With flights grounded for nearly five hours Friday evening, Americans heard from the homeland security secretary. They heard from the transportation secretary. They did not hear from President Trump.
At least not about the nationwide ground stop, the first major crisis the federal government has faced since the midterm elections. The halt grounded or delayed some 10,000 flights from coast to coast and confirmed what experts have been warning for years: that the nation’s flight safety system is perilously fragile.
Instead, the president, who remained behind the scenes at the White House, posted messages to social media that night on other topics.
Trump has not publicly addressed Friday’s nationwide ground stop, which brought air traffic across the United States to a halt following a massive communications breakdown.
CNN’s Kaitlan Collins called the president’s silence “uncharacteristic” in a video, noting that Trump had found time to post about California Gov. Gavin Newsom, Hollywood and renovations to a Washington golf course.
House Democrats promised an investigation next year into how air traffic was brought to a standstill. “Preserve all documents and emails,” Democrats on the committee overseeing homeland security and the Transportation Security Administration wrote online. “Oversight is coming.”
Senator Tammy Duckworth of Illinois, the senior Democrat on the subcommittee overseeing aviation, demanded a thorough investigation into the F.A.A.
ROB SCHMITZ, HOST:
Pressure is growing on the Commerce Department and its Secretary Howard Lutnick over why Nvidia's chips have been allowed to be exported to China, despite national security concerns from cabinet officials and intelligence agencies.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
SCOTT BESSENT: They were in favor of putting Megaspeed on the entity list for months, but commerce has the pin. Commerce BIS has the pin, and you will have to ask them about their internal processes.
SCHMITZ: That is Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent accusing Lutnick's department of not putting Megaspeed, a Singapore-based firm with suspected Chinese intelligence ties, on the federal trade restriction list. Liza Tobin is former China director for the National Security Council in the first Trump and Biden administrations. She's here with us now to discuss this. Welcome.
LIZA TOBIN: Thanks for having me, Rob.
SCHMITZ: So you're watching this situation unfold very closely. Tell me your reaction to these accusations against Secretary Lutnick.
TOBIN: Commerce has the pen. Commerce is the agency that has been given the statutory authority by the Congress to regulate the export of these AI chips. They're the ones that write the rules. They also have a law enforcement role. Right now, the whole cover has been blown off this scandal, and Lutnick is there at the center, and it's clear that he just didn't do his job in enforcing those rules.
SCHMITZ: Why do you think that is?
TOBIN: So that is the trillion-dollar question. I think we're going to find out a lot more as Congress starts to dig into this. I think we're going to learn a lot more about, was Howard Lutnick benefiting from this regulatory capture? You know, he...
SCHMITZ: Well, I mean, we do know that Cantor Fitzgerald, a firm run by Lutnick's sons Brandon and Kyle, helps place companies that run data centers in Asia, and their firm has a financial interest in looser chip restrictions that Lutnick himself was in charge of implementing. That seems like a conflict of interest, no?
TOBIN: It absolutely looks like a conflict of interest. And what's clear is that the rest of the president's advisors - Scott Bessent, the tech advisor Michael Kratsios, the director of national intelligence Jay Clayton, Marco Rubio, and others - were all on one side of this issue, advising the president - Mr. President, we've got to close these loopholes and prevent China from accessing our compute. Remember, the president had changed the policy to say, we can sell the previous generation of Nvidia chips, the so-called H 200...
SCHMITZ: The less powerful chips.
TOBIN: That's right. But the president said we are not going to sell the Blackwell chips, at the time the most advanced. Now we know that a whole lot of these Blackwell chips have either been smuggled or they're being accessed by Chinese AI developers overseas in data centers in Malaysia. So you're absolutely right to point to Cantor's interest in seeing that data center trade continue to grow. He disobeyed the president. The president told him to address this three times, so when is that going to happen?
Roughly a year ago, Mr. Trump was briefed about how American spy agencies had surveillance of Ms. Huang, the Megaspeed executive, whom they had determined was passing information to Chinese intelligence services. The surveillance revealed that she had developed a close relationship with Mr. Huang.
It was an alarming development for national security officials who long worried that Mr. Huang was too nonchalant about concerns that his chips could fall into the hands of the Chinese military or intelligence.
Though Mr. Trump chose not to do anything with the information, it raised questions inside the U.S. government about Mr. Huang’s judgment. It also raised the possibility that Ms. Huang may have gathered insight through Mr. Huang into Mr. Trump’s thinking on artificial intelligence, a vital issue of importance to Washington and Beijing.
“On at least two occasions, President Trump was briefed by his own advisers that the U.S. intelligence community believed that this woman, Alice Huang, with whom Jensen Huang was having a close relationship, had been compromised by Chinese intelligence services. The president took no action either time that we know of, and in fact, moved to take Jensen Huang with him on a trip to China in May,” Haberman says in a new video.
Instead, Trump publicly praised Huang, and reportedly had a conversation with him behind the scenes, urging Huang to fight to keep his job. “Trump’s defense of Jensen Huang speaks not to just some personal affection that he has for the chief executive. It speaks to the fact that Jensen Huang’s company, Nvidia, has a massive, massive market share of the type of chips used to power artificial intelligence models. And President Trump has banked the success of the U.S. economy and therefore his presidency on the growth of artificial intelligence,” Haberman asserts.
Huang had very little political interest prior to the second Trump administration. Haberman notes that after President Joe Biden restricted the sale of certain chips to certain countries because of national security concerns, Huang realized a benefit in a relationship with President Trump. Their relationship grew, and Huang was personally invited to events with Trump. Huang would later announce a commitment to $500 billion in American manufacturing and praised Trump simultaneously, which gave him a leg up with Trump.
Trump’s announcement that Nvidia would be allowed to sell certain types of chips to China sparked backlash, as there was already suspicion that Trump was “essentially making a trade-off of national security in exchange for financial gain for the country,” Haberman notes. It was further complicated by rumors that some of these chips were being diverted into China illegally, which did not seem to faze President Trump or Huang. “Trump viewed Huang as somebody who was going to help lead the United States into a new frontier of technology,” Haberman said. Now, Trump is providing suggestions on Nvidia’s potential new C.E.O., further solidifying the reported alliance.
Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman signaled that he would consider quitting the Democratic Party if the caucus elected Maryland Sen. Chris Van Hollen as majority leader, citing disagreements over U.S. policy toward Israel.
Fetterman was asked Saturday on Fox News whether there was a “red line” that would prompt him to walk away from his party if it moved further to the left.
“Yeah, absolutely,” Fetterman said in a clip highlighted on X by journalist Aaron Rupar. “It would be troubling if my caucus elects someone like Van Hollen that has really made his name being very anti-hostile to Israel, you know. If you are going to be angry or hostile towards any countries in the region, why not make that, you know, Iran or Hezbollah or Hamas as well too?”
Senator Chris Van Hollen -- a lawmaker who thinks creatively about deploying congressional processes toward progressive ends -- announced Thursday night on MS NOW that he’s challenging Chuck Schumer for the post of Senate majority leader. Listen to the interview carefully, and you’ll notice that around half a dozen times, Van Hollen consciously emphasized the word “power.”
Here’s why that matters. Van Hollen is unlikely to prevail against the deeply connected Schumer. But his bid could still accomplish something important. It could force a serious discussion in the Democratic caucus about how far to go in wielding congressional power—and which authorities they’re willing to fully deploy—to check Trump’s lawlessness and derail his efforts at authoritarian consolidation, which are very much ongoing despite last week’s electoral bloodbath.
That’s the big public argument among Democrats we need right now. Because on this particular question, the party is all over the place.
Van Hollen wants his leadership bid to be understood in such terms. “I believe that we should use our full power in the United States Senate to respond to the calls of the American people,” he told MS NOW’s Jen Psaki. He cited the need to defund Trump’s Iran war as an example, saying Democrats should end it “now” because it’s “illegal and senseless.”
Even though Schumer is likely to prevail, the Van Hollen challenge is still valuable. The claim that it is bad for Democratic unity is misplaced. As Hamilton’s comment suggests, the country and the caucus majority are more populist than Schumer, who used to be known as the “Senator from Wall Street.”
Appearing with Jen Psaki on MS NOW, Van Hollen pledged to work to cut off money for the Iran war, pass a “livable minimum wage,” terminate AIPAC money, defund ICE, move toward Medicare for All, eliminate super PACs, and keep the Senate leadership out of primaries.
Democrats need to deliver on both attacking corruption and making life more affordable, and on making the connection between the two. Van Hollen would be a more effective leader than Schumer on all of these fronts. Even if he loses, his campaign will push Schumer in a more progressive direction, because of commitments Schumer has to make to get re-elected and because Van Hollen has planted a flag.
And this challenge will have useful knock-on effects. It may well make it more likely that AOC decides to run against Schumer in 2028 and end his Senate career, or that Schumer himself will pledge to retire to save his leadership position. And it means that even if Schumer survives as leader for now, his deputy and presumed heir apparent, Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI), is unlikely to succeed him.
Far from undermining Democratic unity, Van Hollen’s challenge will produce more unity of the kind that the moment calls for.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, in line to be speaker of the House, was heckled by multiple protesters in Denver Friday, calling on him to support the Green New Deal and Medicare for All.
Jeffries was being interviewed by Fox News’s Jessica Tarlov at the What’s Next conference, hosted by the Majority Democrats organization. In the middle of the conversation, Jeffries was called out by people in the crowd, calling him a “f**king liar” and “traitor” and attacking his record as minority leader.
The protesters called on Jeffries for not supporting Medicare for All and the Green New Deal, as well as for his meeting with Jared Kushner, President Trump’s son-in-law over the summer. “The American people demanded impeachment!” one protester yelled. “Your version of accountability is shaking hands with the Trump family!”
Another told Jeffries that he “better not let a single Democrat vote for BAAJA,” referring to the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act, which critics say is a giveaway to Big Oil.
If Democrats are serious about delivering for voters, they will get out of circular-firing-squad formation and ask themselves: What is the one issue we all campaigned on that unmistakably resonated with voters and, if we followed through, would instantly ease the cost of living?
The obvious answer: rolling back Trump’s tariffs.
Democrats can unify around a tariff reduction with relative ease. And many Republicans are free-traders at heart, too, so the Senate might clear 60 votes to avoid a filibuster, and maybe even have an outside shot at a veto-proof supermajority, which would require about 30 House Republicans and 11 Senate Republicans. Or, if enough Republicans aren’t willing to help, then voters will know who is standing in the way of making their gas and groceries cost less.
That said, nothing is entirely simple. Should Democrats try to repeal specific tariffs Trump has imposed or revisit the underlying laws that give the president authority to set some tariff rates? Are there tariffs some Democrats might want to keep in place? What approaches might be more likely to attract Republican support?
“There is overwhelming support for repealing the tariffs on products from Canada,” Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon, soon to chair the Senate Finance Committee, told The Wall Street Journal last week. But broader reforms may not unify Democrats, let alone garner bipartisan support. Former Representative Dale Kildee, who represented Flint, Michigan, told the Journal, “Where we do see some disagreement is on specific, targeted tariffs and trade actions,” pointing to steel and aluminum imports.
From a policy standpoint, crafting the perfect tariff-reduction bill matters far less than getting some tariff-reduction bill to the floor quickly, while Republicans reel and the public is hungry for proof their votes meant something to their wallets. Some relief is better than no relief, and Democrats should strike while the proverbial iron is hot.
If every Democrat approached this interregnum with a collaborative spirit, everyone would reap the benefits. If the next few months are rife with squabbling and gamesmanship, voter frustrations that have been directed primarily at Republicans will quickly spread to Democrats.
Voters didn’t vote to change names on office doors. They voted to lower their costs—time to act like it.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Following Veterans Day, U.S. Senators Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ranking Member of the Senate Banking Committee, announced the End Veterans Homelessness Act to help address the veteran housing crisis in California and across the country. The legislation would expand veterans’ eligibility for housing vouchers through the Department of Housing and Urban Development-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (HUD-VASH) program while reducing casework bottlenecks that prevent veterans from securing housing.
On any given night in America, nearly 32,500 veterans — including over 9,300 Californians — experience homelessness. To address this crisis, Congress created the HUD-VASH program to distribute vouchers to veterans, prioritizing those with chronic mental illnesses or substance use disorders. As of July 2026, Congress has funded nearly 116,000 HUD-VASH vouchers, but about 20,900 of these vouchers are not being utilized in part due to strict statutory requirements.
The End Veterans Homelessness Act would help veterans access these unused vouchers by enhancing the efficiency of the HUD-VASH program, broadening program eligibility, increasing oversight, and reducing bureaucratic red tape.
“Our veterans have made immense sacrifices to defend our nation, and we owe them our unwavering support, including a stable roof over their heads,” said Senator Padilla. “Too many federally funded HUD-VASH vouchers are going unused every year due to red tape and outdated eligibility requirements. The End Veterans Homelessness Act takes a critical step toward expanding access to essential housing support for veterans and honoring their immense service and sacrifice for our country.”
“No veteran should go without food or shelter,” said Senator Blumenthal. “Every year, thousands of HUD-VASH vouchers—one of our most successful tools to help end veterans homelessness—go unused. Our commonsense legislation will help ensure more housing vouchers get used and will put more veterans into stable housing.”
“Veterans who put their lives on the line to serve our country shouldn’t end up sleeping on the streets. This legislation will cut red tape in the VASH Program to ensure veterans have the assistance and support they need when struggling to find stable, affordable housing,” said Senator Warren.
Specifically, the End Veterans Homelessness Act would:
- Broaden HUD-VASH eligibility to include veterans and their families who are experiencing or at risk of homelessness and veterans who do not require intensive supportive services (and are currently ineligible for the program), while preserving priority for chronically homeless veterans and veterans with chronic disabilities;
- Allow veterans currently receiving housing assistance through other programs to transfer into HUD-VASH, freeing up limited housing subsidies for non-veterans in need;
- Adopt effective Emergency Housing Voucher program flexibilities and allow public housing authorities to use administrative fees to streamline the process; and
- Increase transparency and oversight by directing HUD to provide Congress with an annual report on voucher utilization and barriers to access, and by requiring a Government Accountability Office review of HUD-VASH and veteran housing stability across federal programs.
California Representatives Mark Takano (D-Calif.-39), Maxine Waters (D-Calif.-43), and Mike Levin (D-Calif.-49) led companion legislation in the House of Representatives.
The bill is endorsed by organizations including National Alliance to End Homelessness, National Low Income Housing Coalition, American Legion, National Federation of Federal Employees, and National Coalition of Homeless Veterans.
“We thank Senator Padilla and Representative Takano for reintroducing the End Veterans Homelessness Act,” said Ann Oliva, CEO of the National Alliance to End Homelessness. “Veteran homelessness shows what happens when the nation commits to permanent housing and the services people need to stay housed: it works. Our new preliminary 2026 point-in-time estimate shows continued progress among veterans. HUD-VASH is a big part of that success. This bill would strengthen and expand the program so more veterans can get housed, and it would bring us closer to the goal of ending veteran homelessness for good.”
“I want to thank Senator Padilla and Representative Takano for their leadership in introducing the End Veterans Homelessness Act, which would improve and expand the HUD-VASH program to allow more veterans experiencing homelessness to access permanent housing and wraparound services,” said NLIHC President and CEO Renee Willis. “The HUD-VASH program has been a critical tool for addressing and ending homelessness for hundreds of thousands of veterans. Expanding and building upon the success of the program will bring the nation closer to the goal of ending veteran homelessness and serve as a roadmap for how we can ensure everyone has a safe, affordable place to call home.”
“All veterans should be able to access the housing supports that are most appropriate for their needs and preferences,” said Kathryn Monet, Chief Executive Officer, National Coalition for Homeless Veterans. “This legislation is necessary to remove barriers to housing for veterans and to allow them to transition between programs when that is the right choice for them.”
Padilla has consistently fought to improve veterans’ access to housing and services. In July, the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act became law, which included Padilla’s bipartisan Housing Unhoused Disabled Veterans Act (HUDVA) to ensure that veterans experiencing homelessness and receiving VA disability benefits maintain access to crucial housing support. The HUDVA provision would permanently exclude disability payments received by veterans from annual income for housing assistance eligibility purposes through the HUD-VASH Program. In 2024, Padilla passed a bipartisan amendment into law to increase and streamline veterans’ access to HUD-VASH housing vouchers through the FY24 appropriations package. Last year, Padilla and Senator Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) urged VA Secretary Doug Collins to provide emergency housing and health care for veterans affected by the Los Angeles fires.
In May, Padilla announced more than $110 million in federal funding from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to support updates at Veterans Home in Yountville – which serves the needs of nearly 1,000 veterans and their families.
Padilla believes everyone deserves access to affordable and safe housing and recognizes the need to drastically increase the affordable housing stock to address the homelessness crisis facing California and the country, including through his Housing for All Act. This legislation would invest in proven solutions to address affordable housing shortages and provide a historic level of federal funding for existing programs to reduce homelessness and for innovative, locally developed solutions to support vulnerable populations experiencing homelessness.
A one-pager on the bill is available here.
Full text of the bill is available here.
###
