Editor’s note: A typo in the headline has been corrected.

Just hours after President Donald Trump declared in a newly published interview that he believes Pete Hegseth is “gonna get it together” and described his embattled Defense Secretary’s job as “safe,” the U.S. Navy accidentally lost a $60 million fighter jet when it fell into the Red Sea.

“A US Navy F/A-18 Super Hornet fighter jet has been ‘lost’ at sea after it fell overboard from the USS Harry S. Truman aircraft carrier while it was being towed on board, the Navy said in a statement on Monday,” according to CNN. Reports also indicate that “the Truman made a hard turn to evade Houthi fire, which contributed to the fighter jet falling overboard.”

The jet is said to have sunk.

In their interview, The Atlantic’s Ashley Parker told Trump, “You’re a big supporter of Pete Hegseth’s, but he’s fired three top advisers in recent weeks, he rotated out his chief of staff, he installed a makeup studio at the Pentagon, he put attack plans in two different Signal chats, including one with his wife and personal attorney. Have you had a talk with him about getting things together?”

READ MORE: ‘Heads on Pikes’: Trump White House Accused of ‘Vaguely Fascist’ Display

“Yeah, I have,” the Commander-in-Chief replied.

Asked, “What did you say?” Trump replied: “Pete’s gone through a hard time. I think he’s gonna get it together. I think he’s a smart guy. He is a talented guy. He’s got a lot of energy. He’s been beat up by this, very much so. But I had a talk with him, a positive talk, but I had a talk with him.”

And when asked if, “for now, you think Hegseth stays?” Trump replied: “Yeah, he’s safe.”

Critics were quick to weigh in.

“This is why I said @petehegseth’s rank incompetence needs closer scrutiny here,” wrote national security and civil liberties journalist Marcy Wheeler. “He keeps claiming his half-a—- campaign against the Houthis is having success. But s— like this keeps happening, planes dropping off aircraft carriers.”

“These are the sailors Whiskey Pete put at risk with his reckless treatment of classified information,” Wheeler added.

“Another win for this super competent national security team,” mocked U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT). “I thought our strikes in Yemen were ‘restoring deterrence’.”

READ MORE: ‘Authoritarian Takeover’: Legal Scholars Warn of Trump’s ‘100 Days of Lawlessness’

Democratic political strategist Chris D. Jackson adds, “This is what happens when Trump and Pete Hegseth treated military leadership like a frat house. Unqualified leadership has real-world consequences.”

Barbara Starr, the former CNN national security reporter for more than two decades, strongly suggested there is more here than may appear.

“IMPORTANT: IF [the] Truman had to make a sudden hard turn to avoid enemy fire this is extremely significant. The goal for US troops is to always bring down the enemy as far away as possible NOT close in. And this potentially suggests further improvements in Houthi guidance and targeting. Def more to learn here.”

“Moreover,” Starr continued, “and equally important why does the military press statement not disclose this possibility?”

HuffPost’s White House correspondent S.V. Dáte commented, “Back when the Navy was woke I don’t recall them dropping an F-18 overboard.”

READ MORE: Trump Calls to ‘Immediately’ Eject ‘Disruptors’ as GOP Congressman Faces Boos, Backlash

Image via Reuters

The Trump White House is under fire after Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt posted a video showing lawn signs lining the White House driveway, bearing the photos of allegedly undocumented immigrants, the charges against them, and the word “ARRESTED” in bold, capital letters.

The posters do not indicate the immigrants were convicted, only arrested, for various major crimes.

ABC News described them as “100 posters of alleged criminal migrants.” Axios, which first reported on the posters, called it “a provocative, sure-to-be-controversial move.”

“This morning,” the White House said in a statement, “images of the worst of the worst criminal illegal immigrants arrested since President Donald J. Trump took office were placed on the lawn of the White House for the world to see — highlighting the Trump Administration’s unprecedented effort to secure our homeland and send these vicious criminals back where they belong.”

READ MORE: ‘Authoritarian Takeover’: Legal Scholars Warn of Trump’s ‘100 Days of Lawlessness’

Leavitt posted the video gleefully declaring, “Good Morning from The White House!”

Critics blasted her and the administration.

“These are fake charges with out due process you are lying karoline! 99% of immigrants are law abiding, loving, family oriented members of society! Stop spreading hate!” wrote actor and activist John Leguizamo.

Immigration attorney Allen Orr, Jr. added, “Arrests are not convictions. In addition, how much does this cost, and for what purpose does it serve?”

Alexander Aviña, an associate professor of Latin American history at Arizona State University commented, “historically not a good sign when governments start doing this.”

Former U.S. Ambassador Luis Moreno observed, “The Romans, and others throughout history, used to mount their enemies heads on pikes. This is the 2025 version.”

READ MORE: Trump Calls to ‘Immediately’ Eject ‘Disruptors’ as GOP Congressman Faces Boos, Backlash

“The Trump Administration’s response to deporting a 4 year old American with cancer? Put up yard signs!” commented Fox News co-host Jessica Tarlov.

“Well this is vaguely fascist,” remarked MSNBC columnist Michael A. Cohen.

“And here comes the 100 lawsuits based on the liberty clause. This is disgusting behavior by our chief executive,” wrote Washburn University School of Law Professor Joseph Mastrosimone.

“Reminder that 90% of those supposed criminal deportees to El Salvador had no criminal record at all and the rest were mostly for immigration violations,” noted Virginia Commonwealth University Associate Professor of Political Science Michael Paarlberg.

Legal reporter Amy Miller wrote, “fear mongering works, and they know it.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

Good Morning from The White House! pic.twitter.com/1fhjzMU2gR

— Karoline Leavitt (@PressSec) April 28, 2025

READ MORE: ‘What Fascism Looks Like’: Bondi’s War on Judiciary Is ‘Red Line’ for Democrats

Image via Reuters

The New York Times Opinion editors have gathered responses from nearly three dozen top legal scholars assessing what the paper calls President Donald Trump’s “first 100 days of lawlessness,” with many warning—one bluntly—that “no U.S. citizen is safe” if Trump can act “in violation of the law.”

These top legal minds—and the Times’ editors—use phrases about Trump and his administration’s actions such as “disregard for law,” “flagrantly lawless,” “anti-constitutional,” “quasi-authoritarian,” and “unconstrained by the Constitution.”

Columbia University Professor David Pozen warned: “More important than any specific example of unconstitutional conduct is the overall pattern. The depth and breadth of this administration’s disregard for civil liberties, political pluralism, the separation of powers and legal constraints of all kinds mark it as an authoritarian regime. That is the crucial thing to see.”

“The disregard for law is itself part of the agenda,” offered Harvard Law School Professor Jody Freeman. “They do not seem to care whether they violate the Constitution and statutes, make mistakes, do irreparable harm. That recklessness itself sends a message.”

READ MORE: Trump Calls to ‘Immediately’ Eject ‘Disruptors’ as GOP Congressman Faces Boos, Backlash

The Times editors noted that many of the scholars first flagged the Trump administration’s efforts to end birthright citizenship, calling the move, “a direct assault on the Constitution,” and “an extraordinary thing” done in “his first hours back as president.”

“From there,” the editors noted, “it’s a straight shot to deporting people without due process.”

“Due process dates back to Magna Carta,” wrote one expert, Professor Kim Wehle of the University of Baltimore School of Law, “it is the essence of liberty. Without it, America is not a democracy as freedom itself is at the arbitrary whims of a malevolent ruler.”

Stanford University Law School Professor Shirin Sinnar added, “If the administration can simply spirit people outside the United States in violation of the law and then disclaim any power to bring them back, then no U.S. citizen is safe from similar actions.”

Experts also sounded alarms over Trump and his administration attacking law firms, universities, and the Associated Press, and the firings at independent agencies. Also, the “defiance of our judiciary and constitutional system; the undermining of First Amendment freedoms,” and, “the impoundment of federal funds authorized by Congress; the erosion of immigrant rights; and the drive to consolidate power.”

The Times notes also that there are “concerns about whether court orders will be ignored by the Trump administration or the courts will be undercut by Congress, which controls their budgets and can, under the Constitution, largely dictate which cases federal courts can hear — and can’t.”

The Times, and the experts, suggested Trump’s use of tariffs is suspect.

READ MORE: ‘What Fascism Looks Like’: Bondi’s War on Judiciary Is ‘Red Line’ for Democrats

“Most important is the coming showdown over the president’s asserted power to impose, rescind, raise and delay tariffs on imports,” wrote Stanford Law School Professor Michael McConnell. “The administration can point to broad statutory language authorizing specific import restrictions under emergency circumstances, but the president has no inherent constitutional authority to tax imports. No statute expressly authorizes the president to impose tariffs for the nonemergency purposes of raising revenue, improving our long-term balance of trade or winning unrelated concessions on miscellaneous issues.”

And on the “Big Picture,” Rutgers Law School Professor Katie Eyer added: “The use of the levers of government to exact retaliation for private vendettas — sending people to foreign prisons without due process, dismantling agencies and refusing to spend appropriated funds, and pervasive retaliation for the exercise of First Amendment rights … are the actions of an authoritarian government, not a liberal democracy.”

Professor David Pozen concluded “that the U.S. constitutional system is on the verge of an authoritarian takeover. ‘Authoritarian constitutionalism’ is not an oxymoron; unless the Trump takeover is repelled, our system will retain the familiar constitutional forms while becoming ever more illiberal, undemocratic and corrupt.”

READ MORE: ‘Pure, Unadulterated, Evil’: Trump Envoy’s Putin Meeting Triggers Outrage

Image via Reuters