Sen. Elizabeth Warren took a tumble on the Senate floor on Wednesday — and Donald Trump’s MAGA fans went wild.
The 76-year-old stumbled as she leaned against a desk during a confirmation vote on Trump’s nominee to run the U.S. Marshals Service, and it gave way.
As she fell to the floor, members from both parties rushed to her aid — with even Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), an outspoken foe in the past, helping her to her feet.
Onlookers, meanwhile, rushed to social media, according to a roundup by The Daily Beast.
The website Conservative Brief posted, “Boom! Pocahontas herself, Democrat Sen. Elizabeth Warren, just took a nasty fall on the Senate floor. Perhaps it’s time for her to retire?” Right-wing podcaster Benny Johnson mocked, “Yikes. Down she goes.)
“It’s too bad Elizabeth Warren didn’t fall on her face,” wrote Ian Miles Cheong, an Elon Musk loyalist and commentator, according to the Beast.
Warren was apparently uninjured and went on to join Democrats in voting against the nomination of Gadyaces Serralta as director of the U.S. Marshals Service. The Senate voted to advance his nomination.
Wall Street executives are staying silent on the need for gun laws in the wake of the shooting in Manhattan this week, in part because they fear President Donald Trump would find a reason to throw them in jail for it, New York Times columnist and "Sqawk Box" co-host Andrew Ross Sorkin told MSNBC's Ari Melber on Thursday evening.
The revelation came amid a broader discussion about how Trump is adopting a "command economy," the Republican Party long claimed was un-American, bullying companies, academic institutions, and law firms and using threats to make them change diversity and hiring policies he opposes.
"You know, Tom Wolfe, the Bible of Wall Street, at one point talked about these 'masters of the universe' ... in terms of concentration of wealth, and the added layer of the tech control tech power only proliferated," said Melber. "So I ask you, because you are one of our whisperers to this world, how do you square thinking you're a master of the universe, making multibillion-dollar international deals that control multiple economies on continents and running a tech company like an Altman or Bezos, and then and then do what you just said, which is shirk, and say, well, my god, this is just the world we're in?"
"So I, like you and probably many of the viewers, believed that if you had a certain amount of money ... for example, $1 billion, that that would insulate you from just about anything, and therefore it would create this sort of independence, this remarkable independence, where you could come out and speak your mind and say whatever it is you want," said Sorkin. "So if you disagreed with the president, you could come and say that if you disagree with, you would have that independence to do that."
That is no longer the case under Trump, Sorkin said.
"After this horrific shooting that happened in Midtown Manhattan earlier this week, I wrote something in The New York Times about how business leaders, this is one of those opportunities to have a reasonable conversation about gun violence in America," said Sorkin. "And a couple of CEOs called me up — by the way, mostly Democrats, but a couple of Republicans, too, who said, yeah, we should be having that conversation, but I can't have that conversation because right now I'll lose that conversation. There's no winning in that conversation. And I said to them, 'Well, what happens if you spoke out on this issue, really?' And one of them said, 'Well, the president, if he wants to put me in jail, he can put me in jail."
"Now, I think some of them don't think they're going to go to jail, but they think they're going to make my life difficult with the business," Sorkin added. "They're going to make my life difficult with this or that or who knows what."
A legal expert was taken aback Thursday night after watching President Donald Trump admit he knew of a "grotesque crime" when he talked about his falling out with Jeffrey Epstein.
Ryan Goodman, founding co-editor-in-chief of the legal and policy website Just Security, joined Erin Burnett on CNN's "OutFront" to weigh in on Trump's shocking remarks regarding his relationship with Epstein, who died in prison while awaiting trial on sex trafficking allegations.
Burnett noted the White House has offered multiple explanations about the falling out, including over a real estate deal. Trump, however, has instead said their friendship blew up because Epstein hired his spa workers — a claim that, she said, "doesn’t add up, because the hiring-away was two years before Trump was continuing to say wonderful things about Epstein—and seven years before he kicked him out of the club."
"Now they’re saying, and Trump has used this word before, that Epstein was a 'creep,' and that the White House says, quote, 'Trump kicked Jeffrey Epstein out of his club for being a creep to his female employees.' I mean, does any of this add up legally?
Goodman was floored by the remarks.
"So I think they’ve gotten themselves in more trouble by these references, that the reason for it was that he was a creep or that he was a creep to the —
"It’s hard to say he’s a creep if you said you didn’t know what he was doing," Burnett interjected.
"Exactly," replied Goodman. "So if he kicked him out because of sexual predation toward the employees, then it means he had knowledge."
Goodman said Trump's timeline "doesn’t make sense." A Trump Organization attorney has said Epstein was booted from Mar-a-Lago in 2007 due to an arrest a year earlier in Florida. Now, the White House is claiming he took that action over what he knew.
"A year after the arrest for pedophilia. Seven years after Virginia Giuffre is hired—is stolen—seven years after that?" asked Burnett.
"Seven years after that. So it’s not a good look for them, at the least. And that’s about, in some sense, moral culpability, not legal culpability. There would have to be more for that. But it does seem as though he’s admitting to knowledge of a grotesque crime against minors. That’s the problem."
When Burnett asked whether any recourse is possible for Trump over what he knew at the time, Goodman poured cold water on the idea.
"If it’s just knowledge, there’s only one situation in which there would actually be legal obligations. And that’s if somebody is a mandatory reporter. But to be a mandatory reporter, they’d have to be like a schoolteacher or a medical doctor," he said.
"Not a rich friend?" Burnett clarified.
"No, not just a friend or anything like that. And that would also be under state law. And there would probably also be a statute of limitations problem for that particular offense. But otherwise, that would chalk up to moral culpability."
An attorney and democracy advocate sounded what he called a "five-alarm fire" ignited by Attorney General Pam Bondi, warning that "nothing is as worrisome" as her new scheme.
Marc Elias, founder of Democracy Docket, joined Bryan Tyler Cohen on Cohen's YouTube channel on Thursday to discuss what the Justice Department is doing under Bondi.
"The Department of Justice is systematically going state by state and trying to access and collect individual voter data on every voter in the state. This is not a fire — this is a five-alarm fire," he warned.
Elias pleaded with viewers to appreciate the gravity of the scheme.
"I know there are a lot of other things going on in the world of democracy right now, but nothing is as worrisome to me, as someone who has spent their career fighting against voter suppression and election subversion, than the fact that Pam Bondi’s Department of Justice has been weaponized. They are going to these individual states, and they want the voter records of you, of your neighbor, of your family, your friends, your community, your entire state," he railed.
The feds are seeking comprehensive records from all 50 states, he said, slamming legacy media outlets for "sleeping" on the scandal.
"We need to all be aware of this — not just to understand what’s going on, but to discuss what we do to fight back," he said.
Cohen noted that even if the practice is unlawful, federal prosecutors are the ones tasked with enforcing the law.
"They’re using federal prosecutors to go to state election officials — secretaries of state in some places, election boards in others — to try to get this information. They’re doing it by letter. They’re doing it by request. We haven’t yet seen them use grand jury subpoenas. Right now, they’re doing it through these more informal methods. But remember — we’re still a year and a half from the election."
Elias then shared the question that the Trump administration must be asked by Sunday talk show hosts.
"Why are they collecting this information? What are they using it for?" he asked. "Because there’s no good reason for it. The Department of Justice — certainly the criminal division — doesn’t have a legitimate role in the way we run elections. In fact, they’re supposed to stay out."
Elias later warned there's a "continuum of bad things" the administration could do with the data. The administration could use it to score political points and perpetuate election lies, demonize naturalized citizens and criticize Democratic cities and states.
"That’s the better scenario," he emphasized.
"The worse — and more concerning — scenario is that they’ll use this data when they don’t like the results of elections," Elias warned.
The administration could say the federal government must intervene in a big state like California or Illinois because Govs. Gavin Newsom or J.B. Pritzker allowed ballots to be counted that the Trump administration doesn't believe should have counted.
"We’ve seen this playbook before. And everyone needs to wake up. This is the playbook Donald Trump tried to run in 2020. It’s what he tried to do when Jeffrey Clark, in the DOJ, tried to get acting Attorney General Jeff Rosen to send a bogus letter to Fulton County and the state of Georgia claiming irregularities.
An agitated President Donald Trump called a reporter a "lunatic" — minutes after bashing another reporter — during a question-and-answer session Thursday afternoon, reacting to a question about his tariff policy.
"As you know, a federal appellate court today heard oral arguments about whether or not you had the authority to unilaterally impose those tariffs," the reporter told Trump. "I'm not going to get you to weigh in on the legal arguments, but you're weighing your decision to do that, your authority to do that, based on a 1977 law."
The reporter noted the law has never been invoked.
"Why didn't you invoke this law —" the reporter began, as Trump tried to interject.
"Well, we've been winning all along," Trump began to reply.
But the reporter refused to let the president cut him off.
"I just want to ask you, why didn't you invoke this law in your first term?" the reporter asked. "You could've taken billions upon billions of dollars in your first term, but you waited until your second term."
Trump, now visibly frustrated, took a shot at the reporter.
"Yeah, because I was fighting lunatics like you who were trying to do things incorrectly and inappropriately to a president that was duly elected," he fired back.
Trump insisted they did levy tariffs during his first term, including slapping them on China.
"We took in hundreds of billions from China," he said.
Trump said he also planned to hit France, Italy, Spain, and other countries with tariffs, only to be thwarted by the COVID-19 pandemic.
Trump concluded, "We took in hundreds of billions of dollars in tariffs," before giving the reporter a parting shot.
"You people didn't cover it very well," he said.
Trump placed tariffs on China in a March 2018 memo, slapping tariffs on $50 billion worth of Chinese goods due to concerns about Chinese theft of U.S. intellectual property. The first tariffs of 25% began in July of that year, with the remaining beginning in August 2018. Additional tariffs were imposed on Chinese imports the following year.
President Donald Trump lashed out at ABC News correspondent Rachel Scott after she asked a question about his relationship with accused sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein.
During a White House event on Thursday, Scott noted that the family of Virginia Giuffre, one of Epstein's victims, had expressed outrage after the president said that the sex offender "stole" women from him.
"You said that Jeffrey Epstein stole people from Mar-a-Lago," the reporter remarked. "At the time, did you know why he was taking those young women, including Virginia?"
"No, I didn't know," Trump insisted. "I mean, I would figure it was ABC 'fake' News that would ask that question, one of the worst. But no, I don't know really why."
"But I said if he's taking anybody from Mar-A-Lago, he's hiring or whatever he's doing, I didn't like it," he added. "And we threw him out. We said we don't want him at the place."
Kari Lake, President Donald Trump's special advisor to the U.S. Agency for Global Media, predicted that former President Barack Obama would be "sentenced to time" because of the investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 election.
"I believe that accountability is coming," Lake told Real America's Voice host Eric Bolling on Thursday. "I believe you called it perp walks. I'd like to see justice, is what I call it."
"And that means if you've been found guilty, if you've done something wrong, you're investigated, and you're actually sentenced to time," she continued. "And I think it's going to come starting with maybe even potentially Barack Obama."
Lake called Obama's potential incarceration "the biggest bit of justice the world could see."
"I'm looking forward to seeing some justice, especially right there," she opined. "And frankly, I'd like to see justice when it comes to our elections. Our rigged elections, dating back at least to 2020, possibly earlier, and all of the shenanigans in our elections across the country, we need to see justice for that."
Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) bemoaned Thursday that Republicans "will never catch up" with confirmation hearings for President Donald Trump's executive branch nominees due to "unprecedented obstruction" by the Democrats.
"They are still in full resistance mode," Cornyn said on Newsmax of his Democratic colleagues, "and they have yet to accept the outcome of last November's election."
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) argued that Democrats have blocked the votes because “historically bad nominees deserved historic levels of scrutiny.” The Associated Press reported.
On Thursday's "American Agenda," Cornyn claimed, "we're at the point now where there's well over 160 confirmations to be held on the floor, and Democrats are forcing us to burn the clock out on each of them. We'll never catch up on President Trump's administration when it comes to confirmations unless we can change the rules and expedite the confirmations of these nominees."
"And it's also dangerous because many of these folks are U.S. ambassador nominees who will serve in other parts of the world and represent the United States," Cornyn said. "The problem is, we will never catch up if we have to continue dealing with this unprecedented obstruction."
The AP noted, "Democrats have blocked more nominees than usual this year, denying any quick unanimous consent votes and forcing roll calls on each one, a lengthy process that takes several days per nominee and allows for debate time. It’s the first time in recent history that the minority party hasn’t allowed at least some quick confirmations."
Cornyn told Newsmax that Senate Republicans are looking at changing the rules in order to get some nominations through.
"Unless this ends, we're going to have to change the way we do business here because the status quo is completely unacceptable."
Hedge fund founder Spencer Hakimian, a frequent critic of the Trump administration, posted a lengthy rant to X on Thursday, breaking down how President Donald Trump's tariffs are coming down on businesses.
"A real life example of how braindead our tariff policies are," wrote Hakimian. "I have a friend who works in the gemstone business. The specific type of gemstone he buys & sells *only* comes from Sri Lanka — which got hit with a 30% tariff rate. He works in a building on 47th Street in New York. If he requests a parcel of gemstones to look through, pick out the ones he wants, and return the rest, he must nonetheless pay a 30% tariff on the value of the entire parcel. Even if he only buys 1-2 stones out of the 100 piece parcel."
Despite all of that, Hakimian noted, "The building *next door* to him, has a 'Free Trade Zone' designation. Which means that his competitor is allowed to order the entire parcel, not pay any tariff, and then simply pay the tariff on his final purchase. My friend? Got told to kick sand and deal with it by U.S. Customs. And now, his business is suffering tremendously, simply because he’s working out of the wrong building.
"2nd graders making mock lemonade stands are more sophisticated than the current U.S. government," concluded Hakimian.
Trump has dramatically increased tariffs since taking office, using them as threats and negotiating tools to demand trade deals with various countries. This week, he announced yet another extension of the deadline for new tariffs on Mexico to allow more time for trade talks.
The president's ability to unilaterally declare tariffs is currently being litigated in federal court, where a panel of appellate judges appeared skeptical he even has that authority under economic emergency law.
A National Transportation Safety Board hearing over the deadly Washington, D.C. plane crash has uncovered startling revelations in the past two days, but one supervisor at the Federal Aviation Administration was reprimanded during a discussion and required to move his seat to distance himself from an employee.
NTSB chair Jennifer Homedy said the FAA supervisor "elbowed an employee midsentence during the AA 5342 hearing today, and the employee stopped speaking," Reuters transportation reporter David Shepardson posted Thursday on X.
The implication was that he was possibly being silenced, and the NTSB said that they would change the seating arrangement when they returned from a break.
"I'm not going to put up with that," said Homedy.
Speaking to MSNBC on Thursday after the incident, Tom Costello described Homedy saying, "No, no, no, not in my hearing. This is a hearing to find the facts."
He said that "the NTSB chair has been going after the FAA, saying that the FAA failed to adhere to 15,000 close call warnings at Reagan National Airport between planes and choppers, failed to act, failed to move the helicopter route so that there would not be a disaster. Failed to listen to controllers who warned of a possible disaster. And she says the FAA has been dragging its feet and not cooperating in this investigation."
Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones claimed to have "sources" within President Donald Trump's administration that were orchestrating a retroactive impeachment of former President Barack Obama.
During his Thursday program, Jones encouraged his audience to urge the Trump administration to move forward with prosecutions as retaliation for the probe into Russia's election interference in 2016.
"They're the real predators, and it's time politically, non-violently, to cut their heads off and to just do it," Jones said of Democrats. "And I mean that, again, metaphysically, is an archetype. They started the fight. Now we're going to finish it."
"I'm not saying 100%, but from my Justice Department sources at the very top, right below the very top, and from everything else and how scared the Democrats are acting, they have all the proof, they're releasing the proof, and they have every intention," he continued. "They're going to indict Brennan, Clapper, Comey, his daughter, Hillary, all of them."
"And they're getting ready to try impeachment on Obama retroactively to strip him of presidential immunity. And that's going on."
The U.S. Constitution states that "[t]he President, Vice President and all Civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment ... and Conviction."
However, it's not clear that Congress has the authority to impeach former presidents.
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard suggested that some Democrats were guilty of crimes because they had stopped using the X social media platform.
During a Thursday interview on The Blaze, host Glenn Beck noted that former Secretary of State John Kerry had made his X account private, and Democratic attorney Marc Elias had also stopped using the platform.
"Are you sensing they feel the walls are closing in?" Beck asked Gabbard.
"In my view, that's the only way that I can read this situation," the Trump administration official replied. "Those who are truly innocent would not be taking those kinds of actions."
"And once again, this is why it's so important to declassify this information, to get the truth out," Gabbard added, "because it's something that for anyone who is mildly objective is irrefutable and undeniable and can be used and is currently being reviewed by the Department of Justice to bring about accountability for those involved."
Elias later responded to Gabbard on the Bluesky social media network.
"Just another day where the Director of National Intelligence opines that I must be guilty of something for not posting on X," the attorney wrote. "This is not normal. This is what it looks like when the Trump administration is targeting their political opponents."
Marc Elias stopped posting on X, John Kerry privated his account, & Peter Strzok deleted his X history. Is the Deep State panicking? @TulsiGabbard: “That’s the only way that I can read this situation. Those who are truly innocent would not be taking those kinds of actions.” pic.twitter.com/Z5NM2UeIUA — Glenn Beck (@glennbeck) July 31, 2025
Just another day where the Director of National Intelligence opines that I must be guilty of something for not posting on X.This is not normal. This is what it looks like when the Trump administration is targeting their political opponents.
Reacting to comments made by Donald Trump about Jeffrey Epstein victim Virginia Giuffre, former U.S. Attorney Barbara McQuade claimed it was legitimate to demand the president expand even more upon his relationship with the convicted child rapist.
Appearing on MSNBC with host Anna Cabrera, McQuade focused on Trump's explanation that he had a falling out with Epstein over the recruitment of Giuffre from Mar-a-Lago.
As the Epstein saga drags on, with the White House and DOJ under fire, Giuffre has become the latest focal point after Trump's comments about her, along with a claim in the past where he stated, "Jeffrey ... likes women on the younger side... no doubt about it." The comments deserve close scrutiny, McQuade said.
"I think it's very troubling the way President Trump has dealt with the victims and survivors in this case," she began. "The mere fact that he will not say and foreclose completely the idea of a pardon for [Epstein partner in crime] Ghislaine Maxwell is revictimizing all of those victims and now there's this additional information."
"And as a matter of law, legally, I don't suppose he has any obligation to answer any of these questions," she suggested. "But, politically, I think that it is a fair question to ask. What on earth was he thinking if he knew that Jeffrey Epstein liked young women and was stealing some of them, including Virginia Giuffre? What did he think was going on? What did he think was happening with him?"
"So I think it's an absolutely fair question and it's about time someone advocated for the victims," she added. "In this case, too much concern has been made about Donald Trump's role, about Jeffrey Epstein's role, about whether Ghislaine Maxwell is a victim."
"My gosh, no," the attorney exclaimed. "Let's talk about the real victims and survivors here. And I think that [the Giuffre] family does deserve answers."
