Trump criticises own supporters in Epstein documents row
'They haven't learned their lesson, and probably never will, even after being conned by the Lunatic Left for 8 long years.'
'Let these weaklings continue forward and do the Democrats work, don't even think about talking of our incredible and unprecedented success, because I don't want their support anymore! Thank you for your attention to this matter,' he went on.
The schism between the Republican president and some of his most loyal supporters centres on his administration's handling of the Epstein case.
Last week, the Justice Department and the FBI acknowledged that Epstein did not maintain a 'client list' and they said no more files related to the wealthy financier's sex trafficking investigation would be made public despite promises from Attorney General Pam Bondi that had raised the expectations of conservative influencers and conspiracy theorists.
Mr Trump has since defended Ms Bondi and chided a reporter for asking about the documents.
Mr Trump and many figures in his administration, including FBI director Kash Patel and his deputy, Dan Bongino, have spent years stoking dark and disproved conspiracy theories, including embracing QAnon-tinged propaganda that casts Mr Trump as a saviour sent to demolish the 'deep state'.
Mr Trump's comments so far have not been enough to quell those who are still demanding answers.
'For this to go away, you're going to lose 10%' of the 'Make America Great Again' movement, former adviser Steve Bannon said during a gathering of young conservatives recently.
Far-right commentator Jack Posobiec has said he will not rest 'until we go full January 6 committee on the Jeffrey Epstein files'.
House Speaker Mike Johnson also appeared to break with Mr Trump, calling for the Justice Department to 'put everything out there and let the people decide.'
'The White House and the White House team are privy to facts that I don't know. This isn't my lane. I haven't been involved in that, but I agree with the sentiment to put it out there,' Mr Johnson told conservative podcaster Benny Johnson.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Record
a few seconds ago
- Daily Record
Donald Trump's mystery bruises on hands spark health concerns as he covers them with makeup
Donald Trump's mysterious marks on his hands have appeared once again as the US President appeared to conceal them with makeup during his latest press conference Donald Trump's bruised hands have made headlines once again as the US president seemed to cover up his hands with makeup during a recent press briefing. On Tuesday July 15, eagle-eyed viewers pointed out that the 79-years-old's hand was caked in tanned liquid foundation during a close-up shot. This resparks previous concerns about recurring bruises on the president's hands, which were first spotted in the spring of 2024. The visible green bruise, turning purple, was visible on his hand during his meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron at the White House on Monday July 14. Some are now speculating that it could just be caused by the result of a firm handshake with Macron while others believe more serious health issues are to blame as Trump ages. With these worrying photos coming to light, Trump's White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt was pressed for an explanation regarding the president's significant bruise, the Express reports. Karoline simply responded: "President Trump is a man of the people. His commitment is unwavering, and he proves that every single day." In a subsequent statement, the 27 year old added: "President Trump has bruises on his hand because he's constantly working and shaking hands all day every day." On a separate occasion, Trump's hand bruising was seen during a 30-minute photo session before a 65-minute interview with TIME. When a journalist from the publication questioned him about the condition of his right hand, Trump replied: "It's from shaking hands with thousands of people." Join the Daily Record WhatsApp community! Get the latest news sent straight to your messages by joining our WhatsApp community today. You'll receive daily updates on breaking news as well as the top headlines across Scotland. No one will be able to see who is signed up and no one can send messages except the Daily Record team. All you have to do is click here if you're on mobile, select 'Join Community' and you're in! If you're on a desktop, simply scan the QR code above with your phone and click 'Join Community'. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like. To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose 'exit group'. If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice. During Tuesday's press conference, Trump discussed numerous topics before boarding Marine One on the South Lawn of the White House. The broadcast saw Trump tackle urgent concerns from Americans, including rising curiosity about the Jeffrey Epstein files. When questioned whether he was in agreement of greater transparency surrounding the Epstein matter, Trump vigorously applauded Attorney General Pam Bondi. He said during the conference: "The attorney general's handled that very well. She's really done a very good job." He elaborated: "And I think that when you look at it, you'll understand that. I would like to see that also. But I think the attorney general, the credibility is very important. "And, you want credible evidence or something like that. And I think the attorney general has handled it very well." Trump continued: "And in terms of the credibility of the different things that they've seen, and I would say that, you know, these files were made up by Comey, they were made up by Obama, they were made up by the Biden -- and you know, we and we went through years of that with the Russia, Russia, Russia hoax, with all of the different things that we had to go through." He concluded: "We've gone through years of it, but she's handled it very well, and it's going to be up to her. Whatever she thinks is credible, she should release."
Telegraph
a minute ago
- Telegraph
Russia drops 500kg bomb on Ukrainian shopping centre
Russia dropped a 500kg bomb on a shopping centre in eastern Ukraine on Wednesday, killing two people and injuring dozens more. Some 300 apartments, more than 50 shops and eight cars were damaged in the attack on Dobropillia in Donetsk, which took place on Wednesday evening, according to Vadym Filashkin, the regional governor. 'The Russians have again deliberately targeted an area where there are lots of people – a shopping centre in the middle of town,' Mr Filashkin said on Telegram. 'This time with a 500-kg (1,100-pound) air bomb.' Volodymyr Zelensky, the Ukrainian president, said in his nightly address that the attack was 'simply horrific' and it carried 'no military logic'. The strike came after Donald Trump announced he would send billions of dollars of weapons to Ukraine via Nato and threatened to impose 100 per cent tariffs on Russia's main trading partners. It also came as Mr Trump's envoy for Ukraine, General Keith Kellogg, is in Kyiv on a week-long trip to discuss US support for the country. Dobropillia, which is located 20km from the front line and near the city of Pokrovsk, a key Russian target, has been subject to repeated attacks in recent months. In March, a combined missile, rocket and drone attack killed 11 people, including five children. Russia has intensified its aerial bombardments in recent months, frequently breaking records for the number of weapons fired in a single night. Strikes killed more than 230 civilians last month, the United Nations said – the largest number killed in a single month since the war began in 2022. Meanwhile, Russian authorities claimed they downed 122 Ukrainian drones overnight, including several heading for Moscow and St Petersburg. At least three drones heading for the Russian capital were downed, local authorities said, while one person was killed and six injured in the southern region of Belgorod. It comes after Mr Trump reportedly asked his Ukrainian counterpart whether he could strike Moscow in a phone call earlier this month. 'Volodymyr, can you hit Moscow?... Can you hit St Petersburg too?' the US president asked on the July 4 call, according to reports. The Ukrainian president replied: 'Absolutely. We can if you give us the weapons.' He publicly clarified on Tuesday that he did not want Ukraine to strike the Russian cities and ruled out sending long-range weapons. Asked on Tuesday whether the US would deliver deep-strike munitions to Ukraine, Mr Trump said: 'No, we're not looking to do that.' He went on to say that Ukraine should not attack the Russian capital, adding: 'I'm on nobody's side. You know whose side I'm on? Humanity's side.'
The Guardian
a minute ago
- The Guardian
Trump's $1tn for Pentagon to add huge planet-heating emissions, study shows
Trump's huge spending boost for the Pentagon will produce an additional 26 megatons (Mt) of planet-heating gases – on a par with the entire annual carbon equivalent (CO2e) emissions generated by 68 gas power plants or the entire country of Croatia, new research reveals. The Pentagon's 2026 budget – and climate footprint – is set to surge to $1tn thanks to Trump's One Big Beautiful Act, a 17% rise on last year. Military emissions are closely tied to military spending. The budget bonanza will push the Pentagon's total greenhouse emissions to a staggering 178 Mt of CO2e, resulting in an estimated $47bn in economic damages globally, according to new analysis by the Climate and Community Institute (CCI), a US-based research thinktank, shared exclusively with the Guardian. The huge increase in military spending comes amid worsening climate breakdown, and as Americans – many of them Trump voters – are being hit by destructive extreme weather events such as wildfires, extreme heat and the recent floods in Texas, as well as sea-level rise and other slow-onset climate effects. Trump's 2026 budget legislation slashes federal funding for science, education, Medicaid, food stamps, emergency management, the National Weather Service and humanitarian aid – in order to pay for the military expansion, tax cuts for the wealthy, and Trump's violent immigration crackdown. Trump has also withdrawn the US from the Paris climate accords for the second time, and rolled back Biden-era investments in renewable energies such as solar and wind that are key to weaning the US off fossil fuels in order to curtail climate catastrophe. The US is the largest historical contributor to the climate crisis, and currently the second worst emitter after China – a country with quadruple the population. Emitting 178 Mt of CO2e would make the US military and its industrial apparatus the 38th largest emitter in the world if it were its own nation – and more than the entire annual carbon footprint of Ethiopia, a country of 135 million people. 'Every extra dollar grows the Pentagon's carbon bootprint – and shrinks the chances for a livable future. With this additional funding from the big beautiful bill, the US's trillion-dollar war machine will be responsible for more emissions than 138 individual countries,' said Patrick Bigger, lead author and CCI research director. 'Supposedly this spending is for national security. But what security is there in more droughts, floods, hurricanes, and rising seas?' 'Every dollar of military spending has a climate cost, with procurement decisions being made now risking locking us into decades of emissions through carbon-intensive military equipment,' said Ellie Kinney, climate advocacy coordinator at the Conflict and Environment Observatory (Ceobs). The Pentagon – the US armed forces and Department of Defense (DoD) agencies – is the largest single fossil-fuel consumer in the US, already accounting for about 80% of all government emissions. In 2023, it spent $860bn, generating almost 152Mt of climate pollution through a combination of overseas operations, jet-fuel consumption and domestic base upkeep – as well as emissions from manufacturing the weapons, ships, tanks and planes it operates, according to a previous analysis by Transnational Institute. The 2026 emissions figure uses the same methodology based on military spending, calculating emissions from the Pentagon's operations and full supply chain from the vast US military-industrial complex. The US currently operates 877 overseas military bases – two and a half times more than the rest of the world combined, according to recent analysis. A growing share of the Pentagon budget goes to private companies, with more than half its discretionary spending between 2020 and 2024 going to weapons contractors. The Pentagon has long been the world's largest institutional greenhouse gas emitter. The 2026 $1tn budget will make the total Pentagon carbon footprint equivalent to the annual emissions from 47 coal power plants. Yet the Pentagon's true climate impact will almost certainly be worse, as the calculation does not include emissions generated from future supplemental funding such as the billions of dollars appropriated separately for military equipment for Israel and Ukraine in recent years. Every megaton of CO2 counts, as emissions drive global heating, which is supercharging deadly, destructive and costly extreme weather such as hurricanes, wildfires and drought. The US is already spending nearly $1tn a year on disaster recovery, one recent analysis found. Next year's Pentagon emissions will cause $47bn in economic damages including impacts on agriculture, human health and property from extreme weather, according to the EPA social cost of carbon calculator, adjusted to 2025 dollars. The $150bn Pentagon budget top-up is about five times the annual budget allocated to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema) in recent years – an agency that Trump has threatened to eliminate entirely. 'Amidst a summer of oppressive heat, the Trump administration is dismantling the government's disaster preparedness and response capabilities. Prioritizing military expansion while underfunding disaster response doesn't keep communities safe,' said co-author Lorah Steichen, policy manager at CCI. 'The $150bn increase to military spending is comparable to the amount needed to fund whole-building, deep-energy retrofits for all the nation's public housing units – a true investment in human security.' US military spending and emissions are the highest in the world by a long way. And it is thanks to the US that states are not required to account for military emissions to the UN. In the run-up to the Kyoto protocol, the 1997 international treaty that set binding targets for greenhouse gas reductions, the Pentagon successfully lobbied the Clinton White House to push for a blanket exemption for emissions generated by military fuel use. Still, the total military carbon footprint is estimated at about 5.5% of global emissions – excluding greenhouse gases from conflict and war fighting. This is more than the combined contribution of civilian aviation (2%) and shipping (3%). And the Pentagon has long warned that water scarcity, sea-level rise and desertification in vulnerable regions could lead to political instability and forced migration, framing climate change as a 'threat multiplier' to US interests. In 1991, George HW Bush formally acknowledged climate change as a national security threat. In March this year Trump's defence secretary, Pete Hegseth, wrote on X: 'The @DeptofDefense does not do climate change crap. We do training and warfighting.' Hegseth ordered the termination of dozens of climate studies and renewable energy programs at the Pentagon aimed at making the military both more efficient and resilient. The Pentagon did not respond to requests for comment. The 2024 report is no longer on its website. Military spending is rising across the globe, hitting a record $2.7tn in 2024. This military buildup will have catastrophic climate consequences. Kinney from Ceobs said: 'We cannot keep ignoring the military's contribution to the climate crisis – militaries must be transparent about the scale of their emissions and must make serious commitments to reduce their carbon footprint.'
