'Long live the swamp': Firestorm as Trump FDA guts rule that kept flavored vapes from kids

Critics across the political spectrum erupted Sunday after the Trump administration's stunning move to clear a path for major tobacco companies to flood gas stations and convenience stores with flavored e-cigarettes — a policy shift that benefits some of President Donald Trump's most reliable donors.

The Food and Drug Administration's Friday guidance, issued without public comment or rule-making, drew immediate outrage from public-health advocates and political commentators who framed the move as a straightforward payoff to tobacco giants Reynolds American and Altria, both of which have donated heavily to Trump's MAGA Inc. PAC and pet projects, including his planned White House ballroom.

MSNBC contributor Molly Jong-Fast reacted with three blunt words: "Bad bad bad."

Brian Thompson, a former NBC New York journalist, tied the move directly to Trump's broken promise to "drain the swamp," writing: "So good to know the Swamp still lives. 'Long Live the Swamp!'"

Political journalist Nick Field zeroed in on the contradiction with Trump's "Make America Healthy Again" branding, asking simply: "Make America Healthy Again?" The MAHA initiative, championed by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., has pitched itself as a crusade against industry capture of federal health agencies.

Dr. Joseph Marine, an arrhythmia cardiologist in Baltimore, offered a sharper substantive critique, suggesting the FDA's tobacco regulatory framework had been so gutted it might as well be replaced "with two words: caveat emptor," Latin for "let the buyer beware."

Former U.S. Senate investigator Paul D. Thacker and writer Logan McMillen also flagged the policy as a corporate giveaway, with McMillen noting the absurdity of a government that "enfranchises" tobacco interests while criminalizing milder stimulants.

The reactions come amid mounting reporting that ties the policy shift to lobbying pressure from a tobacco firm that employed White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles before she joined the administration — and where her daughter works today

A hotly contested Democratic primary in Nebraska's Omaha-area Second Congressional District is shaping up as one of the more unusual dilemmas of the 2026 midterms: the candidate best positioned to flip the seat could, under certain circumstances, inadvertently put the district's coveted electoral vote at risk in a future presidential race, according to the New York Times.

The district, known nationally as the "blue dot" for the speck of Democratic blue it can produce on an otherwise red map, awards a single Electoral College vote to its presidential winner. Nebraska and Maine are the only states that split their electoral votes by congressional district, a quirk that made the blue dot a potential tipping point in 2024.

State Senator John Cavanaugh, the progressive frontrunner backed by the Congressional Progressive Caucus, leads the Democratic primary. But his rivals warn that if he wins the House seat and vacates his state legislative seat, Republican Gov. Jim Pillen could appoint a replacement — potentially giving Republicans enough votes to pass a winner-take-all electoral system, eliminating the blue dot entirely.

Though Republicans have held the House seat for most of the last three decades, the blue dot has gone Democratic in three of the last five presidential races, including for Kamala Harris in 2024 and Joe Biden in 2020. In a sufficiently close presidential election, that single electoral vote could prove decisive, as it nearly did in 2024 when some analysts identified a plausible 269-269 Electoral College tie scenario in which the blue dot would break the deadlock.

Cavanaugh and others, including the Democratic mayor of Omaha and departing Republican Rep. Don Bacon, say the threat is overstated. Republicans already hold a supermajority in the state legislature and have declined to move against the blue dot. Cavanaugh argues Democrats are on track to gain state legislative seats in the fall, easily offsetting any loss.

"They control all of the levers of power in the state of Nebraska, and they haven't eliminated the blue dot," Cavanaugh told the Times.

The primary is on Tuesday.

President Donald Trump lashed out at two of his own Supreme Court picks in a rambling Truth Social post this week, suggesting he should pack the nation's highest court after Justices Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett joined the 6-3 majority that struck down his sweeping tariff agenda as unconstitutional.

"I 'Love' Justice Neil Gorsuch! He’s a really smart and good man, but he voted against me, and our Country, on Tariffs, a devastating move. How do I reconcile this? So bad, and hurtful to our Country ," Trump wrote, before turning his ire on Barrett with equal frustration. "I have, likewise, always liked and respected Amy Coney Barrett, but the same thing with her. They were appointed by me, and yet have hurt our Country so badly!"

Trump then floated the idea of expanding the court himself — a move he and Republicans spent years attacking Democrats for proposing.

"With certain Republican Nominated Justices that we have on the Supreme Court, the Democrats don’t really need to 'PACK THE COURT' any longer," he wrote. "In fact, I should be the one wanting to PACK THE COURT! I’m working so hard to, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, and then people that I appointed have shown so little respect to our Country, and its people!"

The meltdown comes months after Trump called the ruling an "embarrassment to their families" during a White House press conference, and as his replacement tariff strategy has now also been struck down by federal judges, dealing yet another blow to his trade agenda.

Trump also demanded ideological loyalty from his appointees, writing that "it's really OK for them to be loyal to the person that appointed them." Legal experts have noted the ruling was a rare act of judicial independence from a court that had largely rubber-stamped his agenda.

President Donald Trump launched a second furious rant against Fox News on Sunday afternoon, hours after a first explosive Truth Social post attacking Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) for an interview the California Democrat gave on the network earlier in the day.

In an evening post, Trump broadened his target beyond Khanna to include comedian Bill Maher, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), and the network itself — claiming that "MAGA Republicans, who are actually close to 100% of the Party, hate Fox."

"You could listen to FoxNews all day long, absolutely devour it, but then, when you hear SLEAZEBAGS, like Congressman Ro Khanna, 'a wolf in sheep’s clothing,' LIE, LIE, LIE, AND LIE AGAIN, without any pushback, or competent rebuttal from an anchor, in this case, Jacqui Heinrich, the entire Common Sense dialogue that has been going on all day at Fox is completely obliterated!" Trump wrote.

He also went after "Low Rated Bill Maher" — accusing the network of giving him "credibility" — and "very Low IQ Hakeem Jeffries," who he claimed, "probably hates our Country."

Trump's claim that nearly all Republicans "hate" Fox is predictably undercut by his own party's viewing habits.

A Pew Research Center survey last year found 57% of Republicans regularly get news from Fox — more than double the share who turn to any other source. Pew also found that 56% of Republicans say they trust Fox News, the highest trust rating Fox received from any group and the highest of any of the 30 outlets Pew tested among Republican respondents.

Trump's escalating war with the conservative network that has long served as his most reliable media ally has become a regular occurrence.

Last week, he publicly demanded that Fox executives yank Democratic commentator Jessica Tarlov from "The Five," and complained about anchor Shannon Bream for not pushing back hard enough on a Democratic guest.

The latest post ended with a stark warning: "Hard to win Elections like this!"