Judicial Coup: Radical Leftist Judges Wage All-Out War Against President Trump and the Nation — 129 Legal Challenges Filed in Two Months and 64 Injunctions His First Term! MORE THAN ALL US PRESIDENTS COMBINED!
By Jim Hoft – Mar 19, 2025
Since returning to the White House on January 20, 2025, President Donald J. Trump has been met with an unprecedented onslaught of legal challenges from far-left activist judges and groups determined to sabotage his second term in power. Appearing on The War Room with Steve Bannon, Josh Hammer, Senior Counsel for the Article III Project, recently warned that what America is witnessing is not just judicial activism—it’s an outright judicial insurrection. This is similar to how the communist left attacked President Trump using a cadre of radical activist judges his first time in office. Except today, they have super-charged the process. READ MORE
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, Elon Musk, and President Trump.
The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) has made a decisive move to refocus its efforts on its core mission by canceling a $397,000 grant that was earmarked for educating queer, trans, and BIPOC urban farmers in the San Francisco Bay Area.This decision underscores the administration’s commitment to eliminating identity-based policies and ensuring that taxpayer dollars are used to strengthen the nation’s agricultural sector rather than fund ideological initiatives. The grant, which was justified under the banner of “food justice” and values-aligned markets, had drawn criticism for prioritizing leftist ideologies over practical, efficiency-driven agricultural practices. By cutting this funding, the USDA is taking a stand against wasteful spending and realigning itself with its original purpose: supporting American agriculture, livestock, and forestry.
Brooke Rollins, a key figure in the administration, emphasized the importance of this decision, stating, “The USDA was funding a $397,000 grant in the San Francisco Bay Area to educate queer, trans, and BIPOC urban farmers and consumers about ‘food justice’ and values-aligned markets. By cutting this wasteful spending, we are ending identity-based policies and realigning our agency with its core mission of supporting American agriculture, livestock, and forestry.” This statement reflects the administration’s broader goal of ensuring that public funds are used to benefit all Americans, rather than being diverted to niche ideological programs that do little to advance the nation’s agricultural productivity.
Conservative groups and agricultural producers have applauded the move, arguing that the USDA should focus on supporting all farmers, regardless of their identity or political beliefs. They contend that federal funds should be directed toward initiatives that enhance productivity, improve agricultural infrastructure, and ensure food security, rather than financing programs that impose specific ideological frameworks. This decision is seen as a step toward restoring neutrality in public policy and ensuring that agricultural funding serves the entire nation, not just select groups.
Progressive critics, however, have lambasted the decision, claiming that such grants are necessary to promote equity in agricultural education. They argue that programs like the one defunded by the USDA are essential for addressing historical disparities in access to agricultural resources and education. Yet, the administration has made it clear that its priority is to ensure that every dollar spent by the USDA contributes to the strength and sustainability of the American agricultural sector, free from political bias.
This move is consistent with President Donald Trump’s broader agenda of cutting wasteful spending and refocusing government agencies on their core missions. Under his leadership, the USDA has taken significant steps to eliminate subsidies for ideologically driven programs and redirect resources toward projects that genuinely benefit the agricultural industry. The decision to cancel the $397,000 grant is just one example of how the Trump administration is working to restore fiscal responsibility and ensure that public funds are used effectively.
🚨@USDA was funding a $397K grant in the San Francisco Bay to educate queer, trans, and BIPOC urban farmers and consumers about food justice and values-aligned markets…🤦🏻♀️
The liberal media, however, has been quick to criticize this decision, framing it as an attack on marginalized communities. But what they fail to acknowledge is that the USDA’s primary responsibility is to support the agricultural sector as a whole, not to fund niche programs that cater to specific identity groups. By cutting this grant, the USDA is ensuring that its resources are used to benefit all farmers, regardless of their background or beliefs.
Attorney Alan Dershowitz highlighted various strategies available to President Donald Trump and Congress to counteract a judge’s decision that temporarily blocked the deportation of over 200 members of the Tren de Aragua (TdA) prison gang. The judge in question, United States District Judge James Boasberg of the District of Columbia, issued an injunction ordering the Trump administration to halt deportations. Trump had previously cited the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to expedite the removal of the gang members.
Dershowitz noted that the language within the Alien Enemies Act might have given Judge Boasberg leeway to stop the deportations. However, he asserted that Trump had multiple avenues to remove TdA members, many of whom lacked proper documentation. The legal expert also mentioned that these options could also help manage Boasberg’s influence over the situation.
“What I don’t understand, maybe my listeners can explain it to me, is why the administration invoked this Alien 1798 French exclusion law that requires that there be either an invasion or declared war,” Dershowitz remarked.
He questioned whether Venezuela, potentially complicit in the situation, could be considered as involved in a declared war or invasion. The complexity of the law, he said, allowed the judge to scrutinize its application.
Dershowitz pondered the consequences if the administration had opted for a different legal approach. “What if they had said, ‘Look, these guys are gang members. They’re murderers. They’re rapists. They’re bringing in fentanyl,’” he mused.
The question of whether the judge would have reacted differently remained unanswered, but Dershowitz emphasized its importance.
President Trump has actively pursued measures to tackle illegal immigration, issuing several executive orders to this end. Notably, he designated Mexican drug cartels, TdA, and MS-13 as foreign terrorist organizations. This highlights the administration’s commitment to addressing the threats posed by violent gangs.
“I think Congress can do more to facilitate the exit of these bad guys,” Dershowitz argued. He suggested that legislative action could limit the jurisdiction of courts, preventing judges from one district from influencing decisions in another. Such measures could streamline the process of deporting dangerous individuals.
Recalling his teaching days, Dershowitz discussed the legal complexities surrounding the Vietnam War. Debates about the war’s constitutionality and the role of courts and presidential decisions were common. He recognized the importance of checks and balances in navigating such intricate issues.
Dershowitz dismissed the idea that Trump’s actions created a constitutional crisis. He asserted that Congress has the power to reshape the judiciary by adjusting the number and jurisdiction of district courts. This legislative authority, he said, could avert potential constitutional conflicts.
“Congress clearly has the authority,” Dershowitz stated. He pointed out that the Constitution does not specify the number or location of lower courts, leaving these decisions to Congress. By exercising this power, Congress can play a more significant role in shaping the judicial landscape.
Despite the current legal challenges, Dershowitz emphasized there is no constitutional crisis. He urged Congress to take proactive steps in legislating on complex legal matters to prevent future disputes. The potential for Congress to have a greater impact on these issues is clear.
Dershowitz’s insights shed light on the intricate interplay between the executive branch, the judiciary, and Congress.
The current situation underscores the ongoing debate about immigration law and the powers of different branches of government. As the nation grapples with these challenges, finding effective solutions remains paramount.
Darnell Thompkins is a Canadian-born American and conservative opinion writer who brings a unique perspective to political and cultural discussions. Passionate about traditional values and individual freedoms, Darnell’s commentary reflects his commitment to fostering meaningful dialogue. When he’s not writing, he enjoys watching hockey and celebrating the sport that connects his Canadian roots with his American journey.
U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts presides over impeachment proceedings for President Donald Trump in the Senate at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 21, 2020, in Washington, D.C. | Senate Television via Getty Images
U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts issued a rare public statement Tuesday in an apparent rebuke of President Donald Trump, who has called for the impeachment of a federal district judge after he attempted to block the deportation of Venezuelan gang members in the U.S. illegally.
“For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose,” Roberts said.
Roberts’ scolding came shortly after Trump unleashed a statement on Truth Social blasting Judge James E. Boasberg, who has served as chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia since 2023.
“This Radical Left Lunatic of a Judge, a troublemaker and agitator who was sadly appointed by Barack Hussein Obama, was not elected President — He didn’t WIN the popular VOTE (by a lot!), he didn’t WIN ALL SEVEN SWING STATES, he didn’t WIN 2,750 to 525 Counties, HE DIDN’T WIN ANYTHING! I WON FOR MANY REASONS, IN AN OVERWHELMING MANDATE, BUT FIGHTING ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION MAY HAVE BEEN THE NUMBER ONE REASON FOR THIS HISTORIC VICTORY,” Trump said.
Trump went on to call for Boasberg’s impeachment.
“I’m just doing what the VOTERS wanted me to do. This judge, like many of the Crooked Judges’ I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!! WE DON’T WANT VICIOUS, VIOLENT, AND DEMENTED CRIMINALS, MANY OF THEM DERANGED MURDERERS, IN OUR COUNTRY. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!” the president added.
Former President George W. Bush appointed Boasberg as an associate judge of the D.C. Superior Court in 2002, and former President Barack Obama nominated him to the D.C. District Court in 2011.
Boasberg has been front-and-center in the news since he blocked Trump’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport Venezuelan nationals who are in the U.S. illegally on Saturday.
The administration claims the deportees are members of Tren de Aragua, a transnational criminal organization and U.S.-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization.
While the deportees were in the air, Boasberg issued a temporary restraining order demanding that the administration turn around aircraft deporting the alleged gang members to El Salvador. The administration is arguing that Boasberg’s ruling did not apply because the aircraft were over international waters at the time.
Freshman Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, filed articles of impeachment against Boasberg in the U.S. House of Representatives on Tuesday.
“He is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors and should be removed from office,” Gill said.
🚨 I just introduced Articles of Impeachment against radical activist Judge James Boasberg.
He is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors and should be removed from office. pic.twitter.com/MO6UjQ6wBb
— Congressman Brandon Gill (@RepBrandonGill) March 18, 2025
Roberts, a George W. Bush appointee who likened judges to “umpires” with “a limited role” during his U.S. Senate confirmation hearing in 2005, has publicly rebuked Trump before.
In 2018, he issued a statement after Trump went after Judge Jon Tigar of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Trump dismissed him as an “Obama judge” after he blocked the administration from enforcing a rule that would deny asylum to anyone who entered the U.S. from somewhere other than a designated port of entry.
“We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges. What we have is an extraordinary group of dedicated judges doing their level best to do equal right to those appearing before them,” Roberts said at the time.
Boasberg’s injunction and the administration’s response have set off a firestorm of debate regarding the separation of powers and the limits of both judicial and executive authority under the U.S. Constitution.
During an appearance Monday on CNN, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller explained the legal reasoning behind the president’s use of the 18th century law, which Miller argued applies because the U.S. is experiencing an invasion by alien criminal gangs “at the direction of the Venezuelan government.”
WATCH IN FULL: White House Deputy Chief of Staff @StephenM schools Fake News CNN's @kasie on the Constitution, the separation of powers, and the rule of law. pic.twitter.com/2TMnKyBLwk
Miller also maintained that federal district court judges do not have the authority to restrict the president’s use of executive power to repel invasion.
“When the president is exercising his Article II powers to defend the country against an invasion, or to repel a foreign terrorist that is unlawfully in the country, he is exercising his powers as commander-in-chief,” Miller said as CNN anchor Kasie Hunt attempted to interrupt him.
“The district court has no ability to in any way restrain the president’s authorities under the Alien Enemies Act, or simply to conduct the foreign affairs of the United States,” Miller later added.
The Alien Enemies Act of 1798, part of the broader Alien and Sedition Acts signed into law by former President John Adams, has been invoked significantly only three times in U.S. history, all during wartime. It was used against British nationals during the War of 1812, against German nationals during World War I, and against German, Japanese and Italian nationals during World War II.
The U.S. transported 261 illegals to El Salvador, including 137 deported under the Alien Enemies Act, 101 Venezuelans deported via Title 8, and 23 MS-13 gang members, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Monday during a press briefing.
A.F. Branco cartoon—The Education Department gets billions in tax dollars, but very little of that money goes towards educating students. It has all the appearances of a money laundering scheme, where money is spent on consultants and then kicked back to politicians. Now throw in teacher unions, and the kids haven’t a chance at being educated well.
Conservative Republican Rep. Harriet Hageman on Waste Uncovered by DOGE at Education Department: ‘Money Laundering at its Absolute Best’ (VIDEO)
By Mike Lachance – The Gateway Pundit – Mar 17, 2025
Conservative Republican Rep. Harriet Hageman of Wyoming recently appeared on Winston Marshall’s podcast and talked about the waste, fraud and abuse that’s being uncovered by DOGE. Using the Education Department as one example, Hageman pointed out that while the department gets billions in tax dollars, very little of that money actually goes towards educating students. Where does the rest of it go? Hageman suggests that it goes to consultants and then gets funneled back to politicians. She comes right out and calls this a form of money-laundering. READ MORE
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, Elon Musk, and President Trump.
A.F. Branco Cartoon – A bunch of left-wing activist judges are committing judicial insurrection to stop the will of the people. These radical judges are trying to block the executive branch to prevent Trump from dismantling their beloved Marxist-style deep state.
BREAKING: Article III Project, War Room and Rep. Brandon Gill Move to Impeach Obama Judge Boasberg Who Ordered Trump to Transport 100’s of Thousands of Violent Gang Bangers Back into US – HERE’S HOW YOU CAN JOIN IN
Representative Brandon Gill (R-TX) announced plans to file articles of impeachment against U.S. District Judge James Boasberg. This action comes in response to Judge Boasberg’s recent decision to temporarily block President Donald Trump’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, aimed at expediting the deportation of members of the Venezuelan gang, Tren de Aragua. U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, an Obama-appointed radical judge, has single-handedly derailed President Trump’s efforts to remove violent Venezuelan gang members from American soil. On Saturday, President Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act, a seldom-used wartime law, to address the pressing threat posed by Tren de Aragua, a violent Venezuelan gang designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization. READ MORE
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, Elon Musk, and President Trump.
•Texas Abortionist Arrested for Running Illegal Clinics •Pro-Life Senators Want to Stop Using Aborted Babies for Research •Brad Schimel Tied With Pro-Abortion Susan Crawford •Catholic Bishop Blasts Democrats for Celebrating Abortionists •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
Think about the three people who affected you the most growing up. For a lot of us, I’d bet at least one is a teacher or coach. It speaks to the influence and importance schools can have on our lives and education. Teachers are difference makers who help us, as parents, educate and develop our kids. But just as we don’t need Washington to tell parents how to parent, we don’t need federal bureaucrats telling our schools how to teach. Many classroom decisions are best left up to our leaders at the local level.
Last week, the Trump administration, under the leadership of Education Secretary Linda McMahon, announced it is following through with a campaign promise to rethink the size and scope of the Department of Education. I think it’s beyond time to return those powers and decisions to the states and restore local control, giving families more freedom.
Since the Department of Education was formed as a standalone department in 1980, we’ve seen its budget and workforce bloat — but we haven’t seen improved outcomes for students, parents, or teachers. We clearly aren’t getting what we’re paying for.
For a decade, I served on the Board of Regents for the University of Nebraska system, getting into the weeds of education policy and decision making for our state. One of the philosophies I brought with me from that experience into the governor’s office is that we need more accountability in government.
Just like a teen staring at a phone screen, too often the U.S. Department of Education’s bureaucracy has been distracted from its mission, and American education has suffered for it. We can’t predict the future, but we have to change something. Our kids’ education is too important for us to keep pursuing mediocre results that cost us billions.
For starters, American taxpayers shouldn’t be funding controversial culture wars through our schools. We should expect that our investment will be spent on teaching kids the essentials: math, reading, science, and civics.
There is a simpler, better path forward. By sending education back to states, we let those nearest to the student have the biggest influence. This is a pro-kid, pro-parent, pro-teacher, pro-school position. No matter the style of schooling families choose — public, private, homeschool, or hybrid — our lessons should be focused on helping our youth succeed, and you don’t need federal government mandates to do that.
In Nebraska, I know the type of people who serve in our schools. Our teachers devote their lives to our kids. We’re human, and we’re not going to get things right 100 percent of the time, but I’m confident in our ability to lead and ensure we’re addressing the needs of our students, teachers, and schools.
Because technology and research constantly change the way we learn, educators must be able to move fast in the classroom in ways some faraway cubicle worker in Washington can’t. Teachers and administrators are closer to the action and better prepared for this type of work.
In my state, we’re leading by making localized decisions: We’re rethinking how we invest and fund K-12 schools, raising awareness and doubling down on special education opportunities, and working with students and schools to ban the distraction of cell phones bell-to-bell.
Secretary McMahon’s stated goal is to make the state of education in America “freer, stronger, and with more hope for the future.” That’s a mission all of us should be able to get behind because there’s no politics in it.
Let’s focus more on how to help the teacher in the classroom who is giving our kids this week’s spelling test. Let’s figure out ways to better support dynamic, inspiring lessons. Let’s support the guidance counselor who is helping our students navigate adolescence while they make big, life-long decisions.
Let’s let our country’s kids — and education — reach the world-changing potential they have. That should be the American tradition. The Department of Education just needs to get out of the way.
A Texas man identified as Seth “Andrea” Gregori has been apprehended for allegedly orchestrating a “mass casualty event” targeting law enforcement officers. According to a police source, Gregori was in the process of “transitioning” genders, which has become a focal point of the case. Even though his driver’s license lists him as male, the Nueces County jail records reportedly registered Gregori as “female.” This revelation has fed into the speculation surrounding his gender identity, especially as different names are being used by law enforcement agencies in their communications regarding the suspect.
Described by some as a ‘would-be terrorist’, Gregori was allegedly attempting to carry out an attack on the Corpus Christi Police Department (CCPD). The FBI’s Houston office revealed that Gregori’s plans were reminiscent of the horrific 2016 Dallas police ambush where Micah Xavier Johnson executed a brutal attack, killing five officers and injuring nine, motivated by racial tensions between black communities and white police officers.
Amid the media spotlight, Gregori’s gender identity has been inconsistently reported. A local news outlet referred to Gregori using female pronouns, whereas others have used his birth name. Pictures released by the CCPD show Gregori with long hair, which only served to intensify the debate regarding his transition. The Daily Caller’s line of questioning underscores a desire to cut through obfuscation often seen in mainstream media’s treatment of similar subjects.
The case, already fraught with tension, took an even more sinister turn with a tip-off received by a joint FBI task force in early February, revealing Gregori’s alleged affinity towards certain police officers and documenting his recent purchase of an AR-style rifle. Citing an affidavit, a report stated that Gregori had the rifle in his backpack at the time of arrest.
Questions arise over why Gregori was targeting “white cops,” as per KENS5 News, who would leave “Black and Mexican cops” unharmed. Given this backdrop, mainstream media’s varied coverage perhaps obscures the real motivations behind Gregori’s intentions, avoiding a deeper conversation on why divisions in discussions about law enforcement and race persist.
#BREAKING FBI Corpus Christi and local partners have thwarted another mass casualty attack!#FBI Corpus and @CorpusChristiPD arrested Seth aka Andrea Gregori today on state charges filed by @NuecesCoDA after he planned an attack on police similar to the 2016 Dallas ambush. #CCTXpic.twitter.com/0JtCCJFRIu
In a separate episode in 2018, Gregori, aged only 14, was listed as missing alongside Jonathan Gregori but was later found. Now aged 21, Seth “Andrea” Gregori is involved yet again with law enforcement, with a pre-file case listed under the name “Andrea Lozano Gregori.” This person, who through this horrifying episode has been thrust into the national conversation, also had prior misdemeanor charges including fleeing from the police in 2023 and criminal trespassing in 2024.
The FBI has arrested Seth "Andrea" Gregori for allegedly making plans for a mass killing of Corpus Christi officers in Texas.
The FBI says "Andrea" allegedly planned to carry out a mass shooting similar to the 2016 Dallas mass killing of police officers by a black nationalist… https://t.co/6IsHd6sgBgpic.twitter.com/qJSVH2r2vC
This raises valid questions about Gregori’s history and how many chances were given before the ultimate plan for a deadly assault was discovered. In this era of progressive narratives often found in liberal media, one must ask if an overemphasis on gender identity clouds the real threats to public safety and the pressing concerns this case raises.
A recent investigation by the Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project has brought to light a startling revelation: nearly every document during Joe Biden’s presidency was signed using an autopen. The only confirmed authentic signature is on his letter announcing his withdrawal from the 2024 presidential race. This finding raises questions about the legitimacy of many presidential actions taken during his term.
The use of the autopen in presidential duties isn’t new; it dates back to the 1950s. Barack Obama became the first president to use it to sign a bill into law in 2013 while vacationing in Hawaii. His office defended the act with a memo from George W. Bush’s legal team, emphasizing a president’s physical presence wasn’t necessary if the signature was authorized.
However, Joe Biden’s cognitive decline has led to concerns about his awareness of these signings. Speaker Mike Johnson disclosed that Biden couldn’t recall signing an LNG exports executive order. This raises serious questions about who might have been using the autopen without Biden’s explicit consent.
According to a report from the New York Post, a senior Biden aide might have been exercising presidential power through the autopen. This aide is suspected of making unilateral decisions about what to sign. The Post has chosen not to disclose the aide’s identity due to a lack of concrete evidence.
The Biden aide often mentioned what “the boss” wanted, although colleagues were unsure if it was true. The internal culture discouraged asking questions, leaving many in the dark about the aide’s actual authority. This situation has led to widespread suspicion about the aide’s true influence in the White House.
Another source revealed the extent of this aide’s power, noting that “everyone” was wary of their authority. The informant from The Post stated there was no clarity on who approved what—the president or the aide. This ambiguity has fueled doubts about the authenticity of decisions made during Biden’s presidency.
A second White House source agreed that the aide was suspected of taking on the president’s roles without clear communication with Biden. This raises the issue of whether the president’s will was being carried out or if it was a case of unauthorized actions. Attorney Mike Davis, an advisor to Trump, stated that if the aide wasn’t carrying out the president’s will, it would be a criminal matter.
Some former Biden staffers have disputed these claims, but the implications are alarming. Every executive order, pardon, and official action could potentially be nullified. This isn’t just a bureaucratic mishap; it could be the most significant presidential scandal in American history.
The American public deserves clarity on who was truly in charge of the country. Was Biden actively making decisions, or was an unelected staffer running the show while Biden struggled? There is an urgent need for a comprehensive investigation into these claims.
Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey is advocating for a Department of Justice investigation. He questions whether Biden’s cognitive state allowed unelected officials to govern. This call for scrutiny highlights the gravity of the allegations surrounding the Biden administration.
Will the mainstream media delve into this autopen scandal? It’s unlikely, but conservative platforms like PJ Media are committed to uncovering the truth. They are urging the public to join their efforts in exposing what they believe the mainstream media prefers to ignore.
By joining PJ Media as a VIP member, supporters can aid in the pursuit of real journalism. Their goal is to bring to light information they claim is being suppressed. They promise to continue their work in revealing the truths about the Biden White House.
Kamala did only one thing for the Democrats: Burn through cash.
Democrats are doomed. Because the only way you can sell lunacy is to get other people to pay for it.
ACTBlue, the Democratic Party’s fundraising behemoth, has long been the financial engine behind progressive campaigns, raking in billions, supposedly from small-dollar donors. But now, the curtain has been pulled back. And what’s revealed is a cesspool of alleged fraud, money laundering, and systemic corruption. The chickens have come home to roost, and the Democrats’ golden goose may finally be cooked.
Anti-Elon protester admits he gets paid to protest outside a Tesla location.
Trump is a fundraising juggernaut. The man inspires and thus evokes passionate support. I’m confident in saying he’s the best I’ve ever seen. And it’s not because of his gift of gab, but instead for his actions. Trump’s fundraising abilities cause the Democrats to have to actually commit crimes to keep up.
For years, ACTBlue’s operations raised eyebrows. Investigative journalist James O’Keefe first exposed the platform’s dubious practices, highlighting how “smurfing”—the use of countless small, untraceable donations—allowed the platform to funnel massive sums into Democratic coffers. These “donors” magically contributed hundreds, even thousands of times, often totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars. How? Through unverified gift cards, repeat small-dollar charges, and donations without verified billing addresses.
It was a scheme so brazen that even a third grader could spot the inconsistencies. Yet, for years, ACTBlue operated with impunity, shielded by a media and political establishment unwilling to ask tough questions. Now, with a Republican-led House Oversight Committee digging into their books, the truth is coming to light—and it’s damning.
The Laundering Allegations: A House of Cards
Rep. James Comer (R-KY), chairman of the House Oversight Committee, has vowed to file criminal charges against ACTBlue, calling it “the largest money laundering scheme in U.S. history.” According to Comer, ACTBlue took money returned from USAID and other sources, funneling it back to the Democratic Party in a sloppy, yet effective, laundering operation.
The irony is palpable. While the IRS was busy chasing down $600 Venmo payments from everyday Americans, ACTBlue was processing billions in questionable donations. Banks like Chase and Bank of America were quick to “debank” conservatives, yet they turned a blind eye to ACTBlue’s blatant irregularities. It’s almost as if the system was designed to protect one side while punishing the other.
The 2020 Election: A Banana Republic Moment
The timing of ACTBlue’s exposure couldn’t be more poetic. For years, conservatives have argued that the 2020 election was marred by systemic fraud, with J6 serving as the cover-up. While Democrats dismissed these claims as conspiracy theories, ACTBlue’s alleged crimes lend credence to the idea that the election was anything but fair.
In 2020, Trump’s team was riddled with spies and infiltrators, and AI wasn’t advanced enough to combat the Left’s digital fundraising dominance. Fast forward to 2024, and the landscape has shifted. Trump’s coalition is stronger than ever, fueled by his unwavering belief that the election was stolen. Meanwhile, Democrats are on the run, their credibility in tatters.
NEW: Rep. James Comer reveals that banks submitted hundreds of Suspicious Activity Reports on ActBlue to the Treasury Department.
"The way ActBlue set up their accounts, it would be really easy to launder money through fake credit cards and fake names."pic.twitter.com/ei0HDQU5WW
The American people are tired of investigations. We’ve had enough of hearings, committees, and empty promises. What we want are charges. We want accountability. And we want everyone involved in this scheme to face the consequences.
ACTBlue’s lawyers are reportedly jumping ship, a clear sign that the walls are closing in. As Comer put it, “This will be the end of the Democratic Party.” Hyperbole? Perhaps. But there’s no denying that ACTBlue’s collapse could cripple the Democrats’ ability to fundraise, leaving them vulnerable in the 2024 elections.
The Bigger Picture: A System Rigged Against Conservatives
ACTBlue’s alleged crimes are just one piece of a larger puzzle. For years, the Left has weaponized institutions to silence conservatives. From debanking to censorship, the playbook is clear: control the flow of money and information, and you control the narrative.
But the tide is turning. ACTBlue’s exposure is a wake-up call, a reminder that no one is above the law. As the investigation unfolds, one thing is certain: the Democrats’ house of cards is collapsing, and the American people are watching.
Conclusion: Justice Is Coming
ACTBlue’s downfall is more than just a scandal—it’s a reckoning. For too long, the Democratic Party has relied on shady tactics to fund its agenda. Now, the truth is out, and the consequences will be severe.
So, to the Democrats I say that your days of operating in the shadows are over. And to the American people I say stay tuned. Justice is coming. This isn’t just about ACTBlue. It’s about accountability, transparency, and the rule of law. And for millions of Americans, it’s about time.
A.F. Branco Cartoon – Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz has announced that he will be hosting town hall events in Republican-held congressional districts across multiple red states. “Tim Walz is a fraud and a liar,” U.S. House Majority Whip Tom Emmer said in a statement. “For him to take his message of failure and incompetence on the road proves that he is focused on his own political ambitions and not the people of Minnesota.”
Walz embarks on multi-state town hall tour as questions about political future remain
Luke Sprinkle – AlphaNews.org – March 4, 2025
Republican elected officials and conservative organizations blasted Walz’s town hall series and urged him to focus on the problems in his own state. Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz has announced that he will be hosting town hall events in Republican-held congressional districts across multiple red states. The tour comes amidst Democratic criticism that Republicans are ducking public forums with their constituents. “I’m hitting the road, traveling to red states across the country to lend a megaphone to the people,” said the governor in a social media post. “Your congressman may not want to listen, but they’re going to hear from us anyway.” … READ MORE
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Trump.
•Trump Administration Defunds Pro-Abortion UNFPA • “Bunch of Losers.” Democrats’ Potential 2028 Candidates are Awful • Teenage Girl Dies After Botched Abortion at Planned Parenthood •Minnesota Democrats Block Bill to Stop Infanticide •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
A major survey on the religious landscape of America was just released by Pew Research Center, and what it reveals about the decline of Christianity should alarm every American, whether or not one is Christian.
Why should the de-Christianization of America worry us? Because, as I’ve argued before, if America loses the Christian faith from which our system of government is derived, we will lose everything that makes America what it is. All of the rights and freedoms we enjoy, the rule of law, the checks and balances on government power, all of that will disappear.
Suffice to say, the loss of America’s Christian identity has huge implications for everyone in the country, Christian or not. And the Pew study demonstrates just how pervasive and precipitous the decline of Christianity in America is right now.
It’s easy to misread the study, or misapprehend what’s important about it, which is that the de-Christianization of American society is not going to stop anytime soon, in part because it’s being driven by a younger, less Christian, increasingly neopagan cohort of Americas as older Christians die off without being replaced and aging Christian parents fail to pass the faith onto their children. Pew itself seems to misapprehend its own survey, giving it the rather optimistic headline, “Decline of Christianity in the U.S. Has Slowed, May Have Leveled Off.”
This is true only in a narrow sense. Pew’s data indeed suggest that for the last five years, the share of the U.S. population that describes itself as Christian has wavered between 60 and 64 percent, and the new Religious Landscape Study (RLS) released earlier this month puts that figure right in the middle of that range, at 62 percent.
But the devil is in the details. Pew has done three RLS surveys over the past 17 years, each of which involved more than 35,000 adults. The first, in 2007, found 78 percent of U.S. adults identified as Christian. Smaller surveys in subsequent years showed this figure slowly ticking downward, and the second RLS, in 2014, found the total was just 71 percent. The most recent RLS in 2023-24 showed a 9-point drop since 2014 and a 16-point drop since 2007, which suggests the rate of our de-Christianization is accelerating.
When Pew says that the numbers are now “leveling off,” it means the smaller surveys conducted between 2019 and 2024 bucked the previous trend of a steadily shrinking Christian population in America, and instead of steady year-over-year decreases, it showed fluctuations within that narrow 60-64 percent range.
The overall trend, however, remains one of precipitous decline in Christianity over the past 17 years. And if one digs a little deeper into the RLS survey data, the picture that emerges is even more alarming. For example, the share of Americans who don’t identify with any religion—the “nones” — increased from 16 percent in 2007 to 23 percent in 2014 to 29 percent in 2024. This increase isn’t limited to growing irreligiosity among any particular group but is “demographically broad-based,” says Pew. “There are fewer Christians and more ‘nones’ among men and women; people in every racial and ethnic category; college graduates and those with less education; and residents of all major regions of the country.”
It’s hard to overstate the effect of the rise of the “nones” on the American religious landscape. As Eric Sammons noted last week, “for every 100 people who leave the religious ‘nones’ (i.e., they join a religion), a full 590 become part of that irreligious cohort.” Sammons also observed that the Pew study shows Catholics are facing a sharper decline than Protestants: for every 100 people who become Catholic, 840 leave the Catholic Church. Whereas for every 100 people who become Protestants, only 180 leave.
But either way it’s a story of decline in the Christian faith across the board, while the overall number of “nones” continues to grow — as do the number of non-Christian religious adherents (Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, etc.) whose share of the population went from 4.7 percent in 2007 to 7.1 percent today.
And it’s not just that the total number of Christians is declining. The practice of the Christian faith is deteriorating as well. Among the 62 percent who describe themselves as Christian, only a third of them say they attend religious services monthly, either in person or virtually (TV or online). Pew doesn’t compare church attendance figures in this new RLS survey with the results from 2014 or 2007 because it used a slightly different methodology (those earlier surveys were conducted entirely by telephone, whereas the new RLS was done with online and paper surveys).
But Pew did note that the old telephone surveys were registering a decline in church attendance in the years before switching to online/paper surveys: “The share of Americans who reported attending religious services at least monthly dropped from 54% in 2007 to 50% in the 2014 RLS and had fallen to 45% by the time the Center transitioned away from phone surveys in 2018-19.”
For Catholics, the single largest cohort of Christians in America, who now make up just 19 percent of America’s Christian population (down from 24 percent in 2007), the attendance problem is even worse. Catholics are obligated to attend Mass weekly, yet less than a third of them (29 percent) say they fulfill this Sunday obligation. That means of America’s roughly 65 million Catholics, only 18.8 million could be considered “practicing”—and that’s not taking into account other Catholic obligations that are increasingly shirked, like going to confession at least once a year.
But one need not get lost in all this survey data to grasp the essential reality that the Pew study reveals: America is losing its Christian religion. Buried in Pew’s analysis is the critical observation that “it is inevitable that older generations will decline in size as their members gradually die. We also know that the younger cohorts succeeding them are much less religious.” That, in turn, means in order for the decline in Christianity to halt, “today’s young adults would have to become more religious as they age, or new generations of adults who are more religious than their parents would have to emerge.” Is that possible? Sure. Is it likely? Not unless something changes.
There’s much more to unpack in the Pew survey, like the decline of Christianity occurring simultaneously with a growth in “spirituality,” which suggests the future of the West will not be one of atheistic, secular materialism but of re-enchantment and neopaganism. But for now, it’s enough simply to be honest with ourselves, and with the data, and acknowledge that we are rapidly de-Christianizing. Once we accept that fact we can begin to think clearly about what it means for our country, and begin at last to fight back.
John Daniel Davidson is a senior editor at The Federalist. His writing has appeared in the Wall Street Journal, the Claremont Review of Books, The New York Post, and elsewhere. He is the author of Pagan America: the Decline of Christianity and the Dark Age to Come. Follow him on Twitter, @johnddavidson.
Gender ideology is unraveling. It’s fraud all the way down. There is no good evidence that “transitioning” helps anyone, especially children. And people are realizing that the entire premise — that a boy can somehow be born into a female body, or vice versa — is superstitious nonsense. Indeed, transgender ideology is so insane that the coalition against it ranges from conservative Christians to lesbian feminists.
Transgender ideology has many enemies, but the most effective are those who have been victimized by wrongly named “gender-affirming care,” especially the detransitioners who have realized that so-called transition is a pursuit of the impossible, driven by lies. The power of their testimony was displayed during the recent Detrans Awareness Day, which was organized by Genspect and hosted at the U.S. Capitol on March 12. There were interviews and meetings with administration officials and members of Congress. The public centerpiece was an outstanding series of panel discussions involving activists, doctors, policy experts, and especially detransitioners.
The first panel included Dr. Eithan Haim, the whistleblower whom the Biden administration persecuted after he exposed the continued medical “transition” of children in Texas. He warned that transgender programs resist being shut down and explained how doctors may be committing fraud to keep performing trans experiments on children. Put simply, they may deliberately use the wrong billing codes to hide what they are doing.
For example, if a girl claims to be transgender, a doctor might change her chart to show her as male, which is easily done in the Epic medical records system, and then “diagnose” her with testosterone deficiency. The doctor could then prescribe testosterone for her and get either private insurance or the government to pay for it without them knowing it was to “transition” a child. Leftist groups are promoting this scheme, publishing literal guides to committing insurance fraud.
Transgender ideologues are resorting to insurance fraud because of laws and policies restricting the medical fraud that is “gender-affirming care.” Pro-trans doctors were confident that if they just kept transing people, eventually evidence would come in and vindicate them, but the opposite happened. Among other examples, the U.K.’s Cass Report foundthere is no good evidence that performing transgender medical interventions on children helps them. It has also been revealed that the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) suppressed a review of the evidence it had commissioned, and that Johanna Olson-Kennedy, one of the nation’s leading pro-transgender pediatric doctors, is suppressing the results of her own taxpayer-funded study.
Detransitioners are flesh-and-blood proof of what the numbers show. Their testimonies indict a medical profession that is either in the grip of radical gender ideology or cowed by those who are, and which has therefore betrayed its duties to patients and the public. The detransitioners speaking in the Capitol described a conveyor-belt approach to transgender medical interventions that quickly affirmed trans identities and encouraged each new step of so-called transition.
Thus they were harmed by those who were charged above all with doing them no harm. In the words of Laura Becker, “I have to wear a mastectomy bra for the rest of my life because I was lied to.” She “was a traumatized girl” who needed help, not a “gay trans man” who needed her breasts cut off.
The malfeasance of the medical system is fed by the internet (increasingly joined by the school systems and social services), which is filled with encouragement to embrace a transgender identity. Instead of addressing trauma or the difficulties of being different, there is the false hope of fleeing into another identity.
The online world and transgender ideology intersect in other malevolent ways. As Chloe Cole put it, exposure to online pornography makes many young women want to escape their femininity; if that is what being a woman is, many girls will want nothing to do with it. Meanwhile, Forrest Smith noted that for males there is often a sexual aspect to the desire to transition, which may also be the result of pornography exposure and use.
Though there are common themes to their stories, and insights to be gained from them, detransitioners are not interchangeable, so it was important to have more of them sharing their distinct experiences. Yes, some detransitioners are more publicly prominent and polished, but they are hardly alone. As Detrans Awareness Day demonstrated, the number of people speaking out about the harms transgender ideology inflicted on them is increasing.
These detransitioners are leading the way to defeat radical gender ideology. Their stories expose the lies and fraud of “gender-affirming care.” Their boldness in speaking out informs both politicians and the public. And their lawsuits against the medical systems that have injured them will likely be the final nail in the coffin of the medical industry’s embrace of transgenderism.
Suing “gender” doctors may make “gender-affirming care” impossible by making it uninsurable. As Soren Aldaco explained, it is not about money but about holding the medical system accountable. The first lawsuits will be the hardest. But it will get easier after the first few wins, and then the floodgates will open as trans-experimenting doctors are rightly sued into oblivion for their fraud and malpractice.
Nathanael Blake is a senior contributor to The Federalist and a fellow in the Life and Family Initiative at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.
President Donald Trump speaks during a visit to the Justice Department on March 14 in Washington, D.C. (Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)
President Donald Trump said the Justice Department is “turning the page on four long years of corruption and weaponization.”
Trump spoke Friday when delivering remarks at the Justice Department for an event focused on fighting fentanyl, a highly lethal drug that has become an escalating problem in the United States. Trump said during the Biden administration, the DOJ was weaponized against political opponents, and “set loose violent criminals and went after patriotic parents.”
After being targeted by a string of Justice Department investigations during the Biden administration, Trump vowed to make the department less political and focus on fighting violent crime, including fighting illegal drug cartels.
Trump said the Biden Justice Department “broke the law on a colossal scale.”
“In the end, truth won, and freedom won,” Trump said.
However, Trump’s Democrats in Congress have insisted that Trump is likely to weaponize the Justice Department to retaliate against political foes.
Trump called for an investigation into what he considered vast corruption in the DOJ duirng the Biden years.
“Now, as the chief law enforcement officer in our country, I will insist upon and demand full and complete accountability for the wrongs and abuses that have occurred,” Trump said.
Trump talked about the targeting of parents speaking out at school board meetings, as well as the targeting of traditional Catholic churches. But also lamented what has happened to him over the Biden years.
“They spied on my campaign; launched one hoax and disinformation operation after another; broke the law; persecuted my family, staff, and supporters; raided my home at Mar-a-Lago; and did everything in their power to prevent me from becoming the president of the United States,” Trump said.
“But in the end, the thugs failed, and the truth won. Freedom won, justice won, the democracy won, and the American people won.”
Trump did note the DOJ had a strong tradition and was “one of America’s most revered institutions.”
“The men and women of the DOJ brought down the Mafia; hunted down the killers, kingpins, and spies; tracked down terrorists and traitors; and tore down corrupt political machines all across America,” the president said.
Under Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel, he added, “you’ll soon be the most admired and most respected of all.”
This is a breaking news article and it may be updated.
The Senate on Friday voted 62-38 to end debate on a continuing resolution to fund the government through September, all but guaranteeing final passage of a GOP-crafted bill that would avoid a partial federal shutdown. 9 Democrats and one independent who caucuses with them helped push the Republican-backed bill over the finish line.
The continuing resolution bill arose out of political necessity after Congress was unable to pass individual spending bills for the current year.
“The budget from last YEAR is still not done. We are working very hard with the House and Senate to pass a clean, temporary government funding Bill (‘CR’) to the end of September. Let’s get it done!” he wrote on Truth Social on Feb. 27.
Trump’s call for a stopgap measure to provide funding to the government came as the narrow Republican majorities in Congress faced the difficult task of agreeing on a budget resolution. The effort to pass a CR through Sept. 30, the end of fiscal 2025, was complicated by Democrat demands that Republicans promise Trump would cease his cost-cutting actions.
Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., the ranking member on the Senate Appropriations Committee, said that she and her fellow Democrats would support the CR if guarantees were provided that Trump would not impound funding and would back off of Elon Musk’s anti-bureaucracy efforts.
Ultimately, the bill passed in the House along mostly partisan lines, with only one Democrat, Rep. Jared Golden, D-Maine, voting for it.
From the outset, the situation in the Senate appeared to be much the same. Sen. John Hickenlooper, D-Colo., who was once thought to be open to the CR, took to X and said he wouldn’t vote for it because of Trump’s frontal attack on the bureaucracy.
“This bill would wipe out congressional oversight, letting Trump cut and redirect funding however he wants,” said Hickenlooper.
But some Democrats, facing the harsh reality of the fact that their opposition could trigger a government shutdown, decided to support the CR. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., who had previously said he would urge his members to vote against it, said in a speech Thursday that he would not block the CR.
“While the CR bill is very bad, the potential for a shutdown has consequences for America that are much, much worse,” said Schumer.
Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., asked shortly before the cloture vote why Schumer backed down, said, “It would be to commit suicide” if the Democrats triggered a shutdown. Sen. John Fetterman, D-Penn., went a step further than Schumer, deciding to support the bill to avoid a shutdown, writing on X, “I disagree with many points in the CR, but I will never vote to shut our government down.”
Sen. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., told The Daily Signal shortly before the cloture vote that she was confident Democrats would moderate their opposition to Trump in the future.
“I actually have great optimism the Democrats will get their land legs back under them. They always have. Right at the moment, they’re flailing a bit. But that won’t last,” said Lummis.
“They’ll pull it together, and they’ll either find ways to work with Republicans to get some of their policy priorities included, and if they don’t, this flailing with opposition instead of legislating will hurt them in the 2026 election cycle.“
The anti-free speech movement in the United States was largely an outgrowth of higher education where viewpoint intolerance has taken hold of many schools. Indeed, intolerance and orthodoxy are often defended on the left in the name of tolerance and pluralism. Harvard Professor Timothy McCarthy is one of those voices demanding the removal of faculty with opposing views in the name of tolerance. He recently told New York University’s Washington Square News that any faculty who do not support “gender-affirming care” should be stripped of their academic titles and fired.
Many academics and citizens oppose “gender-affirming” policies on religious or other grounds. Some believe that school-enforced policies inhibit debate over gender dysphoria and the basis for various treatments and protections on both sides. McCarthy believes that no such debate should be allowed among faculty, declaring that “there’s a particular place in hell for academics who use their academic expertise and power to distort and do violence to people in the world.” He was targeting two professors at NYU who are affiliated with groups critical of surgical and chemical interventions for gender dysphoria.
Professor McCarthy offered the usual nod to free speech and academic freedom before eviscerating both in his comments. He admitted that “a level of suspicion and inquiry into medical practices is healthy,” but then dismissed such views as harmful and mere efforts to “poison the waters.”
There was a time when such intolerance was directed against the left and groups ranging from feminists to those in the LGBT community. Now, it has become a badge of honor, the expected bona fides that show the correctness and firmness of one’s views.
The irony is crushing. Harvard’s Kennedy School website states that McCarthy “was the first openly gay faculty member” at the public policy school “and still teaches the school’s only course on LGBTQ matters.” When I first went into teaching, I had friends who still remained in the closet out of fear that their sexual orientation would undermine their chances for tenure or advancement. Likewise, far-left academics associated with the critical legal studies (CLS) movement were viewed as “poisoning the waters” of higher education and often blocked from teaching.
The left has now adopted the same intolerance and orthodoxy once used against it. Indeed, it has been far more successful in purging the faculty ranks of conservatives, libertarians, and dissenters. As we have previously discussed, Harvard is particularly notorious for this purging of both its faculty and student body.
This year, Harvard again found itself dead last among 251 universities and colleges in the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) annual ranking.
The Harvard Crimson has documented how the school’s departments have virtually eliminated Republicans. In one study of multiple departments last year, they found that more than 75 percent of the faculty self-identified as “liberal” or “very liberal.”
Only 5 percent identified as “conservative,” and only 0.4% as “very conservative.”
According to Gallup, the U.S. population is roughly equally divided among conservatives (36%), moderates (35%), and liberals (26%).
So, Harvard has three times the number of liberals as the nation at large, and less than three percent identify as “conservative” rather than 35 percent nationally. According to the last student survey, only 9 percent of the class identified as conservative or very conservative.
Notably, despite Harvard’s maintenance of an overwhelmingly liberal faculty and student body, even liberal students feel stifled at Harvard. Only 41 percent of liberal students reported being comfortable discussing controversial topics, and only 25 percent of moderates and 17 percent of conservatives felt comfortable in doing so.
Among law school faculty who donated more than $200 to a political party, 91 percent of the Harvard faculty gave to Democrats.
Professor McCarthy appears right at home in his public call for a further purging of faculty ranks.
This is an area that has deeply divided the country, as was evident in the last election. Higher education should play a critical role in that debate by allowing faculty and students to engage with each other in civil and substantive debate. Instead of spending so much time and effort trying to silence those with opposing views, the left could instead focus on refuting these claims. Instead, it is replicating that same pattern of cancellations, deplatformings and firings that marked the last decade. It is the same approach used against academics who questioned aspects of COVID policies including mask efficacy doubts, natural immunity theories, opposition to the closing of schools, opposition to the six-foot rule, and the lab theory on the virus’s origin. They were also removed from faculties and associations. Yet, many of these views have since been vindicated.
What was lost was not just free speech and academic freedom, but a rigorous debate that might have helped us avoid some of the costs of unsupported COVID policies. For example, some of our closest allies listened to skeptics on the need to close schools and opted to keep young children in school. They were able to avoid the massive educational and psychological costs that we incurred in this country. Much like Professor McCarthy, these skeptics were accused of “poisoning the waters” and spreading harmful ideas or disinformation.
There is no difference between the intolerance of figures like Professor McCarthy from those who once sought the same measures against liberals, homosexuals, or feminists. Now firmly in control of higher education, many on the left are using their power to win public debate through retribution, coercion, and attrition. In the process, they are destroying the very essense of higher education for not just our students but ourselves.
A.F. Branco Cartoon – Chuck Schumer and the Democrats are getting more desperate every day watching the Trump policies in action. Not only are Trump’s policies working with inflation, egg prices, and gas prices coming down, but they are finding billions in waste, fraud, and abuse, and the Democrats are in total panic.
Chuck Schumer Calls Republicans “Bastards” Live on Air (VIDEO)
By Cristina Lailia – The Gateway Pundit – Mar 13, 2025
Democrat Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer on Thursday night called Republicans “bastards” live on air during an interview with MSNBC’s Chris Hayes. Schumer appeared on MSNBC to discuss the House-passed spending bill after he caved and announced he would vote for it. “The only people they — the only thing they understand is meeting conflict with conflict. So if you look at Doug Ford in Ontario, who banged the table and said, ‘You’re gonna tariff us? I’m gonna tariff you, we’re gonna put a surcharge on electricity,’ — that’s the only thing that gets their attention. The only thing that gets them to back down is meeting conflict with conflict. If you meet conflict with essentially managed retreat or strategic non engagement, then they roll all over you!” Chris Hayes said to Schumer… READ MORE
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Trump.
•Planned Parenthood Kills 18-Year-Old Girl in Botched Abortion • Senate Committee Approves Pro-Life Dr. Marty Makary to Head FDA • Lawyer Who Defended Abortion Under Biden Resigns as FDA Counsel •White House Pulls Nomination of Pro-Life Dr. Dave Weldon to Head CDC
The Biden administration is facing what could be one of the most egregious cases of illegal government misconduct in modern history. A bombshell email from a senior official at the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has exposed a massive, coordinated effort to destroy crucial documents—an action that appears not only unethical but possibly criminal.
The email, sent by Erica Carr, USAID’s acting executive secretary, instructed staff to gather at the agency’s former headquarters and either shred or burn remaining documents. This is not routine cleanup—this is a calculated attempt to erase evidence.
Carr’s directive explicitly ordered employees to use shredders first but, if necessary, to resort to burn bags—a method historically used to dispose of classified material in emergency situations, not as part of standard operations.
She went even further, demanding that the burn bags be labeled “SECRET” and “USAID/B/IO/” with a dark Sharpie, and cautioned staff not to overfill them, instead securing them with staples. The specificity of these instructions strongly suggests that highly sensitive and possibly incriminating materials are being systematically destroyed under orders from top officials.
This raises urgent questions: What exactly is being destroyed? Why now? And most importantly, who is ordering this cover-up? A former USAID official confirmed to Politico that this scale of document destruction is unprecedented, stating, “I’ve never seen something like this—en masse.”
That is a stunning admission from someone with insider knowledge. Normally, strict protocols govern the handling and retention of classified documents, ensuring that vital information remains available for oversight and legal review. The abrupt urgency behind these orders strongly suggests that someone is trying to eliminate evidence before it can be scrutinized.
The timing of this revelation could not be more suspicious. NBC News has reported that ongoing legal challenges against the Biden administration’s attempts to shut down USAID have triggered an emergency motion to halt the document destruction. This motion argues that the rushed disposal of records could impact ongoing litigation and prevent the agency from reconstructing its operations if the lawsuit succeeds. In other words, by obliterating these documents, officials may be actively obstructing justice—a federal crime.
The case is now in the hands of U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols, a Trump appointee, who has yet to rule on the emergency motion. However, both parties must submit a status report by tomorrow, outlining the legal path forward. If the court does not immediately intervene, there is a real risk that crucial evidence will be permanently lost, ensuring that those responsible escape accountability.
The conservative response to this scandal has been swift and forceful. Newsmax, The New York Post, and Fox News have all drawn comparisons to past government corruption cases, including the infamous Clinton email scandal and the FBI’s raid on Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate over supposedly mishandled documents. But the difference here is clear: This is not about misfiling or bureaucratic errors—this is about deliberate, high-level destruction of government records, possibly to hide wrongdoing.
Fox News commentators have rightly questioned what the administration is so desperate to keep hidden. If USAID was engaged in lawful, transparent activities, why the sudden rush to erase its paper trail? The American people deserve answers. The implications for national security, oversight, and public trust in government institutions cannot be overstated. If this administration is willing to engage in such blatant misconduct at USAID, what other agencies might be involved in similar cover-ups?
The argument that these document purges are a “necessary security measure” is laughable. The United States has strict declassification procedures and retention policies designed to protect national security while ensuring transparency. What is happening at USAID is not security—it is sabotage. It is an effort to prevent Congress, the courts, and the American public from ever knowing the full extent of this administration’s misdeeds.
This scandal should serve as a wake-up call to conservatives and all Americans who value accountability. The destruction of government documents on this scale is not just unethical—it is illegal. If it is proven that officials knowingly ordered the destruction of records to evade oversight or interfere with legal proceedings, those responsible must face criminal charges. This includes not only those carrying out the orders but also those at the highest levels who issued them.
Congress must immediately launch an investigation into this cover-up, subpoenaing all communications related to the directive and holding those responsible to account. The Justice Department, if it truly cares about upholding the law rather than protecting the Biden administration, should open a criminal probe into whether this constitutes obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and violations of federal record-keeping laws.
The hypocrisy on display here is staggering. The same Democratic establishment that weaponized the justice system against Donald Trump over document storage is now caught red-handed engaging in mass destruction of potentially incriminating records. Where is the outrage from the mainstream media? Where are the breathless reports about “threats to democracy” and “government accountability”? The silence is deafening.
This cannot be allowed to stand. If USAID officials, or anyone in the Biden administration, are destroying records to cover their tracks, they must be investigated, prosecuted, and punished to the fullest extent of the law. If the American people let this go unchallenged, it sets a dangerous precedent—one where government officials can erase their misdeeds without consequence. That is not how a democracy functions. That is how corruption festers and grows unchecked.
The courts, Congress, and the public must demand full transparency. Every destroyed document, every erased file, and every burned record represents an attack on the rule of law. If justice is not served in this case, it will only embolden future administrations to engage in even greater corruption. The time to act is now.
Darnell Thompkins is a Canadian-born American and conservative opinion writer who brings a unique perspective to political and cultural discussions. Passionate about traditional values and individual freedoms, Darnell’s commentary reflects his commitment to fostering meaningful dialogue. When he’s not writing, he enjoys watching hockey and celebrating the sport that connects his Canadian roots with his American journey.
A.F. Branco Cartoon – True to the Mascot that represents them, Democrats have been showing their true self as asses lately refusing to clap or stand for a boy battling cancer, DJ Daniel, and other victims of violent crime, while still claiming to be looking out for the little guy.
Monstrous Democrats Remain Seated and Refuse to Clap for Child with Brain Cancer During Trump’s Joint Address
By Cassandra MacDonald – The Gateway Pundit – Mar 4,2025
Democrats are facing backlash on social media after most of their lawmakers refused to stand or clap for a child battling brain cancer who was honored during President Donald Trump’s joint address to Congress. As Trump highlighted the story of a 13-year-old brain cancer survivor who was being made an honorary member of the Secret Service — many Democratic lawmakers remained seated and silent, refusing to join the applause that erupted from the Republican side of the chamber. The child, who dreams of being a police officer, was given just five months to live — six years ago READ MORE…
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Trump.
•Chelsea Clinton: Killing Babies in Abortions is Good for the Economy • Extremist Pays $10,000 Fine for Vandalizing Pro-Life Pregnancy Center • Elon Musk and George Soros are Battling in Wisconsin Supreme Court Race •Ayanna Pressley and Mazie Hirono Celebrate Abortionists
When Donald Trump first sailed into the Oval Office, his detractors shrieked that his blunt rhetoric was dividing the country. His supporters pointed out that Trump wasn’t so much creating division as he was revealing divisions that had been growing in America for a long time.
The reaction to the novel Wuhan coronavirus did the country a similar service, by revealing a new fault line: two sets of rules, which were applied differently to Americans depending on their membership in certain political cliques. For the average American who assumed his political leaders still shared the belief that all men are created equal, it was a cruel betrayal.
Coronavirus lockdowns alerted Americans to an uncomfortable reality: the institutions to which they’d entrusted their liberties were no longer trustworthy. If the 2024 election is any indication, they got the message.
In the Covid times, hardworking people were deemed “nonessential” and lost their jobs while watching Tony Fauci’s net worth climb. They were banished from church while thousands gathered in the street to worship George Floyd. They watched their kids fall behind in school while Nancy Pelosi and Lori Lightfoot broke the rules to get their split ends trimmed. Their dying loved ones left this world alone, while Obama danced with Hollywood stars at his 60th birthday bash. To add further insult, those loved ones were denied proper funerals, while 10,000 people gathered to eulogize a drug-addicted criminal in a gold casket on television. Only some Americans were authorized to print their opinions online, while others were punished and censored.
The delusion that we were “all in this together” didn’t survive for long. A certain set of rules applied to the BLM protesters, the Democrat politicians, and the Hollywood elites, and another set of rules applied to everyone else. Americans started to realize they were being had.
When Covid vaccine mandates rolled out, the dichotomy was even clearer. For the vaccinated class, there were jobs, service academy appointments, college acceptances, and social acceptance. For the unvaccinated, there was talk of denying them entry to airplanes, restaurants, and stores, or even putting them into camps.
Once the double standard was exposed, it became visible everywhere. The Bidens got away with selling White House access because of their last name, while Trump was relentlessly prosecuted for made-up crimes because of his. Peaceful pro-life protesters were dragged to prison while abortion supporters got away with firebombing pregnancy clinics. Ukrainian oligarchs got billions while we watched the buying power of each paycheck shrink. Our government seemed more interested in caring for citizens of other countries who broke our laws than in looking after its own. Our president was more interested in apologizing for using the term “illegal” to describe Laken Riley’s murderer than he was in apologizing to Riley’s family for inviting her killer across the border. Our speech was muzzled as a “threat to democracy” while partisans gleefully dismantled our republic.
Nearly 8 in 10 Americans told Trafalgar Group pollsters in 2022 that they felt they were living under a two-tiered justice system.
If Covid brought the double standard into focus, the racial turmoil of 2020 confirmed leftists’ belief that it was a good thing. Americans were given different rules to live by, depending on the color of their skin. White Americans were expected to engage in public spectacles of guilt and self-hatred for their own inherent racism, examine their white fragility, pay “reparations” to their black friends, and accept fault for all of society’s ills. Black Americans were encouraged to celebrate their “black pride” and demand preferential treatment. The Smithsonian released an infographic saying traits like being “polite” or on time were hallmarks of “whiteness,” with the overly racist implication that black Americans should not be expected to do either. Hiring quotas were installed to reflect the principle that black and white people should be treated differently.
The ideology represented by the shorthand “DEI” turned this discrimination into a $9 billion industry. DEI didn’t just institutionalize racial discrimination, it also implemented discrimination based on sexual preferences. While white guys got blamed for society’s faults, white guys who dressed up as women got special victim status and Bud Light brand deals!
Americans who still believed God created each man and woman with equally valuable souls were offended at the creation of artificial hierarchies that turned true equality on its head, doling out special privileges based on a person’s race, politics, or sexuality. As institutions — from media to academia to government — led the way in imposing those hierarchies, Americans stopped trusting them.
Like Trump’s uncovering of deep-rooted political divisions in 2016, that loss of trust was as necessary as it was uncomfortable. It almost certainly played a role in Gen Z’s rightward swing. It was a huge step in shrinking the power of the leftist-dominated corporate press, which beclowned itself by uncritically repeating the government’s talking points about masks, vaccines, lockdowns, and Covid’s origins. And it laid the foundations for Americans, after four years of the Biden regime, to embrace Trump’s swamp-draining attitude more enthusiastically than ever.
The years of Covid paranoia and power-grabbing were an experiment in trusting The System, and whether Americans accepted or rejected it revealed as much about them as the 2016 election did. But it also revealed a lot about The System — and all the institutions of power that comprise it — to Americans.
They realized the system wasn’t going to save them. They were going to have to do it themselves.
Elle Purnell is the elections editor at The Federalist. Her work has been featured by Fox Business, RealClearPolitics, the Tampa Bay Times, and the Independent Women’s Forum. She received her B.A. in government from Patrick Henry College with a minor in journalism. Follow her on Twitter @_ellepurnell.
San Diego County’s “super sanctuary” policy will remain in place for now following a failed vote to scrap it from Republican county officials.
“The Biden Administration forced San Diego County onto the front lines of its relentless border crisis and now fringe Democrats in the County are trying to do the same,” Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., told Fox News Digital in a statement.
“The people in my district want no part of policies that have contradicted our laws, blocked law enforcement, and gotten innocent Americans killed. Mark these words: Sanctuary policies are going away,” Issa, whose district includes part of San Diego County, continued.
The county’s policy further constrains the ability of authorities in San Diego, a border county, to comply with federal law enforcement when it comes to turning over illegal immigrants, and opponents believe the policy opens the door to the county protecting those suspected of serious crimes.
San Diego County’s “super sanctuary” policy will remain in place for now following a failed vote to scrap it from Republican county officials. (Derek Shook/Fox News Digital)
“This is deeply disappointing,” Republican Supervisor Jim Desmond said in a statement. “This was not about politics. This was about ensuring that criminals—rapists, child abusers, burglars, and violent offenders—are removed from our communities. Instead, fear and misinformation won the day, leaving law-abiding residents at greater risk.”
Although Desmond and Supervisor Joel Anderson voted to get rid of the policy that was put in place by the board’s Democratic majority in December, Democratic Supervisor Monica Montgomery Steppe argued that repealing it would then give a role outside the scope of the county’s purview.
“Even in the very wording of policy L-2, it doesn’t protect criminals. What it was about is ensuring that this county stays in its lane and protects our region and that the federal government stays in its lane,” Democratic Supervisor Monica Montgomery Steppe said during the meeting before voting “no.” Her Democratic colleague, Supervisor Terra Lawson-Remer, abstained.
The county’s policy further constrains the ability of authorities in San Diego, a border county, to comply with federal law enforcement when it comes to turning over illegal immigrants, and opponents believe the policy opens the door to the county protecting those suspected of serious crimes. (Fox News)
The move comes as immigration and border policies changes have had a sweeping impact, as Immigration and Customs Enforcement continues to conduct raids around the country and border crossings have plummeted.
In addition, Trump border czar Tom Homan has been a vocal opponent of governments with sanctuary city policies.
“This failure also makes it harder and more dangerous for federal immigration authorities to do their job. It is far safer and less invasive for ICE to detain criminals while they are still in jail — rather than forcing federal agents to enter our communities, neighborhoods, and workplaces to make arrests,” Desmond continued.
Trump border czar Tom Homan has been a vocal opponent of governments with sanctuary city policies. (Getty Images)
There is currently one vacancy on the board left open by former Chair Nora Vargas, who exited her position just weeks after putting forth the policy, according to KPBS.
Cameron Arcand is a politics writer at Fox News Digital in Washington D.C. Story tips can be sent to Cameron.Arcand@Fox.com and on Twitter: @cameron_arcand
This week, the Ninth Circuit delivered a significant victory for free speech after Professor Lars Jensen won a critical reversal against Truckee Meadows Community College in Reno. Jensen had criticized the school’s lower standards. Jensen objected in 2020 and 2021 to proposed curriculum changes that he argued would have allowed remedial math classes to count for college credit. He distributed a flyer at an event detailing his concerns and warning that a student would be allowed to graduate from college while only being “ready for middle school math.”
TMCC Dean Julie Ellsworth told Jensen not to circulate his fliers during the break at the event, but he refused to relent. Ellsworth warned him that there would be consequences for his “disobeying” her.
In the two performance reviews following the confrontation, Jensen’s department chair suggested he receive an “excellent” rating, but Ellsworth gave him “unsatisfactory” ratings for “insubordination.” That designation required Jensen to undergo review for possible termination.
District Court Judge Larry Hicks dismissed the case in 2023. Now the Ninth Circuit has reversed Judge Hicks and found that Jensen is entitled to his day in court. Moreover, the panel found that Judge Hicks erred in refusing to allow Jensen to amend his complaint.
The panel applied the Pickering standard that we have previously discussed. The Court has held that, when a public employer retaliates against an employee for workplace-related speech, the First Amendment requires “balanc[ing] . . . the interests of the [public employee], as a citizen, in commenting upon matters of public concern and the interest of the State, as an employer, in promoting the efficiency of the public services it performs through its employees.” Pickering v. Bd. of Educ., 391 U.S. 563, 568 (1968).
That standard, in turn, triggers a five-part inquiry:
“(1) whether the plaintiff spoke on a matter of public concern; (2) whether the plaintiff spoke as a private citizen or public employee; (3) whether the plaintiff’s protected speech was a substantial or motivating factor in the adverse employment action; (4) whether the state had an adequate justification for treating the employee differently from other members of the general public; and (5) whether the state would have taken the adverse employment action even absent the protected speech.” Eng v. Cooley, 552 F.3d 1062, 1070 (9th Cir. 2009).
The Ninth Circuit ruled that:
“Jensen’s criticism of the changes in TMCC’s mathematics curriculum addressed a matter of public concern. “[T]he preferable manner of operating [a] school system . . . clearly concerns an issue of general public interest.” Pickering, 391 U.S. at 571. The handout Jensen distributed at the Math Summit spoke to the preferable manner of operating TMCC, specifically its math department. Jensen described how the math department’s lowered standards would impact almost a third of TMCC’s degree and certificate programs and how graduates would consequently have inadequate math and technical skills when entering the job market. Jensen also grounded his criticism in the effect these lower standards would have on the community, noting that employers in the surrounding area subsidize TMCC through their taxes and expect competent graduates in return. The decline of TMCC’s educational standards and the resulting impact on the community is a matter of public concern.”
The ruling remands the case back to the District Court of Nevada, where Jensen’s First Amendment claims can proceed. He may also choose to amend his other claims as necessary to proceed alongside them. Jensen is also represented by Nevada attorney John Nolan, who brought the lawsuit and wrote the briefs filed with the Ninth Circuit.
A.F. Branco Cartoon – The legacy Media (CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NPR, NY Times, etc.) have lost all credibility among most of America because of the outright lies and bias toward the left they have shown over the past few decades. The new Alternative media, such as Warroom with Steve Bannon, Dan Bongino, The Gateway Pundit, and many others, are being turned to as reliable sources for information.
Mark Halperin and Guest Slam Tone Deafness and Bias of Media Outlets Like MSNBC: ‘Utterly Broken’ (VIDEO)
By Mike LaChance – The Gateway Pundit – Feb 27, 2025
Mark Halperin recently had a conversation with Marc Caputo, formerly of Politico, and they tore into MSNBC for the outlet’s inability or flat out refusal to course correct after the outcome of the 2024 election. They make some great points, especially about the hiring of Jen Psaki at MSNBC and how no one in the mainstream media seemed to have a problem with it. MSNBC is in the process of imploding. Joy Reid was just fired and Rachel Maddow has lost a significant portion of her staff and yet they show no signs of trying to fix the problems that are killing the network… READ MORE
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Trump.
•Christians are Fighting Back Against “Satanic Mass” at State Capitol • Pope Francis Condemns Abortion: Baby “Represents Everyone Who has No Voice” • New Third Trimester Abortion Business Opens in Albuquerque •Oregon Gov Tina Kotek Declares a Day to Celebrate Killing Babies
Rep. August Pfluger, R-Texas, is seen here in front of the U.S. Capitol on March 21, 2024. (Alex Wong/Getty Images)
GOP members of Congress on the Republican Study Committee promised Tuesday to fight to turn President Donald Trump’s executive orders into law. Rep. August Pfluger, R-Texas, chairman of the RSC, was joined at a news conference by a dozen other Republican lawmakers, each of them touting their legislation.
Pfluger began the press conference by praising Trump’s work to “eliminate government waste, to secure our borders, and to push back against radical gender and DEI policies.”
The Texas lawmaker then promised that he and his fellow Republicans would codify the president’s executive orders involved into law.
“Now, our Republican-controlled Congress has a responsibility to reinforce and etch these victories into permanent law,” he said.
One by one, Republicans with the RSC took the microphone to pitch his or her legislation.
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., spoke of her legislation to rename the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America. Rep. Pat Harrigan, R-N.C., advocated making it more difficult for the executive branch to impose vaccine mandates on the nation’s military troops.
Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, proposed repealing the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, which was weaponized by the Justice Department under Trump’s predecessor, President Joe Biden, to prosecute and imprison pro-life activists, who Trump pardoned soon after taking office on Jan. 20.
Despite being confident of the support of fellow Republicans, the lawmakers face a likely partisan obstacle; namely, getting enough Democratic votes in the Senate to invoke cloture 0n filibusters to allow for their bills to go to the Senate floor for a vote.
Asked by a reporter how he would overcome that hurdle, Pfluger said he hoped colleagues such as Sen. Bill Hagerty, R-Tenn., who joined him at the event, would be able to iron out differences in the Senate.
But persuading Democrats to allow ambitious Republican legislation to become law may prove to be a tall order.
Just last week, Senate Democrats unanimously blocked a bill that would have barred transgender athletes—biological males—from female sports, despite polling showing nearly 80% public support in polls for such measures.
After the press conference, Pfluger told The Daily Signal that swing-district Democrats must allow Republicans to pass legislation, or they will face electoral consequences.
“Look, there are 13 House of Representative districts that President Trump won,” Pfluger said.
“So, President Trump won these, even though there’s a Democrat in those [House] seats. So, those representatives have to go back and explain to their constituency why they voted against President Trump’s executive order legislation,” he said.
Democrats can’t win without cheating. It’s as essential to their strategy as dead voters in Chicago or suitcases of ballots in Georgia.
The 2020 election wasn’t just a heist; it was a smash-and-grab in broad daylight. And if Democrats could cheat the election, they certainly weren’t going to leave their fundraising to chance. Enter ACT Blue—the money laundering service dressed up as a donation platform. It’s been the piggy bank of the Left for years, and now, the hammer is finally coming down.
This report was back in 2023, though the crimes of ACT Blue will eventually be determined to have happened from inception of the group.
James O’Keefe and others exposed ACT Blue’s shady dealings long ago. From phantom donors to improbable donation patterns, ACT Blue has been the digital equivalent of an offshore account in the Cayman Islands, but for Democrats who don’t want to get their hands too dirty—at least not publicly. Yet, despite mountains of evidence, the media yawned, Republicans twiddled their thumbs, and the system chugged along, laundering money like a Vegas casino on a Saturday night.
Now, as the Democratic Party lurches from one disaster to the next—from the Biden cognitive decline saga to the desperate anointment of Kamala Harris as their last-minute presidential stand-in—ACT Blue is taking on water faster than their fraudulent donation reports can plug the holes.
When Seven Executives Vanish in Three Weeks, It’s Not a Coincidence
The New York Times recently reported that ACT Blue is in “turmoil.” Not a little corporate reshuffling, not a strategic realignment—full-blown panic mode. Seven top executives have mysteriously exited stage left in the past three weeks, some of whom had been with the organization for over a decade. And what did these longtime insiders say about their sudden departures? Absolutely nothing. That kind of silence isn’t just suspicious; it’s screaming “Don’t ask us unless you have a subpoena.”
Meanwhile, the last remaining lawyer in ACT Blue’s general counsel’s office was locked out of his email and placed on leave after sending internal messages reminding everyone that “we have Whistleblower Policies for a reason.” Translation: the ship is going down, and someone tried to send up a distress flare. The response? Smash the flare gun and throw the guy overboard.
Even the unions representing ACT Blue employees are alarmed. Two separate unions are demanding the hiring of an independent investigator to dig into what’s really happening. When even the activist class is panicking, you know something serious is brewing.
Where Did $16 Billion Go? Asking for a Friend (or an Attorney General)
In the past 20 years, more than $16 billion has passed through ACT Blue’s platform. That’s enough money to buy every Democrat in Washington a beachfront home (and maybe some for their grandkids, too). But as money laundering experts have pointed out, the numbers don’t add up. A recent analysis of over 200 million Federal Election Commission records uncovered donation patterns so bizarre that even a third-world dictator would blush.
Hundreds of donations of exactly $2.50 from the same individual.
Elderly individuals or first-time donors suddenly making dozens of contributions in rapid succession.
Donations far greater than the donor could reasonably afford.
Registered voters suddenly contributing to candidates of the opposing party—because nothing says grassroots enthusiasm like financially supporting the person you allegedly hate.
These are not glitches or anomalies; they’re part of a pattern of systemic fraud that should have been obvious from the start. And now that the operation is unraveling, Republicans are (finally) asking state attorneys general to investigate. Not that we should hold our breath—after all, we’ve seen this movie before. But with the heat ACT Blue is feeling, even their usual allies in the justice system might have to pretend to care.
ACT Blue Becomes ACT Black and Blue
The implosion of ACT Blue comes at a time when the Democratic Party can least afford another scandal. They’re already limping into the 2024 election with a candidate so unpopular that they had to swap him out for Kamala Harris—a woman whose own presidential campaign was so bad that she dropped out before her home state even got to vote. Yet, somehow, we’re supposed to believe that she’s setting fundraising records? Please.
ACT Blue’s money machine kept the illusion alive for years, feeding a media narrative that Democrats had enthusiastic grassroots support. In reality, they were just laundering cash and cooking the books like a failing restaurant owner trying to hide the missing inventory.
Now, with executives jumping ship, whistleblowers sounding the alarm, and investigators circling like sharks, ACT Blue is learning the hard way that fraud, like Biden’s presidency, has an expiration date. And as their empire crumbles, one has to wonder: Is this the beginning of the end for the Left’s most effective scam, or just another scandal they’ll survive because the media refuses to report on it?
•Navy and Coast Guard Stop Funding Abortion Travel • Majority of Americans Approve President Trump’s Job Performance • Satanic “Black Mass” Scheduled Inside a State Capitol Building •Pro-Life Group Wants Trump to Designate Abortion Pill Sellers as Terrorists
The US Navy (USN) Sailors man the rails of Nimitz Class Aircraft Carrier USS THEODORE ROOSEVELT (CVN 71) as she leads a formation through the waters of the Persian Gulf with the Spanish Navy 100 Class Frigate ALVARO DE BAZAN (F101) [right] and the USN Arleigh Burke Class Guided Missile Destroyer USS DONALD COOK (DDG 75) during ALVARO DE BAZANÕs departure from Carrier Strike Group 2 (CSG-2). CSG-2 is currently underway on a regularly scheduled deployment conducting maritime security operations (MSO).
A.F. Branco Cartoon – Democrats shooting off both their legs and feet out of pure hate for Trump and the MAGA movement, hoping America fails in the process so they’ll have more of an advantage in the 2026 mid-term election.
Joe Rogan Says Democrats Are Going to Keep Losing People Because ‘They’re Not Course-Correcting at All’ (VIDEO)
Mike LaChance – The Gateway Pundit – Feb 11, 2025
Joe Rogan recently suggested that Democrats are going to keep shedding people because they are not course-correcting at all. This is absolutely right. Since the 2024 election, Democrats have not paused for a single minute to consider why so many voters have fled their party. They have not expended an ounce of energy trying to figure out where they went wrong and what they need to change in order to get back in tune with voters. It’s almost like they’re incapable of doing so, because that would require them to admit that they were wrong and Donald Trump was right. They just can’t do it and Rogan says this is going to lead them off a cliff… READ MORE
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Trump.
A federal judge blocked New York City’s request for President Donald Trump’s administration to return $80 million in Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) funds allocated for migrant shelters and services. Judge Jennifer Rearden, from the Manhattan bench on Wednesday, refused to issue New York City a temporary restraining order to claw back the funds because the city did not prove it would suffer irreparable harm without the money.
“We’re disappointed the court did not grant the emergency relief we were seeking while the case continued, and we are evaluating next steps,” a New York City Law Department spokesperson told Fox News.
The City of New York filed the lawsuit on Feb. 21 against Trump, FEMA, the Treasury Department and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), arguing the $80 million was already approved and paid out by FEMA.
A federal judge blocked New York City’s request for President Donald Trump’s administration to claw back $80 million in FEMA funds. (Getty/AP)
“This morning, our office learned about the federal government clawing back more than $80 million in FEMA grants applied for and awarded under the last administration, but not disbursed until last week,” Mayor Eric Adams, D-N.Y., said in an X post the day the lawsuit was filed.
The lawsuit said the funds were revoked on Feb. 11, after Elon Musk said the Department of Government Efficiencyfound a $59 million FEMA payment to New York City for luxury hotels used to house illegal migrants. DHS Secretary Kristi Noem said she rescinded the funds over concerns that the Roosevelt Hotel is the “Tren de Aragua base of operations.”
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem delivers remarks to staff at the Department of Homeland Security headquarters in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 28. (Manuel Balce Ceneta-Pool/Getty Images)
“I have clawed back the full payment that FEMA deep state activists unilaterally gave to NYC migrant hotels. FEMA was funding the Roosevelt Hotel that serves as a Tren de Aragua base of operations and was used to house Laken Riley’s killer. Mark my words: there will not be a single penny spent that goes against the interest and safety of the American people,” Noem said in an X post.
NYC Comptroller Brad Lander, a mayoral candidate vying for Adams’ seat, said the Trump administration “stole” the funds.
“Let’s be clear: Donald Trump and his loser lackies — Elon Musk and Kristi Noem — acted illegally when they stole $80 million from New York City’s bank account. Seizing our Congressionally-authorized, FEMA-approved money was nothing more than attempted retribution against immigrants seeking asylum, many of them sent here on buses by Governor Abbott from Texas. Like all of Trump’s illegal efforts to freeze and seize Congressionally-authorized funds, this action harmed taxpayers and working families and would force the City to cut services if not reversed,” Lander said in a statement following the ruling on Wednesday.
Boston Mayor Michelle Wu testifies during a House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform hearing in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday. (Anadolu via Getty Images)
The ruling came as Adams and his fellow “sanctuary city” Democratic mayors testified about their response to the migrant crisis on Capitol Hill on Wednesday.
“I’m here today to testify on how New York City can continue to reduce crime, even as a sanctuary city,” Adams told the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.
“To be clear: A sanctuary city classification does not mean our city will ever be a safe haven for violent criminals. It also does not give New York City the authority to violate federal immigration laws. To the contrary, New York City will always comply with city, state, and federal laws, as it does now,” he added.
New York City Mayor Eric Adams speaks during a news conference outside Gracie Mansion in New York on Sept. 26, 2024. (Rashid Umar Abbasi for Fox News Digital)
Adams vowed to protect law-abiding New York City residents, regardless of immigration status, while also directing NYPD officers to comply with DHS and ICE. The mayor’s comments reflect his ongoing effort to strike a balance between protecting New Yorkers and coordinating with the Trump administration’s illegal immigration crackdown.
As New York City struggled to keep up with the busloads of migrants entering the city’s overwhelmed shelter system, Adams was critical of former President Joe Biden’s handling of the migrant crisis. In his plight against the migrant crisis, Adams has developed a relationship with Trump — holding a private meeting with the president in West Palm Beach, Florida, and then meeting with border czar Tom Homan to discuss the migrant crisis in New York City.
Homan said he would hold Adams to his commitments, telling “FOX & Friends,” “If he doesn’t come through, I’ll be back in New York City, and we won’t be sitting on the couch. I’ll be in his office, up his butt, saying, ‘Where the hell is the agreement we came to?'”
Adams’ office did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.
Fox News’ Michael Dorgan and Grace Taggart contributed to this report.
Deirdre Heavey is a politics writer for Fox News Digital.
John Podesta, President Biden’s leading climate official, has been overseeing a substantial allocation of $375 billion for climate change initiatives. This funding has notably been directed towards several organizations that were established just a short while ago. The New York Post reports that the administration has channeled at least $20 billion into recently formed environmental groups.
In a striking case, former Vice President Kamala Harris delivered a $7 billion check to the Climate United Fund in Bethesda, Maryland. This organization is not listed in the IRS’s charity database and lacks federal filings. The lack of transparency surrounding these transactions raises questions about the administration’s oversight.
In 2024, a video surfaced featuring EPA adviser Brent Efron discussing the urgency of dispersing the $20 billion climate fund. Efron candidly remarked, “Get the money out as fast as possible before they [Trump administration] come in … it’s like we’re on the Titanic and we’re throwing gold bars off the edge.” This revelation has sparked further debate over the administration’s spending practices.
EPA administrator Lee Zeldin has addressed the controversy on the Alex Marlow Show. He disclosed that he is collaborating with the FBI and DOJ to investigate eight groups linked to the alleged “gold bars” scheme. Zeldin expressed concerns about the management and distribution of the funds. Zeldin highlighted how the director of the greenhouse reduction fund transitioned from an NGO to the Biden administration. This individual then allocated $5 billion to their previous employer. Such actions have intensified scrutiny over the integrity of the funding process.
One notable grant applicant, who sought $20 million, previously served on the Biden White House environmental justice council. This council had only received $3 million over the past three years, raising eyebrows about the sudden increase in funding. The connections between these groups and administration insiders are being examined.
The EPA discovered $2 billion allocated to Power Forward Communities, linked to Democrat Stacey Abrams. This organization reported just $100 in revenue, prompting questions about the validity of its funding. The disproportionate financial support has drawn significant criticism.
Zeldin stressed the need for heightened oversight and accountability in managing these substantial funds. He articulated his commitment to ensuring every cent is accounted for and transparent. Zeldin expressed a strong desire for the ability to answer Congress’s questions with confidence and clarity.
The revelations about these financial dealings have prompted calls for a thorough investigation. Many are concerned about the potential misuse of taxpayer dollars. The demand for accountability and transparency is growing louder.
Amidst these controversies, conservative voices are calling for stricter regulations and oversight mechanisms. The aim is to prevent any further questionable financial practices. Ensuring the responsible use of funds is a priority for many lawmakers.
As the situation unfolds, the scrutiny on the Biden administration’s climate spending continues to intensify. The focus is on ensuring that funds are directed toward genuine environmental efforts. The necessity for openness and responsible management is widely acknowledged.
The involvement of the FBI and DOJ underscores the seriousness of the allegations. These investigations could have significant implications for the administration. The outcome may influence future policy decisions and funding allocations.
The broader implications of these funding controversies are being closely watched. The integrity of climate change initiatives depends on transparent and accountable financial practices. Public trust in these efforts’ hinges on the administration’s response to these concerns.
The controversy has sparked a wider debate about the role of government in environmental funding. Many argue for a more measured approach that ensures funds are used effectively. The focus is on achieving tangible environmental benefits.
The unfolding drama serves as a reminder of the importance of transparency in government spending. The public demands accountability in how taxpayer funds are utilized. This situation underscores the need for robust oversight mechanisms.
The revelations have also fueled discussions about the effectiveness of current oversight structures. Some believe that reforms are necessary to prevent future abuses. The goal is to create a system that ensures funds are used for their intended purposes.
As investigations proceed, the spotlight remains on the administration’s handling of these funds. The outcome could shape future approaches to climate funding. Ensuring that financial support reaches legitimate organizations is a shared objective.
A.F. Branco Cartoon – Ilan Omar’s allegiance to Somalia above the U.S. is questioned by many, as there are calls for her deportation. Not only did she marry her brother to get citizenship in the U.S., but she’s also accused of setting up workshops to help Somalians evade deportation and advocating the interest of Somalia above the United States.
‘The Time Has Come’: Rep. Brandon Gill Wants to Arrest and Deport Ilhan Omar to Somalia For Treason
By Ben Kew – The Gateway Pundit – Feb 12, 2025
Republican Congressman Brandon Gill is circulating a petition to arrest and deport Ilhan Omar for treason. Gill, a first-term Congressman and son-in-law of conservative filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza, asked supporters to sign a petition to deport Omar in a fundraising email obtained by Axios. The first email states: Friend, we should have never let Ilhan Omar into our country. And frankly, America would be a much better place if she were to be sent back to Somalia. Recently, it came out that Ilhan Omar is hosting free workshops for Somalians, who are in our country illegally, on how to evade ICE and deportation… READ MORE
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Trump.
On Tuesday, Wyoming became the 15th state to enact universal school choice into law with Gov. Mark Gordon’s signature on the Steamboat Legacy Scholarship Act.
The Cowboy State joins a rapidly growing group of states that have passed laws giving all (or nearly all) families statewide choice concerning their children’s kindergarten through twelfth-grade education. Those states are Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah, and West Virginia.
The act grants families who choose to participate with an education savings account of $7,000 per student per year to allocate toward approved K-12 educational expenses. Education savings accounts with universal eligibility are the gold standard of school choice programs due to the flexibility they provide parents to select the best learning avenues for their children.
It also expands eligibility of the state’s existing pre-kindergarten education savings account program from parents with a maximum income of 150 percent of the federal poverty line to up to 250 percent. The amount provided to qualifying parents is $7,000. According to Gov. Gordon, “early education builds a very strong foundation. It’s important that when kids get to kindergarten, they have the grounding that’s necessary to be able to move forward, thrive and really do well.”
Wyoming Speaker of the House Ocean Andrew is a defender of education freedom and under his leadership the bill promptly passed the House by a 39-21 vote on Jan. 29. It then headed to the Senate.
Mid-February, President Trump applauded the leadership of Senate President Bo Biteman and urged every state senator to vote in favor of the bill. On Feb. 19, the Senate passed the bill with a vote of 20-11. As part of the Wyoming legislative process, a Joint Conference Committee was tasked to successfully negotiate the policy differences between the Senate and House, which was completed on Feb. 27. The following day, the Speaker of the House and President of the Senate both signed the bill, sending it to Gov. Gordon for signature.
Wyoming State Superintendent of Public Instruction Megan Degenfelder, who was voted into office in 2022, has been instrumental in providing a strategic plan for the state’s education system. She is a proponent of school choice and understands that it is a rising tide that lifts all boats. Of her six key initiative areas for education reform in Wyoming, “parental empowerment” are the first two words.
“As an economist, I know that greater choices lead to greater outcomes. I am an ardent supporter of universal school choice because even parents in the most rural corners of Wyoming should have the opportunity to determine the best education for their child,” Degenfelder told me.
Hats off to Wyoming leaders for embracing the innovative educational approach of a free market K-12 education landscape by enacting universal school choice. The market forces of competition will drive quality, spur innovation, and decrease costs, which are foundational for achieving the governor’s goal of a world-class education system in Wyoming.
Dr. Keri D. Ingraham is a Senior Fellow at Discovery Institute, Director of the American Center for Transforming Education, and a Senior Fellow at Independent Women’s Forum.
Hello, this is Victor Davis Hanson for The Daily Signal. Have you noticed, everyone, that the crescendo of hatred toward Elon Musk is becoming surreal?
We had a congresswoman from Ohio, I think her name was Marcy Kaptur, she recently said that she wasn’t sure where Elon Musk’s loyalties lay because he’d only been a citizen for 22 years.
He’s a naturalized citizen. This is very interesting because, remember, the Left says that people who are here illegally, and not citizens, should gain all of the protections and rights of citizens. They should be de facto citizens. Anybody who would question a naturalized citizen’s loyalty, according to the Left, would be xenophobic, nativist.
I think Rep. Kaptur has actually voted for resolutions damning—if I could use that word—Republicans for being insensitive to the status of immigrants, whether legal or illegal.
This follows a whole series of personal attacks. We had posters in Washington, D.C., saying, “Eliminate Musk.” We had a man arrested from Indiana online for promising, threatening to kill Elon Musk.
Here in California we have Rep. [Robert] Garcia, I think his name is. And he was on television and he said that Elon Musk was a d—. And when called on it, he said you had to bring weapons, i.e., against Musk, for this bar fight. WEAPONS.
Then we had this unhinged minister, Caudle—was that his name? I think it was. Steve Caudle from Tennessee. And he got up in his pulpit—and it was televised—and he said that Elon Musk was satanic, a devil, and sometimes you had to use violence to stop such devilry.
Add all of this up and you’re getting to the situation in which the bar of what is permissible has been drastically lowered.
We have turned someone who has saved the U.S. space program and will probably save two astronauts, who otherwise would perish in space if it was left to the government program; who reinvented the entire auto industry; who opened up all of social media with X—we have turned this person into a demon. A disloyal demon. A traitor. Someone that we smear and we slander all day long.
For what? For saying the following: that the $36 trillion in debt and the $1.5-$2 trillion, and Joe Biden in some years had $5 trillion and $6 trillion deficits, are unsustainable. And through a series of revenue enhancements and drastic cuts of programs that are unnecessary, we can get near a balanced budget.
He takes no money. He’s not confirmed as the head of a government agency, but, of course, there’s all sorts of deputies and heads of agencies that require no confirmation, including the national security adviser of the United States of America.
So, what is my point? We saw this earlier with Donald Trump.
Just a few days before the first assassination attempt, Joe Biden told a group of people that it’s time “to put Donald Trump in the bull’s-eye.” He ranted and raved about semi-fascist and ultra-MAGA, as if they were somehow dangerous insurrectionaries and threatened the republic. At the same time he was saying this, The New Republic ran a cover story of Elon Musk as Hitler, with a Hitlerian mustache.
Remember, we had had retired generals who said he was Nazi-like. He was equivalent to people who had set up the concentration and, indeed, death camps at Auschwitz. And he was synonymous with Mussolini.
And what did that do? That lowered the acceptable discourse. And that lowering of discourse led to acceptable behavior, such as two assassination attempts.
So, all I would warn the Left is, I think it’s time to stop this. Because if you continue this rhetoric, somebody—as this person in Indiana or this minister in Tennessee—is going to openly call for violence, if they have not already, against one of the most iconic Americans in our history. And when that happens, the responsibility is going to be on you.
So, it’s time to tone down the rhetoric and stop comparing a Renaissance American citizen—A CITIZEN, A CITIZEN—to one of the worst mass murders in history.
A.F. Branco Cartoon – We thought the old Hippies of the ’60s hated war and were pro-peace. I guess that only applied when we were fighting communists. They are now fighting against Trump’s peace initiatives for Ukraine.
White House Announces No More Blank Checks to Ukraine Without Peace Deal (VIDEO)
By Jim Hoft – The Gateway Pundit – Mar 1, 2025
President Donald J. Trump sent a clear message to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy this week: America First is back, and the days of endless handouts with no gratitude are over. What was supposed to be a historic signing of a minerals deal—an economic framework that would have bolstered Ukraine’s war-torn economy while recouping billions of American taxpayer dollars—turned into a diplomatic disaster, thanks to Zelenskyy’s combative attitude and refusal to recognize the new reality in Washington. READ MORE
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Trump.
Remember when the Biden administration recruited a bunch of kids on TikTok to repeat canned pro-Biden propaganda, and we all laughed at what an obviously disingenuous op it was? Now imagine if those kids were older, uglier, and members of the U.S. Senate. (Haven’t you always wanted to GRWM with Chuck Schumer and see Liz Warren’s OOTD?)
Ahead of President Donald Trump’s Tuesday night address to Congress, Democrats have been whispering to their media allies that their messaging strategy surrounding Trump’s speech matters because “tonight marks the first moment since the election that much of America will actually pay any attention to the Democrats.”
The Democrats have landed on their messaging strategy, and it is, in their own words …
Tuesday morning, two dozen Senate Democrats posted their honest, genuine, heartfelt thoughts about Trump’s first 43 days. Those straight-from-the-heart perspectives just happened to all follow the same, word-for-word script, which Sen. Cory Booker took credit for writing.
Booker, along with Senators Angela Alsobrooks, Tammy Baldwin, Richard Blumenthal, Chris Coons, Tammy Duckworth, Dick Durbin, Kirsten Gillibrand, Mazie Hirono, Tim Kaine, Mark Kelly, Andy Kim, Ben Ray Lujan, Ed Markey, Jeff Merkley, Alex Padilla, Gary Peters, Brian Schatz, Chuck Schumer, Chris Van Hollen, Mark Warner, Elizabeth Warren, Peter Welch, and Sheldon Whitehouse each recorded a video rattling off the same lines about how Trump is evil for cutting government bloat and not undoing Bidenflation yet.
Democrats cared nothing about the prices of Americans’ groceries, gas, and housing for four years under Biden. As for government spending cuts, a Harvard-Harris poll just last month found Americans “overwhelmingly support cutting down government expenditures,” so that’s a weird choice of martyr to patronize.
The weirdest choice, though, is being so transparently obvious about the fact that all of Democrats’ outrage about Trump is scripted and fake. It’s not a surprise that Warren, Schumer, and their ilk don’t have original thoughts, but usually their comms staff try to keep that hidden, not broadcast it in a coordinated media blitz.
Democrats are doing the congressional equivalent of copying and pasting fake Amazon reviews. It’s “Can I get 10 REAL friends to copy and paste these five paragraphs onto their own Facebook pages?” but for U.S. senators — a plan someone looked at and thought, “this is exactly the rebrand Democrats need!”
It’s not the first time Dems have manufactured their mania, but you’d be hard-pressed to find a more succinct example. Even the left-wing media, who have the same habit, are conceited enough to change up the words a little when they all turn in the same assignment about things like Joe “sharper than ever” Biden or “No one is above the law” or “no evidence” Biden made money off of the family influence-peddling business.
It’s foolish enough for grown adults whose salaries are paid by tax dollars to stare into an iPhone camera and screech vulgarities, like an out-of-touch grandparent trying to earn points by using Zoomer slang. (Just adding expletives doesn’t make you cool, guys.) When those words are fresh off some social media intern’s copy machine, the effect is even more clownish.
One of the things that neutered Democrats’ 2024 campaign to defeat Trump was the dwindling effectiveness of their manufactured panic. In 2017, thanks to their control of the media establishment, they convinced a sizeable portion of the country that the sitting president was a Russian asset who had colluded with the Kremlin to steal the 2016 election. In 2018, they orchestrated a manic smear campaign to convince the country that Brett Kavanaugh had helped run a gang rape operation in the Washington suburbs. In 2020, their mass-produced panic about the Coronavirus literally shut down the country. In 2021, they said Trump had tried to overthrow the government.
In a last-ditch effort to kill his 2024 campaign, they called him and his supporters fascists and Nazis and Hitler-lovers and threats to democracy, and couldn’t understand that the name-calling had lost its oomph after nearly a decade of Trump repeatedly turning out to not actually be Hitler.
Clearly, Democrats on the Hill still aren’t willing to learn that lesson. They’ve marked Tuesday as the day they’ll set the tone for the ResistanceTM for the next four years, and they’ve chosen the same tone of faux horror that they’ve taken for Donald Trump’s entire political career.
Can’t wait to see how it works out for them!
Elle Purnell is the elections editor at The Federalist. Her work has been featured by Fox Business, RealClearPolitics, the Tampa Bay Times, and the Independent Women’s Forum. She received her B.A. in government from Patrick Henry College with a minor in journalism. Follow her on Twitter @_ellepurnell.
President Donald Trump greets Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. CEO C.C. Wei at the White House on Monday. (Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)
For President Donald Trump, the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co.’s $100 billion investment in U.S. chip manufacturing represented “a tremendous leap—like, a leap that nobody would have really said was possible.” But TSMC’s $100 billion is just a small part of the at least $3 trillion in investments and trade commitments the Trump administration has racked up in just six weeks since Inauguration Day.
The $3 trillion of investment and trade commitments with the United States involve key allies, such as India and Japan, and major players in the private sector—Apple and Oracle, to name just two. These arrangements also cover critical industries beyond chip manufacturing, from pharmaceuticals to automobiles to artificial intelligence.
With the announcement of TSMC’s $100 billion investment—which Trump celebrated with TSMC CEO C.C. Wei, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, and AI czar David Sacks on Monday—the Taiwanese company is nearly tripling its previous investment in additional chip manufacturing investment in the United States. Before the announcement, TSMC had invested $65 billion in U.S.-based manufacturing. Its first American manufacturing plant in Arizona, which began with a $12 billion investment in 2020, opened for business late last year. TSMC plans to use the $100 billion in new investment to set up three new chipmaking plants, two chip-packing plants, as well as a research and development center.
TSMC dominates the global semiconductor industry. In terms of revenue, its foundries account for more than 60% of global market share. But that was not always the case. Just over 30 years ago, the U.S. accounted for 37% of global semiconductor production, while Taiwan was just a few measly percent.
U.S. policymakers engrossed in the doctrines of free trade saw the semiconductor industry flee to subsidized and protected Asian markets. For decades, free-trade dogmatism dragged America into a ditch.
Now, the Trump administration is offering a way out. Trump’s policies have spurred investments that diminish China’s leverage over the American economy. These investments are a foundational pillar for any attempt to make the U.S. economy more resilient to a China shock and revitalize American manufacturing.
During his first full day of his second term, Trump unveiled “Stargate,” a $500 billion investment into artificial intelligence over the next four years. Trump called Stargate—a collaboration between Softbank, OpenAI, and Oracle—“the largest AI infrastructure project, by far, in history.”
Just a month prior, Softbank announced a $100 billion investment that aimed to create 100,000 American jobs. Additionally, Trump secured a $20 billion initial investment by DAMAC Properties in early January for new data centers based in the U.S.
As Vice President JD Vance outlined in his speech at the Paris AI summit last month, the Trump administration is committed to competing with China in the AI space while also challenging European notions of how to regulate AI and chart the future of the AI economy.
After Trump said his administration was considering placing tariffs on pharmaceutical imports, the pharmaceutical company Eli Lilly announced it planned to invest $27 billion in four new manufacturing facilities in America. The company claimed that, once complete, the plants will create more than 3,000 jobs. Building the facilities themselves will require 10,000 construction workers, the company added.
Since China’s accession to the World Trade Organization, production of generic drugs and the chemical compounds used as inputs for those drugs, increased at a rapid pace. That was not the “invisible hand” at work; rather, it was the result of conscious policy choices on the part of the Chinese Communist Party to subsidize those industries, thereby undercutting drug producers and jobs in the U.S. and across the West, nations which were at the time drinking deeply from free-trade dogmatism.
Tariffs also may have been a factor in Apple’s decision to invest in the American economy. After Trump announced an additional 10% tariff on China, Apple announced it would be investing $500 billion in the United States and hire approximately 20,000 workers. Apple plans to open a new factory in Texas and a manufacturing academy in Detroit, Michigan, as well as expansions in Arizona, Nevada, California, North Carolina, and other states.
Apple will double its investment in its U.S. Advanced Manufacturing Fund, which includes working alongside TSMC in the Taiwanese company’s Arizona facility to produce advanced silicon. Apple plans to hire the 20,000 workers over the next four years, the vast majority of whom will be focused on silicon engineering, AI and machine learning, and the like.
Trump has also worked with foreign leaders to court more investment in the American economy and bolster American exports. Saudi Arabian Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman pledged the kingdom would invest $600 billion in America. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi agreed with Trump on increasing the trade between U.S. and India to $500 billion.
Japan, meanwhile, has promised to open more auto plants in the U.S. and import American liquified natural gas at “historic” levels, thereby reducing America’s trade deficit with its Asian ally. One Japanese automaker, Honda, is reportedly moving production of the Honda Civic hybrid from Mexico to Indiana in response to Trump’s tariffs on Mexico and Canada.
For Trump and his administration, “Make America Great Again” starts with actually making things in America again.
Integrity in DC is as hard to find as a good barber, mechanic, or as some women have told me, gynecologist.
We all know what integrity should mean: doing the right thing when no one’s looking, standing by your principles even when it costs you. Unfortunately, in politics, integrity is more of a suggestion than a requirement—like speed limits in California or CNN’s commitment to the truth.
The problem? We need integrity in government. We’re supposed to elect representatives to do our bidding, not use our tax dollars as a personal slush fund. But somewhere along the way, the Left decided “public service” was just a fancy way of saying “enrich yourself while gaslighting the peasants.”
And now, they don’t even bother hiding it.
Presidential Love at First Felony
If integrity were a person, it would have packed its bags and left the White House the minute Joe Biden was inaugurated. And nowhere is that clearer than in his full-blown Godfather-level protection of Hunter.
We were told for years that Hunter was just a “misunderstood artist” with a heart of gold (and a nose full of something else). Every crime, every scandal—swept under the rug faster than that cocaine Hunter dropped at the White House. But when even the DOJ couldn’t keep the charade going, Daddy Biden stepped in.
We all knew he would pardon Hunter. Sure, Biden and the media played it cool for a while, but let’s be real—Biden would pardon Hunter for murder if he had to. “My son’s the smartest guy I know,” he slurs, which is a terrifying statement considering Hunter’s laptop fiasco. Smart guys don’t leave their laptop with incriminating evidence at a repair shop.
The media, of course, pretended a presidential pardon of a literal crackhead influence peddler is totally normal. “It’s about love,” they said, just like how Hillary deleting 33,000 emails was about convenience and Epstein’s cameras mysteriously stopped working.
The Media’s Integrity: Somewhere Between Bigfoot and Honest Politicians
Speaking of people who wouldn’t recognize integrity if it hit them in the face, let’s talk about the media.
These are the same people who spent four years screaming that Trump was a Russian agent because some Clinton-funded fantasy book said so. But Biden being bought and paid for by China? “No evidence,” they say, as Hunter’s emails read like a CCP payroll spreadsheet.
And let’s not forget what the media said about the aforementioned infamous laptop. They all swore in unison that it was “Russian disinformation” right before the election. Turns out, the laptop was more real than Biden’s hair. But by the time they admitted it, their job was done—America had already been duped into electing a guy whose brain resets mid-sentence.
Integrity in journalism is supposed to mean exposing corruption, holding the powerful accountable. Instead, today’s media are more like government PR agents. Frankly, I have more respect for North Korea’s state news.
Trump, Zelenskyy, and the Left’s Selective Outrage
Here’s a fun game: take anything Trump does, replace his name with Biden, and watch the media response do a full 180.
Take Trump’s meeting with Zelenskyy. President Trump wanted to end the war and get an answer to the obvious question—where’s all our money going? The Left lost their minds.
“Trump’s undermining democracy!” they shrieked, as if questioning billions in unaccounted-for cash is somehow treasonous and ending the war is a bad thing. But when Biden sends blank checks to Ukraine faster than Hunter burns through coke dealers, silence.
No calls for accountability, no tough questions. Just a whole lot of “Slava Ukraini” bumper stickers from people who couldn’t find Kyiv on a map.
Because in Washington, integrity isn’t about what you do—it’s about who does it. Zelenskyy reneged on the agreed mineral deal three times, and Leftists want to canonize him.
Integrity Is Making a Comeback… And That’s a Problem for the Left
The truth is integrity is dangerous to the people in charge. It exposes their schemes, shines a light on their corruption. That’s why they attack anyone who has it—whether it’s Trump, whistleblowers, or even regular Americans who ask too many questions.
But here’s the good news: people are waking up. The lies aren’t working like they used to. Every DOGE revelation, and dot connecting the criminals sounds yet another alarm.
Integrity isn’t dead—it’s just been out of fashion for a while. But like bell-bottoms or basic math in schools, it might just be making a comeback. And that’s the Left’s worst nightmare.
For years, the mantra on the left was “reimagining” everything from policing to free speech to defense. Reimagining often was a synonym for defunding or limiting the subject matter. Now, Georgetown Law Professor Sherally Munshi and others are attacking border enforcement as “ethically indefensible.” Munshi calls it “defamiliarizing” the whole concept of borders, which she and others in higher education now find morally reprehensible.
Munshi’s talk, “Unsettling the Border,” is an example of how radical many law faculties have become. She is by no means a standout in such theories. While schools have purged their ranks of conservative, libertarian, and dissenting faculty, there is no limit to faculty writing on the far left.
Munshi insists that “there is nothing natural or inevitable about the United States’ contemporary borders.” She mocked the whole notion of “the so-called border crisis.” Millions of unvetted people just walking over the border is not a crisis… at least not for the country. It is failure in ourselves; “a crisis of imagination.” Accordingly, she is calling for reimagining or defamiliarizing borders:
“Our task, as I put it, is to unsettle the border, to defamiliarize, disenchant, and recontextualize it by critically evaluating the historical processes, the legal developments, the discursive formations that naturalize and legitimate the border.”
It is, of course, racist to want to have secure borders:
“Rather than redress the fact that the international border regime is practically unsustainable [and] ethically indefensible, majorities in the whitest and wealthiest nations are embracing an increasingly authoritarian form of nationalism and exclusion.”
Borders, according to Professor Munshi, are just a construct “within the American imaginary, the southern border divides white from indigenous, purity from heterogeneity, civilization from savagery, settler from Indian.”
Of course, this reimagining of borders will have to extend back a tad further than the American founders. The concept of the nation-state with sovereign borders was recognized in documents like the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648. It was credited with maintaining a Westphalian peace with nations able to maintain their own territory and governing systems. That, in turn, allowed nation-states to form international bodies and further stabilize global relations.
I have heard other faculty present papers along these same lines, dismissing the very concept of border enforcement as racist, privileged, or archaic. It is far rarer to hear conservatives on campuses arguing for border enforcement and deportations. It is even less common to find such advocates on both faculties.
A.F. Branco Cartoon – Zelensky would like to see U.S. troops in Ukraine but is unwilling to move toward peace. Trump is seeking a path to peace and is reluctant to throw American troops into the meatgrinder that has killed nearly 2 million Ukrainian and Russian people.
“America Will Not Put Up with It For Much Longer!” – President Trump Puts Zelensky on Notice After His Latest Insane Statement on War with Russia
By Cristina Laila – The Gateway Pundit – Mar 3, 2025
President Trump responded to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s latest statement on his war with Russia. Zelensky does not want peace with Russia and President Trump has absolutely had it. Trump responded to Zelensky’s claim the end of war with Russia is ‘very, very far away.’ “This is the worst statement that could have been made by Zelenskyy, and America will not put up with it for much longer! It is what I was saying, this guy doesn’t want there to be Peace as long as he has America’s backing and, Europe, in the meeting they had with Zelenskyy, stated flatly that they cannot do the job without the U.S. – Probably not a great statement to have been made in terms of a show of strength against Russia. What are they thinking?” Trump said on Truth… READ MORE
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Trump.
It’s official, folks—being a violent criminal in a Democrat-run city is a pretty sweet gig. You can terrorize innocent people, get shot while trying to stab someone, and the mayor will roll out the red carpet with thoughts and prayers for YOU. Welcome to Woketown, where the law-abiding are an afterthought, and the bad guys get sympathy cards. Why? Because there can never be any positive spin on guns being used to protect people!
Over the weekend, an off-duty Boston police officer became an absolute hero when he stopped a knife-wielding maniac inside a Chick-fil-A. The suspect had already chased two terrified individuals into the restaurant, attempting to stab them. The officer ordered him to drop the weapon, and when the lunatic refused, the officer did what any rational person would do—he eliminated the threat.
But instead of praising this officer for saving lives, Boston’s woke Mayor Michelle Wu and her leftist cronies leaped to comfort the criminal’s family. Because in today’s twisted reality, criminals deserve compassion, and law enforcement deserves suspicion. Sickening.
Boston’s Mayor: Champion of Criminals
Let’s talk about Michelle Wu, the queen of misplaced priorities. This is the same mayor who proposed giving illegal immigrants and even 11-year-olds the right to vote in city budgeting decisions. Because, of course, nothing says “competent governance” like letting pre-teens and people who aren’t even citizens have a say in how tax dollars are spent.
And now? She’s mourning the loss of a knife-wielding attacker, while barely acknowledging the heroism of the officer who prevented what could have been a mass stabbing inside a fast-food restaurant. Instead of standing with the people who keep Boston safe, Wu bends over backward to humanize violent criminals while law enforcement gets nothing but scrutiny.
Here’s what Wu had to say after the shooting:
“My condolences and all of our thoughts are with the family of the individual whose life has been lost.”
Unbelievable. Not a word about the officer. Not a word about the victims who were almost stabbed to death. Nope—just heartfelt sympathies for the would-be killer.
Meanwhile, Suffolk County District Attorney Kevin Hayden joined in on the nonsense, offering “thoughts and prayers” to the attacker’s family while suggesting there’s a bigger “chaotic situation” to investigate. The only “chaos” here is the left’s absolute unwillingness to stand behind the brave men and women in law enforcement.
Soft-on-Crime Lunacy is Destroying Our Cities
This isn’t just a Boston problem—it’s a national crisis in every leftist-controlled city. The same soft-on-crime policies that Wu champions are turning American cities into lawless wastelands. Just take a look:
New York City: Career criminals with dozens of prior arrests walk free within hours, only to commit more crimes.
San Francisco: A shoplifter’s paradise where stores are shutting down because law enforcement is basically optional.
Chicago: Violent criminals get slaps on the wrist while law-abiding citizens are treated like the real problem.
Wu’s leadership is just another version of this insanity. Instead of backing the blue, she’s part of the growing chorus of woke politicians who treat law enforcement like the enemy.
And who suffers the most from this madness? Regular Americans. The people just trying to live their lives, go to work, and enjoy a meal at Chick-fil-A without being chased by some knife-wielding lunatic.
The Officer Did His Job—And He Deserves Praise
Let’s be clear: This off-duty officer did EXACTLY what he was trained to do. He saw a threat, identified himself, issued a command, and when the criminal refused to comply, he neutralized the danger. That’s what policing is supposed to look like.
But in Wu’s Boston? Officers are villains while the criminals get eulogies.
Here’s an idea, Mayor Wu: Instead of sympathizing with violent criminals, how about standing up for the people who actually keep your city from descending into anarchy? How about praising the brave police officer who saved lives? How about making it clear that if you attack innocent people, there will be consequences?
But no, that would require actual leadership—something the left abandoned a long time ago.
Final Thoughts
This incident is just another reminder of what happens when woke leadership infects a city. Criminals are emboldened, law enforcement is demonized, and the average citizen is left wondering, “Whose side is my own government on?”
This officer is a hero, full stop. But in Wu’s Boston, heroism takes a backseat to woke compassion for the worst of society. And that’s exactly why Boston—and every city following this insane model—is spiraling into chaos.
Below is my column in The Hill on the disgraceful Democratic attacks against Elon Musk over his status as a naturalized citizen. For years, some of us have raised concerns over the adoption of McCarthyite tactics and rhetoric by the left to demonize those with opposing viewpoints, including critics of the massive censorship system under the Biden Administration. Those attacks are now reaching a dangerous crescendo after the 2024 loss in the presidential election.
Here is the column:
This month, 75 years ago, Sen. Joe McCarthy (R-Wisc.) gave his infamous speech denouncing disloyal Americans working at the highest levels of our government. It was the defining moment for what became known as McCarthyism, which attacked citizens as dangerous and disloyal influences in government.
Some of us have criticized the rising “rage rhetoric” for years, including that of President Trump and Democratic leaders, denouncing opponents as traitors and enemies of the state.
In the 2024 election, the traditional red state-blue state firewalls again collapsed, as they had in 2016. The response among Democrats has been to unleash a type of new Red Scare, questioning the loyalty of those who are supporting or working with the Trump administration in carrying out his promised reforms.
Elon Musk is the designated disloyal American for many on the left. That rage has reached virtual hysteria on ABC’s “The View.” This is the same show before the election on which hosts warned that, if Trump were elected, journalists and homosexuals would be rounded up and “disappeared.”
After the election, democracy seemed to stubbornly hang on, so the hosts had to resort to attacking as disloyal anyone joining the government or supporting Trump’s policies.
This week, co-host Joy Behar followed many others in questioning Musk’s loyalty and attacking him over being a naturalized American citizen: “The guy was not born in this country, who was born under apartheid in South Africa. So, [he] has that mentality going on. He was pro-Apartheid, as I understand it.”
Behar was then forced, perhaps by panicked ABC lawyers, to walk back the comment — such retractions having become a regular feature on “The View“. What came out was the type of jumbled confusion that results when you interrupt a lunatic on the metro in mid-rave.
Behar stated: “I’m getting some flack because I said that Musk was pro-apartheid. I don’t really know for sure if he was … He was around at that time, but maybe he was, maybe he wasn’t—he might have been a young guy, too. So, don’t be suing me, okay Elon?”
This anti-immigrant attack on Musk, however, has worked its way into many Democrats’ talking points, even though their party had previously claimed to defend immigrants against racist Republicans seeking to close the Southern border and deport criminal illegal immigrants.
On Capitol Hill, Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio) launched a xenophobic tirade that should have shocked the conscience of the nation. She warned citizens that Musk could not be trusted because he is an immigrant who has been a citizen for only a couple of decades: “Mr. Musk has just been here just 22 years and he’s a citizen of three countries. I always ask myself the question: With the damage he’s doing here when push comes to shove, which country is he loyal to? South Africa, Canada, or the United States? And he’s only been a citizen, I’ll say again, 22 years.”
Former Republican Rep. Liz Cheney was another joining in to attack Musk for being an immigrant. “You may be unfamiliar with that part of our history since you weren’t yet an American citizen,” she wrote on Musk’s social media platform, X.
These attacks are straight out of McCarthy’s playbook. It was McCarthy who insisted that “there are no degrees of loyalty in the United States — a man is either loyal or he’s disloyal…” Of course, McCarthy (and the earlier Red Scare) attacked government employees, writers and others on the left. It is now the left that is employing the same tactics, including censorship, blacklisting and public vilification.
Throughout the 2024 campaign, the Democrats, including President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, painted Republicans as either aspiring or actual fascists. That continued recently with Minnesota Gov. and former Vice Presidential candidate Tim Walz (D), who referred to Republicans as “fascists and Nazis.”
Even journalists and civil libertarians have been reviled using the same terms. After a hearing on censorship two years ago, MSNBC contributor and former Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) attacked journalists and members who had spoken in favor of free speech. She denounced the member witnesses (Sen. Chuck Grassley, Sen. Ron Johnson and former Rep. Gabbard) as “Putin apologists” and Putin-lovers.
Stacey Plaskett, the Democratic delegate representing the Virgin Islands in the U.S. House, even suggested arresting respected journalist Matt Taibbi, who, along with Michael Shellenberger, testified on their investigation into a massive censorship system developed under the Biden administration.
The attack on Musk is particularly disgraceful, given his contributions to his adopted country. Ironically, filmmaker Michael Moore denounced the deportations of criminal illegal immigrants last week by noting that Trump was deporting someone who might cure cancer or be the next Steve Jobs. Well, this is a naturalized citizen who not only could be the next Elon Musk. He is Elon Musk.
As politicians and pundits question Musk’s loyalty, Space X is moving to rescue two astronauts stranded in space. Musk has volunteered his time and skills to achieving a record reduction in the size and waste in government. One can disagree with his priorities or the means he uses to achieve his goals, but he has nobly stepped forward to serve his country despite death threats from the left.
Musk is also facing such attacks in Canada, where thousands have signed petitions to strip him of his citizenship. The left did not seek to revoke the citizenship of figures who have eviscerated free speech and other individual rights in that country. It is Musk who is persona non grata.
This is nothing new for Musk, whom the left has targeted since he announced an intention to buy Twitter and restore free speech protections on that site.
The concern is not for Musk, who has the intestinal fortitude (and financial means) to stand up to a global mob. Moreover, with polls showing overwhelming support for reducing the size of government and the budget, the campaign to obstruct these efforts is unlikely to resonate with voters.
The danger is more acute for the country as disagreements over policy are transformed into attacks over loyalty. It is the most dangerous form of rage rhetoric, an effort not to debate but to demonize those with whom you disagree.
When you have members of Congress standing in front of the Capitol, denouncing naturalized citizens as untrustworthy after a mere 22 years as a citizen, it is a moment that would have made McCarthy blush.
A.F. Branco Cartoon – Walz is demonstrating acute paranoia saying Nazis and Fascist are taking over the U.S.. A communist Saul Alinsky tactic accusing a majority of American voters of being Nazis, or has he completely lost it?
CAUGHT ON TAPE: Walz says country stolen ‘by fascists and Nazis’ at nurses event
By Jenna Gloeb – AlphaNews – Feb 26, 2025
Walz’s statement adds to a recent pattern of deploying Nazi-related accusations against his political opponents Gov. Tim Walz said the country is being stolen “by fascists and Nazis,” according to a recording obtained by Alpha News. Sen. Nate Wesenberg, R-Little Falls, provided the recording to Alpha News and said the remarks were made during the Minnesota Nurses Association’s (MNA) Day on the Hill Tuesday—an event to spotlight healthcare issues during Minnesota’s 2025 legislative session. “I see the pundits on TV [saying] ‘what’s wrong with the Democratic Party?’ What’s wrong is our country is being stole by fascists and Nazis,” Walz appears to say, per the recording…. READ MORE
A.F. Branco Cartoon – Zelensky is biting the hand trying to feed him peace on a silver platter. He was disrespectful to both President Trump and VP Vance in the oval office as though he doesn’t want peace but a continued bloody war.
WH Press Sec Says Cameras in Oval Office Showed The World What President Trump Deals with in Negotiations “Behind The Scenes” – Reveals Zelensky has “Continually Denied” Reality in Private Discussions
“The American people and the world were able to see what the President and his team has seen behind the scenes in negotiating with President Zelensky’s team,” she said, indicating that Zelensky’s behavior and unwillingness to make peace has been an ongoing struggle in the effort to end the war. “They have continually denied the pragmatic reality of where their country stands today.” What was already a done deal and a public signing of an agreement went haywire when Zelensky, who couldn’t even bother to wear a suit, repeatedly rolled his eyes, interrupted the President, refused to agree to a ceasefire, then started attacking the President and Vice President. Ukraine had previously agreed to Trump’s requested mineral rights deal with the US to compensate Americans for the hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer money Joe Biden gave them over the last four years, but the agreement was not officialized Friday. READ MORE
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Trump.
There was another meltdown at the Washington Post after owner Jeff Bezos moved again to moderate the newspaper’s message, which has plummeted in readership. Bezos told the editors that he wanted the newspaper to advocate for individual liberties and the free market. The message sent the left into vapors and led to the resignation of Washington Post opinion editor David Shipley. Outside the paper, another round of calls for boycotts and subscription cancellations followed.
In the announcement below, Bezos declared, “I’m confident that free markets and personal liberties are right for America. I also believe these viewpoints are underserved in the current market of ideas and news opinion. I’m excited for us together to fill that void.”
He added that a newspaper should be a voice for freedom — “is ethical — it minimizes coercion — and practical — it drives creativity, invention, and prosperity.” He noted that:
“There was a time when a newspaper, especially one that was a local monopoly, might have seen it as a service to bring to the reader’s doorstep every morning a broad-based opinion section that sought to cover all views. Today, the internet does that job.”
For those of us in the free speech community, the return of the Post as a champion of free speech and other individual rights would be a welcomed change. Notably, staff did not object when prior owners aligned with their views on editorial priorities. Obviously, we will need to see how this new directive is carried out. I would be equally opposed to the Post purging liberal views in the way it moved against conservative and libertarian views for the last decade. I do not see such a directive in this announcement. Bezos wants his newspaper to be a voice for individual freedom and free market principles. That should not mean that the newspaper will not run any dissenting views on policies and programs. It does mean that the newspaper will continue to be an outlet for voicing extreme views calling for the curtailment of free speech and other individual rights.
What is striking is that many on the left expect Bezos to run the newspaper like a vanity project, losing millions of dollars to bankroll a far-left agenda. This is an announcement that goes to the position of the newspaper, not any intrusion into reporting. It also does not bar a diversity of opinion on the op-ed pages which still have a vast majority of liberal writers.
The thought that the Post would now focus on advocating for individual rights and the free market led Jeffrey Evan Gold, who posts as a legal analyst for CNN and other networks, to declare that it was the “last straw” and post his cancellation.
Jeff Stein, the publisher’s chief economics reporter, denounced Bezos as carrying out a “massive encroachment” that makes it clear “dissenting views will not be published or tolerated there.” For many moderates and conservatives, it was a crushingly ironic objection given the virtual purging of conservative and libertarian voices at the newspaper.
Amanda Katz, who resigned from the Post’s opinion team at the end of 2024, offered a vivid example of the culture that Bezos is trying to change at the Post. Katz said the change was “an absolute abandonment of the principles of accountability of the powerful, justice, democracy, human rights, and accurate information that previously animated the section in favor of a white male billionaire’s self-interested agenda.”
Just as a reminder, Bezos simply stated that the newspaper would advocate for freedom and free markets. However, the most telling condemnation came from Post columnist Philip Bump, who wrote “what the actual f**k.” Not surprisingly, Bump wrote the condemnation on Bluesky, a site that promises a type of safe space for liberals who do not want to be triggered by opposing views.
Bump previously had a meltdown in an interview when confronted about past false claims. After I wrote a column about the litany of such false claims, the Post surprised many of us by issuing a statement that it stood by all of Bump’s reporting, including false columns on the Lafayette Park protests, Hunter Biden’s laptop, and other stories. That was long after other media debunked the claims, but the Post stood by the false reporting.
We have previously discussed the sharp change in culture at the Post, which became an outlet that pushed anti-free speech views and embraced advocacy journalism. The result was that many moderates and conservatives stopped reading the newspaper.
In my book on free speech, I discuss at length how the Post and the mainstream media has joined an alliance with the government and corporations in favor of censorship and blacklisting. I once regularly wrote for the Post and personally witnessed the sharp change in editorial priorities as editors delayed or killed columns with conservative or moderate viewpoints.
Last year, that culture was vividly on display when the newspaper offered no objection or even qualification after its reporter, Cleve Wootson Jr., appeared to call upon the White House to censor the interview of Elon Musk with former President Donald Trump. Under the guise of a question, Wootson told White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre that censoring its leading political opponent is “an America issue.”
During a press briefing, the Washington Post’s Cleve Wootson Jr. flagged the interview and said, “I think that misinformation on Twitter is not just a campaign issue…it’s an America issue.”
There was a time when a reporter calling for censorship of a political opponent would have been a matter for immediate termination in the media. Instead, the newspaper that prides itself on the slogan “Democracy dies in Darkness,” was entirely silent. No correction. No qualification.
The Wootson controversy was consistent with the embrace of advocacy journalism at the Post. We previously discussed the release of the results of interviews with over 75 media leaders by former executive editor for The Washington Post Leonard Downie Jr. and former CBS News President Andrew Heyward. They concluded that objectivity is now considered reactionary and even harmful. Emilio Garcia-Ruiz, editor-in-chief at the San Francisco Chronicle said it plainly: “Objectivity has got to go.”
The former Post editor, Downie, recounted how news leaders:
“believe that pursuing objectivity can lead to false balance or misleading “bothsidesism” in covering stories about race, the treatment of women, LGBTQ+ rights, income inequality, climate change and many other subjects. And, in today’s diversifying newsrooms, they feel it negates many of their own identities, life experiences and cultural contexts, keeping them from pursuing truth in their work.”
The decline of the Post has followed a familiar pattern. The editors and reporters simply wrote off half of their audience and became a publication for largely liberal and Democratic readers. In these difficult economic times with limited revenue sources, it is a lethal decision.
Robert Lewis, a British media executive who joined the Post earlier this year, reportedly got into a “heated exchange” with a staffer. Lewis explained that, while reporters were protesting measures to expand readership, the very survival of the paper was now at stake:
“We are going to turn this thing around, but let’s not sugarcoat it. It needs turning around,” Lewis said. “We are losing large amounts of money. Your audience has halved in recent years. People are not reading your stuff. Right. I can’t sugarcoat it anymore.”
Other staffers could not get past the gender and race of those who would oversee them. One staffer complained, “We now have four White men running three newsrooms.” The Post has been buying out staff to avoid mass layoffs, but reporters are up in arms over the effort to turn the newspaper around.
So, let’s recap: The Washington Post’s owner has been pushing the newspaper to shift back toward the middle and restore greater balance on its pages. He is unwilling to bankroll a far-left echo chamber of advocacy journalism. Washington Post opinion editor David Shipley resigned in protest rather than agree to emphasize individual rights and free markets in editorials that speak for the newspaper.
Shipley previously fought to reverse Bezos’s decision not to endorse presidential candidates in 2024 or later elections. Some of us have long argued that newspapers should end such endorsements as inimical to journalistic neutrality and objectivity. The editors reportedly encouraged Bezos that, if he wanted to end such endorsements, he should wait until after endorsing Harris in this election cycle — a remarkable position devoid of any cognizable or controlling principle.
There was a time when advocating for editorials to champion freedom would not have been controversial. The staff’s hyperventilation only reinforces the need for such an intervention. These same voices supported the Post adopting “Democracy dies in Darkness” to oppose what they viewed as an attack on democracy from Trump or the right. However, advocating for freedom in editorials is simply unacceptable.
Perish the thought that a newspaper would commit itself to advocating for individual rights and the free market. (Warning foul language below)
Perhaps the Post could adopt a new slogan: “Freedom dies in Silence.”
Here is the announcement from Jeff Bezos:
I shared this note with the Washington Post team this morning: I’m writing to let you know about a change coming to our opinion pages.
We are going to be writing every day in support and defense of two pillars: personal liberties and free markets. We’ll cover other topics too of course, but viewpoints opposing those pillars will be left to be published by others.
There was a time when a newspaper, especially one that was a local monopoly, might have seen it as a service to bring to the reader’s doorstep every morning a broad-based opinion section that sought to cover all views. Today, the internet does that job.
I am of America and for America, and proud to be so. Our country did not get here by being typical. And a big part of America’s success has been freedom in the economic realm and everywhere else. Freedom is ethical — it minimizes coercion — and practical — it drives creativity, invention, and prosperity.
I offered David Shipley, whom I greatly admire, the opportunity to lead this new chapter. I suggested to him that if the answer wasn’t “hell yes,” then it had to be “no.” After careful consideration, David decided to step away. This is a significant shift, it won’t be easy, and it will require 100% commitment — I respect his decision.
We’ll be searching for a new Opinion Editor to own this new direction. I’m confident that free markets and personal liberties are right for America. I also believe these viewpoints are underserved in the current market of ideas and news opinion. I’m excited for us together to fill that void.
A.F. Branco Cartoon – Unelected left-wing activist Judges are overstepping their constitutional authority and undermining the executive branch in an effort to sabotage the Trump agenda that voters overwhelmingly elected him to do.
Elon Musk Unveils a Creative Proposal to Rid America of the Corrupt Judges Sabotaging the Trump Administration
Conservatives have been rightfully livid following a string of corrupt rulings by Democrat judges sabotaging Trump’s efforts to downsize and make the federal government more accountable. Now, X CEO and DOGE chairman have a great idea to solve this crisis. As The Gateway Pundit reported, a federal judge halted Elon Musk’s government efficiency team from accessing a critical Treasury Department. US District Judge Paul A. Engelmayer, who Barack Obama appointed, cited a risk of “irreparable harm.” The order temporarily stops access to a sensitive payment system that distributes Americans’ tax returns, Social Security benefits, disability payments, and federal employees’ salaries. READ MORE
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Trump.
President Donald Trump’s plan to offer a “gold card” visa to those willing to shell out $5 million could raise new fraud and national security risks, according to one expert.
“Any immigration benefit draws fraud … people are willing to do anything and say just about anything to come to the U.S.,” Lora Ries, director of the Heritage Foundation’s Border Security and Immigration Center, told Fox News Digital.
The comments come after Trump announced Tuesday a plan that would give those willing to pay $5 million for a “gold card” lawful permanent U.S. residency status and a pathway to citizenship, which the president argued would lead to several economic benefits.
“They’ll be wealthy, and they’ll be successful,” Trump told reporters from the Oval Office on Tuesday. “They’ll be spending a lot of money and paying a lot of taxes and employing a lot of people, and we think it’s going to be extremely successful.”
President Donald Trump holds a Cabinet meeting at the White House on Feb. 26, 2025. (JIM WATSON/AFP via Getty Images)
Trump doubled down on those comments Wednesday while also telling reporters that the program would be a way to pay down some of the national debt.
“Companies can go and buy a gold card, and they can use it as a matter of recruitment,” Trump said. “At the same time, the company is using that money to pay down debt. We’re going to pay down a lot of debt with that.”
But while Ries acknowledged that she understands the goals behind the program, she expressed skepticism that applicants could be vetted well enough to prevent the kind of fraud currently seen in the similar EB-5 visa program, which Trump’s gold card would replace.
“Fraud is rarely detected, let alone enforced … so it’s low risk, high reward to commit immigration benefit fraud,” Ries said, adding that even Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick admitted to the widespread fraud plaguing the EB-5 program.
President Donald Trump speaks as Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick looks on after Trump signed executive orders in the Oval Office on Feb. 25, 2025. (Alex Wong/Getty Images)
“So, the question is: How is this going to be different,” Ries said. “It raised the price from a million to 5 million, but how are we going to prevent the fraud? Are you just inviting wealthier fraudsters and corrupt people to exploit this?”
Ries also raised concerns about the potential national security implications of the program, arguing that many of the applications are likely to originate from countries that are not exactly friendly to the United States.
“Who can afford this? What countries have many people who can afford this,” Ries said. “Russia, China … you’re going to get Gulf countries, but China is not exactly our ally – some Russians, the same boat.”
Trump’s gold card plan would extend a path to citizenship for qualified foreign nationals who pay the $5 million fee. (Smith Collection/Gado/Getty Images)
Ries said the key will be the system used to vet potential applicants, details of which have yet to be revealed by the Trump administration.
“It’s going to need thorough vetting for national security concerns, espionage and corruption,” Ries said. “That’s going to be very, very important.”
The White House did not immediately respond to a Fox News Digital request for comment.
Michael Lee is a writer for Fox News. Prior to joining Fox News, Michael worked for the Washington Examiner, Bongino.com, and Unbiased America. He has covered politics for more than eight years.
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
NEWSMAX
News, Opinion, Interviews, Research and discussion
Opinion
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
You Version
Bible Translations, Devotional Tools and Plans, BLOG, free mobile application; notes and more
Political
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
NEWSMAX
News, Opinion, Interviews, Research and discussion
Spiritual
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
Bible Gateway
The Bible Gateway is a tool for reading and researching scripture online — all in the language or translation of your choice! It provides advanced searching capabilities, which allow readers to find and compare particular passages in scripture based on
What Did You Say? 
You must be logged in to post a comment.