ICE Barbie Visited Biohazard Lab With RFK Jr. Before Hospitalization
Kristi Noem was hospitalized for an allergic reaction one day after Robert F. Kennedy Jr. shared a photo of them both visiting a biosafety lab that was temporarily shut down due to safety concerns.
'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
Miami Herald
39 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
No Kings Protests or Trump's Army Parade-Which Won the Weekend? Newsweek Contributors Debate
This weekend saw nationwide "No Kings" protests against the Trump administration. Meanwhile, President Donald Trump was in Washington D.C., for a parade commemorating the U.S. army's 250th anniversary. Which event won the day? Were the weekend's protests the sign of an anti-Trump popular groundswell, or a meaningless flash in the pan? Newsweek Opinion contributors Paul du Quenoy and David Faris debate: Paul du Quenoy: The anti-Trump protests revealed the Democratic Party and its organizers are a mostly disloyal opposition. They place criminals, illegal immigrants, and even foreign countries ahead of the United States, even to the point of flying Mexican flags and attacking U.S. law enforcement officers. Such actions would seem to fit the definition of "insurrection." But while complicit Democrats were all too happy to beclown themselves, President Donald Trump thanked the U.S. Army for its 250 years of exceptional service. Amid blatant insults to servicemen and veterans, President Trump's approval remains relatively high, with most Americans agreeing with his immigration policies. David Faris: While the president sat, visibly bored at the preposterous military parade unsubtly scheduled for his birthday, Americans participated in one of the largest mass protests in our history. The protests proved conclusively that Americans will not tolerate the deployment of the U.S. military in American cities, the constant line-stepping over constitutional boundaries, the arrests of political dissenters, or the arrogant defense of police-state tactics. Polling averages show Trump underwater on every issue the people trusted him to fix. He cuts an increasingly isolated and pitiful figure. The protesters used their First Amendment rights to great effect, while the president fumes. It's clear who won the day. du Quenoy: The latest NBC survey shows a 51 percent majority of Americans approve of President Trump's immigration and border policies. Anti-ICE protests were legally and swiftly brought under control as deportations not merely continue but accelerate. Meanwhile, leaderless, demoralized Democrats languish with approval ratings well below 30 percent, a situation the petulant "No Kings" protest failed to reverse. Faris: Any individual poll is noisy, so it's best to rely on averages—which show Trump's over-the-top response to protests in Los Angeles have again put his immigration approval under 50 percent. The public approves of his border security policy, but his assaults on the economy, trade, education, and the federal government are also unpopular, driving huge turnout to Saturday's peaceful demonstrations. du Quenoy: A poll taken during the anti-ICE riots shows the American public decidedly agreeing with Trump's decision to send the National Guard to stop violent protests. The anti-Trump demonstrations only showed that Democrats and aggrieved blue-state Baby Boomers remain dismayed by the 2024 election results. They were rapidly eclipsed by the glorious Army parade. Faris: Three different polls asking about President Trump's decision to militarize the Los Angeles protests found public disapproval. Americans understand that local and state law enforcement can manage the situation without the inflammatory stunt of sending in the military over the governor's protests. Trump did what he always does: manufacture a crisis, then purport to provide the solution. du Quenoy: An NBC survey conducted more recently than all three of those polls registered a decisive majority in favor of Trump's border security and immigration policies. Clearly, a majority of Americans approve of law and order and oppose the Democrats who stand with criminals, illegal immigrants, and foreign countries over the United States. Faris: Multiple polls specifically demonstrate the public's opposition to Trump's decision to send the military to Los Angeles, which is well outside the American tradition, as is an expensive military birthday fête for a president. The No Kings demonstrations will be remembered as an effective, hopeful rejoinder to a presidency increasingly reliant on deliberate provocation and needless cruelty. du Quenoy: President Trump triumphed this weekend with a popular celebration of the U.S. Army. He remains popular, as do his border control and immigration policies. There is no evidence that the No Kings protests will be remembered at all, let alone as "effective" in opposing the administration's policies, which continue and have only been amplified. The protests registered little more than dissatisfaction with the election results and dismay with policies Trump ran on implementing and enforcing. By comparison, they faded quickly from the headlines as soon as the parade started and President Trump resumed his fight to make America great again. Faris: It is true that the headlines have moved along—to Trump betraying another of his core promises. As the U.S. gears up to participate in or quietly back an illegal Israeli bombing campaign against Iran, MAGA's promise to end forever wars turns out to be as hollow as one of Trump's daily, panic-driven policy pivots. The millions who joined together to peacefully oppose Trump's authoritarian actions sent an unmistakable message: America's democracy and decency won't be dismantled without a fight. Americans are, at the moment, still free to choose between solidarity and vengeance. The president won't be able to sic the military on civilians without nationwide pushback. Paul du Quenoy is President of the Palm Beach Freedom Institute. David Faris is a professor of political science at Roosevelt University and the author of It's Time to Fight Dirty: How Democrats Can Build a Lasting Majority in American Politics and The Kids Are All Left: How Young Voters Will Unite America. His writing has appeared in Slate, The Washington Post, The New Republic, and more. You can find him on Twitter @davidmfaris and Bluesky at The views expressed in this article are the writers' own. Related Articles Former Governors: Trump Is Weaponizing the Power of His Office. It's Putting Our Country at Risk | OpinionRepublicans Must Say No to the AI Regulation Moratorium | OpinionWhy Trump Needs Tesla | Opinion 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
Newsweek
41 minutes ago
- Newsweek
The 1600: Trump Weighs U.S. Options
The Insider's Track Good morning, I have an addendum to my presidential platform of adding more three-day weekends to the calendar. Juneteenth, which is tomorrow, is almost exactly two weeks from July 4. Rather than get a random Thursday off and then another day or two for the Fourth, we call the whole 16-day period "American Freedom Weeks." An extended federal holiday meant to celebrate all of our victories of independence, from the end of slavery to our split from the British. I'm talking a real, European-style holiday. Think Italy in August, everything shuts down. Just two weeks of cookouts, parades, concerts and hanging out to kick off summer. I really think I could win 400 electoral votes strictly on my "more days off" platform. OK, so it's certainly looking like we're about to white-knuckle it through another military adventure in the Mideast. Yeehaw! My thinking is based mostly on my belief that Trump knows he badly needs a W on the board, and he sees bombing Iran as the path of least resistance to get one. His foreign policy is a hot mess, he's not getting any wins in Ukraine or Gaza anytime soon. He gave up on the Houthis. Iran is his chance for a big show of force, and Americans love war. I honestly don't know if there's more to it than that. But you can sort of tell the way the wind is blowing by looking at how JD Vance is twisting himself in knots trying to justify our involvement in precisely the kind of conflict he made a name for himself denouncing.... like spending yesterday replying to randos on Twitter to split hairs about how uranium enrichment works. I consumed an unhealthy amount of conservative media yesterday to try to understand this cleave within the party over our all-but-ordained involvement in this war, and I was actually shocked at how the hawks seem in control of the narrative. I would have thought for sure that the MAGA-isolationist wing of the GOP would be throwing its weight around a bit more in the court of public opinion. Tucker and Bannon, and even dare I say Marjorie Taylor Greene, seem to be the lone voices of caution. There's something particularly grotesque about watching the Senate Warmonger Caucus of Ted Cruz, Tom Cotton and Lindsey Graham take up residency on cable news to spout off about how Iran is a direct threat to Americans, and how in Graham's words, "we have a chance to take out the regime." Who's we, kemosabe?! It ain't your nonexistent kids who are gonna be fighting if we get dragged into another hot war over there. And see how the narrative is shifting in real time? I thought this was about taking out Iran's nuclear program, and now all of a sudden we're talking regime change? So we're gonna decapitate the government of a country with 90 million people and just hope for the best? Did I hallucinate the Iraq War or something? The Bush "smoking gun in the form of a mushroom cloud" argument wasn't that long ago. Meanwhile, the Democrats are nowhere to be found. Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries—two men who've never passed a camera they wouldn't talk into—haven't made a peep. A smart opposition party would be out there trying to steal back the anti-war messaging that MAGA coopted and is now about to lose the moral high ground over. Or they could just continue with the "Taco Trump" taunts and see how far that gets them. The Rundown What seemed impossible just weeks ago—Tucker Carlson agreeing with Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez co-sponsoring a resolution with Thomas Massie—is now unfolding. The recent escalation between Iran and Israel has upended traditional political alliances in Washington. Foreign policy hawks are teaming up with pro-Israel Democrats to support military action, while MAGA hardliners and progressive Democrats are unexpectedly aligned in opposing U.S. involvement in another Middle East conflict. Read more from Newsweek's Jesus Mesa. Also happening: Israel-Iran conflict: Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei warned that any U.S. military intervention amid the ongoing Iran–Israel conflict would bring "irreversible repercussions," declaring that Iran "cannot surrender" under external pressure. Here's more from his televised address. E. Jean Carroll: On the eve of her book release, E. Jean Carroll stepped into Newsweek's Manhattan office in a muted olive-green jumpsuit, shimmery brown blazer and cream lace-up combat boots. With her signature blond bob in place, she restated her mission: to make President Donald Trump "so mad" by spending the $83.3 million she's owed in the lawsuit settlements on causes he hates. Read the story. This is a preview of The 1600—Tap here to get this newsletter delivered straight to your inbox.
The Hill
42 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump rips Powell, suggests appointing himself to Fed
President Trump ramped up his criticism of Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell and suggested appointing himself to the central bank. 'Maybe I should go to the Fed,' Trump mused at the White House on Wednesday, hours before the central bank was set to announce its latest interest rate move. 'Am I allowed to appointment myself at the Fed,' he continued. 'I'd do a much better job than these people.' With less than a year left in Powell's term as Fed chair, most Fedwatchers don't expect Trump to make a run at his job and risk upsetting markets. But Trump has repeatedly suggested removing Powell, and his campaign reportedly considered a plan to give the president more authority over Fed rate decisions despite the bank's legal separation from White House policymaking. The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), the panel of Fed officials responsible for setting interest rates, is expected to keep its baseline interest rate unchanged Wednesday. While Powell is the de facto leader of the FOMC as chair of the Fed board, he is but one of more than a dozen central bank officials who vote on the bank's interest rate moves. Even so, Trump has raged at Powell for more than seven years after the president elevated him to lead the Fed in 2017. Trump has repeatedly threatened Powell's job and criticized his handling of the economy, accusing the lifelong Republican of rigging interest rates to support Democrats and oppose the president's economic policies. During his second term, Trump dubbed Powell 'Mr. Too-Late,' accusing the Fed of raising rates too slowly amid the post-pandemic inflation spike and cutting them too slowly after Trump took office. 'I would have never reappointed him. Biden reappointed him. I don't know why that is. But I guess maybe he was a Democrat,' Trump said Wednesday of Powell, a Republican who worked in the George H.W. Bush administration and has faced fierce backlash from the left throughout his Fed tenure. 'You know, I got great advice from Mnuchin on this one,' he said of former Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, who was the driving force behind Powell's nomination. Fed officials kicked off the year expecting to continue cutting interest rates as inflation drifted back toward its ideal annual level of 2 percent. But the bank has held off through the first half of 2025 amid the uncertainty driven by Trump's tariff plans. 'The labor market is solid, inflation is low. We can afford to be patient as things unfold. There's no real cost to our waiting at this point,' Powell told reporters last month after the Fed kept rates steady following its two-day policy meeting. 'There's a great deal of uncertainty about … where tariff policies are going to settle out and also, when they do settle out, what will be the implications for the economy, for growth and for employment,' he added. Brett Samuels contributed
