The Associated Press is objecting to Donald Trump’s false claims about its ongoing legal dispute over access after the president incorrectly characterized the case in a public forum — a situation that goes back to the news service’s decision last winter not to follow the president’s executive order to rename the Gulf of Mexico.
By DAVID BAUDER
Trump, speaking Sunday on an aircraft carrier while marking the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Navy, said that “we got sued by The Associated Press and they lost.” The president said the “liberal” AP “got thrown out of court” and that “they’re almost not allowed to cover me anymore.”
In fact, the AP won its case against Trump, but the president successfully earned a delay in getting the ruling enforced before the U.S. Court of Appeals considers the issue. Arguments on the president’s appeal are scheduled for November.
“The court ruled in AP’s favor — in a strong opinion in support of free speech — and the government is appealing,” AP spokesman Patrick Maks said. “As we’ve said throughout, the press and the public have a fundamental right to speak freely without government retaliation.”
The White House began blocking AP’s access to limited-space events like Oval Office news conferences or trips on Air Force One in February. That was after the news organization, through its influential Stylebook, advised its journalists that while they could refer to Trump’s desire to rename the body of water the Gulf of America, the name has not officially changed.
The AP sued, arguing that the government was unlawfully punishing the organization for its point of view. U.S. District Judge Trevor N. McFadden, a Trump appointee, agreed that the White House — once it had decided to invite reporters — could not “shut those doors” on those reporters because of what they’ve said or written.
The Trump White House said it’s up to them to determine who gets access to the president. Absent an order to enforce the ruling, the White House has followed its own path. AP photographers are generally permitted into the limited space events, but it’s much rarer for a text reporter. Before Trump’s return to office, the White House Correspondents Association has generally decided on access and AP, as a wire service that most outlets subscribe to, was virtually always permitted.
The president has applied pressure against news organizations on several fronts, with ABC News and CBS News settling lawsuits related to their coverage. Trump has also filed lawsuits against The New York Times and Wall Street Journal. The president has also moved to choke off funding for government-run services like the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.
The AP also disputed Trump’s characterization that the news service is not covering him as a result. Through other methods, such as video of Trump appearances in the White House, it is able to follow what the president is saying and doing.
McFadden, in his ruling, said that he didn’t seek to give AP permanent access to the limited events, “but it cannot be treated worse than its peer wire services either.”
It is day nine of the government shutdown and Democrats and Republicans continue to blame one another for failing to reach a deal. Sen. Edward Markey (D-MA) joins Chris Jansing with his reaction to Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) and President Trump’s comments on military pay and health care spending.
The shutdown is already interrupting benefits for low-income moms and babies — and agencies don’t know when the next check is coming.
By Marcia Brown
The federal government shutdown is already impacting delivery of nutrition aid to low-income moms and babies, with states and organizations pausing benefits even as the White House vows to use tariff revenue to tide them over.
The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children is quickly running out of money. Trump officials said Tuesday that they would tap tariff revenue to fund WIC until the government reopens, but the money hasn’t yet started flowing, according to two people familiar with the administration’s decision.
“We have gotten no information about how much money would be available, when it would be available to states or what states would be able to use it for,” said Ali Hard, policy director at the National WIC Association, which represents state nutrition agencies.
Lawmakers and their staff also weren’t made aware of the administration’s plans to use tariff revenue and haven’t heard when the funds will be sent, according to multiple other people aware of the situation.
The Inter-Tribal Council of Nevada WIC, which serves hundreds of Native and non-native low-income families, announced that its offices would shutter and benefits would be cut off beginning Thursday.
“While the announcement [of tariff revenue] provides short term reassurance, we continue to urge Congress to pass a bipartisan funding bill so families can count on WIC without uncertainty,” the council’s program director Blanca Plascencia-Reyna wrote in an email to POLITICO.
Mississippi has created waiting lists for would-be participants since the state is unable to accept certain new applicants amid the shutdown. And by the end of this week, Sedgwick County in Kansas, which serves 5,000 families, expects to run out of funding for staff who run the program, including those who provide nutrition and breastfeeding guidance.
“As per standard practice, USDA surveyed all WIC agencies and conducted an all-State call,” USDA spokesperson Alec Varsamis said in a statement Wednesday. “Broadly speaking, no State relayed interruption. As details are finalized, USDA will inform appropriate parties, and more importantly, the Trump administration will provide financial resources for vulnerable mothers and babies left behind by Radical Democrats.”
WIC provides infant formula, tailored nutrition packages and breastfeeding support to nearly 7 million low-income moms and children. A $150 million federal contingency fund kept the program afloat through the first week of the shutdown, but states have been using their own funds to support administrative costs — with the expectation that USDA will refund them down the line.
The White House did not immediately respond to questions about when the tariff revenue would begin to flow to states.
Hard is hopeful that the tariff revenue will come through and could be used to maintain benefits in addition to paying for administrative costs. She fears that even a temporary cut off from benefits could lead to a loss of trust in a program that already sees roughly 50 percent of those eligible participate.
“What we’ve seen from prior shutdowns is that, as soon as we start seeing cracks in the system, we have this risk of information spiraling and people really getting very confused and thinking that they shouldn’t go in for their visit, or they shouldn’t use their benefits,” said Hard. “That loss of trust with families is really devastating and it’s really hard to get it back.”
Former FBI Director James Comey reportedly dealt a crushing legal blow to Donald Trump with three stunning moves in court that caught even seasoned analysts off guard. Sources say Trump’s legal team was left scrambling as Comey's strategy unfolded with surgical precision. Could this be the game-changer that finally turns the tide against Trump? Here’s what went down inside the courtroom — and what it could mean moving forward.
No, Democrats didn't shut down the government to fund ‘free abortions,’ as Rick Scott said
By Samantha Putterman
No, Democrats didn't shut down the government to fund ‘free abortions,’ as Rick Scott said
U.S. Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., said Democrats have shuttered the federal government over hyper-partisan issues: abortion and immigration.
"Democrats are shutting down the government and harming American families because they want to waste another trillion of your dollars on liberal priorities like health care for illegal aliens and funding for free abortions," Scott posted Oct. 2 on X. He reshared a post by anti-abortion nonprofit group Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America.
Democrats aren’t seeking to fund health care for immigrants in the U.S. illegally. We previously rated that False. Immigrants in the country illegally are largely ineligible for federally funded health care.
Scott’s other point, about federal funding for free abortions, is also wrong. Federal law prohibits federal funds for abortions, and Democrats' Sept. 17 proposal to temporarily extend government funding wouldn’t change this. The discussion is centered around a fight over a longstanding process in some Affordable Care Act plans that separates federal funds from money paid by patients for abortion care coverage.
The Democratic proposal to temporarily fund the government calls for extending pandemic-era enhanced ACA subsidies that are set to expire at the end of the year. Without congressional action, researchers estimate insurance premiums will rise by more than 114% on average for enrollees who use subsidies, leading to an estimated 3.8 million more people becoming uninsured over the next 10 years.
Democrats also seek to roll back about $1 trillion in Medicaid cuts in Republicans’ tax and spending bill that President Donald Trump signed into law in July. The Democrats’ legislation would restore access to certain health care programs for some legal immigrants who will lose access under the Republican law.
Because some state Affordable Care Act insurance plans cover abortion,anti-abortion advocates say the enhanced federal subsidies Democrats support indirectly fund abortion. But the ACA requires that insurers segregate insurance premiums from enrollees so that money for abortion is separated from federal funds.
"The ACA is very clear in the statute and there is nothing in it that provides ‘free’ abortions using federal dollars," Alina Salganicoff, a senior vice president and director of the Women’s Health Policy Program at KFF, a health care think tank, told PolitiFact. "Non-federal funds are to be collected by the plans and segregated to be used exclusively to pay for abortions. Federal funds are not used to subsidize tax credits or abortion coverage in any way."
PolitiFact contacted Scott’s office but did not hear back.
Democrats’ proposal doesn’t include funding for free abortions
Since 1976, the Hyde Amendment has barred using federal funds for abortions — except in cases or rape, incest or to save the life of the pregnant woman —including via Medicaid, Medicare and other federal insurance providers. Congress enacts the amendment annually and it’s attached as a rider to annual appropriations bills to ensure government money doesn’t go toward abortions. The restrictions apply to the subsidies that Democrats seek to extend.
Anti-abortion groups and some Republican lawmakers have pushed to prohibit subsidies’ use in insurance plans that include abortion coverage, and seek to attach the Hyde Amendment to any ACA subsidy extension. Democrats cite the ACA process to separate taxpayer funds and accuse Republicans of using the debate to expand nationwide restrictions on abortion coverage.
Section 1303 of the health law stipulates that insurers must deposit insurance premiums for abortion services into a separate account and charge each enrollee $1 per month to pay for covered abortion services.
Anti-abortion advocates say the money is fungible, meaning that once insurance providers have collected it, they can spend it on anything, including abortion.
Health policy experts say this argument is flawed. The ACA had the same process in place since its 2010 enactment. Then-President Barack Obama issued an executive order that year affirming that the funding restrictions spelled out in the Hyde Amendment apply to Section 1303.
In 2014, the first year of the federal health care marketplace, a Government Accountability Office report found mixed compliance for the process to separate the funding, and Health and Human Services issued additional guidance instructing insurers how to comply. Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that legalized abortion access, HHS reiterated that ACA coverage of abortion services is subject to state law.
"This is not something new that Democrats are proposing," said Katie Keith, a Georgetown University health policy researcher and Affordable Care Act expert. "This framework has been in place since the ACA was enacted, and for more than a decade since the marketplace opened."
The 2010 law allows states to bar health care plans from covering abortions, which 25 states have done. Twelve states have laws that require marketplace plans to include abortion coverage, while the remainder neither require nor prohibit abortion coverage in ACA plans.
Research has also found that the ACA’s required monthly minimum of $1 per member for abortion services "exceeds the cost of abortions that plans are paying for with those funds," KFF wrote in September. For example, one report found that Maryland ACA plans had $25 million in unspent funds from policyholder payments for abortion coverage.
"Democrats are not touching abortion coverage at all right now," Keith said. "They are talking about extending the status quo and preventing a premium spike for millions of Americans. When COVID-era ACA extensions were put in place it had nothing to do with abortion then — and it still has nothing to do with abortion now."
Scott said Democrats shut down the government because they are seeking to use taxpayer money on "health care for illegal aliens and funding for free abortions."
This distorts the Democratic shutdown proposal on two fronts.
Immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally are largely ineligible for federally funded health care; the Democrats’ proposal would restore access to certain health care programs for some legal immigrants who stand to lose access.
Democrats also are not seeking funding for free abortions. Federal law prohibits federal funds to be used for abortions except in cases or rape, incest or to save the life of the pregnant woman. The ACA requires non-federal funds to be collected by insurance plans and segregated into separate accounts to be used exclusively for abortion services.
One week into the government shutdown, top Republican leaders appear to have lost the plot.
By Dasha Burns and Jordain Carney
One week into the government shutdown, top Republican leaders appear to have lost the plot.
President Donald Trump, Speaker Mike Johnson and Senate Majority Leader John Thune are straining to project a united front against Democrats, just barely concealing tensions over strategy that have snowballed behind the scenes since agencies closed last week.
In one stark example, Trump scrambled the congressional leaders’ messaging Monday when he told reporters in the Oval Office he would “like to see a deal made for great health care” and that he was “talking to Democrats about it.”
Within hours, Trump walked it back: “I am happy to work with the Democrats on their Failed Healthcare Policies, or anything else, but first they must allow our Government to re-open,” he wrote on Truth Social hours after his initial comments.
Johnson said Tuesday he “spoke with the president at length yesterday” about the need to reopen agencies first, while Thune told reporters there have been “ongoing conversations” about strategy between the top Republicans.
A White House official granted anonymity to speak about the circumstances behind the president’s statements said the Truth post was “issued to make clear that the [administration] position has not changed” and was not done at the behest of the two leaders.
But tensions surfaced again Tuesday after a White House budget office memo raised questions about a federal law guaranteeing back pay for furloughed federal workers — one that Johnson and Thune both voted for in 2019.
These episodes are among many where the White House and Hill Republicans have been crosswise on strategy and seemingly not communicating in advance about their key moves. Many of those instances have concerned hardball tactics coming from White House budget director Russ Vought seemingly aimed at cornering Democrats by threatening blue-state spending and the federal workforce.
Not only have those moves so far failed to move Democrats off their positions, they have left Johnson and Thune flat-footed as they confront questions about the GOP strategy for ending the shutdown.
The two leaders, for instance, both struggled to square their own support for federal workers with the administration’s new position questioning back pay for furloughed employees. Thune sought to return focus to Democrats while also indicating frustration with the White House.
“All you have to do to prevent any federal employee from not getting paid is to open up the government,” Thune told reporters Tuesday. “I don’t know what statute they are using. My understanding is, yes, that they would get paid. I’ll find out. I haven’t heard this up until now. But again it’s a very straightforward proposition, and you guys keep chasing that narrative that they’ve got going down at the White House and up here with the Democrats.”
Greene ‘disgusted’ if health care tax credits expire and premiums double
By Sarah Fortinsky
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) signaled a willingness to negotiate with Democrats on their health care demands, breaking with her party on an issue at the core of the government shutdown standoff.
In a lengthy post on the social platform X, Greene said she’s “absolutely disgusted” that health insurance premiums could double if the Affordable Care Act (ACA) tax credits expire, even as she stressed her strong opposition to the Obama-era legislation and to health insurance in general.
“But I’m going to go against everyone on this issue because when the tax credits expire this year my own adult children’s insurance premiums for 2026 are going to DOUBLE, along with all the wonderful families and hard-working people in my district,” Greene wrote in the post.
Greene made clear that she does not support giving health care to immigrants lacking permanent legal status in the U.S. — a frequent GOP characterization of the Democratic position — but said she is committed to solving the issue for Americans.
“No I’m not towing the party line on this, or playing loyalty games. I’m a Republican and won’t vote for illegals to have any tax payer funded healthcare or benefits,” Greene said. “I’m AMERICA ONLY!!!”
“I’m carving my own lane,” she continued. “And I’m absolutely disgusted that health insurance premiums will DOUBLE if the tax credits expire this year.”
Greene, who has broken with her party on several key issues in the past, slammed her fellow Republicans for failing to try to find a solution to the looming health care premium increase, saying the country should prioritize that issue over funding for Ukraine and Israel.
“Not a single Republican in leadership talked to us about this or has given us a plan to help Americans deal with their health insurance premiums DOUBLING!!!” the Georgia Republican wrote.
“All our country does is fund foreign countries and foreign wars, and never does anything to help the American people!!!” she added. “It is absolutely shameful, disgusting, and traitorous, that our laws and policies screw the American people so much that the government is shut down right now fighting over basic issues like this.”
Greene said she is in Washington this week — even as the House canceled votes while the Senate continues to take up the House-passed continuing resolution — and said she’s open to discussing the issue.
“Again, NO FUNDING FOR ILLEGALS AND ANY BENEFITS FOR THEM, BUT WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THE ABSOLUTELY INSANE COST OF INSURANCE FOR AMERICANS,” she wrote. “You don’t HATE your government enough.”
“I’m here in Washington DC this week to meet with anyone who is AMERICA ONLY and will work with me on a plan for AMERICANS ONLY!!!” she continued.
Trump earlier Monday signaled an openness to a potential deal with Democrats on their health care demands, before appearing to walk back those remarks.
“If we made the right deal, I’d make a deal. Sure,” Trump told reporters, when asked in the Oval Office whether he’d be open to making a deal on the ACA subsidies, which Democrats want to see extended before premiums are expected to increase.
“We have a negotiation going on right now with the Democrats that could lead to very good things,” he said. “And I’m talking about good things with regard to health care.”
But the president later seemed to shift away from that position, writing in a Truth Social post, “I am happy to work with the Democrats on their Failed Healthcare Policies, or anything else, but first they must allow our Government to re-open.”
In a statement to The Hill, the White House reiterated the president’s position.
“The President’s position is clear: reopen the government with the clean, bipartisan CR that Democrats supported just 6 months ago and 13 times under Joe Biden and then we can have all the important policy discussions needed,” White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said in a statement.
“But right now, the Democrats are holding the American people hostage with a government shutdown because they want free health care for illegal aliens,” she added.
The government shut down Wednesday after Democrats and Republicans in the Senate failed to reach a funding deal, with Democrats demanding an extension of Affordable Care Act subsidies set to expire at the end of the year.
Without action, enhanced tax credits passed during the COVID-19 pandemic to help people afford coverage will expire at the end of the year. If they expire, premiums for Affordable Care Act enrollees will increase more than 75 percent on average, according to health policy research group KFF.
While Democrats insist an extension be part of any short-term government funding legislation, GOP leaders have argued those discussions can wait until later in the year and should be separate from funding the government.
Democratic House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries ripped into his fellow New York representative, Republican Mike Lawler, for confronting him at the U.S. Capitol about signing a GOP-backed bill to end the government shutdown.
By Anna Commander
The confrontation between the two on Capitol Hill illustrates the deepening partisan tensions at the heart of the ongoing government shutdown.
The dispute centers on extending the Affordable Care Act (ACA) premium tax credits and passing critical funding legislation to reopen the federal government. These debates directly impact millions of Americans' health care affordability and the paychecks of hundreds of thousands of federal employees, including military service members and civilian personnel.
What To Know
On Wednesday, Lawler confronted Jeffries in a hallway outside a news conference, demanding that he back a bipartisan ACA subsidy extension bill crafted by Republican Representative Jen Kiggans of Virginia as a temporary measure to maintain premium tax credits for another year.
He then accused Lawler of speaking over him and said, "Just keep your mouth shut." Lawler responded, "Is that the way to talk?"
The two were discussing the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which passed earlier this year.
Jeffries also accused Lawler of "chasing clout" for confronting him while demanding he sign the bill.
Lawler pressed Jeffries repeatedly about signing the bill and questioned why he has not backed Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic nominee in the race for New York City mayor.
The confrontation comes as the government shutdown stretched into its eighth day, with Senate and House leaders at an impasse over the inclusion of a permanent ACA subsidy extension in stopgap funding measures. While House Republican leaders have urged Democrats to support their continuing resolution, passed last month, Senate Democrats maintain that protecting health care affordability is essential for reopening the government.
Jeffries, during the roughly five-minute confrontation, accused Lawler of not working for the American people. He then asked the New York Republican if he was trying to elevate himself because he's "afraid you're about to lose reelection."
"No, I'm not going to lose reelection," Lawler replied.
Facing a deadline next week on whether to sign a statement acknowledging new restrictions on how they do their jobs or risk being thrown out of the Pentagon, journalists who cover the U.S. military appear headed toward a showdown with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.
By DAVID BAUDER
Negotiations over changing some of the restrictions “have not been as successful as we had hoped,” the Pentagon Press Association said Wednesday.
The rules limit where reporters can go without an official escort and convey “an unprecedented message of intimidation” for anyone in the Defense Department who might want to speak to a reporter without the approval of Hegseth’s team, the association said in a statement.
When the new policy was issued two weeks ago, news organizations were concerned that signing the rules conveyed agreement with them, including to a restriction that they not report on any news — even if unclassified — without official approval.
The Pentagon is now saying it can’t block journalists from reporting news but can revoke the credentials of reporters who ask anyone in the Defense Department for information without an official OK.
“We acknowledge and appreciate that the Pentagon is no longer requiring reporters to express agreement with the new policy as a condition for obtaining press credentials,” the press association said. “But the Pentagon is still asking us to affirm in writing our ‘understanding’ of policies that appear designed to stifle a free press and potentially expose us to prosecution for simply doing our jobs.”
The association is not making any recommendations about whether members should or should not sign. The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, which has also been talking to the Pentagon about the policy, said it still has concerns and expects “that it will pose a significant impediment as journalists weigh with their employers whether or not to sign.”
RCFP did not respond to messages asking whether it was recommending a course of action for reporters.
Changing rules that have worked for years under different presidents
The Pentagon Press Association also said it was surprised to learn that the department was planning to move the press corps from its current work space, suggesting it will likely further isolate journalists.
Pentagon reporters have been operating under the same rules since the Eisenhower administration, including President Donald Trump’s first term in office, the association said, and any suggestion that they are prowling in offices where they are not allowed is preposterous.
A Pentagon spokesperson, Sean Parnell, did not immediately return a call seeking comment.
In an interview with Fox News last weekend, Hegseth said that “we’re not playing games. We’re not allowing everybody to roam around the building.”
“Yes, you can be in the press area, briefing room, but if you want to move around the building, you’re going to have a badge, it’s going to be cleared, you’re going to be escorted when you do so, and we have expectations that you’re not soliciting classified or sensitive information,” he said. “I think the American people see things like that as absolute common sense. The Pentagon press corps can squeal all they want.”
Trump has applied pressure on news organizations in several ways, with ABC News and CBS News settling lawsuits related to their coverage. Trump has also filed lawsuits against The New York Times and Wall Street Journal and moved to choke off funding for government-run services like the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.
“Limiting the media’s ability to report on the U.S. military fails to honor the American families who have entrusted their sons and daughters to serve in it, or the taxpayers responsible for giving the department hundreds of billions of dollars a year,” the Pentagon Press Association said in its statement.
“The American people deserve to know how their military is being run.”
At her press briefing, Karoline Leavitt made the press corps laugh with her response to a reporter asking about a possible White House event for Hispanic Heritage Month.
Diễn Đàn Người Việt Hải Ngoại. Tự do ngôn luận, an toàn và uy tín. Vì một tương lai tươi đẹp cho các thế hệ Việt Nam hãy ghé thăm chúng tôi, hãy tâm sự với chúng tôi mỗi ngày, mỗi giờ và mỗi giây phút có thể. VietBF.Com Xin cám ơn các bạn, chúc tất cả các bạn vui vẻ và gặp nhiều may mắn.
Welcome to Vietnamese American Community, Vietnamese European, Canadian, Australian Forum, Vietnamese Overseas Forum. Freedom of speech, safety and prestige. For a beautiful future for Vietnamese generations, please visit us, talk to us every day, every hour and every moment possible. VietBF.Com Thank you all and good luck.
