TACO? Trump Always Chickens Out. And he did, as Mike noted last night, over the toll he was going to impose for those
traveling through the Strait of Hormuz. Jenny Gross (NEW YORK TIMES) reports:
One
day after proposing a fee for ships transiting the Strait of Hormuz,
President Trump on Tuesday said the United States would instead
guarantee safe passage to vessels from Persian Gulf states that agree to
invest in the United States.
It’s not clear how Mr. Trump’s plans would play out, and the president’s latest comments left questions unanswered.
But
the flip-flop shows how far the debate over the strait, the vital
waterway in the Middle East, has strayed from longstanding practices in
the shipping industry and underscores the level of unpredictability that
businesses working in the region are facing as the conflict between the
United States and Iran lurches back to war.
As
the cease-fire that he once hailed dissolved, Mr. Trump dismissed its
importance, saying in a radio interview that such agreements “don’t mean
much,” while outlining no new strategy for how to resolve the conflict.
The
developments left the president without a clear path forward, given
that neither bombs and missiles nor diplomatic negotiations have yielded
a palatable outcome. Oil prices surged and stocks fell on news of the
naval blockade and shipping tolls, increasing pressure again even as
many Republican lawmakers have expressed worry about the economic toll
and sought to put the focus back on domestic issues in advance of this
fall’s midterm elections.
The agreements "don't mean much"? Yet a few weeks back, at his birthday, he was insisting this same agreement was a major accomplishment. He just lies. The editorial board of THE INDEPENDENT notes:
Having declared victory against Iran some 32 times, including five in one 13-second clip in mid-March,
the president has now, de facto, gone to war again, with a carefully
pre-announced television address to the nation promised for Thursday –
clearly intending to convey the impression that a de jure announcement
that more war will follow.
Every
time Mr Trump declares the war “won”, the Iranians use their leverage to
win more concessions. Every time he reacts by launching fresh attacks,
he tanks the markets and pushes both the price of a barrel of oil and
world inflation higher, damaging America in the process. He cannot win.
To borrow a phrase so beloved by the Trump administration, he doesn’t
have the cards.
He's succeeded in damaging the economy. That's his big 'accomplishment' 111 days from the midterms and that's all he can point to as an 'accomplishment.' Nicolai Haugsted (DAGENS) reports:
Fresh
financial data released by the U.S. government shows refunds linked to
import tariffs have soared this fiscal year, following a Supreme Court
ruling that found a large portion of President Donald Trump’s emergency
tariffs had been imposed unlawfully.
According to The Guardian
via. the newly published budget figures, the U.S. has refunded $81
billion in customs duties since the fiscal year began in October 2025.
During the same period a year earlier, tariff refunds totaled just $5
billion.
A Treasury Department official said
the dramatic increase was almost entirely the result of the Supreme
Court’s February decision, with most of the repayments taking place
during May and June.
His
tariffs damaged the US economy. It increased the costs to Americans
for various goods. Tariffs are a tax. Let's hope we all learned that
lesson.
Chump, of course,
cleaned up and made at least 2.2 billion dollars last year. He's very
good at insider trading and other corrupt schemes. Eric Lipton and John Yoon (NEW YORK TIMES) report:
The
lead investor in a South Korean aluminum company that has challenged
Commerce Department penalties on certain exports from South Korea to the
United States made a $2 million payment last year to President Trump’s
holding company.
The payment by the parent company, Base Group, was revealed for the first time in Mr. Trump’s annual financial disclosure form released in late June.
[. . .]
But
historians and former government officials interviewed by The Times
said these kinds of direct financial entanglements by a president with
foreign entities — and in some cases with foreign governments — had never happened at anything close to this scale.
Most presidents in American history have taken steps to avoid even an appearance of a conflict. George W. Bush sold his stake in the Texas Rangers baseball team as he was considering a presidential run. President Reagan liquidated his stock holdings, and Calvin Coolidge was so concerned about the appearance of a conflict, he did not even want to own a home.
The
reason most presidents took the position of avoiding "even an appearance of a conflict" is because it's not enough for a public servant to have no
conflict of interest. The public servant is held to a higher standard
and are supposed to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of
interest. Chump's just an ugly thug who doesn't care if the whole world
knows he's a cheap grifter. It's why he never got anywhere in New York
upper class and had to move to Florida.
Nicole Charky-Chami (RAW STORY) reports on Chump's two grifting sons:
Donald
Trump Jr. and Eric Trump have quietly raked in billions as the Pentagon
has invested in new defense technology, according to a new Washington Post investigation published Monday.
President
Donald Trump's sons have made significant investments in
military-related startups, "further entangling the United States’
interests and the Trump family’s financial fortunes in an area with
immense stakes for national security," The Post reported.
Many of these financial investments have come as Trump returned to the White House.
"The
companies have collectively generated at least $3.2 billion in direct
government business since the sons invested and an additional $3.1
billion in future contract options," according to The Post. "Some have
gained coveted spots on shortlists of preapproved contractors that can
bid exclusively on up to nearly $200 billion in future work."
Their grift is so notorious that some are anticipating how to address it. Nick Hilden notes:
According
to former Federal Prosecutor James D. Zirin, President Donald Trump,
along with his family and officials, has been engaged in rampant
self-enrichment over the course of his second term to the point where it
may be illegal. And while Trump is likely to leverage his pardon power
to protect himself and his allies, there is one tool that may hold them
at least financially accountable: civil lawsuits.
As Zirin writes in the Hill,
“Last year was a financial bonanza for Trump, bringing in more than $2
billion. More than half of that came from crypto, even as his
administration was gutting the primary regulator of the industry. The
president is exempt from federal conflict of interest laws. But they
would prohibit other executive branch officials, and presumably their
affiliates, from profiting from their relationship with the government.”
Zirin
cites a number of recent grift endeavors by those in Trump’s orbit. His
sons, for example, “stand to reap a fortune from a billion-dollar Tungsten mining venture in Kazakhstan.
The deal is set to receive up to $1.6 billion in federal financing.
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and his sons have also joined the
party.” Then there’s the administration’s effort to eliminate
restrictions on buying guns by mail, which would enrich Don Jr. to the
tune of millions thanks to his involvement with the online gun store GrabAGun.
As
all this is going on, Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner appears to be
preparing an escape plan, buying an island in Albania, “a country
refusing extradition for ‘political offenses’ that has granted
citizenship to the indicted former New York City Mayor Eric Adams.” But
according to Zirin, “Kushner’s presence in Albania is unlikely to shield
him from civil suits.”
Civil suits, argues
Zirin, may be the only viable way to hold the Trump administration
accountable. As he notes, even if the Democrats take the House and
Senate in the midterms, impeachment will be out as the party will lack
the two-thirds Senate majority necessary for conviction and removal.
What’s more, “if the Democrats take the White House in 2028, you can
almost rule out criminal prosecutions of Trump and his flock. Trump will
certainly pardon friends and family on the way out and may even try to
pardon himself. Constitutional experts argue that a self-pardon won’t
hold water because of the venerable principle that ‘no man can be the
judge of his own cause.’ But I would like to see what our reactionary
Supreme Court does with that one. After all, they barely upheld
birthright citizenship.”
Today, Toad Blanche appears before the
Senate Judiciary Committee as he tries to make the case for confirming
him as Attorney General. Dan Rosenzweig-Ziff (REUTERS) notes:
Todd
Blanche will walk into his confirmation hearing on Wednesday carrying
baggage that might have sunk past attorney general nominees.
That
includes a client list featuring the president who nominated him, a
since-shelved $1.8 billion "anti-weaponization fund" that many
Republicans called reckless and a stack of demands from Democrats,
former prosecutors and Jeffrey Epstein survivors urging senators to vote
no after they say he botched the release of the Epstein files.
Two
Democratic senators are calling out acting Attorney General Todd
Blanche for not meeting with survivors of Jeffrey Epstein, saying
Blanche has more interest in protecting President Donald Trump “than
providing transparency to survivors.”
Sens.
Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and Patty Murray (D-Wash.) are holding Blanche
to his word from two months ago that he would meet with survivors of the
late sex trafficker. In a letter,
they said they know Blanche, who is Trump’s former personal attorney,
met last summer with other close advisers of Trump, a group they believe
is “more interested in minimizing damage to the President relating to
his personal friendship” with Epstein.
“Your
responsibility as Acting Attorney General is to pursue justice, not to
shield the President,” the senators’ letter to Blanche reads. “We
therefore expect a response no later than July 28, 2026, confirming a
date for the meeting with survivors you committed to hold.”
During
a May hearing in front of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on
Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, Blanche said he would
“absolutely” meet with Epstein survivors, adding he had already met with
several of them.
A group of 17 survivors said none of them had ever met with Blanche.
Let's drop back to the May 20th snapshot for more on Blanche's meeting with survivors:
Senator Patty Murray: So let me
move to another topic. This Dept of Justice is sending the message that
if you're wealthy. if you're powerful, if you are well-connected, you
won't be held accountable even if you abuse children. You know, it's
after Congress passed The Epstein Files Transparency Act and DOJ finally
began to release the files, your department exposed survivors' names,
their sensitive personal information and even nude photos while
redacting names of alleged perpetrators of those crimes. The message
that sends is this Dept of Justice worked harder to protect the privacy
of potential child abusers than the survivors. Your predecessor refused
to apologize to those victims but I want to give you the same
opportunity to apologize for the way the department handled the release
of these documents. Will you apologize to the survivors?
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche: When the president passed The Epstein Transparency Act, that was the only time --
Senator Patty Murray: Pardon me?
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche: When
the president signed The Epstein Transparency Act, that was when we
were legally allowed to release the files prior to the passage of the
act, which you all passed. I agree --
Senator Patty Murray: That is still not the question I'm asking.
Acting
Attorney General Todd Blanche: It was the question. You asked five or
six questions. I'm answering them in order. That was one of the
questions you asked.
Senator
Patty Murray: The question I want you to answer is: Will you apologize
to the victims whose names, sensitive personal information and even
nude photos were not redacted by your department? Will you apologize to
them?
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche: Of course. That was -- We never want to release a single victim's name --
Senator Patty Murray: That is what we are hearing.
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche: Can I answer the question, please? Is it --
Senator Patty Murray: I'm asking if you'll apologize?
Acting
Attorney General Todd Blanche: So, I -- and I just said yes, but I
wanted to -- I would like an explanation to be given to that. What-what
this act did is it required us to review over 6 million pieces of paper
in a very short period of time. And so 0.0001% we made mistakes and we
owned up to them. And the second that a victim or their lawyer told us
that we made a mistake, we pulled that document down and we put lawyers
24-7 in being responsive to victims and their lawyers to make sure that
we fixed every single problem. And so, yes, --
Senator Patty Murray: I hear your anger.
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche: I'm not angry. No, I'm not angry. I'm just making sure it's understood.
Senator
Patty Murray: I hear your anger and I will tell you who is really angry
is the people who had their nude photos released --
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche: I'm just making sure it's understood that we matter.
Senator Patty Murray: I just want to hear you say, ''I apologize to those victims.''
Acting
Attorney General Todd Blanche: So, as I just said, of course any time
that we release a victim's name that shouldn't be released, we have
failed as a Dept of Justice and so we have to do everything we can to
not fail --
Senator Patty Murray: Well, I still haven't heard the words, "I apologize to those victims."
Acting
Attorney General Todd Blanche: Well I'm trying to give you an
explanation of what happened but I don't think you're really interested
in that because you keep on cutting me off.
Senator
Patty Murray: Well I am but I have a few more questions here and I
want to know -- and I know that Senator Van Hollen raised this -- but I
want to ask will you personally commit to meeting with the survivors? I
have heard from them personally that DoJ refused to meet them and I'm
asking about you, I'm asking about the Justice Dept reaching out to them
to be heard. Not waiting for them to navigate a legal system that has
obviously repeatedly failed them so far.
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche: Can I answer?
Senator Patty Murray: Yeah, will you reach out to them?
Acting
Attorney General Todd Blanche: So, as we have said repeatedly, of
course any lawyer -- Now if the victim has a lawyer, I am not allowed to
reach out to the victim directly. You know that. But any lawyer can
reach out to the Dept of Justice. They have and I've met with many
victims and their lawyers -- as has the FBI, as has the SDNY. We will
always meet with victim's counsel and if any victim or their lawyer can
come forward to the FBGI at any time --
Senator
Patty Murray: You will always meet with victim's counsel? Well these
women -- and I've met with them and I know Senator Van Hollen has and so
many others -- they are personally so feeling abused, again and again
and again, by what happened to them originally and now what's happening
to them. I am saying to you as a human being, don't make them navigate a
system that's impossible to navigate, that has already abused them.
Reach out and ask to meet with them. That's all I'm asking.
Acting
Attorney General Todd Blanche: Wait. You're asking me to call? You
want me to personally call the victims? Is that what you are asking me
to do?
Senator Patty Murray: I can help you reach them.
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche: Oh, that would be great. Yes, because we have said from day one that --
Senator Patty Murray: And you would meet with them if I reached out to them?
Acting
Attorney General Todd Blanche: Of course, there have been members who
have done that and we immediately reach out to the victims or their
lawyers when their lawyers say they ant to do it.
That hearing was May 19th. It's now July 15th and he still hasn't met with any of the survivors.
Here's the release that Senator Murray's office issued yesterday:
Senators’ letter follows Blanche’s commitment to meet with Epstein survivors in response to the Senators’ questioning in front of the Appropriations Committee
ICYMI: At Hearing with Acting AG Blanche, Senator Murray Blasts Outrageous Creation of $1.8 Billion MAGA Slush Fund, Presses for Apology to Epstein Victims
Washington, D.C. – Today, Senator Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, and Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Ranking Member of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies (CJS), called on Acting United States Attorney General Todd Blanche to fulfill the commitment he made at the May 19, 2026, CJS Appropriations hearing to meet with Epstein survivors.
The senators’ letter comes nearly two months after Acting AG Blanche committed to meet with the survivors in response to the senators’ questioning at the hearing and nearly seven months after the first tranche of Epstein files were released by DOJ in accordance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Despite repeated attempts from the senators’ offices to facilitate a meeting, Blanche has still not done so.
The senators begin, “At the May 19, 2026, hearing of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, we asked whether you would meet with Epstein survivors if we connected you with them. You responded, ‘Absolutely.’ It has been nearly two months since then, and even though we provided the Department of Justice (the Department) with the point of contact for the Epstein survivors—and have followed up on this request multiple times—the survivors have not received the promised outreach.”
“Recently, reporting revealed that you were present at several meetings last summer in the White House Situation Room with the President’s closest advisors, confirming that the White House and the Department have been more interested in minimizing damage to the President relating to his personal friendship with Jeffrey Epstein than providing transparency to survivors and holding accountable those who may be implicated in Epstein’s crimes,” they note.
“Your responsibility as Acting Attorney General is to pursue justice, not to shield the President. We therefore expect a response no later than July 28, 2026, confirming a date for the meeting with survivors you committed to hold,” the senators conclude.
The full text of the letter is available HERE and below:
Dear Acting Attorney General Blanche:
At the May 19, 2026, hearing of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, we asked whether you would meet with Epstein survivors if we connected you with them. You responded, “Absolutely.”
It has been nearly two months since then, and even though we provided the Department of Justice (the Department) with the point of contact for the Epstein survivors—and have followed up on this request multiple times—the survivors have not received the promised outreach. Additionally, our offices have not received any substantive responses from the Department indicating when the meeting will be scheduled.
Recently, reporting revealed that you were present at several meetings last summer in the White House Situation Room with the President’s closest advisors, confirming that the White House and the Department have been more interested in minimizing damage to the President relating to his personal friendship with Jeffrey Epstein than providing transparency to survivors and holding accountable those who may be implicated in Epstein’s crimes.
Your responsibility as Acting Attorney General is to pursue justice, not to shield the President. We therefore expect a response no later than July 28, 2026, confirming a date for the meeting with survivors you committed to hold.
###
Lawmakers
are also expected to press Blanche over a now-abandoned $1.776 billion
compensation fund that emerged from the settlement of Trump's $10
billion lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service. The proposal was
initially intended to compensate Trump allies who believed they had been
unfairly targeted by the criminal justice system.
Blanche became the public face of the proposal before announcing it had been scrapped.
"We are not moving forward with the fund, period," he said.
Democrats
are expected to question whether the idea could be revived. Tillis has
separately criticized another IRS agreement granting Trump and his
family immunity from audits, a deal that has also drawn questions from a
federal judge.
Donald
Trump has resorted to begging the Senate to confirm acting Attorney
General Todd Blanche to officially run the Justice Department.
In
a lengthy Truth Social post Tuesday, the president claimed that Blanche
was responsible for the lowest murder rates in 125 years, yet that
arrests for violent crime were simultaneously “UP 100” percent.
But
the main reason Trump wants Blanche for the job came at the end of the
post. The president lauded Blanche—who prior to his stint in the Justice
Department served as Trump’s personal attorney—for representing him
throughout several criminal trials. Blanche defended Trump in his New
York hush-money case, his classified documents case, the federal 2020
presidential election interference case, as well as the Fulton County,
Georgia, RICO case.
As an apparent
reward for his ongoing loyalty, Trump gave Blanche a plum position with
the Justice Department. Since then, Blanche has utilized his office to
enact Trump’s retribution campaign
against his perceived enemies, attempted to force through the
president’s $1.8 billion taxpayer-funded slush fund, worked to squash
the Epstein files, and has even arrested local officials—such as Newark Mayor Ras Baraka—for attempting to conduct oversight of ICE’s regional detention facilities.
Other concerns on Blanche's mind? Well David Edwards (RAW STORY) reports:
Acting
Attorney General Todd Blanche faces a proposed $1,000-a-day fine for
refusing to comply with a federal judge's order to release more Epstein
files.
The motion, filed Monday by independent
journalist Katie Phang's legal team in Washington, asks U.S. District
Judge Emmet Sullivan to hold Blanche in contempt — meaning the court
would punish him for defying its order.
[. . .]
Sullivan ruled in June, as Politico reported, that Blanche had "conceded" he was violating the Epstein Files Transparency Act,
a 2025 law Trump signed requiring the full public release of Justice
Department files on convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. Sullivan
had ordered Blanche to unredact emails, release FBI interview notes, and
publish a log explaining every redaction — and Blanche refused.
"The
Attorney General refuses to review foreign-language documents," the
filing states. "He refuses to produce an explanation for his redactions.
And he refuses to produce documents he concedes contain no victim
information."
According to the
filing, when Sullivan ordered Blanche to begin reviewing
foreign-language Epstein documents that the Justice Department had never
reviewed at all, Blanche claimed he didn't have to—arguing that because
he had told Congress it was "impracticable" and Congress hadn't
complained, he was off the hook.
"This isn't how the law — any law — works," Phang's attorneys fired back.
Legal analyst Elie Honig (INTELLIGENCER) observes:
In
casting off those formative lessons cultivated and practiced by
generations of Department of Justice prosecutors across administrations
of Republicans and Democrats alike, Blanche has emerged as something
altogether unrecognizable. In their place, he has adopted a guiding
tenet of get-ahead expediency, playing to the politics (and politicians)
of the moment. The man now freely spouts incendiary falsehoods,
including his recent claim that there is “a ton of evidence that the
[2020] election was rigged” — despite the conspicuous absence of even a
single criminal charge by the Justice Department he leads.
Blanche’s cynical, truth-optional approach has elicited condemnation from DoJ alums, virtually all Democrats, and even some Republicans. But it has also landed him at the doorstep of the permanent gig as the most powerful law-enforcement official in the country.
,
(Now for the full disclosure: I’ve known Blanche since our early days as trial prosecutors at SDNY in the mid-2000s. We worked in different units — me in organized crime and Blanche in violent crimes and gangs and later the White Plains satellite office — but we were colleagues and friends. I publicly defended him in 2024 when he was under fire for representing Donald Trump personally in various criminal cases. And I have criticized him, frequently and sharply, since he became a senior DoJ official in 2025. I stand by all of it.)
,
On Wednesday, at a confirmation hearing following his nomination as attorney general by President Donald Trump, Blanche will face questioning from the Senate Judiciary Committee. With Republicans holding a narrow majorities of 11-10 in the committee (with one vacancy following the passing of Senator Lindsey Graham) and 52-47 in the full Senate, Blanche has little margin for error. I suspect he will squeeze by, barely. He has undertaken a campaign to meet individually with Republican senators, and he is savvy enough to say all the necessary things behind closed doors. But Blanche’s confirmation is hardly assured, and there’s much yet to be determined at the hearings. Democrats will come ready for battle, and even some Republicans harbor doubts.
Turning to ICE, Madeleine Ngo, Hamed Aleaziz and Zolan Kanno-Youngs (NEW YORK TIMES) report:
The
Trump administration has ordered Immigration and Customs Enforcement
officers to halt most vehicle stops while carrying out operations across
the country, according to people familiar with the matter who were not
authorized to speak publicly about the directive.
The
order comes after ICE officers killed two people over the past week in
Houston and the coastal city of Biddeford, Maine, amid a recent surge in
immigration arrests. Both were shot after agents tried to stop their
vehicles, according to the Department of Homeland Security.
The
pause on vehicle stops could hamper the agency’s ability to increase
arrests as it faces increasing pressure to deliver on the president’s
promise of mass deportations. But it comes as some influential lawmakers
and state officials have demanded answers about the latest shootings.
But yesterday, another man died. David Ovalle and Hamed Aleaziz (NYT) note:
A
28-year-old man running from “an encounter” with federal immigration
agents at a gas station in St. Augustine, Fla., was struck and killed by
a tractor-trailer on Tuesday morning, according to a state highway
patrol spokesman.
It was not immediately clear whether the man interacted with the ICE agents, or if they were pursuing him.
The
death happened shortly before 7 a.m. near a Wawa gas station on a busy
thoroughfare. Agents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement and
Homeland Security Investigations were at the station at the time,
according to Sgt. Dylan Bryan, the Florida Highway Patrol spokesman.
“My
heart breaks for the family and loved ones of the person who lost their
life this morning in St. Johns County,” State Rep. Angie Nixon, of
Jacksonville, said in a statement Tuesday. “As the horrifying details of
this crash come to light, one thing is abundantly clear: This tragedy
is a direct result of an out-of-control agency terrorizing our
communities and our state. “Whether it’s ICE agents gunning down a
father in the streets of Houston, shooting a young man in Maine, or
conducting operations right here in Northeast Florida that result in a
deadly crash, the outcome is the same: fear, chaos, and death,” Nixon
added. “Abolish ICE.” It’s not the first time during the Trump
administration that someone is killed by a moving vehicle while running
away from ICE. In August 2025 in Los Angeles,
an SUV on a freeway hit and killed Roberto Carlos Valdez, a Guatemalan
fleeing from an ICE raid at a Home Depot. Jose Castro-Rivera, a Honduran
immigrant, died in October when running away after a traffic stop on a highway in Norfolk, Virginia.
The man killed in Maine was Joan Sebastian Guerrero. Athena Dawson (THE MIRROR) reports that his home country has questions:
The
Colombian Embassy is demanding answers from the Department of Homeland
Security following the death of one of its citizens in an ICE-involved
shooting.
Guerrero, who was from Bucaramanga, died Monday, a week after agents used lethal force on a Mexican national in Texas.
The
Embassy said in a statement it has "requested information and
clarification" from DHS "regarding the circumstances surrounding this
lamentable death and will continue to follow the case closely as the
investigation progresses."
Maine Governor Janet Mills said the fact that the man wasn't the intended target "makes this tragedy even more disturbing and infuriating."
Let's wind down with this from Senator Elizabeth Warren's office:
New DoD responses also reveal 347 percent increase in use of NDAs by private military landlords from 2020 to 2025
Washington, D.C. — U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) released new data from the Department of Defense (DoD) revealing a 347 percent increase in the use of DoD-approved nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) by private landlords in settlements with service members and military families.
The new data comes in response to Senator Warren’s December 2025 letter pressing DoD on its failure to properly implement a housing complaint database and formal dispute resolution process for residents in privatized housing on military bases across the country.
“For too long, the DoD has allowed privatized military housing companies to silence military families, forcing them to deal with dangerous living conditions,” said Senator Warren. “Our troops and their families deserve better. I’ve got a bill to make sure military families have access to safe housing and don’t have to live in fear of retaliation for reporting unsafe living conditions — it’s time to get this done.”
DoD’s responses revealed that NDAs were used in housing dispute settlements 15 times in 2020, 19 times in 2021, 38 times in 2022, 35 times in 2023, 56 times in 2024, and 67 times in 2025 — a 347 percent increase over five years. DoD also revealed that it conducts a “direct review” of each NDA before it is finalized, raising concerns that the Department is complicit in silencing military families.
According to DoD, private military housing companies are not required to inform residents of their rights or publicly post information about the DoD Housing Feedback System (DHFS), a formal dispute resolution process for residents facing inadequate housing conditions.
The Department also confirmed that it does not provide private military landlords with guidelines on how to resolve tenant feedback, potentially contributing to unresolved housing issues for tenants.
Senator Warren has introduced the Restore Military Families’ Voices Act, which would put an end to these practices by prohibiting private military landlords from requesting that tenants sign an NDA and strengthening tenant protections against landlord retaliation. The bill is included in the House and Senate versions of the FY2027 NDAA. Senator Warren also secured language in the Senate’s FY2027 NDAA that would prohibit DoD from suppressing or altering tenant complaints submitted through the DHFS.
Senator Warren has long sounded the alarm about problems with privatized military housing and has led the push to protect military families:
- In June 2026, U.S. Senators Warren (D-Mass.) and Ossoff (D-Ga.), along with Representative Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.) led the reintroduction of the Restore Military Families’ Voices Act, which would bar private military housing companies from requesting that tenants sign non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) as a condition of housing and related services. The bill would also strengthen existing tenant protections against landlord retaliation in private military housing.
- In February 2026, Senator Warren published new responses from the DoD revealing the Department had entered into another 50-year-lease to extend the privatization of military barracks at Fort Irwin, removing accountability measures and threatening to cause housing quality problems for servicemembers.
- In December 2025, Senator Warren (D-Mass.) wrote to Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth with concerns that the Department of Defense (DoD) is failing to properly implement a housing complaint database and the formal dispute resolution process for service members and families living in privatized housing on military bases around the country.
- In September 2025, Senator Warren pressed Department Secretary Pete Hegseth for answers about the potential privatization of military barracks, given the long history of substandard conditions and exploitative practices by providers of privatized military family housing.
- In April 2025, Senator Warren pressured Trump’s nominee for Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment, Dale Marks, to commit to holding private military housing landlords accountable.
- In February 2025, Senators Warren and Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) urged the Department of Defense to investigate whether landlords were utilizing RealPage price-setting software to artificially raise rents for military families.
- In December 2024, Senator Warren and Representative Jacobs reintroduced the Military Housing Oversight and Service Member Protection Act, which would comprehensively reform the privatized military housing system.
- In July 2024, Senator Elizabeth Warren and Representative Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.) led colleagues in calling out the Department of Defense (DoD) for failing to protect military families living in housing operated by private companies under the Military Housing Privatization Initiative (MHPI).
- In May 2024, Senator Elizabeth Warren led an annual hearing highlighting personnel priorities for the DoD and called for increased investments in military services, including military housing and child care, for Fiscal Year (FY) 2025.
- In April 2024, Senator Elizabeth Warren questioned Army Secretary Christine Wormuth on the need to increase military housing supply and the damaging impact of non-disclosure agreements between private landlords, servicemembers, and their families on housing safety at a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee.
- In December 2023, Senator Elizabeth Warren announced further enforcement of the Tenant Bill of Rights for military families as one of the key priorities passed in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for FY 2024, as well as the creation of a working group made up of DoD officials and military families to ensure ongoing oversight of deficiencies in privatized military housing.
- In December 2023, Senators Elizabeth Warren, Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), and Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, sent a letter to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin requesting information on the DoD’s plans to address the unhealthy prevalence of mold, lead-based paint, and asbestos in housing for America’s servicemembers.
- In October 2023, Senators Elizabeth Warren and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) sent a letter to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin raising concerns that Exceptional Family Member Program (EFMP) families had to pay out of pocket to modify their homes to meet their families’ needs and asking for additional information about DoD’s oversight of the program.
- In June 2023, Senator Elizabeth Warren, along with other Senate Armed Services Committee members, announced the reintroduction of the bipartisan Military Housing Readiness Council Act, which would provide a platform for oversight and accountability of privatized military housing to give military families a voice and bring together experts to ensure military families have the safe housing they deserve.
- In December 2022, Senator Elizabeth Warren and other members of the Senate Armed Services Committee sent a letter to Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin expressing concern over reports that military families are being forced to sign non-disclosure agreements with privatized military housing companies in order to receive compensation for poor housing conditions.
- In December 2022, Senator Elizabeth Warren announced she had secured provisions in the FY 2023 NDAA to require military housing companies to disclose mold and the health effects of mycotoxins before a lease is signed.
- In August 2022, Senators Elizabeth Warren and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) introduced the Military Housing Readiness Council Act, legislation that would ensure oversight and accountability on safe housing conditions for servicemembers and military families. The legislation would create a Military Housing Readiness Council composed of DoD officials, servicemembers, military families, and military housing experts to ensure ongoing oversight of deficiencies in privatized military housing.
- In June 2022, Senator Elizabeth Warren announced the Military Housing Oversight and Service member Protection Act as one of her key priorities for the FY 2023 NDAA. The proposal would ensure medical care for military families affected by unsafe housing by directing DoD to establish a health registry for all servicemembers and families and establishing a presumption of service-connected disability for servicemembers and lifetime medical care for dependents.
- In February 2022 during a Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) hearing, Elizabeth Warren pressed Pentagon nominees for tough oversight as they improve military housing conditions
- In July 2021, Senator Elizabeth Warren announced improving military housing as one of her key priorities for FY 2022 NDAA.
- In January 2021, during a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Senator Elizabeth Warren asked then-Defense Secretary Austin for his public commitment to respond and make her requests about military housing issues a priority In March 2021, Senators Elizabeth Warren and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) wrote to Defense Secretary Austin, and Department of Housing and Urban Development Secretary Marcia Fudge, continuing the lawmakers’ investigation into whether the largest military housing providers under the Military Housing Privatization Initiative are complying with federal laws that protect Americans with disabilities.
- In December 2020, Senators Elizabeth Warren and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) questioned the five largest private military housing providers about their reported failure to provide adequate housing to families with disabilities.
- In May 2019, Senator Elizabeth Warren released the findings from her three-month-long investigation of the Military Housing Privatization Initiative and of five private companies that have contracts with the military services to provide on-base housing under the program. She sent letters to then-SASC Chairman James Inhofe (R-Okla.) and then-Ranking Member Jack Reed, and to the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force, to provide each with the results of her investigation, revealing how and why private military housing developers failed to meet basic housing standards, which in some cases resulted in severe health problems for military families.
- In April 2019, Senator Elizabeth Warren and then-Representative Deb Haaland introduced the Military Housing Oversight and Service Member Protection Act, a comprehensive bill to address a series of disturbing reports revealing unsafe and unsanitary conditions in privatized, on-base housing for military personnel and their families.
###
-
-
TACO Chump7 hours ago
-
-
-
-
-
-
Both Hands7 hours ago
-
-
-
-
-
Greg Mendez on his latest album, 'Beauty Land'19 hours ago
-
-
