Illinois Governor Torches Trump Pardon Recipients With Major Penalty

Governor J.B. Pritzker is blocking any January 6 rioters pardoned by Donald Trump from working for the state of Illinois.

In a statement released Thursday, the Democratic governor blatantly ignored Trump’s attempt to give the rioters a second chance under his administration, ordering Illinois’s Central Management Service to reject all pardoned rioters and consider their potential participation in government as “antithetical to the mission of the State.”

On his first day in office, Trump issued a “full, complete and unconditional pardon” to more than 1,500 January 6 offenders, the first of many moves to reward loyalty above all else over the next four years.

In his statement, Pritzker listed the felonies and misdemeanors of the rioters who stormed the Capitol four years ago, among them members of the far-right militia groups the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers.

“The rioters attacked law enforcement officers protecting people in the Capitol, disrupted the peaceful transfer of power and undermined bedrock principles of American democracy,” the statement reads.

“No one who attempts to overthrow a government should serve in government,” Pritzker said, simply stating the absurdity of the president’s mass pardon.

A longtime Trump critic, Pritzker is the first governor to take direct, effective action against Trump’s sweeping list of executive orders. He has slammed a number of Trump’s other actions too, namely a memo that sought to freeze all federal aid, which has since been blocked in court.

A far-right, extremist group has compiled a list of foreign students and teachers that it thinks should be expelled from the United States for protesting against Israel, and turned it over to officials in the Trump administration.

Betar, a Revisionist Zionist organization inspired by European fascist movements, has been using facial recognition and soliciting tips to identify protesters at rallies and encampments opposing Israel’s brutal war in Gaza over the past year.

“The Zionist community in America has had enough, and while we vowed many months ago to build lists and have them deported, we are pleased that this will now begin,” a spokesperson for the group, Daniel Levy, told Salon. “We have already submitted names of hundreds of terror supporters to the Trump administration who proudly support terror and don’t belong in this country as they are here on visas.”

Donald Trump signed an executive order Thursday that gives federal agencies the power to identify, punish, and deport foreign nationals allegedly prejudiced against Judaism and Jewish people, a blatant attempt to stifle pro-Palestine activism in the United States. Betar wants to make the Trump administration’s attack on the First Amendment even easier.

Levy told Salon that his organization has given its list to attorney general nominee Pam Bondi, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Trump adviser Stephen Miller, U.N. ambassador nominee Elise Stefanik, and other members of the Trump administration. The list isn’t just composed of protesters, either: Betar is targeting academics who advocate for Palestine or who teach an “alternate history” that conflicts with the organization’s worldview.

This, according to Levy, includes people who advocate for a one-state solution: a single, secular democratic state encompassing both Israel and the Palestinian territories.

“When they say ‘one-state solution,’ it’s not for the benefit of the truth or for the benefit of the Jews. They want the six million Jews wiped out,” Levy said.

Trump’s executive order ostensibly aimed at antisemitism is straight out of the playbook of the right-wing Heritage Foundation, which, along with its political manifesto Project 2025, has crafted “Project Esther” to target pro-Palestine activists. An extremist organization like Betar fits right into that plan, helping with the fascist legwork.

A social scientist who wrote an op-ed for the Los Angeles Times has accused the paper’s Trump-friendly owner of bending his words to suit Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s appointment to the Department of Health and Human Services.

Eric Reinhart, a political anthropologist and psychoanalytic clinician, published an essay in the West Coast daily Friday suggesting that Kennedy’s controversial appointment could “pay off” so long as he “pushes real reform.” But the freelancer claims that the pro-Kennedy argument wasn’t his choice—nor his original intent.

“My first time working with the Los Angeles Times, and I expect also my last,” Eric Reinhart, a political anthropologist and psychoanalytic clinician, wrote on X following the article’s publication. “A vote for RFK Jr is a vote for nothing but chaos, the opposite of the essential public-systems building I argue for in the OpEd, and mass death.”

The original and final versions of Reinhart’s article differ drastically in message. The first paragraph of the published opinion piece takes an optimistic tone about Kennedy’s role in the Trump administration, suggesting that the virulent conspiracy theorist could be an answer and solution to the American public’s bubbling resentment toward the health care industry.

President Trump’s nomination of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. reflects anger and frustration at the wanton greed underlying America’s health systems. Major changes are coming. But we must not let those changes leave us even worse off than we already are.

But compare the soft and forgiving language of the published version to Reinhart’s original copy, which he shared on X shortly after the article’s publication. In it, he likens the sociopolitical reckoning of Kennedy’s nomination to the assassination of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson.

Trump’s nomination of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to lead the nation’s health agencies and the assassination of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson are both reflections of the same reality: anger at the wanton greed underlying America’s health systems has reached a fever pitch, and it will not be held back any longer. Major changes are coming, but they may leave us even worse off than we already are.

Additionally, the published iteration of the text completely nixed Reinhart’s closing remarks, in which the social scientist reiterated Kennedy’s blatant disregard for scientific evidence.

Although RFK Jr. and Luigi Mangione are both responses to the same underlying problem of US healthcare corruption, there is a major difference between them: one operated outside the law to kill one person in defense of millions, whereas the other—via his egomaniacal disregard for scientific evidence—seeks to use law itself to inflict preventable death on those millions.

Reinhart vented deeper frustration on BlueSky, where he pointed fingers at the political interests of the paper’s biotech billionaire owner, Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, as a potential reason for the intervention in his thesis.

“Editing out the most urgent point of an OpEd in the minutes before sending to press while then also assigning a title and image that suggest an argument entirely opposite to the author’s clear intent is pretty shitty,” Reinhart wrote.

It is not unusual for news outlets to edit, trim, change, or otherwise alter copy before it reaches publication—even without the author’s consent. But it is noteworthy that the Los Angeles Times’ heavy-handed pen sliced and diced a new argument out of a piece criticizing Kennedy, days after the paper’s owner formally endorsed him.

Soon-Shiong publicly supported Kennedy’s nomination to head HHS earlier this week. In a post on Twitter, the billionaire said that he had not met Kennedy “until a few months ago” but over time had come to “truly believe” that he had “the American public’s best interests at heart.”

“I have worried about toxins and the cause of cancer my entire career. As a physician scientist I really hope he is confirmed tomorrow,” Soon-Shiong posted on Tuesday.

In 2018, Soon-Shiong took control of the Los Angeles Times and The San Diego Union-Tribune in a $500 million deal from Tribune Publishing.

Read Reinhart’s unedited op-ed here.

Republican Congressman Eric Burlison admitted Friday there was no evidence that diversity, equity, and inclusion policies were responsible for the deadly plane crash near Washington, D.C., earlier this week.

Sixty-seven people are believed to be dead after a passenger plane hit a military helicopter midair near Ronald Reagan Nation Airport. The actual cause of the crash remains unknown, but Donald Trump has blamed who he always does: anyone who isn’t a white, straight, able-bodied man.

Trump’s cronies have been quick to echo his harmful theory, but Burlison was forced to admit there was no evidence to prove it, in an interview with Fox News.

“Do you have any evidence that any of those hires were DEI hires?” host Maria Bartiromo asked Burlison after he too criticized the FAA’s diversity hires.

“Not until we get into the investigation,” Burlison admitted.

Burlison is taking a page from Trump’s book. In a press conference on Thursday, Trump said the Federal Aviation Administration’s efforts to hire “workers who suffer severe intellectual disabilities, psychiatric problems, and other mental and physical conditions” in air traffic control centers led to the crash. Trump admitted he had no evidence to back his claim but said he believed it to be true because he has “common sense.”

It’s yet another ridiculous attempt to blame literally every problem on DEI efforts enacted by Joe Biden and Barack Obama.

Ironically though, it was Trump’s own first administration that launched a diversity program to hire air controllers with the very criteria he claimed were responsible for the deadliest U.S. plane crash in 25 years, The Washington Post reported Thursday evening.

Republicans’ new Senate majority leader, John Thune, is being forced to choose between his fearless MAGA leader and the constituents who chose him to represent their interests. 

Trump on Thursday confirmed his plans to levy aggressive 25 percent tariffs on goods from Canada and Mexico, after complaining about “the people that have poured into our country,” “the drugs, fentanyl and everything else,” and “the massive subsidies we are giving to Canada and to Mexico in the form of deficits.”

While Trump and his base cheer on the strongman isolationism, Thune’s constituents in his home state of South Dakota could potentially suffer. The state’s entire economy is reliant on agriculture—it exports soybeans, corn, and beef primarily, according to a Politico analysis. And it just so happens that China and Mexico are the biggest export markets for U.S. agriculture. 

Tariffs against these countries would cripple South Dakota’s economy, as they did in 2018 when Trump enacted the very same tariffs during his trade war. Senators in similar precarious situations are looking to Thune to talk the president down.  

“Obviously the president is somebody who sees great value in the use of tariffs as a tool and we’ll have, I’m sure, lots of conversations,” Thune told Politico, striking a diplomatic chord. “People up here have different views about how and when to use them but I see value when they are used in a targeted way.”

Meanwhile, Thune has been pushing the president’s Cabinet picks through, even after Trump overruled Thune’s plan to split the GOP tax bill in two, signaling that he won’t be open to the Senate majority leader’s hesitations. We’ll see if Thune finds the guts to speak up.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. admitted to senators late Thursday that there was at least one incident in which he settled a case over inappropriate behavior.

The revelation came by way of a series of follow-up questions Democrats sent to the Department of Health and Human Services secretary nominee. Senators wanted to know if Kennedy had ever reached a legal settlement over accusations of misconduct.

Two questions in the list, obtained by Mother Jones, read as follows:

“Yes or no, have you ever reached a settlement agreement with an individual or organization that accused you of misconduct or inappropriate behavior?”

“Yes or no, have you ever agreed to or been subject to a non-disclosure agreement with any individual or organization?”

Kennedy answered yes to each one but offered no follow-up details.

Mother Jones reached out to Kennedy to elaborate on the answer, querying if the 71-year-old’s settlements had to do with previously reported allegations, such as claims that he allegedly groped his children’s babysitter, Eliza Cooney, in the late 1990s.

A spokesperson for Kennedy, Katie Miller, sent a brief reply to the publication: “As a matter of policy, we don’t respond to Mother Jones.”

Kennedy had denied Cooney’s accusation when asked about it during his Senate confirmation hearing. And when Senator Patty Murray asked if there were other instances where Kennedy made “sexual advances toward an individual without their consent,” he said, “No.”

Kennedy, a virulent vaccine conspiracy theorist, was tapped by Donald Trump to run the country’s health policy.

His private life has given pause to a number of lawmakers responsible for confirming him. Kennedy has publicly admitted to dumping a dead bear cub in Central Park, believed the 2004 presidential election was stolen from Democrat John Kerry, peddled conspiracies that the CIA killed his uncle, chainsawed off the head of a dead whale (per his daughter Kick Kennedy), and last week was described by his cousin Caroline Kennedy as a “predator” who is “addicted to attention and power.”

“I have known Bobby my whole life; we grew up together,” the former ambassador to Australia and Japan wrote in a letter to lawmakers obtained by The Washington Post.

“His basement, his garage, his dorm room were the centers of the action where drugs were available, and he enjoyed showing off how he put baby chickens and mice in the blender to feed his hawks,” she continued. “It was often a perverse scene of despair and violence.”

And Kennedy’s history in public health is questionable, at best. His stances, which include unscientific beliefs that AIDS is not caused by HIV and that a large number of vaccines should be stripped from the market, could have major impacts on the agency designed to protect America’s health, especially as bird flu outbreaks begin to dot the country.

On Wednesday, a career official at the U.S. Agency for International Development was placed on administrative leave after he undid an order from Elon Musk’s “Department of Government Efficiency” to immediately fire several career employees at the agency.

Nicholas Gottlieb, the USAID’s director of employee and labor relations, sent an email Thursday reversing the terminations of dozens of senior USAID staff, calling the firings “illegal” and a violation of “due process.”

“You may receive another email within the day reinstating your leave status. However, that notice will not come from me,” Gottlieb wrote. “I wish you all the best—you do not deserve this.”

Gottlieb later emailed the rest of USAID’s staff to notify them that he was being placed on leave, telling them that “it is and has always been my office’s commitment to the workforce that we ensure all employees receive their due process in any of our actions.

“I will not be a party to a violation of that commitment,” Gottlieb wrote.

The Trump administration on Monday fired more than 50 senior USAID officials after accusing the agency of attempting to “circumvent” the president’s executive order freezing all foreign aid. Gottleib then intervened, and has been sidelined for his efforts.

Trump and Musk, through the so-called “Department of Government Efficiency,” have attempted to overhaul and slash the federal workforce, with poor results. What happened to Gottlieb is an example of the consequences for opposing the tech mogul and fascism enthusiast, as well as the president’s ill-thought-out executive orders. And just like the president’s firing of several agency inspectors general last week, it’s probably illegal. Will there be any consequences?

Less than 24 hours after Kash Patel, Donald Trump’s pick to lead the FBI, tried to convince Democrats he doesn’t have an “enemies list,” six senior FBI leaders were ordered to retire or resign if they don’t want to be fired by Monday, CNN reported.

Some of the officials, who oversee everything from cybersecurity to criminal investigations, were demoted during Patel’s Senate confirmation hearing on Thursday, where he failed to clearly answer a number of questions about his plans to go after Trump’s enemies in the bureau.

The Trump loyalist has previously said he would shut down the FBI’s Hoover Building and “replace it with a mausoleum of the Deep State,” sparking concern that Patel would use his power to weaponize the country’s national security organization.

In recent weeks, the FBI Agents Association urged Patel not to punish agents investigating Trump and the January 6 attack on the Capitol. Fear in the bureau escalated this week after Trump fired a number of career Justice Department lawyers who worked on his criminal cases, just the latest move in his gutting of the federal workforce.

On Thursday, Patel feigned ignorance of, but showed no regret about, his plans to go after the president’s adversaries.

“I have no interest, no desire, and will not, if confirmed, go backwards. There will be no politicization at the FBI. There will be no retributive actions taken by any FBI,” Patel said at the hearing, as several officials promoted by former FBI Director Christopher Wray were told to resign the same day.

Patel hopes to join alcoholic Pete Hegseth, fossil fuel ally Lee Zeldin, and former WWE executive Linda McMahon in Trump’s Cabinet.

President Donald Trump is warning a coalition of countries to find “another sucker nation” if they opt to move away from the U.S. dollar.

The major countries in BRICS—Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa—continue to use the U.S. dollar as a reserve currency and for international trade, ensuring America’s financial dominance on the world stage. But on Thursday night, despite the nation reeling from a tragic plane crash in Washington, Trump took to social media to threaten that arrangement, promising that the 10-country coalition (which includes some of America’s biggest trading partners) would face “100 percent tariffs” if it created a new BRICS currency to replace the dollar.

“The idea that the BRICS Countries are trying to move away from the Dollar, while we stand by and watch, is OVER,” Trump posted on Truth Social. “We are going to require a commitment from these seemingly hostile Countries that they will neither create a new BRICS Currency, nor back any other Currency to replace the mighty U.S. Dollar or, they will face 100% Tariffs, and should expect to say goodbye to selling into the wonderful U.S. Economy.

“They can go find another sucker Nation,” he continued. “There is no chance that BRICS will replace the U.S. Dollar in International Trade, or anywhere else, and any Country that tries should say hello to Tariffs, and goodbye to America!”

In a statement to Newsweek, South Africa’s Department of International Relations and Cooperation highlighted that it held the largest economy in Africa, while three other member states—China, India, and Brazil—are among the top 10 countries in the world by population, area, and gross domestic product. The department also emphasized that the major BRICS nations are members of the G20, alongside the United States, and continue to invest billions of U.S. dollars in international projects.

“BRICS leaders have called for a reformed international financial system to facilitate trade in local currencies,” the department said. “However, BRICS is not discussing the creation of a common BRICS currency.

“Instead, South Africa supports the increased use of national currencies in international trade and financial transactions to mitigate the impact of foreign exchange fluctuations, rather than focusing on de-dollarisation.

“The strengthening of correspondent banking networks and the development of infrastructure for settlements in national currencies could further this aim,” they continued. “Enhancing BRICS payment systems to accommodate trading in local currencies does not imply de-dollarisation.”

Tulsi Gabbard’s nomination for director of national intelligence may be in serious jeopardy.

Multiple Senate Republicans have cooled on Gabbard, dashing hopes that she’d receive the same warm treatment the GOP gave Trump’s now Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, a slightly more controversial pick. Though there are many national security concerns about Gabbard becoming the nation’s top intel chief, most of the conservative qualms about Gabbard appear to be due to her refusal to label NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden a “traitor” in her confirmation hearing Thursday.

“Do you believe, as the chairman of this committee believes, as the vast majority of members of our intelligence agencies believe, that Edward Snowden was a traitor to the United States of America?” asked Democratic Senator Michael Bennet. “He broke the law,” Gabbard replied, refusing to answer the question.

“I think it would befit you and be helpful to the way you are perceived by members of the intelligence community, if you would at least acknowledge that the greatest whistleblower in American history, so-called, harmed national security by breaking the laws of the land around our intel authority,” Republican Todd Young told Gabbard. He was “visibly frustrated” by Gabbard’s refusal to fully denounce Snowden.

Other Republicans echoed these sentiments.

“With Ms. Gabbard, I have said that it was like having a sheet of music that was missing notes.… There are many notes still missing and a number of sour notes and awkward silences that simply don’t ring true as a political philosophy on critical national security issues,” said Senator John Curtis after Gabbard’s confirmation hearing. “I leave today’s hearing with more questions than answers.”