Featured

Home Featured
Featured posts

Newly Unsealed Complaint Reveals Disturbing Threat Against Ivanka Trump

2
Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

A newly unsealed federal terrorism complaint has revealed a deeply unsettling detail tied to an alleged Iran-backed terror network — and it appears to place First Daughter Ivanka Trump alarmingly close to potential danger during a family trip to Disneyland Paris earlier this year.

According to the complaint, Harakat Ashab al-Yamin al-Islamiya — a group prosecutors say operates as part of the U.S.-designated terror organization Kata’ib Hizballah — issued a disturbing Snapchat message to President Donald Trump on April 20 that specifically referenced Ivanka Trump in graphic and threatening language.

“From the heart of the matter, where your daughter Ivanka, that whore who throws herself into the arms of men, adorns her face lightly and breathes with delight wherever she falls upon the edge of a rich wealthy man,” the message read before adding: “You moron, your daughter was on the brink of death thirteen days ago, but our men don’t kill whores.”

The post then encouraged followers to kill “arrogant, criminal, cursed Trump.”

The timing immediately raised alarms.

Exactly thirteen days before the April 20 threat was posted was April 7 — the same day Ivanka Trump was publicly photographed visiting Disneyland Paris with her children. TMZ reported at the time that the Trump family traveled with heavy security, including guards stationed outside rides and throughout the park.

No major media outlet appears to have previously connected the “thirteen days ago” reference in the terror message to Ivanka’s highly publicized Paris trip.

The revelation comes as federal prosecutors pursue charges against 32-year-old Iraqi national Mohammad Baqer Saad Dawood Al-Saadi, described in court filings as a senior Kata’ib Hizballah operative with ties to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

According to investigators, Al-Saadi and associates were allegedly operating in Paris around the same time as Ivanka Trump’s visit. Prosecutors say the terror network had also plotted attacks against Western targets in Europe, including an alleged attempt to bomb the Bank of America building in Paris.

Federal authorities say Harakat Ashab al-Yamin al-Islamiya released a propaganda video on March 16 previewing an attack against the exact building.

The allegations add new weight to longstanding concerns about threats directed at members of the Trump family — especially after the 2020 U.S. drone strike that killed Iranian terror mastermind Qassem Soleimani.

According to The New York Post, Al-Saadi allegedly made explicit statements about targeting Ivanka Trump in retaliation.

“After Qassem was killed, he went around telling people ‘we need to kill Ivanka to burn down the house of Trump the way he burned down our house,’” former Iraqi diplomat Entifadh Qanbar told the outlet.

The complaint also points to social media posts allegedly tied to Al-Saadi dating back years.

In posts on X from 2021 and 2023, Al-Saadi allegedly shared maps showing the Florida neighborhood where Ivanka Trump lives with her husband Jared Kushner and their three children.

“I say to the Americans look at this picture and know that neither your palaces nor the Secret Service will protect you,” one post read. “We are currently in the stage of surveillance and analysis. I told you, our revenge is a matter of time.”

Ivanka Trump has long faced heightened security concerns due to her role in the Trump administration and her family’s high profile. During Donald Trump’s first term, federal authorities repeatedly warned of escalating threats from Iran-linked actors following Soleimani’s death, including assassination plots targeting top Trump administration officials.

The newly unsealed complaint alleges Al-Saadi either coordinated or inspired nearly 20 terror attacks across Europe and Canada through Harakat Ashab al-Yamin al-Islamiya, a group prosecutors say was specifically created to mask operational ties to Kata’ib Hizballah, Hezbollah, and Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

The allegations paint an increasingly disturbing picture: a terror network allegedly obsessed with revenge against the Trump family — and possibly operating frighteningly close to Ivanka Trump during a family vacation packed with innocent children and tourists.

Trump Marks Memorial Day With Arlington Ceremony Honoring U.S. Heroes

    1
    Gage Skidmore Flickr

    President Donald Trump is set to spend Memorial Day at Arlington National Cemetery, where he will participate in ceremonies honoring fallen U.S. service members, according to reporting first shared by The Daily Wire.

    Trump is expected to join members of his administration, Gold Star families, and military personnel at the Virginia cemetery on Monday. His schedule includes a visit to the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier followed by remarks nearby commemorating those who died in service to the country.

    Several top administration officials are expected to attend alongside the president, including Vice President JD Vance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins, Veterans Affairs Secretary Doug Collins, FBI Director Kash Patel, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dan Caine.

    White House spokeswoman Olivia Wales told The Daily Wire that Trump would honor “our fallen heroes whose sacrifice has kept our nation free,” adding that the president would express “the enduring gratitude of our entire nation.”

    Memorial Day ceremonies at Arlington have long served as a centerpiece for presidents from both parties, with the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier carrying particular symbolic significance. The monument honors unidentified American service members and sits on one of the highest points in the cemetery overlooking Washington, D.C.

    More than 430,000 people are buried at Arlington National Cemetery, including military veterans, service members, and eligible family members.

    Trump marked Memorial Day there last year as well, taking part in a wreath-laying ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier with members of his administration.

    During remarks at the event, Trump praised U.S. service members who “left behind the blessings of home and family” to answer the country’s call, while acknowledging the sacrifices made by military families.

    Arlington itself has a long and complex history. The cemetery occupies land once connected to the family of Confederate General Robert E. Lee before it was seized by the U.S. government during the American Civil War and converted into a national cemetery amid the war’s heavy casualties.

    This year’s appearance comes as Trump continues using ceremonial presidential events to emphasize themes of military service, patriotism, and national identity during his second term.

    Bolton Warns Trump Could Try to ‘Snatch’ Raúl Castro as Cuba Tensions Escalate

    The White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

    Former National Security Adviser John Bolton is sounding alarms over growing speculation that the Trump administration could take dramatic action against Cuba’s communist leadership — warning officials not to repeat what he called the “Venezuela game plan.”

    Bolton, who has long advocated for hardline policies against authoritarian governments in Latin America, said Thursday he fears the administration could use newly filed criminal charges against former Cuban leader Raúl Castro as justification for a high-risk operation targeting the aging strongman.

    “I’m a little worried that they’re going to try and run the Venezuela game plan and kidnap or snatch Raúl Castro, who’s 94 years old, under this indictment, which is perfectly justified, but it won’t change anything in Cuba, as it really hasn’t changed anything politically in Venezuela,” Bolton said during an appearance on NewsNation’s On Balance.

    His comments come as tensions surrounding Cuba have intensified after the Justice Department announced murder charges against Castro and five others tied to the 1996 shootdown of two civilian humanitarian aircraft over international waters.

    Federal prosecutors allege Castro authorized the Cuban military operation that destroyed the planes, killing four men — including three American citizens. The aircraft were operated by Brothers to the Rescue, a Miami-based humanitarian group that searched for Cuban migrants attempting to flee the island.

    The indictment represents one of the most aggressive legal moves taken against senior Cuban officials in decades and has fueled growing speculation about whether the Trump administration is preparing a broader strategy aimed at regime change.

    Bolton, despite supporting political change in Cuba, argued that removing a single figure would do little to dismantle the country’s entrenched communist system.

    “In Cuba, you need the top echelon of government to depart the island, maybe for exile in Mexico or wherever they want to go, and we have to have a way to bring the government back under the control of the people,” he said, adding that such a process would “take some time.”

    The administration has steadily increased pressure on Havana in recent months through legal, diplomatic, and economic measures.

    A U.S. oil embargo implemented earlier this year has reportedly worsened Cuba’s already severe energy shortages. The island nation of roughly 10 million people has faced repeated rolling blackouts, while shortages of food, fuel, and medicine continue to strain daily life.

    President Donald Trump has also declined to rule out military action. Asked this week about possible intervention in Cuba, Trump told reporters he would “be happy to do it.”

    Meanwhile, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said diplomatic solutions remain the administration’s preferred option but suggested hopes for peaceful negotiations are fading.

    “The president’s preference is always a negotiated agreement that’s peaceful. That’s always our preference. That remains our preference with Cuba,” Rubio said in Miami before departing on an overseas trip.

    “I’m just being honest with you. You know, the likelihood of that happening, given who we’re dealing with right now, is not high.”

    Fueling further speculation, the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz and its strike group recently arrived in the Caribbean, leading some observers to question whether Washington could be positioning military assets closer to Cuba.

    Trump has dismissed suggestions that the deployment was intended as intimidation.

    Bolton, however, questioned whether the administration had fully thought through what comes next.

    “Is the Nimitz carrier strike group really equipped to take military action?” Bolton asked. “I mean, we have a real advantage in Cuba we didn’t have in Venezuela, we have the Guantánamo Bay Naval Base right there on the island, so that’s a, that’s a step forward, but this is something clearly we need to be talking to key figures in the opposition in Cuba, the Cuban American community, I’m sure can be extremely helpful here.”

    “Let’s just think this through before we force it into something that could be very detrimental to the people of Cuba, if the army and the police stick with the regime,” he added.

    The escalating rhetoric comes as questions continue to swirl over whether Washington’s pressure campaign is designed primarily to force concessions from Havana — or whether the administration is laying groundwork for something much larger.

    Report: Mike Lindell To File ‘Anti-Weaponization’ Fund Claim

    2
    Mike Lindell via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    President Trump ally Mike Lindell said Wednesday that he plans to seek compensation through the Department of Justice’s newly created “Anti-Weaponization Fund,” arguing that his company suffered massive financial losses after he became one of the most prominent supporters of Trump’s claims about the 2020 election.

    Lindell made the announcement during an appearance on Lindell TV, saying his company and employees were financially devastated following years of legal battles, public backlash, and scrutiny tied to his election-related activism.

    “We had three third parties look and do an evaluation of MyPillow, what it was prior to all these attacks and what it is now,” Lindell said during the broadcast. “And all of them averaged $400 million that it cost the brand and cost MyPillow. And it’s just horrific that our own government could do this to the American dream.”

    He continued, “This company was built on the American dream and made in the USA and to have this happen. It will be a blessing to actually get some of these, my employees made whole that were stockholders in MyPillow. And even a lot of them that have lost their jobs, you know, that were affected then and all this.”

    Lindell’s comments come just days after the Department of Justice announced a $1.776 billion compensation fund intended to provide relief for individuals who claim they were victims of government “weaponization” or “lawfare.” The five-member commission overseeing the fund will be empowered to issue formal apologies and monetary compensation to qualifying applicants, though the administration has not yet clearly defined eligibility standards.

    The program emerged from a settlement involving President Trump’s now-withdrawn lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service and has generated controversy because of questions surrounding who may ultimately benefit. Critics have questioned whether the fund could become a vehicle for compensating Trump allies, while supporters argue it provides a mechanism for individuals who believe they were improperly targeted by the federal government.

    Lindell appears to be among the first high-profile figures publicly announcing plans to pursue compensation.

    According to reports, other Trump allies considering claims include Michael Caputo and former Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio. Vice President J. D. Vance also suggested Tuesday that Tina Peters could potentially qualify for compensation.

    Lindell spent years aggressively promoting claims that the 2020 election had been stolen from Trump, despite courts repeatedly rejecting allegations of widespread fraud and election officials finding no evidence that fraud altered the outcome of the race.

    The MyPillow CEO said he personally spent approximately $25 million supporting election-fraud claims and financed a three-hour programming block on One America News Network that aired a documentary promoting election conspiracy theories.

    His activism led to a wave of fallout extending beyond politics.

    Multiple major retailers, including several national chains, pulled MyPillow products from their stores amid consumer and political pressure campaigns. Lindell also became the target of multiple defamation lawsuits related to his claims about voting systems and election technology.

    In one of the most notable cases, voting technology company Dominion Voting Systems sued Lindell for defamation, alleging he spread false claims accusing the company of manipulating election results. Smartmatic also filed litigation against him over similar allegations.

    Lindell additionally drew scrutiny from congressional investigators over his involvement surrounding the events of Jan. 6, 2021. He helped organize activities surrounding Trump’s efforts to challenge the election outcome and later had his phone records subpoenaed by the House Select Committee investigating the Capitol attack.

    The DOJ fund itself continues to face mounting legal and political challenges. Former U.S. Capitol Police officer Harry Dunn criticized the program this week, arguing it could create incentives for individuals involved in Jan. 6-related activity.

    “Donald Trump is putting a retainer on a mob, on a militia that’s already showed the violence that they’re willing to enact on his behalf. And he’s incentivizing it, too,” Dunn said during an appearance on CNN.

    Dunn and D.C. Metropolitan Police officer Daniel Hodges have since filed suit seeking to block the Justice Department from moving forward with the payouts.

    Vanessa Trump Announces Cancer Diagnosis

    The White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

    Former Trump family member Vanessa Trump revealed Wednesday that she has been diagnosed with breast cancer, prompting an outpouring of support from relatives, friends, and supporters connected to President Donald Trump’s extended family circle.

    The 48-year-old former model and television personality shared the news in an emotional Instagram statement, describing the diagnosis as an unexpected challenge while emphasizing that she remains optimistic.

    “I’ve recently been diagnosed with breast cancer,” Vanessa wrote. “While this isn’t news anyone expects, I’m working closely with my medical team on a treatment plan.”

    Vanessa also revealed that doctors performed a procedure earlier this week, though she did not provide additional details regarding the nature of the procedure or the stage of her diagnosis. She said she is relying heavily on her family and close loved ones as she begins treatment.

    “I am staying focused and hopeful while surrounded by the love and support of my family, my kids, and those closest to me,” she wrote.

    Vanessa concluded the statement by thanking supporters for their encouragement and asking for privacy while she focuses on recovery.

    The announcement quickly drew public reactions from members of the Trump family.

    President Trump’s daughter, Ivanka Trump, posted a heartfelt response beneath Vanessa’s announcement.

    “Praying for your continued strength and a swift recovery. Love you mama,” Ivanka wrote.

    Vanessa’s daughter, Kai Trump, also shared an emotional message, calling her mother “the strongest person I know” in a social media tribute that resonated with supporters.

    Additional support reportedly came through social media engagement from other members of the Trump family as Vanessa’s announcement spread online.

    Vanessa was married to Donald Trump Jr. for more than a decade before the pair divorced in 2018. The former couple share five children together and have largely maintained a cooperative relationship centered around family matters.

    In recent years, Vanessa has kept a lower public profile compared to many members of the Trump family. However, she returned to headlines after legendary golfer Tiger Woods publicly confirmed their relationship in 2025. The two have since been seen together at family events and golf-related appearances.

    Her diagnosis sparked an immediate wave of support online, with many supporters offering prayers and well wishes as she begins what could be a difficult health battle.

    Boebert Returns To Trump With Tail Between Her Legs

    2

    Rep. Lauren Boebert appeared to be making peace with President Donald Trump this week after finding herself in his crosshairs over her support for ousted Rep. Thomas Massie.

    Just days after Trump publicly threatened to yank his endorsement and potentially back a primary challenger against her, Boebert was back on social media loudly reaffirming her loyalty.

    “Trump is my President! Jesus is Lord!” she posted Tuesday night.

    The timing raised eyebrows.

    Boebert’s declaration came only hours after Massie — one of Trump’s most outspoken Republican critics in Congress — was defeated in Kentucky’s high-profile GOP primary by Trump-backed challenger Ed Gallrein.

    For many Republicans watching the race, the message was hard to miss: crossing Trump can carry a political price.

    The blowup started after Boebert traveled to Kentucky to campaign for Massie, a libertarian-leaning conservative who has repeatedly broken with Trump and Republican leadership on spending battles, surveillance issues, foreign policy fights, and the push to release files related to the Jeffrey Epstein case.

    Trump did not take kindly to seeing one of his longtime congressional allies standing shoulder-to-shoulder with one of his most frequent internal critics.

    “Anybody who can be that dumb deserves a good Primary fight!” Trump wrote over the weekend, before raising the possibility of pulling his own support for Boebert if the “right person” entered the race against her.

    For a politician long viewed as one of Trump’s fiercest defenders on Capitol Hill, it was a rare public dressing-down.

    Boebert initially tried to shrug off the clash.

    “Yes, I saw the President’s post. No, I’m not mad or offended,” she wrote after Trump’s comments. “I knew the risks when I agreed to stand by my friend Thomas Massie.”

    But after Massie’s defeat, Boebert’s latest message sounded less like defiance and more like a quick political reset.

    The dust-up highlights a reality becoming increasingly clear inside today’s GOP: policy disagreements may come and go, but Trump’s influence over Republican primaries remains a force few lawmakers seem eager to test.

    Massie’s defeat already is being viewed by many inside Republican circles as another reminder that even longtime conservatives with strong grassroots support can face serious trouble when Trump decides to make a race personal.

    Boebert appears to have gotten that message.

    And she didn’t wait long to send one back.

    JD Vance Confirms DOJ Is Probing Squad Democrat For Immigration Fraud

    1

    Rep. Ilhan Omar may again face scrutiny from the Justice Department after Vice President JD Vance said Tuesday that federal authorities are examining allegations tied to the Minnesota Democrat’s immigration history.

    Speaking during a White House press briefing while filling in for Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, Vance was asked by Daily Caller White House correspondent Reagan Reese whether Omar could ultimately face an indictment.

    “I don’t want to prejudge an investigation,” Vance said. “You read the things about Ilhan Omar, and about who she married, and whether she didn’t marry this person or that person. It certainly seems like something fishy is there. But everyone is entitled to equal justice under the laws.”

    Vance added that the administration intends to review the matter and pursue legal action only if investigators determine a crime occurred.

    “We’re going to investigate it, we’re going to take a look at it. If we think there’s a crime, we’re going to prosecute that crime, and that’s something that the Department of Justice is looking at right now,” he said.

    The comments revive longstanding controversy surrounding Omar and allegations that she participated in an immigration-related scheme involving a former marriage. Omar has repeatedly denied those claims, and no public evidence has proven them.

    According to reports cited by Fox News and The New York Times, the Justice Department under former President Joe Biden opened an investigation into Omar in 2024 that examined campaign expenditures, personal finances and alleged contacts with a non-U.S. citizen. However, individuals familiar with internal discussions reportedly said investigators did not uncover evidence warranting additional action, and the probe eventually stalled.

    Vance had previously raised the issue publicly. During a March podcast appearance with conservative commentator Benny Johnson, he claimed he had discussed potential legal action involving Omar with White House immigration adviser Stephen Miller. (RELATED: Vance Says Administration Reviewing Action Against Rep. Ilhan Omar)

    “We think Ilhan Omar definitely committed immigration fraud against the United States of America,” Vance said at the time.

    Omar, who was born in Somalia, came to the United States with her family after they were granted asylum in 1995 and became a naturalized citizen in 2000.

    The allegations center on Omar’s past relationships and claims from critics that she legally married a man named Ahmed Elmi in 2009 as part of an immigration arrangement. Omar has denied allegations that Elmi was her brother and has repeatedly dismissed the accusations as false and politically motivated.

    In December, Omar pushed back against renewed criticism on social media, calling the allegations “bigoted lies” and accusing former President Donald Trump of repeatedly targeting her.

    “He needs serious help,” Omar wrote at the time. “Since he has no economic policies to tout, he’s resorting to regurgitating bigoted lies instead.”

    Vance reiterated Tuesday that investigators would ultimately follow the evidence.

    “If we think that there’s a crime, we’re going to prosecute that crime,” he said.

    This article originally appeared on American Liberty News. Republished with permission.

    READ NEXT: ‘Having A Bad Day’: Circle K Clerk Sentenced For Killing Off-Duty Officer

    Republicans Question Trump Over $1.8B DOJ ‘Anti-Weaponization’ Fund

    1
    The White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

    President Trump’s newly created “Anti-Weaponization Fund” is already triggering backlash on Capitol Hill, including from some Republicans, as critics question whether the unprecedented program could become a vehicle for rewarding political allies under the banner of correcting alleged government abuses.

    The Department of Justice announced Monday that it would establish a $1.776 billion compensation fund designed to provide relief for individuals who claim they were wrongfully targeted by the federal government under the Biden administration.

    Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said the fund is intended to create a formal process for people who believe they were victims of government “weaponization” or “lawfare.”

    “The machinery of government should never be weaponized against any American, and it is this Department’s intention to make right the wrongs that were previously done while ensuring this never happens again,” Blanche said in a DOJ statement. “As part of this settlement, we are setting up a lawful process for victims of lawfare and weaponization to be heard and seek redress.”

    According to the DOJ, the fund will be authorized to issue both formal apologies and financial compensation to approved claimants. The department stated that there is “no partisan requirement” to file claims, and any unspent funds will eventually return to the federal government.

    The five-member commission overseeing the fund will be appointed by the DOJ, with one member selected in consultation with congressional leadership. President Trump will also retain the authority to remove members and appoint replacements through the attorney general.

    Exactly who qualifies for compensation remains unclear.

    The administration has not outlined specific eligibility standards, nor has it identified who may ultimately benefit from the program. Questions have also surfaced regarding whether individuals charged in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol riot — including those later pardoned or whose sentences were commuted by Trump — could receive compensation.

    Asked Monday whether Jan. 6 defendants could potentially benefit, Trump deferred to the commission.

    “I didn’t do this deal,” Trump told reporters. “It was told to me yesterday.”

    The new program emerged from a settlement involving Trump’s now-withdrawn $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS. Trump sued the agency after a contractor leaked portions of his tax records to media outlets.

    As part of the agreement, Trump, his family members and the Trump Organization reportedly will receive no direct monetary damages and instead accepted a formal apology while withdrawing multiple legal claims, including administrative complaints tied to the Mar-a-Lago investigation and allegations surrounding the Russia investigation.

    The DOJ defended the structure of the fund by pointing to the Obama-era Keepseagle v. Vilsack settlement, “where the Obama administration created a $760 million fund to redress various claims alleging racism against the federal government over a period of decades.”

    But critics argue the comparison does not hold up.

    Joseph Sellers, an attorney involved in the Keepseagle case, told CNN the situations are fundamentally different.

    “That really is the critical issue,” Sellers said. “You have to serve the same community whose interests were at stake in the litigation that was brought.”

    The administration’s rollout has also generated rare public resistance from Republicans.

    According to Mediaite, Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) criticized the proposal on Tuesday.

    “Yeah, not a big fan,” Thune told reporters. “I’m not sure exactly how they intend to use it. … But yeah, I don’t see a purpose for it.”

    Mediaite also reported that Sen. John Kennedy (R- La.) expressed skepticism while saying he remained open to the concept.

    “I need to know where the money is going to come from. I need to know who would qualify. I need to know the definition of weaponization. I need to know who’s been weaponized against?” Kennedy said Monday.

    Democrats have gone considerably further in their criticism.

    A group of 93 House Democrats filed an amicus brief seeking to block the settlement, arguing that it violates constitutional requirements and improperly redirects taxpayer money.

    Separately, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) condemned the fund as “a racket” intended to channel taxpayer dollars toward Trump allies.

    The issue also surfaced during a Senate Appropriations hearing Tuesday, where Sen. Chris Coons (D-Ct.) pressed Blanche over the unusual nature of the settlement arrangement.

    Coons noted that no previous president had sued his own administration and then settled the case while serving in office.

    Blanche pushed back on suggestions that Trump directed the process and rejected comparisons between the underlying litigation and the Keepseagle case, arguing that only the commission structure itself was similar.

    Still, when Coons asked whether Trump campaign donors could ultimately receive payments from the fund, Blanche declined to provide assurances.

    “I am not committing to anything beyond the settlement agreement itself,” Blanche said. “They are not excluded from seeking compensation if they are recognized.”

    With the fund’s eligibility standards still undefined and its commission not yet assembled, many of the biggest questions surrounding who receives compensation — and whether political allies of the president could benefit — remain unanswered.

    Progressive Rift? Liberal Host Says Tucker Beats AOC For Some On The Left

      3
      Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

      Liberal commentator and podcast host Briahna Joy Gray says she knows “many” people on the political left who would rather support Tucker Carlson for president than progressive star Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez — a striking claim as early maneuvering around the 2028 presidential race begins to intensify.

      Gray made the remarks during a recent episode of her Bad Faith podcast while discussing divisions inside the broader progressive movement and dissatisfaction among some left-wing voters.

      “It’s crazy, I know many people on the left who would happily vote for Tucker Carlson before AOC,” Gray said.

      Gray added that she finds herself frustrated by that reality because she said she would not encourage people to support either figure.

      “I am frustrated by that dynamic because I don’t want Tucker Carlson to be president,” she said. “I also can’t see myself damaging my own credibility by telling someone to vote for AOC. These options hurt us all.”

      Gray argued that Carlson has made numerous controversial comments over the years, including past remarks on immigration and cultural assimilation, but suggested some voters may find him newly appealing following what she described as a political “rebirth.”

      Carlson’s public image has shifted significantly in recent years.

      Once one of the most influential voices in conservative media during his run at Fox News, Carlson later departed the network and increasingly broke with major figures in the Republican establishment, including President Donald Trump.

      More recently, Carlson has criticized Trump over foreign policy and U.S. involvement overseas.

      “You have not done a good job running this country. You don’t even care to try,” Carlson said last month while criticizing Trump’s priorities. “You’d rather run the world or the empire.”

      Carlson has also become increasingly critical of Israel and U.S. involvement in Middle East conflicts, arguing that American foreign policy has become disconnected from domestic concerns.

      His break from Trump has produced mixed reactions among conservatives. Some former supporters praised his willingness to challenge Republican orthodoxy, while others viewed his criticisms as creating distance between himself and Trump’s political movement. (RELATED: Trump Cuts Tucker Carlson Loose From Political Movement)

      Meanwhile, Ocasio-Cortez appears to be moving in the opposite direction politically.

      The New York Democrat has become one of the most recognizable figures in the Democrat Party and is widely viewed as an early potential contender in the 2028 presidential race. She has built a massive social media following, a powerful small-dollar fundraising network and strong support among progressive activists.

      Recent surveys have also suggested Ocasio-Cortez could enter a future Democrat primary with meaningful advantages. An AtlasIntel poll released recently placed her at the top of a hypothetical Democratic field with 26% support.

      But despite that standing, some divisions on the left have become increasingly visible.

      Critics on both the center and the populist left have questioned Ocasio-Cortez’s evolution from anti-establishment insurgent to a more integrated figure within Democratic leadership circles. Gray pointed to a recent social media dispute involving former Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene as an example.

      Greene criticized Ocasio-Cortez after she declined to support an amendment Greene introduced involving Israel funding. Gray argued voters were justified in questioning Ocasio-Cortez’s priorities.

      The comments also arrive as Democrats are quietly beginning to sort out what the post-Biden and post-Sanders era could look like.

      While 2028 remains years away, names already circulating include Ocasio-Cortez, California Rep. Ro Khanna, California Gov. Gavin Newsom, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro and others who could emerge as national contenders.

      For now, there is no indication Carlson intends to run for office, and his name has not regularly appeared among likely presidential candidates but there’s still plenty of time for him to make a surprising move.

      Watch the full podcast:

      Liberal commentator and podcast host Briahna Joy Gray says she knows “many” people on the political left who would rather support Tucker Carlson for president than progressive star Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez — a striking claim as early maneuvering around the 2028 presidential race begins to intensify.

      Gray made the remarks during a recent episode of her Bad Faith podcast while discussing divisions inside the broader progressive movement and dissatisfaction among some left-wing voters.

      “It’s crazy, I know many people on the left who would happily vote for Tucker Carlson before AOC,” Gray said.

      Gray added that she finds herself frustrated by that reality because she said she would not encourage people to support either figure.

      “I am frustrated by that dynamic because I don’t want Tucker Carlson to be president,” she said. “I also can’t see myself damaging my own credibility by telling someone to vote for AOC. These options hurt us all.”

      Gray argued that Carlson has made numerous controversial comments over the years, including past remarks on immigration and cultural assimilation, but suggested some voters may find him newly appealing following what she described as a political “rebirth.”

      Carlson’s public image has shifted significantly in recent years.

      Once one of the most influential voices in conservative media during his run at Fox News, Carlson later departed the network and increasingly broke with major figures in the Republican establishment, including President Donald Trump.

      More recently, Carlson has criticized Trump over foreign policy and U.S. involvement overseas.

      “You have not done a good job running this country. You don’t even care to try,” Carlson said last month while criticizing Trump’s priorities. “You’d rather run the world or the empire.”

      Carlson has also become increasingly critical of Israel and U.S. involvement in Middle East conflicts, arguing that American foreign policy has become disconnected from domestic concerns.

      His break from Trump has produced mixed reactions among conservatives. Some former supporters praised his willingness to challenge Republican orthodoxy, while others viewed his criticisms as creating distance between himself and Trump’s political movement. (RELATED: Trump Cuts Tucker Carlson Loose From Political Movement)

      Meanwhile, Ocasio-Cortez appears to be moving in the opposite direction politically.

      The New York Democrat has become one of the most recognizable figures in the Democrat Party and is widely viewed as an early potential contender in the 2028 presidential race. She has built a massive social media following, a powerful small-dollar fundraising network and strong support among progressive activists.

      Recent surveys have also suggested Ocasio-Cortez could enter a future Democrat primary with meaningful advantages. An AtlasIntel poll released recently placed her at the top of a hypothetical Democratic field with 26% support.

      But despite that standing, some divisions on the left have become increasingly visible.

      Critics on both the center and the populist left have questioned Ocasio-Cortez’s evolution from anti-establishment insurgent to a more integrated figure within Democratic leadership circles. Gray pointed to a recent social media dispute involving former Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene as an example.

      Greene criticized Ocasio-Cortez after she declined to support an amendment Greene introduced involving Israel funding. Gray argued voters were justified in questioning Ocasio-Cortez’s priorities.

      The comments also arrive as Democrats are quietly beginning to sort out what the post-Biden and post-Sanders era could look like.

      While 2028 remains years away, names already circulating include Ocasio-Cortez, California Rep. Ro Khanna, California Gov. Gavin Newsom, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro and others who could emerge as national contenders.

      For now, there is no indication Carlson intends to run for office, and his name has not regularly appeared among likely presidential candidates but there’s still plenty of time for him to make a surprising move.

      Watch the full podcast:

      Appeals Court Temporarily Blocks Trump Payment in E. Jean Carroll Case

        2

        President Trump scored another legal win this week after a federal appeals court agreed to let him hold off on paying writer E. Jean Carroll’s massive $83.3 million defamation judgment while he takes his fight to the Supreme Court.

        The ruling from the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals gives Trump breathing room as he continues a broader legal counteroffensive that has seen him notch several major courtroom victories over the past year — including Supreme Court wins on presidential immunity and multiple delays in politically charged cases brought against him during the 2024 campaign.

        The court’s order allows Trump to pause payment of the judgment for now, though judges required him to increase his bond by roughly $7.5 million to cover mounting interest if his appeal ultimately fails.

        Carroll’s attorney, Roberta Kaplan, tried to frame the ruling as a victory for her client.

        “We are pleased that the Second Circuit conditioned the stay on President Trump posting a bond of nearly $100 million,” Kaplan said after the decision.

        But the practical effect is clear: Trump will not have to pay Carroll anytime soon as the nation’s highest court weighs whether to step into the explosive case.

        The president is asking the Supreme Court to overturn both civil verdicts won by Carroll, who accused Trump of sexually assaulting her inside a Manhattan department store in the mid-1990s — allegations he has repeatedly and forcefully denied.

        Two separate Manhattan juries sided with Carroll in civil proceedings.

        The first jury awarded her $5 million after finding Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation tied to comments he made in 2022.

        The second jury later slammed Trump with the eye-popping $83.3 million judgment after concluding he further defamed Carroll by publicly rejecting her claims while campaigning for president.

        Trump’s legal team has argued the second case should never have moved forward because the statements in question were made while he was serving as president, raising serious constitutional questions involving presidential immunity and executive authority.

        His lawyers have also argued the federal government should substitute itself as the defendant under the Westfall Act, potentially shielding Trump personally from liability.

        So far, lower courts have rejected those arguments — but Trump has increasingly found success when cases reach the Supreme Court.

        Last year, the high court handed Trump a landmark immunity victory that sharply limited prosecutors’ ability to pursue criminal charges tied to official presidential actions. That ruling upended multiple cases brought against him and was widely viewed as one of the most significant constitutional decisions involving presidential power in decades.

        Trump has also benefited from repeated delays in several Democrat-backed prosecutions and investigations that critics argued were timed to damage him politically during the 2024 election cycle.

        Now, the Carroll cases are shaping up to become the next major legal showdown.

        The Supreme Court has already spent months considering whether to hear Trump’s appeal involving the first Carroll verdict. The justices were initially expected to discuss the matter privately in February, but consideration has been delayed multiple times without explanation.

        Trump’s forthcoming appeal of the second verdict will now add even more pressure on the high court to weigh in.

        For now, however, the appeals court ruling marks another temporary but significant courtroom victory for the president as he continues battling a long list of legal challenges while preparing for the remainder of his second term.