
‘Immaturity': Rand Paul rips White House after being ‘uninvited' from picnic
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) had harsh words for the White House on Wednesday after he said he was 'uninvited' from its annual picnic, a snub that came amid the Kentucky Republican's vocal opposition to President Trump's tax cut and spending package.
Paul — who has criticized the debt limit provision in the 'big, beautiful bill,' along with its impact on the deficit — said he had planned to attend the White House picnic on Thursday with his wife, son, daughter-in-law and six-month-old grandson, but he was informed on Wednesday that he was no longer welcome.
'I've just been told that I've been uninvited from the picnic; I think I'm the first senator in the history of the United States to be uninvited to the White House picnic,' Paul told reporters. 'The White House is owned by the taxpayers, we are all members of it, every Democrat will be invited, every Republican will be invited, but I will be the only one disallowed to come on the grounds of the White House.'
'I just find this incredibly petty,' he added. 'I have been, I think nothing but polite to the president. I have been a intellectual opponent, a public policy opponent, and he's chosen now to uninvite me from the picnic and to say my grandson can't come to the picnic.'
Paul continued, saying 'the level of immaturity is beyond words' before tearing into Trump himself.
'I'm arguing from a true belief and worry that our country is mired in debt and getting worse, and they choose to react by uninviting my grandson to the public,' he said. 'It really makes me lose a lot of respect I once had for Donald Trump.'
The senator said he was not offered an explanation for the rescinded invitation, and noted that he was not sure who at the White House made the decision. The Hill reached out to the White House for comment.
The White House has been hosting picnics for decades — under both Democratic and Republican presidents — inviting lawmakers from both parties to mingle on the lawn.
This year's confab comes as the administration is trying to muscle its sprawling agenda bill through Congress — specifically the Senate at the moment — which has been met with some opposition.
Paul, a Libertarian-minded Republican, has expressed opposition to the inclusion of a $4 trillion debt limit increase in the bill, voicing concerns about the ballooning deficit. He has said on multiple occasions that he will not support the legislation if the debt limit provision remains.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has said Congress must raise the borrowing limit this summer to avoid an economic default. Senate Republicans, meanwhile, can only afford to lose three votes and still squeak the package through the chamber, making Paul's opposition a point of concern.
On Wednesday, Paul suggested that the White House's rescinded invitation did not help move him closer to supporting the behemoth bill.
'When they tell you your grandson can't come to a picnic at the White House that all of Congress is allowed to come to, I don't know, it just shows such a pettiness,' he said when asked if the snub makes him less likely to back the bill. 'But they have shown over the last week they don't care about my vote at all,' he added. 'Because I've told them I can and would vote for the bill if the debt ceiling were taken off of it. So conceivably, there might be some situation in which they needed my vote. Instead they have decided to try to attack my character.'
'They're afraid of what I'm saying so they think they're going to punish me, I can't go to the picnic, as if that's somehow going to make me more conciliatory,' he added. 'So it's silly in a way, but it's also just really sad that this is what it's come to. But petty vindictiveness like this, I don't know, it makes you wonder about the quality of people you're dealing with.'
Paul also offered criticism of White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, who earlier this week had attacked Paul over his criticism of the bill. Paul speculated the rescinded invitation could have come from a White House staffer, rather than Trump himself.
'It could be from lower level staff members, but these are people that shouldn't be working over there. But I mean, you have people that are basically going around casually talking about getting rid of habeas corpus,' he said, presumably referring to Miller's proposal earlier this year.
'And the same people that are directing this campaign are the same people that casually would throw out parts of the Constitution and suspend habeas corpus. So I think what it tells that they don't like hearing me say stuff like that, and so they want to quiet me down. And it hasn't worked, and so they're going to try to attack me. They're going to try to destroy me in other ways, and then do petty little things like social occasions or whatever.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


USA Today
31 minutes ago
- USA Today
'Afraid' for court: Trump DOJ sues NY over immigration enforcement in state courthouses
'Afraid' for court: Trump DOJ sues NY over immigration enforcement in state courthouses Show Caption Hide Caption Three Democratic governors testify in House hearing over immigration New York Governor Kathy Hochul, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, and Illinois Governor JB Pritzker, testify on Capitol Hill over immigration policies. NEW YORK − The Trump administration on June 12 sued New York state for its law restricting federal immigration enforcement inside state courthouses. The lawsuit challenges a New York state law that blocks immigration officials from arresting people at or near New York courthouses. The complaint, filed in federal court in Albany, New York, alleges the law frustrates federal immigration enforcement at a venue - state courthouses - where authorities can safely make arrests. U.S. Justice Department lawyers said New York's law and policies restricting cooperation with federal immigration officers violated the Constitution's Supremacy Clause, which gives federal law precedence over state law. The lawsuit filed in federal court in Albany comes after the administration has increased immigration enforcement at workplaces and while people appeared for immigration court hearings. People have protested against the federal actions in cities across the country. Attorney General Pam Bondi blamed so-called 'sanctuary city policies' for violence seen in California. Sanctuary policies generally refers to those limiting local law enforcement from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement. The Justice Department has also sued four New Jersey cities for their laws. New York state had similar policies preventing agents from apprehending migrants, Bondi said in a statement. 'This latest lawsuit in a series of sanctuary city litigation underscores the Department of Justice's commitment to keeping Americans safe and aggressively enforcing the law,' she said. Justice Department lawyers challenged the 2020 state law preventing federal officials from arresting people for civil immigration violations at state courthouses without a signed judicial warrant. New York's 2020 law doesn't apply to federal courthouses or immigration court, according to the legislation's author, state Sen. Brad Hoylman-Sigal, a Manhattan Democrat who called the lawsuit 'baseless and frivolous." The Justice Department said in a news release that enforcement at courthouses reduces risk of people fleeing or dangerous situations, especially since there is enhanced screening inside court buildings. 'Ongoing assault' on rule of law in NY, state officials say State officials said federal agents entering local courthouses make communities unsafe by preventing people from accessing the judicial system. The law ensures New Yorkers can pursue justice without fear, Geoff Burgan, a spokesperson for state Attorney General Letitia James, said in a statement. 'Due process means nothing if people are too afraid to appear in court,' he said. James would defend the law and 'all of New York's laws, just as she will continue to defend the rights and dignity of all who call New York home,' Burgan said. Hoylman-Sigal, who authored the law, said the lawsuit was part of the administration's 'ongoing assault on the rule of law in New York.' To avoid conflicting with federal law or federal immigration authority, the law doesn't apply to federal courts or immigration courts, he said in a statement. Meanwhile, it allows U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to arrest people in local courthouses when they have 'actual, valid judicial warrants.' 'At a time when masked ICE officials are roaming the state and lawlessly detaining New Yorkers without any due process, the law preserves access to justice and participation in the judicial process,' he said. 'Sensitive' areas targets of immigration enforcement A contentious issue has been federal agents targeting people in 'sensitive" areas. Prior Department of Homeland Security guidelines banned enforcement in areas such as schools, places of worship and hospitals. When President Donald Trump took office in January, DHS overturned the longstanding policy to give agents discretion on such actions. The administration enacted another policy permitting enforcement at or near courthouses. Justice Department lawyers also challenged two New York executive orders restricting civil immigration arrests at state facilities, and a separate policy preventing state employees from sharing information to federal officers related to civil immigration enforcement. 'Through these enactments, New York obstructs federal law enforcement and facilitates the evasion of federal law by dangerous criminals, notwithstanding federal agents' statutory mandate to detain and remove illegal aliens,' the complaint said. The same day as the lawsuit, Gov. Kathy Hochul was one of three Democratic governors testifying before Congress about "sanctuary" policies and immigration enforcement. Hochul said her state has cooperated with ICE since she's taken office. "But we have to draw a line somewhere,' Hochul said. 'New York cannot deputize our state officers to enforce civil immigration violations, such as overstaying a visa.' The administration's attack on the 2020 law would turn courthouses 'into traps,' Donna Liberman, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, said in a statement. It would further force immigrant communities into the shadows. An initial conference date for the lawsuit was scheduled for Sept. 10, court records showed. Contributing: Bart Jansen, USA TODAY Eduardo Cuevas is based in New York City. Reach him by email at emcuevas1@ or on Signal at emcuevas.01.
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Gavin Newsom Brutally Mocks Trump's ‘This Is Not Good' Understatement
Donald Trump finally admitted there have been negative consequences to his immigration crackdown ― and California Gov. Gavin Newsom was ready to pounce. On his Truth Social platform Thursday, Trump saidhe'd been hearing complaints from 'our great Farmers and people in the Hotel and Leisure business' about his mass deportation agenda. 'Our very aggressive policy on immigration is taking very good, long time workers away from them, with those jobs being almost impossible to replace,' Trump acknowledged before claiming that 'Criminals' are now 'applying for those jobs.' 'This is not good,' he wrote, promising, 'Changes are coming!' Newsom ― who has been railing against the president since Trump called in the military to suppress immigrant rights protests in Los Angeles ― immediately shot back: 'Turns out, chasing hard working people through ranches and farms and snatching women and children off the streets is not good policy.' Turns out, chasing hard working people through ranches and farms and snatching women and children off the streets is not good policy. — Gavin Newsom (@GavinNewsom) June 12, 2025 A short time later, Newsom posted a video saying that Trump had once again reversed course on policy, a pattern that has inspired the phrase 'Trump Always Chickens Out,' or TACO. 'MAJOR WIN: Trump just reversed course on immigration. We're watching closely — and we'll hold him to it,' Newsom posted. 'This happened because you spoke up. Keep it going. Keep it peaceful. It's working.' MAJOR WIN: Trump just reversed course on watching closely — and we'll hold him to it. This happened because you spoke up. Keep it going. Keep it peaceful. It's working. — Gavin Newsom (@GavinNewsom) June 12, 2025 It's not clear that Trump, despite promising 'changes,' has actually reversed course on any of his policies toward immigrants. In the meantime, people on social media weren't exactly celebrating the president's epiphany. To be fair, Trump always seems surprised when something he does backfires. His budget, his tariffs, his deportations have all backfired for the same reason: incompetent execution. He just never has the discipline to do anything right — Patrick Strother (@PatrickStrother) June 12, 2025 Trump just realized how his terrible policy is hurting the American people. He caved just like he always do. — Ron Smith (@Ronxyz00) June 12, 2025 Immigration TACO. — Paul Graham (@paulg) June 12, 2025 Finally, someone had to spell it out for Trump and his MAGA minions—chasing hardworking people off farms and snatching families off streets isn't 'great policy,' it's a disgrace! The irony of Trump needing a reality check on what the rest of us have known for years is laughable.… — Peter (@_e_tto_) June 12, 2025 Trump is having a really hard time finding the criminals he so dearly longs to deport. So, he's going after the soft targets. People who can't afford to miss a single day's work, even if it means getting dragged from the fields they work in. — Deborah, My Friends Call Me Slayer🔥🐉⚔️🔥 (@drodvik52) June 12, 2025 You can't call them *criminals* one day and *essential workers* the they pick your food, clean your rooms, raise your children— they're not the threat. They're the kind of kingdom arrests the servants but pardons the kings who exploit them? — Digital Jesus (@0xDigital_Jesus) June 12, 2025 Gavin Newsom Savagely Corrects Sarah Huckabee Sanders Gavin Newsom Delivers Grim Predictions About Trump's Next Move Gavin Newsom Offers Blunt Reality Check On Who's Really 'Defending Insurrectionists' Gov. Newsom Files Restraining Order To Block Trump's Militarization Of LA


New York Times
31 minutes ago
- New York Times
A G.O.P. Plan to Sell Public Land Is Back. This Time, It's Millions of Acres.
Senate Republicans are resurrecting a plan to sell millions of acres of federal lands as part of President Trump's giant tax and spending bill, setting up a fight within the party. The proposal would require the Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service to identify and sell between 2.2 million and 3.3 million acres of public lands across 11 Western states to build housing. Past efforts to auction off public land have enraged conservationists and have also proved contentious with some Republicans. A smaller proposal to sell around 500,000 acres of federal land in Utah and Nevada was stripped from the House version of the tax bill last month after opposition from Representative Ryan Zinke, Republican of Montana and a former interior secretary. 'This was my San Juan Hill; I do not support the widespread sale or transfer of public lands,' Mr. Zinke said last month. 'Once the land is sold, we will never get it back.' The new plan to sell public lands was included in draft legislation issued on Wednesday by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee that is part of Mr. Trump's 'big, beautiful bill.' The draft envisions raising as much as $10 billion by selling land for housing in Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming over the next five years. Notably, Mr. Zinke's home state of Montana was left off the list. Senator Mike Lee, the Utah Republican who leads the energy committee, said that the move would turn 'federal liabilities into taxpayer value, while making housing more affordable for hardworking American families.' Want all of The Times? Subscribe.