News
Here Are Cases of Trump Rivals Who Were Subject to Investigation
Former President Donald J. Trump and his allies have suggested that his constant threats to prosecute rivals and perceived enemies if he is elected again should not be taken literally. “His vengeance is going to be by winning and making America great again, not going after his political opponents,” Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, told CNN.
But as president, Mr. Trump tried repeatedly to use the powers of the federal government to investigate or penalize those he considered foes. While a few of them had engaged in conduct that made them legitimate targets of inquiry, there was no legal basis for the investigation of many. None were ultimately put behind bars, but they had to fend off criminal investigations, civil suits brought by the Justice Department and other forms of government pressure.
The decisions to pursue Mr. Trump’s rivals cannot always be traced back to a direct, formal order from him, but they are consistent with public or private pressure he exerted. Here are some of the more prominent examples from his time in office:
James B. Comey
Former F.B.I. director
Subjected to Justice Department investigation and I.R.S. audit
What Comey did that Trump did not like
He declined to prosecute Hillary Clinton, opened an investigation into the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia, refused a loyalty pledge to Mr. Trump and bucked pressure to drop an investigation into Mr. Trump’s national security adviser. He kept and later had contemporaneous memos disclosed about his private meetings with Mr. Trump that raised questions about whether he had obstructed justice, leading to the appointment of a special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III.
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
James Comey is a proven LEAKER & LIAR. Virtually everyone in Washington thought he should be fired for the terrible job he did-until he was, in fact, fired. He leaked CLASSIFIED information, for which he should be prosecuted. He lied to Congress under OATH. He is a weak and…..
8:01 AM · Apr 13, 2018
What Trump wanted done
Mr. Trump publicly called Mr. Comey a traitor and pressed for him to be investigated and prosecuted for disclosing classified information and mishandling the Clinton and Russia investigations. Privately, Mr. Trump pressured the Justice Department and the attorney general to investigate and prosecute Mr. Comey, saying he would prosecute Mr. Comey himself if the attorney general refused. Mr. Trump told his White House chief of staff that he wanted to “get the I.R.S. on” Mr. Comey.
What happened
The Justice Department conducted a criminal investigation into whether Mr. Comey had leaked classified information. Federal prosecutors and a special counsel appointed by Mr. Trump’s attorney general examined whether he had mishandled the Clinton and Russia investigations. The I.R.S. conducted a highly unusual and invasive audit into Mr. Comey’s finances.
Consequences
Mr. Comey was never charged criminally, and the I.R.S. audit found he had overpaid his taxes. Mr. Comey paid tens of thousands of dollars in legal and accounting fees to deal with the investigations and audit. The I.R.S. inspector general investigated how the audit had come about but did not find evidence of political meddling.
Andrew G. McCabe
Deputy F.B.I. director
Investigated by the Justice Department, fired and subjected to I.R.S. audit
What McCabe did that Trump did not like
While Mr. McCabe was serving as Mr. Comey’s deputy at the F.B.I., his wife ran as a Democrat for a state assembly seat in Virginia and took money from a Clinton ally. After Mr. Trump fired Mr. Comey, Mr. McCabe opened a two-pronged investigation into whether Mr. Trump was a counterintelligence threat and was obstructing justice. Mr. McCabe made statements to internal Justice Department and F.B.I. investigators that raised questions about whether Mr. McCabe had lied to them.
What Trump wanted done
Mr. Trump called Mr. McCabe a traitor and asked for him to be investigated and prosecuted for a range of matters, including whether he had lied to the internal F.B.I. and Justice Department investigators. Mr. Trump said he wanted to “get the I.R.S.” on Mr. McCabe and for him to be fired.
What happened
The Justice Department conducted a criminal investigation into whether Mr. McCabe had lied to the F.B.I. and Justice Department, and Mr. McCabe was investigated over whether he had leaked material to journalists. Federal prosecutors and a special counsel appointed by Mr. Trump’s attorney general examined his handling of the Clinton and Russia investigations. The I.R.S. conducted the same highly unusual and invasive audit on him that it did on Mr. Comey.
Consequences
Prosecutors went to a grand jury to seek Mr. McCabe’s indictment, but in a highly unusual move, the grand jury declined to charge him. Amid public and private pressure from Mr. Trump, his beleaguered attorney general, Jeff Sessions, fired Mr. McCabe just days before his retirement, depriving him of his pension and benefits. The Biden Justice Department essentially rescinded the firing and restored his benefits. Mr. McCabe spent over a million dollars in legal fees defending himself in the criminal investigation and tens of thousands of dollars in accounting fees for the audit. As in Mr. Comey’s case, the I.R.S. inspector general found no evidence that the audit — of a type that only a tiny sliver of Americans are selected for — had come about through political interference.
Peter Strzok
Lead F.B.I. agent on Clinton and Russia investigations
Investigated by the Justice Department and fired
What Strzok did that Trump did not like
While serving as lead agent on the Clinton and Russia investigations, Mr. Strzok exchanged text messages with another F.B.I. official that were highly critical of Mr. Trump. He interviewed Mr. Trump’s national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn, at the White House in the early days of the Trump presidency. Mr. Flynn lied about his contacts with Russian officials, leading to Mr. Flynn’s dismissal and ultimate prosecution. Working with Mr. McCabe, Mr. Strzok opened the two-pronged investigation into whether Mr. Trump was a counterintelligence threat and was obstructing justice.
What Trump wanted done
Mr. Trump called Mr. Strzok a traitor and said he should be criminally investigated for his handling of the Russia investigation. Publicly and privately, Mr. Trump pushed to have him fired and told top aides that he wanted the I.R.S. to investigate him.
What happened
The F.B.I. fired Mr. Strzok. Federal prosecutors and a special counsel investigated his handling of the Clinton and Russia investigations. Prosecutors also examined his interview of Mr. Flynn, which ultimately led to the charges against Mr. Flynn being thrown out.
Consequences
Because of his dismissal, Mr. Strzok lost benefits and his pension. He racked up over a million dollars in legal fees dealing with a range of investigations and filed a lawsuit against the Justice Department and the F.B.I., seeking to have his job reinstated and to regain his benefits and pension.
John F. Kerry
Obama’s secretary of state
Investigated by the Justice Department
What Kerry did that Trump did not like
Mr. Kerry helped negotiate the nuclear deal with Iran while serving under President Barack Obama. After leaving office, he publicly criticized Mr. Trump for wanting to pull out of the deal, and he maintained some contacts with Iranian diplomats.
What Trump wanted done
Mr. Trump publicly and privately raised questions about whether Mr. Kerry was breaking the law by continuing to remain in contact with Iranian officials after leaving office. Mr. Trump told top aides and the attorney general that Mr. Kerry should be prosecuted.
What happened
Immediately after Mr. Trump started raising questions publicly about Mr. Kerry, Justice Department officials in Washington told prosecutors for the U.S. attorney’s office in Manhattan that they were referring to them an investigation related to Mr. Kerry’s contacts with Iran.
A year later, after Mr. Trump again publicly attacked Mr. Kerry and raised new questions about whether he was breaking the law, a top Justice Department official in Washington called the U.S. attorney’s office in New York to find out why the office was delaying taking an investigative step to look at Mr. Kerry’s personal communications.
Consequences
The U.S. attorney’s office in Manhattan declined to prosecute Mr. Kerry. But the Trump Justice Department did not give up on trying to bring charges. Attorney General William P. Barr took the case to the U.S. attorney’s office in Maryland, where the top prosecutor there came to the same conclusion as the federal prosecutors in New York and declined to charge Mr. Kerry.
Hillary Clinton
2016 Presidential Campaign
Investigated by the Justice Department
What Clinton did that Trump did not like
Mr. Trump had sought to portray Mrs. Clinton as corrupt throughout the 2016 campaign. Among other issues, he focused on donations to the Clinton Foundation, her use of a private email server and her deletion of messages from it. As his own legal issues intensified after taking office, he sought to redirect attention to what he cast as her criminality.
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
So why aren’t the Committees and investigators, and of course our beleaguered A.G., looking into Crooked Hillarys crimes & Russia relations?
18:49 AM · Jul 24, 2017
What Trump wanted done
Mr. Trump publicly called for Mrs. Clinton and her campaign to be criminally prosecuted on a range of issues. Privately, he pressured Mr. Sessions to investigate and prosecute Mrs. Clinton and told the White House’s top lawyer that if Mr. Sessions refused to prosecute Mrs. Clinton he would do it himself.
What happened
Federal prosecutors and a special counsel examined nearly all the issues and conspiracy theories Mr. Trump raised about Mrs. Clinton, her campaign and the Clinton Foundation, including the Clinton campaign’s role in gathering information during the 2016 campaign about ties between Mr. Trump’s associates and Russia and providing it to the F.B.I.
Consequences
A lawyer for the Clinton campaign was indicted on a charge of making false statements to the F.B.I. about Mr. Trump’s ties to Russia. The lawyer was acquitted. Mrs. Clinton sat for questioning with the special counsel John Durham, answering a litany of questions about the issues and conspiracies Mr. Trump had pushed about her. She was never charged with anything.
Michael D. Cohen
Trump’s former lawyer and fixer
Pleaded guilty to federal charges in hush money case, served prison sentence, faced retaliatory effort to stop him from publishing anti-Trump book
What Cohen did that Trump did not like
Mr. Cohen turned against Mr. Trump in a federal investigation, admitting the president had directed him to make hush money payments to a porn actress in the final days of the 2016 campaign.
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
Remember, Michael Cohen only became a “Rat” after the FBI did something which was absolutely unthinkable & unheard of until the Witch Hunt was illegally started. They BROKE INTO AN ATTORNEY’S OFFICE! Why didn’t they break into the DNC to get the Server, or Crooked’s office?
9:39 AM · Dec 16, 2018
What Trump wanted
After Mr. Cohen pleaded guilty to federal charges connected to the hush money payments and was sentenced to prison, Mr. Trump privately discussed with aides ways of trying to stop publication of a book Mr. Cohen was writing.
What happened
During the pandemic, Mr. Cohen, like many inmates, was allowed to serve his sentence at home. While there, he was told by Bureau of Prisons officials that in order to remain out of prison he had to sign an agreement saying that he would not publish a book while still serving his sentence.
Consequences
Mr. Cohen refused to sign the agreement and was thrown back in prison. Days later, a federal judge freed him, ruling that the decision to put him back behind bars amounted to retaliation. “It’s retaliatory because of his desire to exercise his First Amendment rights to publish a book and to discuss anything about the book or anything else he wants on social media and with others,” the judge said, adding that he had never seen the federal government try to reach such an agreement with a convict.
What news organizations did that Trump did not like
Journalists from all three organizations covered the Trump presidency and the Russia investigation aggressively and used material that Mr. Trump felt had been leaked to hurt him.
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
The Fake News Media has NEVER been more Dishonest or Corrupt than it is right now. There has never been a time like this in American History. Very exciting but also, very sad! Fake News is the absolute Enemy of the People and our Country itself!
8:24 AM · Mar 19, 2019
What Trump wanted
Mr. Trump publicly called the media the enemy of the people and repeatedly pushed aides to use the Justice Department to go after reporters who were writing damaging and embarrassing stories about him. He told the White House’s top lawyer to tell the attorney general to “arrest reporters, force them to serve time in jail, and then demand they disclose their sources,” according to a book by John R. Bolton, who served as Mr. Trump’s national security adviser. The book said that the White House counsel agreed to relay Mr. Trump’s request to the attorney general.
What happened
As part of leak investigations, the Justice Department obtained phone and email records for reporters for CNN, The Washington Post and The New York Times.
Consequences
Lawyers for the media companies were forced to secretly fight the Justice Department to stop them from obtaining the records. The Biden administration subsequently banned the use of subpoenas, warrants or court orders to seize reporters’ communications records or demand their notes or testimony in an effort to uncover confidential sources in leak investigations.
John R. Bolton
Trump’s national security adviser
Faced criminal investigation and civil suit by the Justice Department seeking to block publication of book critical of Trump
What Bolton did that Trump did not like
Mr. Bolton wrote a highly unflattering book about Mr. Trump that was published during the 2020 election.
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
Washed up Creepster John Bolton is a lowlife who should be in jail, money seized, for disseminating, for profit, highly Classified information. Remember what they did to the young submarine sailor, but did nothing to Crooked Hillary. I ended up pardoning him – It wasn’t fair!
6:28 AM · Jun 23, 2020
What Trump wanted
Mr. Trump sought to stop publication of the book.
What happened
The Justice Department filed suit, asking a federal judge to take the extraordinary step of halting the publication on the grounds that Mr. Bolton had failed to complete a prepublication review of the book for classified material. The department sought to use the suit to recoup Mr. Bolton’s profits. The department also opened a criminal investigation into whether Mr. Bolton had unlawfully disclosed classified information in the book, subpoenaing Mr. Bolton’s publisher.
A career government official who reviewed the book for classified information accused White House lawyers of pressuring her to ensure that contents of the book did not come out during Mr. Trump’s first impeachment and said the lawyers retaliated against her when she refused.
Consequences
A federal judge refused to halt the publication. Mr. Bolton was never charged with mishandling classified information. The Biden Justice Department dropped the suit to recoup the book’s profits. The matter cost Mr. Bolton and his publisher hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees.
Omarosa Manigault Newman
Trump’s White House aide
Faced civil suit by the Justice Department that led to a $61,000 fine
What she did that Trump did not like
A former contestant on “The Apprentice” who then worked in the White House communications office in 2017, Ms. Manigault Newman wrote a negative tell-all memoir about Mr. Trump while he was president. After her book came out, Mr. Trump called her “that dog” and a “crazed, crying lowlife.”
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
…Yes, I am currently suing various people for violating their confidentiality agreements. Disgusting and foul mouthed Omarosa is one. I gave her every break, despite the fact that she was despised by everyone, and she went for some cheap money from a book. Numerous others also!
8:58 AM · Aug 31, 2019
What Trump wanted done
The president wanted to sue her for breaking what he considered a confidentiality agreement.
What happened
A day after her publisher announced the book, the White House asked the Justice Department to open an investigation into a seemingly unrelated paperwork dispute involving her. Ten months after the book was published, the Justice Department filed a lawsuit against her citing ethical breaches related to her failure to properly file financial disclosure forms.
Consequences
A judge ruled that she had violated ethics laws that required her to file a report disclosing certain financial and travel matters and fined her $61,585.
Stephanie Winston Wolkoff
Former adviser to Melania Trump, the first lady
Faced a Justice Department lawsuit seeking to recoup her profits from a book critical of Trump and his wife
What she did that Trump did not like
Ms. Wolkoff published an embarrassing book about Mr. Trump and his wife during the 2020 election.
What happened
A month after she published the book, the Justice Department sued her, trying to recoup her profits from it. The suit said she violated a nondisclosure agreement she had signed with the government when she worked as a volunteer to help Mrs. Trump in the early months of the presidency.
Consequences
The Biden Justice Department later dropped the suit.
News
Brass bands in Beijing make way for sticker shock at home as Trump returns to escalating inflation
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump returned from the spectacle of a Chinese state visit to a less than welcoming U.S. economy — with the military band and garden tour in Beijing giving way to pressure over how to fix America’s escalating inflation rate.
Consumer inflation in the United States increased to 3.8% annually in April, higher than what he inherited as the Iran war and the Republican president’s own tariffs have pushed up prices. Inflation is now outpacing wage gains and effectively making workers poorer. The Cleveland Federal Reserve estimates that annual inflation could reach 4.2% in May as the war has kept oil and gasoline prices high.
Trump’s time with Chinese leader Xi Jinping appears unlikely to help the U.S. economy much, despite Trump’s claims of coming trade deals. The trip occurred as many people are voting in primaries leading into the November general election while having to absorb the rising costs of gasoline, groceries, utility bills, jewelry, women’s clothing, airplane tickets and delivery services. Democrats see the moment as a political opportunity.
“He’s returning to a dumpster fire,” said Lindsay Owens, executive director of Groundwork Collaborative, a liberal think tank focused on economic issues. “The president will not have the faith and confidence of the American people — the economy is their top issue and the president is saying, ‘You’re on your own.’”
The president’s trip to Beijing and his recent comments that indicated a tone-deafness to voters’ concerns about rising prices have suggested his focus is not on the American public and have undermined Republicans who had intended to campaign on last year’s tax cuts as helping families.
Trump described the trip as a victory, saying on social media that Xi “congratulated me on so many tremendous successes,” as the U.S. president has praised their relationship.
Trump told reporters that Boeing would be selling 200 aircraft — and maybe even 750 “if they do a good job” — to the Chinese. He said American farmers would be “very happy” because China would be “buying billions of dollars of soybeans.”
“We had an amazing time,” Trump said as he flew home on Air Force One, and told Fox News’ Bret Baier in an interview that gasoline prices were just some “short-term pain” and would “drop like a rock” once the war ends.
Inflationary pain is not a factor in how Trump handles Iran
Trump departed from the White House for China by saying the negotiations over the Iran war depended on stopping Tehran from developing nuclear weapons. “I don’t think about Americans’ financial situation. I don’t think about anybody. I think about one thing: We cannot let Iran have a nuclear weapon,” Trump said.
That remark prompted blowback because it suggested to some that Trump cared more about challenging Iran than fighting inflation at home. Trump defended his words, telling Fox News: “That’s a perfect statement. I’d make it again.”
The White House has since stressed that Trump is focused on inflation.
Asked later about the president’s words, Vice President JD Vance said there had been a “misrepresentation” of the remarks. White House spokesman Kush Desai said the “administration remains laser-focused on delivering growth and affordability on the homefront” while indicating actions would be taken on grocery prices.
But as Trump appeared alongside Xi, new reports back home showed inflation rising for businesses and interest rates climbing on U.S. government debt.
His comments that Boeing would sell 200 jets to China caused the company’s stock price to fall because investors had expected a larger number. There was little concrete information offered about any trade agreements reached during the summit, including Chinese purchases of U.S. exports such as liquefied natural gas and beef.
“Foreign policy wins can matter politically, but only if voters feel stability and affordability in their daily lives,” said Brittany Martinez, a former Republican congressional aide who is the executive director of Principles First, a center-right advocacy group focused on democracy issues.
“Midterms are almost always a referendum on cost of living and public frustration, and Republicans are not immune from the same inflation and affordability pressures that hurt Democrats in recent cycles,” she added.
Democrats see Trump as vulnerable
Democratic lawmakers are seizing on Trump’s comments before his trip as proof of his indifference to lowering costs. There is potential staying power of his remarks as Americans head into Memorial Day weekend facing rising prices for the hamburgers and hot dogs to be grilled.
“What Americans do not see is any sympathy, any support, or any plan from Trump and congressional Republicans to lower costs – in fact, they see the opposite,” Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York said Thursday.
Vance faulted the Biden administration for the inflation problem even though the inflation rate is now higher than it was when Trump returned to the White House in January 2025 with a specific mandate to fix it.
“The inflation number last month was not great,” Vance said Wednesday, but he then stressed, “We’re not seeing anything like what we saw under the Biden administration.”
Inflation peaked at 9.1% in June 2022 under Biden, a Democrat. By the time Trump took the oath of office, it was a far more modest 3%.
Trump’s inflation challenge could get harder
The data tells a different story as higher inflation is spreading into the cost of servicing the national debt.
Over the past week, the interest rate charged on 10-year U.S. government debt jumped from 4.36% to 4.6%, an increase that implies higher costs for auto loans and mortgages.
“My fear is that the layers of supply shocks that are affecting the U.S. economy will only further feed into inflationary pressures,” said Gregory Daco, chief economist at EY-Parthenon.
Daco noted that last year’s tariff increases were now translating into higher clothing prices. With the Supreme Court ruling against Trump’s ability to impose tariffs by declaring an economic emergency, his administration is preparing a new set of import taxes for this summer.
Daco stressed that there have been a series of supply shocks. First, tariffs cut into the supply of imports. In addition, Trump’s immigration crackdown cut into the supply of foreign-born workers. Now, the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz has cut off the vital waterway used to ship 20% of global oil supplies.
“We’re seeing an erosion of growth,” Daco said.
News
Top Drug Regulator Is Fired From the F.D.A.
Dr. Tracy Beth Hoeg, the Food and Drug Administration’s top drug regulator, said she was fired from the agency Friday after she declined to resign.
She said she did not know who had ordered her firing or why, nor whether Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. knew of her fate. The Department of Health and Human Services did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The departure reflected the upheaval at the F.D.A., days after the resignation of Dr. Marty Makary, the agency commissioner. Dr. Makary had become a lightning rod for critics of the agency’s decisions to reject applications for rare disease drugs and to delay a report meant to supply damaging evidence about the abortion drug mifepristone. He also spent months before his departure pushing back on the White House’s requests for him to approve more flavored vapes, the reason he ultimately cited for leaving.
Dr. Hoeg’s hiring had startled public health leaders who were familiar with her track record as a vaccine skeptic, and she played a leading role in some of the agency’s most divisive efforts during her tenure. She worked on a report that purportedly linked the deaths of children and young adults to Covid vaccines, a dossier the agency has not released publicly. She was also the co-author of a document describing Mr. Kennedy’s decision to pare the recommendations for 17 childhood vaccines down to 11.
But in an interview on Friday, Dr. Hoeg said she “stuck with the science.”
“I am incredibly proud of the work we were doing,” Dr. Hoeg said, adding, “I’m glad that we didn’t give in to any pressures to approve drugs when it wasn’t appropriate.”
As the director of the agency’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, she was a political appointee in a role that had been previously occupied by career officials. An epidemiologist who was trained in the United States and Denmark, she worked on efforts to analyze drug safety and on a panel to discuss the use of serotonin reuptake inhibitors, the most widely prescribed class of antidepressants, during pregnancy. She also worked on efforts to reduce animal testing and was the agency’s liaison to an influential vaccine committee.
She made sure that her teams approved drugs only when the risk-benefit balance was favorable, she said.
The firing worsens the leadership vacuum at the F.D.A. and other agencies, with temporary leaders filling the role of commissioner, food chief and the head of the biologics center, which oversees vaccines and gene therapies. The roles of surgeon general and director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are also unfilled.
News
Supreme Court is death knell for Virginia’s Democratic-friendly congressional maps
The U.S. Supreme Court
Andrew Harnik/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Andrew Harnik/Getty Images
The U.S. Supreme Court refused Friday to allow Virginia to use a new congressional map that favored Democrats in all but one of the state’s U.S. House seats. The map was a key part of Democrats’ effort to counter the Republican redistricting wave set off by President Trump.
The new map was drawn by Democrats and approved by Virginia voters in an April referendum. But on May 8, the Supreme Court of Virginia in a 4-to-3 vote declared the referendum, and by extension the new map, null and void because lawmakers failed to follow the proper procedures to get the issue on the ballot, violating the state constitution.
Virginia Democrats and the state’s attorney general then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking to put into effect the map approved by the voters, which yields four more likely Democratic congressional seats. In their emergency application, they argued the Virginia Supreme Court was “deeply mistaken” in its decision on “critical issues of federal law with profound practical importance to the Nation.” Further, they asserted the decision “overrode the will of the people” by ordering Virginia to “conduct its election with the congressional districts that the people rejected.”
Republican legislators countered that it would be improper for the U.S. Supreme Court to wade into a purely state law controversy — especially since the Democrats had not raised any federal claims in the lower court.
Ultimately, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with Republicans without explanation leaving in place the state court ruling that voided the Democratic-friendly maps.
The court’s decision not to intervene was its latest in emergency requests for intervention on redistricting issues. In December, the high court OK’d Texas using a gerrymandered map that could help the GOP win five more seats in the U.S. House. In February, the court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map, adopted to offset Texas’s map. Then in March, the U.S. Supreme Court blocked the redrawing of a New York map expected to flip a Republican congressional district Democratic.
And perhaps most importantly, in April, the high court ruled that a Louisiana congressional map was a racial gerrymander and must be redrawn. That decision immediately set off a flurry of redistricting efforts, particularly in the South, where Republican legislators immediately began redrawing congressional maps to eliminate long established majority Black and Hispanic districts.
-
Ohio5 minutes agoOhio Highway Patrol investigating fatal head-on crash on U.S. Route 62
-
Oklahoma12 minutes agoOklahoma ‘Getting Gritty’ After SEC Tournament Loss
-
Oregon18 minutes agoRecall issued for organic ice cream sold in Oregon over metal concerns
-
Pennsylvania24 minutes agoSen. McCormick tours NSF-funded AI-powered biotech labs at Penn
-
Rhode Island30 minutes agoWhat to expect at Roger Wheeler and Misquamicut beaches this summer
-
South-Carolina36 minutes agoSouth Carolina lands commitment from big transfer portal offensive lineman
-
South Dakota42 minutes agoFact brief: Was an east-west split of Dakota Territory considered?
-
Tennessee48 minutes agoTennessee man arrested after kidnapping his two grandchildren