President Donald Trump and his then-lawyer Alina Habba are on the hook for almost $1 million in sanctions.

The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a court order penalizing Trump and Habba in lawsuits against former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former FBI Director James Comey, former head of the Democratic National Committee Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the DNC itself and others.

Trump and Habba filed suit under anti-racketeering laws against 28 total people and organizations in 2022, alleging a conspiracy to collude with Russia in order to tank his 2016 presidential campaign. Though the Steele dossier at the center of the claims has been described as “discredited” by a number of news outlets, Trump and Habba filed the original suit 5 months after the statute of limitations had passed.

READ MORE: ‘That Family Is Basically a Racketeering Enterprise’: Ex-Obama Adviser Blasts Scandals From Trump’s Adult Children

“We do not doubt that, in the light of the Durham Report, President Trump has concerns about some defendants’ conduct during the 2016 election. The investigation by Special Counsel Durham found that some defendants played a role in orchestrating unverified allegations of him colluding with Russia. And it found that key allegations in the Steele Dossier, relied on by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the press, were never corroborated. Some appeared to be fabricated. The Special Counsel’s investigation found that Bureau officials appeared to favor Clinton and that their investigation decisions reflected that preference. And it found that the Crossfire Hurricane investigation began without ‘any actual evidence of collusion,'” Chief Judge William Pryor Jr. wrote. “Yet, those findings do not cure the deficiencies in Trump’s racketeering claims.”

In addition Pryor wrote that even if Trump had filed suit before the statute of limitations expired, “none of these proceedings are, or even resemble, a racketeering action.”

“At best, they are actions involving some of the conduct that Trump incorporates into his racketeering claim,” Pryor wrote.

There was a minor bit of good news for Trump, however. In one of the four appeals Pryor ruled on, he rejected a request by two appellants, Orbis Limited and Charles Halliday Dolan Jr., for fees and double costs to be levied against the president. Orbis is Christopher Steele’s “private intelligence firm” that produced the Steele dossier, while Dolan was a Clinton campaign operative who provided information used in the dossier.

Pryor found that in this one case, Trump’s appeal to the dismissal of the case made “meritorious arguments.” He remanded that particular case back to the lower court to change its dismissal from “with prejudice”—meaning that the case cannot be filed again—to “without prejudice,” meaning that Trump’s team could fix errors in the original lawsuit and refile.

Image via Reuters

Peter Skandalakis, the Georgia prosecutor who took over the state’s case against President Donald Trump and 14 other co-defendants alleging interference in the 2020 presidential election, dropped the case on Wednesday. Before taking the case, he spent nearly 25 years as the elected Republican district attorney for the Coweta Judicial Circuit in the state.

Skandalakis took over the case earlier this year when the original prosecutor, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, an elected Democrat, was taken off the case. When she was removed, the case was sent to the Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council of Georgia to decide who would take it over. After no other attorneys wanted the job, Skandalakis, the executive director of the council, assigned it to himself, according to Fortune. The Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council of Georgia is a nonpartisan office.

READ MORE: ‘Scared Like Vampires of Sunlight’: Legal Expert Explains Why Mark Meadows Wants to Move Georgia Trial to Federal Court

“Given the complexity of the legal issues at hand — ranging from constitutional questions and the Supremacy Clause to immunity, jurisdiction, venue, speedy-trial concerns, and access to federal records — and even assuming each of these issues were resolved in the State’s favor, bringing this case before a jury in 2029, 2030, or even 2031 would be nothing short of a remarkable feat,” Skandalakis wrote, alleging pursuing the case “would be both illogical and unduly burdensome and costly for the State and for Fulton County,” according to CNN.

The case hinged on a phone call between Trump and Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a fellow Republican, where Trump asked him to “find” enough votes to win the state. If the case had gone forward, being at the state level, Trump could not grant himself or his co-defendants a pardon if convicted.

Skandalakis cited the similar federal case brought against the president by Jack Smith as evidence the Georgia case would not get far.

“[I]f Special Counsel Jack Smith, with all the resources of the federal government at his disposal, after reviewing the evidence in this case and considering the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. United States, along with the years of litigation such a case would inevitably entail, concluded that prosecution would be fruitless,” Skandalakis wrote, according to the New York Post, “then I too find that, despite the available evidence, pursuing the prosecution of all those involved in State of Georgia v. Donald Trump, et al. on essentially federal grounds would be equally unproductive.”

Smith’s case, and its ultimate dismissal, was controversial. The case was originally to be heard by District Judge Tanya Chutkan, but after Trump’s re-election in 2024, Smith asked her to dismiss the case due to a Department of Justice policy against prosecuting a sitting president, according to ABC News. The case had hit a prior speedbump after the Supreme Court ruled along ideological lines that, as president, Trump would be immune to prosecution for any “official acts” executed as president, but not “unofficial ones.”

Image via Reuters

This month, Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) announced that she would be resigning from Congress in January. In the face of criticism over her decision not to serve out the rest of her term, she invoked the recent assassination of pundit Charlie Kirk.

Greene made the comment Wednesday morning in a reply to right-wing commentator Mike Cernovich’s tweet, “You need to serve out your full term.”

“Oh I haven’t suffered enough for you while you post all day behind a screen? Do I have to stay until I’m assassinated like our friend Charlie Kirk. Will that be good enough for you then? Sh*t posting on the internet all day isn’t fighting. Get off YOUR ass and run for Congress. I fought harder than anyone in the real arena, not social media. Put down your little pebbles and put your money where your mouth is,” Greene posted to her personal X (formerly Twitter) account.

READ MORE: Greene Says Kirk Killing Sparked ‘Spiritual Revival’ for Christ — Urges ‘National Divorce’

She then took a screenshot of her post and shared it to her official congressional X account, with more commentary.

“Typical of Republican men telling a woman to ‘shut up get back in the kitchen and fix me something to eat.’ F*ck you in the sweetest most southern drawl I can enunciate. I have been trying tell all you ‘men’ that our kitchen pantry is empty with spider webs, our house has been ransacked, the windows and doors are broken and busted, and the greedy rich bastards have twisted your minds into a sick state that you all continue in the two party toxic political system that acts like college football playoffs yet is burying you and your children and their children and their children in a pine box in a shallow grave. Get off your ass and fix your own damn food and clean up the kitchen when you’re done,” she added.

Typical of Republican men telling a woman to “shut up get back in the kitchen and fix me something to eat.”

F*ck you in the sweetest most southern drawl I can enunciate.

I have been trying tell all you “men” that our kitchen pantry is empty with spider webs, our house has been… pic.twitter.com/ruaw8uEt6K

— Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene🇺🇸 (@RepMTG) November 26, 2025

On November 21, Greene announced that she would be leaving Congress on January 5, 2026 following a falling out with President Donald Trump over her support for releasing files related to disgraced financier and sex criminal Jeffrey Epstein.

“Standing up for American women who were raped at 14, trafficked and used by rich powerful men, should not result in me being called a traitor and threatened by the President of the United States, whom I fought for,” she said at the time.

“There is no ‘plan to save the world’ or insane 4D chess game being played,” she added.

Following Greene’s resignation, Punchbowl News reported that several other Republican congresspeople are considering leaving in the middle of their terms as well, with an anonymous congressperson telling the outlet that the reason was a lack of respect from the Trump administration.

“This entire White House team has treated ALL members like garbage. ALL. And Mike Johnson has let it happen because he wanted it to happen. That is the sentiment of nearly all — appropriators, authorizers, hawks, doves, rank and file,” the congressperson, identified by Punchbowl as a senior House Republican, said. “More explosive early resignations are coming. It’s a tinder box. Morale has never been lower. Mike Johnson will be stripped of his gavel and they will lose the majority before this term is out.”

The Republicans currently have a six-seat lead over the Democrats in the House. Even if no more Republican congresspeople resign mid-term, 28 GOP lawmakers have announced that they will not seek reelection to the House, according to NPR.

Image via Shutterstock