Trump Insists Ballroom’s Skyrocketing Cost Is No Big Deal

President Donald Trump dismissed claims Wednesday that the White House ballroom has suffered cost overrun after its price tag skyrocketed from $400 million in private donations to $1 billion sourced from American taxpayers. 

Trump claimed that there was no cost overrun because he’d previously announced that the cost of construction had gone up. 

“The only reason the cost has changed is because, after deep rooted studies, it is approximately twice the size, and a far higher quality, than the original proposal, which would not have been adequate to handle the necessary events, meetings, and even future Inaugurations,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. 

“This was a necessary change, it was done long ago, but the Fake News failed to report it, trying to make it look like there was a cost overrun. Actually, it is coming in ahead of schedule, and under budget!” Trump added. 

Trump originally claimed that the project would only cost $200 million, but that number later ballooned to $300 million, and then $400 million after he decided to tack on extra construction. The ballroom had previously been paid for by private donors, many of whom held multi-figure federal contracts.  

Then, earlier this week, Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley requested $1 billion for “security adjustments and upgrades” related to the ballroom’s construction. Trump is simply pretending the outrage is over the old price tag, and not the exorbitant one Senate Republicans hope to pass, which will come at a cost to U.S. taxpayers. 

Trump’s defense rings especially hollow, considering that the DOJ launched an investigation into Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell over the cost of renovations to the Fed’s office buildings. The suit was a pretext to attack Powell as he tried to maintain the agency’s independence from the White House. 

In March, Judge James Boasberg quashed subpoenas for the criminal case against Powell, finding that the government has produced “essentially zero evidence” to substantiate its claims.

Mississippi Republicans plan to hold a vote to redraw the state’s congressional map in a building central to the legacy of segregation.

The special legislative session is scheduled to take place on May 20 in what is now known as the Old Capitol Museum in Jackson, ostensibly due to renovations in the House chamber in the newer Capitol building. But the Old Capitol was the site of Mississippi’s vote to secede from the union over slavery in 1861, as well as the location where lawmakers met to establish the state’s 1890 constitution enshrining Jim Crow segregation against its Black population.

“I was a little taken aback with the location of the Old State Capitol,” Democratic state Representative Kabir Karriem, who heads Mississippi’s legislative Black caucus, told The Guardian. “Even though they said that they were doing some remodeling, the optics of it are horrific for 1.2 million Black folks here in the state of Mississippi.”

The redistricting vote is only possible because of the Supreme Court’s ruling last week in Louisiana v. Callais, which gutted the 1965 Voting Rights Act set up to protect the voting rights of Black Americans across the South. The Supreme Court ruling removed protections against racial gerrymandering, allowing states like Mississippi to redraw their districts without any protections for Black voters.

The chair of the Mississippi Democratic Party, Cheikh Taylor, said the special session was about “power, and making sure Black Mississippians never have enough of it to threaten the people who currently hold it.”

“And now they plan to do it in the Old Capitol, the same building where Mississippi voted to secede from the Union over slavery, and where white supremacist delegates crafted the 1890 Constitution that stripped Black citizens of their voting rights and ushered in decades of poll taxes, literacy tests and racial terror,” Taylor, who is also a state representative, said in a statement. “Rep Kabir Karriem is right. It is a slap in the face to the 1.2 million African Americans in this state. It is also a confession. They are returning to the scene of the crime to try and finish the job.”

Republican-run states across the country are hastily moving to redraw their districts, not just because of the Supreme Court but also at President Trump’s urging as he attempts to avert a bloodbath for the GOP in November’s midterm elections. Mississippi has the highest percentage of Black people of any state in the U.S., at about 38 percent. Soon, they may not have a single member of Congress working in their interest.

Satellite imagery has revealed that Iranian airstrikes have done much more damage to U.S. military bases, fuel depots, barracks, and other outposts than the Trump administration is letting on—even as the president and his Cabinet claim to be winning the war.

The Washington Post reported on Wednesday that at least 228 structures at U.S. military sites in the Middle East have been either partially damaged or totally destroyed by Iran since the beginning of the joint U.S.-Israeli war on Iran and Lebanon. The Post reached this number by independently verifying satellite images released by Iranian state media.

The numbers are much higher than the Trump administration has publicly admitted, and the U.S. military has been forced to reduce staffing at many of the attacked sites.

“The Iranians have deliberately targeted accommodation buildings across multiple sites with the intent to inflict mass casualties,” image analyst William Goodhind told the Post. “It is not just equipment, fuel storage and air base infrastructure under fire, but also soft targets, such as gyms, food halls and accommodation.”

Seven U.S. service members have been killed in strikes and over 400 have been injured since the start of the war in February.

This reporting contradicts essentially everything Trump has said—and suggests that he severely underestimated Iran’s military capabilities before getting the country involved in another war in the Middle East.

The FBI has launched a criminal leak investigation into the Atlantic reporter who reported on Kash Patel’s excessive drinking and unexplained absences.

The FBI’s probe is focused on journalist Sarah Fitzpatrick, who reported last month that Patel was known to drink in excess, routinely delayed meetings and time-sensitive operations, and was often unreachable, two people familiar with the matter told MS NOW Wednesday.

The probe is different from a typical leak investigation because it did not stem from a leak of classified information, and instead focuses on leaks to a reporter, the sources said.

“They know they are not supposed to do this,” one source told MS NOW. “But if they don’t go forward, they could lose their jobs. You’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t.”

After The Atlantic published the story, Patel filed a $250 million defamation suit against the publication, claiming the article was “replete with false and obviously fabricated allegations designed to destroy Director Patel’s reputation and drive him from office.”

But if the claims are all false, then why investigate a leak?

This wouldn’t be the first time that Patel undermined his own lawsuit. Last month, Patel flatly denied something asserted in his own court filings. And Patel’s ongoing temper tantrum over the report has apparently only invited more government officials to reach out to Fitzpatrick.

FBI spokesperson Ben Williamson denied the bureau was investigating Fitzpatrick. “This is completely false. No such investigation like this exists and the reporter you mention is not being investigated at all,” he told MS NOW.

“Every time there’s a publication of false claims by anonymous sources that gets called out, the media plays the victim via investigations that do not exist,” he added.

The Atlantic’s editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg gave a statement to MS NOW: “We will have further comment when we learn more. If true, this would be an outrageous, illegal, and dangerous attack on the free press and the First Amendment. We will defend Sarah and all of our reporters who are subjected to government harassment simply for pursuing the truth.”

This story has been updated.

Wannabe California governor Chad Bianco tried to pull a trump card during a GOP debate on CNN, and ended up humiliated on live TV.

During a prolonged exchange with host Kaitlan Collins, the MAGA-aligned Riverside County sheriff vehemently denied that he ever accused his Republican rival, GOP frontrunner Steve Hilton, of “swindling” his way into the Republican arena. But Collins had the receipts, and read them as Hilton stood just feet away.

“I saw the two of you chatting earlier, you and Mr. Hilton. You’ve actually had some harsh words for your fellow Republican,” Collins said. “You’ve called him ‘unethical and dishonest’ and said that he is trying to ‘manipulate Californians’ and ‘swindled his way into the Republican side.’ Are you saying that you don’t think Republican voters can trust Mr. Hilton?”

“I don’t know where that came from. I would tell you, in my entire life I don’t think I’ve used the word ‘swindle,’” Bianco said. “So I don’t know if you were quoting something or if you were saying that—if you were saying that.”

“It’s a quote from you to The Atlantic,” Collins clarified.

Hilton, a California businessman who previously worked for British Prime Minister David Cameron, has been endorsed by Donald Trump. He is currently tied in the polls with Democrat Xavier Becerra, pulling roughly 18 percent of the vote.

Bianco tried to qualify his language, and in doing so again denied having ever used the word “swindle.”

“I don’t know where that came from. I would never, I would never use the word ‘swindled,’” he stuttered.

He then claimed he was the only person on the stage whose job—as a local law enforcement official—revolved around the truth, noting that “right now, lying can get me removed from my job.”

But Collins offered more specifics, quoting directly from an interview that Bianco did with KBAK in March in which the sheriff asserted that Hilton was trying to figure out how he can “manipulate Californians to put him in this position at a time when we know that California Democrats have failed and we are going to vote for a Republican governor, and he has swindled his way into the Republican side, even though he’s not.”

“I probably did say that,” Bianco admitted. “I didn’t use the word ‘swindle’, whatever it was. But that context, I will agree with that 100 percent.”

“So you did say the quote?” Collins pressed.

“Sure,” Bianco said.

It would be a shocking turn of events if Bianco’s blustery performance did anything but hurt him at the polls. During the same debate, the 58-year-old touted his Oath Keeper alliance until one of his opponents, Democrat Antonio Villaraigosa, reminded him that the extremist militia group participated in the January 6 insurrection.

“You’re an Oath Keeper. We all know that,” Villaraigosa said.

“And I’m very proud of it,” Bianco interjected.

“I don’t think an Oath Keeper is qualified to be governor,” Villaraigosa continued.

Bianco later said he had sworn an oath three times “to defend my Constitution.”

“To everyone who wants to lie and get emotionally spun up about the Oath Keeper organization, I want you to go read the mission statement—” Bianco continued, before he was interrupted by another voice on stage: “I saw them on CNN attacking the Capitol.”

“Do you still consider yourself a member of that group, to be clear?” asked Collins.

“No,” Bianco replied.

Vice President JD Vance just reminded everyone what a charisma-less vacuum he is.

Speaking Tuesday at a manufacturing facility in Iowa, Vance stumbled through a speech attempting to boost Zach Nunn, a Republican running for reelection to the House.

“When I see that—when I see Iowa farmers who need to get that E-15 to market, what is, uh, this, what is, uh … Zach, you’re gonna have to help me out with her name here. I lost my page here. Alright. OK, there we go!” Vance said.

The crowd seemed fairly unimpressed with Vance’s riffing. The room stayed silent as Vance struggled, and video showed the people behind him half-heartedly holding up signs and looking around.

There are those of us old enough to remember in 2024 when Vance tried to congratulate himself for not needing to refer to notes while on the campaign trail.

“Ma’am, I don’t need a teleprompter, I’ve actually got thoughts in my head, unlike Kamala Harris,” Vance told the crowd in Erie, Pennsylvania.

Moments later in that speech, Vance mixed up Abbey Gate, the location of a horrific suicide bombing in 2021, with Abbey Road, the location of The Beatles’ London recording studio.

At least one Indiana Republican is still standing firm in his opposition to Trump after the president successfully enacted his revenge on the state’s Republicans blocking his redistricting efforts.

Trump-endorsed candidates won five of the seven state Senate primary races on Tuesday, a resounding victory for the president in an openly confrontational primary. But even in the face of a MAGA takeover in his state, Indiana Senate President Pro Tem Rodric Bray—whom Trump has been lambasting for months as a “total loser”—plans to stay and fight for his party, confirming his intentions to run for reelection in 2028.

“I do plan to run for pro tem again. And I, at this point, I need to make the case for whether, if I’m the right person to lead the caucus and the Senate, and we’ll see where that goes. I don’t make a forecast on that,” Bray told Politico on Wednesday.

Bray said he still believes he’s the right person to lead the Republican Party in Indiana, and refused to comment further on what the purging of his colleagues on Tuesday night means for the wider party.

But whether he’ll say so publicly or not, Bray will certainly have an uphill battle, as the target on his back and the momentum Trump has will make it hard to win his state back,.

President Trump’s about-face on Iran caught his Cabinet members off guard.

Trump announced Tuesday evening that he was pausing “Project Freedom,” his plan for U.S. Navy ships to escort other vessels out of the Strait of Hormuz, for a “short period of time” in order to help negotiations with Iran.

In a Truth Social post, Trump said that “we have mutually agreed that, while the Blockade will remain in full force and effect, Project Freedom (The Movement of Ships through the Strait of Hormuz) will be paused for a short period of time to see whether or not the Agreement can be finalized and signed. President DONALD J. TRUMP.”

But only hours before, administration officials were publicly explaining and praising the plan.

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio each touted the idea to reopen the strait in press conferences earlier in the day on Tuesday.

“Two U.S. commercial ships, along with American destroyers, have already safely transited the Strait, showing the lane is clear. We know the Iranians are embarrassed by this fact. They said they control the Strait. They do not,” Hegseth said, claiming that “hundreds more ships from nations around the world are lining up” to leave the strait with U.S. help.

“We maintain the upper hand, and Project Freedom only strengthens that hand,” Hegseth added, only for Trump to shelve the plan hours later.

At a different press conference, Rubio said the plan was key to ending the war with Iran.

“Operation Epic Fury is concluded. We achieved the objectives of that operation,” Rubio said. “We’re not cheering for an additional situation to occur. We would prefer the path of peace. What the president would prefer is a deal.”

Rubio said that Project Freedom would be offensive, and that the U.S. would not fire at Iran “unless we’re shot at.”

But yet again, Trump has changed his mind and hung his surrogates out to dry. The fate of the Iran war continues to be uncertain as the president claims that the war is over, yet swings between offering threats and new updates in negotiations.

Donald Trump’s Department of Justice was forced Tuesday to clean up acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s outrageous lie about the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Speaking to Fox News on April 21, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche claimed that the government had “no information” to suggest the SPLC had “shared what they learned” from their undercover informant program in hate groups such as the KKK with law enforcement.

The SPLC hit back at Blanche’s claim with a motion to retract his false statement, and refrain from making any others like it.

In a filing Tuesday, the DOJ cited a statement Blanche made days later on Fox News Sunday with Shannon Bream. “It is true that over the years they have selectively shared with law enforcement. That’s well documented and there’s no dispute there. They aren’t charged with any of that conduct,” Blanche said.

“To the extent that any clarification was needed, Acting Attorney Todd Blanche’s remarks on a major Sunday television program certainly suffice,” the filing stated.

This is just the latest bit of graceless leadership from Blanche, who actively undermined the Justice Department’s flimsy case against former FBI Director James Comey on Sunday, and is part of a larger trend of unprecedented prosecutorial missteps in the department, undermining numerous civil and criminal cases.

Even the president’s Cabinet is having a hard time subscribing to what Donald Trump is saying about Pope Leo XIV.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio attempted to cover for his MAGA boss, telling a reporter at the White House Tuesday that she had mischaracterized Trump’s recent barbs against the Catholic leader.

“The president recently said that the pope is endangering a lot of Catholics as a result of his rhetoric around the Iran war. Is that a sentiment—” the reporter began, before Rubio cut her off.

“I don’t think that’s an accurate description of what he said,” Rubio interjected. “I think what the president basically said is that Iran can’t have a nuclear weapon because they would use it against places that have a lot of Catholics and Christians and others, for that matter.”

But Rubio was wrong—that is exactly what Trump said.

“I think he’s endangering a lot of Catholics and a lot of people,” Trump said in a Monday interview with conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt. “But I guess if it’s up to the pope, he thinks it’s just fine for Iran to have a nuclear weapon.”

It was just the latest in a long string of attacks that Trump has made against the pope. Last month, Trump wrote on Truth Social that the religious leader was “weak on crime and terrible for foreign policy.”

The Chicago-born pontiff upset the president and a number of Trump’s underlings when he advocated for world peace earlier this year. The Pentagon reportedly threatened a Holy See ambassador in January, days after the pope made antiwar remarks during his State of the World address.

Leo has brushed off Trump’s remarks, claiming that he has “no fear” of the Trump administration or of “speaking out loudly of the message of the Gospel,” though the Vatican did reject a White House invitation to host the pope for America’s 250th anniversary on July 4.

“I will continue to speak out loudly against war, looking to promote peace, ⁠promoting dialogue and multilateral ​relationships among the states to look ​for just solutions to problems,” the pope told reporters aboard a flight in April. “Too many people are suffering in the world today. Too many innocent ‌people ⁠are being killed. And I think someone has to stand up and say there’s a better way.”

It’s very possible that Iran wouldn’t have an enriched uranium stockpile capable of developing nuclear weaponry if it weren’t for Trump’s ascent to the White House.

Iran lacked a single bomb’s worth of uranium in 2018, three years after former President Barack Obama brokered the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action to limit the country’s enormous uranium stockpile. That changed when Trump withdrew the U.S. from the pact that year and imposed a series of tough economic sanctions against the Middle East country.

By 2025, Iran had curated an 11-ton stockpile of enriched uranium, the whereabouts of which remain largely unknown. The total stockpile could create as many as 10 bombs if fully enriched, according to a 2025 assessment by the International Atomic Energy Agency.