U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth is kicking off Pride Month by ordering the renaming of the USNS Harvey Milk, one of a number of ships in the John Lewis-class, named for the assassinated LGBTQ civil rights leader who served as a lieutenant in the U.S. Navy in the 1950s.

“A defense official confirmed that the Navy was making preparations to strip the ship of its name but noted that Navy Secretary John Phelan was ordered to do so by Hegseth,” Military.com first reported. “The official also said that the timing of the announcement — occurring during Pride month — was intentional.”

The Navy is also considering renaming ships named after other prominent civil rights leaders, including the USNS Thurgood Marshall, USNS Ruth Bader Ginsburg, USNS Harriet Tubman, USNS Dolores Huerta, USNS Lucy Stone, USNS Cesar Chavez, and USNS Medgar Evers, according to a report by CBS News.

READ MORE: ‘You Have One Job’: MTG Scorched for Not Reading Key Provision in Budget Bill

Name changes of ships in service are “exceptionally rare,” CBS added.

“The step furthers Hegseth’s agenda to stomp out DEI initiatives at the Pentagon, which has included removing books from service academies and scrubbing some mentions of women and people of color in the armed services from DOD websites,” reported Politico, noting that the expected date for the renaming is around June 13.

“The reported decision by the Trump Administration to change the names of the USNS Harvey Milk and other ships in the John Lewis-class is a shameful, vindictive erasure of those who fought to break down barriers for all to chase the American Dream,” Democratic Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi told CBS News. “Our military is the most powerful in the world – but this spiteful move does not strengthen our national security or the ‘warrior’ ethos. Instead, it is a surrender of a fundamental American value: to honor the legacy of those who worked to build a better country.”

Milk is considered a “Person of Exceptional Prominence” by the National Archives.

Former CNN national security reporter Barbara Starr blasted the decision.

“This is a bad day for the @USNavy,” the iconic journalist wrote. “Where on earth is the heritage of a force that has long honored, fought, and fallen for all Americans. What is the war fighting reason for this?”

Other critics clammed Secretary Hegseth and his decision.

“That this would happen at the start of Pride is intentional,” observed writer Charlotte Clymer, a former press secretary for the Human Rights Campaign.

READ MORE: Trump Reportedly Furious at Amy Coney Barrett Ahead of Big Supreme Court Rulings

“The act is both gratuitously petty as well as seriously and dangerously wrong,” wrote attorney and former NAACP CEO and President Cornell William Brooks. “This erasing of Harvey Milk’s name and legacy perpetuates the notion that members of the LGBTQ community are lesser citizens, lesser human beings, & less patriotic.”

The progressive PAC VoteVets in a lengthy statement called it “a calculated act of disrespect,” and said it is “about forcing out those who don’t fit Hegseth’s 1980s action figure fantasy of service.”

“If any junior officer showed this level of pettiness, contempt for honorable service, and lack of focus on mission, they’d be ridiculed by peers, benched by superiors, and despised by their Troops,” the statement continued.”

“To erase his name now – during Pride Month – is no innocent bureaucratic decision. It’s part of Hegseth’s broader campaign to purge the military of anyone who doesn’t fit his narrow, outdated vision. He’s working overtime to create a hostile environment that drives out women, people of color, LGBTQ+ Troops – anyone who doesn’t conform to his 1980s action figure fantasy of military service. That doesn’t make us stronger. It makes us weaker. Less unified. Less lethal. Less prepared to meet the real threats we face.”

READ MORE: Tulsi Gabbard Slated to Speak at Event Led by Activist Who’s Lost ‘Tolerance’ With Jews

Image via Reuters

U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) is facing backlash after admitting she voted to pass the House Republicans’ sweeping budget bill—dubbed President Donald Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill”—without reading it in full. Among its many controversial provisions is a clause that bars states from regulating artificial intelligence.

“Full transparency, I did not know about this section on pages 278-279 of the OBBB that strips states of the right to make laws or regulate AI for 10 years,” Congresswoman Greene admitted Tuesday afternoon. “I am adamantly OPPOSED to this and it is a violation of state rights and I would have voted NO if I had known this was in there.”

Greene also threatened to not vote for the bill once it returns to the House if the Senate does not strip out that portion of the legislation.

READ MORE: Trump Reportedly Furious at Amy Coney Barrett Ahead of Big Supreme Court Rulings

U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT), referring to that section, called it “a present to the big AI companies that send $$ to Republicans. So now no state consumer protections against AI stealing our jobs or corrupting our kids.”

“What citizen is asking for that??” he asked.

But Greene was scorched for not reading the full 1000-or-so-page bill itself.

“So, you voted yes on a bill you didn’t even read? And you think that is governing?,” wrote Jared Ryan Sears, a Navy veteran who writes The Pragmatic Humanist. “Now read about the cuts to Medicaid, the explosion of the debt, the transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich, and the erosion of the checks and balances created by the three branches of government that are all in the bill as well.”

“Gee, maybe that’s the problem with the law making process – that representatives don’t even know what’s in a bill,” remarked attorney Mark Farley. “I remember when the GOP made fun of Nancy Pelosi saying that we needed to pass it so we could see what was in it. You’ve been on X praising OBBB for days. Reading the legislation seems to be an essential part of the job.”

READ MORE: Tulsi Gabbard Slated to Speak at Event Led by Activist Who’s Lost ‘Tolerance’ With Jews

“Did she even f—— read the newspaper accounts of it, much less the bill itself, before voting?” asked historian Claire Potter.

And several of Greene’s Democratic House colleagues also leveled strong criticism against her.

“You have one job,” wrote U.S. Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA). “To. Read. The. F——. Bill.”

“Not shocking that House Republicans are just becoming aware of all the stuff that’s in their Big Bad Bill, which we TOLD THEM ABOUT during the hearing they insisted on having IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT!” declared U.S. Rep. Laura Friedman (D-CA). “Too bad they were too busy sleeping to learn what they were voting on.”

“I read the AI provision, that’s one reason I voted no on the GOP’s big, ugly bill,” noted U.S. Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA). “Also, ICYMI, the bill also has the largest cut to healthcare in U.S. history. PRO TIP: It’s helpful to read stuff before voting on it.”

U.S. Rep. Mark Pocan (D-WI) added, “Read the f—— bill instead of clapping for it like a performing monkey. You should have done your job while it was written. You didn’t. You own that vote, @RepMTG.”

READ MORE: ‘Economic Ruination’: Trump Admits Tariffs Could Backfire, Fears Foreign Retaliation

Image via Shutterstock

President Donald Trump is reportedly angry with U.S. Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett, his third appointee from his first term, frustrated that she has not reliably ruled in his favor on key cases. Reports of Trump’s year-long “ire” have emerged just as the Court prepares to release decisions in some of the term’s most consequential cases.

“The behind-closed-doors grievances have been wide-ranging, and while many have been about Barrett, Trump has also expressed frustration about Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh,” his other two SCOTUS appointees, CNN reported on Tuesday. “The president’s anger, sources said, has been fueled by allies on the right, who have told Trump privately that Barrett is ‘weak’ and that her rulings have not been in line with how she presented herself in an interview before Trump nominated her to the bench in 2020.”

A senior administration official told CNN: “It’s not just one ruling. It’s been a few different events he’s complained about privately.”

READ MORE: Tulsi Gabbard Slated to Speak at Event Led by Activist Who’s Lost ‘Tolerance’ With Jews

Trump recently unleashed his anger on Leonard Leo, the former head of the Federalist Society, to which the President effectively outsourced most if not all of his first-term judicial nominations.

“As is his wont, Trump turned on his loyal servant with particular savagery, calling him a “sleaze bag” who had rendered bad advice on a series of judicial nominations,” The New Republic reported. Trump also wrote that Leo is “a bad person, who in his own way, probably hates America.”

But Leo’s SCOTUS picks were a windfall for the convicted-felon president.

“In terms of personal bounty for Trump, all joined the outlandish 2024 immunity opinion that continues to provide him comfort on a regular basis,” TNR added.

Not all of Barrett’s decisions have been as favorable to Trump. For example, Barrett voted against Trump’s $2 billion foreign aid freeze.

READ MORE: ‘Economic Ruination’: Trump Admits Tariffs Could Backfire, Fears Foreign Retaliation

CNN, meanwhile, notes that while Trump “has privately expressed his displeasure” with her, “a source close to Trump insists he does not want to attack her publicly.”

Critics weighed in.

“Every reason to expect we will see some terrible judicial nominations over the next three years,” warned Gregg Nunziata, an attorney, public policy professional, and veteran of the conservative legal movement.

“Funny split growing between Trump and the [Leonard] Leo/FedSoc wing of the party. ACB is in many ways his worst nightmare: ideological social conservative who doesn’t believe the President is absolutely empowered to do crimes. Also, you know, a Woman who tells him ‘no,'” wrote researcher Tyson Brody.

READ MORE: ‘I Have to Do This’: Dem Enters Race to Oust Ernst After ‘We’re All Going to Die’ Fallout

Image: Official White House Photo by Andrea Hanks via Flickr/Public Domain