A place were I can write...

My simple blog of pictures of travel, friends, activities and the Universe we live in as we go slowly around the Sun.



March 06, 2026

13 senators and 54 House GOP members heading for the door......

The record-setting pace of retirements from Congress continues, led by Republicans

Stephen Fowler

One in eight members of Congress now say they plan to leave their current seats after this election cycle, the second-highest total in the last century.

According to NPR's congressional retirement tracker, as of March 5, there are 67 current representatives and senators who are retiring or running for a different office — 13 senators and 54 House members.

They include the surprise retirement announcements this week from Montana Republicans Sen. Steve Daines and Rep. Ryan Zinke and Utah Republican Rep. Burgess Owens' decision in the wake of that state's redistricting that adds a Democratic-leaning seat.

In total, 36 lawmakers say they intend to retire from public office with the rest looking to run for a different office. There are 15 looking to become governors of their states, 15 looking to make the jump from House to Senate and Texas Republican Rep. Chip Roy is running for attorney general of his state.

Roy heads to a May 26 runoff after finishing second in Texas' March 3 primary.

Other notable retirements include longtime leaders such as California Rep. Nancy Pelosi and Kentucky Sen. Mitch McConnell and a slew of politicians looking to flee Washington, D.C., for state or local offices.

Tennessee Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn and Colorado Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet are not up for reelection in 2026 but would resign their seats if they win their respective gubernatorial races.

They join 10 lawmakers who began the 119th Congress in January and have since died or resigned. Former Rep. Mikie Sherrill resigned her New Jersey House seat effective Nov. 20 after winning her race for governor earlier in the month.

Primaries will also see lawmakers leave

As the 2026 midterm primaries get underway, Texas Republican Rep. Dan Crenshaw is the first incumbent that voters chose to send home.

Four other Texas incumbents — Republican Sen. John Cornyn and Democratic Reps. Al Green, Christian Menefee and Julie Johnson will also have their fates decided in the runoff. Republican Rep. Tony Gonzales announced late March 5 that he would retire at the end of his term after admitting he had an extramarital affair with a former staffer who later died by suicide.

Democratic North Carolina Rep. Valerie Foushee narrowly held off a younger primary challenger in the state's March 3 primary. Foushee is one of 12 House Democrats in reliably blue districts NPR identified where young primary challengers are breaking through.

On pace for record departures in the Trump era

According to an NPR review of the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress and campaign records, 901 people have served in Congress since President Trump first took office in 2017. That includes 132 senators, 752 representatives — and 17 who have served in both chambers.

Almost two-thirds of the current Senate and 44% of the current House have also served since the start of Trump's first term.

The most common way to leave Congress in the Trump era is retirement, as more than 140 lawmakers have done from 2017-2024.

Pelosi's announcement came shortly after November 2025 off-year elections that saw Democrats surge in races across the country that she would not seek another term. Georgia Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene's surprise decision to resign effective Jan. 5, 2026, came after a very public clash with President Trump over his second term agenda and the release of the Epstein files.

Ahead of the 2026 midterms, many older Democrats such as Sens. Dick Durbin and Jeanne Shaheen and Reps. Jan Schakowsky, Dwight Evans and Danny Davis, are opting to pass the torch to a younger generation.

An unusually high number of lawmakers are running for governor, Senate and other political offices, including 11 House members and four senators running for governor of their state.

Only one election in the last century saw more retirements

The 54 House members who have already indicated they won't return to their current seats is more than any election cycle since recordkeeping began in 1930 — and second only to 65 retirements announced ahead of the 1992 election.

In the 2018 midterms during Trump's first presidency, 34 House Republicans announced plans to retire. That number sits at 33 currently, with about eight months until Election Day.

For the Senate, the 1996 cycle saw 13 retirements, according to the Brookings Institution's Vital Statistics on Congress, matching the current total. There have never been this many Senate Republicans retiring at once in the last century, records show.

Redistricting and narrow majorities in a midterm year are factors

Republicans have narrow control of both the House and the Senate heading into an election year where the party faces headwinds with voters unhappy with Trump's second-term agenda.

Efforts by Republican-led states to enact mid-decade gerrymandering to gain more favorable districts — and retaliatory redrawing by Democratic-led states like California — has led to a reshuffling of boundary lines that has accelerated some lawmakers' decisions.

The Supreme Court ruled that Texas' new congressional map would be used in 2026, coming just ahead of the state's Dec. 8 primary qualifying deadline that saw nine incumbents retire, file for the Senate or run for other offices.

California's drastic redraw that favors Democrats could see some targeted Republicans announce retirement or be forced into a primary challenge against another sitting Republican.

Several other states may still seek to redraw their House maps ahead of their qualifying deadlines.

Family values party includes fucking your aide behind wife's back....

GOP Rep. Tony Gonzales of Texas ends reelection bid after admitting to affair with aide

By The Associated Press

Republican Rep. Tony Gonzales of Texas said late Thursday he was withdrawing from his reelection race, after having admitted an affair with a former staff member who later died by suicide, but he vowed to finish out his term in Congress.

He had faced calls from GOP leadership to end his reelection bid, and from others in Congress to resign.

"After deep reflection and with the support of my loving family, I have decided not to seek re-election," Gonzales said in a statement posted late Thursday to X.

The move is the latest in a quickly changing situation that stunned Capitol Hill and resulted in a House Ethics Committee investigation into his conduct. Gonzales' decision to bow out of the race appears to clear the field. On Tuesday, he had been forced into a May runoff against Brandon Herrera, a gun manufacturer and YouTube gun-rights influencer who narrowly lost to him in the 2024 primary.

House Speaker Mike Johnson and the GOP leadership earlier Thursday had called on Gonzales to withdraw from reelection after Gonzales, a day earlier, acknowledged a relationship that has upturned the political world in his home state and in Washington.

"We have encouraged him to address these very serious allegations directly with his constituents and his colleagues," said Johnson, Majority Leader Steve Scalise, Whip Tom Emmer, and GOP Conference Chairwoman Lisa McClain in a statement.

"In the meantime, Leadership has asked Congressman Gonzales to withdraw from his race for reelection."

Johnson, R-La., has been under enormous pressure from his own GOP lawmakers to take action, and several Republicans have already called for Gonzales to step aside. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., has introduced two resolutions to punish Gonzales. The first seeks to remove him from his assignments on the House Appropriations and Homeland Security committees, while the second seeks to censure him.

House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York, meanwhile, said he would support expelling Gonzales from the House, a rare step that requires a two-thirds vote from the chamber.

GOP leaders notably did not call for Gonzales to resign from office as they struggle to maintain their slim majority in the House, which they hold by only a handful of seats.

Their move came after Gonzales, appearing on the "Joe Pags Show," was asked whether he had a relationship with the aide, Regina Ann Santos-Aviles.

Santos-Aviles, 35, died after setting herself on fire in the backyard of her home in Uvalde, Texas. The Bexar County Medical Examiner's Office later ruled her death a suicide.

"I made a mistake and I had a lapse in judgment, and there was a lack of faith, and I take full responsibility for those actions," Gonzales said.

The congressman, now in his third term, had said he would not step down in response to the allegations, telling reporters recently that there will be opportunities for all the details and facts to come out.

Gonzales, a father of six, first won his seat in 2020 after retiring from a 20-year career in the Navy that included time in Iraq and Afghanistan.

In the interview broadcast Wednesday, Gonzales said he had not spoken to Santos-Aviles since June 2024. She died in September 2025.

"I had absolutely nothing to do with her tragic passing, and in fact, I was shocked just as much as everyone else," Gonzales said.

Gonzales went on to say he had reconciled with his wife, Angel, and has asked God to forgive him. He also said he looked forward to the Ethics Committee investigation.

Johnson and GOP leadership urged that committee to "act expeditiously."

Under House ethics rules, lawmakers may not engage in a sexual relationship with any employee of the House under their supervision.

Missing Epstein files related to Trump

Justice Department publishes some missing Epstein files related to Trump

By Stephen Fowler, Saige Miller

The Justice Department has published additional Epstein files related to allegations that President Trump sexually abused a minor after an NPR investigation found dozens of pages were withheld.

They include 16 new pages that cover three additional FBI interview summaries with a woman who accused Trump of sexual abuse decades ago when she was a minor. Also included are two pages of an intake form documenting the initial call to the FBI from a friend who relayed the claims.

NPR's investigation previously found 53 pages that appeared to be missing from the public database.

Now that these documents are published, there are still 37 pages of records missing from the public database, including notes from the interviews, a law enforcement report and license records.

Justice Department withheld and removed some Epstein files related to Trump
The Justice Department has repeatedly told NPR that any documents withheld were "privileged, are duplicates or relate to an ongoing federal investigation."

Last week, after NPR's initial story, the Justice Department said it was determining if records had been mistakenly tagged as duplicates and if any were found, "the Department will of course publish it, consistent with the law."

More detail, but less context

The interview documents are part of more than 1,000 new pages published to the Epstein files public database Thursday that also include what appears to be the complete case file from the investigation into Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell initiated in 2006.

The new documents go into more detail about the allegations made against both Trump and Epstein when the woman was between 13 to 15 years old.

An FBI email summarizing the claims and a Justice Department PowerPoint slide deck note the woman claimed that around 1983, when she was around 13 years old, Epstein introduced her to Trump, "who subsequently forced her head down to his exposed penis which she subsequently bit. In response, Trump punched her in the head and kicked her out."

In the newly-published documents, the woman's described how Trump allegedly put her head "down to his penis" and she "bit the s*** out of it." She alleged that Trump struck her and said something to the effect of "get this little bitch the hell out of here."

During the final interview the woman had with the FBI in 2019, when asked whether she "felt comfortable detailing her contacts with Trump," she reportedly asked "what the point would be of providing the information at this point in her life when there was a strong possibility nothing could be done about it."

The new files do not shed any more light on how credible federal investigators viewed her claims or how they were resolved. Still unanswered, too, is why the allegations were included in a Justice Department slide presentation last year summarizing the cases against Epstein and his accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell.

Trump has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing related to Epstein. The White House and Justice Department have warned that the raw files released to the public include "untrue and sensationalist claims."

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement to NPR Friday that Trump has been "totally exonerated by the release of the Epstein files."

"These are completely baseless accusations, backed by zero credible evidence, from a sadly disturbed woman who has an extensive criminal history," Leavitt wrote. "The total baselessness of these accusations is also supported by the obvious fact that Joe Biden's department of justice knew about them for four years and did nothing with them — because they knew President Trump did absolutely nothing wrong. As we have said countless times, President Trump has been totally exonerated by the release of the Epstein Files."

The White House also noted a Justice Department statement posted Thursday on X that said there were 15 documents it discovered were "incorrectly coded as duplicative" and there were five prosecution memos that the Southern District of Florida determined could be published while protecting privileged materials.

Democrats and Republicans on the House Oversight Committee have demanded answers from the Justice Department regarding the missing files and the department's handling of the release of Epstein documents. This week, the committee voted to subpoena Attorney General Pam Bondi to answer questions about the files.

Remember, he is DEMENTED.....

Trump tells CNN he’s not worried whether Iran becomes a democratic state

By Dana Bash

President Donald Trump told CNN Friday that Iran’s leadership has been “neutered” and that he’s looking for new leadership that will treat the United States and Israel well, even if that’s a religious leader and it’s not a democratic state.

“Iran is not the same country it was a week ago,” he told CNN in a brief phone interview. “A week ago they were powerful, and now they’ve been indeed neutered.”

He expressed confidence in the ease of picking a new leader — which he’s said he must be involved in — and again compared the mission to Venezuela, where the US captured Nicolás Maduro earlier this year and put his deputy in power.

“It’s gonna work very easily. It’s going to work like did in Venezuela. We have a wonderful leader there. She’s doing a fantastic job. And it’s going to work Iike in Venezuela,” he said, referring to acting president Delcy Rodriguez.

Trump also said he was open to having a religious leader in Iran. “Well I may be yeah, I mean, it depends on who the person is. I don’t mind religious leaders. I deal with a lot of religious leaders and they are fantastic,” he said.

And pressed on if he is insisting there needs to be a democratic state, Trump told CNN, “No, I’m saying there has to be a leader that’s going be fair and just. Do a great job. Treat the United States and Israel well, and treat the other countries in the Middle East — they’re all our partners.”

He went on to tout his relationship with those countries in the Middle East, claiming they’re “fighting for us.”

“And I became very friendly with all those countries. That’s why they’re all fighting for us. Before I got involved, we didn’t even speak to UAE and Saudi Arabia. You know, (President Joe) Biden shut out. Biden and (President Barack) Obama shut Saudi Arabia, UAE Qatar, he shut them all out. They were all going to go to China, and I got involved in very short period of time that became my friends,” Trump said.

And while the president praised the US operation against Iran — saying it’s a “12, maybe 15 on the scale of 10” — he suggested he wasn’t worried about rising gas prices.

“That’s all right. It’ll be short term time. It’ll go way down very quickly,” he said, while dismissing that prices are up significantly and saying he’s “already figured out” the Strait of Hormuz.

“We’ve knocked their Navy because, you know, when you knock out the Navy, they can’t do what they wanted to be able to do. The Navy is almost, we just hit about the 25 mark. Can you imagine that? Big ones — 25 ships are down,” he said.

Trump suggests Cuba will soon ‘fall’

Trump separately told CNN that Cuba “is going to fall pretty soon.”

“Cuba is gonna fall pretty soon, by the way, unrelated, but Cuba is gonna fall too. They want to make a deal so badly,” he told CNN’s Dana Bash in a phone interview when touting US military success in his second term.

“They want to make a deal, and so I’m going to put Marco (Rubio) over there and we’ll see how that works out. We’re really focused on this one right now. We’ve got plenty of time, but Cuba’s ready — after 50 years,” he added.

“I’ve been watching it for 50 years, and it’s fallen right into my lap because of me, it’s fallen, but it’s nevertheless fallen right into the lap. And we’re doing very well,” he continued.

A day earlier, Trump said at the White House that it’s only a “question of time” before American Cubans can return to their home country, appearing to say that’s next on the administration’s agenda after the ongoing war with Iran.

“He’s doing some job, and your next one is going to be, we want to do that special Cuba,” Trump said referring to his secretary of state. “He’s waiting. But he says, ‘Let’s get this one finished first.’ We could do them all at the same time, but bad things happen. If you watch countries over the years, you do them all too fast, bad things happen. We’re not going to let anything bad happen to this country.”

Dow falls by nearly 700 points........ Who's to blame??? Orange

Dow falls by nearly 700 points as surging oil prices and weak jobs data add to market anxiety

By John Towfighi

US stocks opened lower Friday, with the major indexes on track for weekly losses, as weaker-than-expected jobs data added to concerns rippling through markets.

The Dow was down 676 points, or 1.41%. The S&P 500 fell 1.26% and the tech-heavy Nasdaq sank 1%. Wall Street’s fear gauge, the VIX, jumped 12%.

Oil prices continued to climb: US crude surged 9.2%, to $88.47 per barrel. Brent crude, the international benchmark, gained 6.7%, to $91.16 per barrel.

US oil and Brent prices have surged 32% and 25%, respectively, this week as the conflict with Iran has halted the flow of oil through the Strait of Hormuz and caused disruptions to oil producers in the region.

“The stock market is becoming increasingly vulnerable to turmoil in the Middle East, making the path of least resistance lower,” Craig Johnson, chief market technician at Piper Sandler, said in a note.

President Donald Trump on Friday said in a post on social media “there will be no deal with Iran” except unconditional surrender.

Saad al-Kaabi, Qatar’s energy minister, told the Financial Times that he predicts all Gulf energy exporters will be forced to shut down production, pushing oil prices higher. Higher oil and energy prices could ignite inflation. That’s stoking nerves on Wall Street.

Concerns about energy inflation were paired with nerves about a weaker-than-expected jobs report Friday morning. The US economy lost 92,000 jobs in February and the unemployment rate ticked higher to 4.4%, according to the latest data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

“The combination of trade uncertainty and a lack of population growth points toward a weaker economy at the same time energy prices spike,” David Russell, global head of market strategy at TradeStation, said in an email.

Treasury yields climbed Friday morning despite the weak jobs report as concerns about inflation linger. The 10-year yield traded at 4.17%, up from 3.96% on Monday.

“Add higher oil prices given conflict in the Middle East and renewed tariff uncertainty to the convoluted jobs markets story, and you have a tricky, stagflationary mix of risks in the backdrop for the Fed,” Elyse Ausenbaugh, head of investment strategy at JP Morgan Wealth Management, said in a note.

The US dollar index traded flat after the weaker-than-anticipated jobs report, pausing its recent gains. The index is up 1.7% this week and set for its best week since late 2024 as investors have flocked to the greenback as a safe haven.

“Today’s numbers may have put the Fed between a rock and a hard place,” Ellen Zentner, chief economic strategist at Morgan Stanley Wealth Management, said in a note.

“Significant weakening in the labor market would support a rate cut, but given the risk that higher-for-longer oil prices could trigger another inflation surge, the Fed may feel compelled remain on the sidelines,” Zentner said.

Unemployment rate rose to 4.4%.. Lost 92,000 jobs.....

The US economy lost 92,000 jobs in February and the unemployment rate rose to 4.4%

By Alicia Wallace

Hiring at US businesses unexpectedly plunged last month as employers shed an estimated 92,000 jobs, according to new data released Friday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The unemployment rate edged higher to 4.4% from 4.3%.

Economists were expecting job growth to slow somewhat after a surprisingly strong January – in part due a major labor strike by health care workers and a deep cold snap that hit many US states. The consensus estimates were for a net gain of 60,000 jobs and the unemployment rate to hold steady, FactSet estimates show.

“We had a labor market that nearly froze last year, and it seemed to show some signs of thawing, which made it slushy at best,” Diane Swonk, chief economist at KPMG US, told CNN in an interview.

February’s report, however, showed how precarious the US jobs market is when the supporting “one-legged stool” of health care is kicked out, she said. The health care industry, which has driven the vast majority of the job gains in the past year, posted a loss of 28,000 jobs (31,000 of which were likely attributed to the mid-month Kaiser Permanente nurses and health care workers strike).

“It really illustrates how fragile the economy is on the labor market side of it,” she said. “The labor market weakness that we had seen emerge last year has not completely abated.”

And that renewed vulnerability is being exposed at a time when major shocks have emerged, heightening uncertainty. In the past three weeks alone, there has been a major trade policy twist courtesy of the US Supreme Court, a mass layoff tied to AI; and, most recently, the biggest wildcard of them all: a new war in the Middle East that’s already sent gas prices higher and threatens to undermine the progress made on inflation.

Strike and weather effects

February’s job losses marked a sharp turnabout from January’s surprisingly strong total, which economists said at the time likely overestimated hiring because of some one-time factors such as weather and lower-than-typical post-holiday layoffs. January’s job gains were revised down to 126,000 from 130,000 jobs.

December’s estimated job gains of 48,000 were revised down to a loss of 17,000 jobs.

The US economy has shed jobs in five out of the past nine months. And since May (the first month after President Donald Trump announced his biggest wave of tariffs), the labor market has lost 19,000 jobs, BLS data shows.

February’s report was expected to feature a few distortions of its own: The health care employment totals were expected to take a 31,000-job hit from the mid-month Kaiser Permanente nurses strike. (But, since that strike ended February 23, there will be a one-time boost to March’s jobs report).

Also, economists anticipated that a severe cold wave in the early part of the month could weigh on sectors such as construction and leisure and hospitality.

Friday’s report showed that most industries lost jobs. Some of the deeper declines were in health care (down 28,000 jobs); leisure and hospitality (down 27,000 jobs); and construction (down 11,000 jobs).

“There are enough caveats to the employment weakness to keep the [Federal Reserve] from jumping to the rescue with an interest rate cut next week, but there is also no escaping the fact that the labor market is not as healthy since Trump 2.0 came into office, and Washington economic officials will have to redouble their efforts,” Chris Rupkey, chief economist at FwdBonds, wrote in commentary issued Friday. “Economic growth can remain solid for a time when jobs growth slows, but it cannot continue to expand indefinitely at a satisfactory pace.”

Uncertainty – particularly about the size, scope, duration and price-hiking impacts from tariffs on imported goods – has become an albatross, freezing hiring plans in their tracks and shaking the confidence of consumers long worn down by an inflationary burst and persistent affordability pressures.

Last year’s job gains were some of the weakest in history outside of recessions.

Still, there were indications that the labor market wasn’t fully deteriorating – layoffs haven’t mounted and the unemployment rate has remained relatively low. The slowdown, economists have noted, was also a reflection of shifting demographics: The US economy doesn’t need to add as many jobs as it once did to sustain itself in part because of aging Baby Boomers and a steep pullback in immigration.

February’s headline payroll loss was shocking; however, other data points within the report underscore that the foundation beneath the labor market isn’t necessarily weakening, Nicole Bachaud, economist at ZipRecruiter, told CNN.

The number of people seeking part-time employment for economic reasons fell, as well as the number of marginally attached and discouraged workers, she said. Wage growth was stronger than expected, at a 0.4% monthly gain, lifting the annual rate to 3.8% – still above inflation.

Stupid religious pawns...........

Inside the Latest, and Scariest, Iteration of America’s Endless Abortion Wars

After Trump’s mass pardons of anti-abortion activists, threats and harassment at clinics have surged.

Becca Andrews

“I have a bomb, I have a bomb,” the male voice said. “Don’t let anyone in or out of the clinic, or I’ll set it off.”

For about 25 years, A Preferred Women’s Health Center, an abortion clinic in Charlotte, North Carolina, has endured more than its share of threats—usually, broad warnings about damnation in both this life and the next for the murder of innocent babies. But on July 2, 2024, a call came in that, as the clinic’s executive director, Calla Hales, recalls, “absolutely shook staff.”

Hales, who is in her mid-30s, co-owns this clinic and three others in the Southeast with her parents, Stuart and Lois, who have retired from daily operations. Their children grew up knowing that discussing the family business was not a good idea. “My parents were very clear,” she says as we drive around Charlotte. “We don’t talk about it with other people.” No one was allowed to answer the phone at home—an anti-abortion caller might be on the line.

For the last few years, as protesters from the evangelical organization Love Life have ramped up their demonstrations, caution and vigilance have again become second nature. So when the bomb threat came, Hales knew what she needed to do. “I have the somewhat unique advantage,” she says, “of living my whole life like this.”

Hales’ team of about 20 halted their services and emptied the waiting and recovery rooms. As patients and protesters watched, police searched the clinic with bomb-sniffing dogs. After an anxiety-provoking hour, they told Hales that the call had been a hoax. Weeks of a federal investigation followed, until agents zeroed in on a suspect—a 37-year-old man with a record that includes child abuse, aggravated assault, and burglary—and prosecution seemed imminent.

The case was being investigated under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act, a 1994 federal statute enacted after a series of assassinations and clinic attacks during an era of abortion-related violence three decades ago. Before the FACE Act, protesters suffered minor, if any, penalties for making threats or erecting blockades around clinics. After it passed, they risked real prison time and significant fines. “There was this big, foundational shift,” UC Davis abortion historian Mary Ziegler says about the reduction of violence that followed.

A few days after his second presidential inauguration, Trump pardoned 23 people convicted under the FACE Act, including those who had accosted pregnant patients, stolen fetal tissue, and physically blocked access to clinic entrances. The following day, Trump’s Department of Justice announced it would pursue FACE Act prosecutions only in “extraordinary circumstances”—cases that resulted in “death, serious bodily harm, or serious property damage.” In an online event hosted by the anti-abortion group Live Action, one of the people Trump pardoned, Paul Vaughn, who’d been convicted of obstructing a Tennessee abortion clinic in 2021, said the president’s reprieve had “emboldened” him and other anti-abortion demonstrators. “They wanted to spread fear into the church and people that would dare stand up for the unborn,” Vaughn said. “And yet, God had other plans.”

“These people really don’t give a fuck if I live or die.”

Soon after the pardons, Hales received more disquieting news: The feds were dropping their investigation of the bomb threat and handing off the case to law enforcement in Georgia, where the suspect resides. For the next year, Hales and her staff heard almost nothing. She had pretty much given up hope when authorities surprised her—they had charged their suspect with calling in a bomb threat and the case was being tried at the federal level after all. But with the suspect out on bail and the federal government signaling that it was open season on abortion clinics once again, Hales knew she would have to get used to feeling vulnerable and alone. “These people really don’t give a fuck if I live or die,” she tells me.

Anti-abortion protests have been a part of Hales’ world since she was a kid. But she calls the last five years, since the Covid pandemic and the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision, “the most difficult landscape” she’s ever worked in. She estimates that up to 20,000 protesters now target her Charlotte clinic each year. Most of them are affiliated with Love Life, a national anti-abortion group headquartered in Charlotte and active in 13 states. After Love Life moved into the empty lot next door to Hales’ clinic in 2022 and stationed its headquarters a fraction of a mile down the road, the number of protesters has steadily grown. They show up every day, and monthly prayer walks around the block where the clinic is located draw big crowds.

Back in 1991, during the “Summer of Mercy” protests in Wichita, Kansas, thousands of Operation Rescue anti-abortion protesters brought the city to a halt with sit-ins and clinic blockades. Some 2,600 protesters were arrested over six weeks, and the chaos and menace were catalysts for the FACE Act.

So far, the Love Life protests certainly haven’t had that sort of paralyzing effect on either the city or clinic operations. But there is a link: A former director of Operation Rescue, Flip Benham, has been demonstrating in Charlotte for the last 25 years and is now a respected elder in the Love Life family. The 78-year-old minister has been arrested and convicted of stalking and harassing providers, but is most famous for having baptized Norma McCorvey, a.k.a. Jane Roe of the landmark case that established a national right to abortion. (McCorvey became a born-again Christian and public anti-abortion icon before she ultimately reneged her conversion during a deathbed confession.) Benham is a regular presence outside Hales’ clinic, brandishing a graphic poster of a fetus he calls “Baby Malachi,” which he says was 21 weeks old when it was aborted. His twin sons, David and Jason—whose HGTV show Flip It Forward was canceled before it even aired after their views on abortion and gay marriage became public—sometimes join him, along with Benham’s sister and grandchildren. Benham’s sons have both served on Love Life’s board.

As one of the last Southern states to allow abortions past six weeks of pregnancy, North Carolina is a natural magnet for the anti-abortion movement. It “is definitely a hot spot and a place where they have had a large protester presence for a long time,” says Melissa Fowler, chief program officer for the National Abortion Federation, “and we have seen that escalate.”

But North Carolina is also part of a larger pattern. “There’s no question that there has been increased fear of violence and threats of violence since the Dobbs decision,” says Katie O’Connor, director of federal abortion policy at the National Women’s Law Center. “The decision by this administration to pardon those 23 people really has created a sense that it is open season on abortion providers and abortion patients in an already charged atmosphere.”

The National Abortion Federation reports that clinics across the country are seeing increasing numbers of protesters and levels of aggression. “If you’re leading a protest organization, anger is good, right? It recruits people,” Ziegler says. “It gets people to protest; it does all the things you want. But too much anger is bad, because then you can’t control it.”

In Florida, a man left a one-star Google review for a clinic that included a bomb threat. A clinic in Ohio received an envelope full of what the sender claimed was anthrax, but turned out to be flour. “You had your time to repent and quit killing babies,” the attached note said. “To [sic] late now.” Doctors report being stalked and receiving explicit, credible death threats. In June, former Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband, Mark, were murdered in their home; the man charged with their killings appears to have been motivated by anti-abortion beliefs. The shooter, who also wounded Democratic state Sen. John A. Hoffman and his wife, Yvette, had a list of dozens of targets that included more Democratic politicians, abortion care workers and advocates, and Planned Parenthood locations. Hortman had led the House to pass a law that codified the right to abortion and other forms of reproductive health care in Minnesota after the Dobbs decision.

No physicians have been killed since 2009, when Dr. George Tiller was murdered in Wichita. But in 2015, a gunman opened fire at a Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood, killing three people and wounding eight others. And in November, a leader of a local anti-abortion group allegedly shot a man in the stomach during an altercation outside a Planned Parenthood in Columbia, South Carolina—he has been arrested and charged. (The incident was caught on video.) Today, many people in the reproductive health movement think it’s only a matter of time before these kinds of attacks become more frequent.

Carol Mason, a professor of gender and women’s studies at the University of Kentucky and author of multiple books on the intersection of anti-abortion and right-wing extremism, says she’s noticed an increasing “fight club mentality” among the people she studies. Encounters have escalated from provocative efforts to spark debate to physical altercations. Anti-abortion extremists inspired by Trump’s reelection and rhetoric are operating within what Mason refers to as “kairotic” time, “the moment of revolution where people decide what’s happening in real time is not as important as the sense of yourself in a revolution or in a fight that is ongoing.”

In other words, when people see themselves as crusaders in a holy war, they begin to act accordingly.

A year after the bomb threat, I visit A Preferred Woman’s Health Center. The clinic and its administrative building are unremarkable twin brick structures positioned side by side on Latrobe Drive, a lasso of a road that connects to a busy main drag in southeast Charlotte. The loop of the lasso is home to some medical buildings, therapy practices, and industrial businesses, including a construction company that hosts Love Life’s headquarters. The empty lot where Love Life demonstrators gather is next to the clinic’s administrative building. The rules of engagement require that protesters go no farther than the sidewalks that lead up to the parking lot. To step off the sidewalk is a violation of North Carolina law.

For people seeking abortions in the South, where most states have made the procedure illegal, North Carolina has become a crucial option, albeit one with its own restrictions. In addition to lowering the gestational limit to 12 weeks and six days in 2023, North Carolina passed a law requiring two in-person visits to a clinic—even for people who are getting medication abortions. By design, this has added new hurdles for patients and additional costs for clinics. Abortions in Charlotte range from $550 for a medication abortion to $650 for a surgical one, depending on gestational age, but that’s only a fraction of what patients have to shell out. Hales estimates that nearly 80 percent of her clients receive some form of aid from abortion funds, grassroots groups that help pay for travel, child care, and the abortion itself. But abortion funds are stretched thin as well—the post-Dobbs surge of donor generosity has diminished—and the need to cross state lines for care increases costs. Because so many of Hales’ patients are already struggling financially, raising prices is not an option.

Since Dobbs, one of North Carolina’s 15 clinics has closed, even as abortion procedures have shot up 44 percent. With one of the busiest airports in the country, Charlotte is a vital abortion access point for a region that has been decimated by abortion bans. Mecklenburg County—where Hales’ clinic is located—accounted for 45 percent of all abortions in the state in 2023. Nearly 40 percent of patients came from out of state.

The patients who appear often are emotionally fragile. Every week, Hales estimates, her four clinics in North Carolina and Georgia see 10 to 15 minors. Many patients require more care than others needed in the past. They may be undocumented, non–English speaking, or illiterate. Patients seem angrier and more frightened than in the past, Hales says, and many know nothing about the legal constraints under which clinics must operate. They expect an experience akin to their local urgent care or hospital.

Their confusion and anxiety are unsurprising. By the time they arrive, Hales tells me, many patients have been so jerked around by a system they have no control over that they’re furious. Staff often struggle with figuring out how to balance their clients’ emotional needs with their own complicated reactions to them. A similar phenomenon is playing out around the country among patients who call her organization for help, says Fowler of the National Abortion Federation. “We’ve talked to people on our hotline who are really angry about all the barriers in place, and sometimes they take out that anger on the clinic staff or hotline staff who are helping them,” she says. Here, too, she says, many callers are shocked to discover just how arduous the path to care will be for them—all of which makes the situation, when they finally arrive at clinics, even more combustible.  

On the day I arrive, about 10 Love Life demonstrators, juggling clipboards and pamphlets, pace the sidewalk in front of the clinic’s buildings. As I drive into the parking lot, I see volunteers from each organization, like competing sports teams, dressed in their own colors and vying for the attention of people in the cars that approach. A Love Life volunteer in a coral T-shirt that reads “Hope Is Here” in white lettering—the “o” in “hope” contains a heart—pleads with me to roll down my window, presumably so I can be dissuaded from a decision to terminate a pregnancy. At the same time, a clinic volunteer wearing the uniform of a rainbow-hued and purple-and-black vest and holding a bright pink sign telling patients to “KEEP DRIVING, CLINIC AHEAD” tries to redirect me to the clinic. I tell them both I’m a reporter, and they turn back toward the road.

Cars in the parking lot bear license plates from South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida, all states where abortion is banned after six weeks of pregnancy, and Texas, where it’s banned from fertilization. Upon arrival, patients scan a QR code to check in, and most wait in their cars, windows closed, with the air conditioning cranked against the smothering summer heat. Brown tarps hang like shower curtains from tree limbs and encircle the clinic grounds, providing some privacy from the protesters on the sidewalk out front. Occasionally, someone cautiously exits their vehicle for a free snack or drink from a table set out for visitors, maybe a toy for a child. Earplugs are also available.

A slender brunette wearing a Love Life T-shirt near the perimeter of the parking lot begins to shout to anyone who might be able to hear her. “Mama, your little baby is alive. He loves you. Your baby has an actual heartbeat…Your baby doesn’t deserve a death sentence.” She pauses. “God is knitting your baby in your womb right now, fearfully and wonderfully made, the Bible says. We’re still out here praying for you and that beautiful little baby—”

“—And yellin’ at you,” finishes Shannon Bauerle, a woman in a rainbow vest with “CLINIC ESCORT” in bold letters across the front. Her skin is tanned from countless hours pacing in the sun, commanding her small volunteer army. Bauerle tosses her adversary a sardonic grin. The brunette ignores her and continues her pleas, careful not to cross the property line, as Bauerle keeps watch. Bauerle teaches women’s and gender studies at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte and is the executive director of Charlotte for Choice, which trains and schedules volunteers. There are escorts who get patients in and out of the clinic safely and defenders who confront the protesters to distract them from patients. She describes the clinic as a “destination spot” for protesters from all over the country and says her team already has spotted a few of the activists who’ve been pardoned by Trump.

Later, I catch up with her in the administrative building, where, as she organizes granola bars, water bottles, and walkie-talkies for her volunteers, she tells me a story that has become a constant reminder of the human stakes of her work beyond the rhetoric that ping-pongs across the parking lot on any given day.

In 2020, a 12-year-old girl who’d been raped came to the clinic, escorted by an uncle. The child was distraught, Bauerle says, and the protesters’ shouts pushed her into hysteria. The uncle climbed out of the car and begged the protesters, one man in particular, to just lower their voices. “Please, she’s been through hell,” the uncle pleaded. The protester refused, insisting that by giving birth, the girl would be “healed.” Giving up, the uncle returned to his car. Bauerle tells me it’s the closest she’s come to physically intervening between protesters and patients, but she knew that if she crossed that line, she could be arrested or sued. Instead, she used an oversized umbrella as a way to try to shield the child from the protesters’ view, but she felt helpless nonetheless.

Even now, when she thinks about that day, her face flushes with fury.

Love Life began as a small, nondenominational religious community in Charlotte, but over the past decade, it has become an anti-abortion force to be reckoned with. According to the most recent tax forms available, Love Life employs 77 people—full and part time—and mobilizes more than 600 volunteers. Its total revenue in 2023 was $3.7 million. That’s still small as national right-to-life groups go, but it’s growing, with active chapters in at least 10 other states, including California, Idaho, Illinois, New Mexico, and New York.

I meet the 45-year-old executive director, Daniel Parks, at Love Life’s headquarters, which is only 0.2 miles from the clinic. Friendly, if a bit wary, Parks represents a younger generation of anti-abortion activists, respectful of trailblazers like Flip Benham but preferring a more contemporary style. For one, you won’t catch Parks brandishing posters of dismembered fetuses. Love Life strives to present itself as a community of engaged men and women, moms and dads with young families, the kind of people one might see at the local trendy coffee shop. It has an Instagram page with more than 62,000 followers, where posts announce, “Another precious baby saved in Charlotte, NC, this morning.”

Parks, who sports stylish spectacles and slicked-back silver-blond hair, bristles at my description of the group’s work as “protesting.” Instead, it’s a “ministry,” he clarifies, one that provides pregnant women with church mentors, housing, and parenting classes, among other meaningful social services. A report on Love Life’s website estimates that it has helped “more than 6,700 families choose life for their babies” across the country since its work began in 2016. In the first half of 2025, the report claims that 486 babies were born to women who had planned to terminate their pregnancies before Love Life intervened. Like the previous generation of activists, Parks fervently believes that abortion is murder and that clinic escorts like Bauerle are accomplices. “The people with the vests on,” he tells me, “in some practical ways are, you know, the enemy.”

The group operates out of a basement office tucked below a property management company that owns the space. The walls are covered with large photographs of people caught up in the rapture of worship and babies with toothy grins who’ve been “saved” by the organization, as well as portraits of high-profile pastors like Rep. Mark Harris, a Republican who represents the state’s 8th Congressional District. An ordained Southern Baptist minister, Harris has preached at Love Life events. (In 2018, he was accused of election fraud, and his initial congressional election was overturned, but he never went to trial.) Unlike most people in the anti-abortion movement who identify intensely with the GOP, Parks claims he has no interest in partisan politics. Were he forced to choose, he says, he would prefer to describe himself as a libertarian. As for Trump, “I certainly respect some of the pro-life things,” Parks says. “But yeah, I’m super-skeptical that he’s actually pro-life for the sake of protecting innocent children.”

Saving babies from abortion is the primary goal of Love Life, and for that, it targets not just expectant mothers, but also places of worship; its goal is to build a national network of ministry partners. “Really, we’re after the church,” Parks says. “We want to see the church—the evangelical church, in particular—be aware of the issue of abortion in their city, but then actively do something to help the families that are considering abortion.”

I recount the story Bauerle told me about the pregnant 12-year-old. Parks is skeptical and suggests that the story deliberately positions the Love Lifer as the villain. Such situations, he insists, ought to be handled with compassion. “I’m pretty confident that abortion, in her case, is not,” he lets out a humorless laugh, “going to bring healing to her.” He says he would have been gentle instead, attempting not to “add insult to injury,” but sharing “what we believe is true about that baby and about the situation.” Which is, put simply, that she should have carried her assailant’s child to term. In the end, no matter how expansive and supportive the organization Parks describes may be, Love Life is carrying on the tradition of the hardline anti-abortion movement.

Other experiences Parks describes mirror those reported by those who work at the clinic. Bauerle had related the intrusive actions of some demonstrators in approaching cars. Parks, on the other hand, recounts how one Love Life volunteer was merely handing out a pamphlet to someone through an open car window when a clinic volunteer snatched the literature away.  “It’s like, wow, okay, that’s not pro-choice,” Parks says.

Parks and I emerge from the basement into the bright morning to head over to the prayer walk, which Love Life holds on the second Saturday of every month. We encounter a woman, looking lost and uneasy, who has wandered up from the parking lot behind the group’s office. “Is this the entrance?” she asks.

Parks pauses. “Well, what are you looking for?”

“A Preferred Women’s Health Center.”

“Are you pregnant?” he asks. “Are you looking to have an abortion?”

A guarded look crosses her face, and she starts to back away toward her car.

“I don’t wanna talk about that.”

“God loves you, God loves your baby,” he says. “We can help you.”

“I gotta get to my appointment.” She opens her car door and climbs in.

Parks backs off, and we stand in silence for a moment. “Wow,” he says. “How cool that you got to see that.”

The first chords of worship music begin to silence the chatter of the gathered crowd, which looks to be nearing 200 strong. After a few songs led by a full band, a pastor ambles onstage. More than 230,000 “prayer walkers” have convened “around abortion centers to date,” he tells the crowd. Love Life chapters in other states like New York and California also organize prayer walks on the second Saturday of every month. But since “500 to 600 abortions happen in Charlotte” every week, he goes on, their work is far from over. (According to state data, the number is more like 370.) Protesters fall silent and kneel on the gravel as the pastor prays. Then a Love Life representative announces that guns are prohibited at “parades,” so anyone who is armed should stow their firearms in a vehicle. (No one moves.) The congregants stand and start their march. At the first prayer station, a sign commands, “Repent!”

We pass Benham and his “Baby Malachi” placard. Signs at three more prayer stations ask us to pray for “moms & babies,” “dads,” and “all involved in abortion.” We stop directly in front of the clinic, across the road so as not to trespass. The front doors are hidden by trees and the brown tarps. A man with a guitar picks up a melody, and the group begins to sing a contemporary Christian tune, hands lifting toward the clinic.

Parks tells me that the purpose of the walk is simply to pray, worship, and reflect—not to engage with clinic workers or patients. Love Life draws a hard line at “vigilante justice,” he says, or any sort of physical confrontation. After a few songs, we return to the gravel lot next door to the clinic, where there is a call for volunteers and, of course, donations. “Every dollar that you sow into this ministry, God is going to use to save babies, to save lives, and continue to unite and mobilize the church,” the pastor urges. After one more prayer, the crowd slowly disperses. Many head back up the road to Love Life’s headquarters for fellowship and Chick-fil-A sandwiches.

But according to Bauerle and Hales, other, more ardent protesters attend Love Life’s events and are less committed to nonviolence. The people whom they most fear are the most extreme wing of the anti-abortion movement, the abortion “abolitionists” whose aim is to outlaw abortion in all circumstances—seemingly no matter the cost. Abolitionists believe in criminalizing women who have abortions, their doctors, and anyone who offers any assistance. A bill in South Carolina that did not pass illustrates the idea: It proposed 30-year prison sentences for people involved in abortions. Some abolitionists go further, arguing for the death penalty for both providers and patients.

Parks says Love Life does not identify as an abolitionist organization—“that’s not really our forte.” But he says it does offer a training called “Legalize Life” run by Bradley Pierce, president of the Foundation to Abolish Abortion and Abolish Abortion Texas, who has pushed for legislation that would charge anyone who gets abortion care with murder.

When I press Parks on Pierce, he acknowledges, “Many of the people in our organization align with that ideology, and there are variations of it.” As he describes Love Life’s position on abortion, it sounds very much like one an abolitionist would embrace. “We agree abortion is murder and that it should be outlawed and every human life should be protected under our laws,” he says. “And we believe that children in the womb are human life.”

A few days after I leave Charlotte, Bauerle emails me. “We got this video today,” she writes. “There are a few things, like them talking about guns, that you might find interesting.” I open the file and see an older woman and another woman on the sidewalk outside the clinic, recorded by a security camera affixed to a nearby tree. “I tell you what, the older I get,” the white woman says, “I am tired of rolling over to their acts of aggression and evil.”

The older woman then describes gently pushing away a clinic defender’s sign when the defender got too close to her while she was trying to counsel someone. She says she talked to a police officer who routinely patrols the clinic, and he told her that defending her personal space was fine, so long as it’s done carefully. “Maybe it’s time for me to retire,” she says, adding that she’s talking to Love Life’s lawyer about what she describes as “the slander and the lies”—that Love Lifers are a threat, for instance—the people she describes as “pro-abortion” antagonists spread.

The other woman responds: “A lot of Christians will say, you don’t need no gun, you shouldn’t have a gun. What did Jesus tell ’em?” She then refers to Luke 22:36—“If you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one”—which some Christians have interpreted as a call to arms.  

Bauerle believes the exchange encapsulates a common problem the clinic frequently faces: At what point do vague references to guns and swords lead to actual violence? At what point does a simmer erupt into a boil?

When I ask Hales about the exchange, she sighs. She hasn’t heard about it—probably, she says, because Bauerle is trying to shield her from more stress. Hales used to try to get police to issue citations for credible-sounding threats—if someone said she was going to die that day or someone was going to shoot her—and they would tell her to press charges. “Every single time I did,” she says, “I would be told that the language wasn’t actionable.” And to be clear, the footage Bauerle shared with me did not lay out a specific threat, which makes it protected as free speech. But it was still unnerving for staff and volunteers. Hales says she stopped trying to get the law to intervene.

In October, when Operation Save America, an abolitionist rebrand of Operation Rescue, joined Love Life’s monthly prayer walk following a conference, some 500 protesters showed up. Charlotte-Mecklenburg police allowed them to pierce the boundary to hand out pamphlets, even though doing so would constitute a violation of local and state law. (The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department declined to comment.) The most aggressive of the protesters clustered along the entrance to the clinic parking lot, where clinic defenders tried to hold them back with rainbow umbrellas. Every so often, someone broke through and blocked the driveway for as long as possible, until a volunteer herded them away with an umbrella. Parks, who wasn’t there, told me that as far as he knows, everything proceeded normally on Love Life’s end, but Operation Save America “sort of did their own thing.”

Bauerle and her volunteers had met several times in advance to plan, and it seemed to have paid off—protesters were frustrated by the organized response of the umbrella brigade. “If we didn’t have the volunteers that we do, we’d have been fucked,” she texted me. Still, she describes the day as a “shit show,” particularly local authorities’ response. At least five times, adult protesters crossed the driveway slowly, holding hands with a child. No citations or tickets were issued.

Last year, blocking the driveway was a federal crime. Now, it’s more complicated.

Another of Google’s Sneaky Trick........

Google’s Sneaky Trick to Sidestep an Iowa County’s Data Center Zoning Rules

Just convince a nearby city to annex the land.

Anika Jane Beamer

Google is seeking to bypass data center zoning rules recently adopted by Linn County, Iowa, by annexing the land for its proposed campus into a city two miles away.

If approved by city officials in Palo, the move would free Google from the water-use and economic agreements that Linn County developed for unincorporated areas with input from the company’s representatives. Though Palo is part of the county, the data center would be subject to the city’s rules, not the county’s.

The workaround is “fundamentally wrong,” said Sami Scheetz, supervisor for Linn County’s 2nd District, in a statement issued by the county on Wednesday. “Let’s be clear about what is happening here. We negotiated in good faith. And Google’s response was to go find a local government that will ask for less.”

In October, Google informed the Linn County Board of Supervisors of plans to construct a six-building data center campus on 545 acres of unincorporated land adjacent to the Duane Arnold Energy Center. 

Interest from the tech giant led Linn County staff to develop an ordinance that set guidelines for data center developers based on the experiences and zoning laws of communities across the nation. Google representatives were closely involved in that process, said Charlie Nichols, director of planning and development for Linn County.

“This is going to have regional impacts, regardless of which jurisdiction is going to decide the fate of the project.”

The ordinance, which the Board of Supervisors approved in February, requires data center developers in unincorporated areas of Linn County to conduct a water study as part of their zoning application, enter into water-use and economic agreements with the county and adhere to light and noise pollution rules as well as mandatory setbacks.

In talks with the county, Google bristled at requirements for public disclosure of water use and economic terms that included full property taxation, Nichols said. Nonetheless, he said, the county did not expect Google to sidestep those protections by engaging directly with the city of Palo.

The city has not issued any public comments on the matter, but is likely to go forward with annexing the Google site, Nichols said. It would be considered a “voluntary, non-urban annexation,” meaning the county has no say in the matter.

Members of the Linn County Board of Supervisors expressed their disappointment at a Wednesday meeting. “We were not trying to block this project. We believed in working together in a transparent process for both regional benefits and protections,” said Kirsten Running-Marquardt, chair of the board.

Google had previously verbally agreed to the terms of an economic development plan with Linn County that would have included annual community development payments, a significant strategic partnership fund, environmental stewardship commitments and high-quality job creation, the county stated in its press release.

But on February 26, the same day that the county told Google it would formally consider accepting that economic plan, Google informed county staff it would instead pursue annexation into the city of Palo.

Google did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Wednesday.

Not only would the annexation bypass regulations set for unincorporated areas of the county, but it would also mean the loss of $500,000 in funding that Google committed for a comprehensive regional water balance study.

Now that the company no longer plans to develop through the county, the much anticipated water balance study “is not moving forward,” Nichols told supervisors on Wednesday.

Nichols and all three supervisors are urging the city of Palo to consider adopting a similar code to that laid out in the county ordinance, especially the water study requirement.

“This is going to have regional impacts, regardless of which jurisdiction is going to decide the fate of the project,” Scheetz said. “Our ordinance was pro-growth and pro-community, and I hope that Palo takes that path going forward as well.”

Palo, population 1,407, currently has no zoning codes specific to data centers. City council members have told Nichols they plan to adopt a zoning code for data centers, but that they are working closely with Google and it will not be the same as Linn County’s. 

Palo Mayor Bryan Busch declined to comment on the issue Wednesday, but said that the city would be issuing an official statement in the next few days.

Annexing the data center site will likely be a slow process. Over the next few months, Palo officials will have to host a series of public meetings before they can annex the land, write a new zoning code, and establish any tax incentives for the project, Nichols said. After spending more than half a year drafting the county ordinance, that prospect gives him little comfort.

“I felt like we had a workable ordinance that puts in place really bare minimum requirements of information reporting,” he said. “So for Google to really throw a fit over that, it’s a little bit disheartening.”

Not Funny










 

Privacy proposals

House committee advances kids’ online safety and privacy proposals

Democrats pushed for more enforcement mechanisms.

By Alfred Ng and Ruth Reader

The House Energy and Commerce Committee advanced a package of bills Thursday that would establish national age verification requirements and create new online safety and privacy protections for children.

Lawmakers voted 28-24, along party lines, to send the Kids Internet and Digital Safety Act to the House floor for a full vote.

Republicans brushed aside Democratic opposition during the markup. Democrats argued the bill was too lenient on tech companies and would preempt any state regulations.

Senate versions of the Kids Online Safety Act and the Children and Teens’ Online Privacy Protection Act, known as COPPA 2.0, have bipartisan support, in contrast with the Republican-led House effort.

The committee spent more than two hours debating amendments that Democrats said were needed to strengthen the bill, none of which passed.

“In the past, we have shown that when the stakes are high enough, we can put politics aside and work together, and that is why it is unfortunate the slate of bills today before us is not bipartisan,” Chair Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.) said in his opening remarks. “But at the end of the day, members of Congress, our responsibility is to our constituents, especially our children.”

Guthrie’s KIDS Act combines about a dozen bills focused on product design standards intended to protect children online, as well as requiring age verification for adult content. It includes the latest version of KOSA.

Democrats and kids’ safety advocates argue the House version of KOSA is weaker than its Senate counterpart because it omits “duty of care” language that would require companies to design products with kids’ safety in mind.

“We want something better, stronger, something that is really relevant to the children that have been lost,” said Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.).

The package would create new safety settings for children’s accounts, mandatory disclosure for AI chatbots, age verification requirements for sexual material, and directs federal agencies to study social media’s mental health impact.

Mammoth task to pass emergency funding

Republicans eye a ballooning war package with aid for farmers, wildfires

GOP leaders’ mammoth task to pass emergency funding for the military conflict in Iran is growing.

By Meredith Lee Hill and Jennifer Scholtes

Republicans are debating whether to attach wildfire aid and $15 billion in tariff relief for farmers to a military funding package President Donald Trump is expected to seek for the unfolding conflict in Iran, according to four people granted anonymity to share internal deliberations.

Senior congressional GOP aides caution that no decisions have been made, and House Republican leaders are particularly wary of the package growing too large.

GOP leaders have previously thwarted efforts by farm state Republicans to use unrelated government spending bills to advance billions of dollars in assistance to farmers still reeling from Trump’s tariffs, which the Supreme Court struck down last month.

There’s also anxiety about over-stuffing the already precarious emergency war funding package Trump is expected to submit to Congress in the coming weeks. House GOP leaders are especially sensitive about the final price tag, which in military aid alone could be $50 billion at least.

But some Republicans are quietly discussing a list of items that could draw more Democrats to vote for a supplemental defense funding package, which most would otherwise be inclined to oppose amid broad disapproval of the U.S. strikes.

Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.), who chairs the agriculture funding panel, said in an interview he believes that Republican leaders can build enough support for an emergency military funding package if they include aid for farmers as well as the disaster assistance dollars Democrats have long sought.

“I think we get critical mass for a supplemental, because I think they want funding for the California fires, we want funding for agriculture,” Hoeven said.

Hoeven and Senate Agriculture Chair John Boozman (R-Ark.) have crafted a plan to allocate $15 billion in aid for farmers, on top of the $12 billion the Trump administration is already providing in direct payments to U.S. agriculture producers.

Boozman said Thursday that tying this farm aid into an emergency military funding package is “probably the best thing to do.” Republicans are bracing for another big hit to farmers from the U.S.-Israel war with Iran, with already high production costs expected to be intensified by the conflict.

Republican leaders are preparing for a messy fight over the war and military funding, however, and tacking on a growing list of additional items could end up only exacerbating intraparty battles between war hawks and fiscal conservatives.

House Foreign Affairs Chair Brian Mast (R-Fla.) said in an interview this week he would support an emergency military funding bill that costs tens of billions of dollars for the Middle East conflict alone.

GOP fundraiser with Hegseth scrapped

GOP fundraiser with Hegseth scrapped amid Iran War buildup

Rep. Zach Nunn postponed his “Salute to the Troops” campaign event out of respect for U.S. casualties of the war.

Aaron Pellish

Rep. Zach Nunn has postponed a planned “Top Gun” themed fundraiser with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth that had drawn criticism over its timing — at the start of a war that has already resulted in U.S. casualties.

The Iowa Republican announced the postponement Thursday on social media.

Nunn had said Hegseth would appear at the fundraiser on Saturday, hours after the initial U.S.-Israeli airstrikes in Iran. The event, called “Top Nunn” and billed as a “salute to the troops,” was scheduled for later this month in a Des Moines suburb.

On Tuesday, the Pentagon publicly identified the first U.S. deaths in the war, troops who were killed by an Iranian drone strike in Kuwait. The six soldiers were assigned to an Army Reserve command based in Nunn’s district, and two of them were from Iowa.

The announcement of the fundraiser drew strong condemnation from Democrats, who accused Hegseth of leveraging the war for political purposes. Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spokesperson Katie Smith attacked Nunn’s event as “callous and disqualifying” in a statement on Wednesday.

Nunn, a former intelligence officer for the Air Force, explained the postponement in a social media post while offering condolences to the families of the troops who were killed.

“Operation TOP NUNN is postponed. We will have more to share about the event soon, and all ticket holders will be notified of the new date,” Nunn said. “Our prayers are with the families and our action is with our troops on the frontlines.”

Nunn said he plans to attend the arrival of the remains of the six soldiers at Dover Air Force Base on Saturday along with President Donald Trump.

Nunn paid his respects to the six soldiers in a speech on the House floor Thursday and led a moment of silence.

GOP Gonzales drops reelection

Tony Gonzales drops reelection bid among pressure from GOP

The Texas representative had faced growing calls to resign from members of his own party after allegations of an affair with a staffer surfaced.

By Cheyanne M. Daniels and Mia McCarthy

Scandal-plagued Rep. Tony Gonzales announced late Thursday night he will not seek re-election, ending a runoff between him and gun influencer Brandon Herrera.

“After deep reflection and with the support of my loving family, I have decided not to seek reelection while serving out the rest of this Congress with the same commitment I’ve always had to my district,” Gonzales (R-Texas) said in a statement. “Through the rest of my term, I will continue fighting for my constituents, for whom I am eternally grateful.”

The decision comes after pressure from within his conference, including GOP leaders who urged him to end his re-election bid in a joint statement Thursday. But leaders declined to call for him to resign on Thursday, as they navigate near-zero Republican margins in the House.

Gonzales was facing extensive criticism after he admitted to a sexual relationship with a staffer who later died by suicide.

Reporting in the San Antonio Express-News and 24SightNews revealed text messages that allegedly showed him pursuing a then-staffer for a sexual relationship. POLITICO has not independently confirmed the texts.

Gonzales had previously denied the accusations as “rumors” that “are completely untruthful” before admitting to the affair with Regina Santos-Aviles earlier this month.

“I made a mistake, and I had a lapse in judgment, and there was a lack of faith, and I take full responsibility for those actions,” Gonzales told radio host Joe Pagliarulo shortly after the primary.

But, Gonzales added, the affair had “absolutely nothing to do with” Santos-Aviles’ death. She died in 2025.

The House Ethics Committee also recently launched a formal investigation into Gonzales. POLITICO previously reported that the nonpartisan Office of Congressional Conduct found “a substantial reason to believe” that Gonzales had a sexual relationship with a subordinate, which would be an apparent violation of House rules.

A handful of GOP members called for Gonzales to resign or end his reelection campaign, a number which grew after he publicly admitted to the affair. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) — who endorsed Gonzales before the accusations arose — along with other members of party leadership called for Gonzales to end his congressional bid shortly after the primary.

“The Ethics Committee has announced an investigation into Congressman Tony Gonzales’s conduct, and we urge them to act expeditiously,” Johnson and the three other highest-ranking House Republicans said in a statement. “In the meantime, Leadership has asked Congressman Gonzales to withdraw from his race for re-election.”

Democrats believe that the seat in Texas’ 23rd congressional district could be competitive in the fall with Herrera as the nominee.

Stephen Miller and Pam Bondi should be next

'Good riddance': Dems cheer Noem’s ouster — and call for more departures

Democratic lawmakers said Stephen Miller and Pam Bondi should be next after President Donald Trump announced Kristi Noem would be stepping aside as DHS secretary.

By Jacob Wendler and Gregory Svirnovskiy

Democrats celebrated Kristi Noem’s firing as the Homeland Security secretary on Thursday, while calling for more heads to roll among President Donald Trump’s more controversial aides and advisers.

“Kristi Noem will go down as the most shamelessly incompetent and cruel Homeland Security Secretary in U.S. history,” California Gov. Gavin Newsom wrote on X. “Firing her is not enough. NOEM, GREG BOVINO, and STEPHEN MILLER all must be held accountable for terrorizing and endangering the American people.”

Several other potential 2028 presidential candidates were quick to join the chorus applauding the move, seizing on the opportunity to push for further personnel changes at the highest levels of the Trump administration.

Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker also warned in a video posted to social media that Noem would still “be held accountable.”

“Hey, Kristi Noem, don’t let the door hit you on the way out,” he said. “Here’s your legacy: corruption and chaos, parents and children were teargassed. Moms and nurses, U.S. citizens, getting shot in the face. Now that you’re gone, don’t think you get to just walk away.”

Noem’s impending departure — Trump wrote Thursday on Truth Social that she’ll soon become the inaugural “Special Envoy for The Shield of the Americas” — brings to a close a tumultuous yearlong stint at the agency. Trump also announced that he intends to tap Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) to replace Noem atop the department.

Noem is the most senior administration official to depart thus far in Trump’s second term.

But Democrats were quick to signal they were not satisfied with her exit, swiftly calling for Trump to axe other Cabinet-level officials. Both House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.) urged Trump to fire embattled Attorney General Pam Bondi.

Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), meanwhile, said Trump should cut loose Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. next. Maryland Gov. Wes Moore also celebrated Noem’s ouster.

Noem came under bipartisan fire for her alleged relationship with Trump ally Corey Lewandowski, which she denies, and for labeling two Minnesota protesters killed by federal law enforcement in January “domestic terrorists.”

The former South Dakota governor also faced questions about a $220 million DHS ad campaign, testifying during a Tuesday congressional hearing that Trump approved the spending — a claim he later denied in an interview with Reuters.

“Time and time again, Secretary Noem failed the American people and her duty to the Constitution,” Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) wrote on X. “This was particularly true in how she oversaw ICE. Her departure demonstrates that if you don’t uphold the most basic American values, the American public wants you gone.”

Several Democratic lawmakers also indicated that Noem’s departure does not change their demands surrounding funding for DHS and for reforms at Immigration and Customs Enforcement amid an ongoing partial government shutdown.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said Thursday that ICE faces deeper problems that cannot be addressed with a single personnel change.

“The problems at ICE transcend any one individual. ... It goes beyond any one person,” he said Thursday. “You need to straighten out the whole agency. The rot there is deep.”

Republicans, meanwhile, largely fell in lockstep behind Mullin — who said Thursday he was “excited about the opportunity” — and he will likely face a smooth confirmation process. Some Republican lawmakers acknowledged that a leadership shakeup at DHS was overdue.

“It was time for a change,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) wrote in a social media post, while Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) said the decision was “good for the president and his legacy on border and deportation.”

Abandoned them... Surprised????

GOP restrainers say Trump abandoned them

The president’s restraint-minded backers accuse the administration of breaking its promise.

By Jack Detsch, Eli Stokols and Paul McLeary

First, conservatives opposed to military intervention overseas put their trust in President Donald Trump as he swept back into power.

Then, the faction in his inner circle that backed the administration’s “peace through strength” motto looked to Vice President JD Vance and Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth as their champions.

Now, as all three men are supporting the war in Iran, the pro-restraint wing of the Republican Party is searching for fresh leadership.

The fissure within Trump’s foreign policy community, described by seven White House allies, threatens to splinter a key element of the administration — particularly as it faces pressure to execute the Iran war while keeping American troops from entering the country.

“I would characterize the current moment as one of fear and paralysis,” said Justin Logan, director of defense and foreign policy studies at the conservative Cato Institute. “There’s also a group of people who had aspirations or have aspirations to go into the government, who are asking themselves whether they still want to do so, and who are biting their tongues while they figure out the answer to that question.”

Restraint-minded Republicans once thought Trump had their back. He’d promised not to start new foreign wars on the campaign trail. His vice president and Defense secretary spent the first year of the administration railing against foreign interventionism. Trump’s National Security Strategy even said his foreign policy leaned toward non-interventionism.

But the operation in Venezuela and Iran have changed all that. The back-and-forth over the war has deepened the confusion — even within the MAGA movement — about what Trump’s foreign policy is really about.

Any notion that the administration would set a “high bar” for military interventions is now “dead in the water,” said a former Trump administration official, who like others interviewed, was granted anonymity to speak candidly. “I just can’t wrap my mind around how, given some of the things that are being contemplated, we would pivot back to that.”

Trump, in one of several dozen phone interviews over the last few days, brushed off criticism from political allies upset over his abandonment of the America First mantra he ran on.

“MAGA is Trump,” he said.

The president’s clear expectation that his supporters will back whatever he does, even if it’s a 180-degree turn from long-held positions, applies to his most senior aides as well, according to an ally of the White House.

“Vance and others may have their own views, but they know what they signed up for,” the person said. “Their personal views are not relevant or operable most of the time.”

The White House rejected the idea that the president was forsaking his supporters. “President Trump is courageously protecting the United States from the deadly threat posed by the rogue Iranian regime — and that is as America First as it gets,” said Anna Kelly, a White House spokesperson. The entire national security team is working together “to end Iran’s ability to possess a nuclear weapon, use or develop ballistic missiles, arm proxies, or use its now-defeated navy.”

Trump has so far averted congressional limits on the five-day old military campaign. A war powers resolution to curb the president’s military authority failed in the House and Senate. But the deaths of six U.S. service members, loss of three F-15 jets in a friendly fire incident and the escalation of the fighting beyond Iran have raised concerns among Trump allies on Capitol Hill.

“America First was supposed to be a rejection of the globalist war machine,” said Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio), one of few Republicans to vote for the war powers measure.

Trump is far from the first U.S. president to go back on his campaign pledge to end foreign wars. Woodrow Wilson won the 1916 election promising to keep the U.S. out of combat, only to enter World War I five months later. George W. Bush campaigned against nation building in 2000, only to order U.S. troops to fight in Iraq three years later.

But a massive military campaign in Iran, and muddled messaging about its purpose, is a turning point for some in the foreign policy establishment.

Pentagon policy chief Elbridge Colby told House lawmakers on Tuesday that the U.S. would not be involved in an “endless war.” By Wednesday, Hegseth was saying war with Iran had “only just begun.”

Hegseth on Tuesday said the war was “not about regime change.” But by Thursday, the president was announcing the U.S. would be directly involved in picking the country’s next leader.

The Defense Department denied any discrepancy.

“President Trump and Secretary Hegseth have been crystal clear from day one on our objectives: destroy the Iranian regime’s missiles and obliterate their missile industry; annihilate the Iranian regime’s Navy; ensure the regime’s terrorist proxies can no longer destabilize the region or the world and attack our forces … and guarantee that Iran can NEVER obtain a nuclear weapon,” Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell said in a statement.

One person familiar with the Trump administration’s deliberations on Iran said restraint-minded officials were already uncomfortable with last summer’s Pentagon strikes on Tehran’s nuclear program and the Venezuela operation. But they were indignant about the new U.S. war in the Middle East that has not been tied to a legal authorization in Congress or a strict operational timeline.

The U.S.-Israel war has also confused allies, who thought American military support abroad was receding as the administration focused on the homeland.

“We’re waiting for the next turn,” said one foreign diplomat. “For months we were told that the U.S. was looking inward and the homeland was the focus and regime change was not a goal, but now two regimes have fallen in military action — so which is it?”

But some have yet to take side in the war of ideas within Trump’s team. A person close to the president’s national security team said that clear divisions among top aides haven’t fully developed because the administration is still so unsettled about its endgame in Iran.

“It’s not coherent or clear yet,” the person said, “because they still don’t know what the goals are.”

Massive problem for GOP

Massive war price tag could be a massive problem for GOP leaders

The prospect of a ballooning new spending bill has GOP leaders bracing for a messy internal fight.

By Meredith Lee Hill

Republicans on Capitol Hill are preparing to confront a staggering price tag for the war in the Middle East after closed-door briefings this week detailed the rapid consumption of expensive munitions and the lack of any firm deadline for the end of the military campaign.

Asked how much the Iran offensive would cost, House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) didn’t sugarcoat it.

“A lot,” he replied.

Senior Republicans privately expect President Donald Trump’s administration to request tens of billions of dollars for the Middle East conflict and other military needs from Congress in the coming days, with some GOP lawmakers hearing estimates that the Pentagon is spending as much as $2 billion a day on the war.

Three F-15E jets shot down by friendly fire in Kuwait are estimated to cost $100 million alone. But Trump officials in private briefings have declined to give lawmakers any specific numbers, according to six congressional Republicans granted anonymity to describe the internal discussions.

A White House request for supplemental funding could further balloon once it hits Capitol Hill, according to four other people with direct knowledge of the matter. Farm-state Republicans want an additional $15 billion in tariff relief for farmers, while others float adding tens of billions of dollars in wildfire aid to get enough Democratic support to pass the massive bill.

The prospect of a growing new spending measure has GOP leaders bracing for a messy internal fight, with fiscal hawks who have long decried “forever wars” and bloated Pentagon budgets deeply unsettled by some of the cost estimates flying around on Capitol Hill. At the very least, some are planning to demand offsetting spending cuts.

“I haven’t seen any specifics … but if it’s unpaid-for, I generally have an issue,” Rep. Russ Fulcher (R-Idaho) said.

Another House Republican granted anonymity to describe the conversations among GOP hard-liners said, “It’s not a ‘hell no,’ but it should be offset somehow.”

The topic is now looming over next week’s House Republican policy retreat, which kicks off Monday with a speech from Trump at the president’s resort in Doral, Florida. If the administration sends its formal funding request in the coming days, House GOP leaders will be forced to confront the issue head on.

At least some are expressing unqualified early support for any administration request. House Foreign Affairs Chair Brian Mast (R-Fla.), for instance, said in an interview this week he is ready to support an emergency funding bill spending tens of billions of dollars on the Iran operation alone.

That sentiment could be challenged by the congressional Republicans who are privately wary of the open-ended timeline and shifting rationales for the war. One House Republican recently remarked that Trump’s pledge to do “whatever” it takes, including entertaining boots on the ground, sounded like “President Lyndon Johnson going into Vietnam.”

Rep. Ryan Mackenzie, a vulnerable Pennsylvania Republican, noted that “as much as we need to neutralize their capabilities to continue to attack us, we do also need to make sure that we don’t get dragged into a forever war.”

Asked in an interview if Congress is ready to approve a $50 billion Pentagon funding package, Speaker Mike Johnson replied that he didn’t know the specific number yet but Congress would pass the bill “when it’s appropriate and get it right.”

“We’re waiting on the White House and [the Pentagon] to let us know, but we have an open dialogue about it,” Johnson said.

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, who is attuned to the spending concerns among the fiscal hawks inside the GOP ranks, demurred when asked about the potential for a $50 billion package.

“We’re still just in the first few days of this conflict, and there’s no ask yet from the Department of War for a supplemental,” Scalise said in an interview Wednesday.

He referenced the laborious talks ahead: “When that time comes, we’ll obviously have very serious conversations, because it’s important that the Department of War have the tools they need to keep America safe.”

A bigger potential headache is brewing for Johnson as members of his conference debate whether additional military funding should go in a much-discussed but long-shot budget reconciliation bill. That could move to Trump’s desk along party lines without Democratic support, but only if Republicans are almost completely unified.

House Budget Chair Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) said in an interview this week he expected the chamber to move forward on an initial emergency funding bill but that a second filibuster-skirting megabill could contain additional Pentagon spending, along with some possible offsetting cuts.

“It’s not just for the current conflict,” Arrington said. “There are things that need to be retooled fundamentally at the Defense Department, and the president’s team is making a really good case for that.”

Rep. Ralph Norman, one GOP hard-liner who has objected in the past to big Pentagon budgets, now says he would “absolutely” support a $50 billion bill without offsets.

“I don’t like it, but with what this president’s doing with income — the GDP is increasing, the money he’s bringing in for other investments — to handicap him on that, that’s a problem,” said Norman, who is running for South Carolina governor and seeking Trump’s support.

In the Senate, some GOP appropriators are cautioning that any war funding bill will be a big lift — and warning the administration to get specific, and fast.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), a senior member of the Defense Appropriations subcommittee, said the “administration should not be taking anything for granted.”

“If they come to us at the end of the month and say, ‘This is what we want, and basically, deliver the votes’ … it’s not a winning strategy, in my view,” she said. “You’ve got to start making the case.”