Connect with us

Politics

New revelations in Florida documents trial put Trump on offense against 'deranged' special counsel

Published

on

New revelations in Florida documents trial put Trump on offense against 'deranged' special counsel

Former President Trump is calling for Special Counsel Jack Smith’s arrest after the prosecutors handling the 45th president’s classified documents case admitted seized documents are no longer in their original order and sequence.  

“Now, Deranged Jack has admitted in a filing in front of Judge Cannon to what I have been saying happened since the Illegal RAID on my home, Mar-a-Lago, in Palm Beach, Florida – That he and his team committed blatant Evidence Tampering by mishandling the very Boxes they used as a pretext to bring this Fake Case,” Trump posted to Truth Social on Friday. “These deeply Illegal actions by the Politicized ‘Persecutors’ mandate that this whole Witch Hunt be DROPPED IMMEDIATELY. END THE ‘BOXES HOAXES.’ MAGA2024!”

“ARREST DERANGED JACK SMITH. HE IS A CRIMINAL!” Trump added in a follow-up post. 

Prosecutors admitted in a court filing on Friday that “there are some boxes where the order of items within that box is not the same as in the associated scans.” The prosecutors had previously told the court that the documents were “in their original, intact form as seized.” 

JUDGE UNSEALS FBI FILES IN TRUMP CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS CASE, INCLUDING DETAILED TIMELINE OF MAR-A-LAGO RAID

Advertisement

Former President Trump returns to Trump Tower, New York City, Monday, April 15, 2024. Trump was in Manhattan Criminal Court today for jury selection in the so-called “hush-money” case. (Probe-Media for Fox New Digital)

“The Government acknowledges that this is inconsistent with what Government counsel previously understood and represented to the Court,” a footnote in the filing reads. 

The filing comes after one of Trump’s co-defendants in the case asked for a delay as lawyers were having trouble figuring out the origin of some of the documents in the evidence boxes. 

The FBI agents seized 33 boxes of documents in August 2022 from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida, spurring another legal battle that Trump has called a “scam.” The investigation is overseen by special prosecutor Smith, who Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed to the job, and has charged Trump with 40 felony counts, including allegedly violating the Espionage Act, making false statements to investigators and conspiracy to obstruct justice. 

GOP SLAMS ‘WEAPONIZATION’ OF DOJ AFTER TRUMP’S MAR-A-LAGO RAIDED BY FBI; DEMS CALL IT ‘ACCOUNTABILITY’

Advertisement

Trump has pleaded not guilty to the charges, and slammed the case as an “Election Inference Scam” promoted by the Biden administration and “Deranged Jack Smith.”

Special Counsel Jack Smith arrives to give remarks on a recently unsealed indictment, including four felony counts, against former President Trump on Aug. 1, 2023, in Washington, D.C. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

The case is slated to head to trial on May 20, though the date may change, with presiding Judge Aileen Cannon underacting a trove of documents in the lead-up to the trial that have provided notable updates to the case. 

BIDEN ADMINISTRATION INVOLVEMENT

Judge Cannon recently unredacted more than 300 pages of evidence in the case, including emails and conversations related to the Biden administration’s contact with the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) the year prior to the documents’ seizure from Trump’s home, Real Clear Investigations recently reported. Biden has previously publicly said he was not involved in the case, though the filings show other White House officials were involved in the early stages of the investigation. 

TRUMP SAYS MAR-A-LAGO HOME IN FLORIDA ‘UNDER SIEGE’ BY FBI AGENTS

Advertisement

The unredacted documents allege that just weeks after Trump left office in 2021, the White House Office of Records Management under the Biden administration began working with NARA “on exaggerated claims related to records handling under the Presidential Records Act,” Trump’s attorney wrote in a court filing to compel discovery.  

The Archives’ general counsel, Gary Stern, sent a letter to Trump’s Presidential Records Act representatives in May 2021 asking the whereabouts of “roughly two dozen boxes of original Presidential records [that] have not been transferred to NARA.” Stern explained that he “had several conversations” with White House Office of Records Management officials where they discussed “concerns” regarding Trump’s possession of the documents, according to Real Clear Investigations. 

President Biden speaks at Abbotts Creek Community Center during an event to promote his economic agenda in Raleigh, North Carolina, on Jan. 18, 2024. (Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images)

Stern’s letter detailed that the team was looking for “original correspondence between President Trump and North Korean Leader Kim Jung-un” and “the letter that President Obama left for President Trump on his first day in office,” Real Clear reported.

TRUMP’S LAWYERS PUSH FOR DISMISSAL OF CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS CASE, ARGUING ‘PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY’

Advertisement

He added that he understood that transitioning administrations was “very chaotic” and that it could take “several more months” to transfer the documents, The Federalist reported. By June of that year, a national archivist appointed by former President Obama, David Ferriero, told the Trump team he was running “out of patience,” unredacted filings show. The filing states that Ferriero dismissed “good-faith efforts by President Trump’s PRA representatives to address issues raised by NARA.” 

This view shows former President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate on Aug. 10, 2022, in Palm Beach, Florida. (AP Photo/Steve Helber)

The filing continued that Ferriero allegedly “threatened” a PRA representative for Trump in August 2021, saying he presumed 24 boxes of “alleged – and non-existent” documents were “destroyed” and that he was taking the issue to the DOJ. Ferriero and Stern contacted DOJ officials and Deputy White House Counsel Jonathan Su. Stern met with Su at the White House, according to White House logs reported by Real Clear Investigations. 

“At this point, I am assuming [the boxes] have been destroyed. In which case, I am obligated to report it to the Hill, the DOJ, and the White House,” Ferriero wrote in a warning to Trump’s team in August 2021, according to the documents. 

“To my knowledge, nothing has been destroyed,” a Trump representative responded.

Advertisement

TRUMP DEMANDS JUSTICE DEPARTMENT ‘IMMEDIATELY’ DROP CHARGES AGAINST HIM IN CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS CASE AFTER BIDEN DECISION 

The unredacted filing states that in September, Stern emailed Ferriero and a deputy archivist that he had “reached out to DOJ counsel about this issue” and that “WH Counsel is now aware of the issue.”

Another email, sent on Sept. 15, details that Stern reportedly spoke with Su to “get him up to speed on the issue and the dispute whether there are 12 or 24 missing boxes,” which was followed by another email that “[White House counsel] is ready to set up a call to discuss the Trump boxes.”

Fox News Digital reached out to the White House for comment Sunday but did not immediately receive a reply.

DOJ INSTRUCTS NARA HOW TO PROCEED

Trump’s team delivered 15 boxes of documents to NARA in January 2022, with the Archives’ White House liaison director reporting back to Ferriero and another archivist that the boxes mostly contained newspaper clippings and magazines, in addition to “lots of classified records,” according to court filings. 

Advertisement

Unsealed documents show that following the review of the returned boxes, Su urged Stern to contact Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco. Monaco’s office subsequently “instructed” how Stern could proceed with the matter, including contacting the inspectors general for the Archives and intelligence community, and DOJ National Security Division Chief Jay Bratt, court filings reported by Real Clear show.

This image, contained in the indictment against former President Trump, shows boxes of records stored in a bathroom and shower in the Lake Room at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida. (Justice Department via AP)

Stern complied with the instructions, and a criminal referral was sent to the DOJ on Feb. 9. 

News of the criminal referral sparked condemnation from Republicans that it was spurred by political spite at the hands of Democrats against Trump. 

TRUMP EXPECTED BACK IN COURT FOR CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS HEARING IN SPECIAL SECURE FLORIDA FACILITY

Advertisement

“At no time and under no circumstances were NARA officials pressured or influenced by Committee Democrats or anyone else,” Acting National Archivist Debra Steidel Wall wrote in a letter to congressional Republicans in 2022. 

ALLEGATIONS OF IMPROPER ATTEMPTS TO INFLUENCE WALT NAUTA’S COUNSEL

Trump was charged alongside his personal aide and valet, Walt Nauta, as well as Mar-a-Lago maintenance chief Carlos De Oliveira. Unredacted court filings show Nauta’s attorney was allegedly threatened he could lose a shot at becoming a federal judge if Nauta didn’t flip on Trump. 

A motion filed in June 2023, and recently unredacted, reported that Nauta’s attorney, Stanley Woodward, met with DOJ National Security Division Chief Jay Bratt just weeks after the raid on Mar-a-Lago and “was led to a conference room where Mr. Bratt awaited with what appeared to be a folder containing information about Mr. Woodward,” The Federalist reported. 

This view shows former President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Florida, on March 31, 2023. (Reuters/Ricardo Arduengo)

“Mr. Bratt thereupon told Mr. Woodward he didn’t consider him to be a ‘Trump lawyer,’ and he further said that he was aware that Mr. Woodward had been recommended to President Biden for an appointment to the Superior Court of the District of Columbia,” the motion stated, the Federalist reported. “Mr. Bratt followed up with words to the effect of ‘I wouldn’t want you to do anything to mess that up.’ Thereafter, Mr. Bratt advised Mr. Woodward that ‘one way or the other’ his client, Walt Nauta, would be giving up his lavish lifestyle of ‘private planes and golf clubs’ and he encouraged Mr. Woodward to persuade Mr. Nauta to cooperate with the government’s investigation (this was prior to the appointment of the Special Counsel).”

Advertisement

Bratt was later appointed lead prosecutor to Jack Smith’s case. 

The DOJ argued that “at no point during the meeting did Woodward suggest that any of the prosecutors’ comments were improper.” 

TRUMP FLORIDA JUDGE CANNON DENIES TRUMP DISMISSAL ON ‘UNCONSTITUTIONAL VAGUENESS’

Legal experts, including James Trusty, Trump attorney and former chief of the Justice Department’s organized crime unit, have said the allegations in the filing amount to “extortion.” 

“You had a high-level DOJ official – according to a statement submitted as an officer-to-the-court, to a federal judge – told Stanley Woodward, a defense attorney representing Walt Nauta that it would be a shame, essentially, if he endangered his pending judgeship by not flipping Nauta against President Trump,” Trusty said last year in comment to Fox News’ Mark Levin. 

Advertisement

‘PLASMIC ECHO’

Newly unredacted filings reveal that the FBI investigation into Trump, which officially began in March 2022 following the president and his team voluntarily handing over boxes of documents, was dubbed “Plasmic Echo.” 

“This document contains information that is restricted to case participants,” documents unsealed last month show, Fox News Digital previously reported. It added, “PLASMIC ECHO; Mishandling Classified or National Defense Information, Unknown Subject; Sensitive Investigation Matter.”

TRUMP’S SECURITY CLEARANCE WAS ALLEGEDLY RETROACTIVELY REVOKED

Earlier this year, Trump’s legal team indicated they might use evidence showing Trump acted in “good-faith and non-criminal states of mind” when he took classified documents home to Florida due to a high-level security clearance granted by the Department of Energy. 

Unsealed, unredacted filings assert Trump had the high-level “Q clearance” granted by the DOE until last year, but that it was allegedly revoked following Trump’s indictment.

Former President Trump speaks to supporters at a rally to support local candidates on Sept. 3, 2022, in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania. (Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

Advertisement

The DOE’s “Central Personnel Clearance Index and Clearance Action Tracking System ‘reflect[ed] an active Q clearance’ for President Trump,” according to the 2024 filing, as reported by The Federalist. 

An assistant general counsel at the agency, however, “instructed that the relevant systems ‘be immediately amended’ and ‘promptly modified to reflect the terminated status of [President] Trump’s Q clearance,’” the filing states.

Former President Trump listens as David Pecker is questioned by prosecutor Joshua Steinglass during Trump’s criminal trial in Manhattan, April 26, 2024, in this courtroom sketch. (Reuters/Jane Rosenberg)

Trump’s classified documents case comes as he continues a weeks-long legal battle in a Manhattan courtroom where he is facing 34 felony charges of falsifying business records. Trump has pleaded not guilty to the charges and slammed the case as another “scam” and “witch hunt” promoted by the Biden administration ahead of the general election.

SPECIAL COUNSEL JACK SMITH HITS BACK AT JUDGE FOR ‘FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED LEGAL PREMISE’ IN TRUMP DOCUMENTS CASE

Advertisement

“This Judge has taken away my Constitutional Right to FREE SPEECH. I am the only Presidential Candidate in History to be GAGGED,” Trump wrote last week on Truth Social. 

“This whole ‘Trial’ is RIGGED, and by taking away my FREEDOM OF SPEECH, THIS HIGHLY CONFLICTED JUDGE IS RIGGING THE PRESIDENTIAL OF 2024 ELECTION. ELECTION INTERFERENCE!!!” Trump continued

The classified documents case, meanwhile, also opened the doors to investigations regarding classified documents in the possession of Biden and former Vice President Mike Pence. Special Counsel Robert Hur announced in February that he would not recommend criminal charges against Biden for possessing classified materials after his vice presidency, citing that Biden is “a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.”

President Biden speaks in the Roosevelt Room of the White House on Sept. 15, 2023. (Chris Kleponis/CNP/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

“Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone from whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him – by then a former president well into his eighties – of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness,” Hur wrote in his report. 

Advertisement

 

The findings sparked widespread outrage that Biden was effectively deemed too cognitively impaired to be charged with a crime but could serve as president. Trump has meanwhile slammed the disparity in charges as a reflection of a “sick and corrupt, two-tiered system of justice in our country.” 

Politics

Socialism goes west as DSA-backed challenger ousts longtime Democrat

Published

on

Socialism goes west as DSA-backed challenger ousts longtime Democrat

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo., a 30-year incumbent, lost to a Democratic Socialists of America (DSA)-backed challenger in a high-profile primary on Tuesday evening.

Melat Kiros, a 29-year-old socialist, defeated DeGette in a Democratic primary for a deep-blue House seat anchored in Denver, according to The Associated Press, scoring a major victory for the socialist left on Tuesday evening.

The DSA had been aiming to cast DeGette’s loss as evidence of its growing momentum after a slate of socialist candidates won Democratic primaries in New York City last week.

“Today, the East Coast, next week the Mountain West,” the DSA wrote in a social media post last week.

Advertisement

Rep. Diana DeGette speaks during a press conference outside the U.S. Capitol building in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 10, 2024. (Samuel Corum/Getty Images)

SOCIALISTS CHEER ‘SHOCKWAVE’ PRIMARY NIGHT AS DSA-BACKED CANDIDATES WIN, ADVANCE ACROSS THE MAP

If elected in November, Kiros, who was born in Ethiopia, will likely join the ranks of the far-left group known as the Squad and become one of a handful of the House chamber’s outspoken socialists. 

The millennial challenger was endorsed by Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and the anti-incumbent leftist organization Justice Democrats. Controversial socialist streamer Hasan Piker, who has said Hamas is “a thousand times better” than Israel and praised the Chinese Communist Party, also backed Kiros’ insurgent primary run.

DeGette, a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus who supports abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), sought to win a 16th House term by flexing her leftist bona fides. She argued her seniority on an influential House committee would allow her to push for Medicare-for-All legislation — a longtime priority of the party’s far-left flank.

Advertisement

DeGette, who was endorsed by former CPC Chairwoman Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., also spotlighted her experience as an impeachment manager during Trump’s second impeachment trial in 2021.

Though DeGette and Kiros shared few policy disagreements, they diverged sharply over Israel and antisemitism. Kiros also sharply criticized DeGette for accepting corporate PAC contributions.

Kiros, a PhD student and lawyer, was fired from a New York firm in 2023 after publishing an open letter, arguing that pro-Palestinian student protesters calling for the elimination of Israel were not antisemitic and appearing to defend Hamas.

Melat Kiros participated in a League of Women Voters Congressional District 1 candidate forum at Montview Presbyterian Church in Denver on May 28, 2026. (RJ Sangosti/MediaNews Group/The Denver Post)

WATCH: HOUSE DEMS UNLOAD ON TEXAS DEMOCRAT OVER ‘DEMENTED’ ANTISEMITIC COMMENTS

Advertisement

She has also described the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks against the Jewish state as the “inevitable consequence of apartheid” and declined to characterize the deadly firebombing of protesters in Boulder last year who were urging the release of hostages held by Hamas in Gaza as antisemitic. 

“I don’t know what was in the heart of the perpetrator,” Kiros told Colorado’s 9News in a recent television interview. “All I know is that he went and attacked innocent people because of what they might have believed.”

A June 2025 bipartisan resolution condemning the attack as part of a “rise in ideologically motivated attacks on Jewish individuals” won every present lawmaker’s support, except for Reps. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., and Thomas Massie, R-Ky., who voted present.

Kiros has also suggested the United States deserved 9/11.

“Inevitable in the sense that we destabilized a lot of the Middle East that forced people to believe that another act of violence was the only response,” Kiros told 9News when asked if she thought the terror attack was “the inevitable consequence of American foreign policy.”

Advertisement

“And again, just like I said before, our responsibility is to get rid of those conditions that lead to violence in the first place,” Kiros continued.

DeGette argued that Kiros’ embrace of Piker and her comments about antisemitism and 9/11 were disqualifying. 

“I’m shocked and disgusted that Kiros is doubling down on excusing terrorism and the murder of innocent people,” the 30-year incumbent wrote on Facebook earlier this month.

Streamer and creator Hasan Piker speaks at a press conference during day two of Web Summit Vancouver at the Vancouver Convention Centre in Vancouver, Canada, on May 13, 2026. (Sam Barnes/Web Summit via Sportsfile via Getty Images)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Advertisement

Colorado’s 1st Congressional District is the most liberal seat in the state and voted for former Vice President Kamala Harris by 56 points in 2024.

The primary fight was further scrambled by University of Colorado Regent Wanda James, also running for DeGette’s seat. Though James did not pose the same threat as Kiros, her vote share could ultimately have swayed the contest. 

Continue Reading

Politics

Newsom signs off on 100% California tax for money from Trump’s $1.8-billion ‘slush fund’

Published

on

Newsom signs off on 100% California tax for money from Trump’s .8-billion ‘slush fund’

Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed off on a 100% state tax on money any Californians receive from Trump’s $1.8-billion “anti-weaponization” fund for his political allies.

Newsom unveiled his proposal in May, after Trump’s Justice Department said it would create a fund to compensate Trump’s allies who claim they have “suffered weaponization and lawfare” under Biden’s Justice Department.

The settlement fund was criticized by politicians on both sides of the aisle, including Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who described it as a “slush fund to pay people who assault cops.”

The fund remains in legal limbo. Earlier this month, a federal judge in Virginia extended a court-ordered block on the plan, which critics warned could be used to pay pardoned Jan. 6 rioters.

Fast-tracked into law as part of Senate Bill 122, Newsom’s plan imposes “a tax on any settlement fund payment from the federal Anti-Weaponization Fund, or any subsequent fund, settlement, or agreement, as provided, at a rate of 100%,” according to the bill text. The tax applies to all tax years between 2026 and 2030.

Advertisement

Newsom signed the bill Tuesday. In a statement, his office said the tax is meant to ensure that, should Trump’s fund proceed, California recipients won’t “receive favorable state treatment on those payments.”

“We believe democracy is worth defending, the rule of law matters, and public dollars should support victims—not those who attacked the very institutions that protect our freedoms,” Newsom said in the statement.

University of Southern California law professor Ariel Jurow Kleiman, an expert on tax law and policy, said that while Newsom’s tax is a “novel legal strategy,” she believes there is “no categorical legal restriction” preventing California from implementing it.

States have a “wide degree of discretion” to design their tax systems — including how they define income — so long as they do not violate their constitutions, Jurow Kleiman said.

If a California resident wanted to challenge the tax in court, they would need to show they were harmed by it to have standing to sue, according to Jurow Kleiman. That would mean receiving a payment from Trump’s settlement fund and then paying the 100% California tax. Unless the settlement fund is established and distributes payments, that scenario is unlikely.

Advertisement

While there have been proposals to levy a 100% tax on income above certain thresholds — Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) in 2023 said he supports a 100% tax on income exceeding $1 billion — Jurow Kleiman said she is not aware of any governments that have adopted such a policy.

Continue Reading

Politics

Congress eyes rare bipartisan housing win with or without Trump’s help

Published

on

Congress eyes rare bipartisan housing win with or without Trump’s help

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

The House has officially shipped a colossal bipartisan housing package to President Donald Trump, and lawmakers are hoping that, at the very least, he doesn’t veto it.

Trump was supposed to sign the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act last week, but his last-minute decision to ghost the signing ceremony with House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., put into question whether the bill was dead.

His refusal to sign the bill, which passed with overwhelmingly bipartisan support in both chambers, was to leverage the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) America Act, which doesn’t currently have the votes to succeed in the Senate.

WARREN TELLS TRUMP TO ‘SIGN THE DAMN BILL’ AS BIPARTISAN HOUSING PACKAGE REMAINS STALLED IN WASHINGTON

Advertisement

Trump has refused to sign the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act. (Shawn Thew/EPA/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Trump appears to be in no hurry to sign the bill, despite Republicans who are hungry for a win in the affordability fight ahead of the midterm elections.

“It’s so unimportant … compared to the SAVE America Act,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on Monday. “I think the SAVE America Act is exactly what it says. It’s saving America from crooked elections.”

“Here’s what I would like to sign, much more than a bill that — big deal, it’s a yawn,” he continued. “Some people say it’s wonderful. To me, compared to the SAVE America Act, just about everything is a big yawn.”

GOP INFIGHTING OVER TRUMP’S VOTER ID BILL ERUPTS AS TOP SENATOR CALLS STRATEGY ‘FANTASY’

Advertisement

It’s legislation that is loaded with nearly 60 provisions from both sides of the aisle in both chambers that’s designed to make it easier for homes to be built and for younger Americans to buy their first home. It also includes a ban on hedge funds buying up housing stock that Trump pushed Congress to include during the State of the Union earlier this year.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., one of the architects behind the bill in the upper chamber alongside Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., charged that Congress handed the bill to Trump “on a silver platter.”

“When you ask me what happens next, if he cared about the American people, he’d have already signed the damned thing, and we’d be underway,” Warren said on WCVB’s “On the Record” on Sunday.

But Trump doesn’t have to put his signature on the bill for it to become law.

IRATE REPUBLICANS ACCUSE TRUMP OF HANDING DEMOCRATS A WIN AFTER BLOWING UP HOUSING PACKAGE

Advertisement

The Senate advanced a massive, Trump-backed housing package geared toward lowering the costs of homes and supercharging the housing supply. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., pitched it as legislation to prevent America from becoming a “nation of renters.” (Jemal Countess/Getty Images for Protect Borrowers; Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

The Constitution grants presidents the ability to veto a bill within 10 days of it being transferred over to the White House. In that scenario, Congress could override a veto of the housing package.

It’s happened before under the Trump administration. In early 2021, Congress overrode Trump’s veto of the annual National Defense Authorization Act — a massive Pentagon funding authorization package that some House Republicans are trying to use as a vehicle to pass the SAVE America Act.

But during that 10-day period, if Trump doesn’t sign the bill, it would automatically become law. That’s unless Congress completely adjourns, in which case a “pocket veto” could happen. The Senate is currently in recess and the House is scheduled to leave town by week’s end, but neither count as a full adjournment.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Advertisement

Johnson, who spent the last few days meeting with Trump at the White House about the housing bill and the SAVE America Act, said: “I hope he does sign it.”

“If he doesn’t, it’s still law,” Johnson said. “We’ll still celebrate it, but he’s trying to make a point, and I think he’s making it very effectively. And the fact that you all ask me every three steps down the hallway illustrates that he has achieved the desired objective, and that is to make SAVE America the number one thing, because if we don’t get that right, everybody’s concerned about what happens next.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending