Home Blog

Report: Youngkin’s Trump White House Hopes Dim After Virginia Setback

By
Patrick Houck
-
0
President Donald Trump signs Executive Orders, Thursday, April 17, 2025, in the Oval Office. (Official White House Photo by Molly Riley)

The political fallout from Virginia’s redistricting referendum is reaching beyond the state, cutting into Glenn Youngkin’s standing at a moment that matters for his future.

In recent weeks, the former governor had been floated as a possible pick for a Trump administration role, with secretary of labor among the positions mentioned. He was seen as a Republican who could point to a win in a blue-leaning state and bring a different profile into a national cabinet.

That window now looks narrower.

Timing Undercuts Momentum

The criticism from inside GOP circles is landing at a particularly inconvenient time for Youngkin.

According to Politico’s Dasha Burns, administration officials are blaming him for not doing enough to stop the redistricting measure, which passed by a slim margin and could shift up to four House seats toward Democrats. It’s the kind of loss that gets noticed in Washington, especially when control of the House is on the line.

And it’s not just about the outcome. It’s about perception.

A senior official, speaking anonymously, put it bluntly: “He doesn’t have enough friends here.” That comment points to a problem that goes beyond one referendum. It suggests Youngkin lacks the internal support that often decides who gets a seat at the table.

Burns continues:

Becca Glover, executive director of Youngkin’s Spirit of Virginia PAC, defended the former governor’s efforts, noting he raised and contributed nearly $500,000 to Virginians for Fair Maps and supported the Congressional Leadership Fund and Fair Maps’ fundraising efforts.

“The governor hit the campaign trail making many stops across the Commonwealth from Wise to Virginia Beach to Leesburg to motivate the grassroots to vote no,” Glover said. “He was proud to be part of a team including Speaker [Mike] Johnson and other former governors to get out the vote.”

Glover also pointed to the dozens of interviews Youngkin did and his efforts at retail campaigning.

“He continues to ask that the Supreme Court of Virginia to strike down this unconstitutional power grab,” Glover said.

A source briefed on White House discussions pushed back, saying Youngkin’s actions helped set the stage for the current difficulties facing him and his party in Virginia.

“Look, there’s plenty of blame to go around. But if Youngkin hadn’t left the special session open, Louise Lucas would never have had the chance to ram through those maps,” the person said, referring to the Democratic state senator who played a key role in advancing the redistricting effort. “So he has some responsibility for losing these seats.”

From Rising Star to Question Mark

Youngkin’s appeal to national Republicans has always been tied to his 2021 victory and his ability to win in a competitive state without fully leaning into Trump-style politics.

But that brand cuts both ways.

Inside a Trump-aligned orbit, relationships and loyalty still carry more weight than résumé lines. Another loss in Virginia, even one tied to a ballot measure, gives skeptics more reason to question how much influence Youngkin really has, both at home and in the broader party.

That matters when administration roles are being discussed behind closed doors.

Fewer Openings, More Competition

Even under the best conditions, cabinet-level positions are limited and highly competitive. Candidates need more than a strong narrative. They need advocates inside the administration willing to push their case.

Right now, the signals suggest Youngkin doesn’t have that backing.

The criticism tied to the referendum may not be decisive on its own. But combined with lingering doubts about his connections in Washington, it adds friction at the worst possible time.

READ NEXT: Indicted Democrat Who Resigned From Congress Plans Reelection Bid

Turning Point is funding the largest ballot-chasing operation in U.S. history to win key battleground states. Our grassroots army is already in the field for 2026 and beyond. But they can’t stay there without your support. Donate today to help win the midterms, protect the America First movement, and keep conservatives in power.

Trump’s Signature To Be Added To US Currency

By
Madeleine Jackson
-
3
President Donald Trump gestures to the crowd after delivering remarks at the House GOP Member Retreat, Tuesday, January 6, 2026, at the Donald J. Trump- John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

The Treasury Department announced Thursday that President Donald Trump’s signature will be added to future U.S. paper currency, a move that would mark a notable departure from longstanding norms governing American money.

If implemented, Trump would become the first sitting president whose name appears on U.S. currency, a development that is already drawing both historical comparisons and legal scrutiny. Traditionally, U.S. paper currency features the engraved portraits of deceased presidents and statesmen, along with the signature of the Treasury secretary and the treasurer of the United States—not the president.

The announcement comes alongside broader efforts tied to Trump’s image and legacy in U.S. coinage. The administration has supported the creation of two coins bearing Trump’s likeness: a proposed $1 coin and a special 24-karat commemorative gold coin. The latter recently received approval from the federal Commission of Fine Arts, which voted to move forward with a design based on a photograph of Trump taken in the White House.

Historically, depictions of living individuals on U.S. currency have been restricted. Federal law generally prohibits living persons, including presidents, from appearing on U.S. currency. The administration, however, has argued that the restriction applies differently to coins than to paper money, opening the door to legal interpretation and potential challenges. The only sitting president ever to appear on a U.S. coin was Calvin Coolidge, who was featured on a commemorative half dollar in 1926 marking the 150th anniversary of American independence.

Treasury officials framed the decision as part of a broader effort to commemorate the nation’s upcoming 250th anniversary, also known as the Semiquincentennial, which will take place in 2026. The milestone has prompted a range of proposals aimed at celebrating American history, including new currency designs and commemorative issues.

“Under President Trump’s leadership, we are on a path toward unprecedented economic growth, lasting dollar dominance, and fiscal strength and stability,” Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent said in a statement.

“There is no more powerful way to recognize the historic achievements of our great country and President Donald J. Trump than U.S dollar bills bearing his name, and it is only appropriate that this historic currency be issued at the Semiquincentennial,” he added.

Supporters of the move argue that it reflects Trump’s economic agenda and its perceived impact on U.S. financial policy, while critics have raised concerns about breaking with precedent and politicizing national symbols like currency. Some Democrats and outside stakeholders have already voiced opposition, particularly regarding the commemorative gold coin, arguing that such decisions should adhere to established bipartisan norms and legal guidelines.

Beyond the political debate, the mechanics of redesigning U.S. currency are complex. Changes to paper money typically involve coordination between the Treasury Department, the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, and the Federal Reserve, and can take years to implement due to security features, anti-counterfeiting measures, and logistical considerations.

The Treasury has not yet provided a timeline for when the updated currency bearing Trump’s signature would enter circulation, nor has it clarified whether the change would apply across all denominations.

READ NEXT: Senate Candidate Behind Bars After Florida Resort Incident

Police Officer Chance Bretches was awarded a Lifesaving Medal with Valor for rescuing someone from a burning vehicle…But now radicals are trying to ruin his life just for doing his job. Officer Bretches and his family need your help.[Support Police Officers HERE]

GOP Split Emerges Over Potential Maxwell Pardon In Epstein Investigation

By
Patrick Houck
-
3

A Divided Republican Conference

Republicans on the House Oversight Committee are facing an internal divide over a sensitive and politically risky question: whether Ghislaine Maxwell, the convicted associate of Jeffrey Epstein, should be considered for a presidential pardon in exchange for cooperation with investigators.

The discussion has largely taken place behind closed doors, but it reflects a broader tension between uncovering new information and maintaining public confidence in the justice system.

Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) acknowledged the split, noting that some Republicans believe Maxwell could provide valuable testimony about Epstein’s network if offered clemency. Still, Comer made clear he is not among them.

  • He warned that a pardon “looks bad” politically and ethically
  • He emphasized Maxwell’s central role in the underlying crimes
  • He argued that granting leniency could undermine trust in the investigation

Comer summed up his position bluntly, describing Maxwell as one of the most culpable figures in the case.

Democrats Firmly Opposed

Democrats on the committee are unified in rejecting any potential deal.

Ranking Member Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) strongly criticized the idea, arguing that offering clemency to Maxwell would be offensive to victims and damaging to the integrity of the investigation.

Key concerns raised by Democrats include:

  • The impact on survivors of Epstein’s abuse
  • The credibility of any testimony obtained through a pardon
  • The risk of public perception shifting toward a “cover-up”

Garcia warned that even considering such an arrangement could erode confidence in the process and send the wrong signal about accountability.

Maxwell’s Leverage and Conditions

Maxwell is currently serving a 20-year sentence for her role in Epstein’s trafficking operation. So far, she has declined to cooperate with congressional investigators under existing conditions.

Her legal team, however, has signaled a willingness to engage if circumstances change.

According to her attorney:

  • Maxwell would be willing to testify “fully and honestly”
  • Any cooperation would be contingent on clemency
  • She is positioned as a key source of information about Epstein’s network

Her attorney has also claimed that Maxwell could shed light on the involvement, or lack thereof, of high-profile figures, including former presidents. Those assertions have not eased skepticism among lawmakers.

The Political and Legal Stakes

President Donald Trump has not ruled out the possibility of granting clemency, leaving the issue open and politically charged.

The debate highlights a difficult tradeoff:

  • Potential benefit: New details about Epstein’s network and associates
  • Potential cost: Perceived erosion of justice and accountability

For many lawmakers, the question is not just what Maxwell might reveal, but whether the price of that information is too high.

Why This Matters

At its core, the disagreement reflects a broader challenge facing investigators and policymakers:

  • How far should the government go to obtain critical information?
  • Can justice and transparency be balanced in a case with this level of public scrutiny?

There is no clear consensus, and the path forward remains uncertain.

What are your thoughts? Should a pardon be considered if it leads to new information about Epstein’s network? Share your perspective in the comments below.

READ NEXT: Case Against Leading Trump Opponent Abruptly Dropped

Turning Point is funding the largest ballot-chasing operation in U.S. history to win key battleground states. Our grassroots army is already in the field for 2026 and beyond. But they can’t stay there without your support. Donate today to help win the midterms, protect the America First movement, and keep conservatives in power.

Leak Reveals Trump Planning ‘Mic-Drop’ Showdown With Media At WHCA Dinner

By
Patrick Houck
-
2

WASHINGTON — A leaked report indicates President Donald Trump is preparing a high-profile confrontation with the press at this weekend’s White House Correspondents’ Association dinner, signaling a return to direct engagement after years of boycotting the event.

According to the report, Trump plans to deliver a sharply critical speech targeting media outlets he believes have treated his administration unfairly — particularly coverage of the ongoing Iran conflict — before making a quick exit from the event.

Planned ‘Mic-Drop’ Moment

Sources familiar with the plan say Trump intends to use the traditionally lighthearted dinner as a platform for a more combative message, aimed at what he has frequently described as hostile or biased coverage.

The strategy reportedly includes:

  • Direct criticism of specific outlets
  • A short, pointed address rather than a traditional speech
  • Leaving immediately afterward — before awards and entertainment begin

That approach would break with longstanding tradition, where presidents typically remain for the full program and participate in a comedic back-and-forth with the press.

Timing and Optics

The reported plan comes as tensions between the administration and the media remain elevated, particularly over coverage of military operations involving Iran.

Trump has long accused broad swaths of the press of unfair reporting, while journalists have defended their coverage as part of standard scrutiny of government actions.

His expected appearance would mark his first attendance at the annual dinner as president after previously skipping it during both terms.

Breaking With Tradition

The WHCA dinner has historically served as a symbolic — if sometimes tense — moment of interaction between the presidency and the press corps.

In recent years, the event has evolved:

  • Comedians, once a staple, have been replaced or scaled back
  • The tone has shifted away from direct political roasting
  • Attendance by presidents has become less consistent

This year’s program reportedly features a mentalist rather than a comedian, reflecting efforts to avoid controversy tied to past appearances.

Political Context

The planned speech also carries broader political implications.

A direct confrontation with the media — especially in a high-visibility setting — could energize supporters who view press coverage as adversarial, while further straining relations with journalists already at odds with the administration.

What Comes Next

It remains unclear whether Trump will follow through exactly as outlined in the leaked plan.

But if he does, the dinner could shift from a ceremonial event into a high-stakes political moment — one likely to reverberate beyond a single evening in Washington.

READ NEXT: Watch: Lefty Media Star Makes Disgusting Comments About Atrocities

Tick-Tock: Time is running out to sync your Trump account before your data is lost forever! Team Trump is counting on you. HURRY, before it’s too late! [Click HERE to update your info]

Legal Battle Erupts After Judge Halts Virginia Redistricting Certification

By
Patrick Houck
-
2

Virginia’s attorney general is appealing a court order that halted a newly approved redistricting plan, setting off another legal clash with potential ripple effects far beyond the state.

Attorney General Jay Jones said he will challenge a circuit court judge’s decision to block the measure, even after voters narrowly approved it in a statewide referendum.

“As I said last night, Virginia voters have spoken, and an activist judge should not have veto power over the People’s vote,” Jones said. “We look forward to defending the outcome of last night’s election in court.”

Court steps in after close vote

The dispute centers on a temporary constitutional amendment that would allow Democrats to redraw Virginia’s congressional districts before the next census.

The measure passed with 51% support, compared with 48% opposed. Still, Tazewell County Circuit Court Judge Jack Hurley Jr. moved to block it, raising concerns about how the question was presented to voters and when the vote was held.

Hurley had already tried to stop the referendum months earlier. In February, he issued an order preventing the April vote from going forward.

Twice, the Virginia Supreme Court allowed the process to continue anyway. The justices declined to weigh in fully, saying only that the process, not the outcome, could ultimately come under review.

“Issuing an injunction to keep Virginians from the polls is not the proper way to make this decision,” the court said at the time.

What the new map could do

If it stands, the plan could dramatically reshape Virginia’s congressional delegation.

Democrats currently hold a 6-5 edge. Under the proposed map, that margin could widen to as much as 10-1. The arrangement would remain in place until after the 2030 census, when an independent commission would again take over the process.

That potential shift is drawing attention from both parties nationwide.

National fallout and political warnings

Republicans say the move could trigger similar efforts in GOP-led states.

Sen. Lindsey Graham suggested South Carolina should consider a response.

“After the Virginia Democrats’ efforts to redistrict in order to increase Democrat seats in the House of Representatives, South Carolina should consider fighting fire with fire,” he said, urging state leaders to weigh their options.

Democrats, meanwhile, argue the plan is a reaction to earlier redistricting pushes in Republican-controlled states.

Gov. Abigail Spanberger said Virginia voters understood the stakes.

“When we found the results out, I was really excited but not surprised,” she said. “Because it’s been clear for a number of months that Virginians were really motivated to take this temporary responsive stance.”

She pushed back on criticism that the process lets politicians choose their voters, pointing to public access to the maps and contrasting Virginia with states where legislatures acted without voter input.

A broader fight over redistricting

The debate is part of a larger, escalating battle over congressional maps.

House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries cast the Virginia vote as a direct response to pressure from President Donald Trump, pointing to his push for mid-decade redistricting in Texas as the starting point.

“It was important for Democrats to push back aggressively,” Jeffries said, adding that the party would continue to respond in kind.

But not all Democrats are comfortable with that approach.

Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) warned that tit-for-tat redistricting could damage the political system.

“The wrong thing doesn’t make it the right thing,” he said. “If we continue to just attack the other side … our democracy is degraded.”

What comes next

For now, the legal fight returns to the courts, where the future of the voter-approved plan remains uncertain.

At stake is more than Virginia’s map. The outcome could shape how far states are willing to go in redrawing districts mid-decade and how aggressively parties respond to each other in the process

READ NEXT: Republican Colleagues Seek Answers After Congressman Goes Missing

Turning Point is funding the largest ballot-chasing operation in U.S. history to win key battleground states. Our grassroots army is already in the field for 2026 and beyond. But they can’t stay there without your support. Donate today to help win the midterms, protect the America First movement, and keep conservatives in power.

DOJ Slams Alleged DC Pipe Bomber’s Bid To Claim Trump Pardon

By
Madeleine Jackson
-
1
Tyler Merbler, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

The Justice Department is forcefully pushing back against a striking legal claim from the man accused of planting pipe bombs in Washington, D.C., on the eve of Jan. 6 — that he was effectively pardoned by President Trump.

In a court filing Friday, prosecutors urged a federal judge to reject Brian Cole Jr.’s attempt to have his charges thrown out, calling his argument flatly incompatible with the “clear and unambiguous terms” of Trump’s sweeping Jan. 6 clemency order.

Cole, who was arrested in December 2025 after years of investigation, is accused of placing two pipe bombs outside the Republican and Democratic National Committee headquarters on Jan. 5, 2021 — just hours before rioters stormed the U.S. Capitol.

The devices never detonated, but the FBI has said they were functional and viable, raising the stakes of a case that remained unsolved for nearly five years.

Earlier this year, Cole’s lawyers made a bold move: They argued that his actions were “inextricably and demonstrably tethered” to the events of Jan. 6 — and therefore covered by Trump’s mass pardon of people tied to the attack.

They pointed to the broad language in Trump’s order, which applies to offenses “related to” events at or near the Capitol, and noted that Cole allegedly traveled to Washington for an election protest tied to the same political moment that fueled the riot.

But the Justice Department isn’t buying it.

“The defendant ignores that the proclamation expressly limited relief to individuals who had been ‘convicted of,’ or had a ‘pending indictment’ for, offenses related to the events at or near the United States Capitol on January 6,” U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro wrote.

That distinction, prosecutors argue, is decisive.

When Trump’s pardon took effect on Jan. 20, 2025, Cole had not yet been charged — putting him outside the scope of the order entirely.

“The defendant belonged to neither category, and so the proclamation has no bearing on this case,” Pirro wrote.

Cole was indicted weeks later, in January 2026, on charges including interstate transportation of explosives and malicious attempt to use them.

Prosecutors also made clear that even a broader reading of the pardon wouldn’t help him.

“Even if the Court somehow found, notwithstanding its text, that the proclamation could apply to this case,” Pirro wrote, the Justice Department’s interpretation should still prevail as a “consistent, reasonable” reading by the agency tasked with enforcing it.

The clash sets up a high-stakes test of how far Trump’s Jan. 6 pardons can stretch — and whether conduct that happened before the riot, but is arguably connected to it, can fall under their umbrella.

For now, the Justice Department’s position is blunt: Not this case. Not this defendant.

READ NEXT: Congressman’s Sudden Death Upends Key Race

Police Officer Chance Bretches was awarded a Lifesaving Medal with Valor for rescuing someone from a burning vehicle…But now radicals are trying to ruin his life just for doing his job. Officer Bretches and his family need your help.[Support Police Officers HERE]

DeSantis Mentioned As Possible Trump Supreme Court Nominee

By
Patrick Houck
-
2
Ron DeSantis via Gage Skidmore Flickr

President Donald Trump has told confidants that Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is angling for a role in the Trump administration, describing the governor as “begging” for consideration, according to a report from Axios.

Trump, speaking privately, claimed DeSantis specifically sought the position of attorney general. One person familiar with the conversation said Trump put it bluntly: “Ron was begging me to be AG.”

Private meeting sparks speculation

The remarks followed a private lunch between the two Republicans at Trump National Doral Golf Club in Miami roughly a week earlier. Multiple sources briefed on the meeting said the discussion went beyond casual politics and touched on DeSantis’ future after leaving the governor’s office.

DeSantis is term-limited and set to step down in January 2027, which makes his next move one of the more open questions in Republican politics.

Not everyone close to the conversation agrees with Trump’s characterization. One source described the exchange as broader and less defined.

“There was a conversation at that lunch,” the person said. “I don’t think AG is real. But he’s gonna be looking for work and Trump likes him.”

Competing accounts of DeSantis’ interests

Other accounts suggest DeSantis has different ambitions.

According to Axios, a source familiar with his thinking said the governor has little interest in serving as attorney general. Instead, two roles stand out: secretary of defense or a future seat on the U.S. Supreme Court.

“DeSantis is 100% not interested in the AG job,” the source said. “But he would be interested in two things: War secretary or Supreme Court, which would be his dream job.”

The same source pointed to DeSantis’ long-standing admiration for Justice Clarence Thomas, noting the two “almost have a father-son relationship.” DeSantis has frequently cited Thomas as a model for constitutional interpretation and has publicly defended him amid criticism from the left.

From rivals to allies

The behind-the-scenes discussions reflect a shift in the relationship between Trump and DeSantis.

The two were rivals during the 2024 Republican presidential primary, where tensions often played out in public. That dynamic changed after DeSantis exited the race and endorsed Trump. Since then, both camps have signaled a more cooperative approach.

DeSantis’ office pushed back on the idea that he is lobbying for a specific job, emphasizing instead that the governor “enjoys a great relationship with President Trump.”

Trump, for his part, has said publicly he would consider bringing DeSantis into his administration once the governor leaves office, though no formal offer has been made.

What comes next

Any path forward remains uncertain.

A Supreme Court appointment would depend on a vacancy, something no administration can guarantee. A Defense Department role would require changes in current leadership. And while DeSantis has not ruled out another presidential run, joining an administration could offer a different route to stay relevant on national policy.

For now, the conversations appear informal and fluid. But with DeSantis’ term winding down and Trump continuing to shape his political team, the question of where the Florida governor lands is unlikely to fade anytime soon.

READ NEXT: GOP Lawmakers And Dems Unite To Block Trump’s Key Policy

Turning Point is funding the largest ballot-chasing operation in U.S. history to win key battleground states. Our grassroots army is already in the field for 2026 and beyond. But they can’t stay there without your support. Donate today to help win the midterms, protect the America First movement, and keep conservatives in power.

Hunter Biden Admits His ‘Bias’ Towards Pardons, Says Founders ‘Didn’t Imagine Trump’

By
Madeleine Jackson
-
4
President Joe Biden hugs his family during the 59th Presidential Inauguration ceremony in Washington, Jan. 20, 2021. President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris took the oath of office on the West Front of the U.S. Capitol. (DOD Photo by Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Carlos M. Vazquez II)

Hunter Biden is openly acknowledging what critics have argued for months: when it comes to his father’s sweeping pardon, he is anything but objective.

“I’m completely biased as it relates to what my dad did for me. I fully understand how uniquely situated I am in being privileged enough to have received a pardon from my father,” Hunter said in an interview published by liberal outlet MediasTouch.

The admission revives scrutiny over former President Joe Biden’s dramatic reversal on the issue. After repeatedly insisting he would not grant clemency to his son, Biden ultimately issued a sweeping pardon—undercutting Democrats’ long-standing “no one is above the law” message as Hunter faced serious federal charges.

Despite conceding his own bias, Hunter declined to weigh in on potential reforms to the presidential pardon system. Instead, he pivoted to attacking former President Donald Trump’s use of the same authority, pointing to the more than 1,000 individuals pardoned in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol protest.

Hunter Biden was granted an unusually broad pardon covering any offense he “has committed or may have committed” between Jan. 1, 2014, and Dec. 1, 2024—a scope that drew bipartisan criticism.

“I was filled with gratitude,” he said of his father’s decision.

The legal backdrop is significant. In September 2024, Hunter pleaded guilty to nine federal tax charges tied to a scheme that evaded more than $1.4 million in taxes. Months earlier, he was convicted in Delaware for lying about his drug use on a federal firearm purchase form.

Still, Hunter sought to shift the focus toward Trump and his family, saying, “I don’t think that the founders ever imagined Donald Trump. I don’t think they ever imagined the Trump family.”

He also attempted to contrast pardon totals: “I don’t think people understand is that, in the first year, I think—I don’t know the exact number—I think my dad gave 80 or so pardons over a four-year period of time. I think that that’s about the number.”

He added, “Donald Trump has given over 1,500 pardons in the first year alone. But I’m obviously—I’m not the one to be, I don’t think, fairly or unbiasedly talking about the presidential pardon vote.”

Trump, notably, did not pardon any of his children during his presidency, though he did grant clemency in 2020 to Charles Kushner, the father of his son-in-law.

The White House defended Trump’s record, with spokeswoman Abigail Jackson saying he has used his authority to pardon individuals who were victims of what she described as a “weaponized justice system.”

Jackson also criticized Biden’s final actions in office, arguing that “the only pardons anyone should be critical of are from President Autopen,” citing clemency for violent offenders and “proactive pardons he ‘signed’ for his family members like Hunter on his way out the door.”

In addition to Hunter, Biden issued pardons to several relatives, including his brother James, sister-in-law Sara, sister Valerie, and brother Francis—moves he framed as necessary protection against political retaliation.

READ NEXT: Congresswoman Resigns In Stunning Last-Minute Exit

Tick-Tock: Time is running out to sync your Trump account before your data is lost forever! Team Trump is counting on you. HURRY, before it’s too late! [Click HERE to update your info]

‘Tormented’ Tucker Carlson Apologizes For ‘Misleading’ Viewers On Trump

By
Patrick Houck
-
11
Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

Conservative commentator Tucker Carlson said he is “sorry” for misleading viewers about President Donald Trump, acknowledging in Monday’s episode of his podcast that his past support helped shape public perception.

Speaking on “The Tucker Carlson Show” alongside his brother, Buckley Swanson Peck Carlson, he said he feels “tormented” by his past backing of Trump and accepted some responsibility for helping elevate him politically.

“I want to say I’m sorry for misleading people,” Carlson said, adding that the impact of those decisions will weigh on him “for a long time.”

Carlson also reflected on what he described as missed warning signs, saying that he and others who supported Trump are “implicated” in the current political landscape.

WATCH:

The remarks come amid a growing public rift between Carlson and Trump, with the president increasingly criticizing the commentator in a series of social media posts.

Carlson, once one of Trump’s most prominent media allies, has become more critical in recent months, particularly over foreign policy decisions and messaging.

As Mediaite reports:

Trump has repeatedly lashed out at Carlson in recent months in response to his former ally becoming increasingly critical of the Trump administration – most notably its handling of the Epstein files and the president’s war against Iran.

This month, the president called Carlson “a Low IQ person,” “stupid,” and “highly overrated” in several Truth Social rants attacking him, as well as other former allies, including Megyn Kelly, Alex Jones, and Candace Owens.

Responding to Trump’s attacks this month, Carlson remarked, “I’ve always liked Trump and still feel sorry for him, as I do for all slaves… He’s hemmed in by other forces. He can’t make his own decisions. It’s awful to watch.”

Carlson’s son Buckley Carlson – who shares the same name as his uncle – left his job as Vice President JD Vance’s deputy press secretary last week following Trump’s repeated attacks against his father.

Monday’s apology follows earlier revelations from legal proceedings indicating Carlson had privately expressed skepticism about Trump even while publicly supporting him.

The remarks have drawn mixed reactions across the political spectrum.

Some critics view the apology as an acknowledgment of the influence prominent media figures can have on public opinion. Others have questioned the timing, given Carlson’s long-standing role in shaping conservative discourse.

It remains unclear whether the comments signal a lasting shift in Carlson’s political stance or a temporary break, similar to the waning support he showed toward the end of Trump’s first term.

The episode underscores continuing divisions within conservative media and the broader political movement surrounding Trump, as the administration’s attention remains focused on international developments.

READ NEXT: ‘Awesome’? Senator’s Iran Reaction Sparks Outrage

Turning Point is funding the largest ballot-chasing operation in U.S. history to win key battleground states. Our grassroots army is already in the field for 2026 and beyond. But they can’t stay there without your support. Donate today to help win the midterms, protect the America First movement, and keep conservatives in power.

FBI Director Kash Patel Sues The Atlantic For $250M

By
Patrick Houck
-
0
Image via gage Skidmore Flickr

WASHINGTON — FBI Director Kash Patel has filed a $250 million defamation lawsuit against The Atlantic and one of its reporters, accusing the publication of running what he describes as a “malicious” and false report about his conduct in office.

The lawsuit, filed Monday in federal court in Washington, D.C., centers on a weekend article that alleged Patel engaged in excessive drinking, erratic behavior, and unexplained absences while leading the FBI.

Patel has denied the allegations, calling them “categorically false” and claiming the article relied heavily on anonymous sources with political bias.

In the complaint, Patel’s legal team argues that The Atlantic knowingly published false information or acted with reckless disregard for the truth — a standard known as “actual malice,” which public figures must prove in defamation cases.

His attorneys also say the outlet was warned prior to publication that the claims were untrue but proceeded anyway.

The Atlantic report cited multiple unnamed sources who claimed Patel’s alleged behavior raised concerns inside the FBI and Justice Department.

Among the allegations:

  • Frequent intoxication
  • Missed or rescheduled meetings
  • Periods of being unreachable during critical moments

The magazine’s article, titled “The FBI Director Is MIA,” cited more than two dozen anonymous sources who described a series of troubling incidents.

According to the report, Patel is alleged to have engaged in “conspicuous inebriation” at high-profile clubs in Washington, D.C. and Las Vegas. Officials cited in the article also claimed Patel, 46, has had “unexplained absences” and has frequently delayed or rescheduled meetings and briefings following what were described as “alcohol-fueled nights.”

In one instance, the report states Patel was so unresponsive behind locked doors that his security detail requested “breaching equipment” — typically used by SWAT teams — to gain entry and check on his condition.

The article also described an episode in which Patel reportedly believed he had been fired after being unable to log into his FBI computer system, later discovering the issue was due to a technical error.

Fox News continues:

The lawsuit states The Atlantic, and its staff writer, Sarah Fitzpatrick, must be held “accountable for a sweeping, malicious, and defamatory hit piece published on April 17, 2026.”

It continued, “Defendants are of course free to criticize the leadership of the FBI, but they crossed the legal line by publishing an article replete with false and obviously fabricated allegations designed to destroy Director Patel’s reputation and drive him from office.”

Fitzpatrick reported, among other claims, that Patel has been difficult to wake up by his security team on multiple occasions because he was seemingly intoxicated.

Patel vowed over the weekend to sue The Atlantic for the story. He told Fox News Digital, “The Atlantic’s story is a lie. They were given the truth before they published, and they chose to print falsehoods anyway. I took this job to protect the American people and this FBI has delivered the most prolific reduction in crime in US history. Fake news won’t report it, and their toxicity will never erode nor stop our mission.”

The Atlantic and Fitzpatrick have defended the article, saying it was based on extensive reporting and multiple sources.

READ NEXT: Fox News Stars Pound Vulnerable Republican Over Bombshell ‘Undocumented’ Vote

Hero policeman Salvatore Oldrati was named Officer of the Year after stopping an armed suspect and now liberals want to ruin his life. His family is facing an uphill battle and crushing legal bills. Stand with the men and women who protect us. [Help Police Officers HERE]
123...317Page 1 of 317
© Great America News Desk 2022