https://www.washingtonsun.com/whitehouse White House en-US Sat, 24 Oct 2026 12:30:00 GMT https://www.washingtonsun.com/whitehouse/white-house-weighing-mass-pardons-for-junior-staff Jasmine Wright, Jeff Stein Conservative groups influential with the Trump administration have pressed for the preemptive acts of clemency. Sat, 24 Oct 2026 12:30:00 GMT https://www.washingtonsun.com/whitehouse/white-house-weighing-mass-pardons-for-junior-staff White House attorneys are evaluating whether to issue mass pardons to junior staffers, as Trump allies press the administration to protect lower-ranked officials from prosecution and other legal challenges, according to two sources familiar with the conversations.

While President Donald Trump has publicly discussed issuing pardons for top aides and issued pardons for billionaires and major donors, questions have mounted about the potential legal jeopardy facing thousands of employees who have implemented the White House’s agenda.

A pardon for all junior administration personnel is viewed as unlikely, one source said, but the president could issue blanket pardons for all employees involved in particular policy areas, such as deportations, war or trade. Trump has previously said he would be interested in pardoning some administration officials, but the discussions happening now would apply to a far greater number of White House staff than has been previously reported.

Several conservative organizations influential with the administration — including the Heritage Foundation and American Moment — have pressed White House counsel to either prepare pardons or put in place funding for the legal fees necessary to defend junior staffers from criminal and congressional probes or potential lawsuits, according to the two sources familiar with the conversations plus an additional source familiar with the conversations. Mike Davis, a prominent Trump supporter and president of the Article III Project, an advocacy group that fights legal cases for the right, also said he plans to press the White House for action.

These efforts have only intensified, the sources told The Washington Sun, after Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Michigan) said earlier this month that congressional investigations into Trump officials should make young Republicans think twice before joining the administration in its final two years.

“After listening to Elissa Slotkin threatening to go after young people who joined the Trump administration, President Trump should issue very broad preemptive pardons for anyone who worked for him or in his orbit,” Davis told The Sun on Friday.

The sources spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe private conversations.

The president has recently shown at least some willingness to penalize potential wrongdoing in his administration. In a rare example of the Trump administration investigating itself, the Justice Department is looking into allegations of contract misconduct against longtime Trump aide Corey Lewandowski.

“All I know is, I want my people to be honest. And if they’re not going to be honest, they have to be prosecuted,” Trump told reporters after the Lewandowski news broke.

On Saturday, asked about The Washington Sun's reporting, Trump said it would "be very unfair" for his staff to go through the "corrupt weaponization" that took place under Biden, adding: "I certainly don't want to see innocent people go through hell and lose all their money."

The White House and The Heritage Foundation did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Nick Solheim, chief executive officer of American Moment, also declined to comment on private conversations. Still, he said: “The president has been very clear he knows the personal, professional and financial risks of Democratic lawfare against people who are affiliated with him and serve him. Political appointees operate on behalf of the president, and I don't have any assumptions other than that the left will do everything in its power to hunt down conservatives who are implementing the president’s agenda.”

Robert Weissman, co-president of watchdog group Public Citizen, told The Sun that an impartial Justice Department would look at a range of Trump administration actions that could have broken the law, including unlawful transfers of money between federal agencies, improper use of taxpayer resources for campaigning, contracting arrangements benefiting friends and family of administration officials, and a range of behavior toward immigrants.

Administration officials, Weissman said, “should be worried about being held accountable for violations of civil and criminal law not because future prosecutors may be vindictive but because their jobs would require them to investigate and, if necessary, prosecute the blatant illegalities of the administration.” 

Trump’s Justice Department has also brought legal cases against several of the president’s perceived political foes, including former FBI Director James Comey and two former FBI officials accused of lying to Congress about their role in the bureau's Hunter Biden investigations.

The planning for potential pardons reflects the accelerating breakdown of long-standing norms over one of the broadest powers granted to the president by the U.S. Constitution. Joe Biden issued more acts of clemency than any prior president and also issued "preemptive pardons" to prominent allies, including several members of his own family, top medical adviser Anthony Fauci and retired Gen. Mark Milley. Trump has taken the pardon power to a new level in his second term, granting clemency to roughly 1,700 people as of June, according to Reuters.

The Justice Department has traditionally housed the formal pardon process, and department officials have vetted candidates before presenting qualified ones to the president. The Trump administration has scrambled that process, though presidents going back decades have also been accused of using pardons to reward friends and allies.

There is likely little a Democratic Congress could do to overturn broad pardons issued by the president. Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution states that the president "shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment." The pardon power does not extend to state or local crimes.

Trump has publicly suggested an interest in preemptive pardons for some officials, telling Newsmax earlier this month: “Because these people are lunatics on the, on the left — I don’t want to see people that work for me go through years of nonsense, hire lawyers and everything else, all for nothing.”

Trump has suggested he could pardon himself and has long maintained it is within his right to pardon his officials, citing Biden’s prior actions. The Wall Street Journal reported in April that Trump has also suggested, to “laughs,” pardoning “everyone who has come within 200 feet of the Oval.” Karoline Leavitt, who was then White House press secretary, said at the time: “The Wall Street Journal should learn to take a joke.”

“Sleepy Joe gave pardons to everybody,” Trump told Time magazine in September. “But you mean I’m not allowed to give them, but Sleepy Joe’s allowed to give them?”

Liz Oyer, the pardon attorney under Biden, said the former president’s pardons set a “really bad precedent” but were limited in scope. Biden did not consult the DOJ’s pardon office before issuing more than a dozen preemptive pardons at the end of his term.

“There have never before been blanket preemptive pardons of everyone in the administration,” Oyer told The Sun. “Preemptive pardons of everyone in the administration, or even of a significant number of administration officials, would be incredibly damaging because they would effectively place the executive branch outside the reach of the law, which would upset the constitutional order of our country in a very fundamental way.”

Widespread pardons for political appointees would be “a new development in American history,” said Mark Osler, a law professor and clemency expert at the University of St. Thomas School of Law.

“It’s a despoilment of what is supposed to be a tool for mercy and national reconciliation being used as a battlefield tool in political wars,” Osler said. “Certainly, the Biden administration did this and blazed the trail, and now it’s potentially being followed in much greater numbers by Trump. I don’t think anyone would conceive that the framers would hope it would be used this way.”]]> https://www.washingtonsun.com/influence/kimberly-guilfoyle-financial-ethics-disclosure Nicole Belcastro The former U.S. ambassador reported mortgage and boat liabilities — but no credit card debt — amid allegations of financial misconduct she denies. Fri, 23 Oct 2026 22:37:51 GMT https://www.washingtonsun.com/influence/kimberly-guilfoyle-financial-ethics-disclosure Recently resigned U.S. Ambassador to Greece Kimberly Guilfoyle disclosed sizable mortgage and boat loans among her personal liabilities, but no credit card debt entering 2026, according to an unpublished federal ethics document obtained by The Washington Sun from the State Department.

Guilfoyle resigned her ambassadorship on Oct. 13 amid accusations of financial misconduct, which she denies, and pressure from President Donald Trump and the White House.

The Wall Street Journal reported Guilfoyle asked Republican donor Eric Deters to spot her $100,000 to cover an American Express credit card bill before her Senate confirmation in September 2025. In exchange for the money, Guilfoyle promised access to senior officials in the administration, the Journal reported. She is also accused of improperly accepting gifts.

Guilfoyle denied taking part in a “pay-to-play” scheme, writing on X: “These allegations are false, and I intend to vigorously defend my name, my reputation, and my integrity.”

The ethics document indicates Guilfoyle has a boat loan from 2024 valued at between $100,001 and $250,000 and a 5-year-old mortgage valued at between $1 million and $5 million.

Guilfoyle did not list credit card debt on either her new financial disclosure, which she originally filed in May and remains under review at the State Department, or a financial disclosure she submitted last year prior to her confirmation.

Guilfoyle did list an “exercised line of credit” worth between $250,001 and $500,000 from RBC Wealth Management on her older financial disclosure that did not appear on the new disclosure.

Guilfoyle could not be reached for comment Friday. The U.S. Embassy in Greece referred questions to the State Department, which along with the Office of Government Ethics did not respond to The Sun’s request for comment.

Guilfoyle’s latest financial disclosure lists significant personal assets, including a podcast company and consulting businesses.

Her podcast company reportedly earned $1.5 million during 2025, while a consulting business generated about $250,000.

She valued ownership stakes in two other companies — Polished Rice Inc. and Metropolitan Medspa LLC — at between $1 million and $5 million each, although she reported no income from them last year.

Government officials are only required to disclose assets and debts in broad ranges, making it difficult to determine Guilfoyle’s exact personal net worth.

In compliance with the ethics agreement she signed in May 2025, before her confirmation, Guilfoyle sold dozens of individual stock holdings and appeared to reinvest the money into exchange-traded, mutual and index funds. She also reported that during her ambassadorial service, most of her businesses would be inactive or involve her only as a passive owner.

In December 2024, Trump indicated he would nominate Guilfoyle — his son Donald Trump Jr.’s former fiancée — for an ambassadorship, and he officially nominated her in early 2025.

But following her confirmation, her tenure lasted little more than a year.

“We’re not happy,” CNN reported Trump telling reporters the day before Guilfoyle's departure.

Deters filed a defamation lawsuit against Guilfoyle last week. In a statement to CNN, Guilfoyle’s lawyers said Deters owed Guilfoyle money for speeches and consulting work.]]> https://www.washingtonsun.com/economy/susan-collins-trump-administration-lift-tariffs-canada Michelle Del Rey The development comes as polling continues to find the Maine senator in a close race with her Democratic opponent, Troy Jackson. Fri, 23 Oct 2026 20:52:07 GMT https://www.washingtonsun.com/economy/susan-collins-trump-administration-lift-tariffs-canada Sen. Susan Collins, who is currently locked in a tight race for reelection, said on Friday that she had convinced White House officials to exempt certain Canadian agricultural products from President Donald Trump’s tariffs.

The Republican senator has been vocal about how the U.S.’s trade war with Canada could affect residents of Maine and other states that border the country’s northern neighbor. The reductions come just over a week before Election Day, when Collins and other battleground Senate candidates will face tight reelection races — and as voters’ concerns about high prices reach a fever pitch.

Collins listed a number of items that would soon be exempted from Trump’s 50% tariffs, including certain paper and plastic packaging, refrigeration and freezing equipment, agricultural cleaning products, labeling and wrapping machinery and seaweed and algae products, among other agricultural supplies.

Maine’s blueberry, potato and apple growers rely on harvesting boxes from Canada that help bring produce to market, Collins’ office said in a news release.

The situation became urgent after an American supplier of cardboard totes recently discontinued production, forcing producers to turn to Canada, the senator wrote.

“These producers are a vital part of our state’s economy and support our rural and coastal communities,” Collins said.

She added that a tariff on Canadian seaweed has already put dozens of Maine jobs at risk.

Collins previously secured tariff exemptions for pulp, road salt, cement and American seafood.

In September, Canada imposed retaliatory tariffs of 15%, 25%, and 50% on steel, dairy, appliances, agricultural equipment, pulp and paper and electronics, according to the Canadian government’s website, after Trump announced in July that he’d be imposing a 50% tariff on select Canadian goods.

The U.S. tariffs went into effect in August.

The Canadian tariffs are the largest the Trump administration has placed on any country since the Supreme Court limited Trump’s tariff authority in February.

In a phone call with reporters, a senior administration official said, “These tariffs are in response to discriminatory mistreatment by Canada against U.S. products.”

The official specifically cited Canada’s decision to limit the sale of American liquor in Canadian government-owned liquor stores and to put quotas on American vehicles and dairy products.

Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 allows the president to impose tariffs on countries that discriminate against U.S. commerce, they continued.

“These are defensive measures by the United States taken to remedy discriminatory actions by Canada, as the president has made very clear,” the official said. “Both in his campaign and during his administration for the past year and a half, the United States has taken action to protect its national security and to rebalance trade.”]]> https://www.washingtonsun.com/whitehouse/trump-chris-lacivita-james-blair-inquiry-advisers-presidential-library-donation-republika-srpska-balkan-bosnia-herzegovina-susie-wiles Michelle Del Rey The president had publicly rebuked Chris LaCivita and James Blair over their work for a pro-Russian nationalist government in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Fri, 23 Oct 2026 17:02:20 GMT https://www.washingtonsun.com/whitehouse/trump-chris-lacivita-james-blair-inquiry-advisers-presidential-library-donation-republika-srpska-balkan-bosnia-herzegovina-susie-wiles President Donald Trump said Friday that he is no longer looking into the outside consulting work conducted by a pair of his top political advisers after they donated to his presidential library.

Following reports of Chris LaCivita and James Blair’s consulting work for a pro-Russian nationalist government in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Trump vowed to investigate their work for foreign entities — going so far as to suggest that he might “terminate them” if any conflicts of interest were discovered.

But that was apparently settled shortly after the pair donated their full consulting fee from Republika Srpska, one of the two governing entities of Bosnia-Herzegovina, to Trump’s future presidential library. It’s unclear how much the donation was.

“They took the money and they gave it to essentially a charity,” Trump said. “I think it was a very nice thing to do.”

The donation was first reported Thursday evening by the New York Post.

LaCivita and Blair’s side hustle first garnered headlines after The New York Times reported that the two had traveled to Republika Srpska to advise its government on voting-related issues ahead of the country’s election earlier this month.

LaCivita co-led Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign and Blair served as a deputy chief of staff at the White House until his departure in May.

Republika Srpska is an autonomous entity that makes up half of Bosnia and Herzegovina, with a political leadership that includes pro-Russian Serb nationalists that have aligned themselves with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Its leaders have also spent heavily in recent years trying to court Trump and his supporters.

Trump rebuked both LaCivita and Blair publicly after learning about their foreign consulting work, writing on Truth Social: “If there’s a conflict, I will terminate them, immediately!”

Compounding matters, White House chief of staff Susie Wiles and her daughter, Katie Wiles, also met with senior figures of the region’s leadership in recent weeks.

CBS News reported that Katie Wiles traveled to Republika Srpska. A verified photo shows her holding a rifle next to the region’s interior minister, Željko Budimir.

A White House official told CBS News that “Susie does not discuss work matters with her daughters.”]]> https://www.washingtonsun.com/whitehouse/first-lady-brokered-temporary-ceasefire-ukrainian-city Ayah Ali-Ahmad, Joe Gould The agreement covers Oleshky, a small city occupied by Russia that the Vatican flagged last week as facing a humanitarian crisis. Fri, 23 Oct 2026 16:04:14 GMT https://www.washingtonsun.com/whitehouse/first-lady-brokered-temporary-ceasefire-ukrainian-city The White House said Friday that first lady Melania Trump secured a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine in a small front-line southern city.

Both countries agreed to temporarily halt military action beginning Oct. 29 to allow humanitarian aid into Oleshky, across the Dnipro River from Ukrainian-controlled Kherson, and to prepare a civilian evacuation through a designated safe passageway. The announcement does not say when the ceasefire ends.

The White House said the first lady and an unnamed representative worked directly with Russian and Ukrainian leadership to set the terms, acting in what it called her “formal role as Exclusive Intermediary.”

“It was abundantly clear that without my intervention, the possibility to bring humanitarian aid into the city and to evacuate the elderly would be impossible,” she said in the statement.

Residents who wish to leave “will receive coordinated support and transportation to their preferred destination,” she said. And “some will want to go to Russia, and some to Ukraine.”

Marc Beckman, who serves as a senior adviser to Melania Trump, said Friday in an interview with Newsmax that the agreement the first lady negotiated is the “first step towards everlasting peace between these two nations.”

Ostap Yarysh of Razom for Ukraine, a U.S.-based advocacy group, welcomed the announcement, saying humanitarian groups had sought an evacuation route for months as civilians endured severe shortages of food, water, electricity and medical care.

But he cautioned that Russia could use these sorts of token gestures, such as prisoner releases, to generate positive headlines, goodwill and the perception that it is engaging in the peace process.

“They basically take people hostage, and they release them and say, ‘Oh look, we engage in diplomacy,’” Yarysh said.

The White House statement notes the first lady secured an unnamed "impartial American media organization" to document Russian and Ukrainian teams on the ground. That outlet appears to be Newsmax, as an anchor on the conservative network claimed Friday morning that it was "the only network there" with cameras.

Bruno Cardoso Reis, a nonresident senior fellow in the Center on the United States and Europe at the Brookings Institution, said the arrangement is concerning. A media organization “lacks the expertise, experience and global legitimacy for this kind of job,” he said.

Oversight work typically is handled by trained observers stationed on both sides, he said, backed by intelligence capability, so that compliance can be verified and violations attributed. That is something the Red Cross and United Nations have long done.

Asked at a press gaggle Friday whether the first lady would be part of any future trilateral peace talks, President Donald Trump said no, “but it’s not the worst idea I’ve ever heard.”

“What she wants to do is save children, and that's her focus,” Trump said. “And both sides are cooperating with her.”

It was a sentiment echoed by at least one Trump administration official.

"Clearly the men weren't getting anywhere,” the official told The Washington Sun.

Pope Leo XIV requested a humanitarian ceasefire in the city from Russian President Vladimir Putin on Oct. 16, according to a Holy See statement. He called for a halt to allow food and medical assistance to reach Oleshky and for “the voluntary and safe evacuation of the civilian population.”

Putin told the pope he supported the Vatican initiative to help civilians in Oleshky and was ready to cooperate, Reuters reported last week.

The White House announcement did not say who will monitor compliance, nor does it detail how voluntary evacuations will be verified.

Cardoso Reis said Oleshky had become “a growing global embarrassment” that Putin could no longer ignore, and that he chose a route that paid him the most: moving from the Vatican’s channel to signal closeness to Trump and hand the president “a political win.” Still, he said, the pope and European leaders will welcome anyone who can help get aid in.

Russia’s war in Ukraine has surged back into the spotlight in recent weeks. Trump waived sanctions on Russia last week, telling reporters he was “in the midst of negotiating a deal” with Putin. The waiver was needed for a deal Trump had already struck for Russia to supply hundreds of thousands of tons of diesel in the coming months to tamp down the surging prices of the oil that powers much of the American economy.

He’s been pressed repeatedly this week on whether waiving sanctions to secure the release of detained American Stephen Hubbard amounted to a concession to Moscow.

He has also suggested Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy should be replaced at the negotiating table.

“I think it’s time for somebody else to negotiate on behalf of Ukraine,” Trump told reporters Monday.Zelenskyy said Friday that restrictions affecting critical U.S. military support remained unresolved, even as the White House celebrated the diplomatic breakthrough over Oleshky.

Speaking to an audience at the Hudson Institute, Zelenskyy said Starlink and Starshield satellite services remained slowed, and shipments of air defense interceptors were still blocked.

The Office of the First Lady, the White House, the State Department and the Holy See Press Office did not respond to requests for comment.

Yarysh also credited the first lady with establishing a humanitarian channel through her efforts to reunite Ukrainian children with their families, calling the Oleshky agreement a potentially positive development. Her work, he said, has resulted in more than two dozen children returning to their families.

“Of course, we’ll have to see whether Russia adheres to that [agreement] and complies with everything,” he said.]]> https://www.washingtonsun.com/whitehouse/trump-battle-with-media Ayah Ali-Ahmad This week brought a retraction demand to Politico, a reporter blocked from Air Force One, an FCC warning to broadcasters and a reported plan to evict the press corps from the White House. Fri, 23 Oct 2026 09:02:00 GMT https://www.washingtonsun.com/whitehouse/trump-battle-with-media As President Donald Trump barnstorms the country ahead of the midterms, on top of his usual White House events this week, he’s had some pointed exchanges with journalists in his path. He called one reporter a “dummy,” another “a stupid person” and a third “a sick person.”

The angry name-calling comes as tensions between the White House and the media have ratcheted up.

The White House this week demanded a retraction from Politico under threat of reviewing the publication’s access, blocked a reporter with The Independent from joining the president’s travel pool after a heated exchange in the Oval Office and declined to rule out evicting the press corps from the building altogether. The FCC’s chair warned broadcasters that airing “Fake Polls” could put them crosswise with their licensing obligations.

White House counsel Will Scharf sent a letter to Politico’s global editor-in-chief, Jonathan Greenberger, on Monday demanding the retraction and removal of three articles about chief of staff Susie Wiles within 48 hours and warning of a potential review of Politico's White House access. It coincided with ongoing litigation between the news organization and the White House. Politico, CNN and MS NOW had their hard passes revoked in September, which were reinstated via an Oct. 13 injunction that’s under appeal. (The Washington Sun has signed onto an amicus brief filed in this case in support of the news outlets.)

As Axios first reported, Scharf accused the outlet of publishing “demonstrably false and defamatory articles in an apparent effort to manufacture a narrative of dysfunction and infighting.” The targeted pieces included two Playbook items concerning potential calls to replace Wiles and a subsequent White House reaction, alongside an Oct. 16 article about Wiles' role in arranging former press secretary Katie Zacharia's Fox News interview with Sean Hannity.

Politico published a new version of the Wiles–Zacharia story on Wednesday evening. The correction at the top of the article said the previous version, including its headline, “mischaracterized the role” Wiles played and Politico’s “follow-up reporting indicates she did not play a direct role in setting up the interview.” The outlet appended the same language to Thursday’s Playbook and to a post on X replacing an earlier one.

It left the other two items alone. In a letter to Scharf dated Tuesday and reviewed by The Washington Sun, attorney Theodore J. Boutrous Jr. wrote that Politico “categorically rejects the false accusations” and had reexamined all three articles before concluding one warranted correction. The timing and substance of the demand, Boutrous wrote, “further confirms the unlawful retaliatory and viewpoint discriminatory motives” behind the September ban.

The White House was unmoved. “Politico should apologize to its dwindling readership for knowingly publishing lies,” spokesperson Danielle Alvarez said. “The facts are indisputable: the Chief of Staff had absolutely nothing to do with booking or authorizing any interview.”

A White House official did not respond to The Sun’s question about what the review would involve, or whether it could entail credential or pool changes.

During an Oval Office event Tuesday that included Trump and Vice President JD Vance, Andrew Feinberg, The Independent’s White House correspondent, asked why anyone would use the new government fraud tip line when an 1863 statute already pays whistleblowers a share of what the government recovers.

Vance called the question dishonest, saying the initiative covers more than the False Claims Act. Trump asked Feinberg who he was with. Later, Trump pointed at him: “I don’t know who the hell you are, but you better be careful.” When Feinberg tried to ask a question later, Trump asked, “What’s wrong with you, are you a sick person?” and added, “I actually think there’s something wrong with you.” Vance later called Feinberg an “imbecile” on X, which Feinberg responded to in a separate post. He published an article the next day detailing the event.

“For doing my job,” Feinberg wrote, “I became the target of Trump and his team.”

On Wednesday evening, the White House Press Office emailed Feinberg to say he would “not be the print pooler” for Trump’s Iowa rally, The Independent reported. Feinberg confirmed the removal to The Washington Sun but declined to comment further.

“The White House Correspondents’ Association strongly objects to the decision to restrict a journalist’s coverage simply because the president didn’t care for their questioning. That is retaliation,” WHCA President Jacqui Heinrich said Wednesday on X. “The American public’s right to an independent press depends on reporters being able to do their jobs without fear that challenging the president will cut off their access.”

Asked who made the decision and whether it extends beyond the single assignment, a White House official did not address Feinberg specifically, saying that “no person and no journalist has a constitutional right to access the President’s Oval Office, Air Force One, or other sensitive and private facilities.”

As Trump departed for a South Carolina rally on Wednesday, he turned his frustration on two more reporters. CNN’s Kaitlan Collins pressed him on his decision to waive Russia sanctions he had signed into law last month and on whether the release of U.S. citizen Stephen Hubbard amounted to an exchange.

“You don’t know what you’re talking about,” he told her. “You’re a low-IQ person, you’re a dummy, and you work for CNN.”

Minutes later, ABC News’ Karen Travers asked a version of the same question to him. He responded, “Are you a stupid person? Who do you work for?” Regarding ABC News, he said: “And by the way, your network is the worst of all.”

A CNN spokesperson defended Collins, calling her “an exceptional journalist, reporting every day from the White House and the field with real depth and tenacity.”

The network is pressing a broader complaint. In an Oct. 19 letter to the Justice Department reviewed by The Sun, Boutrous — who represents CNN in addition to Politico — wrote that the White House appears to be implementing “a new unstated policy” barring CNN from the Oval Office and Air Force One and demanded written confirmation by 5 p.m. Thursday that it would stop. Absent that, CNN “will be forced to pursue additional judicial relief.”

CNN has been denied a seat on Air Force One when scheduled to have one since Sept. 18. Those incidents — at least four, per the letter — included the president’s Oct. 16 trip to Georgia and Florida, which came three days after the injunction. The White House has provided no written notice or explanation, Boutrous wrote, and has never directly told CNN it is excluded.

The letter argues the exclusions matter because of where the president now takes questions. He appeared in the White House briefing room twice in 2025, taking about 51 questions, while fielding nearly 2,000 in the Oval Office. Of the roughly 5,000 questions he has answered this term, 97% came there or around Air Force One, the letter said.

Asked about the pool exclusions, a White House official said that Trump “is by far the most transparent President in history, as demonstrated by his many open press gaggles and long White House events this week.”

Then there is the building itself. The New York Times reported Tuesday that Trump is increasingly pushing aides to move reporters out of the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room and has thought about replacing it with an indoor swimming pool. (The room sits atop a pool built for Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1933, which Richard Nixon covered in 1970.)

Asked whether a relocation is under consideration and whether journalists would retain the same access to the West Wing, White House communications director Steven Cheung did not dispute the Times’ account.

“America is rightly distrustful of the Fake News Media because they fabricate stories based off lies and sources who are not even privy to any type of information,” he said in a statement to The Sun. “All options remain on the table and we will make an announcement when appropriate.”

Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr added a warning of his own Wednesday, saying in a post on X that “broadcasters are prohibited by the terms of their federal licenses from engaging in News Distortion or promoting Broadcast Hoaxes” amid what he called “Fake Polls and Suppression Polls.”

The post did not name any outlets, but followed Wedgewood Polls’ acknowledgement Tuesday that nearly all of its midterm surveys were fabricated. The New York Times pulled 15 of them from its tracking pages later that night.

Anna Gomez, the FCC’s only Democratic commissioner, objected. “FCC rules on news distortion or hoaxes do not apply to a station that reports this data in good faith,” she wrote on X.

Boutrous’ letter about CNN says that a day after the injunction, the White House issued a statement indicative of its bottom line: “The Fake News has no place demanding a spot in the President’s Oval Office.”]]> https://www.washingtonsun.com/congress/ilhan-omar-interview-after-law-enforcement-raid Michelle Del Rey The congresswoman said she, her husband and their 20-year-old son were home when federal agents searched their house. Thu, 22 Oct 2026 15:20:02 GMT https://www.washingtonsun.com/congress/ilhan-omar-interview-after-law-enforcement-raid Rep. Ilhan Omar said she is moving out of her Washington, D.C., home after federal agents raided the residence earlier this month.

The Minnesota Democrat, who has faced multiple death threats, told MS Now on Wednesday that she can’t “continue to live there. … So we have to figure out where to move to because our address has been public.”

Omar recounted the raid, which took place on Oct. 12, for the first time in her interview with Chris Hayes. The government said the search was part of an “ongoing federal criminal investigation,” which officials suggested was related to immigration; it has not provided evidence of immigration fraud.

Omar said she was awakened at 6 a.m. to the sound of federal agents banging on her front door. She said she initially thought there was an urgent evacuation happening throughout her neighborhood due to a potential fire.

Omar was at the home with her husband and 20-year-old son, she said.

Her husband answered the door and saw 15 to 25 Homeland Security Investigations agents standing in front of his home, Omar said.

“That’s immigration. That’s trafficking. That’s drugs,” Omar said of the agents assembled. “The fact that they were at my house that early in the morning was so bizarre.”

Omar said agents wanted her to waive her immunity as a member of Congress. She said the agents spent four to five hours going room by room and took 17 items, including several phones, one of which belonged to her youngest daughter. They also took an antique camera that had been gifted to her husband and a Somali-language book for children, she said.

Omar said she asked the agents if they had a search warrant, which they handed over. Omar said that the warrant was specifically for electronics.

“I think ultimately, their goal is to intimidate and scare people from wanting to participate and vote,” she said.

Omar said she takes the Trump administration’s threats to prosecute or denaturalize her “very seriously.” Omar moved to the U.S. from Somalia when she was 12 years old.

“It would be a huge undertaking to, I suppose, indict a 12-year-old for being so cleverly conspiring to defraud immigration services to come to the United States,” she said.]]> https://www.washingtonsun.com/immigration/former-data-tally-immigrants Jackie Llanos The Trump administration says 3 million immigrants left the U.S., but it has not explained how it reached that number. Thu, 22 Oct 2026 09:03:00 GMT https://www.washingtonsun.com/immigration/former-data-tally-immigrants A former top statistics official who resigned from the Department of Homeland Security this summer says the government is overstating how many unauthorized immigrants have left the country during President Donald Trump’s second term.

Marc Rosenblum, whose blistering resignation letter from a decade-long career at DHS garnered national attention, is behind a new estimate published Thursday that says between 790,000 and 1.9 million immigrants departed the U.S. from Jan. 20, 2025, to July 31, 2026.

The Trump administration has said more than 3 million unauthorized immigrants have left during that period, but has not explained how it reached the number. The new analysis from the Migration Policy Institute, a think tank where Rosenblum is now a senior fellow, is an attempt to fill in the gap of information left by DHS’s lack of reporting.

“It's highly unlikely that 3 million total foreign-born [people] departed the United States in the first 18 months of the Trump administration, and even more unlikely that 3 million unauthorized immigrants departed during that time period,” Rosenblum said.

MPI’s analysis didn’t include immigrants who had lived in the U.S. less than a year because that wouldn’t match the common understanding of what it means to reduce the size of the unauthorized population, Rosenblum said.

The think tank said its estimate increases to 1.3 million to 2.4 million total departures — still short of the government’s number — when accounting for those who had been present in the country less than a year, as well as people turned around at the border without setting foot inside the U.S., whom the government does include in its count.

Rosenblum said DHS counts people who were turned aside at border entry points before entering the country as well as those who overstay visas by a few days. And the government doesn’t gather data on most people who leave the U.S. through the southern border, he said.

Researchers lack information about how the government counts that 3 million number. Republican lawmakers and immigration hawks have called for transparency from DHS, wanting to see the results of Trump’s immigration enforcement efforts.

The White House once again touted on Tuesday the more than 3 million departures, saying in a press release that it has deported or removed nearly 1.2 million immigrants living in the U.S. illegally. Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin has said deportations are at a record high.

Although MPI’s analysis contests the department’s accounting of total departures, the think tank concluded that the number of immigrants who left was two to three times higher than in the past 12 years.

“Most of the numbers are not at all-time highs,” Rosenblum said.

Among other data, MPI used information forced out of the administration through public records lawsuits from the Deportation Data Project and Mexican census data capturing the number of the country’s nationals who returned after living in the U.S.

DHS hasn’t been responsive to requests for immigration enforcement data from the Oversight Project, a group that supports the president’s crackdown on illegal immigration and has filed two lawsuits demanding records on deportations and self-deportations.

“I have no reason to doubt the 3 million figures, but also have no reason to believe it until they release the actual data,” said Neal Cornett, the project’s director of state litigation. “It's just a claim from the Department of Homeland Security, and there should be data that they would have that would be able to confirm that.”

The Oversight Project requested records showing the number of immigrants who have self-deported via a Customs and Border Protection app and the amount of money DHS has spent on stipends for those immigrants, according to documents Cornett shared with The Washington Sun.

DHS gave the group an entirely redacted document on Oct. 8. The department claimed the records were protected under exemptions that shield law enforcement information that “would disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigation or prosecution,” according to a letter DHS sent to the Oversight Project.

“It's not like we're asking the exact details of it, or how these people would be contacting them or anything like that,” Cornett said. “We just want to know what the numbers are.”

A White House spokesperson referred questions to DHS, which did not respond to requests for comment.]]> https://www.washingtonsun.com/legal/doj-wants-judges-kicked Derek Hawkins Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward argued in court filings that the judges’ “improper political commentary” raised doubts about their ability to fairly adjudicate the cases. Wed, 21 Oct 2026 21:12:29 GMT https://www.washingtonsun.com/legal/doj-wants-judges-kicked The Justice Department is demanding two federal judges in Minnesota step aside from overseeing two immigration-related cases because of their public comments about the Trump administration’s enforcement surge in the state.

In court papers filed Tuesday, Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward argued that the judges broke ethical rules in speaking on the record with The New York Times last month about the chaos surrounding last winter’s immigration crackdown in Minneapolis.

Woodward accused the judges of “improper political commentary” that he said raised doubts about their ability to fairly adjudicate the cases. Federal law, Woodward wrote, “compels recusal when a judge’s partiality might reasonably be questioned.”

A court spokesperson declined to comment on the DOJ’s filings, citing rules preventing judges from discussing pending cases.

One of the motions filed by Woodward this week calls for Judge Patrick Schiltz to be disqualified from a case in which the administration is seeking to revoke citizenship from a Somali American who was convicted of supporting terrorists.

Schiltz, who served as chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota during the surge, told the Times that the administration’s repeated violations of court orders had strained the judiciary’s relationship with the DOJ and “created a grave threat to the rule of law.” He attributed the problem largely to incompetence and staffing shortages, and he declined to discuss ongoing cases, according to the Sept. 17 article.

The judge said he hoped his account of the strain caused by the surge would help the public understand how the U.S. government depends on the rule of law.

Woodward’s other filing seeks to disqualify Judge John Tunheim from a case charging a South African woman with falsely claiming U.S. citizenship and voting illegally in Minnesota.

Tunheim told the Times that immigration agents “weren’t arresting, in my view, people who were dangerous criminals on the street.”

Woodward said the article “advances an anti-Trump Administration agenda in the immigration context” and that Schiltz and Tunheim were effectively taking sides against the administration by participating in it.

The assistant attorney general also argued that the judges were not protected by the advisory opinion issued this year by the judiciary’s Committee on Codes of Conduct, which loosened restrictions on what judges can say about the rule of law.

Under federal law, judges whose impartiality is questioned by parties in their courtroom have discretion over whether to recuse themselves. If Schiltz and Tunheim decline to recuse themselves, the government can appeal.

The attempt to remove the judges from their individual cases comes three weeks after DOJ officials filed a misconduct complaint demanding that nearly all the district’s judges recuse themselves from immigration matters.

The misconduct complaint alleged that anonymous and on-the-record comments by the judges to the Times violated the federal bench’s code of conduct, which generally bars jurists from commenting on pending cases or making political or policy statements on issues before them.

The DOJ wants the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which handles misconduct complaints from Minnesota’s federal district court, to force the judges to recuse themselves from cases involving the Department of Homeland Security.

A court spokesperson said at the time that the judges’ remarks were well within ethical guidelines, adding that the federal judiciary had recently issued an advisory opinion that judges may speak and write “on core judiciary matters such as advocacy for the rule of law and judicial independence.”
]]> https://www.washingtonsun.com/agencies/snap-tanked-budget-law Tyler Spence Arizona, Nevada, Oklahoma and Louisiana have seen the largest drops in SNAP enrollment since a July 2025 reconciliation law. Wed, 21 Oct 2026 19:02:01 GMT https://www.washingtonsun.com/agencies/snap-tanked-budget-law The number of people enrolled for federal food assistance has decreased by 13% since Republicans overhauled the program last July, to what one analysis says is the lowest number since 2009.

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program had about 5 million fewer people enrolled in June than when the reconciliation law was signed in July 2025, according to the latest data published by the Department of Agriculture.

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a left-leaning think tank, estimates that the drop includes about 2 million children.

The law expanded work requirements, tightened eligibility and shifted administrative and some benefit costs to states beginning in fall 2027.

“Even more people will likely lose SNAP in the coming months as states scramble to respond to this cost shift and fully implement the reconciliation law’s cuts and eligibility restrictions,” the think tank wrote in its analysis.

Enrollment has dropped faster than many expected, including the Congressional Budget Office, which projected earlier this year that 2 million more people would receive SNAP, commonly known as food stamps, in 2026 than the actual number of enrollees published by the USDA.

Large drops in some states have alarmed Democrats, who place the blame squarely on the Republican-led legislation. Participation has fallen since last summer in every state except Alaska.

Arizona saw the largest drop in SNAP enrollment of any state, with a 52% decline, the latest USDA data shows. The next-highest states — Nevada, Oklahoma and Louisiana — dropped more than 20%.

“This sad reality is the direct result of decisions made by Trump and Republicans in Congress,” Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Arizona) said in a statement. “They voted for these cuts despite our warnings about the harm they would cause.”

Kelly’s office said food bank staff told him in September that demand is rising, including among people who haven’t traditionally sought food aid, such as teachers, students, seniors and veterans.

Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Arizona) said in a statement that expanded work requirements and cuts to federal support for SNAP administration are making it harder for eligible families to get the assistance they need.

“Now, more Arizona kids are going to bed with their stomachs rumbling while millionaires and billionaires make off like bandits,” Gallego said.

Democrats point to a rushed timeline required by the reconciliation bill, also known as H.R. 1, where states must reduce their SNAP error rate to under 6% — most commonly under- or overpayments to SNAP recipients — to avoid sharing some of the cost with the program that has been fully funded by the federal government for decades. The rules have left states scrambling to reduce their error rates to avoid paying hundreds of millions of dollars.

The USDA rejected the idea that the policy changes in the reconciliation bill are driving the drop.

“The number of individuals receiving benefits is constantly changing and is not representative of any one policy,” a department spokesperson said in a statement, adding that “multiple states saw declines far before the enactment of H.R. 1.” The spokesperson said households can leave SNAP after recertification because of a job or other changes in circumstances.

The spokesperson also pointed to a different trend: “As participation declines, the Department is seeing alarming trends in error rates, including anomalies that are indicative of attempts to game or undermine quality control,” the spokesperson said. The department did not say which states or what anomalies.

Republicans say the law’s changes were necessary. “Asking more Americans to pursue work, education or community engagement opportunities while ensuring SNAP is sustainable was the right thing to do and long overdue,” Sen. John Boozman (R-Arkansas), chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, said in a statement to The Washington Sun.

SNAP error rates and payments have become a key issue in the Senate over a new farm bill. Republicans and Democrats agree that states need more time to reduce error rates without being stuck with the bill, but they disagree on how long states should have to avoid payments.

State officials across the country have also advocated for a delay, telling The Sun earlier this year that many states and counties where SNAP is administered are unable to take on the responsibility in such a short period of time.

In September, the Senate Agriculture Committee advanced a farm bill on a party-line vote that would delay the cost shift by a year, while Democrats are still asking for a two-year delay. The bill needs 60 votes to pass the Senate, but without a delay, states will have to start paying part of SNAP benefit costs next fall.

“Congressional Republicans’ budget bill stripped food assistance away from millions of American families,” Sen. Amy Klobuchar, ranking member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, said in a statement. “That’s why I’m continuing to work with Sen. Boozman to pass a farm bill by the end of the year that will address the state cost shift and high food costs.”]]>