Just six days after Jeffrey Epstein’s 2019 death at the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) in New York, a Bureau of Prisons “After-Actions team” swept the jail and shredded “huge amounts of paperwork,” recruiting the help of at least two inmates to dispose of the files in a dumpster, a newly unearthed FBI report suggests.
Flagged by famed Epstein reporter Julie K. Brown, the FBI report is a crisis intake form, in which an FBI official documented claims made by a federal corrections officer, who contacted the agency via phone to report misconduct. The correctional officer’s name is redacted in the report, which is dated Aug. 16, 2019, just six days after Epstein was found dead in his cell, with his death controversially ruled a suicide.
“[Redacted] has never seen this amount of bags of shredded documents coming out to be put in the dumpster at the rear gate of the MCC,” the report reads, drafted by an FBI official whose name was also redacted. “Last week Epstein hung himself, and there is an ongoing investigation. There was a [Bureau of Prisons] After-Actions team that come, and they are supposed to review what happened.”
According to the correctional officer, at least one inmate was recruited to help with the disposal of documents, tasked with helping move “bags of shredded documents into the dumpster.” The inmate’s name was also redacted in the report.
“[Redacted] was bringing back bags of shredded papers, around 4 or 5 bags, and caller brought them into the gate to throw into the dumpster. [Redacted] told caller that the after-action team is shredding huge amounts of paperwork,” the report reads.
“Caller found it suspicious that an after-action team charged with investigating would be shredding huge amounts of paperwork with all of the officials from the [assistant inspector general], FBI and [BOP] in the building in the middle of an investigation. Those giving instructions to [redacted] said, ‘Make sure you get that box too.’”
The BOP is a subdivision of the Justice Department, which at the time would have been a part of the first Trump administration.
The Trump DOJ was reported to have directed New York Police Department investigators in 2019 to “stand down” in their criminal probe into Epstein five days after his death. The Trump DOJ also asked the New Mexico Department of Justice to halt its own investigation into Epstein’s infamous Zorro Ranch property, which is alleged to be the burial site of “two foreign girls,” according to a recently unearthed FBI tip.
Donald Trump's offhand remarks during a Monday press availability about Rep. Neal Dunn (R-FL)—casually stating the lawmaker had received a "terminal" diagnosis and would be "dead by June"—have revived scrutiny of the president's own guarded approach to his health.
The Guardian's Victoria Bekiempis noted Saturday that Trump has consistently boasted about his physical and mental vitality while publicly mocking others' physical conditions, all while maintaining what observers describe as suspicious opacity about his own medical status.
When the White House was confronted about the appropriateness of Trump's blunt comments about Dunn's prognosis, officials deflected—and grew visibly irritated when pressed about a visible rash on the president's neck.
The response was notably evasive. White House officials bristled at questions about whether such comments were appropriate and refused to adequately address inquiries about the rash. Weeks earlier, the White House had dismissed Guardian questions about Trump's skincare regimen and sun protection as "false and slanderous allegations."
"President Trump's sharpness, unmatched energy, and historic accessibility stand in stark contrast to what we saw during the past four years," White House spokesperson Olivia Wales shot back, pivoting to attack the news media and the previous administration.
Wales claimed that "unlike the Biden White House, President Trump and his entire team have been fully open and transparent about the President's health, which remains exceptional."
On the rash itself, the White House pointed to a statement from Sean Barbabella, the White House doctor, claiming Trump "is using a very common cream on the right side of his neck, which is a preventative skin treatment, prescribed by the White House doctor" for one week, with redness expected to fade within several more days.
The defensive response underscores a broader pattern: Trump demanding transparency from political opponents while resisting the same scrutiny for himself.
President Donald Trump’s influential MAGA ally Mike Davis is facing new scrutiny after allegedly threatening to stop a Justice Department official during negotiations over a major tech merger, according to a Wall Street Journal investigation.
Gail Slater, then head of the DOJ’s antitrust division, was reviewing Hewlett-Packard Enterprise’s $14 billion bid to acquire rival Juniper Networks when Davis – serving as outside counsel for HPE – reportedly warned her, “If you don’t approve this settlement, I will destroy you. I will destroy your job at the DOJ,” according to sworn testimony from her former deputy, Roger Alford, reviewed by the Journal.
Slater later told colleagues the call from Davis – who had not only been her friend for years but also recommended her to Trump for the top job – had left her shaken.
“The fallout was swift,” the Journal reported Friday. “Within months, two of Slater’s deputies – including Alford – were pushed out of the Justice Department. By February, Slater was gone, too. A senior White House official said Davis played a role in her ouster.”
Davis denied making any threats. The MAGA lawyer called the allegation “utter bull” in an interview published Friday by the Journal and insisted personnel changes stemmed from what he described as “bogus” corruption claims against him.
But a Journal investigation found that Davis “pushed antitrust officials at the Justice Department to approve his deals – and he went over their heads when they wouldn’t comply.”
“Davis, despite having little experience practicing antitrust law, is one of the most visible practitioners of a change playing out across the division,” the Journal reported Friday.
HPE ultimately pursued settlement talks after the DOJ moved to block the deal, arguing the merger would reduce competition in corporate wireless networking.
WASHINGTON — Democrats have continued to push back on the SAVE Act while Republicans were pushing for what President Donald Trump has called the number one GOP priority, and now the Senate plans to continue debating the controversial bill all weekend.
If passed into law, the Republican-backed legislation would require U.S. citizens to provide voter ID at the ballot box, and mail-in votes would be massively hindered. But some lawmakers have expressed concern that this could ultimately backfire on Republicans, especially ahead of the midterms and 2028 presidential election.
Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) told Raw Story in an exclusive interview that the SAVE Act would greatly impact seniors and disenfranchise them — and that the legislation wasn't about making sure citizens can vote, but instead ensuring that Trump can have federal control of upcoming elections.
"Let's say you're like a senior and you don't have a passport anymore, you don't travel anymore. Maybe you never had a passport, and you can't find your birth certificate. What do you do?" Kelly said.
"I think they're OK with people not voting anymore," Kelly said. "And you can go through a long list of, I mean, we all have to re-register. We all have to get these, you know, these documents. And what if somebody doesn't want a passport? They don't, they don't travel, or they can't afford to pay for the passport. What happens to them? They get disenfranchised."
Kelly said people don't always have access to their birth certificate, creating another layer of problems for voters if the legislation passes.
"The hospital I was born in, with my birth certificate, mine comes from the hospital. That place is closed," Kelly said. "What would I do if I didn't have a passport?
"Let's say I wasn't, you know, a U.S. senator, and I'm like, OK, what do I do? Who do I contact? So they're trying to make this really, really hard for people to vote," Kelly said. "And then, you know, I think [Sen. Eric] Schmidt is going to add this amendment to try to eliminate vote by mail — 80 percent of Arizonans vote by mail. In some states, 100 percent of people vote by mail; that's the only option. And it is equally popular in Arizona with Republicans. I think we are, we're trying to save them from themselves, because this will disenfranchise possibly millions of people."
The push for the GOP legislation comes as Trump has federal authorities investigate the 2020 election results in Maricopa County, Arizona, and Fulton County, Georgia.
"I think the president just can't accept that he lost an election despite having won two for president, and he still can't accept it," Kelly said. "It's a combination of that and I think it's, he wants to try to get control over the voting infrastructure, leading up to the 2026 and 2028 elections. I think that's what that's about."
"When you have 2,000 counties and 2,000 plus county recorders, it's really hard for somebody to steal an election," Kelly said. "So when you have one entity, it gets much easier to try to influence the outcome of an election.
Trump has even complained that GOP lawmakers could find it hard to win the midterms without this legislation.
"He said he wants Republicans to control the elections in 15 states," Kelly said. "I mean, that's what he said after nationalizing the elections. Like a couple of sentences later, this is months ago now, he says, 'Yeah, I want Republicans in charge of the elections in 15 states' is what he said. What states? I imagine mine is one of them. Georgia is probably one of them, probably, you know, the ones that have those battleground states for presidential elections, probably somebody should ask him, which 15 states are you talking about?
But Democrats haven't given up.
"This bill is a big deal," Kelly said. "I mean, we passed the Voting Rights legislation in the 1960s. And now it's gonna be up to us to protect us."
The decision will rest with senators.
"I think we're gonna, we're going to do our best, you know, to save voting rights to the American people," Kelly said. "This is not about voter ID. They throw around this polling data that voter ID has 80% approval. Yeah, that's voter ID like we have in Arizona. That's not what this is."
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) told Raw Story that Republicans weren't ready to give up on passing the SAVE Act despite mounting criticism from Democrats.
"We don't want to kill the bill," Johnson said. "This is how it's really supposed to work, OK, where if you had Democrats who are constructive, that'd be fine, but they're not. They want to kill the bill, OK, it's existential to them. So we've got Republicans, you know, we've got a broad spectrum. There are people who have issues with some of the reasonable restrictions on mail-in ballots. So how can we make them reasonable for them? So let's use this process to hone this piece of legislation so that at least we'll have Republican support."
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) told Raw Story that despite Republican maneuvers to try to "fill the tree," a procedure where the Senate majority leader uses their role to "freeze" or control the amendment process, Democrats still were not convinced, and that they had another plan if that happened.
"Democrats feel strongly that it's an effort to disenfranchise eligible registered voters," Kaine said.
"The tree might get filled, but we can bring up privileged resolutions even if they fill the tree, as long as you're not in post, called up in the middle of anything," Kaine added.
Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-WY), who co-sponsored the bill, told Raw Story she stands by the legislation.
"And that is something I've thought about as we've teed up the Save Act, but I am a co-sponsor, and it's important. I believe that everybody who votes be a citizen and be able to prove it," Lummis said. "That's pretty simple. Now, if we get in the weeds and start telling every state what to do, then I get uncomfortable."
Lummis said it's unclear what could happen over the next 10 days, as Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) was expected to potentially delay its recess, according to reports.
"I think we're all a little curious," Lummis added.
CBS News is shutting down its flagship radio network – once home to legendary newsman Edward R. Murrow – as part of its ongoing downsizing operation since the network was taken over by a billionaire ally of President Donald Trump.
Editor-in-chief and known MAGA ally Bari Weiss and president Tom Cibrowski announced Friday morning the network would be laying off dozens of employees, about 6 percent of its workforce, and shutting down CBS Radio, which provides news programming to about 700 affiliated stations around the country. The changes are effective May 22, reported the Hollywood Reporter.
“While this was a necessary decision, it was not an easy one,” Weiss and Cibrowski wrote to CBS Radio staff. “A shift in radio station programming strategies, coupled with challenging economic realities, has made it impossible to continue the service. We are sharing this announcement now to fulfill our commitments to our radio partners and affiliates, which require advance notice of the service’s conclusion.”
The radio network launched in 1928 and its World News Roundup is the longest-running news broadcast in the U.S. It hit the chopping block in the second round of cuts since Trump ally David Ellison took control of parent company last summer, and these latest layoffs reflect the decision making of Weiss, whom he personally installed to lead that division despite having no background in TV news.
"It’s no secret that the news business is changing radically, and that we need to change along with it." Weiss and Cibrowski wrote to employees. "New audiences are burgeoning in new places, and we are pressing forward with ambitious plans to grow and invest so that we can be there for them. That means some parts of our newsroom must get smaller to make room for the things we must build to remain competitive."
"But these are very hard choices and today is a difficult day," they added.
Some of the network's biggest stars, including Anderson Cooper, have left CBS News since Weiss took charge in protest of the MAGA-friendly direction she's leading the network, especially its flagship "60 Minutes" program and CBS "Evening News," which has seen its viewership fall below 4 million.
Chuck Norris, the martial arts champion and conservative actor, has died at the age of 86.
The actor's death was announced on Friday on his Instagram profile.
"It is with heavy hearts that our family shares the sudden passing of our beloved Chuck Norris yesterday morning," a statement said. "While we would like to keep the circumstances private, please know that he was surrounded by his family and was at peace."
"To the world, he was a martial artist, actor, and a symbol of strength. To us, he was a devoted husband, a loving father and grandfather, an incredible brother, and the heart of our family," the family's statement continued. "While our hearts are broken, we are deeply grateful for the life he lived and for the unforgettable moments we were blessed to share with him. The love and support he received from fans around the world meant so much to him, and our family is truly thankful for it. To him, you were not just fans, you were his friends."
Norris appeared alongside Bruce Lee in the 1972 film "The Way of the Dragon." As an actor, he was best known for his action films in the 1970s and 1980s. Later in his career, he starred in the CBS series "Walker, Texas Ranger."
Norris leveraged his celebrity status to become a prominent advocate for conservative and Christian causes throughout his career.
The actor was a vocal supporter of Republican candidates and conservative political movements, frequently endorsing GOP contenders and appearing at conservative events and rallies. He actively promoted Christian values through various platforms, including co-founding the martial arts-based youth program "Kickstart Kids," which emphasizes discipline, Christian principles, and leadership development in schools nationwide.
Norris also wrote extensively about his Christian faith and conservative worldview, authoring books that blended his personal philosophy with religious teachings and conservative political commentary. He was a consistent critic of what he viewed as secular progressivism, and he used his media platform to champion traditional family values, religious freedom, and constitutional conservatism.
CNN's Harry Enten zeroed in on a Democratic senator who will "no doubt" face a primary challenge, and history suggests he will likely lose.
Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) has seen a stunning reversal in his support from his own party's voters since he was first elected to the U.S. Senate in 2023, and Enten told "CNN News Central" that he has never seen an elected official lose backing so dramatically.
"I would just saythat John Fetterman is doing aswell with Pennsylvania Democratsas the New York Giants are asliked in the state of Pennsylvania, the commonwealthof Pennsylvania," Enten said. "I mean, justlook at this: Among Pennsylvania Democrats and that approval of Fetterman, back in 2023, he was a Democrat, liberal darling. He was at plus-68 points. Look athow low he has fallen, down to minus-40 points. He's down therewith the Titanic among Democratsin the commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and, you know, put acomparison point on it."
"You know,we always talk about how [Senate Minority Leader] Chuck Schumer is not well liked by theDemocratic base nationwide," Enten added. "Chuck Schumer has a netpopularity rating of about minus-two points. He is 38 points morepopular than John Fetterman iswith Pennsylvania Democrats, andI was also looking at Kyrsten Sinema, who, of course, ended upleaving the Democratic Party in Arizona. She was considerablymore popular just before sheshifted over than John Fettermanis, at minus-40 points."
Anchor John Berman marveled at Fetterman's drop. "This is 108-point swing," he said, and asked Enten what bearing that might have on his fortunes when he faces re-election in two years.
"Wait aminute, 108-point swing, younever see anything like that," Enten said. "But my goodness gracious. Imean, just take a look here, okay, 2000s senators on party netratings about when they lost aprimary. Bob Smith plus-15, Arlen Specter plus-13 – of course, heswitched parties to the Democrats.It didn't work for him as aRepublican. Plus-six Joe Lieberman, Dick Lugar was atzero points. Lisa Murkowski wasat minus-15 points. All of these wereconsiderably more popular than John Fetterman is right now at minus-40 points. He is below thelowest, the ones who actuallygot beat in a primary."
Murkowski lost Alaska's Republican primary in 2010 but was re-elected as a write-in candidate, and she continues to serve in the Senate.
"There isno historical analog to this," Enten said. "That is how unpopular John Fetterman is with Pennsylvania Democrats. There is basically nodoubt in my mind that Fettermandecides to run for re-election asa Democrat, he will face aprimary challenge and will be avery competitive one."
Democratic Party representatives are calling out Donald Trump and his administration for their flippant style of dealing with the war in Iran.
Trump's admin approved strikes on the Middle Eastern country as part of a joint operation with Israel on February 28. Since then, the president has threatened further strikes and carried out such actions, but he and his cabinet have offered a multitude of different excuses for waging the war.
These excuses have come to a head in Congress, with Sens. Christopher Coons (D-DE) and Tim Kaine (D-VA) calling out Trump for the rhetoric around the war. Coons, speaking with Raw Story Friday, blasted Trump for distancing the US from NATO — especially given the last time the world organization acted on an Article 5 order.
Article 5 states that if a NATO Ally sustains an armed attack, every other member of the Alliance will consider this as an armed attack against all members, and will take the actions it deems necessary to assist the attacked Ally.
Coons ridiculed Trump for claiming, "NATO has never stood with us and that we can't count on them."
"Trump repeated the obscenity yesterday," he said, before explaining how the intergovernmental organization had sprung to action in favor of the US. He said, "The only time NATO has actually invoked Article 5 and deployed to war was in defense of us in Afghanistan. A third of the combat deaths [in Afghanistan] were NATO troops.
"I led a bipartisan delegation to Denmark during the same week Trump gave that speech about how NATO had never stood by us, and Senator Tillis and I laid a memorial wreath at the site that remembers the 52 names of those who died in combat in Afghanistan and Iraq.
"But the president keeps disrespecting our NATO allies this way, which leads to the unsurprising result that when he didn't consult them before launching a war of choice with Iran, they didn't feel willing to but in to open the Strait of Hormuz."
Kaine added, "The problem with his argument is, he's been non-stop screwing around with NATO allies during his whole time in office. Imposing tariffs on them, threatening to invade a NATO ally, and you know, it is unilateral relations 101 that after you've kicked people around when you suddenly ask people to help when you've kicked them around, they're not going to be that interested.
"So he should stop kicking them around, and then he might get more cooperation. If the president were full-throated in his support of Ukraine, that might be a more parallel argument, but the Europeans are looking and going, 'Well, wait a minute'. Biden was really supportive of Ukraine. What have you done about it? It's not an argument where the president is really standing on solid ground."
Jon Stewart got into an ugly — and very public — battle with Elon Musk as the two hurled insults at each other, and the comedian delivered a personal blow to finish it off.
The dispute began after Stewart aired a segment on "The Weekly Show" examining X's impact on democracy. He criticized the Tesla head's focus on undocumented voting, stating, "Musk has pushed this idea that undocumented, non-citizen voting is rampant, it is sowing the seeds of our destruction, and we cannot do it."
Stewart highlighted what he viewed as a fundamental contradiction in Musk's position. He said: "The irony of it all is [because of] this guy's platform, this guy's algorithm, which he is in charge of... he is a far more relevant actor in the warping of our democracy, through his money and his algorithm, than any measure of undocumented, non-citizen voting will ever be."
Stewart predicted Musk's defense, stating, "What his argument—and I think his people's argument—would be, is: Now that we're getting uncensored material, now that the First Amendment has primacy, people move to the right because they learn the truth."
Stewart countered, "The truth is that algorithm incentivizes the misinformation from the right, and he designs it."
A clearly angry Musk responded directly with an attack on Stewart's credibility. "Jon Stewart is an extremely skilled propagandist disguised as a truth-teller," he wrote.
"Not as good as you! Stop being so humble," Musk fired back late Thursday.
Stewart subsequently invited Musk to appear on his show to discuss their disagreements. However, a previous invitation went unfulfilled. Last year, Musk indicated he would appear on Comedy Central's "The Daily Show" if the interview aired "unedited," but the appearance never occurred. Stewart later revealed that Musk had "ghosted" him after reading a follow-up message.
That's when Stewart went personal.
"Judging from his most recent revelations of his baby mamas, I think everyone has been left on read at some point by that gentleman," he said on his podcast.
Musk has at least 14 children with four women.
Musk's X platform has faced widespread criticism for inadequately addressing misinformation. In 2024, researchers reported that false claims originating from Musk received approximately 2 billion views on the platform, according to the Center for Countering Digital Hate.
Earlier this week, Raw Story was interviewing Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) about President Donald Trump’s top priority, the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility, or SAVE, Act, but the Alabama gubernatorial candidate didn’t want to discuss the election bill on the Senate floor this week.
“It ain’t gonna pass,” Tuberville said before he changed the subject. “I’m ready to get rid of the Muslims.”
“Why’s that?” Raw Story pressed.
“It’s time for them to go home,” Tuberville said as he flashed a broad smile. “They're trying to tear our country down.”
That’s news to the four Muslims in the 119th Congress, a record high.
"We've always had these people who really should be considered white nationalists and Christian fundamentalist nationalists," Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) told Raw Story. "So it's not surprising that they want to ban a whole people because of their faith."
“It's ridiculous”
Omar says she isn’t expecting a change in tune anytime soon, though.
"It's not going to go anywhere, though," Omar said. “It's just sad that they have a base that feeds off of this kind of bigotry, this level of unconstitutionality.”
Other Muslims in Congress say their colleagues on the right need a history lesson.
"Muslims have been a part of this country since the inception of this country and even before the inception of this country," Rep. Andre Carson (D-IN) told Raw Story while slowly shaking his head.
The nine-term congressman says critics need to open their eyes.
"Muslims have been critical in our infrastructure. Go to any major hospital, you'll find a Muslim physician,” Carson said. “Go to any major courtroom, you'll find Muslim barristers and judges and law enforcement community keeping us safe, thwarting potential terrorist attacks that you'll never hear about.”
Carson, a senior member of the House Intelligence Committee, knows from experience.
“I was one of them. I worked in counterterrorism and counterintelligence for the Department of Homeland Security in Indiana,” Carson said. “I mean, it's ridiculous.”
Ridiculous or not, since Trump joined Israel in its war against Iran, Islamophobia appears to be en vogue in certain GOP circles.
While the new bill he dropped Tuesday aims at Muslim-majority countries, it doesn’t single out the religion by name, even as it would upend immigration as we know it.
The measure seeks to dismantle the current family-based immigration system — commonly referred to by critics as "chain migration" — established by the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act.
It would “prohibit the admission of aliens from certain countries where the United States cannot reliably verify the identities or backgrounds of individuals seeking entry,” according to the measure’s title.
"All immigration to the United States shall serve the economic, cultural, and security interests of the United States as determined by Congress,” reads a draft of Ogles’ measure.
"Are you serious about the Muslim ban?" Raw Story asked the two-term member of the far-right Freedom Caucus.
"Until they address the violence that's being preached in their mosques, we've got to take a hard look at this,” Ogles replied.
"We downloaded a brochure from a U.S. mosque and it lays out the case and justifies when violence is warranted in the local community. Show me a church that's preaching that. Show me a synagogue, a Hindu temple, Buddhist monks that are preaching that anywhere, much less in the U.S."
"Some would say the Christian nationalist movement, there's violence in there," Raw Story pressed. "What do you make of that?"
"Show me where. Where?" Ogles said before tying recent domestic security incidents to terrorism, even though authorities have stopped short of such an assessment. "Four terrorist attacks in three weeks. They weren't Hindu. They weren't Buddhist."
While the gunman in a recent mass shooting in Austin, Texas, was wearing an Iran flag T-shirt and a "Property of Allah" hoodie, he was an outlier, according to Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), who said Tuberville and Ogles are cherry picking cases.
"It's so interesting to hear them say that when most of the mass shootings at schools are white males,” Tlaib told Raw Story on the steps of the U.S. Capitol. "I watch these shootings constantly, and it's always a white male, and I never hear them talking about banning white males.”
The hate — or “othering” — Muslims regularly feel from American politicians isn’t just from the GOP, though.
“It's very bipartisan"
"The Islamophobia in our Congress on both sides of the aisle is very real. It's very bipartisan," Tlaib said. "And it's the same kind of fear-mongering that you see with immigrants — ‘They're here to do all these awful things. They're drug dealers, gangsters.' — and we all know that's not true."
Tlaib says she knows from personal experience.
In 2023, the four-term congresswoman was censured — with the help of 22 of her fellow Democrats — for “promoting false narratives regarding the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel and for calling for the destruction of the state of Israel,” according to the measure’s text.
But the progressive "Squad" member says she hasn't been intimidated. Just this week, Tlaib took to the House floor to encourage American Muslims as their holy month of Ramadan drew to a close with the Eid al-Fitr celebration on Thursday.
“To all the millions of Muslim Americans in our country right now,” Tlaib said on the House floor this week. “I want you to know that not everybody in this chamber sees you as less human. We know — majority of us in this chamber — know that you are worthy of life, liberty and justice. May this Eid bring us closer to a future grounded in peace, justice, dignity for all.”
While Tlaib was censured by this GOP-controlled Congress, an effort to censure and strip her fellow “Squad” member, Congresswoman Omar, of her committee assignments failed last fall.
That appears to have only emboldened the outspoken four-term Minnesota progressive.
“Are the attacks painful?" Raw Story asked.
"It is not. I don't give a s--- what these people think," Omar replied through a smile. "I ain't going nowhere."
WASHINGTON — House Republicans offered a mixed bag of bravado, deflection and creative accounting Thursday when asked about a potential $200 billion supplemental spending package to fund President Donald Trump's war with Iran, now in its 20th day with no end in sight.
The conflict, launched by the U.S. and Israel on Feb. 28, has spread across at least a dozen countries, closed the Strait of Hormuz and killed more than 2,300 people. Iran ratcheted up pressure further Thursday, attacking energy facilities in Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, threatening to send oil prices surging even more, and raising fresh fears about what the war will ultimately cost American taxpayers.
Freedom Caucus Chair Andy Harris (R-MD), typically among the loudest voices for fiscal restraint, simply smiled and said nothing when approached by Raw Story — a telling silence from a congressman who has built his brand on opposing government spending.
Budget Committee Chair Jodey Arrington (R-TX) wasn't worried about the price tag. He told Raw Story he has a drawer full of potential offsets ready to go.
"I've got $600 billion on the list in my drawers, in my desk, and there's probably three times that," Arrington said, citing GAO and CBO estimates of up to $500 billion a year in government fraud and $180 billion in improper payments. "That's eight weeks of gas and groceries for working people. Of course we have enough money to offset operating expenses."
Rep. Rob Wittman (R-VA), vice chair of the House Armed Services Committee, took the more cautious approach, declining to weigh in until something formal arrives from the White House.
"Nothing's here yet, so I won't comment until I see something," he told Raw Story.
Rep. Derrick Van Orden (R-WI), a former Navy SEAL, threw fiscal concerns out the window entirely.
"The Iranian laws are responsible for killing thousands of American citizens, and everyone else's lives are priceless. You start putting a price tag on Americans, I don't have time for you," the Wisconsin Republican said. "This needs to end."
Van Orden said he's not worried the war could become protracted, and invoked his military résumé.
"I know what I'm doing. I'm the longest serving enlisted guy to ever get elected to Congress in the history of this place. And I've participated in more campaigns than I think anybody in this place, and I've written campaign plans, and I'm not worried about that at all."
Jeffrey Epstein’s lawyer and a co-executor of his estate, Darren Indyke, spoke behind closed doors to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on Thursday and rejected multiple claims that he was involved in the late financier's sex trafficking scheme. He claimed he was unaware of the late financier's crimes.
Politico obtained a copy of Indyke's prepared statement and revealed that the attorney said he did not have a social relationship with Epstein and that he was among several lawyers who consulted the billionaire.
“Let me be clear: I had no knowledge whatsoever of Jeffrey Epstein’s wrongdoings,” Indyke told congressional members, according to the written statement. “My complete lack of involvement in that misconduct is a matter of record: not a single woman has ever accused me of committing sexual abuse or witnessing sexual abuse, nor claimed at any time that she or anyone else reported to me any allegation of Mr. Epstein’s abuse.”
Indyke's testimony comes as the public and a growing number of lawmakers have pushed for the Department of Justice to hold people who were involved in Epstein's operation accountable.
“My primary role was to provide corporate, transactional and general legal services to Mr. Epstein and his companies, and I did so,” Indyke said in his prepared comment.
He told congressional investigators that he was appointed as a co-executor of Epstein's estate in 2019 under the U.S. Virgin Islands probate court. Indyke said he has cooperated with the DOJ and also helped create the Epstein Victims’ Compensation Program.
Indyke also denied any involvement in organizing "sham marriages" for women involved with Epstein, which was an allegation mentioned in a complaint filed by the government of the U.S. Virgin Islands.
“That I did not know what my client did in his private life may be difficult for some to believe, but it is true,” Indyke said.
The House Oversight Committee has held multiple private hearings over the Epstein files, including testimony from former Victoria’s Secret CEO Les Wexner and another co-executor of Epstein’s estate Richard Kahn. Attorney General Pam Bondi has been subpoenaed to testify and her deposition is scheduled for April 14, where she will be questioned on the DOJ's handling of the Epstein files and her compliance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act signed by President Donald Trump in November 2025.
A ex-federal prosecutor is warning that President Donald Trump is "highly likely" to use presidential pardons to protect himself and his allies from criminal charges once he leaves the White House.
Glenn Kirschner, founder of the Justice Matters podcast, told the The Daily Beast that Trump is terrified that multiple of his actions leave him open to being hammered by legal authorities as soon as he leaves the White House.
He added that Democrats and those who oppose Trump have to be ready for a fight to make sure he faces justice.
He cited former Attorney General Bill Barr's congressional testimony regarding the limits of presidential pardon power. According to Kirschner, "Even Bill Barr testified before Congress that if Donald Trump delivered a pardon to somebody who was covering up evidence of wrongdoing by Donald Trump — put another way, using the pardon to perhaps curry favor with or buy the silence of somebody who could implicate him — Bill Barr said that would be improper. That would be a crime. That would be an impermissible use of the pardon power."
Potential pardon recipients could include Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, who faces allegations she perjured herself during Senate Judiciary Committee testimony. The DHS denied these claims, stating: "Any claim that Secretary Noem committed perjury is categorically false."
Attorney General Pam Bondi could also receive clemency given her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein investigation. A DOJ official characterized those concerns as "a tired narrative."
Kirschner emphasized the constitutional stakes, stating, "What we have to do is take these things into court and fight them because it's the right and righteous thing to do. And if the courts — trial court, court of appeals, and the Supreme Court—all say no, a president can buy a co-conspirator's silence by delivering a presidential pardon, then we continue to move in the direction of the end of our republic. Because that is not what the pardon power ought to be able to do."
Trump previously criticized Biden's pardons handed out days before the end of his presidency, declaring that all of his predecessor's clemency decisions were "null, void, and of no further force or effect" because Biden used an autopen signature. Trump wrote on Truth Social, "Anyone receiving 'Pardons,' 'Commutations,' or any other Legal Document so signed, please be advised that said Document has been fully and completely terminated, and is of no Legal effect."
Constitutional experts dispute Trump's authority to do that. Stanford law professor Bernadette Meyler stated, "The Constitution doesn't even require that the pardon be written, so the idea that the signature is by autopen rather than by handwritten signature seems not relevant to the constitutionality because Article II just says that the President has the power to pardon."
White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson dismissed Kirschner's analysis, telling the Daily Beast, "Anything said on the Daily Beast podcast is equivalent to screaming into the void. No one listens to this Trump Derangement Syndrome therapy session."
