Thursday, August 20, 2026. Chump continues to wreck the economy, the US national debt soars to new heights, Pete Hegseth is responsible for the suffering on board THE USS LINCOLN, did FBI documents on Epstein get 'released' to REDDIT, and much more.
As Ben (MEIDASTOUCH NEWS) notes in the video below, the rats are fleeing the sinking ship.
President
Donald Trump suffered his most concentrated series of endorsement
defeats of the 2026 primary cycle on Tuesday, when three Republican
candidates he supported lost races in Florida and Wyoming.
Representative
Cory Mills was defeated in the Republican primary for Florida’s 7th
Congressional District, Catalina Lauf lost the contest for the GOP
nomination in Florida’s 19th District, and Wyoming Superintendent of
Public Instruction Megan Degenfelder fell short in the state’s
Republican gubernatorial primary.
The three losses
do not erase Trump’s long list of successful endorsements, including
several victories on the same night. But they add to a run of August
defeats that has exposed the limits of the president’s ability to carry
candidates past local opposition, controversy or questions about their
fitness for office.
Former NBC News moderator
Chuck Todd summarized the political moment in a post on X late Tuesday,
writing: “August has been a cruel month for Trump politically.”
And
we note that again today because Chump can never admit he's wrong or that he
lost. And so the day after the election, he had to announce that he had
told Cory Mills to drop out of the race:
On Wednesday, in a post on Truth Social, Trump
called Mills a friend but said he had urged him “to get out of the Race,
but he wouldn’t listen.”
Then why, if this lie were true, did you endorse him?
Regardless, you endorsed him and he lost. You called on your followers to vote for him and they told you "NO!"
Donald
Trump’s effort to boost Republican candidates isn’t packing the punch
he wants it to, as his losing endorsements hit double digits this week
thanks to a series of primaries in his home state.
Ten
GOP candidates endorsed by the president have now lost their primary
race after the Florida Republican primary season came to a close on
Tuesday.
[. . .]
Trump seeing
ten candidates he endorsed lose so far is only one shy of the eleven
candidates he endorsed who lost their primary bids in 2022 in total, and
the 2026 primary season has not completely wrapped up.
Back
in 2022, only one of the incumbents Trump endorsed lost his primary,
Rep. Madison Cawthorn, who was facing numerous investigations. Six of
the primary challengers he backed also came up short, making up the vast
majority of his losing endorsements. Four were running for open seats.
In 2024, just four Trump-backed candidates lost their primary bids as the president ran for a second term.
The
last time Trump was president and faced a midterm election season in
2018, only two of the candidates he endorsed in the primaries lost, but
he went on to face a rough general election season, and Democrats retook
the House that year.
Fox News was forced to broadcast an on-air retraction after making false claims about gas prices in the US.
The
news broadcaster issued a correction to viewers after they broadcast a
graphic on Monday, August 17, where it was claimed that in 2025
consumers were paying $4.13 a gallon, with current prices at $4.06 a
gallon. The report stated that this meant the current average gas price
was actually lower than last year, despite President Donald Trump's
ongoing conflict with Iran.
However, the graphic was
actually false, with prices a year ago really sitting at $3.13 a gallon,
meaning that there has been an 93 cent increase based on the current
average. Fox claimed in the correction that the Trump administration has
claimed "those gas prices will fall quickly, once the operations in
Iran end." It comes as CNN analyst Harry Enten shared figures showing the president at a record-low approval rating.
President Donald J. Trump, at least according to a Reuters poll
this week, has the lowest approval rating of his second presidency and
is tied for the lowest across both of his presidencies. The war in Iran,
which Trump launched and with which he is closely associated, is also
wildly unpopular; there’s not much confidence among anyone in either
party that the United States will be able to pull itself out of that
conflict anytime soon.
Therefore,
the Iran War, along with rising gas prices and related inflation, is
likely to be top of mind for voters as the November election approaches.
And that could be bad news for the GOP, beyond the traditional
expectation that the president’s party will lose seats in a midterm
election. And the Republicans are already defending a slim majority in
the House.
CNN
reported that some Republicans are “growing impatient” with the
continuing war, which they fear “threatens to further imperil their
chances in the midterms.” However, as the story notes, very few
Republicans still running for Congress have publicly broken with the
president. Most Republicans in the House with any degree of public
skepticism toward Trump have either declined to run again or lost their
primaries.
Those candidates are “gambling that voters can stomach the economic pain of the war for national security.
“Let’s
deal with this now, and let’s get it done,” Rep. Zach Nunn of Iowa, who
is running for re-election, said of the war, contrasting that with the
position of Democrats, whom he implied want to give up on the Iran
mission.
Barrett Marson, a Republican strategist in Arizona, was a bit more circumspect about the party’s predicament.
“There
is one person in this country who doesn’t care about gas prices — just
one — and unfortunately that one person kind of controls our fate,”
Marson told CNN. “For Republicans, it is a balancing act on the thinnest
of wires to still support the president but also feel the pain that
voters are going through.”
Indeed, Trump said at a rally last week
that he would never apologize for high gas prices and told his
supporters that a bit of a pain at the pump is worth it to prevent Iran
from obtaining a nuclear weapon.
Be
interesting to see how he feels if the voters respond that entering a
war of choice and doing so with no Congressional resolution nor oversight
means it's his problem and his alone. As Joe Scarborough noted
yesterday on MS NOW, "They've got no message. But I would say the worst
message right now is to go out and actually say to a microphone, 'Your
family would be doing much better if we had listened to every expert
over the last generation and not launched an unnecessary war in Iran'."
And it will be interesting to see how voters react to a higher inflation as a result of diesel costs. In a second article, Stephen Silver notes:
According to a Financial Times analysis
published on Tuesday, rising diesel prices “threaten [a] new jolt of
inflation” this fall, ahead of the vote in November. Diesel cost $3.46
at the start of the year, but surged throughout the Iran war,
occasionally dipping on a couple of occasions when it appeared the
conflict was nearly over. At the same time, the continuing war between
Ukraine and Russia has affected oil supplies as well, with frequent
drone strikes on oil tankers and refineries.
Per
FT, the “pump price” of diesel hit $5.47 a gallon on Tuesday, an eight
percent increase over the last month, and is approaching the all-time
high of $5.82, which occurred shortly after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine
in 2022. The “crack spread,” which is the difference between the cost
of diesel and crude oil, has also reached a record high. It’s sometimes
called the “3-2-1 spread.”
Per Bloomberg News,
that spread, defined as the “margin for making diesel from crude oil,”
has risen above $100 per barrel. Monday was the first time that it had
ever settled in the triple digits, after that number had never gone
above $89 per barrel before this year.
The
high cost of diesel can have many effects. It drives up costs for
truckers and across the industrial chain, and businesses may pass those
costs on to customers. That could mean inflation that Americans notice
day to day.
The
economy's in the toilet and Chump put it there with his tariffs, his war
on immigrants and his war on Iran. Business are going under. Christopher Edwards (NEW YORK POST) notes,
"Classic American fried chicken chain KFC has permanently closed a
total of 44 restaurants across California from July 2025 to July 2026,
according to a new analysis from search visibility platform Local
Falcon. The chain closed 312 restaurants nationwide in the same period,
representing a 7.6% loss in the chain’s national footprint." Alexander Kirk (9NEWS) reports,
"Mission Foods will close its tortilla plant in Pueblo and lay off 90
workers. The world's largest tortilla maker will close its factory
plant at 2110 Santa Fe Dr. in Pueblo on Oct. 13, the company said in a
letter to the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment." Jordan Hart, Madeline Berg, Natalie Musumeci and Kelsey Vlamis (BLOOMBERG NEWS) report,
Retailers and restaurants are gearing up for another wave of store closures.
It's
shaping up to be the continuation of a retail pullback that Business
Insider tracked in 2024 and 2025. Major chains, from department stores
like Macy's and Saks Fifth Avenue to restaurant chains Pizza Hut and
Wendy's, have already announced multiyear closure plans that extend into
2026, as have some niche stores.
Columbia House, a pioneer of subscription music before streaming, is shutting down after seven decades in business.
A
widely reported statement appeared on its website saying the company is
closing on September 15 has been removed, but a customer service
representative confirmed to CNN by phone that it is soon ceasing
operations.
Columbia House became a household name in the
1980s and 1990s for offering monthly deliveries of records, tapes, CDs
and later DVDs each month.
Streaming didn't kill off COLUMBIA HOUSE but Chump did.
Things are bad and they could get worse. And the new reality has not been good for Chump. BALLER ALERT notes:
Nearly
one in four people who backed Donald Trump in 2024 now say their
financial situation has gotten worse since he returned to the White
House, putting fresh attention on the economy just months before voters
head back to the polls. The latest Trump economy poll from the Financial
Times and Focaldata found that 24 percent of Trump’s 2024 voters said
they are worse off financially. 23 percent of voters who supported Trump
in 2020 said the same. Across the broader survey, 53 percent of
respondents said their finances have worsened since Trump’s second term
began, while about 20 percent said they are doing better and 26 percent
said their financial situation is about the same.
Today on MORNING JOE (MS NOW), Joe Scarborough noted that Chump promised he was going to pay off the national debt has done nothing but increase the national debt.
Trump returned to office in 2025 pledging to curb wasteful government spending. Treasury secretary Scott Bessent vowed to curb the budget deficit to 3 per cent of GDP by the end of Trump’s term.
But measures taken to cut spending in some areas have been offset by large tax cuts in the president’s 2025 signature budget legislation, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which is set to push up debt by more than $4tn by 2034. Trump has also called for annual defence spending to be increased by more than half to $1.5tn, the largest funding request in US history.
The US gross national debt reached $40tn for the first time on Wednesday, the highest in US history.
The government deficit doubled over the past decade, with government spending growing under both Donald Trump and Joe Biden
– Trump approved $8.4tn worth of debt during his first term, with a
large chunk going to Covid-19 relief spending, while Biden approved
$4.3tn worth of debt.
In fiscal year 2026, which began in October 2025, $1.8tn has been added to the debt so far.
Both Democrats and Republicans
responded to the milestone with outrage, with Democrats placing the
blame on Trump and a Republican-controlled Congress for the uptick in
spending.
“The President said he’d pay off the
debt in his first term. Well we all knew that was a lie. Instead he ran
it up to $40 trillion while he and his family made billions,” Mark Kelly, a Democratic senator from Arizona, posted on X.
“Republicans
ran up the tab, handed billionaires another tax break, and now wanna
lecture working families about ‘fiscal responsibility’. You can’t max
out the card AND pretend you’re the accountant. Pick a struggle,” Jasmine Crockett, a Democratic congresswoman from Texas, said.
“The
Republican One Big Ugly Bill adds over $4 trillion alone—all to
shamefully give tax breaks to billionaires and corporations,” Jason Crow, a Democratic congressman from Colorado, posted on X.
Meanwhile, Chump continues his war on the First Amendment. As he orders and encourages FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr to go after ABC, not only is ABC fighting back, but also others are noticing what's taking place. Matthew Rozsa reports:
President Donald Trump’s war against ABC and Disney for platforming comedian Jimmy Kimmel
has boomeranged on him, with the entertainment behemoth suing Trump’s
FCC for violating their First Amendment rights. More recently, the FCC
has challenged ABC’s broadcasting licenses.
Even a conservative newspaper is siding with ABC and Disney over the Trump administration.
“ABC sued the FCC on Tuesday for ‘coercing and retaliating’ because it ‘refuses to bow to the Administration’s demands,’” wrote The Wall Street Journal editorial board on Tuesday.
“The lawsuit says the government has violated its First Amendment
rights ‘by launching pretextual regulatory investigations and
threatening the Stations’ valuable broadcast licenses.’”
Describing
FCC Chairman Brendan Carr as a “mob-boss” and agreeing with the premise
of the lawsuit, the Journal opined that Trump’s FCC is indeed violating
“the First Amendment by letting the FCC interfere in editorial
judgments and suppress disfavored content and viewpoints. ABC’s lawsuit
says the FCC’s pressure has resulted in it ‘passing on further
consideration of booking several political candidates,’ and none have
appeared on the program since February.”
The
Journal added that Carr once criticized Democratic administrations for
violating free speech rights, and concluded that “in 2020 he lambasted a
progressive media group for petitioning the FCC to censor broadcasts of
Mr. Trump’s Covid press conferences, calling it a ‘dangerous and
sweeping attempt by the left to weaponize the FCC.’
"It’s a shame Mr. Carr won’t defend ABC’s free-speech rights today," the board added.
LEILA FADEL, BYLINE: ABC agreed to a settlement with President Trump
over a defamation lawsuit, and there were critics at the time that said,
well, you're just conceding to an intimidation over your - over speech.
That was the criticism at the time. Why do you think the network is now
choosing to challenge the actions of the government versus settle?
ANNA
GOMEZ: One of the things that we learned from this administration is if
you capitulate, it doesn't buy you peace from the administration.
Instead, it just buys you time. The administration will keep coming back
and continuing the threats, continuing to use whatever leverage it can
in order to retaliate against critics. And so Disney has found its
courage and it is pushing back. And this is good. It's good for the
First Amendment, it's good for the public and it's good for broadcasters
in general.
FADEL: The FCC chief, Brendan Carr, says that
he is upholding requirements that broadcasters operate in the public
interest. What do you say to that?
GOMEZ: When we talk
about the public interest traditionally, we say we want licensees to
provide service to their communities and that means providing them
content that matters to the communities. The problem with saying that
you're using this public interest standard in a vague way is it's now
being wielded about in order to say, any content we don't like is
contrary to the public interest. That is not what our Constitution
allows the FCC to do, it is not what our Communications Act allows the
FCC to. And so I've called on the FCC to say, OK, if we're going to say -
keep using this public-interest standard - a vague, nebulous standard
that really has no definition - then the FCC needs to establish rules
that specifically say what that means. And if those rules violate the
First Amendment, then we will learn that lesson.
FADEL: Are
other commissioners concerned? I know you're the only Democrat on the
commission, and there might be people listening to you saying, well,
that - she thinks that 'cause she's a Democrat and the president is not.
Are other commissioners concerned?
GOMEZ: Well, I will say
this. Protecting the First Amendment is not a partisan issue. And, in
fact, this FCC has heard from former FCC chairs that were Republicans,
former FCC commissioners that were Republicans. We have heard from
Senator Cruz, Senator Kennedy and other Republicans who have been
concerned about the FCC's actions and their effect on the First
Amendment. There is bipartisan support for respecting the First
Amendment.
As we
noted yesterday, there are rumors this week that Pete Hegseth, failed and
failing Secretary of Defense, wants to be a presidential candidate in
2028. Ed Kilgore (INTELLIGENCER) offers his take on that possibility:
Yes,
it’s true the man who lifted Hegseth from a Fox News studio to the
summit of the Pentagon has largely obliterated past assumptions about
qualifications for the presidency. But compared to Hegseth, the
pre-presidential Donald Trump was a virtual Pericles, running (however
erratically) huge businesses, developing a national following, and
expressing opinions on a broad range of issues. The secretary of War was
trounced in a Minnesota GOP convention by a Ron Paul disciple in his one bid for public office (a doomed 2012 U.S. Senate run in Minnesota for the chance to get beaten by Amy Klobuchar)
and then devoted his life to bloviation on Fox News. That was clearly
enough to qualify him for the Trump Cabinet but not to form a Cabinet of
his own.
What would a Hegseth candidacy for
president represent, other than outlandish claims about his brilliance
in directing the U.S. military in a war whose outcome doesn’t look that promising right now? His well-worn tirades against DEI, LGBTQ+ troops, and the debilitating effects of feminism would hardly make him stand out in any sort of GOP presidential field. Now, it is true that he is the highest-ranking over-the-top Christian nationalist in public life today, and that the particular form of patriarchal neo-Calvinism
to which he avidly subscribes might have a constituency in places like
Iowa and South Carolina, both well-established Christian-right
strongholds. But does he have any point of view at all on topics like
the cost of living, AI (other than its military applications), health
care, education, or any other dimension of government beyond bristling
militarism?
If your
reaction to Hegseth for President speculation is to laugh, then laugh
longer and louder and maybe he can be shamed into ruling it out. Even
for Pete Hegseth, hubris must have its limits.
What
makes it all the stranger is that Hegseth is exceptionally unpopular in
the Trump administration. CNN data analyst Harry Enten, reviewing recent polling from Fox News and Quinnipiac University, called Hegseth “the lowest of the low” in the president’s Cabinet. In the Quinnipiac poll,
Hegseth’s job approval is 22 points underwater — significantly worse
than the net approvals of Secretary of State Marco Rubio (-8%), and
Vice President JD Vance (-17%). Given that Rubio is also associated with
the war with Iran (as well as Trump’s intervention in Venezuela), it
suggests Hegseth has something uniquely repellent about him to the
public.
Remarkably, despite his poor marks with the public, The Washington Post reported
that “officials familiar with Hegseth’s thinking believe that he is
considering a run for president or some other political office after his
time in the Trump administration is over.” Appearances in Iowa are a
surefire strategy for potential presidential candidates to float trial
balloons about their viability. Given his track record, anti-charisma
and polling trends, I think we already have the answer to that.
Something tells me Hegseth might need more convincing.
Hegseth's attention appears to be everywhere but where it should be: Focused on doing the job of the Secretary of Defense.
The USS LINCOLN remains a scandal and, we are learning, that it's such a shock because Hegseth lied to the American people. Brendan Cole (NEWSWEEK) reports:
U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth
“hid” how Iran had destroyed much of the main resupply base for the
U.S. military in the Middle East, according to MS Now, as concerns grow
about the conditions faced by sailors on board USS Abraham Lincoln.
The network’s senior national security reporter David Rohde made the claim about the aircraft carrier, which, according to The New York Times, has faced supply problems since Iranian strikes hit the logistics hub Naval Support Activity Bahrain at the start of the war.
During a segment in MS Now discussing President Donald Trump’s dismissal of reports of low morale
and the mental health concerns of those aboard the carrier during an
unusually long deployment, Rohde said the resupply issue was “because
Pete Hegseth hid the fact that Iran destroyed the main resupply base
that the United States has in the Gulf.”
“He
did not make that public in press conference after press conference,
and that is, again, the way that they have mishandled this
war,” Rohde added.
The USS Abraham Lincoln wasn’t able to be resupplied because
the U.S. Navy’s main resupply base in the Gulf of Oman was destroyed by
Iranian strikes—a fact that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth chose not to
make public, David Rhode, MS NOW’s senior national security reporter, said on Tuesday.
From late February until June, Iran launched
extensive missile and drone strikes on Naval Support Activity Bahrain,
causing devastating damage that was not acknowledged by the Pentagon.
The U.S. Navy was forced to evacuate most personnel, and move
supply operations to a U.K. naval base on Diego Garcia, a tiny island
in the Indian Ocean 2,200 miles from where two aircraft carrier groups
have been operating in the Gulf of Oman.
That's presidential? No. No it's cause to fire him from his post immediately.
Let's note this from Senator Tammy Duckworth's office:
[WASHINGTON, D.C.] – Combat Veteran and U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth
(D-IL) joined all of her fellow members on the U.S. Senate Armed
Services Committee (SASC) minority, as well as the Democratic leaders of
the Senate Appropriations Committee and Subcommittee on Defense, in
demanding answers from Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth about
deteriorating conditions aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln. The Senators’
letter follows reports that the aircraft carrier’s crew has endured food
and water shortages, broken plumbing and mental health crises severe
enough that multiple sailors reportedly attempted to go overboard during
its record-setting deployment. The Lincoln has been at sea for more
than 250 days, including over 200 consecutive days without a port call,
the longest continuous deployment at sea for a U.S. aircraft carrier in
the modern era.
In the letter, the Senators wrote: “Our sailors and Marines
signed up to serve and to be treated with respect. They did not sign up
to be kept at sea indefinitely with no announced return date and, by
multiple accounts, without reliable food, hot water, or working
plumbing. That is not how we treat the men and women we ask to carry out
this mission.”
“This situation was preventable, and the conditions aboard
the Lincoln are nearly identical to the issues faced by the USS Ford
when it conducted an extended deployment that ended earlier this year,” the Senators continued. “The
USS Lincoln was redirected to the Middle East as the war with Iran
began and has remained there as that war has dragged on with no clear
endpoint. This is a symptom of poor planning by both you and the
President and exacerbated by the deeply unsound decision to start a war
with Iran. Open-ended deployments driven by an open-ended war have real
consequences for our servicemembers, and we are seeing those
consequences now.”
The Senators pressed Secretary Hegseth on his Department’s failure to
provide a clear timeline for the crew’s return and condemned his public
dismissal of the reports as “completely misrepresented,” as well as
President Trump’s remarks suggesting the Lincoln had not been deployed
“nearly long enough.” The Senators demanded detailed answers on mental
health and medical resources aboard the ship, the state of good order
and discipline, hygiene and food conditions, the full extent of the
reported man-overboard incident and support being provided to military
families, along with a formal request for a bipartisan congressional
delegation to visit the ship.
Along with Duckworth, the letter was co-signed by the following SASC
members: Ranking Member Jack Reed (D-RI), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Kirsten
Gillibrand (D-NY), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Senator Mazie Hirono
(D-HI), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Angus King (I-ME), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA),
Gary Peters (D-MI), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Mark Kelly (D-AZ) and Elissa
Slotkin (D-MI). U.S. Senators Patty Murray (D-WA) and Chris Coons (D-DE)
of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense also joined.
We write regarding the deployment of the USS Abraham Lincoln and
mounting evidence that conditions aboard the carrier have deteriorated
to the point that the safety and wellbeing of its crew could be
compromised. These are deeply troubling reports, and the American people
deserve honest answers.
The USS Lincoln departed San Diego on November 21, 2025. The ship has
now been deployed for more than 250 days, including over 200
consecutive days without a port call, setting a modern-day record for
continuous time at sea for a U.S. aircraft carrier. Family members of
the sailors and Marines serving aboard have received urgent messages
describing conditions that should alarm you, and everyone serving in a
position of leadership at the Pentagon, to include concerns about
exhaustion, food and water shortages, and mental health crises serious
enough that multiple sailors reportedly attempted to go overboard.
In response to these reports, you publicly stated that the conditions
aboard the carrier have been “completely misrepresented.” Even more
galling, when asked by reporters about the conditions on the Lincoln,
President Trump dismissed the concerns of the families and stated that
the Lincoln had not been deployed “nearly long enough.”
Our sailors and Marines signed up to serve and to be treated with
respect. They did not sign up to be kept at sea indefinitely with no
announced return date and, by multiple accounts, without reliable food,
hot water, or working plumbing. That is not how we treat the men and
women we ask to carry out this mission.
This situation was preventable, and the conditions aboard the Lincoln
are nearly identical to the issues faced by the USS Ford when it
conducted an extended deployment that ended earlier this year. The USS
Lincoln was redirected to the Middle East as the war with Iran began and
has remained there as that war has dragged on with no clear endpoint.
This is a symptom of poor planning by both you and the President and
exacerbated by the deeply unsound decision to start a war with Iran.
Open-ended deployments driven by an open-ended war have real
consequences for our servicemembers, and we are seeing those
consequences now.
Recent press reports indicate that the USS George Washington will be
deployed to the Middle East to relieve the USS Abraham Lincoln. While
that is welcome news, the Department’s mismanagement of carrier
deployments also means that the U.S. will not have an aircraft carrier
in the Pacific for the foreseeable future. However, ensuring the USS
Lincoln returns to port takes precedence, and it is incumbent on the
Department to inform Congress, and the families, on the plan and
timeline to get the crew home. Denial and defensiveness are not
acceptable responses. Congress and these families need accountability.
Given the seriousness of these reports, we request written answers to the following:
What is the current timeline for the USS Lincoln’s relief and return
to homeport, and what specific operational requirements are driving
continued extensions of this deployment?
Was the crew informed that the deployment could be extended
indefinitely? Have any members of the crew been changed out since the
beginning of this deployment, and if so, how many?
Has there been any degradation in the operational capability of the USS Lincoln or her airwing?
What mental health resources are being provided to the crew?
Have there been any suicides aboard the ship during this deployment?
How many instances of detected suicidal ideation or attempted
self-harm, including attempts to go overboard, has the Department
recorded?
What other medical resources are available aboard the ship, and are
resources sufficient to meet the crew’s needs given the length of this
deployment?
What chaplain resources are available to the crew, and have they been adequate to the scale of need aboard the ship?
What is the current state of good order and discipline aboard the USS Lincoln?
What is the hygiene and healthy food situation on board, including
the status of reported plumbing failures, water contamination, and food
shortages?
What is the extent of illness or injury aboard the ship, including
full details of the reported man-overboard incident and any other
similar incidents?
What is the state of the families of the sailors and Marines aboard
the USS Lincoln? What resources are being provided to them, and are they
being kept informed on a regular basis about the status of the
deployment and their loved ones’ wellbeing?
Will the Department authorize a bipartisan congressional delegation
to visit the Lincoln to conduct firsthand oversight of conditions aboard
the ship?
As the Secretary of Defense, you are accountable to the men and women
who serve our nation. It is time for you to demonstrate leadership,
rather than peddle excuses. The servicemembers we send into harm’s way
deserve nothing less.
Sincerely,
-30-
Turning to the topic of Jeffrey Epstein, Chump's dead buddy who was a pedophile and a sex trafficker. Jane Doe in The Epstein Files is a woman who spoke to the FBI four times about being assaulted. The file summary on that released by Todd Blanche was the one noting Jeffrey Epstein. Three other interviews -- hidden by Blanche -- had her noting Donald Chump. Katie Phang is suing to get the files released -- as the act of Congress mandated. Yesterday, Ellie Leonard reported on what may be FBI files that have ended up posted to REDDIT.
The
Republican chairman of the House oversight committee has threatened to
hold the private equity investor Leon Black in contempt if he does not
fully cooperate with the panel’s ongoing investigation into Jeffrey
Epstein, amid accusations that the billionaire is purposely delaying and
disrupting the panel’s inquiry.
A letter released by Representative James Comer’s office
on Tuesday, which was addressed to Black’s lawyer, revealed new details
about the high-stakes clash between the powerful Kentucky congressman
and Black, the co-founder of Apollo Asset Management who was Epstein’s
friend and former client and paid Epstein tens of millions of dollars in
fees.
“If Mr Black refuses to provide the
Committee with responsive documents or refuses to appear for his
scheduled deposition on September 3, 2026, the Committee will use all
tools at its disposal, including contempt,” Comer said.
