There is bipartisan support for President Donald Trump’s surprise announcement that roughly 1.5 million U.S. service members will receive $1,776 bonus checks, but some are also questioning where the money is coming from, since Congress approved no such bonus payout.

According to Defense One, Congress did approve the funds, but for an entirely different purpose: military housing allowances.

“Because of tariffs, along with the just passed One Big, Beautiful Bill,” Trump told the nation during Wednesday’s primetime TV address, “tonight, I am also proud to announce that more than 1,450,000, think of this, 1,450,000 military service members will receive a special we call ‘Warrior Dividend’ before Christmas, a Warrior dividend. In honor of our nation’s founding in 1776, we are sending every soldier $1,776.”

READ MORE: ‘With a Grain of Salt’: Urging Caution on Inflation Report Economists Warn of Missing Data

“Think of that,” he added. “And the checks are already on the way.”

Despite Trump’s claim, the funds reportedly are not coming from tariffs.

“Congress appropriated $2.9 billion to the Department of War to supplement the Basic Allowance for Housing entitlement within The One Big Beautiful Bill,” a senior administration official told Defense One. “Approximately 1.28 million active component military members and 174,000 Reserve component military members will receive this supplement.”

That official also announced that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth directed the Pentagon to “disburse $2.6 billion as a one-time basic allowance for housing supplement” to all eligible service members.

“The $2.9 billion meant to subsidize the basic allowance for housing,” Defense One reported, “the monthly payment to cover troops’ off-base expenses such as rent, mortgage, and utilities known as BAH, comes as some service members have struggled to make the most of the benefit.”

While the funds remained within military compensation they were shifted away from housing support toward one-time cash payments.

Critics are blasting not the bonuses, but the diverting and “repackaging” of congressionally-approved funds.

READ MORE: Trump Reveals White House’s ‘Primary’ Policy Goal — And It Isn’t Cutting Costs

“I’m not opposed to anything that helps the troops, but it should be substantive help rather than a publicity stunt,” wrote retired U.S. Air Force colonel Moe Davis, a Democrat running for Congress. “Pay them enough so their families don’t rely on nutritional assistance. Fully fund the VA to take care of them longterm.”

The Bulwark’s Sam Stein wrote, “so it’s not a bonus. it’s taking money from one account for the troops and giving it to them as checks.”

“I was wondering how Trump found his troop pay money without a congressional authorization/appropriation,” remarked The Atlantic’s David Frum. “He found it by taking it away from troop housing money. Always a con artist.”

MSNOW anchor Catherine Rampell, an economics editor for The Bulwark, noted: So…not a bonus. Robbing Peter to pay Paul, who are in this case the same person.”

“Hi! I love the troops so much I will take $1,776 out of their pockets to give them a $1,776 check with my name on it,” snarked HuffPost White House corespondent S.V. Dáte.

“Classic Trump,” commented former GOP Congressman Joe Walsh. “Everything he does is a lie, everything he does is just b– repackaging.”

READ MORE: ‘We’d Bomb Mexico’: Republican Breaks Ranks and Blasts Trump Over ‘WMDs’

Image via Reuters 

Inflation unexpectedly fell to 2.7% in November, according to the just-released report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, but economists, while cheering the drop from 3%, also are warning that data is missing from the calculation due to the shutdown. Experts had forecasted a rise to 3.1%.

Navy Federal chief economist Heather Long noted that 2.7% is the “lowest since July,” while warning that the number was impacted by the shutdown.

“There is almost no October inflation data due to the shutdown and some impact on November data collection as well.”

READ MORE: Trump Reveals White House’s ‘Primary’ Policy Goal — And It Isn’t Cutting Costs

“So much is missing…” she wrote, offering this visual.

Inflation came in lowest than expected in November.
But it’s hard to read too much into the data given how much the shutdown impacted data collection.

Look at “Table A” in the inflation report.

So much is missing… pic.twitter.com/dZLyvYhCXZ

— Heather Long (@byHeatherLong) December 18, 2025

“We always want to see inflation numbers that are down,” Claudia Sahm, a former Federal Reserve Board economist, told Yahoo Finance. “So, you know, downsides surprises are better than upside surprises.”

But she stressed, “I think it is extremely important to take this release with a big grain of salt.”

Pointing to the federal government shutdown, Sahm warned that the data collection “was really disrupted by having a month off in October. And so I think we’re just gonna have to see more data next Monday before we really start running with this lower number.”

Goldman Sachs’ Lindsay Rosner went even further.

READ MORE: ‘We’d Bomb Mexico’: Republican Breaks Ranks and Blasts Trump Over ‘WMDs’

“I think it may even be more than a grain” of salt, Rosner said. “I think it may be an entire bag.”

Rosner, as have others, stressed that due to the shutdown, numbers for prices collected were largely for the end of November — which included Black Friday sales.

“One thing I’d point out in particular, that I think will really resonate with the listeners, is that the sampling for November, specifically, was focused around the timing of Black Friday,” she said. “We all know how good the sales were. And so when you look at those numbers, yes, it’s gonna look like prices were lower, so this soft optic number of inflation seemingly lower, while we really would like to get excited about it — I don’t think it’s deserving of excitement.”

Professor of Economics Justin Wolfers, a frequent cable news guest, summed it up:

“1. It looks like the labor market has frozen 2. It looks like inflation is cooling,” he wrote. “We can’t be sure of either trend given shutdown-related distortions to data collection. But… it surely pushes the Fed toward cutting rates again.”

“It is extremely important to take this release with a grain of salt,” New Century Advisors chief economist @Claudia_Sahm says on the November CPI report, adding: “We’re going to have to see more data.” pic.twitter.com/CWneY6uUqn

— Yahoo Finance (@YahooFinance) December 18, 2025

READ MORE: ‘Negative, Negative, Negative’: Trump Faces Bleak Midterm Prospects Says Analyst

Image via Reuters

U.S. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) delivered sharp criticism of President Donald Trump’s policy of using military force to destroy vessels the U.S. Department of Defense believes are smuggling illicit drugs, including fentanyl, to the United States.

Critics have called the strikes illegal, murder, and war crimes. Earlier this week, President Trump signed an executive order designating illicit fentanyl as a weapon of mass destruction.

“The framers understood a simple truth,” Congressman Massie said on the House floor on Wednesday. “To the extent that war-making power devolves to one person, liberty dissolves. If the president believes military action against Venezuela is justified and needed, he should make the case, and Congress should vote — before American lives and treasure are spent on regime change in South America.”

The U.S. Constitution vests the power to declare war in Congress.

READ MORE: ‘Negative, Negative, Negative’: Trump Faces Bleak Midterm Prospects Says Analyst

“Let’s be honest about likely outcomes,” Massie continued, “Do we truly believe that Nicolás Maduro will be replaced by a modern-day George Washington? How did that work out? In Cuba, Libya, Iraq, or Syria?”

“Previous presidents told us to go to war over WMDs,” he said, referring to weapons of mass destruction, the alleged reason President George W. Bush took America to war against Iraq. “Weapons of mass destruction that did not exist.”

“Now, it’s the same playbook, except we’re told that drugs are the WMDs,” Massie explained.

“If it were about drugs, we’d bomb Mexico, or China, or Colombia. And the president would not have pardoned Juan Orlando Hernández,” he said, the former president of Honduras serving time in a U.S. prison after having been convicted of drug trafficking.

Massie also issued a warning: “This is about oil and regime change.”

Massie: Previous presidents told us to go to war over WMDs that did not exist. Now it’s the same playbook. Except we’re told that drugs are the WMDs. If it were about drugs, we’d bomb Mexico or China or Colombia. And the president would not have pardoned Juan Orlando Hernandez.… pic.twitter.com/5h296rYnPJ

— Acyn (@Acyn) December 17, 2025

READ MORE: FCC Scrubs Website After Chair’s ‘Independent Agency’ Assertion Ignites Heated Clash

Image via Reuters