Adam Nichols

Unpaid Transportation Security Officers at one of the nation's busiest airports finally lost it at ICE as security check lines go crazy — and the immigration agents apparently have nothing to do.

Kyle Pigott, a TSA officer and union president who represents his colleagues at New York City's LaGuardia Airport, snapped Wednesday, three days after Trump ordered the controversial ICE agents in to "help out."

But, Pigott said, the untrained army of armed agents is unable to perform anything that's remotely helpful.

"They’re the reason that we’re not getting paid," he told the website Curbed, which is an offshoot of New York Magazine, referring to the government shutdown that's left TSA agents unpaid for weeks. It stems from a refusal by Democrats to fund ICE as part of the Department of Homeland Security budget.

"And now I’m working next to that person. And they’re getting paid to do nothing. They’re not trained. It takes six months to train a Transportation Security Officer. They’ve received none of that.

"A tweet went out and the next day they’re at the airport walking around sipping coffees, holding on to their vest. They arrived on Monday, and now they’re hanging out in the break room doing nothing. They’re warming up their lunch. I don’t know what you’re hungry from — you didn’t do anything!

"We already have Federal Air Marshal police and Port Authority police, so there’s already 10 armed officers at any given moment."

La Guardia faces unprecedented challenges during the current government shutdown as it was also the scene of a fatal crash late Sunday that's left part of the airport closed and multiple flights canceled.

Pigott also questioned ICE's operational approach: "Why do you need your vest and gun to move a line? That's weird. If police said they were going to come in and help you move a bag or a tray, I don't think they'd come in riot gear. It's gonna make anybody feel uncomfortable. Don't you guys have ICE T-shirts? Don't they have ICE polos?"

Without congressional funding resolution, conditions will deteriorate. Pigott warned: "[A]t the end of the day, what's going to happen? There's gonna be less and less people coming into work. ICE is there, but it doesn't make the line any shorter. They don't make the machines move faster."

A GOP fundraising speech went wildly off track Wednesday as President Donald Trump veered into a vicious attack on Supreme Court justices he appointed.

The National Republican Congressional Committee dinner at Washington, D.C.'s Union Station descended into the angry airing of deeply held grievances as Trump lost it against the judges he believes betrayed him by striking down his tariff scheme.

"I got a decision on tariffs that's going to cost our country... hundreds of billions, potentially, of refunds," he began.

"Giving them back to people that have been ripping off our country because the Supreme Court didn't want to put one little sentence that all money taken in up 'til this date doesn't have to be paid back. Going to cost us hundreds of billions of dollars. So sad to see."

His wildly meandering speech then dabbled in college sports policy, but he quickly returned to his judicial anger.

"Courts, bad courts in this country, are costing us a tremendous amount of money. And the Supreme Court, that's right, of the United States, cost our country — all they needed was a sentence — hundreds of billions of dollars and they couldn't care less. They couldn't care less."

Trump then singled out two justices he had personally appointed.

"And not that it matters, doesn't matter at all," he said. "But two of the people that voted for that, I appointed. And they sicken me. They sicken me because they're bad for our country."

He was referring to Justices Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett.

The court's 6-3 decision in February found Trump had overstepped his authority by imposing wide-ranging tariffs. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote, "The President asserts the extraordinary power to unilaterally impose tariffs of unlimited amount, duration, and scope. In light of the breadth, history, and constitutional context of that asserted authority, he must identify clear congressional authorization to exercise it."

Following the ruling, Trump called the justices "lap dogs," a "disgrace to our nation," and "disloyal to the Constitution." He also accused them of being influenced by foreign interests and "slimeballs" from other countries.

When speaking to reporters, Trump stated, "The Supreme Court's ruling on tariffs is deeply disappointing, and I'm ashamed of certain members of the Court — absolutely ashamed for not having the courage to do what's right for our country."

In a lengthy Truth Social post weeks later, Trump suggested the ruling "mattered most to me" and was responsible for the U.S. being in "such major decline."

Roberts responded to those attacks during a public appearance, saying, "Judges around the country work very hard to get it right, and if they don't, their opinions are subject to criticism. But personally directed hostility is dangerous, and it's got to stop."

Conservative activist Harry Wait said he ordered ballots in the names of prominent local politicians four years ago to expose the risks of voter fraud. Prosecutors determined he was right that voter fraud was an issue — and he was the culprit.

On Tuesday night, a jury in Wisconsin convicted Wait of one felony count of identity theft and two misdemeanor counts of election fraud. The jury acquitted him on a second identity theft charge. He faces a maximum penalty of seven years in prison, though he is unlikely to receive such a severe punishment.

The verdict came as President Donald Trump and his allies focus on the dangers of voter fraud and pressure Senate Republicans to pass legislation requiring proof of citizenship to register and photo identification to vote.

Voter fraud is extremely rare, and Wait's case demonstrates that those attempting to expose it can face serious legal consequences if they exceed legal boundaries.

Wait, a 71-year-old retired business consultant and president emeritus of HOT Government — a group advocating for "honest, open and transparent leadership" — has long criticized Wisconsin's online ballot ordering system. In 2022, he used that system to request ballots in the names of State Assembly Speaker Robin Vos and Racine Mayor Cory Mason.

Wait requested the ballots be sent to his home and then publicly announced his actions, stating he was highlighting a flaw that "bad actors could exploit to cast ballots for other people." The state Justice Department launched an investigation and charged him.

One municipal clerk sent Wait a ballot, while the other did not. Election officials stated that such actions are "extremely rare" and would have been "quickly caught on to" regardless of disclosure. The state tracks ballot destinations and investigates voter inquiries about unauthorized ballot requests.

Despite the charges, Wait has remained steadfast about his actions. "I'd do it again in a heartbeat, because to save the republic, soldiers have to draw blood and blood be drawn," Wait told The Washington Post in 2022.

His supporters have championed him as a hero, wearing "Free Harry" T-shirts and military-style dog tags at rallies. During his trial, backers filled the Racine courtroom.

Wait became involved in election practices scrutiny after Trump's 2020 loss. Multiple reviews have confirmed the election results were correctly tallied, but Wait maintains the election was rigged. Trump has similarly continued claiming the election was stolen, and his administration recently seized ballots in Georgia and election data in Arizona.

Wait is not alone in facing legal consequences for election-related activities. Milwaukee's deputy elections director Kimberly Zapata created three false identities to request military ballots, claiming she sought to identify a system flaw. Fired immediately, she was convicted in 2024 of absentee-ballot fraud and misconduct in office, receiving one year probation.

In Colorado, former Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters is serving a nine-year prison sentence for conspiracy to commit criminal impersonation related to voting machine hard drive copying. In Michigan, two attorneys and a former state lawmaker face charges related to voting machine access efforts.

Journalist and author Kurt Andersen believes he's identified the secret behind Donald Trump's political success: his lifelong stupidity combined with an American culture that's vulnerable to being conned.

Speaking on The Daily Beast Podcast, Andersen said his theory was on full display in Trump's recent foreign policy moves, which he said are fundamentally uninformed. Regarding Trump's Iran strategy, Andersen said that Trump has "no clue" about the region's history and dynamics.

“He’s an idiot," he said. "He’s always been stupid. And his stupidity has been an under-remarked-upon, unheralded part of his — along with the lying, along with the mental disorders — the stupidity is important.”

Drawing from his book "Fantasyland: How America Went Haywire; A 500-Year History," Andersen argues that America possesses a particular vulnerability to manipulation rooted in its religious and cultural history. The foundational American belief, he contends, is, "I can believe what I want because it's the truth and it feels right."

And Trump is an expert at exploiting that.

"All that stuff, which is not uniquely American, but it is definingly American," he said. "America has always been the world leader in that kind of weak-mindedness and slippery sense of the difference between reality and fiction."

Andersen drew parallels to P.T. Barnum, the 19th-century showman who successfully marketed obvious hoaxes by maintaining plausible deniability. When confronted about false claims, Barnum would respond: "How do you know it's not? If you can't prove it's not and people enjoy it, then that's entertainment."

As an example, the author described a 161-year-old woman who was paraded to circus-goers — and which was obviously a hoax.

“He didn’t hide it,” he said. “He didn’t pretend it was true. He said, ‘How do you know it’s not?’ [That] was basically his response to people. If you can’t prove it’s not and people enjoy it, then that’s entertainment.”

Andersen characterized Trump's relationship with truth as similarly ambiguous.

"It's just such an American story. This combination of religiosity, I guess sincere, and this kind of hucksterism. And that's part of the story of America and how Trump came to be, even though he is irreligious and a nonbeliever, I think, pretty clearly."

Andersen identified evangelical Christians as Trump's most devoted supporters, explaining that in a cultural environment where citizens believe "any old thing you want and hear and disbelief in things that are true, anything goes."

"It always tended to be the case in America a little bit, but then it got out of control in the last 60 years and, along with the internet, gave us Donald Trump," he concluded.

Political analyst David Rothkopf characterized the Iran war as fundamentally different from previous conflicts due to its origins in presidential psychology — and he attacked White House insiders for allowing it to happen.

Speaking on The Daily Beast Podcast, Rothkopf stated, "This is so different from any other war that we have ever seen, because it is being driven by the psychosis of one individual."

Rothkopf, CEO and Editor-in-Chief of The DSR Network, emphasized Trump's isolation from meaningful counsel. "Trump doesn't listen to advisers," he said. "As he says, he relies on his gut."

He then laid in the people around Trump for letting him act that way.

"We don't have people around the president who will say no." he said. "And even if we did, he wouldn't listen to that. And everybody in Washington knows that. All the guardrails, all the processes, all the systems that have evolved over time to avoid just this kind of catastrophe have been shut down, broken down, run around, and we're left with a decaying, elderly, ignorant, paranoid, vainglorious, deluded commander in chief making it up as he goes along."

Trump's erratic decision-making has characterized the conflict. Within an hour on Saturday, he claimed to have wiped Iran "off the map" before threatening new military strikes. The war has so far killed 13 U.S. service members and triggered Iran's blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, disrupting global oil markets.

Rothkopf compared the administration's foreign policy approach to chaotic unpredictability. "[The] Trump administration's foreign policy is sort of following the footsteps of a drunk out of the bar," he described.

"We go to the left, we go to the right, we're doing this, we're doing that. I'm on my knees. I'm standing up, you know, shouting at the heavens."

Critical vulnerabilities compound the situation. The State Department fired its oil and gas experts six months before the attacks, eliminating crucial expertise during the current crisis. FBI Director Kash Patel's termination of Iran specialists days before the war further degraded institutional knowledge.

Trump's stated objectives have shifted repeatedly. He initially demanded Iran's "unconditional surrender" before pivoting to nuclear prevention and signals of potentially "winding down" operations.

Rothkopf concluded, "The problem is there has been no planning. There is no sense of consequences. There's no metric by which you can assess what's going on in this misbegotten war and which is the success. There's none."

Jon Stewart got into an ugly — and very public — battle with Elon Musk as the two hurled insults at each other, and the comedian delivered a personal blow to finish it off.

The dispute began after Stewart aired a segment on "The Weekly Show" examining X's impact on democracy. He criticized the Tesla head's focus on undocumented voting, stating, "Musk has pushed this idea that undocumented, non-citizen voting is rampant, it is sowing the seeds of our destruction, and we cannot do it."

Stewart highlighted what he viewed as a fundamental contradiction in Musk's position. He said: "The irony of it all is [because of] this guy's platform, this guy's algorithm, which he is in charge of... he is a far more relevant actor in the warping of our democracy, through his money and his algorithm, than any measure of undocumented, non-citizen voting will ever be."

Stewart predicted Musk's defense, stating, "What his argument—and I think his people's argument—would be, is: Now that we're getting uncensored material, now that the First Amendment has primacy, people move to the right because they learn the truth."

Stewart countered, "The truth is that algorithm incentivizes the misinformation from the right, and he designs it."

A clearly angry Musk responded directly with an attack on Stewart's credibility. "Jon Stewart is an extremely skilled propagandist disguised as a truth-teller," he wrote.

Stewart fired back, characterizing Musk as just, "An extremely skilled propagandist."

"Not as good as you! Stop being so humble," Musk fired back late Thursday.

Stewart subsequently invited Musk to appear on his show to discuss their disagreements. However, a previous invitation went unfulfilled. Last year, Musk indicated he would appear on Comedy Central's "The Daily Show" if the interview aired "unedited," but the appearance never occurred. Stewart later revealed that Musk had "ghosted" him after reading a follow-up message.

That's when Stewart went personal.

"Judging from his most recent revelations of his baby mamas, I think everyone has been left on read at some point by that gentleman," he said on his podcast.

Musk has at least 14 children with four women.

Musk's X platform has faced widespread criticism for inadequately addressing misinformation. In 2024, researchers reported that false claims originating from Musk received approximately 2 billion views on the platform, according to the Center for Countering Digital Hate.

An unredacted email appears to reveal testimony that contradicts President Donald Trump's longstanding narrative about Jeffrey Epstein's relationship to Mar-a-Lago. The 2009 correspondence from Epstein's attorney Jack Goldberger was substantially redacted in the Justice Department's initial Epstein files release.

Representative Dan Goldman displayed the complete email on the House floor Wednesday, exposing its contents. The correspondence documents a telephone conference involving Trump, his attorney Alan Garten, and a person presumed to be Brad Edwards, representing Epstein's victims.

According to Goldberger's summary, when asked whether Epstein was ever expelled from Mar-a-Lago, Garten stated, "No he was not a member. May have been his guest. Never asked to leave." A manager at the Florida estate confirmed to Edwards that Epstein was "never asked to leave Mar-a-Lago."

That directly contradicts repeated claims by Trump and the White House that Epstein had been kicked out of the club.

The email, reported on by The Daily Beast, documents Trump's responses regarding his relationship with Epstein. When questioned about flying on Epstein's plane, Trump stated, "I've been on a lot of planes. May have been on his plane. No young girls on plane." Regarding visits to Epstein's residence, Trump said, "I may have been there with my wife," adding, "May have been children of guests but that's it."

Trump has publicly maintained different positions. He stated he was not "friendly" with Epstein and was "never" on his plane. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt asserted, "President Trump did nothing wrong and he kicked Jeffrey Epstein out of Mar-a-Lago for being a creep."

However, the new evidence contradicts these claims. Trump appears thousands of times throughout Epstein files. Photographs document Trump and Epstein socializing together from the 1980s through the 2000s. Flight logs place Trump on Epstein's aircraft. Membership documents indicate Epstein maintained Mar-a-Lago membership until October 2007, more than one year after his indictment for soliciting prostitution.

Goldman accused Trump of making "false statements over the past quarter century about Jeffrey Epstein." He criticized Attorney General Pam Bondi's department for withholding information, stating: "The reason why this matters is because we don't have half of the Epstein files. We identified 6 million Epstein files for potential release but have only disclosed about 3.5 million."

Goldman questioned Bondi's motives, asking, "If the attorney general is covering up this information that she then reveals to Congress, what else is she covering up about Donald Trump's involvement in the Epstein files?"

The Justice Department and White House did not immediately respond to the Beast's requests for comment.

A ex-federal prosecutor is warning that President Donald Trump is "highly likely" to use presidential pardons to protect himself and his allies from criminal charges once he leaves the White House.

Glenn Kirschner, founder of the Justice Matters podcast, told the The Daily Beast that Trump is terrified that multiple of his actions leave him open to being hammered by legal authorities as soon as he leaves the White House.

He added that Democrats and those who oppose Trump have to be ready for a fight to make sure he faces justice.

"We have to go into court, and we have to fight corruptly delivered pardons," Kirschner said.

He cited former Attorney General Bill Barr's congressional testimony regarding the limits of presidential pardon power. According to Kirschner, "Even Bill Barr testified before Congress that if Donald Trump delivered a pardon to somebody who was covering up evidence of wrongdoing by Donald Trump — put another way, using the pardon to perhaps curry favor with or buy the silence of somebody who could implicate him — Bill Barr said that would be improper. That would be a crime. That would be an impermissible use of the pardon power."

Potential pardon recipients could include Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, who faces allegations she perjured herself during Senate Judiciary Committee testimony. The DHS denied these claims, stating: "Any claim that Secretary Noem committed perjury is categorically false."

Attorney General Pam Bondi could also receive clemency given her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein investigation. A DOJ official characterized those concerns as "a tired narrative."

Kirschner emphasized the constitutional stakes, stating, "What we have to do is take these things into court and fight them because it's the right and righteous thing to do. And if the courts — trial court, court of appeals, and the Supreme Court—all say no, a president can buy a co-conspirator's silence by delivering a presidential pardon, then we continue to move in the direction of the end of our republic. Because that is not what the pardon power ought to be able to do."

Trump previously criticized Biden's pardons handed out days before the end of his presidency, declaring that all of his predecessor's clemency decisions were "null, void, and of no further force or effect" because Biden used an autopen signature. Trump wrote on Truth Social, "Anyone receiving 'Pardons,' 'Commutations,' or any other Legal Document so signed, please be advised that said Document has been fully and completely terminated, and is of no Legal effect."

Constitutional experts dispute Trump's authority to do that. Stanford law professor Bernadette Meyler stated, "The Constitution doesn't even require that the pardon be written, so the idea that the signature is by autopen rather than by handwritten signature seems not relevant to the constitutionality because Article II just says that the President has the power to pardon."

White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson dismissed Kirschner's analysis, telling the Daily Beast, "Anything said on the Daily Beast podcast is equivalent to screaming into the void. No one listens to this Trump Derangement Syndrome therapy session."

Democratic Party strategist James Carville predicted that President Donald Trump's tenure will end prematurely, stating that Trump is not long for the presidency because "everything that he tries blows up in his face."

In a Politicon video, Carville made a bold forecast about Trump's political future. Carville stated: "I'm telling you, I think he's just going to quit next year by this time. I think he's just going to walk away because the Democrats control the House and the Senate."

Carville characterized Trump's position as increasingly untenable, saying, "No one's going to pay attention to him. The fiscal condition of the country is beyond in the ditch. The Iran thing has turned into just a catastrophe of the first order."

Recent polling data supports Carville's assessment. Democrats hold a modest lead in most recent polls, according to a New York Times poll, suggesting potential Republican losses in midterm elections.

The Iran conflict has generated substantial casualties and economic disruption. Thirteen American military personnel have been killed since fighting began on February 28, with over 200 wounded or injured. Six troops died in a March 1 Iranian drone strike on a mobile operations center in Kuwait, and six more perished when a KC-135 refueling aircraft crashed in Iraq. Iran's closure of the Strait of Hormuz has driven gasoline prices to $3.80 per gallon, up nearly one dollar from $2.94 one month earlier.

Carville has become increasingly vocal in his criticism. Last week, he embraced the label "Trump Derangement Syndrome," declaring: "You're right! I got Trump Derangement Syndrome—I hate the motherf---er. I want to hate him more. I pray to God in heaven."

Carville criticized Trump's Iran decision directly, stating: "Pray for people who are paying more for gas for some idiotic war that he never even told us why we're there. He still doesn't know why we're there."

He also condemned Trump's Cabinet appointments, saying Trump appointed "incompetent buffoons" as federal agency leaders.

A Pennsylvania Trump supporter expressed sharp regret during an NBC News interview, stating that voting for President Trump three times was "my bad" — and declaring she is "apparently an idiot."

Amanda Robbins, interviewed by NBC News senior politics reporter Jonathan Allen in Millersburg, Pennsylvania, was asked what she would say to Trump if he were listening. Robbins responded directly: "You are a worthless pile of s--t."

When Allen asked how many times she had voted for Trump, Robbins answered, "Three times. That was my bad. Apparently, I'm an idiot!"

Robbins represents a shift in sentiment among some Trump supporters, angry at U.S. involvement in Iran combined with a high cost of living. The conflict, started on February 28 alongside Israel, has generated considerable domestic backlash.

However, other Millersburg residents expressed support for Trump's military actions. Mike Purcell characterized the combat operations as a "great decision" and stated he is willing to "pay a little more" for gas.

Resident Jim Matter supported Trump's approach, stating: "In the long run, it's going to help us out, because if they get nuclear weapons, you know, we might not even be here in a couple of years. I think that [Trump's] done a good job."

Iran's closure of the Strait of Hormuz on March 2 has driven dramatic economic consequences. Daily shipping traffic in the critical trade corridor has declined to approximately two vessels, down from an average of 60.

American consumers have experienced significant impacts. Gasoline prices have surged to an average of $3.80 per gallon, increasing nearly one dollar from $2.94 one month prior.

The military toll has also mounted. Within three weeks of the conflict's start, 13 American service members have been killed and more than 200 wounded or injured, according to U.S. Central Command. Six personnel died following an Iranian drone strike on a mobile operations center in Kuwait, while another six were killed when a KC-135 refueling aircraft crashed in Iraq.

Millersburg is located in Pennsylvania's 10th Congressional District, a closely contested area that elected ultraconservative Representative Scott Perry in 2024. Perry faces a rematch against former news anchor Janelle Stelson in the upcoming midterms. Stelson lost the previous contest by only 5,133 votes.

The White House did not immediately respond to requests from NBC for comment regarding Robbins' criticism.

President Donald Trump got a severe dressing down from the New York Times editorial board Tuesday as it decried a chaotic, ill-considered and badly planned nearly three weeks of war.

"The war has become an exemplar of Mr. Trump’s chaotic, ego-driven approach to the presidency," the board wrote.

"He has relied for advice on a smaller circle of aides than past presidents did when ordering military action and eschewed the careful process intended to surface objections and potential problems. He has made ridiculous and contradictory public statements, including a claim that the war has nearly achieved its goals. He has tried to mislead the world about the tragic deaths of dozens of Iranian schoolchildren, which were caused by a mistargeted American missile.

"Almost daily, he demonstrates why he cannot be trusted with the most consequential matters of government."

Trump launched military action against Iran without articulating a coherent strategy to the American public or international community, the Times wrote. He has demonstrated "no apparent plan for bringing about the demise of the Iranian regime, something he had said he seeks." If his objectives are more limited — such as seizing nuclear materials — he has "not offered credible ideas for accomplishing it."

Additionally, Trump "failed to plan for a predictable side effect of a war in the Middle East: a disruption of oil supplies that causes a price spike and impairs the global economy."

Despite tactical achievements, Trump's stated objectives lack strategic coherence, the Times went on. Shortly after launching strikes, Trump declared: "To the great, proud people of Iran, I say tonight that the hour of your freedom is at hand." He subsequently called for "unconditional surrender of Iran's government" and claimed he must "approve the country's next leader."

Yet Trump "has not even begun to explain how he will accomplish any of these goals."

Three critical strategic failures have emerged, according to the Times. First, Trump repeated historical mistakes by assuming regime change through air power alone would succeed. Despite this precedent, Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu have pursued vague regime-change scenarios — arming Kurdish minorities or encouraging Iranian security forces to defect. Trump encouraged street protests in January, but "Iran's regime massacred thousands of demonstrators and remained securely in charge of the country."

Second, Trump has not addressed Iran's nuclear stockpile. Secretary of State Marco Rubio acknowledged that "People are going to have to go and get it," yet Trump responded to questioning about uranium: "We're not focused on that."

Third, Trump failed to anticipate economic consequences. Military adviser General Dan Caine warned that Iran would likely attack shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, but Trump dismissed these concerns. Oil prices have since "jumped more than 40 percent." Trump responded by lifting sanctions on Russia and pleading with traditional allies to protect shipping lanes.

The underlying problem reflects Trump's broader approach, the Times concluded. "Throughout his business and political career, Mr. Trump has often sought to create his own reality. When the truth is inconvenient, he ignores it and tells self-serving falsehoods." However, "war tends to be less amenable to spin than politics or marketing. The early reality of the Iran war is not cooperating with Mr. Trump's bluster."

President Donald Trump's retribution campaign is being systematically derailed by federal judges who are striking down high-profile indictments and blocking grand jury subpoenas targeting political adversaries, the New York Times reported Monday.

The cascade of judicial rejections signals that, despite Trump's control over the Justice Department, the courts remain a significant constraint on his ability to weaponize law enforcement.

Judge James E. Boasberg of Federal District Court in Washington, D.C., quashed grand jury subpoenas targeting Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell on Friday. The subpoenas sought information about renovations at the central bank's headquarters and Powell's congressional testimony. Boasberg ruled there was "essentially zero evidence to suspect Chair Powell of a crime."

The judge characterized the investigation as politically motivated, writing, "The subpoenas' dominant (if not sole) purpose is to harass and pressure Powell either to yield to the president, or to resign and make way for a Fed chair who will." Boasberg explicitly acknowledged Trump's revenge campaign, citing a Supreme Court case to note that "judges are not required to exhibit a naïveté from which ordinary citizens are free."

U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, Trump's longtime ally, has vowed to appeal the decision.

This ruling represents the latest setback in a broader pattern of judicial resistance, the Times reported. In November, a judge dismissed indictments against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James after determining that the prosecutor who brought charges, Lindsey Halligan, had been illegally appointed. Subsequently, two grand juries refused to bring fresh indictments against James.

In February, a Washington grand jury rejected efforts to indict six Democratic lawmakers whom Trump wanted prosecuted for sedition after they released a video reminding military personnel of their obligation to refuse illegal orders.

"Officials at the Justice Department have encountered an even more profound problem," the Times reported. "Prosecutors are floundering in the most basic steps of criminal investigations into those President Trump wants scrutinized."

The pattern reflects eroding trust between federal courts and Justice Department lawyers. Traditionally enjoying presumption of regularity — a legal concept granting prosecutors deference — DOJ attorneys have lost this credibility through repeated violations of court orders, contempt findings, and vindictive prosecutions, the Times wrote. Several prosecutors have resigned in protest.

Facing repeated grand jury rejections, prosecutors in Pirro's office have begun shelving weak investigations rather than present them to courts. An inquiry into whether former President Biden violated laws using an autopen for document signatures was quietly abandoned after Trump pressured prosecutors to pursue charges. Despite Trump's demands, prosecutors could not identify what laws had been broken.

Judge Lorna Schofield in New York similarly blocked subpoenas targeting Attorney General James, ruling the U.S. attorney who issued them held his position unlawfully.

A Minnesota judge is currently considering whether to quash subpoenas issued as part of an investigation into whether Democratic officials—including Governor Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey—conspired to impede federal immigration enforcement agents.

When Trump began his second term, he sought indictments, trials, convictions, and imprisonment for his rivals.

Megyn Kelly launched a full-on attack at President Donald Trump ally Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) over his escalating calls for U.S. military involvement in foreign conflicts. Kelly, an outspoken opponent of U.S.-Israeli attacks on Iran, characterized Graham as a warmonger promoting dangerous foreign policy.

Graham has made several aggressive statements across media appearances in recent days. During an interview with Maria Bartiromo on Sunday, he called for direct U.S. intervention in Cuba and urged President Trump to join Israel in attacking the Iran-backed militant group Hezbollah in Lebanon. Speaking to Sean Hannity on Monday, Graham told other Middle Eastern nations to intensify military efforts, stating they needed to "up your game." He also criticized Spain's Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez for opposing Iran attacks, telling Spain it had "lost your way" and calling for the U.S. to withdraw its military air base from the country.

Graham declared his support for Israel, saying he would support the nation "to our dying day," and compared Iran's potential new leadership to Adolf Hitler.

Kelly responded sharply on social media. She posted: "When did Lindsay Graham become our president? In the past 24 hours he's threatened Lebanon, Cuba, the Saudis, the wider Arab region and now—checks notes—Spain."

Kelly escalated her criticism further, stating: "Let's get real. The problem with Lindsay Graham isn't (just) that he's a homicidal maniac, it's that Trump likes and is listening to him, and Trump's favorite channel is parading him around like a Hefner bunny in stockings on every show."

The Wall Street Journal reported that Graham traveled to Israel multiple times to meet with Israeli intelligence officials and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, advising them on persuading Trump to authorize Iran attacks. Both Democratic and Republican lawmakers believe Graham influenced Trump's decision to begin bombing Iran.

Kelly's criticism reflects broader fractures within MAGA ranks. She joins former Fox News host Tucker Carlson and Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene in opposing the Iran conflict. Carlson called the war "absolutely disgusting and evil," prompting Trump to declare he is no longer part of the MAGA movement.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt minimized internal tensions, telling reporters, "This president lives in the real world. And with respect to MAGA, President Trump is the leader of MAGA. He's the creator of the MAGA movement, and there is nothing more America First than taking out terrorists."

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas alarmed a retired judge Tuesday as he broke from all of his colleagues on a question that poses an existential threat to the U.S.

Writing in Newseek, Ex-Judge Thomas G. Moukawsher wrote that Thomas shrugged when asked if Congress should hand its entire power to the president of the U.S.

Moukawsher's observation came days after the court slapped down Trump's tariffs as illegal in a 6-3 ruling. Thomas was in the miniority.

"Several justices wrote opinions supporting the basic result and two wrote in opposition," Moukawsher wrote. "But too many of the words throughout the 164 pages of discussion were about how to use the major questions doctrine and whether it’s a doctrine, a bit of pragmatism, or unnecessary. A fascinating bit of scholarship, but it missed the chance for a clear ruling on a major question for our time: Can Congress allow presidential dictatorship?

"Worryingly, for Justice Clarence Thomas, the answer appears to be 'yes.' Thomas argued that with but a few exceptions, Congress can give its entire power to the president.

"We can be grateful he was alone in this view."

Overall, the latest ruling goes a long way to improving the Supreme Court's recent abysmal approval ratings, he wrote.

The tariff ruling emerged from Trump's reinterpretation of trade law language. Existing legislation granted presidential emergency powers to "regulate" or "prohibit" imports during national security, foreign policy, or economic crises, the ex-judge wrote.

" Trump interpreted "regulate" to encompass tariff authority. He declared fentanyl and unfavorable trade balances national emergencies, then deployed tariffs globally as negotiating leverage. Compliant nations received tariff relief, while those Trump viewed unfavorably faced increased rates.

Six justices recognized this as constitutional overreach—replacing policy judgment with personal preference. Chief Justice John Roberts led the majority in two critical holdings: rejecting Trump's argument that tariffs differ from taxation, and invalidating his claim to unilaterally impose taxes without Congressional authorization.

But a significant concern remains unaddressed, he wrote. Congress should never voluntarily surrender core constitutional powers to the president, regardless of good intentions. Such abdication would effectively eliminate Congress and undermine democracy itself.

Justice Neil Gorsuch approached this issue most directly, asserting that legislative consensus produces wiser taxation policy than individual presidential judgment. However, no justice adequately emphasized this fundamental danger.

The decision focused on whether Congress granted Trump specific tariff authority rather than whether Congress could constitutionally grant such power. The Court applied the "major questions doctrine," requiring Congress to explicitly authorize major powers rather than assuming such intent. Two justices dissented from this framework.

But Thomas dissented, arguing that Congress can delegate virtually all its powers to the president except in a few very narrow circumstances.

The Supreme Court delivered a significant setback to President Donald Trump on Friday, ruling that he exceeded his constitutional authority when imposing broad tariffs under emergency powers legislation.

The justices voted 6-3 that Trump's tariff approach violated the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a 1977 law governing presidential emergency authority over economic matters.

Chief Justice John Roberts authored the majority opinion, joined by three liberal justices and two conservative colleagues, Justices Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett.

Roberts stated: "The president asserts the extraordinary power to unilaterally impose tariffs of unlimited amount, duration and scope." He noted that the Trump administration "points to no statute" in which Congress previously authorized IEEPA language to apply to tariffs.

Justices Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh, and Samuel Alito dissented.

The decision marks a rare Supreme Court defeat for the Trump administration, which has faced minimal judicial obstacles during its second term despite the court's 6-3 conservative majority.

The ruling's scope is limited. Tariffs imposed on steel and aluminum under different statutory authority remain intact. However, the decision invalidates two major tariff categories: country-specific "reciprocal" tariffs ranging from 34 percent for China to 10 percent baseline rates for other nations, and a 25 percent tariff on selected Canadian, Chinese, and Mexican goods justified by fentanyl trafficking concerns.

Trump retains the option to reimpose the struck-down tariffs under alternative legal authorities.