Breaking News
Breaking News
from Washington and beyond

Trump Prepares to Add Two New Countries to His Travel Ban

Donald Trump is reportedly planning a Muslim Ban 2.0.

Donald Trump
Win McNamee/Getty Images

Donald Trump may introduce a new travel ban similar to the “Muslim ban” from his first term, possibly as soon as next week.

Reuters reports that the order would bar people from Afghanistan and Pakistan from entering the United States, based on a government review of security and vetting risks, citing three anonymous sources, who also said that other countries could be included.

In his first term, Trump used a series of executive orders that infamously banned visitors from the Muslim-majority countries of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. Iraq was initially included, but later dropped after the country promised to improve vetting for its own citizens. Despite several legal challenges, the Supreme Court ultimately approved the ban in 2018, and Trump later added six more countries with large Muslim populations to the list.

If Trump’s new ban becomes a reality, it will complicate efforts to resettle tens of thousands of Afghans cleared to come to the U.S. as refugees or on “special immigrant visas” because they worked for the U.S. and fear retribution after the Taliban took control of Afghanistan.

According to one of the sources, the State Department Coordinator for Afghan Relocation Efforts is trying to get an exemption for special immigrant visa holders, “but it’s not assumed likely to be granted,” especially since that office was told to plan for its closure by April.

While campaigning for president in 2023, Trump floated the idea of reinstating and expanding the “Muslim ban,” calling for a “strong ideological screening of all immigrants to the United States” and saying he would ban immigrants from Libya, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen, “or anywhere else that threatens our security.”

In Trump’s first term, the travel ban caused a lot of confusion and chaos, with thousands of people, including immigration lawyers, gathering at airports to protest the move. If the ban comes back, Trump will have a more compliant judiciary. The question is whether protesters will show up in the same numbers with support from Democratic politicians.

Democrats’ Efforts to Stand up to Trump Torched in Devastating Poll

Democrats have made a paltry effort to stand up to Donald Trump.

Democrats hold up signs in protest during Donald Trump’s speech to a joint session of Congress
Kent Nishimura/Bloomberg/Getty Images

Democrats’ so-called resistance to Donald Trump is getting bad reviews among voters.

A new survey from Blueprint, a liberal research firm, found that registered voters have lost the plot on what—if anything—Democratic lawmakers are doing to oppose Trump’s sweeping agenda to shrink the federal workforce, slash essential government programs, and roll back regulations and rights.

A whopping 40 percent of respondents said that the Democratic Party doesn’t have any strategy at all for responding to Trump. Meanwhile, 24 percent of respondents said that the party did have a strategy but that it wasn’t working, and only 10 percent of respondents said that it had a good strategy.

The poll of 1,383 registered voters was conducted between February 16 and 17. Since then, the Democrats’ means of resistance have only gotten more confused.

Ahead of Trump’s address to Congress Tuesday, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries urged his party to take a measured approach and have a “strong” and “dignified” presence at the president’s Capitol appearance. Still, Democratic lawmakers protested in several increasingly small ways. Some lawmakers, such as Florida Representative Maxwell Frost and Texas Representative Jasmine Crockett, walked out of Trump’s address. Others held up small signs with slogans such as, “Musk Steals,” “False,” and “Save Medicaid.” A small contingent wore pink, a failed signal of unity and a devastating blow to absolutely no one.

Only Texas Representative Al Green managed to do any actual protesting, waving his cane and crying out that Trump had “no mandate” to cut Medicaid. Green was escorted out of the chamber, and on Thursday, he was formally censured by his colleagues—including 10 Democrats.

Evan Roth Smith, Blueprint’s top pollster, told Politico that voters had “correctly identified that the Democratic Party has lost its way.”

“The Democratic response [Tuesday] night was more or less a continuation of what we’ve seen from Democrats so far,” Smith explained. “Which is, there was nothing overtly wrong about it, but it didn’t actually do anything to ameliorate this core issue Democrats face, which is voters aren’t quite sure what we stand for and would like us to get back to the basic principles of the party.”

Sixty-five percent of respondents agreed with the statement that the Democratic Party “needs to get back to basics” of protecting Social Security and Medicare, reproductive freedom, and workers’ rights. Sixty-five percent of respondents also agreed with the statement that “no one has any idea what the Democratic Party stands for anymore, other than opposing Donald Trump. Democrats have no message, no plan of their own, and no one knows what they would do if they got back into power.”

10 Democrats Vote to Censure Al Green After Trump Protest

Here are the names of the House Democrats who voted to punish one of their own.

Representative Al Green holds his cane as another man escorts him out of the chamber during Trump’s speech.
Win McNamee/Getty Images

Ten Democrats joined the Republican-led House in censuring Representative Al Green for disrupting Donald Trump’s speech to Congress on Tuesday and protesting the president’s aggressive cuts to Medicaid.

“You have no mandate to cut Medicaid!” the Texas Democrat yelled while waving his cane. Green was later removed from the chamber, becoming the first member of Congress to be removed during a presidential address.

“I did it from my heart and I will suffer whatever the consequences are,” he told reporters the next day. “But truthfully, I would do it again.”

Republican Representative Dan Newhouse quickly introduced a censure against Green, which Democrats failed to block Wednesday.

On Thursday, the House voted 224 to 198, with 10 Democrats joining the GOP in punishing one of their own. Green and Democratic Representative Shomari Figures voted present.

The following Democrats voted to censure Green:

  1. Ami Bera—California
  2. Ed Case—Hawaii
  3. Jim Costa—California
  4. Laura Gillen—New York
  5. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez—Washington
  6. Jim Himes—Connecticut
  7. Chrissy Houlahan—Pennsylvania
  8. Marcy Kaptur—Ohio
  9. Jared Moskowitz—Florida
  10. Tom Suozzi—New York

Trump Threatens to Wipe Out Gaza in Chilling Rant

Did Donald Trump just threaten to kill all Palestinians in Gaza?

Donald Trump bites his lip while standing at the podium during his address to a joint session of Congress
Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

Donald Trump is planning to give Israel everything it needs in order to “finish” Gaza.

In a harrowing post to Truth Social Wednesday, the president threatened Hamas, as well as the Palestinian public, to release the hostages—or be “dead.”

“‘Shalom Hamas’ means Hello and Goodbye—You can choose,” Trump wrote. “Release all of the Hostages now, not later, and immediately return all of the dead bodies of the people you murdered, or it is OVER for you. Only sick and twisted people keep bodies, and you are sick and twisted!

“I am sending Israel everything it needs to finish the job, not a single Hamas member will be safe if you don’t do as I say. I have just met with your former Hostages whose lives you have destroyed,” Trump continued. “This is your last warning! For the leadership, now is the time to leave Gaza, while you still have a chance. Also, to the People of Gaza: A beautiful Future awaits, but not if you hold Hostages. If you do, you are DEAD! Make a SMART decision. RELEASE THE HOSTAGES NOW, OR THERE WILL BE HELL TO PAY LATER!”

Trump then signed the message: “DONALD J. TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.”

Hamas has been in direct talks with U.S. presidential envoy for hostage affairs Adam Boehler to release several American-Israeli dual citizens who were taken hostage during the October 7 attack, Axios reported Wednesday. It’s the first time the U.S. has backtracked on its unofficial mantra of not dealing with terrorists. The U.S. designated Hamas as a terrorist organization in 1997.

“This saves time and effort and minimizes obstacles. Talks are not going very easily, but this is positive,” a Hamas official told NPR, adding that the U.S. had asked the militant group to remain quiet about the deal.

There are currently 59 hostages remaining in Gaza. Fifty-eight of them were abducted during the October 7 attack, while one more was captured before that.

But Trump’s interest in pushing Gazans out of their homeland isn’t so altruistic. Last month, the president said he was “committed to buying and owning Gaza.”

“We’re committed to owning it, taking it, and making sure that Hamas doesn’t move back,” Trump said at the time. “There’s nothing to move back into—the place is a demolition site. The remainder will be demolished. Everything’s demolished.”

The real estate mogul then added that he intended to make it a “very good site for future development.”

That somebody could be Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, who has been eyeing the region for potential real estate projects since at least the beginning of last year. In March 2024, Kushner praised Gaza’s waterfront beachfront property as “very valuable,” advocating at the time for the same plan that Trump touted last week: ethnic cleansing.

Meanwhile, American culture seems misaligned with the new mission. On Sunday, No Other Land—a film about an Israeli and a Palestinian who work in tandem to rebuild homes and communities in the West Bank’s Masafer Yatta after they are systemically claimed and destroyed by Israeli soldiers and settlers—won best documentary feature film at the Oscars.

Elon Musk Suddenly Doesn’t Want Credit for Disastrous DOGE Cuts

Musk is warning Republicans to stop blaming DOGE for the cuts.

Elon Musk walks in the Capitol
Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc/Getty Images

Elon Musk is claiming that the Department of Government Efficiency isn’t actually behind the sweeping cuts to the federal workforce, instead placing the blame on the agency heads who order the firings.

Republican Representative Derrick Van Orden told CNN that during a private meeting with GOP lawmakers Wednesday, Musk told the group that the recently announced elimination of more than 70,000 jobs at the Department of Veterans Affairs “wasn’t a DOGE decision.”

The Wisconsin Republican said that Musk had told lawmakers that the “individual departments” had made their own plans to cut positions and that DOGE had made the “assumption” that those departments intended to “reward the people that are being productive.”

The billionaire bureaucrat has claimed this defense to his organization’s cost-cutting measures before, saying that DOGE simply makes recommendations for cuts to agency heads, and then it’s up to those heads to execute them. It’s unclear what fate would befall the agencies that failed to act in accordance with DOGE directives or the Trump administration’s mission to shrink the federal workforce.

However, Musk privately acknowledged that he’d made some massive missteps, and that he “can’t bat a thousand all the time,” four people familiar with his remarks told Politico. But when Musk misses a swing, people lose their livelihoods.

Republican Representative Russell Fry told CNN that Musk promised to make things right. “He said, like, you know, there’s going to be mistakes along the way. He has said that publicly before too. And then when those are identified, they will be corrected,” Fry said.

Already, Musk-directed massive firings have been rescinded. The Trump administration’s Office of Personnel Management, which has been attempting to manage the entire federal workforce even though it lacks the authority to do so, issued a memo Tuesday instructing federal agency heads that they did not have to comply with instructions to fire probationary employees who have held their jobs for one year or less.