Minnesota state Sen. Nicole Mitchell (D) said that she will resign after being convicted last week on two felony charges.
Nicole Mitchell was convicted of felony first-degree burglary and possession of burglary or theft tools for breaking into her stepmother Carol Mitchell’s Minnesota home in April 2024.
Nicole Mitchell pleaded not guilty, and during the trial, her defense argued that she was at the home to check on her stepmother, who lives with Alzheimer’s.
Nicole Mitchell’s stepmother Carol Mitchell reportedly took the stand, saying that she felt “extremely violated” after finding Nicole Mitchell in her home.
Minnesota Senate Majority Leader Erin Murphy said Nicole Mitchell “has gotten the due process she is entitled to and was convicted by a jury of her peers.”
“With the clarity brought by the resolution of this case, the Senate DFL Caucus will continue to focus on issues that improve the lives of Minnesota families and communities,” Murphy said.
GOPSenate Minority Leader Mark Johnson criticized her decision to not resign immediately and blamed Democrats for “refusing to hold her accountable during session.”His caucus tried and failed to expel Mitchell from the chamber in the wake of the charges.
“Senator Mitchell was convicted of two felonies; she doesn’t get to give the Senate two weeks’ notice. Democrats shielded Mitchell for 15 months to protect their political power, but a jury needed just three hours to confirm what was already clear: she shouldn’t be a senator,” he said in a statement.
Gov. Tim Walz’s office is expected to announce details about a special election after Nicole Mitchell’s resignation. There is another special election set for September to fill a vacancy left by former House Speaker Melissa Hortman’s politically-motivated assassination.
Duncan Lock, Dflock, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons
On Monday, Ghislaine Maxwell, the longtime accomplice of Jeffrey Epstein, called on the Supreme Court to overturn her sex trafficking conviction.
“We are appealing not only to the Supreme Court but to the President himself to recognize how profoundly unjust it is to scapegoat Ghislaine Maxwell for Epstein’s crimes, especially when the government promised she would not be prosecuted,” attorney David Oscar Markus said in a statement.
Maxwell’s attorney argues her conviction violates a nonprosecution agreement Epstein signed with federal prosecutors. The appeal turns on the scope of the 2007 deal, which let Epstein avoid federal charges for pleading guilty to state-level sex crimes in Florida and serving 18 months in prison.
The deal was signed by the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Florida. Lower courts ruled the deal only covers that district and doesn’t apply to federal prosecutors in New York, where Maxwell was sentenced to 20 years in prison for aiding Epstein in abusing underage girls.
“Rather than grapple with the core principles of plea agreements, the government tries to distract by reciting a lurid and irrelevant account of Jeffrey Epstein’s misconduct,” Markus wrote in the new brief.
“But this case is about what the government promised, not what Epstein did.”
The new statement came as Maxwell made her final plea to the Supreme Court on Monday before the justices decide whether to take up her case. Maxwell filed the appeal in April, and the justices are poised to consider it upon returning from their summer recess.
The Justice Department has so far opposed Maxwell’s Supreme Court appeal.
Markus’s latest comments mark his most direct suggestion yet of Trump intervening. Markus said Friday he hadn’t spoken to the president yet about a pardon and “we’re going to take one day at a time.”
Trump has punted on whether he would pardon Maxwell. Trump said Monday that “I’m allowed to give her” a pardon, but “nobody’s approached me.”
“I’m allowed to give her a pardon,” Trump insisted, repeating a claim he made on his way to Scotland on Friday. “Nobody has approached me with it or asked me about it. It’s in the news about that, that aspect of it. But right now it would be inappropriate to talk about it.”
The Justice Department has filed an official complaint alleging misconduct by US District Court Chief Judge James Boasberg.
The complaint, which was directed by AG Pam Bondi and reviewed by Fox News, was written by Attorney General Pam Bondi’s Chief of Staff Chad Mizelle and addressed to the Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Sri Srinivasan.
Today at my direction, @TheJusticeDept filed a misconduct complaint against U.S. District Court Chief Judge James Boasberg for making improper public comments about President Trump and his Administration.
These comments have undermined the integrity of the judiciary, and we will…
— Attorney General Pamela Bondi (@AGPamBondi) July 28, 2025
“The Department of Justice respectfully submits this complaint alleging misconduct by U.S. District Court Chief Judge James E. Boasberg for making improper public comments about President Donald J. Trump to the Chief Justice of the United States and other federal judges that have undermined the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary,” says Mr. Mizelle.
Judge Boasberg is presiding over a high-profile case involving the deportation of several migrants to El Salvador and has talked about holding DOJ lawyers in contempt because of his assertion that his order to turn airborne planes around was not followed. President Trump has also made critical comments about Judge Boasberg.
The complaint details two occasions on which Judge Boasberg made comments that the Justice Department alleges undermine the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.
“On March 11, 2025, Judge Boasberg attended a session of the Judicial Conference of the United States, which exists to discuss administrative matters like budgets, security, and facilities. While there, Judge Boasberg attempted to improperly influence Chief Justice Roberts and roughly two dozen other federal judges by straying from the traditional topics to express his belief that the Trump Administration would “disregard rulings of federal courts” and trigger “a constitutional crisis.” Although his comments would be inappropriate even if they had some basis, they were even worse because Judge Boasberg had no basis—the Trump Administration has always complied with all court orders. Nor did Judge Boasberg identify any purported violations of court orders to justify his unprecedented predictions.”
“Within days of those statements, Judge Boasberg began acting on his preconceived belief that the Trump Administration would not follow court orders. First, although he lacked authority to do so, he issued a temporary restraining order preventing the Government from removing violent Tren de Aragua terrorists, which the Supreme Court summarily vacated.
“Taken together, Judge Boasberg’s words and deeds violate Canons of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, and, erode public confidence in judicial neutrality, and warrant a formal investigation.”
Federal Judge James Boasberg became a key figure in the fight over border security this year, after issuing a controversial temporary restraining order on March 15 that blocked President Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act to speed up deportations of hundreds of Venezuelan nationals to El Salvador.
Boasberg went so far as to demand that all flights bound for El Salvador be “immediately” returned to U.S. soil—an order that was not carried out. His emergency action set off a chain of legal challenges around the country, beginning with the March 15 case in his court, and eventually drew in the Supreme Court. The high court would later rule—twice—that the Trump administration’s expedited removals did not violate constitutional due process.
Despite these rulings, Boasberg and his handling of the matter have been sharply criticized by Trump administration officials, who say his order interfered with the executive branch’s authority to secure the border. President Trump himself suggested earlier this year that Boasberg could be impeached over his conduct, prompting Chief Justice John Roberts to issue a rare public statement.
The current complaint against Boasberg—originally appointed to the bench by President George W. Bush in 2002—comes just as he may once again play a decisive role in a major class-action case involving the same group of former CECOT migrants.
President Trump’s lawyers are moving to depose Rupert Murdoch, and quickly.
The president’s attorneys in a new court filing Monday said they wish to speak with the conservative media mogul as part of evidence-gathering efforts in connection with Trump’s lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal, citing concerns about Murdoch’s waning health and advanced age. Murdoch is 94 years old.
This lawsuit arose from The Wall Street Journal’sarticlethat described an album allegedly compiled by Epstein’s former girlfriend and accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell for his 50th birthday in 2003.
According to the report, Trump contributed a letter for the birthday collection that included a lewd drawing and referenced the two men sharing a “wonderful secret.” President Trump has dismissed the letter as fake.
The letter bearing Trump’s name, which was reviewed by the Journal, is crude—like others in the album. It contains several lines of typewritten text framed by the outline of a naked woman, which appears to be hand-drawn with a heavy marker. A pair of small arcs denotes the woman’s breasts, and the future president’s signature is a squiggly “Donald” below her waist, mimicking pubic hair.
Trump filed the complaint in federal court in Miami earlier this month against the Journal, the Journal’s publishing firm Dow Jones, parent company News Corp, owner Rupert Murdoch, News Corp CEO Robert Thomson, and the two Journal reporters, Safdar and Palazzolo. He alleges two claims, defamation per se and defamation per quod, and demands $10 billion in damages.
On Monday, Trump filed a motion to compel the expedited deposition de bene esse of Murdoch, a de bene esse deposition is also sometimes called a “preservation deposition,” and is intended to be taken to preserve testimony for trial.
“[T]here is good cause to expedite Murdoch’s deposition, and the Court should exercise its discretion to authorize the same,” the motion for fast-tracked discovery says.
“Murdoch is 94 years old, has suffered from multiple health issues throughout his life, is believed to have suffered recent significant health scares, and is presumed to live in New York, New York,” wrote Trump lawyer Alejandro Brito. “Taken together, these factors weigh heavily in determining that Murdoch would be unavailable for in-person testimony at trial.”
In the meantime, though, Trump is demanding crucial testimony from the owner of the Journal, whom Trump apparently failed to persuade not to publish the Epstein exclusive in the first place. The plaintiff insists that Murdoch has an “advantage” that Trump does not have, but that the scales would even out were an expedited deposition to occur.
“Murdoch has an advantage over President Trump as Murdoch is able to defend himself because he has access to all the information and documents related to the below-defined malicious and defamatory Article, and the decision behind deciding to publish it,” the motion continued. “On the other hand, President Trump has very limited information related to the Article. For these and other reasons that follow, Murdoch would not suffer any prejudice significant enough to outweigh the good cause that exists to grant this Motion.”
Secretary of Defense Marco Rubio signaled he’s in favor of Vice President JD Vance’s potential 2028 run for the White House during a recent interview.
In an interview on Fox News’s “My View with Lara Trump,” Rubio sidestepped a question about his own presidential ambitions when asked by the president’s daughter-in-law whether his own sights are “set outside the State Department.” Last week, Trump announced she would not run for Senate in North Carolina after considering jumping inot the race.
“I think JD Vance would be a great nominee… if he decides he wants to do that,” Rubio said during the Saturday interview.
“I think he’s doing a great job as vice president. He’s a close friend, and I hope he intends to do it,” Rubio added.
Pivoting back to his own political future, Rubio said he loves his job as Secretary of State and intends to serve out his full term. He noted that would likely preclude him from running for president in 2028.
“I know it’s kind of early, but being in the role that I’m in here, as the secretary of State, I really don’t play in politics. There’s actually rules against me being involved in domestic politics,” Rubio said.
“And I want to do this job, as long as the president allows me to do it, and stay in that job, which would keep me here all the way through January of 2028,” he added.
By Office of Vice President of the United States – @VP on X, Public Domain,
Rubio, who ran unsuccessfully for president in 2016, did not shut the door to a future White House bid, but he said he would be satisfied if his career of public service peaks with his tenure at the State Department.
“I feel, honestly, you never know what the future holds. You never rule things out or anything, because you just don’t know. Things change very quickly,” Rubio said. “But that said, I believe that if I am able to be here through the duration of this presidency — and we get things done at the pace that we’ve been doing the last six months — I’ll be able to look back at my time in public service and say, ‘I made a difference, I had an impact, and I served my country in a very positive way.’”
“And I would be satisfied with that as the apex of my career,” Rubio said. “And so that’s what I’m focused on right now because what we’re doing some special things that I think are going to bear dividend and fruit for a generation.”
The slogan, written in red paint, read “AOC funds genocide in Gaza.” The vandals had also spread the paint all over the entrance to the campaign office before police arrived at roughly 1 a.m. Monday.
NEW — Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s (D-NY) campaign headquarters in the Bronx was vandalized overnight with “AOC Funds Genocide in Gaza” written in red paint on the front gate.
— Paul A. Szypula 🇺🇸 (@Bubblebathgirl) July 21, 2025
The incident came just days after Ocasio-Cortez voted against legislation from Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) that would have cut funding for the Israeli Defense Forces.
The lawmaker, who has been vocally critical of Israel’s war in Gaza, said she voted against the bill because it only cut funding for the defensive “Iron Dome” and did nothing to cut off the “actual bombs killing Palestinians.”
Greene’s legislation would have cut off roughly $500 million in funding for Israel. Her proposed amendment, which failed on Thursday, came after Israeli Defense Forces bombed the Holy Family Catholic Church in Gaza.
“Israel bombed the Catholic Church in Gaza, and that entire population is being wiped out as they continue their aggressive war in Gaza,” Greene said.
Voting alongside Greene on the amendment were Reps. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) and Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) members of the progressive so-called “squad” to which Ocasio-Cortez also belongs.
Mike Lindell just scored a major legal win in his battle to expose election integrity concerns. On Wednesday, the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Lindell’s favor, tossing out a $5 million arbitration ruling that sought to award a tech contestant prize money from his 2021 “Prove Mike Wrong” challenge.
In a unanimous decision, the three-judge panel said the arbitration panel overstepped its authority by rewriting clear contract terms to reward software developer Robert Zeidman. “Fair or not, agreed-to contract terms may not be modified,” wrote Judge James Loken in the ruling, reinforcing that legal agreements must be honored—not manipulated for political convenience.
Lindell called the years-long legal fight a “setup” and declared the decision as “vindication.”
“This opens a door that no man can shut. I am so excited. I mean, this is an answer to prayer,” Lindell told The Hill.
The case stemmed from Lindell’s 2021 Cyber Symposium, where he challenged the public to prove that his data—allegedly showing Chinese interference in the 2020 election—wasn’t related to the actual vote. Zeidman submitted a rebuttal, but the internal judges ruled he hadn’t met the challenge’s high bar. When Zeidman took the issue to arbitration, the panel sided with him and awarded the $5 million. Now, that ruling has been reversed by the federal court.
The appeals court made clear: the arbitration panel violated Minnesota contract law by using outside evidence to redefine what kind of data Lindell had to provide.
“The panel effectively amended the unambiguous Challenge contract,” the court said.
The ruling orders a lower court to vacate the arbitration award and halts any effort to force Lindell to pay the $5 million—another setback for those trying to financially crush voices challenging the official 2020 narrative.
While Lindell continues to face ongoing lawsuits from companies like Dominion and Smartmatic, he remains defiant. Just last month, a Colorado jury hit him with a $2.3 million judgment for alleged defamation—but Lindell isn’t backing down.
“You’re going to see the big win will be as you watch me melting down these machines and turning them into prison bars,” he declared boldly.
Republican National Committee (RNC) Chair Michael Whatley is planning to run for Senate in North Carolina to succeed retiring Sen. Thom Tillis (R), a source familiar confirmed to The Hill.
The source said Whatley will run with President Trump’s blessing for the seat. Politico first reported the news. The development comes after former RNC Co-Chair Lara Trump, the president’s daughter-in-law, was openly considering a bid for the seat. Politico reported that she has decided against a run.
Whatley’s candidacy tees up one of the marquee Senate races of the midterms, as former Gov. Roy Cooper (D) reportedly plans to jump in next week. The Cook Political Report currently rates the seat as a “toss up.”
The news that Whatley will pursue the seat comes a month after news broke that President Trump’s daughter-in-law, Lara Trump, was considering entering the race.
A source confirmed to The Hill that Trump, who is married to Eric Trump, the president’s third child, was weighing her options in the wake of Tillis’s announcement Sunday. NOTUS first reported she was “seriously considering” a bid.
She was previously floated as a potential Senate candidate when former Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) retired in 2023. However, she opted not to launch a campaign for the seat, leaving the door open to a future run for office.
Lara Trump served as a co-chair of the RNC during the 2024 campaign, with a focus on fundraising efforts. She stepped down from that position and earlier this year began hosting a weekend show on Fox News.
This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.
On Wednesday, French President Emmanuel Macron filed a lawsuit against podcaster Candace Owens over her repeated claims that his wife, Brigitte, is a man.
The lawsuit, which was filed in the Superior Court of the State of Delaware, calls Owens’ claims “devastating lies” and adds that the podcast host “disregarded all credible evidence disproving her claim in favor of platforming known conspiracy theorists and proven defamers.”
In 2024, Owens —who was then a host at Ben Shapiro’s outlet the Daily Wire — boldly stated that she’d stake her “entire professional reputation” on Brigitte Macron being a man. Since then, Owens has repeatedly insisted that the French first lady is a biological man.
Owens even launched an eight-episode series called “Becoming Brigitte” to further examine the conspiracy theory.
That series, the suit alleges, is packed with “outlandish, defamatory, and far-fetched fictions” including “that Mrs. Macron was born a man, stole another person’s identity, and transitioned to become Brigitte; Mrs. Macron and President Macron are blood relatives committing incest; President Macron was chosen to be the President of France as part of the CIA-operated MKUltra program or a similar mind-control program; and Mrs. Macron and President Macron are committing forgery, fraud, and abuses of power to conceal these secrets.”
“These claims are demonstrably false, and Owens knew they were,” the suit states.
NEW: French President Emmanuel Macron and his wife Brigitte have filed a defamation lawsuit against Candace Owens over claims that Brigitte was a man.
Brigitte Macron says she was not born a man and is ‘traumatized’ by Owens’ comments.
This is nothing new for Owens. She has built a brand on provocation, not truth. Owens labels herself as an independent “investigative journalist” while routinely peddling misinformation under the guise of legitimate reporting. She has promoted a range of conspiracy theories, including anti-vaccine falsehoods, long-debunked antisemitic tropes such as blood libel, and Holocaust distortion — going so far as to dismiss the atrocities of Josef Mengele’s medical experiments as mere “propaganda.” Her content is not intended to inform but to inflame and attract attention through sensationalism and conspiracy theories.
The Macron family, represented by high-profile American law firm Clare Locke, is seeking damages and is demanding a jury trial.
A spokesman for Owens told Mediaite that she would respond to the suit on Wednesday’s episode of her podcast.
“Candace will be officially responding to this on her podcast today,” the spokesman said, “as we are just learning about this in the press.”
Last week, Candace Owens accused President Donald Trump of thinking that his political base is “stupid” on the latest episode of her show, which she opened by calling the Jeffrey Epstein scandal “terminal cancer” for the MAGA movement.
After comparing the administration’s attempt at moving on from the Epstein scandal to the stories about Hunter Biden that were dismissed by the “Deep State,” Owens accused Trump of “being guilty of gaslighting the public.”
“It seems like you think your base is stupid. That’s how I feel. I feel like Trump thinks his base is stupid, or, again, because I don’t think he’s pressing send on these messages, the people around him think that Trump is stupid. And that shouldn’t surprise you given the fact that all of these people were ‘Never Trump.’ They were ‘Never Trump.’ Trump is surrounded by people who hate him and have infiltrated his base,” argued Owens, who went on to submit that Trump — or those around him — had decided to give Ukraine more weapons in order to distract from the conversation about Epstein.
“Operation: Just Give Them More War. Yeah, war as a distraction. Never mind! We can’t talk about Epstein because guys, guess what? Look at this headline: Trump announces an aggressive, or Trump is to announce an aggressive Ukraine weapons plan. Yeah, he already indicated that in that same press conference that there’s just going to be more weapons sent to Ukraine, they’re going to attack Russia. We’re just going to have to have a world war and another reset, I guess. So, you guys just stop talking about Jeffrey Epstein,” she added. “I am telling you that I will be the very last person that will stop talking about Jeffrey Epstein. I will do his entire genealogy backwards and forwards, including everybody around him, get their genealogy, before we let go of this.”
On Wednesday morning, Republican Rep. Mike Lawler of New York announced he will seek re-election in next year’s midterms in his crucial battleground House district, which covers a large swath of New York City’s northern suburbs.
Lawler, who announced his news in an interview Wednesday morning on Fox News’ “Fox and Friends,” had been seriously considering a bid for New York State governor.
“There’s no question Kathy Hochul is the worst governor in America,” Lawler told Fox News’ Brian Kilmeade, before adding, “In 2026, she needs to be defeated. But after months of deliberating over this and really working through it, I’ve decided the right thing to do for me and my family and my district is to run for re-election.”
Serving the Hudson Valley has been the greatest honor of my life, and I'm proud of the wins I’ve delivered for New York and the American people. From delivering historic tax relief, raising the SALT cap, securing our border, and strengthening our national security and America’s… pic.twitter.com/yfB7trXzd1
His news is seen as a major relief to the White House and congressional Republicans, who are defending their razor-thin House majority in the 2026 midterms.
Top House Republicans as well as President Donald Trump had pressed Lawler to seek re-election, and Fox News confirmed that Lawler met with Trump last week at the White House to discuss his 2026 plans and other issues.
“While I fundamentally believe I am best positioned to take on Kathy Hochul and offer New Yorkers a real choice for Governor, I have made the decision to run for re-election to the House and continue the important work I’ve been doing over the past two and a half years,” Lawler shared in a statement with Fox News Digital Wednesday morning.
The Democratic Governors Association called Lawler’s decision a “humiliating setback” for Republicans, arguing that his choice means he doesn’t believe a Republican can win statewide.
However, Republicans now seem likely to avoid a hotly contested primary, as they said they hoped only one of Lawler or Elise Stefanik would go forward with a gubernatorial run.
Elise Stefanik released a statement Wednesday morning, calling Republicans “more unified than ever in our mission to fire the Worst Governor in America Kathy Hochul in 2026” and Lawler a “great, effective, and hardworking Representative for New York’s 17th Congressional District.”
“As I have previously stated, I am focused on supporting strong Republican local and county candidates on the ballot this November to lay the groundwork with a strong team for next year. I will make a final decision and announcement after this year’s November election which we are all focused on,” Stefanik added.
Stefanik seems all but certain to run for governor, with a source familiar with her thinking telling The Hill last month that “it’s not a matter of if, it’s a matter of when.”
Republicans have been hopeful that they could seriously compete for the office in 2026 after impressive performances in recent years. Hochul only won reelection in 2022 by about 6 points, a much closer margin than observers expected.
Trump also made significant gains in New York in last year’s presidential election, while still falling short by double digits of victory in the state.
