By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Brennan’s attorneys contend that administration officials have prejudged their client as criminal, even before indictment, and that the Department of Justice is engaged in irregular prosecutorial activity to satisfy the President’s directives. Brennan is seeking to preserve records from President Trump, White House officials, and DOJ personnel, as reports indicate the Southern District of Florida, with consulting from former DOJ official John Yoo, is investigating him. The removal of a DOJ prosecutor who reportedly had doubts about the investigation further fuels concerns about the politicized nature of the proceedings.
Read the original article here
It seems the Trump team is in a bit of a panic mode as the Fourth of July approaches, and the reason is rather… small. Reports suggest a recent, seemingly insignificant fair attracted a disappointingly tiny crowd, sending the former president into a predictable rage. This reaction, apparently, is causing considerable unease within his inner circle, leading to what some are describing as a full-blown panic as they face the upcoming major holiday.
The context for this particular meltdown appears to be a past event, likely a rally or campaign stop, that failed to draw the expected throngs. The observation that even this “tiny fair crowd” could send him into such a state highlights a recurring theme: a deep-seated insecurity about crowd size and public reception. It’s as if a smaller-than-anticipated gathering is perceived not just as a minor setback, but as a deeply personal affront, triggering a disproportionate and volatile response.
This fragility is reportedly spilling over into the planning for the upcoming July 4th celebrations. With the specter of another underwhelming turnout looming, the Trump team is apparently scrambling to salvage the event and, perhaps more importantly, salvage the image of their leader. The fear is palpable; a poorly attended July 4th event, especially one tied to the nation’s 250th anniversary, would be an optics nightmare.
The current DC weather forecast, with temperatures expected to soar and no coolers allowed, is hardly helping matters. Adding to the unappealing prospect, the fireworks are scheduled for a late 11 p.m. start, well past the bedtime for many families. Then there’s the inherent draw of listening to an “old man rant and rage,” as one perspective put it, in sweltering conditions. It all paints a rather uninviting picture, leading to the prediction that people will “stay away in droves.”
The frustration within the team seems to be two-fold: the inability to secure large, enthusiastic crowds and the leader’s own volatile reactions to this perceived deficiency. There’s an almost desperate hope expressed for someone to “secretly record him going ape,” to capture the much-whispered-about rage for all to see, rather than just hear about it secondhand. The idea of using “crisis actors” to artificially inflate attendance also surfaces, a suggestion that speaks volumes about the perceived desperation.
The description of the actual fair itself paints a picture of missed opportunities. What could have been a vibrant festival with free concerts and attractions was apparently scaled back significantly. Instead of a celebratory atmosphere, the event is characterized as a “sad carney show,” a shadow of what it could have been, with the funding likely reallocated or simply lost. This suggests a fundamental disconnect between the vision of what should be a grand national celebration and the grim reality of its execution, further fueling the perceived panic.
The prevailing sentiment is that this isn’t a matter of specific policy failures or external sabotage, but rather a fundamental inability to connect with a broad audience. The leader’s constant state of “meltdown” or “tantrum” is seen as a defining characteristic, and the obsession with crowd size is highlighted as a particularly peculiar, yet persistent, political vulnerability. It’s framed as a toddler-like inability to handle disappointment, a seven-year-old “asshole bully” upset that not enough people showed up to his party.
The suggestion of cancelling the address altogether, citing weather as a convenient excuse, reflects the high stakes and the perceived lack of good options. The media’s focus on attendance figures and aerial photos is recognized as a significant pressure point, a constant reminder of any perceived shortfall. The idea that attendees will be funneled through the “fair” solely to inflate the headcount for a photo opportunity underscores the perceived artificiality and the team’s efforts to manufacture a positive narrative.
There’s a stark divide in how this situation is viewed. On one hand, there’s a sense of schadenfreude, a hope that the leader will be seen publicly “ranting and raving in 100+ degree heat,” an almost morbid curiosity about his reaction. On the other hand, there’s a deep cynicism about the entire endeavor, with suggestions that the MAGA crowd might demand more than they’re willing to pay for, implying a transactional rather than ideological loyalty.
The event’s lack of typical fair attractions like game booths or rides, combined with the strict rules about coolers and the late fireworks, makes it an unappealing proposition. It’s described as a “big yawn,” further amplifying the feeling that the team is struggling to generate genuine enthusiasm or even basic comfort for attendees. The leader is repeatedly characterized as a “toddler,” unable to handle the reality of a smaller crowd, and his leadership is seen as flawed, with everything he “touches turns to shit.”
The overarching narrative is one of a frantic, last-ditch effort to avoid embarrassment. The panic seems rooted in the fear of a public spectacle of inadequacy, amplified by the leader’s own volatile nature. The hope that “no one shows up” in some quarters reflects a profound disillusionment, a feeling that the celebration itself is tainted. The question of what there is to celebrate after “a century of slavery,” or numerous invasions, or financial crises, is raised, suggesting that the very premise of a nationalistic celebration is being questioned, further complicating the Trump team’s efforts to rally support.