President Donald Trump signed an executive order Monday classifying fentanyl as a weapon of mass destruction, giving the U.S. government additional legal firepower in its efforts to combat illegal trafficking of the synthetic drug. The executive order cites the lethality of the drug, which kills tens of thousands of Americans every year, and the fact that transnational criminal groups the Trump administration has designated as foreign terrorist organizations use the sale of fentanyl to fund activities that undermine U.S. national security. Speaking in the Oval Office as he signed the order, the president said the amount of drugs coming into the U.S. by sea has decreased by 94 percent (most drugs, including fentanyl, enter the U.S. via land ports of entry). Trump added that drug flows are “a direct military threat to the United States of America.” The administration has focused considerable resources on combating fentanyl as part of its efforts to secure the U.S. border with Mexico. Top administration officials have argued that Trump’s strict immigration limits and border security measures have led to a drop in domestic consumption of fentanyl. “With a secure border, lives are being saved every day, sex trafficking has plummeted, fentanyl has plummeted,” White House border czar Tom Homan said Monday. While classifying a narcotic as a WMD is a nearly unprecedented presidential action, there has been public debate about characterizing fentanyl that way before. The Biden administration had previously faced pressure from a bipartisan contingent of attorneys general to classify fentanyl as a WMD. And fentanyl, even in tiny quantities, is potent enough to kill large numbers of people very quickly through overdoses. The synthetic drug, which has some limited legal pharmacological uses, mostly comes to the United States via Mexico, where drug cartels manufacture fentanyl using “precursor chemicals” imported from China. Fentanyl production is also booming in the Golden Triangle region of southeast Asia, which includes the countries of Laos, Myanmar and Thailand. Fentanyl can be easily made in makeshift labs, adding to the challenge authorities have faced in eradicating production within their borders. The administration, meanwhile, has accused cartels operating in Venezuela of trafficking fentanyl into the United States as a justification for the use of lethal force against alleged drug boats in the Caribbean Sea. Venezuela, while seen as a hub for cocaine trafficking, is not viewed as a major contributor to global fentanyl trafficking. The timing of the designation is striking, as speculation mounts that the U.S. will carry out land strikes against alleged drug trafficking targets on Venezuelan soil as part of its pressure campaign against Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. Declaring fentanyl a weapon of mass destruction would give the U.S. additional legal justification to use military force against Venezuela. Claims that Iraq still possessed WMDs were used as a legal justification for the invasion of the Middle Eastern country and the overthrow of its then-leader Saddam Hussein under the George W. Bush administration. The U.S. has also previously floated military strikes against Colombian and Mexican drug cartels, and it has been expected that the U.S. will eventually turn its focus away from Venezuela toward threats from groups in those countries.

BRUSSELS — Donald Trump should not get involved in European democracy, Ursula von der Leyen said Thursday, days after the U.S. president launched a stinging attack on Europe. “It is not on us, when it comes to elections, to decide who the leader of the country will be, but on the people of this country … That’s the sovereignty of the voters, and this must be protected,” the European Commission president said in an interview at the POLITICO 28 gala event in Brussels. “Nobody else is supposed to interfere, without any question,” the Commission chief added in response to a question about the U.S. National Security Strategy, which was published last week and caused uproar in Europe. The strategy claims Europe is facing “civilizational erasure” within the next 20 years, a narrative that has resonated well with Europe’s far-right leaders, including Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, as well as in Russia. The document also bashes European efforts to rein in far-right parties, calling such moves political censorship, and speaks of “cultivating resistance to Europe’s current trajectory within European nations.” Von der Leyen said this is one of the reasons why the EU proposed the Democracy Shield, meant to step up the fight against foreign interference online, including in elections. The Commission chief said she has always had “a very good working relationship” with U.S. presidents, and ” this is also the case today.” However, she stressed that Europe should focus on itself rather than making comparisons with others. “From the bottom of my heart, I’m a convinced transatlanticist. But what is so important? [What’s] important is that … we take pride in being the European Union, that we look at our strength and that we deal with the challenges that we do have,” she said. “Ofa course, our relationship to the United States has changed. Why? Because we are changing. And this is so important that we keep in mind: what is our position? What is our strength? Let’s work on these. Let’s take pride in that. Let’s stand up for a unified Europe. This is our task … [to] look at ourselves and be proud of ourselves,” von der Leyen said, to applause from the crowd. The U.S. president denounced Europe as a “decaying” group of nations led by “weak” people in an interview with POLITICO’s Dasha Burns that aired Tuesday in a special episode of The Conversation podcast. “I think they’re weak,” Trump said, referring to the continent’s presidents and prime ministers, adding, “I think they don’t know what to do. Europe doesn’t know what to do.”  POLITICO on Thursday named Trump the most powerful person shaping European politics, placing him at the top of the annual P28 list. The list highlights who is expected to have the most sway over Europe’s political direction in the coming year, based on input from POLITICO’s newsroom and the power players POLITICO’s journalists speak with.

U.S. President Donald Trump’s top envoy to the EU told POLITICO that overregulation is causing “real problems” economically and forcing European startups to flee to America. Andrew Puzder said businesses in the bloc “that become successful here go to the United States because the regulatory environment is killing them.” “Wouldn’t it be great if this part of the world, instead of deciding it was going to be the world’s regulator, decided once again to be the world’s innovators?” he added in an interview at this year’s POLITICO 28 event. “You’ll be stronger in the world and you’ll be a much better trade partner and ally to the United States.” Puzder’s remarks come as the Trump administration launched a series of blistering attacks on Europe in recent days. Washington’s National Security Strategy warned of the continent’s “civilizational erasure” and Trump himself blasted European leaders as “weak” and misguided on migration policy in an interview with POLITICO. Those broadsides have sparked concerns in Europe that Trump could seek to jettison the transatlantic relationship. But Puzder downplayed the strategy’s criticism and struck a more conciliatory note, saying the document was “more ‘make Europe great again’ than it was ‘let’s desert Europe’” and highlighted Europe’s potential as a partner.

BRUSSELS — Donald Trump says he wants to reshape politics in Europe. For many voters in major European democracies, it feels like he already has. Trump’s return as U.S. president is far more significant for voters in Germany, France and the U.K. than the election of their own national leaders, according to respondents to the first international POLITICO Poll. The finding vividly illustrates the impact of Trump’s first year back in the White House on global politics, with his sway felt particularly keenly in Europe. The online survey, conducted by the independent London-based polling company Public First, also shows many Europeans share Trump’s critical assessment in a POLITICO interview earlier this week of the relative weakness of their own national leaders. The poll had more than 10,000 respondents from the U.S., Canada and the three biggest economies in Europe: Germany, France and the United Kingdom. For leaders like Germany’s Chancellor Friedrich Merz and French President Emmanuel Macron, it makes particularly grim reading: They are seen by their own voters as having largely failed to handle the unpredictable American president effectively so far. EU leaders fared worst of all. In France, only 11 percent thought Brussels had done a good job of handling Trump, with 47 percent saying EU leadership had navigated the relationship badly. Britain’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer gets a slightly better rating — his record on managing Trump is seen as neither good nor bad. “These results show how much Trump has shaped the last year of political conversation not just in the U.S., but globally,” said Seb Wride, head of polling at Public First. “This is true for the public as much as it is for policymakers — the fact that so many believe Trump’s election, on the other side of the world, has been more significant for their own country than their own leaders’ election lays this bare.” The polling comes at an acutely sensitive moment for transatlantic relations. A new White House National Security Strategy unveiled last week destroyed any notion of American neutrality toward its historic allies in Europe, instead launching a crusade to convert the region’s democracies to his own MAGA ideology. POLITICO on Tuesday named Trump as the most powerful person shaping European politics, at the top of its annual P28 list. The list is not an endorsement or award. It reflects, instead, each individual’s capacity to shape Europe’s politics and policies in the year ahead, as assessed by the POLITICO newsroom and the power players POLITICO’s journalists speak with. In a White House interview on Monday with POLITICO’s Dasha Burns for a special episode of “The Conversation,” Trump expanded on the message, saying he would endorse candidates from parties in Europe who shared his outlook — especially on shutting down immigration. ELECTIONS MATTER, BUT SOME MORE THAN OTHERS In an effort to unpack Trump’s disruptive influence on international affairs since he returned for his second term in January, Public First conducted an online survey of 10,510 adults aged 18 and over, between Dec. 5 and Dec. 9. The research found that in Germany and the U.K. over half of respondents considered Trump’s election even more important than the elections of their own leaders, even though both Merz and Starmer have only relatively recently won power themselves. In Germany, 53 percent of people thought Trump’s election was more significant for their country than the election of Merz, compared with 25 percent who thought the German election was more important. In the U.K., 54 percent said Trump’s return was more significant than Starmer’s Labour Party taking power and ending 14 years of Conservative rule, compared with 28 percent who said the change of national government last year was more important for Britain.  French voters were a little less stark in their view, but still 43 percent thought Trump’s victory was more significant, against 25 percent who believed Macron’s election had a bigger impact on France. In Canada, however, respondents were split. Mark Carney’s victory in April, on the back of a campaign promise to stand up to Trump, was viewed by 40 percent as more significant than Trump’s return to power. Only slightly more — 45 percent — said Trump’s win was more significant for Canada than Carney’s. TRANSPARENCY TRUMPS STRENGTH In his interview with POLITICO, Trump denounced European leaders as “weak,” provoking retorts from politicians across the European Union and even prompting the pope to urge him not to “break apart” the transatlantic alliance. The researchers found that Europeans broadly shared Trump’s view that their leaders were weak, at least in comparison to him. They rated Trump as more “strong and decisive” than their own leader, by 74 percent to 26 percent in Germany; 73 percent to 27 percent in France; and 69 percent to 31 percent in the U.K. Canada was again the notable exception, with 60 percent saying Carney is stronger and more decisive compared to Trump, and only 40 percent saying the reverse.  Overall, however, the quality of being a strong and decisive leader is not seen as the most desirable trait among voters questioned in the survey. Far more important across all five countries in the research, including the U.S., is being honest and transparent.  “Strength is not the most important trait for a leader, but it is clearly an area where European leaders’ approach fall short so his words in the POLITICO interview will ring true,” said Wride.  Pollsters also asked how people felt their own leaders were handling the whirlwind of geopolitical upheaval in Trump’s second term. In France and Germany, more people think their leaders handled Trump badly than approved: Only 24 percent thought Merz had done a good job, while 34 percent thought his handling of Trump had been bad.  In France, Macron fared even worse. Just 16 percent of respondents said he had done well compared to 39 percent who thought he had done badly at managing relations with the White House. The verdict on Starmer was mixed: 29 percent thought he was handling Trump well, the same proportion as said he was doing badly. That represents an underwhelming verdict on a prime minister who has made a priority of maintaining a warm and effective alliance with the U.S. president.  RESISTANCE VS. STANDING UP TO TRUMP The research found that people in Europe wanted their leaders to stand up to Trump and challenge him, rather than prioritize getting along with him. However, when asked how their own particular national leaders should behave, Europeans took the opposite view, saying collaboration was more important than challenging the president.  Canadians remained punchy regardless, with a slight preference for Carney to confront Trump.  “Perhaps the only opportunity Trump has offered national leaders is the opportunity to stand up to him, something which we find tends to improve perceptions of them,” said Wride, from Public First. “Having fallen short on this, from the public’s perspective, leaders are seen to have largely failed to respond for the last year.” This edition of The POLITICO Poll was conducted from Dec. 5 to Dec. 9, surveying 10,510 adults online, with at least 2,000 respondents each from the U.S., Canada, U.K., France and Germany. Results for each country were weighted to be representative on dimensions including age, gender and geography, and have an overall margin of sampling error of ±2 percentage points for each country. Smaller subgroups have higher margins of error. The survey is an ongoing project from POLITICO and Public First, an independent polling company headquartered in London, to measure public opinion across a broad range of policy areas. You can find new surveys and analysis each month at politico.com/poll. Have questions or comments? Ideas for future surveys? Email us at poll@politico.com.

U.S. President Donald Trump’s plan to require tourists to hand over their social media data ahead of next year’s World Cup generated outrage on Wednesday.  An elected European official, human rights groups and fan organizations condemned the move and urged the world football governing body, FIFA, to pressure the Trump administration to reverse course.   Visitors to the U.S. — including those from visa-free countries such as France, Germany and Britain — would have to submit five years of social media activity before being allowed through the border, according to a proposal by the Trump administration published Wednesday.  The new rules, which would also require travelers to provide emails, phone numbers and addresses used in the last five years, would come into effect early next year — shortly before hundreds of thousands of football fans are expected to travel to the U.S. to watch their teams compete in the World Cup, which begins in June. The U.S. is co-hosting the tournament with Mexico and Canada.  “President Trump’s plan to screen visitors to the U.S. based on their past five-year social media history is outrageous,” Irish Member of the European Parliament Barry Andrews of the centrist Renew group said in a statement.   “Even the worst authoritarian states in the world do not have such an official policy,” he added. “The plans would of course seriously damage the U.S. tourist industry as millions of Europeans would no longer feel safe … including football fans due to attend next year’s World Cup.”  The Trump administration has stepped up social media surveillance at the border, vetting profiles and denying tourists entry or revoking visas over political posts, prompting rights groups to make accusations of censorship and overreach.  Minky Worden, director of global initiatives at Human Rights Watch — which has repeatedly warned FIFA about its interactions with the Trump administration — called the new entry requirements “an outrageous demand that violates fundamental free speech and free expression rights.”  “This policy expressly violates [football governing body] FIFA’s human rights policies, and FIFA needs to pressure the Trump administration to reverse it immediately,” she added. “The World Cup is not an opportunity for the U.S. to exclude and harass fans and journalists whose opinions Trump officials don’t like.”  FIFA directed POLITICO to the U.S. State Department when asked for comment. The State Department and Customs and Border Protection, the agency that authored the proposal, did not immediately respond to POLITICO’s requests for comment.   The prospect of turning over years of social media data to American authorities also sparked fury from football supporters, who turned their fire on FIFA.  Fan organizations condemned the move and urged FIFA to pressure the Trump administration to reverse course. | Mustafa Yalcin/Getty Images “Freedom of expression and the right to privacy are universal human rights. No football fan surrenders those rights just because they cross a border,” said Ronan Evain, executive director at Football Supporters Europe, a representative group for fans. “This policy introduces a chilling atmosphere of surveillance that directly contradicts the welcoming, open spirit the World Cup is meant to embody, and it must be withdrawn immediately. “This is a World Cup without rules. Or at least the rules change every day. It’s urgent that FIFA clarifies the security doctrine of the tournament, so that supporters can make an informed decision whether to travel or stay home,” he added.  Aaron Pellish contributed to this report. 

Listen on * Spotify * Apple Music * Amazon Music Die Bundesregierung verschiebt die Entscheidung über das neue Bürgergeld. In der vorletzten Kabinettssitzung des Jahres wird deutlich, dass wichtige juristische Fragen noch offen sind. Rasmus Buchsteiner erklärt, warum die Regierung mehr Zeit braucht, welche technischen Details nun geprüft werden und wie das Thema am Abend im Koalitionsausschuss weiter verhandelt wird. Auch andere offene Projekte wie Planungsbeschleunigung, Industriestrompreis und Rentenfragen stehen dort erneut auf der Tagesordnung. Parallel sorgt ein Interview von Donald Trump mit POLITICO für neues Kopfschütteln in Europa. Wieder greift er die Europäische Union und besonders die Migrationspolitik. Auch für die Ukraine findet er Worte, die in Europa wenig gefallen dürften. Dasha Burns, die das Gespräch für ihren Podcast “The Conversation” geführt hat, schildert, wie Trump Europa sieht, wie er direkt spricht und warum seine Aussagen zu London, Paris und Kiew für politische Unruhe sorgen. Sie beschreibt außerdem den Ablauf und die Besonderheiten eines solchen Interviews. Das Video des gesamten Interviews gibt es hier.  Im 200-Sekunden-Interview bewertet Jürgen Hardt, außenpolitischer Sprecher der Unionsfraktion, die Lage. Er erläutert, warum Europa trotz Trumps Tonfall auf Partnerschaft setzt, welche Fortschritte Deutschland bei Verteidigung und Abschreckung vorweisen will und welche Bedeutung die Debatte über eingefrorene russische Vermögen für die Ukrainehilfe hat. Das Berlin Playbook als Podcast gibt es jeden Morgen ab 5 Uhr. Gordon Repinski und das POLITICO-Team liefern Politik zum Hören – kompakt, international, hintergründig. Für alle Hauptstadt-Profis: Der Berlin Playbook-Newsletter bietet jeden Morgen die wichtigsten Themen und Einordnungen. Jetzt kostenlos abonnieren. Mehr von Host und POLITICO Executive Editor Gordon Repinski: Instagram: @gordon.repinski | X: @GordonRepinski. Legal Notice (Belgium) POLITICO SRL Forme sociale: Société à Responsabilité Limitée Siège social: Rue De La Loi 62, 1040 Bruxelles Numéro d’entreprise: 0526.900.436 RPM Bruxelles info@politico.eu www.politico.eu

President Donald Trump has pledged to “permanently pause migration from all Third World Countries,” in what would be a major escalation of the U.S. government’s tough-on-immigration policy. Trump said the suspension will remain in place until the U.S. immigration system “fully recovers,” and vowed to terminate what he called “the millions of Biden illegal admissions.” He also promised to “remove anyone who is not a net asset to the United States or is incapable of loving our Country,” strip federal benefits from non-citizens, and deport any foreign national deemed a security risk, public burden or “incompatible with Western civilization.” Trump made the announcement on his Truth Social platform after a gunman opened fire near the White House on Wednesday, killing a National Guard member and wounding one of her colleagues. Authorities identified the suspected shooter as 29-year-old Rahmanullah Lakanwal, an Afghan national. CIA Director John Ratcliffe confirmed to POLITICO that Lakanwal had previous ties to the U.S. — including to the intelligence agency. “In the wake of the disastrous Biden Withdrawal from Afghanistan, the Biden Administration justified bringing the alleged shooter to the United States in September 2021 due to his prior work with the U.S. Government, including CIA, as a member of a partner force in Kandahar, which ended shortly following the chaotic evacuation,” Ratcliffe said. “This individual — and so many others — should have never been allowed to come here. Our citizens and servicemembers deserve far better than to endure the ongoing fallout from the Biden Administration’s catastrophic failures. God bless our brave troops,” he added. Trump condemned the shooting on Wednesday as “an act of evil and act of hatred and an act of terror,” calling it “a crime against our entire nation.” National Guard troops have been stationed in Washington since August, when Trump ordered their deployment as part of his intensified immigration enforcement and crackdown on street crime. Shortly after the shooting, U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said that Trump had instructed him to deploy an additional 500 National Guard troops to Washington. “Only REVERSE MIGRATION can fully cure this situation,” Trump said.

Some of the Senate GOP’s top Russia hawks are up in arms over a peace plan President Donald Trump hopes will end Vladimir Putin’s war in Ukraine. The plan — which would see Ukraine ceding Crimea, Donbas, Luhansk and parts of Kherson and Zaporizhia; place limits on Kyiv’s military and permanently block a pathway to NATO membership — has drawn the ire of Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), who are urging the White House to refrain from actions they say would be detrimental to the region. “While there are many good ideas in the proposed Russia-Ukraine peace plan, there are several areas that are very problematic and can be made better,” Graham, a Trump ally who has long promoted a bill that would place crippling sanctions on Moscow, wrote in a post on X Saturday. “The goal of any peace deal is to end the war honorably and justly – and not create new conflict.” McConnell, who hasn’t shied away from criticizing the White House over defense and foreign policy since Trump won reelection last year, compared the proposal to former President Joe Biden’s harried exit from Afghanistan in 2021. “Putin has spent the entire year trying to play President Trump for a fool,” he said in a statement Friday. “If Administration officials are more concerned with appeasing Putin than securing real peace, then the President ought to find new advisors. Rewarding Russian butchery would be disastrous to America’s interests. And a capitulation like Biden’s abandonment of Afghanistan would be catastrophic to a legacy of peace through strength.” In a Friday post on X, Wicker said that he was skeptical that the “so-called ‘peace plan’” could achieve real peace and detailed his opposition to limiting the size of Ukraine’s military. “The size and disposition of Ukraine’s armed forces is a sovereign choice for its government and people,” he wrote. “And any assurances provided to Putin should not reward his malign behavior or undermine the security of the United States or allies.” The three senators are far from the only Republicans wary of the president’s sudden push for peace. A coalition of House lawmakers led by Republican Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Penn.), a co-chair of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus, has announced plans to force a discharge petition over the sanctions legislation shortly after returning from the Thanksgiving recess. Meanwhile, Ukraine’s European allies are fuming, and experts caution the 28-point plan, drafted with Russian input, may actually undermine Ukraine’s push for sustainable peace. But the White House believes now is its best chance to pressure Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to make peace as the Ukrainian leader faces scandal at home. The administration has given him until Thanksgiving — which is under a week away — to agree to the proposal. Despite the pressure campaign, Trump himself suggested Saturday that his mid-week missive to Ukraine wasn’t set in stone. “We’re trying to get it ended. One way or the other, we have to get it ended,” Trump told reporters outside the White House when asked whether the deal sent to Zelenskyy was his final offer. “He can continue to fight his little heart out.”

Get ready to read the Epstein files. President Donald Trump signed the Epstein Files Transparency Act into law this week, starting the 30-day clock for the administration to publicly release information about the case against convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. In recent months, the issue has become a political juggernaut, as prominent figures and politicians have faced renewed scrutiny for their ties to the late disgraced financier. The bill’s passage defied political odds: House Republican leadership spent months trying to prevent a vote on the legislation at the White House’s behest, only for Trump to abruptly reverse course and give the effort his blessing. Now, the Justice Department has to scramble to prepare more than 300 gigabytes worth of documents — which could include heavy redactions — before a looming December deadline. Here’s POLITICO’s guide to get you up to speed on the Epstein files. WHEN WILL WE SEE THE FILES? The administration has about a month to prepare the disclosure for the public. The bill Trump signed into law Wednesday demands Attorney General Pam Bondi release a host of wide-ranging materials in her department’s possession related to Epstein and his co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell. DOJ has 30 days to “make publicly available in a searchable and downloadable format all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials,” the bill states. Relevant documents include internal communications among DOJ staffers and data from institutions — such as businesses or universities — that were tied to Epstein’s alleged trafficking scheme. Bondi must also hand over a “list of all government officials and politically exposed persons” in the files to the House and Senate Judiciary committees. Asked Wednesday how and when the Justice Department plans to distribute the files, Bondi spoke in vague terms. “We will continue to follow the law with maximum transparency while protecting victims,” she said. Still, Bondi’s claim that her agency is following through on past disclosures undercuts a July statement from DOJ and the FBI “that no further disclosure” of Epstein-related materials “would be appropriate or warranted.” Justice Department spokespeople did not respond to a request for further comment. WILL THE FILES BE REDACTED? There will certainly be redactions among the materials due to be released, particularly around the names of potential victims. Bondi can redact identifiable information to protect victims’ privacy along with depictions of abuse, death or injuries. She can also withhold information to protect ongoing federal cases, along with information that may risk national defense or international policy. Congress has ordered that any redactions be justified in writing and publicly disseminated. But in an apparent effort to ensure that the identities of potential Epstein accomplices are outed, the bill states that Bondi cannot withhold information “on the basis of embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity.” WHAT NEW MATERIAL DO WE ACTUALLY EXPECT? The documents disclosed by the Justice Department will likely be a mix of new information and previously disclosed material, since reams of documents from investigations into Epstein and Maxwell have already been released. DOJ brought federal sex trafficking charges against Epstein over his alleged abuse of underage girls, and Epstein died by suicide in 2019 while awaiting trial on those charges. Epstein had previously pleaded guilty in 2008 to state prostitution charges in Florida after reaching a federal non-prosecution agreement with the U.S. attorney’s office there that allowed him to serve minimal jail time. Substantial material in DOJ’s investigative files from the Epstein and Maxwell cases was disclosed as evidence in the Maxwell trial, where she was convicted on sex trafficking charges, or through various civil lawsuits. Maxwell is serving a 20-year prison sentence. In recent weeks, Congress also released thousands of other documents obtained directly from Epstein’s estate. But there are significant tranches of material that have never been seen by the public. That includes any prosecution memos laying out the evidence to support charging individuals examined during the investigation; transcripts of witness interviews; and materials obtained through the searches conducted of Epstein’s five palatial properties. Bondi also could release documents provided in response to subpoenas issued in the federal investigations, which could include materials from financial institutions, as well as email accounts and phone records. CAN DOJ WITHHOLD SOME MATERIAL? Yes, the Justice Department can choose not to release certain material if it determines that making the material public “would jeopardize an active federal investigation or ongoing prosecution, provided that such withholding is narrowly tailored and temporary, ”according to the bill Trump signed. Last week before the bill signing Trump ordered the department to open an investigation into prominent Democrats’ ties to Epstein, and Bondi assigned the task to Manhattan U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton. While it could be viewed as a loophole, the situation may present a bit of a conundrum for the Trump administration, since any material that looks incriminating for Democrats is likely precisely the material they’d seek to release, not withhold. Bondi suggested Wednesday that the Manhattan investigation could be the basis to hold back some records, but she was circumspect about how it would impact the congressionally-mandated document dump. “We’re not going to say anything else on that because now it is a pending investigation in the Southern District of New York,” she said. There is also a high likelihood that the Justice Department will withhold some material recovered from Epstein’s homes in Palm Beach, Manhattan, on his private island or other locations, because federal agents say that’s where they found child pornography. In Epstein’s Upper East Side mansion, for example, agents found thousands of sexually suggestive photographs, some in a locked safe they sawed open. Many were on compact discs with handwritten labels, the details of which prosecutors redacted in court filings as “Young [Name] + [Name].” When judges were considering releases of sealed information in civil litigation involving Epstein, some of his associates — acting anonymously — came forward to object to additional disclosures. It’s possible Epstein’s acquaintances could try something similar this time, but they would face an uphill battle.

Listen on * Spotify * Apple Music * Amazon Music Während die Junge Gruppe der Union das Reformvorhaben für die Rente weiter ablehnt, spielt CSU-Chef Markus Söder eine entscheidende Rolle. Er hält die Koalition zusammen, nutzt aber den Moment, um seine eigene Handschrift in der Sozialpolitik zu betonen. Vor allem mit der Mütterrente, die Milliarden kostet und weitere Konflikte auslöst. Im 200-Sekunden-Interview spricht Konrad Körner, jüngster CSU-Abgeordneter im Bundestag, über Generationengerechtigkeit, Loyalität und die Frage, wie weit Kompromisse gehen dürfen. Danach richtet sich der Blick in die USA. Dort steht die mögliche Freigabe der Epstein-Akten bevor. Franziska Nocke von POLITICO erklärt, warum sich Donald Trump plötzlich für Transparenz ausspricht, welche Dynamik das in den Reihen der Republikaner ausgelöst hat und was das über die Machtverhältnisse in der Partei verrät. Hier geht’s zur Testversion unseres Newsletters D.C. Decoded. Zum Schluss geht es um digitale Souveränität. Bei einer Veranstaltung im Axel-Springer-Journalistenclub Politiker und Unternehmer über die digitale Abhängigkeit und Unabhängigkeit Europas von den USA und Asien. Das Berlin Playbook als Podcast gibt es jeden Morgen ab 5 Uhr. Gordon Repinski und das POLITICO-Team liefern Politik zum Hören – kompakt, international, hintergründig. Für alle Hauptstadt-Profis: Der Berlin Playbook-Newsletter bietet jeden Morgen die wichtigsten Themen und Einordnungen. Jetzt kostenlos abonnieren. Mehr von Host und POLITICO Executive Editor Gordon Repinski: Instagram: @gordon.repinski | X: @GordonRepinski.