Home Blog

White House Pushes Back Over Trump’s $45,000 Gift To Close Aide

By
Madeleine Jackson
-
0
Image via Pixabay free images

The White House is defending President Donald Trump’s eye-popping $45,000 holiday gift to close aide Natalie Harp, dismissing questions about whether the payment crossed a federal ethics line.

Harp, a special assistant and executive assistant to the president, disclosed the cash on a recently released financial form. Trump gave identical $45,000 gifts to communications adviser Margo Martin and deputy director of Oval Office operations Chamberlain Harris, according to CBS News.

All three women earn taxpayer-funded salaries of $150,000 a year, making each gift equivalent to nearly one-third of their annual government pay.

But the White House insists the money was personal—not payment for work performed inside the administration.

“The President has a longstanding practice of giving Christmas gifts to people in his orbit, including at times employees and aides, both in government and in his time in the private sector,” White House spokesperson Davis Ingle said.

“The gifts at issue here have nothing to do with any of these individuals’ official government duties, and therefore are entirely permissible under relevant legal and ethical standards.”

More Than $150,000 Handed Out

The newly released disclosures show Trump gave at least $155,000 to four members of his White House inner circle during the 2025 holiday season.

In addition to the three $45,000 payments, Trump reportedly gave $20,000 to Walt Nauta, his longtime aide and current director of Oval Office operations. Nauta earns $175,000 annually, according to ABC News.

The disclosures described the payments as “cash gift[s] for the holidays.” They did not provide specific dates, although ABC reported that three of the forms listed Trump’s Palm Beach address—supporting the administration’s claim that the money came from Trump personally rather than government funds.

The White House has not indicated whether Trump consulted administration ethics officials before distributing the money.

Ethics Expert Raises Legal Questions

Richard Painter, who served as the White House’s chief ethics lawyer under President George W. Bush, told The Washington Post that the size and circumstances of the payments raised concerns under a federal law restricting outside compensation for government employees.

“He’s clearly trying to make it easier for them financially to work in government service at the White House,” Painter said, according to Mediaite. “You can’t do that.”

“It’s not like tipping the doorman on Fifth Avenue,” Painter added. “These are U.S. government employees. If you want a job where you get tips, you shouldn’t be working for the U.S. government.”

The statute at the center of the debate, 18 U.S.C. § 209, prohibits federal employees from receiving outside money as compensation for their government service.

That final distinction could be crucial. The law does not categorically prohibit every personal gift from a supervisor; it focuses on payments connected to an employee’s official work. The White House maintains Trump’s gifts were motivated entirely by the holidays and his personal relationships with the aides.

Guidance from the Office of Government Ethics similarly says a supervisor’s gift could raise concerns if it rewards official duties, while acknowledging that some gifts driven by personal motives may not violate the statute.

No government ethics agency or court has determined that Trump’s payments broke the law.

Harp’s Place In Trump’s Inner Circle

Harp, 35, has become one of Trump’s most visible and loyal White House aides. She earned the nickname “human printer” during the 2024 campaign because she regularly carried a portable printer to provide Trump with physical copies of news stories, social media posts and other material.

She has remained frequently at the president’s side since joining the second Trump administration in January 2025.

That closeness has made her a target for Democratic attacks—and now placed Trump’s unusually generous Christmas present under Washington’s ethics microscope.

Why Some Republicans Are Skipping Trump’s Midterm Convention

By
admin
-
1
The White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

President Donald Trump is billing the Republican National Committee’s first midterm convention as a two-day show of party unity. Yet some of the GOP candidates with the most at stake in November have decided their time is better spent somewhere other than Dallas.

The unusual gathering runs Wednesday and Thursday at the American Airlines Center, with Trump and Vice President JD Vance serving as its biggest draws. More than 100 Republican candidates and elected officials are expected to participate, and party leaders say the event will promote the administration’s record while energizing voters ahead of the midterms.

But several Republicans fighting for political survival have made a different calculation: They would rather stay close to the voters who will decide their races.

Vulnerable Republicans Stay On The Campaign Trail

CBS News contacted 60 Republican candidates in competitive House, Senate and gubernatorial contests. Only four confirmed that they planned to attend, while five said they would not.

The remaining 51 did not respond, meaning the survey is not a definitive count of the convention’s no-shows. Still, the confirmed absences include several Republicans in closely watched races.

Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, whose Pennsylvania district Trump carried by fewer than 300 votes in 2024, offered one of the bluntest explanations: “Our bosses are back home.”

He told CBS News that voters are struggling with household budgets, health care and business costs—and that elected officials should be listening to them instead of standing inside a convention hall.

Colorado Rep. Gabe Evans similarly said his focus would remain on constituents in his highly competitive district north of Denver.

Florida Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar said she needed to campaign in Miami, telling the network, “No one votes for me in Washington or in Dallas.”

Other Republicans sitting out the event reportedly include Reps. Zach Nunn of Iowa and Tom Barrett of Michigan, both of whom are running in districts rated as toss-ups. Sen. Mike Rounds of South Dakota said he planned to spend the time speaking with constituents about concerns that include affordability.

Even Vance has acknowledged that attending may not be the best move for every candidate. He told reporters that Republicans in close races should do whatever helps them make their case to voters, whether that means appearing in Dallas, campaigning at home or raising money.

A $25,000 Price Tag Sparked Confusion

Time away from the campaign trail is only part of the story.

The National Republican Congressional Committee initially asked House members to contribute at least $25,000 for a convention package. According to Axios, it included two tickets, a hotel room and admission to a welcome reception. Larger contributions came with additional benefits, including access to events with party leaders.

The party later exempted members in the NRCC’s “Patriot” program for vulnerable incumbents, but Axios reported that some lawmakers remained confused about who was required to pay.

Tennessee Rep. Tim Burchett called the price “pretty steep,” while Texas Rep. Jake Ellzey said some members believed the money would be more useful in their own campaigns.

NRCC Chairman Richard Hudson pushed back on the idea that lawmakers were being shut out, telling CBS News that he distributed 2,000 free tickets to members and staff. Hudson described the dispute as confusion between ordinary admission and optional fundraising packages.

For donors, the asking price climbed much higher. CBS News reported that an RNC email offered packages beginning at $15,000, with premium options reaching $150,000. Those sums have fueled complaints from some party figures who question the value of a costly late-summer spectacle so close to Election Day.

Trump’s Spotlight Creates A Strategic Divide

The convention’s heavy focus on Trump is another factor for candidates trying to hold politically divided districts.

The president has urged supporters to behave as though he were on the ballot, and the RNC says the Dallas gathering is designed to translate his ability to mobilize loyal voters into turnout for Republican candidates.

That strategy has obvious appeal in reliably Republican territory. Georgia Rep. Andrew Clyde told CBS News the convention would give the party an opportunity to highlight its record and draw a contrast with Democrats.

Candidates in swing districts face a more complicated choice. Appearing beside Trump could excite core Republican voters, but it could also make it harder for an incumbent to keep the focus on local concerns or appeal to independents.

That helps explain why the event’s speaker list includes competitive-seat Republicans such as Reps. Mike Lawler of New York, Derrick Van Orden of Wisconsin, Monica De La Cruz of Texas and Rob Bresnahan of Pennsylvania—even as other vulnerable members stay home.

There is also tension over the convention’s apparent emphasis on Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who is locked in a competitive Senate race against Democrat James Talarico.

Trump said Paxton would be a central focus of the event, while CBS News reported that some major Texas donors remain aligned with Sen. John Cornyn, whom Paxton defeated in a bitter Republican primary.

A Test Of Competing Midterm Strategies

The Dallas gathering is not a traditional nominating convention. No presidential candidate will be formally selected, and the party is not meeting to adopt a new national platform.

Instead, it is a made-for-television rally, fundraising event and turnout operation built around Trump and the Republican record.

RNC spokesperson Natalie Baldassarre said its purpose is to rally voters around the president, his agenda and GOP candidates. Convention host committee chairman Ray Washburne has argued that attendees will gain valuable access to donors, administration officials and other party leaders.

For candidates skipping Dallas, however, the political logic is more immediate: With Election Day approaching, a day spent at a town hall, local business or neighborhood event may be more valuable than a night beneath the convention balloons.

Trump Posthumously Honors 9/11’s ‘Man In The Red Bandana’

By
Madeleine Jackson
-
1
White House image via Wikimedia Commons

President Donald Trump posthumously awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom on Tuesday to Welles Crowther, the 24-year-old volunteer firefighter whose final acts of courage inside the World Trade Center saved as many as 18 people.

Trump presented the nation’s highest civilian honor during the Tunnel to Towers Foundation’s “Steel Across America” event near the White House, part of a nationwide commemoration marking 25 years since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

“Today we also remember another hero of 9/11,” Trump said before recounting how Crowther repeatedly entered the smoke and wreckage of the South Tower to guide strangers toward safety.

Crowther became known simply as the “Man in the Red Bandana,” but the survivors he helped did not initially know his name. They remembered only the calm young man who appeared amid the chaos with a red bandana covering his nose and mouth.

A Rescuer Appears In The Smoke

Crowther was working as an equities trader for Sandler O’Neill & Partners on the 104th floor of the South Tower when the attacks began.

A graduate of Boston College and a volunteer firefighter since the age of 16, he drew upon his emergency training as smoke, fire and confusion engulfed the building.

According to the National September 11 Memorial & Museum, Crowther reached the devastated 78th-floor sky lobby and discovered injured survivors near the only viable stairwell. He carried one badly wounded woman on his back, led a group downstairs and then climbed back toward the danger to help others.

“He just did things that people said were not even imaginable,” Trump said Tuesday. “He willingly made all of these trips up and down, up and down, over and over again, saving life after life.”

Crowther reportedly helped extinguish fires, administered first aid and issued clear instructions to survivors who were frightened, injured and struggling to see through the smoke.

He could have continued down the stairs and escaped. Instead, he turned around.

Again and again, Crowther went back for people who could not save themselves.

Investigators later found his remains in the wreckage of the South Tower alongside firefighters and other emergency workers. He was believed to have still been participating in rescue efforts when the building collapsed.

The Clue That Revealed His Identity

For months, Crowther’s family did not know what he had done after leaving a final voicemail telling his mother he was safe.

The answer emerged in 2002, when survivors publicly described the mysterious rescuer who had directed them through the burning tower. They could not provide his name, but they all remembered the red bandana around his face.

After reading their accounts, Crowther’s mother contacted the survivors and showed them photographs of her son. They recognized him as the man who had saved them.

“His family learned through witness accounts that Welles’ compassion, leadership and unwavering commitment to others were key to his courage in his final moments,” the Welles Remy Crowther Charitable Trust recounts.

The red bandana had been part of Crowther’s life since childhood. His firefighter father had given it to him when he was a boy, and Crowther continued carrying one as an adult.

Trump recalled that Crowther once made a striking prediction about the simple piece of red cloth: “With this red bandana, I’m going to change the world.”

“Little did he know, on September 11th Welles saved many, many people before losing his own life,” Trump said.

A Hero’s Light Still Shines

Trump first announced the award during a May appearance in Crowther’s home county in New York after Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.) advocated for the recognition.

“It’s such a beautiful thing that even 25 years later, Welles’ light still shines brightly,” Crowther’s mother, Alison, said at the time, according to Fox News.

One of Crowther’s bandanas now sits inside the 9/11 Memorial & Museum, where it serves as a reminder that even in one of America’s darkest hours, extraordinary courage could be found in an ordinary object—and in the young man wearing it.

His legacy also lives on through the charitable trust established in his name, educational programs teaching young people about character and service, and Boston College traditions honoring its fallen alumnus.

The “Steel Across America” tour has carried a massive beam recovered from the World Trade Center through communities across the country. Tunnel to Towers said the journey was created to preserve the memory of the 2,977 people killed on Sept. 11 and the bravery demonstrated that day.

“This tour is about ensuring that every generation can remember, and truly understand, what happened 25 years ago,” Tunnel to Towers Chairman and CEO Frank Siller said when the national tour was launched.

Standing near that battered piece of steel Tuesday, Trump formally placed Crowther among the nation’s most honored civilians.

“Today, in honor of his incredible bravery and all of the other countless unknown acts of heroism that day, it is my privilege to award” Crowther the Presidential Medal of Freedom, Trump said.

Nearly 25 years after Crowther made his final trip up the stairs, the identity of the Man in the Red Bandana is no longer a mystery.

His name—and what he chose to do when others needed him most—will not be forgotten.

House Republican Scrubs Trump From Campaign Homepage As GOP Showdown Heats Up

By
Madeleine Jackson
-
0
The White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Rep. Young Kim (R-CA) has reportedly scrubbed prominent references to President Donald Trump and his “America First” agenda from her campaign homepage as she fights for political survival in a rare Republican-versus-Republican election.

The makeover comes after Trump-centered messaging helped define Kim’s campaign during the primary — and as she now competes for Democrats, independents and moderate voters against fellow GOP Rep. Ken Calvert.

Politico’s California Playbook first reported the changes Tuesday, prompting additional coverage from Mediaite.

Trump Disappears From The Homepage

During the June primary, Kim’s campaign homepage reportedly presented her as a “Proven Fighter who will Stand with President Trump to deliver a bold America First Agenda.”

Another prominent message promised “America First Leadership to Defend the American Dream,” according to an archived copy of the website.

Neither message currently appears on the homepage.

Instead, Kim’s revamped campaign website now declares that she is “taking on Career Politicians to Restore the American Dream.” A second message simply describes her as “Fighting for the American Dream.”

The apparent shift is not limited to the website.

Campaign signs Kim promoted before the primary identified her as a “Trump Republican.” Signs highlighted by her campaign after the primary instead feature a pocketbook-focused message: “Cut Taxes & Lower Costs!”

Campaign Rejects Distancing Claim

Kim’s campaign insists the makeover is not an attempt to put space between the congresswoman and Trump.

Spokesman Chris Pack called that interpretation “completely absurd,” pointing Politico toward recent social media posts in which Kim mentioned the president, including a birthday message.

Trump has not vanished from the campaign website altogether. Kim’s longer biography continues to bill her as a “Proven America First Fighter” and says she fights to ensure Trump has allies in Congress.

“Our campaign has consistently framed this race as a choice between an effective leader like Young Kim, who has delivered results in less than three terms in Congress, and Ken Calvert, whose career has been plagued by corruption controversies and FBI investigations,” Pack told Politico.

The spokesman added that the campaign has Trump-themed signs ready to distribute once local rules allow them to be displayed.

Two Republicans, One House Seat

Kim and Calvert landed in the same race after California voters approved Proposition 50 and redrew the state’s congressional map. Calvert currently represents the 41st District, while Kim represents the 40th.

Both advanced from California’s all-party primary, setting up an unusual general election in which voters will choose between two sitting Republican members of Congress.

Calvert finished first in the June primary with 35 percent of the vote. Kim placed second with 21 percent.

That result means the November winner may need support from voters who backed one of the six eliminated candidates — including Democrats — giving both Republicans a reason to adjust their messages beyond the GOP base.

The fight has already turned intensely personal. Each campaign has accused the other candidate of being insufficiently conservative or insufficiently loyal to Trump.

Calvert’s campaign has branded Kim a “RINO” and resurfaced a past remark in which she reportedly said she wanted to “whip” Trump’s “butt.” Kim’s campaign, meanwhile, attacked Calvert over decades-old reports involving a prostitute and accused him of “sabotaging Trump.”

Now, as the two incumbents compete for the same seat, Kim’s disappearing homepage references are fueling fresh questions about which version of her campaign she believes can win in November.

Lindsay Clancy’s Lawyer Seeks Trump Pardon

By
Madeleine Jackson
-
2

The attorney representing Massachusetts mother Lindsay Clancy is appealing directly to President Donald Trump after a jury failed to decide whether she was criminally responsible for the deaths of her three young children.

There is just one major obstacle: Trump does not have the constitutional authority to pardon Clancy on state murder charges.

Kevin Reddington made the extraordinary request Tuesday during an interview with ABC’s “Good Morning America,” days after Clancy’s closely watched trial ended with a deadlocked jury.

“Mr. President, I would hope that you would consider this young lady and the person she is, what she’s been through, and consider a pardon,” Reddington said.

Trump Signals Clancy Will Face ‘A Price’

Trump has not publicly responded directly to Reddington’s pardon request, and no response from the White House or another top administration official had been reported as of Tuesday afternoon.

The president did, however, weigh in on the case after the mistrial—and his comments gave no indication that he was considering clemency.

Trump described the deaths as a “horrible tragedy” and said he expected Clancy to face consequences.

“I assume there’s going to be another trial,” Trump told reporters Friday. “There’ll be a price. It’s going to be a mental institution or jail or something.”

Clancy faces three counts of murder in connection with the Jan. 24, 2023, deaths of her children at the family’s Duxbury home. Her daughter Cora was 5, her son Dawson was 3 and her youngest son, Callan, was 8 months old.

Clancy has not denied killing the children. She pleaded not guilty by reason of a lack of criminal responsibility, with her attorneys arguing that she was experiencing severe postpartum psychosis and could not understand the wrongfulness of her actions.

Prosecutors rejected that defense and portrayed the killings as calculated and premeditated.

Pardon Request Faces Constitutional Roadblock

Although Reddington directed his appeal to Trump, the Constitution limits a president’s pardon authority to federal offenses. Clancy was charged in a Massachusetts court under state law, placing the case beyond the reach of a presidential pardon.

Any pardon involving Massachusetts charges would have to come through the state’s clemency system. Democratic Gov. Maura Healey holds the state pardon power with the consent of the Governor’s Council, according to the Massachusetts Secretary of the Commonwealth.

Neither Healey nor the Governor’s Council had been publicly reported as considering clemency for Clancy.

Defense Seeks Deal After 11-1 Split

Judge William Sullivan declared a mistrial on Sept. 4 after jurors deliberated for more than 38 hours without reaching a unanimous decision. Court notes indicated that the jury was divided 11-1, although the court did not formally disclose how the majority intended to vote.

Reddington has said the 11 jurors favored finding Clancy not criminally responsible and accused the lone holdout of refusing to apply the court’s reasonable-doubt instructions.

Before the mistrial was finalized, Clancy’s attorneys unsuccessfully asked the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court to intervene and require further questioning of the dissenting juror. The emergency petition was denied.

Reddington now hopes to avoid putting Clancy—and the children’s family—through another grueling trial.

He said Tuesday that he wants Plymouth County District Attorney Tim Cruz to reconsider the case after hearing weeks of testimony from medical experts, relatives and other witnesses.

Cruz has not announced whether prosecutors will pursue another trial. After the mistrial, he emphasized that his office remains focused on securing justice for Cora, Dawson and Callan.

Clancy is scheduled to return to court for a status conference on Sept. 29. A new trial could be held as soon as the fall, though prosecutors could also negotiate an agreement with the defense.

Trump Crosses ‘Mexico’ Off The Map — Floats ‘New America’ Rename

By
Madeleine Jackson
-
5
By The White House - https://www.flickr.com/photos/202101414@N05/54325633746/, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=159707159

President Donald Trump has found a new target for his growing campaign to rebrand America’s map: New Mexico.

Trump ignited a political firestorm Sunday after sharing a map on Truth Social that showed a large “X” over “Mexico” in the state’s name and replaced it with “America.”

The result: “New America.”

The official White House account quickly reposted the image on X, giving the provocative proposal an even bigger platform.

Hours later, Trump suggested the idea may have staying power.

“Many people suggested changing the name of New Mexico,” the president wrote in a follow-up post, calling the proposed name “so much more prestigious and beautiful.”

“Wow, I Love It!!!” Trump added.

A Hoax Becomes A Presidential Talking Point

The idea did not originate with the White House.

According to Snopes, a satirical social media account falsely claimed on Sept. 1 that Trump had signed an executive order changing the state’s name. The fabricated announcement quickly spread across multiple platforms.

No such executive order had been issued.

Trump nevertheless picked up the idea days later, first circulating the altered map and then openly praising the potential name change. The president did not say whether he plans to pursue any formal action.

The distinction could prove significant. A previous analysis prepared for the New Mexico Legislature concluded that the state itself “probably has the authority to change its own name.” A proposed state constitutional amendment in 2001 would have sent a name change to New Mexico voters.

Democrats Dig In

New Mexico’s Democratic congressional delegation wasted little time pushing back.

“Three things I will always call by their actual names,” Sen. Martin Heinrich wrote on X, listing the Gulf of Mexico, Lake Ontario and New Mexico.

Rep. Melanie Stansbury delivered a blunter response: “Oh hell no!”

“Our state’s name carries generations of history, culture, and family — and it belongs to us,” Stansbury wrote.

Rep. Gabe Vasquez, who faces Republican Greg Cunningham in his reelection campaign, accused Trump of attempting to “erase” the state’s history and culture.

California Democratic Rep. Ted Lieu also seized on the controversy, arguing that the White House should focus on fuel prices and the ongoing Iran war.

But Utah Republican Sen. Mike Lee appeared entertained by the proposal, calling “New America” “kind of catchy.”

A Name Older Than The United States

Any attempt to remove “Mexico” from the state’s name would immediately collide with centuries of history.

Spanish explorers used “Nuevo México” in documents dating to the late 1500s, according to a historical review by the New Mexico Legislature. The National Archives notes that Spain formally established the colony of New Mexico in 1598 — nearly two centuries before the United States declared independence.

New Mexico later came under Mexican rule before the United States took control in the 1840s. President William Howard Taft admitted it to the Union under its current name in 1912.

Trump’s Growing Map Makeover

The latest proposal follows Trump’s moves to replace the Gulf of Mexico with the “Gulf of America” and rename Lake Ontario “Lake America.”

The Lake Ontario order drew fierce opposition from Canadian officials, tribal leaders and congressional Democrats. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney declared that its traditional name would remain in use for Canadians and “the rest of the world.”

Even Rep. Claudia Tenney, R-N.Y., whose district includes much of the lake’s American shoreline, suggested Trump’s move was likely designed to troll Canada during an escalating trade dispute.

Trump Hands Ted Cruz A Surprise 2028 Boost

By
Madeleine Jackson
-
0
White House image via Wikimedia Commons

President Donald Trump just gave one of his fiercest former rivals a potentially valuable boost in the increasingly crowded battle to inherit the MAGA movement.

Trump praised Sen. Ted Cruz as “very talented” when asked whether the Texas Republican could become president—offering an encouraging assessment as Cruz openly flirts with another White House campaign.

“Ted Cruz keeps teasing a 2028 presidential run. You’ve run against him for president. Do you think he could be president? What’s your reaction to that?” Daily Caller White House correspondent Reagan Reese asked Trump during an Oval Office press conference.

“I would say that he’s very talented. He’s a very good friend of mine. I think he might do that. He’s a talented guy,” Trump responded.

It was far from an endorsement—but in a Republican Party still dominated by Trump, the president’s warm words are certain to attract attention.

Cruz Refuses To Clear The Field

Cruz’s ambitions spilled into the open after he was asked during an MS NOW interview whether Republicans had already settled on Vice President JD Vance as their presumptive 2028 nominee.

“I don’t think it’s accurate to say the party is universally settled,” Cruz said, according to The Hill. “I think there will be a full and vigorous discussion about who should carry on the legacy of President Trump.”

The senator became even more direct one day later during an appearance on Sean Hannity’s podcast.

“Do I want to be president? It’s no secret that I want to be president,” Cruz said, according to CBS Austin.

Cruz previously sought the Republican nomination in 2016, emerging as Trump’s toughest primary opponent before ultimately suspending his campaign. Their bitter rivalry eventually gave way to a powerful political alliance, with Cruz becoming one of Trump’s most dependable defenders in the Senate.

Now, Cruz appears unwilling to let the Republican nomination simply be handed to Vance.

The Wall Street Journal reports that Cruz has been visiting Iowa, promoting his latest book and hitting the podcast circuit as he weighs another campaign. The outlet described Vance as the early polling leader but said Cruz is already taking some shots at the presumed front-runner.

Trump Keeps Everyone Guessing

Trump has repeatedly entertained questions about who should succeed him, with Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio most frequently mentioned.

The president reportedly told donors during a private Oval Office meeting, “At the end of the day, we need to elect JD,” according to a Washington Post report cited by the Daily Caller.

Trump later denied that the comment amounted to an endorsement.

“No,” Trump told the Caller when asked about the report. “I think he’s great, but we’re way too early to even be thinking about that.”

Trump has reportedly continued asking allies whether Vance or Rubio should lead the Republican ticket in 2028, suggesting that the president is in no hurry to crown an heir.

“Anyone assuming it’s a lock is just getting way ahead of themselves, or just doesn’t know the president very well,” one administration official told the Washington Post.

That uncertainty gives Cruz an opening—and Trump’s latest comments ensure that the Texas senator will not be dismissed as merely a long-shot challenger.

The 2028 race may still be years away, but the battle to succeed Trump has already begun.

FAA Seeks Permanent Airspace Restrictions Near Trump’s Mar-a-Lago

By
Madeleine Jackson
-
1
Marine One lifts-off after returning President Donald J. Trump to Mar-a-Lago Friday, March 29, 2019, following his visit to the 143-mile Herbert Hoover Dike near Canal Point, Fla., that surrounds Lake Okeechobee. The visit was part of an infrastructure inspection of the dike, which is part of the Kissimmee-Okeechobee Everglades system, and reduces impacts of flooding for areas of south Florida. (Official White House Photo by Joyce N. Boghosian) [Photo Credit: The White House from Washington, DC, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons]

The Federal Aviation Administration is moving to permanently tighten the airspace surrounding President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate as federal officials confront persistent threats from unauthorized aircraft and potentially weaponized drones.

The proposed rule, requested by the U.S. Secret Service, would establish a permanent Special Flight Rules Area around President Donald J. Trump International Airport in Palm Beach, formerly known as Palm Beach International Airport.

“At the request of the U.S. Secret Service in the interest of national security, the FAA is proposing Special Air Traffic Rules for the airspace near Donald J. Trump International Airport,” an FAA spokesperson told Fox News Digital.

The restricted zone would extend one nautical mile from Mar-a-Lago and reach from the surface to 2,000 feet above sea level.

According to the FAA’s proposed rule, the Secret Service requested permanent restrictions because of “adverse threat intelligence” and the agency’s continuing mission to protect Trump.

The Secret Service argued that stronger rules would “greatly increase” its ability to counter the “persistent risks” posed by unauthorized aircraft and unmanned aircraft systems operating near sensitive locations.

Strict New Rules For Aircraft

Pilots entering the proposed security zone would have to meet several conditions.

Aircraft arriving at or departing from the Palm Beach airport would need an active visual or instrument flight plan, authorization from air traffic control and continuous two-way radio communication. Pilots would also be required to transmit a unique transponder code assigned by controllers.

Military flights supporting the president or Secret Service, along with active law enforcement, firefighting and air ambulance operations, could still enter the area after receiving clearance and meeting the communication requirements.

The permanent zone would not replace the larger temporary flight restrictions imposed when Trump is in Palm Beach. Those presidential restrictions can stretch 30 nautical miles from Mar-a-Lago and reach nearly 18,000 feet.

Instead, the new rules would keep a smaller security perimeter in place even when the broader presidential restrictions are inactive.

A temporary version of the proposed one-mile zone has been operating since October 2025 and is scheduled to expire on Oct. 20. The FAA said converting it into a permanent, charted restriction would improve public awareness and provide greater security than a temporary notice.

FAA Tries To Avoid Airport Chaos

The agency stopped short of proposing a complete ban on flights through the area because Mar-a-Lago sits dangerously close to the airport’s primary commercial runway.

The FAA determined that establishing a fully prohibited zone could make Runway 28R/10L essentially unusable for many commercial aircraft. That runway averaged approximately 86 airline operations per day in 2025.

The proposed system is designed to preserve commercial service while making it easier for federal authorities to identify and track aircraft entering the sensitive zone.

According to the FAA, the plan would have “little to no impact” on the airport’s daily traffic because pilots are already following many of the same procedures under the temporary restriction.

But whether the regulatory line will stop a determined attacker is another question.

Drone Expert Sounds The Alarm

Brett Velicovich, a former Army special operations intelligence analyst and drone expert, warned that declaring an area off-limits cannot replace systems capable of actively detecting and disabling hostile drones.

“We’re going to have to have more counter-drone systems in place because it is not good enough simply for the FAA to send a message saying this area is a no-drone zone,” Velicovich told Fox News Digital. “When you’re a bad actor, that doesn’t matter.”

Velicovich pointed to the 2024 assassination attempt against Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania. Investigators later determined that the gunman had flown a commercially available drone near the rally site before opening fire.

“When you look at what happened in Butler, it was discovered later on that the shooter had done very basic surveillance with a drone — a Chinese drone that you could buy off Amazon — before he conducted the attack against the president,” Velicovich said.

The threat has only become more serious as commercially available drones grow cheaper, more capable and easier to modify.

Fox News Digital reported that authorities disrupted a separate plot in June involving suspects accused of discussing an attack using explosive-laden drones during the UFC Freedom 250 event at the White House.

The FAA proposal is open for public comment through Oct. 2. The White House referred questions about the security plan to the Secret Service, which did not provide Fox News with additional comment.

Ted Cruz Quietly Builds 2028 Campaign Machine: Report

By
Madeleine Jackson
-
1

Sen. Ted Cruz may be ready for another White House brawl — and this time, Vice President JD Vance could be standing in his way.

The Texas Republican has quietly begun asking political operatives whether they would consider working on a potential 2028 presidential campaign, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Cruz has not formally announced a campaign, and his spokesperson declined to comment on the report. But the behind-the-scenes recruiting represents the clearest indication yet that the senator is seriously considering another run for president.

Cruz Starts Putting In The Work

Cruz has been making trips to Iowa, appearing on podcasts and promoting his new biography of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas — moves that could help him reconnect with Republican activists and potential donors.

He traveled to Iowa twice this year, including a May appearance before the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition and a recent campaign swing with Republican Senate candidate Ashley Hinson.

The state holds special significance for Cruz. He won the Iowa Republican caucuses in 2016 before ultimately finishing second to Donald Trump in the GOP primary.

Cruz has also become increasingly open about his lingering presidential ambitions.

“It’s no secret that I want to be president,” Cruz said during an appearance on Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick’s podcast, according to The Texas Tribune.

“This is a bug that history has proved is rarely ended,” Cruz added. “It is a permanent and often fatal bug.”

When Patrick pressed him on whether he would run in 2028, Cruz stopped short of confirming a campaign.

“Time will tell,” he said.

A Collision Course With Vance?

Any Cruz campaign would likely put him on a collision course with Vance, who leads early polls of prospective Republican candidates and is widely viewed as a possible successor to Trump.

Asked recently whether the Republican Party had already settled on Vance, Cruz immediately rejected the premise.

“Oh no,” he told MS NOW. “There’s going to be a full discussion about who we are and what we believe.”

Cruz said he would “certainly be part of the discussion,” signaling that he intends to help shape the post-Trump Republican Party whether or not he ultimately enters the race.

The senator has already begun highlighting potential differences with Vance, particularly on foreign policy. Mediaite reported that Cruz criticized Vance’s involvement in negotiations over the abandoned memorandum of understanding with Iran.

“JD negotiated the MOU with Iran,” Cruz said. “That was a terrible deal.”

He has also taken aim at Vance’s association with former Fox News host Tucker Carlson, opening another potential fault line over the party’s approach to foreign affairs.

People close to Vance have reportedly dismissed Cruz as a serious threat to the vice president’s path to the nomination. But Cruz has already demonstrated that he can compete nationally, winning 11 states during the 2016 primaries.

Trump Leaves The Door Open

Trump, meanwhile, has offered Cruz a notable public boost despite their vicious 2016 rivalry.

“He’s very talented. He’s a very good friend of mine,” Trump told the Daily Caller when asked about Cruz’s presidential ambitions. “I think he might do that.”

Trump has praised Vance behind the scenes, but he has resisted publicly locking in an endorsement for 2028, insisting it is too early to make that decision.

That uncertainty may be all Cruz needs to begin assembling a team — and prepare for another bare-knuckle Republican primary.

Trump-Appointed Judge Blocks DOJ Bid To Clear Steve Bannon

By
Madeleine Jackson
-
0

A federal judge appointed by President Donald Trump has thrown a temporary roadblock in front of the Justice Department’s effort to erase Steve Bannon’s contempt of Congress case.

U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols declined to dismiss the indictment underlying Bannon’s 2022 conviction, ruling that federal prosecutors failed to provide an adequate explanation for abandoning the case.

The Justice Department’s request “does not explain its motivations for seeking dismissal,” Nichols wrote, according to Bloomberg Law.

Nichols said the government must provide “a statement of reasons and underlying factual basis” supporting its request—not merely a broad assertion that dropping the case would serve the interests of justice.

The ruling leaves Bannon’s conviction intact for now, but it does not necessarily represent a lasting defeat. Nichols denied the motion “without prejudice,” allowing prosecutors to return with a more detailed justification.

DOJ’s One-Sentence Explanation Falls Short

Bannon, who served as Trump’s White House chief strategist during the president’s first term, was convicted on two counts of contempt of Congress after refusing to comply with a subpoena from the House committee that investigated the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot.

The committee sought documents and testimony related to Bannon’s communications with Trump and efforts to challenge the results of the 2020 presidential election.

Bannon maintained that he declined to comply after Trump asserted executive privilege. He was nevertheless convicted by a Washington jury in 2022 and served a four-month federal prison sentence in 2024.

After Trump returned to office, the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington moved in February to vacate the judgment and dismiss the indictment with prejudice, which would prevent prosecutors from bringing the same case again.

“The government has determined in its prosecutorial discretion that dismissal of this criminal case is in the interests of justice,” prosecutors wrote.

That explanation, signed by U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, did not satisfy Nichols. According to ABC News, the judge found that prosecutors had failed to comply with local court rules requiring the government to explain its reasons for seeking dismissal.

Pirro and Nichols were both appointed by Trump.

Supreme Court Cleared The Path—But Did Not End The Case

The procedural showdown comes months after the Supreme Court handed Bannon a significant victory in his appeal.

In April, the justices vacated the federal appeals court judgment that had upheld Bannon’s conviction and returned the case for further consideration in light of the government’s pending motion to dismiss the indictment.

The high court did not directly dismiss Bannon’s charges. Its brief April 6 order instead cleared the procedural path for Nichols to consider the Justice Department’s request.

In its Supreme Court filing, the Justice Department argued that Rule 48(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure permits prosecutors—with a judge’s approval—to dismiss an indictment even after a jury has returned a guilty verdict and the court has entered judgment.

Bannon had asked the Supreme Court to examine whether someone “willfully” defies a congressional subpoena when acting on a good-faith assertion of executive privilege. He also challenged the composition of the House Jan. 6 committee.

The Justice Department’s reversal made it unlikely that the justices would reach those broader constitutional questions. Instead, the court vacated the appellate judgment and sent the case back down.

Nichols’ latest ruling means the conviction remains on Bannon’s record while prosecutors decide whether to submit a renewed motion with the detailed factual and legal explanation the judge demanded.

Because Bannon has already completed his prison sentence, the immediate consequences are largely symbolic. Clearing the conviction, however, would still deliver an important legal victory to one of Trump’s most prominent and outspoken allies.

123...346Page 1 of 346
© Great America News Desk 2022