The BLUE PRESS JOURNAL

We aim to be a voice in the ongoing political discourse, providing both factual information and opinionated analysis, from a progressive or center-left perspective, free from the direct influence of major
established Main Street Media.

  • The Great Tariff Loophole: How a Policy Meant to Help Working Americans Ended Up in Corporate Hands

    How Trump’s Illegal Trade Duties Transformed Into a Multibillion-Dollar Corporate Windfall

    by Winston Wendell

    When President Donald Trump returned to office in January 2025, he promised a new set of tariffs would fix the damage caused by his own 2017 tax cuts. He said regular folks wouldn’t notice the extra charges on imported goods, American manufacturers would see a boom, and those millions in profits that used to flow to the national elite would finally go away.

    Trucks queue beneath tariff signs at a Canada–U.S. customs checkpoint

    That’s not what happened. Instead, import duties turned into a backwards tax on the middle class, who got hit with higher prices as businesses passed the costs right along. And now, after a historic Supreme Court decision called these Trump’s tariffs illegal, billions in refunds are landing right in shareholders’ pockets.

    Tariff Refunds Go Right to Shareholders

    This giant shift of cash from regular middle class Americans to the wealthiest is all thanks to a Supreme Court ruling in February. The Court said Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act for tariffs was illegal.

    So the government had to pay back the businesses that shelled out $166 billion in tariffs, half that money, the Court decided, should go straight to the firms who paid it.

    But are the companies who squeezed extra billions out of Americans actually planning to refund the people they overcharged?

    Big corporations say they won’t. Even after these firms got their government refund (plus interest), they’re just using the money to make shareholders richer and further pump up profits.

    Here’s how some companies are spending their “surprise” rebate:

    Nike: In summer 2025, Nike executives said they’d cover a $1 billion tariff cost by getting creative, including strategic $5 to $10 price hikes to consumers on US goods. Fast forward, and after scoring nearly $1 billion back, Nike execs called the cash an “unplanned benefit” to bump up their profits. Meanwhile, there’s now a class-action lawsuit accusing Nike of “double-dipping”: raising prices to cover tariffs, then pocketing the refund.

    Dollar Tree: The loss cost discount retailer landed $383 million in tariff refunds, but only set aside $22 million for price cuts as part of a “tariff reinvestment initiative.” The rest? It doesn’t even compare. Dollar Tree also announced a $605 million share buyback, a move to pad shareholders’ wallets, at 27 times the size of their consumer refund gesture.

    Steve Madden: The shoe company bragged about just raising prices and letting customers pay for the tariffs. Now, they’re sitting on a $92 million rebate and say they’ll use it to pay off company debt.

    Levi Strauss: After hiking prices to offset tariff costs, Levi’s got $80 million back. Execs said they’re not sure what to do with the cash. And like Nike, Levi Strauss faces a class-action lawsuit for not paying customers back.

    Walmart, Target, and Lowe’s: These giants all made vague promises about using the rebate to lower prices or to help “fund price leadership” in their industries. Concrete numbers? Still missing. Lowe’s even changed its tune, swapping “customer-facing actions” for promises of “strong profitability” for itself and its shareholders.

    The Truth About These Refunds

    One reason companies get away with this? It’s almost impossible to figure out how to break the rebate apart for each individual shopper, since those tariff costs were part of millions of everyday items’ prices.

    Still, the bigger problem is the federal government. If these tariffs had gone through proper approval, they would’ve just been another regressive tax on middle class Americans. But slapping them in as an executive order under the IEEPA set up this jackpot in the first place.

    So, the policy, in the end, was just another regressive tax on the poor and middle class. Like the tax cuts from 2017 and 2025, this is yet another “win” for everyone except for the workers and consumers who always end up paying the bill.

  • The Cost of No Endgame: Why Donald Trump’s Iran War Strategy is a Foreign Policy Failure

    by Winston Wendell

    The ancient art of diplomacy teaches a simple but an extremely important lesson, which is that one should never start a war unless they have an exit strategy. The Trump administration ignored that particular wisdom, dooming the United States to yet another hopeless conflict. The war with Iran is doomed to happen, and that is entirely down to Donald Trump and his ill-considered decision to engage in it without any thought to an exit strategy.

    Donald Trump speaking at a podium with the American flag behind him

    War is not an end in itself but a means to achieve political goals through military action. By initiating a war with Iran, the Trump administration thought it through as far as wanting to demonstrate America’s military might, but they did not have a viable plan as to what to do after the initial display of force. In fact, the famous military theorist Carl von Clausewitz warned that war is the continuation of politics by other means. But in the case of Trump and Iran, it appears that there was no particular political goal beyond the point of making a show of strength.

    Without a well-defined plan and an exit strategy, the White House has failed to achieve any concrete result in the case of Iranian military involvement. While it makes for a great show to target and kill high-profile terrorist leaders or even the foreign leadership, such actions have serious and dire consequences for years to come. With the war against Iran, those consequences are to be found in an exacerbated opposition to the US in the form of hundreds of proxy groups ready to fight America’s soldiers. Moreover, Iran has effortlessly shut down the critical world trade routes in the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz, as well as accelerate their nuclear program.

    By failing to formulate a plan and an exit strategy, the White House has placed the United States on a collision course with another unpopular and long war. As the history of the USA teaches us, it is much easier to get into a war than to get out of it with honor and minimal losses. A famous analyst Richard Haass put it succinctly when he stated that the problem is not starting a war, it is ending one.

    A nation’s leadership is not supposed to make rash decisions and waste its soldiers’ lives. The ability to plan a proper political campaign and follow through until the very end is what sets a leader apart from an opportunist. By rushing into a military conflict with Iran, the United States have demonstrated that it does not have the calibre of leadership under Donald Trump that is required to handle such matters with care and precision.

    Fediverse reactions

  • The Fiscal Legacy of the Trump Era: A Study in Mounting Debt

    by Winston Wendell

    I have been watching America’s debt situation, and it is worrying to observe the scale. According to the latest data the national debt has officially surpassed an unprecedented $40 trillion. A significant part of its growth can be attributed to the policies implemented by President Donald Trump.

    Public debt sculpture with money bags labeled NATIONAL DEBT, TAXES, GDP, NATIONAL REVENUE, and a £2,573,145,678,901 counter.

    The increased debt can be explained by the direct intervention of Trump and the GOP in the economy through corporate tax reductions. In particular, the enactment of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) of 2017 resulted in a significant decrease of the corporate tax rate by 14% (from 35 to 21%). The TCJA introduced substantial changes in the taxation of pass-through income, allowing businesses to deduct up to 20% of their profit. In addition, the lawmakers doubled the exemption threshold of the estate tax. The Trump administration’s fiscal policy was built on neoclassical supply-side ideas, claiming that the changes to the corporate tax would lead to economic growth and prosperity. Well it didn’t.

    According to the estimates conducted by the Congressional Budget Office and the bipartisan Joint Committee on Taxation, the initial design of the TCJA led to a $1.5 trillion reduction in revenues over the decade. The administration’s actions in Congress failed to recognize the limitations of the supply-side economics, which promised to deliver the significant growth of the economy, in other words it failed. As the federal budget was starved of revenue, it complicated the situation with the COVID-19 pandemic response.

    The pro-business and billionaire policies of the administration, which decreased the overall revenues of the federal budget, resulted in the inability to finance the pandemic response adequately. Thus, the federal debt is forecasted to exceed 100% of the GDP, which makes the U.S. economy extremely vulnerable. Trump’s interference in the economy resulted in the growing budget deficit, which has a detrimental effect on the federal budget.

    Trump’s approach to fiscal policy promised to deliver economic growth, but it actually reduced revenues of the federal budget making the debt issue skyrocket. The Republican party needs to stop pretending Trump’s policies did’t increase the federal debt. Trump keeps blaming others when the blame for over 30 percent of the debt is squarely on this tax the middle class and give to the rich. These consequences will be pasted to future generations. Maybe it’s time to reform the taxation system to make sure that everyone, including billionaires and millionaires, contribute to country proportionally to their incomes.

    Fediverse reactions

  • The Political Fallout of Medicaid Cuts: Why These Two Senate Races Matter Most

    by Winston Wendell

    Two Senate races could decide the fate of a popular budget that has already taken millions upon millions of healthcare dollars away from Americans. Everything is on the line for both sides: not only healthcare coverage, but also the livelihoods of those affected and their trust in the government. Last Summer, with the guidance of the President himself and the Republican party, legislators pushed through some of the most devastating cuts to healthcare the US has witnessed in a long time. The consequences and effects of this decision have been immediate and severe. This is how everything is unfolding.

    Firstly, congress sliced off a whooping 900 billion dollars from Medicaid, the program providing healthcare to children, pregnant women, people with disabilities, and others who are especially vulnerable. At the same time, they allowed subsidies under the affordable care act, which had been expanded by the Obama administration, to lapse away. As a result, rates soared, and almost 8 million people lost coverage. This is according to the Protect Our Care Progress group, as they released a report detailing the losses state by state, from Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, and the Affordable Care Act.

    The president of the Progress group, Brad Woodhouse, had some particularly biting remarks for President Trump and the Republican legislature that pushed through the vote. He noted that eight million Americans have lost healthcare coverage because of Donald Trump and the republican party’s “decision to give tax breaks to billionaires and gut the safety net for working families” instead of protecting it. This has resulted in many, many families making impossible choices between paying premiums and putting food on the table, or senior citizens having to stretch out their medications for longer, or pregnant women having to drive longer distances for prenatal care. All because of the cuts to the Medicaid program that have left millions of Americans without healthcare in an era when it was supposed to be a fundamental right.

    Senator Susan Collins, incumbent Republican representing the state of Maine, is facing an uphill re-election battle from a Democratic opponent after voting to slash Medicaid and chip away at the affordable care act. Her opponent is expected to mobilize his supporters to vote Collins out of office after she helped to dismantle the Obama administration’s healthcare law. Her state has been particularly hard hit by the cuts to the Medicaid program with over 18,700 Mainers losing access to healthcare.

    Over 7,500 residents have lost their marketplace coverage due to the end of the federal subsidy at the end of 2025. Although Senator Collins voted against the final budget, she has already voted for the initial version, and critics of her vote are reminding voters at every opportunity that she voted for it in the first place. Meanwhile, the impact of her vote is being felt in the state’s hospital system and rural communities, as they grapple with a 38 million dollar funding shortfall.

    The damage is particularly visible in the state’s healthcare sector as both hospitals and other facilities scramble to cover uncompensated care costs or find ways to reduce expenses by cutting staff, threatening to worsen the crisis in the state’s rural areas.

    Another Republican senator, Dan Sullivan of Alaska, has also voted to slash Medicaid despite the impact that it would have on the residents of his state. In Alaska, the number of people who have lost coverage exceeds 25,600. In addition, premium rates for the covered plans have jumped an astonishing 346%.

    With the vast distances between communities, especially in rural parts of Alaska, and a shortage of healthcare facilities, this decision has placed an especially severe burden on the residents of the state. Sullivan is also set to face a re-election campaign and will have to answer for his role in the disaster that has befallen the state’s healthcare system.

    Brad Woodhouse believes that “these voters in Alaska, Maine, and across the country – our friends, neighbors, parents, and children – are seeing how policies advocated by President Trump and his allies in the Senate are undermining their ability to afford health care, and they are going to hold these lawmakers accountable at the ballot.

    In a very real way, voters in Maine and Alaska will decide not only the fate of their states’ health coverage but also the future of the country, as both senators face re-elections in the middle of the year.”

    Everything is on the line in these two crucial Senate races, including the future of the American healthcare system. The voters in these two states are now having to deal with the consequences of the actions of their legislators who put party before patriotism and placed millions of Americans in danger.

    Fediverse reactions

  • From Motorcade Trunk to White House Confidante: The Rising Influence of Natalie Harp

    by Winston Wendell

    Remarks by Senator Jon Ossoff (D‑Ga.) that President Trump “travels with Natalie” has rekindled interest in the relationship between the president and his 35-year-old aide Natalie Harp. Known as the “human printer” for providing printouts of positive online stories about Donald Trump while he was in transit, Ms. Harp was once again in the news for an alleged altercation over her travel arrangements following the president’s recent court appearance in New York City.

    According to a CNN report from October 24, 2023, Ms. Harp was brought to New York City to brief Trump in the days leading up to his court appearance. The news outlet reported that when the President’s motorcade arrived at the destination, the staff told Ms. Harp that there were no available seats for her in the front of the vehicle. Nevertheless, Ms. Harp insisted that she would only return with Mr. Trump because she had previously been requested by the President to accompany him to the courtroom. Following a “screaming match” with the President’s staff, Ms. Harp climbed into the trunk of one of the SUVs and arrived in New York City. In addition, CNN reported that it had received a photograph of Ms. Harp in the trunk of the vehicle, which has since been shared on several news websites.

    The alleged incident in the trunk of the SUV is the latest development in the ongoing controversy surrounding Ms. Harp’s relationship with Mr. Trump. In September 2023, Politico reported that Ms. Harp has served as the President’s “gatekeeper,” providing him with printouts of online articles containing information that the president may find of interest. According to Politico , since her hiring, Natalie Harp has been responsible for screening news feeds and choosing which news items to print out for the President based on their perceived relevance. Similarly, The New York Times , in its March 2024 article about Trump’s staff, noted that Harp has been a “near-constant presence” at both the president’s rallies and court proceedings.

    Although the White House did not respond directly to the allegations regarding the trunk incident, former Trump officials told Reuters that the president sometimes engaged in “unorthodox” behavior with his staff. According to the news outlet, the President’s staff members are generally willing to comply with his requests due to his status as a national leader.

    Senator Ossoff’s remarks were made during a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee on January 15, 2024. Following his comments, several representatives laughed and discussed the extent to which staff members are permitted to travel with the President. However, as this story continues to gain traction in the national news, it is likely to raise additional questions about the potential risks and dangers facing Trump’s staff. From this standpoint, the “trunk controversy” may have significant implications for the White House.

    Fediverse reactions

  • A Score Card: Examining the Economic, Legal, and Social Legacy of the Trump and GOP Era

    by Winston Wendell

    As the 2026 political cycle approaches, America faces a question it can’t keep skirting: Is Trump’s strongman persona and brand of hardline republicanism really what this country needs, or a risky step backward with consequences we haven’t fully reckoned with?

    Donald Trump and officials standing in a line inside an ornate marble hall

    A compilation of legal, academic, and investigative articles presents a detailed list of failures of the president throughout his time in office.

    It all started long before he became president when Atlantic City casinos were his main asset. His numerous bankruptcies as a businessman became a major subject of investigation, with critics pointing out that his financial decisions negatively affected the local economy, trying to save his own skin while billions of other people’s dollars went down the drain. Simultaneously, labor rights protesters accused Trump of knowingly allowing illegal immigration and subjecting those immigrants to substandard working conditions, using threats of deportation to force them to work for lower than allowed wages.

    The controversies followed him home and impacted his personal life as well as his presidential campaign. Throughout his professional life, dozens of women accused him of sexual harassment, which, during his presidential campaign, led to a hush-money indictment—a felony charge connected to the Stormy Daniels scandal.

    His presidency began with a major challenge, COVID-19, and, according to many experts, failed to adequately address the situation. It resulted in hundreds of thousands of preventable deaths, with Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health estimating the mortality rate to be as high as 210,000 due to the administration’s downplaying of the coronavirus and inadequate measures to combat it. The president’s tweets and the lack of a nationwide policy, as well as frequent conflicts with the scientific community contributed to a disjoined response that made things worst

    Of economic matters, the president’s legacy includes corporate tax cuts from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, a bill that, according to many economists, failed to stimulate the economy as promised while adding billions of dollars to the national debt that could have been used for federal investments and programs.

    His administration’s environmental policy is widely regarded as counterproductive, with Trump openly calling climate change a hoax, directing the EPA to roll back emissions regulations, and defunding federal disaster preparedness. Researchers suggest that the deregulation, along with the lack of funding for safety equipment for emergency officials, may have contributed to the increased impact of extreme weather.

    When it comes to Trump’s social legacy, his anti-immigrant rhetoric and controversial policies such as family separation and capping SNAP benefits for legal immigrants have disproportionately affected minorities and disadvantaged groups. The president’s rhetoric toward veterans, workers, and officials also created a divisive atmosphere around the key founding pillars of the country.

    Law and order were the foundation of Trump’s campaign and a major part of his presidential term. The only thing he did’t say was it apparently did not apply him and his inter- circle. A compilation of articles tells the story of how he used his presidential powers to pardon political donors and business associates while neglecting to hold his allies accountable for their actions. The list of his subordinates and political allies accused of fraud and tax evasion is rather lengthy, with all of them getting away due to Trump’s intervention. However, those interventions seem to have had limited impact on white-collar criminals, with agencies such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the SEC having their budgets cut and investigations halted.

    Perhaps unsurprisingly, the most lasting legacy of his term as president is the dispute over the integrity of the 2020 election. A number of constitutional scholars and Democrats argue that his allegations of fraud and obstruction of vote counting will have long-lasting effects on the future of democratic elections in the US.

    We have to remind everyone that you get the government you vote for.

    Fediverse reactions

  • Economists Warn of Imbalance as Trump Cheers Stock Market Success

    by Winston Wendell

    Despite Trump’s optimism about the US economy, there are growing concerns about the gap between main street and wall street. In recent months, the stock market has seen a three week long rise. This has put the S&P 500 close to a record high which Trump is quick to point out as proof of his economic genius, especially when it comes to those with retirement plans. But many would say that the market’s success is misleading given the state of the economy for most Americans.

    Busy stock exchange trading floor beneath electronic market index boards

    “The economic realities for most Americans are not nearly as positive as suggested by the president,” said Laura Tyson, a former Chair of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers for President Clinton. “While the stock market is doing well, wages are not keeping pace with inflation, therefore most Americans are not seeing an increase in their purchasing power.”

    According to the latest report from the Labor Department, July saw an unexpected decrease in the number of new jobs. Although wages are rising, they are not keeping up with the increase in the size of the economy. The result? Average living standards for most of the population are actually dropping.

    The impact of these numbers are being felt most by Americas’ middle and lower classes who are living from paycheck to paycheck. Credit card debt has skyrocketed as families with low wages are forced to use their savings or charge purchases to cover essentials such as groceries, housing and healthcare. Added to all this the price of electricity alone has jumped 12 percent since Trump took office, leaving many households struggling to pay their bills.

    “Most people in America are not benefiting from the dramatic rise in profits of the large companies in the S&P 500, many of which are in the healthcare and energy industries,” said Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel Prize-winning economist. “This imbalance cannot be beneficial to America’s future as it breeds social unrest amongst many groups due to growing inequalities in income and wealth.”

    As Trump promotes the success of the stock market, many are concerned about the health of the American economy. Although those on the top of the economic ladder are enjoying the best increase in wealth in five years, many others are finding life as a middle class family becoming harder and harder to manage.

    Fediverse reactions

  • Retrograde Engineering: Why Trump’s Steam Catapult Order is a Bad Move for the Navy

    by Winston Wendell

    Now is not the time to be worrying about the technical specifications of catapults when America’s households are drowning in the rising costs of gasoline, food, and healthcare. Yet, that is exactly what former President Donald Trump seems to be doing as he wakes up from his delusionary stupor. In one of his latest nonsensical outbursts, Trump ordered the Pentagon to abandon future aircraft carrier catapults that utilize cutting-edge electromagnetic technology and revert back to the old steam-powered systems.

    President Trump’s order instructs the Navy to equip future carriers with old steam catapults instead of future electromagnetic aircraft launching systems.

    The president defended his decision by claiming that such a move would be better for the shipbuilding industry as it would allow them to use existing infrastructure to get contracts. However, military officials and senators have condemned the decision as ill-informed and short-sighted. Electromagnetic systems are undeniably better than their steam-powered predecessors in almost every regard.

    The consensus among critics of Trump’s order is that the new electromagnetic systems are far better than the old steam ones. Therefore, canceling their development and returning to the previous technology is a huge waste of resources.

    The cancellation of EMALS would lead to enormous financial losses for the Navy, contractors, and the US economy in general.

    The decision to cancel the EMALS program would lead to “wasteful spending” as there was already a $500 million investment in the development of electromagnetic catapults. It’s argued that the Pentagon does not even have the necessary infrastructure to produce the older catapults.

    A senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, noted that the president’s order creates “unimaginable complications.”

    Senators reacted furiously to the news of the president’s intentions. Senator Kelly served in the Navy and was a pilot during the Gulf War. He accused the former president of interfering with complex military matters that he does not understand.

    “I’ve launched off the front of aircraft carriers hundreds of times, have a Master’s degree in aeronautical engineering, and am a test pilot and even I wouldn’t suggest to the Navy how to engineer specific systems on its ships,” Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), a former Navy pilot who sits on the Senate Armed Services Committee.

    Fediverse reactions

  • Trump’s Secret Flight: Did the President Jeopardize Lives for a Risky Decoy Plan?

    by Winston Wendell

    Last month at a NATO meeting in Turkey, President Trump abruptly left his plane and used decoys to guard against a possible Iranian attack, despite safer options. He left his bodyguards, reporters, and security detail on the tarmac, secretly exiting via a catering truck, boarding a smaller plane back to England, and later reappearing on a luxury Boeing 747 donated by the Qatari royal family, which lacked the advanced missile defense system of his usual aircraft.

    The presidential entourage left behind consists of heavyweights such as Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Deputy Chief of Staff Dan Scavino, executive assistant Natalie Harp, and a number of military and press personnel, possibly numbering over a hundred decoys.

    The President could have chosen a much safer route.

    His advisors suggested using F-35s for close protection detail, including electronic warfare pods, and utilizing other aircraft to obscure the movement. In addition, a straightforward departure with minimal fanfare, announcing his intentions after leaving danger zones, could have prevented the chaos.

    Presidents do not make it a habit to vanish under the radar, it seems. History offers instances of FDR inviting reporters to accompany his staff to the front lines, Biden making surprise stops in Kyiv, and Bush bringing along the press during the Somalia operation. In any case, Trump has stirred up controversy by questioning his own conduct as commander-in-chief. If presidents are ever going to make decisions based on national security, they must understand that they will be subjected to withering criticism for any misstep.

    Fediverse reactions

  • Inside the Trump DOJ Corruption Scandal: Why a Federal Judge Just Torched a Top Official Over the Adani Case

    by Winston Wendell

    When the machinery of American justice begins to wheeze and grind to a halt, it’s rare that we get to see proceedings from behind the velvet curtains. Every now and then, however, a federal judge feels inclined to pull back the curtain for good and show us the workings of the system for all to see.

    That’s exactly what U.S. District Judge Nicholas Garaufis proceeded to do in a 47-page ruling that exposed the Trump DoJ’s corruption at the heart of the case against Indian billionaire Gautam Adani.

    Front facade of the Robert F. Kennedy Department of Justice Building in Washington, D.C. with American flags and people walking nearby

    For context, Adani is a billionaire businessman and major political donor to the Republican party whose federal criminal fraud and foreign bribery indictment was revoked by none other than the Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General Trent McCotter. When Judge Garaufis ruled against the intervention, he made sure to deliver a stern dressing down to McCotter for dismissing the case in the first place.

    In particular, the judge seemed especially concerned with the fact that McCotter didn’t think highly of the investigative authorities that worked on the case before he decided to drop the charges.

    As per the ruling, McCotter’s actions were “inexplicable,” as the judge found it “particularly troubling” that the high-ranking DOJ official had the “independent judgment” to ignore the FBI, SEC, and prosecutors. The judge even remarked on how it was totally “unbecoming of someone in [McCotter’s] position” to rely on the private conversations with Adani’s lawyers concerning the case, as he “failed” to take into account all relevant information.

    You see, in order to dismiss the five-count indictment against Adani, McCotter only had to rely on the “advice of his legal counsel” and have “direct communications with the defense,” ignoring all other factors. He claimed that the case was dismissed due to “political interference,” but the judge quickly retorted that it would be “unbecoming of someone in [McCotter’s position]” to rely on private communications with the defendant’s lawyers.

    After all, as we know, political pressure has a way of interfering with due process. That’s why the case was dismissed, according to the ruling.

    On the other hand, Garaufis pointed out, it would be “unconscionable” for the President Trump to simply accept a bribe in exchange for dropping the case. So, in short, if there really were no bribes involved, the case shouldn’t have been dropped in the first place.

    It appears that in order to get the charges dropped against Adani, the defendant’s defense team made a “personal appeal” to DOJ’s Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General Trent McCotter. This, according to CBS News, happened during a meeting with Adani’s lawyer Bob Giuffra of Sullivan & Cromwell and included an offer of a $10 billion donation to the U.S. if the indictment was revoked.

    The foreign bribery and fraud charges that were dropped are crimes that the current government has long since given up on prosecuting and it’s high time that we reminded them of their sworn duty to protect and serve.

    It’s absolutely sickening to witness politicians and government officials alike selling justice for money while the rest of the taxpayers fund their obscene salaries. It’s also heartening to see judges like Nicholas Garaufis take matters into their own hands and finally bring these corrupt officials to task.

    Fediverse reactions