Washington, D.C
America’s toxic political climate faces calls to ‘tone it down’ after assassination attempt on Trump
WASHINGTON (AP) — “Tone it down!”
That was the plea from one Republican congressman as he came to grips with the assassination attempt against Donald Trump at a political rally in the Butler Farm area where he grew up.
“I am in a state of bewilderment of how and what has happened to the United States of America,” Rep. Mike Kelly, R-PA., told The Associated Press early Sunday.
The shocking attempt on Trump’s life has brought into stark relief the toxic climate in America’s political life. While the details of the shooter’s motive remain unclear, the violence is a further gauge of how what was once unacceptable, if not unthinkable, in American society has become painfully commonplace.
As the 2024 election enters a crucial phase ahead of the national conventions, how the nation responds will test the first presidential contest since 2020, an election that became defined by efforts to overturn Trump’s defeat and the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.
On Sunday, civic leaders, pastors and elected officials from President Joe Biden on down appealed to Americans for unity, urging an end to vitriol.
“We can’t allow this violence to be normalized,” Biden said in an evening address to the nation from the Oval Office.
Under a charged atmosphere, the Republican National Convention opens this week in Milwaukee to renominate Trump to lead the ticket, while Democrats prepare for their own convention next month uncertain if the party will stick with the incumbent Biden in an expected rematch.
Trump’s rhetoric, though tempered in the immediate aftermath of the shooting, had taken on deeper and darker tones in this, his third campaign for the White House.
This spring, Trump who has accused migrants of “poisoning the blood of the country” and vowed to launch the largest domestic deportation operation, told autoworkers there would be a “ bloodbath ” in this country if he is not reelected.
“If we don’t win, I think our country is finished,” he said during the New Hampshire primary.
Trump has promised retribution on his political rivals, particularly those in the Justice Department after he was indicted on federal charges of storing classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago home and in the conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election.
Trump also made make light of violence. When Nancy Pelosi’s husband, Paul Pelosi, was attacked by an intruder looking for the former House speaker at the family’s San Francisco home in 2022 — beaten over the head with a hammer — Trump mocked the security fencing she had installed as insufficient.
Trump drew chuckles in a speech before California Republicans last year when he asked, “How’s her husband doing, by the way?”
Biden, in turn, has warned that Trump’s return to power poses a grave threat to the country’s civic traditions. He chose a location near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania, for his initial 2024 campaign event, portraying the likely rematch as “all about” whether democracy can survive.
Addressing the nation Sunday, Biden pointed to past examples of political upheaval, including Jan. 6 and more recently harassment of election workers, and said, “There’s no place in America for this kind of violence, for any violence, ever.”
Still, one of Trump’s potential vice-presidential picks, Sen. JD Vance of Ohio, said on social media over the weekend that Biden’s earlier rhetoric against Trump “led directly” to the attempted assassination.
And House Speaker Mike Johnson, who said it’s time to “turn the temperature down in this country,” also singled out for blame Biden’s recent comments during a call with political donors in which the president said, “It’s time to put Trump in the bullseye.”
Johnson said he knows Biden didn’t literally mean Trump should be targeted, but added, “that kind of language on either side should be called out.”
Nick Beauchamp, an associate professor of political science at Boston’s Northeastern University, said there is an opportunity now for political leaders to “start framing their critiques of the others in words that explicitly denounce violence.”
From the the 1968 killings of American leaders Bobby Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr. to the 1981 attack on President Ronald Reagan, to shootings of Republicans and Democrats in the past decade, the violent strain has always been part of American politics.
Other violent incidents have intersected more recently with the nation’s political struggles in frightful ways.
Outside Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s suburban home, a man with a knife and gun who threated to kill the justice was arrested in 2022. Members of Congress have experienced increased security threats. And harassment against elections officials from cities and states across the nation has led to a wave of departures because of threats on their livelihoods.
Last summer, FBI agents fatally shot a Utah man who had threatened to assassinate Biden and had referred to himself as a “MAGA Trumper.” That followed a series of drive-by shootings earlier in the year targeting Democrats in New Mexico, a startling outburst that led to criminal charges against a failed state legislative candidate who had parroted Trump’s rigged-election rhetoric.
A gunman who died in a shootout in 2022 after trying to get inside the FBI’s Cincinnati office apparently went on social media and called for federal agents to be killed “on sight” following the search at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate.
Jacob Ware, a research fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations who focuses on domestic terrorism, said, “The warning lights have been blinking red regarding violence in this election cycle for months, if not years now.”
As Trump took the stage Saturday evening, he had opened the rally in Pennsylvania as he often does, marveling at the “big beautiful crowd” gathered to see him — and demeaning Biden’s own crowds as paltry in comparison.
The former president had just started his speech, launching into his mass deportation agenda and complaints of a nation in decline.
“Our country is going to hell,” Trump said.
Minutes later, shots rang out.
Rep. Dan Meuser of Pennsylvania, who was sitting with other Republican officials behind Trump, called it all just a terrible tragedy. “The level of lack of civility and hostility, maybe this will send a ringing signal to all those to cool it,” he told the AP.
As Americans took stock Sunday, the common message was a call for unity.
The Rev. Chris Morgan, senior pastor of Christ United Methodist Church in Bethel Park, which is a few streets away from where the shooter lived, urged his congregation during a morning service to pray for the country.
“Clearly there’s a lot going on and a lot that is causing people to have great anxiety and great struggle,” he said. “I want to encourage you to be praying for those that have been involved that they too can find what it means to show kindness to others.”
___
Associated Press writers Ali Swenson, Brian Slodysko and Holly Meyer contributed to this report.
Washington, D.C
Fact Check Team: Iran conflict revives Washington fight over who can authorize US force
WASHINGTON (TNND) — As the war in Iran intensifies across the Middle East, a constitutional battle is unfolding in Washington over a fundamental question: Who has the authority to declare war, Congress or the president?
The debate focuses on the War Powers Resolution, a 1973 law designed to prevent years-long military conflicts without congressional approval. Lawmakers passed the measure in the aftermath of the Vietnam War to reclaim authority they believed had drifted too far toward the executive branch.
What Is the War Powers Resolution?
The War Powers Resolution was intended to put limits on a president’s ability to send U.S. troops into combat without Congress signing off.
Under the law, a president can deploy forces into hostilities only if Congress has formally declared war, passed a specific authorization for the use of military force, or the U.S. has been attacked.
The resolution also sets strict deadlines.
The president must notify Congress within 48 hours of introducing U.S. forces into hostilities. From there, a 60-day clock begins. If Congress does not approve the military action within that time, troops must be withdrawn — though the law allows an additional 30-day wind-down period.
Some argue the law was crafted to prevent “never-ending wars.” While others say presidents from both parties have routinely stretched and sidestepped its requirements.
WASHINGTON, DC – JANUARY 14: Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) visits with Senate pages in the basement of the U.S. Capitol Police ahead of a vote on January 14, 2026 in Washington, DC. Republicans voted to block a Venezuela war powers resolution after receiving assurances from President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio of no U.S. forces remaining in Venezuela and pledges for congressional involvement in major future operations. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
What Does the Constitution Say?
The War Powers Resolution is rooted directly in the U.S. Constitution.
Article I, Section 8 gives Congress — not the president — the power “to declare War.”
Article II, Section 2 names the president as Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy.
In simple terms, Congress decides whether the country goes to war. The president directs the military once it is engaged.
The framers intentionally split that authority. Their goal was to avoid concentrating too much war-making power in one person — likely a reaction to the monarchy they had just broken away from.
But how that balance plays out in real time is often a legal and political fight. At times, disputes over war powers have reached the courts, though Congress and the executive branch frequently resolve them through political pressure rather than judicial rulings.
A Pattern of Stretching the War Powers Resolution
Essentially, every president since 1973 has pushed the boundaries of the War Powers Resolution rather than fully complying with its original intent. As the Council on Foreign Relations explains, the resolution was designed to “provide presidents with the leeway to respond to attacks or other emergencies” but also to **require termination of combat after 60 to 90 days unless Congress authorizes continuation.”
For example:
- Ronald Reagan ordered the U.S. invasion of Grenada in 1983 without prior congressional authorization, later reporting to Congress in a manner “consistent with” the resolution.
- Bill Clinton directed the 1999 NATO air campaign in Kosovo after congressional authorization efforts failed, continuing U.S. engagement beyond the WPR’s typical 60-day reporting window.
- Barack Obama oversaw U.S. participation in the 2011 Libya campaign, arguing that limited strikes did not trigger the full force of the WPR’s time limits.
In more recent years, Donald Trump’s administration has once again brought these issues to the forefront.
War Powers Arguments from the White House
The Trump administration’s principal legal rationale has centered on two points:
Short-term strikes or limited military actions do not always trigger the full 60-day clock under the War Powers Resolution, especially when described as defensive, limited in scope, or tied to national security emergencies rather than prolonged hostilities. In some cases, the White House relies on prior Authorizations for Use of Military Force (AUMFs) or other statutory authorities rather than seeking new congressional approval.
Current Public Opinion on Iran Strikes
Public opinion reflects significant skepticism about the current U.S. military engagement with Iran. A recent Reuters/Ipsos poll found that just 27% of Americans support the recent U.S. and allied strikes on Iran, while 43% disapprove and 29% remain uncertain.
Another national poll conducted by SSRS for CNN found that nearly 60% of U.S. citizens disapprove of the military actions, and a similar share said that President Trump should seek Congressional authorization for further action.
Beyond polling, internal deliberations in Congress have already begun. Both Democratic and Republican lawmakers have pushed for votes on war powers resolutions that would seek to limit or require authorization for further military action against Iran. Past attempts to pass similar restraints have failed, reflecting deep partisan divisions and the complexities of enforcing the War Powers Resolution.
Washington, D.C
Students at Southeast charter school outperformed 75% of DC on citywide math test – WTOP News
Two years ago, leaders at Center City Public Charter School’s Congress Heights campus made a decision to offer more advanced math classes to some of their oldest students.
This page contains a video which is being blocked by your ad blocker.
In order to view the video you must disable your ad blocker.
Students at Southeast charter school outperformed 75% of DC on citywide math test
Two years ago, leaders at Center City Public Charter School’s Congress Heights campus in D.C. decided to offer more advanced math classes to some of their oldest students.
The choice was complicated, and some educators wondered whether the kids would be ready.
To prepare for the possible change, Principal Niya White and her team visited high schools, both nearby and farther away, to see how algebra was being taught.
In some classrooms, White would see former students sleeping in the back. They were bored or had already finished their work.
For White, that made the choice clear — in order to set students up for success, they needed to expand their offerings so kids felt challenged and engaged by the time they reached high school.
“I’m born and raised here,” White said. “I was given the option of whether to leave Southeast D.C., leave D.C., go off to do things and come back. There are a lot of folks and a lot of students or a lot of families that don’t ever get that option. They’ve got to have it.”
Now, the Southeast D.C. campus is offering pre-algebra to seventh graders and algebra to eighth graders. In the 2024-25 school year, 70% of eighth graders at the school either met or exceeded expectations on the citywide standardized math test.
Education news outlet The 74 first reported that’s a stronger mark than the 64% of eighth graders who met or exceeded expectations in Ward 3. Only one-fourth of all D.C. students did the same.
Jessi Mericola, who teaches seventh and eighth grade math, was one of the educators who considered whether students were ready to make such a significant leap.
Initially, half of the rising eighth graders did an accelerated seventh grade curriculum, and then attended summer school to finish the curriculum so they could take algebra in eighth grade.
This year, for the first time, all of seventh grade is being accelerated so next year, “all of our students will be doing algebra,” Mericola said.
“We found that if we tell them they’re ready for it, they believe you, and they want to meet that expectation,” Mericola said.
Each class has about 20 students, with the largest in the school at 26, she said. Classes are divided into sections. There’s an individual review on a recently learned concept, a small group review on something from earlier in the year and then a full group lesson.
Mericola co-teaches with a colleague, and even if a student is struggling to grasp an idea, “we come back and reteach things from before that maybe you missed it the first time, but you catch it the second time; and if you miss it the second time, you catch it the third time.”
It’s an approach, White said, comes from avoiding the assumption that “we can’t move a child forward because of something or one of the things they haven’t mastered yet.”
Eighth grader Kennedy Morse said math was a struggle before she got to the Congress Heights campus, but now, it’s become one of her strongest subjects.
She’s gained confidence from tutoring help and being able to ask questions without judgment.
“It was really shocking for me to be on a higher level,” Morse said. “It was hard. It was hard at first.”
Leonard White had a similar experience.
“I’m actually glad that they can believe in me to do the harder work in these classes,” White said.
While getting access to more advanced math classes at a younger age could help students take more rigorous courses in high school and college, Principal White said with any change, the focus is helping “show them all the possibilities and help them make the choice for themselves, versus it being forced upon them.”
Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.
© 2026 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.
Washington, D.C
Washington Commanders to pay DC $1M to resolve lawsuit over abusive workplace culture – WTOP News
Brian Schwalb, the District’s attorney general praised the new ownership for rectifying the Commanders’ internal issues.
The former owners of the Washington Commanders will pay the District of Columbia $1 million to resolve a 2022 lawsuit that alleged the NFL franchise misled its fans regarding the team’s toxic and abusive workplace culture in order to protect the its brand.
Dan Snyder still owned the team at the time, and as D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb announced the settlement Monday, he praised the new owners for rectifying internal issues, including accusations of rampant sexual assault and harassment.
“The Commanders’ current owners have commendably opened a new chapter in the team’s history, committing to ensure all employees are protected from abuse and treated with dignity,” Schwalb said. “I want to thank the victims for coming forward to tell their stories — without their bravery, none of this would have come to light.”
A group led by Josh Harris purchased the Commanders in 2023 from Snyder, who had faced pressure to sell the team after a series of scandals and decades of perceivable mediocrity on the field.
Since then, new ownership has strengthened the team’s human resources department and implemented an anti-harassment policy and an investigation protocol for complaints of misconduct, Schwalb’s office said in a news release.
Under the agreement, the team will maintain those reforms, along with paying $1 million to D.C.
The NFL separately fined Snyder $60 million in 2023 after its own investigation concluded that he personally engaged in multiple forms of misconduct, including sexual harassment.
D.C.’s suit accused Snyder and the team of misleading the public about what they knew regarding the hostile work environment and Snyder’s role in creating it.
The Commanders and Snyder deny all the allegations and are not admitting wrongdoing by reaching a resolution, according to the terms of the settlement.
Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.
© 2026 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.
-
World6 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts6 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Denver, CO6 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Louisiana1 week agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Oregon4 days ago2026 OSAA Oregon Wrestling State Championship Results And Brackets – FloWrestling
-
Florida3 days agoFlorida man rescued after being stuck in shoulder-deep mud for days
-
Maryland3 days agoAM showers Sunday in Maryland
-
Culture1 week agoTry This Quiz on Thrilling Books That Became Popular Movies