The Dictatorship
It’s Tulsi Gabbard’s turn to target Trump’s enemies
President Donald Trump was impeached in December 2019, charged by the House of Representatives with abusing his office to gain leverage over Joe Biden in the upcoming presidential election. This week, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard rebooted that scandal with the release of a handful of newly declassified documents that question the beginning of the impeachment investigation — in hopes of discrediting everything that followed.
MS NOW confirmed Wednesday that Gabbard’s office has sent criminal referrals to the Justice Department for the whistleblower whose concern over a phone call between Trump and Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy launched the impeachment inquiry and the former inspector general who fielded their complaint. The referrals were first reported by Fox News.
Gabbard’s new disclosures mirror a well-worn playbook used by Trump’s loyalists to investigate his investigators. But in every instance, including this latest endeavor, the evidence gathered of wrongdoing on Trump’s part has far outweighed proof of misconduct from his investigators.
In every instance, the evidence gathered of wrongdoing on Trump’s part has far outweighed proof of misconduct from his investigators.
In Gabbard’s telling, as she posted on Xthe process was an inherently corrupt conspiracy where “deep state actors within the Intelligence Community concocted a false narrative that Congress used to usurp the will of the American people.” Michael Atkinson, former inspector general for the Intelligence Community, is painted in a press release accompanying the new materials as a rogue actor who spun a secondhand tale into an attempted coup.
Newly-declassified records expose how deep state actors within the Intelligence Community concocted a false narrative that Congress used to usurp the will of the American people and impeach duly-elected President @realDonaldTrump in 2019.
Today, we reveal the truth 👇… pic.twitter.com/oLXW5nqi2n
— DNI Tulsi Gabbard (@DNIGabbard) April 13, 2026
The materials posted Monday do provide an interesting window into the chain of events eventually leading to Trump’s first impeachment. Among them are official records from the preliminary 14-day investigation Atkinson undertook to determine that the whistleblower’s initial complaint was of “urgent concern” and needed to be reported to Congress. Also included are transcripts from Atkinson’s two closed-door interviews with the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, one before the White House released the transcript of the Zelenskyy call and one after the impeachment inquiry was underway.
But despite Gabbard’s breathless claims of a “coordinated effort … to manufacture a conspiracy,” nothing among the materials contradicts anything uncovered later. If anything, the initial interviews with the whistleblower, conducted in late August 2019, line up neatly with the fuller story that would be revealed over the coming weeks in the press and during the House’s impeachment inquiry. Both the whistleblower and a corroborating witness were extremely forthcoming about exactly what they did and did not know about the call, and why they were deeply concerned by Trump’s repeating conspiracy theories and pressing Zelenskyy to resume an investigation into Biden.

Gabbard’s cries of “politicization” from Atkinson are likewise overblown. Her claim is based on a section in the IG’s interview process where subjects were asked if they have anything in their background that might reveal any biases that could be used against them. The responses given suggest a certain hesitation to speak out for fear their words would be spun into right-wing attacks but was overridden by the necessity to speak out. Atkinson transparently mentioned in a letter to then-acting DNI Joseph Maguire that there was an “indicia of an arguable political bias” from the complainant, but that it didn’t alter his determination that their information was credible.
Maguire initially prevented Atkinson from providing the complaint to Congress, claiming that the Justice Department ruled it was outside of the IG’s remit. Atkinson disagreed and told lawmakers an “urgent concern” existed, as he believed the law required him, but did not provide the whistleblower’s complaint. Instead, it was only after media reports of the investigation and the White House’s subsequent release of the so-called perfect call with Zelenskyy that Atkinson was able to speak to Congress about the complaint directly.
All of this, in Gabbard’s telling, amounted to a “weaponization” of the process.
Several things stand out at this point. First is how ill-equipped Gabbard is to be leading America’s intelligence community. Her emphasis on how the first people to come forward about Trump’s scheme didn’t have firsthand knowledge of the call would be laughable if it weren’t so inept. It is literally the job of the intelligence community to consume partial information as it is received and work that raw data into a complete analysis. What Gabbard is essentially saying is that someone who only saw a single piece of the puzzle, at first, cannot be trusted to put together a picture in their head once more pieces have come together.
It is literally the job of the intelligence community to consume partial information as it is received and work that raw data into a complete analysis.
Second is how blatantly she has copied the failed formula of the GOP’s efforts to discredit the Russia investigation during Trump’s first term. For years now, through numerous investigations from the House and an independent counsel alike, Republicans have tried to claim wrongdoing from the FBI and other supposed “deep state” figures when first investigating hints of Russian interference in the 2016 election. But John Durham’s four-year-long probe came up empty, and despite Trump’s demands for revenge, there have been no criminal charges filed against anyone involved in the case.
Finally, it’s worth remembering Gabbard’s position when she was serving as a U.S. representative from Hawaii during Trump’s first impeachment. By the time the House voted on the articles of impeachment, she was already running a longshot bid for president. Accordingly, she was attempting to position herself as not beholden to the left wing, but still a viable candidate to be the Democratic nominee.
Gabbard was the only Democrat in the House to vote “present” on the articles. But she made clear in a statement afterward that she believed “President Trump is guilty of wrongdoing.” Her vote, or nonvote rather, was cast because, in her view, “removal of a sitting President must not be the culmination of a partisan process, fueled by tribal animosities that have so gravely divided our country.” The centrism by way of cowardice branding that brought her to prominence has fully given way — she now simply yields to the rightward pressures she finds herself under as part of Trump’s cabinet.
In his first interview with the House Permanent Select Committee on IntelligenceAtkinson described himself as a first responder, one who may not have had the full picture, but who had heard a fire alarm ringing and chose to act. “I don’t know whether it is just smoke, don’t know whether it is a small fire,” he told lawmakers as he refused to reveal what he’d learned from his preliminary findings. “All I know is that there was a time when … another first responder was not getting information about an alleged fire.”
Atkinson did what he thought was right and in accordance with the law by telling Congress that a complaint existed. The whistleblower did the same, despite the potential reprisals they’d face from a vengeful White House. Gabbard is now targeting them specifically for doing so, even as it is her job to be the early warning system against the nation’s greatest threats. It’s disturbing then to think what alarm bells she would prefer to silence, what risks she would take with America’s safety, rather than risk upsetting Trump.
Hayes Brown is a writer and editor for MS NOW. He focuses on politics and policymaking at the federal level, including Congress and the White House.
The Dictatorship
Putin visits China to reaffirm Russia ties as Xi also seeks stability with Trump
BEIJING (AP) — Russian President Vladimir Putin arrived Tuesday night in China for meetings with Chinese leader Xi Jinping less than a week after U.S. President Donald Trump wrapped up his own trip to Beijing.
Putin’s plane landed in Beijing, where he was greeted by Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and an honor guard, as well as youths in light blue shirts waving Chinese and Russian flags and chanting, “Welcome, welcome, warmly welcome!”
His two-day visit is likely to be closely watched as Beijing seeks to maintain stable relations with the United States while also preserving strong ties with Russia.
The Kremlin has said Putin and Xi plan to discuss economic cooperation between the two countries, but also “key international and regional issues.” The visit coincides with the 25th anniversary of the Sino-Russian Treaty of Friendship signed in 2001.
AP AUDIO: Putin visits China to reaffirm Russia ties as Xi also seeks stable US relations after Trump summit
AP correspondent Charles de Ledesma reports Russia’s leader is visiting China to reaffirm ties with President Xi Jinping.
China is a key trading partner for Russia, especially after Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Beijing has said it is neutral in the conflict while maintaining trade ties with the Kremlin despite economic and financial sanctions by the U.S. and Europe.
Putin said in a video address released before his visit that bilateral ties are at “a truly unprecedented level” and the relationship plays an important role globally, China’s official Xinhua News Agency reported Tuesday.
There is “no connection” between the visits by Trump and Putin, presidential aide Yuri Ushakov said Monday, noting the trip by the Russian leader was agreed in advance, several days after Putin and Xi spoke via videoconference on Feb. 4.
“The Trump visit was about stabilizing the world’s most important bilateral relationship; the Putin visit is about reassuring a long-standing strategic partner,” said Wang Zichen, deputy secretary-general for the Beijing-based think tank Center for China & Globalization. “For China, these two tracks are not mutually exclusive.”
Putin and Xi call each other ‘friend’
Putin last visited China in September 2025 to attend the annual summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization in Tianjin, watch a military parade honoring the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II, and hold talks with Xi.
At the time, Xi called his counterpart an “old friend ” while Putin addressed Xi as “dear friend.” In China, “old friend” is a very rare diplomatic term used by the government and party to describe favored foreigners.
In April, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov visited Beijing and met Xi, who described the bilateral relationship as “precious” in the current international context. Xi said China and Russia needed to strengthen and defend their shared interests.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said over the weekend that Putin’s trip also would allow Russia to receive direct updates and exchange views with China on its talks with the U.S.
During Trump’s visit, Xi described the bilateral relationship between the U.S. and China as the world’s most important and said they should see each other as partners rather than rivals. By the end of the two-day summit, the countries said they would work on a new framework to manage “a constructive China-U.S. relationship of strategic stability.”
Wang of the center for China & Globalization observed, “Beijing wants stable relations with the West, continued strategic trust with Moscow, and enough diplomatic room to present itself as an unbiased major power capable of talking to all sides.”
China is Russia’s primary trade partner
For some, Putin’s visit is meant to reinforce the partnership between Russia and China that has strengthened in recent years.
China has become Russia’s top trading partner following the start of the war in Ukraine, and is the top customer for Russian oil and gas supplies. Moscow expects the war in Iran to increase the demand. China also has ignored demands from the West to stop providing high-tech components for Russia’s weapons industries.
Ushakov, the Russian presidential aide, said Russia’s oil exports to China grew by 35% in the first quarter of 2026 and that Russia is one of the biggest exporters of natural gas to China.
During “the crisis in the Middle East,” Russia remains a reliable energy supplier and China is a “responsible consumer,” Ushakov said.
Putin noted earlier this month that Moscow and Beijing have reached “a very substantial step forward in our cooperation in the oil and gas sector.”
“Practically all the key issues have been agreed upon,” he said. “If we succeed in finalizing these details and bringing them to a conclusion during this visit, I will be extremely pleased.”
Putin also praised their bilateral relationship as a crucial, balancing force in international relations.
“Interaction between such nations as China and Russia undoubtedly serves as a factor of deterrence and stability,” he said.
Moscow welcomes China’s dialogue with the U.S. as another stabilizing element for the global economy, Putin added.
“We stand only to benefit from this, from the stability and constructive engagement between the U.S. and China,” he said.
The Dictatorship
Senate confirms Steve Pearce to lead the Bureau of Land Management
ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. (AP) — The U.S. Senate confirmed President Donald Trump’s pick to oversee the management of a quarter-billion acres of public lands on Monday, as the administration pushes ahead with more mining and drilling while reversing conservation plans.
Former congressman Steve Pearce will lead the Interior Department’s Bureau of Land Management following Monday’s 46-43 confirmation vote. Pearce’s background as a Republican Party leader in New Mexico known for supporting public land leasing and industry made him a contentious pick. Democrats and environmental groups were strongly opposed.
He attempted to assuage any fears during his February confirmation hearing by noting that he grew up on a family farm where conserving the land and water was a necessity.
“The security and economic health of the country, especially the western states, rests squarely with the BLM,” he testified. “We can and must balance the different uses of public land. Local economies and future generations depend on us doing our job right.”
The land bureau has about 10,000 employees who manage roughly 10% of land in the U.S. It’s also responsible for 700 million acres (283 million hectares) of underground minerals, including major reserves of oil, natural gas and coal.
Trump and Republicans in Congress have been unraveling regulations from former President Joe Biden’s administration that are viewed as burdensome to industry. They have opened millions of acres of public lands for mining and drilling and canceled land plans and conservation strategies formulated under Biden.
The Democratic Party of New Mexico prior has called Pearce “an outright enemy of public lands,” suggesting he’s beholden to the oil and gas industry.
The Center for Western Priorities said Pearce’s confirmation was part of a broad assault by Trump and Republicans on public lands, pointing to the recent cancellation of grazing rules and other changes.
Pearce, a former fighter pilot and Vietnam War veteran, served seven terms in the U.S. House representing a district that spans oil fields, including portions of the Permian Basin and vast tracts of other public land.
He had a conservative voting record and advocated for ranchers when parts of Lincoln National Forest were closed to protect the endangered New Mexico meadow jumping mouse.
Pearce has said that his time in Congress and his visits to constituents showed him that the federal government had become what he called an absentee landlord. Instead of partnering with states and local communities on land management, he said the government was ruling over them.
As director, he vowed he would ensure local input would be part of his decision-making process.
While in Congress, Pearce urged the U.S. Interior Department to reduce the size of the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument outside Las Cruces, New Mexico, as part of a nationwide review of monument designations during Trump’s first term. He said a reduction would preserve traditional business enterprises on public lands. That earned him lasting ire from environmentalists who called for his nomination to be rejected.
___ Associated Press writer Morgan Lee in Santa Fe, New Mexico, contributed to this report.
___
Brown reported from Billings, Montana.
The Dictatorship
Senate approves war powers vote to rein in Trump on Iran
The eighth time is sort of the charm for the U.S. Senate.
Amid attendance issues and growing defections in the GOP ranks, the Senate on Tuesday approved a procedural vote related to a war powers resolution. If adopted, the war powers resolution would severely restrict President Donald Trump’s war powers in Iran.
After seven failed previous attempts, the Senate voted 50-47 to discharge the war powers resolution, with Republican Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky, Susan Collins of Maine, Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska joining with nearly all Democrats in backing the procedural motion. (Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., once again opposed the vote.)

Cassidy, the newest GOP defection, just lost his bid for reelection to the Senate over the weekend, after Trump backed a challenger in the Louisiana primary. Cassidy also voted to support an Iran war powers resolution in 2020.
Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., told MS NOW the Cassidy flip underscores there is “steady progress towards a realization that we are overextended and diplomacy is the only reasonable way to resolve this.”
But this victory will mostly be symbolic. Three GOP senators — John Cornyn, R-Texas, Thom Tillis, R-N.C., and Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala. — weren’t present for the vote Tuesday, hence why the resolution succeeded. The resolution will now get another procedural vote before a final up-or-down vote in the Senate.
Even if those senators supported the measure, the legislation would still need to be adopted in the House — and survive an almost certain veto from President Trump.
None of those things are likely. But after seven failed votes in the Senate, this victory is at least symbolic for Democrats.
Introduced by Tim Kaine, D-Va., the resolution directs the president “to remove the United States Armed Forces from hostilities within or against Iran.”
Last week, Kaine told reporters a day would come soon that Republicans joined Democrats on the resolution. By luck, or pure vengeance, that day came today.
Under Senate rulesa floor vote on the war powers resolution must occur within three calendar days — which should give Republicans more than enough time to get senators back to Washington to defeat the underlying resolution.
Still, the vote exposes growing frustration in the GOP ranks over the Iran war.
With the Iran conflict nearing the three month mark and a critical 90 day deadline, military action is supposed to cease unless Congress votes to declare or authorize war, according to the War Powers Resolution of 1973. The Trump administration, however, has disputed that the Iran war is on the clock, arguing the timeline has paused while in a ceasefire.
Still, the Senate’s vote comes as Democrats in the House are also expected to force a vote this week on reining in the president’s Iran war authority.
Last week, the House’s third vote on a war powers resolution failed with a 212-212 tied vote. Notably, the sole Democrat who voted with Republicans against that measure — Rep. Jared Golden, D-Maine — objected on technical grounds and has suggested he could vote for a slightly different resolution this week.
Jack Fitzpatrick contributed to this report.
Kevin Frey is a congressional reporter for MS NOW.
Peggy Helman is a desk associate at MS NOW.
Lillie Boudreaux
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
The Dictatorship8 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words






