Tuesday, October 27, 2026

Chump took part in assaulting sex trafficked women?

First up, Katie Phang.



Next up, Jeffrey Epstein and Chump the roll dogs of depravity.  Olivia Salamone (OK) reports: 

A Jeffrey Epstein accuser claimed Ghislaine Maxwell introduced her to Donald Trump at a New York City party before setting them up on a date.
The allegation is among several detailed in a newly released report by House Judiciary Committee Democrats examining Trump's alleged ties to Epstein and the Justice Department's handling of records related to the convicted s-- offender.
According to an FBI interview cited in the report, a former model who later testified against Maxwell under the pseudonym "Kate" said Maxwell "presented" her to Trump at a party in New York.
Kate reportedly described the encounter as similar to how Maxwell had previously "introduced her to Epstein," who died in federal custody in 2019 while awaiting trial on federal s-- trafficking charges.
[. . .]
Democrats accuse Trump of being an "active participant" in Epstein's abuse of young women in the 1990s.
The document details accounts from 11 women, including five who directly accuse Trump of r--- or sexual assault in Epstein's presence or close company.

She testified against Maxwell in that trial.  So the feds obviously believed her.  And she's told about Chump assaulting her as well.  Seems like we believe her on one, we believe her on both. 


The White House lashed out Monday after House Democrats released a devastating report detailing allegations of sexual misconduct involving President Donald Trump and the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
White House communications director Steven Cheung called the report, which comes just eight days before the midterm elections, a politically motivated attack.
[. . .]
The 53-page report from Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee details allegations involving 11 women, including five who accused Trump of rape or sexual assault in Epstein’s company or presence. The allegations have not been proven in court.
Democrats also accused Trump’s Justice Department of shutting down investigations and withholding evidence while insisting there was no basis to investigate Epstein’s possible accomplices.
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), the committee’s ranking member, said “an independent special counsel must investigate Epstein’s co-conspirators and DOJ’s cover-up and ensure that state and foreign prosecutors have the evidence they need to pursue justice.”

Chump is guilty and now we know why he didn't want to release the files and why, when he did okay the release, Blanche only released some of the files -- he hid the ones implicating Chump.  Chump is disgusting and vile and there was never a way that he ran with Epstein from the 80s through the 00s and wasn't taking part in the assault on girls and women.  Chump is guilty.

Let's turn to Miss Sassy JD Vance.  Things aren't going much better for him.  Sarah Ewall-Wice (DAILY BEAST) reports:

Vice President JD Vance’s campaign speech in Montana was derailed on Monday when hecklers interrupted him in the red state.
It was the 6th time in a series of stops that protesters have interrupted the vice president during the sprint to the midterms.
But Vance’s attempts to brush them off haven’t gone smoothly either, as hecklers have repeatedly drawn attention away from his prepared remarks.

He's an idiot.  The perfect partner to Chump.  


Here's C.I.'s "The Snapshot:"


Tuesday, October 27, 2026.  Chump continues his DESPERATION TOUR as Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee release a report tying Chump even close to Jeffrey Epstein with various women accusing Chump of assault, Vivek learns that being vile and disgusting does create a negative response to you, and much more. 



Starting with the deceased Jeffrey Epstein and his still-alive roll dog Donald Chump.  The two began hanging together in the 80s.  Epstein was a sex trafficker and pedophile.  Chump was his best buddy.  The two pursued women (and girls?) together.  And though Chump has lied repeatedly to the press -- and some press idiots have run with the lie -- that he was completely exonerated by the Justice Dept, that was never true.  He's claimed that.  But since February of this year, that claim has seemed more and more untrue.  


Democrats just dropped a heavy hammer on the president, eight days out from Election Day.

House Judiciary Committee Democrats released a 50-page report Monday morning accusing Donald Trump of participating in Jeffrey Epstein’s criminal sex schemes. The caucus also accused the Trump administration of a broad cover-up, designed to shield the president from blowback as they tried to roll out the release of the Epstein files to the general public.

The report cites the experiences of 11 women, FBI records, and documents released through the Epstein Files Transparency Act. At least five women accused Trump of rape or sexual assault in Epstein’s company, according to interviews conducted by the committee. Others said there were “apparent attempts” by Epstein and his longtime girlfriend and associate Ghislaine Maxwell to traffic them to the real estate magnate.

Beatrice Keul told lawmakers that Trump “violently raped” her at a November 1993 pageant at the Plaza Hotel. She further described the beauty pageants as a “hunting ground” that Epstein and Trump would use to find and “prey” on young women and girls. Jill Harth also shared an account of a party at Mar-a-Lago in 1994, where she said Trump aggressively pursued and sexually assaulted her. Trump and Epstein were the only men present, Harth told lawmakers.
In total, at least 28 women have accused Trump of rape or sexual misconduct.

The report concludes that Trump and Paolo Zampolli, a former modeling agent and longtime friend of the president as well as a former senior Trump administration official, “may have been co-conspirators” in Epstein’s sex trafficking ring in the 1990s.

The report also claims that Trump’s Justice Department deliberately or prematurely shut down investigations into Trump-related allegations made by some Epstein survivors. It also accuses Attorney General Todd Blanche of specifically instructing Maxwell not to discuss a survivor whose account implicated the president.


The report covers a great deal:

A growing body of evidence demonstrates that Donald Trump was an active participant in
Jeffrey Epstein’s sexual abuse of young women during the mid-to-late 1990s. The Department of
Justice (DOJ) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) are doing everything they can to keep the
American people in the dark about it.
From the very first weeks of the Trump Administration, DOJ shut down ongoing criminal
investigations into Epstein’s enablers and co-conspirators, lied about clear evidence of crimes in
its possession, and sought to silence survivors. In July 2025, then-Deputy Attorney General Todd
Blanche and one of his senior deputies, Emil Bove -- both former criminal defense lawyers for
Donald Trump -- released a memorandum stating that DOJ and FBI had determined that “no further disclosure” of the Epstein files would be “appropriate or warranted.”
Trump has claimed that the Epstein files “totally exonerate” him, but the evidence, as
detailed in this Staff Report, could not be less exonerating. The historical record shows that Trump was a close friend and confidant of Epstein. Trump flew on his jet with Epstein’s victims and made shared references to lusting after young women. The record shows that Epstein and Trump, working with other predators like Paolo Zampolli and John Casablancas, exploited the thin veneer of professionalism offered by the 1990s modeling industry to lure victims into their orbit. The evidence, much of it still hiding behind redactions in DOJ vaults, shows that Trump lied about kicking Epstein out of his Mar-a-Lago club and strongly suggests that Epstein introduced Trump to his wife Melania. The evidence demonstrates that Trump has lied about the nature and extent of  his relationship with Epstein dozens of times -- incriminating behavior for someone who  supposedly has nothing to hide.
Above all, the actual evidence we have seen -- as shared in the accounts and stories of 11
women, each described below -- indicates that Trump abused, assaulted, and even raped numerous women alongside, and in coordination with, the most infamous sex trafficker in history.
[. . .]
Of the 11 women who tie Donald Trump to Epstein’s sex trafficking operation, five of
them -- Beatrice Keul, Stacey Williams, Jill Harth, Katie Johnson, and a Jane Doe -- have
directly accused Trump of raping or sexually assaulting them in Epstein’s company or direct
physical presence:
• Beatrice Keul, whose account is comprehensively set forth for the first time in this
report, credibly alleges that Trump violently raped her at a November 1993 pageant
at the Plaza Hotel in New York City and that Epstein, Trump, and others used this
pageant as a “hunting ground” to prey on vulnerable young women and girls;
• Stacey Williams, who offered a detailed and corroborated account of Trump
sexually assaulting her in the early 1990s while she was alone with him and Epstein
in an office at Trump Tower;
• Jill Harth, who has also publicly detailed Trump aggressively pursuing and
violently sexually assaulting her and another woman in 1994 at a Mar-a-Lago party
where Epstein and Trump were the only men present;
• Katie Johnson, who gave FBI a detailed account of her repeated rape at the hands
of Trump and Epstein in 1994 in New York City when she was a minor; and
• A Jane Doe, who offered FBI a graphic account of Trump assaulting her when she
was a minor in the mid-1980s in New York by forcibly pushing her head down to
his exposed penis.
Beyond these direct allegations of physical assault, three survivors speak of
encounters with Trump whose circumstances indicate that he was a participant in Epstein’s
crimes, as shown by how Epstein and his accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell, tried to make (or
made) these women available for sex.
• Two Epstein survivors -- “Jane” and “Kate” -- told FBI that either Epstein or
Maxwell seemingly offered them up to Trump for the purposes of sex or indicated
their availability. Jane and Kate were deemed so credible that federal prosecutors
called them to testify as government witnesses -- subject to probing crossexamination—against Ghislaine Maxwell at her criminal trial.
• Another survivor, Maria Farmer, described how Epstein had to actively prevent
Trump from preying on her late at night after Trump confused her with a teenage
girl potentially victimized by Epstein.
Kate’s story is particularly suggestive of Trump’s active involvement in Epstein’s sex
trafficking ring. Her FBI witness interview, released in the Epstein files, details how Ghislaine
Maxwell took her to a party in New York where Maxwell “presented” Kate to Trump. Kate, a
young model, remarked that this was the same way Maxwell “introduced [Kate] to Epstein.”
Another document in the file confirms that Maxwell set Kate up on a date with Trump, and other
sources show Maxwell, Trump, and Kate then traveled together on Trump’s private jet to Florida.
Maxwell’s role of introducing young women to Trump was so well known that a tabloid covered
it in 1997, remarking how Trump was friends with “Robert Maxwell’s daughter Ghislaine, who
has introduced several of her attractive friends to the property developer.”

Beyond direct victim accounts of rape and assault, three additional women appeared to
have shared a possibly sexual relationship with Epstein and Trump. In one case, Epstein joked
perversely that he sold “a fully depreciated woman” to Trump: the woman in question was a young,  foreign, recent college graduate who dated both men. Other accounts describe Trump’s assault of a young model, Lauren Petrella, at a party where Epstein was present. And Trump paid for yet another young model to live at one of his buildings in New York, around the time when she was flying on Epstein’s jet with Maxwell and Prince Andrew.
These reports do not stand alone, and they are not aberrations. They are remarkably
consistent with the extensive public reports of Trump’s sexual misconduct at the time. Other
women have accused Trump of a range of sexual misconduct at similar modeling events and parties in New York and Palm Beach -- including Trump arranging for pageant contestants as young as to dance for him and his frequent practice of walking into changing rooms while young girls were in a state of undress. Indeed, Trump has acknowledged this lecherous behavior, boasting he could “get away with it” because he owned the pageants in question. In 2005, in the now notorious Access Hollywood recording, Trump bragged that “when you’re a star, [beautiful women] let you do it.  You can do anything. Grab ‘em by the pussy. You can do anything.” When asked about this video  in a civil deposition, Trump defended this statement, stating that he was one such “star.”
[. . .]
In the face of this wave of evidence, the only recourse for the President has been to spread
lies and obfuscation. In July 2019, after Epstein was arrested on charges of conspiracy to traffic
minors, Donald Trump claimed that he knew Epstein “just like everybody in Palm Beach knew
him” and insisted that he “had no idea” about Epstein’s crimes.
This evasion and this denial are contradicted by almost all of the available evidence,
including Trump and Epstein’s own words and the documents contained in the Epstein files.
Epstein bragged he was Trump’s “closest friend for 10 years.” In 2002, Trump said of Epstein:
“I’ve known Jeff for 15 years. Terrific guy. 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.” Since these
statements, and the world’s discovery of Epstein’s crimes, Trump has unleashed a string of easily
refutable lies about their relationship. He has falsely claimed that he never rode on Epstein’s private jet (he did, repeatedly), that he kicked Epstein out of his Mar-a-Lago Club (he did not), and that he did not write Epstein a lewd birthday note (he most certainly did, as the whole world can see).  This Staff Report, relying on redacted passages in the Epstein files and new, never-before-released whistleblower testimony, further reveals the full scope and brazenness of Trump’s lies.


Now pay attention to this section especially: 


As revealed by this Staff Report, documents in the Epstein files show that then-Deputy
Attorney General Todd Blanche likely knew about certain survivors’ claims against the President
when he traveled to Tallahassee, Florida, to interview Epstein co-conspirator Maxwell in federal
prison. The transcript of that meeting shows that on at least three separate occasions, Blanche
directed Maxwell not to discuss one individual, Jane, whose report to FBI implicated Donald
Trump in Epstein’s sex trafficking ring, but whose claims were not yet known to the public. In 
other words, Attorney General Blanche may have engaged in criminal obstruction of justice while
acting on a mission to protect Trump.

He wasn't the one who should have been questioning Maxwell.  Remember that.  He was Deputy Attorney General.  Maurene Comey -- who would be fired after Toad spoke to Maxwell was the Justice Dept person who should have been questioning Maxwell.  Toad coached Maxwell and encouraged her not to discuss Jane.


JANE DOE 1 (A.K.A. JANE) – 14 YEARS OLD
DOJ documents released pursuant to EFTA include an allegation that in 1994 at Mar-aLago, Jeffrey Epstein “introduced [a victim] to Trump saying ‘This is a good one, huh’ and Trump
responded ‘Yes.’”67 The victim was 14 years old at this time. As made apparent when viewed in
the version made available to Members of Congress, but not to the public, Jane Doe 1 was viewed
as a credible witness by DOJ investigators and prosecutors, and she was one of four women to
testify against Ghislaine Maxwell during her criminal trial under the pseudonym “Jane.”68 Jane’s
testimony was devastating for Maxwell’s defense. She described, in detail, abuse and sex acts that
occurred at Epstein’s properties in Florida, New Mexico, and New York, sometimes involving
Maxwell and groups of people.6
This slide deck of “Prominent Names” in the Epstein investigation, was created by DOJ
and FBI personnel in the weeks leading up to Todd Blanche’s interview of Maxwell and seemingly
initiated in “Response to 07/10/2025 Director’s call.”70 The slide deck includes a reference to
Jane’s account of Trump and Epstein’s conversation. Yet, strikingly, when then-Deputy Attorney
General Blanche interviewed Maxwell, ostensibly to “pursue justice wherever the facts may lead”
in the Jeffrey Epstein case, he did not ask any questions at all about Jane’s allegations.71 In fact,
when on several different occasions, Maxwell proactively referenced Jane, he quickly redirected
Maxwell away from any further discussion of “Jane” or her claims. 
In one instance, Maxwell volunteered to Attorney General Blanche: “I believe you’re
talking about Jane,” to which he responded “yeah” -- indicating he was aware of her allegations.
However, as soon as Maxwell began to “address that,” meaning Jane’s claims, Attorney General
Blanche cut her off and instructed her not to share specifics. At various points during the interview,  Attorney General Blanche interrupted Maxwell and instructed her not to discuss Jane’s claims, for instance, saying “yeah, yeah, I don’t want to get into … he said, she said.” Maxwell responded “Absolutely, not. I’m not -- I don’t want to go there either” and even more explicitly, “I’m not going to do that.” At another point, Maxwell again raises Jane on her own and Attorney General Blanche abruptly cuts in saying, pointedly, “Let’s not talk about individuals.” The whole point of the conversation was not to uncover information but to create a conspiracy of silence and strategically deter Ghislaine Maxwell from sharing information that was not public at the time regarding the relationship between Trump and Epstein.
Attorney General Blanche’s actions, while perhaps not surprising given his former role as
Donald Trump’s defense attorney, potentially constituted witness tampering and obstruction of an
official proceeding -- serious felonies. At the time of this interview, the House Oversight
Committee had scheduled an interview with Maxwell for August 11 -- less than two weeks later.
Blanche’s apparent instructions not to discuss a specific Epstein victim, and how that victim could
implicate Donald Trump, could easily run afoul of 18 U.S.C. § 1512, which forbids hindering or
delaying the communication of information relating to the potential commission of a federal
offense to a law enforcement officer, as well as corruptly influencing the testimony of any person
in an official proceeding -- such as a congressional interview and investigation.
74 Similarly, 18 U.S.C. 1505 forbids corruptly influencing, obstructing, or impeding any pending proceeding before Congress -- a crime which would almost certainly encompass indicating to a witness that they should not provide Congress with specific information that could implicate the President of the United States.




Then there are the documents. The report says an FBI agent’s internal search for Trump and Epstein under “exploitation of minors” returned a case number tied to Epstein’s 2007 federal investigation. A whistleblower told Democrats that documents linked to that case number have been withheld from Congress and the public. A still-redacted 2009 email from Epstein’s lawyer says “Trump specifically asked” his own attorney to let Epstein’s team know about Trump’s interview with a lawyer for Epstein’s victims. That same redacted 2009 material has Trump saying Epstein “was never asked to leave” Mar-a-Lago. That’s awkward, since “I kicked him out” has been the official story for years. Blanche’s explanation for the redaction is that it’s a privileged communication between counsel.

The Epstein Files Transparency Act, which Trump signed, allows redactions to protect victims. It has no carve-out for things that make the president look bad, a distinction the DOJ has struggled with since jump. Blanche personally blocked the DEA from releasing an unredacted document about a 2015 investigation into Epstein’s associates. Then Katie Phang sued him, and Judge Emmet Sullivan found Blanche had effectively conceded he was violating the law. Blanche answered with a brief that reads like a kid yelling “that’s not fair,” and by September, Sullivan was warning him about contempt. New Mexico sued too, because it can’t get the files it needs for its own criminal investigation into Epstein’s Zorro Ranch. So the “state and foreign prosecutors” part of Raskin’s demand isn’t hypothetical. And last week brought reports that White House officials helped draft the July 2025 FBI/DOJ memo that effectively shut down further Epstein investigations.

Got that? The DOJ kept a 2009 email about the president under wraps, but it published survivors’ identifying information. 



There is so much in the report but that alone makes clear that Toad Blanche is not fit to be attorney general. 


House Judiciary Committee Democrats are calling for an independent special counsel to investigate evidence of President Donald Trump’s alleged criminal ties to Jeffrey Epstein, according to a new report made public Monday.
“The bottom line,” they wrote in the report, “There is more than sufficient evidence to launch a criminal investigation.”


A woman who had accused President Donald Trump of sexually assaulting her in 1993 described it to congressional staff as rape and said the interaction left her bleeding and bruised, according to a report released Monday by Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee examining Trump's ties to Jeffrey Epstein.

Beatrice Keul, a model and former Miss Switzerland, alleged to Judiciary Committee staff that she was raped by Trump in a Plaza Hotel suite in Manhattan when she was 24. Keul said that while attending the American Dream Pageant, which had a partnership with Trump, she met with Trump at a press luncheon at the event. 

Trump, according to Keul, promised to arrange her visa in the U.S. and ensure her acceptance into New York University through his friend Paolo Zampolli, a close Trump ally who was, until earlier this month, part of his Administration. At the same event, she also spent at least 10 minutes talking to Epstein who she said claimed to have organized “many parties with Don.”

Later that day, Keul alleges, Trump invited her to a hotel suite where Trump “grabbed Keul from behind and forcibly raped her,” causing “bleeding and bruising on multiple parts of her body,” the report says. Following the incident, Keul alleges Trump made her promise she would keep quiet and repeated his promise for visa and college admission.

Because Keul’s passport had been taken from her on her arrival, she was not able to leave the contest following the incident, she alleges, according to the report. After she returned to Switzerland, she declined to participate in an additional Trump-sponsored pageant in Hawaii several weeks later.


Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee issued the following:

DOJ and FBI Shut Down Investigations and Withheld Evidence While Claiming No Basis to Prosecute or Even Investigate Any Additional Epstein Co-Conspirators

In Two-Day Interview, Attorney General Todd Blanche Instructed Maxwell Not to Discuss a Specific Survivor Whose Account Implicated Trump

Five Women Accuse Trump of Rape or Sexual Assault in Epstein’s Company or Presence; Others Describe Apparent Attempts by Epstein or Maxwell to Traffic Them to Trump

Committee Interviews, Survivor Accounts and FBI Records Trace Criminal Ties Among Trump, Epstein, Former Trump Envoy Paolo Zampolli and Known Pedophile John Casablancas in the Murky World of Beauty Pageants in 1990s New York

Judiciary Democrats Call for Independent Special Counsel to Investigate Epstein’s Co-Conspirators, Full Cooperation With State and Foreign Prosecutors Requesting Evidence, and Congressional Action to End DOJ’s Cover-Up

Washington, D.C. (October 26, 2026)—Today, Rep. Jamie Raskin, Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee, released a sweeping new Committee staff report, “‘We Have Certain Things in Common, Jeffrey’: The Case Against Donald Trump Emerging in the Epstein Files and DOJ’s Desperate Efforts to Cover it Up,” detailing evidence involving 11 women, five of whom directly accuse Donald Trump of rape or sexual assault in Jeffrey Epstein’s close company or presence. The report concludes that, based on the available evidence and witness testimony, Trump and Paolo Zampolli—who until recently served as a senior Trump Administration official and diplomat—may have been co-conspirators in Jeffrey Epstein’s conspiracy to traffic and abuse young women in the 1990s.

Drawing on interviews conducted by Committee staff, survivor accounts, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) records and documents released under the Epstein Files Transparency Act, the report traces striking similarities in the stories of women abused by Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump. With one exception, each assault or instance of sexual misconduct occurred between 1992 and 1997, in New York and Palm Beach, and many of the victims were closely tied to the modeling industry and Zampolli.

“Donald Trump says he knew Jeffrey Epstein ‘just like everybody in Palm Beach knew him.’ Not exactly. Evidence involving 11 women tells a completely different and far more damning story about their relationship and the abuse of young women and girls that took place in their network. Five women have directly accused Trump of rape or sexual assault in Epstein’s company or presence; others have indicated that Epstein or Maxwell attempted to traffic them to Trump. These women have spoken to investigators and, in some cases, testified under oath, yet Trump’s Justice Department has shut down investigations, deliberately withheld evidence and, through Todd Blanche, prevented Ghislaine Maxwell from discussing a survivor whose account implicated Trump—all while insisting there is no basis upon which to investigate Epstein’s possible accomplices. Trump’s Justice Department appears to be covering up these crimes to protect the President. The women who survived Epstein deserve to be heard, Congress must have the complete files required by law, and an independent special counsel must investigate Epstein’s co-conspirators and DOJ’s cover-up and ensure that state and foreign prosecutors have the evidence they need to pursue justice,” said Ranking Member Raskin.

Key findings and survivor accounts include:

  • Trump and Epstein Shared a World Built Around Young Models. In the 1990s, both men moved through New York modeling agencies, pageants and parties where young women and girls were recruited and often exploited. Trump hosted Elite Model Management competitions for teenage models and had close ties to Elite founder and known pedophile John Casablancas and modeling agent Paolo Zampolli. FBI records describe multiple young models who had a sexual relationship with Zampolli or were connected to Zampolli’s agency who subsequently were sexually assaulted by Epstein.
    • A former longtime Epstein assistant told the FBI that Epstein introduced Melania to Donald Trump, contradicting Zampolli’s account.
  • Women Describe Sexual Assault and Other Troubling Encounters Involving Trump and Epstein. Five women have directly accused Trump of rape or sexual assault in Epstein’s company or presence. Three others describe encounters in which Epstein or Maxwell appeared to offer women to Trump or indicate that Trump was “in” on Epstein’s abuse. Their accounts and stories, when told together, paint an unmistakable picture of a conspiracy to abuse and traffic women.
    • Beatrice Keul told Committee staff that Trump raped her in a Plaza Hotel suite during his November 1993 American Dream Pageant. Keul said Trump promised that Zampolli would arrange her visa while Trump would arrange for admission to New York University; Epstein then approached her, introduced himself as “Don’s best friend” and offered to cover her travel and accommodations for a party at Mar-a-Lago. Following her brutal rape that same day, Keul said Trump pressed her to keep quiet and later called her in Switzerland to renew his offers for a visa and admission to NYU – similar offers Epstein made to his victims. While Keul had previously discussed Trump’s conduct, the report presents more information about the assault than previously offered, as well as corroborating evidence from others present at the pageant.
    • Stacey Williams said Trump groped her in his Trump Tower office while Epstein stood beside them. Williams said the men smiled and continued talking during the assault; Epstein then berated her for allowing Trump to touch her.
    • Jill Harth alleged in a 1997 lawsuit that Trump forcibly kissed and fondled her at Mar-a-Lago during a gathering at which she and her former spouse said Epstein was the only other male present. Harth also alleged that Trump assaulted another young model that night.
    • “Jane,” who later testified against Maxwell, told the FBI that Epstein introduced her to Trump at Mar-a-Lago when she was 14, saying, “This is a good one, huh.” Trump responded, “Yes.” During Ghislaine Maxwell’s July 2025 prison interview, then-Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, who appeared to have been briefed on Jane’s claims, prevented Maxwell from discussing Jane at least three times, at one point saying, “Let’s not talk about individuals.” With Maxwell scheduled to appear before the House Oversight Committee less than two weeks later, Blanche’s efforts to prevent discussion of Jane’s account potentially constituted witness tampering and obstruction of an official proceeding.
    • “Katie Johnson” alleged to the FBI that Trump and Epstein repeatedly raped her at Epstein’s New York residence in 1994, when she was 13. She said the men argued over who would take her virginity. Whistleblower information obtained by the Committee indicates that documents linked to a case number involving Katie Johnson have been withheld from Congress and the public.
    • Maria Farmer said Trump approached her in a sexual and threatening manner in Epstein’s New York office before Epstein intervened, saying, “She’s not here for you.” Farmer said Trump then remarked that he had thought she was 16. Farmer reported Epstein’s abuse to the FBI and raised concerns about Trump, yet her reports of Trump’s misconduct are absent from the Epstein files.
    • “Kate,” who was abused by Epstein and Maxwell and was a witness at Maxwell’s trial, told the FBI that Maxwell “presented” her to Trump at a New York party in the same way “Maxwell introduced [Kate] to Epstein.” Maxwell was also famous for “introduc[ing] several of her attractive friends” to Trump around this time. Kate was later flown to Mar-a-Lago along with Ghislaine Maxwell and was put up at a Trump property.
    • Another woman alleged that Trump assaulted her when she was 13 in the 1980s. She told the FBI that Trump struck her after she resisted him during the alleged assault. The Committee has not independently verified her allegation against Trump. FBI agents’ handwritten interview notes reportedly contain further details and potential witnesses collected across multiple interviews, but DOJ has not released them to the public.
    • Records concerning three other young women add to the picture of Trump and Epstein’s shared orbit. Jill Harth alleged that Trump assaulted young model Lauren Petrella at the Mar-a-Lago gathering where Harth says she, too, was assaulted. Epstein’s birthday book explicitly refers to another young woman as someone he had “sold” to Trump; records illuminate that this woman was a young foreign college student who had a sexual relationship with both men. A third model lived in a Trump property and later flew on Epstein’s jet with Maxwell and Prince Andrew. These women have not come forward as survivors. 
  • Trump’s Repeated Denials Contradict the Record. Trump has minimized his friendship with Epstein, denied knowing about his crimes and made specific claims about their relationship that conflict with documents and witness accounts. Some of the information impeaching Trump’s self-serving account is hidden behind redactions in the Epstein files. For example:
    • “I kicked him out.” Trump and the White House have said he expelled Epstein from Mar-a-Lago. But a 2009 account of a conversation involving Trump, his lawyers and an attorney for Epstein survivors records Trump saying Epstein “was never asked to leave.” The account remains redacted in DOJ’s public files; Members of Congress reviewed the unredacted passage.
    • “I knew him like everybody in Palm Beach knew him.” Trump described Epstein in 2002 as a “terrific guy” he had known for 15 years and remarked that Epstein liked women “on the younger side.” Epstein later described himself as Trump’s “closest friend for 10 years.” The men socialized, attended events together and remained in each other’s orbit through much of the 1990s.
    • “I had no idea.” Trump denied knowing about Epstein’s crimes. The former Palm Beach police chief told the FBI that Trump called him in 2006 and said of Epstein, “everyone has known he’s been doing this.” An email Epstein sent in 2019 likewise claimed Trump “knew about the girls.”
    • “I was never on Epstein’s plane.” Trump’s 2024 denial conflicts with flight records showing that he traveled on Epstein’s jet at least eight times in the 1990s, according to the report and a prosecutor’s review of the logs.

This evidence demands a complete and independent investigation. Judiciary Democrats call for the appointment of an independent special counsel to investigate and prosecute Epstein’s co-conspirators and ensure that state and foreign prosecutors receive DOJ and FBI’s full support, including access to all relevant evidence.

DOJ’s conflict of interest and obstruction make clear that Trump’s appointees cannot be trusted to pursue accountability. Congress must use its legislative and oversight powers to end the cover-up and ensure that those responsible for these crimes face justice.

Click here to read the report.


The report comes as Tom Latchem (DAILY BEAST) notes:

A senior Republican election insider fears Democrats’ Jeffrey Epstein attack ads could suppress MAGA midterms turnout and help cost the GOP control of the Senate.
With President Donald Trump, 80, already struggling to keep his party afloat ahead of next week’s elections, the Dems are spending tens of millions of dollars attacking his candidates over their handling of the late sex offender’s case.
Their aim is to exploit discontent among MAGA voters who feel betrayed by the administration’s failure to deliver the transparency it promised.
The fear inside GOP circles is not necessarily that disgruntled Trump supporters will switch parties, the insider said, but that they will simply stay home on Election Day, potentially giving Democrats a route to victory in otherwise safely Republican states.




As Chump's fig leaf of innocence gets blown away, he continues THE DESPERATION TOUR.  7 days until the last day of voting in the midterms and Chump tries to turn out voters or at least tries to attract audiences who will listen to him drone on.  Attacking Norway, for example.  Alex Leary, Natalie Andrews and Philip Wegmann (WALL STREET JOURNAL) report what they saw during their seven days covering the tour:

Trump has returned to the rally stage in force, hoping to energize his supporters and defy the polls predicting deep Republican losses in November.

Crowds are generally smaller than they were when he was on the ballot, but the president is reveling in the attention, touting his agenda, stirring the pot and veering off script.

Some Republicans fear the spectacle will motivate Democrats and give his opponents plenty of fodder to paint the president as out of touch. But at the arenas, gyms and airport hangars where he has been holding court, the Trump show is unabashedly back—perhaps for a final time as his decadelong dominance in politics begins to sunset.

Wall Street Journal reporters attended every one of Trump’s midterm rallies this past week: seven events across seven states, starting in Kansas on Monday and ending in Michigan on Sunday, with stops along the way in North Carolina, South Carolina, Iowa, Florida and Georgia. All told, Trump spoke for more than 11 hours. By Saturday, his voice was noticeably hoarse.
The rallies are something of a security blanket for Trump, according to advisers, freeing him from the pressures of the job, critical news coverage and the lowest approval rating of any president heading into midterm elections in Wall Street Journal polling dating to the 1990s. Most analysts expect the GOP will lose control of the House and possibly the Senate.
[. . .]
Critics see self-aggrandizement, a blizzard of falsehoods and increasingly uncivil attacks on his opponents. But there is a strategy behind putting Trump at the center of the midterms. Advisers see Trump as the single best motivator for voters.
The Trump political machine is rerunning much of the playbook that returned him to the Oval Office in 2024: targeting the MAGA base, especially low-propensity voters, in red states. A senior White House official said that despite Trump’s polarizing nature, the approach is paying dividends, pointing to Kansas, where Republican Sen. Roger Marshall has seen an uptick in enthusiasm in internal metrics.
Still, it is a risky approach. Far-reaching Republican losses in the midterms could signal that Trump’s political power is diminishing. And the president has made statements at his rallies that could make life harder for vulnerable Republicans.



Sunday, Maria Villarroel (THE MIRROR) reports, "President Donald Trump was booed as he spoke on stage at a Michigan rally, where he promised $5,000 to voters who cast their ballots for Republican candidates in the upcoming midterm elections."  He's getting booed a lot more and he freaks out over it, usually directing the crowd to go after the person booing. 



Let's turn to Vivek Ramaswamy.  His vile and disgusting nature was addressed on some of the Sunday chat & chews.  For those who may have missed it, last week, Vivek Ramaswamy began running an add where he allowed a woman who enabled her daughter's rape for nearly two years to show up decades later and call the daughter "a liar."  The ad is repulsive and most Americans feel that way.  ABC's THIS WEEK addressed it in their roundtable:


KARL:  The roundtable is here. Former DNC chair Donna Brazile, “New York Times” opinion political correspondent Michelle Cottle, former North Carolina Congressman Patrick McHenry, and former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie.

Okay. So, Donna, I want to get right to the Vivek Ramaswamy ad against Amy Acton featuring her mother, but not so much just what the ad and the controversy. I want to ask you about this that J.D. Vance said about it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

J.D. VANCE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES:  I have to admit that I'm a little bit disgusted when I see Republicans across the country who are whining more about that advertisement than they are about what the congressional Democrats and other Democrats want to do to the United States of America.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KARL:  Okay. So, J.D. Vance is disgusted, but not by the ad, but by Republicans criticizing the ad.

DONNA BRAZILE, FORMER DNC CHAIR & ABC NEWS CONTRIBUTOR:  Well, first of all, J.D. Vance, who calls himself a man of faith, should really think twice before saying that. This is a woman who survived childhood trauma, raped repeatedly by her stepfather. He was convicted in July of 1978. The only reason why he didn't serve time is because he ran as a fugitive.

And to use someone's mother in that way --

KARL:  Ran with Amy Acton's mother.

BRAZILE:  Thank you.

I mean, it's a sign of desperation that the gubernatorial candidate cannot campaign on what Donald Trump wants the Republicans on his record, because you can't campaign on a record of broken promises. It's a disgusting, despicable ad, and I agree with the governor. It should be removed from there.

KARL:  But, Patrick, is there any -- I mean, the way Trump and Vance have continued to talk about it. And Ramaswamy, of course, do they think it's going to work? I mean, is there a chance that it works?

PATRICK MCHENRY, (R) FORMER NORTH CAROLINA CONGRESSMAN:  No. There's an old axiom, just because you can doesn't mean you should.

KARL:  Yeah.

MCHENRY:  And in this circumstance, what Vivek is trying to do is go to the heart of his opponent's campaign and do it in such a way that breaks through the noise of the media. I get that.

But you have to have judgment on whether or not that is going to bring ill repute on you for making such a crazy accusation using somebody who's so -- has such an unsavory background.

This only highlights his opponent's strength. It shows a complete lack of judgment. And what you need in a governor is judgment.

And that is one of the qualities where you see Jon Husted, who is not at the top of the ticket. He's actually second on the ticket in Ohio, saying, “This is not sound judgment.” That's actually the smart answer here.

KARL:  Governor, you had some words for Ramaswamy when you debated him, if I recall.

CHRIS CHRISTIE, (R) FORMER NEW JERSEY GOVERNOR & ABC NEWS CONTRIBUTOR:  I did.

Look, it goes to a bigger issue than just the fact that this is a horrible ad and one that should never have been run. This goes to the rotten moral core that Donald Trump has created for my party. And you then take the two, probably two of the most prominent Trump wannabes in our party, J.D. Vance and Vivek Ramaswamy, and what they're showing America is, we want to be just as morally bankrupt as Trump, but we don't have any of the charm or charisma that people might like.

This is the future of our party if we don't get our act together, is to have charmless people with no charisma and the lack of moral clarity and center that Donald Trump has.

I think this ad showed much more about J.D. Vance and Vivek Ramaswamy and the cautionary tale for the future of our party than anything else that's happened in this election because if Ramaswamy wins in Ohio, we're going to see the exact same stuff in 2028. If he loses, I think it's going to be a real wake-up call for this type of conduct in our party.

KARL:  I mean, Michelle, they've kind of been alone among Republicans, I mean prominent Republicans on this.

MICHELLE COTTLE, NEW YORK TIMES OPINION POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT:  I mean you had Governor DeWine come out and say that this needs to be taken off the air. We've seen Ashley Henson in Iowa talk about this, former Governor Kasich. Basically, if you can't look at this ad and just say this is wrong, we should not be going in this direction, you need to rethink your basic life choices because I do think it's incredibly clarifying to Governor Christie's point.

This is a moment where you are watching the soul of the party just kind of turn into this Trumpian nasty bile.


Dana Bash (STATE OF THE UNION) addressed the ad with Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro:

BASH: We are less than 20 miles from Ohio. We're so far up north and west here in Pennsylvania. The Republican candidate for governor, Vivek Ramaswamy, is under fire for putting the estranged mother of his Democratic opponent in a TV ad, despite claims that she had and some issues went through the courts about childhood sexual abuse.

President Trump and Vice President Vance have defended it. The vice president even admonished Republicans for calling Ramaswamy out on it. You're shaking your head.

SHAPIRO: You know, I have prosecuted dozens of people for sexual abuse.

And the cases where they are familial, you have a parent, a stepparent, abusing their own child are maybe the ones that upset me the most, the ones that would keep me up at night as we were going through those cases. Those are so unbelievably painful.

The idea that a guy who wants to run for governor would weaponize that, that the vice president of the United States, who does this phony preacher nonsense about morality every day, would double down and say, not only is it an acceptable ad, keep running it and admonish Republicans like Mike DeWine who actually had the courage to speak out and call it out, I think it just speaks to how profoundly and pathetically weak of a human being J.D. Vance is.

And it speaks to the character, frankly, lack thereof, of Ramaswamy to attack a victim like that, to attack a victim and take the side of the perpetrator, the enabler of that abuse. It's disgusting.

And what I'm hearing more and more from Republicans, along with Democrats, independents, is they're just tired of this. They're tired of the politics that Trump and Vance practice. And remember, Ramaswamy, he really is just a product of that Trump/Vance politics of the lowest common denominator.

I think you're going to see Americans of all stripes, Democrat and Republican, come out in states all across our country and reject that. 




Vivek Ramaswamy has quietly edited his controversial attack ad targeting Democratic rival Amy Acton, removing her estranged mother’s accusations that she lied about being homeless as a child.

Days after President Donald Trump urged him not to take the ad down, the MAGA gubernatorial candidate released a new 30-second version of the original 60-second spot amid scathing bipartisan criticism.
The shift came hours before Acton appeared onstage with Barack Obama in Cleveland, where the former president delivered a scorched-earth rebuke of Ramaswamy, saying there was almost nothing he wouldn’t do to get into the limelight.

“There’s got to be something inside you where you just say, ‘No office is worth stooping that low,’” Obama said of the Trump-backed gubernatorial candidate.

The original ad sparked a political firestorm because Acton had not spoken to her mother, Donna Arthur, in decades. Arthur remained with Acton’s stepfather even after he raped her as a child.

The fallout continues.  Alia Shoaib (NEWSWEEK) reports:

Ohio’s largest newspaper has reversed its policy against endorsing candidates in major races to back Democrat Amy Acton for governor, condemning Republican Vivek Ramaswamy after his campaign released an ad that featured Acton’s estranged mother calling her a liar.

“Vivek Ramaswamy, seeking the highest office in this state, has produced a campaign advertisement that weaponizes the sexual abuse his opponent, Amy Acton, suffered as a child,” The Plain Dealer wrote in an editorial.

It added that the ad “crossed a line that Ohioans should defend, whatever their party.”


Several Ohio venues have also scrapped plans to host Ramaswamy in recent days, according to Newsweek.
On Friday, Old Dog Ale House & Brewery in Delaware canceled an event scheduled to feature him. Elliot’s Wood Fired Kitchen in Newark also said it would not host his planned Tuesday appearance. The Ohio Republican Party has indicated it plans to reschedule both appearances.

It was vile and disgusting and has made clear to voters that Vivek is vile and disgusting himself.  Those who defended the ad -- such as Chump and Vance -- will have a lot to answer for themselves. 

We noted Maurene Comey who got fired from the Justice Dept back in July of 2025. Brett Meiselas (MEIDASTOUCH NEWS) reports:

A federal judge delivered a major legal defeat to the Trump administration Monday, ruling that the Justice Department illegally fired veteran federal prosecutor Maurene Comey, the daughter of former FBI Director James Comey, and ordering the government to provide her with backpay and retroactive reinstatement.
In a blistering 55-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman of the Southern District of New York rejected the administration’s extraordinary argument that the Constitution allowed it to fire Comey without cause, notice, or an opportunity to defend herself.
The judge warned that accepting the Justice Department’s position would threaten the constitutional balance of power and risk returning the federal government to a political spoils system that Congress began dismantling more than a century ago.
“Defendants’ argument that Article II bars Congress from regulating the removal of AUSAs flies in the face of nearly two centuries of Supreme Court precedent,” Furman wrote.


Comey worked in the Southern District Court of New York for nearly a decade, and prosecuted both Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell before she was abruptly fired by then-Attorney General Pam Bondi in August 2025.
It was the same Southern District Court where it was ruled on Monday that the Trump administration’s move to fire Comey under Article II of the Constitution was “wrong” after Comey sued for wrongful termination.
“It is also without merit,” the ruling states. “Indeed, to accept Defendants’ argument would be to unsettle the very equilibrium established by this Nation’s constitutional system.”
“The Court grants Comey retroactive reinstatement and backpay effective from the date of her termination through December 20, 2025, which will make her whole for the period during which she was unlawfully terminated,” the ruling said.

Let's wind down with this from Senator Patty Murray's office:

Murray: “President Trump illegally slashed Feed the Future funding and fought to cancel programs like this one—instead, I wrote that funding into law and secured $72 million to restore it, so he couldn’t simply make it disappear. Because I fought back, WSU researchers are now leading this work instead of watching it shut down.”

Washington, D.C. — U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, announced Washington State University (WSU) was awarded a federal grant to lead a new Feed the Future Animal Health Innovation Lab (AHIL) to contribute to animal health research to expand world markets for American livestock technologies, and support international efforts to improve animal health and food security in Africa. WSU’s research will support communities in Kenya, Tanzania, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, Senegal, and Zambia. 

WSU will receive an initial $9.6 million, with the opportunity to increase funding up to $40 million over five years to support animal health and livestock research. 

“WSU is proving once again why Washington state’s universities are among the best in the world: this research will protect livestock, strengthen food security for families across Africa, and open new markets for agricultural technology from America,” said Senator Murray. “President Trump illegally slashed Feed the Future funding and fought to cancel programs like this one—instead, I wrote that funding into law and secured $72 million to restore it, so he couldn’t simply make it disappear. Because I fought back, WSU researchers are now leading this work instead of watching it shut down. I’m incredibly proud of my alma mater, and I’ll keep working to make sure American universities can lead the world in tackling hunger.”

The Feed the Future Innovation Lab program is funded through the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Disaster and Humanitarian Response. In fiscal year 2025, President Trump cut off funding for Innovation Labs, illegally cancelled funding approved by Congress, and pushed to scrap the program. But as Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, Senator Murray pushed back, and continued to fund the Feed the Future Innovation Lab program while strengthening legal mandates that it gets carried out in the fiscal year 2026 State and Foreign Operations appropriations bill. Senator Murray secured $72 million to restore funding for Feed the Future Innovation Labs that support partnerships between U.S. universities and developing country research institutions to advance novel solutions to pressing food security challenges.

Learn more about WSU’s plans for the new Animal Health Innovation Lab HERE.

###



The following sites updated:

Posted by at

Monday, October 26, 2026

Chump embarrasses us on the world stage yet again

First up, Katie Phang.





Donald Trump has hit out at Norway in another sweary rant after his Nobel Prize snub.
The US President told a political rally in Port Huron, Michigan, on Sunday that immigrants from Norway are not welcome in the United States, days before next week's midterm elections.
The US President escalated his invective against the Scandinavian country, calling it a "s**t house country" and complaining that the Nobel committee, based in the capital Oslo, has not awarded him a Peace Prize.
President Trump has long coveted the prize and made no secret of his aspiration to win it. He has previously heaped pressure on the committee to give him the prestigious accolade.
Attributing recent unrest in France to immigration, Trump said he would welcome immigrants from some countries but not from Norway "because ‌I didn't get the Nobel Prize ... So I don't want anybody from Norway."
"Norway has become a s**t house country, actually," Trump said, using a term that he has previously applied to Haiti, Libya, Somalia and Yemen.

He is such an embarrassment.  He embarrasses us to the entire world.  Little cry baby didn't get a prize he wasn't qualified for and so he talks about another country like that.  The government of that country is not over the Nobel Peace Prize.  Even if they were, he'd still look like a little whiny baby for saying things like that.  Grow the hell up.  That's what he should have been told a long, long time ago.


President Donald Trump is preparing his next strikes to hit the Middle East once the election has finished, according to a CNN report.

The details come on the heels of comments Zeteo's Asawin Suebsaeng cited from one Trump advisor who said, “It’s moron time, again."

The Trump aide said that following Nov. 3, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is repackaging the old strategy of endless bombing to see if they can get a "win" out of the Iran war.

They will begin 96 hours after the president makes the order, CNN reported.

"Sufficient forces are now deployed in the region to carry out the potential attacks, the sources said," according to CNN. "The scope of new US military operations would likely go beyond efforts to simply 'mow the lawn' or maintain the status quo by striking radars, launchers and other Iranian assets that can be quickly reconstituted — as has been the case since Trump halted full combat operations earlier this year, the sources added."

They are beyond stupid -- Hegseth and Chump.  They have no plans and are just now going to start doing the same thing that they did months ago.  What is the point?  Why can't Chump end this war?  He's such a disaster. 


Donald Trump’s disgraced former personal physician was embarrassingly snubbed by the president, despite pumping money into his businesses.
Former White House doctor Ronny Jackson has remained close to the president despite withdrawing from consideration to lead the Department of Veterans Affairs in his first term amid misconduct allegations.
The Texas congressman has also kept his wallet close by. Team Ronny PAC—a joint fundraising vehicle benefiting the Texas Republican’s campaign alongside Texas Red and the National Republican Congressional Committee—has funneled more than $120,000 directly into Donald Trump’s corporate coffers, according to the Washington Post.
The spending spree included a single, eye-popping bill for more than $48,000 at the Mar-a-Lago Club in April. The tab was run up during the week of Jackson’s birthday blowout, an extravaganza featuring a custom cake decorated with a stethoscope and a poolside bar—though the host of honor’s favorite president didn’t bother to show up.
Jackson’s representatives have been contacted for comment.
Jackson served as physician to the president from 2013 to 2018 under Barack Obama, and then Trump, who nominated Jackson—who had achieved the rank of one-star rear admiral in the Navy—to lead the Department of Veterans Affairs in his first term.
It was then that Jackson’s many scandals came to light, with nearly two dozen current and former White House medical staff accusing him of drinking on the job, over-prescribing opioids, and creating a hostile work environment.

All of Chump's friends are scum, have you noticed that? 

Here's C.I.'s "The Snapshot:"


Monday, October 26, 2026.  Chump's ICE continues to terrorize and is arresting American citizens, Toad Blanche goes after Alaska because Chump told him to despite having no legal standing, he thinks he can force a do-over if the Republican loses the race, and much more. 




But a quieter kind of surge was spreading across the country at the same time. In September 2025, ICE announced new incentives for a partnership program known as 287(g). The program’s most aggressive form, the so-called task force model, which Ingram opted in to, enlists local police officers as deputy immigration agents, and the new incentives included a $100,000 vehicle stipend, a $7,500 equipment stipend for every participating officer, quarterly performance bonuses and funding to help cover officer salaries and overtime. “By joining forces with ICE,” the announcement read, “you’re not just gaining access to these unprecedented reimbursement opportunities — you’re becoming part of a national effort to ensure the safety of every American family.”

Alexander completed an online course with ICE a few weeks after the baptism party, qualifying him for time-and-a-half pay whenever he helped the agency pick up immigrants. Here in the Texas Hill Country, he soon became the local face of the national crackdown.

Ingram was just starting to recover from its worst natural disaster in a century, the flood that summer that killed at least 139 people up and down the Guadalupe River, including 25 girls at Camp Mystic. In the riverbed, towering bald cypress trees now stood at a lean, their branches swept back by a 30-foot surge of water and mud, their trunks still plastered with debris. As construction workers rebuilding the community traveled to their job sites via Junction Highway, Ingram’s five-lane main thoroughfare, a black Charger began stopping them before they could get there.

Within three months of the baptism party, Alexander and Ingram’s other patrol officer had delivered at least 70 people to immigration agents, picking off what the police chief called a “dumbfounding” number of undocumented drivers. Within a year, they would hand over the equivalent of 10 percent of Ingram to ICE.

The weight of what Alexander was doing started to settle on him after Christmas. He says he was out patrolling as one of his new ICE handlers, a man in a ball cap and dark glasses, hovered nearby in an unmarked S.U.V. Around lunchtime, Alexander followed two Latino men in a 2008 GMC truck for several blocks before stopping them, they recall him saying, for failing to signal a turn.

A young man sat in the passenger seat. Alexander checked his papers along with the driver’s and determined that both were undocumented. The agent in the unmarked S.U.V. rolled up behind them. Alexander realized who the man in the passenger seat was only after Martinez arrived in tears. It was her husband, Ulices Macias, the father of her newborn daughter.

“I don’t normally do this,” Martinez recalls Alexander telling her, “but I’m going to open up the car. I’m going to take the handcuffs off him.” He let the family have a moment together. In a video taken by Martinez’s younger sister, Alexander stood by, expressionless, as Martinez embraced Macias by the rear door of the Charger. He watched Macias cradle his 2-week-old baby girl, swaddled in a white blanket, and hug Martinez’s 4-year-old son, his stepson.

Then the ICE agent put the handcuffs back on Martinez’s husband, wrapped a chain around his waist and led him away. Alexander says Martinez threw herself to the ground and sobbed.

Images of the family he broke up shortly after Christmas would intrude on Alexander’s thoughts for months, he told us. But it didn’t keep him from doing his job. His next shift came a few days after he handed over Macias, and he was back in the Charger, back to stopping cars on Junction Highway.

[. . .]

Alexander said it was hard for him to be out in public anymore. He can’t escape being recognized in Ingram and Kerrville. Sometimes he catches Latinos staring at him, then walking away, visibly uncomfortable. So he tries to do his shopping and errands in another town 30 minutes away.


Alexander is grappling with what he's done right now.  And it's only going to get worse for him.  We noted this when Chump ramped up his war on immigrants  That the people rounding these people up were going to struggle to live with their actions.  That some would self-harm and self-medicate.  Because this is not about humanity and it's honestly not about immigration. 


Chump's got quotas.  To meet those quotas, it sometimes requires rounding up US citizens.   THE NEWSHOUR (PBS) covered this last week:

Geoff Bennett:

Officials in California are calling for an investigation into the actions of federal immigration officers after they allegedly injured and detained a U.S. citizen this past weekend.

William Brangham has the latest on the growing number of Americans who are being caught up in the administration's enforcement action.

William Brangham:

The incident in question took place on Saturday in Long Beach, California. Video shows the moment Ricardo Gonzalez, a U.S. citizen, is riding an e-bike and then is stopped alongside an unmarked ICE vehicle. It's unclear whether the vehicle hit him or not. He's later seen being held face down in handcuffs screaming.

Ricardo Gonzalez, Detained By ICE:

My arm is broken. Help me. Help me. My arm is (EXPLETIVE DELETED) broken. My arm is (EXPLETIVE DELETED) broken. My arm is broken. It (EXPLETIVE DELETED) hurts!

William Brangham:

Gonzalez was later taken to the hospital and treated for serious injuries. ICE says Gonzalez was arrested because he was rioting and damaged a government vehicle.

Details of Gonzalez's detainment come as a new investigation by ProPublica has found more than 500 U.S. citizens have been caught up in the ongoing immigration dragnet.

For more on this, we are joined by ProPublica's Nicole Foy, who was one of the reporters on this series.

Nicole, thank you so much for being here.

Is this incident that we saw reported in California this weekend, does this align with the kinds of cases that you document in your reporting?

Nicole Foy, ProPublica:

It absolutely does, mostly because we found citizens getting detained by immigration officials for a variety of reasons around the country and sometimes in very similar situations like this, where maybe there was a protest nearby or maybe there was just an unexpected encounter between a U.S. citizen in their neighborhood where they lived with immigration officials, who have really expanded their dragnet and the number of people that they're trying to detain.

And, sometimes, those two people co collide, quite literally in this case. And there are many, many citizens that we have documented of the more than 500 that we found were detained so far who were also really seriously injured after their encounters as well.

William Brangham:

I mean, DHS, as you reported in your series, repeatedly says that they do not detain or arrest U.S. citizens, despite what your reporting shows.

When you say that U.S. citizens are being detained, as you documented, who are the people that are being detained and what are the other circumstances around their cases?

Nicole Foy:

Yes, it's a mix of folks.

Sometimes, it is folks that immigration officials have accused of assaulting or interfering with immigration operations. Sometimes, that seems to be the case. And, other times, there is witness -- witness testimony or footage that really contradicts that narrative.

But there's also been many, many people who have been detained because of questions about their citizenship, whether they were on a construction site and didn't speak English very well, or they were -- there were questions about whether they also were here in the United States without papers. We have seen people detained in a variety of ways.

William Brangham:

What happens after these people are detained? I mean, are formal charges filed? It seems that if ICE then realizes you have an American citizen in custody, you would think that would be the end of it.

Nicole Foy:

Yes, some people who have been charged with -- who have been arrested on allegations of assault were charged with assault, but we found many who still to this day have not been charged with assault, even if officials release statements accusing them of that.

We also found dozens of people who were held for several days, including at least 24 hours without being able to access their phone or their lawyer or to contact their family and let them know where they were. So it's -- some people really had a very brief detention, where it was maybe 15 minutes, 20 minutes where they're in handcuffs on the side of the road.

But other people disappeared into a system that was actually very difficult for their loved ones and their lawyers to find them, and at the same time they sometimes were seriously injured as well.

William Brangham:

You shared a lot of your reporting, including the videos that you compiled, with former immigration officials to gauge their reaction. What was it that they told you about what you had uncovered?

Nicole Foy:

They were really shocked by what they saw. These are folks who -- two particular officials that I'm thinking of retired fairly recently.

And they said that, first of all, they had never seen this many U.S. citizen encounters at all, let alone this level of detention, and that the -- they really characterized much of the use of force, the apparent reason or probable cause for stops, as really troubling, because it did not -- it did not seem that officers were following what they believe that they should have been trained to do.

William Brangham:

Are there constitutional protections for Americans in these kinds of circumstances? And, if so, have there been any sort of enforcement actions against officers who might have been accused of or found committing wrongdoing?

Nicole Foy:

Yes, I mean, everyone in the U.S. has constitutional protections, whether you are an immigrant or you are a U.S. citizen.

But what our reporting found was just, particularly when you're just looking at these detentions and arrests of U.S. citizens, really some very troubling examples of possible violations of folks' Fourth Amendment, the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, whether that's accusations of racial profiling or accusations of really excessive force use during the arrest.

But we also found hundreds of people who were arrested because they were participating in a protest. We found many people who were also film -- were simply filming when they were arrested, and they believe that that is the reason why they are arrested. The government may disagree, but they believe their First Amendment rights were violated in that way as well.


Over the weekend, Christine Zhu (NC NEWSLINE) reported:


Immigration advocates are demanding answers after a U.S. citizen said he was arrested at gunpoint by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement on his way to work in Charlotte earlier this week.

Atilio Portillo, a resident of east Charlotte who owns a small construction business, told reporters during a press conference Friday that ICE agents stopped him as he was on his way to work early Wednesday morning with his brother and nephew.

The agents blocked his work truck with unmarked vehicles, broke its windows, and pointed guns at the passengers, according to Portillo. He said his requests for a warrant or explanation of the stop were denied.

Bystander video compiled by the advocacy group Siembra NC shows a man in an ICE uniform holding a a handgun while breaking Portillo’s driver’s side window. It also shows Portillo yelling, “I am a U.S. citizen” while agents put him in handcuffs.


Also on ICE, Mike Ludwig (TRUTHOUT) notes:


The Trump administration is attempting to intimidate Latino voters and naturalized citizens with the threat of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids and arrests ahead of the midterm elections, democracy advocates are warning.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which oversees ICE, has deployed federal agents in multiple states to knock on doors and demand voters verify their identities and registration as part of an “Unlawful Voter Initiative” launched in August. In response to a lawsuit filed on October 19 by labor and voting rights groups, a federal judge in California ruled the DHS initiative violates the Voting Rights Act and ordered federal agents to halt “elections-related field operations and field interviews” in California, Wisconsin, New York, Missouri, Connecticut, Nevada, Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Washington.

“I look at this list of states, and I can think of some high-profile races that may be anticipated to be close in a lot of those jurisdictions,” said David Janovsky, senior policy analyst and acting director of the Constitution Project at the Project On Government Oversight, in an interview. “So, I think there is a reasonable question in all of this about how the federal government is choosing to focus these efforts, and the motivation that is behind that.”

Critical contests in these states include the tight race between Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff and Republican Rep. Mike Collins in Georgia, which could decide which party has a majority in the Senate. In California, New York, and beyond, multiple races could help to determine control of the House or pad a Democratic majority. 


Markwayne Mullin is doing a great job, isn't he?  Arresting US citizens, going door to door to hunt out voters.  I'd love to hear him answer for that in a Senate hearing. 

 





On the Dept of (In)Justice's move on Alaska, Robert Davis (RAW STORY) quotes DEMOCRACY WATCH's Marc Elias:


"This is serious stuff," Elias said. "This is going to determine whether we have free and fair elections or not, and I think it's going to determine whether or not Democrats are going to be able to sweep the House and the Senate, as I expect them to, or Donald Trump is going to try to rig the outcome."

Elias noted that the Justice Department's arguments are seemingly meritless. For instance, the law the DOJ cited in its brief deals with voter registration, not certification, Elias said. 


Zolan Kanno-Youngs (NEW YORK TIMES) explains:

Rather than simply push false claims at his rallies or target voters his administration claims should not be on the rolls, Mr. Trump moved to pre-emptively challenge the certification of Alaska’s Senate election if the Republican candidate narrowly loses.

In doing so, Mr. Trump harnessed the power of the federal government to try to interfere in the voting process before Election Day — essentially trying to nullify an opponent’s potential win before the game has been called.

Even for a president who worked to undermine and overturn the 2020 presidential election, the anticipatory strike reflects a new intensification of Mr. Trump’s attempts to use his official powers to achieve the election results he wants — one that undermines the democratic process, according to election and legal experts. While they say the administration’s lawsuit is unlikely to be successful, the tactic could still further Mr. Trump’s goals by shaking the confidence of voters in the outcome of the race.

“This is part of the election takeover playbook that I’ve seen around the world and unfortunately in some other autocratic environments,” said Michael McNulty, a former senior elections adviser for the U.S. Agency for International Development who has studied election issues around the world, including in El Salvador, Hungary and Venezuela. “Trump has essentially undermined the independence of the D.O.J. and it’s been weaponized.”

The latest phase of Mr. Trump’s strategy centers on the Justice Department, which asked a federal court to block the certification of the election if the Republican incumbent, Senator Dan S. Sullivan, were to lose by a slim margin. The administration argued the presence of another candidate with a nearly identical name on the ballot has skewed the election toward Democrats.

The issue has already been litigated in the state: In June, the Alaska Supreme Court ruled that Daniel J. Sullivan Jr., a retired elementary schoolteacher, could appear on the ballot.


Attorney General Toad Blanche appeared Sunday on CNN's STATE OF THE UNION where Dana Bash attempted to make some sort of sense out of Blanche's ridiculous law suit:


BASH: I want to start where I just left off, which is the question. What exactly is the crime that the president says is being committed in Alaska?

BLANCHE: Well, it's not the president -- it's not only the president that's saying that. It's the director of the Alaskan election process, who has said that the second Dan Sullivan is going to create confusion, is not a real candidate, and is on the ballot only to pull votes from the incumbent.

So the real question that Americans should be asking is not what you just opened on, but how, as a country, how, as Alaskans, are we allowing this to happen? How can it be that somebody that the director of the Alaskan election process has said is a fraud and should not be allowed to run because his only purpose is to pull votes away from the from another candidate who's running for the right reasons?

BASH: What's the crime?

BLANCHE: And so - yes, so the department -- what's the crime? Well, it depends. There could be a crime, but the real wrong here is that Alaskans are going to be confused and will not have their vote heard.

So, an Alaskan intends to vote for one candidate, but is confused because of the -- of a second candidate with exactly the same name who's voted Democrat his entire life, who donated money to the other Democrat opponent, is running. That's the real question.

BASH: Mr. Attorney General, I don't need to tell you that the Constitution says -- Article I in the Constitution, Article I, section 4, states that the times, places, and manner of holding elections for senators and representatives shall be prescribed in each state.

You mentioned the fact that people are upset in Alaska. It went all the way up to the Alaska State Supreme Court, and they ruled four months ago on this matter. They said that Daniel J. Sullivan Jr. could remain on the ballot. 


There is no crime.  Alaska's Supreme Court already ruled on this.  The ballot with the two Dan's notes which of the two is a Republican and which of the two is the incumbent.  


Blanche is asking for a do-over in case he doesn't like the results.  If he doesn't like the results, he insists, the voters were confused.


Voters are confused all the time.  They get fake mailers all the time -- like in Texas where a 'trans organization' that doesn't exist attempted to rile voters in what is likely a Republican scam.  The GOP is notorious for its misinformation and disinformation.  It exists to confuse voters.  

In the end, it's the role of the voter to educate themselves.  That includes on proposals on the ballot as well as candidates on the ballot.  Pat Paulsen ran in GOP primaries and that wasn't a problem.  Pat was never a real candidate.  He was a comedian.  The whole thing was a lark but he was on the ballot.   North Dakota's GOP primary found him coming in second to George H.W. Bush and this was 1992 after he'd been pulling this prank or joke since 1968. 

Were some people in North Dakota in 1992 confused?  I'm sure they were.  That was their fault.  They're supposed to educate themselves.  And I'm also sure that some people found the run amusing and voted for Pat for that reason while others chose Pat because it was, to them, the ultimate screw you.


Blanche is predicting that people will be confused and insisting on a do over.  How are people confused?  In Alaska, this reached their state supreme court and now, thanks to Blanche, this candidate is yet again in the news.  Anyone wanting to vote for the incumbent know there are two people on the ballot and they should know that the incumbent is a Republican and is labeled on the ballot as an incumbent and as a Republican.  If they're not able to differentiate between the two Dan Sullivans -- with party and incumbent listed by the name of one -- then they honestly aren't informed enough to vote.  But they chose to vote so that's on them. 

There are no do overs nor should there be.  

Chump has admitted that Blanche is acting on his directive but Toad refused to confirm that in his conversation with Dana Bash.   Speaking on FACE THE NATION yesterday, he refused to even believe that Chump had said publicly that he ordered the lawsuit:


MARGARET BRENNAN: He said: "I told them to do it."

Did he tell that to you?

ATTORNEY GENERAL TODD BLANCHE: No, that wasn't your question. No. No, he didn't say it on camera.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes, he did.


Brennan is correct, Chump said it and said it publicly. 





 On NBC's MEET THE PRESS, Senator Adam Schiff weighed in on DoJ's Alaskan lawsuit:


KRISTEN WELKER:

Let me ask you about this big news out of the Justice Department. President Trump says he told DOJ to sue to block Alaska’s Senate race certification if Republicans lose. And just to explain to our viewers, the issue here is that the incumbent is named Senator Daniel S. Sullivan. There is another candidate who is on the ballot named Daniel Sullivan. And I think we have a look at the ballot right here. The argument is this could confuse voters. Does DOJ have a point here? What’s your reaction to the lawsuit, Senator?

SEN. ADAM SCHIFF:

No, they don’t have a point. And what’s more, they don’t have standing to bring this kind of a suit. It’s not the federal government’s business to run Alaskan elections. It’s Alaska’s business to do that. And they’ve already adjudicated this question. And the Justice Department knows this. But it just shows how complicit they are now in the Trump campaign to try to subvert the elections. Back in 2020 when the president was likewise trying to challenge an election he lost, he tried to enlist the support of the Justice Department. He told top DOJ lawyers, “Just say the election was corrupt and leave the rest to the Republican Congressmen and to him.” Well, they refused. Bill Barr crossed a lot of ethical lines, but there was one he refused to cross, which was trying to overturn a legitimate election. This time with Blanche, they’re all in on this disgraceful campaign. So this suit has no chance of succeeding. But the fact that Todd Blanche and the Justice Department are willing to go along with it, they’re willing to put their name on it, is an indication of how far they will go after this election is over to try to challenge the results. And the best remedy for the American people is make sure this isn’t close anywhere. Turn out in overwhelming numbers. Use every effort to intimidate as further reason to turn out and vote.


Victor Blackwell raised this issue on CNN THIS MORNING with Richard Pildes:


Blackwell: With me now is Richard Pildes, constitutional law professor at NYU School of Law. Professor, good to have you.


So, let's start with Alaska. The incumbent is Republican Daniel S. Sullivan. There's the independent Daniel J. Sullivan and Democrat Mary Peltola on the ballot.

When you look at this case in Alaska, this has already been adjudicated on the state level all the way through the Alaskan Supreme Court. Are the feds trying to make a different case? Basically, what are they claiming here that would be different than what the state's already decided? 


RICHARD PILDES, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW PROFESSOR, NYU SCHOOL OF LAW: Well,
they are trying to re-litigate under a different theory what the Alaska Supreme Court has already decided. So the concern here, as you described, is that there are two candidates on the ballot with fairly similar names.

The incumbent senator is Daniel J. Sullivan Jr., and he's actually listed on the ballot as Republican incumbent. And then, I'm sorry, the incumbent is Dan S. Sullivan, who's listed as the Republican incumbent. And there's gadfly candidate Daniel J. Sullivan Jr. So, the concern is voters could be confused about who they're voting for.

But as you say, the issue was taken to the Alaska Supreme Court. The Alaska Supreme Court said the candidates have a right to run under their names, and the federal government is now trying to come in. And it's actually quite puzzling what they're trying to accomplish here. I've said this is the weakest election lawsuit I can recall seeing.

For one thing, the only basis the federal government asserts for coming in here is a federal voter registration statute. And that statute has nothing to do with the qualifications of candidates.

And then, in addition, even if one goes down this path, how in the world would the courts determine which people voted for the wrong candidate inadvertently? How do we even know which of those people are who voted for this candidate, let alone how would we probe the reasons for doing it? And the suit also comes way too late in the day, in the middle of the voting process. There's so many problems with this lawsuit.

[06:45:02]

So, I think this lawsuit has no chance whatsoever of being accepted.

BLACKWELL: Yes. I mean the question of can voters keep the Daniel Sullivan straight. We have an issue of doing it. I heard you have to fix it in your answer.

The way I do it is Daniel S. Sullivan. The S is the one who's already a senator. So that's how when I'm just having a conversation. I keep it straight.

Speaking of late in the day, let's talk about California. Because California says that this now requests to set aside ballots from about 20,000 voters. There comes after voting is already started.

So how does that influence the ability to even comply and the merits of this effort from DOJ?

PILDES: Yes, I mean, this is one of the several problems with both of these lawsuits. The government could have brought either of these suits many months ago and courts in general are extremely reluctant to allow lawsuits late in the day in the election process, particularly when they could have been brought earlier.

So here in California, the government is claiming that it's looked at the voter rolls in California and found 20,000 people that it claims are likely to be non-citizens and what it wants the courts to do because most people in California vote by mail is to set aside those ballots from those 20,000 individuals. So that disputes over whether they are in fact citizens could be litigated after the vote takes place.

 

Blanche's actions are outrageous and lack standing.  He's got no right to bring a lawsuit.  And that's before you even get into the fact that Chump ordered him to do it.  



Let's wind down with this from Senator Elizabeth Warren's office:

Warren demands USDA reverse course after over 5 million Americans—including 2 million children—lose SNAP benefits.

“Together, rising food prices and cuts to SNAP are trapping more and more American families in a food insecurity crisis.”

Text of Letter (PDF)

Washington, D.C. — U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) wrote to U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Secretary Brooke Rollins, highlighting a new analysis by her office that quantifies the devastating toll of President Trump’s economic policies on American households. Warren revealed the “food misery index,” which shows that under President Trump, the combined impact of skyrocketing grocery prices and cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) has stripped more than $22 billion from American families since July 2025.

“These outcomes are not inevitable. They are the direct result of President Trump’s failed policies – and I urge the Department of Agriculture to act now to reverse them,” Senator Warren wrote. 

Grocery prices rose 2.3 percent in 2025, almost double the rate in 2024. These prices continue to rise due to President Trump’s chaotic tariffs and illegal war in Iran. While grocery prices continue to climb, President Trump and Congressional Republicans have gutted SNAP, ripping away more than five billion dollars in food assistance from American households. The impact of these cuts will only grow, as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) slashed nearly $187 billion over the 2026 to 2034 period – the biggest cuts in the program’s history. 

“SNAP participation is falling because the Trump administration has intentionally kicked people off of the program – leaving Americans hungry and still struggling to afford food,” wrote Senator Warren.

OBBBA has further restricted eligibility for lawful immigrants, capped future benefit increases, and shifted a substantial portion of program costs onto already-strained state budgets. One recent analysis of 28 states with a decline in SNAP participation found that, of the 3.6 million Americans who lost their food assistance, nearly half were children.

The “food misery index” combines the more than $17.2 billion in increasing grocery costs since July 2025 with the more than $5.1 billion in lost household SNAP benefits to reveal that the true cost of the Trump administration’s food assistance failures on American families exceeds $22 billion since the enactment of the OBBBA last July.

“Instead of reaching for tools to mitigate these threats to families and working to bring down costs, the administration continues to sit idly by, peddling false narratives about the drop in SNAP participation, while delivering a one-two punch to American families who are struggling to put food on their tables. With grocery prices and food insecurity on the rise, I urge the administration to work with Congress to immediately reverse its harmful cuts to SNAP.” concluded Senator Warren. 

###



The following sites updated:




Posted by at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)