Featured Stories:
‘Trying to reinstate invasion!’ MAGA whines as Trump dealt another court loss
MAGA adherents have taken to social media to proclaim that the federal judge who ruled against the Trump administration's attempts to stifle asylum-seekers should simply be ignored.
U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss ruled in favor of 13 individuals seeking asylum, as well as three immigrant rights groups that challenged Trump's executive order suspending U.S. asylum law.
"In his decision, Moss ruled that neither the Immigration and Nationality Act nor the Constitution give the president and administration officials 'the sweeping authority' asserted in his proclamation," CBS News reported.
Top White House aide and architect of Trump's deportation program Stephen Miller posted, "To try to circumvent the Supreme Court ruling on nationwide injunctions a marxist judge has declared that all potential FUTURE illegal aliens on foreign soil (eg a large portion of planet earth) are part of a protected global 'class' entitled to admission into the United States."
Far from simply expressing their opposition to the ruling, MAGA took to social media to demand that the judge's opinion be discounted altogether.
Eric Daugherty with Florida's Voice News posted, "Federal judge says President Trump needs to RE-OPEN the border for 'asylum seekers' - POLITICO WTF? A JUDGE is trying to REINSTATE INVASION! Do not listen to this ruling AT ALL!"
Two MAGA commentators, @GuntherEagleman and @MrPitbull07 wrote, simply, "Ignore the judge."
Others commented on the recent Supreme Court decision blocking universal injunctions, with The Conservative Alternative writing, "The Supreme Court just ruled 6-3 that these universal injunctions don't hold legal authority. Trump needs to ignore every order that doesn't come from the Supreme Court itself."
Radio host Cash Loren posted, "Ignore that commie Judge. SCOTUS has already ruled they don't have the authority."
SeekingTruth took a more drastic approach, writing, "Send in the FBI or, better yet, the military police and charge the insurrectionist judge with treason and insurrection. Lock him up in a military prison while awaiting trial."
Demolished: Trump claims smacked down by AI technology he actively champions
Donald Trump's enthusiasm for artificial intelligence may be tempered by a new report from the Washington Post that demonstrated that five different AI models responded that the president plays fast and loose with the truth.
In recent speeches, the president has been a big booster of AI, in addition an executive order designed to “sustain and enhance America’s dominance in AI.”
With that in mind, the Post's Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, Stephen Henriques and Steven Tian decided to test the technology to see how Trump's statements hold up when compared to reported facts.
As it turns out, Trump did not fare well.
Setting the stage, the report notes, "To counter any inadvertent bias or systemic failures, we asked each of five leading AI models — OpenAI’s ChatGPT; Anthropic’s Claude; X/xAI’s Grok (owned by Elon Musk); Google’s Gemini; and Perplexity — to verify the president’s most oft-repeated claims or assertions," while pointing out each platform is independent from the others.
"Artificial intelligence discredited all the Trump claims we presented, fact-checking the president with startling accuracy and objective rigor," the report notes before adding, "Across all questions, AI model responses disproving Trump’s claims or rejecting his assertions were always in the majority (i.e., 3 out of 5 responses or greater). All five models generated consistent responses firmly denying the claims in 16 of the 20 questions."
As an example, the AI platforms were asked the touchy question: "Will Trump’s current tariff policies be inflationary?"
Both Grok and ChatGPT came to the same conclusion with Grok, on Elon Musk's X, replying, "Trump’s 2025 tariff policies are likely to be inflationary, with estimates suggesting a 1-2.3% rise in consumer prices, equivalent to $1,200-$3,800 per household in 2025."
The platforms also came back with answers unfavorable to Trump on his cryptocurrency involvement (Grok: "Trump’s cryptocurrency investments … present a strong case for a conflict of interest due to his administration’s pro-crypto policies, personal financial gains, and events like the $TRUMP gala, which suggest access-selling) and the even touchier question of "Is Trump right that the media is 'dishonest' or 'tells lies'?"
Examples like that led to the following summation: "How would Trump respond to the near-unanimous denial of his claims by the five AI models? Probably the way he always reacts to unfavorable news — by discrediting the dissent. But would he disavow the technology he is decisively promoting? Or, is there something fundamentally wrong with the accuracy of these AI models that is not widely realized?"
"The simple truth our analysis points to is this: Either the president is wrong, or the technology is a failure. We leave it to you to choose," the Post report concluded.
You see more examples here.
‘Oh my God!’ MTG shocks Steve Bannon with ‘whispers’ of Mike Johnson’s next bill
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) stunned MAGA influencer Steve Bannon by revealing there were "whispers" that House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) could be planning to pass a continuing resolution (CR) to keep the government open in the coming weeks.
During a Tuesday interview, Bannon asked Greene if Johnson had the votes in the House to "rubber stamp" President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill after the Senate approves it.
"I cannot imagine. No, no!" Greene exclaimed. "I can't imagine they have the votes. There's no way that Johnson has the votes in the House for this."
The lawmaker argued that specific provisions in the bill — such as funding for border security — must pass.
"And I want to tell everyone clearly, I want to tell everyone clearly, that this bill is maybe the only true victory once we get it right, once we can get it to a good point," she explained. "It may be our only real victory this Congress because there are whispers, and the whispers are getting louder and louder in the House that we are being told that they're going to give us another CR on September 30th."
"Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa!" Bannon interrupted. "What's that whisper about what?"
"Yeah, the CR, CR. So, government funding has to be done," Greene confirmed.
"Oh, my God!" Bannon gasped.
"Yeah, it's, that's absolutely, that's a non-starter. They're just the non-starter. And Steve, that should make everyone furious," Greene said.
‘Going back to prison:’ Elon Musk wants Steve Bannon jailed after SpaceX threat
Tesla and SpaceX founder Elon Musk ramped up his ongoing feud with Steve Bannon Tuesday after asserting that President Donald Trump’s former chief strategist would be “going back to prison.”
“Bannon is going back to prison,” Musk wrote on X, responding to a comment suggesting Bannon wanted the United States government to “nationalize” the billionaire's space technology company. “This time for a long time.”
The feud between Musk and Bannon kicked off in June after Bannon called for the Trump administration to launch a probe into Musk’s immigration status, suggesting the South African native may have overstayed his visa in the United States. Bannon has also called for a probe into Musk’s alleged drug use, with The New York Times reporting Musk to have used “ketamine often, sometimes daily, and mixing it with other drugs” back in May.
Bannon has also been critical of Musk’s brief tenure leading the U.S. Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, the federal task force established to reduce government waste.
Bannon was indicted in 2020 on charges off fraud and money laundering related to the “We Build the Wall” campaign, a fundraiser dedicated to crowdfunding funds to build Trump’s proposed border wall on America's southern border. While he would go on to receive a full pardon from Trump in early 2021, Bannon was indicted and found guilty in 2022 of criminal contempt of Congress after defying a January 6 subpoena, receiving a four-month federal prison sentence.
Musk and Trump have fallen out recently after the billionaire repeatedly bashed Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act. On Monday, he vowed to see Republicans supportive of the bill “lose their primary (election) next year” on Monday in a social media post, something Bannon has pushed back on.
“This was the guy that told the president he was going to cut two trillion dollars of waste, fraud and abuse, but then he backed it off to one trillion,” Bannon said Monday, speaking on his podcast War Room. “I don’t know, folks, I know some of you fanboys said we got $160 billion, but we haven’t seen the $160 billion. What we do have is a $9 billion rescission, and all of that is programmatic.”Political reporter caught off guard by Trump’s latest ‘odd move’ in court
In perhaps one of the most bizarre legal whiplashes since the start of Donald Trump's second presidency, he dropped his lawsuit against polling expert Ann Selzer and the Des Moines Register on Monday — but then filed it again, in a different court.
Politico's Kyle Cheney, reporting on the development, expressed puzzlement by the move.
"UPDATE: Trump has refiled his suit against Selzer and DMR in Iowa state court, an odd move since the federal judge in the original case denied his effort to transfer back to state court," Cheney posted on X. "Appeal was pending when Trump dismissed earlier suit."
The suit stems from a poll released by Selzer and the newspaper days before the 2024 election. The poll, widely regarded as the gold standard for forecasting Iowa voters, had then-Vice President Kamala Harris carrying the state, which would have been a massive upset as Iowa has not been regarded as competitive in presidential contests since the Obama administration.
Ultimately, the poll was off, with Trump carrying the state decisively, and Selzer later announced her retirement from the polling industry. However, Trump sued Selzer and the Register under a novel legal theory that the poll was a deliberate act of fraud designed to mislead the voting public and depress turnout for his voters.
Legal experts widely view the lawsuit as meritless and an attempt to intimidate journalists who might report negative things about the president into silence.
“This frivolous effort is motivated solely by a president’s desire to punish perceived political opponents and to intimidate would-be critics into silence — a breathtaking assault on the First Amendment and the underpinnings of a free society," stated Robert Corn-Revere chief legal counsel for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, in a press release about their legal brief in defense of Selzer and DMR. "Once you get past the groundless assertions, campaign-style hyperbole, and overheated conspiracy theories, there is nothing left.”
Internet loses it over Trump’s $199 fragrance line: ‘New frontiers of grifting’
President Donald Trump took the opportunity Monday evening to hawk his line of fragrances — and earned swift reaction from critics Monday evening, many of whom were astounded by the eye-popping price.
Trump has a long history of pushing fragrances, dating back to at least 2004, when he launched "Donald Trump, The Fragrance" in partnership with Estée Lauder.
In 2015, Trump released the fragrance, "Empire by Trump." And last year, Trump introduced the "Victory 47" cologne and perfume as part of his merchandise line, available for pre-order beginning in June, as well as a new fragrance line called "Fight, Fight, Fight," which included both men's and women's scents.
On Monday, the president took to his Truth Social platform to push his new fragrances.
"Trump Fragrances are here. They’re called 'Victory 45-47' because they’re all about Winning, Strength, and Success — For men and women. Get yourself a bottle, and don’t forget to get one for your loved ones too. Enjoy, have fun, and keep winning!"
The internet immediately weighed in on the announcement.
X user Burt Macklin joked on X, "Just spent my entire life saving on his new phone service. Going to take out a few payday loans to get this new fragrance."
Fellow X commenter Drew Logan jabbed potential buyers, writing: "You are a complete f---ing loser if you buy this."
Fred Wellman, host of the On Democracy podcast, repeated a familiar Trump refrain in resharing the president's post: "Thank you for your attention."
Journalist Aaron Rupar wrote on X, "new frontiers of grifting."
Former MSNBC host and Zeteo founder Mehdi Hasan questioned on X, "How is this legal?"
X user Kate from Kharkiv simply reacted, "Wtf? Lol"
CNN's Kristen Holmes homed in on the eyebrow-raising price.
"President Trump is launching his own fragrance line called 'Victory 45-47'. $199 a bottle," she noted.
And fellow X user Jeff Fleischmann remarked, "Trump launching fragrance line called 'Victory 45-47'. $199 a bottle. => Rumored to be made from 'essence' of his 'precious bodily fluids.' Appropriate warnings may or may not be listed on label. Use with extreme caution and ideally in the presence of a medical professional."
