The Trump administration has brought some 1,700 military personnel under the command of state governors to help with the administration's immigration law enforcement mission, the Pentagon said on Friday.
Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said the service status of 1,200 personnel, who were already assisting with the mission, was changed to Title 32 from Title 10 and an additional 500 personnel were authorized to help with the immigration effort.
"Through active planning and collaboration with our ICE partners, the Department determined that specific operational needs may require direct interaction with individuals in ICE custody," leading to this reevaluation of military personnel duty status, Parnell said in a statement.
Companies are raising tens of billions of dollars, not to invest in their businesses or hire employees, but to purchase bitcoin and more obscure cryptocurrencies. A Japanese hotel operator, a French semiconductor manufacturer, a Florida toy maker, a nail-salon chain, an electric-bike maker—they’re all plowing cash into tokens, helping to send all kinds of digital currencies to record levels. News that a new company plans to buy crypto is enough to send its shares flying—spurring others to consider joining the frenzy.
Since June 1, 98 companies have announced plans to raise over $43 billion to buy bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, according to Architect Partners, a crypto advisory firm. Nearly $86 billion has been raised for this purpose since the start of the year. That’s more than double the amount of money raised in initial public offerings in the U.S. in 2025, according to Dealogic.
Skeptics say the rush of companies buying crypto is a sign the market is overheating, noting that digital tokens, especially the obscure ones, are notoriously volatile and have uncertain futures. They scratch their heads about why an investor would buy shares of a company purchasing cryptocurrencies when they can buy them on their own through low-cost exchange-traded funds and other vehicles.
Others note that many of these companies are worth much more than the cryptocurrencies they hold, as if investors are willing to pay $2 for a $1 bill.
That hasn’t stopped big-name bankers, investors and others from jumping in. Mutual-fund giant Capital Group, hedge fund D1 Capital Partners and investment bank Cantor Fitzgerald are among those backing recent efforts by companies to raise huge sums to purchase cryptocurrencies.
Venture capitalist Peter Thiel’s Founders Fund, Mike Novogratz’s Galaxy Digital and other investors backed a move by a company called Bitmine Immersion Technologies to raise $250 million to buy ether. The company, worth $26 million on June 27, the Friday before its announcement, is now worth over $2 billion after a surge of more than 800%. Thiel, the tech billionaire known for starting PayPal and Palantir, holds a 9.1% stake in the company, according to a recent filing. He declined to comment.
“If you blink, you miss a couple of these deals,” said Bob Diamond, the former Barclays chief executive.
He should know. Last week, an investment firm Diamond co-founded called Atlas Merchant Capital said it was working with Paradigm, D1, Galaxy, 683 Capital and other big investors to form an entity that will spend $305 million to buy a seven-month-old crypto token called Hype. Diamond will be chairman of the new entity, while Eric Rosengren, the former president of the Boston Fed, is expected to be on its board of directors.
“We think Hype is pretty special,” Diamond says.
The new entrants are following in the footsteps of the company once known as MicroStrategy, whose CEO, Michael Saylor, pioneered the so-called crypto-treasury strategy in 2020. Now known simply as Strategy, it has spent years selling shares and debt to buy bitcoin. It is now worth over $115 billion, up 153% in the past year and 3,371% in the past five years.
Saylor has long implored other companies to buy bitcoin with their excess cash. Most everyone ignored or scoffed at the notion. Using spare cash or raising money to buy volatile cryptocurrencies seemed a dicey proposition. Executives who run companies that sell products and services weren’t supposed to speculate on bitcoin. As of last August, just a handful of companies were using their cash to buy any crypto.
That all changed this year. President Trump has embraced crypto, vowing to make America the “crypto capital of the planet.” He has installed crypto-friendly cabinet members and Congress has advanced legislation that could make cryptocurrencies part of the mainstream financial system. Trump Media and Technology Group, the social-media firm controlled by the president’s family, has also bought about $2 billion worth of bitcoin and related securities as part of its treasury strategy.
Lately, companies have been taking things further than even Saylor suggested—buying overlooked or unknown digital currencies, not to diversify their holdings but to make outright wagers on risky tokens. Even Saylor is unsure that’s a wise move.
“Applying a treasury strategy to other crypto assets introduces a different—and often speculative—risk profile,” Saylor said in an email. “I haven’t seen a compelling rationale for doing so.”
Some bears are wading into the frenzy, including well-known short seller Jim Chanos, to bet against some of these companies.
“In my three decades experience I have never witnessed a period where investors are willing to pay such large premiums for assets they can readily purchase on their own,” says Michael O’Rourke, chief market strategist at JonesTrading.
Big companies, including tech giants Meta and Microsoft, have resisted the idea, as have their investors. Shareholder proposals at both companies sought to add bitcoin to their balance sheets at recent annual meetings, but were overwhelmingly voted down. Meta and Microsoft’s boards of directors recommended voting against the proposals to invest in bitcoin.
The companies that are taking the plunge are being transparent about their plans to raise cash and put it all in crypto. They argue that they can do things an ETF cannot, such as “stake” tokens, or lock them up for a specified amount of time to earn a return. The companies can also borrow money to buy additional cryptocurrencies, something ETFs also can’t do.
Cryptocurrencies are volatile even in the best of times. If the price of a token plunges after a company has bet the farm, it could be left holding a worthless asset. Staking amplifies the risk, since it means an investor can’t touch the locked-up tokens if they start to fall in value. And then there’s the risk that investors sour on the strategy.
Last week, Volcon, an electric-bike maker based in Austin, Texas, raised $500 million in just seven days to initiate its bitcoin treasury strategy, according to co-CEO Ryan Lane. Shares of Volcon jumped from $9.22 to more than $44 on the day of its announcement as speculators rushed to snap up the stock. Shares have fallen every day since, closing Friday at $13.40.
Two weeks ago, French semiconductor manufacturer Sequans Communications raised $384 million from more than 40 institutional investors to buy bitcoin. The company’s stock jumped 215% that week and peaked at $5.83 a share—but it’s since fallen back down to $1.98.
“What happens in six, 12 or 18 months from now and instead of the current bull market, we have a bear market?” said Evgeny Gaevoy, the co-founder of crypto market-making firm Wintermute. “A lot of low-effort crypto treasury companies will potentially crash and burn. And a lot of the retail investors that predominantly invested in them will be affected.”
Executives of some of the companies aren’t waiting to see if their plans work out—they’re dumping their personal shares after making the announcements, pocketing millions in the process.
On June 16, for example, SRM Entertainment, a toy-and-souvenir manufacturer in Winter Park, Fla., with a market value of $25 million the Friday before, announced plans to spend $100 million on a cryptocurrency called Tron.
The token purchase is part of a reverse merger between SRM and crypto entrepreneur Justin Sun’s company, also called Tron. SRM’s stock, which traded between 28 cents and $1.45 a share all year, shot up past $9.
Over the next several days, the company’s CEO, Richard Miller, and its chief financial officer, Douglas McKinnon, exercised previously issued stock options to buy a combined 600,000 shares at 56 cents a share, according to data from The Washington Service. They sold a combined $2 million or so of the newly acquired shares. A vice president of the company sold $941,000 worth of stock.
Executives of the company, which has changed its name to Tron Inc. and rang the Nasdaq opening bell on Thursday, declined to comment.
Lately, tiny companies are working with recognized names in finance to raise cash to buy crypto. Among them is Cantor Fitzgerald, run by Howard Lutnick before he became commerce secretary this year and passed the reins to his sons Brandon and Kyle Lutnick. Cantor last week said it would form a $5.3 billion bitcoin treasury company with Adam Back, an early cryptographer. It was Cantor’s second multibillion-dollar crypto-treasury SPAC deal in less than three months. The firm also facilitated several other bitcoin treasury deals and acted as an adviser to Trump Media’s plan to buy bitcoin.
For now, many investors are scoring big profits betting on these deals, which remind some of the frenzied SPAC boom of the pandemic era, when established members of the financial world jumped on the wave. Fabio Giorno, an entrepreneur who operates a tutoring business in Toronto, says he has begun to invest in Bitmine and SharpLink Gaming, another ether-focused treasury stock.
He’s done well on the stocks, but says the volatility of the shares shakes him.
“Sometimes it’s a little risky when you walk away from your computer, because you never know what’s going to happen with the news,” he said.
A judge on July 24 granted a reprieve to West Virginia parents whose children were being blocked from attending school because they had not received the required vaccinations.
West Virginia Circuit Judge Michael Froble issued a preliminary injunction for three sets of parents who sued the state Board of Education over its directive to school districts not to allow children with religious exemptions to attend school. The directive contradicted an executive order from the governor.
“The court believes that the compulsory vaccination law is not valid without a religious exemption, that constitutional law and constitutional review indicate that statute itself is not constitutional and is invalid without a religious exception,” Froble said from the bench during a hearing in Beckley, the Parkersburg News and Sentinel reported.
The state’s law requiring school children to receive certain vaccines states that medical exemptions must be permitted, but does not mention religious exemptions.
In the lawsuit, parents requested that the court find the law violated another state law, approved by lawmakers in 2023, that says in part that no action from the state may “substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion” unless it is essential to “further a compelling government interest.”
West Virginia Gov. Patrick Morrisey, a Republican, said in a January order that officials were refusing to let children with religious exemptions attend school, which “substantially burdens the free exercise of religion.” He directed state officials to permit religious exemptions.
The West Virginia Board of Education, in a directive to districts, said that they should continue excluding children without the required vaccines from schools unless they had medical exemptions, prompting the lawsuit.
“Big victory for religious liberty in West Virginia!” Morrisey wrote on X on Thursday. “We will continue to defend our 2023 Equal Protection for Religion law so that no child in the state is denied an education based on their religious beliefs.”
Aaron Siri, an attorney who is helping represent the parents, said on X that he was pleased with the injunction.
“We rest when every family has this freedom,” he said.
In a statement to news outlets, the West Virginia Board of Education said it was disappointed by the ruling and that members would decide on the next steps soon.
“This injunction is limited in scope and applies only to those named in this lawsuit. It will have no impact on other students in Raleigh County or throughout the state,” the board stated. “As students prepare for the upcoming school year, families are encouraged to comply with West Virginia’s compulsory vaccination laws.”
The ruling came one day after a different judge in the state dismissed a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union of West Virginia that challenged Morrisey’s order on religious exemptions. That suit, lodged in May, said that Morrisey lacked the power to require officials to grant religious exemptions.
The judge said that the plaintiffs in the case failed to notify the defendants at least 30 days ahead of time before suing, violating a requirement in state law.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has ordered a sharp increase in the use of GPS-enabled ankle monitors for migrants in its Alternatives to Detention (ATD) program, according to a June 9 internal memo reviewed byThe Washington Post. The memo directs officers to fit ankle monitors on ATD participants “whenever possible,” expanding surveillance under the Trump administration.
Roughly 183,000 migrants are currently enrolled in ATD, a program that allows them to remain out of detention while awaiting immigration hearings, according to the Washington Post. Until now, only about 24,000 wore ankle monitors. Most others used a mobile app or checked in with case managers. The memo exempts pregnant women from ankle bracelets, requiring wrist-worn devices instead.
“If the alien is not being arrested at the time of reporting, escalate their supervision level to GPS ankle monitors whenever possible and increase reporting requirements,” wrote acting assistant director Dawnisha M. Helland.
The change significantly broadens a surveillance practice ICE has used for two decades. While cheaper than detention, ankle monitors have long been criticized as stigmatizing, invasive, and physically painful.
“This will be a tool used to extend the reach of the government from just the folks it can manage to put in physical detention to an additional hundreds of thousands more that it can surveil,” said Laura Rivera of Just Futures. “It’s designed to turn their own communities and homes into digital cages.”
ICE spokeswoman Emily Covington defended ankle monitors as an “enforcement tool” to ensure compliance, adding, “More accountability shouldn’t come as a surprise.” She said decisions are still made case by case.
In practice, however, compliant migrants are increasingly being subjected to stricter monitoring without explanation. “Why are people any more of a flight risk now?” asked immigration attorney Annelise Araujo. “People who have lived in the same community, in the same home, in the same job for 20 years?”
WaPo reports that the expansion benefits private prison giant Geo Group, whose subsidiary BI Inc. runs the ATD program. Geo, which donated over $1.5 million to Trump’s campaign and inaugural committee, manufactures the monitors and employs case managers.
Geo CEO David Donahue told investors in May, “We are very well positioned” to scale up monitoring. Each monitored migrant generates $3.70 in revenue per day—potentially hundreds of millions annually.
Although ICE recently extended BI’s contract without competitive bidding, internal sources say the agency is now looking for additional vendors amid concerns BI cannot meet demand. Many monitors are old or recycled, and case managers are already stretched, with some overseeing up to 300 individuals.
Tom Homan, Trump’s former border czar and one-time consultant to Geo, is one of several officials with ties to both ICE and its contractors. A White House spokesperson said Homan recuses himself from contract discussions.
In Virginia, dozens of migrants recently waited in ICE offices to be fitted with monitors. “Everybody in here needs to either wear hardware or be detained,” one ICE official told immigration lawyer Megan Brody.
According to the American Immigration Council, 83% of non-detained migrants attended all court hearings from 2008 to 2018. Yet the ankle monitor is the only ATD tracking method that’s increased under Trump, with 4,165 added since January.
ICE says it considers factors like criminal record, compliance history, and caregiving responsibilities in assigning tracking methods. However, many say they are placed under surveillance without justification and not moved to less restrictive options even after proving reliability.
ICE may soon broaden ATD to include more types of devices and tech, depending on what it can purchase quickly. Covington declined to comment on those plans.
Several social media companies should not be held liable for helping an avowed white supremacist who killed 10 Black people in 2022 at a Buffalo, New York grocery store, a divided New York state appeals court ruled on Friday.
Reversing a lower court ruling, the state Appellate Division in Rochester said defendants including Meta Platforms' Facebook and Instagram, Google's YouTube, and Reddit were entitled to immunity under a federal law that protects online platforms from liability over user content.
The case arose from Payton Gendron's racially motivated mass shooting at Tops Friendly Markets on May 14, 2022.
Relatives and representatives of victims, as well as store employees and customers who witnessed the attack, claimed the defendants' platforms were defective because they were designed to addict and radicalize users like Gendron.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Other defendants included Alphabet, Amazon.com, Discord, 4chan, Snap and Twitch, all of which Gendron used, the mid-level state appeals court said.
Writing for a 3-2 majority, Justice Stephen Lindley said holding social media companies liable would undermine the intent behind Section 230 of the federal Communications Decency Act, to promote development of and competition on the internet while keeping government interference to a minimum.
While condemning Gendron's conduct and "the vile content that motivated him to assassinate Black people simply because of the color of their skin," Lindley said a liability finding would "result in the end of the Internet as we know it."
"Because social media companies that sort and display content would be subject to liability for every untruthful statement made on their platforms, the Internet would over time devolve into mere message boards," he wrote.
Justices Tracey Bannister and Henry Nowak dissented, saying the defendants force-fed targeted content to keep users engaged, be it videos about cooking or puppies, or white nationalist vitriol.
"Such conduct does not maintain the robust nature of Internet communication or preserve the vibrant and competitive free market that presently exists for the Internet contemplated by the protections of immunity," the judges wrote.
Gendron pleaded guilty to state charges including murder and terrorism motivated by hate, and was sentenced in February 2023 to life in prison without parole.
He faces related federal charges that could lead to the death penalty. Questioning of potential jurors in that case is scheduled to begin in August 2026, court records show.
Pakistani Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar said on Friday the United States and Pakistan were "very close" to a trade deal that could come within days, but comments from the U.S. after Dar met with Secretary of State Marco Rubio mentioned no timeline.
"I think we are very close to finalizing a deal with U.S. Our teams have been here in Washington, discussing, having virtual meetings and a committee has been tasked by the prime minister to fine-tune now," Dar said in a discussion at the Atlantic Council think tank in Washington.
"It's not going to be months, not even weeks, I would say (just) days," he said.
Under U.S. President Donald Trump, Washington has attempted to renegotiate trade agreements with many countries that he threatened with tariffs over what he calls unfair trade relations. Many economists dispute Trump's characterization.
The U.S. State Department and Pakistan's foreign ministry, in separate statements after Rubio's meeting with Dar, said the two stressed in their discussion the importance of expanding trade and ties in critical minerals and mining. A post by Rubio on X after the meeting and the State Department's statement mentioned no timeline for finalizing a trade deal.
The Pakistan foreign ministry also said Dar "appreciated the pivotal role" by Trump and Rubio "in de-escalating tensions between Pakistan and India by facilitating a ceasefire." The State Department statement did not mention India.
Trump has repeatedly taken credit for the India-Pakistan ceasefire he announced on social media on May 10 after Washington held talks with both sides. India disputes Trump's claims that the ceasefire resulted from his intervention and trade threats.
India's position is that New Delhi and Islamabad must resolve problems directly with no outside involvement.
An April 22 militant attack in India-administered Kashmir killed 26 men and sparked heavy fighting between the nuclear-armed Asian neighbors in the latest escalation of a decades-old rivalry. India struck Pakistan on May 7 and the two nations exchanged hostilities, killing dozens across three days. The ceasefire was declared on May 10.
New Delhi blamed the April attack on Pakistan, which denied responsibility and called for a neutral investigation. Washington condemned the attack but did not blame Islamabad.
The Trump administration is taking steps to repeal a key climate policy from the Obama era, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin confirmed Wednesday, according toThe Hill.
“EPA has sent to the Office of Management and Budget a proposed rule to repeal the 2009 endangerment finding from the Obama EPA,” Zeldin told Newsmax this week.
That 2009 determination, made under President Obama, found that greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide and methane posed a threat to public health. It provided the legal foundation for regulating emissions from vehicles and other sources under the Clean Air Act.
“Through the endangerment finding, there has been into the trillions worth of regulations, including tailpipe emissions and including electric vehicle mandates,” Zeldin said.
While Biden-era vehicle emissions standards didn’t explicitly mandate electric cars, they were expected to significantly shift the market toward them. The repeal of the endangerment finding could undercut such climate rules entirely.
The move, first reported by The New York Times, signals a major escalation in Trump’s rollback of environmental regulations. Although his first term saw the weakening of emissions limits, the endangerment finding itself remained intact—until now.
Critics warn repealing it would gut the EPA’s authority to address climate change. “We are right back to full-throated climate denialism of the early 2000s,” said Zealan Hoover, a former senior EPA advisor under Biden. He called it “insane” to deny climate change’s impacts on public health.
“Climate change impacts public health because it changes the Earth’s climate patterns in ways that are beyond both what the human body and our built systems, evolved to have been designed to adapt [to]… that looks like extreme heat… sea level rise… more damaging storm surges and even flooding on non-storm days,” Hoover added.
The 2009 endangerment finding followed a 2007 Supreme Court ruling requiring the EPA to determine whether greenhouse gases threaten public health. That ruling authorized the agency to regulate them if they did.
The Hill writes that although the agency has floated the idea of repealing the finding before, this is the first concrete proposal. In March, the EPA said it would “reconsider” the finding without specifying a direction.
The current proposal is not yet final. Formal revocation could take months or years, and the agency appears to still be developing its case. A similar recent EPA move argued that power plants' emissions should not be considered “significant” contributors to dangerous air pollution—signaling a broader strategy to eliminate climate-based regulations.
Zeldin, during his confirmation hearing, declined to say whether he believes the EPA has a duty to regulate climate change.
Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-OH) compared Federal Reserve Chairman Jay Powell to Dr. Anthony Fauci in an interview with CNN's Kaitlan Collins.
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN HOST: I think the question that people have had is seeing the president there, you know, this typically has been this independent line between the administration and the Federal Reserve. Do you think that that is important for the Federal Reserve to have independence?
SEN. BERNIE MORENO (R-OH): Oh, of course. And we're not talking about that. What we're talking about is, is this guy competent? Now, the reason it's now in our consciousness about this renovation is because we had him in front of our Banking Committee hearing, and he lied. He said the building did not have a VIP elevator and dining rooms and beehives and waterfalls. All that is just objectively not true.
So again, either he lied before our banking committee, which, by the way, is a felony, or he's just grossly incompetent. I fall more in the second one, given his track record, losing hundreds of billions of dollars, not managing the U.S. economy properly. Also, by the way, in that same hearing, says it's a good idea to forgive student debt.
Imagine the head of the Federal Reserve, our central bank, telling our policymakers that we should forgive debt. That's insanity. So this is a guy who's hyper-partisan.
And as a result of his hyper-partisanship, he's costing the country hundreds of billions of dollars.
COLLINS: But then why did Trump pick him to be the chair of the Federal Reserve?
MORENO: Look, I've employed 1,100 people in my life. Out of 1,100 people, I made some bad hires. You recover quickly.
President Trump, in my opinion, got some bad advice from somebody. He put him in place. Of course, now he was in there.
And now he's back. His term is up in May. I asked Jay Powell in my office, when your term is up in May, are you going to do what every other Fed chair did and leave the Federal Reserve?
He said, only if he doesn't feel the institution is at risk. The height of arrogance and ego to make that kind of statement is pretty shocking. He should leave now.
COLLINS: Why not? Should the president fire him?
MORENO: I believe he should leave. It would just be a lot easier if he just said, hey, I resigned. It would make the country better.
It would make the Federal Reserve better.
COLLINS: But if he doesn't, he doesn't do that.
MORENO: Well, the president certainly, in my opinion, has all the rights to do it. In a Supreme Court case called Humphrey's, you can look it up, there's a term called inefficiency, which basically means incompetence. And if that standard doesn't apply to Jay Powell, it doesn't apply to anybody.
He's the Anthony Fauci of the financial system in this country.
COLLINS: OK, but Trump also kept Anthony Fauci on and gave him a medal.
PresidentDonald Trumpsaid Friday that former President Barack Obama "owes me big" following the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity ruling.
Trump on Tuesday claimed that Obama was the "ringleader" of Russiagate, calling for him to be criminally investigated amid new claims that members of his administration allegedly "manufactured" intelligence that prompted the Trump–Russia collusion narrative. Obama has denied the allegations, with a spokesperson for him describing them as "bizarre."
"It probably helps him a lot. Probably helps a lot. The immunity ruling, but it doesn't help the people around him at all. But it probably helps him a lot," Trump said Friday. "He's done criminal acts, there’s no question about it. But he has immunity, and it probably helps him a lot... he owes me big, Obama owes me big."
The intelligence community did not have any direct information that Russian President Vladimir Putin wanted to help elect Donald Trump during the 2016 presidential election, but, at the "unusual" direction of then-President Barack Obama, published "potentially biased" or "implausible" intelligence suggesting otherwise, the House Intelligence Committee found, according to a Fox News report earlier this week.
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard had declassified a report prepared by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence back in 2020.
The report, which was based on an investigation launched by former House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., was dated Sept. 18, 2020. At the time of the publication of the report, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., was the chairman of the committee.
The committee focused on the creation of the Intelligence Community Assessment of 2017, in which then-CIA Director John Brennan pushed for the inclusion of the now-discredited anti-Trump dossier, despite knowing it was based largely on "internet rumor," as Fox News Digital previously reported.
According to the report, the ICA was a "high-profile product ordered by the President, directed by senior IC agency heads, and created by just five CIA analysts, using one principal drafter."
"Production of the ICA was subject to unusual directives from the President and senior political appointees, and particularly DCIA," the report states. "The draft was not properly coordinated within CIA or the IC, ensuring it would be published without significant challenges to its conclusions."
The committee found that the five CIA analysts and drafter "rushed" the ICA’s production "in order to publish two weeks before President-elect Trump was sworn-in."
In a statement Tuesday, Obama denied Trump's "bizarre allegations" that he was the Russiagate "ringleader."
"Out of respect for the office of the presidency, our office does not normally dignify the constant nonsense and misinformation flowing out of this White House with a response," Obama spokesman Patrick Rodenbush said in a statement. "But these claims are outrageous enough to merit one."
"These bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction," Obama's spokesman continued. "Nothing in the document issued last week undercuts the widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked to influence the 2016 presidential election but did not successfully manipulate any votes."
Gabbard later told "Jesse Watters Primetime" on Wednesday that there were "deep state obstacles" to releasing her information about the Trump-Russia collusion investigation and that some people within the intelligence community (IC) didn't want it to "see the light of day."
"There are a lot of deep state actors still here within Washington. President Trump wants us to find the truth. I want to find that truth. The American people deserve the truth, and they deserve accountability," she said.
