Republican senators offered a range of responses when pressed on how the Trump administration has been handling the Epstein files controversy, with some calling it a distraction and others arguing the American people are ‘entitled’ to answers.

Attorney General Pam Bondi announced the ‘first phase’ of declassified files related to Jeffrey Epstein Feb. 27, noting the move was following through on President Donald Trump’s commitment to ‘lifting the veil’ on Epstein and his co-conspirator’s actions. Bondi also said the same month she was in possession of an Epstein ‘client list.’

However, the February declassification contained mostly information and files that had already been publicly available, and the Justice Department subsequently indicated that no ‘client list’ exists. Since then, a series of events, including a clash between FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino and Attorney General Bondi, have led to mounting pressure on the Trump administration to release more files. 

‘This is factual. Epstein trafficked a lot of young women, some of whom were minors. The American people are entitled to know who — if anyone — he trafficked these young women to, besides himself, and why they weren’t prosecuted,’ John Kennedy, R-La., said. 

‘Now that’s a very simple question that’s at the bottom of all of this. The Department of Justice is going to have to answer that question to the satisfaction of the American people.’

Kennedy’s call for transparency comes after the president described the Epstein situation as a ‘hoax’ while blasting Democrats and other ‘weaklings’ who continue to buy into it. 

‘Their new SCAM is what we will forever call the Jeffrey Epstein Hoax, and my PAST supporters have bought into this ‘bull—-,’ hook, line, and sinker,’ Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform last month amid mounting reports of internal division within the administration over its handling of the Epstein case 

When asked about how the Trump administration was handling the Epstein furor, Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., said he thought the situation was being used by Democrats to create a ‘distraction’ from the ongoing investigations into former President Biden and others, like the probe related to Biden’s use of an autopen tool to sign important documents and the investigation into whether Obama-era officials manufactured evidence to accuse Trump of Russian collusion.

‘Look what’s being investigated right now through the Biden administration. … So, what are they going to talk about now?’ Mullin asked. ‘This is nothing but a distraction from the actual facts that is coming out about the Biden administration. Of course, the Democrats say, ‘Well, we’re just about transparency.’ Well, where was the transparency the last four years?’

Democrats have suggested Trump could be implicated in the files, but Mullin said that if such a circumstance were true, the information would have been leaked by the Biden administration. 

Mullin’s counterpart in the Senate, Republican Oklahoma Sen. James Lankford took more of a middle ground in his response about how the administration has been handling the Epstein files.

‘The challenge is there are people that are victims that are in it, and there are folks that are not criminals that are in it as well,’ Lankford said. ‘And the challenge the Department of Justice has is you’ve got a girl that was 14, 16 years old and was abused. Well, now she’s, let’s say 26 or 30, married and has children. 

‘Maybe her family knows about this, maybe they don’t. I don’t know the situation, but we gotta figure out a way to be able to protect those folks that are genuine victims on all this as well as getting out as much information as you possibly can.’

For Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, the debate about the Epstein files was not something she was interested in talking about when approached by Fox News Digital.

‘I’m going,’ Collins responded when pressed on the matter outside the Capitol complex.

In a sweeping move aimed at rolling back pandemic-era mandates, the Trump administration on Friday directed all federal agencies to erase any records related to employees’ COVID-19 vaccination status, prior mandate noncompliance or exemption requests.

The guidance, issued by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM), was a response to recent litigation and is part of a broader push to reverse what officials have described as ‘harmful pandemic-era policies’ imposed under the Biden administration. 

‘Things got out of hand during the pandemic, and federal workers were fired, punished or sidelined for simply making a personal medical decision,’ OPM Director Scott Kupor said in a statement.That should never have happened. Thanks to President [Donald] Trump’s leadership, we’re making sure the excesses of that era do not have lingering effects on federal workers.’

Former President Joe Biden signed Executive Order 14043 in September 2021, directing federal agencies to require COVID-19 vaccination as a condition of federal employment. 

After the controversial demand, numerous lawsuits were filed by federal employees, unions and states alleging the mandate violated constitutional rights and federal labor laws.

A federal appeals court blocked enforcement of the order in 2022m and Biden repealed the mandate in May 2023, prompting OPM officials to issue a memorandum to human resources directors stating that ‘agencies should review their job postings … to ensure that none list compliance with the now revoked Executive Order 14043 as a qualification requirement.’ 

The memo also reminded agencies that the executive order could no longer be enforced.

In a memo to heads and acting heads of departments and agencies Friday, Kupor announced that, effective immediately, agencies are barred from using a person’s vaccine history or exemption requests in any employment-related decision, including hiring, promotion, discipline or termination. 

Unless an employee affirmatively opts out within 90 days, all vaccine-related information must be permanently removed from both physical and electronic personnel files.

Agencies must certify compliance with the memo by Sept. 8, according to the memo.

The White House did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.

On July 15, President Trump nominated my friend and former Gorsuch clerk colleague Eric Tung to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. If confirmed, Tung will succeed Judge Sandra Ikuta, who recently assumed senior status after a distinguished tenure. Judge Ikuta leaves behind a strong legacy, one Tung is more than equipped to uphold and extend.

Tung’s credentials are exceptional. He earned a philosophy degree from Yale in 2006 and graduated with high honors from the University of Chicago Law School in 2010. While there, he served as managing editor of the University of Chicago Law Review, one of the most rigorous legal journals in the country.

Following law school, Tung clerked for two of the most respected jurists in America: then-Judge Neil Gorsuch on the Tenth Circuit and Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. These clerkships are offered only to the legal elite. Even among that group, Tung stood out.

Although President Trump made inroads during his first term in balancing out the nation’s most liberal federal appeals court outside of Washington, D.C., of the 29 active judges, 16 were Democratic nominees. Tung replacing Ikuta won’t change that balance, but it will ensure the vacated seat remains in the hands of a strong constitutionalist.

Tung’s brilliance, ethics, and temperament have earned him bipartisan respect. A letter supporting his nomination was signed by fellow Supreme Court clerks from across the ideological spectrum, from Justice Ginsburg’s to Justice Thomas’. That level of cross-aisle support is rare and speaks volumes.

One signer, Danielle Sassoon, a former federal prosecutor who has publicly disagreed with the Trump administration, went out of her way to endorse Tung. Her support underscores how widely admired he is for his intellect and integrity, regardless of politics.

Ultimately, what really matters is Tung’s record, and it’s unimpeachable. He is a brilliant legal mind, a fair-minded jurist, and a committed constitutionalist.

Tung’s experience goes far beyond the top of the legal profession. He served in the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Policy, where he helped vet judicial nominees, giving him a firsthand look at what makes a good judge. As an Assistant U.S. Attorney in Los Angeles, he prosecuted serious criminal cases, gaining invaluable courtroom experience. Now a partner at Jones Day, Tung handles complex appellate and trial work at a national level.

Although President Trump made inroads during his first term in balancing out the nation’s most liberal federal appeals court outside of Washington, D.C., of the 29 active judges, 16 were Democratic nominees. Tung replacing Ikuta won’t change that balance, but it will ensure the vacated seat remains in the hands of a strong constitutionalist.

Despite this impeccable record, Tung’s Senate Judiciary Committee hearing was marred by partisan theatrics. Several Democrat senators ignored his qualifications and fixated instead on social media posts I had written. Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., quoted part of an old post of mine and demanded Tung ‘condemn’ it. Tung, noting the canons of judicial ethics, rightly declined to weigh in, clarifying that my opinions are not necessarily his.

Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., followed suit, hitting Tung over a post where I had labeled certain Democrats ‘evil Marxists.’ Booker then attempted to cast himself as a model of bipartisan civility, citing his friendship with Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., conveniently omitting that he once claimed supporters of Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court were ‘complicit in evil.’ Again, Tung refused to be drawn into political grandstanding, displaying the restraint and poise we should expect from a federal judge.

This guilt-by-association line of attack is dishonest and irrelevant. Tung’s record speaks for itself. Rather than engage with his legal merits, some senators tried to hijack yet another Judiciary Committee  hearing to score cheap political points. Tung never took the bait.

His nomination also highlights the double standard in how judicial diversity is treated. As the son of Chinese immigrants and a fluent Mandarin speaker, one would think Democrats would celebrate Tung at least for their sacred metrics of representation and diversity on the federal bench. But because he’s a conservative, his background is downplayed, or even used against him. The selective celebration of diversity and identity politics in judicial nominations is glaring.

Ultimately, what really matters is Tung’s record, and it’s unimpeachable. He is a brilliant legal mind, a fair-minded jurist, and a committed constitutionalist. His combination of courtroom experience, academic rigor, and ethical clarity makes him an ideal appellate judge.

The Senate should rise above political posturing and confirm Eric Tung without delay. His confirmation will not only fortify the Ninth Circuit, but strengthen the rule of law nationwide. President Trump’s reshaping of the federal judiciary with principled, constitutionalist judges will take a significant step forward with Tung’s appointment.

Eric Tung is exactly the kind of judge Americans want: sharp, steady, and scrupulously fair. The Senate must act upon its return and confirm him in September.

Mike Davis is the founder and president of the Article III Project.

Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., has condemned the Department of Health and Human Services’ move to shift funding away from mRNA vaccine development, claiming it undermines President Donald Trump’s agenda to make the nation healthy again.

‘We reviewed the science, listened to the experts, and acted,’ Department of Health and Human Services Sec. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said, according to an HHS press release.

‘BARDA is terminating 22 mRNA vaccine development investments because the data show these vaccines fail to protect effectively against upper respiratory infections like COVID and flu. We’re shifting that funding toward safer, broader vaccine platforms that remain effective even as viruses mutate.’

Cassidy registered his objection to the move.

‘It is unfortunate that the Secretary just canceled a half a billion worth of work, wasting the money which is already invested. He has also conceded to China an important technology needed to combat cancer and infectious disease. President Trump wants to Make America Healthy Again and Make America Great Again. This works against both of President Trump’s goals,’ the lawmaker said in a post on X. 

The HHS stated, ‘While some final-stage contracts (e.g., Arcturus and Amplitude) will be allowed to run their course to preserve prior taxpayer investment, no new mRNA-based projects will be initiated. HHS has also instructed its partner, Global Health Investment Corporation (GHIC), which manages BARDA Ventures, to cease all mRNA-based equity investments. In total, this affects 22 projects worth nearly $500 million. Other uses of mRNA technology within the department are not impacted by this announcement.’

Fox News Digital reached out to Cassidy’s office to request comment from the senator on Thursday, but did not receive a response by the time of publication.

Cassidy, who has served in the upper chamber since 2015, is aiming to get re-elected in 2026, though the incumbent faces competition from other Republicans who have also launched bids for the Senate seat.

In February 2021, Cassidy voted to convict Trump after the House impeachment in the wake of the January 6 episode at the U.S. Capitol. That Senate vote, which occurred after Trump had already left office, ultimately fell short of the threshold necessary to convict.

Anita Dunn is the 10th former Biden administration aide appearing before the House Oversight Committee as the panel investigates whether former President Joe Biden’s inner circle covered up evidence of mental decline, and whether decisions were signed off on via autopen without his full awareness.

Dunn is a longtime Democratic operative who has run communications for top left-wing figures and causes for decades.

She first likely engaged with Biden when serving as communications director for Senate Democrats’ campaign arm, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, in the late 1980s.

Dunn was a central figure in shaping communications policy during Biden’s White House term as well, and she played a key role in helping him prepare for re-election in 2024.

Her husband, lawyer Robert Bauer, is also known as a figure close in Biden’s orbit – having reportedly served as his personal lawyer.

‘If it’s a room of five people, Anita and Bob are two of them,’ an unnamed former White House aide told NBC News in January 2023.

But her relationship with others in Biden’s circle has reportedly been rocky at times, particularly toward the end of his four-year term.

NBC News reported in July 2024 that Biden family members discussed whether the president should fire Dunn and Bauer amid fallout from his disastrous debate against now-President Donald Trump, 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.

Her relationship with Hunter Biden in particular, the former president’s only living son, has been in the spotlight on multiple occasions.

Dunn criticized the president’s handling of his son Hunter’s pardon during an event in Dec. 2024, saying that she disagreed with the ‘timing’ and the ‘rationale,’ describing it as an ‘attack on our judicial system.’

‘Had this pardon been done at the end of the term in the context of compassion, the way many pardons will be done, I’m sure, and many commutations will be done, I think it would have been a different story,’ Dunn told a New York Times panel at the DealBook Summit 2024.

‘So, I will say, I absolutely agree with the president’s decision here. I do not agree with the way it was done, I don’t agree with the timing, and I don’t agree, frankly, with the attack on our judicial system.’

Hunter, meanwhile, recently name-checked Dunn during a tirade against Democratic operatives during a recent interview on YouTube show Channel 5.

He said Dunn ‘made $40 or $50 million’ off of work on behalf of the Democratic Party, while going further in criticism of others like David Axelrod and James Carville.

Notably, however, Dunn was among those who continued to defend Biden after his debate – while criticizing fellow Democrats’ reaction to it.

‘It was a bad debate, but it didn’t feel catastrophic at all, certainly in terms of voters,’ Dunn told Politico Magazine in Aug. 2024, noting she was watching the debate at home while monitoring voters’ reactions in real time.

‘What did change it was 24 days of unremitting negative, horrible attacks on Joe Biden. . . . From his own party and from the press,’ Dunn said.

She went further in that interview, calling the public criticism of Biden ‘bullying’ while arguing that it was led by the media rather than voters themselves.

‘[T]he data still didn’t support this at all. We were looking at it and we were not seeing huge changes. But we were seeing an environment in the press that was just unremittingly negative. And nobody was covering Trump whatsoever,’ Dunn said.

‘I went to Wisconsin with [Biden] for an event, and people felt very strongly about the bullying. They didn’t like it, and voters didn’t like it. They felt that it was unfair and that it was wrong. So you had a lot of different things going on here. You know, clearly there were leaders of the party who decided to go ahead and go very public. And that gave permission to other people to go public.’

Before joining Biden’s 2020 campaign and later his White House as a senior advisor, Dunn was known as a close ally of former President Barack Obama, having aided both his 2008 and 2012 campaigns.

Both she and her husband worked in the Obama administration. Dunn served as White House communications director in 2009 and Bauer as White House counsel from 2010 to 2011.

Dunn spent time before and after that as a consultant at public affairs firm SKDK, raising questions at the time about her influence with both outside actors and those in Obama’s inner circle.

The New York Times reported in 2012 that Dunn had visited more than 100 times since leaving her communications job there.

That report also had White House officials denying any conflicts of interest on the part of Dunn or the administration. 

After leaving Biden’s White House, Dunn moved on to play a key role in former Vice President Kamala Harris’ short-lived 2024 campaign.

She’s since returned to SKDK as a principal.

Fox News Digital’s Andrew Mark Miller contributed to this report.

The Trump administration will deliver $93 million in new food aid to 12 African countries and Haiti to fight malnutrition, the State Department has announced.

State Department spokesperson Tommy Pigott said in a Thursday press briefing that the Trump administration will treat nearly one million children suffering from malnutrition through $93 million in ready-use therapeutic food (RUTF). 

The food aid will be distributed in Haiti, Mali, Niger, Ethiopia, Sudan, South Sudan, Nigeria, Madagascar, the Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Djibouti, Kenya and Chad.

Following the announcement, Pigott was asked to square the discrepancy between the Trump administration’s revocation of visas belonging to Haitians in the U.S. and plans to potentially deport them, with the administration’s efforts to try to promote stability in the region through food assistance.  

‘Look, we’ve seen actions from this administration in order to try to encourage stability in Haiti. We’ve seen actions, announcements taken to try to go after those that are leading to instability in Haiti,’ Pigott responded. 

‘For specifics on TPS, I assume that you’re talking about whether they are afraid of [Department of Homeland Security] in terms of those specific decisions. But we have seen actions here from the State Department to try to encourage stability in Haiti.’

The announcement about new foreign nutrition aid comes after the Trump administration gutted billions from the government’s spending on foreign aid. As part of the reforms, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), the primary government agency tasked with disbursing foreign aid, was folded into the State Department.

The $93 million in new food assistance will be utilized by the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) and will run until June, according to Semafor, which spoke to a State Department official familiar with the new food aid disbursement. 

In addition to providing ready-to-eat food, the new assistance, which will all be American-made, according to the State Department, will also be used to help produce or grow more ready-to-eat food, Semafor reported.  

After a report by the Daily Mail cited ‘well-placed’ sources close to Steve Bannon who claim he is gearing up for a 2028 presidential run, the former chief strategist to Donald Trump gave a two-word response. 

‘Trump 2028,’ Bannon said in response to a report he’s seeking political advice for a potential run. The report also claimed Bannon had privately disparaged Vice President JD Vance, considered the top contender to run for the presidency on the GOP’s ticket in 2028.

A source in Bannon’s inner circle told the Daily Mail Bannon has repeatedly said he does not think Vance is tough enough to run in 2028.

However, this week, President Trump said JD Vance would most likely be his successor. He added that Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio would make a formidable ticket, noting it was ‘too early’ to discuss the matter. 

‘I thinkJD Vance would be a great nominee if he decides he wants to do that,’ Rubio said during an interview with Lara Trump.

Bannon’s two-word response was published by the conservative news outlet The National Pulse, which blasted the Daily Mail for the ‘thinly sourced story’ and argued the article was an effort to drive division within the Republican Party.

Bannon told Politico in March that ‘all I do is back President Trump and try to move the populist agenda and the America First agenda. I don’t think like a politician.’ Bannon also described the notion of him running for president as ‘absurd.’ 

In April, Bannon told News Nation that there are ‘many different alternatives’ that could permit Trump to sidestep constitutional term limits, noting in another interview the same month that ‘we have a team’ looking at those alternatives. 

Three days after Trump’s 2025 inauguration, Rep. Andy Ogles, R-Tenn., introduced a constitutional amendment that would allow the president to serve a third and final term. 

According to Congress.gov, that proposal was referred to the House Judiciary Committee but has received no further consideration thus far.

The official Trump Store continues selling ‘TRUMP 2028’ merchandise, such as a hat for $50, which has further fueled speculation about a potential Trump run for a third term.

Former President Joe Biden’s campaign team allegedly opted against a Super Bowl interview last year because of special counsel Robert Hur’s report, Fox News Digital has learned.

A source familiar with Anita Dunn’s interview with the House Oversight Committee told Fox News Digital the report, in which Hur described Biden as ‘well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory,’ factored into Biden breaking with the decades-old tradition.

But a source close to Dunn told Fox News Digital she said Biden’s team decided against doing a Super Bowl interview last year because it thought the main coverage would be about what he did with classified records and not about the president’s policy decisions. The source claimed the choice was made before Hur’s report was released.

Dunn sat with House investigators for just over five hours Thursday as Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., probes allegations that Biden’s inner circle worked to conceal evidence of mental decline in the former president.

The source familiar with her interview said Dunn also told committee staff that Biden’s inner circle came to a consensus he should not take a cognitive test, concluding it would offer no political benefit.

It comes two days after Fox News Digital was told that ex-deputy White House chief of staff Bruce Reed, who met with House investigators Tuesday, said Biden’s White House physician Kevin O’Connor called cognitive tests ‘meaningless.’

The source close to Dunn said Thursday that Biden’s team believed he would be able to pass a cognitive test, even if they saw no political benefit in one.

Dunn also told investigators she was not aware of Biden’s stutter, which he’s said he dealt with all his life, until media coverage of it in 2020, the first source said. 

‘She went on to blame the media for pushing the narrative that President Biden was old,’ the source said.

The practice of pre-Super Bowl interviews began with former President George W. Bush opting to sit for an interview before the big game in 2004 and has followed by both former President Barack Obama and President Donald Trump, though Trump also skipped out on a Super Bowl interview in 2019.

Biden sat for Super Bowl interviews in 2021 and 2022, but did not in 2023 and 2024.

In 2023, talks about a pre-Super Bowl interview fell through with Fox Corp.

Hur’s report was released publicly Feb. 8, 2024. The Super Bowl was played Feb. 11 that year.

Hur was appointed special counsel by former Attorney General Merrick Garland in 2023 to investigate whether Biden mishandled classified documents. 

Hur ‘uncovered evidence that President Biden willfully retained and disclosed classified materials after his vice-presidency when he was a private citizen’ but said it did not ‘establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.’

Given that Biden ‘would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory,’ Hur said, ‘it would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him — by then a former president well into his eighties — of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness.’

Dunn is the tenth ex-Biden administration official to appear before the House Oversight Committee.

In addition to investigating the alleged cover-up, Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., is looking into whether decisions were approved via autopen without the former president’s knowledge.

Of particular interest to Comer is the myriad of clemency orders Biden signed in the latter half of his presidency, though the former president told The New York Times last month he was behind every decision.

Dunn, like most who appeared before her, defended Biden’s mental acuity to committee investigators.

‘The president made it clear that decisions rested with him, and White House staff brought issues to him for him to decide,’ Dunn said in her opening statement, obtained by Fox News Digital. ‘I believed strongly then, and I believe just as strongly today, that Joe Biden was an effective president who accomplished many important things for the American people.’

A spokesperson for the House Oversight Committee criticized Dunn after the statement came out in the media, however.

‘It’s no surprise Anita Dunn is telling the American people not to believe their own eyes, claiming Joe Biden was sharp and ‘fully engaged.’ This opening statement, leaked to media before Ms. Dunn even delivered it, is yet another example of the absurd lengths Biden loyalists will go to defend his failed presidency,’ the spokesperson told Fox News Digital.

Fox News Digital also reached out to a representative for Biden and to Dunn’s counsel for comment.