Trump Team Pissed as L.A. Juries Refuse to Indict ICE Protesters

It seems the city that rose up to protect its neighbors from Immigration and Customs Enforcement is similarly protective of its protesters—especially when they’re being tried on trumped-up charges.

Donald Trump’s federal prosecutor in Los Angeles is struggling to get indictments for protesters arrested in anti-ICE demonstrations earlier this summer, the Los Angeles Times reported.

Grand jury indictments only require probable cause that a crime has been committed—a lower bar than the standard for a criminal conviction. And even so, out of the 38 felony cases filed by Trump-appointed U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli, only seven have resulted in indictments.

In a recent case, the grand jury refused to indict a protester accused of attacking federal law enforcement officials. And Trump’s prosecutor was not happy: The Times described “screaming” that was “audible” from outside the grand jury room coming from Essayli.

According to legal experts interviewed by the Times, it’s incredibly rare that a grand jury wouldn’t indict in cases like these—which indicates weak cases brought by an attorney whose goal may be to promote Trump’s anti-immigration agenda rather than go after real crime.

Meghan Blanco, a former federal prosecutor in L.A., said the cases are “not deserving of prosecution.” Some may have even been based on faulty intel from ICE agents, the supposed victims of the alleged crimes.

Either “what is being alleged isn’t a federal crime, or it simply did not happen,” she told the Times.

In June, thousands of Angelenos took to the streets to protest ICE raids that saw the federal anti-immigration officers arresting people attending mandatory check-ins at a federal building and snatching people from Home Depot. Though the protests were largely peaceful, some escalated as ICE and the Los Angeles Police Department used tear gas and “less-lethal” munitions on the crowd.

Community organizer and protester Ron Gochez said at the time that it was “brutal violence” but that “what they didn’t think was going to happen was that the people would resist.”

To the Times, former prosecutor Carley Palmer said that Essayli’s struggle to get his cases through was “a strong indication that the priorities of the prosecutor’s office are out of sync with the priorities of the general community.” Yet again, the Trump administration has likely underestimated L.A. residents’ appetite for resistance.

On Wednesday night, Senator Ted Cruz cast cold water on MAGA’s burning zeal to lock up former President Barack Obama for treason.

Joining Fox News’s Laura Ingraham, Cruz acknowledged that the chances Obama is prosecuted for treason are slim to none.

In recent days, Donald Trump’s White House released evidence it claimed proves a “treasonous conspiracy” by the Obama administration to rig the 2016 and 2020 elections. The so-called evidence claims that Obama manufactured intelligence about Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election “to lay the groundwork for what was essentially a years-long coup against President Trump.”

The president has seized on the purported findings, calling Obama guilty of “treason” and saying, “It’s time to go after people.” Over the weekend, the president took to Truth Social to share memes about imprisoning Obama. Obama’s office has dismissed the allegations, suggesting they’re “a weak attempt at distraction” from the Epstein scandal.

Dashing MAGA dreams of Obama behind bars, Ingraham on Wednesday said, “He’s not going to be prosecuted for treason. It’s not going to happen.”

Though Cruz floated other plans to go after Obama officials, he agreed. “He’s not going to be prosecuted in all likelihood for treason.”

“At all,” Ingraham added.

Cruz cited not the weakness of Gabbard’s madcap accusations—which he called “very important, troubling new information”—but the fact that the Supreme Court greatly expanded the powers of the presidency in its 2024 decision in Trump v. United States, which, per Justice Sonia Sotomayor, makes the individual holding the highest office a “king above the law.”

Cruz’s point is similar to one made on Wednesday by The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board, which reminded Trump that the Supreme Court’s ruling applies to all presidents, not just to himself.

“Leave aside the narrow definition of ‘treason’ in the Constitution,” wrote the Journal’s editorial board. “Has Mr. Trump so quickly forgotten his victory at the Supreme Court in Trump v. U.S.? The Justices held 6-3 that a President can’t be prosecuted for exercising ‘core constitutional powers,’ and he has ‘presumptive immunity’ for ‘official acts.’ This surely includes Mr. Obama’s supervision of spy agencies.”

The Treasury Department wants you to Venmo it to help with the $36.65 trillion national debt.

On Wednesday, NPR’s Jack Corbett pointed out that there was an option on Pay.gov, the Treasury’s online payment platform, where Americans could go to throw their Venmo dollars at the gargantuan national debt. You can also use PayPal. The page is titled “Gifts to Reduce the Public Debt.”

The Treasury has run this program for years, and people have donated $67.3 million since 1996, a minuscule amount of the total debt. But the options to use Venmo or PayPal are new.

This is an absolute joke. Leaders on both sides of the aisle harangue Americans every day about the specter of the national debt while throwing billions of dollars at funding the military, funding Israel’s military, and funding Trump’s brutal immigration campaign. To even create this option when the majority of the country is working/middle class appears deeply unserious and tone deaf.

And even if people were feeling generous, it would be virtually impossible to make a dent in the debt given its current size and the fact that it is set to keep growing, and fast.

The best way to stop sex trafficking? Let the people who did it out of prison, if Republican Representative Tim Burchett is to be believed.

House Republicans may ask the Department of Justice to reduce convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell’s sentence in exchange for information about the so-called “Epstein files.”

Burchett acknowledged that Jeffrey Epstein’s former girlfriend and right-hand woman Maxwell is a “liar” and a “dirtbag,” but said that he and his colleagues do have some “leverage” to ensure she tells the truth.

“One thing we’ve got holding over her head is if we find out she lies, she goes back to her original sentence. That’s looking at lifetime. If she’s looking to parlay this into reducing her sentence, then we could have some leverage there,” Burchett said to the Daily Caller on Wednesday.

Luckily for Burchett, no one has ever lied in order to avoid jail time.

Maxwell is slated to testify before Congress in August from a Florida prison, where she is currently serving 20 years for crimes related to her time building Epstein’s pedophile network, and trafficking and abusing women and girls.

Regardless of what Maxwell reveals in her testimony, MAGA will likely be hanging on her every word: Donald Trump’s base has been clamoring for more information on Epstein ever since the president promised to release damning details on the powerful people who associated with the sex trafficker—and then backtracked in July, with Attorney General Pam Bondi saying that the so-called “client list” did not exist.

Since then, Trump has scrambled in vain to quell his base’s rage. He’s attempted different tactics: calling the investigation a “hoax” perpetuated by Democrats, saying that those still interested in the case were “bad people,” and eventually changing tacks to placate his base by requesting the release of grand jury testimony from Epstein’s first trial in 2006. (A judge has denied this request.)

The president purportedly didn’t even know that his DOJ was bringing in Maxwell to assist in the investigation, saying Tuesday that the move “sounds appropriate” but stressing that the Epstein fallout is “sort of a witch hunt.”

Trump’s seeming indifference to the potential bombshells Maxwell could drop speaks to the mindset of a man who, according to the The Wall Street Journal, was told by his attorney general in May that he’s mentioned in the Epstein files.

With each passing day, more information emerges on Trump’s relationship with Epstein, which the financier characterized as one of close friends. The Journal published a report of a “bawdy letter” that Trump sent to Epstein as part of a book for the latter’s 50th birthday—a book that the victims’ lawyer confirms exists. And back in 2002, Trump said to New York magazine that he had known “Jeff” for 15 years, calling him a “terrific guy” who likes “beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.”

Pressure is still mounting against conservatives to release the Epstein files.

On Tuesday, Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene described the demand for transparency as “overwhelming,” noting that the call volume related to Epstein at her office has been “extremely high.”

“Since I became a freshman member of Congress—this is fascinating—I’ve tracked the calls to my office,” Greene told reporters. “I have a whole spreadsheet my staff maintains. They track all the calls coming in from the district and from outside the district. We categorize the issues, from past ones to current ones.

“The call volume on Epstein has been almost 100 percent—district and out of district—since this started. They’re demanding transparency,” she said.

Greene noted that many of her colleagues are “getting beaten up at home in their districts” over the Epstein files, as well.

The Georgia Republican has joined hands with a dozen other lawmakers in a bipartisan effort—H.Res.581, dubbed the Epstein Files Transparency Act—to make the Epstein case files publicly available.

Introduced by Representative Thomas Massie, who has a habit of actually standing up to Donald Trump, the bill aims to “make publicly available in a searchable and downloadable format all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials in the possession of the Department of Justice, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation and United States Attorneys’ Offices,” relating to child sex traffickers Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell.

The text of the bill specifies the release of flight logs, travel records, the names of individuals and government officials connected to Epstein’s “criminal activities, civil settlements, immunity or plea agreements, or investigatory proceedings,” the names of corporations or organizations tied to Epstein’s trafficking networks, potential immunity deals or sealed settlements, as well as “internal DOJ communications.”

And if conservative lawmakers were prioritizing transparency, perhaps they would have pushed through a Democratic-led effort to release the Epstein files instead of blocking it last week, before the chamber recessed. The final vote was 211–210: Just one dissenting Republican would have tipped the scales.

Even if the new bill passes, Americans will have to wait a while for answers. Amid the Epstein-induced federal frenzy, House Republicans decided to start the lower chamber’s summer recess early, ushering lawmakers back home and away from the Capitol while the Trump administration flails in response to the mounting scandal.

A Quinnipiac poll published last week found that 63 percent of voters disapprove of the way that the Trump administration has handled the Epstein case, which has so far included the Justice Department backtracking on the existence of certain documents and the president chalking up Epstein’s notoriety to a Democrat-invented “hoax.”

Columbia University has handed the reins of its admission process to the White House.

One of the oldest educational institutions in the country agreed Wednesday to pay the Trump administration $200 million to settle multiple investigations and reinstate billions of dollars’ worth of federal grants.

But the agreement comes with an alarming clause that will deliver granular admissions data on every Columbia applicant to the Trump administration, effectively allowing the White House to decide if the school has admitted enough historically advantaged demographics—or needs to face further investigations.

The school, according to the settlement, must provide admissions data “consistent with 34 C.F.R. § 100.6 and similar regulations” to an independently appointed resolution monitor, alongside analysis of which students were rejected or admitted on the basis of their “race, color, national origin, grade point average” and test performance. The form will be due to the White House by October 1 of each year.

That data will also, subsequently, be made public, according to the settlement details.

But even abiding by the new system won’t save Columbia from future power trips by the White House.

“Nothing in this Agreement prevents the United States (even during the period of the Agreement) from conducting subsequent compliance reviews, investigations, or litigation into Columbia’s future admissions practices to ensure that those practices are in full compliance with all applicable laws and not a proxy for prohibited discrimination,” the settlement reads.

The university, however, did not interpret the contents of the agreement the same way, minimizing the impact of sharing applicants’ sensitive details with the government.

“Critically, Columbia retains control over its academic and operational decisions,” the school wrote in an email blast to students. “As part of the settlement, the University has not admitted wrongdoing and does not agree with the government’s conclusion that it violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.”

Columbia has kowtowed and bowed its head repeatedly to the White House since the Trump administration made an example of it earlier this year, repeatedly attacking the institution over its response to a pro-Palestine protest that took place on campus in 2024. The Trump administration has accused Columbia of engaging in antisemitism for apparently failing to subdue the protests as aggressively as Trump would have liked.

On Tuesday, Columbia said it would be disciplining dozens of pro-Palestine protesters who participated in the occupation of Butler Library in May, which saw multiple arrests at the time. A pro-Palestine group on campus, Columbia for Palestine, said that 80 students had been informed of their punishments, and noted that the move marked “the most suspensions for a single political protest in Columbia campus history.”

Last week, Columbia further capitulated to the Trump administration, adopting a new campus-wide definition of antisemitism that conflates hatred of the Jewish people with general opposition to Zionism. It has also said it would no longer engage with the pro-Palestinian group Columbia University Apartheid Divest, permitted federal immigration officials into its buildings, and allowed the administration to attempt to deport foreign students who support the free state of Palestine, though those cases have encountered judicial roadblocks.

As per the terms of the settlement arrangement, Columbia will also institute a new liaison to the Jewish community in University Life.

South Park used its first new episode in two years to openly ridicule President Trump and Paramount, its own parent company. The episode, titled “Sermon on the Mount,” parodies much of the president’s first six months, portraying him literally in bed with Satan.  

In the episode, the parents of South Park protest against Trump’s insertion of prayer into their schools, and Trump threatens to sue them for $5 billion. Jesus himself then appears and asks the parents to simply capitulate.

 “I didn’t want to come back and be in the school, but I had to because it was part of a lawsuit and the agreement with Paramount,” Jesus says. “You guys saw what happened to CBS? Well, guess who owns CBS? Paramount. You really want to end up like Colbert? You guys got to stop being stupid.… He also has the power to sue and take bribes, and he can do anything to anyone. It’s the fucking president, dude.… South Park is over.”

The episode also depicts Trump with an abnormally small penis, which he harasses Satan with while they’re in bed together. 

This episode is particularly audacious, as it comes after Paramount made two major concessions to Trump by ending The Late Show With Stephen Colbert and settling for $16 million because he didn’t like the way 60 Minutes edited an episode with Kamala Harris during the 2024 campaign. This also comes as South Park Digital Studios announced its own $1.5 billion licensing deal with Paramount. 

“Hard to think of anything more defiant in media & entertainment recently than Trey Parker & Matt Stone going scorched earth on Paramount in a South Park season premiere on the heels of netting a $1.5 billion deal with the very same company,” Puck senior correspondent Dyland Byers wrote on X. 

Bradley Edwards, who’s represented hundreds of survivors of sexual abuse by notorious sex criminal Jeffrey Epstein, affirmed that Epstein’s 50th birthday book—which, The Wall Street Journal reported, includes a lewd message from Donald Trump—exists. He also shared exactly where one can find it.

Asked about the book by MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell Wednesday night, Edwards replied, “Yes, I know that the executors of [Epstein’s] estate are in possession of that book, and I think that after they turn it over, it should probably be set in the Smithsonian as an artifact at this point in time.”

Edwards had said moments earlier that anyone interested in seeing the book could simply reach out to Epstein’s executors, Darren Indyke and Richard Kahn, and, “If they didn’t just voluntarily turn over the book out of fear of reprisal, Congress could issue a subpoena to their attorneys at Patterson or at Troutman—those are the two law firms. I know those attorneys. They would turn the book over immediately. Nobody would have to guess. There wouldn’t need to be a lawsuit. There wouldn’t have [to be a] wait to [do] discovery. You would immediately have the answers. You could flip to the page. Is there a letter, is there not a letter?”

O’Donnell observed that the House Oversight Committee, which on Wednesday voted to subpoena the Justice Department for the Epstein files, might be interested in acting on Edwards’s tip. With confidence, Bradley said the lawyers of Epstein’s executors would comply “immediately,” citing his close working relationship with them.

Democratic Representative Rho Khanna, a member of the Oversight Committee who has led charges to force the Epstein files’ release, told MSNBC shortly thereafter that Edwards’s revelation is a “bombshell.” He indicated that the House Oversight Committee would look to subpoena Epstein’s estate for the birthday book, which, he added, would be much easier than subpoenaing the DOJ.

If Epstein’s birthday book is shared with the public, and it indeed includes Trump’s letter as reported by the WSJ (complete with its cryptic message and sketch of a naked woman), it would be a massive embarrassment for the president, who is currently suing the Journal for defamation over the story, which he asserts is “a fake thing.”

And such embarrassments are piling up for Trump in recent days, as his former friendship with Epstein is coming more clearly into view amid his administration’s scandalous lack of transparency on the deceased financier. On Wednesday, the Journal dropped another whopper, reporting that Trump’s Justice Department informed the president in May that his name is in the Epstein files—seemingly explaining the president’s outbursts and his team’s foot-dragging over the Epstein affair.

President Donald Trump loves artificial intelligence, calling it “one of the most important technological revolutions in the history of the world” at an AI summit in Washington Wednesday.

But he’s got one big problem with the so-called revolutionary tech: its name.

“Everyone around the globe is talking about artificial intelligence…. ‘Artificial,’ I can’t stand it. I don’t even like the name,” he said. “You know, I don’t like anything that’s artificial. So could we straighten that out please? We should change the name.”

Over laughter, he clarified: “I actually mean that.”

Perhaps the president is taking a page out of naturopathic health crusader and vaccine-denier Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s book. The health secretary too has a noted dislike of anything artificial, and has mandated that companies remove chemical food dyes from their products as part of his Make America Healthy Again initiative. (Though interestingly, Kennedy has displayed a disturbing willingness to rely on shoddy AI slop at the Department of Health and Human Services.)

Later Wednesday, Trump signed a trio of executive orders that would deregulate the AI industry and “[get] rid of woke,” as he said in his remarks. One order would ban federal agencies from contracting with AI companies that have so-called “ideological biases.”

We’ve been down this road before: After Elon Musk’s xAI chatbot Grok partly blamed Musk and Trump for deaths in the aftermath of the Texas floods, X updated the chatbot to “not shy away from making claims which are politically incorrect.” This resulted in a chatbot that spewed antisemitic dogwhistles and white supremacy and started calling itself “MechaHitler.”

Not quite at Grok level, the president has different nomenclature in mind for the tech.

“I don’t like the name ‘artificial’ anything because it’s not ‘artificial,’ it’s genius. It’s pure genius,” Trump said.

Trump’s choice of name isn’t surprising. The president has long had an affinity for the word genius, calling himself a “very stable genius” in a 2018 tweet about his mental capacities. He also just signed the GENIUS Act, the first major cryptocurrency legislation.

If only he were still in cahoots with former buddy Musk, we could perhaps expect to see the debut of Grok 5: Stable Genius Intelligence.

Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein had a personal relationship, in Epstein’s own words.

In resurfaced footage of the pedophilic sex trafficker’s 2010 deposition, Epstein confesses to socializing with Trump—but refuses to answer whether or not they spent time with children.

“Have you ever had a personal relationship with Donald Trump?” the interviewer asked.

“What do you mean by ‘personal relationship,’ sir?” Epstein responded.

“Have you socialized with him?” the interviewer clarified, to which Epstein said, “Yes, sir.”

“Yes?” the interviewer pressed.

“Yes, sir,” Epstein repeated.

But Epstein wasn’t able to answer with such clarity when it came to darker topics.

“Have you ever socialized with Donald Trump in the presence of females under the age of 18?” the interviewer asked.

After a brief pause, Epstein failed to answer in the negative, notably under the threat of perjury. Instead, he sidestepped the question completely.

“Though l’d like to answer that question, at least today l’m going to have to assert my Fifth, Sixth, and 14th Amendment rights, sir,” he said.

There is mounting evidence that Trump and Epstein had a remarkably close relationship, though the president has vehemently denied any such connection since his administration became consumed by an internal scandal over Epstein’s alleged “client list.” A Quinnipiac poll published last week found that 63 percent of voters disapprove of the way the Trump administration has handled the Epstein case, which has so far included the Justice Department backtracking on the existence of certain documents and the president chalking up Epstein’s notoriety to a Democrat-invented “hoax.”

Prior to his death, Epstein described himself as one of Trump’s “closest friends.” The socialites were named and photographed together several times, Trump allegedly penned a salacious letter to Epstein for the pedophile’s 50th birthday, the real estate mogul reportedly flew on Epstein’s jets between Palm Beach and New York at least seven times, and the first time that Trump slept with his now-wife Melania was reportedly aboard Epstein’s plane, nicknamed the “Lolita Express.”

In a 2002 New York magazine profile of Epstein, Trump said he had known Epstein for 15 years and referred to him as a “terrific guy.”

“It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side,” Trump said at the time.