Summary: GAO audit covers june 2025 to august 2025 DOGE claimed $215 billion in savings, GAO verified $110 billion Nearly 2,000 contracts DOGE claimed terminated were not ended The U.S. DOGE Service, the cost-cutting group spearheaded by Elon Musk, consistently overstated its savings in online posts, taking credit for lease cancellations initiated before the group existed, according to a report from a government watchdog expected to be released on Aug. 6. DOGE also claimed contracts were terminated that had not been and loaded its database with savings that could not be verified, the report said. In an audit spanning from June 2025 through this month, the Government Accountability Office examined savings claimed by DOGE, the group that swept through federal agencies after President Donald Trump began his second term last year, dismantling the U.S. Agency for International Development and much of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The report, which came after a request by Democratic Sens. Gary Peters of Michigan and Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, provides the most comprehensive government assessment of DOGE’s public accounting of its impact, bringing the organization’s figures further into doubt. Though Musk aimed to cut $2 trillion in federal spending, even by DOGE’s own estimates it fell well short. A sporadically updated website tallying its cuts in a “Wall of Receipts” stated that its initiatives had saved $215 billion. The GAO examined $110 billion of this claimed savings that derived from contracts, grants and leases. Among the issues identified by GAO: DOGE’s “Wall of Receipts” “includes leases identified for termination before was established,” according to the report. In total, 108 of 264 leases DOGE identified on its website “were already in process for termination” when it came into being, the GAO said. In addition, DOGE claimed to have terminated 13,476 contracts, but the GAO analysis showed nearly 2,000 of these contracts “were not terminated.” Of $61 billion in contracts savings DOGE reported, the GAO said more than half the funds — nearly $35 billion — were either not terminated or unable to be corroborated by the investigators, because DOGE’s data was not specific enough to identify it. Roughly $27.4 billion of the savings DOGE claimed from cancellations were from contracts that were not actually terminated, the GAO said. “In these cases, another action, such as reducing the contract value or deobligating some funds could have occurred,” it said. From the watchdog’s analysis of federal procurement data, “we found that DOGE did not accurately report actions taken on contracts,” the GAO said in the report. Musk and the White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment. “Elon Musk and the Trump administration claimed billions of dollars in savings it could not substantiate, took credit for work already underway, and refused to show its work, all while putting Americans’ sensitive data at risk and hollowing out critical agencies,” Sen. Peters said. The GAO investigation was conducted at the request of Senate Democrats who sought greater accountability of DOGE’s dealings. The findings were shared with administration officials and lawmakers ahead of its Aug. 6 release. Although DOGE promised massive savings, the accounting of its cuts on its website didn’t come close, fact-checkers and media outlets found. Updates to the website slowed to a trickle after Musk left and some of the “savings” were later removed. Federal workers told The Washington Post that DOGE added red tape and extra hurdles even as it touted regulation cuts on its website. The GAO said it sought to speak with DOGE officials and submitted written questions to the group. However, it said, “the U.S. DOGE Service did not respond to our inquiries.”

Summary: Sen. Ron Wyden calls for federal bank probe Bank of America failed to report $170 million payments JPMorgan allegedly delayed reporting over $1 billion transfers   U.S. Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden called for federal regulators to probe big banks over their handling of Jeffrey Epstein's accounts after what Wyden said was potential evidence surfaced that the banks failed to report suspicious transactions linked to the late convicted ​sex offender. In a report released on Aug. 4, Wyden alleged that Bank of America, Deutsche Bank and JPMorgan Chase may have violated federal anti-money-laundering laws by failing to report Epstein's suspicious transactions in a timely manner. Wyden's four-year investigation included a review of so-called suspicious activity reports, or SARs, which banks file to the Treasury Department, materials from lawsuits and court filings, and information the senator sought from Wall Street banks and the U.S. Treasury. Bank of America failed to properly screen and report $170 million in payments to Epstein, Wyden's report said, adding that the bank years later concluded in suspicious activity reports that the transactions had no verifiable business purpose. "We take our legal and regulatory obligations seriously and, as we have previously said, the bank did not facilitate wrongdoing,” a BofA spokesperson said. Deutsche Bank failed to report on time more than $250 million in suspicious wire transfers tied to Epstein, including payments to women in Russia and other parts of Eastern Europe, the report said. Deutsche Bank said in a statement that it takes its legal obligations seriously and regrets its historical connection with Epstein. Wyden's report also alleged that JPMorgan delayed reporting over $1 billion in suspicious Epstein-linked transfers to the Treasury, including payments to women in Russia and Belarus. A spokesperson for the bank said that was false. "We began flagging suspicious transactions for the government as early as 2002 and throughout our relationship ... even after we closed his accounts," she said. "We acted appropriately on what we knew, when we knew it, as the law requires." Epstein was a JPMorgan client from 1998 until the bank cut him off in 2013, years after he pleaded guilty to prostitution-related charges. Deutsche took him on as a client in 2013 after JPMorgan closed his accounts. "We have cooperated with regulatory and law enforcement agencies regarding their investigations and have been transparent in addressing deficiencies and investing in strengthening our control environment in parallel," a Deutsche Bank spokesperson said. Reuters couldn't verify the details of the report. An administration official said Treasury does not comment on investigations, including to confirm or deny whether one exists. Treasury has fully cooperated with valid requests for information from Congress, the official said. Epstein died in a Manhattan ​jail cell in August 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. His death was ruled a suicide by New ‌York City's ⁠medical examiner. Wyden is one of several lawmakers probing Epstein's relationships on Wall Street. (Reporting by Arasu Kannagi Basil in Bengaluru; additional reporting by Tatiana Bautzer and Tom Sims; editing by Michelle Price and David Gaffen)

Summary: Justice Sonia Sotomayor denies stay of $655.5 million judgment 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reinstates judgment in March Supreme Court upheld Promoting Security and Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor declined on Aug. 3 to halt $655.5 million in damages that Palestinian authorities were ordered to pay plaintiffs in a civil suit over attacks that killed and injured Americans in Israel from 2002 to 2004. Sotomayor denied a request by the Palestinian Authority and the Palestine Liberation Organization to put on hold the judgment while they appeal a lower court's decision to revive the case years after it had been dismissed. The lawsuit was brought on behalf of Americans killed or injured in those shootings and bombings in the Jerusalem area. The Supreme Court last year upheld a federal law that allowed claims like those brought by the plaintiffs in the case. Sotomayor did not explain her decision and did not refer the case to the entire court. Sotomayor handles emergency matters for cases arising from New York and certain other states. The Manhattan-based 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated the judgment in March following the Supreme Court's 9-0 decision in June 2025 to uphold the 2019 law, called the Promoting Security and Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act. The Palestinian organizations said that enforcing the judgment in the case will cause severe financial harm and destabilize government services in the West Bank, harming people who live there and jeopardizing regional security. They said in a written filing that the plaintiffs intend to seek payment from indirect Palestinian tax revenue collected by Israel, a key source of funding for Palestinian government operations. Security, sanitation and school services in the West Bank "are hanging by a thread," they wrote. The plaintiffs, in winning the judgment in New York federal court in 2015, alleged that the Palestinian entities were responsible for the incidents from 2002 to 2004. The 2nd Circuit threw out that verdict in 2016 and ordered that the case be dismissed, concluding that the federal judge in the case did not have jurisdiction over the matter. The Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of the case in 2018. Congress then passed the 2019 law to facilitate lawsuits against Palestinian authorities. Under the law, the PLO and Palestinian Authority automatically "consent" to jurisdiction if they conduct certain activities in the United States or make payments to people who attack Americans. The 2nd Circuit subsequently decided that the 2019 law violated the rights of those Palestinian authorities to due process under the U.S. Constitution. But the Supreme Court overturned that ruling last year. Following that Supreme Court action, the 2nd Circuit resurrected the judgment for the plaintiffs. The Palestinian authorities urged the Supreme Court to halt the payment for now, saying the judgment had long become void and a "nullity." "The money judgment at issue became a legal nullity when ... appeals were exhausted in 2018," they said. (Reporting by Andrew Chung; Editing by Will Dunham)