• When it comes to money, I'm a big budgeter, and my husband prefers taking risks.
• Now that we're building a house together, our differences are causing some disagreements.
• We've learned to stay flexible and balance each other's approaches.

My husband and I have very different ideas about financial responsibility.

When we're feeling stressed about money, my instinct is to run the numbers and account for every financial what-if. He's a big-picture dreamer who sees what something could become and is more willing to say, "We'll figure it out."

His attitude has paid off before. He had the vision for our first home, which we bought for under $100,000 and recently sold for a decent profit after 13 years of renovations.

I know some of the best things we've done together wouldn't have happened without my husband's willingness to take a chance, but our differences have still caused some friction over the years.

Now that we're building a new home together, we're trying to balance my need to plan for the unknown with his belief that we'll find a way forward.

After 13 years, we took a risk and sold our home

For 13 years, we'd lived in the same place. My husband had moved frequently as a child, and he wanted his two daughters to have a consistent place to call home.

Leaving this house behind was bittersweet, but my oldest stepdaughter had just bought her own house, and my younger one was heading off to college. We were ready for what came next.

We could have bought an existing house needing renovations. Instead, we found land in southern Maine that felt worth taking a risk on.

We've always loved the area. My family has an annual reunion there, where we spend a week at the beach. Our new property will hopefully give us that lifestyle without the summer crowds: It's more than 2 ½ acres with hiking trails next door, a nearby kayak and paddleboard launch, and the ocean just a short drive away.

We decided to go for it, and by the end of August, our old house was nearly empty. My younger stepdaughter left for college on a Wednesday, we moved the rest of our things to a rental on a Thursday, and officially sold the house that Friday.

Every estimate comes with an 'unless'

In September, we began building our 1,500-square-foot house.

We're now paying $3,000 a month for a rental home — with a construction loan on top of that — and keeping track of a lot of numbers, from lumber and labor to excavation, plumbing, electrical, permits, and finishes.

My husband is doing most of the construction himself, which is what makes this project possible. If we had to pay for all of the labor, we probably couldn't afford to build right now.

However, that's not to say this hasn't been a very stressful time. We think we've accounted for everything, but every estimate has an asterisk: Unless lumber prices go up. Unless a contractor's price changes.

Unless we hit ledge — that is, solid bedrock beneath the soil that can be expensive to excavate. We might have to rethink the foundation or adjust the entire plan once we see what's underground.

I find that uncomfortable, but my husband doesn't.

We're leaving room to adjust

My husband can picture what this property could become over time, and has big dreams for it.

He wanted a garage, a small cottage where our family could stay when they visit, a little more space, and nicer finishes in some areas. I kept bringing us back to what we could afford right now, and how much we wanted to keep in savings rather than put everything into the house.

After a lot of discussion, we decided to start small. We're building for the life we have today, while — at his request — leaving room for the one we might want tomorrow. The garage and cottage can wait. For now, we're focusing on getting the house right without stretching our budget too far.

That means staying flexible. For instance, my husband wants a finished basement, and I agreed, knowing this would give us the option to add a third bedroom down the road.

Though the cost difference between a basement and an unfinished crawl space isn't huge upfront, hitting ledge could put us thousands — or even tens of thousands — over budget.

We're willing to give the basement a shot, but if excavation costs start climbing, we may have to scale back to a crawl space and save the extra bedroom for another day.

We have a plan, but we know it might change once we get further into the build. I'll keep making the spreadsheets and asking for the numbers. He'll keep looking at the big picture and reminding me why we decided to do this.

This project, and my husband, have taught me that financial responsibility isn't necessarily about eliminating every risk, but knowing which risks are worth taking and staying open to changing course.

It’s another No Kings weekend in the United States of America. Demonstrations against Donald Trump’s imperial presidency are taking place across the country, trying to raise awareness for the midterm elections that are just over two weeks away, while registering a collective complaint against arguably the most un-American administration in our country’s history.

And yet, I can’t help but feel underwhelmed. This is not to throw cynical shade at the resistance-coded No Kings movement. Many people are struggling (even more than usual) thanks to Trump’s mishandling of the economy, and not everyone has the time to take to the streets and demand accountability for a uniquely corrupt, lawless and bigoted president. Furthermore, anyone who does make the effort to dissent in a time of naked authoritarianism deserves commendation, not eye-rolls.

No, what underwhelms me is a certain subset of Americans who are not attending these protests. This cohort (according to recent polls) apparently exists but appears to lack the courage to stand up and be counted in public: right-of-center voters that are more loyal to the Constitution than to Trump.

There ought to be nonstop protests across the U.S. against an illegal war that’s crippling millions of Americans’ budgets, making the world less safe and failing at every one of its constantly-shifting stated objectives.

A Fox News poll conducted between Oct. 9-12 found that among self-identified MAGA Republicans, Trump’s approval rating is 95% — a figure that would make most dictators blush. Meanwhile, among Republicans who don’t self-identify with the cult of Trump, the president is underwater: 47% approve, while 52% disapprove. Among independents, 22% approve and 78% disapprove.

Hey, non-MAGA Republicans and independents who live in objective reality, now’s a good time to show your faces in public!

It’s one thing to be a career GOP politician, terrified of crossing Trump for fear of losing their position of power. It’s spineless and opportunistic, of course, but at least it’s a reason. What’s the excuse for the rest of you?

Surely Trump’s relentless disrespect of American values and constitutional rights — like freedom of speech and religion; due process; birthright citizenship; prohibitions on bribes from foreign governments and warrantless searches; the freedom to walk outside without proof of citizenship — ought to have you mad as hell and taking to the streets. If you call yourself a libertarian or a conservative, then obviously you should see Trump as a greater threat to the rule of law and civil liberties than annoying woke college undergrads. If you’re a right-leaning independent, then Trump and his family gorging on ill-gotten countless billions must have you willing to let bygones be bygones and ready to march in the streets side by side with your liberal neighbors.

There ought to be nonstop protests across the U.S. against an illegal war that’s crippling millions of Americans’ budgets, making the world less safe and failing at every one of its constantly-shifting stated objectives. There should be investigations by the party that controls both houses of Congress into his and his family’s exploitation of our government to make themselves as rich as the petroleum kleptocrats they partner with in business. The only appropriate “American” reaction to the administration’s overt bigotry toward Muslims, immigrants and any number of other people is bipartisan revulsion.

And the politicization of our military — infused with an illiberal and intolerant ideology known as Christian nationalism — ought to curl the spine of any constitutional conservative. For Americans still bitter about “Woke 1” speech-policing and temporary Covid-19 vaccine requirements, the administration’s efforts to brand its political opponents as “domestic terrorists” and its use of a secret police force to shoot and detain Americans without due process or accountability should have them firmly in the “anyone but MAGA” camp.

But I’m confident few, if any, of these folks will attend No Kings rallies this weekend. Whether because of apathy or fear of catching cooties from anything associated with Democrats or the left, the result is the same: they’ll be sitting on the sidelines as Trump gobbles up more American yardage for himself.

Hey, non-MAGA Republicans and independents who live in objective reality, now’s a good time to show your faces in public!

It’s possible that the polls predicting a “blue wave” election are correct. But a midterm “wipeout” isn’t enough for America to recover. Impeachments, investigations and public shaming ought to be the order of the day if Democrats win back one or both houses of Congress, but even that won’t do. For America to achieve some semblance of a shared national identity, there must be a near-universal call for a return to decency and respect for plurality. But that can only happen when roughly half the country demands the end of an unprecedented American personality cult that they’ve voted for in three consecutive elections.

I’m glad No Kings is drawing people to the streets and encouraging people to vote. It’s just not nearly enough. Not until the non-left — composed of non-MAGA Republicans, conservatives, libertarians and anti-woke centrists — confronts its own complicity and forges its own No Kings movement.

The post What’s missing at No Kings? The Republicans who say they’re fed up with Trump. appeared first on MS NOW.

Setting aside the jokes about the shortness of Katie Zacharia’s tenure as White House press secretary, the controversy over her claim to be a lawyer obscures a more damaging issue. For years, she promoted some of the most heinous and bizarre conspiracy theories bubbling up from the right-wing swamp. Simply put: Zacharia was ousted for the wrong reason. Her embrace of extreme and downright loony assertions amount to a much stronger basis for dismissal than her bogus lawyer claim.

Zacharia’s social media history suggests a worldview colored by baseless thinking, defamatory accusations and sinister fantasies — not exactly a good look for someone tasked with conveying the U.S. president’s policies and actions to the press and public with authority and integrity. The noxiousness of her posts and reposts was apparently evident even to her, since she deleted many of them before her new role was announced.

According to reporting by CNN, the Bulwark and the newsletter Popular Information, Zacharia has repeatedly accused people, particularly Democrats, of sexually molesting children. In April 2022, she reposted and later deleted a Truth Social post from “Stop the Steal” organizer Ali Alexander: “Democrats want to mask and rape your children. That’s their satanic platform.”

She repeatedly referred to Democratic operative and former White House chief of staff John Podesta as a “pedo,” apparently still connecting him to an outrageous child-abuse conspiracy theory that had been debunked years earlier. She later paid tribute to the late Robert David Steele, a conspiracist who claimed that children were being kidnapped and sent to a colony on Mars: “He was exposing the pedo rings of the elite cabal,” Zacharia wrote. “May he Rest in Peace and the work of his hands not have been in vain.” In another Truth Social post, she noted that “the radical left Hollywood elites are sick pedo cannibals.” She added, “Change my mind.”

If Trump does indeed find another role for Zacharia in his administration, questions should be asked.

Another of Zacharia’s reposts suggested that Joan Rivers’ death in 2014 was somehow connected to an insulting crack the comedian once made about the Obamas: “Remember that time Joan Rivers said Obama was gay and Michelle had a dick then suddenly died?”

This wasn’t the output of a mischievous teen troll; Zacharia’s controversial deleted posts and reposts date from as recently as 2022. By then, Zacharia was in her late 30s and had been employed in various senior communications roles, including most recently as an adviser to Truth Social, the Trump-owned social media platform.

Zacharia’s deleted posts on political issues were problematic for another reason. For instance, she re-posted and deleted a tweet accusing the Justice Department of covering up the crimes of people involved in the Jeffrey Epstein scandal, an opinion at odds with the administration she was tapped to speak for. Last year, she advocated suspending habeas corpus — the fundamental right to challenge detention in court — for migrants arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, an extreme and authoritarian measure. (Zacharia’s legal theory, if any, was that the Constitution justifies denial of this right in cases of rebellion or invasion.)

In its article Tuesday on this social media activity, CNN reported that neither Zacharia nor White House communications director Steven Cheung directly addressed the issue. In a statement, CNN reported, Cheung called her “uniquely qualified” and “whip smart to help inform the American people.” The White House responded to Popular Information’s request for comment by referring it “to the President’s TRUTH on Katie,” a post in which Trump praised Zacharia as “a loyal and brilliant supporter, right from the beginning.” Zacharia wasn’t asked about these posts in interviews with three conservative outlets, including Fox News, between Thursday and her ousting Friday.

Clearly, the safe space couldn’t last. Trump apparently realized that if she ever assumed the podium again, Zacharia would inevitably face a barrage of questions about herself. That, too, is problematic: A press secretary shouldn’t be the story. But Zacharia’s history of hair-raising statements rightly made her one.

The lawyergate bubble burst in just five days. On Thursday, in an interview with right-wing influencer Jack Posobiec — himself a noted purveyor of conspiracy theories — Zacharia acknowledged that she didn’t pass the California bar exam. On advice from legal experts, she said, she decided that it was proper to call herself a lawyer but not an “attorney.” She said much the same to the New York Times, which reported on Thursday that she had identified herself on LinkedIn as general counsel to a group led by a Trump loyalist. In the wake of a CNN report Thursday that Zacharia had shared at least 15 social media posts over the past two years in which she referred to herself as an attorney, she told Sean Hannity that those were retweets of a title she had been given — but she was out shortly after lunchtime Friday.

But if Trump does indeed find another role for Zacharia in his administration, questions should be asked. Among them: Did she really think Hollywood “elites” engaged in pedophilia and cannibalism? How did she come by this knowledge, and who are the individuals who’ve engaged in these repulsive crimes? Is the Justice Department still covering up Epstein’s crimes? Does she truly believe there’s a lost colony of kidnapped children on Mars? As press secretary, there was no way Zacharia could keep the public focus on war, the economy, healthcare and the midterm elections while also defending a conspiracy about Joan Rivers’ death. But a less prominent position doesn’t moot the questions that should be asked if Zacharia is drawing a taxpayer-funded salary.

For Trump, media controversy may be on brand. The White House’s most recent top spokesperson had been a font of misinformation, outrageous “theories” and mortifying lies. In view of her boss’ track record, that may not be a bug or even a feature. It may be why Zacharia got the job in the first place.

The post The real Katie Zacharia controversy wasn’t her claim to be a lawyer appeared first on MS NOW.

White House press secretary Katie Zacharia resigned Friday after just five days in the job, following President Donald Trump’s advice.

---

Zacharia’s departure came barely a week after she was named to the post, succeeding Karoline Leavitt, and after a heavily questioned first press briefing before the media.

RELATED: Trump’s Attack on Mail-In Voting Seeks to Create an Advantage for Republicans

The crisis was directly linked to doubts about her legal training. After initially announcing her and publicly describing her as a lawyer, questions arose over the past week as to whether she had actually passed the bar exam to practice as such, despite being a graduate of Pepperdine University’s law school in California.

Definitive confirmation of the suspicions came last Thursday, when Zacharia admitted in an interview with Fox News that she had not passed the bar exam. The revelation intensified media criticism and opened an intense debate about vetting and background-check processes at the White House.

Facing the media siege, Trump chose to intervene publicly Friday morning. Leaving the White House, Trump told reporters that he had directly advised Zacharia to reconsider remaining in the job given the hostility of the environment.

President Trump is a kind, wonderful, gracious, thoughtful, enthusiastic, and hardworking man. I wish more Americans appreciated him. No one will ever make America great the way he has and continues to.

It was an honor to work for him. pic.twitter.com/Tp4NizrhE2

— Katie Zacharia (@KatieZacharia) October 17, 2026

The U.S. president said there is no rush to immediately announce a replacement to fill the vacancy left by Zacharia at the press room podium.

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump on Friday signed an executive order that puts on hold a sweeping new sanctions package targeting the Russian economy, telling Congress the pause was in the national interest.

Trump personally signed the legislation just last month and his move came just two days before a deadline set in the law itself for its implementation. It drew shift condemnation from congressional Democrats.

Named after late South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, the legislation had sought to clamp down more quickly on the flow of financial resources fueling the war against Ukraine.

Trump’s unexpected decision comes a week after he stunningly said the U.S. had agreed to purchase diesel from Russia to try to bring down global energy prices, despite that potentially hurting Ukraine in its war with Russia.

An AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll published Oct. 1 found that Americans disapprove of the president’s handling of the Iran war and blame him for higher prices. Trump’s approval ratings have sunk to near-historic lows and pressure is mounting as Republicans try to hold control of both chambers of Congress after midterm elections on Nov. 3.

Sanctions were seen as part of Graham’s legacy

Graham, a close ally and friend of the president, had just returned from Ukraine when he unexpectedly died in July. He had advocated for stricter U.S. sanctions against Russia as a way of pressuring it to end its war in Ukraine.

His colleagues in Congress responded with bipartisan support after his death and Trump attached his signature to the legislation — then changed his mind Friday.

The package had been meant to starve Russian President Vladimir Putin of the resources Moscow needs to continue its war in Ukraine after invading its neighbor more than four years ago. The bill, also drafted by Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., had sought to sanction Russian officials, banks and a shadow fleet of tankers that keeps Russian energy moving.

It also directed Trump to impose up to 100% tariffs on the top five importers of Russian oil or natural gas, with an exception for countries that import less than 15% of Russia’s natural gas exports and have taken significant steps to reduce those imports.

Blumenthal said in a statement that Trump was turning his back on “the majority of Americans, their representatives in both houses of Congress, and our European allies.”

“These waivers have nothing to do with our national security, and everything to do with sucking up to Vladimir Putin,” Blumenthal said.

Democratic Virginia Rep. Don Beyer noted on social media shortly after the announcement of the sanctions being suspended that he and others had “warned” Trump might make such a move. The veteran congressman, who spoke out against the bill as it was debated, called on Congress to “fix this flawed law to stop Trump from capitulating to Putin and ensure that it truly supports Ukraine.”

The White House did not immediately explain how pausing the sanctions was in the national interest. The decision was posted on the White House website late in the evening, and the notification noted that the report explaining the decision had been submitted to Congress.

Still, it comes as Trump has increasingly lashed out at Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, blaming him for failing to make a deal with Putin to end the fighting.

The Trump administration, meanwhile, had remained mostly quiet since the passage of the bill with large majorities in the House and Senate following Graham’s sudden death — with lawmakers urged ahead by Zelenskyy.

Trump’s action follows announced diesel deal with Putin

Under last week’s agreement, Trump said Russia would immediately supply more than 300,000 tons of diesel, followed by an additional 500,000 tons in November and 1 million tons “immediately thereafter.”

Trump’s striking a diesel deal with Putin has been pilloried by Republicans and Democrats alike who say it will help Russia execute its war against Ukraine — without making a different to global fuel prices, which are elevated mostly due to Trump’s war on Iran.

The sanctions that Trump has now suspended, meanwhile, also had become a campaign centerpiece for Sen. Darline Graham, the late senator’s sister who was appointed to serve out the remaining months in his current term. She is now running to replace him in the Senate more permanently.

Darline Graham said in a statement after Trump signed the bill, “I wish Lindsey were here to celebrate this historic day.” In a debate earlier this week with Democratic nominee Annie Andrews, Graham — who has Trump’s endorsement and is expected to campaign with him in South Carolina next week — said she had been “so proud” to help get the measure passed.

She acknowledged, however, that it was the president’s purview as to how he implemented it.

“It gives the president tools that he can use if he so chooses, to end the war through economic sanctions,” Graham said Sunday during a debate in Columbia. “So that’s up to him as to whether or not he wants to use it, or whether he wants to use something else, but I think the purpose of it is to bring down the gas prices and ultimately end the war. And when the war ends, gas prices will fall.”

The post Trump puts new Russia sanctions that he recently signed into law on hold, citing national interest appeared first on MS NOW.

• President Donald Trump chose Katie Zacharia to serve as the new White House press secretary.
• After five days, a White House official said that she is "transitioning out" of the role.
• Zacharia is among three other former press secretaries with tenures lasting under two months.

Katie Zacharia's first briefing as President Donald Trump's press secretary was on Tuesday. By Friday, the White House confirmed she was out.

The record five-day tenure came after days of missteps by Zacharia, and amid two watchdog groups filing complaints with the State Bar of California on Wednesday, asking it to investigate whether she violated California law by calling herself a lawyer.

While the longest-serving press secretary was Stephen Early, who held the post for 12 years under Franklin D. Roosevelt, only four press secretaries have lasted under two months.

Here's a closer look at White House press secretaries with the shortest tenures.

Katie Zacharia

Katie Zacharia made her White House press briefing debut on Tuesday and quickly came under intense scrutiny over her legal credentials.

Shortly after Tuesday's briefing, she was asked which state she passed the bar exam in and replied: "When I moved to China."

On Thursday in an interview with right-wing provocateur Jack Posobiec, Zacharia said she took the bar exam but failed, and never retook it.

Zacharia moved to China after earning her law degree in 2011, and told Posobiec she had already preregistered for the bar exam before moving to Beijing, where her husband was working at an American private equity firm.

"I didn't want to withdraw from that," Zacharia said of the bar exam. "And we knew we would be moving out to China, and I was obviously incredibly distracted and overwhelmed and excited for finally being married to someone who I had been long-distance from for at least a year."

She served as press secretary between October 12 and October 16.

Stephen Early

Stephen Early is both the longest-serving press secretary in US history and the press secretary with the second-shortest tenure.

He was President Franklin D. Roosevelt's press secretary for 12 years, from 1933 to March 1945.

Early then briefly returned as acting press secretary under President Harry S. Truman in December 1950 after the death of press secretary Charles Ross.

Early was in the position for 14 days, from December 5 to December 18, 1950.

Jerald TerHorst

Jerald TerHorst served as President Gerald Ford's press secretary for over one month, from August 9 to September 8, 1974.

He resigned in protest of Ford's pardon of former President Richard Nixon following the Watergate scandal.

TerHorst said he could not defend Ford's decision in good conscience, despite his long-standing friendship with the president.

Jonathan Daniels

Jonathan Daniels served a short tenure as press secretary at the end of Franklin D. Roosevelt's presidency and at the beginning of Harry S. Truman's.

That brings his tenure to 48 days, from March 29 to May 15, 1945.

He was appointed shortly before Roosevelt's death and stayed on temporarily to help Truman transition into the presidency.

Truman then selected Charles Ross as Daniels' replacement.

Katie Zacharia may not be a licensed lawyer, but as they say, she plays one on TV. Or at least, she did.

On Friday, the White House confirmed Zacharia would no longer be serving as President Donald Trump’s press secretary, just three days after her first and only media briefing. Her ouster followed criticism from pundits, ethics experts and, perhaps more importantly for Trump, a less-than-friendly interview with Sean Hannity on Fox News.

Zacharia’s removal was also preceded by a California state bar ethics complaint alleging the now former press secretary had been incorrectly labeling herself a lawyer despite lacking a license to practice law. Indeed, when Trump was asked in front of cameras Wednesday in which state she had passed the bar exam, Zacharia responded, “When I moved to China.”

Zacharia has spent the past few days attempting damage control, for good reason. Few jobs require more public trust than representing the president of the United States. But trust, just like a license to practice law, must be earned.

Zacharia graduated from Pepperdine University School of Law in 2011. But that is not the same thing as being a licensed attorney, a term derived from the word “appointed” that refers to a lawyer who represents clients. State bar authorities regulate their profession, providing law licenses only to applicants who pass a rigorous written examination. The bar examination tests a broad array of legal topics, including criminal law, evidence, torts, property, constitutional law, contract law and professional responsibility, among others. Applicants must also pass a background check for “moral character” to determine whether any events in their past might cast doubt on their integrity to serve as an officer of the court.

Even after a person is admitted to the bar, lawyers must continue to pay annual dues to the state licensing authority, fulfill any continuing legal education requirements and refrain from any legal misconduct. The goal of regulators is to ensure that clients are represented only by lawyers with the requisite training, capability and trustworthiness.

According to the bar complaint filed by Campaign for Accountability, a nonprofit watchdog organization, Zacharia is not admitted to practice law in any U.S. state, including California, where she lived until her recent move to Washington, D.C. According to The Wall Street Journal, Zacharia sat for the California bar after law school but did not pass. She then worked at a law firm in Beijing for two years, but China licenses only Chinese nationals to practice law. Even if she were licensed in China, that would not be sufficient to practice law in the U.S.

California law makes it a misdemeanor to advertise or hold oneself out as “practicing law or entitled to practice law or otherwise practicing law who is not an active licensee of the State Bar.” Zacharia’s representations that she is a “lawyer” in television appearances for Fox News may have been misleading, but they likely do not arise to the level of holding oneself out as entitled to practice law under the statute.

For her part, Zacharia told The New York Times that this was all a misunderstanding, and that Pepperdine’s president personally told her it was fine to identify as a “lawyer” when appearing on cable TV, but that she should avoid “attorney” or “esquire.” (She also tried to clean up her earlier “moved to China” comment by claiming she had thought the question she was being asked was, “Where were you after law school?”)

But the questions about her conduct don’t end there. According to Zacharia’s LinkedIn profile, she served as general counsel for a conservative advocacy organization called Fix California, founded by former Trump administration official Richard Grenell, from 2024 to 2025. The general counsel is typically the top lawyer of an organization. That title suggests someone who is actively practicing law by providing legal advice for the organization and is permitted to accept service of process on its behalf. Recipients of correspondence on letterhead from someone using the title of general counsel would certainly assume that the writer was licensed to practice law. Using the title “general counsel” would seem to be “holding oneself out as entitled to practice law.” And without a license, that use would put Zacharia in violation of California law.

Similar accusations have been made against Abdul El-Sayed, the Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate in Michigan, who uses the title “doctor” despite never having practiced medicine. What is different about El-Sayed is that he not only graduated from medical school but he also obtained a doctoral degree in public health from Oxford University in England, earning the degree — and title — of “doctor.”

Zacharia’s tenure may be historically short, but her hiring still raises questions about the vetting the administration uses in hiring candidates for important positions. While some may argue that Zacharia’s position as press secretary does not require a law degree, her resume puffing should have been disqualifying for a White House role built on credibility. America must be able to have some amount of confidence in the person representing the presidential agenda in the briefing room.

Of course, Trump voters have long made peace with accepting a president who lies. What difference does it make if his press secretary did, too?

The post The rise and fall of TV ‘lawyer’ Katie Zacharia appeared first on MS NOW.

• Katie Zacharia is out as White House press secretary after five days on the job.
• That's likely a record for the shortest-serving White House press secretary in history.
• Here are 10 other things that last longer than Zacharia's time in the White House.

Katie Zacharia is out as White House press secretary after five days on the job, officials confirmed on Friday.

The lawyer-ish-person-turned-White House spokesperson had a rocky debut at the podium on Tuesday, during which she stumbled over prepared remarks and later raised eyebrows after she told a reporter that she passed the bar in China.

President Donald Trump said on Friday that he told Zacharia to reconsider the role. Later that day, a White House official told Business Insider that Zacharia was "transitioning out" of the position.

By standards of the Trump White House, which had a notorious revolving door during the first go-round, that's pretty short.

There are a lot of other things that lasted longer than Zacharia's tenure. Here are 10 of them.

MS NOW legal analyst Andrew Weissmann said President Donald Trump’s disregard for court orders has turned the nation’s justice system into a laughingstock.

“The Trump administration is making the courts look like fools,” he said.

With the midterm elections quickly approaching, Weissmann warned it is time for America’s judges to work “faster and smarter” before it’s too late.

“The administration, over and over again, is doing things unilaterally without permission and, at times, in violation of court orders,” the former Justice Department official explained.

According to an analysis from The Associated Press earlier this year, district court judges have found the second Trump administration violated or failed to follow federal court orders in at least 31 lawsuits and in more than 250 individual immigration cases.

When the court does intervene, sometimes it’s already too late, Weissmann said, pointing to the administration’s use of taxpayer dollars to run ads for the president. When a federal judge blocked that effort, it was only after nearly $22 million had already been spent.

“Tens of millions of people saw those ads, paid for by you and me,” he said.

Weissmann argued that Trump’s DOJ has effectively taken a “do now and ask questions later” approach to the law.

“The court only belatedly says, ‘Hey, don’t do that.’ But the damage is already done, and you can’t put the genie back in the bottle,” he said.

The former federal prosecutor said it was time for courts to be “faster and smarter” in responding to Trump’s blatantly illegal moves, and he cautioned against setting “a permission structure for this administration,” especially as the election approaches.

“What I am worried about is: The midterms are coming up, and is this going to be a government that goes ahead and seizes ballots with the idea that we can break the chain of custody, we can make it impossible to count votes? And maybe later a court will say, ‘You shouldn’t have done that,’ but the damage will have been done,” he explained.

“There has to be a deterrent,” Weissmann warned. “And courts have to be faster and smarter to not get outplayed.”

View this post on Instagram

You can watch Weissmann’s full comments in the clip above.

The post ‘Faster and smarter’: Legal analyst warns courts they can’t let Trump outplay them appeared first on MS NOW.

Her firing comes after scrutiny over how she presented her legal career and whether she was fit for the role

Katie Zacharia stepped down from her role as White House press secretary this Friday, after U.S. President Donald Trump suggested she resign following criticism she faced during her first week on the job, an official confirmed to EFE.

RELATED:

Katie Zacharia Debuts as White House Press Secretary

She is in the process of leaving the position of press secretary, the source stated, without specifying whether she resigned or was dismissed. Her departure comes just five days after she assumed the role on Monday, October 12, replacing Karoline Leavitt, who left the position in August to focus on her family.

The president indicated that he would leave that decision up to her and noted that he would speak with the press secretary. The White House did not officially announce the departure, although government sources confirmed it to outlets such as CNN and Fox News.

Zacharia’s first appearance before the press, on Tuesday, October 13, lasted barely 14 minutes. During the press briefing, she read much of her statement and answered only three questions—all of which came from conservative media outlets.

New White House press secretary Katie Zacharia opened her first briefing by praising President Donald Trump and his midterm campaign. Zacharia, 41, is a conservative commentator who previously worked as a senior communications adviser for Trump Media & Technology Group, the… pic.twitter.com/BK2X1XSwII

— The Associated Press (@AP) October 13, 2026

The official also struggled to answer certain questions, including one regarding the sharing of intelligence with Ukraine. Her performance drew criticism and led to increased scrutiny of her professional background.

Her appointment came as a surprise in Washington, following weeks of speculation about who would succeed Leavitt. According to an official cited by CNN, the White House faced challenges in recruiting higher-profile figures, as several potential candidates had previously been critical of Trump.

Presidential aides repeatedly narrowed down the list of candidates, ruling some out after discovering past unfavorable comments they had made about the president—which automatically disqualified them.

Zacharia’s departure marks one of the shortest tenures in the White House press office in recent memory, leaving the position of presidential press secretary vacant once again.

#UnitedStates | Trump is reviving unsubstantiated election fraud claims ahead of the November 3 midterms, targeting mail-in voting while encouraging supporters to vote early.
Polls suggest the cost of living remains voters' top concern.#Midterms2026 #teleSUREnglish pic.twitter.com/wHdgdHaT1J

— teleSUR English (@telesurenglish) October 9, 2026

Donald Trump and the MAGA movement’s grip on white voters appears to be slipping, and in an effort to reverse that trend, it seems Vice President JD Vance has designated himself the pied piper of racist rage.

Numerous polls this year have spotlighted Trump’s declining support among white voters — particularly, white working-class voters who’ve been key to his and his party’s political success. Amid this trend, Vance — in speech after speech — has resorted to rhetoric seemingly designed to groom the white American psyche so that white voters turn their ire on nonwhite people rather than on Trump and the Republican Party.

The latest example came during a rally Vance hosted in Michigan on Thursday, in which he suggested Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed is resentful of certain people and places because they’re “too white, too proud or too American.” He called El-Sayed a “weasel who should shut his mouth and show a little gratitude to the country that gave him everything.”

.@VP JD Vance says he feels bad for U.S. Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed (D-MI): "I don't know why he resents the things that he does. Perhaps it's because he sees them as too white, or too proud, or too American." pic.twitter.com/6zTXQG3okK

— CSPAN (@cspan) October 15, 2026

Vance has returned to this well numerous times over the past year as Trump’s corrupt business dealings, economically destructive tariffs and his deadly war with Iran have turned off some in the MAGA base. You can see plenty of other examples of Vance launching similar appeals to white bigots — including here, here and in the following clip from last December, when Vance told an audience of right-wing Turning Point USA affiliates that they no longer had to “apologize for being white.”

Vance: In the United States of America, you don't have to apologize for being white anymore. pic.twitter.com/QikIDkXNy5

— Acyn (@Acyn) December 21, 2025

Back in August, the vice president gave an interview to Fox News suggesting that white people who support El-Sayed hate themselves. And keep in mind that all of this is coming from the No. 2 leader of a Republican Party that has spent years frothing at the mouth about liberals supposedly weaponizing “identity politics.” The question is whether white voters choose to indulge in what I’ve previously described on-air as the “racist slop” being offered up by the MAGA movement.

And here, history can be informative. White supremacist movements and organizations in years past — including the Ku Klux Klan — have all sought to unify white Americans around a single racial identity. This trend is explored in films like the documentary “White with Fear,” which shines light on the history of right-wing, racist fearmongering in the United States. White supremacist groups have historically managed to convince some white people to fall in line behind them, but they’ve also faced white backlash as some of the same people have been awakened to these groups’ corrupt ways and self-serving bigotry.

And despite Vance’s efforts, a similar outcome seems to be in play for the white supremacy-boosting MAGA movement as well.

The post Vance desperately targets white voters as Trump’s grip slips appeared first on MS NOW.

On Tuesday afternoon, after Katie Zacharia’s disastrous first briefing as White House press secretary, a White House official told MS NOW, “She needs to get much better, fast, otherwise she’ll break Scaramucci’s record,” set, of course, by Anthony Scaramucci, who served as Donald Trump’s communications director for 11 days in 2017.

Three days later, she did what few thought possible by breaking that record. As a truly brutal first week neared its end, MS NOW reported:

After a turbulent five days in the role, Katie Zacharia is out as White House press secretary, two White House officials familiar with her departure told MS NOW on Friday.

The details — whether Zacharia voluntarily left her role or was directly fired — are still unclear. On Friday, President Donald Trump told reporters that he asked Zacharia to “reconsider” her role.

After Richard Nixon resigned in 1974, thus elevating Gerald Ford to the presidency, the Michigan Republican needed a new White House team. Ford tapped Jerald terHorst, a veteran journalist, to be the press secretary, and he seemed like a perfectly sensible choice.

The arrangement, however, did not last. A month into Ford’s tenure, the new president issued a controversial pardon to Nixon, and terHorst, unwilling to defend the decision, resigned. His tenure — just 31 days — was the shortest of any White House press secretary ever.

A half-century later, Zacharia’s time in the office lasted roughly one-sixth the length of terHorst’s tenure.

During a brief Q&A with reporters just outside the White House on Friday afternoon, the president made it sound as if he were doing his newly minted press secretary a favor.

“It’s not an easy job, and I think she was really treated very unfairly,” Trump said, adding, “I told her, ‘I think you’re better off being happy, and I’m not sure you can ever be happy in this job.’”

Asked whether Zacharia would continue to serve in his administration, the Republican said, “Yeah. In some form — but maybe a more pleasant form.”

Q: "Will Katie [Zacharia] continue to be in the administration?"Trump: "Yeah. In some form. But maybe a more pleasant form…I just think the press has been very tough on Katie and I said, 'There's no reason for you to have to do this.'…We'll make a determination."

— The Bulwark (@thebulwark.com) 2026-10-16T17:25:17.043Z

The development marks a stunning turn of events, including the exposure of Zacharia’s extensive record of peddling unhinged conspiratorial nonsense via social media, her misleading claims about her legal credentials, her work at a business that she described as “sort of a pyramid scheme” and her concession that she tried and failed to pass the California Bar Exam.

The president is already trying to blame this remarkable fiasco on the news organizations that reported accurate information, but as the dust settles, Trump and his team should at least try to consider a few lessons.

First, meritocracies are good, and hiring random people because the president saw them on television is bad.

Second, some routine vetting of prominent White House officials is a standard and responsible move.

And third, picking an unqualified press secretary three weeks before nationwide elections, having her move across the country and then throwing her into a difficult role without any meaningful preparation is a recipe for inevitable failure.

Put another way, there’s a fair amount of blame to go around for this humiliating debacle, which has managed to make the entire White House appear even more incompetent.

The post As Katie Zacharia’s tenure ends after just 5 days, here are some lessons for Team Trump appeared first on MS NOW.

• President Donald Trump said he told Katie Zacharia to reconsider the White House press secretary job.
• Shortly after, a White House official said she is "transitioning out" of the role.
• She lasted five days in the role after mounting scrutiny over her legal credentials.

Embattled White House press secretary Katie Zacharia is out of the job after just five days, making her the shortest-tenured person to hold the role in history.

President Donald Trump said on Friday that he told Zacharia to reconsider taking on the high-profile job.

Shortly after his statements, The New York Times and CNN reported that Zacharia had been fired after less than a week in the role. A White House official told Business Insider that she is "transitioning out" of the role.

"I said to Katie just two minutes ago, I said, 'Katie, you know, you don't have to do this if you don't want,'" Trump told reporters at the White House, adding that Zacharia responded that the job is "a lot tougher" than she thought.

"I said to her, 'Honestly, if I were you, I'd reconsider. You think about it, but I would reconsider,'" Trump said.

A conservative commentator who has repeatedly described herself as a lawyer, Zacharia made her White House press briefing debut on Tuesday and quickly came under intense scrutiny over her legal credentials.

She was widely panned after the roughly 14-minute briefing, most of which was spent on reading from prepared remarks. After the briefing, while alongside Trump, Zacharia was asked which state she passed the bar exam in and replied, "When I moved to China," raising eyebrows.

National headlines soon followed reports that Zacharia had not been licensed to practice law in any US jurisdiction.

On Thursday, Zacharia said she took the bar exam but failed, and never retook it.

Trump told reporters on Friday that Zacharia had been treated "very badly" and "very unfairly" by the media.

"She's been treated very rough, and she's a nice person, very nice person," the president said. "I've watched her for years on television, but I said, 'Is this for you, Katie? Because, honestly, you don't need this.'"

"She's been treated, I would say, very nastily," he said.

A rocky start

Following her first briefing, CNN reported that "several White House officials" were questioning how long she could remain in the role.

The news of Zacharia's ouster means Trump will be searching for a top spokesperson again after Karoline Leavitt left the role in August.

Previously, Jonathan Daniels held the record for shortest tenure. Daniels served as White House press secretary for just 19 days before President Franklin D. Roosevelt died in office. (He briefly served in an interim capacity for President Harry Truman.)

In the modern era, press secretaries have historically served roughly a year in the role, a fact that CNN noted when Trump's first-ever White House press secretary, Sean Spicer, departed after 182 days in August 2017.

During the first Trump administration, Anthony Scaramucci famously spent just 11 days as the White House communications director before he was booted from the position.

Scaramucci, known as "The Mooch," weighed in on Zacharia's departure in an X post, writing, "Records are made to be broken. But I take no pleasure in other people's pain."

Before becoming press secretary, Zacharia worked for Trump Media, the parent company of Truth Social, and served a brief stint at the Department of Homeland Security.

Compared to her predecessors, her résumé was void of the campaign and Capitol Hill experience that previous White House press secretaries brought to the challenging role.

After a turbulent five days in the role, Katie Zacharia is out as White House press secretary, two White House officials familiar with her departure told MS NOW on Friday. The sources were granted anonymity to discuss sensitive matters.

It was not immediately clear whether Zacharia resigned or was fired. On Friday, President Donald Trump told reporters that he told Zacharia to “reconsider” her role.

Zacharia delivered her first and only press briefing on Tuesday, which lasted just over 14 minutes. She took just three questions — all from conservative media outlets — and failed to answer the first policy question she was asked. She defended her performance in an interview with Fox News host Sean Hannity on Thursday, telling him she had “very little prep time.”

In the days after her appointment, questions swirled about her past experience, including her past references to being a lawyer. Though she obtained a law degree from Pepperdine University in 2011, she said this week that she did not pass the bar exam. She said she did not intend to mislead about her legal credentials, telling Real America’s Voice that it was a “miscommunication.”

Responding to a reporter on Friday who asked if he wanted Zacharia to “stick around ultimately,” Trump said he planned to talk to her when he returned to the White House from Georgia.

“I just said, ‘I think you should reconsider because I think the press is really being very unfair,'” he said.

Trump announced Zacharia as his new press secretary on Oct. 9, filling a vacancy left by Karoline Leavitt, who departed in August to spend more time with her two young children.

Former White House Communications Director Anthony Scaramucci, who was fired after just 11 days in the role during Trump’s first administration, posted on X following the news of Zacharia’s departure: “Records are made to be broken. But I take no pleasure in other people’s pain.”

This is a developing story. Check back for updates.

The post Katie Zacharia is out as White House press secretary after just 5 days appeared first on MS NOW.

Polling suggests that concerns about corruption and healthcare costs are top of mind for most voters as Election Day approaches. A Fox News poll released this week showed large majorities of voters listed both in the top five issues they were “extremely” or “very” concerned about. A new report about President Donald Trump’s self-enrichment by way of the pharmaceutical industry underscores the uniquely awful political predicament Republicans have created for themselves by wedding their party to one of the most corrupt administrations in American history.

Democrats on the Joint Economic Committee previously spotlighted the ways that Trump’s stock investments in the oil and gas industries have benefited from his destructive geopolitical agenda, including his deadly war with Iran. Now, the committee is out with a new report on the ways Trump’s stock investments in the pharmaceutical industry have benefited from provisions of the (ridiculously) so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act that Republicans forced through last year.

According to the new report:

As Americans face sky-high health care costs, President Trump and Congressional Republicans passed into law last year a new giveaway to Big Pharma that enables many pharmaceutical companies to keep charging seniors exorbitant prices for cancer treatments and other medications. This measure — which blocks the Medicare program from negotiating lower prices for several high-cost drugs — will add around $9 billion to the deficit.

The report cites financial disclosure forms that show that in 2025, “Trump held as much as $39.1 million in stock in the same Big Pharma companies that directly benefited from the giveaway that he and Congressional Republicans devised.” And that “these companies reported at least $54 billion in U.S. sales of drugs that benefitted from the carveout in 2025, a 13 percent increase from the year before.”

Trump has made more stock trades since returning to office than everyone in Congress combined. The White House has routinely said that these trades are handled by third parties over which Trump has no influence, denying allegations of corruption or conflicts of interest.

But it seems the majority of Americans aren’t convinced that the self-described “freaking genius” president has truly extricated his personal business dealings from industries that benefit from his policies: A recent AP-NORC poll found that 60% of adults think Trump has either illegally or unethically profited from the presidency.

The post The ‘One Big Beautiful Bill’ opened the door to benefit Big Pharma — and Trump appeared first on MS NOW.

Katie Zacharia is departing as White House press secretary, a person familiar with the matter said Friday, after a short and rocky tenure that was defined by questions about her professional background and lack of polish in fielding questions from journalists.

MS NOW’s Joe Scarborough criticized President Donald Trump for condemning Ukraine’s renewed strikes on Russian oil sites while saying little about Moscow’s continued violations of his energy ceasefire.

“These events are shocking — even by Trumpian standards,” Scarborough said.

In an interview with Newsmax on Thursday, Trump called Ukraine’s decision to resume drone strikes on Russian oil refineries “a disgrace” and said the attacks would drive up global oil prices. (Trump has repeatedly blamed the Russia-Ukraine war for surging energy costs, though experts say the U.S. war with Iran has had a greater impact.)

“I’m not a big fan of Zelensky,” Trump said of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, adding that he found him “more difficult to deal with” than Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Reacting to Trump’s comments, Scarborough said Friday on “Morning Joe” that he “just can’t get Ukraine off my mind and the absolute betrayal of Ukraine.”

The MS NOW host cast Trump’s criticism of Ukraine as the latest in a series of moves that he argued favor Moscow. Last week, Trump announced the United States would lift sanctions on Russian diesel exports. Scarborough said the agreement would help “pump billions of dollars into Vladimir Putin’s killing machines.”

He also cited Reuters’ report that an order to limit Ukraine’s access to SpaceX’s Starshield satellite service came from inside the White House. The temporary restriction disrupted Ukrainian drone operations, according to the report. A White House official denied that Trump ordered the Pentagon to limit the service.

“That’s all in Donald Trump’s hands,” Scarborough continued. “He’s the one in charge of this.” He said he believed Trump was “doing everything he can to help” Putin “win this war.”

According to the “Morning Joe” co-host, Trump has “been telling us who he is since 2015” when it comes to his feelings toward Putin.

“He’s always been with Russia,” he said. “Long before this war in 2015, while he was running for president, he was talking about his great admiration for Vladimir Putin.”

Scarborough also recalled what he called Trump’s “shameful, pathetic, weak performance” at his 2018 meeting with Putin in Helsinki, during which Trump publicly cast doubt on U.S. intelligence agency findings on Russian meddling in the 2016 election.

Since Trump returned to the White House, Scarborough said, “we’ve heard more of the same.” He said Trump’s advisers would share responsibility for the consequences of the administration’s approach to Ukraine.

“Everybody around him that has anything to do with this policy, this betrayal of the West, this betrayal of Western freedom, this betrayal of Ukraine, this will be marked upon their legacies for as long as they live,” he said.

You can watch Scarborough’s full comments in the clip at the top of the page.

The post Joe Scarborough slams Trump’s ‘betrayal’ of Ukraine: ‘He’s always been with Russia’ appeared first on MS NOW.

A couple of months ago, Donald Trump appeared on a conservative radio show and said that “a lot of people” wanted to see the president pardon himself in his first term.

“I had the absolute right to do it,” he said. “Instead, I fought it through the courts and won.”

While that wasn’t an entirely accurate summary of recent history — Trump, who was convicted of several felonies in New York, only “won” when the federal criminal cases against him ended upon his return to the White House, not because they were adjudicated in his favor — the president’s rhetoric about his “absolute right” to pardon himself stood out.

This week, he returned to the issue during an interview with Newsmax’s Rob Finnerty.

Trump suggests he is going to pardon everyone, including himself: "I'm allowed to do a self-pardon … I don't want to see people that work for me go through years of nonsense"

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) 2026-10-16T00:20:10.130Z

Asked specifically whether he’s “seriously considering a self-pardon” before he leaves office, the president initially hedged, saying he’s done “nothing wrong,” before adding, “I’m allowed to do a self-pardon. I’m allowed to pardon. … The pardon is very powerful. I know that. They say it’s the most powerful thing a president has, the power of pardon.”

As my MS NOW colleague Jordan Rubin explained in detail just last week, whether presidents can actually pardon themselves is a matter of some controversy. Ahead of Richard Nixon’s resignation in 1974, the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel prepared a memo concluding that presidents can’t pardon themselves, though OLC opinions are not binding on the courts, and the matter has never been tested — at least not yet.

But also of interest was the other point Trump made as part of the same exchange.

On the topic of pardons, the Republican went on to say, “I can tell you this, I don’t want to see my people go through — because these people are lunatics on the, on the left — I don’t want to see people that work for me go through years of nonsense, hire lawyers and everything else, all for nothing.”

This came a few weeks after Trump also told Time magazine that he’s prepared to issue pardons to members of his administration.

Time will tell whether he follows through, and just as notably, just how many members of his team are considered for presidential clemency. But that Trump keeps making comments like these might very have a real impact in the White House and throughout the executive branch: The president is effectively letting a small army of political appointees know that, no matter what they do as part of their duties, he’s inclined to hand them a pardon, whether or not they deserve one.

Systemic government corruption is already a problem in the Trump era. The signal he’s sending to his team is likely to make matters worse.

The post ‘I’m allowed to do a self-pardon’: Trump opens the door to pardons for staff and himself appeared first on MS NOW.

For more than a year, President Donald Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, has acted as one of the nation’s top diplomats, exercising significant authority on behalf of the U.S. government on conflicts involving foreign hostilities, without undergoing the Senate confirmation process or filing a single financial disclosure. If you’re asking how that’s legal, it’s not.

Kushner is a figure of great influence on our national security and foreign policy apparatus. He has been tasked with meeting directly with heads of state, negotiating peace deals and representing the United States in efforts to end the president’s war in Iran, which has put our troops in harm’s way and exacerbated the affordability crisis here at home. My organization, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, just filed a lawsuit asking the court to block Kushner from continuing to perform his outsized role without Senate confirmation and compel him to file his required financial disclosures.

A White House spokesperson said in a statement that “[Kushner’s] personal business activities have nothing to do with his diplomatic engagements, which he conducts on a volunteer basis at the President’s request and while paying his own expenses,” while an attorney representing Kushner dismissed CREW’s lawsuit as “without merit.”

These laws exist to ensure that people granted substantial authority and power in our government are deserving of that power and maintain their ethical obligations to put Americans’ interests first. Kushner and the Trump administration have decided to sidestep this process.

The American public, through its elected senators and government officials, has the right to evaluate whether individuals are qualified and meet the ethical standards to hold powerful positions in our government. Kushner and the Trump administration have denied us that right, and that is both unacceptable and illegal.

The Constitution’s Appointments Clause requires that individuals who hold continuing government positions and are afforded substantial levels of authority be vetted and approved by the Senate before they take office. In my prior role as a senior counsel to the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, I helped conduct this vetting. It involved poring over a nominee’s background and experience, reviewing their past conduct, soliciting opinions on the nominee from outside experts, reviewing their financial records and interviewing them with other committee staff.

Nominees often also meet with senators to answer questions in private, are vetted by the FBI and sit for a public hearing in front of senators and the public before the committee of jurisdiction. Then the full chamber votes to approve or reject their appointment. In addition to that rigorous and multifaceted process, the Ethics in Government Act requires that individuals nominated to such positions file public financial disclosures so that the public and Congress can assess and monitor potential conflicts of interest prior to confirmation and while they serve in the role.

These laws exist to ensure that people granted substantial authority and power in our government are deserving of that power and maintain their ethical obligations to put Americans’ interests first. Kushner and the Trump administration have decided to sidestep this process.

Many officials with less power undergo more scrutiny than Kushner. For example, ambassadors who represent the U.S. in just one country — like the recently ousted Kimberly Guilfoyle — are required to be confirmed by the Senate and file public financial disclosures. Without any such vetting, Kushner has met with the presidents of Russia and Ukraine, as well as leaders from Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, and has been involved in peace negotiations surrounding Gaza, Iran and Ukraine. Meanwhile, Trump has not appointed ambassadors to Russia or Ukraine, as well as Qatar, or the UAE. Those positions remain vacant while Kushner exercises at least some of the powers and duties traditionally assigned to those positions, functionally dodging the Appointments Clause and the required vetting for confirmation.

Kushner is also an atypical diplomat. In addition to being Trump’s son-in-law, the seeming overlap between his government portfolio and business ventures has led to widespread questions. As senior adviser to the president in the first Trump administration, Kushner was required to file financial disclosures, which showed that he and his wife, Ivanka Trump, made between $172 million and $640 million in outside income while working in the White House. Soon after the first Trump administration ended, Kushner secured billions of dollars for his investment firm from the very governments, including Saudi Arabia, he had worked closely with in his official capacity. He continues to run that firm while he engages with foreign leaders who have invested with his company.

While Kushner has occasionally addressed these concerns publicly, he has not done so in Senate testimony under oath, nor provided appropriate documentation of his finances. As is the case with any nominee, his word alone is not good enough. Kushner’s lawyer claims that government ethics officials confirmed that this arrangement complies with applicable ethics requirements, but the Trump administration has routinely blessed ethically dubious conduct by the president and his family. In the first Trump administration, Kushner was granted a security clearance against the reported recommendation of career security specialists who raised concerns about his foreign entanglements.

Kushner is making decisions that affect everything from our safety and position on the world stage to the price of gas and groceries at home. This power, whether or not he has a formal title or receives a government salary, makes him subject to the Appointments Clause and the Ethics in Government Act. The very least we deserve is for Kushner to abide by the law — to be publicly vetted and transparent about his financial entanglements. He has thus far refused to do that, and we refuse to stand idly by.

The post Jared Kushner has no right to be playing diplomat appeared first on MS NOW.