Trump to Face (Symbolic) Consequences for (Some of) His Crimes

Donald Trump’s bid to halt sentencing for his felony conviction in his hush-money case in New York hit a setback Tuesday when a state appeals court denied his request.

The president-elect is scheduled to be sentenced on Friday, barring a last-minute appeal in federal court, or even the Supreme Court. On Tuesday, Judge Ellen Gesmer listened to arguments in a brief court hearing before ruling against the president-elect 30 minutes later.

During the hearing, she asked Trump’s lawyer Todd Blanche if he had “any support for a notion that presidential immunity extends to president-elects.”

“There has never been a case like this before,” Blanche replied, admitting that he did not have an answer. He tried to claim that sitting presidents had immunity, only for Gesmer to remind him that Trump was not yet president.

If Trump’s sentencing for his 34 felony convictions ultimately goes through, however, he will likely be spared jail time, the judge presiding over his case, Juan Merchan, signaled last week. Trump was accused of using his former fixer Michael Cohen to sweep an affair with porn star Stormy Daniels under the rug ahead of the 2016 presidential election.

But after the Supreme Court ruled in July that presidents have near-total immunity, the prospect of Trump facing any real consequences for his conviction basically evaporated. Trump’s election in November also didn’t help matters, and his other criminal cases never made it to trial before the Supreme Court and the election rendered them moot. Now, with less than two weeks left until Trump is sworn in as president, he might not even get a slap on the wrist.

Read Trump’s lips: No new windmills.

The president-elect took time out of his rambling press conference on Tuesday to remind everyone just how much disdain he has for popular, efficient energy alternatives.  

“They turn to garbage … the only people that want them are the people getting rich off windmills, getting massive subsidies from the U.S. government.… They’re many many times more expensive than clean natural gas,” Trump said. “We’re gonna try and have a policy where no windmills are being built.”

Regardless of what Trump says, demand for wind energy is increasing—especially in red states. Last year wind farms created 22 percent of electricity generated in Texas and 59 percent of electricity  produced in Iowa. It’s an expanding, low-cost industry that employs 125,000 people.  

But the president-elect chooses to create his own narratives rather than engage with reality. “You see what’s happening up in the Massachusetts area with the whales.… They had two whales wash ashore in a 17-year period, and now they have 14 this season,” Trump said at the same press conference. “The windmills are driving the whales crazy … obviously.”

There is no scientific evidence to support that claim. 

If a bill that the House of Representatives passed Tuesday becomes law, undocumented immigrants arrested for nonviolent crimes will be targeted for deportation.

The bill was named after Laken Riley, a 22-year-old nursing student killed last year in Georgia by an undocumented immigrant who was arrested and charged with shoplifting but wasn’t detained. It passed in the House Tuesday by a 264–159 margin, with every Republican voting for it.

They were joined by 48 Democrats, despite the fact that the bill doesn’t require a conviction or charge, but merely an arrest, to target an undocumented immigrant. These Democrats appear to be supporting the GOP’s rhetoric demonizing all undocumented immigrants, seeking to penalize them merely for being suspected of a crime.

With Donald Trump’s promised mass deportations likely coming soon after his inauguration in less than two weeks, the 48 Democrats who voted for the Laken Riley Act appear to be surrendering early. Seven of them even voted against the bill in March, only to vote for it Tuesday. Here is the list of all 48 Democrats, with the seven who changed their votes in bold:

• Brendan Boyle—Pennsylvania
  
• Nikki Budzinski—Illinois
• Janelle Bynum—Oregon
• Jim Costa—California
• Joe Courtney—Connecticut
• Angie Craig—Minnesota
• Henry Cuellar—Texas
• Sharice Davids—Kansas
• Don Davis—North Carolina
• April McClain-Delaney—Maryland
• Chris Deluzio—Pennsylvania
• Shomari Figures—Alabama
• Laura Gillen—New York
• Marie Gluesenkamp Perez—Washington
• Jared Golden—Maine
• Vicente Gonzalez—Texas
• Maggie Goodlander—New Hampshire
• Adam Gray—California
• Josh Harder—California
• Jahana Hayes—Connecticut
• Steven Horsford—Nevada
• Val Hoyle—Oregon
• Marcy Kaptur—Ohio
• Greg Landsman—Ohio
• Susie Lee—Nevada
• Mike Levin—California
• Stephen F. Lynch—Massachusetts
• John Mannion—New York
• Lucy McBath—Georgia
• Kristen McDonald Rivet—Michigan
• Dave Min—California
• Joseph Morelle—New York
• Jared Moskowitz—Florida
• Frank J. Mrvan—Indiana
• Chris Pappas—New Hampshire
• Josh Riley—New York
• Hillary J. Scholten—Michigan
• Kim Schrier—Washington
• Terri A. Sewell—Alabama
• Eric Sorensen—Illinois
• Greg Stanton—Arizona
• Suhas Subramanyam—Virginia
• Tom Suozzi—New York
• Emilia Sykes—Ohio
• Dina Titus—Nevada
• Ritchie Torres—New York
• Derek Tran—California
• George Whitesides—California

A report from the inspector general’s office alleges that three senior Justice Department officials under Donald Trump had “partisan political motivation” for publicizing certain department activities ahead of the 2020 election.

Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s 53-page report, which was published by ABC News Tuesday as the result of a Freedom of Information Act request, detailed the efforts of senior officials to target states with Democratic governors ahead of the 2020 elections. That could potentially violate the Hatch Act, which forbids federal employees from engaging in certain political activities in their official capacities.

In August 2020, the Department of Justice published a press release announcing that it had requested information about government-run nursing homes in Michigan, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York, “despite having been provided data indicating that the nursing homes with the most significant quality of care issues were in other states,” according to the report.

While no one complained about the press release at the time, more recently, current and former officials described it as “unusual and inappropriate.”

As the election approached, the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division pressured individuals in the department’s Civil Division to send a letter to New York officials seeking data on Covid-19 related deaths in private nursing homes.

The report said that individuals in the Civil Division were “led to believe” that the order to make information about this letter public had come straight from then–Attorney General Bill Barr.

In October 2020, a senior official with the DOJ’s Public Affairs Department texted colleagues that they wanted to leak information about the letter, as well as other information about an investigation into state-run nursing homes in New Jersey.

“I’m trying to get [them] to do letters to [New Jersey and New York] respectively on nursing homes. Would like to package them together and let [a certain tabloid] break it. Will be our last play on them before election but it’s a big one,” the official wrote, according to the report.

Then, a week before the election, information about the letter was provided to a New York–area tabloid and published, accusing New York authorities of undercounting deaths in nursing homes—which, to be clear, they actually had done, according to the report.

On October 27, 2020, the New York Post published an exclusive article titled “DOJ seeks more NY nursing home data after finding COVID death undercount.”

“The then upcoming 2020 election may have been a factor in the timing and manner of those actions and announcing them to the public,” Horowitz wrote in the report. He concluded that the three officials had violated the DOJ’s media contacts policy, and referred his findings to the U.S. Office of Special Counsel.

Donald Trump couldn’t help but gloat Tuesday that he’d successfully bullied Mark Zuckerberg into making a spate of policy changes at Meta that will allow for the rampant spread of misinformation.

During a press conference, one reporter asked the president-elect whether he thought he had anything to do with Zuckerberg’s decision to supposedly recommit his social media platforms to free speech by demolishing its fact-checking system, as well as certain content filters and restrictions. 

“Do you think he’s directly responding to the threats that you have made to him in the past?” the  reporter asked. 

“Probably,” Trump replied.

Meta’s new policy changes comes as Trump prepares to return to the White House and make good on the threats he’s been making to Zuckerberg for months. 

“We are watching him closely, and if he does anything illegal this time he will spend the rest of his life in prison—as will others who cheat in the 2024 Presidential Election,” Trump wrote in his book Save America, which was published in August. 

The president-elect had previously called out his buddy “ZUCKERBUCKS” in a July post on Truth Social, promising to “pursue Election Fraudsters at levels never seen before, and they will be sent to prison for long periods of time.” 

Trump’s outrage at the technocrat was in direct response to Zuckerberg’s efforts to curb Covid-19 misinformation, which Trump readily provides. Zuckerberg’s content moderation efforts were rebranded on the right as a kind of censorship, rather than a public health and safety service. 

Zuckerberg has since gushed over the president-elect’s “badass” response to almost being assassinated, and donated a cool $1 million to Trump’s inauguration fund through Meta. 

Zuckerberg announced Tuesday that Meta’s platforms Facebook, Instagram, and Threads would no longer have third-party fact-checkers, instead relying on X’s model of community notes, in which the mob decides the truth. Additionally, Zuckerberg said he’d remove restrictions around topics such as gender and immigration to create space for right-wing talking points and opinions that might have been silenced due to outdated concerns over the spread of dangerous misinformation or, hey, even hate speech. Zuckerberg also said he would raise the threshold for removing any problematic content to allow for a freer flow of ideas, whose quality will soon go entirely unvetted. 

Marjorie Taylor Greene is unsurprisingly feeling empowered by Trump’s plan to change the Gulf of Mexico’s name to the “Gulf of America.” Trump floated the idea at a press conference on Tuesday, claiming that the United States already had ownership of the Gulf anyway.

“We’re gonna be changing the name of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America … what a beautiful name. And it’s appropriate … Mexico has to stop allowing millions of people to pour into our country. They can stop them.”

Greene appeared on popular right-wing commentator Benny Johnson’s show on Tuesday to gleefully reaffirm the president-elect’s goofy idea.

“I was so fired up watching the press conference today … I directed my leg staff to immediately draft legislation … to officially change the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America,” Green told Johnson. “And Congress has to do this.… It’s absolutely the right thing to do. We change post office names all the time up here. You better bet we are absolutely going to change the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America. Let’s go!”

This is Trump’s latest dream of world domination, as he has mentioned buying Greenland, pitched Canada as the fifty-first state, and raised taking over the Panama Canal.

The president-elect isn’t the first elected official to try to change the Gulf’s name. Former Representative Stephen Holland proposed a bill doing the exact same thing in 2012—but as a joke, a commentary on his Republican colleagues’ prejudice toward Mexico. Trump’s version is an oddly cosmetic nod to U.S. hegemony. The odds of Greene’s bill surviving remain to be seen.

Trump may be able to change the Gulf’s name on U.S. reference maps, but getting other countries (like … Mexico) to recognize it as such is a separate issue. The name Gulf of Mexico is credited to Baptiste Boazio, who was explorer Francis Drake’s illustrator in the 1580s.

Donald Trump has successfully blocked the release of special counsel Jack Smith’s final report on the two federal criminal investigations into the president-elect, at least for the time being.

Judge Aileen Cannon, appointed by Trump, ruled Tuesday that the Justice Department can’t release the report, in response to a request from Walt Nauta and Carlos de Oliveira, two Trump aides who were the president-elect’s co-defendants in his classified documents case. Smith was expected to complete his report in the coming days, and Attorney General Merrick Garland has said he plans to release the report publicly.

Cannon’s ruling states that Garland, the Justice Department, Smith, and “all of their officers, agents, and employees, and all persons acting in active concert or participation with such individuals” can’t release any part of the report until three days after a federal appeals court rules on the issue.

However, the case is pending in the Eleventh Circuit, which is outside of Cannon’s jurisdiction, adding confusion to the fact that she technically doesn’t have the authority to make such a ruling. Plus, Cannon only presided over Trump’s classified documents case and not his attempt to overturn the 2020 election.

Ever since Trump appointed her to the federal bench, Cannon has gone out of her way to give the president-elect favorable rulings, especially regarding the classified documents case, which she dismissed on flimsy grounds. Once again, Cannon has  given Trump what he wants, albeit temporarily.

It backs up Trump’s idea that the law and justice system don’t apply to him, and should in fact legally protect him. He has the support of the conservative-controlled Supreme Court, which gave him near-total immunity last year. With Trump’s inauguration less than two weeks away, he may just run out the clock before the public can see the evidence against him that should have resulted in a successful prosecution.

Donald Trump just announced a massive new deal with a man connected to a $600,000 payment to the FBI informant convicted of lying to the FBI about Hunter Biden’s business decisions.

On Tuesday the president-elect announced a $20 billion investment from Emirati company DAMAC to build new data centers throughout the Unied States, according to CNBC.

The company was founded by Trump’s friend billionaire Hussain Sajwani. He and DAMAC are pledging “at least” $20 billion toward the centers, according to Trump. “They may go double, or even somewhat more than double, that amount of money,” the president-elect said. The “first phase” will begin in Texas, Arizona, Louisiana, Ohio, Illinois, Michigan, and Oklahoma. Trump has overstated similar investments in the past.

In 2020 FBI informant Alexander Smirnov received $600,000 from Economic Transformation Technologies, or ETT. He began lying to the FBI about Hunter and Joe Biden that year, claiming they were engaged in bribery. DAMAC chair Farooq Arjomand is a large ETT shareholder, and has strong ties to Trump via Sajwani.

This is the second high-profile investment announcement Trump has made since his election victory, with Japanese billionaire investor Masayoshi Son pledging $100 billion in American spending in December.

Donald Trump delivered incoherent remarks Tuesday while railing against what he imagined were Joe Biden’s energy and water conservation policies.

In his first address since the results of the 2024 presidential election were certified, Trump responded to the Biden administration’s new standards requiring newly manufactured or imported tankless gas water heaters to waste less heat by using condensing technology.

So what’s the problem with that? Well, Trump couldn’t actually describe it, so he made something up.

“He wants all gas heaters out of your homes and apartments. He wants ’em to be replaced by essentially electric heaters,” Trump said.

Crucially, condensing tankless water heaters use gas, not electricity. But, let’s put that aside for a moment.

According to the Appliance Standards Awareness Project, more than 60 percent of tankless gas water heaters sold today are compliant with the new standard because they already use condensing technology. It’s also worth noting that tankless water heaters are far less common than normal gas tank or electric tank water heaters, which had new standards set in April. 

So, while Biden’s new rule might make non-condensing tankless water heaters less available, perhaps compelling some to buy electric or heat pump systems, it doesn’t mean that anyone is coming to replace gas water heaters with electric models. 

That didn’t stop Trump from going on an extended rant about it, though, which is included in full because that’s how inane it all is. 

“I don’t know what it is with ‘electric.’ This guy loves ‘electric.’ We’re going to be ending the electric car mandate quickly, by the way,” Trump rambled. “This guy loves electric, and he—we don’t have enough electricity, and then we have AI where we need more. And he wants to get, he wants everybody to have an electric heater instead of a gas heater.

“Gas heater is much less expensive. The heat is much better. It’s a much better heat. Uh, as the expression goes, ‘You don’t itch.’ Does anybody have a heater, where you go and you’re scratching? That’s what they want you to have, they don’t want you to have the gas where you don’t have the problems of the electric,” Trump continued. “And the source is plentiful. They’re much cheaper to operate, they’re much better, they work much better, they look much better.”

While condensing models have a higher upfront cost, consumers may save money over the product’s lifetime because it uses its own exhaust gas to help heat the water, wasting less energy. Switching to a condensing heater will also help lower greenhouse gas emissions, something Trump, who is set on ramping up oil and natural gas production, couldn’t care less about. 

“Sixty percent of homes and apartments have gas heaters. He wants them all removed quickly, these people are crazy. There’s something wrong with ’em. There’s something wrong with ’em,” Trump muttered solemnly.

Trump wasn’t done inventing energy polices there. He went on to talk about other appliances that the Biden administration has supposedly tampered with, as well. 

“They also want to go back, and they have already started that too, when you buy a faucet no water comes out, because they want to preserve. Even in areas where you have so much water you don’t know what to do. It’s called rain, it comes down, it comes down from heaven,” Trump said.  

“And they want to do ‘no water comes out of the shower.’ It goes drip … drip … drip. So what happens? You’re in the shower 10 times as long, you know?”

He also claimed that “no water comes out of the faucet,” which is bad for when “you wanna wash your hands.”

“I, as you know, I ended that policy. You can have all the water you want, makes no difference. [inaudible] Especially in some areas, we have so much water, we don’t know what to do with it,” Trump said. 

Faucets were only the tip of the iceberg for the president-elect.

“They want very, very little water to go into your dishwasher. Almost none. And you know what people do? They just keep pressing, pressing, pressing. Keep it going. They end up using more water. Likewise, washing machines.

“We’re a party of common sense, and things that I’m telling you right now are all about common sense,” Trump said. 

Unsurprisingly, a number of water heater manufacturers that produce condensing water heaters that meet the new standards, such as A.O. Smith, Bradford White, and Rheem, supported the new requirements, a Department of Energy spokesperson told Nexstar. Also unsurprisingly, the American Gas Association criticized it, saying that it would lead to a dearth of more affordable non-condensing water heaters. 

Trump’s railing against electric appliances coincides directly with his goals of increasing oil and natural gas production—but is ultimately a bad long-term investment in an increasingly warming world that will use less and less gas every year.

This story has been updated. 

Donald Trump Jr. paid a visit to Greenland Tuesday, flying to the territory on his father’s private plane, and seemed to give weight to the president-elect’s half-baked plan to acquire it—despite the fact that it is currently an autonomous territory within Denmark.

While the younger Trump didn’t have any plans to meet with political leaders, he brought along pundit Charlie Kirk and Trump administration staffer Sergio Gor on a trip he described as tourism.

“We’re really happy to be here. We’re here as tourists to see this incredible place,” Trump Jr. told a local broadcaster. He said he had spoken to his father, “and he says hello to everyone in Greenland.”

Later, Trump Jr. visited a restaurant with his friends and called his father on speakerphone.

“I just want to say that it’s a very special place. It needs security for itself but it also needs security very much for the world, the location, really,” Trump said through his son’s phone. “You see the people and the ships sailing around and they’re not the right ships. They’re not the ships you want to know about. So, we need security and our country needs it and the whole world needs it.”

The visit follows a Truth Social post from the president-elect Monday night where he reiterated his plan to annex Greenland and seemed to be under the impression that its people were on board with the idea, despite the fact that Greenland’s own leaders disagree.

“I don’t want to be a pawn in Trump’s hot dreams of expanding his empire to include our country,” Aaja Chemnitz, a Greenlandic member of the Danish Parliament, said. Last month, Greenland’s Prime Minister Mute Egede said that the island is not for sale.

What started as blatant trolling by Trump appears to be being entertained as a serious plan. The president-elect has also discussed annexing Canada, even inviting Canadian businessman and Shark Tank panelist Kevin O’Leary to Mar-a-Lago to discuss the plan. Trump has also floated taking over the Panama Canal zone, which was predictably met with hostility from Panama’s president. Is this what the next four years will look like?