Tag: donald trump
Trump at UN General Assembly 2026

Trump Constantly Accuses Mainstream Outlets Of 'Treasonous' News Coverage

President Donald Trump, in a Truth Social post published shortly before midnight on Tuesday, declared reporters at news outlets that produce reporting critical of his administration as “treasonous.”

Trump, in his rambling and confused message, expressed dismay that CNN’s Kaitlan Collins and other unnamed “SLEAZEBAGS” had been present to cover his Tuesday appearance at the United Nations General Assembly after he banned CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from the White House on Friday. He added of Collins: “She’s got a ‘TRUMP’ addiction, and so does CNN and MSDNC [MSNOW]. They’re all sick, treasonous, and demented!”

The post marked at least the third time this month, and the ninth time since March, that Trump had accused news outlets of “treasonous” reporting, according to a Media Matters review of his statements on social media and transcripts of his public events compiled by Roll Call’s Factba.se. The president also said news outlets had nearly or almost committed treason on four additional occasions during his second term, though since May he has transitioned to making outright accusations.

Treason is “the only crime expressly defined by the Constitution,” which limits such charges to “levying war” against the United States or “in adhering to [its] enemies, giving them aid and comfort,” and the Supreme Court has narrowly interpreted that definition. Trump has nonetheless declared that a slew of figures — from Democratic congressional leaders like Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) to leakers within his administration to critics of AI to members of the group that filed suit to block his construction of a White House ballroom — have committed treason by defying his will.

But his frequent claims that news outlets are committing treason by publishing reports he doesn’t like are particularly worrisome and fit into a larger war on the press in which his administration has used state power to punish journalists for their work. The Justice Department, for example, argued in a Tuesday night court filing that the president’s banning of CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from the White House is justified because the outlets’ reporting on stories related to the Iran war and the ballroom “have threatened national security.”

[EDITOR'S NOTE: On Wednesday evening, U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly ordered the White House to “return, reinstate, and restore” the reporters' credentials while litigation proceeds. But journalists from those outlets were denied access again on Thursday morning.]

In December, Trump responded to reporting on his apparent physical decline by calling it “seditious, perhaps even treasonous, for The New York Times, and others, to consistently do FAKE reports in order to libel and demean ‘THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.’” That was the first example we found of the president linking reporting with treason since his return to the White House.

But Trump’s treason accusations really picked up after the war he launched against Iran on February 28 began to falter. Since then, Trump has accused CNN, MS NOW, ABC, NBC, The Washington Post, and The New York Times of treason, singling out CNN’s Collins and Times reporter David Sanger in particular. He has specifically described it as “treasonous” to report that the Iran war has left Iran in a strengthened position, that it has reduced U.S. munitions stockpiles to a critical level, and that he is displeased with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.

The best case scenario is that the president of the United States is an addled old man who is impotently lashing out at his critics as his administration collapses around him. Possible alternative explanations — that Trump is encouraging his pliant Justice Department appointees to actually file charges against reporters, or his followers to take matters into their own hands — are more sinister.

Here’s a list of examples of the president’s treason rhetoric.

September 22, 2026: CNN, MS NOW are “sick, treasonous, and demented!” [Truth Social]

Trump post

September 3, 2026: “For the treasonous SCUM that refuses to accurately report on our Military Operation in Iran…” [Truth Social]

Trump post

September 3, 2026: “Media Outlets that keep harping on the fact that we have no ammunition … are actually treasonous.” [Truth Social]

Trump post

August 6, 2026: “I really believe” The Washington Post’s “fake ‘reporting’” that Trump is displeased with Hegseth “is treasonous!” [Truth Social]

Trump post

July 13, 2026: “I actually think it’s treasonous” that The New York Times reported Iran is “stronger today than they were four months ago.” [Interview, Fox News’ Fox & Friends]

July 13, 2026: “The fake news would rather see us lose the war than win the war, which is really treasonous, which is really treasonous in a certain way.” [Remarks]

June 21, 2026: The Times’ Iran coverage “is, in my opinion, ‘TREASONOUS.’” [Truth Social]

Trump post

May 15, 2026: Trump tells Times reporter Sanger, “I actually think it's sort of treasonous what you write” about Iran, “I actually think it’s treason when you write, like, ‘They’re doing well militarily.’” [Press gaggle]

May 12, 2026: “When the Fake News says that the Iranian enemy is doing well, Militarily, against us, it’s virtual TREASON…” [Truth Social]

Trump post

April 12, 2026: “CNN, The New York Times, ABC fake news, NBC fake news … they report things that they know are false. It's almost treasonous, actually.” [Interview, Fox News’ Sunday Morning Futures]

March 27, 2026: “If you read the Times, you think we’re doing poorly [in Iran]. It’s so — It’s almost treasonous.” [Remarks]

March 15, 2026: “The story was knowingly FAKE and, in a certain way, you can say that those Media Outlets that generated it should be brought up on Charges for TREASON for the dissemination of false information!” [Truth Social]

Trump post

December 9, 2025: “I actually believe it’s seditious, perhaps even treasonous, for The New York Times, and others, to consistently do FAKE reports in order to libel and demean ‘THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.’” [Truth Social]

Trump post


Reprinted with permission from Media Matters

Laura Ingraham Claims To Have Opposed Iran War 'From Day One' (She's Lying)

Laura Ingraham Claims To Have Opposed Iran War 'From Day One' (She's Lying)

Fox News’ Laura Ingraham said on her September 21 show that she opposed President Donald Trump’s war on Iran, a position that would almost certainly come as a surprise to her viewers. Those who had watched her show in early March, as the Trump administration launched its war against Iran alongside Israel, heard something very different.

“I've not been for the war in Iran,” Ingraham said. “I'm not happy with high gas prices — I see a lot of other good trends, but I'm not happy with those at all.” She added that she’d been opposed to it “from day one."

Ingraham’s revisionist history is self-serving, as public opinion about the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran sinks and the MAGA movement lurches toward whatever form it may take after Trump is no longer sitting in the Oval Office.

It is true that prior to Trump launching the war on February 28, Ingraham was mildly skeptical of it by Fox News standards.

On January 12, Ingraham said, “We know that America does not have the best track record when it comes to regime change in the Middle East, so that can’t really be the goal here."

During an interview with Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) on January 14, she said about a war in Iran: “How does that help the average American who is still struggling to pay some bills?”

On the eve of the war on February 27, Ingraham worried about the possible spike in “energy prices, which could be affected if we get into some really protracted engagement in Iran."

Ingraham gets on board with the Iran war

None of that is a full-throated denunciation, of course, but it does evince some small degree of reluctance.

Within days, Ingraham’s weathervane had caught the breeze and her tone was markedly more hawkish. Her March 2 show was a full endorsement of Trump’s war of aggression.

“Only a few days into military strikes, none of the major objections to this action withstand serious scrutiny,” Ingraham said.

This is not a “pointless war,” she said, adding: “Trump has given us no indication that he is going to betray his supporters by asking them to make unnecessary sacrifices.”

Her guest and Trump daughter-in-law Lara Trump falsely claimed that Iran was “very clearly on the path to making another nuclear weapon,” and Ingraham fueled baseless and Islamophobic speculation “about sleeper cells in the U.S.”

On March 5, Ingraham declared: “Trump has already won in Iran.”

On March 25, she cautioned that the conflict with Iran could be creating “a series of cascading problems for the region, including maybe outside the region — political problems for the president in a midterm election year.” Later in the episode, she warned that voters are “very impatient for victory,” and polling suggests “the American people are sending a message to President Trump that it's time to put the focus back on the home front.”

But by March 31, Ingraham had fully reverted to the Fox News neocon mean.

“Why are people calling this a quagmire after a month?” she wondered. “Trump is taking some big risks. But, with big risks come great rewards. Eliminating the Iranian threat is a gift to future generations.”

Ingraham has not been the loudest voice at Fox News in favor of the Iran war. But to claim she has opposed it “from day one” is a self-serving fantasy.

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters

Betsy Klein

The Press Finally Stands Up To Trump! Courage Is Contagious

It’s good to see that all the major news outlets are standing together behind the three outlets that lost their White House press credentials because Donald Trump didn’t like their reporting. The three, CNN, MS NOW, and Politico, had apparently written something that hurt Trump’s feelings, so he decided to take revenge by banishing them from the White House grounds.

In a great display of solidarity, all the networks, including Fox News, abandoned their live feeds from the White House. This deprives Trump of what he values most: an audience.

Many of us were disappointed, if not altogether surprised, by the rapidity with which major institutions and prominent individuals abandoned principles and bent the knee for Trump at the start of his second term. The major universities stand out in this respect, as several, notably Columbia University, quickly abandoned principles of academic freedom to accommodate Trump in terms of what could be said or taught on campus.

It was especially disgusting to see that much of the assault on universities was ostensibly about protecting Jews from antisemitism. This came from an administration that has an ongoing problem with the neo-Nazi ties of various staffers rising to the surface. Elon Musk, its major campaign funder, and briefly co-president, is an open supporter of neo-Nazi political parties around the world.

Similarly, a number of law firms with long-established reputations for promoting civil rights and other liberal causes quickly entered into deals with the administration. To repent for the sin of trying to hire and promote people from disadvantaged groups, they signed an agreement to stop the practice and do free legal work for Trump’s chosen causes. (See Michelle Goldberg’s excellent New York Times column on this capitulation, which is based on a new book by Jacob Weisberg: Profiles in Cowardice: A Study of Collaboration in the Trump Era.)

Many members of the super-rich, with at least some credentials as committed small “d” democrats, quickly donned their MAGA hats and joined the inaugural celebrations. Centibillionaires Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg stand out in this respect. Bezos had bought and revitalized the Washington Post in 2013. When Trump won the first time, he changed the newspaper’s masthead to “democracy dies in darkness.”

Zuckerberg and his wife, Chan Zuckerberg, had donated hundreds of millions of dollars to support the electoral infrastructure. This was especially important in 2020, when the Covid pandemic created an unprecedented situation for carrying through a national election.

Rather than risk any of their hundreds of billions, both billionaires quickly embraced Trump. Bezos turned the Post into a right-wing megaphone. Zuckerberg canned anything remotely progressive from his philanthropic activities and Meta.

It should have been possible for a more unified response to Trump’s authoritarian threat. There were more than two months between the election and when Trump took office, but it seems the only thing this crew was interested in planning was its outfits for the inauguration.

The media did not react any better. When Trump decided to change the name of the “Gulf of Mexico” to the “Gulf of America,” it suspended AP from the White House press briefings because it did not go along with this absurdity in its reporting. (We can now wear Gulf of Mexico and Lake Ontario tee-shirts as political statements.) Rather than standing in solidarity with AP and walking out, the rest of the media collectively looked the other way.

But now they have recovered their integrity. They all know that the only sin the three banished outlets have committed is reporting. Trump is upset because reality contradicts his dementia dreams, and he doesn’t like that pointed out. But that is what real news outlets are supposed to do.

It has become increasingly evident that Trump fears reality like a vampire fears light. He has staffed his entire administration with sycophants. Even in the rare case they have some level of competency, they will gladly put it aside to do Trump’s bidding. The result is rising inflation and interest rates, a pointless and tremendously destructive war, an abandonment of any pretense to care about human rights or national sovereignty, and the return of measles.

That’s a real disaster, and it’s good that much of the media is prepared to tell the true story. Their act of solidarity should make it easier for more to regain their courage and join the throng of the formerly MAGA.

Dean Baker is a senior economist at the Center for Economic and Policy Research and the author of the 2016 book Rigged: How Globalization and the Rules of the Modern Economy Were Structured to Make the Rich Richer. Please consider subscribing to his Substack, from which this is reprinted with permission.

Ashley Hinson and Trump

Iowa Republicans Now Fleeing From Trump To Save Themselves In Midterm

Staring down an electoral wipeout, members of Iowa’s all-Republican congressional delegation are desperately trying to distance themselves from President Donald Trump.

On Monday, Rep. Ashley Hinson—the GOP nominee for Iowa’s open U.S. Senate seat—called for an “immediate end” to the war, which she blamed for the skyrocketing diesel prices that are hurting Iowa’s farmers.

“Iowans are being squeezed and shouldn’t have to foot the bill at the pump or the checkout line for the war in Iran,” Hinson wrote in a post on X, saying that aside from ending the war, Congress should suspend the gas tax, ban diesel exports, and create a “diesel relief program to help our farmers and truckers being crushed by the high costs.”

She added, “I am working every day to deliver bipartisan results for Iowans and I will work with anyone who is ready to tackle this challenge immediately.”

Of course, Hinson has voted four times against ending Trump’s war, including a vote just last week against a war powers resolution. So her attempt to paint herself as a bipartisan warrior who wants this war to end is face-saving bullshit, which her Democratic opponent Josh Turek has pointed out.

“[I]t’s easy to send a tweet but when you had the chance to vote to end this war, you chose not to. You voted seven times to continue it, including just last week,” Turek wrote in a post on X, addressing Hinson. “It’s time to actually end the forever wars and put Iowa and Iowans first.”

What’s more, Hinson calling for a relief program for farmers and truckers is the kind of government welfare she and other Republicans typically condemn.

Meanwhile, two of Hinson’s Republican House colleagues from Iowa—Reps. Mariannette Miller-Meeks and Zach Nunn—voted for the war powers resolution for the first time last week, a sign that they, too, believe the conflict is hindering their reelection bids. Nunn and Miller-Meeks are in toss-up races this fall, even though Trump carried both of their seats in 2024.

Like Hinson, both Miller-Meeks and Nunn called for the same policy changes to try to bring down the cost of fuel.

“We must immediately suspend the federal and state gas tax, sell American diesel to Americans first, and get relief to the farmers and truckers who cannot wait,” Miller-Meeks wrote in a post on X. “Then we fix the cause by drilling more here, selling E15 year-round, and ending the open-ended war. Last week I voted with Republicans and Democrats to do exactly that.”

“We have to bring down the price of diesel,” Nunn also wrote in a post on X. “My plan: Sell American energy to Americans first. Pass my Iowa-led biofuel bill = bring down gas 50 cents. Hold Big Oil accountable for gouging.”

The fact that Iowa Republicans are trying to distance themselves from Trump and his war is a telling sign of how badly things are going for the GOP six weeks out from Election Day.

A Marist poll released on Tuesday found Hinson trailing Turek in the Senate race by a stunning eight percentage points. The poll showed that a whopping 13 percent of Republican voters plan to defect and vote for Turek.

As for the lawmakers’ ideas to lower fuel prices, none of this would happen until after the election anyway. Republicans fled Washington, D.C., early to campaign.

On top of that, experts say their ideas are unlikely to work—and may even cause more harm than good.

“U.S. diesel prices are determined not by a U.S. supply and demand balance, but a global one,” gas prices expert Patrick De Haan wrote in a post on X. “Keeping distillates and diesel home does not change the world price that reference our prices. You can’t fence off a globally traded commodity by executive order and expect the global price to stop applying to it.”

De Haan added that an export ban could backfire, causing countries that purchase diesel fuel from the U.S. to go elsewhere permanently and actually cause refinery closures.

“The U.S. spent years becoming the world’s backstop for diesel supply. Telling every buyer from South America to Europe that American supply is politically conditional pushes them to diversify away from U.S. refineries and U.S. supplies, softening long-term demand for U.S. product and foregoing political leverage,” De Haan wrote. “This will be painful if this trend continues.”

At the end of the day, Hinson, Nunn, and Miller-Meeks are just as responsible as Trump for the war and its consequences. For months, all three Iowa lawmakers refused to use their constitutionally granted powers to stop the president. And now that the war has spiraled out of control, they’re throwing out bad ideas in a last-ditch effort to try to fix the damage they helped create.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos


Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Trending

World