Video

Legal analysts are trying to figure out a way to stop the Justice Department from giving millions in cash to Jan. 6 attackers who got pardons thanks to President Donald Trump.

After hundreds of protesters beat police officers and reporters, it's the J6 attackers who are now alleging "excessive force” in a $18.4 million class action lawsuit, reported "All Rise News" reporter Adam Klasfeld on Monday. He also noted that while the class-action suit includes only some of the attackers, the DOJ may decide to compensate all of those arrested and charged.

Speaking to former federal prosecutor Mitchell Epner on Tuesday, Klasfeld asked if there was any way to stop taxpayer dollars from being handed over to anyone Trump wants.

Last week, the Justice Department cut Michael Flynn a check for $1 million for what they said was "malicious prosecution." However, no court of law ruled that it was malicious prosecution. The case never went to trial

Trump is working with the Justice Department to get the government to hand him $10 billion from the IRS and U.S. Treasury Department for a "data breach" that included his tax information. He's also suing the DOJ for roughly $230 million for the 2022 Mar-a-Lago search and Russia probe inquiries.

Trump was never investigated in the Russia probe; those in his orbit were. Special counsel Robert Mueller said that Trump was never investigated because it was against the DOJ inspector general policy memo. The DOJ dismissed charges against Trump without prejudice after the judge in that case claimed that special counsel Jack Smith was not legally appointed by Congress. Those charges could be brought again if Congress were to appoint another special counsel, Smith suggested while testifying in January, the conservative Washington Examiner said at the time.

It raises the question of whether the DOJ could "settle" with Trump for whatever amount the two agree on without ever going before a judge. That is not necessarily the case for the Jan. 6 attackers.

"I always say that I can't imagine things getting any worse, but that's only because of low levels of my imagination," confessed Epner.

He explained that in the Michael Flynn case, the suit didn't even go to court. It was "just a direct case with one plaintiff and no judge [who] could step in to have anything to do with the settlement." In the case of a class action suit, however, the "Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 lays out a bunch of specific issues that the judge has to consider before deciding whether or not to approve the settlement."

Epner said that at first he thought it would be difficult for a judge to find anything in the text of Rule 23 that would allow a judge to say, 'No, you can't go forward with this.' I think a creative judge might be able to use Rule 23, Section 2, Subpart B, which requires the judge to find that the proposal was negotiated at arm's length.'

In this case, a settlement like this would be "the furthest thing possible from arm's length. It's a collusive case. The plaintiff's counsel are bringing it where the deputy attorney general, Todd Blanche, who should be ashamed of himself every single day because he knows better and he sold his soul, was bragging only last week to people that they should feel good about Donald Trump living up to his promises to his base because he pardoned the people who were insurrectionists on Jan. 6."

So, the idea that Todd Blanche is engaged in anything at arm's length around Jan. 6 is like saying Al Capone and Frank Nitti were involved in arm's-length negotiations," Epner continued, citing the infamous mob boss (Capone) and his right-hand man (Nitti).

In the end, Epner thinks that with a creative judge, the case doesn't make it past the first court. It would then be appealed, likely all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. That would likely take longer than Trump has in the White House, and another attorney general could refuse a settlement and require a full trial.

President Donald Trump paused his management of the war in Iran to promote his new designs for his presidential library on Monday night. By Tuesday, people who've been in Miami questioned the safety of a building so tall.

The new library looks remarkably similar to his New York Trump Tower, with a gold elevator and marble.

While the new renderings aren't yet uploaded to Trump's library website, Trump posted the photos to social media showing that the gargantuan structure will be 50 stories tall, The Guardian reported Monday. It appears to dwarf other buildings in Miami, with almost twice as much height, one reporter observed.

The reality, however, is that the Panorama Tower is currently the tallest building in Miami, with 85 stories. So, the new Trump Tower won't be the biggest in the city from the start of construction.

There are two other new buildings that, when completed, will be taller than the Panorama Tower: the Waldorf Astoria Miami (100 stories) and the Cipriani Residences Miami (80 stories). There are 11 other buildings currently in Miami that will stand above Trump's. Seven buildings are currently under construction in Miami that will be larger than the new Trump library.

Trump's structure won't even be among the top 20 largest buildings in the city if it is completed.

Another key detail prompted one reporter to suggest architects rethink the design to take the Florida weather into account. While many are eagerly building larger and larger structures in the city,

"I don't know if he's ever been to Miami in the windy season, like, that building is two buildings taller than everything else in Miami, according to the rendering," said CNN senior White House correspondent Kristen Holmes. "Like I would be scared just in a normal-sized building in Miami for the windows rattling. I think they need to rethink the size of that just based on where it is."

Holmes, too, was looking at the rendering photos, not the actual specs.

A congressman is sounding the alarm that President Donald Trump's declaration of victory leaves something to be desired.

Speaking to CNN on Tuesday, Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Ill.) said that Iran likely knew its former leader's reign was coming to an end, as he was 86 years old. So, the new leadership is likely part of plans that were already in place.

"The fact is, meet the new boss, same as the old boss and maybe worse, right?" said Quigley. "The new leader is more conservative, more rigid, and really more of a threat to the region and to the United States. So if this is victory, then we're in big trouble."

He clarified, "I have no idea the condition of the current leader," when asked about whether Mojtaba Khamenei was still alive.

"I will say this: it really doesn't matter," he added. "The regime isn't going to fold just because its leader is killed. If anything, they seem to be more emboldened. And we've got to ask ourselves the question I hear on the House floor from Democrats and Republicans alike: What are we trying to do?"

He asked whether it was regime change or whether the goal was to actually change how Iran behaves in the area.

"Are we going to declare victory and go home? Is this about the nuclear capacities of Iran?" he also asked. "Maybe we shouldn't. Trump shouldn't have abandoned the treaty in which Iran was in compliance, not to go forward with the bomb. The JCPOA. So it's a mixed message. It's garbled. It's half-truths."

The JCPOA is the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the agreement that former President Barack Obama, five other countries and the European Union signed with Iran. Trump said that the deal was bad and tore it up.

The EU site "Modern Diplomacy" reported this week, "Gulf allies express concerns about a premature U.S. withdrawal, fearing fallout from a hostile Iran. Ground troop deployment remains a contentious issue, with warnings from Gulf allies against such an escalation."

Former Secretary of State Antony Blinken spoke at the Harvard Institute of Politics last week and made it clear that under President Joe Biden's administration, they knew military intervention was an option, but that they decided Iran's responses weren't worth it.

The celebrity rag with a pro-Donald Trump slant is now sending its paparazzi to follow lawmakers on break during Holy Week.

The two-week vacation began on Friday for the House of Representatives after Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) announced he would not allow the House to vote on the bill. The U.S. Senate passed the bill overnight that would fully fund the TSA, the Secret Service, and other agencies. Johnson said he would call members back if anything happened, but sent members home anyway, refusing a vote.

TMZ has taken it upon itself to harass members of Congress for leaving Washington, NOTUS reported on Tuesday.

"To show how fed up the American people are. Because we are. It's so insulting that the Republicans blame the Democrats ... no, it's both of your faults," said TMZ chief Harvey Levin.

Democrats agree, saying that they were ready to vote on the unanimous Senate bill.

TMZ tracked Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) to Las Vegas, where they claimed he was hanging out at a casino.

"California Congressman Robert Garcia was hangin' at a Vegas casino Sunday, while thousands of federal workers are goin' belly up," the site posted on Threads.

Garcia agrees that lawmakers should be back in Washington, but noted he was at the casino having lunch with his dad on the way back to his district.

"Actually I don’t mind what TMZ is doing here. Like the story says my dad has lived in Vegas for 15 years and I had just finished lunch with him. I try to see him whenever I can. And like I said a few days ago, Speaker Mike Johnson should have never sent us all home," he wrote.

The following day he was back in Long Beach, California.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) was tracked by TMZ to Disney World, which spread across the internet on Monday. Buy Monday evening, Graham claiming he was shooting off guns instead, which TMZ wrote was "days after he was packing a bubble wand in the Magic Kingdom ... but, all while the government shutdown still drags on."

"Kinda hard to ignore LG's huge pivot from theme parks to the shooting range. We broke the story," bragged TMZ.

They then tracked Ted Cruz (R-Texas) chilling on the plane and Rep. Katherine Clark (D-Mass.) walking through the airport with the police security escort.

Clark later told CNN, "We should be in Washington today. I agree with everything he just said. And what did we get to? We got to a bipartisan agreement. There is one segment of Congress that when it come and take a step forward into agreeing to put TSA workers, put Coast Guard, FEMA, our cyber security, those working at our ports and in customs first pay them for the work they are doing. And that's House Republicans. Unanimous in the Senate. Republicans and Democrats. That is what the people are hungry for, for us to come together," said Clark.

TMZ also reported seeing Senate Majority Leader John Thune at the airport, leaving town, where it asked him if he thought everything was resolved. He said he hoped so, but that there was still a lot of work left to do.

Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso and Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) were both spotted at airports, too.

President Donald Trump has a rarely used power he could deploy that would require all members to return to Washington to vote on the bipartisan bill. Democrats have thought about using a discharge petition, which, when signed by a majority of lawmakers, would force a vote on the bill. It's how the law was passed that forced the Justice Department to make the investigation files of trafficker Jeffrey Epstein public.

On Friday, however, Johnson told reporters that he'd just spoken to Trump and that the president supported his plan to block the vote, even if it meant more federal workers wouldn't get paid.

President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio continue to appear at odds with each other’s messaging on Iran, as Secretary Rubio declared four “clear objectives” for the war — objectives Trump has said have already been met, with Rubio describing Iran’s new current leadership as possibly impermanent, while the president praises them.

On ABC News’ “Good Morning America,” Secretary Rubio on Monday said it is unclear if the current Iran regime will “end up being in charge,” according to the Wall Street Journal’s Alex Ward.

“We have to see [if] these people end up being the ones in charge, seeing if they’re the ones who have the power to deliver,” he said.

Also on Monday, President Trump announced that the U.S. “is in serious discussions with A NEW, AND MORE REASONABLE, REGIME to end our Military Operations in Iran. Great progress has been made but, if for any reason a deal is not shortly reached, which it probably will be, and if the Hormuz Strait is not immediately ‘Open for Business,’ we will conclude our lovely ‘stay’ in Iran by blowing up and completely obliterating all of their Electric Generating Plants, Oil Wells and Kharg Island (and possibly all desalinization plants!), which we have purposefully not yet ‘touched.'”

“Here are the clear objectives of the operation,” Rubio said, as the State Department posted. “You should write them down: 1. The destruction of Iran’s air force 2. The destruction of their navy 3. The severe diminishing of their missile launching capability 4. The destruction of their factories.”

Opening the Strait of Hormuz — which Trump demanded and critics note was open before Trump began his war thirty-one days ago, is not listed among the four objectives Rubio declared on Monday. Trump has stated previously that the first three have already been met — and he is reportedly preparing to send thousands more troops to the Middle East, possibly for a ground invasion.

Rubio’s stated objectives drew strong backlash.

“Perhaps the reason Secretary Rubio is having trouble convincing people that these are the only objectives is that none of these goals require thousands of ground troops, which makes it curious why they are flowing into the region right now as I type this tweet,” noted associate professor of political science Christopher Clary.

“No mention of nuclear capabilities, vague language that leaves room for interpretation. Preparing the media space to declare victory and leave?” asked Institute for Military Operations Professor Olivier Schmitt.

“Always good to have clear objectives laid out one month after you start a war,” noted Eli Clifton of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.

“Moving the goal posts isn’t the solution Mr. Secretary. What happened to nuclear weapons? Uranium enrichment? Support to proxies? Civilian rising up to challenge the regime? Reopening the Strait of Hormuz?” posited retired U.S. Army military intelligence officer Jon Sweet.

The House could vote, and likely pass, the Senate bill to fund the Department of Homeland Security, but on Friday afternoon, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) made it clear he's not going to.

Johnson said in a press release that his members won't vote on the bill in its current form. He trashed the Senate for accepting a "radical, crazy agenda." The bill fully funds all of DHS except Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Both of those were already heavily funded through the "Big Beautiful Bill" in 2025.

But in a fact-check, CNN made it clear, Johnson has the votes because Democrats are willing to support the Senate bill if they were to vote on it. There are enough Democrats and Republicans willing to support the legislation as it passed in the early hours of Friday morning.

"House Speaker Mike Johnson is very clearly in a very tough spot here. You can tell by how he is pretending that Democrats are in control of the Senate and that the Senate bill that he and House Republicans are rejecting was not actually sent over to the House by the Republican-led upper chamber," said CNN host Brianna Keilar.

"He said House Republicans are not going to be part of any effort to reopen borders or stop immigration enforcement, he said. They're going to deport illegal aliens. This, we should note, as ICE has actually been sort of redirected to go to some airports," Keilar explained.

ICE is currently being paid, while those at airports are beside TSA agents who are not being paid, despite both being under the umbrella of Homeland Security.

Johnson "said Senate Democrats have foisted this on them as a radical, crazy agenda, but we do just need to note that if this is part of a radical, crazy agenda, it was good enough for Senate Republicans, who do hold the majority in the Senate," Keilar fact-checked.

"And he said the Senate bill has zero funding for immigration enforcement. Now, there isn't ICE and CBP funding, but we should note here that ICE and CBP are funded quite substantially for years by that 'Big, Beautiful Bill,' that landmark legislation of President Trump's. So there was sort of a question even in this. What ultimately did Democrats even achieve by going through this shutdown? But clearly, there are things Republicans want in this bill," Keilar said.

Speaking with co-host Boris Sanchez made it clear that, throughout this full shutdown, immigration agents have been paid. TSA workers and civilian Coast Guard members have not been paid.

At the end of the press conference, Johnson said that before coming out to speak to them, he and Trump spoke via phone and that he supports Johnson.

"It's also notable that he's talking about Democrats wanting open borders. That's not what they were demanding out of this shutdown," added Sanchez. "They wanted adjustments to immigration enforcement, policy changes to body cameras, masks being worn, judicial warrants being required to enter people's property. So, a lot there from Speaker Johnson that doesn't pass muster."

Speaking to CNN congressional reporter Lauren Fox, Sanchez said that Johnson was "clearly trying to spin the fact that he doesn't have enough votes to pass the plan that Republican Senators put forward."

Fox agreed that if Johnson voted on it that Democrats would "go along with him."

"And we heard from [Minority] Leader [Hakeem] Jeffries (D-N.Y.) earlier today that he said Democrats were willing to do whatever is necessary in order to end TSA workers not getting paid as soon as today," said Fox. "So, the votes likely would have been there if he would have brought this to the floor. But obviously, he is facing a lot of pressure from conservatives in his conference who were not happy with what the Senate."

She called it "really astounding" to pick apart pieces of the bill that Republicans unanimously supported overnight.

- YouTube www.youtube.com

Republicans have lost faith in President Donald Trump's ability to manage the war in Iran.

CNN's "Inside Politics" Dana Bash spoke with Kristen Holmes, whom she referred to as "The Trump Whisperer," because she "speaks Trump." In the discussion, Holmes explained that the president is all over the place with Iran, and Republicans are growing fearful.

"It's been really hard to decipher," Holmes said about the short clip of a Trump phone interview with Fox News. "I mean, he has gone back and forth so many times. And even in the Cabinet meeting yesterday, he's basically saying he doesn't care about the negotiations, but at the same time saying that he wants the negotiations, then saying that he's going to strike them, you know, to oblivion, then saying, 'Steve is telling me things are going well.' I mean, that was one sitting and that was one conversation."

Talking to Republicans, she said, the fear is that Trump "has boxed himself in here. That he got ahead of his skis, that he spent his time comparing this to Venezuela, thinking that he could get in and get out, that the leadership structure would be the same because things are going well in Venezuela."

Trump, she said, was so "excited" with how well things are going in Venezuela, he assumed he could make the same thing happen everywhere else.

Nate Swanson, a former Trump staffer and current senior fellow and director of the Iran Strategy Project at The Atlantic Council, made a similar point on Monday.

"My assumption here, and what we've heard, is that, you know, the administration is expecting a three to four day war — was they thought this would be fast. But I think that was a significant misread of where Iran was and how they were perceiving the threat. So, probably not enough planning," said Swanson.

Holmes said that anyone who has studied Iran knows there is no comparison between Iran and Venezuela. For one, she said, Iran is a "deep-seated theocracy."

"However, he is here now, and the question is, what are the next steps?" she continued. "And we know that they are planning or making plans for a potential ground invasion, should they have to get there. And that is something that President Trump has always said, both privately and publicly, he never wanted to do. But again, if you talk to these Republicans, they feel like he's boxed himself in and there really aren't that many options now."

President Donald Trump made news after he voted by mail despite spending years railing against the practice as "cheating" in elections. His family followed suit with their own ballots for the Florida special election.

“Mail-in voting means mail-in cheating. I call it mail-in cheating, and we've got to do something about it all,” Trump said on Monday while participating in his crime task force roundtable.

His comments came after Trump and his family submitted their mail-in ballots, according to records.

After Trump spoke in his Thursday Cabinet meeting, before he began taking questions from the press, one reporter questioned him on the mail-in ballot.

Trump began by claiming that he voted by mail because he felt he was needed more at the White House.

"But you were in Palm Beach," the reporter quipped.

"That's right. And I — yeah," he stuttered. "And I decided that I was going to vote by mail-in ballot because I couldn't be there because I had a lot of different things. But, you know, we have exceptions for mail-in ballots. You do know that, right? So if you're away, you have an exception. If you're in the military, we have an exception. If you're on a business trip, we have an exception. If you're disabled, we have an exception. And if you're ill, if you're not feeling good. So I was away mostly in Washington, D.C. So, I used a mail-in ballot."

He added sarcastically, "But I appreciate the question because I know, I know, it was so well-meaning. Yeah."

“You know, brought to my attention today that we’re the only country that doesn’t — that does mail-in voting,” Trump claimed falsely in his speech on Monday. “You know, there’s not a country in the world that does mail-in ballots anymore."

A CNN fact check on Tuesday pointed out a Trump comment during the speech on Monday that President Jimmy Carter formed after his presidency, “came out and said very strongly: ‘No mail-in ballots.’”

At a press conference on March 9, Trump said: “Frankly, I think it’s probably the best thing Jimmy Carter did. He said, ‘You can’t have mail-in voting because it’s inherently dishonest.'"

President Donald Trump's potential plan to deploy his own personal army could be doomed to fail, with one CNN reporter revealing that numerous experts have said it "would not hold up in court."

Trump's MAGA allies have recently suggested that his decision to deploy federal immigration agents to airports dealing with TSA staffing shortages is a trial run for deploying the same agents to polling places during midterm voting in November. Steve Bannon, the one-time adviser to the president and prominent MAGA advocate, has made such suggestions frequently, claiming that the federal agents would be needed to prevent non-citizens from voting.

Trump himself has long claimed that non-citizens, and undocumented immigrants in particular, are committing widespread voter fraud in the U.S., despite every major study into the claim finding that such fraud is extremely rare. He is currently pushing for the SAVE America Act in Congress, which would hugely alter the documentation requirements for voting, and has not officially stated that he plans to deploy ICE and CBP agents to polling places, but fears remain that he is keeping the plan in mind should his other efforts to influence the midterms fail.

Speaking on the matter during a CNN segment on Wednesday with host Dana Bash, correspondent Gabe Cohen explained why such a deployment of federal forces would be illegal and what experts have told him about the likelihood that the plan will succeed in court.

"What federal law says — and that's 18 U.S. Code, section 592 ... that armed federal officers or the military are not allowed at any location where an election is happening unless such force be necessary to repel armed enemies of the United States," Cohen explained. "So that's what the federal law says. Now, could the president and the administration argue that, well, there is a threat, whether it's foreign interference, whether it's the idea of non-citizens voting, or whatever evidence that they've obtained over time, is it gangs, drugs? Could there be that emergency?"

He continued: "Well, the state election officials I've talked to, the voting rights attorneys I've talked to, say that would never hold up in court... That would be struck down. There would be repercussions, but it could create some chaos, obviously, along the way, especially given what we have seen with ICE in recent months."

Cohen stressed that while the administration has not confirmed such plans, certain officials, when pressed further, have never denied that they would be employed.

He also responded to the critiques some Republicans have made, wondering why Democrats are concerned about immigration officers being present at polling locations if, as they have argued, non-citizens are not actually showing up at them to vote. As Cohen argued, the presence of these agents could be seen as intimidation for all voters, given how often these agents have gone after lawful U.S. citizens.

"First off, I would say it's not just Democrats who are worried about that," Cohen said. "But beyond that, beyond the federal law issues here, there are also concerns that this could be seen as voter suppression or voter intimidation. Just look at what happened in Minneapolis when officers were clashing with not just undocumented migrants, but also U.S. citizens. Citizens who were out in the streets, where some U.S. citizens were detained, some were injured. A couple were even killed."

He continued: "And so even though most of the state officials I've talked to or voting rights attorneys I've talked to, have said this feels unlikely, they're still preparing. They're preparing swift legal arguments in case there is a deployment, and they need an emergency order. They're preparing local law enforcement on how to address potential federal overreach. And then, of course, preparing poll workers for if officers do show up."

First lady Melania Trump was at the White House for a rare appearance on Wednesday, where she touted an AI robot that could replace teachers.

It was the second day of the Fostering the Future Together Global Coalition Summit when the first lady entered the room with the humanoid robot.

The press pool report for the first lady read, "Melania Trump entered the East Room at 11:14 am. A robot led her into the room, to great applause."

The summit focuses on delivering global access to education, with representatives from 45 nations.

The moment was ripe for mockery and the internet provided, noting that the two were the same. One commented how human it looked, "and the robot is pretty good too." Another commented that she was training her replacement. Meanwhile, a few remarked how "cringe" the moment was. Noting that they'd "seen this movie" before.

“It’s fair to state you’re my first American-made humanoid guest in the White House,” Melania said.

"The robot on the left seems to have more personality than the other robot," said Public Citizen writer Alan Zibel.

"They’ve got her doing all sorts of odd side quests this time around," said senior politics reporter for Business Insider, Bryan Metzger.

"Walking into my nephew's christening after my wife told me not to take that edible," joked Jack Stebbins, a contributor at The Onion.

Republican Steve Guest clarified the video was not AI, just the robot. "This is real," he wrote on X.

Tech expert Lance Ulanoff said simply, "I got nothing."

Joe Allen, author, reporter, and anti-transhumanist activist, suggested a plot twist on X: "Would've been a better scene if the robot tripped and fell and started spazzing out like a beetle on its back. But that's just me."

One person remarked that the robot's high price tag comes at a time when teachers can't even afford school supplies. Indeed, the projected price point is typically cited as around $20,000 – $50,000, one reviewer explained. The National Educator's Association reports the national average beginning teacher salary is $46,526.

One person recalled a BBC show that featured a skit about Russian agents who had to sneak into the White House to repair the Melania robot that was spying on the U.S.

Some states are stepping in to help drivers ease the burden of high fuel costs caused by the war in Iran. Most states, however, won't be able to.

David Goldman, a senior CNN business reporter, explained that for states offering the gas tax holiday, drivers are saving about 40 cents per gallon, or as much as $8, in a 20-gallon truck or SUV. The problem, however, is that gas stations are setting the prices, not the states.

"So a gas station has to play ball. They have to lower their prices by as much as the state gas tax," he said. "That's why generally we're seeing about 80 percent of those savings go into your pocket, not the full 100."

A greater problem is that most states can't afford to offer drivers a gas-tax holiday. Goldman said that key provisions in President Donald Trump's "Big, Beautiful Bill," passed by the GOP-led House and Senate, cut funding to states so severely that states simply don't have the money to give people that kind of tax cut.

"Remember, this took billions of dollars of funding away from states. That means it's probably not going to happen because states need the money from the gas tax to fill their coffers," he said.

His other warning is that this fuel crisis will last longer than most realize, and much longer than the spike in 2022.

"We think it's just not going to be feasible for states to lower that gas tax. And I want to say one more thing about this," said Goldman. "In 2022, it was a very, very different economy. Today, people are going into their savings. In 2022. People had a lot of savings because of all the stimulus. That's why people are asking this question. They really want to know, is there any way that we can lower their prices? I wish I had better news, but the gas tax could be one way if we decided to do that."

Congress is considering a gas tax suspension that would reduce the federal gas tax by 18 cents. But legislation in Congress hasn't been moving very efficiently.

Gas taxes generally fund wear and tear on the state's roads, helping build better infrastructure, fund public transportation and other related things.

Retired U.S. Army Brig. Gen. Steve Anderson said that it's clear to him that President Donald Trump appears intent on full-fledged war in Iran.

Speaking to CNN on Wednesday, Anderson said that sending 1,000 troops to the Middle East tells him that "they're serious about conducting some kind of a ground operation in Iran."

"Why else would you be sending the immediate ready brigade from the 82nd airborne?" he asked. "And of course, that would be a tremendous logistics operation. I mean, it would probably take 22 hours or so to actually deploy over there to some sort of a staging area."

He explained they would likely be housed in Qatar and "have a couple squadrons of C-130s in order to conduct some kind of an air assault into Kharg Island or one of the other islands in the Strait of Hormuz."

There are also two Marine Expeditionary Units (MEU) en route, with one that may already be "at the mouth of the Persian Gulf." MEU's are described by the Marine website as a kind of rapid-reaction force of roughly "2,200 Marines and Sailors."

"But, you know, this tells me that they're very serious about conducting ground operations," he continued. "And all I can say is, if you like Iraq and Afghanistan, you're going to love Iran."

Brown University's Washington School of International and Public Affairs charted the full cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, showing that 7,052 U.S. soldiers died in the wars, 21 Defense Department civilians also died, along with 8,189 U.S. contractors, 680 journalists or media workers, and 892 humanitarian aid workers were killed in the wars that took place from 2001 to 2024. It doesn't count the civilian death count, which is somewhere between 363,939 and 387,072. In economic terms, it will ultimately cost the U.S. about $8 trillion, including veterans' care, over the next 30 years.

Thus far, Trump has already asked Congress for an additional $200 billion to fund the war. This does not include the over $12.7 billion the U.S. spent in the first six days of the war, The Guardian outlined last week.

National security analyst David Sanger, who also serves as the correspondent for the New York Times, reported Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud is pushing the U.S. to go "all-in" and "defeat the Iranians."

President Donald Trump woke up on Wednesday morning to Democrats flipping a seat in a Republican stronghold in Florida. One Democratic strategist thinks that it's because Americans are furious with the Republican Party.

Speaking to CNN, Democratic strategist Chuck Rocha explained that Trump is stuck "with a special election that happened in his backyard, where a Democrat flipped a seat R plus 12." He's saying that the district favored Republicans by 12 points.

He's talking about Emily Gregory, the Democrat who just flipped a seat in the state House in the district that covers Trump's Mar-a-Lago country club. The balance of power in the state legislature won't change much, as Republicans continue to hold the majority. But for Democrats, winning the seat was symbolic.

Meanwhile, the Tampa Bay Times reported Wednesday morning that Democrat Brian Nathan is leading his GOP opponent, former state Rep. Josie Tomkow, by a thin margin, putting it in recount territory. Nathan said that Tomkow had already called to concede.

The report said that while more Republicans than Democrats turned out to vote, the difference came down to third-party votes, which broke heavily for Democrats.

“It came down to turnout,” Nathan told the Times. “I really think this came through because we were speaking to (third-party voters) where they were at.”

The report also noted that "Tomkow outspent Nathan more than 3-to-1. She also received more than $400,000 in in-kind contributions from the Florida Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee."

"The point of the matter of what we're talking about here is there's an anxiety and a frustration, and you're seeing this overperformance with Democrats across the board," said Rocha. The reason, he said, "because Republicans are getting blamed because they're in charge. And there's an anxiety in what we see here that just builds on it. They're not blaming Democrats for this. They're blaming Republicans. And the numbers don't lie."

Rep. Suzan DelBene (D-Wa.) noted that Democrats have been trying to present solutions, but they're just being shot down by Republicans and by the president.

One bill Democrats proposed would have fully funded the airport TSA workers as they hammer out the details on DHS funding as a whole. Republicans blocked it. According to Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), both sides found an agreement, but it was Trump who shut the deal down.

While Trump is launching a war, DelBene said that Democrats are "out talking to people" about the affordability crisis. Whereas Trump is calling the crisis a "hoax."