss comes after she elected to run in a more conservative district last cycle in an effort to preserve her political future. But Laubacher, who served more than three decades in the Navy, capitalized on the national headwinds against the GOP and focused her campaign on affordability issues.
The win denies Boebert, an ally of President Donald Trump and one of the most outspoken conservatives in the House Republican conference, a fourth term. Boebert was first elected in 2020, after she upset a fifth-term Republican incumbent in a primary.
As Elaine noted last night:
Boe-Boe entered Congress in 2020 claiming to be a family values candidate. May 11, 2023, she filed for a divorce from her husband who was the father of their four children. September 10th, she was out on a date in public when she and her date engaged in heavy petting in a theater where the musical BEETLEJUICE was being performed. October 10, 2023, her divorce was granted. She's been a single parent since. GOOGLE AI notes:
Tyler Boebert, the 21-year-old eldest son of U.S. Representative Lauren Boebert, was arrested and charged with felony child sexual exploitation and contributing to the delinquency of a minor.
The Arrest: Tyler Boebert was arrested by the Garfield County Sheriff's Office on August 9, 2026, and posted a $10,000 bond the same day
The case involves three felony counts of sexual exploitation of a child and two felony counts of contributing to the delinquency of a minor, stemming from a 2024 incident where he allegedly shared explicit media involving a 17-year-old on Instagram.
This was not his first run-in with the law. Amanda Pampuro (COURTHOUSE NEWS) reminds, "In 2024, Boebert pleaded guilty to a single charge for attempting to commit identity theft related to a spree of vehicle break-ins committed around the small Colorado city of Rifle. The judge granted Boebert a deferred sentence. He is scheduled to appear in court for sentencing on the identity theft case on Sept. 10."
She leaves Congress with a jailbird for a son and without a husband. Those are apparently her real family values.
In other news, Russell Brand is human trash who's been convicted of rape in England. Ann's covered this in "Grifter and rapist Russell Brand," "More accusations at convicted rapist Russell Brand" and "Rapist Russell Brand." Holly Baxter (INDEPENDENT) notes:
Russell Brand has been sentenced to more than 10 years in prison for rape and sexual assault in London, but just a few weeks ago, he was sitting onstage next to Trump administration official Mehmet Oz at a September conference for MAHA Action, joking obliquely about the very serious allegations against him.
Brand had almost been late because he was distracted backstage, “hugging the secretary for agriculture,” said Oz, during introductory remarks. “She initiated that contact, I should make clear, doctor!” Brand replied.
Both Oz and Brand laughed heartily at the apparent cleverness of the joke.
Of course it looks bad now, but it should’ve looked bad then, when the court case was on the horizon, so let’s not expect much hand-wringing from Oz, MAHA-maven RFK Jr., and the other Trump health officials who embraced Brand over the past two years.
And indeed, Brand has been making jokes like this for years in plain sight. His ‘I’m just telling it like it is’ persona meant that he was announcing he would sleep with pretty much anyone from under the age of consent upwards during his early 00’s standup routines. He often encouraged young women to line up outside gigs and wait for him so he could have sex with them afterwards.
For a long time, yes, Brand managed to get away with just looking like a shameless Lothario. He managed that even when there was evidence of an undercurrent of viciousness and misogyny: calling up Andrew Sachs to “prank him” on-air while lewdly describing how he’d slept with Sachs’ granddaughter; saying during a live interview with Vanessa Feltz that he’d like to have sex with her and her two teenage daughters, the youngest of whom was 15 at the time; performing a mean-spirited comedy routine about Katy Perry in the immediate weeks after their divorce, where he heavily implied that she was bad in bed.
In other words, Brand wasn’t just a tomcat who strutted around talking about the size of his libido. He was someone who, again and again, spoke about women with dehumanizing derision. Whether that woman was an ex-wife or an interviewer or the secretary for agriculture, it always came back to objectification. (Remind you of anyone?)
So he was a perfect fit for Chump and Chump's administration. After awhile, you'd think Chump would be asked about all these predators that he has surrounded himself with.
Let's wind down with this from Senator Tammy Duckworth's office:
[WASHINGTON, D.C.] – U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) issued the following statement announcing she will vote against advancing the permitting reform bill:
“It couldn’t be clearer that Americans are sick of abuses of power, sick of the sky-high cost of living and sick of business as usual. While I appreciate some of the changes in the latest version put forward by committee leadership, the bill still isn’t good enough. Not for Illinois, not for the communities who won’t have a say in data centers and development coming into their neighborhoods and not for the entire nation.”
“After Americans issued a complete and total rejection of Donald Trump, Congress should not be rushing to pass a bill that would hand that same man even more power to put Big Oil and Big Tech over ratepayers. I cannot support a bill that depends on the empty promises of Trump, who violates the law every day and continues to hold up billions in energy funding from blue states like mine simply because we did not support him in the last election. I’m also skeptical that we’ll be successful in lowering costs for the American people by passing a bill that is supported by data centers and utility corporations who are jacking up their costs.
“Americans empowered Democrats to fight for them. We must use that power to fight for a better deal that prioritizes people over profits, establishes stronger guardrails and protects states like Illinois against any future retaliation by the President.”
-30-
The following sites updated:
Corrupt Chump is in denial
6 hours ago
Chump contemplates his own end
6 hours ago
Bye-bye Boe-Boe
6 hours ago
Weekend Box Office
6 hours ago
Chump worries many
6 hours ago
Rapist Russell Brand
6 hours ago
The Texas Miracle
1 day ago
