War on Immigrants

The Quiet War on Immigrants, Round Two

Exclusive: Sen. Ed Markey’s new report says the system hasn’t been torn down—it’s been hollowed out.

Isabela Dias

In 2019, Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) denounced a “stealth anti-immigration campaign” by the first Trump administration. Through a combination of high-profile policy changes like the travel ban on foreigners from Muslim-majority countries and less visible administrative tweaks, a report from the senator comprehensively documented that the Republican president “surreptitiously remade” the immigration system to fulfill a “perverse vision that erases the existence of immigrants in the United States.”

As it turns out, that was only the beginning. Now, seven years later, the second Trump administration has expanded those “under the radar” attacks against the entire US immigration system, as the senator again details in a follow-up report shared exclusively with Mother Jones. Those efforts, the report says, have “destabilized lawful presence, expanded enforcement, and reengineered adjudication to accelerate and prioritize removal.”

“This report shines a light on Trump’s cruel project to dismantle due process, strip immigrants of their lawful status, and turn our immigration courts into deportation machines,” Sen. Markey told Mother Jones. “The Trump administration must be held accountable for its attacks on our immigrant neighbors.”

The report reveals an administration that is pulling all levers to completely reorient the immigration system—including the elements that had been intended to support immigrants. The sweeping goal appears to be destabilizing the lives of noncitizens in the United States and boosting deportations. “Refugee admissions have effectively stalled, humanitarian protections have been withdrawn or narrowed, work authorization has become more tenuous, and avenues to secure or retain lawful status have grown increasingly uncertain,” the report reads.

The Trump administration has not only stripped the legal status of hundreds of thousands of immigrants, but it has also made the process of seeking lawful status and even citizenship more burdensome and riskier. (Not to mention the ongoing crusade to undermine birthright citizenship.) For instance, last August, the Department of Homeland Security’s agency in charge of visas and immigration benefits rolled out a policy expanding the “good moral character” standard requirement for citizenship applicants, a requirement that introduced more subjectivity and unpredictability into the process.

Another approach with sweeping consequences with which the administration is changing the playing field can be seen in the politicization of the immigration courts, which are part of the Department of Justice. In addition to firing more than 100 immigration judges and replacing them with temporarily assigned military lawyers, the administration has transformed the make-up of the Board of Immigration Appeals, which reviews judges’ decisions. This body, in turn, has issued precedent-setting rulings that restrict immigrants’ access to due process and relief from deportation.

Even without formal legislative changes and while ostensibly keeping protections on the books, Sen. Markey concludes, President Donald Trump has nonetheless managed to create “not an openly dismantled immigration system, but one transformed from within, appearing legally intact” in which “individuals are not only more likely to become vulnerable to enforcement, but less able to avoid or defend against it.”

Americans have already paid more than $75 billion in additional gasoline and diesel costs

The Iran War’s Other Bill—And You’re Paying It

The costs go way beyond gas. Delivery fees are up and diapers, baby wipes, and stuffed animals are likely next.

Amanda Pike

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth recently told Congress that the US government has spent an estimated $37.5 billion to date on the Iran war and requested an additional $67 billion in emergency funding. 

But there are several hidden costs that don’t factor into Hegseth’s accounting—ones that the rest of us are actually paying.

The most obvious example is increased fuel prices. As of this writing, Americans have already paid more than $75 billion in additional gasoline and diesel costs—more than $570 per household—since the war began, according to a live tracker from Brown University’s Climate Solutions Lab.

The jump in fuel prices has raised the cost of airline tickets, and delivery fees for Amazon, UPS, FedEx and the US Postal Service have gone up as much as 8 percent. Because trucks carry more than 70 percent of goods in the US, higher diesel prices affect almost everything on store shelves, including groceries.

Oil is used to make plastics and petrochemicals, so higher prices are already starting to work their way into the cost of everything from stuffed animals, diapers, and baby wipes to crayons, bottled water, soft drinks, and clothing.

And because K-12 schools in the US spend more than $8 billion a year on energy—their second-largest expense after teacher salaries—rising utility costs will likely strain already-stressed public schools.

The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has also caused the price of fertilizer to skyrocket. About 70 percent of US farmers said they were unable to afford all the fertilizer they need, according to a survey by the American Farm Bureau Federation. In the US, that will likely eventually mean higher food prices. In other parts of the world, the UN is warning that the war in Iran is driving historic levels of global hunger. The head of the World Food Programme recently said the organization is being forced to “take from the hungry to give to the starving.”

Of course, the impact of the cost in human life is incalculable. At least 18 US service members have been killed and more than 100 wounded. In Iran alone, human rights groups have documented at least 1,700 civilian deaths, with the regional toll likely thousands more.

Ultimately, the cost of the war doesn’t end when the last shot is fired. Veterans will draw care and disability payments for decades. Historically, these costs don’t peak until 30 to 40 years after a war ends. Meanwhile, US weapons stockpiles will need replenishing and American facilities in the Middle East—damages to which are reportedly more extensive than the Trump administration has acknowledged—will need to be rebuilt. 

Taken all together, $37.5 billion isn’t anywhere near a final number. It’s more like a down payment—one that all of us are making.

Not Funny

 

Ousted by a Republican challenger

GOP Rep. Andy Ogles ousted in Tennessee primary

His loss makes him the second Donald Trump-endorsed candidate to lose a primary this week.

By Andrew Howard

Tennessee GOP Rep. Andy Ogles was ousted by a Republican challenger on Thursday, a blow to President Donald Trump and Speaker Mike Johnson who tried to boost his campaign in the final days.

Former Tennessee Agriculture Commissioner Charlie Hatcher won the GOP primary for the 5th District after outraising Ogles, receiving a late endorsement from GOP Gov. Bill Lee and seeing a flood of outside money on his behalf from a renewable energy super PAC.

Ultimately, that spending, coupled with a newly redrawn district that forced Ogles to reach new voters, helped end his reelection bid. Ogles has also faced a number of controversies since he was first elected in 2022.

He deleted a homophobic social media post that was denounced by members of his own party in June, and he drew severe backlash for another post in which he said “Muslims don’t belong in American society.” In 2024, the FBI searched Ogles’ phone during an investigation into campaign finance records, which came after a watchdog group filed an ethics complaint into his use of campaign funds. And in 2023, he faced scrutiny for false claims about his resume.

Ogles’ loss makes him the second Trump-endorsed candidate to lose a primary this week, after a Michigan House candidate who had the president’s backing fell to a challenger who had already dropped out.

Hatcher will face the Democratic mayor of Columbia, Tennessee, Chaz Molder, in November. Molder has posted strong fundraising hauls, while Hatcher will basically be starting from scratch.

But Republicans redrew the seat to favor Trump by 23 points after the Supreme Court severely limited the Voting Rights Act earlier this year, leaving Hatcher as the front-runner.

Tiny dick, tiny brain. Feels inadequate...

Hellbent on putting Fauci in jail, Rand Paul wants to skip a Senate vote

The Kentucky senator and nemesis of America’s Covid czar says he’s taking his case straight to the attorney general.

By Simon J. Levien and Robert King

Rand Paul wants to fast-track prosecution of former Covid czar Anthony Fauci.

The legal process will be fraught.

After the Kentucky Republican pushed a contempt of Congress resolution through his Senate committee on party lines Thursday morning — saying Fauci had impeded his investigation of the pandemic by refusing to answer questions last week — Democrats demanded he take it to the full Senate for a vote they could filibuster. Paul said he’s going to instead take it straight to the attorney general.

For Fauci, the difference is massive. A failed Senate vote to hold him in contempt would show he’s still got defenders after Republicans released a diary showing his enthusiasm for fame and then grilled him while he took the Fifth. A referral to the attorney general puts a decision on prosecution in the hands of a Trump Justice Department that has shown it’s willing to play politics.

“Maybe he should” be prosecuted, President Donald Trump told reporters about Fauci on Thursday, referencing the contempt prosecutions of two of his allies, Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro, that began when Democrats controlled Congress. “What he did is far more serious than a lot of crimes.”

After his committee voted, Paul said he’s sick of waiting to hold his pandemic nemesis accountable. “This way we don’t sit a month waiting to determine whether or not to bring it to the Senate floor,” he told reporters. “It will immediately be referred over, and I think it’s important for them to look at.”

But the committee vote is no criminal charge, and Paul’s shortcut opens several legal pitfalls. It’s far from certain, legal experts say, that a committee can trigger the contempt process without a full Senate vote. It is also unclear whether the pardon President Joe Biden issued Fauci, barring federal prosecution for any of his official actions from 2014 till Biden’s last day in office, meant Fauci couldn’t take the Fifth. Paul contends it does. Fauci invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination during a hearing before Paul’s Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee last week more than 100 times.

Paul is in a “legal netherland,” according to Stan Brand, the former counsel to House Speaker Tip O’Neill who also represented Navarro and another Trump aide, Dan Scavino, during contempt proceedings over their refusal to testify before the House committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot.

The House held both Navarro and Scavino in contempt in a floor vote. Navarro was later convicted on contempt charges while the Justice Department declined to prosecute Scavino. Unlike the Senate, the House can pass contempt resolutions on simple majority votes. The Senate standard is 60, usually requiring bipartisan support.

Brand doubts Paul’s gambit. “This is just another example of boys gone wild, tearing loose from the mores of procedure, regular order, constitutional doctrine to vindicate some political vendetta,” Brand said. “And it’s going to fail like all the others have failed.”

He added that a grand jury cannot pursue a contempt indictment without the approval of the Senate or its leader. “Without that, it’s flawed ab initio.”

The procedural question could turn on the wording of federal statute. In an interpretation favorable to Paul, U.S. Code may permit a contempt resolution to go through the Senate president when Congress is not in session. In this case, the fate of Paul’s resolution would be in Vice President JD Vance’s hands. Vance, who also serves as Senate president, would have to choose to certify it and then refer it to the U.S. attorney for D.C., Jeanine Pirro.

But the law does not clearly resolve whether a committee vote alone is sufficient — or what kind of recess makes Congress “not in session.” The Senate is expected to be out for more than a month.

That makes the committee-only approach “a little bit of a gray area, so I think you could try that,” said Jonathan David Shaub, a professor of law and public policy at the University of Kentucky’s Rosenberg College of Law. “It would really be up to the Justice Department to decide if that was valid or not.”

Even if Vance certifies a referral, the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington could be another stopping point. A congressional referral does not itself compel the Justice Department to charge anyone. It would be up to Pirro’s office whether to open a probe and seek an indictment. Shaub said prosecutors could decline if they conclude the referral has procedural issues or that Fauci validly invoked the Fifth Amendment. And if prosecutors do bring a case, Fauci’s attorneys could argue these procedural concerns before a judge.

Regardless, Paul has not indicated tapping Vance is a route he would pursue. He has also not been successful in previous demands that the Biden and Trump administrations investigate Fauci.

While Senate Majority Leader John Thune has said a contempt vote “ought to be available to us,” he has given no sign he would exercise the so-called “nuclear option,” a drastic rule change to eliminate the 60-vote requirement. Thune has resisted calls from his colleagues and Trump to make that change to pass other legislation.

The merits of a federal case against Fauci would present a separate debate about whether taking the Fifth Amendment shielded him from his responsibility to answer questions before Paul’s committee. The criminal contempt of Congress rules can and have punished witnesses who refuse testimony during hearings. Republicans argue Biden’s pardon removed Fauci’s risk of federal prosecution for the conduct senators wanted to examine and so he had to testify.

But the pardon covered only federal offenses committed before it was issued in January 2025 — not state charges or new, post-pardon offenses including perjury committed at the hearing. Fauci suggested Paul was setting a perjury trap and gave that as his reason for taking the Fifth. (In recent weeks, several red-state attorneys general have begun their own investigations into Fauci’s conduct.)

Josh Chafetz, a Georgetown law professor who has researched contempt of Congress, said on social media that despite Paul’s “obsession” with Fauci, he had an obligation to testify truthfully. Jonathan Turley, a George Washington University law professor who testified in the Clinton and Trump impeachment hearings, said on his website that the pardon’s impact is legally “murky.”

“The odds favor Fauci in a court finding that he can still invoke the privilege,” Turley wrote of Fauci’s decision to take the Fifth Amendment. “In any challenge, a court would likely find that there remains a risk of self-incrimination.”

Paul and his colleagues have said repeatedly Fauci should be behind bars, accusing him of covering up the origins of the coronavirus. Those threats, Brand argued, could be cited as an inadmissible reason to subpoena Fauci in the first place. Fauci’s legal team has taken note.

“The Senate should reject Senator Paul’s meritless and politically-motivated contempt resolution,” David Schertler, Fauci’s lawyer, said in a statement. “It is shameful and wrong that Senator Paul is abusing his power by trying to weaponize the Justice Department against an honorable public servant.”

A criminal contempt of Congress conviction is punishable with a fine up to $100,000 and imprisonment between one month and a year, according to statute.

Big cock block....

Appeals court blocks Trump’s White House ballroom renovation

But the panel temporarily put their ruling on hold to allow the president to seek relief from the Supreme Court.

By Kyle Cheney and Josh Gerstein

A federal appeals court panel has ruled against President Donald Trump’s attempt to unilaterally demolish portions of the White House to build a massive ballroom, saying the unprecedented project requires congressional approval.

“Executive actions that take control of that property out of the hands of the people’s representatives while irreparably harming the historical and visual architecture of perhaps the most prominent public building in the United States seriously intrude on the public interest,” Judges Patricia Millett, an Obama appointee, and Bradley Garcia, a Biden appointee, wrote in a joint majority opinion issued Friday.

The appeals court put its ruling on hold for two weeks to allow Trump to seek relief from the Supreme Court. If the high court doesn’t act by then, above-ground construction at the site would have to halt.

Trump has claimed that security concerns necessitated tearing down the East Wing and replacing it with a ballroom and other features, such as a rooftop launching pad for drones. But the appeals panel’s majority rejected the notion that raising security issues meant the courts couldn’t enforce federal statutes governing funding for such projects.

“The bold assertion that the Executive can act with utter lawlessness, destroying treasured national landmarks and harming the interests of individuals, and that no court can stop it flouts our constitutional order,” Millett and Garcia wrote. “While this court accords great weight and deference to invocations of national security and the safety of the President, such arguments are not an automatic get-out-of-law-free card.”

The ruling is the latest blow to Trump’s effort to remake Washington, D.C., in his image. A federal judge blocked his bid to add his own name to the Kennedy Center, and his effort to revitalize the Reflecting Pool at the base of the Lincoln Memorial has been marred by construction failures and the failed prosecutions of alleged vandals that Trump had blamed for the defects.

Judge Neomi Rao, a Trump appointee, dissented, saying the security needs and aesthetic prerogatives of the White House vastly outweigh the concerns raised by the plaintiff in the lawsuit — the National Trust for Historic Preservation — and that the court where the suit was filed had no jurisdiction over the dispute to begin with.

Rao said U.S. District Judge Richard Leon, the George W. Bush appointee who initially ruled against the administration, had abused his authority by seeking to block the ballroom’s construction.

“In deciding the ballroom construction ‘has to stop!’ the district court transgressed the equitable authority of the federal courts,” Rao wrote, needling her lower-court colleague’s penchant for infusing his opinions with exclamation points.

“The district court seized supervision of construction at the White House, and my colleagues affirm this judicial overreach,” Rao concluded. “Because the injunction is beyond the proper province of the federal courts, construction should be allowed to continue.”

Construction crews abruptly demolished the White House’s East Wing last October, before the White House sought approvals from boards and commissions that oversee building projects on federal land in Washington. White House spokespeople noted that Trump had announced the project in July 2025 and posted sketches of the plan online, but critics said that announcement did not indicate the East Wing would be demolished in its entirety.

Trump has said the ballroom is needed because large events such as State dinners are difficult to accommodate at the White House and temporary tenting does significant damage to the lawns and grounds. He has also said the new ballroom will be more secure, although its planned capacity is too small to accommodate many of the major events presidents typically speak at in Washington.

Run away!!!!!!!

Senators find their exit strategy

There’s still a number of questions that need to be answered if Majority Leader John Thune wants to adjourn for recess by the end of the day.

Calen Razor

The Senate’s plan to get out of town is coming together.

Majority Leader John Thune teed up a final vote on the Russia sanctions legislation for this morning, as well as a confirmation vote for dozens of nominees and a procedural step on a stopgap funding bill.

But there’s still a number of questions that need to be answered if Thune wants to adjourn for recess by the end of the day:

— BLANCHE’S FATE: President Donald Trump’s pick for attorney general needs to secure at least one more vote to be confirmed before the break.

It looks like it’s all up to Sen. Bill Cassidy after Sen. Lisa Murkowski announced Friday morning she is opposed. Thune indicated Thursday night Blanche’s fate was uncertain and that leaders were “still working to get the final vote.”

— SAVE AMERICA ACT: Thune said to expect a vote related to the SAVE America Act as well as an initial vote on a budget blueprint for a third party-line spending bill — which includes elements of Trump’s election security legislation.

The decision to hold the budget vote comes after two Republican senators, granted anonymity to speak candidly, told POLITICO Thursday they believed Sen. Mike Lee or another member of the GOP’s right flank would have otherwise forced a vote on the framework.

But as we’ve previously reported, Republicans don’t believe the budget resolution has the votes within the conference to be adopted — meaning the expected initial vote today will fail to clear a simple majority threshold.

And it’s not clear Lee or like-minded senators will be satisfied and allow for lawmakers to adjourn for recess without more action on the elections measure. The senator has made similar threats over the past year but has never followed through.

— TIME AGREEMENT: GOP leaders need to strike an agreement to finish other business, including passing the stopgap government funding bill and advancing a college sports bill.

At this point, any single senator could still object to expediting the chamber’s agenda, which would derail Thune’s goal of getting members out of town by the end of the day.

“We’ve been having these conversations with Democrats trying to figure out what’s the path,” Thune said.

“We’ll see how it goes,” he added.

Would oppose confirming him....

Lisa Murkowski says she will oppose Blanche, endangering his confirmation

Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy remains undecided on the attorney general nominee.

By Riley Rogerson and Jordain Carney

Todd Blanche’s attorney general nomination is on the brink after Sen. Lisa Murkowski announced Friday that she would oppose confirming him.

The Alaska Republican said in a statement that she did not believe Blanche, who has been serving as acting attorney general since April, would act to rein in President Donald Trump and reverse the “politicization—even weaponization” of the Justice Department that has “accelerated” under Trump.

“The country needs an Attorney General who will check the worst impulses of this administration,” she said. “I hope Mr. Blanche is able to achieve that, if confirmed, but I simply do not have confidence that will be the case.”

Blanche’s fate is now thought to come down to Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, who has been increasingly critical of the president since losing his renomination campaign to a Trump-backed Republican earlier this year.

Cassidy met with Blanche alongside Murkowski Wednesday afternoon but hasn’t yet said how he will vote. Blanche has to win his support in order to be confirmed, given unified opposition from Democrats and opposition from Murkowski and Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine).

The extended absence of Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky for health reasons has also left Republicans short of a vote.

Murkowski cited Blanche’s handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files and the settlement agreement reached between Trump and the IRS under his watch as well as DOJ’s “repeated targeting” of Trump’s political enemies.

Blanche courted Murkowski heavily in recent months. He visited Alaska for two days in July to learn about public safety and tribal jurisdiction issues, two matters dear to the state’s senior senator. He also announced a nine-figure federal settlement benefiting Alaska Native health care.

“I just appreciated the fact that he went to the state,” Murkowski said this week.

Senate Republicans rejecting Blanche would be a significant blow to Trump, who has pressured GOP senators to support Blanche over the past week as his nomination has been in limbo. And it would come as he’s already fuming at the conference, and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, over their inability to end the legislative filibuster and pass the elections bill known as the SAVE America Act.

All hated....

Jeanine Pirro berated Doug Burgum. But Interior staffers have been angry at him for months.

The broadsides from D.C.'s top prosecutor against the Interior secretary echoed what agency staffers have said privately.

By Daniel Lippman, Ian M. Stevenson and Ben Lefebvre

Interior Department staffers were optimistic after Doug Burgum was confirmed to lead the agency in 2025, believing he had strong executive experience as governor of energy-rich North Dakota who led successful tech startups and businesses.

But since he took over at Interior last year, that hope has been replaced by confusion and concern that the agency is poorly run, has devolved into secrecy and has lost thousands of the staff needed to manage the national park systems and millions of acres of public lands.

Some staffers were alarmed that some employees were asked to sign nondisclosure agreements, according to two former staffers. Former employees accuse Burgum of surrounding himself with a toxic leadership team, leading to staffers fleeing. Since Burgum came in, several top officials have left the agency — including the Senate-confirmed legal counsel, the secretary’s former chief of staff and Interior’s top energy official.

Tony Irish, who worked at Interior for more than 20 years, including as associate solicitor for general law until he left last year, said it is “abundantly clear” that Burgum does not solicit or value the opinions of career staffers.

“Burgum appears to combine arrogance with an utter lack of curiosity or humility to seek out the advice of people who have dedicated their professional careers to [Interior’s] objectives,” Irish said. “I think it shows his disdain for the rank and file.”

And officials at Interior decry what they view as a culture of secrecy. Burgum asked colleagues early on about trying to add a sensitive compartmented information facility, or SCIF, on the department’s sixth floor even though one exists just three floors below, according to a person who heard the comment. According to three staffers who witnessed it, officials have routinely shredded official documents and use disappearing Signal messages — even for mundane scheduling matters — to avoid communications being preserved, as is required by the Federal Records Act.

“They’re terrified of written records,” said one former official.

These complaints come as Burgum entered into bureaucratic infighting with Washington’s top prosecutor, Jeanine Pirro, over how Interior handled accusations of vandalism in connection with criminal charges centered on renovations to the Reflecting Pool. Pirro, according to The New York Times, laced into Burgum and alleged Interior misrepresented how the pool’s lining was damaged.

The disclosures also show the dysfunction in a department that many thought would thrive under the leadership of a man who gained fame as a software mogul and governor of North Dakota. While Burgum was often a cheerleader for U.S. energy dominance, he soon took charge of the administration’s actions to stall renewable energy projects at the behest of President Donald Trump.

Eight former Interior officials and five industry lobbyists spoke to POLITICO for this story, and many were granted anonymity because they feared retribution for speaking out against Burgum and other senior staffers.

In a statement, Interior spokesperson Katie Martin said that Burgum has led a “high performing team” with “gratitude, humility, curiosity and courage.”

“These anonymous and false attacks have been proven to be Fake News by the record of success at the Department,” she said, referencing Interior’s expansion of oil and gas leasing and high visitation numbers at national parks. “The only culture of paranoid secrecy is inside the heads of those stricken with TDS.” TDS stands for “Trump Derangement Syndrome.” She also denied that Burgum ever asked for an additional SCIF.

White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt said in a statement that Trump “has tremendous respect” for Burgum, and he is “one of the most valuable members of his cabinet.”

“The president is deeply grateful for the secretary’s incredible work to make our country beautiful again and unleash American energy dominance,” she added.

Burgum took the position at Interior almost as a consolation prize, said people familiar with the discussions about his joining the administration. The former North Dakota governor originally set his sights on a nomination as secretary of State, or, failing that, the Commerce Department or White House chief of staff. He agreed to helm Interior only after Trump created the National Energy Dominance Council and placed Burgum as its chair.

But once atop Interior, Burgum staunchly supported Trump’s policies, including shrinking the department’s workforce. Starting with the Elon Musk-led government efficiency sprint last year and continuing through a round of buyouts and early retirements this spring, Interior’s workforce has shrunk by close to 14 percent, according to data from the Office of Personnel Management. Officials have been largely mum about these staffing changes and its leadership, saying that the department does not comment on personnel.

Beyond the rank and file personnel, those who left include top lawyer William Doffermyre; chief of staff Wynn Radford; congressional affairs director Matt Schafle; deputy assistant secretary for land and minerals management Jake Tyner; Leslie Beyer — who exited only months after being confirmed as assistant secretary for land and minerals management — and senior counselor Adam Suess. Tyler Hassen, who led the reorganization of Interior under DOGE, also left.

When asked why they left, Doffermyre and Suess didn’t respond to requests for comment. Radford and Beyer also declined to comment. Hassen said in a statement: “I’m grateful for the opportunity to have worked for and learned from an outstanding leader like Doug Burgum.”

In a statement, Schafle called it “the privilege of a lifetime” working for Burgum. “I am forever grateful for the opportunity to work alongside the dedicated team at the Department of the Interior.” In an email, Tyner said he “thoroughly enjoyed” working for Burgum.

Three former Interior officials blame Burgum’s chief of staff, JoDee Hanson, at least partly for their decisions to leave. Hanson has worked with Burgum since the late 1990s, including at his former company Great Plains Software. She has caused subordinates to cry due to her rough style, according to three of the former officials familiar with the matter, and one who was told of the incidents.

“The way that she managed the politicals in that building contributed to me leaving,” said one of the people.

Hanson didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Martin said Hanson “exudes professionalism and class” and that allegations of “improper behavior” are false.

Hanson drew attention early on in the administration when The Atlantic reported that she demanded that appointees use the agency’s industrial ovens to make chocolate chip cookies for Burgum and visitors. The Atlantic cited unnamed Interior officials saying that the cookies were a gesture of hospitality for guests to the agency.

In recent days, Burgum has been at the center of a fight within the administration over the botched repairs to the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, which Interior granted to a Virginia company with a no-bid contract that ballooned millions of dollars over budget in the rush to apply lining to the pool before this summer’s 250th anniversary celebrations.

After bringing charges against a former Olympian and others for allegedly vandalizing the reflecting pool, Pirro abruptly reversed course last week and sought to dismiss the charges against several defendants, saying in a court filing that federal prosecutors had been misled by uncooperative Interior officials who withheld key details that indicated damage to the liner was caused by blunders made during the installation.

Interior officials failed to accurately provide timely evidence of the vandalism, despite “dozens and dozens” of inquiries from federal prosecutors, according to Pirro’s DOJ filing. And when they did, it showed the cause of damage was shoddy work rather than deliberate destruction.

“Had [Interior] been forthcoming with the information clearly in its possession, the government would not have sought a grand jury indictment,” Pirro wrote.

Pirro’s spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment.

Burgum has so far stood by the vandalism explanation, while Pirro on Monday accused the secretary of shirking responsibility by covering up the botched repairs during an hourlong Oval Office meeting with Trump, according to The New York Times.

Karen Budd-Falen, a high-ranking ranking department official, has also drawn scrutiny. Budd-Falen worked at Interior in the first Trump administration, when her husband secured a $3.5 million water rights deal in Nevada between her husband’s ranch and a lithium mining company that had federal approvals pending before Interior. She never disclosed that profit and since early 2025 has been working on a range of grazing and other land management policies despite owning at least five ranching operations on lands in Wyoming and Nevada that are each valued at more than $1 million and holding BLM permits.

In March, she received a partial ethics waiver to work on grazing policy of “general applicability.”

Interior under Burgum never publicly announced that Budd-Falen had rejoined the department in 2025. She disclosed her hiring in an interview with a Wyoming media outlet, something that the Interior Department at the time declined to confirm with POLITICO saying only “The Department doesn’t have comment on personnel.”

Budd-Falen did not respond to a request for comment. An Interior spokesperson previously said she “has complied, and continues to comply, with any and all legal requirements, ethical standards and ethics guidelines.”

Staffers have also condemned what they say is a push for secrecy under Burgum’s leadership. Burgum used a private email for some Interior-related business early on as secretary, according to two former Interior officials familiar with the matter.

Martin said there is “zero truth” to Burgum using a personal email account for government business and that the department “follows all federal records management obligations.”

A shift toward more secrecy began early in Trump’s second term, when “identifiable pods of appointees,” as one former Interior official called them, would disappear for hours during the workday to hold meetings in the third-floor SCIF.

And in early May, a Virginia company that specializes in secure office technology called Bridges System Integration received a $215,000 contract for a “SCIF AV UPGRADE,” according to federal contract records, which Martin said is for the existing SCIF. In an email, Bridges System Integration declined to comment.

Martin said that Burgum’s position as chair of the National Energy Dominance Council gives him a position on the National Security Council, a high-level group that often discusses sensitive intelligence matters.

“They just thought everything should be completely private,” the former official said. “So many of them just don’t understand what public service means.”

All dictators say that while they are standing against the firing squad wall......

Trump says voters are mad at other Republicans, not him, as midterms approach

The GOP faces the prospect of heavy losses this November amid the war in Iran.

By Gregory Svirnovskiy

President Donald Trump said voters may seek to punish Republicans — but not him — in the November midterm elections, as GOP lawmakers sweat that affordability concerns and the war in Iran could mean Democrats flip the House and perhaps even the Senate.

“They’re angry at Republicans,” Trump said in an interview with Punchbowl News that aired Friday. “But they’re not angry at me. They’re not angry at me, but they are angry at Republicans.”

The GOP faces the prospect of heavy losses this November, as gas and grocery prices remain stubbornly high due in part to the White House’s five-month-long war in Iran. The administration’s guidance on campaign trail messaging has been “tone deaf,” House Republicans fear.

Meanwhile, the president’s approval rating has tumbled since he returned to the Oval Office last year, and even his biggest supporters have grown frustrated over his Middle East war.

And with a messy, jam-packed slate of primaries now all but in the rearview mirror, Democrats are determined to go on offense. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has 58 seats on its midterm target map that stretches into redder territory — while still facing an uphill climb to take the Senate.

Trump has a massive war chest at his disposal. His MAGA Inc. super PAC reached $400 million in June. The president told Punchbowl he plans to use it to “help Republicans,” but he stressed that he faces no pressure in this campaign cycle.

“I said to somebody, ‘Wait a minute, you don’t understand, I won,’” Trump said, referencing his 2024 presidential election victory. “I’m not campaigning.”

The biggest issue for Republicans this year? That Trump himself is not on the ballot, he said.

“If I don’t run, will those people go out and vote? And that’s the one thing I can’t tell, I’m going to ask them to,” he said.