Democrats are preparing a hostile audit of President Trump and his inner circle, intent on exposing — and ultimately ending — the most lucrative presidency in American history.Why it matters: Since winning the 2024 election, Trump has operated in a Wild West of his own making — monetizing the office to the tune of billions, while enabling family, friends and donors to cash in along the way.He and the White House have denied any conflicts of interest. Republicans, who spent years investigating the Biden family's business dealings, have shielded Trump from the same scrutiny.But Democrats see the presidential gold rush as corruption personified — and plan to bury Trump's orbit in subpoenas if they win the House in November's midterms.Zoom in: Trump's $2.2 billion financial disclosure is a 927-page roadmap for the coming investigations, itemizing every known venture that made 2025 the richest year of his life.A crypto business that barely existed when Trump took office minted him roughly $1.2 billion — eclipsing, in a single year, the real estate empire he spent decades building.His biggest single payday was $635 million in royalties from the $TRUMP meme coin, which has crashed roughly 95% from its inauguration-week launch — destroying billions for the small investors who bought in.Trump also reported tens of millions from legal settlements with major media and tech companies, plus new income from branded watches, sneakers, Bibles, fragrances and foreign licensing deals.Zoom out: For Democratic investigators, the ripest targets are the people around Trump: family, appointees and allies who, unlike the president, can be compelled to testify under oath.World Liberty Financial, the crypto venture launched by the Trump and Witkoff families, has become a magnet for foreign money, including a secret $500 million investment from a senior Emirati royal.A New York Times investigation found that Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump and the sons of Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick have ties to at least 14 companies seeking $8.9 billion in federal support for critical-minerals deals.Jared Kushner, Trump's son-in-law, has raised billions from Gulf governments while leading Middle East peace talks. In Albania, Kushner's firm won "strategic investor" status for a $1.4 billion luxury resort on a protected island — igniting mass protests dubbed the "flamingo revolution."What they're saying: Trump dismissed criticism of his financial disclosure on Wednesday, telling reporters his money is run by outside advisers in what he called a "blind account.""Everybody is profiting," Trump said, because "the stock market's going up."In a CNBC interview Thursday, Trump said he didn't know about many of the crypto gains disclosed in the filing because his son Eric and outside firms handle his investments. But he also argued that even if he had known, "there's nothing illegal with that," saying presidents cannot realistically recuse themselves from every decision that might affect their finances.Reality check: Trump's defense focuses on who manages his investments. Democrats are preparing to scrutinize the much bigger ecosystem around them: a portfolio that made more than 21,000 securities transactions in 2025, a family crypto empire, foreign business deals and other ventures that expanded alongside his presidency.The explanation also sidesteps broader ethics questions, including Trump's acceptance of a $400 million Qatari jet that entered service as Air Force One on Wednesday.Trump plans to keep the luxury plane — the largest foreign gift in U.S. history — for his presidential library after he leaves office.White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said in a statement: "President Trump only acts in the best interests of the American public — which is why they overwhelmingly re-elected him to this office, despite years of lies and false accusations against him and his businesses from the fake news media. There are no conflicts of interest."The big picture: Scrutiny of Trump's finances comes amid a growing anti-billionaire current in U.S. politics, exacerbated by a cost-of-living crisis the president repeatedly has downplayed.The number of democratic socialists in Congress is poised to more than double after the midterms, giving the left's anti-oligarchy message a bigger platform inside the Democratic Party.Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) has made corruption the central theme of his re-election message, drawing 2028 chatter for his viral speeches detailing the Trump family's foreign windfalls.For Democrats, the bet is that Trump's profits can become part of a broader affordability argument: Washington works for the well-connected, while everyone else pays the price.The bottom line: It's no secret that Democrats intend to make life miserable for Trump and his inner circle if they win the midterms."They will turn every committee of Congress into an investigative body, and they'll go after the president's family, the Cabinet, his donors and friends," House Speaker...
Two people are in police custody after climbing to the top of the Empire State Building on Wednesday afternoon while dressed in black and holding a pro-peace banner, the NYPD confirmed. Their charges are currently pending. “Two unknown individuals were observed on the antenna of the Empire State Building located 20 West 34 Street, within…
Almost 60,000 buildings may have been damaged or destroyed in Venezuela after two powerful earthquakes last week, according to a NASA satellite assessment.
Just days before America's 250th anniversary celebration of our independence, the Democrats' latest attempts to take away American citizens' gun rights are being called out by the Department of Justice.On Wednesday, the Department of Justice sued two different states, both of which are run by increasingly notorious Democrat governors, over their latest attempts to ban certain firearms. 'On April 10, I promised Governor Spanberger that we would sue Virginia if she signed this unconstitutional weapons ban into law. I keep my promises.'The DOJ sued California and Virginia for their so-called "Glock ban" and the semi-automatic-weapon ban, respectively.The lawsuit against California is in fact two-fold: First, the DOJ is challenging the ban of Glock-brand firearms, a popular choice of handgun among gun owners.RELATED: 2A win: Appeals court in DC strikes down high-capacity magazine restrictions Jim Vondruska/Getty ImagesSecond, the DOJ is challenging the legality of California's "Gun Roster," which shows which pistols are allowed and which are banned.The law triggering this ban was signed by Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom on October 25. The specific "Glock ban," as well as the ban on any other guns removed from the gun roster on January 1, was set to take effect on Wednesday. Nearly 40 Glock models were removed from the gun roster at the beginning of this year, meaning they "may no longer be sold, offered for sale, imported for sale, or manufactured in California." Additionally, more than 70 models from Auto-Ordnance; Magnum Research; Kimber; Sturm, Ruger & Co.; Kahr Arms; Phoenix Arms; Franklin Armory; Sig Sauer; and Nighthawk Custom were removed from the approved gun roster on the same day. In a state Senate hearing last year to discuss the bill before it was signed into law, the group Gun Owners of California argued against the passage of the bill, warning that the language was "overly broad" and not primarily concerned with the safety of the public: "By specifically targeting the potential for modification, this bill disproportionately affects potential Glock purchasers and restricts access to one of the most popular handguns available, further demonstrating that this legislation is not about safety but about incremental firearm prohibition." Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said in a press release Wednesday: “The Second Amendment is a sacred right belonging to all Americans, even those in California. California cannot ban the most popular type of handgun in America. We will work to stop this blatant trampling of our rights by the California government to protect the rights of lawful gun owners.”In response to a request for comment, a spokesperson for Newsom told Blaze News:The Trump administration is once again trying to dismantle California's commonsense gun safety laws. Our response is simple — these laws save lives. California has proven that strong, evidence-based gun safety measures can reduce gun violence while respecting the rights of responsible gun owners. That's why we have one of the lowest gun death rates in America and historically low crime rates across the board. We won't be intimidated by another politically motivated lawsuit. We'll continue defending the laws that protect Californians and keep dangerous weapons off our streets.In addition to the DOJ's challenge to California, the Department of Justice is also suing Virginia for its newly enacted law that bans the purchase and sale of ordinary semi-automatic rifles. The law, signed by Democratic Gov. Abigail Spanberger on May 14, essentially freezes the markets for sales of "assault firearms" in the commonwealth.Similar to the California law, Virginia's ban was set to take effect on July 1, thus triggering the two lawsuits on the same day. “On April 10, I promised Governor Spanberger that we would sue Virginia if she signed this unconstitutional weapons ban into law. I keep my promises,” Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon said in a press release. “Law-abiding Americans should not have to live under threat of criminal sanction for simply exercising their Second Amendment right to possess arms owned by millions of their fellow citizens.”Spanberger's office did not respond to a request for comment from Blaze News.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Co-hosts Mexico reached the last 16 – where England potentially await – with a stirring win over Ecuador at Mexico City StadiumMexico’s football culture dates back to the early 20th century, and the country has a place in history as participants in the first ever World Cup match, when they lost 4-1 to France on the opening day of the 1930 World Cup in Uruguay.The following match against Chile they conceded the World Cup’s first own-goal. Continue reading...
