Ruth's Report: Chump's embarrassing boyfriend James Comer

Quoting C.I. from this morning's snapshot:

Somethings I just never understand. Carly Simon sings that in "You Know What To Do To Me" (written by Carly, Jacob Brackman, Peter Wood and Mike Mainieri for the HELLO BIG MAN album) and I feel that way often. Like the nonsense an idiot House Committee Chair's pulling these days. Simon Marks (THE PAPER) reports:

Republicans in the House of Representatives delivered Donald Trump a wakeup call on Tuesday. The good news for the White House: they voted to subpoena, among others, former president Bill Clinton and Secretary Hillary Clinton, compelling them to testify before the House of Representatives Oversight Committee as it investigates the Jeffrey Epstein affair.

But they simultaneously delivered devastating news, sending a subpoena to Trump’s own Department of Justice in a fresh effort to force the White House to release Epstein-related documents and other evidence that many core Republican supporters suspect are being covered up.

Publicly, congressman James Comer of Kentucky – the pro-Trump bulldog who chairs the committee – is vowing to haul the Clintons over the coals within the next 10 weeks. In a pugnacious social media posting, he announced that Hillary Clinton will be deposed by the Committee on 9 October, with her husband following on 14 October.

I get it. James Comer probably has a micro penis. It's probably gotten smaller over the years and it's probably just a tiny little mushroom. That's made him bitter so he does things like the above.

If you want to subpoena Bill Clinton, by all means do. But if you're also issuing a subpoena for Hillary Clinton, realize that we all grasp that you are suffering from some psycho sexual problems.

There's no reason to subpoena Hillary Clinton. You're obsessed with her, we get it. You're a fat 52 y.o. joke of a man and she's your great white wale that you and all the other Republican losers have never been able to honestly lay a hand on or prove a rumor about. It's driven you crazy and made you impotent. So we watch and we laugh as you repeatedly go after Hillary.

You've spent how many decades whispering she's a 'cold fish' but now you've got a sex trafficking case and you just know she's involved. It makes no sense. She's not been accused of traveling with Epstein. She's certainly not been accused of procuring young girls from him. But this is who the important, fat, stupid and under-educated Comer issues a subpoena to Hillary Clinton -- not one to Alex Acosta who is responsible for the sweet heart deal Epstein got in Florida when he should have been buried in a prison and not Donald Chump who, as a sitting president, should be at the top of the list since he claims now that he knew Epstein was trafficking and that Epstein stole underage employees from Chump and what the hell were 16 year old girls doing at Chump's resort giving grown men massages? None of it make sense. None of it has ever made sense.

But, James Comer, we get it, you are both a failure as a human being and a failure as a man and that harassing Hillary is the only thing that provides meaning to his otherwise worthless life. And, yes, Comer, your father was disappointed when you failed to become a medical doctor and instead majored in ag but not as disappointed as he was when you reached maturity and still had that girlish voice. What did he used to say, "Take the cock out of your mouth when you speak so I can understand you?"

I read that and loved it and turned on MSNBC while doing some dusting and saw -- different terms -- similar points being made. And Tom Boggioni reports:

Plans by Rep. James Comer (R-KY) to use his position as the chair of the House Oversight and Reform Committee to calm the waters around the Jeffrey Epstein files will fail before he even starts, former prosecutor Dave Aronberg explained on MSNBC on Thursday morning.

During the segment on "Morning Joe," Aronberg claimed there are too many hurdles for the Kentucky Republican to overcome that range from subpoenaed witnesses likely to refuse to give depositions to problems with the courts releasing testimony that could hamper convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell's appeal headed to the Supreme Court.

According to the former prosecutor, even if Comer can maneuver the minefield he has entered, it still won't satisfy the hard-right base that wants complete Epstein transparency.

Pointing to Comer's target list of people he wants to testify, the ex-prosecutor stated he doesn't believe anyone gave legal advice to Comer.

"I think this list was developed by political advisor," he told the hosts before joking, "It just looks like Comer threw darts at a list of Trump's enemies from both sides of the aisle."

"Like, why is Hillary Clinton on the list? What does she have to do with this?" he asked. "Bob Mueller, Bob Mueller! Who Trump hates, he was the FBI director at the time, but he had nothing to do with the [Epstein] non-prosecution agreement. You know who did? [Former US Attorney] Alex Acosta, but he's not on the list as you correctly noted. Of course, Trump's not on the list either."

Why is Hillary Clinton being called on to testify? She has nothing to do with this. It really is just the Republicans trying to work out all their grudges while avoiding accountability. Mr. Acosta and Mr. Chump both need to be testifying.

Meanwhile, Alex Griffing (MEDIAITE) reports:

Independent journalist Roger Sollenberger uncovered an old New York Post article this week that appeared to refute President Donald Trump’s story about when and why he booted convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein from his Mar-a-Lago club.

“Epstein denies he is banned from Mar-a-Lago and says, in fact, he was recently invited to an event there,” Sollenberger noted on Tuesday, adding it is a “Crazy line from an Oct. 15, 2007, NYPost piece confirming that Trump only canceled Epstein’s membership two weeks after he agreed to plead guilty.”

Trump replied, “I don’t know. I think she worked at the spa. I think so. I think that was one of the people, yeah. He stole her. And, by the way, she had no complaints about us, as you know, none whatsoever.” Giuffre, who sought civil and criminal action against Epstein and his accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell, and accused Prince Andrew of sexual abuse, killed herself in April of this year.

Trump’s comment raised eyebrows at the time as it called into question the known timeline surrounding Trump barring Epstein from his club. Ryan Goodman, a NYU law professor and legal analyst, shared the clip online and noted, “Here’s the very disturbing part of this.” He added:

The timing and Trump’s knowledge:

Year 2000: Epstein-Maxwell ‘took’ Virginia Giuffre from Mar-a-Lago

2002: Trump said most infamous line about Epstein being a “terrific” friend and liking “younger” ones

2004: Trump rupture with Epstein

Epstein later pleaded guilty to underage sex offenses in June of 2008.

Goodman wasn’t the only one to note the timeline surrounding Trump and Epstein’s falling out. S.V. Dáte, the White House correspondent at HuffPost, added, “Trump on AF1 confirms that one of the people Epstein “stole” from him at Mar-a-Lago was Virginia Giuffre. That was in 2000. He told NY mag in 2002 that he admired Epstein’s taste in women. The break from Epstein wasn’t for another 2 years.”

In other news, Aaron Blake (CNN) reports:

Early in President Donald Trump’s second term, plenty of ink was spilled on the question of whether his 2024 voters regretted their votes. The verdict – including my own – was generally that this theory was overblown.

There were anecdotes, yes, but it didn’t seem to be an especially measurable phenomenon.

More than six months in, that could be changing, at least somewhat.

It’s probably still too simple to say that lots of Trump supporters regret their votes. But to appropriate a phrase you might have heard from your parents once upon a time: Many Trump voters aren’t mad (or fully regretful); they’re just disappointed.

A new poll from the University of Massachusetts Amherst is one of the best gauges of this to date.

It found just 69% of 2024 Trump voters agreed that they are “very confident that I made the right choice.”

That’s fewer than the 78% of Kamala Harris voters who said the same of her. It’s also down slightly from the 74% of Trump voters who said they were very confident in their vote back in April.

This is C.I.'s "The Snapshot" for today:

Thursday, August 7, 2025. Chump continues to be leader of the Grand Old Pedophile party, Epstein survivors are not going away, redistricting Texas is Chump's attempt to avoid a third impeachment, he should be impeached for Alligator Alcatraz alone, and much more.

I get it. James Comer probably has a micro penis. It's probably gotten smaller over the years and it's probably just a tiny little mushroom. That's made him bitter so he does things like the above.

If you want to subpoena Bill Clinton, by all means do. But if you're also issuing a subpoena for Hillary Clinton, realize that we all grasp that you are suffering from some psycho sexual problems.

Aaron Blake (CNN) reports:

[R]epeatedly in recent days and weeks, those victims and allies have stepped forward to raise serious questions about the Trump administration’s handling of the matter. They’ve complained about favorable treatment of convicted Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell. They’ve objected to the lack of disclosure. They’ve complained about the administration’s treatment of them.

They’ve invoked the phrase “cover-up” on at least three occasions. Others have more subtly pointed in that direction.

Victims have raised concerns about the government’s handling of the matter for years – in particular focusing on a favorable non-prosecution agreement Epstein landed in 2007 and the years before he was later charged – but their complaints are now directed squarely at the Trump administration.

All of which makes it much more difficult for the administration to just move on, as the president would clearly prefer.

Last week, family members of one of Epstein’s and Maxwell’s most prominent accusers, Virginia Giuffre, cited Trump’s recent admission that he had been aware that Epstein recruited Giuffre from Mar-a-Lago. They cited other evidence that Trump was aware of Epstein’s affinity for young girls and women and said, “It makes us ask if he was aware of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell’s criminal actions.”

(Giuffre died by suicide earlier this year.)

In another letter, Giuffre family members and other accusers also cited the still-unexplained prison transfer of Maxwell to a lower-security prison camp that sex offenders like her don’t appear eligible for, without a waiver. That news came shortly after Maxwell, who’s serving a 20-year sentence, was interviewed by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche. And it comes as Trump has dangled the possibility of pardoning Maxwell, who’s appealing her conviction.

“This move smacks of a cover up,” they wrote. “The victims deserve better.”

The survivors and their families have had enough with Donald Chump and his gifts and favors to Maxwell. Virginia Giuffre's family spoke yesterday on CBS MORNINGS.

In 1997, Alicia Arden became the first known victim to file a police report for assault against Jeffrey Epstein. Yesterday, she and attorney Gloria Allred held a press conference calling for an end to the US government ignoring the survivors and an end to the new perks Chump wants to give convicted pedophile Maxwell.

SCRIPPS NEWS GROUP adds:

The family of Virginia Giuffre is speaking out following a report that Vice President JD Vance is hosting a “strategy session” on the Trump administration’s handling of the so-called Epstein files.

Giuffre, one of Jeffrey Epstein’s most prominent sex trafficking accusers, died by suicide earlier this year.

CNN reported that Vance planned to convene top Trump administration officials at his home in Indiana.

"Missing from this group is, of course, any survivor of the vicious crimes of convicted perjurer and sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein," Giuffre's family said in a statement obtained by Scripps News. "Their voices must be heard, above all."

The meeting was supposed to be a secret but it began leaking Tuesday night (we noted it in yesterday's snapshot). The meeting became a public relations disaster. Nandita Bose (REUTERS) explains, "A dinner for senior administration officials at Vice President JD Vance's residence to discuss topics including the Trump administration's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case has been canceled after news of it leaked, a source familiar with the matter said."

Lawrence weighed in last night on Epstein and many other topics including Chump's potty mouth.

In Texas, Donald Chump's minions want to redistrict the state -- again. It's already taken place after the 2020 census. But Chump wants more Republicans in Congress so he's called on Governor Greg Asshole and the rest to ignore the law, ignore the costs and redistrict.

Julia Kirschenbaum and Michael Li (Brennan Center for Justice) explain:

After the Census Bureau released detailed population and demographic data from the 2020 census, states and local governments began the once-a-decade process of drawing new voting district boundaries known as redistricting. And gerrymandering — when those boundaries are drawn with the intention of influencing who gets elected — followed.

Four takeaways on how voting maps made the difference in a tight fight for the House in 2024. >>

The latest redistricting cycle was the first since the Supreme Court’s 2019 ruling that gerrymandering for party advantage cannot be challenged in federal court. Here are six things to know about partisan gerrymandering and how it impacts our democracy.

Gerrymandering is deeply undemocratic.

Every 10 years, states redraw their legislative and congressional district lines following the census. Because communities change, redistricting is critical to our democracy: maps must be redrawn to ensure that districts are equally populated, comply with laws such as the Voting Rights Act, and are otherwise representative of a state’s population. Done right, redistricting is a chance to create maps that, in the words of John Adams, are an “exact portrait, a miniature” of the people as a whole.

But sometimes the process is used to draw maps that put a thumb on the scale to manufacture election outcomes that are detached from the preferences of voters. Rather than voters choosing their representatives, gerrymandering empowers politicians to choose their voters. This tends to occur especially when line drawing is left to legislatures and one political party controls the process, as has become increasingly common. When that happens, partisan concerns almost invariably take precedence over all else. That produces maps where electoral results are virtually guaranteed even in years where the party drawing maps has a bad year.

There are multiple ways to gerrymander.

While legislative and congressional district shapes may look wildly different from state to state, most attempts to gerrymander can best be understood through the lens of two basic techniques: cracking and packing.

Cracking splits groups of people with similar characteristics, such as voters of the same party affiliation, across multiple districts. With their voting strength divided, these groups struggle to elect their preferred candidates in any of the districts.

Packing is the opposite of cracking: map drawers cram certain groups of voters into as few districts as possible. In these few districts, the “packed” groups are likely to elect their preferred candidates, but the groups’ voting strength is weakened everywhere else.

Some or all of these techniques may be deployed by map drawers in order to build a partisan advantage into the boundaries of districts. A key note, however: while sometimes gerrymandering results in oddly shaped districts, that isn’t always the case. Cracking and packing can often result in regularly shaped districts that look appealing to the eye but nonetheless skew heavily in favor of one party.

Gerrymandering has a real impact on the balance of power in Congress and many state legislatures.

In 2010, Republicans — in an effort to control the drawing of congressional maps — forged a campaign to win majorities in as many state legislatures as possible. It was wildly successful, giving them control over the drawing of 213 congressional districts. The redrawing of maps that followed produced some of the most extreme gerrymanders in history. In battleground Pennsylvania, for example, the congressional map gave Republicans a virtual lock on 13 of the state’s 18 congressional districts, even in elections where Democrats won the majority of the statewide congressional vote.

Nationally, extreme partisan bias in congressional maps gave Republicans a net 16 to 17 seat advantage for most of last decade. Michigan, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania alone — the three states with the worst gerrymanders in the last redistricting cycle — accounted for 7 to 10 extra Republican seats in the House.

On the state level, gerrymandering has also led to significant partisan bias in maps. For example, in 2018, Democrats in Wisconsin won every statewide office and a majority of the statewide vote, but thanks to gerrymandering, won only 36 of the 99 seats in the state assembly.

Though Republicans were the primary beneficiaries of gerrymandering last decade, Democrats have also used redistricting for partisan ends: in Maryland, for instance, Democrats used control over map-drawing to eliminate one of the state’s Republican congressional districts.

Regardless of which party is responsible for gerrymandering, it is ultimately the public who loses out. Rigged maps make elections less competitive, in turn making even more Americans feel like their votes don’t matter.

Gerrymandering affects all Americans, but its most significant costs are borne by communities of color.

Residential segregation and racially polarized voting patterns, especially in southern states, mean that targeting communities of color can be an effective tool for creating advantages for the party that controls redistricting. This is true regardless of whether it is Democrats or Republicans drawing the maps.

The Supreme Court’s 2019 decision in Rucho v. Common Cause greenlighting partisan gerrymandering has made things worse. The Voting Rights Act and the Constitution prohibit racial discrimination in redistricting. But because there often is correlation between party preference and race, Rucho opens the door for Republican-controlled states to defend racially discriminatory maps on grounds that they were permissibly discriminating against Democrats rather than impermissibly discriminating against Black, Latino, or Asian voters.

Targeting the political power of communities of color is also often a key element of partisan gerrymandering. This is especially the case in the South, where white Democrats are a comparatively small part of the electorate and often live, problematically from the standpoint of a gerrymanderer, very close to white Republicans. Even with slicing and dicing, discriminating against white Democrats only moves the political dial so much. Because of residential segregation, it is much easier for map drawers to pack or crack communities of color to achieve maximum political advantage.

Gerrymandering is getting worse.

Gerrymandering is a political tactic nearly as old as the United States. In designing Virginia’s very first congressional map, Patrick Henry attempted to draw district boundaries that would block his rival, James Madison, from winning a seat. But gerrymandering has also changed dramatically since the founding: today, intricate computer algorithms and sophisticated data about voters allow map drawers to game redistricting on a massive scale with surgical precision. Where gerrymanderers once had to pick from a few maps drawn by hand, they now can create and pick from thousands of computer-generated maps.

Gerrymandering also looks likely to get worse because the legal framework governing redistricting has not kept up with demographic changes. Before, most people of color in the country’s metro areas lived in highly segregated cities. Today, however, a majority of Black, Latino, and Asian Americans live in diverse suburbs. This change has given rise to powerful new multiracial voting coalitions outside cities such as Atlanta, Dallas, and Houston that have won or come close to winning power. Yet the Supreme Court has not granted these multiracial coalition districts the same legal protections as majority-minority districts, making them a key target for dismantling by partisan map drawers.

Federal reform can help counter gerrymandering — so Congress needs to act.

The Freedom to Vote Act, a landmark piece of federal democracy reform legislation that has already passed the House, represents a major step toward curbing political gamesmanship in map drawing. The bill would enhance transparency, strengthen protections for communities of color, and ban partisan gerrymandering in congressional redistricting. It would also improve voters’ ability to challenge gerrymandered maps in court.

With redistricting now beginning in many states, the need for Congress to pass reform legislation is more urgent than ever. Fair representation depends on it.

Russell Payne (SALON) reports:

With Texas Republicans using every lever of power in their attempt to give themselves five new House seats, state Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer told Salon that it’s time for national Democratic leaders to either “do something — or get out of the way.”

Earlier this week, Democrats in the Texas state legislature left their homes behind in order to deny Republicans the quorum needed to force through new House maps, maps which would deliver Republicans five new, safe Republican seats in the 2026 midterms.

To prevent Republicans from pushing through the new maps, state Democrats have fled the state, breaking quorum, and preventing the Texas House from taking up business while they are gone. Many of the state representatives have gone to states like New York and Illinois, where local leaders have promised to help them as much as they can.

In response, Gov. Greg Abbot threatened to bring bribery charges against Democrats who left the state and ordered their arrest. The Republicans in the Texas House have proceeded to issue civil arrest warrants for the Democrats who left the state.

Chump very publicly wants to gerry mander Texas districts to lower the impact Democrats can have. He wants few Democrats coming out of Texas to the US Congress. And this is how he thinks he can make it happen. A functioning Supreme Court would have already stopped him and protected voting rights. But we don't have a functioning Supreme Court We have a court that has been misled by Chief Justice John Roberts for about two decades now.

He will go down in history as the worst chief justice ever and as the enemy of democratcy that he truly is.

Even some Republicans are objecting to this move. Andrew Solender (AXIOS) reports:

A growing number of blue-state House Republicans — at risk of being drawn out of their own seats — are speaking out against their party's mid-decade redistricting efforts.

Why it matters: Their comments represent a sharp break with President Trump and Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), who have both endorsed efforts in Texas and other states to carve out more Republican House seats.

Democrats in states like California and New York have threatened to respond in-kind by attempting to redo their maps.

Caught in the crossfire are a cohort of blue-state Republicans, who tend to be more moderate than the average House Republican and often represent swingier districts.

Driving the news: Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Calif.), a swing-district member, took a shot at Johnson on Tuesday, saying in a Fox News interview that he "needs to step up and show some leadership" on the issue.

"This is not something that is popular among members of our conference," added Kiley, who has introduced legislation to ban mid-decade redistricting in all states.

Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.) said Monday that he will introduce similar legislation after saying in PBS News interview over the weekend: "I don't think Texas should do it."

Rep. Nicole Malliotakis (R-N.Y.) said in a Bloomberg interview: "I don't care if it's the Republicans or the Democrats that are doing it — it's wrong and it should not be done."

Rachel Scully (THE HILL) adds:

“I think it’s wrong, what Texas is doing,” he said of Texas Republicans’ release of the new map during a Tuesday evening appearance on CNN. “I don’t support it. I think it is wrong.”

Lawler compared the situation to the situations in Illinois and New Jersey, which have also been criticized for doing the same, in some cases even seeing their maps struck down because of it.

“We have to actually have neutral districts across this country,” he said. “It would serve the country better.”

Lawler mentioned that he plans to introduce legislation to “outright ban gerrymandering,” a term coined more than 200 years ago in the U.S. that’s used to describe political manipulation in legislative mapmaking, according to The Associated Press.

“This is fundamentally why Congress is broken,” he continued. “You do not have competitive districts, and so most members are focused on primaries and not actually engaging in a general election.”

It's so hilarious to hear Chump fall back on 'elections have consequences'

You know what else has consequences?

Bad legislation.

Legislation that rips apart the safety net and destroys Medicaid and schools to give tx breaks for the super wealthy, for the most corrupt in this country.

Donald lied to Republicans in the House that voting for his 'big beautiful bill' would not have negative consequences.

The town halls continue to be brutal for House Republicans. Chump lied to them. And now he tries to save his own ass -- he's afraid of another impeachment -- by getting states to redistrict.

Travis Gettys reports:

The White House is driving the showdown between Texas Democrats and Republicans over a gerrymandering scheme to protect President Donald Trump from getting impeached for a third time, according to a reporter from a conservative publication.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has asked the state Supreme Court to remove state Rep. Gene Wu from office as the so-called "ringleader" of the Democrats who fled the state to deprive the Republican-led legislature of a quorum needed to pass a controversial redistricting plan, and National Review correspondent Audrey Fahlberg told "CNN This Morning" why the president's team was pushing the move.

"The White House is driving this because clearly they are worried about losing the midterms," Fahlberg said. "They're convinced that if House Democrats flip the House, that Trump is going to get impeached again, right. The 'big beautiful bill' is not polling super well right now, so they're going on offense here. They're driving this into motion in Texas. They're looking at other states, as well. We may see this continue in states like Florida, Indiana. Vice President [JD] Vance is meeting with state legislators there and their Republican governor."

I'm not for redistricting when it's already been done in the decade. But I'm also not for standing on high ground while the other side breaks every rule in the book. What California Governor Gavin Newsom and other Democrats are proposing is self-defense at this point. And it's the only way to save this country.

Donald is a huge liar. But even he grasps that the Republicans are not going to pull off the mid-terms via the voters. So he's calling for redistricting in an attempt to grab five extra seats in Texas, X in Indiana, go through the list. It's about rigging the system and cheating.

Indiana?

Ewan Palmer (DAILY BEAST) explains:

Vice President JD Vance is being sent to Indiana to try to convince the state’s legislative leaders to redraw its congressional map in the latest gerrymandering battle.

Vance will arrive in the Hoosier state on Thursday for an RNC fundraiser in Indianapolis and also will meet with Gov. Mike Braun, House Speaker Todd Huston, and Senate President Pro Tempore Rodric Bray, where the topic of trying to give the GOP any advantage it can ahead of the 2026 midterms is expected to come up, the Indianapolis Star reports.

Both Vance and Braun are being coy about what the Republicans plan to discuss during their meeting. A spokesperson for Vance told the Daily Beast that the vice president will meet with Braun and “other state officials to discuss a variety of issues.”

The governor told Indiana’s statehouse the issue of redrawing the congressional map is “exploratory” but there have been “no commitments made.”

Moving over to an important immigration report, Hatzel Vela (NBC NEWS) notes:

Her name is Lindsey.

NBC6 is only using her first name because she worries about her family’s privacy and possible online harassment.

“It's inhumane the way that they're keeping their residents,” she told NBC6.

Lindsey provided NBC6 documentation that shows she arrived at the so-called "Alligator Alcatraz" on July 6 and worked at the controversial detention center for about a week before she caught Covid and had to isolate.

From the beginning, she told NBC6 the situation was tough.

“When I got there, it was overwhelming,” she said. “I thought it would get better. But it just never did.”

Lindsey provided NBC6 with her State of Florida credential, which lists her position as a “corrections officer.”

She says she was told the job would be five days on, two days off.

Lindsey also provided a copy of her contract with GardaWorld Federal Services, a security company reportedly one of the vendors at "Alligator Alcatraz."

A job posting on the company’s LinkedIn account shows they were hiring for the position a month ago and offered $26 an hour for the job.

“I was aware that it was going to be the Alligator Alcatraz,” said Lindsey, who added that while she knew she would be living in a shared trailer, she said the conditions were rough for everyone there.

“We had to use the porta-johns. We didn't have hot water half the time. Our bathrooms were backed up,” she said.

NBC6 has reported similar accounts of conditions inside from advocates, detainees and their families.

When talking about the space where detainees are being held, Lindsey said it look like “an oversized kennel.”

She says each tent had eight large cages, which hold 35 to 38 inmates, which means each tent holds close to 300 detainees.

“They have no sunlight. There's no clock in there. They don't even know what time of the day it is,” Lindsey said. “They have no access to showers. They shower every other day or every four days.”

She added: “The bathrooms are backed up because you got so many people using them.”

On rainy days, she said, water pours into the tents. She described the conditions as miserable, not to forget — the constant battle with mosquitos.

Let's wind down with this from Senator Elizabeth Warren's office:

“[W]e have concerns that President Trump’s interests in Trump Mobile could lead him, his business partners, or his appointees in his administration to improperly interfere with regulators at the expense of consumers and competitors.”

“Trump Mobile offers yet another avenue for tech and telecom companies to purchase influence with President Trump…”

Text of Letter (PDF)

Washington, D.C. — U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) led Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), and Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), along with Representatives Doris Matsui (D-Calif.) and Greg Casar (D-Texas), in writing to federal agencies to ask how they plan to mitigate potential conflicts of interest involving the new wireless service offered by Trump Mobile. President Trump stands to reap profit from Trump Mobile, while as President he has significant influence over the agencies that oversee the venture and its competitors. The letter was sent to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the Department of Commerce, the Department of the Treasury, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the United States Trade Representative.

“We write because we have concerns that President Trump’s interests in Trump Mobile could lead him, his business partners, or his appointees in his administration to improperly interfere with regulators at the expense of consumers and competitors,” wrote the lawmakers.

In June, Trump Mobile, the Trump Organization, and Donald Trump’s sons announced T1 Mobile LLC and the flagship $499 “made in USA” T1 smartphone, since backtracking on the “Made in the USA” claims to say that the smartphones are “[d]esigned with American values in mind.” The Trump Mobile site uses the Trump name under a trademark license, which is managed by a corporation fully owned by President Trump, who earned more than $6.6 million from his various licensing deals in 2024 alone.

“It is crucial for agencies tasked with upholding laws and regulations for wireless services to be able to do so unimpeded,” said the lawmakers.

The agencies named in the letter are responsible for overseeing the different parts of the marketplace that the T1 Mobile venture could affect. The FCC is responsible for regulating and enforcing the laws around interstate and international communications which includes mobile virtual network operators (MVNOs) like Trump Mobile. The FTC is responsible for ensuring that companies like Trump Mobile do not make false or misleading claims when marketing products. The FDA is in charge of regulating medical devices, software, and mobile medical applications, which Trump Mobile appears to plan to integrate through telehealth services provided by Doctegrity and its proprietary medical device, LifeVitals. The Departments of Commerce and Treasury, along with the U.S. Trade Representative’s office, help oversee tariff policy, which presents another venue for administration officials to potentially favor Trump Mobile over other competitors.

“Trump Mobile heightens the risk that President Trump could expect preferential treatment from your agencies for this company and those that partner with it—or expect you to penalize competitors,” wrote the lawmakers.

Analysts have already raised concerns that the FCC and other regulators are favoring companies that support the President’s policies rather than evaluating mergers and other matters on the merits.

“It is critical that federal regulators continue to evenhandedly enforce competition and consumer protection laws against Trump Mobile and any companies with which it works, especially in the face of this opportunity for corruption and self-dealing for President Trump,” concluded the lawmakers.

The members of Congress asked the agencies to respond to a series of questions by September 5, 2025, including: whether they have discussed the venture with President Trump, the Trump Organization, or Trump Mobile; their plans to avoid undue political influence; and whether they would allow President Trump to intervene in the agencies’ decisions related to Trump Mobile.

###

Isaiah's THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS ''Greetings From Club Fed." The following sites updated: