Author: admin

By Shauneen Miranda
National

WASHINGTON — A handful of Democratic state attorneys general said Tuesday that expert officials from their offices were denied access to a major White House anti-fraud meeting convened by Vice President JD Vance and attended by Republican AGs.

Two dozen Democratic attorneys general had earlier declined invitations for their own attendance at the White House anti-fraud roundtable, citing extremely short notice and a lack of an agenda in a letter to Vance, who has helmed the Trump administration’s sweeping anti-fraud effort.

Instead, some sent top officials from their offices to Washington. Democratic attorneys general in California, New York and New Jersey said at a press conference later Tuesday that officials from their states were not allowed to attend the anti-fraud meeting.

New York Attorney General Letitia James said officials from Minnesota, Massachusetts, Maryland and Nevada were also turned away and that part of the reason apparently had to do with the officials’ titles.

“They gave various reasons that conflicted, and that didn’t really make sense,” James said. “At the end of the day, the message is, is, that there were experts who have been working on complex fraud cases, that have worked in our respective offices over the year — they have engaged in successful criminal prosecutions, investigations and settlements resulting in millions and millions of dollars, and they were all turned away, despite the fact that they had RSVP’d on Friday evening, and in some cases on Saturday.”

California Attorney General Rob Bonta, who led the press conference, said “we won’t be used as props in Vance’s political performance.”

Bonta was joined by James, along with Hawaii Attorney General Anne Lopez, New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport and Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul.

“The truth is, Democratic AGs have recovered billions of taxpayer dollars, secured criminal convictions and implemented reforms to strengthen the security of our programs,” Bonta added.

The California attorney general noted that “the short notice we were given sends a clear message that we were either an afterthought or we weren’t really welcome.”

Though the initial invitation was made to AGs only, exceptions were made for chiefs of staff or deputy attorneys general, according to an individual familiar with the fraud roundtable.

Lower ranking staff members, both Republican and Democrat, did not participate and guidelines were made clear in advance of the roundtable, that individual said, speaking on background.

Trump administration anti-fraud campaign

At the meeting, Vance and administration officials gave brief remarks before ushering out the press so that they could have “the real conversation.”

Minnesota has taken center stage in the administration’s efforts to combat alleged fraud. Just last week, administration officials announced they were charging 15 people in the state for alleged Medicaid fraud schemes totaling millions of dollars in intended loss.

In a list provided by the Republican Attorneys General Association ahead of the event, the attorneys general slated to attend the Vance meeting included: Tim Griffin of Arkansas; Raúl Labrador of Idaho; Todd Rokita of Indiana; Brenna Bird of Iowa; Kris Kobach of Kansas; Russell Coleman of Kentucky; Lynn Fitch of Mississippi; Austin Knudsen of Montana; Mike Hilgers of Nebraska; Drew Wrigley of North Dakota; Andy Wilson of Ohio, Gentner Drummond of Oklahoma; Marty Jackley of South Dakota; and Derek Brown of Utah.

Bird, of Iowa, said in a press release that she attended the fraud task force meeting with other AGs to “discuss collaborative efforts between the White House and state attorneys general on combating benefits fraud, as well as the resources needed by attorneys general to fight fraud in their states.”

She added, “When bad actors commit fraud—whether it’s against the government, against businesses, or against individuals, the American taxpayer always ends up on the hook. I’ve been fighting to protect Iowans against fraud for the last four years as attorney general, and I don’t intend to stop.”

Dems complain about short notice

The two dozen state Democratic attorneys general had written to Vance earlier Tuesday that while they “would appreciate the opportunity to engage in serious discussions, the invitation was provided with less than one business day’s notice with no agenda,” per a letter obtained by States Newsroom.

The group added that “this short notice does not match the spirit of collaboration that has long defined our joint efforts with federal partners.”

POLITICO, which first reported on the letter and the Democrats’ choice to not partake in the meeting, noted that Republican attorneys general were invited days earlier and initially the event was only supposed to include them.

“As I’ve said repeatedly, this does not need to be — this should not be — a partisan effort,” Vance said during the roundtable.

“Everybody should care about fraud, everybody should care about rooting out fraud, everybody should care about saving the American taxpayers money, and importantly, everybody should care about actually protecting the programs that only work and are only properly funded if the money funding those programs isn’t being stolen by fraudsters.”

The vice president said at the meeting that representatives from the attorneys general in Connecticut and Oregon were in attendance.

In a statement after the meeting, the executive director of the Republican Attorneys General Association bashed Democrats.

“While Republican Attorneys General are aggressively fighting fraud, waste, and abuse, Democrat AGs like Keith Ellison in Minnesota and Letitia James in New York knowingly aid and abet scams and fraud in their states,” said Adam Piper, the executive director. “Republican AGs are thrilled to roll up our sleeves and work with JD Vance, Republican AG staff alum Andrew Ferguson, Scott Brady, and the White House Task Force to save taxpayers billions of dollars and deliver maximum accountability. Vice President Vance is right – this is not a partisan issue. However, historical Democrat inaction speaks volumes.”

By Ashley Murray
National

WASHINGTON — Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche argued in a court filing that a shooting Saturday in the vicinity of the White House further proves the need for an East Wing ballroom with “a heavy steel, drone proof roof, missile resistant and drone proof columns, bullet, ballistic, and blast proof glass,” among other features.

A gunman opened fire at a U.S. Secret Service checkpoint at 17th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue and was killed when agents returned fire. One bystander was also shot and injured, according to the Secret Service.

President Donald Trump was inside the White House during the incident but was unharmed, and no ongoing operations were impacted, according to the agency.

“This second attack on the President this month underscores the critical need for top level, state of the art security at the White House, including the Ballroom, a knitted, unified, cohesive part of the East Wing Project, which is vital for National Security, and is being constructed to ensure that the President can perform his constitutional duties in a safe and heavily secured facility,” Blanche argued.

The acting attorney general, Trump’s former personal defense lawyer, filed the supplemental brief Sunday opposing a federal court order that temporarily halted any above-ground construction on the ballroom.

Shooting at press dinner

The proposed ballroom “will provide a ‘SAFE HAVEN’ from attackers such as the one last night, and on April 25th,” Blanche wrote, referring to the gunman who opened fire at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner last month.

The alleged shooter, Cole Tomas Allen, who pleaded not guilty, is charged with attempting to assassinate the president and is being held in jail in Washington, D.C., awaiting trial.

The Trump administration and his supporters in Congress amped up calls for a secure ballroom following the shooting at the historic annual dinner where Trump, the first lady and several Cabinet officials safely evacuated.

But skepticism among some Senate Republicans of using taxpayer dollars has all but scuttled a $1 billion Secret Service funding proposal — $220 million of which was earmarked for the ballroom.

Trump maintains the ballroom will be funded by private donors and routinely speaks about the project at unrelated events.

Drone port, sniper facilities

Blanche slammed the lawsuit against the White House construction project as “meritless.” The National Trust for Historic Preservation filed the suit in December, less than two months after Trump demolished the White House East Wing to make way for the large structure.

The lawsuit, Blanche argued, “has been a great attack on our Country in that the Military, Secret Service, and Law Enforcement are not happy that all of these Top Secret features have been revealed to potential enemies, criminals, and all others, including the fact that there will be a major drone port and Government sniper facilities on the heavily secured roof of the Ballroom.”

The proposed ballroom is slated to have “bomb shelters, a state of the art hospital and medical facilities, Top Secret military installations, structures, and equipment,” according to the court filing.

Trump posted an image of the filing on his Truth Social platform Monday morning.

The president also thanked the Secret Service on Truth Social in the wee hours of Sunday.

“This event is one month removed from the (White House Correspondents’ Dinner) shooting, and goes to show how important it is, for all future Presidents, to get, what will be, the most safe and secure space of its kind ever built in Washington, D.C. The National Security of our Country demands it!” he wrote.

The National Trust for Historic Preservation did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

By Jonathan Shorman
National

The Congressional Black Caucus on Tuesday urged American corporations to condemn efforts to dilute Black voting strength, as Southern states eliminate congressional districts where most residents are Black.

The CBC’s attempt to mobilize the business community comes as Black representation in Congress potentially faces its most severe threat since the end of Reconstruction following the Civil War. But some business leaders have taken a friendlier tone with President Donald Trump, who backs the gerrymandering.

A U.S. Supreme Court decision in April, in a case called Louisiana v. Callais, sharply weakened the federal Voting Rights Act, which had blocked states from breaking apart majority-minority districts. It limited the use of race in redistricting, prompting several Southern states to advance new maps targeting these districts, which are mostly held by Black Democrats.

“These actions are not routine political exercises,” the letter reads. “They are coordinated efforts to silence Black voices at the ballot box and strip communities of representation in American democracy.”

The message is addressed to more than 200 corporations and business groups that signed on to a 2021 letter in support of voting rights, as well as an unnamed number of other corporate leaders. Among the signatories were Amazon, Apple, Cisco, Facebook, Intel, Microsoft, Nike, PepsiCo, Starbucks, Target, Tesla and Unilever USA.

That letter called on Congress to update the Voting Rights Act, including changes that would restore the federal government’s ability to review changes to election and voting laws in states and local governments with a history of discrimination, a practice called preclearance that the Supreme Court effectively halted in 2013.

On Tuesday, the CBC said those companies should issue individual or joint public statements opposing efforts to dilute Black voting strength and dismantle protections in the Voting Rights Act.

The lawmakers also want companies to report on corporate political spending and relationships connected to attacks on voting rights and “discriminatory redistricting schemes.” Companies should accept an invitation to participate in a national gathering alongside civil rights leaders and advocates to discuss voting rights and Black political power, the lawmakers wrote.

The letter asks businesses to respond by June 9.

“Five years ago, corporations across America publicly affirmed that democracy, racial equity, and voting rights matter. Today, in the wake of the Supreme Court’s Callais decision, those commitments are being tested in real time,” Rep. Yvette Clarke, a New York Democrat who chairs the CBC, said in a statement.

“Corporations that have profited from Black consumers, relied on Black workers, and benefited from Black communities cannot remain silent while Black political representation is dismantled in plain sight,” Clarke said. “Silence in this moment is not neutrality — it is complicity.”

Corporate leaders warm to Trump

But political attitudes in parts of corporate America, especially among tech firms, have shifted since 2021.

When businesses signed the July 2021 letter, they were acting after the May 2020 murder of George Floyd, a Black man, by a white police officer in Minneapolis, and the Jan. 6, 2021, storming of the Capitol by Trump supporters. Six years later, some titans of American business have taken a more conciliatory approach to Trump and the Make America Great Again movement.

Elon Musk, who leads Tesla, spearheaded the Department of Governmental Efficiency, or DOGE, initiative in 2025 that resulted in the firings and layoffs of thousands of federal workers. Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg has spoken positively about the president. Jeff Bezos, Amazon’s CEO, called Trump “more mature” in his second term.

Trump has also led a push against diversity, equity and inclusion efforts. In March, the president signed an executive order targeting DEI practices by federal contractors. The directive followed another anti-DEI order in January 2025 that encouraged the private sector to “end illegal DEI discrimination and preferences.”

Since the Supreme Court’s decision in Callais, some Republicans have portrayed eliminating majority-minority districts as a constitutional imperative. The current districts should be tossed because they were drawn with their racial makeup in mind, they say.

“I don’t think race should be used to help a person because of his race, and I don’t think race should be used to harm a person because of his or her race,” Sen. John Kennedy, a Louisiania Republican, said at a Senate hearing on racial gerrymandering last week.

Rapid remaps

Since the release of the Callais decision on April 29, Florida and Tennessee have changed their maps and Louisiana is expected to follow soon. South Carolina lawmakers tried but failed to advance a new map and Alabama has taken steps to implement a 2023 gerrymander after the Supreme Court lifted a lower court order that had blocked it.

A panel of three federal judges on Tuesday issued a new order halting the Alabama map, which would likely force out one of the state’s two Black Democratic members of Congress if enacted. The judges found that the map was racially discriminatory, even in light of Callais.

Alabama has appealed the decision to the Supreme Court.

“I applaud the three-judge panel for upholding the rule of law and reaffirming that racial discrimination has no place in our redistricting process,” Rep. Terri Sewell, an Alabama Democrat who also signed Tuesday’s CBC letter, said in a statement.

“While we know that this legal battle is far from over, today’s ruling sends a clear message: Black voters in Alabama cannot and will not be silenced.”