Vice President JD Vance is hosting senior Trump administration officials at his residence in Washington, D.C. for dinner on Wednesday evening to discuss, among other things, how the administration should handle the ongoing Jeffrey Epstein fallout and move forward, Fox News has learned.

Vance invited U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, FBI Director Kash Patel, and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche to dinner at the sprawling, 12-acre vice-presidential residence in Northwest Washington. White House chief of staff Susie Wiles is also expected to be in attendance, according to sources familiar. 

News of the dinner was first reported by CNN. It comes after weeks of unsuccessful attempts by senior Trump officials to quell mounting public pressure to release more information related to the Epstein investigation — underscoring the sticking power of the Epstein scandal, including among Trump supporters, who have been some of the leading voices demanding the release of additional information.

A spokesperson for Vance disputed the CNN report in question, which he described to Fox News as ‘pure fiction.’ 

‘There was never a supposed meeting scheduled at the vice president’s residence to discuss Epstein strategy,’ William Martin, Vance’s communications director, said in a statement. 

Two well-placed sources in the administration subsequently confirmed to Fox News that the dinner at the vice president’s residence is taking place. They said that the dinner — while not focused entirely on the Epstein fallout — will be one of the topics they plan to discuss.

The Justice Department and the White House have also struggled to coordinate their messaging on the ongoing fallout from the Epstein scandal, following the release of an unsigned July 7 memo that said they did not plan to release additional information about the investigation.

Most recently, the White House and DOJ have been at odds over whether to release an audio file and transcript from Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s interview with Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell late last month, senior administration officials confirmed.

It is unclear how long the audio footage and transcripts from the interviews between Blanche’s interview with Maxwell are, but they do exist, Fox News Digital reported yesterday, and discussions remain underway today involving whether — and when — to release the transcript.

Fox News Digital reported yesterday that DOJ officials have both the audio and transcript from Blanche’s interview with Maxwell, which took place over two days at the U.S. Attorney’s office near the Federal Correctional Institution in Tallahassee, Florida, where Maxwell had been serving out a 20-year prison sentence for sex trafficking.

Maxwell was transferred last week without explanation to a new, minimum-security women’s federal prison camp in Texas.

Anything released by the Trump administration would almost certainly involve heavily redacting any identifying information of individuals named in the transcript in order to protect victims — something Bondi has stressed in public on multiple occasions.

News of Vance’s dinner prompted fresh concerns from family members of one Epstein victim, Virginia Roberts Giuffre, who committed suicide earlier this year. 

‘We understand that Vice President JD Vance will hold a strategy session this evening at his residence with administration officials,’ Giuffre’s sibling said in a statement Wednesday shared with Fox News Digital. ‘Missing from this group is, of course, any survivor of the vicious crimes of convicted perjurer and sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein. Their voices must be heard, above all,’ they said.

‘We reiterate that Ghislaine Maxwell should have remained in a maximum security prison and does not deserve the luxuries currently afforded her.’

Pressure to release information has been unrelenting in the weeks since July 7, when the Justice Department said in an unsigned memo that it did not plan to release more information about the investigation. The Justice Department and FBI also said that investigators had not found a so-called ‘client list’ from Epstein, as had been suggested widely online, and by some Trump officials earlier this year.

Asked on Fox News in February about news that the DOJ would release ‘the list of Jeffrey Epstein’s clients,’ and when that would happen, Bondi replied, ‘It’s sitting on my desk right now to review.’ 

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt later said Bondi had been referring more broadly to all the files related to Epstein, and not a single list.

The Department of Justice made a sweeping request to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence this week for more information about allegations of a 2016 conspiracy to tie President Donald Trump to Russia, marking the next step in the department’s grand jury inquiry into the matter.

A DOJ prosecutor asked the ODNI for a range of documents to supplement Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard’s recent request to the DOJ to investigate Obama administration officials over the alleged conspiracy. The Federalist first reported on the prosecutor’s request. A source familiar with the request confirmed the veracity of the report to Fox News Digital.

The prosecutor requested in a letter to the ODNI a dozen categories of items, including any nonpublic material Gabbard had pertaining to the tranche of declassified documents she made public in July. 

Gabbard also revealed Tuesday night on the Ingraham Angle that she had met that day with the DOJ prosecutors involved in the grand jury inquiry. Gabbard said they ‘have more questions, and they’re going to be really taking a deep dive into this again.’

‘They are committed to leaving no stone unturned as they conduct this grand jury investigation and find the truth,’ Gabbard said.

The revelation that a meeting had occurred and that a DOJ official leading the grand jury inquiry is seeking records from the ODNI signals that the probe is underway and in an information-gathering phase. 

Grand jury investigations are conducted in secret and can take days, weeks or longer to conclude. Prosecutors present the grand jury with evidence, and the panelists on the jury are tasked with deciding whether probable cause exists to charge someone with a crime. Obtaining an indictment against a person through a grand jury is generally much easier than the subsequent process of securing a conviction against them.

Fox News Digital first reported on the existence of a grand jury investigation related to Gabbard’s intelligence on Monday, but it remains unclear whom is being targeted in the investigation or what criminal charges could be on the table and still within the statutes of limitations.

Gabbard has alleged that newly declassified evidence shows that President Barack Obama and his national security officials, including John Brennan, James Comey and James Clapper, had forgone typical protocols to compile a faulty intelligence product after President Donald Trump won the election in 2016 that undermined his election win.

Gabbard alleged that the intelligence laid the ‘groundwork’ for the Trump-Russia narrative that loomed over much of the president’s first administration. Trump’s first presidency was dominated by two-year-long special counsel inquiries surrounding Russia’s involvement in the 2016 election, but neither special counsel identified a conspiracy among Obama officials like the one Gabbard has now alleged.

The DOJ official’s letter to ODNI this week also included a request for information about any intelligence community investigations into media leaks, signaling that those could also be part of the grand jury probe. Gabbard has claimed the media obtained information through the Obama administration that helped to falsely attribute Trump’s win to Russian interference in the election in the eyes of the public.

Obama recently rejected Gabbard’s allegations through a spokesperson in a rare statement.

‘Out of respect for the office of the presidency, our office does not normally dignify the constant nonsense and misinformation flowing out of this White House with a response,’ the statement said. ‘But these claims are outrageous enough to merit one. These bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction.’

Russia narrowly avoided an armed skirmish with Romania, a member of the NATO alliance, after striking just a half mile from its border. 

Romanian defense officials believe the new law passed by parliament explicitly allowing its armed forces to shoot down Russian drones that fly over its territory prevented the Kremlin from incurring on its territory. 

Russia struck a gas distribution center in the Ismail Area of Ukraine with Shahed kamikaze drones on Tuesday and Wednesday, so close to Romania’s border that Bucharest deployed F-16 aircraft to monitor. No unauthorized intrusions were reported. 

‘They know we passed this law, and in the last two months they have avoided crossing into our airspace,’ one Romanian defense source told Fox News Digital. 

Ilie Bolojan, Romania’s then-acting president, signed the law, which Romanian parliament had passed in February in response to Russian drones spilling over into its territory during attacks on Ukraine. 

The law specifies that Romanian authorities must establish the drone’s position and identity, attempt contact, intercept and fire warning shots, before neutralizing it. 

Piloted vehicles can only be destroyed if they conduct an attack or respond aggressively. 

Romania shares a 380-mile-wide border with Ukraine, though at this time there is no evidence Moscow has deliberately targeted its territory. 

Ukraine typically receives gas through the Orlovka gas distribution center in Izmail from Greece, Turkey and Romania. 

If Russia had incurred into Romanian territory and Romania responded by shooting down its drones, a tit-for-tat escalation risks drawing a NATO member state directly into the war.

NATO allies agree to Article 5, a collective defense pact that states each would come to the aid of the other in the case of an attack. 

Earlier this week, drones believed to originate in Belarus, a client state of Russia, landed in Lithuanian territory. 

Other eastern European states have enacted new laws to fortify their borders from the threat of Russia: Poland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania pulled out of an international treaty banning the use of landmines over humanitarian concerns earlier this year. 

Lithuania this week asked NATO to help strengthen its air defenses after a Russian drone carrying explosives entered its territory. 

‘This is not just Lithuanian airspace, not just Lithuania’s security — it is NATO airspace, NATO security and also EU security,’ foreign minister Kęstutis Budrys said. 

A Senate Republican renewed his push to federalize Washington, D.C., following an attack on a former Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) staffer and President Donald Trump’s threat to put the District under federal control.

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, has long called for control of Washington to fall under Congress, going so far as to introduce the Bringing Oversight to Washington and Safety to Every Resident (BOWSER) Act, named after D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, in an effort to combat crime in the District.

The bill, which Lee introduced alongside Rep. Andy Ogles, R-Tenn., has not made it out of committee since being dropped in February. But Trump’s highlight of an attack against former DOGE staffer Edward Coristine, also known as ‘Big Balls,’ has resurrected the discussion.

‘The Constitution already federalizes D.C.,’ Lee said on X. ‘We just need Congress to do its job — and reassert its lawmaking power over our nation’s capital city. My bill, the BOWSER Act, would do that.’

Fox News Digital reached out to Lee for further comment.

Lee’s bill would effectively repeal the District of Columbia Home Rule Act, a law passed in the 1970s that established a city council and mayor and reduced the amount of oversight that Congress has over the city and its affairs.

But calls have grown by lawmakers over the years to increase Congress’ oversight of the city, largely centered on concerns over increased crime and criticisms of attempts to rewrite the District’s criminal code.

And Trump jumped into the discourse, too, threatening that if ‘D.C. doesn’t get its act together, and quickly, we will have no choice but to take Federal control of the City.’

‘Perhaps it should have been done a long time ago, then this incredible young man, and so many others, would not have had to go through the horrors of Violent Crime,’ Trump said on his social media platform, Truth Social. ‘If this continues, I am going to exert my powers, and FEDERALIZE this City.’

Fox News reached out to Bowser’s office for comment but did not immediately hear back.

Zack Smith, a senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation and a former prosecutor, told Fox News Digital that in the past, the D.C. council has pushed ‘policies that have made it much more difficult for law enforcement, for prosecutors, to do their jobs and keep citizens safe.’

Bowser and the D.C. Council have, for several years, worked to update the District’s criminal code. However, changes to the code that would have severely lowered sentencing for a variety of crimes that were at first vetoed by Bowser were on the precipice of becoming law before Congress and former President Joe Biden overrode the reforms.

Smith noted that Congress still has the authority to legislate the District, meaning that lawmakers and the federal government are ‘still the backstop,’ and that both Trump and Lee were right to call for a ‘reevaluation of the District’s status.’

‘That’s why Congress was able to step in and overturn that proposed radical rewrite of the Criminal Code,’ he said. ‘And so what the BOWSER Act would actually do, if it repeals home rule, it would essentially change the way the local D.C. government functions. It might involve Congress and the Federal Government taking a more direct role.’

‘I think there is broad and in some ways bipartisan consensus that the current system in D.C. is not working as it should,’ he continued. 

The horse race for the next open Senate seat in Tennessee is already kicking off after Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., announced a bid for the governorship earlier Wednesday.

Tennessee Republican Reps. Andy Ogles and Tim Burchett both told Fox News Digital they’re interested in Blackburn’s seat.

Ogles said, ‘Absolutely,’ when asked if he would consider a push for Congress’ upper chamber. Burchett noted that any such situation was a ‘long ways off’ but confirmed he was looking at it as well.

Blackburn just won re-election for her second term in the U.S. Senate in the November 2024 cycle.

If she ran for governor and won, Blackburn would have to vacate her seat – setting up a potential power vacuum in the Volunteer State.

Tennessee law grants the governor the ability to appoint someone to fill Senate vacancies until the next regularly scheduled election.

That means that if Blackburn leaves by 2026, her successor would be tapped to serve until 2031. 

Both Ogles and Burchett said they would be interested in running for the seat in the 2030 election cycle if appointed to the upper chamber.

But it could very well be up to Blackburn to choose her successor, depending on when she hypothetically resigned from the Senate.

Tennessee state law does not specify when she has to step down from the Senate, according to local outlet Knox News.

If the vacancy occurred before Blackburn stepped down, the decision would likely fall to term-limited Gov. Bill Lee. But Lee could leave the decision to Blackburn if she resigned after being sworn in to take his place.

‘Trump is back, America is blessed, and Tennessee – better than ever,’ Blackburn said in a video announcing her campaign launch on Wednesday. ‘I love Tennessee, I believe in Tennesseans, and I’m ready to deliver the kind of conservative leadership that will ensure our state is America’s conservative leader for this generation and the next.

Her candidacy sets up a high-stakes GOP primary against her congressional colleague, Rep. John Rose.

If she wins, Blackburn would be the first female governor of Tennessee.

In a win for Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) advocates, six more states have gotten waivers allowing them to ban soda, candy and other high-sugar junk foods from being purchased through the federally funded, but state-operated Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP. 

The waivers, which amend the statutory definition of eligible food for purchase under SNAP, were granted to West Virginia, Florida, Colorado, Louisiana, Oklahoma and Texas. The new restrictions on what can and cannot be purchased will go into effect in 2026.

The six new waivers bring the number of states that have sought to restrict SNAP purchases of junk food to 12. The other states who received waivers from the Trump administration earlier this year were Nebraska, Iowa, Indiana, Arkansas, Idaho and Utah.

‘For years, SNAP has used taxpayer dollars to fund soda and candy, products that fuel America’s diabetes and chronic disease epidemics,’ Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said

‘These waivers help put real food back at the center of the program and empower states to lead the charge in protecting public health.’

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins has praised the historic efforts that states, mostly those with Republican leadership, have made to help improve the health and nutrition assistance provided through SNAP. 

On average, 42 million low-income Americans receive food stamp assistance each month, including one in five American children under 17, according to a report from the Trump administration released earlier this year.

‘It is incredible to see so many states take action at this critical moment in our nation’s history and do something to begin to address chronic health problems,’ Rollins said after the latest announcement of new waivers. ‘President Trump has changed the status quo, and the entire Cabinet is taking action to Make America Healthy Again. … These state waivers promote healthier options for families in need.’

Of the 12 states that have been granted SNAP waivers thus far, all of them will restrict SNAP funds from being used to purchase sugary drinks, including soda, while at least eight of the states have indicated plans to ban SNAP funds for candy purchases. Some states, such as Florida, Louisiana and Nebraska, will explicitly ban energy drinks as well, while others, like Arkansas, have indicated drinks with less than 50% natural juice will be banned. 

ABC News medical correspondent Darien Sutton argued the move, although pushed as an effort to improve health outcomes, lacks evidence.

‘There’s no evidence that taking away access to soda will actually fight these conditions,’ he said, according to ABC News. ‘Sugar is one of those culprits that you always have to be mindful of.’ 

Sutton pointed out that U.S. dietary guidelines recommend that men do not have more than 35 grams of sugar per day, while women are told to limit it to 25 grams per day. 

President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin appear to be on track to soon have their first meeting since Trump took office for his second term earlier this year.

‘As for Ukrainian affairs directly, at the suggestion of the American side, an agreement was agreed upon in principle to hold a bilateral meeting at the highest level in the coming days, that is, a meeting of Presidents Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump,’ aide to the Russian president Yuri Ushakov noted, according to a Russian to English translation by Google Translate of Ushakov’s comments.

‘As for the option of a trilateral meeting, which for some reason was discussed yesterday in Washington, this option was simply mentioned by the American representative during the meeting in the Kremlin. But this option was not specifically discussed. The Russian side left this option completely, without comment,’ Ushakov noted. ‘We propose first of all to focus on preparing a bilateral meeting with D. Trump and we believe that the main thing is for this meeting to be successful and productive.’

Fox News Digital reached out to the White House for comment early on Thursday morning.

The potential meeting would come as President Trump has been trying to help broker an end to the years-long Russia-Ukraine war.

‘My Special Envoy, Steve Witkoff, just had a highly productive meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Great progress was made!’ Trump declared in a Wednesday post on Truth Social. 

‘Afterwards, I updated some of our European Allies. Everyone agrees this War must come to a close, and we will work towards that in the days and weeks to come. Thank you for your attention to this matter!’

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt noted, ‘As President Trump said earlier today on TRUTH Social, great progress was made during Special Envoy Witkoff’s meeting with President Putin. The Russians expressed their desire to meet with President Trump, and the President is open to meeting with both President Putin and President Zelensky. President Trump wants this brutal war to end.’

Fox News Channel’s Peter Doocy contributed to this report

Veteran Democratic operative Anita Dunn will be on Capitol Hill on Thursday for a closed-door interview with House Oversight Committee investigators.

She is the tenth former White House official to appear before the panel’s lawyers, as Committee Chair James Comer, R-Ky., probes whether former President Joe Biden’s inner circle worked to cover up signs of mental decline in the elderly leader – and whether executive actions signed via autopen were done without his awareness.

Dunn is appearing voluntarily before the committee’s lawyers for a transcribed interview. It’s expected to begin around 10 a.m. and will likely last several hours into the afternoon.

Three of the 10 former Biden administration officials who have appeared so far have come under subpoena, and each pleaded the Fifth Amendment to avoid answering material questions.

Appearing voluntarily does not give people the ability to invoke the constitutional right against self-incrimination, but it’s possible Dunn will give House investigators little to work with.

The six former White House aides who appeared voluntarily before her have all defended Biden’s mental acuity and ability to serve as president, sources said, even as some, like ex-Chief of Staff Ron Klain, have conceded the 82-year-old’s age has worn on him over time.

Dunn, like those who appeared before her, has known Biden for years.

She’s been a key player in Democratic communications and public relations strategies for decades, and reportedly was a central figure in Biden’s messaging strategy both at the White House and during his short-lived 2024 campaign.

‘She’s running everything,’ one unnamed White House advisor told CNN in June 2023 while discussing Biden’s re-election bid.

A January 2023 report by NBC News described Dunn and her husband, former Obama administration White House counsel Robert Bauer, as central figures in Biden’s orbit. Bauer also reportedly served as Biden’s personal lawyer.

‘If it’s a room of five people, Anita and Bob are two of them,’ an unnamed former White House aide told the outlet.

Dunn was also a central figure amid the fallout after Biden’s disastrous June 2024 debate against then-candidate Donald Trump.

NBC News reported in July 2024 that Biden family members discussed whether he should fire Dunn and Bauer, though White House chief of staff Jeff Zients dismissed the reports as ‘unfounded and insulting rumors’ in a statement to the outlet at the time.

Dunn served as White House communications director under former President Barack Obama, and Biden brought her onto his 2020 campaign to help with his own communications strategy.

She also served as senior advisor to the president for communications in the Biden White House before playing a key role in his 2024 campaign.

Comer wrote in his letter summoning Dunn, ‘You served as former President Biden’s ‘most senior communications adviser.’ Former President Biden confided in you extensively over the past decade.’

‘The Committee seeks to understand your observations of former President Biden’s mental acuity and health as one of his closest advisors. If White House staff carried out a strategy lasting months or even years to hide the chief executive’s condition—or to perform his duties—Congress may need to consider a legislative response,’ Comer wrote.