President Donald Trump gestures to the crowd after delivering remarks at the House GOP Member Retreat, Tuesday, January 6, 2026, at the Donald J. Trump- John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)
President Donald Trump is keeping a surprising political secret: He believes Democrats have several formidable presidential contenders for 2028, but he refuses to reveal their identities.
Speaking with Fox News hosts Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum on Wednesday, Trump acknowledged that Democrats have talented potential candidates who could pose a serious challenge to Republicans in the next presidential election.
But the president made clear he has no intention of giving those Democrats an early boost.
“Well, I’d rather not say because I actually know some that I think would be formidable,” Trump said. “But I don’t want to put them in play.”
Trump suggested the strongest potential challengers might not be the familiar names already dominating speculation about the Democratic nomination.
“People aren’t even thinking about them,” he added.
The president then joked that identifying those individuals could create unnecessary trouble for Republicans.
“I mean, all of a sudden we’ll end up with a real opponent,” Trump said.
The unexpected praise comes just one day after Democrats delivered a major midterm election upset, capturing control of both the House and Senate and setting the stage for a contentious final two years of Trump’s presidency.
While Trump declined to identify the Democrats he considers most threatening, speculation surrounding the party’s 2028 field has included California Gov. Gavin Newsom, former Vice President Kamala Harris, former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro.
On the Republican side, Trump expressed confidence in his party’s prospects but stopped short of endorsing a successor.
“We have a great bench,” Trump said. “We have a great group of talented people that I think would do a very good job.”
Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio remain prominent names in discussions about the Republican nomination. Trump has previously praised both men, even floating the possibility of a Vance-Rubio ticket.
However, the president suggested Republicans could ultimately face a competitive primary rather than a handpicked successor.
“They say whoever Trump endorses is gonna win, or whoever Trump picks is gonna win,” he said. “I don’t know if that’s true or not.”
For now, Trump is keeping his options open on both sides of the political aisle.
David B. Gleason from Chicago, IL, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons
President Donald Trump is standing firmly behind Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth — but he also believes his Pentagon chief could have a promising political future in the U.S. Senate.
Speaking to reporters Wednesday, Trump praised Hegseth and suggested he would be a popular choice to replace Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), who won Tennessee’s gubernatorial election Tuesday.
“I think he’s doing a very good job, and I actually think he’d be very popular if he did that. But I haven’t heard that at all,” Trump said, according to The Hill.
The president’s remarks come amid growing speculation about Hegseth’s future following Republicans’ sweeping midterm election losses.
CBS News reported Wednesday that Trump had privately asked advisers whether Hegseth should remain in his position. However, when questioned directly about replacing the defense secretary, Trump dismissed the possibility.
“No, I think he’s doing a very good job,” the president said.
Hegseth’s name is already gaining traction in Tennessee political circles.
A recent UpOne Insights survey found Hegseth had a 72% favorable rating among Tennessee voters, compared with just 13% unfavorable, according to the Washington Examiner.
Blackburn’s victory creates an opening in the Senate when she assumes the governorship in January. Other potential contenders include Republican Reps. Tim Burchett and Chuck Fleischmann, along with former Knox County Mayor Glenn Jacobs.
Meanwhile, Hegseth faces mounting pressure from Democrats, who are preparing investigations into his handling of the Iran war and have raised the possibility of impeachment after taking control of Congress.
Despite the political turbulence, Trump has made clear he remains satisfied with Hegseth’s performance.
For now, a Senate appointment remains speculative. But the president’s public praise has added fresh intrigue to an increasingly competitive race for Blackburn’s seat.
Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons
President Donald Trump is refusing to clean house following Republicans’ sweeping midterm election losses, dismissing suggestions that his Cabinet should shoulder responsibility for the party’s defeat even as reports of internal finger-pointing intensify.
Speaking with Fox News host Bret Baier late Tuesday, Trump was asked whether the Democratic takeover of both the House and Senate would prompt him to make changes to his administration.
“No, I don’t think so. Had nothing to do with my Cabinet,” Trump responded.
The president characterized the election results as a temporary political setback rather than a reflection of his administration’s performance.
“It’s just a point in time, Bret. Just a point in time. Just the way it is. There was a mood in the air, I guess,” Trump said.
The remarks, first reported by The Hill and also covered by Mediaite, came as Democrats celebrated victories in several traditionally Republican states, leaving Trump facing an opposition-controlled Congress for the remainder of his presidency.
Pete Hegseth Faces Growing Scrutiny
Although Trump has publicly ruled out a Cabinet shakeup, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has emerged as a potential target of frustration among some administration insiders.
According to CBS News reporting cited by The Hill, some Trump aides believe Hegseth could face blame for Republicans’ losses, particularly because of the political fallout from the administration’s war with Iran.
The Washington Examiner separately reported Wednesday that individuals within Trump’s political orbit were looking for explanations for the election results, with one source questioning Hegseth’s handling of the conflict and its consequences for Republicans.
The speculation follows weeks of reports describing internal tensions within the administration.
In October, Semafor reported that some Trump allies believed Hegseth could become a target if the Iran war contributed to significant Republican losses. The White House dismissed that speculation at the time, calling the accounts baseless.
The controversy surrounding Hegseth comes as Trump has acknowledged that the Iran conflict and rising gasoline prices contributed to voter dissatisfaction.
In a separate interview with The Wall Street Journal, Trump conceded that the war was one factor in the election results but defended his decision to pursue the military campaign.
“Iran was a piece of it,” Trump said, according to reporting summarized by The Hill.
The president has maintained that preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons remains more important than the immediate political consequences.
For now, however, Trump’s public comments suggest Hegseth’s position is not in immediate jeopardy because of the election results.
Trump Points to Another Reason for GOP Defeat
Rather than blaming his Cabinet, Trump has repeatedly argued that Republicans suffered because he was not personally on the ballot.
In a Truth Social post Tuesday, the president claimed his presence as a candidate would have dramatically changed the outcome.
“And if I was, we would have won IN A LANDSLIDE!” Trump wrote.
During his Fox News interview, Trump also pointed to the historical tendency of the president’s party to lose seats during midterm elections.
He suggested that the political environment had worked against Republican candidates regardless of his administration’s accomplishments.
Trump also acknowledged that some GOP candidates failed to connect with voters.
According to The Wall Street Journal, the president argued that voters simply did not like certain Republican candidates, suggesting the party’s losses could not be attributed solely to his administration.
Despite expressing surprise at the scale of the defeats, Trump congratulated Democrats on their victories and signaled a willingness to negotiate with the incoming congressional majorities.
Reports of White House Infighting Intensify
Trump’s public defense of his Cabinet stands in contrast to reports that some advisers and political operatives have been positioning themselves to avoid responsibility for the election results.
Weeks before Election Day, CNN reported that administration officials were bracing for possible personnel changes if Republicans suffered major losses.
The Washington Post similarly reported in October that several senior figures were maneuvering for influence amid uncertainty surrounding White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles.
Some officials reportedly believed Wiles could depart following the elections, while others questioned the effectiveness of the Republican campaign strategy overseen by Trump allies.
Trump has previously demonstrated a willingness to replace senior officials during his second term.
Earlier this year, he removed Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Attorney General Pam Bondi, two of the most prominent departures from his administration.
The president’s latest comments, however, indicate that he is not currently planning another round of high-profile dismissals in response to Tuesday’s results.
The Washington Examiner reported that some administration officials were also resisting attempts to single out individual advisers for blame.
One White House aide characterized the results as a broad electoral wave rather than the failure of any particular official.
A New Challenge for Trump’s Administration
The Democratic takeover of Congress creates a different set of challenges for Trump’s Cabinet, regardless of whether the president decides to replace anyone.
Beginning in January, Democratic lawmakers will control congressional committees with the authority to investigate federal agencies, summon administration officials and demand records.
Hegseth and other senior officials could face heightened scrutiny over military spending, immigration enforcement and the administration’s handling of the Iran conflict.
Democrats will also control the Senate confirmation process for any future Cabinet nominees, potentially complicating Trump’s ability to replace senior officials should he change his mind.
For now, Trump is making clear that he does not intend to respond to the Republican defeat by firing members of his leadership team.
But with Democrats preparing to take control of Congress and questions mounting about the party’s political future, the president’s decision to stand by his Cabinet is unlikely to end the debate over who bears responsibility for Tuesday’s losses.
President Donald Trump is facing an extraordinary new controversy after former ally Tucker Carlson claimed the White House could be days away from deciding whether to launch a nuclear strike against Iran.
The explosive allegation has ignited a political firestorm, drawing attention from Trump critics and conservative commentators alike as questions mount over the president’s next move in the Middle East.
In a lengthy statement posted to X, Carlson alleged that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was aggressively lobbying Trump to use nuclear weapons against Pickax Mountain, a fortified Iranian complex believed to be associated with Tehran’s nuclear program.
Under pressure from Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the Trump administration may be within days of launching a nuclear strike on Iran. The target would be Pickax Mountain in central Iran, where Israeli intelligence claims the Iranian government has restarted its…
Carlson claimed the president could make a decision by November 7, just days after Tuesday’s midterm elections.
“Netanyahu has been pushing hard for one,” Carlson wrote, citing an unnamed observer who claimed the Israeli prime minister contacts Trump about the issue daily.
The warning quickly attracted attention beyond Carlson’s conservative audience.
CNN anchor Christiane Amanpour was among the prominent figures reacting, while Trump critic George Conway reportedly urged his followers not to dismiss the allegations.
The Bulwark’s Tim Miller similarly acknowledged Carlson’s controversial track record while raising questions about his connections to individuals close to the administration.
Their reactions highlight an unusual development: a former Trump loyalist’s extraordinary warning is attracting serious discussion among some of the president’s political opponents.
But Carlson has offered no publicly verifiable evidence that Trump is preparing to authorize a nuclear attack, and his allegations have not been independently confirmed.
The president himself has publicly rejected the nuclear option.
During an October 15 interview with Newsmax, Trump declared, “I wouldn’t use nuclear. We don’t have to. We’re the greatest nuclear power in the world.”
Trump has nevertheless raised the possibility of additional conventional military action against Iran, including strikes targeting its deeply buried nuclear infrastructure.
According to Mediaite, Carlson argued that the Pickax Mountain complex is so heavily protected that conventional American weapons would be insufficient to destroy it.
The commentator also alleged that Trump’s own advisers are divided over the path forward.
He claimed Vice President JD Vance and presidential envoy Steve Witkoff favor continued negotiations with Tehran, while other senior officials are pushing for renewed military action.
Those alleged internal divisions have not been independently verified.
The controversy also exposes the increasingly bitter divide between Trump and Carlson, whose opposition to the Iran war has transformed him from a prominent presidential ally into one of the administration’s most outspoken conservative critics.
As the president weighs his next steps, Carlson’s dramatic prediction has placed fresh scrutiny on the White House’s military strategy.
President Donald J. Trump visits the El Arepazo Doral restaurant, Monday, March 9, 2026, in Miami, Florida. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)
Democratic lawmakers are preparing investigations and subpoenas targeting the Trump administration, while Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth faces a separate impeachment effort.
President Donald Trump is confronting the prospect of a third impeachment after Democrats swept Tuesday’s midterm elections, seizing control of both chambers of Congress and gaining new powers to investigate his administration during the final two years of his presidency.
The results put Trump in precisely the position he warned Republicans about earlier this year, when he predicted Democrats would pursue impeachment if the GOP surrendered its congressional majorities.
During a January gathering of House Republicans, Trump urged lawmakers to win the midterms or prepare for another impeachment battle.
“You got to win the midterms because if we don’t win the midterms, it’s just going to be — I mean, they’ll find a reason to impeach me. I’ll get impeached,” Trump said, according to ABC News.
That warning has taken on new significance following Democratic victories across several traditionally Republican states, including Senate races in Texas, South Carolina and Kansas.
Democrats also reclaimed the House, giving the party control of congressional committees and the ability to launch investigations into Trump’s policies, administration officials and business dealings.
Democrats Put Trump on Notice
Democratic lawmakers wasted little time signaling how they intend to exercise their new authority.
“LAWYER UP,” Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., wrote on X as election results rolled in Tuesday night.
According to Fox News, Garcia, the leading Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, has been preparing potential investigations into the Trump family’s business interests, immigration enforcement, alleged corporate corruption and the administration’s handling of documents related to Jeffrey Epstein.
Garcia has indicated that Democrats intend to move quickly once they assume control of congressional committees in January. Fox News+1
The new Democratic majorities could substantially complicate Trump’s remaining legislative agenda while subjecting senior administration officials to congressional testimony, document demands and potentially contentious hearings.
The president has already acknowledged that impeachment could become a recurring issue.
During an October 2 exchange with reporters outside the White House, Trump was asked about the possibility of being impeached for a third time.
“Well, I don’t know, but I’m getting good at it,” Trump responded.
He went on to characterize the previous proceedings as politically motivated and suggested Democrats were eager to pursue additional impeachment efforts against him. Trump was impeached twice during his first term, in 2019 and 2021, but was acquitted by the Senate both times.
Although Democrats now control both chambers, another impeachment is not guaranteed. House lawmakers would need a simple majority to approve articles of impeachment, while removing Trump from office would require a two-thirds vote in the Senate.
Pete Hegseth Emerges as Another Impeachment Target
Trump is not the only administration official facing renewed congressional pressure.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth could become one of the first major targets of the incoming Democratic majority, with lawmakers already considering impeachment proceedings over his handling of the war with Iran and other military operations.
Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., has pledged to force a vote on impeaching Hegseth when lawmakers return for the post-election session.
Massie has questioned the legality of military operations conducted without congressional authorization, while Democrats have raised additional concerns about Pentagon oversight and the administration’s conduct of the Iran conflict.
House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries has also indicated that removing Hegseth would be a priority for his party.
According to CNN, Democratic lawmakers are preparing extensive investigations into the Pentagon’s military operations and the administration’s decision-making surrounding the conflict.
Trump defended Hegseth last week when questioned about the possibility of impeachment.
“I think it’s terrible,” Trump told reporters October 29. “All they do is they talk about impeaching everybody.”
The president also praised Hegseth’s performance and suggested Republicans could respond in kind to Democratic impeachment efforts.
“He’s doing a great job. He’s a great warrior,” Trump said, according to the Washington Examiner.
House Speaker Mike Johnson has dismissed the impeachment effort against Hegseth as a political stunt, arguing that the defense secretary has performed exceptionally well.
The Pentagon has also defended Hegseth’s leadership and rejected suggestions that he intends to resign.
Republican Infighting Complicates Trump’s Position
The election results have also exposed divisions among conservatives over Trump’s handling of the Iran war and his broader second-term agenda.
Massie, who lost his Republican primary to a Trump-backed challenger, argued that the GOP’s defeat reflected dissatisfaction with promises he believes the administration failed to honor.
“Tonight’s outcome isn’t about placing faith in Democrats or socialist principles; it’s about holding Republicans accountable for betraying their promises,” Massie wrote on X, according to Fox News.
Tonight’s outcome isn’t about placing faith in Democrats or socialist principles; it’s about holding Republicans accountable for betraying their promises.
All Republicans had to do was:
1. put Americans First 2. not start another war 3. prosecute sex traffickers
Former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene similarly criticized Trump for abandoning commitments made to his supporters.
Trump’s biggest betrayal to the American people isn’t what he failed to do. It’s what he promised NOT to do… and did anyway.
We gave President Trump our support, we gave him our money, we gave him our vote, we gave him our time and we got behind him publicly and he didn't… pic.twitter.com/ZParFZyLJD
Conservative commentator Matt Walsh also blamed the Iran conflict for the Republican Party’s losses, describing the military campaign as a major political mistake.
The criticism underscores a challenge for Trump as he faces a newly empowered Democratic Congress while confronting disagreements within his own political coalition.
Trump Signals He Will Fight Back
Despite the election losses, Trump has indicated that he intends to use the powers of the presidency to resist legislation advanced by Democrats.
In a November 3 interview with CBS News, Trump emphasized his authority to reject bills passed by Congress.
“I have the ultimate power — it’s called ‘veto,'” Trump said.
The president suggested he would be comfortable adopting the nickname “Mr. Veto” if Democrats attempted to advance legislation he opposed. CBS News
Following the election, Trump also signaled a willingness to work with Democrats, even as he acknowledged the scale of the Republican losses. and hints at plans for cabinet
Still, presidential veto authority offers no direct protection against congressional investigations or impeachment proceedings.
Democrats will be able to pursue hearings, demand documents and question administration officials once they take control of the relevant committees.
Whether those investigations eventually produce articles of impeachment against Trump remains uncertain. Democratic leaders have expressed differing views about the political wisdom of pursuing another impeachment, with some emphasizing oversight and legislative priorities instead. Semafor
For Trump, the immediate consequence of Tuesday’s elections is clear: A Congress that largely supported his administration’s agenda will soon be replaced by one with the authority to investigate it.
And the possibility of another impeachment battle — something Trump warned Republicans about months before Election Day — has become a central question hanging over the remainder of his presidency.
President Donald Trump’s administration suffered another legal setback Monday after a federal judge dismissed its lawsuit seeking additional admissions records from Harvard University as part of an investigation into whether the Ivy League institution continues to use race-based admissions practices.
U.S. District Judge Myong Joun ruled that the Justice Department had failed to establish that it followed the necessary procedural steps before asking the court to compel Harvard to turn over the requested information.
The ruling represents another defeat in the administration’s ongoing legal battle with Harvard, although the judge left the door open for federal officials to revive the case.
According to The Hill, the administration sought detailed admissions records to determine whether Harvard was complying with the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision restricting the use of race in college admissions.
Federal officials accused the university of withholding information necessary to determine whether its admissions policies violate federal civil rights law.
However, Joun emphasized that his decision addressed procedural requirements rather than the underlying allegations against Harvard.
“The ruling does not determine whether Harvard has discriminated, whether the agencies may lawfully seek appropriately defined applicant-level data, or whether Harvard may ultimately be required to provide such data,” Joun wrote.
Justice Department Vows to Continue Fight
Despite the dismissal, the Trump administration quickly signaled that it had no intention of abandoning its investigation.
A Justice Department spokesperson told The Hill that the government would file an amended complaint and continue pursuing the requested admissions records.
“The Court dismissed the case without prejudice on a narrow pleading question and invited the United States to amend. We will do exactly that,” the spokesperson said.
“Nothing in the ruling changes the core problem: Harvard continues to refuse to provide the admissions information it is required to produce as a recipient of federal funds under Title VI,” the spokesperson added.
The department maintained that Harvard’s receipt of federal funding carries legal obligations, including compliance with federal civil rights requirements.
Harvard, meanwhile, has argued that it already provided substantial admissions information before the administration filed its lawsuit.
Another Chapter in Trump’s Harvard Showdown
The dismissal adds to a series of courtroom setbacks for the Trump administration in its broader confrontation with Harvard.
Previous administration efforts to restrict federal funding and revoke the university’s ability to enroll international students also encountered legal obstacles.
Still, Monday’s ruling does not resolve whether Harvard has violated federal civil rights law.
Joun dismissed the lawsuit without prejudice, meaning the government can potentially return to court after addressing the procedural deficiencies identified in his decision.
“Because the deficiency may be cured by additional administrative steps or by an adequately supported pleading identifying compliance with the applicable prerequisites, dismissal without prejudice is appropriate,” the judge wrote.
The Justice Department has pledged to do precisely that, setting the stage for another round in the administration’s continuing legal battle with one of the nation’s most prominent universities.
Duncan Lock, Dflock, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons
President Donald Trump’s administration suffered a significant legal setback Monday evening after the Supreme Court rejected an emergency request to set aside thousands of California mail-in ballots over concerns that they could have been cast by noncitizens.
The ruling came just hours before Tuesday’s midterm elections, dealing a last-minute blow to the Justice Department’s efforts to prevent potentially ineligible ballots from being counted.
In a brief, unsigned order, the justices denied the administration’s request without explanation. No justice publicly dissented.
The administration had asked the high court to require California election officials to separate ballots associated with more than 20,000 individuals identified by federal authorities as suspected noncitizens.
The Justice Department argued that the ballots should remain separate until officials could verify the voters’ citizenship status.
California officials strongly disputed the federal government’s findings, arguing that the list contained significant inaccuracies and included eligible American voters.
The Supreme Court’s decision followed earlier defeats for the administration in federal district court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Federal Prosecutors Warn of Election Integrity Concerns
Speaking at a Monday news conference before the ruling, First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli warned that even a relatively small number of unlawful ballots could influence closely contested elections.
“There are many close elections in our system here. We have elections that are decided by less than twenty votes within recent memory here in California,” Essayli said, according to The Daily Wire.
“It doesn’t take many illegal votes to corrupt our elections,” he added.
Essayli emphasized that the administration was not seeking to automatically discard every ballot associated with the federal list, but instead wanted an opportunity to determine whether those votes were legally cast.
“Our goal is not to charge all 20,000 people, our goal is to get California to not count the votes of noncitizens,” he said.
The prosecutor also announced six additional criminal cases involving green card holders accused of illegally registering to vote or participating in federal elections.
According to The Daily Wire, the defendants included an Iranian national accused of voting twice in 2024 and a Canadian citizen accused of voting in the 2022 and 2024 elections.
Essayli said federal authorities had charged 34 individuals identified through the government’s investigation with election-related offenses.
California Challenges Federal Evidence
Despite the administration’s concerns, federal judges repeatedly questioned the reliability of the government’s voter list.
According to the Los Angeles Times and federal court records, judges warned that separating thousands of ballots so close to Election Day could disrupt election operations and potentially prevent eligible Americans from having their votes counted.
A divided Ninth Circuit panel rejected the administration’s emergency request Friday, with two judges declining to order California to segregate the disputed ballots.
One judge appointed by Trump dissented, arguing in favor of granting the government’s request.
The dispute began in October when the Justice Department sued California after federal immigration and homeland security officials identified more than 20,000 individuals they believed were likely noncitizens registered to vote.
California officials maintained that the government’s findings were unreliable and that existing election safeguards should remain in place.
The Supreme Court’s refusal to intervene does not resolve the underlying legal dispute or establish that everyone on the federal list is eligible to vote.
However, the decision leaves the administration without the emergency restrictions it sought as voters head to the polls Tuesday.
President Joe Biden hugs his family during the 59th Presidential Inauguration ceremony in Washington, Jan. 20, 2021. President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris took the oath of office on the West Front of the U.S. Capitol. (DOD Photo by Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Carlos M. Vazquez II)
Federal judge accuses administration of “weaponization” after throwing out charges against two former FBI officials accused of misleading Congress.
A federal judge delivered a stunning setback to President Donald Trump’s Justice Department on Monday, throwing out criminal charges against two former FBI officials accused of lying to Congress about the Hunter Biden investigation — and accusing the administration of using the justice system for political purposes.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Zia Faruqui dismissed the criminal complaint against Nikki Cole Floris and Bradley Benavides following days of contentious hearings that exposed serious questions about how the FBI investigation was launched and how federal prosecutors pursued the charges.
“What has transpired here cannot be described as anything other than weaponization,” Faruqui declared, according to Fox News and the New York Post.
The judge also characterized the prosecution as a “rush job,” taking aim at the involvement of Trump and FBI Director Kash Patel in an investigation that began years after the officials testified before Congress.
The ruling represents a high-profile defeat for an administration that has repeatedly promised to expose alleged political misconduct inside federal law enforcement.
Trump, Patel and a controversial investigation
The criminal case centered on allegations that Floris and Benavides misled congressional investigators in 2023 about their knowledge of the FBI’s handling of investigations involving Hunter Biden ahead of the 2020 presidential election.
But testimony during last week’s hearings raised uncomfortable questions for prosecutors.
According to CBS News, FBI Special Agent Bryan Witt acknowledged that the investigation began following a July speech in which Trump revisited allegations of election interference.
Witt testified that Patel had directed the investigation and that he was concerned about its political appearance.
“I had concerns that this would be political,” Witt told the court.
The agent also described the assignment as a major distraction from his other investigative responsibilities.
The New York Post reported that Patel received weekly updates about the investigation, an unusually direct level of oversight for a case involving alleged false statements.
Prosecutors face a courtroom showdown
The controversy escalated when prosecutors attempted to introduce an additional obstruction charge through an amended criminal complaint.
Faruqui rejected that filing after determining that the government had submitted it without obtaining the necessary judicial approval.
The procedural dispute prompted a series of sharp exchanges between the judge and prosecutors, who were forced to defend their handling of the case.
According to Roll Call, Faruqui questioned why prosecutors had departed from established charging procedures and warned that their actions were strengthening the defense’s accusations of political motivation.
Monday’s ruling went further.
The judge concluded that the government had not established probable cause to support the false-statement charges, effectively ending the prosecution in its current form.
Trump administration had promised accountability
The dismissal is particularly striking given the administration’s aggressive public statements when the charges were first announced.
In an October 23 Justice Department announcement, U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro argued that the allegations reflected serious misconduct by senior law enforcement officials.
“Lying to Congress by anyone strikes at the heart of our democratic system,” Pirro said.
Attorney General Todd Blanche also promised that the Justice Department would pursue government officials who broke federal law.
Patel accused former FBI personnel of engaging in political weaponization, saying his leadership would not tolerate abuses of public trust.
Those allegations remain disputed, and neither former official has been convicted of wrongdoing in the case.
Now, the administration faces a pointed accusation of weaponization from the very judge overseeing its attempt to prosecute alleged FBI misconduct.
The legal fight may not be finished.
The Justice Department could seek a grand jury indictment or pursue an appeal, according to The Washington Post. But Monday’s dismissal leaves prosecutors facing significant questions about their evidence, investigative decisions and political independence.
With control of Congress hanging in the balance, President Trump is abandoning the traditional battleground-state finale for a high-profile appearance at one of America’s most iconic landmarks.
President Donald Trump is preparing to close out the 2026 midterm campaign with an unexpected political spectacle in the heart of Washington, D.C., choosing the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool as the backdrop for his final appeal to voters before Tuesday’s elections.
Rather than spending Election Day eve rallying Republicans in a competitive state, Trump will deliver remarks Monday afternoon from the National Mall, highlighting his administration’s accomplishments and his sweeping efforts to transform the nation’s capital.
The White House confirmed the appearance Sunday, with the president scheduled to speak at 2 p.m. ET.
The unusual setting comes as Republicans fight to maintain control of both chambers of Congress, with the outcome potentially determining the direction of Trump’s legislative agenda during the remainder of his second term.
According to Axios, a White House official said the president would highlight the accomplishments of his administration and congressional Republicans while discussing efforts to restore Washington.
The decision also places one of Trump’s most controversial construction projects squarely in the national spotlight.
Trump Makes an Unexpected Final Campaign Move
Trump first hinted at the appearance Sunday while speaking with reporters in Iowa, where he was continuing a whirlwind campaign schedule.
“We might hold it tomorrow or something,” Trump said, explaining that the event would “show how beautiful it is,” according to the Associated Press.
The president subsequently confirmed that his Sunday evening rally in Kansas would be his final campaign stop outside Washington.
The announcement capped a monthlong political blitz that included more than 25 rallies as Trump sought to energize Republican voters ahead of a closely watched election.
But his decision to finish in Washington rather than a traditional swing state marks a striking departure from the usual campaign playbook.
Instead, Trump is using the final hours before Election Day to put his presidency—and his vision for the nation’s capital—front and center.
A Multimillion-Dollar Project Returns to the Spotlight
The Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool has become a centerpiece of Trump’s effort to overhaul Washington’s most recognizable landmarks.
During a May visit to the construction site, the president offered an enthusiastic assessment of the work.
Trump argued that the restoration would leave the landmark looking better than when it was originally built in 1922.
The project, however, has attracted substantial criticism.
According to the Associated Press, the restoration was initially expected to cost approximately $1.5 million but ultimately exceeded ten times that amount.
Construction delays, algae growth and problems with the pool’s new liner forced additional work, complicating the administration’s efforts to showcase the project as a success.
The controversy also produced a legal dispute after a former Olympic canoeist was accused of damaging the pool. Prosecutors eventually dropped the case after concluding that the damage resulted from installation problems.
Despite those setbacks, Trump has remained an outspoken defender of the renovations.
During his May appearance, he said the administration’s goal was to improve the appearance and condition of Washington’s public spaces.
“Our country’s about beauty, cleanliness, safety, great people—not a filthy capital,” Trump declared.
Trump’s Bigger Vision for Washington
The Reflecting Pool is only one component of a much broader construction agenda.
The president has overseen major changes to the White House grounds, including the demolition of the East Wing to accommodate a new ballroom and the transformation of the Rose Garden into a patio.
Additional proposals have included new monuments and improvements to federal properties around Washington.
Trump has repeatedly defended his interest in architecture and construction, describing the projects as an important part of restoring the capital’s appearance.
His decision to close the campaign at the Reflecting Pool effectively connects that message to his broader argument that Republicans should remain in power.
The stakes are significant.
Democrats have sought to make the economy, rising energy costs and the administration’s handling of the Iran war central issues in the midterm elections.
Republicans, meanwhile, are hoping Trump’s late campaign appearances will motivate supporters to turn out and protect their congressional majorities.
Whether the president’s unconventional finale strengthens that effort remains to be seen.
But with Election Day only hours away, Trump is ensuring that his final campaign message unfolds against one of the most recognizable backdrops in American political history.
Rep. Haley Stevens shocked Democrats by backing Republican Mike Rogers in Michigan’s Senate race. Now her chief of staff has quit, party leaders are furious, and President Donald Trump is praising her decision.
A stunning political defection in Michigan has erupted into a full-blown Democratic Party feud, with Rep. Haley Stevens’ chief of staff and multiple aides resigning after the congresswoman endorsed a Republican Senate candidate backed by President Donald Trump.
Stevens, a Michigan Democrat who narrowly lost her party’s Senate primary to Abdul El-Sayed in August, stunned political observers Sunday when she announced she was supporting Republican Mike Rogers just 48 hours before Election Day.
The unexpected endorsement triggered immediate backlash from Democratic leaders, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Sen. Bernie Sanders.
Rep. Haley Stevens shocked Democrats by backing Republican Mike Rogers in Michigan’s Senate race. Now her chief of staff has quit, party leaders are furious, and President Donald Trump is praising her decision.
A stunning political defection in Michigan has erupted into a full-blown Democratic Party feud, with Rep. Haley Stevens’ chief of staff and multiple aides resigning after the congresswoman endorsed a Republican Senate candidate backed by President Donald Trump.
Stevens, a Michigan Democrat who narrowly lost her party’s Senate primary to Abdul El-Sayed in August, stunned political observers Sunday when she announced she was supporting Republican Mike Rogers just 48 hours before Election Day.
The unexpected endorsement triggered immediate backlash from Democratic leaders, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Sen. Bernie Sanders.
But the fallout didn’t stop there.
Stevens’ longtime chief of staff, Justin German, announced that he and several other members of her congressional team were resigning in protest, creating a staffing crisis just as the congresswoman approaches the end of her term.
“We are shocked and heartbroken,” German said in a statement.
The extraordinary developments have turned Michigan’s closely watched Senate race into a bitter public confrontation within the Democratic Party, with Trump himself celebrating Stevens’ decision.
Stevens’ Top Aide Quits After Eight Years
German, who served as Stevens’ chief of staff for eight years, announced the resignations Sunday in a statement circulated on social media.
Speaking on behalf of departing staff members, German declared his support for El-Sayed, the Democratic nominee whom Stevens had just rejected.
“As of this morning, many members of our team have resigned, including myself,” German said.
The statement described the staff’s disappointment with Stevens’ decision to endorse Rogers, a former Republican congressman and Trump-backed candidate.
The resignations underscore how dramatically Stevens’ political relationships have deteriorated since her endorsement.
The congresswoman had previously pledged to support El-Sayed after losing the Democratic primary and reaffirmed that position only days before switching sides.
But after a dispute over a planned campaign appearance, Stevens abruptly changed course.
Her decision has now cost her the support of senior aides who had worked alongside her for years.
Trump Praises Democrat for Breaking Ranks
President Trump wasted little time responding to the unexpected endorsement.
In a Truth Social post Sunday, Trump praised Stevens as a respected Democrat who had demonstrated unusual political courage by backing Rogers.
“Haley said what few people are willing to say,” Trump wrote.
The president described her decision as an act of loyalty to Michigan voters rather than to party leadership.
“It’s a thing called bravery,” Trump added.
The endorsement provides Rogers with a notable crossover supporter during the final days of his campaign against El-Sayed.
Rogers, who previously served in Congress and chaired the House Intelligence Committee, is competing for the seat being vacated by retiring Democratic Sen. Gary Peters.
After appearing with Stevens at Detroit’s Perfecting Church on Sunday, Rogers told reporters he was honored to have her support.
The Republican candidate also emphasized that Stevens had not abandoned her Democratic identity.
The unusual alliance gives Trump and congressional Republicans a new talking point as they campaign in the final hours before Tuesday’s elections.
Sanders Slams Stevens as Democrats Turn on One Another
The backlash has extended far beyond Stevens’ congressional office.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who supports El-Sayed, publicly defended the departing staff members and sharply criticized the congresswoman.
“Rep. Haley Stevens’ staff is right to resign in disgust,” Sanders wrote on X.
He accused Stevens of putting her “fragile ego” ahead of the Michigan Senate contest and urged Democrats to unite behind El-Sayed.
Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, who had supported Stevens during the primary, also condemned her endorsement.
“This is a despicable betrayal from Rep. Stevens,” Schumer wrote.
This is a despicable betrayal from Rep. Stevens.
Senate Democrats are united in our support for Abdul El-Sayed, because we know he will fight for the economic interests of working families in Michigan, unlike Mike Rogers, who is a tool of Donald Trump and billionaire donors.
Michigan Democratic Party Chairman Curtis Hertel went even further, declaring that Stevens would no longer have a place in the state party.
“Congresswoman Stevens is not a current member of the Michigan Democratic Party, nor will she be in the future,” Hertel wrote.
The unusually public rebukes illustrate how a last-minute endorsement has reopened divisions between progressive and moderate Democrats at a critical point in the election.
Republican Congresswoman Offers Stevens a Lifeline
While Democrats criticized Stevens, at least one Republican lawmaker offered to help keep her congressional office functioning.
Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) said her office would assist Stevens with constituent services and other responsibilities during the remainder of the 119th Congress.
“My office will happily assist @RepHaleyStevens with anything she needs,” Luna wrote on X.
My office will happily assist @RepHaleyStevens with anything she needs, including constituent services, during her remaining time in the 119th Congress.
She has done more for this country than the majority of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle by taking a stand and putting…
Luna praised Stevens for taking a position that crossed party lines, calling it an example of putting country ahead of party.
The offer came as questions mounted about how Stevens’ office would continue operating following the departure of senior staff.
Stevens has not announced that she is switching political parties, and she has emphasized that her endorsement of Rogers is limited to this particular election.
“I’m not turning my back on Democrats. It is this one vote,” Stevens told reporters Sunday.
Bitter Primary Feud Explodes Before Election Day
The endorsement followed months of hostility between Stevens and El-Sayed, who defeated her by less than one percentage point in Michigan’s August Democratic Senate primary.
Their disagreements centered partly on U.S. policy toward Israel and the war in Gaza.
Stevens, a strong supporter of Israel, repeatedly challenged El-Sayed over his criticism of the Israeli government and his association with progressive political commentator Hasan Piker.
The conflict intensified last week after Stevens’ fiancé, Jason Turkish, publicly announced that he would vote for Rogers.
Stevens subsequently demanded that El-Sayed condemn an advertisement produced by an independent political group linking U.S. support for Israel to rising grocery prices.
El-Sayed said the advertisement was not produced by his campaign and rejected its contents.
The two Democrats were originally scheduled to attend a church service together Sunday in what party leaders hoped would be a public display of unity.
Instead, Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.) asked Stevens not to attend, explaining that the dispute had become too distracting.
Hours later, Stevens appeared alongside Rogers at a different Detroit church and announced her endorsement.
The dramatic reversal reportedly surprised even members of Rogers’ campaign.
El-Sayed Brushes Off Endorsement as Election Nears
Despite the turmoil, El-Sayed has attempted to keep attention on his campaign’s economic message.
Asked about Stevens’ decision Sunday, the Democratic nominee dismissed its importance.
“At the end of the day I actually don’t think about Haley Stevens,” El-Sayed told reporters.
He said he was focused instead on the concerns of Michigan voters, particularly the cost of living.
The contest between El-Sayed and Rogers will determine who succeeds retiring Democratic Sen. Gary Peters.
Michigan is among the states receiving intense national attention as Republicans and Democrats battle for control of the Senate.
The last-minute endorsement has also exposed deeper disagreements within the Democratic coalition over Israel, progressive politics and the party’s direction.
For Trump and Rogers, Stevens’ decision represents an unexpected endorsement from across the aisle.
For Democrats, it has triggered resignations, public condemnations and a dispute that has overshadowed part of their final campaign push.
With Election Day arriving Tuesday, Stevens’ decision has transformed a closely watched Senate contest into one of the most unusual political stories of the midterm campaign.
But the fallout didn’t stop there.
Stevens’ longtime chief of staff, Justin German, announced that he and several other members of her congressional team were resigning in protest, creating a staffing crisis just as the congresswoman approaches the end of her term.
“We are shocked and heartbroken,” German said in a statement.
The extraordinary developments have turned Michigan’s closely watched Senate race into a bitter public confrontation within the Democratic Party, with Trump himself celebrating Stevens’ decision.
