We May Still Hear Everything Jack Smith Has on Trump

The American public may still have the opportunity to hear former special counsel Jack Smith’s case against Donald Trump.

Smith developed two cases against Trump: one into the MAGA leader’s alleged retention of classified documents after he left the White House in 2021, and another into Trump’s involvement in the January 6 riots. But both were dismissed after Trump won the 2024 election, on the basis of a long-standing Justice Department policy that prevents the prosecution of a sitting president.

The investigator was invited by Republican Representative Jim Jordan for a closed-door session before Congress last month, giving Smith a platform that top Democrats surprisingly claim was the most advantageous to eventually charge Trump.

“Yeah, well, I left that closed-door deposition of Jack Smith, and I said that Chairman Jordan’s decision to do it behind closed doors was the best decision he ever made in his life, because it was absolutely devastating for Donald Trump and for those who still want to try to pretend as if he wasn’t guilty of these things, he was clearly guilty of these things,” Democratic Representative Jamie Raskin told MS NOW on Tuesday.

Raskin went on to argue that Trump had not evaded his charges because of “any kind of innocence.”

“What’s allowed him to escape, you know, Houdini-like, is the Roberts court and the fact that he’s been able to manipulate the levers of power to keep himself going,” Raskin said. “I mean, if he put, you know, a fraction of that energy into trying to actually do something for the American people, we might be in a different position in America today.

“But the economy, the society are basically in ruins because of the guy,” he continued. “But he has been able to stay afloat, even as it’s overwhelmingly clear that he engaged in an attempt to defraud the United States, disrupt this federal proceeding, and massively violate the voting rights of all Americans by stealing an election. He wasn’t trying to stop election fraud. He was trying to commit election fraud for several months.”

Last week, Raskin told reporters that it would have been “devastating” for Trump if the public heard the extent of Smith’s testimony, which involved “schooling the Judiciary Committee on the professional responsibilities of a prosecutor and the ethical duties of a prosecutor.”

In the midst of rants about seizing Venezuelan oil and threatening to leave NATO, President Donald Trump gave a shout-out to one of his favorite supporters—recently fired Baltimore Ravens Head Coach John Harbaugh.

Harbaugh, who coached the Ravens for 18 years, was fired after a tumultuous season that ended in heartbreaking fashion—a missed field goal in the last seconds of a game against the rival Pittsburgh Steelers that sent the Ravens home packing, dashing any hopes of making the postseason, much less the Super Bowl.

While some see Harbaugh’s firing as a long time coming, President Trump surprisingly chimed in to defend him.

“HIRE JOHN HARBAUGH, FAST. HE, AND HIS BROTHER, ARE TOTAL WINNERS!!! President DJT,” he wrote in all caps.

While Trump might just be tapped in, it’s worth mentioning that Harbaugh had a friendly visit with the president at the White House this summer—something many fans brought up in jest when discussing what went wrong for the Ravens this season.

Last summer, Harbaugh, his brother Jim—the current head coach of the Los Angeles Chargers—and their mother made a trip to the White House, even as President Trump had described Baltimore as a disgusting, rat- and rodent-infested mess” where “no human being would want to live” back in 2019.

“It was amazing. It was awesome. And I promise you I root for our president,” Harbaugh said. “I want our president to be successful just like I want my quarterback to be successful and I want my team to be successful, and it was an amazing experience.”

If support for Trump is any indication, Jim’s Chargers might be in trouble this weekend against the Patriots.

President Trump spent a large part of his Wednesday morning ranting on Truth Social, with one of those rants concerning how helpless NATO is without him, how he ended eight wars, and how he still deserves the Nobel Peace Prize—even though he swears he doesn’t really care.

“Remember, for all of those big NATO fans, they were at 2% GDP, and most weren’t paying their bills, UNTIL I CAME ALONG. The USA was, foolishly, paying for them! I, respectfully, got them to 5% GDP, AND THEY PAY, immediately,” he wrote. “Everyone said that couldn’t be done, but it could, because, beyond all else, they are all my friends. Without my involvement, Russia would have ALL OF UKRAINE right now.”

While this is par for the course for Trump—he’s been railing against NATO for years—this recent installment comes with Trump’s threatened military annexation of Greenland hanging overhead. That kind of escalation could end NATO as we know it, and our European allies are far from thrilled.

“I believe one should take the American president seriously when he says that he wants Greenland,” Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said earlier this week. “But I will also make it clear that if the U.S. chooses to attack another NATO country militarily, then everything stops, including NATO and thus the security that has been established since the end of the Second World War.”

Trump could care less about this, as he’s more concerned with what NATO has done for him lately, and vice versa.

“Remember, also, I single-handedly ENDED 8 WARS, and Norway, a NATO Member, foolishly chose not to give me the Noble Peace Prize,” he continued, misspelling “Nobel” while repeating his “ended 8 wars” lie. “But that doesn’t matter! What does matter is that I saved Millions of Lives. RUSSIA AND CHINA HAVE ZERO FEAR OF NATO WITHOUT THE UNITED STATES, AND I DOUBT NATO WOULD BE THERE FOR US IF WE REALLY NEEDED THEM. EVERYONE IS LUCKY THAT I REBUILT OUR MILITARY IN MY FIRST TERM, AND CONTINUE TO DO SO. We will always be there for NATO, even if they won’t be there for us. The only Nation that China and Russia fear and respect is the DJT REBUILT U.S.A.”

Is Trump about to invade a country and destroy NATO all because he didn’t win the “Noble” Peace Prize? It sure seems like it.

As if there wasn’t enough news Tuesday, Tony Dokoupil spent a full minute of CBS Evening News that night “saluting” Secretary of State Marco Rubio for being the subject of online memes.

“Only in America: the many lives and many jobs of Marco Rubio,” Dokoupil said, closing out the second night of his already unfortunate run at the flagship program with a segment called “Marco Rubio’s ‘Moment.’” Who exactly said the secretary of state was having a “moment”? Dokoupil didn’t bother to say, but it quickly became clear.

“Whatever you think of his politics, you have to admit, it’s an impressive résumé. And now, AI memes have added to that portfolio—” Dokoupil continued, as a slideshow of differently outfitted Rubios glazed the screen.

But it’s not an “impressive résumé”—it’s a disgrace. One must assume that Rubio is not actually simultaneously serving as secretary of state, interim national security adviser, acting archivist at the National Archives and Records Administration, and most recently, “viceroy of Venezuela.” Rather, he is simply holding those titles while allowing organizations such as USAID, of which he is also acting administrator, to suffocate beneath him.

In any case, if your fluff piece about one of the president’s goons is enough to be reposted by the White House, then it’s not journalism—it’s a fancam.

“Marco Rubio, we salute you! You’re the ultimate Florida man,” Dokoupil concluded.

Meanwhile, Dokoupil only gave fewer than 20 seconds to discussing the fifth anniversary of the deadly January 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol, the first anniversary since Donald Trump pardoned more than 1,500 rioters. Dokoupil also dangerously bothsidesed the memorial, saying Trump accused Democrats of not preventing the attack while House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries “accused the president of quote, ‘whitewashing it.’” (Trump went so far as to publish an alternative history timeline on the White House website.)

Dokoupil was tapped by right-wing shill Bari Weiss to revamp the nightly broadcast. So far, his performance in the role is already aligning with Weiss’s journalistic North Star: staying on the Trump administration’s good side, and pulling the national discourse to an invented center that is both unrigorous and uninteresting.

President Trump is overseeing the transfer of between 30 and 50 million barrels of Venezuelan oil into U.S. custody—making his true motives in the region all the more apparent.

Trump stated Wednesday evening on Truth Social that the “interim authorities” of Venezuela—likely referring to Venezuela’s acting leader, Delcy Rodríguez—were gifting him “High Quality, Sanctioned Oil.”

“This Oil will be sold at its Market Price, and that money will be controlled by me, as President of the United States of America, to ensure it is used to benefit the people of Venezuela and the United States!” he continued. “I have asked Energy Secretary Chris Wright to execute this plan, immediately. It will be taken by storage ships, and brought directly to unloading docks in the United States. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

It seems that the Trump administration extrajudicially killed more than 100 fishermen off the Venezuelan coast, killed 80 people while bombing Caracas, and kidnapped President Nicolás Maduro and his wife in the middle of the night all to have even more control over oil that we’ve historically always gotten from them.

And his promise to “ensure [the oil] is used to benefit the people of Venezuela and the United States” is dubious at best.

This comes as Secretary Wright announced plans to control Venezuelan oil “indefinitely.”

The U.S. will never stop being involved in Venezuela’s oil production, according to Trump administration officials.

Washington will instead continue to oversee and sell Venezuelan oil “indefinitely,” Energy Secretary Chris Wright said Wednesday morning, even after U.S. officials finish selling off the Latin American country’s stockpiled oil reserves.

“Instead of the oil being blockaded, as it is right now, we’re gonna let the oil flow … to United States refineries and around the world to bring better oil supplies, but have those sales done by the U.S. government,” Wright said while speaking at Goldman Sachs’s Energy, CleanTech & Utilities Conference.

“We’re going to market the crude coming out of Venezuela, first this backed-up stored oil, and then indefinitely, going forward, we will sell the production that comes out of Venezuela into the marketplace,” he noted.

Wright added that the proceeds from the oil sales will go into “accounts controlled by the U.S. government” before supposedly flowing back to benefit the Venezuelan people.

Some of the cash is already on its way to the U.S. Trump announced Tuesday night that Wright would oversee the sale of some 50 million barrels of sanctioned Venezuelan oil, a sale that could be worth as much as $2.5 billion.

U.S. forces invaded Venezuela early Saturday, bombing its capital, Caracas, as nearly 200 American troops infiltrated the city to capture its 13-year ruler, Nicolás Maduro.

Donald Trump failed to notify Congress before the invasion but didn’t forget to tip off his friends at America’s biggest oil companies, which stand to gain the most from America’s newfound control over Venezuela’s oil supply—the largest in the world.

The invasion followed months of naval attacks and escalating rhetoric between the White House and Venezuela’s leadership, which saw the Trump administration repeatedly pin U.S. fentanyl deaths on Venezuelan drug cartels despite a resounding lack of evidence.

Venezuela nationalized its oil supply in 1976 but tightened its grip on the valuable resource during the 2000s under President Hugo Chávez, when the country stripped control and seized assets from several major oil companies, including ExxonMobil.

But a Trump-controlled Venezuela is not likely to be as hostile. Instead, Wright revealed Wednesday that he had already been in discussions with U.S. oil companies about their potential return to the Latin American nation. He emphasized, however, that returning Venezuela to pre-Chávez oil production levels would require “tens of millions of dollars and significant time.”

This story has been updated.

A federal judge is demanding to know why Lindsey Halligan still thinks she’s U.S. attorney.

U.S. District Judge David Novak of Richmond—who was appointed by Donald Trump in 2019—filed an order late Tuesday, giving Halligan seven days to explain why she is lying about overseeing the legal matters of the Eastern District of Virginia.

“For these reasons, the Court hereby DIRECTS Ms. Halligan to file, within seven (7) days of the issuance of this Order, a pleading explaining the basis for Ms. Halligan’s identification of herself as the United States Attorney, notwithstanding [U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan] Currie’s contrary ruling,” Novak wrote, referring to Currie’s November ruling that found that the Justice Department had violated the Constitution by appointing Halligan.

“She shall also set forth the reasons why this Court should not strike Ms. Halligan’s identification of herself as United States Attorney from the indictment in this matter,” Novak continued. “Ms. Halligan shall further explain why her identification does not constitute a false or misleading statement.”

Trump handpicked Halligan—a former White House aide with no prior prosecutorial experience—to replace the last attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Erik Siebert. Siebert was forced out when he refused to prosecute former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James after he couldn’t find incriminating evidence against the pair.

Halligan was sworn into the powerful position in September. Ignoring protocol, the Trump loyalist moved full steam ahead on prosecutions under the banner of Trump’s approval for months, despite the fact that she was never confirmed by the Senate.

But Currie’s decision didn’t seem to matter one iota to Justice Department officials, who continued to sign Halligan’s name on criminal indictments even after she ruled that Halligan was unlawfully appointed as interim U.S. attorney.

In his own order, Novak suggested that Halligan could face disciplinary consequences for blatantly ignoring the law.

Donald Trump just can’t seem to wrap his head around why Representative Henry Cuellar isn’t backing off his reelection bid after being pardoned by the president last month.

Writing on Truth Social Tuesday night, Trump unloaded two lengthy screeds targeting the Texas Democrat, whom he’d pardoned from charges of bribery, unlawful foreign influence, and money laundering.

The president gushed about Webb County Judge Tano Tijerina, his pick to win in November, before turning his attention to Cuellar’s “great act of disloyalty” of running again as a Democrat.

“The Democrats wanted to put him ‘away’ for the rest of his life and, likewise, the life of his wife,” Trump wrote. He claimed that if given the chance, he would save Cuellar from “Political Persecution” again, but said the Democrat was “not smart in what he did, not respected by his Party” and was “a person who truly deserves to be beaten badly in the upcoming Election.”

“Henry should not be allowed to serve in Congress again,” the president wrote.

In a second post, Trump revealed exactly why he’d pardoned Cuellar: The embattled Texas Democrat reminded the president of himself.

“Nobody knows Henry Cuellar better than Donald J. Trump,” the president wrote, noting: “He was a weak and incompetent version of me.” He explained that they were in agreement about bolstering border security and had both suffered “Political Weaponization” at the hands of the Democrats.

Trump included a letter from Cuellar’s two daughters Catherine and Christina, who speculated that their father’s disagreements with his party “may have contributed to how this case began.”

“I never assumed he would be running for Office again, and certainly not as a Democrat, who essentially destroyed his life even with the Pardon given,” Trump wrote, adding that “despite doing him by far the greatest favor of his life,” the president now had to challenge his bid for his seat.

The Wyoming state Supreme Court ruled Tuesday to protect access to abortion—hilariously using a state law originally passed to undermine Obamacare.

The justices ruled 4-1 that two laws banning abortion, including the country’s first ban on abortion pills, violated the state Constitution—specifically an amendment ensuring that “each competent adult shall have the right to make his or her own health care decisions.”

That amendment was originally introduced in 2010 by Republican state Senator Leslie Nutting in order to resist adopting the Affordable Care Act. The bill was backed by Wyoming’s GOP-led legislature before being signed into law in 2011.

Attorneys for the state attempted to argue that abortion was not health care—and failed.

While the justices conceded that the amendment hadn’t been intended to apply to abortion, they determined that it was not their job to “add words” to the state Constitution.

It’s been five years since Donald Trump’s supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol in an attempt to undermine the results of the 2020 presidential election. To celebrate, the White House erected a new website Tuesday detailing the events of the day—though it has published a wildly inventive interpretation of the insurrection.

At the top of the black-and-white site: an enlarged portrait of former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Below her are smaller, glitching images of several prominent Democrats that led the two impeachment proceedings against Trump during his first term, including Representative Jamie Raskin and Senator Adam Schiff.

The first paragraph on the page makes mention of the sweeping pardon Trump signed during the initial hours of his second term, exonerating some 1,600 January 6 defendants. Below that, a chronological history that would challenge even the most forgiving recollection of the day.

The first slide of the timeline, labelled “Call to Action,” claims that prior to the day, Trump invited “patriotic Americans to Washington, DC on January 6 for a peaceful and historic protest.” It also states that Trump’s call was met by “hundreds of thousands” of his supporters. First fact check: that was not the case. It’s estimated that approximately 53,000 people attended his speech at the Ellipse that day. (Trump has previously claimed that attendance at his “Stop the Steal” rally rivaled Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s 1963 march on Washington, which drew roughly 250,000 attendees.)

The White House’s retelling goes on to purport that, after Trump delivered his speech, the “massive crowd peacefully” marched toward the Capitol building. The site refers to their demeanor as “orderly and spirited,” emphasizing their devotion to the 45th president.

Not mentioned on the website: the repeated lies and violent rhetoric that Trump espoused to hype his supporters up while at the Ellipse, which included Trump encouraging the crowd to “fight like hell” or else they wouldn’t “have a country anymore.” Also not mentioned: when Trump promised to join the march but immediately ditched them instead, hopping into his SUV for a lift to the White House where he chose to watch the bedlam from afar. (Years after the riot, it would become clear that even Trump’s supporters believed the president had incited their violence.)

The website then claims that the violence began after Capitol Police “aggressively fired tear gas, flash bangs, and rubber munitions into crowds of peaceful protesters.” But video evidence and extensive investigations into the proceedings of the day tell the story the other way around: shortly after 1:00 p.m., Trump’s supporters burst through the barriers around the Capitol, running toward the building as Congress voted to certify the election results. They were practically unimpeded by security forces.

Instead, the webpage suggests that Trump’s supporters breezed into the building, practically admitted by Capitol Police who “inexplicably removed barricades, opened Capitol doors, and even waved attendees inside the building,” all while insisting that some portions of the crowd were unfairly targeted by “violent force.”

Trump’s timeline ignores when Capitol Police discovered two bombs on the premises of the Capitol grounds, or when his supporters breached the Capitol by scaling its walls, smashing its windows and busting its doors. It also conveniently forgets that the events placed the Capitol on lockdown, or that the volatile crowd began chanting for the deaths of U.S. lawmakers.

The website claims that, after 2:24 p.m. Trump attempted to engineer a peaceful resolution for the pandemonium. Writing on Twitter, Trump did urge the crowd to “remain peaceful” and “respect the law,” though he did not tell them to exit the Capitol or go home. (Trump wouldn’t do that until 4:17 p.m., well after his supporters broke into Pelosi’s office and ransacked Congress.) But the White House’s retelling leaves out the part where Trump criticized his former number two, Mike Pence, before the vice president—who that morning had told Trump he would not overturn the election results—could exit the building.

“Mike Pence didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution, giving States a chance to certify a corrected set of facts, not the fraudulent or inaccurate ones which they were asked to previously certify. USA demands the truth!” Trump posted at the time.

Pence would eventually find his way out of the building, evading armed crowds chanting for his death.

The next slide on the White House-affiliated website announces that Pelosi repeatedly claimed responsibility for the building’s insufficient security detail. It links out to a video of the former speaker, captured the day of the riot, in which she laments that the National Guard had not been preemptively deployed to protect the legislative chambers from an attack by the president’s supporters.

(An egregious miscommunication between the Pentagon and the commander of the D.C. National Guard would result in the troops’ appallingly delayed deployment to assist the besieged Capitol Police.)

The page then features a smattering of allegations that only make sense through the lens of someone vehemently convinced that the 2020 presidential election was stolen, which mounds of evidence and repeat investigations have proven was not, in fact, the case. The White House accuses Pence of “cowardice and sabotage” for refusing to follow Trump’s orders to defy the votes of the American people, claims that the 2020 election was the effect of “massive mail-in ballot fraud” and “hidden suitcases of ballots.” The site argues that the fallout from the day unfairly “silenced” Trump (on social media), resulted in “mass arrests of patriotic protesters,” and inspired “weaponized prosecutions” against the real estate mogul.

“Despite relentless Deep State efforts to imprison, bankrupt, and assassinate him—all designed to sabotage his political comeback through fabricated indictments, invasive raids, and rigged show trials—President Trump emerges triumphant,” the website concludes in its final panel on Trump’s rewritten history. “Fueled by unbreakable resolve, the fierce loyalty of his courageous family, team, and Patriotic Americans, and God’s unmistakable grace, he delivers a landslide 2024 victory and reclaims the White House in the greatest comeback in American History.”