MAGA Senator Secretly Begged Trump for a Break From Signature Policy

Alabama Senator Katie Britt praised President Donald Trump’s tariffs in public, but behind closed doors, the Republican lawmaker begged for relief, The Wall Street Journal reported Monday.

In an email sent to the U.S. trade representative in April 2025, shortly after Trump announced his so-called “Liberation Day” tariffs, Stephen Newton, the legislative director for Britt’s office, requested tariff “exclusions” for “specific Alabama manufacturers.”

Those companies included TNT Fireworks, which could not source fireworks of the same “quality and safety” as those produced in China; Novelis, an aluminum company that relies on imports from Canada, South Korea, and Brazil and could no longer complete construction on a new plant in Alabama; Kronospan, a wood panel maker that required “highly specialized equipment that is not available from domestic manufacturers;” and Airbus, the aircraft manufacturer, which could no longer afford to compete production on its third final assembly line in Mobile.

It’s not clear that any of these companies received exemptions, as the USTR “does not have an exemption process at this time,” the agency told Journal.

But months later, Britt struck a different tone in a social media post following the Supreme Court’s decision to undo Trump’s disastrous tariffs.

“What the media won’t tell you is that President Trump’s tariffs work, and that’s why even the Biden Administration left them in place,” Britt wrote on X.

If there’s that much daylight between Britt’s public-facing comments and her actual politicking, one has to wonder what other hard-line Trump administration policies the MAGA mouthpiece secretly knows are bullshit? And how many other Republicans feel the same?

President Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, who serves as a special envoy for peace in the Trump administration, has made billions of dollars for his investment firm from donors in the Middle East at the same time.

The New Yorker reports that during peace negotiations with Iran earlier this year, Kushner managed to raise $5 billion for his group, Affinity Partners. When America’s attacks on Iran restarted, some observers became suspicious that Kushner’s business activities were linked to his work for the Trump administration.

“My sense is that he thinks he was killing two birds with one stone—he was helping the Arabs defeat the Iranians, and he wanted to be paid for it,” an unnamed American source with extensive ties to leaders in the Middle East told the magazine.

With the U.S. left with no good options as Iran maintains control of the Strait of Hormuz, Kushner and Trump’s other special envoy Steve Witkoff haven’t been active in peace talks. The latest round of negotiations over the summer were led by Vice President JD Vance. The leaders of Arab Gulf states are reportedly disappointed in Kushner for failing to end the war.

“They were investing money in him. They thought that would bring them some influence that would protect them, and it did the opposite,” a former senior U.S. official told The New Yorker. “Their whole business model was stability. And now it’s gone.”

Kushner’s firm was built off of investments in and from the Middle East. Using money from Saudi Arabia, Affinity put $110 million into the car-leasing Shlomo Group, and nearly $300 million into Phoenix Financial, an insurance company. Both are Israeli companies, according to The New Yorker.

All of this raises massive conflict of interest concerns. When Kushner jets off to Pakistan or Qatar, is he seeking the best outcomes for the American people or for his investment firm? Are Israel and the Gulf states trying to coerce him into specific outcomes by dangling lucrative business deals? Kushner has already caused upheaval in Albania thanks to his real estate project there. What if he puts the U.S. at risk trying to make a buck in the Middle East amidst a quagmire with Iran?

A whistleblower has alleged that federal investigators violated state law in a desperate attempt to find proof of President Trump’s baseless claims of voter fraud.

Agents at the Department of Homeland Security have been posing as voters, entering people’s personal voting information (like Social Security numbers and dates of birth) into public-facing state websites, and using that to determine if they are eligible to vote or not—all in about 12 minutes thanks to their 40-person-a-day quota. Many states have laws indicating that only the actual person voting may input their own information into said public-facing sites, making the agents’ actions potentially illegal.

These questionable tactics make the “Unlawful Voter Initiative” launched by Trump two weeks ago an extremely tenuous endeavor.

In the report, compiled by the government watchdog group the Democracy Defenders Fund, the whistleblower also alleges that the agents’ rushed data collections may be rife with inaccuracies. The “alien identification numbers” of people who entered the U.S. as noncitizens are still listed on their records—even if they became a full citizen years ago. The hasty nature of DHS’s efforts may result in people who are well within their right to vote as citizens are flagged as “unlawful voters.” The report also notes that some of the agents themselves began to grow concerned about using people’s personal data, and hesitated to identify individuals as unlawful voters.

DHS in a statement argued that it is well within its rights to peruse the intimate voter data of millions of Americans because, “It’s not rocket science; it’s an easy step to secure our elections.”

“I do think the American people value keeping their personal information private,” said Senator Alex Padilla, who the report was delivered to on Sunday. “The other thing that’s concerning here, that the American people who would be offended by, is the knowing inaccuracy of what they’re doing, whether it’s the data or their sham analysis. It’s going to produce false positives.”

While at a campaign rally in Kansas for incumbent Republican Senator Roger Marshall, Vice President JD Vance was interrupted by a heckler.

“He sues his patients!” the protester shouted while Vance spoke at the MAGA Inc. event in Olathe, Kansas, Monday. A New York Times report last week exposed Marshall for suing patients who couldn’t pay their bills while he was a practicing ob-gyn prior to his political career (and even during the first few years he was in Congress).

“I see we have, I see we have a guy who is protesting,” Vance said as the pro-Trump crowd chanted “USA” and the heckler was escorted off of the premises by security. “You know, the last time I gave a speech and we had a guy who was interrupting, he had the common courtesy to bring a Mexican flag so we knew where he stood.”

“Now this guy, this guy, I’m telling you, ladies and gentlemen, here’s what happened, is he decided to come in and lie about my very dear friend Doc Marshall, because the reality is that Doc Marshall has stood up for everyday Americans every single day he’s been in the United States Senate,” Vance continued.

Marshall was attacked by his Democratic opponent, pastor Adam Hamilton, during a debate at the Kansas State Fair on Saturday over the lawsuits.

“There are 2,000 verses in the Bible that speak to caring for the poor,” Hamilton said. “This is not happening under this man.”

Marshall struggled to speak over a loud and unfriendly crowd in the rest of the event, saying that he engaged in “common business practices” and claimed that his hospital “would go a year before we’d ever send somebody over” to litigation. However, the Times reporting found multiple instances of patients who were sued just months after their appointment.

While Kansas hasn’t elected a Democratic senator since 1932, they elected a Democratic governor, Laura Kelly, in 2018 and reelected her in 2022. In a year where the incumbent president and the Republican Party are historically unpopular, Marshall’s medical lawsuits could sink his chances.

Twenty-two states and the District of Columbia are filing lawsuits against the Trump administration to prevent the Department of Homeland Security from changing the “public charge” rule, increasing the power of federal immigration officials to deny green card and visa applicants based on their potential future participation in federal aid programs.

A separate lawsuit was filed the same day on behalf of Democratic cities including New York, Chicago, San Francisco, and Seattle.

Traditionally, immigration officers look at whether applicants relied on programs like Supplemental Security Income and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. But the Trump administration now wants to expand that to penalize applicants who are enrolled in Medicaid or receive food stamps.

“Under @POTUS Trump, DHS is restoring the basic principle that immigrants must be able to support themselves,” DHS announced earlier this summer, before the lawsuit was filed. “We are reaffirming the requirement of self-reliance, protecting public resources, and ending policies that encouraged dependency on hard-working American taxpayers.”

New York Attorney General Letitia James zeroed in on that “self-reliance” bit during a press conference on Monday.

“The rule would allow immigration officers to consider use of critical benefits like Medicaid and SNAP (the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program), and even participation in school meal programs, as part of an applicant’s circumstance,” said James. “That means immigrant New Yorkers may be forced to ask themselves impossible questions: ‘Will getting health insurance hurt my chances of getting a green card? Will accepting food assistance when I fall on hard times be held against me?’”

“Cruelty is the point.... Having a chilling effect on immigrants is the point. Letting individuals know that they are not welcome here is the point. Immigration animus is the point,” James continued. “The fact that you’re going to deny individuals who are sick and hungry and homeless benefits just is beyond the pale. And that’s why we are seeking in the state of New York to vacate this rule,” she said.

This rule change, if accepted, will also incur a massive chilling effect, leading green card and visa applicants and their families to avoid engaging with federal programs at all, even if they’re legal and needed.

“No family should have to choose between accessing health care and nutrition assistance today—or protecting their pathway to a green card tomorrow,” California Attorney General Rob Bonta said. “The Trump Administration is seeking to rewrite more than 100 years of law with its expansive new definition of who is considered a ‘public charge.’ In doing so, it is providing individual immigration officers with the discretion and power to punish families for lawfully accessing certain public benefits programs during short-term periods of need. This administration’s cruelty continues to know no bounds. We’re going to court on behalf of the millions of immigrants who call this state home—and we will fight to get this unlawful rule undone.”

The public charge policy change is scheduled to take effect on Friday.