Trump’s Reckless Marine Exercise in California Hits Vance’s Motorcade

Vice President JD Vance’s team ridiculed California Governor Gavin Newsom for closing a stretch of Interstate 5 amid a Saturday military demonstration by the Trump administration (coincidentally on the same day as the No Kings protests). Then, during the display, shrapnel rained down in the area, hitting vehicles in Vance’s motorcade.

When it was announced that the military would fire artillery shells over I-5 in the Golden State for the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Marine Corps, Newsom objected, saying President Donald Trump was putting his “ego” over “public safety,” and closed part of the freeway.

A Vance spokesperson told media outlets that Newsom was being misleading about “an established safe practice,” and called the governor’s decision consistent with a “track record of failure.”

But on Saturday afternoon, an artillery round, fired near where highway patrol personnel in Vance’s security detail were parked after escorting the vice president to the Marines’ 250th event at Camp Pendleton, detonated prematurely. Highway officers “saw the artillery round fail to clear the highway and explode near southbound lanes,” reported the BBC.

According to The New York Times, one officer heard something similar to pebbles striking his motorcycle and the surrounding area, where shrapnel was later discovered. Two others watched a piece of shrapnel hit their patrol car’s hood. It left a minor dent. Vance’s team—so quick to jeer at Newsom previously—was apparently chastened by the accident, declining to comment to the Times.

Afterward, Newsom shot off a series of deserved I-told-you-so posts on social media. “Donald Trump and JD Vance put lives at risk to put on a show,” he wrote in one post. “This could have killed someone,” he said in another, responding to a Fox News report downplaying the incident.

And just like that, Prince Andrew is no longer a duke.

The second son of Queen Elizabeth II has been on the outs with the rest of the British royal family since the late Virginia Giuffre, one of pedophilic sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein’s most prominent accusers, first claimed in the 2010s that she had been forced to have sex with the prince while she was a minor.

The king appeared to take matters into his own hands Friday. After years of Andrew being relegated to the fringes of royal life, King Charles III formally stripped his 65-year-old brother of his royal duties. In a concise statement, Prince Andrew acknowledged that his sorry reputation had become a distraction for the rest of the monarchy.

“In discussion with The King, and my immediate and wider family, we have concluded the continued accusations about me distract from the work of His Majesty and the Royal Family,” the prince wrote in a statement released by Buckingham Palace. “As I have said previously, I vigorously deny the accusations against me.

“With His Majesty’s agreement, we feel I must now go a step further. I will therefore no longer use my title or the honours which have been conferred upon me,” Prince Andrew continued. “As I have said previously, I vigorously deny the accusations against me.”

Prince Andrew, as a son of the late queen, will retain his title of “prince,” but he has relinquished several other titles since speaking with the king, including his standing as Duke of York and membership of the Order of the Garter—two titles that brought him enormous pride.

He cut his military affiliations, ended his royal patronages, and stopped using the style of “His Royal Highness” in 2022 during a civil case brought by Giuffre. The prince settled that lawsuit without admitting any wrongdoing.

Officially nullifying the prince’s titles will, however, take some more time, as the deed requires an official act of Parliament.

The family’s decision to sever ties with Prince Andrew arrived several days after the publication of Giuffre’s posthumous memoir Nobody’s Girl, in which she details at least three incidents in which the prince allegedly raped her.

But Giuffre’s disturbing accusations were far from the only bad press that plagued the prince. Public interest in his personal finances and judgment have also been a sore spot for the family, as was Andrew’s decision to cozy up to an accused Chinese spy.

Puzzlingly, Andrew’s misdeeds were not severe enough to peel him from the monarchy’s succession plan: He will still remain eighth in line for the throne. He will also remain in his Windsor home, Royal Lodge, where he has a private lease with an expiration date in 2078.

He will not, however, be present during the royal family’s Christmas festivities this year in Sandringham.

Prince William, who has had a frigid relationship with Prince Andrew, consulted his father on the decision to strip his uncle of his titles.

“This is unlikely to bring them any closer,” reported the BBC.

Prince Andrew’s children, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie, will reportedly retain their titles, according to the British network. His ex-wife will no longer be known as the Duchess of York and instead will just be Sarah Ferguson.

The Justice Department has joined the Republican campaign to discredit Saturday’s No Kings protests, going so far as to describe the event as an attempt to “destabilize” the U.S. government.

No Kings demonstrations—which last swept the country in June—protest the monarchical nature of the Trump presidency by invoking the nation’s founding. They also explicitly name nonviolence as their “core principle.”

But Republicans would have you believe the protests planned for Saturday are “hate America” rallies, with terrorists, Hamas supporters, and antifa in attendance. GOP officials have also baselessly accused Democratic lawmakers of prolonging the government shutdown to appease these supposed radicals.

Now joining the fearmongers is a top DOJ official, Harmeet K. Dhillon, the U.S. assistant attorney general for the Civil Rights Division, who warned that the rally “is not your average protest” in an ominous post on X Friday.

“It’s being led by the people shutting down your government and keeping hundreds of thousands of federal workers from being paid,” Dhillon continued, referring to Democratic politicians.

“Take care and be very aware what is going on here,” she went on: “attempts to gaslight the public and destabilize our government.”

Dhillon was responding to a tweet from MAGA propagandist Laura Loomer, who, in typical inflammatory register, conflated No Kings with “political violence.”

Donald Trump’s self-advertised credentials for solving the Russia-Ukraine war: his ability to constantly get played.

Speaking to reporters during a White House lunch with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy Friday, Trump attempted to instill confidence in his negotiating tactics by describing himself as a sucker.

“Aren’t you concerned that maybe the Russian president is trying to buy himself more time?” asked a reporter.

“I am, but you know, I’ve been played all my life by the best of them, and I came out really well,” Trump said. “A little time … I’m pretty good at this stuff.”

Despite spending months boasting about his cozy relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Trump has pulled an about-face in his public stance on the foreign conflict in recent weeks. Last month, Trump claimed that Ukraine could reclaim all of its occupied territory, and earlier this week, he threatened to deliver Tomahawk missiles—which have a range of more than 1,500 miles—to Kyiv should Russia not end its assault.

However, seated feet away from the Ukrainian leader Friday, Trump began to waffle about sharing American munitions, expressing to the room that he was concerned about America’s diminishing supply.

“We’d much rather have them not need Tomahawks. We’d much rather have the war be over,” Trump said. “It could mean a big escalation. It could mean a lot of bad things could happen.”

The two world leaders openly negotiated on the arms while in front of reporters, with Zelenskiy suggesting that Ukraine could support the development of more drones in exchange for the missiles, which would give Kyiv power to strike far beyond Moscow.

MAGA politics neatly align with Russian interests. Halfway across the world, between the borders of America’s Cold War nemesis, elements of the MAGA agenda have already been perfected: Being gay or transgender is illegal, the majority of the country identifies homogeneously as Orthodox Christians, and NATO is a loathed institution rather than a celebrated one.

But even their closely synced political ideologies could not broker an arrangement when Trump rolled out the red carpet for Putin in Alaska this summer. After the theatrics were over, the two world leaders failed to reach a consensus on how to end the bloodshed, with Trump losing his cool while Putin demanded that Ukraine cede more territory to Russia, according to a bombshell report published by Financial Times Friday.

President Donald Trump, 79, invented a bizarre claim that a Democratic senator from Hawaii wants to build a railroad from the continental United States to the archipelago.

Apparently speaking about Senator Mazie Hirono, Trump said Friday, “She wanted a tunnel from the mainland to Hawaii. Then she said, ‘Well, we can’t do that, so we’re gonna build a railroad to Hawaii.’ Do you remember? She’s a current, sitting senator, a Democrat. She wants a railroad to go to Hawaii. You know who that is, right?”

“She’s another b—” the president started, before stopping himself. “She’s another beauty.”

The president’s statement is a nesting doll of inaccuracies, stemming back to a 2019 joke Hirono made regarding misinformation about the content of the Green New Deal.

At the time, conservative media outlets and politicians were spreading the false claim that the Green New Deal would eliminate air travel and replace it with high-speed rail. A Fox News reporter asked Hirono, who supported the progressive climate plan, about the nonexistent provision. The senator laughingly replied, “That would be pretty hard for Hawaii.”

Some on the right, including Trump, took that comment and ran with it. At a February 2019 rally, Trump called the Hawaii Democrat “crazy” for supporting something that (he incorrectly believed) would eliminate air travel to her state. In the six years since, Trump’s grip on reality has apparently only slipped further.

Eric Trump, the second son of the president, did little to allay concerns about his father’s apparent promise to arrange a phone call about Trump Organization business between Eric and the president of Indonesia.

In a hot-mic moment at Monday’s Gaza ceasefire summit, President Trump and Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto were caught exchanging words, seemingly about a Trump Organization project in Indonesia.

Trump told Prabowo that he would have Eric, a vice president at the company who holds no government role, reach out to him. “He’s such a good boy,” the president said of his son. “I’ll have Eric call.”

CNN’s Kaitlan Collins on Thursday asked about this apparent instance of the president using his office to advance his and his family’s business interests. Eric Trump, 41, said of his father: “I’m glad he acknowledges that I’m a good boy. I am a good boy.”

He also said he hasn’t received the call (yet), but expressed gratitude that the president of Indonesia is aware of the Trump Organization’s ventures in the country. “I’ve never met the president of Indonesia,” he said, “but it doesn’t surprise me, given the magnitude and prominence of those projects, that he knows about what I’m doing over there.”

But Prabowo’s conversation with Trump raises the possibility that he is more than just aware of the Trump Organization’s works in Indonesia. Trump and Prabowo seemed to discuss details about the progress of a specific project, and at one point, the Indonesian president told Trump he had spoken to “Hary”—possibly meaning Hary Tanoesoedibjo, a businessman who frequently partners with the Trump Organization on its projects in the region.

Collins asked Eric Trump if he sees the hot-mic conversation as weakening the notion that a “wall” separates his father’s presidential and private affairs.

“I think there’s a huge wall,” he replied. “I mean, there’s so much of a wall that the guy [Prabowo] has never met me.” It was an interesting response, given the president clearly promised to arrange the very meeting his son was citing as proof that a “wall” exists.

Even America’s top military commanders are jumping in on the AI chatbot wave.

A U.S. Army general told reporters earlier this week that he’d become very fond of “Chat,” even trusting the algorithm to make “key command decisions” in relation to his post.

“I’ve become—Chat and I are really close lately,” Maj. Gen. William “Hank” Taylor said, using a cozy pop culture moniker to refer to generative AI programs during a roundtable at the annual Association of the United States Army conference on Monday.

“As a commander, I want to make better decisions,” Taylor explained. “I want to make sure that I make decisions at the right time to give me the advantage.”

Taylor did not provide specific examples as to how AI has assisted him in completing his duties, though he underscored its use in writing weekly reports and noted that the field army he commands in South Korea was “regularly using” relevant AI programs for predictive analysis.

“As we talk about protection, drone use, counter-drones and counter-UAS, medical modernization, aviation modernization, we have something going on in almost every domain of modernization in Korea, right? AI is one thing that, as a commander, it’s been very, very interesting for me. Obviously, I’ve been in the Army for a long time, right? And so I was in the Army before computers,” Taylor said, according to DefenseScoop.

Like most of America’s managerial workforce, Taylor said that he’s also turned to AI to inform his leadership approach.

“One of the things that recently I’ve been personally working on with my soldiers is decision-making—individual decision-making. And how [we make decisions] in our own individual life, when we make decisions, it’s important. So, that’s something I’ve been asking and trying to build models to help all of us,” Taylor said. “Especially, [on] how do I make decisions, personal decisions, right—that affect not only me, but my organization and overall readiness?”

How much playing dumb can House Speaker Mike Johnson do before he reveals that he’s a genuine idiot?

During a press conference Friday, Johnson had an outlandish response when asked about a recent ProPublica report that found 170 U.S. citizens had been unlawfully detained by ICE, including 20 children.

“I’m not—I don’t know what you’re talking about with the children,” Johnson replied.

When the reporter interrupted to repeat the number of U.S. citizens that had been detained, Johnson doubled down. “I haven’t seen that, so I’m not going to comment on it. But I will tell you that ICE is doing the job that the American people demanded that they do.”

Johnson was also asked about Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene’s comments criticizing the speaker for failing to address the protective order against Representative Cory Mills for allegedly threatening to release sexually explicit materials of his ex-girlfriend.

“They expelled George Santos, Mike Johnson did. He was speaker and oversaw George Santos being expelled. Why isn’t he doing anything about Cory Mills?” Greene told Axios Thursday.

“There’s clearly proof behind her accusations that a judge is issuing a restraining order. So I would say to Speaker Johnson, this is a serious matter, and it needs to be taken seriously,” she added.

But Johnson didn’t seem interested in that. “I don’t—I try not to react to what Marjorie Taylor Greene says every day,” he replied Friday.

“I did see, somebody told me that she accused me of ousting Santos, which of course is the exact opposite of the history. Everyone can go review what happened. I opposed his expulsion from Congress. I voted against it. I advocated to my colleagues not to do that,” he said.

Johnson oversaw Santos’s expulsion in 2023, though he noted at the time he had voted against the measure because he didn’t want to set a precedent of removing members who had not been convicted of a crime. The Louisiana Republican also claimed that as Santos reported to prison, he had posted a friendly message about the speaker. In fact, Santos had accused Johnson of blocking his shot at a presidential pardon.

“So look, I don’t know what Marjorie’s talking about,” Johnson said, adding that he’d wait for the legal procedures against Mills to play out. (Johnson had dismissed a question about the Mills allegations Wednesday as not “really serious.”)

This is far from the first time Johnson has played dumb about a question, as he continues to conduct daily propaganda press briefings during the ongoing government shutdown. “I don’t know” has become his answer for everything.

Johnson claimed Thursday he had “no idea” how the government shutdown would end. When asked about reports of brutality by federal agents operating in Chicago, Johnson claimed he’d “not seen them cross the line yet.”

Lawyers for alleged UnitedHealthcare CEO–killer Luigi Mangione on Friday cited President Donald Trump’s own social media posts in court to argue the entire case should be dismissed, or at least the death penalty should be taken off the table.

Mangione’s defense team argued that the Trump administration is using their client as “a pawn to further its political agenda,” and that statements and reposts by DOJ officials have completely tarnished his right to a fair trial.  

On September 18, Trump said in a Fox News interview that Mangione looked like a “pure assassin.”  

“He shot someone in the back as clear as you’re looking at me.… He shot him right in the middle of the back—instantly dead.… This is a sickness. This really has to be studied and investigated.” 

Everything Trump said was only alleged. 

A clip of the interview was posted by the White House social media team Rapid Response 47. Justice Department Public Affairs head Chad Gilmartin retweeted it, commenting that the president was “absolutely right,” violating the judge’s explicit orders that DOJ employees refrain from public comment about the  case. 

“The Department of Justice and the White House have coordinated to cultivate and disseminate negative public rhetoric deliberately designed to taint the prospective jury pool,” defense attorneys Karen Agnifilo and Avi Moskowitz told the court. “The significance of these prejudicial statements is that they have life or death consequences for Mr. Mangione.”

The Justice Department tried to argue that Trump’s statements are irrelevant given that he’s not related to the case, but the defense highlighted the president’s growing control of DOJ.

“Unlike any of its predecessors since the Watergate era, the Department of Justice has not acted independently of the White House in this case—or in several others,” the defense filing read. “This departure from the longstanding principle of prosecutorial independence has created a blurred and constitutionally troubling line between the Department of Justice and the Executive Office of the President.”

Prosecutors also argued that any potential jurors have plenty of time between now and Mangione’s trial to forget about Trump’s statements. Mangione’s lawyers disagreed. 

“The government has engaged in purposeful, repeated, unlawful actions specifically designed to hurt Mr. Mangione’s chances at fair legal proceedings and a fair trial and as part of a wider government effort to further a political agenda,” they said. “These same officials—whether acting directly or through their subordinates—have continued on this course even after this Court has explicitly directed them not to has caused this case to be unlike any prior death penalty case.”

Mangione still sits in a Brooklyn jail awaiting a trial date. 

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries pulled no punches in comments about White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt Friday morning.

Leavitt had drawn widespread outcry with an inflammatory claim Thursday that the Democratic Party’s “main constituency” consists of “Hamas terrorists, illegal aliens, and violent criminals.”

Jeffries, in turn, described the press secretary as “sick” and “out of control.”

“I’m not sure whether she’s just demented, ignorant, a stone cold liar, or all of the above,” he told reporters. “But the notion that an official White House spokesperson would say that the Democratic Party consists of terrorists, violent criminals, and undocumented immigrants. This makes no sense that this is what the American people are getting from the Trump administration in the middle of a shutdown.”

Leavitt’s divisive statement has earned condemnations from other prominent Democrats as well.

Democratic Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut called it both “grossly dark” and “politically dumb,” writing on X, “How do they think Americans will react to being told that anyone who doesn’t support Trump is a terrorist?”

“Most Republicans are good people. Most Democrats are good people. The White House says outrageous things to make you hate your neighbor,” said Tim Walz, the Minnesota governor and previous Democratic nominee for vice president. “Your neighbor isn’t the problem. The White House is.”

Representative Greg Casar of Texas, a progressive Democrat, called on Leavitt to resign. “They try to make us hate each other,” he said, “to distract from the fact that they’re robbing us all blind.”