Can't win the argument...

Popes have spoken out on politics before. But with Trump and Pope Leo it's different

By Ava Berger

The ongoing war of words between President Trump and Pope Leo XIV is unparalleled in modern history. It's not new for popes to speak out on political issues, historians of religion say, but Trump's insults toward the pope are without precedent.

The direct nature of Pope Leo's responses as well as him being the first American pope are also playing a role in how the exchange is being interpreted by the public.

The recent back and forth started with Leo's calling for peace in response to the war in Iran, and continued with him warning of the "delusion of omnipotence" and writing that "God does not bless any conflict."

It escalated this past weekend when Trump accused Leo of being "WEAK on Crime, and terrible for Foreign Policy," a potential response to Catholic leaders' calling for more humanity in the Trump administration's immigration policies. Trump also claimed Leo was in favor of Iran having nuclear weapons. Trump continued his attacks Tuesday night with another social media post, saying, "Will someone please tell Pope Leo that Iran has killed at least 42,000 innocent, completely unarmed, protesters in the last two months."

"I have no fear of neither the Trump administration nor of speaking out loudly about the message in the Gospel," Leo told reporters on Monday at the start of an 11-day Africa tour.

Middle East conflict

Pope Leo brushes off Trump criticism amid growing Vatican–U.S. tensions over Iran war

Vice President Vance, who is Catholic, also weighed in on the controversy on Tuesday night, saying the pope should "be careful when he talks about matters of theology."

"What we saw ... is an unprecedented, unhinged attack by the president of the United States on the pope," said Christopher White, associate director of the Initiative on Catholic Social Thought and Public Life at Georgetown University. "It was clearly meant to intimidate the pope," but, he added, "the pope's response shows he is undeterred by the president's broadside and won't be distracted from his efforts to push for peace."

The charged nature of the exchange is new, but many popes have been known for their political critiques. Here's a brief overview of times when modern popes spoke out on politics, and how Pope Leo is different.

Modern popes have never shied away from voicing political opinions, sometimes running contrary to world leaders.

"When the pope speaks, it's not that he's taking sides. He's really pointing out the objective moral law," said Michele Dillon, a professor of sociology at the University of New Hampshire whose research focuses on the Catholic Church.

But prior interactions were much more diplomatic.

In 1965, Pope Paul VI was the first pope to speak before the United Nations, urging an end to the Vietnam War and famously saying, "No more war, war never again." Paul VI pushed President Lyndon Johnson to "increase even more your noble effort" to negotiate for peace in Vietnam in 1967. Later that year, Johnson released a cordial statement after meeting the pope, saying "I deeply appreciate the full and free manner" of the pope's opinions.

In 1979, Pope John Paul II spoke before the United Nations, focusing on human rights and peace. He advocated an end to conflicts in the Middle East, with a "just settlement of the Palestinian question" and the "territorial integrity of Lebanon." John Paul II visited President Jimmy Carter in the White House, where they talked about the Philippines, China, Europe, South Korea, and the Middle East, according to Carter's notes.

John Paul II, a Polish pope, was also involved in less-public political influence. He supported Polish opposition to the Soviet Union and has been credited with helping to bring down the Berlin Wall in 1989. Later, in 2003, he spoke against the U.S. invasion of Iraq and also sent representatives to Washington and Baghdad to make appeals to avoid the war. Those appeals were ignored, but he correctly predicted decades of unrest in the Middle East, according to White.

John Paul II also voiced opinions on social issues with presidents — disagreeing with Bill Clinton on abortion and pushing George W. Bush to reject stem cell research — but neither president escalated the situation and both remained respectful.

More recently, in 2013, Pope Francis called an impromptu vigil to plead for peace in the civil war in Syria and wrote to Russian President Vladimir Putin to oppose military intervention there. Francis responded to a chemical attack that left some 70 people dead in Syria in 2017, saying he was "horrified," and he appealed "to the conscience of those who have political responsibility" to end the violence.

In 2015, Francis released a document saying the church accepted the scientific consensus on climate change and urged world leaders to act.

"Many of the world's leading climate activists have said that no one has done more to shape public opinion on [climate change] than Pope Francis," White said.

Francis was also a tireless advocate for peace in Gaza, and would call Gaza's Church of the Holy Family nightly during the war between Hamas and Israel.

Francis also went head to head with Trump in 2016 before Trump's first election. When Francis visited the U.S.-Mexico border, he said a person "who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian." Trump called the pope's comments "disgraceful," but he quickly smoothed over the situation and called Francis a "wonderful guy."

Popes have been reluctant to name names before now

Popes have historically been hesitant to name the person their criticism is directed at outright. A hotly contested example is Pope Pius XII's decision to not directly name and denounce Adolf Hitler during World War II.

Pope Francis also faced criticism for his ambiguous references to Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

This makes Leo's directness all the more relevant, according to White, who is also the author of Pope Leo XIV: Inside the Conclave and the Dawn of a New Papacy. Leo referring to Trump by name, though still a rare occurrence, was a "new tact" for the papacy, he said.

"There's just kind of a reflex on the Vatican's behalf to want to be perceived as neutral as possible in a conflict," he said. Leo, however, "appealed to [Trump] directly and in a sense, pointed the finger to say: 'You started this war, you have the power to end this war.'"

The pope does not want to get involved in a political back and forth, said Dillon, the UNH professor, but his job is to preach the Catholic teachings.

"That's the last thing any pope wants to do, because they do want to be a pope for the universal church and for all people," Dillon said. "A pope of peace."

The Trump administration is frequently invoking religion 

Another reason for Leo's outspokenness may be the Trump administration's continued religious rhetoric and imagery, experts said.

On Sunday, Trump shared an AI-generated image that depicts him as a Jesus-like figure, wearing a white robe and red sash and laying his hands on a sick, bedridden man as light appeared to radiate from his hands. The post was later deleted and Trump claimed the image was of him as a doctor.

Robert Orsi, a professor of religious studies and history at Northwestern University, said he was alarmed by the post's connotations. He called the whole exchange with Leo "unprecedented," and "never in U.S. history has this happened."

On Wednesday, Trump shared a post on social media with an image of him being embraced by Jesus. Trump told reporters last week that he believes God supports the U.S. military action in Iran because "God is good and God wants to see people taken care of." Last year, the White House posted an image of Trump as the pope.

"We have an administration, not just a president, but an administration that is speaking out in more overtly religious terms than even somebody like Jimmy Carter," said Margaret Thompson, a professor of history and political science at Syracuse University. Carter was an evangelical Christian.

Dillon, the UNH professor, said that because of this, Leo may have felt a duty to personally reference and respond to Trump's attacks, because he recognizes that "appeasement has a moral price."

Jesuit priest and author James Martin told Morning Edition that "pretty much every Catholic I spoke to, from progressive Catholics to traditional Catholics, were appalled," at Trump's words toward the pope. "The pope is, you know, the representative of the whole church. So it's an attack on the church."

Pope Leo is the first American pope, but he does not think of himself as just an American. "He's the Holy Father for everyone," said Peter Martin, a former U.S. diplomat accredited to the Holy See.

Still, that doesn't stop people from looking at the saga from an American angle.

Dillon said the fact that the pope is American could allow him to have greater influence. Americans may have seen popes such as Francis, who were "pointed in their criticism of a great power like America," as just "anti-America," she said.

"But if you have a pope who was born and raised in Chicago and really a true out-and-out American criticizing in pointed terms, I actually think that carries more weight," Dillon said.

Religion

Jesuit priest shares how Catholics are reacting to Trump's criticism of Pope Leo

In early April, Leo appealed to the American people "to seek ways to communicate. Perhaps with congressmen, with authorities, saying that we don't want war, we want peace."

"It doesn't get more American than that," White said. "I mean, I don't think there's any precedent for a pope saying, 'call your congressman.'"

If you could pile shit so high.....

Trump touts newly released plans for D.C. triumphal arch

Chloe Veltman

President Trump on Friday unveiled official architectural renderings for the triumphal arch he plans to add to the National Mall in Washington, D.C.

The proposed monument would stand at one end of the Arlington Memorial Bridge next to the Arlington National Cemetery.

In addition to the president's post on Truth Social, the plans were released by the Commission on Fine Arts, a federal agency that has review authority over the design and aesthetics of construction within Washington, D.C., and produced by Harrison Design, an architecture, interior and landscape design firm with offices in six U.S. cities, including D.C. The mockup shows a structure very similar to the 3D model that Trump touted at a fundraising dinner at the White House last October.

At 250 feet tall, the overall height of the structure is intended to serve as, "a fitting recognition of America's 250th birthday," the White House said in an email to NPR.

A monument aimed at honoring what and whom?

The proposed arch bears a striking resemblance to the Arc de Triomphe in Paris — though would stand almost 100 feet taller — and is topped with two golden eagles and a winged, crowned figure reminiscent of the Statue of Liberty (which was gifted to the U.S. by France in 1884.) On one side, the words "One nation under God" appear, with the phrase "Liberty and justice for all" on the other.

The structure would also loom over the nearby Lincoln Memorial — at more than twice the height.

"The Triumphal Arch in Memorial Circle is going to be one of the most iconic landmarks not only in Washington, D.C., but throughout the world," said White House spokesperson Davis Ingle in an email to NPR. "It will enhance the visitor experience at Arlington National Cemetery for veterans, the families of the fallen, and all Americans alike, serving as a visual reminder of the noble sacrifices borne by so many American heroes throughout our 250 year history so we can enjoy our freedoms today. President Trump will continue to honor our veterans and give the greatest Nation on earth — America — the glory it deserves."

When asked by CBS political correspondent Ed O'Keefe whom the monument was intended to honor after Trump initially unveiled his plans in October, Trump responded: "Me." The exchange was captured in a social media video.

A group of Vietnam War veterans launched a lawsuit in February seeking to bar the Trump administration from constructing the arch. The plaintiffs argued the project violates statutes requiring express congressional authorization for the erection of commemorative works or any "building or structure" on federal park grounds in D.C., among other issues.

"It's textbook Trump," said Sue Mobley, director of research at Monument Lab, of the proposed plans for the arch, in an interview with NPR. The nonprofit design studio based in Philadelphia reimagines public art and structures. "It has to be the biggest. That's the authoritarian impulse." Trump has repeatedly pushed back on accusations of authoritarianism, rejecting the label of dictator.

Mobley added that she doesn't think the plans will come to fruition. "It will likely get tied up in court," she said.

Approval process

The White House said it will "follow all legal requirements" in constructing the triumphal arch. As part of that process, it mentioned the National Park Service's recent request to present potential designs to the Commission on Fine Arts. The plans are scheduled to be reviewed next week. At this point, that commission is composed entirely of members appointed by Trump. (In October 2025, Trump took the unusual step of firing six sitting members of the commission.) The National Capital Planning Commission, the federal government's central planning agency for the National Capital Region, is also expected to weigh in on the plans.

The White House said the estimated cost of the project, which it anticipates will draw on a combination of public and private funds, is still being calculated. Harrison Design, the architecture firm behind the plans, did not immediately respond to NPR's request for information about the price tag.

Multiple D.C. makeover projects

The arch plans are the latest in a series of current and potential architectural interventions from the White House in and around Washington, D.C.

Most dramatically, the administration is pushing for the creation of a $400 million neoclassical ballroom at the White House. A federal appeals court on Saturday temporarily allowed the construction of the ballroom to move forward while the administration challenges a March ruling that it required congressional approval. Whatever the outcome, the historic East Wing has already been demolished to make room for the new structure.

Trump has converted the White House Rose Garden into a stone-covered patio. He aims to shut down The Kennedy Center for two years to facilitate a major renovation (a coalition of groups including the National Trust for Historic Preservation, the American Institute of Architects, and the D.C. Preservation League, filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in March opposing the plans.) And he has proposed architectural changes to the Washington Dulles International airport through an initiative the Department of Transportation launched late last year to overhaul the Northern Virginia airport. Several prominent architecture firms including Zaha Hadid Architects and Adjaye Associates have submitted proposals.

In August, the president also signed an executive order requiring that new federal buildings with construction budgets of more than $50 million be designed in "classical" or "traditional" styles.

Wonderful....

Official says travelers in Europe may soon face flight cancellations due to lack of fuel

By Olesya Dmitracova

If oil supplies remain trapped because of the war with Iran, some upcoming flights in Europe may be canceled, the head of the International Energy Agency told the Associated Press today.

Europe has “maybe six weeks or so (of) jet fuel left,” Fatih Birol said, echoing his warning on an April 1 podcast that jet fuel and diesel shortages were likely in Europe this month or by early May.

Speaking today, he said that for Europe, if the Strait of Hormuz isn’t reopened, “soon we will hear the news that some of the flights from city A to city B might be canceled as a result of lack of jet fuel.”

Birol’s forecast of a looming jet fuel shortage is slightly more upbeat than another recent warning: On April 9, ACI Europe, which represents European airports, said Europe was only three weeks away from such a shortage.

Airlines have already been dropping some less profitable flights as jet fuel prices have soared since the start of the war.

Prepared to blockade Iran? I thought they were?????

US rearming and prepared to blockade Iran "as long as it takes," warn top military leaders

By Kit Maher, Lauren Chadwick, Aileen Graef and Kaanita Iyer

In the Pentagon briefing that wrapped up a short while ago, top US military leadership warned Iranian leaders the blockade of the country’s ports and economic pressures would continue unless they “choose wisely” and that US troops in the Middle East are “rearming” during the ceasefire.

Here’s a look at what we learned from the briefing:

• Troops rearming: The US are using this pause in fighting to rearm, retool and adjust their “tactics, techniques and procedures,” said US Central Command chief Adm. Brad Cooper, who oversees US forces in the region.
• “Choose wisely:” US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the US would impose a blockade on Iranian ports for “as long as it takes” and called on Iran to “choose wisely.” He threatened to target infrastructure and energy sites “if Iran chooses poorly.”
• Underneath Iran: Hegseth added that Iran is “digging out” missiles and launchers from bombed facilities, arguing that it can’t “replenish” its military capabilities. CNN has previously reported on satellite images showing earth-moving equipment digging for missile launchers trapped underground.
• Blockade enforcement: Joint Chiefs chairman Dan Caine warned that the US could board or use force against ships not complying with the blockade. He said 13 ships have turned around so far but, as of this morning, the US has not had to board “any particular ships.”
• Third parties: Hegseth also responded to reporting that China is planning to send weapons to Iran, saying the US has been assured that won’t happen. Separately, Caine said the US military will pursue vessels from any country that may be providing “material support” to Iran in other regions.

Strikes ambulance crews

Israel strikes ambulance crews multiple times, Lebanese authorities say, killing 4 medics

By Charbel Mallo, Ibrahim Dahman and Sana Noor Haq

The Israeli military launched three successive attacks on emergency crews handling a relief mission in southern Lebanon, according to Lebanese authorities, killing four paramedics and wounding several others.

CNN has reached out to the Israeli military for comment.

Israel struck rescue teams “three consecutive times” in the town of Mayfadoun, southern Lebanon, on Wednesday, the Lebanese Public Ministry of Health said. At least three paramedics were killed and six others injured, the health ministry added.

That death toll rose to at least four paramedics killed, Lebanon’s National News Agency reported on Thursday. The crew were “on a relief mission following a raid that targeted the town,” NNA said.

“While they were in the area, they were targeted by a drone strike, which led to the martyrdom of the four paramedics,” the news agency added.

One of the slain paramedics — Mahdi Abu Zaid — was injured in an initial Israeli strike before he returned to try and rescue others and was killed, according to a senior colleague.

“Despite his injury, he (Mahdi Abu Zaid) went and moved the car back, and he refused to leave any martyr or wounded person on the ground,” Mohamed Suleiman, a chief paramedic in Nabatieh, told Reuters.

“What Mahdi did embodies the kind of heroism offered by Nabatieh paramedics,” Suleiman added.

The UN’s human rights office (OHCHR) condemned the attack.

Death toll: Israeli bombing on Lebanon after the Iran-backed group Hezbollah fired projectiles into Israel on March 2 has flattened neigborhoods and displaced 1.2 million people. Israeli strikes have killed at least 2,196 people in Lebanon, including 172 children and 93 health workers, the Lebanese health ministry reported on Wednesday. In the last 24 hours alone, at least 29 people were killed in Lebanon, the ministry said.

CNN’s Dana Karni and Tamara Qiblawi contributed reporting.

Trump Fed clash

Tillis holds the cards in Trump Fed clash — and won’t fold

The outgoing North Carolina Republican isn't relinquishing his leverage as he pushes the DOJ to drop its investigation into Fed Chair Jerome Powell.

By Jordain Carney and Jasper Goodman

Donald Trump has a growing Thom Tillis problem. The administration’s actions this week are doing nothing to solve it.

As the president flirts with trying to fire Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell and dismisses Tillis as “no longer a senator,” the retiring North Carolina Republican shot back with his own message to the administration Wednesday: “I’m not dead yet.”

“I’m not very tauntable,” he told reporters. “That’s part of growing up in a trailer park — you kind of get used to this stuff.”

Tillis is blocking Trump’s Fed chair nominee, Kevin Warsh, until the Justice Department drops an investigation into Powell. And the stalemate is leaving him in limbo with no clear off-ramp in sight.

The Senate Banking Committee, where Tillis holds a deciding vote, is holding Warsh’s nomination hearing next Tuesday. And Tillis is leaving the door open to using even more of his leverage, including his Senate Judiciary vote in the event the panel considers a successor to former Attorney General Pam Bondi.

Some of Tillis’ fellow Republicans privately acknowledged Wednesday they don’t understand the White House’s current strategy, which they believe risks antagonizing Tillis and empowering Powell. And publicly, a growing chorus of Republicans are calling on the DOJ to end its investigation into whether Powell lied to Congress about cost overruns at the Fed’s Washington headquarters. Powell, who denies wrongdoing, has said the investigation is a pretext to target him for not lowering interest rates as aggressively as Trump wants.

“[Tillis has] made it very clear, his position on it,” said Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), who sits next to Tillis on Senate Banking. “This is easily resolvable.”

Tillis denied any personal bad blood between himself and the president Wednesday, noting they’ve spoken in recent days about other issues. But he didn’t pull his punches when asked about Trump’s threat to fire Powell or a visit that officials from U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s office made to the Federal Reserve’s headquarters this week.

“It’s kind of like, guys, what are you doing?” he said. “You’re watching too many cop shows thinking that that’s cute — go up there intimidating a witness. For goodness sake — that’s so bush league. … They’re upping the pressure, but they have nowhere to go.”

He suggested that DOJ officials are only digging themselves into a deeper hole and advised them to “take the shovel out of their hands.”

Trump has shown little interest in seeing the DOJ end its probe, which focuses on statements Powell made to the Senate Banking Committee during testimony last year.

“Whether it’s incompetence, corruption, or both, I think you have to find out,” the president said on Fox Business Wednesday.

Meanwhile, Trump is ratcheting up his conflict with Powell, saying he would seek to oust the Fed chief if he stays on after his term as chair ends next month — a growing possibility as Warsh’s confirmation remains stalled amid the Tillis stalemate. Any move to fire Powell would kick off a major legal clash, and the Supreme Court has signaled opposition to the president exerting control over the Fed.

“I’ll have to fire him, OK? If he’s not leaving on time,” Trump told Maria Bartiromo on Fox Business.

Tillis is warning that moving to fire Powell would ultimately backfire.

“He won’t have the right to terminate him, and all we’ve done is wasted time that could have otherwise resulted in a new chair and a new Fed board member under this president,” he said.

Even as the administration digs in over the Powell probe, Senate Republicans are making clear that they don’t expect Tillis to fold.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune said Wednesday that he believed the administration should wrap up its investigation. He said Republicans are “excited” about Warsh, but he’s basically stuck until they resolve the standoff with Tillis over Powell.

“I think at some point they’re going to have to deal with the committee, and they’re going to have to deal with Tillis,” Thune said of the administration.

It’s not the only committee where Tillis has leverage. Over on Judiciary, he’s warned that he will block any attorney general nominee who has dismissed the events of Jan. 6, 2021, when a mob of Trump’s supporters at the Capitol violently interrupted the formal counting of the electoral college results. And he’s not completely ruling out making the Fed probe a litmus test for AG nominees if it continues.

“If we keep letting this go on, I have to consider other options for really amplifying my concern,” Tillis said of his Fed fight. “I don’t see myself tying it to it now.”

Revive clash

Epstein files revive clash over Trump’s college sexual misconduct rule

Epstein’s messages offer a rare window into how powerful figures viewed President Donald Trump’s Title IX regulation as leverage in defending against sexual harassment claims.

By Bianca Quilantan

When a celebrity physicist found himself embroiled in a sexual harassment probe on his college campus, he turned to Jeffrey Epstein for help.

As Epstein looked for ways to help, he saw an opportunity with the Trump administration when he heard it was drafting a new rule for how sexual misconduct gets investigated by schools.

The late sex offender was trying to help Lawrence Krauss, then a professor at Arizona State University facing a sexual harassment complaint at the height of the #MeToo movement. In 2018, according to files released by the Justice Department this year, Epstein fielded texts, phone calls and emails from Krauss and helped bolster the professor’s legal defense.

Krauss has denied wrongdoing. But their exchange reveals how much Epstein believed the first Trump administration’s work to establish more protections for people accused of wrongdoing under Title IX — the federal education law that bars sex-based discrimination — could limit the university’s probe into Krauss and let him keep his job.

“My friends in the White House HATE the title ix c--ts,” Epstein wrote to Krauss in April 2018.

“Ironic but he might be your out,” Epstein added, without being clear about who “he” was.

“Ironic indeed!” Krauss, a vocal Trump critic, replied. “But I will take it.”

Trump has said he and Epstein, who was once a frequent guest at Mar-a-Lago, had a falling out years before Epstein died in 2019. While Epstein’s relationship with Krauss has been well known, the newly released correspondence remains resonant eight years later in part because advocates for sexual assault survivors say the messages back up their calls to stop the second Trump administration from officially resurrecting its Title IX rule.

“The emails really offered what was a very rare thing in public life: a paper trail showing exactly how men with power talk about the laws designed to hold them accountable,” said Noreen Farrell, executive director of Equal Rights Advocates, a nonprofit women’s rights organization.

The public attention to the Epstein files “is a powerful cultural zeitgeist on the broader issue of sex abuse that I think we should leverage in this moment as we approach rulemaking,” Farrell said.

The Biden administration tried to scrap the 2020 regulation, but its efforts were ultimately stymied in court over its inclusion of discrimination protections for transgender students.

Last year, the new Trump administration used that legal status to ditch Biden’s version altogether as it seeks to codify its rule through regulation, a process that may begin as soon as this fall but can take years to finalize.

“This Epstein email and essentially his blessing and support of the Trump 2020 rule, it just really affirms what we’ve been saying all along,” said Shiwali Patel, senior director of Education Justice at the National Women’s Law Center.

“It’s meant to be an anti-survivor rule,” she said. “I don’t know if it could be made any more clear after the Epstein files revealed his role in support of it.”

The White House declined to comment. Krauss did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

The Trump administration has been enforcing the first-term Title IX requirements through guidance — policies advocacy groups say have chilled reporting of incidents on campus and added hurdles for them in the complaint process.

Those organizations point out that the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights did not resolve any sexual harassment or violence complaints last year when the Trump administration began enforcing its rule again.

They argue that the public’s fervor around Epstein’s crimes — combined with the department’s inaction on those complaints — could help them garner enough public support to make reimposing the rule politically unpopular.

Epstein wrote about how he believed the pending Title IX regulation meant the university and faculty investigating Krauss “are now on notice that the rules they have been operating under , will be changed.”

“DUE PROCESS,” Epstein wrote.

Title IX lawyer Justin Dillon, who represented Krauss in the university’s probe as well as dozens of students accused of misconduct, remains a proponent of the 2020 rule. He has argued the Trump rule is more protective of due process rights for those accused of misconduct compared to previous federal guidance.

Dillon said Epstein’s views about the policy shouldn’t hold weight.

“Just because a monster like Jeffrey Epstein thought more due process was a good idea does not make more due process bad, and I cannot imagine why anyone would possibly care what he thought about this issue,” Dillon said in a statement. “‘Bad person liked thing I do not like’ is not much of an argument.’”

Krauss’ outreach to Epstein began six months before Arizona State University relaunched an investigation under Title IX into Krauss after misconduct allegations emerged in a February 2018 Buzzfeed article and a complaint was filed. The ASU report detailed unwelcome sexual comments and touching, sexist comments and unprofessional and sexually inappropriate interactions with students and employees of the Origins Project, an initiative that explores the origins of life and the universe that was partially funded by Epstein and his associates.

“IF being silly , socially unaware is a crime. under title 9, , half of the great scientists would be out of work,” Epstein told Krauss.

Epstein paid at least $15,000 for Krauss’ legal fees, vetted lawyers and consulted high-profile allies including Ken Starr, who investigated former President Bill Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky, according to the Epstein documents. Starr lost his job as president of Baylor University in 2016 over the school’s handling of sexual assault allegations.

Epstein also told Krauss that Trump’s Education Department had a new view on how colleges should handle sexual harassment complaints. These views sharply diverged from Obama administration policies directing schools to quickly investigate and resolve sexual harassment complaints or lose their federal funding.

Epstein made a point of noting the university’s financial ties to the federal government, which included receiving Pell Grants, funding that helps low-income students pay for college.

“I’m told they should be reminded that there is [a] new sheriff in dc,” Epstein wrote.

Krauss knew of Epstein’s supposed ties to the White House. In emails with Dillon — which he often forwarded to Epstein — Krauss touted Epstein’s list of friends with influence as a reason why Dillon needed to consult Epstein.

“Bottom line is that Jeffrey is not only friends with most of the famous people from finance, to business, to Hollywood, who have either been brought down during #metoo,” Krauss wrote to Dillon, ”he also speaks regularly with people ranging from the awful white house people, who he is friends with, to ken starr etc.”

The Title IX final rule that took effect in August 2020 was a key part of Betsy DeVos’ legacy as Education secretary during Trump’s first term. She scrapped Obama-era guidance that called on schools to take immediate action on any unwelcome sexual misconduct and developed a formal process schools must undertake in investigating such accusations.

That included requiring colleges to respond to formal complaints with courtroom-like hearings and allowing representatives for alleged offenders and survivors to call witnesses and challenge their credibility and assess evidence. The rule also changed the government’s definition of sexual harassment and allowed schools to use a higher standard of proof in campus disciplinary proceedings compared to the Obama-era guidance.

DeVos has said the rule officially codifies protections to hold schools accountable by ensuring sexual assault survivors aren’t brushed aside and no accused student’s guilt is predetermined.

“We can and must continue to fight sexual misconduct in our nation’s schools, and this rule makes certain that fight continues,” DeVos said at the time. A DeVos spokesperson declined to comment for this report.

Education Department spokesperson Amelia Joy said the Trump administration’s rule “provides a balanced legal approach that protects both survivors and the constitutional right to due process.”

“On the other hand, the Obama and Biden Administrations distorted the law, including by using it to suspend and expel students with no notice, giving no opportunity for evidence to be reviewed, and providing no right to a hearing,” Joy said in a statement. “The Trump Administration remains committed to upholding Title IX, restoring commonsense safeguards against sexual assault, and vigorously protecting all students.”

The rule has also helped standardize the process for all schools across the country, said KC Johnson, a Brooklyn College professor whose 2019 research showed the number of legal challenges over the campus adjudication processes were climbing.

“The DeVos regulations were designed to deal with this problem, which is that these lawsuits had exposed the often glaringly unfair processes,” he said, adding that since the regulations have been in effect “there’s been a dramatic decrease in litigation against schools because schools that actually adhere to these regulations are forced to do the process in a fair way.”

Epstein appeared to be watching the rulemaking closely.

As discussions about the rule advanced in 2018, he advised Krauss to ask the university “which title 9 rules are they applying.” He told Krauss to tell the school, “as you know the title 9 rules are being modified. I assume we will operate under the proposed regs. as you are on notice. of the changes. ??”

“If they say no, you might suggest , waiting until they are finalized as after a hearing you will fly a court action. that will by definition. have the new rules in place by that time,” Epstein added.

Ultimately, Krauss didn’t benefit from the Trump rule because it took several years to finalize after drawing more than 124,000 public comments and several legal challenges.

Arizona State University’s investigation determined that most of the complaint against the professor was valid. Krauss was put on paid leave by the university and was later ousted from the leading post of the prestigious science program that he founded. The university found that Krauss breached the school’s sexual harassment policy and senior university officials recommended his firing. But the professor ended up retiring instead.

“To be clear, I have never harassed or assaulted anyone and have most certainly not exhibited gender discrimination in my professional dealings at the University or elsewhere,” Krauss wrote in a statement at the time.

Krauss has also said none of his correspondence with Epstein “relate in any way to the horrendous crimes he was accused of in 2019.”

The Trump Title IX rule was not finalized until 2020, but advocates who tried to crush the regulation argue the documents prove their view that it would give the advantage to those accused of misconduct.

“When Betsy DeVos was the secretary of Education, the public talking points were about male students being falsely accused and that the Obama administration had gone too far and the result was these really unfair sexual assault misconduct processes,” said Amanda Walsh, a spokesperson for the Victim Rights Law Center, which provides free legal services for sexual assault survivors.

“But when you look at these emails, it reads as if this is a group of just well connected guys looking out for each other,” she said.

Some argue, however, that many provisions in Trump’s version of the rule may prove popular.

“How do you argue against letting people see the evidence against them or question and bring up their witnesses?” said Robert Shibley, who is special counsel for campus advocacy at FIRE, a free speech group advocating for the due process protections in the regulation. “It’s shocking that that wasn’t routinely part of the Title IX process before.”

Getting rid of the Trump rule was a key priority for former President Joe Biden, who said the policy “gives colleges a green light to ignore sexual violence and strip survivors of their rights.”

Catherine Lhamon, who led the Education Department’s civil rights office under both Biden and Obama, said she found the Epstein correspondence stunning.

“When I saw that text in the Epstein files, my jaw dropped,” said Lhamon, who now leads UC Berkeley Law’s Edley Center on Law and Democracy. “It is very surprising to me to see the crass and dismissive terminology, as reported, from the White House about survivors of discrimination … and the ugliness of the explicit planning and strategizing and which of our kids in school our federal government disdains.”

The National Women’s Law Center is still fighting in court to uphold the Biden administration’s sexual misconduct portions of the regulation. But Trump administration officials have said they are already enforcing the 2020 regulation.

Still, the Education Department has to go through another rulemaking process to officially strip the Biden regulation off the books to ensure a future administration can’t quickly unravel its efforts.

The Trump administration’s enforcement of its own rule is also being criticized.

Dozens of groups that advocate for students who have experienced sexual harassment or violence say the department is “neglecting” its mandate to address campus Title IX complaints.

In late February, the groups said the agency had “resolved zero complaints of sexual harassment or violence in 2025” and opened fewer than 10 sexual violence investigations since March 2025. About 90 percent of overall complaints to the office from March to September 2025 were also dismissed.

Johnson said there are accused students who file these OCR complaints as well.

“The issue of OCR not resolving things, that’s a much more serious line of argument to me than the Epstein stuff,” he said.

The Education Department did not respond to a question about the cases. By contrast, Lhamon said her office addressed 11 sexual harassment cases in just the three weeks leading up to Trump’s 2025 inauguration.

“I know what cases were pending, what cases we were trying to get resolved, what cases were in negotiations when I walked out the door on the last day of the Biden administration,” Lhamon said. “I am sick about those cases still sitting and the affected students not receiving the relief that the law entitles them to.”

Kills wife, self in murder-suicide

Former Virginia Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax kills wife, self in murder-suicide, police say

Fairfax, a former federal prosecutor, was elected lieutenant governor in 2017, despite never previously having held public office.

By Gregory Svirnovskiy

Former Democratic Virginia Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax and his wife, Cerina, were found dead in their Fairfax County home in an apparent murder-suicide, police said on Thursday.

“It’s high profile in nature, it’s tragic in nature, certainly a fall from grace for a relatively high-profile family that seemingly had a lot of things going in their favor,” Fairfax County Police Chief Kevin Davis told reporters in a press conference.

Fairfax, Davis said, shot his wife “multiple times” in the basement of their home just after midnight, before firing a gun at himself in a room upstairs. One of the couple’s two teenage children alerted the police. The two were in the midst of divorce proceedings, Davis told reporters.

The two were pronounced dead on the scene when police arrived at their home, “within minutes of the 911 call,” Davis said.

Fairfax, a former federal prosecutor, was elected lieutenant governor in 2017, despite never previously having held public office. He served alongside Gov. Ralph Northam, also a Democrat.

But both Fairfax and Northam soon found themselves embroiled in scandal. In 2019, multiple women accused Fairfax of sexual assault, leading to calls from nearly the entire state’s congressional delegation and a variety of presidential candidates that he resign.

The accusations came as Northam also faced calls to leave office after he admitted to previously wearing blackface.

Fairfax denied the accusations, which came to light as conversation swirled around him potentially taking on the governor’s post.

“Does anybody think it’s any coincidence, that on the eve of potentially my being elevated, that that’s when this uncorroborated smear comes out?” he said in February 2019.

Despite the allegations, Fairfax ran for governor in 2021 and finished in a distant fourth in the Democratic primary. He left the state capital in January 2022 and started his own legal practice.

 

Golden Arches...

 

"Me so horny" How Melania met her 'husband' by accident at strip club

Melania Trump’s Epstein statement stunned White House aides but was in keeping with a first lady who does her own thing

By Adam Cancryn, Kristen Holmes

With war raging in the Middle East and midterms on the horizon, the White House seemed to have finally shaken the Jeffrey Epstein saga that plagued the first year of Donald Trump’s second term.

Inside the White House, officials had started to move on.

But for first lady Melania Trump, the Epstein story was still all consuming.

Trump’s extraordinary remarks on Thursday distancing herself from the late sex offender were driven by her monthslong fixation on press coverage and internet speculation about her ties to Epstein, two people familiar with the matter told CNN.

The first lady’s dismay over the issue prompted her seemingly abrupt decision to publicly address it — despite little apparent need to do so and with minimal advance notice given even to her husband.

“There were stories about her that were being amplified by random blogs — and they were still hitting her over Epstein, because that is what they do,” one of the people familiar with the matter said. “She wanted to go on the record and deny it.”

The White House announced on Wednesday morning that Trump would be making a statement, without specifying the topic. Standing in the Cross Hall a little more than 24 hours later, the first lady stunned senior White House aides.

Even her husband said in a brief phone interview later that day that he didn’t know about it ahead of time. On Friday, he told The New York Times that he knew the first lady had wanted to speak about Epstein at some point but confirmed he did not know what she planned to say.

The president declined to tune into her remarks in real time, a senior White House official said.

But those remarks immediately reverberated across the Republican Party. They upended a news cycle dominated by highly anticipated efforts to negotiate a Middle East peace and dragged a saga her husband had been desperate to escape right back to the fore.

Among those who know her best, it fit a yearslong pattern of Melania Trump finding and focusing on negative coverage of herself no matter where on the internet it came from.

“She’d see things that I had no idea about and tell me something was ‘everywhere’ and send me links to websites I didn’t even know existed,” one former staffer told CNN, who was among those who recounted the first lady often complaining about stories from obscure sources. “It was not ‘everywhere.’”

Trump had informed West Wing officials ahead of time that she planned to make a statement but gave no indication what it was about, the senior White House official said.

The episode has left administration officials befuddled and bracing for the fallout, including the potential for the White House to get bogged down again by Epstein coverage.

Donald Trump defended his wife’s decision on Friday, telling The New York Times that “she had a right to talk about it,” even if he personally questioned whether he would have gone about it the same way.

The first lady on Thursday called for more congressional scrutiny of Epstein — specifically allowing survivors of his abuse to testify at public hearings, which undercut her husband’s insistence in recent months that Americans should move on to other topics.

On Friday, House Oversight Chairman James Comer committed to hold more hearings.

“I agree with the first lady,” the Kentucky Republican said on Fox News. “We will have hearings.”

A spokesman for the first lady declined to comment. The White House did not respond to a request for comment.

She ‘does what she wants to do when she wants to do it’

The first lady’s decision underscores the remarkable independence that she enjoys within the administration, where public statements are typically closely coordinated and can be scrutinized for days ahead of time.

Melania Trump, by contrast, has long operated largely apart from the rest of the White House, pursuing her own initiatives and only occasionally lending her voice to support priorities on the president’s broader agenda, even as she remains one of the most influential figures around him. Over the last year, she’s often been absent from Washington, preferring to spend most of her time in Florida and New York.

“When I worked on the [2024 Trump] campaign, we literally never knew what she was doing,” a former senior campaign official told CNN.

The first lady has kept a small inner circle throughout, and remains wary of the press, having sat for only three interviews so far this term — all of which were with Fox News, and all meant to promote her documentary film. In keeping with her approach during her husband’s first term, she has sought to fiercely protect the privacy of her and her family.

“All she cares about is her family,” said one person close to the White House. “She doesn’t care about politics.”

That hyper-protective mindset could at times manifest as a fixation on what she saw as unflattering coverage that she believed was damaging to her or her family, multiple people familiar with the matter said. And since her husband’s return to the White House, perhaps no topic has challenged the public’s perception of the first family like the Epstein files.

While much of the scrutiny last year focused on Donald Trump’s past ties to Epstein — fueling his efforts to brand the topic a Democratic “hoax” — it has also resurfaced photos of Melania Trump with Epstein and correspondence between her and his accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell. The Epstein files included a friendly email exchange between the two women where Melania Trump signed her message, “Love, Melania,” and Maxwell responded, calling her “sweet pea.” (Neither Trump faces any accusations by law enforcement of wrongdoing in connection with Epstein’s crimes.)

The first lady last year also launched legal challenges over claims made about her and Epstein, eventually winning retractions and apologies from The Daily Beast, HarperCollins Publishers and Democratic strategist James Carville.

Much of that Epstein furor had died down in recent months, as the White House pursued new foreign engagements in Venezuela and against Iran.

Yet for Melania Trump, who remained upset by suggestions that she was close with Epstein, the story never subsided. In her remarks on Thursday, she appeared to address her emails with Maxwell specifically, insisting that they “cannot be categorized as anything more than casual correspondence.”

The first lady also sought to downplay her interactions with Epstein, asserting that the only time she ever “crossed paths” with him was at an event in 2000.

“Epstein did not introduce me to Donald Trump,” she said.

The fervent denial set off speculation across Washington over what potential forthcoming revelation had prompted such a sudden disclosure, with some GOP officials questioning whether Trump had sought to get ahead of fresh reporting. Democrats privately surveyed their colleagues about the status of their party’s ongoing Epstein investigations, only to be told that no major break in the case was imminent, a Democratic Hill aide said.

But within the circle of current and former aides who have worked with Trump, there was ultimately far less surprise at her freelancing. Pressed in the immediate aftermath over whether it was possible neither she nor her team briefed the West Wing ahead of time, the answer was a resounding “yes.”

The first lady had decided to do something — and no one in the White House was going to stop her, regardless of the repercussions.

“She is a very strong and independent woman who does what she wants to do when she wants to do it,” a former staffer to the first lady said.

When asked by the Times if he was upset about his wife reintroducing Epstein into the news, the president said, “I never get upset.”

NGC 3310

The party is still going on in spiral galaxy NGC 3310. Roughly 100 million years ago, NGC 3310 likely collided with a smaller galaxy causing the large spiral galaxy to light up with a tremendous burst of star formation. The changing gravity during the collision created density waves that compressed existing clouds of gas and triggered the star-forming party. The featured image from the Gemini North Telescope shows the galaxy in great detail, color-coded so that pink highlights gas while white and blue highlight stars. Some of the star clusters in the galaxy are quite young, indicating that starburst galaxies may remain in star-burst mode for quite some time. NGC 3310 spans about 50,000 light years, lies about 50 million light years away, and is visible with a small telescope towards the constellation of Great Bear Ursa Major.

Don’s Con Gone

Is the Don’s Con Gone?

The Iran war is the latest in a series of moves that have undermined his scams.

David Corn

A con man’s challenge is to stay ahead of his con. If his marks begin to see too many signs that they are being played—and the swindler can’t craft a cover story to account for these contrary facts—the artifice can start to crumble.

Donald Trump may be at this point.

Of course, millions of Americans have known from the start that Trump has long been a deceitful scammer. But millions of others have fallen for his hustle—and they stuck with his flimflam after his first stint as president demonstrated he lied when he promised cheaper and better health care, a revival of American infrastructure, and an end to budget deficits. Despite his failure to make good on these pie-in-the-sky promises, he managed to keep the con going—even after miserably mismanaging the Covid pandemic and then scheming to overturn a national election.

As we know—and he certainly does—many scams depend on people wanting to believe the scammer. That was evident in 2024, when Trump’s vow to lower grocery prices and spur an economic Golden Age appealed to voters slammed by inflation and the high cost of living. He had conned the electorate once before and nearly destroyed American democracy, but these voters were willing to give the bunko artist another shot. This was akin to an abused spouse offering their abusive partner a second chance on the promise that all will be grand this time.

Yet even within false realities, facts can emerge and threaten a hustle. That might be happening now. It has been widely noted that Trump campaigned as an America Firster opposed to so-called “forever wars,” and yet he launched this war of choice against Iran on what appears to have been a whim. (His press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, called it a “feeling.”) At the time of his impulse, negotiations between Washington and Tehran were still underway and Iran was not two weeks away from producing a nuclear weapon, as Trump has insisted. His trigger-happiness has belied his proclaimed aversion to Mideast wars and overseas interventions. He showed no fealty to what he professed to be a chief principle. This brazen contradiction is tough for everyone but the most committed Trump devotees to ignore.

And that’s not all. This past week, Trump proposed a $1.5 trillion Pentagon budget, which would entail a 44 percent increase for the military. Such a boost is inconsistent with an America First position. If the priority is the well-being of Americans at home, why spend so much more for potential overseas military actions? The 2025 US military budget is already $962 billion, the most in the world and more than the combined total of the next nine nations (China, $246 billion; Russia, $150 billion; Germany, $109 billion).

Moreover, Trump’s wish-list budget cut 10 percent of non-defense spending. He said last week that it’s “not possible” for the federal government to fund Medicare, Medicaid, and child care costs—which was sort of big news that got lost in the shuffle. Any president saying something like that in years past would have faced days—maybe weeks—of headlines.

This budget proposal is unlikely to be adopted by Congress, but his call for shoveling an additional half-a-trillion dollars into the Pentagon while further gutting health care programs and much else is no America First position. Plus, pursuing such a path would exacerbate the budget deficits he once pledged to eliminate.

Trump’s con is being undermined on other fronts. His one big promise in 2024 was to lower prices and make life more affordable. His tariffs have done the opposite—so, too, the Iran war. He has cast himself as the champion of the little guy who’s been screwed over by Washington and the elites. Yet in his second term, Trump has wallowed in opulence and narcissistic self-worship, gold-leafing whatever he can, attaching his name to whatever he can, constructing a poorly designed White House ballroom, and pocketing tremendous amounts of money in assorted grift, including his own crypto scam. (In a December poll, 66 percent disapproved of Trump adding his name to the Kennedy Center; only 18 percent favored this self-glorifying move.) His claim that his mass deportation crusade targets criminal migrants has been proven false by horrific accounts of arrests, detentions, and deportations of law-abiding residents, including students, workers, grandmothers, and other valued members of local communities. And the public has reacted with revulsion to his immigration policies.

In a healthy sign of popular rationality, Trump’s approval rating has been on a steady decline over the past year, and many polls now have his approval only in the mid-30s. That means he’s getting close to his floor. My guess is that about 25 percent of American adults are full-on MAGA—people who believe whatever bunk Trump peddles and will follow the guy off a cliff, while he has the only available jet pack. These surveys suggest that non-cultists are not buying his crap anymore.

That seems especially true regarding Iran. A Reuters/Ipsos poll last month found that only 35 percent of Americans support the military strikes on Iran. And the numbers are sliding among non-MAGA Republicans. A CBS News poll in mid-March showed that while 92 percent of self-identified MAGA Republicans backed his war on Iran, only 70 percent of non-MAGA Republicans did. An Economist/ YouGov poll published on March 31 found that support for the war in Iran had dropped by 1 point for the MAGA GOPers fell by a whopping 23 points for those non-MAGA Republicans. Trump is losing everyone but the die-hard Trumpists, who don’t really give a damn about the supposedly cherished ideas of MAGA—such as America First—and are driven mostly by devotion to a divisive demagogue.

Trump’s act is getting old. His chaos does not wear well. He’s not delivering on the unrealistic promises he made, and he’s making things worse. And there’s not much room for improvement on the horizon, especially since it’s unclear how this dumb war will be resolved. Which may be why some folks fear that Trump—cornered like a wounded bear—might become more dangerous and resort to authoritarian measures in the midterms to preserve GOP power (to avoid a boatload of investigations and possibly another impeachment).

Or that he could lash out with more war. His Easter message to Iran’s leaders—“Open the Fuckin’ Strait, you crazy bastards, or you’ll be living in Hell—JUST WATCH! Praise be to Allah”—showed derangement and desperation. His subsequent statement to Axios—“If they don’t make a deal, I am blowing up everything over there”—was a threat to commit war crimes.  

One commentator—I don’t recall who—recently observed that Trump might be hitting an “Emperor’s New Clothes” moment. In that Hans Christian Andersen fairy tale, the con is that the vain emperor’s new outfit is made of magical fabric only the intelligent can see. So he struts around naked, with everyone afraid to say he’s wearing nothing—until during a procession through town, while his aides pretend to be carrying his train, a child exclaims, “He hasn’t got anything on.” Then all the people join in and cry out the same: The dude’s not wearing anything! The scam is uncovered. The Emperor exposed (literally).

Is Trump close to such a brink? Andersen’s story does not conclude with that moment of truth. After the people see through the ruse, Andersen wrote,

The Emperor was vexed, for he knew that the people were right; but he thought the procession must go on now! And the lords of the bedchamber took greater pains than ever, to appear holding up a train, although, in reality, there was no train to hold.

The spell was broken. But the Emperor and his die-hard supporters continued with the charade.

Trump is the most successful con man in American history. Maybe in world history. (Who else ran a swindle that landed him in charge of an arsenal that can blow up the planet?) But the con is fraying. Perhaps it will collapse. As Bob Dylan once warbled, “Even the president of the United States / Sometimes must have to stand naked.” Now, no one wants to see Trump in the buff. But it may be time to wonder what happens when his racket no longer holds—and what perils that could present.

Doesn’t Add Up

Trump’s Math Behind Medicaid Fraud Claims Doesn’t Add Up—Literally

An administration official admitted their estimate of New Yorkers receiving home care was off by more than 4.5 million people.

Julia Métraux

The Trump administration is bad at math.

On Friday, the Associated Press reported that an administration official admitted to miscounting how many people in New York receive care through home and community-based services by millions.

Home and community-based services were established during the Reagan administration, Like the name suggests, these services help disabled people stay in their communities instead of institutions. Care through HCBS can include having skilled nursing, delivered meals and building modifications at one’s home.

This estimation error is important in a time when Medicaid is under attack. Last year, Congress passed nearly $1 triillion worth of cuts to this program. The Trump administration’s continued attacks on Medicaid also hint that more cuts could be coming.

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services head Dr. Mehmet Oz claimed in March that around five million out of roughly eight million people on Medicaid in the state of New York receive home care.

In actuality, the number is around 450,000.

“CMS is committed to ensuring its analyses fully reflect state-specific billing practices and will continue to work closely with New York to validate data and strengthen program integrity oversight,” spokesman Chris Krepich told the AP in a statement. CMS did not respond to Mother Jones’ request for comment by the time of publication.

The administration’s accusations of rampant fraud across the system. During a House committee hearing on alleged Medicaid and Medicare fraud, CMS deputy administrator Kimberly Brandt bragged about CMS’s fraud detection through its aggressive-sounding fraud war room, as I reported:

In Oz’s absence, CMS deputy administrator Kimberly Brandt claimed that the agency’s “fraud war room” was using artificial intelligence to root out alleged Medicare and Medicaid fraud, particularly increased rates of home and community-based services billing in New York and California.

“We are constantly using heat maps and data analysis to be able to look and see where we think the largest shifts are,” Brandt said.

As I’ve also previously reported, there are around seven million disabled people and older adults on Medicaid’s home care program. Just about every state is expected to enact cuts to home and community-based services due to its being an optional Medicaid program.

Home and community-based services also save money for states. According to KFF, the cost of HCBS on average per person is around $36,000, whereas long-term care in places like nursing homes for people on Medicaid is around $47,000.

This underlines how attacks on HCBS are not only heartless in forcing people out of their communities, it also doesn’t make much financial sense.

Dumps January 6 Sedition Convictions

Trump DOJ Dumps January 6 Sedition Convictions

The White House is turning the lies that sparked the insurrection into government policy.

Dan Friedman

In 2023, after Stewart Rhodes, the founder of the far-right Oath Keepers militia group, was sentenced to 18 years in prison for his role in the January 6, 2021, attack on Congress, the Justice Department noted the stiff sentence reflected the court’s conclusion that Rhodes’ “conduct was terrorism.”

“The Oath Keepers plotted for months to violently disrupt the peaceful transfer of power from one administration to the next,” then–Attorney General Merrick Garland said. “The Justice Department will continue to do everything in our power to hold accountable those criminally responsible for the January 6th attack on our democracy.”

Not anymore. In court filings Tuesday, DOJ lawyers asked DC Circuit Court judges to vacate the seditious conspiracy and other convictions of 12 members of the Proud Boys groups and Oath Keepers, including Rhodes.

The defendants affected were all convicted over their effort to prevent the peaceful of transfer of power following Donald Trump’s election defeat in 2020. After his win in 2024, while pardoning around 1,600 people convicted of taking part in the January 6 riot, Trump treated the convicted seditionists differently, merely commuting their prison sentences—which meant that while free, they remained convicted felons. Those defendants continued to appeal their original convictions.

The new DOJ move would end their designation as seditionists and undo the symbolically important legal determination that the attack on Congress was part of an effort to overthrow the lawful government of the United States.

The DOJ filings, signed by District of Columbia US Attorney Jeanine Pirro, did not explain the department’s reasoning beyond a line stating: “The government has decided in its prosecutorial discretion that dismissal of a criminal case is in the interests of justice.”

The filing comes a few weeks after Trump fired Attorney General Pam Bondi, reportedly in part out of frustration that the Justice Department had failed to secure criminal convictions of political foes whom the president had demanded face prosecution on dubious charges.

Trump has fared better pushing DOJ to advance his claims about January 6, which he has called a “day of love,” while continuing to insist that the false claims that fueled the attack—his claim that he won the 2020 election—were accurate.

Now, the lies that led to the first-ever attempt to stop the peaceful transfer of power in the United States are effectively government policy. The Justice Department, under acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, Trump’s former personal lawyer, is moving further from its long-standing independence—and attempting to give the president the legal system he wants.

Races to secure air defense

Ukraine races to secure air defense as global demand surges

Limited stockpiles and slow industrial ramp-up leave Ukraine leaning on U.S.-backed systems despite push for European solutions.

By Chris Lunday and Veronika Melkozerova

Ukraine urgently needs more air defenses but fears surging global demand for interceptors — driven by the Iran war and European rearmament — will leave it short.

"There is not enough production capacity in Europe," Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said in Berlin on Thursday.

That's forcing Kyiv to continue relying on the American-made Patriot air defense system, as well as pushing for more French-German SAMP/Ts. Kyiv is even developing its own anti-missile defenses to make it less reliant on outsiders.

"We must ensure that we have the capabilities to enable Europeans to produce here in Europe everything that is critically necessary for Europe’s defense," Zelenskyy said, adding: "This applies, in particular, to Europe’s ability to produce anti-ballistic air defense systems in the necessary quantities."

During Zelenskyy's visit to Berlin, his Defense Minister Mykhailo Fedorov signed a €4 billion defense cooperation deal with Germany that includes a contract with the Patriot producer Raytheon for several hundred PAC-2 missiles fired by Patriot systems, which will be built in Germany.

PAC-2s explode near their target to destroy it, while PAC-3 missiles hit the incoming missile directly, making them more precise and better suited for stopping ballistic threats.

Production will be set up to deliver those missiles in 2027, a Raytheon representative told Hartpunkt. The deal also includes 36 IRIS-T medium and short-range launchers made by Germany's Diehl Defense.

"Today we again agreed on new aid packages, primarily in air defense," said Chancellor Friedrich Merz.

Air defenses are also likely to come up during Wednesday's meeting of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group (UDCG) that organizes military aid for Kyiv.

Ukraine has made enormous strides in intercepting daily waves of Russian drones and regularly knocks down over 90 percent of them. But it has a much more difficult time with ballistic missiles, rockets that ascend to the edge of Earth's atmosphere before a high-speed reentry toward a target. The missiles' speed and trajectory makes them difficult to intercept, which require hard-to-get systems like the Patriot or the SAMP/T.

But it's not just Ukraine that is pushing for more missile defense systems.

The United States and its allies fired 1,802 Patriot interceptors in the first 16 days of the U.S.-Israeli war against Iran, according to the U.S.-based Payne Institute — more than twice as many as Ukraine has used over the four years of the war against Russia.

This month, the Pentagon signed a $4.7 billion deal with Lockheed Martin to boost production of PAC-3s from about 600 a year to 2,000.

European countries are also rearming and building up their own defense systems while continuing to supply Ukraine.

During Wednesday's meeting of the UDCG — also known as the Ramstein group — NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte and U.K. Defence Secretary John Healey will join German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius and Fedorov.

A central part of the allied effort is the NATO-led Prioritised Ukraine Requirements List program, where countries buy U.S. weapons — including Patriots — for Ukraine. It's a response to new U.S. military aid for Kyiv ending under Donald Trump.

“As long as we see this deficit, we need the PURL program,” Zelenskyy said in Berlin, adding that the program can bridge production gaps in Europe.

Russia has intensified its long-range strikes against Ukraine this year, firing 270 ballistic and hypersonic missiles, the Ukrainian Defense ministry said. 

While European governments have increased support, including deliveries of systems such as SAMP/T, production remains limited and slow to scale. That has left Kyiv heavily dependent on Patriots.

Merz said Germany and Ukraine had agreed on “further comprehensive support,” including in air defense, long-range weapons, drones and artillery ammunition. 

Ukraine is also trying to develop its own air defense system.

Last week, Ukrainian missile producer Fire Point told Reuters it is working on an anti-ballistic air defense system, with the aim of it going into action by next year. The company's co-founder Denys Shtilerman said the goal is to drive the cost of an interceptor missile to below $1 million, about a quarter of the cost of a PAC-3.

The effort is still in early stages. Shtilerman said the company is seeking cooperation with European partners on radar, targeting and communications — key areas where it lacks expertise.

Zelenskyy has made clear that building a domestic system is a strategic priority. “The unconditional task is our own air defense, which will be able to fight against ballistics,” he said earlier this week.

For now, however, Ukraine remains reliant on Western supply, Zelenskyy said.

Are they waking up?

‘They’re not getting what they voted for’: Jesus meme lays bare GOP frustrations with Trump

The president’s attacks on the first American pope and a deleted Jesus meme are deepening fractures within his MAGA coalition.

By Megan Messerly and Alex Gangitano

President Donald Trump’s weekend tirade against the pope — capped off by an AI-generated depiction of the president as Jesus — was, for some of his supporters, just too much.

Their unusually severe backlash comes as many once-devout Trump supporters are having a crisis of faith. Upset over what they feel is a too timid deportation agenda, a sputtering economy and another war in the Middle East, many couldn’t stomach the affront the way they might have in the past.

The backlash cut across evangelical Protestants, traditional Catholics and the populist conservatives who form the backbone of Trump’s base — a sign of how little grace key supporters are willing to extend at a moment when frustrations are already running high.

To some, the Jesus meme — which Trump later said was never meant to liken him to Jesus but was instead supposed to depict the president as a Red Cross worker — exhausted whatever goodwill remained.

“They’re not getting what they voted for to begin with. On top of that, whether he’s mocking their religion intentionally or not, he still is,” said Erick Erickson, a conservative radio host and an influential voice with evangelical voters central to the MAGA base. “I think we are looking not really at a MAGA crack-up per se, but a lot of the base becoming exasperated enough to start looking beyond Trump.”

The recriminations come as the president works to hold together his coalition ahead of the midterms — and as some allies warn that the divisions risk hastening his lame duck status. Allies also fear that Democrats will use divisions in the coalition, such as between Catholics, to depress Republican turnout not only ahead of the midterms but the 2028 election.

Trump, who used to be Presbyterian but is now nondenominational, won 59 percent of the Catholic vote in 2024, up from 50 percent in 2016. Former President Joe Biden, the second Catholic president, won the voting bloc with 52 percent in 2020, according to CNN exit polling.

“Peel off certain Catholic demos and maybe you win a few House seats,” said Michael Caputo, a longtime Trump adviser and former administration official, now pursuing a masters in theology at Ave Maria, a Catholic enclave in Florida.

“The Democrats found the Catholic door to the division they need before the midterms — and after meeting Obama’s top adviser, the pope helped them turn the handle,” he added, pointing to former Obama adviser David Axelrod’s recent meeting with the pope as evidence the strategy is already underway.

For weeks, some of the president’s core supporters have been nursing grievances over the Iran war — which alienated the GOP’s isolationist wing — as well as rising prices, an insufficiently aggressive deportation agenda , and lingering frustration over his administration’s handling of the Epstein files. The weekend collapse of Viktor Orbán’s government in Hungary, a lodestar for that wing of the movement, is only deepening the disillusionment. Against this backdrop, some of the president’s supporters had no tolerance for the attempted appropriation of Jesus.

Some White House allies saw the quick deletion of the post and the president’s explanation as an unusual sign of a contrition from an administration that is loath to back down. Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters on Tuesday that he asked the president to delete the Jesus meme, indicative of the politically vulnerable situation the president finds himself in.

“It was almost like a dual-headed misstep — he wants to go on a riff against the pope, and then he tries to appropriate Jesus,” said a Republican fundraiser who is Catholic, granted anonymity to speak candidly. “He got significant pushback on both sides of the Christian aisle, from evangelicals and Catholics. It’s a no-go zone.”

Other Trump loyalists argue the people criticizing the president are taking for granted what he’s done for them.

“Some people are frustrated over lots of other stuff, and therefore they’re saying, I’m sick of it,” said one senior administration official and devout Catholic, also granted anonymity to speak candidly. “If it makes them feel good to say, ‘I find this blasphemous,’ fine, but it doesn’t really comport with where you are in terms of making a difference.”

Both RNC spokesperson Kiersten Pels and White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers echoed that point in statements, arguing that Trump has passed a number of pro-Catholic policies, as well as undone policies from former President Joe Biden, including on abortion and transgender issues.

“President Trump ended the weaponization of the federal government against people of faith, proudly defended and expanded our religious rights, pardoned pro-life activists, stopped the chemical mutilation of our nation’s children, and protected parents’ rights,” Rogers said.

The president’s decision to launch into invective against Pope Leo XIV while flying home from Miami Sunday night left many allies perplexed. In the post, an apparent reaction to a “60 Minutes” segment featuring three prominent Catholic cardinals criticizing the Iran war, Trump called Leo “weak,” said that he should “get his act together,” and claimed credit for his ascension to the papacy.

“He wasn’t on any list to be Pope, and was only put there by the Church because he was an American, and they thought that would be the best way to deal with President Donald J. Trump. If I wasn’t in the White House, Leo wouldn’t be in the Vatican,” the president wrote on Truth Social.

One White House ally, granted anonymity to speak candidly, said that “the goal of fighting with the pope is not really clear.”

“People are puzzled,” the person said.

Shortly after, Trump posted to his Truth Social account the image of him, clad in a white robe and draped with a red shawl, bathed in light, appearing to heal a sick man in a hospital bed, swathed in classic Americana imagery — the Statue of Liberty, the American flag, and a bald eagle.

Some of the president’s allies brushed it off as a joke — Trump being Trump. He had, after all, previously posted a picture of himself as the pope.

“Shit posting is what he does, so it’s not something I’m particularly offended by, but I just think it’s gratuitous, like, why do that? It just feels like a mosquito. It’s annoying me,” said one MAGA Catholic close to the White House.

“I don’t think that this is a unique one-off that shatters the coalition,” the person added. But “the people who are the most upset about it have been irritated for a number of reasons — and this is just one more thing.”

A recent CBS News/YouGov poll found that Trump’s overall approval rating is at about 39 percent, with 35 percent approving of his handling of the economy and 31 percent approving how he has addressed inflation. His approval rating on the war stands at about 36 percent.

The incident has left many of the president’s Catholic allies grappling with how to hold together a coalition being pulled in two directions: conservative populist Catholics, frustrated with the pace of immigration enforcement and the president’s intervention in Iran, among other issues, and more moderate, Leo-aligned Catholics, including some Hispanics, who backed Trump on the economy but are now questioning whether he’s kept his promises. Democrats, they say, are only too happy to foment the divisions.

“It isn’t just an issue for the midterms. When we see this kind of surge in a voting demographic, you work to grow it more. This clever division strategy is weed killer instead,” Caputo said. “It will be our job to heal this demo before November and into 2028.”

LIE LIE LIE

Trump says war in Iran ‘can be over very soon’ amid uncertain peace negotiations

Negotiators left Pakistan last weekend without an agreement.

By Gregory Svirnovskiy

President Donald Trump said that the war in Iran may soon come to an end, even with the U.S. military now several days into a blockade at the Strait of Hormuz and oil prices continuing to roil the global economy.

“I think it can be over very soon. If they’re smart, it will end soon,” he said of the Iranian negotiators in an interview that aired Wednesday on Fox Business’ “Mornings With Maria Bartiromo.”

Trump reiterated a red line that he has constantly raised: “It’s really about no nuclear, they cannot have a nuclear weapon,” he said.

Peace talks in Islamabad led by Vice President JD Vance fell apart over the weekend. Vance told reporters that the Iranians would not pledge to no longer pursue the development of a nuclear weapon.

“They have chosen not to accept our terms,” he said. “The simple fact is that we need to see an affirmative commitment that they will not seek a nuclear weapon and they will not seek the tools that would enable them to quickly achieve a nuclear weapon.”

Further talks between American and Iranian negotiators have not been publicly disclosed. But Trump told a New York Post reporter on Tuesday that “something could be happening over the next two days, and we’re more inclined to go [to Pakistan],” praising Pakistani leaders’ roles in the negotiations.

The blockade could exacerbate shortages of key agricultural commodities and helium, already in scant supply due to Iran’s earlier closure of the strait. Oil and gasoline prices, meanwhile, have remained stubbornly high, an ominous sign for Republicans ahead of the fall midterm elections.

With negotiations on ice and the war already well past Trump’s four-to-six-week timeline, the president has still been quick to claim victory in the military arena.

“They have no navy,” he said. “They have no air force. Everything has been wiped out. They have no anti-aircraft equipment. They have no radar. They have no leaders. The leaders they have — and now it’s a new regime — and we find them pretty reasonable to be honest with you, by comparison pretty reasonable. It really is a new regime.”

Also on Wednesday, Trump took to Truth Social to write that China had agreed not to send any weapons to Tehran ahead of his visit to the country in mid-May. Beijing “is very happy” with the American push to force Iran to open the strait, the president wrote. And Chinese President Xi Jinping, he said, “will give me a big, fat, hug when I get there in a few weeks.”

Shred UK trade deal

Trump threatens to shred UK trade deal over Starmer’s Iran war opposition

The U.K. prime minister hit back saying he will not yield to the U.S. president’s threats.

By Sophie Inge

U.S. President Donald Trump threatened to unpick America’s trade deal with the U.K. amid increasing frustration over Britain’s opposition to military action against Iran.

In an interview on Wednesday, the president said the United States had given the U.K. a “good trade deal” that was “better than I had to,” adding that it could “always be changed.”

His comments to Sky News come as tempers flare in Washington over the U.K.’s stance on Iran, with Trump also turning his criticism towards Prime Minister Keir Starmer — casting fresh doubt on the strength of the so-called “special relationship.”

Speaking in the House of Commons Wednesday Starmer told MPs he will not yield to the U.S. president's threats.

"It is not our war, and a lot of pressure has been applied to me to take a different course, and that pressure included what happened last night. I'm not going to change my mind. I'm not going to yield," he told British MPs.

Asked about U.K.-U.S. relations in the same Sky interview, Trump did not hold back. “It’s the relationship where: when we asked them for help, they were not there. When we needed them, they were not there. When we didn’t need them, they were not there. And they still aren’t there.”

The U.S. president’s threat will sound alarm bells through Westminster 11 months after the U.K. became the first country to sign a trade deal with the U.S. under Trump's second term. The pact saw the U.S. agree to lower tariffs on British automotives, steel and aerospace in exchange for beef and bioethanol access.

As the first anniversary of the deal approaches, U.S. tariffs on British steel have still not been fully removed, while the future of the Technology Prosperity Deal negotiated during Trump’s state visit to the U.K. in September hangs in the balance amid concern over the pace of wider trade negotiations.

The U.S. president, whose “drill, baby drill” mantra has defined his energy policy, also used the interview to sound off about the U.K.’s decision to cut back on new oil and gas exploration in the North Sea.

“I think he [Starmer] has made a tragic mistake in closing the North Sea oil,” the president said. “You see your energy prices are the highest in the world.”

Trump’s comments are awkwardly timed ahead of King Charles III’s planned state visit to the U.S. later this month.

Lib Dem leader Ed Davey said Trump's trade deal threat must be "the last straw," and urged Starmer not to send the British monarch to meet "a man who treats our country like a mafia boss running a protection racket. "

Despite his growing anger towards the U.K. government, Trump was full of warm words for Charles in the Sky interview, describing the king as a “great gentleman” and a “friend."

Threatens to fire Powell

Trump threatens to fire Powell if he stays on Fed board

The president also suggested that his administration will not drop its criminal probe into the renovations of the central bank's headquarters.

By Victoria Guida

President Donald Trump on Wednesday ratcheted up his conflict with Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, saying he will fire the central bank chief if he doesn’t step down from his job “on time.”

Trump, speaking to Maria Bartiromo on Fox Business, suggested that his administration will not drop its criminal probe into the renovations of the Fed’s headquarters, despite the investigation being a roadblock to Senate confirmation of his nominee to succeed Powell, Kevin Warsh.

“Whether it’s incompetence, corruption, or both, I think you have to find out,” the president said of the ballooning costs of the construction project.

Bartiromo noted that the Justice Department investigation may hold up the very result Trump is seeking — Powell’s departure. Powell has said he won’t step down from the central bank’s board until the investigation is concluded and that he would stay on as acting chair if necessary until Warsh is confirmed.

“Well then, I’ll have to fire him, OK? If he’s not leaving on time,” Trump responded. “I’ve held back firing him. I’ve wanted to fire him, but I hate to be controversial.”

Powell’s term as Fed chair ends next month, though his term on the central bank’s board doesn’t end until 2028. In the meantime, Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), like Powell, has raised concerns that the Justice Department’s probe is a pretense to pressure the Fed to lower interest rates, a view shared by a federal judge, who blocked DOJ subpoenas.

The Justice Department has been looking into Powell’s statements to Congress about the renovations, though several Senate Republicans, including Banking Chair Tim Scott (R-S.C.), have said they do not think that the Fed chair committed a crime in his testimony.

Warsh’s hearing before the Banking Committee is scheduled for April 21.

Truth