GRUNGECAKE

Tag: President Trump

  • Ariana Grande fires back at Trump supporters in fiery Instagram post

    Ariana Grande
    [/media-credit] Ariana Grande

    Pop superstar Ariana Grande recently ignited controversy with a pointed message aimed at supporters of President Donald Trump. In a post shared on her Instagram Story, Grande used strong language to challenge what she sees as hypocrisy and misconduct among the President’s backers.

    Ariana Grande
    [/media-credit] Ariana Grande

    Whilst the full text of the post was later removed or made private, screenshots and media coverage indicate she used the word “f**kery” to describe behaviours she attributed to Trump supporters. The message appeared to criticise their actions, aligning with Grande’s ongoing pattern of outspoken political commentary.

    Though Grande has made political statements in the past, this latest post drew particular attention for its blunt tone and direct targeting of a vocal political base. Over recent years, she has shared her views on issues like transgender rights, immigration, and war powers. In June 2025, for instance, she reposted a call from Rep Alexandria Ocasio‑Cortez to impeach Trump following his decision to bomb Iran without congressional approval.

    Grande’s activism has also made her a frequent target of criticism. Conservative commentators have challenged her public positions, sometimes shifting their focus to her appearance or credentials rather than her message.

    But despite the backlash, she continues to use her platform to voice her beliefs—and to spark conversation.

    Whether the Instagram post was a spontaneous eruption of frustration or a calculated move, it reinforces a clear truth: Ariana Grande is far from a neutral observer when it comes to politics, and she isn’t shying away from conflict. Her boldness underscores both her willingness to speak out and the cultural tensions that arise when celebrity and activism intersect.

  • President Donald Trump willing to let Americans suffer: Trade war

    In recent developments, President Donald Trump has acknowledged that his trade policies, including the implementation of tariffs, may lead to economic challenges for Americans. In an interview with Fox News’ Sunday Morning Futures, Trump mentioned that Americans might encounter “a little disturbance” due to his tariffs and trade policies, and did not rule out the potential for a recession this year.

    These admissions come amid significant market volatility. The S&P 500 index experienced a 1.8% decline, whilst the Nasdaq-100 index fell by 2.6%, erasing gains made since November 2024. Such fluctuations have raised concerns about the broader economic impact of the ongoing trade tensions.

    Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick has sought to reassure the public, asserting that no recession is anticipated and expressing confidence in the administration’s strategy to lower global tariffs. However, some lawmakers, such as Senator Elissa Slotkin, have criticised the administration’s approach, advocating for more precise and consistent trade policies.

    The Administration’s stance reflects a willingness to accept short-term economic disruptions in pursuit of long-term trade objectives. As the situation evolves, the balance between these immediate challenges and future benefits remains a focal point of national economic discourse.

  • President Donald Trump’s death penalty proposal for drug dealers sparks controversy

    [media-credit name=”EPA” link=”https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy4mmrr7j8mo” width=1498 align=”none”][/media-credit]

    President Donald Trump has reignited discussions on capital punishment by proposing the death penalty for drug dealers, a stance he describes as “very humane” to deter drug-related crimes. This proposal aligns with his broader agenda, known as Agenda 47, which outlines various policy initiatives for his potential return to the White House.

    Historical context

    Trump’s advocacy for capital punishment in drug-related offenses is not new. In 2018, during a speech in New Hampshire, he officially proposed the death penalty for certain drug dealers as part of his administration’s efforts to combat the opioid crisis. This initiative was part of a broader strategy to address the surge in overdose deaths, which had reached alarming rates at the time.

    Recent developments

    In a recent rally in Nevada, Trump brought attention to the issue by highlighting the tragic death of Marine veteran Nicholas Quets, who was killed in Mexico by individuals reportedly linked to a drug cartel. Trump vowed to address such incidents by implementing stricter measures against drug smugglers and human traffickers, including the death penalty.

    Executive actions

    Building on his previous stance, Trump signed an executive order directing the Attorney General to assist states in obtaining lethal injection drugs, aiming to facilitate the enforcement of capital punishment. This move seeks to restart federal executions after a moratorium imposed in 2021.

    Public health expert criticisms

    Public health experts have criticised Trump’s proposal, arguing that it may not effectively deter drug trafficking and could divert attention from more comprehensive approaches to addressing substance abuse and its root causes.

    Conclusion

    Trump’s renewed call for the death penalty for drug dealers has sparked a complex debate that touches on criminal justice, public health, and ethical considerations. As discussions continue, it remains to be seen how this proposal will influence policy decisions and public opinion in the lead-up to the next presidential election.

  • Trump Administration intensifies legal actions against New York’s immigration policies

    [media-credit name=”EPA” link=”https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy4mmrr7j8mo” width=1498 align=”none”][/media-credit]

    On February 12, 2025, the Trump Administration filed a lawsuit against the state of New York, challenging its sanctuary policies that allegedly impede federal immigration enforcement efforts. Attorney General Pam Bondi announced the legal action, asserting that New York’s practices endanger public safety by prioritising undocumented immigrants over citisens.

    The lawsuit specifically targets New York’s “Green Light Law”, which permits undocumented immigrants to obtain driver’s licenses and restricts the sharing of personal information with federal authorities without a judicial order. Bondi emphasized that such policies would no longer be tolerated, stating, “New York’s prioritisation of illegal aliens over its own citizens will end.”

    In response, Governor Kathy Hochul defended the state’s stance, highlighting the balance between security and privacy that the law aims to achieve. She postponed a scheduled meeting with President Trump following the lawsuit’s announcement.

    This legal action is part of a broader effort by the Trump administration to challenge sanctuary policies in various states. A similar lawsuit was recently filed against Illinois, signaling the administration’s intent to enforce federal immigration laws more stringently. The lawsuit has intensified tensions between federal and state authorities, with New York officials and immigrant advocacy groups expressing strong opposition. Critics argue that the administration’s actions undermine state sovereignty and instill fear within immigrant communities.

    As the legal battle unfolds, it underscores the ongoing national debate over immigration policy and the balance of power between federal and state governments.

  • The National Park Service falls in line with President Trump’s executive order, mandating recognition of two genders only

    [media-credit name=”National Park Service” link=”https://www.nps.gov/ston/index.htm” width=640 align=”none”][/media-credit]

    ADVERTISEMENT

    //pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js

    (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

    Today (Thursday, February 13, 2025), during a news report on television, I heard about the removal of the transgender reference across the street from the Stonewall Inn in New York City. To read deeper into the change, I searched online and found an article by The Hill. According to the report, The National Park Service is referred to as the largest agency in line with President Trump’s executive order mandating that the country only recognise two genders (male and female). The changes made to the page dedicated to the Stonewall National Monument were first reported by The New York Times. To put it plainly, the staff deleted the words “transgender” and “queer” from the LGBTQ+ acronym. As a result, it just reads “LGB” for lesbian, gay, and bisexual.

  • President Trump sworn in without hand on bible, breaking tradition

    [media-credit name=”EPA” width=1498 align=”center”][/media-credit]

    On January 20, 2025, during his inauguration as the 47th President of the United States, Donald Trump deviated from tradition by not placing his hand on a Bible whilst taking the oath of office. First Lady Melania Trump held two Bibles—the Lincoln Bible and a family Bible—but President Trump kept his left hand at his side and raised his right hand to recite the oath.

    Whilst using a Bible during the swearing-in ceremony is customary, it is not a constitutional requirement. The United States Constitution mandates the presidential oath but does not specify the use of any religious text. Historically, most presidents have chosen to swear in on a Bible, though some have opted for other texts or none at all.

    The Lincoln Bible, one of the two Bibles present at the ceremony, was previously used by President Abraham Lincoln in 1861 and by President Trump during his first inauguration in 2017. President Trump’s decision to forgo placing his hand on the Bible during the oath marks a notable departure from inaugural norms, sparking discussions about the role of tradition in presidential ceremonies.