Trump administration asks US Supreme Court to endorse immigration detention policy

2026-06-26T17:59:32.57Z / Reuters

June 26 (Reuters) – U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to let it detain people arrested in its immigration crackdown without a chance to seek bond, even if they have lived in the country for years.

The administration made that request in a filing made public on Friday, asking the Supreme Court to overturn a May decision by a federal appeals court, which had rejected its reinterpretation of a decades-old immigration law that now underlies its mass detention policy.

Sign up here.

The administration filed the appeal earlier this week, before the 6-3 conservative majority court handed it a pair of major wins on immigration policy on Thursday, including by allowing it to strip hundreds of thousands of Haitian and Syrian immigrants of protections against deportation.

The administration is asking the Supreme Court to review a ruling by a 2-1 panel of the Cincinnati-based 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, one of three appeals courts that have joined with hundreds of lower-court judges in rejecting its detention practice.

Two other appeals courts have endorsed the administration’s policy, a fact U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer noted as he urged the justices to intervene and resolve a “critically important question of immigration law” that is fueling thousands of lawsuits by people challenging their detention.

“Detaining aliens who are living in the country after an illegal entry while their removal proceedings unfold prevents those aliens from evading hearings and helps ensure their removal from the United States,” Sauer argued in a petition.

Bucking a long-standing interpretation of immigration law, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security last year took the position that non-citizens already residing in the United States, and not just people arriving at the border, qualify as “applicants for admission” subject to mandatory detention.

Under federal immigration law, “applicants for admission” to the United States are subject to mandatory detention while their cases proceed in immigration courts and are ineligible for bond hearings.

The Board of Immigration Appeals, which is part of the Justice Department, issued a decision in September that adopted that interpretation. As a result, immigration judges, who are employed by the department, across the country began ordering mandatory detention.

The 6th Circuit’s ruling came in cases out of Michigan involving citizens of Mexico, El Salvador, Venezuela, Nicaragua and Guatemala who had resided in the United States for years before being arrested by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement or U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

It held that the administration misinterpreted a provision of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 and that the migrants were denied bond hearings in violation of their due process rights under the U.S. Constitution’s Fifth Amendment.

Reporting by Nate Raymond in Boston, Editing by Alexia Garamfalvi and Sanjeev Miglani

Suspect in Minnesota fraud case arrested in Somalia after 4 years on the run, officials say

June 26, 2026 / 3:29 PM EDT / CBS News

MINNEAPOLIS — An alleged leader of the largest pandemic-era fraud scheme in the country was arrested overseas after being on the run for more than four years, according to federal officials.

Abdikerm Eidleh, 43, was arrested in Mogadishu, Somalia, earlier this week in a daytime raid coordinated by both the FBI and Somali intelligence agencies. He was indicted in September 2022 as part of the sweeping $250 million Feeding Our Future fraud investigation.

“This is a big fish,” Daniel Rosen, U.S. Attorney for Minnesota, told CBS News. “Eidleh was a key leader and was responsible for bribing and recruiting business to steal from the American taxpayer.”

Rosen said Eidleh was “second in command” to Aimee Bock, the convicted ringleader of the scheme, who was just sentenced to more than 40 years in prison.

Abdikerm Eidleh

Investigators allege Eidleh personally collected $5 million in bribes and kickbacks after instructing restaurants and catering businesses to inflate receipts submitted to the Minnesota Department of Education for reimbursement.

“This shows the global reach and outstretched arm of American law enforcement,” said Christopher Dotson, FBI Special Agent in Charge at FBI Minneapolis. “Somalia is not the safe haven you may think it is.”

So far prosecutors have charged 79 people, most of Somali descent, in the Feeding Our Future case. Of those, 66 have been convicted or pleading guilty.

Dozens of others have also been charged in Minnesota in a range of alleged schemes to defraud taxpayer-funded social service programs, including childcare, housing and behavioral health.

Rosen previously told CBS News the total amount of fraud in Minnesota could top $1 billion.

“The chapter for Feeding Our Future might be closing, but we’re still in the beginning of making sure we protect the American taxpayer,” Rosen said

‘Damning silence’: Swing-seat Democrat stays quiet after AOC voices support

Cait Conley has yet to comment on AOC’s support or address the three socialist candidates sharing Democratic ticket

June 26, 2026 12:49pm EDT / Fox News

NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!

A Democratic House hopeful vying for one of the nation’s most competitive districts is staying silent after Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., voiced support for her campaign.

Ocasio-Cortez, a leftist firebrand with growing influence in the Democratic Party, congratulated former Biden administration official Cait Conley on her primary victory in a social media post Wednesday.

“I look forward to working together as a delegation as we fight for working families across New York,” Ocasio-Cortez wrote.

The post also celebrated a Democrat vying to succeed retiring Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., alongside three socialist candidates backed by New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani.

RISING SOCIALIST STARS ON TRACK TO CONGRESS: WHO ARE DARIALIZA AVILA CHEVALIER, BRAD LANDER AND CLAIRE VALDEZ?

Brad Lander, former New York City comptroller and U.S. House candidate, stands with NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders at a “Get Out The Vote” rally at Kings Theater in Brooklyn on June 18, 2026.(Adam Gray/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Conley has yet to comment on Ocasio-Cortez’s support or address the trio of far-left candidates — longtime New York official Brad Lander, state Assembly member Claire Valdez, D-N.Y., and activist Darializa Avila-Chevalier — who have called for abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), are outspoken critics of Israel and have vowed to advance the Palestinian cause in Congress.

Conley’s general election opponent, Rep. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., insists she should have to answer for it.

“Which is it, Cait: do you reject AOC and the candidates who want to abolish ICE, defund the police, and tear down our borders, or do you embrace them?” Lawler’s campaign manager Ciro Riccardi said in a statement to Fox News Digital.

“The Hudson Valley deserves an answer, and so far all we’ve heard is your damning silence,” he continued.

Lander and Avila-Chevalier previously called for defunding the police, while the latter has continued to advocate for abolishing prisons and stopping all deportations. Avila-Chevalier also reposted a tweet denying Israel’s right to exist and helped form a pro-Palestinian group at Columbia University that called for “the total eradication of Western civilization.”

The three Mamdani-backed candidates are expected to double the ranks of the left-wing group known as the “Squad,” an informal bloc closely aligned with Ocasio-Cortez, who also supports abolishing ICE.

Fox News Digital reached out to the Conley campaign for comment.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., a leader of the Democratic Party’s leftist flank, voiced support for Democratic House candidate Cait Conley after she won a contested primary Tuesday.(Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images; Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc. via Getty Images)

DEM CANDIDATE CLEARS CROWDED FIELD TO FACE TRUMP-BACKED INCUMBENT IN NY

The scrutiny comes after Conley avoided criticizing the socialist candidates during an interview with MS NOW on Thursday.

Asked about socialist candidates who support prison abolition and have suggested the United States deserved 9/11, Conley talked about her own background rather than directly addressing the question.

“I joined the Army and went to West Point because of 9/11 because I watched the suffering and pain that we as a nation, we as a state, we as the Hudson Valley, experienced that day,” Conley said. “And so when you talk about the American government’s responsibility to the people, it is to keep it safe.”

“While, you know, folks were elected down in New York City, in New York-17, Democratic voters chose a West Point grad and 16-year Army combat veteran to be their representative in this fight this fall,” Conley added, referring to herself.

Aber Kawas, a socialist and pro-Palestinian activist who won a Democratic primary for a New York State Senate seat Tuesday, appeared to justify 9/11 in a resurfaced 2017 video.

Conley has previously faced scrutiny over her role on former President Joe Biden’s national security team. Lawler has argued that she downplayed her alleged involvement in the former president’s botched 2021 Afghanistan withdrawal, which coincided with her time on the National Security Council.

The battleground race is expected to be one of the most hotly-contested races in the country, with national Republicans expected to aggressively defend Lawler’s bid for a third House term.

Rep. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., leaves the U.S. Capitol after the last vote of the week on Jan. 9, 2026.(Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc. via Getty Images)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The nonpartisan Cook Political Report rates the contest as a “toss-up” after shifting the race in favor of Democrats earlier this year.

In 2024, former Vice President Kamala Harris narrowly won the purple district, where Democrats hold a sizable voter registration advantage.

https://www.foxnews.com/video/6399411108112

Trump threatens 100% tariff on any country that imposes digital services tax

2026-06-26T16:36:48.05Z / Reuters

By Doina Chiacu and David Lawder

June 26, 2026 4:36 PM UTC Updated 1 hour ago

U.S. President Donald Trump walks to address guests as he hosts a dinner with farmers in the Rose Garden of the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., June 25, 2026. REUTERS/Evan Vucci

• Summary

• Trump threatens new tariff to deter digital services taxes
• Move follows Macron’s refusal to back down from French levies ​on US tech firms
• EU countries cut tariffs on US goods on Thursday to meet Trump’s ‌July 4 deadline

WASHINGTON, June 26 (Reuters) – U.S. President Donald Trump threatened on Friday a 100% tariff on all goods from any country that imposes a digital services tax on American companies, inflaming transatlantic trade tensions a day after ​European Union countries met Trump’s July 4 deadline to cut tariffs on U.S. goods.

“Numerous European Countries have ​been discussing the imminent implementation of a Digital Services Tax on American Companies,” Trump ⁠said in a social media post. “Some of these Countries are close to actually doing this.

Get weekly news and analysis on U.S. politics and how it matters to the world with the Reuters Politics U.S. newsletter. Sign up here.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

“Please let this ​statement serve to represent that any Country that imposes such a Tax will immediately be met with a ​100% TARIFF on any and all Goods sent to the United States of America.”

Trump said the new tariff would supersede any trade deals with the United States, “whether implemented, signed or not.”

That would include the deal the U.S. and EU agreed to ​last year, which caps U.S. tariffs on European goods at 15% in exchange for EU countries reducing tariffs ​on U.S. industrial goods to zero.

But a lengthy EU legislative process to meet the bloc’s commitments under the deal prompted ‌Trump ⁠to threaten to reimpose a 25% tariff on imports from Europe, including autos. EU lawmakers then scrambled to meet a deadline from Trump to implement the changes by July 4.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

French President Emmanuel Macron said last week, before meeting with Trump at a G7 summit, that France would not bow to pressure from him and scrap ​its digital tax on U.S. ​tech giants. The digital ⁠services it taxes include online marketplaces and advertising.

Before setting off for the summit in France, Trump had warned that the U.S. would “have no choice” but to apply ​100% tariffs on French wine unless Paris eliminated its digital tax.

France has applied ​a 3% ⁠levy since 2019 on revenue earned in France from digital services provided by companies with revenue of more than €25 million in the country and €750 million ($854.02 million) worldwide. French lawmakers last year proposed doubling the tax to 6%.

The U.S. ⁠Trade Representative’s ​office has long threatened France, Britain, Austria, Spain and other ​European countries with retaliatory tariffs if they impose digital services taxes, arguing that these levies discriminate against U.S. companies, which dominate the sector globally.

($1 = ​0.8782 euros)

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

Reporting by Jasper Ward, David Lawder and Doina Chiacu; Editing by Chizu Nomiyama, Deepa Babington, Rod Nickel

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Rep. Stansbury: Billionaire Leon Black walked out in the middle of Epstein interview

3:42 PM EDT, Fri June 26, 2026 / CNN

By Blake McGill, CNN

https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/26/politics/video/cncpm-leon-black-oversight-committee

Rep. Stansbury: Billionaire Leon Black walked out in the middle of Epstein interview

House Oversight Committee member Rep. Melanie Stansbury and CNN’s Boris Sanchez discuss billionaire Leon Black’s voluntary appearance before the committee.

6:15 • Source: CNN

Politics of the Day 10 videos

Rep. Stansbury: Billionaire Leon Black walked out in the middle of Epstein interview
06:15
Now playing
• Source: CNN

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito accuses Justice Sonia Sotomayor of blindsiding him
04:47
Now playing
• Source: CNN

Supreme Court lets Trump end protections for Haitians and Syrians
01:49
Now playing
• Source: CNN

The Odds: Democratic Socialism
04:02
Now playing
• Source: CNN

Trump hosts “rally to end all rallies” to open festival
02:15
Now playing
• Source: CNN

Rep. Liccardo: ‘Trump is the biggest buzz kill at the party’
01:32
Now playing
• Source: CNN

Senate walks back rebuke of Trump over Iran war
02:14
Now playing
• Source: CNN

Congressman: ‘Trump clearly decided that his crisis was more important than America’s crisis’
03:06
Now playing
• Source: CNN

Michigan state senator: ‘We cannot afford for somebody who is going to be loyal to Donald Trump to get into this seat’
01:54
Now playing
• Source: CNN

Sen. Van Hollen: Trump is saying he ‘doesn’t give a damn’ about people who can’t afford housing
02:04
Now playing
• Source: CNN

See more videos

Clinton judge orders DOJ to unseal the Epstein files it has been keeping hidden

2026-06-26 12:17pm EDT / Fox News

Redacted records include a 2007 draft indictment and emails with hidden senders including one about a torture video

By Elaine Mallon, Fox News

A federal judge has ordered the Justice Department to release more unredacted Jeffrey Epstein records or justify keeping them sealed by July 2, with redacted versions of the files including sensitive interview notes documenting a minor’s uncorroborated sexual assault allegations against President Donald Trump.

U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan, a Clinton-appointed judge, issued the order after granting a preliminary injunction sought by independent journalist Katie Phang, who sued Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche in April. She alleged that the Justice Department failed to comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act that was signed last year when she requested several documents. The law requires the government to make Epstein-related investigative records public while allowing limited redactions to protect victims and other legally protected information.

More than half of the six million files have been made publicly available, with the remaining files withheld because of legal privilege protections or because they are duplicates, according to the Justice Department. But the department has faced growing criticism over the scope of its redactions, with critics arguing it has concealed information that should be public under the law.

EPSTEIN FALLOUT GROWS AS DOJ WATCHDOG DIGS DEEPER INTO HANDLING OF THE CASE

Jeffrey Epstein walks outdoors in New York City on Feb. 23, 2011. He is the subject of a bipartisan House Oversight Committee investigation.(David McGlynn)

In a 48-page memorandum, Sullivan ordered the Justice Department to either disclose less-redacted versions of several key Epstein records or justify the redactions. The documents covered by the order include eight emails with hidden senders or recipients; a 2007 draft federal indictment — with the names of potential co-conspirators redacted — that was never filed; and a 2019 email referencing alleged co-conspirators whose identities were obscured.

Among the redacted records is an email — with the recipient’s identity concealed — in which Epstein wrote that he “loved” a torture video he watched. During the litigation, Blanche suggested the recipient was wealthy Middle Eastern businessman Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem.

The order also covers FBI records summarizing 2019 interviews with a woman who made allegations involving President Donald Trump. In the FBI’s interview summary, the woman alleged she met Epstein when she was 14 or 15 years old and that he later introduced her to Trump, whom she accused of sexually assaulting her in explicit detail. Those claims are uncorroborated, and the president has denied the allegations. Trump was friends with the late financier in the 1990s and early 2000s but cut ties after a falling-out in the mid-2000s.

The Justice Department is also required to issue a complete log of every redaction made in records released under the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

DOJ PUBLISHES TROVE OF EPSTEIN FILES, SAYS MORE TO COME AFTER FRIDAY DEADLINE

The Justice Department had argued the lawsuit should be dismissed because Phang could have sought the records through the Freedom of Information Act. Sullivan rejected that argument, concluding that FOIA did not provide Phang an “adequate remedy.”

Phang’s lawyers said the department’s previous denial of related FOIA requests showed that FOIA was not an adequate way to obtain the records.

[image_4]

Acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche.(Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

“I have standing to be able to get Todd Blanche to comply with Judge Sullivan’s order, which is now telling him that on or before July 2, he either has to put up or shut up,” Phang said during an appearance on the MeidasTouch network. “He either has to bring forth unredacted files or show cause as to why he should not or cannot do so.”

The ruling also noted that the department itself had previously acknowledged the Epstein Files Transparency Act required broader disclosure than would ordinarily occur through FOIA, including limiting certain exemptions typically available under federal public records law.

[image_5]

Jeffrey Epstein’s mugshot was taken in New York in 2019 after federal authorities filed trafficking charges against him.(Kypros/Getty Images)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Sullivan has become a prominent figure in cases involving Trump and his allies. He oversaw former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn’s criminal case and challenged the Trump Justice Department’s effort to drop the charges after Flynn pleaded guilty. Sullivan also presided over the Jan. 6 Capitol riot cases.

Fox News Digital reached out to the Justice Department and the White House for comment.

Elaine Mallon is a writer for Fox News Digital and Fox Business covering national politics.

blob:https://www.foxnews.com/55465229-6c70-4098-b27c-4bf593a8328a

“Regime Change” authors on Trump’s “information bubble,” Situation Room meetings on Epstein

2026-06-26 12:08 PM EDT / CBS News

By

President Trump has “a fundamentally different conception of the U.S. presidency” than his predecessors, New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan explain in their new book, “Regime Change: Inside the Imperial Presidency of Donald Trump.”

Haberman and Swan sat down with “CBS Mornings” Friday to talk about their book, which dives into the president’s second term and is the result of more than 1,000 interviews.

“This administration is so unrecognizable [compared] to Trump’s first one,” Haberman told “CBS Mornings” co-host Gayle King.

She said “it became really clear to us,” over many months of reporting, “that we were covering not the transfer of power from a Democrat to a Republican or a Democrat to a Democrat. This is a fundamentally different conception of the U.S. presidency.”

Here are some of the key takeaways from their reporting.

Trump is using executive power like never before

Swan said the second Trump administration, and the book, are “really about the way he’s using executive power.”

“We haven’t seen anything like this in our lifetime in terms of the unilateral expression of executive power,” Swan said, noting that it comes at a time when “it’s pretty hard to think of a precedent for a U.S. president having the command that Trump has had over his own party in Congress.”

“There really isn’t a precedent. I mean, he basically got them to do whatever he wanted, and Congress wasn’t even consulted when he went to war with Iran.”

Even former President George W. Bush, for all the criticism of the wars he led in Iraq and Afghanistan, got congressional authorization, Swan noted.

“Trump is just acting,” Swan said. “He is acting and the system is trying to catch up to him. That’s really the way it’s working.”

Trump is fundamentally changing the U.S. approach to foreign policy

Through his unilateral actions, Mr. Trump is also changing the United States’ approach to foreign policy, from his acquisition of Venezuelan oil to his unabated aspirations of acquiring Greenland.

“It is changing how countries around the world, leaders around the world, how people in the U.S. look at their president, and we’re not used to covering regime change, as you say, here,” Haberman said. “But that is what we were doing.”

Two things that matter to Trump: Loyalty and looking the part

The president’s decisions in picking top officials for critical roles boil down to two things, Haberman and Swan said: Is that person fiercely loyal to him, and do they look the part?

“Loyalty was a premier characteristic he was seeking, and loyalty — and we write about this — has a bit of a fungible definition,” Haberman said. “What became the real litmus test was January 6th. Where you were on January 6th and where you were on January 7th? If on January 7th in Trump’s mind in any way you were separated from him, he did not want you around.”

The authors also wrote about how the president selected members of his Cabinet. According to the book, before picking John Ratcliffe as CIA director, the president said he thought he looked like actor Cary Grant, straight out of central casting.

“The ‘central casting’ aspect is a big one,” Haberman said. “Part of that is Pete Hegseth, how you now have him as the secretary of defense/war. He liked that Hegseth was good on TV. He liked that Hegseth defended, quote unquote, warriors. When it comes to someone like Tulsi Gabbard, who was the director of national intelligence, it was, ‘Let’s give it to her, what harm could she really do?’”

Trump operates in an “information bubble” and is rarely told bad news

Much more so than in his first term, the president operates in an “information bubble” where his advisers rarely tell him bad news, Haberman and Swan write. In the president’s first term, he had more advisers who would push back on occasion — but not so much these days.

Haberman noted that former President Joe Biden also hated receiving negative news, but she said, “Trump is in an information bubble that is unlike anything that I can remember.”

“The inputs that are reaching him are so small,” she said, adding that many times “decisions are being made by a group of about a half a dozen people.”

For example, Haberman said, in the lead-up to the Iran war, “The energy secretary and the treasury secretary, the two people would have to manage the after-effects and economic impacts of a global energy crisis caused by this war, were not part of these meetings initially because they were concerned about leaks.”

The Situation Room was used for meetings about Epstein files

In a series of closely held meetings, the Situation Room — normally the site of top-level national security decisions — was used for discussions about how to handle fallout from Jeffrey Epstein and the Epstein files, Haberman and Swan write in their book.

“This was a pretty extraordinary series of meetings that happened last summer and the setting itself was extraordinary,” Swan said.

“Over the summer of last year they essentially turned the Situation Room into an Epstein crisis response center, and you had the most senior officials in the U.S. government gathering in that room to figure out essentially a PR strategy to deal with the Epstein crisis,” he said.

“One of the problems they had was they built this website that they were going to release — a Justice Department public-facing website. And they were searching around in it for Trump and they were finding a lot of stuff on Trump and some of it was, you know, embarrassing, so they had to make decisions about what to disclose and what not to disclose. But that really was a political crisis that has had long-term effects way beyond what his team expected.”

Why JD Vance is downplaying Richard Nixon’s corruption

2026-06-26T16:51:04.732Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/26/politics/jd-vance-richard-nixon-corruption

It’s not every day that you see the would-be frontrunner for a major party’s presidential nomination extolling the virtues of Richard Nixon and downplaying his corruption.

But there was Vice President JD Vance on Thursday doing precisely that.

During an appearance at the Nixon Presidential Library and Museum in California, Vance likened Nixon’s ouster to efforts to hold President Donald Trump accountable in his first term, blaming the “deep state.” Vance also claimed Watergate wouldn’t be much of a story today.

There are some grains of truth in what he said, as well as some potential strategic benefit.

But there is also some danger. The vice president’s comments point to how perceptions of corruption are a sleeping giant for the Trump administration — and, by extension, for Vance in 2028.

“I think that his historical legacy is enjoying a bit of a renaissance — but I think deservedly so,” Vance said of Nixon. “As I joked … backstage, if Watergate happened tomorrow, it would be like a 12-hour news story. Like, the idea that it would have taken down a presidency is crazy.”

Vance added: “And by the way, if you look at the story of how the deep state took down Richard Nixon, it’s not all that different from what the same groups of people — the same institutions — tried to do to Donald Trump in the first Trump administration. There is a parallel.”

Vance even compared his profile to Nixon’s — having been vice president and “hated by the media” — adding with a smile in perhaps a light-hearted way: “I’ve always liked Richard Nixon.”

For starters, Vance’s contention that Nixon’s legacy is enjoying a “bit of a renaissance” is unproven. If anything, that comment might point to a longstanding criticism of Vance, which is that he’s a bit too online.

There has been an effort by some prominent conservatives to rehabilitate Nixon’s image in recent years. Witness this Politico story from 2023, as well as these Time magazine and NBC News stories from last year.

Then-GOP presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy used his own appearance at the Nixon Library in August 2023 to call Nixon “the most underappreciated president of our modern history in this country, probably in all of American history.”

But there is scant evidence that these efforts have truly penetrated with the broader public. The most recent quality poll — from Gallup in December 2024 — showed 54% of Americans rated Nixon “below average” or “poor,” to just 12% who rated him “above average” or “outstanding.” Those were the worst numbers among 10 presidents tested.

Even among Republicans, about twice as many rated Nixon negatively (39%) as positively (19%).

Is it possible that has changed in the last year and a half? Perhaps modestly. But it’s likely Vance was praising a man who is still quite unpopular.

Of course, the real point of Vance’s comments probably wasn’t to make Nixon seem good; it was to make Trump seem not so bad.

As some of those Nixon stories linked above noted, much of this effort to rehab Nixon’s image appears to be about downplaying Trump’s problems.

Watergate is the archetype of the modern political scandal, and if people suddenly regard it as no big deal or even a “deep state” operation, maybe they’ll view Trump’s corruption allegations accordingly.

And to be clear, suggestions of corruption could ultimately matter a lot more than it might seem right now.

Trump has flooded the zone with controversy and made it so that any corruption-related stories don’t last very long. He’s also commandeered the Justice Department, and his party controls Congress. So there’s not really an investigative entity at the ready to hold him accountable.

But there is a real chance that after the November midterm elections, Democrats will control one or both legislative chambers next Congress. That would give them subpoena power and the ability to launch investigations.

And at this point, there are so many potentially fruitful probes that the dilemma is really about which one — or ones — to focus on.

Tangle’s Isaac Saul last month assembled a great compendium of the biggest potential corruption issues in the Trump administration.

Some of the big ones:

• The extensive self-enrichment, which the New Yorker has pegged at $4 billion.
• The regular intermingling of official and personal business.
• The many pardons of allies.
• The rather transparent effort to train the Justice Department on Trump’s political foes based on flimsy evidence.
• The administration’s often bizarre handling of the Epstein files in which, as The New York Times’ Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan recently reported, the chief goal seemed to be protecting Trump. (He has denied any wrongdoing in connection with the late sex offender.)

Just think about potential House Oversight Committee hearings, for example, on the still-unexplained decision to move Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell to a lower-security prison right after she said things that could help Trump.

The perception of corruption is not generally regarded as a main reason why Trump’s political fortunes have declined so much. (Those would be inflation, the economy and the Iran war.) But it shouldn’t be dismissed as a factor.

A Reuters-Ipsos poll last month showed Americans disapproved of Trump’s handling of corruption issues 61%-27%. And history shows many a would-be strongman leader has been felled by supporters turning on them over corruption. Corruption was a big reason Trump ally Viktor Orbán was ousted in Hungary this spring after 16 years in office.

There’s a reason why Vance, ahead of a potential 2028 bid, would fear perceptions of the administration’s self-dealing resonating with the public.

For many apparent conflicts of interest, there isn’t a great explanation. Trump has fed these perceptions rather unapologetically, out in the open.

When The New York Times asked Trump in January why he reversed his first-term policy of his family avoiding overseas business, Trump replied: “Because I found out that nobody cared.” (Meanwhile, the White House has repeatedly argued that Trump is “restoring the integrity of the Executive Branch” by being “the most transparent” president.)

But one way for a potential Trump successor to try to manage those optics is to muddy the waters. If Watergate’s not actually a scandal, after all, what is?

Vance surely exaggerates. Watergate, after all, involved bona fide crimes including ones committed by high-profile Nixon administration officials, as well as secret tapes. But there is some truth to the claim that it’d probably be somewhat less shocking today.

That’s because Trump has absolutely blitzed the country with actions that would be scandalous in any other era.

And while Trump has proven adept at getting past these issues and keeping his base intact, it’s not so clear Vance will be so adept.

OpenAI defers public rollout of GPT‑5.6 as US seeks early access to frontier AI models

June 26, 2026 5:02 PM UTC Updated 2 hours ago / Reuters

OpenAI logo is seen in this illustration taken June 11, 2026. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration/File Photo

June 26 (Reuters) – OpenAI said on Friday it was delaying a full public launch of GPT‑5.6 at the U.S. government’s request, limiting the AI model’s initial access ​to a small group of vetted partners whose details were shared with the ‌authorities.

The decision underscores growing concern in Washington over the national security risks posed by powerful AI systems, with policymakers pressing companies to put guardrails around them.

Jumpstart your morning with the latest legal news delivered straight to your inbox from The Daily Docket newsletter. Sign up here.

By securing early access to frontier models, U.S. officials are aiming ​to identify threats ranging from cyberattacks to military misuse before the tools are widely ​deployed.

OpenAI said in a blog post that the limited release was a temporary ⁠step as it works with Washington on a broader framework for future launches. The ChatGPT ​maker presented its plans and the models’ capabilities to the government prior to the launch, it ​added.

President Donald Trump signed an executive order earlier this month establishing a voluntary framework for AI developers to offer “covered frontier models” to the U.S. government for up to 30 days before releasing them to trusted partners.

“We ​are taking this short-term step because we believe it is the strongest path to broader availability ​in the coming weeks, while we work with the Administration to develop the cyber Executive Order framework and ‌a ⁠repeatable process for future model releases,” OpenAI said.

The company said it would continue rigorous testing and close coordination with its partners as it prepares for a wider release, but cautioned that this level of government access and oversight should not become a permanent standard. It did not disclose ​the names of its ​partners.

OpenAI, however, expressed ⁠concern that such a process would restrict access to advanced AI tools for users including developers, businesses, cybersecurity professionals and international partners who could ​benefit from them.

At the center of the new lineup is GPT‑5.6 Sol, OpenAI’s ​most advanced model ⁠yet, alongside mid-tier Terra and lower-cost Luna.

Earlier this month, the U.S. government ordered Anthropic to suspend access to its frontier AI models for foreign nationals, citing national security concerns. The Claude maker remains embroiled in ⁠a legal ​and regulatory battle with the government.

Both OpenAI and Anthropic have confidentially ​filed for U.S. initial public offering. The New York Times reported on Thursday that OpenAI is considering holding off its ​public debut until next year.

Reporting by Jaspreet Singh in Bengaluru; Editing by Anil D’Silva and Sahal Muhammed

Epstein’s longtime assistant grilled by U.S. lawmakers over Amex travel booked for women or girls

June 26, 2026 / 1:11 PM EDT / CBS News

U.S. lawmakers recently grilled Jeffrey Epstein’s longtime assistant Lesley Groff about Epstein’s use of American Express to book travel for multiple women or girls, according to a transcript of her hours-long testimony released this week by the House Oversight Committee.

CBS News was the first to report in February that the late convicted sex offender used Amex’s top-tier Centurion travel service and an Amex Black Card to arrange hundreds of travel itineraries for women or girls, predominantly from Eastern Europe. Groff, who worked for Epstein for nearly two decades, was a central point-person in arranging the bookings with Amex, documents released by the Justice Department earlier this year indicated.

CBS News cannot verify the number of women or girls who received travel bookings or their ages, due to the redaction of names in the files released by the Department of Justice.

In her sworn testimony to the House Oversight Committee on June 9, Groff said she did not believe she ever arranged travel for girls under the age of 18, according to the transcript released Tuesday. She said her understanding was the bookings were being arranged for “traveling assistants” employed by Epstein.

Groff denied being aware of any instance in which the purpose of the travel was for Epstein or anyone in Epstein’s network to engage in sexual activity with the women involved.

She was pressed by the House Oversight Committee about whether “decoy flights” had been arranged for the purpose of obtaining visas for women or girls involved. As CBS News reported last month, Amex had a dedicated relationship manager, Natalia Molotkova, assigned to Epstein’s account, and emails in the files released by the Justice Department appear to show she was arranging such flights, at Groff’s request, to obtain visas for the women or girls.

Lesley Groff, center, arrives to testify at a closed-door interview with the House Oversight Committee on Capitol Hill on June 9, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

In one 2016 email exchange, Groff wrote to Molotkova: “Natasha, we need to find a flight that departs Rome and goes to London on the 29th for [redacted]. This flight should depart around the same time. The flight we are holding for [redacted] Rome to Miami, 10:35 a.m. No return flights for this flight. This is a decoy flight. She will not really take it, but she needs to show an itinerary for this flight.”

When asked whether the purpose of the flight was to obtain a visa, Groff’s attorney Michael Bachner told the committee, “with all due respect, there is no indication that it was to obtain a visa.”

“This woman wanted to take a flight to visit Mr. Epstein. She did not want to tell her parents that she was going to take this flight. She wanted to keep a flight that was taking her to London and have a different flight, though, take her really to see Mr. Epstein,” Groff told lawmakers. “I don’t know why she didn’t want to tell her parents, but this was not for a visa.”

In a December 2012 email exchange, Groff wrote to Molotkova: “[redacted] has an interview with the consulate at 1030… she needs proof of hotel stay and air for this meeting.”

Molotkova asked Groff directly whether the woman needed a flight and accommodation reservation only for visa purposes.

“It is against AMEX policy, to be honest,” she wrote to Groff, “but here is the option, we can hold it till tonight.”

Groff directed Molotkova to cancel the fully refundable travel itinerary that was being held and signed off to Molotkova with, “you’ve been great,” a day after the alleged consulate appointment took place, the files released by Justice appear to show.

In an exchange with House Oversight Committee Senior Counsel Brittany Brignac, in which she was asked what the purpose of that particular booking was, Groff replied: “I don’t know. I think that this was an assistant of Mr. Epstein’s that wanted to get her visa.”

“The only thing I facilitated was getting her a ticket and a hotel room reservation,” Groff told the lawmakers. “It looks to me like she needed to get her visa, and she was requesting it, and that’s it. I was asked to get the ticket. I was dealing with Amex Centurian. That’s it.”

When challenged on whether this was an example of a decoy flight, Groff replied, “no.”

American Express declined to comment Friday on Groff’s testimony and whether the company had carried out enough due diligence on Epstein’s account.

In February, an American Express spokesperson told CBS News the company, “strongly condemns abuse, exploitation, and human trafficking. We take our legal and regulatory responsibilities seriously, including reporting suspicious activity.”

“We terminated his account following federal charges against him, and we continuously update our processes and controls. We regret having him as a customer,” the spokesperson said.