Thursday, July 23, 2026

The Snapshot

Thursday, July 23, 2026.  An Epstein associate turns up dead, the price of oil per barrel soars, Chump continues his war on Iran and the American economy, and much more. 





Iranian attacks on nine U.S. locations across the Middle East in the two weeks since the cease-fire broke down show that the country maintains an ability to inflict damage on precise targets, despite the Trump administration’s repeated claims that Iran’s military capabilities have been diminished or destroyed.

A New York Times visual analysis of U.S. military bases and other sites found the strikes have caused damage to living quarters and working areas, drone shelters, radar systems and other structures.

One of the attacks, on Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan, killed three U.S. soldiers and wounded others. A military official told The Times that nearly a dozen troops were also wounded severely enough by Iranian missile and drone attacks in Jordan and other countries this month that they were flown to a U.S. military hospital in Germany for treatment.


And the price of oil is climbing.  Steve Kopack (NBC NEWS) reports:

The price of oil surged nearly 5% on Wednesday as U.S. officials talked down the chance of new peace talks after an 11th straight night of strikes on Iran and with major disruption now facing two of the world’s key supply routes.

International Brent crude oil rose almost 5% to more than $95 per barrel for the first time in almost six weeks. U.S. crude oil rose more than 4% to more than $88 per barrel.
While Brent is widely considered the international oil benchmark, it also influences U.S. gas prices.

Those pump prices rose again Wednesday, extending their climb above $4. The national average price per gallon rose 5 cents from Tuesday to $4.06 per gallon, according to AAA data tracked by NBC News.


Leo Sands (NYT) adds, "The price of oil surged to $98 a barrel on Thursday morning, as Iran’s Houthi allies in Yemen claimed strikes on two Saudi tankers in the Red Sea, and neither the United States nor Iran showed any letup in their fighting."  98 dollars a barrel.  And when he started this war of choice,  he claimed it would only last days. 



Desi Lydic: You might remember back in March when President Trump quickly launched his quick war in Iran and conservative media told you how quick it was quickly going to go 

THE DAILY SHOW then offered a clip fest of TV MAGAs repeatedly claiming that the war was over and over.  


No, this is not what Chump promised as Steve Benen (MS NOW) reminds:

Around this time two years ago, then-candidate Donald Trump seemed to recognize the political potency of energy prices as a campaign issue, which led the Republican to make some rather specific promises.

“We intend to slash prices by half within 12 months, at a maximum 18 months,” he said in August 2024. Trump went on to claim, “We’re looking to cut them in half, and we think we’ll be able to do better … You will never have had energy so low as you will under a certain gentleman known as Donald J. Trump. Have you heard of him? So we think your energy bills will be down by 50% to 70%. How good would that be?”

In theory, it would have been quite good indeed. But this week, his presidency hit the 18-month mark, and it’s clear that he’s failed spectacularly to deliver on his promise.

That's all Chump ever offered: Empty and meaningless words from a serial liar.  



President Donald Trump’s net approval rating has hit its lowest level ever, according to a new poll.

The survey, conducted by the American Research Group between July 16 and 20, revealed that a total of 30 percent of Americans approved of Trump’s handling of his job as president, while 67 percent disapproved. This gave Trump a net approval rating of -37 percent, his lowest rating yet.

 

And even MAGA is catching on.  Megan Messerly (POLITICO) reports:

Half of President Donald Trump’s MAGA base thought the Iran war was worth its economic costs in May. Now, just a little more than a third do.

That precipitous, 13-point drop in just two months, according to a new POLITICO Poll, reveals how the president’s most die-hard supporters are starting to agree with the majority of Americans who have long opposed the U.S.’ involvement in the war.
Additionally, 37 percent of self-identified MAGA Trump voters say the U.S. should continue its involvement only if it doesn’t increase costs, up from 29 percent who said the same in May, according to the survey, conducted by independent polling firm Public First. Nearly 1 in 5 MAGA voters believe that the U.S. should end its war in Iran, regardless of the costs.


Survey analyst G. Elliot Morris reports voters aren’t falling for President Donald Trump’s scheme to blame oil companies for high prices. They know it’s the president’s fault — and they think we’re here because he’s nuts.

The national average price of gasoline is back above $4 a gallon as fighting with Iran resumed in recent weeks, reports Morris. Rather than haggle out a lasting peace accord for the war Trump started, Trump’s response has been a well-lauded proposal to hunt down price-gougers with a probe of oil companies, despite oil companies warning Trump what his Middle Eastern aggression would do to prices.
“Polls suggest voters aren’t buying the ruse,” said Morris. “In our latest Strength In Numbers/Verasight poll, fielded July 14–17, 51 percent of Americans say Trump and his administration are most responsible for the price of gas right now, whereas 12 percent put the blame primarily on oil and gas companies.”


Behaving erratically and coming off unhinged, Chump has earned a reputation.  Kathrine Frich (DAGENS) reports:

When a former leader returns to power, voters watch closely to see if the second act matches the promises.

A year and a half into this sequel, public opinion has started to solidify.

A newly released survey asked citizens to sum up the commander-in-chief, and the top choice is stark.
According to YouGov polling cited by Daily Express, most Americans choose the word “dangerous” to describe Donald Trump.

Fifty-two per cent of respondents picked that exact term. The numbers do not improve much from there.
These divides arrive at a truly difficult moment. The president is sitting at a negative 24 per cent net approval rating.

That figure is worse than his polling numbers at the exact same point in his first term.

Voters are frustrated by recent controversies, including the sluggish release of the Epstein files. Global living costs have also skyrocketed amid the Iran conflict.

And on the topic of oil and our serial liar, what about Venezuela?  Will Neal (DAILY BEAST) reports:

Donald Trump is facing intense scrutiny over the billions his administration has raked in from Venezuela that now appear to have vanished into thin air.

Analysis by the Financial Times suggests the White House has brought in $13 billion from Venezuelan oil sales so far after capturing despot Nicolas Maduro in January and installing vice president Delcy Rodriguez in his place.
The raid saw the U.S. seize control of oil exports in Venezuela, which account for as much as 25 percent of the country’s GDP.

Trump, 80, also eased sanctions against the regime, which the FT notes was “expected to provide a major boost” to Venezuela’s economy, which was struggling “even before last month’s devastating earthquakes.”

The White House has been unclear on the oil money. An executive order said any oil funds would remain Venezuelan property, and be held in U.S. accounts in a “custodial capacity.”
But Trump has said the U.S. is “making a lot of money” from Venezuelan oil, and the U.S. Department of Energy has said the funds “will be disbursed for the benefit of the American people and the Venezuelan people.”

Economists told the newspaper that any evidence of a recovery in Venezuela six months after Maduro’s capture remains “relatively muted,” suggesting a significant share of the $13 billion seized by the U.S. may not have made its way back to the country.
“Trump’s invasion of Venezuela has been about oil, power, and graft from the very beginning, with billions of dollars in Venezuelan oil revenue being controlled by the Trump administration without transparency or safeguards,” Democratic Rep. Joaquin Castro, 51, told the FT.

Malcolm Ferguson (THE NEW REPUBLIC) observes, "It seems clear that the most corrupt president in history is withholding oil revenue from Venezuelans who badly need it, as oil makes up nearly a quarter of the entire country’s GDP. In January, Semafor reported that Trump would be keeping proceeds from the first $500 million sale of Venezuelan oil in an offshore bank account based in Qatar. It might be worth checking up on that account."  Back in June, Roxanna Vigil sounded the alarm at the Council on Foreign Relations:

In the first four months of the United States exerting control over Venezuela’s oil exports, almost one hundred million barrels of oil worth an estimated $8 billion have flowed through a process marked by no transparency and minimal oversight. While the Trump administration has repeatedly framed this control as benefiting both countries, it has not publicly disclosed how much Venezuelan oil it has sold, how much revenue it has collected, or how it has used those funds since seizing control of the country’s oil exports following the January 3 military intervention that deposed Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro.
Based on tanker-tracking data from Bloomberg and reports on discounts applied to Venezuelan crude, the estimated value of U.S.-controlled oil exports has increased from $600 million in January (about 380,000 barrels per day) to about $3.7 billion in April alone (about 1.1 million barrels per day). The largest recipients of Venezuelan oil since January 3 have been the United States (43 percent), India (26 percent), and Spain (8 percent).

[. . .]

Venezuela’s state-owned oil and gas company, known as PDVSA, has not published oil revenue figures since 2016, and the Trump administration has not publicly disclosed the exact figures it controls. It is also unclear who within the administration oversees those funds. Trump said he would control the revenue when he announced the first fifty-million-barrel tranche on social media just days after Maduro’s ouster. However, Executive Order 14373, which establishes Foreign Government Deposit Funds as property of the Venezuelan government held in custody by the Treasury Department, indicates that the secretary of state will give the Treasury instructions for disbursements.

Except for a few details shared with Congress and in Executive Order 14373, the Trump administration has provided almost no information on the system it has established to sell Venezuelan oil, collect the revenue, and use the funds. The administration has also not released the written agreements it has entered into with the Venezuelan government, traders, buyers, banks, and other entities involved in the process. Both Rubio and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent separately committed to Congress to share a copy of the written agreements governing U.S. control of Venezuelan oil exports, though it is unclear whether those copies were delivered to Congress, and no copies have been made public.

Despite Rubio’s insistence before Congress that commodities trading companies Trafigura and Vitol were a “short-term fix” to quickly sell the first tranche of oil, both companies—each of which has a history of bribery schemes related to oil sales—remain involved in Venezuela five months later. A third trader, GE Warren, has since entered the picture, and the Trump administration has offered no explanation for their ongoing role. In mid-April, the State Department witness told Congress that accounting firm KPMG would conduct quarterly audits of how Venezuelan oil revenues are being spent, to include a retrospective audit “from the beginning,” but said he did not know when the reports would be available.


Chump's war on Iran continues the destruction of the US economy that Chump began with his ill advised tariffs.  Jobs are not being created.  This topic was addressed yesterday on USA TODAY's podcast THE EXCERPT:

Dana Taylor:  The unemployment rate fell in June and normally that's good news, but economists are saying - not so fast. The US added just 57,000 jobs in June while previous months were revised down. Also, the labor force participation rate fell.  In other words, the job market may look steadier on paper than it really is. Hello and welcome to USA TODAY's The Excerpt. I'm Dana Taylor. Today is Wednesday, July 22nd, 2026. Here to dig into the numbers and explain what's really going on is USA TODAY Money Reporter Rachel Barber. It's so good to have you here, Rachel.

Rachel Barber:  Yes, thanks for having me, Dana.

Dana Taylor:  So let's start with the basic tension in this latest jobs report. The unemployment rate fell in June, but economists say that may have happened for the wrong reasons. Why?

Rachel Barber:  So the unemployment rate, if you break it down, is really just a function of how many people are unemployed that would like to be employed. And so what economists are saying is given the fact that the labor force participation rate fell, which the labor force participation rate is just a fancy way of saying the percent of people 16 and older who are looking for work or working, saying because that fell, the unemployment rate dropping from 4.3 to 4.2 percent is most likely more so a function of the fact that people have just stopped applying for jobs rather than the fact that a lot of people are getting hired. So that's a troubling sign in what would usually be considered a bright spot in this jobs report.

Dana Taylor:  Rachel, I mentioned that the US added just 57,000 jobs in June or previous months were revised down. Just how weak is that number?

Rachel Barber:  So when you compare it to other months this year, the US has added well over 100,000 jobs. In the prior three months, for example, we saw negative job growth or job losses in February, but every other month this year has been positive. But when you compare it back to 2025, for example, the US added only 181,000 jobs over the entire year.  So in a way, this is kind of on track or even a little bit of an improvement from the averages we saw last year, but also last year was a historically weak year for hiring in the United States. So kind of depends on your timeline, but for the most part, this is a weak print.



The number of Americans not working has climbed to a record high under President Donald Trump.

According to figures from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, the ranks of Americans classified as “not in the labor force” (NILF) swelled to 105.8 million in June, marking the highest level ever recorded.

That means the total number of Americans classified as “not in the labor force” is now higher than it was during the Great Recession or the COVID-19 pandemic.
The category includes everyone age 16 and older who is not working, from retirees and students to people who have stopped looking for a job.

About 5.3 million Americans—roughly 5 percent of the total—are no longer searching for work because they have become discouraged. Another 23.3 million, or around 22 percent, are out of the workforce due to long-term illness, disability, or other benefit programs.
[. . .]
The economy added just 57,000 jobs in June—barely half of the 115,000 economists had expected. The Labor Department also sharply revised previous figures lower, reporting 31,000 fewer jobs were created in April and another 43,000 fewer in May than originally estimated.

One of the biggest drags came from the leisure and hospitality sector, which lost 61,000 jobs in June instead of ramping up for the busy summer travel season.

Yesterday on MS NOW's MONEY POWER POLITICS WITH STEPHANIE RUHLE, the topic of tariffs was addressed as well as today's economy. 



As Stephanie pointed out, manufacturing jobs are decreasing under Chump and Hugh Cameron (NEWSWEEK) notes:


President Donald Trump’s administration is taking credit for a manufacturing “renaissance” in the United States, though data on employment gains since he returned to office last January tell a less triumphant story.

Reviving and restoring America’s migrating manufacturing base was one of the marquee pledges of Trump’s successful 2024 campaign. And this aim has been used as a justification for many of his policies, notably tariffs but also his signature tax legislation—the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA)—that was signed last July.
[. . .]
But despite this conviction, payroll figures from the Department of Labor tell a slightly different story, with manufacturing employment having declined by 75,000 roles since his inauguration, compared to significant gains made under his predecessor.
[. . .]
Other industry groups have blamed the legislation for wiping out jobs in many sectors, such as the pro-clean energy advocacy group E2, which in a recent analysis estimated that this had cost the country nearly half a million jobs and hundreds of billions of dollars in energy investments and tax revenue since being signed into law.

And payroll figures from the Department of Labor likewise show that manufacturing employment has declined rather than improved since Trump returned to office. The economy added around 3,000 manufacturing roles last month, though this modest gain is one of the few positive readings over the past year and a half.

All told, the economy has lost 75,000 manufacturing roles between January 2025 and June of this year. 




Turning to Todd Blanche, America's acting Attorney General who wants to become Attorney General so badly that he's apparently saying whatever he thinks his listener wants to hear in private. Jennifer Bendery (HUFFINGTON POST) reports:

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche is disputing he told Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) that he “made a mistake” by creating a $1.7 billion slush fund for payouts to people claiming they were wronged by the government, like Jan. 6, 2021 rioters.

Durbin, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, shared this tidbit with reporters last Tuesday, right after a meeting with Blanche. He and a top aide, who attended the private meeting with Blanche, even said it was a direct quote.
But in his written responses to follow-up questions from the committee, where he’s awaiting a vote to be confirmed to his post, Blanche denied Friday that he said that.

“In our meeting this week, you said, ‘I made a mistake’ by creating this slush fund,” Durbin asked in his written questions. “Do you stand by this characterization of this slush fund?”

“I contest the accuracy of this statement,” Blanche replied.

Claude Wooten (2PARAGRAPHS) reports on Blanche's interaction with another US senator:

President Trump’s acting Attorney General Todd Blanche repeatedly refused to answer written questions posed by U.S. Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC) regarding the development of the Department of Justice’s $1.776 Billion “anti-weaponization” fund. Along with other inquiries, Tillis asked who was involved and who determined the amount of the fund.
[. . .]
Political scientist Norman Ornstein, an emeritus scholar at the conservative think tank American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C., replied: “Blanche is daring @SenThomTillis to vote against him. It is a real test of Tillis's spine and moral character. He knows full well how utterly unqualified and dangerous Blanche is. If he provides the vote to confirm this monster, that will be the act that defines his public service.”


Blanche appeared Wednesday of last week before Durbin, Tillis and other members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. It did not go well.  His efforts to clarify issues since have also not gone well.  Also not going well?  His efforts to avoid the judge's ruling in Katie Phang's case.   Henry Giardina (QUEERTY) reports: 

Journalist Katie Phang has stayed on the DOJ’s neck since the first Epstein file release. This April, she filed suit against Todd Blanche for failing to release the files in exact accordance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act. The suit wasn’t only about the estimated 3 million Epstein files that remain under wraps: it called out the shocking redactions made seemingly without any motivation other than helping Tr*mp keep his reputation afloat.
Now, less than a month after Phang won her case, we’re finally getting some answers around Blanche and the FBI’s role in redacting the names of powerful men in the files, while leaving victims exposed and vulnerable to attack.
It should surprise exactly no one to learn that in training videos created to guide FBI agents through the redaction process, protecting Tr*mp was detailed as the most important priority in blacking out identifying names.

On a new episode of Phang’s podcast on the MeidasTouch network, Phang interviews The Daily Beans journalist Alison Gill about the recently-unearthed training tapes, and exactly who and what they were meant to protect.
Speaking with her sources inside the bureau, Gill confirms that the training videos exist both on the classified FBI channel BeauTube and on an open, accessible site. In both cases, insiders confirmed something interesting.

“The very first instructions [to the FBI] was to hide Tr*mp and other politically popular peoples’ names,” Gill says.

Not very good news for Blanche, Tr*mp, or anyone involved in the cover-up. According to Gill, this guidance didn’t sit well with certain FBI analyists, who actually do care about victims’ safety. But their concerns apparently were not taken into consideration. Instead of being told to focus on keeping Epstein survivors and victims protected, workers in the FBI’s information management division were coached to “find, log, and redact D*n*ld Tr*mp’s name.”

This tedious work involved creating two separate spreadsheet databases detailing when, where, and in what context Tr*mp’s name showed up allegedly over 1 million times in the files.





Blanche is facing major pushback on his nomination including from Epstein survivors.  Peter Charalambous and Lauren Peller (ABC NEWS) report:

Two dozen survivors of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell's alleged abuse are again urging Republican Sens. Thom Tillis and John Cornyn to vote against confirming Todd Blanche as attorney general. 

In a letter to both senators, the group said that Blanche's recent meeting with Epstein victims was nothing more than "a box-checking exercise arranged only after his confirmation was put at risk."
"Survivors received an hour of deflection, interruption and gaslighting," the letter said. "Todd Blanche showed no remorse for the horrific release of materials that exposed survivors' identities and images. He also gave no indication that he believed there were investigative leads worth pursuing, or that he intended to seek accountability beyond Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell."
Sen. Tillis last week required Blanche to meet with the victims to secure his vote, and Blanche met with them late Thursday at the Department of Justice. Blanche described the meeting as "productive" -- saying he encouraged them to provide any information that could support an investigation -- but acknowledged they conveyed "frustration" with the process. 


Some senators may vote for him just because of their own ties to the Epstein class.  Take Susan Collins who has a long history of siding with Epstein.  Troy Matthews (MEIDASTOUCH NEWS) reports: 


Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) accepted campaign donations from known Jeffrey Epstein associates, while taking legislative action to block the release of the Epstein files. More names of Collins' donors with Epstein ties have been identified since the first MeidasTouch report.

In September of 2025, Collins accepted a $10,000 donation from Epstein associate Casey Wasserman, including $7,000 to her campaign committee and $3,000 to Dirigo PAC, a political action committee sponsored by Collins. Wasserman also hosted a Hollywood fundraiser for Collins.
Wasserman was forced to sell his business after his close friendship with Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell became public. Wasserman had taken multiple flights with Epstein and exchanged emails of a sexual nature to Maxwell, saying among other things, "I think of you all the time. So, what do I have to do to see you in a tight leather outfit?"

In another email, Maxwell asked Wasserman whether it will be foggy enough during an upcoming visit "so that you can float naked down the beach and no one can see you unless they are close up?"
Collins also accepted $2,800 from Epstein associate Leon Black. Black resigned as CEO of Apollo Global Management due to his relationship with Epstein. Black and Jeffrey Epstein knew each other for decades, “Often socialized and dined together,” and Black was a lucrative client for Epstein until Epstein’s death.
Black was accused of sexual assault by a woman interviewed by the FBI and federal prosecutors as part of investigations into potential co-conspirators of Jeffrey Epstein, but denied any wrongdoing. Black described his relationship with Epstein as one largely limited to tax strategy, estate planning and philanthropic advice.



A French professional model recruiter who for over a decade arranged for the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein to meet multiple models, was found dead at his home near Paris on Monday.

Daniel Siad’s body was found in his house in Colombes, a suburb of the French capital, Marie-Céline Lawrysz, deputy public prosecutor at the Nanterre Judicial Court, told CNN in a Wednesday statement.
An autopsy will be performed on the body to determine the cause of death.







Daniel Siad, 69, was reportedly under investigation by French prosecutors for trafficking tied to the late sex offender and for separate allegations of sexual crimes.
His attorney, Menya Arab-Tigrine, told ABC News that Siad's death was discovered by the sister of a neighbor. The attorney said she believed Siad had suffered a heart attack but was waiting for an official report.

Siad's name appears more than 2,000 times in records released by the U.S. Justice Department in response to the Epstein Files Transparency Act. His correspondence with Epstein often contained references to young women he had scouted -- in Sweden, Eastern Europe and elsewhere -- that he thought would be of interest to Epstein.
[. . .]
Siad's death comes less than a week after the BBC published a detailed story about an alleged Epstein victim, who was identified by the pseudonym "Anya." According to the article, Anya had alleged that Siad had introduced her to Epstein, which she claimed led to years of manipulation and abuse by Epstein.

She described Siad as "essentially a professional trafficker," according to the BBC.





Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche is withholding foreign-language Epstein documents that could be used to bring new charges against convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell, a legal analyst warned.

Former MS NOW anchor and attorney Katie Phang — who personally sued Blanche over Epstein file compliance and won a court order forcing him to act — made the accusation on her YouTube channel.

Her analysis was prompted by the death of modeling scout Daniel Siad, 69, found dead Monday at his home in the Paris suburb of Colombes, BBC News reported.

Siad was under French investigation for allegedly helping run Epstein's international sex trafficking network. French authorities had never interviewed him before he died, BBC News reported. Phang argued his death made the Justice Department's handling of the case more urgent, not less.
"The passage of time is hurting the ability to prosecute these cases," she explained in a broadcast on Wednesday.


Let's wind down with this from Senator Patty Murray's office:


***WATCH: Senator Murray’s full opening remarks***

Washington, D.C. — Today, at a Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee (SVAC) hearing on the future of Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) research—U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), a former chair and senior member of SVAC, delivered the following opening remarks.

Senator Murray’s remarks, as delivered, are below:

“Look, I think Senators on both sides of this aisle have a real appreciation of VA’s research enterprise, which has been at the forefront of cutting-edge science for more than 100 years, it’s led to breakthroughs like the pacemaker, the first successful liver transplant, the nicotine patch, and CT scanning. 

“But I am not sure that the Trump administration has that same appreciation. And I am very concerned the actions by this administration have demoralized VA research staff, and have created instability in research funding, and put up barriers that has slowed the research process.

“On the very first day of the Trump Administration, all VA research staff became subject to a hiring freeze and probationary firings. As a result – research at the Pittsburgh VA to predict stroke risk was put on hold, enrollment into clinical trials for advanced cancer was delayed, and a clinical trial in Florida on preventing dementia and heart disease was cancelled.

“And look, Mr. Chairman, I could go on. I have heard a lot of stories like that.

“The Department also enforced vacancy cuts and staffing caps on its facilities. Though these cuts technically exclude research staff, a study at a VA site in the Pacific Northwest was delayed because staffing caps prevented them from hiring nurses who were needed to administer that study.

“These workforce actions have also taken a toll on employees at VA’s Central Office responsible for getting new research studies up and running.

“VA researchers now report startup times for their studies often stretch to more than a year. Those delays are partially due to a wildly inefficient hiring process for VA research staff. Researchers are reporting to us that the time to hire a new member of their staff now often takes up to six months. As a result, a planned study on RSV missed its enrollment window and could not even enroll participants. Another clinical trial closed after it took six months to hire a researcher. The study’s principal investigator and its lead clinician both resigned from the VA after this debacle.

“VA researchers are not only being undermined by delays and cuts at the Department, but also by instability and cuts at other federal agencies like the National Institutes of Health, which frequently provides funding for our VA researchers. For example, a VA researcher’s NIH grant for studying opioid use disorder among minority veterans was cancelled—why? Because it was deemed ‘DEI-related.’

“Large VA research sites are also reporting their non-VA federal funding is down one-third or more compared to the previous year.

“And in one final blow to research, the Office of Management and Budget published a proposed rule that would require all federal grants, including those for VA research, to be approved by political appointees. That doesn’t make sense—let the political appointees overrule the scientist on what research is worth pursuing and funding.

“Given the current state of VA research under this administration – there is a demoralized workforce with limited access to non-VA federal funding – so it is really inexplicable to request a decrease in funding for VA research for fiscal year 2027.

“I am speaking here in place of Senator Blumenthal, but I can tell you right now as Vice Chair of Appropriations it is my intention to rip up Trump’s budget up and write a new one.

“I really hope our VA witnesses will take the concerns raised in this hearing seriously and commit to taking action to address them. If VA wants to ensure it can recruit and retain the brightest minds to conduct research and provide clinical care for our nation’s heroes, it has to work to restore the trust it has lost with many of its research staff.

“This committee and this congress should stand up for research. And it should stand up for science. And it should stand up for veterans—that’s where I am, Mr. Chairman.”

###








Posted by at