Truthout
Ex-Nuclear Negotiator Criticizes Trump’s Push for Abraham Accords in Iran Deal
Trump threatened to blow up Oman and said Gulf states “owe” it to the US to normalize relations with Israel.
Far Left
Raw Story
Multiple star headliners pull out of Trump's 'Freedom 250' Festival
Far Left
Cracks are forming in the MAGA-linked "Freedom 250" festival.Marketed as a celebration of America's 250th anniversary, artists in the lineup are now withdrawing due to the event's increasingly politicized direction. Morris Day denied involvement despite appearing in promotional materials, explicitly stating he would not perform, reports Bring Me The News. Young MC, the rapper behind "Bust a Move," followed suit, announcing on X he informed his agents he would not participate. Young MC also revealed artists were never told about political involvement with the event, despite organizers claiming it was non-partisan.The American rapper stated he hopes to perform in Washington D.C. at a future event "that is not so politically charged." The festival, scheduled for the National Mall, originally featured performers including Vanilla Ice and Flo Rida. The artist departures raise questions about the event's credibility and appeal.The "Freedom 250" Festival was described by SPIN magazine as "Trump-backed." Watch the video below. Your browser does not support the video tag.
Compare Perspectives
Found 8 stories
Trump Vows to Protect the Family Businesses: Crypto and Prediction Markets
In a Truth Social post Wednesday, President Trump typed out a lengthy paragraph on the necessity of protecting the prediction and crypto markets, taking the opportunity to label a slew of Democrats “scum,” call the US the crypto capital of the world, and claim prediction markets are a new form of financial market. He didn’t […]
Left
Alternet.org
'Imaginative' plan to kill Trump's slush fund gets applause
Few events in President Donald Trump’s second term have prompted as much outrage as the announcement that the DOJ will create a $1.776 billion “anti-weaponization” fund to compensate those “harmed” by the Biden administration, which has been broadly denounced as a “slush fund” for convicted J6 criminals. There has been bipartisan discussion of how to block the fund, and now famed Esquire political commentator Charles P. Pierce is applauding one “imaginative” idea. Earlier this week, New York Democratic state assemblymember and House candidate Alex Bores unveiled legislation that would level a 100 percent tax against payouts from the fund. Then on Wednesday, California Governor Gavin Newsom gave even greater visibility to the idea, telling reporters, “Anyone from California that receives any of those funds, we want to tax 100 percent of those proceeds.” Other congressional Democrats have gotten behind similar efforts.“I love this,” said Pierce. “This is the kind of imaginative grassroots pushback the national Democratic party needs. The more that this incredibly corrupt bargain is subjected to public scorn and ridicule, the better.”While the concept may have a hard time catching on among Republicans who are famously antagonistic toward enacting new taxes, conservative lawmakers have been so angered by the fund that they may be willing to take dramatic steps to oppose it. Even congressional Republicans who are usually hesitant to break with the president have blasted the move, with former Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell declaring, “So the nation’s top law enforcement official is asking for a slush fund to pay people who assault cops? Utterly stupid, morally wrong — take your pick.” The tax idea hasn’t been the only effort to stymie the fund. Shortly after it was announced, the Bipartisan Transparency for American Taxpayers Act was introduced by Representatives Tom Suozzi (D-NY) and Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA), which declared simply that “no federal funds may be used for the payment of any claim submitted to the Anti-Weaponization Fund, established by the Department of Justice on May 18, 2026.” If enacted, it would essentially kill the fund. Representative Jamie Raskin (D-CA) introduced the No Taxpayer-Funded Settlement Slush Funds Act, which would similarly deny federal cash to the fund.Interestingly enough, in February, a slate of Republican lawmakers began pushing the Stop Settlement Slush Funds Act of 2026, which has so far failed to gain traction. If enacted, it would prohibit government officials from entering into settlement agreements that divert funds to third-party organizations, with the intention of preventing the Executive Branch from circumventing Congress and steering settlement money to its preferred recipients — an exact description of the circumstances surrounding the J6 slush fund.
Left
The New Republic
Trump Treasury Secretary Flails When Grilled About Slush Fund
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent gracelessly dodged questions about the $1.8 billion slush fund the Department of Justice awarded to the president and his allies. During a White House press briefing Thursday, a reporter asked Bessent to comment on the process for developing the $1.8 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund,” set up as part of a settlement for Donald Trump’s failing lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Services.Surprise, surprise: Bessent’s response did not mention the fund at all. “This is going to be the only question I take on this matter today. So, there’s ongoing litigation, so it’d be inappropriate for me to comment,” Bessent said. “President Trump is a great American who has endured more than 10 years—10 years of nonstop harassment and weaponization from federal and state government actors. A bad actor at the IRS leaked more than 400,000 tax returns including the Trump family, all the employees, and that’s how we got here now.”“No American should be targeted for political reasons and every citizen deserves fair treatment and the full protection of the law. The Department of Justice represented the Treasury and the IRS in this matter, and I’m going to have to refer any questions to active Attorney General Todd Blanche.”Q: There's a lot of people talking about the 'weaponization fund.' What is the process for those funds now?BESSENT: Thank you for the question. This will be the only question I will take on this matter. President Trump is a great American who has endured more than 10 years of… pic.twitter.com/j6qZZfaDxY— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 28, 2026CNN’s Kaitlan Collins also pressed the secretary on the sudden exit of Brian Morrissey, the Treasury’s top legal officer, following the announcement of the fund—but Bessent wouldn’t bite.“I will not be taking any other questions, I will not be taking any other questions,” he repeated. Maybe he should add that to his list of pathetic affirmations?Q: Mr. Secretary, about the $1.8B slush fund. Is it accurate that the general counsel of the Treasury Department resigned over that?Trump's Treasury Secretary: I will not be taking any other questions. pic.twitter.com/2sz5PDD5U0— Headquarters (@HQNewsNow) May 28, 2026It appears that Bessent is intent on allowing Trump to pillage the Treasury and award his worst allies with taxpayer dollars—without owing taxpayers any answers. This lack of transparency is par for the course, but Trump’s $1.8 billion slush fund is a criminal enterprise so egregious that it manages to stand out in a presidency that was already blatantly corrupt.
Left
The Hill News
Watch live: Bessent leads White House briefing after ‘Trump Accounts’ go live
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent will lead Thursday afternoon’s White House press briefing, hours after the new app for the Trump administration’s newborn investment accounts went live. President Trump has touted the investments, dubbed “Trump Accounts” and established under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, as another economic win ahead of the midterms. Under the plans,…
Center
The Gateway Pundit
WATCH: Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent Confirms Treasury is Prepared to Print $250 Bill with Trump’s Face
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told reporters on Thursday that the Treasury Department is, in fact, making preparations to begin printing $250 bills with President Trump's face on them, pending approval from Congress. This comes after a Washington Post report, claiming that Trump administration officials are pressuring the Treasury's Bureau of Engraving and Printing to design a design a $250 featuring Trump's portrait. The post WATCH: Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent Confirms Treasury is Prepared to Print $250 Bill with Trump’s Face appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.
Far Right
Raw Story
DOJ subpoenas Reddit in effort to unmask Trump critics
The Justice Department is intensifying efforts to identify anonymous social media users who have criticized government deportation policies, issuing grand jury subpoenas to Reddit and X demanding names, addresses, and banking information.The US Attorney's Office for Washington under Jeanine Pirro has subpoenaed the platforms as part of criminal investigations targeting at least two anonymous posters who have criticized Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations, reported Bloomberg.“They started with an administrative summons, which does not indicate a criminal investigation, and then progressed to the grand jury subpoena, which does,” said Lauren Regan, an attorney representing a Reddit user who posted criticism of ICE. "[That] is further proof that this is a bad faith attempt to unmask the user.”The targeted users learned of the subpoenas only after being notified by the companies themselves and subsequently hired attorneys to challenge the government demands.Neither the Justice Department nor the users have been informed what specific crimes are allegedly being investigated, but defense attorneys suspect the investigations may relate to allegations of revealing a federal officer's location data or making perceived threats, but they argue their clients committed no crimes. They contend that even if no charges are ultimately filed, the government's effort to unmask dissenters amounts to intimidation designed to suppress protected free speech.Court records show the administration initially pursued administrative summonses — which bypass judicial review — but withdrew them after legal challenges. The government then escalated to grand jury subpoenas, which carry the weight of criminal investigations and are far more difficult to challenge.According to former federal prosecutor Bonnie Greenberg, those challenging such subpoenas face an extremely heavy burden, saying that in her 37-year career as an assistant U.S. attorney, only one person attempted to quash a grand jury subpoena, and the judge ruled against them.The cases involve relatively innocuous posts. One user posted simply "expletive ICE," while another made what his attorney describes as a sarcastic remark on X that included an address found elsewhere on social media. Defense attorneys note the posts contain no indication of violent intent.Civil liberties advocates warn the tactic threatens fundamental protections for anonymous speech. First Amendment Coalition Executive Director David Snyder pointed to The Federalist Papers, which founding fathers published under pseudonyms to protect themselves from government retaliation while shaping the nation's founding principles.Both sets of lawyers have filed motions to quash the subpoenas in federal court, with cases pending before U.S. District Chief Judge James Boasberg.Reddit has stated it vigorously defends user anonymity and routinely objects to overbroad requests threatening civil rights, but the outcome will likely have significant implications for online speech protections in the current political climate.
Far Left
Alternet.org
Legal experts warn Trump is the one who committed perjury in E. Jean Carroll trial
Legal experts Katie Phang, Norm Eisen and Adam Klasfeld appeared on Thursday for a discussion about the new taxpayer-funded lawsuit against foe E. Jean Carroll by President Donald Trump's Justice Department. Trump, who lost two lawsuits for defamation, was accused of sexual assault by Carroll, and when Trump spoke out against her, she sued. Two juries awarded her $88 million and declared him liable for defamation while also agreeing that he committed an act of sexual abuse. The DOJ now claims that she lied under oath when she was asked whether someone was funding her legal fees. In reality, Democratic megadonor Reid Hoffman was footing some of the costs, though it's unclear whether she knew that when she was asked. Carroll's lawyer later told the judge that Hoffman was funding some of the legal expenses. The DOJ says she lied under oath. In the latest conversation with "The Contrarian," Klasfeld called it ironic because there were acts of perjury on Trump's part. "I was in federal court when the deposition of Donald Trump was unspooled and he famously, and one might say wretchedly, claimed she's not my type," he recalled. Trump claimed to the lawyers that he could not have sexually assaulted Carroll because she wasn't attractive enough. "That was his defense to sexual abuse. She's not my type," Klasfeld continued. "And in this deposition, he was shown a picture that he was not aware included E. Jean Carroll, pointed to that picture, and confused her with Marla Maples. So clearly, she was his type. He confused her with his second wife."Eisen began laughing. "What an a——." "And so that was just one example of the demonstrable lies that led a unanimous federal jury to find him liable for sexually abusing E. Jean Carroll," continued Klasfeld. "And what is inspiring this new leg of the retaliation tour, in the very district where they just failed to prosecute six local activists and politicians known as the Broadview Six. They were supposed to be on trial right now, but evidence of shocking grand jury misconduct came to light."Klasfeld said it was the "perfect place" for the DOJ to pick a jurisdiction in which to "persecute" Carroll. Phang said that she wasn't surprised because FBI Director Kash Patel and acting Attorney General Todd Blanche spent a year investigating seashells on the beach in North Carolina. "But here's the thing: you notice how they're not going after her about the substantive testimony she provided about the sexual assault that she was victimized by Trump, right?" Phang added. "They're not going after that. They're not going after the underlying facts of what she has alleged happened to her at the hands of Donald Trump. That is the tell."Instead, Trump is going after a Reid Hoffman-related question, claiming it was perjury. But they're not disputing the facts of the case and the jury's verdict.Coffee with the Contrarians, with Norman Eisen and Katie Phang by All Rise NewsA recording from Adam Klasfeld and Norman Eisen's live videoRead on Substack
Left