BREAKING: JD Vance Announces Task Force Has Uncovered Billions in Fraud

 From America First:

Vice President JD Vance delivered a striking update on the Trump administration’s fight against government fraud during a Cabinet meeting at Camp David, announcing that a task force he leads has identified $230 billion in fraudulent or improper payments perpetrated against the American people, with $56 billion of that amount already halted before it went out the door.

The announcement came during the first-ever live-streamed Cabinet meeting held at Camp David, a format that allowed Americans to watch the administration’s internal deliberations in real time. Vance, who has served as the chair of the Task Force to Eliminate Fraud since President Trump established it by executive order in March 2026, framed the findings as one of the clearest early wins of the administration’s broader push to root out waste and corruption in the federal government.

“Just since the beginning of the Fraud Task Force that I started under the president’s leadership and direction, we have identified $230 billion of fraud that’s being perpetrated against the American people, and we have halted already $56 billion of that,” Vance told the gathered Cabinet, according to multiple accounts of the meeting. (Read more.)

Share

Counterrevolution: Thirty Years of the Conservative Press

 From Mark Judge at Hot Air:

Conservative media has been engaging in hand-to-hand combat with the left for so long that sometimes we forget to pull the lens back and fully appreciate how much we have leveled the playing field. Thirty years ago, if a conservative got destroyed in the media, the only recourse was to submit a letter to the editor of the local Stasi press outlet, where it would be ignored or edited and buried in the paper a week later. Now conservative journalists can actually dismantle lies and even collapse things like a book launch by a major publisher for leftist journalists. 

    Part of what got me thinking about this was reading an advanced copy of the great new book by Victor Davis Hanson, The Counterrevolution: The Fall and Rise of Donald Trump and the MAGA Movement. The book doesn’t come out for a month, and I will have a fuller review then, but in terms of its overall message and how it diagnoses the media, it is a bull’s-eye. Hanson argues that Trump has been the most effective counterforce to the slow crawl of “progressive” politics over the last century - and that kneecapping the media was a crucial part of that. (Read more.)

Share

Dictators for Life

From Tierney's Real News:

For the past decade, the fake news and liberals in America have been proclaiming that President Trump is trying to be a dictator for life, a King that can never be removed. That is a lie. That is BS propaganda from our enemies. The truth is that the REAL dictators are on the left and part of the Islamo-Communist Red-Green axis and this newsletter will PROVE that.

On Sunday night, in Nicaragua, Communist President Daniel Ortega stood in front of thousands of Sandinista loyalists at the 47th anniversary of the 1979 revolution and said what everyone already knew was true: there will be no more elections in Nicaragua. He finally admitted out loud that Nicaragua is a Communist dictatorship!

 “There won’t be any more elections here for them to try to seize the government and seize power. The days when parties backed by the Yankees and the Somocistas would return to power are over — never again.” (Read more.)

Share

The Left’s Imaginary Food Stamps “Crisis”

 From AMAC:

SNAP enrollment has dropped by about 4.5 million people over the past year—an 11 percent decline. While critics call this a "crisis" and blame the Trump administration for stripping benefits from needy families, the reduction largely reflects new work requirements and stronger anti-fraud measures under the One Big Beautiful Bill. This article examines the data behind the debate and explains what's really driving the change in food stamp participation.

To most Americans, a significant drop in the number of people on food stamps is a positive development. But to the left-wing outrage mob, it’s cause for all-out panic and one of the most absurd fits of anti-Trump hysteria to date.

According to recent government data, as of July 1, approximately 4.5 million fewer people are enrolled in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) compared to the same time last year – a reduction of about 11 percent. Still, the nearly 42 million people enrolled in SNAP is much higher than the 35 million on the dole in 2019. (Read more.)

Share

Catherine Herridge Uncovers Shocking Revelations About The Biden Family

 From Zero Hedge:

Herridge, a veteran Emmy-winning investigative reporter, has previously pursued stories on the Hunter Biden laptop, the Biden family's foreign business dealings, and related corruption allegations - reporting that put her at odds with CBS leadership and the broader media consensus.

In February 2024 she was among those laid off in a round of cuts. CBS then seized her reporting files, including materials involving confidential sources. Testifying before the House Judiciary Committee, Herridge described the seizure in stark terms: "When my records were seized I felt it was a journalistic rape."

She added that "CBS News' decision to seize my reporting records crossed a red line that I believe should never be crossed by any media organization" and that "When the network of Walter Cronkite seizes your reporting files, including confidential source information, that is an attack on investigative journalism."

She has maintained that she simply "reported out the facts of the story. I called balls and strikes." The network eventually returned the files under pressure from the House Judiciary Committee and her union.

Earlier, during the 2020 campaign, the Biden team had already labeled her a "partisan, rightwing hack." Her treatment fits a pattern of institutional pushback against journalists who refused to look away from the Biden family's financial ties.

Those ties have been documented for years. House Oversight Committee investigations, led by Chairman James Comer, obtained bank records and witness accounts showing Chinese Communist Party-linked money flowing to Biden family members.

Comer stated that the documents demonstrated the family had received funds from CCP-connected entities and that family members "attempted to sell access & influence around the world." (Read more.)

Share

Blame Democrats, Not ICE, for Recent Deadly Shootings

 From Chronicles:

In the wake of recent shootings in Texas and Maine, President Trump’s mass deportation campaign hit another wall. Over the past week, two men, one from Mexico and another from Colombia, were killed during encounters with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents during traffic stops.

ICE says that both of the two men, Joan Sebastian Guerrero in Maine and Lorenzo Salgado Araujo in Texas, were in the country illegally, but that they were not the intended targets of ICE’s operations. Critics have used these cases of mistaken identity to impugn ICE and Trump’s efforts to secure the nation’s interior. In response, ICE temporarily paused vehicle stops across the country.

However, President Trump on Wednesday used TruthSocial to reverse that policy, writing, “[W]e must be strong, tough, and smart, and we CANNOT give up one of I.C.E.’s most important and effective Crime Fighting tools, THE TRAFFIC STOP!”

Fatal shootings by ICE, while unfortunate, are rare. Considering the scale of ICE’s operations, the number of fatalities during these inherently dangerous operations has been very low. ICE agents have been making hundreds of arrests each day across the nation for the last 18 months, and ramped up to 2,000 arrests per day in June. Despite the intensity of its operations and the fierce public backlash, there have been only 11 deaths related to ICE enforcement operations during Trump’s second term beginning January 2025. That is compared an average of 800 people killed in the U.S. every year by police and other law enforcement officers. And yet, left-wing newspapers like The Guardian quote pro-immigrant activists about “terrifying new levels” of ICE violence. (Read more.)

Share

Isabel of Castile and Chess

From Nobility:

Today, the Queen is the most powerful piece on the board, but it was not always this way. Nor was this piece always called “Queen.” It was the King’s “adviser,” so in the Kingdom of Bengal (India), it was called the mantri (minister); in Persia, the Vazīr (vizir); in the Arabic world, Wazīr/Firz (vizier); in Turkey, vezir; but an improvement was made when chess was brought to Catholic medieval Europe. Players began referring to this piece as the “queen,” since its initial position was right next to the king, making them the royal couple. The queen was one of the weaker pieces though. She moved just one square at a time, diagonally at that, making her less powerful than today’s bishop.

All this changed with Isabella the Catholic’s dramatic intervention in the siege of Baza, in 1489, seven years into her ten-year war of reconquest of the Muslim Kingdom of Granada.

Her husband, King Ferdinand of Aragon, was one of the best generals of his time and he had excellent generals helping him in this siege, but it all seemed “a bridge too far.” The city was too powerful, defended by a strong, 20,000-man garrison, and well provisioned to withstand the longest siege. The Catholic troops and artillery seemed woefully disproportional to the task and after six months of siege warfare, the King called his generals to a council of war, and they recommended lifting the siege and withdrawing. Before striking camp, however, Ferdinand sent a messenger to Isabella who was then at Jaen, 90 miles away. She sent back word that a retreat would demoralize all Spain. They should continue the siege and she would go herself to their assistance.

The Queen’s arrival at the camp sent the Crusaders into transports of joy and enthusiasm, while inside Baza, the Muslim garrison despaired, seeing in her arrival the fatal seal of impending doom. Three weeks later they surrendered and were given all the honors of war.

As the news of Baza’s fall was carried everywhere, the Crusaders’ enthusiasm at Isabella’s arrival at their camp reverberated throughout Spain, and among the manifestations of joy, the rules of chess were changed, with the Queen becoming a most powerful piece, sweeping and majestic in her moves. A few years later, Luis Ramírez de Lucena enshrined the new rules in Repetición de Amores y Arte de Ajedrez, the oldest printed book on chess we have today, and the new rules were here to stay. (Read more.)

Share

Persecution: Dems Target Christians Again

 From The Western Journal:

Roman Catholic nuns are engaged in a legal battle with New York over a state law encouraging terminally ill patients to end their lives. Becket, a law firm that tackles cases of religious freedom, filed suit last Friday. The group is asking a federal court to block the law before it goes into effect Aug. 5. Just The News said the groups represented in the suit are numerous: Carmelite Sisters for the Aged and Infirm, Little Sisters of the Poor, the Dominican Sisters of Hawthorne, Missionary Sisters of St. Benedict, Diocese of Rockville Centre and its Bishop John Barres, and other orders.

The outlet noted the law in question is the New York Medical Aid in Dying Act.

A short description of the law describes it as a way for “a terminally ill, mentally capable adult with a prognosis of 6 months or less to live to have the option to request, obtain and decide to ingest medication to die peacefully in their sleep if suffering is unbearable.”

Becket said the groups it represents cannot prescribe suicide drugs in accordance with their faith, nor can they direct patients in how to obtain them or facilitate a suicide in any way. Becket argued the law will require them to do so.

“Beginning August 5, any healthcare provider who declines to prescribe suicide pills could still have to tell terminally ill patients about their ‘right’ to kill themselves, help them meet the requirements for obtaining suicide pills, and direct them to a provider willing to prescribe the lethal drugs. Refusal invites significant fines, license revocation, or even time behind bars. (Read more.)

Share

House Passes Bill to Ban Congressional Stock Trading and Require Voter ID

 From Big League Politics:

The U.S. House of Representatives has passed legislation that would prohibit members of Congress and their immediate families from trading individual stocks while also requiring photo identification for voting in federal elections.

The bill passed by a vote of 232-198, with 13 Democrats joining Republicans in support.

The legislation combines two major Republican priorities: cracking down on congressional stock trading and implementing a nationwide voter ID requirement for federal elections.

The measure, known as the Stop Insider Trading Act, was introduced by Rep. Bryan Steil (R-Wis.) and seeks to prevent lawmakers from personally profiting from information obtained through their positions in Congress.

Under the bill:

• Members of Congress, their spouses, and dependent children would be prohibited from purchasing publicly traded stocks.

• Lawmakers would be required to publicly disclose planned stock sales at least seven days before they occur.

• Violations would carry penalties of $2,000 or 10% of the transaction’s value, whichever is greater, along with forfeiture of any profits earned from the trade.

Steil argued the legislation would help restore public confidence by ensuring elected officials cannot use nonpublic information for personal financial gain. (Read more.)

Share

Awaiting the Birth of the Silicon Antichrist

 From Chronicles:

“Technology,” we are often told, “is neither good nor bad, but merely what we make of it.” But what if technology is taking advantage of our complacency to make something of us?

What if, in fact, there really is a “ghost in the machine”? The phrase was coined by British philosopher Gilbert Ryle in 1949 as part of a critique of Cartesian dualism. While Ryle would no doubt have scoffed at the notion that our increasingly complex machines might come to embody autonomous minds, the idea has begun to proliferate in the age of AI and is frequently embraced by our Silicon Valley savants.

Already in the 1960s, media guru Marshall McLuhan popularized the idea that electronic technology was quickly becoming an extension of human consciousness, radically realigning our self-awareness and reshaping the social order. If McLuhan sometimes expressed mild reservations about the long-term implications of electronic media, the French thinker Jacques Ellul, a contemporary of McLuhan, was a trenchant critic of what he called “the technological illusion.” As Ellul wrote in The Technological Society (1954), “Technique has become autonomous, it has its own laws, its own evolution, and its own demands.”

Paul Kingsnorth’s latest book explores the implications of Ellul’s assertion, especially in light of the emergence of a world in which the internet has become the dominant political and social reality. In Kingsnorth’s analysis, the “Machine” (always capitalized) becomes an all-encompassing term describing the malign evolution of modernity under the influence of technological change. Artificial Intelligence, in his view, is simply the endgame in a development that began with the Industrial Revolution, though its roots in Western thought date back to Duns Scotus and the late Middle Ages. The era of the great revolutions, the rise of Progressivism, the emergence of the nation-state, capitalism, Marxism, feminism, the sexual revolution—Kingsnorth believes all of these and more are profoundly implicated as carriers of, or as products of, the tyranny of the Machine. In short, technology, which has been with us since the invention of the wheel, has in the modern era become what philosopher Eric Voegelin might have termed a “second reality” that threatens to devour our very humanity. (Read more.)

Share

The Norma Desmond Revolutionaries

 From Unlicensed Punditry:

There is something patently ridiculous about watching people (many highly privileged) in the freest, most prosperous, most tolerant country in the world wrap themselves in the ragged costumes of revolutionaries.

I happen to believe that most, if not all, self-identified and so-called “revolutionary” movements in America today are fraudulent. In an age and a country where everybody can afford to hold luxury beliefs, the people leading or people close to the people leading these movements are actually privileged dilettantes cosplaying revolutionary characters.

The recent wave of ridiculousness started with a certain Justice Democrat bartending lassie from Westchester surrounded by her gaggle of supporters from the Island of Misfit Toys. Now these “democratic socialists” have added more comedic value to the show.

America has no shortage of self-described dissidents, resisters, radicals, abolitionists, insurgents, and movement leaders who speak as if they spend their days dodging secret police and composing manifestos by candlelight in some damp cellar. They borrow the vocabulary of people who opposed absolute monarchies, communist dictatorships, military juntas, and theocracies as they invoke the moral authority of men and women who faced prison, torture, exile, and death merely for saying aloud what everyone around them knew to be true.

The problem is that most American revolutionaries face no such danger. In truth, many of them are wealthy in their own right, are children of privilege, or from a “protected class” that has been funded and/or supported by the very society and systems they oppose.

They organize publicly, raise money, and give interviews. They sell books, teach university courses, operate nonprofit organizations, collect speaking fees, post revolutionary slogans on social media, and in an absolute denial of irony, appear on cable television to explain, at length, how thoroughly they have been completely silenced. (Read more.)

Share

Spying and Lying

 From Sharyl's Substack:

The news that Special Counsel Jack Smith spied on Congress and then lied about it should be of no surprise.

It’s far from the first time something like that has happened.

And since nobody has been held accountable in the past in any meaningful way, why would anybody expect the behavior to stop? Why wouldn’t the abuses expand?

The same could be said after the forensically proven government spying on me and my family. I was an investigative correspondent at CBS News at the time. The Department of Justice has defended the improper spying against me, in court. under Obama, Trump, and Biden—rather than holding the guilty parties accountable.

Let’s look at an early scandal that left the guilty officials unscathed and foreshadowed more to come.

In March 2013, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper gave false information under oath before the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) asked him directly: “Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?”

Clapper replied: “No, sir… Not wittingly.”

This was untrue. We didn’t know it at the time but the National Security Agency (NSA) was secretly collecting massive amounts of telephone metadata, records of who called whom, when, and for how long, on tens of millions of Americans through the Section 215 program, along with other bulk surveillance programs. (Read more.)

Share

Ghouls

 From Unlicensed Punditry:

Lindsey Graham’s sudden death caused the ghoulish cretins on the left to slither out of their dens once again. I’ve come to expect any death of a conservative or a Republican to result in grotesque hatred spewing from the left – and yes, without fear of contradiction, I can state that most of this behavior does come from the left. It has become who they are.

When I look at things that some find disagreeable today that were once entirely unremarkable, I find myself wondering where the line is between principled disagreement and conditioned reflex. At what point does opposition cease to be the product of reason and become little more than an autonomic response? When does “I disagree because I think you’re wrong” quietly become “I disagree because you’re the one saying it”?

That is not a trivial distinction. It is the difference between a healthy society/republic and dysfunctional ones.

Once people drift into the mindset of “I’m against it because you’re for it” or “I’m for it because you’re against it,” the possibility of persuasion begins to disappear. Facts become secondary. Evidence becomes negotiable. The merits of the policy no longer matter because the policy itself has become little more than a tribal flag. Supporting or opposing it is no longer an exercise in judgment; it is a declaration of identity. (Read more.)

Share

Limited-purpose Libel

 From Mark Judge at The New Criterion:

To understand the negative effects of New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, the 1964 Supreme Court case that changed American libel laws, consider the example of David Enrich. An investigative reporter for The New York Times who participated in the paper’s smear campaign against Brett Kavanaugh in 2018, Enrich is the author of Murder the Truth: Fear, the First Amendment, and a Secret Campaign to Protect the Powerful (2025), a book that defends the press and, specifically, New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. Though Enrich has expressed regret for his own sloppy and malevolent reporting, it is protected by the very legal victories he celebrates in his own book.

The events of the case began in 1960 when The New York Times published a political advertisement critical of Southern opposition to desegregation that condemned the Montgomery police force but also contained inaccuracies. This led L. B. Sullivan, the Montgomery police commissioner, to sue the Times for libel. Sullivan prevailed in the trial court and won the appeal in the Supreme Court of Alabama. The Times then appealed to the Supreme Court. In an opinion authored by Justice William Brennan, the Court reversed the lower-court decisions: to be guilty of libel, a media outlet had to be guilty of “actual malice.”

Insight into the case is provided by Carson Holloway, a professor of political science at the University of Nebraska, in his new book No Liberty to Libel: The Constitutional Case Against New York Times v. Sullivan, published by Encounter Books. (Editor’s note: The New Criterion and Encounter Books are both published by Roger Kimball.) As Holloway describes it, 

“Actual malice” here carried a specific, technical meaning—that the allegedly defamatory claims had been published with knowledge of their falsity, or at least with reckless disregard for their truth or falsity. To win damages in a libel action, the Court held, plaintiffs who were public officials would have to show not only that they had been defamed by a false publication, but also that the falsehood had been published knowingly or recklessly. This new standard gave the press (and others) what the Court believed was the constitutionally required breathing room to discuss vital public issues without undue fear of incurring large damage awards for erroneous publications—with the admitted side effect that some public officials who had actually suffered reputational damage from false reports would be unable to secure legal redress for their injuries.

In the years after Sullivan, Holloway notes, “additional rulings proceeded further down the trail blazed by the Sullivan Court, extending the ‘actual malice’ requirement to cases involving not only public officials but also ‘public figures.’” In 1967, the Supreme Court found in both Curtis Publishing Company v. Butts and Associated Press v. Walker that the actual-malice rule should apply not only to libel cases brought by public officials but also to those brought by all public figures—entertainers, professional athletes, musicians, business leaders, or university presidents. “Many who do not hold public office at the moment are nevertheless intimately involved in the resolution of important public questions,” Chief Justice Warren wrote in his decision on Curtis Publishing Company v. Butts. He continued, “our citizenry has a legitimate and substantial interest in the conduct of such persons, and freedom of the press to engage in uninhibited debate about their involvement in public issues and events is as crucial as it is in the case of ‘public officials.’” (Read more.)

Share

The Tragic Life of Marie-Thérèse of France

From Salon Privé Magazine:

As Marie-Thérèse Charlotte of France grew older, the French Revolution threatened. Because the country supported the American Revolution, funds were very low and France was borderline bankrupt. Attacks on the royal family became more vicious and the monarchy’s popularity plummeted. Within the Court of Versailles, xenophobia and jealousy were the primary causes of resentment towards Marie Antoinette, and due to her unpopularity with high-ranking officials within the court, she became the target of a vicious smear campaign. Pamphlets and leaflets were printed accusing her of a wide range of sexual deviancies and of sending France into financial ruin. Now, experts agree that Marie Antoinette was unfairly victimised and did little to deserve such treatment. At the time, however, this smear campaign worked and the public turned on her. (Read more.)

Madame Royale is one of the only novels about the life of Marie-Thérèse Charlotte.


Share

Why We’re Dismantling the ICC

 From U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio:

Most of us would struggle to imagine a world in which U.S. soldiers, police officers, Border Patrol agents and elected leaders could be dragged before an international court, tried by judges from random countries across the globe, found guilty under international laws we neither consent to nor control, and then imprisoned thousands of miles from America.

But that is what the International Criminal Court now claims the power to do.

The ICC was born at the turn of the century. At first, it was marketed as a narrow backstop to prosecute the gravest crimes. Now the ICC and its allies seek a standing world tribunal with near-unlimited reach, empowered to override the courts and constitutions of the U.S. and other sovereign states—and to prosecute and arrest our citizens. (Read more.)

Share

The US Should Exit the UN

 From Brownstone Insights:

The UN is often viewed as an ineffectual bureaucracy that occasionally does some good. It is nothing so benevolent. Its origins may have been well-meaning, but the current UN has become what it claims to oppose. The US should leave the UN altogether and immediately, especially since its unjust policies are likely to get worse…and soon.

The UN’s Original Mission

The UN Charter (1945) opens,

WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED…to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women…

The Preamble of its Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) states,

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Article 2 of the Declaration provides,

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex…

‘All human beings are equal’ is the basis of Western justice, whether the equality is under nature, God, or law. Instead of pursuing equality, however, the UN is now a woke and corrupt actor that creates inequality and division. The UN’s financial malfeasance, the sexual abuse by field personnel, its demonization of the West…are well documented in the 104-page report From Watchdogs to Ideologues: How Politicized UN Rapporteurs Are Subverting Human Rights by the Geneva-based NGO UN Watch.

The UN’s demonstrated commitment is to social justice or a wokeness rooted in equity, not equality. Equity seeks the redistribution of wealth and power to those who are considered oppressed from those who are considered oppressors. Equity is the opposite of equality under the law. (Read more.)

Share

Bastille Day and the French Revolution Were Not Caused by Marie-Antoinette

From The New American:

July 14 marks another anniversary of Bastille Day, the day the Paris mob rioted and stormed the Bastille, a prison fortress in the city. The popular image of the incident is that of the French Revolution itself, which is that the liberty-loving French folk in Paris spontaneously rose up against a tyrannical king and his arrogant wife, and heroically stormed the symbol of the Old Regime — liberating hundreds of political prisoners. This led to an abolition of the monarchy and the establishment of a government dedicated to liberty for all the people of France.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Almost everyone has heard that Queen Marie Antoinette said, “Let them eat cake,” in haughty response to the plea of the poor starving masses of France: “We have no bread.”

That is also untrue.

And it is widely believed that Antoinette caused or at least was the principal cause — of the entire French Revolution.

That is ridiculous.

Whereas Louis XVI and his wife, Marie, are usually pictured in the history books and in the popular culture as tyrants of the worst sort, the truth is quite different. The real Marie Antoinette was a charitable woman, who lodged and fed 12 poor families, at her own expense, at Trianon. She founded the Society of Ladies of Maternal Charity. She even once stopped her carriage for over an hour to aid an injured person, waiting until a surgeon was located.

Historian Antonia Fraser disputed the cruel libel in her book Marie Antoinette, the Journey. “As a handy journalistic cliché, [“Let them eat cake”] it may never die,” Fraser wrote, adding “such ignorant behavior would have been quite out of character. The unfashionably philanthropic Marie Antoinette would have been far more likely to bestow her own cake impulsively upon the starving people before her.”

If the Revolution was not caused by Marie Antoinette, then just who did cause it? (Read more.)

Share

Rubio Overturns Walz’s Gift to Child Rapist

From The Daily BS:

Secretary of State Marco Rubio says a convicted child rapist whom Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz helped shield from deportation is now out of the United States for good.

The case is quickly becoming one of the most politically damaging immigration controversies facing Walz, who is already under scrutiny for Minnesota’s sanctuary-state policies and a series of clemency decisions involving criminal illegal aliens.

At the center of the firestorm is Tue Lue Vang, a Laotian national convicted of repeatedly sexually assaulting a 10-year-old girl. Federal officials say Vang was scheduled for deportation when Walz and Minnesota’s Board of Pardons intervened and granted him clemency last month.

That pardon immediately raised alarms inside the Department of Homeland Security, which warned that the move could complicate federal efforts to remove him from the country.

According to Rubio, the Trump administration found another way.

“Just weeks ago, a foreign child rapist was freed to once again endanger America’s children after receiving a pardon from Minnesota Governor Tim Walz,” Rubio told Fox News Digital.

Rubio didn’t mince words. (Read more.)

Share

McConnell’s Absence Gives Trump’s Voter ID Push an Unexpected Opening

 From The Daily BS:

President Donald Trump’s push for a nationwide voter ID and citizenship verification law remains stuck in the Senate, but one of its most persistent Republican opponents is suddenly off the field.

Sen. Mitch McConnell’s extended absence due to health issues has temporarily removed a reliable “no” vote from the equation, offering a small but politically significant break for supporters of the SAVE America Act. The Kentucky Republican has repeatedly bucked both Trump and much of the GOP conference on the legislation, helping stall one of the president’s signature election-security priorities.

The development does not solve the bill’s larger problem: Senate Democrats remain unanimously opposed, and Republicans still lack the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster. Senate Majority Leader John Thune has made clear that he has no intention of detonating the chamber’s legislative filibuster to get the bill across the finish line.

“The only way you could get there is to undo or get rid of the legislative filibuster,” Thune said previously. “There aren’t even close to the votes here in the United States Senate in order to achieve that.” (Read more.)

Share