On Wednesday, Senate Republicans’ “last-ditch” attempt at showing voters the party is trying to address the affordability crisis failed when a bill relating to AI data centers was voted down. According to the Wall Street Journal, critics of the effort “dismissed it as the product of a desperate political exercise,” and its failure deprives the GOP of a legislative win it desperately needs as the midterms loom. “With just over a month to go before the midterms, Democrats are giving Republicans a run for their money in states President Trump won by double digits in 2024, including Ohio, Iowa, Alaska, Texas and Kansas,” writes the Journal. “The latest Wall Street Journal poll showed Americans in both parties backing ideas such as government-imposed price caps and other market interventions to make life more affordable.” Republicans face historically bad midterm polling in large part due to their inability to address the cost-of-living crisis, and they have no further plans to take action before the November elections. The GOP’s latest failed measure was sponsored by Sen. Jon Husted (R-OH), who is in a narrow re-election battle with former Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown. According to the Journal, “Brown has been hammering Husted as an ally of the tech industry who helped fuel Ohio’s data-center boom when he was a top state official. Ohio has become increasingly competitive as voters sour on high prices and the Iran War, and Democrats see it as one of their top targets as they try to flip four seats to win control of the Senate. Democrats in other key states including Texas and Michigan have also used data centers to target Republicans.” “All Republicans offer is a toothless messaging bill. This bill is a fraud,” asserted Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), pointing out that the guardrails proposed in Husted’s legislation aren’t mandatory. “Some Republican senators said they regretted not spending more time on pocketbook issues in the run-up to the election. Sen. Josh Hawley (R., Mo.) listed bills he said he wished the GOP-led Senate had put more effort behind, including measures to suspend the gas tax, allow taxpayers to deduct out-of-pocket medical expenses, and to cap insulin prices,” writes the Journal. “Sen. Jim Justice (R-WV) said Republicans should have done more months ago to sympathize with voters and confront their affordability concerns head on — and now they could pay the price at the ballot box.” As Justice told the Journal, “No matter how much you love us as Republicans, we’re in control. And if you can’t pay the bills, you’ve got a real problem with us.” And as the Journal reports, the GOP is all out of opportunities to take action before the midterms. “It is the only game in town,” Husted said, referring to the failed legislation. “It is the only bill that has a chance to get to the president’s desk before we get to the election.”

The process of getting a first U.S. passport will go fully online next year, said Secretary of State Marco Rubio, so if your picture is bad, it’ll be your fault.

How to read all these midterm polls.

Several judges spoke to the New York Times about their concerns around the immigration crackdown. One judge Wednesday defended his decision to speak publicly as “well within the ethical rules.”

President Donald Trump once wanted to make criticizing the Supreme Court, something he now does regularly, illegal. According to a new analysis from The Atlantic, this shift is an "illuminating projection" that exposes what Trump truly "fears." Writing for the outlet on Wednesday, staff writer and author Adam Serwer highlighted a quote Trump made on the subject during his 2024 campaign, in which he accused people critiquing the court's rulings of "playing the ref" and besmirching "some of our greatest justices and a lot of great judges." He further suggested that this alleged conduct should be "punishable by very serious fines and beyond that." Now, Serwer noted, the president sings a wildly different tune. "Trump criticizing the Supreme Court, however, is perfectly fine and not illegal at all," Serwer wrote. "Earlier this month, a day after a majority of the justices rejected Trump’s effort to restrict voting by mail in the midterms, Trump lashed out in a post: 'These are not the people I interviewed to serve on the United States Supreme Court, they are merely a shell of their original selves.' Trump accused the justices of being 'bullied and cajoled by the Radical Left.'" As has become a noticeable trend among Trump and the GOP, Serwer argued further that this tendency to lash out at the court exposes what the president is actually thinking, and what he "fears." "As is nearly always the case with the president’s accusations, this was an illuminating projection," Serwer explained. "Trump fears that public pressure on the Supreme Court can sway the justices and how they rule. So when they don’t side with him, he assumes that’s what happened, and he trashes the Court in the hope that it will side with him the next time. He views criticism of the Supreme Court much as he views laws in general: When Trump or one of his allies wants to do something, such as use taxpayer dollars for cultish campaign ads, it’s legal. When his opponents want to do something, it’s illegal." Serwer also conceded that it is widely understood that presidents expect their judicial appointments to rule in their favor more often, and that Trump has merely put this notion out in the open, noting that while it "is a little embarrassing... it’s not like he’s saying anything Americans don’t already know and understand." "Trump has taken a few high-profile losses at the Supreme Court recently—in the tariffs case and in the birthright-citizenship case—but the Court has been more than willing to do his bidding most of the time," he concluded. "This is the Supreme Court that eviscerated the Voting Rights Act in Louisiana v. Callais, sanctioned Trump’s overt racial discrimination toward Haitians in Mullin v. Doe, fabricated a right to presidential immunity that appears nowhere in the Constitution in Trump v. United States, and gave Trump unfettered control over agencies that are supposed to be independent. Considering that record, few could disagree that the justices have 'rendered some of the most destructive, hurtful, and damaging decisions in our Country’s history.' Trump’s real complaint is they haven’t done that enough."

A Republican measure to limit, but not bar, congressional stock trading faltered in the Senate as Democrats thwarted a G.O.P. bid to show progress on an issue that has rankled voters.

Wednesday’s event in Quantico, Virginia, occurs a year to the day after the defense secretary gave a highly partisan lecture to the military’s generals and admirals.

On Wednesday, a prominent conservative commentator revealed that the GOP is desperate to avoid the impeachment of President Donald Trump’s officials, particularly that of embattled Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. According to American Conservative senior editor Luke Nicastro – who previously served as National Security Advisor to MAGA-oriented Senator Josh Hawley – if Democrats regain power, successful impeachments could put Trump administration collaborators on the path to “the Hague.” As Nicastro explains, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) recently adjourned the House for its recess two weeks early, breaking an earlier promise to “work all the way through September and every day that’s on the calendar.” The reason was clear to everyone. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) was attempting to force a vote on Hegseth’s impeachment, and according to Nicastro, it was “obvious” that Johnson “wanted to avoid that impeachment vote. Massie’s measure had a 48-hour timer baked into it, and it was introduced on a Tuesday. Johnson sent his members home on Wednesday night, thus punting consideration of impeachment until the House gavels back in after the midterms.” In Nicastro’s estimation, there was a good chance the impeachment would have been a success. As he writes, “Hegseth has antagonized Republican lawmakers to an unusual degree, including by summarily dismissing senior defense officials and military officers, failing to offer details on how he’ll spend the gargantuan sums for which his department is asking, and generally exhibiting what might charitably be called an indecorous manner. And more than any other administration figure — excepting only the president himself — Hegseth owns the least popular war in American history. Indeed, polling suggests a majority of Americans support Hegseth’s impeachment. It’s therefore not inconceivable this thing might have passed. And even an unsuccessful impeachment measure would be politically embarrassing, both for Johnson and the White House.” But, notes Nicastro, there is likely another reason the GOP took such drastic action to block the vote. “Assuming a blue wave in the midterms,” he explains, “this would start next year with congressional investigations, hearings, and impeachments. If a Democrat were to win the White House in 2028, these efforts would quickly escalate to encompass the full machinery of government. Hegseth is likely to be among the highest-priority targets. His record reads like it was cooked up in a lab to enrage liberal sensibilities: He is a former Fox News host who has been accused of sexual assault, a brash and crude culture warrior who delights in what progressives call ‘punching down,’ and a combination hype man/executive agent for the president’s various military interventions. Dozens of Democratic lawmakers have openly said he is guilty of war crimes.” And Democrats aren’t alone in suggesting Hegseth’s criminality. Massie’s impeachment attempt, argues Nicastro, “could significantly bolster such a case. For his effort isn’t hastily drawn-up hackwork; it consists of eight separate articles, each of which is specific and serious. The articles accuse Hegseth of illegally using U.S. forces for hostilities not authorized by Congress in Iran, Venezuela, and Yemen; contravening the War Powers Resolution of 1973; ordering extrajudicial killings in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific; ignoring legislation requiring the minimization of civilian casualties; and using his department to retaliate against Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) in violation of the latter’s First Amendment rights. And while most of the charges essentially amount to carrying out illegal orders from his commander-in-chief, two of them — ignoring responsibilities for protecting civilians and targeting Kelly — concern things that Hegseth seems to have done on his own.” What’s more, asserts Nicastro, “Dems are unlikely to be content with bagging Hegseth; others further down in the Pentagon bureaucracy could be in legal jeopardy as well. Nor is the American justice system the only worry. One increasingly hears speculation that a liberal administration could manifest its enthusiasm for the ‘rules-based international order’ by working with the Hague on this.” Nicastro believes that having these articles debated, memorialized in the public record, and voted upon — even if ultimately rejected — would “give substance to prospective future prosecutions, both domestic and international. The whole affair is also likely to spook those currently running the war, especially if the president at some point decides to make good on his perennial threats to ‘annihilate’ Iran.” And as Nicastro notes, such concerns would be justified given the UN’s recent finding that there are ‘reasonable grounds’ to believe the U.S. military has committed war crimes in Iran. Regardless of the GOP’s delays, Nicastro concludes, “impeachment will sooner or later be considered by the House. And these are unlikely to be the last charges lodged against Hegseth.”

Senate Democrats were expected on Wednesday to block a measure that would encourage, but not require, states to protect consumers from power rate hikes as a result of data center growth.

Sen. John Fetterman's slow lurch to the right has made him enemies among his own party and earned him the nickname "Trump's favorite Democrat," and now, per a report from The Atlantic, he is also helping figures in MAGA-world make bank. In a piece published Wednesday, the outlet reported that Fetterman, the first-term Democrat from Pennsylvania, found himself working with a MAGA-friendly, "GOP-aligned" fundraising entity, Blitz Digital, after his previous Democratic firm, MissionWired, parted ways with him over the summer. The report further cited internal communications about a fundraising pitch signed by Fetterman — in which he pledged to "always going to reject Socialism and the anti-American way of life" and accused his own party of being hijacked by socialists — "doing crazy numbers" for the company. "Shortly [after leaving MissionWired], he forged a joint fundraising committee with Pennsylvania’s other senator, Dave McCormick, a Republican," The Atlantic explained. "In July, Fetterman joined a group of Republican politicians for a retreat with Fox News executives at Rupert Murdoch’s ranch in Montana. On September 9, he spoke in a recorded address at Trump’s midterm convention in Dallas, delivering a message about rejecting socialism that would feature in his fundraising solicitation later that month." The report added later: "Days after speaking at the midterm convention, Fetterman’s political operation began working with a Republican-aligned firm to start arranging emails and text messages to acquire new conservative donors, which were first reported by The Intercept. Fetterman’s missives were circulated by more than a dozen political operations with domain names such as America1stWarRoom.com, ConstitutionPatriots.com, RedMajorities.com, TheDesantisDaily.com, and TrumpTruths.org, according to records collected by the Archive of Political Emails. The new effort deepens the mystery around his political intentions and is a cause for concern for Democratic leaders. Fetterman’s refusal to limit himself to the Democratic ecosystem could matter a great deal next year, especially if he finds himself as the decisive swing vote and holds the power to decide which party will control the Senate." Fetterman's increasing tendency to voice more right-leaning stances has led to widespread concerns among the Democratic Party that he could make himself a grave nuisance in the Senate after the midterms. If the party manages to wrest the majority away from Republicans in November, there are fears that Fetterman could stall their agenda as a Joe Manchin-esque spoiler vote. Or, he could wreck their majority altogether by switching his affiliation to the GOP, an idea he has been dismissive but noncommittal about. "One Republican digital consultant told us, after requesting anonymity to discuss the arrangements, that although the relationships Fetterman is building are unusual, fundraising-list brokers typically push the language that performs the best, and that there is clear appeal for a Democrat who is willing to echo Republican talking points about socialism," the report added. “'Assuming he believes all the things he says,' the consultant said about Fetterman, 'it is just a natural place to go, because he agrees with Republicans on some things.'"

President Donald Trump’s promise to send Americans $5,000 checks if Republicans keep control of Congress is falling on deaf ears with much of the public, with new polling showing skepticism extending into his own party. This month, at the Republican midterm convention in Dallas, Trump said every adult U.S. citizen would get a $5,000 "dividend" if the GOP keeps both the House and the Senate in November, raising concerns about voter-buying. However, a poll carried out by Strength In Numbers and Verasight from September 16 to 21 showed that only 13 percent of adults believed the president intends to send the money. Sixty-two per cent of the people interviewed thought the promise was mainly a ploy to get votes. The survey showed that 71 percent of adults thought it was inappropriate for a president to make a financial promise on the premise that his party won the election, including 53 percent of Republicans. About a quarter of respondents believed the checks would be issued if Republicans won. Support for the payment varied considerably depending on how the proposal was presented. When respondents were asked about payments of $5,000 without Trump's name mentioned or any condition attached to the election, 53 percent backed the idea and 35 percent opposed it. But when it was stated that the money would only be sent if the Republicans won, support dropped to 35 percent, while 54 percent opposed it. Salon columnist Amanda Marcotte referred to the findings in her latest report, saying Trump's most recent attempt to win over voters with his record is meeting increasing skepticism, even among those who previously supported him. She writes, "The president has perhaps the most staggering track record of defrauding Americans of any hustler in the country’s 250-year history," citing his 34 felony fraud convictions and civil fraud cases. The article cites the Bulwark’s report on Trump’s long list of cash-incentive promises he failed to keep, including the $5,000 DOGE dividend, the $2,000 stimulus checks tariff rebate, and the $500 Obamacare rebate checks. Trump has kept up his praise of the economy. At a press conference on Monday, he stated that the United States had "the best economy we've ever had" and told the reporters that their 401(k) accounts had doubled. “You’re twice as wealthy as you were a short time ago, every one of you,” Trump said. “And that’s because of me.” His government has publicly defended the TV ads funded by taxpayers which promote Trump and his policies. On Monday, Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota criticized the expenditure, stating that "it shouldn't be paid for with taxpayer money." The $5,000 promise now offers another indication of whether Trump's argument is influencing voters ahead of the Nov. 3 midterms. The polling suggests the payment itself is more popular than the election condition he attached to it.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit asking a judge to compel the university to provide information on hiring practices that it said discriminated against white men.

The Senate nominee’s bid to unseat incumbent Susan Collins (R) is critical to Democrats’ hopes for reclaiming control of the chamber.

Christa Pike was scheduled to die Wednesday morning, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit intervened.

Republican Sen. Eric Schmitt's badly fumbled line of attack against Jack Smith has been widely mocked and denounced, and now, even his own local news program has joined in, eviscerating his "clown-show" argument in a recent segment. On Tuesday, former special counsel Jack Smith once again sat for questioning at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, in which Republicans once again attempted to attack his investigations into President Donald Trump as corrupt. At one point, Schmitt, with the aid of posters, tried to accuse Smith of colluding with Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis in his investigations, basing his logic on Smith supposedly attending an Atlanta Hawks basketball game in February 2024. As it turned out, Schmitt had mixed up teams, as Smith had actually attended an Iowa Hawkeyes women's college basketball game. Before he was corrected, the senator went so far as to accuse Smith of perjury when he denied attending the Atlanta Hawks game. The incident was widely criticized, among pundits and Schmitt's own colleagues, as an embarrassing flub. On Tuesday evening, prolific left-wing commentator Christopher Webb shared a segment from Schmitt's own local news program, which dug further into the extent to which the senator's information was grossly inaccurate. "This is priceless. Check out how local news is reporting on Sen Eric Schmidt’s clown-show grilling of Jack Smith," Webb wrote in his post. "It's the kind of moment senators dream about," the reporter in the segment explained. "Sen. Schmitt had his stage, and hey, shooters shoot. He knows ball, right? So he took his shot." The segment continued, following a clip of the exchange between Smith and Schmitt: "We did find the broadcast video, though, Fox Sports, courtesy of them, and we do find Jack Smith. You can see him yourself, top corner up here, section 109, row 1. In fact, that seat itself doesn’t even exist in Atlanta. Marv Albert would call this an airball. Like any intense game, we had some trash talk too, Sen. Schmitt called Smith, quote, 'a dirtbag,' and 'a villain.' He quickly made the rounds on conservative podcasts where these influencers priased his appearance for taking Jack Smith down a peg." The reporter noted that the network had reached out to Schmitt's office for an explanation or an apology, but did not hear anything back. He added that when a witness lies under oath, they can face punishments up to and including prison time, but when a senator like Schmitt gets their facts wrong, "he's just asking questions."This is priceless.Check out how local news is reporting on Sen Eric Schmidt’s clown-show grilling of Jack Smith.They found Jack Smith at the game…“Top corner, section 109, row 1. In fact, that seat doesn’t even exist in Atlanta.” https://t.co/CDyPrKkNgQ — Christopher Webb (@cwebbonline) September 30, 2026

Nicole Saphier, a radiologist and former Fox News contributor, is the third person the president has nominated to be surgeon general in his second term.

On Tuesday, a former White House insider asserted that once President Donald Trump enters his lame duck stage and loses power, the GOP will “splinter” as it fights over the future of the party. This is according to strategist and former President Bill Clinton senior advisor Doug Sosnik, who writes in the New York Times that the post-Trump era will bring political tumult as the country struggles to move forward and rebuild. “The chaos of the 20 months since President Donald Trump returned to office is nothing compared with the volatility that will follow the midterms,” writes Sosnik. “In less than 40 days, the convergence of multiple forces will further destabilize the U.S. political system as the country moves beyond an era dominated by Trump. This period will trigger a full-throated debate about the future of the country.” According to Sosnik, the first moment of struggle will come if and when the Democrats take the majority in the House and possibly the Senate, which could lead to Trump challenging the election results in a manner that has the potential to “destabilize American democracy.” “Once Democrats take control, Trump will functionally become a lame-duck president,” writes Sosnik. “Trump has always made his own interests his top priority — and significant midterm losses for the Republicans could increase the urgency he feels to define his legacy before he leaves office. As Trump continues to age, his attempts to secure his place in history will probably be paired with even more erratic behavior. That will put even more distance between his administration and the rest of the GOP.” It is then that the party will begin to “splinter,” asserts Sosnik. Trump’s coalition was always comprised of factions that were in conflict, and there is no other figure who can sustain that fragile alliance. “The factions will begin fighting over who will define the party,” asserts Sosnik. “Heavy Republican losses in November would widen these divisions. Already, the populist and establishment wings of the party are split. In an August NBC News Decision Desk poll, 45 percent of Republicans said they supported the MAGA movement over the party.” Sosnik predicts that populist forces will continue to gain power, and could play a major role in what the party’s message looks like in 2028. It will be the first open-seat presidential election in 12 years, in which no incumbent is vying for the position and pushing a first-term message, which will result in fierce debate over the political future. With all this in mind, warns Sosnik, “The two years between the midterms and the 2028 election will be a period of transition between two political eras: the Age of Trump and the Age After Trump. Although little of substance is likely to get done, the policy fights in Washington and in the presidential campaign will shape the country’s direction after the election. The Age of Trump will probably be remembered less for building a new architecture for American governance than for dismantling the old one. It will fall to the next president to begin building something new. Until then, expect disorder.”

Nearly all Senate Democrats voted to require the State Department to report on Israeli settler violence in the West Bank.

The effort by President Donald Trump to reduce the price of hamburgers by permitting imports of beef with low tariffs has ruffled the nerves of cattle producers in Republican states, while economists say the policy will save consumers only a few pennies per pound. As Vox reported, Trump’s administration increased the amount of imported lean beef trimmings eligible for lower tariff rates by 300,000 metric tons, or about 661 million pounds last month. The White House stated that the temporary action was necessary since the domestic supply of beef was not sufficient to meet demand at reasonable prices. The policy focuses on the lean trimmings used in ground beef, the price of which was about 8 percent higher in August than a year before. Economists at Purdue University, Ken Foster and Bernhard Dalheimer, estimated that the additional imports amount to approximately 6.8% of the annual U.S. ground-beef supply and could lower wholesale prices by at most 1.41 percent. Vox carried out a calculation based on earlier research by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which had shown that only about 19 percent of the declines in wholesale beef prices reach consumers, and concluded that the policy could reduce retail prices by approximately 0.27 percent, around two cents per pound in the best-case situation. In cattle-producing areas, there have been political consequences as a result of the savings. Ranchers claim that extra imports reduce the demand for domestic animals, especially older "cull" cows since their lean meat directly competes with the imported trimmings. They also worry that continuous government intervention whenever beef prices rise could cut down on the profits needed to make it worthwhile to rebuild herds. Republican Senators Chuck Grassley from Iowa and Jerry Moran from Kansas joined numerous other members of Congress in urging Trump not to take actions which could cause cattle prices to fall. “Cattle markets are cyclical, and ranchers use the upswings to prepare for the inevitable downturn,” they said. Farmers are also under pressure from a number of other factors. According to Vox, U.S. beef exports dropped by 12 percent in 2025 due to trade disputes with China, and at the same time fuel and fertilizer prices have risen. Cattle groups in Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas stated that the recent ICE activity had caused workers to remain at home, which delayed the shipments and resulted in financial losses for the producers. The disagreement occurs as Republicans are experiencing very close races throughout the Farm Belt; although Trump won Kansas by more than 16 points in 2024, he also won Iowa by around 13 points and Nebraska by more than 20 points. Yet the polling mentioned by Vox indicates that there are competitive Senate races in all three states. Last week, Reuters also stated that the Republicans were putting a large amount of money into Iowa and Kansas and making numerous campaign appearances as the races became more closely contested ahead of the November midterms. The beef policy was intended to provide help available at the grocery store, but in cattle-producing areas it has instead become yet another cause of conflict with an industry which has in the past supported the Republicans.

President Donald Trump and his Republican colleagues failed to receive a "bump" from their midterm convention in Dallas, Texas in September. The goal of the convention was for Trump to spend several nights promoting GOP speakers in an hours-long event that was capped off each night by speeches from him and the vice president. In reality, Not only did the Republican party as a whole fail to achieve a bump from the convention, but Senate candidate Ken Paxton likewise saw no lift from the event. After Republicans spent around $50 million for the gathering, Paxton's numbers didn't move an inch. In fact, according to Paxton, the whole thing may have actually hurt him. The New York Times reported on Wednesday that Paxton was caught on tape blaming Trump for the empty promises of the convention. During a private Washington D.C., fundraiser last Thursday, Paxton was taped by an attendee, and that recording was passed along to the Times. “Do you feel like he’s a little bit of a drag?” A person asks, though it isn't clear at first whether they're referring to Trump or someone else. Paxton says: “So to be honest with you, the numbers — when we did that convention — it dropped our numbers. Everybody’s numbers dropped. Right now, yeah, not good.” According to the Times, the gathering was only about a dozen people and the person who recorded it emphatically opposes Paxton. "Three other people with knowledge of the event confirmed Mr. Paxton’s attendance. Two of these people recalled that Mr. Paxton had been posed this question, and one recalled his response about the negative consequences of Mr. Trump’s convention," the Times said. A senior Paxton adviser, Nick Maddux, claimed that the recording was fake. “This is more manipulated nonsense from The New York Times to create a story that doesn’t exist," Maddux said. “Our latest poll from the last week has Ken Paxton leading by three points, and every serious pollster will tell you that our numbers have improved since early September,” Maddux added. “Ken Paxton is going to win this race, and he looks forward to closing strong alongside President Trump, including when he comes to Texas this week.” Two Republican lobbyists, Susan Hirschmann and Chris Brinson, held the event in a conference room near Capitol Hill, the report explained. The report called Paxton's remarks "notable" given his strong relationship with Trump and the extent to which the president stuck his neck out to support Paxton over safe Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas). The president, meanwhile, constantly blasts Paxton for looking sloppy and lacking public speaking chops. “He may not be the best-looking guy I’ve ever seen,” the president said, “but you know what, he is — he’s the greatest attorney general in America.”

The African nation refused to make an agreement with the Trump administration, which has sought to slash foreign assistance and impose new terms on recipients.

Troy Jackson is challenging Republican Sen. Susan Collins in a pivotal contest that has been dominated by campaign finance issues.

The trend says a lot about how candidates see this election, with the midterms just more than four weeks away.

The president wants to eliminate the public road that loops around the Hains Point peninsula, allowing the golf course to stretch to the water’s edge.

Taxpayers spent $6.7 million last year on the program, which reimburses lawmakers for food and lodging expenses in D.C., a Washington Post analysis found.

An Arizona guide service challenged rules that force foreigners to pay a $100 surcharge to visit 11 national parks, saying that only Congress can change pricing.

Mayor Karen Bass and her onetime ally, Nithya Raman, made their case to voters with just five weeks left until the election.

Eric Schmitt humiliated himself on live TV today. It was during testimony by Jack Smith, the special prosecutor who charged Donald Trump. The Missouri senator's self-own was so spectacular that it overshadowed Smith's opening statement in which he said he found "proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump engaged in serious crimes against our nation." Maybe that was the goal. If so, it backfired. The Times: "Senator Eric Schmitt’s accusation that Smith attended an NBA game in Atlanta to secretly meet with prosecutors pursuing Trump there — which appeared to immediately fall apart — is overshadowing every other exchange at the hearing on social media. It has the potential to undermine Republican efforts to demolish Smith’s credibility by demonstrating a carelessness with basic facts." But Schmitt was the careless one. He accused Smith of conspiring with Fanni Willis, the district attorney of Fulton County, Georgia, who indicted Donald Trump. Schmitt presented enlarged copies of text messages he said came from Smith's team. He said they placed Smith at an NBA game, the day after news broke of Willis' affair with a county prosecutor. We were supposed to understand the implication that Smith was scheming with Willis against Trump. In his closing remarks, Schmitt said, addressing Smith, that "you may think you're the hero in this story, but let me tell you something. You're the villain." He added: "You have done so much damage. As a former prosecutor, I can say there's so much damage to the trust and faith people have in our system. You have weaponized the Department of Justice against political enemies to an extent that has never happened in the history of this country. "You will go down as a total dirtbag." That sounded noble. That sounded just. Only one problem. He confused the Hawks of Atlanta with the Hawkeyes of Iowa. Political journalist Dave Weigel called the scene "cinematic": "The sly smirk when Schmitt thinks he's gotten Smith to perjure himself. The hasty vanishing of the sign. [Minnesota Senator Amy] Klobuchar getting [Louisiana Senator John] Kennedy to hold it up. Schmitt getting loud and angry when Klobuchar points out he mixed up the Hawks and Hawkeyes." Nick Fish, the president of the American Atheists, an advocacy group, was less charitable: "The s----eating grin from Schmitt and the staffer chuds behind him — just before stepping on a rake — is the current state of the Republican Party in Congress. Brains pickled by conspiracy theories that immediately collapse under the slightest examination." Even so, Schmitt won't lose credibility. Like all Republicans, he has a media infrastructure that not only advances his interests but prevents him from facing the consequences of failure. This morning, before testimony, Axios ran a friendly story promoting Schmitt as a possible running mate for JD Vance. ("We hear the VP views Schmitt, 51, as trustworthy, intelligent, articulate and a deft political operator," Jim VandeHei wrote.) Afterward, Schmitt went on The Charlie Kirk Show, the podcast still named after the late propagandist. "You caught [Smith] in this NBA game too in Atlanta," the host says. "Yeah," Schmitt replies. (This is in the context of a ferocious online effort at damage control. "This is like a full court press," Elias Isquith reported. "All the maga accounts on Twitter are promoting alternative facts.") As I said at the top, Schmitt's humiliation today was spectacular. If you consume only rightwing media, however, you might not know it was humiliation at all. You might even think Schmitt took Smith down in the name of the people. If the future of democracy depends on shared truth, and if shame is the right response to bad faith, what is the future of democracy when men like Eric Schmitt not only shrug off humiliation but are even rewarded for it? For an answer, I got in touch with Don Moynihan, a professor of public policy at the University of Michigan. An expert on governance, he publishes a newsletter called Can We Still Govern? He watched the Schmitt episode and how Sean Hannity framed his humiliation as victory. "Once you go along with the claim that American elections were stolen, or that immigrants are eating pets, you've shown you will go along with anything," he said. In this brief interview, I asked Professor Moynihan how can anyone govern in a climate in which shame no longer matters politically and what the Democrats can do about it? Eric Schmitt humiliated himself. Then he went on a friendly podcast to pretend he didn't. Future democracy depends on a majority understanding the truth. But rightwing media is dedicated to warping it. Can anyone govern in this climate? A virtue we do not value enough in governing is shame. If you went on the Senate floor and made plainly false accusations, you should be ashamed of yourself. If not, other people should shame you! Amy Klobuchar did a good job of calling Schmitt out when he would not acknowledge his gotcha had backfired, but if he had any decency, he should have owned up to it himself. Seems to me Dems do not value shame enough. They try to move on to more "important things," even if it's just decorum. It would be good politics to drop everything else and focus on the shameful acts. Liberals generally underrate the power of humiliation. Thoughts? I'd put it differently. I think Republicans are more successful in turning events into scandals. That is what Schmitt was trying to do today, and it seemed he had already queued up a bunch of right-wing media to cover what turned out to be a misfire. Lets take another example, which is secret F-35 airline parts being shipped to China. The issue has certainly been covered in the media, but I suspect if it happened under a Democratic President, it would be wall-to-wall coverage on Fox and Newsmax and the wider rightwing media. We would see talking heads and Republicans make the case that this was an example of incompetence, and demanding resignations. Why can’t Dems do the same? Despite the persistent rightwing complaints of a liberal media bias, the reality is that traditional mainstream media does not want to be viewed as partisan cheerleaders, to the point that they will bend over backwards to demonstrate fairness. So it might not be possible for Dems to shame Republicans in a persistent way that deters shameful acts? I think Dems operate in a more discerning media landscape than their counterparts. The fact that Hannity posted about Schmitt putting Smith "on the spot" as if it was a big victory moment rather than a screw-up is telling. Rachel Maddow would not embarrass herself in that way. But once you go along with the claim that American elections were stolen, or that immigrants are eating pets, you've shown you will go along with anything. So back to the beginning: how does anyone govern in this climate? The truth still matters. For the last couple of years, we have seen a style of governing that is a mixture of conspiracy and fantasy, but sooner or later, reality still matters. If the midterms go as predicted, and Republicans are shellacked, I wonder if they will have a real conversation about the degree to which they have focused more on feeding the base conspiracy theories versus actually fixing real problems. Because right now, it feels like stunts like Schmitt are less and less connected to reality.

The assessment by the State Department’s inspector general echoes concerns raised by critics of the move to shutter V.O.A., including some Republicans in Congress.

A Republican strategist blew his top on Tuesday about his party's self-inflicted humiliation when interrogating prosecutor Jack Smith. As they attempted to impress President Donald Trump and his supporters by proving Smith lied about being in Atlanta, and by implication meeting with another anti-Trump prosecutor Fani Willis, Sens. Eric Schmitt (R-MO) and John Kennedy (R-LA) touted as evidence that a giant board showing that Smith had supposedly attended an Atlanta Hawks game. In fact, however, Smith had attended a basketball game with the University of Iowa Hawkeyes, one that was held in Smith's home state of Maryland. Soon right-wing commentators like Sean Hannity and Benny Johnson, who promoted the moment as Schmitt and company catching Smith both committing perjury and conspiring with Willis, were frantically deleting their social media posts. Discussing the matter on CNN on Tuesday, GOP adviser Shermichael Singleton was indignant at his party's embarrassing faux pas. "We have races in Texas, Georgia, Michigan, Maine, Ohio and North Carolina that are either toss-ups or slightly leaning Democrat," Singleton told CNN anchor Kaitlan Collins. "We're going to have to spend a lot of money to get these people across the finish line. A lot of our base, working-class people, men of color, are struggling. They're barely getting by. There are a lot of people who are wondering how their children and grandchildren will get through college and afford a house. So as a strategist, a Republican one, I want to talk about those issues, the tangible issues the American people are saying they want to hear about from their political leaders." He added, "I couldn't care less about Jack Smith in this particular moment, when we're weeks away from a midterm and I want to focus on drawing a contrast with the other side and figuring out the policy solutions to the issues that are clearly impacting everybody in this country right now. That must be the focus of my party and the messaging going into November." Collins asked Singleton, "Are you saying Republicans should not have invited Jack Smith to Capitol Hill today?" Singleton agreed. "For what?" he asked. "What in the h - - - are we getting out of this? I'm just being very honest about this" Pointing out that Republicans need to enthuse their base and win over both low-propensity voters and independents, he dismissed approaches that focus on the president's wishes by saying that "Trump isn't on the ballot. They're not happy about the economy. These are very real structural things that, operationally, we must figure out a way to address." This is not the first time Singleton has criticized his own party for failing to connect with the voters it needs to win. In August, he told CNN's "The Arena" that they were failing the Black men who had helped put Trump over the top in the 2024 election. “I've critiqued my own party about meeting particularly Black men, who really showcase some diversity in their political thought in 2024, in terms of voting for Trump and Republicans to actually deliver electorally, deliver legislatively,” Singleton said at the time. “We're not supporting Black male candidates. We should be supporting legislation that empower Black men. And the party has completely failed, in my opinion.”

The recommendations are not binding, but it is rare for them to be ignored in the military justice system.

A Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist said she would have felt suicidal if she had made a mistake as egregious and foolish as that committed by Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-MO) when he tried to pull a "gotcha" on Jack Smith, the prosecutor who attempted to hold President Donald Trump accountable for his 2020-2021 insurrection. "Here's what I would say," said MS NOW host Chris Hayes on Tuesday when interviewing the acclaimed Carol Leonnig. Hayes and Leonnig were discussing how Schmitt tried to prove Smith had lied about never being to Atlanta — and, by implication, had colluded with another prosecutor investigating Trump — by showing he had been to an Atlanta Hawks game. It was quickly proved that in fact Smith had attended a basketball game by a team called the University of Iowa Hawkeyes, one held near his home in Maryland. Even conservative commentators like Scott Jennings admitted Schmitt embarrassed himself, while right-wing pundits like Sean Hannity and Benny Johnson, who initially characterized the encounter as a win for Schmitt, later deleted their posts. "You talk to all sorts of people in the world who have different views of the media," Hayes told Leonnig. "And one of the things I always say is, when we do this show here, us and the whole team, people know where I'm coming from, what my views are, but we really do try to make sure we get things right. It's a real point of pride. We do our due diligence. And I just can't believe that level of sloppiness." Leonnig replied, "I think there are some journalists who might have, I don't mean to be grim, but would have been suicidal" if they had made that kind of mistake. "It's not cool and it's not copacetic, and it would be heart palpitations forever." She added, "I'm a reporter. I'm not an anchor. I'm not a host... but I agree with you about MS NOW's position, which is: okay, yeah, we ask hard questions. As a network, the anchors are generally progressive-leaning and worried about democracy, but the reporting here is fact-based. And my jaw opened as far as it could when Schmitt began accusing Jack Smith of perjury. I could see Jack Smith saying, 'Whoa, whoa, I've never been to Atlanta, except maybe through the airport on a connecting flight.'" She concluded, "The guy is being criticized for various things, but he's not going to perjure himself. He's a [careful] lawyer. And so that was all going very, very fast in front of our eyes. That's a problem I think all of us fact-based journalists are kind of wrestling with: this administration is pushing this grand conspiracy case, and there are no facts suggesting that people got together in a big plot to try to hurt Donald Trump." This is not Schmitt's first encounter with national controversy. Last year he delivered a speech widely characterized as white nationalist, one in which he argued that America was not founded on a "proposition" but were instead “believed they were fighting for a nation, a homeland for themselves and their descendants." He added, “They fought, they bled, they struggled, they died for us. They built this country for us. America, in all its glory is their gift to us, handed down across the generations. It belongs to us. It’s our birthright, it’s our heritage, our destiny. If America is everything and everyone, then it is nothing and no one at all.” - YouTube www.youtube.com

A seating chart of the meeting illustrated growing divisions within the artificial intelligence industry and how it is viewed by the White House.

No matter how much conservative Nick Catoggio dislikes President Donald Trump, he is always quick to admit Trump’s Teflon superpower is impressive. But on Tuesday, Catoggio said he was surprised to have to confess that Trump’s Teflon armor regarding Jeffrey Epstein appears to be cracking. Trump’s name appears generously throughout the investigative files on convicted sex trafficker Epstein, but Catoggio predicted back in 2025 that Trump’s voters would obediently back off when Trump ordered them to. This, he now says, does not appear to be the case. After damning news of Trump allegedly sending Epstein a lewd birthday message in 2003 alluding to ‘certain things in common’ that the two men shared, Trump warned in a post on Truth Social that no true fan of his would be suckered by the Jeffrey Epstein “hoax” perpetrated by Democrats and the liberal press. He even blasted right-wingers who remained suspicious of him. “Surely his followers would obey his commands. Don’t they always?” demanded Catoggio at the time. “The Journal’s bombshell is effectively, and ironically, the end of the scandal as a political threat to Trump rather than the start. MAGA simply lacks the civic integrity to keep pursuing the truth about Epstein now that it’s been transformed, stupidly and cynically, into a referendum on the media.” “[But] was I wrong?” Catoggio now asks, pointing to a poll finding public credulity about an Epstein cover-up to be widespread and bipartisan. Among Republicans, 57 percent said they suspect the government is keeping information about the sex trafficker secret, and 17 percent said they believe the cover-up is aimed at concealing “significant” material in the files about Trump. “Forget Republicans, though,” said Catoggio. “Among independents, a group whom Trump came within 3 points of winning in 2024, opinion on Epstein is radioactive. Fully 81 percent think the government is hiding things about him, and 66 percent(!) suspect that ‘significant’ information about the president has something to do with the reason why.” In an America with no war in the Middle East and inflation at 2 percent, none of that would matter in November, said Catoggio, adding that only “the most committed cranks” would vote against the ruling party at a moment when things are going well economically and overseas because they’re mad that Trump didn’t open the Epstein files. But in an nation trapped in a “forever war” with diesel at $6.50 per gallon, the Epstein issue may be “just the trick" granting "disaffected Trumpy populists psychological ‘permission’ to break with him without feeling like traitors by doing so,” said Catoggio. Perhaps his supporters would have stuck with Trump on Iran and refused to betray him to the hated left. But the fact that he “crossed them on Epstein last year” may have “given them a face-saving way to express their broader disenchantment with his presidency,” said Catoggio. "It was he who betrayed them by not eagerly exposing America’s pedophile class, a supreme populist priority, and so now they’re free to oppose him on anything they like. Including the war.” Additionally, Catoggio said a record-high share of the public now believes that the government is corrupt. And this same opinion among Republicans has barely budged. “Trump’s supporters know he’s corrupt, in other words, and they know it well enough that they can’t be bothered to pretend otherwise even when talking to pollsters,” Catoggio said. “… The swamp won because Trump wanted it to win, those supporters might conclude — on war, on influence peddling, and on Jeffrey Epstein. If any meaningful part of the right ends up entertaining that possibility in November, the president and his party are cooked.”