WSJ delivers withering rebuke: Iran is playing Trump — and he's letting it happen

Internal warnings about DC park lease dismissed by Trump admin: report

The Trump administration repeatedly dismissed internal objections from National Park Service officials regarding a proposal to lease nearly 40 acres of Rock Creek Park in Washington, D.C., to a private operator. Internal records reveal Park Service employees raised legal, environmental, and ethical concerns about the plan, which includes the Rock Creek Tennis Center, reported The Washington Post.Officials explained the proposal violated federal rules protecting public access to parklands, threatened the habitat of the Hays Spring amphipod —a federally protected crustacean— and exceeded boundaries even the expected lessee had requested. Emails show Park Service officials coordinated with Washington businessman Mark Ein, who owns the DC Open, before formal bidding opened. A senior official warned the lease could be vulnerable to legal challenge and questioned how the agency could determine it would not interfere with park protection or visitor enjoyment. Despite these warnings, leadership approved the larger footprint. No lease agreement has been announced months after the administration's March 1 deadline.Watch the video below. Your browser does not support the video tag.

Trump just suffered the biggest self-inflicted wound of his second term: expert

President Donald Trump just suffered one of the biggest self-inflicted wounds of his second term, according to one legal expert. On Tuesday, sources inside the Trump administration claimed that the $1.776 billion so-called "anti-weaponization" fund had effectively been killed after Trump met with Republican leaders at the White House. The fund was created as part of a settlement between Trump's Department of Justice and the IRS over the president's leaked tax returns. It sought to pay claims by people who alleged they had been improperly prosecuted by the government, and multiple of Trump's allies had publicly said they would seek payments. Both Republicans and Democrats sharply criticized the idea. Harry Litman, a former federal prosecutor, argued in a new Substack essay that Trump's retreat on the anti-weaponization fund showed that Trump knew he was "pinned between a rock and a hard place." But it also represents another public defeat for a president whose brand is built on bravado and winning. "So the parameters of the retreat remain unclear as of this writing. It may be a full capitulation. It may be a tactical pause dressed up as a concession. Either way, as a matter of political reality, it is a humiliation—the administration’s biggest self-inflicted wound of Trump 2.0, now compounded by a very public retreat," Litman wrote. Litman argued that the fund had become "politically radioactive" after reporters began asking Republicans whether they supported paying people convicted of assaulting police officers during the insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021. He also warned that Trump may take some "serious lumps" from the MAGA base as the midterms approach because of the retreat. "Trump is backing down precisely because the politics of supporting them became untenable—it is they whom Trump is plainly abandoning," Litman wrote. "All of that amounts to a richly deserved comeuppance for Trump’s staggering audacity in trying to make the American people not just pardon but financially reward the most serious assault on American democracy since the Civil War."

Optimism over US-Iran deal fades; Trump scrambles to secure Lebanon truce 

The optimism that President Trump projected last week toward securing a deal with Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz has quickly faded, with Tehran on Monday suspending talks in protest of Israel’s punishing strikes on Lebanon.  Trump sent varying messages as he scrambled Monday to secure a truce between Israel and Hezbollah, the Iran-linked…

Trump official's bold claim instantly backfires: 'These spineless cowards are terrified'

A spokesperson for Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth caught heat from political analysts and observers on Monday after making a wild claim about the department's "transparency" on social media. "This is the most transparent War Department in history. No amount of spin from the Fake News media will change that," Joel Valdez, the acting press secretary for DoD, posted on his official X account. "The Pentagon Press Office has been redesignated as a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility due to speechwriters from the Office of the Secretary of War sharing the facility," he added. "These speechwriters routinely handle classified material and require SIPRNet access. As a result, journalists will no longer be permitted to enter the office space. There’s nothing controversial about that."Valdez's comments came at a time when Hegseth has faced considerable scrutiny over his use of encrypted messaging platforms and his handling of classified information. Last year, Hegseth was in a Signal group text that disclosed sensitive military operations to The Atlantic's Editor-in-Chief, Jeffrey Goldberg. Political analysts and observers roasted the spokesperson online. "This is all lies. These spineless cowards are absolutely terrified of the free press," Fred Wellman, a Democratic candidate in Missouri, posted on X. "Last year @SeanParnellASW promised the press the most transparent Pentagon ever," Konstantin Toropin, a Pentagon reporter at the Associated Press, posted on X. "Now, their position is that “there’s nothing controversial” about designating the office with their press officers - officers and civilians that are supposed to work with the press - as classified.""Fact check: The latter three paragraphs of Joel's statement appear to be true. The bit about transparency, not so much," Dan Lamothe, military affairs reporter at The Washington Post, posted on X.

Iran Throws Wrench Into Talks, Pulling Yet Another Hypocritical Move

New Melania-Epstein claims emerge from ex of Trump envoy: report

Former Brazilian model Amanda Ungaro made explosive claims about first lady Melania Trump over the weekend, tying her to the Jeffrey Epstein scandal, according to a new report. In a since-deleted post on X, Ungaro claimed that Melania Trump was one of Epstein's escorts, and that is how she was introduced to her husband, President Donald Trump, the Daily Beast reported. Ungaro shared a WhatsApp recording on X in which she accused her former partner, Paolo Zampolli, one of Trump's appointees to the Kennedy Center's Board of Trustees, of lying about introducing the Trumps in 1998, the report added. “Let’s tell the public you never were the one introducing Melania to Trump. It was Jeffrey Epstein, as she was [an] escort of Jeffrey Epstein. That’s how she met Donald Trump,” Ungaro said in the recording, posted around 11 p.m. Sunday. “And I know, because I was with you [for] 20 years and you always told me it was not you—it was Jeffrey Epstein,” she added.Ungaro's claims are at odds with statements Melania Trump made during her seemingly impromptu press conference in April about her relationship with Epstein. Melania forcefully denied being introduced to Trump through Epstein or having any involvement in his crimes during the press conference. “I am not Epstein’s victim," Melania Trump said at the time. "Epstein did not introduce me to Donald Trump. I met my husband, by chance, at a New York City party in 1998. This initial encounter with my husband is documented in detail in my book, 'Melania.'”Zampolli told the Daily Beast that Ungaro's claims are a "disgrace" and made him concerned for her mental health.Ungaro's claims also surfaced at a time when she is embroiled in a custody battle with Zampolli. She accused her former partner of using his influence to have her arrested by immigration agents last year, according to the report.

Democrats plot nefarious move to 'blow up' Supreme Court in desperate attempt to put Trump on defense

As Democrats hurdle towards the November midterms with favorable polls, top Republicans are warning their first move in power will be to 'blow up' the Supreme Court.

Trump Backs Off Plan for $1.8 Billion Fund That Drew Political Backlash

The fund has drawn backlash from critics who said it was a scheme to reward President Trump’s political allies with public benefits.