15 stories credited to Salon
3 stories on salon.com credited to other publishers
Latest story Sep 23, 2026 · on ChamberLight since Apr 2026
A story can appear as several articles (copies of the same piece), so counts of stories and of articles differ.
Scores for Salon
Political lean
13 stories · 95% range 14–22 · updated Sep 25, 2026
Originality
4 of those 15 carry an unconfirmed copying flag, which is not evidence either way.
18 stories · updated Sep 25, 2026
Writing quality 68 of 100: the average rating of 10 stories, each rated on its own (separate from credibility). How it is measured
Scores last checked Sep 25, 2026.
Articles this site reproduces
How provenance is decidedOriginal publishers of articles on salon.com
Counted from articles on salon.com whose original publisher is verified from the page itself or confirmed by an independent signal.
Stories ChamberLight collected, by month
Stories credited to Salon, by publication date. ChamberLight collects articles that mention the officials it tracks, so this shows its own coverage of this source, not how much the source publishes.
- Stories from Salon
- Shaded: ChamberLight collected no stories, or almost none, from any outlet (a gap in its collection, not in the outlet’s publishing)
Show as a table
| Month | Stories | All outlets |
|---|---|---|
| February 2026 | 3 | 70 (collection gap) |
| March 2026 | 3 | 1,094 |
| April 2026 | 7 | 4,538 |
| May 2026 | 0 | none collected |
| June 2026 | 0 | none collected |
| July 2026 | 0 | none collected |
| August 2026 | 0 | 1 (collection gap) |
| September 2026 | 3 | 1,320 |
Top topics
Share of this source’s stories tagged with each topic. A story can carry several topics, so the shares do not add up to 100%.
- Ethics/Corruption12
80% of 15 stories · 58% across all outlets
- Foreign Policy8
53% of 15 stories · 29% across all outlets
- Defense/Military7
47% of 15 stories · 25% across all outlets
- Healthcare4
27% of 15 stories · 8% across all outlets
- Voting Rights4
27% of 15 stories · 19% across all outlets
- Budget/Spending3
20% of 15 stories · 31% across all outlets
- Criminal Justice3
20% of 15 stories · 19% across all outlets
- Technology/Privacy2
13% of 15 stories · 10% across all outlets
The thin mark on each bar is the topic’s share across all outlets.
Who they cover
Party of the officials these stories are mainly about, across all 20 officials named. A story counts once for each official it is mainly about, so the split is over 31 story–official pairs, from 15 stories.
- Republican65% · 20 pairs
- Democrat32% · 10 pairs
- Party not recorded3% · 1 pair
Most covered
Stories mainly about each official, and their share of the source’s 15 stories.
- 1Donald TrumpR9 stories · 60%
- 2Pete HegsethR3 stories · 20%
- 3Ro KhannaD2 stories · 13%
- 4Alexandria Ocasio-CortezD1 story · 7%
- 5Becca BalintD1 story · 7%
- 6Bonnie Watson ColemanD1 story · 7%
- 7James ComerR1 story · 7%
- 8John ThuneR1 story · 7%
- 9Jon OssoffD1 story · 7%
- 10Ken PaxtonR1 story · 7%
+ 10 other officials (10 story–official pairs)
Article tone
ChamberLight’s article analysis assigns each story a tone toward the official it covers. It describes the coverage of that official, not Salon’s stance, and reader votes do not change it. 15 stories.
- Good Look
- 1 (7%)
- Mixed
- 6 (40%)
- Informational
- 1 (7%)
- Bad Look
- 7 (47%)
Related sources
Lean 95% range 16–22 · updated Sep 25, 2026
Similar lean · 3 shared topics
Lean 95% range 16–18 · updated Sep 25, 2026
Similar lean · 3 shared topics
Lean 95% range 18–21 · updated Sep 25, 2026
Similar lean · 3 shared topics
Lean 95% range 15–18 · updated Sep 25, 2026
Similar lean · 3 shared topics
Lean 95% range 16–24 · updated Sep 25, 2026
Similar lean · 3 shared topics
Lean 95% range 17–27 · updated Sep 25, 2026
Similar lean · 2 shared topics
Challenges to these scores
No one has challenged a score on this page yet. Anyone can; editors publish every outcome here.
Articles served from salon.com
33
The FBI anti-corruption squad was circling Susan Collins — Until Trump got in the way
The FBI sought to launch a pay-to-play investigation examining interactions between Collins and a top donor
Democrats need a bold 2028 ticket: Ro Khanna and AOC should run
The party can't afford to play it safe. These members of Congress offer a new vision
Democrats need a bold 2028 ticket: Ro Khanna and AOC should run
The party can't afford to play it safe. These members of Congress offer a new vision
We have to talk about the Jon Ossoff thirst edits
"If the girls and the gays want to look at Jon Ossoff and be like, ‘Wow, he looks so good in those pants,’ let us.
Tierra Walker died after she couldn’t get an abortion. Her family is suing Ken Paxton
The case argues that Texas’ near-total abortion ban violates the state and U.S. constitutions
Republicans edge toward a breaking point on Trump
Donald Trump’s world is on fire, but not according to him. He believes he lives in a universe where he is lord and savior. “If I weren’t president, the world would be torn to pieces,” he told ABC News’ Jonathan Karl on Tuesday. If you believe otherwise, you’re not alone. Many believe that Trump has jumped the shark and is beyond delusional. In two Truth Social posts in successive weeks, Trump threatened to destroy the entire Iranian civilization while claiming to be the president of peace. Then he compared himself to Jesus and got into a fight with the pope. Whoever had “Trump threatens a WWE Pope Leo smackdown” on their bingo card is the winner. The rest of us are still trying to figure out how Trump can claim the Strait of Hormuz is open, or can be easily opened, or can easily be opened with the help of our allies, or isn’t open but we don’t care, or will magically open, or Iran has closed it and we’ve blockaded it. On Wednesday he posted on Truth Social that “China is very happy that I am permanently opening the Strait of Hormuz. I am doing it for them, also – And the World. This situation will never happen again.” But CENTCOM and White House staff later refuted the president’s post, saying the American blockade is still in place. This is noteworthy because, for the first time, the military and people inside Trump’s administration publicly contradicted him, though they tried to soft pedal their pushback. They join a growing number of people who have expressed concern about Trump’s ability to grasp the facts. Those who have called the president’s sanity into question have multiplied. They join a growing number of people who have expressed concern about Trump’s ability to grasp the facts. Those who have called the president’s sanity into question have multiplied. At the same time, Democrats who have so far avoided talk of a third impeachment are now openly doing so. They previously feared political backlash, but the president’s threat to obliterate “a whole civilization” if Iran did not cave to his demands opened the floodgates. And some Republicans are backing them up — well, maybe. “He’s lost some key support,” a member of Senate Majority Leader John Thune’s office told me. “I couldn’t say that last week as easily as I say it today, and it will probably get worse by next week.” Marc Racicot, the former Republican National Committee chairman, Army JAG officer and Montana governor, called the administration a “lawless regime,” telling me, “If there should be any regime change, it ought to be in America.” Racicot’s assessment is no surprise. He endorsed Joe Biden over Trump in the 2020 election, which led to his censure three years later by the Montana Republican Party, along with the notice that they no longer considered him a Republican. Covering this chaos is taking a toll on everyone — especially members of the press. “We are not in a simulation,” a veteran White House reporter told me. “We’re in a f**king MEME that changes by the hour.” According to my sources, some Republicans in Congress believe they are targeted for retribution by Trump, based on their personal contact with him and his social media attacks on MAGA influencers. This is ironic when you consider that the sticking point to an impeachment and conviction are congressional Republicans — that particular brand of politician who remains privately brave and publicly cowardly. “They have not the courage nor the insight nor the willingness to stand up and do the right thing for the right reasons,” Racicot said. But a former member of Trump’s staff said that is changing. Why? “The Boss is driving them there.” Trump’s approval ratings are making him less attractive than a rabid skunk, and some supporters say that’s causing some Republicans to back away from him in self-interest following his ongoing attacks on Pope Leo XIV and an artificial intelligence-generated image of himself as Jesus that he posted on Truth Social. On Sunday night Trump went after the pope in a lengthy Truth Social post that accused the pontiff of being “WEAK on Crime, and terrible for Foreign Policy.” Related Trump is right: He is MAGA’s Jesus “I don’t want a Pope who thinks it’s OK for Iran to have a Nuclear Weapon,” he wrote. “I don’t want a Pope who criticizes the President of the United States because I’m doing exactly what I was elected, IN A LANDSLIDE, to do.” Forget for a moment that Trump wasn’t elected in a landslide, the pope has nothing to do with America’s foreign policy and he never said he wanted Iran to have a nuclear weapon. Trump just doesn’t like people disagreeing with him — especially “someone younger than him from Chicago,” as my White House source explained. Trump further muddied the water Monday morning with an artificial intelligence-generated image posted on his Truth Social platform. The meme depicted Trump in a white robe and red tunic cradling a ball of light while he laid hands on a man that looked suspiciously like Jon Stewart. Angels, or maybe the Avengers sailed around his head next to a soaring F-15 Strike Eagle. A woman sat nearby with her hands folded as if in prayer. Trump claimed the image portrayed him as a doctor. He deleted the meme after religious groups reminded him of Galatians 6:7: “Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows.” His posting was especially insulting to conservative Catholics. “We are a little bit beside ourselves,” said John Yep, the CEO of Catholics for Catholics, a nonprofit group that has hosted faith events at Mar-a-Lago. On Monday, Thune said “I would leave the church alone.” Other GOP senators, including Kevin Cramer of North Dakota, Mike Rounds of South Dakota and Steve Daines of Montana, called Trump’s attacks on the pope inappropriate. While Daines is part of the state GOP that disowned Racicot, he and other critical Republicans are edging toward sounding more like Racicot every day. “He’s gone so far as to try and intimidate the pope, for God’s sake,” Racicot said. “This guy has no respect for any part of the Constitution. He’s the one who said he didn’t know if he had a duty to defend the Constitution because he wasn’t a lawyer. He’s incompetent in terms of managing the government of the United States.” If a vote could be taken by secret ballot today, many Republicans I’ve spoken with say Trump would likely be impeached, convicted and removed from office. And after this week, there is a growing possibility it could happen in full daylight with a roll call vote in the Senate. “I wouldn’t bet on it,” a member of Thune’s office said. “But let’s see what happens tomorrow.” Want more sharp takes on politics? Sign up for our free newsletter, Standing Room Only, written by Amanda Marcotte, now also a weekly show on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts. The best bet for this scenario still remains after the midterm election. During the first Trump administration, former White House communications director Bill Shine told me and Roll Call’s John Bennett there was “no strategy” in the White House; they were always in crisis mode. Trump came in with a strategy in his second administration based on the Supreme Court ruling that gave him unlimited immunity. But things have fallen apart so thoroughly that with slightly more than 1,000 days left in his term, the president appears more out of control than he ever appeared at any time during his first administration. “And that is frightening to consider,” a former White House staffer admitted to me. What’s worse? JD Vance is waiting in the wings. Not only did the vice president, who converted to Catholicism in 2019, also refuse to apologize to the pope after Trump’s dustup with the pontiff, but Vance decided to lecture him as well. “Stick to matters of morality,” he said. “What the hell does the vice president think the pope was talking about?” my White House source asked. “He was talking about morality issues.” With Vance clearly following Trump’s lead — wherever it takes us — invoking the 25th Amendment to remove him from office seems as delusional as the president’s belief in himself. To do so would require the vice president and a majority of the Cabinet declaring Trump was unable to discharge his duties, at which point Vance would become acting president. Trump could then contest the decision, which would allow him to resume the presidency unless the vice president and Cabinet object within four days. Congress would be left to decide Trump’s fate within 21 days; his removal would require a two-thirds vote in both chambers to permanently remove him. With that said, many still consider it to be an easier route than Impeachment. “The 25th is fast and involves fewer people from a convenience perspective and speed perspective,” Racicot said, “but it has to start inside. And frankly, there’s been no indication to me that I see that indicates there’s any effort to try and even contemplate that. And what do you get in the event that you succeed? JD Vance.” Republicans feel trapped in a corner by a delusional president they happily supported and a horrible vice president they don’t respect. Either way, Republicans feel trapped in a corner by a delusional president they happily supported and a horrible vice president they don’t respect. “I don’t think it’s hysterical rhetoric to say that the country is on the verge of demise. It is being torn apart and the glue that holds us together is becoming brittle,” Racicot said. Retiring Sen. Thom Tillis says Trump has other problems. The North Carolina senator, who until the start of the president’s second term was largely seen as a Trump loyalist, said he won’t vote for Kevin Warsh, Trump’s nominee to replace Jerome Powell as Federal Reserve chair, until the president drops an investigation into Powell. Tillis said he doesn’t want to reward Trump’s “bad behavior,” and then he pushed it a bit further by saying he doesn’t see any obvious goals in the fight with Iran. “I’m not quite clear what the strategic objectives are,” he said, explaining “it’s going to be difficult to get my support” to continue the conflict. As for Trump’s attacks on the pope, Tillis said apologies are “underused” by politicians and that the president should apologize to the pontiff and move on. Which brings us back to Karl’s ABC interview with Trump. When the president said the world would be “torn to pieces” if he weren’t around, Karl should have asked, “Are you delusional?” I asked Trump that question in the Brady Briefing room after he lost the 2020 election and refused to concede to Biden. He stormed off without answering me. We need your help to stay independent Subscribe today to support Brian Karem’s commentary Karl had the perfect opportunity — a one-on-one interview. I would have saved the question for last, but I still would have asked it. We all should. It’s becoming clear that at least some Republicans are beginning to see it that way too, as are members of the administration, but I’m still skeptical they’ll do anything about it. Last week we saw several of Trump’s MAGA media megaphones abandon him on the issue of Iran. This week we saw Republicans, the military and his own staff in three different instances do the same over the issue of the pope. Where will we be next week? Several Republican and Democratic congressional staffers I spoke with tell me their telephone calls from constituents demanding Congress take action against Trump are becoming more frequent. Trump’s world is on fire, but as Shine told me during the first administration, the president likes to fly by the seat of his pants through the problems of his own making. For the first time it looks like that strategy is backfiring and that by threatening genocide and picking a fight with the pope Trump has created a fire which may consume him. Read more about this topic Trump is right: He is MAGA’s Jesus Trump’s clash with podcasters puts Fox News on notice The cracks in Trump’s coalition keep growing — but when does it break? The post Republicans edge toward a breaking point on Trump appeared first on Salon.com.
Republicans edge toward a breaking point on Trump
Donald Trump’s world is on fire, but not according to him. He believes he lives in a universe where he is lord and savior. “If I weren’t president, the world would be torn to pieces,” he told ABC News’ Jonathan Karl on Tuesday. If you believe otherwise, you’re not alone. Many believe that Trump has jumped the shark and is beyond delusional. In two Truth Social posts in successive weeks, Trump threatened to destroy the entire Iranian civilization while claiming to be the president of peace. Then he compared himself to Jesus and got into a fight with the pope. Whoever had “Trump threatens a WWE Pope Leo smackdown” on their bingo card is the winner. The rest of us are still trying to figure out how Trump can claim the Strait of Hormuz is open, or can be easily opened, or can easily be opened with the help of our allies, or isn’t open but we don’t care, or will magically open, or Iran has closed it and we’ve blockaded it. On Wednesday he posted on Truth Social that “China is very happy that I am permanently opening the Strait of Hormuz. I am doing it for them, also – And the World. This situation will never happen again.” But CENTCOM and White House staff later refuted the president’s post, saying the American blockade is still in place. This is noteworthy because, for the first time, the military and people inside Trump’s administration publicly contradicted him, though they tried to soft pedal their pushback. They join a growing number of people who have expressed concern about Trump’s ability to grasp the facts. Those who have called the president’s sanity into question have multiplied. They join a growing number of people who have expressed concern about Trump’s ability to grasp the facts. Those who have called the president’s sanity into question have multiplied. At the same time, Democrats who have so far avoided talk of a third impeachment are now openly doing so. They previously feared political backlash, but the president’s threat to obliterate “a whole civilization” if Iran did not cave to his demands opened the floodgates. And some Republicans are backing them up — well, maybe. “He’s lost some key support,” a member of Senate Majority Leader John Thune’s office told me. “I couldn’t say that last week as easily as I say it today, and it will probably get worse by next week.” Marc Racicot, the former Republican National Committee chairman, Army JAG officer and Montana governor, called the administration a “lawless regime,” telling me, “If there should be any regime change, it ought to be in America.” Racicot’s assessment is no surprise. He endorsed Joe Biden over Trump in the 2020 election, which led to his censure three years later by the Montana Republican Party, along with the notice that they no longer considered him a Republican. Covering this chaos is taking a toll on everyone — especially members of the press. “We are not in a simulation,” a veteran White House reporter told me. “We’re in a f**king MEME that changes by the hour.” According to my sources, some Republicans in Congress believe they are targeted for retribution by Trump, based on their personal contact with him and his social media attacks on MAGA influencers. This is ironic when you consider that the sticking point to an impeachment and conviction are congressional Republicans — that particular brand of politician who remains privately brave and publicly cowardly. “They have not the courage nor the insight nor the willingness to stand up and do the right thing for the right reasons,” Racicot said. But a former member of Trump’s staff said that is changing. Why? “The Boss is driving them there.” Trump’s approval ratings are making him less attractive than a rabid skunk, and some supporters say that’s causing some Republicans to back away from him in self-interest following his ongoing attacks on Pope Leo XIV and an artificial intelligence-generated image of himself as Jesus that he posted on Truth Social. On Sunday night Trump went after the pope in a lengthy Truth Social post that accused the pontiff of being “WEAK on Crime, and terrible for Foreign Policy.” Related Trump is right: He is MAGA’s Jesus “I don’t want a Pope who thinks it’s OK for Iran to have a Nuclear Weapon,” he wrote. “I don’t want a Pope who criticizes the President of the United States because I’m doing exactly what I was elected, IN A LANDSLIDE, to do.” Forget for a moment that Trump wasn’t elected in a landslide, the pope has nothing to do with America’s foreign policy and he never said he wanted Iran to have a nuclear weapon. Trump just doesn’t like people disagreeing with him — especially “someone younger than him from Chicago,” as my White House source explained. Trump further muddied the water Monday morning with an artificial intelligence-generated image posted on his Truth Social platform. The meme depicted Trump in a white robe and red tunic cradling a ball of light while he laid hands on a man that looked suspiciously like Jon Stewart. Angels, or maybe the Avengers sailed around his head next to a soaring F-15 Strike Eagle. A woman sat nearby with her hands folded as if in prayer. Trump claimed the image portrayed him as a doctor. He deleted the meme after religious groups reminded him of Galatians 6:7: “Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows.” His posting was especially insulting to conservative Catholics. “We are a little bit beside ourselves,” said John Yep, the CEO of Catholics for Catholics, a nonprofit group that has hosted faith events at Mar-a-Lago. On Monday, Thune said “I would leave the church alone.” Other GOP senators, including Kevin Cramer of North Dakota, Mike Rounds of South Dakota and Steve Daines of Montana, called Trump’s attacks on the pope inappropriate. While Daines is part of the state GOP that disowned Racicot, he and other critical Republicans are edging toward sounding more like Racicot every day. “He’s gone so far as to try and intimidate the pope, for God’s sake,” Racicot said. “This guy has no respect for any part of the Constitution. He’s the one who said he didn’t know if he had a duty to defend the Constitution because he wasn’t a lawyer. He’s incompetent in terms of managing the government of the United States.” If a vote could be taken by secret ballot today, many Republicans I’ve spoken with say Trump would likely be impeached, convicted and removed from office. And after this week, there is a growing possibility it could happen in full daylight with a roll call vote in the Senate. “I wouldn’t bet on it,” a member of Thune’s office said. “But let’s see what happens tomorrow.” Want more sharp takes on politics? Sign up for our free newsletter, Standing Room Only, written by Amanda Marcotte, now also a weekly show on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts. The best bet for this scenario still remains after the midterm election. During the first Trump administration, former White House communications director Bill Shine told me and Roll Call’s John Bennett there was “no strategy” in the White House; they were always in crisis mode. Trump came in with a strategy in his second administration based on the Supreme Court ruling that gave him unlimited immunity. But things have fallen apart so thoroughly that with slightly more than 1,000 days left in his term, the president appears more out of control than he ever appeared at any time during his first administration. “And that is frightening to consider,” a former White House staffer admitted to me. What’s worse? JD Vance is waiting in the wings. Not only did the vice president, who converted to Catholicism in 2019, also refuse to apologize to the pope after Trump’s dustup with the pontiff, but Vance decided to lecture him as well. “Stick to matters of morality,” he said. “What the hell does the vice president think the pope was talking about?” my White House source asked. “He was talking about morality issues.” With Vance clearly following Trump’s lead — wherever it takes us — invoking the 25th Amendment to remove him from office seems as delusional as the president’s belief in himself. To do so would require the vice president and a majority of the Cabinet declaring Trump was unable to discharge his duties, at which point Vance would become acting president. Trump could then contest the decision, which would allow him to resume the presidency unless the vice president and Cabinet object within four days. Congress would be left to decide Trump’s fate within 21 days; his removal would require a two-thirds vote in both chambers to permanently remove him. With that said, many still consider it to be an easier route than Impeachment. “The 25th is fast and involves fewer people from a convenience perspective and speed perspective,” Racicot said, “but it has to start inside. And frankly, there’s been no indication to me that I see that indicates there’s any effort to try and even contemplate that. And what do you get in the event that you succeed? JD Vance.” Republicans feel trapped in a corner by a delusional president they happily supported and a horrible vice president they don’t respect. Either way, Republicans feel trapped in a corner by a delusional president they happily supported and a horrible vice president they don’t respect. “I don’t think it’s hysterical rhetoric to say that the country is on the verge of demise. It is being torn apart and the glue that holds us together is becoming brittle,” Racicot said. Retiring Sen. Thom Tillis says Trump has other problems. The North Carolina senator, who until the start of the president’s second term was largely seen as a Trump loyalist, said he won’t vote for Kevin Warsh, Trump’s nominee to replace Jerome Powell as Federal Reserve chair, until the president drops an investigation into Powell. Tillis said he doesn’t want to reward Trump’s “bad behavior,” and then he pushed it a bit further by saying he doesn’t see any obvious goals in the fight with Iran. “I’m not quite clear what the strategic objectives are,” he said, explaining “it’s going to be difficult to get my support” to continue the conflict. As for Trump’s attacks on the pope, Tillis said apologies are “underused” by politicians and that the president should apologize to the pontiff and move on. Which brings us back to Karl’s ABC interview with Trump. When the president said the world would be “torn to pieces” if he weren’t around, Karl should have asked, “Are you delusional?” I asked Trump that question in the Brady Briefing room after he lost the 2020 election and refused to concede to Biden. He stormed off without answering me. We need your help to stay independent Subscribe today to support Brian Karem’s commentary Karl had the perfect opportunity — a one-on-one interview. I would have saved the question for last, but I still would have asked it. We all should. It’s becoming clear that at least some Republicans are beginning to see it that way too, as are members of the administration, but I’m still skeptical they’ll do anything about it. Last week we saw several of Trump’s MAGA media megaphones abandon him on the issue of Iran. This week we saw Republicans, the military and his own staff in three different instances do the same over the issue of the pope. Where will we be next week? Several Republican and Democratic congressional staffers I spoke with tell me their telephone calls from constituents demanding Congress take action against Trump are becoming more frequent. Trump’s world is on fire, but as Shine told me during the first administration, the president likes to fly by the seat of his pants through the problems of his own making. For the first time it looks like that strategy is backfiring and that by threatening genocide and picking a fight with the pope Trump has created a fire which may consume him. Read more about this topic Trump is right: He is MAGA’s Jesus Trump’s clash with podcasters puts Fox News on notice The cracks in Trump’s coalition keep growing — but when does it break? The post Republicans edge toward a breaking point on Trump appeared first on Salon.com.
Trump’s Middle East envoys are partners in duplicity
There was a time when the very concept of a conflict of interest in politics was a serious matter that could cause investigations and resignations in the federal government. Long before Watergate, Richard Nixon was famously accused of corruption when it was revealed at the height of the 1952 presidential election, in which he was Dwight D. Eisenhower’s running mate, that some supporters had set up a slush fund to help pay for his expenses. Nixon went on television and delivered his famous “Checkers” speech to upwards of 60 million people, insisting that his wife Pat wore a respectable Republican cloth coat and that they intended to keep Checkers, the little dog a supporter had given to his daughters. He got away with it that time, but the moniker ‘Tricky Dick” stuck with him throughout his political career. Nixon wasn’t the only Republican dogged by conflict of interest accusations in the 1950s. Sherman Adams, Eisenhower’s chief of staff, resigned in 1958 after refusing to answer questions about a vicuña coat and an Asian rug given to him by a textile manufacturer. Two years later, John C. Doerfer, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, likewise bowed out when it was revealed he had vacationed on the yacht of a wealthy friend. Seventy years later, it all sounds so quaint. At one time, it was considered an absolute necessity for public officials to observe these rules and take proper action to avoid them. If they didn’t there would be consequences: dismissal or resignation, and sometimes legal action. The following decades saw scandals featuring legislators and political operatives of both parties who were accused of conflicts of interest, which were generally defined as a person’s private interests. These were usually financial and directly clashed with their duties, making it difficult for them to act objectively. Many were even determined to have the appearance of conflict of interest — the distinction being that even if a person were acting ethically, someone else might look at their situation and believe they could be compromised — in which case they were required to either divest themselves of the conflict or resign their public position. At one time, it was considered an absolute necessity for public officials to observe these rules and take proper action to avoid them. If they didn’t there would be consequences: dismissal or resignation, and sometimes legal action. The way money and power converge in our political system, some amount of corruption is probably inevitable. In fact, the system is built for it. But Donald Trump and his cronies have made all the previous cases look like child’s play. As the president himself would say, “We’ve never seen anything like it.” And if you want to really see why these prohibitions once existed, you have only to look at Trump’s special envoys for peace: Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff, whose lack of experience and conflicts of interest have turned the Middle East into a raging fire and even helped lead to the Iran war. Related Trump revealed his objective in Iran — 40 years ago The New York Times reported on Monday about an event that would have been unthinkable just a decade ago when Republicans were shrieking that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton should be disqualified from running for president because she would supposedly sell out America’s national security to procure money from foreign leaders to fund her family’s global charity. In late March, as the Iran war was dragging into its 26th day, Kushner appeared at a Saudi investment conference in Miami. The president’s son-in-law, who had represented the U.S. in the failed talks that led to war breaking out with Iran, was not in south Florida as an American official but as the founder and chief executive of Affinity Partners, an investment firm that had received billions from the Saudi Arabia sovereign wealth fund. Kushner was reportedly fundraising for another massive cash injection from the Saudi crown prince at the same time he was serving as a special envoy in the administration’s negotiations with Iran — and as the the Saudis were reportedly pushing for war with the Islamic Republic. It is one of the most egregious examples of conflict of interest in American political history. And nobody said a word. Within days he was off to the Middle East for more talks with Trump’s other special envoy, Steve Witkoff, another arrogant real estate investor with no diplomatic experience who is botching American foreign policy all over the globe. Want more sharp takes on politics? Sign up for our free newsletter, Standing Room Only, written by Amanda Marcotte, now also a weekly show on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts. Like his partner in duplicity, Witkoff’s conflicts are numerous. He previously joined with the Trump family in the cryptocurrency World Liberty Financial, and after he was named special envoy, Witkoff leveraged his position to argue for an export deal to export the world’s most advanced artificial intelligence chips to the United Arab Emirates, a deal which had not been previously approved due to national security concerns. Coincidentally, I’m sure, a UAE government-backed company handed World Liberty a $2 billion investment in its stablecoin. Democratic Sens. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Ron Wyden of Oregon issued a statement saying that “[the deal] appears to have aided a foreign power’s effort to acquire U.S. technology with serious economic and national security implications — and [Witkoff] potentially did so in exchange for his personal financial benefit.” This is a marked contrast to the Clinton Foundation, which did accept foreign and corporate donations in support of programs to fight HIV/AIDS and economic empowerment for women. When issues about the appearance of conflicts of interest were raised during Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign for president, how did the organization respond? By pledging to stop taking foreign and corporate corporations if she were elected, and by ending the Clinton Global Initiative regardless. Ten years later, it’s apparently fine for Kushner and Witkoff to allegedly be profiteering from their diplomatic partners. The epic failure of this duo in dealing with the Iran war — at least from a national security perspective, if not their own personal portfolios — shows how this sort of conflict of interest can warp someone’s ability to do the job. As the Times lays out, Kushner and Witkoff represent Donald Trump’s mindset — “a rogue version of diplomacy that’s focused on the flashy and theatrical, a reflection of the Trump real estate developer ethos. But that ethos has failed, and Iran is proof.” We need your help to stay independent Subscribe today to support Heather Digby Parton’s commentary But they also symbolize his blatantly corrupt view of government as a legitimate tool for growing their own personal fortunes. As Trump himself said in January after being asked by Times reporters why he was no longer abiding by any ethics rules about conflicts of interest, “because I found out that nobody cared. I’m allowed to.” Blatant corruption, it seems, has become just another perk of the job. The White House is not requiring Kushner to file financial disclosure documents, and certification of Witkoff’s has been inexplicably delayed for months. Since Trump has promised to issue mass pardons to his staff before leaving office, it’s highly unlikely the pair will be held accountable for their behavior. But the lesson is clear: Allowing government officials, even so-called special envoys, to leverage their positions for personal financial gain is a recipe for disaster. When Democrats return to power, those arcane rules about conflicts of interest should be codified into law — and made to stick. Read more about Iran Chairman of the Joint Chiefs is enabling Trump’s immorality Trump’s war crime threat is a betrayal of American values Trump treats war as entertainment The post Trump’s Middle East envoys are partners in duplicity appeared first on Salon.com.
GOP states are taking up voting laws modeled after Trump’s SAVE America Act
This story was originally reported by Marissa Martinez of The 19th. Meet Marissa and read more of their reporting on gender, politics and policy. President Donald Trump’s priority elections bill has languished in the Senate for the past several weeks as some GOP politicians hesitate to upend precedent for voter registration in federal elections before the midterms. That hasn’t stopped lawmakers in several red states from introducing similar changes for their elections. Certain provisions that mirror the SAVE America Act — particularly going through voter rolls to remove already registered citizens deemed non-eligible — could put up hurdles to voting for married women, trans people and others who have changed their names. Republican governors in Florida, Mississippi, Utah and South Dakota recently signed bills that would require documentary proof of citizenship for people looking to register ahead of state and local elections. One is on its way to the desk of Tennessee’s Republican governor, Bill Lee. And several other state legislatures have moved toward tightening voter ID and registration laws over the past year. Though a few states have already had similar bills on the books — including Arizona, whose 2004 proof-of-citizenship law has weathered several legal challenges, including a Supreme Court case — Trump’s talk of uprooting already rare election fraud led to more legislatures scrambling to implement new limitations over the last two years. “Even though the efforts to enact these extreme citizenship policies at the federal level have run into roadblocks, whether that’s [Trump’s 2025] executive order being blocked or the Senate not taking up the SAVE America Act, there have been several state legislatures that have moved in this direction,” said Chris Diaz, director of legislative tracking at Voting Rights Lab, a nonpartisan nonprofit that tracks election policy. These laws usually require proof of citizenship in the form of a passport or birth certificate — documents that are difficult for many Americans to access or obtain. Half of U.S. citizens do not have a passport. Voting rights advocates say these state and local laws, like the proposed SAVE America Act, could more heavily impact married women and trans people who have changed their names — particularly in states where existing voters, not just new registrants, have to be re-checked against federal and local databases. Of the 12 states that currently have proof-of-citizenship laws for local election registrants, 10 are Republican trifectas — meaning both legislative chambers and the governor’s office are held by the same party. Beyond the burden the laws could place on people looking to register to vote, administrators say they need a longer runway to successfully stage elections and inform residents of policy changes. Critics of these voter registration overhauls also point to the additional administrative costs and lawsuit payouts, including the millions paid over time by Arizona and Kansas, which faced a legal challenge in 2018. Related Inside Trump’s effort to “take over” the midterms This spring, Utah and South Dakota enacted their bills requiring documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote in state and local elections. Utah’s will take effect May 6, ahead of its June 23 primaries, while South Dakota’s will take effect immediately before its June 2 primaries. Mississippi’s Safeguard Honesty Integrity in Elections for Lasting Democracy (SHIELD) Act requires voter rolls to be verified through state and federal databases. If an individual can’t be confirmed, they must eventually provide proof of their citizenship to vote in later elections — proof that could include a valid passport, though Mississippi has the second-highest share of citizens without valid passports in the nation, according to data from the Voting Rights Lab. The state already held primaries in March, and the law goes into effect July 1. Tennessee’s state legislature recently sent a bill authorizing county election administrators to verify voters’ citizenship status through a federal database to Lee, who is likely to sign it. And Florida’s law, which won’t take effect until after the midterms, will also mandate existing voter roll verification, require proof of citizenship to register and impose stricter voter ID restrictions. Advocacy groups, including the League of Women Voters of Florida and the American Civil Liberties Union, filed a lawsuit to block its implementation — naming elderly Black voters and Puerto Ricans whose birth certificates were issued before 2010 among the communities that would be affected. “State voter registration systems aren’t set up to contain a record of what documentation has been presented. There’s a huge IT component to this,” Diaz said. “This is another example of a state trying to impose new requirements for elections without thinking through the timelines and costs.” The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) database used to verify citizenship status — as mandated in the recent Mississippi, Tennessee and Florida laws, among others — usually sees a low error rate, but has mistakenly flagged eligible voters as noncitizens in the past in states like Texas. Naturalized citizens are at particular risk for being flagged, said Andrew Garber, a counsel for the voting rights and elections program at the Brennan Center for Justice. Even if a person is able to resolve their case and provide evidence, receiving an erroneous message in itself can be jarring for people, he added, and could potentially turn them off from correcting the record. Several states will have ballot initiatives this November to decide whether to amend local constitutions or laws to clarify that only citizens can vote, including Arkansas, Arizona, Kansas, South Dakota and Alaska. In Michigan, a similar measure has not yet been placed on the ballot, as the state elections bureau has not verified the signatures required to advance. Arizona has required proof of citizenship to vote in local elections since 2004, but a patchwork of laws, errors and court rulings created logistical hurdles for putting those requirements into practice. Because they run a bifurcated elections system that handles federal and state contests separately as mandated by the National Voter Registration Act, Arizona and a handful of other states have “federal-only voters,” tens of thousands of people who vote in only national elections because they have not presented accepted proof of citizenship to the state. Garber said that while those numbers don’t offer insight into how Arizona’s laws impact individual voter registration, they illustrate the hurdles such voters face in registering with the state — where elections have been won by the smallest of margins. Experts worry that the new proof of citizenship laws and other state proposals will run into similar snafus, and further affect voters in hubs like college campuses, which tend to lean more liberal. “These are really big administrative burdens. It might sound really simple, like you just have to check someone’s passport and they’re good to go,” Garber said. He also noted the new systems for training election officials and maintaining voter rolls will take more time to implement than is available — especially since local governments already struggle with election administration funding. “The idea that these systems can be up and running in the next few months before the midterms is a fanciful one.” Some women in other states that already added proof-of-citizenship requirements say they have felt the burden of finding documentary evidence — including voters in Texas who worried about reconciling their varying names after the state advanced voter roll review legislation last year — though experts say the wider effect would still have to be studied as the laws settle. New Hampshire’s 2024 proof-of-citizenship law is also facing legal challenges for its disproportionate impact on women who have changed their surnames. Federal lawmakers are set to return from recess this week and are set to take up the SAVE America Act again for debate alongside ongoing DHS funding negotiations, which has been shut down since February 14. Despite ramped up pressure from the White House and some GOP stalwarts, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, a South Dakota Republican, has not indicated progress on elections negotiations within the upper chamber. Meanwhile, Trump signed an executive order on March 31 that would, among other conditions, require DHS and other agencies to create a list of confirmed American citizens, as well as direct agencies to withhold federal funds from non-compliant local governments — all stipulations that bypass parameters set up by the SAVE America Act. Democratic lawmakers and nearly two dozen states sued soon after over the order. Read more about this topic Trump is reshaping election policy in many states, with or without the SAVE America Act Trump executive order gives USPS unprecedented control over mail voting States are resisting the Trump admin’s voter data power grab The post GOP states are taking up voting laws modeled after Trump’s SAVE America Act appeared first on Salon.com.
“Never seen spending like this”: House Dems grill Vought on war spending
White House Office of Management and Budget Director Russel Vought faced harsh criticism over Iran War spending increases from a slew of Democratic lawmakers in the House on Wednesday. As the costs of the Iran War continue to rise, Vought faced an onslaught of questions about the Trump administration’s budgetary decisions. Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman, D-N.J., asked Vought if fighting “a war of choice” with Iran was more important than “economic development” in the U.S., including social welfare and education programs. Coleman chided Vought for being a part of a “narrative” around the war that “has nothing to do with reality.” “It’s not a war of choice,” Vought insisted. “It’s a security objective.” Rep. Becca Balint, D-Vt., pressed Vought on the “shocking surge of Pentagon spending” requested by the administration. “We have never seen funding like this,” Balint said, asking Vought if the asked-for $350 billion would “lower costs for Americans” while noting that the amount could fund the Affordable Care Act subsidies for a decade. Vought responded by praising Trump for having “led on peace and against endless wars.” Related Trump’s Iran war price tag just keeps rising “The president has also been clear that he is not going to allow a nuclear Iran,” Vought said, arguing that any kind of militarized Iran would “impact our national security.” VOUGHT: This president has campaigned and led for peace, and against endless wars BALINT: So it's peace through war? Is that where are right now? Peace through war? pic.twitter.com/cSQOqVWnqQ — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) April 15, 2026 Balint interrupted his answer, accusing him of peddling “peace through war.” “Is that where we are right now? Peace through war?” she asked. Start your day with essential news from Salon. Sign up for our free morning newsletter, Crash Course. During the hearing, Vought revealed that he did not have an estimate for the total cost of the Iran War, nor did the White House have a formal budget request for the conflict. “We’re not ready to come to you with a request; we’re still working on it. We’re working through to figure out what’s needed in this fiscal year versus next fiscal year,” Vought said. The admission comes after previous budgetary requests for a $1.5 trillion military budget in 2027. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth requested $200 billion in funding for the war just last month. Rep. Veronica Escobar, D-Texas, pressed him to “ballpark” the number. “Will it be more than $50 billion?” she asked Vought. “I don’t have a ballpark for you, congresswoman,” he said. Watch the entire hearing below: Read more about this topic Why the Iran war could make everything, not just oil, more expensive The Iran war’s second front is at home Evidence of insider trading on Iran war grows The post “Never seen spending like this”: House Dems grill Vought on war spending appeared first on Salon.com.
“Never seen spending like this”: House Dems grill Vought on war spending
White House Office of Management and Budget Director Russel Vought faced harsh criticism over Iran War spending increases from a slew of Democratic lawmakers in the House on Wednesday. As the costs of the Iran War continue to rise, Vought faced an onslaught of questions about the Trump administration’s budgetary decisions. Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman, D-N.J., asked Vought if fighting “a war of choice” with Iran was more important than “economic development” in the U.S., including social welfare and education programs. Coleman chided Vought for being a part of a “narrative” around the war that “has nothing to do with reality.” “It’s not a war of choice,” Vought insisted. “It’s a security objective.” Rep. Becca Balint, D-Vt., pressed Vought on the “shocking surge of Pentagon spending” requested by the administration. “We have never seen funding like this,” Balint said, asking Vought if the asked-for $350 billion would “lower costs for Americans” while noting that the amount could fund the Affordable Care Act subsidies for a decade. Vought responded by praising Trump for having “led on peace and against endless wars.” Related Trump’s Iran war price tag just keeps rising “The president has also been clear that he is not going to allow a nuclear Iran,” Vought said, arguing that any kind of militarized Iran would “impact our national security.” VOUGHT: This president has campaigned and led for peace, and against endless wars BALINT: So it's peace through war? Is that where are right now? Peace through war? pic.twitter.com/cSQOqVWnqQ — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) April 15, 2026 Balint interrupted his answer, accusing him of peddling “peace through war.” “Is that where we are right now? Peace through war?” she asked. Start your day with essential news from Salon. Sign up for our free morning newsletter, Crash Course. During the hearing, Vought revealed that he did not have an estimate for the total cost of the Iran War, nor did the White House have a formal budget request for the conflict. “We’re not ready to come to you with a request; we’re still working on it. We’re working through to figure out what’s needed in this fiscal year versus next fiscal year,” Vought said. The admission comes after previous budgetary requests for a $1.5 trillion military budget in 2027. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth requested $200 billion in funding for the war just last month. Rep. Veronica Escobar, D-Texas, pressed him to “ballpark” the number. “Will it be more than $50 billion?” she asked Vought. “I don’t have a ballpark for you, congresswoman,” he said. Watch the entire hearing below: Read more about this topic Why the Iran war could make everything, not just oil, more expensive The Iran war’s second front is at home Evidence of insider trading on Iran war grows The post “Never seen spending like this”: House Dems grill Vought on war spending appeared first on Salon.com.
“Never seen spending like this”: House Dems grill Vought on war spending
White House Office of Management and Budget Director Russel Vought faced harsh criticism over Iran War spending increases from a slew of Democratic lawmakers in the House on Wednesday. As the costs of the Iran War continue to rise, Vought faced an onslaught of questions about the Trump administration’s budgetary decisions. Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman, D-N.J., asked Vought if fighting “a war of choice” with Iran was more important than “economic development” in the U.S., including social welfare and education programs. Coleman chided Vought for being a part of a “narrative” around the war that “has nothing to do with reality.” “It’s not a war of choice,” Vought insisted. “It’s a security objective.” Rep. Becca Balint, D-Vt., pressed Vought on the “shocking surge of Pentagon spending” requested by the administration. “We have never seen funding like this,” Balint said, asking Vought if the asked-for $350 billion would “lower costs for Americans” while noting that the amount could fund the Affordable Care Act subsidies for a decade. Vought responded by praising Trump for having “led on peace and against endless wars.” Related Trump’s Iran war price tag just keeps rising “The president has also been clear that he is not going to allow a nuclear Iran,” Vought said, arguing that any kind of militarized Iran would “impact our national security.” VOUGHT: This president has campaigned and led for peace, and against endless wars BALINT: So it's peace through war? Is that where are right now? Peace through war? pic.twitter.com/cSQOqVWnqQ — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) April 15, 2026 Balint interrupted his answer, accusing him of peddling “peace through war.” “Is that where we are right now? Peace through war?” she asked. Start your day with essential news from Salon. Sign up for our free morning newsletter, Crash Course. During the hearing, Vought revealed that he did not have an estimate for the total cost of the Iran War, nor did the White House have a formal budget request for the conflict. “We’re not ready to come to you with a request; we’re still working on it. We’re working through to figure out what’s needed in this fiscal year versus next fiscal year,” Vought said. The admission comes after previous budgetary requests for a $1.5 trillion military budget in 2027. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth requested $200 billion in funding for the war just last month. Rep. Veronica Escobar, D-Texas, pressed him to “ballpark” the number. “Will it be more than $50 billion?” she asked Vought. “I don’t have a ballpark for you, congresswoman,” he said. Watch the entire hearing below: Read more about this topic Why the Iran war could make everything, not just oil, more expensive The Iran war’s second front is at home Evidence of insider trading on Iran war grows The post “Never seen spending like this”: House Dems grill Vought on war spending appeared first on Salon.com.
“Never seen spending like this”: House Dems grill Vought on war spending
White House Office of Management and Budget Director Russel Vought faced harsh criticism over Iran War spending increases from a slew of Democratic lawmakers in the House on Wednesday. As the costs of the Iran War continue to rise, Vought faced an onslaught of questions about the Trump administration’s budgetary decisions. Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman, D-N.J., asked Vought if fighting “a war of choice” with Iran was more important than “economic development” in the U.S., including social welfare and education programs. Coleman chided Vought for being a part of a “narrative” around the war that “has nothing to do with reality.” “It’s not a war of choice,” Vought insisted. “It’s a security objective.” Rep. Becca Balint, D-Vt., pressed Vought on the “shocking surge of Pentagon spending” requested by the administration. “We have never seen funding like this,” Balint said, asking Vought if the asked-for $350 billion would “lower costs for Americans” while noting that the amount could fund the Affordable Care Act subsidies for a decade. Vought responded by praising Trump for having “led on peace and against endless wars.” Related Trump’s Iran war price tag just keeps rising “The president has also been clear that he is not going to allow a nuclear Iran,” Vought said, arguing that any kind of militarized Iran would “impact our national security.” VOUGHT: This president has campaigned and led for peace, and against endless wars BALINT: So it's peace through war? Is that where are right now? Peace through war? pic.twitter.com/cSQOqVWnqQ — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) April 15, 2026 Balint interrupted his answer, accusing him of peddling “peace through war.” “Is that where we are right now? Peace through war?” she asked. Start your day with essential news from Salon. Sign up for our free morning newsletter, Crash Course. During the hearing, Vought revealed that he did not have an estimate for the total cost of the Iran War, nor did the White House have a formal budget request for the conflict. “We’re not ready to come to you with a request; we’re still working on it. We’re working through to figure out what’s needed in this fiscal year versus next fiscal year,” Vought said. The admission comes after previous budgetary requests for a $1.5 trillion military budget in 2027. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth requested $200 billion in funding for the war just last month. Rep. Veronica Escobar, D-Texas, pressed him to “ballpark” the number. “Will it be more than $50 billion?” she asked Vought. “I don’t have a ballpark for you, congresswoman,” he said. Watch the entire hearing below: Read more about this topic Why the Iran war could make everything, not just oil, more expensive The Iran war’s second front is at home Evidence of insider trading on Iran war grows The post “Never seen spending like this”: House Dems grill Vought on war spending appeared first on Salon.com.
Victims criticize Melania Trump’s statement on Epstein connections
On Thursday, first lady Melania Trump made a public appearance to deny she had any amicable connections to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Now multiple Democratic members of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform are calling for the president’s wife to testify under oath on her alleged links to Epstein and his accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell. “I am not Epstein’s victim. Epstein did not introduce me to Donald Trump,” Trump said. She also addressed a 2002 email to Maxwell made public through the Epstein Files Transparency Act President Trump signed into law November 2025. The email congratulated Maxwell on a photograph in a magazine, signing off with “Love, Melania.” The first lady denied any closer involvement with Maxwell, who is serving 20 years in prison for child sex trafficking. She called the emails “casual correspondence” and stated, “My polite reply to her email doesn’t amount to anything more than a trivial note.” At the end of her statement, she shifted focus to survivors, suggesting there should be “a public hearing specifically centered around the survivors.” “If the first lady wants to clear her name, she should come before the Oversight Committee and testify under oath,” Rep. Suhas Subramanyam, D-Va., said on X. “Otherwise, this is just a shameless book promotion.” California Rep. Ro Khanna called on Melania Trump to use her power in the White House to release the rest of the Epstein files and said that he “absolutely” agrees there should be an oversight hearing. Related Justice in fragments: Epstein’s shredded records resurface “She needs to call on her husband to get the remainder of the files released,” he said in an interview with MS NOW. “She needs to call on [acting Attorney General Todd] Blanche to have investigations, and the survivors are absolutely right that the burden should not be on them.” “We agree with first lady Melania Trump’s call for a public hearing with the survivors of Jeffrey Epstein,” Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., posted on X. “We encourage Chairman Comer to respond to the first lady’s request and schedule a public hearing immediately.” Start your day with essential news from Salon. Sign up for our free morning newsletter, Crash Course. While the top Democrat of the House Oversight committee agreed with this sentiment, many survivors had an opposing perspective. “Survivors of Jeffrey Epstein have already shown extraordinary courage by coming forward, filing reports, and giving testimony,” a letter signed by 15 Epstein survivors said. “Asking more of them now is a reflection of responsibility, not justice.” “Survivors have done their part. Now it’s time for those in power to do theirs,” the letter reads. The letter said Melania Trump was “shifting the burden onto survivors under politicized conditions to protect those with power.” The statement also calls for former Attorney General Pam Bondi, whom Trump fired earlier this month, to be held responsible for revealing survivor’s identities and concealing files. Read more about the Epstein files The Epstein files are conspiracy-pilling everybody “Points to possible cover-up”: DOJ withheld Trump-related documents in Epstein files “We love Pam”: Trump fires Attorney General Pam Bondi The post Victims criticize Melania Trump’s statement on Epstein connections appeared first on Salon.com.
Victims criticize Melania Trump’s statement on Epstein connections
On Thursday, first lady Melania Trump made a public appearance to deny she had any amicable connections to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Now multiple Democratic members of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform are calling for the president’s wife to testify under oath on her alleged links to Epstein and his accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell. “I am not Epstein’s victim. Epstein did not introduce me to Donald Trump,” Trump said. She also addressed a 2002 email to Maxwell made public through the Epstein Files Transparency Act President Trump signed into law November 2025. The email congratulated Maxwell on a photograph in a magazine, signing off with “Love, Melania.” The first lady denied any closer involvement with Maxwell, who is serving 20 years in prison for child sex trafficking. She called the emails “casual correspondence” and stated, “My polite reply to her email doesn’t amount to anything more than a trivial note.” At the end of her statement, she shifted focus to survivors, suggesting there should be “a public hearing specifically centered around the survivors.” “If the first lady wants to clear her name, she should come before the Oversight Committee and testify under oath,” Rep. Suhas Subramanyam, D-Va., said on X. “Otherwise, this is just a shameless book promotion.” California Rep. Ro Khanna called on Melania Trump to use her power in the White House to release the rest of the Epstein files and said that he “absolutely” agrees there should be an oversight hearing. Related Justice in fragments: Epstein’s shredded records resurface “She needs to call on her husband to get the remainder of the files released,” he said in an interview with MS NOW. “She needs to call on [acting Attorney General Todd] Blanche to have investigations, and the survivors are absolutely right that the burden should not be on them.” “We agree with first lady Melania Trump’s call for a public hearing with the survivors of Jeffrey Epstein,” Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., posted on X. “We encourage Chairman Comer to respond to the first lady’s request and schedule a public hearing immediately.” Start your day with essential news from Salon. Sign up for our free morning newsletter, Crash Course. While the top Democrat of the House Oversight committee agreed with this sentiment, many survivors had an opposing perspective. “Survivors of Jeffrey Epstein have already shown extraordinary courage by coming forward, filing reports, and giving testimony,” a letter signed by 15 Epstein survivors said. “Asking more of them now is a reflection of responsibility, not justice.” “Survivors have done their part. Now it’s time for those in power to do theirs,” the letter reads. The letter said Melania Trump was “shifting the burden onto survivors under politicized conditions to protect those with power.” The statement also calls for former Attorney General Pam Bondi, whom Trump fired earlier this month, to be held responsible for revealing survivor’s identities and concealing files. Read more about the Epstein files The Epstein files are conspiracy-pilling everybody “Points to possible cover-up”: DOJ withheld Trump-related documents in Epstein files “We love Pam”: Trump fires Attorney General Pam Bondi The post Victims criticize Melania Trump’s statement on Epstein connections appeared first on Salon.com.
Victims criticize Melania Trump’s statement on Epstein connections
On Thursday, first lady Melania Trump made a public appearance to deny she had any amicable connections to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Now multiple Democratic members of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform are calling for the president’s wife to testify under oath on her alleged links to Epstein and his accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell. “I am not Epstein’s victim. Epstein did not introduce me to Donald Trump,” Trump said. She also addressed a 2002 email to Maxwell made public through the Epstein Files Transparency Act President Trump signed into law November 2025. The email congratulated Maxwell on a photograph in a magazine, signing off with “Love, Melania.” The first lady denied any closer involvement with Maxwell, who is serving 20 years in prison for child sex trafficking. She called the emails “casual correspondence” and stated, “My polite reply to her email doesn’t amount to anything more than a trivial note.” At the end of her statement, she shifted focus to survivors, suggesting there should be “a public hearing specifically centered around the survivors.” “If the first lady wants to clear her name, she should come before the Oversight Committee and testify under oath,” Rep. Suhas Subramanyam, D-Va., said on X. “Otherwise, this is just a shameless book promotion.” California Rep. Ro Khanna called on Melania Trump to use her power in the White House to release the rest of the Epstein files and said that he “absolutely” agrees there should be an oversight hearing. Related Justice in fragments: Epstein’s shredded records resurface “She needs to call on her husband to get the remainder of the files released,” he said in an interview with MS NOW. “She needs to call on [acting Attorney General Todd] Blanche to have investigations, and the survivors are absolutely right that the burden should not be on them.” “We agree with first lady Melania Trump’s call for a public hearing with the survivors of Jeffrey Epstein,” Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., posted on X. “We encourage Chairman Comer to respond to the first lady’s request and schedule a public hearing immediately.” Start your day with essential news from Salon. Sign up for our free morning newsletter, Crash Course. While the top Democrat of the House Oversight committee agreed with this sentiment, many survivors had an opposing perspective. “Survivors of Jeffrey Epstein have already shown extraordinary courage by coming forward, filing reports, and giving testimony,” a letter signed by 15 Epstein survivors said. “Asking more of them now is a reflection of responsibility, not justice.” “Survivors have done their part. Now it’s time for those in power to do theirs,” the letter reads. The letter said Melania Trump was “shifting the burden onto survivors under politicized conditions to protect those with power.” The statement also calls for former Attorney General Pam Bondi, whom Trump fired earlier this month, to be held responsible for revealing survivor’s identities and concealing files. Read more about the Epstein files The Epstein files are conspiracy-pilling everybody “Points to possible cover-up”: DOJ withheld Trump-related documents in Epstein files “We love Pam”: Trump fires Attorney General Pam Bondi The post Victims criticize Melania Trump’s statement on Epstein connections appeared first on Salon.com.
Democrats, Marjorie Taylor Greene call for Trump’s removal from office following Iran threat
70 Democrats in the House of Representatives support removing President Donald Trump from office over his recent threats to destroy Iran. That tally comes via Axios’ Andrew Solender after several days of social media brinksmanship from the commander-in-chief. Some congressional Democrats — such as frequent Trump target Rep. Ilhan Omar — were floating impeachment or removal under the Constitution’s 25th Amendment before Trump threatened to kill a “whole civilization.” The president had set a deadline for Iran, demanding that the country lift its blockade of the Strait of Hormuz by Tuesday night. Over the Easter weekend, Trump threatened an attack on critical infrastructure in the country. He reiterated those threats in a post to Truth Social on Tuesday morning. “A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again. I don’t want that to happen, but it probably will,” he wrote. “Maybe something revolutionarily wonderful can happen, WHO KNOWS? We will find out tonight, one of the most important moments in the long and complex history of the World.” The post drew immediate backlash from Democrats. “The President’s enablers must wake up to the fact that he is becoming increasingly erratic and dangerous, and our country needs new leadership,” wrote Rep. Seth Magaziner, D-R.I., on X. Related “Delusional”: Iran calls Trump’s bluff as he threatens “a whole civilization will die” The post also concerned several Republicans and former Trump allies. Rep. Nathanial Moran, R-Texas, said the president’s statement did not reflect American values. “I do not support the destruction of a ‘whole civilization.’ That is not who we are, and it is not consistent with the principles that have long guided America,” he wrote. Start your day with essential news from Salon. Sign up for our free morning newsletter, Crash Course. Former congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene called for Trump’s removal from office. “25TH AMENDMENT!!! Not a single bomb has dropped on America. We cannot kill an entire civilization,” she wrote on X. “This is evil and madness.” Right-wing conspiracist and radio host Alex Jones said on X that Trump was talking like a “super villain” after called for Trump’s Cabinet to “25th Amendment his ass” earlier in the week. Read more about this topic Trump revealed his objective in Iran — 40 years ago The Iran war’s second front is at home US rescues final airman after Iran shoots down two fighter jets The post Democrats, Marjorie Taylor Greene call for Trump’s removal from office following Iran threat appeared first on Salon.com.
Democrats, Marjorie Taylor Greene call for Trump’s removal from office following Iran threat
70 Democrats in the House of Representatives support removing President Donald Trump from office over his recent threats to destroy Iran. That tally comes via Axios’ Andrew Solender after several days of social media brinksmanship from the commander-in-chief. Some congressional Democrats — such as frequent Trump target Rep. Ilhan Omar — were floating impeachment or removal under the Constitution’s 25th Amendment before Trump threatened to kill a “whole civilization.” The president had set a deadline for Iran, demanding that the country lift its blockade of the Strait of Hormuz by Tuesday night. Over the Easter weekend, Trump threatened an attack on critical infrastructure in the country. He reiterated those threats in a post to Truth Social on Tuesday morning. “A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again. I don’t want that to happen, but it probably will,” he wrote. “Maybe something revolutionarily wonderful can happen, WHO KNOWS? We will find out tonight, one of the most important moments in the long and complex history of the World.” The post drew immediate backlash from Democrats. “The President’s enablers must wake up to the fact that he is becoming increasingly erratic and dangerous, and our country needs new leadership,” wrote Rep. Seth Magaziner, D-R.I., on X. Related “Delusional”: Iran calls Trump’s bluff as he threatens “a whole civilization will die” The post also concerned several Republicans and former Trump allies. Rep. Nathanial Moran, R-Texas, said the president’s statement did not reflect American values. “I do not support the destruction of a ‘whole civilization.’ That is not who we are, and it is not consistent with the principles that have long guided America,” he wrote. Start your day with essential news from Salon. Sign up for our free morning newsletter, Crash Course. Former congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene called for Trump’s removal from office. “25TH AMENDMENT!!! Not a single bomb has dropped on America. We cannot kill an entire civilization,” she wrote on X. “This is evil and madness.” Right-wing conspiracist and radio host Alex Jones said on X that Trump was talking like a “super villain” after called for Trump’s Cabinet to “25th Amendment his ass” earlier in the week. Read more about this topic Trump revealed his objective in Iran — 40 years ago The Iran war’s second front is at home US rescues final airman after Iran shoots down two fighter jets The post Democrats, Marjorie Taylor Greene call for Trump’s removal from office following Iran threat appeared first on Salon.com.
Trump summons dead prophet to boost Iran war
On March 9, Donald Trump posted a nine-year old video on Truth Social that seemed to reveal his worsening political desperation. The video is a compilation of clips of charismatic Christian prophet Kim Clement, spliced together from 2007 appearances in California and Arizona. (Clement died in 2016.) The clear implication is that Clement was identifying Trump as God’s choice for president. Now some MAGA leaders may be taking the prophecy show on the road. Trump has been scrambling to justify the war against Iran, and some military commanders, up to and including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, have told troops that it is a “holy war,” part of God’s larger plan for America and the world. The late Prophet Clement and others like him are part of a growing and politically connected movement within charismatic and Pentecostal Christianity called the New Apostolic Reformation. Its leaders, apostles and prophets say they are empowered and informed by direct revelations from God, and they are seeking religious and political dominion over society. (Although the NAR, by design, does not resemble more mainstream religious denominations, its honorific titles are not random or self-assigned.) Notable apostles and prophets who have gained some public notoriety include Apostle Lance Wallnau, who waged a national voter mobilization campaign among low-propensity evangelical voters on Trump’s behalf in 2024; Apostle Dutch Sheets, who played a role in the planning and execution of the Jan. 6 insurrection; Apostle Ché Ahn, who was a candidate in this year’s California gubernatorial election until the secretary of state barred him from the ballot for neglecting to file the necessary paperwork (he is still running a write-in campaign); and Apostle Paula White-Cain, a friend and spiritual adviser to Trump. Related “Unfriending” America: The Christian right is coming for the enemies of God — like you and me The rise of this movement, its involvement in Trump’s campaigns, both of his presidential administrations and the wider MAGA movement is one of the most important and underreported stories of our time. (Salon has covered the NAR on several occasions in recent years, including my story in the inset above.) Here’s an example to set Kim Clement in context: He and White-Cain, then a prominent televangelist known as Paula White, appeared on TV together in September of 2005, long before she became associated with Trump or the NAR. White said she was “honored to sit with my dear friend, with the man of God that I labor in the Kingdom of God with, Prophet Kim Clement. God bless you, prophet. … Love you. We go way back.” Trump’s promotion of the Clement prophecies from nearly 20 years ago is designed to fuel a critical part of his supporter base, those Christians who see themselves as engaged in a biblically-prophesied war leading to the End Times. Mikey Weinstein, president of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, sees the Trump administration’s attempt to cast the Iran war as a religious conflict as both dangerous and dangerously out of sync with foundational American values of religious equality and separation of church and state. “We all know that past is prologue,” Weinstein, a former Air Force JAG officer and Reagan White House lawyer, told Salon. “When we look back at human history, every prior time when an extremist version of any religious faith is inextricably intertwined with that part of the state which makes war, we end up with one thing, and one thing only: oceans of blood.” From the Crusades of the Middle Ages to “the Inquisition, the pogroms [of Eastern Europe] or the Holocaust,” Weinstein added, “it’s always the same damn thing.” Some leading voices in evangelical media and pro-Trump influencers have jumped at the chance to amplify Trump’s message. NAR evangelist Sean Feucht posted to Facebook: “President Trump posts the exact prophetic word about him from Kim Clement in Redding, California in 2007.” We need your help to stay independent Subscribe today to support Salon’s progressive journalism Charisma magazine, a publication targeting charismatic and Pentecostal Christians, reported it this way: For many believers who follow prophetic ministry, Clement’s words have long circulated in Christian circles as a striking prediction about who would one day rise to the highest office in the United States. However, Trump’s decision to highlight the prophecy himself has renewed interest in what the late prophet said nearly two decades ago. Richard Bartholomew, a British scholar of religion who followed Clement for years, does not believe Clement was talking about Trump in his 2007 prophecies. Instead, Clement almost certainly meant former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, who was considered the frontrunner for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination at the time. Trump’s promotion of prophecies from nearly 20 years ago is designed to fuel a critical part of his supporter base, those Christians who see themselves as engaged in a biblically-prophesied war leading to the End Times. A fair-minded reading of the transcript suggests that Bartholomew is right. Clement quotes God as saying, “I will not forget 9/11. I will not forget what took place that day, and I will not forget the gatekeeper that watched over New York who will once again stand and watch over this nation.” It’s difficult to imagine he meant that “gatekeeper” to be Trump, who had no official role in 2001. Giuliani, on the other hand, made national headlines as “America’s mayor” for his leadership during the 9/11 crisis, and immediately became a plausible candidate for president. In any event, Giuliani’s 2008 campaign was a flop. He dropped out early and John McCain won the GOP presidential nomination, before losing to Barack Obama that November. Trump, of course, didn’t run for president until eight years later. Clement did indeed mention the man then known as a real estate tycoon and reality-TV host, however. “Trump shall become a trumpet, says the Lord,” he said. “Trump shall become a trumpet. I will raise up the Trump to become a trumpet and Bill Gates to open up the gate of a financial realm for the church.” The “most obvious interpretation” of this deliberately abstruse language, Bartholomew said, is the correct one: Clement was prophesying that Giuliani, “the gatekeeper that watched over New York” on 9/11, would become president, while Trump and Gates would “become evangelists.” Clement “was fascinated by powerful businessmen,” Bartholomew added, and he “appears to have further believed that their very names are puns that reveal God’s purposes.” It’s true that trumpets play a significant role in NAR symbolism, as can be seen in their use of the shofar — a traditional Jewish instrument made from a ram’s horn — in ceremonies and events. Bill Gates, on the other hand, has played no role in underwriting or supporting the NAR movement. Clement’s prophecies over the years, Bartholomew explained, were “often expressed in a vague and obscurantist way,” but “Trump does not appear to have been a figure of particular interest.” The larger significance of Clement’s prophecies has little to do with whether they are demonstrably true or false, but rather that their devoted fanbase happens accrues to Trump’s political benefit. Clement’s fervid following is somewhat like that of Nostradamus, the 16th-century French physician and seer whose book “Les Prophéties” is often said to have predicted future events, and whose followers continue to seek signs in his elliptical writings. Indeed, in both cases, followers of the dead prophets are constantly finding new meaning in old prophecies. Clement’s followers look to his decades-old utterances to discern what might happen in 2026 as well as 2027. Some followers of Nostradamus can offer predictions for every year far into the future, sometimes with a contemporary political spin. Getting Christianity right — or wrong People in the apostolic movement live in what they consider to be a prophetic moment, when God will reveal what is to come. Their guides are NAR leaders who follow what’s called the “Five-Fold Ministry.” This idea embodies the notion that historic Christian denominations of all varieties have gotten it wrong for 2,000 years, and that the only truly Christian offices are apostle, prophet, evangelist, pastor and teacher (as described in the book of Ephesians). They believe that God speaks directly to and through the NAR’s anointed apostles and prophets about current and sometimes future events. NAR leaders follow what’s called the “Five-Fold Ministry,” which embodies the notion that historic Christian denominations of all varieties have gotten it wrong for 2,000 years. Clement was deeply involved in this movement. He came to the U.S. from South Africa in 1981 to study at Christ for the Nations Institute in Dallas, a leading hub of NAR’s vision of bringing about the kingdom of God on Earth by whatever means necessary, which teaches the doctrine of the Five-Fold Ministry. The Institute says it has graduated more than 40,000 missionaries since its founding in 1970. In addition to Clement, its notable graduates include Apostle Dutch Sheets, Kevin Jonas Sr. (father and manager of the Jonas Brothers pop band) and Vance Boelter, the alleged assassin of Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman, who was shot and killed, along with her husband, outside their home in June of 2025. The fact that Clement’s prophecies are now being personally promoted by the president himself is an indication of how much CFNI and NAR have moved from the far-right periphery of Christianity toward the center of American culture and politics. Facts and false prophesies As with any revolutionary movement, NAR leaders do not always see eye to eye on everything. In recent years, the movement has become polarized over what many see as false prophecies, including widespread predictions that Trump would be re-elected in 2020. Predictably, some prophets and apostles later insisted that they were not wrong, since that election had been stolen. Dutch Sheets, for example, has been among the leaders of the pro-Trump Stop the Steal campaign. Trump’s apparent falsification of Clement’s prophecy to justify his war in Iran may widen and deepen the split. Indeed, this comes amid a noticeable rift in the movement, after 92 apostolic leaders issued a statement in April 2021 aimed at establishing “prophetic standards.” Prophets are “to bring correction, instruction, and directional clarity,” they wrote, “but not independent of other leaders, and therefore different from the model of the independent Old Testament prophet.” Those who wanted to use “Old Testament prophetic texts to exercise influence or authority over their followers,” the statement continued, “should remember that inaccurate prophecy under that same Old Testament standard was punishable by death.” Prophets should not try to “serve as spiritual fortune tellers or prognosticators.” Indeed, every available translation of the Bible holds that false prophets should be put to death by stoning. Followers of the Clement prophecies, it’s fair to say, appear to have wandered far from scripture at this point. Trump’s apparent falsification of Clement’s prophecy to justify his war in Iran may widen and deepen the NAR split, and comes amid a noticeable rift in the movement. Clement’s prophecy also reveals the NAR’s deepening break with all forms of historic Christianity, from the Roman Catholic Church to mainline Protestant denominations and the majority of traditional evangelicals. Clement and his ilk say they routinely receive fresh revelations from God. These extra-Biblical communiqués are not accepted by traditional Christianity, which NAR leaders say is under the influence of a “religious spirit,” meaning that it comprises sinful and arguably demonic obstacles to advancing the Kingdom of God on Earth. The general NAR position is that most or all forms of mainstream Christianity must be defeated, even eliminated. The full context of the Clement prophecies cited by Trump — which were delivered on April 4, 2007, in Redding, California, and Feb. 10, 2007, in Scottsdale, Arizona — is available in a searchable archive maintained by Clement’s daughter, Donné Clement Petruska. (That may serve as a useful resource for media fact-checkers during the election season.) For example, the transcript (unlike the video posted by the president) provides a full and unedited passage in which Clement says that God will eventually take full control of the news media, and has had it with institutional Christianity. In his Redding prophecy, Clement announces that “the Spirit of God says” there will be a “transfiguration, a going into the marketplace if you wish, into the news media. Where Time Magazine will have no choice but to say what I want them to say. Newsweek, what I want to say. ‘The View,’ what I want to say. “I am God and you have called to Me,” Clement continues, “and many from this Nation have said ‘enough, enough of religion, enough, enough of dead speech.’” Start your day with essential news from Salon. Sign up for our free morning newsletter, Crash Course. What he did not say, but his listeners presumably understood, is that in the NAR’s vision of America’s future, it will be apostles, prophets and members of what they call the “Ekklesia” who provide God’s words to compliant media outlets. The Ekklesia comprises Christians — of the right sort, naturally — as the one true church of the End Times and the governing bodies at all levels of society. (We can only speculate about the fate of non-compliant media and unreformed Christians.) All the current and convenient interpretations of Clement’s prophecies that have circulated in charismatic and Pentecostal precincts of the internet for two decades are meant to bring about the NAR’s vision of society, as well as the religious war it believes will be required to get us there. On the road again These redeployments of Clement prophecies may not be limited to Trump’s political needs regarding the war in Iran. With its leader now presumably in his final term in office, the MAGA movement could use a booster shot. The far-right ReAwaken America Tour, led by retired general and former Trump White House official Michael Flynn, is holding a two-day rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma, entitled The Remnant Rising: Resist the Reset, whose poster features an image of Clement, who died 10 years ago. That’s probably because ReAwake founder Clay Clark credits a Clement prophecy from April 2013, which mentions a “man by the name of Mr. Clark,” as something like a divine mandate. The host pastor of the Tulsa event, Jackson Lahmeyer, recently announced that he’s running in the Republican primary for the seat of Rep. Kevin Hern, himself a pro-Trump conservative now running for the vacated U.S. Senate seat of Markwayne Mullin, recently appointed as Trump’s new DHS secretary. That GOP primary is on June 16, three days before the Remnant Rising event at Lahmeyer’s church. Lahmeyer was also the founder of Pastors for Trump in 2024, and helped launch the original ReAwaken America tour through his connections with Clark and Flynn. He has appeared as a featured speaker at multiple ReAwaken stops, often sounding very much like an NAR preacher, although his connection to the movement is not explicit. Rolling Stone reported on the tour event held at Trump National Doral Miami in 2024: “Satan, right now has an entire political party in this nation doing his bidding — for free,” Lahmeyer told the crowd, referring to the Democratic party, whose president, in truth [meaning Joe Biden], is an observant Catholic. “The battle that we are in is one that is between good and evil,” Lahemeyer added before leading the assembly in a prayer. “Our nation knows a God who rescues his people, when we find ourselves in trouble. We lift up President Donald Trump, and we ask that You would give him divine wisdom.” The ReAwaken tours have offered a variety show of QAnon conspiracism, Trumpian speeches, election denial and anti-vaccine campaigners, accompanied by the blowing of shofars, casting out of demons and, at times, video clips of Clement prophesies presented by his daughter. Previous events have drawn thousands of participants, and featured such stars of the MAGA constellation as MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell, Trump adviser Roger Stone, the late Charlie Kirk and conspiraciy-monger Alex Jones, along with NAR figures like Apostle Lance Wallnau. As one poster for the June event puts it: “We are getting the band back together.” The speakers’ lineup in Tulsa will reportedly include Flynn, Clark, Eric Trump, Jackson Lahmeyer and his wife Kendra, and a veritable apostolic Lollapalooza of NAR-friendly preachers. Another headliner will be Dr. Stella Immanuel of Houston, an infamous anti-vaccine physician affiliated with the right-wing group America’s Frontline Doctors and a major promoter of two debunked treatments for COVID, ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. Immanuel made headlines a few years ago for claiming that many of America’s health problems are linked to alien DNA and sperm from demons. It’s not clear whether Donné Clement Petruska will speak in Tulsa, but her father’s ghost will very much be a presence, both there and throughout this summer and fall, as Trump’s supporters battle to solidify their far-right religious base. Read more about religion in Trump’s America Hollywood finds religion again Not quite losing my religion: Being a liberal evangelical isn’t always easy Trump’s misguided “Christian” war is anything but The post Trump summons dead prophet to boost Iran war appeared first on Salon.com.
Trump summons dead prophet to boost Iran war
On March 9, Donald Trump posted a nine-year old video on Truth Social that seemed to reveal his worsening political desperation. The video is a compilation of clips of charismatic Christian prophet Kim Clement, spliced together from 2007 appearances in California and Arizona. (Clement died in 2016.) The clear implication is that Clement was identifying Trump as God’s choice for president. Now some MAGA leaders may be taking the prophecy show on the road. Trump has been scrambling to justify the war against Iran, and some military commanders, up to and including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, have told troops that it is a “holy war,” part of God’s larger plan for America and the world. The late Prophet Clement and others like him are part of a growing and politically connected movement within charismatic and Pentecostal Christianity called the New Apostolic Reformation. Its leaders, apostles and prophets say they are empowered and informed by direct revelations from God, and they are seeking religious and political dominion over society. (Although the NAR, by design, does not resemble more mainstream religious denominations, its honorific titles are not random or self-assigned.) Notable apostles and prophets who have gained some public notoriety include Apostle Lance Wallnau, who waged a national voter mobilization campaign among low-propensity evangelical voters on Trump’s behalf in 2024; Apostle Dutch Sheets, who played a role in the planning and execution of the Jan. 6 insurrection; Apostle Ché Ahn, who was a candidate in this year’s California gubernatorial election until the secretary of state barred him from the ballot for neglecting to file the necessary paperwork (he is still running a write-in campaign); and Apostle Paula White-Cain, a friend and spiritual adviser to Trump. Related “Unfriending” America: The Christian right is coming for the enemies of God — like you and me The rise of this movement, its involvement in Trump’s campaigns, both of his presidential administrations and the wider MAGA movement is one of the most important and underreported stories of our time. (Salon has covered the NAR on several occasions in recent years, including my story in the inset above.) Here’s an example to set Kim Clement in context: He and White-Cain, then a prominent televangelist known as Paula White, appeared on TV together in September of 2005, long before she became associated with Trump or the NAR. White said she was “honored to sit with my dear friend, with the man of God that I labor in the Kingdom of God with, Prophet Kim Clement. God bless you, prophet. … Love you. We go way back.” Trump’s promotion of the Clement prophecies from nearly 20 years ago is designed to fuel a critical part of his supporter base, those Christians who see themselves as engaged in a biblically-prophesied war leading to the End Times. Mikey Weinstein, president of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, sees the Trump administration’s attempt to cast the Iran war as a religious conflict as both dangerous and dangerously out of sync with foundational American values of religious equality and separation of church and state. “We all know that past is prologue,” Weinstein, a former Air Force JAG officer and Reagan White House lawyer, told Salon. “When we look back at human history, every prior time when an extremist version of any religious faith is inextricably intertwined with that part of the state which makes war, we end up with one thing, and one thing only: oceans of blood.” From the Crusades of the Middle Ages to “the Inquisition, the pogroms [of Eastern Europe] or the Holocaust,” Weinstein added, “it’s always the same damn thing.” Some leading voices in evangelical media and pro-Trump influencers have jumped at the chance to amplify Trump’s message. NAR evangelist Sean Feucht posted to Facebook: “President Trump posts the exact prophetic word about him from Kim Clement in Redding, California in 2007.” We need your help to stay independent Subscribe today to support Salon’s progressive journalism Charisma magazine, a publication targeting charismatic and Pentecostal Christians, reported it this way: For many believers who follow prophetic ministry, Clement’s words have long circulated in Christian circles as a striking prediction about who would one day rise to the highest office in the United States. However, Trump’s decision to highlight the prophecy himself has renewed interest in what the late prophet said nearly two decades ago. Richard Bartholomew, a British scholar of religion who followed Clement for years, does not believe Clement was talking about Trump in his 2007 prophecies. Instead, Clement almost certainly meant former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, who was considered the frontrunner for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination at the time. Trump’s promotion of prophecies from nearly 20 years ago is designed to fuel a critical part of his supporter base, those Christians who see themselves as engaged in a biblically-prophesied war leading to the End Times. A fair-minded reading of the transcript suggests that Bartholomew is right. Clement quotes God as saying, “I will not forget 9/11. I will not forget what took place that day, and I will not forget the gatekeeper that watched over New York who will once again stand and watch over this nation.” It’s difficult to imagine he meant that “gatekeeper” to be Trump, who had no official role in 2001. Giuliani, on the other hand, made national headlines as “America’s mayor” for his leadership during the 9/11 crisis, and immediately became a plausible candidate for president. In any event, Giuliani’s 2008 campaign was a flop. He dropped out early and John McCain won the GOP presidential nomination, before losing to Barack Obama that November. Trump, of course, didn’t run for president until eight years later. Clement did indeed mention the man then known as a real estate tycoon and reality-TV host, however. “Trump shall become a trumpet, says the Lord,” he said. “Trump shall become a trumpet. I will raise up the Trump to become a trumpet and Bill Gates to open up the gate of a financial realm for the church.” The “most obvious interpretation” of this deliberately abstruse language, Bartholomew said, is the correct one: Clement was prophesying that Giuliani, “the gatekeeper that watched over New York” on 9/11, would become president, while Trump and Gates would “become evangelists.” Clement “was fascinated by powerful businessmen,” Bartholomew added, and he “appears to have further believed that their very names are puns that reveal God’s purposes.” It’s true that trumpets play a significant role in NAR symbolism, as can be seen in their use of the shofar — a traditional Jewish instrument made from a ram’s horn — in ceremonies and events. Bill Gates, on the other hand, has played no role in underwriting or supporting the NAR movement. Clement’s prophecies over the years, Bartholomew explained, were “often expressed in a vague and obscurantist way,” but “Trump does not appear to have been a figure of particular interest.” The larger significance of Clement’s prophecies has little to do with whether they are demonstrably true or false, but rather that their devoted fanbase happens accrues to Trump’s political benefit. Clement’s fervid following is somewhat like that of Nostradamus, the 16th-century French physician and seer whose book “Les Prophéties” is often said to have predicted future events, and whose followers continue to seek signs in his elliptical writings. Indeed, in both cases, followers of the dead prophets are constantly finding new meaning in old prophecies. Clement’s followers look to his decades-old utterances to discern what might happen in 2026 as well as 2027. Some followers of Nostradamus can offer predictions for every year far into the future, sometimes with a contemporary political spin. Getting Christianity right — or wrong People in the apostolic movement live in what they consider to be a prophetic moment, when God will reveal what is to come. Their guides are NAR leaders who follow what’s called the “Five-Fold Ministry.” This idea embodies the notion that historic Christian denominations of all varieties have gotten it wrong for 2,000 years, and that the only truly Christian offices are apostle, prophet, evangelist, pastor and teacher (as described in the book of Ephesians). They believe that God speaks directly to and through the NAR’s anointed apostles and prophets about current and sometimes future events. NAR leaders follow what’s called the “Five-Fold Ministry,” which embodies the notion that historic Christian denominations of all varieties have gotten it wrong for 2,000 years. Clement was deeply involved in this movement. He came to the U.S. from South Africa in 1981 to study at Christ for the Nations Institute in Dallas, a leading hub of NAR’s vision of bringing about the kingdom of God on Earth by whatever means necessary, which teaches the doctrine of the Five-Fold Ministry. The Institute says it has graduated more than 40,000 missionaries since its founding in 1970. In addition to Clement, its notable graduates include Apostle Dutch Sheets, Kevin Jonas Sr. (father and manager of the Jonas Brothers pop band) and Vance Boelter, the alleged assassin of Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman, who was shot and killed, along with her husband, outside their home in June of 2025. The fact that Clement’s prophecies are now being personally promoted by the president himself is an indication of how much CFNI and NAR have moved from the far-right periphery of Christianity toward the center of American culture and politics. Facts and false prophesies As with any revolutionary movement, NAR leaders do not always see eye to eye on everything. In recent years, the movement has become polarized over what many see as false prophecies, including widespread predictions that Trump would be re-elected in 2020. Predictably, some prophets and apostles later insisted that they were not wrong, since that election had been stolen. Dutch Sheets, for example, has been among the leaders of the pro-Trump Stop the Steal campaign. Trump’s apparent falsification of Clement’s prophecy to justify his war in Iran may widen and deepen the split. Indeed, this comes amid a noticeable rift in the movement, after 92 apostolic leaders issued a statement in April 2021 aimed at establishing “prophetic standards.” Prophets are “to bring correction, instruction, and directional clarity,” they wrote, “but not independent of other leaders, and therefore different from the model of the independent Old Testament prophet.” Those who wanted to use “Old Testament prophetic texts to exercise influence or authority over their followers,” the statement continued, “should remember that inaccurate prophecy under that same Old Testament standard was punishable by death.” Prophets should not try to “serve as spiritual fortune tellers or prognosticators.” Indeed, every available translation of the Bible holds that false prophets should be put to death by stoning. Followers of the Clement prophecies, it’s fair to say, appear to have wandered far from scripture at this point. Trump’s apparent falsification of Clement’s prophecy to justify his war in Iran may widen and deepen the NAR split, and comes amid a noticeable rift in the movement. Clement’s prophecy also reveals the NAR’s deepening break with all forms of historic Christianity, from the Roman Catholic Church to mainline Protestant denominations and the majority of traditional evangelicals. Clement and his ilk say they routinely receive fresh revelations from God. These extra-Biblical communiqués are not accepted by traditional Christianity, which NAR leaders say is under the influence of a “religious spirit,” meaning that it comprises sinful and arguably demonic obstacles to advancing the Kingdom of God on Earth. The general NAR position is that most or all forms of mainstream Christianity must be defeated, even eliminated. The full context of the Clement prophecies cited by Trump — which were delivered on April 4, 2007, in Redding, California, and Feb. 10, 2007, in Scottsdale, Arizona — is available in a searchable archive maintained by Clement’s daughter, Donné Clement Petruska. (That may serve as a useful resource for media fact-checkers during the election season.) For example, the transcript (unlike the video posted by the president) provides a full and unedited passage in which Clement says that God will eventually take full control of the news media, and has had it with institutional Christianity. In his Redding prophecy, Clement announces that “the Spirit of God says” there will be a “transfiguration, a going into the marketplace if you wish, into the news media. Where Time Magazine will have no choice but to say what I want them to say. Newsweek, what I want to say. ‘The View,’ what I want to say. “I am God and you have called to Me,” Clement continues, “and many from this Nation have said ‘enough, enough of religion, enough, enough of dead speech.’” Start your day with essential news from Salon. Sign up for our free morning newsletter, Crash Course. What he did not say, but his listeners presumably understood, is that in the NAR’s vision of America’s future, it will be apostles, prophets and members of what they call the “Ekklesia” who provide God’s words to compliant media outlets. The Ekklesia comprises Christians — of the right sort, naturally — as the one true church of the End Times and the governing bodies at all levels of society. (We can only speculate about the fate of non-compliant media and unreformed Christians.) All the current and convenient interpretations of Clement’s prophecies that have circulated in charismatic and Pentecostal precincts of the internet for two decades are meant to bring about the NAR’s vision of society, as well as the religious war it believes will be required to get us there. On the road again These redeployments of Clement prophecies may not be limited to Trump’s political needs regarding the war in Iran. With its leader now presumably in his final term in office, the MAGA movement could use a booster shot. The far-right ReAwaken America Tour, led by retired general and former Trump White House official Michael Flynn, is holding a two-day rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma, entitled The Remnant Rising: Resist the Reset, whose poster features an image of Clement, who died 10 years ago. That’s probably because ReAwake founder Clay Clark credits a Clement prophecy from April 2013, which mentions a “man by the name of Mr. Clark,” as something like a divine mandate. The host pastor of the Tulsa event, Jackson Lahmeyer, recently announced that he’s running in the Republican primary for the seat of Rep. Kevin Hern, himself a pro-Trump conservative now running for the vacated U.S. Senate seat of Markwayne Mullin, recently appointed as Trump’s new DHS secretary. That GOP primary is on June 16, three days before the Remnant Rising event at Lahmeyer’s church. Lahmeyer was also the founder of Pastors for Trump in 2024, and helped launch the original ReAwaken America tour through his connections with Clark and Flynn. He has appeared as a featured speaker at multiple ReAwaken stops, often sounding very much like an NAR preacher, although his connection to the movement is not explicit. Rolling Stone reported on the tour event held at Trump National Doral Miami in 2024: “Satan, right now has an entire political party in this nation doing his bidding — for free,” Lahmeyer told the crowd, referring to the Democratic party, whose president, in truth [meaning Joe Biden], is an observant Catholic. “The battle that we are in is one that is between good and evil,” Lahemeyer added before leading the assembly in a prayer. “Our nation knows a God who rescues his people, when we find ourselves in trouble. We lift up President Donald Trump, and we ask that You would give him divine wisdom.” The ReAwaken tours have offered a variety show of QAnon conspiracism, Trumpian speeches, election denial and anti-vaccine campaigners, accompanied by the blowing of shofars, casting out of demons and, at times, video clips of Clement prophesies presented by his daughter. Previous events have drawn thousands of participants, and featured such stars of the MAGA constellation as MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell, Trump adviser Roger Stone, the late Charlie Kirk and conspiraciy-monger Alex Jones, along with NAR figures like Apostle Lance Wallnau. As one poster for the June event puts it: “We are getting the band back together.” The speakers’ lineup in Tulsa will reportedly include Flynn, Clark, Eric Trump, Jackson Lahmeyer and his wife Kendra, and a veritable apostolic Lollapalooza of NAR-friendly preachers. Another headliner will be Dr. Stella Immanuel of Houston, an infamous anti-vaccine physician affiliated with the right-wing group America’s Frontline Doctors and a major promoter of two debunked treatments for COVID, ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. Immanuel made headlines a few years ago for claiming that many of America’s health problems are linked to alien DNA and sperm from demons. It’s not clear whether Donné Clement Petruska will speak in Tulsa, but her father’s ghost will very much be a presence, both there and throughout this summer and fall, as Trump’s supporters battle to solidify their far-right religious base. Read more about religion in Trump’s America Hollywood finds religion again Not quite losing my religion: Being a liberal evangelical isn’t always easy Trump’s misguided “Christian” war is anything but The post Trump summons dead prophet to boost Iran war appeared first on Salon.com.