Category: National Politics

  • Philly DA Larry Krasner says ‘don’t be a wimp’ after Gov. Josh Shapiro decried his comparison of ICE agents to Nazis

    Philly DA Larry Krasner says ‘don’t be a wimp’ after Gov. Josh Shapiro decried his comparison of ICE agents to Nazis

    Philadelphia’s bombastic district attorney, Larry Krasner, is no stranger to opposition from within his own party, but the anger directed at him last week after he said ICE agents are “wannabe Nazis” was more pronounced than usual.

    After making the comparison, Krasner faced a wave of criticism, including from Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, a Democrat, who called the comments “abhorrent” and said the rhetoric doesn’t help “bring down the temperature.”

    But the progressive district attorney said Monday that he would not back down, saying “these are people who have taken their moves from a Nazi playbook and a fascist playbook.”

    “Governor Shapiro is not meeting the moment,” Krasner said in an interview. “The moment requires that we call a subgroup of people within federal law enforcement — who are killing innocent people, physically assaulting innocent people, threatening and punishing the use of video — what they are. … Just say it. Don’t be a wimp.”

    Krasner pointed to a speech by Rabbi Joachim Prinz at the March on Washington in 1963: “Bigotry and hatred are not the most urgent problem. The most urgent, the most disgraceful, the most shameful, and the most tragic problem is silence.”

    In invoking that speech, Krasner said: “A reminder, Mr. Governor: Silence equals death.”

    Krasner’s defense came after days of criticism from across the political spectrum, ranging from the White House press secretary to Democratic members of Congress. And it punctuated a yearslong history of conflict with Shapiro.

    The governor and Philadelphia’s top law enforcement official have feuded politically, sparred in court, and disagreed on policy. In 2019 — when lawyers from Krasner’s office decamped to work for then-Attorney General Shapiro — DA’s office staffers referred to Shapiro’s office as “Paraguay,” a reference to the country where Nazis took refuge after the war.

    It is not new for Krasner — whose Jewish father volunteered to serve in WWII — to compare President Donald Trump’s administration to elements of World War II-era fascism. Krasner has on several occasions referred to ICE as akin to the Nazi secret state police, and last year he called the president’s immigration agenda “Nazi stuff.”

    Last week, during a news conference about proposed restrictions on immigration enforcement in Philadelphia, the district attorney said he would “hunt down” and prosecute U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents who commit crimes in the city.

    “There will be accountability now. There will be accountability in the future. There will be accountability after [Trump] is out of office,” Krasner said. “If we have to hunt you down the way they hunted down Nazis for decades, we will find your identities.”

    Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro during a talk for his new memoir “Where We Keep the Light” on Jan. 29 in Washington.

    Shapiro, who is Jewish and is a rumored presidential contender, was interviewed a dozen times last week on national media while promoting his new memoir and condemned ICE’s tactics during all of them.

    During an interview Thursday on Fox News’ Special Report with Bret Baier, Shapiro was asked about Krasner’s comparison of ICE agents to Nazis and called the comments “unacceptable.”

    “It is abhorrent and it is wrong, period, hard stop, end of sentence,” Shapiro said.

    Several other Democrats in political and media circles weighed in. U.S. Sen. John Fetterman, a Pennsylvania Democrat who has at times sided with Trump on immigration matters, appeared on Fox News and said he “strongly” condemned Krasner’s language.

    He said that “members of ICE are not Nazis.”

    “That’s gross,” Fetterman said. “Do not compare anyone to Nazis. Don’t use that kind of rhetoric. That can incite violence.”

    Sen. John Fetterman (D., Pennsylvania).

    U.S. Rep. Chris Deluzio, a Democrat who represents parts of Western Pennsylvania, in an interview with the Washington Examiner contrasted his own approach with Krasner’s, saying: “I reserve throwing the phrase Nazis at actual Nazis. I don’t just throw that around.”

    And State Rep. Manuel Guzman Jr., a Democrat who represents a significant Latino population in Berks County, wrote on social media Friday: “I really, really want Krasner to chill tf out.”

    “I get it. We want to protect our immigrant community,” Guzman wrote, “but I question if constantly poking the bear is the right strategy. At the end of the day it’s my community that is under siege.”

    Republicans also swiftly castigated Krasner.

    On Wednesday, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt shared a video clip of Krasner’s comments on social media, writing: “Will the media ask Dems to condemn?”

    And U.S. Rep. Dan Meuser, a Republican who represents parts of Northeast Pennsylvania, appeared on Newsmax and called Krasner a “psychopath with a badge.”

    Meuser — who considered challenging Shapiro for governor with Trump’s backing but ultimately decided not to run — also on social media decried “the Left’s silence and, in many cases, encouragement of this rhetoric.”

    Krasner doubled down. In an interview on CNN on Thursday, he criticized Fetterman as “not a real Democrat” and also said, “There are some people who are all in on the fascist takeover of this country who do not like the comparison to Nazi Germany.”

    He said that when he promised to “hunt down” federal agents who kill someone in his jurisdiction, he was attempting to make a point that there is no statute of limitations on homicide.

    The interviewer, Kaitlan Collins, asked Krasner whether he could have made that point without comparing agents to Nazis.

    “Why would I do that?” Krasner responded. “They’re taking almost everything they do out of the Nazi playbook.”

  • President’s House slavery exhibits were ‘not destroyed’ in storage, judge says after inspection

    President’s House slavery exhibits were ‘not destroyed’ in storage, judge says after inspection

    The exhibits about slavery dismantled from the President’s House have not been “destroyed,” a federal judge said Monday after inspecting the panels in a storage room that’s inaccessible to the public on the property of the National Constitution Center.

    “I did not see anything that concerned me about the condition, because there are some marks, but I can’t portray where they are from, and I do not believe that they’re in a worsened condition now,” Judge Cynthia M. Rufe told reporters after spending about 30 minutes in the storage facility, which is controlled by the National Park Service even though the center is not part of the agency.

    Rufe’s visit to the exhibits and the President’s House were the latest development in the high-profile lawsuit Mayor Cherelle L. Parker’s administration filed in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against the federal government.

    After the inspection, Rufe ordered the government to safeguard the removed exhibits and mitigate any potential harm to them.

    The suit came after National Park Service employees took down educational panels about slavery from the President’s House at Independence National Historical Park on Jan. 22.

    It also follows a hearing in federal court Friday in which city attorneys and U.S. attorneys sparred over the removal of the exhibits. During the hearing, Rufe, a George W. Bush appointee, chastised a U.S. attorney representing President Donald Trump‘s administration for talking out of “both sides of his mouth” and making “dangerous” arguments.

    Rufe issued an order Monday preventing further removals or changes to the President’s House until further notice. The judge also instructed the city to file a new injunction request to clarify what it is seeking, and gave the U.S. attorney’s office another week to respond.

    Michael Coard, leader of advocacy group Avenging the Ancestors Coalition, which helped develop the President’s House in the early 2000s and is providing legal backing to the city’s suit, told reporters that he didn’t see any damage to the panels, but “there was desecration.”

    What he saw was “completely disrespectful, demoralizing, defiling, and desecration,” Coard said, noting that the signs, many of which are fragile, were not cushioned and that some were against the wall on a cement floor.

    Coard joined the judge and attorneys in the storage facility as a representative for the coalition’s legal support of the lawsuit. Members of the press were not allowed to review the exhibits.

    Before going to the storage facility Monday, Rufe and the attorneys gathered in the lobby of the Constitution Center, which has a direct view to Independence Hall from Arch Street to Chestnut.

    Rufe invoked the iconic building Friday to set the stakes for the city’s suit against Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, acting National Park Service Director Jessica Bowron, and their respective agencies.

    “It’s threatening to think that that could happen to Independence Hall tomorrow,” Rufe said during the hearing. “It’s frightening to think that the citizenry would not be involved in such an important change.”

    After having been in limbo for months, the informational panels were removed by Park Service employees using wrenches and crowbars on orders from the Trump administration, provoking outrage from Philadelphians. The displays were then piled into the back of a pickup truck and transported to the storage facility.

    Mijuel Johnson (left), a guide with The Black Journey: African-American Walking Tour of Philadelphia, shows Judge Cynthia Rufe (right) around the President’s House in Independence National Historical Park on Monday.

    The exhibits are stored by the National Parks Service in a room accessible through the National Constitution Center, but the civics-nonprofit “does not oversee that space, and Center staff have no knowledge of what materials may be stored there,” a spokesperson said in a statement.

    After reviewing the removed exhibits for roughly 30 minutes, Rufe and her law clerks walked across Independence Mall toward the President’s House, a block away at Market Street. The judge stood at the site of the former home of Presidents George Washington and John Adams, as a guide from The Black Journey explained the historical significance of the slavery exhibit.

    “This is the first of its kind memorial on federal property to the enslaved people of the United States,” said Mijuel Johnson, who led the tour.

    Johnson directed the judge’s attention to panels telling the story of the presidency and the enslaved Africans who lived on the property, part of the routine tour script, but the walls were bare.

    Rufe asked questions about the removed panels and what exhibits could be further removed. She walked around the site, still not cleared of the previous weekend’s snow, to review a wall in which the names of the President’s House enslaved residents are etched into the stone.

    Judge Cynthia Rufe views the “Memorial to Enslaved People of African Descent in the United States of America,” during a visit to the President’s House in Independence National Historical Park on Monday. This exhibit was not removed with other panels at the site on Jan. 22. The judge visited the site while hearing the Parker administration’s suit to have President Trump’s administration restore the panels.

    Outside the location that served as the slaves’ quarters, adjacent to the Liberty Bell, Rufe paused and took out her glasses to read a memorial panel.

    “This enclosed space is dedicated to millions of men, women and children of African descent who lived, worked and died as enslaved people in the United States of America,” the panel read. “They should never again be forgotten”

    Relevant to the core disagreement in the lawsuit, about who has the right to change the site, the bottom of the memorial panel bears the names of two entities: the National Park Service and the City of Philadelphia.

  • Trump amasses $483 million war chest to bolster midterm chances

    Trump amasses $483 million war chest to bolster midterm chances

    President Donald Trump has said the “only thing” he worries about is losing Republican control of Congress in the November elections. The latest campaign finance filings show he’s built an unprecedented war chest to help keep that from happening.

    Trump’s political committees and the Republican National Committee amassed $483 million through the end of December, according to documents filed with the Federal Election Commission. That’s nearly triple the $167 million collectively held by the Democratic National Committee and its Senate and House party committees and super PACs.

    The haul comes from tapping Trump’s wealthiest donors with events like “MAGA Inc. dinners” at his Florida and New Jersey resorts as well as relentless appeals via text and email to small-dollar contributors who constitute the Make America Great Again base.

    Since returning to the White House, MAGA Inc. has gotten eight-figure contributions from pipeline billionaire Kelcy Warren and his company Energy Transfer LP; quant trader Jeff Yass; OpenAI co-founder Greg Brockman; and Crypto.com exchange operator Foris DAX Inc. In total, MAGA Inc. alone has raked in $313 million since Trump’s 2024 election victory.

    Targeting the other end of the donor spectrum, Trump’s Never Surrender leadership PAC recently asked potential contributors to make a “small, sustaining contribution so we can complete the MAGA agenda.” It asked for as little as $33.

    Whether all that financial armor is enough to buck history – incumbent presidents almost always lose ground in midterms – isn’t so clear, and Trump knows it.

    “Even presidents, whether it’s Republican or Democrat, when they win, it doesn’t make any difference – they seem to lose the midterms,” Trump said in a Jan. 27 interview on Fox News. “So, that’s the only thing I worry about.”

    Only twice since 1938 has the party in control of the White House gained House seats in a midterm election. During Trump’s first presidency, in 2018, Republicans lost 40 seats. In the two midterms that took place during Barack Obama’s presidency, in 2010 and 2014, Republicans netted 63 seats and 13 seats, respectively.

    – – –

    Growing Frustration

    This year, momentum and history seem to be on the Democrats’ side – they only need to swing a handful of seats to take control of the House.

    Working in their favor, national polls show a majority of voters disapprove of Trump’s handling of the economy, as well as growing frustration with the administration’s approach to deportations and foreign policy. Parts of the coalition that swept him back to office – including independents and young voters as well as Black and Hispanic males – are fraying.

    That handicap for Republicans has been evident in elections over the past three months in which Democrats have outperformed expectations, in part by tapping into voter frustration over cost-of-living concerns.

    “House Republicans are running scared,” said Viet Shelton, a spokesman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. He added that “with better candidates, a better message, and the public souring on Republicans, Democrats are poised to take back the majority.”

    Reflecting the shifting mood, the non-partisan Cook Political Report last month moved 18 House races toward Democrats, bringing the number of seats considered solidly blue to 189, compared to 186 for Republicans. A party needs 218 seats to win the majority.

    In the latest example of the headwinds Republicans face, this past weekend in Texas a Democratic candidate for a state Senate seat, Taylor Rehmet, defeated a Republican in a district Trump won in 2024 by 17 percentage points over Kamala Harris.

    As the GOP’s fund raiser-in-chief, Trump isn’t waiting until November to put his cash to work. The president intends to use the money he’s amassed to play the role of kingmaker in the midterms, according to people familiar with the strategy.

    That involves doling out money to loyalists, or chosen candidates in competitive primaries or congressional races and punishing lawmakers who’ve crossed him over the past year on everything from the passage of his signature tax bill to the release of the Epstein files.

    Trump allies also expect to tap their stockpile for specific districts in the final two months in the states and races where it’s most needed, flooding the zone to try to ensure victory.

    “MAGA Inc. will have the resources to help candidates who support President Trump’s America First agenda,” Alex Pfeiffer, a spokesperson for the super-PAC, said.

    MAGA Inc. has already intervened in one election: it spent $1.7 million backing Tennessee Republican Matt Van Epps in a special election to fill a vacant House seat. Van Epps won by about 9 points – but that margin was narrower than the cushion of more than 21 points his Republican predecessor enjoyed in 2024.

    Privately, many Trump allies are resigned to the idea the party could lose control of the House. Trump has warned he could be impeached for a third time if that happens, and his signaled he thinks his party’s lawmakers would be to blame.

    House Speaker Mike Johnson, a perennial optimist in his public remarks, said on Sunday that he remains “very bullish on the midterms” and cited the party’s fund-raising prowess as one reason.

    “We’re going to have a war chest to run on,” Johnson said on Fox News Sunday. “I think we’re going to defy history.”

    Trump says his first year as president shows he deserves reelection. Pressed in Iowa last week about why voters may perennially pick the opposition party in midterms, Trump mused about the electorate wanting “fences” or “guardrails” on presidents.

    But, he quickly added, “I don’t need guardrails. I don’t want guardrails.”

  • House speaker ‘confident’ partial shutdown will end by Tuesday

    House speaker ‘confident’ partial shutdown will end by Tuesday

    House Speaker Mike Johnson (R., La.) said Sunday that he is “confident” he will have enough support from Republicans in the House conference to end the partial government shutdown by Tuesday.

    In an interview with NBC News’ Meet the Press, Johnson said the House will vote to reopen the government “at least by Tuesday.”

    “We have a logistical challenge of getting everyone in town, and because of the conversation I had with Hakeem Jeffries, I know that we’ve got to pass a rule and probably do this mostly on our own,” Johnson said, referring to the minority leader as he looked to blame Democrats for the second shutdown of President Donald Trump’s second administration, which began early Saturday.

    After the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration enforcement operation in Minneapolis left two U.S. citizens dead, Democrats have said they would not advance government funding measures unless changes were made to a funding bill for the agencies driving the Trump administration’s immigration policies, including the Department of Homeland Security. The department houses U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

    On Friday, Congress missed a midnight deadline to approve six new spending bills because the Senate changed DHS funding measures after the House passed them. The Senate, however, quickly approved a bipartisan agreement backed by Trump to pass five major appropriations bills and a temporary two-week funding extension for DHS to buy time for additional policy negotiations.

    Over the weekend, Johnson remained adamant that the House will move quickly to pass those measures when it returns to Washington on Monday, despite frustrations from conservative members of the Republican caucus and skepticism from House Democrats.

    “We’ll have a lot of conversations to have with individual Republican members over the next 24 hours or so. We’ll get all this done by Tuesday,” Johnson said on Fox News Sunday. “I don’t understand why anybody would have a problem with this, though. Remember, these bills are bills that have already been passed.”

    Johnson will need nearly all of the House GOP majority to pass the bills if Democrats refuse to support DHS funding. The speaker said he believed he could get the backing of his members, emphasizing that Trump “is leading this” and that it “is his play call to do it this way.”

    The president, Johnson added, “has already conceded that he wants to turn down the volume” in the immigration enforcement operations, a change punctuated by his decision to send border czar Tom Homan to Minneapolis last week to take control of the situation.

    Johnson said the Trump administration has acknowledged to Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D., N.Y.) that some of the changes and processes that Democrats are demanding “are fine with them,” including a requirement for ICE agents to wear body cameras.

    Johnson, however, said that while some of the proposed DHS revamps are “obviously reasonable,” he doesn’t think House Republicans will support Democrats’ demands that federal agents remove their masks and wear an ID while conducting immigration operations.

    “There’s a lot of details in this, we could get deep in the weeds, but we will do that over the next two weeks,” he said on Meet the Press.

    House Democrats have not committed to supporting the bipartisan agreement struck in the Senate, although they plan to support the other five funding bills. Jeffries (D., N.Y.) told ABC News’ This Week that Democrats would meet Sunday afternoon to discuss “what we believe is the best path.”

    “What is clear is that the Department of Homeland Security needs to be dramatically reformed,” Jeffries said. “Body cameras should be mandatory. Masks should come off. Judicial warrants should absolutely be required consistent with the Constitution, in our view, before DHS agents or ICE agents are breaking into the homes of the American people or ripping people out of their cars.”

    When asked if he believes the administration will enforce the changes if they pass, Jeffries said that this is “an untrustworthy administration” but that the American people are strongly rejecting the violent immigration enforcement actions they’ve seen out of Minneapolis.

  • Senate passes Trump-backed government funding deal, sending it to House

    Senate passes Trump-backed government funding deal, sending it to House

    WASHINGTON — The Senate voted Friday to fund most of the government through the end of September while carving out a temporary extension for Homeland Security funding, giving Congress two weeks to debate new restrictions on federal immigration raids across the country.

    With a weekend shutdown looming, President Donald Trump struck the spending deal with Senate Democrats on Thursday in the wake of the deaths of two protesters at the hands of federal agents in Minneapolis. Democrats said they would not vote for the larger spending bill unless Congress considers legislation to unmask agents, require more warrants and allow local authorities to help investigate any incidents.

    “The nation is reaching a breaking point,” Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said after the vote. ”The American people are demanding that Congress step up and force change.”

    As lawmakers in both parties called for investigations into the fatal shootings, Trump said he didn’t want a shutdown and negotiated the rare deal with Schumer, his frequent adversary. Trump then encouraged members of both parties to cast a “much needed Bipartisan ‘YES’ vote.”

    The bill passed 71-29 and will now head to the House, which is not due back until Monday. That means the government could be in a partial shutdown temporarily over the weekend until they pass it.

    Speaker Mike Johnson, who held a conference call Friday with GOP lawmakers, said he expects the House to vote Monday evening. But what is uncertain is how much support there will be for the package.

    Johnson’s right flank has signaled opposition to limits on Homeland Security funds, leaving him reliant on Democrats who have their own objections to funding U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement without immediate restraints.

    Two-week debate over ICE

    It was unclear how involved Trump will be in the negotiations over new restrictions on immigration arrests — or if Republicans and Democrats could find any points of compromise.

    Senate Democrats will not support an extension of Homeland Security funding in two weeks “unless it reins in ICE and ends violence,” Schumer said. “If our colleagues are not willing to enact real change, they should not expect Democratic votes.”

    Similarly, House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries told reporters that any change in the homeland bill needs to be “meaningful and it needs to be transformative.”

    Absent “dramatic change,” Jeffries said, “Republicans will get another shutdown.”

    Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said the two sides will “sit down in good faith,” but it will be “really, really hard to get anything done,” especially in such a short amount of time.

    “We’ll stay hopeful, but there are some pretty significant differences of opinion,” Thune said.

    Democrats demand change

    Irate Democrats have asked the White House to “end roving patrols” in cities and coordinate with local law enforcement on immigration arrests, including requiring tighter rules for warrants.

    They also want an enforceable code of conduct so agents are held accountable when they violate rules. Schumer said agents should be required to have “masks off, body cameras on” and carry proper identification, as is common practice in most law enforcement agencies.

    Alex Pretti, a 37 year-old ICU nurse, was killed by a border patrol agent on Jan. 24, two weeks after protester Renee Good was killed by an ICE officer. Administration officials, including Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, originally said Pretti had aggressively approached officers, but multiple videos contradicted that claim.

    Republican pushback

    The president’s concessions to Democrats prompted pushback from some Senate Republicans, delaying the final votes and providing a preview of the coming debate over the next two weeks. In a fiery floor speech, Trump ally Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina warned that Republicans should not give away too much.

    “To the Republican party, where have you been?” Graham said, adding that ICE agents and Border Patrol agents have been “slandered and smeared.”

    Several Republicans have said that if Democrats are going to push for restrictions on ICE, they will push for restrictions on so-called “sanctuary cities” that they say do not do enough to enforce illegal immigration.

    “There no way in hell we’re going to let Democrats knee cap law enforcement and stop deportations in exchange for funding DHS,” said Missouri Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., ahead of the vote.

    Still, some Republicans said they believe that changes to ICE’s operations were necessary, even as they were unlikely to agree to all of the Democrats’ requests.

    “I think the last couple of days have been an improvement,” said Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul. “I think the rhetoric has been dialed down a little bit, in Minnesota.”

    Last-minute promises

    After Trump announced the deal with Democrats, Graham held the spending bills up for almost a day until Thune agreed to give him a vote on his sanctuary cities bill at a later date.

    Separately, Graham was also protesting a repeal of a new law giving senators the ability to sue the government for millions of dollars if their personal or office data is accessed without their knowledge — as happened to him and other senators as part of the so-called Arctic Frost investigation into the Jan. 6, 2021, attack by Trump supporters at the Capitol.

    The spending bill, which was passed by the House last week, would repeal that law. But Graham said Thune had agreed to consider a separate bill that would allow “groups and private citizens” who were caught up in Jack Smith’s probe to sue.

  • The Justice Department released 3 million pages from its Jeffrey Epstein files

    The Justice Department released 3 million pages from its Jeffrey Epstein files

    NEW YORK — The Justice Department on Friday released many more records from its investigative files on Jeffrey Epstein, resuming disclosures under a law intended to reveal what the government knew about the millionaire financier’s sexual abuse of young girls and his interactions with rich and powerful people such as Donald Trump and Bill Clinton.

    Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said the department would be releasing more than 3 million pages of documents in the latest Epstein disclosure, as well as more than 2,000 videos and 180,000 images. The files, posted to the department’s website, include some of the several million pages of records that officials said were withheld from an initial release in December.

    Included in the batch were records concerning some of Epstein’s famous associates, including Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, formerly known as Britain’s Prince Andrew, as well as email correspondence between Epstein and Elon Musk and other prominent contacts from across the political spectrum.

    The documents were disclosed under the Epstein Files Transparency Act, the law enacted after months of public and political pressure that requires the government to open its files on the late financier and his confidant and onetime girlfriend, Ghislaine Maxwell. Lawmakers complained when the Justice Department made only a limited release last month, but officials said more time was needed to review an additional trove of documents that was discovered and to scour the records to ensure no sensitive information about victims was inadvertently released.

    “Today’s release marks the end of a very comprehensive document identification and review process to ensure transparency to the American people and compliance with the act,” Blanche said at a news conference announcing the disclosure.

    Friday’s disclosure represents the largest document dump to date about a saga the Trump administration has struggled for months to shake because of the president’s previous association with Epstein. State and federal investigations into the financier have long animated online sleuths, conspiracy theorists and others who have suspected government cover-ups and clamored for a full accounting, demands that even Blanche acknowledged might not be satisfied by the latest release.

    “There’s a hunger, or a thirst, for information that I don’t think will be satisfied by the review of these documents,” he said.

    After missing a Dec. 19 deadline set by Congress to release all the files, the Justice Department said it tasked hundreds of lawyers with reviewing the records to determine what needed to be redacted, or blacked out. But it denied any effort to shield Trump, who says he cut ties with Epstein years ago despite an earlier friendship, from potential embarrassment.

    “We did not protect President Trump. We didn’t protect — or not protect — anybody,” Blanche said.

    Among the materials withheld is information that could jeopardize any ongoing investigation or expose the identities of potential victims of sex abuse. Women other than Maxwell were redacted from videos and images being released Friday, Blanche said.

    The number of documents subject to review ballooned to roughly 6 million, including duplicates.

    Epstein’s famous friends

    The latest batch of documents include correspondence either with or about some of Epstein’s friends.

    Mountbatten-Windsor’s name appears at least several hundred times in the documents, sometimes in news clippings, sometimes in Epstein’s private email correspondence and in guest lists for dinners organized by Epstein. Some of the records also document an attempt by prosecutors in New York to get the former prince to agree to be interviewed as part of their Epstein sex trafficking probe.

    The records also show that Musk, the billionaire Tesla founder, reached out to Epstein on at least two separate occasions to plan visits to the Caribbean island where many of the allegations of sexual abuse purportedly occurred.

    In a 2012 exchange, Epstein inquired how many people Musk would like flown by helicopter to the island he owned — Little Saint James in the U.S. Virgin Islands.

    “Probably just Talulah and me,” Musk responded, referencing his partner at the time, actress Talulah Riley. “What day/night will be the wildest party on our island?”

    Musk messaged Epstein again ahead of a planned trip to the Caribbean in December 2013. “Will be in the BVI/St Bart’s area over the holidays,” he wrote. “Is there a good time to visit?” Epstein responded by extending an invite for sometime after the New Year holiday.

    It’s not immediately clear if the island visits took place. Spokespersons for Musk’s companies, Tesla and X, didn’t immediately respond to emails seeking comment.

    Musk has maintained that he repeatedly turned down the disgraced financier’s overtures.

    “Epstein tried to get me to go to his island and I REFUSED,” he posted on X in 2025 when House Democrats released an Epstein calendar with an entry mentioning a potential Musk visit to the island.

    The documents also contain hundreds of friendly text messages between Epstein and Steve Bannon during Trump’s first term.

    Bannon, a conservative activist who served as Trump’s White House strategist earlier in the president’s first term, bantered over politics with the financier, discussed get-togethers with him over breakfast, lunch or dinner and, on March 29, 2019, asked Epstein if he could supply his plane to pick him up in Rome: “Is it possible to get your plane here to collect me?”

    Epstein told him his pilot and crew “are doing their best” to arrange that flight but if Bannon could find a charter flight instead, “I’m happy to pay.” Apparently in France at the time, Epstein followed up with a text saying: “My guys can pick you up. Come for dinner.” The exchange did not show how that played out.

    On one occasion in December 2012, Epstein invited Howard Lutnick — now Trump’s commerce secretary — to his private island in the Caribbean for lunch, documents released Friday show. Lutnick’s wife, Allison Lutnick, enthusiastically accepted the invitation and said they would arrive on a yacht with their children. On another occasion in 2011, the two men had drinks, according to a schedule shared with Epstein.

    Lutnick has tried to distance himself from Epstein, saying in a 2025 interview that he cut ties decades ago and calling him “gross.” He didn’t respond to a request for comment Friday.

    During Trump’s first term, Epstein emailed Kathy Ruemmler, a lawyer and former Obama White House official, to warn that Democrats should stop demonizing Trump as a Mafia-type figure even as he derided the president as a “maniac.”

    A spokesperson for Goldman Sachs, where Ruemmler serves as general counsel and chief legal officer, said in a statement that Ruemmler “had a professional association with Jeffrey Epstein when she was a lawyer in private practice” and “regrets ever knowing him.”

    Building on the earlier release

    The Justice Department released tens of thousands of pages of documents just before Christmas, including photographs, interview transcripts, call logs and court records. Many were either already public or heavily blacked out.

    They included previously released flight logs showing Trump flew on Epstein’s private jet in the 1990s, before they had a falling-out, and several photographs of Clinton. Neither Trump, a Republican, nor Clinton, a Democrat, has been publicly accused of wrongdoing in connection with Epstein. Both have said they had no knowledge he was abusing underage girls.

    Epstein killed himself in a New York jail cell in August 2019, a month after he was indicted on federal sex trafficking charges.

    In 2008 and 2009, Epstein served jail time in Florida after pleading guilty to soliciting prostitution from someone under the age of 18. At the time, investigators had gathered evidence that Epstein had sexually abused underage girls at his Palm Beach home. The U.S. attorney’s office agreed not to prosecute him in exchange for his guilty plea to lesser state charges.

    In 2021, a federal jury in New York convicted Maxwell, a British socialite, of sex trafficking for helping recruit some of his underage victims. She is serving a 20-year prison sentence at a prison camp in Texas, after being moved there from a prison in Florida. She denies any wrongdoing.

    U.S. prosecutors never charged anyone else in connection with Epstein’s abuse of girls, but one of his victims, Virginia Roberts Giuffre, accused him in lawsuits of having arranged for her to have sexual encounters at age 17 and 18 with numerous politicians, business titans, noted academics, and others, all of whom denied her allegations.

    Among those she accused was Britain’s Prince Andrew, who was stripped of his royal titles amid the scandal. Andrew denied having sex with Giuffre but settled her lawsuit for an undisclosed sum.

    Giuffre died by suicide last year at age 41.

  • Judge chastises Trump administration attorney in hearing over dismantled President’s House exhibits

    Judge chastises Trump administration attorney in hearing over dismantled President’s House exhibits

    Attorneys for the City of Philadelphia and President Donald Trump’s administration sparred in federal court Friday over the abrupt removal of slavery-related exhibits from the President’s House on Independence Mall.

    The hearing centered on the city’s request that the judge order that no more exhibits be removed from the President’s House and that the already-removed exhibits be protected as the effort to return them is litigated.

    Mayor Cherelle L. Parker’s administration is “fighting” to restore the panels, City Solicitor Renee Garcia told reporters after the hearing.

    “I want to be very clear that we want those panels back up, but we also do not want anything else to come down,“ Garcia said.

    Judge Cynthia M. Rufe wasn’t ready to issue a ruling after the daylong hearing in the courthouse across the street from the historic site. On Monday, she wants to visit the President’s House and ensure that the removed exhibits being stored in a National Park Service storage facility adjacent to the Constitution Center are not damaged. She asked the federal government to maintain the status quo until she makes her decision.

    But with the nation’s 250th anniversary celebration being planned for the site in dispute, Rufe said she would not let the case drag into the spring or summer.

    The George W. Bush-appointed judge chastised the attorney representing the government, Assistant U.S. Attorney Gregory in den Berken, for talking out of “both sides of his mouth” and making “dangerous” arguments.

    The federal government argued the injunction request was invalid on procedural grounds, and that the removal was lawful because, in den Berken said, “the government gets to choose the message that it wants to convey.”

    “That’s horrifying to listen to,” Rufe said. “Sorry. That’s not what we elected anybody for.”

    The judge asked the assistant U.S. attorney to imagine Germany removing a monument for the American soldiers who liberated the Nazi concentration camp Dachau in an effort to erase the crimes of the Holocaust. “What are we doing here? Are we speaking truth and justice?” Rufe asked.

    In another notable exchange, the judge read Trump’s posts from then-Twitter in 2017 in which he lamented the removal of statutes of confederate leaders.

    “Sad to see the history and culture of our great country being ripped apart with the removal of our beautiful statues and monuments,” Trump wrote. “You can’t change history, but you can learn from it.”

    Rufe asked the assistant U.S. attorney to reconcile that sentiment with Trump’s directive to remove slavery-related exhibits.

    “Is this a desire to change history?” the judge asked.

    In den Berken declined to respond or opine on the motivations of the president or decision-makers at the Department of Interior, and returned to procedural arguments.

    A three-way collaboration

    Friday’s hearing marked the first time the City of Philadelphia and Trump’s administration have gone head-to-head in court during his second term.

    The city sued Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, acting National Park Service Director Jessica Bowron, and their respective agencies Jan. 22 while Park Service employees were dismantling educational exhibits about slavery at the President’s House.

    The President’s House, which opened in December 2010, seeks to inform visitors about the horrors of slavery and memorialize the nine people George Washington enslaved there while he resided in Philadelphia during the early years of the United States. All information at the site is historically accurate.

    The exhibits were dismantled after increased scrutiny from the Trump administration. Last year, Trump and Burgum issued orders calling for content at national parks that “inappropriately disparage Americans past or living” to be reviewed and potentially removed.

    Garcia argued the removal of exhibits violated federal law and an agreement between the federal government and the city, and caused imminent harm.

    “The contents of the removed panels are critical context to share the stories of the individuals enslaved at the president’s home and their fight for freedom” Garcia said.

    The President’s House exhibition was the results of yearslong collaboration between the city and the federal government that spanned multiple presidential and mayoral administrations, Garcia said. Two former mayoral chiefs of staff testified to the city’s extensive work alongside the National Park Service.

    “I could not imagine that anybody would decide, after all that it took, together, and that we always had each others back, that they would over night tear it down,” said Everett Gillison, chief of staff under former Mayor Michael Nutter. “It boggles my imagination.”

    Valerie Gay, the city’s chief cultural officer, also testified to the historical importance of the site to Philadelphians and to visitors for the upcoming 250th anniversary celebrations.

    The city’s lawsuit has been supported by Gov. Josh Shapiro and Democrats in Pennsylvania’s state Senate, who filed briefs in support of the requested injunction alongside a coalition of residents who advocated for historical acknowledgment of the enslaved people living in Washington’s house, Avenging The Ancestors Coalition, and the walking tour company The Black Journey.

    Michael Coard, attorney and founding member of Avenging the Ancestors Coalition, at President’s House in Philadelphia.

    The President’s House was also a partnership with the public, said Cara McClellan, the attorney representing the coalition and The Black Journey

    It was advocacy by coalition leader Michael Coard in the early 2000s that kickstarted the process to recognize the nine enslaved people who lived in Washington’s house through exhibits on the site, McClellan told Rufe. The design was the result of multiple public meetings, with the participation of thousands of Philadelphians.

    Yet the exhibits were removed without public input, notice, or reasoning, the attorney said.

    “This is like pulling pages out of a history book with a razor,” McClellan said. ”History does not change based on who is in political office.”

  • Trump names former Federal Reserve governor Kevin Warsh as the next Fed chair, replacing Jerome Powell

    Trump names former Federal Reserve governor Kevin Warsh as the next Fed chair, replacing Jerome Powell

    WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump said Friday that he will nominate former Federal Reserve official Kevin Warsh to be the next chair of the Fed, a decision likely to result in sharp changes to the powerful agency that could bring it closer to the White House.

    If approved by the Senate, Warsh would replace current chair Jerome Powell when his term expires in May. Trump chose Powell to lead the Fed in 2017 but this year has relentlessly assailed him for not cutting interest rates quickly enough.

    “I have known Kevin for a long period of time, and have no doubt that he will go down as one of the GREAT Fed Chairmen, maybe the best,” Trump posted on social media. “On top of everything else, he is ‘central casting,’ and he will never let you down.”

    The appointment, which requires Senate confirmation, amounts to a return trip for Warsh, 55, who was a member of the Fed’s board from 2006 to 2011. He was the youngest governor in history when he was appointed at age 35. He is currently a fellow at the right-leaning Hoover Institution and a lecturer at the Stanford Graduate School of Business.

    In some ways, Warsh is an unlikely choice for the Republican president because he has long been a hawk in Fed parlance, or someone who typically supports higher interest rates to control inflation. Trump, by contrast, has said the Fed’s key rate should be as low as 1%, a level few economists endorse, and far below its current level of about 3.6%.

    During his time as governor, Warsh objected to some of the low-interest rate policies that the Fed pursued during and after the 2008-09 Great Recession. He also often expressed concern at that time that inflation would soon accelerate, even though it remained at rock-bottom levels for many years after that recession ended.

    More recently, however, in speeches and opinion columns, Warsh has voiced support for lower rates.

    Early reaction

    Financial markets reacted in ways that suggest investors expect that Warsh could keep rates a bit higher over time. The dollar and yields on long-term U.S. Treasurys rose, although that moderated a bit.

    The 10-year yield is at 4.26%, up from 4.23% Thursday. U.S. stock futures saw losses of around 0.5%. The biggest moves were in the suddenly volatile metals markets, where gold dropped more than 5% and silver sank more than 13%.

    In Congress, Sen. Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican who is retiring, reiterated in a social media post that he will oppose Warsh’s nomination until a Justice Department investigation into Powell is resolved.

    Tillis is a member of the Senate Banking Committee, which will consider Warsh’s nomination.

    He added that Warsh is a “qualified nominee” but stressed that “protecting the independence of the Federal Reserve from political interference or legal intimidation is non-negotiable.”

    Tillis’s opposition could complicate the confirmation process. Asked late Thursday whether Warsh could be confirmed without Tillis’s support, Senate Majority Leader John Thune said, “Probably not.”

    Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, the highest-ranking Democrat on the Banking Committee, said, “This nomination is the latest step in Trump’s attempt to seize control of the Fed.”

    Warsh beat out several other candidates, including Trump’s top economic adviser, Kevin Hassett, investment manager Rick Rieder, and current Fed governor Christopher Waller.

    Controlling the Fed

    Warsh’s appointment could be a major step toward Trump asserting more control over the Fed, one of the few remaining independent federal agencies. While all presidents influence Fed policy through appointments, Trump’s rhetorical attacks on the central bank have raised concerns about its status as an independent institution.

    The announcement comes after an extended and unusually public search that underscored the importance of the decision to Trump and the potential impact it could have on the economy. The chair of the Federal Reserve is one of the most powerful economic officials in the world, tasked with combating inflation in the United States while also supporting maximum employment.

    The Fed is also the nation’s top banking regulator.

    The Fed’s rate decisions, over time, influence borrowing costs throughout the economy, including for mortgages, car loans, and credit cards.

    For now, Warsh would likely fill a seat on the Fed’s governing board that was temporarily occupied by Stephen Miran, a White House adviser whom Trump appointed in September. Once on the board, Trump could then elevate Warsh to the chair position when Powell’s term ends in May.

    Trump has sought to exert more control over the Fed. In August he tried to fire Lisa Cook, one of seven governors on the Fed’s board, in an effort to secure a majority of the board. Cook, however, sued to keep her job, and the Supreme Court, in a hearing last week, appeared inclined to let her stay in her position while her suit is resolved.

    Powell revealed this month that the Fed had been subpoenaed by the Justice Department about his congressional testimony on a $2.5 billion building renovation. Powell said the subpoenas were “pretexts” to force the Fed to cut rates.

    Trump’s economic policies

    Since Trump’s reelection, Warsh has expressed support for the president’s economic policies, despite a history as a more conventional, pro-free trade Republican.

    In a January 2025 column in the Wall Street Journal, Warsh praised Trump’s deregulatory policies and potential spending cuts, which he said would help bring down inflation. Lower inflation would allow the Fed to deliver the rate cuts the president wants.

    Trump had said he would appoint a Fed chair who will cut interest rates to lower the government’s borrowing costs and bring down mortgage rates, though the Fed doesn’t decide those costs directly.

    In December, he wrote on social media of the need for lower borrowing costs and said, “Anyone who disagrees with me will never be the Fed chairman!”

    Potential challenges and pushback

    Warsh would face challenges in pushing interest rates much lower. The chair is just one member of the Fed’s 19-person rate-setting committee, with 12 of those officials voting on each rate decision. The committee is already split between those worried about persistent inflation, who’d like to keep rates unchanged, and those who think that recent upticks in unemployment point to a stumbling economy that needs lower interest rates to bolster hiring.

    Financial markets could also push back. If the Fed cuts its short-term rate too aggressively and is seen as doing so for political reasons, then Wall Street investors could sell Treasury bonds out of fear that inflation would rise. Such sales would push up longer-term interest rates, including mortgage rates, and backfire on Warsh.

    Trump considered appointing Warsh as Fed chair during his first term, though ultimately he went with Powell. Warsh’s father-in-law is Ronald Lauder, heir to the Estee Lauder cosmetics fortune and a longtime donor and confidant of Trump’s.

    Warsh in recent years has become harshly critical of the Fed, calling for “regime change” and assailing Powell for engaging on issues like climate change and diversity, equity and inclusion, which Warsh said are outside the Fed’s mandate.

    His more critical approach suggests that if he does ascend to the position of chair, it would amount to a sharp transition at the Fed.

    In a July interview on CNBC, Warsh said Fed policy “has been broken for quite a long time.”

    “The central bank that sits there today is radically different than the central bank I joined in 2006,” he added. By allowing inflation to surge in 2021-22, the Fed “brought about the greatest mistake in macroeconomic policy in 45 years, that divided the country.”

  • Pete Buttigieg endorses Bob Brooks, a firefighter running for Congress in the Lehigh Valley

    Pete Buttigieg endorses Bob Brooks, a firefighter running for Congress in the Lehigh Valley

    Pete Buttigieg, former President Joe Biden’s transportation secretary and a potential presidential hopeful for 2028, has endorsed Democrat Bob Brooks, a firefighter running for Congress in the Lehigh Valley.

    Brooks, the president of the Pennsylvania Professional Fire Fighters Association, is running to represent Pennsylvania’s 7th Congressional District, which is currently held by freshman U.S. Rep. Ryan Mackenzie, a Republican. At least six other Democrats are also vying for the nomination as of this month.

    Buttigieg’s endorsement of Brooks, shared first with The Inquirer, illustrates the political importance of the Lehigh Valley, a national bellwether.

    Democrats see the 7th Congressional District as one of a limited number of flippable Republican-held seats in the 2026 midterms. It’s also notable that Buttigieg, who could once again be on the national stage in 2028, is weighing into politics in Pennsylvania, a key battleground state.

    “People are seeking leaders who understand their lives and fight for their needs,” Buttigieg said in a news release, noting Brook’s experience as a firefighter, union leader, and snowplow driver.

    “He understands the urgency of lowering costs because he’s lived it – working long hours, juggling jobs, and fighting for a paycheck that actually covers the basics,” Buttigieg added. “It’s a perspective Washington needs more of, and I’m proud to endorse him.”

    This undated photo provided by Bob Brooks for Congress in August 2025 shows Bob Brooks, president of the Pennsylvania Professional Fire Fighters Association. (Bob Brooks for Congress via AP)

    In addition to Buttigieg, Brooks has also received the backing of Gov. Josh Shapiro (another potential 2028 candidate), Lt. Gov. Austin Davis, U.S. Rep. Chris Deluzio, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), various unions, and other elected officials.

    Brooks said in the news release that Buttigieg’s endorsement “means a great deal.”

    “He’s focused on listening to new voices and making government work for everyday people at a time when too many feel shut out and left behind,” Brooks said. “It’s an honor to have him on board as we fight to build a Congress that looks like and works for the people it serves.”

    Mackenzie’s seat is a top target for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, along with Republican U.S. Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick, of Bucks County, Scott Perry, of York County, and Rob Bresnahan of Lackawanna County.

    President Donald Trump has endorsed Mackenzie (and every other congressional Republican in Pennsylvania except Fitzpatrick) and Vice President JD Vance swung through the district in December.

    But Trump may not be the boon for Mackenzie he was two years ago.

    Trump made his biggest gains in the state in 2024 in the Lehigh Valley and Northeastern Pa., but recent interviews with voters and polling data suggests his support in the region could be dwindling heading into the midterms.

  • Trump threatens Canada with 50% tariff on aircraft sold in U.S., expanding trade war

    Trump threatens Canada with 50% tariff on aircraft sold in U.S., expanding trade war

    WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump on Thursday threatened Canada with a 50% tariff on any aircraft sold in the U.S., the latest salvo in his trade war with America’s northern neighbor as his feud with Prime Minister Mark Carney expands.

    Trump’s threat posted on social media came after he threatened over the weekend to impose a 100% tariff on goods imported from Canada if it went forward with a planned trade deal with China. But Trump’s threat did not come with any details about when he would impose the import taxes, as Canada had already struck a deal.

    In Trump’s latest threat, the Republican president said he was retaliating against Canada for refusing to certify jets from Savannah, Ga.-based Gulfstream Aerospace.

    Trump said the U.S., in return, would decertify all Canadian aircraft, including planes from its largest aircraft maker, Bombardier. “If, for any reason, this situation is not immediately corrected, I am going to charge Canada a 50% Tariff on any and all Aircraft sold into the United States of America,” Trump said in his post.

    Spokespeople for Bombardier and Canada’s transport minister didn’t immediately respond to messages seeking comment Thursday evening.

    The U.S. Commerce Department previously put duties on a Bombardier commercial passenger jet in 2017 during the first Trump administration, charging that the Canadian company is selling the planes in America below cost. The U.S. said then that the Montreal-based Bombardier used unfair government subsidies to sell jets at artificially low prices.

    The U.S. International Trade Commission in Washington later ruled that Bombardier did not injure U.S. industry.

    Bombardier has since concentrated on the business and private jet market in recent years. If Trump cuts off the U.S. market it would be a major blow to the Quebec company.

    Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent warned Carney on Wednesday that his recent public comments against U.S. trade policy could backfire going into the formal review of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, the trade deal that protects Canada from the heaviest impacts of Trump’s tariffs.

    Carney rejected Bessent’s contention that he had aggressively walked back his comments at the World Economic Forum during a phone call with Trump on Monday.

    Carney said he told Trump that he meant what he said in his speech at Davos, and told him Canada plans to diversify away from the United States with a dozen new trade deals.

    In Davos at the World Economic Forum last week, Carney condemned economic coercion by great powers on smaller countries without mentioning Trump’s name. The prime minister received widespread praise and attention for his remarks, upstaging Trump at the gathering.