The Morning Sixpack - December 31, 2026 (New Year's Eve Edition)
Veto fights, Gaza demolitions, Epstein fallout, ICE’s warlike hiring spree, Minnesota’s funding freeze, and a CIA strike in Venezuela define the day
Trump’s First Vetoes of Term Two Put Him at Odds with His Own Party
President Trump opened his second-term veto ledger by killing two bipartisan bills that practically sailed through Congress without dissent—and he managed to infuriate Republicans who rarely break with him.
One bill would have advanced Colorado’s long-delayed Arkansas Valley Conduit, a project designed to deliver clean drinking water to more than 50,000 people in southeastern Colorado. Even Rep. Lauren Boebert—usually a loyal Trump ally—torched the White House, pointing out that the administration “unilaterally vetoed a ‘non-controversial, bipartisan bill’” that her district desperately needed. She didn’t shy away from questioning the timing either, noting she had just crossed the aisle to support a push forcing Trump to release the Jeffrey Epstein files.
Her frustration only sharpened in a statement that cut right to the bone:
Nothing says ‘America First’ like denying clean drinking water to 50,000 people in southeastern Colorado, many of whom enthusiastically voted for [Trump] in the last three elections.
When you have a Republican warning her own party’s president that he’s punishing the very voters who lifted him into office, things are…not routine.
The White House, for its part, defended the veto by arguing the federal government shouldn’t be stuck paying for what it called a “local water project” that should’ve been financed locally. That same cost-cutting logic supposedly fueled Trump’s second veto, which blocked a bill granting the Miccosukee Tribe expanded authority to manage parts of the Florida Everglades—though this time the administration added an ideological twist, accusing the tribe of opposing Trump’s immigration agenda.
Boebert has already hinted this fight isn’t over, and given that both bills passed by voice vote—Congress’s version of “everyone agrees, let’s go home”—there’s at least a path, however narrow, to a veto override. But the real takeaway is simpler: these early-term vetoes weren’t about policy nuance; they were about drawing lines, even if that means crossing his own supporters in the process.
Source: The Hill
Editor: The fastest way to turn your base into your opposition is to shut off their water supply—politically or literally.
But is Boebert surprised? She voted for the release of the Epstein Files and now she’s paying Trump’s price. Duh.
Israel’s New “APC Bomb” Tactic Turned Gaza Neighborhoods into Craters
Israel’s conversion of outdated armored vehicles into multi-ton rolling bombs didn’t just reshape the battlefield—it erased entire neighborhoods from Gaza City in the weeks before the October 10 “ceasefire”.
What Reuters uncovered is nothing short of a tactical pivot with catastrophic civilian fallout: mothballed M113 Armored Personnel Carriers, once meant to move troops, transformed into 1-to-3-ton demolition charges rolling straight into dense urban blocks. As Israeli forces pushed toward central Gaza City, these APC bombs—paired with airstrikes and armor-plated bulldozers—flattened whole swathes of Tel-al-Hawa and Sabra. Drone and satellite imagery confirm the landscape shifted from bustling districts to moonscapes of pulverized concrete.
One family’s story puts a human face on the engineering diagrams and blast-radius charts. Hesham Mohammad Badawi watched his five-story home—and more than 20 surrounding buildings—get blown apart on Sept. 14. He says he received no evacuation warning, describing explosions in five-minute intervals and relatives escaping “by a miracle” through gunfire and collapsing walls. Later, experts reviewing Reuters footage confirmed the tell-tale debris: an APC track weighing hundreds of kilograms hurled onto a rooftop. “We could not believe this was our neighborhood,” he said. Hard to blame him—650 buildings across Tel-al-Hawa, Sabra, and nearby districts vanished in just six weeks.
Military experts interviewed by Reuters called the tactic highly unusual, even reckless, for a dense civilian environment. Their analysis suggests these blasts approached the destructive force of the U.S.-made Mark-84 bombs—ironically, the very weapons Washington had restricted, prompting Israel to improvise. Israel insists every demolition meets standards of “necessity, distinction, and proportionality,” but so far has provided no evidence that these flattened buildings were Hamas assets. Meanwhile, the U.N. human rights office warns that if military necessity wasn’t proven, this kind of destruction “could amount to wanton destruction of property,” a war crime.
The shift to APC-based bombs didn’t happen in a vacuum. With U.S. limits on heavy munitions and Caterpillar D9 bulldozer sales, plus battlefield losses of D9s early in the war, Israeli forces filled the capability gap by detonating APCs—some days reportedly as many as 20. A retired brigadier called it an “innovation of the Gaza War,” a phrase that lands rather differently when set against rows of tents where family homes once stood.
By October, Reuters counted thousands of newly affected structures and documented an uptick in remotely operated explosive vehicles rolled into city streets. Israel’s defense minister has admitted soldiers demolished two dozen towers; the U.N. says there’s no proof those towers were military targets. In some corners of Tel-al-Hawa, Reuters found nearly every building—more than 60—gone.
Even after absorbing the satellite maps and forensic blast analysis, it’s Badawi’s line that lingers: “We didn’t recognize this as our house.” When your own street becomes unrecognizable, something larger than tactics is at stake.
Source: Reuters Graphics Investigation
Editor: It’s amazing how quickly “military necessity” becomes a catch-all explanation—right up until someone asks for receipts. Then suddenly everyone’s inbox is mysteriously full.
The Mar-a-Lago House Call That Finally Got Jeffrey Epstein Banned
An 18-year-old spa worker’s house call to Jeffrey Epstein in 2003—ordered by Mar-a-Lago management—ended with allegations that he pressured her for sex, and it forced Donald Trump to finally bar Epstein from the club.
For years, Mar-a-Lago’s spa sent young employees to Epstein’s Palm Beach mansion as if he were a dues-paying member, even though he wasn’t. Staff say Trump personally instructed them to treat him like one. And while employees quietly warned each other that Epstein exposed himself during house-call massages, the practice continued until that 18-year-old beautician returned from an appointment shaken, went straight to management, and set off internal alarms. A manager faxed Trump the allegations; Trump said it was a “good letter” and ordered Epstein kicked out. Police were never notified.
The incident filled in a crucial missing chapter: this wasn’t some clean, decisive break between Trump and Epstein—it was the culmination of years of discomfort simmering inside Mar-a-Lago. Staff had long been uneasy.
Marla Maples, Trump’s second wife, openly told people that “something was off” about Epstein.
Maxwell, meanwhile, was using the club’s spa as her own recruitment pond, offering young workers under-the-table “extra money” gigs that led straight to Epstein’s door. One of them was Virginia Giuffre, recruited at age 16, who later alleged years of abuse and trafficking.
Even after the 2003 ban, Trump and Epstein still orbited each other: competing over Palm Beach real estate, appearing in each other’s call logs, and overlapping in social circles. Only years later—after Epstein’s arrests and mounting public scrutiny—did Trump begin describing their “falling-out” as a principled stand. The White House now insists he “did nothing wrong,” but the record shows a relationship that unwound slowly, unevenly, and only after an employee reported sexual misconduct.
The larger context makes the episode even more damning. Epstein’s address book contained the names of multiple Mar-a-Lago employees. Maxwell was wandering Palm Beach spas recruiting. And yet the club kept sending young women to Epstein’s mansion until one complaint became too explicit to ignore. For a man who now claims he alone “dropped Epstein,” the truth is less triumphant and far more uncomfortable.
Source: The Wall Street Journal (free)
Editor: The idea that “he hired help” was the breaking point—rather than years of red-flag behavior happening under Trump’s nose—would be funny if it weren’t so evil.
ICE’s $100 Million “Wartime Recruitment” Blitz Aims Squarely at Gun Shows, Veterans—and Your Phone
ICE is rolling out a $100 million, one-year recruitment barrage built to feel less like hiring for a federal agency and more like launching a combat franchise—and the target audience is gun fans, military enthusiasts, and anyone who’s ever hovered near a NASCAR track or a UFC arena.
Not funny: The United States is building a mercenary force.
The internal strategy document obtained by The Washington Post lays out the whole blueprint: flood every platform with militarized messaging, dispatch influencers to sell deportation work as a patriotic calling, and use geofencing to drop ads onto the phones of anyone walking through gun shows, bases, or “tactical lifestyle” events.
This is all in service of Trump’s pledge for mass deportations powered by more than 10,000 fresh hires. ICE leadership calls it a “wartime recruitment” surge—because nothing says “civil administrative agency” like wrapping the job in battlefield aesthetics.
The scope is staggering: deals with influencers in the “tactical/lifestyle enthusiast” space, targeted campaigns for conservative media consumers, and recruitment booths at UFC Fight Nights, rodeos, and NASCAR’s Southern 500.
ICE’s ads promise applicants a “sacred duty” to repel “foreign invaders,” casting immigration as a national siege rather than a policy challenge. The point, as the document admits, is to normalize deportation work through peer-to-peer storytelling from vets, former agents, and “pro-ICE creators,” all backed by eight-figure marketing buys.
The department insists the campaign is “under budget and ahead of schedule,” boasting 220,000 applications in five months. Editor: Serious question—did Congress approve this spending?
But the method is raising alarms—even from former ICE leaders—who warn the war-movie framing risks attracting exactly the kind of recruits who see the job as open-season policing (i.e., mercenaries). Critics say the ads flatten the complexity of immigration enforcement into a simple morality tale, while DHS simultaneously runs “self-deportation” ads aimed at Spanish-language music listeners and people interested in Mexican cuisine. Subtle this is not.
Put all the pieces together and the picture is unmistakable: a federal agency turning to hyper-targeted digital tools, culture-war aesthetics, and influencer marketing to build a mercenary army at speed. The question isn’t whether the approach works—the applicants are pouring in—but what kind of culture it creates once those recruits put on the badge.
Source: The Washington Post
Editor: If your recruitment drive looks indistinguishable from a video-game trailer and a political ad had a baby, maybe pause and ask whether you’re staffing a government agency or assembling a themed militia.
HHS Freezes Minnesota Child-Care Funds After Viral Video Sparks Fraud Crackdown
The Biden-era guardrails are gone, and the new HHS just slammed the brakes on Minnesota’s federal child-care cash after a viral video claimed daycare centers were pulling in taxpayer money without actually watching kids.
Deputy Secretary Jim O’Neill went public with the freeze, citing “blatant fraud that appears to be rampant in Minnesota and across the country.” His message wasn’t subtle: a decade of supposedly bogus daycares, millions in federal funds, and a state government asleep at the switch. HHS has now demanded receipts—literally. States must show photo proof or documentation before federal funds move, and the department has set up a fraud hotline and begun identifying individuals shown in the viral clip. Hey, be a patriot! Turn in your neighbors!
That video, filmed by conservative activist Nick Shirley, shows multiple Minnesota centers appearing to operate with no children present. It caught fire online and triggered DHS Secretary Kristi Noem to announce a “massive investigation” into childcare and other alleged fraud cases. Minnesota officials, while skeptical of the video’s approach, admit the claims require scrutiny. State regulators inspected the centers and found that two had already shut down this year; another intends to reopen. Records show all but two daycares cited in the video retain active licenses and had been inspected in the last six months, with no fraud uncovered—though plenty of smaller violations around training, safety, and cleanliness.
This controversy lands on top of Minnesota’s ongoing federal probes into 14 Medicaid-funded programs—none tied to childcare—but the political gravity comes from the fallout of the Feeding Our Future scandal. That case involved an estimated $250 million in stolen federal food program funds and dozens of convictions, fueling Republican attacks and drawing in Rep. Ilhan Omar, who had previously promoted the program. It’s no mystery why the Trump administration is now leveraging the moment to freeze funds and demand audits; the politics practically write themselves.
Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz has been ordered to produce a full audit—attendance logs, licenses, complaints, inspections. Whether the viral video captures genuine fraud or just empty rooms at the wrong hour remains to be proven, but HHS has already chosen its narrative: trust is gone, and the burden of proof now sits squarely on the state.
Source: UPI
Editor: Nothing says “effective oversight” like governing by viral video—but here we are, building federal policy off TikTok-tier investigations while states scramble to prove children actually exist.
Trump Confirms CIA Strike Inside Venezuela as Covert Campaign Escalates
President Trump has now all but admitted that the CIA carried out a drone strike on Venezuelan soil—an operation U.S. officials say targeted a dock used by drug cartels and marks a major escalation in his long-running pressure campaign against Nicolás Maduro.
Editor: Has Congress approved a declaration of war? Oh yeah, I forgot. The US Constitution doesn’t matter anymore.
The strike hit a loading area believed to service drug-running boats, the first known CIA operation inside Venezuela since Trump rolled out his Caribbean buildup in August. And while the administration won’t officially confirm anything, Trump himself keeps nudging the line: first telling WABC radio the U.S. destroyed a “big facility where ships come from,” then standing beside Netanyahu at Mar-a-Lago and describing a “dock area where they load the boats up with drugs.” When asked whether CIA or military forces carried out the strike, he suddenly had nothing to say—an answer that said plenty.
Special Operations Command distanced itself immediately, insisting it provided no support. That left only one conclusion, which two officials then confirmed anonymously: this was a CIA hit. And it wasn’t spontaneous. Trump has spent months threatening direct action in Venezuela, even taking the rare step of publicly acknowledging he’d authorized the CIA to operate inside the country—an unusual move for a president who normally wraps covert action in plausible deniability.
This also fits a broader strategy. After deploying massive U.S. assets to the Caribbean, Trump’s team executed more than 30 strikes on alleged drug boats and began a de facto blockade of Venezuelan oil tankers. Lawmakers will eventually be looped in—covert actions require notification of key intelligence committee leaders—but choosing the CIA for the first land strike all but guarantees less oversight than a military operation would trigger.
Trump’s justification? He claims Venezuela has “emptied their prisons into the United States” and continues to funnel drugs by sea—statements that do more political work than evidentiary work. Meanwhile, Maduro and his circle remain under U.S. federal indictment on narcoterrorism charges, with the bounty on Maduro’s arrest now doubled to $50 million. For his part, the Venezuelan leader didn’t acknowledge the strike at all during a lengthy public address, an omission that says he’s not eager to spotlight the CIA hitting inside his borders.
But whether Maduro acknowledges it or not, the precedent is now set: the Trump administration has crossed into direct CIA action on Venezuelan soil—and seems perfectly content to let the president himself be the one to leak it.
Source: NPR
Editor: If the goal was subtle statecraft, maybe don’t have the president casually chatting about covert strikes like he’s reviewing last night’s takeout order.