ICE Barbie Visited Biohazard Lab With RFK Jr. Before Hospitalization
'With @Sec_Noem and @SenRandPaul inspecting the biological hazard labs at Fort Detrick,' the Health and Human Services Secretary posted, sharing an image of himself with Noem and GOP Sen. Rand Paul at the Integrated Research Facility in Frederick, Maryland.
On Tuesday, Noem was taken to the hospital by ambulance for an 'allergic reaction,' DHS' Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin told the Daily Beast in a statement.
'She was transported to the hospital out of an abundance of caution. She is alert and recovering,' McLaughlin said.
It's not clear what prompted the allergic reaction, and there's nothing to suggest the incident was anything more than a bizarre coincidence.
Noem is yet to comment on her condition publicly.
The Integrated Research Facility at Fort Detrick studies viruses 'causing high-consequence disease' such as Ebola and SARS-CoV-2, according to its site. One of its focus areas is to 'mitigate major public health events related to emerging or reemerging infectious diseases or biological weapons attacks.'
The MAHA Institute, a think tank supporting Kennedy's 'Make America Healthy Again' agenda, posted on X earlier that Noem, Paul, and Kennedy had toured the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases biosecurity lab at Fort Detrick on Monday.
The offices of Noem, Paul and Kennedy did not immediately return requests for comment.
Kennedy's department ordered an indefinite work stoppage at the lab in April.
A spokesperson for NIH told WIRED at the time that the safety stand-down 'follows identification and documentation of personnel issues involving contract staff that compromised the facility's safety culture.'
An unnamed HHS official told Fox News the incident stemmed from a 'lover's spat' between researchers at the facility, which allegedly resulted in one of the people poking holes in the other's personal protective equipment.
Kennedy told a Senate committee in May the FBI was investigating it as a potentially 'deliberate criminal act' because the pathogens the individuals were handling were highly dangerous. He said he intended to visit the facility with Noem.
Democrats last week pressed Kennedy's office for more answers on the research pause, noting that scientists at the Integrated Research Facility 'study some of the most dangerous pathogens and viruses to prevent, address, and eradicate high-consequence and deadly diseases,' and that safety measures there 'are of the utmost importance for our constituents in the surrounding communities.'
The letter also asked for a timeline on when work at the labs would resume.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
a minute ago
- Newsweek
Trump Bill Student Loan Changes Spur New College-Goers to Reconsider Plans
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Since President Donald Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act into law on July 4, new federal loan limits are set to go into effect. The law also issued the elimination of certain repayment options and removal of Grad PLUS loans, prompting many college students to rethink whether and how they would finish their degrees, according to a new U.S. News survey. Why It Matters The One Big Beautiful Bill Act set new annual and lifetime borrowing limits for graduate and professional students that take effect for new loans beginning July 1 next year. The law also reduces the number of available federal repayment plans for some borrowers, creating immediate uncertainty for those planning graduate or professional degrees. Due to the changes, millions of current and prospective students might face higher out-of-pocket costs or reduced repayment flexibility, and experts say those shifts could alter enrollment, degree choices and reliance on private credit for education financing. Harvard graduates listen attentively to speakers during the commencement ceremony in Harvard Yard on May 29, 2025, in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Harvard graduates listen attentively to speakers during the commencement ceremony in Harvard Yard on May 29, 2025, in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Libby O'Neill/Getty Images What To Know The U.S. News survey of 1,190 college students found 61 percent of students said they would be personally impacted by the law, and 35 percent said they were considering cutting back on schooling. Roughly 32 percent were considering pursuing a different degree, and 38 percent said they were considering using private student loans to fill funding gaps. "On social media, a lot of students feel like they've been sold a lie. Just a few years ago, coding was pitched as the next big career track. Now, many coders are already being replaced by AI, ironically by the very technology they built," Kevin Thompson, the CEO of 9i Capital Group and the host of the 9innings podcast, told Newsweek. "That's created real fear about pouring money and years into degrees that may not hold value." The survey also reported that student stress about paying for college increased after the law, with the share saying they felt "extremely" stressed rising from 24 percent to 31 percent. The majority of college students also said they don't support any of the law's changes, at 51 percent. The changes that gained the highest approvals were the borrowing caps or the elimination of certain income-driven repayment plans, at just around 20 percent. The exact ways college students will be impacted by the GOP law vary. In addition to around a third choosing to cut back on schooling or pursue a different degree, another 31 percent said they would consider going abroad to finish school, while 26 percent were thinking about joining the military to help pay for their college. "The American Dream has always been the freedom and opportunity to attain a better life, and there is no better path up the socioeconomic ladder than higher education," Drew Powers, the founder of Illinois-based Powers Financial Group, told Newsweek. "This law hurts student loan borrowers, which disproportionately hurts middle- and lower-income families, the same groups who need it the most." The One Big Beautiful Bill Act introduced various changes to the federal student loan borrower system, including annual and lifetime caps on federal borrowing for graduate and professional students and the elimination of the Grad PLUS program for future borrowers. The caps would limit graduate borrowing to $20,500 per year with a $100,000 lifetime cap, and professional programs such as medical or law school would face annual caps of $50,000 and a $200,000 lifetime cap for loans taken after July 1, 2026. "That means lower-income students will likely be priced out or pushed toward private loans that carry higher interest rates. Over time, that could widen the gap in access—especially for minorities trying to enter fields like medicine," Thompson said. "The government's hope is that by removing subsidies, tuition costs will eventually fall. But whether that actually happens remains to be seen." Newsweek reached out to the Department of Education for comment via email. What People Are Saying Drew Powers, the founder of Illinois-based Powers Financial Group, told Newsweek: "This law essentially forces student and parent borrowers out of the federal student loan system and into the laps of the banks, which have proven time and again they are not going to be friendly to borrowers. The mere existence of federal loans forced the banks to offer more competitive interest rates in return for the lack of protections on the federal loan side. Once borrowers have maxed out their federal loans under the new law, the banks will not have any incentive to offer any friendly terms." Alex Beene, a financial literacy instructor for the University of Tennessee at Martin, told Newsweek: "The changes coming to student loan distribution and repayment are significant, with the pathway to less expensive monthly payments and loan forgiveness becoming a more difficult one, if not impossible for students who are already in certain income brackets. "Changes to loan distribution in 2026 could also make it more challenging to secure federally backed student loans for certain majors that fail to meet the new percentage income standards if those rules are strictly enforced. Combine all those new additions with currently high interest rates on new loans, and it's easy to see why students are cautious on their academic road ahead." What Happens Next The wide range of changes enacted by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act could mean falling enrollment at universities as more students opt for community colleges, Thompson said. "If tuition at four-year schools doesn't drop, demand for community colleges may push their prices up too," Thompson said. "If that shift plays out, the result could be a wider gap in white-collar careers, with lower-income students getting pushed more toward trades."
Forbes
a minute ago
- Forbes
Marjorie Taylor Greene's Financial Disclosure Doesn't Mention Book Agreement With Donald Trump Jr.'s Company
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., filed her 2024 financial disclosure last week without mentioning her book agreement with Donald Trump Jr.'s publishing house, which appears to run afoul of federal rules for financial disclosures—though she's unlikely to face prosecution from President Donald Trump's Justice Department. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) talks on the phone at the White House on May 1 in Washington, DC. Getty Images Greene's financial disclosure reports she earned $178,229.99 in 2024 from Winning Team Publishing, the right-wing publisher co-founded by Trump Jr. that was behind the congresswoman's 2023 memoir 'MTG.' She did not disclose her agreement with Winning Team Publishing on a separate section of the disclosure, Schedule F, that asks for any agreements the lawmaker has made, which include book royalties. Though Greene's book was published in 2023, federal rules dictate she would still have to disclose the book deal in 2024 because she continues to receive money from it, Brett Kappel, an attorney specializing in campaign finance and government ethics, told Forbes. Federal rules state agreements must be disclosed under Schedule F when they result in 'continuing compensation payments,' and Kappel also directed Forbes to federal rules requiring any 'ownership interest' in intellectual property—such as a book—to be disclosed if it generates more than $200 in income during the reporting period. Other GOP members of Congress have disclosed their book agreements on Schedule F, such as former Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., and Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio. Greene's office has not yet responded to a request for comment. Greene's 2024 filing appears to have been submitted two days after the deadline to do so, with the filing dated Aug. 15 after Greene was previously given an extension until Aug. 13 to submit it. Greene spokesperson Alec Ernst told Forbes on Aug. 15 that 'today is the submission deadline,' and, when asked for further clarification given the deadline previously being Aug. 13, said Greene's filing was 'under legal and reconciliation review' prior to being filed the morning of the 15th. Did Marjorie Taylor Greene Disclose Her Book Income In 2023? No. Greene's financial disclosure in 2023 didn't include the book agreement or report any income she made off the book, despite it being published in November of that year. Greene's office told the Daily Beast last year that the 'book agreement was reviewed and approved by the House Ethics Committee and in 2023 there was no financial activity that required reporting.' There appears to be some gray area whether book royalties are required to be reported when they haven't been received yet and are just anticipated, the Daily Beast notes, but Kappel told Forbes that Greene should have disclosed the agreement in 2023. Greene's financial disclosure largely details the congresswoman's stock and other investment holdings, which make up the bulk of the assets and 'unearned' income she reported, along with some real estate in Washington, D.C., and Georgia. She also has a 51% interest in her family construction company Taylor Commercial, Inc., which she reported generated between $1 million and $5 million in income for her last year. Her book royalties were the only 'earned income' she reported, and the lawmaker did not report receiving any gifts, travel reimbursements or making any other agreements. Her only liability is a loan for an office property she owns in Georgia, which is valued between $100,000 and $250,000. News Peg Greene's financial disclosure comes after the right-wing congresswoman lashed out earlier this month over reports her net worth has significantly gone up since she entered office, with Benzinga claiming the lawmaker's net worth went up from $700,000 before taking office to approximately $22 million in 2025. (Forbes has not yet valued Greene's net worth.) 'As a matter of fact I made a hell of a lot more money and my life was WAY EASIER before I entered public life,' Greene claimed on X on Aug. 10, saying she 'made all of my net worth BEFORE I became a Member of Congress in 2021' and claiming the reports about her wealth are 'outright slander and lies.' The lawmaker, one of the most outspoken and controversial members of Congress, has also recently drawn scrutiny for her stock holdings. Forbes previously reported Greene may have violated House ethics rules by calling for government investigations into the protests against Tesla earlier this year, given her financial stake in the company. She subsequently went on to buy even more Tesla shares, despite serving as the head of the subcommittee overseeing Tesla CEO Elon Musk's activities with the Trump administration's Department of Government Efficiency. In a statement to Forbes in May, Greene said she 'signed a fiduciary agreement to allow my financial advisor to control my investments' and usually finds 'out about them when the media asks.' Can Marjorie Taylor Greene Be Punished For Failing To Disclose Book Agreement? Under House ethics rules, the attorney general can bring a civil lawsuit against anyone 'who knowingly and willfully falsifies' or 'fails to file or report any information' on their financial disclosure and ask for them to pay up to $50,000 in damages. Knowingly falsifying or withholding information can also be a criminal violation punishable by a fine or up to a year in prison. That being said, while Greene has been increasingly critical of Trump in recent weeks regarding his administration's failure to release files on Jeffrey Epstein, the Trump administration and its Justice Department is still unlikely to bring any consequences against Greene, who has largely been the president's ally. Zach Everson contributed reporting. Further Reading Forbes Marjorie Taylor Greene Urges DOJ Probe Into Tesla Protests—A Possible House Rules Violation Since She Owns The Company's Stock By Zach Everson Forbes Marjorie Taylor Greene Issues Warning To Trump Over Epstein — Here's What Other Republicans Are Saying By Sara Dorn Forbes Marjorie Taylor Greene Buys More Tesla Shares This Week While Chairing DOGE Subcommittee By Molly Bohannon
New York Times
a minute ago
- New York Times
Republican Bid to Help Trump Move Past Epstein Falls Flat
When House Republican leaders rushed to leave Washington for a long August break, they seemed desperate to quell the anger among their supporters about the Trump administration's backtracking on a promise to release files related to its investigation of the accused sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. But halfway through a five-week congressional recess, the clamor shows little sign of quieting. While Republicans had hoped that legal rulings might insulate them from having to confront the issue, the courts have yet to intervene. Back in their districts, lawmakers have continued to face questions about the Epstein investigation from their constituents. And the Justice Department, which ignored a Friday deadline from Senate Democrats and faces another on Tuesday to comply with a bipartisan subpoena to provide the materials to Congress, has yet to release anything. At the same time, Democrats, in some cases with the help of Republicans, have laid a series of procedural traps that will make it all but impossible for the G.O.P. to avoid confronting the Epstein issue again when Congress reconvenes in September. 'We're going to keep the pressure up — 100 percent,' Senator Ruben Gallego, Democrat of Arizona, said at an event in Iowa this month. 'As often as we can, until we know exactly what happened, why it happened.' Even with Congress in recess, the issue continues to generate attention in Washington. On Monday, William P. Barr, who was President Trump's attorney general when Mr. Epstein died, testified in a closed-door deposition for the House Oversight Committee. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
