Explained: How Lisa Cook’s three home loans became central to Trump’s fight over her Federal Reserve seat
Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook’s legal battle against President Donald Trump centered, in part, on a trio of mortgages she obtained before joining the nation’s central bank. The loans, tied to properties in Michigan, Georgia and Massachusetts, drew scrutiny regarding whether Cook misrepresented how the homes would be used — as primary residences or otherwise. Trump cited those allegations in his effort to boot her from the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, arguing they constituted cause for her removal. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled 5-4 that Cook can remain on as a Fed governor while her separate lawsuit challenging her firing proceeds. WHO IS LISA COOK? THE FED GOVERNOR AT THE CENTER OF TRUMP’S SUPREME COURT FIGHT Cook challenged Trump’s attempt to oust her in federal court, arguing that the move was unlawful and threatened the Federal Reserve‘s independence. Her lawsuit, filed Aug. 28, did not address allegations that she listed two homes as a primary residence on mortgage documents. The allegations originated with Bill Pulte, a Trump appointee who oversees the federal agency that regulates Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Pulte, who is now acting Director of National Intelligence, linked Cook to the trio of properties in referrals sent to the Justice Department, which later confirmed it had opened a criminal investigation into allegations of mortgage application fraud. The mortgages cited in the Justice Department probe were issued in 2021, before former President Joe Biden nominated Cook to the Federal Reserve Board. At issue were the preferential terms that come with primary-residence loans, which lenders typically view as lower risk than mortgages for vacation homes or rental properties. Cook disclosed all three mortgages in a financial filing with the U.S. Office of Government Ethics in June 2025, listing them alongside her income, retirement accounts and investments. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OPENS CRIMINAL PROBE INTO FED’S LISA COOK The filing also showed that Cook earned more than $50,000 a year in rental income from her Cambridge, Massachusetts, condominium. Pulte alleged in his DOJ referral that Cook represented the Cambridge condominium as a second home rather than an investment property, despite reporting rental income from the unit. Cook bought the condo in 2002 when she was a professor at Harvard University. For this property, she obtained a 15-year loan for $361,000 at a rate of 2.5% in April 2021. Two months later, Cook secured a mortgage for a three-bedroom home in Ann Arbor, Michigan. The 15-year loan for $203,000 at a 2.87% rate through the University of Michigan Credit Union covered the 1,800-square-foot property. At the time, she taught economics and international relations at Michigan State University, roughly an hour’s drive away. She also obtained a $540,000, 30-year mortgage for a luxury condo above the Four Seasons Hotel in Atlanta, Georgia. The loan, issued by the Bank Fund Staff Federal Credit Union, carried a 3.25% interest rate. A RARE FILING IN THE LISA COOK–TRUMP CASE COULD SWAY SUPREME COURT JUSTICES In that loan agreement, Cook “affirmed that this property would serve as her primary residence within 60 days of the execution of the mortgage and would serve as her primary residence for a full year,” according to Pulte’s referral letter to the Justice Department. Cook has not publicly explained why both the Michigan and Georgia properties were designated as her primary residence. Her attorney, Abbe Lowell, denied the allegations in a Sept. 2 filing, writing that Cook “did not ever commit mortgage fraud.”
Wife of Louis Farrakhan dead at 90
Khadijah Farrakhan, the wife of Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, died at the age of 90. The two had been married for 72 years. “The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan with deep sadness yet with profound gratitude to Allah informs you that his beloved wife of 72 years, the First Lady of the Nation of Islam, Mother Khadijah has returned to Allah (may Allah be pleased),” a Saturday statement by The Executive Council of the Nation of Islam from Student Minister Ishmael R. Muhammad said. WHAT IS THE NATION OF ISLAM? “We thank Allah for the precious life of a loving wife, mother, a faithful devoted follower of The Honorable Elijah Muhammad. Mother Khadijah will forever be cherished and remembered. May Allah give His unequaled comfort to the family as we mourn this tremendous loss and lift the family in our prayers and thoughts,” the statement continued. “Allah, there is no God but He, He gives life and to Him is our eventual return. Funeral (Janazah) services will be sent as soon as it’s available,” the statement concluded. Farrakhan, who survives his wife, is 93. WHO IS LOUIS FARRAKHAN? WHAT TO KNOW ABOUT THE CONTROVERSIAL NATION OF ISLAM LEADER Born Betsy Ross, Khadijah Farrakhan married her husband, then named Louis Walcott, in Boston on Sept. 12, 1953. DEM CANDIDATE CAUGHT ON CAMERA APPLAUDING NOTORIOUS ANTISEMITE’S VIOLENT RHETORIC: ‘YOU BREAK HIS NECK’ The couple had nine children — sons Louis Farrakhan Jr. and Joshua Farrakhan passed away in 2018 and 2023 respectively. The Associated Press contributed to this report .
Who is Lisa Cook? The central bank governor at the heart of the Supreme Court’s Trump-Fed showdown
Lisa Cook’s ascension to the Federal Reserve was historic from the start. Appointed by former President Joe Biden in 2022, she became the first black woman to serve as a governor on the Fed board — a seven-member panel that sets national interest rates and oversees the banking system. Now, she stands at the center of another historic moment, as the Supreme Court ruled Monday against President Donald Trump’s effort to fire her, preserving long-standing protections around the central bank’s independence. TRUMP VS THE FEDERAL RESERVE: HOW THE CLASH REACHED UNCHARTED TERRITORY Cook’s legal fight traces back to late August, when Trump said he was firing her from the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, the seven-member body that helps set monetary policy and oversee the U.S. banking system. He alleged she misrepresented information tied to a trio of mortgages she obtained before joining the central bank. Cook has denied any wrongdoing and has not been charged with a crime. She sued Trump in federal court in Washington, D.C., to block her removal from the nation’s most powerful central bank. On Sept. 9, a district court judge barred Trump from firing her while the case proceeds, a decision later upheld by a federal appeals court. A RARE FILING IN THE LISA COOK–TRUMP CASE COULD SWAY SUPREME COURT JUSTICES Before joining the Fed board, the Oxford alumna and UC Berkeley-trained economist built a career in academia, including faculty roles at Harvard University and Michigan State University. A graduate of Spelman College, Cook has been described by American economist Barry Eichengreen as “part economist and historian,” with command of several languages, including French, Russian, Spanish and Wolof — a widely spoken language in Senegal. Cook has also held senior roles in government, serving as a senior economist on then-President Barack Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers from 2011 to 2012. Before that, she served as a senior adviser on finance and development in the Treasury Department’s Office of International Affairs. She joined the Fed board in May 2022 and was reappointed in September 2023 for a term that runs through January 2038.
Jeffries’ socialism dilemma: New York victories expose Democratic Party divide
The man looks tired. Veteran observers of Democratic House Leader Hakeem Jeffries know at a glance when the fellow isn’t catching his Zs. Some politicians bark gruffly when they are under pressure. Others become wildly frenetic. Some pick fights. Others go quiet, and retreat. Jeffries gets puffy. It has been one of those tells that longtime Empire State and Washington, D.C. hands have noticed for years. When the Brooklyn Democrat appears on morning television looking a little baggy, a tad swollen around the eyes; when he speaks in his trademark measured cadence but stumbles over the elucidation; when he presents the unmistakable glaze of someone who has squeezed three hours of sleep into what should have been a seven-hour night, it usually means he spent the evening on the phone. HAKEEM JEFFRIES CONFRONTED ON ‘YOU’RE NEXT’ CHANTS FOLLOWING NY DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST VICTORIES Counting votes. Putting out fires. Trying to solve a problem. Since Tuesday, the problem has been coming from inside his own party. Not Donald Trump. Not Republicans. Not the economy. Not the spending bill. The Democratic Party. More specifically, the Democratic Socialists of America inside the Democratic Party. For much of the last week, Jeffries has found himself staring transfixed at perhaps the most difficult political challenge of his career — immobilized not because he does not know what he thinks, but because he knows exactly what he thinks. He believes Democrats need to look mainstream to win swing districts. He believes affordability is a stronger message than ideology. He believes most Americans don’t want a political revolution. And he surely believes that Republicans — from President Donald Trump on down — cannot wait to compel every rival candidate to answer for the most controversial voices inside the Democratic Party. That has always been the danger of ideological movements. They rarely stay quaintly confined to the neighborhoods where they first emerge. They spread. They redefine brands. They force everyone wearing the same jersey to bear responsibility for the teammates they did not recruit. This week, such a menace landed squarely on Jeffries’ desk. The source of the headache was New York City, where Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s stunning Democratic victory last November now has staged a second, hugely consequential act, as three candidates backed by Mamdani — Brad Landler, Claire Valdez and Darializa Avila Chevalier — won congressional primaries. Valdez and Chevalier are both members of the Democratic Socialists of America. The victories are significant for reasons that resonate far beyond New York. For years, the Democratic establishment has comforted itself with the belief that support for democratic socialism was limited to a handful of safe districts represented by colorful personalities who generated cable-news segments but exercised limited influence over the broader direction of the party. Tuesday suggested something different. Democratic socialists did not merely sustain their corner of the party with fringe support, they expanded it — and expanded it in Jeffries’ own backyard. It is difficult to overstate the implications of such a predicament for the Democratic leader. Jeffries is not Bernie Sanders, nor is he Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Rather, Jeffries has spent years carefully cultivating an image as a disciplined institutionalist — a modern Democratic leader capable of appealing to progressives without frightening suburban moderates. His personal politics always have been considerably closer to the political center than to those of the raucous activists in his coalition. He is, by temperament and instinct, a coalition builder. Coalition builders do not enjoy civil wars. It is a major hurdle for Jeffries to explain and finesse the ballooning faction without detonating a timebomb inside his party. Almost immediately after Tuesday’s results, reporters and anchors began asking Jeffries his opinion of the new nominees — not whether he supported them, but whether he supported what they unequivocally endorsed. It was an impossible line of questioning precisely because everyone already knew the answer. Jeffries does not believe America should abolish Immigration and Customs Enforcement, prisons or the police force. He has never argued for dismantling capitalism, nor has he embraced many of the wider ideological positions associated with the Democratic Socialists of America. So, he did what experienced political leaders often do when trapped between principle and practicality. He tried to change the subject. In interview after interview, Jeffries gently, nebulously, acknowledged that he did not share every position or previous statement made by the nominees. He steered the conversation toward affordability, alternate Democratic victories and the overarching national map. It was classic Hakeem Jeffries: polite, measured, disciplined and careful. But politics rarely allows careful people to remain above the fray forever, and, before long, one of the nominees, Chevalier, became a national story. Opposition researchers — and increasingly, reporters — began to dredge up years of Chevalier’s social-media posts and public statements, staunchly expressed and clearly defined. She did indeed call for abolishing police and prisons, and argued for eliminating borders and ICE. She harshly, profanely, criticized Kamala Harris and Joe Biden, and decried America as “a f—— disgrace.” Her many posts involving race, white women, and interracial relationships spread rapidly, first across conservative media and then on MSNOW and CNN. For many, it does not matter that she has deleted and repudiated some of the posts. One Democratic Party stalwart told me ruefully, “Chevalier is our David Duke. She is poisoning the possibility of a Democratic majority.” AOC ISSUES WARNING TO HER FELLOW DEMOCRATIC INCUMBENTS IN THE WAKE OF SOCIALISTS WINNING BIG IN NYC But another Democrat familiar with the House caucus, who has been aligned with the progressive wing, offered me an opposing view. “The reality is that the energy of the party in primaries is anti-genocide, anti-billionaire and for Medicare-for-all. Many centrists and House Democratic members are having a hard time coming to terms with this. But that’s where voters primary are. They are unfortunately jamming Jeffries unnecessarily instead of letting him embrace the progressive wing.” Whether Chevalier’s comments are viewed as youthful activism, sincere ideological conviction or political malpractice, they guarantee one thing: the questions
Supreme Court rules on mail-in ballots received after Election Day
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday ruled in favor of a Mississippi law allowing mail-in ballots to be counted in elections even if they are received after Election Day. The court was split 5-4 on the ruling, with Justice Amy Coney Barrett writing the majority opinion. She was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, as well as justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Barrett’s opinion held that Election Day, in the context of federal law, set a deadline for when voters must make a choice regarding their preferred candidate. Relevant laws, however, impose no standard for when ballots must be received to be considered valid. SCOTUS TO REVIEW TRUMP EXECUTIVE ORDER ON BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP “The electorate’s choice is made when voting is complete, not when ballots are received,” she wrote. “Election-day statutes say nothing about ballot receipt, and we cannot add to the words Congress chose.” Justice Samuel Alito, writing his dissent, took a different view of what it means for the electorate to have made a choice. “If ballots received after election day are added to the set of ballots that dictate the election’s outcome, the electorate’s choice does not occur on election day,” he wrote. “The acceptance of these late-arriving ballots effectively postpones the date on which the electorate’s choice is made.” SUPREME COURT HANDS TRUMP TWO MAJOR IMMIGRATION VICTORIES If the Supreme Court had ruled that ballots received after election day were invalid, 14 states, three U.S. territories and Washington, D.C. would have been forced to change their voting laws ahead of the midterm elections. Military ballots, which often arrive after election day, took center stage as the case played out. The Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act, the federal law governing military and overseas absentee voting, makes repeated reference to ballot-receipt deadlines under different state laws, something the majority argued would not be the case if Congress had already established a national standard for when ballots need to be received. “I disagree with counting ballots after election day, but Barrett’s argument is persuasive that federal statutes recognize state leeway in counting ballots after election day and the plaintiffs themselves struggled to agree on the parameters,” conservative broadcaster Erick Erickson said of the decision. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., meanwhile, called Barrett’s opinion “shockingly wrong” and “terrible for election integrity.” During oral arguments for the case, Alito and Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who ultimately joined the dissent, voiced concerns that counting large quantities of ballots after Election Day could shake the public’s trust in election results. SUPREME COURT STRIKES DOWN ‘VAMPIRE RULE’ IN MASSIVE SECOND AMENDMENT WIN “If the apparent winner the morning after the election ends up losing due to late arriving ballots, charges of a rigged election could explode,” Kavanaugh noted. Referring to this possibility, Alito argued that “confidence in election outcomes can be seriously undermined” when large numbers of later-arriving ballots impact the results of elections. The majority, however, did not address these arguments, stating that they were outside the scope of what the court had authority to rule on. “Finally, plaintiffs assert that requiring ballots to be received by election day protects election integrity and increases voter confidence in election results,” Barrett wrote. “As we have said time and again, however, policy arguments are properly directed to legislatures, not courts.” “The question today is not whether requiring ballots to be received by election day is a good or bad idea; the question is whether the idea has made its way into the United States Code,” she added. This is a developing story. Check back soon for updates.
What to know about the Newsom-linked charities reportedly caught in DOJ’s sights
Federal investigators are reportedly probing nonprofits linked to California first lady Jennifer Siebel Newsom, putting renewed scrutiny on two organizations that conservative watchdogs and media reports have criticized over alleged conflicts of interest tied to their proximity to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s political orbit. Newsom has accused President Donald Trump’s Justice Department of launching a politically motivated “fishing expedition” against him and his wife, but the DOJ has not publicly confirmed any probe. The reported inquiries have revived questions about The Representation Project and California Partners Project, two nonprofits connected to Siebel Newsom that have received donations from corporations, tribes and other entities with interests before California state government. While Newsom has cast the purported investigation as a political witch hunt, the DOJ has yet to publicly confirm that a probe is even taking place, though internal sources speaking to media outlets have confirmed as much. Most recently, a source speaking to the California Post claimed that the FBI was looking into Siebel Newsom’s taxes. “The sheer amount of cash, combined with the nature and timing of government activity, is eye-catching — especially when unexpected windfalls are benefiting the contributors,” Americans for Public Trust executive director Caitlin Sutherland told the Washington Free Beacon in July 2025, around the time sources claim the probe into Newsom’s wife began. “It’s past time for this cash flow to fall under intense scrutiny.” FEDERAL PROSECUTOR CALLS NEWSOM ‘KING OF FRAUD’ AS TRUMP LAUNCHES CALIFORNIA CORRUPTION PROBE Siebel Newsom’s finances first came under major scrutiny in 2021 when the Sacramento Bee reported that TRP had received more than $800,000 from a dozen corporations that frequently lobby the state of California for policy concessions. The outlet also found that many of the companies that donated to TRP later received favorable treatment from Newsom. Data analyzed by the Sacramento Bee showed that Siebel Newsom’s charity saw its revenue spike whenever her husband’s political career advanced between 2011 and 2019. FORMER SAN FRANCISCO HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION LEADER ACCUSED OF ‘SELF-DEALING,’ PUBLIC CORRUPTION Siebel Newsom pays herself directly from TRP, pulling a salary of over $160,000 a year. TRP also cuts six-figure checks to a media production company owned by Siebel Newsom each year, tax documents show. Newsom claims federal investigators have questioned people connected to his wife, including those affiliated with her nonprofits, as part of an inquiry involving their finances. The California governor has called the investigation a politically motivated “fishing expedition” by President Donald Trump’s Justice Department and said he and his wife have “nothing to hide.” He said the inquiry is aimed at him because he is considering running for president and that “to get me, he’s coming after my wife.” The Justice Department has not publicly confirmed the investigation and has declined to comment. Sources speaking to CNN on the condition of anonymity insist that the investigation was not requested by DOJ leadership in D.C. but was instigated by local officials after they received whistleblower reports. NEWSOM’S FREE-PHONE GIVEAWAY TO STATE BUSINESS LEADERS PAID FOR BY NONPROFIT RUN BY EX-STAFFERS Years after the Sacramento Bee report, the Washington Free Beacon released a follow-up investigation in 2025 that reportedly uncovered a similar pattern. California has a unique system through which politicians can “behest,” basically request, that a given individual or organization make a contribution to a charity. Through this system, Newsom routed roughly $4.3 million to TCPP between February 2020 and March 2026. Cross-referencing California state records and nonprofit tax documents shows that behests made by Newsom accounted for over 80% of the TCPP revenue between 2020 and 2024. NEW EXPOSÉ CLAIMS CALIFORNIA LOST AT LEAST $180B TO FRAUD UNDER GAVIN NEWSOM Critics have pointed to several donors to Siebel Newsom-linked nonprofits that later benefited from actions by Newsom’s administration, though Newsom has denied any connection between the donations and state decisions. Newsom made headlines in 2024 for opposing the construction of a casino project north of San Francisco, writing a letter to the Biden administration urging it to block the project, then suing the federal government when development was allowed to continue. Just months before Newsom sent his letter to the Biden administration, however, he requested that an American Indian tribe give $500,000 to TCPP. He asked for another half a million dollars just before suing the federal government in April 2025. The American Indian tribe agreed to both requests. EX-NONPROFIT BOSS ALLEGEDLY SWIPED $1.2M MEANT FOR HOMELESS PROGRAMS TO FUND LAVISH LIFESTYLE, DA SAYS The payments are significant because the proposed casino project would have competed directly with a casino run by the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria just 15 miles away. Entities that have donated to Newsom’s family charities typically deny that their contribution had political strings attached, stating instead that they cut the checks because they genuinely believed in feminist mission statements of the groups. Multiple conservative media outlets, however, have characterized the arrangement as a “pay for play” scheme. While, unlike TRP, Newsom’s wife doesn’t draw a salary from TCPP, the funds transferred to it at the request of her husband nonetheless provide her with resources to spend on activist causes she cares about. JOURNALIST WHO EXPOSED ALLEGED MINNESOTA FRAUD SAYS NEWSOM, CALIFORNIA ARE HIS NEXT TARGETS The Newsoms have also been hit with allegations of self-dealing. Many of the films produced by Siebel Newsom’s enterprise are shown in California public schools, generating revenue for California’s first family by routing tax dollars to their personal enterprises. Following the public scrutiny, Siebel Newsom’s charity appears to have become less transparent. A TRP spokeswoman told the Sacramento Bee in 2021 that the charity discloses all donors over $5,000 on its website; however, as of publishing, no such webpage exists. COMER TELLS NEWSOM TO ‘LAWYER UP’ AS HOUSE OVERSIGHT LAUNCHES CALIFORNIA FRAUD PROBE Newsom has separately faced scrutiny over whether donors received state benefits after contributions. After donating to Newsom, wealthy contributors have secured multimillion-dollar public contracts, access to large tax credits, favorable executive action and appointments to prestigious public posts, a 2025
Newsom under fire as California gas tax hike sends pump prices even higher
FIRST ON FOX: California motorists are set to pay even more at the pump starting Wednesday as another gas tax increase takes effect, prompting some of the state’s Republican lawmakers to warn that added costs will further squeeze residents already shouldering some of the highest fuel prices in the nation. California’s GOP congressional delegation, led by Rep. David Valadao, R-Calif., is urging Gov. Gavin Newsom, D-Calif., to suspend the planned 2.2-cent-per-gallon hike, which would raise the state’s excise gas tax to 63.4 cents per gallon. The lawmakers say that figure doesn’t include the state’s sales tax and other local fees, bringing the total surcharge burden to about $1.15 per gallon at California pumps. “According to AAA, the average price of gasoline in California is currently $5.58 per gallon—the highest in the nation and $1.65 above the national average,” the lawmakers wrote Friday in a letter sent to Newsom. “Instead of further unaffordable increases to California’s gasoline excise tax, we urge you to prioritize commonsense energy policies that will provide meaningful relief for all Californians.” STEVE HILTON: GAVIN NEWSOM’S $9 GAS NIGHTMARE LOOMS OVER THE GOLDEN STATE Of the average $5.58 price per gallon cited by the lawmakers, about $4.43 reflects the cost of gasoline, with the rest going toward taxes and fees. California GOP Reps. James Gallagher, Tom McClintock, Vince Fong, Jay Obernolte, Young Kim, Ken Calvert, Darrell Issa, and Kevin Kiley, I-Calif., also signed the letter. Valadao has repeatedly urged Newsom to suspend California’s gasoline excise tax increases in recent years, which are indexed to inflation and rise annually. The policy dates back to a 2017 California transportation law that raised the state’s fuel taxes to help fund road, highway and transit projects. Voters rejected a 2018 ballot measure to repeal the law, allowing the annual excise tax increases to remain in effect. Newsom has balked at scrapping the fuel tax hikes, arguing a temporary gas tax holiday or repeal effort would jeopardize the state’s road repair programs, and he blamed President Donald Trump’s war against Iran for sending fuel prices higher. He has also dismissed the idea that suspension efforts would lead to lower prices at the pump. “Repealing gas taxes wouldn’t lower prices at the pump — it would hand oil companies a massive tax break with no guarantee that a single cent would be passed on to drivers,” Newsom’s office wrote in a March press release. NEWSOM KNOCKED FOR ‘INSANE’ CALIFORNIA GAS PRICES AFTER BLAMING TRUMP FOR RISING COSTS Republicans have sharply criticized Newsom for pursuing policies they argue have raised energy prices in the state, which in turn can make everyday life more expensive. Two major California oil refineries operated by Valero and Phillips 66 closed down this year in part due to the adoption of stringent climate regulations and fuel standards that threatened the economic viability of their operations. Less fuel-making capacity means the state has to purchase more crude oil and gasoline outside California — often from abroad at a higher price. Because California lacks pipeline connections to the major oil-producing parts of the country, it imports roughly three-fourths of its crude oil, while domestic production continues to decline. About one-third of those imported barrels come from the Middle East, leaving the state especially vulnerable to fuel price spikes as the war against Iran disrupted shipping through the Strait of Hormuz. Chevron moved its headquarters to Houston in 2024 after operating for more than 140 years in the Golden State — a decision that was attributed to Texas’ more business-friendly corporate environment and California’s aggressive environmental policies that pushed fossil fuel companies out of the state. Newsom has also backed a goal for California to halt all oil extraction in the state by 2045. “California drivers pay almost $2 more per gallon than the national average, yet Governor Newsom continues to advance policies that will drive prices even higher,” Valadao said in a statement to Fox News Digital. “Central Valley families are already feeling the strain of California’s high cost of living, and they can’t afford to pay an extra 71 cents per gallon every time they fill up their tanks.” “It’s past time for Sacramento to stop these harmful price hikes, prioritize domestic energy production, and ease the burden on hardworking Californians instead of adding to it,” he added. A Fox News poll released earlier in June found that just 23% of voters approve of Trump’s handling of gas prices. A spokesperson for Newsom did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Biden’s illegal immigration surge caused higher rent and home prices, Fed study finds
A new Federal Reserve working paper found the record surge in illegal immigration during the Biden administration came at a cost to one of the nation’s fiercest political debates: higher home prices and rent rates. The findings arrive as immigration remains a defining political issue, with Republicans arguing former President Joe Biden’s border policies strained housing and public resources while Democrats have pointed to immigration as helping ease labor shortages and support economic growth. The new report, published by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas by compiling individual immigration court records and government administrative data, is among the first comprehensive efforts to measure how the unprecedented wave of illegal migration between 2021 and 2024 impacted local economies and affected local labor markets. A PROBLEM HIDING IN PLAIN SIGHT IS KEEPING AMERICANS FROM BUYING HOMES The authors cautioned that the paper is a preliminary draft circulated for professional comment and that its findings do not necessarily reflect the views of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas or the Federal Reserve System. Researchers found the influx of illegal immigrants boosted local employment with little measurable effect on wages, but came with a trade-off of increasing housing demand enough to drive up home prices and rents. The researchers found that illegal immigrant worker inflows increased local employment “approximately one-for-one,” meaning a 1% increase in unauthorized workers relative to a local area’s workforce corresponded with roughly a 1% increase in overall employment. The study found no evidence that the immigration surge lowered average wages. THE KEY STRATEGY RED STATES ARE USING TO LOWER HOUSING COSTS REVEALED That 1% increase in illegal immigrant worker flow, however, raised local home prices by about 2.2% and rents by roughly 1.4%, while finding little evidence that new housing construction expanded enough to absorb the increased demand, according to the study. So while wages remained relatively stable due to the influx of illegal immigration, housing prices and rent surged and left American workers struggling to keep up. The housing crisis has heavily impacted affordability in the U.S. and is a key midterm issue for many voters on both sides of the political aisle. Researchers concluded the influx of illegal immigrant workers acted as a housing demand shock in markets where supply remained relatively constrained. The authors argued the increase in housing demand outpaced homebuilding in many areas, amplifying price pressures where housing supply was already limited. ONE TYPE OF PROPERTY IS QUIETLY SAVING AMERICANS THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS The economists estimate illegal immigrant worker flows accounted for roughly 30% of employment growth in the average local labor market between March 2021 and March 2024. They also estimate those inflows explained about 30% of home-price growth and roughly 20% of rent growth in the average metropolitan area over the same period. SIGN UP TO GET THE POLITICS NEWSLETTER The findings suggest the recent immigration surge had different effects across sectors—expanding the labor force without significantly affecting wages while increasing demand in housing markets where supply struggled to keep pace. The estimates refer to the average metropolitan area in the study and do not suggest immigration was the sole driver of rising housing costs nationwide. The paper describes the years between 2021 and 2024 as an “unprecedented boom” in illegal immigration. Citing Congressional Budget Office estimates, the authors said net unauthorized immigration added roughly 7 million people to the U.S. population during that period before slowing sharply beginning in mid-2024. The researchers also examined government spending and found areas with larger increases in unauthorized immigrant workers experienced declines in government transfer payments. They suggested the finding could reflect stronger employment and lower use of safety-net programs among working-age immigrants, while acknowledging the result differs from some previous survey-based research. Read the full report here:
DOJ launches grand jury probe into Marxist mogul Neville Roy Singham’s funding of leftist groups
FIRST ON FOX: A federal grand jury is investigating alleged financial crimes by Neville Roy Singham, the China-based tech tycoon whose fortune has funded a sprawling network of socialist, communist and Marxist organizations across the U.S. over the last decade. According to sources familiar with the matter, the grand jury in Manhattan has issued subpoenas as part of a probe launched by U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton for the Southern District of New York, one of the country’s most powerful districts for federal prosecutions. Acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche authorized the investigation as the Trump administration seeks to crack down on fraud, money laundering and other financial crimes in the multibillion-dollar nonprofit industry. The grand jury action follows a Fox News Digital investigation published in mid-March, documenting how Singham pumped $285 million from his base in Shanghai into a Goldman Sachs philanthropy fund and two shell corporations that then fed the money into a constellation of nonprofit organizations, media operations and activist groups pushing sectarian division, identity politics and support for socialist politicians. The investigation is examining the movement of the money in Singham’s financial network and attempting to determine if Singham, the organizations he funded or their leaders committed wire fraud, bank fraud, money laundering or other financial crimes, according to sources familiar with the matter. HOUSE OF SINGHAM: READ FOX NEWS DIGITAL’S 5-PART INVESTIGATION Prosecutors have presented evidence to the grand jury, which has issued subpoenas seeking bank records and other financial documents from organizations in Singham’s network. Federal prosecutors use grand jury subpoenas as an investigative tool to compel the production of documents and testimony as they determine whether sufficient evidence exists to pursue criminal charges. Nicholas Biase, spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York, declined to comment. According to sources, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent traveled to New York City earlier this year for a meeting with Goldman Sachs Chairman and CEO David Solomon. The men discussed the role of a Goldman Sachs philanthropic arm — GS Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund For Wealth Management Inc. — that facilitated the movement by Singham of millions of dollars into a network of U.S. nonprofits. A Treasury Department spokesman declined to comment. A person familiar with the meeting confirmed that it occurred, saying that Bessent has regular meetings with business leaders, and declined to comment further on the substance of the meeting. At that meeting, sources said, Bessent delivered a blunt ultimatum: Goldman Sachs could face scrutiny for alleged conspiracy in the funneling of the Singham money and urged Solomon to cooperate with federal investigators. Like many U.S. companies, Goldman Sachs has had a long business relationship with the Chinese Communist Party, with Solomon participating in a meeting, for example, on Nov. 4, 2025, with He Lifeng, a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China Central Committee and director of the Office of the Central Commission for Financial and Economic Affairs. Solomon pledged his cooperation, according to sources. As previously reported, a Goldman spokesman told Fox News Digital that the company terminated its relationship with SIngham in February 2024 following an initial round of public scrutiny about his donations to far-left causes. WALL STREET BANKS HELPED CHINESE MILITARY-LINKED FIRM RAISE BILLIONS DESPITE RED FLAGS, LAWMAKERS FIND By mid-May, with the Southern District of New York investigation in full throttle, Solomon joined a delegation of powerful American business leaders who accompanied President Donald Trump, Bessent and other administration officials to China to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping and other leaders of the Chinese Communist Party. In a five-part investigative series published earlier this year, Fox News Digital unearthed a four-minute-13-second speech in which Singham stood on a stage at the Golden Tulip Hotel on Nov. 13, 2025, for a conference of the “Global South Academic Forum,” coincidentally just days after the Goldman Sachs’ chief was in Beijing. Tricontinental Ltd., a Singham-funded nonprofit, co-sponsored the event with academic institutions administered by the Chinese Communist Party. On stage, Singham openly supported a “new world order” promoted by Chinese President Jinping and the Chinese Communist Party. During the speech, he called the United States a “fascist” nation, echoing the propaganda of the Chinese Communist Party now also parroted on the streets by communist, socialist and Democratic Party activists. WATCH THE NOVEMBER 2025 SINGHAM SPEECH: The series revealed a 172-page report in which Singham outlined his theory of change, invoking 20th century Chinese communist leader Mao Zedong’s battle plan to wage a “people’s war” to spread communism. Mao was inspired by communist leaders Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin. LAWMAKERS RAISE ALARM OVER NEVILLE ROY SINGHAM’S $278M NETWORK SPREADING CCP PROPAGANDA IN THE U.S. Singham’s rise as a global political financier accelerated after his February 2017 marriage to Jodie Evans, the co-founder of Code Pink, a far-left activist group that has aligned itself with authoritarian regimes including the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Communist Party of Cuba and the Chinese Communist Party. According to sources, Evans is also a target of the investigation, emerging as a board member in the U.S. on many of the organizations that Singham funded. That same year, Singham sold his company, ThoughtWorks, for an estimated $785 million to a London-based private equity firm, Apax Partners. A spokeswoman for Apax Partners said the company wouldn’t disclose the names of the investors who pumped money into that sale, but sources told Fox News Digital that federal investigators are looking for potential ties to the Chinese Communist Party. After that sale, Fox News Digital found, Singham began directing large sums of money into a network of organizations that now form part of a broader activist infrastructure in the United States and abroad. In its investigation, Fox News Digital mapped 223 transactions from 2017 through 2025 that moved $591 million across five continents through 67 core groups in the Singham network. They partner with hundreds of groups worldwide, resulting in a network of about 2,000 groups, amplifying anti-U.S., pro-China messages. Of that money, Fox News Digital
Mamdani-backed socialists look to take New York playbook nationwide after primary victories
Hours after their ballot box victories in a handful of congressional primaries in New York City, the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) set their sights west. “Today, the East Coast, next week the Mountain West,” the DSA wrote in a social media post last week. The post came after DSA-aligned Darializa Avila Chevalier, a 32-year-old far-left community organizer, ousted incumbent Democratic Rep. Adriano Espaillat, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus chair, and state Assembly Member Claire Valdez, another socialist, won a congressional primary by beating an establishment-backed candidate. The victories by Chevalier and Valdez, who were heavily supported by socialist New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, further emboldened the far left as it takes on the center-left establishment in a high-stakes battle for the future of the Democratic Party. VICTORIES BY MAMDANI-BACKED CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATES SPOTLIGHTS GROWING RIFT IN DEMOCRATIC PARTY The DSA is now looking to replicate its playbook across the country, starting Tuesday in the Democratic primary in Colorado’s 1st Congressional District, a solidly blue seat anchored in Denver that then-Vice President Kamala Harris carried by a whopping 56 points in the 2024 election. Democratic Rep. Diana DeGette, who was first elected to Congress three decades ago, is facing two primary challenges, including DSA-backed Melat Kiros, a first-time candidate and former attorney born four months after DeGette first took office. Kiros, who lost her job as a lawyer in New York after writing an essay critical of Israel, is also supported by Justice Democrats, the nearly decade-old political group known for heavily supporting “Squad” members Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Ayanna Pressley, and Rashida Tlaib as they toppled entrenched incumbents in their initial elections to Congress. DEMOCRACY ’26: STAY UP TO DATE WITH THE FOX NEWS ELECTION HUB “ELECT ANOTHER SOCIALIST TO CONGRESS ON JUNE 30TH,” a DSA social media post states as it urges supporters to lend a hand to the Kiros campaign. The far left is also training its firepower in two high-profile statewide Democratic primaries in early August in key battleground states: the Senate showdown in Michigan and Wisconsin’s gubernatorial contest. DSA-aligned Abdul El-Sayed, a former Wayne County health director who unsuccessfully ran for governor eight years ago, is one of three major candidates trying to succeed retiring Democratic Sen. Gary Peters. LURCHING LEFT: MAMDANI-BACKED CANDIDATES OUST ESTABLISHMENT DEMOCRATS And Wisconsin state Rep. Francesca Hong is on the rise among a crowded field of candidates in the race to succeed retiring Democratic Gov. Tony Evers. “It’s a great day to be a democratic socialist,” the DSA-aligned Hong posted on X last week. “Wisconsin is next!” Mamdani’s stunning Democratic mayoral primary victory a year ago sent political shockwaves across the country and cemented the DSA as a major political force. A year later, Mamdani’s kingmaker status was further enhanced by last week’s results in New York City. Possibly looking to the national stage, the mayor said, “My goal is to make America a place that every American can afford.” Democratic strategist Joe Caiazzo, a veteran of progressive champion Sen. Bernie Sanders’ 2016 and 2020 presidential campaigns, told Fox News Digital, “Some of the DSA and the majority of the left wing of the Democratic Party appear to be the only ones truly engaging in a conversation about economic populism in a period where costs continue to soar, and there is seemingly no plan from anyone in Washington to rectify that problem. You can see why it’s appealing.” BERNIE SANDERS, DSA REVEAL DEMANDS FOR DEM PARTY AFTER SOCIALISTS SWEEP NEW YORK ELECTIONS It’s not just strategists from the progressive wing of the party that acknowledge the increasing power of the far left. Matt Bennett, one of the leaders at the Third Way, a leading center-left Democratic organization, noted, “There is enormous energy around the far left in very, very blue places, like New York City” and that “they are succeeding in their mission to oust incumbents or mainstream Democrats from blue seats and make them bluer.” But outside what has been labeled New York City’s “commie corridor,” which includes parts of Brooklyn and Queens, where voters in recent years have consistently backed far-left and socialist candidates, more mainstream Democrats prevailed in Tuesday’s primaries. In the high-profile showdown to succeed retiring longtime Democratic Rep. Jerry Nadler in Manhattan, former Nadler staffer Micah Lasher came out on top. Miles north of New York City in the state’s swing 17th Congressional District, Army veteran Cait Conley won the primary and will challenge GOP Rep. Mike Lawler in a key midterm contest that is one of a handful which will determine if Republicans hold the slim House majority. In Utah, former Democratic Rep. Ben McAdams defeated progressive rivals to win the primary in the newly redrawn and blue-leaning 1st Congressional District. In Maryland, just outside of Washington D.C., in the race to succeed longtime Rep. Steny Hoyer, Adrian Boafo, who was supported by Hoyer, topped a crowded and diverse Democratic primary field. And in South Carolina, Nancy Lacore, a former Navy admiral who was fired by War Secretary Pete Hegseth, won the Democratic primary in a Republican-leaning district Democrats had hopes of flipping. Bennett said the New York City races grabbing outsized attention “are not representative districts, and it remains the case that the far left, in the Trump era, has failed to flip a single seat in Congress from red to blue, House or Senate.” “They’re doing nothing to put a check on Trump or get power back,” he argued. “And in fact, they’re making it harder, because they’re handing Republicans very potent ammunition to use against Democrats in swing districts the way the GOP used ‘defund the police’ very effectively in 2020.” Veteran center-left Democratic strategist Matt Corridoni, who advises the political groups The Bench and Majority Democrats, said, “I think if we’re only focusing on New York we’re missing the forest through the trees.” Corridoni said, “There are dozens of examples across the country of these sort of purple reddish districts where we’re getting candidates who are tapping into the