News

Home News

Secret Service Fatally Shoot Armed Mar-A-Lago Intruder

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]

PALM BEACH, Fla. — A 21-year-old man was shot and killed early Sunday after allegedly breaching the secure perimeter of President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate, prompting a multi-agency federal investigation, the U.S. Secret Service confirmed.

The incident unfolded around 1:30 a.m. when the suspect made what officials described as an “unauthorized entry” onto the property.

According to the Secret Service, the individual was observed near the north gate carrying what appeared to be a shotgun and a fuel can. Agents, along with a deputy from the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office (PBSO), responded immediately.

Sheriff Ric Bradshaw identified the suspect as Austin Tucker Martin, 21, of North Carolina.

Bradshaw said during a press conference that a deputy and two Secret Service agents assigned to the detail confronted the man after he entered what authorities described as the “inner perimeter” of the estate.

“They confronted a white male that was carrying a gas can and a shotgun. He was ordered to drop those two pieces of equipment that he had with him — at which time he put down the gas can, raised the shotgun to a shooting position,” Bradshaw told reporters. “At that point in time, the deputy and the two Secret Service agents fired their weapons and neutralized the threat.”

Bradshaw said the suspect did not respond verbally to commands from law enforcement officers to drop the items.

Martin was pronounced dead at the scene.

Officials confirmed that no Secret Service personnel or sheriff’s deputies were injured during the confrontation. No Secret Service protectees were present at Mar-a-Lago at the time of the incident, and Trump was not in Florida when the shooting occurred.

The FBI, Secret Service, and Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office are jointly investigating the shooting, including the suspect’s background, actions, potential motive, and the use of force.

FBI Miami Special Agent in Charge Brett Skiles said the bureau is assisting due to the location being under Secret Service protection.

The FBI’s evidence response team is processing the scene and collecting physical evidence. Skiles urged residents in the area to review surveillance footage from late Saturday night into early Sunday morning.

“If you see anything that looks suspicious or out of place, please contact us,” he said.

FBI Director Kash Patel said in a post on X that the agency “is dedicating all necessary resources in the investigation of this morning’s incident,” adding that the bureau “will continue working closely with @SecretService as well our state and federal partners and will provide updates as we are able.”

Heightened Security After Previous Threats

Sunday’s incident comes amid heightened security surrounding Trump following multiple high-profile threats and assassination attempts in recent years. Most notably, Trump survived an assassination attempt during a July 2024 campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, where a gunman opened fire, injuring Trump and killing a rally attendee. That attack prompted sweeping reviews of Secret Service procedures and significantly intensified protective measures at Trump properties and public events.

Since then, federal authorities have reported disrupting additional threats against the former president, contributing to an already elevated security posture.

Mar-a-Lago, which serves as Trump’s private residence and a frequent venue for political and public events, operates under layered security protocols when under Secret Service protection. Officials have not yet indicated whether Sunday’s incident is connected to any broader threat.

The investigation remains active, and authorities say additional details will be released as they become available.

Air Force One Jets To Be Repainted In Trump’s Iconic Colors

2
Image via Pixabay

Air Force One and other presidential aircraft are expected to receive a new paint design featuring red, white, gold, and dark blue — colors long associated with President Trump’s preferred aesthetic — according to confirmation from NewsNation.

An Air Force spokesperson told NewsNation that both the luxury jet donated by Qatar and the new VC-25B Boeing aircraft currently under development will adopt the updated color scheme. The title “Air Force One” refers to any aircraft carrying the president.

In addition to the presidential aircraft, four smaller C-32 planes are also slated for repainting. These aircraft are designated as “Air Force Two” when the vice president is aboard and are frequently used by the first lady and Cabinet secretaries for official travel.

A Break from the Kennedy-Era Design

The current light blue and white design has been in place since the Kennedy administration in the early 1960s. The iconic look was created by famed industrial designer Raymond Loewy at the request of President John F. Kennedy and has remained largely unchanged for more than six decades.

The shift to a darker blue with bold red and gold accents marks the most significant visual update to the presidential fleet in generations.

According to NewsNation, the first C-32 aircraft has already been repainted and is expected to be delivered to the Air Force within the next few months.

Work Underway in Texas

CBS News first reported on the repainting efforts. Contractor L3Harris is overseeing upgrades to the Air Force Two planes at its facility in Greenville, Texas. The broader VC-25B program — the long-delayed replacement effort for the current 747-based Air Force One aircraft — remains under development through Boeing.

The new VC-25B jets are designed to replace the aging presidential aircraft that have been in service since 1990. The modernization program includes upgraded communications systems, enhanced security features, and defensive capabilities intended to ensure continuity of government under any circumstances.

A Longstanding Proposal

The idea of changing Air Force One’s paint scheme is not new. During his first term, President Trump proposed replacing the light blue design with a darker navy base and bold red striping. At the time, he described the existing color scheme as outdated and expressed interest in a look that he said better reflected American strength and tradition.

The updated red, white, and dark blue palette aligns more closely with the American flag and mirrors the aesthetic often seen in Trump-branded properties and campaign materials.

While the aircraft’s mission capabilities and security features remain the primary focus of the modernization effort, the visual redesign ensures that the presidential fleet will look noticeably different when the new planes enter service.

The repainting of the C-32 fleet is expected to be completed first, with the new VC-25B aircraft anticipated to enter service later this decade, pending continued testing and production milestones.

Trump Announces 10% Global Tariff While Blasting SCOTUS Ruling

0
President Donald Trump signs Executive Orders, Monday, February 10, 2025, in the Oval Office. (Official White House photo by Abe McNatt)

President Donald Trump strongly criticised the Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision that ruled he does not have the authority to levy sweeping tariffs under a specific emergency powers law, saying he will pursue “alternatives” to tariffs under the emergency law.

“Other alternatives will now be used to replace the ones that the court incorrectly rejected,” Trump said during a White House press briefing Friday afternoon. “We have alternatives. Great alternatives. Could be more money. We’ll take in more money, and we’ll be a lot stronger for it. We’re taking in hundreds of billions of dollars. We’ll continue to do so.”

The president also announced he is imposing a 10% “global tariff” following the court’s decision.

“Today I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff under section 122 over and above our normal tariffs already being charged,” Trump said. “And we’re also initiating several section 301 and other investigations to protect our country from unfair trading practices of other countries and companies.”

The Supreme Court blocked Trump’s tariffs levied under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) in what amounts to a consequential test of the executive branch’s authority. 

Trump called the ruling “deeply disappointing,” saying he was “ashamed” of certain members of the court.

“I’m ashamed of certain members of the court, absolutely ashamed, for not having the courage to do what’s right for our country,” the president said. “In actuality, I was very modest in my ask of other countries and businesses because… I wanted to be very well-behaved.

“I didn’t want to do anything that would affect the decision of the court, because I understand the court. I understand how they are very easily swayed. I want to be a good boy. I have very effectively utilized tariffs over the past year to make America great again,” he said.

This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.

Supreme Court Rules On Trump Tariffs

The Supreme Court on Friday delivered a significant blow to President Donald Trump’s trade agenda, ruling that he cannot use a national emergency law to impose sweeping tariffs on most U.S. trading partners without clearer authorization from Congress.

In a 6–3 decision, the justices struck down Trump’s so-called “Liberation Day” tariffs, which included a 10% global import duty and higher “reciprocal” tariffs targeting certain nations. Trump has argued the policy was essential to protecting American industry and described it as “life or death” for the U.S. economy.

At the center of the case was Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a statute designed to give presidents broad authority to respond to “unusual and extraordinary threats” after declaring a national emergency.

In April, Trump declared the nation’s growing trade deficit a “national emergency,” and his administration cited that declaration as the legal foundation for imposing the tariffs.

Supporters of the policy argued the tariffs were necessary to counter unfair foreign trade practices and to defend American workers from decades of global economic imbalance. However, the Supreme Court ruled that IEEPA does not provide the president with unilateral power to impose tariffs on such a broad scale.

While the law allows presidents to “regulate…importation” during emergencies, it does not explicitly mention tariffs — a key point raised repeatedly during oral arguments held in November.

Several justices, including some appointed by Trump, questioned whether Congress intended IEEPA to serve as a tool for taxation-like powers, traditionally reserved for lawmakers.

Administration lawyers argued that regulating imports through tariffs is effectively the same as other emergency economic actions such as sanctions or embargoes. But the Court appeared unconvinced that the statute provides sufficient guardrails for such a sweeping policy.

The Supreme Court took up the case after multiple lower courts blocked the tariffs.

Earlier this year, the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled unanimously that Trump does not have “unbounded authority” under emergency law to impose tariffs. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld that decision, pressing the administration on why Trump relied on IEEPA rather than more specific tariff statutes passed by Congress.

Those laws typically include limits, timelines, and congressional oversight — restrictions the administration sought to bypass through emergency authority.

The Justice Department urged the Court to allow the tariffs to remain in place, warning that denying tariff authority under IEEPA could leave the United States vulnerable to foreign retaliation and without “effective defenses” in global trade disputes.

Trump has long maintained that persistent trade deficits represent a serious economic threat and that strong executive action is necessary when Congress fails to respond quickly.

The ruling represents not only a setback for Trump’s trade strategy but also a major decision defining the limits of presidential power in economic emergencies.

Report: Trump Advisor Warns ‘90% Chance’ Strike On Iran Is Coming

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)

A senior adviser to President Donald Trump is warning that U.S. military action against Iran may be imminent as diplomatic efforts appear to be faltering.

One senior adviser told Axios reporter Barak Ravid on Monday that there is a “90% chance” the United States could launch strikes within weeks.

“The boss is getting fed up. Some people around him warn him against going to war with Iran, but I think there is 90% chance we see kinetic action in the next few weeks,” the adviser said.

The comments come amid heightened tensions following three-hour talks in Geneva between Trump advisers Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. Both sides publicly stated that discussions “made progress,” though significant differences remain.

Vice President JD Vance echoed that assessment, signaling that while diplomacy has not collapsed, it may be nearing its limits.

Negotiations “went well” in some ways, Vance said, but “in other ways it was very clear that the president has set some red lines that the Iranians are not yet willing to actually acknowledge and work through.” He cautioned that diplomacy could soon have “reached its natural end.”

The administration has consistently maintained that Iran will not be permitted to obtain a nuclear weapon, a position widely supported by Republican lawmakers and national security hawks. Trump has repeatedly emphasized that Tehran must meet strict conditions or face serious consequences.

At the same time, U.S. military deployments in the region have accelerated. Two aircraft carriers, dozens of warships, and hundreds of fighter jets are being positioned across the Middle East. More than 150 cargo flights have reportedly delivered weapons systems and ammunition to support forces in the region.

According to Axios, a potential strike on Iran would likely unfold as a sustained and coordinated U.S.-Israeli effort. Sources familiar with planning discussions indicated that any operation would not be limited to nuclear facilities but could also target key regime assets.

While the president has continued to leave the door open to a negotiated solution, senior officials suggest patience is rapidly wearing thin.

On Tuesday, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the two sides reached a “general agreement on a number of guiding principles” and agreed to begin drafting text for a possible agreement during a meeting between the two countries, with plans to exchange drafts and schedule a third round of talks. 

“Good progress was made compared to the previous meeting,” he said, adding that while drafting would slow the process, “at least the path has started.”

Report: DHS Spokeswoman To Leave Trump Admin.

0
The White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin is leaving the Trump administration, Fox News has reported.

McLaughlin, who has acted as one of the administration’s leading vocal defenders of President Trump’s immigration enforcement policies, is set to leave the administration next week. 

Politico reports:

A former top communications aide to Vivek Ramaswamy’s 2024 presidential campaign and Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine, McLaughlin started planning to leave in December but delayed her departure amid the aftermath of the Renee Good and Alex Pretti shootings, according to the people briefed on her exit. (They were granted anonymity to speak about internal personnel matters.) In the instance of Good, McLaughlin was quick to characterize her actions as an example of “domestic terrorism.

It’s unclear what she will do next but asked by the paper if she would ever run for office if she returned to Cincinnati, McLaughlin, who’s married to GOP consultant Ben Yoho, said she “wouldn’t rule anything out.”

This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.

Former White House Adviser Reveals Trump Previously Offered To Fund White House Ballroom Expansion Under Obama

3

Former White House adviser David Axelrod revealed this week that President Trump once offered to personally fund a new White House ballroom during the Obama administration — an offer that, at the time, generated little controversy.

In an interview with The New York Times published Tuesday, Axelrod said Trump first reached out in the aftermath of the 2010 BP oil spill cleanup. According to Axelrod, Trump proposed paying for a new space to host state dinners and gatherings for world leaders, noting that such events were often held in temporary outdoor tents.

Axelrod recalled Trump saying, “I build ballrooms, I build the greatest — you can ask anybody, my ballrooms are the greatest ballrooms.”

Trump added, “You have these state dinners, and you have them in these shitty little tents out in the backyard. Let me build a modular ballroom that you can assemble when you have state dinners, so it’ll look good,” according to Axelrod.

At the time, Axelrod said he told Trump he would pass the proposal along to the appropriate White House official.

“I said: ‘Well, that’s really nice of you. I’m going to pass this on to the social secretary and I’ll have her call you,’” Axelrod told The Times, adding, “I did. She didn’t.”

The idea ultimately went nowhere.

Years later, however, Trump moved forward with plans for a permanent White House ballroom — a project designed to accommodate significantly more guests and modernize state functions. The $400 million initiative, funded primarily by private donors, has drawn fierce criticism from Democratic lawmakers, pundits, and former Obama-era officials after demolition work began on part of the East Wing late last year.

Axelrod himself sharply criticized the project in a post on X.

“This image of the East Wing of the White House is a metaphor for broader, reckless destruction,” he wrote. “The ballroom that will go up there will be a gaudy monument to vanity, corruption and excess. For anyone who has worked at the WH, or cares about its rich history, it’s a gut punch.”

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former first lady Michelle Obama, and several historic preservation groups have echoed similar concerns.

Supporters of the project, however, point out that Trump’s original offer to build a ballroom during the Obama years was met with indifference rather than outrage — raising questions about whether the current backlash is driven more by politics than preservation.

The Trump administration has defended the project as a long-overdue upgrade that will eliminate the need for temporary outdoor structures and enhance the White House’s ability to host major diplomatic events. Officials have repeatedly described the ballroom as a “gift” to the American people.

Trump underscored that message last month on Truth Social.

“All of the Structural Steel, Windows, Doors, A.C./Heating Equipment, Marble, Stone, Precast Concrete, Bulletproof Windows and Glass, Anti-Drone Roofing, and much more, has been ordered (or is ready to be), and there is no practical or reasonable way to go back. IT IS TOO LATE! …” he wrote.

“Congress never tried, or wanted, to stop the Ballroom Project! Everyone knew what was taking place at the White House — A great, big, beautiful gift to the United States of America!” he added.

Trump Praises Late Civil Rights Icon Rev. Jesse Jackson

0
By Lorie Shaull from St Paul, United States - Jesse Jackson at Hyatt Regency McCormick Place Thursday Aug. 22, 2024 in Chicago, CC BY 2.0,

The nation mourns an icon…

President Donald Trump reacted to the news of the death of Rev. Jesse Jackson in a Tuesday Truth Social post.

Trump said he knew Jackson “well” and described the 84-year-old civil rights leader as “a good man.”

“The Reverend Jesse Jackson is Dead at 84. I knew him well, long before becoming President. He was a good man, with lots of personality, grit, and “street smarts.” He was very gregarious – Someone who truly loved people!” the president said in the post.

“Despite the fact that I am falsely and consistently called a Racist by the Scoundrels and Lunatics on the Radical Left, Democrats ALL, it was always my pleasure to help Jesse along the way,” Trump continued.

“I provided office space for him and his Rainbow Coalition, for years, in the Trump Building at 40 Wall Street; Responded to his request for help in getting CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM passed and signed, when no other President would even try; Single handedly pushed and passed long term funding for Historically Black Colleges & Universities (HBCUs), which Jesse loved, but also, which other Presidents would not do; Responded to Jesse’s support for Opportunity Zones, the single most successful economic development package yet approved for Black business men/women, and much more,” the president added.

“Jesse was a force of nature like few others before him. He had much to do with the Election, without acknowledgment or credit, of Barack Hussein Obama, a man who Jesse could not stand. He loved his family greatly, and to them I send my deepest sympathies and condolences. Jesse will be missed!” Trump concluded.

Trump Vows Death Penalty For Nancy Guthrie Kidnappers

1

President Donald Trump said Monday that he would direct the Department of Justice to pursue the death penalty against those responsible for kidnapping Nancy Guthrie if the 84-year-old mother of “Today” show co-anchor Savannah Guthrie is found dead.

In a brief phone interview with the New York Post, Trump made clear that the consequences would be “very, very severe — the most severe” if the abductors harm her. When asked directly whether the Justice Department would seek capital punishment in the case, the president responded, “The most, yeah — that’s true.”

Guthrie was last seen on the night of Jan. 31 at her home outside Tucson, Arizona. She was reported missing the following day, and investigators believe she was taken against her will in what authorities are treating as a kidnapping.

The FBI is offering a reward of up to $100,000 for information leading to her location and/or the arrest and conviction of those involved. Surveillance images captured by Guthrie’s doorbell camera show a suspect described as a man standing between 5-foot-9 and 5-foot-10 with an average build. In footage released last week, the individual is seen wearing dark gloves, sweatpants, and a jacket, and carrying a black 25-liter Ozark Trail Hiker Pack backpack.

The case has drawn national attention, not only because of the victim’s age but also because of her daughter’s public profile. Savannah Guthrie has been a longtime journalist and co-anchor of NBC’s “Today” show.

President Trump personally reached out to Savannah Guthrie on Feb. 4 to offer support and underscore the federal government’s commitment to resolving the case. He later stated that he directed “ALL Federal Law Enforcement to be at the family’s, and Local Law Enforcement’s, complete disposal, IMMEDIATELY. We are deploying all resources to get her mother home safely.”

On Friday, Trump said he believes “progress has been made” in the investigation.

Savannah Guthrie released a video Sunday urging anyone with information to come forward, saying, “it is never too late to do the right thing, and we are here.”

As the investigation continues, federal and local authorities remain engaged in what the president has described as a full-scale effort to bring Nancy Guthrie home safely and hold those responsible accountable.

Massie Slams DOJ, Trump Administration Over Epstein Files: ‘This Is the Epstein Administration’

3

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) delivered sharp criticism of President Donald Trump and Attorney General Pam Bondi during a fiery appearance Sunday on ABC’s This Week, accusing the administration of failing to deliver real transparency on the Jeffrey Epstein files.

Speaking with host Martha Raddatz, Massie — one of the most outspoken Republicans pushing for full disclosure of Epstein-related records — questioned Bondi’s performance during last week’s high-profile House Judiciary hearing.

“She came with a book full of insults, one for each congressperson,” Massie said. “She obviously had one for me. And, you know, I’ve been there when [former AG] Merrick Garland was there. Obviously, politically, I don’t agree with him, but he performed much better in terms of at least not looking bad. And, unfortunately, we didn’t get the answers we wanted about the Epstein Files Transparency Act from her.”

Massie also took aim at Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche over a letter sent Saturday claiming the Department of Justice has now produced “all” Epstein files.

“I know the DOJ wants to say they’re done with this document production,” Massie said. “The problem is they’ve taken down documents before we were able to go over to the DOJ and look at the unredacted versions. They took down some of the most significant documents. Two of them involving Virginia Giuffre’s case and other things, the picture of Epstein at — in a room where it’s got CIA written on the boxes. That’s been taken down. We want to be able to look at all these files. They can’t keep those documents down after they’ve already produced them.”

New Report Raises Questions About DOJ’s “Full Release” Claim

Massie’s concerns come as a new investigation by Channel 4 News is raising fresh doubts about whether the Justice Department has truly released the full Epstein archive.

According to internal emails reviewed by the broadcaster, federal investigators expected to process between 20 and 40 terabytes of data seized from Epstein’s properties — including his Florida mansion, New York townhouse, and private island. Other early-stage emails referenced totals as high as 50 terabytes.

In one internal email from 2025, officials reportedly said they were “looking at approximately 14.6 terabytes of archived data.”

By contrast, Channel 4 noted that the most recent release of roughly 3.5 million documents amounted to just over 300GB — which the outlet said represents only about 2% of the data investigators were discussing.

“They claimed that 6 million pages were identified, including duplicates — they released over 3 million,” Channel 4’s U.S. editor Asnushka Asthana said. “Both those numbers are tiny compared to the amount collected according to today’s emails.”

One investigator described the data dump as chaotic and incomplete:

“Imagine if we had seized the papers from approximately 100,000 filing cabinets. Then that all just got dumped in one big pile… And then any of those documents that was larger than 100 pages couldn’t be opened. That’s what we’ve got.”

Massie Turns Fire on Trump

Raddatz closed the interview by asking Massie directly about President Trump, who has thrown his support behind Massie’s primary challenger, Ed Gallrein, and has repeatedly attacked the Kentucky congressman over his push for transparency.

Massie did not hold back.

“Look, this is about the Epstein class, the people who are funding the attacks against me,” Massie said. “They may or may not be implicated in these files, but they were certainly rubbing shoulders with the people who are in these files. They’re billionaires who are friends with these people. And that’s what I’m up against in Washington, D.C. Donald Trump told us that even though, you know, he had dinner with these kinds of people in New York City and West Palm Beach, that he would be transparent. But he’s not. He’s still in with the Epstein class. This is the Epstein administration, and they’re attacking me for trying to get these files released.”

Watch:

Bondi Stands By DOJ Position

Despite the mounting scrutiny, Bondi has insisted the Justice Department has complied fully with the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

In a February 14 letter to lawmakers, she stated that the department had “released all ‘records, documents, communications and investigative materials’” in its possession, along with a list of “all government officials and politically exposed persons” referenced in the released materials.