The DOJ Just Charged Dozens More for Anti-ICE Church Protest

The Department of Justice unsealed an indictment against an additional 30 protesters who mounted an anti-ICE protest at Cities Church in St. Paul, Minnesota, last month.

Attorney General Pam Bondi announced on X Friday that federal agents had already arrested 25 of the 30 new defendants at her direction.

“YOU CANNOT ATTACK A HOUSE OF WORSHIP. If you do so, you cannot hide from us—we will find you, arrest you, and prosecute you,” she wrote emphatically. “This Department of Justice STANDS for Christians and all Americans of faith.”

(It’s worth noting that Donald Trump’s administration is simultaneously facing multiple legal challenges from churchgoers and religious groups alleging that the government has impeded worship by removing restrictions against immigration enforcement near houses of worship.)

Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon announced that the charges that had been brought were a misdemeanor charge under the FACE Act of 1994 for intimidating or interfering with people exercising their constitutional freedom to practice religion, and a felony charge under the KKK Act of 1871 for conspiring to interfere with individuals’ religious rights. She credited the teamwork of the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, as well as Homeland Security Investigations and FBI agents, for making the arrests.

The case’s original nine defendants who were charged similarly in connection with the anti-ICE protest at Cities Church—including Don Lemon—have pleaded not guilty.

Lemon and Georgia Fort, an independent journalist charged in the case, have asked the court to consider disclosing the grand jury transcripts, arguing that the government’s conduct surrounding the case had been “highly unusual, nakedly political, and inconsistent with practice in this District.”

National concern is mounting as the White House mulls over a possible attack on Iran, though JD Vance isn’t worried in the slightest.

The vice president told reporters aboard Air Force Two Thursday that there’s “no chance” the U.S. will get sucked into a long, drawn-out conflict if the White House follows through on military intervention in the Middle East.

Vance said he is not aware of the president’s ultimate decision on the matter, but that the problem could be resolved by military strikes “to ensure Iran isn’t going to get a nuclear weapon,” or through diplomatic means.

“The idea that we’re going to be in a Middle Eastern war for years with no end in sight—there is no chance that will happen,” Vance told The Washington Post.

That’s contrary to what top U.S. military officials and foreign policy experts have cautioned. Earlier this week, reports circulated that Trump’s chief military adviser—Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine—had warned the White House against such an attack, arguing that it could entangle America in a prolonged conflict.

Nonetheless, Caine has acquiesced to the president’s whims with little pushback. Over the last month, he has assembled the largest military presence in the Middle East since the U.S. invasion of Iraq, a hardware collection across a web of U.S. bases that includes numerous ships—including naval destroyers and aircraft carriers—and more than a dozen jets in the region, reported CNN.

U.S. officials, including Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner—Trump’s son-in-law—met with an Iranian delegation in Geneva early Thursday to discuss the countries’ ongoing standoff. An adviser to Iran’s supreme leader told CNN that an “immediate agreement” could be within reach if the discussions singularly focus on Iran’s “non-production of nuclear weapons.”

The current mobilization would be the Trump administration’s second attempt to destroy Iran’s nuclear program, which the White House has claimed is for weapons development. The first attack took place on June 22.

At the time, Trump celebrated that the strike had “completely and totally obliterated” Iran’s three nuclear sites, publicly rejecting a battle damage assessment by the Pentagon that determined that the impact of the missile barrage on the larger program was minimal, and had only set Iran’s nuclear program back by a few months. The White House has thus far failed to explain the discrepancy, or why it would need to spend more taxpayer funds attacking a site that has already been eviscerated.

Before the June attack, Iran had argued that it was seeking uranium for peaceful purposes, such as expanding its nuclear energy program. The nation has undergone years of nuclear site inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency, and mere weeks before the U.S. bomb strike had allowed IAEA inspectors to remain in the country, according to the United Nations entity.

Trump scrapped a potential nuclear deal with Iran during his first term, pulling out of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in May 2018.

Fewer than one in three Americans trust Trump a “great deal or quite a bit” to make good decisions with America’s military, according to an Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll published Thursday. Just 27 percent said so, while 56 percent of respondents said they trust the president “only a little or not at all.”

House Oversight Democrats believe they have the votes to force Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick to testify before the committee regarding his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein and the lies he told about it.

“We also need other people, part of the Epstein class, to come before this committee. If President Clinton can answer questions, many others need to as well,” Representative Ro Khanna said on the steps of a performing arts center in Chappaqua, New York, where Bill Clinton was set to testify, just moments after demanding that President Donald Trump also testify before the Oversight Committee about his ties to Epstein.

“I was pleased to see Congresswoman Nancy Mace today calling for Howard Lutnick to come before our committee,” Khanna continued. “I believe we will have the votes to subpoena him, and we will work with ranking member [Robert] Garcia to make sure he comes before our committee next.”

In an interview on the New York Post’s Pod Force One podcast last October, Lutnick told a dramatic story about how an awkward meeting he had with Epstein in 2005 when they were Manhattan neighbors led him to decide he would “never be in the room with that disgusting person ever again.”

“I say to him, ‘Massage table in the middle of your house? How often do you have a massage?’” Lutnick said in the interview. “And [Epstein] says, ‘Every day.’ And then he gets, like weirdly close to me, and he says, ‘And the right kind of massage.’ … In the six to eight steps it takes to get from his house to my house, my wife and I decided that I will never be in the room with that disgusting person ever again.”

That turned out to be a huge lie. Files revealed that Lutnick took his entire family to Epstein’s private island seven years after he said he cut off ties with the predator. Now, after going virtually unscathed by what should be a career-ending scandal, Lutnick might have to face the music for it.

Fox News’s Maria Bartiromo had to be reminded that the Second Amendment exists while defending the federal immigration agents who shot and killed American citizens.

Speaking with Bartiromo Friday, Representative Ro Khanna defended his congressional colleagues’ decision not to stand in support for Donald Trump’s immigration enforcement at the State of the Union, arguing that they couldn’t support the ICE that had killed American citizens.

“This requires some context,” Bartiromo replied, launching into a defense of federal agents responding to citizens who interrupted their immigration enforcement operations, referring to Alex Pretti, the 37-year-old ICU nurse who had been filming agents during a protest.

“I think if an ICE agent feels a threat and feels that he or she and his team is under threat by having someone who’s armed, clearly armed with a gun on his belt, interrupt him, then he’s going to shoot,” she said. “And they’re trained to kill.”

Khanna was forced to remind Bartiromo of the existence of the Second Amendment. “You can’t say that any person who shows up with a gun, simply by doing that at an event, can be shot to death,” the California Democrat chided.

Bartiromo struggled to conceal the shock on her face, and stammered as she insisted Pretti had previously been seen “antagonizing” agents. Khanna noted that harassing agents would not require capital punishment.

“I guess I just have such a strong belief in civil liberties and constitutional rights, he’s an American citizen, you don’t kill him,” he added, leaving the conservative news host thoroughly humiliated.

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy is addressing the affordability crisis by asking Americans to eat more liver and less steak.

“There’s a lot of good food in grocery stores that goes to waste. Most of the cheap cuts of meat are very inexpensive. If you buy a porterhouse steak … it is gonna set you back,” the secretary said as he gave the keynote address at the “Eat Real Food” rally in Austin, Texas, on Thursday. “You can buy liver, or the cheaper cuts of steak that are very very affordable.”

Nothing’s wrong with eating liver. But to put the burden of the affordability crisis on the choices of everyday Americans rather than the administration he works for is woefully out of touch. The liberal rebuke was swift.

“Dear @WhiteHouse: PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE SEND @RobertKennedyJr TO EVERY SWING HOUSE DISTRICT WHERE HE CAN TELL AMERICANS TO EAT LIVER OR CHEAP CUTS OF MEAT TO COPE WITH SURGING INFLATION,” Representative Ted Lieu wrote on X. “THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER.”

“NEW AD TAGLINE: “Liver. It’s what’s for dinner,” chimed in CNBC reporter Carl Quintanilla.

“A reminder that Trump is hosting a candlelit dinner for his donors at Mar-a-Lago this weekend,” DNC Chair Ken Martin wrote. “I wonder what they’re serving?”

Paramount Skydance successfully outbid Netflix Thursday, paving the way for the media behemoth to merge with its Burbank, California, neighbor, Warner Bros. Discovery—but local officials caution that the acquisition still has a long way to go before it’s official.

“Paramount/Warner Bros is not a done deal,” California Attorney General Rob Bonta told Deadline Thursday evening.

“These two Hollywood titans have not cleared regulatory scrutiny—the California Department of Justice has an open investigation, and we intend to be vigorous in our review,” Bonta added.

Netflix surprised the media landscape when it announced its intention to buy Warner Bros. in late December, though the streaming giant’s celebration was short-lived. Paramount, which completed its merger with Skydance in August in a whopping $8 billion deal, was projected to be the frontrunner in the deal and refused to let go.

The two companies have duked it out in the weeks since, offering successively large bids in order to acquire the media studio. Last week, California’s Department of Justice opened a probe into the bidding war, examining the legality of the deal regardless of the auction’s ultimate victor.

“The film and entertainment industry not only has historical importance to our state, it also is a critical sector that buoys the state’s economy of California and touches the lives of Americans daily,” Bonta said on February 20. “The proposed Warner Bros. transactions must receive a full and robust review, and California is taking a very close look.”

That could cause problems for Paramount Skydance, which won out with a “superior proposal” valued at around $111 billion. The company’s absorption of Warner Bros. Discovery would only further consolidate America’s largest media companies, merging two of the five major Hollywood film studios in what poses the threat of a monopoly on the industry.

Democrats were explicitly critical of Paramount Skydance’s merger last summer, questioning the timing of Paramount’s multimillion legal settlement with Trump and the FCC’s ultimate green stamp on the seismic studio tie-up.

Other California Democrats have taken aim at the Warner Bros. deal, insisting that the purchase must pass through the proper governmental channels without interference from the Trump administration.

“What was true for Netflix is still true now for Paramount,” said Senator Adam Schiff, who earlier this month pressed the companies for a commitment to protect California’s labor market. “The merger of two of Hollywood’s biggest studios must be subject to the highest levels of scrutiny, free from White House political influence, to determine its impact on American jobs, freedom of speech, and the future of one of our nation’s greatest exports.”

Donald Trump told reporters Friday that he thinks the U.S. could have a “friendly takeover” of Cuba, alluding to the blockade the U.S. has currently placed over the island.

“The Cuban government is talking with us, they’re in a big deal of trouble as you know, they have no money, they have no anything right now, but they’re talking with us,” Trump told reporters on the White House lawn as he prepared to board a helicopter. “Maybe we’ll have a friendly takeover of Cuba. We could very well end up with a friendly takeover of Cuba.”

The U.S. has effectively stopped ships from reaching Cuba in the past few months, preventing any oil from reaching the island. Last month, Trump signed an executive order threatening to impose tariffs on any country that sends oil to Cuba, and the country is now running out of fuel fast. 

Trump’s words about a takeover carry extra weight considering that Cuban Border Guard troops killed four people on a boat entering the country’s territorial waters on Wednesday, The Cuban government claims that the people on board the U.S.-registered vessel opened fire on the troops, who fired back. 

Trump has deployed several ships to the Caribbean Sea and seized several oil tankers in the region, preventing any countries from trying to thwart the blockade. It’s taking a toll on ordinary Cubans, exacerbating conditions on the island. The New York Times reports that food prices are skyrocketing, schools are canceling classes, hospitals are suspending surgeries, and garbage is building up.  

The U.S. is allowing some humanitarian aid to Cuba, including $6 million in help through the Catholic Church. But Cuba’s medical assistance to other countries, which brings revenue to the government, is ending due to U.S. pressure. 

For example, Honduras announced earlier this week that they would stop using Cuban doctors, following other countries such as Guatemala, Bahamas, Antigua and Barbuda, and Grenada ending or scaling back their use of Cuban medical professionals. All of this is isolating and weakening Cuba, lending credence to the idea that the U.S. is gearing up for a takeover of the island.

This story has been updated.

Former President Bill Clinton called out Republicans in his opening statement to the House Oversight Committee Friday for bringing in his wife, former Senator and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, to testify about Jeffrey Epstein.

Clinton said in his own testimony that his wife had never even met Epstein and had no dealings with him, and having her testify before the committee was “not right.”

“I have to get personal. You made Hillary come in. She had nothing to do with Jeffrey Epstein. Nothing. She has no memory of even meeting him. She neither traveled with him nor visited any of his properties. Whether you subpoenaed 10 people or 10,000, including her was simply not right,” Clinton said.

Clinton also denied having any knowledge of Epstein’s crimes, saying, “I saw nothing, and I did nothing wrong.”

“As someone who grew up in a home with domestic abuse, not only would I not have flown on his plane if I had any inkling of what he was doing—I would have turned him in myself and led the call for justice for his crimes, not sweetheart deals,” Clinton said.

Both Clintons agreed to testify before the committee, although Chair James Comer turned down their requests to have public hearings. Hillary’s testimony took place yesterday and was nearly derailed when conservative influencer Benny Johnson posted photos from the closed-door hearing sent to him by Representative Lauren Boebert.

Clinton argued that if details of the hearing were coming out while it was in progress, the press should be allowed in, but her request was denied. Boebert and Johnson, meanwhile, were excoriated by conservatives on social media for nearly derailing a hearing with one of the right-wing’s least favorite people.

Unlike Hillary, Bill Clinton is a former president. How will the right handle his testimony? So far, according to Representative Anna Paulina Luna, Clinton is being “cooperative and answering all of our questions.”

Donald Trump ignited a standoff between the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia with a phone call.

Trump contacted UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed last November regarding what he said was a request from Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to impose sanctions on the UAE. Trump said Salman made the request earlier that month, citing the UAE’s support for the Rapid Support Forces, a mercenary group fighting in Sudan’s civil war.

After the call, The New York Times reports, tensions between the UAE and Saudi Arabia boiled over. Senior UAE officials felt betrayed by the Saudis, and by the next month, things had gotten so bad that Saudi Arabia bombed a shipment from the UAE to Yemen.

According to the Saudis, that wasn’t the request at all—they wanted additional sanctions on the RSF to cut off its outside support, not sanctions on the UAE directly. They hoped that targeting the RSF in this manner would cause the UAE to back down and that the war in Sudan would end sooner. An official in the Trump administration also told the Times that MBS never asked Trump to sanction the UAE.

But the damage was done, and now two key U.S. allies are not getting along with each other. The UAE’s leader is convinced that MBS asked Trump for direct sanctions against his country. According to Emirati officials, Trump told Zayed that his friends the Saudis were out to get him, but that the U.S. stands behind him.

At best, Trump misunderstood Salman’s request, and at worst, he bungled a very sensitive matter. In either case, two powerful Arab countries are at odds, and it’s not only playing out in Sudan but also in Yemen, where a shipment was bombed after a UAE-backed faction advanced close to the Saudi border. The Saudis accused the UAE of sending weapons to Yemen, which they denied, and then subsequently ended their support for the faction.

The Saudis and UAE each have extensive business ties with Trump, his family, and other administration officials. One wonders if and how Trump plans to settle this rift. He said on February 16, “We can get it settled very easily. “That’s an easy one to settle.” Will he manage not to mess things up again?

The Department of Homeland Security was caught lying Thursday about abandoning a blind refugee who was later found dead on the street.

The Department of Homeland Security claimed that the Tim Hortons in Buffalo where federal agents left Nurul Amin Shah Alam, a 56-year-old Burmese refugee who was blind and spoke no English, was “determined to be a warm, safe location near his last known address.”

Video footage reviewed by The Washington Post, however, showed that the location had already closed, except for the drive-thru.

In video footage released by IP, Shah Alam could be seen walking past the drive-thru window, then pacing by the locked front doors, before he eventually wandered across the parking lot toward a Dollar Tree. The Border Patrol agents drove away after one minute.

Shah Alam was blind and spoke no English. He was found dead on Tuesday.

Shah Alam was arrested more than a year ago when he was out for a walk and got lost. The refugee was using a curtain rod as a walking stick that police alleged he was “swinging in a menacing manner.” He was tased, beaten, and arrested. He later pleaded guilty to trespassing and misdemeanor possession of a weapon.

After Border Patrol determined that the charges did not render Shah Alam removable, they should have returned him to the holding center where sheriff’s deputies could contact his family to retrieve him.

But Shah Alam’s lawyer was not contacted, and neither was his family. It was Border Patrol who requested custody of Shah Alam after his release, according to Christopher Horvatits, a spokesperson for the Erie County Sheriff’s Office. While Shah Alam’s family waited for a call to pick him up, the holding center called Border Patrol instead.

Border Patrol agents offered Shah Alam a “courtesy ride,” according to Michael Niezgoda, a spokesperson for Customs and Border Patrol. But Shah Alam wasn’t returned to his last known address, or his family’s address. Instead, he was brought to the parking lot of a closed coffee shop miles away from his home, and left there.

“I feel like in a situation like this, we wouldn’t necessarily be here if [Border Patrol] had just exercised a little bit of humanity,” said Siana McLean, Shah Alam’s immigration attorney.