Blanche says ‘the system worked’ to protect Trump from White House correspondents’ dinner shooting
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche appears on ABC News’ “This Week” on April 26, 2026. (ABC News)
(WASHINGTON) — Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said Sunday that “the system worked” and kept President Donald Trump and other leaders safe from a shooting outside of the White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner on Saturday night that they were attending.
“The system worked; law enforcement and the Secret Service protected all of us. The man barely got past the perimeter. And so when you have a perimeter designed to keep people safe, like President Trump, and it works — that’s something that should be applauded,” Blanche told “This Week” anchor George Stephanopoulos when asked about the fact that the president and many members of the presidential line of succession were there.
“Secondly, as President Trump said, we are not going to stop doing what we’re doing. We’re not going to stop living; we’re not going to stop being out there,” Blanche added. “President Trump is going to continue communicating with the American people in public, and the fact that the vice president and other leadership were there last night in one room, is why we had such a robust security [operation] surrounding the place, inside the place, and it’s why we are all safe.”
Blanche spoke to Stephanopoulos the morning after a shooting incident outside the dinner.
The incident took place near the main magnetometer screening area at the event, according to the Secret Service. A suspect, whom law enforcement sources identified to ABC News as Cole Allen of Torrance, California, is in custody, officials said.
Blanche said the suspect was likely acting alone, although investigations are ongoing, and that “we believe that he traveled by train from Los Angeles to Chicago and then Chicago to Washington, D.C.”
Asked by Stephanopoulos how the suspect may have gotten a firearm into the hotel, Blanche replied, “It’s a good question. And listen, I’m not sure. It appears that he checked in on the 24th [of April] to the hotel, and we’re still looking at video surveillance and footage of where he walked and how he got in and how those firearms got in, but at the end of the day, I expect we’ll have a lot more about that in the coming days.”
President Donald Trump speaks as Vice President JD Vance listens in the Oval Office of the White House, March 16, 2026, in Washington. (Alex Wong/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — The Senate is expected to take up the SAVE America Act this week after President Donald Trump earlier this month thrust the bill into focus with a threat to withhold his signature on all other legislation until the GOP voting reform bill hits his desk.
Debate on the bill could kick off in the Senate as soon as Tuesday, but on Monday the president seemed doubtful that it would get to his desk.
“I think it’s imperative that it gets done. I’m not sure it is,” Trump said when asked about the bill’s outlook.
“I hope [Senate Majority Leader] John Thune can get it across the line. He’s trying. I mean, he told me this morning. I spoke to him, he’s trying,” Trump said. “I think it’ll be a very, very bad thing for our country if they don’t. We’re just asking for basic things,” Trump said.
Things could get quite heated on the floor, but ultimately the legislation, despite having a passionate base of GOP supporters, will almost certainly fail.
Here’s a look at what to know about this bill as it takes center stage this week:
What is the SAVE America Act?
The SAVE America Act is a Republican-led election reform bill that would require photo ID at polling places and mandate that states obtain proof of citizenship before registering a person to vote in a federal election.
Trump has said that passing the SAVE America Act is a top priority. The president has also tacked additional provisions onto the list of things he would like to see in the law: restricting mail-in ballots, banning transgender women from playing in women’s sports and gender-affirming surgeries for minors.
Will the bill the Senate is considering include Trump’s additional demands?
The Senate is expected to consider amendments to the SAVE America Act aimed at adding Trump’s demands. But those amendments would need 60 votes to pass, and are not expected to get enough support to ultimately be tacked onto the bill.
What do Democrats think of the bill?
Senate Democrats have been clear they intend to oppose this legislation, which they say would make it more difficult for millions of Americans to vote.
During a press call on Sunday, Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer called the bill “one of the most despicable pieces of legislation I’ve come across in the many years I’ve been a legislator.”
Democrats have been quick to underscore that the bill does more than require voters to show ID at the polling place. They say it amounts to an effort to nationalize elections and could lead to many people being turned away at their polling place.
What can be expected on the Senate floor this week?
The Senate is expected to hold a potentially lengthy debate on the floor this week as they consider the bill.
It will be a contentious couple of days during which the floor will be open for nearly unlimited debate on the bill. This debate could stretch into this weekend, but the result is already baked. When lawmakers run out of steam to keep debating, there will be a vote to move forward with the bill that requires 60 votes to advance. Democrats will almost certainly block it, and the bill will fail.
Will the SAVE America Act pass?
It is highly unlikely that the SAVE America Act will pass the Senate.
Though there’s going to be a lot of debate on the bill, the Senate rules that require 60 votes to pass most legislative matters will remain intact. That means that even if every Senate Republican were to cast a vote in favor of this legislation, at least seven Democrats would need to support it for it to pass.
Democrats have vowed to block the bill. Without their support, it will fail.
Could senators change the rules?
Yes, they could. But they won’t.
The Senate filibuster rule requires 60 votes to pass most legislative matters into law. Senators have the ability to change their rules with a simple majority of votes, and they’ve faced considerable pressure from Trump and others to do so.
But Thune has been consistent throughout his time as party leader about the lack of support within the Republican conference to change the Senate’s rules. Thune is a supporter of the Senate filibuster, and he has been clear there are not the votes to change the filibuster rule.
Senators are not expected to make modifications to the threshold of votes necessary to pass this bill. Without those changes, its hard to see how this would pass.
If the Senate fails to pass it, what happens?
Then it’s back to the drawing board.
This week’s actions amount to a good-faith effort by Senate Republicans to demonstrate that they are trying to make good on Trump’s priority. But this is largely a messaging vote unlikely to get the support it needs.
The House could take further action to try to revive the bill. But Democratic opposition in the Senate makes it unlikely that any renewed efforts will see a different outcome.
What’s less clear is whether this will be enough to back Trump off of his threat to withhold his signature on all other bills.
Editor’s note: This story has been updated to reflect the elements of the House-passed bill.
A mail-in ballot issued by Hudson County, New Jersey, for the 2024 U.S. general election is seen on September 22, 2024, in Hoboken, New Jersey. (Gary Hershorn/ABC News)
(WASHINGTON) — In a case with potentially major ramifications for the 2026 midterm elections and all federal elections going forward, the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday is considering a Republican Party bid to prevent states from counting mail-in ballots received after Election Day even if they were postmarked on or before.
Thirty states plus D.C. and several U.S. territories have laws allowing tabulation of some late-arriving ballots provided that they were timely cast and received within a specified post-election timeframe, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.
The case before the justices centers on Mississippi’s acceptance of absentee ballots up to five days after Election Day so long as they were received by the Postal Service on or before.
The Republican National Committee, which brought the lawsuit, alleges the policy violates federal law establishing the Tuesday after the first Monday in November as the day for election of members of the House, Senate, and presidential electors, in specified years.
Republicans argue that the term “election” means both “ballot submission and receipt” and that Congress intended that it be completed on a single day.
“Allowing states to count large numbers of mail-in ballots that are received after Election Day undermines trust and confidence in our elections,” said RNC chair Joe Gruters in a statement on the case. “Elections must end on Election Day.”
Mississippi and several voter advocacy groups defending the state law insist “election” has historically meant when voters make their “choice” by marking and submitting their ballots — not necessarily when they are received and counted.
“The weight of the law and the weight of the precedent is on our side,” said Marc Elias, a prominent Democratic election law attorney representing some of the parties defending the Mississippi law.
A Supreme Court decision in favor of the RNC could upend voting policies and procedures in dozens of states five months before voters head to the polls for the midterm elections.
Voting rights advocates also warn that an abrupt change in policy could lead to widespread rejection of ballots that were properly cast by well-intended voters but experienced unintended delivery delays by the Postal Service or other circumstances.
Hundreds of thousands of mail-in ballots in the 2024 general election arrived after Election Day but were still legally counted that year across 22 states and territories with a post-election grace period, according to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission.
Extended ballot receipt deadlines have also been aimed at helping active duty military service members and other Americans living overseas who cast their ballots from afar.
Elias said he believes the RNC suit — against a Republican-led state with minimal absentee voting — was part of a broader effort on the part of President Donald Trump and his allies to make it more difficult to vote by mail under the belief the practice favors Democrats.
“I don’t suspect that spending millions of dollars to affect the handful of ballots in the state of Mississippi that only allows excuse absentee voting anyway to be counted after Election Day is what the RNC is really after,” said Elias. “This is just a partisan effort to undermine mail-in voting.”
In March 2025, Trump signed an executive order that attempted to cut federal election funding to states that have mail ballot receipt grace periods, but it has largely been blocked by federal courts for now.
The president later said on social media that he is leading a “movement to get rid of MAIL-IN BALLOTS,” claiming, without providing evidence, that they lead to voter fraud.
Trump has also been pushing Republicans in Congress to approve the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE America) Act, which would — in part — outlaw voting by mail for anyone without a legitimate excuse, such as military service, illness, or disability, making it impossible to vote in person.
Data on which party would potentially benefit from changes to mail ballot rules is not clear.
Most Americans, 58%, support allowing any voter to cast a ballot by mail, according to a Pew Research Center survey late last year. But there is sharp division among parties, with 83% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters favoring mail-voting with 68% of Republicans and Republican-leaning voters opposed.
The Trump administration, which is not a party to the case, told the court in an amicus brief that it strongly supports a decision striking down Mississippi’s law and others like it.
“Ensuring all ballot boxes close on the same day eliminates incentives and opportunities for fraudulent abuse,” wrote Solicitor General John Sauer. “Leaving them open conflicts not only with the ordinary meaning of ‘election day,’ but also with the very integrity of the election.”
Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch, a Republican, dismissed that claim in a filing with the court, arguing that neither ballot receipt nor ballot counting is part of the “election” and that both have historically extended beyond Election Day.
“Counting votes is not part of the election,” Fitch told the court. “That is why counting votes lawfully can and does occur after Election Day. So, too, with ballot receipt: it is vital — but it is not part of the election itself. So, states may do what the Mississippi legislature has done: make a ‘policy choice’ to require only that absentee ballots be mailed by election day.”
A decision is expected in the case by the end of June.
President Donald Trump speaks to announce that the U.S. had begun “major combat operations” in Iran, on the day Israel and the U.S. conducted strikes on Iran, Feb. 28, 2026. (The White House)
(WASHINGTON) — An Iranian plot to kill then-candidate Donald Trump was clearly on the president’s mind when he ordered the attack that killed Iran’s supreme leader.
“I got him before he got me,” Trump Sunday night, not long after he announced Ayatollah Ali Khamenei had been killed. “They tried twice. Well, I got him first.”
President Trump was referring to an Iranian plot to kill him during the 2024 presidential campaign. During the summer of 2024, U.S. intelligence believed the Iranian government was plotting to kill then-candidate Trump.
The plot was not tied to the assassination attempts against the candidate in Butler, Pennsylvania, or West Palm Beach, Florida, but Trump was briefed on the threat and additional resources were added by the Biden administration to his Secret Service detail.
When I spoke with President Trump late Sunday night after he had returned to the White House from a weekend overseeing military operations in Iran from his club in Mar-a-Lago, he sounded like a president who is feeling invincible.
He said he believes the military operation has been an unmitigated success.
“Nobody else could have done this but me, and you know that,” Trump told me.
Trump told me the Iranians had made significant concessions in the last round of talks. He suggested his decision to cut off talks those and order the attack was driven in part by the success of the military operations to capture Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro, whom the U.S. said was an illegitimately elected president , and to strike the Iranian nuclear facilities last summer in coordination with Israel.
“A year ago, it would have been great to accept that deal for me,” he said on Sunday, “but we have become spoiled.”
Trump told me that someone in the Iranian government reached out to him, but he would not say who.
“I probably shouldn’t tell you,” he said. “One of the few remaining people who are still alive. He doesn’t report to the Supreme Leader anymore.”
Before the attacks, the administration had identified possible leaders of a post-Khamenei Iran, but Trump said they are all gone. Khamenei was killed on Saturday alongside around 40 senior Iranian officials, the Israel Defense Forces said.
“The attack was so successful it knocked out most of the candidates,” Trump said. “It’s not going to be anybody that we were thinking of because they are all dead. Second or third place is dead.”
When asked about his statement earlier in the day that there would be more American casualties.
“It’s war and you have casualties in war,” he said.
Trump marveled at the level of American losses so far, pointing to last summer’s attack and the operation against Maduro in Venezuela as evidence of his administration’s military precision.
“All the things we went through and we lost three people. We lost three,” he said. “But if you ask Iran how many they lost, they can’t count that high.”
U.S. Central Command on Monday said another member of the U.S. military had been killed during the operation against Iran, bringing the total known U.S. deaths to four people. At least 555 people have been killed in Iran in U.S.-Israeli strikes, the Iranian Red Crescent Society said in a statement on Monday.
When asked on Sunday how long the war would go on, Trump said, “We always thought it was a four-to-five-week deal.”
Was he prepared to go longer?
“Sure. We have a lot of ammunition,” he said. “It could also go less.”