DOGE Achieved More than You Think

 From City Journal:

The media often portrayed DOGE as a way for Donald Trump to get back at agencies he disfavored and social programs he disliked. It would surprise many to learn that the biggest workforce reductions came at the former Department of Defense, now the Department of War. The department has over 85,000 fewer employees than it did at Trump’s inauguration, down more than 10 percent. The Trump administration and the Republican Congress have showered the department with largesse and expanded military purchases, but that hasn’t stopped DOGE and Trump from trimming its civilian headcount.

Though liberal-leaning agencies like Health and Human Services saw larger proportional shrinkage, every agency across the federal government took cuts. The Department of Veterans Affairs, another agency favored by Trump and Republicans, has 27,000 fewer employees today than it did pre-inauguration.

Looking beyond departments to the types of jobs eliminated, the biggest group by far, at over 43,000, consisted of general administration, management, and “program analysis” positions—the sorts of middle-management jobs that previous government-slimming efforts have targeted. Other positions that saw large cutbacks included general attorneys, HR officials, clerks, and general business managers, each losing roughly 7,000 workers. If you wanted to trim fat, these are the positions you’d start with.

DOGE also made smaller cutbacks across hundreds of types of federal positions, adding up to significant numbers. The government has eliminated 1,000 or more positions among public-affairs specialists, logistics managers, financial administrators, accountants, budget analysts, social-science analysts, and grants managers. It also lost about 100 interior designers and creative-arts therapists. (Read more.)

Share

Trump Has Delivered on the Economy, the Drive-By Media Simply Won't Report on It

 From The Enterprise:

Trump’s policies give manufacturers reasons to build here. Tariffs make domestic production more attractive relative to shipping goods into the country, while the tax law restored 100% expensing for equipment and extended it to new factory construction. Expensing lets a business deduct qualifying costs upfront rather than spread the deduction over time. That changes the calculation for a company deciding where to put its next plant.

A chip fab takes four years from permit to wafer; a petrochemical plant takes five. The wait is real, and a pledge is no guarantee of completion. Yet the same reporters who dismiss Trump’s commitments as vapor celebrated every Biden CHIPS Act press release as a manufacturing renaissance, including projects since shelved. Apply the same scrutiny to both. One-directional skepticism is partisanship with a notebook.

The habit predates the factory announcements. In 2021 and 2022, the Biden administration called inflation “transitory,” and the drive-by media repeated it for most of a year as inflation climbed from 5% to 9%. When a Fox reporter asked Biden about inflation in January 2022, the president answered with an obscenity on a hot mic and the press corps chuckled. When gasoline crossed $5, CNN supplied silver linings. When two consecutive quarters of negative growth arrived that summer, the White House redefined recession and the networks adopted the definition within a news cycle. (Read more.)

Share

Trump’s Next Two Years Can Be His Greatest

 From The Enterprise:

Donald Trump should enter January ready to govern with confidence. Last Tuesday the Democrat Party captured both the House and the Senate, then joined its willing accomplices in the drive-by media in spending the week composing his political obituary. They mistake a congressional majority for control of the presidency. Chuck Schumer will run the Senate calendar and Hakeem Jeffries will hold the House gavel. Neither will inherit the executive branch, its lawful authority, or the money already appropriated for Trump’s priorities.

His agenda never depended on a Republican Congress that, for most of two years, acted like an obstacle wearing an ally’s uniform. Chasing 218 House votes and 60 Senate votes for bills that never arrived consumed attention better spent governing. Victor Davis Hanson identified the opportunity within days of the results: a nominal majority of 53 senators can mean 53 private vetoes. Divided government can strip those vetoes of their bargaining value. (Read more.)

Share

The Perfect President Who Never Existed

 From Unlicensed Punditry:

President Reagan is considered by many to be the patron saint of modern American conservatism. Reagan believed in limited government, individual liberty, free enterprise, and a strong national defense. He also raised taxes, signed an immigration amnesty (he believed the Democrats were honorable), negotiated compromises on Social Security, presided over substantial increases in the national debt, and accepted government policies that would send some of today’s self-described constitutional conservatives into fits of apoplexy.

By the standards of ideological purity some demand of Trump, Reagan himself might be dismissed as insufficiently conservative. Apparently, the only acceptable conservative president is one who has never occupied the Oval Office.

Reagan also enjoyed a political advantage that no longer exists in any meaningful form. During the 1980s, conservative Democrats, particularly those from the South and rural America, frequently crossed party lines to support his agenda. Reagan never had a Republican majority in the House of Representatives, yet he accomplished much of his legislative program through coalitions with Democrats who shared enough of his principles to recognize common objectives.

Those Reagan era conservative Democrats have largely disappeared from Congress, victims of the ideological sorting that has transformed both parties into increasingly homogeneous political organizations. Reagan governed in a political environment where disagreement did not automatically constitute treason against one’s party.

This brings us to Trump and the curious phenomenon of conservatives who appear to measure him against a president assembled entirely from their own political preferences. This imaginary president never compromises, never makes an unfortunate appointment, never says anything embarrassing, never signs imperfect legislation, and never exercises executive authority in a manner that offends their particular interpretation of constitutional government. He also never has to negotiate with Congress, deal with an entrenched bureaucracy, confront hostile courts, or win an election. Governing is remarkably easy when your presidency exists entirely between your ears.

President Reagan is considered by many to be the patron saint of modern American conservatism. Reagan believed in limited government, individual liberty, free enterprise, and a strong national defense. He also raised taxes, signed an immigration amnesty (he believed the Democrats were honorable), negotiated compromises on Social Security, presided over substantial increases in the national debt, and accepted government policies that would send some of today’s self-described constitutional conservatives into fits of apoplexy.

By the standards of ideological purity some demand of Trump, Reagan himself might be dismissed as insufficiently conservative. Apparently, the only acceptable conservative president is one who has never occupied the Oval Office.

Reagan also enjoyed a political advantage that no longer exists in any meaningful form. During the 1980s, conservative Democrats, particularly those from the South and rural America, frequently crossed party lines to support his agenda. Reagan never had a Republican majority in the House of Representatives, yet he accomplished much of his legislative program through coalitions with Democrats who shared enough of his principles to recognize common objectives.

Those Reagan era conservative Democrats have largely disappeared from Congress, victims of the ideological sorting that has transformed both parties into increasingly homogeneous political organizations. Reagan governed in a political environment where disagreement did not automatically constitute treason against one’s party.

This brings us to Trump and the curious phenomenon of conservatives who appear to measure him against a president assembled entirely from their own political preferences. This imaginary president never compromises, never makes an unfortunate appointment, never says anything embarrassing, never signs imperfect legislation, and never exercises executive authority in a manner that offends their particular interpretation of constitutional government. He also never has to negotiate with Congress, deal with an entrenched bureaucracy, confront hostile courts, or win an election. Governing is remarkably easy when your presidency exists entirely between your ears.

President Reagan is considered by many to be the patron saint of modern American conservatism. Reagan believed in limited government, individual liberty, free enterprise, and a strong national defense. He also raised taxes, signed an immigration amnesty (he believed the Democrats were honorable), negotiated compromises on Social Security, presided over substantial increases in the national debt, and accepted government policies that would send some of today’s self-described constitutional conservatives into fits of apoplexy.

By the standards of ideological purity some demand of Trump, Reagan himself might be dismissed as insufficiently conservative. Apparently, the only acceptable conservative president is one who has never occupied the Oval Office.

Reagan also enjoyed a political advantage that no longer exists in any meaningful form. During the 1980s, conservative Democrats, particularly those from the South and rural America, frequently crossed party lines to support his agenda. Reagan never had a Republican majority in the House of Representatives, yet he accomplished much of his legislative program through coalitions with Democrats who shared enough of his principles to recognize common objectives.

Those Reagan era conservative Democrats have largely disappeared from Congress, victims of the ideological sorting that has transformed both parties into increasingly homogeneous political organizations. Reagan governed in a political environment where disagreement did not automatically constitute treason against one’s party.

This brings us to Trump and the curious phenomenon of conservatives who appear to measure him against a president assembled entirely from their own political preferences. This imaginary president never compromises, never makes an unfortunate appointment, never says anything embarrassing, never signs imperfect legislation, and never exercises executive authority in a manner that offends their particular interpretation of constitutional government. He also never has to negotiate with Congress, deal with an entrenched bureaucracy, confront hostile courts, or win an election. Governing is remarkably easy when your presidency exists entirely between your ears.

President Reagan is considered by many to be the patron saint of modern American conservatism. Reagan believed in limited government, individual liberty, free enterprise, and a strong national defense. He also raised taxes, signed an immigration amnesty (he believed the Democrats were honorable), negotiated compromises on Social Security, presided over substantial increases in the national debt, and accepted government policies that would send some of today’s self-described constitutional conservatives into fits of apoplexy.

By the standards of ideological purity some demand of Trump, Reagan himself might be dismissed as insufficiently conservative. Apparently, the only acceptable conservative president is one who has never occupied the Oval Office.

Reagan also enjoyed a political advantage that no longer exists in any meaningful form. During the 1980s, conservative Democrats, particularly those from the South and rural America, frequently crossed party lines to support his agenda. Reagan never had a Republican majority in the House of Representatives, yet he accomplished much of his legislative program through coalitions with Democrats who shared enough of his principles to recognize common objectives.

Those Reagan era conservative Democrats have largely disappeared from Congress, victims of the ideological sorting that has transformed both parties into increasingly homogeneous political organizations. Reagan governed in a political environment where disagreement did not automatically constitute treason against one’s party.

This brings us to Trump and the curious phenomenon of conservatives who appear to measure him against a president assembled entirely from their own political preferences. This imaginary president never compromises, never makes an unfortunate appointment, never says anything embarrassing, never signs imperfect legislation, and never exercises executive authority in a manner that offends their particular interpretation of constitutional government. He also never has to negotiate with Congress, deal with an entrenched bureaucracy, confront hostile courts, or win an election. Governing is remarkably easy when your presidency exists entirely between your ears. (Read more.)

Share

20 Million “New Voters” with No Proof of Citizenship

From Tierney's Real News:

If you want to understand what actually happened to our elections, you have to compare 2026 directly against 2024.

When you look at the raw state-by-state data, the true story emerges: roughly 25 million fewer Republicans turned out in 2026 in states where a Senator or Governor was on the line - compared to Trump’s 2024 presidential totals, while the Democrat voter drop-off was only about 14 million.

Republicans collapsed without Trump at the top of the ticket. Democrats did not.

Since publishing those numbers, I’ve been digging deeper into how the Democrats were able to add 11 million more votes in key states and 20 million more votes nationwide in this midtern — and why the establishment GOP seems completely unbothered by it. What I found answers the question of why the turnout numbers looked the way they did, and it points to a massive “manipulation” that was kept hidden in plain sight. (Read more.)

Share

The Numbers Don't Lie

 From Tierney's Real News:

25 million Republicans stayed home because Trump wasn’t on the ballot and Democrats outvoted us by 11 million votes and those votes were targeted to races that Democrats needed to win to secure a wide margin in the House and Senate!

In plain English, about 11 million more Democrats showed up relative to their presidential baseline than Republicans did relative to theirs. In several states the Democratic candidate actually got *more* votes than Harris received in 2024. That did not happen on the Republican side at all.

If the standard “people just don’t vote in midterms” excuse were true, both parties should have seen roughly the same kind of drop. They didn’t. Republicans collapsed without Trump on the ballot. Democrats did not.

That is exactly what Trump has been saying. He was the one who brought those voters out. When he wasn’t there, a huge chunk of the coalition stayed home. The professional Republican get-out-the-vote operation, the consultants, the state parties, the “ground game” everyone was supposed to be running — it did not replace him. The numbers show it. (Read more.)

Share

The Triad of Power

 From Tierney's Real News:

Once you put the numbers side by side, you immediately understand why so many mainstream commentators, corporate institutions, and online influencers default to the European Union’s framing or soft-pedal Communist China. The European Union (EU) offers a comforting vocabulary of “rules,” “values,” and managed decline. It flatters an entire class of credentialed professionals who prefer process over outcomes.

Communist China (CCP) offers massive scale, deep pockets, and the quiet promise that American primacy is fading anyway—so the smart play is to hedge, compromise, and accommodate.

Both of these narratives let people sound incredibly sophisticated while ignoring the exact same set of undeniable facts: the United States still holds the largest nominal economy, the highest individual productivity, and the only military capable of projecting devastating power at a distance. The other two blocs know this. They are actively trying to close those gaps on their own terms.

The deeper conflict isn’t just about territory; it is about what the world should actually look like. (Read more.)

Share

Iran Tried to Hold the World’s Oil Hostage

 From Tierney's Real News:

The fake news and the political hacks in Washington are running their usual playbook. They are overreacting about short-term gas prices, calling the White House reckless over Iran, and worrying about low oil stocks.

They are missing the bigger picture.

Alexander Muse just wrote a strong summary titled “Trump Was Right to Take On Iran, and Two Years of Refilling Oil Tanks Is a Bargain.” Muse correctly pointed out that what Trump is doing with Iran is justified, well-timed, and a good deal for Americans. This is not only about stopping a dangerous regime. It is Trump making a smart move to keep America strong for the next fifty years.

1. Defeating Iran’s Financial Warfare: Starving the Beast

For years, past presidents and Washington experts tried to “contain” Iran with weak talks or piles of cash. Meanwhile, the Iranian leaders and their military used oil money and blackmail proceeds to fund themselves, Hamas, Hezbollah, and Houthi terrorists. Trump changed the approach.

By fully blocking Iran’s oil, its crude exports have basically stopped. Shipping trackers show almost no Iranian oil leaving through the Strait of Hormuz since September. No successful shipments have gotten through the blockade. CENTCOM says the operation has already blocked about $25 billion in oil revenue for Iran. Cutting off the money does what years of limited fights could not: it starves the regime’s allies and stops it from building missiles and drones that threaten American friends and ships.

Stopping a dangerous regime by cutting its money is just as effective as stopping it in a fight. (Read more.)

Share

Strengthening Social Security for Future Generations

 From Stone Cold Truth:

For years, certain free-market conservatives have dismissed Social Security as a bankrupt, compulsory government Ponzi scheme. They pointed to demographics, political raiding of the trust funds, and a worker-to-beneficiary ratio that has collapsed from over 40-to-1 in the early decades to under 3-to-1 today. The actuarial math looked grim enough that those critics appeared headed for vindication.

Trustees reports have long projected the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance trust fund’s exhaustion in the early 2030s. After that point, incoming payroll taxes would cover only about 78 percent of scheduled benefits. That trajectory has shifted under President Trump.

Social Security Administration Commissioner Frank Bisignano, a trustee of the system, has stated plainly that the program “will be around for another 90 years.”

“This is a long journey. It’s 90 years old, and it’ll be around for another 90 years,” he said. “The president has promised to protect and preserve and that’s what we’re doing.”

The change rests on concrete actions. These include stronger anti-fraud measures, tax relief for seniors, and—most fundamentally—a growing economy that generates the revenue any safety net requires.

President Trump eliminated federal income taxes on Social Security for the vast majority of beneficiaries through the One Big Beautiful Bill. This delivered the largest tax break for seniors in history and fulfilled a core campaign promise. Roughly 88 to 90 percent of recipients will now pay no federal tax on their benefits, keeping more of what they earned through decades of work. This is not merely relief. It reinforces the program’s legitimacy as a return on contributions rather than a pure transfer. (Read more.)

Share

Doomsday Bunkers?

Interesting. From Tierney's Real News:

Here is the short version of what my earlier reports established, so you don’t have to start from zero:

- Iran has already demonstrated ballistic missiles with ranges that can reach U.S. bases, Europe, and the U.S. East Coast. The next step is mating nuclear warheads to them. They have proven the delivery capability. Pretending they would never use it is the delusion.

- Iran’s leadership is driven by Twelver Shia eschatology. This is not ordinary great-power competition. Key elements of the regime view the destruction of the current world order (and the conditions that bring the return of the Mahdi) as a religious duty, not a last resort.

- The White House ballroom project is not primarily a party venue. It is a hardened military complex: multi-story underground facilities, drone-proof and missile-resistant construction, military hospital, secure command spaces, biodefense systems, and rooftop drone/air-defense capacity. Court filings and official statements have described it as essential for continuity of government and presidential protection against nuclear, missile, and drone threats. (Read more.)

Share

Turn in the Fraud, Collect the Check

 From Tierney's Real News:

Today President Trump and Vice President JD Vance launched a new program called WHIP, the Fraud Whistleblower Incentive Program.

Here’s how it works. The Department of Justice is setting aside $25 million. If you send in a tip at fraud.gov and it leads to a conviction or a major enforcement action, you can get up to $30,000. The goal is simple: get ordinary people to report fraud in federal programs. Vance has led the administration’s fraud task force since March.

Trump also talked about a bigger idea. If a tipster helps recover a huge amount, like $1 billion or $10 billion, they could get a 1 percent “commission” cut, as long as they can prove the tip came from them. He said citizen journalists could qualify too.

Trump handed a $10,000 check to citizen journalist Nick Shirley for his work on Somali fraud. In 2025, Shirley made videos about Minnesota childcare centers that were getting federal money. His work led to investigations and arrests. Trump called the fraud in Minnesota a “horrible plague” in a “once beautiful state” and criticized Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, Peggy Flanagan and Ilhan Omar. I’ve been reporting on Somali election and immigration and welfare fraud in Minnesota since 2018 - I wish I could collect for that! I’d be a multi-millionaire!  (Read more.)

Share

A Never Trump Influencer Who Spent Years Sabotaging Him Just Flipped

 From Tierney's Real News:

Karol Markowicz is a New York Post and Fox News columnist, the host of The Karol Markowicz Show and co-host of the Normally podcast, and co-author of the bestselling book Stolen Youth. She just published a full-throated defense of President Trump’s second term in the New York Post. The headline says it all: “I was a Trump skeptic — but his second-term wins made me a believer.”

She admits she voted third-party in 2016, sat out 2020 entirely, and never owned a MAGA hat. Now she’s listing all the reasons that America MUST stick with President Trump, and vote for his endorsed Republican candidates, instead of handing power back to the Communists and Islamists on the left who want to close prisons, install woke DEI, end capitalism, and open the borders wide again.

I’m glad she’s finally awake. I’m also sad it took this long. Here’s the opinion piece, which is well written and 100% correct, followed by my commentary: (Read more.)

Share

The Iran Victory Hiding in Plain Sight

 From The Enterprise:

Picture a man on a Tehran rooftop on the night of January 8. He has a Starlink dish wrapped in a blanket, one of somewhere between 50,000 and 100,000 terminals that activists believe were smuggled into Iran, and he knows that a law passed late last year can send him to prison for 10 years for owning it, or to the gallows if a judge decides to call it espionage. Below him, the streets are full. By the following night, according to Iranian health officials who spoke to Western media and hospital tallies compiled by the surgeon Amir Parasta, as many as 100,000 of his countrymen may be dead. The regime cut the internet before the shooting started, and it did so on purpose.

President Trump understood what that blackout meant. On January 11th, he said he would work with Elon Musk to get Iranians back online, and two days later SpaceX waived its fees inside Iran. Then came February 28th, the strikes, and a second blackout that ran 88 days, with connectivity falling to roughly 1% by early March. Since then Iran has been through a ceasefire, a memorandum signed on June 17, attacks on shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, and renewed hostilities on July 7. Most voters in Ohio or Arizona see strikes and a blockade. They see very little of the Iranian people, and in 27 days they vote.

Iranian American organizations have drafted four measures that would change that picture, and each one passes a single demanding test. The President can direct it now, under authority he already holds, without waiting on Congress, new appropriations, foreign capitals, or corporate goodwill. Congress, which voted in both chambers in June to direct a withdrawal from the conflict, is in no mood to help. The measures are modest on paper. I suspect they would matter more to ordinary Iranians than anything else Mr. Trump could do between now and Election Day. (Read more.)

Share

Freedom & Justice Return to Latin America

 From The Enterprise:

Most Americans picture USAID as sacks of grain and boxes of malaria medicine. In Latin America that picture was badly incomplete. The agency’s inspector general reported that democracy, human rights, and governance made up its largest program category in the region, and the portfolio was candid about its purposes. It funded “political competition and consensus building,” civil society, independent media, the free flow of information, governance, human rights, and election-related work. Political competition is the contest for power itself. An agency that funds it inside another country has entered that country’s politics, whatever label it prints on the grant.

A political party resembles a business storefront. Voters see the sign, the candidates, the slogans. Behind the storefront runs a supply chain: the advocacy groups that draft policy, the institutes that produce studies, the journalists who decide which stories count as news, the monitors who certify an election as clean, the lawyers who bring the lawsuits, and the foreign validators who tell other capitals which side speaks for democracy. A party can survive a bad candidate. It struggles to survive losing its supply chain. USAID ran no storefronts in Latin America, but it financed a large share of the supply chain, and the goods on those shelves suited one kind of store far better than the other.

El Salvador shows how the arrangement worked in practice. When USAID concluded that Nayib Bukele’s government was backsliding, its inspector general recorded that the agency moved money away from four government institutions and toward civil-society groups working on transparency, anti-corruption, and human-rights monitoring. It paid for legal assistance and advocacy, for protecting activists and journalists, and for mechanisms that helped civic organizations and media push back against the government. Bukele did not deserve the pushback. Salvadoran voters had handed Bukele enormous majorities, and a US agency, having judged him objectionable, used American tax dollars to strengthen the people opposing him at home. Bukele saw it plainly. In a February 2025 post on 𝕏, he wrote that funds sold as democracy promotion were mostly “funneled into opposition groups, NGOs with political agendas, and destabilizing movements.” (Read more.)

Share

Tariffs Work For America

 From Tierney's Real News:

Today, President Trump announced a major expansion of the Korea Strategic Trade and Investment Deal, unlocking $200 billion in new Korean investments in the United States as part of the broader $350 billion partnership reached last year.

Tariffs served as the primary leverage that secured this deal. For those who still question how tariffs help Make America Great Again, this is a clear example.

In 2025, the Trump administration imposed or threatened reciprocal tariffs on South Korean goods at around 25 percent. To avoid or reduce those rates, South Korea committed $350 billion in U.S. investments—$150 billion for shipbuilding and $200 billion for strategic projects in energy—in exchange for lowering tariffs on most Korean goods to 15 percent.

This investment pledge was the explicit quid pro quo for tariff relief. Trump has directly linked the funding to the negotiations, noting that South Korea “paid to get tariffs reduced and part of that money is going to this project,” and that investments of this scale might not otherwise have been available. Throughout 2026, the threat of higher tariffs continued to ensure progress on delivering the commitments.

As a result, these commitments are now being converted into concrete, large-scale energy and infrastructure projects that will yield tens of thousands of American jobs, expand reliable power capacity, strengthen national energy security, and support the trillions of dollars already flowing into advanced manufacturing and semiconductors. (Read more.)

Share

President Trump Announces the END of America’s 23-Year “QUAGMIRE” in Iraq

 From Overton News:

23 years later, the United States is completely withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq. The news broke early this morning from the War Department, signaling the formal end of the U.S. mission in Iraq, closing one of the longest and most disastrous chapters of America’s post-9/11 foreign policy. The war began in 2003 under President George W. Bush, but more than two decades later, President Donald Trump is the one overseeing the final withdrawal of the last remaining American forces from the country. He’s bringing them all home. It was finally happening. Nearly 4,500 U.S. service members lost their lives during the Iraq War. (Read more.)

Share

New White House ‘Restricted-view’ Press Section

 The Daily B.S:

The White House restored access to CNN, MS NOW and Politico on Thursday, complying with a federal judge’s order by creating a new press section inside the White House with full access to the building and no discernible view of the president.

The three outlets were issued restored hard passes and assigned seats in the newly designated Brady Briefing Room Restricted-View Annex, located directly behind the briefing-room wall.

“The court ordered access to the White House, and they have access to the White House,” a senior administration official said. “They’re in it right now.”

The annex contains three folding chairs, a water cooler and a narrow opening in the wall through which credentialed reporters can hear approximately 70 percent of each briefing.

Officials said the opening was already there. CNN asked whether it could be enlarged. The request was denied.

Under the new arrangement, reporters wishing to ask a question may write it on an index card and slide it through the opening.

Questions deemed appropriate will be read aloud by a White House staffer. Follow-ups require a second index card.

Politico asked whether reporters would be permitted to enter the actual briefing room. “The judge ordered us to restore their White House access,” an official said. “Nobody said anything about a good seat.”

MS NOW objected that reporters could not see the podium from the annex. The White House responded Thursday afternoon by installing a mirror. (Read more.)

Share

Will the GOP Hold the House and Senate?

 From Tierney's Real News:

What will happen in the midterms? Here’s my best thinking right now.

Republicans currently hold both the House and Senate by narrow margins.

Left-leaning pollsters project Democrats will flip the House in 2026 by 9–15 seats while Republicans cling to the Senate by a single vote.

A few weeks ago, right-leaning pollsters expected Democrats to take the House by one seat and Republicans to expand their Senate edge to 2–3 seats.

In the past week, however, many of those same voices on the right have flipped: they now predict the GOP will hold both chambers—again by narrow margins.

All bets are off.

Here’s a sample of what some conservatives are saying on X right now:

• David Marcus: GOP hold in both houses.

• Ted Cruz: If we show up and unify, the GOP can grow our majorities in both the House and Senate. It’s all about turnout.

• Bill Mitchell: Democrats are going to lose in November in the most humiliating fashion possible.

• RNC Chair Joe Gruters: I expect Republicans to hold both chambers—220 House seats and 53 Senate seats.

• Seth Levy: 53-47 GOP in the Senate and 218-217 Republican in the House. Republicans hold both.

• House Speaker Mike Johnson: Republicans will hold and grow the House majority.

• Unseen1: With all the propaganda and fake polls, there’s no way of predicting. 50/50 chance the GOP keeps the House; I think they hold the Senate.

(Read more.)

Share

NO Global Government and NO Global Taxes

 From Tierney's Real News:

Today, President Trump addressed the 81st session of the United Nations General Assembly and delivered a powerful message: America is back and we’re not putting up with nonsense any longer...

President Trump declared that under his leadership, America is stronger than ever — and we will use our strength to confront our enemies, protect our interests, forbid communism, combat terrorism, reject global control, make the world a safer place for all and always defend our sovereignty.

The camera focused on each of our adversaries while he warned them of his resolve and some walked out in fear and anger. I loved every minute!

Here are some highlights followed by a transcript of the entire speech. I strongly encourage you all to read or watch the entire thing. He covered two months worth of news in just 30 minutes - telling us the truth about many issues that the fake news refuses to accurately report or report at all:

• “Two and a half centuries after the cause of liberty found its home on this continent, I can report to you with pride that America is back, and our country is stronger today than ever before.” (Watch)

• “As President of the most extraordinary nation in history, I have no interest in leaving dangers to grow for another day. I do not believe in letting problems fester; they only become harder to solve. So, while others have talked, I have acted. While others have spoken of peace, I have made peace. While others have ignored threats, I have confronted them. While others have talked of courage, America has shown it. While others have promised strength, I have used it to make America the most powerful country in the world. Working with many nations in this room, we are solving decades of intractable challenges — and we are settling years of unfinished business.” (Watch)

• “There is no better example of a danger that was allowed to gather strength at the world’s peril than the number one sponsor of terror, the Islamic Republic of Iran… From the first day I entered the political arena, I have been unwavering — I will never allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon.” (Watch)

• “In America, we just marked the 25th anniversary of the worst terror attack in history, September 11th, which killed 3,000 people just a few miles from here. In two weeks, we will mark the third anniversary of the October 7th attack in Israel, where terrorists funded by Iran tortured, mutilated, and killed 1,200 very innocent civilians, including dozens of Americans… Iran’s Supreme Leader celebrated that massacre and called it a ‘service to humanity.’ The same regime slaughtered over 72,000 of its citizens this year; recently, 10,000 were killed for protesting. Just imagine if such a vile regime were ever empowered to carry out large-scale terror attacks from behind a nuclear shield. This was the reality we had to confront — a reality that far too many preferred to ignore.” (Watch) (Read more.)

Share

Trump Took Iran at Its Word — History Will Reward Him

 From Tierney's Real News:

The leaking and finger-pointing on Iran by MAGA disloyalists have begun. The Wall Street Journal reports that in February, then-Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard warned President Donald Trump that if he attacked, “Tehran would rush to close the Strait of Hormuz, destabilizing the global energy market.” Her admonition “echoed warnings Trump was receiving from all corners,” the Journal wrote, including from top military leaders who expressed “concerns about the weapons stockpile and readiness problems for an overstretched force” and from Vice President JD Vance, who “promoted a more cautious approach” focused on negotiations that would be “less costly than a war with unwieldy consequences.”

The message of the leakers is clear: Had Trump only listened to us, we would not be in this mess.

In fact, these self-serving leaks actually show the opposite — by demonstrating what a courageous decision Trump made. Virtually alone, surrounded by naysayers, Trump acted to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon.

Indeed, Trump not only ignored the words of the naysayers; he did something few presidents before him have ever done: He listened to the words of the enemy.

The most tragic mistake that world leaders made over the past century was the failure to take the words of the monsters of history seriously. These tyrants repeatedly stated precisely what they intended to do, but their ideas were assumed to be too foolish, or too fantastic, to be serious.

In the early 1900s, Vladimir Lenin published a pamphlet called “What Is To Be Done?,” in which he laid out his plans to overthrow the Russian czar and establish a “dictatorship of the proletariat.” The world didn’t take his words seriously, and the totalitarian empire he founded spawned communist revolution across the globe that killed an estimated 100 million people and brought the world to the brink of nuclear annihilation.

In the 1920s, Adolf Hitler published “Mein Kampf,” in which he laid out his plan to establish a thousand-year Reich in Germany and eradicate the Jews. The world didn’t take his words seriously, and his Nazi regime built gas chambers, set the world aflame and killed 17 million people.

In the late 1990s, Osama bin Laden issued a fatwa declaring war on the West, calling on all Muslims to wage “jihad against the enemies of God, your enemies the Israelis and Americans.” The world didn’t take his words seriously, and on Sept. 11, 2001, his followers flew airplanes into the Pentagon and World Trade Center.

In 2021, Russian President Vladimir Putin published a 7,000 word manifesto explaining that Ukraine had been stolen from Russia, its “historical motherland,” and promising to reunite them. The world didn’t take his words seriously, and a few months later he launched the largest land invasion in Europe since World War II — a war that has resulted in more than 2 million dead and wounded among military personnel and civilians so far. (Read more.)

Share