A Democratic political analyst was floored on Sunday after President Donald Trump's "lying" about negotiations to end the war in Iran seemed to come back to bite him.

Over the weekend, Trump said the White House was preparing to send another delegation to Pakistan to negotiate the end of the war in Iran. The deployment follows Vice President JD Vance's unsuccessful trip to the Middle East last week to secure a deal.

Trump's announcement seemed to catch the Iranian counterparts off-guard, as Iranian state media reported that Iranian officials were unaware that talks had been scheduled.

The news floored Adam Mockler, a Democratic analyst and founder of Mockler Media, who asked Trump in a new reaction video on YouTube, "How do you screw up this badly?"

"Iran wasn't privy to any more negotiations, yet Donald Trump announced that we're sending JD Vance and an entire delegation over to Pakistan for negotiations," Mockler said. "But the question is, negotiations with whom? Iran isn't even privy to any of this again. How do you screw up this badly on the global stage?"

Mockler added that Trump's "lying" was sending him down a path where he is losing credibility with world leaders. That could come back to bit him as he seeks a way to end the war in Iran.

"He is straight-up lying about negotiations that aren't taking place," Mockler said.

Eight children were killed, and the suspect is dead following a mass shooting Sunday morning that Shreveport police are describing as a domestic disturbance, KSLA-TV and KTBS-TV report. Two adult women and another teen were also injured in the incident that took place at two separate residences.

The victims who died range in age from 18 months to approximately 14 years old, according to Shreveport Police Department Cpl. Chris Bordelon. The eight child appeared to have tried escaping by jumping off a roof on the back of the house, he said.

The shootings occurred at two separate addresses about a quarter-mile apart in Shreveport’s Cedar Grove neighborhood, within 100 yards of the Caddo Magnet High School property.

Shreveport police pursued the suspect, 31-year-old Shamar Elkins, who reportedly carjacked the vehicle he used in his attempt to escape. He led police on a chase into Bossier City, where Bordelon said officers fired their weapons at Elkins. It was not immediately clear whether police killed Elkins or he took his own life.

Elkins is related to some of the children who were killed and was in a relationship with one of the survivors, according to police.

Louisiana State Police will conduct an investigation of the shooting involving the Shreveport Police and Elkins.

Shreveport Mayor Tom Arceneaux called Sunday morning’s events “maybe the worst tragic situation we’ve ever had.”

This is the fifth mass shooting in Louisiana this year and one of 114 nationwide, according to the Gun Violence Archive. It counts a mass shooting as an incident in which four or more people are killed or injured. Mass shootings have killed 10 people and injured 17 more in Louisiana.

This is a developing story.

Louisiana Illuminator is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Louisiana Illuminator maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Greg LaRose for questions: info@lailluminator.com.

President Donald Trump has dragged the U.S. into a "really dangerous" situation that he can't get out of, according to one analyst.

David Pakman, a liberal YouTuber and host of "The David Pakman Show," argued in a recent reaction video that Trump's efforts to reinstate the terms of the Obama administration's Iran Nuclear Deal, which Trump tore up in 2018, have put the U.S. in a bad situation. On the one hand, it has given Iran some leverage in the negotiations to end the war. On the other hand, it has also soured the relationship between the U.S. and its European allies, Pakman argued.

"We are now getting a president saying out loud, 'I'm trying to get us back to where we were,'" Pakman said. "He can barely speak now, in comparison, with fragmented sentences and all of it. And the reason I'm referring to the cognitive stuff is that Trump wasn't even coherent enough to realize in 2018 that this deal was not bad."

"Now with another seven and a half to eight years of decline behind us, it is even less likely that he is going to be able to put something together," he added.

"So, as Trump tries to dissolve the problems that he created and solve issues that are of his own doing, allies around the world are saying, 'That is not something we want to be a part of.' And that's a really dangerous thing," he continued.

A former Trump administration official was baffled on Sunday as President Donald Trump's strategy to end the war in Iran backfired.

Last week, Trump dispatched Vice President JD Vance to Pakistan to negotiate an end to the war, but Vance returned to the U.S. empty-handed. John Bolton, Trump's national security advisor during his first administration, said on CNN's "CNN Newsroom with Fredricka Whitfield" that this strategy has given the Iranians "enormous leverage" in the negotiations, and that Trump may be making it worse by sending more high-level officials next week.

"You shouldn't send the Vice President," Bolton said. "He's one level below the President. We don't know that the people the Iranians are sending have any authority to commit their government to begin with. If we were going to send a high-level official, it should have been the Secretary of State, not the Vice President, and not civilian volunteers, such as Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and special envoy Steve Witkoff.

Bolton added that Trump's deployment of high-level officials signals to the Iranians that he wants to find a way out of the conflict.

"I think they smell panic in the White House," he said. "I think they can see Trump wants out of this. He's just he's broadcasting it almost every day. And it gives the Iranians enormous leverage."

A political analyst shared a stark warning for President Donald Trump during a segment on MS NOW on Sunday.

Chris Hayes, host of MS NOW's "All In with Chris Hayes," said during a segment on Sunday's broadcast of "Crooked on MS NOW" that Republicans seem to be aware that Trump's "lame duck-ness" is setting in. That means there could be many Republicans who start to distance themselves from the Trump brand during the midterms as they chart their path forward without him, Hayes added.

"I do think that once everyone understands there's a future without him, I think it will be easier to kick him to the curb or to distance themselves from him," Hayes said. "And I think you'll see that more and more. If I had to guess, I don't think he's going to retain the kind of cult-like hold even over the Republican primary voter a year from now. I could be wrong, but he's just doing a terrible job."

"The other thing is, not only is he doing a terrible job, but he does not care," Hayes said. "I don't think he cares at all about his polling on his popularity. He certainly doesn't care about the fate of the Republican Party. He cares about his own fate."

A lawyer predicted on Sunday that one of the "messy" members of President Donald Trump's cabinet could be the next to go.

Shant Karnikian, co-host of the "Civil Action" podcast, predicted during a new episode that Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer could be the next one of Trump's cabinet secretaries to depart the administration because her husband has been accused of inappropriately touching employees at the Labor Department. Karnikian described it as a "messy little saga" inside the administration.

"We've covered this character before, Lori Chavez-DeRemer, but there's more going on right now," he said. "And we are predicting that she may be the next big firing. I don't know how big it is because there are other big ones possibly coming down the line, but she may be another one that bites the dust soon."

Recent cabinet secretaries who have departed the Trump administration include former Attorney General Pam Bondi and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. Bondi was reportedly let go after she failed to prosecute the president's political enemies, and Noem was terminated after a culmination of leadership failures.

President Donald Trump announced on Sunday that the U.S. has seized an Iranian-flagged ship in the Strait of Hormuz that was allegedly attempting to get through the U.S. blockade.

The announcement came at a time when U.S. officials have said that Iran chose to close the Strait of Hormuz to many foreign ships, which is in violation of the fragile ceasefire agreement the two countries recently agreed to. At the same time, some U.S. officials are scheduled to travel to Pakistan next week to continue negotiations to end the war in Iran, which has raged since late February.

"Today, an Iranian-flagged cargo ship named TOUSKA, nearly 900 feet long and weighing almost as much as an aircraft carrier, tried to get past our Naval Blockade, and it did not go well for them," Trump wrote on Truth Social. "The U.S. Navy Guided Missile Destroyer USS SPRUANCE intercepted the TOUSKA in the Gulf of Oman, and gave them fair warning to stop."

"The Iranian crew refused to listen, so our Navy ship stopped them right in their tracks by blowing a hole in the engineroom (sic)," he added. "Right now, U.S. Marines have custody of the vessel. The TOUSKA is under U.S. Treasury Sanctions because of their prior history of illegal activity. We have full custody of the ship, and are seeing what’s on board!"

President Donald Trump's latest series of late-night social media posts sparked fresh health concerns on Sunday.

Late Saturday night, Trump posted a video on his Truth Social page of Frank Sinatra singing his hit song "My Way." It was one of dozens of posts Trump made throughout the night, which alarmed some observers. The video also came at a time when some have raised concerns about the president's mental fitness after he threatened to obliterate the Iranian civilization in a previous post on Truth Social.

Observers reacted to the video on social media.

"This is a sacrilege," Nancy Sinatra, Frank Sinatra's eldest daughter, posted on X.

"I do AV work for a funeral home, and this is one of the most common song choices," Josiah Sutton, creator of Fruitless Media, posted on Bluesky. "It seems to be one of those songs that elderly boomers and silent generation folks turn to as they’re thinking about death."

"This is not normal," Daniel McAdams, executive director of The Rand Paul Institute, posted on X.

The post also seemed to enrage some observers.

"Frank Sinatra loathed Donald Trump," the anti-Trump advocacy group The Lincoln Project posted on X.

"What a bizarre a-- timeline we’re in," Don Johnson, chief economist at Macro Edge, posted on X. "Seriously."

"How comforting," liberal news outlet The Tennessee Holler posted on X.

President Donald Trump claimed on Sunday that peace talks between the United States and Iran were set to resume on Monday, but within a matter of hours, the claim was fiercely rebuked by a senior Iranian official.

“Despite Trump's announcement this morning that a new round of negotiations has been set, a senior Iranian official told me Tehran has not officially agreed to talks,” wrote Drop Site News reporter Jeremy Scahill, citing a senior Iranian official who spoke with the outlet on the condition of anonymity.

Trump has aggressively pushed for Iran to accept a deal with the United States to bring about an end to the U.S. war against Iran, but thus far has come up short. A U.S. delegation met with Iranian officials last week in Islamabad, Pakistan, but failed to reach an agreement to bring about an end to the conflict.

Trump told multiple media outlets that a U.S. delegation was being sent for a second round of talks in Pakistan, but according to the senior Iranian official, Tehran has outright rejected the Trump administration’s requests for negotiations.

Furthermore, the official warned that Trump’s erratic behavior was jeopardizing any future potential for a negotiated settlement.

President Donald Trump has been handed a grim reality check with a poll suggesting his administration's economy is the worst in 74 years.

Political analyst Pat Ford, during an appearance on the David Pakman Show, highlighted how the economy had sunk to its lowest point in decades under Trump's watch. A 74-year low puts the Trump economy on the same footing as Dwight D. Eisenhower's economic forecast in the early 1950s.

Ford said, "American consumers have delivered their verdict. They feel this economy under Trump is the worst in 74 years. The results are a historic indictment of the current administration."

The University of Michigan’s Consumer Sentiment Index fell to 47.6 in preliminary April 2026, a drop of 10.7% from March 2026. It is also the lowest reading in the history of the Consumer Sentiment poll. The prior record low came under Joe Biden's administration in 2022, which Ford explained was during a time when the United States had only just begun to recover from the Coronavirus pandemic.

Ford added, "There was also the start of the Russia-Ukraine war. This is immeasurably tied to Trump's decision to attack Iran because last month Trump was at 53.3, several points higher, now it's dropped 10.7%."

The results, Ford argues, put the US economy in a "more desperate light than even the 2008 financial crisis," but noted it does not mean the economy is "inherently worse" than 2008.

"It does mean that consumers feel the most dejected, that they feel the least confident this time since 1952. I think it is important to point out, especially because this has to do with how the public is feeling and we're only seven or so months away from the 2026 midterms, and people are going to be voting with their wallets.

"They're going to be voting based on how the economy is doing. And if Americans are saying that the economy is worse at this point than it has been at any point over the last 74 years, that's not going to be good for Trump, and that's not going to be good for Republicans. So you better believe that this economic sentiment is going to show up in the midterm elections."

MAGA supporters were dealt a devastating blow earlier this week and will struggle to recover from it, a political analyst has claimed.

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, a far-right autocrat who has led the country for 16 years, conceded defeat in April 2026 to opposition leader Peter Magyar, marking a stunning rebuke to Trump-backed authoritarianism in Europe. Endorsement from Vice President JD Vance was not enough to win Orban the election, marking an embarrassing moment for Donald Trump's administration and the MAGA movement.

Salon columnist Andrew O'Hehir believes Orban's election loss will set the MAGA movement back, but not stop them from attempting to pool their resources in Europe. He wrote, "It wasn't a great week for the far right’s self-appointed crusade to reconquer Europe as a fairytale paradise of whiteness and Christianity.

"Maybe that’s because that whole idea is vaporware, rooted in a nonsensical social and historical vision and devoted to a losing battle against economic and demographic reality. But that quality of noble, doomed struggle toward impossible goals is both the far-right movement’s fundamental weakness and the source of its power and danger."

O'Hehir went on to suggest that MAGA's backing of Orban and the subsequent election loss highlighted an undermining of Trump's own support during his second term in the Oval Office.

He wrote, "Viktor Orbán, the pudgy poster boy for 'illiberal democracy' and object of a mysterious man-crush by legions of American conservatives, suffered a catastrophic electoral defeat in Hungary that felt, at least for a day or two, like the global MAGA movement’s Waterloo moment.

"As for Donald Trump, what is there to say? The entire world is over him, big time, and it’s the unique curse of America’s narcissistic self-regard that we’re still stuck with him, dominating the headlines day after day with his empty, contradictory and randomly-punctuated blather.

"Trump heads into the latter stages of his presidency as a damaged and toxic figure, a human AI-meme desperately trying to spin his way past the massive humiliation of the Iran war he chose to fight and the global energy crisis he single-handedly created.

"As for the ambitious schemes to reshape Europe’s political map variously proposed by JD Vance, Stephen Miller, Steve Bannon and Elon Musk, among others, to this point none have amounted to more than flatulent rhetoric."

Religious statements made by members of Donald Trump's administration are harming the Republican Party, a political analyst has warned.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth delivered a Pentagon prayer service featuring a fabricated Bible verse directly from Quentin Tarantino's 1994 film Pulp Fiction. Hegseth introduced the prayer as CSAR 2517, which is actually Ezekiel 25:17—the fictional passage recited by Samuel L. Jackson's character Jules Winnfield.

The prayer included Hegseth's modifications, replacing movie dialogue with military references. The incident sparked widespread ridicule from legal experts and lawmakers, with critics questioning Hegseth's fitness to lead the military while weaponizing Christianity to justify warfare.

Vice President JD Vance also sparked controversy by publicly lecturing Pope Leo XIV on theology during a Turning Point conference. Vance stated the pope must be "careful" when discussing theological matters and ensure statements are "anchored in the truth." Pope Leo XIV directly rebuked Vance, declaring, "JD Vance is wrong: Jesus doesn't ask us to rank our love for others."

The confrontation highlighted tensions between Vance's Christian nationalist ideology and papal teachings emphasizing universal compassion over national interest prioritization.

David Wippman and Glenn C. Altschuler, writing in The Hill, suggest these moments from Hegseth and Vance highlight a dangerous precedent set by Trump's team.

They wrote, "The Trump administration’s threats to attack Iran’s energy infrastructure and destroy its civilization in the name of Jesus have prompted sharp rebukes from religious leaders, including Pope Leo, who quoted the Prophet Isaiah as saying God 'does not listen' to leaders with 'hands full of blood.'

"Trump’s profanity and endorsements of a Christian crusade are doing incalculable damage. In a nation in which only 62 percent of citizens identify as Christians, the president’s justification for his war of choice is eroding trust, intensifying political polarization, and contributing to an environment in which almost half of Americans think members of the other party are 'downright evil.'

"As Trump divides Americans while claiming God anointed him to lead the country, his rhetoric and his actions make clear that America and its leaders are no longer what they once were — the linchpin of an international order resting on shared values, laws and respect for national sovereignty."

A new poll from NBC News revealed Sunday that support for the U.S. war against Iran has plummeted as the conflict inches closer to the two-month mark, and at such a rate that it left several critics astonished.

“It took two years for two-thirds of Americans to disapprove of Bush’s handling of Iraq. It took less than two months for the same number to disapprove of Trump’s handling of Iran,” noted historian and foreign policy analyst Stephen Wertheim, reacting to the poll in a social media post shared on X Sunday with his more than 33,000 followers.

According to the poll, conducted between March 30 and April 13, only 33% of the 32,433 adults surveyed indicated that they approved of President Donald Trump’s handling of the U.S. war against Iran, and a staggering 67% disapproved. Of the 67% that disapproved, 54% indicated that they “strongly” disapproved of Trump’s handling of the war.

“Not a surprise if you’ve been listening,” wrote Sen. Andy Kim (D-NJ) in a social media post on X in response to the poll. “People are livid. They’ve seen a war in their name and at their expense, but without their approval. It’s time to end it.”

The poll also revealed that Trump’s overall approval rating has continued to dip, reaching 37% by this month, the single lowest figure since NBC News Decision Desk began tracking Trump’s favorability during his second term. In April of 2025, Trump’s approval rating sat at 45%.

Trump’s disapproval also increased during that same time period, climbing from 55% in April of last year to 63% as of this month.

President Donald Trump has been urged to change tactics in how he is dealing with Iranian officials looking to end the war.

The Trump administration's attempts to broker peace with Iran have ended in complete failure, with Vice President JD Vance announcing the collapse of negotiations on April 12, 2026.

Political analyst Sabrina Haake suggested the administration must look to more qualified personnel when brokering peace with the Middle Eastern country. Writing in her Substack, Haake suggested drafting new experts and negotiators to speak with Iran.

She wrote, "To resolve the highly complex quagmire he created, Trump needs negotiators steeped in Iran’s history, geography, culture, and technological capacities.

"But he’s relying on loyalists: VP Vance, real estate developer Steve Witkoff, and his son-in-law Jared Kushner, all of whom lack the expertise and diplomatic experience needed to achieve an agreement. Two diplomats from the failed negotiations immediately identified Trump’s problem: choosing negotiators for personal loyalty instead of subject-matter expertise."

Foreign policy expert Karim Sadjadpour suggested Trump had thrown Vice President JD Vance under the bus with failed peace talks between the US and Iran.

He wrote, "When toppling the Iranian regime appeared within reach to him, Trump wanted the credit; now, sensing the war’s unpopularity, he is content to let Vance own the outcome."

Trump has also prematurely declared victory over Iran, which the Preparedness and Politics Substack has suggested will make it harder to actually broker peace. They wrote, "For shipping markets and insurance underwriters, the political contradiction is itself risk.

"When the US president publicly declares victory while ten thousand US personnel actively enforce a blockade that the other party calls illegal and threatens to retaliate against, the contradiction is a reason to keep rates high.

"If Iran reneges on the opening — as the April 7-8 pattern suggests is entirely possible — lifting the blockade in response becomes harder, not easier, because Trump has already claimed the situation is resolved."

If you’ve noticed an uptick in female rage online over the last week, we have our reasons.

Women have been reeling over the Eric Swalwell scandal, which saw our former collective Dem Crush fall from grace in the span of a mere 11 days. Republicans really could learn a lot about accountability from Democrats, but why would they bother doing anything that makes sense?

And while we were still trying to sort out the disappointment of learning that a supposedly Good Guy Ally is actually the polar opposite, we found out about the “Online Rape Academy,” exposed by a lengthy global CNN investigation.

All of the details revealed about the “Motherless” website are unspeakably horrifying. While women have always been fully aware of the potential dangers of sexual assault as a result of being drugged in public spaces, we never considered the possibility of it happening thanks to a trusted intimate partner. The website received 62 million unique hits in the month of February, and over 82 million in March. While its founder has been arrested, the site was still very much active at the time of this writing.

The site contains multiple subforums where men share videos of themselves assaulting and raping their female partners, who are fully passed out thanks to drinking spiked tea or being drugged some other way. They also share tips on which drugs are better than others, meaning which ones stay in a woman’s system for the shortest amount of time so that they can’t remember any of the rapey parts and therefore can’t report the men they trust most in the world to the police.

These and other horror movie details have created the kind of reaction from women that you’d expect, while too many men are pulling the “Not All Men” defense. And fellas, you need to drop that one like a counterfeit $100 bill.

Women are rightfully enraged by our collective lived experiences. After all, we’ve been watching men get away with sexual crimes since the dawn of recorded history. It’s only now in the digital age that women are finally able to shed the shame so often associated with sexual assault. We have lived with “harmless” catcalls on the street (my first one was at the age of 14 in Manhattan). We know what it’s like to be sexualized by adult men from very young ages (including by our own fathers), to be shamed over our bodies as a male power move, to be assigned our value from men based on our breast sizes, hip widths, belly fat, leg lengths, and ass shapes.

All too many of us know what it’s like when men cross the line into committing crimes against women, ranging from stalking to rape and murder. We have a man found liable of sexual abuse currently squatting in the White House who’s being enabled by the entire Republican Party, including members of his Cabinet who’ve been named along with him in the Epstein Files.

It also doesn’t help that Substack is platforming accused international sex trafficker Andrew Tate, who was given safe harbor in Florida by Donald Trump, who also welcomed Tate’s brother, Tristan, back to America. Andrew is somehow the #1 Bestseller this week, with over 1.1 million subscribers, which just shouldn’t be allowed on the app where the smart kids post. Or ANYWHERE ELSE, because he’s an accused CRIMINAL.

I’m very proud to say that all three of them blocked me on Twitter, because women need to stand up to men who abuse women, not enable them with our silence.

Understandably, women are gathering online to figure out how to channel this rage in the most effective ways. The main conversations are happening on Threads and Instagram, where women have dubbed the movement “MeTwo.” They can simply ask the Threads algorithm to put fellow raging females in their feeds so we can all take over everything as quickly as possible.

Along with the rightfully furious women are the male allies who are standing with us and calling out their fellow men to join them in smashing the patriarchy in the right way. We need much more of this energy, fellas.

Of course, there are the fragile MAGA snowflakes who are triggered and freaking out over women holding men accountable--and therefore keep proving our points for us. We know it’s “not all men,” but it is ALWAYS men, and it’s happened to literally ALL women.

ALL OF US.

If you’re a man reading that, read it again. And again. And really take it in.

Because when I say all of us, I’m telling you that there’s not a woman who’s ever walked this planet who, at the very bare minimum, hasn’t been the target of an inappropriate comment from a man. It’s really not a question of IF a woman you know--from your mom to your sister to your aunts, cousins, friends, girlfriends, and wives--has a story to tell about a Bad Man. The question is WHEN was the first time she can remember something happening to her?

Any follow-up questions? Before you ask them, remember that no woman “asks for it.” Especially not a woman who’s been drugged by her partner. More men need to be taught never to shame the victims of sexual violence, only the perpetrators. And yet, protecting a man’s professional reputation has all too often been the focus, instead of believing the women.

Women have had it, guys. There’s been a very real and perceptible shift in our attitudes. Women are naming and shaming their attackers, going back to their childhoods. Women are done protecting the men who’ve hurt us, and we’re also done staying silent if you start anything with us in public.

Women are going to get louder and louder. I’d advise all men trying the “not all men” thing to think about what all women live with, and then say nothing instead.

FBI Director Kash Patel repeated his vow to file a lawsuit against The Atlantic on Sunday following the magazine’s explosive report about Patel’s alleged behavior that has “alarmed” colleagues.

Citing insiders both in and close to the FBI, The Atlantic reported Friday that Patel’s “excessive drinking” and “unexplained absences” had “alarmed colleagues.” The FBI director appeared on Fox News on Sunday to fiercely refute the allegations.

“I’m happy to announce on your show that we are not going to take this lying down. You want to attack my character? Come at me, bring it on, I’ll see you in court,” Patel said, speaking with Fox News’ Maria Bartiromo.

“We have to fight back against the fake news. It’s one of the many things that President Trump is so successful at in leading out on, because no one is attacked as baselessly as he is, and as much as he is. I won't tolerate their attacks on me because they are indirect attacks on the men and women of the FBI that we cleaned up.”

Patel told Bartiromo that he would be filing a lawsuit against The Atlantic on Monday, suing the magazine for defamation.

Patel did not share details to vindicate himself against the allegations leveled against him, but did launch into a lengthy critique of media outlets, calling them the “fake news Mafia.”

“If the fake news mafia wants to ring their drums as loud as they can, they’re never going to stop me from completing the mission that President Trump asked me to do, which is safeguarding America, and we’re doing it better than ever before,” Patel said.

President Donald Trump has been accused of using former members of the Armed Forces to patch up leaks in his administration, an analyst has claimed.

The Trump administration has initiated deportation proceedings against 34 former military members and arrested 125 others for immigration violations over the past year, reversing Biden-era protections for service members and their families.

Federal data shows immigration authorities also placed 248 relatives of veterans into deportation proceedings after Trump rescinded preferential treatment guidance. Additionally, the administration cut over 12,700 jobs at the Department of Veterans Affairs through mass government layoffs.

But Trump's recent approval for the Food and Drug Administration to review psychedelic drugs including ibogaine for use as a prescription for those suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder was roundly praised by political analysts.

Heather Delany Reese, writing in her Substack, suggested that while it could be a positive step in helping veterans, the administration has approved the drug review to save face.

Reese wrote, "Nothing that helps our veterans should take decades to reach them. That part is not in question. What is in question is the machinery behind the moment. Because what we watched today had nothing to do with veterans. Trump loves to use veterans as props, the same way he uses anyone who serves his purposes and discards them when they don’t.

"Even if he wasn’t fully aware of why this was being fast-tracked on a Saturday, the people operating the levers behind him understood exactly what was happening. This was the machine recognizing a fracture in the foundation and moving to seal it before it spread any further.

"That is how Trump operates. He doesn’t persuade his critics. He purchases them. Not always with money, but with access, with wins, with the thing they care about most. [Joe] Rogan wanted psychedelic therapy for veterans.

"[Robert] O’Neill wanted recognition for a cause close to his heart. Trump gave them both what they wanted, and in return, he got the only thing he ever wants: the appearance of loyalty and control. A vision of his presidency that everything is great, even as the world outside that room was falling apart.

"Because while Trump sat in the Oval Office telling reporters that the situation with Iran was 'going actually along very well,' Iran was closing the Strait of Hormuz again. For the second time this week. Hours after announcing it would reopen the strait as part of the fragile ceasefire, Iran reversed course after Trump insisted on maintaining the U.S. naval blockade of Iranian ports."

Vice President JD Vance could be building up the nerve to turn on Donald Trump and save his 2028 presidential bid, a political analyst has claimed.

Vance has found himself crumbling in the polling, according to The Guardian's Simon Tisdall, who notes that the vice president has been backing Trump. But doing so has been a detriment to his own projections of being the next President of the United States, Tisdall claims, and Vance may soon hit his breaking point.

Tisdall wrote, "The vice-president is paying a high price for sycophantic loyalty to his boss. His poll ratings are plunging. His MAGA succession hopes falter. He suffers by association – although his own inflammatory statements and misjudgments often make matters worse. Yet amid growing doubts about Trump’s mental health and fitness to govern, Vance remains the White House’s next-in-line.

"Vance’s loyalty is not reciprocated. Remember the fate of Trump’s first vice-president, Mike Pence, who refused to block the 2020 election result. Trump reportedly backed Capitol Hill rioters who wanted Pence hanged for treason.

"If the mood takes him, Trump will happily throw faithful followers under the bus, no matter how they bow and scrape. Ask Pam Bondi. Yet Vance’s loyalties and beliefs are flexible, too."

Tisdall went on to suggest it is not a matter of if Vance betrays Trump to secure his spot as the Republican Party nominee for the 2028 elections, but when.

"In short, Vance is a crude opportunist, a self-proclaimed hillbilly peddling political moonshine," he wrote. "But his position is stronger than other cabinet members in one key respect. Trump cannot fire an elected vice-president – though under the 25th Amendment to the Constitution, Vance could help fire Trump.

"A group of Democrats in Congress wants him to join a special commission that would do exactly that if Trump were judged unfit. Vance will bide his time.

"But Trump’s Iran fiasco and increasingly unhinged behavior is eroding grassroots support – and that hurts his deputy, too. Vance’s lead over the secretary of state, Marco Rubio, in the notional contest for the Republican nomination is slipping."

Vance is not guaranteed any success if he does break from Trump, with Tisdall arguing it would take a "miracle" to rehabilitate the Vice President in the eyes of the voters.

He wrote, "If, between now and November 2028, he can learn statesmanship, practice humility and moderation, and heed what Abraham Lincoln called the 'better angels of our nature,' he may yet find redemption. At 41, Vance still has time to reinvent himself again."

President Donald Trump made several dozen social media posts Saturday night about everything from election fraud to his administration’s policy regarding farmers, but one post in particular sparked concern among onlookers.

The post in question was a nearly four-minute video of cultural icon Frank Sinatra performing “My Way” – among his most recognized songs and notable for its use at funerals – in 1978 at Caesars Palace in Las Vegas, Nevada. Trump posted the video without commentary, leading many observers to voice concern due to both the song’s subject matter and the post’s ambiguity.

“[What] is going on? Should I be in a bunker or something?” wrote X user “Pope Respecter,” a popular social media user who comments on religion, in a social media post to their nearly 44,000 followers.

“Should I be preparing for a global famine?” wrote another X user, “Michael Orthodox,” also a frequent commentator on religion.

The vague online post came as the U.S. war against Iran continues to escalate, with Iran reversing course over the weekend and re-closing the Strait of Hormuz to U.S.-aligned vessels, prompting fury from the president who on Sunday reissued fresh threats to destroy Iran’s civilian infrastructure, actions that would likely constitute war crimes.

“The United States is going to knock out every single Power Plant, and every single Bridge, in Iran. NO MORE MR. NICE GUY!” Trump wrote Sunday morning on his social media platform Truth Social.

President Donald Trump has made his next target for prosecution clear, a former attorney has claimed.

Joyce Vance, who served as the United States attorney for the Northern District of Alabama from 2009 to 2017, suggested former CIA Director John Brennan could be in the firing line of Trump's legal wrath. Writing in her Substack, Vance considered the reasons why Brennan would be made a prosecution target for Trump, with the former CIA Director incurring the president's wrath.

Former CIA Director John Brennan faces potential criminal prosecution under the Trump administration. Legal experts warn that no federal court is likely to convict Brennan of crimes.

The Trump administration claims Brennan used classified information inappropriately, though no credible evidence supports criminal charges. Brennan has responded defiantly, stating he will not be intimidated by Trump.

Vance added, "This is what Donald Trump does for his friends—the people willing to plot a violent insurrection in hopes he could hold onto power after losing the 2020 election.

"He treats the people he thinks of as enemies very differently, but the stench of corruption is the same. The current example is former CIA Director John Brennan—one of the ultimate catches on Trump’s revenge prosecution list.

"Trump became convinced during his first term in office that Brennan had been involved in some shadowy plot against him, and although nothing in the extensive 'Crossfire Hurricane' investigation carried out by then AG Bill Barr and Special Counsel John Durham bore that out, Trump apparently still holds a grudge.

"Trump has always been sensitive to the 2017 intelligence assessment that found Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election in order to help him, and since Brennan was at the CIA when that happened, Trump seems to hold him responsible. The intelligence assessment appears to have been accurate; both the FBI and a bipartisan Senate Committee agreed."

The Republican Party could lose the Senate following the midterm elections, a selection of party strategists has claimed.

GOP personnel believe a blue wave could hit the party in the November elections, and it may mean losing their majority in the Senate. A dire prediction has been made by party insiders, with Michigan-based GOP strategist Jason Roe pinpointing the war in Iran as a vote loser this fall.

"Momentum has shifted to Democrats," he told Politico. "They do still have an uphill battle, but when you look at what the map looks like today and what we thought it would look like a few months ago, it’s very different."

An unnamed Georgia-based GOP strategist gave a more positive reading on the situation the party faces. They said, "If combat operations are over in the summer, there’s plenty of time for the dislocation of gasoline prices, which I think is really the primary concern here. I think that will return to normal."

Though some analysts are waiting to see if the war in Iran cools off by summer, others believe that Donald Trump's administration and their statements have made life harder for Republican Party officials.

An Iowa-based strategist said, "They say the right things strategically, and then they don’t execute them where you want them to be better."

Former Ohio Republican Rep. Jim Renacci has sounded the alarm too, saying the party is on unsteady footing in the lead-up to the midterm elections. He said, "I think we’re back in 2018 where the headwinds were against Republicans.

"I mean, I ran against Sherrod Brown in 2018 and the national electorate was about a D plus 6 to 8. I think we’re getting about that same place in Ohio."

Iowa-based GOP strategist Morgan Bonwell has called on the party to unite behind one candidate to salvage their chances of beating Jon Ossoff. Bonwell said, "Republicans really need to unify behind one candidate to beat Jon Ossoff. I don't think they can continue, or afford to continue, beating each other up."

President Donald Trump doubled down Sunday on his long-running threats to destroy Iran’s civilian infrastructure, warning Tehran that he was ready and willing to authorize such an attack at a moment’s notice.

Trump’s latest round of threats were issued shortly after Iran shut down travel through the Strait of Hormuz, forcing two tankers to turn around early Sunday morning in opposition to the U.S. naval blockade authorized by Trump last week.

“We’re offering a very fair and reasonable DEAL, and I hope they take it because, if they don’t, the United States is going to knock out every single Power Plant, and every single Bridge, in Iran. NO MORE MR. NICE GUY!” Trump wrote on his social media platform Truth Social.

“They’ll come down fast, they’ll come down easy and, if they don’t take the DEAL, it will be my Honor to do what has to be done, which should have been done to Iran, by other Presidents, for the last 47 years. IT’S TIME FOR THE IRAN KILLING MACHINE TO END!”

Supreme Court Judge Clarence Thomas has been heavily criticized for a speech made against progressive politics.

Thomas delivered a scathing critique of progressivism during a speech at the University of Texas Austin Law School, characterizing the political philosophy as fundamentally incompatible with American constitutional principles. Thomas argued that progressivism seeks to replace the foundational premises of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution itself.

"Progressivism seeks to replace the basic premises of the Declaration of Independence and hence our form of government," Thomas stated. "[Progressivism] holds that our rights and our dignities come not from God, but from government.

"It requires of the people a subservience and weakness incompatible with a constitution premised on the transcendent origin of our rights."

Heather Digby Parton, writing for Salon, suggested the speech highlighted an ongoing problem in America's right-wing politics. She wrote, "Coming from the mouth of an associate justice of the Supreme Court, those words — and their implications — are jaw-dropping and cause for alarm.

"If you read between the lines, he is saying that the country is at war, and the battles are not just political or philosophical. They are also spiritual.

"But Thomas’ attack on the left is really just a slightly more elegant indictment than the ones you might read on an obscure Reddit thread, or have read on an old Usenet forum back in the 1990s."

"But Clarence Thomas, like many conservatives in this misbegotten era, suffers from Fox News brainrot, a condition that encourages them to wallow in the bitterness of their own experience while believing the world is going to hell in a handbasket because of people who refuse to accept the way things are supposed to work."

Political analysts previously criticized Thomas' speech, with political scientist and The Atlantic contributing editor Norman Ornstein calling the 76-year-old judge the "most corrupt justice in the history of the United States."

Investigative journalist Jacke Singh added, "Um. Wow. An outright psyop attempt. Narrative inversion. Manipulation. From a sitting Justice."

Amid the ongoing U.S. war against Iran, President Donald Trump considered awarding himself the Medal of Honor, the most prestigious military award issued by the U.S. government, White House insiders claimed in a report published Saturday evening in the Wall Street Journal.

Citing a “senior administration official” and people who have “spoken” with the president, the Journal’s report revealed that Trump had privately panicked in early April after learning of the downed U.S. fighter jet over Iran.

“Trump screamed at aides for hours. The Europeans aren’t helping, he said repeatedly. Gas prices averaged $4.09,” the Journal’s report reads. “Images of the 1979 Iranian hostage crisis – one of the biggest international policy failures of a presidency in recent times – had been looming large in his mind, people who have spoken to him said.”

According to a senior administration official, Trump had demanded that the pilots of the downed fighter jet be rescued immediately, though discussions grew adversarial due to the president’s “impatience.”

“Aides kept the president out of the room as they got minute-by-minute updates because they believed his impatience wouldn’t be helpful, instead updating him at meaningful moments, a senior administration official said,” the Journal’s report reads.

Amid the chaos, which according to the insiders also involved Trump “sometimes” losing focus and attempting to pivot to topics unrelated to the U.S. war against Iran such as his White House ballroom, the president also actively considered awarding himself the highest military decoration in the United States’ history.

“He has made risky pronouncements without input from his national security team – including his post about plans to destroy the Iranian civilization – saying seeming unstable could help spur the Iranians to negotiate,” the Journal’s report reads.

“At one point he even mused he should award himself the nation’s highest military honor, the Medal of Honor.”

Vice President JD Vance has been ridiculed by leading theological experts and philosophers for a recent statement made about Pope Leo XIV.

Vance has engaged in a direct theological dispute with Pope Leo XIV, criticizing the pontiff's understanding of Catholic doctrine. At a Turning Point conference, Vance stated, "I think it's very, very important for the pope to be careful when he talks about matters of theology."

"If you're going to opine on matters of theology, you've got to be careful, you've got to make sure it's anchored in the truth." The Pope, formerly Cardinal Robert Prevost, responded by directly rebuking Vance's ideology. "JD Vance is wrong: Jesus doesn't ask us to rank our love for others."

Vance also suggested the Vatican focus on morality rather than foreign policy, claiming the pope should "stick to matters of morality and the matters of the Catholic church."

Pope Leo XIV has since downplayed the feud with President Donald Trump and his administration, saying that the feud had "not been accurate in all of its respects" and that he has "no interest at all" in debating the president.

Vance issued another statement on Pope Leo XIV, posting to X on Saturday: "I am grateful to Pope Leo for saying this. While the media narrative constantly gins up conflict–and yes, real disagreements have happened and will happen–the reality is often much more complicated.

"Pope Leo preaches the gospel, as he should, and that will inevitably mean he offers his opinions on the moral issues of the day. The President–and the entire administration–work to apply those moral principles in a messy world. He will be in our prayers, and I hope that we'll be in his."

This statement has been heavily criticized, with journalist Pedro L. Gonzalez writing, "JD Vance knows he messed up. He was supposed to pretend to be a Catholic, do the whole pious statesman charade ahead of 2028, but he underestimated how unpopular he is, so attacking the Pope was like putting his hand in a hornet’s nest.

"Now he wants to save face, but the damage is done. I guess JD will just have to change his name again and write a third memoir when this is over."

Catholic Clergy member Father James Anyaegbu added, "To pray for the Pope is a good step, but to listen to him is even better and commendable. Because authentic prayer should open us to obedience, not just sympathy.

"It should move us to take seriously the voice of the one entrusted with guarding and proclaiming the truth of the Gospel. We cannot affirm the Pope when it is convenient and reduce his teaching to 'opinion' when it challenges us. The Gospel is not negotiated to fit the world; it calls the world to conversion."

Christopher Hale, who worked on the Joe Biden and Barack Obama presidential campaigns, wrote, "You told Pope Leo XIV to be more 'careful' when 'opining on theology' twice this week. The American bishops’ committee on doctrine rebuked you. Do you rescind those remarks?"

Political philosopher Kevin Vallier added, "This is STILL WRONG. Popes ALSO apply moral principles to the 'messy' world. And on Catholic teaching, they're not merely his view, in many cases. And the implication that TRUMP prays for the Pope and the Pope might not in return is a nasty dig."

I recently came home from the studio and turned on the TV to see an MSNOW host and her guest agree on how important it is that Democrats “unite around the issue of term limits” for members of Congress. Last week, the Democratic governor of a swing state said on my program that he was pushing for term limits.

In just the past 48 hours, I’ve heard three different commentators on MSNOW and CNN speak of them as if term limits are the “solution” to “elderly” legislators or to the naked corruption that’s so rampant in DC.

This is the wrong issue for Democrats to be promoting now: term limits actually do more damage than good, which is why Republicans and the Heritage Foundation have been pushing them for decades.

For example, they’d get rid of good, effective, high-quality legislators like Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Ron Wyden, Maxine Waters, Barbara Lee, and Pramila Jayapal, among others.

But the problem with term limits goes far deeper than that.

Unfortunately, term limits are popular because they seem like an easy fix to the corruption crisis in American politics (over 70 percent of Americans favor them), but in reality, they simply hand more power over to giant corporations and the morbidly rich. Here’s how:

First, term limits shift the balance of power in a legislature from the legislators themselves to lobbyists, which is why corporate-friendly Republicans so often speak fondly of them.

Historically, when a new lawmaker comes into office, he or she will hook up with an old-timer who can show them the ropes, how to get around the building, where the metaphorical bodies are buried, and teach them how to make legislation.

With term limits, this institutional knowledge is largely stripped out of a legislative body, forcing new legislators to look elsewhere for help.

Because no Republican has ever, anywhere, suggested that lobbyists’ ability to work be term-limited, we have an actual experiment we can look to. Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma, and South Dakota all have term limits.

Research has shown, repeatedly and unambiguously, that in those states with term limits the lobbyists end up filling the role of permanent infrastructure to mentor and guide new lawmakers, and thus have outsized power and influence, far greater than they had before the term limits were instituted.

Of course, lobbyists — and the billionaires and corporations that pay them — love this. It dramatically increases lobbyists’ power and influence, giving them an early and easy entrée into the personal and political lives of the individual legislators who, in those states with term limits, are forced to lean on them for guidance.

This simple reality is not lost on the GOP, which has been pushing these restrictions on service at the federal and state legislature level for years: term limits are law in 16 states, all as the result of heavy Republican PR efforts and lobbying during the George HW Bush presidency.

Pappy Bush rolled the idea out in 1990 as a central part of his failed run for re-election in 1992. An unpopular president who was being blamed by voters for the destruction of unions and factories rapidly moving offshore, his advisors thought it would be a great way to blame Congress for the problems that neoliberal Reaganomics had inflicted on the nation.

As The New York Times noted on December 12, 1990:

“President Bush has decided to push for a constitutional amendment to limit the number of terms for members of Congress, his chief of staff, John H. Sununu, said today. Doing so as he prepares for his re-election campaign will put Mr. Bush squarely and publicly on the side of an idea that is as widely popular among voters as it is wildly unpopular among members of Congress…
“But even though passage of such an amendment is unlikely, there is little risk for Mr. Bush in associating himself with this movement. Politically, the move fits nicely with the growing effort by the White House to depict Congress as the source of most of the nation’s problems.”

While the US Congress never seriously took up the idea, Bush’s advocacy of it echoed through the states and was heavily promoted by Rush Limbaugh, whose national hate-radio show had rolled out just two years earlier in 1988.

Newt Gingrich made term limits the cornerstone of his 1994 Contract On America, but the issue died at the federal level in 1995 when the Supreme Court, in U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, ruled term limits imposed on federal officials are unconstitutional.

This doesn’t mean Congress can’t impose term limits on itself; it would just require them to be done as a constitutional amendment or via some other mechanism that gets around the Supreme Court, like court-stripping (which, itself, is dicey). Term limits were imposed on the presidency by Congress in 1951, a GOP backlash against FDR’s having won election to four consecutive terms in office, but that took ratification of the 22nd Amendment.

Following Bush’s promotion of them, Oklahoma picked up term limits for its legislature in 1990, with Maine, California, Colorado, Arkansas, Michigan, Florida, Ohio, South Dakota, Montana, Arizona, and Missouri debating them during the 1991 and 1992 legislative sessions and all putting them into law in 1992. Louisiana and Nevada put them into law in 1995 and 1996, respectively, Nebraska in 2000, and North Dakota finally got around to them in 2022.

In every single case, term limits have worked to the benefit of billionaires and special interests and against the interests of average citizens. It’s why the Koch brothers and rightwing think-tanks have been pushing them for decades, like you’ll find in the article “Term Limits: The Only Way to Clean Up Congress” on the Heritage Foundation’s website.

In addition to strengthening the hand of lobbyists, term limits also prevent good people who aren’t independently wealthy from entering politics in the first place.

What rational person, particularly if they have kids, would take the risk of a job they know will end in six years when instead they could build a career in a field that guarantees them security and a decent retirement?

Also because of this dynamic, term limits encourage legislators to focus on their post-politics career while serving.

Many busily legislate favors for particular industries in the hope of being rewarded with a job when they leave office. This is just one of several ways term limits increase the level of and incentives for corruption.

Because term limits encourage independently wealthy people to enter politics and push out middle-class would-be career politicians like Bernie Sanders or Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, they always shift the Overton window of legislatures — regardless of the party in power — to the right.

Probably the strongest argument against term limits, though, is that they’re fundamentally anti-democratic. In fact, we already have term limits: they’re called elections.

The decision about who represents the interests of a particular state or legislative district shouldn’t be held by some abstract law: it should be in the hands of the voters, and term limits deny voters this.

And, because term limits weaken the power of the legislative branch by producing a constant churn, they strengthen the power of the executive branch, a violation of the vital concept of checks-and-balances.

Even where governors or presidents are term-limited by law or constitution, the concentration of power in a single executive is inherently problematic, requiring a robust legislative branch to balance it. Term limits thus neuter a legislature’s ability to mount a muscular challenge to a governor or president grasping for excess power.

States that have instituted term limits generally suffer from “buyer’s remorse.” As the Citizens Research Council of Michigan noted in a 2018 report titled Twenty-five Years Later, Term Limits Have Failed to Deliver On Their Promise:

“Legislative term limits in Michigan have failed to achieve their proponents’ stated goals: Ridding government of career politicians, increasing diversity among elected officials, and making elections more competitive.
“Term limits have made state legislators, especially House members, view their time as a stepping stone to another office. Term limits have failed to strengthen ties between legislators and their districts or sever cozy relationships with lobbyists. They have weakened the legislature in its relationship with the executive branch.”

A scholarly study of term limits in Florida similarly concluded:

“The absence of long-serving legislators under term limits equates to a significant loss of experience and institutional memory. … Those who had built a career in the Legislature were not applauded for the expertise they had developed but were castigated…
“After the first full decade with term limitations in place, the Florida Legislature is a dramatically different institution. Term limits increased legislator turnover and drastically affected legislative tenure, all but destroying institutional memory.”

The Brookings Institution, in a paper titled Five Reasons to Oppose Congressional Term Limits, notes that the primary results of term limits are to:
— “Take away power from voters,”
— “Severely decrease congressional capacity,”
— “Limit incentives for gaining policy expertise,”
— “Automatically kick out effective lawmakers,” and
— “Do little to minimize corruptive behavior or slow the revolving door.”

As a result, Idaho, Massachusetts, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming have all repealed their legislative term limits.

For people who’ve never worked in politics or held elective office — which is most of us — term limits sound like a quick and easy answer for the complex problems of corruption and congressional dysfunction. But the only truly reasonable place for term limits to be applied are to the presidency (which we’ve already done) and the unelected members of the Supreme Court (18 years is generally suggested as an appropriate limit to their terms).

So, the next time you hear some politician or TV pundit proclaiming that term limits are the “best solution” to the “problem” of corruption or congressional dysfunction, consider their real agenda.

Unless they’re simply naïve or cynical, it’ll almost always be that they are or once were (before Trump) a Republican and just can’t help themselves.

A former GOP speechwriter was blown away on Saturday as President Donald Trump's "strategy" to win the war in Iran appeared to backfire.

Last week, Trump announced that Iran had agreed to open the Strait of Hormuz, a key waterway that accounts for 20% of the world's energy, which had been closed since the war began in late February. Its closure has sent global energy prices skyrocketing, and American allies in Europe have said they may have as much as six weeks of reserve jet fuel.

All of that reversed on Saturday as Trump said the strait was closed again. The president added that the administration is having "very productive" talks with the Iranians, but no solution had been reached as of Saturday night.

Tim Miller, host of "The Bulwark Podcast," said in a new reaction video that the closure showed Trump's "strategy" isn't working.

"That was fast!" Miller said.

"You're seeing that Trump's strategy is just making a bunch of claims and hoping that they come to fruition," he added.

Miller added that the Strait's closure could compel Trump to make further concessions to the Iranians as negotiations continue.

"I think obviously that Trump will continue to offer more and more concessions in the hope that the Strait can get reopened," Miller said. "But the situation is a lot dicier than it was made to seem 24 hours ago or even 12 hours ago."

An author who has written four books about President Donald Trump said on Saturday that the president's "political charm" is starting to backfire on the administration.

For years, part of Trump's appeal to voters has been that he does not course-correct when things go sideways, journalist Michael Wolff argued in a new episode of "Inside Trump's Head," a podcast he co-hosts with Joanna Coles of The Daily Beast. However, that strategy appears to be failing him as the administration and the Republican Party limp toward the 2026 midterms.

"Course correcting is the absolute opposite of what he does. Trump is strictly a double-down guy," Wolff said. "It's part of his political charm in its way. 'I don't pander, I don't give a s---. I just do what I'm going to do.' And for various points that has been impressive, even charming, to lots of people."

"But at various other points, it's calamitous, and I think we're at one of those points," he added.

Wolff noted that Trump seems to have stopped discussing issues that matter to the MAGA base in the White House, citing conversations he'd had over the last week.

For instance, Wolff said Trump still measures the economy's success by stock market performance, which doesn't resonate with many MAGA voters. He's also been raging about the Federal Reserve and the White House Ballroom, two other issues that don't appeal to MAGA, he said.

"Everybody around him, their response is frustration, but I think they have to convert that into patience because you can't tell him, 'Hey, we're really heading for disaster here.' They are heading for disaster. No one can say that."

President Donald Trump's next move appears likely to send his administration into "complete and utter disarray," and sink the GOP in the process, according to one analyst.

David Pakman, host of the "David Pakman Show" on YouTube, argued in a new reaction video that Trump appears to be underestimating how damaging his rhetoric about the war in Iran has been. For instance, Pakman pointed to a clip from last week where Trump said the negotiations to end the war "didn't matter" because the U.S. had "already won."

Pakman warned Trump that his words could backfire as the November 2026 midterm elections approach.

"What we know from tracking Trump historically over the last number of years, [is that] number one, he only really cares about himself," Pakman said. "And so, you paying higher gas prices or JD Vance failing negotiations, he doesn't care as long as it doesn't affect him directly."

"He may be miscalculating on that," he added. "I think it will affect him directly in the sense of making Republicans lose in November and throwing his final two years of the presidency into complete and utter disarray, which he's not going to like.
But at the end of the day, this is all about how can Trump appear strong and pull out something approximating a victory."

Another one of President Donald Trump's former attorneys has landed a gig investigating the president's political foes, according to a new report.

The New York Times reported on Saturday, citing "a senior law enforcement official," that Joseph diGenova has been tapped by the Trump Department of Justice to lead a "sprawling inquiry" into whether federal prosecutors committed crimes while they investigated Trump during his first term. The report added that diGenova is expected to split time between Miami and Fort Pierce, where a grand jury overseen by Trump-friendly judge Aileen Cannon has been convened.

DiGenova, a former U.S. Attorney during the Ronald Reagan administration, will hold the title of counselor to the attorney general, the report says, and he was assigned to the Southern District of Florida, where his work will be overseen by another Trump ally, U.S. Attorney Jason Reding Quiñones.

DiGenova represented Trump during his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. He is stepping into a role left vacant after a career prosecutor, Maria Medetis Long, was removed from the case, according to the report.

"Together, the moves show how the Justice Department under Mr. Trump’s control has been willing to embrace politically charged tactics and unorthodox personnel decisions in its efforts to satisfy his demands to prosecute his perceived foes — even as other prosecutors loyal to him have encountered forceful pushback from courts against his wide-ranging retribution campaign," the report reads in part.