Trump’s Administration Defies Supreme Court in Illegal Deportation Case of Innocent Man

El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele recently asserted that he will not return Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a man the U.S. government falsely deported to his country, during a meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump. Bukele dismissed the idea of smuggling Garcia back to the U.S., stating, “The question is preposterous.” He emphasized that El Salvador does not favor releasing individuals labeled as terrorists.

Trump and his administration, known for its inhumane immigration policies, have tried to downplay accountability for Garcia’s wrongful deportation, with Trump insisting on a narrative wherein Bukele should accept more criminals. Despite Trump’s false claims, Garcia has no criminal charges against him in the U.S. or El Salvador, which underscores the absurdity of the administration’s position.

This situation escalated after a federal judge highlighted the defective nature of Garcia’s deportation, directed by the Supreme Court to “facilitate” his return. The court deemed the deportation as illegal due to an existing judicial order preventing Garcia’s removal to El Salvador. The Justice Department even admitted their error, yet high-profile officials in the Trump administration like Marco Rubio and Stephen Miller continue to evade responsibility, insisting on fabricating a story that Garcia should remain in El Salvador.

Miller, on Fox News, attempted to validate the false narrative that Garcia was appropriately sent to El Salvador, dismissing Justice Department admissions of an administrative error. His comments stand in stark contrast to the Supreme Court’s ruling against the removal as it deemed Garcia’s deportation illegal.

As the judicial battle continues, it’s evident that the Trump administration’s approach has only exacerbated the vulnerabilities within the immigration system, while simultaneously showcasing the manipulative tactics in play to shift blame and maintain control over immigrant narratives. This episode not only highlights the horrific consequences of Trump’s harsh immigration policies but reinforces the ongoing challenges faced by individuals wrongly ensnared in this system.

(h/t: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-administration/president-el-salvador-wont-return-deported-man-kilmar-abrego-garcia-rcna201136)

Trump Makes More Legal Threats Against CBS

Former President Donald Trump has escalated his longstanding feud with CBS News by demanding that the network’s iconic program, 60 Minutes, be taken off the air. Claiming he’s been characterized in a “derogatory and defamatory way,” Trump stated via Truth Social that he found the show’s recent coverage of Ukraine and Greenland to be “highly inaccurate.” This public outburst continues his trend of dismissing media criticism as biased and fraudulent, particularly as he faces legal challenges against CBS related to alleged election interference.

Trump’s tirade isn’t just a random venting of frustration; it reflects a pattern of hostility towards media organizations that dare to challenge him. In the past year, he has sued CBS for a staggering $20 billion, accusing it of “partisan and unlawful acts” stemming from a 60 Minutes interview with Vice President Kamala Harris. His lawyers allege that CBS manipulated the interview to mislead voters, but the network has consistently rebuffed these claims, defending its journalistic integrity and the editing process as standard practice.

In a particularly revealing moment, Trump lambasted CBS’s handling of Harris’s responses during the interview. He asserted that the network unfairly edited her answers to present her in a more favorable light, something CBS denies, citing unaltered transcripts to validate their reporting. This constant back-and-forth underscores Trump’s attempts to control the narrative surrounding his actions and the media portrayal of his presidency.

The former president’s animosity towards the press has further manifested in actions like banning reporters from the Associated Press from attending White House briefings over trivial disagreements about terminology. This anti-press agenda aligns with broader Republican strategies that seek to undermine journalistic scrutiny and weaken constitutional protections for free speech, fueling a dangerous trend toward media hostility in American politics.

Negotiations between Trump and CBS, including mediation efforts, are reportedly in progress to resolve their disputes. However, Trump’s persistent public attacks on the media raise serious questions about his respect for democratic norms and the role of the press in holding leaders accountable. Such ongoing conflicts not only jeopardize journalistic integrity but also threaten to stifle dissent and critical inquiry, cornerstones of a healthy democracy.

(h/t: https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-cbs-60-minutes-off-air-2059351?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR6hRbT-cWeoQPxTL_39rlIFAKIaOC9x9O-aghv20Zzn_kiqCasvXZVsl19eBA_aem_f948vZMBJhf47H5u549sCA#Echobox=1744620974)

Trump Administration’s Illegal Classification of Immigrants Highlights Dangerous Abuse of Federal Records

In a shocking violation of government ethics, the Trump administration, under the influence of Elon Musk’s U.S. Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), has wrongfully classified over 6,100 living immigrants as dead. This decision was made despite strong objections from senior officials within the Social Security Administration (SSA), including Greg Pearre, who warned against the legal and moral implications of such actions. Pearre’s resistance was met with retaliation, as he was abruptly removed from his position after raising concerns about the legality and fairness of the maneuver.

This incident stems from a broader strategy orchestrated by Trump political appointees aimed at using the SSA’s Death Master File to force immigrants out of the country by stripping them of their legal ability to work. These actions not only endanger the livelihoods of those wrongly labeled dead but also undermine the integrity of federal recordkeeping. Experts have widely condemned this move, stating it constitutes falsification of government records, a clear violation of privacy laws, and poses various risks to the individuals affected.

The SSA’s internal warnings regarding potential vulnerabilities in its death database were ignored as officials attempted to manipulate the data for immigration enforcement purposes. Staff at the agency scrambled to sound the alarm on the ease with which individuals could be declared dead without any legitimate evidence, fearing that the database could be weaponized against politically unwanted populations. Yet, alarmingly, the administration appeared unconcerned, opting instead to proceed with plans that could devastate the lives of many innocent individuals.

Among the immigrants targeted were minors and individuals who had previously received legal status, raising serious questions about the motivations driving this calculated decision by Trump’s administration. As legal challenges mount, including a lawsuit arguing that these actions violate both privacy and labor laws, the SSA continues to add the names of living individuals to the death database. With federal bureaucracies increasingly hollowed out by Trump’s loyalists, transparency and accountability have taken a significant hit, revealing the deeply unethical lengths to which Republican leadership will go to enforce their harsh ideological stances.

Overall, this episode underscores the urgent need for oversight in federal agencies, as the misuse of such powerful governmental tools not only threatens the rights of immigrants but also erodes democratic principles and the very foundations of the Social Security system. The actions taken by Trump and his associates exemplify a troubling pattern of governance that prioritizes discriminatory political agendas over human lives and constitutional adherence.

(h/t: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/04/12/trump-immigrants-dead-social-security/)

Stephen Miller’s Rhetoric Exposes Trump’s Fear-Based Nationalism and Economic Isolationism

Stephen Miller, a senior advisor to President Trump, made alarming claims on a recent Fox News interview, asserting that Trump’s tariff policies are a crucial step in preventing China from achieving economic dominance. He framed these tariffs as a historical turning point to “save the West” from a perceived threat posed by Beijing, though this rhetoric is steeped in the same xenophobic nationalism that has characterized much of Trump’s agenda.

Miller criticized the United States for allowing significant components of its critical supply chains to be based in China, labeling this control as “unthinkable.” He presented the administration’s 10 percent baseline tariff on foreign imports as a necessary measure to combat what he described as “illicit means” used by China. Such statements reflect a broader anti-China sentiment within Trump’s White House, often used as a scapegoat for economic issues in the U.S.

There has been a steep escalation in tariffs on Chinese goods under Trump’s rule, with rates climbing to 125 percent in some cases. This aggressive stance has raised concerns over a potential trade war, further complicating relationships with global trading partners. The narrative that frames such policies as patriotic overlooks the economic repercussions many Americans may face as job losses and rising consumer prices loom on the horizon.

Miller’s comments hinge heavily on accusations of Chinese theft of intellectual property, manipulation of currency, and state-led policies that allegedly distort global trade. However, such assertions often lack concrete evidence and closer scrutiny reveals a tendency to exaggerate threats to bolster a narrative of American victimhood that fuels nationalist fervor.

Ultimately, Miller’s assertions highlight a troubling aspect of Trump’s administration, which leans heavily on fear-based tactics associated with white nationalism and economic protectionism. This approach not only alienates international partners but risks plunging the country into further isolationism, with consequences that could undermine the very democracy and economic frameworks it purports to protect.

Trump Administration’s Brutal Deportation Policies Fuel Anti-Immigrant Sentiment and Human Rights Concerns

In a continuation of his administration’s harsh immigration policies, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced the deportation of another ten individuals, described as criminals affiliated with the MS-13 and Tren de Aragua gangs, to El Salvador. This move underscores the Trump administration’s commitment to its controversial immigration crackdown, which has drawn widespread condemnation for its inhumane treatment of migrants.

Rubio emphasized the collaboration between the Trump administration and El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele, claiming it serves as a model for regional security. His remarks were made via a post on social media platform X, where he described the deportees as some of “the most violent alien enemies of the World,” further demonizing migrants in a manner reminiscent of the Trump administration’s overall rhetoric.

President Trump echoed Rubio’s sentiments in a statement, portraying the deportation as a crucial step in eradicating threats to American citizens. He claimed that these gang members, now in the custody of El Salvador, would no longer pose a danger to the United States. His aggressive language fuels anti-immigrant sentiment, suggesting that the administration’s actions are a bulwark against perceived threats.

Amidst these deportations, a Maryland man, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, was mistakenly deported to El Salvador. A federal judge mandated the administration to provide updates regarding his status, prompting concerns over the government’s compliance with legal obligations to rectify such mistakes. This situation highlights the precarious nature of immigration enforcement under Trump’s regime, where individuals may find themselves caught in the crosshairs of bureaucratic blunders.

As the Trump administration continues to assert dominance over immigration policy through these harsh measures, it raises critical questions about human rights and the ethical implications of viewing migrants solely as criminals. The broader narrative of fear and division being perpetuated by Trump and his allies serves to further erode the foundational ideals of justice and democracy in America.

Trump’s Stock Advice Raises Insider Trading Concerns Amid Market Surge

Donald Trump recently posted a message encouraging investors to “buy” stocks on his social media platform Truth Social, just hours before announcing a 90-day pause on his tariffs. His post came as the stock market was fluctuating, and shortly after he made the recommendation, stocks surged dramatically, with the S&P 500 gaining back about $4 trillion in value.

Former White House ethics lawyer Richard Painter expressed concerns over the timing of Trump’s advice, suggesting it raised questions about potential insider trading. Securities law prohibits trading on insider information, and Painter’s remarks highlighted the ethically dubious nature of Trump’s financial communications.

When asked about the timing of his decision regarding the tariffs, Trump offered a vague response, claiming he arrived at the decision earlier that morning while acknowledging that he had been considering it for several days. This ambiguity only fueled speculation regarding whether he used his post to manipulate the market for personal gain.

The significance of Trump’s initials, “DJT,” at the end of his post has also drawn attention, as it corresponds to the stock symbol for Trump Media and Technology Group. This raised further questions about whether he was subtly promoting his own company’s stock rather than offering general investment advice.

Experts in government ethics warn that such behavior would typically provoke an investigation in other administrations, but it appears unlikely that Trump’s actions will receive any serious scrutiny. Critics argue this indicates a troubling precedent where the president may feel empowered to manipulate market dynamics without consequence.

(h/t: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/trump-told-investors-to-buy-on-social-media-hours-before-his-tariff-pause-rose-stocks-raising-questions-about-manipulation)

Trump’s Disbanding of Evaluation Offices Erodes Accountability

President Donald Trump is continuing his troubling trend of undermining crucial governance frameworks by dismantling offices responsible for evaluating government programs. By eliminating the Department of Health and Human Services’ office that sets federal poverty guidelines, Trump has put at risk the well-being of around 80 million Americans dependent on essential services like Medicaid and food assistance.

This elimination of oversight not only endangers public aid but also reflects a broader strategy of the Trump administration to cut funding for assessments that inform policy effectiveness. The systematic dismantling of evaluation capabilities, such as the near-total reduction of staff at the Institute of Education Sciences, threatens the ability of government officials to make informed, evidence-based decisions.

The dismantling of these evaluation programs is compounded by the administration’s history of promoting misleading information. For instance, hiring individuals who promote discredited views, such as the debunked connection between vaccines and autism, demonstrates a dangerous embrace of misinformation. This trend serves to erode public trust in credible scientific sources and undermines the foundation of an informed citizenry.

Moreover, these cuts go against the bipartisan support for evaluation established by the Evidence-Based Policymaking Act in 2019, which mandated that federal agencies develop protocols for assessing their programs. The Trump administration’s actions represent a significant retreat from accountability measures that have been in place for decades, fundamentally compromising the ability of citizens to hold their government to account.

As the administration disregards established frameworks for data collection and evaluation, the public’s access to critical information will diminish, leaving them vulnerable to unchecked propaganda and ineffective governance. The implications of these cuts extend far beyond short-term fiscal beliefs, threatening the principles of democracy and the well-being of millions.

FBI Analyst on Leave After Trump Ally’s Targeting List

The FBI has placed analyst Brian Auten on leave, following his inclusion in a list of alleged “deep state” actors compiled by Kash Patel, the current FBI Director. This decision highlights the ongoing politicization of the FBI under a regime loyal to former President Donald Trump, revealing how the agency is being used to target dissenting voices within its ranks.

Auten, a specialist in Russia, was previously recommended for internal discipline by former FBI Director Christopher Wray due to errors related to the investigation into Trump’s ties to Russia. Despite these recommendations, a Justice Department review exonerated FBI staff, confirming they acted without political bias. However, Patel’s characterization of Auten as part of a national embarrassment demonstrates a troubling agenda to undermine accountability within the FBI.

In his 2023 book, “Government Gangsters,” Patel directly condemned Auten, labeling him a conspirator involved in the so-called “Russia Gate” scandal. Patel’s claims, which lack substantial evidence, are indicative of a broader pattern of the Trump-influenced narrative that seeks to delegitimize factual inquiries into electoral misconduct and foreign interference.

This latest action against Auten is part of the Trump administration’s ongoing assault on FBI officials connected to investigations of January 6th insurrectionists and past Trump-related inquiries. Over the past few months, numerous FBI executives were dismissed or coerced into leaving, raising alarms about the operational integrity and independence of one of America’s key law enforcement agencies.

Overall, the actions being taken today reflect deep-rooted extremism and represent a significant threat to American democracy, as the Trump administration continues to purge those within law enforcement who uphold the rule of law. This consolidation of power, through the weaponization of federal agencies against perceived enemies, underlines the authoritarian grip that Trump—along with his allies like Patel—maintains over the Republican party and its agenda.

(h/t: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-administration/fbi-analyst-targeted-kash-patel-book-placed-leave-brian-auten-rcna200999)

Military Dismisses Commander for Criticizing Vance’s Political Agenda Amidst Authoritarian Loyalty Purge

The military recently dismissed Colonel Sussanah Meyers from her position as commander of the Pituffik Space Base in Greenland, following an email she sent that criticized a visit from Vice President JD Vance. This decision came just days after Vance’s remarks, which implied that Denmark was failing in its responsibilities regarding Greenland’s security.

Colonel Meyers’ email sought to clarify that the opinions expressed by Vance regarding Denmark were not representative of the views held at the Space Base. In her message, she emphasized the importance of maintaining nonpartisan conduct within the military, a principle that appears to contradict Vance’s politically charged comments and the agenda of the Trump administration, which has consistently sought to undermine diplomatic relations with allies.

Colonel Kenneth Klock, the commander of Space Base Delta 1, made the decision to relieve Meyers of her command, citing a “loss of confidence.” The Space Force emphasized the necessity of commanders adhering to high standards of conduct and remaining nonpartisan in their duties. This move highlights the increasing scrutiny and pressure military personnel face to align with the political narratives advanced by Trump and his associates.

Defense Department officials, including Joe Kasper, reiterated the principle of civilian control over the military, asserting that any actions deemed as undermining the chain of command or disrupting the administration’s agenda would not be tolerated. This reflects a broader trend within the military under Trump’s administration, where political loyalty is prioritized over the ethical conduct expected of service members.

After the dismissal, Republican Senator Eric Schmitt called for a formal investigation into Colonel Meyers’ actions, reinforcing the idea that military personnel must not engage in political expressions while in uniform. This situation underscores the troubling reality of an authoritarian loyalty purge within the ranks of the U.S. military, where dissenting voices are silenced in favor of a singular, politically driven narrative.

(h/t: https://abcnews.go.com/amp/International/commander-us-base-greenland-fired-email-critical-vance/story?id=120705531)

Trump Closes DHS Civil Rights Office, Freezing 600 Cases

The Trump administration’s recent closure of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (CRCL) has devastating implications for civil rights oversight, freezing approximately 600 ongoing investigations. The dismantling, orchestrated by DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, strikes at the heart of protections for both immigrants and U.S. citizens, stripping the agency of essential monitoring mechanisms as it increasingly shifts toward a mass-deportation agenda.

During a recent meeting, DHS officials presented a departmental program that allocated funds to assist nonviolent immigrants with legal support, aimed at ensuring their attendance in court proceedings. However, this initiative was met with disdain by Trump-appointed officials who bizarrely labeled it “money laundering,” reflecting a broader trend within the administration to undermine civil rights protections under the guise of efficiency.

The elimination of the CRCL has effectively created a vacuum of accountability within DHS. Analysts and former employees have articulated that the office historically served as a crucial internal check, deterring unethical practices by border patrol and immigration agents. With its closure, numerous civil rights violations—ranging from medical neglect of detainees to the abuse of power by enforcement authorities—are now likely to go unchecked. This action signifies a clear disregard for the constitutional rights of individuals, revealing a troubling shift toward authoritarianism.

As civil rights advocates express concern over the fallout, reports suggest that not only investigations into abuses have been halted but also ongoing complaints have been silenced. Of particular distress is the fact that various allegations, including those against Customs and Border Protection (CBP) regarding abuse of U.S. citizens and violations of their rights, are left without a proper investigative channel. The despair among former CRCL employees is palpable, as many now find themselves sidelined and powerless to affect change.

In a broader context, this systematic dismantling of civil rights oversight within Trump’s DHS poses significant risks to the very fabric of American democracy. By targeting organizations tasked with protecting vulnerable individuals from abuse, the administration is drifting dangerously close to unchecked authoritarian practices. This erosion of civil liberties must not go unnoticed or unchallenged, as it signals an alarming trajectory for civil rights in the United States.

(h/t: https://www.propublica.org/article/homeland-security-crcl-civil-rights-immigration-border-patrol-trump-kristi-noem?utm_campaign=propublica-sprout&utm_content=1744456369&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR7UTpmwEC2oV4NTQn9fImjWN1nCkSUPRhYtZgM5xIfmGPEV-OS67YhV-evqEA_aem_lQ6FlX6M-uqzT7CslkrGew)

1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 435