Thank you , , , , , and many others for tuning into my live video with and ! Join us Fridays at 2 p.m. every week.

Get more from Camaron Stevenson in the Substack app

Available for iOS and Android

Get the app

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

What Happened

The Trump administration on Thursday ignored a federal court order to restore White House access to three banned news outlets, instead relying on what it sees as precedent from two other press freedom lawsuits currently stalled in the courts.

The most recent ban came directly from President Donald Trump, who revoked access from Politico, CNN, and MS NOW after criticizing their coverage of him. The outlets sued, arguing that the ban was a violation of the First Amendment.

“MS NOW journalists were denied access to the White House grounds,” MS NOW said in a statement. “MS NOW intends to take any and all steps necessary to defend our First Amendment rights and the essential role of independent journalism in our democracy.”

In defense of the ban, Department of Justice lawyers pointed to two other media restrictions imposed by the administration that have received partial backing from the courts.

One involves the Associated Press, who was banned from the White House press pool over its refusal to go along with Trump’s attempt to rename the Gulf of Mexico. The AP sued the administration in February 2025, access was reinstated in April, but the ruling was paused last fall by the US District Court of Appeals, where the case has sat ever since. AP reporters are still barred from the Oval Office and Air Force One, and have described its access to the White House overall as sporadic. it’s unclear when the lawsuit will continue.

The other ongoing case the DOJ cited involves restrictions put on journalists covering the Pentagon. In October 2025, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth told reporters that they would need to sign a pledge allowing the government to dictate their coverage, or their press passes would be taken away. News outlets sued and the matter has been slowly working its way through the courts.

The White House has used the sluggish nature of the court process to its advantage, and appears to be testing what it can get away with in the absence of a vigilant judiciary. Despite preliminary injunctions in both prior cases siding with the news outlets, the Trump administration has continued to further restrict press access while the litigation proceeds.

“Trump’s ban harms both the press and the public, which relies on journalists to report independently on the president and his administration,” said Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University. “We hope that Judge Kelly will soon make his temporary order permanent, and that his permanent order addresses the news organizations’ First Amendment claims, not just their Fifth Amendment ones. The First Amendment bars the president from transforming the press corps into a propaganda machine.”

Viewed in the broader context of Trump’s aggression towards the press during his second term, the decision to ignore US District Judge Timothy Kelly’s order restoring access to Politico, CNN, and MS NOW is part of a methodical effort to control information about the administration. In addition to outright bans, the White House has taken control of the press pool away from an independent agency, defunded public media like PBS and NPR, replaced reporting at the state-run Voice of America with far-right misinformation, initiated a retaliatory review of ABC’s broadcast license, ended protections for journalists’ confidential sources, and seized computers from the home of a reporter whose coverage had been critical of the administration.

Attempts to Sanewash

• Judge orders White House to ‘immediately’ restore CNN, Politico and MS NOW’s access. Trump shrugs

• Media outlets request hearing after journalists’ White House ban despite court order

• White House press ban set to continue for now after hearing ends without ruling

Far-Right Spin

• Judge says White House must give ‘fake news’ organizations temporary access

• Trump Administration Continues to Block White House Access to CNN, Politico, and MSNOW Despite Judge’s Order- Seizes Their Press Passes

• Banned At The Gate: Trump Boots Major Networks From White House As Obama Unleashes Blistering Warning

Subscribe now

Share

Legislation introduced to stop ICE detention warehouses once and for all

The Trump administration’s failed plan to create mass detention camps shocked and horrified the public, and it could be revived because the loopholes that let the government buy warehouses without local input are still on the books.

Last December, communities across the country were stunned to discover that the Department of Homeland Security had begun purchasing industrial warehouses to convert into detention camps for people arrested by ICE. The news blindsided state lawmakers and city councils, who immediately raised concerns regarding sewage, water, public safety, and potential human rights violations.

The plan was eventually abandoned due to intense opposition from the public, but the legal loopholes that allowed the federal government to spend $1 billion on 11 warehouses — without approval from local authorities and without even complying with standard land survey or permitting processes — still exist. They could be utilized in the future, in a more subtle manner that would not provoke the same public rage.

US Rep. Veronica Escobar (D-TX) worked for months to stop a detention center from opening in her district. DHS bought an industrial complex in Socorro, Texas, for $122 million but refused to engage with the town council or solicit public input — an offense Escobar plans to make illegal. In September, she introduced the DHS Community Consultation Act, which would require DHS to adhere to a 60-day public comment period, actively engage with community members and leaders, and honor any local ordinances that prohibit detention facilities in the region.

“The administration cannot do whatever it wants, but there are gaping loopholes that we need to make sure that we close,” Rep. Escobar told COURIER. “We need to put up guardrails around this and future administrations so that we protect the rights of communities.”

Escobar’s legislation would also require DHS to assess the impact any facility would have on public utilities — like water infrastructure, electric power grids, and roads — healthcare and emergency services, and overall community health. It would establish contagious disease protocols that align with local mandates, reducing the risk of an outbreak at the facilities.

Ultimately, the legislation would codify local control that many elected officials thought was already the law of the land. It turned out those protections were merely societal norms that were quickly bulldozed by the Trump administration. Communities have seen the same playbook with data centers, where permitting requirements and tax burdens have often been waived without regard for public concerns.

“The American people are really angry about a number of issues, and a number of ways that the administration has exploited these loopholes,” said Escobar. “When you look at data centers that are proliferating across the country, including in my community, frequently without community consultation, frequently with a complete disregard for natural resources and air quality — the same thing goes for immigration detention, or for border wall construction. Congress really needs to take back much of the authority that has been given to the executive over decades. We have to shut down all of those loopholes and opportunities that are used by rogue administrations to exert their will over the will of communities.”

As it stands, the DHS Community Consultation Act faces an uphill battle until next year: the House is in recess until November, and Speaker Mike Johnson is unlikely to allow a vote on any legislation that doesn’t have Trump’s express support. Escobar is hopeful that if Democrats take control of Congress, her legislation will quickly be brought to the floor for a vote.

Share

Zorro Ranch investigation sparks action to close ‘Epstein Loophole’

By Jackie Appel, investigative reporter

A technicality in New Mexico’s legal code allowed one of the most notorious sex traffickers in modern history to operate inconspicuously in the state for decades. This year, lawmakers are taking steps to close that loophole.

On June 30, 2008, Jeffrey Epstein plead guilty to soliciting prostitution and procuring a minor for prostitution in the state of Florida. Considering what is now known about Epstein’s vast trafficking empire, the charges seem ludicrously small, especially considering the fact that the jail time to which he was sentenced was served in large part from the comfort of his own home and an office he controlled.

However, the sentencing did accomplish one very important thing: it forced Epstein to register as a sex offender.

Typically, this would be a significant step towards keeping people safe from a man like Epstein. Sex offenders are often barred from living in or working near certain places, and they need to let state governments know they are in the vicinity any time they set up residence across state lines.

Except, as it turns out, that wasn’t true in New Mexico, where Epstein owned and maintained his massive Zorro Ranch property from 1993 until 2019. Following his 2008 conviction, Peter Schoenburg—one of Epstein’s lawyers—noticed a loophole in New Mexico’s laws that meant he would not need to register as a sex offender in the state, even though his conviction required him to register in Florida and New York, where he also owned property.

That loophole remains open to this day. Now, legislators are trying to close it.

Slipping through the cracks

As the Santa Fe New Mexican reported earlier this month, State Rep. Meredith Dixon (D-Albuquerque) said she intends to introduce “a comprehensive package for victims and survivors” during the next legislative session in 2027. She is working closely with Attorney General Raúl Torrez, who she credits with “spearheading this effort.”

Most central to the Epstein case, the package would increase the protected age listed for victims of sexual crimes from 16 to 18. In doing so, legislators would finally close the loophole Epstein used to avoid registering as a sex offender in the state.

While the actual age of Epstein’s victim in his 2008 conviction is disputed, court documents list her as 17 at the time when she was sexually abused by Epstein — and that distinction played a major role in how Epstein got around the court order to register as a sex offender in every state he maintained residence.

In Florida, where Epstein was convicted, the law required him to register as a sex offender for “procuring [a] person under [the] age of 18 for prostitution.” In New Mexico, the closest similar statute is called “sexual exploitation of children by prostitution.” While this sounds like it might be even more all-encompassing than the Florida law, the text specifies that in order for the statute to apply, the victim must be “a child under the age of sixteen.” In Epstein’s case, that meant that the charge of soliciting prostitution from a minor could not legally have been levied against Epstein in the state of New Mexico because his victim was 17, and thus, the state’s registration requirements did not apply.

It was this technicality Epstein’s attorneys leaned on, and ultimately, they convinced state officials that Epstein did not have to register as a sex offender. The decision kept him off local law enforcement’s radar as he built his trafficking empire, where he used his wealth and influence to oversee the abuse of over 1,000 victims — at least 30 of which were assaulted at Zorro Ranch.

Building a safer future

While closing the loophole does little to those who have already been harmed, lawmakers believe correcting the law would do a world of good to protect potential future victims from suffering the same fate as those who were abused by Epstein.

The package compiled by Dixon and Torrez has several objectives beyond simply closing the ‘Epstein loophole,’ many of which fall under the umbrella of aligning New Mexico more closely with federal Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) standards by adding and updating crucial definitions to relevant statutes.

“The [original] reason that I was interested in making the updates to SORNA was actually from a budgetary perspective, because the fact that New Mexico is out of compliance with the federal standards means we are not able to access certain grant monies that we could use to support victims” Dixon told COURIER. “We have not kept up with the changing times. So a lot of our definitions and registry requirements are either outdated or they’re too lax compared to other states. Our effort is to bring our standards up to get us closer to compliance with what the federal standards want.”

Unlike most reporting around Epstein — which is often scandalous and attention-grabbing — the legislative package will be decidedly dull, as it will deal mainly with tweaks to the language and definitions in existing statues. But these small changes (which should be released to the public sometime in October) could mean a world of difference for victims trying to get justice.For example, Dixon said the package will attempt to change the language of the statute outlining who must register as a sex offender.

“I think [one of] the most important [changes] that we are trying to [make] is add sex trafficking. So, if you are convicted of sex trafficking, that would be an offense for which you would need to register as a sex offender,” Dixon explained.

“Right now, it is not a definition that is encompassed in our statute, so that is something that we need to add,” she continued. “There’s exploitation, solicitation, incest, enticement. And there’s sexual exploitation of children by prostitution, but not [sex trafficking].”

The package Dixon and Torrez have compiled heavily focuses on adjusting statutes that could allow perpetrators to operate in the state of New Mexico in much the same way that Epstein did. But Dixon and Torrez intend for it to have broader implications that protect even more potential victims.

“One of the bills that is going to be included is allowing victims — especially child victims — to refuse a pre-trial interview,” Dixon told COURIER. As of right now, victims of trafficking cannot bow out of pre-trial interviews, potentially subjecting them to extended and numerous sessions of answering questions that have the potential to bring their traumas back to the forefront of their minds. “If the defense counsel wants to interview a child victim five times, they’re allowed to do that, and all of that’s before trial.”

Another piece of legislation is focused on removing barriers for victims coming forward to report instances of human trafficking, namely, removing the 10-year statute of limitations. “I think we know now that victims frequently are not ready to speak immediately,” Dixon said, “and so we need to allow them additional time.”

As for why officials seem to have chosen now as the time to finally address many of these concerns, Dixon (perhaps macabrely) credits the recent increased visibility of the Epstein case.

“I have run legislation and worked with colleagues to amend SORNA in the past, and it hasn’t made it to the House floor,” she said. “Now, with everything that’s going on with the Epstein Commission looking at Zorro Ranch and this loophole, I think there’s a better understanding — by legislators and members of the public — of exactly why we need to make some of the changes that we’ve been asking for.”

“I’m very optimistic,” she said, regarding the chances of the package passing during the next legislative session, which will take place at the beginning of 2027.

Hopefully, for the sake of potential future victims, she’s right.

Subscribe now

Share

COMING UP: Next week, we’ll have stories on a new criminal investigation into the executors of Jeffrey Epstein’s estate, Richard Kahn and Darren Indyke. Got questions? Drop ‘em in the comments!

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Support our journalism

Among other excuses, Blanche has spent the last several months telling a federal judge he just can't seem to turn over a few handwritten FBI notes that happen to mention Donald Trump. Now his defense is starting to buckle, as at least one of his attorneys has withdrawn from the case.

As a result of Phang’s lawsuit, the DOJ has also published the redaction justifications it delivered to Congress in the Federal Register — you can read them here.

Thank you , , , , , and many others for tuning into my live video with and ! Join us next Friday at 2 p.m.

Share

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Pledge Your Support

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Pledge Your Support

What Happened

The US House recessed early this week, but not before voting unanimously to refer criminal contempt charges against Jeffrey Epstein bankroller Leon Black to the Justice Department over his refusal to comply with congressional subpoenas.

The referral forces the DOJ to pry open a door into a criminal enterprise US Attorney General Todd Blanche has desperately tried to keep shut. Shortly after joining the agency, Blanche was tasked with leading the department’s investigation into Epstein, which he quickly closed. The decision was widely criticized, as the closure came under the pretense that, despite identifying more than 1,000 victims, the DOJ had not uncovered enough evidence to prosecute any alleged co-conspirators. Blanche spent the following 14 months insisting that the DOJ had moved on, and that the public should do the same.

The criminal referral for Black now forces the DOJ to either revisit Epstein’s criminal network or risk provoking a Congress that has unified behind little else. Public pressure to hold those connected to Epstein accountable and deliver justice for survivors of their abuse pushed congressional Republicans to defy President Donald Trump and join Democrats in passing the Epstein Files Transparency Act last year. That same pressure has fueled an ongoing investigation into the government’s handling of the Epstein case by the House Oversight Committee.

“No one is above the law,” said committee chair Rep. James Comer (R-KY). “We will continue to seek transparency for the American people and justice for survivors in our investigation of the federal government’s handling of the Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell criminal cases.”

The committee’s investigation has been met with outright opposition from the Trump administration and reluctant compliance from private citizens. In July 2025, the committee approved Rep. Summer Lee’s (D-PA) motion to subpoena the DOJ for the full, unredacted Epstein Files. To date, the department has not complied. Nearly a year later, when billionaire and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick appeared before the committee to answer questions about his relationship with Epstein, he let it slip that the White House had coached him before his interview — a revelation many on the committee point to as the reason behind his contradictory answers.

Others who appeared before the committee also did so willingly, but offered similarly deceptive answers. Epstein attorney Darren Indyke gave investigators misleading answers about his compensation and involvement in money laundering; Epstein scheduler Lesley Groff claimed to know nothing about trafficking despite having coordinated travel for victims; and former Goldman Sachs executive Kathy Ruemmler told investigators she hadn’t helped with Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell’s legal troubles, despite emails that confirm otherwise.

Like the others, Black initially appeared before the committee voluntarily. But he cut his interview short after refusing to answer questions about non-disclosure agreements he had women sign, prompting Comer to issue a surprise subpoena for Black’s NDAs. Black left, and when the time came for him to deliver the documents and appear for a deposition, he instead sued the committee. The committee then unanimously voted to hold Black in contempt, a decision that was approved by the full House on Wednesday.

“We just voted on the House floor to hold Leon Black in contempt of Congress,” said Rep. Suhas Subramanyam (D-VA), who sits on the committee. “He’s the guy who funded Jeffrey Epstein to the tune of $180 million. He’s all over the Epstein Files, and even the survivors said that he’d show up, and he was particularly brutal with a few women. Whatever happened, he has a lot of information, a lot of documents that are central to our investigation.”

Black’s long, sordid relationship with Epstein is of particular interest to congressional investigators, who view his role as friend and financier as crucial to understanding how a failed high school teacher came to own two islands, develop close relationships with the world’s richest and most powerful people, amass a personal fortune of over $500 million, and operate an international trafficking and money laundering network seemingly undisturbed for nearly 30 years.

Epstein is believed to have negotiated NDAs between Black and the women he had sexual relationships with, and investigators believe those contracts could provide insight into how Epstein tried to keep his criminal network under wraps. Should Blanche decide to prosecute, Black would either have to comply with the subpoena and deliver the requested NDAs to Congress or face fines and prison time.

“They didn’t have non-disclosure agreements, and this guy does, which means he’s paid women for — whatever reason,” Comer told COURIER. “According to some of the survivors, Epstein negotiated some of these NDAs. He negotiated the terms. Now, Mr. Black said in the transcribed interview — which if he’s lying to Congress, that’s a felony — he said that Epstein didn’t have anything to do with the NDAs. I don’t know if that’s factual or not, and a lot of people in the committee want to know for sure whether that’s true.”

Share

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

Steve Bannon sides with Wall Street oligarchs over tech billionaires at in AI race

The focus of an artificial intelligence summit this week was overshadowed by its main speakers, whose opposing proposals on how to best reign in the emerging tech were instead heralded as a singular message of unity and compromise.

In reality, remarks made by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and far-right strategist Steve Bannon were, predictably, polar opposites. Though both railed against the unchecked power and control tech billionaires wield over AI, Sanders’ solution involved public ownership of AI corporations, while Bannon’s would shift that power from one set of oligarchs to another.

“The American citizens are not going to be supplicants to the oligarchs anymore. We can’t do it,” said Bannon, speaking of tech CEOs. “Here’s what we have to do first: to slow down the pace so that we can understand exactly what’s going on, and also let [China] understand that we’re not going to let them put a moat around this, we’re not going to let [them] be a cartel, we’re not going to underwrite the liabilities while they take the upside. We need time. And this is not legislation — this is going to have to be executive action.”

Bannon’s proposition focused on three components, based on his belief that the US is in the midst of an AI race with China: national security, regulation, and the economy. Under his plan, President Donald Trump would take control of the AI sector as a matter of national security. After consolidating power through executive orders, Bannon said, the US would need to use regulation to end all relations with China: divest any investments, turn away China-based businesses, and deport all Chinese nationals.

On his third component, the economy, Bannon offered no solutions. He also shied away from discussing job losses and the security threats AI itself could pose, two of the main topics at the summit. Sanders, by contrast, focused on ways to provide economic security to people whose jobs might be lost to AI, while shifting control of the industry away from tech billionaires and into the public domain.

“Virtually all of the decisions regarding the development of AI have been made by a handful of the richest people in the world — Musk, Zuckerberg, Bezos, Thiel, Ellison, Brin, and a few others — whose chief goal is to achieve even more wealth and more power than they already have, no matter what the impact their work has on ordinary people,” said Sanders. “If the lives of every man, woman, and child are going to be fundamentally changed by this technology, then the people of this country must make the decisions about AI — and not just a handful of oligarchs. That is why I have introduced legislation, the AI American Sovereign Wealth Fund Act, that would require that half of the board members of the larger AI companies be appointed by the public. The big tech oligarchs must no longer be allowed to determine the future of humanity.”

Sanders also urged the US to engage in open dialogue with China to ensure AI doesn’t develop beyond humanity’s ability to control it. Like Bannon, Sanders compared the situation to the Cold War — but instead of an arms race, Sanders proposed an armistice, in which both countries could reach an agreement that looks to the benefit of humanity as a whole. Ultimately, Sanders said, both countries would need to agree to pause AI development and implement a ban on superintelligence, a treaty Bannon said would be impossible.

While Sanders and Bannon disagreed on nearly every aspect of AI — who should control it, what the dangers are, and how to work with other countries — they did share one singular warning about its advancement: slow it down before it’s too late.

Attempts to Sanewash

• The Bannon-Bernie Bromance Over AI and Oligarchs

• Bernie Sanders and Steve Bannon put aside differences to sound AI alarm

• Steve Bannon turns on Trump to team up with Bernie Sanders over AI threat

Far-Right Spin

• Bernie Makes ‘Strange Coalition’ To Go After AI Following Mystery Man’s ‘Kill Us All’ Warning

• We Are Heading Towards A Cold War Moment With AI

• Odd couple: Bernie Sanders, Steve Bannon join forces to push for stricter AI regulations

Subscribe now

Share

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Pledge Your Support

The latest episode of (In)sanewashing is now available! To support ad-free episodes like this, please consider joining as a paid subscriber today.

Join COURIER’s Camaron Stevenson and Nardos Araya as they discuss the president’s $5,000 bribe to voters, and his most recent attempt to make the Sept. 11 attacks all about him. And don’t miss V Spehar from Under the Desk News, who talks about what it was like living in New York on 9/11, and how it shaped how our generation sees the world.

You can find COURIER’s other shows, like How Is This Better? and Gloves Off on our YouTube channel, and don’t miss our in-depth reporting, right here on Substack.

Thank you , , , and many others for tuning into my live video with and ! Join me for my next live video in the app.

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Become a Paid Supporter

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

What Happened

In a desperate attempt to retain his control of Congress, the President of the United States on Wednesday offered to pay voters in exchange for supporting his party in the midterm elections.

The apparent bribe is the latest in a series of empty financial promises made by President Donald Trump. But while other reneged windfalls, like the $5,000 DOGE dividend or the $2,000 tariff rebate, were presented as the fruits of his administration’s labor, the newly-imagined $5,000 Trump Dividend is explicitly contingent upon voters casting their ballots for Republicans.

“Here is my promise,” Trump said. “If the Republicans win the House of Representatives and the United States Senate, both of them, because of our economic, tremendous economic success — in history we’ve never had anything like what’s happening, but because of our tremendous strength and success, economically, I will issue a dividend to every adult citizen in the United States of America for $5,000.”

Despite the impossibility of Trump’s latest quid pro quo, a number of trusted media outlets have given it legitimacy with misleading headlines that imply the pretend dividend is all but guaranteed. The indulgence builds on the goodwill Trump garnered during his first term, when he issued pandemic stimulus checks with his name on them. While those payments had little to do with Trump personally, they were one of the few things voters remembered about him during the 2024 election, and are believed to have helped shift the results in his favor.

Several factors could make the gambit less effective in November. In 2024, Trump was both out of office and on the ballot, a position that gave him a nostalgic glow with a direct line for voters to show their support for him. This time around, voters are facing the economic consequences of Trump’s leadership on a daily basis. Those who support the president but are dissatisfied with the government are unlikely to transition their enthusiasm for him into support for Republican candidates.

Trump appears fully aware of that dynamic, as evidenced by his $10 million ad buy featuring commercials about him rather than the candidates running for office, his decision to host an event dubbed Trump-a-palooza that many of his endorsed candidates bailed on, and his insistent pleas to undecided voters.

“The midterms are not supposed to be won by the sitting president,” Trump said. “Pretend that I am on the ballot.”

Attempts to Sanewash

• Crunching the numbers on Trump’s $5K midterm ‘dividend’

• Donald Trump Announces New $5,000 Dividend Checks: Here’s Who Qualifies

• Trump Wants to Give Out $5,000 Checks. Is That Possible?

Far-Right Spin

• Trump Announces Huge Payout for Americans If GOP Wins Midterms

• Trump Offered Americans Something Incredible, but There’s a Twist

• Trump offers $5,000 to every U.S. adult ahead of midterms

Share

Disqualified Trump appointee’s assault charges against Rep. McIver allowed to proceed

A federal appeals court has ruled that two of the three charges brought by a disqualified Trump appointee against Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-NJ) may go to trial, rejecting the congresswoman’s defense of legislative immunity.

The split 2-1 decision by a panel of judges with the US Third Circuit Court of Appeals comes more than a year after the incident in question, when McIver and Newark Mayor Ras Baraka attempted to conduct an oversight visit of the privately-run ICE detention center, Delaney Hall. They were turned away by guards, who were then ordered to arrest Baraka by then-Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche. Baraka and McIver were in a crowd answering questions when law enforcement pushed their way through to make the arrest. After Baraka was taken away, McIver was allowed to proceed with her oversight visit.

One month later, US Attorney Alina Habba dropped the trespassing charges against Baraka and announced she would instead prosecute McIver for “forcibly impeding and interfering with federal officers.” Habba was later disqualified from her position after the Third Circuit ruled she had been unlawfully appointed. That same court, however, did not dismiss the prosecutions Habba initiated during her brief tenure, including the charges against McIver.

“What you see here is an attempt to intimidate a member of Congress from conducting her legitimate congressional legislative role — her oversight function — and representing her constituents. Being faced with criminal prosecution is an intense and deeply damaging risk,” said Joshua Kolb, senior counsel for Democracy Defenders who helped write an amicus brief in McIver’s defense. “The implication of something like this is an attempt to stop members of Congress from, for example, seeing what’s happening at ICE detention facilities. The stories about what’s happening at ICE detention facilities have not abated in the past year.”

The court also rejected McIver’s claim that she was at Delaney Hall in her official capacity as a member of Congress, and therefore immune from personal liability for any alleged criminal conduct. In addition to facing 17 years in prison, that determination means McIver can’t rely on congressional legal counsel and must use personal funds to cover court costs — while, as a member of Congress, remaining prohibited from accepting pro bono legal aid.

While the Trump administration has regularly used the DOJ to intimidate and threaten members of Congress, McIver is the first to be charged. If convicted, McIver’s legal counsel Paul Fishman believes it would trigger a seismic shift in the delicate balance of power between the three branches of government.

“This is a fight for Congresswoman McIver and every other member of the House of Representatives and the United States Senate who could be targeted by this administration for speaking out, for conducting oversight of the executive branch,” said Fishman. “It’s designed both to chill her and to chill the other members who want to engage in the same kind of conduct, and hold the executive branch responsible for what they’re doing.”

Congressional oversight visits to ICE facilities have provided transparency into DHS’ detention network and revealed inhumane conditions those taken by the Trump administration have been forced to endure. In response, DHS has attempted to change the rules around oversight visits several times. While those rule changes have been temporarily blocked by a federal judge, a successful conviction against McIver would aid the department in its effort to restrict members of Congress from inspecting detention facilities.

Share

It’s easy for individual members of Congress to get overlooked by national outlets as they quietly skate to reelection again, and again, and again. The following is an overview of different congressional representatives you may not have heard of, with fun facts about their origin stories they’ve tried to keep out of the public narrative.

US Rep. Virginia Foxx, North Carolina’s 5th Congressional District

Since taking office in 2005, Rep. Foxx has:

• Seen her net worth decrease from around $5.8 million to $4.7 million

• Sponsored 266 bills, 10 of which have been signed into law

• Initially voted against the Epstein Files Transparency Act

• Expressed belief that sexual assault victims should be forced to give birth to their abuser’s child

• Voted against sending federal aid to victims of Hurricane Katrina

• Spent more than a decade trying to end birthright citizenship

• Described universal healthcare as a bigger threat than terrorism

• Rejected the idea that violence based on sexual orientation is a hate crime

Fun Facts

When she’s not telling reporters to shut up, Rep. Foxx is bullying ten-year-olds and taking potshots at teachers, apparently. Earlier this year, an elementary school student from her district sent the octogenarian congresswoman a letter about electric vehicles as part of an assignment. In response, Foxx told the student that he should “turn away from this dangerous path,” and accused his teacher of indoctrinating him with propaganda.

@couriernewsroomRep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) is under scrutiny for her response to a 10-year-old student.

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

Subscribe now

Share

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Pledge Your Support

Subscribe now

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

What Happened

A Wall Street billionaire known for bankrolling Jeffrey Epstein’s trafficking operation in the US Virgin Islands is expected to be held in contempt of Congress over his refusal to appear Thursday for a congressional deposition and his failure to turn over subpoenaed documents.

Leaders from both parties on the House Oversight Committee said they plan to hold Leon Black in contempt after he ignored a subpoena to appear before the committee and refused to provide copies of nondisclosure agreements between himself and women he had sexual encounters with. Epstein is believed to have negotiated a number of these contracts, which could provide crucial insight into how the sex trafficker silenced victims and offered protection to his co-conspirators.

“When we brought him in to testify [in June] and when he walked out — we made it clear that he needed to come back,” said Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA), ranking member of the committee. “The process of contempt has to begin. He, along with Les Wexner, are the two key financial figures in this whole investigation. It’s not acceptable that he’s not coming in. His lawsuit against the committee is laughable.”

The only sticking point, according to committee chairman James Comer (R-KY), is a lawsuit Black filed against the committee, naming Comer personally. In the lawsuit, Black claims the subpoenas are invalid and would violate the privacy of the NDAs’ signatories.

“I would hold him in contempt right now,” said Comer. “This is the first time, of all the people we’ve brought in, of all the powerful billionaires and political people we’ve brought in for interviews and depositions, this is the first time anyone’s filed suit. I don’t want to do anything to harm our chances in court. The most important priority for the committee — I think, but I’m going to talk with the committee as a whole — the most important priority is to get Mr. Black in to answer questions.”

Black is one of more than a dozen individuals interviewed by the committee as part of an investigation into Epstein’s crimes and the government’s handling of its case against him. While others delayed their appearances or made demonstrably false statements, Black is the first to challenge the committee in court. He first appeared before the committee voluntarily in June, but refused to answer questions almost immediately, and stormed out after Comer subpoenaed him in order to compel his cooperation.

Garcia, who would become chair should Democrats regain control of the House next year, said Black’s attempt to sue the committee amounts to little more than a futile attempt to stall the inevitable.

“Chairman Comer did the right thing when he forced him to come in under subpoena and asked for the NDAs,” Garcia said. “What Black is trying to do is slow the process down. He’s very aware that Congress is in session for a certain amount of time before the recess. He’s very aware that Comer is no longer going to be the chairperson. But what Mr. Black should understand is that we will be even more aggressive than Chairman Comer as it relates to his testimony. If Chairman Comer does not begin the contempt proceedings with Mr. Black before the end of this Congress, I certainly will.”

At the heart of the committee’s pursuit of Black is his collection of NDAs. It has been public knowledge for years that Black used NDAs to guarantee silence from women he cheated on his wife with. But documents made public as part of the Epstein Files Transparency Act allege that Epstein personally negotiated an $18 million NDA between the Wall Street billionaire and Russian model Guzel Ganieva, and may have been the one to introduce the concept of using contracts to intimidate women into silence. If the NDAs in Black’s possession were Epstein’s handiwork, it could raise questions about similar agreements used by others who swam in their circles, including convicted sex abusers Harvey Weinstein, Larry Nassar, and President Donald Trump.

American Freakshow

The Billionaire and the Recruiters Part Three

The Indy 500 is zipping around our capital, but the wheels of American justice are slow. Attorney General Todd “Boy Cohn” Blanche – with the help of FBI agents flagging documents with the acronym POTUS for special review – has thrown enough roadblocks into the Epstein Files Transparency Act to defend his boss for now…

Read more

a month ago · 101 likes · 16 comments · Nina Burleigh and Katie Chenoweth

Congressional investigators also want more details regarding the millions of dollars Epstein received from Black and fellow billionaire Les Wexner. The committee believes Wexner gave Epstein a billion dollars over 20 years. Wexner cut Epstein off when the latter was arrested for soliciting prostitution from a minor in 2007, but the tab was picked up almost immediately by Black, who doled out over $180 million over the next decade.

During that 30-year period, Epstein used his newfound wealth to set up headquarters in New Mexico, New York, and the US Virgin Islands and created a billion-dollar international sex trafficking empire, with alleged clients ranging from European royalty to two United States presidents.

“Leon Black gave Epstein over $180 million dollars. He was Epstein’s primary client,” said Oversight member Rep. Suhas Subramanyam (D-VA). “All we’re asking from him is to sit down with our committee and offer us basic information and basic documents — that we’ve asked of most other people as well — and he’s not providing that. We are Congress. We are not one of his clients. We are not one of his friends.”

Comer said he plans to consult with the full committee and its legal team before contempt charges are filed. The timeline could be severely delayed, however, as Republican leadership has ordered the house to recess until mid-November, leaving only a four-day window in September to accomplish any legislative work.

Attempts to Sanewash

• Billionaire Leon Black ignores Epstein investigation subpoena, sues congressional committee

• Leon Black sues House Oversight to block subpoenas in Epstein probe

• Billionaire Leon Black is suing Congress for ‘fishing’ into his alleged ties to Epstein

Far-Right Spin

• Billionaire STUNS Epstein hearing with surprise move

• Billionaire Leon Black Sues Congress Rather Than Answer for His Epstein Ties

• Democrats fume as Epstein associate Leon Black skips deposition: “It’s a shame”

Share

Poll: Epstein Cover-up front of mind for voters going into Midterms

With just two months until the midterm elections, voters across party lines are looking for candidates who are willing to take on corruption, hold powerful abusers accountable, and demand the full release of the Epstein Files.

A new nationwide poll conducted by public opinion research firm GBAO and released Wednesday by COURIER and Reckoning Action found that 88% of Americans who plan to vote in the midterms, including 83% of Republican voters, will prioritize candidates who promise to hold powerful people accountable, including through the release of the full Epstein files. Justice for Epstein’s victims ranked higher for voters than almost every other issue, including healthcare, affordability, immigration, public safety, and the Iran War.

The issue could complicate President Donald Trump’s efforts to boost his endorsed midterm candidates. Three out of four respondents who voted for Trump in 2024 said justice for Epstein’s victims and accountability for his co-conspirators would be a top factor when filling out their ballots.

“For months, Americans across the political spectrum have seen the release of the Epstein files completely mishandled, the privacy and the safety of survivors disregarded, and justice routinely denied. Now, voters across party lines are drawing a line and making it clear: this issue will be a critical determining factor in their midterm vote,” said Cheyenne Hunt, executive director for Reckoning Action. “To every candidate hoping to earn the trust of voters ahead of November, know this: if you have been in any way complicit with this cover-up, or if you are unwilling to take a stand for justice, voters will not forget.”

When asked about a candidate’s message to voters, addressing justice for Epstein’s victims had a 17-point advantage over the Iran War and ranked 15 points higher than messaging around transgender issues, two of President Trump’s primary talking points. The only issue ranked higher was corruption, a term voters are beginning to see as synonymous with Trump and his enablers in Congress.

Releasing the Epstein Files became a national priority in 2025, as the Trump administration became engrossed in an apparent cover-up of the records, what they contained, and who they might implicate. The most grievous transgressions include secret meetings in the Situation Room; moving Epstein’s convicted co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell to a low-security prison; holding a fake Epstein Files release party with far-right media personalities; and closing its investigation into Epstein without additional prosecutions after a hasty review of less than 7% of the DOJ’s investigative files.

In lieu of executive accountability, the public turned to Congress. Pressure from voters grew so intense that the bipartisan Epstein Files Transparency Act (EFTA) passed with virtually unanimous support. But the new polling suggests that voters may now turn to the ballot box to punish those they believe have failed to ensure the law is upheld. To date, only half of the 6 million records from the government’s case files on Epstein have been released, and the US Department of Justice has failed to provide Congress with explanations for redactions and omissions as required by law.

The full release of the Epstein Files will take a Congress willing to use its power to force the DOJ to comply with the law, as Attorney General Todd Blanche has stonewalled any attempts to do so. Senate Republicans approved Blanche’s nomination to his role in August, despite pleas from survivors of Epstein’s abuse to reject him. Blanche took lead on the Epstein investigation in 2025, members of Congress currently investigating his handling of the case say his priority has been to protect the president every step of the way.

“He is the chief architect of the cover-up that the White House is engaging in to prevent the disclosure of files,” said Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL). “To prevent the disclosure of any information that might implicate Donald Trump.”

Some candidates have taken note of the salience of this issue and are already running campaign ads attacking opponents who have failed to deliver accountability on Epstein. Democratic candidates Mary Peltola in Alaska and Sen. Jon Ossoff in Georgia have criticized their opponents for initially voting against releasing the Epstein Files, while Sherrod Brown in Ohio went a step further, highlighting donations Sen. Jon Husted received from billionaire Les Wexner, whose wealth financed Epstein’s criminal network for over a decade.

Others, like James Talarico in Texas, have used past records of leniency for perpetrators of sexual assault as an example of enabling abusers like Epstein. In Arizona, Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs released a scathing television ad putting Republican candidate Rep. Andy Biggs’ record on Epstein front and center. While Biggs voted to pass the EFTA, he voted against the House Oversight Committee’s subpoena to obtain the full, unredacted files, and has been absent from the committee’s investigation into Epstein’s criminal network.

Hobbs also tied Biggs’ inaction on Epstein to his record on other related issues as a state legislator, including voting against funding to investigate sexual abuse crimes and supporting protections for a fundamentalist cult known to be a hotbed of domestic violence and child abuse.

Republicans, in contrast, have largely kept Epstein out of their campaigns. The few attempts to counter accusations of taking cash from the “Epstein Class” have either been disproved or backfired, and Democrats’ votes to release the Epstein Files were consistent throughout the process.

The strategy reflects another finding from the COURIER/Reckoning Action poll: the more closely an issue aligned with Epstein’s crimes and the questions surrounding the case, the more likely voters were to rank it as a concern.

Of the 15 issues tested, five were considered top concerns by over 80% of respondents: child abuse, government corruption, abuse of power, those in power avoiding accountability, and human trafficking as the top five concerns. Among the issues of least concern were several Trump sees as his strengths: immigration, transgender athletes, and public safety.

With control of Congress in the balance this fall, the president, administration, and candidates across the political spectrum will all have to contend with the simple fact that the Epstein cover-up isn’t going away.

Share

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Subscribe now

For months, the Department of Justice has refused to publicly release a section of the Epstein Files containing handwritten notes from an FBI interview with one of Epstein’s victims — but last week, some of those notes were found posted online, uploaded by a conservative journalist who received them from a DOJ employee.

The 37 pages of handwritten notes have been the subject of speculation, criticism, and lawsuits over the DOJ’s stewardship of the Epstein Files. Attorney General Todd Blanche has blocked the publication of millions of investigative files the DOJ has on Epstein, including the handwritten interview notes, claiming they are merely duplicative of records that have already been released. But an unredacted copy of the notes, uploaded to the document hosting site Scribd by Washington Examiner reporter Kaelan Deese, reveals enough discrepancies between what they contain and what was already public to cast Blanche’s entire defense into question.

“There are a few details that wouldn’t have needed to be redacted,” said Dr. Rye Howard-Stone, a computer scientist who tracked the origin of the leaked notes and verified their authenticity. “There’s a road trip to New Jersey, a school trip to Washington DC, and then the names of corroborating witnesses she gave the FBI — who, according to the Post and Courier, were never contacted. Obviously, the names of the witnesses should be redacted. But the fact that there are, or potentially are, uncontacted witnesses is important.”

Blanche has repeatedly invoked the duplicative defense since Congress passed the Epstein Files Transparency Act, claiming that — contrary to the law as it’s written — he can withhold any duplicate records since the information they contain has already been published. However, even by Blanche’s own standard, there appears to be no legal reason to withhold the notes from Doe 4’s interview, as the leaked documents disprove the notion that the information would be redundant.

In fact, releasing duplicative records does not appear to have been a consistent concern to the DOJ at all when deciding what to release. An independent analysis by COURIER and ThorianAI found that at least 40% of the DOJ’s Epstein Library consists of duplications. The outlet has added a “deduplication” feature to its Epstein Files database that shows users how many duplicates or variants exist of each file. Instead, Blanche’s top priority seems to be preventing the release of any information that could implicate Trump.

“There have been no saving graces in the DOJ’s handling of the Epstein files,” said Howard-Stone. “This is just yet another example in a long chain of miscarriages of justice in this case by the government.

The discovery of the fully unredacted notes is the latest revelation in a bizarre saga involving allegations against Epstein and Trump. The omission of Doe 4’s FBI interviews were first discovered in February, when independent journalist Roger Sollenberger found references to them in the Epstein Files, but the interviews themselves were nowhere to be found. American Freakshow Nina Burleigh and Katie Chenoweth dug deeper and found that Doe had been labeled a protected source, a designation typically reserved for informants who provide credible information involving high-profile individuals.

The DOJ initially — and falsely — claimed the information was duplicative, but ultimately conceded and released the typed interview reports, known as FD-302s, in early March. The typed reports revealed new and graphic allegations against Trump, including that he raped and beat Doe 4 when she was a young teen. Early drafts of the report — handwritten notes investigators took while interviewing Doe 4 — remained withheld, with the DOJ once again arguing that the information they contained was redundant.

“The Department has not produced underlying handwritten notes for FD-302 interview reports because, by their nature, the underlying notes are substantially similar to the ultimate reports, and have accordingly been deemed duplicative of the typewritten reports memorializing the interviews,” Blanche wrote in a court filing on the matter. “Their handwritten nature further complicates the redaction process and increases the risk of inadvertent disclosure of victim [personal identifying information].”

On March 6, the same day the DOJ released the typed interview notes, Deese uploaded the handwritten versions to Scribd. It remains unclear whether he received an embargoed copy of the released documents that erroneously included the notes or whether a DOJ employee leaked them in secret. Deese didn’t mention the notes in an article published the following day and has not responded to requests for comment on this story.

In April, independent journalist Katie Phang sued Blanche over the release of the handwritten notes, as well as a number of other omissions she argued represented the government’s failure to comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act. While the case remains ongoing, US District Judge Emmet Sullivan found in June that the DOJ was in violation of the law, and chastised Blanche and government attorneys for ignoring court orders intended to bring him back into compliance.

Share

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Become a Paid Supporter Today

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

And thank you , , , and many others for tuning into my live video with and ! If there are any other midterm candidates you’d like me to interview, please let me know.

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

What Happened

People are seeing recession indicators everywhere — at the store, in restaurants, on credit cards — but one of the biggest, most depressing, and uniquely American recession indicators has been quietly popping up in strip malls everywhere they’re legal to operate: plasma centers.

The allure of quick cash at a time when prices continue to rise and wages remain stagnant has brought a surge of new clientele to the for-profit plasma industry since President Donald Trump returned to the White House. Payouts to donors hit a record-breaking $4.7 billion in 2025 and are expected to surpass $5 billion in 2026. Unsurprisingly, the states with the largest increases in donations overlap almost identically with those where residents report the highest levels of economic distress — and nowhere is that disparity more stark than in Texas.

Texas is home to more than 180 plasma centers, which doled out over $650 million to residents last year. State Rep. Gina Hinojosa, the Democratic nominee for governor, said that where these facilities are setting up shop and who their target customers are has shifted in recent years, from college students and low-income residents to working professionals.

“There are now these plasma centers that are popping up in suburban, middle-class areas where teachers are giving plasma two to three times a week just to pay their bills,” Hinojosa told COURIER. “It’s a second job — donating plasma two to three times a week. That’s the level of desperation people are feeling.”

Hinojosa believes the financial necessity of selling plasma is symbolic of the state of Texas under Gov. Greg Abbott’s leadership. While Abbott has enticed large corporations like Tesla to migrate from California to Texas with low taxes, the wealth their leaders have amassed has not trickled down in the slightest. The year Texas became home to the world’s first trillionaire, local businesses closed or went bankrupt at a faster rate than any other state in the country.

In an effort to transfer some of that wealth back to Texas households, Hinojosa has proposed a one-time, $1,500 tax refund. The money would come from the state’s rainy day fund, which has ballooned to a record $25 billion under Abbott. The refund, dubbed the “Greg Abbott Corruption Tax Refund” by Hinojosa, would use approximately $17 billion from the fund and provide each household with a tax-free lump sum roughly equivalent to the payout from 30 plasma donations.

Also closing at an alarming rate are the state’s public schools, a result of the state’s new voucher system that subsidizes private schools with money from Texas’ public school budget. As has happened in other states, Texas’ voucher program has incentivized the for-profit education industry to open hundreds of new private and charter schools, siphoning funds away from local public schools, forcing some to either condense their schedules to four days a week or close completely.

“It is one big grift, that is what we’re experiencing in Texas,” said Hinojosa. “We pay more — property taxes have skyrocketed under Greg Abbott — yet we have over 170 schools shutting down in the state. We have over 150 whole school districts operating at four days a week because they can’t afford to operate at five days a week. That’s the crisis we have in public schools right now; that’s why we see this as the last best chance to save our public schools.”

Despite promises that school vouchers — known deceptively as “school choice” by advocates — offer households at every income level the opportunity to improve their children’s education, it’s been confirmed time and time again that they disproportionately benefit the wealthy. The vast majority of voucher money is used to subsidize the education costs of students who already attended private schools, while lower-income households who rely on public schools are left with fewer options as schools are forced to close.

Hinojosa, who began her political career as a school board member, plans to reign in voucher spending and return funding to public schools. In the state legislature, she worked with Republicans to vote down Abbott’s voucher proposal in 2023 over fears of rural school closures. The closures that have occurred since vouchers were approved in 2025 have confirmed those fears. Hinojosa believes she can work with Republicans again as governor to shut down the state’s $1 billion voucher program and redirect the money toward reopening underfunded schools.

Attempts to Sanewash

• Some say selling plasma is exploitative — others say it’s a life-saving economy booster

• Selling blood plasma for money is becoming a side hustle as more Philadelphia-area residents try to make ends meet

• Middle-class Americans are selling their plasma to make ends meet

Far-Right Spin

• BurritoGate & America’s Affordability Crisis

• Government made your burrito more expensive, and socialism will make it worse

• California burdened most by affordability issue, Steve Hilton says

Share

DOJ leaked withheld portion of Epstein Files to conservative media, doxxing victims

For months, the Department of Justice has refused to publicly release a section of the Epstein Files containing handwritten notes from an FBI interview with one of Epstein’s victims — but last week, some of those notes were found posted online, uploaded by a conservative journalist who received them from a DOJ employee.

The 37 pages of handwritten notes have been the subject of speculation, criticism, and lawsuits over the DOJ’s stewardship of the Epstein Files. Attorney General Todd Blanche has blocked the publication of millions of investigative files the DOJ has on Epstein, including the handwritten interview notes, claiming they are merely duplicative of records that have already been released. But an unredacted copy of the notes, uploaded to the document hosting site Scribd by Washington Examiner reporter Kaelan Deese, reveals enough discrepancies between what they contain and what was already public to cast Blanche’s entire defense into question.

“There are a few details that wouldn’t have needed to be redacted,” said Dr. Rye Howard-Stone, a computer scientist who tracked the origin of the leaked notes and verified their authenticity. “There’s a road trip to New Jersey, a school trip to Washington DC, and then the names of corroborating witnesses she gave the FBI — who, according to the Post and Courier, were never contacted. Obviously, the names of the witnesses should be redacted. But the fact that there are, or potentially are, uncontacted witnesses is important.”

Blanche has repeatedly invoked the duplicative defense since Congress passed the Epstein Files Transparency Act, claiming that — contrary to the law as it’s written — he can withhold any duplicate records since the information they contain has already been published. However, even by Blanche’s own standard, there appears to be no legal reason to withhold the notes from Doe 4’s interview, as the leaked documents disprove the notion that the information would be redundant.

In fact, releasing duplicative records does not appear to have been a consistent concern to the DOJ at all when deciding what to release. An independent analysis by COURIER and ThorianAI found that at least 40% of the DOJ’s Epstein Library consists of duplications. The outlet has added a “deduplication” feature to its Epstein Files database that shows users how many duplicates or variants exist of each file. Instead, Blanche’s top priority seems to be preventing the release of any information that could implicate Trump.

“There have been no saving graces in the DOJ’s handling of the Epstein files,” said Howard-Stone. “This is just yet another example in a long chain of miscarriages of justice in this case by the government.

The discovery of the fully unredacted notes is the latest revelation in a bizarre saga involving allegations against Epstein and Trump. The omission of Doe 4’s FBI interviews were first discovered in February, when independent journalist Roger Sollenberger found references to them in the Epstein Files, but the interviews themselves were nowhere to be found. Nina Burleigh and Katie Chenoweth dug deeper and found that Doe had been labeled a protected source, a designation typically reserved for informants who provide credible information involving high-profile individuals.

The DOJ initially — and falsely — claimed the information was duplicative, but ultimately conceded and released the typed interview reports, known as FD-302s, in early March. The typed reports revealed new and graphic allegations against Trump, including that he raped and beat Doe 4 when she was a young teen. Early drafts of the report — handwritten notes investigators took while interviewing Doe 4 — remained withheld, with the DOJ once again arguing that the information they contained was redundant.

“The Department has not produced underlying handwritten notes for FD-302 interview reports because, by their nature, the underlying notes are substantially similar to the ultimate reports, and have accordingly been deemed duplicative of the typewritten reports memorializing the interviews,” Blanche wrote in a court filing on the matter. “Their handwritten nature further complicates the redaction process and increases the risk of inadvertent disclosure of victim [personal identifying information].”

On March 6, the same day the DOJ released the typed interview notes, Deese uploaded the handwritten versions to Scribd. It remains unclear whether he received an embargoed copy of the released documents that erroneously included the notes or whether a DOJ employee leaked them in secret. Deese didn’t mention the notes in an article published the following day and has not responded to requests for comment on this story.

In April, independent journalist Katie Phang sued Blanche over the release of the handwritten notes, as well as a number of other omissions she argued represented the government’s failure to comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act. While the case remains ongoing, US District Judge Emmet Sullivan found in June that the DOJ was in violation of the law, and chastised Blanche and government attorneys for ignoring court orders intended to bring him back into compliance.

Share

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Become a Paid Supporter Today

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Rep. Veronica Escobar (D-TX) announced the most recent closure on August 11: a planned detention center just outside Socorro, Texas, that would have been the largest in the country. The 1 million-square-foot industrial park, made up of three warehouses, was purchased by the Department of Homeland Security for $123 million in February. The plan sounded straight out of a dystopian science fiction novel: remodel the buildings into an Amazon-style distribution center — “Prime, but with human beings,” according to former ICE Director Todd Lyons.

“I am really proud of the way the community came together. Early on, the city of Socorro voted to create a moratorium on this and other projects,” said Escobar. “This was a priority for me and my team. We did a lot of work, elevating the voices of the community, ensuring that the decision makers at the highest levels of the federal government understood the significant challenges that having a detention facility at Socorro would create, and we spent a lot of time working various processes to get to this end result.”

The Socorro complex was one of 11 warehouse sites the Trump administration purchased for a combined $1 billion, with the express purpose of holding people detained by ICE indefinitely. Eleven other locations were in the early stages of development, but swift, visceral opposition from local residents killed those projects before sites could be purchased. Only one facility is still in the works: a 64,000-square-foot industrial warehouse in San Antonio, Texas, that officials expect to open in Spring 2027. Two other purchased sites, one in Arizona and another in Maryland, are paused indefinitely due to lawsuits brought by the states’ attorneys general.

A searchable map of all 23 locations, including their current status, can be found here.

The fire sale of seven warehouses, along with the uncertain future of the few sites still in DHS’ possession, marks the end of an era of aggressively rapid anti-immigration expansion spearheaded by Trump advisor Stephen Miller. In Trump’s first year back in office, Miller sought to deport one million people, strip citizenship from millions more, and develop a national mass incarceration network to hold whoever stood in his way. Public opinion on the administration’s handling of immigration quickly soured as Miller’s efforts resulted in the illegal detention and deportation of citizens and noncitizens alike, inhumane conditions at detention centers, and warzone-style military operations in US cities politically opposed to the president.

The breaking point came in January 2026, when ICE agents participating in Operation Metro Surge killed two US citizens, Renée Nicole Good and Alex Pretti. Protests erupted nationwide, fueled further by news that the Trump administration planned to accelerate its efforts with its warehouse detention plans. Once the locations of the warehouses became public, they became rallying points for activists, who effectively pressured local leaders and warehouse owners to block DHS from turning the sites into detention camps.

Within a month, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem was fired, and her replacement, Markwayne Mullin, announced that the warehouse plan was on hold. The project has since been slowly dismantled, and activists are now working to ensure the remaining DHS-owned sites in Arizona, Maryland, and Texas meet the same fate as the complex in Socorro.

“DHS didn’t do this because they wanted to,” said Brent Peak, Co-Chair of Arizona’s Northwest Valley Indivisible. “This is a real win. It is not the end of the fight though, and we’re not walking away until this prison camp is shut down for good.”

Share

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Subscribe now

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

What Happened

Stories have circulated for years about Donald Trump’s overly attentive aide, Natalie Harp, but a speech by Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-GA) earlier this month thrust her into the national spotlight, eliciting both curiosity and concern for a woman whose entire world seems centrally focused on serving at the pleasure of the president.

“[Trump] doesn’t want to do the job,” said Ossoff. “He wants to build his ballroom and travel with Natalie on their apparently defenseless flying palace gifted by the Emir of Qatar.”

While Harp’s intense dedication has been chronicled piecemeal by the Washington Post and New York Times, the full scale of her loyalty is difficult to grasp without a comprehensive accounting of her ascent. The role of an executive assistant would not normally be a matter of national interest, but Harp’s role as a conduit of information feeding Trump’s ego and obsession with conspiracy theories — coupled with her active presence in private meetings with cabinet members and access to communications involving national security — has garnered intense public scrutiny in the days following Ossoff’s remarks.

To that end, COURIER has compiled a comprehensive timeline of Harp’s rise, from teenage George W. Bush fangirl to one of the most influential people in the Oval Office.

1991: Harp is born and raised in a Christian fundamentalist household, where she is taught to adhere to a belief in American Exceptionalism.

2007: At 16 years old, Harp begins writing President George W. Bush letters of support and admiration.

2012: She graduates from Point Loma Nazarene University, a Bible College in San Diego.

2015: Harp receives her Masters degree from Liberty University, a far-right, Christian fundamentalist school.

2016: Harp is diagnosed with bone cancer and becomes disillusioned with the US healthcare system. She responds positively to treatment and the cancer eventually goes into remission.

2019 – June 12: In a LinkedIn post critical of Joe Biden’s healthcare record, Harp misattributes a law signed by Trump as the reason she was able to access lifesaving cancer medication.

2019 – June 23: Harp is invited to talk about her LinkedIn post on Fox News, where she credits her survival to Trump. Trump sees the segment, and later invites her to join his re-election campaign’s advisory board.

2020: Harp is hired by the far-right media company OANN, where she hosts a show focused on Trump’s presidency and disproven conspiracy theories surrounding the 2020 election.

2020 – July 17: Harp’s father dies by suicide. Her brother, Preston, later said he believes his sister’s infatuation with Trump was born out of the desire for a father figure after their dad’s death.

2020 – August 24: At Trump’s request, Harp speaks at the RNC.

2021: Harp maintains her support for Trump after the Jan. 6 Attack on the Capitol, even as a number of staff, aides, and cabinet members resigned for his role in the insurrection.

2022: Harp quits OANN and moves to Florida, where Trump hires her as an assistant. She accompanies him while golfing and travels with him to his various court proceedings in Georgia and New York.

“She is indicative of the people around him who just love him,” a Trump adviser told the Washington Post at the time. “Love him too much.”

2023: Harp is entrusted with helping manage Trump’s social media accounts. Unlike others who manage his accounts, she appears to post whatever he tells her to without question, including images and text posts that cause political controversy and potentially complicate his court cases. Throughout the year, Harp sends Trump a series of letters that other staff members consider highly concerning.

Excerpts obtained by the New York Times include, “You are all that matters to me,” “I don’t ever want to let you down…Guardian and Protector in this Life,” and “I want to bring you joy… to feel like we can get through a day without ever having to talk ‘work.’”

2023 – March: Harp provides Trump with an edited photo depicting him holding a baseball bat to the head of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg. Trump posts it the week before Bragg indicts him on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records.

2023 – October: Harp screams at the person managing Trump’s motorcade because there is no seat for her on the morning of his trial. Unwilling to separate herself from the president and arrange alternate transportation, she rides in the trunk of an SUV.

2024: Harp joins Trump’s reelection campaign. She continues traveling with the president and joining him on the golf course, eventually carrying a portable printer with a backup battery pack so she can print out social media posts and news reports favorable to him. Her coworkers on the campaign nickname her “the human printer.”

2024 – January: Harp publishes 40 social media posts about Jean E. Carroll in less than an hour on Trump’s accounts. It’s unclear whether she acts independently or Trump dictates the messages to her. She is subsequently given more control over his social media and communications, including the ability to send text messages on Trump’s behalf.

2024 – August: Harp, posing as Trump and using his phone number, sends a series of aggressive text messages to Republican megadonor Miriam Adelson.

2024 – September: Harp takes a screenshot of a private message Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy sent to Trump and posts it on his Truth Social account.

2024 – November: Trump wins reelection and creates the role of special assistant and executive assistant to the president for Harp.

2025: White House Deputy Chief of Staff Dan Scavino, who for years managed Trump’s social media presence, passes the majority of that responsibility to Harp, who relies on a large repertoire of AI-generated images and videos throughout the year.

2026 – February: Harp posts a racist AI-generated video of former President Barack Obama and former First Lady Michelle Obama. The post is later deleted.

2026 – April: Harp posts an AI-generated image depicting Trump as Jesus Christ. The post is later deleted, and Trump takes credit for posting it.

2026 – July: The Trump administration discovers a credible plan to attack Air Force One while the president is in Turkey. Trump and Harp are hidden in a catering container and secretly boarded onto a separate plane for safety. Journalists, cabinet members, and other White House staff traveling with Trump are not told of the potential attack and are made to board Air Force One.

Subscribe now

Share

Supercharge your program with Action Network Boost

Powerful features for the most advanced digital programs, including deliverability reporting, priority support, a new way to dig deeper into your data, simplified email customization, and much, much more. Sign up and get 10% off Boost here >

Only one warehouse remains from Trump admin’s mass detention camp plan

An eight-month effort to stop the Trump administration’s plan to turn industrial warehouses into mass detention camps has proven massively successful, with all but one of the 23 selected locations abandoned or paused indefinitely.

Rep. Veronica Escobar (D-TX) announced the most recent closure on August 11: a planned detention center just outside Socorro, Texas, that would have been the largest in the country. The 1 million-square-foot industrial park, made up of three warehouses, was purchased by the Department of Homeland Security for $123 million in February. The plan sounded straight out of a dystopian science fiction novel: remodel the buildings into an Amazon-style distribution center — “Prime, but with human beings,” according to former ICE Director Todd Lyons.

“I am really proud of the way the community came together. Early on, the city of Socorro voted to create a moratorium on this and other projects,” said Escobar. “This was a priority for me and my team. We did a lot of work, elevating the voices of the community, ensuring that the decision makers at the highest levels of the federal government understood the significant challenges that having a detention facility at Socorro would create, and we spent a lot of time working various processes to get to this end result.”

The Socorro complex was one of 11 warehouse sites the Trump administration purchased for a combined $1 billion, with the express purpose of holding people detained by ICE indefinitely. Eleven other locations were in the early stages of development, but swift, visceral opposition from local residents killed those projects before sites could be purchased. Only one facility is still in the works: a 64,000-square-foot industrial warehouse in San Antonio, Texas, that officials expect to open in Spring 2027. Two other purchased sites, one in Arizona and another in Maryland, are paused indefinitely due to lawsuits brought by the states’ attorneys general.

A searchable map of all 23 locations, including their current status, can be found here.

The fire sale of seven warehouses, along with the uncertain future of the few sites still in DHS’ possession, marks the end of an era of aggressively rapid anti-immigration expansion spearheaded by Trump advisor Stephen Miller. In Trump’s first year back in office, Miller sought to deport one million people, strip citizenship from millions more, and develop a national mass incarceration network to hold whoever stood in his way. Public opinion on the administration’s handling of immigration quickly soured as Miller’s efforts resulted in the illegal detention and deportation of citizens and noncitizens alike, inhumane conditions at detention centers, and warzone-style military operations in US cities politically opposed to the president.

The breaking point came in January 2026, when ICE agents participating in Operation Metro Surge killed two US citizens, Renée Nicole Good and Alex Pretti. Protests erupted nationwide, fueled further by news that the Trump administration planned to accelerate its efforts with its warehouse detention plans. Once the locations of the warehouses became public, they became rallying points for activists, who effectively pressured local leaders and warehouse owners to block DHS from turning the sites into detention camps.

Within a month, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem was fired, and her replacement, Markwayne Mullin, announced that the warehouse plan was on hold. The project has since been slowly dismantled, and activists are now working to ensure the remaining DHS-owned sites in Arizona, Maryland, and Texas meet the same fate as the complex in Socorro.

“DHS didn’t do this because they wanted to,” said Brent Peak, Co-Chair of Arizona’s Northwest Valley Indivisible. “This is a real win. It is not the end of the fight though, and we’re not walking away until this prison camp is shut down for good.”

Share

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Subscribe now

Supercharge your program with Action Network Boost

Powerful features for the most advanced digital programs, including deliverability reporting, priority support, a new way to dig deeper into your data, simplified email customization, and much, much more. Sign up and get 10% off Boost here >

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

Deaths at Delaney Hall

Immigration officials have used a new reporting loophole to conceal the deaths of at least two individuals who were abruptly released from custody amidst medical emergencies.

Jose Chajon-Raxon was booked into the privately-run Delaney Hall in New Jersey on July 18 and began experiencing recurring seizures shortly after his arrest. It wasn’t until four days later that he was released and sent to the hospital, where he died shortly after his arrival. Less than two weeks later, Edwin Lopez-Cornejo experienced a similar fate. After being denied prescription medication for over a month, he experienced a medical emergency, was quickly released from custody, and died.

Neither family was alerted that their relative had been transferred until after their death. In both cases, ICE did not file a report and refused for days to confirm what had happened, only relenting after sustained pressure from activists, lawmakers, and the families of Chajon-Raxon and Lopez-Cornejo. Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-NJ), a vocal critic of the facility who successfully conducted an oversight visit in December, said the private prison company that runs Delaney Hall does not provide adequate onsite medical care for those in detention.

“GEO Group does in-house for most of their medical services. We’ve gone many times and we’re like, ‘Hey, where’s the physician? Not here,’” McIver told COURIER. “They’ll have an RN there, or maybe some assistants on staff, but never 24/7 a physician — which is problematic in the first place. We’re like, ‘Give us answers on how a person intakes. How do you make sure people are getting their medicine? What is the routine?’ And it’s never consistent, never transparent.”

The process has become even less transparent since June, when ICE ended a policy requiring the department to report to Congress the death of any individual who died within 30 days of being detained. With the policy gone, detention staff are no longer required to report a death as long as the individual is released before they die, as was the case with Lopez-Cornejo, Chajon-Raxon, and an unknown number of others who may have been released while experiencing medical emergencies.

@couriernewsroomActivists say private contractors at Delaney Hall are using a loophole called "discretionary release" to dump severely ill detainees — like a man actively having seizure — outside of the facility. Because he technically wasn't in their custody when he passed away, the facility doesn't have to report his death to anyone. In 2025 alone, 33 people died in ICE custody. This year, there have already been at least 26 deaths. Under the Trump administration, changed reporting rules and restricted oversight have made it easier than ever for private contractors to hide the true toll of their neglect.

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

The change is part of an ongoing effort by the Trump administration to restrict what the public knows about conditions in immigration detention. McIver had attempted to conduct an oversight visit for months before she finally gained access. DHS has since changed the rules around when a member of Congress can conduct an inspection, how long they can stay, who they can talk to, and how much notice they’re required to give before being granted access.

The Trump administration has also attempted to make an example of McIver in an effort to dissuade her colleagues from conducting similar visits. In May 2025, Delaney Hall security initially denied McIver access to the facility while she was attempting to conduct a routine oversight visit. She was eventually allowed in, but was later charged by the DOJ with a three-count indictment for assaulting federal officers. The case is ongoing, and McIver says the legal threats against her have only strengthened her resolve.

“It’s all a part of their agenda — the Trump administration’s agenda. Cruelty is the point of everything that they do,” said McIver. “They tried to stop me last May. But since then — with me even returning, and going back multiple times — there’s always a new rule. There’s always something. ‘Oh, you can’t talk to these people, you can’t do this, you can’t do that.’ Because they’re literally trying to cover up the cruelty.”

In 2025, 33 people that we know of died in ICE custody — more than during the entire Biden administration. This year, there have been 26, but thanks to the new reporting rules, the only reason the public knows about the two most recent deaths at Delaney Hall is that members of Congress like McIver, activists, and family members of those taken by ICE are there every day, pushing for answers.

Correction: A previous version of this story incorrectly stated Rep. McIver was arrested. While she was charged, the congresswoman was never under arrest.

Share

One year in: Oversight Chair eyes criminal referrals in Epstein probe

A congressional investigation into Jeffrey Epstein’s criminal network is expected to submit criminal referrals to prosecutors by the end of the year, as Republicans face mounting pressure from voters to act before the midterm elections.

Leaders from both parties on the House Oversight Committee have now committed to pursuing criminal charges based on discoveries made in its ongoing investigation into Epstein. Ranking member Rep Summer Lee (D-PA) told COURIER in April that perjury charges should be brought against former Attorney General Pam Bondi and Darren Indyke, Epstein’s former attorney, for lying to the committee. Rep. James Comer (R-KY) told NOTUS he expects to send referrals to the Justice Department before his term as chair ends in December.

Below The Belt(way) is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

“I fully expect criminal referrals, and some things — we’ve found enough that I believe the Department of Justice should look into certain people, “Comer said. “We’re going to do everything we can to hold anyone accountable who’s still alive.”

Since conducting its first deposition with former Attorney General William Barr in August 2025, the committee has questioned a number of current and former government officials, as well as Epstein’s friends, staff, clients, and prison guard. It has privately spoken with witnesses and survivors, conducted depositions and hearings in New York, Ohio, and Florida, and released thousands of previously unseen documents obtained from Epstein’s estate.

Many of those brought in by the committee were never contacted by the DOJ as part of its investigation into Epstein, despite the department compiling more than 6 million records on the convicted sex criminal’s multibillion-dollar international human trafficking empire.

Democrats on the committee have expressed frustration over the way Comer has handled the investigation, opting for voluntary interviews rather than mandatory depositions under oath and on camera. While the approach has yielded results, Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-AZ) believes it has also produced disingenuous testimony and would like to hold future hearings in public, backed by the legal weight of congressional subpoenas.

“That’s how every single one of these should be: under oath in a public hearing in front of the American people, videotaped,” Ansari said. “We need full transparency for the survivors as well as for the American public.This cover-up has to end immediately.”

Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA), who would become committee chair next year should Democrats win a majority in the House, already has committee staff “working on preparation, letters, research.” He plans to issue a slew of subpoenas and hold public hearings to expose what he has described as one of the most extensive government cover-ups in the history of the United States. At the top of Garcia’s subpoena list are First Lady Melania Trump, who has been accused of being entangled in Epstein’s trafficking network, and President Donald Trump, a longtime friend of Epstein who is believed to be impeding the committee’s investigation behind the scenes.

And voters may soon give him the chance to do so. Comer has been one of the few — and often only — Republicans on the committee to participate in the investigation, and the campaign strategies of Democrats in swing states suggest the electorate still hasn’t forgiven Republicans for their resistance to releasing the Epstein Files. That, coupled with the Trump administration’s decision to close its criminal investigation into Epstein despite having only one conviction under its belt, have made accountability for Epstein’s enablers a focal point of Democratic attack ads in Arizona, Georgia, Ohio, Tennessee, and Wisconsin.

For Comer, who is expected to easily win reelection, taking action on Epstein could have consequences that extend well beyond the midterms. The five-term Republican is expected to run for Congress next year, where he could square off against Rep. Thomas Massie, known for spearheading the passage of the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Criminal prosecutions stemming from the investigation before Comer’s term-limited tenure as committee chair ends could help put him on equal footing with Massie, whereas failing to do so could put him at a severe disadvantage.

While criminal referrals now seem likely no matter which party is in control, what would happen with those recommendations remains unknown. US Attorney General Todd Blanche has repeatedly shown a softer side for Epstein’s co-conspirators than he has for his victims. Last August, he moved Epstein accomplice and convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell to a low-security prison, and last month refused to follow leads given to him during a meeting with survivors.

It could take significant pressure from Congress to force Blanche’s hand — pressure both Comer and Garcia have promised to apply if necessary.

Share

Subscribe now

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Subscribe now

A congressional investigation into Jeffrey Epstein’s criminal network is expected to submit criminal referrals to prosecutors by the end of the year, as Republicans face mounting pressure from voters to act before the midterm elections.

Leaders from both parties on the House Oversight Committee have now committed to pursuing criminal charges based on discoveries made in its ongoing investigation into Epstein. Ranking member Rep Summer Lee (D-PA) told COURIER in April that perjury charges should be brought against former Attorney General Pam Bondi and Darren Indyke, Epstein’s former attorney, for lying to the committee. Rep. James Comer (R-KY) told NOTUS he expects to send referrals to the Justice Department before his term as chair ends in December.

“I fully expect criminal referrals, and some things — we’ve found enough that I believe the Department of Justice should look into certain people, “Comer said. “We’re going to do everything we can to hold anyone accountable who’s still alive.”

Since conducting its first deposition with former Attorney General William Barr in August 2025, the committee has questioned a number of current and former government officials, as well as Epstein’s friends, staff, clients, and prison guard. It has privately spoken with witnesses and survivors, conducted depositions and hearings in New York, Ohio, and Florida, and released thousands of previously unseen documents obtained from Epstein’s estate.

Many of those brought in by the committee were never contacted by the DOJ as part of its investigation into Epstein, despite the department compiling more than 6 million records on the convicted sex criminal’s multibillion-dollar international human trafficking empire.

Democrats on the committee have expressed frustration over the way Comer has handled the investigation, opting for voluntary interviews rather than mandatory depositions under oath and on camera. While the approach has yielded results, Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-AZ) believes it has also produced disingenuous testimony and would like to hold future hearings in public, backed by the legal weight of congressional subpoenas.

“That’s how every single one of these should be: under oath in a public hearing in front of the American people, videotaped,” Ansari said. “We need full transparency for the survivors as well as for the American public.This cover-up has to end immediately.”

Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA), who would become committee chair next year should Democrats win a majority in the House, already has committee staff “working on preparation, letters, research.” He plans to issue a slew of subpoenas and hold public hearings to expose what he has described as one of the most extensive government cover-ups in the history of the United States. At the top of Garcia’s subpoena list are First Lady Melania Trump, who has been accused of being entangled in Epstein’s trafficking network, and President Donald Trump, a longtime friend of Epstein who is believed to be impeding the committee’s investigation behind the scenes.

And voters may soon give him the chance to do so. Comer has been one of the few — and often only — Republicans on the committee to participate in the investigation, and the campaign strategies of Democrats in swing states suggest the electorate still hasn’t forgiven Republicans for their resistance to releasing the Epstein Files. That, coupled with the Trump administration’s decision to close its criminal investigation into Epstein despite having only one conviction under its belt, have made accountability for Epstein’s enablers a focal point of Democratic attack ads in Arizona, Georgia, Ohio, Tennessee, and Wisconsin.

For Comer, who is expected to easily win reelection, taking action on Epstein could have consequences that extend well beyond the midterms. The five-term Republican is expected to run for Congress next year, where he could square off against Rep. Thomas Massie, known for spearheading the passage of the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Criminal prosecutions stemming from the investigation before Comer’s term-limited tenure as committee chair ends could help put him on equal footing with Massie, whereas failing to do so could put him at a severe disadvantage.

While criminal referrals now seem likely no matter which party is in control, what would happen with those recommendations remains unknown. US Attorney General Todd Blanche has repeatedly shown a softer side for Epstein’s co-conspirators than he has for his victims. Last August, he moved Epstein accomplice and convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell to a low-security prison, and last month refused to follow leads given to him during a meeting with survivors.

It could take significant pressure from Congress to force Blanche’s hand — pressure both Comer and Garcia have promised to apply if necessary.

Share

Subscribe now

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

What Happened

A court filing this week revealed a major factor in the president’s adamancy that he and his primary business be given immunity from IRS audits: money laundering.

President Donald Trump sued Capital One last year over the financial institution’s decision in 2021 to close nearly 400 accounts connected to the president and his businesses. Trump’s lawyers argued the accounts were closed due to “political discrimination” following his impeachment for inciting the January 6 insurrection. Capital One, however, says the decision had nothing to do with politics and instead stemmed from concerns the accounts were being used to launder money.

“The closures were the result of months of analysis and a careful review by Capital One’s [anti-money laundering] team in accordance with bank policies and regulatory guidance,” the court filing states. “Plaintiffs cannot meaningfully criticize the robust process undertaken by Capital One’s [anti-money laundering] professionals with decades of law enforcement experience in deciding to close the accounts.”

The findings of Capital One’s internal investigation have not been made public, and it’s unknown whether the suspicious activity was reported to the US Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN). No federal investigation is currently possible, however, because acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has granted Trump tax immunity for any financial crimes committed before May 2026.

In a settlement agreement between Trump and his administration, Blanche “forever barred” the federal government from pursuing any legal claims against Trump, his two eldest sons, or the Trump Organization that would involve any of their tax returns. Without those records, it would be impossible to investigate alleged crimes reported by Capital One or any other financial institution. Blanche’s order also saved Trump from being required to pay back at least $100 million in back taxes.

It’s unclear if Blanche’s prohibition on auditing Trump will remain in effect after the president’s term ends, or if it can legally be in effect at all. A federal judge in July declared Blanche’s agreement illegal, and US Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Ron Wyden (D-OR) wrote a letter to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent seeking verification that it had not gone into effect.

“The Department of Justice lacks the authority to declare in a settlement that the IRS will drop audits unrelated to the lawsuit being settled. Federal law also bars the President and White House officials from requesting that the IRS end audits into particular taxpayers,” the letter states. “The IRS should not and cannot implement illegal orders.”

What’s less clear is whether FinCEN would take any action to investigate Trump’s alleged money laundering, even if it was reported by Capital One. The agency’s history of prosecuting blatant criminal activity is abysmal, at best. Convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein made over $1.8 billion in suspicious money transfers over the course of 20 years and was never investigated. A 2020 whistleblower revealed that FinCEN and major financial institutions routinely ignore illegal transactions that fund organized crime, terror networks, and human and drug trafficking because of the profit that’s generated from these transactions.

Despite that record, Trump is one of the few financial criminals FinCEN has successfully prosecuted — on multiple occasions. The first instance was in 1998, when Trump Taj Mahal was fined nearly $500,000 for consistently failing to file currency transaction reports on its customers. Casinos are required to keep a record of anyone who makes transactions larger than $5,000. Without that information, it’s impossible to trace money flowing in and out of casinos, making them a premiere destination for money laundering.

In one month alone, “Trump Taj Mahal failed to file 30 CTRs totaling $500,000, stemming from the Casino’s failure to adequately monitor and report when a patron inserts more than $10,000 into a slot machine in a given day.”

Trump’s casino continued ignoring anti-money laundering laws and was fined another $10 million in 2015. Investigators found that it had allowed millions of dollars in transactions to go untraced for at least a decade, and had “willfully violated the program, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements of the Bank Secrecy Act,” even after being warned several times.

Share

Supercharge your program with Action Network Boost

Powerful features for the most advanced digital programs, including deliverability reporting, priority support, a new way to dig deeper into your data, simplified email customization, and much, much more. Sign up and get 10% off Boost here >

New Mexico releases first report on Epstein’s Zorro Ranch

On Wednesday, a commission established by the New Mexico Legislature to investigate crimes committed at Jeffrey Epstein’s Zorro Ranch released its initial findings and issued subpoenas to three state agencies and a local spa where Epstein preyed on women.

The Survivors’ Truth Commission’s brief meeting included an overview of its 110-page interim report led by state Rep. Andrea Romero, as well as testimony from Rachel Benavidez, one of several massage therapists Epstein hired and then raped once they arrived at Zorro Ranch. Benavidez was first brought to the ranch in 1999, when she was 25.

“While my survivor sisters continue to show up in Washington, demanding justice and accountability, questioning the powers that be about the withholding of justice, I, too, am here today asking these very same questions,” Benavidez said. “There is a mountain of evidence this government has been sitting on for decades. We don’t need more paper files sitting as artifacts. We need the black-and-white words and names within those files to jump off the page and become real-time answers and actions.”

Benavidez is one of more than 1,000 women the US Department of Justice believes were abused as part of Epstein’s international trafficking operation. Despite the scale of the abuse, coupled with the roughly 6 million investigative records compiled as part of the government’s case against Epstein, the Trump administration concluded that only two people were responsible for the crimes committed.

No previous investigation into Epstein’s criminal network examined what happened in New Mexico, but state officials are hopeful that what is uncovered by the Commission’s investigation will prompt prosecutors to pursue additional charges against accomplices and co-conspirators.

Here are the seven takeaways from the Commission’s interim report:

1. Epstein first set up shop in New Mexico

Before his international sex trafficking operation took root in Manhattan and the US Virgin Islands, Epstein bought nearly 8,000 acres of land just outside Albuquerque in 1993. Over the next 25 years, at least 30 girls and women were brought there and abused by Epstein and his co-conspirators. As is detailed in the report, local law enforcement during those years — including after Epstein’s first conviction — “played a passive role in investigating him,” and allowed his trafficking empire to grow undisturbed.

2. State charges against co-conspirators appear unlikely

Based on what’s been uncovered so far, it’s unlikely that criminal charges for state crimes will result from this investigation. The Commission identified eight chargeable offenses for the crimes uncovered so far, most with a statute of limitations of only five or six years. Witness testimony and evidence currently available place the alleged criminal conduct at Zorro Ranch between 1996 and 2012.

Two potential charges — criminal sexual penetration and criminal sexual contact — remain prosecutable until a victim turns 35 if they were a minor at the time of the assault. The Commission has recommended amending state law to remove the statute of limitations on trafficking for future cases, though restrictions in the state constitution prevent such a change from applying retroactively.

The Commission has also recommended the legislature close New Mexico’s age of consent loophole, which allowed Epstein to stay off the state’s sex offender registry after his 2008 conviction.

3. Zorro Ranch was a 50,000-square-foot compound with a live-in staff and shooting range

Epstein got an incredible deal on the land purchase, thanks in part to his now-convicted accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell, who served as a “disinterested person” in appraising the land. Part of the sweetheart deal included ranching and agricultural leases with the Bureau of Land Management that New Mexico officials didn’t monitor and Epstein failed to uphold.

Over the next six years, Epstein built a sprawling, 50,000-square-foot compound featuring a three-story main residence, eight guest houses, stables, a hangar and airstrip, a helipad “as part of a labyrinth garden,” and a shooting range. The Commission identified 13 Zorro Ranch employees, some of whom lived onsite, were issued cell phones and had access to ranch vehicles. Epstein also installed extensive communications infrastructure.

4. Epstein used his girlfriend’s dental license to order oxygen and anesthetics

Karyna Shuliak, Epstein’s girlfriend at the time of his death and the primary beneficiary of his fortune, was a licensed dentist in New Mexico from 2015 to 2021. She had graduated from Columbia University’s dental school a few years prior — thanks to Epstein’s connections, a reported $5-10 million donation, and $630,000 in tuition payments — and told the New Mexico Regulation and Licensing Department she planned to open a practice called Zorro Smiles at the ranch.

The business never materialized, but Epstein asked Shuliak to have oxygen and anesthetics delivered to the property. The interim report notes that multiple victims said they woke up at the ranch next to medical equipment, though it “is unknown at this time if Shuliak’s dental instrumentation and these accounts are related.”

5. New Mexico officials ignored Epstein for decades

Despite victim testimony pointing to Zorro Ranch as early as 1996, local and federal law enforcement never seriously investigated Epstein’s New Mexico operation. Different departments routinely deferred responsibility to others rather than taking action themselves. The Commission found that local and state officials repeatedly chose to let “others in Miami and in New York do it. As a result, the conduct of Epstein and his co-conspirators in New Mexico went unexamined and unpunished.”

Even while federal prosecutors were building their massive case against Epstein and Maxwell in 2019, cooperation with New Mexico authorities amounted to little more than requisite paperwork. In September of that year, New Mexico Deputy Attorney General Clara Moran sent investigators in the Southern District of New York “materials related to the criminal investigation and potential prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein’s co-conspirators.” The Commission later found that Moran’s office did not retain any copies of the investigative material after it was passed along.

Two months later, Moran’s office offered to assist SDNY in executing a search warrant at Zorro Ranch, suggesting that the property could be seized and funds from its sale could be used to benefit survivors. Neither department applied for a warrant, and the property was sold by Epstein’s estate for $18 million.

6. 24 subpoenas issued, 100,000 records received

The Commission issued four new subpoenas Wednesday to three state agencies and a local spa used by Epstein as a recruiting hub. Earlier this year, it subpoenaed ten other state and local agencies, the Federal Aviation Administration, JPMorgan, Deutsche Bank, and US Attorney’s Offices in New Mexico, New York, Florida, Michigan, South Carolina, and the US Virgin Islands.

About half have complied with their subpoenas, submitting roughly 100,000 records to the Commission. Deutsche Bank has agreed to fully comply, and says it will deliver approximately 60,000 pages of Epstein’s financial records.

7. Several witnesses and victims have come forward since the investigation began

Dozens of survivors and witnesses have contacted the Commission since its investigation began. The number of known individuals abused at Zorro Ranch has grown from 10 to 30, five of whom have their experiences outlined in the interim report. The sheer volume of emails, calls, texts, and in-person encounters with those who wish to speak with the Commission stands in stark contrast to the US Department of Justice, which closed its investigation into Epstein last year, and whose acting attorney general refused to meet with survivors until his job depended on it.

“This was a monster who used power, intimidation, wealth, influence, false pretenses, and a masked disguise to gain access and exploit the one thing that meant everything to me at that time — my hard-earned career. He exploited us all. And too many people within his network scoffed at the idea that he could possibly be a sexual predator and a criminal,” said Benavidez. “Let there be no mistake — I use this survivor platform to stand on the right side of every survivor’s journey toward truth and justice. I am holding on to faith that real accountability will be achieved.”

Share

Subscribe now

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Pledge Your Support

Supercharge your program with Action Network Boost

Powerful features for the most advanced digital programs, including deliverability reporting, priority support, a new way to dig deeper into your data, simplified email customization, and much, much more. Sign up and get 10% off Boost here >

On Wednesday, a commission established by the New Mexico Legislature to investigate crimes committed at Jeffrey Epstein’s Zorro Ranch released its initial findings and issued subpoenas to three state agencies and a local spa where Epstein preyed on women.

The Survivors’ Truth Commission’s brief meeting included an overview of its 110-page interim report led by state Rep. Andrea Romero, as well as testimony from Rachel Benavidez, one of several massage therapists Epstein hired and then raped once they arrived at Zorro Ranch. Benavidez was first brought to the ranch in 1999, when she was 25.

“While my survivor sisters continue to show up in Washington, demanding justice and accountability, questioning the powers that be about the withholding of justice, I, too, am here today asking these very same questions,” Benavidez said. “There is a mountain of evidence this government has been sitting on for decades. We don’t need more paper files sitting as artifacts. We need the black-and-white words and names within those files to jump off the page and become real-time answers and actions.”

Benavidez is one of more than 1,000 women the US Department of Justice believes were abused as part of Epstein’s international trafficking operation. Despite the scale of the abuse, coupled with the roughly 6 million investigative records compiled as part of the government’s case against Epstein, the Trump administration concluded that only two people were responsible for the crimes committed.

No previous investigation into Epstein’s criminal network examined what happened in New Mexico, but state officials are hopeful that what is uncovered by the Commission’s investigation will prompt prosecutors to pursue additional charges against accomplices and co-conspirators.

Subscribe now

Here are the seven takeaways from the Commission’s interim report:

1. Epstein first set up shop in New Mexico

Before his international sex trafficking operation took root in Manhattan and the US Virgin Islands, Epstein bought nearly 8,000 acres of land just outside Albuquerque in 1993. Over the next 25 years, at least 30 girls and women were brought there and abused by Epstein and his co-conspirators. As is detailed in the report, local law enforcement during those years — including after Epstein’s first conviction — “played a passive role in investigating him,” and allowed his trafficking empire to grow undisturbed.

2. State charges against co-conspirators appear unlikely

Based on what’s been uncovered so far, it’s unlikely that criminal charges for state crimes will result from this investigation. The Commission identified eight chargeable offenses for the crimes uncovered so far, most with a statute of limitations of only five or six years. Witness testimony and evidence currently available place the alleged criminal conduct at Zorro Ranch between 1996 and 2012.

Two potential charges — criminal sexual penetration and criminal sexual contact — remain prosecutable until a victim turns 35 if they were a minor at the time of the assault. The Commission has recommended amending state law to remove the statute of limitations on trafficking for future cases, though restrictions in the state constitution prevent such a change from applying retroactively.

The Commission has also recommended the legislature close New Mexico’s age of consent loophole, which allowed Epstein to stay off the state’s sex offender registry after his 2008 conviction.

3. Zorro Ranch was a 50,000-square-foot compound with a live-in staff and shooting range

Epstein got an incredible deal on the land purchase, thanks in part to his now-convicted accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell, who served as a “disinterested person” in appraising the land. Part of the sweetheart deal included ranching and agricultural leases with the Bureau of Land Management that New Mexico officials didn’t monitor and Epstein failed to uphold.

Over the next six years, Epstein built a sprawling, 50,000-square-foot compound featuring a three-story main residence, eight guest houses, stables, a hangar and airstrip, a helipad “as part of a labyrinth garden,” and a shooting range. The Commission identified 13 Zorro Ranch employees, some of whom lived onsite, were issued cell phones and had access to ranch vehicles. Epstein also installed extensive communications infrastructure.

4. Epstein used his girlfriend’s dental license to order oxygen and anesthetics

Karyna Shuliak, Epstein’s girlfriend at the time of his death and the primary beneficiary of his fortune, was a licensed dentist in New Mexico from 2015 to 2021. She had graduated from Columbia University’s dental school a few years prior — thanks to Epstein’s connections, a reported $5-10 million donation, and $630,000 in tuition payments — and told the New Mexico Regulation and Licensing Department she planned to open a practice called Zorro Smiles at the ranch.

The business never materialized, but Epstein asked Shuliak to have oxygen and anesthetics delivered to the property. The interim report notes that multiple victims said they woke up at the ranch next to medical equipment, though it “is unknown at this time if Shuliak’s dental instrumentation and these accounts are related.”

5. New Mexico officials ignored Epstein for decades

Despite victim testimony pointing to Zorro Ranch as early as 1996, local and federal law enforcement never seriously investigated Epstein’s New Mexico operation. Different departments routinely deferred responsibility to others rather than taking action themselves. The Commission found that local and state officials repeatedly chose to let “others in Miami and in New York do it. As a result, the conduct of Epstein and his co-conspirators in New Mexico went unexamined and unpunished.”

Even while federal prosecutors were building their massive case against Epstein and Maxwell in 2019, cooperation with New Mexico authorities amounted to little more than requisite paperwork. In September of that year, New Mexico Deputy Attorney General Clara Moran sent investigators in the Southern District of New York “materials related to the criminal investigation and potential prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein’s co-conspirators.” The Commission later found that Moran’s office did not retain any copies of the investigative material after it was passed along.

Two months later, Moran’s office offered to assist SDNY in executing a search warrant at Zorro Ranch, suggesting that the property could be seized and funds from its sale could be used to benefit survivors. Neither department applied for a warrant, and the property was sold by Epstein’s estate for $18 million.

6. 24 subpoenas issued, 100,000 records received

The Commission issued four new subpoenas Wednesday to three state agencies and a local spa used by Epstein as a recruiting hub. Earlier this year, it subpoenaed ten other state and local agencies, the Federal Aviation Administration, JPMorgan, Deutsche Bank, and US Attorney’s Offices in New Mexico, New York, Florida, Michigan, South Carolina, and the US Virgin Islands.

About half have complied with their subpoenas, submitting roughly 100,000 records to the Commission. Deutsche Bank has agreed to fully comply, and says it will deliver approximately 60,000 pages of Epstein’s financial records.

7. Several witnesses and victims have come forward since the investigation began

Dozens of survivors and witnesses have contacted the Commission since its investigation began. The number of known individuals abused at Zorro Ranch has grown from 10 to 30, five of whom have their experiences outlined in the interim report. The sheer volume of emails, calls, texts, and in-person encounters with those who wish to speak with the Commission stands in stark contrast to the US Department of Justice, which closed its investigation into Epstein last year, and whose acting attorney general refused to meet with survivors until his job depended on it.

“This was a monster who used power, intimidation, wealth, influence, false pretenses, and a masked disguise to gain access and exploit the one thing that meant everything to me at that time — my hard-earned career. He exploited us all. And too many people within his network scoffed at the idea that he could possibly be a sexual predator and a criminal,” said Benavidez. “Let there be no mistake — I use this survivor platform to stand on the right side of every survivor’s journey toward truth and justice. I am holding on to faith that real accountability will be achieved.”

Subscribe now

Share

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

What Happened

Once thought to be a shoo-in, Todd Blanche’s confirmation as attorney general is now in peril after his efforts to use his office to personally benefit the president began eroding support within Congress.

The Senate Judiciary Committee canceled a vote planned for Thursday to advance Blanche’s nomination over objections from a majority of its members. The main point of contention is the nearly $2 billion taxpayer-funded slush fund Blanche created for President Donald Trump, along with a provision barring the IRS from auditing any member of the Trump family or their businesses.

Though Blanche testified under oath that he had put an end to both, he has refused to provide a written rescission of the settlement agreement he filed with the courts in May. Until he does, the slush fund and tax immunity are legally still in effect.

“All I want them to do is to confirm what he said in his sworn testimony before the Judiciary Committee, with regard not only to the weaponization fund, but also who is protected from future audits and what agencies of the federal government are bound by the release,” Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) told reporters. “It’s pretty simple, and we’ve actually sent them a redline strikeout.”

Without Cornyn’s support, Blanche cannot advance out of the Judiciary Committee and would instead have to go through a lengthy procedural process before reaching the Senate floor. Trump responded by suggesting he might temporarily withdraw Blanche’s nomination until after the midterm elections in the hope that the incoming Congress will somehow be more willing to do his bidding than the current one.

Blanche’s refusal to end DOJ initiatives that personally benefit Trump mark a clear line between what he is and isn’t willing to do to keep his job. During his confirmation hearing earlier this month, Cornyn and Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) laid out two conditions Blanche would have to meet in order to secure their votes: shut down the slush fund and meet with survivors of Jeffrey Epstein.

He quickly fulfilled only one of those demands. A meeting with survivors was held that same day, but those in the room describe Blanche as disrespectful, condescending, and performative.

Jena-Lisa Jones, a survivor whose lawyers attended the meeting, told COURIER that no one left believing that Blanche had taken their concerns seriously. She said survivors repeatedly confronted him with information implicating their abusers, only for the acting attorney general to cut them off and tell them to report any tips to their local FBI office.

“Todd Blanche is unfit to serve as the highest position of law enforcement in this country,” said Dani Bensky, a survivor who also attended the meeting with Blanche. “He’s led the DOJ to protect perpetrators with absolute impunity, while exposing nude photos and all of our identifying information. He’s prioritized mitigating the president’s reputational harm by meeting in the White House’s Situation Room instead of following a single investigative lead.”

The bare minimum effort appears to have fallen short with Tillis as well. Though Tillis was initially appreciative toward Blanche for holding the meeting, the senator changed his tone after speaking directly with Benski on Wednesday, making clear that spoken assurances from Blanche are no longer going to cut it.

“I didn’t hear in there — I want to see — specific action items,” said Tillis. “And some of that may even have to do with the investigation.”

Benski, Jones, and other survivors have demanded that the DOJ reopen its investigation into Epstein and his co-conspirators, return convicted accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell to a maximum security prison, and offer restitution for the department’s failure to properly redact the Epstein Files.

Share

Supercharge your program with Action Network Boost

Powerful features for the most advanced digital programs, including deliverability reporting, priority support, a new way to dig deeper into your data, simplified email customization, and much, much more. Sign up and get 10% off Boost here >

Sen. Duckworth on the Iran War and voting against an overblown defense budget

Congress is currently in a stalemate over the Trump administration’s request for a $1.5 trillion defense budget, which includes funding for an unauthorized war in Iran and startup money for a $1 trillion “Golden Dome” missile defense project.

Until last year, the National Defense Authorization Act was one of the most reliably bipartisan pieces of legislation at the Capitol. But this year’s proposal — the ballooning of an already massive budget loaded with stockpiles of cash for President Donald Trump’s pet projects — has seen even some of the military’s strongest champions drop their support.

To better understand the current status of the defense budget, and what those opposed to it would like changed, I spoke with National Guard Army veteran Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-IL). A member of Congress since 2013, Duckworth has spent years shaping military funding legislation after earlier serving in state and federal veterans affairs’ offices beginning in 2006.

This interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Camaron Stevenson

Just to kick it off, could you let me know about the current situation of the Defense Authorization Act?

Sen. Tammy Duckworth

The Defense Authorization Act is basically to authorize the defense budget for the nation. It has been one of the most bipartisan pieces of legislation going back over 60 years. I myself have never voted ‘no’ on a Defense Authorization Act until last year, and this year is the first time I’ve ever voted no on it in committee.

It passed out of committee on essentially largely partisan lines. We’re at a point now where it takes 60 votes to open debate on the bill, and they don’t have 60 votes to open debate. So we’re at a stalemate. And a lot of it has to do with the war in Iran, and what President Trump is doing with prosecuting this war against the wishes of the American people.

Stevenson

To that end: you did introduce an amendment regarding the war and funding for it. Could you tell me a little about what your amendment does, and how much money would go to fund the Iran War if your amendment isn’t part of the bill?

Duckworth

My amendment basically says that there can be no more spending on this war in Iran until the administration comes and explains to the American people what exactly they’re doing through their representatives in Congress. They need to come and explain: what is the goal of the war? How are you going to end the war? What are you going to do? What are you going to spend after the war is over in Iran?

The American people need to know this. They’ve asked for something like $300 billion to rebuild Iran. I would like $300 billion to rebuild the United States of America. This president would rather spend money rebuilding Iran than rebuilding America. What my amendment says is no more money for the war, no more money for Secretary of Defense Hegseth to continue to travel, until the administration comes and explains to the American people what the heck they’re doing.

It’s pretty simple. Now, you can still continue to defend America. You can still spend money on defense, on intelligence gathering. You just can’t spend any more money prosecuting the war.

Stevenson

How is it that we’ve been able to spend money on this war in the first place when it hasn’t been approved by Congress?

Duckworth

Well, they’re taking money from other parts of the defense budget that they already had. And as far as we know — as of almost a month ago — they came to us and said they’d already spent $35 billion. And that was just in the first couple of months, so that number is old. We think it’s going to be upwards of $400–$500 billion when all is said and done. But we don’t know.

They’re supposed to come tell us: How many munitions have you expended? What is the cost of rebuilding America’s military bases that have come under attack in places like Kuwait? Those are the numbers that they have not given to the American people. And frankly, the American people deserve to know — because we have bridges that need to be fixed.

They’ve cut funding for educational programs like Pell Grants by declaring that nursing is not a profession, so nursing students can’t qualify for a lot of Pell Grants anymore and will have to take on more student loan debt. I’d rather spend money on that than on rebuilding Iran, which is what this president is proposing to do.

Stevenson

Is there anything else in the Defense Authorization Act that you feel is a non-starter — or conversely, is there anything in there that you think is really good that you wish would come through?

Duckworth

There’s stuff that I wish was in there. For the first time in a few years, my bill on providing IVF to military families was not included. This was something that passed unanimously out of committee in both the House and the Senate two years ago, and last year it passed. The year before that, it passed by a roll call vote. Last year, it passed by voice vote. This is how popular it is.

This year, when the same language that people voted on previously came up for a vote, Chairman Whitaker — just before we had a voice vote on it, like we did last year and it passed — said, What does Susan B. Anthony think of this? This is the anti-choice, anti-IVF group.

And immediately the whole thing fell apart, and so it was not part of it. And frankly, with infertility rates among military men and women being more than double that of the general population, these are people who need help starting their families. I don’t know why we would be opposed to helping provide IVF for military families. So I wish that was in the bill.

Stevenson

One other thing I wanted to ask about — there was in this bill a ban on stock buybacks for companies who make money from the defense bill. Are you familiar with that?

Duckworth

I am. There are certainly things in that bill that I have voted for, but overall, I just cannot vote to authorize the war in Iran. See, if you vote on the defense budget, that is voting to authorize the war in Iran. If you vote on the supplemental — which is a piece of legislation that asks for more money to prosecute the war in Iran — then you’re saying you approve of the war in Iran.

I am at a place where the administration has not come to explain to the American people why they’re conducting this war, how they plan on ending the war, and what they’re going to spend to rebuild Iran. If they don’t tell us that, I can’t vote to authorize it. So I can’t vote on the supplemental. I can’t vote on the defense budget.

They need to come tell me — I have to do my job for the American people, and that is: tell me exactly what you are doing with this war that you started on your own, against the wishes of the American public.

Stevenson

And then I want to ask about one other thing — Secretary Hegseth today announced that he’s going to implement testosterone testing. Mandatory over 30, optional if you’re under 30. Does this sound like anything you’re familiar with from your experience in the military, and what do you think the real purpose of this is?

Duckworth

I try not to get in the head of the most incompetent Secretary of Defense in our nation’s history, but I will tell you that to me it sounds like gender-affirming care. And I’m supportive of gender-affirming care, so if that’s what his intent is, then great.

But look: bottom line, I want more health care for military men and women. I want more health care for all Americans. If we can expand health care for military men and women, that would be something that I could support — but it has to be for women as well as for men. Let’s do hormone testing for both men and women, and if you find that hormone levels are low and you need help getting pregnant, then let’s provide access to IVF for military men and women so that they can start their families.

But I don’t think that’s what Hegseth is doing. I think this is performative bullshit from a Secretary of Defense who cares more about lifting fake weights that look bigger and heavier than they really are and how many push-ups he can do. He should be more worried about what’s actually happening in Iran than this kind of stuff. But it’s to be expected of an incompetent Secretary of Defense.

Stevenson

Is there anything else you want to touch on that maybe I missed — about the Defense Bill, the Secretary of Defense, or anything that people might be missing out on right now?

Duckworth

I think what people have to understand is that we cannot effectively defend the United States of America if we do not have a well-trained, healthy, well-supported fighting force. We are going to lose men and women out of our military mid-career — people we’ve spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to train — if they can’t start their families. We’re going to lose them. They’re going to leave the military and go into the civilian world.

We’ve invested all this money to train them. If they’re not treated well while they’re in the military, if they feel that they’re being used as cannon fodder for wars of choice from a president that the American people have not authorized — then we lose them.

When you send somebody to war, when you ask them to be ready to lay down their lives to defend this nation, you better safeguard that commitment from these heroes by doing your job and upholding your responsibility to make sure that what you’re asking them to do is truly to the benefit of the American people, is truly for the defense of this great nation.

And frankly, we’ve not done that. The President of the United States and the Secretary of Defense have not done that. They’ve just started a war of choice that’s resulted in dead service members, wounded service members. And for what? Are we safer than where we were before? We have a worse Ayatollah than the one that was there before. The Strait of Hormuz is now closed. Americans are suffering with higher gas prices. And now the President says he wants to spend $300 billion rebuilding Iran when he should be spending $300 billion rebuilding America.

Share

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Subscribe now

Supercharge your program with Action Network Boost

Powerful features for the most advanced digital programs, including deliverability reporting, priority support, a new way to dig deeper into your data, simplified email customization, and much, much more. Sign up and get 10% off Boost here >

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

What Happened

Estimates for President Donald Trump’s ongoing vanity projects have surpassed $1 billion, with much of that money being directly funneled to his wealthy donors through no-bid contracts and opaque tax-deductible contributions.

Democrats on the House Oversight Committee and the Senate Subcommittee on Investigations held a hearing Wednesday on government waste, where witnesses detailed personal and professional concerns about Trump’s costly pet projects. Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA), ranking member of the Oversight Committee, believes the initiatives serve two purposes: to satiate the president’s ego and provide him with a way to reward his supporters at no personal cost.

“It’s both a huge vanity project, but it’s also about corruption,” Garcia said in an interview with COURIER. “Donald Trump is destroying America’s monuments, he’s trying to destroy the White House — which he’s doing now — the Kennedy Center, putting his name on it; the reflecting pool, millions of dollars in contracts to his donors; he’s building an arch to himself. This is about Trump trying to remake DC in his own image, while giving contracts to his friends. That’s a level of corruption that has to be investigated, and has to be stopped.”

The estimated price tag of the administration’s construction projects around the nation’s capital, including those Garcia highlighted, is over $1 billion. Some, like the White House ballroom, have tripled in cost since their original estimates. Others, such as the renovation of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, have incurred additional expenses beyond original estimates due to poor craftsmanship.

Current estimates for projects the administration is planning or already carrying out include:

$600 million: Demolition of the East Wing and construction of a six-story subterranean bunker complete with a military hospital, drone defenses, and a ground-level ballroom for entertaining guests.

$257 million: Renovation of the Kennedy Center, not including associated legal costs for the illegal placement and court-ordered removal of Trump’s name from the building’s facade.

$100 million: Construction of the Triumphal Arch, a 250-foot granite structure modeled after Europe’s triumphal arches despite commemorating no specific military or national victory.

$40 million: Creation of the National Garden of American Heroes, a sculpture garden featuring statues of 250 historical figures to mark the United States’ 250th anniversary.

$16 million: Failed restoration of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool.

The Trump administration has also deployed National Guard troops to Washington as part of its DC Safe and Beautiful Task Force, an operation that currently costs roughly $3 million per day. The total cost of the deployment, which ends in January 2029, is projected to be upwards of $3 billion.

Independent investigations have found that an overwhelming majority of the government contracts awarded for these projects have gone to people and corporations that have donated to Trump’s presidential campaigns or other initiatives. A report by the nonprofit consumer advocacy group Public Citizen found that more than a dozen corporations that contributed to the construction of Trump’s ballroom were later awarded a combined $50 billion in government contracts. Those corporations will also be effectively reimbursed for their donations as they were funneled through nonprofit organizations and qualify as tax-deductible.

“Tens of millions were raised from companies that have business before the government,” Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) said of the ballroom donations. “Of those donors, more than half have received new contracts or expanded the ones they have now. Pay-to-play is the MO here. These actions are a microcosm of how the president views our whole country. He expects all of us to glorify him and pay money to his friends and family whenever they ask — even while everyday Americans struggle to meet the needs of life.”

The intra-congressional meeting Democrats held was one of a growing number of “shadow hearings,” unofficial proceedings held without the support of the majority party. While they can do little to spur immediate action, Democrats hold them as a preview of how they will run the Capitol should voters give them control in the November midterm elections.

Share

Melania Trump threatens former modeling friend with defamation lawsuit over Epstein allegations

First Lady Melania Trump on Tuesday made another defamation threat against individuals linking her and the president to Jeffrey Epstein, alleging they caused her “overwhelming financial and reputational harm” through comments made during a live YouTube interview last week.

Trump’s legal team sent a retraction demand to journalist Zev Shalev and diplomat Amanda Ungaro, who shared the letter with COURIER. In it, attorneys outline three statements made during the hourlong interview they contend are defamatory toward Mrs. Trump. The comments in question center on Ungaro’s former partner, Paolo Zampolli, a longtime friend of the Trumps who currently works in the administration and has maintained that it was he, not Epstein, who introduced the future first couple in 1998.

Ungaro and others dispute that account, claiming that Zampolli falsely took credit for introducing the couple in order to shield them from scrutiny during Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. During the interview, Ungaro and Shalev also discuss how Melania has remained unusually close to Zampolli and supposedly pressured her husband into giving him a role within the administration.

The contested statements include the title of the video itself — “First Lady Spy Scandal,” even though the word “spy” is not mentioned once during the interview -— and two comments made by Shalev:

“What is she trying to hide? Why come out with a statement like that without ever needing to?” Shalev said, describing an April press conference held by Mrs. Trump. “It’s really the man that you have in common with her, which is Paolo Zampolli.”

Later in the interview, Shalev added, “Melania tried to get [Zampolli] to be an ambassador … and she went on to insist that he become a special envoy. … He brought her to the United States, he’s in constant contact with her, she’s rewarded him with this special envoy title.”

Aaron Terr, director of public advocacy for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, reviewed the letter at COURIER’s request and said defamation threats like this are often used by powerful people to intimidate critics into silence.

“Defamation lawsuits and threats of litigation have too often been used by the powerful as a tool to stifle constitutionally protected criticism. President Trump and his allies have repeatedly employed that tactic,” Terr said in a statement. “We take no position on whether the statements challenged in this demand letter are defamatory. But it’s notable that the letter characterizes the challenged statements at a high level of generality, offering little explanation of why they’re defamatory, while baldly asserting the speakers knew they were making false statements.”

Alejandro Brito, the Florida-based attorney representing the First Lady, did not respond to a request for comment on this story.

Melania has vehemently denied accusations that she was an escort, and has been aggressively litigious when confronted about her association with Zampolli and how she met her husband. Her first major lawsuits came in September 2016 against the Daily Mail and Tarpley.net, a small Maryland-based blog. The Daily Mail reported that she and Zampolli ran an escort service disguised as a modeling agency, while Tarpley alleged that Melania had worked as an escort. Two months later, she threatened to sue People magazine for publishing a firsthand account of a woman who accused Donald Trump of sexually assaulting her in 2005, while Melania was pregnant.

Melania prevailed in her suit against the Daily Mail, securing $3 million in damages and a public apology. Tarpley settled before the case went to trial, and was ordered to issue an apology and pay a “substantial sum,” according to Politico. The defamation lawsuit against People never materialized, and the magazine never retracted its story.

Litigation largely took a pause during the four years’ between Trump’s presidencies. Melania remained noticeably silent throughout her husband’s legal battle with writer E. Jean Carroll, whom a jury determined was raped (as the term is commonly understood) and later defamed by Trump. But the legal threats ramped back up as the Department of Justice’s partial release of the Epstein Files brought renewed scrutiny on the Trumps’ history with the convicted sex trafficker.

In August 2025, the First Lady threatened to file a $1 billion defamation lawsuit against Hunter Biden over comments he made during an interview with Channel 5 reporter Andrew Callaghan. Biden repeated the claim that Epstein introduced Melania and Donald and said he believed that future releases from the Epstein Files would further implicate the president. To date, no lawsuit has been filed and Biden, who refused to apologize, publicly welcomed any legal challenge that would allow him to depose members of the Trump family.

Two months later, Mrs. Trump sent a demand letter to journalist and Epstein confidante Michael Wolff, ordering him to retract and apologize for his public statements claiming Epstein introduced Melania to Donald Trump.That dispute remains ongoing. This past Tuesday, Melania filed a motion requesting that the court sanction Wolff, accusing him of using their legal battle as a fundraising opportunity.

In addition to the retraction demand sent to Shalev and Ungaro, the First Lady’s lawyers this week sent a similar letter to blogger Anthony Andrews over a Substack post he made about President Trump. The letter to Andrews, who has less than 1,000 subscribers on the platform and has recently written about Zampolli and Ungaro, suggests the White House is willing to cast a wide net in its efforts to silence any commentary speculating on the relationship between Epstein, Zampolli, and the Trumps.

Share

Supercharge your program with Action Network Boost

Powerful features for the most advanced digital programs, including deliverability reporting, priority support, a new way to dig deeper into your data, simplified email customization, and much, much more. Sign up and get 10% off Boost here >

It’s easy for individual members of Congress to get overlooked by national outlets as they quietly skate to reelection again, and again, and again. The following is an overview of different congressional representatives you may not have heard of, with fun facts about their origin stories they’ve tried to keep out of the public narrative.

US Rep. Brad Finstad, Minnesota’s 1st Congressional District

Since taking office in 2022, Rep. Finstad has:

• Seen his net worth decrease from $7 million to $4 million

• Sponsored 64 bills, none of which have been signed into law

• Held zero in-person town halls in 2025

• Voted against the expulsion of disgraced Rep. George Santos from Congress

• Threatened an ethics investigation into Rep. Angie Craig (D-MN) for holding town halls in his district

• Signed onto a bipartisan statement condemning the politically-motivated assassination of Melissa and Mark Hortman in Minnesota

Fun Facts

One of the first bills Rep. Finstad introduced was the Audit and Return It Act, which would have created a system for the government to recover misused COVID relief funds and apply them toward reducing the federal deficit. The proposal included an audit of Paycheck Protect Program (PPP) loans, an area where Finstad has an interesting history.

Shortly after PPP loans became available, the staff at Finstad’s private company tripled from 11 to 33, qualifying the business for a $168,620 loan. The following year, his seemingly pandemic-proof business grew to 43 employees and received a second PPP loan worth $155,873. Both loans were later forgiven and since then, his company has reduced its workforce back to 11 employees.

One of Finstad’s major accomplishments in the Minnesota Legislature was securing public funding for a Major League Baseball field. The deal was largely funded by taxpayer dollars, saving Carl Pohlad, the billionaire owner of the Minnesota Twins until his death in 2009, over $350 million.

Share

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Subscribe now

Supercharge your program with Action Network Boost

Powerful features for the most advanced digital programs, including deliverability reporting, priority support, a new way to dig deeper into your data, simplified email customization, and much, much more. Sign up and get 10% off Boost here >

First Lady Melania Trump on Tuesday made another defamation threat against individuals linking her and the president to Jeffrey Epstein, alleging they caused her “overwhelming financial and reputational harm” through comments made during a live YouTube interview last week.

Trump’s legal team sent a retraction demand to journalist Zev Shalev and diplomat Amanda Ungaro, who shared the letter with COURIER. In it, attorneys outline three statements made during the hourlong interview they contend are defamatory toward Mrs. Trump. The comments in question center on Ungaro’s former partner, Paolo Zampolli, a longtime friend of the Trumps who currently works in the administration and has maintained that it was he, not Epstein, who introduced the future first couple in 1998.

Ungaro and others dispute that account, claiming that Zampolli falsely took credit for introducing the couple in order to shield them from scrutiny during Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. During the interview, Ungaro and Shalev also discuss how Melania has remained unusually close to Zampolli and supposedly pressured her husband into giving him a role within the administration.

The contested statements include the title of the video itself — “First Lady Spy Scandal,” even though the word “spy” is not mentioned once during the interview -— and two comments made by Shalev:

“What is she trying to hide? Why come out with a statement like that without ever needing to?” Shalev said, describing an April press conference held by Mrs. Trump. “It’s really the man that you have in common with her, which is Paolo Zampolli.”

Later in the interview, Shalev added, “Melania tried to get [Zampolli] to be an ambassador … and she went on to insist that he become a special envoy. … He brought her to the United States, he’s in constant contact with her, she’s rewarded him with this special envoy title.”

Aaron Terr, director of public advocacy for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, reviewed the letter at COURIER’s request and said defamation threats like this are often used by powerful people to intimidate critics into silence.

“Defamation lawsuits and threats of litigation have too often been used by the powerful as a tool to stifle constitutionally protected criticism. President Trump and his allies have repeatedly employed that tactic,” Terr said in a statement. “We take no position on whether the statements challenged in this demand letter are defamatory. But it’s notable that the letter characterizes the challenged statements at a high level of generality, offering little explanation of why they’re defamatory, while baldly asserting the speakers knew they were making false statements.”

Alejandro Brito, the Florida-based attorney representing the First Lady, did not respond to a request for comment on this story.

Melania has vehemently denied accusations that she was an escort, and has been aggressively litigious when confronted about her association with Zampolli and how she met her husband. Her first major lawsuits came in September 2016 against the Daily Mail and Tarpley.net, a small Maryland-based blog. The Daily Mail reported that she and Zampolli ran an escort service disguised as a modeling agency, while Tarpley alleged that Melania had worked as an escort. Two months later, she threatened to sue People magazine for publishing a firsthand account of a woman who accused Donald Trump of sexually assaulting her in 2005, while Melania was pregnant.

American Freakshow

Who IS Paolo Zampolli? Live with Bekah Day and Katie Chenoweth

Your Freakshow guides have recently introduced you to Italian oaf, Melania pal, and Trump’s “envoy” for global partnerships - a made-up, non State Department diplomatic-appearing role. Today we got to spend an hour with investigative journalist Bekah Day, who from her perch in Kansas City, broke the Amanda Ungaro deportation story months before the New …

Listen now

4 months ago · 313 likes · 31 comments · Nina Burleigh, Katie Chenoweth, and bekah day

Melania prevailed in her suit against the Daily Mail, securing $3 million in damages and a public apology. Tarpley settled before the case went to trial, and was ordered to issue an apology and pay a “substantial sum,” according to Politico. The defamation lawsuit against People never materialized, and the magazine never retracted its story.

Litigation largely took a pause during the four years’ between Trump’s presidencies. Melania remained noticeably silent throughout her husband’s legal battle with writer E. Jean Carroll, whom a jury determined was raped (as the term is commonly understood) and later defamed by Trump. But the legal threats ramped back up as the Department of Justice’s partial release of the Epstein Files brought renewed scrutiny on the Trumps’ history with the convicted sex trafficker.

In August 2025, the First Lady threatened to file a $1 billion defamation lawsuit against Hunter Biden over comments he made during an interview with Channel 5 reporter Andrew Callaghan. Biden repeated the claim that Epstein introduced Melania and Donald and said he believed that future releases from the Epstein Files would further implicate the president. To date, no lawsuit has been filed and Biden, who refused to apologize, publicly welcomed any legal challenge that would allow him to depose members of the Trump family.

Two months later, Mrs. Trump sent a demand letter to journalist and Epstein confidante Michael Wolff, ordering him to retract and apologize for his public statements claiming Epstein introduced Melania to Donald Trump.That dispute remains ongoing. This past Tuesday, Melania filed a motion requesting that the court sanction Wolff, accusing him of using their legal battle as a fundraising opportunity.

In addition to the retraction demand sent to Shalev and Ungaro, the First Lady’s lawyers this week sent a similar letter to blogger Anthony Andrews over a Substack post he made about President Trump. The letter to Andrews, who has less than 1,000 subscribers on the platform and has recently written about Zampolli and Ungaro, suggests the White House is willing to cast a wide net in its efforts to silence any commentary speculating on the relationship between Epstein, Zampolli, and the Trumps.

Subscribe now

Share

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

After no consequences for January Killings, ICE agents open fire in Texas and Maine

Immigration officers shot and killed individuals in Texas and Maine earlier this month, but lawmakers have noted a troubling difference from the extrajudicial killings by ICE agents earlier this year: no one recorded the attacks.

Graphic footage from the murders of Renee Goode and Alex Pretti in Minnesota earlier this year set off a wave of nationwide protests against ICE, forcing the Trump administration to reign in some of the more violent protocols it had previously encouraged among law enforcement. Recordings from multiple angles — taken by bystanders, ICE agents, and Pretti himself — were seen by millions, and the widespread videos of unprovoked aggression are seen as a major factor in public sentiment turning against the Trump administration’s anti-immigration efforts.

No such footage exists of the deaths of Lorenzo Salgado Araujo and Joan Sebastian Guerrero. The officers were not wearing body cameras, no bystanders have come forward with recordings, and video from nearby security cameras is indiscernible. And no footage has been released of a third ICE-related death that occurred the same week, when a man in Florida was struck by oncoming traffic while attempting to flee an immigration traffic stop. Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-FL) said the lack of consequences for officers involved in earlier shootings has emboldened agents and created a chilling effect among witnesses.

“People are scared to death to take out their phone and record ICE. Why? Because there are no consequences, and because the last person that did it — Alex Pretti — was murdered for taking out his phone to video an interaction with ICE. This is part of their strategy: to have people too scared to hold them accountable,” said Frost. “The fact that we don’t have that kind of video for the last three incidents just shows that their strategy, unfortunately, is working, and it’s scaring people.”

The Trump administration confirmed as much, when White House official Tom Homan blamed the murders on those exercising their First Amendment rights by recording law enforcement and informing immigrants about their legal protections.

“It all goes back to the Dems, who want to continue to attack ICE, and tell people to evade ‘em, tell people, ‘don’t comply,’ tell people to resist, and tell people ICE isn’t a real law enforcement agency,” Homan told Fox News host Laura Ingraham. “You and I talked about this a year and a half ago, Laura. I said, ‘If the hateful rhetoric didn’t stop, there will be bloodshed,’ and I’m saying it right now: there’s still gonna be more bloodshed unless they shut their mouth and let ICE enforce the laws.”

The administration has gone to great lengths to protect its immigration officers from consequences — both legally and socially. DHS agents regularly use unmarked vehicles, cover their badges, mask their faces, and refuse to identify themselves to the public. Vice President JD Vance at one point offered offending agents “absolute immunity,” and the White House has responded to each killing by defending the shooter and attacking the deceased.

Rep. Christian Menefee (D-TX), whose hometown of Houston has been devastated and enraged by the death of Salgado Araujo, believes the Trump administration has corrupted DHS beyond repair and that ICE must be abolished entirely in order for the federal government to mend its lethal approach to immigration.

“President Trump, Kristi Noem, and the current head of DHS — they have radicalized that agency. They now view themselves as a military force that is able to go throughout the country, through President Trump’s enhanced ICE enforcement operations, and target people. We saw what they did to Keith Porter, we saw what they did to Alex Pretti, to Renee Goode, and they now act like a radicalized military police force,” said Menefee. “It’s horrific, and it just shows that that agency needs to be ripped down to the studs.”

While abolishing ICE has gained support in recent years, the effort would be an uphill battle that could take years before meaningful change is realized. As a more immediate step, Frost has introduced the Right to Record Act, a bill that would immediately strengthen First Amendment protections and create financial consequences for law enforcement officers who violate them.

Law enforcement officers are currently protected from civil lawsuits by the doctrine off qualified immunity, which generally shields them from personal liability for actions taken in their official capacity. Some states have taken those protections a step further and codified them into law. In Arizona, voters approved a 2024 ballot proposition that grants what the vice president might describe as absolute immunity to any officer who violates someone’s rights while enforcing immigration laws.

The Right to Record Act would supersede qualified immunity in any form and allow anyone whose “right to record, observe, or peacefully protest law enforcement activities” has been violated to sue both the federal government and the offending agent for $25,000 per violation, with up to an additional $100,000 per violation in punitive damages.

“In a just world, these people would — number one, be off the job, and they would be held accountable in a court of law,” Frost said. “But I don’t really believe in the agency itself being the be-all and end-all of deciding what consequences their own people face. It needs to be done in a court of law and these people need to be held criminally liable. This is part of the problem with our system of law enforcement in this country — we shield people from personal accountability. And I think that’s a problem. You’re more likely to make a mistake, or to do something that could end in the loss of life, if there are no consequences. There is no other job in this country where you’re empowered to do something like that. There needs to be a heightened level of scrutiny.”

Frost said that ICE’s growing lethality has generated increased interest in his bill, as lawmakers watch the Trump administration do little to rein in its violent offenders. Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) signed on as a cosponsor two days after Salgado Araujo was killed, and Sens. John Cornyn (R-TX) and Rand Paul (R-KY) have said the continued shootings represent a failure on the part of the administration.

Menefee, who seemed supportive of the bill but has not yet signed on as a co-sponsor, said every effort should be made to right the wrongs committed by DHS, from holding agents accountable to transforming the agency itself.

“We should use every single tool in the toolbox. That means strongly pushing to reform the agency, but it also means holding individual agents accountable when they break the law,” Menefee said. “They should be treated the same way that someone who’s not in law enforcement is treated when they kill somebody. If President Trump and the head of DHS were so proud of what ICE agents are doing, why are they hiding their identities? To me, accountability looks like — at a macro level, taking on the agency; at a micro level, addressing the investigation and holding the individual agents accountable.”

Share

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

What Happened

Acting US Attorney General Todd Blanche met with victims of Jeffrey Epstein on Thursday afternoon after two senators told him he was required to do so in order to keep his nomination on track.

The meeting ended a yearlong stalemate between the DOJ and survivors, who say the Trump administration refused to speak with them about Epstein’s criminal network. But the change in course was not due to a change of heart; Blanche was told during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee that his nomination for attorney general would not advance if he continued to evade Epstein’s victims.

“I can’t understand how this attorney general could find 48 hours to visit with Ghislaine Maxwell, who has been prosecuted for sex trafficking, and can’t find 30 minutes to meet with the survivors,” ranking committee member Dick Durbin (D-Il) told survivor Dani Bensky during the hearing. “I don’t think his name should be called on the floor of the United States Senate until he meets with you. It’s not too much to ask.”

Durbin’s demand later received bipartisan backing from Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC), who told Blanche he would need to meet with survivors in order to earn his support. With his job on the line, Blanche conceded and spent an hour at the Justice Department headquarters with a handful of women whose personal information had not been redacted from the DOJ’s initial publication of its Epstein Library, which contains a partial release of the government’s case files on Epstein.

But those in attendance described the meeting as more akin to checking a box than a meaningful conversation. Blanche gave noncommittal responses when offered leads on potential Epstein clients and accomplices of, offered unsatisfactory answers about transferring one of their abusers, Ghislaine Maxwell, to a minimum-security prison, and provided no additional details regarding the redactions in the Epstein Files that left survivors exposed, while seemingly protecting those implicated in crimes.

“I don’t think that we had high expectations going into this meeting. I certainly did not. But I didn’t expect to walk out of the meeting feeling the way that we feel right now. It was demoralizing, to say the very least,” Liz Stein, a survivor in attendance, told MSNOW. “It felt like more political posturing and using survivors the way that we’ve been used as political pawns.”

Blanche told reporters he did not intend for the meeting to be anything more than a listening session and encouraged survivors to share any information they have with federal investigators. The hands-off approach failed to win survivors’ support. After the meeting, they urged senators to reject his nomination.

Despite that reaction, Tillis signaled his support and commended Blanche for meeting with survivors, praising him for “doing what all his predecessors over the last two decades never did: meet with the victims of Jeffery [sic] Epstein’s horrific crimes.”

The encounter capped a tense, two-day confirmation hearing in which Blanche’s handling of the Epstein investigation was a focal point for senators. Blanche offered little, repeating his defense that redaction errors were a result of the “Herculean task” of complying with the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which his department has so far failed to do. He also defended the FBI’s conclusion that there was insufficient evidence to investigate anyone else involved in Epstein’s criminal network, despite documents that appear to identify co-conspirators and seized messages to Epstein that seem to incriminate the senders, whose names remain redacted and hidden from public view.

Internal communications between federal agents have also revealed that the DOJ’s decision to close the case was based on a rushed review of less than 7% of the 6 million documents contained within the Epstein Files, and agents did not take financial documents, personal communications, or the majority of witness testimony into consideration when closing the case.

Blanche has been described by many in Congress — and by Bondi, his former boss at the DOJ — as wholly responsible for the Trump administration’s handling of the Epstein investigation. Decisions to close the investigation, grant leniency to the only person convicted, and withhold information that the law requires to be made public have made Blanche the center figure in what is being described as the largest government cover-up in recent history.

“He’s at the center of the cover-up of the Epstein Files,” said Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-AZ). “When we spoke to Pam Bondi, in her transcribed interview, she mentioned Todd Blanche over 30 times, saying that the Epstein Files cover-up was entirely under his purview.”

Attempts to Sanewash

• Blanche holds meeting with Epstein accusers after request from Tillis

• Epstein survivors say Todd Blanche ignored them. Now one Republican senator is making him listen

• Blanche defends handling of Epstein files as he aims to solidify GOP support at confirmation hearing

Far-Right Spin

• Democrat politicos rerun underhanded leftist playbook in effort to torpedo Trump’s AG nominee

• Booker: As AG, Blanche Would Be ‘One of the Most Corrupt’ Law Enforcement Officers Ever

• Tillis Says Blanche Met With Epstein Accusers After His Demand

Subscribe now

It’s easy for individual members of Congress to get overlooked by national outlets as they quietly skate to reelection again, and again, and again. The following is an overview of different congressional representatives you may not have heard of, with fun facts about their origin stories they’ve tried to keep out of the public narrative.

US Rep. Brian Babin, Texas’ 36th Congressional District

Since taking office in 2015, Rep. Babin has:

• Seen his net worth increase from roughly $2.5 million to over $3.5 million, with a brief spike to $6.2 million in 2021

• Sponsored 99 bills

• Authored one bill that has been signed into law, to rename a post office

• Proudly documented his misogyny, homophobia, and transphobia

• Begged Trump to pardon convicted war criminals

• Attempted to end birthright citizenship

• Been investigated by his peers for conspiring to overturn the 2020 election results

• Championed the failed SCOTUSCare Act, which would have required US Supreme Court justices to obtain health insurance through the Affordable Care Act marketplace

• Attempted to stop refugee programs during the 2015 European migrant crisis, which had been partially caused by US-funded proxy wars in the Middle East

Fun Facts

Babin began his professional journey by enlisting in the US Air Force in 1975. He left after only four years, saying he felt “demoralized” by his commander-in-chief, President Jimmy Carter. He left the service and went to work on Ronald Reagan’s presidential campaign.

He took the lessons of success he learned from Reagan back home to Texas, where he was elected mayor of Woodville. His political rise was undercut by his bigotry, however, during his failed 1998 congressional campaign. An outspoken opponent of LGBTQ rights, Babin had hired an openly gay campaign manager, who quit without warning a few months before the general election.

“Babin abhors homosexuality. I am a homosexual,” Jon-Marc McDonald said in his resignation statement. “Therefore, I can no longer work for someone who thinks that my sexuality is a disease, a sin and unnatural.”

McDonald later alleged that Babin told staff that “homosexuals should be shot,” and went on to become a successful New York playwright. Babin was given a series of consolation-prize positions in state government by former Governors George W. Bush and Rick Perry until he saw an opportunity to snag a safe Republican seat in the US House in 2015.

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Donate

Acting US Attorney General Todd Blanche met with victims of Jeffrey Epstein on Thursday afternoon after two senators told him he was required to do so in order to keep his nomination on track.

The meeting ended a yearlong stalemate between the DOJ and survivors, who say the Trump administration refused to speak with them about Epstein’s criminal network. But the change in course was not due to a change of heart; Blanche was told during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee that his nomination for attorney general would not advance if he continued to evade Epstein’s victims.

“I can’t understand how this attorney general could find 48 hours to visit with Ghislaine Maxwell, who has been prosecuted for sex trafficking, and can’t find 30 minutes to meet with the survivors,” ranking committee member Dick Durbin (D-Il) told survivor Dani Bensky during the hearing. “I don’t think his name should be called on the floor of the United States Senate until he meets with you. It’s not too much to ask.”

Durbin’s demand later received bipartisan backing from Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC), who told Blanche he would need to meet with survivors in order to earn his support. With his job on the line, Blanche conceded and spent an hour at the Justice Department headquarters with a handful of women whose personal information had not been redacted from the DOJ’s initial publication of its Epstein Library, which contains a partial release of the government’s case files on Epstein.

But those in attendance described the meeting as more akin to checking a box than a meaningful conversation. Blanche gave noncommittal responses when offered leads on potential Epstein clients and accomplices of, offered unsatisfactory answers about transferring one of their abusers, Ghislaine Maxwell, to a minimum-security prison, and provided no additional details regarding the redactions in the Epstein Files that left survivors exposed, while seemingly protecting those implicated in crimes.

“I don’t think that we had high expectations going into this meeting. I certainly did not. But I didn’t expect to walk out of the meeting feeling the way that we feel right now. It was demoralizing, to say the very least,” Liz Stein, a survivor in attendance, told MSNOW. “It felt like more political posturing and using survivors the way that we’ve been used as political pawns.”

Blanche told reporters he did not intend for the meeting to be anything more than a listening session and encouraged survivors to share any information they have with federal investigators. The hands-off approach failed to win survivors’ support. After the meeting, they urged senators to reject his nomination.

Despite that reaction, Tillis signaled his support and commended Blanche for meeting with survivors, praising him for “doing what all his predecessors over the last two decades never did: meet with the victims of Jeffery [sic] Epstein’s horrific crimes.”

The encounter capped a tense, two-day confirmation hearing in which Blanche’s handling of the Epstein investigation was a focal point for senators. Blanche offered little, repeating his defense that redaction errors were a result of the “Herculean task” of complying with the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which his department has so far failed to do. He also defended the FBI’s conclusion that there was insufficient evidence to investigate anyone else involved in Epstein’s criminal network, despite documents that appear to identify co-conspirators and seized messages to Epstein that seem to incriminate the senders, whose names remain redacted and hidden from public view.

Internal communications between federal agents have also revealed that the DOJ’s decision to close the case was based on a rushed review of less than 7% of the 6 million documents contained within the Epstein Files, and agents did not take financial documents, personal communications, or the majority of witness testimony into consideration when closing the case.

Blanche has been described by many in Congress — and by Bondi, his former boss at the DOJ — as wholly responsible for the Trump administration’s handling of the Epstein investigation. Decisions to close the investigation, grant leniency to the only person convicted, and withhold information that the law requires to be made public have made Blanche the center figure in what is being described as the largest government cover-up in recent history.

“He’s at the center of the cover-up of the Epstein Files,” said Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-AZ). “When we spoke to Pam Bondi, in her transcribed interview, she mentioned Todd Blanche over 30 times, saying that the Epstein Files cover-up was entirely under his purview.”

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up