Trump's rambling response to Epstein question that of a "deeply guilty man"

 

DONALD: "...these (Epstein) files were made up by Comey. They were made up by Obama. They were made up by  Biden..." 

 

From your Quora Digest

Rick

·

I've been following politics since Reagan. Jul 15

Donald Trump gets asked to his face if Attorney General Pam Bondi found his name in the Jeffrey Epstein files — while Karoline Leavitt stands visibly uncomfortable right beside him.

This is the response of a deeply guilty man...

"On Epstein, the attorney general briefed you in the DOJ and FBI's review, the findings of that review, the attorney general briefed you on that—" began a reporter.

"On what? On the uh?" asked Trump, who seems to be having trouble hearing recently.

"On the DOJ and FBI—" said the reporter.

"On what? On what subject?" Trump interjected again.

"Epstein. On Epstein. Of the review of the files, Attorney General Pam Bondi—" replied the reporter.

"A very quick briefing," claimed Trump.

"What did she tell you about the review and specifically did she tell you at all that your name appears in the files?" asked the reporter.

"No, no she's uh, she's given us just a very quick briefing," said Trump. "And in terms of the credibility of the different things that they've seen... And I would say that, you know, these files were made up by Comey. They were made up by Obama. They were made up by the Biden..."

Trump first trotted out this absurd new lie that Barack Obama wrote the Epstein files over the weekend amidst growing MAGA backlash over his refusal to release more information on the billionaire pedophile's case. Unfortunately for him, much of his base is rejecting the idea outright.

"Uh, you know, and we went through years of that with the Russia, Russia, Russia hoax with all of the different things that we had to go through," Trump went on. "We've gone through years of it. But she's handled it very well and it's going to be up to her. Whatever she thinks is credible, she should release yeah."

The last bit is noteworthy. Trump is setting Bondi up to take be his scapegoat. His supporters are already clambering for him to fire her because they are pathologically incapable of accepting the obvious reality that Bondi does whatever Trump directs her to do. They want to believe that Trump is insulated from this wrongdoing. In reality, Bondi was chosen for the job because of her long history of corruption and because Trump knew that she'd follow orders.

The simple truth is that if we don't get these Epstein files, it's because Trump doesn't want us to have them. Given that Elon Musk has alleged that Trump himself is implicated in this case, this stonewalling from the administration is all too predictable.

Don't you love them MAGA beards: a real turn-on.
 

COLBERT AXED: Billionaire Class Buying Up All the Media So We Can’t Laugh at Them Anymore

  

Trump world is run by thin-skinned losers who have swapped patronage for censorship

Opheli Garcia Lawler / Cracked

20 July 25   

Yesterday, it was announced that Late Night with Stephen Colbert would be coming to an end in 2026. Not only would the host be out of a job, but the decades-long Late Night would be ending in its entirety. This isn’t entirely a surprise; for weeks, rumors have been circulating that the merger between Skydance and Paramount would result in both Colbert and Jon Stewart getting axed from the corporation.

Skydance owners, Larry and David Ellison, were reportedly already planning to cozy up to Donald Trump, by giving him free political ads on their network worth up to $20 million. So, when Trump called for the firing of Colbert, there was plenty of speculation that the Ellisons would capitulate there as well. And look, they did.  While Jon Stewart still has his job, Colbert and his staff of 200 people will be out of one by next year.

It’s pathetic and scary. Paramount and the Ellisons have bowed so low to Trump that they have a perfect view of our president’s ridiculously swollen ankles. The President of the United States is now silencing his TV critics, unable to stomach the fact that even while he doles out unfathomable cruelty to us we’re still laughing at him. 

I’ll never be the first one to say that anything Colbert was doing was the smartest, bravest or even most entertaining comedy. But he made my mother laugh.

What’s really terrifying is that there wasn’t a great attempt by Paramount and CBS to give a convincing alternative reason for pulling Colbert from the air. Late Night is consistently the highest rated, most viewed show in its slot. If you can’t convert 2.4 million nightly viewers into something profitable, you’re bad at your job. This was about censorship and punishment.

There will be hemming and hawing about the motives, despite the obvious reality of the situation. Why? Because billionaires are always getting the benefit of the doubt. They go around the world stealing, committing environmental crimes and making the internet worse, and yet, there’s a large segment of the population that oohs and ahhs at their entrepreneurship.

Billionaires aren’t sociopaths surrounded by sycophants; they’re leaders, businessmen. We live in a world where poor people get prosecuted for stealing meat and diapers from Walmart while Walmart CEO Don McMillon carries on the company’s decades’ long practice of egregious wage theft to applause. 

It’s not just that rich people are habitually pilfering our shit, either. They aren’t patrons of anything anymore, either. We’ve left the era of benevolent philanthropy and are now fully ensconced in the era of thin-skinned malevolent avarice.

Not only are these greedy bastards not patrons of art, theater or science (bombs and vanity space field trips don’t count), the billionaire class is sabotaging the forms of free-expression that existed despite them. The sometimes-brilliant, often-mean, undeniably-essential website Gawker? Pummeled out of existence by B-plot supervillain Peter Thiel. The endlessly-useful, sometimes-revolutionary platform formerly known as Twitter? Elon Musk bought it because everyone was (rightfully) making fun of him. Jeff Bezos owns the Washington Post, which is in a state of constant turmoil because of his nonstop editorial interference.

None of these men — Trump, Bezos, Musk, Thiel, the Ellisons — can stomach being the punchline. So they’re stealing our laughter too.

 

Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison and his son David Ellison, who own Skydance have been reportedly planning to provide Trump with free political ads. Aren't you glad these thugs don't live next door? (photo: Getty)

  

This could be the final straw for MAGA

A bus stop near U.S. Embassy in London shows a poster of Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein, on July 17.

By Kos 

Daily Kos Staff  

Thursday, July 17, 2025 at 6:01:01p MDT

 

REPUBLISHED BY:

Blue Country Gazette Blog

Rim Country Gazette Blog 

Supporters demand the release of all Epstein case files

INTRO: Epstein counted as his friends a number of powerful men, including Trump. In 2002, Trump raved about their friendship to New York magazine. “I’ve known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy,” Trump said. “He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.”

They’re having a meltdown over at r/conservative, the main political hub for right-wing users on Reddit. In thread after thread after thread after thread, pro-MAGA users are losing their minds over President Donald Trump’s gaslighting on convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

On Wednesday, a furious Trump called his own supporters “weaklings” for demanding his administration release the Epstein case files. He said his “PAST supporters have bought into this ‘bullshit,’” and declared, “I don’t want their support anymore!”

Daaaamn. Epstein has been a central fixation of right-wing conspiracy theorists for years—one Trump himself has gleefully exploited. He repeatedly promoted the idea that Democrats, especially former President Bill Clinton, were implicated. And while the vast majority of the conspiracy ecosystem is nonsense, there is a legitimate core question: Who were the powerful people who abused the underage girls Epstein trafficked? If his co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell was convicted of helping traffic the girls, who were the clients?

That gap in public knowledge—i.e., verifiable crimes but very few named perpetrators—has long fueled the Epstein conspiracies. And now Trump is pretending it’s all a “Hoax”? Even his base isn’t buying it.

For the first time in memory, a significant chunk of Trump’s online base is taking off the blinders. They’re not just furious that Trump is calling the Epstein files a Democratic smear job—they’re seeing it in the context of broader betrayals:

There are countless comments like that one: Trump said he’d end the war in Ukraine and cut the debt but now he’s arming Ukraine and signed a spending bill that adds trillions to the deficit. I want him to support Ukraine (assuming he doesn’t flip-flop), but it’s enraging his fanbase that  he loves Russian dictator Vladimir Putin. And the budget deficit? His base doesn’t yet realize how badly this bill will gut rural America—but they do know it explodes the deficit.

And yet … none of that made them waver much. Not until now. Not until Epstein.

And Trump is so rattled by the backlash that he’s pretending to dump them before they can dump him. “I don’t want their support anymore!” he wrote in Wednesday’s Truth Social post.

What happens next is anyone’s guess. Never underestimate the cult’s ability to rationalize themselves back into his arms. But this time? This break feels real. It might finally be too deep to mend.

Let's zoom in on that poster.  Are these two men sharing a secret?

PRO-TRUMP RULING: Supreme Court Majority's Treachery Continues

President Trump speaks to reporters after signing the “Halt All Lethal Trafficking of Fentanyl Act” in the East Room of the White House in Washington, D.C., on July 16, 2025. (Andrew Caballero-Reynolds / AFP via Getty Images)

An order from the high court allowing the Trump administration to fire Department of Education employees leaves more questions than answers.

 

If Trump Is Somehow Stopped, This Court Majority Will Face Another Nuremberg for "Committing Atrocities Against Their Citizens"

 

By Jed Rubenfeld

07.16.25 — U.S. Politics

This week, the Supreme Court issued an order permitting the Trump administration to move forward with the elimination of some 1,400 Department of Education employees while the legal challenge to those discharges works its way through the courts.

On what grounds did the Court rule? No one knows.

The one-paragraph, unsigned order on Monday offered no reasoning. No explanation. No precedent. Once upon a time, unexplained orders granting relief were a rarity. According to astute court-watcher Steve Vladeck, Monday’s ruling is the Court’s seventh such order—all favoring the government—in the last ten weeks.

This has to stop.

On the merits, I’m probably more sympathetic than most constitutional law professors to the administration’s mass layoffs. While civil service statutes create almost impenetrable protections when an individual federal employee is fired, large-scale “reductions in force” are permitted. Some think that’s a crazy state of affairs—how can firing one person be harder than firing thousands?—but that’s the law.

Does the court agree with me? Maybe. But we don’t know, because the court’s order said nothing about whether the justices thought the firings were lawful. It didn’t say whether the court thought the plaintiffs lacked standing. It didn’t say whether the lower court had jurisdiction. It didn’t say anything at all.

That’s not law. That’s just an exercise of power.

The mission of courts is to say what the law is, and the mission of law is to apply power through reason and rule—to decide not by fiat, but by logic and principle and precedent and text. That’s why courts issue opinions, not just orders. That’s the difference between the law’s power and raw power.

An unexplained, unreasoned Supreme Court order cannot claim the mantle of law. It must be obeyed, but it deserves no respect.

Why would the Court issue such an order? In 2024, Justice Brett Kavanaugh argued in a concurrence that the Court should be cautious about writing an opinion when deciding emergency cases, because the Court has to decide quickly and may be mistaken. Therefore it should avoid a formal opinion, which could have an unjustified “lock-in” effect on lower courts. So one possibility is that the majority all agreed that the DOE firings were lawful, but they didn’t want to tip their hand and “lock in” that ruling.

---

Read

How Do You Fix Schools? Teachers Union Says Stop Trump, ICE, and Fascism

---

That seems unlikely to me. If the majority all agreed on the merits, I suspect they would have said so. Here’s another possibility.

Imagine that two justices thought the DOE firings were lawful (but seven justices did not). Meanwhile, two other justices thought the plaintiffs lacked standing (but seven justices did not). And two more justices thought the lower court lacked jurisdiction (but seven justices did not). That creates a quandary.

On each of those legal points, taken one at a time, a strong majority of seven justices favors the plaintiffs. In other words, seven justices believe the plaintiffs had standing, seven believe the lower court had jurisdiction, and seven believe the DOE firings were unlawful. Seems like the plaintiffs should win 7–2, right?

Wrong. That’s not how the Supreme Court, or any multi-judge court, comes to its ultimate decision. Instead, each justice casts a vote either for the plaintiff or the defendant (in this case, the defendant is the government), and in the scenario I just described, a majority of the Court—six justices—would vote in favor of the government. That’s because each of those six agrees with the government on one of its core arguments.

So the administration wins, 6–3. Those six justices don’t agree on why the government should win, but still the government wins.

In that scenario, no legal opinion for the Court can be written. No rationale is supported by a majority. There’s no law in such a case. There is only a judgment—a winner and a loser.

Maybe something like that happened here. But even if so, the justices on the government’s side owed the country an explanation.

In this case, the three liberal justices—Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson—issued a strident, 19-page dissent. They argued in part that Trump had overstepped his authority in trying to dismantle an agency created by congressional statute. They also argued that the government would not suffer irreparable harm if the injunction were allowed to stand, while the fired employees would. So at least we know the dissenters’ arguments, their reasoning, and where they stand. The same cannot be said of the Court’s conservative majority.

---

Read

This Supreme Court Term Proves the System Still Works

---

Split decisions with no majority are not all that uncommon on the Supreme Court. But when they occur, the justices invariably write opinions, often several different opinions, some concurring in the judgment, some dissenting. There is no opinion for the Court itself, because no opinion commands a majority. But at least there are opinions.

In such cases the justices discharge their fundamental obligation to give reasons and arguments, to cite text and precedent. Each justice takes responsibility for his or her legal position. The parties, the lower courts, and the entire country can see what the disputed issues were, what the justices agreed on, what they disagreed on, and whether the justices in the majority had satisfactory answers to those in dissent.

Whatever divisions existed or didn’t exist in Monday’s ruling, the justices in the majority failed to discharge this fundamental obligation. They didn’t explain, they didn’t take responsibility, and they gave no reasons.

When this is done on an emergency basis to reverse a lower court and let the administration go forward with a controversial policy, the country is badly served. The justices on the government’s side owed the country much more and much better. They owed the country law, not a display of their own power.

When Donnie says "Jump," this sextet says "How High, Massuh."

First she killed her dog, now innocent children: You won't believe how badly Kristi Noem bungled Texas flood response

   

Kristi Noem and Cricket in happier times, before the deadly trip to the landfill.

 

Didn't approve rescue teams for 3 days 

 

By Emily Singer

Daily Kos Staff 

Thursday, July 10, 2025 at 10:30:12a MDT

 

REPUBLISHED BY:

Blue Country Gazette Blog

Rim Country Gazette Blog 

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem's cost-cutting measures at the Federal Emergency Management Agency slowed search and rescue efforts in Texas by 72 hours, possibly costing some of the at least 120 lives lost in the devastating natural disaster, CNN reported.

According to CNN, Noem created a new policy that requires her to personally sign off on any costs greater than $100,000. The Urban Search and Rescue crews seeking to be deployed to the Texas Hill Country—where hundreds of people were swept away by the rapidly rising rivers after heavy rainstorms—met that criteria.

But CNN reported that Noem didn't approve the deployment of those search and rescue crews until Monday—three days after the floods swept through Texas.

From CNN’s report:

As central Texas towns were submerged in rising waters, FEMA officials realized they couldn’t pre-position Urban Search and Rescue crews from a network of teams stationed regionally across the country.

In the past, FEMA would have swiftly staged these teams, which are specifically trained for situations including catastrophic floods, closer to a disaster zone in anticipation of urgent requests, multiple agency sources told CNN.

But even as Texas rescue crews raced to save lives, FEMA officials realized they needed Noem’s approval before sending those additional assets. Noem didn’t authorize FEMA’s deployment of Urban Search and Rescue teams until Monday, more than 72 hours after the flooding began, multiple sources told CNN.

DHS tried to deny that Noem’s incompetence hindered the search and rescue efforts. But their denial actually proved the CNN story.

DHS said in a post on X, “President Trump approved a Major Disaster Declaration, hours after Governor Greg Abbott’s request. By Tuesday, FEMA had deployed 311 staffers, providing support and shelter for hundreds of people. Under President Trump and Secretary Noem’s leadership, DHS is reforming FEMA to prioritize state-led, locally executed disaster response, as Texas has exemplified.”

That means that CNN’s report was correct, that it took until Tuesday for FEMA to deploy the search and rescue teams.

Noem appeared on “Fox & Friends” on Thursday, where she was asked about the CNN report. But instead of providing evidence that she swiftly approved the search and rescue teams, she only attacked CNN—classic deflection that did not actually deny the report.

“CNN has a report accusing you of slowing the process in Texas,” one of the hosts asked Noem, to which she replied, “Well there you go. Fake news CNN is absolutely trash, what they are doing.”

Noem, for her part, has implemented the cost-cutting measures in DHS that hamstrung the search and rescue efforts in Texas even as she spends hundreds of millions galavanting around the country and globe cosplaying for PR stunts and visiting the torture camps she's gleefully sending immigrants to.

A Wall Street Journal report from April said Noem spent $9 million on a television ad advising immigrants to self-deport.

She also sported a $50,000 Rolex watch on a visit to the CECOT prison in El Salvador where the Trump administration illegally deported immigrants against court orders. Noem is also seeking a $50 million private jet to transport her to the stunts she's carrying out.

Turns out, Noem cares more about creating torture porn than she does about saving lives.

Below: Kristi Noem and her $50,000 Rolex watch pose in front of prisoners deported to El Salvador without due process.  Too bad for Cricket.  Her dead dog would be better off in El Salvador.

Tinpot Dictator Can Only Be Stopped By People Power...and that means YOU!

 

He can be stopped only with people power. (photo: EFE)

 

IT'S YOUR TIME: This Thursday, July 17, we must DOUBLE the number who turned out June 14. Because it’s our country 

 

Robert Reich / Substack 

 

 14 July 25

Never before in American history, not even in wartime, has one man exercised such unbridled discretion affecting the lives of so many of us, while simultaneously preventing others — Congress, the courts, the American people — from having a say or even knowing what he’s going to do next.

Recently he sent ICE agents and National Guard troops into Los Angeles, over the objections of the governor of California and the mayor of Los Angeles. He is also sending 200 Marines to Florida to aid ICE.

Where will he next direct ICE, National Guard, and active duty military? He isn’t saying. But it’s our country.

He has targeted undocumented agricultural and hospitality workers for arrest and deportation, after saying he would not do so. What’s the policy here? He isn’t telling us. But it’s our country.

Meanwhile, he said yesterday that he’d subject imports from Japan, South Korea, and a dozen other nations to new 25 percent tariffs — which will, of course, translate into additional taxes on American consumers — effective August 1.

He threatened to impose even higher tariff-taxes on countries that align with BRIC nations (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) after that group expressed “serious concerns” over any country imposing unilateral tariffs.

I remember a time when American presidents had to go to Congress to impose tariffs. How can he tax us without our consent? It’s our country.

He is consulting with Benjamin Netanyahu about the next stage of the war with Iran, but not consulting Congress, yet it’s our country.

He is targeting universities that he believes haven’t adequately eliminated DEI, or have allowed transgender athletes to compete, or failed to stop demonstrations against Israel’s war in Gaza. Last week, his regime forced a major university president to resign.

Which universities are next, and for what reason? He isn’t saying, even though it’s our country.

He intends to go after more law firms and media companies that have crossed him. But which, and why?

Will he let TikTok continue to function in the United States even though Congress has passed a law prohibiting it? He hasn’t said.

He says it’s all a “bargaining strategy” to make better deals. But deals for whom?

Rubbish. It’s not a bargaining strategy. He doing all this because he loves to display his power. He relishes it when powerful people plead with him, prostrate themselves before him, beg him, and submit to his whims. He delights in changing his mind and keeping everyone else guessing.

Some who seek his favor are pouring money into TV ads for his eyes only in West Palm Beach, where he resides at Mar-a-Lago (according to a Wall Street Journal analysis of advertising data).

Some who seek his favor are buying his crypto coins.

Some are sending him lavish jet airplanes.

Some who seek his favor are speaking publicly of his brilliance, his insight, his daring. They talk of putting his face on Mount Rushmore. Of nominating him for the Nobel Peace Prize.

Many are afraid to criticize him.

This, my friends, is called a dictatorship.

The chief executive of a democracy doesn’t say — as Trump did recently — “I may or may not, nobody knows what I’ll do.” The chief executive of a democracy doesn’t say this because power in a democracy belongs to the people.

This is why Congress enacted a War Powers Act, so presidents have to gain Congress’s consent before sending the United States to war.

It’s why the Constitution gives Congress the power to set the terms of international trade, including tariffs.

Why the Constitution gives Congress the power to appropriate funds.

Why laws bar a president from sending active military troops into a state without the permission of the state’s governor.

And why there’s no basis in law or the Constitution for a president to single out specific law firms, universities, or media companies for penalties because they have angered him.

So how do we take our democracy back?

The federal courts are playing a crucial role. Across America, judges — appointed by both Democratic and Republican presidents — are stopping the tinpot dictator from taking over entirely. They deserve our gratitude.

But you and and I are playing the most critical roles — marching, organizing, demonstrating, boycotting, demanding, supporting leaders who stand up to him and criticizing those who won’t.

It may seem like months ago, but on June 14, some 6 million of us protested against him — the largest civil demonstration in American history. It showed the power of the people. It gave many of us hope.

We must follow that extraordinary event by an even larger nationwide demonstration on July 17, Good Trouble Lives On Day.

On July 17, five years since the passing of Congressman John Lewis, communities across the country will take to the streets, courthouses, and community spaces to carry forward his fight for justice, voting rights, and dignity for all.

On July 17, we must DOUBLE the number of us who turned out June 14. Because it’s our country.

And we must also appear in town halls that any Republican senators and representatives are holding, to tell them we refuse to live in a dictatorship. And tell them that we’re going to make sure they aren’t reelected.

Democracy is not a spectator sport.

For more information on July 17 protests and how you can participate, go to Indivisible.org

Join your friends, neighbors, and activists of all stripes for Good Trouble Lives This Thursday, July 17

 

This Thursday, on July 17, people all across the country will gather together in honor of the late Rep. John Lewis to participate in the Good Trouble Lives On National Day of Action. With MAGA Republicans continuing their ghoulish campaigns to terrorize communities, crush dissent, and tear families apart, it’s more important than ever that we stand up, speak out, and make some good trouble.  What’s good trouble? Coined by civil rights leader Congressman John Lewis, "good trouble" means coming together to take non-violent action to challenge injustice and create meaningful change. That could look like a candlelight vigil, a community event, a rally, or any other creative way you can think of to stand up and remind the world that we will continue to fight back against this authoritarian regime. Once you’ve found an event, invite 3 friends to join you.  As we take the baton from John Lewis and the fight for civil rights, it’s important to remember that the work of opposing an authoritarian takeover must be loud, it must be visible, and it must be sustained. Now is not the time to rest on our laurels of past work; we have to build our opposition and keep it up until we win. And we will win. Join your friends, neighbors, and activists of all stripes as we make sure the Good Trouble Lives On on Thursday, July 17. In solidarity, Indivisible Team P.S. A core principle behind Good Trouble Lives On is a commitment to non-violent action. All participants are expected to de-escalate any situations that arise. If you haven't yet, it's time to get involved.  Show up Thursday and make your voice heard.

MAGAs burn hats as Trump hides Epstein client list

Looks like we have to wait for one of those then-14-year-old girls to come forward 

 

Story by Charlie Jones

The Mirror US

MAGA loyalists are calling for the burning of the iconic MAGA cap as anger over the Epstein Files grows, even among Donald Trump's own supporter base.

The Justice Department claimed on Monday that Jeffrey Epstein did not maintain a “client list" and said no more files related to the wealthy financier’s sex trafficking investigation would be made public. This was despite promises from Attorney General Pam Bondi that had raised the expectations of conservative influencers and conspiracy theorists. 

The claims have been met with fury from the far-right who claim they have been strung along by the Trump administration. Bondi previously said in a Fox News interview earlier this year that such a document was “sitting on my desk” for review. It comes after a Trump family member revealed the latest disturbing symptom of his "cognitive decline".

READ MORE: Dementia fears raised as mysterious lump spotted in Trump’s pants

READ MORE: Lip reader reveals Trump's three-word question to Melania that hints at state of their marriage

Controversial right-wing figure Nick Fuentes wrote on X: "We need to burn our MAGA hats, I think that's a solution. That's the only language Trump will understand. He needs to be abandoned at this point."

Trump came under fire for hosting Fuentes, who has been described as a white supremacist, as a dinner guest at his Mar-a-Lago resort in 2022 as he geared up for the 2024 election. 

Fuentes added: "Now he's going to tell us there's no Esptein black book, no client list. The message needs to be this: 'We're done. We don't understand. The radical right is f***ing furious. We are done.'"

He continued: "I'm burning my MAGA hat. I think other people should too."

Another video showed a man who voted for Trump in 2016 and 2020 burning his MAGA hats over the fact that the Epstein files will not be released. We have chosen not to use the video due to the insensitive language used, but still images can be seen below:

Bondi for weeks had suggested more material was going to be revealed — “It’s a new administration and everything is going to come out to the public,” she said at one point — after a first document dump she had hyped angered President Donald Trump’s base by failing to deliver revelations.

That episode, in which far-right influencers were invited to the White House in February and provided with binders marked “The Epstein Files: Phase 1” and “Declassified” that contained documents that had largely already been in the public domain, has spurred conservative internet personalities to sharply criticize Bondi.

After the first release fell flat, Bondi said officials were poring over a “truckload” of previously withheld evidence she said had been handed over by the FBI.

In a March TV interview, she claimed the Biden administration “sat on these documents, no one did anything with them,” adding: “Sadly these people don’t believe in transparency, but I think more unfortunately, I think a lot of them don’t believe in honesty.”

But after a months-long review of evidence in the government’s possession, the Justice Department determined that no “further disclosure would be appropriate or warranted,” the memo says.

The department noted that much of the material was placed under seal by a court to protect victims and “only a fraction” of it “would have been aired publicly had Epstein gone to trial.”

The gang's all here.  Such good friends.

MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell Torches Trump In Scathing Rant On Deadly Floods

 

 Lawrence O'Donnell

 

‘Doesn’t Know What He’s Doing’ 

 

Tommy Christopher Jul 8th, 2025, 1:07 pm

mediaite 

MSNBC host Lawrence O’Donnell tore into President Donald Trump over the deadly Texas floods that have claimed more than 100 lives and counting, telling viewers Trump “doesn’t know what he’s doing.”

The tragic flash floods in Texas over the 4th of July weekend have claimed at least 118 lives, and drawn criticism of the Trump administration over cuts to weather-related agencies and Trump’s own ongoing desire to scale back or eliminate the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

The White House has pushed back on the criticisms, and reporting indicates it’s too early to tell what direct impact Trump’s policies may have had on the disaster, if any.

On Monday night’s edition of MSNBC’s The Last Word, O’Donnell blasted Trump for his stance on FEMA, just the jumping-off point for a marathon commentary with the theme that Trump “doesn’t know what he’s doing” about everything:

LAWRENCE O’DONNELL, MSNBC HOST: Well, Donald Trump proved once again today beyond a reasonable doubt that he does not know what he is doing.

Donald Trump proved that in more than one way today, including his response to a question in the aftermath, the tragic aftermath of the horrible flooding in Texas where the death count is now at 118 with the possibility of going higher (170 are still missing). 28 of the victims were children sleeping at a summer camp on the banks of the river.

After declaring a federal disaster area in the flood zone in Texas, which then activates a full response by FEMA, the federal emergency management agency, Donald Trump was asked, “Are you still planning to phase out FEMA?” to which Donald Trump said, “Well, FEMA is something we can talk about later, but right now they’re busy working, so we’ll leave it at that.”

Right now, they’re busy working? how could they possibly be busy working if, as Donald Trump and Elon Musk believed back when they were pretending to be friends, that FEMA is a complete waste of money and should be disbanded? Only someone who doesn’t know what he’s doing could say, “Let’s get rid of FEMA.”

There’s a reason no other president has ever suggested that because every other president always knew that FEMA was busy working somewhere because FEMA’s work goes on long after the disaster is in the news. And that work always overlaps with new FEMA jobs that come along when other very predictable disasters take place like hurricanes during hurricane season or horrible massive flooding in a place in Texas known as Flash Flood Alley.

That’s the area where that deadly flood occurred. It is predictable that horrible flooding will occur in such a place, and it is a long-established government function to create as strong an early warning system as possible for predictable disasters like hurricanes and blizzards and floods and fire in dry high wind areas.

Earthquakes are completely unpredictable. So, you never know when FEMA is going to be rushed to the site of a deadly earthquake. But Donald Trump wanted to get rid of FEMA and now refuses to say if he wants to get rid of FEMA because now, they’re busy working.

Those are the words of someone who does not know what he’s doing as president of the United States. The first federal disaster relief from Washington was in 1803 after a devastating fire in New Hampshire. And federal disaster relief has been going on since 1803 and was formally centered in one organization when FEMA was created 46 years ago.

FEMA has been a bipartisan success and enjoyed bipartisan support until Donald Trump decided to get rid of it because Elon Musk told him way back when they were still pretending to be friends. What was that? Years ago or I guess weeks ago.

"Dammit Donald, when are you going to act like you know what the hell you're doing."

 

A New Declaration of Independence From Tyranny...

 

A woman holds an upside down American flag. (photo: Allison Robbert/Getty)  (Today, most protestors associate the upside down flag with the nation heading in the wrong direction, or being under the control of the wrong political party. The upside down version of the flag is becoming more pronounced among both conservatives and liberals.)

 

(Editor's note: Satirist Andy Borowitz turns serious on this 4th of July weekend.)

 

"...to build a future grounded in compassion, courage, and shared humanity." 

Andy Borowitz / The Borowitz Report 

 

04 July 25

 

When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for a people to break from a leader who governs with cruelty, contempt, and corruption, a decent respect to the opinions of humankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all people are created equal, endowed with inherent dignity and unalienable rights—among these are life, liberty, equality, and the pursuit of justice.

That to secure these rights, governments derive their power from the consent of the governed. When a leader becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right and duty of the people to refuse allegiance and to stand united in the defense of their freedoms.

The current holder of high office has shown himself to be unfit to lead a free and just society.

* He disrespects women, mocking survivors of violence and stripping away their rights.

* He fuels racism and white supremacy, scapegoating communities of color and denying their equality.

* He assaults free speech, attacking the press, punishing dissent, and spreading disinformation.

* He exploits public office for private gain, enriching himself and the billionaire class while abandoning the poor and working people.

* He undermines justice, ignores the rule of law, and places himself above accountability.

* He disregards science, endangering lives in times of crisis and sacrificing the planet for profit.

* He fans division and incites violence to maintain power, wielding fear as a weapon against the people.

Time and again, we have protested peacefully, spoken truthfully, and appealed to our shared humanity. We have been met with indifference, hostility, and violence. A leader who governs through hatred and greed is unfit to govern at all.

Therefore, we, the people of conscience and conviction, do solemnly declare our independence from this tyrant and all he represents.

We withdraw our consent.

We refuse to be complicit in cruelty.

We reject the abuse of power for personal gain.

We stand for dignity, truth, equality, and justice for all people.

With firm reliance on each other and unwavering hope in our collective strength,

We pledge to resist oppression in all its forms,

To uphold the rights of the vulnerable,

And to build a future grounded in compassion, courage, and shared humanity.

Let this declaration be both a breaking and a beginning.