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.



April 22, 2026

Another criminal...

And Then There Was Mills

Three scandal-plagued members of Congress have resigned in the past eight days. Florida Republican Rep. Cory Mills remains defiant.

Noah Lanard

At the start of last week, there were four members of Congress at risk of expulsion due to allegations of severe misconduct. Two of those members, Reps. Tony Gonzales (R-Texas) and Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), quickly resigned. On Tuesday afternoon, Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-Fla.) became the third member of Congress to resign in eight days. Now only one of the scandal-plagued members is still standing: Rep. Cory Mills (R-Fla.).

The allegations against Swalwell and Gonzales involved accusations of misconduct against women—including rape in Swalwell’s case. (The former California congressman has said that “allegations of sexual assault are flat false.”) Cherfilus-McCormick was indicted by a federal grand jury in November based on allegations that she and her brother stole government funding then used some of it to make illegal contributions to her campaign. A subcommittee of the House Ethics committee more recently found a pattern of “progressive and compounding corruption.” (The Florida Democrat resigned moments before the Ethics committee met to determine what, if any, punishment she should face.) 

The accusations against Mills, who remains under investigation by the Ethics Committee, are shockingly wide-ranging. As I reported in a February profile, the Florida congressman has been accused of:
  • Severely exaggerating his military record by falsely claiming to have been an Army Ranger, an Army sniper, and a Special Forces qualified medic—none of which are supported by records released by the Army 
  • Earning a Bronze Star through stolen valor and false claims about saving the lives of multiple former Army comrades in Iraq 
  • Punching someone during a trip to Ireland while serving in Congress in 2023
  • Threatening to share sexually explicit content of an ex-girlfriend and, according to court testimony, saying he would kill her future partners 
In October, a Florida judge placed a restraining order on Mills after concluding that he subjected his ex-girlfriend to “dating violence” via cyberstalking. Mills has defended himself by noting that he has never been criminally charged for that, or other, alleged misbehavior. That is true but highly misleading. Mills spent more than three hours in court as part of the restraining order case. He took the stand to defend himself but failed to convince a Florida judge to rule in his favor. (As part of his decision, the judge determined that Mills was not “truthful” about explicit material recorded during the relationship.)

Earlier last year, Mills was also implicated in an alleged assault involving a different girlfriend, although she later retracted the claim. According to bodycam footage and documents recently obtained by the Washington Post, police were on the verge of arresting Mills in relation to those allegations. The Post explained:  

Before changing her account, the woman had shown [officer] Mazloom bruises on her arms and marks on her face, the body-camera footage shows. Tearful, she told the officer that Mills had harmed her during an argument and forcibly removed her from his Southwest Washington penthouse apartment, according to the footage.

Subsequent bodycam footage reviewed by the Post showed the alleged victim talking on the phone. She then told Mazloom, the DC police officer, that “he wants me to say” that the marks “were from our vacation and that I bruise easily.” According to the Post, Mazloom told fellow officers that he understood the alleged victim had been speaking to Mills.

Mills, an Army veteran who became an international arms dealer before running for Congress, has made enemies on both sides of the aisle in Washington. On Monday, Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.), who has been in a long-running feud with her Republican colleague, introduced a resolution to expel Mills from Congress. Mills is reportedly weighing introducing his own resolution to expel Mace. (His congressional office has not responded to multiple interview requests and requests for comment that I have sent between January and April.)

For now, Mills may remain safe from expulsion as the Ethics Committee investigation proceeds on an open-ended timeline. This fall, though, Mills is facing what is likely to be his first truly competitive reelection battle since he entered Congress in 2023. His likely Democratic opponent, Bale Dalton, is a former Navy helicopter pilot who served as the chief of staff for NASA.

In 2024, Mills won by 13 points in his Republican-leaning district. In a normal year with a normal Republican running for reelection, that would be an insurmountable challenge for Democrats. In 2026, as Democrats overperform in races across the country and Mills’ scandals become more widely known, none of the usual rules apply.

They are insane.......

Tech Billionaires Want Christians to Believe in AI

For Peter Thiel and JD Vance allies, the tech right is framing AI as a moral—even divine—mission.

Kiera Butler

In early January, a short essay by a little-­known AI entrepreneur turned internet philosopher named Will Manidis went viral on X. The post was mostly an attempt to explain why Boston, where Manidis lived before relocating to New York a few years ago, had failed as a tech hub. He pointed to a suite of reasons for the slow decline of the city’s once-crackling biotech scene, mainly the usual culprits of overregulation and overtaxation. But at the core of Manidis’ argument was something much deeper: The heart of the problem was the growing consensus among Boston’s stodgy elites that there was something unsettling and possibly even dangerous about the rapid pace of technological development. That mounting uneasiness about tech—and especially artificial intelligence—lay beneath the decisions that sealed the fate of Boston’s tech scene.

“The average American understands AI is a thing that wastes water, skyrockets power costs, and scams their grandparents in exchange for exposing children to deviant sexual content, sports gambling, and all other manner of sin,” he writes. “If we cannot articulate why innovation is a moral imperative, we can expect the entire technology industry to end up like Boston. First taxed, then looted, then exhausted. And we’ll be stuck wondering where it all went.”

Manidis, who describes himself as a Christian, writes about religious matters on X and his Substack. When I called to talk with him about this idea of tech as a “moral imperative,” he used a theological metaphor: “The mix of oligarchs and tech people and tech money and tech politics and the tech right,” he told me, “they’ve just been unable to communicate a coherent apologetic.”

His term—apologetic—refers to the project of defending the mysteries of faith to nonbelievers. The Christian tradition of apologetics is rich. Its brightest lights include St. Paul, Thomas Aquinas, and C.S. Lewis—all of whom made the case for their faith not by biblical invocation or surrender to the divine, but rather through engagement, rational arguments, and evidence. Manidis believes AI needs those kinds of defenders, because the public appears to be losing faith in it.

Last summer, right-wing luminaries converged at the annual National Conservatism Conference, a group that has emerged as a strong influence on the Trump administration’s policy decisions. The speaker lineup included some of ­MAGA’s most trusted interlocutors—for example, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley, and White House budget director and Project 2025 architect Russell Vought. But lesser-known conservative thinkers appeared as well.

University of New Mexico psychology professor Geoffrey Miller, for instance, confronted Palantir CTO Shyam Sankar during a heated exchange reported by The Verge. The AI industry, Miller told Sankar, is “globalist, secular, liberal, feminized transhumanists. They explicitly want mass unemployment, they plan for UBI-based communism, and they view the human species as a biological ‘bootloader,’ as they say, for artificial superintelligence.”

Many aspects of Miller’s position are extreme, but his discomfort with AI is broadly shared. A Pew Research Center survey last November found that more than half of Americans say they are “more concerned than excited” about the technology, up from 37 percent in 2021, the year before ChatGPT launched. Historically, Republicans share this opinion slightly more than Democrats, but Manidis doesn’t think the messengers of the tech world are doing AI any favors bolstering support on either end of the political spectrum. For example, that one time in 2015 when Sam Altman, co-founder of OpenAI, famously opined that AI “will probably most likely lead to the end of the world, but in the meantime, there’ll be great companies.”

“What becomes incredibly useful for these people to do is to present their products as the answer to the meaning of life.”

“Why?” Manidis lamented to me on the phone. “Why would you say that? Like, come on, buddy.”

As if in response to Altman’s overblown rhetoric, some Silicon Valley oligarchs are attempting to run interference between two emerging camps in the religious right: AI’s cheerleaders on one side and its skeptics on the other. The likes of Palantir’s Peter Thiel and other religious techies such as Andreessen Horowitz’s Katherine Boyle and Anduril’s Trae Stephens are spearheading an effort to create the “apologetic” that Manidis called for. Bolstered by their own Christian zealotry, they argue that far from being the demonic force described by Miller, technology is more comparable to a savior—even a Christlike messiah. Not only are Christians called to embrace technology, but they have an obligation to do so, because progress itself is a moral good.

Culturally speaking, these tech elites are coded very differently from charismatic Holy Rollers who have had a long tradition of promising their followers that adherence to Christian faith and practices will yield material wealth. But essentially, they are offering a similar, though slightly inverted proposition: Tech can make you rich and a good Christian. Call it the prosperity gospel of technology. Much in the way they have shaped culture with social media algorithms, tech evangelists now are attempting to normalize the use and acceptance of AI by wrapping it in a spiritual message. They also have explicit policy goals, and the Trump administration appears to be heeding their call, with new federal efforts aimed at unshackling AI from safety regulations.

Greg Epstein is a humanist chaplain at Harvard University and MIT who has spent the last two decades building ethical communities for nonreligious people and, more recently, writing about the similarities between Silicon Valley and faith groups. In 2024, he published the book Tech Agnostic: How Technology Became the World’s Most Powerful Religion, and Why It Desperately Needs a Reformation. Epstein laments that while many have written about the cultlike aspects of the tech world, few have examined the motivations that lie behind making it that way. “What becomes incredibly useful for these people to do is to present their products as the answer to the meaning of life,” Epstein told me.

In Silicon Valley’s embrace of Christianity, he sees a marriage of convenience: “They’re trying to imbue wealth with meaning,” he said. “But they’re also trying to imbue a certain kind of meaning with wealth.” In other words, Christianity gets an elite, luxury-set rebrand, and in return, the tech titans get to sanctify their vast fortunes.

If one were to name a spokesperson for the anti-AI right, it would be hard to imagine someone more perfectly suited for the role than British writer Paul Kingsnorth. In his 2025 book, Against the Machine: On the Unmaking of Humanity, Kingsnorth, an erstwhile lefty environmental activist turned Orthodox Christian crusader, makes the case that technology, especially AI, is a semi-sentient being with its own anti-human, anti-Christian agenda. In prose so entertaining that you hardly notice how frantic and conspiratorial it all is, Kingsnorth conjures an ominous vision that implicates “the Machine”—or technology—in all manner of the political right’s favorite bêtes noires. He describes “progressive leftism and the Machine” as a “usefully snug fit” because they are both “suspicious of the past, impatient with borders and boundaries, and hostile to religion.” Both progressive leftism and the Machine, he concludes, “are in pursuit of a global utopia where, in the dreams of both Lenin and Lennon, the world will live as one.”

For example, Kingsnorth considers this technology demon to be the true culprit behind “mass gender confusion.” Moreover, the struggle for transgender acceptance is actually a step on the path toward permanently abandoning our bodies. “A young generation of hyper-urbanized, always-on young people, increasingly divorced from nature and growing up in a psychologised, inward-looking anticulture,” he writes, “is being led toward the conclusion that biology is a problem to be overcome.” Young people learn that the “body is a form of oppression and that the solution to their pain may go beyond a new set of pronouns, or even invasive surgery, towards ­nanotechnology, ‘cyberconsciousness software,’ and perhaps, ultimately, the end of their physical embodiment altogether.”

Those ominous predictions apparently struck a chord: Kingsnorth’s book was a New York Times bestseller and widely reviewed, especially among Christian critics. In Christianity Today, Justin Ariel Bailey was rhapsodic, calling the work “a trenchant and terrifying account of what modern people have sacrificed in exchange for technology’s promise of power and autonomy.”

To say that Silicon Valley’s Christian power players see things differently is an understatement—and they’re working hard to spread the countervailing message of technology’s godly promise. Leading this charge is Boyle, the Andreessen Horowitz partner who is an ally of Vice President JD Vance. Boyle, who shares thoughts about her Catholic faith openly on social media, runs a fund called American Dynamism, which, its website says, aims to back tech companies—in aerospace, defense, education, public safety, and other sectors—whose success “supports the flourishing of all Americans.” For her, the efforts to set guardrails around AI are nefarious, camouflaged, as she co-wrote with her colleague Martin Casado in a 2024 Wall Street Journal op-ed, as efforts “to promote safety.” In fact, they insisted, “We believe the true purpose is to suppress open-source innovation and deter competitive startups.”

Boyle, an ex–Washington Post journalist whose former colleagues recall her as pleasant, a bit distant, and always impeccably dressed, argues that tech not only is not evil, but also perfectly embodies the family-first values of many Christians. In a keynote address (PDF) at the American Enterprise Institute last year, she argued for a coming together between the tech sector and the American family so they could become allies against an overzealous government. “Much has been written about this nascent alliance between the tech right, or the so-called tech right, and this administration, and how weird it is for the transhumanists of Silicon Valley to find common ground with a MAHA mother in Missouri,” she said. “Except that they have identified a common evil. They know that the gravest threat to their businesses, their industry, their family’s health, and their freedom is a censorious and authoritarian state.”

Boyle highlighted the many ways in which technology could be a boon for families. Mothers could spend more time at home with their children through tech-­enabled remote work. Tech could also make both parents “more entrepreneurial” by allowing them to start businesses on platforms like Etsy. “This means a mother can now earn income while her child naps from the school parking lot,” she said. AI could be harnessed “to build infinitely patient and extremely knowledgeable tutors for every child in this country.”

But the biggest tech win of all for families, Boyle said, was that it could “help reshape the culture” to make motherhood high status. She continued: “Meme it, and we will be it,” concluding, “a single influencer on Instagram can have a greater effect on behavior than the smartest tax policies.”

One of Boyle’s most successful projects appears to support that hypothesis. Before she joined Andreessen Horowitz, Boyle was with another venture firm, General Catalyst. There, she invested in Hallow, which, with 24 million downloads across 150 countries, claims to be the world’s most popular prayer app. There is a free version that includes features such as chats with Magisterium, “an AI-powered tool designed to provide answers based on the teachings of the Catholic Church.” But for $69.99 a year, users can “choose from 10,000+ sessions, 5-60 minute lengths, 100+ guides, and 1,000s of music options to lead you deeper into relationship with Christ,” and have access to celebrity spokespeople (“pray a rosary with Mark Wahlberg”). Boyle sees Hallow’s success as evidence that people are hungry for religion. “What I think Hallow is showing is…this desperate consumer need that is manifesting itself,” she told Tablet magazine in 2021. But it also provides a wholesome experience for Christian users, who are deepening their relationship not only with God, but also with technology. (When I reached out to Hallow for comment, I received an email back from Hallow’s AI agent, promising a real person would get back to me. They never did. Boyle also did not respond to a request for comment.)

Boyle is not the only captain of Silicon Valley industry attempting to give AI’s reputation a Christian-friendly makeover. Trae Stephens, the billionaire in charge of the autonomous weapons company Anduril, has been a vocal proponent of tech apologetics in San Francisco. A leader at the nondenominational Epic Church in San Francisco, Stephens delivered a lecture in 2024 titled “God and Technology,” in which he argued that humans, like God, are creators and that “what our soul deeply longs for is progress in building a better future.” He assured listeners that if they chose “good quests” rather than empty or destructive ones, they would be fulfilling God’s plan. (Stephens did not respond when I reached out to him for comment.)

Stephens invoked a historical precedent to make his point. Some of the scientists who worked on the Manhattan Project, which created the atomic bomb, “were tormented by what they were doing,” he said. “And you could make a really rational argument in either direction. Was it a good thing to do? Was it a bad thing to do?” Stephens didn’t give any hint as to which he believed, though his professional life suggests the former.

His career and immense fortune were created by harnessing the power of AI to build “smart battlefields”—think of Anduril as the Waymo of drones and bombs. In a 2024 Wired interview, for example, Stephens spoke of “a classification of drones called loiter munitions, which are aircraft that search for targets and then have the ability to go kinetic on those targets, kind of as a kamikaze.” Since 2019, Anduril has been awarded more than $1.8 billion in government contracts.

As an answer to the classic “What would Jesus do?” question, “start robot wars” would be an unconventional response, to put it mildly. And yet, Stephens appears to endorse surrendering to tech. As he put it in his Wired interview, “The call that I have been trying to make to the tech community is that we have a moral obligation to do things to benefit humanity, to draw us closer to God’s plan for his people.”

“It’s almost as if [other AI companies] kind of think they’re creating God or something.” —Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Meta

To wit: In 2024, his wife, health care tech executive Michelle Stephens, co-founded ACTS 17 Collective, a Bay Area group for “thinkers, builders, artists, and leaders who are wrestling with what it means to live with purpose and conviction.” The name is a reference to a New Testament book that focuses on Christian apologetics and is also, conveniently, an acronym: Acknowledging Christ in Technology and Society. Garry Tan, the Christian president and CEO of tech startup incubator Y Combinator, has hosted ACTS 17 events at his home—which used to be a church—and Pat Gelsinger, former Intel CEO, also a Christian, has been a speaker.

Last year, ACTS 17 sponsored a series of four lectures by PayPal and Palantir co-founder Peter Thiel, who is Trae Stephens’ former boss, JD Vance’s mentor, Gawker’s murderer, and President Donald Trump’s megadonor. His subject? The Antichrist.

The event was private, with tickets reportedly costing $200, but transcripts were leaked to reporters. While Kingsnorth argues in his book that technology itself is the devil incarnate causing a one-world government, Thiel appears to believe the exact opposite: Anything preventing unbridled technological development—from overbearing government regulation to climate activist Greta Thunberg—is the Antichrist. “In the 17th, 18th century, the Antichrist would have been a Dr. Strangelove, a scientist who did all this sort of evil crazy science,” he said, according to the Washington Post. “In the 21st century, the Antichrist is a Luddite who wants to stop all science.” AI’s detractors, he reportedly claimed, were part of a plot to install a global government. “There are a lot of rational reasons I can give why the one-world state’s a bad idea,” he said. “But I think if you strip it from the biblical context, you will never find it scary enough. You will never really resist.”

Of course, exceedingly wealthy Silicon Valley dreamers with weird ideas are nothing new. (Juicero, anyone?) But for most Americans, these fever dreams may be a little too weird, says tech journalist Gil Durán, host of the Nerd Reich podcast and author of a forthcoming book by the same name. “If you read anything by Michelle [Stephens] or by Katherine Boyle—these things are pretty far out there,” he told me. He gave the example of Boyle’s American Enterprise Institute keynote in which she argued that the state was the enemy of the family. “That is an extremely bizarre thing for her to say, especially since American Dynamism is all about partnering with an authoritarian government,” he added in an email, in reference to the Trump administration. They have “no sense of calibrating for a mass audience,” he told me, “so as long as those are the people in charge of it, I’d say that chances are they’re going to fail.”

Still, there is some indication that Christian tech apologetics are working their way into the highest realms of political influence. Vice President Vance, in a sprawling 2020 essay titled “How I Joined the Resistance,” published in the Catholic publication The Lamp, chronicled his conversion to Catholicism. In 2011, Vance writes, he attended a lecture by Thiel that he describes as “the most significant moment of my time at Yale Law School.” In the talk, Thiel, who would later become Vance’s employer and then close friend, expressed frustration with the slow pace of technological progress. He argued that professional striving was a fundamentally empty quest for prestige and status and posited that he saw “these two trends—elite professionals trapped in hyper-­competitive jobs, and the technological stagnation of society—as connected,” Vance writes. “If technological innovation were actually driving real prosperity, our elites wouldn’t feel increasingly competitive with one another over a dwindling number of prestigious outcomes.”

That notion of endless empty striving is what Thiel’s Stanford professor, the late French Catholic academic René Girard, called “mimetic desire.” This phenomenon causes immense human anguish—and, according to Thiel, technological innovation can deliver us from it, and hence from suffering.

Vance, who does not seem to have ceased striving, now describes technology as a net good not only for American economic prosperity, but also for the human condition. In a speech at Boyle’s 2025 American Dynamism Summit, Vance quoted Pope John Paul II’s 1981 encyclical, Laborem exercens. Focusing on work and the individual, the pope made two fundamental points: Labor should be a greater priority than capital, and individuals should be more important than things. These decades-old teachings received an update from Vance, who factored in technology and AI. “In a healthy economy, technology should be something that enhances rather than supplants the value of labor, and I think there’s too much fear that AI will simply replace jobs rather than augmenting so many of the things that we do,” he said. “Real innovation makes us more productive, but it also, I think, dignifies our workers.”

Vance, whose views have been publicly criticized by both the current pope and the previous one, was obviously putting his own spin on the teachings—and he didn’t mention the decidedly un-Christlike fact that replacing workers with robots would further line the pockets of tech oligarchs. Nevertheless, his interpretation that AI promotes human dignity appears to be spreading. Last July, the Trump administration released “Winning the Race: America’s AI Action Plan.” The report promises that AI will “usher in a new golden age of human flourishing” and will “increase the standard of living for all Americans.”

This rhetoric, of course, is precisely what Kingsnorth considers to be most dangerous: a hubristic quest to replace God with progress—and maybe even to become gods willing robots into sentient beings. “We will always seek some greater meaning, some transcendent truth, and if we can’t or won’t find the real thing we will attempt to create it,” he writes in Against the Machine. “This attempt is the story of modernity; the Machine is what we have created to fulfill it.”

But Kingsnorth appears to be shouting into a headwind of mimetic desire. In the past two years, as the most recent Pew poll shows, conservatives have become less skeptical of AI. In 2023, 59 percent said they were “more concerned than excited” about AI, but by late 2025, that number had fallen to 50 percent. Manidis, it seems, may not have to worry about the Boston scenario repeating itself after all.

Wicker slams White House

Wicker slams White House attacks on foreign allies

It was the sharpest rebuke yet from the Senate Armed Services Committee chair following months of Trump administration criticism of NATO and European allies.

Leo Shane III

The Republican chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee condemned administration officials on Tuesday for their recent attacks on U.S. foreign allies, saying the partnerships are crucial to the long-term security of America.

“It is not helpful when American leaders speak of our alliances with derision,” said Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) in a statement before a hearing on the posture of U.S. forces in the Indo-Pacific region. “We must be clear about the numerous political, strategic and moral benefits that our country receives from its alliances.”

Numerous GOP leaders — including President Donald Trump — have sharply criticized NATO allies’ decision not to assist in America’s war against Iran. And while Wicker has admonished the administration for previous saber-rattling against European allies, such as threats to withdraw U.S. forces from the continent, Tuesday’s remarks were his sharpest criticism yet.

Still, in keeping with his past statements. Wicker did not specifically criticize Trump. Instead, he more broadly condemned skeptics within his party who have labeled foreign partners as drains on America rather than assets — a rare public rebuke of the White House by a GOP Senate stalwart.

“For decades, our alliance bonds, including NATO, have provided a comparative advantage over authoritarian states like China, North Korea, Russia and Iran,” Wicker said. “These alliances continue to pay dividends for the United States. People need to stop saying otherwise.”

Both Wicker and House Armed Services Committee Chair Mike Rogers (R-Ala.) have backed provisions in the annual defense authorization bill to strengthen ties with NATO and other foreign allies, even as Trump has suggested pulling back from those partnerships.

Wicker also voiced support for maintaining overseas military bases, saying the forward deployed troops provide a strategic advantage for America. Trump has suggested drawing down personnel from European and Pacific bases.

“Skeptics argue that the United States must shift the burden, and that word shift is what I have a problem with,” Wicker said. “I’m glad to see America’s allies stepping up, as they are doing all over the world. There’s a difference between burden shifting and burden sharing. The president has called for increased burden-sharing, and I support that.”

Adm. Samuel Paparo Jr., head of Indo-Pacific Command, testified at the hearing that U.S. troops in the region conducted more than 100 exercises with partner militaries last year, calling them key for military readiness and deterrence efforts. He lauded partner nations without directly responding to Wicker’s concerns about the administration’s stance.

A literal dick-head.........

Rick Scott holds up Coast Guard promotions

The Florida Republican said he’s trying to resolve an issue for a home-state shipbuilder.

Jordain Carney

Florida Sen. Rick Scott is blocking quick confirmation of hundreds of Coast Guard promotions as he tries to resolve a dispute involving a shipbuilder in his home state.

The Republican said in an interview Tuesday that he has placed a hold on the Coast Guard promotions, which prevents the Senate from easily clearing them unanimously and would force Majority Leader John Thune to set up time-consuming roll call votes on promotions that are usually agreed to with little fanfare.

“I’ve been talking … since Trump came into office about trying to resolve an issue they have with a boat builder in Florida. And they … won’t put the time in to get a result,” Scott said.

“I’ve met with everybody that I can meet with, and I want them to focus,” Scott said of the Coast Guard, adding that he wasn’t trying to dictate the outcome to the administration but emphasizing “you have to get this resolved.”

Scott didn’t specify which shipbuilder he was referring to. But Scott has been a longtime booster of a Coast Guard contract with Panama City-based Eastern Shipbuilding Group to deliver four new advanced cutters. A person granted anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about the matter said the hold is related to the company.

Then-Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem scrapped plans for two of the boats last year, and ESG announced in November it would stop work on the two remaining boats “due to significant financial strain caused by the program’s structure and conditions.”

The tussle over the nominations comes as Thune is trying to quickly assemble and approve a new personnel package, telling reporters Monday night that confirming another tranche of President Donald Trump’s nominees is a priority alongside resolving the DHS shutdown and renewing soon-to-lapse surveillance powers.

Will it do anything

Bipartisan group rolls out labor rights notification bill

The new legislation would lay out requirements for labor rights notifications.

Jordain Carney

A bipartisan, bicameral contingent of lawmakers unveiled legislation Tuesday that would establish new labor rights notification requirements for employers.

The new bill — introduced by Sens. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) and Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.) in the Senate, and Reps. Riley Moore (R-W.Va.) and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (D-Wash.) in the House — would mandate that all employers post and maintain notices to employees of their rights in the workplace, according to a copy of the proposal first obtained by POLITICO.

The “Know Your Labor Rights Act” also would require employers to notify new employees of those rights upon their hiring, and penalties would be imposed for noncompliance.

It has backing from Teamsters General President Sean O’Brien, who said in a statement it would “help put power back in the hands of working people.”

“American workers have a right to unionize in the workplace and fight for fair wages,” said Hawley in a separate statement. “That’s why I’m introducing legislation to ensure that employees have basic visibility into their fundamental rights.”

The proposal is part of a “pro-worker” framework championed by Hawley, who has urged his party to embrace more populist-leaning policies. It’s frequently speculated he could run for president in 2028, even as Hawley has batted that down.

As part of his larger framework, Hawley is also backing legislation that would accelerate the timelines for companies to negotiate initial collective bargaining agreements with unionized workers. Rep. Donald Norcross (D-N.J.) filed a discharge petition Monday to circumvent GOP leadership and force a floor vote on the House version of the bill.

Fucking whore.......

Cherfilus-McCormick resigns amid ethics investigation

Cherfilus-McCormick was facing numerous charges and bipartisan calls for resignation.

By Hailey Fuchs, Meredith Lee Hill, Calen Razor and Cheyanne M. Daniels

Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick has officially resigned in the face of corruption charges at home and calls for her ouster in Washington.

News broke minutes before the House Ethics Committee was about to meet for a public hearing Tuesday afternoon to determine a punishment for the third-term Democrat, who was charged with stealing $5 million in Covid relief funds.

In a statement, Cherfilus-McCormick said the congressional proceedings did not constitute a “fair process” and that she was “choos[ing] to step aside” rather than “play these political games.”

“I will not stand by and pretend that this has been anything other than a witch hunt,” she said. “I simply cannot stand by and allow my due process rights to be trampled on, and my good name to be tarnished.”

Cherfilus-McCormick is facing a federal criminal trial in Florida over allegations that she stole millions from FEMA. She has pleaded not guilty and that case is expected to go to trial next year.

Her lawyer recently argued before a House Ethics subcommittee that pursuing her case at this juncture would jeopardize the fairness of her criminal trial. Lawmakers disagreed, ultimately finding “clear and convincing evidence” of dozens of charges related to improprieties.

On Tuesday, the adjudicatory subcommittee was poised to consider whether to recommend her expulsion from Congress — the most serious punishment the Ethics Committee can suggest. Only six members have ever been expelled, including, most recently, former Rep. George Santos, the New York Republican ultimately convicted of wire fraud and aggravated identity theft. President Donald Trump later commuted his sentence.

Ethics Committee members were beginning to arrive for the scheduled 2 p.m. hearing when news of Cherfilus-McCormick’s resignation began to spread. Rep. Glenn Ivey (D-Md.), a member of the adjudicatory subcommittee that was considering her case, seemed to be caught off-guard by the developments.

The panel opted to gavel in as planned, and House Ethics Chair Michael Guest (R-Miss.) read Cherfilus-McCormick’s resignation letter into the record. He announced that since Cherfilus-McCormick was no longer a member of Congress, the panel would no longer have jurisdiction over the case and would not deliberate over a punishment.

Guest also defended his panel’s handling of the matter, which spanned years since the Office of Congressional Conduct delivered a referral to the Ethics Committee in 2023.

“This was not a rush to judgement as some claim,” he said.

Cherfilus-McCormick alerted at least one colleague of her plans to resign ahead of her official announcement, and she was seen speaking with members of the Congressional Black Caucus on the floor Monday night. According to three people granted anonymity to share private conversations, the CBC gathered to discuss their colleague’s options, including to resign before the Ethics Committee’s scheduled meeting. Several of them urged her to take this route.

Ahead of her resignation, CBC Chair Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.) advised Cherfilus-McCormick to “focus on her wellbeing.”

“This is a heavy heavy situation to find yourself in. She has a criminal court proceeding that she needs to focus on,” said Clarke. “She has a family she needs to focus on. This institution is great and I know she loved her job here but her wellbeing is most important.”

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), who is also a member of the CBC, told reporters that Cherfilus-McCormick “did the right thing for her constituents. I think Americans should be entitled to the presumption of innocence and their day in court.

“House Democratic leadership will work with her staff to ensure that the needs of the people in her congressional district are met during this transition,” he continued.

Years of losses and a struggling stock price...... Normal...

Former Republican Rep. Devin Nunes out as Trump Media CEO

The Truth Social parent company's shake-up comes after years of losses and a struggling stock price.

By Declan Harty

Former Rep. Devin Nunes is out as CEO of President Donald Trump’s social media company, in a major shake-up.

Trump Media & Technology Group, the Truth Social parent company whose largest shareholder is Trump, said in a statement Tuesday that Nunes would be succeeded by Kevin McGurn, an adviser to the company, who will take over as interim CEO effective immediately. It did not offer a reason for Nunes’ unexpected departure.

“I want to thank Devin Nunes for his dedicated service to the Company over the past four years, and congratulate Kevin McGurn on his appointment as Interim CEO,” said Donald Trump Jr., who sits on the company’s board and oversees a trust holding his father’s shares in the company. “Kevin brings deep experience across media, technology, and capital markets, as well as a strong understanding of Trump Media’s operations and strategic priorities.”

The C-suite overhaul lands after years of repeated losses at Trump Media, a company that was once billed as a conservative challenger to Silicon Valley giants and the next gem in Trump’s vast business empire. The company recorded a net loss of more than $712 million and revenues of $3.7 million in 2025. Trump Media shares have struggled all the while as well. The stock, which trades under the ticker “DJT,” closed at $9.82 on Tuesday — marking a more than 75 percent decline since Trump’s inauguration.

Best known for Truth Social, the president’s preferred online megaphone and a critical source of advertising dollars for the company, Trump Media has announced a series of pivots over the last year in a push to expand its business.

That includes into everything from cryptocurrencies and the prediction markets to traditional financial products. The company unveiled a more than $6 billion deal in December to merge with fusion company TAE Technologies. And earlier this year, Trump Media said it was considering spinning off Truth Social into a separate company after the TAE deal closes.

Nunes, a staunch Trump ally, has led the company since stepping down from Congress in 2021 to take the CEO job. In a post on Truth Social, he wrote that it was “an appropriate time” for McGurn to take over as CEO and “steer Trump Media through its current transition phase.”

His exit is the third among Trump Media’s senior ranks in recent weeks.

Eric Swider, who helped bring the company public, resigned from the board this month, and Robert Lighthizer, who served as Trump’s U.S. Trade Representative during his first term, did the same in March. The company said at the time of reporting both departures that neither were due to any “dispute with management or the Board.”

EU’s mega energy crisis

How the EU’s mega energy crisis plan will — and won’t — help

There’s only so much the EU can do to address the fallout of the chaotic war in the Gulf.

By Ben Munster

The European Commission will present a sweeping emergency energy package on Wednesday, as it attempts to fend off a looming energy crisis.

If only it knew what problem it was trying to fix.

Since the Iran war broke out on Feb. 28, the EU has swung between wildly divergent policy impulses as the chaos in the Persian Gulf progresses at breakneck pace. It began with anxieties around high prices that were already simmering before the war. That morphed into concerns around Europe’s gas supplies, before the bloc’s dwindling jet fuel stocks and jitters over refinery capacity took center stage. 

Dangling above it is the war itself, as Donald Trump's shifting objectives and erratic diplomacy do little to secure the Strait of Hormuz, the crucial waterway at the center of the energy woes. 

Draft documents obtained by POLITICO show that the EU's raft of measures on Wednesday will attempt to deal with these fast-moving targets simultaneously — within the bounds of reality.

Primarily, the EU is either advising countries to use existing laws or is introducing subtle, temporary changes to make those rules more effective. Proposed changes to subsidies rules will allow countries to cover up to 70 percent of the cost of wholesale power bills until December, and up to 50 percent of the extra fuel costs caused by the crisis for some sectors. The Commission will also work with countries to develop targeted tax cuts to bring down energy bills.

But a good portion of the EU's response remains, necessarily, either long-termist or fully improvised, reflecting both the fast-changing reality and the difficulty of dislodging decades of fossil fuel dependence.

Some measures are simply a continuation of the EU's ambitious, years-old climate agenda, including commitments to speed up the decarbonization of Europe's grids, mobilize green investment, and encourage increased adoption of green home appliances. Others appear to have been designed on the fly to address a situation that remains impossible to track, with measures to increase member country coordination, reduce demand, and boost information sharing to better understand the problem.

But the energy troubles continue to be so broad, multifaceted and fast-changing that observers doubt that whatever the EU comes out with on Wednesday can satisfy capitals gearing up for potentially years of turbulence. Expanding subsidies, for instance, "may give some comfort to some but is unlikely to make a dent," complained one national official.

The painful reality is that a truly effective response requires time — and money — that many countries simply don't have.

"Not every country dependent on fossil fuels can quickly turn to electricity but this is the only solution," Žygimantas Vaičiūnas, Lithuania's energy minister, told POLITICO. "Nobody can forecast the future for global markets — sometimes we are hostages of the situation."

How did we get here?

When the war started, talk of an EU-wide policy response was seen as premature if not outright irresponsible. EU officials and energy ministers signaled optimism for the first two weeks, pointing to the bloc's diversified supply and the growth of renewables as evidence this crisis wouldn't be as bad as the one that followed Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

In meeting after meeting, officials said supply was secure and that the main risk was rising prices. Instead of rolling out concrete measures, the European Commission — the EU's executive — was content to remind countries of the limited tools already available under EU laws such as tax cuts and subsidies, while urging them to hasten efforts already underway to decarbonize and electrify their economies.

If anything, the message was one of vindication — the green transition and sweeping diversification efforts set into motion years ago were the correct course, and the EU just had to go further. But as the war progressed, that position became harder to defend.

The early confidence was rooted in the EU's limited exposure to the Strait of Hormuz. Even though the waterway accounts for around 20 percent of global oil and liquefied natural gas supplies, the EU's imports from the region are comparatively small. Most come from the U.S., Canada and Norway, as well as Azerbaijan and Algeria.

But a pressing supply issue soon emerged nevertheless: the EU's reliance on natural gas.

The EU bought only a small amount of its natural gas from the Gulf, but the growing uptake of liquefied natural gas — the seaborne, supercooled gas that the bloc switched to as it sought to wean itself off the piped Russian variety — presented a new problem. Unlike pipes, LNG tankers are often free to pursue business wherever it's most lucrative, meaning the closure of the strait threatened a fierce global competition for dwindling supplies, redirecting ships from Europe to Asia.

The event that seemed to crystallize the EU's growing gas problem came with a quite literal bang in the middle of a summit of European leaders on March 19, when the bombardment of two huge natural gas fields in Qatar knocked out 3 percent of global supply in a matter of seconds. Several EU countries were exposed, including Italy and Belgium, which both faced significant loss of supply after the boss of Qatar's top energy company declared force majeure on contracts with the countries, warning that it could take up to five years to rebuild production capacity.

The threat of a long disruption suddenly became very real. Officials were now aware that even if the war ended, the wrenching changes to global energy supply chains could last years, with permanent effects on prices. And it only added to fears over the EU's unusually low gas reserves, depleted following sharp drawdowns over the winter.

The same day as the leaders summit, the EU began to tease out a more concrete set of policies to respond to the turmoil, with hints of "targeted and temporary" changes to subsidies rules, the EU's carbon market and even — softly, softly — a windfall tax on energy companies. It also called on countries to soften demanding gas storage targets to avoid panic buying and further price spikes. But countries were already starting to take matters into their own hands, with Italy's Giorgia Meloni, for instance, visiting Algeria and Saudi Arabia to shore up new supplies.

Pointedly, however, the Commission also resisted calls for structural changes to the EU's green agenda, in the face of a concerted attack by a cohort of fossil-fuel-dependent countries.

Dive-bombing into the discourse

But even as the gas situation looked to be improving, a bigger problem began to overshadow it. The bloc's supply of jet fuel and diesel — unlike gasoline, crude oil and natural gas — drew heavily from the Gulf, with around 40 percent of EU supplies transiting Strait of Hormuz.

Since late March, that worry has dominated policy discussions. It began with the EU urging governments to get citizens to travel less to conserve fuel, and has since blossomed into talk of mandatory fuel sharing, warnings against hoarding fuel, and — per the latest draft — gentle encouragement for Europeans to take up "eco-driving" lessons as a possible voluntary measure.

But even with the 400 million barrels of oil released by a group of wealthy countries under the auspices of the International Energy Agency in March, analysts warn that the continent has only six weeks left of jet fuel supplies. Some member countries, meanwhile, are quietly worried about cuts to domestic production of refined fuel, compounding the bloc's dependence on foreign imports.

The pace of the proliferation of new concerns appears to have undermined the Commission's ability to formulate an effective response that's well-suited to all members and doesn't blow up the single market. In the draft of the sweeping proposals set to be announced Wednesday, key sections on jet fuel are yet to be filled in among the more-fleshed-out proposals on state aid and tax cuts.

The Commission's response has also been contradictory, with officials denying there's a fuel crisis even as airports warn of flight cancellations and the EU executive itself pushes Europeans to cut transport use.

Evidently, one issue is just how limited the EU's understanding of its own energy mix is: The proposals expected on Wednesday include measures to increase the mapping of jet fuel dependencies and European refining capacity.

Coordination is also an issue. While groups are regularly convened to discuss supply issues, most real coordination takes place bilaterally between the Commission and countries, according to two energy officials involved in such discussions. It's no surprise one energy minister in a meeting earlier this month went so far as to call for a WhatsApp group to share information about supplies, and that the EU is looking into reviving a controversial effort to coordinate gas purchases.

Earlier this week, the Netherlands went out on its own, launching emergency measures and announcing an additional release of oil stocks — bypassing the EU’s own glacial effort to coordinate the release.

The draft of Wednesday's proposals still broadly hews to the line set out by the EU executive as the war got going, focusing on providing better incentives for the green transition, including reduced grid tariffs and murky commitments to mobilize green funding.

But these provisions have proved controversial, too, with some countries, especially in the rich North, arguing that expanding subsidies risks distorting the EU's single market and undermining years of careful green investment planning. Others warn they don't go far enough, leaving national capitals to handle the bulk of the response.

Vaičiūnas, the Lithuanian energy minister, applauded the EU's decision to encourage countries to unleash new funds for the green transition, but expressed concern that smaller countries — and some debt-burdened bigger ones — would be unable to generate the financial firepower to make the most of relaxed rules.

"In principle, these exemptions make more freedom for member states, but the financial burden is on their shoulders," he said, calling for EU-wide financial instruments, such as common debt, to supplement the regulatory changes and help countries finance heat pumps, batteries and electric vehicles.

To Vaičiūnas, finishing off Europe's fossil fuel dependency is the only durable solution to the energy madness prompted by the U.S.-Israeli attack on Iran — and there's no quick fix for that.

Drink Drink Drink said the bitch.....

Patel lashes out at press over story painting him as drunk and AWOL

The FBI director denied being intoxicated on duty and defended his celebration with the men’s Olympic hockey team.

By Josh Gerstein

FBI Director Kash Patel lashed out at the news media Tuesday with a combative public rebuttal to an article that claimed his drinking had sometimes left him difficult to contact, alarming colleagues and his security detail.

Appearing before reporters for the first time since The Atlantic exposé was published last week, a defiant Patel framed the story as part of a deliberate effort to disparage him, pointed to the libel suit he filed Monday against the magazine and warned other journalists they could be next if they echo the allegations.

“I can say unequivocally that I never listen to the fake news mafia and when they get louder, it just means I’m doing my job,” Patel said in response to questions during an unrelated announcement at Justice Department headquarters. “I’ve never been intoxicated on the job, and that is why we filed a $250 million defamation lawsuit. And any one of you that wants to participate, bring it on.”

Patel insisted at length that he has put in more work hours than any of his predecessors and that his efforts have translated into fewer murders, more espionage arrests and fewer opioid deaths. “I’m on the job. I’m the first one in. I’m the last one out,” he said.

But the FBI chief also sought to address an image that has fueled perceptions he sometimes overindulges: video of him guzzling a beer in February while celebrating in the locker room with players of the U.S. Olympic Men’s Hockey team just after they defeated Canada to take the gold medal in Milan, Italy.

“I’m like an everyday American who loves his country, loves the sport of hockey and champions my friends when they raise a gold medal and invite me in to celebrate,” Patel said.

During the press conference about the federal fraud indictment of a prominent civil rights group, Patel and an NBC News reporter got into a verbal tangle after the journalist pressed Patel on a claim in an Atlantic article: that after an incident where Patel could not log in to his FBI computer, he told colleagues he was concerned he was locked out because he’d been fired by President Donald Trump.

“The problem with you and your baseless reporting is that is an absolute lie. It was never said. It never happened. And I will serve in this administration as long as the president and the attorney general want me to do so,” Patel said. “I was never locked out of my systems.”

“Your lawsuit says the opposite,” the reporter, Ryan Reilly, shot back.

“Anyone that says that … is lying,” Patel replied.

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche responded to a question about Patel’s alleged inebriation by criticizing the Atlantic story, which he said he had not read, for relying on anonymous sources and making inaccurate claims.

“My concerns are completely around the anonymous reporting that comes forth constantly,” Blanche said. “But when you have a bunch of people who are hiding behind closed curtains saying things we’re not willing to say publicly, and there’s certain parts of the article that are blatantly false, because apparently, I was told something that I wasn’t. It’s suspicious.”

In a statement following the filing of Patel’s lawsuit, The Atlantic defended its journalism.

“We stand by our reporting on Kash Patel, and we will vigorously defend The Atlantic and our journalists against this meritless lawsuit,” the statement said.

Dems big win in the gerrymandering wars

Virginia voters give Dems big win in the gerrymandering wars

The new map could wipe out Republicans' gains so far in the race President Donald Trump kicked off last summer in Texas.

By Erin Doherty

Virginia voters on Tuesday approved Democrats’ effort to gerrymander the state, giving the party an edge in its bid to reclaim the House in November.

The new map would give Democrats the chance to flip four seats currently held by Republicans. Its adoption could put Democrats slightly ahead in the national mid-decade gerrymandering wars — a result few thought possible when President Donald Trump picked the fight by pushing Texas Republicans to redraw their map last summer.

The result is a major win for Democrats’ hopes of retaking Congress, and showed their ability to mobilize voters distrustful of partisan redistricting and push back against Trump in the Democratic-leaning state. It’s also a victory for Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger in her first national test as governor, after she faced pressure to take a more active role in the campaign’s final stretch.

Virginia’s contest saw an explosion of outside spending and the involvement of national heavyweights like former President Barack Obama and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, as both sides raced to convince people to vote during an off-cycle April election. Even Trump, who largely stayed on the sidelines of the battle, joined an eleventh-hour tele-rally on Monday to urge voters to reject the redistricting ballot measure.

“This is really a country election. The whole country is watching,” the president said.

Democrats entered the final stretch of voting cautiously optimistic despite tight polling numbers, buoyed by their five-seat gain in California last November and an unexpected new seat in Utah drawn by the courts. Those seats, and the new Virginia map, effectively wipes out the gains Republicans made in Texas, Ohio, North Carolina and Missouri.

Still, one major threat still looms over Virginia’s map: The state’s Supreme Court could nullify the redistricting effort, a move that would effectively void the election results.

And this cycle’s gerrymandering fight isn’t over yet. Florida GOP lawmakers could act as soon as next week to unveil a new map that could offset Democrats’ new advantage.

Gerrymandering loss

‘The GOP should’ve done more’: Virginia Republicans point fingers after gerrymandering loss

They are frustrated the party didn’t spend extensively and are putting pressure on Florida to give them back an edge.

By Erin Doherty and Aaron Pellish

After a narrow loss in Virginia, Republicans are pointing fingers as President Donald Trump’s national gerrymandering fight slips into a stalemate.

Multiple Republicans say the party should’ve spent much more, much earlier to have a better shot at blocking Democrats’ Virginia map, which could give the party as many as four more House seats. And pressure is now growing on Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis to make up for Democrats’ gains with a GOP-led redistricting effort in his state, as soon as next week.

“You’d be hard pressed to find a single Republican tonight who doesn’t think the GOP should’ve done more in Virginia. It actually hurts more that it was so close,” said a GOP operative, granted anonymity to speak candidly, like others in this article.

There are mounting signs that Trump and the GOP have used valuable time and political capital on an arduous tit-for-tat that is so far looking like it will be close to a draw. Even if Republicans squeeze out gains in a new Florida map, their total gains are likely to be modest at best.

“I just don’t think that Republicans looked at the map and said, ‘Okay, what’s the worst case scenario, what could happen if all the Democrat-controlled legislators rebel against this?’” said one Virginia Republican. “We’re seeing a thing that felt really good at the moment erase gains that we fought for elsewhere.”

Tuesday’s results in Virginia, combined with gains in California and a new court-drawn seat in Utah, have effectively erased the advantage Republicans built off new maps in Texas, North Carolina, Ohio and Missouri. It’s a stark reversal nearly nine months after Trump first urged Republicans in the Lone Star State to redraw maps, upending the midterm battlefield.

“Just so you get the truth and not the partisan spin here, Republicans came up with the idea of the mid-decade redistricting fight and started in Texas,” Erick Erickson, a conservative radio host and an influential voice with evangelical voters central to the MAGA base, wrote on X after the amendment passed in Virginia.

“Now, as drawn, the Democrats have an advantage from the redistricting fight,” he said.

The RNC and the White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

National Republican Congressional Committee chair Rep. Richard Hudson is holding out hope that the state’s Supreme Court, which reserved the right to weigh in on the new map after the election, voids Democrats’ effort.

“This close margin reinforces that Virginia is a purple state that shouldn’t be represented by a severe partisan gerrymander,” Hudson said in a statement. “That’s exactly why the courts, who have already ruled twice to block this egregious power grab, should uphold Virginia law.”

Still, several Virginia Republicans said their party could have done more to prevent Democrats from edging out a victory Tuesday. Democrats outspent Republicans by a roughly three-to-one margin, putting Republicans at a disadvantage on the airwaves until the late stages of the race. Virginians for Fair Elections — which led the “yes” effort — raised $64 million, according to Virginia Department of Elections data, boosted by nearly $38 million in support from House Majority Forward, a political nonprofit aligned with House Democratic leadership.

Even though Republicans have far more money stacked up in outside groups — including $297 million brought in by the Trump-aligned MAGA Inc. since the start of last year alone — they ultimately never matched Democrats’ investment.

“If they had spent some money, they could have won tonight and someone’s got to own that and explain why that decision was made,” said a second Virginia-based GOP strategist.

Some Republicans turned their ire to the Indiana Legislature, where GOP lawmakers rejected the White House’s push to draw a new map that would give them two additional red-leaning seats. Chris LaCivita, Trump’s former campaign co-manager and a longtime Virginia-based GOP strategist, shared a social media post on Tuesday calling out Republicans in Indiana for not being more aggressive.

It’s now too late for the state to redraw its lines, and Trump allies have spent time and millions of dollars to defeat the GOP legislators who opposed the effort.

With most states off the table, Republicans are now looking to DeSantis as one of their last and best chances to win back the upper hand ahead of November. The Florida governor delayed a special session to take up redistricting in the state until after Virginia’s election, and he has yet to release a new map proposal.

Former Trump White House spokesperson Harrison Fields urged Republicans in Florida to respond to the Virginia outcome with an aggressive gerrymander.

“To my friends in Tallahassee: in a state that is ruby red, it’s time to respond to what we saw tonight in Virginia with a redistricting plan that reflects Florida’s true partisan lean — and adds 3–4 GOP seats to our supermajority,” Fields said in a social media post. “Virginia is a purple state being drawn as deep blue. Florida should draw a map that’s even redder — and get it passed ASAP.”

Not everyone is on board with escalating the redistricting arms race. Rep. Kevin Kiley, a Republican-turned-independent who was targeted by California Democrats’ gerrymander, said the result was further proof that the redistricting war never should have been started.

“It’s very unfortunate that it’s happened in Texas. I think it’s very unfortunate that it happened in California and Virginia and everywhere else where it’s happened,” Kiley told POLITICO after the Virginia race was called Tuesday evening. “Now that this whole thing has just gotten completely out of hand, there have been no winners, and it’s created such instability, maybe this is the time that we can come together and say, ‘Alright, enough is enough.’”

Yet for all the recriminations over Republicans losing ground in the president’s redistricting campaign, one person escaped largely unscathed: Trump himself.

The president mostly stayed on the sidelines until he hosted a tele-rally alongside Speaker Mike Johnson to urge people to vote “no” in the race’s final hours.

Some Republicans in the state were glad he stayed away, given his flagging national standing, particularly in a light blue state. Thirty-three percent of adults approve of Trump’s job performance, according to an AP-NORC poll released Tuesday.

“If I was the Democrats, I’d want Trump on the stump every day,” Virginia-based Republican strategist Brian Kirwin said.

Seizing 2 ships

Iran reports seizing 2 ships in Strait of Hormuz hours after Trump’s ceasefire extension

Trump announced that he was extending the ceasefire indefinitely on Tuesday.

By Gregory Svirnovskiy

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps seized two foreign ships traveling through the Strait of Hormuz on Wednesday, according to a semi-official state news agency, a major escalation coming just hours after President Donald Trump announced he was extending a ceasefire between Washington and Tehran.

The state-linked Tasnim News Agency said that the captured vessels were “operating without authorization, repeatedly violating regulations, and manipulating navigation aid systems in a way that endangered maritime safety.”

The vessels are now in Iranian territorial waters, Tasnim reported.

The seizures underscore how the status of the Strait of Hormuz may yet dictate peace talks.

The critical shipping lane — through which about 20 percent of the world’s oil travels — saw traffic slow to a trickle in the weeks after Iran effectively shut down the passageway following U.S and Israeli attacks in February.

The White House responded by blockading Iranian shipping on the strait. And an agreement to reopen the waterway collapsed last week after the president kept the blockade in place.

Trump announced Tuesday that he was indefinitely extending the ceasefire, which was set to expire Wednesday. But he again said the U.S. blockade over the strait would remain. Iran has signaled it won’t send its negotiating team to continue talks with the U.S. in Pakistan until the blockade is lifted.

“I have therefore directed our Military to continue the Blockade and, in all other respects, remain ready and able, and will therefore extend the Ceasefire until such time as their proposal is submitted, and discussions are concluded, one way or the other,” Trump wrote Tuesday on Truth Social.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the seizures.

Fuck him...........

Trump weighs consequences for NATO allies on 'naughty' list

The effort is the latest sign President Donald Trump plans to make good on his threats against members not deemed “model allies."

By Jack Detsch and Paul McLeary

The White House has developed something akin to a “naughty and nice” list of NATO countries, as the Trump administration looks for ways to punish allies who refused to back the Iran war.

The effort, which officials worked on ahead of NATO head Mark Rutte’s visit to Washington this month, includes an overview of members’ contributions to the alliance and places them into tiers, according to three European diplomats and a U.S. defense official familiar with the plan.

It’s the latest sign that President Donald Trump plans to make good on his threats against allies who don’t adhere to his wishes. And it’s another pressure point on the increasingly frayed alliance, which has been battered by Trump’s attacks — from his push to annex Greenland to his warning of a complete withdrawal from the pact.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth floated the broad idea in December. “Model allies that step up, like Israel, South Korea, Poland, increasingly Germany, the Baltics and others, will receive our special favor,” he said. “Allies that still fail to do their part for collective defense will face consequences.”

One of the diplomats said the list appeared to reflect that concept. “The White House has a naughty and nice paper so I guess the thinking is similar,” the person said.

The administration is keeping any details quiet as it plans options, according to the people. And officials have provided little clarity on what the favors or consequences might be.

“They don’t seem to have very concrete ideas…when it comes to punishing bad allies,” said another European official, who, like others, was granted anonymity to discuss sensitive diplomatic issues. “Moving troops is one option, but it mainly punishes the U.S. doesn’t it?”

The White House made its frustration with allies clear. “While the United States has always been there for our so-called allies, countries we protect with thousands of troops have not been there for us throughout Operation Epic Fury,” said White House spokesperson Anna Kelly, referring to the Pentagon’s name for the operation. “President Trump has made his thoughts on this unfair dynamic clear, and as he said, the United States will remember.”

NATO did not respond to a request for comment.

Few other alternatives exist for moving American troops out of Europe, so any potential plan would likely involve relocating them from one country to another. Even then, a shift could prove expensive and time consuming.

It’s not clear which countries fit into which category or if Rutte knows about the effort. But the Romanians and Poles could end up being some of the biggest beneficiaries, since both remain in the president’s good graces and would welcome more U.S. troops. The Polish government, which is one of NATO biggest defense spenders, already pays almost all of the costs to host the 10,000 American troops stationed there. And Romania’s recently expanded Mihail Kogălniceanu Air Base — which the country allowed the U.S. to use for the air war in Iran — has room for more American troops.

Hegseth initially used the model ally rhetoric to refer to NATO partners who had increased defense spending in line with the alliance’s 5 percent targets championed by Trump. Officials also referenced it in the National Defense Strategy released in January.

The Defense Department “will prioritize cooperation and engagements with model allies who are doing their part for our collective defense,” the Pentagon said in a statement. “In doing so, we will empower those allies as they step up in the defense of our shared interests while also strengthening incentives for other allies to do their part.”

The concept could give the U.S. options to pull back troop deployments, joint exercises, or military sales from perceived “bad” allies and give them to “good” ones, according to two of the European officials familiar with the plan. Hegseth has also used the term “model ally” in meetings with NATO members, according to the third diplomat.

And it would offer Trump more tools to differentiate between members who supported U.S. efforts in Iran — such as ending Tehran’s blockade of the Strait of Hormuz and allowing base use — from those who didn’t.

While Spain and allies such as the U.K. and France either rejected or stalled U.S. requests for help, Romania and several smaller nations allowed the U.S. to use their air bases. Bulgaria also quietly supported American logistics in the Middle East.

Spain was already in trouble with the Trump administration for pushing back on NATO’s 5 percent defense spending target at the alliance’s Hague summit last year. Officials, though, have praised Baltic nations such as Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, and Poland for consistently ranking at the top of the bloc in military spending.

“President Trump has rightly made clear that he expects allies and partners to step up and help secure this vital waterway in the Middle East,” Pentagon policy chief Elbridge Colby told NATO allies this month during a virtual meeting of defense ministers that Hegseth declined to attend.

But there is little precedent for taking such steps to punish allies, and such notions already face push back on Capitol Hill.

“It is not helpful when American leaders speak of our alliances with derision,” Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) said Tuesday before a hearing on U.S. forces in the Indo-Pacific region. “We must be clear about the numerous political, strategic and moral benefits that country receives from its alliances.”

And some former officials doubt the Trump administration has the bandwidth to manage another existential crisis to the alliance.

“Trump and his team are busy trying to extract themselves from their self-inflicted quagmire,” said Joel Linnainmäki, a former Finnish official who worked on the country’s 2023 accession into NATO. “Likely the administration does not have the bandwidth to open another hostile front with Europe as long as the war continues.”

Maximum warfare

Jeffries vows ‘maximum warfare’

The minority leader is taunting Republicans after Virginia voters approved redistricting favorable to Democrats.

By Riley Rogerson, Calen Razor and Zachary Warmbrodt

Virginia just delivered the moment Hakeem Jeffries has been waiting for.

Voters approved a new congressional map that adds up to four Democratic-leaning districts, handing the party a stronger chance of retaking the House. The minority leader is leaning in, taunting Republicans and vowing “maximum warfare, everywhere, all the time.”

“Democrats defeated Donald Trump’s gerrymandering scheme in Virginia tonight,” Jeffries said in a statement Tuesday evening. “We will crush the DeSantis Dummymander in Florida next.”

Jeffries has staked much of his credibility as a party leader on the effort, pouring time, money and political capital into a nationwide push to create new blue districts as Republicans rush to do the same in red states.

Tuesday night’s narrow win marks a major feather in Jeffries’ cap that will help burnish his reputation in the Democratic caucus as an operator and foil to Trump. It’s also a signature win for a rising leader who is often compared to his iconic predecessor, Nancy Pelosi.

Democrats are reading the success as a promising bellwether ahead of the midterms and a sign of mounting voter frustration with Trump and the GOP trifecta.

Yet Tuesday night’s buzz could quickly become a political hangover, as a handful of Democratic primaries spring up in new seats and Republicans take a fresh look at other newly competitive districts.

“We don’t take anything for granted,” Democratic Rep. James Walkinshaw said in an interview. “All of the districts will get a little bit more competitive.”

Walkinshaw listed five districts, including his own in Northern Virginia, that he thinks could require renewed attention from Democrats to hold. He said Democrats are bracing for the likelihood that “strong Republican candidates” may be waiting in the wings.

But House Republicans aren’t exactly projecting confidence about sudden pick-up opportunities, and they seem to be more focused on the sudden need for defense. All five Virginia Republicans — Ben Cline, Morgan Griffith, Jen Kiggans, John McGuire and Rob Wittman — skipped votes Tuesday.

Notably, Wittman serves as vice chair on the Armed Services Committee. A loss in his new district — which Kamala Harris would have won by over 17 points in 2024 — throws a wrench into his not-so-secret plan to become the panel’s next top Republican.

NRCC Chair Richard Hudson said in an interview Tuesday that he hopes the state Supreme Court “will step in and stop” the new map.

Pressed on whether NRCC strategy or funding will change at all, Hudson did not offer any specifics — just that he believes Kiggans, who Republicans saw as their most vulnerable Virginia member, “can win either map.”

April 21, 2026

It's called 'Being in the shitter..."

Trump approval is falling into George W. Bush territory

Analysis by Aaron Blake

It was almost exactly this time 20 years ago that the bottom began to fall out on George W. Bush’s approval ratings. And as Bush’s numbers in most polls fell into the 30s for the first time in late winter and early spring, the culprit was clear: the Iraq war.

History could be repeating itself with President Donald Trump in 2026. Just swap Iraq with Iran.

Two new polls released Tuesday morning showed Trump’s approval rating in the mid-30s: 36% in a Reuters-Ipsos poll and 35% in a Strength in Numbers-Verasight poll. They follow an NBC News poll over the weekend that showed Trump hitting a new low of 37%.

Over the past month now, eight of nine quality polls tracked by CNN have shown Trump in the 30s.

The only exception was a Fox News poll pegging Trump at 41%, but even that showed Trump with his worst numbers in its polls since 2017.

Let’s put those numbers in context.

Trump’s disapproval is hitting new highs

Not every poll shows Trump plumbing new depths with his approval rating.

Some pollsters showed him slightly lower in his first year in office in 2017, or after the January 6, 2021, Capitol attack.

But Trump’s 62% average disapproval rating in the CNN Poll of Polls — which averages the quality surveys mentioned above — is higher than just about any pollster indicated in either of those past instances.

Trump’s highest disapproval ratings in individual polls in 2017 were as follows: 63% in a Pew Research Center poll, 61% in a Quinnipiac University poll and 60% in Reuters-Ipsos polls. After January 6, he hit 62% in a CNN poll, 61% in a Quinnipiac poll and 60% in a Washington Post-ABC News poll.

Trump is now averaging those kinds of numbers across all polls, suggesting more Americans than ever are opposed to Trump.

The trendline is consistent

And perhaps more troubling for Trump, the trendline in his second term has been remarkably consistent — consistently down.

While there may have been a general perception that Trump was pretty unpopular in his first term as president, he recovered from the lows of 2017 to spend most of his presidency with an approval rating in the low 40s, which is somewhat normal for a president these days. That included ahead of the 2018 midterm elections and in his 2020 reelection race.

Trump’s approval rating in his first term was, for the most part, pretty flat.

But in his second term, those numbers have trended slowly but steadily downward.

That trend predated the Iran war. But the war also appears to be solidifying some of Trump’s major liabilities, costing him the support of the kinds of people who hadn’t ditched him before.

New lows on the economy

A big reason for that appears to be views of his handling of the economy, which the Iran war — and the rising gas prices that have accompanied it — has sent to new lows.

Trump’s disapproval on inflation is now routinely around 70%.

Inflation has long been Trump’s worst issue, with voters often saying he has neglected concerns about rising costs. But increasingly, polls show it has some competition for that mantle from the Iran war.

The NBC poll showed two-thirds of Americans disapproved of Trump on the Iran war — just a tick less than the 68% who disliked how he’s handled inflation.

And the earlier CNN poll showed 67% disapproved of Trump’s handling of Iran, compared to 69% for the economy and 72% for inflation.

He’s getting into Bush territory

It’s certainly possible that the trend line could change and that a resolution to the Iran war could help Trump.

But if the president’s approval rating solidifies in the mid-30s, he would be in some pretty rare company. It would be territory mostly inhabited in recent decades by just one man: George W. Bush.

When Bush dropped into the 30s two decades ago, he was the first president to spend a sustained period there since Jimmy Carter, according to Gallup data. Joe Biden, like Bush, spent some significant time in the 30s, but generally in the high 30s.

It’s not unusual for presidents to be unpopular these days; in fact, it’s kind of the norm.

But Trump is teetering into some pretty unusual and dangerous political territory.

Sun is tearing an asteroid to pieces

The sun is tearing an asteroid to pieces, and Earth is now flying through the fallout

by Patrick M. Shober, The Conversation

Across Earth, every night, thousands of automated stargazers are waiting to take pictures of shooting stars. I am one of the scientists who study these meteors.

Most movies and news alerts focus on large asteroids that could destroy Earth. And your phone notifies you every few months that an object nine washing machines wide is going to just narrowly skim past. However, the small dust and rubble that enter our atmosphere daily tell an equally interesting story.

My planetary science colleagues and I use camera observations of the night sky to better understand dust, car-sized asteroids and debris from comets in our solar system.

In a study published in March 2026 in the The Astrophysical Journal , I searched through millions of meteor observations collected by all-sky camera networks based in Canada, Japan, California and Europe and found a small, recently formed cluster. The 282 meteors associated with this cluster tell the story of an asteroid that got a little too close to the sun.

Meteor formation

When a sand-sized crumb of space rock hits our atmosphere, it heats up almost instantly, vaporizing its surface layer and turning it into an electrically charged gas. The whole fragment starts to glow—this is what we call a meteor. If the object is larger, like a boulder, and brighter, it's called a bolide or a fireball. On average, these objects hit our atmosphere going over 15 miles per second. For small dust or sand-sized objects, the whole process lasts only a fraction of a second before they completely disappear.

Most of these sand-sized fragments in the solar system originate from comets—cold, icy objects from the outer reaches of the solar system. As comets pass by the sun, their icy components turn to gas, releasing tons of dust. This is why comets are often called "dirty snowballs" and appear fuzzy in telescopic images.

Asteroids, on the other hand, are leftovers from the early solar system that formed closer to the sun. They are dry and rocky, and do not have the same ices that give comets their characteristic tails.

What does it mean to be active?

Astronomers call an asteroid or comet "active" when it sheds dust, gas or larger fragments. This activity is caused by some external force on the object in space, like heat from the sun, a small impact, or when asteroids spin too fast and fly apart.

Understanding and identifying activity helps scientists better understand how these objects change over time.

For comets, sublimation of ices—when solid ice turns directly into gas, skipping the liquid phase—is the primary culprit. However, for asteroids, the reason for activity can vary greatly.

For example, NASA's OSIRIS-REx mission, which launched into space to study an asteroid named Bennu, saw activity from its surface, with heat stress and small impacts among the leading explanations.

Other sources for asteroid activity include breakup when an asteroid spins too fast, tidal forces ripping apart asteroids during close encounters with a planet, or gas release.

Researchers most commonly search for activity using telescopes. Astronomers can look for a "tail" or fuzziness around the object. This tail is a clear sign that there is gas and dust around the body. But there is another way to search for activity—meteor showers.

Finding hidden asteroids via meteor showers

The most famous active asteroid is 3200 Phaethon. It is the parent body of the Geminid meteor shower that occurs every year in mid-December. During past close approaches with the sun, Phaethon released vast amounts of dust and larger fragments. These morsels of Phaethon have spread out along its entire orbit over time, leading to the present Geminid meteor stream.

Each meteor shower we observe occurs when Earth passes through one of these debris streams. So if astronomers can detect meteor showers, they can also be used to find active objects in space.

At first, debris shed by an asteroid or comet travels closely together. Imagine squeezing a single drop of food dye into a moving stream of water: Initially, the dye stays in a tight, concentrated cloud. But as it flows, the water's swirling currents pull at the dye, causing it to spread out and fade.

In space, the gravitational tugs from passing planets act like those currents. They pull on the individual meteor fragments in slightly different ways, causing the once-tight stream to gradually drift apart until it completely dilutes into the background dust of our solar system.

This diagram shows the radiant—the point in the night sky from which meteors of the newly discovered shower appear to originate. Credit: Patrick Shober—NASA JSC

The discovery of a rock-comet

In a study published in March 2026 in the Astrophysical Journal, I used millions of observations of meteors to search for recent, unknown activity from asteroids near Earth. I found one clear cluster of 282 meteors that stood out.

What makes this discovery so exciting is that we are essentially witnessing a hidden asteroid being baked to bits. This newly confirmed meteor stream follows an extreme orbit that plunges almost five times closer to the sun than Earth does.

Based on how these meteors break apart when they hit our atmosphere, we can tell they are moderately fragile, but tougher than stuff from comets. This finding tells us that intense solar heat is literally cracking the asteroid's surface, baking out trapped gases and causing it to crumble. This is likely a major source of past Phaethon activity and the main reason the meteorites on Earth are so diverse.

The search for the source

Why does finding a hidden, crumbling asteroid matter? Meteor observations act as a uniquely sensitive probe that lets us study objects that are completely invisible to traditional telescopes.

Beyond solving astronomical mysteries, analyzing this debris helps us understand the physical evolution of asteroids and comets in our solar system. More importantly, it reveals hidden populations of near-Earth asteroids, which is vital information for planetary defense.

The new meteor shower's parent asteroid remains elusive. However, NASA's NEO Surveyor mission, launching in 2027, offers a promising solution. This space telescope, dedicated to planetary defense and the discovery of dark, hazardous, sun-approaching asteroids, will be the ideal tool for searching for the shower's origin.

Planet-building disks around newborn stars

Astronomers crack a decades-old mystery, catching gas morphing into planet-building disks around newborn stars

by Academia Sinica Institute of Astronomy and Astrophysics

An international team led by Dr. Indrani Das of Academia Sinica Institute of Astronomy and Astrophysics (ASIAA) has shown, for the first time, how infalling gas from star-forming cores gradually transitions into planet-forming disks. Their findings, combining numerical simulations with Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA) observations, are published today in The Astrophysical Journal.

Protoplanetary disks form around young stars when dense molecular cloud cores collapse under their own gravity. An outer shroud of gas and dust, known as the envelope, surrounds and feeds both the young star and the forming disk. While it is well understood that planets eventually form within these disks and follow Keplerian orbits, the mechanism that transforms rapid infalling gas motion from the envelope into ordered Keplerian motion within the disk has remained a mystery for decades.

Based on both theoretical and observational evidence, the recent study discovered that there exists a distinct transition zone at the envelope-disk interface of a young star-disk system, which Das named ENDTRANZ (Envelope Disk Transition Zone). The findings have established that infalling gas motions gradually transition into Keplerian motions across this transition zone. Crucially, this transition is far from abrupt and contradicts earlier infall models that are based on classical test-particle dynamics.

"The existence of ENDTRANZ naturally results from the redistribution of mass and angular momentum during the formation of disks around young stars. This process ultimately governs how infalling material from the envelope, which rotates more slowly than the Keplerian speed, spreads out to form the disk and gradually settles into ordered Keplerian rotation," explained Das, emphasizing that the discovery of ENDTRANZ is a major step forward in understanding how stars and planetary systems—including our own solar system—form.

To determine the physics of ENDTRANZ, the team first ran the numerical simulations using FEOSAD, a code that models the star-disk system starting from the collapse of a starless cloud core. Their results showed that the transition from the infalling-rotating envelope to the spinning disk gradually unfolds through a "jump" across a finite thickness in the radial profile of specific angular momentum, which they identified as a novel signature of ENDTRANZ.

Specific angular momentum is defined as the total angular momentum per unit mass, describing how fast and how far out a mass parcel orbits regardless of its mass. Thus it serves as a powerful tool for understanding how material rotating at different rates reorganizes during the evolution from collapsing gas clouds to disks. This systematic reorganization is analogous to atmospheric convection, where circulation occurs in an organized way, with warm air rising and cool air descending while exchanging heat.

"This ENDTRANZ tracer, in the form of a jump in the specific angular momentum profile, essentially manifests from the gradual transition in the rotational velocity. This change in rotational behavior offers a diagnostic framework for understanding the physical processes at play that drive the disk evolution," said Shantanu Basu, a co-author of the study.

The team also studied L1527 IRS, a young star located about 450 light-years from Earth in the Taurus molecular cloud, which hosts a disk with a radius of approximately 70 astronomical units. Using the high-resolution ALMA Large Program eDisk (Embedded Disks in Planet Formation) observations, the researchers, for the first time, identified a similar jump in the radial profile of the specific angular momentum at the envelope-disk transition of L1527 IRS. Spanning a radial width of about 16 astronomical units, this observed jump confirmed the existence of a transition zone.


"At first, I did not believe that the observational data of L1527 IRS showed evidence of ENDTRANZ, but surprisingly, it was there! A careful inspection and comparison of the radial dependence of specific angular momentum between the observational data and the simulation helped identify the evidence of ENDTRANZ in L1527 IRS," said Nagayoshi Ohashi, the principal investigator of the ALMA eDisk large program and another co-author of this study.

"Interestingly enough, model ENDTRANZ exhibits significant local variations in kinematics around the disk circumference and, when combined with observations, can offer insights into the complex spiral structure of a protoplanetary disk," commented Eduard Vorobyov, another co-author of the study.

This pioneering work establishes ENDTRANZ as a new frontier in star and planet formation studies, opening the door to deeper exploration of its complex physics and to searching for its signatures in other young stellar systems. In many ways, the team believes this is just the beginning.