Category: Unethical

Trump Demands Canada Pay Damages for Wildfire Smoke

President Trump demanded Canada pay financial damages or face tariffs for wildfire smoke reaching U.S. cities, claiming the air has been “poisoned” and citing business closures in Michigan. Trump stated he had spoken with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and told him to stop fires from “poisoning our air,” but indicated the conversation yielded insufficient action. He proposed Canada either compensate the United States or face tariff threats, framing the wildfires as Canada’s responsibility rather than a natural disaster.

Trump cited specific economic harm, noting that Ford’s Michigan assembly plant experienced thick smoke forcing dozens of workers to seek medical attention and requiring the closure of car plants and other businesses. The president claimed he had never witnessed such widespread wildfire smoke impacts in his lifetime, stating the phenomenon only began occurring over the previous 4-5 years. These assertions contradicted established climate science documenting decades of wildfire escalation tied to warming temperatures and changing weather patterns.

The wildfire situation reflects Trump’s history of weaponizing natural disasters and federal authority against states and nations he opposes. Earlier, Trump denied federal disaster assistance to Colorado following wildfires and flooding, accusations he was punishing Democratic Governor Jared Polis. Trump has simultaneously eliminated the EPA’s scientific finding that climate change endangers human health and the environment, stripping the agency of authority to regulate greenhouse gases and rejecting decades of peer-reviewed research.

Trump’s demand for payment or tariffs exploits environmental destruction to advance his trade agenda while refusing to acknowledge the climate emergency driving increased wildfire severity. His simultaneous erasure of climate science and blame-shifting to Canada exemplifies his strategy of using governance crises to consolidate executive power and attack adversaries rather than address root causes. The pattern extends to using disaster denial and aid weaponization against Democratic officials, subordinating disaster response to partisan loyalty tests.



(Source: https://www.mediaite.com/politics/trump-wants-canada-to-stop-poisoning-the-usas-air-maybe-they-should-pay/)

Trump’s Truth Social Sells Wall Street Early Access to Presidential Posts

President Donald Trump’s media company announced Thursday a paid service called Truth PSI that will provide Wall Street trading firms expedited access to Truth Social posts, including those from Trump himself on topics affecting national security and financial markets. The service enables institutional investors to see posts from the platform’s highest-ranking accounts, with Trump commanding 12.9 million followers, ahead of other users, potentially allowing traders to profit from market movements triggered by his announcements. Trump Media & Technology declined to disclose pricing or whether the president’s posts would be excluded from the offering.

Kathleen Clark, a government ethics expert at Washington University School of Law, characterized the arrangement as “brazen corruption” and “improper exploitation of government power to enrich himself,” noting that Trump is selling direct access to information about his presidential decisions. Conflict-of-interest law bars federal officials from owning companies that profit by selling access to their office decisions; however, presidents and vice presidents are statutorily exempt from this restriction. Every president since the law’s passage has voluntarily complied by divesting stock holdings or placing assets in blind trusts, but Trump has refused.

Trump has used Truth Social to announce major policy decisions including military actions against Iran, tariff implementations, and immigration enforcement operations. Iran-related posts are particularly significant because investors fear oil price increases will intensify inflation and potentially trigger Federal Reserve interest rate increases. The president stands to benefit directly as the largest shareholder in Trump Media & Technology, the publicly traded parent company.

Trump Media’s stock has collapsed more than 70 percent since Trump took office, erasing $6 billion in shareholder wealth, yet Trump’s annual financial disclosures show he extracted more than $1 billion in revenue from the same companies and ventures last year. The company recently replaced longtime CEO Devin Nunes with Kevin McGurn, a seasoned media executive, who described Truth PSI as part of a strategy to “monetize proprietary assets” and predicted it would generate “meaningful, ongoing source of revenue.” Trump Media stated it plans to launch the service next month after already securing customers.



(Source: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-truth-social-access-wall-street-b3016554.html?fbclid=IwdGRjcATHN09wZG9mA2ZkaWQWUKto0BXhlicEpxh4I4QKu6fTKhvAzWV4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkCjY2Mjg1NjgzNzkAAR6U4pURNaAFX11kgVjUKUzbnBIC0zeXX9TJzj-ZehGvKoWBhYIu1CcfvdZVUw_aem_0g_1ZKC2GOYkeTCIkhzw_Q)

Trump Demands NBC ABC License Revocation Over Primetime Speech

Donald Trump demanded that NBC and ABC have their broadcast licenses revoked for declining to air his Thursday night primetime address on their primary television channels, falsely characterizing the networks’ editorial decision as part of a “plot” to hide information from the public. Both networks carried the speech live on their streaming platforms (NBC News NOW and ABC News Live) and aired detailed summaries after Trump concluded, but Trump attacked them anyway for not broadcasting it on their main channels, stating that “fraud like this should mean a revocation of their licenses.” White House communications director Steven Cheung amplified the demand, calling the networks “cowards” on social media.

Trump’s attack on broadcast licenses represents an escalation of his systematic pressure on media outlets through regulatory threats. Trump has previously weaponized FCC regulatory power against late-night hosts, calling for their termination and celebrating their departures, while FCC Chair Brendan Carr, a Trump appointee, has threatened broadcasters’ licenses in response to presidential complaints about coverage. Carr is currently investigating whether ABC’s talk show The View qualifies as a “bona fide news program” under equal time rules, using regulatory authority to punish editorial independence.

In the 23-minute address, Trump made unsubstantiated claims about election security, alleging without evidence that China conducted “the largest compromise of election data in history” and that American elections remain vulnerable to foreign interference. He accused unnamed national security officials of concealing information about election security while offering no documentation to support these assertions. Much of the “stolen” election data Trump referenced is publicly available for commercial purchase by political campaigns, undermining his claims of a security breach.

CNN declined to air the speech live, with anchor Kaitlan Collins stating the network would “monitor” Trump’s remarks to fact-check statements given his “well-documented history of saying blatantly false things about elections,” while Fox News broadcast the full address. Trump’s demand for license revocation targets networks that exercised editorial judgment about primetime coverage, using the presidency to punish outlets for decisions that displeased him and demonstrating contempt for the independence of broadcast journalism.



(Source: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-election-fraud-address-nbc-abc-licence-b3016842.html)

FCC Officials Took Gifts From Paramount While It Had Business Before Them — ProPublica

FCC officials who voted on Paramount’s merger accepted luxury Kennedy Center gala tickets worth over $260,000 from the company they regulate, violating federal ethics rules that explicitly prohibit gifts from entities with pending business before the agency. FCC Chair Brendan Carr attended the December 2025 gala in a private $125,000 skybox with Paramount CEO David Ellison after the company sought FCC approval for its $110 billion merger with Skydance Media, while Commissioner Olivia Trusty received tickets worth $12,000 before casting a decisive vote approving the deal.

Ethics experts, including former Office of Government Ethics director Walter Shaub and former White House ethics lawyer Virginia Canter, said the commissioners violated federal law by accepting gifts from a regulated entity with business pending before them. Shaub stated that “there’s no way that any top federal regulator should ever accept a gift from a regulated company with interests their work will foreseeably affect,” and Canter called the conduct “shocking” and “disturbing.” The experts warned that Carr and Trusty compromised the agency’s impartiality and should have recused themselves from voting on the merger.

Seven of ten FCC commissioners who served since 2016 accepted Kennedy Center tickets from CBS or its parent company, totaling over $260,000 according to ProPublica’s analysis of ethics disclosures. Carr alone has accepted tickets at least seven times since 2017, totaling over $63,000. Federal ethics rules explicitly ban employees from accepting gifts from entities that do business with, are regulated by, or seek official action from their agency, yet the FCC claimed agency ethics officers approved the practice as consistent with law—a justification Shaub dismissed as equivalent to a “school child” excuse.

The timing of the gifts intensified the conflict. Paramount filed its Skydance merger paperwork in September 2024, and the December gala occurred as the company prepared its hostile takeover bid for Warner Bros. Discovery. Hours after the gala ended, Paramount launched the hostile bid. Trump has systematically pressured the FCC to strip broadcast licenses, and Carr reopened a CBS investigation days after taking office, later requiring Paramount to eliminate diversity initiatives and appoint a bias ombudsperson to secure the merger’s approval.

Multiple ethics experts told ProPublica that the Justice Department should investigate potential violations of federal ethics rules and that the commissioners’ gift-taking could become central in legal challenges to the merger. California, New York and ten other Democratic states filed a lawsuit seeking to block the $110 billion consolidation under federal and state anti-monopoly laws, citing concerns about job elimination and industry independence from consolidated ownership.



(Source: https://www.propublica.org/article/paramount-mergers-fcc-kennedy-center-gala?fbclid=IwdGRleATEdV1wZG9mA2ZkaWQWUKl7HV6hSpBeYhKKEUCD5qTfb1VVhGV4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkCjY2Mjg1NjgzNzkAAR5j5tj7vuKcNF4EYkiA-zdtgiNLF39w-xW5ou0h_zK0uZfJ56eQA2uIrEgulg_aem_j4wlCLmUFGCAM_E3ngC6aw)state anti-monopoly laws, citing concerns about job elimination and industry independence from consolidated ownership.

Donald Trump Talks About Giving His Sons the Medal of Honor

President Trump used a speech at the Theodore Roosevelt Presidential Library in North Dakota on Wednesday to talk repeatedly about awarding himself and his sons the Congressional Medal of Honor. Trump referenced the historical father-son pairs of Theodore Roosevelt and General Theodore Roosevelt Jr., and Arthur MacArthur and General Douglas MacArthur, who are among the only recipients of the award, then pivoted to himself. "As I see my two beautiful sons sitting there, I think, 'I'm going to give one to myself and one to them'. We'll have a threesome. I'll pick out one of the two," Trump stated, adding he would give the medals "for their genius at hunting" and claiming he deserves one "for taking on Russia, Russia, Russia, or something."

Trump acknowledged the routine nature of these comments, admitting "I have thought about this" while claiming to joke frequently on the topic. He also noted the risk of his remarks being misinterpreted, saying "this is dangerous to say because the fake news is up there." Trump has made similar Medal of Honor jokes at least twice within two weeks, including a recent appearance in Montana, establishing a pattern of returning to the idea throughout his second term.

The Medal of Honor is the nation's highest military decoration, awarded exclusively for extraordinary heroism in combat. Trump's casual treatment of the award contradicts his stated reverence for it; he has previously struggled publicly with the ceremonial presentation of the medal, fumbling to fasten it around a recipient's neck at a formal Congressional Medal of Honor ceremony.

The remarks reflect Trump's pattern of conflating personal grievance with national honors and blurring the line between jest and actual policy inclination. Trump's sons, Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, were present during the speech but did not respond publicly to the comments about receiving military decorations neither has earned through military service.

(Source: https://www.mediaite.com/media/news/trump-drops-wild-rant-about-giving-his-sons-medals/)

Trump White House Secretly Pressured Board Protecting Federal Workers

The Trump administration orchestrated a covert pressure campaign on the Merit Systems Protection Board, a federal agency designed to shield civil service employees from arbitrary dismissal, resulting in a March ruling that dismantled decades of precedent protecting federal workers. The board's decision accepted the White House's constitutional theory that President Trump possesses sweeping authority to remove officials without due process, effectively erasing civil service protections for federal employees, including immigration judges whose legal duties often conflict with Trump's political objectives. This ruling represents a deliberate dismantling of the most effective mechanism federal workers possess to contest wrongful termination.

The pressure campaign, led by a White House aide dedicated to expediting federal worker terminations, operated through both public and private channels in ways that parallel direct judicial coercion. By compelling the board to abandon established legal standards, the Trump administration weaponized a protective agency into a tool for authoritarian control over the federal workforce. The board's reversal of longstanding doctrine signals the administration's systematic effort to consolidate executive power and eliminate institutional checks on presidential authority.

This decision implements the "unitary executive" theory, a cornerstone of Trump's governing philosophy that concentrates all executive branch power in the presidency, allowing Trump to direct federal prosecutors, immigration judges, and other officials whose professional independence once constrained his political agenda. The administration has already moved to measure HHS employees' performance based on demonstrable loyalty to Trump's policies, illustrating the practical application of this authority. The ruling defangs the primary legal recourse available to federal workers challenging unlawful dismissals.

Though the board's decision does not directly affect pending Supreme Court cases on presidential power over the civil service, its precedent could devastate protections for vast segments of the federal workforce if upheld on appeal. The timing and methodology of this ruling reveal the administration's calculated assault on institutional independence, transforming independent agencies into compliance mechanisms for Trump's consolidation of power.

(Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/28/us/politics/trump-firings-workers-merit-systems-protection-board.html)

Tulsi Gabbard, her guru and the mysterious messages that helped shape her political career – The Washington Post

Tulsi Gabbard’s political trajectory has been shaped significantly by her association with Chris Butler, the leader of a Hawaii-based spiritual organization. According to reporting by The Washington Post, Gabbard maintained close ties to Butler and his group throughout her congressional career and into her role as Director of National Intelligence under Trump, raising questions about external influence on her decision-making in sensitive national security positions.

Butler’s organization, which operates with characteristics similar to a cult, exerts considerable control over members’ lives and finances. Gabbard’s deep involvement with the group and Butler’s teachings informed major policy positions she advocated for in Congress, including her foreign policy stances and opposition to military interventions. Former associates and observers have documented how Butler’s ideological framework aligned closely with positions Gabbard publicly promoted, suggesting her independent political identity may have been substantially intertwined with the organization’s philosophy.

During her tenure as Director of National Intelligence, Gabbard’s handling of sensitive intelligence raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest and allegiance to Trump over institutional independence. Reports indicated she intervened in standard intelligence protocols in ways that benefited Trump personally, departing from the nonpartisan norms expected of intelligence officials. Her willingness to prioritize Trump’s interests over established intelligence community procedures demonstrated the kind of loyalty expected from those in his inner circle, paralleling the deference she showed to Butler within the spiritual organization.

Gabbard resigned from her position as Director of National Intelligence in June 2026, citing family health reasons. Her departure followed a pattern of concerns about her judgment and independence in the role, with critics and intelligence professionals questioning whether her background and affiliations made her suitable for overseeing the nation’s intelligence agencies. The brevity of her tenure underscored the broader questions about whether individuals with strong ties to charismatic leaders can operate with the independence required in positions of national security responsibility.

The Washington Post’s investigation documents how Gabbard’s relationship with Butler and his organization persisted as a defining influence on her political career, from her congressional service through her appointment to Trump’s administration. The reporting suggests that understanding Gabbard’s actions and positions requires recognizing the role played by external figures and organizations in shaping her worldview and decision-making, casting doubt on claims of complete political autonomy made by her supporters.



(Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2026/06/21/tulsi-gabbard-her-guru-mysterious-messages-that-helped-shape-her-political-career/) by her supporters.

DOJ Defies Judge’s Oath Demand on Trump Weaponization Fund

The Justice Department defied a federal judge’s order on Friday by refusing to swear under oath that Trump’s nearly $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization fund” is dead. Judge Leonie Brinkema had given the administration a seven-day deadline to declare, under penalty of perjury, that the fund would not proceed. Instead, DOJ attorneys claimed the oath requirement violated “separation of powers,” rejecting the judge’s explicit demand.

The fund, announced in May by Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche following a Trump-IRS settlement, was designed to compensate individuals claiming “weaponization and lawfare” by the federal government. Lawmakers and watchdogs immediately flagged that the $1.776 billion would likely flow to Trump’s political allies and supporters, with no genuine safeguards against partisan abuse. After public backlash, Blanche told House lawmakers in June the fund was “not moving forward, ever,” yet the administration has continued to dodge court accountability through written oath.

Democracy Forward, representing plaintiffs challenging the fund, characterized the DOJ’s filing as proof of evasion. “It is telling that even after the federal court gave them a week, the Acting Attorney General and other senior administration officials continue to refuse to say under oath that the Slush Fund is dead,” said Skye Perryman, president and CEO of the organization. The DOJ’s refusal to commit in writing contradicts its public assurances and signals the fund’s legal status remains unresolved despite official denials.

DOJ counsel Andrew Block argued that prior statements by administration officials, made “against the backdrop of serious penalties for falsity,” should satisfy the court without formal sworn declarations. However, his assertion that penalties alone substitute for testimony under oath undercuts the judicial authority to enforce compliance and verify executive accountability. Trump previously attacked media coverage of his abandoned anti-weaponization fund during an Oval Office press session, indicating the administration’s sensitivity to scrutiny of the scheme.

Federal courts were closed Friday for Juneteenth, with Judge Brinkema unlikely to respond before Monday. The administration’s defiance of the judge’s direct order exemplifies Trump’s broader pattern of disregarding judicial oversight and refusing transparent accountability for executive action, particularly regarding funds that would have redistributed billions toward his political base.



(Source: https://thehill.com/homenews/5932296-doj-snubs-judge-weaponization-fund/?fbclid=IwdGRleASjHeNleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZAo2NjI4NTY4Mzc5AAEe0RHlZAtCTd-K1VzzDlsNgkPiPV2ofZ6eegFe9bcVc_HCWwpiOljhMudJL5w_aem_qnM_3Nm8oGzpkfnt_vuGDw)

Trump’s Plan to Meet With AI Companies Was News to AI Companies – NOTUS — News of the United States

President Donald Trump announced Friday he had scheduled a meeting with major artificial intelligence companies to discuss the government acquiring equity stakes in their firms. The announcement blindsided the companies themselves, who learned of the purported meeting only through Trump’s comments to reporters on Air Force One, according to three sources familiar with private deliberations. As of Monday afternoon, the White House had provided no details about timing or location for the supposed meeting.

Trump stated he would meet with “all of the companies” to discuss how “the American people can benefit from the success of AI” through government ownership of “pieces” of their businesses. However, leading AI firms including OpenAI, Anthropic, SpaceX, and Google declined to confirm any scheduled meeting or prior coordination with the administration. The companies’ surprise at Trump’s public announcement underscores his pattern of using press statements to announce policy positions without advance notification to affected parties.

The proposal to nationalize equity in major AI companies would constitute one of the most consequential federal interventions in the private sector in modern history, forcing firms to forfeit billions in company value and creating novel legal and regulatory complications. Trump has already moved to claim equity stakes across American corporations, including a 10% share of Intel, and has signaled intent to execute similar deals. The AI companies face pressure to comply, as they depend on federal government support for logistics and regulatory matters, making direct confrontation with Trump administratively costly.

Internal disagreement exists within the tech industry about the nationalization proposal. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman pitched the idea to Trump in early 2025 and discussed it again with senior officials recently. However, Anthropic, now valued at $900 billion as the world’s most valuable AI company, had not yet engaged in such discussions as of last week. David Sacks, Trump’s former AI czar, publicly opposed the plan, warning that government ownership would accelerate “corporate-government fusion” and risk establishing “a CCP-style social credit system in the U.S.”

Trump’s unannounced equity nationalization scheme demonstrates his authoritarian approach to governing, using public pressure and coercive threats rather than legitimate negotiation. By announcing policy to the press before consulting affected companies, Trump forced firms into a position where resistance becomes publicly visible and administratively risky. The schem(Source: https://www.notus.org/technology/trump-blindsided-ai-companies-equity-meeting-plan)e consolidates Trump’s control over critical technology sectors essential to national defense and economic competition, embodying his drive toward state control of private enterprise.

‘Some homework to do’: Trump appointees vote to address gaps in arch plan in heated meeting – ABC News

Trump’s National Capital Planning Commission, stacked with his appointees, voted Thursday to conditionally advance a 250-foot “triumphal arch” project near Arlington National Cemetery, but only after staff identified significant gaps requiring the administration to provide additional details before final approval. Commission Chair Will Scharf, Trump’s White House staff secretary, acknowledged the project team has “homework to do,” requesting more renderings and technical information on lighting, stormwater management, materials, and height justification under the Height of Buildings Act. Despite Trump immediately claiming approval on social media, Scharf clarified the vote was not final and will return for further review.

The commission received 1,696 public comments before the hearing, nearly all opposing the project as a vanity structure inconsistent with American values. Veterans including Gary Langston and Marine Jimi Shaughnessy testified that the arch would obstruct views of Arlington National Cemetery and cast literal and figurative shadows over sacred ground where their families rest. Langston warned the design contains “elements that I fear won’t stand the test of time,” while Shaughnessy called the 250-foot structure “a profound disruption and insult at the entrance to sacred ground” and “a momentous symbol of selfishness.”

Commission staff, though outnumbered by Trump loyalists, raised critical unresolved issues including pedestrian safety, potential interference with Reagan National Airport flight paths, and obstruction of cemetery views. Jamie Herr, the commission’s urban planner, stated the submission lacks essential information and noted the administration must provide “necessary elements for the commission to review as the design advances.” Jessica Bowron, representing Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, supported the staff recommendations and pledged to provide the requested additional information.

The vote to accept staff concerns passed 9-1, with only Evan Cash, representing D.C. Council Chair Phil Mendelson, voting no on grounds that the administration cannot answer the “fundamental question about why this project belongs in this place.” Cash’s dissent highlighted the threshold issue: whether Trump’s triumphal arch near Arlington serves any purpose beyond personal aggrandizement, part of a broader pattern of Trump spending millions to gild and renovate Washington monuments while bypassing normal oversight processes.(Source: https://abcnews.com/Politics/homework-trump-appointees-vote-address-gaps-arch-plan/story?id=133600719)

1 2 3 … 13