Trump to give primetime speech on 2020 election: Sources
U.S. President Donald Trump looks on during a bilateral meeting with the Prime Minister of Iraq Ali al-Zaidi, in the Oval Office of the White House on July 14, 2026 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — President Donald Trump is set to deliver a primetime address Thursday evening, during which he is expected to detail information that he has recently received from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence related to the 2020 election, sources familiar with the matter tell ABC News.
Trump has long pushed debunked conspiracy theories to claim that his 2020 election loss was fraudulent. It’s not immediately clear what allegations he will make as part of his speech.
Sources caution Trump’s plans can always change, but at this point “election fraud” is the topic of his 9 p.m. address.
Despite Trump’s claims of voter fraud that contributed to his 2020 election loss, officials have found no evidence of widespread voter fraud.
Asked about the speech, which he announced on his social media platform on Monday, Trump said it was “really big news,” mentioning the importance of “free and fair elections.”
“Thursday is, it doesn’t get bigger because without free and fair elections, you don’t have a country. We’ll be discussing other things, too. But — but it’s going to be a very big announcement,” Trump said in the Oval Office on Tuesday.
Trump recently installed loyalist Bill Pulte, who has no previous national security experience, to lead DNI and has said that he wanted Pulte to declassify information and fire scores of experienced career staff.
Under the first Trump administration, officials already detailed efforts by Iran, China and Russia to influence the 2020 election, though officials later determined that none of their interference would have changed the election result. Initially Trump administration officials suggested China was also involved in influencing the election, a claim that was later determined by Trump’s intelligence community to be false.
The White House is remaining tight-lipped about the president’s Thursday night speech.
“The truth is, nobody knows yet what President Trump will ultimately say, which is why everyone should tune in,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement about the remarks.
Ken Martin, chair of the Democratic National Committee, speaks during an interview at DNC headquarters in Washington on Sunday, November 2, 2025. (Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — Members of the Democratic National Committee voted down a symbolic resolution aimed at curbing the “growing influence” of “dark money” corporate groups in Democratic primaries that specifically called out the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).
Committee members gathered on Thursday in New Orleans, where a majority of members objected to the resolution for singling out AIPAC and argued it was redundant, since they had already approved a broader measure earlier in the meeting condemning the influence of dark money in the midterms without naming specific groups.
Allison Minnerly, who sponsored the resolution, responded to the criticism that her resolution was singling out AIPAC, the pro-Israel political lobbying group.
“Members like to say that we don’t want to single out AIPAC, but AIPAC will entirely single out them and all of our different progressive leaders when it comes to primary elections,” said Minnerly.
AIPAC’s influence has become a flashpoint inside the Democratic Party, as leaders struggle to respond to rapidly shifting views about Israel among progressives, especially in the wake of the war in Gaza and amid the current U.S.-Israeli war with Iran.
DNC Chair Ken Martin posted on X, stating, “We had various resolutions that focused on different industries and groups, and instead of going one-by-one, we passed a blanket repudiation.”
The panel’s rejection of the AIPAC resolution means it will not go before the full body for a final vote on Friday.
“The DNC made clear today that all Democrats, including millions who are AIPAC members, have the right to participate fully in the Democratic process, and we plan to do just that,” AIPAC spokesperson Deryn Sousa told ABC News.
Minnerly’s resolution stated that “the use of massive outside spending to support or oppose candidates based on their positions regarding international conflicts or foreign governments raises concerns about undue influence over democratic debate and policymaking, potentially constraining elected officials’ ability to represent the views of their constituents,” and referenced the millions of dollars spent by AIPAC in the recent Illinois Democratic primaries.
Andrew Lachman, a DNC member and the former president of California Jewish Democrats, said that it was “troubling” that the resolution was focused on calling out AIPAC.
“There are a lot of super PACs, a lot of right-wing organizations out there. There are a lot of left-wing ones out there that take advantage of the super PAC status as well. We need to address that,” Lachman said. “None of those were mentioned … I think respectfully, if it’s about our campaign finance system, let’s take it on. But when you mention only one group, it comes across like you’re not actually interested in the campaign finance issue and transparency issue. It’s about something else.”
In a statement to ABC News, Brian Romick, the president and CEO of the Democratic Majority for Israel said, “We’re pleased that the DNC Resolutions Committee rejected a set of divisive, anti-Israel resolutions. These measures would be a gift to Republicans, would further fracture our party, and do nothing to bring Israelis and Palestinians closer to peace.”
“They should have voted for the AIPAC resolution given the pernicious influence they had in Illinois,” progressive Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., told ABC News.
In a video posted on X, Khanna said, “anyone who wants to lead the party must condemn and reject AIPAC money.
2 other measures deferred
During the resolutions committee hearing, members also deferred action on two broad resolutions addressing Middle East conflicts, one of which would recognize Palestinian statehood and another that urged the party to support conditioning military aid to Israel. Instead, the proposals were sent to the party’s newly formed Middle East working group.
The question of how productive this group has been was a topic of conversation from DNC members and was mentioned during the resolutions committee hearing.
“We recommend this going back to the task force, but then we can put som. … expectations that we hear back,” said Ron Harris, co-chair of the DNC’s resolution committee, referring to the measure on Palestinian statehood.
Minnerly told ABC News she sponsored a measure to oppose the war in Gaza last August, but the resolution was defeated. In the wake of that, DNC Chair Ken Martin established a Middle East working group.
“I’m not surprised that members of the resolutions committee are eager for an update … Since that meeting [in August], there has not been consistent progress or even forward motion, and the characterizations of the task force were accurate,” said Minnerly, who is a member of the DNC’s Middle East working group.
In recent weeks, progressives like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and Khanna have said they do not support any U.S. military aid to Israel, including defensive systems like the Iron Dome.
When asked if opposing funding for Israel’s defensive systems is a stance more of the Democratic Party should represent, Minnerly told ABC News last week in advance of Thursday’s meeting, “The further escalation has gone, the longer the war has been, we have seen the Democratic Party really migrate towards this ideal of de-escalation and not funding conflict.”
Lachman, however, also speaking in advance of Thursday’s meeting, said that he just sees this change in tune from some Democrats as “pressure from certain segments within the [Democratic Socialists of America]” and “some people who may be future candidates, particularly for president, are just trying to pander to them.”
He added, “I don’t think this is a mainstream view within the party, by any stretch of the imagination.”
An exterior view of the U.S. Capitol on September 9, 2024 in Washington, DC. (Bonnie Cash/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — Congress is one step closer to passing its most far-reaching housing reform legislation in decades.
The Senate voted 85-5 on the final passage of the 21st Century Road to Housing Act on Monday.
With midterm elections months away, Congress is taking noteworthy and rare bipartisan action to tackle one element of affordability, a talking point in races across the country this year.
The bill comes as a recent Zillow analysis found the cost of buying a starter home is $1 million or more in a record 242 cities across the country.
The legislation aims to address the nation’s housing shortage by increasing the supply of homes and overall homeownership. This is achieved through loosening regulations to encourage housing construction and limiting Wall Street investors’ ability to buy homes that could go to families instead.
A 2024 study from the government-sponsored housing enterprise Freddie Mac estimated that U.S. faces a shortfall of 3.7 million units contributing to its housing crisis.
The bill also provides grants to turn vacant buildings into affordable housing.
By increasing the supply of homes for sale, the legislation is intended to lower home costs for Americans.
With the Senate passing the bill 85-5, the legislation now moves to the House of Representatives, where it is also expected to pass with overwhelming bipartisanship as early as Tuesday night when they return from their recess break.
Once through Congress, the bill will head to the desk of President Donald Trump to become law.
“Today’s vote proves that it is possible to find bipartisan common ground on legislation that actually helps the American people, and importantly, it proves that bipartisan legislation doesn’t have to be the weakest, most milquetoast agreement that doesn’t offend anyone or do too much to help anyone,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren, the top Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee, said on the Senate floor ahead of Monday’s vote.
“I don’t say this a lot, but today I’m proud to be a member of the United States Senate,” Warren said.
Senate Banking Committee Chairman Sen. Tim Scott, a Republican from South Carolina, discussed how the bill can give Americans more options on Monday.
“When you put more housing supply on the market, more people have a chance to become first-time homebuyers,” he said. “Today, the average first-time homebuyer is 40 years old. That is just too old.”
Republican Sens. Ron Johnson (Wisc.), Mike Lee (Utah), Rand Paul (Ky.), Rick Scott (Fla.) and Tommy Tuberville (Ala.) voted against the legislation. Over the weekend, Sen. Rick Scott explained his objection to the legislation, arguing that the federal government cannot successfully impact housing regulation.
“Well, I don’t see how it’s going to drive down the cost of housing. What’s going to drive down the U.S. cost of housing, two things, if you balance a budget, interest rates are going to come down, one of the biggest with lousing,” Scott said on Fox News’ Saturday in America. “Number two, most of regulation with respect to housing is not the federal level. It’s at the local level, what cities and counties are doing. The federal government cannot drive the cost of housing down.”
President Donald Trump holds an executive order he signed during an Ambassador Meeting in the Cabinet Room of the White House on March 25, 2025.(Win McNamee/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — A federal judge on Wednesday permanently blocked the Trump administration from enforcing an executive order signed last year that required proof of citizenship to register to vote and demanded mail-in ballots be received by Election Day.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
