President Donald Trump has enacted a 25% tariff on certain advanced AI chips, including Nvidia's H200 and AMD's MI325X, citing national security concerns. The move aims to bolster domestic semiconductor production and reduce reliance on foreign supply chains.

## Trump Imposes 25% Tariff on Select AI Chips

President Donald Trump has officially imposed a 25% tariff on certain advanced computing chips, specifically targeting the Nvidia H200 AI processor and AMD's MI325X semiconductor.

This decision, announced on January 14, 2023, is part of a broader strategy to enhance national security and stimulate domestic semiconductor manufacturing.

The proclamation follows a nine-month investigation conducted under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, which allows the president to impose tariffs on imports that threaten national security.

The investigation revealed that the US currently manufactures only about 10% of the semiconductors it requires, making it heavily reliant on foreign supply chains, particularly from countries like Taiwan.

The tariffs will not apply to chips imported for the purpose of building up the US technology supply chain, which raises questions about the criteria for exemption.

The White House has not clarified what specific conditions must be met for these exemptions.

In his announcement, Trump emphasized the importance of reducing dependence on foreign sources for semiconductors, stating that such reliance poses a significant economic and national security risk.

The tariffs are intended to incentivize domestic production and ensure that the US can meet its semiconductor needs without relying on imports.

Nvidia and AMD have responded positively to the tariff announcement, with Nvidia expressing support for the decision as a means to bolster the American chip industry and create high-paying jobs.

However, the implications of these tariffs could lead to increased costs for consumers, as companies may pass on the additional expenses associated with the tariffs to their customers.

The move to impose tariffs on AI chips is part of Trump's broader agenda to position the US as a leader in artificial intelligence technology.

The administration has previously discussed the potential for broader tariffs on semiconductors and their derivative products, indicating that this may be just the beginning of a more extensive trade policy aimed at the tech sector.

Critics of the tariff strategy warn that such measures could lead to higher prices for consumers and disrupt global supply chains.

The tariffs could also complicate relationships with key trading partners, particularly in the semiconductor industry, where many components are sourced from abroad.

As the US navigates these new tariffs, the administration's focus on domestic manufacturing and national security will likely continue to shape its trade policies.

The long-term effects of these tariffs on the semiconductor market and the broader economy remain to be seen, but they underscore the administration's commitment to reshaping the landscape of American manufacturing in the tech sector.

In conclusion, Trump's imposition of a 25% tariff on select AI chips marks a significant step in the ongoing efforts to bolster US manufacturing and address national security concerns.

As the situation develops, stakeholders in the tech industry will be closely monitoring the impact of these tariffs on both domestic production and international trade relations.

Trump Imposes 25% Tariff on Select AI Chips

trump-imposes-25-tariff-on-select-ai-chips

The Senate voted 51-50 to block a resolution that would have restricted President Trump's military actions in Venezuela. Vice President JD Vance cast the tie-breaking vote after two Republican senators reversed their support for the measure, following pressure from the Trump administration.

## Senate Votes Against War Powers Resolution on Venezuela

In a significant political move, the Senate voted 51-50 on Wednesday to effectively block a war powers resolution aimed at preventing President Donald Trump from using military force in Venezuela without congressional approval.

The resolution, which had initially gained bipartisan support, faced a dramatic reversal as two Republican senators changed their votes under pressure from the White House.

The resolution was co-sponsored by Senators Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and sought to require Trump to seek prior approval from Congress before engaging in military actions against Venezuela.

Last week, Senators Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) and Todd Young (R-Ind.) had voted to advance the resolution, but both flipped their positions after receiving assurances from Secretary of State Marco Rubio that there were no US troops currently in Venezuela and that any future military operations would require congressional authorization.

The Senate was deadlocked at 50-50, prompting Vice President JD Vance to cast the tie-breaking vote that ultimately scuttled the resolution.

This vote highlights the ongoing tension within the Republican Party regarding Trump's influence and the reluctance of some lawmakers to oppose him directly.

Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY), who supported the resolution, criticized the outcome, stating that it emboldens Trump to pursue a more aggressive military stance without accountability.

He emphasized the need for Congress to assert its role in decisions regarding military force, arguing that the American public does not want troops sent into conflict without a thorough debate.

The resolution's defeat is seen as a reflection of the political climate in Washington, where many Republican lawmakers are hesitant to challenge Trump, especially as he ramps up his rhetoric regarding Venezuela and other nations.

Trump's public pressure campaign against the five Republican senators who initially supported the resolution was noted as a significant factor in their decision to change their votes.

Despite the resolution's failure, critics of US military involvement in Venezuela view the debate as a partial victory, as it forced Congress to confront the issue.

Cavan Kharrazian, a senior adviser at Demand Progress, remarked that the administration's efforts to kill the vote indicate a recognition of Congress's war powers authority when it is actively asserted.

The resolution aimed to direct the President to terminate the use of US Armed Forces for hostilities within or against Venezuela unless explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or specific authorization for military force.

The procedural maneuvering that led to its defeat underscores the complexities of legislative processes and the influence of executive power in military matters.

As the political landscape continues to evolve, the implications of this vote may resonate beyond Venezuela, affecting how Congress engages with the executive branch on military actions in the future.

In summary, the Senate's decision to block the war powers resolution reflects the ongoing challenges of balancing presidential authority with congressional oversight in matters of military engagement.

The outcome serves as a reminder of the significant influence Trump holds over Republican lawmakers and the complexities of US foreign policy in volatile regions like Venezuela.

Senate Votes Against War Powers Resolution on Venezuela

senate-votes-against-war-powers-resolution-on-venezuela

President Trump stated that he has been informed that executions in Iran have ceased, despite Iranian officials indicating plans for rapid trials and executions of detained protesters. The situation remains tense as the US considers its response to Iran's crackdown on dissent.

## Trump Claims Iran Executions 'Stopped' Amid Ongoing Protests

President Donald Trump claimed on Wednesday that he has been told "on good authority" that plans for executions in Iran have stopped, even as Iranian officials signaled that fast trials and executions are imminent for those detained during recent protests.

During a press event at the White House, Trump stated, "We've been told that the killing in Iran is stopping -- it's stopped -- it's stopping," while signing executive orders and legislation.

However, he did not provide details on the sources of this information, describing them only as "very important sources on the other side." He expressed hope that the information was accurate but acknowledged uncertainty, saying, "Who knows?".

The president's comments come amid a backdrop of escalating violence in Iran, where the crackdown on protests has reportedly resulted in at least 2,586 deaths, according to the US-based Human Rights Activists News Agency.

In response to the unrest, Trump has previously indicated that "help is on the way" for the Iranian people and that his administration would "act accordingly" to address the situation.

Despite Trump's optimistic assertions, Iranian officials have made it clear that they plan to expedite the judicial process for over 18,000 detainees, with judiciary chief Gholamhossein Mohseni-Ejei stating, "If we want to do something, we have to do it quickly." He emphasized the need for rapid trials and executions, suggesting that delays would diminish the impact of their actions.

The Iranian government has also threatened a "decisive response" if the US or Israel intervenes in the domestic unrest, further complicating the situation.

In light of these threats, personnel at a key US military base in Qatar were advised to evacuate, reflecting heightened tensions in the region.

Trump's national security team, including Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, has been meeting to discuss potential responses, which range from diplomatic measures to military action.

The president's vague statements have left many questioning the US strategy moving forward, particularly in light of Iran's aggressive stance against perceived foreign interference.

As the situation develops, the international community remains watchful, with activists warning that executions could occur soon.

The Iranian regime's crackdown on dissent has drawn widespread condemnation, and the potential for further violence looms large as both sides prepare for possible escalation.

In summary, while Trump claims that executions in Iran have ceased, the reality on the ground suggests a different narrative, with Iranian officials poised to carry out swift justice against protesters.

The US response remains uncertain, as the administration grapples with the complexities of the situation.

Trump Claims Iran Executions 'Stopped' Amid Ongoing Protests

trump-claims-iran-executions-stopped-amid-ongoing-protests

Texas House Democrats are urging an investigation into Elon Musk's AI chatbot, Grok, over allegations of generating sexually explicit images, including those of minors. The call for action follows reports of Grok producing thousands of sexualized images per hour, raising concerns about compliance with state laws aimed at protecting children.

## Texas Democrats Demand Investigation into Elon Musk's AI Chatbot

Texas House Democrats are calling for an investigation into Grok, an artificial intelligence chatbot integrated into the social media platform X, owned by Elon Musk.

The lawmakers allege that Grok has been generating sexually explicit images, including those involving minors, which raises significant legal and ethical concerns.

The demand for an inquiry comes shortly after the Texas Responsible AI Governance Act took effect, aimed at regulating AI technologies that could be used for creating sexually explicit materials.

In a letter sent to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, over 40 Democratic representatives expressed their concerns regarding Grok's capabilities and its potential violations of Texas law.

Reports indicate that Grok is capable of producing an alarming rate of sexualized images, with investigations revealing that it generates approximately 7,750 such images per hour, including at least one nonconsensual image per minute.

This has prompted lawmakers to question whether X is adhering to Texas laws that require age verification for platforms with significant sexually explicit content.

Mihaela Plesa, who spearheaded the letter, emphasized the urgency of the situation, stating, "Parents across Texas should be furious: Every day AG Paxton delays is another day Texas children are at risk." She criticized both Musk and Paxton for their perceived inaction regarding the chatbot's misuse.

The Democrats' letter also highlights the need for a public enforcement and reporting pathway for victims of AI-generated content, as well as clear guidance for platforms to ensure compliance with Texas laws.

Experts have noted that proving intent behind the misuse of such technology can be complex, especially given the vast number of users and content generated on platforms like X.

In addition to the local concerns, Grok has faced scrutiny on a global scale.

Countries such as Malaysia and Indonesia have already blocked access to the chatbot due to its controversial outputs, and the United Kingdom is conducting its own investigation into the platform.

The political implications of this investigation are significant, as Paxton is currently campaigning for a US Senate seat.

His response to the Democrats' request could place him in a challenging position, balancing his tough stance on child exploitation against his ties to Musk, a prominent Republican donor.

Musk has publicly acknowledged the issues surrounding Grok, stating that accounts attempting to use the chatbot for creating inappropriate images would face consequences.

However, critics argue that these assurances are insufficient without concrete enforcement measures.

As the situation develops, Texas lawmakers are advocating for immediate action to protect children and ensure that AI technologies are used responsibly.

The outcome of this inquiry could set a precedent for how AI is regulated in the state and beyond, highlighting the need for robust safeguards in an era of rapidly evolving technology.

The controversy surrounding Grok underscores the broader challenges of regulating AI and ensuring user safety in digital spaces.

As lawmakers push for accountability, the implications of this investigation will likely resonate far beyond Texas, influencing discussions on AI governance nationwide.

With the increasing accessibility of AI tools, the need for clear legal frameworks and protective measures is more critical than ever, as communities grapple with the potential risks associated with these technologies.

Texas Democrats Demand Investigation into Elon Musk's AI Chatbot

texas-democrats-demand-investigation-into-elon-musk-s-ai-chatbot

The US Supreme Court has ruled that candidates can legally challenge election laws before voting begins, a decision that may lead to an increase in pre-election lawsuits. The ruling, which stemmed from a case involving Illinois Rep. Michael Bost, establishes that candidates have a personal stake in the election rules that govern their races.

## Supreme Court Allows Candidates to Challenge Election Laws

The US Supreme Court has made a significant ruling that allows political candidates to challenge election laws before voting or counting begins.

This decision, delivered in a 7-2 vote, stems from a case involving Illinois Republican US Rep.

Michael Bost and other candidates who sought to contest a state law permitting the counting of mail ballots that arrive up to two weeks after Election Day, provided they are postmarked on time.

Chief Justice John Roberts authored the majority opinion, asserting that candidates possess a "concrete and particularized interest" in the rules governing the counting of votes in their elections.

He emphasized that this interest exists regardless of whether the rules may harm their electoral prospects or increase campaign costs.

The ruling overturns a previous decision by the 7th Circuit Court, which had denied Bost standing to challenge the Illinois law.

The implications of this ruling are profound, as it opens the door for a potential surge in litigation regarding election laws.

Candidates can now initiate lawsuits based on their interests in the electoral process, which could lead to a significant increase in pre-election legal challenges.

Legal experts have noted that this decision may help clarify election laws before elections occur, potentially reducing disputes that arise after votes are cast.

However, the ruling has also raised concerns about the potential for frivolous lawsuits.

Critics, including Wendy Weiser from the Brennan Center for Justice, warn that allowing candidates to challenge laws without demonstrating actual harm could lead to an influx of baseless legal actions that might undermine public confidence in the electoral process.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett, in a concurring opinion, agreed that Bost had standing but expressed reservations about the broad implications of the ruling.

She argued that candidates should be held to the same standards as other litigants, suggesting that the court's decision creates a unique standing rule for politicians.

In dissent, Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor contended that the ruling could politicize the judiciary further by granting candidates the ability to sue based on generalized grievances rather than provable harm.

Jackson emphasized that the interest in a fair electoral process is common to all voters, not just candidates.

The Supreme Court's decision is expected to influence future cases, including one involving Mississippi's mail ballot law, which is set to be heard later this term.

Legal scholars have noted that the ruling could lead to more election-related lawsuits being resolved before votes are counted, which is seen as a positive step for electoral integrity.

As the political landscape continues to evolve, the ramifications of this ruling will likely be felt in upcoming elections, with candidates now empowered to challenge election laws more readily than before.

The balance between ensuring electoral integrity and preventing frivolous litigation will be a critical issue moving forward.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court's ruling marks a pivotal moment in election law, potentially reshaping how candidates interact with electoral regulations and the legal system in the lead-up to elections.

Supreme Court Allows Candidates to Challenge Election Laws

supreme-court-allows-candidates-to-challenge-election-laws

The US economy is exhibiting resilience with solid growth and a strong labor market, despite persistent inflation concerns. Key risks include geopolitical tensions, supply chain vulnerabilities, and potential shifts in consumer behavior. Additionally, updates on monetary policy and consumer sentiment are crucial for understanding future economic conditions.

## U.S. Economy Shows Strength Amid Inflation Risks and Key Updates

The US economy is currently demonstrating notable strength, characterized by solid growth and a robust labor market.

However, persistent inflationary pressures pose significant risks that could impact future economic stability.

As we navigate through these complexities, several key updates and risks warrant attention.

Recent data indicates that the US economy has maintained a strong trajectory, with gross domestic product (GDP) increasing at a solid pace.

The growth has been primarily driven by private domestic final purchases, particularly in personal consumption, which saw a significant rise in retail sales during the third quarter of 2023.

Despite this positive outlook, core inflation remains elevated, hovering around 2.8% as of late 2023, which is above the Federal Reserve's target of 2%.

This persistent inflation is largely attributed to pressures in housing services and other essential goods.

The labor market remains a cornerstone of economic strength, with payroll employment gains rebounding and the unemployment rate stabilizing at a low level of 4.2%.

Job vacancies continue to outnumber unemployed workers, indicating ongoing demand for labor.

However, the labor market dynamics are shifting, with some signs of loosening conditions, which could affect wage growth and consumer spending.

Despite the positive indicators, three major risks could undermine the current economic stability:.

**Geopolitical Tensions**: Ongoing geopolitical issues, particularly in the Middle East and Eastern Europe, could disrupt global supply chains and lead to inflationary pressures on essential commodities like food and energy.

**Supply Chain Vulnerabilities**: The US economy remains susceptible to shocks in global supply chains, which could exacerbate inflation and impact economic growth.

Recent trends suggest that labor strikes and other disruptions could further complicate the supply landscape.

**Consumer Behavior Shifts**: Changes in consumer sentiment, particularly among lower-income households, could lead to reduced spending.

Higher prices for housing, food, and energy have disproportionately affected these groups, potentially leading to a pullback in consumption.

The Federal Reserve has been actively recalibrating its monetary policy in response to these economic conditions.

Following a series of interest rate cuts, the target range for the federal funds rate has been adjusted to reflect the current economic landscape.

The Fed's approach remains data-dependent, with a focus on achieving price stability while supporting maximum employment.

Looking ahead, the economic outlook remains cautiously optimistic.

Analysts expect continued solid growth, supported by strong consumer spending and business investment, particularly in technology sectors driven by artificial intelligence.

However, the potential for inflation to stall or rise remains a concern, necessitating careful monitoring of economic indicators and consumer behavior.

In addition to the economic risks and monetary policy updates, several other factors are shaping the current landscape:.

- **Consumer Sentiment**: Post-election consumer sentiment appears to be improving, although it remains below pre-pandemic levels.

This sentiment is crucial for sustaining consumer spending, which is a significant driver of economic growth.

- **Investment Trends**: Business investment, particularly in technology and AI, is expected to remain strong, contributing to overall economic resilience.

However, there are concerns about potential overcapacity and the sustainability of such investments.

- **Inflation Dynamics**: The inflationary environment is expected to remain sticky, with core inflation projected to stay above the Fed's target for the foreseeable future.

This could limit the central bank's ability to lower interest rates significantly.

In conclusion, while the US economy shows signs of strength, the interplay of inflationary pressures, geopolitical risks, and consumer behavior will be critical in shaping the economic landscape in the coming months.

Policymakers and analysts will need to remain vigilant as they navigate these challenges to ensure sustained economic growth and stability.

U.S. Economy Shows Strength Amid Inflation Risks and Key Updates

u-s-economy-shows-strength-amid-inflation-risks-and-key-updates

President Trump has reaffirmed his intention to acquire Greenland, emphasizing its strategic importance for US national security. This statement follows a tense meeting with Danish and Greenlandic officials, who firmly rejected the notion of selling the territory, highlighting ongoing geopolitical tensions.

## Trump Reiterates Desire for Greenland After High-Stakes Meeting

President Donald Trump has once again expressed his desire for the United States to acquire Greenland, a self-governing territory of Denmark.

His comments came after a high-stakes meeting on January 14, 2025, with Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen and Greenlandic Foreign Minister Vivian Motzfeldt in Washington, DC.

During a press conference, Trump stated, "Greenland is very important for national security, including of Denmark," and emphasized that Denmark cannot adequately protect the island from potential threats posed by Russia or China.

He further claimed that the US could provide better security for Greenland, referencing recent geopolitical events as evidence of the need for US control.

The meeting, which lasted approximately two hours, revealed significant differences in perspective between the US and its NATO ally Denmark regarding the future governance of Greenland.

While Trump reiterated his belief that the US needs Greenland, Rasmussen described the American position as an "unacceptable breach of sovereignty," asserting that Greenland is "not for sale.".

In the lead-up to the meeting, Trump had taken to social media to argue that NATO would be more effective with Greenland under US control, stating, "Anything less than that is unacceptable." He has consistently framed the acquisition of Greenland as a national security imperative, despite widespread opposition to such a move among the American public.

The Danish and Greenlandic officials expressed their commitment to maintaining the island's sovereignty, with Rasmussen urging for "respectful" cooperation rather than coercion.

They announced the formation of a working group to address security concerns while respecting Denmark's sovereignty, but the fundamental disagreement over the island's status remains unresolved.

Greenland's Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen emphasized the importance of unity with Denmark in the face of US pressure, stating, "If we have to choose between the US and Denmark here and now, we choose Denmark, NATO, and the EU." This sentiment reflects a growing anxiety among Greenlanders about the potential implications of US interest in their territory.

Public sentiment in Greenland appears to be shifting, with leaders now focusing on the island's relationship with Denmark rather than independence.

Nielsen noted that the current priority is to engage in dialogue with allies rather than gamble with their right to self-determination.

The geopolitical stakes surrounding Greenland are high, with both Russia and China closely monitoring developments.

European leaders, including those from France and Germany, have expressed support for Denmark's territorial integrity, reinforcing the notion that any attempt to alter Greenland's status would have significant repercussions.

As the situation unfolds, the US administration's approach to Greenland continues to provoke strong reactions from both Greenlandic and Danish officials.

The Danish defense ministry has announced plans to increase military presence in the region, signaling a commitment to Arctic security amid rising tensions.

In conclusion, Trump's reiterated desire for Greenland underscores the complex interplay of national security, sovereignty, and international relations in the Arctic.

The ongoing dialogue between the US, Denmark, and Greenland will be crucial in determining the future of this strategically significant territory.

Trump Reiterates Desire for Greenland After High-Stakes Meeting

trump-reiterates-desire-for-greenland-after-high-stakes-meeting

Austin Energy is working to enhance its solar energy footprint as part of its commitment to achieving 100% carbon-free generation by 2035. The utility plans to increase local solar capacity and battery storage while addressing environmental concerns related to natural gas peaker plants.

## Austin Energy Aims to Expand Solar Energy Capacity

Austin Energy is making significant strides to expand its solar energy footprint as part of its broader goal of achieving 100% carbon-free generation by 2035.

The utility has been a pioneer in renewable energy in Texas, having established a robust portfolio of wind and solar power sources over the years.

In Fiscal Year 2024, Austin Energy reported that 47% of its power generation came from renewable sources, including seven utility-scale solar farms and ten wind farms across Texas.

The utility has secured renewable resource generation capacity exceeding 2,866 megawatts, which includes wind, solar, and biomass energy.

This commitment to renewable energy not only supports the environment but also creates clean energy jobs, contributing positively to the local economy.

As part of its ongoing efforts, Austin Energy is currently finalizing its Resource, Generation and Climate Protection Plan proposal, which is set to be reviewed by the city's Electric Utility Commission (EUC).

This plan aims to address the utility's local generation resources and includes ambitious targets for expanding solar and battery storage infrastructure.

Specifically, the EUC has recommended that Austin Energy add at least 500 megawatts of local solar capacity and 2,000 megawatt-hours of battery storage by 2035.

However, the proposal has faced scrutiny regarding the inclusion of new natural gas peaker plants, which are intended to alleviate gaps in local generation resources.

While some commissioners express concerns about the environmental impact of these plants, Austin Energy's Deputy General Manager, Lisa Martin, argues that they are necessary for meeting immediate energy demands while transitioning to cleaner sources.

The peaker plants are expected to operate at a low capacity, primarily during peak demand periods, and will be equipped with technology to reduce emissions.

The push for increased solar capacity aligns with broader trends in renewable energy adoption across Texas.

For instance, Austin Community College has recently transitioned two of its campuses to 100% clean, renewable energy, becoming the first community college in Texas to achieve this milestone.

This shift reflects a growing commitment to sustainability and reducing carbon footprints within the region.

As Austin Energy continues to navigate the complexities of energy generation and environmental responsibility, the utility remains focused on enhancing its renewable energy portfolio.

The integration of emerging technologies and energy storage solutions is expected to play a crucial role in increasing the reliability and sustainability of renewable energy sources.

In conclusion, Austin Energy's efforts to expand its solar footprint are part of a larger strategy to transition to a more sustainable energy future.

By balancing the need for immediate energy solutions with long-term environmental goals, the utility aims to lead the way in renewable energy development in Texas while addressing community concerns about air quality and environmental justice.

Austin Energy Aims to Expand Solar Energy Capacity

austin-energy-aims-to-expand-solar-energy-capacity

The Department of Justice is investigating six Democratic lawmakers who appeared in a video urging military personnel to disobey illegal orders. The inquiry has drawn accusations of political harassment from the lawmakers, who assert they were merely restating legal principles.

## DOJ Interviews Democratic Lawmakers Over 'Illegal Orders' Video

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has initiated interviews with at least four Democratic lawmakers involved in a controversial video that encourages military and intelligence personnel to disobey illegal orders.

This investigation follows a request from the FBI, which first contacted the Senate and House sergeant-at-arms in November regarding the six lawmakers featured in the video.

The video, which has been labeled as "seditious" by President Donald Trump, features Senators Elissa Slotkin of Michigan and Mark Kelly of Arizona, along with Representatives Jason Crow of Colorado, Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania, Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire, and Chris Deluzio.

The lawmakers argue that their message was a lawful reminder of the rights of service members, while the Trump administration views it as a dangerous challenge to presidential authority.

Slotkin confirmed that she and her colleagues have been contacted by the DOJ for formal interviews.

She expressed her readiness to cooperate, stating, "To be clear, this is the president's playbook.

Facts don't matter, and anyone who disagrees with him becomes an enemy." Slotkin also highlighted the intimidation tactics she has faced since the video's release, including bomb threats and harassment directed at her family.

Crow echoed Slotkin's sentiments, accusing Trump of using federal resources to intimidate political opponents.

He stated, "I won't be intimidated and will keep fighting to uphold my oath to the Constitution and defend our country." Houlahan also criticized the investigation, asserting that it is an attempt to silence dissenting voices.

The DOJ's investigation raises questions about the legal implications of the lawmakers' actions.

While it remains unclear what specific crimes, if any, are being investigated, Trump has suggested that the lawmakers' behavior could be classified as "seditious." This characterization has been met with strong pushback from the lawmakers, who maintain that they are simply advocating for adherence to the law.

Topic

US

Recent articles:

Senate Votes Against War Powers Resolution on Venezuela

Trump Claims Iran Executions 'Stopped' Amid Ongoing Protests

Texas Democrats Demand Investigation into Elon Musk's AI Chatbot

Supreme Court Allows Candidates to Challenge Election Laws

U.S. Economy Shows Strength Amid Inflation Risks and Key Updates

Trump Reiterates Desire for Greenland After High-Stakes Meeting

Austin Energy Aims to Expand Solar Energy Capacity

DOJ Interviews Democratic Lawmakers Over 'Illegal Orders' Video

Trump Declares Economic Boom Amid Rising Consumer Prices

Hegseth Unveils Plans to Transform DOD's AI and Tech Hubs

Fact-Checking Trump's Detroit Economic Club Speech

Federal Judges Approve California's New Democratic Map for 2026

Cygames Launches AI Studio Amid Player Concerns

Minneapolis Fed's Neel Kashkari Highlights AI Investment's Economic Impact

Trump's Credit Card Interest Cap: A Risky Economic Gamble

CES 2026: Media and Entertainment Move Beyond AI Hype

Understanding Trump's Travel Ban: A Country Guide

Stock Market Declines Amid Positive Bank Earnings and Iran Tensions

Trump Administration Cancels Mental Health Grants in New Hampshire