Tuesday, February 24, 2026. More tied to Epstein face consequences, Chump is not among them and he prepares to deliver the State of the Union address, Democrats hear from a Homeland Security whistle-blower, and much more.
AFP reports, "London police on Monday arrested former ambassador Peter Mandelson in a probe into allegations over his ties to disgraced US financier Jeffrey Epstein, only days after ex-prince Andrew was detained. Mandelson, a pivotal figure in British politics and the UK's former envoy to Washington, was arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office following allegations arising from the latest set of documents linked to Epstein, released by the US government last month." Pan Pylas and Jill Lawless (AP) add, "Under U.K. law, police can hold a suspect without charge for up to 24 hours. This can be extended to a maximum of 96 hours. Mandelson could be charged, released unconditionally or released while investigations continue.Police are investigating Mandelson over claims he passed sensitive government information to Epstein a decade and a half ago." Callum Sutherland (TIME) notes, "Once a prominent figure in the U.K.'s ruling Labour Party, Mandelson was sacked as ambassador in September, just months after his appointment, following disclosures from a former batch of Epstein files that showed his relationship with the financier extended beyond what he’d previously disclosed."
Laura Strickler (NBC NEWS) notes former prince Andrew and Peter Mandelson as two who have stepped down over revelations of their ties to Epstein and Stickler notes others stepping down include former prime minister of Norway Thorbjorn Jagland, US attorney Kathy Ruemmler, US attorney Brad Karp, former US Senator George Mitchell, Emirati business man Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem, media mogul Casey Wasserman, former prince Andrew's wife Sarah Ferguson (she shut down her charity Sarah's Trust -- for more on her see Ann's many posts), Norway's Ambassador to Jordan and Iraq Mona Juul, Miroslav Lajcak who had been the national security advisor to Slovakia's prime minister, Jack Lang who resigned from The Arab World Institute, and former president of the Maldives Mohmed Waheed Hassan.
Alex Weprin (THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER) types, "Longevity guru Dr. Peter Attia is stepping aside as a contributor to CBS News, after correspondence between Jeffrey Epstein and the researcher and health media personality came to light in the release of the Epstein Files from the Department of Justice. CBS News staff were informed of the decision Monday in a note from the network's booking department, The Hollywood Reporter has learned. Attia told CBS that he would be resigning effective immediately." Types? He did not step down. That's a face saving move. As Ava and I noted two weeks ago, he thought he could stay with CBS NEWS and Bari Weiss, who picked him, thought he could as well. And they both tried to ride it out. However, his crude remarks were not going to be overlooked by CBS NEWS no matter what Bari thought and wanted. That was made clear to her Sunday and she informed Peter on Monday at which time they prepared the statement to allow him to save face. There is no face saving for him nor should there be. It's amazing -- and telling -- that he was removed from a protein bar company for his Epstein ties before CBS NEWS sent him packing.
The Guardian spoke with students, employees and alumni at some of the universities implicated.
On 9 February, faculty at Barnard College, the private women’s liberal arts’ college affiliated with Columbia University, published an open letter signed by more than 70 faculty members calling on the university to “acknowledge and investigate” recently released correspondence between Epstein and Francine LeFrak, a prominent donor and member of the school’s board of trustees. LeFrak appears in the Epstein files 15 times, according to reporting from the Barnard Bulletin.
In one appearance, LeFrak asked – in 2010 – to join a close friend and Epstein during “the holidays”; in another, later that year, she invited Epstein “as her guest” to a trip to Rwanda, where she founded an initiative that provides occupational training and employment for female survivors of that country’s genocide.
The letter notes that the connection between Epstein and LeFrak is “repugnant”, particularly since the interaction took place following Epstein’s 2008 conviction of soliciting prostitution from a minor.
“We do not believe that people who maintained contact with a notorious sex trafficker and convicted sex offender express our values, nor have they behaved as proper trustees of Barnard College,” the letter states. It also calls on Barnard to remove LeFrak’s name from the newly constructed Francine A LeFrak Center for Well-Being, which houses the school’s sexual violence education, prevention and outreach program, among other initiatives.
Many faculty members expressed confusion and outrage specifically regarding LeFrak’s relationship to a program that is meant to encourage the health and wellbeing of young women.
“I just feel a real, deep disappointment, because I think, as a women’s college, our mission is directly antithetical to every revelation of those files,” a Barnard professor, who asked to remain anonymous, said.
“It is some very privileged, powerful, in many cases secretive and nefarious men controlling the lives and narratives around a wide swath of women. How can a women’s college – with its stated commitments to women’s health, wellbeing, excellence – have a prominent name on campus that is now associated with a sex offender?”
A Barnard spokesperson the school has “retained independent counsel to review the facts and advise the college accordingly”, and noted that “Barnard is a place where women’s education is championed and where women are supported, uplifted and given the tools to become the best versions of themselves. Barnard has never accepted money from Jeffrey Epstein, and we are not aware of any connection to the college.”
Elsewhere, Columbia University disciplined two people affiliated with its dental college after documents revealed that they helped Epstein’s girlfriend get into the school. Dr Letty Moss-Salentijn was stripped of her title as vice-dean of the dental college while Dr Thomas Magnani was removed from the school’s admissions review committee and volunteer leadership roles.
The university also noted that they will be making a donation of $210,000, the same amount it received from Epstein and related entities, to two New York-based non-profit organizations supporting survivors of sexual abuse and human trafficking.
Across the world, people are paying for their questionable relationship with a convicted pedophile and a sex trafficker. All over except in the White House where you have so many people who've had relationships with Epstein. Dareh Gregorian (NBC NEWS) noted earlier this month:
During a testy oversight hearing on Wednesday. Rep. Becca Balint, D-Vt., pressed Attorney General Pam Bondi on whether any current administration officials have been questioned by the Justice Department about their ties to Epstein.
"I'm stunned that you want to continue talking about Epstein," Bondi replied while sidestepping the question.
Gregorian notes Robert Kennedy Jr., Howard Lutnick, Doctor Oz, Stephen Feinberg, John Phelan, Kevin Warsh, Tom Barrack, Elon Musk, Steve Bannon and Donald Chump all had ties to Epstein.
A bombshell report revealed Monday that under the first Trump administration, the FBI appeared to have issued a “stand down” order to New York Police Department investigators regarding their criminal probe into Jeffrey Epstein, an order that came just five days after the disgraced financier’s arrest in 2019.
The existence of the supposed directive was revealed by law professor and legal scholar Ryan Goodman, who found it buried within the Justice Department's recent release of around 3.5 million files on Epstein.
“The directive applied to NYPD’s Special Victims Unit – the group specially trained and equipped to handle sex crimes and child abuse cases,” Goodman wrote in a report published Monday in Just Security, a non-partisan law and policy journal.
“At the time, the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office (DANY) had an ongoing investigation involving Epstein’s victims, the documents reveal, but the FBI assumed that would come to a halt as well following the Bureau’s directive.”
The relevant file is an email dated July 11, 2019, sent just five days after Epstein was arrested on sex-trafficking charges.
“[Redacted] just called – FBI reached out to NYPD leadership already and they were told that SVU has been directed to stand down and that all Epstein stuff needs to go to and through us,” reads the email, of which both the sender and recipient’s names had been redacted.
In another email, this one dated Jan. 29, 2020, apparent FBI agents seem to confirm the existence of the supposed “stand down” order, with one noting that the NYPD’s investigation was likely closed after the directive was issued.
Tonight, Chump offers some form of State of the Union address. MEIDASTOUCH NEWS and MOVEON.ORG will be highlighting an alternative featuring Democrats while Chump stumbles through whatever he has planned. Katie Phang and Joy Reid will host. It will kick off 8:00 pm EST and you can stream it here.
When President Donald Trump gives his State of the Union address Tuesday, he will face a public that increasingly questions his priorities and expresses broad doubts about whether his proposed policies are helping the nation, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
Adding to the pile of alarming indicators for the president’s party heading into this year’s midterms, Trump’s approval rating among political independents has dipped to a new low in CNN polling.
Just 32% of Americans now say that Trump has had the right priorities, while 68% say he hasn’t paid enough attention to the country’s most important problems. That’s the president’s most negative reading on that question to date during either of his terms in office. At the same time, Americans say, 61% to 38%, that Trump’s policies will move the country in the wrong direction rather than the right one. And Trump’s job approval rating among all adults remains mired at 36%.
[. . .]
Some of the steepest declines include a 19-point drop in approval among Latino Americans and an 18-point drop among Americans younger than 45. Among political independents, Trump’s approval rating has dropped 15 points over the past year to 26%, the lowest it’s been in either of his terms.
His second year, however, is already suffering from many of the same problems that plagued the first term — erratic messaging, policy reversals, plummeting poll numbers and intraparty tussles.
The president’s crackdown on immigration was met with bipartisan blowback. He posted a racist depiction of former President Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle, prompting several Republicans to condemn the post and to demand an apology that didn’t happen. Six House Republicans defied him to join Democrats in overturning his Canada tariffs. Then the Supreme Court struck down his preferred method of imposing global tariffs as unconstitutional, throwing his economic agenda into chaos.
And as Trump readies his State of the Union message on Tuesday, Republicans facing disappointed voters in the midterms fear the White House isn’t sufficiently focused on the economic message that could allow them to keep control of Congress. A Democratic takeover of either chamber or both could halt any legislation Trump tried to pass and invite aggressive oversight and investigations.
“Things are starting to unravel a little bit, and I think it gives Republicans an opportunity to step away from the Trump world and really kind of take back the messaging to voters, because they’re going to need to, if they want to not get completely blown out of the water come midterms,” Republican strategist Maura Gillespie said.
When President Trump gives his State of the Union address on Tuesday night, more than a dozen Democratic congresswomen plan to again make a sartorial political statement by wearing white, according to the Democratic Women's Caucus.
Democratic congresswomen have used fashion as a form of protest against Mr. Trump since his first address to a joint session of Congress in 2017, then donning suffragist white in support of women's rights.
In the years since, they've mostly stuck with that choice, with the exception of 2018, when some wore black in support of the #MeToo movement. They also broke tradition during last year's speech, which wasn't technically a State of the Union, wearing pink to highlight their opposition to Mr. Trump's policies.
Rep. Teresa Leger Fernández of New Mexico, who leads the 96-member Democratic Women's Caucus, told CBS News that the color choice "depends on where we're at in the moment."
"This year, there are specific attacks on women's ability to vote," she said. "The Democratic Women's Caucus is wearing white both to honor that fight that women have always had and to signal we are still in the fight."
Leger Fernández will skip the State of the Union address itself, but other members of the caucus are expected to be in attendance. Members who have alternate plans will still wear white, according to a spokesperson for the group. A number of Democrats in Congress plan to attend a rally organized by the group MoveOn, dubbed the "People's State of the Union," on the National Mall during Mr. Trump's speech.
The White House's plan to dispatch members of President Donald Trump’s Cabinet to competitive districts for the midterm elections to aid Republican efforts is the best thing Democrats could hope for, said MS NOW Producer Steve Benen.
“[President Donald Trump’s] first-term Cabinet was a mess,” said Benen. “… But a month into the sixth year of Trump’s presidency, it’s probably fair to say that his second-term Cabinet is worse.”
Eleven months ago, New York Times’ Frank Bruni criticized Trump’s fledgling Cabinet in a scathing report, outlining the fact that Trump was not hiring for aptitude or intelligence. Trump, Bruni said, wanted bootlicks.
“Trump chose people for senior administration positions not because they had demonstrated the skills and disposition that those jobs required, not because they had paid their dues, not because they had proved their mettle. He wanted provocateurs. He wanted sycophants. … Competence didn’t enter the equation, so competence isn’t among the results. He got exactly what he paid for, and now a nation is paying the price," Bruni wrote.
One year later Benen said the results are clear.
“Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem is at the center of a variety of ongoing controversies and faces bipartisan calls for her ouster,” said Benen. “Attorney General Pam Bondi recently humiliated herself during a congressional hearing. Around the same time, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. talked about his past history of snorting cocaine off toilet seats against a backdrop of systemic problems at the federal department he ostensibly leads
Rachel Maddow noted the corrupt administration last night on her MS NOW program.
A former ICE teacher at a Georgia training center told congressional Democrats on Feb. 23 that new agents are trained to run roughshod over constitutional rights, including the right against a home invasion, and that the federal agency is “broken.”
Ryan Schwank, who resigned from Immigration and Customs Enforcement on Feb. 13, told the forum that ICE is training new agents to violate Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure.
“ICE is lying to Congress and the American people about the steps it is taking to ensure its 10,000 new officers faithfully uphold the Constitution,” Schwank, who joined ICE as legal counsel in 2021, said in the draft.
The DHS on Monday denied his allegations.
But Schwank said one two-hour program was cut to 10 minutes, “shoe-horned into a lesson [on the Fourth Amendment,” Schwank said, answering a question from Sen. Amy Klobuchar, a Minnesota Democrat.
Klobuchar asked Schwank to go over what programs had been skipped or condensed, noting, “It’s been my constituents that have been dragged out of their homes.”
The Department of Homeland Security, which runs ICE, has said all of its officers were following federal law throughout Operation Metro Surge in Minneapolis and other widespread escalations such as in Chicago.
Schwank said he was told to teach officer candidates they could apprehend individuals with only an administrative removal order, not a judge’s warrant — a practice used in Minneapolis.
Schwank countered administration claims that it has maintained training standards even as it has condensed some aspects of its program.
“For the last five months, I watched ICE dismantle the training program, cutting 240 hours of vital classes from a 584 hour program, classes that teach the Constitution, our legal system, firearms training, the use of force, lawful arrests, proper detention and the limits of officers’ authority,” said Schwank, who recently trained cadets at the ICE academy in Georgia.
“They ceased all of the legal instructions regarding use of force. This means that cadets are not taught what it means to be objectively reasonable, the very standard which the law requires them to meet when deciding whether or not to use deadly force. Our jobs as instructors are to teach them so well that they can make split second decisions about what they can and cannot do in life or death situations,” he added.
“Yet, in the name of churning out an endless stream of officers, DHS leadership has dismantled the academic and practical tests that we need to know if cadets can safely and lawfully perform their job, all to satisfy an administration demanding they train thousands of new officers before the end of the year.”
Schwank is an attorney and former career ICE employee who resigned from the immigration agency less than two weeks ago. A spokesperson for Whistleblower Aid, the legal group representing Schwank, said he quit the agency in protest. It stands as one of the first instances of an ICE official who has served under the second Trump administration publicly rebuking the agency and the adequacy of its training. Schwank resigned from ICE on Feb. 13, according to congressional aides.
The hearing, organized by Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut and Rep. Robert Garcia of California, comes as calls for accountability grow in the wake of several incidents where federal immigration officers have deployed deadly force, including the January killing of Renee Good in Minneapolis. Schwank's testimony will likely fuel Democrats' refusal to fund the Department of Homeland Security until the Trump administration agrees to a number of reforms for ICE, including a prohibition on agents wearing masks.
"I am duty bound to tell you the ICE Basic Immigration Enforcement Training Program is now deficient, defective, and broken," Schwank said Monday. He alleged ICE officials are lying about the amount of training new recruits receive.
Some of the previously unreported documents released on Monday indicate that ICE officers are now training for significantly fewer hours than they did before President Trump’s hiring surge. Others suggest that several training classes appear to have been cut from the required syllabus, including one titled “Use of Force Simulation Training” and others on immigration law and ICE’s legal authorities.
Together, the new disclosures underscore concerns about the conduct and preparedness of Homeland Security Department agents, who have shot and killed at least three American citizens over the last year. Mr. Trump’s decision to order immigration officers into major American cities has led to a rise in violent encounters with members of the public, leading to fears that poor training for new agents will produce more chaos.
We'll wind down with this from Senator Richard Blumenthal:
[WASHINGTON, D.C.] – Today, U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (PSI) Ranking Member Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) released a memorandum and previously undisclosed documents revealing new details about drastic cuts the Trump Administration is making to the training and testing of new Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Enforcement Removal Operations (ERO) officers.
The documents were produced to Blumenthal via a disclosure from two Department of Homeland Security whistleblowers who have requested that they not be identified. Specifically, these documents provide new evidence regarding: (1) the aggressive graduation targets that ICE aims to achieve for new ERO officers in fiscal 2026; (2) cuts of more than a dozen significant practical examinations which potential ICE ERO officers no longer must undergo; (3) numerous classes which appear to have been wholly cut from the training curriculum for ICE ERO officers; and (4) the drastic reduction in the hours of training for potential ICE ERO officers.
These documents appear to directly contradict representations made under oath to Congress by Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons.
“We know about the Trump Administration’s decimation of training for immigration officers and its secret policy to shred your Constitutional rights because of the brave Americans who are speaking out today,” Blumenthal said. “They are coming to Congress because we have the responsibility to not only bear witness to these crimes, but to do something to make sure they don’t happen again.”
“To anyone else who is repulsed by what you’re seeing or what authorities are asking you to do, please know that you can make a real difference by coming forward. You’ll meet a moral imperative. Our door is open, we are here for you when you are ready, and we will do everything within our power to protect your rights.”
Blumenthal released the documents ahead of a bicameral public forum he is hosting with U.S. Representative Robert Garcia (D-CA), Ranking Member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, on constitutional violations and abuses by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
The forum will feature testimony from Ryan Schwank, a whistleblower who is speaking publicly for the first time about his experience as an Instructor for the incoming “surge” of new ICE recruits at the ICE Academy at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (“FLETC”) in Glynco, Georgia.
Teyana Gibson Brown, a U.S. citizen and resident of Minneapolis, Minnesota, will also testify about ICE agents forcefully entering her home without a judicial warrant, breaking down her door and pointing guns at her family. Stevan Bunnell, the General Counsel for the Department of Homeland Security from 2013 to 2017, will testify as well.
A link to the memorandum and attachments is available here.
Staying with Homeland Security, THE NEW YORK TIMES notes, "The Department of Homeland Security’s funding has lapsed and lawmakers are deadlocked over a proposal to restore it, with Democrats seeking restrictions on the federal agents carrying out President Trump’s immigration crackdown." Brittney Melton (NPR) adds, "The agency shut down after lawmakers failed to meet a Friday deadline to fund DHS and its workforce of over 260,000 people. The funding lapse points to a greater issue: Congress's consistent failure to do its job on time." Sahil Kapur, Scott Wong, Julie Tsirkin and Frank Thorp V (NBC NEWS) explain that the Democrats and the White House continue to debate what's needed before funding can be approved, "The two sides have continued to trade offers, signaling some hope for an agreement. But it remains unclear which Democratic demands the White House will agree to and Congress left Washington on Thursday without a deal.
ED O'KEEFE: We turn now to House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, who joins us this morning from New York City. Leader Jeffries, thank you for being here.
DEMOCRATIC LEADER HAKEEM JEFFRIES: Good morning. Great to be with you.
ED O'KEEFE: So as this shutdown continues, I want to remind our viewers what it is, exactly, congressional Democrats are seeking to reopen the Department of Homeland Security. You want immigration agents to show IDs, to wear body cameras, take off their masks, stop racial profiling and seek judicial warrants to enter private property. Talks between the White House and congressional Democrats are continuing. Are you willing to compromise, to let any of these go, to get the government reopened?
REP. JEFFRIES: Well, our value proposition is simple, taxpayer dollars should be used to make life more affordable for the American people, not brutalize or kill them, as we horrifically saw in Minneapolis with the cold blooded killings of Rene Nicole Good and Alex Pretti. We know, and the American people clearly know, that ICE is totally out of control and they need to be reined in. Because the American people deserve immigration enforcement that is fair, that is just, and that is humane. And so, we need dramatic change at ICE, including, but not limited to, the types of things that you laid out before any DHS funding bill moves forward.
ED O'KEEFE: With the exception of some flexibility on body cameras, because they're starting to spend some money to get those out there, some Republicans have rejected this list of policy reform proposals. You guys still seem miles apart. So when, conceivably, will we see this resolved? And again, I ask you, if- are there any of these points that you're willing to let go in order to get the government reopened?
REP. JEFFRIES: Well, we're willing to have a good faith conversation about everything, but fundamentally we need change that is dramatic, that is bold, that is meaningful and that is transformational. And these are common sense things. For instance, judicial warrants should be required before ICE agents can storm private property or rip everyday Americans out of their homes. We need to make sure that there are actual independent investigations, so that if state and local laws are violated, in many cases, violently violated, that state and local authorities have the ability to criminally investigate and criminally prosecute anyone who has violated the law. Because we cannot trust Kristi Noem or Pam Bondi to conduct an independent investigation. We believe that sensitive locations should be off limits, sensitive locations like houses of worship, schools, hospitals or polling sites, and that fundamentally ICE should be targeting violent felons who are here unlawfully, as opposed to violently targeting law abiding immigrant families, which is completely inconsistent with what Donald Trump promised the American people he would do.
ED O'KEEFE: Right. And we, of course, this past week reported that about 14% of those detained had violent criminal records. About 60% of them were wanted on criminal records overall. But it was that 14%, violent criminals. Again, I just- it sounds like this is going to go on a while, because Tom Homan wasn't terribly flexible on anything, especially on the issue of warrants and masks. You're not ceding any ground. So there's a few things coming up here. For example, State of the Union is scheduled for a week from Tuesday. Should it be held if the Department of Homeland Security is shut down?
REP. JEFFRIES: Well, we'll cross that bridge when we get to it. It is certainly my hope--
ED O'KEEFE: --Sounds like you're going to get to it, though. I mean--
REP. JEFFRIES:--we can come to a resolution in advance of it. Well, here's the thing, the administration and Republicans have made a clear decision that they would rather shut down FEMA, shut down the Coast Guard and shut down TSA, than enact the type of dramatic reforms necessary so that ICE and other DHS law enforcement agencies are conducting themselves like every other law enforcement professional in the country. For instance, police officers don't use masks. County Sheriffs don't use masks. State troopers don't use masks. Why is it that ICE agents who are untrained, are being unleashed on American communities with this type of lawlessness, violence and brutality. Unacceptable, unconscionable, and it's un-American.
When an immigration agent shot Julio C. Sosa-Celis in the leg last month in Minneapolis, touching off hours of tense protests, the Trump administration rushed to sell a version of events that demonized the wounded man and defended the agent.
About two hours after the gunfire, a Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman claimed that three people had attacked an agent with a broom and snow shovel. She said the agent “fired a defensive shot to defend his life” as he was “being ambushed.” The next day, Kristi Noem, the homeland security secretary, accused the men of trying to kill the agent.
But the federal government’s account soon shifted. And by Friday, it had fully unraveled.
When assault charges were filed days after the shooting against Mr. Sosa-Celis and one of the other men, Alfredo A. Aljorna, officials changed their narrative, saying it was not three people who attacked the agent, but two. Several other details revealed in court records also differed from the original account.
Then on Thursday, the top federal prosecutor in Minnesota asked a judge to drop the case, saying that “newly discovered evidence in this matter is materially inconsistent with the allegations.” On Friday, the acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Todd Lyons, said two agents had been placed on leave for providing accounts that appeared to conflict with video footage of what happened. Those agents, he said, could eventually face termination and prosecution.
[. . .]
The collapse of the government’s narrative, which came just as the administration was ending its more than two-month surge of immigration agents to Minnesota, was the latest instance of the Department of Homeland Security providing an account of a shooting that later proved questionable or outright wrong. For many, especially those already skeptical of the Trump administration’s deportation agenda, the repeated emergence of evidence that undermines official accounts has cast doubt on almost anything the government says about immigration enforcement.
This is absolutely egregious. Two men were accosted by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, and one took a bullet to the leg. Then the federal government called them murderers and hit them with heavy charges, all for ICE’s own head to admit that his agents appear to have been lying under oath—a crime that this administration doesn’t seem to take very seriously.
This shooting happened one week after Renee Good was killed, and just over a week before Alex Pretti was killed. The Trump administration lied to us about both of those events, as well. Only time will tell just how many more of these ICE shootings were offensive rather than defensive.
On HBO's LAST WEEK TONIGHT WITH JOHN OLIVER last night, John addressed the lies of Homeland Security.
Students in more than three dozen states have walked out of class to protest the Trump administration’s deportation tactics in recent weeks, a wave of defiant demonstrations that continues as some officials have vowed to crack down.
Teenagers in Utah carried backpacks and bullhorns as they walked out of eight schools in Salt Lake County. In Maine, students in mittens convened on a bridge over the Kennebec River. Scores of students were seen stopping highway traffic in Maryland. Classmates at a high school in Sunnyside, Wash., lined a parking lot carrying hand-drawn posters. “We are skipping our lesson to teach you one,” read one.
But in Texas, where more than half of all public school students are Hispanic, Republican leaders have tried teaching a very different lesson of their own, threatening students, teachers and school districts with severe consequences for taking part in demonstrations.
Gov. Greg Abbott of Texas has suggested that state funding could be stripped from school districts and that students who are disorderly during protests should be arrested. The Texas Education Agency has warned that districts found to have facilitated walkouts could be taken over by the state.
“Schools and staff who allow this behavior should be treated as co-conspirators,” Mr. Abbott said in a social media post last week, which focused on one walkout in Kyle, Texas, outside of Austin.
Yet despite the threats from state officials — and the pleas to students from many school administrators — the protests over immigration enforcement did not stop.
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott threatening to take away state funding from high schools with students who participate in protests is a restriction of the First Amendment.
In response to high school students protesting Immigration and Customs Enforcement on Jan. 30, Abbott argued walkouts are disruptive and lead to criminal chaos, and the schools allowing this behavior should be treated as co-conspirators.
But what is so criminal about student walkouts?
This type of political demonstration has been conducted by students since 1766. The Great Butter Rebellion at Harvard University, where students protested poor food quality, is considered the first student protest in the United States.
As Seguin High sophomore Janelle walked to the corner of Silo and Eden roads in Arlington, a green shirt with a Mexican flag stitched on the back draped over her shoulders.
Worry, anger and fear all washed over her as she stood next to classmates and wondered what the consequences would be for walking out of school to protest recent deportations and deadly shootings related to immigration enforcement. Then she remembered her grandmother, who inspired her to attend Thursday’s protest in the first place.
“She came here as an immigrant,” Janelle said. “So I feel like I should be out here and show her that I can do it, and I can protect people.”
Janelle was one of many in Arlington and Mansfield who participated in walkouts this week to protest against the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Caitlin Leggett (KTXS) reports, "Students from Abilene High School walked out of class and marched to Abilene City Hall around noon Thursday, staging a student-led protest centered on concerns about immigration enforcement and what they described as recent actions by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement." KTAB/KRBC offer a photo essay here. CNN notes, "More than 100 Dripping Springs High School students walked out of class and marched Tuesday to protest Immigration and Customs Enforcement, but some participants left the demonstration with traffic citations. Students carried signs and chanted as they left campus. One student, asked what they decided to put on their sign, said, 'We are skipping our lessons to teach you one. ICE out'." Jacob Daniels (KRISTV) adds, "Students at multiple Corpus Christi Independent School District campuses walked out of classes Thursday afternoon, carrying signs and chanting in what many described as a powerful statement. The demonstration sparked debate among community members about student safety and supervision during the protest." Arthur Clayborn (KLTV) notes, "Kilgore High School students walked out of classes Thursday morning to protest deportations by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, with organizers saying recent family separations in their community motivated the demonstration. Student organizer Kemuel Ondinyo said he was inspired to act after watching similar protests at other Texas schools and witnessing deportations affecting people in his community." Bianca Seward (HOUSTON PUBLIC MEDIA) notes, "More than 50 students from the Houston Academy for International Studies walked out of school Tuesday protesting Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations in the United States. The protest, which students said they started planning last week, started just after noon. While chanting 'ICE off our streets, ICE off our streets,' several students said they were there to call attention to the treatment of immigrants under the Trump administration."
And on Friday, walk outs continued. Priscilla Rice (KERA) reports, "Young North Texans continue to protest the federal government’s anti-immigration policies by walking out of class. More than 200 students walked out of Grand Prairie High School just after 11 a.m. on Friday. Students told KERA stronger U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement measures have affected not only their community, but communities nationwide." WBAP notes, "Several dozen students walked out of the Dallas Uplift Williams Prepatory School Friday morning, hiking into Dallas to protest ICE immigration activities at the American Airlines Center. Waving flags from several nations, students say they are protesting immigration and other federal agent violence, illegal arrests, and illegal deportations of their teachers and neighbors who have been here for years." Daniel Perreault (KVUE) adds, "Students at multiple Austin ISD schools walked out of class during the school day once again on Friday to protest. Students from three Austin high schools walked out around 1:30 p.m. and then marched to Austin City Hall." And Matt Mitchell (HOODLINE) notes, "More than a hundred McNeil High School students walked out of class in Round Rock on Friday afternoon, marching off campus to the corner of McNeil Drive and Parmer Lane to protest recent actions by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The midday demonstration kicked off shortly after 2 p.m., part of a wave of student-led protests that has rolled across Central Texas since late January."
On Friday thousands of high school students walked out of Los Angeles-area schools to protest ICE’s Gestapo tactics, participating in another national “day of action.” Those who gathered outside the federal jail in downtown Los Angeles heroically stood up against an attack with gas and batons by federal agents.
Helicopter video by local television stations show demonstrators standing their ground near the U.S. Metropolitan Detention Center, many obviously teenagers, some shoving back and throwing objects at the federal thugs in self-defense.
[. . .]
In a related retaliatory action, Ricardo Lopez, a history teacher at the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) Charter Synergy Quantum Academy in South Los Angeles, was fired for opening a locked gate to allow students, who were then risking injury by climbing over gates and fences, to join the walkout, a move school administrators labeled insubordination. Already almost a thousand signatures have been collected demanding Lopez’s reinstatement. To date the United Teachers of Los Angeles (UTLA) bureaucracy has issued no statement in support of the victimized teacher.
A group of singers gathered in downtown Indianapolis Sunday night to protest U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
The demonstration, which was organized by Indy Singing Resistance, was held at Monument Circle at 6 p.m. Instead of chanting, protestors used their signing voices to express themselves.
In a release sent ahead of the protest, Singing Resistance indicated that a small group of people would lead all who show up for the event. Those leaders taught demonstrators the songs they planned to sing during the protest upon their arrival at the event. No singing experience was required for protest attendees.
In Tennessee, WCYB reports, "Despite rainy conditions, protesters took to the streets in Johnson City on today to rally against U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations in the region, saying they are concerned about what they describe as an increased ICE presence spreading across Northeast Tennessee. Community members gathered holding signs and chanting, saying they would not stay silent against what they described as growing enforcement efforts by ICE. Pandora Burns a protestor said, 'I mean they don't stop deporting people in the rain either so'."
Meanwhile unhinged Pam Bondi sent out a letter on Saturday announcing that all the Epstein files had been released.
The Epstein Class. A group Chump's protecting. His friends. Remember the ones that would be hurt by the release of the Epstein files? He yelled that at Marjorie Taylor Greene, remember? Christopher Lamb (CNN) reports:
Steve Bannon, a former White House adviser to US President Donald Trump, discussed opposition strategies with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein against Pope Francis, with Bannon saying he hoped to “take down” the pontiff, according to newly released files from the US Department of Justice.
Messages sent between the pair in 2019, released in the massive document dump last month, reveal Bannon courted the late financier in his attempts to undermine the former pontiff after leaving the first Trump administration.
Bannon had been highly critical of Francis whom he saw as an opponent to his “sovereigntist” vision, a brand of nationalist populism which swept through Europe in 2018 and 2019. The released documents from the DOJ appear to show that Epstein had been helping Bannon to build his movement.
“Will take down (Pope) Francis,” Bannon wrote to Epstein in June 2019. “The Clintons, Xi, Francis, EU – come on brother.”
Pope Francis was the people's pope so it's only natural that a disgusting creep like Steve Bannon would want to take him "down." The Epstein Class is being made uncomfortable and a few are having to find the exit door. Claire Zillman (FORBES) notes:
On Thursday, Goldman Sachs said general counsel Kathryn Ruemmler will leave the bank in June after the documents showed she stayed in close contact with Epstein until 2019, at one point calling him “Uncle Jeffrey” as she thanked him for high-end gifts. And on Friday, Dubai-based logistics group DP World named a new chair and new CEO, signaling the departure of Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem whose emails with Epstein included references to sexual experiences. Both ousters followed earlier resignations in the U.K. public sector, namely those of former U.S. ambassador Peter Mandelson from the House of Lords and Morgan McSweeney, Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s chief of staff who’d advised on Mandelson’s appointment.
Following an exodus of talent who have left the Wasserman Group talent agency after emails between founder Casey Wasserman and Jeffrey Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell were revealed in the Justice Department's latest tranche of documents, pressure for the founder to step down came to a boiling point. On Friday, Wasserman announced that he was selling the company as he had become a "distraction" to the business he founded 24 years ago.
The latest releases also placed a shadow over the previous accounts given by allies of President Trump — from Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick to Elon Musk — regarding their dealings with Epstein.
There is no suggestion of criminality around either Lutnick or Musk, but the latest batch of emails contradicted Lutnick’s earlier assertions of when he had cut off contact with Epstein and called into question Musk’s previously emphatic insistence that he “refused” to visit the disgraced financier’s Caribbean island.
In one newly released email, the entrepreneur asks Epstein which day or night might feature the wildest party on the island. It’s unclear if Musk actually visited.
Beyond all of that, there is the broader fear and anger raised by the nature of the Epstein story.
Specifically, it stokes the sense of a wealthy and powerful elite hovering above the rest of society, forming a chummy circle of mutual protection, and remaining out of reach of the laws and ethical standards to which everyone else is subject.
At a time when anti-elitist populism is already one of the strongest animating political forces in the United States — and in many other parts of the world — the Epstein story is rocket fuel.
A Donald Trump insider has been revealed to have been in "regular contact" with the late child sex abuser Jeffrey Epstein, including in one email that says "miss u," according to the latest DOJ release.
CBS News reported on the Epstein files release on Saturday in an article called, "Trump insider Tom Barrack kept in regular contact with Jeffrey Epstein for years, files show." Barrack is also an administration ambassador to Turkey.
"President Trump's longtime confidant Thomas Barrack, now serving as U.S. ambassador to Turkey and special envoy to Syria, was in regular, close contact with Jeffrey Epstein for years after Epstein's 2008 conviction for soliciting a minor, a CBS News analysis of over 100 texts and email exchanges from the newly released Justice Department documents shows," according to CBS.
The outlet further reported, "The correspondence places Barrack, a globe-trotting billionaire, among a circle of wealthy and influential figures who maintained social contact with Epstein even as his criminal history became widely known. Their relationship continued even after Barrack became a prolific fundraiser for Mr. Trump's 2016 campaign, and later, led his inaugural committee and became a frequent presence in the White House."
According to an FBI document released by the DOJ, the agency received a tip in June of 2021 from an individual whose name has been redacted, but is described as an alleged “victim,” a former member of the Sinaloa Cartel, and a close confidant of Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell.
According to the document, the individual was formally interviewed by an FBI agent, and accused Trump of being aware of and having funded “underage sex parties at the Donald Trump Golf course.”
That individual went on to claim that they had “recordings of Trump, Epstein and Maxwell discussing marketing strategies for high profile sex parties,” according to the FBI official who drafted the document, their name also redacted. The individual claimed that in one of the recordings, Trump can be heard stating “he was aware of the underage sex parties.”
Let's wind down with this from Senator Alex Padilla's office:
Padilla and Wyden sound alarm that IRS errors improperly exposed private taxpayer information to ICE
WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Senators Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Immigration Subcommittee, and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Ranking Member of the Senate Finance Committee, demanded answers and accountability from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) after the agency admitted in a court filing that the flawed system it adopted to transfer people’s home addresses to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) potentially led to thousands of records being shared improperly in violation of taxpayer privacy laws. In a new letter to Acting IRS Commissioner Scott Bessent and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, the Senators also raised grave concerns that the automated system the Trump Administration created to transfer taxpayer data to ICE may have misidentified a large but unknown number of taxpayers — possibly including American citizens — in response to ICE inquiries, potentially exposing them to immigration enforcement actions at a time when serious questions are being raised about how such actions are being carried out.
“The IRS failed to properly verify that the information it disclosed to ICE belonged to the correct taxpayers. Instead, it used a faulty, automated verification system to identify the taxpayers whose information it thought it could disclose under the terms of the agency’s data-sharing agreement, which it reached last year with the Department of Homeland Security,” wrote the Senators. “… The IRS now admits that this system led to exactly the kinds of grave mistakes our taxpayer privacy laws were designed to prevent, and that Congress as well as IRS employees previously warned could happen under this data-sharing agreement.”
Senators Padilla, Wyden, and additional Senate Democrats warned early last year that the data-sharing agreement between the IRS and ICE would result in serious errors and violate taxpayer privacy. They demanded details about the status and potential misuse of the data sharing program as recently as January 30 of this year.
“The risk to innocent people was entirely predictable once taxpayer data was used for immigration enforcement,” continued the Senators. “Because the administration ignored the warnings, we now face the extraordinarily troubling likelihood that in some significant, unknown number of cases, the IRS not only provided return information to ICE in violation of strict taxpayer privacy laws, but it also provided information about the wrong taxpayers. Those individuals may have been injured by ICE, improperly detained or imprisoned, or improperly deported.”
In their letter, the Senators called for explanations of exactly how many taxpayer records were shared improperly, who was responsible and what accountability measures will be taken, whether anyone has been wrongly detained or deported based on shared data, and what steps the Trump Administration is taking to notify taxpayers whose information was improperly disclosed. The letter was also signed by Senators Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Angus King (I-Maine), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), and Peter Welch (D-Vt.).
Last spring, Senators Padilla, Wyden, and Cortez Masto condemned the IRS’ plan to provide sensitive taxpayer information to the Department of Homeland Security to locate suspected undocumented immigrants. The Senators also led a March 2025 letter to IRS and DHS leadership raising the alarm on reports that DHS and the Department of Government Efficiency illegally requested sensitive taxpayer information from the IRS.
Full text of today’s letter is available here and below:
Dear Acting Commissioner Bessent and Secretary Noem:
We write with alarm following up on our January 29, 2026, letter to Acting Commissioner Bessent regarding the IRS’s disclosure of 47,289 taxpayers’ return information (including “last known addresses”) to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials. Validating our fears expressed in that letter, an IRS court filing made on February 11, 2026, confirms that thousands of these disclosures may have been improper.
The government has argued that it was permitted to disclose tax return information with respect to specific taxpayers who were under active investigation by ICE. That premise is subject to litigation, and ICE’s initial claim that it had more than a million active investigations underway is absurd. Furthermore, the IRS failed to properly verify that the information it disclosed to ICE belonged to the correct taxpayers. Instead, it used a faulty, automated verification system to identify the taxpayers whose information it thought it could disclose under the terms of the agency’s data-sharing agreement, which it reached last year with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). This agreement was signed by Secretaries Bessent and Noem. The IRS now admits that this system led to exactly the kinds of grave mistakes our taxpayer privacy laws were designed to prevent, and that Congress as well as IRS employees previously warned could happen under this data-sharing agreement.
Because it is common for multiple taxpayers to have similar or identical names and because not all ethnic groups follow the same naming conventions, the IRS needs more than an individual’s first and last name to ensure it does not disclose information about the wrong taxpayer in violation of Internal Revenue Code (IRC) section 6103.
In its recent court filing, the IRS admits it provided return information, including the taxpayers’ “last known addresses” (which may be current addresses unknown to ICE), even in many cases where ICE’s request for taxpayer information included a name but not a complete or accurate address.
As an example, if ICE requested the last known address of “John Doe” at “Unknown Address, 99999” the IRS’s automated system would disclose the last known address for a person named John Doe to ICE. This is because the IRS system only looked to see if the address field in ICE requests was or was not populated, not whether it was populated with an address that matched IRS records.
The IRS estimates that up to five percent of its 47,289 disclosures to ICE may have involved insufficient address data. In other words, thousands of taxpayers’ information may have been disclosed in violation of section 6103, including those who are not targets of immigration investigations.
The risk to innocent people was entirely predictable once taxpayer data was used for immigration enforcement. Because the administration ignored the warnings, we now face the extraordinarily troubling likelihood that in some significant, unknown number of cases, the IRS not only provided return information to ICE in violation of strict taxpayer privacy laws, but it also provided information about the wrong taxpayers. Those individuals may have been injured by ICE, improperly detained or imprisoned, or improperly deported.
That would be an unimaginable nightmare for those wrongly targeted people and their families. Conditions in ICE facilities are horrific, and 32 people died in ICE custody last year, meeting the record last reached in 2004, and another 8 have died this year alone. The Trump administration has deported people to foreign torture prisons, third countries they have no ties to, or back to their home countries, despite having pending asylum claims. Exposing people to such risk because of an improper sharing of tax information is unconscionable.
As noted in our prior letter, penalties for 6103 violations are severe. IRC section 7213 requires responsible employees to be terminated, and IRC section 7431 allows a taxpayer to bring a civil lawsuit for damages.
Injured taxpayers will not know they can sue until the government informs them of their rights. The government is required by section 7431 to inform the victims when a person is criminally charged with a violation of section 6103 or when the IRS proposes an adverse action against an employee.
Accordingly, please respond no later than March 15 to the following questions:
1. Exactly how many taxpayers’ return information was disclosed in circumstances that the IRS now considers improper or potentially improper?
a. How and when did you find out about the inappropriate disclosures?
b. Who at the IRS first became aware that the inappropriate disclosures were made?
2. Which officials are responsible for approving, executing, and supervising the disclosures now considered to be improper or potentially improper?
3. Has any IRS or DHS employee been investigated, charged, disciplined, placed on administrative leave, or otherwise held accountable in connection with any improper disclosures?
a. If not, explain why not.
b. If so, please identify the employee and describe the accountability measure taken.
4. Have DHS or ICE accessed, reviewed, relied upon, copied, or further disseminated the affected data before remediation efforts began?
5. What specific steps have DHS or ICE taken to prevent further disclosure or dissemination of the data?
6. What specific steps are DHS and ICE taking to dispose of data improperly disclosed by the IRS?
7. Have any of the 47,289 taxpayers whose information the IRS provided to ICE been questioned, arrested, detained, or deported?
a. If so, how many are among the subset of individuals whose information the IRS shared improperly with ICE?
b. What steps are the IRS and DHS taking to make this determination?
c. What plan has the IRS and DHS put in place to remedy any detainments or deportations made in error?
8. Have any affected taxpayers been notified that their information has been improperly disclosed?
a. If not, when will the notification occur?
b. If the IRS has concluded that such notice is not required, provide the legal basis for that determination.
We look forward to your prompt and complete response.
