Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has sent a message loud and clear to the Pentagon’s top brass, letting them know it’s time to start phasing out service members who identify as transgender. In a video shared on X with the caption “TRANS is out at the DOD,” Hegseth emphasized, “This is what the American people voted for.”
Hegseth’s memo gives active-duty transgender-identifying service members until June 6 to voluntarily separate from the military. Reservists have until July 7 to do the same. Those choosing to leave can receive voluntary separation pay.
After this window closes, any service members diagnosed with or having a history of gender dysphoria will be discharged. The Pentagon had reported back in February that there were 4,240 troops diagnosed with gender dysphoria, though the actual number might be higher. Sean Parnell, the Pentagon’s chief spokesman, mentioned that approximately 1,000 service members have identified themselves as having gender dysphoria. These individuals will begin the separation process voluntarily.
Hegseth’s memo referenced President Donald Trump’s Executive Order 14183, which prioritizes military excellence and readiness. The memo stated that expressing a gender identity different from one’s biological sex fails to meet the necessary standards for military service.
Trump’s policy emphasizes that the military must maintain high standards for readiness, cohesion, and integrity. The accommodations and health issues faced by gender-dysphoric individuals are seen as incompatible with these standards.
Hegseth’s memo followed the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to temporarily stay a lower court’s injunction against Trump’s transgender military ban. This stay is pending the government’s appeal before the Ninth Circuit Court.
The three liberal justices on the Supreme Court expressed that they would have denied the Trump administration’s request for a stay in U.S. v. Shilling. Activist groups like Lambda Legal and the Human Rights Campaign Foundation have criticized the stay, calling it a setback for transgender service members.
These groups argue that the policy has more to do with prejudice than military readiness. The criticism hasn’t swayed the administration, which views the policy as a step towards strengthening military standards.
In response to the Supreme Court’s decision, Hegseth gave a speech declaring, “We are leaving wokeness and weakness behind.” He emphasized a shift away from focusing on pronouns and other progressive issues.
The Pentagon’s official account on X echoed Hegseth’s sentiments, stating, “No more pronouns. No more drag shows. No more dudes in dresses. NO MORE TRANS AT THE DOD.”
Beyond just readiness, these policy changes might also lead to financial savings. The military has reportedly spent $52 million on medical expenses related to transgender service members since 2015.
These expenses include treatments such as hormone therapy and surgeries. The New York Times highlighted these costs as part of the ongoing debate over the policy.
The administration’s stance remains clear: the focus is on military effectiveness and preparedness. The policy aims to streamline and strengthen the military by adhering to traditional standards. While the debate continues, the administration is unwavering in its direction. The military is expected to align with these newly reinforced standards of excellence and integrity.
As the separation process begins, the military is set to stay committed to its core values. This move is seen as a return to focusing on the essentials for a strong defense force.
The policy has sparked discussions across various platforms, with strong opinions on both sides. However, the administration maintains its course towards reinforcing military readiness.
The changes are poised to impact many service members, prompting a reevaluation of military policies. As the situation develops, the focus remains on maintaining a robust and prepared military force.
This decision marks a significant moment in the administration’s efforts to prioritize military capability. The focus is shifting back to traditional values and standards within the armed forces.
Brittany Mays is a dedicated mother and passionate conservative news and opinion writer. With a sharp eye for current events and a commitment to traditional values, Brittany delivers thoughtful commentary on the issues shaping today’s world. Balancing her role as a parent with her love for writing, she strives to inspire others with her insights on faith, family, and freedom.
The numbers are in, and April saw an incredible boost in income from customs duties, largely thanks to tariffs. The revenue from President Trump’s trade policies has started to show its impact, hitting a record $16.3 billion. As someone might famously quip, that’s a big deal for our economy.
Customs duties in April soared to new heights, showing an 86% increase from March, according to the Treasury Department. This is more than double what was collected a year ago, highlighting the effectiveness of Trump’s trade strategies. These figures reflect the 10% tariffs Trump imposed on U.S. imports starting April 2, on top of other targeted duties.
Even before the raised tariffs on countries like China, the revenue was climbing, showing promise for future economic strength. Though it won’t entirely solve the U.S. deficit and debt issues, it’s making a significant dent. It’s a more notable impact than what we’ve seen under the Biden administration, which hasn’t managed to achieve the same results.
Despite running a substantial budget deficit, the tariff revenue helped reduce some of the imbalance for April, a month that typically sees a surplus due to tax filings. The surplus reached $258.4 billion, marking a 23% increase from the previous year. This helped cut the fiscal year-to-date total to $1.05 trillion, still higher than last year but showing progress.
On an annual scale, receipts rose by 10% in April from 2024, while outlays decreased by 4%. Year-to-date figures indicate a 5% increase in receipts, while expenditures have risen by 9%. It’s not a perfect scenario, but it’s a step in the right direction.
The future impact of various trade deals remains to be seen, but with agreements made with the UK and China, there’s optimism. These deals might reduce tariff income yet trade itself could compensate for that. It’s a balancing act, but the potential for a stronger economy is there.
Government spending continues to be a pressing issue, with a need for significant cuts to address the crisis. The Department of Government Efficiency has made some strides, but drastic changes are necessary. Growing the economy and restoring the manufacturing base is a more viable solution than inflating or repudiating debt.
President Trump’s administration is focused on revitalizing the U.S. as an industrial leader, which is key to handling the debt issue. Becoming a nation that produces goods again is critical for long-term economic health. This strategy aligns with the goals of past conservative leaders who prioritized growth and industrial strength.
The Monthly Treasury Report offers a detailed view of the economic landscape, including tariff income, and provides intriguing financial insights. It’s worth examining to understand the broader picture of the U.S. economy under Trump’s leadership.
Supporters of Trump’s economic policies can help spread the truth about his administration’s successes. By joining RedState’s VIP, individuals can stay informed and contribute to promoting a Golden Era for America. Use promo code FIGHT for a significant discount on membership.
While challenges remain, the progress made under Trump’s trade policies is undeniable. The record-breaking tariff income is a testament to the administration’s commitment to strengthening the economy. As more trade deals come into play, there’s hope for continued improvement.
The emphasis on fair trade and production is a strategy that resonates with conservative values. By focusing on these areas, the Trump administration is working to bring about positive change. Restoring America as a manufacturing powerhouse is a goal that benefits all.
In the face of ongoing challenges, the progress made so far serves as a beacon of hope. Economic growth through strategic trade deals and tariffs is a path that could lead to prosperity. The focus remains on building a robust, self-reliant economy.
The Trump administration’s efforts are a reminder of the potential for economic revival through strong leadership and sound policies. By harnessing the power of trade and manufacturing, there’s a vision for a brighter economic future. This approach is a nod to the principles of conservative icons like Reagan and Goldwater.
As the nation moves forward, the commitment to economic strength and independence remains a priority. The journey is far from over, but the groundwork has been laid for a promising future. With continued focus and determination, the potential for success is within reach.
In a stunning interview that’s lighting up conservative media, tech titan Elon Musk sat down with Lara Trump on her hit Fox News program My View and pulled the curtain back on what could be one of the most explosive government fraud scandals in modern U.S. history. Musk revealed that approximately 100,000 federal employees have allegedly been illegally collecting unemployment benefits while still on the federal payroll—a massive violation that took place right under the nose of the Biden administration.
The bombshell came during a frank discussion about government waste and inefficiency; a topic President Donald Trump has long campaigned against. Musk, who has become increasingly vocal about his concerns with federal overreach and corruption under Democrat leadership, didn’t mince words.
“We’ve actually found there’s a lot of people who are federal government employees,” Musk told Lara Trump. “These folks are still working—getting paid by the taxpayers—and drawing unemployment. That’s fraud. It’s criminal.”
The revelations come from an internal watchdog group linked to the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a nonpartisan group that has become more prominent as Republicans call for stricter accountability and oversight in federal agencies. Musk noted that the team uncovered shocking evidence of widespread abuse of unemployment insurance systems—evidence pointing directly to massive failures in Biden-era oversight mechanisms.
When pressed by Lara Trump for clarification, Musk confirmed the scale of the problem: “While they’re federal employees? Yes. Wow. And this appears to be at least 100,000 people.”
That number is staggering—and if even partially accurate, it means American taxpayers have been robbed of hundreds of millions, possibly billions, of dollars by their own federal workforce. And yet, no federal agency has come forward to admit fault or announce investigations. The Department of Labor has stayed silent. The Biden administration has stayed silent. And the left-wing media? Predictably, they’ve buried the story.
This scandal underscores exactly what President Trump has warned about for years: an entrenched, bloated bureaucracy riddled with inefficiency, corruption, and total lack of accountability. It’s yet another reason why Americans put Trump back in office in 2024—to finish what he started and drain the swamp once and for all.
Conservative lawmakers on Capitol Hill are already demanding answers. House Oversight Committee members are reportedly reviewing the DOGE report and considering subpoenas if the Department of Labor and other relevant agencies continue to stonewall.
Senator Josh Hawley and Representative Jim Jordan have called for a full federal audit of the unemployment insurance system, particularly the funds dispersed during the COVID-era stimulus expansion under Biden, which was rife with unchecked claims and botched oversight.
“We knew there was fraud in the unemployment system,” said Rep. Jordan. “But this kind of institutional rot—100,000 federal employees committing fraud—this is an indictment of the entire administrative state under Biden.”
Let’s be clear: knowingly collecting unemployment while still employed is criminal insurance fraud. Depending on the state and the amount involved, these violations can be prosecuted as misdemeanors or felonies. In some states, convicted individuals face prison time and fines exceeding $50,000.
And yet, despite this being black-and-white fraud, no action has been taken. No charges filed. No agencies named. No heads rolling. Why? Because this appears to be yet another example of the unaccountable deep state shielding itself—a recurring theme under Biden’s weak leadership.
The federal unemployment insurance system is supposed to be a carefully monitored joint effort between state and federal agencies. But under the Biden administration, that system appears to have become a piggy bank for insiders, with zero transparency and minimal enforcement.
Musk didn’t reveal which agencies were implicated or exactly how long the fraud has been ongoing. But the scale of the allegation—and the fact that such a massive breach of public trust has gone unnoticed or ignored—points to a far deeper crisis within the federal bureaucracy.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, unemployment benefits were expanded dramatically under Biden, including through the disastrous American Rescue Plan. As fraud exploded, federal oversight collapsed. Billions of taxpayer dollars vanished into a black hole of bogus claims, phantom businesses, and identity theft rings. And now, it appears even government employees may have gotten in on the grift.
Lara Trump, a rising star in conservative media and a sharp political voice in her own right, didn’t let the moment pass. Her interview with Musk was direct, revealing, and offered the kind of unfiltered truth Americans no longer get from the legacy media. She echoed what millions of hardworking Americans are feeling: disgust, frustration, and a renewed sense of urgency to hold the government accountable.
This scandal isn’t just about fraud—it’s about trust. It’s about whether the federal government exists to serve the people or enrich itself. Under President Trump, waste, fraud, and abuse were investigated and prosecuted. He signed executive orders to root out inefficiency and cut red tape. He empowered inspectors general, slashed bloated budgets, and made bureaucrats actually do their jobs.
Now, in his second term, Trump and his America First team are poised to go even further. From firing corrupt bureaucrats to streamlining the federal workforce, Trump’s plan is to clean house—permanently.
If the Biden-era bureaucracy allowed 100,000 federal employees to collect unemployment fraudulently while working, then this is just the tip of the iceberg. It’s time for a full reckoning.
RedState will continue to follow this developing story closely and keep readers updated as more facts emerge. But one thing is clear: this is not a glitch—it’s systemic abuse, and only bold leadership like President Trump’s can restore integrity to our government.
President Trump was in an understandably foul mood early Saturday morning as the radical-left judges continued to sabotage his immigration agenda. That’s because he knows America’s future is bleak if this continues and the Supreme Court continues to do nothing. As The Gateway Pundit reported, a federal judge on Thursday issued a permanent injunction and barred the Trump Administration from using the Alien Enemies Act (AEA) to remove Venezuelan gang members and transport them to El Salvador. US District Judge Fernando Rodriguez, a Trump appointee, called the President’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act “unlawful.” According to Judge Rodriguez, the AEA only applies when the US is at war and under an armed attack… READ MORE
A.F. Branco Cartoon – Senator Thom Tillis has voted for Democrats Blinken, Garland, and Yellen, but can’t bring himself to vote for Trump’s pick for U.S. Attorney, Ed Martin. Folks are smelling a RINO doing his part to sabotage the MAGA movement.
Senator Thom Tillis gloated in response to President Trump’s comment on his opposition to Ed Martin. During a swearing-in ceremony at the White House on Wednesday, a reporter asked President Trump about Senator Tillis’ decision to come out against Ed Martin. On Tuesday Senator Tillis, who voted to confirm Biden’s radical pick for Attorney General Merrick Garland, told reporters that he opposes the nomination of Ed Martin for DC US Attorney. Tillis made a shocking admission to reporters. He actually said he would support Ed Martin for any district except where January 6 happened… READ MORE
Jim Schultz: AG Ellison’s war on common sense an attack on Minnesota’s daughters
By Jim Schultz – AlphaNews.org – May 8, 2025
Ellison sued the federal government to ensure that biological males can compete against girls in school sports. This is not where the public stands. If you want to understand just how disconnected Minnesota’s leadership is from ordinary citizens (and even from basic reality), look no further than Attorney General Keith Ellison. On April 22, Ellison announced he is suing the federal government, not to fight violent crime or recover the $250 million stolen from taxpayers in the Feeding Our Future scandal, but to ensure that biological males can compete against girls in school sports. That’s right. With Minnesota facing the threat of crime, rampant fraud in public programs, and skyrocketing costs burdening every family, Ellison has made it a priority to ensure boys can take spots on girls’ teams. It’s absurd… READ MORE
A.F. Branco Cartoon – Trump is bringing in the wins every day, with trade deals, ending wars, and boosting the economy, while the Democrats keep doubling down on stupid
RFK Jr. Says Trump Just Did What No Democrat Ever Had the Guts to Do (VIDEO)
By Vigilant Fox – The Gateway Pundit – May 12, 2025
President Trump just did what every other politician only talked about—he took a sledgehammer to Big Pharma. With the stroke of a pen, he signed an executive order that could slash drug prices by as much as 90%. And then RFK Jr. stepped up and revealed why no one else—not even Bernie Sanders—ever followed through. It was a moment you’ll remember for decades. Standing before reporters and his healthcare team, President Trump announced the most aggressive move on drug pricing America has ever seen. The plan? To cut prescription drug costs by up to 90%—a direct strike against the industry that’s drained American families dry for years… 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.
•Planned Parenthood Kills a Record 402,000 Babies in Abortions •House Reconciliation Bill Unveiled, Will Defund Planned Parenthood •Planned Parenthood Now Gets $800 Million a Year in Tax Dollars •Planned Parenthood Kills 57 Babies for Every Mom It Helps With Prenatal Care •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
In a shocking and tragic sequence of events, a man whose son was fatally shot by Cincinnati police the day before deliberately struck and killed a Hamilton County sheriff’s deputy with his car, authorities confirmed. The incident, which unfolded near the University of Cincinnati during graduation festivities, has sparked outrage and condemnation from officials, with Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine stating he was “sickened by what appears to be an intentional act of violence.”
Rodney Hinton Jr., 38, was charged with aggravated murder after allegedly driving directly into Deputy [Name Not Released], who was directing traffic at the time. The deputy, a retired officer working an off-duty assignment, was rushed to UC Medical Center in critical condition but succumbed to his injuries shortly after. Hamilton County Sheriff Charmaine McGuffey described the fallen deputy as “so well-liked and so well-known,” adding, “What a tremendous loss we have all suffered.”
A Calculated Act of Retribution?
The chilling incident comes just one day after Hinton’s 18-year-old son, Ryan Hinton, was shot and killed by Cincinnati police during a pursuit following a stolen vehicle report. Police claim the teen pointed a gun at officers, prompting the fatal shooting. Bodycam footage released Friday shows an officer shouting, “He’s got a gun, he’s got a gun!”before multiple shots ring out as Ryan flees behind an apartment complex. However, Police Chief Teresa Theetge admitted there was “no indication that he fired at police before he was shot.”
While the liberal media has been quick to frame this tragedy as another example of systemic police brutality, they conveniently ignore the fact that Ryan Hinton was allegedly armed and evading arrest. Instead of focusing on the officer’s split-second decision in a life-or-death situation, left-wing outlets have subtly justified Rodney Hinton’s alleged retaliatory killing of an innocent deputy—a blatant double standard that undermines law enforcement.
Hamilton County Prosecutor Connie Pillich vowed, “If the facts show this act was intentional, as the charge suggests, I will throw the full force of the law at the perpetrator.” Yet, one can’t help but wonder if the same fervor would exist if the roles were reversed and a cop had targeted a civilian in retribution.
Selective Outrage and Media Bias
The mainstream media’s coverage of this case reeks of hypocrisy. While they amplify narratives of police misconduct, they downplay or outright ignore violent acts against officers. Where is the outrage for a deputy murdered in cold blood? Where are the protests for the law enforcement family now grieving? The silence is deafening.
Meanwhile, Rodney Hinton’s defense is already being subtly softened. WLWT-TV reported that his attorney emphasized he “has no prior felonies and understands it’s a serious charge.” But does a clean record excuse an alleged premeditated murder? The liberal playbook seems to think so—unless, of course, the perpetrator wears a badge.
The Supreme Court has recently allowed the Trump administration’s ban on transgender individuals serving in the military to go forward. This decision came despite opposition from Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson, who stood firmly against the administration’s request. The court’s order was unsigned, yet it marks a significant win for those advocating for traditional military standards.
Many years after the Biden administration had encouraged diversity and inclusion initiatives, the Supreme Court’s decision pauses a ruling by U.S. District Judge Benjamin Settle. Judge Settle, based in Seattle, had previously found Trump’s transgender military ban to be unconstitutional, calling it “unsupported, dramatic and facially unfair.” This ruling has been viewed as a victory for those who prioritize military readiness and cohesion over social experiments.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco had declined to halt Judge Settle’s decision, paving the way for increased liberal protests. Critics of the ban argue that it is another example of discrimination against the LGBTQ community. However, supporters believe it is essential for maintaining the strength and unity of the armed forces.
President Trump, upon returning to office, issued a directive excluding individuals with gender dysphoria from military service. The Biden administration, in contrast, had opened the doors to transgender individuals, some of whom sought expensive gender reassignment surgeries funded by taxpayers. Trump’s administration put an end to this practice, asserting that military resources should be focused on defense rather than personal medical procedures.
There is an ongoing debate about the impact of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives on military effectiveness. Some argue that individuals who prioritize personal identity over collective mission might not uphold the values required of service members. Critics fear that such policies could lead to a military less prepared to defend the nation in times of crisis.
The exact number of transgender service members remains uncertain, with estimates ranging from 4,240 to 14,000 across all military branches. The discrepancy in numbers highlights the challenges in assessing the impact of the ban on military personnel. Regardless, the Trump administration remains committed to a military that emphasizes traditional values and readiness.
Trump’s appointment of Pete Hegseth as Secretary of Defense has been a turning point for recruitment efforts. Under his leadership, the military has seen an increase in enlistment numbers, reversing the decline experienced during the Biden years. Hegseth’s policies align with a vision of a strong, focused military force.
The Supreme Court’s decision is part of a series of victories for the Trump administration. The court’s rulings have consistently reinforced the administration’s commitment to conservative policies. This latest decision represents a significant step in reshaping military policy to align with these values.
Despite criticism from left-leaning media outlets, the ban is seen by supporters as a necessary measure. They argue that it upholds the integrity and effectiveness of the armed forces. Meanwhile, detractors claim it targets individuals who do not identify with their birth-assigned gender, sparking heated debates.
The Trump administration’s stance on military policy reflects a broader conservative agenda. This approach emphasizes traditional values, national security, and fiscal responsibility. Under this framework, military policies are designed to prioritize defense over social issues.
As the administration moves forward, the impact of these decisions on the military remains a topic of discussion. Proponents believe these steps strengthen the armed forces, ensuring they are well-prepared for any challenges. Critics, however, continue to voice concerns about the exclusion of transgender individuals.
The Supreme Court’s ruling has ignited discussions across the nation. Supporters of the ban argue that it aligns with the values of selflessness and humility required of service members. Opponents, on the other hand, view it as a setback for LGBTQ rights.
While the decision is controversial, it underscores the administration’s focus on military priorities. This approach resonates with those who believe in a disciplined, unified military force. The debate over transgender service members continues to be a focal point in discussions about military policy.
The Trump administration’s policies reflect a broader commitment to conservative principles. This includes a focus on national security and a rejection of policies perceived as social experiments. The administration’s stance is clear: the military’s mission should not be compromised by external pressures.
As the nation watches these developments unfold, the future of military policy remains in the spotlight. Supporters of the ban emphasize the importance of maintaining a strong, cohesive military. Critics continue to challenge the decision, advocating for inclusivity and diversity within the armed forces.
The Supreme Court’s decision has sparked reactions from various corners of the political spectrum. While some celebrate it as a victory for military readiness, others decry it as an attack on personal freedom. The conversation around transgender individuals in the military is far from over, with passionate arguments on both sides.
A.F. Branco Cartoon – President Trump signs executive order ending taxpayer money to left-wing biased NPR and PBS. Why should we pay for media that is, for the most part, fake news, with a 90% plus negative reporting on conservatives and President Trump?
In a stunning new development, President Trump has signed a sweeping executive order defunding National Public Radio (NPR) and Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), the Democrats’ taxpayer-funded leftist propaganda machines. As The Gateway Pundit reported, the president previously called on Congress to defund the absurdly dishonest “news” organizations following a House Oversight DOGE subcommittee hearing, which exposed the stations’ already well-known bias and radical content. This includes documentaries about transvestites and transitioning, a documentary about “Racist Trees,” and so-called educational programming for young children, including toddlers, that featured a cross-dressing freak… READ & SEE 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.
•FBI Lied to Americans About Shooting of Pro-Life Rep. Steve Scalise •Media Wins Pulitzer Lying About How Abortion Killed ThisWoman •Trump Nominates His First Slate of Conservative Judges •Pro-Life Group Calls on Trump to Limit Abortion PilL •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
EXCLUSIVE: Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) made a high-profile arrest on Monday in Maryland.
DHS told Fox News Digital that Joel Armando Mejia-Benitez, 38, is a “validated MS-13 gang member” from El Salvador who had no visas “approved or pending” at the moment of his arrest.
“ICE Baltimore arrested Joel Armando Mejia-Benitez an MS-13 gang member with an Interpol Red Notice. He first entered the country illegally in 2005 and was deported. He then reentered our country at an unknown date before he was arrested by HSI Baltimore in 2014. He was issued a notice to appear and released back into Silver Spring, MD,” DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin told Fox News Digital in an exclusive statement.
An Interpol Red Notice is put out by the international legal group asking to “locate and provisionally arrest” somebody. It’s not considered an “international arrest warrant,” but it’s meant to make sure a person is taken into custody for further legal action, according to Interpol’s website. The Red Notice database has over 6,500 individuals.
“This criminal illegal gang member and suspected terrorist should have never been released into our country. Thanks to President Trump and Secretary Noem, he is off our streets and will soon be out of our country,” McLaughlin continued.
The latest arrest comes as ICE touts over 65,000 illegal alien removals and over 66,000 arrests since Trump took office in January, including thousands with existing criminal convictions on top of being in the United States illegally.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, left, and White House border czar Tom Homan speak with reporters at the White House, Wednesday, Jan. 29, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
“The brave men and women of ICE protect our families, friends and neighbors by removing public safety and national security threats from our communities,” ICE acting Director Todd M. Lyons said in a statement. “During President Trump’s first 100 days, ICE alone has arrested over 65,000 illegal aliens — including 2,288 gang members from Tren de Aragua, MS-13, 18th Street and other gangs. Additionally, 1,329 were accused or convicted of sex offenses, and 498 were accused or convicted of murder.”
Many alleged gang members have been to CECOT in El Salvador, which has garnered praise, but it’s also ignited a major debate about who qualifies for due process.
This image shows the border wall separating Mexico from the U.S. in San Diego Sector. (Fox News)
The Trump administration has made the argument that members of designated foreign terrorist organization, which includes MS-13 and Tren de Aragua, do not go through the same legal processes, whereas many others, including Democrats, have argued to the contrary.
Meanwhile, encounters at the border have taken a nosedive in recent months.
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
Really? A 0.1% slip qualifies as “sinking”? If that’s the case, my diet attempts “collapse” every time I glance at a donut.
This kind of hyperbolic doom-spinning is exactly how the media treats anything related to Donald Trump—relentless negativity, even when the facts don’t cooperate. And just like clockwork, Democrats keep doubling down on their favorite pastime: lying.
“Nobody Is Above the Law”… Except Democrats, Apparently
The Left’s sanctimonious chant of “Nobody is above the law!”has aged like milk left in a hot car. One judge has fallen for her theatrics (for now). But by “Trump Summer”, the legal tide will turn—and the Left’s tears will flow like a flash flood of the Amazon River.
I keep reflecting on the arrest of that so-called “judge” in Wisconsin. The shot over the bow that Trump offered lit the Leftist world on fire. And if you think the LA fire was big, wait until you get a load of this one.
The American people are done watching Democrats skate on blatant crimes while weaponizing the justice system against their opponents. There’s a higher law at play here—call it divine justice, karma, or just common sense. Democrats can’t lawyer their way out of reality this time.
Don’t believe me? Ask 60 Minutes, which is reportedly restructuring to pay Trump a chunk of the $20 billion he’s suing them for. When even legacy media outlets start sweating, you know the jig is up.
I’ve already started compiling my list of potential perps, and perhaps we will start the betting line soon. Because it’s only a matter of time before Team Trump starts laying down indictments.
The Left’s Playbook: Eternal War, Zero Peace
Don’t rest on your laurels—this battle isn’t ending anytime soon. The Left doesn’t want peace for America citizens. After all there is too much money in chaos. So expecting them to quit lying is like asking a cat to stop licking it’s naughty bits. It won’t because it’s in the cat’s nature, as evil is in Democrats’ nature.
But here’s my advice: Enjoy the ride. That’s why you’re here, right? I’m not here to solve all the world’s problems (though I could, if given a cape and a caffeine IV). I’m here to help you survive Leftism with your sanity—and sense of humor—intact. I do that by validating you existing sanity, and letting you know that you are on the side of righteousness, so shout your opinions from the mountaintop.
Next, when you finally corner a Leftist with facts, and their face does that “I just realized my entire worldview is built on quicksand” twitch, savor it. That look of cognitive dissonance is natural habitat for them. Try to snap a picture of it, so you can laugh uncontrollably, when life gets you down.
The Silent Civil War (Where Only One Side Fights Dirty)
We’ve been in a cold civil war for decades—no bullets, just endless gaslighting by Leftists. Conservatives kept hoping sanity would return on its own. Sadly, it won’t.
The Left has turned lies into truth, and America into a banana republic run by jackals with journalism degrees and hyper-inflated egos.
Trump’s presidency resembled the Matrix, as he walked through a hailstorm of bullets unscathed—for us. How many politicians (or CEOs) could’ve survived that onslaught? His family, his allies, even Elon Musk (more on him in a sec) paid a price just for being near him.
Elon Musk: The Left’s Latest Victim (Because He Dared to Work With Trump)
Speaking of casualties, let’s talk about Elon. The man lost billions simply because he had the audacity to… checks notes… work with Trump. If he’d done the same for Obama, the Left would’ve built him a golden statue and bought an extra Tesla, just for the parts.
Instead? Media hit jobs. Activist tantrums. The full “How dare you not hate the right people!” treatment. But the tide is turning. Democrats miscalculated—they assumed their lies would hold forever.
Truth Always Wins (Eventually)
Democrats bet everything on deception. But history has a way of humbling frauds. So grab your popcorn, sharpen your arguments, and get ready—because the Left’s house of cards is collapsing.
A.F. Branco Cartoon – Many in Texas have significant concerns over Sharia Law enveloping their state. A planned Islamic-compliant only mega community (Epic City) is being planned in Texas near Dallas that is Sharia Law compliant. The only laws all Americans should follow are the Constitution and U.S. Law.
BRANCO TOON STORE
By Mike LaChance – The Gateway Pundit – April 8, 2025
Conservative talk radio legend Mark Levin recently discussed the Islamic, Sharia Law compliant city being planned near Dallas in Texas and cited this report from the Gateway Pundit. In the report, a retired police lieutenant describes his findings after looking into the matter and raises some major concerns. Texas Governor Greg Abbott has also spoken out about this and is investigating. The entire concept of this planned community is un-American. We do not need or want countries to be formed within our country. READ MORE
A.F. Branco Cartoon – Walz claimed he was Kamala’s code talker for white rural males, watching Football and fixing their trucks in order to put them at ease so they’d vote for the ticket.
Walz said that he was the “permission structure” for white males in rural areas to vote for the Democratic ticket. (Daily Caller News Foundation) — Democrat Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz said Monday that former Vice President Kamala Harris picked him as her running mate to “code talk to white guys.” Walz said during a Harvard Kennedy School forum that he was the “permission structure” for white males in rural areas to vote for the Democratic ticket. He admitted that his role on the campaign failed to procure the necessary male votes, who cast their ballots for President Donald Trump in record numbers… READ MORE
A.F. Branco Cartoon – Democrats are only interested in saving that one life if it fits their Marxist anti-gun agenda, but not when it comes to deporting illegal alien criminals.
MUST SEE: Stephen Miller GOES OFF in Explosive Five-Minute-Long Rebuke of the Fake News Media for Shilling for Terrorists and Failing Death and Destruction Caused by Biden’s Illegals (VIDEO)
Miller joined Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt in the briefing room this morning to discuss the Trump administration’s return to common sense in the first 100 days. One reporter foolishly asked about rumors that the Trump Administration is in talks with El Salvador to inquire about returning deported MS-13 terrorist Kilmar Garcia Abrego, and Miller let it rip. As The Gateway Pundit reported, a reporter asked Secretary of State Marco Rubio a similar question during a cabinet meeting on Wednesday. Rubio leveled her with his response, saying, “I would never tell you that, and you know who else I would never tell? A judge.” 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 Senate Passes Bill Stopping Abortion Pills • Trump Must Stop Abortion Pills • Trump Attorney: We Will Prosecute Leftists Who Attacked Pregnancy Centers •Texas County Passes Law Banning Abortions •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
Comments or questions? Email news@lifenews.com. Copyright 2003-2025 LifeNews.com For info on advertising or reprinting news, emailus.
LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report Friday, May 2, 2025
Top Stories
•House Republican Bill Would Defund Planned Parenthood • Florida Heartbeat Law Saves 12,000 Babies From Abortions • President Trump Signs Executive Order Defunding NPR and PBS •Trump’s First Judicial Nominee of 2nd Term Defended Abortion Ban •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
Comments or questions? Email news@lifenews.com. Copyright 2003-2025 LifeNews.com For info on advertising or reprinting news, emailus.
LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report Monday, May 5, 2025
Top Stories
•Man Convicted of Murdering Girlfriend for Refusing Abortion • Washington State Cuts $8.5 Million From Abortion Program • Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin Vetoes Two Pro-Abortion Bills •Thousands of Pro-Life People in Ireland March Against Abortion •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
For years, the mainstream media has been criticized for open political bias, including repeating false narratives and claims. There is little evidence that that will change despite falling revenues and audiences. That was evident this week as leading journalists continued to raise a dubious claim about the Trump Administration deporting children, including cancer patients.
The media has been promulgating a false claim that children as young as four are being deported. The Administration immediately stated that the decision rested with the mothers on whether they would take the children or leave them in the United States with family.
Many of the same figures accused of promulgating false stories quickly picked up the spin from the Washington Post.
On NBC’s Meet the Press, Kristen Welker pursued the narrative with Secretary of State Marco Rubio:
KRISTEN WELKER: Let’s talk now about some new reporting that came in overnight. I want just to go through it with you and for our audience. Three U.S. citizen children have been deported with their mothers. Now this is according to The Washington Post. The family’s lawyer says one of them is a 4-year-old with Stage 4 cancer, deported without medication or ability to contact doctors. The family’s lawyers are also saying their clients were denied communication with family and legal representatives before being deported, and it’s raising concerns about the issue of due process. That it’s being violated. So let me ask you, is everyone on U.S. soil, citizens and non-citizens, entitled to due process?
MARCO RUBIO: Yes, of course. But let me tell you, it looks- in immigration standing, the laws are very specific. If you are in the country unlawfully, you have no right to be here and you must be removed. That’s what the law says. Somehow over the last 20 years, we’ve completely lost this notion that somehow- or completely adopted this idea that yes, we have immigration laws but once you come into our country illegally it triggers all kinds of rights that can keep you here indefinitely. That’s why we were being flooded at the border, and we’ve ended that. And that’s why you don’t- you see a historically low number of people not just trying to cross our border, trying to cross the border into Panama, all the way down in the Darien Gap. I mean- i it’s been a huge help for those countries as well. On the headline- that’s a misleading headline. Okay? Three U.S. Citizens, ages 4, 7 and 2 were not deported. Their mothers who were illegally in this country were deported. The children went with their mothers. Those children are U.S. citizens- they can come back into the United States- there’s- their father or someone here who wants to assume them. But ultimately who was deported was the mother- their mothers who were here illegally. The children just went with their mothers. But it wasn’t like- you guys make it sound like ICE agents kicked down the door and grabbed the 2-year-old and threw them on an airplane. That’s misleading. That’s just not true.
That would ordinarily leave a journalist looking at their shoes in embarrassment, but Welker decided to double down and add the claim that children are being denied “due process”:
WELKER: Just to be clear, because I do want to get to the overhaul at the State Department. Is it the U.S. policy to deport children, even U.S. citizens, with their families- and I hear what you’re saying- without due process? Just to be very clear there.
RUBIO: Well- no, no, no. No, no. Again, if someone is in this country unlawfully, illegally, that person gets deported. If that person is with a 2-year-old child or has a 2-year-old child and says “I want to take my child with you- with me,” well then you have two choices. You can say yes, of course, you can take your child whether they’re a citizen or not because it’s your child or you can say yes, you can go, but your child must stay behind. And then your headlines would read, “U.S. holding hostage 2-year-old, 4-year-old, 7-year-old, while mother deported.”
There is a great deal of litigation working through the courts on the level of due process required for deportations. The public overwhelmingly supports the deportation of unlawful immigrants and elected Trump based on his pledge to carry out such deportations. Unlawful immigrants often spend years in this country despite orders of deportation or removal. The level of review depends on their status. If they have previously entered unlawfully, they are subject to expedited removal.
The critical point, however, is that the children were the ones being deported. If they were born in this country, they are still treated as U.S. citizens (though the Administration is challenging birthright citizenship in the courts). Having a child in the United States does not make parents immune from removal or afford them special legal status over other deportees.
Over at CBS, Margaret Brennan (who was criticized for her “fact checks” in the presidential debate) also jumped on the narrative in interviewing Border Czar Tom Homan on Face the Nation:
MARGARET BRENNAN: On Friday, there were three American citizen children, born here, who were deported along with their mothers from Louisiana down to Honduras. And according to advocates, one of them is a 4-year-old child with Stage Four cancer. A rare form of metastatic cancer who was sent back to Honduras without getting to talk to a doctor and without medication. I understand this child’s mother entered this country illegally. But isn’t there some basis for compassionate consideration here that should have allowed for more consultation or treatment?
TOM HOMAN: Well, it certainly is discretionary. I’m not aware of this specific case. But no U.S. citizen child was deported. Deported means you gotta be ordered — reported by the immigration judge. We don’t deport U.S. citizens.
BRENNAN: The mother was deported along with the children.
HOMAN: These children- Children aren’t deported. The mother chose to take the children with her. When you enter the country illegally and you know you are here illegally and you choose to have a U.S. citizen child, that’s on you. That’s not on this administration. If you choose to put your family in that position, that’s on them. But having a U.S. citizen child, after you enter this country illegally, is not a “get out of jail free” card. It doesn’t make you immune from our laws. If that’s the message we send to the entire world, women are going to keep putting themselves at risk and come to this country. We send a message: you can enter the country illegally, that’s okay, you can have due process at great taxpayer expense, get ordered to move, that’s OK. Don’t leave, but have a U.S. citizen child and you are immune from removal? That’s not the way it works.
BRENNAN: So, you don’t think there should be compassionate consideration for a 4-year-old child undergoing treatment for cancer?
HOMAN: I didn’t say that. I said ICE officers do have discretion-
BRENNAN: That was the question.
HOMAN: ICE officers do have discretion. I’m not familiar with the specific case. I don’t know what facts surround this case. I was just made aware of this when you mentioned it this morning. I was not aware of that case.
Brennan correctly noted that a court recently found a lack of due process in a child’s case. However, Holman had a reasonable response in citing the mother’s election in this one case to leave with her child.
BRENNAN: On Friday, a federal judge who was appointed by President Trump said a 2-year-old American citizen child had been sent to Honduras with the mother. But the judge said, quote: “there was no meaningful process.” So again, this is another similar situation and dynamic. Shouldn’t there be special care when the deportation cases involve small American-born children?
HOMAN: First of all, I disagree with the judge. There was due process. That female had due process at great taxpayer expense and was ordered by an immigration judge after those hearings. So she had due process. Again, this is Parenting 101. And you can decide to take that child with you or you can decide to leave the child here with a relative or another spouse. Having a child doesn’t make you immune from our laws of the country. American families get separated every day by law enforcement- thousands of times a day. When a parent gets put in jail, the child can’t go with them. If you are an illegal alien and you come to this country and you decide to have a U.S. citizen child, that’s on you. You put yourself in that position.
BRENNAN: Well, when it came to this particular case, you just pointed out that they could have made arrangements. The father tried, actually, to make arrangements as we understand it through our reporting. But he and the mother who were separated, since she was in detention after showing up for her appointment, was only allowed a very brief phone call. The father tried to petition to get the child handed over to an American citizen relative. So the mother had to make this decision and took the child with her. It just seems like there could be some more time frame here around due process allowed. That’s what the judge is saying, is saying- there should have been more of a process here.
HOMAN: There was due process. The 2-year-old baby- the two year old baby was left with the mother because the mother signed a document requesting her 2-year-old baby go with her. That’s the parent’s decision. I don’t think the judge knows the specifics of this case. The 2-year-old went with the mom. The mom signed a paper saying, “I want my 2-year-old to go with me.” That’s a parent’s decision. It’s not a government decision; it’s a parent’s decision.
BRENNAN: The father wrote a note. Anyhow, we have to leave it there, Director. Thank you for your time today. We’ll be right back.
It is important to note that these are two very different cases that were blended into the coverage. In the second case, the government insists that there was no prior arrangement for the child to be left with the family and that the mother made this decision.
ICE should endeavor to accommodate such requests and there should always be an inquiry into allegations that these women were prevented from making arrangements for their children to remain in the country. However, there will also be practical limits in addressing those issues in the midst of a removal.
If Holman is correct, the mother was in the system long before the actual removal. The father “sending a note” at the end of that process is worth looking into, but it is hardly surprising that the removal proceeded with the mother’s consent.
The same narrative was playing over at ABC as Martha Raddatz had this exchange with former DOJ spokesperson Sarah Isgur:
MARTHA RADDATZ: Sarah, I want to turn here to some information that has been in The Washington Post about deportations of very young children who are American citizens. A 2-year-old, a 4-year-old, a 7-year-old sent back to Honduras. Is that legal?
SARAH ISGUR: This is something our immigration system deals with nearly every day. U.S. citizen children have to make that decision with their parents of whether they’re going to stay. The parent has the decision. We do not allow illegal alien parents to stay just because they have custody over U.S. citizen children, and at least one of these cases with the 2-year-old, the mother was the one who made the decision to take her daughter with her. The father is the one saying he wanted the daughter to stay here. Often times, it’s going to look more like a custody dispute than an immigration question.
Again, as Isgur correctly points out, this is the election of the parents who are being removed.
Critics have pushed back on these interviews, noting how the media seemed only marginally interested in thousands of children lost in the system under the Biden Administration as millions poured over the border. Thousands of unaccompanied children were pushed over the border and then lost by the government, according to the Trump Administration. Many may have ended up with sex traffickers or criminal gangs. The coverage suggested that children were being thrown on planes to be dumped in some foreign land.
The Washington Post, which is cited for the story, has been repeatedly accused of pushing misleading or false narratives. There was a recent riot in the newsroom when owner Jeff Bezos demanded that the newspaper return to more balanced coverage.
The most telling condemnation came from Post columnist Philip Bump, who wrote “what the actual f**k.” Bump has been repeatedly accused of false claims and 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 stating 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 have 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 “I think that misinformation on Twitter is not just a campaign issue…it’s an America issue.”
The baby hoax shows that little has (or likely will) change. In the meantime, the public is moving on. New media is rising as mainstream media audiences shrink. Journalists and columnists are increasingly writing for each other as polling shows trust in the media is at an all-time low.
Robert Lewis, a British media executive who joined the Post, 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.”
It simply does not matter. The media continues to vigorously saw on the branch upon which it is sitting.
HUGE: Barack Obama Was Using USAID to Pretend to Send ‘Aid’ Overseas But Was Laundering It to Train ‘Rent-a-Riots’ Instead
By Jim Hoft – The Gateway Pundit – March 23, 2025
Mike Benz, the founder of the Foundation for Freedom Online, recently joined Joe Rogan on his very popular podcast The Joe Rogan Experience with over 19 million subscribers. The podcast was filmed several weeks ago but a clip from this discussion is making the rounds this week on social media. During their conversation, Mike Benz shared how Barack Obama was using money to USAID to pretend to send “aid” overseas. In actuality, Obama was laundering the taxpayer dollars and using it to train “rent-a-mobs” instead! This is a huge development but maybe not so surprising considering how Democrats believe they can do anything they please. With other people’s money. READ MORE
A.F. Branco Cartoon – The last face you want to see if you are an illegal alien gang member is Tom Homan, while the legacy media and radical left-wing judges run defensive maneuvers for them.
BOOM! “Get Your Affairs in Order” – Border Czar Tom Homan Closes Press Briefing with Stern Warning for Illegal Aliens to Self Deport: “You Cannot Hide from ICE. We’re Actively Looking for You” (VIDEO)
Border Czar Tom Homan joined Karoline Leavitt in the White House Press briefing room on Monday and put illegal aliens on notice that they will be found, prosecuted, deported, and never allowed to return if they don’t follow the law and leave immediately. “If you’re an illegal alien in the United States, this message is for you,” he said. “You cannot hide from ICE. We’re actively looking for you.” He continued, “Make no mistake, if you’re in the country legally and you fail to do what the law requires, we will prosecute you, you will go to jail, then we’ll deport you. ” This comes as the White House ramps up efforts to encourage self-deportation amid radical left judges blocking the Trump administration from executing mass deportations. Earlier this month, the Department of Homeland Security and White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt reminded illegal aliens that they must register with the federal government under the “long-ignored” Alien Registration Act and leave the country or be arrested. 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.
•30 Pro-Life Groups Ask Trump to Take Action Against Abortion Pill • Triplets Saved When Mom Changes Her Mind on Abortion • Experts Urge Trump to Stop Abortion Pill •Canadian Woman Waits Two Years to See a Surgeon •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
FILE PHOTO: U.S. President Donald Trump signs documents as he issues executive orders and pardons for January 6 defendants in the Oval Office at the White House on Inauguration Day in Washington, U.S., January 20, 2025. REUTERS/Carlos Barria/File Photo
For decades, 60 Minutes was the crown jewel of investigative journalism—an institution that shaped public trust and defined Sunday night television. But the show that many Americans once revered is now a shadow of its former self.
Behind the crumbling façade lies a string of scandals, ideological bias, and recent events that signal the end of any claim to journalistic integrity. With the resignation of longtime executive producer Bill Owens and a looming legal showdown with Donald Trump, 60 Minutes finds itself exactly where it’s been heading for years: rock bottom.
The Fall of a Media Giant
What happened to 60 Minutes didn’t happen overnight. The erosion of its credibility has been a slow, painful process. The once-respected news program long ago abandoned its commitment to unbiased reporting, trading journalistic skepticism for partisan narratives.
One of the most glaring examples came during a 2020 interview between Donald Trump and correspondent Lesley Stahl. In what was supposed to be a serious pre-election discussion, Stahl dismissed Trump’s mention of the Hunter Biden laptop story—claiming there was no way to verify its authenticity and calling it “unverified” and “disinformation.” Today, we know she was dead wrong. Not only has the laptop been verified by multiple outlets, but even mainstream sources now admit its contents were legitimate. Stahl, however, has yet to issue a retraction or apology. That’s not journalism; that’s gaslighting.
And that pattern of deception hasn’t just hurt their audience—it’s now hurting them legally. Donald Trump has filed a $475 million defamation lawsuit against CBS and Lesley Stahl, arguing that their reporting constituted deliberate misinformation with political intent. At the heart of the case: the network’s failure to correct the falsehoods Stahl spread on national television. Trump’s legal team claims this goes beyond error—it’s weaponized disinformation under the guise of journalism.
A “News” Show That Protects Kamala Harris?
The situation only worsened during the 2024 campaign. When 60 Minutes aired what was billed as a hard-hitting interview with Vice President Kamala Harris, critics quickly noticed something strange: two versions of the same exchange. In one, Harris appeared poised, offering a succinct response. In the other, uncut footage revealed a meandering, disjointed answer—the kind of embarrassing verbal gymnastics that have become Harris’s trademark.
So why the two cuts? Editing interviews isn’t unusual, but 60 Minutes went beyond polishing; they flat-out sanitized Harris’s performance. That’s not editing for time. That’s editing for narrative. It was a blatant act of political damage control masquerading as journalism.
Internal Turmoil and a Public Exit
Bill Owens, the show’s executive producer since 2019, recently announced his resignation. His departure wasn’t framed as a hostile firing, but reading between the lines, it’s clear Owens was being pushed out—or boxed in.
In his memo to staff, Owens wrote:
“Over the past months, it has become clear that I would not be allowed to run the show as I have always run it, to make independent decisions based on what was right for 60 Minutes, right for the audience.”
That’s as close to a whistleblow as one gets in mainstream media. Owens essentially admitted that editorial independence—once a hallmark of 60 Minutes—had been replaced with corporate micromanagement and ideological filtering. He continued:
“Having defended this show—and what we stand for—from every angle, over time with everything I could, I am stepping aside so the show can move forward.”
Translation: they broke it, and I’m not going down with the ship.
Getting Beat Down—Literally
To understand just how far 60 Minutes has fallen, one only needs to recall a bizarre and humiliating moment that perfectly encapsulates the modern state of Western media abroad. In 2011, 60 Minutes correspondent Lara Logan was brutally assaulted by a mob while covering protests in Cairo’s Tahrir Square. The horrifying attack highlighted not only the dangers of foreign reporting but also the disconnect between legacy media’s narratives and ground reality. Logan later said the media refused to talk about what really happened—who attacked her and why—because it would have contradicted the prevailing political storyline.
It was another warning sign: 60 Minutes, like much of corporate journalism, had become more concerned with narrative control than truth-telling. Even the safety of their own journalists became secondary to optics.
The Death Rattle of Corporate Journalism
The irony is staggering. A show once known for its fearless exposés now finds itself accused of being a tool for political manipulation. Viewership is declining, credibility is shot, and the lawsuits are piling up. What was once must-watch TV is now just another example of legacy media self-destructing under the weight of its own hypocrisy.
With Bill Owens out, lawsuits mounting, and public trust in free fall, 60 Minutes is rapidly becoming a cautionary tale of what happens when journalism becomes activism.
The ticking stopwatch is still there. But instead of signaling truth, it now ticks toward irrelevance.
Stephen Miller, the fearless Trump advisor and architect of America First immigration policies, dismantled a left-wing reporter’s attempt to smear the Trump administration’s deportation efforts. The reporter, clearly pushing a biased narrative, tried to frame the administration as cruel for deporting illegal alien mothers—ignoring the fact that these individuals broke U.S. law and that many, like the Honduran mother in question, requested deportation for themselves and their children.
The reporter smugly asked, “Is it the best use of the administration’s resources to be going after moms of young kids, basically?”—a classic leftist gotcha question designed to paint Trump’s enforcement policies as heartless. But Miller, refusing to play along, flipped the script and exposed the absurdity of the media’s open-borders agenda.
Miller’s Devastating Response: “Do you yourself have an opinion on this subject? What percentage of the, let’s just pick an even number of say, 10 million illegal aliens. Let’s say that Biden released, I think it’s close to 20 million. Let’s say he released 10 million illegal aliens into the country over the last four years. What percentage do you think we should let stay here of those 10 million?”
The reporter, flustered, shouted back, “I’m not trying to do a game!”—proving that the liberal media can’t handle it when their own emotional arguments are turned against them. Miller pressed further: “Is it your view that if a Democrat president releases 10, 15, 20 million illegals into the country, they all then should get to stay forever and for all of life?”
The reporter, unable to defend the disastrous Biden border crisis, deflected: “Stephen, I don’t have a view about what Democratic presidents do. I’m asking what the Republican president…”
Miller, unrelenting, shut it down: “Okay, so you don’t want to answer the question because you know the answer is obvious. Everyone that Biden let in has to go home. Of course. It’s a crazy thing to even ask. You think we should give administrative amnesty to some subset of the illegals that Biden [let in]?”
He then delivered the knockout blow, reaffirming Trump’s commitment to law and order: “ICE is going to continue to focus on raids against high-threat criminal aliens. We’re going to use the entire force and power of the federal government to get them all home. Many will choose also to leave voluntarily and take advantage of the CBP Home app. But we are not going to ask taxpayers to subsidize the presence of a single illegal alien in this country.”
🚨 MAJOR SMACKDOWN ALERT: Stephen Miller does it again. Fake news reporter in utter shambles.
REPORTER: "Is it the best use of the administration's resources to be going after moms of young kids, basically?"
This exchange perfectly encapsulates the media’s hypocrisy. They feign concern for illegal aliens while ignoring the catastrophic consequences of open borders—soaring crime, drained resources, and the erosion of American sovereignty. Meanwhile, President Trump and his administration are the only ones serious about protecting American citizens and enforcing the law.
A.F. Branco Cartoon – The left’s mantra for the past few years regarding Trump was “no one is above the law”, but when it comes to radical left-wing judges breaking the law, they are singing a different tune.
Former Obama Attorney General Eric Holder criticized FBI Director Kash Patel for posting a photo of Milwaukee Judge Hannah Dugan in handcuffs Friday after she was arrested on federal charges for obstructing ICE efforts to arrest an illegal alien outside her courtroom April 18. Patel posted the photo of the back of Dugan with her hands in cuffs as she was being led away by FBI agents with the message, “No one is above the law.” Holder accused Patel trying to “trying to maximize intimidation” by violating a Justice Department rule established by Holder restricting the release of photos of federal defendants. 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.
•Study: Complications From Abortion Pill 22 Times Higher Than FDA Says • Teen Who Slit Her Newborn Baby’s Throat Sent to Prison for 35+ Years • Colorado University Cancels “Sex Ed Summer Camp” for Kids •This Abortionist Killed About 42,000 Babies •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
A.F. Branco Cartoon – The Uni-Party, the Deep State, and the Military Industrial Complex seem to have an all-out war on peace. Maybe it’s only because it’s Trump who’s fighting for peace.
BREAKING: Pete Hegseth Hit With Another Round of Leaks Claiming He Used Unsecured Internet Line
By Cristina Laila – The Gateway Pundit – April 24, 2025
Another day, another Deep State leak. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth was hit with another round of leaks on Thursday after several top aides have been fired for leaking. The attacks against Pete Hegseth’s use of Signal began last month after Jeffrey Goldberg, the anti-Trump editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, claimed he was accidentally added to a secure Signal group chat where top Trump administration officials discussed sensitive military operations against Iran-backed Houthi terrorists in Yemen. The Biden Administration installed Signal on government-issued computers, but use of the app only became a scandal during the Trump Administration. READ MORE
Moriarty gives ‘diversion’ to Walz admin staffer but charges teen with felony for lesser property damage
By Jenna Gloeb – AlphaNews.org – April 24. 2025
The alleged double standard was too much for concerned citizen Jon Shanahan of Brooklyn Park, who filed a complaint this week with the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility. Share This Story Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty is caught in yet another controversy—this time for letting a state employee off the hook after he was caught on video vandalizing Teslas in Minneapolis, racking up over $21,000 in damage. Dylan Adams, 33, a fiscal policy analyst for the Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS), won’t face a single charge. Instead, Moriarty’s office handed him a free pass in the form of a diversion program—something her own office guidelines say shouldn’t apply to cases with more than $5,000 in property damage. Adams caused more than four times that. READ MORE
•Abortion Biz That Killed Babies Up to Birth for 50 Years Permanently Closes • Pro-Life Father Mark Houck Fights to Hold Biden’s FBI Accountable • North Carolina Bill Would Ban Abortions on Babies With Beating Hearts •OBGYNs are Not Leaving Pro-Life States Because of Abortion Bans •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
Dr. Warren Hern’s clinic in Boulder, Colo., on Monday, June 1, 2009. Hern mentioned security measures necessary for him to practice. Such as U.S. Marshalls for guards and the bullet proof glass used in the office windows. (AP Photo/Ed Andrieski)
When Elon Musk announced in February that there were 10 million Social Security numbers belonging to holders apparently aged 120 years and older, instead of acknowledging the great potential for fraudulent activity, the corporate media downplayed the concerns. They insisted that Social Security fraud is “not very common” and maligned the Trump administration’s efforts to purge the federal government of waste and abuse. However, multiple instances of Social Security fraud confirmed in April alone are a reminder that the system has enabled abuse for years.
According to the Social Security database, these are the numbers of people in each age bucket with the death field set to FALSE!
Maybe Twilight is real and there are a lot of vampires collecting Social Security 🤣🤣 pic.twitter.com/ltb06VX98Z
In late March, DOGE announced that, following a “major cleanup” of records, 9.9 million number holders listed with ages 120 years and older “have now been marked deceased.” (While people do live past 100, the oldest person who ever lived in modern times was Jeanne Louise Calment, of France, who died in 1997 at 122 years old.)
Corporate media and so-called experts have claimed that the listed ages of these centenarian number holders may be the result of “coding quirks” in the system and that efforts to mark these number holders as deceased could lead to more errors. But this does not change the fact that unused Social Security numbers marked as live are ripe for fraud.
What can you do with a spare Social Security number? You could register to vote again or sign up for social welfare, like housing, health insurance, cash assistance, and SNAP. Noncitizens can get a job, and of course, collect Social Security retirement or disability benefits.
Last month, a White House fact sheet, citing an inspector general report from 2024, noted how “The Social Security Administration made an estimated $72 billion in improper payments between 2015 and 2022.”
Social Security Fraud Is Alive And Well
Last week, Wendy Stone of Rochester, New York, pleaded guilty to “conversion/unlawful conveyance of government money, which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine,” according to U.S. Attorney Michael DiGiacomo’s office.
Back in 2022, Stone went to the home of an acquaintance and found that person had died a few days earlier. Stone didn’t report the death to authorities. Instead, she moved the body to the basement of the home, stuffed it in a storage bin, and covered it in bleach, occasionally topping off the bleach to keep the body covered. It remained there from December 2022 to September 2023, the DOJ release explains. Stone, 63, “improperly collected” $7,900 of the victim’s Supplemental Security Income money, which is administered by the Social Security Administration, and used the victim’s Social Security number “to activate a new debit card.” Stone also later falsely claimed the victim lived with her to receive $1,070 in SNAP benefits, according to the release.
On April 9, Mavious Redmond of Austin, Minnesota, pleaded guilty to committing Social Security fraud for 25 years, roughly half her life. Redmond, 54, “collected more than $360,000 in Social Security payments intended for her mother,” who died in 1999, the DOJ said in an April 14 release.
“On multiple occasions, Redmond impersonated her deceased mother to keep her fraud scheme going,” reads the statement from Acting U.S. Attorney Lisa D. Kirkpatrick’s office. “For example, on June 4, 2024, Redmond personally visited the SSA office, posing as her deceased mother, and submitted a fraudulent SS-5 Application for Social Security Form using her mother’s name, date of birth, Social Security number, and forging her deceased mother’s signature.”
Deborah Bailey, 68, from Piscataway, New Jersey, pleaded guilty to theft of public money after claiming her dead mother’s Social Security retirement money for eight years after her death. After Bailey’s mom died in 2016, she didn’t tell the Social Security Administration, and an investigation revealed she withdrew more than $150,000 “in retirement benefits” from her mom’s bank account between 2016 and 2024. She faces sentencing in August, according to a DOJ release from U.S. Attorney Alina Habba’s Office.
Reynaldo Martinez of Pawtucket, Rhode Island, admitted togetting his mitts on 40 SNAP cards using “stolen identities and stolen or fraudulent Social Security numbers.”
“Court documents reflect that Martinez appeared in person at multiple Rhode Island Department of Human Services offices and filed applications for SNAP benefits,” according to a DOJ release from April 2. “He did this by presenting fraudulent drivers’ licenses in various names but depicting his own photograph, and using Social Security numbers assigned to others, including that of a deceased individual, living adult citizens, and at least one juvenile.”
He admitted to receiving more than $33,000 in SNAP free food benefits. Martinez also admitted to cashing “altered” U.S. Treasury checks, which can be tax refunds, Social Security, or other benefits. Martinez pleaded guilty and will be sentenced in July, according to the DOJ. He was arrested and convicted multiple times in the past on other fraud and criminal charges, “dating back to 2012.”
Still, the desperate media really want the Trump administration to stop looking for fraud.
Last week, President Trump signed a memorandum aimed at “preventing illegal aliens from obtaining Social Security Act benefits.” Without missing a beat, Axios’ Jason Lalljee wrote under the headline: “Trump aids Musk’s Social Security fraud hunt, despite lack of evidence.”
But while the media cry about Trump eradicating fraud, and protesters key Teslas to punish Musk over DOGE findings, there are plentiful examples of Social Security fraud. The above are just a few admissions from April alone.
Not every mismarked 150-year-old Social Security number is connected to fraud, but for those and others that are, one person can bleed years of funding from the program, threatening its solvency and the security of those who truly need it.
Beth Brelje is an elections correspondent for The Federalist. She is an award-winning investigative journalist with decades of media experience.
Oh, the irony! California Gov. Gavin Newsom, the gel-haired darling of the left, has decided to play President Andrew Jackson’s foil in a modern-day Nullification Crisis. His lawsuit to block President Donald Trump’s tariffs — filed with all the fanfare of a Hollywood premiere — smacks of South Carolina’s 1832 tantrum over federal tariffs. Back then, the Palmetto State tried to nullify federal law, claiming it could pick and choose which national policies applied.
Newsom, it seems, fancies himself a latter-day John C. Calhoun, strutting onto the national stage with a States’ Powers swagger. The only problem? He’s reading from a script debunked by history, law, and common sense.
Let’s rewind to 1832. South Carolina, peeved over the tariffs of 1828 and 1832 — derisively called the “Tariff of Abominations” — declared them null and void within its borders. The state’s economy, tied to slave-driven cotton exports, chafed under duties that protected northern industry but raised costs for southern planters. Calhoun, then vice president, penned the intellectual case for nullification, arguing states could override federal laws they deemed unconstitutional. Andrew Jackson called this treasonous nonsense. He issued a Proclamation of Force, threatening troops, and Congress passed a compromise tariff to cool the feud. South Carolina backed down, but the episode laid bare a dangerous question: Can states defy federal authority rooted in the Constitution? Gavin Newsom, on a different day, would say that the Civil War answered that one with a resounding “no.”
Fast forward to 2025, and enter Newsom, California’s self-anointed guardian of the “resistance.” On April 16, Newsom announced a lawsuit to halt Trump’s tariffs, which slap a 10 percent baseline on imports and far steeper levies on goods from China. Trump justifies these under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a 1977 law granting presidents broad authority in national emergencies.
Newsom, flanked by California Attorney General Rob Bonta, claims the tariffs are “unlawful” and will wreak “chaos” on California’s economy — think higher prices for almonds, wine, and Hollywood flicks as other nations hike their tariffs in response. Sound familiar? Like South Carolina, California is griping about federal policy hitting its economic interests. Like Calhoun, Newsom is betting on state power to thwart Washington. And like 1832, this is a clash over who gets to call the shots.
The parallels are uncanny, and the irony is thicker than a blanket of Sacramento Tule fog. Newsom, a Democrat who’s spent years preaching federal supremacy on everything from climate to immigration, now cloaks himself in the mantle of state sovereignty to dodge Trump’s trade agenda.
Let’s be clear: States don’t have rights; they have powers, delegated by the Constitution. Only people have rights, a truth the Founders etched into our framework. Newsom’s rhetoric, implying California can opt out of federal policy like some sovereign republic, misreads the Constitution as badly as Calhoun did. This is the same governor who has cheered federal overreach when it suits his progressive piety — think EPA mandates or Obamacare. Yet when Trump wields federal power to address trade deficits, Newsom cries foul, claiming California, the “world’s fifth-largest economy,” deserves special treatment. Newsom is dusting off Calhoun’s playbook, arguing his state can nullify federal law.
But let’s not kid ourselves. Newsom’s not just channeling South Carolina’s ghost. He’s auditioning for 2028. This lawsuit isn’t about protecting California’s farmers or tech bros; it’s about burnishing his anti-Trump credentials for a future presidential run. He’s been laying the groundwork for months, from begging foreign leaders to spare California from retaliatory tariffs to launching a tourism campaign to lure Canadians back to Napa Valley. Never mind that his own state is riddled with “rampant crime, homelessness, and unaffordability,” as a White House spokesperson pointed out. Newsom’s too busy playing global diplomat to fix the mess in his own backyard.
Here’s where the irony deepens. South Carolina’s nullification gambit failed because the Constitution vests Congress with the power to regulate commerce (Article I, Section 8). The Supreme Court has upheld this for centuries, from Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) to modern cases. Newsom’s lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, argues Trump’s use of IEEPA exceeds his authority. Good luck with that. Courts have historically given presidents wide latitude under emergency powers, and Trump’s trade war is hardly the first time IEEPA’s been invoked. Newsom’s legal Hail Mary is less about winning in court and more about rallying the coastal elites who cheer his every anti-Trump jab.
And let’s talk about the Logan Act, shall we? Newsom’s earlier stunt of cozying up to foreign governments to secure tariff exemptions for California skirts dangerously close to violating this 1799 law, which bars unauthorized citizens from meddling in U.S. foreign policy. If a conservative governor tried this, the media would scream “treason.” But Newsom gets a pass because, well, he’s the left’s poster boy. Imagine the headlines if Texas Gov. Greg Abbott negotiated trade deals with Mexico. The hypocrisy is staggering.
The Nullification Crisis of 1832 exposed the fragility of a Union in which states could cherry-pick federal laws. It took Jackson’s resolve and a compromise tariff to avert disaster. Today, Newsom’s tariff lawsuit risks reopening that wound, not because California will secede (don’t threaten us with a good time), but because it fuels a narrative of state defiance that undermines national unity. Trump’s tariffs may be bold, but they’re a federal prerogative, like it or not.
Newsom’s grandstanding, like South Carolina’s, is a losing bet. The Constitution hasn’t changed, and neither has the lesson: States don’t get to nullify federal law, no matter how much their governors crave the spotlight.
So, here’s to Gavin Newsom, California’s would-be Calhoun, tilting at windmills while his state’s problems fester. The Nullification Crisis ended with South Carolina eating crow. Newsom might want to study that history before his lawsuit crashes and burns.
There is controversy at George Mason University after Nicholas Decker, an economics PhD student published an essay asking “When Must We Kill Them?” in reference to Trump and his supporters. The essay captures the growing violent ideation on the left, fueled by rage rhetoric from politicians and commentators. The danger is that, for some on the extremes of our society, the question is not “when must we kill them?” but “when can we kill them?”
On his Substack “Homo Economicus,” Decker warns that “evil has come to America” and that Trump is “engaged in barbarism” and seeking “to destroy the institutions which oppose” him. He then suggests that the answer may be murder and violence.
“What remains for us to decide is when we fight,” Decker writes. “If the present administration wills it, it could sweep away the courts, it could sweep away democracy, and it could sweep away freedom. Protest is useful only insofar as it can affect action. Our words might sway the hearts of men, but not of beasts.‘
“If the present administration chooses this course, then the questions of the day can be settled not with legislation, but with blood and iron. In short, we must decide when we must kill them.“
This is obviously just the reckless rhetoric of one individual. However, it is indicative of a larger and growing problem on the left where people are increasingly turning to political violence. Rage gives people a sense of license to break free from basic norms of civility, decency, and even legality.
Decker is an example of that unhinged hatred masquerading as logic.
I found the essay deeply depressing. This is a student who clearly must be interested in teaching, but has not only undermined his chances of teaching but has adopted the very antithesis of an intellectual life.
Yet, I do not believe that this essay should be the basis for prosecution. The university has referred the matter to federal and state authorities for investigation. I have long opposed violent speech from being criminalized.
As someone who has received death threats for years from the left, I do not take such viewpoints lightly. However, I have long disagreed with sedition and violent speech prosecutions as a general matter.
College is often a time when students dabble with extreme or controversial viewpoints. Most quickly return to the center and moderate their positions. Some yield to the impulse to shock or to unsettle others. Again, it does not excuse the chilling statements made in this essay. While Decker added that “violence is a last resort,” he still maintains that it is an option. He ignores that Trump is the product of a democratic process and that the legal process is working to sort out these disputes.
Trump is likely to prevail in some cases, but not all. Our system does not guarantee that you will prevail in such controversies, and failure to succeed is not a license to use violence “as a last resort.”
What I am more concerned about is the culture that is producing such increasingly violent rhetoric on our campuses. Many current faculty have long espoused such violent positions. Indeed, some faculty members continue to make the news for violent political acts.
Of course, some professors have gone further and committed acts of political violence. Such conduct should be prosecuted and those faculty members fired. However, even in those extreme cases, liberal faculty have often rallied around their colleagues.
At Hunter College in New York, Professor Shellyne Rodríguez was shown trashing a pro-life display of students.
She was captured on a videotape telling the students that “you’re not educating s–t […] This is f–king propaganda. What are you going to do, like, anti-trans next? This is bulls–t. This is violent. You’re triggering my students.”
Unlike the professor, the students remained calm and respectful. One even said “sorry” to the accusation that being pro-life was triggering for her students.
Rodríguez continued to rave, stating, “No you’re not — because you can’t even have a f–king baby. So, you don’t even know what that is. Get this s–t the f–k out of here.” In an Instagram post, she is then shown trashing the table.
Another example comes from the State University of New York at Albany, where sociology professor Renee Overdyke shut down a pro-life display and then resisted arrest. One student is heard screaming, “She’s a [expletive] professor.” That, of course, is the point.
This student is voicing the same rage that he has heard from teachers and commentators. The current generation of faculty and administrators has created this atmosphere of political radicalism and moral relativism on campuses.
I genuinely feel saddened by Decker’s essay because we likely share a desire to teach and to be part of an intellectual community. The most essential part of that life is to defend a diversity of viewpoints and oppose violence as a means to force ideological compliance in others. I hope that Decker and others in our community will come to understand that in time.
Nina Jankowicz, the former head of Biden’s infamous Disinformation Governance Board, was “back with a vengeance.” After the outcry over the board led to its elimination, Jankowicz did what many of the displaced disinformation experts have done: she peddled her dubious skills to Europeans and others like a wandering rōnin without a master. Now, Jankowicz has appeared before one of the most anti-free speech bodies in the world — the European Union — to call upon those 27 countries to fight against the United States, which she called a world threat.
How the “Mary Poppins of disinformation” came to alight upon Europe is a familiar tale. The European Union has become the global hub for censorship efforts and, after she departed from the government, Jankowicz made a beeline for Europe.
I have been a long critic of Jankowicz, who became an instant Internet sensation due to a musical number in which she sang “You can just call me the Mary Poppins of disinformation” in a TikTok parody of the song “Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious.” After the Biden Administration reluctantly disbanded her board, she later moved to join a European group as a foreign agent to continue her work to block views that she considers disinformation.
The false portrayal of the United States as a lawless, autocratic nation no doubt thrilled the Europeans. In announcing her heading a private disinformation group called the American Sunlight Project, Jankowicz used the same hysteria to attract donors, insisting that “Disinformation knows no political party. Its ultimate victim is our democracy.”
Of course, Jankowicz herself has been accused of disinformation that served one particular party. She was previously criticized for allegedly spreading disinformation and advocating censorship.
The ultimate irony is that Jankowicz knows that she can count on many of us in the free speech community to support her right to spread such sensational and inflammatory information. She has every right to trash this country and the results of the election.
Jankowicz has clearly found a home with globalists in Europe where our “Mary Poppins of Disinformation” is “practically perfect in every way”
A.F. Branco Cartoon – Their hill to die on, Democrats continue to double down on their stupid anti-American agenda; Open borders, rescuing MS-13 gangs from deportation, Men in women’s sports, etc.
Four Democrat House Members Arrive In El Salvador to Visit MS-13 Gangbanger Abrego Garcia – Trump Admin. Responds By Asking a Blunt Question
By Cullen Linebarger – The Gateway Pundit – April 21, 2025
Four House Democrats arrived in El Salvador on Monday to meet with their new hero, MS-13 terrorist Kilmar Abrego Garcia, and the visit did not go unnoticed by the Trump White House. As Fox News reported, Reps. Robert Garcia of California, Maxwell Frost of Florida, Yassamin Ansari of Arizona, and Maxine Dexter of Oregon all announced in a press release that they had arrived in El Salvador “to pressure the Trump Administration to abide by a Supreme Court order to facilitate the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia.” The four Democrats went on to falsely describe Garcia as “a Maryland man with protected legal status who was unlawfully deported by the Trump Administration.” They also called his imprisonment a “direct violation of due process” under the United States Constitution. READ MORE
A.F. Branco Cartoon – The left celebrates Earth Day by vandalizing Tesla dealerships while Bernie and AOC fly around in a fuel-burning private jet trying to get a failed populist rage going against Trump.
On Tuesday, Extinction Rebellion activists vandalized a Tesla showroom in Manhattan. Yes, that means that their reprehensible stunt against the electric vehicle leader happened on “Earth Day.” Seriously. The climate change radicals spray-painted “F*** Off DOGE” and “WE DO NOT CONSENT” on the showroom windows. They targeted Tesla to protest Elon Musk’s role as head of the Department of Government Efficiency. Two maskless men used fluorescent red and green spray paint to scrawl their messages, according to Fox News. They even drew a red circle with a slash, or “no” symbols, over DOGE signs, showing their disdain for Musk’s agency, whose worst sin is trying to cut government fraud and bloat. 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.
•Pope Francis Passes Away, Strongly Condemned Abortions • Melinda Gates: I’m Pro-Abortion But I’m a Faithful Catholic • Investigation Opened Into Death of Teen Who Planned Parenthood Killed •Andrew Cuomo May be Prosecuted After Lying About Killing Seniors •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
Comments orquestions? Email news@lifenews.com. Copyright 2003-2025 LifeNews.com For info on advertising or reprinting news, email us.
LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report Tuesday, April 22, 2025
Top Stories
•Trump Administration Eyes $5,000 Baby Bonus to Boost Birth Rates • Tim Walz Signed a Law Allowing Infanticide • Democrat Resolution Honors PP CEO Cecile Richards •Pope Francis: “Defend the Unborn Against Abortion” •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
A.F. Branco Cartoon – The U.S. has implemented restrictions to limit funding and support for China’s military-industrial base, but some argue that U.S. investments in Chinese companies still contribute to its military capabilities.
China Using U.S. Investor and Consumer Funds for Its Military
By Antonio Graceffo – The Gateway Pundit – 11/26/2025
The People’s Republic of China is modernizing its military for a potential conflict with the United States, with Xi Jinping aiming for readiness by 2027—though a slowing economy may delay this goal. Despite these tensions, China continues to benefit from U.S. capital markets, with significant funding for the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) coming from American investors and consumers, effectively putting U.S. money to work against its own interests. Since 2012, U.S.-China financial ties expanded significantly but have contracted since 2020 due to China’s economic slowdown, increased capital controls, and heightened U.S. government scrutiny of investments in China. READ MORE
A.F. Branco Cartoon – The Uni-party has been kicking the can down the road for decades, but now there’s a new President in town ready to stop, crush the can, and fix long overdue problems
By Paul Ingrassia – The Gateway Pundit – Jan 3, 2024
“[America] is breaking down,” declared Donald Trump in a recent Truth Social post, responding to the outbreak of terrorism and violence that embroiled the nation in the first two days of the new year. Had victory not been secured on November 5th, the likelihood of the country surviving much beyond January 20th, given present dismal trends, would have been miniscule. In a little over two weeks from now, America will undergo the forty-sixth transition in the republic’s history. Just two years shy of its semiquincentennial (250th birthday), the republic is still very much a fledgling one, a toddler if not an infant, in the grand scheme of Western history. READ MORE
A.F. Branco Cartoon – Letitia James is now getting a taste of her own medicine after she venomously went after Trump on her phony lawfare mission against him. Now she faces real, lawful charges for possible mortgage fraud and breaking campaign laws.
Branco Toon Store (New Product)
NEW EVIDENCE AGAINST NY AG: Letitia James’s Fishy Virginia Foreclosure Purchase in Martinsville Warrants Separate Investigation
By Guest Contributor – April 17, 2025
By Joel Gilbert—the investigative journalist who exposed the Letitia James Files. New York Attorney General Letitia James’s mortgage fraud problems just got even bigger, and may now include the possible breaking of campaign disclosure laws. Questions are now being raised about a foreclosure sale in December 2008 that involved James as a purchaser. Documents show her name appearing on the “Final Foreclosure Accounting” for the purchase of a single-family home at 21 Peters Street in Martinsville, Virginia. READ MORE
A.F. Branco Cartoon – This is what Easter is all about. The Death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, much to the disappointment of Evil.
Trump to Host Special Easter Service at White House, Top Preachers to Participate
Randy DeSeSoto – Western Journal – April 14, 2025
President Donald Trump will be hosting an Easter dinner and worship service at the White House on Wednesday. Preachers Greg Laurie, Franklin Graham, and Jentezen Franklin are all slated to participate, according to Fox News. The Holy Week schedule for the president is being organized by the White House Faith Office. “The newly created White House Faith Office is grateful to share that President Trump will honor and celebrate Holy Week and Easter with the observance it deserves,” Jennifer Korn, faith director of the White House Faith Office, told Fox. 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.
•Planned Parenthood Has Closed 10 Centers in 2025 • Missouri House Passes Amendment Banning Abortions • Delaware Legislature Passes Dangerous Assisted Suicide Bill •Abortions Fall 36% in South Carolina •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
Comments or questions? Email news@lifenews.com. Copyright 2003-2025 LifeNews.com For info on advertising or reprinting news, email us.
LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report Friday, April 18, 2025
Top Stories
•95.9% of Abortions are Killing Babies as Birth Control • Senator Tommy Tuberville: Defund Planned Parenthood • Florida Sees Largest Abortion Drop in America •Tell Your Members of Congress to Defund Planned Parenthood •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
Political violence flared again in Pennsylvania on Sunday in another troubling example of an apparent nutjob who seemingly imbibed the leftist paradigm that legitimizes the use of force.
Cody Balmer — the Harrisburg man accused of torching the Pennsylvania governor’s mansion while Gov. Josh Shapiro, his family, and some guests slept inside — was charged Sunday with terrorism, attempted homicide, aggravated arson, and other related charges, according to a Pennsylvania State Police criminal complaint.
State police say Balmer was captured on several security cameras, and a woman contacted police and said that “her ex-paramour, Cody Balmer [38] was the individual responsible for setting the fire.” She told police he confessed to her and “wanted her to call police to turn him in.” Soon, he was outside police headquarters where he approached a state trooper and turned himself in, the complaint said.
Balmer told police he put gasoline from his lawnmower into two beer bottles and carried these homemade Molotov cocktails and a sledgehammer from his house, on a nearly four-mile walk through Harrisburg, to the mansion. Security cameras show he scaled the fence, broke a window, threw one bottle into the piano room, then broke another window, went inside, and deployed the second one to burn the dining room.
Balmer told police he knew it was possible Shapiro could be inside the mansion and might get injured, and when asked what he would have done if Shapiro had caught Balmer inside the home, Balmer “advised he would have beaten him with his hammer,” the complaint said. “During the interview, Balmer admitted to harboring hatred towards Governor Shapiro.”
“This type of violence is not OK,” Shapiro said in a press conference on Sunday, and he is right. But this type of violence is celebrated by Democrats and their left-wing media.
When they called the violent 2020 Black Lives Matter riots “peaceful protests,” as thugs threw bricks in windows, looted businesses, and burned neighborhoods, the left normalized violence. When Pennsylvania authorities responded to the protests with new rules for police, instead of clear punishment for the destruction of neighborhoods, they normalized violence.
Just saying Black Lives Matter is not enough.
We must listen 👂 We must take action ✊
These two laws are a down payment on the progress we still need in this commonwealth and in this country. #BLMpic.twitter.com/kX0U57J0oG
At that time, The Philadelphia Inquirer ran a column titled“Buildings Matter, Too,” about the destruction of buildings during the riots — a completely valid topic, for the paper’s architecture critic. The Inquirer’s “journalists of color”walked out in protest, the publication changed the column’s title and ran an apology, and Executive Editor Stan Wischnowski left the paper. The incident made it impossible to safely speak the truth there, and the response gave another win — a louder voice — to political violence.
Today, the left continues to devalue life and reward violence.
After another probable nutjob, Luigi Mangione, allegedly assassinated UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson (ostensibly to communicate some vague message about health insurance), shooting him in the back on a New York City sidewalk, the reaction should have been universal horror that a father and husband was needlessly dead. But some on the left thought Mangione may have had a “good point” (whatever it was, exactly) and some swooned, “Did you notice how handsome he is?”
Now there are women fangirling over him, and ditz writer Taylor Lorenz, like, totally gets it. In a mirthful CNN interview filled with laughter this week, Lorenz described how those women see Mangione.
“You’re going to see women especially that feel like, Oh my God, right? Like, here’s this man, who, who’s revolutionary, who’s famous, who’s handsome, who’s young, who’s smart. He’s a person that seems … like this morally good man, which is hard to find.”
Struggling CNN thinks content like this (Taylor Lorenz salivating over accused killer Luigi Mangione) is going to turn its ratings around pic.twitter.com/fKwA8cA3mt
Imagine how Thompson’s family feels seeing someone minimize his murder and fawn over the suspect.
When the lines between right and wrong are unclear, our culture drifts into danger, and Democrats should not be surprised when the political violence they normalized happens to one of their own.
Beth Brelje is an elections correspondent for The Federalist. She is an award-winning investigative journalist with decades of media experience.
The intense struggle between the Trump Administration and federal judges continued this week with another court ordering a halt to a nationwide program. In Massachusetts, District Judge Indira Talwani is preventing President Donald Trump from canceling a Biden program granting parole and the right to work to immigrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela (CHNV). Judge Talwani’s order would require individual hearings for the half of a million individuals allowed into the country under this program by President Joe Biden.
Under the announcement published in the Federal Register, the Department of Homeland Security officially moved to terminate the CHNV Program. The announcement followed an Executive Order, signed on Trump’s first day in office, entitled “Securing Our Borders,” directing the DHS to end the CHNV program. Under the notice, DHS said that the parole status would expire in 30 days “unless the Secretary makes an individual determination to the contrary.” It further mandated that parolees who had not obtained a legal basis to be in the United States, such as a green card or other visa, must depart the United States before their parole expires.
In the prior hearing, Judge Talwani indicated that she would not allow that to happen, stating that the Administration’s interpretation of the law was “incorrect” and that “[t]he nub of the problem here is that [Homeland Security Secretary Krisit Noem], in cutting short the parole period afforded to these individuals, has to have a reasoned decision.”
In her opinion, Judge Talwani wrote:
“If their parole status is allowed to lapse, plaintiffs will be faced with two unfavorable options: continue following the law and leave the country on their own, or await removal proceedings. If plaintiffs leave the country on their own, they will face dangers in their native countries, as set forth in their affidavits.”
The court also noted that leaving would cause family separation and jeopardize their ability to seek a remedy based on the Administrative Procedure Act.
The Administration argued that it did have a “reasoned decision” to end the CHNV program and weighed the cost to the parolees. It noted that the parolees were always going to face family separation and costs since this was just a temporary, two-year program. It asserted that it did weigh alternative periods for winding down the program. While the court may disagree with its conclusions, it asserts that it has the same discretion used by President Biden in creating the program.
There was another pressing reason for the change. If the parolees were allowed to run the course of the full period, those who did not obtain legal status could force formal removal proceedings rather than the expedited removal under the program.
The Justice Department maintained:
“DHS’s decision to terminate the CHNV program and existing grants of parole under that program is within this statutory authority and comports with the notice requirements of the statute and regulations,” they wrote. “Additionally, given the temporary nature of CHNV parole and CHNV parolees’ pre-existing inability to seek re-parole under the program, their harms are outweighed by the harms to the public if the Secretary is not permitted to discontinue a program, she has determined does not serve the public interest.”
All of this presents another novel legal question. Parole is not a legal status under immigration laws. It is a status created by executive action and is now being curtailed under that same authority. However, these individuals came to the country under the promise of a two-year period. The question is whether a temporary program created by executive fiat can be treated as creating a type of vested right.
If Judge Talwani prevails, individual determinations of half a million cases would be an overwhelming burden on the Administration and easily run out the time granted under the program for these individuals. Indeed, for many of the individuals, the appellate process could exceed that period.
The court is not weighing the harshness of the decision but the president’s discretion in making such a decision. Judge Talwani suggests that, once created by President Biden, the program cannot be curtailed or shortened by President Trump. That question could very well find itself on the Supreme Court’s ever-lengthening docket.
A.F. Branco Cartoon – America is dying, and Trump is fighting to save her. Tariffs may cause short-term pain, but something must stop the decline and bring America back.
Peter Navarro Defends Trump’s Tariffs – “We’ve Given Away Our Houses, Our Office Buildings, Our Food Supply, Our Farmland” (VIDEO)
By David Greyson – The Gateway Pundit – April 4, 2025
Peter Navarro was on “Sunday Morning Futures” with guest host Jackie DeAngelis on Sunday to talk about the benefits of President Trump’s tariffs. “Let’s talk about the markets, the uncertainty out there, and the volatility. Do you expect it to continue?” DeAngelis asked. “First rule, particularly for the smaller investors out there, you can’t lose money unless you sell. Right now, the smart strategy is not to panic, just stay in because we are gonna have the biggest boom in the stock market we have ever seen under the Trump policies,” Navarro said. DeAngelis also discussed with Navarro about President Trump’s overall plans being pro-business and pro-consumer regarding tariffs, deregulation, tax cuts and spending cuts. 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.
•Judge Rules There’s No Right to Kill Babies in Abortions • Trump Will Celebrate Jesus on Easter • Investigation Covers Up How Military Called Pro-Lifers “Terrorists” •Abortionist Who Killed Woman in Botched Abortion Was Never Disciplined •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
FILE – In this June 29, 2015, file photo, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump smiles for a photographer before he addresses members of the City Club of Chicago, in Chicago. As other presidential candidates fight to raise money, Trump is reminding everyone hes already got a lot of it. The celebrity businessmans campaign was expected to reveal details on July 15 of his fortune, which he estimated last month at nearly $9 million when announcing his Republican presidential candidacy. (AP Photo/Charles Rex Arbogast, File)
The Supreme Court’s continuing failure to define lower courts’ authority is wreaking havoc on the reputation of the courts — and our constitutional order.
The Supreme Court has interceded six times in less than three months to rein in federal judges who improperly exceeded their Article III authority and infringed on the Article II authority of President Donald Trump. Yet the high court continues to issue mealy-mouthed opinions which serve only to exacerbate the ongoing battle between the Executive and Judicial branches of government. And now there is a constitutional crisis primed to explode this week in a federal court in Maryland over the removal of an El Salvadoran — courtesy of the justices’ latest baby-splitting foray on Thursday.
On Thursday last, in Noem v. Garcia, the Supreme Court issued a short two-page order on President Trump’s application asking the justices to vacate an injunction issued by Maryland federal judge Paula Xinis. That injunction, issued on April 4, 2025, ordered the Trump Administration “to facilitate and effectuate the return of Plaintiff Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia to the United States by no later than 11:59 PM on Monday, April 7, 2025.” The lower court further held that the “preliminary relief is issued to restore the status quo and to preserve Abrego Garcia’s access to due process in accordance with the Constitution and governing immigration statutes.”
After the Fourth Circuit refused to stay Judge Xinis’ order, the Trump Administration filed an application with the Supreme Court seeking an immediate stay followed by vacatur of the injunction. In its application, the Trump Administration acknowledged that Garcia had been wrongly removed to El Salvador, agreeing that there was an order barring Garcia’s return to his native homeland. However, the Trump Administration stressed that the order also concluded Garcia, as an alien illegally present in the United States, was subject to removal under federal law — just not to El Salvador. The immigration judge also rejected Garcia’s petition for asylum and for withholding of removal under CAT, or the Convention Against Torture. The Board of Immigration Appeals upheld those decisions.
Further, while Garcia had been wrongly removed to El Salvador, the Trump Administration argued that Judge Xinis lacked the authority to order him to “facilitate and effectuate” Garcia’s return. First, it was not for a federal judge to tell the Executive branch how to engage in diplomatic relations. And second, the president lacks the ability to control a foreign sovereign, making it impossible for him to “effectuate” Garcia’s return to the United States. Finally, Judge Xinis’ order improperly directs the Trump Administration to admit Garcia even though he is a member of MS-13, which has been designated a terrorist organization.
Chief Judge John Roberts granted the Trump Administration an administrative stay, thereby nixing the April 7, 2025 deadline for the president to have “effectuated” Garcia’s return to the United States. Then on April 10, 2025, the Supreme Court entered an order stating the Trump Administration’s “application is granted in part and denied in part, subject to the direction of this order.”
But what precisely were those directions? Well, first, there was the deadline, which had already come and gone, and so the Court stated: “[T]he deadline imposed by the District Court has now passed. To that extent, the Government’s emergency application is effectively granted in part and the deadline in the challenged order is no longer effective.”
The Supreme Court then said that “[t]he rest of the District Court’s order remains in effect but requires clarification on remand.” Here, the high court explained what parts of the lower court order it believed proper, namely to “require the Government to ‘facilitate’ Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador.” However, “[t]he intended scope of the term ‘effectuate,” the Supreme Court explained, is “unclear, and may exceed the District Court’s authority.” The Supreme Court ended by stating “[t]he District Court should clarify its directive, with due regard for the deference owed to the Executive Branch in the conduct of foreign affairs.” But “the Government should be prepared to share what it can concerning the steps it has taken and the prospect of further steps,” the Supreme Court added.
What exactly does any of that mean?
To Judge Xinis it meant she merely needed to clarify what “effectuate” means. But rather than do that, the Barack Obama appointee just dropped that directive from her injunction, amending her order “to DIRECT that Defendants take all available steps to facilitate the return of Abrego Garcia to the United States as soon as possible.”
She further directed the Trump Administration to file “a supplemental declaration from an individual with personal knowledge, addressing the following: (1) the current physical location and custodial status of Abrego Garcia; (2) what steps, if any, Defendants have taken to facilitate Abrego Garcia’s immediate return to the United States; and (3) what additional steps Defendants will take, and when, to facilitate his return.”
Late Thursday, Judge Xinis ordered the Trump administration to file that declaration by 9:30 a.m. on Friday, even though the Supreme Court’s order only dropped Thursday evening around 7:00 p.m. The Maryland-based federal judge then denied the government’s motion for extension of time until Tuesday to file the declaration, but she gave them an additional two hours.
Unsurprisingly, 11:30 a.m. came and went without the declaration being filed. Soon after, the Trump Administration filed a response to the court’s amended injunction, noting it was “unable to provide the information requested by the Court on the impracticable deadline set by the Court hours after the Supreme Court issued its order.” The government’s response continued:
“Defendants are not in a position where they ‘can’ share any information requested by the Court. That is the reality. Defendants received the order late in the evening last night. They are reviewing the order and actively evaluating next steps. It is unreasonable and impracticable for Defendants to reveal potential steps before those steps are reviewed, agreed upon, and vetted. Foreign affairs cannot operate on judicial timelines, in part because it involves sensitive country-specific considerations wholly inappropriate for judicial review.”
Rather than re-evaluate her position, Judge Xinis doubled down, finding “Defendants have failed to comply with this Court’s Order,” and stating, “Defendants made no meaningful effort to comply.” She then entered a further order requiring the Trump Administration to file daily, on or before 5:00 p.m., “a declaration made by an individual with personal knowledge as to any information regarding: (1) the current physical location and custodial status of Abrego Garcia; (2) what steps, if any, Defendants have taken to facilitate his immediate return to the United States; (3) what additional steps Defendants will take, and when, to facilitate his return.”
Judge Xinis added that if plaintiffs wanted any additional relief, they should file a motion by Saturday at 5:00 p.m. Garcia’s attorneys filed the suggested Motion on Saturday, asking the court to grant “three additional types of relief.”
First, the El Salvadoran’s lawyers asked the Court to order the government to, by end of day on Monday: (a) request “its agents and contractors release Abrego Garcia from custody in El Salvador pursuant to the contract or arrangement providing for his detention there at the Government’s direction; (b) dispatch personnel to accompany Abrego Garcia upon his release from [the El Salvadoran prison] to ensure his safe passage to the aircraft that will return him to the United States; (c) [p]rovide air transportation for Abrego Garcia to return to Maryland, because he may not be in current possession of sufficient identification to board a commercial flight; and (d) “[g]rant Abrego Garcia parole” and “prepare all paperwork and forms required to allow him to reenter the United States.”
Second, Garcia’s attorneys asked for the Court to grant their client discovery including production of the Trump Administration’s contract with El Salvador concerning detentions at the prison. The illegal alien’s attorneys further requested the court direct the Trump Administration to produce witnesses for the hearing scheduled for Tuesday. Specifically, Garcia’s attorneys wanted to question representatives from the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice, and the Department of State, concerning: “(i) Abrego Garcia’s current physical location and custodial status; (ii) what steps, if any, the Government has taken to facilitate Abrego Garcia’s return to the United States; (iii) whether the Government has informed officials at CECOT that it wishes Abrego Garcia to be released into U.S. custody; and (iv) what, if any, additional steps the Government intends to take, and when, to facilitate Abrego Garcia’s return.”
Finally, the plaintiff’s attorneys requested the court order the government to show cause why they should not be held in contempt for violating the Court’s command that they file a declaration by Friday at 11:30 a.m.
Shortly after Garcia’s motion hit the docket, the Trump Administration filed its first required daily declaration. That declaration attested that, based on official reporting from our Embassy in San Salvador, “Abrego Garcia is currently being held in the Terrorism Confinement Center in El Salvador.” “He is alive and secure in that facility,” the declaration continued, adding: “He is detained pursuant to the sovereign, domestic authority of El Salvador.” The second daily declaration, filed yesterday, stated the government’s declarant had nothing to add to those facts.
Judge Xinis has not yet ruled on the plaintiff’s motion, but given her refusal to respond reasonably to the Trump Administration’s request for an extension of time to file the declaration, her utter failure to show any deference to the Trump Administration’s handling of foreign affairs, and that the declarations said nothing of efforts by the Trump Administration to obtain Garcia’s release from prison, it seems likely she will grant Garcia much of what he requests.
Yet, those requests, as the Trump Administration pointed out yesterday in its response brief, directly infringe on the president’s Article II authority. “The federal courts have no authority to direct the Executive Branch to conduct foreign relations in a particular way or engage with a foreign sovereign in a given manner,” the Trump Administration wrote. Rather, “[t]hat is the ‘exclusive power of the President as the sole organ of the federal government in the field of international relations.’”
While the Supreme Court has declared that “[s]uch power is ‘conclusive and preclusive,’ and beyond the reach of the federal courts’ equitable authority,” given her orders to date, Judge Xinis is unlikely to stand down. Rather, expect the Obama appointee to enter another scathing order demanding details and actions. But with its core executive powers at stake, the Trump Administration cannot comply.
The justices should have foreseen this standoff and defused the situation last week by clearly defining the limits of the lower court’s authority. The Supreme Court’s continuing failure to do so is wreaking havoc on the reputation of the courts — and our constitutional order.
Margot Cleveland is an investigative journalist and legal analyst and serves as The Federalist’s senior legal correspondent. Margot’s work has been published at The Wall Street Journal, The American Spectator, the New Criterion, National Review Online, Townhall.com, the Daily Signal, USA Today, and the Detroit Free Press. She is also a regular guest on nationally syndicated radio programs and on Fox News, Fox Business, and Newsmax. Cleveland is a lawyer and a graduate of the Notre Dame Law School, where she earned the Hoynes Prize—the law school’s highest honor. She later served for nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk for a federal appellate judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Cleveland is a former full-time university faculty member and now teaches as an adjunct from time to time. Cleveland is also of counsel for the New Civil Liberties Alliance. Cleveland is on Twitter at @ProfMJCleveland where you can read more about her greatest accomplishments—her dear husband and dear son. The views expressed here are those of Cleveland in her private capacity.
President Donald Trump pointed out Monday on his Truth Social account that the war between Russia and Ukraine began during President Joe Biden’s administration.
“The war between Russia and Ukraine is Biden’s war, not mine. I just got here, and for four years during my term, had no problem in preventing it from happening,” Trump wrote, adding that he “had nothing to do with this war” but is working “diligently to get the death and destruction to stop.”
“If the 2020 presidential election was not rigged, and it was, in so many ways, that horrible war would never have happened,” he continued. “President [Volodymyr] Zelenskyy and Crooked Joe Biden did an absolutely horrible job in allowing this travesty to begin. There were so many ways of preventing it from ever starting. But that is the past. Now we have to get it to stop, and fast. So sad!”
On 60 Minutes Sunday, Zelenskyy called on Trump to support Ukraine.
“President Trump, being a strong president of a strong country, must be on Ukraine’s side,” Zelenskyy said. “I think it is wrong that America wants to be neutral.”
Zelenskyy also warned Russian President Vladimir Putin’s ultimate goal could result in a World War.
“If we do not stand firm, he [Putin] will advance further,” Zelenskyy told CBS News. “It is not just idle speculation; the threat is real. Putin’s ultimate goal is to revive the Russian empire and reclaim territories currently under NATO protection. Considering all of this, I believe it could escalate into a world war. There won’t be a safe place, there won’t be a safe place for [anyone].”
President Donald Trump on Monday said CNN refuses to report accurately on the decrease in migrants crossing the southern border because “they hate our country.” During a meeting with El Salvador President Nayib Bukele in the Oval Office, Trump talked about military and law enforcement recruitment that has surged.
“Actually, what you’re doing with the border is remarkable. It has dropped, what, 95%? It’s incredible,” Bukele said to Trump.
“As of this morning, 99%, 99.1% to be exact,” Trump replied.
“Why are those numbers not in the media?” Bukele asked.
“Well, they get out, but the fake news, you know, like CNN — CNN over here doesn’t want to put them out because they don’t like putting out good numbers … because I think they hate our country, actually,” Trump said.
Trump then asked Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to comment.
“It’s just been absolutely phenomenal what a great leader can do,” Noem said. “Clear direction. Our laws matter. We should only have people in our country that love us. And our Border Patrol and our ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) officers and law officers have done fantastic work. So, we’re proud of them.’
“Now, we just need to get the criminals and murderers and rapists and dangerous gang members and terrorist organizations out of our country.”
After the media availability ended, CNN’s Dana Bash took issue with Trump’s words.
“I just want to say, for the record, since we heard President Trump say in the Oval Office that CNN hates our country, CNN does not hate our country,” she told viewers. “That should go without saying.”
Bash added, “I’ve been here for 32 years, and I see a rhetorical device in him trying to say such a thing. That said, I want to focus on the news that we heard.”
Below is my column in the Hill on recent disclosure that the Biden Administration may have withheld evidence contradicting the Chinese on the origins of COVID. Millions of Americans lost loved ones and would like to know who was responsible. It appears that our government and many experts were less motivated to find that answer.
Here is the column:
Imagine a world war that left more than seven million dead, hundreds of millions became ill, wrecked the global economy, and left a generation with lasting psychological and developmental injuries. We have seen such wars in history. What is different in this circumstance, however, is that all of that happened, and yet, years later, we still have no agreement on the original cause or possible culprits behind a pandemic that ravaged the world.
Worse yet, many politicians, experts and journalists do not seem inclined to find the answers. This is like fighting World War II and then shrugging off the question of what actually started it.
New questions are being raised over long-withheld evidence on the origins of COVID, information that contradicted the accounts of not just the Biden administration but also allies in academia and the media.
The Chinese first reported the outbreak in December 2019 and insisted that it came from a wet market in Wuhan — a natural or “zoonotic” transfer from bats sold at the market. Others were skeptical and pointed to the nearby Wuhan government virus lab, known to have conducted coronavirus studies with bats. This lab had a history of safety and contamination concerns.
The “lab-leak theory,” which was always the most obvious explanation, was further reinforced by scientists who saw evidence of possible manipulation of the virus’s genetic code, particularly the “spike protein” that enables the virus to enter the human body in a “gain of function” operation. There was (and still is) a serious controversy over the origins of the virus, but any debate was quickly scuttled in favor of the natural theory.
The Chinese immediately moved to crush any speculation of a lab-leak. Wuhan scientists were gagged and the Chinese refused to allow international investigators access to them or the lab in question. The Chinese also used their considerable influence over the World Health Organization and other groups to dismiss or downplay the lab theory..
Now, a long-withheld military report has finally been released by the Trump administration. It appears to confirm what was once denied by the Biden administration: U.S. military service members contracted COVID-19-like symptoms after participating in the World Military Games in October 2019 in Wuhan.
That contradicts China’s timeline. It suggests a longer cover-up in that country, which allowed the virus to spread not only to the U.S. but to countries around the world. Other nations also reported that their military personnel had fallen ill after attending the same games, suggesting that the virus was not only spreading but already raging in the area at that time.
The most disturbing aspect of this report is not the alleged conduct of the Chinese government, but that of our own. Rumors of U.S. military personnel coming down with the virus had long been out there. Republicans in Congress repeatedly asked the Biden administration about any report on the outbreak. Then-Pentagon spokesperson John Kirby told The Washington Post in June 2021 that the military had “no knowledge” of COVID-19 infections among the troops participating in those games.
Even as the illness associated with the games became known, the Biden administration repeatedly refused to confirm the U.S. cases, and a 2022 report was withheld from both Congress and the public. If true, the level of duplicity and dishonesty is shocking. In the U.S. alone, more than 1.2 million died and more than 111 million were made sick by this virus. Yet the Biden administration is accused of withholding this information from the world. Why?
This disclosure follows an equally troubling disclosure that scientists in the Biden administration actually found support for the lab theory but were silenced by their superiors.
Last December, the Wall Street Journal released an alarming report on how these scientists supported the lab theory on the origin of the COVID-19 virus. Not only were the FBI and its top experts excluded from a critical briefing of Biden, but government scientists were reportedly warned that they were “off the reservation” in supporting the lab theory.
As scientists were being attacked publicly and blacklisted for supporting the lab theory, experts at both the FBI and the Energy Department found the lab theory credible. Although no theory could be proven conclusively, it was deemed a more likely scenario than the natural-origin theory. The CIA also found the lab theory credible.
What the public was hearing was entirely different. They were hearing the same narrative laid out by the Chinese government in December 2019. The Chinese relied upon western scientists to form a mob against anyone raising the lab-leak theory as a possible explanation. Many were enlisted to sign letters or publish statements denouncing the idea. It became an article of faith — a required virtue signal among university scientists. The western media were equally primed to quash the theory.
After President Trump embraced the lab theory, the Chinese had the perfect setup. The media was on a hair-trigger in opposition and denounced his comments as not only unfounded but also racist. MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace mocked Trump and others for spreading “conspiracy theories.” MSNBC’s Kasie Hunt insisted that “we know it’s been debunked that this virus was manmade or modified.”
MSNBC’s Joy Reid called the lab leak theory “debunked bunkum.” Over at CNN, reporter Drew Griffin criticized the “widely debunked” theory and host Fareed Zakaria told viewers that “the far right has now found its own virus conspiracy theory” in the lab leak.
The Washington Post was particularly dogmatic. After Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) raised the lab-leak theory, he was chastised for “repeat[ing] a fringe theory suggesting that the ongoing spread of a coronavirus is connected to research in the disease-ravaged epicenter of Wuhan, China.”
The Post’s “fact checker” Glenn Kessler mocked Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) for entertaining the theory. “I fear @tedcruz missed the scientific animation in the video that shows how it is virtually impossible for this virus to jump from the lab,” he posted. “Or the many interviews with actual scientists. We deal in facts, and viewers can judge for themselves.”
Even in 2021 when countervailing evidence was surfacing, the unrelenting attacks continued. New York Times science and health reporter Apoorva Mandavilli urged journalists not to mention the “racist” lab theory. Social media companies also enforced the narrative and, with the coordination of the Biden Administration, experts raising the lab theory were targeted, censored, and blacklisted.
It now appears that the COVID outbreak may have occurred months before the alleged wet market release — months that could have been used to contain the virus. Instead, China is accused of suppressing the news and allowing the virus to spread worldwide. Our military personnel alone went home from the Wuhan games to 25 states, potentially carrying it with them. When information on these infections connected to the games was reported around the world, China even suggested that the U.S. used the games to release the weaponized virus.
In 2020, I wrote a column on why China seemed poised to avoid any liability for what might be the greatest act of negligence in history. The sheer size of the disaster somehow seemed to insulate China. As Joseph Stalin had once said, “a single death is a tragedy” and “a million deaths is a statistic.”
Try more than seven million, and you have a statistic that was not worth confronting the Chinese over. What was done was done.
Attorney Chris Madel said, “Today is a complete vindication for Liz Collin, Dr. Chaix, and Alpha News—and a complete victory for the First Amendment.” On Tuesday, Judge Edward T. Wahl dismissed the defamation lawsuit filed by Katie Blackwell—the Assistant Chief of Operations for the Minneapolis Police Department—against Alpha News, senior reporter Liz Collin, director Dr. JC Chaix, and others. In filing the lawsuit, Blackwell and her attorneys labelled Alpha News and the other defendants as “extremists.” They claimed that “this lawsuit involves the politically motivated attack on a respected member of the Minneapolis Police Department who was maliciously defamed with respect to her performance of the duties of her employment and profession by extremists who are more interested in shaping a narrative and provoking outrage than in communicating any version of truth.”… READ MORE
A.F. Branco Cartoon – People suspect that many Democrats and some Republicans are being paid off through CCP money and that it’s influencing their vote on China trade policies, all the while calling Trump a Putin puppet without evidence.
Progressive Anti-Audit Democrats Took Communist-Sponsored Trips to China; “Collaborated Extensively” With CCP
By Julian Conradson – The Gateway Pundit – Aug 19, 2021
Multiple prominent Democrats who have been leading the charge against efforts to audit the 2020 election were just exposed for their “extensive collaboration” with one of the Chinese Communist Party’s most influential propaganda groups. According to an exclusive report byThe National Pulse , “NewDEAL Leaders,” a radical-progressive Democrat ‘network’ comprised of state and local elected officials, has repeatedly sent lawmakers on trips to China that were paid for by the CCP, and have essentially been colluding with America’s foremost adversary since at least 2016. The trips were paid for by funds from the People’s Liberation Army of China, with the express intent to “influence” US policy decisions. 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.
•Hospital Wants to Remove Baby’s Life Support Without Consent • Planned Parenthood Aborted Triplets, Left Parts of Babies Inside Mom • Democrats are So Rabidly Pro-Abortion, They’re Fine With Infanticide •Canada Has Abortions Up to Birth, Pierre Poilievre Won’t Stop It •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
After sitting back for four years while the leader of the Democrat Party allowed millions of illegal aliens to invade the country, 208 Democrats voted against legislation Thursday that would keep foreign nationals out of American elections.
The Republican-led House passed the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act 220-208. The legislation, introduced by Texas Rep. Chip Roy, would require documentary proof of citizenship in order to register to vote.
“Despite the ridiculous attacks and purposeful misinformation spread about the bill, I am pleased to see that the House of Representatives once again passed the SAVE Act on a bipartisan basis to ensure only U.S. citizens vote in federal elections,” Roy said in a statement to The Federalist.
“In order to preserve this republic, we must uphold what it means to be able to vote in a U.S. election,” Roy continued. “I am grateful that my colleagues answered the call and passed the SAVE Act, as this serves as a critical first step to ensure that we maintain election integrity throughout our country. It is now up to the Senate to take up, pass, and send this important bill to President Trump’s desk.”
Four Democrats — Rep. Ed Case (HI); Rep. Henry Cuellar (TX); Rep. Jared Golden (ME); and Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (WA) — voted alongside Republicans to pass the SAVE Act.
Democrat Reps. Vicente Gonzalez Jr. of Texas and Don Davis of North Carolina previously voted in July to pass the SAVE Act but voted in opposition to the legislation on Thursday. The previously legislation passed in July, 221 to 198, after Democrats stated noncitizen voting is already illegal.
But just because noncitizen voting is already illegal doesn’t mean it’s not happening — or that current law does anything to prevent it. Current law prohibiting noncitizens from voting is largely toothless, with prospective voters simply checking a small square box on a federal registration form attesting under penalty of perjury that they are a citizen.
The SAVE Act would amend the 1993 National Voter Registration Act to make documentary proof of citizenship a requirement to register to vote. The legislation would add the additional, necessary layer of protection to keep foreign nationals out of U.S. elections. Under the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), states are required to check information about newly registered voters in federal elections against information stored in the state’s motor vehicle administration database. Individuals who do not have a driver’s license identification number can instead provide the last four digits of his Social Security number. But foreign nationals can obtain both of those documents, so neither one really confirms citizenship.
In California, prospective voters who lack both a driver’s license identification number and a Social Security number can instead provide proof of identity — not citizenship — using low-security identification like a gym membership, utility bill, or credit card.
Such a vulnerable system has enabled 11,198 noncitizens to register to vote in Pennsylvania despite, as Democrats have made clear, it being illegal, according to the Washington Times. Oregon’s Secretary of State meanwhile found nine noncitizens who had voted in past elections after discovering “more than 300 noncitizens were erroneously registered to vote,” as reported by The Federalist’s Logan Washburn. Similarly, a Georgia audit found 20 noncitizens registered to vote — nearly half of which cast a ballot in previous elections, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
The SAVE Act now heads to the Senate for a vote.
Brianna Lyman is an elections correspondent at The Federalist. Brianna graduated from Fordham University with a degree in International Political Economy. Her work has been featured on Newsmax, Fox News, Fox Business and RealClearPolitics. Follow Brianna on X: @briannalyman2
Protests against President Donald Trump’s administration have been cropping up nationwide. They appear to have two things in common — gray hair and a lack of energy. Are Americans supposed to believe these are organic? Or are they organized by left-wing groups to undermine Trump’s administration?
Now the answers to those questions are becoming clear. The “Hands Off” protests of April 5 and earlier anti-Tesla protests were supported by a coalition of powerful leftist groups, including The Indivisible Project, and organized through Mobilize America — which was initially founded as a Democrat PAC. Now leftist organizers are planning more demonstrations across America for the socialist holiday May Day.
The ‘Hands Off’ Protests
Leftists gathered in cities across America to protest Trump’s administration on April 5. As images of the events streamed in from across the web, something soon became clear — many of the protestors were elderly.
Anti Trump protest in Charles Town, WV. About 200 people, not paid protestors, but the median age appears to be about 70. pic.twitter.com/ygFoKa8Ybn
Whether disaffected boomers, one-time hippies, or former bureaucrats, these were people with extra time on their hands. This was not lost on far-left activists, who used Mobilize America — a “volunteer management platform and network that connects left-wing organizations, campaigns, and activists,” according to InfluenceWatch — to stage the Hands Off protests, apparently attempting to subvert confidence in the Trump administration.
Hands Off is tied to the Indivisible Project, which launched in 2016 to help leftists “Resisting the Trump Agenda,” according to InfluenceWatch. Indivisible is listed among Hands Off’s “partners,” and the group’s website directs users to various Hands Off materials. Hands Off directs “general inquiries” to an Indivisible.org email address. When The Federalist asked about this, Indivisible Project Chief Campaigns Officer Sarah Dohl said the address online was a “typo.”
“Hands Off is a campaign, not an organization,” according to Dohl. She called it a “broad coalition effort,” pointing to “nearly 200 partner organizations.” According to Dohl, Indivisible provided Hands Off participants with content, toolkits, and “digital infrastructure.”
“We were proud to help build the Hands Off website and provide early infrastructure to get the campaign off the ground,” Dohl said. “The site and campaign are now supported by many different groups, not just Indivisible.”
A host of leftist groups “partner[ed]” in the Hands Off protests, including the anti-religious freedom Human Rights Campaign, leftist League of Women Voters, far-left Our Revolution, radical environmentalist group Greenpeace, and anti-Trump Women’s March. Left-wing union giants AFL-CIO, American Federation of Teachers, National Education Association, Service Employees International Union, and United Auto Workers also supported the demonstrations.
Indivisible provided graphics and messaging to protestors, even suggesting wording for their signs and offering to reimburse groups up to $200 worth of expenses for each protest — though Dohl previously told The Daily Signal the group does “not pay protestors.”
An Indivisible document online guides demonstrators on “Tesla Town Halls,” specifically “how to plan a Tesla protest” and “executing your Tesla protest.” It listed grievances with Trump’s administration, including alleged “economic terrorism.”
“The idea of ‘Tesla Town Halls’ was one of several suggestions we offered as part of our early February congressional recess guidance — alongside more traditional options … ” Dohl said. As The New York Post reported, Indivisible also backed the “Musk or Us” protest during Congress’s March recess, encouraging the use of messages such as “Fire Elon Musk” and “GTFO Musk.”
Another main group behind the anti-Musk town hall protests was MoveOn, as The Washington Free Beacon reported. MoveOn is listed among the “partners” of the Hands Off protests.
Despite the burning Tesla graphic, Indivisible included a disclaimer in its document about a “commitment to nonviolent action.” The group recommended protesting “during business hours when foot traffic is high,” and focusing on “Tesla showrooms, factories, and dealerships.”
“Indivisible was not the central organizer of the Tesla day of action. … Some local groups chose to participate and did so peacefully,” Dohl said to The Federalist.
In the protest guidance document, Indivisible told anti-Tesla demonstrators to register their event with Mobilize America — the same group used to organize Tesla Takedown and Hands Off demonstrations. Dohl called Mobilize a “widely used events platform.”
“Like many other organizations, we use it to share volunteer opportunities and amplify partner events,” Dohl said. “There’s nothing unusual about that — it’s just a tool.”
Plotting May Day Protests
The Hands Off website hosts a link to the May Day National Day of Action. “This is a war on working people — and we will not stand down,” the May Day webpage reads. Itlinks to a “May 1st National Day of Action Host Toolkit,” featuring the popular Marxist iconography of the raised fist. The guide provides demonstrators with things like “sample social media posts,” a “sample email,” and even a “sample message frame” to “[a]lign your message with the broader movement,” even providing specific wording.
The guide tells organizers to register their event with Mobilize America to enable radical activists to “push out your event and help recruit attendees.” The document gives “[f]ull credit to Hands Off and Indivisible for sharing a sample toolkit we are building from.”
Dohl told The Federalist her group “isn’t involved in planning May Day actions directly, and our understanding is that plans are still coming together across the coalition.”
“[W]e expect to see mobilizations happening throughout the spring,” Dohl said.
The left-wing Action Network is also involved, hosting a map of the May Day events and description that declares, “We will not be intimidated by Trump, Musk, or their billionaire backers. … Their time is up. And May Day is just the beginning.” According to InfluenceWatch, Action Network “emerged during the Occupy Wall Street protests in 2011.” It also helped organize the anti-Keystone XL pipeline protests, the anti-gun March for Our Lives, and the anti-Trump Women’s March. Some Tesla Takedown “global day of action” organizers used Action Network to plot anti-Tesla demonstrations on March 29.
According to an online map, the May Day protests are planned for the coming weeks in major cities across the country.
Follow the Money
Indivisible was “founded by two left-wing activists” in 2016 to oppose the Trump agenda, according to InfluenceWatch. The infamous Tides Foundation, a leftist dark money giant that sponsored pro-Hamas protests on college campuses last spring, is a “funding partner” to Indivisible’s 501(c)(3) branch. LinkedIn co-founder and Democrat megadonor Reid Hoffman, who said he wished he had made Trump a “martyr” before last summer’s assassination attempt, has also contributed to Indivisible.
Mobilize America initially began as a Democrat PAC and received thousands from Democrat sources, according to InfluenceWatch. But Federal Election Commission filings listed the PAC as “terminated” in fiscal year 2019-2020. And, as Capital Research Center Investigative Researcher Parker Thayer pointed out, Mobilize’s privacy policy shows the group was listed as part of Bonterra LLC as of February 2023. Bonterra provides various left-wing volunteer and fundraising services.
The Federalist also contacted Hands Off and Mobilize, but they did not comment in time for publication.
Logan Washburn is a staff writer covering election integrity. He is a spring 2025 fellow of The College Fix. He graduated from Hillsdale College, served as Christopher Rufo’s editorial assistant, and has bylines in The Wall Street Journal, The Tennessean, and The Daily Caller. Logan is from Central Oregon but now lives in rural Michigan.
His bold leadership, which quickly brought 75 countries to the negotiating table, he said, should be applauded. Clearly, his strategy is working: America is gaining leverage, and China is becoming more and more isolated.
While conservatives have been divided and disorganized about how to respond to the president’s policy, with almost all Republicans in Washington still watching from the sidelines, we’re calling on Americans to unify around a “yes, and” agenda.
That means saying yes to strategic, reciprocal tariffs that target China and other trade abusers—based on their barriers, not simply the balance of trade—as we work toward true free and fair trade.
And it means insisting that tariffs are most effective when paired with a broad array of conservative policies that alleviate economic pain on the American people. While Trump works to liberate us from foreign abuses, congressional Republicans must fight to liberate Americans from the burdens of federal regulations, mandates, and taxes.
Republicans Must Make Tax Cuts Permanent
First, we must not settle for extending the status quo on tax relief. Thanks to the majorities Trump delivered in November, Republicans must pursue deeper tax reform through reconciliation. Every penny raised from tariffs should be offset with pro-growth tax cuts.
Making the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act permanent is a good start, but we also must remove every remaining tax penalty on expanding hiring and business operations in America by adopting full and immediate expensing for all investments. Pairing this with a simplified flat tax for all is even better. Congress should collapse the personal income and corporate tax rates to 15%.
Second, Congress should work alongside the Trump administration, using the reconciliation process, to transform the current 10% universal tariff into a true border-adjusted tariff. That means applying a universal 10% tariff on all imports, while granting a matching 10% credit to all American exports.
That isn’t just smart policy—it’s a long-overdue correction to a global tax system that has punished American industry for decades.
We’ve let foreign goods pour into our markets tax-free, while our manufacturers are taxed at home and slapped again abroad. That’s not free trade—it’s economic surrender. And no country has abused this broken system more brazenly than China, which has cheated on trade, exploited our openness, and gutted the U.S. industry while Washington looked the other way.
If we want to rebuild our economy, secure our supply chains, and end our dependence on adversarial regimes, then a border adjustment tariff must be part of the conservative economic playbook.
As a bonus, these revenues can be used to offset lost revenue from the lower tax rates we are calling for.
Congress Must Cut Federal Spending
Third, Republicans must finally get serious about cutting spending—not with half measures or messaging bills, but with real, structural reform. Through reconciliation, Congress should significantly cut mandatory spending riddled with waste, fraud, and abuse.
Now is not the time to settle for the lowest common denominator, which is always a temptation in politics. If we are to undo the fiscal and inflationary damage done by the previous administration and decades of fiscal irresponsibility, we must go big and take advantage of this historic electoral mandate.
Then, through the appropriations process, we must slash the bloated discretionary budget that fuels the unchecked growth of the federal bureaucracy.
In the meantime, the Department of Government Efficiency must be fully unleashed to do its job—scrutinizing every dollar, rooting out inefficiency, and holding agencies accountable. This is how we restore fiscal integrity and prove to the American people that their government works for them, not the other way around.
Businesses Need Deregulation
Fourth, American enterprise must be unleashed through sweeping deregulation. For too long, unelected bureaucrats have imposed crushing rules that stifle innovation, punish small businesses, and expand government control far beyond its proper bounds.
It’s time for Congress to reassert its constitutional authority, starting by empowering lawmakers to roll back legacy regulations that have accumulated over decades of executive overreach by passing the REINS Act and the Sunset Act.
At the same time, the administration should lead a coordinated effort—through executive orders and agency rulemaking—to dismantle the regulatory state piece by piece.
Fifth, permitting reform is long overdue, and it’s time we treat it like the national priority it is. For decades, radical environmentalists and bloated bureaucracies have used red tape to delay, derail, and destroy American energy and infrastructure projects. The result? Higher costs, energy dependence, and missed opportunities for American workers.
We need to streamline the permitting process from top to bottom—cut timelines, eliminate duplicative reviews, and ensure projects get approved on merit, not political ideology. If we’re serious about unleashing American energy, rebuilding our industrial base, and securing true energy independence, then Congress must act—the administration must lead—with bold, unapologetic reform.
In Washington, conservatives talk a lot about policies, but policies are not ends in themselves. They’re tools to achieve a certain end—the flourishing of the American people. Americans care about policy only insofar as it influences how they can purchase a home, build strong families, raise their children in safe communities, and live lives rooted in faith, purpose, and freedom.
For too long, America’s strength has been undermined by a bipartisan failure to defend our own economic foundation. Congress and previous presidents ran up our debt, piled up regulations, outsourced our manufacturing base, surrendered our supply chains, and signed trade deals that ignored Chinese cheating.
All of this served government bureaucrats, but not the American family. The result? Hollowed-out towns, lost jobs, and a working class forced to pay the price for decisions made in Washington and on Wall Street.
This result wasn’t inevitable—it was a choice. And it’s time we choose differently. It’s time to put American industry, families, and sovereignty back at the center of our national agenda.
As conservatives, we’re not just fighting for policies—we’re fighting for the American way of life. A way of life rooted in personal responsibility, bound by opportunity, and defined by human dignity. Every policy we advance—whether it’s tax reform, deregulation, tariffs, or border security—must serve that higher purpose: to strengthen families, empower communities, and preserve the blessings of liberty for the next generation.
Parental rights are emerging as one of the major civil liberties movements of this generation — and one of the greatest conflicts between the right and the left in this country. For example, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ruled schools can hide a change of gender in young children from their parents. Now, Colorado is poised to pass a law that would threaten the custody rights of parents who “deadname” or “misgender” their own children. If a parent does not adopt a child’s new pronouns or name, they could be found to have exercised “coercive control” and lose custody in divorce proceedings in favor of a more enlightened parent.
As someone who grew up in an Italian family, I must confess that I thought “coercive control” of a parent was called . . . well . . . parenting. I can still remember my Sicilian mother brandishing a broom in front of our door to prevent one of my sisters from going out with a boy that she did not like. She simply declared “I gave you life, I can take it away” and my sister went back upstairs.
I admit the Italian parental style can be a bit shocking for outsiders and misunderstood by many. (My Irish father would sit bemused in the kitchen). In reality, it was all drama, but you knew that it conveyed not anger but love.
Under the new proposal, House Bill 25-1312, Colorado would use the “Kelly Loving Act” to make “deadnaming” and “misgendering” children a factor in child custody disputes. Referring to your child’s biological gender or given name or pronoun would now be considered harmful and abusive, inviting a court to take your child away from you as a coercive parent.
“Section 2 provides that, when making child custody decisions and determining the best interests of a child for purposes of parenting time, a court shall consider deadnaming, misgendering, or threatening to publish material related to an individual’s gender-affirming health-care services as types of coercive control. A court shall consider reports of coercive control when determining the allocation of parental responsibilities in accordance with the best interests of the child.”
So, the state will require parents to adopt a gender, name, and pronoun that they believe are harmful for their children. Many such parents may believe that a young child should proceed slowly and not make such changes as they consider the implications of such decisions.
One question is whether this would be limited to custody proceedings or eventually expand to families generally. If this is deemed abusive or harmful during custody battles, it would also be presumably abusive or harmful outside of such proceedings. The fear is that the underlying conclusions could support a view of a household being abusive and not being in the best interests of the child.
Notably, the Supreme Court will now be considering a Colorado case involving a ban on counselors offering “conversion therapy” for children. Under the state rule, a counselor can lose her license if she agrees to such counseling at the request of her parents. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit tossed the challenge, ruling that conversion therapy is harmful and the rule is part of an effort to regulate the healthcare profession.
“This bill is the bare minimum of what we can do as a state, and the fact that we have to legislate for people to not bully and misgender and deadname people because of whatever insecurities they might have is sad to me. Why can’t we just respect one another? Why can’t we just understand that someone else’s identity has nothing to do with me or you?”
The bill passed the committee on a straight party vote with Republicans in opposition. I believe that the Democrats are not just ignoring parental rights but political realities. They will find that this is not a partisan issue. It is a primal issue. For parents, Democratic politicians like Garcia fail to “understand” that it has a lot “to do with them.” They are the parents of these children. If Democrats do not “understand” that, they are likely soon to find that out.
A.F. Branco Cartoon – The globalist keeps underestimating Trump and is like the coyote in a Roadrunner scenario. They are wrong again, but that doesn’t stop them from trying. Toon Revised from 2017.
WAYNE ROOT: Trump is Roadrunner. Democrats are Wiley E. Coyote. “Beep, Beep.” And Here is How Trump Can Turn Tariffs into Most Popular Grand Slam Home Run in History!
By Assistant Editor – The Gateway Pundit – April 7, 2025
By Wayne Allyn Root
Believe it, or not, I still have Democrat friends. Just a handful out of the 6,000 names in my cell phone address book. But those few Democrats keep texting me to say, “We finally got him. Your friend Trump has finally done it. He screwed up- he’s destroyed the economy, he’s destroyed the Republican Party.”And I just smile and laugh.I’ve heard this exact same delusional, wishful thinking a hundred times since 2015. It’s been 10 straight years of “He’s finally done it. Trump is finished.” And for 10 years all these delusional Democrats have been dead wrong every time. READ MORE
A.F. Branco Cartoon – Compared to Mr. Sippy Cup Biden, President Trump is bound to leave behind a larger-than-life legacy that is sure to end up in the Smithsonian Archives.
BREAKING: Trump Announces Immediate Tariff Increase on China to 125% and Grants 90-Day Tariff Reduction for Over 75 Other Countries
By Cassandra MacDonald – The Gateway Pundit – April 9, 2025
The announcement led to an immediate and massive surge in the stock market. Trump announced the tariff change on Truth Social, writing that it was due to China’s “lack of respect for the World’s Markets.” In response to Trump’s original 104% tariff on China, the Chinese government announced it would retaliate by increasing tariffs on American products from 34% to 84%. Trump highlighted discussions with representatives from over 75 other countries by U.S. departments such as Commerce, Treasury, and the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR). These nations, he wrote, have sought to negotiate solutions regarding trade barriers, tariffs, currency manipulation, and non-monetary tariffs. 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.
•Pro-Abortion Man Who Tried to Assassinate Kavanaugh Pleads Guilty • Senate Budget Paves the Way to Defund Planned Parenthood • Baby Saved When Mom Changes Her Mind During the Abortion •New Study Shows Grief More Common Than Relief After Abortion •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
Comments orquestions? Email news@lifenews.com. Copyright 2003-2025 LifeNews.com For info on advertising or reprinting news, email us.
LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report Thursday, April 10, 2025
Top Stories
•Woman Who Brutally Assaulted Pro-Life Advocate is Arrested • House Passes Resolution That Sets Up Defunding Planned Parenthood • Joe Biden Broke the Law, Used Anti-AIDS Program to Fund Abortion •Kansas Legislature Overrides Gov Kelly’s Veto of 3 Pro-Life Bills •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
The White House is signaling that new tariffs on Chinese imports are taking effect after China’s government missed a deadline to lift its retaliatory tariffs that were imposed in response to President Donald Trump’s tariffs.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Tuesday that because China declined to lift its retaliatory tariff, the president’s additional 50% tariff levied on top of previously imposed tariffs of 20% and 34% took effect, bringing the total tariff on Chinese goods to 104%.
She added that the tariffs took effect at noon Eastern Time on Tuesday, with tariff collection set to begin on Wednesday. Leavitt said that U.S. trading partners should be coming to the administration with deals to improve trade terms.
“The president’s message has been simple and consistent from the beginning to countries around the world – bring us your best offers and he will listen,” Leavitt said during a White House press briefing Tuesday. “Deals will only be made if they benefit American workers and address our nation’s crippling trade deficits.”
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said China’s failure to lift retaliatory tariffs prompted the Trump administration to hike tariffs further. (Reuters/Kevin Lamarque / Reuters)
Leavitt said that by contrast, China’s retaliatory tariffs have prompted Trump to increase duties on Chinese imports in response, serving as an example of what other countries that follow suit can expect.
“On the other hand, countries like China, who have chosen to retaliate, and try to double down on their mistreatment of American workers are making a mistake,” she said.
“President Trump has a spine of steel and he will not break, and America will not break under his leadership. He is guided by a firm belief that America must be able to produce essential goods for our own people and export them to the rest of the world,” Leavitt said. “A strong America cannot be solely dependent on foreign countries for our food, medicines, and critical minerals, and America must always maintain a robust defense supply chain.”
Tariffs are taxes on imported goods that are paid by the importer, who typically passes the higher costs on to consumers. (Photo by Qian Weizhong/VCG via Getty Images / Getty Images)
The Trump administration has centered its tariff strategy around the elimination of trade deficits. After touting plans for “reciprocal” tariffs, the administration’s formula for those tariffs was calculated based on the size of the U.S. trade deficit with various trading partners.
Economists tend to dismiss trade deficits as neither good nor bad, arguing they’re the result of mutually beneficial trade decisions. Ryan Young, senior economist at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, previously told FOX Business that trade balances don’t “say anything about a country’s economic health, good or bad,” and noted the U.S. has run trade deficits for over 50 years.
The U.S. and China are escalating their trade war with tariff hikes. (Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images / Getty Images)
“The U.S. has run a trade deficit every year since the 1970s, yet living standards are better by almost every measure, whether it’s income, unemployment rate, life expectancy, percentage of low-income households with air-conditioning, internet and other goods,” he said.
“If the trade deficit were harmful, much of what we see all around us every day should not exist,” Young added.
JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon wrote in his annual shareholder letter released Monday that trade deficits “are not necessarily good or bad” and observed, “Even if our country had no net trade deficit, it would likely be running deficits with some countries and surpluses with others.”
RINO Congressman Announces He Will Be Introducing Legislation to Sabotage President Trump’s Tariff Authority (VIDEO)
By Cullen Linebarger – The Gateway Pundit – April 6, 2025
A RINO Congressman announced on Sunday that he would be moving to undercut President Trump’s bold move to reshape the global economic order with reciprocal tariffs on countries that have taken advantage of America for years. The Gateway Pundit previously reported that President Donald Trump announced on Wednesday the implementation of a 10% baseline tariff on all imports, effective April 5, 2025. On April 9, the worst offenders will be hit with even tougher measures. Speaking from the White House Rose Garden, Trump proclaimed April 2 as “Liberation Day,” marking a new era of economic independence. He emphasized that this measure is essential to protect American jobs and revitalize domestic manufacturing. The White House also released a detailed chart showing how badly many countries have been ripping off American workers, charging high tariffs on U.S. goods while benefiting from America’s generosity in return. 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.
•Woman Who Assaulted Pro-Life Advocate Won’t Take Responsibility • Michael Schiavo Keeps Secret Files About Terri Schiavo Sealed • Kansas Gov Vetoes Bill to Protect Christians Adopting Children •Colorado Passes Bill Forcing Taxpayers to Fund Abortions Up to Birth •Scroll Down for More Pro-Life News
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.