Feed aggregator

President Donald Trump doubled down Sunday on his pledge to send $5,000 “dividend” checks to American adults if Republicans retain control of Congress in November, declaring that the payments will “happen 100 percent” and arguing that the United States is bringing in enough money to finance them. The proposal, however, would require congressional authorization and could carry a price tag exceeding $1 trillion.

Trump compared the proposed payments to the $1,776 checks distributed to U.S. military personnel last year, telling reporters outside Air Force One that he has encountered similar skepticism about his latest plan.

“The $5,000 is going to happen 100 percent,” he said. “And the reason is because our country is taking in trillions and trillions of dollars. And it’s going to happen.”

Trump said he deliberately does not intend to distribute the money before the midterm elections, tying the proposal to Republicans maintaining control of both the House and Senate.

“I don’t want to do it now, because if the Democrats get it, our country will be in shambles and they won’t be able to do it,” he continued. “If we get in, we’re taking in tremendous amounts of money. We’re taking in over $20 trillion in terms of investment. And with the Democrats, all of that money will be thrown out. If the Democrats get in, they won’t be able to pay it.”

Trump first unveiled the proposed payments last Wednesday during the Republican National Committee’s midterm convention in Dallas, where he said the country’s economic performance would allow his administration to distribute $5,000 to every adult American citizen if Republicans win both chambers. He also stipulated that the money would have to be spent inside the United States.

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said Thursday that the administration does not envision financing the checks through taxpayer dollars. Instead, he said the administration believes it can generate the necessary funds through other government revenue sources.

Lutnick said the administration could “earn the money that Donald Trump wants to pay out, not from the deficit and not from taxpayers.”

National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett has suggested that Congress could approve the payments through a budget reconciliation package. Under the Constitution, Congress controls federal appropriations, meaning the administration cannot simply distribute public money without legislative authorization.

House Speaker Mike Johnson confirmed Sunday that congressional action would be necessary. Appearing on CNN’s “State of the Union,” Johnson called Trump’s proposal a “creative idea” but said lawmakers would have to determine the specifics.

The President has compared his latest proposal to the $1,776 payments that approximately 1.45 million U.S. military service members received last year. Those checks were funded through a one-time housing supplement included in Trump’s sweeping tax and spending legislation.

Republican Sen. Bernie Moreno of Ohio quickly embraced Trump’s latest proposal, announcing after the President’s Dallas speech that he intends to introduce legislation aimed at putting the $5,000 payments into effect if Republicans retain control of Congress.

The cost of such a program would be substantial. With roughly 245 million adult U.S. citizens, providing each of them with $5,000 would cost more than $1.2 trillion. Other estimates have put the potential price tag at approximately $1.3 trillion, depending on the eligibility rules ultimately adopted.

Paul Berman, a professor at George Washington University Law School, has questioned whether tariff revenue could come close to financing the program. The Hill reported that Treasury data cited by the Bipartisan Policy Center showed approximately $341 billion in net tariff revenue collected since the beginning of 2025 — far below the estimated cost of the proposed checks.

“Even if there were, that’s money that goes back to the public fisc, and then Congress is the one that has the power of the purse to allocate it,” Berman said.

The financing question has become more complicated after the Supreme Court struck down major portions of the Trump administration’s tariff program and ordered refunds of revenue collected under the invalidated tariffs. Independent analyses have likewise concluded that tariff receipts would be insufficient on their own to finance payments of $5,000 to every adult citizen.

Not all Republicans have embraced the proposal. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has pointed to the size of the national debt and warned that another massive round of direct payments could contribute to inflation.

Sen. Susan Collins of Maine has also expressed reservations about the potential cost and the absence, thus far, of an income limit determining who would qualify.

“From the few details we have, it seems that the proposed $5,000 dividend would not have an income cap and would be extraordinarily costly,” Collins said about the dividends.

The administration has not yet released a detailed legislative proposal explaining exactly who would qualify, how the checks would be financed, when they would be distributed or how the requirement that the money be spent in the United States would be enforced.

Trump, however, made clear Sunday that he is standing firmly behind the promise. Despite questions about the cost, congressional approval and the source of the funding, the President said there should be no doubt about his intention to deliver the payments if Republicans maintain control of Congress.

“The $5,000 is going to happen 100 percent,” he said.

Sen. Ruben Gallego said Sunday that if he were elected president, he would support undoing many of President Donald Trump’s architectural changes to Washington, including tearing down the new White House ballroom and Trump’s planned 250-foot triumphal arch near Arlington National Cemetery.

The Arizona Democrat, who has not announced a 2028 presidential campaign but has acknowledged considering a run, made the remarks during an appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union.” His comments marked one of the clearest statements yet from a potential Democratic presidential contender that some of Trump’s major construction projects should ultimately be demolished rather than simply inherited by a future administration.

CNN anchor Jake Tapper raised the subject while discussing Trump’s extensive effort to reshape prominent landmarks and public spaces around the nation’s capital, including the White House ballroom, the proposed triumphal arch and changes involving the Kennedy Center and Reflecting Pool.

“President Trump is putting his mark on Washington, DC quite a bit, building a White House ballroom. He plans to build an arch, attempts to rename the Kennedy Center, the reflecting pool, and on and on and on. It seems clear to me that this is going to be a big issue for Democrats running for president in 2028. I know you haven’t made a decision yet about whether or not you’re going to run for president, but if you do, would you advocate for tearing down the ballroom or tearing down the arch?” Tapper asked.

Gallego indicated that he would favor reversing nearly all of the changes.

“I think I’d be advocating for almost all of that. You know, the the real stain that this president has put on this country has been the fact that he eroded democracy, right. Let’s start with January 6. The fact that for the first time ever, a U.S. president attempted an actual coup. That right there is a reason why we should not have anything named toward him. The fact that he has destroyed the institutions that have kept this government together through some of the hardest times, and eroded, for example, our Department of Justice, is another reason why we needs to be taking down all these honorific situations or emblems of him. The fact that he wants to destroy the Kennedy Center, a man that contributed so much to this country, to replace it with his name, who has done everything to destroy this country, is another reason why we have to make sure that we wipe him out. So this is not me trying to get to Donald Trump because I don’t like Donald Trump, it’s because of what Donald Trump has done to this country. And as somebody who visits a lot of my friends at Section 60 of Arlington National Cemetery, the fact that we’re going to have this ugly monstrosity in the view of this very sacred site —”

Tapper interrupted to clarify which project Gallego was referring to.

“The arch?”

Gallego confirmed that he was referring to Trump’s planned triumphal arch.

“The arch is another reason why that needs to be taken care of. Because, again, this man has done nothing but actually destroy the very fundamental things that these men and women have fought for, which is to save this country in continuous democracy.”

Gallego’s remarks came as Trump has moved aggressively ahead with a series of major construction and renovation projects in Washington. The proposed arch is planned for Memorial Circle between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington National Cemetery and has been envisioned at roughly 250 feet tall. The administration has said the monument would honor American veterans and has compared its design to Paris’ Arc de Triomphe.

The arch has generated both political and legal opposition. Critics contend that the structure would interfere with the historic sight line between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington House and argue that the administration lacks the congressional authorization required to build it. The administration has disputed those arguments, while the project has yet to receive final approval from the National Capital Planning Commission.

Trump has strongly defended the project, saying of the planned arch, “I think it will be the most beautiful in the world.” He has compared it to the Arc de Triomphe in Paris and said the Washington structure would be of a similar scale, though slightly larger.

The White House ballroom has separately become a major political and legal flashpoint. Construction on the project has continued following litigation over whether congressional approval was required, with the Supreme Court recently allowing work to proceed while the legal battle continues.

Trump has defended the ballroom as both a major improvement to the White House and a project intended to serve future presidents, rather than himself. He has also described the facility as designed with significant security features.

“This is for future presence. This isn’t for me. This is for future presence. And it’s a gift. We’re making a gift to our country, spending hundreds of millions of dollars to build a ballroom,” Trump said last month.

The dispute over what a future administration should do with Trump’s Washington projects has been building for months. Some Democrats have discussed reversing name changes and other alterations, although others have suggested that physically demolishing completed structures would be far more difficult to justify. CNN reported earlier this month that Democrats it had spoken with generally did not expect a future Democratic administration to tear down completed projects because doing so could itself be viewed as destructive.

Gallego, however, went considerably further Sunday, saying he would favor removing much of Trump’s imprint if he eventually reached the White House. His comments were particularly pointed regarding the arch, which he described as an “ugly monstrosity” because of its planned location within view of Arlington National Cemetery.

The Arizona senator tied his opposition to friends buried in Section 60 at Arlington, arguing that Trump should not be memorialized near a site honoring American servicemembers.

Gallego’s remarks also offered a preview of an issue that could become part of the 2028 presidential debate: whether Trump’s physical transformation of Washington should remain after he leaves office or whether a succeeding administration should attempt to reverse it.

[Video below.] Michigan Democratic Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed escalated his attacks on President Donald Trump on Sunday, calling the President a “barbarian in the White House” during a nationally televised interview on CBS News’ “Face the Nation.”

El-Sayed made the remark while responding to questions about the extraordinary amount of attention Republican leaders have focused on his candidacy ahead of November’s midterm elections. El-Sayed, a physician and former director of the Detroit Health Department, is facing Republican Mike Rogers in Michigan’s closely watched U.S. Senate contest. Republicans have increasingly sought to make El-Sayed and his progressive political views a national campaign issue.

During the interview, CBS host Weijia Jiang noted that El-Sayed had repeatedly been singled out by leading Republicans at the recent Republican National Convention, including President Trump, Vice President JD Vance, House Speaker Mike Johnson and Rogers.

Jiang then played a clip of Johnson warning about El-Sayed and New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani while arguing that Democrats in competitive congressional districts ultimately align themselves with the party’s progressive wing.

“We know who the Mamdanis and the El-Sayeds are, but it’s the Democrats in the swing seats who say one thing and then join forces and vote with the socialists that they’re afraid of. That is the dangerous part. They’re the ones who have let the barbarians inside the gate,” Johnson said.

Asked what he thought about Republicans devoting so much attention to him, El-Sayed immediately turned Johnson’s “barbarians” characterization against President Trump.

“Well, I’ll tell you this: the barbarian is in the White House, and we’re seeing the consequences of that right now,” El-Sayed said.

El-Sayed then accused Republicans of attempting to divert voters’ attention from economic and foreign-policy issues, citing gas and grocery prices, tariffs, the administration’s conflict with Canada, the war with Iran and access to medical care.

“You know, it was not a subject at all of the RNC? the gas prices, grocery prices, these ridiculous tariffs, and this war with Canada that’s raising our prices an average $5,600 a year for the average Michigan family. The war in Iran- didn’t want to talk about any of it. The fact that you can’t see a doctor in the United States. So, they’re going to point to me. They’re going to talk about me. They’re going to point to my name. They’re going to point to our faith. And at the end of the day, they’re doing that so that you don’t pay attention to the fact that you are being nickled and dimed by the barbarian in the White House and by a set of public policies that are not in your interest, but in his.”

The remarks came as El-Sayed has emerged as a major Republican target in the battle for control of the Senate. Republican leaders have portrayed his candidacy as evidence of the Democratic Party’s movement toward its progressive wing, while El-Sayed has sought to make affordability, health care and economic policy central themes of his general-election campaign.

The Michigan contest has attracted national attention in part because of its potential significance in determining control of the Senate. Democrats need a net gain of four seats to take the chamber, making competitive races such as Michigan particularly consequential.

El-Sayed has also faced controversy during the campaign over previous remarks and associations. Earlier this month, he apologized to Michigan’s Jewish Democratic Caucus over comments he made following an attack on Temple Israel in West Bloomfield, Michigan. El-Sayed had said in discussing the attacker that “hurt people hurt people,” while referencing the man’s reported personal losses in an Israeli airstrike. He later said he had intended to provide context rather than justify the attack and acknowledged that it was not the appropriate moment for such analysis.

At the same time, some attacks directed at El-Sayed have drawn criticism for targeting his Muslim faith. Republican figures have made allegations about El-Sayed having ties to terrorism without presenting evidence, while El-Sayed has argued that Republicans are deliberately focusing on his name and religion.

Sunday’s exchange underscored the increasingly personal tone of the Michigan race. Republicans have sought to associate El-Sayed with the Democratic Party’s progressive and socialist wing, while El-Sayed used his CBS appearance to turn one of their most pointed descriptions back on President Trump — twice referring to the President as the “barbarian in the White House.”

WATCH:

{Matzav.com}

Researchers are raising concerns about a rare and potentially fatal neurological disorder that has been reported among some patients using popular GLP-1 weight-loss medications, including Wegovy and Zepbound, with experts warning that severe appetite suppression, vomiting and other gastrointestinal side effects can leave patients dangerously deficient in essential nutrients.

A study published in Clinical Nutrition documented 15 reported cases of Wernicke encephalopathy, a serious brain disorder resulting from a severe deficiency of vitamin B1, or thiamine, among people who had been taking GLP-1 receptor agonists.

The majority of cases were associated with semaglutide, which is marketed under the brand names Ozempic and Wegovy, or tirzepatide, which is sold as Mounjaro and Zepbound.

The researchers identified the 15 cases by reviewing reports contained in the FDA’s Adverse Event Reporting System, previously published medical literature and cases seen at their own medical center.

Many of the patients experienced gastrointestinal or nutrition-related problems, including significant weight loss, vomiting, reduced appetite and malnutrition.

The researchers also found that reports of Wernicke encephalopathy occurred disproportionately among people using GLP-1 drugs compared with patients taking other medications. They cautioned, however, that their findings demonstrate an association and do not establish that the medications themselves caused the disorder.

Vitamin B1 is essential for normal brain function. A severe deficiency can result in confusion, difficulty walking, impaired balance and changes in vision. Without prompt treatment, Wernicke encephalopathy can cause lasting neurological injury and, in severe cases, death.

Karthik Achari, a Chicago-based clinician and founder of PepMD who was not involved with the research, stressed that the findings need to be understood in the context of the enormous number of people now using GLP-1 medications.

“Researchers went through adverse event reports and the medical literature and found a small number of cases, 15, of Wernicke encephalopathy in people taking GLP-1 drugs,” Achari told Fox News Digital. “That’s out of millions of people on these medications. So this is rare.”

“But it’s real, it’s serious, and the mechanism makes sense,” he added.

According to Achari, GLP-1 drugs can substantially suppress appetite and can also trigger nausea and vomiting. In certain patients, that combination could lead to inadequate food intake and eventually a vitamin B1 deficiency.

“The drug shrinks your appetite. It doesn’t shrink your body’s requirements,” he said. “You can now eat very little without feeling it, which is the point of the medication, but your need for protein, vitamins, and fluids didn’t go anywhere.”

Achari said certain groups could be particularly vulnerable, including patients experiencing prolonged nausea or vomiting, those rapidly losing weight while consuming very little food, people who previously underwent bariatric surgery and those who consume alcohol heavily.

Erin Palinski-Wade, a New Jersey-based nutritionist and author of “The Sleepdemic Solution,” similarly emphasized that adequate nutrition and hydration should be an important component of care for patients using GLP-1 medications.

“GLP-1 medications can dramatically reduce appetite, but that also means people may unintentionally under-eat the very things their bodies need most, especially protein, fiber and fluids,” she told Fox News Digital.

Palinski-Wade warned that persistent vomiting or diarrhea can contribute to dehydration and potentially lead to kidney complications. She recommended seeking medical advice when such symptoms continue for approximately 24 hours.

“Don’t assume every side effect is just part of being on a GLP-1,” Palinski-Wade said. “Severe or persistent symptoms deserve attention.”

The study’s authors noted important limitations to their findings, particularly that much of the research was based on adverse-event reports submitted to the FDA. Such reports cannot establish that GLP-1 drugs caused Wernicke encephalopathy. The researchers called for further study, while medical experts cautioned that patients should not discontinue prescribed GLP-1 medications solely because of the new findings.