FIREWORKS IN DC - Senate Votes on Save Act Voter ID - It's Official Now

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Republican majority in the Senate rejected a GOP-led effort to attach key provisions of election integrity legislation sought by President Donald Trump to a measure funding agencies of the Department of Homeland Security during an early Thursday morning vote. The amendment failed by a vote of 48 to 50.

Sens. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine, and Mitch McConnell of Kentucky joined all Democrats in opposing the attachment of a modified version of the SAVE America Act to the bill funding immigration enforcement. Their defection occurred during the Senate’s lengthy “vote-a-rama,” a period in which lawmakers can propose votes on a wide range of amendments regardless of alignment with the main budget plan.

The outcome highlighted warnings from several Republicans in recent weeks that the proposal lacked sufficient support within the GOP to pass. Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota had initiated an oral filibuster to advance the measure with a simple majority of 50 votes. Nevertheless, Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana advocated for his version of the SAVE America Act and threatened to delay the process until Thursday.

Kennedy acknowledged that his approach might not align with the strict Senate rules governing the reconciliation process, known as the Byrd Rule, but argued that critics “can’t predict the future.” Had Kennedy’s proposal been adopted, it would have directed the Senate Rules Committee to draft legislation requiring voter ID for federal elections, limiting voting to Election Day, and mandating that ballots be counted within 36 hours. The plan also included a $10 billion cap for implementing those changes. The Senate Rules Committee, chaired by McConnell, would have been responsible for developing the legislation.

Collins previously said she supports the broader SAVE America Act but did not back this version of the proposal. Murkowski and Tillis also expressed opposition following the Republican-led push to advance the measure. Tillis and McConnell are both retiring after the midterm elections.

President Trump has consistently advocated for the passage of the SAVE America Act. Last month, he pledged not to sign any other bills until it is approved and stated that he would not accept a diluted version. Kennedy’s unsuccessful attempt occurred at a time when discussion surrounding the SAVE America Act had lost focus in the Senate in recent weeks. The Senate floor has been largely dominated by the GOP’s reconciliation gamble, efforts to reauthorize the nation’s contentious surveillance powers, and the ongoing war in Iran.

Nevertheless, Republican leadership currently has no plans to conclude its takeover of the floor. Meanwhile, House Speaker Mike Johnson and McConnell have come out in support of Trump’s actions in Iran, even amid the president’s online statements threatening to practically wipe out Iran. McConnell, when asked about Trump’s comments, said he supports Trump’s efforts in Iran. “They’ve been at war with us for 47 years,” McConnell said. “They’ve killed Americans. They’ve killed Israelis. They’ve killed throughout the Middle East. They’re bad guys.” McConnell said he does not know how the conflict in Iran will end. However, he stated that the country’s capabilities have “significantly diminished.”

When Pope Leo XIV criticized the Iran war on Wednesday, Johnson used centuries-old Christian theological teachings to defend the Trump administration’s strikes against Tehran, calling them a “just war.”

The SAVE America Act would require documentary proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections, strengthen voter identification rules, and expand federal involvement in maintaining voter rolls. Polling has consistently shown broad public support for such requirements across party lines. The failed amendment vote reflects ongoing partisan divisions over election procedures, immigration enforcement funding, and the use of the reconciliation process. The Senate continues to navigate multiple high-stakes deadlines, with lawmakers weighing national security, fiscal priorities, and electoral integrity measures as the midterm cycle approaches.

Further attempts to advance voter ID provisions or related election integrity measures may occur in subsequent legislative vehicles. The outcome of the vote-a-rama has drawn attention to internal Republican dynamics and the challenges of achieving consensus on contentious policy riders during budget negotiations. Both parties are expected to continue debating the balance between security, access, and administrative feasibility in federal elections.

Stunning Moment as President Donald Trump Just FIRED Her In Front of Everyone - President Trump Has Fired a Top Copyright ...

WASHINGTON, D.C. — President Donald Trump’s administration dismissed the nation’s top copyright official just days after removing the Librarian of Congress. Shira Perlmutter, who led the U.S. Copyright Office—an agency under the Library of Congress—was abruptly terminated. The U.S. Copyright Office informed reporters that Perlmutter had received an email from the White House stating, “Your position as the Register of Copyrights and Director at the U.S. Copyright Office is terminated, effective immediately.”

The move follows the earlier dismissal of Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden. Both Hayden and Perlmutter were informed of their dismissals via email. Hayden had appointed Perlmutter to head the Copyright Office in October 2020. The actions are viewed as part of the administration’s broader effort to replace officials perceived as resistant to the president’s agenda. The Copyright Office handles registration of copyrights, administration of copyright law, and policy recommendations on intellectual property matters. The Librarian of Congress oversees the Library of Congress, which serves as the nation’s oldest federal cultural institution and houses the Copyright Office.

The firings have drawn attention to the administration’s approach to personnel changes across federal agencies and cultural institutions. Officials have not provided detailed public explanations for the specific terminations beyond the standard notification language. The developments occur amid ongoing discussions about the role of independent agencies and the balance between executive authority and institutional continuity.

Separately, federal prosecutors announced charges against a former USAID employee accused of creating a fictitious company to illegally obtain coronavirus relief funds for personal gain. Yusuf Akoll, who worked as a Senior Procurement Contract Specialist at the U.S. Agency for International Development, was charged with making materially false statements that resulted in two Paycheck Protection Program loans totaling approximately $16,666. Prosecutors allege that Akoll registered Naagode Consulting LLC in Virginia in November 2020 and applied for the loans, falsely claiming the company was operational as of February 2020 and had earned income in 2019 despite having none.

The case highlights issues with oversight during the rapid distribution of pandemic relief funds under the “pay and chase” model, where the government prioritized quick disbursement with the expectation that fraudulent claims would be addressed later. The Biden administration largely abandoned efforts to recover smaller loans, citing equity concerns. USAID was shut down earlier this year, with remaining functions absorbed into the State Department amid Republican concerns over financial mismanagement. Akoll had oversight of hundreds of thousands of dollars in funding directed to foreign countries, money that was often difficult to track.

The Department of Government Efficiency has focused on addressing such oversight gaps as a core part of its mission. The agency reported that more than 527,000 people have been deported since Trump took office on January 20, 2025, with 1.6 million voluntary departures out of approximately 2 million total departures. Officials expect these numbers to increase with additional funding and resources.

The personnel changes at the Copyright Office and Library of Congress, combined with the fraud case at USAID, reflect the administration’s emphasis on accountability and alignment with executive priorities across federal institutions. No further details on the specific reasons for the dismissals of Hayden and Perlmutter have been released by the White House. The developments are likely to generate continued discussion about the balance between institutional independence and presidential authority in shaping the federal workforce.

DENIED! Supreme Court Drops Jaw-Dropping 8-1 Ruling

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court issued an 8-1 ruling annulling a lower court injunction that had blocked President Donald Trump from revoking the protected legal status of hundreds of thousands of migrants currently living in the United States. The decision facilitates the administration’s efforts to end Biden-era Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for approximately 300,000 Venezuelan migrants and proceed with their deportation. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the sole dissenter in the case.

The ruling came after the Trump administration challenged a lower court order that had halted the revocation process. U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer argued before the court that the district court’s reasoning was untenable and that the program involves discretionary, sensitive, and foreign-policy-laden judgments reserved for the executive branch. Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem had rescinded the TPS designation for Venezuela in a February memo, citing that the country no longer met the criteria for the designation and that allowing the nationals to remain temporarily was against the national interest.

The TPS designation for Venezuela had been extended multiple times under the previous administration. In October 2023, former Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas extended the 2021 designation for 18 months and issued a redesignation effective through April 2025. In January 2025, Mayorkas announced a further extension through October 2026. Noem’s memo in February 2025 revoked the 2023 designation, restoring the prior status quo. U.S. District Judge Edward Chen of the Northern District of California suspended the revocation in March, describing the administration’s portrayal of migrants as potential criminals as unfounded and replete with racism.

The Supreme Court’s decision removes that injunction and allows the administration to move forward with ending the protected status. As of late October 2025, the Department of Homeland Security reported that more than 527,000 people have been deported since Trump took office on January 20, 2025. The agency also recorded 1.6 million voluntary departures out of approximately 2 million total departures. Officials expect these numbers to increase with additional funding and resources.

The case highlights ongoing tensions over immigration enforcement and the scope of executive authority in managing temporary protected status programs. The Trump administration has prioritized ending certain Biden-era protections as part of broader efforts to address illegal immigration and national security concerns. Legal experts note that the ruling affirms significant discretion for the executive branch in immigration policy decisions involving foreign relations and national interest determinations. The decision does not resolve all related litigation but clears the way for the revocation to take effect while lower courts continue to review underlying claims.

The outcome is expected to have immediate implications for the affected Venezuelan migrants, many of whom have been living in the United States under TPS protections for several years. Supporters of the ruling argue it restores proper executive authority and enforces immigration laws as written. Critics contend the decision disrupts long-standing humanitarian protections and could lead to instability for individuals who have built lives in the country. The Department of Homeland Security has indicated that enforcement actions will proceed in accordance with the law and available resources. The ruling adds to a series of recent Supreme Court decisions that have favored the current administration on immigration-related matters.

BREAKING: Democrat Sen. John Fetterman Stuns Everyone With Big Announcement

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) published an op-ed on Thursday in which he outlined his differences with the current direction of the Democratic Party while affirming that he remains a Democrat. In the piece titled “I Haven’t Changed. Here’s What Has,” Fetterman argued that positions he holds today on border security, government accountability, and support for Israel were once considered mainstream within the party. He stated that the party has shifted further to the left, leading to internal criticism, public denunciations, and protests at his home in Braddock, Pennsylvania.

Fetterman wrote that the Democratic Party cannot simply define itself as the opposite of whatever President Donald Trump supports. He cited his role as the lead Democrat on the Laken Riley Act, named after a Georgia nursing student killed by an individual in the country illegally, and his vote in favor of a bipartisan border reform bill in 2024. He also supported keeping the government funded during recent shutdown deadline negotiations, stating that the need to keep essential services operating outweighed partisan considerations. On foreign policy, Fetterman has maintained consistent support for Israel during its conflict with Hamas and has commended aspects of the Trump administration’s approach to Iran.

The senator noted that he continues to align with Democrats on many issues but has faced backlash from progressive activists for his stances on border security and Israel. Some party officials, including DNC Vice Chair Malcolm Kenyatta and local county party chairs in Pennsylvania, have publicly criticized him, with some calling for his resignation or labeling him a “traitor.” Fetterman acknowledged the tension but maintained that he has not left the party. The op-ed comes as Democrats continue to assess their losses among working-class voters in states such as Pennsylvania and Michigan in recent elections.

The developments reflect broader internal debates within the Democratic Party ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. Progressives have pushed for ideological shifts, while some members argue for broader appeal to moderate and working-class voters. Fetterman’s comments have drawn mixed reactions, with some viewing them as a call for pragmatism and others seeing them as a departure from core party principles. House Democrats recently passed a bipartisan resolution condemning socialism, which passed 285-98 with support from 86 Democrats, including House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries.

Fetterman has not indicated any intention to switch parties and has continued to vote with Democrats on many legislative matters. Political observers note that his positions have made him a target for criticism from the party’s left wing, while drawing interest from some Republicans who see potential for cross-aisle cooperation on specific issues. The senator’s office has not commented further on the op-ed beyond its publication. As the 2026 midterm cycle approaches, Democrats continue to navigate internal divisions over policy priorities and messaging strategy.

The situation underscores ongoing discussions within the party about how to regain support among voters who shifted toward Republicans in recent elections. Fetterman’s public statements have added to those conversations without signaling a formal break from the Democratic Party.

SHALL MEANS SHALL Ruling Supreme Court Blockbuster 9-0

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Senate Majority Leader John Thune indicated that Republicans may turn to budget reconciliation to advance the SAVE America Act if Democratic opposition blocks the measure through traditional procedures. Thune stated that reconciliation remains a viable legislative tool when circumstances warrant its use. “I think that budget reconciliation, as I’ve said before, you have to have a reason to do it. And if we have reasons to do it—and we may, very well may—I think there are a number of our colleagues in the Senate—we just came out of a luncheon where this was discussed—and I think there’s a lot of support for a budget reconciliation bill,” Thune said.

The senator noted that Republicans have multiple legislative pathways available and would evaluate them to ensure the bill reaches final passage. “We have two legislative vehicles, as you know, available to us, so we could tee one of those up. And that’s an option. And we’ll see—if that’s what it takes to get some of these things across the finish line, and we can do it with simple majorities, we’ll take a hard look at it,” he added.

Budget reconciliation allows certain legislation to pass the Senate with a simple majority of 51 votes rather than the 60 votes typically required to overcome a filibuster. Vice President JD Vance could cast a tie-breaking vote if needed. The process is governed by the Byrd Rule, which limits provisions to those directly affecting federal spending or revenue; items deemed extraneous may be stripped from the bill.

Sen. John Kennedy expressed support for exploring reconciliation to move the legislation forward. “I think we are, Mr. President—I know you are—we need to try to pass this legislation through reconciliation,” Kennedy said. “Now, you know how reconciliation works, Mr. President. It means we can pass this bill with 50 Republican votes and the Vice President to break the tie,” he said.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin confirmed that discussions are underway. He noted that Senate Republican leadership, including Sen. Lindsey Graham, is developing a framework. “Lindsey Graham, the chairman where the reconciliation will funnel through, is committed to making sure we get reconciliation through,” Mullin said. “If that is in some form with funding ICE, possibly backfilling from the One Big Beautiful Bill, but also, more importantly, the SAVE America Act—there’s a framework that we can use through reconciliation, paying for it and putting in some of the policies that cost money,” he said.

Mullin emphasized public support for the measure. “Because there’s nothing more important than the SAVE America Act. I mean, that’s what the American people want. Eighty percent of the population says they want only Americans voting—citizens who are registered to vote, citizens who have done it the right way,” he said. “And I believe that everybody wants election integrity. So fortunately, Lindsey Graham has said that, through reconciliation, he’s willing to put the framework out for that,” he said.

The SAVE America Act would require documentary proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections, strengthen voter identification rules, and expand federal involvement in maintaining voter rolls. The legislation has drawn strong support from Republicans who argue it safeguards election integrity, while Democrats have opposed it, contending that existing laws already address citizenship requirements and that the measure could create unnecessary barriers for eligible voters.

The current discussion occurs amid broader partisan debates over Senate procedures and the balance between majority rule and minority protections. Reconciliation has been used in recent years for major fiscal and health policy measures, though its application to voting rules would represent a notable expansion. Senate leaders continue to weigh the procedural and political implications as the 2026 midterm elections approach.