Featured Stories:
Justice Amy Coney Barrett admits Trump could be beyond the Supreme Court’s control
In an interview released on Thursday, Supreme Court Associate Justice Amy Comey Barrett had to be asked twice what the nation’s highest court would do if Donald Trump turned up his nose at an adverse ruling and refused to abide by it.
In a wide-ranging interview with the New York Times’ Ross Douthat, Barrett was first asked about the extent of the president’s power over the government that has been a central tenet of Trump’s second term as his inner circle has pushed the so-called “unitary executive theory" that slots him above the legislative and judicial branches of government.
According to Trump’s last appointee to the court, who replaced the late liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in 2020, “It would imply strong presidential power over executive agencies. There has been a lot of debate and some new originalist scholarship debating right now whether indeed it has sound originalist credentials. But yes, it is one that has traditionally been associated with originalists.”
She then noted that debate is currently being addressed “in some of the cases on the court’s docket now.”
With that looming over the court as an avalanche of challenges to the current president are overwhelming federal courts, Douthat pointed out to the justice, “The Supreme Court does not command the power of the purse, doesn’t command the military, doesn’t have police powers. What it has, in a sense, is prestige, public support, a historic constitutional role.”
Adding, “... we’re in a moment — and we don’t have to make this specific to the Trump White House — when it’s very easy to imagine, from either the left or the right, some present or future president deciding to test the court, Andrew Jackson-style, saying: Interesting ruling, Justice Barrett. Good luck enforcing it,” he proposed, “How do you think about that potential challenge, as a member of the court?”
Admitting the NYT columnist was correct, Coney Barrett attempted, “... just as the court must take account of the consequences on the institutional dynamics, say, between a current president and a future president, the balance of power between the executive branch and the legislative branch, that of course, those same kinds of institutional concerns for the long run are ones that play a part in the court’s separation of powers decisions and always have, because they also are reflected in concerns of the constitutional structure.”
Unsatisfied with the lack of clarity in her answer, Douthat pressed, “OK, let me try that again: If a president defied the Supreme Court, what would you do?”
Coney Barrett then admitted that the court’s hands would be tied because there is no enforcement mechanism at their disposal.
“Well, as you say, the court lacks the power of the purse. We lack the power of the sword,” she conceded. “And so, we interpret the Constitution, we draw on precedents, we have these questions of structure, and we make the most with the tools that we have.”
You can read her entire interview here.
‘Give me a break!’ Tom Homan flees reporters as he refuses to deny taking $50K bribe
Border czar Tom Homan dodged reporters at the White House as he refused to say if he took a $50,000 cash bribe in an FBI sting.
Despite finding time for a Fox News interview on Thursday, Homan immediately turned and walked quickly to avoid other reporters at the White House.
"I don't have time today, folks. I'm 20 minutes late," he said.
"Did you take the $50,000 cash in a bag?" one reporter shouted.
"Give me a break!" Homan responded as he fled.
After reports emerged last month that Homan had taken $50,000 cash from undercover FBI agents posing as businessmen seeking government contracts, Fox News host Laura Ingraham asked him about the allegations.
"I did nothing criminal or illegal," the border czar said without denying that he took the cash. The Fox News host declined to ask a follow-up question.
"This response will likely trigger more reporters to ask [the] same question," CBS News correspondent Scott MacFarlane predicted after Homan dodged the question on Thursday.
‘We defended that evil ideology’: Mike Johnson makes horrific gaffe in Nazi speech
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) made a horrific apparent gaffe when discussing a swastika spotted in a Republican congressman's office.
U.S. Capitol Police were called to investigate a display of an American flag altered to show the Nazi symbol pinned to a wall in a cubicle used by Angelo Elia, a staffer for Rep. Dave Taylor (R-OH), and the GOP speaker attempted to distance the party from fascist ideology.
"With regard to the swastika thing, this happened last night, a Republican congressman, allegedly, one of his staffers had something in the background, something in a Zoom, that's what I heard this morning," Johnson told reporters. "He says that that's not his and there was a proper investigation ongoing, and the congressman did exactly what he should have done, and that is report it. It's under investigation, and I can't comment on it any further until that's done."
The swastika display was noticed a day after Politico reported on a Young Republican group chat where organization leaders used racial slurs, joked about the Holocaust, celebrated slavery and rape, and praised Adolf Hitler.
"But I will say, obviously, that is not the principles of the Republican Party," Johnson said. "We stand for the founding principles of America – want me to articulate them for you right now? Individual freedom, limited government, the rule of law, peace through strength, fiscal responsibility, free markets, human dignity – the things that lead to human flourishing."
"We have stood against that, we have fought against the Nazis," Johnson added, and then apparently misspoke before insisting Nazi sympathies were a problem in both parties. "We defended that evil ideology. We roundly condemn it, and anybody in any party who espouses it, we're opposing that."
Epic Freudian slip
"We fought the Nazis, we defended that evil ideology" -Mike Johnson pic.twitter.com/uvVcUtNBJT
— The Lincoln Project (@ProjectLincoln) October 16, 2025
‘Take a drug test:’ GOP lawmaker attacks Jeffries over filibuster performance
Rep. Andy Ogles (R-TN) took aim at House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) Thursday over what he called Jeffries’ “low-T” filibuster on President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act.
“Dollar Store Obama has been hysterically rambling for over three and a half hours, whining about tax cuts for working Americans, bonuses for our brave law enforcement, and mass deportations of illegals,” Ogles said Thursday in a social media post on X.
“He’s still droning on like a broken record… Hakeem needs to get off the House floor, take a drug test, and start putting America first – not last.”
Jeffries has been taking advantage of a loophole in House floor rules that allows party leaders to speak for as long as they want during debate, sometimes referred to as the “magic minute.” The OBBBA, Trump’s budget reconciliation package, advanced in the House early Thursday after a number of Republican holdouts were persuaded to vote in favor of moving the bill forward for a final vote.
Now, as it’s become clear Republicans likely have the votes to pass the bill outright, Jeffries appears to be holding off the final vote for as long as he can, and much to the ire of Republicans like Ogles.
“Not sure if his batteries are running low or if he's just low-T, but someone needs to hand Discount Dollar Store Obama some caffeine ASAP,” Ogles said.
With Republicans’ slim majority in the House, the party can afford no more than three dissenting votes on the OBBBA for it to pass. Amid his filibuster, Jefferies has repeatedly called for “only four Republicans” to dissent and join Democrats in stopping the bill from passing.
‘Fallen off a mental cliff’: New Trump traits have White House insiders alarmed
Bizarre new behavior from President Donald Trump has planted fresh new worries among White House insiders, according to a report Thursday.
Some who described changes to Salon’s Brian Karem are concerned that Trump is quickly losing ability to put in the hours needed for his position — and that his mental acuity has taken a significant downturn.
“Maybe Trump has fallen off a mental cliff,” wrote Karem, adding “even some in his administration [are] worried about his physical and mental health.”
Among warning flags are the fact that the president has apparently stopped working on Mondays. The information came from a White House source who told Karem, “I’d lose my job if I talked about this publicly. Or worse.”
He confided that Trump hasn’t shown up in the Oval Office on a Monday for the past month. He’s also been playing golf in Virginia, avoiding his usual trips to his clubs in Florida and New Jersey.
“That’s because he doesn’t have to be gone from the White House as long,” the source told Karem. “I don’t think he’s in good physical health.”
Other causes for concern voiced to the writer by two people inside Trump’s circle included, “His recent lackluster public appearances, his gait, his apparent befuddlement, his propensity to govern via Truth Social postings, his sloppy attire and his lack of engagement at the White House with others.”
“His sanity looks long gone,” Karem surmised. “And that doesn’t bode well for the country since there’s absolutely no chance the sycophants in his cabinet will invoke the 25th Amendment.”
Marjorie Taylor Greene says ‘Diddy’ verdict means Hunter Biden should go to jail
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) reacted to a partial guilty verdict against Sean "Diddy" Combs by insisting that Hunter Biden should be prosecuted for the same crimes.
After the musician was found guilty of prostitution-related offenses based on the Mann Act, former Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) suggested that Combs was targeted because he was Black.
"Diddy has spent nearly 10 months in jail for two Mann Act violations," Gaetz said in a Wednesday promotion for his television show. "We explore the origins of the Mann Act and how it has been used against famous Black people since its inception more than 100 years ago."
"The denial of bail in this matter is nonsense," he insisted.
On Thursday, Greene responded to Gaetz by arguing that "Diddy belongs in jail for a very long time."
"Also notice that while the Mann Act has been used against many black men, it was not used against one white man," she added. "His name is Hunter Biden."
"I brought the receipts last Congress, and the DOJ never prosecuted and Hunter was pardoned," Greene stated.
Trump more focused on ‘selling fragrances’ than telling the truth: lawmaker
Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-CA) called out President Donald Trump for being "more committed to selling fragrances than he is to telling the truth" about the so-called "Big Beautiful Bill."
As Republicans try to muster the votes for Trump's legislation, Kamlager-Dove spoke with a group of Congressional Black Caucus members outside the Capitol on Wednesday.
"We have a president that is more committed to selling fragrances than he is to telling the truth," she railed. "And [Republicans] are negotiating with this person about bending the knee to him rather than bending the knee to the constituents."
"And in our district, in every single district across this country, 85% of voters in every single district want Medicaid, want SNAP, want these programs that they are cutting," she continued. "If you cut Medicaid, you're going to close hospitals, you're going to close urgent cares, you're going to close community clinics."
The lawmaker also insisted Trump was "lying" about his pledge not to tax tips, overtime, or Social Security.
"Working folks who rely on tips, who rely on overtime, might only end up taking an additional $10 home," Kamlager-Dove explained. "How is $10 going to help you? It's not, especially when the richest of the rich are getting tax breaks of up to $300,000."
"We want everyone to know how more broke, how more hungry, how more sick they are going become and we need to be holding these receipts up to and through 2026 and holding these Republicans accountable. Why aren't they here with balloons and megaphones touting how beautiful this thing is? Because they know it stinks just like the cologne that they are selling in the White House," she added.
‘Stop lying’: Top Dem rips Trump after attack on NYC’s Mamdani
President Donald Trump has escalated his attacks on Democratic New York mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani, a young, progressive Muslim state representative who pulled off a massive upset by defeating the comeback candidacy of former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo last month — but House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) is putting his foot down against it.
"As President of the United States, I'm not going to let this Communist Lunatic destroy New York," Trump posted on his Truth Social platform. "Rest assured, I hold all the levers, and have all the cards. I'll save New York City, and make it 'Hot' and 'Great' again, just like I did with the Good O' USA!"
Jeffries, however, hit back on Wednesday.
"Stop lying about Assemblyman Mamdani," Jeffries posted to X. "He is neither a communist nor a lunatic. And New York City doesn’t need to be saved by a wannabe King. Besides, you are too busy destroying America with your One Big Ugly Bill to do anything else."
This comes after Jeffries appeared hesitant to give a full endorsement to Mamdani's candidacy in an interview with ABC on Sunday, saying, "We don’t really know each other well. Our districts don’t overlap. I have never had a substantive conversation with him" — which Politico had speculated might mean Jeffries was poised to throw him under the bus.
Trump has previously drawn fire for suggesting he could have Mamdani arrested if he interferes with immigration enforcement in New York City, and falsely claimed he might not even be in the country legally and could face deportation.
Mamdani, a naturalized citizen, rebuffed these threats, saying, “The president of the United States just threatened to have me arrested, stripped of my citizenship, put in a detention camp and deported, not because I have broken any law but because I will refuse to let ICE terrorize our city. His statements don’t just represent an attack on our democracy, but an attempt to send a message to every New Yorker who refuses to hide in the shadows: if you speak up, they will come for you. We will not accept this intimidation.”
‘Trying to reinstate invasion!’ MAGA whines as Trump dealt another court loss
MAGA adherents have taken to social media to proclaim that the federal judge who ruled against the Trump administration's attempts to stifle asylum-seekers should simply be ignored.
U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss ruled in favor of 13 individuals seeking asylum, as well as three immigrant rights groups that challenged Trump's executive order suspending U.S. asylum law.
"In his decision, Moss ruled that neither the Immigration and Nationality Act nor the Constitution give the president and administration officials 'the sweeping authority' asserted in his proclamation," CBS News reported.
Top White House aide and architect of Trump's deportation program Stephen Miller posted, "To try to circumvent the Supreme Court ruling on nationwide injunctions a marxist judge has declared that all potential FUTURE illegal aliens on foreign soil (eg a large portion of planet earth) are part of a protected global 'class' entitled to admission into the United States."
Far from simply expressing their opposition to the ruling, MAGA took to social media to demand that the judge's opinion be discounted altogether.
Eric Daugherty with Florida's Voice News posted, "Federal judge says President Trump needs to RE-OPEN the border for 'asylum seekers' - POLITICO WTF? A JUDGE is trying to REINSTATE INVASION! Do not listen to this ruling AT ALL!"
Two MAGA commentators, @GuntherEagleman and @MrPitbull07 wrote, simply, "Ignore the judge."
Others commented on the recent Supreme Court decision blocking universal injunctions, with The Conservative Alternative writing, "The Supreme Court just ruled 6-3 that these universal injunctions don't hold legal authority. Trump needs to ignore every order that doesn't come from the Supreme Court itself."
Radio host Cash Loren posted, "Ignore that commie Judge. SCOTUS has already ruled they don't have the authority."
SeekingTruth took a more drastic approach, writing, "Send in the FBI or, better yet, the military police and charge the insurrectionist judge with treason and insurrection. Lock him up in a military prison while awaiting trial."
Popular articles
Justice Amy Coney Barrett admits Trump could be beyond the Supreme Court’s control
In an interview released on Thursday, Supreme Court Associate Justice Amy Comey Barrett had to be asked twice what the nation’s highest court would do if Donald Trump turned up his nose at an adverse ruling and refused to abide by it.
In a wide-ranging interview with the New York Times’ Ross Douthat, Barrett was first asked about the extent of the president’s power over the government that has been a central tenet of Trump’s second term as his inner circle has pushed the so-called “unitary executive theory" that slots him above the legislative and judicial branches of government.
According to Trump’s last appointee to the court, who replaced the late liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in 2020, “It would imply strong presidential power over executive agencies. There has been a lot of debate and some new originalist scholarship debating right now whether indeed it has sound originalist credentials. But yes, it is one that has traditionally been associated with originalists.”
She then noted that debate is currently being addressed “in some of the cases on the court’s docket now.”
With that looming over the court as an avalanche of challenges to the current president are overwhelming federal courts, Douthat pointed out to the justice, “The Supreme Court does not command the power of the purse, doesn’t command the military, doesn’t have police powers. What it has, in a sense, is prestige, public support, a historic constitutional role.”
Adding, “... we’re in a moment — and we don’t have to make this specific to the Trump White House — when it’s very easy to imagine, from either the left or the right, some present or future president deciding to test the court, Andrew Jackson-style, saying: Interesting ruling, Justice Barrett. Good luck enforcing it,” he proposed, “How do you think about that potential challenge, as a member of the court?”
Admitting the NYT columnist was correct, Coney Barrett attempted, “... just as the court must take account of the consequences on the institutional dynamics, say, between a current president and a future president, the balance of power between the executive branch and the legislative branch, that of course, those same kinds of institutional concerns for the long run are ones that play a part in the court’s separation of powers decisions and always have, because they also are reflected in concerns of the constitutional structure.”
Unsatisfied with the lack of clarity in her answer, Douthat pressed, “OK, let me try that again: If a president defied the Supreme Court, what would you do?”
Coney Barrett then admitted that the court’s hands would be tied because there is no enforcement mechanism at their disposal.
“Well, as you say, the court lacks the power of the purse. We lack the power of the sword,” she conceded. “And so, we interpret the Constitution, we draw on precedents, we have these questions of structure, and we make the most with the tools that we have.”
You can read her entire interview here.
‘Give me a break!’ Tom Homan flees reporters as he refuses to deny taking $50K bribe
Border czar Tom Homan dodged reporters at the White House as he refused to say if he took a $50,000 cash bribe in an FBI sting.
Despite finding time for a Fox News interview on Thursday, Homan immediately turned and walked quickly to avoid other reporters at the White House.
"I don't have time today, folks. I'm 20 minutes late," he said.
"Did you take the $50,000 cash in a bag?" one reporter shouted.
"Give me a break!" Homan responded as he fled.
After reports emerged last month that Homan had taken $50,000 cash from undercover FBI agents posing as businessmen seeking government contracts, Fox News host Laura Ingraham asked him about the allegations.
"I did nothing criminal or illegal," the border czar said without denying that he took the cash. The Fox News host declined to ask a follow-up question.
"This response will likely trigger more reporters to ask [the] same question," CBS News correspondent Scott MacFarlane predicted after Homan dodged the question on Thursday.
‘We defended that evil ideology’: Mike Johnson makes horrific gaffe in Nazi speech
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) made a horrific apparent gaffe when discussing a swastika spotted in a Republican congressman's office.
U.S. Capitol Police were called to investigate a display of an American flag altered to show the Nazi symbol pinned to a wall in a cubicle used by Angelo Elia, a staffer for Rep. Dave Taylor (R-OH), and the GOP speaker attempted to distance the party from fascist ideology.
"With regard to the swastika thing, this happened last night, a Republican congressman, allegedly, one of his staffers had something in the background, something in a Zoom, that's what I heard this morning," Johnson told reporters. "He says that that's not his and there was a proper investigation ongoing, and the congressman did exactly what he should have done, and that is report it. It's under investigation, and I can't comment on it any further until that's done."
The swastika display was noticed a day after Politico reported on a Young Republican group chat where organization leaders used racial slurs, joked about the Holocaust, celebrated slavery and rape, and praised Adolf Hitler.
"But I will say, obviously, that is not the principles of the Republican Party," Johnson said. "We stand for the founding principles of America – want me to articulate them for you right now? Individual freedom, limited government, the rule of law, peace through strength, fiscal responsibility, free markets, human dignity – the things that lead to human flourishing."
"We have stood against that, we have fought against the Nazis," Johnson added, and then apparently misspoke before insisting Nazi sympathies were a problem in both parties. "We defended that evil ideology. We roundly condemn it, and anybody in any party who espouses it, we're opposing that."
Epic Freudian slip
"We fought the Nazis, we defended that evil ideology" -Mike Johnson pic.twitter.com/uvVcUtNBJT
— The Lincoln Project (@ProjectLincoln) October 16, 2025
