16 stories credited to Atlanta Black Star
Latest story Sep 17, 2026 · on ChamberLight since Apr 2026
A story can appear as several articles (copies of the same piece), so counts of stories and of articles differ.
Scores for Atlanta Black Star
Political lean
15 stories · 95% range 19–32 · updated Sep 24, 2026
Originality
1 of those 16 carry an unconfirmed copying flag, which is not evidence either way.
16 stories · updated Sep 24, 2026
Writing quality 57 of 100: the average rating of 15 stories, each rated on its own (separate from credibility). How it is measured
Scores last checked Sep 24, 2026.
Stories ChamberLight collected, by month
Stories credited to Atlanta Black Star, by publication date. ChamberLight collects articles that mention the officials it tracks, so this shows its own coverage of this source, not how much the source publishes.
- Stories from Atlanta Black Star
- Shaded: ChamberLight collected no stories, or almost none, from any outlet (a gap in its collection, not in the outlet’s publishing)
Show as a table
| Month | Stories | All outlets |
|---|---|---|
| March 2026 | 4 | 477 |
| April 2026 | 10 | 4,537 |
| May 2026 | 0 | none collected |
| June 2026 | 0 | none collected |
| July 2026 | 0 | none collected |
| August 2026 | 0 | 1 (collection gap) |
| September 2026 | 2 | 598 |
Top topics
Share of this source’s stories tagged with each topic. A story can carry several topics, so the shares do not add up to 100%.
- Ethics/Corruption14
88% of 16 stories · 62% across all outlets
- Foreign Policy6
38% of 16 stories · 30% across all outlets
- Budget/Spending4
25% of 16 stories · 33% across all outlets
- Defense/Military4
25% of 16 stories · 26% across all outlets
- Criminal Justice3
19% of 16 stories · 20% across all outlets
- Voting Rights3
19% of 16 stories · 20% across all outlets
- Economy2
13% of 16 stories · 26% across all outlets
- Healthcare2
13% of 16 stories · 8% across all outlets
The thin mark on each bar is the topic’s share across all outlets.
Who they cover
Party of the officials these stories are mainly about, across all 20 officials named. A story counts once for each official it is mainly about, so the split is over 31 story–official pairs, from 16 stories.
- Republican65% · 20 pairs
- Democrat26% · 8 pairs
- Party not recorded10% · 3 pairs
Most covered
Stories mainly about each official, and their share of the source’s 16 stories.
- 1Donald TrumpR11 stories · 69%
- 2Markwayne MullinR2 stories · 13%
- 3Charles SchumerD1 story · 6%
- 4Hakeem JeffriesD1 story · 6%
- 5James ClyburnD1 story · 6%
- 6Jerome Powell–1 story · 6%
- 7Joyce BeattyD1 story · 6%
- 8Karoline Leavitt–1 story · 6%
- 9Kristi NoemR1 story · 6%
- 10Marjorie Taylor Greene–1 story · 6%
+ 10 other officials (10 story–official pairs)
Article tone
ChamberLight’s article analysis assigns each story a tone toward the official it covers. It describes the coverage of that official, not Atlanta Black Star’s stance, and reader votes do not change it. 16 stories.
- Good Look
- 1 (6%)
- Mixed
- 6 (38%)
- Informational
- 0 (0%)
- Bad Look
- 9 (56%)
Related sources
Lean 95% range 17–35 · updated Sep 24, 2026
Similar lean · 3 shared topics
Lean 95% range 25–29 · updated Sep 24, 2026
Similar lean · 3 shared topics
Lean 95% range 18–29 · updated Sep 24, 2026
Similar lean · 3 shared topics
Lean 95% range 26–34 · updated Sep 24, 2026
Similar lean · 3 shared topics
Lean 95% range 27–35 · updated Sep 24, 2026
Similar lean · 3 shared topics
Lean 95% range 14–24 · updated Sep 24, 2026
Similar lean · 3 shared topics
Challenges to these scores
No one has challenged a score on this page yet. Anyone can; editors publish every outcome here.
Articles served from atlantablackstar.com
31
'None of Them Have Shame': Video of a Nearly Unresponsive McConnell Being Redirected Mid-Vote as He Almost Sides with Dems Sparks Fears of Elder Abuse
A vote on the farm bill was the first real test of whether Sen. Mitch McConnell was ready to return to work after three months away dealing with serious health problems -- and the scene that followed only intensified the questions surrounding his ability to serve. McConnell, 84, had returned to Cap
'Wipe That Smirk Off His Face': Maxine Waters Corners Scott Bessent on Live TV, Then Fires Off the 5-Word Line That Ends Him
Congresswoman Maxine Waters wasn't playing around at a House Financial Services Committee hearing. The longtime California Democrat repeatedly clashed with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent Tuesday over President Donald Trump's trade tariffs, rising inflation and economic policies. "If tariffs are
‘Let Her Tell You!’: Whoopi Goldberg Snaps After Sunny Hostin Refuses to Back Down as MTG Clash Erupts Into Chaos on ‘The View’
The ladies on “The View” are known to have some heated moments as the opinions of several strong-willed professional women occasionally clash while discussing politics. And this present season with hosts Whoopi Goldberg, Sunny Hostin, Joy Behar, Sara Haines, Ana Navarro, and Alyssa Farah Griffin, is no different, as conversations about government policies, the war in Iran, or anything tied to President Donald Trump often end in yelling and unprovoked insults. But this time, two co-hosts almost went at each other. Whoopi Goldberg and Sunny Hostin got feisty during a debate about Marjorie Taylor Greene’s switch-up on Trump. (Photos by YouTube/“The View”; by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images) ‘She Defend Her Cheating Husband’: Pissed-Off Cheryl Hines Explodes On The View’ Host Sunny Hostin for Calling Husband RFK Jr. ‘the Least Qualified’ A discussion about former MAGA supporter Marjorie Taylor Greene’s 180-degree Trump turnaround during Wednesday’s episode got a little fiery, to say the least. The former Republican congresswoman from Georgia was previously a loud and outspoken supporter of President Trump, but she recently changed her tune. After Trump threatened the people of Iran with a profanity-laced post on Easter Sunday, saying they would be “living in Hell,” Greene called for him to be removed from office via the 25th Amendment while calling him “evil” and “insane.” “The View” host also shared a clip of Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar during her recent appearance on “Pod Save America,” where the Democratic congresswoman congratulated Greene for having “gotten off the sycophant train” and admitting to choosing the wrong person. After Goldberg asked whether voters could move past Greene’s past support of Trump, an argument about whether the ex-congresswoman should be forgiven got heated. View this post on Instagram A post shared by Here’s Why w/ Kevin Ortega-Rojas (@hereswhykevin) She said, “The question is, can voters on both sides of the aisle move past this insanity and do something about what we’re seeing? Can people say, ‘Yes, we disagree on many things, but we agree on this, that this cannot continue.’” Behar added that Trump’s rhetoric from the White House gets worse daily, and she could welcome former Trump supporters who’ve recognized the president has lost his way. “Every day it’s crazier and crazier,” Behar exclaimed, ” And so, I think that they are beginning to see that,” she added before saying she’d welcome former Trump supporters. Haines clapped back and noted that Greene is still a racist who “dances in circles of anti-Semitism,” and just because she doesn’t like Trump anymore doesn’t mean she should be embraced. After Behar asked Haines, “So what should you do, reject her altogether?” Hostin jumped in with an unequivocal, “Yes! We should reject her altogether. I’m sorry, Joy,” as the crowd applauded her. Behar replied that she doesn’t hold a grudge, and Hostin responded, “I’m going to hold a grudge,” as she and Goldberg went on to agree that Greene needed to address her base about her mistake in supporting Trump. However, Hostin is not for the warm embrace of Greene that Behar seemed to be offering. “In terms of welcoming her with open arms like Joy wants to do with a big bear hug, I’m not going to do that,” added Hostin. “I just think that if you voted for Donald Trump three times, when you voted for him this last election when we told you what was going to happen…. this country is on fire … You need her, but you don’t have to welcome her. It is unforgiveable,” she said as she rolled her eyes. After Griffin interjected to say she agreed with Behar, Hostin, whose eyes were still rolling, snapped, “You wanna give Marjorie Taylor Greene a bear hug?” Marjorie Taylor Greene on Trump: “I’ve always been a supporter of President Trump for the policies. But once he became President, he changed his policies. What we campaigned on was no more foreign wars. He said he was going to be the peace President… pic.twitter.com/DbdfJ2dsd6 — IT’S TIME FOR JUSTICE (@LiddleSavages) April 10, 2026 Goldberg then interjected as she put her hand up and told Hostin, “Let her tell you what she wants to do. Calm down!” Reactions to the exchange from YouTubers were mixed, with several siding with Goldberg and Hostin, and some saying the former MAGA supporter should be kicked to the curb. “Sunny is correct,” wrote one fan. “MJT’s redemption arc still baffles me to this day.” “Sunny is 100% correct! Just because some Republicans are realizing how stupid their vote was, doesn’t mean they will be welcomed. It seems like we always have to allow Republicans to learn their lesson before there is change. I am tired of it. We were saying this BEFORE he was elected.” A third added, “You tell it Whoopi .. truth!!” while another observed, “Whoopi telling Sunny to calm down all the while she was interrupting her pissed me off.” But there’s no turning Greene into a likeable personality as many cautioned, “Once a snake … all it does is shed its skin, it’s still a snake. They don’t change” and “I still dont trust MTG !!! Keep your eyes on her !!!?” MTG’s switch off Trump is not fooling many, as she has adamantly stated that she supports the old Trump and not the one he’s “becoming.” But many outside the MAGA circle say he’s always been just who he is, and MTG knows it. ‘Let Her Tell You!’: Whoopi Goldberg Snaps After Sunny Hostin Refuses to Back Down as MTG Clash Erupts Into Chaos on ‘The View’
‘Let Her Tell You!’: Whoopi Goldberg Snaps After Sunny Hostin Refuses to Back Down as MTG Clash Erupts Into Chaos on ‘The View’
The ladies on “The View” are known to have some heated moments as the opinions of several strong-willed professional women occasionally clash while discussing politics. And this present season with hosts Whoopi Goldberg, Sunny Hostin, Joy Behar, Sara Haines, Ana Navarro, and Alyssa Farah Griffin, is no different, as conversations about government policies, the war in Iran, or anything tied to President Donald Trump often end in yelling and unprovoked insults. But this time, two co-hosts almost went at each other. Whoopi Goldberg and Sunny Hostin got feisty during a debate about Marjorie Taylor Greene’s switch-up on Trump. (Photos by YouTube/“The View”; by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images) ‘She Defend Her Cheating Husband’: Pissed-Off Cheryl Hines Explodes On The View’ Host Sunny Hostin for Calling Husband RFK Jr. ‘the Least Qualified’ A discussion about former MAGA supporter Marjorie Taylor Greene’s 180-degree Trump turnaround during Wednesday’s episode got a little fiery, to say the least. The former Republican congresswoman from Georgia was previously a loud and outspoken supporter of President Trump, but she recently changed her tune. After Trump threatened the people of Iran with a profanity-laced post on Easter Sunday, saying they would be “living in Hell,” Greene called for him to be removed from office via the 25th Amendment while calling him “evil” and “insane.” “The View” host also shared a clip of Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar during her recent appearance on “Pod Save America,” where the Democratic congresswoman congratulated Greene for having “gotten off the sycophant train” and admitting to choosing the wrong person. After Goldberg asked whether voters could move past Greene’s past support of Trump, an argument about whether the ex-congresswoman should be forgiven got heated. View this post on Instagram A post shared by Here’s Why w/ Kevin Ortega-Rojas (@hereswhykevin) She said, “The question is, can voters on both sides of the aisle move past this insanity and do something about what we’re seeing? Can people say, ‘Yes, we disagree on many things, but we agree on this, that this cannot continue.’” Behar added that Trump’s rhetoric from the White House gets worse daily, and she could welcome former Trump supporters who’ve recognized the president has lost his way. “Every day it’s crazier and crazier,” Behar exclaimed, ” And so, I think that they are beginning to see that,” she added before saying she’d welcome former Trump supporters. Haines clapped back and noted that Greene is still a racist who “dances in circles of anti-Semitism,” and just because she doesn’t like Trump anymore doesn’t mean she should be embraced. After Behar asked Haines, “So what should you do, reject her altogether?” Hostin jumped in with an unequivocal, “Yes! We should reject her altogether. I’m sorry, Joy,” as the crowd applauded her. Behar replied that she doesn’t hold a grudge, and Hostin responded, “I’m going to hold a grudge,” as she and Goldberg went on to agree that Greene needed to address her base about her mistake in supporting Trump. However, Hostin is not for the warm embrace of Greene that Behar seemed to be offering. “In terms of welcoming her with open arms like Joy wants to do with a big bear hug, I’m not going to do that,” added Hostin. “I just think that if you voted for Donald Trump three times, when you voted for him this last election when we told you what was going to happen…. this country is on fire … You need her, but you don’t have to welcome her. It is unforgiveable,” she said as she rolled her eyes. After Griffin interjected to say she agreed with Behar, Hostin, whose eyes were still rolling, snapped, “You wanna give Marjorie Taylor Greene a bear hug?” Marjorie Taylor Greene on Trump: “I’ve always been a supporter of President Trump for the policies. But once he became President, he changed his policies. What we campaigned on was no more foreign wars. He said he was going to be the peace President… pic.twitter.com/DbdfJ2dsd6 — IT’S TIME FOR JUSTICE (@LiddleSavages) April 10, 2026 Goldberg then interjected as she put her hand up and told Hostin, “Let her tell you what she wants to do. Calm down!” Reactions to the exchange from YouTubers were mixed, with several siding with Goldberg and Hostin, and some saying the former MAGA supporter should be kicked to the curb. “Sunny is correct,” wrote one fan. “MJT’s redemption arc still baffles me to this day.” “Sunny is 100% correct! Just because some Republicans are realizing how stupid their vote was, doesn’t mean they will be welcomed. It seems like we always have to allow Republicans to learn their lesson before there is change. I am tired of it. We were saying this BEFORE he was elected.” A third added, “You tell it Whoopi .. truth!!” while another observed, “Whoopi telling Sunny to calm down all the while she was interrupting her pissed me off.” But there’s no turning Greene into a likeable personality as many cautioned, “Once a snake … all it does is shed its skin, it’s still a snake. They don’t change” and “I still dont trust MTG !!! Keep your eyes on her !!!?” MTG’s switch off Trump is not fooling many, as she has adamantly stated that she supports the old Trump and not the one he’s “becoming.” But many outside the MAGA circle say he’s always been just who he is, and MTG knows it. ‘Let Her Tell You!’: Whoopi Goldberg Snaps After Sunny Hostin Refuses to Back Down as MTG Clash Erupts Into Chaos on ‘The View’
‘Oops!’: Dr. Oz Tries to Joke About Trump’s Wild Health Theory, Then Slips Up Mid-Story and the Internet Immediately Goes Into Diagnosis Mode
The internet is speculating that Dr. Mehmet Oz may have accidentally revealed the president’s medical diagnosis after repeating Donald Trump’s claim that Diet Coke can kill cancer cells. Oz, a former cardiothoracic surgeon and television personality who now runs the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, made the comment during an interview with Donald Trump Jr. on his podcast “Triggered with Don Jr.” on Monday. President Donald Trump’s affinity for diet sodas led to eyebrow-raising recent comments from his Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Chief, Dr. Oz. (Photos: Health Digest, Triggered with Don Jr.) “Your dad argues that diet soda is good for him because it kills grass — if poured on grass — so, therefore, it must kill cancer cells inside the body,” Oz told the president’s son. ‘Wow, He’s So Lost’: Trump Walks Straight Into a Reporter’s Trap, Gets Dragged Into a Bizarre Rant He Can’t Pull Back From — Never Realizing He’s Being Played in Real Time “You know, we were on Air Force One the other day, and I walked in there because he wanted to talk about something, and he had an orange soft drink on his desk. He’s got a Fanta on the desk,” Oz said. “And I say, ‘Are you kidding me?’ So he starts to like, sheepishly grin. He says, ‘You know, this stuff’s good for me, it kills cancer cells.’” Oz recalled the president joking with him that Fanta, made with orange juice from concentrate, couldn’t be bad for him because it’s “fresh-squeezed.” “OK, OK,” Don Jr. interjected, “but then maybe he’s onto something. Because I will say this: I know a lot of guys pushing 80. Not a lot have his level of energy, recall, stamina.” “Yeah, maybe a bit of a slip there,” @rluhan4533 commented on Threads. “Because of his age, most likely prostate cancer. If low-grade can live untreated for years,” @rees9902 added. The president has a well-documented affinity for junk food, and especially for diet soda. During his first term, People reported the president affixed a red valet button to his desk that allowed him to instantly order a Diet Coke. The White House reportedly reinstalled the “Diet Coke button” when Trump returned to office. Oz has made numerous controversial claims on his former daytime television show, “The Dr. Oz Show.” Some of the claims made by the television star turned politician include spacing out childhood vaccines, conversion therapy, using colloidal silver as a treatment, and miracle diet pills. According to Science-Based Medicine, “No other show on television can top ‘The Dr. Oz Show’ for the sheer magnitude of bad health advice it consistently offers, all while giving everything a veneer of credibility.” “Huh, we should start reading between the lines? Oops! If that is true, you heard it from Dr. Oz first!” @Karenthompson1885 posted on Threads. In addition to his diet sodas, Trump has defended his love of fast food as a feature of his health consciousness. “He doesn’t want to get sick, so he eats junk food, but it’s food made in large, reputable chains because they have quality control,” Oz said on Monday’s podcast. In a similar instance of repeating unfounded scientific claims, the president suggested in 2020 that injecting disinfectants could kill the COVID-19 virus. “It sounds interesting to me,” he told reporters at the time. “Ugh, this is ridiculous and so embarrassing. We have idiots running our country,” @the.subverted.flower wrote on Threads. Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland requested a medical evaluation this month, citing signs he claimed were consistent with dementia or cognitive decline. The bill has already been co-sponsored by 50 additional Democratic House members. “President Trump’s sharpness, unmatched energy, and historic accessibility stand in stark contrast to what we saw during the last administration when Democrats like Raskin intentionally covered up [President] Joe Biden’s serious mental and physical decline from the American people,” White House spokesperson Davis Ingle told the Daily Mail in a statement. There are no confirmed reports that the president has been diagnosed with cancer, according to official reports released by the White House this month. ‘Oops!’: Dr. Oz Tries to Joke About Trump’s Wild Health Theory, Then Slips Up Mid-Story and the Internet Immediately Goes Into Diagnosis Mode
‘What’s Going On Here?!’: Trump Spirals Over Powell — Then a Simple Question Trips Him Up, He Gets a Chance to Fix It, But Blows Right Past It and Somehow Says Something Worse
President Donald Trump has once again threatened to fire Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, whose term expires in a month. But the president didn’t make the threat without saying something new that is raising a few eyebrows. The president’s threat came during an interview with Fox Business host Maria Bartiromo on Wednesday. US Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell and US President Donald Trump speak at a news conference at the Federal Reserve headquarters, following the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting in Washington, DC, on September 17, 2025. (Photos: Getty Images) “He’s doing a bad job,” Trump said, referring to Powell. “He should be lowering interest rates.” Powell’s term as Fed chairman is set to expire in mid-May, but he’s promised to stay on the job until a successor is confirmed. ‘Enough of This!’: Trump Explodes at Black Reporter, But When He Refuses to Flinch, a Visibly Rattled Trump Pulls a Move That Forces the Room Into Dead Silence “That is what the law calls for,” Powell told reporters last month. “And that’s what we’re going to do in this situation.” Trump has repeatedly threatened to remove the Fed chairman, although it’s not clear he has the authority to do so. Trump nominated former Federal Reserve Governor Kevin Warsh as Powell’s replacement earlier this month. At one point during the interview when discussing Warsh, the president incorrectly stated that North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis is no longer a senator. Tillis remains in the Senate but announced last June that he would not seek reelection this fall. But even as Bartiromo initially moved past Trump’s gaffe, he circled back and forced the moment back into the spotlight. “Thom Tillis is no longer a senator, right? He quit,” Trump insisted. “Well, he’s on his way out,” Bartiromo pushed back. “No, he quit. He quit,” Trump repeated, doubling down. He then offered his own theory for Tillis’ departure, “I think he doesn’t want the legacy of stopping a person who could be great. He doesn’t want the legacy of having an incompetent guy stay there for longer than is necessary.” BARTIROMO: Jerome Powell said he's not leaving TRUMP: Then I'll have to fire him BARTIROMO: And you think Warsh can get confirmed? You think Tillis is gonna give you a vote? TRUMP: He might not, but that's why Tillis is no longer a senator BARTIROMO: Okay pic.twitter.com/Mfwj9v7AIP — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) April 15, 2026 “Super reassuring the man who started a war and holds the nuclear codes doesn’t know who’s in the Senate,” @Me36181491 commented on X. “You know.. he’s just fast talking liar…it comes completely automatically…no brain attached,” @summer7570 added. Another user wondered, “What is going on here?” “If there’s one thing dementia is gonna do, it’s get worse,” commented @citizengatsby. Tillis has said he will not vote to confirm Trump’s nominee for Powell’s position until the Justice Department’s probe of cost overruns at the Fed’s headquarters renovation project is resolved, NPR reports The president has not indicated if U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro would back down from investigating the project. “You want Jay Powell out of the way?” Bartiromo asked the president. “If he’s not leaving on time—I’ve held back firing him, I’ve wanted to fire him, but I hate to be controversial, you know. I want to be uncontroversial, but he will be fired,” Trump responded. “Man, who posted that a whole civilization would die, said in that clip he hates to be ‘controversial,’” @NewsiesNeighbor commented on the video on X. Trump’s language underscored the stakes and the potential complications the administration faces if Powell doesn’t step down from the seven-member Fed board. Reuters reports that Trump appointed three of the current members, including Fed Governor Stephen Miran. Former President Joe Biden appointed three other members of the board. Powell was promoted to the top central bank job by Trump, but has proved himself independent of the president’s pressure and threats, and even Trump appointees like Fed Governor Christopher Waller are considered unlikely to support radical change or even abide by Trump’s advice on interest rates, Reuters reports. Trump told Bartiromo he would not instruct prosecutors to drop their probe of the Federal Reserve. ‘What’s Going On Here?!’: Trump Spirals Over Powell — Then a Simple Question Trips Him Up, He Gets a Chance to Fix It, But Blows Right Past It and Somehow Says Something Worse
‘What’s Going On Here?!’: Trump Spirals Over Powell — Then a Simple Question Trips Him Up, He Gets a Chance to Fix It, But Blows Right Past It and Somehow Says Something Worse
President Donald Trump has once again threatened to fire Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, whose term expires in a month. But the president didn’t make the threat without saying something new that is raising a few eyebrows. The president’s threat came during an interview with Fox Business host Maria Bartiromo on Wednesday. US Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell and US President Donald Trump speak at a news conference at the Federal Reserve headquarters, following the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting in Washington, DC, on September 17, 2025. (Photos: Getty Images) “He’s doing a bad job,” Trump said, referring to Powell. “He should be lowering interest rates.” Powell’s term as Fed chairman is set to expire in mid-May, but he’s promised to stay on the job until a successor is confirmed. ‘Enough of This!’: Trump Explodes at Black Reporter, But When He Refuses to Flinch, a Visibly Rattled Trump Pulls a Move That Forces the Room Into Dead Silence “That is what the law calls for,” Powell told reporters last month. “And that’s what we’re going to do in this situation.” Trump has repeatedly threatened to remove the Fed chairman, although it’s not clear he has the authority to do so. Trump nominated former Federal Reserve Governor Kevin Warsh as Powell’s replacement earlier this month. At one point during the interview when discussing Warsh, the president incorrectly stated that North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis is no longer a senator. Tillis remains in the Senate but announced last June that he would not seek reelection this fall. But even as Bartiromo initially moved past Trump’s gaffe, he circled back and forced the moment back into the spotlight. “Thom Tillis is no longer a senator, right? He quit,” Trump insisted. “Well, he’s on his way out,” Bartiromo pushed back. “No, he quit. He quit,” Trump repeated, doubling down. He then offered his own theory for Tillis’ departure, “I think he doesn’t want the legacy of stopping a person who could be great. He doesn’t want the legacy of having an incompetent guy stay there for longer than is necessary.” BARTIROMO: Jerome Powell said he's not leaving TRUMP: Then I'll have to fire him BARTIROMO: And you think Warsh can get confirmed? You think Tillis is gonna give you a vote? TRUMP: He might not, but that's why Tillis is no longer a senator BARTIROMO: Okay pic.twitter.com/Mfwj9v7AIP — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) April 15, 2026 “Super reassuring the man who started a war and holds the nuclear codes doesn’t know who’s in the Senate,” @Me36181491 commented on X. “You know.. he’s just fast talking liar…it comes completely automatically…no brain attached,” @summer7570 added. Another user wondered, “What is going on here?” “If there’s one thing dementia is gonna do, it’s get worse,” commented @citizengatsby. Tillis has said he will not vote to confirm Trump’s nominee for Powell’s position until the Justice Department’s probe of cost overruns at the Fed’s headquarters renovation project is resolved, NPR reports The president has not indicated if U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro would back down from investigating the project. “You want Jay Powell out of the way?” Bartiromo asked the president. “If he’s not leaving on time—I’ve held back firing him, I’ve wanted to fire him, but I hate to be controversial, you know. I want to be uncontroversial, but he will be fired,” Trump responded. “Man, who posted that a whole civilization would die, said in that clip he hates to be ‘controversial,’” @NewsiesNeighbor commented on the video on X. Trump’s language underscored the stakes and the potential complications the administration faces if Powell doesn’t step down from the seven-member Fed board. Reuters reports that Trump appointed three of the current members, including Fed Governor Stephen Miran. Former President Joe Biden appointed three other members of the board. Powell was promoted to the top central bank job by Trump, but has proved himself independent of the president’s pressure and threats, and even Trump appointees like Fed Governor Christopher Waller are considered unlikely to support radical change or even abide by Trump’s advice on interest rates, Reuters reports. Trump told Bartiromo he would not instruct prosecutors to drop their probe of the Federal Reserve. ‘What’s Going On Here?!’: Trump Spirals Over Powell — Then a Simple Question Trips Him Up, He Gets a Chance to Fix It, But Blows Right Past It and Somehow Says Something Worse
‘Whoa Whoa Whoa’: Trump Lines Up Another Press Secretary Days After Blaming Leavitt for Poor Ratings — Then a Tiny On-Screen Mistake Sparks a Firestorm
Donald Trump‘s Cabinet experienced staffing shakeups with the departures of Kristi Noem from the secretary of homeland security role in March and Pam Bondi from the attorney general role in early April. Noem was quickly replaced by Oklahoma Republican Senator Markwayne Mullin, while Bondi was replaced in an acting capacity by Todd Blanche. And now people think Karoline Leavitt is next on the chopping block after Trump singled out the White House Press Secretary, amid frustration grows over disappointing poll numbers, with critics suggesting Leavitt’s being positioned as an easy scapegoat. President Trump rolled out his “spokeswoman Barbie” one week after he blamed Karolina Leavitt for the bad publicity he’s been receiving amid the conflict in Iran. ((Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images) ‘Somebody’s Trying to Save Their Job‘: Karoline Leavitt Drops Details Of Bizarre Call with Trump, But the Part She Won’t Explain Is Raising Eyebrows The pendulum keeps swinging, fueling whispers about who might hear “You’re fired” next — just as another insider quietly rises, with Trump now backing a new mouthpiece whose debut has people questioning Karoline Leavitt’s future in Washington. Riley Podleski, a bright-eyed 25-year-old blonde, was upgraded to assistant press secretary of the U.S. Department of Defense, unofficially recognized by Trump supporters as “The Department of War,” after Easter weekend. The Liberty University alumna has been working in the Capitol since 2025, first as the communications assistant to congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene and then as the Pentagon’s assistant press secretary. She has already been brutally nicknamed “War Spokeswoman Barbie.” Podleski, wearing a white long blazer, flexed her new title in an April 10 “DOW Situation Report,” a highlight reel perpetuating Trump’s successful war narrative about obliterating Iran’s military operations by using “less than 10 percent” of the US’s armed forces’ combat power. To our warfighters and the American people— THIS IS WHAT WE DID THIS WEEK AT THE WAR DEPARTMENT! pic.twitter.com/vdR8CguF6Y — DOW Rapid Response (@DOWResponse) April 10, 2026 She began by stating, “Thanks to the strength of our commander in chief, the United States announced a two-week ceasefire with Iran. In other words, the new Iranian regime understood that a deal was far better than the fate that awaited them.” Copying Secretary of War Pete Hegseth at last Wednesday’s briefing, she reiterated their message that “the US dismantled one of the world’s largest militaries.” “We own their skies, wiped out their navy, destroyed their missile program, and rendered their defense industrial base useless,” said Podleski. “President Trump has made history and has done what no other president had the courage to do before.” Days prior, the president threatened that a “whole civilization” would die if a deal were not reached to halt attacks and reopen the Strait of Hormuz. SecDef Pete Hegseth: "Iran's navy is at the bottom of the sea… Iran's air force has been wiped out. Iran no longer has any sort of a comprehensive air defense system… Their missile program is functionally destroyed." Total dominance. pic.twitter.com/RJCyQ17ZKi — The Real Axel Vasa (@Axlvasa) April 8, 2026 The curated highlight reel imploded after four seconds. “Assistant Press Secretary”? Is that a thing?” asked another person who had never heard of such a title. When people learned that she would work closely with Hegseth, who has skipped at least two major meetings this week, some said the video makes her “look like AI” or “another white blonde lady fall guy” like Noem and Bondi, if something goes wrong. Another joked, “I’m not convinced that’s not Pete Hegseth with a blonde wig. Who the f–k even is this girl???” An eagle-eyed viewer zoomed in and left comments like “OMG and “Whoa Whoa Whoa.” Others remarked, “Is this a joke? Is this a joke. Bc secretary is spelled wrong… LOL I can’t tell what’s real anymore.” Podleski misspelled her own title as “sacratary,” and the slip didn’t go unnoticed. A second heckler jumped in, mocking the administration as anything but the “finest, best and brightest of the bottom of the barrel.” turning the moment into something bigger than a typo — especially as it mirrored that earlier “SSecretary of War” sign placed in front of Hegseth during a Cabinet meeting. The discourse unraveled when folks began commenting about Podleski’s appearance, many of whom said she looked as young as 14 years old. Others wrote comments such as “He loves surrounding himself with blonde women” and “How many weeks do we give her before the Mar A Lago makeover?” View this post on Instagram A post shared by Karoline Leavitt Riccio (@karolineleavitt) Podleski’s youthfulness also fueled speculation that she is “auditioning” to become Trump’s new superstar. An individual openly wondered, “So this is Prego’s replacement? Just a younger version of herself? This is really sick actually.” Leavitt, 28, is pregnant with her and her husband Nicholas Riccio’s, second child, a daughter due in May. The fiery blond launched her career with Trump by working as his 2024 campaign spokesperson. Recently, the president transitioned from lauding Leavitt’s “machine gun lips” to attributing his dismal approval ratings and humiliating headlines to her. During an Oval Office press conference, Trump said, “Maybe Karoline is doing a poor job, I don’t know. She’s my representative; you’re doing a terrible job. Should we keep her? I think we’ll keep her.” Whether he was displaying a dry sense of humor or sending Leavitt a clear warning to tighten up is debatable. Someone else suggested that the young lady, “Seems like she took lessons from reading off a teleprompter from her wonderful ‘commander in chief.’ Melania better watch her step. This one looks to be about the right age.” Trump: I got 93% bad publicity. Maybe Karoline is doing a poor job. pic.twitter.com/HINANqxbs9 — Acyn (@Acyn) March 31, 2026 A similar discussion unfolded in February, when critics noticed that Leavitt and Melania “wannabes” were being recruited for positions to push Trump’s many agendas. Chamberlain Harris, a 26-year-old, was installed on the Commission of Fine Arts panel overseeing the handling of his White House ballroom. ‘Whoa Whoa Whoa’: Trump Lines Up Another Press Secretary Days After Blaming Leavitt for Poor Ratings — Then a Tiny On-Screen Mistake Sparks a Firestorm
‘Whoa Whoa Whoa’: Trump Lines Up Another Press Secretary Days After Blaming Leavitt for Poor Ratings — Then a Tiny On-Screen Mistake Sparks a Firestorm
Donald Trump‘s Cabinet experienced staffing shakeups with the departures of Kristi Noem from the secretary of homeland security role in March and Pam Bondi from the attorney general role in early April. Noem was quickly replaced by Oklahoma Republican Senator Markwayne Mullin, while Bondi was replaced in an acting capacity by Todd Blanche. And now people think Karoline Leavitt is next on the chopping block after Trump singled out the White House Press Secretary, amid frustration grows over disappointing poll numbers, with critics suggesting Leavitt’s being positioned as an easy scapegoat. President Trump rolled out his “spokeswoman Barbie” one week after he blamed Karolina Leavitt for the bad publicity he’s been receiving amid the conflict in Iran. ((Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images) ‘Somebody’s Trying to Save Their Job‘: Karoline Leavitt Drops Details Of Bizarre Call with Trump, But the Part She Won’t Explain Is Raising Eyebrows The pendulum keeps swinging, fueling whispers about who might hear “You’re fired” next — just as another insider quietly rises, with Trump now backing a new mouthpiece whose debut has people questioning Karoline Leavitt’s future in Washington. Riley Podleski, a bright-eyed 25-year-old blonde, was upgraded to assistant press secretary of the U.S. Department of Defense, unofficially recognized by Trump supporters as “The Department of War,” after Easter weekend. The Liberty University alumna has been working in the Capitol since 2025, first as the communications assistant to congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene and then as the Pentagon’s assistant press secretary. She has already been brutally nicknamed “War Spokeswoman Barbie.” Podleski, wearing a white long blazer, flexed her new title in an April 10 “DOW Situation Report,” a highlight reel perpetuating Trump’s successful war narrative about obliterating Iran’s military operations by using “less than 10 percent” of the US’s armed forces’ combat power. To our warfighters and the American people— THIS IS WHAT WE DID THIS WEEK AT THE WAR DEPARTMENT! pic.twitter.com/vdR8CguF6Y — DOW Rapid Response (@DOWResponse) April 10, 2026 She began by stating, “Thanks to the strength of our commander in chief, the United States announced a two-week ceasefire with Iran. In other words, the new Iranian regime understood that a deal was far better than the fate that awaited them.” Copying Secretary of War Pete Hegseth at last Wednesday’s briefing, she reiterated their message that “the US dismantled one of the world’s largest militaries.” “We own their skies, wiped out their navy, destroyed their missile program, and rendered their defense industrial base useless,” said Podleski. “President Trump has made history and has done what no other president had the courage to do before.” Days prior, the president threatened that a “whole civilization” would die if a deal were not reached to halt attacks and reopen the Strait of Hormuz. SecDef Pete Hegseth: "Iran's navy is at the bottom of the sea… Iran's air force has been wiped out. Iran no longer has any sort of a comprehensive air defense system… Their missile program is functionally destroyed." Total dominance. pic.twitter.com/RJCyQ17ZKi — The Real Axel Vasa (@Axlvasa) April 8, 2026 The curated highlight reel imploded after four seconds. “Assistant Press Secretary”? Is that a thing?” asked another person who had never heard of such a title. When people learned that she would work closely with Hegseth, who has skipped at least two major meetings this week, some said the video makes her “look like AI” or “another white blonde lady fall guy” like Noem and Bondi, if something goes wrong. Another joked, “I’m not convinced that’s not Pete Hegseth with a blonde wig. Who the f–k even is this girl???” An eagle-eyed viewer zoomed in and left comments like “OMG and “Whoa Whoa Whoa.” Others remarked, “Is this a joke? Is this a joke. Bc secretary is spelled wrong… LOL I can’t tell what’s real anymore.” Podleski misspelled her own title as “sacratary,” and the slip didn’t go unnoticed. A second heckler jumped in, mocking the administration as anything but the “finest, best and brightest of the bottom of the barrel.” turning the moment into something bigger than a typo — especially as it mirrored that earlier “SSecretary of War” sign placed in front of Hegseth during a Cabinet meeting. The discourse unraveled when folks began commenting about Podleski’s appearance, many of whom said she looked as young as 14 years old. Others wrote comments such as “He loves surrounding himself with blonde women” and “How many weeks do we give her before the Mar A Lago makeover?” View this post on Instagram A post shared by Karoline Leavitt Riccio (@karolineleavitt) Podleski’s youthfulness also fueled speculation that she is “auditioning” to become Trump’s new superstar. An individual openly wondered, “So this is Prego’s replacement? Just a younger version of herself? This is really sick actually.” Leavitt, 28, is pregnant with her and her husband Nicholas Riccio’s, second child, a daughter due in May. The fiery blond launched her career with Trump by working as his 2024 campaign spokesperson. Recently, the president transitioned from lauding Leavitt’s “machine gun lips” to attributing his dismal approval ratings and humiliating headlines to her. During an Oval Office press conference, Trump said, “Maybe Karoline is doing a poor job, I don’t know. She’s my representative; you’re doing a terrible job. Should we keep her? I think we’ll keep her.” Whether he was displaying a dry sense of humor or sending Leavitt a clear warning to tighten up is debatable. Someone else suggested that the young lady, “Seems like she took lessons from reading off a teleprompter from her wonderful ‘commander in chief.’ Melania better watch her step. This one looks to be about the right age.” Trump: I got 93% bad publicity. Maybe Karoline is doing a poor job. pic.twitter.com/HINANqxbs9 — Acyn (@Acyn) March 31, 2026 A similar discussion unfolded in February, when critics noticed that Leavitt and Melania “wannabes” were being recruited for positions to push Trump’s many agendas. Chamberlain Harris, a 26-year-old, was installed on the Commission of Fine Arts panel overseeing the handling of his White House ballroom. ‘Whoa Whoa Whoa’: Trump Lines Up Another Press Secretary Days After Blaming Leavitt for Poor Ratings — Then a Tiny On-Screen Mistake Sparks a Firestorm
‘Whoa Whoa Whoa’: Trump Lines Up Another Press Secretary Days After Blaming Leavitt for Poor Ratings — Then a Tiny On-Screen Mistake Sparks a Firestorm
Donald Trump‘s Cabinet experienced staffing shakeups with the departures of Kristi Noem from the secretary of homeland security role in March and Pam Bondi from the attorney general role in early April. Noem was quickly replaced by Oklahoma Republican Senator Markwayne Mullin, while Bondi was replaced in an acting capacity by Todd Blanche. And now people think Karoline Leavitt is next on the chopping block after Trump singled out the White House Press Secretary, amid frustration grows over disappointing poll numbers, with critics suggesting Leavitt’s being positioned as an easy scapegoat. President Trump rolled out his “spokeswoman Barbie” one week after he blamed Karolina Leavitt for the bad publicity he’s been receiving amid the conflict in Iran. ((Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images) ‘Somebody’s Trying to Save Their Job‘: Karoline Leavitt Drops Details Of Bizarre Call with Trump, But the Part She Won’t Explain Is Raising Eyebrows The pendulum keeps swinging, fueling whispers about who might hear “You’re fired” next — just as another insider quietly rises, with Trump now backing a new mouthpiece whose debut has people questioning Karoline Leavitt’s future in Washington. Riley Podleski, a bright-eyed 25-year-old blonde, was upgraded to assistant press secretary of the U.S. Department of Defense, unofficially recognized by Trump supporters as “The Department of War,” after Easter weekend. The Liberty University alumna has been working in the Capitol since 2025, first as the communications assistant to congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene and then as the Pentagon’s assistant press secretary. She has already been brutally nicknamed “War Spokeswoman Barbie.” Podleski, wearing a white long blazer, flexed her new title in an April 10 “DOW Situation Report,” a highlight reel perpetuating Trump’s successful war narrative about obliterating Iran’s military operations by using “less than 10 percent” of the US’s armed forces’ combat power. To our warfighters and the American people— THIS IS WHAT WE DID THIS WEEK AT THE WAR DEPARTMENT! pic.twitter.com/vdR8CguF6Y — DOW Rapid Response (@DOWResponse) April 10, 2026 She began by stating, “Thanks to the strength of our commander in chief, the United States announced a two-week ceasefire with Iran. In other words, the new Iranian regime understood that a deal was far better than the fate that awaited them.” Copying Secretary of War Pete Hegseth at last Wednesday’s briefing, she reiterated their message that “the US dismantled one of the world’s largest militaries.” “We own their skies, wiped out their navy, destroyed their missile program, and rendered their defense industrial base useless,” said Podleski. “President Trump has made history and has done what no other president had the courage to do before.” Days prior, the president threatened that a “whole civilization” would die if a deal were not reached to halt attacks and reopen the Strait of Hormuz. SecDef Pete Hegseth: "Iran's navy is at the bottom of the sea… Iran's air force has been wiped out. Iran no longer has any sort of a comprehensive air defense system… Their missile program is functionally destroyed." Total dominance. pic.twitter.com/RJCyQ17ZKi — The Real Axel Vasa (@Axlvasa) April 8, 2026 The curated highlight reel imploded after four seconds. “Assistant Press Secretary”? Is that a thing?” asked another person who had never heard of such a title. When people learned that she would work closely with Hegseth, who has skipped at least two major meetings this week, some said the video makes her “look like AI” or “another white blonde lady fall guy” like Noem and Bondi, if something goes wrong. Another joked, “I’m not convinced that’s not Pete Hegseth with a blonde wig. Who the f–k even is this girl???” An eagle-eyed viewer zoomed in and left comments like “OMG and “Whoa Whoa Whoa.” Others remarked, “Is this a joke? Is this a joke. Bc secretary is spelled wrong… LOL I can’t tell what’s real anymore.” Podleski misspelled her own title as “sacratary,” and the slip didn’t go unnoticed. A second heckler jumped in, mocking the administration as anything but the “finest, best and brightest of the bottom of the barrel.” turning the moment into something bigger than a typo — especially as it mirrored that earlier “SSecretary of War” sign placed in front of Hegseth during a Cabinet meeting. The discourse unraveled when folks began commenting about Podleski’s appearance, many of whom said she looked as young as 14 years old. Others wrote comments such as “He loves surrounding himself with blonde women” and “How many weeks do we give her before the Mar A Lago makeover?” View this post on Instagram A post shared by Karoline Leavitt Riccio (@karolineleavitt) Podleski’s youthfulness also fueled speculation that she is “auditioning” to become Trump’s new superstar. An individual openly wondered, “So this is Prego’s replacement? Just a younger version of herself? This is really sick actually.” Leavitt, 28, is pregnant with her and her husband Nicholas Riccio’s, second child, a daughter due in May. The fiery blond launched her career with Trump by working as his 2024 campaign spokesperson. Recently, the president transitioned from lauding Leavitt’s “machine gun lips” to attributing his dismal approval ratings and humiliating headlines to her. During an Oval Office press conference, Trump said, “Maybe Karoline is doing a poor job, I don’t know. She’s my representative; you’re doing a terrible job. Should we keep her? I think we’ll keep her.” Whether he was displaying a dry sense of humor or sending Leavitt a clear warning to tighten up is debatable. Someone else suggested that the young lady, “Seems like she took lessons from reading off a teleprompter from her wonderful ‘commander in chief.’ Melania better watch her step. This one looks to be about the right age.” Trump: I got 93% bad publicity. Maybe Karoline is doing a poor job. pic.twitter.com/HINANqxbs9 — Acyn (@Acyn) March 31, 2026 A similar discussion unfolded in February, when critics noticed that Leavitt and Melania “wannabes” were being recruited for positions to push Trump’s many agendas. Chamberlain Harris, a 26-year-old, was installed on the Commission of Fine Arts panel overseeing the handling of his White House ballroom. ‘Whoa Whoa Whoa’: Trump Lines Up Another Press Secretary Days After Blaming Leavitt for Poor Ratings — Then a Tiny On-Screen Mistake Sparks a Firestorm
‘An Utter Embarrassment’: Trump Accused of Cashing In While in Office — Then Insider Bets Start Surfacing and the White House Scrambles to Warn Staff About a ‘Serious Offense’
President Donald Trump’s rapid-fire foreign policy moves are now being watched for more than just their geopolitical impact — they’re drawing scrutiny for how closely they seem to line up with a series of suspiciously well-timed bets. The wagers keep landing just before the headlines and then paying off big. What might have once looked like lucky guesses is starting to raise deeper questions about whether something else is driving the timing. Donald Trump danced to the “Y.M.C.A.” again following his speech to farmers at the White House on Friday, March 27, 2026. It first drew attention during the lead-up to Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro’s capture, when a little-known account placed a heavy bet hours before the news broke. Months later, the pattern resurfaced again, this time ahead of a sudden shift in U.S. policy toward Iran, when trading activity spiked just before the announcement. ‘What a … Scumbag!’: Trump Makes a Move He Thought Would Fly Under the Radar, Then MTG and His Own Base Drag It Into the Light and Refuse to Let It Go For critics watching it unfold, one can’t help but wonder if the fix is in. The White House is now trying to get ahead of that perception. In a staff-wide warning sent March 24, officials reminded employees that insider trading tied to government decisions is a crime, responding to a string of suspiciously successful bets placed shortly before major policy announcements. According to The Wall Street Journal, the message was unequivocal: “Recent press reports have raised concerns about government officials using nonpublic government information to place wagers on online prediction markets, such as Kalshi or Polymarket,” the email reads, adding that it is a “criminal offense for anyone to use nonpublic information to buy or sell these contracts.” Market manipulation and insider trading coming out of the White House. https://t.co/JzTZtzI8QT — Matt Stoller (@matthewstoller) March 24, 2026 The warning underscores a growing concern inside and outside the administration that fast-moving policy decisions — and the markets reacting to them — may be creating opportunities for abuse. The email went further, stressing that “government ethics regulations prohibit the use of nonpublic information for the private benefit of an employee or any other third party,” and concluding, “All White House employees are reminded that the misuse of nonpublic information by government employees for financial benefit is a very serious offense and will not be tolerated.” The timing was not accidental. It came just one day after Trump publicly announced he would postpone strikes on Iranian power plants — an announcement that followed a burst of trading activity in oil futures shortly beforehand. That sequence has become a recurring concern. Data shows that more than $760 million in oil futures contracts changed hands in under two minutes shortly before one of Trump’s abrupt policy reversals. On crypto-based prediction platforms like Polymarket, anonymous users have placed high-stakes bets on geopolitical outcomes tied directly to Trump’s decisions and won big. One early case emerged in January, when a newly created account wagered $32,000 that Maduro would be ousted. Within hours, Trump ordered a rapid military operation that led to Maduro’s capture, netting the bettor more than $400,000. In another instance, a trader known as “Magamyman” reportedly earned more than $553,000 betting on developments tied to Iran and its leadership just before a coordinated U.S.-Israel strike killed Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Six additional accounts collectively made $1.2 million betting on that same outcome. Even ceasefire announcements have followed the pattern. More than 50 anonymous accounts placed “Yes” bets on a U.S.-Iran ceasefire shortly before Trump confirmed it on April 7 — despite having issued a stark warning just hours earlier that he might destroy Iran’s “whole civilization.” Absolute bombshell. A prominent journalist exposes how the Trump administration completely dismantled the SEC to protect their own massive insider trading schemes. The White House is operating a corrupt syndicate to profit off the disastrous war in Iran. pic.twitter.com/m7EDYSQrFn — Furkan Gözükara (@FurkanGozukara) April 3, 2026 Not every bet has paid off, but the clustering of successful wagers around key announcements has fueled suspicions. There is no confirmed evidence that anyone inside the administration leaked information or acted on insider knowledge. Still, the optics have proved difficult to shake, particularly as prediction markets allow users to operate anonymously while placing large, targeted bets tied to sensitive global events. Public reaction was swift, with many openly questioning what they were seeing. One commenter on MSN wrote, “The tone of any business emanates from the top down. Having a lawless, corrupt person at the helm filters down to the employees who learn to care less about right and wrong.” Another questioned whether the issue extended beyond staff behavior: “Hey! Even if Trump and his family take advantage of these ‘well timed bets’ doesn’t mean his staff gets to do the same. I don’t know, is that greed, hubris, or what?” Others pointed directly at the president’s broader financial dealings. “It is an utter embarrassment that the President of the United States is allowed to blatantly fill his pockets without any consequence. The Trump cryptocurrency may be the most insultingly obvious corruption in recent memory,” one post read. Another added, “Pretty sure that the hypocrite, crypto corrupto criminal Trump has advised the Don Trumpeleon criminal family to place bets using the insider info. he is giving them-hour by hour.” One reaction tied together the timing and scale of the trades while questioning who was behind them: “And just five minutes before Trump announced a pause on attacking Iranian energy infrastructure-a move that sent oil prices crashing and stocks soaring-an anonymous trader placed a massive $1.5 billion bet on the exact move, reaping staggering profits. Who was it? Trump? A family member? A White House staffer? The question hangs unanswered, but the pattern is unmistakable: access is currency, war is profit, and the American people are left holding the bill.” Inside the administration, officials have pushed back firmly. White House spokesperson Davis Ingle said, “President Trump has been crystal clear: while he seeks a strong and profitable stock market for everyone, members of Congress and other government officials should be prohibited from using nonpublic information for financial benefit. The only special interest that will ever guide President Trump is the best interest of the American people.” View on Threads He also dismissed allegations of wrongdoing as “baseless and irresponsible reporting.” Still, the issue has drawn bipartisan concern on Capitol Hill. More than 55 Democratic lawmakers have called for tighter oversight of prediction markets, joined by several Republicans. Proposed legislation would limit or outright ban betting on military actions, with critics arguing that the current system risks turning national security decisions into profit opportunities. Connecticut Sen. Richard Blumenthal warned that such platforms “are turning war into a casino game, and creating a market for national security leaks,” while New Jersey Sen. Andy Kim said “Corruption and exploitation” are thriving in regulatory gaps. Ethics rules already make the boundaries clear: federal regulations bar government employees from using nonpublic information for personal gain or from gambling on government property. But the rapid rise of crypto-based prediction markets — combined with Trump’s unpredictable, high-impact decision-making style — has created a new kind of gray area, where the timing alone is raising eyebrows. ‘An Utter Embarrassment’: Trump Accused of Cashing In While in Office — Then Insider Bets Start Surfacing and the White House Scrambles to Warn Staff About a ‘Serious Offense’
‘Desperate’ and ‘Hypocritical’: Trump’s Latest Effort to Limit Voting By Mail Meets Instant Rebuke from Top Democratic Leaders — and a Federal Lawsuit
Black and Democratic leaders in Congress are railing against the executive order issued by President Trump on Tuesday seeking to restrict mail-in voting ahead of this year’s midterm elections, and they quickly filed a lawsuit to nullify it. Trump’s order directs Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin to work with the Social Security Administration to compile lists of verified U.S. citizens who are eligible to vote in each state. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., conducts his weekly news conference in the Capitol Visitor Center on Wednesday, January 8, 2025. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images) It bars the U.S. Postal Service from sending ballots to anyone not on the state’s approved mail-in ballot list and requires ballots to be secured in envelopes with barcodes for tracking. It also directs the U.S. attorney general to prioritize investigations into cases involving ballots sent to ineligible voters. States that don’t comply with the new requirements could face a loss of federal funding. Black Congressman Says MAGA Republicans In His State Told Him ‘Slavery Was a Good Thing’ and Believes They Would ‘Absolutely’ Reinstitute Jim Crow “Cheating on mail-in voting is legendary. It’s horrible,” Trump said while signing the order on Tuesday. “Democrats want to use it for cheating.” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, a New York Democrat, immediately criticized the order as an “unlawful power grab,” calling the president’s actions “unhinged” and accusing Republicans of trying to “desperately cling to power” by making it harder for people to vote. “The Constitution is clear. Donald Trump has no power to change the way states conduct their elections,” Jeffries said in a statement. “We will fight back against this desperate Republican scheme to take over our free and fair elections and end the era of voter suppression in America once and for all.” On Wednesday several national Democratic groups, including the Democratic National Committee, as well as U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Jeffries filed a federal lawsuit against Trump, the Department of Justice and several other federal agencies asking the court to declare the executive order in violation of the constitutional separation of powers, the Voting Rights Act, the First and Fifth Amendments, and other federal laws, and to bar the Trump Administration from enforcing it. The complaint, written by attorney Marc Elias, an election law specialist, knocks Trump for once again trying “to rewrite election laws for his own perceived partisan advantage” and notes that the Constitution’s framers “anticipated this kind of desire for absolute power” and “the menace it would pose to ordered liberty and the ways in which it would corrode self-government like an acid.” To resist that threat, “they left most election authority with the States” and “permitted state regulations to be displaced only upon the agreement of both chambers of Congress.” The “radical changes to the manner and conditions under which citizens may cast absentee or mail-in ballots” proposed in the order “threaten to disenfranchise lawful voters and plainly exceed the President’s lawful authority,” the complaint contends. Jeffries argued that the order allows the administration to “unilaterally determine who is allowed to vote” and seeks to intimidate state election officials by subjecting them to “unnecessary” investigations. He also said it will make voting “unnecessarily difficult for women, communities of color, young people, individuals with disabilities and older Americans.” Trump has often claimed, without evidence, that mail-in ballots and instances of undocumented immigrants voting contributed to widespread fraud in the 2020 presidential election. Cases of mail voting fraud are very rare, accounting for only .000043 percent of total mail ballots cast, or about four cases out of every 10 million mail votes, the Brookings Institute reported last year. And the practice is popular among Americans. In 2024, the U.S. Postal Service processed more than 99 million mail-in ballots, including more than a third of all ballots cast in the 2024 federal election. Jeffries also pointed out Trump’s own use of mail voting. “Donald Trump just voted by mail in the Florida special election where he was once again defeated. Now he wants to ban it for everyone else,” Jeffries wrote. “What a phony.” NAACP President Derrick Johnson called Trump’s action hypocritical and unconstitutional. “Shocking… the mail-in president restricts mail-in voting. A hypocrite, as always,” Johnson said. “Not only is his order unconstitutional, it’s unserious. This order will not stand. His attempts to silence us will only make us louder – with our voices and our votes.” The President’s attack on mail-in ballots is desperation plain and simple. It’s a panicked attempt to silence the people and salvage a failing presidency. It will not stand. — Senator Reverend Raphael Warnock (@SenatorWarnock) March 31, 2026 Sen. Raphael Warnock, a Georgia Democrat, called the move as an act of political desperation. “The President’s attack on mail-in ballots is desperation plain and simple,” Warnock wrote on X. “It’s a panicked attempt to silence the people and salvage a failing presidency. It will not stand.” Joanna Lydgate, CEO of the States United Democracy Center, said the order is another attempt by Trump to seize authority over elections that belong to the states. “Elections are run by the states. President Trump has once again signed an unconstitutional executive order trying to grab that power for himself,” Lydgate told Democracy Docket. “But it won’t work — states have successfully fought this type of illegal overreach once, and they’ll do it again.” Arizona, California and Oregon, states that widely offer mail-in voting, immediately pledged to sue the Trump administration, reported Fox News. We’re challenging it. See you in court. https://t.co/wPYfLyJOUy — Gavin Newsom (@GavinNewsom) March 31, 2026 “The President wants to limit which Americans can participate in our democracy,” California Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom wrote on X. “We’re challenging it,” he added. “See you in court.” New York Attorney General Letitia James vowed on X on Tuesday: “Millions of Americans rely on mail-in voting to participate in our democracy and make their voices heard. My office will fight back against any unlawful attacks on our free and fair elections.” Previous Trump executive orders attempting to impose nationwide election rules — including proof-of-citizenship requirements and federal control over voter registration processes — were blocked by federal courts, which ruled that the president cannot unilaterally rewrite election law. David Becker, an election law expert, told Democracy Docket that the order on mail-in voting exceeds presidential authority and is likely to fail a court challenge. “This is unconstitutional on its face. The Constitution clearly gives the president no power over elections,” Becker said. “I expect that this will be blocked by multiple federal courts in a very short period of time and have no legal effect whatsoever.” “See you in court. You will lose,” Senate Minority Leader Schumer, a New York Democrat, wrote Tuesday on X. Damon Hewitt, president and executive director of the Lawyers Committee On Civil Rights, called the executive order unlawful and “designed to make it harder for people to cast a ballot and to intimidate voters, all while sowing confusion in the process. That’s not a strategy for governance. That’s anti-democracy politics of the worst kind.” “Even though the executive order is patently illegal, it could still have devastating consequences. We anticipate a large number of Black voters and other people of color who were eligible to vote in many past elections will be wrongfully excluded from the so-called approved vote by mail lists.” Although Trump previously urged his supporters to vote using mail ballots prior to the 2024 election, Democrats have been significantly more likely to vote using mail-in ballots, compared to Republicans, since the 2020 election, NPR reported. That gap has widened in recent elections as GOP-led states have passed more restrictions on this method of voting. ‘Desperate’ and ‘Hypocritical’: Trump’s Latest Effort to Limit Voting By Mail Meets Instant Rebuke from Top Democratic Leaders — and a Federal Lawsuit
‘Desperate’ and ‘Hypocritical’: Trump’s Latest Effort to Limit Voting By Mail Meets Instant Rebuke from Top Democratic Leaders — and a Federal Lawsuit
Black and Democratic leaders in Congress are railing against the executive order issued by President Trump on Tuesday seeking to restrict mail-in voting ahead of this year’s midterm elections, and they quickly filed a lawsuit to nullify it. Trump’s order directs Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin to work with the Social Security Administration to compile lists of verified U.S. citizens who are eligible to vote in each state. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., conducts his weekly news conference in the Capitol Visitor Center on Wednesday, January 8, 2025. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images) It bars the U.S. Postal Service from sending ballots to anyone not on the state’s approved mail-in ballot list and requires ballots to be secured in envelopes with barcodes for tracking. It also directs the U.S. attorney general to prioritize investigations into cases involving ballots sent to ineligible voters. States that don’t comply with the new requirements could face a loss of federal funding. Black Congressman Says MAGA Republicans In His State Told Him ‘Slavery Was a Good Thing’ and Believes They Would ‘Absolutely’ Reinstitute Jim Crow “Cheating on mail-in voting is legendary. It’s horrible,” Trump said while signing the order on Tuesday. “Democrats want to use it for cheating.” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, a New York Democrat, immediately criticized the order as an “unlawful power grab,” calling the president’s actions “unhinged” and accusing Republicans of trying to “desperately cling to power” by making it harder for people to vote. “The Constitution is clear. Donald Trump has no power to change the way states conduct their elections,” Jeffries said in a statement. “We will fight back against this desperate Republican scheme to take over our free and fair elections and end the era of voter suppression in America once and for all.” On Wednesday several national Democratic groups, including the Democratic National Committee, as well as U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Jeffries filed a federal lawsuit against Trump, the Department of Justice and several other federal agencies asking the court to declare the executive order in violation of the constitutional separation of powers, the Voting Rights Act, the First and Fifth Amendments, and other federal laws, and to bar the Trump Administration from enforcing it. The complaint, written by attorney Marc Elias, an election law specialist, knocks Trump for once again trying “to rewrite election laws for his own perceived partisan advantage” and notes that the Constitution’s framers “anticipated this kind of desire for absolute power” and “the menace it would pose to ordered liberty and the ways in which it would corrode self-government like an acid.” To resist that threat, “they left most election authority with the States” and “permitted state regulations to be displaced only upon the agreement of both chambers of Congress.” The “radical changes to the manner and conditions under which citizens may cast absentee or mail-in ballots” proposed in the order “threaten to disenfranchise lawful voters and plainly exceed the President’s lawful authority,” the complaint contends. Jeffries argued that the order allows the administration to “unilaterally determine who is allowed to vote” and seeks to intimidate state election officials by subjecting them to “unnecessary” investigations. He also said it will make voting “unnecessarily difficult for women, communities of color, young people, individuals with disabilities and older Americans.” Trump has often claimed, without evidence, that mail-in ballots and instances of undocumented immigrants voting contributed to widespread fraud in the 2020 presidential election. Cases of mail voting fraud are very rare, accounting for only .000043 percent of total mail ballots cast, or about four cases out of every 10 million mail votes, the Brookings Institute reported last year. And the practice is popular among Americans. In 2024, the U.S. Postal Service processed more than 99 million mail-in ballots, including more than a third of all ballots cast in the 2024 federal election. Jeffries also pointed out Trump’s own use of mail voting. “Donald Trump just voted by mail in the Florida special election where he was once again defeated. Now he wants to ban it for everyone else,” Jeffries wrote. “What a phony.” NAACP President Derrick Johnson called Trump’s action hypocritical and unconstitutional. “Shocking… the mail-in president restricts mail-in voting. A hypocrite, as always,” Johnson said. “Not only is his order unconstitutional, it’s unserious. This order will not stand. His attempts to silence us will only make us louder – with our voices and our votes.” The President’s attack on mail-in ballots is desperation plain and simple. It’s a panicked attempt to silence the people and salvage a failing presidency. It will not stand. — Senator Reverend Raphael Warnock (@SenatorWarnock) March 31, 2026 Sen. Raphael Warnock, a Georgia Democrat, called the move as an act of political desperation. “The President’s attack on mail-in ballots is desperation plain and simple,” Warnock wrote on X. “It’s a panicked attempt to silence the people and salvage a failing presidency. It will not stand.” Joanna Lydgate, CEO of the States United Democracy Center, said the order is another attempt by Trump to seize authority over elections that belong to the states. “Elections are run by the states. President Trump has once again signed an unconstitutional executive order trying to grab that power for himself,” Lydgate told Democracy Docket. “But it won’t work — states have successfully fought this type of illegal overreach once, and they’ll do it again.” Arizona, California and Oregon, states that widely offer mail-in voting, immediately pledged to sue the Trump administration, reported Fox News. We’re challenging it. See you in court. https://t.co/wPYfLyJOUy — Gavin Newsom (@GavinNewsom) March 31, 2026 “The President wants to limit which Americans can participate in our democracy,” California Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom wrote on X. “We’re challenging it,” he added. “See you in court.” New York Attorney General Letitia James vowed on X on Tuesday: “Millions of Americans rely on mail-in voting to participate in our democracy and make their voices heard. My office will fight back against any unlawful attacks on our free and fair elections.” Previous Trump executive orders attempting to impose nationwide election rules — including proof-of-citizenship requirements and federal control over voter registration processes — were blocked by federal courts, which ruled that the president cannot unilaterally rewrite election law. David Becker, an election law expert, told Democracy Docket that the order on mail-in voting exceeds presidential authority and is likely to fail a court challenge. “This is unconstitutional on its face. The Constitution clearly gives the president no power over elections,” Becker said. “I expect that this will be blocked by multiple federal courts in a very short period of time and have no legal effect whatsoever.” “See you in court. You will lose,” Senate Minority Leader Schumer, a New York Democrat, wrote Tuesday on X. Damon Hewitt, president and executive director of the Lawyers Committee On Civil Rights, called the executive order unlawful and “designed to make it harder for people to cast a ballot and to intimidate voters, all while sowing confusion in the process. That’s not a strategy for governance. That’s anti-democracy politics of the worst kind.” “Even though the executive order is patently illegal, it could still have devastating consequences. We anticipate a large number of Black voters and other people of color who were eligible to vote in many past elections will be wrongfully excluded from the so-called approved vote by mail lists.” Although Trump previously urged his supporters to vote using mail ballots prior to the 2024 election, Democrats have been significantly more likely to vote using mail-in ballots, compared to Republicans, since the 2020 election, NPR reported. That gap has widened in recent elections as GOP-led states have passed more restrictions on this method of voting. ‘Desperate’ and ‘Hypocritical’: Trump’s Latest Effort to Limit Voting By Mail Meets Instant Rebuke from Top Democratic Leaders — and a Federal Lawsuit
‘Desperate’ and ‘Hypocritical’: Trump’s Latest Effort to Limit Voting By Mail Meets Instant Rebuke from Top Democratic Leaders — and a Federal Lawsuit
Black and Democratic leaders in Congress are railing against the executive order issued by President Trump on Tuesday seeking to restrict mail-in voting ahead of this year’s midterm elections, and they quickly filed a lawsuit to nullify it. Trump’s order directs Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin to work with the Social Security Administration to compile lists of verified U.S. citizens who are eligible to vote in each state. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., conducts his weekly news conference in the Capitol Visitor Center on Wednesday, January 8, 2025. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images) It bars the U.S. Postal Service from sending ballots to anyone not on the state’s approved mail-in ballot list and requires ballots to be secured in envelopes with barcodes for tracking. It also directs the U.S. attorney general to prioritize investigations into cases involving ballots sent to ineligible voters. States that don’t comply with the new requirements could face a loss of federal funding. Black Congressman Says MAGA Republicans In His State Told Him ‘Slavery Was a Good Thing’ and Believes They Would ‘Absolutely’ Reinstitute Jim Crow “Cheating on mail-in voting is legendary. It’s horrible,” Trump said while signing the order on Tuesday. “Democrats want to use it for cheating.” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, a New York Democrat, immediately criticized the order as an “unlawful power grab,” calling the president’s actions “unhinged” and accusing Republicans of trying to “desperately cling to power” by making it harder for people to vote. “The Constitution is clear. Donald Trump has no power to change the way states conduct their elections,” Jeffries said in a statement. “We will fight back against this desperate Republican scheme to take over our free and fair elections and end the era of voter suppression in America once and for all.” On Wednesday several national Democratic groups, including the Democratic National Committee, as well as U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Jeffries filed a federal lawsuit against Trump, the Department of Justice and several other federal agencies asking the court to declare the executive order in violation of the constitutional separation of powers, the Voting Rights Act, the First and Fifth Amendments, and other federal laws, and to bar the Trump Administration from enforcing it. The complaint, written by attorney Marc Elias, an election law specialist, knocks Trump for once again trying “to rewrite election laws for his own perceived partisan advantage” and notes that the Constitution’s framers “anticipated this kind of desire for absolute power” and “the menace it would pose to ordered liberty and the ways in which it would corrode self-government like an acid.” To resist that threat, “they left most election authority with the States” and “permitted state regulations to be displaced only upon the agreement of both chambers of Congress.” The “radical changes to the manner and conditions under which citizens may cast absentee or mail-in ballots” proposed in the order “threaten to disenfranchise lawful voters and plainly exceed the President’s lawful authority,” the complaint contends. Jeffries argued that the order allows the administration to “unilaterally determine who is allowed to vote” and seeks to intimidate state election officials by subjecting them to “unnecessary” investigations. He also said it will make voting “unnecessarily difficult for women, communities of color, young people, individuals with disabilities and older Americans.” Trump has often claimed, without evidence, that mail-in ballots and instances of undocumented immigrants voting contributed to widespread fraud in the 2020 presidential election. Cases of mail voting fraud are very rare, accounting for only .000043 percent of total mail ballots cast, or about four cases out of every 10 million mail votes, the Brookings Institute reported last year. And the practice is popular among Americans. In 2024, the U.S. Postal Service processed more than 99 million mail-in ballots, including more than a third of all ballots cast in the 2024 federal election. Jeffries also pointed out Trump’s own use of mail voting. “Donald Trump just voted by mail in the Florida special election where he was once again defeated. Now he wants to ban it for everyone else,” Jeffries wrote. “What a phony.” NAACP President Derrick Johnson called Trump’s action hypocritical and unconstitutional. “Shocking… the mail-in president restricts mail-in voting. A hypocrite, as always,” Johnson said. “Not only is his order unconstitutional, it’s unserious. This order will not stand. His attempts to silence us will only make us louder – with our voices and our votes.” The President’s attack on mail-in ballots is desperation plain and simple. It’s a panicked attempt to silence the people and salvage a failing presidency. It will not stand. — Senator Reverend Raphael Warnock (@SenatorWarnock) March 31, 2026 Sen. Raphael Warnock, a Georgia Democrat, called the move as an act of political desperation. “The President’s attack on mail-in ballots is desperation plain and simple,” Warnock wrote on X. “It’s a panicked attempt to silence the people and salvage a failing presidency. It will not stand.” Joanna Lydgate, CEO of the States United Democracy Center, said the order is another attempt by Trump to seize authority over elections that belong to the states. “Elections are run by the states. President Trump has once again signed an unconstitutional executive order trying to grab that power for himself,” Lydgate told Democracy Docket. “But it won’t work — states have successfully fought this type of illegal overreach once, and they’ll do it again.” Arizona, California and Oregon, states that widely offer mail-in voting, immediately pledged to sue the Trump administration, reported Fox News. We’re challenging it. See you in court. https://t.co/wPYfLyJOUy — Gavin Newsom (@GavinNewsom) March 31, 2026 “The President wants to limit which Americans can participate in our democracy,” California Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom wrote on X. “We’re challenging it,” he added. “See you in court.” New York Attorney General Letitia James vowed on X on Tuesday: “Millions of Americans rely on mail-in voting to participate in our democracy and make their voices heard. My office will fight back against any unlawful attacks on our free and fair elections.” Previous Trump executive orders attempting to impose nationwide election rules — including proof-of-citizenship requirements and federal control over voter registration processes — were blocked by federal courts, which ruled that the president cannot unilaterally rewrite election law. David Becker, an election law expert, told Democracy Docket that the order on mail-in voting exceeds presidential authority and is likely to fail a court challenge. “This is unconstitutional on its face. The Constitution clearly gives the president no power over elections,” Becker said. “I expect that this will be blocked by multiple federal courts in a very short period of time and have no legal effect whatsoever.” “See you in court. You will lose,” Senate Minority Leader Schumer, a New York Democrat, wrote Tuesday on X. Damon Hewitt, president and executive director of the Lawyers Committee On Civil Rights, called the executive order unlawful and “designed to make it harder for people to cast a ballot and to intimidate voters, all while sowing confusion in the process. That’s not a strategy for governance. That’s anti-democracy politics of the worst kind.” “Even though the executive order is patently illegal, it could still have devastating consequences. We anticipate a large number of Black voters and other people of color who were eligible to vote in many past elections will be wrongfully excluded from the so-called approved vote by mail lists.” Although Trump previously urged his supporters to vote using mail ballots prior to the 2024 election, Democrats have been significantly more likely to vote using mail-in ballots, compared to Republicans, since the 2020 election, NPR reported. That gap has widened in recent elections as GOP-led states have passed more restrictions on this method of voting. ‘Desperate’ and ‘Hypocritical’: Trump’s Latest Effort to Limit Voting By Mail Meets Instant Rebuke from Top Democratic Leaders — and a Federal Lawsuit
‘Desperate’ and ‘Hypocritical’: Trump’s Latest Effort to Limit Voting By Mail Meets Instant Rebuke from Top Democratic Leaders — and a Federal Lawsuit
Black and Democratic leaders in Congress are railing against the executive order issued by President Trump on Tuesday seeking to restrict mail-in voting ahead of this year’s midterm elections, and they quickly filed a lawsuit to nullify it. Trump’s order directs Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin to work with the Social Security Administration to compile lists of verified U.S. citizens who are eligible to vote in each state. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., conducts his weekly news conference in the Capitol Visitor Center on Wednesday, January 8, 2025. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images) It bars the U.S. Postal Service from sending ballots to anyone not on the state’s approved mail-in ballot list and requires ballots to be secured in envelopes with barcodes for tracking. It also directs the U.S. attorney general to prioritize investigations into cases involving ballots sent to ineligible voters. States that don’t comply with the new requirements could face a loss of federal funding. Black Congressman Says MAGA Republicans In His State Told Him ‘Slavery Was a Good Thing’ and Believes They Would ‘Absolutely’ Reinstitute Jim Crow “Cheating on mail-in voting is legendary. It’s horrible,” Trump said while signing the order on Tuesday. “Democrats want to use it for cheating.” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, a New York Democrat, immediately criticized the order as an “unlawful power grab,” calling the president’s actions “unhinged” and accusing Republicans of trying to “desperately cling to power” by making it harder for people to vote. “The Constitution is clear. Donald Trump has no power to change the way states conduct their elections,” Jeffries said in a statement. “We will fight back against this desperate Republican scheme to take over our free and fair elections and end the era of voter suppression in America once and for all.” On Wednesday several national Democratic groups, including the Democratic National Committee, as well as U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Jeffries filed a federal lawsuit against Trump, the Department of Justice and several other federal agencies asking the court to declare the executive order in violation of the constitutional separation of powers, the Voting Rights Act, the First and Fifth Amendments, and other federal laws, and to bar the Trump Administration from enforcing it. The complaint, written by attorney Marc Elias, an election law specialist, knocks Trump for once again trying “to rewrite election laws for his own perceived partisan advantage” and notes that the Constitution’s framers “anticipated this kind of desire for absolute power” and “the menace it would pose to ordered liberty and the ways in which it would corrode self-government like an acid.” To resist that threat, “they left most election authority with the States” and “permitted state regulations to be displaced only upon the agreement of both chambers of Congress.” The “radical changes to the manner and conditions under which citizens may cast absentee or mail-in ballots” proposed in the order “threaten to disenfranchise lawful voters and plainly exceed the President’s lawful authority,” the complaint contends. Jeffries argued that the order allows the administration to “unilaterally determine who is allowed to vote” and seeks to intimidate state election officials by subjecting them to “unnecessary” investigations. He also said it will make voting “unnecessarily difficult for women, communities of color, young people, individuals with disabilities and older Americans.” Trump has often claimed, without evidence, that mail-in ballots and instances of undocumented immigrants voting contributed to widespread fraud in the 2020 presidential election. Cases of mail voting fraud are very rare, accounting for only .000043 percent of total mail ballots cast, or about four cases out of every 10 million mail votes, the Brookings Institute reported last year. And the practice is popular among Americans. In 2024, the U.S. Postal Service processed more than 99 million mail-in ballots, including more than a third of all ballots cast in the 2024 federal election. Jeffries also pointed out Trump’s own use of mail voting. “Donald Trump just voted by mail in the Florida special election where he was once again defeated. Now he wants to ban it for everyone else,” Jeffries wrote. “What a phony.” NAACP President Derrick Johnson called Trump’s action hypocritical and unconstitutional. “Shocking… the mail-in president restricts mail-in voting. A hypocrite, as always,” Johnson said. “Not only is his order unconstitutional, it’s unserious. This order will not stand. His attempts to silence us will only make us louder – with our voices and our votes.” The President’s attack on mail-in ballots is desperation plain and simple. It’s a panicked attempt to silence the people and salvage a failing presidency. It will not stand. — Senator Reverend Raphael Warnock (@SenatorWarnock) March 31, 2026 Sen. Raphael Warnock, a Georgia Democrat, called the move as an act of political desperation. “The President’s attack on mail-in ballots is desperation plain and simple,” Warnock wrote on X. “It’s a panicked attempt to silence the people and salvage a failing presidency. It will not stand.” Joanna Lydgate, CEO of the States United Democracy Center, said the order is another attempt by Trump to seize authority over elections that belong to the states. “Elections are run by the states. President Trump has once again signed an unconstitutional executive order trying to grab that power for himself,” Lydgate told Democracy Docket. “But it won’t work — states have successfully fought this type of illegal overreach once, and they’ll do it again.” Arizona, California and Oregon, states that widely offer mail-in voting, immediately pledged to sue the Trump administration, reported Fox News. We’re challenging it. See you in court. https://t.co/wPYfLyJOUy — Gavin Newsom (@GavinNewsom) March 31, 2026 “The President wants to limit which Americans can participate in our democracy,” California Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom wrote on X. “We’re challenging it,” he added. “See you in court.” New York Attorney General Letitia James vowed on X on Tuesday: “Millions of Americans rely on mail-in voting to participate in our democracy and make their voices heard. My office will fight back against any unlawful attacks on our free and fair elections.” Previous Trump executive orders attempting to impose nationwide election rules — including proof-of-citizenship requirements and federal control over voter registration processes — were blocked by federal courts, which ruled that the president cannot unilaterally rewrite election law. David Becker, an election law expert, told Democracy Docket that the order on mail-in voting exceeds presidential authority and is likely to fail a court challenge. “This is unconstitutional on its face. The Constitution clearly gives the president no power over elections,” Becker said. “I expect that this will be blocked by multiple federal courts in a very short period of time and have no legal effect whatsoever.” “See you in court. You will lose,” Senate Minority Leader Schumer, a New York Democrat, wrote Tuesday on X. Damon Hewitt, president and executive director of the Lawyers Committee On Civil Rights, called the executive order unlawful and “designed to make it harder for people to cast a ballot and to intimidate voters, all while sowing confusion in the process. That’s not a strategy for governance. That’s anti-democracy politics of the worst kind.” “Even though the executive order is patently illegal, it could still have devastating consequences. We anticipate a large number of Black voters and other people of color who were eligible to vote in many past elections will be wrongfully excluded from the so-called approved vote by mail lists.” Although Trump previously urged his supporters to vote using mail ballots prior to the 2024 election, Democrats have been significantly more likely to vote using mail-in ballots, compared to Republicans, since the 2020 election, NPR reported. That gap has widened in recent elections as GOP-led states have passed more restrictions on this method of voting. ‘Desperate’ and ‘Hypocritical’: Trump’s Latest Effort to Limit Voting By Mail Meets Instant Rebuke from Top Democratic Leaders — and a Federal Lawsuit
Black Congressman Says MAGA Republicans In His State Told Him ‘Slavery Was a Good Thing’ and Believes They Would ‘Absolutely’ Reinstitute Jim Crow
Congressman James Clyburn recently said that some MAGA Republicans have told him outright they wish to return the country’s social and political landscape to the Jim Crow and slavery eras. During an appearance on PBS’s “Firing Line with Margaret Hoover” back in November, the 85-year-old U.S. representative gave a detailed overview of his newest book, “The First Eight: A Personal History of the Pioneering Black Congressmen Who Shaped a Nation,” which tells the stories of South Carolina’s first eight Black congressmen who were elected after the Civil War and emancipation, and how they navigated intense racial dynamics, reshaped political office, and paved a way for Clyburn’s rise to power as the ninth Black congressman from the Palmetto State. Democratic Rep. James Clyburn of South Carolina speaks before introducing President Joe Biden at the International African-American Museum on January 19, 2025, in Charleston, South Carolina. (Photo: Grant Baldwin/Getty Images) Clyburn wrote the book following the deadly U.S. Capitol insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021, which he believes was inspired by the Antebellum era and came to pass as a result of reactionary politics. A clip from the show that’s garnered some recent attention online shows Clyburn explaining some personal interactions he’s had with constituents in his district who are MAGA loyalists and supporters of President Donald Trump, some of whom want the country to return to a segregated state. When asked whether he thought MAGA Republicans were explicitly racist, Clyburn said he doesn’t liberally apply the term to the entire group, but explained that some believed “slavery was a good thing.” “I’m very circumspect about using the term. There are racists,” Clyburn said. “There are white supremacists. There are people who are supporters of this president who admit to me that they are white supremacists. I’ve had people who support this president tell me that they thought slavery was a good thing.” In 2016, a YouGov poll surveyed Trump supporters and found that nearly 20 percent did not approve of the Emancipation Proclamation ordering the freedom of enslaved Americans in Confederate states during the Civil War. Clyburn said he believes the MAGA Republicans “wish to get us back as close to slavery as they can possibly get us” without violating the Constitution and would attempt to reinstitute Jim Crow with the help of the Supreme Court. “Anything that’s happened before can happen again,” Clyburn said. “All it takes is a rogue Supreme Court.” Black Congressman Says MAGA Republicans In His State Told Him ‘Slavery Was a Good Thing’ and Believes They Would ‘Absolutely’ Reinstitute Jim Crow
‘That’s a Lie!’: After Bondi’s Embarrasing Exit, Trump’s AG Thought the Epstein Chaos Was Dying Down — Then Massie Fires Off a Brutal Shot That Instantly Has Them Scrambling Again
The Justice Department appeared to think it had found a way out of the Epstein files chaos. Just two weeks after former Attorney General Pam Bondi was fired, officials moved to block her from testifying under oath before Congress — arguing that because she no longer holds the position, she is no longer bound by the subpoena issued while she was still in office. (L-R) US Representative Ro Khanna, Democrat of California, US Representative Thomas Massie, Republican of Kentucky and US Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, Republican of Georgia speak during a press conference on the “Epstein Files Transparency Act” at the US Capitol in Washington, DC on November 18, 2025. (Photo by DANIEL HEUER / AFP via Getty Images) The timing raised immediate questions. Bondi had been scheduled to testify about her handling of millions of pages tied to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein in a deposition lawmakers from both parties had been pushing for as frustration grew over what they see as an incomplete and heavily redacted release of the files. To some on Capitol Hill, the move looked less like a legal technicality and more like an attempt to sidestep accountability altogether. ‘We Are So Cooked’: Trump Drops Cryptic All-Caps Message Ahead of Peace Talks Like He’s in Control As New Warning Signals Something Much Worse for Americans But if the administration believed that would quiet things down, it didn’t last long. Acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche stepped into the role projecting confidence, praising Bondi’s tenure and signaling a desire to move forward. Instead, he walked straight into the same storm and lawmakers were already waiting. Kentucky Republican Rep. Thomas Massie wasted no time putting Blanche on notice. “Congratulations AG Blanche. Now you have 30 days to release the rest of the files before becoming criminally liable for failure to comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act,” Massie said bluntly in a post on X. Massie, along with California Democrat Ro Khanna, co-authored the legislation that mandated the release of all Justice Department files related to the deceased sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, and Trump signed it into law last year. Blanche, however, insisted there was nothing left to uncover. Congratulations AG Blanche. Now you have 30 days to release the rest of the files before becoming criminally liable for failure to comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act. https://t.co/LOcytrTXJV — Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) April 3, 2026 During a tense exchange with a reporter at a Justice Department press conference, he pushed back on the idea that key information was being withheld. “Just to clarify, is the public going to learn the identities of the men who abused the girls with the information that you’re releasing, and if not, why not?” a journalist asked. Blanche shot back, “You just baked in an assumption into your question that I’ve never said and don’t know to be true. Is the public going to learn about men that abuse these girls and what does that mean? I don’t understand what that means.” Pressed further, he doubled down. “If we had information — we meaning the Department of Justice — about men who abused women, we would prosecute them,” Blanche said. “That is not the case.” But critics say that claim doesn’t square with the facts. It took an act of Congress to force the release of the files in the first place. Even then, millions of pages remain undisclosed, and many of the documents that have been released are heavily redacted and often identify victims while obscuring alleged perpetrators. Q: Is the public going to learn the identities of the men who abused the girls in the Epstein files? Acting AG Todd Blanche: Like, what does that mean? I don't understand what that means. pic.twitter.com/CkKLHaWcDU — FactPost (@factpostnews) April 2, 2026 Blanche later took to Fox News to defend the administration’s handling of the situation, insisting the department had been fully transparent. “We have made every single congressman, senator available to come and see any document, redacted, unredacted, that they want,” he said. He also made clear he wants to move on. “To the extent the Epstein files were a part of the last year of this Justice Department, it should not be a part of anything going forward,” Blanche added. That stance was quickly challenged. “This is a lie,” California Rep. Robert Garcia fired back. “About 50% of the files have been released and per our subpoena it’s illegal to withhold them.” Much like Massie, Garcia has no plans to back down. “Blanche may think it’s over, but we are just getting started,” he warned. This is a lie. About 50% of the files have been released and per our subpoena it’s illegal to withhold them. Blanche may think it’s over, but we are just getting started. https://t.co/U19GKzR9Eg — Congressman Robert Garcia (@RepRobertGarcia) April 3, 2026 The dispute now circles back to Bondi and whether the administration can actually keep her off the witness stand. In a letter to Congress, the Justice Department argued that Bondi is no longer obligated to comply with the subpoena issued while she was attorney general, effectively asking lawmakers to withdraw it. But lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are rejecting that argument outright. Rep. Nancy Mace, a South Carolina Republican who supported compelling Bondi’s testimony, didn’t mince words. “A Department of Justice with nothing to hide doesn’t avoid a subpoena,” she said. Democrats have been even more direct. “It is shameful that Pam Bondi is still trying to protect powerful men and their connections to Jeffrey Epstein,” members of the House Oversight Committee said in a joint statement, accusing her of defying Congress. Garcia has gone further, warning that the subpoena still applies regardless of her job status and that failure to comply could lead to criminal contempt charges. “Legally, at the end of the day, if somebody is under subpoena, it doesn’t matter if they change jobs,” Garcia said in an interview with MS Now. “They’re still expected to appear before Congress.” “If she doesn’t come forward… then we will hold Pam Bondi in contempt.” That looming confrontation threatens to keep the Epstein files controversy alive, even as the administration tries to move past it. And for Blanche, what may have looked like a reset is quickly turning into something else entirely — a continuation of the same battle, with pressure building from both parties and no clear off-ramp in sight. ‘That’s a Lie!’: After Bondi’s Embarrasing Exit, Trump’s AG Thought the Epstein Chaos Was Dying Down — Then Massie Fires Off a Brutal Shot That Instantly Has Them Scrambling Again
‘That’s a Lie!’: After Bondi’s Embarrasing Exit, Trump’s AG Thought the Epstein Chaos Was Dying Down — Then Massie Fires Off a Brutal Shot That Instantly Has Them Scrambling Again
The Justice Department appeared to think it had found a way out of the Epstein files chaos. Just two weeks after former Attorney General Pam Bondi was fired, officials moved to block her from testifying under oath before Congress — arguing that because she no longer holds the position, she is no longer bound by the subpoena issued while she was still in office. (L-R) US Representative Ro Khanna, Democrat of California, US Representative Thomas Massie, Republican of Kentucky and US Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, Republican of Georgia speak during a press conference on the “Epstein Files Transparency Act” at the US Capitol in Washington, DC on November 18, 2025. (Photo by DANIEL HEUER / AFP via Getty Images) The timing raised immediate questions. Bondi had been scheduled to testify about her handling of millions of pages tied to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein in a deposition lawmakers from both parties had been pushing for as frustration grew over what they see as an incomplete and heavily redacted release of the files. To some on Capitol Hill, the move looked less like a legal technicality and more like an attempt to sidestep accountability altogether. ‘We Are So Cooked’: Trump Drops Cryptic All-Caps Message Ahead of Peace Talks Like He’s in Control As New Warning Signals Something Much Worse for Americans But if the administration believed that would quiet things down, it didn’t last long. Acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche stepped into the role projecting confidence, praising Bondi’s tenure and signaling a desire to move forward. Instead, he walked straight into the same storm and lawmakers were already waiting. Kentucky Republican Rep. Thomas Massie wasted no time putting Blanche on notice. “Congratulations AG Blanche. Now you have 30 days to release the rest of the files before becoming criminally liable for failure to comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act,” Massie said bluntly in a post on X. Massie, along with California Democrat Ro Khanna, co-authored the legislation that mandated the release of all Justice Department files related to the deceased sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, and Trump signed it into law last year. Blanche, however, insisted there was nothing left to uncover. Congratulations AG Blanche. Now you have 30 days to release the rest of the files before becoming criminally liable for failure to comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act. https://t.co/LOcytrTXJV — Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) April 3, 2026 During a tense exchange with a reporter at a Justice Department press conference, he pushed back on the idea that key information was being withheld. “Just to clarify, is the public going to learn the identities of the men who abused the girls with the information that you’re releasing, and if not, why not?” a journalist asked. Blanche shot back, “You just baked in an assumption into your question that I’ve never said and don’t know to be true. Is the public going to learn about men that abuse these girls and what does that mean? I don’t understand what that means.” Pressed further, he doubled down. “If we had information — we meaning the Department of Justice — about men who abused women, we would prosecute them,” Blanche said. “That is not the case.” But critics say that claim doesn’t square with the facts. It took an act of Congress to force the release of the files in the first place. Even then, millions of pages remain undisclosed, and many of the documents that have been released are heavily redacted and often identify victims while obscuring alleged perpetrators. Q: Is the public going to learn the identities of the men who abused the girls in the Epstein files? Acting AG Todd Blanche: Like, what does that mean? I don't understand what that means. pic.twitter.com/CkKLHaWcDU — FactPost (@factpostnews) April 2, 2026 Blanche later took to Fox News to defend the administration’s handling of the situation, insisting the department had been fully transparent. “We have made every single congressman, senator available to come and see any document, redacted, unredacted, that they want,” he said. He also made clear he wants to move on. “To the extent the Epstein files were a part of the last year of this Justice Department, it should not be a part of anything going forward,” Blanche added. That stance was quickly challenged. “This is a lie,” California Rep. Robert Garcia fired back. “About 50% of the files have been released and per our subpoena it’s illegal to withhold them.” Much like Massie, Garcia has no plans to back down. “Blanche may think it’s over, but we are just getting started,” he warned. This is a lie. About 50% of the files have been released and per our subpoena it’s illegal to withhold them. Blanche may think it’s over, but we are just getting started. https://t.co/U19GKzR9Eg — Congressman Robert Garcia (@RepRobertGarcia) April 3, 2026 The dispute now circles back to Bondi and whether the administration can actually keep her off the witness stand. In a letter to Congress, the Justice Department argued that Bondi is no longer obligated to comply with the subpoena issued while she was attorney general, effectively asking lawmakers to withdraw it. But lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are rejecting that argument outright. Rep. Nancy Mace, a South Carolina Republican who supported compelling Bondi’s testimony, didn’t mince words. “A Department of Justice with nothing to hide doesn’t avoid a subpoena,” she said. Democrats have been even more direct. “It is shameful that Pam Bondi is still trying to protect powerful men and their connections to Jeffrey Epstein,” members of the House Oversight Committee said in a joint statement, accusing her of defying Congress. Garcia has gone further, warning that the subpoena still applies regardless of her job status and that failure to comply could lead to criminal contempt charges. “Legally, at the end of the day, if somebody is under subpoena, it doesn’t matter if they change jobs,” Garcia said in an interview with MS Now. “They’re still expected to appear before Congress.” “If she doesn’t come forward… then we will hold Pam Bondi in contempt.” That looming confrontation threatens to keep the Epstein files controversy alive, even as the administration tries to move past it. And for Blanche, what may have looked like a reset is quickly turning into something else entirely — a continuation of the same battle, with pressure building from both parties and no clear off-ramp in sight. ‘That’s a Lie!’: After Bondi’s Embarrasing Exit, Trump’s AG Thought the Epstein Chaos Was Dying Down — Then Massie Fires Off a Brutal Shot That Instantly Has Them Scrambling Again
‘That’s a Lie!’: After Bondi’s Embarrasing Exit, Trump’s AG Thought the Epstein Chaos Was Dying Down — Then Massie Fires Off a Brutal Shot That Instantly Has Them Scrambling Again
The Justice Department appeared to think it had found a way out of the Epstein files chaos. Just two weeks after former Attorney General Pam Bondi was fired, officials moved to block her from testifying under oath before Congress — arguing that because she no longer holds the position, she is no longer bound by the subpoena issued while she was still in office. (L-R) US Representative Ro Khanna, Democrat of California, US Representative Thomas Massie, Republican of Kentucky and US Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, Republican of Georgia speak during a press conference on the “Epstein Files Transparency Act” at the US Capitol in Washington, DC on November 18, 2025. (Photo by DANIEL HEUER / AFP via Getty Images) The timing raised immediate questions. Bondi had been scheduled to testify about her handling of millions of pages tied to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein in a deposition lawmakers from both parties had been pushing for as frustration grew over what they see as an incomplete and heavily redacted release of the files. To some on Capitol Hill, the move looked less like a legal technicality and more like an attempt to sidestep accountability altogether. ‘We Are So Cooked’: Trump Drops Cryptic All-Caps Message Ahead of Peace Talks Like He’s in Control As New Warning Signals Something Much Worse for Americans But if the administration believed that would quiet things down, it didn’t last long. Acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche stepped into the role projecting confidence, praising Bondi’s tenure and signaling a desire to move forward. Instead, he walked straight into the same storm and lawmakers were already waiting. Kentucky Republican Rep. Thomas Massie wasted no time putting Blanche on notice. “Congratulations AG Blanche. Now you have 30 days to release the rest of the files before becoming criminally liable for failure to comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act,” Massie said bluntly in a post on X. Massie, along with California Democrat Ro Khanna, co-authored the legislation that mandated the release of all Justice Department files related to the deceased sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, and Trump signed it into law last year. Blanche, however, insisted there was nothing left to uncover. Congratulations AG Blanche. Now you have 30 days to release the rest of the files before becoming criminally liable for failure to comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act. https://t.co/LOcytrTXJV — Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) April 3, 2026 During a tense exchange with a reporter at a Justice Department press conference, he pushed back on the idea that key information was being withheld. “Just to clarify, is the public going to learn the identities of the men who abused the girls with the information that you’re releasing, and if not, why not?” a journalist asked. Blanche shot back, “You just baked in an assumption into your question that I’ve never said and don’t know to be true. Is the public going to learn about men that abuse these girls and what does that mean? I don’t understand what that means.” Pressed further, he doubled down. “If we had information — we meaning the Department of Justice — about men who abused women, we would prosecute them,” Blanche said. “That is not the case.” But critics say that claim doesn’t square with the facts. It took an act of Congress to force the release of the files in the first place. Even then, millions of pages remain undisclosed, and many of the documents that have been released are heavily redacted and often identify victims while obscuring alleged perpetrators. Q: Is the public going to learn the identities of the men who abused the girls in the Epstein files? Acting AG Todd Blanche: Like, what does that mean? I don't understand what that means. pic.twitter.com/CkKLHaWcDU — FactPost (@factpostnews) April 2, 2026 Blanche later took to Fox News to defend the administration’s handling of the situation, insisting the department had been fully transparent. “We have made every single congressman, senator available to come and see any document, redacted, unredacted, that they want,” he said. He also made clear he wants to move on. “To the extent the Epstein files were a part of the last year of this Justice Department, it should not be a part of anything going forward,” Blanche added. That stance was quickly challenged. “This is a lie,” California Rep. Robert Garcia fired back. “About 50% of the files have been released and per our subpoena it’s illegal to withhold them.” Much like Massie, Garcia has no plans to back down. “Blanche may think it’s over, but we are just getting started,” he warned. This is a lie. About 50% of the files have been released and per our subpoena it’s illegal to withhold them. Blanche may think it’s over, but we are just getting started. https://t.co/U19GKzR9Eg — Congressman Robert Garcia (@RepRobertGarcia) April 3, 2026 The dispute now circles back to Bondi and whether the administration can actually keep her off the witness stand. In a letter to Congress, the Justice Department argued that Bondi is no longer obligated to comply with the subpoena issued while she was attorney general, effectively asking lawmakers to withdraw it. But lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are rejecting that argument outright. Rep. Nancy Mace, a South Carolina Republican who supported compelling Bondi’s testimony, didn’t mince words. “A Department of Justice with nothing to hide doesn’t avoid a subpoena,” she said. Democrats have been even more direct. “It is shameful that Pam Bondi is still trying to protect powerful men and their connections to Jeffrey Epstein,” members of the House Oversight Committee said in a joint statement, accusing her of defying Congress. Garcia has gone further, warning that the subpoena still applies regardless of her job status and that failure to comply could lead to criminal contempt charges. “Legally, at the end of the day, if somebody is under subpoena, it doesn’t matter if they change jobs,” Garcia said in an interview with MS Now. “They’re still expected to appear before Congress.” “If she doesn’t come forward… then we will hold Pam Bondi in contempt.” That looming confrontation threatens to keep the Epstein files controversy alive, even as the administration tries to move past it. And for Blanche, what may have looked like a reset is quickly turning into something else entirely — a continuation of the same battle, with pressure building from both parties and no clear off-ramp in sight. ‘That’s a Lie!’: After Bondi’s Embarrasing Exit, Trump’s AG Thought the Epstein Chaos Was Dying Down — Then Massie Fires Off a Brutal Shot That Instantly Has Them Scrambling Again
‘That’s a Lie!’: After Bondi’s Embarrasing Exit, Trump’s AG Thought the Epstein Chaos Was Dying Down — Then Massie Fires Off a Brutal Shot That Instantly Has Them Scrambling Again
The Justice Department appeared to think it had found a way out of the Epstein files chaos. Just two weeks after former Attorney General Pam Bondi was fired, officials moved to block her from testifying under oath before Congress — arguing that because she no longer holds the position, she is no longer bound by the subpoena issued while she was still in office. (L-R) US Representative Ro Khanna, Democrat of California, US Representative Thomas Massie, Republican of Kentucky and US Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, Republican of Georgia speak during a press conference on the “Epstein Files Transparency Act” at the US Capitol in Washington, DC on November 18, 2025. (Photo by DANIEL HEUER / AFP via Getty Images) The timing raised immediate questions. Bondi had been scheduled to testify about her handling of millions of pages tied to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein in a deposition lawmakers from both parties had been pushing for as frustration grew over what they see as an incomplete and heavily redacted release of the files. To some on Capitol Hill, the move looked less like a legal technicality and more like an attempt to sidestep accountability altogether. ‘We Are So Cooked’: Trump Drops Cryptic All-Caps Message Ahead of Peace Talks Like He’s in Control As New Warning Signals Something Much Worse for Americans But if the administration believed that would quiet things down, it didn’t last long. Acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche stepped into the role projecting confidence, praising Bondi’s tenure and signaling a desire to move forward. Instead, he walked straight into the same storm and lawmakers were already waiting. Kentucky Republican Rep. Thomas Massie wasted no time putting Blanche on notice. “Congratulations AG Blanche. Now you have 30 days to release the rest of the files before becoming criminally liable for failure to comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act,” Massie said bluntly in a post on X. Massie, along with California Democrat Ro Khanna, co-authored the legislation that mandated the release of all Justice Department files related to the deceased sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, and Trump signed it into law last year. Blanche, however, insisted there was nothing left to uncover. Congratulations AG Blanche. Now you have 30 days to release the rest of the files before becoming criminally liable for failure to comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act. https://t.co/LOcytrTXJV — Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) April 3, 2026 During a tense exchange with a reporter at a Justice Department press conference, he pushed back on the idea that key information was being withheld. “Just to clarify, is the public going to learn the identities of the men who abused the girls with the information that you’re releasing, and if not, why not?” a journalist asked. Blanche shot back, “You just baked in an assumption into your question that I’ve never said and don’t know to be true. Is the public going to learn about men that abuse these girls and what does that mean? I don’t understand what that means.” Pressed further, he doubled down. “If we had information — we meaning the Department of Justice — about men who abused women, we would prosecute them,” Blanche said. “That is not the case.” But critics say that claim doesn’t square with the facts. It took an act of Congress to force the release of the files in the first place. Even then, millions of pages remain undisclosed, and many of the documents that have been released are heavily redacted and often identify victims while obscuring alleged perpetrators. Q: Is the public going to learn the identities of the men who abused the girls in the Epstein files? Acting AG Todd Blanche: Like, what does that mean? I don't understand what that means. pic.twitter.com/CkKLHaWcDU — FactPost (@factpostnews) April 2, 2026 Blanche later took to Fox News to defend the administration’s handling of the situation, insisting the department had been fully transparent. “We have made every single congressman, senator available to come and see any document, redacted, unredacted, that they want,” he said. He also made clear he wants to move on. “To the extent the Epstein files were a part of the last year of this Justice Department, it should not be a part of anything going forward,” Blanche added. That stance was quickly challenged. “This is a lie,” California Rep. Robert Garcia fired back. “About 50% of the files have been released and per our subpoena it’s illegal to withhold them.” Much like Massie, Garcia has no plans to back down. “Blanche may think it’s over, but we are just getting started,” he warned. This is a lie. About 50% of the files have been released and per our subpoena it’s illegal to withhold them. Blanche may think it’s over, but we are just getting started. https://t.co/U19GKzR9Eg — Congressman Robert Garcia (@RepRobertGarcia) April 3, 2026 The dispute now circles back to Bondi and whether the administration can actually keep her off the witness stand. In a letter to Congress, the Justice Department argued that Bondi is no longer obligated to comply with the subpoena issued while she was attorney general, effectively asking lawmakers to withdraw it. But lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are rejecting that argument outright. Rep. Nancy Mace, a South Carolina Republican who supported compelling Bondi’s testimony, didn’t mince words. “A Department of Justice with nothing to hide doesn’t avoid a subpoena,” she said. Democrats have been even more direct. “It is shameful that Pam Bondi is still trying to protect powerful men and their connections to Jeffrey Epstein,” members of the House Oversight Committee said in a joint statement, accusing her of defying Congress. Garcia has gone further, warning that the subpoena still applies regardless of her job status and that failure to comply could lead to criminal contempt charges. “Legally, at the end of the day, if somebody is under subpoena, it doesn’t matter if they change jobs,” Garcia said in an interview with MS Now. “They’re still expected to appear before Congress.” “If she doesn’t come forward… then we will hold Pam Bondi in contempt.” That looming confrontation threatens to keep the Epstein files controversy alive, even as the administration tries to move past it. And for Blanche, what may have looked like a reset is quickly turning into something else entirely — a continuation of the same battle, with pressure building from both parties and no clear off-ramp in sight. ‘That’s a Lie!’: After Bondi’s Embarrasing Exit, Trump’s AG Thought the Epstein Chaos Was Dying Down — Then Massie Fires Off a Brutal Shot That Instantly Has Them Scrambling Again