Raw Story

MSNBC's Andrew Ross Sorkin mocked President Donald Trump for "blinking" under pressure and perpetuating the economic whiplash that continues to rile the markets.

Morning Joe host Mika Brzezinski introduced Sorkin Wednesday, asking, "We have Trump blinking? Or, how would you describe it?"

"Oh! I think it's full blinking, lots of blinking!" Sorkin quipped while fluttering his eyelids.

He continued, "Actually, the market's up this morning. I think a lot of folks actually think that he's blinking. Whether he really will blink, we don't know. But it is a 180-degree turn, both in terms of what he's suggesting about how he's going to negotiate with China. For the last several weeks, he's been playing the role of strongman. Now, he says he wants to be nice and wants to find a compromise, which is going to be interesting to see how the Chinese react to that and will have either leverage over him or he'll have leverage over them. "

ALSO READ: 'Retribution or bust’: 'Secretary of Retribution' joins J6 leaders to demand mass arrests

Sorkin also mentioned Trump's "180" on Fed Chairman Jerome Powell.

"[Trump] had been both, you know, on Truth Social and other places, saying that he thought that the federal reserve chair should effectively get fired, was too late, should have lowered interest rates. And now he's saying, 'I'm not firing him.' And I think he suggested basically that he was never planning to fire him, which is not what he said originally."

Sorkin said investors may be regaining some confidence because they see Trump course-correcting after "realizing he can't do all the things that he wanted to."

Sorkin concluded by pointing out the unpredictability of how the Trump administration has been reacting on any given day.

"What looks like a blink today could be very different tomorrow," Sorkin said.

Watch the clip below via MSNBC or click here.

President Donald Trump lashed out at U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell, an Obama appointee hearing a lawsuit over an executive order against law firm Perkins Coie.

In a Wednesday message posted on his Truth Social platform, Trump called Howell an "unmitigated train wreck" after she declined to remove herself from the case.

"I’m suing the law firm of Perkins Coie for their egregious and unlawful acts, in particular the conduct of a specific member of this firm, only to find out that the Judge assigned to this case is Beryl Howell, an Obama appointment, and a highly biased and unfair disaster," Trump wrote. "She ruled against me in the past, in a shocking display of sick judicial temperament, on a case that ended up working out very well for me, on appeal."

Trump is thought to be upset with Perkins Coie after it hired Fusion GPS, which funded an investigation into him in 2016 and paid for the so-called Steele dossier on behalf of Hillary Clinton's campaign.

"I could have a 100% perfect case and she would angrily rule against me," the president whined. "It’s called Trump Derangement Syndrome, and she’s got a bad case of it. To put it nicely, Beryl Howell is an unmitigated train wreck. NO JUSTICE!!!"

ALSO READ: 'Retribution or bust’: 'Secretary of Retribution' joins J6 leaders to demand mass arrests

For her part, Howell has accused Trump and the Department of Justice of trying to undermine the court.

“This strategy is designed to impugn the integrity of the federal judicial system and blame any loss on the decision-maker rather than fallacies in the substantive legal arguments presented," she wrote in one ruling against Trump's executive order.

“Adjudicating whether an Executive Branch exercise of power is legal, or not, is actually the job of the federal courts, and not of the President or the Department of Justice, though vigorous and rigorous defense of executive actions is both expected and helpful to the courts in resolving legal issues."

President Donald Trump backed off a threat he has escalated for weeks on Tuesday, telling reporters he doesn't have any plans to fire Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, according to the Wall Street Journal.

When reporters in the Oval Office asked Trump whether he plans to do so, he replied, “None whatsoever."

"Never did. The press runs away with things. No, I have no intention of firing him," Trump insisted.

The reply was a marked break from the recent past in which Trump proclaimed that Powell's "termination cannot come soon enough" and that he was a "major loser" who is "Mr. Too Late" when it comes to reducing interest rates — even accusing Powell, with no evidence or examples, of manipulating interest rates in 2024 to hurt his presidential campaign.

Trump was the president who initially appointed Powell to lead the Federal Reserve in the first place. However, he has grown enraged at Powell after the central bank head said Trump's tariffs risked price increases and could prevent the Federal Reserve from cutting interest rates as soon as Trump would wish.

ALSO READ: 'We’ve made a mistake': Trump’s trade war sends GOP into frenzy

Rate cuts generally result in increased borrowing and spending and energize the economy, but can also worsen inflation during periods when prices are rising quickly. In those situations, the Fed generally raises rates, and reduces borrowing and spending, to try to force price stability, which tends to come at a cost of higher unemployment and slower growth.

Complicating any potential move to fire Powell would be the fact that no president has ever removed a Fed chair before the end of their term, and current law doesn't actually provide a legal mechanism to do so, as part of ensuring the central bank maintains its independence from politicians who might seek to manipulate rates for election season.

The Wall Street Journal's own editorial board has condemned Trump's previous threats against Powell, warning that if Trump even tried to remove him, it could send the stock market into chaos.

The Trump administration responded Tuesday to a New York Times report that raised troubling questions about the whereabouts of a Venezuelan migrant in U.S. custody.

But even the Department of Homeland Security’s attempt to clear up the confusion surrounding Ricardo Prada Vasquez, who friends say “simply disappeared,” sent alarm bells ringing for American Immigration Council senior fellow Aaron Reichlin-Melnick.

“It should HORRIFY you that it took a major news story for @DHSGov to say publicly that it imprisoned someone in El Salvador five weeks ago,” Reichlin-Melnick told his social media followers. “The man never once got a trial. No judge ever found him to be a public safety threat or a member of a gang. No due process. No nothing.”

The prominent immigration attorney was reacting to a DHS statement that unsurprisingly pegged Vasquez as a “confirmed member of Tren de Aragua,” who the agency said on Tuesday was removed from the country last month.

ALSO READ: You're overlooking something very important about Trump if you think Hegseth is finished

“On Jan. 15, Prada was encountered at the Detroit Windsor Tunnel in Detroit, Michigan attempting to enter the U.S. from Canada and was referred to secondary inspection,” the DHS statement said. “Further investigation resulted in Prada being designated a public safety threat as a confirmed member of TdA and in violation of his conditions of admission. Prada was apprehended and transferred to ICE Michigan for detention. On Feb. 27, an immigration judge ordered Prada removed from the U.S. On March 15, Prada was removed to El Salvador.”

That timeline appears to fit the Times’ reporting that stated Prada had not been heard from or seen since March 15, when the Trump administration flew out planes carrying Venezuelan migrants from Texas to El Salvador.

But, Prada’s name did not appear “on the list of 238 people who were deported to El Salvador that day,” nor did he appear “in the photos and videos released by the authorities of shackled men with shaved heads,” the Times reported.

Tech billionaire Elon Musk's Tesla Motors posted its long-anticipated earnings report — and it painted a dire picture of the company, with net revenue plunging by three-quarters. Experts attributed a large part of the drop to people simply rejecting the brand, as Musk has become close with President Donald Trump and headed up his Department of Government Efficiency task force to dismantle the federal civil service.

Commenters on social media, including both Musk's own X platform and the alternative Bluesky platform, had a field day with the news.

"Tesla just reported what is likely the worst earnings for a mega cap tech company since Meta in February 2022," wrote hedge fund founder Spencer Hakimian.

ALSO READ: 'Alarming': Small colleges bullied into silence as Trump poses 'existential threat'

"A devastating Tesla earnings report today," wrote the anti-Trump group The Lincoln Project. "Net income fell 71%. Total revenue slid 9% from $21.3 billion a year earlier. Tesla stock down 41% so far in 2025, suffered their worst quarterly drop since 2022."

"Tesla posts a $400M profit, down 71% year-over-year. Revenue is down nearly $2B compared to the same time last year. Wow," wrote Washington Post tech journalist and Musk biographer Faiz Siddiqui, adding that the numbers are even worse than they look, because, "Without $595M in automotive regulatory credits, which other manufacturers buy off Tesla to comply with emissions requirements, Tesla would have posted a loss this quarter."

"This is why Republicans were posting pictures with Teslas," wrote former Ohio state senator and progressive activist Nina Turner, referencing the promotional stunt Trump and Musk held with Tesla vehicles on the White House lawn last month.

"Tesla’s the Hindenburg, and frankly it couldn’t happen to a s------r company," wrote anti-Trump author and retired journalism professor Seth Abramson, who added that, "Teslas are — by the data — poorly made, dangerous, aesthetically passé, short on promised luxuries, tied to fascism, and feature poor customer service and allegedly jacked odometers."

A respected immigration attorney expressed his shock and dismay on social media over the fate of a Venezuelan immigrant who disappeared after accidentally crossing into Canada and being detained by U.S. authorities.

Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, senior fellow with the American Immigration Council, wrote Tuesday, "This story from today is SHOCKING. The United States has disappeared a man. His last known whereabouts on March 15 was in the same place as others sent to El Salvador, but his name doesn't appear on the leaked list of people sent there. He is, for all intents and purposes, gone."

The story Reichlin-Melnick referred to was written by Miriam Jordan, national immigration correspondent for The New York Times.

Jordan wrote about Ricardo Prada Vásquez, who was working a delivery job in Detroit.

He was heading to the address to drop off a McDonald's order "when he erroneously turned onto the Ambassador Bridge, which leads to Canada. It is a common mistake even for those who live in the Michigan border city. But for Mr. Prada, 32, it proved fateful," she wrote.

ALSO READ: 'We know where this leads': How Trump’s crackdown puts Jewish people in peril

U.S. authorities took Prada into custody when he tried to re-enter the country, and he was ordered deported," Jordan wrote.

"That evening, the Trump administration flew three planes carrying Venezuelan migrants from the Texas facility to El Salvador, where they have been ever since, locked up in a maximum-security prison and denied contact with the outside world."

According to Jordan, Prada has not been heard from or seen since.

"He is not on the list of 238 people who were deported to El Salvador that day. He does not appear in the photos and videos released by the authorities of shackled men with shaved heads."

Jordan quoted a friend of Prada's saying, "He has simply disappeared."

"Mr. Prada’s disappearance has created concerns that more immigrants have been deported to El Salvador than previously known," Jordan wrote. "It also raises the question of whether some deportees may have been sent to other countries with no record of it. The U.S. authorities have confirmed that he was removed from the United States. But to where?"

Read The New York Times article here.