In a Truth Social post on Thursday morning, President Donald Trump demanded that officials stop counting votes in the U.S. Senate race in Alaska, and that all votes for third-party candidates be given to Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan — disregarding thousands of votes that are yet to be counted as well as voters’ preferences in a possible instant runoff. The demand is highly unusual and…
Source
Plaintiffs challenging President Donald Trump’s plans to overhaul a historic Washington, D.C., golf course asked a federal judge Thursday to temporarily block the administration from closing part of the East Potomac Park later this month.
In a new 276-page motion seeking a temporary restraining order, the D.C. Preservation League and two individual plaintiffs urged U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes to intervene before the administration’s planned Nov. 15 closure, arguing that the move would advance Trump’s redevelopment project without required environmental and historic preservation reviews.
“Defendants’ plan to close East Potomac Park leaves them poised to take another significant step in implementing the Washington National Plan,” the plaintiffs wrote. “In doing so, they threaten imminent injury to Plaintiffs and the public interest.”
The plaintiffs argue that the closure would cause irreparable harm by depriving visitors of access to the park’s recreational and historic resources. They are seeking a 14-day temporary restraining order or, alternatively, a 14-day stay preventing the closure while the legal challenge proceeds.
The National Park Service previously told the court that it intends to close East Potomac Park south of Buckeye Drive, including the golf course, on Nov. 15, citing safety concerns related to a deteriorating seawall along the Potomac River.
But the plaintiffs contend those concerns do not justify closing the entire park and are instead a pretext for advancing Trump’s plan to replace the existing historic golf course with a championship-style course designed by architect Tom Fazio.
The latest filing follows weeks of back-and-forth between the administration and the court over the scope of the redevelopment and whether federal officials have been forthcoming about their plans.
In an Oct. 26 ruling, Reyes blocked
Democrats regained control of both the House and the Senate in Tuesday’s historic midterm elections, a comeback fueled largely by voter anger over high prices and the war on Iran. But surveys also found that corruption was a major concern, with 76% of voters telling a Harris poll that elected officials care more about enriching themselves than improving the economy for ordinary people.
Source
Documents show that Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth’s wife, Jennifer Hegseth, was paid to consult by a top D.C. firm whose clients include Lockheed Martin, marking a massive potential conflict of interest as Democrats prepare a potential impeachment inquiry into the embattled Pentagon chief. Politico first reported on Jennifer Hegseth’s work in 2025 for top consulting firm Watchtower…
Source
Ahead of Donald Trump’s return to office in January 2025, a divided Supreme Court declined to halt his criminal sentencing in New York.
Over dissent from four of the court’s six GOP-appointed justices, the five-justice majority let the sentencing proceed for two main reasons: One was that Trump was only being sentenced to an unconditional discharge, which is basically a nonpenalty; the other was that “the alleged evidentiary violations at President-Elect Trump’s state-court trial can be addressed in the ordinary course on appeal.”
Nearly two years later, that “ordinary course” is still unfolding.
On Thursday one of the president’s personal lawyers, Robert Giuffra, was in a Manhattan courtroom to press Trump’s appeal in the so-called hush money case. Those “alleged evidentiary violations” were among the arguments presented to the appellate panel — that is, that some of the evidence used to convict Trump at his spring 2024 trial ran afoul of the presidential immunity ruling the Supreme Court announced that summer.
Trump was convicted of falsifying business records to cover up a hush money scheme in connection with the 2016 presidential race. Although covering up a hush money scheme is not an official act protected by presidential immunity, Trump’s lawyers have cited the immunity ruling’s related prohibition against using evidence of official acts to secure convictions for unofficial conduct. They have pointed to evidence from his first term in office: discussions with White House communications director Hope Hicks, statements on social media, discussion with the attorney general and testimony about White House operations.
Immunity is not the only issue in the appeal. Much of the discussion at Thursday’s hearing focused on Giuffra’s argument that