Duncan Lock, Dflock, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons
The Supreme Court will not get involved.
On Monday, the Supreme Court declined to revive Michael Cohen’s lawsuit seeking damages for retaliation during his prison sentence.
Cohen’s lawsuit comes after the former Trump “fixer” began serving his sentence for federal election finance crimes during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Due to health reasons that would be exacerbated by the virus, Cohen’s prison term was furloughed, and he was temporarily sent to home confinement.
Officials later ordered him back to prison after he raised issue with a release condition asking him to waive his ability to criticize then-President Trump
A federal judge ruled to release Cohen again and said the former president’s ex-fixer suffered unconstitutional retaliation for wanting to critique Trump on social media and in a book. However, the judge later dismissed Cohen’s claim for damages over the incident.
“As it stands, this case represents the principle that presidents and their subordinates can lock away critics of the executive without consequence,” Cohen wrote in his request for the justices to hear his case.
Trump attorney Alina Habba said in the former president’s brief to the court that Cohen’s complaint is “entirely devoid of merit.” She also added a question over whether Cohen’s claim is barred by presidential immunity, which the justices declined to weigh.
Cohen testified as a star witness in the Manhattan district attorney’s criminal case against his former boss, which ended in a conviction in May, and took the stand in an earlier civil fraud trial against Trump and his business.
In a previous interview with The Hill, Cohen said his appeal to the justices was about deterrence. His experience, he said, was “merely a practice run” for the sweeping retribution Trump has vowed in a potential second term.
“Donald has opened up a Pandora’s box for future Trump 2.0s acting in the same autocratic manner,” Cohen said. “This writ of certiorari will be part of the process that would prevent any other U.S. citizen ever from being imprisoned because they refused to waive their First Amendment right or because they express criticism.”
The type of relief Cohen sought against Trump, various officials involved and the federal government itself for violating his constitutional rights is known as a Bivens claim. Over the past 44 years, the Supreme Court has turned away a dozen such lawsuits – making the ex-fixer’s request an uphill fight.
This is a breaking news story. Click refresh for the latest updates.
Vice President JD Vance reportedly opened a private channel to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign in 2016, urging her team to change course in the Midwest as Donald Trump closed in on the White House.
The previously unreported episode adds a striking new chapter to Vance’s well-known evolution from a fierce Trump critic into the president’s running mate and one of the most prominent figures in the MAGA movement.
According to a new Vanity Fair profile by Chris Whipple, Vance repeatedly asked an intermediary connected to Clinton’s campaign to put him in touch with Jake Sullivan, who was serving as one of Clinton’s senior policy advisers.
The intermediary recalled Vance saying, “I hate Hillary. But I hate Trump more.”
A Midwestern Warning Clinton Did Not Heed
Vance reportedly believed Clinton was in danger of losing the industrial Midwest and wanted her to make an urgent appeal to voters in Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.
The source told Vanity Fair that Vance wanted Clinton to spend less time campaigning with celebrities and more time confronting the anger surrounding her 2002 vote to authorize military force in Iraq. His argument centered on working-class communities that had sent family members to war and felt forgotten by national leaders.
Vanity Fair reported that Vance eventually spoke directly with Sullivan roughly six weeks before Election Day.
A second source close to Sullivan confirmed that a conversation occurred but offered a narrower recollection. That person did not remember Vance laying out a broader strategy for the so-called Blue Wall states. The source did recall Vance pressing Clinton’s team to repair the damage from her “basket of deplorables” remark about Trump supporters and warning that she needed to sharpen her focus.
Clinton ultimately lost Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania—three states Democrats had carried in every presidential election since at least 1992. Trump captured all three by narrow margins, breaking through the Democratic firewall and winning the presidency.
Vance’s Office Pushes Back
Vance spokesman Taylor Van Kirk disputed Vanity Fair’s description of the outreach.
Van Kirk said Vance did not work for either campaign and was encouraging politicians in both parties to pay attention to working-class communities like his hometown of Middletown, Ohio. The spokesperson said the vice president’s office “100 percent reject[s]” the suggestion that his purpose was to help Clinton win.
The report does not claim that Vance formally joined Clinton’s campaign or held any official role. Its central allegation is that he privately delivered political advice to a senior Clinton adviser because he wanted Trump defeated—a characterization his office denies.
From Never Trump To Trump’s No. 2
Vance’s opposition to Trump in 2016 was never a secret. While promoting his bestselling memoir, Hillbilly Elegy, he publicly called himself a “Never Trump guy,” described Trump as unfit for office and ultimately voted for independent conservative Evan McMullin rather than Trump or Clinton.
His position changed in the years that followed. As Vance entered the 2022 Ohio Senate race, he apologized for his earlier attacks and aligned himself with Trump’s political movement. Trump endorsed him in a crowded Republican primary, Vance won the Senate seat, and Trump selected him as his running mate in 2024.
The new account is especially notable because Vance’s reported advice identified the very weakness that helped decide the 2016 election: Clinton’s failure to hold key Midwestern states. It also reveals just how far the future vice president may have been willing to go at the time to stop the man whose administration he now helps lead.
Still, the most explosive interpretation remains contested. Vanity Fair’s sources portray Vance as trying to help Clinton defeat Trump. Vance’s team portrays the conversation as a bipartisan plea for Washington to stop ignoring working-class America.
Vanity Fair’s account, including confirmation from a second source that Vance and Sullivan spoke, offers the clearest description yet of the distance between Vance’s 2016 politics and his role in the Trump White House today.
Duncan Lock, Dflock, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons
On Monday, the Supreme Court declined to take up a challenge by social platform X, formerly known as Twitter, to court rulings that forced the platform to turn over data on former President Trump’s account to special counsel Jack Smith.
Early last year, Smith obtained a secret warrant for Trump’s account on X, where Trump posted constantly during his White House term, as part of prosecutors’ federal election interference investigation.
X was prohibited from informing the former president about the warrant. It only became public last summer, after Trump was charged with four felonies in the case. He pleaded not guilty.
The company challenged the order, arguing the records were potentially covered by executive privilege and not being able to tell Trump violated the First Amendment. Court filings show X at one point was fined $350,000 for not timely turning over Trump’s data.
X brought its fight to the Supreme Court, hoping to prevent the process from happening again, insisting most similar challenges never reach the high court and the case was a “rare opportunity” to review the issue.
“If the Court does not grant this petition, it could be decades (if ever) before it gets another clean vehicle to resolve the important and recurring questions presented,” X wrote in its petition.
The Supreme Court declined to take up X’s appeal in a brief, unsigned order.
“If review of the underlying legal issues were ever warranted, the Court should await a live case in which the issues are concretely presented,” prosecutors wrote in court filings.
By The White House - https://www.flickr.com/photos/202101414@N05/54346096651/, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=160407812
Few political advisers in modern American politics have maintained influence as persistently as Stephen Miller. Long known as the architect behind many of President Donald Trump’s most hardline immigration policies, Miller is once again at the center of intense political scrutiny.
New reports published by The Daily Beast and widely circulated through media outlets including AOL News describe what insiders characterize as a carefully managed effort by Miller to preserve — and potentially expand — his political influence within the Trump movement.
According to those reports, Miller has reportedly reduced his public profile while continuing to exercise substantial behind-the-scenes control over immigration strategy and White House operations. Critics describe the effort as a “shadow influence campaign,” while allies argue he remains one of the administration’s most effective policy strategists.
The story has reignited broader questions about executive power, political loyalty networks, and the role of unelected advisers in shaping federal policy.
The Reports Behind “Stephen Miller’s Secret Plot to Cling on to Power”
The current controversy emerged after investigative reporting suggested Miller had intentionally stepped back from public visibility while maintaining substantial operational authority behind the scenes.
According to reporting cited by The Daily Beast’s PunchUp investigations unit, several senior administration officials claimed Miller’s apparent “retreat” from media appearances was strategic rather than accidental.
Claims Reported by Media Outlets
The reports allege that:
Miller continues participating in high-level immigration discussions
He maintains influence over Department of Homeland Security operations
Public-facing responsibilities have shifted toward other officials
Internal strategy meetings reportedly still center around Miller’s priorities
Political allies remain embedded across federal agencies
Importantly, many of these claims rely on anonymous sources familiar with internal discussions. No public evidence has emerged proving unlawful conduct or formal attempts to bypass constitutional processes.
The Department of Homeland Security publicly denied suggestions of internal conflict, stating officials work collaboratively to implement administration priorities.
The “Quiet Power” Strategy
One of the most discussed aspects of the latest reporting is the idea that Miller intentionally reduced his public visibility.
Political analysts say this approach reflects a broader strategy often used by influential White House advisers: remain operationally powerful while avoiding media backlash.
Reported Strategic Changes
Public Role
Behind-the-Scenes Activity
Fewer TV appearances
Continued policy meetings
Reduced public interviews
Coordination with immigration officials
Lower social media profile
Internal strategy influence
Delegated public messaging
Maintained advisory authority
Critics argue the strategy allows controversial policy initiatives to continue without attracting the same level of public scrutiny.
Supporters counter that Miller’s reduced visibility merely reflects an effort to focus on operational efficiency rather than cable news appearances.
The Role of Tom Homan and DHS Leadership
Several reports suggest Miller’s influence now overlaps significantly with other immigration hardliners, including Tom Homan.
Some insiders described Miller and Homan as operating “in lockstep” on immigration strategy.
The reports also referenced tensions surrounding leadership appointments within DHS and ICE.
Key Issues Reportedly Under Debate
ICE leadership succession
Deportation targets
Enforcement visibility
Recruitment and training standards
Public communications strategy
However, official government statements have rejected narratives of dysfunction or internal rivalry.
Facts vs. Analysis
To maintain clarity, it is important to separate verified reporting from interpretation.
Verified Facts
Stephen Miller remains an influential Trump adviser
He has played a major role in immigration policy since 2016
Multiple outlets reported he reduced public appearances
Administration officials confirmed continued coordination between Miller and DHS leadership
Claims of a “secret plot” are interpretive descriptions, not legal findings
Allegations about power consolidation rely heavily on anonymous sourcing
Assertions about long-term political ambitions remain speculative
No evidence has emerged suggesting unconstitutional activity
This distinction matters because politically charged headlines often blur the line between factual reporting and analytical framing.
Conclusion
The debate surrounding Miller’s role reflects broader tensions inside modern American politics — especially over immigration, executive authority, and the growing role of influential advisers operating outside the public spotlight.
Verified reporting confirms that Miller remains deeply involved in immigration policy discussions and maintains substantial influence within Trump-aligned political circles.
As the political landscape continues to evolve heading into the final stretch of another highly contested election cycle, Miller’s growing influence is likely to remain under intense scrutiny from supporters, critics, and media organizations alike.
For now, one thing remains clear: despite reducing his public profile, Stephen Miller remains one of the most consequential — and controversial — political strategists in Washington.
This article originally appeared on American Liberty News. Republished with permission.
Looking east towards 6th Avenue along north (48th Street) side of Fox News building on a snowy afternoon. [Photo Credit: Jim.henderson, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons]
Fox News has invited Donald Trump and Kamala Harris to participate in another debate before Americans cast their ballots.
Fox has offered the candidates the opportunity to debate each other in Pennsylvania on two potential dates: Thursday, Oct. 24 or Sunday, Oct. 27. Fox News anchors Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum would moderate the proposed debate.
The network claimed in a statement addressed to the Trump and Harris campaign that the final debate would be an “opportunity for each candidate to make his or her closing arguments” before November. And they referenced a New York Times op-ed which called for Harris to debate on Fox News.
“As made clear in The New York Times on Monday: ‘Harris Should Offer to Debate Trump Again – On Fox’ — this would present an opportunity for each candidate to make his or her closing argument,” said Fox News Media president and executive editor Jay Wallace in a statement.
Wallace added, “We’re including proposed criteria and format, which mirror those of the CNN & ABC debates; as well as data on our broad audience reach. We appreciate your consideration and look forward to the opportunity to foster informed political dialogue at this pivotal moment for our nation.”
The rules proposed by Fox states that it will mute a candidate’s microphone when the time belongs to the another candidate. Moreover, Trump and Harris will not be permitted to interact with their campaign staff during commercial breaks
CNN has offered to host another debate on Oct. 23 — with the Harris campaign accepting the offer.
By David Shankbone - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=3937757
Hollywood liberal Rosie O’Donnell is once again taking aim at President Donald Trump after he renewed his call to revoke her U.S. citizenship.
O’Donnell, who left the country in March to settle in Ireland, addressed Trump’s comments Thursday on her Substack. She insisted that the Constitution protects her from such action.
“He can’t do that because it’s against the Constitution, and even the Supreme Court has not given him the right to do that … he’s not allowed to do that, the only way you’re allowed to take away someone’s citizenship is if they renounce it themselves, and I will never renounce my American citizenship,” O’Donnell said. “I am a very proud citizen of the United States.”
The comedian added that she is working toward Irish citizenship and hopes to enjoy dual status.
“I am also getting my citizenship here so I can have dual citizenship in Ireland and the United States because I enjoy living here. It’s very peaceful. I love the politics of the country. I love the people and their generous hearts and spirit. And it’s been very good for my daughter. But I still want to maintain my citizenship in the United States. My children are there. I will be there visiting and go to see them. And I have the freedom to do that, as does every American citizen.”
President Trump had reignited the feud Wednesday, writing on Truth Social:
“As previously mentioned, we are giving serious thought to taking away Rosie O’Donnell’s Citizenship. She is not a Great American and is, in my opinion, incapable of being so!”
O’Donnell, for her part, accused Trump of using her as a distraction from unrelated scandals.
She also lashed out at Trump personally, continuing her years-long pattern of hostility:
“The president of the USA has always hated the fact that I see him for who he is — a criminal con man sexual abusing liar out to harm our nation to serve himself,” she wrote. “This is why I moved to Ireland — he is a dangerous old soulless man with dementia who lacks empathy compassion and basic humanity.”
This is not the first time the two have sparred. Their public back-and-forth dates back nearly two decades, with O’Donnell regularly launching harsh attacks at Trump and his supporters.
Back in March, when O’Donnell first announced her move abroad, Trump responded pointedly on Truth Social:
“Because of the fact that Rosie O’Donnell is not in the best interests of our Great Country, I am giving serious consideration to taking away her Citizenship. She is a Threat to Humanity, and should remain in the wonderful Country of Ireland, if they want her. GOD BLESS AMERICA!”
A president is not allowed to strip the citizenship of someone born in the United States under the Constitution. O’Donnell, who was born in New York, has her citizenship protected by the 14th Amendment.
In an unexpected move, President Trump has endorsed Sen. Mike Rounds for re-election despite vowing to “never endorse” him again years ago.
Trump previously endorsed Rounds in 2020, but later eviscerated the senator in 2022 after Rounds appeared on ABC’s “This Week” and described the 2020 election as “fair.”
Senator Mike Rounds (@RoundsforSenate) continues to deliver for South Dakota! Mike is working hard for our incredible Farmers and he is strong on Trade, Military, our Vets, and the Second Amendment. Mike has my Complete and Total Endorsement! #SDSenhttps://t.co/qM8LsXR9tN
“‘Senator’ Mike Rounds of the Great State of South Dakota just went woke on the Fraudulent Presidential Election of 2020,” Trump declared at the beginning of a lengthy statement in January 2022.
NEW!
President Donald J. Trump:
““Senator” Mike Rounds of the Great State of South Dakota just went woke on the Fraudulent Presidential Election of 2020. He made a statement this weekend on ABC Fake News, that despite massive evidence to the contrary, including much of it… pic.twitter.com/VXFglmh4gX
“Even though his election will not be coming up for 5 years, I will never endorse this jerk again,” Trump later said in the statement.
“The Radical Left Democrats and RINOS, like ‘Senator’ Mike Rounds, do not make it easy for our Country to succeed. He is a weak and ineffective leader, and I hereby firmly pledge that he will never receive my endorsement again!” Trump asserted in that statement several years ago.
But in a surprising turnaround, President Trump is now endorsing Rounds.
In a Monday Truth Social post, the President called the South Dakota Senator “An America First Patriot,” declaring, “Mike Rounds has my Complete and Total Endorsement for Re-Election – HE WILL NEVER LET YOU DOWN!”
Sen. Rounds responded to Trump, thanking him for the endorsement.
A prominent Oklahoma pastor who built his national profile as a staunch Trump ally and conservative Christian activist has abruptly suspended his campaign for Congress after reports revealed intimate text exchanges with a former beauty queen connected to his campaign.
Jackson Lahmeyer, founder of the pro-Trump organization Pastors for Trump, announced he was ending his bid for Oklahoma’s 1st Congressional District following reports detailing flirtatious messages between him and former Miss Oklahoma USA Caitlin Simmons Key, who worked as a fundraiser for his campaign.
The controversy quickly exposed an uncomfortable contradiction for a candidate who has spent years promoting conservative family values while presenting himself as a moral voice within the MAGA movement.
Lahmeyer admitted he had “crossed a boundary line through text messaging” but denied having a physical affair. He said he and his wife had already addressed the matter through counseling and prayer.
“I decided to choose my wife over my ambition,” Lahmeyer told reporters after announcing his withdrawal.
The political consequences were swift.
President Donald Trump, who had previously endorsed Lahmeyer and praised him as a “MAGA Warrior,” publicly abandoned the pastor and shifted his support to Oklahoma state Rep. Mark Tedford.
While Trump thanked Lahmeyer for his loyalty and years of support, he made clear that Tedford would now carry the America First banner in the race.
Lahmeyer insists his decision to leave the race was made before Trump’s endorsement switch became public. Still, the timing underscored how quickly political fortunes can change when personal scandals collide with public campaigns.
For years, Lahmeyer cultivated close ties to the Trump movement. His Tulsa church hosted appearances from Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, and he became a nationally recognized evangelical voice defending Trump’s agenda. He also promoted claims of widespread voter fraud following the 2020 election and worked to mobilize evangelical voters during Trump’s 2024 campaign.
Now, the pastor who built his reputation on faith, family values, and political activism finds himself stepping away from public office after failing to meet the standards he routinely championed.
His exit effectively clears the path for Tedford to become the Republican nominee in the race to replace outgoing Rep. Kevin Hern, who is running for the U.S. Senate.
This article originally appeared on Election Watch News. It is republished with permission. To receive more reporting and analysis from Election Watch News, subscribe by clicking here.
Trump is narrowing down his search for his next running mate…
During a weekend interview, former President Donald Trump said he has two potential candidates in mind.
Trump mentioned Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) and South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem when asked during a Sunday interview with Maria Bartiromo
“Well, I have a lot of good people. We have a lot of really good people,” Trump said. “I have a lot of good ideas, but I haven’t — and there’s no reason to do that quickly.”
“I speak to everybody,” he said. “I called Tim Scott … and I said, ‘you’re a much better candidate for me than you are for yourself.’ When I watched Tim, he was fine, he was good, but he was very low-key, et cetera, et cetera.”
However, Trump admitted he’s still a ways off from making any final decisions on a running mate. The GOP frontrunner told Bartiromo that his priority in choosing a running mate will be choosing “someone who would be a good president.”
“I watched him in the last week defending me and sticking up for me and fighting for me,” he continued. “I said, man, I said, ‘you’re a much better person for me than you are for yourself’, because, for himself, he was low-key. For me, he’s been a real tiger. He’s been incredible. And others have too.”
Trump brings up Tim Scott and Kristi Noem when asked about his pick for Vice President
“Kristi Noem has been incredible fighting for me,” Trump added. “She said, I’d never run against him because I can’t beat him. That was a very nice thing to say.”
On Monday, former Trump senior adviser Kellyanne Conway advised the President to consider choosing a person of color for VP during an op-ed published in The New York Times.
“With a crisis on the border, economic dissatisfaction, fears about crime, a parents’ rights renaissance and multiple wars and threats across the globe, Mr. Trump’s deputy must be able to navigate chaos and challenges at home and abroad,” Conway wrote.
“Taking all of this into consideration, if I were advising Mr. Trump, I would suggest he choose a person of color as his running mate, depending on vetting of all possibilities and satisfaction of procedural issues like dual residency in Florida,” Conway wrote. “Not for identity politics a la the Democrats, but as an equal helping to lead an America First movement that includes more union workers, independents, first-time voters, veterans, Hispanics, Asian Americans and African Americans.”
Conway listed Sen. Tim Scott, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), and Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.) among the potential options.
This article originally appeared on American Liberty News. Republished with permission.
FLOTUS at Fayetteville, N.C. -The Arts Center speech
Official White House Photo by Joyce N. Boghosian
There will not be another Obama in the White House any time soon…
Despite rumors that former First Lady Michelle Obama is eyeing her own bid for the Presidency, her office is quashing those claims once and for all.
“As former first Lady Michelle Obama has expressed several times over the years, she will not be running for president,” Crystal Carson, the director of communications for Obama’s office, said in a statement provided to ITK on Tuesday.
Obama “supports President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris’ re-election campaign,” Carson said.
The statement rejecting any chance of Obama attempting a return to the White House as president, first reported by NBC News, comes after Republicans, including Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (Ga.), Sen. Ted Cruz (Texas) and former presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, publicly floated the evidence-free idea that the former first lady could replace Biden on the ballot in November.
Commentators have also touted Obama as the “best chance” for Democrats to retain the White House in a potential matchup against former President Trump.
However, despite the Left’s calls for Obama to consider running for public office, she has adamantly tamped down the speculation.
“There are so many ways to improve this country and build a better world, and I keep doing plenty of them, from working with young people to helping families lead healthier lives,” Obama, who founded the voter registration and engagement organization When We All Vote in 2018, said at the time.
“But sitting behind the desk in the Oval Office will never be one of them. It’s just not for me,” she said.
