Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
U.S. President Donald Trump said on Wednesday that there should be a cap of around 15 percent on foreign students at Harvard University, while continuing to pressure it to submit its list of foreign students.
“Harvard has to show us their lists,” Trump told reporters at the White House. “They have foreign students. About 31 percent of their students are foreign based. Almost 31 percent. We want to know where those students come. Are they troublemakers?”
Trump claimed that many of those students were troublemakers “caused by the radical left lunatics in this country.”
“I think they should have a cap of maybe around 15 percent, not 31 percent, we have people want to go to Harvard and other schools they can’t get in because we have foreign students there,” he said.
After Trump returned to the White House, he has targeted many U.S. universities, warning that those that do not adjust their policies will face funding cuts. The Trump administration’s main demands include eradicating antisemitism on campus and abolishing diversity initiatives that favor minority groups.
With billions of dollars in funding frozen, its tax-exempt status in jeopardy and multiple investigations underway, Harvard is facing an unprecedented crisis.
On May 22, the Department of Homeland Security announced the revocation of Harvard’s eligibility for the Student and Exchange Visitor Program — one of the latest moves by the Trump administration aimed at pressuring the university.
Harvard has filed a lawsuit against the federal government, and a federal judge in Massachusetts has temporarily blocked the ban, and a court hearing on the issue was scheduled for May 29. Previously, Harvard filed a lawsuit against the administration over federal funding cuts.
According to data from Harvard, as of fall 2023, international students made up more than 27 percent of the total student population. Currently, Harvard enrolls nearly 6,800 international students and scholars from over 140 countries and regions, most of whom are pursuing graduate programs.
LONGBOAT KEY, Fla., May 28, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Rumble (NASDAQ:RUM), the video-sharing platform and cloud services provider, today praised President Trump and U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio for their announcement that they will restrict the visas of foreign officials or nationals who engage in the censorship of Americans. As a company, Rumble has experience in this area as it is currently suing Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes, alleging that Moraes violated the free speech protections of the First Amendment when he ordered the suspension of the U.S.-based Rumble accounts of a specific well-known, politically outspoken user.
“Freedom of expression is an innate human right, so it is great to see that President Trump has the United States leading the way once again,” said Rumble CEO Chris Pavlovski. “As Rumble has experienced, these enemies of free speech from around the world try to reach into America and supersede the First Amendment. Secretary of State Rubio has made clear that America will stand for freedom of speech around the world and that is tremendous news.”
“This move by the Trump administration is a landmark defense of American digital sovereignty and the First Amendment,” said Martin De Luca and Matthew L. Schwartz, attorneys at Boies Schiller Flexner LLP. “Foreign officials like Moraes have spent years issuing sealed censorship orders against U.S. companies, targeting American executives and users of these platforms, and attempting to criminalize protected speech on U.S. soil. We commend President Trump and Secretary Rubio for taking a decisive step to uphold the Constitution and protect digital sovereignty.”
ABOUT RUMBLE
Rumble is a high-growth video platform and cloud services provider that is creating an independent infrastructure. Rumble’s mission is to restore the internet to its roots by making it free and open once again. For more information, visit: corp.rumble.com.
When I despairingly contemplate the horrors and cruelty that Palestinians in Gaza are being subjected to, I sometimes try to put this in the context of where I live.
I live on the Kāpiti Coast in the lower North Island of Aotearoa New Zealand.
Geographically it is around the same size as Gaza. Both have coastlines running their full lengths. But, whereas the population of Gaza is a cramped two million, Kāpiti’s is a mere 56,000.
The Gaza Strip . . . 2 million people living in a cramped outdoor prison about the same size as Kāpiti. Map: politicalbytes.blog
I find it incomprehensible to visualise what it would be like if what is presently happening in Gaza occurred here.
The only similarities between them are coastlines and land mass. One is an outdoor prison while the other’s outdoors is peaceful.
New Zealand and Palestine state recognition Currently Palestine has observer status at the United Nations General Assembly. In May last year, the Assembly voted overwhelmingly in favour of Palestine being granted full membership of the United Nations.
To its credit, New Zealand was among 143 countries that supported the resolution. Nine, including the United States as the strongest backer of Israeli genocide outside Israel, voted against.
However, despite this massive majority, such is the undemocratic structure of the UN that it only requires US opposition in the Security Council to veto the democratic vote.
Notwithstanding New Zealand’s support for Palestine broadening its role in the General Assembly and its support for the two-state solution, the government does not officially recognise Palestine.
While its position on recognition is consistent with that of the genocide-supporting United States, it is inconsistent with the over 75 percent of UN member states who, in March 2025, recognised Palestine as a sovereign state (by 147 of the 193 member states).
NZ Prime Minister Christopher Luxon . . . his government should “correct this obscenity” of not recognising Palestinians’ right to have a sovereign nation. Image: RNZ/politicalbytes.blog/
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon’s government does have the opportunity to correct this obscenity as Palestine recognition will soon be voted on again by the General Assembly.
In this context it is helpful to put the Hamas-led attack on Israel in its full historical perspective and to consider the reasons justifying the Israeli genocide that followed.
7 October 2023 and genocide justification The origin of the horrific genocide of Palestinians in Gaza and the associated increased persecution, including killings, of Palestinians in the Israeli occupied West Bank (of the River Jordan) was not the attack by Hamas and several other militant Palestinian groups on 7 October 2023.
This attack was on a small Israeli town less than 2 km north of the border. An estimated 1,195 Israelis and visitors were killed.
The genocidal response of the Israeli government that followed this attack can only be justified by three factors:
The Judaism or ancient Jewishness of Palestine in Biblical times overrides the much larger Palestinian population in Mandate Palestine prior to formation of Israel in 1948;
The right of Israelis to self-determination overrides the right of Palestinians to self-determination; and
The value of Israeli lives overrides the value Palestinian lives.
The first factor is the key. The second and third factors are consequential. In order to better appreciate their context, it is first necessary to understand the Nakba.
Understanding the Nakba Rather than the October 2023 attack, the origin of the subsequent genocide goes back more than 70 years to the collective trauma of Palestinians caused by what they call the Nakba (the Disaster).
The foundation year of the Nakba was in 1948, but this was a central feature of the ethnic cleansing that was kicked off between 1947 and 1949.
During this period Zionist military forces attacked major Palestinian cities and destroyed some 530 villages. About 15,000 Palestinians were killed in a series of mass atrocities, including dozens of massacres.
The Nakba – the Palestinian collective trauma in 1948 that started ethnic cleansing by Zionist paramilitary forces. Image: David Robie/APR
During the Nakba in 1948, approximately half of Palestine’s predominantly Arab population, or around 750,000 people, were expelled from their homes or forced to flee. Initially this was through Zionist paramilitaries.
After the establishment of the State of Israel in May this repression was picked up by its military. Massacres, biological warfare (by poisoning village wells) and either complete destruction or depopulation of Palestinian-majority towns, villages, and urban neighbourhoods (which were then given Hebrew names) followed
By the end of the Nakba, 78 percent of the total land area of the former Mandatory Palestine was controlled by Israel.
Genocide to speed up ethnic cleansing Ethnic cleansing was unsuccessfully pursued, with the support of the United Kingdom and France, in the Suez Canal crisis of 1956. More successful was the Six Day War of 1967, which included the military and political occupation of the West Bank and Gaza.
Throughout this period ethnic cleansing was not characterised by genocide. That is, it was not the deliberate and systematic killing or persecution of a large number of people from a particular national or ethnic group with the aim of destroying them.
Israeli ethnic cleansing of Palestinians began in May 1948 and has accelerated to genocide in 2023. Image: politicalbytes.blog
In fact, the acceptance of a two-state solution (Israel and Palestine) under the ill-fated Oslo Accords in 1993 and 1995 put a temporary constraint on the expansion of ethnic cleansing.
Since its creation in 1948, Israel, along with South Africa the same year (until 1994), has been an apartheid state. I discussed this in an earlier Political Bytes post (15 March 2025), When apartheid met Zionism.
However, while sharing the racism, discrimination, brutal violence, repression and massacres inherent in apartheid, it was not characterised by genocide in South Africa; nor was it in Israel for most of its existence until the current escalation of ethnic cleansing in Gaza.
Following 7 October 2023, genocide has become the dominant tool in the ethnic cleansing tool kit. More recently this has included accelerating starvation and the bombing of tents of Gaza Palestinians.
The magnitude of this genocide is discussed further below.
The Biblical claim Zionism is a movement that sought to establish a Jewish nation in Palestine. It was established as a political organisation as late as 1897. It was only some time after this that Zionism became the most influential ideology among Jews generally.
Despite its prevalence, however, there are many Jews who oppose Zionism and play leading roles in the international protests against the genocide in Gaza.
Zionist ideology is based on a view of Palestine in the time of Jesus Christ. Image: politicalbytes.blog
Based on Zionist ideology, the justification for replacing Mandate Palestine with the state of Israel rests on a Biblical argument for the right of Jews to retake their “homeland”. This justification goes back to the time of that charismatic carpenter and prophet Jesus Christ.
The population of Palestine in Jesus’ day was about 500,000 to 600,000 (a little bigger than both greater Wellington and similar to that of Jerusalem today). About 18,000 of these residents were clergy, priests and Levites (a distinct male group within Jewish communities).
Jerusalem itself in biblical times, with a population of 55,000, was a diverse city and pilgrimage centre. It was also home to numerous Diaspora Jewish communities.
In fact, during the 7th century BC at least eight nations were settled within Palestine. In addition to Judaeans, they included Arameans, Samaritans, Phoenicians and Philistines.
A breakdown based on religious faiths (Jews, Christians and Muslims) provides a useful insight into how Palestine has evolved since the time of Jesus. Jews were the majority until the 4th century AD.
By the fifth century they had been supplanted by Christians and then from the 12th century to 1947 Muslims were the largest group. As earlier as the 12th century Arabic had become the dominant language. It should be noted that many Christians were Arabs.
Adding to this evolving diversity of ethnicity is the fact that during this time Palestine had been ruled by four empires — Roman, Persian, Ottoman and British.
Prior to 1948 the population of the region known as Mandate Palestine approximately corresponded to the combined Israel and Palestine today. Throughout its history it has varied in both size and ethnic composition.
The Ottoman census of 1878 provides an indicative demographic profile of its three districts that approximated what became Mandatory Palestine after the end of World War 1.
Group
Population
Percentage
Muslim citizens
403,795
86–87%
Christian citizens
43,659
9%
Jewish citizens
15,011
3%
Jewish (foreign-born)
Est. 5–10,000
1–2%
Total
Up to 472,465
100.0%
In 1882, the Ottoman Empire revealed that the estimated 24,000 Jews in Palestine represented just 0.3 percent of the world’s Jewish population.
The self-determination claim Based on religion the estimated population of Palestine in 1922 was 78 percent Muslim, 11 percent Jewish, and 10 percent Christian.
By 1945 this composition had changed to 58 percent Muslim, 33 percent Jewish and 8 percent Christian. The reason for this shift was the success of the Zionist campaigning for Jews to migrate to Palestine which was accelerated by the Jewish holocaust.
By 15 May 1948, the total population of the state of Israel was 805,900, of which 649,600 (80.6 percent) were Jews with Palestinians being 156,000 (19.4 percent). This turnaround was primarily due to the devastating impact of the Nakba.
Today Israel’s population is over 9.5 million of which over 77 percent are Jewish and more than 20 percent are Palestinian. The latter’s absolute growth is attributable to Israel’s subsequent geographic expansion, particularly in 1967, and a higher birth rate.
Palestine today (parts of West Bank under Israeli occupation). Map: politicalbytes.blog
The current population of the Palestinian Territories, including Gaza, is more than 5.5 million. Compare this with the following brief sample of much smaller self-determination countries — Slovenia (2.2 million), Timor-Leste (1.4 million), and Tonga (104,000).
The population size of the Palestinian Territories is more than half that of Israel. Closer to home it is a little higher than New Zealand.
The only reason why Palestinians continue to be denied the right to self-determination is the Zionist ideological claim linked to the biblical time of Jesus Christ and its consequential strategy of ethnic cleansing.
If it was not for the opposition of the United States, then this right would not have been denied. It has been this opposition that has enabled Israel’s strategy.
Comparative value of Palestinian lives The use of genocide as the latest means of achieving ethnic cleansing highlights how Palestinian lives are valued compared with Israeli lives.
While not of the same magnitude appropriated comparisons have been made with the horrific ethnic cleansing of Jews through the means of the holocaust by Nazi Germany during the Second World War. Per capita the scale of the magnitude gap is reduced considerably.
Since October 2023, according to the Gaza Health Ministry (and confirmed by the World Health Organisation) more than 54,000 Palestinians have been killed. Of those killed over 16,500 were children. Compare this with less than 2000 Israelis killed.
Further, at least 310 UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency) team members have been killed along with over 200 journalists and media workers. Add to this around 1400 healthcare workers including doctors and nurses.
What also can’t be forgotten is the increasing Israeli ethnic cleansing on the occupied West Bank. Around 950 Palestinians, including around 200 children, have also been killed during this same period.
Time for New Zealand to recognise Palestine The above discussion is in the context of the three justifications for supporting the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians strategy that goes back to 1948 and which, since October 2023, is being accelerated by genocide.
First, it requires the conviction that the theology of Judaism in Palestine in the biblical times following the birth of Jesus Christ trumps both the significantly changing demography from the 5th century at least to the mid-20th century and the numerical predominance of Arabs in Mandate Palestine;
Second, and consequentially, it requires the conviction that while Israelis are entitled to self-determination, Palestinians are not; and
Finally, it requires that Israeli lives are much more valuable than Palestinian lives. In fact, the latter have no value at all.
Unless the government, including Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters, shares these convictions (especially the “here and now” second and third) then it should do the right thing first by unequivocally saying so, and then by recognising the right of Palestine to be an independent state.
Ian Powell is a progressive health, labour market and political “no-frills” forensic commentator in New Zealand. A former senior doctors union leader for more than 30 years, he blogs at Second Opinion and Political Bytes, where this article was first published. Republished with the author’s permission.
United States President Donald Trump was “not happy” with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, this week.
For three consecutive nights, from Friday to Sunday, Russia launched about 900 drones and scores of missiles at Ukraine. At least 18 people were killed, including three children.
“We’re in the middle of talking and he’s shooting rockets into Kyiv and other cities,” Trump told reporters on Sunday, after Putin ordered the largest air assault on Ukraine’s civilians in its three-year war.
Following up on his remarks, Trump posted on social media that Putin had “gone absolutely CRAZY!”
Putin is not crazy. He is a tactician with a long-term goal: to make Russia a great power again and secure his place in the history books as the re-builder of Russia’s imperial might.
Trump announced after a phone call with Putin on May 19 that Russia and Ukraine would “immediately start negotiations” towards a ceasefire.
With his latest air campaign on Ukraine, however, Putin is threatening to destroy the goodwill he’s built up in Washington, where Trump has been consistently soft on Russia and tough on his allies.
So, what is Putin’s strategy? Why is he launching these massive air bombardments on Ukrainian civilians now?
Putin sees weakness in the West
One theory is these attacks are somehow preparations for a major offensive. That makes little sense.
Attacking military facilities, weapons depots or even frontline troops are useful preparations for an impending attack. Indiscriminate bombing of civilians, meanwhile, is a sign of either desperation or impatience.
The US also sent bombers to Japan in the final stages of the war because the American public became tired of seeing their sons, husbands, brothers and fathers die on Pacific islands they had never heard of. The war had dragged on forever by this point, and there seemed no end in sight.
Is Putin desperate or impatient? Likely the latter.
From the perspective of the Kremlin, Russia’s strategic situation is as good as it has been for years.
The US is trying to destroy itself through trade wars and boorish diplomacy. Trump clearly dislikes Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and hopes the war will somehow end if he just demands it.
Europe is continuing to back Ukraine. However, for the time being, it still needs US support because its entire security structure is built around NATO and US strength, both economic and military.
What Putin sees when he surveys the international scene is weakness. In his thinking, such weakness needs to be exploited – now is the time to hurt Ukraine as much as possible, and hope it will crack. Analysts call this a “cognitive warfare effort”.
Indiscriminate air war on civilians is the only means Putin currently has to pressure Ukraine. His army has been advancing, but painfully slowly. There is no breakthrough in sight, even once the spring muds dry and the summer fighting season starts in earnest.
Russia has gradually advanced in Ukraine throughout 2024, but with no perceivable change in the overall situation. Putin does not command precision weapons or super spies, which he could use to take out Ukraine’s leadership.
All he can do is rain death on women, children and the elderly from relatively cheap, unsophisticated weapons, such as drones. He now has these in large supply, thanks to ramping up military production at home.
Bombing campaigns do not end wars
A strategic air war on civilians seldom works, however.
Japan’s surrender in 1945 is an exception, but it is misleading in many ways. The Americans had flattened Japan’s cities for a while already, just not using their new atomic weapons. Japan had already lost the war and the real question was if there would be a bloody US invasion or surrender.
And as the US dropped its two nuclear bombs in August of that year, the Red Army joined the fight, racing across Manchuria to help occupy Japanese territories.
In Germany, the British-American bombings from 1942 onwards certainly had an effect on war production, as they killed workers and destroyed factories. But they did not incapacitate the German army and certainly did not break morale.
Instead, the bombings led to embitterment and a closing of ranks around the regime. German society fought to the last moment. It did so not just despite, but because of the air war. The German army was eventually defeated by the ground troops of the Red Army, who took Berlin in an incredibly bloody fight.
Other historical failures are even more spectacular. The US air force dropped 864,000 tons of bombs on North Vietnam during an air campaign of more than 300,000 sorties lasting from 1965 to late 1968. The North Vietnamese lost maybe 29,000 people (dead and wounded), more than half of them civilians. The Americans and their South Vietnamese allies still lost the war.
Putin’s air war will likely follow the historical pattern: it has further embittered the Ukrainians, who know very well that what comes from the east is not liberation.
Another summer of fighting lies ahead. Ukraine’s friends in the democratic world need to urgently redouble their efforts to support Ukraine. The misguided hopes that Putin would somehow “make a deal” lie under the rubble his drones leave behind in Ukraine’s cities.
Mark Edele receives funding from the Australian Research Council.
Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts Ed Markey
Senator Markey joined by local leaders, advocates in Chelsea
Boston (May 28, 2025) – Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), co-chair of the Senate Climate Change Task Force and a member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, today hosted a walking tour and press conference in Chelsea after the Trump administration announced the termination of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)’s Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) program, cancelling over $90 million in climate resilience funding for Massachusetts communities. The canceled funding includes $50 million awarded to the cities of Chelsea and Everett for their Island End River Coastal Flood Resilience Project. The project includes the construction of a storm surge barrier and storm surge control facility, as well as ecological restoration of the marshes in the Mystic River tributary. With cancelled funding, this multi-year effort to protect residents and businesses from flooding is now at risk.
“To rip away $50 million of federal funding from Chelsea and Everett is an act of climate injustice. The Trump administration’s reckless decision to terminate disaster resiliency funding not only harms communities on the frontline of the climate crisis but also has repercussions far beyond,” said Senator Markey. “This funding isn’t a budget line—it’s a lifeline for our constituents. Cancelling it will directly harm our constituents and our economy. It will cost us as we pay and pay and pay again to clean up and rebuild flood after flood that are only becoming more frequent and more severe. It is penny wise and billions of destruction and damage foolish. For months, the Trump administration has made it clear they do not care about our health, safety, or resiliency, and they do not care about the long-term, long-dreamed visions of our communities to build a future safe from climate change.”
Senator Markey was joined on the walking tour and at the press conference by Chelsea City Manager Fidel Maltez; State Senator Sal DiDomenico; State Representative Judith Garcia; Gladys Vega, Executive Director of La Colaborativa; and John Walkey, Director of Climate Justice & Waterfront Initiatives at GreenRoots.
Source: United States Senator for Arkansas Tom Cotton
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Caroline Tabler or Patrick McCann (202) 224-2353 May 28, 2025
Cotton, Boozman, and Westerman to Driscoll: Army Must Analyze Pine Bluff’s Potential to Address our Munitions Shortage
Washington, D.C. — Senators Tom Cotton (R-Arkansas), John Boozman (R-Arkansas), and Congressman Bruce Westerman (Arkansas-04) today sent a letter to Army Secretary Dan Driscoll, asking for the detailed plan for the future of Pine Bluff Arsenal as a critical element of the defense industrial base. The lawmakers also urged prompt delivery of a Congressionally-mandated report outlining a plan to address issues facing America’s domestic munitions production and supply chain chokepoints, as well as a course of action for the future of Pine Bluff Arsenal. This letter follows another sent earlier this month about the Army’s intent to downsize Pine Bluff Arsenal that is at odds with President Trump’s agenda of accelerating munitions manufacturing in America.
In part, the lawmakers wrote:
“We remain committed to ensuring, in line with President Trump’s directive to the department, that the military has the munitions it needs to fight and win decisively. Fortunately, Pine Bluff Arsenal can help the Army solve the munitions crisis, hence we’re not willing to allow its capabilities to wither on the vine.”
Full text of the letter may be found here and below.
The Honorable Dan P. Driscoll
Secretary of the Army
101 Army Pentagon
Washington, DC 20310-0101
Secretary Driscoll,
We write to establish next steps regarding the future of Pine Bluff Arsenal and to secure its crucial role in the defense industrial base. Please provide answers to the following inquiries no later than June 6, 2025.
As we discussed, we believe the Army’s organic industrial base has an irreplaceable role to play in addressing this nation’s munitions crisis. Our delegation has worked for years to persuade the Army to take steps to improve its arsenals, ammunition plants, and depots, including by re-orienting production at Pine Bluff Arsenal to address urgent military-munitions requirements.
To that end, we passed language in the FY2025 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Joint Explanatory Statement that directed the Secretary of the Army to provide a plan to “establish secondary domestic production sources at existing arsenals, depots, and ammunition plants of the U.S. Army to address munition supply chain chokepoints” no later than June 1, 2025. We expect the Army to produce this report in accordance with the law and provide a thorough, well-considered set of plans that explains how it should use Pine Bluff Arsenal and the other facilities within the Army’s organic industrial base to meet urgent operational needs.
Furthermore, we are justifiably concerned that Army is attempting to circumvent the law by slowing operations at the arsenal before the FY26 NDAA and appropriations season, thus presenting Congress with a virtual fait accompli and limiting our ability to perform our constitutional oversight and budgetary responsibilities. Title 10 USC § 2687, base closures and realignments, specifies the Army may not close any military installation of more than 300 civilians or reduce its personnel by more than 50 percent without notifying Congress and presenting it with detailed strategic and economic evaluations of the impact of such a downsizing or closure. Title 10 USC § 4532, the Arsenal Act, requires the Secretary of the Army to procure supplies in government-owned factories or arsenals if possible “on an economical basis.” We expect, and insist, that the Army will comply with current statute when producing a path forward at Pine Bluff Arsenal.
Please note that we’re particularly interested to understand your cost assumptions regarding your compliance with the Arsenal Act. As we have explained on multiple occasions, we believe ample evidence indicates that Pine Bluff Arsenal is more economical than most commercial options. Thus, we want to assess what assumptions the Army is using to argue otherwise.
In addition to the required report, we now request the following additional information:
The Army’s planned actions over the next 30 to 90 days at Pine Bluff Arsenal, to include proposed or enacted changes to staffing and production schedules. If no changes to Pine Bluff operations or personnel will occur, please definitively state that.
The courses of actions the Army is developing for Pine Bluff Arsenal’s future, with at least the following information:
o How each course of action complies with both 10 USC § 2687 and 10 USC § 4532, to include detailed cost data analysis.
o At least one course of action explaining how the Army could use the arsenal to produce materials such as nitrocellulose, RDX, or TNT to address supply chain chokepoints.
o Detailed estimates of the costs that will be incurred if Army moves the white phosphorus ammunition mission away from Pine Bluff Arsenal, including the cost and time associated with acquiring the necessary environmental permits.
Current capability gaps within the Army where manufacturing placement in the Army organic industrial base is possible, i.e. s-UAS, battery technology, brushless motors, etc.
We remain committed to ensuring, in line with President Trump’s directive to the department, that the military has the munitions it needs to fight and win decisively. Fortunately, Pine Bluff Arsenal can help the Army solve the munitions crisis, hence we’re not willing to allow its capabilities to wither on the vine.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Jimmy Gomez (CA-34)
Los Angeles, CA — Today, Representative Jimmy Gomez (CA-34) hosted a roundtable with the Korean business community in LA to hear firsthand how Trump’s tariffs is disrupting trade, delaying shipments, and raising the cost of essential goods. He also shared his push to end Trump’s tariffs, prevent him from punishing allies, and put Congress back in charge of trade.
“Today I met with Korean American business owners in Koreatown who are being hit hard by Trump’s reckless tariffs — prices are up, shipments are delayed, and it’s getting harder to plan for tomorrow,” said Rep. Jimmy Gomez. “These aren’t just numbers on a spreadsheet, they’re family-run shops, local jobs, and people trying to build a future. I’m fighting to end Trump’s damaging tariffs and stop him from punishing our allies because our community needs trade policies that help them thrive, not ones that drive up costs for customers or threaten their businesses.”
During the discussion, Korean American businesses discussed how these tariffs and tax policies have driven up container fees and import duties, while causing uncertainty that makes it hard to grow or plan. Many also stressed the need for better workforce development support and a business environment that works for small businesses in LA.
Rep. Jimmy Gomez — a member of the House Ways and Means Committee, which oversees trade — has been holding the administration accountable in committee and led the Congressional Dads Caucus in calling out the harm to working families, and fighting to pass legislation to shut down Trump’s global tariffs. He recently visited the Port of LA to hear directly from port staff and highlight the real-world consequences of President Trump’s tariffs on imported goods — including a projected 35% drop in cargo volume next week.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Julia Brownley (D-CA)
Washington, DC – Today, Congresswoman Julia Brownley (CA-26) joined Congresswoman Nanette Diaz Barragán (CA-44) and every Democratic member of the California Congressional Delegation in sending a letter to President Donald Trump and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., urging them to safeguard federal funding for the Head Start program. The letter comes in response to alarming reports that the Trump Administration considered eliminating Head Start funding during recent federal budget discussions.
“From Los Angeles County to the Central Valley to rural tribal lands, Head Start provides comprehensive early learning, health, nutrition, and family support services to children who are disproportionately impacted by poverty and housing instability,” wrote the members. “These essential services support our state’s economy by allowing parents to work and go to school, while giving our future workforce the strong start that they need to be successful later in life.”
California is home to one of the largest populations of Head Start children in the nation. In Fiscal Year 2023 alone, Head Start and Early Head Start programs served more than 94,000 children across the state. These programs offer critical support to children by integrating early education with health, nutrition, and family services – providing targeted support to those experiencing poverty, housing insecurity, and systemic inequities.
“The elimination or reduction of Head Start funding would be catastrophic. In California, it would shut the doors of 1,835 Head Start and Early Head Start Centers and eliminate access to early education for tens of thousands of children – disproportionately children of color, English learners, children with disabilities, and those living in low-income and rural communities.”
Since its founding in 1965, Head Start has served over 40 million children and families nationwide. Decades of research confirm that the program improves school readiness, boosts long-term academic and employment outcomes, and helps break the cycle of poverty.
“Head Start is not optional – it is a national commitment that must be honored,” the members added. “We urge you to reject any future attempts to weaken or eliminate this program and to ensure its continued success for the children and families who rely on it every day.”
The letter was co-signed by each of the 45 Democratic members of the California Congressional Delegation: Senators Alex Padilla and Adam Schiff, and Representatives Pete Aguilar, Nancy Pelosi, Robert Garcia, Linda Sánchez, John Garamendi, Kevin Mullin, Mark Takano, Ted Lieu, Maxine Waters, Laura Friedman, J. Luis Correa, Ro Khanna, Mike Thompson, Norma Torres, Mark DeSaulnier, Juan Vargas, Gilbert Ray Cisneros, Jr., Judy Chu, Derek Tran, Raul Ruiz, Jared Huffman, Doris Matsui, Salud Carbajal, Brad Sherman, Ami Bera, Jimmy Panetta, Zoe Lofgren, Eric Swalwell, Lateefah Simon, Dave Min, Jimmy Gomez, Sydney Kamlager-Dove, Jim Costa, George Whitesides, Luz Rivas, Sara Jacobs, Scott Peters, Josh Harder, Adam Gray, Mike Levin, and Sam Liccardo.
The full letter can be found here and below:
President Trump and Secretary Kennedy:
We write today to express serious concern over reports that your Administration considered proposals to eliminate federal funding for the Department of Health and Human Services’ Head Start program in recent budget discussions. While we are relieved that the White House Office of Management and Budget’s Fiscal Year 2026 proposal did not include this cut, that such an action was even contemplated underscores the vulnerability of this vital program under your Administration. As members of the California Congressional Delegation, we urge you to safeguard this critical program, which plays an irreplaceable role in supporting California’s children and families, especially those facing economic hardship and systemic barriers.
California is home to one of the largest populations of Head Start children in the nation. In Fiscal Year 2023 alone, more than 94,000 children and pregnant women in California were served by Head Start and Early Head Start programs. These services are not just beneficial – they are essential. From Los Angeles County to the Central Valley to rural tribal lands, Head Start provides comprehensive early learning, health, nutrition, and family support services to children who are disproportionately impacted by poverty and housing instability. These essential services support our state’s economy by allowing parents to work and go to school, while giving our future workforce the strong start that they need to be successful later in life.
Since its founding in 1965, Head Start has supported more than 40 million children and their families nationwide – and millions in California alone. Research continues to confirm what educators and parents have long known: Head Start works. It boosts school readiness, improves long-term academic outcomes, increases high school graduation and employment rates, and helps break cycles of generational poverty.
The elimination or reduction of Head Start funding would be catastrophic. In California, it would shut the doors of 1,835 Head Start and Early Head Start Centers and eliminate access to early education for tens of thousands of children – disproportionately children of color, English learners, children with disabilities, and those living in low-income and rural communities. Thousands of parents would also lose their ability to go to work or school, and otherwise participate in the economy.
Head Start is not optional – it is a national commitment that must be honored. For these reasons, we urge you to reject any future attempts to weaken or eliminate this program and to ensure its continued success for the children and families who rely on it every day.
Source: United States Senator for Washington State Patty Murray
OPM encourages agencies to offer maximum salary to Trump political appointees, encouraging them to sidestep agency HR offices & standard vetting process
Lawmakers: “Padding the pockets of political operatives while firing food safety inspectors is nothing short of an egregious abuse of taxpayer dollars.”
Washington, D.C. — Today, Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, and Senators Tim Kaine (D-VA), John Fetterman (D-PA), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Mark Warner (D-VA), Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD), Alex Padilla (D-CA), and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) sent a letter to the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) calling out its recent memo encouraging agencies to ignore the recommendations of agency HR offices and offer the maximum available salary of $195,200 to Schedule C political appointees.
As the Trump administration fires dedicated federal employees en masse across government, the senators demanded information about the Trump administration’s hiring of Schedule C political appointees, their salaries, the number of appointees making the maximum salary, justification for sidestepping HR recommendations and vetting processes, any guardrails implemented to prevent cronyism, and the costs to taxpayers.
“You issued a memo to the heads and acting heads of departments and agencies encouraging them to offer the maximum available salary to political appointees and sidestep the regular hiring process,” write the senators. “This memo, coupled with the Administration’s widespread layoffs of career government workers who have loyally served in the Executive Branch for Presidents of both political parties, makes clear your intention: fire dedicated public servants in droves, cut essential government services, and use taxpayer dollars to instead hire underqualified and overpaid political cronies.”
“While this Administration pushes out scores of public servants and guts entire agencies, often in defiance of Congress and federal law, your memo encourages agencies to help install loyalists who have not been properly vetted, in critically important positions—and to pay them at the highest possible rate. As dedicated career public servants are receiving notice that they have been fired, the Administration is offering higher pay for those hired under Schedule C,” they continue.
“Per your memo, agencies may consider setting initial salaries at up to $195,200, almost five times the median income for individuals in the U.S.,” write the lawmakers.
The lawmakers note that the OPM memo “demonstrates a desire for the expeditious hiring of underqualified and overpaid political elites. Schedule C hires are not career civil servants. They will not be answering phones at Social Security field offices or conducting food inspections or fighting wildfires.”
“Padding the pockets of political operatives while firing food safety inspectors is nothing short of an egregious abuse of taxpayer dollars and massively wasteful,” they state.
The full letter is available HERE and below:
Mr. Charles Ezell
Acting Director
Office of Personnel Management
1900 E Street N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20415
Dear Acting Director Ezell:
On April 10, 2025, you issued a memo to the heads and acting heads of departments and agencies encouraging them to offer the maximum available salary to political appointees and sidestep the regular hiring process. This memo, coupled with the Administration’s widespread layoffs of career government workers who have loyally served in the Executive Branch for Presidents of both political parties, makes clear your intention: fire dedicated public servants in droves, cut essential government services, and use taxpayer dollars to instead hire underqualified and overpaid political cronies.
Since President Trump took office, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has worked with Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to facilitate the firings of tens of thousands of government employees under the guise of government efficiency. The American people have experienced only chaos as a result. The phone lines at Social Security are overwhelmed, food inspections are down, and as fire season begins, the Forest Service is planning to layoff wildland firefighters—to name just a few of the consequences of this administration’s arbitrary and thoughtless cuts. Put simply, OPM’s actions have sowed inefficiency and counter-productivity for the essential government services that our constituents depend on.
While this Administration pushes out scores of public servants and guts entire agencies, often in defiance of Congress and federal law, your memo encourages agencies to help install loyalists who have not been properly vetted, in critically important positions—and to pay them at the highest possible rate. As dedicated career public servants are receiving notice that they have been fired, the Administration is offering higher pay for those hired under Schedule C, a type of appointment for those serving in confidential or policy roles, including as confidential assistants, policy experts, special counsel, and schedulers. Per your memo, agencies may consider setting initial salaries at up to $195,200, almost five times the median income for individuals in the U.S. Further, your memo encourages agency heads to sidestep the standard hiring process and remove the objective additional reviewer of candidates. This would allow appointees to begin work in sensitive roles without any vetting, including for conflicts of interest or background checks, bypassing the basic guardrails that have been in place for decades. On its face, OPM’s April 10 memo demonstrates a desire for the expeditious hiring of underqualified and overpaid political elites.
Schedule C hires are not career civil servants. They will not be answering phones at Social Security field offices or conducting food inspections or fighting wildfires. They do not work for the American people; they work to advance the political agenda of the President. OPM’s April 10 memo makes clear the Trump Administration’s ultimate goal is to decimate the nonpolitical career civil service and use taxpayer dollars to enrich and reward political allies, all at the cost of the government services that people rely on.
Padding the pockets of political operatives while firing food safety inspectors is nothing short of an egregious abuse of taxpayer dollars and massively wasteful.
In order to ensure OPM works to actually promote efficiency and productivity in the government workforce, we request you provide the following information:
The salary information of all Schedule C appointees, and the current number of Schedule C appointees, broken down by agency. For those Schedule C appointees the administration has hired at a pay level of GS-15 or $195,200, please provide a brief job description for each.
The justification for revoking the authority of agency HR departments to set the terms for Schedule C appointment and additional information as to how agencies will set the terms for Schedule C appointment without HR involvement.
Any guidance or detail OPM has provided to agencies as to how to set the terms for a Schedule C appointment in order to avoid widespread corruption.
The agency-level cost of hiring the desired number of Schedule C appointees.
Any written information detailing the role of the Presidential Personnel Office (PPO) in hiring Schedule C appointees.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. We look forward receiving your responses no later than June 4, 2025.
Sincerely,
The Biden Administration released both illegal aliens into the country in 2023
WASHINGTON – On May 25, 18-year-old Ava Moore was hit by an illegal alien on a jet ski while kayaking in Lake Grapevine and tragically killed. The illegal alien fled the scene. Moore recently accepted an appointment to join the U.S. Air Force Academy as a member of the class of 2029.
The driver of the jet ski was allegedly Daikerlyn Alejandraa Gonzalez-Gonzalez, an illegal alien from Venezuela. Following the collision, Gonzalez allegedly fled the scene with Maikel Alexander Coello-Perozo, also an illegal alien, and they also struck two vehicles while leaving.
Ava Moore, one of the countless victims of illegal alien crime.
Gonzalez has been charged with felony manslaughter.
Daikerlyn Alejandraa Gonzalez-Gonzalez
Perozo has been charged with hindering apprehension.
Maikel Alexander Coello-Perozo
ICE lodged immigration detainers with the Grapevine Police Department following the arrest of Gonzalez and Perozo. Both are in removal proceedings.
Gonzalez entered the United States illegally on Sept. 28, 2023, and was released by the previous administration into the country.
Perozo entered the country illegally on January 22, 2023, and was released by the previous administration into the country.
“Ava Moore was a patriot serving her country when she was killed by an illegal alien in a hit-and-run over Memorial Day weekend. This senseless tragedy was 100 percent preventable,” said Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin. “Daikerlyn Gonzalez and Maikel Perozo should have never been in our country and Ava Moore should be alive today preparing for the Air Force Academy. The previous administration’s open border policies have cost too many Americans their lives. President Trump and Secretary Noem will continue to stand with victims of illegal alien crime and their families.”
Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts – Elizabeth Warren
May 28, 2025
Trump, DOGE service cuts will require people to make nearly 2 million additional trips to understaffed Social Security field offices each year
In 31 states, over 25% of seniors must travel over an hour to access nearest Social Security field office
Washington, D.C. – A new analysis from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities revealed that recent cuts to Social Security phone services are forcing long, unnecessary travel burdens on seniors and other beneficiaries.
The Trump Administration and Elon Musk’s DOGE made cuts to Social Security Administration (SSA) phone service, including removing the ability to change direct deposit and other banking information over the phone. These changes will require Americans to make nearly 2 million additional trips to already-understaffed Social Security field offices each year — resulting in hours of wasted time, money spent on gas, and more.
The new analysis found that half of all seniors must drive at least 33 minutes to visit a field office, and nearly a quarter of seniors (13.5 million) live more than an hour round trip from their nearest office. Further, an estimated over 6 million seniors do not drive, and nearly 8 million seniors report a medical condition or disability that makes it hard to travel.
Earlier this year, DOGE identified dozens of Social Security Administration offices across the country it proposed to close — which would make accessing offices even more difficult and time-consuming for Americans.
Source: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
Senate Dems’ Social Security War Room is a coordinated effort to fight back against the Trump administration’s attack on Americans’ Social Security. The War Room coordinates messaging across the Senate Democratic Caucus and external stakeholders; encourages grassroots engagement by providing opportunities for Americans to share what Social Security means to them; and educates Senate staff, the American public, and stakeholders about Republicans’ agenda and their continued cuts to Americans’ Social Security services and benefits.
Source: United States Senator Reverend Raphael Warnock – Georgia
ICYMI: Senator Reverend Warnock, American Farm Bureau Federation President Zippy Duvall Sit for Joint Interview, Discuss Farm Bill Priorities, Tariffs
Senator Reverend Warnock and American Farm Bureau Federation President Zippy Duvall sat down with Southeast AgNet Radio’s Dale Sandlin to talk about the prospects of a 2025 Farm Bill and the Trump administration’s reckless tariff policy
Senator Reverend Warnock on the Farm Bill: “I remain focused on supporting farmers in Georgia and across the Southern region. The Farm Bill is a tool that we need to get that done”
Senator Reverend Warnock on the Farm Bill: “Coming from Georgia, I understand the importance of reference prices. Math is math, we need a raise in reference prices, I’ve advocated for that for Georgia farmers”
Zippy Duvall: “It’s absolutely necessary that we get a Farm Bill and that we get it done now”
Washington, D.C. – Recently, U.S. Senator Reverend Raphael Warnock (D-GA) and American Farm Bureau Federation President Zippy Duvall spoke with Southeast AgNet Radio’s Dale Sandlin about the prospects of a 2025 Farm Bill and the Trump administration’s inconsistent tariff policy. The Senator shared his thoughts about the prospects of getting a Farm Bill this year.
“We need a Farm Bill and it’s something that I’ve been pushing for, for a long time…the Farm Bill won’t happen until after reconciliation and so I think what happens there in that piece of legislation will greatly impact the terms of the debate,” said Senator Reverend Warnock. “I remain focused on supporting farmers in Georgia, and across the southern region, and the Farm Bill is a tool that we need to get done.”
“It’s absolutely necessary that we get this done and get it done now. We have had two extensions, we’re in a Farm Bill that was created in 2018, and a lot of things have happened in agriculture, not just in Georgia, but all across America,” said AFBF President Zippy Duvall, echoing the Senator’s comments. “With COVID, inflation, the cost of everything has gone up and reference prices – as the Senator referred to – does need some attention. Modernizing this Farm Bill will bring certainty to rural America and family farmers across the country.”
Senator Warnock acknowledged farmers concern about negative impacts of the current administration’s sweeping tariffs and stressed he will continue to advocate on their behalf to fight for Georgia farmers’ bottom line:
“I know how important trade is for our Georgia farmers,” said Senator Warnock. “The big problem with the tariffs is that it is creating a lot of uncertainty. And with that uncertainty it’s very difficult to plan any business in a marketplace that’s already very, very challenging.”
“Our policy at the Farm Bureau does not supports tariffs but we are encouraged that the president is trying to level the playing field and to open up markets,” said AFBF President Duvall. “20 percent of our farmers’ income comes from trade, and we need to have open markets across the world. Mexico, China, and Canada are our three largest trading partners. It’s not only just affecting farmers, it’s also affecting input costs, but it’s our job to be the voice of agriculture and we continue to work with senators like Senator Warnock and with the administration to let them know how they affect farmers so that hopefully they can either massage or exempt agriculture to the point where it won’t cause any collateral damage.”
As a veteran member of the Senate committee overseeing federal agriculture policies, and as a senator representing a leading agricultural state, Senator Warnock is a champion of smart policies that help Georgia farmers keep more profits in their pockets and keep the industry at the frontlines of Georgia’s economic success. Last year, Senator Warnock introduced the Southern CROPS Act, a comprehensive package of legislation to provide Georgia row crop farmers additional financial security to help farmers get ahead and remain on their land. Additionally, during last year’s Farm Bill negotiations, Senator Warnock pushed for a raise in reference prices for southeastern commodities. Senator Warnock has also used his perch on the Senate Agriculture Committee to fight for Georgia pecan and peanut farmers, including leading successful, bipartisan efforts to lower India’s tariffs on U.S. grown pecans by 70 percent. The Senator has continued to be outspoken about any concerning impacts President Trump’s inconsistent trade policy pose for hardworking Georgians and their bottom lines.
Listen to the conversation on the Farm Bill HERE.
Listen to the conversation on Tariffs HERE.
Source: United States Senator for Rhode Island Jack Reed
PROVIDENCE, RI – At a time when many Americans believe government should be more responsive to everyday families, Congressional Republicans are working on a law to kick millions of Americans off their health care coverage and food assistance programs this week, with House passage of President Donald Trump’s irresponsible tax bill that will increase poverty to enrich the ultra-wealthy, while doing nothing to lower costs.
According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the Republican reconciliation package would cause millions of Americans to lose access to their affordable health care and leave Americans in worse financial shape.
According to the Center on American Progress, under the House Republican bill, roughly 40,000 Rhode Islanders would be kicked off of their health insurance. And 21,000 Rhode Islanders would lose access to SNAP, which provides nutrition assistance to vulnerable children, seniors, and families.
Today, U.S. Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) spoke out against the bill:
“The numbers don’t lie. And the ugly truth about the GOP’s so-called ‘big beautiful bill’ is that it’s a fiscally irresponsible betrayal of hardworking American taxpayers that will take away people’s health care and increase costs.
“The tax code should be simpler and fairer across the board, with tax breaks targeted to working people, not the uber-wealthy.
“The Republican bill takes from the poor to give to the rich and President Trump’s preferred special interests. America cannot afford this ill-conceived and unbalanced proposal to take the most from the least and place a heavier financial burden on states and middle-class taxpayers. I commend Congressmen Magaziner and Amo for opposing this bill in the House and I will strongly oppose it in the Senate.
“This bill rips away people’s health care. It reduces vital nutrition assistance for children in need. It will increase poverty — further disadvantaging the most vulnerable Americans in order to give a bigger benefit to the top one percent.
“America’s credit rating has already been down-graded under Trump and this bill will make America’s financial outlook worse. This so-called ‘big, beautiful bill’ will ultimately make it harder to access affordable health care and cause a big, ugly financial mess.”
Source: United States Senator for Rhode Island Jack Reed
VIDEO: Sen. Reed delivers remarks on latest in Ukraine
CRANSTON, RI – As Russia steps up its targeting of Ukraine, with nearly 400 Russian drones and missiles fired at Ukrainian cities over the past few days, Russian President Vladimir Putin continues to demonstrate his commitment to the illegal invasion of Ukraine and contempt for President Trump’s negotiating efforts. In the wake of Russia’s increasing attacks, Germany became the latest Ukrainian ally to lift all range restrictions on weapons it sends to Ukraine to combat Moscow’s offensive.
U.S. Senator Jack Reed, the Ranking Member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, believes now is the time for President Trump to throw his support behind tough, targeted sanctions against the Putin regime. Senator Reed says that if President Trump refuses to act, the U.S. Senate must quickly pass a comprehensive sanctions package with a veto-proof majority.
“The Trump Administration must recognize that the only thing Vladimir Putin responds to is strength. To demonstrate our strength, the U.S. must join our allies in levying new sanctions on Russia to intensify the economic pressure. The European Union has recently approved a new package of sanctions targeting covert Russian oil exports, and has announced that work is underway for another set of even tougher sanctions,” said Senator Reed.
“The President claims to understand pressure and leverage in tough negotiations. But none of that has been evident in his dealings with Putin. He has refused to pressure Russia and has been unwilling to bolster Ukraine with adequate military assistance to gain leverage,” Reed continued. “Since the Administration has so far failed to take tough actions to pressure Russia to stop its brutal and illegal war of choice, the U.S. Senate must take up and quickly pass a comprehensive sanctions package against Russia. These bipartisan sanctions on Russia are overdue, should be swiftly enacted to counter Putin, and failure to do so will only embolden bad actors.”
Senator Reed is an original cosponsor of the Sanctioning Russia Act of 2025 (S. 1241), which has 81 cosponsors – 40 Democrats, 40 Republicans, and 1 Independent. The measure includes a 500 percent tariff on imports from nations that purchase Russian oil, petroleum products, natural gas or uranium. The lead sponsor of the bill, U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), wrote in the Wall Street Journal demanding change in Trump’s negotiating strategy and noting that the U.S. Senate is “prepared” to do what the president has not: impose severe sanctions on Moscow.
The bipartisan sanctions calls are coming from the U.S. Senate as President Trump himself is questioning Putin’s motives, writing over the weekend: “I’ve always had a very good relationship with Vladimir Putin of Russia, but something has happened to him. He has gone absolutely CRAZY!” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “He is needlessly killing a lot of people, and I’m not just talking about soldiers. Missiles and drones are being shot into Cities in Ukraine, for no reason whatsoever.”
“I’ve always said that he wants ALL of Ukraine, not just a piece of it, and maybe that’s proving to be right, but if he does, it will lead to the downfall of Russia!” Trump added.
The Kremlin responded to Trump’s criticism by blaming it on “emotional overload” followed by an escalation of military strikes on Ukraine. And Russian State Media site RT mocked Trump’s social media posts in a post of their own on X, writing:
‘Putin doesn’t realize… he’s playing with fire!’ — Trump’s message leaves little room for misinterpretation
Until he posts the opposite tomorrow morning
Senator Reed urged the Trump Administration to spend less time on social media and get to work on submitting a budget request that includes robust support for Ukraine. Failing to do so would harm U.S. national security and economic interests and benefit Russia.
“The Ukrainian people continue to bravely hold the line against Russian forces, which are supplemented by North Korean troops, equipped by Iran, and supported economically by China. The Ukrainians need arms and supplies to continue to protect their country. Instead, the Trump Administration has choked off U.S. military aid and has failed to request any additional support. This must be reversed immediately,” said Senator Reed. “I will continue to do everything in my power to support Ukraine, as their fight is our fight. I urge my Senate colleagues and the President to join me.”
-end-
Source: United States Senator for Iowa Chuck Grassley
BUTLER COUNTY, IOWA – The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Department of Justice (DOJ) failed to prosecute Fusion GPS contractor Nellie Ohr for lying to Congress about her role in advancing the FBI and DOJ’s Crossfire Hurricane investigation, according to an internal FBI analysis confirming Ohr’s false congressional testimony.
The 2019 FBI analysis, obtained by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and declassified at the chairman’s request, provides detailed evidence Ohr lied to Congress during sworn testimony and, as a result, obstructed ongoing congressional investigations, violating federal statutes 18 U.S.C. § 1001 and 18 U.S.C § 1505. The document also exposes how the FBI prevented agents from reviewing all relevant information necessary to perform a full analysis of the extent of Ohr’s false testimony and her role in the fake Russia collusion investigation.
“By lying to Congress, Nellie Ohr showed contempt for congressional oversight and the American people. What’s more, the FBI and DOJ’s failure to hold Ohr accountable for appearing to commit multiple felonies and its obstructive conduct against agents that sought additional information reveals the agencies’ deeply disturbing political bias. Ohr never suffered consequences for advancing the phony Trump-Russia narrative and attempting to cover up her involvement in the hoax. Yet time and again, the American justice system has been weaponized against President Trump and his associates with reckless abandon,” Grassley said. “The DOJ’s inaction on Nellie Ohr’s criminal referral – despite the obviously incriminating evidence provided in the FBI’s own analysis – undermines public trust in the rule of law. I applaud Director Patel, Attorney General Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Blanche for cooperating with my request to declassify this information, which is in the public’s interest, and chart a new course for transparency and accountability at the FBI and DOJ.”
Read the unclassified Nellie Ohr analysis HERE.
Background:
Nellie Ohr was employed by the political opposition research firm Fusion GPS between 2015 to 2016 to perform open-source research attempting to connect then-presidential candidate Donald Trump to Russian organized crime. This research was paid for by the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign and Democratic National Committee (DNC). Both organizations ultimately settled with the Federal Election Commission after allegations of campaign finance violations for intentionally misreporting the true purpose of the payments.
At the time of Nellie Ohr’s Fusion GPS employment, her husband, Bruce Ohr, was an Associate Deputy Attorney General at DOJ. Both Nellie and Bruce Ohr testified to the House Committee on the Judiciary and the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform in 2018 as part of the committees’ oversight of the FBI’s bogus 2016 Crossfire Hurricane investigation into President Trump’s disproven collusion with Russia.
In 2019, then-Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), a member of the House Oversight Committee, filed a criminal referral with DOJ asserting Nellie Ohr knowingly provided false testimony to the House committees.
Key Findings of the FBI’s 2019 Nellie Ohr Analysis:
Nellie Ohr may have been involved in drafting aspects of the Steele Dossier and conspired with her husband, Bruce Ohr, to ensure high-level FBI officials received her work product, while Fusion GPS coordinated with media entities to legitimize the FBI’s opening of its now discredited Trump-Russia investigation.
Nellie Ohr may have falsely testified to Congress that she had no knowledge of the DOJ’s Trump-Russia investigation (pg. 13).
Nellie Ohr gave a thumb drive containing her Fusion GPS work to her husband, Bruce Ohr, which he then provided to the FBI as part of its ongoing investigation (pg. 14).
Nellie Ohr’s email traffic shows she emailed her Russian investigative research directly to Bruce Ohr. Nellie’s research closely mirrored the DOJ and FBI’s Trump-Russia investigation (pgs. 15-16).
Bruce Ohr only shared information with the FBI relating to the Trump-Russia investigation after receiving it from his wife, Nellie Ohr (pgs. 15-17).
Nellie Ohr and Bruce Ohr met personally with British intelligence officer and Fusion GPS contractor, Christopher Steele, in 2016 (pg. 21).
Fusion GPS pitched Nellie Ohr’s research to the Department of State (DOS) for additional investigation, per DOS emails (pg. 23).
Nellie Ohr deleted emails with Russia-focused DOJ prosecutors, indicating an effort to conceal her exchanges with DOJ officials involved in the Trump-Russia investigation (pg. 24).
Nellie Ohr may have falsely testified to Congress that she was not involved in drafting the Steele Dossier (pgs. 25-28).
Nellie Ohr made an analytical error in her own research identical to that in the Steele Dossier (pgs. 29-30).
A report deleted from a thumb drive owned by Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson and provided to the FBI via Bruce Ohr contained the same subject matter researched by Nellie Ohr (pg. 31-33).
In direct contradiction to her congressional testimony, Nellie Ohr disseminated Fusion GPS research to DOJ prosecutors beyond those identified in her testimony (pg. 33).
Nellie Ohr repeatedly sent information to the following DOJ officials: Lisa Holtyn, Ivana Nizich, Joseph Wheatley (pgs. 34-37).
In direct contradiction to her congressional testimony, Nellie Ohr took six ham radio classes and an exam during her time as a Fusion GPS employee (pg. 37). Ham radios can facilitate international communication without the use of a cell signal.
Nellie Ohr claimed her ham radio training occurred before she was employed by Fusion GPS. However, per records from the Fairfax Fire and Rescue Department and Federal Communications Commission, Nellie Ohr’s entire ham radio training occurred between March to May 2016, while working at Fusion GPS.
Nellie Ohr may have been involved in the “Alfa dossier,” an additional sham document attempting to connect Trump to Russian crime (pg. 40).
-30-
Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Melanie Stansbury (N.M.-01)
Albuquerque, N.M. – U.S. Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-NM) and U.S. Representative Melanie Stansbury (NM-01) held a town hall in Albuquerque on Tuesday to sound the alarm on Republican-led efforts to gut critical federal programs that New Mexicans rely on, including Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and SNAP.
The town hall followed a House vote advancing legislation that would slash billions from health care and food assistance programs while delivering trillions in tax giveaways to the wealthiest Americans. New Mexicans packed the event to hear directly from Senator Luján and Representative Stansbury and to raise concerns about the devastating impact these Republican-led proposals would have on New Mexico families. Senator Luján and Representative Stansbury denounced the Republican proposal and warned that the legislation would impose the biggest cut to Medicaid and nutrition assistance in American history.
“We are in the fight of our lives for our communities, our democracy, and to make life better for our people. Every day, I am deeply honored to be in this fight for New Mexico alongside Senator Luján and our entire congressional delegation. Together we are working to defend our rights and Constitution and to tackle our biggest challenges from healthcare, housing and education to caring for our veterans and protecting our lands and waters,” said Representative Melanie Stansbury (NM-01). “I am grateful to everyone who showed up to our Town Hall and who is speaking up and speaking out against the GOPs disastrous reconciliation bill which will gut Medicaid and food assistance for millions of Americans. As this bill heads to the Senate and the GOP continues to gut programs, we need you in this fight.”
“This Republican-led bill is a total rip-off for New Mexicans – all to line the pockets of people like President Trump and Elon Musk,” said Senator Ben Ray Luján. “The Republicans’ priorities couldn’t be more clear: tax handouts for billionaires and massive corporations, paid for by cutting health care, food assistance, and benefits for New Mexicans. We are not backing down. In the Senate, I’m going to keep fighting for our seniors, our children, and the future of New Mexico.”
Impacts of the House GOP legislation include:
Cuts to SNAP, reducing food assistance for children, families, and seniors;
Source: United States Senator Peter Welch (D-Vermont)
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, the Vermont Congressional Delegation, U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Senator Peter Welch (D-Vt.), and U.S. Representative Becca Balint (VT-At-Large), pushed back on the Trump Administration’s plans to eliminate the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) and terminate employees at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) who distribute the funding. The Delegation previously called on Secretary of HHS Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. to immediately reinstate the staff of the Division of Energy Assistance at HHS and disburse funding to states for LIHEAP. They have yet to receive a reply.
LIHEAP is a lifeline to more than 26,000 Vermonters and 6.2 million Americans nationwide. In 2024, approximately 23% of Vermont households reported being unable to pay their energy bills in full. The State of Vermont receives approximately $20 million in LIHEAP funding per year.
“The President has described LIHEAP as ‘unnecessary’ and has suggested shifting the burden of this program to states. However, states are under increasing pressure to balance their budgets and will have to prioritize which social services they continue to provide in the absence of federal funding,” wrote the Delegation. “Given the Trump Administration’s continued cuts to safety net programs, states could face budget shortfalls if they are responsible for shouldering the full cost of LIHEAP.”
The Delegation continued: “The administration has a legal responsibility to disburse current LIHEAP funding to states. We appreciate that all funding for fiscal year 2025 continue to be disbursed. However, we remain concerned about the future of LIHEAP under these circumstances.”
In their letter, the Delegation requested a staff briefing and answers to the following questions:
Which division within the Department of Health and Human Services is currently administering this program? How many FTE staff are working on administering the funding?
Does the Department of Health and Human Services intend to operate LIHEAP going forward?
If not, does the Department expect states to operate the program?
If states are expected to operate the program, will the Department provide resources to transition the administration to state agencies?
Read the full text of the letter.
Source: United States Senator Peter Welch (D-Vermont)
MANCHESTER, VT — At a roundtable in Manchester this afternoon, U.S. Senator Peter Welch (D-Vt.) brought together Vermont businesses and manufacturers to hear directly how global tariffs and President Trump’s trade war are impacting them. The event was held at The Orvis Company, which was founded in Manchester, Vermont, in 1856.
This roundtable follows Senator Welch’s recent trip to Ottawa, where he met with Prime Minister Mark Carney and other Canadian leaders to discuss President Trump’s tariffs and trade war.
“I always appreciate hearing directly from Vermonters about how President Trump’s tariffs are hurting the success of manufacturers and farmers here in our state. As I said after President Trump threatened these tariffs, nobody wins a trade war. Congress must reassert its constitutional role over trade policy and end this White House’s economic blunder,” said Senator Welch.
“It was clear listening to folks in Manchester today: we so revere the relationship between Vermonters and Canadians, both in the personal and the economic sense—and the rhetoric and reckless policies they’re forced to respond to are causing real harm,” concluded Senator Welch. “I traveled with a bipartisan delegation of Senators last week to convey how important Canada is to us in Vermont, as it is to so many border states. I know families, businesses, and farmers in the Green Mountain State feel the same way.”
Senator Welch was joined by business leaders from a variety of industries, including homebuilding, retail, and food and kitchen manufacturing, including Orvis, Vermont Country Store, JK Adams, Mary Meyer Stuffed Toys, RK Miles, Back Roads Granola, RAD Innovations, and Brattleboro Development Credit Corporation (BDCC).
Senator Welch has blasted Trump’s tariffs and trade war and shared stories from constituents about how President Trump’s economic policies have impacted their businesses, farms, and communities. Senator Welch is a cosponsor of a bipartisan resolution to repeal the tariffs on Canada, a bipartisan bill to restore congressional tariff authority, a bill to restrict the Executive Branch’s authority to impose tariffs through the International Economic Emergency Powers Act, and a bill to exempt small businesses from the April 2nd global tariff Executive Order.
Senator Welch also led a bipartisan resolution to end President Trump’s ruinous global tariffs.
The Senator has hosted roundtables in Stowe, Newport, St. Albans, and virtually to hear concerns and first-hand stories from Vermont and Canadian leaders impacted by the trade war.
Media Note: A recording of the event can be provided upon request.
Source: United States Senator for Virginia Tim Kaine
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senators Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine (both D-VA) joined six of their colleagues in sending a letter to the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) criticizing its recent memo encouraging agencies to ignore the recommendations of agency human resources (HR) offices and offer the maximum available salary of $195,200 to Schedule C political appointees.
This memo comes on the heels of the Trump Administration firing dedicated federal employees en masse across the government. In the letter, the senators demanded information about the Trump Administration’s hiring of Schedule C political appointees, their salaries, the number of appointees making the maximum salary, justification for sidestepping HR recommendations and vetting processes, any guardrails implemented to prevent cronyism, and the costs to taxpayers.
“…You issued a memo to the heads and acting heads of departments and agencies encouraging them to offer the maximum available salary to political appointees and sidestep the regular hiring process,” wrote the senators. “This memo, coupled with the Administration’s widespread layoffs of career government workers who have loyally served in the Executive Branch for Presidents of both political parties, makes clear your intention: fire dedicated public servants in droves, cut essential government services, and use taxpayer dollars to instead hire underqualified and overpaid political cronies.”
“While this Administration pushes out scores of public servants and guts entire agencies, often in defiance of Congress and federal law, your memo encourages agencies to help install loyalists who have not been properly vetted, in critically important positions—and to pay them at the highest possible rate. As dedicated career public servants are receiving notice that they have been fired, the Administration is offering higher pay for those hired under Schedule C, a type of appointment for those serving in confidential or policy roles,” they continued.
“Per your memo, agencies may consider setting initial salaries at up to $195,200, almost five times the median income for individuals in the U.S.,” wrote the lawmakers. “…Padding the pockets of political operatives while firing food safety inspectors is nothing short of an egregious abuse of taxpayer dollars and massively wasteful.”
In addition to Warner and Kaine, the letter was also signed by U.S. Senators Patty Murray (D-WA), Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), John Fetterman (D-PA), Alex Padilla (D-CA), and Chris Van Hollen (D-MD).
The full letter is available here and below:
Dear Acting Director Ezell:
On April 10, 2025, you issued a memo to the heads and acting heads of departments and agencies encouraging them to offer the maximum available salary to political appointees and sidestep the regular hiring process. This memo, coupled with the Administration’s widespread layoffs of career government workers who have loyally served in the Executive Branch for Presidents of both political parties, makes clear your intention: fire dedicated public servants in droves, cut essential government services, and use taxpayer dollars to instead hire underqualified and overpaid political cronies.
Since President Trump took office, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has worked with Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to facilitate the firings of tens of thousands of government employees under the guise of government efficiency. The American people have experienced only chaos as a result. The phone lines at Social Security are overwhelmed, food inspections are down, and as fire season begins, the Forest Service is planning to layoff wildland firefighters—to name just a few of the consequences of this administration’s arbitrary and thoughtless cuts. Put simply, OPM’s actions have sowed inefficiency and counter-productivity for the essential government services that our constituents depend on.
While this Administration pushes out scores of public servants and guts entire agencies, often in defiance of Congress and federal law, your memo encourages agencies to help install loyalists who have not been properly vetted, in critically important positions—and to pay them at the highest possible rate. As dedicated career public servants are receiving notice that they have been fired, the Administration is offering higher pay for those hired under Schedule C, a type of appointment for those serving in confidential or policy roles, including as confidential assistants, policy experts, special counsel, and schedulers. Per your memo, agencies may consider setting initial salaries at up to $195,200, almost five times the median income for individuals in the U.S. Further, your memo encourages agency heads to sidestep the standard hiring process and remove the objective additional reviewer of candidates. This would allow appointees to begin work in sensitive roles without any vetting, including for conflicts of interest or background checks, bypassing the basic guardrails that have been in place for decades. On its face, OPM’s April 10 memo demonstrates a desire for the expeditious hiring of underqualified and overpaid political elites.
Schedule C hires are not career civil servants. They will not be answering phones at Social Security field offices or conducting food inspections or fighting wildfires. They do not work for the American people; they work to advance the political agenda of the President. OPM’s April 10 memo makes clear the Trump Administration’s ultimate goal is to decimate the nonpolitical career civil service and use taxpayer dollars to enrich and reward political allies, all at the cost of the government services that people rely on.
Padding the pockets of political operatives while firing food safety inspectors is nothing short of an egregious abuse of taxpayer dollars and massively wasteful.
In order to ensure OPM works to actually promote efficiency and productivity in the government workforce, we request you provide the following information:
The salary information of all Schedule C appointees, and the current number of Schedule C appointees, broken down by agency. For those Schedule C appointees the administration has hired at a pay level of GS-15 or $195,200, please provide a brief job description for each.
The justification for revoking the authority of agency HR departments to set the terms for Schedule C appointment and additional information as to how agencies will set the terms for Schedule C appointment without HR involvement.
Any guidance or detail OPM has provided to agencies as to how to set the terms for a Schedule C appointment in order to avoid widespread corruption.
The agency-level cost of hiring the desired number of Schedule C appointees.
Any written information detailing the role of the Presidential Personnel Office (PPO) in hiring Schedule C appointees.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. We look forward receiving your responses no later than June 4, 2025.
Source: United States Senator for Virginia Tim Kaine
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Just a week after Moody’s downgraded the U.S. credit rating due to mounting government debt, pushing up mortgage interest rates, Republicans in the House moved forward with their plan to provide massive tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans that would add an additional $3.8 trillion to the deficit, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. U.S. Senators Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine (both D-VA) issued the following statement:
“Moody’s decision to downgrade our nation’s credit rating should have been a wake-up call, but instead, Republicans in the House doubled down with a tax plan that blows a hole in the deficit and leaves working families holding the bag. The result will be a ballooning national debt, higher interest rates, and the very real prospect of increased prices for everything from groceries to mortgages. Virginia families are already feeling the pinch from inflation and rising costs. The last thing they need is a reckless giveaway to the richest Americans that undermines our economic stability and puts the full faith and credit of the United States at risk. In the Senate, we will oppose this disastrous legislation.”
Additionally, the GOP tax bill would add so much to the national debt that it could trigger nearly $500 billion in cuts to Medicare beginning next year, according to the CBO analysis.
The nonpartisan CBO report also confirmed what Warner and Kaine have previously warned – that working Americans will foot the bill for massive tax breaks handed to the wealthiest few, if President Trump and congressional Republicans move forward. The CBO found that under the GOP plan, the bottom 10 percent of Americans would see household resources reduced by 4 percent while the top 10 percent would see their resources increase by 2 percent. Meanwhile, the Republican bill would result in $698 billion in cuts to Medicaid and $267 billion in cuts to nutrition assistance.
Warner and Kaine have been sounding the alarm about the effects of the GOP plan on Virginia families if Republicans in Congress continue to insist on gutting vital programs in order to pay for tax breaks for the richest Americans, noting that the GOP bill would strip health insurance from more than 262,000 Virginians, cut SNAP benefits for more than 204,000 people in Virginia, raise energy costs for Virginia households, jeopardize more than 20,000 Virginia jobs, and raise taxes on minimum wage workers while giving the richest 0.1% a $188,000 tax cut.
Source: United States Senator for Wisconsin Tammy Baldwin
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) joined Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and Peter Welch (D-VT) to introduce the Strengthening Medicare and Reducing Taxpayer (SMART) Prices Act. The legislation would expand the number of drugs that Medicare can negotiate lower drug prices for, reduce federal spending, and give the Department of Health and Human Services stronger tools to negotiate lower drug prices in Medicare Part B and Part D.
“No Wisconsinite should be forced to forgo the medication they need to stay healthy because of cost,” said Senator Baldwin. “This bill will build on the progress we’ve made to give more Americans some breathing room – cracking down on greedy drug companies and helping ensure no Wisconsinite has to choose between affording their medication and putting food on the table.”
This legislation builds on the Baldwin-backed Inflation Reduction Act, which was passed into law in 2022, and empowered Medicare to negotiate prescription drug prices for the first time, unleashing the power of 53 million seniors enrolled in Medicare Part D Drug Coverage. The SMART Prices Act would extend this progress by more than doubling the number of prescription drugs Medicare must negotiate to a minimum of 50 per year, allowing the costliest prescription drugs to have negotiated prices five years after approval by the Food and Drug Administration, and by increasing the discount that Medicare is allowed to negotiate.
According to preliminary estimates from a model by West Health and Verdant Research, if the SMART Prices Act was enacted in 2026, it would save 33 percent more by 2030 than current law. It would also allow Medicare to begin negotiations earlier and bring down the price of more expensive drugs.
The bill is endorsed by Center for American Progress, FamiliesUSA, Patients For Affordable Drugs NOW, Protect Our Care, and Public Citizen.
“The SMART Prices Act builds on the progress of the Inflation Reduction Act to help bring down today’s exorbitant prescription drug prices,” said Andrea Ducas, Vice President of Health Policy at the Center for American Progress. “The bill is an important step forward in holding pharmaceutical companies accountable and ensuring seniors are paying fair and affordable prices for life-saving medications.”
“One in three Americans can’t afford their prescription drugs. We hear from patients every day who are rationing medication or skipping doses because of high drug costs. The SMART Prices Act is a welcome step that builds on the historic drug price reforms in the Inflation Reduction Act by increasing the number of drugs subject to Medicare negotiation – a proposal that has broad support from Americans on both sides of the aisle. We are grateful to Senator Klobuchar for her tireless leadership on this critical issue and are eager to expand Medicare negotiation to secure a better deal for more patients on Medicare,” said Merith Basey, Executive Director of Patients For Affordable Drugs Now.
“Senators Klobuchar and Welch are fighting for seniors and their families by bringing down the high cost of prescription drugs,” said Protect Our Care Chair Leslie Dach. “Americans across the political spectrum support Medicare’s ability to negotiate drug prices and want to see the program expand. Instead, Trump and his cronies in Congress are charging ahead with their budget that not only guts Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act to fund billionaire tax breaks, but hands billions in give-aways over to Big Pharma. The contrast couldn’t be more clear. If Republicans are serious about wanting to lower drug prices and save taxpayer dollars, they should join Senators Klobuchar and Welch in passing the SMART Prices Act and deliver real, lasting relief for the American people.”
“The SMART Prices Act would save billions of dollars by empowering Medicare to negotiate lower prices for more patients sooner. We applaud Senators Klobuchar, Welch, and cosponsors for their leadership. Congressional Republicans should follow their lead instead of seeking to undermine Medicare drug price negotiations and take away health insurance from millions of our society’s most vulnerable people,” said Robert Weissman, Co-President of Public Citizen.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Randy Weber (14th District of Texas)
Galveston, TX– U.S. Rep. Randy Weber (TX-14) sat down with local business leaders, the Galveston Regional Chamber of Commerce, and the Galveston-Texas City Pilots for a U.S. Camber of Commerce roundtable discussion focused on protecting hardworking Texans from looming tax hikes. With key provisions of President Trump’s historic 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) set to expire at the end of the year, Rep. Weber and local stakeholders made the case for extending these pro-growth tax policies that have fueled job creation and economic opportunity across Southeast Texas.
“As a former small business owner, I know firsthand what it takes to make payroll, grow a company, and support workers,” said Rep. Weber. “Local job creators shouldn’t be punished with higher taxes. The 2017 tax cuts were a game-changer for our economy, and now we’re working to make them permanent. Texans want less government, lower taxes, and more freedom to build their businesses. We’re putting small businesses first, right where they belong.”
“The Galveston Regional Chamber of Commerce was honored to host the U.S. Chamber’s Roundtable with Congressman Randy Weber. We are grateful for the Galveston-Texas City Pilots and the local business leaders who participated in a substantial discussion around the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, tariffs and issues crucial to the region,” said Gina Spagnola, President and CEO of the Galveston Regional Chamber. “Lending their voices and vision proved how important this community is to Texas. As a former small business owner, the Congressman knows businesses in every sector collectively shape our economy and we are grateful for his incredible leadership and unwavering commitment.”
“The U.S. Chamber thanks Congressman Weber for working tirelessly to ensure Americans everywhere continue to benefit from the pro-growth policies enacted in the Tax Cuts and Jobs act of 2017. I am grateful to the Galveston Regional Chamber for partnering in today’s discussion which highlighted these tax provisions included in the recent House passage of the budget bill. The impact on businesses of all sizes in this district help to fuel, feed and transport resources across the nation,” said Monique Thierry, Vice President, Southwest/South Central region, U.S. Chamber of Commerce. “Congressman Weber is once again demonstrating his commitment to the workers, families, and businesses of Texas 14th District.”
On May 22, the House passed H.R. 1 – the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, legislation that would lock in the 2017 Trump tax cuts for families, small businesses, and workers. The bill now heads to the Senate.
Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
Moscow, May 28 /Xinhua/ — Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov had a telephone conversation with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Wednesday, the Russian Foreign Ministry reported.
According to the department, S. Lavrov informed M. Rubio about the progress of implementing the agreements between Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump on May 19, as well as about the preparation by the Russian side of specific proposals for the next round of direct Russian-Ukrainian negotiations in Istanbul, Turkey.
It is noted that M. Rubio, in turn, “emphasized D. Trump’s focus on a speedy end to the Ukrainian conflict and expressed Washington’s readiness to facilitate a rapprochement between the parties’ positions.”
“The parties confirmed their mutual commitment to continuing a constructive and mutually respectful dialogue between the foreign policy departments of Russia and the United States,” the Russian Foreign Ministry added.
It is reported that during the conversation, current issues on the bilateral agenda were also touched upon. –0–
SEATTLE — Attorney General Nick Brown today joined a coalition of 15 other attorneys general to file a lawsuit against the Trump administration’s illegal attempts to cut critical National Science Foundation (NSF) programs and funding that help maintain the United States’ position as a global leader in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM).
On April 18, NSF began terminating projects focused on increasing the participation of women, minorities, and people with disabilities in STEM fields. On May 2, NSF announced that it would also cap “indirect costs” of research projects like laboratory space, equipment, and facility services at 15 percent. This arbitrary limit on indirect costs would slash millions of dollars for groundbreaking scientific research across the country, jeopardizing national security, the economy, and public health.
With this lawsuit, Attorney General Brown and the coalition are seeking a court order blocking the implementation of NSF’s new directives to eliminate programs addressing diversity in STEM and cut vital funding for research across the country.
“Washington’s college and university system is at the forefront of critical research and emerging technologies, and relies heavily on support from the National Science Foundation,” said Brown. “Congress created the NSF to promote the progress of science and has recognized America’s need for a preeminent STEM workforce. The Trump administration does not have the authority to unilaterally cut NSF grants and their terminations threaten our national security and economic dominance.”
NSF also has a Congressionally mandated focus on improving diversity in STEM fields. Congress has instructed in law that a “core strategy” of NSF’s work must be to increase the participation of people who have historically been left out of STEM occupations. This policy has been a success. As the coalition of attorneys general notes, between 1995 and 2017, the number of women in science and engineering occupations, or with science or engineering degrees, has doubled. During that same time, people of color went from 15 percent to 35 percent of science and engineering job or degree holders. As a result of NSF’s April 18 directive to terminate programs seeking to increase diversity in STEM, dozens of projects have been canceled.
The coalition also asserts in the lawsuit that NSF’s directive to cap indirect costs at 15 percent would devastate scientific research at universities throughout the country. NSF’s new cap would mean essential research and infrastructure would be cut, leading to critical projects being abandoned, staff laid off, and research essential to national security, public health, and economic stability ending. The administration’s unlawful attempts to cap indirect costs at 15 percent for National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Department of Energy (DOE) grants have already been stopped by courts, in part due to a lawsuit brought by Attorney General Brown and 21 other attorneys general.
Brown and the coalition argue that NSF’s directives violate the Administrative Procedure Act and the Constitution by unlawfully changing NSF policy and ignoring Congress’s intent for how NSF should function. The lawsuit seeks a court order ruling NSF’s new policies are illegal and blocking them from being implemented.
Joining the Washington state Attorney General’s Office in filing this lawsuit are the attorneys general of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Wisconsin.
The lawsuit is available here.
-30-
Washington’s Attorney General serves the people and the state of Washington. As the state’s largest law firm, the Attorney General’s Office provides legal representation to every state agency, board, and commission in Washington. Additionally, the Office serves the people directly by enforcing consumer protection, civil rights, and environmental protection laws. The Office also prosecutes elder abuse, Medicaid fraud, and handles sexually violent predator cases in 38 of Washington’s 39 counties. Visit www.atg.wa.govto learn more.
Media Contact:
Email: press@atg.wa.gov
Phone: (360) 753-2727
General contacts: Click here
Media Resource Guide & Attorney General’s Office FAQ
EW YORK – New York Attorney General Letitia James today co-led a coalition of 15 other attorneys general in suing the Trump administration to stop its illegal attempts to cut critical National Science Foundation (NSF) programs and funding that help maintain the United States’ position as a global leader in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM). On April 18, NSF began terminating projects focused on increasing the participation of women, minorities, and people with disabilities in STEM fields. On May 2, NSF announced that it would also cap “indirect costs” of research projects like laboratory space, equipment, and facility services at 15 percent. This arbitrary limit on indirect costs would slash millions of dollars for groundbreaking scientific research across the country, jeopardizing national security, the economy, and public health. With this lawsuit, Attorney General James and the coalition are seeking a court order blocking the implementation of NSF’s new directives to eliminate programs addressing diversity in STEM and cut vital funding for research across the country.
“Every time we go online, scan a barcode at checkout, or get an MRI, we use technology made possible by the National Science Foundation,” said Attorney General James. “This administration’s attacks on basic science and essential efforts to ensure diversity in STEM will weaken our economy and our national security. Putting politics over science will only set our country back, and I will continue to fight to protect critical scientific research and education.”
Since its creation in 1950, NSF has been an independent federal agency crucial to maintaining the United States’ dominance in STEM. From developing artificial intelligence (AI) technology to creating innovative solutions to environmental and energy challenges, NSF-funded research at American universities is vital to addressing the nation’s biggest challenges and maintaining the country’s competitive edge.
NSF also has a Congressionally-mandated focus on improving diversity in STEM fields. Congress has instructed in law that a “core strategy” of NSF’s work must be to increase the participation of people who have historically been left out of STEM occupations. This policy has been a success. As Attorney General James and the coalition note, between 1995 and 2017, the number of women in science and engineering occupations, or with science or engineering degrees, has doubled. During that same time, people of color went from 15 percent to 35 percent of science and engineering job or degree holders.
As a result of NSF’s April 18 directive to terminate programs seeking to increase diversity in STEM, dozens of projects have been canceled. In New York, these include 18 programs funded with $11 million in NSF funds within the City University of New York (CUNY) that specifically seek to promote participation in STEM fields by women, minorities, and people with disabilities. All of those programs have had their funding canceled.
Attorney General James and the coalition also assert in the lawsuit that NSF’s directive to cap indirect costs at 15 percent would devastate scientific research at universities throughout the country. Twenty-three campuses across the State University of New York (SUNY) system participate in NSF-funded research and received over $104 million in NSF funding in fiscal year 2024. These funds supported cutting-edge research, including microelectronics research at the University at Buffalo, world-leading atmospheric science and climate research at the University at Albany, and the NSF Upstate New York Energy Storage Engine led by Binghamton University, which aims to establish a hub for new battery technology to decrease dependence on technology from China.
As Attorney General James and the coalition argue, NSF’s new cap would mean essential research and infrastructure would be cut, leading to critical projects being abandoned, staff laid off, and research essential to national security, public health, and economic stability ending. In fiscal year 2025, SUNY expects to receive $24.6 million for indirect costs. A 15 percent cap on indirect costs would slash $18 million in critical research funding for the SUNY system. The administration’s unlawful attempts to cap indirect costs at 15 percent for National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Department of Energy (DOE) grants have already been stopped by courts, in part due to a lawsuit brought by Attorney General James and 21 other attorneys general.
Attorney General James and the coalition argue that NSF’s directives violate the Administrative Procedure Act and the Constitution by unlawfully changing NSF policy and ignoring Congress’s intent for how NSF should function. The lawsuit seeks a court order ruling NSF’s new policies are illegal and blocking them from being implemented.
Joining Attorney General James in filing this lawsuit are the attorneys general of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, and Washington.
Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts – Elizabeth Warren
May 28, 2025
Boston, MA – Yesterday, U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) joined state and federal leaders at the Cambridge Health Alliance’s Revere Care Center to sound the alarm about Republicans’ planned cuts to health care for Massachusetts children, families, seniors, veterans and people with disabilities.
Senator Warren laid out the impact of these planned cuts to health care and food assistance, and explained how the cuts would raise costs for working families.
“Right now, you probably know someone who counts on Medicaid to pay for medicine that helps treat their cancer, the hip replacement they need to walk, the inhaler their kid needs to breathe, or the nursing home that takes care of their aging parents. And they are all at risk,” said Senator Warren.
Senator Warren also made clear that Massachusetts leaders are united in fighting back against the cuts.
“We believe that no senior should be kicked to the curb so that Mark Zuckerberg [can] buy another Hawaiian island. And we believe that no person with a disability who needs a home health aide should have to give that up so that Jeff Bezos can buy a third yacht. We believe that, and that is why we are here to fight back,” concluded Senator Warren.
Transcript: Remarks on Medicaid Cuts at the Cambridge Health Alliance’s Revere Care CenterMay 27, 2025
As Delivered
Senator Elizabeth Warren: It is a real honor to stand here with the Governor, with [] Senator [Markey], with [] Senator [Edwards], with [] Mayor [Keefe], with the doctors, with the people who fight for health care here in the Commonwealth. I am grateful for that and I look forward to the fact that when we partner up, that’s how we make real change.
So, last week the House of Representatives passed Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful bill.” This would be the greatest transfer of wealth—from just one piece of legislation—from the poorest Americans to the richest Americans ever before in US history. Think about that: these guys are actually out there making history by taking away—from hardworking families, from people down on their luck, from seniors, from little babies—so that a handful of billionaires and corporate CEOs can get more giveaways from the government.
That’s the Republican plan: Billionaires win, everyone else loses.
Now, the details are gruesome on this bill. This bill would: cut Medicaid, gut the Affordable Care Act, and slash food assistance.
If it passes the Senate, this bill will rip health care away from 14 million people, over a quarter of a million right here in Massachusetts — all to pay for tax handouts for billionaires.
This Republican bill will raise costs for working families — from groceries to health care to utility bills — while making the richest Americans even richer.
Here in Massachusetts, the consequences will be severe.
In our state, Medicaid is known as MassHealth, and it covers almost two million people. If this bill passes, every one of them will be at risk of losing their health coverage.
That is one-third of all newborn babies and their mamas right here in Massachusetts at risk for losing their health care.
That’s checkups and trips to the doctor for ear infections and money for asthma medications and for antibiotics for more than a third of all kids here in Massachusetts.
That’s paying the monthly bills for almost TWO-thirds of all nursing home residents here in Massachusetts.
As the Governor said, the pain will echo throughout our communities, hitting even those who don’t currently receive direct care. Without the guaranteed payments from Medicaid, our hospitals and community health centers are at risk.
Community hospitals, even with Medicaid reimbursement, are already struggling.
And right now, nearly half the funding for Massachusetts community health centers – which saves money by preventing people from needing to go to the emergency room – half their money currently comes from Medicaid that is on the chopping block by the Republicans.
When those hospitals and community health centers are forced to close, we all lose.
Now, right now, you probably know someone who counts on Medicaid to pay for the medicine that helps treat their cancer. You probably know someone who got the hip replacement they needed so that they can walk paid for by Medicaid. You probably know someone whose kid gets their inhaler from Medicaid, or the nursing home that takes care of their aging parents. And all of those are at risk.
This is a full-blown crisis, and we are here to sound the alarm.
I’m here with Governor Healey and with the senators and everyone behind me because we believe that no one in America should go without health care so that Elon Musk can take a rocket ship ride to Mars.
We believe that no senior should be kicked to the curb so that Mark Zuckerberg wants to buy another Hawaiian island.
And we believe that no person with a disability who needs a home health aide should have to give that up so that Jeff Bezos can buy a third yacht.
We believe that and that is why we are here to fight back.
I am proud to stand beside the Governor, and beside the senators, beside the mayor to make sure that everyone in Massachusetts and around the country gets the health care that they deserve.
And with that, I will turn it over to a wonderful partner and a tremendous fighter in the United States Senate—my partner, Ed Markey.
Source: United States Senator Peter Welch (D-Vermont)
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senators Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), and Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) urged the Trump Administration to drop its misguided plan to cut homebuilding tax credits in the midst of a housing crisis. The lawmakers urged the administration to reconsider its preliminary Fiscal Year (FY) 2026 budget request, which would completely eliminate funding for the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) HOME Investment Partnership Program.
“Many households are contributing more than half of their income to rent, leaving less for other needs like health care, groceries, or saving for emergencies. For-profit developers also struggle to build entry-level or middle-income housing, resulting in a focus on high-end construction with units unaffordable to working families,” wrote the Senators. “Now is the time for strong federal support for HOME and the Housing Trust Fund to close financing gaps and build more homes.”
“Unfortunately, reports of unauthorized funding freezes and contract cancellations have raised concerns among housing investors about the stability of all of the federal funding sources in their projects’ capital stack, leading them to reconsider their investments. Decreasing or eliminating the funding sources that make LIHTC projects financially feasible will have detrimental impacts on rural communities’ ability to build more housing, especially when coupled with Fannie Mae’s newly restricted investment activity in this space,” the Senators continued.
The Senators concluded: “States are making efforts to speed housing construction through zoning reforms, permitting streamlining, innovative incentive structures, and housing equity programs. Unless the federal government provides consistent, flexible funding to close the financing gap for major projects, this progress will stall. With that in mind, we urge you to provide an FY26 Budget Request that furthers HUD’s mission to ensure safe and clean affordable housing and reinforce low-income housing tax credit investor confidence by advocating for reliable funding for HOME and the Housing Trust Fund.”
HOME and the Housing Trust Fund programs work in conjunction with the low-income housing tax credit (LIHTC) to fuel affordable housing construction across the country. The LIHTC has funded the construction of almost 2.75 million affordable housing units across the country. However, despite the proven efficacy of these programs, the federal government has underinvested in them for decades, resulting in a severe, nationwide shortage of affordable rental housing for working families.
Read the full text of the letter.
Bipartisan Appropriations Letter Urges Congress to Fund Grant to Scrub Judges’ Personal Information from the Internet
Threats Against Judges Have Risen Over 100% in the Last 6 Weeks, Coinciding with Harsh Rhetoric from Trump Administration
Read the LetterHere
Washington, D.C – Congressman Dan Goldman (NY-10) and Congresswoman Mikie Sherill (NJ-11) led a bipartisan group of 39 of their colleagues in writing to the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, and Science Chairman Hal Rogers (KY-05) and Ranking Member Grace Meng (NY-06) requesting that they provide $10 million for a program within the bipartisan Daniel Anderl Judicial Security and Privacy Act of 2022 for state and local governments to remove the personal information of federal judges and their families from the internet, such as property tax records that would list addresses.
“As Donald Trump has escalated his attacks on federal judges, their safety and security are increasingly at risk. If judges alter their decisions out of fear for the safety of themselves and their families, then we no longer live under the rule of law,” Congressman Dan Goldman said. In order to enhance the security of federal judges, it is vital for Congress to fund this essential grant program and ensure that sensitive personal information, including home addresses, financial records, and details about family members, is kept private.”
Between 2015 and 2021, threats against federal judges rose by more than 450%, from 926 incidents in 2015 to 4,511 in 2021. The Trump administration’s recent rhetoric against individual judges who have rendered unfavorable rulings has only supercharged that trend, with threats against judges rising over 100% in the last six weeks alone.
“Time is of the essence in implementing the Anderl Act’s protections for our federal judges and their families, as members of the Federal judiciary have been exposed to an increased number of personal threats in connection to their role,” the Members wrote.
Named after Daniel Anderl—the son of a federal judge who was murdered by a disgruntled attorney who obtained the judge’s home address online—the law’s provisions authorizing anti-doxxing grants for state and local governments have never been funded.
“The importance of the Anderl Act to our federal judiciary and to our federal legal system cannot be overstated. It is critical that Congress take action to protect all our public servants on the federal bench and prevent this type of violence and threats in the future. Our judiciary, and by extension, our democracy, cannot continue to bear this burden alone,” the Members concluded.
Read the letterhere or below:
Dear Chair Rogers and Ranking Member Meng:
As you begin consideration of the Fiscal Year 2026 Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies appropriations bill, we ask that within the accounts funding the Department of Justice State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance account, you provide $10 million for the state and local government grant program authorized in Section 5934(c) of the Daniel Anderl Judicial Security and Privacy Act of 2022 (Public Law 117-263).
This program permits the Attorney General to make grants to States or units of local governments so they can remove personal information about federal judges and their families from their websites, such as property tax records that would list federal judges’ addresses.
Time is of the essence in implementing the Anderl Act’s protections for our federal judges and their families, as members of the Federal judiciary have been exposed to an increased number of personal threats in connection to their role. Testifying before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and the Federal Government in February of this year, U.S. Marshals Service Director Ronald Davis said that threats against federal judges have doubled in the past 3 years. In fact, from 2015 to 2021, threats against federal court personnel jumped more than 450 percent, from 926 incidents recorded in 2015 to 4,511 incidents in 2021.
Among the incidents demonstrating the unfortunate urgency of these measures is the 2020 murder of Daniel Anderl, for whom the legislation was named. The 20-year-old son of New Jersey District Judge Esther Salas, Daniel was shot and killed at home by a disgruntled lawyer who found the judge’s address on the internet and also critically wounded Judge Salas’ husband.
After Judge James Robart’s 2017 decision to block former President Trump’s travel ban, critics posted the judge’s home phone and address online. Judge Robart received 40,000 messages, 1,100 of which were serious enough to be investigated, and so many death threats that U.S. marshals set up camp around his house. Additionally, in 2022, a California man was indicted for attempting to assassinate Justice Brett Kavanaugh. An FBI affidavit stated that the would-be assassin found Justice Kavanaugh’s address online.
In his annual year-end report in December, Chief Justice Roberts warned about the rising number of threats to the judiciary’s independence, including calls for violence against judges and “dangerous” suggestions by elected officials to disregard court rulings they disagree with. This warning was followed by another by the U.S. Marshals to federal judges indicating an “unusually high threat level” in March. The importance of the Anderl Act to our federal judiciary and to our federal legal system cannot be overstated. It is critical that Congress take action to protect all our public servants on the federal bench and prevent this type of violence and threats in the future. Our judiciary, and by extension, our democracy, cannot continue to bear this burden alone.
Thank you for your consideration of this important request.
OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today filed a lawsuit to stop the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) from: (1) terminating grants for scientific research that seeks to promote and understand diversity in higher education and the workforce, and (2) imposing a 15% cap on indirect cost reimbursements for research projects. From creating AI technology that predicts weather patterns to protect communities, to developing sustainable solutions for environmental and economic challenges, to making power grids more sustainable, NSF-funded research at American universities has ensured the United States’ status as a global leader in scientific innovation. In the complaint, Attorney General Bonta and 15 other attorneys general ask the court to bar NSF from implementing the terminations and cost cap as arbitrary and capricious and contrary to law in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act.
“President Trump wants to make America’s universities second tier with his backwards efforts to slash research funding that has kept us on the cutting edge of science and innovation,” said Attorney General Bonta. “For more than 50 years, Congress has expressly authorized the National Science Foundation to train up the next generation of talent and invest in the infrastructure necessary to keep our position as a global leader in STEM. With President Trump’s latest round of indiscriminate funding cuts, America is poised to fall behind its competitors at a critical moment in the global technology race. We’re suing to stop him.”
At the direction of President Trump, NSF is taking aim at the twin pillars sustaining the United States’ STEM preeminence. First, NSF announced a departure from Congress’s longstanding policy to promote a robust STEM workforce that draws in underrepresented populations. Second, NSF announced that it would slash support for the infrastructure necessary for cutting edge American research. These actions violate the law and jeopardize America’s longstanding global leadership in STEM.
Since 1980, Congress has maintained that for the United States to maintain its competitive edge, the nation would need to encourage and prepare people from groups traditionally underrepresented in STEM to acquire skills and pursue careers in science and engineering fields. And it has directed, empowered, and funded NSF to carry this policy out – with significant success. Between 1995 and 2017, the number of women in science and engineering occupations, or with science or engineering degrees, doubled; minorities, meanwhile, went from representing about 15% of those groups to about 35%.
To conduct NSF research, universities must maintain and staff substantial infrastructure, such as cutting-edge laboratories, advanced computer systems and networks, appropriate security, and specialized heating or cooling systems. Because the costs associated with such infrastructure often are not attributable solely to one federally sponsored research project, the federal government negotiates indirect cost rates that ensure research grants are sufficient to actually sustain university research efforts. By indiscriminately slashing indirect cost rates, NSF is repeating the unlawful practices of the National Institutes of Health and the Department of Energy, which districts courts have already enjoined.
In California, millions of dollars in funding are at risk across the California State University, University of California, and public community college systems. Many innovations — like the internet, GPS, and MRI technology — trace their origins to research initially funded by NSF. Without NSF funding, many California colleges and universities will be forced to substantially reduce or stop altogether potentially groundbreaking programs and research projects.
Attorney General Bonta joins the attorneys general of Hawaii, New York, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, and Washington in filing the lawsuit.
Source: US Whitehouse
President Donald J. Trump’s One, Big, Beautiful Bill is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to cut spending, fuel growth, and level the fiscal footing of the American economy.
Stephen Miller, White House Deputy Chief of Staff, explains the bill’s historic nature:
“The Big Beautiful Bill is NOT an annual budget bill and does not fund the departments of government. It does not finance our agencies or federal programs. Instead, it includes the single largest welfare reform in American history. Along with the largest tax cut and reform in American history. The most aggressive energy exploration in American history. And the strongest border bill in American history. All while reducing the deficit.”
Miller goes on to explain how the legislation also reduces the deficit:
“The bill saves more than 1.6 TRILLION in mandatory spending, including the largest-ever welfare reform. A remarkable achievement. I’ve also seen claims the bill increases the deficit. This lie is based on a CBO accounting gimmick. Income tax rates from the 2017 tax cut are set to expire in September. They were always planned to be permanent. CBO says maintaining *current* rates adds to the deficit, but by definition leaving these income tax rates unchanged cannot add one penny to the deficit. The bill’s spending cuts REDUCE the deficit against the current law baseline, which is the only correct baseline to use.”
Meanwhile, Peter Navarro, Senior Counselor for Trade and Manufacturing, explains why so-called “forecasts” fail to account for the bill’s contributions to economic growth and debt reduction:
“In making its projections, the CBO [Congressional Budget Office] has refused to account for — or ‘score’ as they say in CBO lingo — any of the new revenues from the Trump reciprocal tariffs.
Remember here a key goal of Trump’s fair-trade policies is to shift the U.S. tax base from one primarily reliant on income taxes to one that, with the vision of the new External Revenue Service, is also supported by tariff revenues. Consider, then, the impacts on the CBO’s projected revenue shortfall of just the modest 10 percent global baseline tariff Trump recently put into effect.
Such a tariff, depending on consumer responses (as measured by demand elasticities) and enforcement efficacy (i.e., how much cheating occurs), should generate between $2.3 trillion and $3.3 trillion in additional revenue over the ten-year forecast period. When this revenue is layered onto the enhanced dynamic growth scenario, the projected budget impact from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act ranges from a modest $300 billion increase in the debt under the 2.2 percent growth assumption to as much as a $2 trillion surplus under the 2.7 percent growth assumption.”