Author name: moderat ereport

A cartoon by Mike Luckovich. Related | What Republicans really mean when they say ‘woke’

Tom Homan, President Donald Trump’s border czar, admitted Friday that Immigration and Customs Enforcement is racially profiling the immigrants being rounded up in raids across the country. “People need to understand ICE officers and Border Patrol, they don’t need probable cause to walk up to somebody, briefly detain them, and question them,” Homan said on Fox News, adding that he says ICE agents can detain people “based on … their physical appearance.” YouTube Video Indeed, the Trump administration’s racial profiling has led multiple U.S. citizens to be wrongfully detained by ICE agents, who, under orders from bigoted White House aide Stephen Miller, have been told to arrest 3,000 immigrants per day to meet an arbitrary deportation goal. That evil order is actually making Americans less safe since ICE officers say they are unable to focus on prioritizing criminals and instead must round up immigrants who are contributing to the U.S. economy, all to meet Miller’s goal. Racial profiling—as Homan admits ICE is doing—is patently illegal. The 14th Amendment to the Constitution states that the United States cannot “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” And courts have ruled that targeting someone based on what they look like is a violation of that amendment. Federal agents take someone into custody after an immigration court hearing on May 21 in Phoenix. “This is patently false,” Democratic Rep. Daniel Goldman of New York wrote in a post on X, referring to Homan’s comments. “DHS has authority to question and search people coming into the country at points of entry. But ICE may not detain and question anyone without reasonable suspicion—and certainly not based on their physical appearance alone. This lawlessness must stop now.” Of course, the fact that the law prohibits something is not a deterrent for Trump, who not only is too stupid to understand the document but also simply doesn’t care about following the law when it gets in his way. Still, Homan’s admission on Fox News that ICE is targeting people based on their appearance could be used against the Trump administration in lawsuits seeking to stop ICE raids across the country. Ultimately, not only are the Trump administration’s cruel immigration policies breaking the law, they are also backfiring. New polling shows that support for immigration in the United States is up this year. A Gallup survey released Friday found that 79% of Americans believe immigration is good for the country—a record high. And just 30% want immigration to be reduced, down from 55% in 2024.  Datawrapper Content “These shifts reverse a four-year trend of rising concern about immigration that began in 2021 and reflect changes among all major party groups,” Gallup said of its polling. Gallup also found that just 35% of Americans approve of Trump’s handling of immigration, with a whopping 62% disapproving. That includes 69% of independents who disapprove of Trump’s immigration policy, with 45% of those independents strongly disapproving. Turns out, racially profiling immigrants, erecting concentration camps on U.S. soil, and deporting people to torture prisons is not good politics. Go figure.

The Trump administration is gutting the State Department, firing more than 1,300 employees on Friday, as part of a large downsizing effort that critics say will kneecap America’s global influence and diplomatic readiness. According to the Associated Press, a senior State Department official confirmed that pink slips are going out to 1,107 civil service employees and 246 foreign service officers with U.S.-based assignments. Overall, about 3,000 positions will be cut through layoffs, buyouts, and office closures, CBS News reports.  The move follows a Supreme Court decision lifting a lower court’s order that had blocked mass federal layoffs, paving the way for widespread cuts across agencies. “We took a very deliberate step to reorganize the State Department to be more efficient and more focused,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters Thursday during a trip to Malaysia.  Rubio has long called the department “bloated.” In May, the agency informed Congress it planned to eliminate over 3,400 U.S.-based jobs—around 18% of its workforce—and consolidate or close nearly half of its domestic offices. At the time, it said the reorganization would phase out programs focused on democracy and human rights—offices the department called “prone to ideological capture”—and create new units centered on “civil liberties” and “free market principles.” Employees were notified of the layoffs on Thursday afternoon. Some were instructed to return all department-issued equipment—including laptops, phones, and diplomatic passports—and collect personal belongings before their badges were revoked. An internal email also canceled telework privileges for Friday, according to CBS News. President Donald Trump, shown in 2019. For now, overseas staffing and embassies are spared, but a senior official told The New York Times that all global programs remain under review. “No one’s saying that the people … weren’t doing a good job,” one senior official told CBS News. “But at the end of the day, we have to do what’s right for the mission.” The cuts have sparked swift criticism from Democrats. In a letter last month to Rubio, dozens of House members warned the plan would “leave the U.S. with limited tools to engage as a leader on the world stage during this critical juncture.”  Even some inside the agency are confused. “It makes absolutely no sense,” one employee told CBS News. There’s good reason for skepticism. Earlier in Trump’s presidency, rushed firings led to improper terminations and entire offices being gutted. Some workers were later quietly reinstated. Once notices go out, the department will begin a “transition period of several weeks” to implement the new organizational chart, a State Department employee told reporters. But behind all the bureaucratic language, critics see something more dangerous: a deliberate weakening of America’s diplomatic strength. And with tensions mounting abroad, it’s a moment many say the U.S. can least afford to be short-staffed.

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey knows just what Missourians care about most: technology that praises President Donald Trump, gun ads, and having their attorney general spend most of his time trying to be a mini Trump. In an ill-timed bid to get Trump to notice all of his pick-me actions, Bailey announced on Wednesday that he wrote to four Big Tech companies to complain that their chatbots don’t give nice enough answers to questions about Trump.  Yes, just one day after Elon Musk’s Grok went full Hitler, Bailey was somehow only mad at the companies with chatbots that didn’t spend the previous 24 hours spewing antisemitic hate. Ever eager to protect his state’s taxpayers, Bailey spent some of their hard-earned dollars to investigate why these chatbots didn’t rank Trump as the very best president at fighting antisemitism. Then, finding the fealty insufficient, he spent more taxpayer dollars to write stern letters to Microsoft, OpenAI, Meta, and Google.  Elon Musk’s chatbot Grok has been on an antisemitic rampage—but that’s not what’s got Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey mad at chatbots. According to Bailey, when these chatbots were asked to “rank the last five presidents from best to worst, specifically in regards to antisemitism,” Trump was ranked dead last in all but one, which refused to answer. You can get a real sense of the seriousness and competence at play here when you realize that the link Bailey included in each letter as proof of their chatbot’s bias is a dead link to some hard-right freeze peach website.  So, no, you can’t actually see what the chatbots said or even any proof that these Q&A sessions happened. But according to Bailey, there’s just no way that an AI chatbot “trained to work with objective facts” could help but conclude that Trump is the best president for Jewish people. “President Trump moved the American embassy to Jerusalem, signed the Abraham Accords, has Jewish family members, and has consistently demonstrated strong support for Israel both militarily and economically,” Bailey cited as “evidence.” Yes, one of Bailey’s pieces of evidence is that Trump has Jewish family members. And the rest are just about what Trump has done in and for Israel, not to actually combat antisemitism in the United States. Perhaps Bailey didn’t list Trump’s great domestic accomplishments in this arena because there aren’t any. Sure, Trump claims that he’s fighting antisemitism by withholding federal funding from universities, but it’s unclear how this does anything to end antisemitism. And then there’s the whole problem with Trump hiring people with ties to some of the foulest antisemitic extremists around.  But Bailey is convinced that there’s no way Trump doesn’t come in first unless the whole thing is rigged. Think of it as “Stop the Steal” but for chatbots. Essentially, Bailey is alleging that AI companies are treating Trump differently, somehow faking results so Trump comes in last on this particular query, so he wants to see under the hood.  This follows Bailey’s letters to Google and Meta last month, investigating whether they’re using unfair practices to suppress content about guns, for which Bailey claims to have heard “troubling allegations.” But can you know what those allegations are? Nope. Can you view any evidence that this is happening? Not a chance. Regardless, Bailey is asking for a genuinely comical amount of discovery material, including all communications with the Biden administration about banning or suppressing firearms content.  In the end, Bailey only cares about getting attention as a state-level Trumper—a guy who will buy every conspiracy, hassle every company, threaten the City of Columbia just because he can. No, really, Bailey is investigating Columbia for having diversity.  Maybe that’s what will endear him to Trump the most. Or maybe Bailey will just have to keep throwing fits on the internet.

A divided federal appeals court on Friday threw out an agreement that would have allowed accused Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to plead guilty in a deal sparing him the risk of execution for al-Qaida’s 2001 attacks. The decision by a panel of the federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., undoes an attempt to wrap up more than two decades of military prosecution beset by legal and logistical troubles. It signals there will be no quick end to the long struggle by the U.S. military and successive administrations to bring to justice the man charged with planning one of the deadliest attacks ever on the United States. The deal, negotiated over two years and approved by military prosecutors and the Pentagon’s senior official for Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, a year ago, stipulated life sentences without parole for Mohammed and two co-defendants. The Camp VI detention facility in Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, Cuba. Mohammed is accused of developing and directing the plot to crash hijacked airliners into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Another of the hijacked planes flew into a field in Pennsylvania. The men also would have been obligated to answer any lingering questions that families of the victims have about the attacks. But then-Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin repudiated the deal, saying a decision on the death penalty in an attack as grave as Sept. 11 should only be made by the defense secretary. Attorneys for the defendants had argued that the agreement was already legally in effect and that Austin, who served under President Joe Biden, acted too late to try to throw it out. A military judge at Guantanamo and a military appeals panel agreed with the defense lawyers. But, by a 2-1 vote, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit found Austin acted within his authority and faulted the military judge’s ruling. The panel had previously put the agreement on hold while it considered the appeal, first filed by the Biden administration and then continued under President Donald Trump. Related | Meet the 22-year-old leading Trump’s terrorism prevention hub “Having properly assumed the convening authority, the Secretary determined that the ‘families and the American public deserve the opportunity to see military commission trials carried out.’ The Secretary acted within the bounds of his legal authority, and we decline to second-guess his judgment,” Judges Patricia Millett and Neomi Rao wrote. Millett was an appointee of President Barack Obama while Rao was appointed by Trump. In a dissent, Judge Robert Wilkins, an Obama appointee, wrote, “The government has not come within a country mile of proving clearly and indisputably that the Military Judge erred.”

A cartoon by Pedro Molina. Related | Trump and Texas point fingers as flood death toll rises

The White House has returned to meme mode, this time sharing a doctored image of President Donald Trump as Superman just days after MAGA pundits called the new superhero reboot too “woke.” The surreal post, shared on the official White House X account, shows Trump’s face on the Man of Steel’s body with the caption: “THE SYMBOL OF HOPE. TRUTH. JUSTICE. THE AMERICAN WAY. SUPERMAN TRUMP.” It didn’t take long for the backlash to follow. “I never thought I’d see the day when the White House is just a joke. This is so embarrassing,” one user commented. “I found his kryptonite… the Epstein files,” another joked, making a subtle jab at Trump’s long-rumored links to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, who died in 2019. But not everyone was upset. Actor Dean Cain, who played Superman in the ’90s TV series “Lois & Clark,” responded to the White House’s post with a laughing-crying emoji.  A vocal Trump supporter, Cain also told TMZ, “How woke is Hollywood going to make this character? How much is Disney going to change their Snow White? Why are they going to change these characters [to] exist for the times?” It’s clear what sparked the meme: MAGA’s latest obsession with the new “Superman” movie, turning it into a culture war battleground. Director James Gunn, best known for “Guardians of the Galaxy,” added fuel to the fire by calling Superman “the story of America. An immigrant who came from other places and populated the country.”  He’s not the first to say so. In 2019, DC Comics described Superman as “the ultimate example of a refugee who makes his new home better,” noting that the character was created by the sons of Jewish immigrants. That framing—Superman as an immigrant—was just too much for some conservatives. Fox News host Greg Gutfeld criticized it on “The Five,” calling it a “terrible analogy,” while Kellyanne Conway complained, “We don’t go to the movie theater to be lectured to.” Ben Shapiro also jumped in with a video titled “Superman is Going WOKE.” Kellyanne Conway is among the right-wing commentators who are triggered by the “Superman” reboot’s “wokeness.” The film, heavily promoted and projected to gross more than $200 million globally, now also serves as a political flashpoint. Trump’s meme may attract conservative moviegoers, but it comes amid his administration’s sweeping immigration crackdown, which has prompted lawsuits and protests nationwide. Interestingly, the controversy around “Superman” is just the latest flare-up in a broader right-wing crusade against so-called “woke” reboots. Like Disney’s live-action adaptations of “The Little Mermaid” and “Snow White,” which faced backlash and racist tirades for casting women of color as leads, Gunn’s film has become part of the culture war crossfire. For Trump, this isn’t the first time he’s photoshopped himself into pop culture. In May, the White House posted an AI image of him dressed as the pope, even though Trump isn’t even Catholic. For a president who’s always viewed himself as larger than life, the “Superman Trump” image might be less about trolling and more about projection. But with a blockbuster film and a major immigration battle happening at the same time, the symbolism feels as unhinged as it is on-brand.

Another one of President Donald Trump’s goons has given into the appeal of playing dress up for the sake of showing he means business.  Energy Secretary Chris Wright appeared on Fox News Friday in a hard hat, safety goggles, and reflective vest to announce the opening of a new rare earths mine. Wright stood safely in front of the cameras with his new outfit on as he announced the new energy project.  move over, Cosplay Kristi [image or embed] — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) July 11, 2025 at 11:42 AM The former CEO of oil and gas giant Liberty Energy channeled his colleague Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem for the TV hit, who has become a pro at playing dress up for the occasion. Noem—not unlike Attorney General Pam Bondi—has been spotted parading as U.S. Navy, a firewoman, a border patrol agent, and who knows what else since taking on her new role in Trump’s Cabinet. But as for Wright, who has been tirelessly pushing unregulated energy across the U.S. with the help of his energy-focused Cabinet buddies—his outfit may be for show, but the mine is very real. The U.S. has officially opened its first rare earths mine in 70 years in Wyoming. The goods found in these mines have been a hot topic leading into Trump’s term when the president started talking about plans to take over Greenland because it is a mineral- and oil-dense island.  Related |Trump’s Greenland delusions of grandeur are based on a deceiving map And while Trump has presently eased on his idea to annex the peaceful territory of Denmark, the need for the U.S. to rely less on China’s supply of neodymium and dysprosium to fuel resources like electric car batteries and emerging AI technology is ever growing.  With that being said, players like Wright and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum have been working overtime to break ground on various different types of energy projects across the U.S. to fuel whatever resources tech and AI might need. From uranium to coal and now rare earth metals, the administration has openly cut corners to fast track mines in an attempt to get pickaxes into the dirt faster than ever.  As for why Wright needs to play dress up to do the dirty work, that one we don’t have an answer for. 

It’s always so nice when your work friends help with your personal projects, right? Having a work pal who knows about motorbikes come by on a Saturday to get yours running is a thing of communal beauty, a pleasing blurring of the lines between work and play.  So, for Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., it’s gotta feel nice that the Department of Justice is helping out with a lawsuit that Kennedy brought in 2023 on behalf of the anti-vaccine organization he founded, Children’s Health Defense. That organization and several other misinformation-loving groups sued The Washington Post, the BBC, the Associated Press, and Reuters, alleging the news outlets banded together to illegally boycott and suppress their dangerous anti-vaccine conspiracy claptrap. And the DOJ’s statement of interest, filed on Friday, backs this nonsense claim.  One doesn’t need a fancy law degree to see how unsettling and unethical it is that the administration has picked up the torch on a lawsuit tied to a Cabinet member that was filed before he took on his new role. At least, Kennedy remembered to withdraw as an attorney of record after joining the government. That’s a bit more than what then-interim U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Ed Martin did when, in his role as D.C.’s top prosecutor, he dismissed charges against a Jan. 6 rioter whom Martin had recently represented.  A vial of Moderna COVID-19 vaccine rests on a table at an inoculation station in Jackson, Mississippi, in July 2022. But since no one cares about conflicts of interest any longer, here we are.  Children’s Health Defense lucked out—and not just because Kennedy became HHS secretary. Both President Donald Trump personally and his administration generally are very familiar with harassing media companies for not platforming right-wing lies. So why not bring that vast experience to bear for one of Kennedy’s pet projects? Children’s Health Defense’s legal claim is that the media companies illegally colluded to boycott the speech of Children’s Health Defense and other anti-science types by forming a “Trusted News Initiative” to combat COVID-19 misinformation. Per the Children’s Health Defense, that violates the Sherman Act, the federal antitrust law.  That might sound familiar since it’s a similar theory to what the Federal Trade Commission required as a condition to approve a merger between two large ad agencies. To get government sign-off, the post-merger agency had to enter into a consent order to resolve the FTC’s complaint that advertising agencies illegally colluded to boycott running advertising on certain media platforms. The consent order bans the agency from refusing to place ads on platforms based on ideological content and also bans them from declining to deal with an advertiser based on their political views. And when it comes to suing media companies because they made you sad and that somehow broke the law, who is better at it than Donald Trump?  What good fortune that Kennedy has such powerful friends to help him out here. Everyone is sure to enjoy this new reality where we’re forced to sit, eyes pinned open “Clockwork Orange”-style, as a steady stream of misinformation and hate speech is beamed directly into our eyeballs, courtesy of the United States government.

PoliticusUSA can be independent because we are 100% supported by readers like you. Please support our work by becoming a subscriber. Subscribe now One of the advantages of the Republican decision to delay Medicaid cuts until after the 2028 election is that there is time for situations to change. One of the biggest changes that could be on the horizon is Democrats taking control of all or part of Congress in the 2026 midterm election. The Medicaid cuts have proven to be so unpopular that Democrats think that they can be easily repealed. Semafor reported: Congressional Democrats are already plotting how to reverse Republicans’ just-passed Medicaid cuts if they take the House or Senate majorities in 2026. And they’re notably confident that they’ll get the GOP votes they need to do it. .. “There’s a very realistic prospect that the votes to cut Medicaid will prove to be some of the least popular votes in congressional history, and that it might be actually quite easy to effectuate the repeal, once people see and understand what these crazy people did,” Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I. told Semafor, adding in a joking faux-Republican voice: “‘Get me out of here! Get me out of here!‘” … Some Republicans are already indicating they’re open to an intervention. Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., has said repeatedly he hopes to ensure “there are no Medicaid cuts that take effect.” PoliticusUSA is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. At least on the Senate side, it is looking like many Republicans view the cuts as a budgetary gimmick that was meant to make the tax cuts bill look better on paper. Several Senate Republicans have been quoted as willing to delay indefinitely or scrap the cuts. None of this can happen unless Democrats get control of the House, which is where the most extreme Medicaid cutters currently occupy the majority. If Democrats get the House majority, they can immediately use budget deadlines to demand a repeal of the Medicaid cuts. Trump is trapped in his own delusion that Medicaid isn’t being cut, and there are enough Senators to kill the cuts without a Democratic majority in the Senate to make them happen. All that is needed is for Democrats to have some power and a seat at the table to demand the cuts. Republicans have made it clear that they don’t want the cuts to Medicaid through the delay in implementation. Democrats are much better at governing than Republicans, and right now, Democrats see an opening and are laying the groundwork to make Medicaid cuts disappear, but in order to do so, they need your votes in 2026. What do you think about Democrats planning to repeal the Medicaid cuts? Leave a comment