The Democrats continue to receive bad news. The Party is in an existential crisis.

Especially after CNN learned about this Texas plan to cement Trump’s control over Congress.

CNN’s lead data analyst Harry Enten highlighted that Texas’ latest redistricting proposal could secure Republican control of the U.S. House in the 2026 midterm elections. On July 15, President Donald Trump expressed to journalists his goal for a revised Texas congressional map that would enable Republicans to gain five additional House seats.

Texas Republicans unveiled a new map proposal on Wednesday designed to achieve this in 2026. During a segment on “CNN News Central,” Enten noted that these five seats could be pivotal in maintaining the GOP’s House majority, given the tight margins in recent elections.

“It could make a huge difference. This, in fact, could maintain control for the Republicans in the House of Representatives … Texas has 38 congressional districts,” Enten said. “Look at those that Trump won last year by at least 10 percentage points. Under the current lines, it’s 25. Under the proposed lines, it’s 30. That’s … five potential pickup opportunities for the Republican Party.”

“You might think five seats is just five seats, but keep in mind this — margin to spare for the House majority: in 2020, the Democrats had four seats; 2022, Republicans had four seats; this time around, two seats for Republicans out of the 2024 elections,” he added. “Five seats can make all the difference in the world. And that is why Republicans in Texas providing five pickup opportunities could, in fact, make the difference between Republicans losing control of the House of Representatives and maintaining control of the House of Representatives.”

Currently, Republicans hold an eight-seat majority in the House, accounting for vacancies left by the recent passing of three Democratic representatives.

Redistricting congressional boundaries outside the standard decennial cycle following a Census, known as mid-decade redistricting, is rare and often sparks controversy. A notable example occurred in Texas in 2003, when a mid-decade redistricting effort proceeded despite opposition from over 50 state Democratic legislators attempting to prevent a vote on the new map.

That 2003 map significantly favored Republicans, resulting in the GOP gaining five Texas House seats in the 2004 elections.

Why the 2026 Midterms Are Critical for the Trump Administration

The 2026 midterm elections will be a defining moment for the Trump administration, as they will determine whether Republicans can maintain control of Congress to advance the president’s legislative agenda. Historically, midterm elections often serve as a referendum on the sitting president, with the party in power typically losing seats. For Trump, securing a Republican-friendly Congress is essential to enact key policy priorities, such as immigration reform, tax cuts, and deregulation, which require legislative approval.

With Republicans currently holding a slim eight-seat majority, the proposed map’s potential to add five GOP seats could prove decisive. Web sources indicate that narrow House majorities, as seen in 2020 (Democrats, four seats) and 2022 (Republicans, four seats), amplify the impact of even small shifts. A loss of control in the House could stall Trump’s agenda, as opposition from a Democratic majority would likely block Republican-backed bills.

Control of the Senate is equally critical. In 2026, one-third of Senate seats will be up for election, and Republicans will aim to either maintain or expand their current majority (depending on the 2024 outcome). A Republican Senate is vital for confirming Trump’s judicial and administrative nominees, including potential Supreme Court justices. Web analyses suggest that a divided Congress, with one chamber controlled by Democrats, could lead to gridlock, hampering the administration’s ability to pass legislation or secure appointments.

By redrawing district lines to favor Republicans, the state could offset potential losses elsewhere. However, mid-decade redistricting is contentious and may face legal challenges, as seen in 2003 when Texas Democrats briefly fled the state to block a similar effort. Web reports note that courts often scrutinize such maps for violations of voting rights laws, which could delay or alter the proposed changes.

Beyond Texas, national demographic trends and voter sentiment will shape the 2026 midterms. Data suggests that issues like inflation, border security, and cultural debates could drive Republican turnout, but a strong Democratic campaign focusing on reproductive rights or economic equity could counter this. Trump’s personal popularity will also play a role, as his polarizing style may energize both supporters and opponents.

The stakes for the Trump administration extend beyond domestic policy. A Republican Congress would facilitate foreign policy initiatives, such as trade agreements or sanctions, which require legislative backing. Conversely, a Democratic Congress could constrain Trump’s international agenda, as seen during his first term when opposition-led investigations limited his maneuverability.

Russia and America are butting heads. And it could get ugly fast.

Now Donald Trump shot a sobering warning to a Russian leader that shows he means business.

Trump’s Firm Response to Russian Rhetoric Signals Strong Leadership

President Donald Trump delivered a sharp rebuke to former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev’s provocative warnings about escalating tensions with the United States, showcasing his no-nonsense approach to foreign policy. In a midnight post on TRUTH Social on Thursday, July 31, 2025, Trump dismissed Medvedev’s remarks, telling the deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council to “watch his words.”

Addressing Medvedev’s comments on U.S.-India relations, Trump wrote, “I don’t care what India does with Russia. They can take their dead economies down together, for all I care.” He emphasized the minimal trade ties between the U.S. and both nations, noting India’s high tariffs and Russia’s limited economic engagement with the U.S. “Let’s keep it that way, and tell Medvedev, the failed former President of Russia, who thinks he’s still President, to watch his words. He’s entering very dangerous territory!” Trump’s direct response underscores his commitment to defending U.S. interests while refusing to be intimidated by Russian posturing, particularly Medvedev’s reference to the Cold War-era “Dead Hand” nuclear retaliation system, which the former Russian leader invoked mockingly on Telegram.

Strategic Tariffs and Ultimatums Reshape Global Dynamics

Trump’s foreign policy has increasingly intertwined trade and geopolitics, a strategy evident in his recent actions toward Russia and its allies. During a Monday speech in Scotland, Trump issued a stern ultimatum to Russian President Vladimir Putin, shortening a previous 50-day deadline to 10 or 12 days for Russia to agree to a ceasefire in Ukraine. Failure to comply, Trump warned, would result in intensified “sanctions, tariffs, and maybe secondary tariffs” on Moscow and countries purchasing Russian goods and energy.

This follows stalled negotiations with Putin, which Trump lamented have yielded little progress toward peace.

Medvedev, in an earlier X post, criticized Trump’s approach, warning, “Trump’s playing the ultimatum game with Russia: 50 days or 10. He should remember 2 things: 1. Russia isn’t Israel or even Iran. 2. Each new ultimatum is a threat and a step towards war. Not between Russia and Ukraine, but with his own country. Don’t go down the Sleepy Joe road!”

On Wednesday, Trump announced a 25% tariff on Indian imports, effective August 1, citing India’s “strenuous and obnoxious non-monetary” trade barriers and its heavy reliance on Russian oil and military equipment. While calling India a “friend,” Trump criticized its role as a major buyer of Russian energy, especially amid global calls for Russia to end its aggression in Ukraine. He also highlighted India’s membership in BRICS, a group he described as “anti-the United States” and a threat to the dollar’s global dominance.

At a press conference, Trump stated, “BRICS is basically a group of countries that are anti-the United States and India is a member of that, if you can believe it. It’s an attack on the dollar. And we’re not going to let anybody attack the dollar.”

Economic Wins Bolster Trump’s Global Trade Vision

Trump’s trade policies have sparked debate but also delivered tangible results, reinforcing his narrative of revitalizing the U.S. economy. On Thursday, he celebrated his reciprocal tariffs plan, which he said brought “billions” into the U.S. economy, writing on social media, “Tariffs are making America GREAT & RICH Again.” He contrasted his approach with past administrations, claiming, “ONE YEAR AGO, AMERICA WAS A DEAD COUNTRY, NOW IT IS THE ‘HOTTEST’ COUNTRY ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD. CONGRATULATIONS TO ALL!” The EU trade deal, announced with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in Scotland, has been a cornerstone of this success, despite criticism from figures like Medvedev, who dismissed its framework.

Trump’s insistence on linking trade deals to foreign policy alignment was evident when he warned Canada that its support for Palestinian statehood could jeopardize a potential trade agreement, stating, “That will make it very hard for us to make a Trade Deal with them.”

Economic indicators support Trump’s claims of progress. Inflation has dropped from Biden-era peaks of 9.1% in 2022 to 3.2% in June 2025, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, while GDP grew 3% last quarter, per the Bureau of Economic Analysis. These figures bolster Trump’s argument that his tariff-driven strategy is strengthening the U.S. economy without triggering the inflation critics feared.

By imposing tariffs on nations like India and pressuring Russia through economic measures, Trump is reshaping global trade dynamics to prioritize American interests.

Former Vice President Kamala Harris failed big time in 2024. But she is keeping her options open.

And now Kamala Harris has finally announced her plans to run for office again.

Kamala Harris Declines 2026 California Gubernatorial Run

Kamala Harris, the former Vice President, confirmed on Wednesday that she will not seek the California governor’s seat in the 2026 election, putting an end to widespread speculation about her next political move.

Her decision follows a significant setback in the 2024 presidential election, where she was defeated by President Donald Trump. This loss has sparked discussions about her political trajectory and what role she might play in the Democratic Party moving forward.

“In recent months, I have given serious thought to asking the people of California for the privilege to serve as their governor,” Harris stated, according to Politico. “I love this state, its people, and its promise. It is my home. But after deep reflection, I’ve decided that I will not run for Governor in this election.”

“I have extraordinary admiration and respect for those who dedicate their lives to public service — service to their communities and to our nation,” she added. “At the same time, we must recognize that our politics, our government, and our institutions have too often failed the American people, culminating in this moment of crisis. As we look ahead, we must be willing to pursue change through new methods and fresh thinking — committed to our same values and principles, but not bound by the same playbook.”

While Harris did not clarify whether she plans to pursue the presidency in 2028, she emphasized her commitment to engaging with voters and supporting other Democratic candidates in the interim. The former vice president noted that she would provide “more details” about her future intentions in the months ahead, leaving open the possibility of other political endeavors.

Why Democrats Should Steer Clear of Kamala Harris for 2028

Kamala Harris’s decision to forego a gubernatorial run in California has shifted attention to her potential role in the 2028 presidential election. However, Democrats should approach her candidacy with caution, as her political track record and public perception present significant challenges that could hinder the party’s success.

Harris’s 2024 presidential campaign struggled to resonate with a broad electorate. Her inability to secure the presidency against Donald Trump highlighted weaknesses in her messaging and voter connection. Political analysts have noted that her campaign lacked a clear narrative, often failing to articulate a vision that distinguished her from other Democratic contenders or addressed the economic and social concerns of swing voters.

Public opinion polls from 2024 consistently showed Harris with underwhelming approval ratings. A Gallup poll from October 2024 indicated that her favorability hovered around 40%, a troubling figure for a candidate aiming to unify a fractured party. This lack of widespread appeal could make it difficult for her to galvanize the diverse coalition needed to win a national election.

Her tenure as vice president also drew criticism for a lack of clear accomplishments. Tasked with high-profile issues like immigration and voting rights, Harris faced scrutiny for limited progress. For instance, her role in addressing the root causes of migration from Central America yielded few tangible results, leading to perceptions of ineffectiveness that could haunt her in future campaigns.

Moreover, Harris’s prosecutorial background, while an asset in her early career, has become a liability among progressive Democrats. Her record as California’s attorney general, where she championed tough-on-crime policies, has been criticized by activists who view her as out of step with the party’s growing emphasis on criminal justice reform. This tension could alienate key segments of the Democratic base in 2028.

The Democratic Party is also undergoing a generational shift, with younger voters and emerging leaders pushing for fresh faces. Figures like Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer or Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman have gained traction for their ability to connect with working-class voters in battleground states. Harris, by contrast, struggles to shake the perception of being a Washington insider, which could clash with the party’s desire for a new direction.

Economic concerns further complicate Harris’s prospects. With inflation and cost-of-living issues dominating voter priorities, Democrats need a candidate who can credibly address pocketbook issues. Harris’s 2024 campaign was criticized for vague economic proposals, and without a stronger platform, she risks being outmaneuvered by opponents who can offer concrete solutions.

The Republican Party would likely capitalize on Harris’s vulnerabilities, as they did in 2024. GOP strategists successfully painted her as an out-of-touch elitist, a narrative that resonated in key swing states. If she runs in 2028, Democrats can expect a repeat of these attacks, which could prove difficult to counter given her existing public image challenges.

Harris’s communication style has also drawn scorn. While she can deliver compelling speeches, her off-the-cuff remarks have occasionally been seen as awkward or overly rehearsed, leading to viral moments that damaged her credibility. In a media-saturated campaign environment, these missteps could be magnified, undermining her ability to compete effectively.

The Democratic Party’s path to victory in 2028 depends on unifying its progressive and moderate wings while appealing to independents. Harris’s polarizing presence risks exacerbating internal divisions, particularly among progressives who view her as too centrist and moderates who question her electability. A less divisive candidate could better bridge these gaps.

Emerging demographic trends also suggest Democrats need a candidate who can energize young voters and communities of color. While Harris’s historic candidacy as a woman of color was a milestone, her 2024 campaign struggled to mobilize these groups at the levels seen in past Democratic victories, raising doubts about her ability to inspire turnout.

President Trump is losing patience. He’s demanding Russia back down.

But Putin instead flipped President Trump the middle finger in this new announcement.

Russia Stands Firm Against U.S. Pressure for Ukraine Ceasefire

Russian President Vladimir Putin is holding his ground against U.S. President Donald Trump’s threats of economic penalties, including tariffs and sanctions, if a ceasefire in Ukraine is not achieved, according to a Wednesday report by Reuters.

The Kremlin emphasized that Russia remains resilient to U.S. economic measures, despite Trump’s announcement on Tuesday that he is drastically shortening the timeline for securing a ceasefire in Ukraine. Since taking office in January, Trump has grown increasingly frustrated with Putin’s refusal to engage seriously in peace talks, Reuters noted.

“We have been living under a huge number of sanctions for quite a long time, our economy operates under a huge number of restrictions,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told Reuters. “Therefore, of course, we have already developed a certain immunity in this regard, and we continue to note all statements that come from President Trump, from other international representatives on this matter.”

Initially, Trump set a 50-day deadline for negotiations on July 14, but he reduced this to just 10 or 12 days during his Tuesday remarks. Former President Joe Biden also targeted Russia’s oil sector with sanctions, but those measures fell short of significantly weakening the Russian economy.

“There’s no reason they’re waiting… it’s 50 days, I want to be generous, [but] we just don’t see any progress being made,” Trump told reporters Tuesday about the decision to expedite the deadline.

Alongside Trump’s threats of secondary tariffs and sanctions on countries trading with Russia, U.S. Congress is advancing bipartisan legislation to empower Trump to impose 500% tariffs on nations importing Russian uranium, gas, and oil.

In response to Putin’s delays, Trump authorized renewed weapons shipments to Ukraine through NATO on July 11 to pressure Moscow toward a peace agreement. Russia insists that any deal must acknowledge its control over occupied Ukrainian territories, a condition Kyiv has firmly rejected.

Trump Administration Seeks to End Russia-Ukraine War Through Economic Pressure

The Trump administration has intensified efforts to resolve the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict by leveraging economic measures aimed at pressuring Russia into agreeing to a ceasefire. Since taking office in January 2025, President Donald Trump has prioritized ending the war, viewing it as a critical foreign policy objective. His strategy centers on imposing stringent tariffs and sanctions to weaken Russia’s economy, which he believes will force Moscow to negotiate.

On Tuesday, Trump announced a significant escalation, shortening the timeline for Russia to engage in ceasefire talks from 50 days to as little as 10 or 12 days. This move reflects growing frustration with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s reluctance to advance peace negotiations. Trump’s approach builds on previous U.S. efforts, including sanctions on Russia’s energy sector under the Biden administration, though those measures failed to deliver a decisive economic blow.

The administration’s economic strategy includes threats of secondary tariffs and sanctions targeting countries that continue to trade with Russia. This tactic aims to isolate Russia economically by discouraging nations from purchasing its key exports, such as oil, gas, and uranium. Congressional support for this approach is evident in a bipartisan bill that would grant Trump authority to impose 500% tariffs on countries importing these Russian resources, a move designed to choke off Moscow’s revenue streams.

Russia, however, has shown resilience to such pressures. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov highlighted that the Russian economy has adapted to years of sanctions, developing what he described as “immunity” to external economic restrictions. This adaptability stems from Russia’s experience navigating sanctions since its 2014 annexation of Crimea and the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022.

In addition to economic measures, Trump has resumed weapons shipments to Ukraine via NATO, starting July 11, to bolster Kyiv’s position and pressure Russia into negotiations. This marks a shift from earlier U.S. policy, which had paused some military aid to encourage diplomacy. The weapons are intended to strengthen Ukraine’s leverage at the negotiating table, where Russia demands recognition of its control over annexed territories—a condition Ukraine categorically rejects.

The economic measures targeting Russia’s energy sector are particularly significant, as oil and gas exports account for a substantial portion of Moscow’s revenue. By threatening punitive tariffs, the Trump administration aims to disrupt this financial lifeline. However, Russia has diversified its trade partners in recent years, notably increasing exports to countries like China and India, which may blunt the impact of U.S.-led sanctions.

The bipartisan congressional bill targeting Russian energy imports signals strong domestic support for Trump’s strategy. If passed, the legislation would give the president unprecedented authority to penalize nations facilitating Russia’s energy trade, potentially reshaping global energy markets. Critics, however, warn that such measures could raise energy prices worldwide, impacting U.S. consumers and allies.

Despite the pressure, Putin’s insistence on territorial concessions complicates the path to peace. Russia’s demand for Ukraine to cede occupied regions, including parts of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson, has been a non-starter for Kyiv. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has repeatedly vowed to reclaim all territories, viewing any concession as a betrayal of national sovereignty.

President Trump is a man on a mission. He has to undo all of the Biden admin’s disasters.

That’s why Donald Trump nuked Joe Biden’s legacy with this one swipe of the pen.

Trump Administration Reverses Biden-Era Energy Restrictions in Alaska

The Trump administration moved decisively on Monday to roll back three policies from the Biden era that had constrained energy development in Alaska’s National Petroleum Reserve (NPR-A). The action signals a shift toward prioritizing resource extraction and economic growth in the region.

Under the Department of the Interior (DOI), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) rescinded policies that limited energy resource development in the NPR-A. During his tenure, President Joe Biden implemented measures to curb Alaska’s energy sector, halting mining and oil and gas projects to focus on environmental conservation. In contrast, the Trump administration has sought to tap into Alaska’s abundant energy reserves to boost domestic production.

“Alaska’s resource potential has been held hostage for years by anti-development ideologues,” said DOI Secretary Doug Burgum. “The Trump administration is delivering certainty for industry, opportunity for Alaskans and real energy security for the American people. We are committed to putting development back at the center of land management where it belongs.”

The rescinded Biden policies included a directive to produce a report on “maximizing protection” in the NPR-A, a request for information, and a memorandum addressing “special areas” within the reserve. These reversals mark a new direction for the agency under Trump’s leadership, emphasizing energy development over restrictive conservation measures.

The DOI stated that the move eliminates “burdensome restrictions,” enabling Alaska to capitalize on its natural resources. This aligns with an executive order signed by President Donald Trump on his first day in office, which aimed to unleash Alaska’s energy potential and reduce regulatory barriers.

Biden’s policies had imposed significant limits on oil and gas activities across nearly half of the NPR-A, a 23-million-acre expanse on Alaska’s North Slope. Established by Congress in the 1970s to address the oil crisis, the reserve holds an estimated billions of barrels of oil, according to the U.S. Geological Survey.

Local communities, particularly native groups reliant on the energy sector, expressed frustration with Biden’s restrictions, which they viewed as detrimental to their economic stability. Community leaders have since praised Trump’s efforts to revitalize oil and gas development, noting its critical role in supporting Alaska’s economy.

Trump’s Energy Policies Gain Traction Amid Push for Resource Development

President Donald Trump’s energy policies, particularly his push to utilize all available energy sources, have resonated with a significant portion of the American public and key stakeholders in energy-producing regions. His administration’s focus on deregulation and maximizing domestic energy production, including oil, gas, coal, and renewables, has sparked widespread discussion about energy independence and economic growth.

In Alaska, Trump’s reversal of restrictive Biden-era policies has been met with enthusiasm from local leaders and industry advocates. The National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, a key area for oil and gas exploration, has become a focal point for Trump’s strategy to prioritize resource development. By removing barriers to drilling and mining, the administration aims to bolster local economies and reduce reliance on foreign energy.

Public sentiment, as reflected in various polls and online discussions, shows strong support for policies that promote energy independence. A 2024 Rasmussen Reports poll indicated that 62% of Americans favor expanding domestic oil and gas production to lower energy costs, aligning with Trump’s approach to leveraging all energy sources. This sentiment is particularly strong in energy-producing states like Alaska, Texas, and Wyoming, where local economies depend heavily on resource extraction.

Trump’s “all-of-the-above” energy strategy, which encourages the development of fossil fuels alongside renewables, has also gained traction among industry groups. The American Petroleum Institute (API) has praised the administration’s efforts to streamline permitting processes and reduce regulatory hurdles, arguing that these measures enhance energy security while fostering job creation. In 2025, the API reported that the oil and gas industry supported over 10 million jobs nationwide, underscoring the economic impact of such policies.

However, Trump’s energy agenda has faced criticism from environmental groups, who argue that deregulation could exacerbate climate change and harm ecosystems. Organizations like the Sierra Club have voiced concerns over expanded drilling in sensitive areas like the NPR-A, citing potential risks to wildlife and indigenous lands. Despite these objections, Trump’s policies remain popular among those prioritizing economic growth and energy affordability.

The administration’s emphasis on energy development extends beyond Alaska. In states like Pennsylvania and Ohio, Trump’s support for natural gas extraction through fracking has garnered significant backing from local communities and industry workers. A 2025 report from the U.S. Energy Information Administration noted that natural gas production reached record highs in 2024, driven by relaxed regulations and increased investment under Trump’s leadership.

Internationally, Trump’s energy policies have also drawn attention. By promoting exports of U.S. liquefied natural gas (LNG), the administration has positioned the United States as a major player in global energy markets. In 2024, the U.S. became the world’s largest LNG exporter, surpassing Qatar and Australia, according to Bloomberg. This achievement has bolstered Trump’s argument that unrestricted energy development strengthens both national security and global influence.

Trump hasn’t even been in office for a year and people are talking. It’s anyone’s guess who will be the 2028 favorite.

But now a Major Republican threw his support behind this 2028 candidate for president.

Rubio Backs Vance for 2028 GOP Nomination

Secretary of State Marco Rubio dismissed speculation about running for president in 2028, instead endorsing Vice President JD Vance as a potential Republican nominee.

In an interview with Lara Trump on Fox News’ “My View with Lara Trump,” Rubio stated, “I think JD Vance would be a great nominee if he decides he wants to do that.”

Highlighting their close relationship, Rubio described Vance as one of his “closest friends in politics.”

His endorsement underscores confidence in Vance’s leadership and aligns with President Donald Trump’s vision for the Republican Party’s future, reflecting Rubio’s commitment to supporting the administration’s agenda while serving as the nation’s top diplomat.

Rubio Content with Cabinet Role

Appointed by President Trump as Secretary of State after the 2024 election victory over Vice President Kamala Harris, Rubio expressed satisfaction with his current role, saying, “I want to do this job as long as the president allows me to.”

A former Florida senator, Rubio was among the first confirmed to Trump’s Cabinet, bringing his foreign policy experience to the administration.

He emphasized his desire to make a lasting impact, stating:

“I believe that if I am able to be here, through the duration of this presidency, and we get things done at the pace that we’ve been doing the last six months, I’ll be able to look back at my time in public service and say I made a difference, I had an impact, and I served my country in a very positive way.”

Vance’s Rising Profile in Trump Administration

Rubio’s praise for Vice President Vance, who has emerged as a key figure in Trump’s second term, reflects the administration’s cohesive leadership.

Rubio commended Vance’s performance, noting, “And I would be satisfied with that as the apex of my career.”

His endorsement positions Vance as a strong contender for 2028, building on the momentum of Trump’s 2024 campaign, which resonated with voters through policies like the “Liberation Day” tariffs and domestic economic reforms.

Politicians really just want to sit around and collect their paycheck. But sometimes they have to do things they aren’t happy about.

And now a GOP Congressman threatened to force a vote that is turning heads.

Massie Pushes for Epstein Files Release Vote

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) announced plans to force a House vote after the August recess to unseal documents related to Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking case, leveraging bipartisan support to ensure transparency.

Appearing on ABC’s “This Week,” Massie declared, “Well, I think we should get a lot more than just the book. Let’s get the financial records of the estate, follow the money, as they say up here. We should look at the plea-bargain, open that up, see what was the deal, what was the deal that was cut.”

He emphasized the need for a comprehensive release, including Epstein’s estate financials and the 2008 plea deal, to uncover details about the financier’s operations.

Massie’s initiative, backed by President Donald Trump’s call for openness, reflects a growing demand to address lingering questions about Epstein’s case, which continues to captivate public attention.

Bipartisan Discharge Petition Gains Traction

Massie, alongside Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), is utilizing a discharge petition to bypass House leadership and bring the Epstein files release to a floor vote, requiring 218 signatures.

He noted, “Ro Khanna and I are using a procedure called a discharge petition whereby if we get 218 votes, and we’re well on our way to that, 218 signatures, then we can force the vote.”

With 12 Republican co-sponsors and potential Democratic support, Massie stated, “If every Democrat signs this, I have 12 Republican co-sponsors and I only need six to sign it.”

Host Jonathan Karl raised concerns about challenging Speaker Mike Johnson’s control, to which Massie responded, “I think the pressure will build over August recess. I don’t think it will dissipate like the speaker hopes that it will.”

The petition’s momentum underscores Trump’s influence in pushing for accountability, aligning with his commitment to transparency.

Public Pressure and Legislative Strategy

Massie predicted that public and political pressure will intensify, ensuring the vote proceeds, stating:

“If merely just half the people who have co-sponsored this legislation follow through and sign it, then it’s going to come to the floor for a vote.”

The Epstein case, marked by his 2008 lenient plea deal and 2019 death ruled a suicide, has fueled speculation about connections to influential figures. Massie’s call for financial records and plea deal details aims to “follow the money” and reveal any hidden agreements.

Supported by Trump, who has endorsed releasing related grand jury testimony, Massie’s effort highlights a rare bipartisan push to address a high-profile controversy, with the discharge petition serving as a strategic tool to overcome potential resistance from House leadership and deliver answers to the American public.

Trump and his administration aren’t messing around. They are playing to win.

And now the White House drew an immovable line in the sand that changed everything.

Trump’s “Liberation Day” Tariffs Set to Launch

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick confirmed that President Donald Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs, scheduled for August 1, 2025, will proceed without further delays.

Speaking on “Fox News Sunday,” Lutnick stated, “No extensions, no more grace periods. Aug. 1, the tariffs are set; they’ll go into place. Customs will start collecting the money, and off we go.”

Initially announced on April 2 with a 10% baseline tariff on all U.S. imports and customized rates for various countries, the tariffs were postponed twice from their original April 9 start date.

Lutnick noted Trump’s openness to dialogue, saying:

“Obviously, after Aug. 1, people can still talk to President Trump. I mean, he’s always willing to listen, and between now and then, I think the president is going to talk to a lot of people. Whether they can make him happy is another question.”

Strategic Trade Deals and Global Negotiations

Trump has leveraged the tariff initiative to secure preliminary trade agreements with the United Kingdom, Vietnam, Japan, Indonesia, and the Philippines, while negotiating a tariff truce with China, setting an August 12 deadline for a broader deal.

Lutnick emphasized Trump’s focus on major economies, stating, “We set the table. The team sets the table. But Donald Trump does his negotiations by himself.”

During a recent U.K. trip, Trump met with European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen to discuss trade with the 27-nation EU, a key U.S. trade partner.

Existing tariffs, including 50% on aluminum and steel and 25% on non-compliant imports from Canada and Mexico under the USMCA, have generated significant revenue.

Tariffs Fund Domestic Priorities and Geopolitical Strategy

Lutnick highlighted the economic benefits of the tariffs, predicting, “What’s going to happen is very few products are actually going to move in price,” and estimating revenue of “$700 billion, $800 billion, maybe it’s possible we get near a trillion dollars,” which could reduce the U.S. deficit.

He tied this to Trump’s domestic agenda, asking, “What do you think is paying for no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, no tax on Social Security, right?”

Trump has also used tariffs geopolitically, warning Cambodia and Thailand to resolve border disputes or face halted trade talks and threatening Russia with 100% secondary tariffs on oil exports unless it negotiates with Ukraine.

The Fed has been a thorn in the side of Americans as well as Trump. But that’s changing now.

Because a top federal official completely vindicated Donald Trump’s Federal Reserve move.

Trump and Powell Clash Over Federal Reserve Renovation Costs

President Donald Trump and Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell publicly disagreed during a visit to the Federal Reserve’s headquarters about the cost of its ongoing renovation project.

Trump claimed the project’s total cost had risen to $3.1 billion, stating, “It looks like it’s about 3.1 billion. Went up a little bit — or a lot.”

Powell, visibly disputing the figure, responded, “I haven’t heard that from anybody at the Fed,” suggesting Trump’s numbers referred to a separate building completed five years ago.

However, Mark Paoletta, General Counsel of the Office of Management and Budget, confirmed Trump’s accuracy, citing Federal Reserve documents showing a 2022 budget of $1.8 billion for the headquarters’ three buildings (Eccles, 1951, and Martin) and a 2025 budget reflecting a $2.5 billion cost for the Eccles and 1951 buildings alone, totaling $3.1 billion.

Federal Reserve Budget Overruns Draw Scrutiny

Paoletta’s statement detailed a $1 billion cost overrun for the Eccles and 1951 buildings since the 2022 budget, incurred after Trump’s first term.

The renovation, which includes the Eccles building previously renovated from 1999 to 2003, has raised concerns about fiscal oversight.

On July 10, Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought wrote to Powell, criticizing the project’s management and questioning its compliance with the National Capital Planning Act, which mandates approval by the National Capital Planning Commission.

Vought referenced Powell’s June 25, 2025, Senate Banking Committee testimony, where he denied extravagant features like VIP dining rooms or roof gardens, clarifying that some 2021 plan elements were removed.

Vought argued that Powell’s statements suggested significant deviations from the approved plan, prompting calls for greater accountability in the Federal Reserve’s spending on its headquarters.

Broader Trump-Powell Tensions and Policy Implications

The renovation dispute occurs against a backdrop of ongoing friction between Trump and Powell, whose Federal Reserve term ends in May 2026.

Trump has expressed frustration with Powell’s refusal to lower interest rates, a decision made collectively by the Federal Reserve Board, which Powell leads.

In mid-July, Trump indicated he had not ruled out firing Powell, while Powell, in November 2024, stated he would not resign if asked.

During his 2024 campaign, Trump claimed superior economic instincts compared to Federal Reserve officials.

The public disagreement over renovation costs underscores broader policy clashes, with Trump advocating for tighter fiscal discipline and Powell defending the Federal Reserve’s independence.

Americans are demanding answers about Epstein. Now Trump is telling all.

Because he implicated major public figures in an awful scandal.

Trump Redirects Epstein Case Questions to Clinton and Summers

President Donald Trump suggested that inquiries about Jeffrey Epstein’s s*x trafficking case should focus on former President Bill Clinton and former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers.

Speaking to reporters while departing for Scotland, Trump stated, “You ought to be speaking about Larry Summers. You ought to be speaking about some of his friends that are hedge fund guys. You ought to be speaking about Bill Clinton.”

He accused Clinton of visiting Epstein’s private island, a claim Clinton has denied, asserting in his 2024 memoir, “Citizen,” that he never visited the island and regretted meeting Epstein. Trump emphasized he had never been to the island himself.

The remarks followed a meeting between U.S. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche and Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell in Florida, amid ongoing public interest in the case.

Spokespeople for Clinton and Summers did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

DOJ Maintains Closure on Epstein Investigation

The Trump administration’s Department of Justice (DOJ) and FBI announced in July that they would not release additional investigation materials related to Epstein’s s*x trafficking case, concluding their review with no new individuals identified for charges and no evidence of a “client list” of associates.

This decision drew criticism from some conservatives seeking further transparency.

Trump has downplayed the case’s significance, stating on July 14, “He’s dead for a long time. I don’t understand what the interest or what the fascination is. I really don’t, and the credible information’s been given.”

Epstein, a financier convicted in 2008 for soliciting a minor and charged again in 2019 with federal s*x trafficking, died by suicide in his Manhattan jail cell in August 2019, according to official reports.

Maxwell’s Role and Ongoing Developments

Ghislaine Maxwell, convicted in 2021 on charges including s*x trafficking of a minor and sentenced to 20 years, met with Deputy AG Blanche to discuss the Epstein case.

Blanche posted on X, stating, “Today, I met with Ghislaine Maxwell, and I will continue my interview of her tomorrow.

The Department of Justice will share additional information at the appropriate time.” Maxwell’s cooperation with authorities remains a focal point, given her central role in Epstein’s operations.

The case, involving allegations of abuse against minors and ties to prominent figures, continues to attract public attention, despite the DOJ’s assertion that no further actionable evidence exists.

The president has been on a major win streak. But this threatens to shake things up.

And now Trump received a test result that rattled the Republican Party.

Trump’s Approval Among Young Voters Drops Sharply

A CBS News/YouGov poll conducted July 1-31, 2025, with 2,500 registered voters, revealed a sharp decline in President Donald Trump’s approval rating among voters aged 18-29, with 66% disapproving of his job performance, 28% approving, and 6% unsure.

This marks a significant shift from a January CBS/YouGov survey, where 67% of this demographic expressed optimism about Trump’s return to the White House.

The overall national approval rating stands at a net negative of -13, with 54% of Americans disapproving, 41% approving, and 5% unsure, the lowest in Trump’s second term.

RealClearPolitics’ polling average aligns closely, showing 39% disapproval and 46% approval.

The poll, which included 1,800 adults nationwide, highlights Trump’s struggle to maintain support among younger generations, a critical voting bloc, amid broader challenges in addressing key voter concerns like economic stability and government transparency.

Economic Issues and Epstein Case Drive Public Sentiment

Inflation emerged as the top issue for 22% of respondents, followed by jobs and the economy (15%), health care (11%), and immigration (10%).

Trump’s approval ratings on these issues were negative, with inflation/prices at -30, foreign trade at -16, jobs and the economy at -13, foreign policy at -12, immigration at -7, and national security at -3.

The poll also found strong public demand for transparency in the Jeffrey Epstein case, with 82% of Americans favoring the release of all related documents.

Notably, 68%—including 85% of Democrats, 55% of Republicans, and 64% of Independents—believe the government is concealing evidence about Epstein’s client list and death.

A Department of Justice and FBI memo on July 7, 2025, concluded Epstein died by suicide in 2019 and had no client list, a finding Trump dismissed as a “hoax” pushed by Democrats, as reported by CatholicVote on July 16.

Divergent Views on Public Broadcasting, Ukraine Aid, and Other Issues

Public opinion on funding for public broadcasting outlets like PBS and NPR is divided, with 28% supporting cuts or elimination, 29% favoring increased funding, 32% preferring current levels, and 11% unsure.

Republicans showed the strongest opposition, with 53% backing reduced funding, compared to 6% of Democrats and 26% of Independents.

On U.S. military aid to Ukraine, amid Russia’s ongoing invasion since February 2022, 34% support increasing aid, 24% favor maintaining current levels, 11% want cuts, 15% advocate ending aid, and 16% are unsure.

The poll also explored views on immigration policy, with 45% supporting stricter border enforcement, 30% favoring a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, and 25% undecided.

Additionally, 60% of respondents expressed concern over rising health care costs, with 40% supporting expanded government involvement in lowering prescription drug prices.

The Left rarely leaves their flank exposed. But now they’ve made a massive mistake.

And a Democrat governor resigned and handed Republicans a massive opportunity.

Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers to Retire After Second Term

Democratic Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers announced he will not seek a third term, citing a desire to prioritize family time after a 50-year career in politics.

In a statement, Evers, 73, said, “For five decades, my family has sacrificed to give me the gift of service. They’re my world, and I owe it to them to focus on doing all the things we enjoy and love doing together.”

He expressed gratitude for his role, calling it “the best job I ever had,” and predicted he would have won a sixth statewide election if he ran again.

Evers’ term ends on January 4, 2027, setting the stage for an open gubernatorial race in 2026. Wisconsin’s swing-state status was evident in the 2024 presidential election, where President Donald Trump won by approximately 30,000 votes, while Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) secured re-election by a similar margin against Republican Eric Hovde.

Political Landscape Shifts as Candidates Eye 2026 Race

Evers’ decision opens a competitive field for Wisconsin’s 2026 gubernatorial election. Potential Democratic candidates include Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez, Attorney General Josh Kaul, Secretary of State Sarah Godlewski, Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley, and Milwaukee Mayor Cavalier Johnson, according to NBC News.

On the Republican side, Washington County Executive Joe Schoemann and manufacturing CEO Bill Berrien have announced campaigns, with U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany and businessman Tim Michels, who lost to Evers in 2022, also considering runs.

Berrien criticized Evers, stating, “Tony Evers is too scared to run on the Madison Democrats’ record of failure,” signaling a contentious campaign ahead.

Evers’ tenure, marked by vetoes of Republican-backed bills on issues like voting, abortion, and gun rights, has polarized voters, particularly his 2023 veto of legislation banning irreversible transgender surgeries for minors, which he argued harmed LGBTQ individuals by fostering an unsafe environment.

Evers’ Vetoes and Policy Record Define Legacy

Evers, a former science teacher and state superintendent, faced significant criticism for his 2023 veto of a bill passed by Wisconsin’s Republican-controlled legislature that would have prohibited transgender surgeries and hormone treatments for minors.

Critics, including former state Sen. Duey Stroebel, called the veto “out of touch with reality,” arguing it failed to protect children from irreversible medical procedures.

Evers defended his decision, stating, “This type of legislation… harms LGBTQ people and kids’ mental health, emboldens anti-LGBTQ hate and violence, and threatens the safety and dignity of LGBTQ Wisconsinites.”