President Donald Trump has indicated he will not devote his full energy to campaigning, appearing instead to accept the prospect of becoming a lame-duck president in 2027 and pursuing agreements with Democrats.

For observers who have followed his remarks closely, that stance may not be unexpected.

Since late last year, Trump has repeatedly pointed to the longstanding political pattern in which a president’s party loses support in the midterms, often allowing the opposition to take control of Congress.

He has said presidents rarely defy that trend and has at times questioned whether Republicans can overcome history in this election cycle.

That context made his response less surprising when Fox News host Laura Ingraham asked whether he would ‘campaign harder than you’ve ever campaigned’ this month.

‘No,’ Trump replied quickly. ‘The hardest I ever campaigned, because I had to win, was the last. I took four months, no empty days, no empty hours. I made speeches all day.’

Trump said he did not take a day off during the final 120 days of the 2024 campaign.

‘But isn’t this just as important, Mr President? I mean, your whole legacy is on the line,’ Ingraham responded, appearing taken aback by his relaxed approach.

‘It’s never as important,’ Trump contended.

As the president would explain, he will be remembered for being a president who blocked Democratic priorities in his final two years. 

He would strike the occasional deal with the liberals too, he added. 

ALSO READ: Billy Porter Updates Fans After Near-Fatal Sepsis Battle

‘Look, I’m campaigning for other people. When you say my legacy, I’ll be a block. I’ll end up being a blocker. I’ll block all their bad stuff for two years,’ he said. 

‘It won’t be the same, but I’ll be a blocker. What can I tell you? And probably be able to make deals with them.’

When the camera briefly cut back to the host, she had a surprised look on her face with her mouth hanging open. 

Trump continued: ‘They’re going to want some stuff, and you to make deals; it’s one of those things.’

‘So, it’s not as dire,’ he said, quickly adding, ‘maybe it is?’

According to the popular prediction market Kalshi, Republicans have a 52 percent chance of retaining the Senate. Democrats need to flip four seats to do so. 

Meanwhile, Democrats have a commanding 86 percent chance of winning the House of Representatives. 

Should Democrats win both chambers of Congress, they would be able to jam through legislation to undo the president’s agenda without Republican votes. 

They would also likely begin sweeping investigations into Trump, his administration, his associates and likely his network of businesses. 

Though Trump seems unconcerned now with the possibility of Democratic control of Congress, he may feel differently when his top military and Cabinet officials start getting dragged to hostile hearings on Capitol Hill and his agenda unravels. 

Fox News, which hosted live coverage of Trump’s Thursday night speech at the GOP convention, only brought in an average audience of about 2.5 million for the conclusion of the event. 

The outlet did not get the usual ‘Trump bump’ in ratings that occasionally comes with carrying his live remarks, but maybe some are tired of the show.

President Donald Trump has become the first sitting president to appear on a U.S. $1 coin, with the newly released collectible selling out within hours.

US Treasurer Brandon Beech told the Daily Mail that the administration first considered placing Trump’s portrait on a $250 bill to coincide with America’s 250th anniversary. That plan, however, would have required new legislation.

With Congress passing relatively little legislation, officials instead turned to existing authority that allowed them to feature the president on a $1 coin.

Beech said he reached out to the White House photography team and received 12 images of Trump. Officials created coin prototypes from the photographs and presented them to the president, who chose the final design himself.

“This is what he picked,” Beech said. “It came out last week. We sold out in four hours.”

The US Mint offered the Trump $1 coins in pre-release rolls of 25 for $61 — nearly two and a half times their face value — as well as bags containing 100 coins for $154.50.

Although the coins have a gold-like shine, they contain no gold. They are made from an alloy of copper, zinc, manganese and nickel. A special run of 250,000 coins struck on July 4 features a “July 4th” privy mark.

Beech maintained that the higher price is only temporary.

‘You can get these at a bank in the next month. You should be able to go into a bank like you get a roll of quarters, you should be able to get a roll of Trump coins, dollar coins, and then you can go out and use them as legal tender and spend them.’ 

The coin is already proving controversial, with Democratic Senator Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada calling it ‘completely contrary to America’s democratic values’ and previously introducing legislation with Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley to block living presidents from appearing on US currency.

 A legal challenge has also been filed, arguing that putting a living president’s likeness on U.S. currency violates federal law.

 Nine million coins were struck, with 8.75 million initially put up for sale by the Mint, while the rarer July 4-marked versions are already being offered for hundreds of dollars online, far above their $1 face value. 

READ MORE: Ebola Outbreak Nears Tipping Point, Risking Worst Epidemic Ever

And for those who want to spend rather than collect them, Beech said the coins should soon be available through banks just like rolls of quarters. 

‘You should be able to go into a bank like you get a roll of quarters, you should be able to get a roll of Trump coins, dollar coins, and then you can go out and use them as legal tender and spend them.’ 

Asked whether it was appropriate to honor a sitting president on money while American forces were fighting a war with Iran, Beach did not hesitate.

‘No, listen, this is our 250th birthday. We’re proud to be Americans,’ he said. ‘I love this country. I’m unapologetic about loving America and being part of a great country, and we should all love this country. And we should love our president and respect our president and be happy that we got a dollar coin with his image on it.’

At the Republican convention in Dallas, where the coin was the talk of the floor, the price drew shrugs.

Actor John Schneider was the most emphatic.

‘I think it’s fantastic,’ the Dukes of Hazzard star said. ‘He’s done so much for our country, not only in our country, but globally, that I think it’s a wonderful, wonderful kind of award for him and he deserves it.’

Schneider said he saw the coins as ‘nostalgia’ and ‘honor’ rather than investment. ‘I don’t think a lot of people talk about honoring President Trump, and I don’t know why,’ he said.

Denise Hopkins, from Mandeville, Louisiana, called the coin ‘very cool’ and rattled off its uses: ‘souvenirs, keepsakes, Christmas gifts, stocking stuffers.’

Roy Parker, of Carrollton, Texas, said of Trump becoming the first living president on a U.S. dollar coin: ‘I would absolutely love that,’ citing ‘everything that he’s done for this country.’

Michael Walton, from Dallas, was more clear-eyed about the markup. ‘It’s probably going to end up being a novelty. So it’s not unexpected.’

Karen Love, from the Dallas area, had not heard of the coin until asked, but called $61 ‘fair’ and guessed it would become a ‘memorial kind of thing.’

Schneider had no ceiling at all.

‘I’d spend $90 to honor him,’ he said. ‘Why not 100? I’ll do it.’

A high school teacher has failed in a Fair Work bid for 16 weeks of paid parental leave after claiming he was entitled to the benefit once he became the primary carer for his newborn.

Andrew Read sought to remain at home with the child after his wife returned to work, arguing that he would then take on the role of primary caregiver.

However, the 16-week paid leave provision in his workplace agreement was not available to every parent who assumes primary caring duties.

The entitlement applied only in defined circumstances in which a person is granted parental responsibility, such as through adoption, surrogacy or a permanent care order.

As the biological father, Mr Read held parental responsibility from the time of the child’s birth and did not satisfy those requirements.

Mr Read has worked as a classroom teacher at Mordialloc College since January 2024.

He and his wife welcomed their child in 2026.

His wife first took parental leave as the baby’s primary caregiver, while Mr Read took four weeks of paid partner leave between January and March 2026.

At the same time, he applied for the more generous entitlement known as ‘other paid parental leave’, which provides up to 16 weeks of paid leave.

Mr Read argued that he should qualify because he planned to become the child’s primary carer once his wife returned to work.

While his paid partner leave was approved by the college’s principal, she said she did not have authority to approve the additional leave and referred his follow-up request to Victoria’s Department of Education.

The department rejected the application, arguing that although Mr Read was the child’s biological father, he did not meet the eligibility criteria for the 16-week entitlement.

Fair Work Commissioner Oanh Thi Tran upheld that decision on September 4.

She found the entitlement was clearly limited to particular circumstances and did not extend to biological fathers simply because they later took over the day-to-day care of their child.

The provision applies to Victorian education employees who have been granted parental responsibility following an adoption, surrogacy arrangement, permanent care order or in other circumstances approved by the education department.

During proceedings, Mr Read argued that he did not need a formal legal order or official process to be given parental responsibility.

He said that once his wife returned to work and he took over caring for their baby, he would effectively become the child’s primary caregiver and have parental responsibility.

MORE STORY: CIA 9/11 Files Revisit Clinton-Era Decisions on Osama bin Laden

The department disagreed, arguing there had been no new grant of parental responsibility because Mr Read already held that responsibility automatically as the child’s biological parent.

Commissioner Tran agreed, finding no one had ‘given, accorded, bestowed or conferred’ parental responsibility on Mr Read because he had automatically acquired it when his child was born.

While she acknowledged the benefits of fathers taking parental leave, she found the agreement did not allow Mr Read to access the entitlement he was seeking.

‘This is an admirable and appropriate thing for a father to desire,’ she wrote in her published decision.

‘I accept that it may be desirable for fathers and non-birthing parents to have entitlements to paid parental leave, particularly in circumstances where they may be the primary caregiver.’

But she found the agreement clearly limited the 16-week entitlement to specific circumstances and did not cover biological fathers in Mr Read’s position.

Mr Read had also argued that the agreement should be interpreted in a way that was not discriminatory.

Commissioner Tran rejected that argument.

‘I do not consider that there is any discrimination where more generous provisions have particular criteria required in order for them to be accessed,’ Commissioner Tran wrote.

‘Interpreting an agreement does not involve rewriting it to give effect to what might be regarded as a fair or just outcome.’

The case is likely to reignite debate about parental leave entitlements for fathers and other parents who become primary carers.

Currently, the Australian Government provides eligible parents with up to 26 weeks of Paid Parental Leave at the national minimum wage, while the National Employment Standards guarantee eligible employees access to unpaid parental leave.

The Workplace Gender Equality Agency reported last month that two in three employers with 100 or more staff now offer paid parental leave.

The amount of leave varies between employers and is often linked to whether an employee is classified as a primary or secondary carer.

On average, employers provide 14 weeks of paid leave to primary carers and 3.7 weeks to secondary carers.

A growing number of Australian employers have also moved towards gender-neutral parental leave policies, with 20 per cent offering the same leave entitlements to all parents irrespective of gender.

WGEA said the approach encourages a more equal sharing of caring responsibilities and helps remove gender stereotypes around parenting.

– READ MORE: Major WFH ruling in the boss’s favour shakes corporate Australia: Busy white collar dad working from the couch loses plea over kid’s daycare and wife’s medical condition 

– READ MORE: Mining worker on $187,000 is forced to return to the office early from maternity leave after taking fight to Fair Work 

The Clinton White House was warned that Osama bin Laden intended to crash a bomb-laden aircraft into an American city exactly three years before the September 11 hijackings, newly released CIA records show.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the alert appeared in a September 10, 1998 report prepared for senior Clinton administration officials authorized to receive the president’s most highly classified daily intelligence briefing.

The report, titled ‘Bin Laden’s Location and Intentions,’ did not identify a date or a specific target. But it indicated that the al-Qaeda leader was focused on Washington, DC. Three years later, terrorists working for bin Laden flew a hijacked plane into the Pentagon.

Additional documents show intelligence analysts told the White House in July 1998 that a bin Laden attack inside the United States was “plausible.” In October 2000, they warned that he was still “committed” to striking American targets, although officials said they “cannot pinpoint targets or timing.”

The disclosure emerged as Clinton attended the 25th-anniversary commemoration at Ground Zero, alongside families whose relatives were killed in the attack anticipated by the earlier memo.

In 2001, bin Laden appeared in at least 18 separate editions of President Bush’s daily intelligence briefing, including seven delivered in the weeks before the Twin Towers were destroyed.

A July 24, 2001 memo also reported that an “expected imminent” bin Laden operation had been delayed, while warning that other attacks could still be underway.

The CIA released the 71 documents to mark a quarter-century since nearly 3,000 people were murdered in New York City, at the Pentagon and in a field in Pennsylvania.

The 9/11 Commission had mentioned the 1998 memo, but never disclosed it had been written for the president’s own briefing stream.

Former acting CIA chief Michael Morell told the Wall Street that the documents prove the agency delivered ‘long and loud strategic warnings’ that two administrations failed to act upon.

But agency insiders told the outlet that the intelligence at the time was often thin and drawn from ‘highly questionable sources.’ 

The lack of certainty, insiders told WSJ, made it difficult for policymakers to respond to a potential plot with no time, place or method.

However, one CIA analyst claimed that counterterrorism operations were not a presidential priority before 9/11, and the agency lacked the manpower to dismantle bin Laden’s terror network. 

Bin Laden had played a key role in the 1998 embassy bombings in East Africa and the 2000 attack on the USS Cole.

CIA Director John Ratcliffe hailed the dump as the largest release of the agency’s 9/11 analysis ever, calling it an act of transparency to honor the dead.

Just hours earlier at Ground Zero, 9/11 widow Terry Strada accused ‘administration after administration, including leaders in front of us here today’ of protecting Saudi Arabia, and urged Trump to release the unredacted files on the kingdom’s alleged role.

Conservative Representative Anna Paulina Luna, who chairs the House task force pushing for the declassification of federal secrets, told followers on X she had been tipped that 9/11 files would be made public. 

The Democratic Republic of the Congo has reached a critical moment in its battle to contain Ebola, with health experts warning that the response now stands at a decisive crossroads.

Authorities must rapidly build on existing measures to suppress the current outbreak, or face the prospect of it becoming the most severe Ebola epidemic ever documented.

Since the outbreak was declared in May 2026, the DRC had recorded more than 6,186 confirmed infections and 3,007 deaths as of September 1. The toll makes it the deadliest Ebola outbreak in the country’s history.

The crisis involves the Bundibugyo strain of the virus responsible for Ebola disease. No licensed vaccine or targeted treatment is currently available for this strain.

Health officials believe the outbreak began in late April 2026 in Mongbwalu, a highly mobile mining hub in north-eastern DRC’s Ituri region. It then spread through linked communities and health-care networks into the Rwampara and Bunia health zones in Ituri province, before crossing into Uganda.

The Congolese government is leading the national response, supported by the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, the World Health Organization and other partners. Their work has included expanding disease surveillance, laboratory services, treatment facilities, infection prevention, vaccination efforts, logistics, public outreach and safe, dignified burials.

There have been important gains, notably in Uganda, where transmission was halted through firm national leadership and close cooperation with local communities.

In the DRC, however, persistent insecurity, high population movement, late case detection, funding and supply shortfalls, and limited community ownership have continued to fuel the spread of the virus.

The current response remains insufficient to break the chain of transmission in the DRC. Officials say surveillance, testing, treatment, vaccination and community engagement must be brought closer to villages if the outbreak is to be contained.

And public health experts with expertise in Ebola say more action is required.

What’s required is informed by the four factors that have made this epidemic difficult to control:

• The DRC’s difficult geographical and humanitarian environment
• Highly mobile populations
• Low trust and poor community engagement
• The incomplete scientific arsenal against the Bundibugyo virus

The four factors 

First, this is an outbreak occurring in an exceptionally difficult environment. The affected areas are vast, remote and, in many places, insecure. Short journeys can take a day or more on bad roads, particularly during the rainy season (which is now).

Second, populations are highly mobile. Mining communities, motorcycle transport, displacement and cross-border movement connect villages and health zones that are difficult to monitor. 

The outbreak has been concentrated in several interconnected areas, particularly in Ituri, about 1,700 miles (2,886 kilometers) from Kinshasa, the DRC capital. Bunia, the main urban hub in Ituri, is connected to surrounding transmission areas. Movement of people is important in the response.

Third, trust and community engagement remain challenges. When people are afraid, when health facilities have closed after health workers have died, or when families have experienced Ebola without seeing an effective response, they may delay or avoid getting help. 

This directly affects surveillance. Current investigations by our team suggest that a substantial proportion of cases are being identified outside established contact lists. The response therefore cannot depend only on traditional contact tracing.

Fourth, unlike Ebola caused by the Zaire species, the Bundibugyo virus has no licensed vaccine or specific treatment. Clinical research is therefore part of the response itself.

The DRC has launched Ebola vaccination in Kisangani. The first injections were administered to health workers and other frontline responders. 

More than 50,000 doses have been received. 

The International Coordinating Group on Vaccine Provision has approved 70,000 doses of Ervebo for use in the country. Around 20,000 doses will be used in a clinical trial to assess its effectiveness against the Bundibugyo strain.

The response thus far 

It is important to recognize how much has been achieved in only three months, between May 15 and August 15, 2026.

More than 20 Ebola treatment and isolation facilities have been established or supported. At the height of the crisis in late May 2026, treatment capacity was overwhelmed, with bed occupancy exceeding 200 percent. In late August, occupancy had fallen to around 66 percent.

Laboratory capacity has expanded dramatically, with 22 laboratories operating across the five affected provinces. 

Before, there was only one in Kinshasa with the capacity to detect Bundibugyo. This has helped reduce turnaround time between sample collection and results, from over a week to just hours.

Safe and dignified burials have also improved substantially, with the vast majority now taking place within 24 hours.

These improvements matter. They are signs that the response can change the trajectory of an epidemic when resources, coordination and technical capacity come together.

There are also encouraging epidemiological signals. The effective reproduction number, which measures how fast a disease spreads, has fallen substantially from the very high levels (Rt 4.0, which means each infected person is passing on Ebola to four others) observed in May. The average number of people that each patient infects has fallen from four to just over one.

The scale of resources mobilized for the outbreak is substantial, with approximately $1.72 billion in pledges, including $118.5 million committed by African countries. Around $867 million (about half of the pledges) has reportedly been released.

The continental response plan launched on June 5, 2026 by Africa CDC and WHO was designed around a simple principle: one plan, one budget, one team, one monitoring and evaluation framework, with communities at the center.

What’s required 

The next phase must center on the villages. Local representatives, health workers and leaders should become active partners in surveillance, early detection, referral, risk communication and community protection.

Digital tools can support this, but technology must serve the community rather than replace it.

Commercial motorcycle riders, who connect communities across enormous distances, must be engaged as partners in the response rather than being treated simply as a risk.

Vaccination must be brought closer to communities. Research must be done where the epidemic is occurring. Clinical trials of vaccines and therapeutics must proceed with urgency and scientific rigor.

Essential health services must continue alongside Ebola control.

The same applies to the reopening of schools. This must happen with infection-prevention measures, including training teachers, providing hygiene facilities, developing clear referral mechanisms, and adapting communication about the epidemic for school children and families.

Humanitarian and Ebola responses must also be integrated. A community facing insecurity, displacement and disease cannot be expected to navigate separate systems for each crisis.

Finally, Ebola doesn’t respect borders. The collaboration between the DRC and Uganda shows what regional solidarity can look like. It’s about joint surveillance, moving diagnostic capacity closer to border communities, sharing information and coordinated action. 

The DRC-Uganda lessons must be extended to South Sudan, the Republic of Congo and other neighboring countries as agreed in Bangui, Central African Republic, in mid August.

This article is adapted from The Conversation, a nonprofit news organization dedicated to sharing the knowledge of experts. It was written by Yap Boum, Professor in the faculty of Medicine at Mbarara University of Science and Technology, and Marie Roseline Belizaire, a Researcher in the School of Medicine at Universidad de Alcalá. It was edited by Luke Andrews, Daily Mail senior health correspondent.