The Obamas have made their most forceful comments yet on rumors of divorce that have been following them for months.
It marks the first time the couple has joined together to shut down the speculation, which began months ago after Michelle Obama missed a pair of state events.
The former First Lady skipped Jimmy Carter's funeral and President Trump's second inauguration, leaving her husband to attend the events alone.
The Obamas have ignored the rumors for months, although they tried to put on a united front with social media posts on Valentine's Day and Michelle's birthday.
The couple, who married in 1992 and share two children, have rarely been seen together publicly in recent months, something they joked about during an episode of Michelle Obama's podcast.
“She took me back!” Barack Obama said on IMO with Michelle Obama and Craig Robinson. “It was touch and go for a while.”
“It’s so nice to have you both in the same room together,” Michelle's brother, Craig Robinson, said.
"I know because when we aren’t, folks think we’re divorced," Michelle responded.
On a more serious note, Michelle acknowledged "hard times" in their marriage. The couple has admitted to going through counseling in the past.
"There hasn't been one moment in our marriage where I thought about quittin' my man," Michelle said. "And we've had some really hard times," Michelle Obama said. "We have had a lot of fun times, a lot of adventures, and I have become a better person because of the man I'm married to."
Michelle Obama previously addressed the topic of divorce on her own, blasting her critics as sexists for making negative assumptions about her independent lifestyle.
“My decision to skip the inauguration, what people don’t realize — or my decision to make choices at the beginning of this year that suited me were met with such ridicule and criticism,” she said. "People couldn’t believe that I was saying no for any other reason that they had to assume that my marriage was falling apart.”
While Michelle was clearly angered by the divorce rumors, her husband claims he was completely ignorant of them.
“These are the kinds of things that I just miss,” Barack Obama said. “So I don’t even know this stuff’s going on and then somebody will mention it to me and I’m like what are you talking about?”
Hunter Biden defended his father from Democrats who blame Joe Biden for the party's demoralizing defeat in 2024.
Democrats lost because they "did not remain loyal" to the former president, Hunter told former Democratic party boss Jaime Harrison, a fellow Biden loyalist.
Bucking the conventional wisdom, Hunter asserted that his father was well-positioned to win re-election when Democrats suddenly panicked following his infamous debate on CNN.
Biden's feeble performance cost him support from Democrats and liberal media organizations that had defended him throughout his presidency.
As Biden grew isolated, he leaned on his family, who encouraged him to stay in the race. But Biden eventually stepped aside, endorsing vice president Kamala Harris to take his place. She floundered on the national stage, despite an initial burst of hype.
“We lost the last election because we did not remain loyal to the leader of the party,” Hunter told Harrison's podcast.
“That’s my position. We had the advantage of incumbency, we had the advantage of an incredibly successful administration, and the Democratic Party literally melted down,” he added.
Hunter also dismissed accusations that he played a high-level role in his father's White House, telling Harrison that he “stayed as far away as I possibly could — which, by the way, broke my heart.”
Hunter predicted that the impact of the Democratic party's implosion will linger for some time.
“You know what, we are going to fight amongst ourselves for the next three years until there’s a nominee. And then with the nominee, we better as hell get behind that nominee,” he argued.
Before leaving office, Joe Biden gave his son a controversial blanket pardon for tax and gun charges, despite promising not to do so. The decision clouded Biden's final days in power in scandal.
Despite Democrats' wishes for him to retire quietly, Biden has continued to speak up in defense of his legacy. He has denied being in cognitive decline while in office, and he clings to the belief that he could have won re-election, a conviction that few seem to share outside his immediate family.
In an interview with The View in May, Biden said the "only reason" he dropped out was to avoid dividing Democrats, and he said he takes responsibility for the party's defeat.
"I do, because, look, I was in charge and he won. So, you know, I take responsibility," Biden said.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The news has been filled in recent months with instances of federal judges delivering attacks on the administration of President Donald Trump, releasing rulings that take control of Executive Branch decisions, restrict Trump's programs to secure the border and remove illegal alien criminals from U.S. shores.
Those cases have involved cutting federal spending, removing illegal aliens, eliminating destructive DEI programs, protecting children from transgender ideologies, and mutilations, stopping anti-Semitism and much more.
There has been the appearance of bias in the judiciary.
The news has been filled in recent months with instances of federal judges delivering attacks on the administration of President Donald Trump, releasing rulings that take control of Executive Branch decisions, restrict Trump's programs to secure the border and remove illegal alien criminals from U.S. shores.
Those cases have involved cutting federal spending, removing illegal aliens, eliminating destructive DEI programs, protecting children from transgender ideologies, and mutilations, stopping anti-Semitism and much more.
There has been the appearance of bias in the judiciary.
Further, Boasberg also was at the center of activism before President Trump's first term when he was under attack in the fabricated Russiagate conspiracy theory launched by the Hillary Clinton campaign and others with lies about Trump campaign collusion with Russia.
Boasberg was chosen for his job by leftist Barack Obama, who now is just one subject of a congressional investigation into a vast conspiracy that developed in Washington targeting Trump.
Boasberg, in fact, when sentencing an ex-FBI lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith, who admitted doctoring a 2017 email regarding Deep State's work against Trump, refused to give him any prison time but told him to do community service.
Boasberg ruled against Trump in one deportation dispute and told him to order airplanes carrying illegal aliens out of the United States to turn around mid-air and come back.
The White House responded that the jets, carrying the "terrorist alien" individuals, already had left U.S. airspace and the judge had no jurisdiction there.
Federal judges already have heard hundreds of claims by those wanting to stop Trump's agenda to remove unneeded personnel from federal payrolls, stop handing billions of tax dollars to unfriendly foreign interests and more.
As a result of the campaign by district judges to target Trump's actions, the Supreme Court intervened and said they were misusing their offices by repeatedly ordering nationwide injunctions against Trump's agenda. The court said those judges haven't been granted the constitutional authority to do that.
The Federalist reported it obtained access to a memo from a recent Judicial Conference meeting in Washington.
That group is the national policymaking body for federal courts.
"That Judge Boasberg and his fellow D.C. District Court judges would discuss how a named Defendant in numerous pending lawsuits might respond to an adverse ruling is shocking. Equally outrageous is those judges' clear disregard for the presumption of regularity — a presumption that requires a court to presume public officials properly discharged their official duties," the Federalist reported.
At the meeting, the report said, "a side conversation at the group's most recent meeting revealed a disturbing detail — the predisposition of supposedly unbiased judges against the Trump Administration."
The memo explained, "District of the District of Columbia Chief Judge James Boasberg next raised his colleagues' concerns that the Administration would disregard rulings of federal courts leading to a constitutional crisis."
The Federalist noted the memo continued, "Chief Justice Roberts expressed hope that would not happen and in turn no constitutional crisis would materialize."
The report pointed out, "Donald Trump, however, is not merely the president: He is a Defendant in scores of lawsuits, including multiple cases in the D.C. District Court. As such, this conversation did not concern generic concerns of the judiciary, but specific discussions about a litigant currently before the same judges who expressed concern to the Chief Judge of the D.C. District Court that the Trump Administration would disregard the court's orders."
The report noted, "Judge Boasberg's comments reveal he and his colleagues hold an anti-Trump bias, for the Trump Administration had complied with every court order to date (and since for that matter). The D.C. District Court judges' 'concern' also went counter to the normal presumption courts hold — one that presumes public officials properly discharged their official duties. Apparently, that presumption does not apply to the current president, at least if you are litigating in D.C."
The Federalist noted just days later, "Boasberg, in a case in which he completely lacked jurisdiction, as the Supreme Court would later confirm, entered a lawless order commanding the Trump Administration to halt removals to El Salvador. So, one of the judges concerned about Trump following the law, ignored the law."
He went even further in his agenda, the report said: "Boasberg would later find 'the Trump Administration committed criminal contempt of court' by failing to turn the planes around or fly the gang members back to the U.S., even though the court's written (and unlawful) injunction ordered neither."
Cleveland explained that Boasberg and his colleague "prejudged Trump as a scofflaw," even though that's not the case.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Only hours after President Donald Trump described Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., one of the most ardent Trump attackers in Congress, as a scam artist, it was revealed that Schiff was named in a criminal referral on suspicion of mortgage fraud.
In a Truth Social post Tuesday, Trump said: "I have always suspected Shifty Adam Schiff was a scam artist. And now I learn that Fannie Mae's Financial Crimes Division have concluded that Adam Schiff has engaged in a sustained pattern of possible Mortgage Fraud.
It was during the Ingraham Angle podcast that Laura Ingraham revealed she had obtained access to a criminal referral submitted to the Department of Justice naming Schiff.
The Gateway Pundit reported the referral was from Housing Director Bill Pulte and it accuses Schiff of falsifying bank documents and property records over a period of 16 years "in order to score more favorable mortgage terms."
Ingraham explained, "The referral, submitted to the DOJ by Housing Director Bill Pulte, alleges that Schiff has, in multiple instances, falsified bank documents and property records to acquire more favorable loan terms—impacting payments from 2003 to 2019 for a Potomac, Maryland-based property. Schiff owns a home in California and another in Maryland."
Former federal prosecutor Jonathan Fahey joined Laura Ingraham to analyze the criminal referral, saying, "Well, when Trump does it, they make it seem like the biggest deal ever—like they alleged in the New York case. That's a fun irony here. But basically, it's lying on a mortgage application to get more favorable loan terms. When you say it's your primary residence, you get a more favorable loan term than if it's a rental residence or something else. What's really interesting about this—Adam—this was not just coming from President Trump. In 2023, CNN reported on this issue. He's, on one hand, saying he's a resident of California to run for office—to run for the House, and then for the Senate—and also taking a deduction in California based on claiming residency in California. For the IRS, also, you can't claim residency in both California and Maryland. He's got a lot of issues, because it seems like, however this breaks down, it looks like he's saying one thing here, one thing there. He can't be a resident in both places. So it's either: was he lying in California, or lying in Maryland to get more favorable loan terms?"
Schiff first went to Congress in 2000. Then in 2003 he apparently bought a home in Maryland, stating it would be his primary residence.
But he continued to vote, as a resident, in California.
Schiff, who wildly claimed during the Russiagate conspiracy theory that he had seen the evidence of Trump's criminal actions, and later insisted on leading a failed impeach-and-remove campaign against Trump, has never desisted in making scandalous claims about him.
Attorney General Pam Bondi has fired Maurene Comey from her job at the Manhattan U.S. attorney’s office, Breitbart reported. The daughter of former FBI Director James Comey previously prosecuted accused sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein and his alleged accomplice, Gislaine Maxwell.
Politico broke the news that she was let go, but noted that "the reason for her firing was not immediately clear." In fact, Breitbart couldn't get a return call for comment from the Department of Justice of the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Manhattan, where Maurene Comey was employed.
In addition to the Epstein case, Maurene Comey was also the prosecutor for the case against Sean "Diddy" Combs. The disgraced rap mogul was accused of sex trafficking and racketeering, but was only convicted of lesser crimes.
🚨 BREAKING: Attorney General Pam Bondi fires Maurene Comey from her job as top DOJ Manhattan prosecutor, the daughter of James Comey, per POLITICO.
She was responsible for prosecuting Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. pic.twitter.com/MtnbdiZMC7
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) July 16, 2025
With so little information available about the circumstances of her firing, rumors abound about the possibilities. One of those speculating is noted internet commentator and investigative journalist Laura Loomer.
Loomer posted to X, formerly Twitter, on Thursday with her theory about the firing. She said the move "came 2 months after" Bondi was subjected to a "pressure campaign" to fire Maurene Comey and her husband.
"Maurene Comey’s husband is Lucas Issacharoff," Loomer noted. "As I previously reported, he works at the current Trump DOJ, despite a long history of being a Trump hater. He is the Assistant U.S. Attorney is SDNY, working in the Civil Division since 2019," Lomer noted.
"No word yet on whether or not he was also fired today, but he should be!" she added. Loomer celebrated this as a "+1" move for Bondi.
While it's not known if there's any connection, it's curious that the FBI recently launched a probe into the Russia collusion hoax. At the center of that scandal were James Comey and CIA Director John Brennan.
The shakeup comes as President Donald Trump and his administration face criticism for suddenly downplaying the case against the late Jeffrey Epstein. According to Fox News, Trump had contradicted Bondi's earlier promises by presenting Epstein's as old news after the case was closed without the promised release of the files.
"He's dead for a long time. He was never a big factor in terms of life," Trump said Tuesday when asked by reporters what he thought about the fact that there were still calls to release the files.
"I don't understand what the interest or what the fascination is. I really don't, and the credible information's been given," Trump added.
"It's pretty boring stuff. It's sordid, but it's boring." Trump simply claimed. He has been supportive of Bondi despite contradicting her earlier promises, but it's unknown whether firing Maurene Comey was part of this effort to move on from Epstein.
Some things are happening in the Trump administration that don't make sense at the moment. However, Trump still has the support of his base and a mandate in office, and hopefully, both will bolster his ability to continue implementing his original agenda.
President Donald Trump slammed his own supporters who are not backing down from demanding answers about Jeffrey Epstein's criminal activity, the UK Daily Mail reported. The president now claims that the late financier's sex trafficking was all a "hoax."
For years, Trump has spoken about Epstein's alleged crimes and made remarks about his manner of death. Epstein reportedly hanged himself with his own bed sheets while in prison in 2019, but many people, including Trump, had questioned the official narrative.
However, Trump seemingly backtracked on all of it when pushed by the public to release the files on Epstein. The president called it the "Epstein hoax" and said that Republicans were "duped" into worrying about it while speaking to reporters on Wednesday.
"I know it’s a hoax," Trump told the press. "It’s started by Democrats. It’s been run by the Democrats for four years," Trump added.
It wasn't enough for Trump to say that the Epstein files don't exist. Trump also played on the sympathies of his supporters by comparing the scandal to the Russia collusion hoax cooked up by the Democrats.
Trump said that those in his own Make America Great Again movement calling for more information on the Epstein case were falling prey to Democrats' tricks. "Some stupid Republicans and foolish Republicans fall into that net, so they try and do the Democrats’ work," Trump claimed.
The president also stood behind Attorney General Pam Bondi, who has faced criticism for promising to release the files Trump now claims don't exist. "Whatever is credible, she can release," Trump capitulated.
"If a document is credible, if a document's there that is credible, she can release it," the president reiterated. Trump doubled down on his narrative about Epstein being a Democrat-invented fiction, even though he still supports Bondi.
"All it is the Republicans – certain Republicans – got duped by the Democrats. And they’re following a Democrat playbook," Trump claimed. "Let these weaklings continue forward and do the Democrats' work, don't even think about talking of our incredible and unprecedented success, because I don't want their support anymore!" Trump later posted to his Truth Social on Wednesday.
These comments represent a more forceful and cutting approach than Trump had taken just the day before. "He’s dead for a long time. He was never a big factor in terms of life," Trump told reporters Tuesday, downplaying the significance of the Epstein case.
"I don’t understand why the Jeffrey Epstein case would be of interest to anybody. It's pretty boring stuff. It's sordid, but it's boring, and I don't understand why it keeps going," Trump continued.
"I think really only pretty bad people, including fake news, want to keep something like that going. But credible information? Let them give it — anything that's credible, I would say, let them have it," Trump added.
NOW - Trump: "I don't understand why the Jeffrey Epstein case would be of interest to anybody. It's pretty boring stuff. I think really only pretty bad people, including fake news, want to keep something like that going." pic.twitter.com/JL8xMR7VIU
— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) July 15, 2025
It's difficult to see why Trump has taken this stance against his own supporters on this particular issue. Republicans and others concerned about justice have waited a long time for the facts of this case to come out, but the Trump administration has completely abandoned them.
The questions about Jeffrey Epstein are only growing, and now it appears that an insider has a story about what really happened to the financier-turned punch line.
Epstein was known to be connected to the richest and most famous people in the world, but he was eventually also known for human trafficking, and that eventually caught up with him, as Fox News reported.
Epstein, who allegedly had dirt on everyone from A-list actors to the English monarchy, found himself behind bars just a few years ago and never lived to stand trial.
News broke well before his trial that Epstein had allegedly killed himself, but according to the financier’s former lawyer, he likely had help in doing that particular deed.
"It is clear from the evidence that Epstein committed suicide," attorney Alan Dershowitz wrote in an opinion article for the Wall Street Journal.
"What isn’t clear is whether he was assisted by jail personnel. That seems likely to me, based on the evidence of allegedly broken cameras, transfer of his cellmate, and the absence of guards during relevant time periods."
That death, which took place while Epstein was in federal custody, prompted plenty of questions about what might have been about to come out in court.
While lots of Americans believed that it was possible that people in the government who didn’t want Epstein’s dirty life details out, recent changes have shed new light on the issue.
Epstein’s infamous “list” was supposed to be released, according to a number of conservatives close to President Donald Trump.
However, earlier this week the president and the Attorney General, Pam Bondi, said that, actually, there was no list. FBI Director Kash Patel also backed that up, saying that it was all “conspiracy” and there was nothing to see.
That was confirmed by Dershowitz, who said it’s true, there is no client list, and Epstein didn’t keep those kinds of records.
However, he did say that some of Epstein’s accusers who were interviewed by the FBI alleged they knew of “clients" whose names were redacted from official documents.
"I know who they are," Dershowitz wrote. "They don’t include any current officeholders. We don’t know whether the accusations are true. The courts have also sealed negative information about some of the accusers to protect them.
"The media can and should petition the courts for the release of all names and information, so the public can draw its own conclusions," he added.
In a pointed criticism, Senator Ed Markey has demanded the resignation of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem for her handling of severe floods in central Texas.
Senator Markey attributed the sluggish and ineffective flood response directly to Secretary Noem, drawing parallels with past federal failures.
The crisis began with devastating flooding in central Texas, which led to widespread property damage and loss of life. Subsequently, the response led by Homeland Security under Secretary Noem's directive was met with significant criticism for its inefficiency.
FEMA, the agency responsible for managing emergency situations, failed to handle the vast number of emergency calls effectively, addressing only 16% within the first three days after the flooding commenced. This failure has raised acute concerns regarding the preparedness and responsiveness of federal emergency services.
"We’ve seen all of the evidence with regard to Kristi Noem not responding quickly enough," expressed Markey. His condemnation continued as he described the administration's flood response efforts led by Noem as a "disgrace."
The debate intensified with Markey's critique of the federal decision to cut funding to NOAA, which plays a critical role in providing early warnings that are vital during such natural disasters.
Senator Markey invoked memories of past administrations' shortcomings, specifically referencing the inadequate federal response to Hurricane Katrina. He compared current praises for Noem to the infamous commendation of FEMA’s leadership during the Katrina disaster.
Amid ongoing recovery efforts, Markey stated, "It is still a crisis in Texas," emphasizing the continued struggle and the administration's failure to adequately support the affected communities. This ongoing situation has revealed deeper systemic issues within the disaster response protocols.
Markey's stark assessment paints a grim picture of federal disaster response under Noem's leadership, emphasizing that "everyone in America can see it as the lead story on their televisions every single night."
This incident has sparked a nationwide discussion on the efficiency of disaster response and management. Experts are calling for an overhaul of current systems to prevent a recurrence of such poorly handled responses.
Part of the dialogue involves the importance of maintaining and possibly increasing funding for NOAA to enhance storm prediction and readiness capabilities, ensuring that communities can better prepare for and respond to natural disasters.
The broader implications of these discussions could lead to significant changes in policy and operational procedures aimed at bolstering the nation's response to natural calamities.
The ongoing crisis and federal response have galvanized communities and legislators alike, advocating for more robust infrastructure and clearer crisis management strategies.
As discussions advance, there is a conscientious push towards more sustainable and effective disaster management practices that prioritize human safety and swift response.
In light of these events, Markey’s call for Noem's resignation is not just about accountability for the Texas flood response, but also a demand for proactive leadership in Homeland Security.
A federal appeals court has blocked President Trump from ending a "temporary" legal status granted to Afghan refugees by his predecessor, Joe Biden.
The refugees have Temporary Protected Status (TPS), which provides relief from deportation and work permits. The Trump administration has emphasized the "temporary" nature of the status, but federal courts have repeatedly challenged his authority to suspend the program.
"Once again, a rogue judge is trying to infringe on the separation of powers and impede the Trump administration's rightful ability to carry out its immigration policy. Temporary Protective Status is meant to be 'temporary' in nature. We look forward to ultimate victory on the issue," White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said in a statement.
Thousands of Afghans entered the U.S. as part of Biden's chaotic evacuation from Kabul in 2021. The poor vetting involved in the Biden administration's rushed process for admitting Afghan refugees has raised security concerns.
A 27-year-old Afghan national who entered the U.S. in September 2021 on a special immigrant visa - a status given to Afghans who supported the U.S. military - pled guilty last month to plotting an Election Day terrorist attack. The TPS program is separate from the special immigrant visa.
CASA, an immigrant advocacy group, sued to block Trump's May order that suspends TPS for thousands of Afghans. TPS was greatly expanded under President Biden, who used it as a de facto amnesty program.
The Biden administration renewed TPS protections for Afghans in 2023, citing "deepening humanitarian crisis" and "economic collapse" under Taliban rule.
Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has said that Afghanistan has gotten safer, so there is nothing preventing Afghans from returning to their homeland.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit froze Trump's move for one week and gave Trump and CASA one week to file arguments.
Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said the appellate court's ruling "ignores the President's clear authorities under both Article II of the Constitution and the plain language of federal law."
"Temporary Protected Status (TPS) was never intended to be a de facto asylum program, yet it has been abused as one for decades," McLaughlin said. "The Trump administration is restoring integrity to our immigration system to keep our homeland and its people safe, and we have the law, the facts, and common sense on our side."
The ruling sets up an absurd scenario: the current U.S. president is being forced to keep immigrants in the country who are only allowed to stay under a "temporary" status that was abused by Trump's predecessor. It's also worth noting that those immigrants only came here in the first place because of a crisis in Afghanistan that Biden and his team caused.
In May, the Supreme Court allowed Trump to end TPS protections for 350,000 Venezuelans.
The co-founder of Home Depot is revising his opinion of President Trump, saying he is "sold" on President Trump after months of solid results.
“If I told you how bullish I was…I have never been more excited about the future of America than I am right now, right this minute," said billionaire GOP donor Ken Langone told CNBC's Squawk Box.
Langone said Trump has "good shot at going down in history as one of our best presidents ever.”
In April, after Trump imposed historic tariffs that caused Wall Street to panic, Langone was skeptical of Trump's "b-----" rates.
“Forty-six percent on Vietnam? Come on,” Langone told the Financial Times. “You might as well tell them, ‘Don’t even bother calling.'”
Langone also predicted, at the time, that tariffs would add to the ballooning federal deficit. But the budget had a surplus in June as tariff revenues topped $100 billion, a new record.
While skeptics say consumers are paying the price, inflation ticked up slightly in June to 2.7%, in line with expectations and well within the normal range.
Meanwhile, Trump confirmed a trade deal with Indonesia this week, and he says an agreement with Vietnam is all but finished.
"Initially, my concern was I don’t like tariffs; I like free trade. However, I think — damn it, give Trump credit. His instincts are good. Some of these things need to be fixed," Langone said.
Langone also praised Trump's strikes on Iran's nuclear sites, which brought praise from some of his staunchest critics.
"The world is a mess, but I think it’s coming more in our direction than it was. I think that strike in Iran had significant symbolic meaning for the world that America is here and when our interests are at risk, we’re going to do something about it," Langone said.
On the domestic front, Trump secured a landmark achievement in July with the enactment of the "Big, Beautfiul Bill." The law includes major investments in immigration enforcement and makes Trump's first-term tax cuts permanent, while adding new tax breaks that he promised in 2024.
The mega bill will "trigger significant economic growth," Langone said, adding, "we might see tax revenues going up from the profitability.”
Overall, Langone said he is pleased to see that Trump is focused on making the country better, instead of seeking retribution, as Langone initially predicted.
"Like it or not, this guy’s getting things done,” Langone said.