American Farmers Slam Trump’s “Betrayal” With Argentina Beef Deal

President Donald Trump is facing backlash from American ranching groups after he said Sunday that the United States may “buy some beef from Argentina” in order to “bring our beef prices down.”

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins confirmed Tuesday that Trump is “in discussions with Argentina”—with more details to come—though she claimed that not “very much” beef would be imported, in part due to a “foot-and-mouth disease issue” facing Argentina.

Or perhaps she made the addendum because of the outrage the Trump administration has been facing.

Trump’s proposal to take in Argentine beef has stoked fears about depressed domestic beef prices among cattle ranchers and industry groups. And it’s salt in a fresh wound, as farmers are already displeased with the administration’s multibillion-dollar lifeline to Argentina under Trump ally President Javier Milei—a move that benefited a major agricultural competitor as American farmers suffer under Trump’s trade policies.

Farm Action, an agricultural watchdog group, called the plan “a betrayal of the American rancher,” lamenting that, “after crashing the soybean market and gifting Argentina our largest export buyer, [Trump is] now poised to do the same to the cattle market.”

The National Farmers Union similarly observed that Trump “recently bailed out Argentina with $40 billion in U.S. taxpayer-backed aid, and Argentina’s response was to strike new deals selling soybeans to China—deals that hurt American crop farmers. The last thing we need is to reward them by importing more of their beef.”

“Increasing imports under current rules ultimately benefits foreign suppliers and multinational packers, while putting U.S. ranchers on the losing end and depriving American consumers of honest transparency at the meat counter,” said the U.S. Cattlemen’s Association in a statement, which went on to warn that Trump’s approach “weakens our industry’s foundation and undermines rural America.”

The American Farm Bureau Federation urged Trump “to carefully consider the damage importing more beef and cattle from other countries will have as cattle farmers decide whether to invest in rebuilding America’s herds.”

“This plan only creates chaos at a critical time of the year for American cattle producers, while doing nothing to lower grocery store prices,” said the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, which called on Trump “to let the market work, rather than intervening in ways that do nothing but harm rural America.”

When asked by a reporter on Sunday to address U.S. farmers who feel they are being stiffed, Trump grew testy and condescending. “Argentina is fighting for its life, young lady,” he told the journalist. “You don’t know anything about it.” Having aggrieved major ag groups, the president will need a more convincing answer.

House Speaker Mike Johnson won’t stop lying through his teeth about Arizona Representative-elect Adelita Grijalva—and Democrats are calling him out.

New York Representative Pat Ryan slammed Johnson Monday for using him as an excuse for delaying Grijalva’s swearing-in, and accused him of attempting to block a House vote to release the government’s files on alleged sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein.

During a press conference earlier Monday, Johnson claimed he was simply following the precedent set by former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who had waited 21 days to swear in Ryan in 2023—but unlike Grijalva, Ryan had requested that date specifically.

“Hey Mike—if you’re gonna keep invoking my name, at least get the facts right,” Ryan wrote on X. “No one CANCELLED scheduled votes to delay my swearing-in. You’re deliberately cancelling votes to protect pedophiles and take away health care from the American people.”

Notably, the Louisiana Republican swore in special election winners during pro forma sessions in April, but he has refused to do so with Grijalva, who is poised to provide the deciding signature on a bipartisan petition for a vote to release the Epstein files in full.

Ryan wasn’t the only Democratic lawmaker to pull apart Johnson’s lies.

Speaking on CNN last week, Johnson snidely suggested that Grijalva should stop posting political “stunt” videos about him and get to work. “She should be taking constituent calls, she should be directing and helping them navigate the crisis her colleagues have created for her constituents,” he said.

But Minnesota Representative Kelly Morrison pointed out Monday that by not swearing her in, Johnson was preventing her from doing just that.

“Unlike Mike Johnson, I actually spoke to Representative-elect Adelita Grijalva this week,” she wrote on X. “She does not have access to an official website for constituents to receive updates, an office phone number for constituents to call, or a Congressional email to receive news like the rest of Congress.

“Why? Because until Johnson swears her in, she is not a member of Congress,” she wrote.

Before Russell Vought became the director of the Office of Management and Budget, he was Donald Trump’s side project.

In the background of Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign, the Republican presidential candidate and the Project 2025 architect shared regular calls, though the topic wasn’t always politics. Instead, Trump was fixated on getting the recently divorced Vought laid, reported Zeteo’s Swin Suebsaeng on Tuesday.

Vought’s ex-wife, Mary Vought (of the Heritage Foundation), had left him in 2023. Trump, in turn, appointed himself as Vought’s wingman.

“Trump spoke to Vought, a self-described Christian nationalist who’s now one of the president’s most hardline enforcers, about the ‘gorgeous’ and ‘beautiful ladies’ who roam Trump’s club, Mar-a-Lago, so often that it ‘weirded out’ some of his advisers,” sources told Zeteo.

“And Trump spoke crudely of all the ‘pussy’ that Vought would surely get as the president’s favorite ‘bachelor.’”

The report is a crass and unsurprising illustration of the president, who famously boasted on a hot mic that he grabs women “by the pussy” before millions of Americans voted him into the nation’s highest and most powerful political office for the first time.

But Trump’s gross language doesn’t bode well as his administration continues to bungle the release of the Epstein files.

Prior to his death, pedophilic sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein described himself as one of Trump’s “closest friends.” The socialites were named and photographed together on several occasions and were caught partying with underage girls in New Jersey casinos. Epstein was invited to attend Trump’s wedding to Marla Maples in 1993, and in 2002, Trump told New York magazine that Epstein was a “terrific guy.”

“He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side,” Trump told the magazine.

But Trump also has a terrible track record with how he treats women all on his own. The current president was found liable by a jury two years ago for sexually abusing Elle columnist E. Jean Carroll, and was convicted as a felon for crimes relating to his affair with porn star Stormy Daniels.

Three police officers in Fairhope, Alabama, took down and arrested a 61-year-old woman at the local No Kings protest for wearing a giant penis costume. 

In a statement posted on Facebook on Monday, Fairhope police said they responded to a complaint Saturday about the penis costume, stating that they “observed an individual in a phallic costume near the Baldwin Square Shopping Center.” They approached Jeana Renea Gamble and told her to take the costume off because it was “deemed obscene in a public setting.”  When she refused, she was tackled to the ground and charged with disorderly conduct and resisting arrest. 

A video of the arrest posted on Bluesky captures bystanders yelling at police that she posed no threat.

Indivisible Baldwin County, which was involved in organizing the local No Kings protest, condemned Gamble’s arrest. 

“Ms. Gamble was peacefully expressing her point of view on Saturday. Her violent arrest for expressing herself in ways the police found rude is indefensible, morally and legally,” they said in a statement. “Public officials must take seriously their duty to uphold the First Amendment. Their complete failure to do so in this situation runs against the free expression values that created the city of Fairhope and against the liberty guarantees enshrined in Alabama law and the United States Constitution.”

Gamble is scheduled to appear in court on November 5. 

It looks like President Donald Trump’s administration is finally leaning into the fact that it’s staffed by witless bullies, after an aide for Pete Hegseth gave a moronic response to a reporter’s question about the defense secretary’s highly questionable accessory choices.

During a visit from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy last week, Hegseth wore a tie that had the same colors and pattern as the Russian flag. The tie was so similar that Tass, the Russian state news agency, remarked that Hegseth “stood out” from the “restrained” attire of colleagues by wearing a “tie in the colours of the Russian tricolor.” Russian President Vladimir Putin’s special economic envoy, Kirill Dmitriev, even shared a photograph of the secretary to X.

HuffPost reported Monday that when a reporter asked Hegseth’s office if he was aware of the attention the tie had garnered from Russia, Pentagon chief spokesman Sean Parnell replied, “Your mom bought it for him—and it’s a patriotic American tie, moron.”

It looks like this is becoming a thing—though it may be localized to questions from HuffPost, for now. Last week, when HuffPost reporter S.V. Dáte asked who had picked Hungary as the next venue for talks between Trump and Putin, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt had stupidly replied: “Your mom.” A minute later, White House communications director Steven Cheung replied, “Your mom did.”

JD Vance responded to the tie controversy on X Friday: “Or maybe he was wearing the colors of America.” Or maybe Hegseth was wearing the colors of Cuba, or Czech Republic, or Cambodia, or any of the roughly 30 countries with red, white, and blue flags. But strangely enough, only one nation seemed to perceive it as a sneaky signal of support.

President Donald Trump’s hand-selected prosecutor reportedly voluntarily offered up information about sensitive grand jury matters while complaining to a legal reporter about a social media post.

Lindsey Halligan, Trump’s former personal lawyer whom he recently installed as the interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, reached out to Lawfare’s Anna Bower almost two weeks ago to discuss the recent indictment of New York Attorney General Letitia James for mortgage fraud. 

“Anna, Lindsey Halligan here,” she began, messaging Bower on Signal. “You are reporting things that are simply not true. Thought you should have a heads up.”

Halligan proceeded to discuss her efforts to indict James. Throughout the entire exchange, she never requested that she be allowed to speak off the record—until Bower later reached out to the Department of Justice for comment. 

Halligan took issue with Bower’s sharing excerpts from The New York Times to X. The Times had reported that James’s second home was being occupied by her niece Nakia Thompson, who testified before a grand jury that “she had lived in the house for years and that she did not pay rent.” 

Bower wrote on X that the article was “important exculpatory evidence” because the reporting undermined the prosecution’s central claim that James used the second property as a rental home. But Thompson seemed to have testified before a separate grand jury in Norfolk, Virginia, not the one in Alexandria that had indicted James. Thompson did not testify again. 

“Did they get something wrong?” Bower asked Halligan, referring to the Times report. 

“Yes they did but you went with it! Without even fact checking anything!!!!” Halligan replied. “And they are disclosing grand jury info—which is also not a full representation of what happened. I guess I expect them to do that but I was surprised by you running with it.”

When Bower prompted Halligan to specify what she would like corrected, the interim U.S. attorney referred her to the indictment, which alleged that James had received thousands of dollars in rent.

“I can’t tell you grand jury stuff,” Halligan added. But her correspondence with Bower had already touched on grand jury materials, which is wildly abnormal and legally risky.

While James’s tax information was not publicly available, the New York attorney general’s ethics disclosures revealed that she had previously collected rent on the property—but only once in 2020, and for a sum between $1,000 and $5,000. When Bowers relayed these findings, Halligan started ranting. 

“You’re biased. Your reporting isn’t accurate. I’m the one handling the case and I’m telling you that. If you want to twist and torture the facts to fit your narrative, there’s nothing I can do. Waste to even give you a heads up,” she wrote. 

When Bower reached out to the Department of Justice for comment, they said that Halligan was “attempting to point you to facts, not gossip, but when clarifying that she would adhere to the rule of the law and not disclose Grand Jury information, you threaten to leak an entire conversation.

“Good luck ever getting anyone to talk to you when you publish their texts,” DOJ added. 

Later, Halligan texted Bower again to insist they had been speaking off record. “You’re not a journalist so it’s weird saying that but just letting you know,” she wrote.

“I’m sorry, but that’s not how this works. You don’t get to say that in retrospect,” Bower replied. 

“Yes I do. Off record,” Halligan responded.  

“I am really sorry. I would have been happy to speak with you on an off the record basis had you asked,” Bower replied “But you didn’t ask, and I still haven’t agreed to speak on that basis. Do you have any further comment for the story?” 

Even then, Halligan continued. “It’s obvious the whole convo is off record. There’s disappearing messages and it’s on signal. What is your story? You never told me about a story.”

This isn’t the first gaffe Halligan’s made since being installed. She previously submitted faulty paperwork in both James’s case and the indictment of former FBI Director James Comey. 

Federal workers were told to stop documenting changes to the White House after images of the East Wing’s facade being torn down amid construction on President Donald Trump’s planned 90,000-square-foot ballroom sparked outrage online.

On Monday evening, a Treasury Department official directed staff, who, as occupants of the building neighboring the East Wing, have a direct vantage point to the site, not to snap photos.

“As construction proceeds on the White House grounds, employees should refrain from taking and sharing photographs of the grounds, to include the East Wing, without prior approval from the Office of Public Affairs,” stated an email to Treasury Department personnel, as reported by The Wall Street Journal.

In a statement to CNN, a Treasury spokesperson explained the ban as follows: “Carelessly shared photographs of the White House complex during this process could potentially reveal sensitive items, including security features or confidential structural details. Out of an abundance of caution, we have urged our employees to avoid sharing these images.”

Earlier Monday, viral images showed a construction crew taking a backhoe to the side of the East Wing.

Throughout the day, Democrats took to social media to comment on the arresting footage of the East Wing and decry the Trump administration.

“Seeing the White House torn apart is really emblematic of the times we’re in,” wrote Senator Tina Smith on social media.

“Oh you’re trying to say the cost of living is skyrocketing?” tweeted Senator Elizabeth Warren. “Donald Trump can’t hear you over the sound of bulldozers demolishing a wing of the White House to build a new grand ballroom.”

Trump originally said the White House ballroom “won’t interfere with the current building,” but press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters that “necessary construction will take place” so that the East Wing, which was added in 1942, could be “modernized.” The president confirmed Monday on Truth Social that the East Wing is “being fully modernized.”

The MAGA crowd was appalled Monday as one of the Trump administration’s top officials dared to celebrate Diwali, the Hindu festival of lights—and they weren’t shy about sharing their disgust.

Diwali is celebrated by more than a billion people around the world, including Sikhs, Jains, and some Buddhists. It represents the spiritual fight of light over darkness, and of knowledge over ignorance. But FBI Director Kash Patel’s simple post commemorating the joyous holiday ushered in a scourge of vitriol from the Trump administration’s political base.

“Happy Diwali—celebrating the Festival of Lights around the world, as good triumphs over evil,” Patel wrote on his personal X account, sharing an image of thousands of clay oil lamps known as diyas floating down a river.

The post received nearly 3,000 comments—many of which were repulsed by Patel’s religion. They chastised paganism and condemned him for not choosing Jesus Christ, flagrantly forgetting the protections granted for freedom of religion by the First Amendment.

“This is a Christian Nation. Check your foreigner stuff at the gate,” commented X user John McGlone, whose bio describes him as an “unapologetic Christian American.”

A Christian nationalist known as Sons of Korah responded with a meme that read, “Not today Satan.”

X user Scott Hambrick symbolically flagged Patel’s account for the Department of Homeland Security, responding to his Diwali post with just one word: “Deport.” He wasn’t the only one. A self-described “Project 2025 respecter” on the site, Rusty Shackleford, wrote: “We need to deport all hindus.”

Ben Garrett, a pastor at Refuge Church in Ogden, Utah, had a particularly Christian response: “Go back.”

Gabriel Rench, the host of the CrossPolitic podcast, offered Patel a choice.

“Here is the deal. Either go back to your home country or assimilate into Christian America,” Rench wrote. “Thank you for your attention to this matter.”

MAGA’s digital diatribe could be a snapshot of what’s to come later Tuesday, when Donald Trump hosts a formal Diwali event at the White House at 4 p.m. Amid heated tariff negotiations with India, Trump commemorated the holiday Monday, extending a Diwali greeting to all Americans in celebration.  

“It is also a time to bring families and friends together to celebrate community, draw strength from hope, and embrace a lasting spirit of renewal,” Trump wrote in a statement posted to the White House website. “To every American celebrating Diwali, may this observance bring abiding serenity, prosperity, hope, and peace.”

Republican Senator Ted Cruz warned his party of “political peril” in 2026 if the GOP doesn’t take the No Kings protests seriously. 

“Unquestionably we should take political peril seriously,” Cruz said on Monday on Bloomberg Television. “I think it’s bad for America when one of our two major political parties has gotten so extreme and radical the way the Democrats are. They’re a party that is unified behind hate for Donald Trump.” 

While the first part of Cruz’s warning falls into the same hyperbolic rhetoric that the GOP has been pushing about No Kings being an antifa meetup, the second half rang surprisingly true. 

“In terms of the midterms in 2026, it’s dangerous.… Substantively Republicans have a lot to campaign on,” he continued, citing things like the drop in illegal border crossings and the release of Israeli hostages. “That being said … there is a lot of energy, there is a lot of anger on the left, and elections can be dangerous when one side is mobilized, is angry.  I’ll tell you in terms of fundraising, the Democrats are raising a lot more money because their radicals hate Trump so much. And look, angry, energized voters show up to vote. And I do worry just about ordinary voters who are happy or complacent who say, ‘Gosh, Trump won, things are good, I don’t need to show up and vote.’ There’s no doubt that if one side shows up and the other doesn’t, that that leads to a bad election.” 

Even as they overexaggerate and misrepresent the Democrats—whose leadership is clearly center-left, at best—Cruz’s point shows that Republicans are paying attention to the size and scope of the No Kings rallies. But they just still can’t seem to figure out why everyone is so upset with President Trump. 

Paul Ingrassia—President Donald Trump’s nominee to head the Office of Special Counsel—may not be confirmed after his racist and antisemitic messages were unearthed Monday by Politico, leading some Republican senators to repudiate him.

In the private text messages, Ingrassia, a MAGA attorney and podcaster, said he has a “Nazi streak” and that he believes Martin Luther King Jr. Day ought to be “tossed into the seventh circle of hell.” He also called for an end to other holidays that celebrate Black history, which he referred to using an Italian slur for Black people.

While Ingrassia has an extensive public record of MAGA extremism, these private messages were a bridge too far for some Senate Republicans.

One of them is Majority Leader John Thune, who told reporters Monday night that Ingrassia is “not going to pass,” and that he hopes the White House withdraws his nomination.

Senator Rick Scott similarly said, “I don’t plan on voting for him.” Senator James Lankford told reporters he has “tons of questions for him when he comes on Thursday, but I can’t imagine supporting that.” Senator Ron Johnson told HuffPost he hopes the Trump administration pulls the nomination as well.

Prior to the scandal, Senator Thom Tillis already said he would oppose Ingrassia’s nomination, citing the nominee’s comments about the January 6 Capitol riot, as well as “a number of other things.”

Assuming full Democratic opposition, Ingrassia can only afford to lose three Republican votes before Vice President JD Vance would have to step in to break the tie. Four Republicans opposing him would tank the nomination.

Scott, Johnson, Lankford are also all on the 15-member (8 Republicans, 7 Democrats) Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, which has a confirmation hearing for Ingrassia scheduled for Thursday. Ingrassia needs a simple majority of the panel’s votes to advance his nomination to the full Senate.