The Dictatorship
Crypto billionaires among donors for White House ballroom
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump says his $300 million White House ballroom will be paid for “100% by me and some friends of mine.”
The White House released a list of 37 donors, including crypto billionaires, charitable organizations, sports team owners, powerful financiers, tech and tobacco giants, media companies, longtime supporters of Republican causes and several of the president’s neighbors in Palm Beach, Florida.
It’s incomplete. Among others, the list doesn’t include Carrier Group, which offered to donate an HVAC system for the ballroom, and artificial intelligence chipmaker Nvidiawhose CEO, Jensen Huangpublicly discussed its donation.
The White House hasn’t said how much each donor is giving, and almost none was willing to divulge that. Very few commented on their contributions when contacted by The Associated Press.
A senior White House official said the list has grown since it was first released in October, but some companies don’t want to be publicly named until required to do so by financial disclosure regulations. No foreign individuals or entities were among the donors, according to the official who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss details that haven’t been made public.
Here’s a look at the divulged donors:
Tech giants (8):
Amazon Background: Trump was once highly critical of company founder Jeff Bezoswho also owns The Washington Post, but has been much less so lately. Amazon donated $1 million to Trump’s inaugurationan event attended by Bezos. Its video streaming service paid $40 million to license a documentary about first lady Melania Trump. Its cloud-based computing operation, Amazon Web Services, is a major government contractor.
Apple Background: After an up-and-down relationship during Trump’s first term, CEO Tim Cook has sought to improve his standing with the president this time. Before returning to the White House, Trump hosted Cook at his Palm Beach estate, Mar-a-Lago, and said he had spoken with Cook about the company’s long-running tax battles with the European Union. Cook also donated $1 million to Trump’s inauguration fund. In the spring, Trump threatened the computing giant with tariffs after Apple announced plans to build manufacturing facilities in India. In August, Cook presented the president with a customized glass plaque with a gold base as the CEO announced plans to bring Apple’s total investment commitment in U.S. manufacturing over four years to $600 billion.
Google Background: During his first term, Trump’s administration sued Google for antitrust violations. While a candidate last year, Trump suggested he might seek to break up the search engine behemoth. Once Trump won the election, Google donated $1 million to his inauguration, and its CEO, Sundar Pichaijoined other major tech executives in attending the ceremony. Google’s subsidiary, YouTube, agreed in September to pay $24.5 million to settle a lawsuit with Trump after it suspended his account following the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol. According to court filings, $22 million of that went to the Trust for the National Mall, which can help pay for ballroom construction.
HP Background: An original Silicon Valley stalwart, the company donated to Trump’s inaugural fund. HP ‘s CEO, Enrique Lores, participated in a White House roundtable event in September. Lores also previously met with President Joe Biden at the White House on multiple occasions as top CEOs endorsed that administration’s economic plans.
Meta Background: Founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg had been critical of Trump going back to 2016, and Facebook suspended Trump for years after the Jan. 6 insurrection. This time around, Meta contributed $1 million to Trump’s inaugurationand Zuckerberg attended.
Micron Technology Background: The producer of advanced memory computer chips announced an April 2024 agreement with the Biden administration to provide $6.1 billion in government support for Micron to make chips domestically. Then, in June, Micron pledged $200 billion for U.S. memory chip manufacturing expansion under Trump. But at least $120 billion of that involved holdovers first announced during Biden’s administration.
Microsoft Background: The company donated $1 million to Trump’s inauguration, twice what it spent for Biden’s or for Trump’s first inauguration. CEO Satya Nadella has also met with Trump numerous times, as Microsoft has supported the administration’s relaxation of regulations on artificial intelligence. He met previously with Biden, too. Trump has called for Microsoft’s president of global affairs, Lisa Monaco, to be fired because she was a deputy attorney general under Biden when the Justice Department led several investigations against Trump.
Palantir Technologies Background: Co-founded by billionaire libertarian Peter Thielthe firm concentrates on artificial intelligence and machine learning. It has seen profits soar thanks to lucrative defense and other federal contracts.
Crypto (5):
Coinbase Background: The major cryptocurrency exchange was founded by Brian Armstronga top donor to a political action committee that helped Trump and other pro-crypto candidates in 2024. Armstrong attended the first crypto summit at the White House in March. Coinbase also hired Trump’s co-campaign manager, Chris LaCivita, to its Global Advisory Council.
Ripple Background: In March, the Securities and Exchange Commission dropped a lawsuit filed during Trump’s first term, which accused the company of violating securities laws by selling XRP crypto coins without a securities registration. In his second term, Trump has eased regulations on digital assets, repealing an SEC accounting rule and a previous presidential executive order mandating more federal study and proposed changes to crypto regulations.
Tether Background: A cryptocurrency company and major stablecoins issuer, Tether paid fines for misleading investors. CEO Paolo Ardoino has been to Trump’s White House, and, in April, the company hired former Trump administration crypto policy official Bo Hines to lead its domestic expansion efforts.
Cameron Winklevoss and Tyler Winklevoss Background: Each Winklevoss twin is listed as a separate donor. Best known as Zuckerberg’s chief antagonists in “The Social Network,” the brothers founded the Gemini cryptocurrency exchange. Biden’s SEC sued Gemini for selling unregistered securitiesbut the case has been paused under Trump.
Energy and industrial (4):
Caterpillar Background: The equipment maker ‘s PAC has donated to candidates from both parties, but given more to Republicans. It has also said publicly that Trump’s tariffs, some of which the administration has now easedcould increase its costs and hurt earnings.
NextEra Energy Background: NextEra is the world’s largest electric utility holding company. Trump says he’ll work to ensure tech giants can secure their own sources of electricity to power data centers, especially as they expand energy-hogging artificial intelligence operations. Google recently entered into an agreement to buy power from a shuttered nuclear power plant in Iowa owned by NextEra, which the company plans to bring back online in 2029.
Paolo Tiramani Background: An American industrial designer who has donated to Trump’s political campaigns. Tiramani, with his son, runs BOXABL, a firm specializing in modular, prefabricated homes.
Union Pacific Background: Trump has endorsed the company’s proposed $85 billion acquisition of Norfolk Southern, which would be the largest-ever rail merger. It also will be up to the president to appoint two more Republican members of the Surface Transportation Board, who will ultimately decide whether to approve the merger. In August, Trump fired one of the two Democratic members of the board.
Philanthropy (3):
Adelson Family Foundation Background: Founded to strengthen the state of Israel and the Jewish people, the foundation was created by Miriam Adelson, the majority owner of the NBA’s Dallas Mavericks, close Trump ally and longtime GOP megadonor. She’s also the widow of Sheldon Adelson, the billionaire founder and owner of Las Vegas Sands.
Betty Wold Johnson Foundation Background: Based in Palm Beach, the foundation supports health, arts and culture initiatives, as well as environmental and educational programs. It’s named in honor of the mother of New York Jets owner Woody Johnsonwho served as Trump’s ambassador to the United Kingdom during his first term.
Laura & Isaac Perlmutter Fou ndation Background: The nonprofit based in Lake Worth Beach, near Palm Beach, focuses on promoting health care, social justice, the arts and community initiatives. Isaac is an Israeli American businessman and financier and former chair of Marvel Entertainment. He and his wife have donated to Trump’s presidential campaigns and affiliated PACs.
Trump administration officials (3):
Benjamin Leon Jr. Background: The Cuban American founder of Miami-based Leon Medical Centers is Trump’s nominee for U.S. ambassador to Spain.
Kelly Loeffler and Jeffrey Sprecher Background: A former Republican senator from GeorgiaLoeffler heads Trump’s Small Business Administration. Her husband is CEO of the energy market Intercontinental Exchange Inc. and chairs the New York Stock Exchange. The couple faced scrutiny in 2020 for dumping substantial portions of their portfolio and purchasing new stocksincluding in firms making protective equipment, after Congress received briefings on the severity of the coming coronavirus pandemic.
Lutnick Family Background: Howard Lutnick is Trump’s commerce secretary. A crypto enthusiast, he once headed the brokerage and investment bank Cantor Fitzgerald.
Communications/entertainment (3):
Comcast Background: The mass media and telecom conglomerate has often been criticized by Trump, including in April, when the president posted that Comcast was a “disgrace to the integrity of broadcasting.” The company owns NBC and is spinning off BLN. It could be interested in acquiring Warner Bros. Discover, and that would leave Comcast looking for government approval.
Hard Rock International Background: A Florida-based gaming and tourism concern owned by the Seminole Tribe, the company operates a number of casinos, including the former Trump Taj Mahal casino in Atlantic City, New Jersey. Trump has for decades criticized federal exemptions allowing tribes to operate casinos.
T-Mobile Background: The wireless carrier is indirectly linked to Trump Mobile, which the president’s family controls and offers gold phones and cell service in a licensing deal. Trump Mobile uses Liberty Mobile Wireless, a small, Florida-based network that T-Mobile says runs its operations on T-Mobile’s network. T-Mobile says that is unrelated to its decision to donate to Trump’s ballroom, which it says is meant to “restore and enrich the historic landmarks that define our nation’s capital.”
Big Tobacco (2):
Altria Group Background: The tobacco giant controls Philip Morris USA, maker of Marlboro. It has pressed for federal crackdowns on counterfeit and illegal vaping products. The company donated $50,000 to Trump’s inauguration.
Reynolds American Background: With brands including Lucky Strike and Camel, the company has been active in lobbying to steer the Trump administration away from a Biden-proposed ban on menthol cigarettes.
Defense/national security (2):
Booz Allen Hamilton Background: A major defense and national security technology firm with extensive government contracts, it paid fines to settle lawsuits with the Justice Department under Biden. Booz Allen Hamilton agreed to pay more than $377 million in 2023 to settle allegations that it improperly billing costs to its government contracts. In January, it paid nearly $16 million to settle allegations that it submitted fraudulent claims in connection with government contracts.
Lockheed Martin Corporation Background: The massive defense contractor has huge government contracts. It said in a statement that it “is grateful for the opportunity to help bring the President’s vision to reality and make this addition to the People’s House.”
Individuals (7):
Stefan E. Brodie Background: A biotech entrepreneur and co-founder of the chemical manufacturing company Purolite, Brodie and his family donated to Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign and affiliated committees. Brodie and his brother, Donald, were convicted in 2002 of circumventing U.S. sanctions on Cuba.
Charles and Marissa Cascarilla Background: Charles Cascarilla is co‑founder of the blockchain firm Paxos. He and his wife are philanthropists who have advocated for financial technology sector deregulation.
J. Pepe and Emilia Fanjul Background: Longtime Republican donors and Palm Beach residents, the couple controls U.S. sugar refining interests that includes the Domino brand.
Edward and Shari Glazer Background: Members of the family that owns the NFL’s Tampa Bay Buccaneers and has a controlling stake in the Manchester United football club, the couple donated to Trump’s campaign. Edward is the founder and CEO of US Property Trust, which operates shopping centers, and the car dealership company US Auto Trust.
Harold Hamm Background: The billionaire oil tycoon and pioneer of hydraulic fracturing heads the oil producer Continental Resources. He’s praised the Trump administration for aggressively moving to purchase oil to replenish the Strategic Petroleum Reserve stockpile.
Stephen A. Schwarzman Background: A Palm Beach resident and chair and CEO of the Blackstone Group, a global private equity firm he helped establish in 1985. Schwarzman has donated to Trump and his PACs previously and led his first-term President’s Strategic and Policy Forum.
Konstantin Sokolov Background: Born in Russia, he immigrated to the U.S. and now heads the Chicago-based private equity firm IJS Investments. Sokolov has donated to many educational and charitable causes in the past, and to Trump’s political campaigns.
___
Associated Press writer Darlene Superville contributed to this report.
___
This story has been updated to correct the first name of an individual who donated to the White House ballroom. He is Harold Hamm, not Howard Hamm.
BATON ROUGE, La. — With his political future hanging in the balance and President Donald Trump looming large over Louisiana’s Republican Senate primary, Sen. Bill Cassidy spent the campaign’s final hours trying to hit a moving target.
During a campaign stop at a gun range on Friday, the incumbent senator — fighting for his political life against two Trump-aligned candidates — said his primary “is not me versus Donald Trump.”
“This is me fighting for the people of Louisiana,” he said.
When MS NOW asked if he regretted his vote to convict Trump following the president’s impeachment after the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol — a vote that set into motion the primary fight currently threatening his political career — Cassidy said he doesn’t sit around and think about what happened five years ago. “I’m focused on the future,” he said.
And when MS NOW pressed Cassidy on whether there’s room in the GOP for a Republican willing to cross Trump, he shot down the question.
“I’m gonna let you hold on that because I think you got a theme there,” Cassidy said, turning from reporters and walking toward the gun range. “So let me go shoot.”
In a race defined by Trump, closely watched by Trump, and playing out in a state that voted for Trump three times, Cassidy is choosing his words carefully. But instead of avoiding the topic entirely, he’s embracing it in his own way.
The Louisiana Republican said he’s the only candidate in the race “who’s ever had Donald Trump sign a bill into law,” pointing to his sponsorship of a measure that reclassified fentanyl as a schedule 1 drug and a separate bill that aimed to combat the opioid crisis.
“My opponent, she has never had a single piece of legislation signed into law,” Cassidy said. “I’ve had dozens.”
The strategy is a risky gamble for the incumbent senator, who’s fending off two Trump-affiliated candidates in a state that voted for the president by more than 18 percentage points in the 2024, 2020 and 2016 presidential elections. The race has taken on national interest, with onlookers across the country watching to see if a Republican can cross Trump and survive.
With his congressional career on the line, Cassidy is confident in the wager.
“I plan on winning,” Cassidy said. “It may go to a runoff. If it goes to a runoff, I’ll win in the runoff.”
He went on to shoot an AR-15 and a 9mm pistol, highlighting the suppressors on the guns after he championed a bill that eliminated a tax on silencers. He admired his target sheet showing five shots hitting the bullseye and one in the innermost ring.
“I wanted them all like right there, but that’s not too bad — I’m pretty pleased with that,” he told reporters, pointing to the bullseye. “You know what I’m saying? I’m real pleased with that.”
Whether Cassidy will be just as pleased when results begin to roll in on Saturday is another question.
Primary polls show Cassidy trailing both his Trump-associated opponents — Rep. Julia Letlow and former Rep. John Fleming — spelling trouble for Cassidy’s chances at a third term in Congress. If none of the candidates reach a majority vote, the top two vote-getters will head to a runoff.
Letlow, a second-term congresswoman whom Trump hand-picked to challenge Cassidy, is a relative newcomer, after arriving on Capitol Hill in 2021 to succeed her late husband. But Letlow’s political fortunes have since skyrocketed since she secured Trump’s endorsement
“Highly Respected America First Congresswoman, Julia Letlow, of the wonderful State of Louisiana, is a Great Star, has been from the very beginning, and only gets better!” Trump wrote on Truth Social Friday.
But there’s also Fleming, the former congressman and Louisiana State Treasurer, who is a founding member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus and deputy chief of staff during Trump’s first administration. Despite not having the coveted endorsement, the MAGA loyalist has stressed his Trump credentials.
“I served in the Trump administration for four years. I was Trump’s deputy chief of staff for the last 10 months of his administration, his first one. And also, I was there Jan. 6,” Fleming said at a primary debate last week. “And you know what? There were a lot of resignations in that White House on Jan. 6. I stood there, stayed there, and did not leave my post in the White House. I was there to the very end.”
Trump has had his sights set on Cassidy since shortly after Jan. 6, when the Louisiana lawmaker was one of seven Senate Republicans who voted to convict Trump following his impeachment after the Capitol attack. Of that group, just three remain.
The tensions continued into last year, when Cassidy — a doctor by trade — raised doubts about Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and his vaccine skepticism after Trump nominated him to lead the Department of Health and Human Services.
If Cassidy — the chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee — had voted against Kennedy for a preliminary committee vote, he would’ve been blocked. In the end, Cassidy supported Kennedy, but noted to Kennedy that he was “struggling with your nomination.”
Last month, Trump unleashed on Cassidy as the president’s pick to be the next surgeon general, Casey Means, stalled amid GOP opposition from Cassidy and others. Trump called Cassidy “a very disloyal person” and urged Louisiana residents to vote him “OUT OF OFFICE in the upcoming Republican Primary.”
The recent opposition comes back to Cassidy’s core identity: A doctor. During his outing at the gun range on Friday, donning protective earmuffs and glasses, the physician-turned-politician spoke about the physics of the suppressors and how they protect people’s hearing.
Minutes after dodging a question about whether he regrets his vote to convict Trump, Cassidy said his experience as a doctor — gathering information, making decisions, and not looking back — guides everything he does.
“When you graduate from med school in 1983 and you’ve been a doctor ever since, that is the prism through which you use things, which is really good,” he told reporters. “As a doctor, you’re taught to serve people. You’re taught to listen to them, figure out what the issue is, digest it, observe, and then come up with an answer.”
“You make the answer, you live with it, you move on,” he continued. “You learn from a mistake, but you move on. And so, in one sense that’s insightful. You could probably look at like almost everything I do, and you can say there’s a doctor in him.”
Mychael Schnell is a reporter for MS NOW.
Syedah Asghar
Syedah Asghar covers Congress for MS NOW.
In the Supreme Court’s latest action that helps Republicans ahead of the midterms, the justices rejected Virginia Democrats’ emergency bid to save the state’s redistricting effort that voters approved last month.
Friday’s order follows the GOP-appointed majority’s recent Voting Rights Act ruling in Louisiana v. Callaiswhich prompted Republican-led states to try to make their maps redder ahead of November’s elections. Earlier this week, the high court majority granted emergency relief to Alabama Republicans who cited Callais as justification to use a congressional map that was previously deemed discriminatory.
The justices didn’t explain their decision in their unsigned order Friday, as is typical for emergency appeals. None of the justices noted any dissent.
The rejection of Virginia’s appeal is another court win for Republicans in this election season because the state’s voters had approved a process for new congressional districts that were poised to deliver more seats to Democrats. At President Donald Trump’s urging, Texas set off a wave of mid-decade redistricting last year that led other states, including Virginia, to follow suit. In prior orders affecting congressional maps, the Supreme Court approved the Texas effort as well as a Democratic countermeasure in California while also helping New York Republicans hold onto a seat.
The GOP-appointed majority said in a 2019 ruling that federal courts can’t do anything about partisan gerrymandering. Combined with Callais, that set the stage for Republicans to erase districts across the South that have been led by Black representatives and supported by Black voters, under the legal guise of partisanship rather than race. The Callais ruling makes it even more difficult to prove that map-makers are motivated by improper racial considerations rather than the partisan ones that the high court majority has effectively approved.
The Virginia rejection was expected because, although the Supreme Court can hear appeals from state high courts, this case posed a challenge for Virginia officials. That’s because the state court ruling they challenged was based largely on Virginia jurists’ interpretation of their state’s constitution, and the Supreme Court gets involved when there are federal issues to resolve. The Virginia case didn’t squarely call into question the Voting Rights Act or other federal matters of the sort the justices have been ruling on in election cases.
Still, in their emergency appealVirginia Democrats maintained that their case presented federal issues warranting the justices’ attention. The NAACP supported that position in an amicus briefwriting that invalidating Virginians’ votes “constitutes a deprivation of constitutional due process that requires this Court’s immediate intervention.”
Opposing the application, state Republicans arguedamong other things, that the state high court’s ruling rested on “pure state-law grounds” and so “no federal issue is present” for the justices to take up.
The meaning of ‘election’
In the state court ruling that struck down the measure, Virginia’s justices split 4-3 in deciding that the process that put it on the ballot had violated Virginia’s Constitution.
The state’s amendment procedures are, per the state court majority, admittedly “laborious” and “slow-walk[ed]” to “guard against hasty changes.” With that in mind, the majority explained that the process gives voters two chances to weigh in on a proposed amendment, the first time indirectly and the second time directly. The first, indirect time is after legislators initially propose the amendment, when voters can choose to retain those representatives based on their position on the amendment. The second, direct time occurs if it gets on the ballot, as this one did when voters approved itin April.
To get an amendment on the ballot, it actually needs to be approved twice by the state legislature before it goes to the voters. In this case, the proposed amendment first passed the legislature on Oct. 31 and then in January before voters backed it at the ballot box last month.
The legal issue in the ruling centered on the first step in late October when the legislature voted after early voting began but before Election Day on Nov. 4. That timing turned out to be crucial because the state constitution says the second approval must happen “after the next general election.” So the case raised the question of whether the first vote technically happened prior to the November election.
The state court majority said it did not, reasoning that the phrase “general election” in this context included early voting. The majority rejected what it called the state’s “thesis” that early voters “unknowingly forfeited their constitutionally protected opportunity” to base their November election votes on whether their representatives supported the amendment.
The dissent said the majority’s reading was an unnatural one that “broadened the meaning of the word ‘election’” and was “in direct conflict with how both Virginia and federal law define an election.”
As for why the court didn’t rule until after voters approved the measure, the majority said that’s a “fair” question to ask but that Virginia officials have no right to complain because, the majority recalled, they insisted that the court couldn’t rule prior to the vote.
Jordan Rubin is the Deadline: Legal Blog writer. He was a prosecutor for the New York County District Attorney’s Office in Manhattan and is the author of “Bizarro,” a book about the secret war on synthetic drugs. Before he joined MS NOW, he was a legal reporter for Bloomberg Law.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday threatened to sue The New York Times over its publication of an opinion column detailing allegations of sexual abuse against Palestinians by Israeli forces and settlers.
The Times’ articlewritten by Nicholas Kristof and published Monday, was based on conversations the Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist said he had with 14 men and women who alleged they had been sexually assaulted in what Kristof described as “a pattern of widespread Israeli sexual violence against men, women and even children — by soldiers, settlers, interrogators in the Shin Bet internal security agency and, above all, prison guards.”
In one account, a Palestinian freelance journalist told Kristof that when he was detained in 2024, a group of guards threw him to the ground, pulled down his pants and underwear and that one guard raped him with a rubber baton. A Palestinian woman separately told Kristof she was repeatedly stripped naked, beaten and groped after she was arrested following the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks on Israel.
Kristof also cited a 49-page United Nations report alleging sexual violence has become one of Israel’s “standard operating procedures” and “a major element in the ill treatment of Palestinians” since the Hamas-led attacks that became the deadliest day in Israeli history.
Israeli leaders have denied the allegations. Netanyahu wrote in a social media post Thursday that he asked his legal advisers to consider “the harshest legal action” against Kristof and The New York Times.
“They defamed the soldiers of Israel and perpetuated a blood libel about rape, trying to create a false symmetry between the genocidal terrorists of Hamas and Israel’s valiant soldiers,” Netanyahu said.
The Israeli prime minister’s statement and his threat to sue the Times falls against the backdrop of the war against Iran that he is waging jointly with President Donald Trump, who has separately threatened to sue the same news organization over its Iran war coverage.
Israel’s foreign ministry called Kristof’s article “one of the most hideous and distorted lies ever published against the State of Israel in the modern press.”
The Times said in a statement posted on X that the allegations detailed in Kristof’s article “were extensively fact-checked, with accounts further cross-referenced with news reporting, independent research from human-rights groups, surveys and in one case, with U.N. testimony.”
Asked for comment, New York Times spokesperson Danielle Rhoades Ha said Netanyahu’s threat to file a lawsuit “is part of a well-worn political playbook that aims to undermine independent reporting and stifle journalism that does not fit a specific narrative.”
“Any such legal action would be without merit,” she said in a statement to MS NOW, adding, “Nick has covered sexual violence for decades, and is widely regarded as one of the world’s best on-the-ground journalists in documenting and bearing witness to sexual abuse experienced by women and men in war and conflict zones.”
The statement continued:
“The accounts of the men and women he interviewed were corroborated with witnesses, whenever possible, and with people the victims confided in, including family members and lawyers. Details were extensively fact-checked, with accounts further cross-referenced with news reporting, independent research from human-rights groups, surveys and in one case, with U.N. testimony. Independent experts were consulted on the assertions in the piece throughout reporting and fact-checking.”
This story has been updated to include additional comment from The New York Times.
Erum Salam is a breaking news reporter for MS NOW, with a focus on how global events and foreign policy shape U.S. politics. She previously was a breaking news reporter for The Guardian.
- Texas county passes 1-year data center construction ban
- Trump pushes to attach his SAVE act to must-pass bipartisan bills
- Cassidy defiant as Trump’s revenge campaign closes in
- Poll: MAGA is largely aligned with Israel as GOP divides deepen
- Bill Cassidy’s last stand?
- Mullin has more work to do to repair the relationship between DHS and Congress
- Tennessee Democrat Steve Cohen announces retirement
- Johnson: House will amend stalled housing bill despite White House, Senate GOP pushback
- Capitol agenda: Nervous GOP weighs options on ballroom
- Nervous Republicans weigh their options amid White House’s ballroom lobbying blitz
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
The Dictatorship8 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words