Senior Republican Warns House Trump Expects Total Loyalty—or Else

House Republicans are fielding threats from their party whip: Bend to Donald Trump’s agenda, or risk losing your seat.

In an interview with NOTUS on Tuesday, Majority Whip Tom Emmer candidly shared his strategy for getting legislative outliers to fall into place.

“Do you really want the president going to your district and telling your voters that you are the one that is preventing him from doing what he was elected to do? I don’t think so,” Emmer told NOTUS.

Trump has a tough path ahead of him when it comes to advancing his agenda through the 119th Congress. Republicans have just enough lawmakers in the House to constitute a simple majority—but they won’t be able to lose any votes on items that Democrats rally against. Meanwhile, Republicans have a slightly more comfortable lead in the Senate, where the conservative party holds 53 seats compared to Democrats’ 45.

But should GOP lawmakers find problems in any legislation advanced by Trump’s MAGA acolytes in the House, Emmer believes that they’ll come to discover that the sacrifice of compromising on their ideals in order to aid Trump will all be worth it.

“Are they all going to be happy with everything? I seriously doubt it,” Emmer told NOTUS. “But at the end of the day, when that final product is ready, they’re all going to vote for it.”

Emmer’s statement is a signal that Trump’s expectation of total loyalty has crept from the White House and seeped into another branch of government.

That common denominator carried more weight than practically any other quality as the forty-seventh president selected dozens of nominees to lead different agencies, nearly all of whom had previously lent a hand to Trump in his criminal trials, donated money to his political campaign, or helped build out one of his presidential transition playbooks, such as Project 2025.

They have, in turn, consistently yielded to the president’s demands and expectations throughout their confirmation hearings over the last two weeks. When asked if he would obey the Impoundment Control Act, Trump’s nominee to run the Office of Management and Budget (and Project 2025 architect) Russell Vought claimed that the law was unconstitutional and that he would defer to the Trump administration as to whether his office would act in accordance with the law.

U.S. attorney general nominee (and former Trump attorney) Pam Bondi weaseled her way out of answering whether Trump lost the 2020 election. Trump’s confirmed Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent wouldn’t commit to not cutting Medicaid. (Project 2025, the fiscal year 2025 Republican Study Committee budget plan, and the fiscal year 2025 House budget all propose sweeping cuts to the wildly popular program that provides comprehensive health insurance to some 72 million Americans.)

In October, transition team co-chair Howard Lutnick promised that a government equipped with total allegiance to the chief Republican was on its way.

While explaining how Trump’s last administration buckled under the weight of staff turnover due to disagreements in “vision,” Lutnick said that the new agenda was to eradicate any internal hostility to the Republican’s plans.

“They’re all going to be on the same side, and they’re all going to understand the policies, and we’re going to give people the role based on their capacity—and their fidelity and loyalty to the policy, as well as to the man,” the Wall Street billionaire said at the time.

Donald Trump will sign an executive order Wednesday that goes after the specter of antisemitism, giving the federal agencies powers to identify, punish, and deport foreign nationals allegedly prejudiced against Judaism and Jewish people.

The order’s language places an emphasis on “pro-Hamas aliens and left-wing radicals,” as well as “leftist, anti-American colleges and universities,” The Forward reports. The order calls for the deportation of foreign nationals who are “Hamas sympathizers on college campuses,” a clear threat to international students who have participated in pro-Palestine protests.

The order additionally calls for the United States to “ensure that admitted aliens and aliens otherwise already present in the United States” do not “support designated foreign terrorists,” which is vague enough to justify severe action from the Trump administration. The order places particular emphasis on what it calls “the explosion of antisemitism on our campuses and streets” since Hamas’s October 7, 2023, attacks on Israel, which sparked the more than year-long brutal war on Gaza.

In October, Republicans in Congress floated punishing universities and colleges allowing pro-Palestine protests by revoking their accreditation and jeopardizing their federal funding. Trump has already taken aim at higher education institutions in his deluge of executive orders with one provision that would investigate diversity, equity, and inclusion “discrimination” at “institutions of higher education with endowments over $1 billion,” which could be used against racial and religious groups on campuses that support Palestinian rights and protest against Israel.

Many of Trump’s executive orders directly align with goals outlined in the conservative Project 2025 manifesto, and some of the same right-wing minds behind the manifesto at the Heritage Foundation have also crafted “Project Esther” to target pro-Palestine activists.

Project Esther specifically calls for deporting foreign students if they take part in pro-Palestinian activism, and during his campaign, Trump pledged to “deport pro-Hamas radicals” to end protests against Israel’s war in Gaza. Most protesters, however, are U.S. citizens. This latest executive order is straight from the Project Esther playbook, and could be the first of many to blatantly violate First Amendment rights to free speech and freedom of assembly.

Donald Trump’s federal funding freeze has somehow become even more of a fiasco—and he has his press secretary to thank.

Twenty-three state attorneys general appeared in federal court in Rhode Island Wednesday to oppose the Office of Management and Budget’s memo freezing federal funding for grants and loans that Congress had already approved and passed.

Ahead of the hearing, the OMB issued a memo rescinding its original memo about the freeze. White House aides said that the decision to rescind the memorandum was not intended as a way to back off the funding freeze, but rather to sidestep another court’s injunction that was issued Tuesday night, according to CBS News’s Jennifer Jacobs.

Unfortunately for the White House, press secretary Karoline Leavitt seems to have undermined their gambit by giving up the game in a statement posted to X.

“This is NOT a rescission of the federal funding freeze. It is simply a rescission of the OMB memo,” Leavitt wrote Wednesday. “Why? To end any confusion created by the court’s injunction. The President’s EO’s on federal funding remain in full force and effect, and will be rigorously implemented.”

Hours later, the states were able to introduce Leavitt’s confused and confusing statement during the hearing as evidence that their lawsuit should continue despite the fact that the memo had been rescinded.

Chief U.S. District Judge John McConnell agreed to grant a restraining order on the freeze, saying that “based on comments by the president’s secretary,” the rescission of the “hugely ambiguous” OMB memo was merely a linguistic distinction and hadn’t actually blocked the freeze at all, according to Politico’s Kyle Cheney.

While the Trump administration insisted that certain programs, such as Medicaid and Head Start, would not be affected by the directive, every single state experienced issues accessing these programs on Tuesday, leading to a national outcry from citizens and Democratic lawmakers.

In a separate case brought forward by nonprofits, a district judge issued a brief administrative stay before the memo was expected to go into effect Tuesday evening.

Trump wants to send 30,000 undocumented immigrants to Guantánamo Bay.

The president announced Wednesday that he will sign an executive order to transform the former detention camp for military prisoners into another detention camp for immigrants.

“I’m signing an executive order to instruct the departments of Defense and Homeland Security to begin preparing the 30,000-person migrant facility at Guantánamo Bay, most people don’t even know about it,” Trump told reporters, while signing into law the Laken Riley Act, which would allow federal authorities to detain any immigrant accused of a crime.

“We have 30,000 beds in Guantánamo to detain the worst criminal illegal aliens threatening the American people, some of them are so bad we don’t even trust the countries to hold them because we don’t want them coming back. So we’re gonna send them out to Guantánamo. This will double our capacity immediately, and tough, that’s a tough place to get out of. Today’s signing brings us one step closer to eradicating the scourge of migrant crime in our communities once and for all.”

Guantánamo is infamous for the rampant torture and abuse that U.S. interrogators inflicted on prisoners since the camp opened in 2002. There are currently 15 people still being detained there.

Donald Trump signed the Laken Riley Act, one of the most extreme anti-immigration bills in recent memory, into law Wednesday.

This is the first piece of legislation that Trump has signed in his second term—and it sets the tone for what’s to come. The law will allow law enforcement to detain and deport undocumented immigrants on the mere suspicion of committing a crime, with no conviction necessary. It does not include protections for children or DACA recipients. Twelve Democrats in the Senate and 46 Democrats in the House joined every Republican in Congress to pass the bill.

The new law will make it easier for Trump to pursue his goal of mass deportations, which have already begun in earnest around the country. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents have set the heavy goal of 1,200 to 1,500 deportations a day, in the process, innocent people have been detained, such as Native members of the Navajo Nation and several Puerto Ricans, including a child and a U.S. military veteran.

The stepped-up immigration raids have already a negative effect on the food industry, but have also been met with opposition from many Americans. Trump’s “border czar” Tom Homan complained on Tuesday that people in Chicago are hampering detention efforts because “they’ve been educated how to defy ICE, how to hide from ICE.”

Trump’s Department of Homeland Security was sued on Monday by multiple Quaker religious groups from across the country for lifting a restriction on immigration raids in places of worship. Trump and his right-wing allies are using every existing tool in their arsenal and passing new laws to boost their deportation efforts, but the process has been chaotic and negligent.

This story has been updated.

Mike Pence is pulling out receipts to lobby senators against confirming Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for health and human services secretary.

The former vice president posted a minute-long compilation of clips showing President Trump disparaging RFK Jr., mostly while they were each on the campaign trail last year.

“President Trump was right the first time.… Senators, Vote No on RFK. Jr.,” the video is captioned.

“RFK Jr is a Democrat plant, a radical left liberal,” one clip from May showed Trump saying. “He makes the ‘Green New Scammers’ look very conservative by comparison, and he’s anti-military and he’s anti-vet.… I’d even take Biden over Junior.”

The clip ends with inviting viewers to visit “RFKQuestions.com,” which redirects to a letter from conservative PAC Advancing American Freedom urging the Senate not to confirm RFK Jr. on the grounds that he is pro-abortion.

The video was posted on the eve of RFK Jr.’s first confirmation hearing Wednesday, during which the Trump nominee crumbled when questioned about his own past comments.

Donald Trump’s administration has made its calamitous freeze on federal grants and loans even worse.

In a brief memo Wednesday, the Office for Management and Budget announced that it would be withdrawing its order to pause funding for review.

“OMB Memorandum M-25-13 is rescinded. If you have any questions about implementing the President’s Executive Orders please contact your agency General Counsel,” the memo stated.

But then, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt just made things even messier.

“This is NOT a rescission of the federal funding freeze. It is simply a rescission of the OMB memo,” she wrote on X. “Why? To end any confusion created by the court’s injunction. The President’s EO’s on federal funding remain in full force and effect, and will be rigorously implemented.”

The freeze was originally intended to go into effect at 5 p.m. on Tuesday. But all day, state officials and lawmakers reported having issues accessing essential government services such as Medicaid and Head Start, despite subsequent assurances from OMB that these programs would not be affected by the freeze. These issues and widespread confusion led to a public outcry, as many feared that their health care access was in jeopardy.

Democratic leaders called it a “constitutional crisis,” as Trump’s administration was clearly preventing funds from being allocated as Congress had decided. To resecure funding, these organizations would have had to report to OMB on whether they promote ideas such as environmental justice, “gender ideology,” and diversity, equity, and inclusion. They would also have to say whether they provide services to undocumented immigrants.

Tuesday night, a district judge ordered a brief administrative stay on the freeze, delaying it from going into effect until February 3. This means that Leavitt’s claim the executive orders are “in full force and effect” is false.

“Thanks. This clarifies nothing,” Minnesota Senator Tina Smith tweeted in response, speaking for all of us.

Virginia Senator Tim Kaine warned that “this battle is just beginning.”

“I don’t know that they know what they’re doing. I think all they know is they got a backlash they didn’t expect, and so we’re not assuming the rescission is to be taken as a resolution,” he told reporters. “So we’re going to be on the floor tonight raising hell about this.”

New York Attorney General Letitia James warned that “this is just more confusion and chaos. We will be in court this afternoon.”

James is part of a coalition of Democratic attorneys general who have sued the Trump administration over the funding freeze.

This first major fiasco by the Trump administration promises only more chaos to come.

This story has been updated.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. may have framed himself as a grassroots political candidate in the 2024 election, but Democrats during Wednesday’s Senate Finance Committee hearing to confirm the secretary of health and human services nominee weren’t buying it. Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren were quick to note that the self-admitted anti-vaxxer was making cash off of his extreme public health stances.

“I think the gist of what you’re trying to say today is that you’re really pro-vaccine, you want to ask questions—you have started a group called the Children’s Health Defense. You’re the originator of it,” Sanders said.

“Right now, as I understand it, on their website they are selling what’s called onesies—little things, clothing for babies. One of them is titled ‘Unvaxxed, unafraid’. Next one, and it’s sold for 26 bucks apiece, by the way, next one is ‘No vax, no problem’.”

“Now, you’re coming before this committee and saying you’re pro-vaccine,” the independent Vermont politico continued. “And yet your organization is making money selling a child’s product to parents for 26 bucks which casts fundamental doubt on the usefulness of vaccines.

“Can you tell us now, now that you are pro-vaccine, that you’re going to have your organization take these products off the market?” Sanders pressed.

In a disclosure form filed for his nomination, Kennedy claimed that he had resigned as chairman and chief legal counsel of Children’s Health Defense in December. He made roughly $326,000 for just three months of work at the nonprofit in 2023, according to the group’s 990 form that year. The same disclosure form revealed that the outspoken vaccine critic made roughly $10 million over the last year related to speaking fees, dividends from his vaccine lawsuits, and leading Children’s Health Defense.

Still, Kennedy told Sanders that he had “no power” over the organization, which he left just last month.

“You founded that; you certainly have power,” Sanders continued, raising his voice. “Are you supportive of these onesies?”

“I am supportive of vaccines. I want good science,” Kennedy said, refusing to say whether or not he would advise the group to reconsider such merchandise.

Warren had a similarly heated exchange with Kennedy, torching the familially ousted “predator” for making a business out of collecting fees on vaccine- and medication-related lawsuits.

“There’s a lot of ways you can influence those future lawsuits and pending lawsuits while you are secretary of HHS,” Warren said, pointing out that Kennedy could publish his anti-vax theories on U.S. government letterhead to influence juries, change vaccine labels, request that the CDC remove jabs from the vaccine schedules, or change which claims are compensated in the vaccine injury compensation program.

“I’m asking you to commit right now, that you will not take a financial stake in every one of those lawsuits so that what you do as secretary will also benefit you financially down the line,” Warren said.

But Kennedy wouldn’t commit to the specificity of that promise.

“I will comply with all the ethical guidelines,” Kennedy said, before claiming that Warren was simply asking him not to sue more vaccine companies. “That’s exactly what you’re doing,” he said.

“No one should be fooled here,” Warren said, addressing the room. “As secretary of HHS, Robert Kennedy will have the power to undercut vaccines and vaccine manufacturing across our country.

“The bottom line is the same: Kennedy can kill off access to vaccines and make millions of dollars while he does it. Kids might die, but Robert Kennedy can keep cashing in.”

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. made several disturbing comments during his first Senate confirmation hearing Wednesday suggesting that, as Donald Trump’s secretary of health and human services, he’s hoping to limit access to the abortion pill mifepristone.

Representative James Lankford, a Republican from Oklahoma, asked Kennedy if he had plans to improve Food and Drug Administration transparency in regard to the side effects associated with mifepristone, one of the drugs used to induce abortions, which he claimed were not being reported under the Biden administration. The FDA approved mifepristone in 2000.

“It’s against everything we believe in in this country, that patients or doctors should not be reporting adverse events. We need to know what adverse events are, we need to understand the safety of every drug: mifepristone and every other drug,” Kennedy said.

“And President Trump has made it clear to me that one of the things—he is not taking a position yet on mifepristone, a detailed position, but he’s made it clear to me that he wants me to look at safety issues, and I’ll ask NIH and FDA to do that.”

The FDA has previously found that after decades of use by millions of women, mifepristone has proven to be “extremely safe” and that “serious adverse events are exceedingly rare.” But, given Kennedy’s other statements opposing abortion, it seems that he is interested in severely limiting abortion access, and calling for the FDA to review mifepristone’s safety could be his way to do just that.

When answering another question from Lankford about how he planned to handle Title X, an HHS policy that provides funding for family planning services, Kennedy replied, “I agree with President Trump that every abortion is a tragedy. I agree with him that we cannot be a moral nation if we have 1.2 million abortions a year. I agree with him that the states should control abortion.

“President Trump has told me that he wants to end late-term abortions, and he wants to protect conscience exemptions, and he wants to end federal funding for abortions here or abroad,” Kennedy said. “I serve at the pleasure of the president, I’m gonna implement his policies.”

(Reproductive health experts have warned that the term “late-term abortion” is scientifically meaningless and is actually a tool anti-abortion activists use to fearmonger that people are committing infanticide.)

Kennedy’s stance represents a significant change-up from his past statements about abortion—and Senator Maggie Hassan, a Democrat from New Hampshire, brought receipts.

“In 2023, you came to New Hampshire and said, ‘I’m pro-choice, I don’t think the government has any business telling people what they can or cannot do to their body,’” Hassan said. “So, you said that, right?”

“Yes,” Kennedy replied.

“But you also said, ‘We need to trust the women to make that choice because I don’t trust government to make any choices.’ You said that too, right?”

“Yes,” Kennedy said.

“It is remarkable that you have such a long record of fighting for women’s reproductive freedom, and really great that my Republican colleagues are so open to voting for a pro-choice HHS secretary,” Hassan said.

“So Mr. Kennedy, I’m confused,” she continued. “You have clearly stated in the past that bodily autonomy is one of your core values. The question is, do you stand for that value or not? When was it that you decided to sell out the values you’ve had your whole life in order to be given power by President Trump?”

Hassan wasn’t the only lawmaker to go after Kennedy over abortion. Senator Catherine Cortez Masto, a Democrat from Nevada, also got in on the action.

“A pregnant woman with a life-threatening bleeding from an incomplete miscarriage goes to the E.R., and her doctor also determines that she needs an emergency abortion. But she’s in a state where abortion is banned,” Cortez Mastro said. “You would agree also as an attorney that federal law protects her right to that emergency care, correct?”

“Um. I don’t know,” Kennedy sputtered. “I mean, the answer to that is I don’t know.”

“Well, let me ask you this, as an attorney, doesn’t federal law preempt state law?”

“The federal Constitution does. Not every federal law preempts state laws,” Kennedy replied.

Donald Trump’s Justice Department is moving to drop the charges against his two former Mar-a-Lago employees, Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, in the classified documents case.

The DOJ filed a motion Wednesday to dismiss an appeal to revive the charges against the pair, thus ending the last traces of the federal criminal cases against the president. In July, Trump appointee Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the 42 felony charges against Trump, Nauta, and De Oliveira, on the grounds that special counsel Jack Smith had been illegitimately appointed. The Justice Department appealed the decision, asking that the charges against Nauta and De Oliveira remain.

The pair were accused of helping Trump move boxes of classified documents at his Florida estate so that federal investigators could not find them and of trying to delete security footage that showed them moving boxes. Trump also asked Nauta to lie on his behalf to the FBI and promised him a pardon if he faced any charges.

Earlier this month, Nauta and De Oliveira had also sought to block special counsel Jack Smith’s final report on the classified documents case from being released, but their appeal was denied. Cannon, who showed clear bias toward Trump during his classified documents case, did manage to block the release of a selected volume of Smith’s report to select members of Congress last week, leaving parts of the case still unknown to the public.

In November, following Trump’s election victory, Smith moved to have the federal charges against the president for trying to overturn the 2020 election dismissed without prejudice, meaning that they could be refiled after his term of office ends in 2029. For Nauta and De Oliveira, Wednesday’s action might be the end of the classified documents case. But for Trump, will it resurface four years from now?