President Donald Trump on Monday escalated his criticism of U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, accusing one of his longtime allies of “choking” after her office dropped criminal charges against a former Olympian accused of vandalizing the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool. In the Oval Office, Trump expressed frustration with Pirro, who was appointed U.S. attorney in part because of her close relationship with the president. “I was disappointed with Jeanine Pirro, really disappointed with Jeanine Pirro. She folded like an umbrella, and people get away with things, and it’s a disgrace,” Trump told reporters.  The president was referring to news that broke Friday, when Pirro’s office determined that the damage to the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool stemmed from faulty construction rather than vandalism. White House reporter Jake Traylor spotted Pirro arriving at the West Wing following Trump’s remarks. The Daily Wire asked the White House whether Pirro’s job was in jeopardy following Trump’s criticism. The administration referred back to the president’s public comments without offering further clarification. Pirro moved to drop criminal charges against David Hearn, a former U.S. Olympian, whom prosecutors accused of deliberately damaging the pool during a sweeping renovation project for America’s 250th anniversary. In a motion to dismiss the case, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia blamed “flawed installation” by contractor Atlantic Industrial Coatings for the damage, admitting that newly produced evidence “undermines the evidentiary basis” for the indictment. Over the weekend, Trump said he “100%” disagreed with Pirro’s decision in a scathing Truth Social post, and on Monday, he doubled down on his objection while speaking at the White House. “The judge was extremely unfriendly to Jeanine and, frankly, I think she choked because the judge was really vicious,” Trump said. “Instead of going after the people that did it, the judge went after her and went after her department.” “I guess she choked. I don’t know what the hell happened,” he added.  It marked a dramatic reversal for Pirro, who had secured a grand jury indictment against the three-time Olympian just weeks earlier, alleging he ripped a piece of sealant from the bottom of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool with his bare hands. Hearn, 67, was facing a felony count of destruction of property following his. June 19 arrest in the nation’s capital, The Daily Wire previously reported. Attorneys for Hearn said their client was innocent and that the grand jury charges were “outrageous and should be alarming to every American.” “This was a deliberate act to damage the Reflecting Pool at the National Mall that members of the National Park Service actually have worked hard to restore,” Pirro said at a July 2 press conference. “We can state and prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he caused damage, and that damage is over $1,000.” On June 19, Hearn, a former Olympic canoeist, was on a bike ride when he stopped to see the Reflecting Pool after viral reports of algae in the water, describing himself to ABC News as a “curious, concerned citizen.”  That’s when U.S. Park Police warned, then arrested, the former Olympian after he touched a piece of blue coating. Prosecutors say he later tore two square feet of sealant from the bottom of the pool, an account Hearn denies. “I saw a piece of this loose end of this blue coating … I reached out and touched the end of that piece that was loose but still attached to the bottom,” Hearn told ABC News. “I was able to reach out and touch the edge that was still attached at the bottom and handled it a little bit.” At the time, federal prosecutors painted a different picture of the incident.  “Our evidence further shows that the National Park Service employees observed Hearn actually forcefully and violently pulling up and removing the bottom liner with both hands,” Pirro said in July, adding that witnesses described Hearn’s behavior as “belligerent” and “disrespectful.” The dismissal of the case marks a setback for Trump, who has repeatedly railed against damage and negative publicity surrounding iconic landmarks he has pushed to restore, calling alleged vandals “SICK, DERANGED PEOPLE!”

The House Ethics Committee on Monday recommended censuring Rep. Chuck Edwards (R-NC), concluding there is “substantial reason to believe” he repeatedly subjected two female staffers to inappropriate and unprofessional treatment.  The bipartisan committee found Edwards violated House Rules related to sexual harassment and hostile workplaces after a months-long investigation, concluding that the two-term North Carolina Republican developed inappropriately close relationships with young female staffers that affected his official duties.  According to the committee’s report, Edwards, who is married, showered the women with expensive gifts, repeatedly commented on their appearance, invited them to intimate dinners and vacations, sent notes expressing his affection, and frequently sought to spend time with them alone. Investigators said Edwards called the women “pretty” and “breathtaking,” commented on one staffer’s weight, and gave them gifts including jewelry worth more than $1,000, designer handbags, firearms, shoes, flowers, a laptop, a cellphone, a KitchenAid mixer, a robotic vacuum, vacations, and tickets to performances.   The report also alleges Edwards skipped House votes on one occasion to visit a female staffer’s home, where he helped with yard work and decorated her Christmas tree. Investigators said he also wrote poems, paid for gambling outings, discussed visiting strip clubs in Washington, D.C., and planned weekend getaways with the women. The committee said it found no evidence that Edwards engaged in sexual activity with either staffer.  “A member of Congress should not single out a staffer and isolate them from other staff, make frequent comments regarding that person’s appearance and weight, send messages in the middle of the night, text staff deeply personal and seemingly romantic thoughts, intrude on personal occasions without invitation, pay for personal vacations, and spend thousands of dollars on gifts for staffers,” the report concluded.  “That Representative Edwards did all these things to two young staffers, repeatedly over a sustained period, was beyond inappropriate,” it added.  In a 15-page response, an attorney for Edwards said the committee cleared the congressman of sexual misconduct allegations and accused the panel of reaching its conclusions through a short-circuited process. The attorney also claimed the report, which recommended a formal censure vote, did not prove the two female staffers “expressed discomfort” and said the congressman was never able to challenge the facts of the allegations. A House censure is a symbolic public rebuke that does not remove a member from office or strip him of committee assignments. The ethics probe arrives at a politically difficult time for Edwards, whose western North Carolina district has emerged as one of Democrats’ top pickup opportunities in the 2026 midterms. Democratic challenger Jamie Ager outraised Edwards by a wide margin during the latest fundraising quarter, bringing in roughly $1.4 million compared to Edwards’ approximately $155,000, The Daily Wire previously reported. National election forecasters have also shifted the district from “Likely Republican” to a more competitive “Lean Republican” as Democrats increase their investment in the race.

Last week, American diplomats walked out of a United Nations Security Council meeting after French diplomats publicly lectured the United States on human rights. Their only mistake was ever going back. In certain corners of prestige globalist coteries and the well-heeled, well-connected New York-Paris-Geneva jet set, it’s a popular sentiment that the UN was a brilliant accomplishment and a bastion of civilization; it’s easy to take that supposition for granted. But I’m a little at a loss as to what exactly makes the UN so great. The concept is actually rather ridiculous. Nations, by their very nature, are not united — at least not in any broad sense. A nation is a group of people with a common allegiance based on a shared set of values and identity. Because of this, any given nation has an inherent set of goals that are fundamentally distinct from those of the rest of the world. This is not to suggest that there is anything wrong with international cooperation. NATO, despite its flaws, is a much better model. A group of nations with a shared set of values and foreign policy objectives has voluntarily agreed to invest in one another’s safety. Their commitment to one another is conditional, narrowly tailored, and serves their individual interests. This is a far cry from a sprawling bureaucracy that is regularly empowered to impugn our national sovereignty. Leaving aside the practical inefficiencies of the UN, it is generally understood (save for a few starry-eyed college students) that the body has no real tangible power or enforcement mechanisms. It is symbolic. Still, symbolism is important, if hollow, and must be taken seriously. So from where does the UN derive its symbolic power? Supposedly, it represents the interests of all the peoples of the world in a parliament. This logic fails on two fronts. First, there is nothing democratic or representative about the UN. The majority of its member states are dictatorships. Approximately 45% of UN member states are democracies. That means the majority of representatives are not selected by the “people” at all, but by authoritarian governments. Even if the UN were actually a democratic body, that would not make it any more legitimate. Plenty of people, especially outside of the Western world, believe some pretty horrible things. Plenty of people would do some pretty horrible things if given the chance. I, for one, couldn’t give a damn what those people think of American foreign policy. They don’t get a say. We need not limit our criticisms to the theoretical. Let’s examine a few consequences of the grand UN experiment. Kurt Waldheim, the UN secretary-general from 1972 to 1981, served as a Nazi intelligence officer who was barred from entering the United States for war crimes. UN Special Rapporteur on human rights Francesca Albanese has written that the U.S. is subjugated by the “Jewish lobby” and that Jews feel a “need to be superior.” She also argued that the October 7 massacre was not motivated by antisemitism, but a “reaction” to “Israel’s oppression.” In 2011, a UNESCO-funded Palestinian magazine distributed an essay praising Hitler and the Holocaust. Over 100 current and former United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees employees were implicated in the October 7 attack. Behold our moral superiors. For decades, the UN has provided a legitimized platform for the defense of some of history’s worst atrocities. Syrian representatives deflected responsibility for their chemical-weapons attacks and received backing from Russia. Iranian leaders have consistently used the UN’s global stage to advance Holocaust denial. Monsters in suits are still monsters. Giving them a global audience and an official outlet for their monstrosity is a moral failure of the highest order. The Human Rights Council includes China, Iraq, Qatar, and Pakistan. Yes, these are the countries whose governments appoint representatives to lecture you on human rights. Since 2006, the UN Human Rights Council has adopted 112 resolutions against Israel, 45 against Syria, 16 against Iran, 11 against Russia, and four against Venezuela. In 2025, the UN General Assembly adopted 15 resolutions against Israel and only 11 against the rest of the world. Even if you accept the death tolls purported by Hamas, they pale in comparison to the victims of the Assad regime. So why the disparity in reactions? I’ve been assured it’s not antisemitism. This is top-down epistemology at its finest. The UN supposedly carries moral authority, claiming the height of credibility. The fact that it hates Israel more than North Korea is simply accepted as evidence that Israel is worse than North Korea, rather than evidence that the UN is a fundamentally unserious body. None of this is to say that we should withdraw from the world stage or abandon the concept of diplomacy. But we must reject the pretense that the greatest country in the world requires the seal of approval of authoritarian thugs and academics masquerading as adjudicators. The UN is not just a clown show. It’s a moral disgrace. 

Singer Ariana Grande plans to step back from the public spotlight after wrapping up her “Eternal Sunshine” tour next month, with her representative citing relentless public scrutiny as the reason.  “Ariana will be taking a step back from visibility after she completes the Eternal Sunshine Tour,” a statement from the rep said. “She looks forward to finishing the tour and ending it on a high note, both healthily and happily, and then taking a much-deserved break from public-facing work and appearances, which has led to endless, ongoing public scrutiny,” the statement continued. “This tour has been a beautiful experience for her. She loves her fans and has loved every minute of this tour so much.” Grande will also no longer be appearing in the West End revival of the Broadway show “Sunday in the Park with George,” as People reported. Fans have been commenting on social media frequently about Grande’s appearance, saying she looks thinner than she has in the past and speculating on whether she has an eating disorder. These conversations really took off following the press tour for the movie “Wicked.”  The singer has addressed comments about her body in the past, notoriously calling out those who voiced concern in her song “Yes, And?” from her 2024 album “Eternal Sunshine.” Those lyrics say: “My face is sitting, I don’t need no disguise / Don’t comment on my body, do not reply / Your business is yours, and mine is mine.” Many fans interpreted lyrics from her recent single “Petal” as addressing the ongoing scrutiny.  “But I don’t need someone to save me / ‘Cause this music and I will never die,” the lyrics of the song say. “This is not a cry for help / A couple million for my thoughts, I’ve got plenty / But I am not the victim / B*tch, I’m practically drowning in my blessings.” One of the top comments on the video says, “It’s not about wanting the old Ariana back. It’s about wanting her to be healthy.” As concern over Grande’s appearance has grown online, some fans have drawn comparisons to singer Karen Carpenter, who died in 1983 from heart failure caused by complications of anorexia nervosa. 

California Senator Adam Schiff in March introduced a bill that would ban prediction markets, slamming them for, among other things, violating “tribal sovereignty.” It’s a notable objection — one shared by the Native American tribes that have poured hundreds of thousands of dollars into groups backing the Democrat. The Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians and the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria have steered at least $210,000 to pro-Schiff super PACs and the senator’s legal defense fund, a Daily Wire review of campaign finance reports and Senate disclosures found. The Agua Caliente Band gave $10,000 to Schiff’s legal defense fund a few months before the senator introduced the Prediction Markets Are Gambling Act, which would prohibit platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket from offering predictions on markets that resemble sports bets or casino games. “Sports prediction contracts are sports bets — just with a different name,” Schiff said of the legislation. “It’s time for Congress to step in and eliminate this backdoor which violates state consumer protections, intrudes upon tribal sovereignty, and offers no public revenue.” Fights over prediction markets have flooded Capitol Hill since they rose in popularity in 2024, with lawmakers from both parties debating whether they should be classified as gambling or something else. Native American tribes that operate casinos on their reservations have come out against the platforms, the latest instance of tribal groups opposing casino alternatives. Several tribes fought to keep sports betting apps like DraftKings and FanDuel from expanding to California. The Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians and Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria each donated $100,000 to pro-Schiff super PACs set up during Schiff’s 2024 Senate race, the Los Angeles Times reported. The political focus of the involved tribes is demonstrated in legal court documents. The Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, together with numerous other tribes, filed an amicus brief in the Sixth Circuit against Kalshi in May 2026. The brief was issued by the indigenous nations to rebuke Kalshi’s nationwide sports prediction market. Among the groups listed on that filing was the California Nations Indian Gaming Association, of which the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria is a member tribe. Schiff’s legislation, which was co-sponsored by Utah Republican Senator John Curtis, would “prohibit Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) registered entities from listing any prediction contract that resembles a sports bet or casino-style game.” A companion to the better-known Securities and Exchange Commission, the CFTC handles derivatives, a broad category encompassing all manner of financial contracts, including those facilitated by prediction markets. In February, the CFTC launched a public-private partnership, the Innovation Advisory Committee, which brings together companies on the forefront of commerce, including Kalshi. Schiff has raised over a million dollars for his legal defense fund, which he launched amid claims that the Trump administration was waging lawfare against him. In addition to the Native tribe, donors included prominent Democrat politicians and the late actor Rob Reiner. The fund has spent nearly $40,000 on processing fees for ActBlue, the Democrat fundraising platform. Schiff’s office did not reply to The Daily Wire’s request for comment.