Breaking News
Breaking News
from Washington and beyond

Josh Hawley Reacts as Trump Tears Into Him as “Second-Tier” Senator

The Missouri Republican seems to be going against his entire party with a proposed ban on congressional stock trading.

Senator Josh Hawley speaks to reporters in the Capitol
Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images

Republican Senator Josh Hawley’s proposed bill banning stock trading by legislators has Republicans running around like chickens with their heads cut off—including the president. But Hawley is keeping his cool.

On Wednesday, Trump slammed Hawley on Truth Social, accusing him of playing into the hands of the Democrats with his legislation, which would prohibit members of Congress, the president, and the vice president from trading stocks.

“I don’t think real Republicans want to see their President, who has had unprecedented success, TARGETED, because of the ‘whims’ of a second-tier Senator named Josh Hawley!” Trump wrote.

But Hawley was unbothered by the president’s digs, and laughed them off, according to The Independent. In fact, Hawley says that Trump is a supporter of the bill, reaffirming what the president said to reporters hours before his Truth Social rant.

“He and I had a nice visit this afternoon and he reiterated that he is in favor of a stock ban for members of Congress [and ] that he wants to see it passed,” Hawley said. “He thinks we need to move full speed ahead.”

The bill, which was originally called the PELOSI Act in a mocking tribute to the accusations of insider trading against Representative Nancy Pelosi’s husband, made it through the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs on Wednesday, in an 8–7 vote, with Hawley as the sole Republican to support the act.

Though the bill does ban the president and vice president from trading or owning stocks, it includes a notable carve-out for Trump: That prohibition will only kick in for future administrations.

Virginia Giuffre’s Family Shocked by Trump Claim Epstein “Stole” Her

The family of Jeffrey Epstein victim Virginia Giuffre is wondering what else the president knows.

Virginia Giuffre exits federal court surrounded by other people.
Jeenah Moon/Bloomberg/Getty Images
Virginia Giuffre, a victim of Jeffrey Epstein, exits from federal court in New York on August 27, 2019, after Epstein killed himself in prison.

The family of Virginia Giuffre has spoken out after President Trump stated that deceased serial predator Jeffrey Epstein “stole” Giuffre from him.

“It makes us ask if he was aware of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell’s criminal actions, especially given his statement two years later that his good friend Jeffrey ‘likes women on the younger side … no doubt about it,’” Giuffre’s two brothers and sisters-in-law told The Atlantic. “We and the public are asking for answers; survivors deserve this.”

Giuffre had alleged that she was abducted in 2000 by Ghislaine Maxwell at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate, where she worked at the time as a pool attendant, and was subsequently abused for the next two years. Giuffre committed suicide in April.

“Hired, by him, in other words—gone,” Trump said earlier this week when asked about Epstein and his “falling out.”

“Other people would come and complain, ‘This guy is taking people from the spa.’ I didn’t know that. And then when I heard about it, I told him, I said, ‘Listen, we don’t want you taking our people.’ Whether it was spa or not spa, I don’t want him taking people.”

“Did one of the stolen persons—did that include Virginia Giuffre?” a reporter asked.

“Um, I don’t know. I think she worked at the spa,” Trump said. “I think so. I think that was one of the people. He stole her. And by the way, she had no complaints about us, as you know. None whatsoever.”

These comments and the immunity deal that the Trump administration may offer to Maxwell drove Giuffre’s family to make a statement.

“If our sister could speak today, she would be most angered by the fact that the government is listening to a known perjurer, a woman who repeatedly lied under oath and will continue to do so as long as it benefits her position.”

Trump Issues Threat to Canada After It Backs Palestinian State

Donald Trump is ramping up his trade war with Canada after its decision to recognize Palestine.

Donald Trump speaks while seated in a chair and points a finger.
Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

Canada on Wednesday became the third close U.S. ally to announce its plan to recognize the state of Palestine in recent days, leaving President Donald Trump none too pleased.

“Preserving a two-state solution means standing with all people who choose peace over violence or terrorism, and honouring their innate desire for the peaceful co-existence of Israeli and Palestinian states as the only roadmap for a secure and prosperous future,” said Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney.

Canada’s decision follows an announcement from France last week that it will recognize Palestinian statehood. On Tuesday, the United Kingdom committed to do the same unless Israel fails to meet certain conditions to improve conditions in Gaza and commit to peace.

Canada’s decision, like the U.K.’s, comes with stipulations. Palestine must demilitarize, for example, and “hold general elections in 2026 in which Hamas can play no part,” said Carney.

Trump lashed out in a Truth Social post, in which he threatened that the decision could hamper a prospective trade deal between the U.S. and Canada, which is to be reached by a Friday deadline lest hefty tariffs go into effect.

“Wow!” Trump wrote. “Canada has just announced that it is backing statehood for Palestine. That will make it very hard for us to make a Trade Deal with them. Oh’ Canada!!!”

The response to Canada, a country Trump seemingly has a penchant for intimidating, had more teeth than those to France’s and the U.K.’s announcements (on the former he said, “That statement doesn’t carry weight”; the latter, he said, would reward Hamas).

Trump seemingly hopes to use the impending trade deal deadline to bully Canada into backing down on its pledge to uphold statehood for Palestine (which is, under international law, “a right, not a reward,” according to the U.N.’s secretary-general).

Carney, for his part, has already noted that the U.S.-Canada trade deal may take some additional time to come to fruition. “We’re seeking the best deal for Canadians,” he said Wednesday. “We have not yet reached that deal. Negotiations will continue until we do.”

Trump’s fluid list of demands, per the National Post, has included Canada shelling out for Trump’s “Golden Dome” defense system and aiding Trump’s immigration agenda along the U.S.-Canada border.

19 Senate Democrats Vote to Keep Arming Israel as It Starves Gaza

Here’s the list of every Democrat who voted against measures from Senator Bernie Sanders to stop giving weapons to Israel.

Pro-Palestine protesters march toward the Capitol with signs that call Benjamin Netanyahu a war criminal or read "Free Palestine."
Nathan Posner/Anadolu/Getty Images
A pro-Palestine protest in Washington, D.C. in July 2024

With the help of 19 Democrats, the Senate rejected two resolutions Wednesday from Senator Bernie Sanders to block arms sales to Israel as it continues its campaign of mass starvation in Gaza.

The Senate rejected S.J.Res.34, which would have prohibited the sale of $675 million in weapons to Israel, such as 1,000-pound bombs and Joint Direct Attack Munition guidance kits used in airstrikes, by a vote of 27–70. Nineteen Democrats joined Republicans to block the measure.

Seventeen Democrats also voted against S.J.Res.41, which failed by a vote of 24–73 and would have prohibited the sale of fully automatic assault rifles to Israeli forces.

The resolutions had little chance of surviving the House, and President Donald Trump announced earlier on Wednesday that he would veto the measures if they reached his desk. But 19 Democrats still couldn’t support even a symbolic vote against Israel.

Notably, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer voted against both resolutions, as did Senator Cory Booker, who represents New Jersey. In April, Israeli forces killed a 14-year-old Palestinian American from New Jersey, Amer Rabee.

Senators Ruben Gallego, Mark Kelly, and Elissa Slotkin did not vote for or against either bill.

The U.N. estimates that one in three Palestinians in Gaza haven’t eaten anything in days, as a result of Israel’s blockade and ongoing genocide. The World Health Organization has also said a “worst-case scenario of famine” has hit the region.

Here is the name of every Democrat who voted to keep arming Israel anyway, blocking at least one of Sanders’s resolutions:

  1. Michael Bennett (CO)
  2. Richard Blumenthal (CT)
  3. Cory Booker (NJ)
  4. Maria Cantwell (WA)
  5. Chris Coons (DE)
  6. Catherine Cortez Masto (NV)
  7. John Fetterman (PA)
  8. Kirsten Gillibrand (NY)
  9. Maggie Hassan (NH)
  10. John Hicklenlooper (CO)
  11. Jon Ossoff (GA)
  12. Alex Padilla (CA)
  13. Gary Peters (MI)
  14. Jack Reed (RI)
  15. Jackie Rosen (NV)
  16. Adam Schiff (CA)
  17. Chuck Schumer (NY)
  18. Mark Warner (VA)
  19. Ron Wyden (OR)

Democrats Launch New Effort to Force ICE to Let Them Into Facilities

ICE has repeatedly blocked Democratic lawmakers’ efforts to tour detention facilities.

Representative Robert Garcia gestures while speaking into microphones outside the Capitol
Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc/Getty Images
Representative Robert Garcia

A dozen Democratic lawmakers are suing the Trump administration for denying them access to Immigration and Customs Enforcement facilities. 

In a 67-page federal court filing Wednesday, the group of 12 congresspeople alleged that a new rule requiring them to provide a week’s advance notice to the Department of Homeland Security before visiting a facility used to detain immigrants was illegal. The new rule coincided with a steep increase in the number of immigration arrests and a number of sweeping reports detailing horrific conditions at ICE detention facilities across the country. 

Lawyers alleged that the department’s new rule violated Section 527 of the 2024 DHS appropriations bill, as incorporated by the fiscal year 2025 Continuing Resolution, which stated that the government could not require lawmakers to “provide prior notice of the intent to enter a [DHS] facility.” 

This clause isn’t out of the ordinary—Congress has adopted a similar statute every year since 2019, always proving that no funds appropriated to DHS “may be used to prevent” a Congress member from conducting an oversight visit at such a facility. Since Donald Trump entered the White House, however, each of the 12 plaintiffs said they had been blocked from entering a DHS facility in person. 

The plaintiffs included Representatives Joe Neguse, Adriano Espaillat, Bennie G. Thompson, Jamie Raskin, Robert Garcia, J. Luis Correa, Jason Crow, Veronica Escobar, Daniel S. Goldman, Jimmy Gomez, Raul Ruiz, and Norma Torres. 

In addition to allegedly violating Section 527, the lawsuit accused the DHS of violating the Administrative Procedure Act by acting contrary to the law and in excess of its statutory authority. The lawmakers argued that the oversight visit policy was “arbitrary and capricious because it lacks a lawful basis.” 

The lawsuit also alleged that by preventing the lawmakers from entering the facilities, ICE  had wrongly delayed them from performing their duties. 

The lawmakers are seeking for DHS to declare the rule unlawful and vacate it and to ensure they will be able to freely conduct oversight visits. 

Last month, the Department of Homeland Security imposed restrictions requiring lawmakers to provide ICE with at least 72 hours’ notice before visiting a facility where immigrants are being detained. Previously, sitting members of Congress were allowed to conduct oversight visits at any DHS facility used to “detain or otherwise house aliens” without providing prior notice, and congressional staffers only needed to give 24 hours’ notice. 

The new guidance also granted ICE wide discretion to “deny a request or otherwise cancel, reschedule or terminate a tour or visit” for a number of reasons, including “operational concerns” or if ICE officials or facility managers “deem it appropriate.”