Featured

Home Featured
Featured posts

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The program emerged from a settlement involving President Trump’s now-withdrawn lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service and has generated controversy because of questions surrounding who may ultimately benefit.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.

      Secret Service Agent, Chinese Security Get Into Standoff During Trump Visit

        0

        Chinese officials repeatedly clashed with members of the American delegation on Thursday during President Donald Trump’s high-profile visit to China, creating several chaotic scenes involving the United States Secret Service, White House staffers, and members of the U.S. press corps.

        One tense confrontation unfolded when a Secret Service agent accompanying the White House press pool was blocked from entering a secured area by Chinese security officials because he was carrying a firearm — standard procedure for agents tasked with protecting American officials overseas.

        According to reports, Chinese authorities demanded the agent surrender his weapon before entering the area near President Trump’s motorcade. The agent refused, triggering a heated standoff that delayed the White House press pool for roughly 30 minutes as journalists attempted to follow the president’s movements through Beijing.

        Video from the scene showed frustrated American reporters arguing with Chinese officials as access remained restricted.

        “We have to go!” one reporter shouted during the delay.

        “U.S. press, we are going!” another yelled as journalists eventually pushed past security personnel to catch up with the presidential convoy.

        At one point, a person caught on the live feed described the unfolding confusion as a “sh*t show.”

        As the group moved toward the motorcade, additional Chinese officials reportedly rushed toward the American press contingent in an effort to stop them, though the journalists ultimately reached the convoy.

        The confrontation added to a growing sense of disorder surrounding portions of Trump’s visit to China, despite the carefully choreographed public optics displayed by Beijing earlier in the trip.

        In a separate incident Thursday, a female White House aide was reportedly knocked to the ground and trampled by Chinese reporters scrambling to enter a meeting room ahead of bilateral talks between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping. The aide suffered bruising but was not seriously injured.

        The clashes contrasted sharply with the lavish welcome Chinese officials staged for Trump upon his arrival Wednesday night. Beijing rolled out an elaborate reception for the American president as Trump began a closely watched diplomatic visit centered on trade negotiations, military tensions in the Indo-Pacific, and the broader U.S.-China power struggle.

        Trump spent much of Thursday meeting with Xi and senior Chinese officials before attending a formal banquet at the Great Hall of the People.

        “It was a fantastic day,” Trump said during remarks at the banquet. “And in particular, I want to thank President Xi, my friend, for this magnificent welcome.”

        “We had extremely positive and productive conversations and meetings today with the Chinese delegation earlier,” Trump added.

        The security confrontations, however, underscored the deep mistrust and competing protocols that continue to define relations between Washington and Beijing.

        Originally published on Official Trump Tracker. Republished with permission.

        National Intelligence Spokesperson Breaks Silence On Reported Federal Office Raid

        2
        Police image via Pixabay free images

        The Office of the Director of National Intelligence is pushing back forcefully on viral claims that the CIA conducted a “raid” on its office, calling the reporting false and urging clarification amid a swirl of online speculation.

        “This is false,” Olivia Coleman, a spokesperson for Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, wrote on the social platform X. “The CIA did not raid the DNI’s office.”

        The statement was a direct response to a now-deleted post from Fox News host Jesse Watters, who had amplified claims tied to comments from Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.).

        Luna had alleged that materials connected to the assassination of former President John F. Kennedy and the CIA’s MK-ULTRA program were removed from the National Reconnaissance Office in Virginia. She linked the matter to broader concerns about historical intelligence records and declassification efforts.

        According to its public records, the NRO periodically reviews collections tied to historically significant programs for potential declassification and public release, a routine process that can include older intelligence archives.

        “The reason why this is troubling … there was an executive order that the president directed the full declassification of JFK, but then also to the MK-ULTRA files. Famously the CIA said that all documents were released and other documents had been destroyed,” Luna said during an appearance on NewsNation’s “Katie Pavlich Tonight.”

        “So, these are allegedly those documents that apparently never existed,” she added.

        Luna also said she personally contacted CIA Director John Ratcliffe regarding the matter. In a follow-up post, she pushed back on interpretations of her comments and denied claims that she alleged a raid on Gabbard’s office.

        “I am noticing a few large accounts stating falsely that I claimed there was a raid on Tulsi Gabbard’s office by the CIA. This is completely false …” Luna wrote on X. “There is no clip or statement that exists. Why is there an orchestrated push for this narrative”

        “When Congress is notified of conflicting narratives from different agencies, i.e., the CIA and ODNI, it is our job to follow through to ensure documents are preserved and not destroyed,” she continued. “This is not an issue with Ratcliffe or Gabbard.”

        She added, “For people to act like the CIA doesn’t have a history of destroying documents is BIZARO-WORLD. Watch the clip for yourself. I am talking about what the whistleblower is saying under oath.”

        Luna, who chairs the House Oversight Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets, has announced plans to hold a hearing on MK-ULTRA records later this month.

        The CIA program MK-ULTRA, launched in 1953, focused on behavioral modification research and has long been associated with controversy and conspiracy theories. According to University of Louisville archival records, the program has remained a recurring subject in public debate over intelligence agency transparency.

        White House Explores 250 Pardons to Mark America’s 250th Birthday

        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)

        President Donald Trump is weighing an ambitious new wave of clemency that could see as many as 250 pardons issued either on his own birthday — Flag Day, June 14 — or as part of the nation’s July 4 celebration marking America’s 250th birthday, according to a new report from the Wall Street Journal.

        The proposal, still in what administration officials describe as “preliminary discussions,” would dramatically expand Trump’s already aggressive use of presidential pardon powers during his second term and further cement clemency as one of the defining features of his presidency.

        According to the report, White House officials are debating whether the pardons should coincide with Trump’s birthday celebration on June 14 — which also falls on Flag Day — or whether they should instead be tied directly to the nation’s semiquincentennial festivities on the Fourth of July.

        Some aides inside the White House are reportedly uneasy about the timing, warning that another major round of pardons ahead of the midterm elections could create political headaches for Republicans. Still, administration officials stressed that no final decision has been made and that Trump remains the ultimate authority on clemency matters.

        The possible move would fit neatly into Trump’s broader effort to put his personal stamp on America’s 250th birthday celebration. Since returning to office, Trump has championed a series of patriotic projects tied to the anniversary, including plans for a “National Garden of American Heroes” featuring 250 statues of iconic Americans such as George Washington, Ronald Reagan, and Jackie Robinson. He has also promoted “Patriot Games” athletic competitions for high school students and ordered renovations around national monuments in Washington.

        Historically, rulers and political leaders often used “jubilee” celebrations to grant mercy or forgiveness, a tradition Trump allies have increasingly referenced as justification for a broader use of presidential clemency powers.

        One of the administration officials helping oversee the current pardon operation is Trump-appointed pardon attorney Ed Martin, who earlier this year argued that pardons are an “essential” part of justice and pointed to historical examples of kings and popes granting mass clemency during anniversary celebrations.

        Trump’s second term has already featured some of the most controversial and sweeping pardons in modern presidential history.

        Most notably, Trump issued a broad pardon for many supporters charged in connection with the January 6 Capitol riot, a move that sparked outrage from Democrats and some Republicans alike. Critics accused Trump of rewarding political allies, while supporters argued he was correcting what they viewed as politically motivated prosecutions.

        Trump has also pardoned several high-profile figures tied to the cryptocurrency world and corporate fraud cases. Those granted clemency include former Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao and Silk Road founder Ross Ulbricht, whose case became a rallying point for libertarian activists and parts of the crypto community.

        In another controversial case, Trump pardoned former Nikola executive Trevor Milton after Milton was convicted of defrauding investors.

        The administration’s willingness to entertain high-profile pardon requests has also fueled a surge in clemency applications nationwide. The Journal reported that more than 16,000 pardon requests were filed last year — the highest number recorded since at least 1937.

        Among those publicly seeking relief from Trump is disgraced FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried, though Trump has publicly mocked the idea of pardoning him.

        There has also been speculation surrounding imprisoned Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell after her legal team floated the possibility of cooperation in exchange for clemency. So far, however, there is no indication Trump is considering such a move. Earlier releases tied to the Epstein investigation showed Trump praising Florida investigators for pursuing Jeffrey Epstein and describing Maxwell as “evil.”

        The looming possibility of another massive clemency push also revives comparisons to former President Joe Biden, who faced bipartisan criticism after commuting the sentences of nearly 2,500 federal inmates during the final stretch of his presidency. Biden’s pardon of his son, Hunter Biden, and his commutation of dozens of federal death row inmates generated particularly fierce backlash.

        Trump allies argue that Biden normalized expansive uses of executive clemency, opening the door for Trump to exercise the same authority even more aggressively during his second term.

        For now, administration officials say discussions remain fluid. But if Trump ultimately moves forward, the pardons would likely become one of the most politically explosive moments of the country’s 250th anniversary celebration — while simultaneously reinforcing Trump’s longstanding view that the presidency’s pardon power should be used far more aggressively than previous administrations were willing to do.