Political newcomer Darline Graham wins South Carolina’s GOP Senate runoff

Politics — 2026-08-25 20:03:00 — www.politico.com

Trump’s Decisive Support Secures Victory for Darline Graham in South Carolina GOP Senate Primary

President Donald Trump’s active and unwavering support proved to be the decisive factor in Sen. Darline Graham’s victory over Rep. Ralph Norman in South Carolina’s snap Senate GOP primary—a significant win for Trump after several recent setbacks for his endorsed candidates.

Trump’s Involvement: Early Endorsement and Rallying Support

Trump played a central role in Graham’s campaign from the outset. He encouraged her to enter the race with an early endorsement and continued to back her even after she struggled on the debate stage. Unlike his approach with many other preferred candidates this cycle, Trump went further by rallying for Graham in Myrtle Beach, signaling the importance he placed on her success.

Financial Muscle and Strategic Focus

The president’s support extended beyond public appearances. MAGA Inc., Trump’s super PAC, invested over $827,000 in phone calls and text messages to boost Graham’s campaign—a significant sum that many Republicans in more competitive battlegrounds had hoped would be directed their way. This financial backing, combined with Trump’s personal involvement, underscored his commitment to ensuring Graham’s victory.

A Test of Trump’s Influence

Graham’s win is being viewed as proof that Trump’s endorsement remains a powerful force in Republican politics when he chooses to provide active and consistent support. Her victory was especially notable given her lack of prior elected experience and her recent appointment to the Senate following the unexpected death of her brother, Lindsey Graham.

Contrast with Ralph Norman

Norman, a member of the Freedom Caucus with nine years in Congress, had occasionally clashed with Trump over spending but generally supported the president’s agenda. Despite his experience, Norman was unable to overcome the combined effects of Trump’s backing for Graham and opposition from the solar industry, which spent $1 million to defeat him.

Conclusion: Trump’s Endorsement Still Matters

The outcome of this primary highlights that, despite recent losses by other Trump-endorsed candidates, the president’s active involvement can still tip the scales in favor of his chosen contenders. Graham’s victory demonstrates that Trump’s influence within the Republican Party remains formidable when he is fully engaged in a race. As Graham prepares to replace her late brother on the ballot in November, her campaign stands as a testament to the enduring power of Trump’s endorsement in deep red South Carolina.

Source article

Source: https://www.politico.com/news/2026/08/25/darline-graham-wins-south-carolina-senate-runoff-01050320

Trump touts power of his endorsement following South Sen. Darline Graham’s primary win : NPR

NPR Topics: Politics — 2026-08-26 15:14:00 — www.npr.org

Trump Claims Credit for Darline Graham’s Senate Primary Win, Pushes Nationalized GOP Midterm Strategy

President Trump is taking full credit for Senator Darline Graham’s victory in the South Carolina special primary runoff, asserting that his endorsement and campaign efforts were decisive. In a post, Trump called Graham “an underdog candidate” and implied that his support was essential to her win. Beyond a simple endorsement, Trump held a rally in the Myrtle Beach area to boost turnout and mobilized his super PAC, MAGA Inc., to spend over $800,000 on robocalls and text messages aimed at getting his supporters to the polls.

At a rally for Graham, Trump told voters, “What I really want you to do is pretend, please, that I’m on the ballot. Just come and vote. It’s so important.” This approach reflects his broader strategy to nationalize the midterm elections, making himself the central figure in energizing Republican voters—even in races where local dynamics might otherwise dominate.

Trump’s team believes that he is the key to Republican success in the midterms, despite his policies being deeply unpopular with the broader electorate just 70 days before the election. He is not giving Republicans in swing districts or states much room to run their own races, instead focusing on boosting turnout among his base.

Financially, Trump’s influence is backed by significant resources. MAGA Inc. reportedly has more than $400 million in cash on hand and demonstrated its ability to quickly deploy large sums to support candidates. Trump is also scheduled to headline a two-night Republican midterm convention in Dallas and attend a fundraiser in Texas for the Republican Party.

The takeaway: Trump is not only claiming credit for individual victories like Graham’s but is also positioning himself as the driving force behind GOP midterm efforts, using both his personal brand and substantial financial resources to shape the party’s strategy and turnout.

Source article

Source: https://www.npr.org/2026/08/26/nx-s1-5945088/trump-touts-power-of-his-endorsement-following-south-sen-darline-grahams-primary-win

Judge denies Minnesota bid to extradite ICE officer from Texas, paving way for his release from custordy

PBS News Hour – Politics — 2026-08-26 14:45:00 — www.pbs.org

Texas Governor Cites Trump’s Claims to Justify Refusal of Extradition in ICE Officer Shooting Case

A federal judge in Brownsville, Texas, has refused to order the extradition of Christian Castro, an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer charged with assault and falsely reporting a crime after shooting a man during an immigration crackdown in Minneapolis. The case has drawn national attention not only for its legal implications but also for the political justifications cited by Texas officials.

Governor Greg Abbott stated last week that he would not respond to Minnesota’s extradition request, pointing to an ongoing investigation into fraud in Minnesota’s government social service programs. Notably, Abbott’s refusal is directly linked to claims made by President Donald Trump, who used allegations of fraud in Minnesota to justify his administration’s immigration crackdown in the state.

Trump’s use of alleged fraud in Minnesota’s social service programs as a rationale for harsher immigration enforcement has been a recurring theme in his public statements and policy justifications. However, fact-checks and investigations have repeatedly shown that Trump has exaggerated the scale and impact of such fraud, using it to stoke fears and support aggressive immigration measures. In this case, Trump’s claims have provided cover for Texas officials to resist cooperating with Minnesota authorities, even as concerns mount that Castro could flee the country if released.

The controversy underscores how Trump’s record of distortion and exaggeration on issues of immigration and government fraud continues to influence state-level decisions, with real consequences for the pursuit of justice and interstate cooperation. As the legal battle unfolds, the reliance on Trump’s disputed claims raises questions about the integrity and motivations behind Texas’s refusal to extradite a law enforcement officer facing serious charges.

In summary, Texas’s refusal to extradite an ICE officer accused of shooting a man is being justified by Governor Abbott through allegations of fraud that President Trump has used—often misleadingly—to support his immigration agenda. This case highlights the ongoing impact of Trump’s false and exaggerated statements on state and national policy, with significant implications for the rule of law and accountability.

Source article

Source: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/judge-denies-minnesota-bid-to-extradite-ice-officer-from-texas-paving-way-for-his-release-from-custordy

He Once Launched a Grenade for Trump. Now He’ll Be White House Counsel.

NYT > U.S. > Politics — 2026-08-26 16:44:00 — www.nytimes.com

Donald Trump’s Approach to Legal Counsel: Loyalty Over Legal Limits

As Donald Trump prepares for another term in office, the selection of his legal team and their approach to presidential power are once again under scrutiny. In August 2023, Trump personally reached out to Will Scharf, D. John Sauer, and Michael Talent—three lawyers who would soon become some of the most influential legal figures in his administration. Their rise followed a period when Trump’s legal representation was seen as toxic in many circles, with several previous attorneys facing disbarment for their conduct while representing him.

The trio’s most notable early achievement was securing a Supreme Court victory that granted Trump broad immunity from criminal prosecution. This legal win has positioned them at the center of Trump’s efforts to shield himself from accountability, raising questions about the boundaries of presidential power.

A Pattern of Disregarding Legal Advice

The role of White House counsel has historically been fraught under Trump, who is described as “known to hear what he wants to hear and to disregard the rest.” This pattern has led to repeated clashes between Trump and his legal advisors in the past, particularly when those advisors cautioned against actions that could violate the law or the Constitution.

Will Scharf, soon to be Trump’s White House counsel, is seen by colleagues as someone who does not view standing up to Trump as part of his job. Instead, his approach is to find ways to execute the president’s wishes, rather than to set boundaries. As one friend put it, “His view is that his job is not to tell the president all the things he can’t do, but how he can do things.”

Enabling Aggressive Moves

This attitude has enabled Trump to push forward with some of the most controversial elements of his agenda, including projects and executive actions that have faced legal challenges and court blocks. The current White House counsel, David Warrington, has also been described as working to enable Trump’s most aggressive moves, such as invoking emergency powers and sending troops into cities.

Critics have raised concerns that this dynamic turns legal advisors into “yes men,” rubber-stamping Trump’s initiatives rather than providing independent legal guidance. The rapid approval of a $400 million ballroom on the White House grounds, overseen by Scharf, is cited as an example of this approach.

A History of Clashes and Consequences

Previous White House counsels, such as Donald F. McGahn II and Pat A. Cipollone, have clashed with Trump over issues like the Russia inquiry and efforts to overturn the 2020 election. These advisors warned Trump that certain actions could result in severe legal jeopardy, but Trump’s tendency to dismiss unwelcome advice has remained a hallmark of his leadership style.

Conclusion: Loyalty Over Law

As Trump’s new legal team takes shape, the central question remains whether they will act as independent legal advisors or continue the pattern of enabling Trump’s most extreme impulses. The record so far suggests a preference for loyalty over legal limits, raising ongoing concerns about the rule of law and the proper role of legal counsel in the highest office of the land.

Source article

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/26/us/politics/will-scharf-white-house-counsel.html

‘It's put up or shut up time’: Battleground Republicans want the Darline treatment

Politics — 2026-08-25 22:49:00 — www.politico.com

President Donald Trump’s Influence Tested as Republicans Question His Priorities

President Donald Trump secured a significant political win Tuesday night as his endorsed candidate, Sen. Darline Graham, triumphed in South Carolina’s Senate GOP runoff. Graham, a political unknown just weeks ago, credited Trump’s “steadfast support” for her victory, declaring, “South Carolina is truly Trump country.” Trump’s involvement included championing her appointment, providing an early endorsement, and holding a high-profile rally in Myrtle Beach, with his super PAC, MAGA Inc., spending heavily in the race’s final days.

Despite this success, Trump’s decision to focus resources on a safe Republican seat has drawn criticism from GOP strategists and candidates in more competitive battleground states. Many Republicans are urging Trump to shift his attention and substantial campaign funds to states where the outcome could determine the balance of power in Washington. The president has told reporters he will spend “a lot of that money” to support “Republican candidates that I think are good,” but has not specified where or when those resources will be deployed.

Some party insiders worry that Trump’s continued focus on less competitive races, coupled with his overall unpopularity in national polls, could hinder Republican prospects in key swing states. Others see his South Carolina investment as a sign of more aggressive involvement to come. As the midterms approach, the party remains divided over whether Trump’s influence will be a decisive asset or a potential liability in the nation’s most contested races.

In summary, Trump’s hands-on approach in South Carolina has reignited debate within the GOP about the best use of his political capital and campaign war chest. With the midterms looming, the party is watching closely to see if Trump will extend his support to the battlegrounds that matter most.

Source article

Source: https://www.politico.com/news/2026/08/25/trump-attention-battleground-republicans-darline-graham-01050345

Darline Graham wins South Carolina GOP nomination to replace her late brother in U.S. Senate

PBS News Hour – Politics — 2026-08-26 10:40:00 — www.pbs.org

Trump’s Endorsement Proves Decisive in South Carolina Senate GOP Runoff

President Donald Trump’s influence was on full display in South Carolina as U.S. Sen. Darline Graham secured the Republican nomination to replace her late brother, Lindsey Graham, on the general election ballot. Trump’s backing of Graham, a political newcomer, was a central factor in her victory over U.S. Rep. Ralph Norman in Tuesday’s special Republican primary runoff.

Trump’s Public Support and Strategy

Trump’s involvement in the race was both vocal and strategic. He quickly endorsed Darline Graham after her appointment to serve out the remainder of her brother’s term and encouraged her to run for a full term. Trump campaigned for her in the state, telling a crowd in Myrtle Beach, “I want it to happen. Good luck, Darline.” He described her selection as “a fabulous tribute” to Lindsey Graham and urged her to enter the race before she had officially declared her candidacy.

Trump’s support was not just rhetorical. MAGA Inc., the super PAC aligned with Trump, spent nearly $830,000 on voter outreach in support of Graham, signaling the importance he placed on her victory.

Graham Aligns with Trump’s Agenda

Throughout her campaign, Darline Graham emphasized her intent to support Trump’s policy positions. She highlighted her co-sponsorship of a voting bill that has become a key priority for Trump, making it clear to voters that she would be an ally for the president’s agenda in the Senate.

Voters Respond to Trump’s Endorsement

For many voters, Trump’s endorsement was decisive. One supporter, Robert Tropiano, stated, “Trump wants her, he’s doing a great job and I believe we should give him what he wants.” This sentiment underscores the continued sway Trump holds over Republican primary voters in South Carolina.

Norman Criticizes Trump’s Involvement

Ralph Norman, Graham’s opponent, expressed frustration with Trump’s decision to back Graham, saying, “I never understood why he got in this race. It is what it is and we accept it.” Norman also criticized the influx of outside PAC money supporting Graham, much of it tied to Trump’s network.

Conclusion

Trump’s active role in the South Carolina Senate primary demonstrates his ongoing influence over Republican politics. By endorsing and campaigning for Darline Graham, he helped propel a political novice to victory over more experienced rivals. As the general election approaches, Graham’s close alignment with Trump’s agenda will remain a defining feature of her candidacy, further cementing the former president’s imprint on the GOP.

Source article

Source: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/darline-graham-wins-south-carolina-gop-nomination-to-replace-her-late-brother-in-u-s-senate

Canadian trade minister says reaching deal with U.S. in best interest for both countries

PBS News Hour – Politics — 2026-08-25 17:52:00 — www.pbs.org

Trump’s Tariffs Threaten U.S.-Canada Trade Talks, Prompt Retaliation Concerns

President Trump announced that a trade deal with Canada was close, but negotiations collapsed after he set a midnight Friday deadline for imposing a series of Section 338 tariffs at 50 percent on nearly $28 billion of Canadian exports to the United States. This aggressive move, according to Canadian officials, created a rush to finalize an agreement that ultimately failed due to unresolved issues over auto tariff reductions and the treatment of steel and aluminum derivative products.

Trump’s administration had previously implemented a 25 percent tariff on cars and raised steel and aluminum tariffs to 50 percent, despite the USMCA agreement he signed in his first term, which had established zero tariffs in these sectors. Canadian Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc emphasized that these unilateral U.S. tariffs targeted sectors deeply integrated with the American economy, such as automobiles, steel, and aluminum. LeBlanc noted that 50 percent of cars made in Canada contain American parts, and Canada is a major customer for U.S. vehicles.

The Trump administration’s tariff escalation has been met with concern in Canada, with officials warning that a trade war would inflict major economic damage on both countries. Canada is preparing to retaliate dollar for dollar, targeting the same sectors affected by the U.S. tariffs, including steel, paper, and aluminum derivative products. These industries have traditionally operated in a tariff-free context for decades, underscoring the disruption caused by Trump’s trade policies.

Canadian leaders have accused the U.S. of weaponizing economic integration and undermining trust in trade agreements. Despite the current turbulence, Canadian officials remain hopeful that a mutually beneficial agreement is still possible, but they stress the need to protect their own economic interests in the face of aggressive U.S. actions.

Conclusion

President Trump’s imposition of steep tariffs and his hardline negotiating tactics have pushed U.S.-Canada trade relations to a breaking point, threatening long-standing economic ties and prompting Canadian retaliation. The dispute highlights the risks of unilateral trade measures and the broader consequences for both economies when established agreements are disregarded.

Source article

Source: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/canadian-trade-minister-says-reaching-deal-with-u-s-in-best-interest-for-both-countries

DHS concedes noncitizen voter numbers it touted are inflated : NPR

NPR Topics: Politics — 2026-08-25 13:15:00 — www.npr.org

President Trump’s Claims on Noncitizen Voting in Nevada Face Scrutiny from State Officials

More than a month after President Trump claimed in a primetime address that his administration had found over 250,000 noncitizens on the voter rolls of Nevada and three other states, those states are still waiting for proof or even a complete list of the alleged voters federal officials say should be investigated.

Trump’s announcement, which specifically cited Nevada, has prompted state officials to demand evidence supporting the administration’s claims. In a call with Nevada election officials, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) staff detailed their methodology but also undermined the broader claim that American elections are rife with noncitizen voters.

DHS initially said it had found close to 16,000 noncitizens on Nevada’s voter list, but a DHS official later acknowledged that this figure was only “the ceiling” and that each voter would need to be manually reviewed. The next day, DHS provided Nevada with a list of just 185 voter ID numbers it said were “confident” matches for noncitizens. When Nevada asked for more information about these 185 voters and the data points used to match them to noncitizens, DHS declined to provide further details.

The agency also told Nevada it still had more than 14,000 voters needing “additional review” and provided another list of over 6,000 voter IDs it said were “higher confidence” matches, but these had not yet been reviewed. Officials in Pennsylvania, another state mentioned in Trump’s allegations, reported a similar lack of follow-through from DHS after the president’s claims.

An official familiar with the Pennsylvania meeting said, “It was clear that DHS did not have confidence that the numbers they have stated publicly were accurate.” DHS did not address why it publicly touted numbers its own employees acknowledged were inflated.

State election officials in Nevada and California have expressed concern that eligible voters could be wrongly removed from the rolls as a result of what they called the administration’s “fishing expedition for purported non-citizens.” Nevada’s deputy secretary of state for elections, Mark Wlaschin, emphasized the importance of careful vetting to avoid disenfranchising U.S. citizens.

Despite the administration’s public statements, DHS has not provided the data necessary for states to verify or act on the claims. Nevada officials said they were “unable to conduct an analysis without real verifiable information.”

Conclusion

President Trump’s high-profile claims about noncitizen voting in Nevada and other states have not been substantiated by the evidence provided to state officials. DHS has acknowledged that its numbers were inflated and has declined to share the data needed for independent verification. As Election Day approaches, state officials remain wary of removing voters without clear proof, highlighting the risks of making sweeping allegations without supporting facts.

Source article

Source: https://www.npr.org/2026/08/25/nx-s1-5940807/noncitizen-voters-trump-nevada-call

Trump’s ‘No Tax on Tips’ Claim Doesn’t Add Up

FactCheck.org — 2026-08-25 12:55:00 — www.factcheck.org

Trump’s Claims on “No Tax on Tips” Policy Greatly Exaggerate Tax Savings for Tipped Workers

President Donald Trump has repeatedly claimed that his “no tax on tips” policy delivered massive tax savings to tipped workers in Nevada and Georgia, but a review of federal data and expert analysis shows these statements are highly misleading and unsupported by evidence.

Trump’s Claims

During an August 5 speech in Las Vegas, Trump declared, “This past filing season, 440,000 tipped workers right here in Nevada saved an average of $10,000 on their taxes.” He added, “every worker made $10,000 more money. That’s all because of the fact that I said I was going to do it and I got it done.” In a similar July 22 speech in Georgia, he claimed, “130,000 tipped workers right here in Georgia saved an average of more than $7,000 on their taxes. And that’s because of no tax on tips.”

No Evidence for Claimed Savings

When pressed for supporting data, the White House did not provide a government source for Trump’s figures. While a spokesman insisted that “tens of millions of working-class Americans are saving thousands of dollars” due to the policy, no documentation was offered to substantiate the specific numbers cited by Trump.

What the Law Actually Does

The “no tax on tips” provision, part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act signed by Trump on July 4, 2025, allows a temporary federal income tax deduction of up to $25,000 in qualified tips per year. However, this is a deduction from taxable income—not a direct reduction in taxes owed. Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes still apply to tips.

As tax experts explain, a deduction only reduces the amount of income subject to tax. For example, a $10,000 deduction for someone in the 12% tax bracket would save about $1,200 in taxes—not $10,000. Similarly, a $7,000 deduction would yield about $840 in tax savings. The average actual savings for those able to use the deduction is far less than Trump’s claims.

Exaggerated Numbers of Beneficiaries

Trump also appears to have overstated the number of workers benefiting from the deduction. While he cited 440,000 tipped workers in Nevada and 130,000 in Georgia, independent analyses suggest the real numbers are much lower. The Tax Policy Center estimated that only about 5% of Nevada workers are in tipped jobs—roughly 80,000 people. Many jobs included in broad government lists do not regularly receive tips, further reducing the actual number of beneficiaries.

Average Savings Far Lower

According to the Tax Policy Center, only about 3% of U.S. households benefit from the tips deduction, with average tax savings around $1,400. Even the White House Council of Economic Advisers estimated the average increase in take-home pay at about $1,300 per year for affected workers—nowhere near the $7,000 to $10,000 figures Trump cited.

Conclusion

President Trump’s statements about the impact of his “no tax on tips” policy are not supported by federal data or independent analysis. The actual tax savings for tipped workers are a fraction of the amounts he claimed, and the number of workers benefiting is far smaller than he suggested. These exaggerated claims highlight the importance of scrutinizing political statements and relying on verified facts when assessing the impact of major policy changes.

Source article

Source: https://www.factcheck.org/2026/08/trumps-no-tax-on-tips-claim-doesnt-add-up/

Canada retaliates with tariffs against U.S. as relations deteriorate

PBS News Hour – Politics — 2026-08-25 17:55:00 — www.pbs.org

Trump Escalates Trade War with Canada, Threatens Steeper Tariffs and Makes Unusual Claims

As tensions between the United States and Canada intensify, President Trump has taken a confrontational stance, threatening even steeper tariffs on Canadian goods and making a series of provocative statements about the bilateral relationship.

Trump’s Threats and Unusual Social Media Remarks

President Trump has threatened to impose 50 percent tariffs on Canadian steel and autos starting next year, escalating the trade dispute after his administration already placed 50 percent tariffs on roughly $20 billion worth of Canadian imports. In a striking move, Trump wrote on social media that the U.S. does not expect to do business with the Canadian border province of Ontario, and added, “The United States is giving serious consideration to changing the name of Lake Ontario to Lake America.” This statement was met with a firm response from Canadian officials, who dismissed the idea outright.

Acknowledgment of U.S. Reliance on Canadian Aluminum

Despite his combative rhetoric, Trump acknowledged the importance of Canadian imports to the U.S. economy, particularly aluminum. He stated, “You know, selfishly, we need aluminum in this country. We don’t have it. We get it all from Canada for the most part, and we need it badly.” This admission highlights the complexity of the economic ties between the two nations, even as Trump continues to focus on the trade deficit, which he claims stood at nearly $50 billion last year.

Fact-Checking Trump’s Claims

While Trump has long lamented the trade deficit with Canada, the tariffs he has imposed affect only a small fraction of the overall $800 billion in commerce between the two countries. U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer noted that the tariffs represent just 5 percent of imports from Canada and only 0.06 percent of overall U.S. consumption, suggesting that Trump’s rhetoric may exaggerate the broader economic impact.

Consequences for Businesses and Consumers

The ongoing trade war is already having tangible effects on businesses and consumers, particularly in states like Michigan that rely heavily on trade with Canada. Increased tariffs have led to higher costs for manufacturers and have begun to erode profits for small businesses, with some reporting significant financial losses.

Conclusion

President Trump’s approach to trade with Canada has been marked by threats, exaggerations, and unusual public statements. While he continues to focus on the trade deficit and threaten further escalation, the reality is that the tariffs imposed so far affect only a small portion of the vast economic relationship between the two countries. As both sides dig in, the costs to businesses and consumers are mounting, underscoring the risks of an all-out trade war driven by rhetoric and retaliatory measures.

Source article

Source: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/canada-retaliates-with-tariffs-against-u-s-as-relations-deteriorate