President Donald Trump participates in a welcome ceremony with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman Al Saud at the Royal Court Palace in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Tuesday, May 13, 2025. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)
President Donald Trump will have his annual medical checkup at a hospital near Washington on May 26, the White House said Monday night.
The oldest person ever inaugurated as President, Trump, turns 80 in June. Trump traveled to China for a summit with that country’s leader, Xi Jinping this week.
Read the full statement from the White House:
President Donald J. Trump will visit Walter Reed National Military Medical Center on May 26 for his annual dental and medical evaluations, and to visit with the men and women of the military. This will include the President’s routine annual dental and medical assessments as part of his regular preventive health care. The President will also spend time with service members and staff at Walter Reed in recognition of their service, professionalism, and dedication to the nation. Additional details regarding the President’s schedule will be released at a later date.
In March, the White House doctor said the president was taking a prescription “preventative skin treatment” to treat irritation on his neck.
Last July, the White House said Trump had been diagnosed with chronic venous insufficiency, a common condition tied to swelling in the legs, but that doctors had otherwise found the president to be in “excellent health.”
Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) is launching a renewed push to wipe President Donald Trump’s two impeachments from the House record — calling the proceedings a “maliciously false” partisan campaign that damaged Trump’s reputation and abused congressional power.
The California Republican introduced H.Res.1211, a resolution that would formally expunge both impeachments approved by the House in 2019 and 2021 “as if such Article had never passed the full House of Representatives.”
“The fact is that the Constitution doesn’t spell out what to do when you’ve wrongfully indicted somebody,” Issa told Fox News Digital. “An impeachment is basically an indictment, and it’s an indictment that you can’t really be acquitted from.”
“If you are impeached by the House, famously where do you go to get your reputation back?” he added. “That’s sort of a problem that we’re dealing with.”
The impeachments of @realDonaldTrump were false, dishonest, corrupt, and should be expunged.
— Rep. Darrell Issa (@repdarrellissa) May 11, 2026
The measure, which has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee, reignites a fierce constitutional and political debate over whether Congress can retroactively erase an impeachment after it has already become part of the historical record.
Issa argued that newly declassified intelligence documents and revelations about the impeachment investigations justify revisiting the issue years later.
The resolution claims Trump’s first impeachment in 2019 — tied to his phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky — relied on politically biased and unreliable information supplied by an anonymous whistleblower who allegedly lacked firsthand knowledge.
Issa’s resolution also points to recently declassified material highlighted by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who earlier this year said documents revealed what she described as a “coordinated effort” within the intelligence community “to manufacture a conspiracy that was used as the basis to impeach President Trump in 2019.”
Trump became the third president in U.S. history to be impeached in December 2019 after House Democrats accused him of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress over allegations he pressured Ukraine to investigate then-candidate Joe Biden ahead of the 2020 election. The Senate later acquitted Trump in February 2020, with only one Republican — Sen. Mitt Romney — voting to convict on one article.
The president was impeached a second time in January 2021, just days after the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, on a charge of “incitement of insurrection.” That impeachment made Trump the only president ever impeached twice.
Issa blasted the second impeachment as rushed and fundamentally unfair.
“They impeached him for essentially an insurrection, a true high crime, and it’s false,” Issa said.
The resolution argues House Democrats rammed the second impeachment through Congress in just two days without a full evidentiary process, fact witnesses, or an extended investigation. While lawmakers held a brief hearing with constitutional scholars, Republicans argued Trump was denied basic due process protections.
Trump was acquitted by the Senate in February 2021 after falling short of the two-thirds threshold needed for conviction, though seven Republicans joined Democrats in voting guilty — the largest bipartisan vote to convict a president in impeachment history.
Issa also accused Democrats of violating House norms throughout both proceedings.
A source close to Issa’s office told Fox News Digital that some Democrats have privately acknowledged information that emerged after the impeachments “reflects so poorly on the House” and represents “an example of what’s gone wrong in the Capitol and in Washington.”
The effort already has backing from powerful Republicans, including House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan.
“Democrats weaponized impeachment against President Trump with politically motivated charges,” Jordan told Fox News Digital. “We applaud Chairman Issa for leading the fight to expunge this sham from the record.”
More than 20 House Republicans have signed on as co-sponsors, including Claudia Tenney, Tim Burchett, Harriet Hageman and Ronny Jackson.
The push follows several failed Republican attempts to erase Trump’s impeachments from congressional records. Similar resolutions introduced in 2022 and 2023 never received hearings, markups or floor votes before dying at the end of the previous Congress.
Issa insists this latest effort is different.
“The previous resolutions were not written as strongly as this one and didn’t have what we have,” he said, referring to what he called newly uncovered evidence of misconduct tied to the impeachment inquiries.
Still, constitutional scholars remain divided over whether Congress can truly “erase” an impeachment. Supporters argue the Constitution gives the House the “sole Power of Impeachment,” meaning lawmakers also control their own records and can vote to expunge prior actions.
Critics counter that Congress cannot undo the historical fact that the House impeached a president, even if lawmakers later condemn or annotate the process as flawed. In practice, many legal experts say the effort would be largely symbolic.
Issa, however, says symbolism matters.
“Our goal is to show that it’s false and it was maliciously false,” he said. “When you’ve been falsely accused, whether it’s days, weeks, months or years later, somebody should be just as interested in printing that retraction on the front page as they were in putting the original charge on the front page.”
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 sharply criticized two Supreme Court justices he appointed, lamenting what he called a “devastating” ruling against his tariff policy while suggesting the court could soon rule against his administration again on birthright citizenship.
In a lengthy Sunday night Truth Social post, Trump singled out Justices Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett by name after they joined Chief Justice John Roberts and the court’s liberal wing in a recent ruling striking down his use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs.
“I ‘Love’ Justice Neil Gorsuch! He’s a really smart and good man, but he voted against me, and our Country, on Tariffs, a devastating move,” Trump wrote. “How do I reconcile this? So bad, and hurtful to our Country.”
Trump added that he also “liked and respected” Barrett, but said both justices had “hurt our Country so badly” with the ruling.
The president argued the decision could cost the United States billions of dollars in refunded tariff payments.
“They were appointed by me, and yet have hurt our Country so badly!” Trump wrote. “I do not believe they meant to do so, but their decision on Tariffs cost the United States 159 Billion Dollars that we have to pay back to enemies, and people, companies, and Countries, that have been ripping us off for years. It’s hardly believable!”
Duncan Lock, Dflock, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons
Trump claimed the court could have avoided forcing the administration to repay tariff revenues by adding what he described as a “tiny” sentence to the ruling.
“They could have solved that situation with a ‘tiny’ sentence, ‘Any money paid by others to the United States does not have to be paid back,’” he wrote. “Why wouldn’t they have done so?”
The Supreme Court’s 6-3 ruling against Trump’s tariff authority under IEEPA saw Gorsuch, Barrett, and Roberts side with Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Brett Kavanaugh dissented. (RELATED: Supreme Court Strikes Down Most Trump Tariffs, Reasserts Congress’ Role)
Trump went even further in the post, arguing that some Republican-appointed justices have become overly eager to distance themselves from conservatives.
“With certain Republican Nominated Justices that we have on the Supreme Court, the Democrats don’t really need to ‘PACK THE COURT’ any longer,” Trump wrote. “In fact, I should be the one wanting to PACK THE COURT!”
He also complained that Republican-appointed justices often seek to appear “independent,” while Democratic-appointed justices remain loyal to the presidents who nominated them. (RELATED:Supreme Court Rules On Trump Tariffs)
“What is the reason for this?” Trump wrote. “They have to do the right thing, but it’s really OK for them to be loyal to the person that appointed them to ‘almost’ the highest position in the land, that is, a Justice of the United States Supreme Court.”
“Democrat Justices always remain true to the people that honored them for that very special Nomination,” he continued. “They don’t waver, no matter how good or bad a case may be, but Republican Justices often go out of their way to oppose me, because they want to show how ‘independent’ or, ‘above it all,’ they are.”
Trump also predicted the court could soon rule against his administration on birthright citizenship, another major issue currently pending before the Supreme Court.
The president tied that concern to his unprecedented appearance at a Supreme Court session earlier this year.
“I choose people to help our Country, not to hurt it,” Trump wrote, “and now, based on what I witnessed recently by being the first President in History to attend a Supreme Court session … they will be ruling against us on Birthright Citizenship, making us the only Country in the World that practices this unsustainable, unsafe, and incredibly costly DISASTER.”
While Trump insisted he was not demanding personal loyalty from the justices, he suggested their rulings should align more closely with what he believes is best for the country.
“I don’t want loyalty,” he wrote, “but I do want and expect it for our Country.”
Trump also warned that an unfavorable ruling on birthright citizenship, combined with the court’s tariff decision, could have severe economic consequences.
“Yes, I have another way of doing Tariffs, but it is far slower, and more laborious than what was just determined, in a close decision, to be ‘illegal’ or ‘unconstitutional,’” Trump wrote. “Sometimes decisions have to be allowed to use Good, Strong, Common Sense as a guide.”
“A negative ruling on Birthright Citizenship, on top of the recent Supreme Court Tariff catastrophe, is not economically sustainable for the United States of America!”
On Monday, the suspect accused of attempting to assassinate President Donald Trump during the White House Correspondents Association dinner pleaded not guilty to four federal charges.
Cole Allen, 31, entered the plea in federal court Monday morning.
Allen allegedly attempted to breach the event at the Washington Hilton, where Trump and senior officials were present. The suspect was apprehended, and a federal officer was injured but survived, officials said.
🚨 IT'S OFFICIAL: Attempted Trump assassin Cole Allen pleads NOT GUILTY in federal court, facing up to life in prison if convicted
He even wants to KICK OFF US Attorney Jeanine Pirro and AG Todd Blanche from the case.
According to investigators, Allen allegedly stormed a security checkpoint armed with a shotgun, a handgun, and multiple knives—triggering panic at the high-profile event packed with journalists and political elites.
Authorities say Allen left behind a disturbing manifesto outlining what appears to be a calculated plan to target members of the Trump administration.
In the writings, he described prioritizing officials “from highest-ranking to lowest,” suggesting a methodical approach to the attack.
He also made clear he was willing to harm others if necessary to reach his intended targets.
In one particularly unsettling detail, Allen referenced his choice of ammunition—claiming he selected buckshot “to minimize casualties,” even as he prepared for violence.
Allen faces charges of attempting to assassinate Trump and assaulting an officer or employee of the United States with a deadly weapon, in addition to two other firearms-related charges: transportation of a firearm and ammunition through interstate commerce with intent to commit a felony and using, carrying, brandishing and discharging a firearm during a crime of violence.
The alleged gunman has agreed to remain detained ahead of trial.
This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.
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.
🇺🇸 A public airport is being renamed after Trump, and his family needed a trademark deal to make it happen.
Palm Beach County approved a licensing agreement with Trump's family business yesterday, a requirement to rename Palm Beach International Airport after the sitting… pic.twitter.com/dhONytQG79
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.
For the first time, I am extremely proud to share the OFFICIAL logo for the Donald J. Trump International Airport in Palm Beach, Florida. There is no person more deserving of this incredible honor than @realDonaldTrump! Congratulations Dad!
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.
The former New York City mayor is now breathing on his own after doctors removed him from a ventilator, marking a dramatic turnaround from what had been a life-threatening condition just hours earlier.
Dr. Maria Ryan told Fox News that Giuliani’s condition had deteriorated rapidly after he returned from a trip to Paris, with severe breathing issues forcing doctors to place him on a ventilator. At one point, his situation became so dire that a priest was called to administer last rites.
But by Tuesday, everything changed.
“He’s a fighter — the way he was yesterday in such a critical condition, he did have a priest come anoint him,” Ryan said. “And all the prayers from around — it’s like a miracle. This guy’s got 9 lives, today he’s doing much better.”
Giuliani, 81, is now off the ventilator, breathing independently, and able to speak, though he remains in critical but stable condition. Ryan said she expects him to make a full recovery.
A spokesperson for Giuliani pointed to the long-term health toll of his time at Ground Zero following the September 11 attacks, where exposure to toxic debris led to a diagnosis of restrictive airway disease — a condition that can make respiratory illnesses far more dangerous.
In a video update, spokesman Ted Goodman confirmed the improvement.
“Mayor Rudy Giuliani is the ultimate fighter,” Goodman said, adding that he is now “breathing on his own” while continuing to recover.
The scare comes after a series of health challenges in recent years, including a serious car crash in New Hampshire in 2025 that left Giuliani with a fractured vertebra and multiple injuries.
Yet once again, he’s defying the odds.
Doctors say the latest improvement could mark a turning point, though he remains under close monitoring in the days ahead.
President Trump and Senate Republicans are making a bold, behind-the-scenes play: trying to lure Sen. John Fetterman out of the Democratic Party — and into the GOP’s column.
According to Politico’s Jonathan Martin, some Republicans believe they could cling to Senate control even if they lose multiple seats this fall — if they can convince the Pennsylvania Democrat to switch sides.
“Trump has made the sell, offering his patented total and complete endorsement plus a financial windfall to the Pennsylvanian,” Martin reported. Behind the scenes, GOP senators have also been “gently feeling out Fetterman” about the idea of defecting, according to multiple high-level Republican officials.
So far, Fetterman is holding the line — publicly, at least.
“I’m not changing,” he said. “I’m a Democrat and I’m staying one.”
But the intrigue hasn’t died down.
When one Republican floated the idea of Fetterman becoming an independent, the senator didn’t shut it down outright — he “absorbed the suggestion and didn’t embrace or reject the overture,” according to a GOP official familiar with the exchange.
And in Washington, actions often speak louder than words.
Fetterman has increasingly drifted from his Democratic colleagues, skipping party luncheons and spending hours with Republicans during Senate votes. He’s developed a friendly rapport with Senate Majority Leader John Thune — the two reportedly text regularly — and has been spotted hanging out in the GOP cloakroom, once considered off-limits territory for Democrats.
His growing ties to Republicans extend beyond politics. According to Martin, Fetterman has formed close relationships with Sen. Dave McCormick (R-PA) and Sen. Katie Britt (R-AL), along with their spouses — relationships some insiders believe could ultimately influence his political future.
At the same time, Fetterman has been openly at odds with his own party on key issues — especially immigration.
“The Democratic Party… we became an open border party, without a doubt. And now that’s wrong,” Fetterman said in a recent interview. “I support to make our border more secure, and deport all of the criminals right now.”
Still, he insists a full switch isn’t in the cards.
“So I can’t be a Republican because in many other areas, I disagree… but I’m staying in my party,” he said.
Even so, his standing among Democrats appears shaky. When asked about his relationships within the caucus, Fetterman laughed before answering: “Well, I mean, cordial… but I’m not necessarily the popular guy.”
Threats Add a Dark Backdrop
The political maneuvering comes amid a disturbing real-world threat targeting both Fetterman and Trump.
Federal authorities recently arrested a Pennsylvania man — who had just launched a Senate campaign against Fetterman — after he allegedly left a series of violent voicemails threatening the senator, his family, and the president.
According to court filings, Raymond Eugene Chandler III is accused of making graphic threats over the course of a year. In one message, he allegedly warned that Fetterman and his daughter would be dragged from their home and have their “throat… slit.”
A Pennsylvania Democrat senate candidate Raymond Chandler has been arrested after leaving multiple voicemails threatening to kill Senator John Fetterman’s 13 year old daughter and President Trump.
— Right Angle News Network (@Rightanglenews) May 3, 2026
Days later, prosecutors say, he escalated further — urging Fetterman to assassinate Trump.
“Walk into the Oval Office with a gun in your hand… put it to the President’s head… and… pull the trigger,” the caller said, according to investigators.
Authorities say the threats prompted increased security for lawmakers and their families, part of a broader surge in political violence and intimidation nationwide.
In a bizarre twist, Chandler posted a YouTube video announcing his Senate campaign just hours before his arrest, pitching a far-left platform that included wealth taxes, universal basic income, and abolishing ICE.
High Stakes, High Drama
For Republicans, flipping Fetterman would be a political earthquake — and a potential lifeline in a tight Senate map.
For now, the senator remains a Democrat — but with Trump making his pitch, GOP senators keeping the door open, and tensions rising both politically and personally, Washington is watching closely.
By The White House - https://www.flickr.com/photos/202101414@N05/54581054338/, Public Domain,
President Donald Trump is turning up the heat on House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries — and floating a move that isn’t even constitutionally possible.
In a fiery Truth Social post Sunday night, Trump demanded to know why the New York Democrat isn’t being impeached after branding the U.S. Supreme Court “illegitimate” over its latest Voting Rights Act ruling.
“Hakeem Jeffries, a Low IQ individual, said our Supreme Court is ‘illegitimate.’ After saying such a thing, isn’t he subject to Impeachment?” Trump wrote. “I got impeached for A PERFECT PHONE CALL. Where are you Republicans? Why not get it started? They’ll be doing this to me! President DONALD J. TRUMP.”
🚨 JUST IN: President Trump calls on Hakeem Jeffries to be REMOVED FROM OFFICE following Jeffries saying the Supreme Court is “ILLEGITIMATE”
“Where are you Republicans? Why not get it started? They'll be doing this to me!”
The post quickly ignited backlash — and confusion — since members of Congress aren’t subject to impeachment under the Constitution. Instead, lawmakers can only be expelled by a two-thirds vote of their chamber.
Still, Trump’s message was clear: he wants Jeffries gone.
The clash comes days after the Supreme Court’s 6–3 decision striking down Louisiana’s second majority-Black congressional district, ruling it was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.
Chief Justice John Roberts described the district as a “snake” drawn along racial lines, while Justice Samuel Alito called the map an “unconstitutional gerrymander” and framed the ruling as an “update” to how courts interpret the Voting Rights Act.
Trump praised the decision, calling it the “kind of ruling I like.”
Jeffries, meanwhile, unloaded on the high court.
“Today’s decision by this illegitimate Supreme Court majority strikes a blow against the Voting Rights Act and is designed to undermine the ability of communities of color all across this country to elect their candidate of choice,” he said.
“It’s an unacceptable decision, but not an unexpected decision,” Jeffries added. “Because this isn’t even really the Roberts Court. It’s the Trump Court.”
He also accused the ruling of helping Trump “scheme to suppress the vote and rig” upcoming elections.
Trump wasn’t having it — and fired back with his impeachment call, even as constitutional reality undercuts the demand.
Jeffries brushed off the attack with a short jab of his own on X: “Jeffries Derangement Syndrome,” a play on Trump’s long-used “Trump Derangement Syndrome” line.
The ruling has sparked outrage across liberal media circles, with commentators like Al Sharpton, Abby Phillip, and legal analyst Paul Butler slamming the decision and arguing it shows the court does not “respect” the rights of minority voters.
But for Trump, the focus isn’t the ruling — it’s the rhetoric.
And he’s making it clear he wants Republicans to escalate the fight.
Trump’s demand — even if constitutionally misplaced — comes at a time when expulsion threats are no longer theoretical on Capitol Hill.
Just weeks ago, Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) resigned from Congress as sexual misconduct allegations mounted and colleagues began weighing an expulsion vote.
“I am aware of efforts to bring an immediate expulsion vote against me and other members,” Swalwell said at the time. “Expelling anyone in Congress without due process… is wrong. But it’s also wrong for my constituents to have me distracted from my duties. Therefore, I plan to resign my seat in Congress.”
Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-Texas) stepped down the same week under similar pressure, with both lawmakers facing potential removal by their colleagues.
Most recently, Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-Fla.) announced she is resigning from the House of Representatives after Republicans vowed to force a vote to expel her from the chamber for committing a bevy of violations involving financial misconduct.
“Rather than play these political games, I choose to step away so I can devote my time to fighting for my neighbors in Florida’s 20th District,” she wrote on social media. “I hereby resign from the 119th Congress, effective immediately.”
“This fight is far from over,” Cherfilus-McCormick, who was indicted by a grand jury last year for allegedly stealing COVID-19 emergency funds, added in her statement.
The House Ethics Committee found “clear and convincing evidence” in March that the Florida Democrat misused federal disaster relief money that was improperly paid to her family’s healthcare company, among other misconduct.
She is facing 53 years in prison as part of a separate criminal indictment.
A former top security aide to slain conservative activist Charlie Kirk is taking Candace Owens to court — accusing the firebrand commentator of pushing wild conspiracy theories that ruined his reputation.
Brian Harpole, who served as Kirk’s security chief the day he was assassinated at Utah Valley University last September, filed a defamation lawsuit Thursday claiming Owens falsely accused him of being involved in the killing.
According to the complaint, Owens “falsely accus[ed] Brian Harpole of conspiring to assassinate Charlie Kirk,” amplifying baseless claims that he was tied to a shadowy plot involving the U.S. government.
“Owens is the most high profile spreader of baseless Charlie Kirk conspiracy theories,” the lawsuit states. “Her actions have encouraged and emboldened…others to jump on the Charlie Kirk conspiracy bandwagon.”
On behalf of Brian Harpole, I filed this defamation lawsuit against Candace Owens and Mitchell Snow. We will not be providing any other statements. You can follow me for updates.https://t.co/Bu89sCxalB
— Matt Sarelson, Esq. – Celebrity Attorney & Advisor (@MSarelson) April 30, 2026
Harpole’s legal team points directly to Owens’ public comments — including claims that Kirk’s security team was “shady” and suggestions that Harpole attended a secret pre-operation meeting at a U.S. Army base the day before the shooting.
The lawsuit flatly rejects that claim.
“The claim that Harpole was present at Fort Huachuca…is verifiably false,” the complaint reads, noting travel records place him in Dallas at the time — with no evidence he ever accessed the base.
Owens didn’t stop there.
In a December post on X, she questioned whether Harpole had been truthful about what happened in the chaotic moments after Kirk was shot, even asking whether anyone from his team had called 911.
She later requested an “off the record discussion” with Harpole — a request he ignored — before continuing to discuss him on her podcast for weeks, according to the filing.
Now, Harpole says the damage is real.
The lawsuit alleges he has lost business opportunities, suffered severe emotional distress, and seen both his personal and professional reputation take a hit.
“All of Owens’s statements are either false on their face or create a false meaning,” the complaint states. “It is simply false that Harpole knew Charlie Kirk was going to die or was involved in the planning…of the assassination.”
Owens, for her part, is not backing down.
Addressing the lawsuit on her podcast Thursday, she brushed it off — and even suggested it could work in her favor.
“This will give me the power of subpoena,” she said, questioning why Harpole never demanded a retraction or responded to her outreach before filing suit.
On X, she added another jab: “It’s certainly an interesting claim that Brian Harpole is losing clients/contracts because of me—and not like, you know, how his last job ended.”
Candace Owens is being sued by Brian Harpole.
Harpole claims in the suit that he ignored Candace’s text messages asking to confirm his whereabouts on September 8-9th because he didn’t want her to profit off of his response.
The lawsuit marks the latest legal headache for Owens, who has also faced litigation tied to comments about French First Lady Brigitte Macron.
Meanwhile, the case against Kirk’s accused killer is still unfolding.
Authorities arrested 22-year-old Tyler Robinson days after the shooting, alleging he confessed to his father. He now faces charges including aggravated murder, with prosecutors seeking the death penalty.
But the case has hit complications.
Robinson’s defense team is pushing to delay a key May hearing, citing a mountain of evidence — including a recent ATF ballistics report that was deemed “inconclusive” on whether a bullet fragment came from the rifle allegedly used in the attack.
They’ve also pointed to DNA from multiple individuals found on items at the scene, arguing further testing is needed.
Prosecutors insist that doesn’t change the case.
“When the results…come back as inconclusive, that means only that the fragment did not contain enough detail,” a spokesperson said.
As the criminal case grinds forward, Harpole’s lawsuit opens a new nuisance — one that could drag Owens into a high-stakes legal battle over just how far commentary can go before it crosses the line.
President Donald Trump answers questions from members of the media aboard Air Force One en route to Mount Pocono, Pennsylvania, for a rally on the economy, Tuesday, December 9, 2025. (Official White House Photo by Molly Riley)
President Donald Trump revealed in a “60 Minutes” interview that a prominent Democrat approached him for a hug in the chaotic aftermath of the shooting at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner — a moment he described as unexpectedly unifying.
Speaking with CBS’ Norah O’Donnell, Trump said the night took a dramatic turn just as he was preparing to deliver a speech aimed at the press.
“I was going to hit them really hard, with humor,” Trump said, noting the event was ultimately scrapped due to the security scare. “But I couldn’t do it. I would’ve had to just get up there and say, ‘I love you all.’”
Instead, the evening became something far different.
“There was love in the room. It was amazing. There was love in the room,” Trump said.
According to the president, even longtime political adversaries softened in the moment.
“Democrats that truly can’t stand me were saying, ‘Sir, could I just shake your hand?’” Trump said. “I’m leaving, and I’m seeing high-level people, and they’re saying, ‘Sir, great job.’”
Then came the moment that stood out most.
“One of them said, ‘Could I hug you?’” Trump recalled with a laugh. “A big politician on the other side. There was love. It just all came together. It was very amazing to see. It was a very beautiful thing — at a non-beautiful moment.”
The chaos erupted Saturday night when a suspect, identified as Cole Allen, rushed a security checkpoint at the Washington Hilton and opened fire. A Secret Service officer was struck in his bulletproof vest and survived. Allen was quickly apprehended and now faces multiple felony charges.
Video released late Thursday by U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro, shows the 31-year-old suspect pacing a hallway on April 24, before returning the following evening and sprinting through security while heavily armed.
Today, we are releasing video already provided to U.S. District Court showing Cole Allen shoot a U.S. Secret Service officer during his attempt to assassinate the President at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner.
The gunfire forced the evacuation of Trump, his Cabinet, and attendees. The annual dinner has since been postponed, though Trump said he pushed to keep it going.
“I fought like hell to have it continue,” he said, adding that the event will likely be rescheduled within the next month.
In the immediate aftermath, Trump struck an unusually conciliatory tone toward the media.
“This was an event dedicated to freedom of speech that was supposed to bring together members of both parties with members of the press — and in a certain way, it did,” he said during a press briefing. “I saw a room that was totally unified. It was, in one way, very beautiful.”
For one night, at least, Trump said the divisions in Washington briefly gave way to something else.
