Leavitt Says Trump Calling Reporter “Piggy” Is a Sign of Respect

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt offered a truly pathetic defense Thursday for President Donald Trump calling a female reporter “piggy.”

During a press briefing, Leavitt was asked to explain what the president meant when he said, “Quiet, piggy” to Bloomberg reporter Catherine Lucey earlier this week. Lucey had asked him a question about Jeffrey Epstein while on Air Force One.

Presenting her own wild spin, Leavitt claimed Trump’s crude and sexist comment was him being “frank and open” with the press, and an example of behavior that was “a lot more respectful” than that of the previous administration.

“So, I think the president being frank and open and honest to your faces, rather than hiding behind your backs, is frankly a lot more respectful than what you saw in the last administration, when you had a president that lied to your face and then didn’t speak to you for weeks, and hid upstairs and didn’t take your questions,” Leavitt said. “So I think everyone in this room should appreciate the frankness and the openness that you get from President Trump on a near daily basis.”  

Leavitt’s right about one thing: This is completely normal behavior for Trump. The president has a well-documented history of berating female reporters who ask him tough questions, calling them “the worst” and “second-rate,” telling them “to be quiet” and that they “know nothing about nothing,” and saying that he doesn’t like their “attitude.”

A White House official responded earlier this week to the incident with Lucey, claiming that she had “behaved in an inappropriate and unprofessional way towards her colleagues on the plane.” When pressed on what specifically Lucey had done wrong, the White House did not respond.

Bedlam has consumed the House of Representatives since the end of the government shutdown.

Lawmakers don’t seem to remember how to get along with one another after a whopping 54-day recess. Instead, they’re practically at each other’s throats, with several major intra- and interparty clashes taking center stage in the lower chamber.

On Tuesday, Democratic Representative Marie Gluesenkamp Perez’s resolution to rebuke her liberal colleague Representative Chuy Garcia passed the House, formally reprimanding the Chicago-area politico for attempting to handpick his successor.

Hours later, the House deliberated on censuring Virgin Islands Delegate Stacey Plaskett. Documents released from the Epstein estate revealed Plaskett had texted with Jeffrey Epstein during a 2019 Oversight Committee hearing, using his answers to craft questions for the president’s former fixer Michael Cohen.

After that vote failed, Representative Lauren Boebert—a member of the conservative coalition that penned the censure—practically exploded at her fellow Republicans, torching them for failing to act while they hold majorities in both chambers of Congress.

“It was multiple F-bombs,” one Republican who witnessed the tirade told NBC News. “At least one of them that I heard clearly was, ‘What the f--- am I doing here?’”

But wait, there’s more! Representative Nancy Mace moved Wednesday to force a vote on censuring embattled Florida Representative Cory Mills. The effort would strip Mills from his committee appointments, potentially removing him from the Armed Services and Foreign Affairs committees.

Last month, a judge granted a restraining order against Mills after his ex-girlfriend accused him of “harassment, threatening to release sexual videos, and to harm future boyfriends.” It’s hard to imagine that didn’t catch Mace’s attention, since she has spent the better part of the year working to introduce legislation to curb revenge porn.

The House Ethics Committee announced Wednesday that it would open an investigation into Mills, but Mace’s attempt to censure him before that investigation has even begun rubbed one of her fellow Republicans the wrong way.

“It’s insanity. They want to convict and sentence people, and then send it to Ethics for investigation. Ass backwards,” one lawmaker told NBC.

House Speaker Mike Johnson thinks it’s “wildly inappropriate” for Democrats to tell troops to obey the U.S. Constitution, but he wasn’t the slightest bit concerned about President Donald Trump’s threat to execute Democratic lawmakers.

Speaking to the press Thursday, Johnson was asked to respond to Trump’s claim that a group of Democratic lawmakers had committed “seditious behavior punishable by death” by posting a video reminding members of the military and intelligence community not to obey illegal orders.

Johnson fumed about the message these lawmakers were sending to impressionable “young troops,” but he did not address the president’s own violent rhetoric. “I mean think of what the threat that is to our national security and what it means to our institutions,” the speaker said. 

“We have got to raise the bar in Congress, this is out of control, and it is wildly inappropriate. And for a senator like Mark Kelly or any member of congress in the House or Senate to be engaged in that kind of talk is to me just so beyond the pale,” Johnson said. 

What was beyond the pale was Trump’s fury at lawmakers reminding troops and intelligence officials  that they’d sworn an oath to defend and obey the U.S. Constitution—not the president or his administration. 

Senator Marsha Blackburn also defended Trump’s outrageous response during an appearance on Newsmax Thursday, claiming that members of the military were simply “there to carry out their orders.”

Both Johnson and Blackburn seem to think that diminishing the agency and intelligence of servicemembers is the best way to justify the president’s outrageous response. 

While the lawmakers didn’t get specific about what orders were unconstitutional, there have been major legal concerns about a number of the president’s actions. A recent report revealed that the top military lawyer for the command overseeing Trump’s strikes on alleged “drug boats” thought they were illegal—but the Pentagon ignored him. Additionally, the Trump administration’s federal law enforcement takeover of American cities has also been challenged in courts around the country.

Federal prosecutors are seeking to dismiss charges against a woman shot by Border Patrol last month.

Marimar Martinez and her co-defendant, Anthony Ruiz, were charged with impeding a federal officer with a deadly weapon when her car collided with a Border Patrol vehicle in Chicago’s Brighton Park neighborhood on October 4. But Martinez has argued the opposite: Border Patrol agent Charles Exum crashed into her car, and then shot her.

On Thursday, prosecutors moved to dismiss the charges just before a new hearing in federal court, where Martinez and Ruiz’s attorneys were going to reveal new text messages from Exum that have not yet been made public. Exum has already gotten in trouble for Signal texts bragging about the shooting to his fellow agents, saying, “I fired 5 rounds and she had 7 holes. Put that in your book boys.” Exum also sent a news article to another recipient saying, “Read it. 5 shots, 7 holes.”

The move to dismiss charges suggests damaging material was going to be revealed in the new texts. Already, the facts in the case reflected poorly on Exum, as he quickly drove his government-issued Chevrolet Tahoe to a Border Patrol mechanic in Maine for repairs before any investigation could examine the damage. Also, video from the incident allegedly shows Exum saying, “Do something, bitch,” before getting out of his car and shooting Martinez.

President Trump’s “Operation Midway Blitz,” ostensibly to enforce immigration law, has resulted in brutality against protesters and multiple court rulings against Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Border Patrol chief Gregory Bovino left Chicago after being rebuked by a federal judge for using tear gas and other riot-prevention methods against protesters.

Martinez was a victim of this half-baked operation, along with countless immigrants in Chicago. But the White House is doing the same thing in other cities across the U.S., such as Charlotte, North Carolina. How will the government be held accountable?

President Trump is so devoted to protecting the artificial intelligence industry that he is preparing to sign an executive order attacking states’ rights to regulate it.

The order would direct the Justice Department to sue states that pass AI regulation laws. It would also have Attorney General Pam Bondi create an “AI Litigation Task Force” to “challenge state AI laws, including on grounds that such laws unconstitutionally regulate interstate commerce, are preempted by existing federal regulations, or are otherwise unlawful.” The order would also have the Commerce Department withholding federal funding from states that didn’t fall in line with Trump on AI.

Trump could issue the executive order as soon as Friday, according to reports.

This summer, the Senate voted overwhelmingly against an effort to restrict AI regulation on the state level. Many of Trump’s own party members disagreed with the legislation on the grounds that it would protect an industry that may cut jobs, hurt children, and drive up utility prices. Those same issues—along with the erosion of states’ rights at the center of the effort—are still prevalent.

“There should not be a moratorium on states rights for AI,” MAGA Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene wrote on X Thursday. “States must retain the right to regulate and make laws on AI and anything else for the benefit of their state. Federalism must be preserved.”

MTG is unfortunately correct here. States should play a large role in determining the extent to which they want AI active within their borders. Trump using an executive order with the Justice and Commerce departments to prioritize AI companies over real people feels like a shrewd, neoliberal move—not very small government or antifederalist for a Republican president.

“Preemption is a question for Congress, which they have considered and rejected, and should continue to reject,” Center for Democracy and Technology director Travis Hall told The Washington Post. “This proposal is shocking in its disregard for the democratic processes of state governments in their work to address the real and documented harms arising from AI tools.”

Even the top military lawyer for the command overseeing President Donald Trump’s strikes on alleged “drug boats” thought they were illegal—but the Pentagon ignored him.

Senior government officials reportedly dismissed legal concerns raised by the senior judge advocate general at the U.S. Southern Command in Miami, who warned against the Trump administration’s plan to bomb foreign vessels the government claims are transporting drugs. He warned that the strikes could be considered extrajudicial killings, according to two senior U.S. officials, two senior congressional aides, and two former senior U.S. officials who spoke with NBC News.

Among those senior officials were members of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, the six sources said.

Three people familiar with the matter identified the senior judge advocate general as Marine Col. Paul Meagher, who is the top lawyer overseeing command for military operations in the Caribbean.

In a statement to NBC News, chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell denied that anyone had “raised concerns to any attorneys in the chain of command regarding the legality of the strikes conducted thus far.”

Historically, the U.S. would use intelligence to stop vessels that could be involved in drug trafficking, and then board and search them. But starting in September, Trump has opted to just blow them up, killing dozens of crew members, violating international law, and costing the U.S. valuable intelligence allies.

The Trump administration has claimed that its military strikes on these foreign vessels have targeted “unlawful combatants” engaged in an “armed conflict.” But a closer look at some of the men killed in these strikes revealed that they were not so-called “narco-terrorists” or members of criminal gangs or cartels. Crucially, they weren’t all smuggling drugs. Those that were were smuggling cocaine, not synthetic opioids responsible for killing tens of thousands of Americans every year.

New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani is meeting with President Trump at the White House on Friday, where he plans to discuss how New Yorkers are struggling to afford to live in their city.

Mamdani spoke to MS NOW’s Chris Hayes Wednesday night, saying that his office reached out to the president “because of a commitment that I made to New Yorkers that I would be willing to meet with anyone and everyone so long as it was to the benefit of eight and a half million people who call the city home and their struggle to afford the most expensive city in the United States.”

“I want to just speak plainly to the president about what it means to actually stand up for New Yorkers and the way in which New Yorkers are struggling to afford this city,” Mamdani added. “Frankly, cost of living is something that I heard time and time again from New Yorkers about why they voted for Donald Trump.”

A few days after Trump won the presidential election in 2024, Mamdani, then a New York state assemblyman, took to New York’s streets to ask people why they voted for Trump. What he found was that they were upset with politics, angry about Israel’s genocide in Gaza, and feeling squeezed by the city’s high cost of living.

One year later, Mamdani defeated a well-funded opponent, former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, to be elected mayor, despite facing multiple attacks on his agenda of affordability and policy items such as free city buses and childcare. Right-wing figures, including Cuomo, made bigoted remarks about Mamdani’s Muslim faith and support for Palestine.

Trump was no exception, urging New Yorkers to vote for Cuomo and continuously calling Mamdani a Communist, even in his announcement on Truth Social of Friday’s meeting. What happens in that meeting will preview how Mamdani will handle a president who has already sent the National Guard into cities he doesn’t like and threatened to revoke all federal funding to New York.

Donald Trump was reportedly still in contact with Jeffrey Epstein as he ascended to public office.

Trump has claimed he cut off contact with Epstein after the financier was convicted in 2009 for soliciting underage prostitutes, referring to Epstein as a “creep.” But he rang his old “pal” in 2016, shortly after he won the presidential election, according to one of the sex trafficker’s closest confidants.

“After the election—you know I used to speak to Jeffrey regularly—and one of the calls we spoke, Jeffrey told me that Trump, it was after the election that Trump called him,” Epstein’s brother Mark told CNN Wednesday.

“And it was sort of like, can you believe this? Because nobody believed Trump was going to win. Trump was very surprised himself that he won, so Jeffrey said he called him like, ‘Can you believe this?’” Epstein continued, specifying that Trump had called his brother and not the other way around.

Trump and Epstein were friends for decades before their relationship reportedly dissolved over a real estate dispute in Palm Beach, Florida. Prior to his death, the child rapist 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 at the time.

But the pair weren’t always simpatico, especially in the years leading up to Epstein’s death. In the same interview with CNN, Mark Epstein recalled a documented conversation between his brother and former Trump White House strategist Steve Bannon, in which the New York financier said he “stopped hanging out with Trump when he realized Trump was a crook.”

“That’s a direct quote from Jeffrey,” Epstein told the network.

Bannon assisted Epstein in navigating the political and legal quagmire that was the last year of his life. As part of that, Bannon conducted a series of interviews with Epstein between 2018 and early 2019, totaling about 15 hours of unseen footage.

“Crook” wasn’t the only bad word that Epstein shared about his longtime friend. In a 2017 exchange with Larry Summers, the former treasury secretary and president of Harvard University, Epstein said that Trump was “dangerous” and was one of the worst people he’d ever met. “Not one decent cell in his body,” Epstein wrote to Summers.

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche wants to investigate a group of Democratic lawmakers who made a video warning members of the military and intelligence community about the Trump administration, but he doesn’t even know what they were trying to instruct them to do.

In a video released Tuesday titled “Don’t Give Up the Ship,” a group of Democratic lawmakers with backgrounds in the armed forces and intelligence warned that the Trump administration was “pitting our uniformed military and intelligence community professionals against American citizens.” They reminded government officers that they swore an oath to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution. 

The participating lawmakers were Michigan Senator Elissa Slotkin, a former CIA analyst; Arizona Senator Mark Kelly, a former astronaut and naval officer; as well as Representatives Chrissy Houlahan, Chris Deluzio, Maggie Goodlander, and Jason Crow.

“Right now, the threats to our Constitution aren’t just coming from abroad, but from right here at home. Our laws are clear, you can refuse illegal orders,” the lawmakers said. “You must refuse illegal orders.”

During an appearance on Fox News’s Hannity Wednesday night, Blanche was pressed on how he might investigate the video, which has riled Trump officials and the president himself. Blanche fumed that the lawmakers hadn’t actually specified which “court orders” ought to be violated. “You cannot do that in this country, especially if you’re a leader,” he said.  

Of course, the lawmakers hadn’t said anything about defying court orders, rather the orders they were given by the administration that defied the Constitution or federal law.

“I think they should be held to account,” Blanche continued. “I think that those congressmen should be required to answer questions about why they did what they did. And the American people deserve that, and so does President Trump.”

Despite lawmakers making only a vague reference to unconstitutional orders, Trump accused the lawmakers Thursday of “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!”

In a series of posts on social media, Trump flew into a fury. “Each one of these traitors to our Country should be ARRESTED AND PUT ON TRIAL. Their words cannot be allowed to stand—We won’t have a Country anymore!!! An example MUST BE SET,” he wrote on Truth Social.

“This is really bad, and Dangerous to our Country,” he wrote in another post. “Their words cannot be allowed to stand. SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR FROM TRAITORS!!! LOCK THEM UP???”

White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller claimed Tuesday that “Democrat lawmakers are now openly calling for insurrection,” while in fact, they were calling for the opposite.

On Tuesday, multiple congressional Democrats made a video reminding the members of the military and intelligence community of their duty to the Constitution, not to President Trump. On Thursday, Trump called them “TRAITORS” and shared a post calling for them to be executed. 

The fairly milquetoast video that drew Trump’s outrage featured Senators Mark Kelly and Elissa Slotkin, and Representatives Jason Crow, Chris Deluzio, Maggie Goodlander, and Chrissy Houlahan—all former military or intelligence veterans. 

“This administration is pitting our uniformed military and intelligence community professionals against American citizens. Like us, you all swore an oath to protect and defend this Constitution. Right now, the threats to our Constitution aren’t just coming from abroad, but from right here at home,” the Democrats said. “Our laws are clear. You can refuse illegal orders.”

The clip set Trump and MAGA off. 

“This is really bad, and Dangerous to our Country. Their words cannot be allowed to stand,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR FROM TRAITORS!!! LOCK THEM UP??? President DJT.” 

“HANG THEM GEORGE WASHINGTON WOULD !!” read another post retruthed by Trump.

The person who posted that had a “deus vult” profile picture, a symbol commonly associated with the neo-Nazi movement.

“Get these people out of office!!  They aren’t doing their jobs, they are looking for ways to be rebels, and take others with them.  They need to go!!!” yet another said.

“Why aren’t they under arrest for sedition......thrown out of their offices...ENOUGH IS ENOUGH…” read another.

It’s rich to hear the January 6 crowd who wanted to hang Mike Pence now whine about sedition, treason, and conspiracy. Trump absolutely has pitted the military against normal American citizens. From releasing them into the streets of American cities, to the possibility of sending them to polling stations in blue districts to “monitor” elections, there is a clear attempt from Trump here to make the military his personal army rather than a body beholden to the rules of the Constitution he has so much disdain for. 

This story has been updated.