Raw Story

I am seeing a lot of nonsense being reported about the America-attacking Donald Trump alleging last weekend he will not seek a third term in office ... as if anything that comes out of his dirty mouth is at all credible.

Have we learned nothing yet?

Listen to me, good people: Unless he has the decency to die first, America’s First Felon has no intention of leaving the White House in 2028.

What we do between now and then in revolt of this revolting man will tell the tale.

After 10 years of carpet-bombing the truth, can everybody at least understand that we can never trust a single word that comes out of the dirty mouth of the woman-abusing narcissist, who according to one count told an astonishing 30,573 lies and mistruths during his first chaotic presidency when hundreds of thousands of Americans needlessly died because of his RFK Jr.-like response to a once-in-a-century killer pandemic?

We need only rely on his past despicable actions to get at his true future intent, because whatever this racist lowlife — who is actively trying to disappear people of color and their history from our government websites — is saying and what he has actually done is far, far worse.

We know by his actions that after losing the 2020 election by more than seven million votes to Joe Biden, Trump began making it crystal clear to everyone that he had no intention of stepping down and honoring the vote of the people.

Thus, the Big Lie was hatched.

Rather than gracefully concede his loss, as Hillary Clinton had done four years earlier after winning close to three million votes MORE than him, Trump decided to go to war against America.

We know by his revolting actions, that after losing scores of legal challenges, and publicly threatening and shaking down poll workers and election officials, Trump finally summoned the worst people in America, his lawless base, to Washington in an attempt to violently overthrow the government.

We watched for hours as overmatched law enforcement officers were beaten with American and rebel flags, and stomped into curbs. We watched as Trump’s thugs breached our Capitol inflicting millions of dollars worth of damage, and then hunted down politicians threatening them with death and hanging.

And while all this was happening Trump took no action, except for hoping the insurrection would succeed.

Finally, when it was clear the attack had been put down, he grudgingly harrumphed in front of a camera on the White House lawn, and through gritted, yellow teeth told the people who had attacked us that he loved them.

He told them that he loved them …

I just want to stop here for a second and ask again, because it can never be asked enough: What would have happened on this terrible day if Black people had inflicted the worst attack on our Capitol since 1812? Would they have have been told they were loved by the outgoing President of the United States?

Fact is, there would have been thousands of dead and wounded littering the Capitol grounds, and most white people would have been falling all over themselves to say they got what they deserved.

Because that is how America operates today and always. We are a racist country governed by white people, who predominate our elected offices, our military and law enforcement barracks, but mostly our banks.

I’ll never forget any of what happened that terrible day, but mostly I’ll never forget that chilling moment when the racist Trump told those disgusting people that he loved them, because that’s when I knew for sure he was coming back.

It was yet another call to the far-right, racist extremists who cement his morally bankrupt base to “stand back and standby.”

By telling the people who violently attacked us that he loved them, Trump was making it plain as day that unless he was jailed and/or prevented by Congress from ever running again, he was going to be back to finish us off in 2024.

He was telling us he understood America and the degenerates in the Republican Party better than the elected officials who were supposed to keep us safe, and honor our Constitution.

He was telling us he knew this country better than Mitch McConnell, or Biden, or anybody who he appointed to be his Attorney General. He was making a bet on injustice and cruelty, and against the country he had attacked.

First, McConnell and 42 other gutless Republican senators failed to vote to convict at Trump's second impeachment trial, which would have prevented the America-attacker from ever running for office again. Then there was the three-dimensional chess-playing legal scholar, Merrick Garland, who spent four years successfully putting himself in check.

So catastrophically did Biden's attorney general fail us, that even the foot soldiers in the Jan. 6 attack who he was able to successfully jail are now back on the streets because he refused to lay a glove on their lawless leader, the most dangerous man in the world.

Finally, there was Biden, a good man who spent four years too often talking about an America that never existed, and ended his term perched in front of a crackling fire at the White House just days after Trump had carried out his threat to return, and enthusiastically offering him his hand, a warm smile and a, “Welcome back!”

Welcome back. My God …

When will people start taking this violent, democratic arsonist seriously? When will we start looking at his repulsive actions, instead of taking him at his empty word?

I bring all this up today because in addition to making sure we never forget what has really happened to America, we keep a close eye on what is really happening in America.

The American-attacking Trump is telling us in words what he has been telling us with his actions the past 10 years: The Constitution of the United States simply does not apply to him.

When asked during the same interview last Sunday in which he said he wouldn’t run again, NBC’s Kristen Welker pressed him on if he will uphold that Constitution.

Trump answered this way: “I don’t know.”

Now ask yourself what would have happened if Barack Obama had given that answer.

D. Earl Stephens is the author of “Toxic Tales: A Caustic Collection of Donald J. Trump’s Very Important Letters” and finished up a 30-year career in journalism as the Managing Editor of Stars and Stripes. You can find all his work here, and follow him on Bluesky here.

ALSO READ: 'Sad white boys': Fear as Trump terror adviser shrugs off threat from 'inside the house'

The Trump administration is weighing plans to publicly release audio recordings of Joe Biden’s interview with Robert Hur, the special counsel who raised concerns about the former president’s mental acuity after an investigation into his handling of classified documents.

That’s according to Politico, which reported Wednesday that while no final decision has been made, Biden’s camp is preparing for the possible release of the audio. The recordings stem from Hur’s investigation of Biden, which triggered a political firestorm when he concluded the Democrat was a “well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.”

The recordings have long been sought by President Donald Trump’s MAGA allies.

“The Hur audio will confirm what is one of the biggest cover ups in American history,” Far-right legal activist Mike Davis, a staunch outside Trump ally, told Politico.

ALSO READ: ‘Pain. Grief. Anger’: Families heartbroken as Trump backlash smashes adoption dreams

Biden had made attempts to block the tapes from reaching the public, asserting executive privilege last year to prevent House committees from obtaining the recordings, the outlet added. The Biden White House had argued that making the audio public could deter future witnesses in high-profile investigations and infringe on Biden’s privacy.

According to Politico, a deadline may force the issue.

“In separate Freedom of Information Act lawsuits brought by conservative groups like Judicial Watch and the Heritage Foundation and various news organizations, the Justice Department has been ordered by a judge to say whether it will stand by Biden’s assertion of executive privilege to block the release of the tapes,” the publication reported.

“DOJ officials will also have to indicate whether they will continue to press other arguments for keeping the audio secret, including that disclosure would invade Biden’s privacy and that it could interfere with future investigations by making high-level officials less willing to cooperate,” according to the report.

Far-right conspiracy theorist Laura Loomer is once again lashing out at the Trump administration – this time over the replacement for a nominee she herself helped tank.

Hours after President Donald Trump withdrew the nomination of Dr. Janette Nesheiwat for U.S. surgeon general – following complaints from Loomer – he announced a new pick: wellness influencer and metabolic health advocate Dr. Casey Means.

But Loomer still isn’t satisfied.

“Casey Means, the new Trump nominee for US Surgeon General doesn’t even have an active medical license in Oregon when she established her medical practice,” Loomer posted in a series of social media posts bashing Means – and her family.

“How is the top doctor in the US supposed to give medical guidance and advice to the nation when she doesn’t even have an active medical license in the state where she allegedly practiced medicine?” Loomer wrote.

ALSO READ: ‘Pain. Grief. Anger’: Families heartbroken as Trump backlash smashes adoption dreams

“This is so embarrassing for the Trump administration,” the MAGA influencer added. She went on to tell her social media followers that Means “didn’t even support Donald Trump” and questioned the Trump administration: “Who is doing the vetting?????”

In a post just minutes earlier, Loomer questioned the title of the position itself. “The term Surgeon General is interesting given the fact that there is no requirement to be a Surgeon to be Surgeon General,” Loomer posted.

“Turns out you can be a social media influencer and become Surgeon General,” she said. In yet another lengthier post, Loomer went after Means’ father, who she claimed “wrote a pro-trans children’s book.”

“I’m told that Casey is VERY CLOSE with her father and shares his views,” she wrote. “So basically, we are now going to have a Democrat US Surgeon General who doesn’t even have an active medical license and whose family is writing books about how to make children transgender.”

“What a mess,” Loomer concluded.

The Wall Street Journal's conservative editorial board trashed President Donald Trump's new idea to give Americans pricing relief as his "worst idea since tariffs," and potentially disastrous for prescription drug markets.

The conservative board has posted several times about the dangers of Trump's economic policy in recent months.

"President Trump and Republicans appear to be shrinking from reforming Medicaid, but that’s not the worst of it," wrote the board. "To replace the spending slowdown they won’t get in Medicaid, they may expand drug price controls. For that trade we could have elected Democrats."

ALSO READ: ‘Pain. Grief. Anger’: Families heartbroken as Trump backlash smashes adoption dreams

Specifically, the board wrote, Trump's idea would be to cap prices for prescription drugs covered under Medicaid at the cheapest rate they go for in other developed countries. This, they warned, would have severe unintended consequences — and wouldn't even make a dent in replacing the spending cuts the GOP is struggling to get the votes for in their budget reconciliation bill.

"Medicaid already receives hefty discounts for drugs under statutory formulas that require manufacturers to kick back a share of a medicine’s price to states in a rebate. Medicaid rebates in 2023 amounted to 52% of the program’s drug spending. Because Democrats in 2021 removed a cap on these rebates, state Medicaid programs may pay nothing for some drugs," said the report. "Drugs accounted for less than 4% of Medicaid spending ($21.2 billion) in 2023. The feds spent 10 times more on hospital payments. Even if Republicans required drug makers to give away medicines to Medicaid, savings wouldn’t come close to $880 billion."

Meanwhile, they wrote, this would actually cost more money in the long run.

"Drugs actually reduce Medicaid spending by preventing complications that require expensive hospital care. Take hepatitis C antiviral drugs, which have a 95% cure rate. A treatment course can cost upward of $24,000. But the Congressional Budget Office estimates that expanding Medicaid patient access to these drugs would save $7 billion over a decade."

The real risk, the board wrote, is that drug manufacturers would withdraw from Medicaid altogether rather than pay these rates, leaving more people to get sick and putting Medicaid on the hook for more expensive, drug-preventable illnesses.

"Drug price controls are a Democratic perennial," the board concluded. "If Republicans go along with Mr. Trump’s most-favored-nation plan, Democrats will invariably extend it to Medicare and the commercial market next time they control Congress. If Republicans lack the courage to reform Medicaid, they should at least do no harm."

The U.S. farming sector is on the brink of crisis as President Donald Trump's trade war implodes America's ability to ship crops abroad, reported CNBC on Tuesday morning.

This follows warnings from lawmakers in Trump's own party who represent agricultural areas, fearing the negative impact on the mounting taxes and retaliatory taxes from other countries.

"What began as a rapid drop in U.S. imports as shippers cut orders from manufacturing partners around the world has now extended into a nationwide export slump, with the U.S. agricultural sector and top farm products including soybeans, corn and beef taking the hardest hit," said the report. "The latest trade data shows that a slide in U.S. exports to the world, and China in particular, that began in January now extends to most U.S. ports, according to trade tracker Vizion, which analyzed U.S. export container bookings for the five-week period before President Donald Trump’s tariffs began and the five weeks after the tariffs took effect."

The numbers, per the report, are some of the worst that have been seen since the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted supply chains in 2020.

“We haven’t seen anything like this since the disruptions of summer 2020,” Vizion's CEO Kyle Henderson told CNBC. “That means goods expected to arrive in the next six to eight weeks simply won’t. With tariffs driving costs higher, small businesses are pausing orders. Products that once moved reliably are now twice as expensive, forcing importers into tough decisions.”

Even before these numbers, the report noted, the agricultural industry "has been warning of a 'crisis' and ports data is showing more evidence of lack of ability to move product out to global markets." Some of the worst hit areas are Pacific Northwest ports like Portland and Tacoma, which specialize in shipping U.S. crops to Asia; the Port of Portland has already seen a 51 percent drop in exports.

One of the core rationales for Trump enacting the tariffs in the first place was his paranoia over trade deficits, or countries sending more imports to the U.S. than they take in exports.

Economists have long agreed trade deficits aren't an inherently bad thing, but Trump and his advisers are convinced they are an indicator of unfair foreign trade practices, and explicitly set their tariffs based on the size of each country's trade deficit.

President Donald Trump is quickly running into a problem in court, Politico reported on Tuesday — federal judges have lost patience and trust with the Justice Department attorneys defending his policies.

The long string of cases in which DOJ attorneys under Pam Bondi have either been caught lying to judges, or the Trump administration has simply misrepresented judges' own rulings or tried to ignore them outright, are starting to work against them, wrote Ankush Khardori.

And it's eliminating a key advantage most administrations get in federal court.

"Judges and juries alike tend to trust DOJ lawyers out of the gate — even ones they have never met before — by virtue of their positions and their obligation to uphold the Constitution and advance the public interest," said the report.

"Many federal judges were once Justice Department lawyers themselves. All day every day, in federal courthouses across the country, the Justice Department benefits from a general presumption of good faith when a DOJ lawyer walks into a courtroom because people assume that they are both honest and well-intentioned. That may be changing."

A number of judges in recent months have grown visibly frustrated and distrusting, the report continued, as they "have been unusually sharp — at times directly questioning the honesty of the government’s lawyers and the accuracy of their factual claims — and taken together, they suggest that the administration’s officials are squandering the department’s credibility just when they need it most."

ALSO READ: 'Sad white boys': Fear as Trump terror adviser shrugs off threat from 'inside the house'

The case of Maryland father Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who remains in an El Salvadoran prison despite multiple courts' demands the administration work for his return, is a clear example.

This even makes its way up to the Supreme Court itself, a body with a majority of six Republican appointees — and the problem stretches even further back to 2019, when the court struck down Trump's plan to use the Census to interrogate people about citizenship and claimed it was just an attempt to enforce anti-discrimination law.

“We are presented ... with an explanation for agency action that is incongruent with what the record reveals about the agency’s priorities and decisionmaking process,” wrote Roberts, effectively calling out the DOJ's dishonesty.

"We may get our first real sign next week of whether these credibility concerns have reached any of the Supreme Court’s Republican appointees — who are now entering a period in which they will have to directly and substantively engage with the Trump administration’s unprecedented effort to expand the powers of the presidency, and who now hold the fate of much of Trump’s second-term agenda in their hands," the report concluded.