Capitol Hill is in a frenzy over the latest debt deal reached between lawmakers.
Watch Amanda explain the situation below:
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
As Florida legislators weigh a proposal to rename Palm Beach International Airport after President Donald J. Trump, a related trademark filing by a company associated with the Trump Organization is drawing national attention — and predictable political reactions.
Public records show that DTTM Operations, an entity tied to the Trump Organization, filed trademark applications on Feb. 13 for “President Donald J. Trump International Airport” and “Donald J. Trump International Airport.”
A spokesperson for the Trump Organization said the filings are purely defensive and not intended to generate revenue.
“To be clear, the President and his family will not receive any royalty, licensing fee, or financial consideration whatsoever from the proposed airport renaming,” spokesperson Kimberly Banza said in a statement. She explained that the trademark applications are meant to prevent “bad actors from infringing upon or misusing the name.”
The proposal to rename the airport comes as Florida’s GOP-controlled legislature considers honoring Trump, whose Mar-a-Lago residence is located in Palm Beach. Supporters see the move as a fitting recognition of a former and current president with deep ties to the region and a significant political legacy.
Critics, however, have seized on the trademark filings to raise concerns about potential conflicts of interest. Dylan Hedtler-Gaudette of the nonprofit Project on Government Oversight argued that the situation highlights broader questions about presidential business holdings.
Trademark attorney Josh Gerben, who first reported on the filings, described the move as unusual, noting that while airports have been named after past presidents, a sitting president’s private company seeking trademark protection in advance appears to be unprecedented.
Gerben suggested that the filings raise technical legal questions about whether a publicly owned airport would need permission to use the name if it were trademarked — though no such arrangement has been proposed.
The broader political backdrop is hard to ignore. President Trump has long been a polarizing figure, and even routine legal filings tied to his name tend to generate outsized scrutiny. Supporters argue that trademark protection is standard practice for high-profile public figures and brands, particularly given Trump’s long history as a global business leader.
The White House has not indicated that the president is personally involved in the legislative effort. Trump has also denied reports that he is seeking to have other major transportation hubs, such as Washington’s Dulles Airport or New York’s Penn Station, renamed in his honor.
For now, the proposal remains in the hands of Florida lawmakers. Whether the renaming effort moves forward — and whether the trademark filings ultimately matter — will depend on decisions made at the state level.
Former president of PayPal David Marcus announced he has switched political parties and endorsed Donald Trump via X.
“I am crossing the Rubicon and backing the Republican Party and President Trump. Many — including a former version of myself — get trapped in a mental framework that becomes their identity and prevents them from radically evolving their thinking with new facts and information. I finally broke free from it.”
“My journey has been a gradual political 180 from where I stood in every previous election. It has been an eye-opening process of disenchantment, zero-basing lifelong beliefs, and rebuilding from there,” wrote Marcus.
Marcus cited an anecdote where, in 2017, he was enlisted to raise $100M from Silicon Valley for the Democratic National Convention in order to “prevent a repeat of Hillary Clinton’s inadequate, outdated 2016 campaign.”
David Marcus is aligned with Trump on technology innovations like crypto and AI as well as foreign policy–especially the Middle East. Marcus opined, “on Iran, this administration is continuing a misguided Obama-era plan to bring Iran closer to the West by unfreezing Trump-era sanctions, thus giving the Mollahs’ regime the ability to fund terrorism and pursue its anti-America, anti-Israel, and anti-Jewish agenda.”
“I believe we need a President who is unequivocally pro: America, the Constitution, business, Bitcoin/crypto, innovation, Israel, small government, legal immigration, free speech, meritocracy, and common sense — and anti: regulatory proliferation, illegal immigration, unjust wars, Iran’s current regime, and domestic groups that oppose American values.”
Marcus completed his post by referencing the attempt on former President Trump’s life at a rally in Butler, PA on July 13.
“It’s impossible to close this post without mentioning President Trump’s recent assassination attempt. The courage and resolve he displayed seconds after being hit by a bullet was awe-inspiring for his followers and detractors alike. This was a man, however imperfect, who, at that moment, incarnated the American spirit in the most vivid way, starting to bring a split nation together,” wrote Marcus.
“In this pivotal moment, confronted with the choices we have, I am endorsing and supporting a return to a Republican administration in 2025,” the post concluded.
Trump has seen a number of prominent pro-business donors flock to his campaign this season as Republicans seek to a return to the White House.
“Judge Judy” Sheindlin called Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s (D) hush money case against former President Trump “nonsense” in a recent interview.
“You gotta twist yourself into a pretzel to figure out what the crime was. [Bragg] doesn’t like him — New York City didn’t like him for a while,” Sheindlin said of Trump in a “Who’s Talking to Chris Wallace?” interview streaming Friday on Max.
“I would be happier, as someone who owns property in Manhattan, if the district attorney of New York County would take care of criminals who were making it impossible for citizens to walk in the streets and use the subway, to use his efforts to keep those people off the street, than to spend $5 million or $10 million of taxpayers’ money trying Donald Trump on this nonsense,” the longtime TV judge told Wallace.
Watch:
“I, as a taxpayer in this country, resent using the system for your own personal self-aggrandizement,” the “Judy Justice” personality said of Bragg.
Asked by the CNN anchor what she thought of Trump, the 81-year-old former Manhattan Family Court judge replied, “I think he was a good businessman, a real estate guy. And he was certainly terrific on ‘The Apprentice.’”
The celebrity judge’s comments come as the Manhattan DA seeks an extension of the restraining order against former President Donald Trump. (RELATED: Manhattan DA Seeks Extended Gag Order Against Trump Amid Death Threats To Bragg)
They argue that Trump’s public statements have increased tensions and led to threats against Bragg and his team before Trump’s July 11 sentencing.
The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office charged Trump with 34 counts of falsifying business records as part of a hush-money scheme to prevent porn star Stormy Daniels from speaking out about her alleged extramarital affair before the 2016 presidential election.
Before Trump, no sitting or former president ever faced criminal charges. This is the lowest level felony in New York, any potential sentence will more than likely be served after the 2024 election.
As The New York Times reports:
The order, issued before Mr. Trump’s Manhattan criminal trial began in mid-April, bars him from attacking witnesses, jurors, court staff and relatives of the judge who presided over the trial, Juan M. Merchan.
Mr. Trump’s lawyers have sought to have the order lifted since Mr. Trump’s conviction in late May. But in a 19-page filing on Friday, prosecutors argued that while Justice Merchan no longer needed to enforce the portion of the gag order relating to trial witnesses, he should keep in place the provisions protecting jurors, prosecutors, court staff and their families.
Article Published With The Permission of American Liberty News
President-elect Trump announced three special envoys on Thursday with the purpose of promoting business in Hollywood.
Those special ambassadors will be Jon Voight, Mel Gibson, and Sylvester Stallone, Trump said. All three actors are conservative and have appeared publicly with Trump or praised him publicly in the past. Stallone, for example, praised Trump as “the second George Washington” while introducing him at the America First Policy Gala in Palm Beach in November.
“It is my honor to announce Jon Voight, Mel Gibson, and Sylvester Stallone, to be Special Ambassadors to a great but very troubled place, Hollywood, California,” Trump wrote in a Thursday Truth Social post. “They will serve as Special Envoys to me for the purpose of bringing Hollywood, which has lost much business over the last four years to Foreign Countries, BACK—BIGGER, BETTER, AND STRONGER THAN EVER BEFORE!”
“These three very talented people will be my eyes and ears, and I will get done what they suggest,” Trump added. “It will again be, like The United States of America itself, The Golden Age of Hollywood!”
The actors’ support for Trump is particularly significant given the strong anti-Trump sentiment voiced by many Hollywood progressives, such as George Clooney, who embrace politicians like former President Barack Obama.
“When George Washington defended his country, he had no idea that he was going to change the world,” Stallone said of Trump in November. “‘Cause without him, you can imagine what the world would look like. Guess what, we got the second George Washington.”
The family of late soul singer Isaac Hayes is suing former President Donald Trump for using the icon’s music at his rallies, Isaac Hayes III announced last week.
The filing accused the former president and the Republican Nation Committee of “willfully and brazenly” engaging in 134 counts of copyright infringement.
A letter to Trump and his campaign from the Georgia-based law firm Walker & Associates reads:
Our firm has been retained by the family and Isaac Hayes Enterprises, who own the copyright to the musical composition and recording “Hold On (I’m Coming)” (the “Song”). It has come to our attention that you or the campaign have authorized the illegal public performance of the Song on multiple occasions during various rallies for your political campaign without authorization from the copyright holder, despite being asked repeatedly not to engage in such illegal use by our client.
Upon information and belief, you, your campaign, and/or the RNC and other parties have willfully and brazenly engaged in copyright infringement in violation of several provisions of Title 17 U.S.C., including § 501, of the Copyright Act of 1976, as amended, over one hundred times. We have attached for your convenience a non-exhaustive list attached hereto as Exhibit A. As we prepared this letter, there was an additional use in Montana just two nights ago, even with your office apparently aware that you had no permission. We and the family hereby demand that you cease the continual infringement of our copyright and stop all unauthorized use of the Song.
The suit further demands Trump pay $3 million, stop using the song, and to remove any campaign multimedia of the song being played at rallies. Hayes’ estate also demanded Trump issue a statement acknowledging he played the song without permission.
Billionaire Elon Musk clashed publicly with Boris Epshteyn, one of Trump’s closest allies in what sources called a “massive blowout” over key Cabinet appointments.
According to three sources cited by Axios, the dispute reached a boiling point during a dinner at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club last week during which Musk accused Epshteyn of leaking sensitive details about the transition process, including potential personnel picks.
“You don’t know what you’re talking about,” Epshteyn reportedly fired back during the heated exchange.
The altercation highlights a power struggle as Musk, a newcomer to Trump’s inner circle, increasingly advocates for his preferred candidates. Musk has reportedly criticized Epshteyn’s influence in selecting Justice Department nominees, including Matt Gaetz for attorney general.
Musk is lobbying for Howard Lutnick, co-chair of Trump’s transition team, as Treasury secretary, over Wall Street veteran Scott Bessent.
Despite the friction, Musk maintains considerable support among Trump’s family and allies.
However, the tech billionaire’s growing role in the transition has rankled longtime Trump loyalists, who view him as overstepping boundaries.
Musk has been among the president-elect’s most vocal and influential supporters since he endorsed Trump immediately after a July assassination attempt at a Pennsylvania rally but some in Trump’s inner circle say the Tesla CEO is being to overstay his welcome.
“Elon won’t go home. I can’t get rid of him. Until I don’t like him,” Trump quipped, according to a source in the room when Trump met with Republican lawmakers on Capitol Hill last Wednesday.
some Republicans have questioned how long Trump and Musk can happily co-exist, particularly given Trump’s past frustration with those who take up too much of the spotlight.
“Trump is not going to have another alpha. I think Trump is going to tire of him,” one source close to the transition told The Hill.
One Republican lobbyist with ties to Trump said there are some in the president-elect’s orbit who think Musk is “a little big for his britches.”
Trump transition team spokesperson Karoline Leavitt did not respond to requests for comment from The Hill, but in a statement on Wednesday to NBC News described Musk and Trump as “great friends and brilliant leaders working together to Make America Great Again.”
“Elon Musk is a once in a generation business leader and our federal bureaucracy will certainly benefit from his ideas and efficiency,” Leavitt said.
Kevin O’Leary, co-host of the TV show “Shark Tank” and a successful investor in his own right, stated in a Monday interview with Fox News host Neil Cavuto that he will never invest in New York after a judge ordered Donald Trump to pay over $350 million in penalties in a civil fraud case.
“I’m not different than any other investor. I’m shocked at this. I can’t even understand or fathom the decision at all. There’s no rationale for it,” O’Leary told Cavuto.
From Mediaite:
In his New York fraud case, Trump was ordered by Judge Arthur Engoron to pay more than $350 million, and the former president was also barred from doing business in New York for three years. Trump was accused of fraud through past valuations of his properties that were inflated and used to get more beneficial agreements in a civil lawsuit filed by New York Attorney General Letitia James.
O’Leary called Trump’s actions a victimless crime and said other companies are now going to be even more fearful to conduct business in New York, which the Canadian-born O’Leary called a “loser state.”
“It doesn’t matter what the governor says, New York was already a loser state. Like California‘s a loser state. There are many loser states because of policy, high taxes, uncompetitive regulation, it was already on the top of the list of being a loser state. I would never invest in New York now, and I’m not the only person saying that,” he said.
O’Leary, long a vocal critic of New York’s policies for business, described running into massive amounts of red tape while trying to set up a “high end data center” in New York and he’s now abandoning the state for “winner states,” like the Oklahoma, North Dakota, and West Virginia.
“The fine people of New York should ask themselves, why are we such a loser state? How are we going attract business?” O’Leary continued. “It’s not just the existing businesses that are fleeing out to Texas and Florida. What about new money like what I’m talking about?”
“This is a New York problem now,” the businessman, investor and philanthropist concluded.
This article originally appeared on American Liberty News. Republished with permission.
Shipping and logistics company DHL sued Mike Lindell’s MyPillow this week over an alleged shipping debt of nearly $800,000.
In the lawsuit filed in Minneapolis on Monday, DHL alleged Lindell’s company violated a previous lawsuit settlement from May 2023 which required MyPillow to pay off its $775,000 debt to DHL in 24 monthly installments.
According to the lawsuit, MyPillow only partially paid off the required installments, paying DHL $64,583.34, with the last installment in June.
DHL reportedly threatened to sue MyPillow in July and, after several months of no success, finally filed its lawsuit in court this week.
DHL is now seeking $799,925.59 from MyPillow, along with attorney fees and an 18% annual interest.
Lindell who has been a vocal and active supporter of former President Donald Trump has been embroiled in a number of lawsuits over the past few years, including defamation lawsuits from Dominion Voting Systems and Smartmatic over his allegations that the 2020 election was rigged.
In February, Lindell was ordered to pay $5 million to a man after he lost his own “Prove Mike Wrong” challenge.
In March, MyPillow was evicted from a warehouse in Minnesota for allegedly being $200,000 behind on rent.
Palm Beach County commissioners narrowly approved a controversial trademark agreement Tuesday that clears the way for Palm Beach International Airport to be renamed after President Donald Trump — pushing forward a politically charged project that has divided local leaders and raised fresh concerns about taxpayer costs and oversight.
In a 4-3 vote, the commission signed off on a licensing deal with DTTM Operations LLC, the Trump family company that manages the president’s trademarks. The agreement gives Trump’s organization significant control over how the airport’s new identity is used, including authority over branding, marketing materials and the sale of airport-themed merchandise.
The vote marks the first official action by county commissioners tied directly to the airport renaming effort, which was mandated earlier this year by Florida lawmakers and signed into law by Gov. Ron DeSantis.
Under the agreement, the airport is expected to adopt the name “President Donald J. Trump International Airport,” matching trademark filings submitted by Trump’s company in February.
Supporters of the deal argued the county had little choice but to move forward after state lawmakers forced the renaming through Tallahassee. Republican commissioners said approving the trademark agreement ensures Palm Beach County retains at least some role in negotiations surrounding the airport’s future branding and operations.
But critics warned the agreement grants unusually broad authority to Trump’s business organization while locking the county into a deal with no clear exit strategy.
Democratic commissioners Gregg Weiss, Joel Flores and Bobby Powell Jr. voted against the measure, saying they were given less than 24 hours to review the final agreement before Tuesday’s meeting.
They also raised concerns about provisions allowing Trump’s company to approve how the president’s image and biography are used in airport promotions and displays. Another clause requires airport retailers to source airport-branded merchandise only from vendors approved by Trump’s organization.
Trademark attorney Josh Gerben said portions of the agreement go beyond what is typically included in standard licensing deals.
“Normally a trademark agreement focuses on quality control standards,” Gerben said. “It’s unusual to see language requiring retailers to purchase merchandise from approved sellers selected by the trademark owner.”
County Attorney David Ottey defended the provision during Tuesday’s meeting, saying it was designed to maintain quality standards and insisting the Trump family would not financially benefit from sales made inside the airport. However, county officials acknowledged they still do not know which vendors may ultimately be approved.
The agreement also contains no termination clause, meaning Palm Beach County would remain bound by the deal indefinitely unless state law changes in the future.
Beyond the political controversy, county officials continue to warn about the financial impact of the renaming project. Administrators estimate the airport overhaul — including signage changes, marketing updates, federal documentation and operational adjustments — could cost taxpayers roughly $5.5 million.
County leaders have repeatedly urged the state to cover those costs rather than forcing local officials to redirect funding away from other infrastructure projects.
Officials have also raised concerns in recent months about possible safety and logistical complications tied to changing the airport’s name, particularly involving aviation systems, emergency coordination and federal regulatory updates.
Still, with Tuesday’s approval now complete and Trump having already signed the agreement over the weekend, the renaming effort appears poised to move ahead — cementing one of the most politically symbolic airport name changes in the country.
This article originally appeared on Official Trump Tracker. Republished with permission.
