Trump to host thousands of admin officials for one of the largest events ever on White House lawn
EXCLUSIVE: President Donald Trump on Wednesday evening is hosting the more than 3,000 political appointees in his administration for one of the largest events ever held on the White House lawn to celebrate their work, Fox News Digital has learned.
The event will be the first time ever that the president has invited all individuals hired across all departments to the White House at the same time for the same event, officials told Fox News Digital.
Traditionally, events are held over several shifts for each department, but Wednesday's event will honor the more than 3,000 individuals hired for the second Trump administration.
"This is his team. These are his people," an official told Fox News Digital. "These are individuals who are hand-selected by the president to work in the administration delivering on the historic mandate that he received in November."
The president will attend the event and address the attendees. Most members of the Cabinet will also attend.
Those familiar with the planning of the event told Fox News Digital that there will be food and entertainment for staff.
"President Trump's Office of Presidential Personnel is breaking hiring records at an unprecedented pace," Director of Presidential Personnel Sergio Gor told Fox News Digital. "In just 135 days, we have filled 91% of all political appointments across the U.S. government, a historic achievement."
Gor told Fox News Digital that "the quality of talent that we've assembled is remarkable."
"Each political appointee in the Trump administration is unwavering in their commitment to this president and his goal to make America great again," Gor said.
Since the president took office Jan. 20, the administration has hired more than 3,200 appointees.
An official in the Office of Presidential Personnel told Fox News Digital that at the Departments of Defense, Commerce and Treasury, more than 85% of political hires are complete; at the Departments of Health and Human Services, Labor and Homeland Security, 90% of political hires are complete; and at the Department of Veterans Affairs, 100% of political hires are complete.
The official told Fox News Digital that the administration is filled with individuals who have served as Fortune 500 executives, accomplished business leaders, technical experts and "dedicated aides that are working to ensure that President Trump continues to deliver for the American people."
"We have hired the best and brightest to make America great again and advance the America First agenda," the official said.
Trump's Cabinet was also confirmed in record time, with officials noting that none of his Cabinet-level nominees failed in committee or on the Senate floor for confirmation.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
25 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Traders Scour for ‘Elusive' Catalyst to Push S&P 500 to Record
For stock traders there's little to fear at the moment. Corporate America keeps churning out solid earnings. The chances of a recession aren't blaring. And President Donald Trump's tariff policy is expected to become more clear before long. So what's there to worry about?
CNN
27 minutes ago
- CNN
How a Supreme Court decision backing the NRA is thwarting Trump's retribution campaign
As Harvard University, elite law firms and perceived political enemies of President Donald Trump fight back against his efforts to use government power to punish them, they're winning thanks in part to the National Rifle Association. Last May, the Supreme Court unanimously sided with the gun rights group in a First Amendment case concerning a New York official's alleged efforts to pressure insurance companies in the state to sever ties with the group following the deadly 2018 school shooting in Parkland, Florida. A government official, liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote for the nine, 'cannot … use the power of the State to punish or suppress disfavored expression.' A year later, the court's decision in National Rifle Association of America v. Vullo has been cited repeatedly by federal judges in rulings striking down a series of executive orders that targeted law firms. Lawyers representing Harvard, faculty at Columbia University and others are also leaning on the decision in cases challenging Trump's attacks on them. 'Going into court with a decision that is freshly minted, that clearly reflects the unanimous views of the currently sitting Supreme Court justices, is a very powerful tool,' said Eugene Volokh, a conservative First Amendment expert who represented the NRA in the 2024 case. For free speech advocates, the application of the NRA decision in cases pushing back against Trump's retribution campaign is a welcome sign that lower courts are applying key First Amendment principles equally, particularly in politically fraught disputes. In the NRA case, the group claimed that Maria Vullo, the former superintendent of the New York State Department of Financial Services, had threatened enforcement actions against the insurance firms if they failed to comply with her demands to help with the campaign against gun groups. The NRA's claims centered around a meeting Vullo had with an insurance market in 2018 in which the group says she offered to not prosecute other violations as long as the company helped with her campaign. 'The great hope of a principled application of the First Amendment is that it protects everybody,' said Alex Abdo, the litigation director of the Knight First Amendment Institute. 'Some people have criticized free speech advocates as being naive for hoping that'll be the case, but hopefully that's what we're seeing now,' he added. 'We're seeing courts apply that principle where the politics are very different than the NRA case.' The impact of Vullo can be seen most clearly in the cases challenging Trump's attempts to use executive power to exact revenge on law firms that have employed his perceived political enemies or represented clients who have challenged his initiatives. A central pillar of Trump's retribution crusade has been to pressure firms to bend to his political will, including through issuing executive orders targeting four major law firms: Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, WilmerHale and Susman Godfrey. Among other things, the orders denied the firms' attorneys access to federal buildings, retaliated against their clients with government contracts and suspended security clearances for lawyers at the firms. (Other firms were hit with similar executive orders but they haven't taken Trump to court over them.) The organizations individually sued the administration over the orders and the three judges overseeing the Perkins Coie, WilmerHale and Jenner & Block suits have all issued rulings permanently blocking enforcement of the edicts. (The Susman case is still pending.) Across more than 200-pages of writing, the judges – all sitting at the federal trial-level court in Washington, DC – cited Vullo 30 times to conclude that the orders were unconstitutional because they sought to punish the firms over their legal work. The judges all lifted Sotomayor's line about using 'the power of the State to punish or suppress disfavored expression,' while also seizing on other language in her opinion to buttress their own decisions. Two of them – US district judges Beryl Howell, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, and Richard Leon, who was named to the bench by former President George W. Bush – incorporated Sotomayor's statement that government discrimination based on a speaker's viewpoint 'is uniquely harmful to a free and democratic society.' The third judge, John Bates, said Vullo and an earlier Supreme Court case dealing with impermissible government coercion 'govern – and defeat' the administration's arguments in defense of a section of the Jenner & Block order that sought to end all contractual relationships that might have allowed taxpayer dollars to flow to the firm. 'Executive Order 14246 does precisely what the Supreme Court said just last year is forbidden: it engages in 'coercion against a third party to achieve the suppression of disfavored speech,'' wrote Bates, who was also appointed by Bush, in his May 23 ruling. For its part, the Justice Department has tried to draw a distinction between what the executive orders called for and the conduct rejected by the high court in Vullo. They told the three judges in written arguments that the orders at issue did not carry the 'force of the powers exhibited in Vullo' by the New York official. Will Creeley, the legal director at the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, said the rulings underscore how 'Vullo has proved its utility almost immediately.' 'It is extremely useful to remind judges and government actors alike that just last year, the court warned against the kind of shakedowns and turns of the screw that we're now seeing from the administration,' he said. Justice Department lawyers have not yet appealed any of the three rulings issued last month. CNN has reached out to the department for comment. In separate cases brought in the DC courthouse and elsewhere, Trump's foes have leaned on Vullo as they've pressed judges to intervene in high-stakes disputes with the president. Among them is Mark Zaid, a prominent national security lawyer who has drawn Trump's ire for his representation of whistleblowers. Earlier this year, Trump yanked Zaid's security clearance, a decision, the attorney said in a lawsuit, that undermines his ability to 'zealously advocate on (his clients') behalf in the national security arena.' In court papers, Zaid's attorneys argued that the president's decision was a 'retaliatory directive,' invoking language from the Vullo decision to argue that the move violated his First Amendment rights. ''Government officials cannot attempt to coerce private parties in order to punish or suppress views that the government disfavors,'' they wrote, quoting from the 2024 ruling. 'And yet that is exactly what Defendants do here.' Timothy Zick, a constitutional law professor at William & Mary Law School, said the executive orders targeting private entities or individuals 'have relied heavily on pressure, intimidation, and the threat of adverse action to punish or suppress speakers' views and discourage others from engaging with regulated targets.' 'The unanimous holding in Vullo is tailor-made for litigants seeking to push back against the administration's coercive strategy,' Zick added. That notion was not lost on lawyers representing Harvard and faculty at Columbia University in several cases challenging Trump's attacks on the elite schools, including one brought by Harvard challenging Trump's efforts to ban the school from hosting international students. A federal judge has so far halted those efforts. In a separate case brought by Harvard over the administration's decision to freeze billions of dollars in federal funding for the nation's oldest university, the school's attorneys on Monday told a judge that Trump's decision to target it because of 'alleged antisemitism and ideological bias at Harvard' clearly ran afoul of the high court's decision last year. 'Although any governmental retaliation based on protected speech is an affront to the First Amendment, the retaliation here was especially unconstitutional because it was based on Harvard's 'particular views' – the balance of speech on its campus and its refusal to accede to the Government's unlawful demands,' the attorneys wrote.
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
2 Reasons AMC Stock Is Soaring in June
Memorial Day weekend set moviegoing records, and a lot of the sales went to AMC as the largest theater chain. With many expected hit movies slated for release, management thinks it's turned a corner. AMC stock is still down year to date and the company has a lot to prove. 10 stocks we like better than AMC Entertainment › AMC (NYSE: AMC) is the largest movie theater operator in the world, but being the leader in a troubled industry hasn't done much for the company over the past few years. With the advent of streaming and residual fears from the pandemic, moviegoing just isn't what it once was and AMC continues to struggle. However, Memorial Day weekend was a boon for the company and AMC stock has been climbing. Let's see why and what it means for the future. Streaming from home has taken a toll on the box office, but there is still life left in theaters. Four of the top 10 highest-grossing films ever were released since the pandemic started, including Avatar: The Way of Water in the No. 3 spot and last year's Inside Out 2. People are still going to the movies. That fact was reinforced with a record Memorial Day weekend in May. Disney's live-action remake of Lilo & Stitch had the highest-ever four-day Memorial Day opening, and it was buttressed by a strong showing for Paramount's Mission: Impossible -- The Final Reckoning. Altogether, these two topped a blowout weekend with $326.7 million in domestic ticket sales, and Lilo & Stitch is already the second-highest-grossing domestic film of the year. Of course, that success trickled down to generate incredible financial results for AMC. Management said it set an all-time record for admissions revenue, food and beverage revenue, and total revenue for a weekend Memorial Day opening, and that the five-day stretch was the third-highest revenue for any five-day slot in more than 10 years. As for attendance, this was the highest-attended weekend and highest-attended five-day period of the year, both domestically and globally. Management didn't provide specific financial metrics for the weekend, so investors aren't likely to hear the nitty-gritty details until the second-quarter earnings release sometime in July or August. But management's update and optimism are boosting investor confidence. It's nice for the company to have a solid, record-breaking opening, but can it last? Management thinks so, and the market may be pricing that in. CEO Adam Aron said that after this weekend, AMC has turned a corner. "With many more potentially huge movies coming in June all the way through the end of 2025, and beyond that deeply into 2026 as well," he said, "we firmly expect to be enjoying a robust theatrical box office as we look ahead." Here's what to be excited about. Disney has a full slate of films coming out over the next few years, including the third film in the Avatar series. The first two are the highest-grossing and third-highest-grossing films ever, and the next film is slated for release this coming December. It also has the next Frozen film and other top franchises coming out soon. Warner Bros. has its own expected hits coming out, including a new Superman, and Comcast's Universal Studios has the next installment of Wicked and a new Shrek. Sequels to popular franchises can be big business. But the company is still reporting revenue declines and losses as of the 2025 first quarter. It will take some time to see if AMC has indeed turned a corner. As the price has increased in June, so has the short interest in AMC, hitting almost 15% of all outstanding shares. These investors are betting on this being a short-term boost and that the price will fall from this surge. Even though AMC stock is up 29% over the past month, it's still down 15% year-to-date. Unless the company releases incredibly strong earnings for the second quarter and keeps up its performance, the price jump may not last. Part of what's frustrating about that for investors is that many variables are beyond the company's control. It's up to film producers to create hit movies that bring viewers into theaters and to make the decision to keep them there long enough before they hit streaming services. That can be quite lumpy. You need to have real confidence in the future of the film industry and the resilience of theaters as a beckoning call for die-hard fans to want to invest in AMC's future, and for most investors, that time isn't now. Before you buy stock in AMC Entertainment, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and AMC Entertainment wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $674,395!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $858,011!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 997% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 172% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join . See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 2, 2025 Jennifer Saibil has positions in Walt Disney. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Walt Disney. The Motley Fool recommends Comcast. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. 2 Reasons AMC Stock Is Soaring in June was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
