🌡️ RollingBoil Daily - December 02, 2025
Five years after the 2020 election, the consequences of Trump-era disinformation are still unfolding in real time—and today's newsletter shows just how far the rot has spread. Fox News is back in court facing another defamation trial for amplifying election lies, a stark reminder that accountability moves slowly while damage spreads fast. Meanwhile, Trump's influence over the Republican Party faces a test in a Tennessee special election, and his incoming administration is already showing its authoritarian colors: FEMA employees who dared criticize him were briefly unsuspended, only to be punished again in what looks like pure retaliation.
But perhaps most alarming is what's happening on the international stage. Putin is meeting with Trump associates Witkoff and Kushner as part of so-called "Ukraine deal" negotiations—raising urgent questions about who's actually conducting American foreign policy and whose interests are being served. These aren't isolated incidents; they're part of a pattern of eroding democratic norms, weaponizing government agencies, and blurring the lines between personal loyalty and national interest. Today's stories remind us why we can't look away, even when the headlines feel exhaustingly familiar. Let's dig in.
⚡ Quick Hits
-
US Homeland Security secretary calls for more travel bans
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, a Trump administration appointee, is advocating for expanded travel bans targeting countries she claims are sources of criminal activity. This aligns with the Trump administration's hardline immigration stance and represents a continuation of restrictive border and travel policies central to right-wing political priorities. The proposal reflects the administration's emphasis on law-and-order messaging and immigration enforcement as key policy objectives. -
Watch live: House Republicans give remarks amid Hegseth turmoil
House Republican leaders are addressing media regarding Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's controversial orders for Pentagon strikes on alleged drug boats in the Caribbean. The Trump administration is asserting executive authority to conduct military operations without congressional approval amid rising Venezuela tensions, representing a significant assertion of presidential power that aligns with Trump administration policies on executive action and military intervention. -
Tennessee voters make final call in House special election testing Trump’s power
Tennessee's 7th District special election serves as a critical test of Trump's political influence and Republican momentum following recent Democratic victories. The Trump administration and GOP leadership have heavily invested in the race through MAGA Inc. ($1M+), virtual rallies, and direct candidate support, reflecting the seat's strategic importance for maintaining House Republican control heading into 2026 midterms. -
Who Gets a Presidential Pardon?
This article examines Trump's use of presidential pardon authority, a significant executive power that has been central to Trump administration policy and political strategy. Pardon decisions reflect Trump's priorities regarding allies, political opponents, and his base, making this a key indicator of administration values and political calculations. The pardon power represents a critical intersection of executive authority and political influence within right-wing governance. -
DOGE Isn’t Dead. Here’s What Its Operatives Are Doing Now
DOGE, the Trump administration initiative led by Elon Musk to reduce government spending and eliminate federal agencies, continues operating within government agencies despite reports of its dissolution. The article indicates DOGE operatives have embedded themselves throughout federal bureaucracy to implement efficiency measures and structural changes aligned with Trump administration priorities. -
Dominion still has pending lawsuits against election deniers such as Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell
Dominion Voting Systems maintains active lawsuits against prominent Trump allies and election deniers Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell over false claims about the 2020 election. This ongoing litigation represents a significant legal reckoning for key figures in the right-wing election denial movement and continues to shape discourse around Trump-era legal consequences. -
Indiana Republicans propose map to flip two House seats
Indiana House Republicans have proposed a mid-census redistricting map designed to flip two Democratic-held U.S. House seats to Republican control, with President Trump publicly pressuring state GOP leaders to adopt aggressive map changes. The proposal reflects Trump's direct involvement in state-level Republican strategy and highlights internal GOP divisions, as some Indiana Senate Republicans have resisted Trump's calls for the aggressive redistricting push despite House Republican confidence in passage. -
Update: White House defends second Venezuela boat strike as legal
The Trump administration's defense of controversial military strikes on alleged Venezuelan drug boats represents a significant test of executive power and military authority under Trump's second term, with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's authorization of lethal operations triggering rare bipartisan congressional scrutiny and potential war crimes allegations. The incident reflects the administration's aggressive posture on drug trafficking and Venezuela while raising questions about the scope of presidential war powers and the legal boundaries of military operations outside declared armed conflicts.
đź“Š By The Numbers
- $1 million - MAGA Inc. spent on Tennessee special election for Van Epps
- 21 percentage points - Margin Trump won Tennessee's 7th District by in 2024
- 14 - FEMA employees suspended, reinstated, then resuspended over Trump criticism
đź“° Today's Big Stories
1. Fox News faces critical test in 2nd case over false 2020 election claims
Fox News Faces Round Two: Another Voting Company Takes the Network to Court Over 2020 Election Lies
Fox News is back in the legal hot seat over its promotion of false 2020 election conspiracy theories, this time facing a multibillion-dollar defamation lawsuit from a second voting technology company. The case echoes the network's disastrous Dominion Voting Systems settlement earlier this year, where Fox paid a staggering $787.5 million to avoid trial. Now, another voting tech firm is pursuing similar claims, alleging the network knowingly broadcast debunked allegations about rigged voting machines to appease its audience and maintain ratings after Donald Trump's defeat.
This lawsuit represents more than just legal jeopardy for Rupert Murdoch's media empire—it's a critical test of whether powerful right-wing media outlets can be held accountable for amplifying dangerous disinformation. The case involves many of the same cast of characters: Fox hosts who platformed conspiracy theorists like Sidney Powell and Rudy Giuliani, despite internal communications showing network executives and personalities knew the election fraud claims were baseless. The legal discovery process could once again expose the cynical calculus behind Fox's editorial decisions, revealing how the network prioritized profit and audience retention over truth during a pivotal democratic moment.
For progressives tracking the accountability gap in right-wing media, this case matters enormously. If successful, it could further drain Fox's resources and establish stronger precedents that media organizations cannot recklessly defame private companies while spreading election lies. The cumulative financial and reputational damage may finally create meaningful deterrents against the kind of democracy-threatening disinformation that fueled January 6th and continues to poison American political discourse. It also signals that the business community—particularly the tech sector—won't tolerate being scapegoated in service of authoritarian narratives.
What to watch: Monitor whether Fox attempts another costly settlement or risks trial, which could expose even more damaging internal communications. Pay attention to how this case influences other potential litigation against right-wing media outlets and whether it emboldens more companies to pursue legal action. The discovery phase will be crucial—any new revelations about Fox's internal deliberations could have broader implications for ongoing investigations into 2020 election interference and media complicity in spreading the "Big Lie."
2. Fox News faces critical test in 2nd case over false 2020 election claims
Fox News Faces Another Reckoning Over 2020 Election Lies
Fox News is back in the legal hot seat over its promotion of false 2020 election claims, this time in a multibillion-dollar defamation lawsuit brought by a voting technology company. The case echoes the network's previous legal battle with Dominion Voting Systems, which Fox settled last year for a staggering $787.5 million—just as the trial was set to begin. Now, another voting tech firm is pursuing accountability for the conspiracy theories Fox amplified in the weeks following Donald Trump's defeat, when the network's hosts and guests repeatedly pushed baseless allegations of rigged voting machines and stolen votes.
The political stakes extend far beyond Fox's balance sheet. These cases represent a rare moment of legal accountability for the right-wing media ecosystem that incubated and spread the "Big Lie" about the 2020 election—propaganda that ultimately fueled the January 6th Capitol attack and continues to erode public trust in democratic institutions. Fox News made a calculated business decision to platform election deniers and conspiracy theorists, apparently prioritizing ratings and audience retention over truth. Internal communications revealed during the Dominion case showed Fox executives and hosts privately acknowledged the election fraud claims were false even as they promoted them on air.
For those tracking the authoritarian playbook unfolding on the American right, this lawsuit matters because it targets the infrastructure of disinformation. Fox News isn't just a passive observer of right-wing politics—it's an active architect of the alternative reality in which millions of conservatives now live. When the nation's most-watched cable news network legitimizes conspiracy theories, it doesn't just defame individual companies; it weaponizes lies against democracy itself. Another massive settlement or courtroom loss could finally force some accountability for the network's role in democracy's deterioration.
Watch whether Fox chooses to settle again or risk a trial that could expose more damaging internal communications. Also monitor whether this case emboldens other victims of Fox's disinformation campaigns to pursue legal action, and whether the financial consequences prove significant enough to actually change the network's behavior—or if spreading profitable lies simply remains part of their business model.
3. Tennessee House special election tests Trump’s political pull
Trump's Tennessee Test: Special Election Becomes Referendum on GOP's Grip
What Happened: Tennessee's 7th Congressional District—a seat Trump won handily in 2024—has become an unexpected battleground in a special House election that wrapped up Tuesday. Republican Matt Van Epps, heavily backed by Trump and GOP leadership, faced Democratic state Rep. Aftyn Behn in what should have been a sleepy race. Instead, polling showed the contest tightening enough that Trump himself phoned into a rally, declaring "the whole world is watching Tennessee right now." Both parties have flooded the district with money and resources typically reserved for competitive swing seats, turning a deep-red special election into a high-stakes proxy war.
The Political Context: Trump has personally elevated this race into a test of his political strength, calling it a "big thing" and acknowledging that anything less than a commanding Van Epps victory would be spun as a warning sign for his administration and the GOP. Speaker Mike Johnson and national Republican organizations have scrambled to shore up support, while Democrats see an opening: Behn has centered her campaign on affordability and economic strain under Trump's second term, the same kitchen-table pitch that's helped Democrats overperform in recent special elections nationwide. With Republicans clinging to a razor-thin House majority, even the margin matters—a close result could embolden Democrats heading into next year's midterms and rattle GOP strategists already nervous about defending Trump-adjacent seats.
Why It Matters: This race is a real-time stress test of whether Trump's hold on deep-red America remains ironclad or whether economic anxiety and Democratic messaging on cost-of-living issues can crack open districts long considered untouchable. If Behn pulls off an upset or even comes within single digits, it would validate Democratic strategy and suggest Trump's political capital is softer than his 2024 victory implied. For Republicans, anything short of a blowout in a district this conservative would signal serious vulnerability and potentially embolden primary challengers and Democratic recruiters alike. The outcome will either reassure GOP leaders that their narrow majority is defensible or confirm their worst fears about a backlash brewing in their base.
What's Next: Watch the margin closely—if Van Epps wins by less than 10 points in a district Trump carried by double digits, expect Democratic groups to immediately target similar seats and Republican donors to demand course corrections. If Behn somehow wins, it would trigger panic in GOP ranks and likely prompt emergency strategy sessions about Trump's drag on down-ballot races. Either way, both parties will dissect turnout patterns and messaging effectiveness here as a preview of 2026's midterm battlefield, particularly around whether economic populism can overcome partisan gravity in Trump country.
4. FEMA employees who signed letter critical of Trump unsuspended, then resuspended
FEMA Employees Caught in Political Purge Whiplash
In a disturbing display of political retaliation, the Trump administration has re-suspended 14 FEMA employees who briefly had their suspensions lifted after signing a letter critical of the administration. The workers were initially placed on leave for alleged "misconduct"—though the nature of that misconduct appears to be their willingness to speak out against Trump's policies. When agency officials reinstated them, the administration quickly reversed course upon learning of their return, with the Department of Homeland Security claiming the employees were "wrongly and without authorization reinstated by bureaucrats acting outside of their authority."
This incident reflects the broader purge of federal workers that has characterized Trump's approach to executive branch agencies. By targeting FEMA employees—civil servants responsible for disaster response during hurricanes, wildfires, and other emergencies—the administration is sending a chilling message to the federal workforce: political loyalty trumps professional expertise. The characterization of career officials as "bureaucrats acting outside of their authority" for personnel decisions is particularly alarming, suggesting a centralization of control that undermines agency independence.
The stakes extend far beyond these 14 individuals. FEMA's effectiveness depends on experienced professionals who can respond to disasters without political interference. Purging employees for expressing concerns about administration policies threatens the agency's operational capacity precisely when climate-related disasters are increasing in frequency and severity. Americans facing hurricanes, floods, and fires need FEMA staffers focused on saving lives, not watching their backs for political retribution.
Watch for: Whether these employees will be formally terminated or face ongoing limbo status, if other FEMA workers come forward about the chilling effect on agency operations, and whether congressional Democrats launch oversight investigations into what constitutes the alleged "misconduct" that triggered these suspensions.
5. Putin to Meet With Witkoff and Kushner as U.S. Pushes for Ukraine Deal
Trump's Inner Circle Takes Ukraine Diplomacy Behind Closed Doors
President Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff and son-in-law Jared Kushner are heading to Moscow to meet directly with Vladimir Putin, presenting a revised proposal to end Russia's war in Ukraine. This high-stakes diplomatic mission places two figures with deep personal and financial ties to Trump—but limited foreign policy credentials—at the center of negotiations that will determine the fate of Ukrainian sovereignty and European security architecture for generations to come.
The political context is striking: rather than relying on experienced State Department diplomats or Ukraine experts, Trump has empowered his personal loyalists to negotiate directly with an adversary who has waged an illegal war of aggression for three years. Kushner, who profited handsomely from Middle Eastern investments after his previous White House stint, brings a track record of transactional diplomacy that often prioritized deals over democratic values. Witkoff, a real estate investor and Trump friend with no diplomatic experience, represents the administration's preference for personal relationships over institutional expertise. Their mission signals that Ukraine policy is being crafted in Trump's immediate orbit, with minimal congressional oversight or traditional diplomatic guardrails.
This matters because any "deal" that emerges will likely pressure Ukraine to cede territory and sovereignty to end the conflict—essentially rewarding Putin's aggression while undermining the international principle that borders cannot be changed by force. European allies are watching nervously as the U.S. potentially abandons its security commitments, which could embolden authoritarian regimes worldwide and fracture the Western alliance. The involvement of figures like Kushner also raises questions about whose interests are truly being served: Ukraine's survival, American security, or the business prospects of Trump's inner circle in a post-deal landscape.
Watch for details of what concessions are being offered to Putin, how Ukraine's government responds to being sidelined, and whether congressional Democrats or European leaders push back against a deal negotiated without transparency or accountability. Any agreement that trades Ukrainian territory for a temporary ceasefire would represent a historic shift in U.S. foreign policy—and a potential green light for future authoritarian land grabs.
RollingBoil • Tracking right-wing actions and accountability
Stay informed. Stay vigilant.