Push Notification

Even after rattling off various positive measures of Donald Trump's health in various press conferences, White House physician Dr. Sean Conley has been adamant about not answering one of the most vital questions facing those exposed to Trump in recent days: When was the last time testing showed Trump was not carrying the pandemic virus that would send him to the hospital only a day after the White House admitted he was sick?

That's important, because it would allow those who came into contact with Trump during last Tuesday's presidential debate to know whether they spent 90 minutes in an enclosed space with a COVID-19 carrier shouting at them for most of that time—one of the precise scenarios that experts warn is most likely to result in pandemic spread.

It's also important because all evidence so far points to the White House knowing of Trump's illness at least as of Monday, before the debate. And it's important because the pattern of infections coming out of the White House do not appear to correlate with people who attended the Rose Garden celebration the previous weekend. They appear to more closely correlate with people known to have spent significant amounts of time in proximity to Donald Trump himself.

On Monday, we were treated to a rare sight at the White House: An outdoor press briefing in which Trump spoke at a podium alone, while all other speakers at the pandemic-related briefing used a podium set up on a separate platform well-distanced from Trump's own.

Tuesday's debate featured another unusual sight: Melania Trump alone, among the Trump family, followed debate venue rules and kept her mask on during the full event—only removing it when approaching Donald at his podium for the usual post-debate family visuals. But the Trump family arrived at the debate venue too late to be given COVID-19 tests at the venue, debate moderator Chris Wallace said afterward. "There was an honor system when it came to people that came into the hall from the two campaigns."

There are reasons to believe the White House is lying about the outbreak timeline, and it is absolutely certain that they are hiding key elements of that timeline, as White House doctor Conley did yet again on Monday. The first known illnesses from the White House outbreak are, for the most part, those immediately surrounding Trump himself.

• White House adviser Hope Hicks and assistant Nicholas Luna

• First lady Melania Trump

• Trump's debate prep team member Chris Christie and Trump campaign manager Bill Stepien

• White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany and two assistant press secretaries

But what of the multiple Rose Garden guests who tested positive after the Saturday celebration held for Amy Coney Barrett, including Sen. Thom Tillis, Sen. Mike Lee, pastor Greg Laurie, Notre Dame president John Jenkins, and Kellyanne Conway?

All of them were seen in close proximity to Trump in the Diplomatic Room of the White House, during an indoors reception for Barrett that featured a much smaller group of people. Infections during the Rose Garden event were not, as far as we know, spread evenly throughout the outside crowd. They have appeared predominantly among the most important guests, the ones allowed to sit and the first few rows—and who were invited inside for a more personal meet-and-greet hosted by Trump.

The evidence, then, is that Trump himself may have been the source of infection for most of the COVID-19 cases in his orbit. Whether he was or wasn't, the outbreak was in full swing as of Saturday, during the Diplomatic Room event.

The White House, however, is flatly refusing to tell the public, the Biden campaign, the debate staff and others Trump met with when Trump, who is allegedly as president tested daily or near-daily, was last known to be free of the virus. They either don't know—because they haven't been doing the testing—or they're hiding it because they have a reason to hide it. The White House has also announced that it will not be doing contact tracing of Rose Garden guests, nor will they allow the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention to launch that effort itself.

They are quite insistent on not finding out either the true extent of the White House outbreak, or revealing its origins.

It's reasonable to question whether the White House knew Trump was infected, or suspected it, at least as of Monday, when Trump's press event was set up to have the unusual dual-podium arrangement. It's reasonable to question whether the Trump campaign avoided testing at the venue not out of lateness, but because they did not want testing to be done. It's not just reasonable to assume Trump, a malevolent narcissist, would willingly expose others to his illness for momentary gain: It's proven, both from Trump's pointless but self-celebrating joyride around Walter Reed, unnecessarily putting Secret Service agents in an airtight container with him at the likely height of his own contagiousness, and his immediate removal of his mask upon returning to the White House.

There are very good reasons to suspect that the White House knew or believed Trump to be infected with COVID-19 before the debate with Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden took place, and that the White House covered up his infection to allow the debate to go forward. It is possible that, had Trump not become so physically ill two days afterward as to require public acknowledgement, then hospitalization, the White House intended to hide Trump's infection from the public completely.

This would be unconscionable behavior by itself, but exposing a rival presidential candidate to a deadly disease on purpose brings it past unconscionable and into the realm of the unthinkable. But here we are.

This is not an idle, fringe supposition. Senate Democratic leaders are themselves demanding that the White House explain their secrecy around Trump's initial diagnosis, accusing the White House (correctly) of "deliberately" hiding this information. The press is focusing in on this question as well. It is entirely within the realm of possibility that this White House would cover up a presidential illness even if it caused the possible death of others, and even if it exposed Trump's immediate campaign rival to the same disease. On the contrary, it is the most plausible theory we have as to why the White House is refusing to clarify the timeline of Trump's illness.

White House physician Dr. Sean Conley is explicitly hiding this information—and endangering lives. This is not tenable. If the press cannot scrape an answer from him, Vice President Biden's Secret Service detail might need to go question him directly.

Republican consultants appear flabbergasted that President Donald Trump can remain so stubbornly clueless in supporting something so obviously despised by his own voters.

According to Daily Mail, strategists are panicking that Trump keeps aping arguments from leading AI and technology executives about data centers, despite the issue being pure poison to the voting public — and Republicans in particular.

Consultants cringed when Trump called data center critics “backwards and poor,” one Republican political strategist told the Daily Mail.

“His team has convinced him to go all in for AI, all in for data centers,” the strategist said. “He's in a bubble.”

The worst-case scenario, one political strategist told the Daily Mail, is that disillusioned rural Republicans stay home during the midterms, giving Democrat voters the advantage.

Another strategist, soldiering on with optimism, suggested Trump’s vehement defense of data centers and AI had little to do with the president’s wooden-headed contempt of voters, but because he was being led into dark places by wealthy tech leaders.

“Trump is increasingly becoming the face of data centers and AI because tech executives have failed to communicate the benefits of the industry,” according to Daily Mail.

'AI and tech people all think they are insanely smart, but they are not good at politics. They don't know how to sell the issue,' the strategist told the Daily Mail.

But Trump was “war-gaming” the data center and AI issues as far back as July, the Daily Mail reported after a private strategy dinner at Washington's Four Seasons hotel.

In that work session, the tech industry ended up urging candidates to stress that data centers should 'pay for their own power and water' and ensure that any leftovers flow back to communities. But Trump's social media posts contained none of those talking points, instead taking a confrontational and dismissive approach. Trump instead preferred to write off the growing Republican backlash rather than addressing or alleviating concerns.

“The only reason that communities throughout the USA should not want data centers is if they want to end up being backwards and poor,” Trump raged in a message on social media, according to Daily Mail. The president said that such centers would help create jobs and lower taxes in communities, urging Americans to “let data reign.”

But opposition to data centers is so widespread that some GOP lawmakers — especially those seeking reelection in competitive swing states and swing districts — are joining Democrats in vigorously campaigning against them. And the issue is becoming a deciding factor in precarious Senate and House races in places like Texas and other former GOP strongholds as Democrats nail Republicans on the sensitive issue and smear it with Trump’s face.

Until recently, Atlantic Industrial Coatings was handling the waterproofing and repainting of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool. Now, a new company is taking over with a $2.7 million contract to address the algae issue, local NBC Washington reports.

President Donald Trump's Reflecting Pool disaster has become a kind of "Money Pit" satire of Washington, D.C. over the past year. The goal was to add a liner to the pool in "American Flag Blue" to eliminate the algae problems that have existed since the pool was built.

Trump initially said that the liner would cost about $1.8 million. He later described the estimate as roughly $1.5 million to $2 million, but the project’s cost ultimately rose to more than $14 million. After the pool was finished and the liner began to peel, the White House gave an additional $2 million to fix it. The cost now exceeds $16 million, according to contract records. Green Water Solutions was hired to run its nanobubble technology to clean the pool ahead of the July 4 holiday. Once they were finished, however, their equipment was removed.

The new contract will mean an additional $2.7 million to address the algae problem for a second time, government spending data shows.

“I read about it in the New York Times, and I said you know what, I can fix this problem,” said Richard Rosen, the founder and CEO of American Ag Energy, Inc. told NBC Washington.

He said that his company was one of five that were bidding on the contract to fix the algae issue.

“Our goal is to have nothing growing in the water,” Rosen said.

A longtime expert in swimming pools said he knew the culprit behind the Reflecting Pool "vandalism" that caused an ongoing algae bloom. "Swimming Pool Steve" Goodale is a second-generation pool builder with a YouTube channel dedicated to explaining aspects of swimming pools and hot tubs. Speaking to CNN in June, he explained that there's no way to fix the algae problem without using chemicals that can be dangerous to animals that use the pool.

"Well, somebody definitely planted the algae, and it was the very first bird that landed in the water," said Goodale. "You know, in an open-air environment like this, there's no stopping the algae from coming. It's going to be in the water. It's just how are you going to deal with it, knowing that it will be expected."

He suggested a multi-pronged solution: the pool must be drained and the immediate remediation would likely follow.

"It would really come down to a matter of concentration," said Goodale. "And again, we're talking about, you know, 6.5 million gallons of water or more. So, it would take an awful lot of product to get to dangerous levels of contamination here. It's why hydrogen peroxide would be commonly used for an open-air, clear water environment like this, because it is kind of the safer of the options. It's why we don't use something like chlorine, which wouldn't be as safe for the wildlife."

Rosen explained that his team has experts and engineers who have "decades of experience managing water quality in facilities around the world."

He described his team as "conducting a biological and chemistry profile of the Pool, to understand exactly where the water is coming from, what organisms are living in the water, and how the environment around the Pool impacts the water in the pool itself," the report said.

He thinks the problem stems from the water's chemical composition. Before the 2012 renovations, the National Park Service used city water to fill the pool. The new goal was to circulate the water from the Potomac River through a filtration system and into the pool to keep the use of city water to a minimum.

"I think we can do a lot of stuff for much lower cost, because we are going to focus on knowing what we’re doing,” Rosen said.

The report claimed that he's still not "overly confident," however.

“I don’t believe in anything until I actually see it work,” Rosen added.

He also swears there's nothing political about his bid for the contract.

“I don’t want any politics in this at all,” Rosen told NBC Washington. “We don’t have any political motivations here. This is really science and technology and engineering.”

Fox Business News host Maria Bartiromo is out, Vanity Fair correspondent Aidan McLaughlin reported on X.

"Maria Bartiromo out at Fox News per a terse statement," McLaughlin wrote on X.

According to the statement, "Effective today, Maria Bartiromo is no longer with FOX News Media. In making the announcement, FOX News Media said, 'We thank Maria for her work over the last 12 and a half years and wish her all the best in her next chapter."

Bartiromo’s last “Mornings with Maria” aired Thursday morning on the Fox Business Network, and the show will be renamed.

The news comes as the White House has been attempting to fill the press secretary position for the past week after Karoline Leavitt announced she'd leave to spend more time with her family. Vice President JD Vance will speak from the podium Thursday.

During his second presidency, Donald Trump and his MAGA allies have made a concerted effort to place his image and his name in as many places as possible — from renaming the Kennedy Center to Trump memecoins to renaming Palm Beach, Florida's airport the President Donald J. Trump International Airport. But not everyone on the right has a favorable view of Trump's nonstop self-promotion. In a scathing editorial, the conservative National Review argues that a "tacky" new Trump dollar coin is wildly incompatible with U.S. norms and traditions.

"Citing language in the Circulating Collectible Coin Redesign Act of 2020, the Trump administration has issued a new one-dollar coin featuring the president's scowling face," the National Review editorial board writes. "While, technically, the coin is a collectible, the administration has been keen to insist nevertheless that they 'may be still used as legal tender.' Which is to say that the president of the United States has found a legal loophole that, in a departure from two centuries of tradition, has allowed him to put his own likeness on the money. Is this draining the swamp?"

The conservative National Review writers stress that the U.S. "has a long history of declining to put living people on its currency," going back to its first president George Washington — who learned that the U.S. Mint "intended to add his face to the money" and "condemned the idea as unrepublican."

"In 1866," according to the Review, "Congress formalized Washington's instinct with the passage of a law that barred the 'portrait or likeness' of any living figure from being featured on paper notes. Since then, this norm has held, with one narrow exception: commemorative coins. Care to guess whether President Trump is more interested in the norm or the exception?"

The Review editorial writers warn that the "national custom" Trump "has broken here is a valuable one."

"The United States is neither a monarchy, in which it is customary for the king's face to adorn the money, nor a dictatorship, in which it is customary for the dictator's face to adorn everything," the Review emphasizes. "On its own, this infraction will not bring down the republic. But republicanism is a habit, and habits require constant reinforcement. America has become what it is today thanks to a patchwork quilt of customs, manners, modes, and routines. Nobody asked President Trump for this violation of those routines. Nobody will thank him for it, either."

President Donald Trump's new scheme to try and reduce fuel costs ahead of the election was to announce that he'd be taking some of the Venezuelan oil. But, Congress told the Pentagon it's not legal, Semafor reported Thursday.

Experts have made it clear that the thick, tar-like oil in Venezuela's fields requires a specialized refineries to process the oil into usable fuel. There's also a major infrastructure issue. The country lacks the necessary upgrades to get it out of the oil fields. Infrastructure has suffered years of under-investment and deterioration, CNBC reported. Repairing pipelines, power systems, drilling equipment and upgrades could take years.

But oil reserves aren't the same as barrels currently being produced. Experts agree that, at most, Trump's plot could put modest downward pressure on prices over the longer term, but it likely wouldn't impact fuel prices for 10-15 years, the report said.

Semafor cited a person familiar with the matter who said that Congress told the Pentagon's Office of Strategic Capital that it doesn't have the authority to take an equity stake in a private company. Trump used the Pentagon's Office of Strategic Capital to take an equity stake in the second-largest oil firm in Venezuela.

"It did so by declining to pass legislative proposals that would have granted the office the legal authority to seek equity stakes that were submitted by the Pentagon in recent years," the person told Semafor.

Skeptical lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are asking the Trump administration to give information about the effort and how it would work.

The more immediate problem is accessing oil elsewhere, like Iran. Analysts made it clear that the Iran conflict and disruptions in global oil routes are exerting a much greater short-term influence on prices than Trump's Venezuela scheme.

U.S. pump prices respond to worldwide crude prices, refinery capacity, transportation costs, seasonal demand and geopolitical disruptions. It trades on the global market. So, even Trump flooding the U.S. market with oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) can only go on so long. The Reserve continues to blow through its nearly 290 million barrels left in an effort to soften the blow of soaring gas prices.

Currently, U.S. refineries are operating at near capacity (97 percent), the Wall Street Journal reported this week. More oil doesn't automatically mean more gasoline if there isn't enough refinery capacity to process it.

Venezuelan oil would be only one additional source of supply and could not control the global market on its own.

In 2024, a U.S. Senate seat in West Virginia flipped to Republican when then-Gov. Jim Justice enjoyed a 41 percent victory over Democratic nominee Glenn Elliott (the seat was formerly held by centrist Joe Manchin, who left the Democratic Party and became an independent that year). But now, Justice is, according to Politico, "seriously considering launching a campaign to return to the governor's mansion." And if that happens, it could set the stage for bitter infighting among West Virginia Republicans.

Politico's Aaron Pellish reports, "Less than two years into his Senate term, Jim Justice is seriously considering launching a campaign to return to the governor's mansion. The West Virginia Republican is exploring a 2028 gubernatorial primary challenge to Gov. Patrick Morrisey, according to two people who have spoken directly with Justice about his deliberations and were granted anonymity to discuss them."

One of the two Politico sources said that Justice is "very seriously exploring" a gubernatorial run, adding, "I think he's closer to running than not. If I had to give a percentage, I would think he's 75 percent likely to do this."

Both of the Politico sources, however, said that Justice hasn't made a final decision. But if the conservative senator does decide to run for governor, Pellish notes, it could pave the way for an intense "clash" among Republicans in West Virginia.

"A Justice gubernatorial campaign would set up a major intraparty clash with Morrisey that could further entrench growing factions within the state GOP," Pellish explains. "Morrisey is a conservative hardliner, while Justice, who was originally elected to the governorship as a Democrat before dramatically announcing a party switch during a rally with President Donald Trump in 2017, is more closely aligned with the pro-business wing of the party."

The Politico reporter notes that Justice and Morrissey have "never been close."

"Justice endorsed Morrisey's opponent, Moore Capito, the son of Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), in the 2024 gubernatorial primary," Pellish notes. "Justice was heavily recruited by Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to take on then-Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin in the 2024 election, when he was closing in on the end of his second term as governor. West Virginia law restricts any governor from serving more than two consecutive terms, but has no limits on non-consecutive terms. Manchin opted to retire."

Morrissey has the support of Club for Growth President David McIntosh, who vowed that if the governor does face a GOP primary challenge in 2028, "We are prepared to do what it takes to help him win again."

According to West Virginia-based Republican strategist Greg Thomas, who doesn't work for either Justice or Morrissey, the senator has his work cut out for him if he takes on Morrissey in 2028.

Thomas told Politico, "To beat Morrisey, (Justice is) going to have to run the best campaign he's ever run. He'll have to run a bigger, more comprehensive, well-funded effort to beat Morrisey than what he's had in past elections."

Vice President JD Vance and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick gave critics of the Trump administration a lot to talk about with recent controversial remarks — Vance talking about the "End Times" in an expression of solidarity with far-right fundamentalist evangelicals, Lutnick claiming that data centers "don't use water." And according to the i Paper, such comments from Trump's "band of clowns" do more than make his second Trump administration look bad — they make things even worse for Republican candidates in the midterms.

"With exactly two months to go before the U.S. midterm elections," reporter Simon Marks explains in the UK-based i Paper, "Donald Trump is no longer the only member of his administration squandering the opportunity to win over voters and making clownish headlines for all the wrong reasons."

Lutnick aggressively defended data centers during an interview with CNBC's Joe Kernan, telling the host, "One of my favorite things is when people talk about data centers using water. The number-one product in America that uses water is cattle … I mean, data centers don't use water."

Marks notes, however, that "in fact, data centers consume several million liters of water daily to cool servers and generate electricity."

Although Vance is a convert to Catholicism — not an evangelical Protestant — he brought up the "End Times" (a major focus of some far-right evangelical fundamentalists) during an interview with Christian podcaster Bryce Crawford.

Vance told Crawford, "We are committed to doing as much as possible to try and make the world the kind of world that God wants it to be. What I'm trying to focus on is doing as much of God's work as possible right now, and if that leads to the End Times, OK."

Marks argues that Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent was also being "clownish" when he blamed Ukraine for rising prices around the world.

Bessent told Fox News, "Ukraine has decided that they want to blow up Russian energy assets and refined products, so that is creating upward price pressure on a global basis."

GOP strategists are hoping to save their party from a blue wave in the midterms. And these comments from Trump administration officials, Marks stresses, are only making that harder.

"As the summer winds down and Americans prepare to cast their verdict on Trump's return to power," Marks observes, "a slew of his top lieutenants are now competing with one another to demonstrate that their own grip on reality is loosening."

The House of Representatives has set records in the 119th Congress for being among the most "do nothing" sessions in history, according to critics. Now they're canceling the last two weeks of session in September.

The term “Do-Nothing Congress” originated with the 80th Congress, which served from 1947 to 1949. President Harry Truman used the phrase during his 1948 reelection campaign to attack the Republican-controlled Congress for blocking much of his domestic agenda, particularly when it came to proposals involving housing, prices, labor and civil rights. At that point, there were hundreds of bills that passed through the 80th Congress.

In 2026, Congress passed 30 public laws. Collectively, for the full session, they've passed 103 laws. As of Sept. 3, only 64 of those bills have actually become laws. The only Congress worse than the 119th was the first session of the 118th Congress in 2023. Controlled by Republicans, the House passed only 34 bills. The Republican-led Congress in 2013 was also extremely low, with fewer than 60 votes passed. The House, Senate and White House are all controlled by Republicans.

Rep. Katherine Clark (D-Ma.), the Democratic Whip, noted that the House GOP made the change to the schedule, pausing votes until approximately 6:30 p.m. EST on Monday, Sept. 14. "Members are advised that votes are no longer expected in the House the week of September 21 and Sept 28," she said in a release. "Pending Senate adoption of House Concurrent Resolution 113, votes are possible in the House during the weeks of September 21 and September 28, 2026. Members will receive 48 hours' notice prior to any potential voters in the House." She explained that this is a change from the previous schedule.

States News reporter Jenniffer Shutt noted that this extends "the pre-election campaign break to seven weeks."

Deputy chief of staff to Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.), Aaron Fritschner, said on BlueSky, "The last votes in the House before the midterm, if they adhere to the current schedule, will be two weeks from today. We're also out next week."

Politico's Meridith Lee Hill explained, "That means members are set to depart no later than Sept. 17 and not return until mid-November.

One person commented, "It's honestly telling how many in the comments think this is bad news[.] This is literally the GOP House Majority signaling: they are terrified [and] are basically giving up."

Yahoo Sports Reporter Ross Dellenger noted, "This impacts the Protect College Sports Act. The House, originally scheduled to be in session for four weeks in September, is now scheduled for just two. This means the House would not consider the congressional bill until it returns in mid-November — if it passes the Senate."

"This Republican majority almost certainly holds the record for the most floor time lost in modern congressional history. It is a historically dysfunctional majority. The only recent saving grace is MGP & Golden throwing Johnson a lifeline for no good political reason," said attorney Blake Allen.

"The French legislature is looking at Mike Johnson and thinking s—— is this much vacation allowed?" ex-Republican Tim Miller of The Bulwark wrote on X.

"House lawmakers will never defeat the not working allegations," NOTUS reporter Oriana González wrote.

"Crazy how Republicans claim that 'nobody wants to work anymore,' and oppose paid leave social safety nets, but then work as little as possible while getting a taxpayer-funded paycheck and healthcare," quipped Melanie D'Arrigo, executive director of the Campaign for New York Health.

The U.S. Postal Service's effort to restrict mail-in ballots had another day in court on Thursday in Massachusetts, and the Justice Department ran up against the judge's citations from the U.S. Constitution.

President Donald Trump's executive order and the new USPS rules require states that choose to participate to submit voter names, addresses and unique ballot barcodes through a secure Federal Ballot Mail Portal. Ballot envelopes must meet USPS design standards, including official markings and barcodes that match that same portal data.

The federal portal is then approved by election officials, not the general public, the USPS site says. The rule applies to ballots containing federal races. The implementation has been fraught with legal challenges and court restrictions, given that the Constitution requires elections to be handled by the states.

Critics claim that the process is Trump's attempt to 'rig" the 2026 elections. Legal analysts fear that the Supreme Court conservatives are "chopping at the bit" to significantly restrict vote-by-mail.

Cambridge freelance reporter John Hawkinson was in court Thursday to follow the debate between U.S. District Court Judge Indira Talwani and the Justice Department.

The judge remarked that 70 days out from the Nov. 3 election, "I have nothing from USPS, I don't have anything that will tell me whether this will have programming invitation portals, upload a spreadsheet 10 at a time? 10,000 at a time?" relayed Hawkinson's account of the debate. As of Thursday, there are 61 days until the election. However, some states, like North Carolina, begin sending absentee ballots out as early as Friday, Sept. 4, the Secretary of State's website shows. The state with the latest vote-by-mail ballot start date is California, on October 5, which is just 32 days away, its Secretary of State website says. All other states send their ballots out before then.

Nevada's elections chief announced this week that he has little faith in the federal government's ability to implement any of the new rules in time before ballots are delivered.

The Justice Department told the judge in court that the final rule from USPS, "I believe, specifies [that] Excel files can be uploaded to the portal. They don't need to type it in."

The judge noted that "step one" would not be to upload the spreadsheet. "Step one is getting approval of the ballots," she posited.

"Step zero, under the rule, is a notification of intent to open a line of communication," the Justice Department claimed. There were a few other optional steps like designing an envelope.

"I'm just trying to do the ones that matter," the judge cut off. "I think every state has obligations under other laws to allow people to use the mail. So 'if you want to use it' isn't really an option."

"Out of respect for federalism, I just want to clarify states can do what they want," the Justice Department claimed.

That's when Hawkinson said the judge smiled.

"We have important issues here," the judge began. "You say, 'if you wish to use that.' You mean 'if the legislatures of the state?'"

The DOJ said, "yes."

"And every state's legislators have chosen?" the judge asked. The DOJ agreed.

"You'd be asking people, if they don't want to use the mail, to go back and change their laws?" the judge said.

The DOJ claimed they didn't follow her logic.

"Well, you say it's optional. But the states have already done this. USPS is aware of that. We have a system that allows states to make that decision — federalism," she quipped.

The DOJ went on to claim that it would take only two days for the USPS to process everything.

Opposition to data centers is so widespread that some GOP lawmakers — especially those seeking reelection in competitive swing states and swing districts — are joining Democrats in vigorously campaigning against them. But according to Politico, Democrats are hoping that a hidden provision in the Big, Beautiful Bill Act of 2025 will make data centers even more of a political liability for Republican candidates in the 2026 midterms.

Politico reporters Kelsey Brugger and Brian Faler explain, "Voters are in an uproar over data centers — and Democrats are trying to direct anger toward Republicans by pointing to a tax provision buried in the GOP's 'Big, Beautiful Bill.' Of the myriad talking points on this issue that Democrats are preparing (to) deploy heading into the midterms, they this week began alluding to 'opportunity zones' — an initiative designed to boost growth in areas deemed underdeveloped and which, at one point, Republicans had touted as a way to spur the construction of data centers."

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-New York), who is hoping to become speaker if his party flips the U.S. House of Representatives in November, used that data centers/Big, Beautiful Bill talking point when, during a news conference on August 31, he told reporters, "Every single House Republican but one or two voted to unleash data centers on the American people in an unfettered fashion." And the following day on the House floor, Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Massachusetts) told fellow lawmakers, "A year ago, Republicans were bragging about giving tax breaks to Big Tech in order to build data centers. With November on the horizon, some House Republicans are acting as if they did not turbocharge the data center buildout."

But House Ways and Means Chairman Jason Smith (R-Missouri) is pushing back against the talking point, telling Politico, "Huge stretch. Opportunity zones control, like, everything — from child daycare centers to manufacturers. Can data centers be used in them? Yes. But so can everything else."

Brugger and Faler note that Democrats' new "messaging tactic" linking data centers to a "yes" vote on the Big, Beautiful Bill Act "arrives as Republicans are already struggling to sell voters on their 2025 tax law ahead of the midterms."

Simon Wang, an economic mobility specialist, told Politico, "You're seeing an increasing trend of (opportunity zones) being utilized to develop data centers." And Rep. Ro Khanna (D-California), whose district includes Silicon Valley, told Politico, "Trump has made it an issue by saying that he wants data centers reigning everywhere; he's basically saying he doesn't care about local control, he doesn't care about local communities. We can be on the side of local cities, rural communities, factory towns, suburbs — places that don't want Big Tech coming and telling them what to do."

President Donald Trump appears to be tightening his security around the White House while he's building his new presidential security bunker.

Trump has been doing his beautification work on what's known as Presidential Park, more formally known as Lafayette Square, which sits across from the White House, outside of the secure area of the White House and the Eisenhower Executive Office Building. But the work was completed months ago, as D.C. resident and anti-Trump activist Joe Flood said this week on X. The tall fence around the area remains in place, even though there's a huge fence around the White House with agents stationed around it.

Now it appears they might be making it permanent, which will prevent people from being able to take close photographs of the White House without the fence in the way.

"Trump officials on Thursday will publicly present their latest plans to permanently fence Lafayette Square," the Washington Post reported. "The project, a longtime Secret Service priority, was discussed but never approved in past administrations, as officials wrestled with how to boost security without unduly restricting public access, said four people who spoke on the condition of anonymity to detail internal conversations."

The move comes after Trump bragged that he has eliminated crime in Washington D.C.

Trump has claimed that he simply does what the Secret Service says. “I just follow what they’d like to do," he said, according to the report.

Trump has significantly increased his security during this term. Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry S. Truman, Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush, Barack Obama and Joe Biden all faced attacks and assassination attempts before Trump was shot at in 2024 outside of the White House while on a campaign stop.

It's unclear if Trump is growing increasingly fearful about his security situation, but over the past year, there have been significant changes, including his speaking behind bulletproof glass and his incident of secretly switching planes out of his Qatari-gifted plane when flying out of Turkey after a NATO meeting.

Trump was the first president since Sept. 11, 2001, to be rushed to the presidential bunker due to security fears. It came when Washington residents protested the brutal murder of George Floyd in 2020. A little over one block away from the White House was "Black Lives Matter Plaza," outside of the AFL-CIO building on 16th Street N.W. He is now renovating and significantly expanding the bunker, his administration has said in court documents. They consider it crucial for national security and the president's safety.

Protests often take place outside of the White House. A permanent camp has been outside the White House since 1981. It's known as the "White House Peace Vigil."

The report said that the Secret Service wants a "permanent visitors' visitor screening center." One was previously built on the southwest side of the White House off of 17th and E Streets N.W. There is a large area south of the White House known as The Ellipse that has more space than Lafayette Square and wouldn't block off any other buildings or prevent the infamous tourist photos.

As the economy continues to struggle and the affordability crisis continues, the Post report closed with Trump debating whether to change the red bricks in Lafayette Square to something fancier.

“We have a big decision to make,” Trump said in the Oval Office in August. “Do we take the pavers that are red, you know, the red brick pavers? And do we change them into a granite? They’re beautiful, but they’re not the original.”