News
Trump Plans to Target ActBlue, Democrats’ Cash Engine
President Trump on Thursday plans to direct the Justice Department to investigate ActBlue, the fund-raising platform that powers virtually every Democratic candidate and cause, according to a person briefed on the preparations. The move steps up Republicans’ effort to cripple their opponents’ political infrastructure.
It will be the third time in three weeks that Mr. Trump has directed the government to target a perceived political enemy, a drastic expansion of his use of his powers to try to damage domestic opponents.
Mr. Trump plans to call for an investigation by Attorney General Pam Bondi into ActBlue, which is used across the Democratic Party’s ecosystem to collect donations online. The inquiry is ostensibly meant to look into possible illegal donations made by people in someone else’s name, known as straw donations, as well as hard-dollar contributions from foreign donors.
Mr. Trump’s impending action represents a threat to one of the key financial cogs of the left, potentially hindering Democrats’ ability to compete in elections. It is likely to please elements of his base, for whom ActBlue has become a top target. Congressional Republicans have separately been investigating what they claim are the platform’s insufficient security provisions.
For days, Democratic groups have been worried that the White House was planning executive orders or memorandums that would target an array of nonprofit organizations. White House officials insisted no such orders were being drafted and maintained that stance for days.
On Thursday, Politico and other news outlets reported that Mr. Trump planned to sign an ActBlue memorandum later in the day. The person briefed on the preparations insisted that the memorandum was different from the type of order that Democrats had speculated might be in the offing, because it related to foreign donations.
Just over two weeks ago, Mr. Trump signed memorandums targeting two officials from his first term for investigation by his current government. One, Miles Taylor, has been deeply critical of the president. The other, Chris Krebs, was targeted for rejecting Mr. Trump’s false claims of widespread election fraud involving voting machines.
The Republican scrutiny of ActBlue has focused on claims — thus far unsubstantiated — that it allows straw and foreign donations. Federal election law bars straw donations, and it prohibits foreign citizens without permanent residency from donating directly to federal political candidates or political action committees.
A Justice Department investigation into ActBlue is likely to create vulnerabilities for the entire Democratic fund-raising apparatus. Party consultants have relied on ActBlue to bring in donations. Candidates, committees for federal and state legislative chambers, and liberal caucuses use the platform as their primary mechanism to process donations.
“ActBlue plays a vital role in enabling all Americans to participate in our democracy and the organization strictly abides by all federal and state laws governing its activities,” said Megan Hughes, an ActBlue spokeswoman. “We will always stand steadfast in defending the rights of all Americans to participate in our democracy and ActBlue will continue its mission undeterred and uninterrupted, providing a safe, secure fund-raising platform for the millions of grass-roots donors who rely on us.”
There is great fear across the Democratic Party that any of the entities that have used ActBlue could soon find themselves enmeshed in an investigation into foreign contributions from a hostile Justice Department with direction from Mr. Trump.
As word of the impending Trump memorandum circulated among Democrats, panicked Democrats blasted fund-raising appeals.
“Please, while we still can, make a donation to my campaign’s emergency fund through ActBlue,” Senator Ruben Gallego of Arizona wrote to supporters on Thursday afternoon. “Any amount at all. We’ve got to be ready for any outcome, and we’ve got to start preparing now.”
ActBlue itself got into the fund-raising game. Regina Wallace-Jones, the platform’s chief executive, wrote to Democratic partners late Wednesday asking for money to help “fight against the creeping despotism of the right, and to win back power in Washington, D.C., and the halls of government across the country.”
She wrote that the looming threat of an executive order or memorandum from Mr. Trump had already damaged ActBlue and its allies.
“The current strategy of distraction and exhaustion is effective,” she wrote. “We see this across the country and are not immune to this ourselves. The flow-on effect from the initial innuendo of the E.O. caused many in the ecosystem anxiety and distress.”
ActBlue has faced internal turmoil since Mr. Trump won the presidential election in November. At least seven senior officials quit the organization in late February, prompting two employee unions to warn of an “alarming pattern” of departures that was “eroding our confidence in the stability of the organization.”
Republicans have been encouraging the Trump administration to investigate ActBlue.
This month, the leaders of three Republican-led House committees accused the group of not doing enough to prevent fraud and demanded more information about the recent resignations. Last week, several of the people who left ActBlue received their own letters asking them to appear before Republican congressional investigators.
Last month, several Republican lawmakers urged Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to investigate ActBlue or to help them do so.
And Representative Andy Biggs of Arizona asked the F.B.I. to investigate whether ActBlue had allowed Democrats “to skirt the integrity of federal campaign finance laws,” including by processing donations that originated in hostile foreign countries.
Elon Musk, the president’s billionaire adviser who poured hundreds of millions of dollars into the 2024 election, has criticized ActBlue for weeks, claiming without evidence that the organization was funded by Democratic megadonors including Herb Sandler, who died in 2019. On Thursday, Mr. Musk wrote on his social media platform, “ActBlue is guilty of widespread criminal identity theft.”
Last month, the White House brought in Scott Walter, the president of the conservative watchdog group Capital Research Center, which has investigated ActBlue, to brief senior officials on the organization and other aspects of Democratic political financing.
On Thursday, Mr. Walter suggested that the planned memorandum was about compliance with election law, and was not an effort to undermine Democrats’ electoral prospects.
“Liberal funding schemes for political and charitable giving have drawn criticism from left- and right-leaning watchdogs,” he said in a statement.
Democrats and their allies reject that.
In a fund-raising email on Thursday, the Democratic-aligned news organization Courier Newsroom said the actions against ActBlue and other liberal groups “aren’t about election security — they’re about silencing dissent and cutting off the resources behind grass-roots resistance to Trump’s authoritarianism.”
News
National Guard has done little to reduce violent crime in D.C., a new study finds
National Guard members stand watch near the Lincoln Memorial on the morning of Memorial Day in Washington, DC, May 25, 2026.
Alex Wroblewski/AFP via Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Alex Wroblewski/AFP via Getty Images
President Trump’s deployment of the National Guard in Washington, D.C. has reduced petty property crimes, but has had little to no effect on violent crime, despite the high cost to taxpayers, according to a new analysis from the nonpartisan think tank Niskanen Center.
The study’s findings were published just weeks after federal officials announced that the number of troops in D.C. is set to double this summer to 5,000 as part of a “summer surge” of law enforcement ahead of events planned for America’s 250th birthday celebration.
Trump deployed the National Guard to D.C. last August, as part of the administration’s Safe and Beautiful Task Force, which he said was an effort to reduce crime and beautify the city. The task force includes hundreds of federal law enforcement — including immigration enforcement — working in conjunction with local police. It’s an approach that Trump previously said he wants to carry out in “many cities,” and already has in places like Memphis and New Orleans.
There are currently around 2,800 National Guard members deployed to D.C. from both the city itself and about a dozen other states, all of which have Republican governors. In contrast to other controversial National Guard deployments by Trump during his second term, the president has the authority over the Guard in D.C.
Guard members do not legally have the power to carry out arrests, but can detain individuals.
Troops — many of whom are armed — are largely carrying out what are called “high visibility patrols” to make their presence known around federal property and in residential areas, parks and city metro stations in an effort to free up D.C. police to redeploy to higher-crime areas. The report found that generally hasn’t happened.
Instead, researchers found that the deployment led to a 24% drop in “opportunistic” crimes — like property crimes and vehicle break-ins. But the presence of the Guard had no effect on violent crimes, including robberies, which were already on a downward trend before Trump came back into office.
“What the Guard brought was a massive, sudden shock from the visible presence of uniformed military personnel on the streets of Washington almost overnight,” researchers wrote, calling the deployment of the Guard a “blunt and expensive instrument.”
A recent assessment by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office found that it costs the federal government around $1.5 million per day for the current number of troops deployed to D.C.
“I think on balance the National Guard’s deployment is not a failure, there is success in what they’ve done. But I guess the point that we try to make is: compared to what?” says Richard Hahn, one of the authors of the study. “You could get the same or better outcomes, possibly much better outcomes, for much cheaper, if you just were very thoughtful about policing.”
In response to NPR’s request for comment about the study, White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said that it “should not be taken seriously.”
“The President’s Safe and Beautiful Task Force and National Guard presence have driven down crime, beautified the city, and improved quality of life for countless individuals,” Jackson said, without providing any evidence.
It’s unclear when the planned “summer surge” would end, or if the number of National Guard troops in the city would return to their current levels in the fall.
“Our message today is that we’re not done. We are not satisfied. We are not content with good. We are coming for perfection, and we won’t be done until we reclaim every last inch of ground on anyone seeking to do harm in our nation’s capital,” Assistant Attorney General Colin M. McDonald said when announcing the surge.
NPR reached out to task force officials behind the Guard deployment for clarity on when the surge might start or end, but did not receive an immediate response.
News
How Each House Member Voted on the Iran War Powers Resolution
Vote
Total
Democrats
Republicans
215
211
4
208
0
208
The House on Wednesday passed a measure to direct President Trump withdraw U.S. forces from Iran or win congressional approval to continue military operations there. The vote was the fourth of its kind in the chamber since the war began, the previous three having failed.
A vote on this measure was originally scheduled for last month but was pulled by House Republican leaders after it became clear they lacked the votes at the time to defeat it because of several members’ absences. Several Republicans were also absent on Wednesday, but party leaders were unable to delay the vote any longer.
Votes fell mostly along party lines, with the exception of four Republicans, who voted with Democrats to pass the measure. Representative Jared Golden, Democrat of Maine, who had previously voted with Republicans, flipped and voted with his party.
Republicans who voted against their party
The House vote came after four Senate Republicans last month broke from their party to advance a measure to assert the legislature’s role in authorizing the war. The Senate had rejected seven other similar measures, but Republicans in both chambers have expressed increased uneasiness with the conflict as it wears on.
Even if a war powers resolution passed in both the House and Senate, it would be subject to an all-but-certain veto by Mr. Trump, which would need a two-thirds majority in both chambers to override. Beyond that, the president and his senior aides have frequently dismissed efforts by Congress to rein in his war powers, saying they are unconstitutional.
How Every Member Voted
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
Did not vote
Did not vote
Did not vote Did not vote
Did not vote
Did not vote
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Did not vote
Republicans
Member
Answer
Democrats
Member
Answer
News
House votes to rein in Trump on Iran as war loses GOP support
Washington — The House on Wednesday passed a measure that would force President Trump to end the war with Iran without congressional authorization, marking the first time the lower chamber has defied the White House on the conflict.
The House voted 215 to 208 to approve the war powers resolution with the help of four Republicans. Democratic Rep. Jared Golden of Maine, who has voted against the three previous failed attempts, also dropped his opposition and voted for the measure, giving his party unanimity on the issue.
Republican Reps. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, Tom Barrett of Michigan and Warren Davidson of Ohio voted with Democrats in favor of the measure.
Democrats in the chamber erupted in applause after passage.
The vote was supposed to take place before lawmakers left for the Memorial Day recess, but House GOP leaders abruptly pulled the vote when it became clear they did not have the numbers to block it. Several Republicans were absent and others were expected to support it.
The Senate advanced a similar measure in May to rein in Mr. Trump on Iran after four Republicans joined all but one Democrat to push it forward. Three Republican absences also helped deliver the breakthrough after seven previous unsuccessful votes.
But the Senate’s procedural vote was just the first step on the way to potential passage, and Republicans will have another opportunity to block it in the coming days.
It’s unclear when they plan to vote on the House version. In a statement, House Democratic leaders called on Senate Republicans “to do the right thing.”
Support for the war from some Republicans waned after the conflict passed a statutory 60-day deadline under the War Powers Resolution of 1973, which says the president must remove armed forces from hostilities if Congress has not authorized the war. The war passed the deadline on May 1, but the administration has argued that a fragile ceasefire stopped the clock in early April, though both sides have carried out attacks since then.
The Trump administration has also argued the War Powers Resolution of 1973 is unconstitutional, though that theory has never been tested in court.
Republicans who have voted in favor of limiting Mr. Trump’s military powers in Iran have been uncomfortable with the lack of congressional authorization on the war and a strategy to end it. Some fear the war’s unpopularity and the economic fallout could harm the GOP’s chances at keeping control of Congress after the midterm elections in November.
GOP Rep. Ashley Hinson of Iowa, who is running for Senate, said in a private exchange at a campaign stop last week that the war could be a “political liability” if it continues beyond “the next couple of weeks,” according to audio obtained by CBS News.
But Mr. Trump said last month he was in “no hurry” to make a deal with Iran ahead of the midterms.
“Everybody’s saying, ‘Oh, the midterms, I’m in a hurry.’ I’m in no hurry,” he said.
The resolution approved Wednesday was introduced in April by Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. It directs the president “to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities with Iran,” unless Congress declares war or authorizes the use of military force.
Rep. Brian Mast of Florida, the Republican chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, earlier Wednesday called it a “stupid political vote” that “weakens the president’s hands as he’s negotiating with Iran.”
After the vote, Meeks brushed off the assertion that the war powers votes have undercut the president during negotiations with Iran. When asked whether Democrats would keep forcing votes to end the Iran war, Meeks told reporters, “You can expect us to continue to do our jobs.”
“We’re going to continue to do our constitutional responsibilities,” he said.
Fitzpatrick, who also voted in favor of a war powers resolution in May, said, “The law is the law.”
“We have to follow the law. There’s a law on the books,” Fitzpatrick said. “So you have two choices: You either follow the law or you change the law. You can’t violate the law. That’s not an option.”
During floor debate on the measure on May 20, Democrats questioned why Republicans haven’t held a vote on an authorization for military force to provide Mr. Trump with legal guardrails for attacking Iran.
“If my Republican colleagues believe this is justified, they should bring an AUMF to the floor,” Meeks said.
There’s been little momentum so far behind an AUMF introduced by Barrett earlier in May.
Rep. Kevin Kiley of California, an independent who caucuses with Republicans, argued there are “better tools” for Congress to assert its authority.
“We actually have the ability to provide direction as to how funds should be used,” Kiley said, referring to Congress’ power of the purse. “I understand why people want to use whatever tools are available, but I believe that Congress should use those tools of congressional oversight and the powers we have under Article I that really have teeth here.”
-
Technology5 minutes agoAmazon develops a warehouse robot workers can speak to
-
World8 minutes agoAlbino buffalo nicknamed ‘Donald Trump’ becomes sensation at Bangladesh’s national zoo for its blond hair
-
Politics13 minutes agoThe growing list of controversies threatening Democrat Graham Platner’s Maine Senate bid
-
Health20 minutes agoNew cancer vaccine delivers stunning result against one of the deadliest skin cancers
-
Sports23 minutes agoFan disrupts NBA Finals Game 1 while trying to take selfie with Spurs’ Victor Wembanyama
-
Business35 minutes agoHow Google’s 32-million mosquito project could change California’s battle against dengue
-
Entertainment37 minutes agoAfter ‘Barbie’ success, Mattel looks to He-Man for another box-office lift
-
Lifestyle43 minutes agoWith Highway 1 open, Big Sur braces for its busiest summer in years