Wednesday, October 22, 2025. The non-stop lies of the crooks -- Chump, Bondi, Kristi and so many more.
All Donald Chump has ever known is how to lie. It remains his only skill to this day. Here's MEIDASTOUCH NEWS' Ben this morning with realities that beat down Chump's lies.
Love him waiving around those English language Bibles -- the ones printed and made in Hangzhou. Hangzhou? What an interesting name. Is it next to Kalamazoo in Michigan. No. No, it's in China. Any job Chump creates is overseas. He's tanked our economy.
President
Trump is demanding that the Justice Department pay him about $230
million in compensation for the federal investigations into him,
according to people familiar with the matter, who added that any
settlement might ultimately be approved by senior department officials
who defended him or those in his orbit.
The
situation has no parallel in American history, as Mr. Trump, a
presidential candidate, was pursued by federal law enforcement and
eventually won the election, taking over the very government that must
now review his claims. It is also the starkest example yet of potential
ethical conflicts created by installing the president’s former lawyers
atop the Justice Department.
Mr. Trump
submitted complaints through an administrative claim process that often
is the precursor to lawsuits. The first claim, lodged in late 2023,
seeks damages for a number of purported violations of his rights,
including the F.B.I. and special counsel investigation into Russian
election tampering and possible connections to the 2016 Trump campaign,
according to people familiar with the matter. They spoke on the
condition of anonymity because the claim has not been made public.
The
second complaint, filed in the summer of 2024, accuses the F.B.I. of
violating Mr. Trump’s privacy by searching Mar-a-Lago, his club and
residence in Florida, in 2022 for classified documents. It also accuses
the Justice Department of malicious prosecution in charging him with
mishandling sensitive records after he left office.
The
litigious liar is aware that any settlements would actually be paid by
the US citizens with the money they send to the government for taxes.
Stephanie Ruhle addressed Chump's attempted theft of American dollars last night on THE 11TH HOUR WITH STEPHANIE RUHLE.
Donald Trump is reportedly trying to loot the federal
government to the tune of $230 million. That’s how much he’s demanding
from the Department of Justice in compensation for past federal probes
of his misdeeds, according to a Tuesday report in The New York Times.
The Times’
sources say that before he returned to the White House, Trump filed
administrative claims, or formal requests for relief from a government
agency, which often precede a lawsuit. One 2023 claim seeks damages for
investigations into Russian election interference and ties to the Trump
2016 campaign—another, filed in 2024, for the 2022 FBI search of
Mar-a-Lago for classified documents.
The president reportedly expects to be paid a settlement but, so far, has not gotten his nine-figure payday.
The
potential settlement, being for an administrative claim, would not need
to be publicly announced, and would simply need the approval of one of
two Trump-friendly officials: Todd Blanche, who is the deputy attorney
general and Trump’s former criminal defense attorney, or DOJ civil
division chief Stanley Woodward Jr., who has represented many of the
president’s aides and allies—from Trump’s co-defendant in the classified
documents case to participants in the January 6 Capitol attack.
Compensation in such cases is “typically covered by taxpayers,” the Times reports.
Does anyone want to try to connect this to DOGE? That was the attack on the safety net that some fools cheered on -- not just the right-wing but radical con artists on the left like Ben Cohen who didn't just root for DOGE, he also set up a website celebrating it. We were told -- by Chump and his minions like Ben Cohen -- that DOGE was needed. To save money. The same person supposedly interested in saving the taxpayer money now wants to stick them with a bill for over $200 million? It was never bout saving money. It was about destroying our way of life Shame on liars like Donald Chump and Ben Cohen and everyone who willing participated in the attack on We The People, in the attack on our commons and our public square. Liars who spread lies.
The
U.S. military has killed at least 32 people in seven strikes off the
coast of Venezuela without telling Congress or the American people who
was killed, or on what evidence.
The big picture: The U.S. is eight weeks into a military campaign in the Caribbean Sea with the twin aims of stopping drugs and, potentially, toppling Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro.
"Officially,
our position is we're there to stop narco-terrorists. We're going to
blow up their boats. And we're going to be patient about it. No one is
in any rush," a senior administration official said.
The scene:
The Trump administration has deployed an unprecedented number of
warships, spy planes, fighter jets, bombers, drones, and U.S. Marines
off the coast of Venezuela.
"It's
not just the CIA, it's all of our intelligence capabilities," said an
insider involved in discussions about the operation." The U.S. knows
where Maduro is, where he stays, where he goes. If we wanted to kill him
with a missile, we could have done it by now."
Since Sept. 1, the United States has been blowing up boats
in the Caribbean Sea and killing people on board with apparent
impunity. The current known death toll stands at 32. According to
President Donald Trump,
the dead — and those the Navy continues to target — are Venezuelan
“unlawful combatants” and “narco-terrorist” members of the Tren de
Aragua gang and are alleged to be transporting drugs bound for America.
This amounts to war on drug cartels, Trump has said, allowing the U.S. to act in self-defense.
As Salon’s Andrew O’Hehir has written,
this “phony war” is indicative of the twisted pathology of Trump’s
worldview. Reporting over the last week has made it clear: The danger of
this situation going sideways becomes greater every day. And
considering America’s history in the region, such an outcome almost
seems pre-ordained.
Last
week, Adm. Alvin Holsey, who heads the U.S. Southern Command, which
oversees operations in Central and South America, resigned less than one
year into his three-year term. Although the Pentagon did not give a
reason for his departure, the New York Times reported that he had raised concerns about the boat attacks, as well as the larger drug counter-mission.
Holsey’s
is a high-ranking resignation, but he is not the first to resign or be
forced out over the strikes against Venezuelan boats. On Oct. 15, CNN’s
Natasha Bertrand reported
on Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s destruction of the Judge Advocate
General’s Corps, with “multiple current and former JAGs telling CNN that
the strikes do not appear lawful.” Doubts have also been raised within
the defense department’s Office of General Counsel. The Pentagon has
denied these reports, saying there is unanimous agreement that the
strikes are lawful.
They are not. As Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said on “Meet The Press”
on Sunday, “[W]hen you kill someone, if you’re not in a declared war,
you really need to know someone’s name at least. You have to accuse them
of something. You have to present evidence. So all of these people have
been blown up without any evidence of a crime.”
The
president, though, does not seem to feel any moral obligation — or
pressure — to produce any evidence, and over the weekend he inadvertently revealed
the vacuity of the administration’s arguments. “It was my greatest
honor to destroy a very large DRUG-CARRYING SUBMARINE that was
navigating towards the United States on a well known narcotrafficking
transit route,” he said in a social media post. While two were killed,
Trump announced that the “two surviving terrorists are being returned to
their Countries of origin, Ecuador and Colombia, for detention and
prosecution.”
Can
we see the problem here? He killed two people because they were
allegedly unlawful combatant terrorists with whom we are at war. But
then he sent their two compatriots back to their home countries for
prosecution? How does that make any sense?
On Saturday night, Colombian President Gustavo Petro, went public with an accusation that in September, the U.S. murdered an innocent Colombian fisherman
whose boat was in distress. Trump responded that Petro is an “illegal
drug dealer” with “a fresh mouth toward America.” He announced that he
would immediately halt all counter-narcotics aid payments to Colombia —
which seems counterproductive — and, needless to say, he also vowed to
raise tariffs.
It's one wrong adventure after
another with the Convicted Felon back in the White House. Some may
wonder what you have to do in order to get fired from the Chump
administration?
Since
the Trump administration ramped up its hardline immigration agenda,
dozens of cases have emerged across the United States involving alleged
violations of due process and human rights.
One
of the most prominent is that of Kilmar Abrego García, a Salvadoran man
who was wrongfully deported to El Salvador in March. Since being
returned to the country, he has been entangled in a prolonged legal
fight with federal immigration authorities who want to deport him as
soon as the case is solved.
As that legal battle
continues, a new CBS News report reveals that a former Department of
Justice attorney claims he was fired for refusing to support what he
describes as a false narrative in Abrego García's case. The attorney,
Erez Reuveni, told the outlet that he declined to sign a legal brief
describing Abrego García as a member of the MS-13 gang and a terrorist,
an accusation he says was used in an effort to prevent the man from
returning to the United States.
Reuveni, who
once received praise from Trump administration officials for defending
the president's immigration policies during his first term, said what he
witnessed inside the DOJ violated basic legal principles.
"I
took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution," Reuveni said. "And
my view of that oath is that I need to speak up and draw attention to
what has happened to the department, what is happening to the rule of
law. I would not be faithfully abiding by my oath if I stayed silent
right now."
He also described the moment when a
supervisor called to pressure him into signing off on the brief that
labeled Abrego García as a gang member.
"I
respond up the chain of command, no way. That is not correct. That is
not factually correct. It is not legally correct. That is a lie. And I
cannot sign my name to that brief," Reuveni recounted.
Erez Reuveni was on his way up. He was an attorney in the
Department of Justice who was so effective defending President Trump's
first-term immigration policy, that he was promoted right away in
Trump's second term. But Reuveni's 15-year Justice Department career
ended suddenly after, he says, he witnessed government lawyers lying in
court and evading orders of a judge. These last few months have been a
time of upheaval in the Justice Department. Now, Reuveni's claims are
raising concern in courtrooms across the country. The administration has
called Reuveni a leaker seeking five minutes of fame. But in his first
television interview, Erez Reuveni told us, he's paid a price: speaking
up cost him his dream.
Erez Reuveni: Even before I went to law
school, I understood what I wanted to do as a lawyer was to be involved
in public service. And everyone understood at the time. You do it at the
Department of Justice in Washington, D.C. There's no better place as a
young attorney to just do the sorts of cases where you're standing up in
court as a first-chair attorney on behalf of the United States, doing
things that law firm partners don't do.
Scott Pelley: And that meant what to you?
Erez
Reuveni: That meant I was there on behalf of the American people, on
behalf of the millions of citizens of this country to make sure that
justice was done.
Erez Reuveni started in 2010 as a so-called
"career" attorney. Most lawyers at the Justice Department stay for
years, even decades, defending the policies of one president after
another. Reuveni specialized in immigration law. And in the first Trump
term he defended the controversial ban on travelers from Muslim countries, among many other cases.
Again, lie and you keep your job, tell the truth and you get fired. After her appearance before the Senate Judiciary
Committee (here, here and here), we all know Attorney General Pam
daBimbo Bondi lies. And if you work under her, you better lie too. Robert Alexander (NEWSWEEK) explains:
A
growing number of federal judges are expressing frustration with the
Department of Justice (DOJ) under Attorney General Pam Bondi, citing
repeated incidents in which government lawyers have been accused of
misleading the courts or ignoring judicial orders.
The
concerns have intensified following a whistleblower’s account aired on
60 Minutes and a comprehensive review of federal cases by legal
scholars.
The growing conflict between federal
judges and Bondi’s Justice Department goes beyond one whistleblower’s
account. It strikes at the core of the rule of law—whether courts can
still rely on the government’s word.
Allegations
that department lawyers misled judges, ignored orders, and punished
internal dissent have prompted rulings from both Republican- and
Democratic-appointed judges questioning the government’s honesty in
court.
If the Justice Department loses its
hard-earned presumption of good faith, the damage could outlast any
administration and weaken the integrity of the nation’s judicial system
itself.
daBimbo doesn't care about the Justice Dept or about justice, she only wants to lie in service of the Convicted Felon. That makes her like everyone else in the Cabinet.
Again, tell a lie and you're a
made person in the Chump mob and they don't fire you. Look at Kristi
Noem and the people under her. Farrah Tomazin (DAILY BEAST) notes:
Homeland
Security Secretary Kristi Noem and her department have been accused of
lying to the public after being caught passing off an old photo of a
drug boat to promote Trump’s war on narco-terrorists.
On
Monday, the DHS News account posted a photo on X designed to discredit
Colombian President Gustavo Petro, who had accused Trump of murdering an
innocent fisherman in an attack on a boat the U.S. claimed was run by
drug smugglers.
“Colombian President claims one of the
Narco boats destroyed by the US Naval Task Force was ‘just a poor
Colombian fisherman’. Does this look like a fishing boat? It looks like
he had tons of bait (cocaine, attracts lots of fish). Colombian
president is a liar!!” the post said.
The photo featured the rear of a motorboat, with what appeared to be numerous bags of drugs.
However,
the post was deleted after social media users pointed out that it came
from a 2024 operation that took place about 1000 kilometers south of the
Canary Islands, which was reported at the time by Spanish newspaper El
País.
“This photo is from a drug bust that
occurred in 2024, zero ties to the current situation,” said a community
note that was added to the post as a consumer-based fact check.
“Photo is taken from the video attached in the article below.”
The
Department of Homeland Security has purchased two Gulfstream private
jets for Kristi Noem, the secretary, and other top department officials
at a cost of $172 million, according to documents reviewed by The New
York Times.
The jets, which a department
official said were needed for safety, are the latest expenditures on
behalf of Ms. Noem to draw scrutiny from Democrats and other critics who
have noted her lavish spending on living and other expenses during her
time in public life.
The Coast Guard put in its
budget earlier this year a request to purchase a new long-range
Gulfstream V jet, estimated to cost $50 million, to replace an aging one
used by Ms. Noem.
Kristi Noem’s lavish spending on the taxpayer’s dime is reaching atmospheric heights.
The
glammed up DHS Secretary will be traveling on not one but two new
private jets worth $172 million, reports the New York Times. The Coast
Guard bought the two crafts, which will be used by other DHS officials
as well.
Only the best for “ICE Barbie” and her cosplaying minions!
[. . .]
Meanwhile,
when it comes to actually serving American citizens–you know, the saps
paying for Noem’s cross-jetting lifestyle–Noem orders austerity. She’s
implemented a requirement that any department purchase over $100,000
needs her personal approval. The onerous process has been blamed for
FEMA failing to answer calls from thousands of survivors in the
immediate aftermath of the Texas floods last summer.
One
year later, FEMA still hasn’t approved any homeowner buyouts for
individuals in western North Carolina who lost their houses due to
Hurricane Helene.
But when it comes to
replacing private jets for $172 million, Noem finds the funds. Keep in
mind, the planes were purchased in the midst of a shutdown, when most
government employees aren’t getting paid.
Notable exceptions are ICE and Border Patrol agents. They’ve got immigrants to brutalize, and photo shoots to take part in.
Saturday, US House Reps Rosa DeLauro and Lauren Underwood's offices issued the following:
WASHINGTON
— Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem is
spending $200 million of taxpayer money on a pair of top-of-the-line
luxury Gulfstream G700 private jets during a government shutdown.
House
Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Rosa DeLauro (CT-03) and
Homeland Security Subcommittee Ranking Member Lauren Underwood (IL-14)
requested more information from the Secretary regarding the purchase,
which does not align with earlier funding requests for the Department.
“It
has come to our attention that, in the midst of a government shutdown,
the United States Coast Guard (USCG) entered into a sole source contract
with Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation to procure two new G700 luxury
jets to support travel for you and the Deputy Secretary, at a cost to
the taxpayer of $200 million,” write DeLauro and Underwood. “Based on
the Department’s public statement that you personally sign off on all
DHS contracts that exceed $100,000 in value, and prior solicitations
indicating that you are a primary user of these aircraft, we assume that
you are involved in the approval of this contract.”
The
lawmakers write that Noem appears to prioritize herself over
servicemembers: “Indeed, from choosing to live rent-free in the
Commandant’s quarters, to defending Mr. Lewandowski’s refusal to provide
basic information about his special government employee status, to your
frequent appearances at ongoing operations which require a diversion of
resources to focus on your security, it appears you are routinely
prioritizing yourself and those closest to you over the needs of the
USCG servicemembers who protect this nation.”
In their letter to the Department of Homeland Security, DeLauro and Underwood requested, in part, the following information:
This
contract announcement reflects a substantially different LRCCA
acquisition strategy compared to what was provided in the Fiscal Year
2025 spend plan. Why did DHS not update the Committees on the changing
strategy and changing use of taxpayer funds?
What operational
requirements have changed since the Department’s submission of USCG’s
Fiscal Year 2025 spend plan in May? When did these requirements change
and why were the Committees not notified of any change requirements?
If
the Coast Guard intends to use funds other than regular Fiscal Year
2025 appropriations to execute this contract, please explain the amount
and from which account(s) and why LRCCA procurement is a better use of
taxpayer funds than the original purpose of any such funds.
Please
provide the name and title of each person in the Department, including
any special government employees and senior advisors who reviewed or
approved this contract.
The full text of the letter is available here and below:
The Honorable Kristi Noem
Secretary
Department of Homeland Security
1790 Ash Street, SE
Washington, DC 20032
Dear Secretary Noem:
It
has come to our attention that, in the midst of a government shutdown,
the United States Coast Guard (USCG) entered into a sole source contract
with Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation to procure two new G700 luxury
jets to support travel for you and the Deputy Secretary, at a cost to
the taxpayer of $200 million. Based on the Department’s public statement
that you personally sign off on all DHS contracts that exceed $100,000
in value, and prior solicitations indicating that you are a primary user
of these aircraft, we assume that you are involved in the approval of
this contract.
This contract award directly
contradicts the acquisition strategy and operational needs for the
USCG’s Long Range Command and Control Aircraft (LRCCA) fleet, as
outlined by your Department to the Committee in May and again in
September. Worse, it reflects a continuing trend of self-aggrandizement
in your tenure as Secretary. Your first priority should be to organize,
train and equip a Coast Guard that is strong enough to meet today's
mission requirements. Instead, it appears your first priority is your
own comfort.
Indeed, from choosing to live
rent-free in the Commandant’s quarters, to defending Mr. Lewandowski’s
refusal to provide basic information about his special government
employee status, to your frequent appearances at ongoing operations
which require a diversion of resources to focus on your security, it
appears you are routinely prioritizing yourself and those closest to you
over the needs of the USCG servicemembers who protect this nation. In
addition to raising serious questions about your ability to effectively
lead an agency whose procurement strategies appear to vary on a whim,
the procurement of new luxury jets for your use suggests that the USCG
has been directed to prioritize your own comfort above the USCG’s
operational needs, even during a government shutdown. We are deeply
concerned about your judgment, leadership priorities, and responsibility
as a steward of taxpayer dollars.
In light of
this abrupt change in procurement strategy, we request answers to the
following questions as soon as possible, but no later than 12:00pm (EDT)
October 30, 2025.
This contract announcement
reflects a substantially different LRCCA acquisition strategy compared
to what was provided in the Fiscal Year 2025 spend plan. Why did DHS not
update the Committees on the changing strategy and changing use of
taxpayer funds?
What operational requirements have changed
since the Department’s submission of USCG’s Fiscal Year 2025 spend plan
in May? When did these requirements change and why were the Committees
not notified of any change in requirements?
What is the timeline for delivery of the two aircraft contemplated in the award announcement?
If
USCG conducted an Analysis of Alternatives or similar exercise
comparing the procurement of two G700s to the strategy of purchasing one
used G550 (as the Department proposed in May), please provide that
document to the Committee. If it did not conduct such analysis, please
explain why not and why in the absence of such data the Coast Guard
believes this strategy is in the best interests of the taxpayer and the
Coast Guard.
Please clarify the funding source used to pay for
this contract. If the Fiscal Year 2025 spend plan has changed as a
consequence of this decision, please provide an updated plan reflecting
changes related to this procurement.
If the Coast Guard
intends to use funds other than regular Fiscal Year 2025 appropriations
to execute this contract, please explain the amount and from which
account(s) and why LRCCA procurement is a better use of taxpayer funds
than the original purpose of any such funds.
Please provide
the name and title of each person in the Department, including any
special government employees and senior advisors, who reviewed or
approved this contract.
Did any DHS component submit a
justification and approval (J&A) document to support a sole-source
award for this contract? If so, please provide that documentation. If
not, please explain how DHS met statutory competition requirements under
the Federal Acquisition Regulation.
Finally, we remind you to
preserve any and all documents related to this procurement should the
Committee or other Congressional committee engage in further oversight
of this matter.
A
senior ICE official is under fire after publicly sharing a 13-year-old
child's information — and an expert warns it "could lead to serious
consequences."
DHS spokesperson Tricia
McLaughlin, 31, who is the most senior public affairs official under
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, revealed the identity, alleged
criminal history and a photo of the child detained by ICE, The Daily
Beast reported Monday.
McLaughlin is accused of sharing children's information not just once, but multiple times.
Her
social media post and the DHS actions “could lead to serious
consequences inside the government, such as an Inspector General
investigation, disciplinary action, or even congressional scrutiny," Los
Angeles-based criminal defense attorney Arash Hashemi told The Beast.
Public
anger was rising after a Brazilian-born seventh-grader in Massachusetts
was reportedly taken by federal agents to a juvenile detention center
more than 500 miles away from his family.
In an attempt to stop the public criticism, McLaughlin and DHS tried to use social media.
"They
claimed that the boy had an 'extensive rap sheet,' while listing some
of his apparent past offenses. They also stated—falsely, it
transpired—that he had been in possession of a firearm," The Beast
reports.
It's illegal for DHS or law enforcement to share a child's information.
McLaughlin lied about him having a gun? See, they lie and then they lie again.
Truth always matters but it especially matters when Chump and his administration spew lies constantly. That's why Senator Jeff Merkley took to the floor of the Senate last night and entered truth into the record for 13 hours.
On FACEBOOK, he noted:
THIS IS NOT NORMAL. I’m holding the floor to protest Trump dragging us further into authoritarianism.
