Raw Story

Faced with the possibility that the Republican Party is headed for a wipeout in the November midterms, White House insiders are attempting to head off a Friday announcement by President Donald Trump of new tariffs.

Trump is preparing to impose what the Financial Times is calling a "barrage" of fresh tariffs on dozens of countries this week, but his own advisers are urgently counseling him to step back from the brink, the outlet's report states. Senior officials worry that resurrecting his trade war—which delivered economic shocks and voter backlash in his first term—could prove "catastrophic" heading into elections Republicans are already struggling to win.

According to the report, "Behind the scenes, senior officials have been counseling the president to maintain stability with trading partners and honor the deals that Washington struck with them to reduce their tariffs in 2025, according to two people familiar with the matter.”

The timing is particularly fraught. Existing 10 percent tariffs adopted after a Supreme Court decision in February struck others down are set to expire Friday and some in the White House are engineering probes "of forced labor practices, allowing Trump to avoid using the emergency authorities knocked down by the Supreme Court."

The prospect of renewed tariffs collides with an already-deteriorating economic landscape. The escalating Iran conflict has roiled energy markets, pushing gas prices back above $4 per gallon. Voters are already furious about the cost of living and recent polling found two-thirds of Americans disapprove of how Trump is managing affordability.

Adding tariff hikes to soaring energy prices risks "inflaming voter frustration over the high cost of living," a sign that even Trump's own team recognizes the political danger, the report notes.

"This does not mean that tariff hikes are in the rear-view mirror," Wendy Cutler, a former U.S. trade official now at the Asia Society Policy Institute, told the Financial Times. "But it does suggest that a more cautious approach is now called for, particularly in the lead up to the midterm elections."

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) issued a fierce demand Monday to Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche regarding President Donald Trump’s “long-term friendship” with Jeffrey Epstein, arguing it may have not only influenced the Trump administration’s policies, but created a “major national security liability.”

Raskin's demand came in the form of a letter to Blanche's office requesting records on Epstein's foreign ties, details of which have emerged through the Justice Department's release of millions of Epstein-related files that started last year. Specifically, Raskin’s request centered around suspicions that Epstein acted as a “foreign agent” for multiple countries, and on some occasions, did so “in order to influence policies of the first Trump administration.”

“Given the information Mr. Epstein possessed about President Trump and his easy access to high-level officials in the President’s inner circle, Mr. Epstein’s relationships with foreign leaders, including adversaries, posed a major national security liability,” Raskin’s letter reads.

Raskin, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, released the letter publicly on Tuesday, in which he cited evidence suggesting that Epstein worked on behalf of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Russia and Israel, a potential violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).

Raskin went on to detail several examples as to how Epstein’s friendship with Trump may have created a legitimate “security risk” to the United States, including one involving a “Russian oligarch.”

“Mr. Epstein privately alleged the President was involved in an international money laundering scheme with a Russian oligarch that centered around real estate in Florida. In another missive, Mr. Epstein connects the dots between this scheme and the sale of expensive artwork to [Saudi Arabian Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman],” Raskin’s letter reads.

“While Mr. Epstein was prone to exaggeration and self-aggrandizement, these emails suggest President Trump’s foreign business interests may have had a tangible effect on foreign policy and that Mr. Epstein knew about and was willing to weaponize such lurking and explosive conflicts of interest.”

Raskin demanded that Blanche's office turn over “all records” related to Epstein and 19 different countries, as well as all records relating to entities associated with Epstein that “may have been set up to avoid their foreign contacts triggering personal FARA registration requirements.”

In the letter, Raskin noted that Epstein, alongside former Trump official Steve Bannon, appeared to employ “strategies for skirting FARA’s requirements,” including the use of non-profit entities and other non-governmental organizations to structure “international arrangements,” and to “use go-betweens so he could remain ‘surgically pure.’”

Sen. John Fetterman's increasingly independent political moves are drawing concern from Senate colleagues and raising questions about whether the Pennsylvania Democrat might eventually leave his party.

Fetterman said last week he would formally switch his party affiliation if Democrats make opposition to Israel part of their official platform — the first time he's laid out specific conditions for departing – and he pointed to recent contested primaries as evidence the party is shifting toward candidates who are "intensely anti-Israel," not just critical of its policies.

One Democratic senator, speaking anonymously to NOTUS, said, "I am concerned" about the prospect of Fetterman switching parties unexpectedly.

Fetterman has also set up a joint fundraising committee with Republican Sen. Dave McCormick (R-PA), an arrangement that struck colleagues as unusual. Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) said he'd "never seen it before." Rep. Chris Deluzio (D-PA), a progressive who has left open the possibility of challenging Fetterman in 2028, called the move "crazy stuff," arguing it helps Republicans in battleground Pennsylvania races.

Fetterman brushed off the arrangement as "nothing sinister," rooted in shared state interests, and fired back at Deluzio over the congressman's earlier campaign donation to Graham Platner, the Maine Senate candidate who dropped out amid a sexual assault allegation he denies.

The senator has increasingly clashed with his party over Israel, the Iran war, and border security, and recently expressed regret for once calling to eliminate the filibuster, praising former Sens. Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema for opposing its removal.

His standing among Pennsylvania Democrats has slipped sharply — a Quinnipiac poll found his approval at just 19% among Democrats, with 52 percent of voters overall saying they want him to leave the party.

Adam Jentleson, Fetterman's former chief of staff, said he believes Fetterman might switch parties "in order to stay relevant," particularly if Democrats win a narrow Senate majority in November and Fetterman could become a decisive vote. Jentleson also warned Fetterman could side with Republicans on a future Supreme Court nomination.

“I think, if he is the majority-maker, he will flip, because it would give him a massive amount of attention,” said Jentleson, who last year expressed concerns about Fetterman's mental health.

Other Democrats pushed back on the switching narrative. Sen. Peter Welch noted Fetterman "votes Democratic all the time," while Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-NM) urged him to stay, saying his positions still align more with Democrats than Republicans on balance.

“I would just encourage him to stay,” Heinrich said. “I think you can have policy differences, but on balance, with the exception of one or two issues, when you look at what he cares about, I think that looks a lot more like the Democratic Party than the Republican Party. He’s always, always welcome in our caucus.”

With the war with Iran spiraling and public opinion about the military excursion at an all-time low, a leading scholar on tyranny warned on Tuesday that Donald Trump’s people may do the unthinkable.

Late Monday, Fox News host Laura Ingraham warned the president that “the clock is ticking” as supporters lose patience with the war that has been unpopular since the U.S. attacked in late February.

According to historian Timothy Snyder, whose book "On Tyranny" is often cited when discussing the Trump administration, a false flag terror attack in the U.S. that can be blamed on Iran is not beyond the realm of possibilities as the president's approval numbers slide.

On X he wrote, “Trump is pursuing this war in the HOPE that Iran carries out an act of terror in the US. And even if it doesn’t, which I doubt it will, consider the possibility that Trump's people would fake one. Please consider this essay, written back in March, as well as the last few lessons of ‘On Tyranny.’”

In the March essay he linked to, he predicted, "A purpose of the war on Iran might well be to provoke a terrorist attack inside the United States. This would provide Donald Trump with a pretext to try to cancel or 'federalize' the coming Congressional elections.“

"Self-terrorism might not have been the initial aim; but as time goes by, and failures and atrocities mount, its appeal will grow. Trump could think that he has much to gain; the war itself makes terrorism more likely; there are plausible vectors of terror; and the United States has let down its defenses," he added.

As for the timing, he elaborated, “We know that he is obsessed with the fall elections, which his party will almost certainly lose by spectacular margins, and that he fears the accordant loss of power. This is clear from his own statements and actions.”

Rep. Jim McGovern (D-MA) unloaded on the Republican Budget Committee Chairman on Monday over the climbing debt under President Donald Trump's spending policies.

The clash came at a House Rules Committee hearing, where McGovern grilled Rep. Jodey Arrington (R-TX) over a budget resolution that Democrats say adds $4.7 trillion to the national debt with no offsets.

"I love you, Republicans. You don't take responsibility for anything," McGovern said. "You control the House, you control the Senate, you control the White House, I think you control the Supreme Court, and nothing is your responsibility."

In 2024, Arrington had told the same committee that "not paying for our spending is not only irresponsible, but it is also irrational."

McGovern asked Arrington to confirm that the national debt had risen $3.3 trillion since Trump took office — from $36.2 trillion to $39.5 trillion. Arrington insisted that the statistic was "misleading" before getting pushback from Rep. Morgan McGarvey (D-KY).

"The debt of this country from George Washington through Bill Clinton was about $5.7 trillion," McGarvey noted. "The debt from George W. Bush and Donald Trump alone is nearly double that."

McGovern then pressed Arrington on whether the resolution's deficit spending could really be called an emergency, zeroing in on the bill's tax cuts for wealthy Americans.

"Was it an emergency to give tax breaks to billionaires and millionaires?" McGovern demanded. "Because that was not paid for either."

"It was, in fact," Arrington shot back.

"Okay. All right. So we just have a disagreement," McGovern replied. "You think an emergency is making sure that millionaires and billionaires get tax cuts, big corporations — I just disagree with that. That's a fundamental values question."

"I didn't say that, just for the record," Arrington argued.

McGovern also challenged Arrington over a provision directing $60 billion in new deficit spending toward the Iran conflict, noting the Pentagon already had $75.7 billion in unspent defense funds from a package passed last July.

He called it "irresponsible to spend another $60 billion in taxpayer dollars on Trump's war when you already have $75 billion available."

When asked why the resolution contained nothing to lower everyday costs for American families, Arrington blamed the previous administration.

"I would say that the first step in unwinding the cost of living crisis that was created by the failed policies of your party was to stop the wild, reckless, unbridled spending," Arrington said.

"It sounds like we're back to 'let's blame Joe Biden,'" McGovern replied.

"When it comes to war and tax cuts for the wealthy and big corporations, you guys trip over yourselves to spend tax dollars with no offsets," McGovern charged. "This is your MO. But when it comes to helping American families, Republicans think it would be wasteful spending."

"They can't afford their rent, can't afford to buy homes, childcare costs are out of control, health care costs are out of control," the Democrat said at the close of his remarks. "They wanna know why the hell we aren't focused on that. And instead, we're focused on giving the well-off and the well-connected even more."

"I think people have had it," he added.

Comedy legend Larry David ridiculed Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in a hysterical sketch delivering laughs online.

David, who was formerly a personal friend of Kennedy's and even played the husband of Kennedy's real-life wife, actress Cheryl Hines, on the popular show "Curb Your Enthusiasm," made it clear what he thought about the Trump official. He appeared to tell his character in the spoof to "drop dead" in one segment of his new HBO series, "Life, Larry, and the Pursuit of Unhappiness: An Almost History of America."

In the sketch, David casts himself as the mother of Jonas Salk — an American virologist and biomedical scientist who developed one of the first successful polio vaccines — who gets into a fighting match with neighbor "Bobby," who has a similar-sounding voice and tan as the health secretary.

The internet reacted to the brutal burn.

"Holy s---, Larry David absolutely COOKED RFK Jr's stupid a--, playing Dr. Jonas Salk's mom, saying it would be a 'dark day for humanity' if some idiot ever put HIM in charge of health. This is HILARIOUS!" The X account BrooklynDad_Defiant!, which has more than 1.3 million followers, wrote.

"The bear part is by far the best SICKO!" Journalist Meghan McCarthy wrote on X.

"Larry David is a flat out genius," Eric Land, a political commentator with nearly 10,000 followers, wrote on X.

"Larry David casting himself as Salk's mom is the kind of absurdly precise satire that makes the point better than any actual policy debate could. It's the only way to fight that level of chaos," author Hüseyin Örskaya wrote on X.