David Edwards

President Donald Trump threatened to take State Department paintings home during a mining roundtable Friday, breaking off mid-speech to size up the room's art and declare, "I'm taking it."

The event was held in the Benjamin Franklin State Dining Room at the State Department, where Secretary of State Marco Rubio hosted nearly 200 mining executives.

The room holds more than 5,000 pieces of American art and artifacts — gifts from private citizens — valued at over $90 million, according to the State Department.

Trump opened his remarks by touting the administration's mining investments, according to a White House transcript.

"I'm delighted to be here at the Department of State to announce some of the largest ever investments in American mining," Trump said.

The president seemed to drift off topic mid-speech as he noticed valuables in the room.

"It's a beautiful building, but — you know, I look at — the president's allowed to remove things from any building, and I'm liking the chandeliers," Trump said. "I really — I like those Corinthian columns, but I don't know. Cutting them out would be not good."

"Those are beautiful columns, but I'm allowed to do it," he added. "Every once in a while, I'll come in here and grab a painting and put it at the Oval Office. Right? But not too much."

Later in the event, Rubio tried to thank the president, and accidentally pointed him toward a target.

"Thank you for coming to the State Department. We like this room a lot too, and obviously don't look back. There's a painting up here. Just don't — uh-oh," Rubio said.

"I like that. That's a good one. I'm taking it with me," Trump replied.

"I shouldn't have said anything," Rubio said.

The White House said Trump announced more than $2 billion in mining investments and $180 million in mining school grants at the event.

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito declared he will serve another term and refused to rule out a "high correlation" between his rulings and what President Donald Trump wants.

Alito, 76, made the remarks in a rare summertime interview with the Wall Street Journal at his Washington chambers, a month after an erroneous NPR report set off a wave of speculation that he was stepping down.

The interview answered two questions that had shadowed the justice's 20th full term: Would he retire while Trump and a Republican Senate could lock in a younger replacement? And was he simply voting the way Trump wanted?

"Obviously I'm here for another term," Alito said.

On the partisanship charge, he was equally blunt. "I vote in every case the way I think the case should be decided," Alito told the Journal.

"If that means a high correlation with what Trump wants, fine. If it means zero correlation with what Trump wants, fine as well," he said. "I think it's wrong, it's absolutely wrong, to say, 'Well, you know what? I'm going to decide some cases this way and some cases the other way so that people will say, "Well, he's objective."' There have been people who've recommended to me that I do that. I'm not going to do that."

According to SCOTUSblog, Alito dissented in all three major cases the administration lost in the term just ended — on tariffs, birthright citizenship, and the president's attempt to fire a Federal Reserve governor.

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote all three majority opinions, joined each time by the court's three liberal justices.

Justice Neil Gorsuch, in the tariffs case, called out Alito and two colleagues for inconsistency, noting they had voted against a Democratic president's use of the same sweeping executive authority they now defended for Trump, according to SCOTUSblog.

The retirement speculation began June 30, when NPR legal affairs correspondent Nina Totenberg misheard an announcement by Chief Justice John Roberts about staff retirements and briefly published a story declaring Alito was leaving the bench. The report was retracted within minutes.

Calls for Alito to step aside have grown louder as Trump enters the final stretch of his term. Justice Stephen Breyer retired in 2022 under intense pressure from the left, clearing the way for a Democratic appointment. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg did not, a decision many liberals consider a historic miscalculation that helped produce the current conservative supermajority.

"It's not pleasant, in the sense that it's a reminder of mortality," Alito told the Journal. "It's like, what are those vultures doing up there? They are flying around. But it goes with life tenure."

He also dismissed the idea that he and a hypothetical younger replacement would be interchangeable.

"Yeah, I think some of those who call for the retirement of judges think that way," Alito said. He added that cable news panels of "20-somethings, 30-somethings, particularly if they're not lawyers," have no appreciation of what the court actually does.

On the law itself, Alito pushed back against critics who say his brand of originalism — reading the Constitution as it was understood when adopted — is just conservatism in disguise.

"You can take an important principle that is in the Constitution, like equal treatment," he said, "and if you view it at a very high level of generality, you can say that the Constitution requires equal treatment in a context that never occurred to, or never could have occurred to, those who adopted the provision."

With the 2026 midterms approaching and Senate control uncertain, the window for a Republican-confirmed replacement could close as soon as November.

A GOP group allied with Rep. Max Miller (R-OH) blamed security concerns on Friday after a rally featuring Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) was suddenly canceled amid the Ohio Republican's widening abuse scandal.

Shannon Burns, chair of the Strongsville GOP and a Miller ally, announced the cancellation of the Brunswick, Ohio, event Monday morning, according to NBC News.

The cancellation comes as Miller faces mounting domestic abuse allegations — which he denies — from his ex-wife and growing calls from fellow Republicans to drop out of his re-election race.

"I am angry and deeply disappointed to announce that we must cancel Monday's SAVE America Act Rally with Congressman Max Miller and Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna," Burns said. "

After consultation with law enforcement and the venue, the number and nature of the threats received have made the event untenable. We cannot responsibly expose our guests, attendees, volunteers, venue staff, or law enforcement officers to an unacceptable safety risk."

That same week, Miller formally filed a joint fundraising committee with Luna, Roger Sollenberger reported on X.

The filing drew attention because Luna has taken a different stance toward Rep. Cory Mills (R-FL), another Florida Republican facing his own domestic violence allegations.

"I do not know Max to be a violent person and have only ever found him to be incredibly kind and honorable," Luna said in a text message to Politico.

When it came to Mills, Luna argued that he "needs to not be seeking reelection" — and this week endorsed a primary challenger against him.

Miller's ex-wife, Emily Moreno, has accused him of throwing hot water on her, slamming her against a wall, and holding a gun to her head.

Moreno also told police their 2-year-old daughter said, "Daddy kill you," law enforcement records show.

The Ohio Republican has not faced charges linked to the allegations.

Moreno's father, Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-OH), broke with his former son-in-law last weekend, telling NBC News he tried to keep the matter private but felt he had no choice.

"He is a danger to my daughter, and I hold my breath every minute he has custody of my granddaughter," the senator said.

Monday was also the last day Ohio Republicans could replace Miller on the ballot by selecting a substitute through county party chairs, according to Newsweek.

Internal polling showed Miller trailing his Democratic opponent by 5 percentage points, according to NOTUS.

A federal appeals court tore apart the Trump administration's legal defense of the White House ballroom, declaring its claim that no court could stop the demolition "flouts our constitutional order."

In a 2-1 ruling Friday, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a preliminary injunction blocking above-ground construction of President Donald Trump's $400 million project — the third court to halt it.

The court stayed its ruling for 14 days to allow the Trump administration to seek emergency review from the U.S. Supreme Court.

"We are aware of no instance in American history in which a President unilaterally and using privately collected funds demolished substantial portions of the White House that Congress authorized to be built and American taxpayers paid for," the majority wrote in the ruling. "Until now."

At oral argument in June, Justice Department attorney Yaakov Roth told the judges flatly that even if the administration were breaking the law, no court had the power to stop it — not the district court, not the Circuit, not the Supreme Court.

"On these theories, I think that's right," Roth said.

"The bold assertion that the Executive can act with utter lawlessness, destroying treasured national landmarks and harming the interests of individuals, and that no court can stop it flouts our constitutional order," the ruling said.

Trump had the entire East Wing demolished in just three days in October 2025 — without congressional approval — to make way for the 90,000-square-foot ballroom. The government's own environmental assessment found the project would have "permanent adverse impacts" on the White House grounds.

The court also rejected the administration's claim to ownership of the building itself.

"Each President is a temporary tenant, not the owner, of the White House and its Executive Residence," the majority wrote.

The government had also argued the ballroom would be hidden from public view by trees. The district court — and the appeals court — called that claim "[p]ure fiction," pointing to the government's own renderings showing the structure clearly visible from Lafayette Square and the steps of the U.S. Capitol.

When the government tried to claim a routine maintenance statute quietly gave the president unlimited construction authority, the court was equally dismissive.

"Congress does not 'hide elephants in mouseholes,'" the majority said, using a phrase from a prior Supreme Court ruling.

Whether to build the ballroom, the court concluded, is "[n]ot a matter for Executive self-help" — meaning Congress, not the president, must authorize it.

Circuit Judge Neomi Rao, a Trump appointee, dissented, calling the injunction a "blatant abuse of discretion" and arguing the project fell within the president's authority to improve the Executive Residence.

The court's ruling is on hold for 14 days, giving the Trump administration a window to ask the Supreme Court to intervene.

Nearly a decade of President Donald Trump's attacks on journalist Don Lemon have recoiled on Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, as Lemon's lawyers moved to throw out his criminal case.

Lemon was charged in January with two felony civil rights counts after he livestreamed an anti-Immigration and Customs Enforcement protest inside a St. Paul, Minnesota church. He has pleaded not guilty, according to CNN.

The motion, filed Friday in federal court in Minnesota, argues the prosecution was retaliation for journalism — not a legitimate law enforcement action. The case was personally managed by then-Attorney General Pam Bondi before Trump fired her in April. It now belongs to Blanche.

"The record could not be more clear that Mr. Lemon has been a persistent target of President Trump's ire before the events in Minnesota," Lemon's lawyers wrote in the motion, "and that the Justice Department acted on the President's animus by filing unprecedented charges against a journalist for doing his job."

Trump's attacks on Lemon in the filing span nine years. He first called Lemon "the dumbest man on television" in a 2017 post.

"WHAT TOOK THEM SO LONG?" Trump asked on Truth Social after CNN fired Lemon in 2023.

When Lemon flew to Minneapolis in January 2026 to cover Operation Metro Surge — the Trump administration's ICE crackdown that deployed more than 3,000 federal agents and left two people dead — the attacks took on new significance, the filing said.

The same day the government sought Lemon's arrest warrant, Trump singled him out at a White House press conference, the filing said.

"And they have to be abused by guys like Don Lemon, who's a, you know, loser, lightweight," Trump said.

That same day, then-Attorney General Pam Bondi publicly dismissed Lemon's press credentials, the filing noted.

"I don't care if you're a failed CNN journalist, you have no right to do that in this country," Bondi said.

Hours before the warrant was sought, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt had posted on X that Trump "will not tolerate the intimidation and harassment of Christians in their sacred places of worship."

Six minutes later, Harmeet Dhillon, the Justice Department's civil rights chief, replied with two words.

"ON IT!"

When Lemon's lawyers offered to arrange a voluntary surrender, the government instead tracked him to a Los Angeles hotel where he was covering the Grammy Awards and arrested him at midnight, according to the filing. He was held for 14 hours before seeing a judge.

"When life gives you lemons…" the White House posted on X to mark the occasion.

The motion also accuses the government's case agent of making false sworn statements — falsely claiming Lemon had been "chanting with agitators" inside the church, the filing said.

Bondi was fired April 2. Blanche — Trump's former personal defense lawyer — stepped in and inherited the case she had personally championed.

"The law has long recognized that bearing witness is not the same as taking part," Lemon's lawyers wrote in the filing.

"The government should not be permitted to use criminal prosecutions to chill journalism disfavored by the President," his lawyers wrote.

A Houston man stands accused of threatening to stab every employee in Gov. Greg Abbott's (R-TX) office over laws he said 'blocked' his access to anime, reports show.

Joseph Roy Ozment, 35, was charged with making a terroristic threat — a third-degree felony that carries up to 10 years in prison and a $10,000 fine — according to KXAN.

The Texas Department of Public Safety accused Ozment of calling the Governor's Constituent Communications line on July 25 and leaving a voicemail demanding officials repeal the laws, KXAN reported.

Investigators say the affidavit does not identify which anime Ozment was trying to watch or which website was involved.

"I'm a f—ing stab every godd— one of you b—-es," Ozment is accused of saying, according to KXAN. "Unlock my f—ing anime."

The message was forwarded to the DPS Executive Protection Bureau, which tracked the phone to Cypress, Texas through an emergency location ping, KXAN reported.

The employee who first reviewed the voicemail told investigators he was "in fear not only for his life but also for his coworkers' and the general public at the [office]," the affidavit said.

A DPS special agent wrote that the message was designed to put staff "in fear of serious injury" or to pressure "the executive branch of the state government to change legislation," the affidavit said.

Court records obtained by FOX 7 Austin show Ozment posted a $5,000 bond. He must undergo a mental health evaluation, is barred from possessing firearms, and must stay away from the Capitol Complex and the Governor's Office.

Texas has not banned anime, but Abbott has signed three laws since 2023 that restrict access to certain online content, KXAN reported.

House Bill 1181, a 2023 law requiring adult websites to verify the age of visitors, prompted Pornhub and other sites to block all Texas users rather than comply, the Statesman reported.

Abbott also signed the App Store Accountability Act in May 2025, which requires Apple and Google to verify users' ages before allowing app downloads, Reuters reported.

Ozment's voicemail complained that his Google account confirmed he was over 18 — pointing directly at that law, FOX 7 Austin reported.

A third law, Senate Bill 20, signed by Abbott in June 2025, made it a felony to possess obscene visual material depicting a minor — including cartoons and animations, FOX 7 Austin reported. Some anime falls within that definition.

"Safety and online privacy for Texas children remains a priority," Abbott's press secretary said in an August 2025 press release explaining the App Store Accountability Act. Abbott made no direct public comment on the laws' effects on adult users.

"The statement probably wouldn't have been alleged as a crime, but for the last sentence of what he said in the voicemail," Austin criminal defense attorney Sam Bassett, who is not affiliated with the case, told FOX 7 Austin. "Threatening an aggravated assault, and if taken seriously, it's certainly a serious situation for people on the governmental staff."

An Australian TMZ reporter confronted Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) outside a Senate hearing Thursday, challenging him to explain how punishing someone for using the Fifth Amendment could be constitutional.

The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee had just voted 8-5 along party lines to hold former top federal health official Dr. Anthony Fauci in contempt of Congress for invoking his Fifth Amendment right 111 times at a hearing last week. TMZ reporter Charlie Cotton caught Scott in the hallway immediately after.

"Now maybe I'm just, like, not in the know because I'm Australian," Cotton said to Scott, "but how can you hold someone in contempt and punish someone for using a constitutional right? Isn't it there to use as a right?"

Scott argued Fauci had no grounds to use it.

"He had a pardon, so he — he didn't have that right to do that once he had the pardon," the senator said.

"But didn't he have risk of prosecution because if he'd misspoke, or if he'd lied or something?" Cotton pressed.

"Yeah, if he lied," Scott admitted.

"So he was at risk?" Cotton pointed out.

"He didn't have the right," Scott insisted.

"But not from the hearing," Cotton said, "because the hearing — if he lied, you said that he could be held, you know, accountable for that."

"He could've just told the truth," Scott said. "That's all he had to do."

"Well, he felt like it was a witch hunt," Cotton pushed back, "and you guys would stop at nothing to catch him and send him to prison."

"That's not my intention," Scott said. "I just want to get information."

"It's Rand Paul's intention, though," Cotton pressed.

"No," Scott said. "It's for his actions."

As Cotton was asking his next question, the Republican senator quickly walked away.

"Yep. Okay then," the TMZ reporter said.

Former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani told Newsweek that invoking the Fifth was "the right legal move" — the pardon covered past conduct, but pleading the Fifth protected Fauci from perjury charges based on anything he said at the hearing.

As CEO of Columbia/HCA, Scott himself invoked the Fifth Amendment 75 times in a 2000 civil deposition while the company faced a federal investigation that led to a $1.7 billion settlement — at the time the largest Medicare fraud case in American history, Florida Phoenix reported.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) planned to hand-deliver the contempt referral to the Justice Department Thursday, bypassing a full Senate floor vote, CBS News reported.

Sen. Tim Sheehy (R-MT) turned on Rep. Max Miller (R-OH) Wednesday, calling him a "degenerate sociopath" who should step aside before his abuse scandal hands Democrats a House seat.

Miller, who faces domestic abuse allegations from two women, has refused to leave his reelection campaign in Ohio's 7th Congressional District.

Republicans have until Monday to replace him on the ballot — and Sheehy says time is running out. However, President Donald Trump has continued to stand behind his endorsement of Miller.

"What kind of person would treat their daughter this way?" Sheehy wrote on X, referring to an alleged incident where Miller held his daughter's favorite toy "hostage" for 48 hours. "This guy is clearly a degenerate sociopath."

"Staying in this race makes it far more likely we lose this seat and hand Democrats a majority to impeach President Trump," he added.

Ohio's 7th Congressional District was considered a safe Republican seat until polls began to shift when Miller's scandal caught fire.

Miller has held the northeast Ohio seat since 2023, and the district — which Trump carried by 13.5 points in 2024 — leans Republican. But The Hill reported that GOP strategists warn the allegations have made the seat nearly impossible to hold with Miller on the ballot, as the party clings to a four-seat House majority.

In interview after interview, the candidate has insisted that he will stay in the race.

"I'm not going anywhere," he told CNN Wednesday.

Sheehy is just the latest in a growing number of Senate Republicans who have joined him since Miller's former father-in-law, Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-OH), broke his silence Sunday and said Miller "should not serve in the House of Representatives."

"He should resign. He should quit," Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS) told Politico.

Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) said Miller "shouldn't be in office," Politico reported.

On Wednesday, Moreno revealed to CNN anchor Jake Tapper that Miller's ex-wife and daughter had fled the state due to safety concerns.

"I sent my daughter, granddaughter, and wife out of state to a secure place until such time as they feel safe," Moreno told CNN.

Days earlier, Moreno had described going to a police station to pick up his granddaughter, where he alleged Miller refused to hand the child her stuffed rabbit at the custody exchange.

"She has a little blue bunny that she sleeps with. Max would not hand over the little blue bunny. Literally held it hostage for 48 hours," Moreno said, according to the Washington Examiner.

"This is the level of total and complete depravity," Moreno added.

Miller denies all of the allegations against him and has asked the House Ethics Committee to investigate.

A federal judge tore apart Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche's legal case for seizing voter data Thursday, calling his reading of the law "strange and unharmonious."

U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss, an Obama appointee who once ran the Justice Department's own legal office, dismissed Blanche's lawsuit against the D.C. Board of Elections.

Blanche had sued the board after it refused to hand over unredacted voter registration records — including partial Social Security and driver's license numbers — for more than 400,000 registered voters.

The judge went out of his way to call out Blanche by name after former Attorney General Pam Bondi, who launched the campaign, was fired before the case was decided.

Moss ruled that Title III of the Civil Rights Act of 1960 — the law Blanche invoked to demand the data — only covers documents that election officials receive from voters, such as registration applications, not lists the officials themselves create.

"Nothing in the text of Title III compels this strange and unharmonious reading of federal election law," Moss wrote in the ruling.

The judge also admonished Blanche's attempt to bypass standard court rules by treating the suit as a fast-track proceeding that required no real legal scrutiny.

"The government is not entitled to a judicial order rubber stamping its records request," Moss noted.

Moss rejected Blanche's claim that Title III gave the Justice Department a "freewheeling source of authority" to investigate any violation of federal election law.

The judge found a deeper problem with the government's legal theory. Under Blanche's reading of the law, state election officials could face criminal penalties simply for updating voter rolls — routine maintenance that federal law actually requires them to do.

"And, paradoxically, it would subject officials to liability for taking the steps mandated by the [National Voter Registration Act] and [Help America Vote Act] — the very statutes the government has asserted an interest in enforcing," Moss wrote.

When Blanche's team called the distinction between voter registration applications and voter registration lists "pedantic," Moss was unmoved.

"In light of this history, the Department's characterization of Title III's distinction between voter registration records and voter registration lists as 'pedantic' … falls flat," the judge wrote.

Moss also noted a "conspicuous absence" of any provision in federal election law giving Blanche special access to state voter rolls, saying it was "difficult to discern the basis for the Department's assertion" that Congress intended him to have it.

The ruling is Blanche's 21st straight loss in President Donald Trump's nationwide voter data campaign, which began in May 2025. The Justice Department has now brought at least 30 suits demanding unredacted voter rolls from states and Washington, D.C., according to Democracy Docket.

Moss noted that 20 other district courts and the Sixth Circuit had already ruled against the government, leaving his court "with no shortage of guidance on these issues."

The losing streak comes as Blanche fights for his confirmation as permanent attorney general. Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) announced Tuesday she will vote against him, meaning he can afford to lose just one more Republican vote and still be confirmed.

"The Department of Justice has become increasingly political," Collins said. "Mr. Blanche has taken several actions that have further eroded the department's independence."

Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) drew a wave of conservative backlash Tuesday after telling Americans struggling with food costs to "stop whining, get a job, eat Ramen."

The Texas congressman wrote on X late Tuesday that he wanted to "make the losers on social media angry before going to bed."

The post landed in the middle of a viral conservative fight over food prices that had already consumed social media for much of the day.

It started when a college student involved with Turning Point USA complained that a burrito costs $20, NJ.com reported. Turning Point USA spokesperson Andrew Kolvet shared the complaint online, saying the "lived experience is the same: it just feels like basic things cost too much."

Washington Post columnist Marc Thiessen dismissed the gripe. "Cry me a river," Thiessen wrote. "The burritos in the college cafeteria are included in your meal plan."

That drew a sharp response from Vice President JD Vance, who wrote that Thiessen had "never missed a burrito," according to NJ.com.

Crenshaw weighed in later on Thursday with an attack on food insecurity.

"Stop whining, get a job, eat Ramen like the rest of us did in college, on a budget with 4 roommates," Crenshaw sneered on X, wading into the fight.

He went further, asking whether critics of rising food prices were "a communist" or "an American adult male capable of handling his own s—."

The backlash from the right was swift.

"The Republican Party is still dominated by traitors who got rich off of insider trading but mock you for thinking that you should be able to eat meat in a first world country," conservative commentator Auron MacIntyre wrote on X.

MacIntyre's reference to insider trading echoed a NOTUS report from last month that found Crenshaw had violated the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act — a federal disclosure law for lawmakers — by failing to report stock trades on time.

"You are so unbelievably tone deaf and oblivious to public sentiment that it's no wonder your own constituents fired you," conservative pundit Christian Heiens fired back on X.

Montana Libertarian Party Vice Chair Liam McCollum wrote simply: "I'm against whatever this is."

Blaze TV commentator John Doyle wrote on X that Crenshaw's posture was a strategy "so their boomer cash cows identify with them even more strongly."

Crenshaw lost his congressional seat in a Republican primary in March, becoming the first House member to lose renomination in the 2026 midterm cycle, CBS News projected. He was also the only Republican House member running for re-election in Texas who did not receive President Donald Trump's endorsement.

A Republican congressman's denial that he held his toddler daughter's stuffed animal "hostage" blew up in his face Thursday when a reporter unearthed records disproving his claims.

Rep. Max Miller (R-OH) fired back Tuesday on X at Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-OH), his ex-wife Emily's father, who had accused Miller on Auf. 4 of holding the blue bunny hostage during a recent custody exchange.

"[P]lease stop the lies," Miller snapped back on X. "My daughter got her bunny back in 14 hours."

But records obtained by Mother Jones show the court-appointed parenting coordinator in Miller's custody case said he refused to return the toy despite her own recommendation that it stay with the child.

On Aug. 3 — one day before Bernie Moreno went public — Andrew Zashin, Emily Moreno's attorney, emailed Miller's legal team about the bunny.

"For no apparent reason, Max is not returning [redacted]'s blue bunny to Emily," Zashin wrote, according to Mother Jones. "Dr. Koricke tried to get the blue bunny back. Dr. K made clear that despite her recommendation that the blue bunny stay with Emily, Max refuses to return it."

"This is totally ridiculous," Zashin wrote. "Please have Max return the bunny forthwith."

In March 2025, more than a year before the dispute became national news, Emily Moreno had already sent Miller an email asking him to return the toy, according to Mother Jones.

"Please don't punish [redacted] if you're upset with me," she wrote.

On Tuesday, Sen. Moreno stood before reporters at the Capitol and described picking up his granddaughter at a police station without the bunny she cannot sleep without, according to the Washington Examiner.

"She has a little blue bunny that she sleeps with," Sen. Moreno said.

"Max would not hand over the little blue bunny. Literally held it hostage for 48 hours. This girl is crying at night because she can't sleep without her little blue bunny. His answer is, 'I'm just not going to give it to you.' … This is the level of total and complete depravity," Sen. Moreno said.

Emily Moreno has accused her ex-husband of domestic abuse — claims he denied with a massive document dump that has faced mounting scrutiny.

The crisis has deepened Miller's reelection trouble in Ohio's 7th Congressional District, a seat President Donald Trump won by more than 10 points. A poll by a Republican firm, reported by MS NOW, showed Miller trailing Democratic challenger Brian Poindexter 44% to 39%.

Trump called Miller to deliver a warning, which Miller relayed on CNN, according to MS NOW.

"I don't know if you're gonna be able to, you know, pull this one out," Miller said, recounting what Trump told him.

"People have asked me, you know, what are you gonna do? Are you gonna drop out of this race? Are you gonna resign? You know, are you gonna get out before the deadline? And my answer to you, Jake, is no," Miller told CNN's Jake Tapper, according to MS NOW.

"He should resign," Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS) said, according to MS NOW. "He should quit."

A federal judge froze all evidence-gathering in President Donald Trump's $10 billion defamation lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal over an Epstein birthday letter.

U.S. District Judge Darrin P. Gayles issued the stay Wednesday after hearing oral arguments in Miami federal court on the Wall Street Journal's motion to have the case thrown out entirely, according to court records.

Trump sued in July 2025 after the Wall Street Journal reported that a letter bearing his name appeared in convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein's 50th-birthday album.

The letter contained a drawing of a naked woman and ended with the words, "A pal is a wonderful thing. Happy Birthday — and may every day be another wonderful secret," according to the Wall Street Journal's reporting. Trump has denied writing it.

During a hearing on Wednesday, the Wall Street Journal argued the case should be killed for good. Gayles suspended discovery in the case later that same day.

"His case should be dismissed again — this time with prejudice," a June 10 filing by the Wall Street Journal said, using a legal term that would bar Trump from refiling in federal district court.

The paper said Trump's amended complaint falls "woefully short" of proving the Journal knew its reporting was false — the standard public figures must meet to win a defamation suit.

"The [amended complaint] only bolsters the conclusion that he can never do so," the filing said.

When Congress subpoenaed Epstein's estate in 2025, the released book contained a letter that matched the Journal's original description exactly, the filing noted.

"Plaintiff tellingly does not dispute that resemblance (because he cannot)," the filing said.

The Journal also moved to recover its legal fees under anti-SLAPP statutes — laws in Florida and New York designed to penalize meritless lawsuits that target free speech — according to the filing.

"This lawsuit, brought by the President of the United States, subverts this principle," the filing said, referring to the First Amendment.

Wednesday's stay also blocks Trump from deposing News Corp Chairman Emeritus Rupert Murdoch, whom Trump had previously said on Truth Social he looked forward to putting under oath in the case, according to court records.

If Gayles grants the Wall Street Journal's motion with prejudice, Trump cannot refile the case in federal district court, the filing said.