Featured

Home Featured
Featured posts

Senior Diplomat Fired Over Trump Remarks

    3
    Image via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    New Zealand’s most senior diplomat to the U.K. was fired after seeming to question President Donald Trump’s understanding of history and his handling of Russia. 

    Phil Goff, who was serving as New Zealand’s high commissioner to the U.K., apparently tried to draw a contrast between Winston Churchill’s handling of Nazi Germany and Trump’s approach to Russia. 

    The New Zealand official said he was re-reading a famous Churchill speech from 1938 in which the British leader blasts then-Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain’s decision to sign the Munich Agreement with Adolf Hitler. 

    “President Trump has restored the bust of Churchill to the Oval Office. But do you think he really understands history?,” Goff asked Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen, referencing the bust seen during President Trump’s heated exchange with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

    Valtonen seemed uncomfortable with the question, saying she would “limit” herself in her response. Rather than saying anything about Trump, the Finnish official said many of Churchill’s remarks were “timeless.”

    When speaking with media, New Zealand Foreign Minister Winston Peters, who fired Goff, called the diplomat’s question “deeply disappointing.” He also said that it made “his position as high commissioner to London untenable.”

    Peters called Goff’s firing “one of the most difficult” things he has had to do in his career. He also said that had the former high commissioner made the statement about any other nation, he would have been “forced to act,” implying that the firing was not because Goff specifically insulted Trump. 

    “When you’re in that position, you represent the views of the government and the policies of the day – you’re not able to free-think, you are the face of New Zealand,” Peters told the press on Thursday.

    Trump Targets Law Firm Linked To Dominion Voting Systems Lawsuit Against Fox News

      0
      The White House from Washington, DC, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

      President Trump issued an order targeting law firm Susman Godfrey, the firm that helped Dominion Voting Systems secure a $787 million settlement against Fox News after the 2020 election.

      Trump’s order will ban the firm from accessing government buildings, viewing documents or representing any party who has any litigation with the federal government.

      The Hill reports:

      “Lawyers and law firms that engage in activities detrimental to critical American interests should not have access to our Nation’s secrets, nor should their conduct be subsidized by Federal taxpayer funds or contracts,” the order reads.

      The president said the move was necessary “to address the significant risks, egregious conduct, and conflicts of interest,” at Susman Godfrey.

      The firm, in a statement, responded that “anyone who knows Susman Godfrey knows we believe in the rule of law, and we take seriously our duty to uphold it.”

      “This principle guides us now,” the company said. “There is no question that we will fight this unconstitutional order.”

      Susman Godfrey helped voting systems provider Dominion secure a multi-million dollar settlement in 2022 against Fox News over false claims it aired after the 2020 presidential election promoted by Trump and his allies.

      Trump’s order comes the same week a Delaware judge ruled that cable news channel Newsmax aired false and defamatory statements about Dominion Voting Systems as part of its coverage of the 2020 election.

      On Thursday, Delaware Superior Court Judge Eric Davis ruled the statements made on Newsmax were defamatory, and Dominion must now prove in court the channel acted with “actual malice” to harm the company’s reputation.

      Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

      Davis’s ruling comes ahead of a jury trial that is slated to begin later this month in connection with the voting system provider’s defamation lawsuit against the conservative cable channel. (RELATED: Report: Fox News Reaches Last-Minute Settlement With Dominion Voting Systems)

      Dominion sued Newsmax in 2021 over a series of claims alleging the company’s machines were manipulated to swing votes in President Biden’s favor and against former President Trump.

      In a new statement Wednesday, Newsmax said it “covered both sides of the 2020 election dispute fairly. At no time did it defame Dominion. This case represents a serious threat to free speech and a free press and Newsmax will defend itself vigorously at trial.”

      Nebraska Democrat-Turned-Republican Senator Blocks Trump’s Electoral Vote Plan

      2
      Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

      In a surprising political move, Nebraska State Sen. Mike McDonnell, a former Democrat-turned-Republican, has effectively derailed efforts by former President Donald Trump and his allies to alter the state’s method of distributing electoral votes just ahead of the 2024 election. The proposal, if passed, could have shifted Nebraska to a winner-take-all system, favoring the GOP in a heavily conservative state.

      McDonnell’s Decision: A Game-Changer

      On Monday, McDonnell announced that he would not support the push to change the way Nebraska awards its electoral votes. “I understand the motivations of some of my colleagues,” McDonnell told The Washington Post. “However, after considerable reflection, it’s clear that with just over a month left before Election Day, now is not the right time to make this change.” (McDonnell has long been seen as a swing vote in the legislature, making his decision particularly impactful.)

      How Nebraska’s System Works

      Nebraska and Maine are unique in how they allocate their electoral votes. Unlike the typical winner-take-all system, these states distribute votes by congressional district. This allowed President Joe Biden to secure one electoral vote from Nebraska’s 2nd Congressional District, covering the Omaha area, in the 2020 election. Trump allies aimed to shift Nebraska to a winner-take-all model to bolster Republican chances.

      Pushback From Trump Allies

      Trump supporters have lobbied for months to change Nebraska’s system, viewing it as a crucial battleground. Their aim was to prevent Vice President Kamala Harris from easily winning the Omaha district, which could combine with her victories in other swing states like Wisconsin and Michigan.

      Rising Pressure

      Last week, South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, a vocal Trump ally, visited Nebraska to lobby for the change. Trump also personally reached out to state legislators. However, McDonnell’s decision has made it unlikely that Nebraska’s governor, Jim Pillen, will call a special session to vote on the matter.

      Trump’s Response

      Trump expressed his frustration on Truth Social, accusing McDonnell of blocking a “huge Republican victory.” Calling him a “grandstander,” Trump made it clear that he views this decision as a significant setback for his 2024 campaign.

      What’s Next?

      Although the current effort has stalled, State Sen. Loren Lippincott, who sponsored the bill, stated that he plans to reintroduce the legislation during the next session. “This fight isn’t over,” Lippincott said, signaling that Nebraska’s electoral system may be contested well beyond 2024.

      What It Means for the 2024 Election

      McDonnell’s decision could have significant implications. By keeping the congressional district-based allocation in place, the Omaha area remains competitive for both parties. This keeps Nebraska’s 2nd Congressional District in play and could provide a critical edge in a tight race between Trump and Harris.

      For now, McDonnell’s refusal to back the change has ensured that Nebraska’s 2nd District will remain a swing district, at least through the 2024 election.

      READ NEXT: Awesome News: Former Fox News Star Drops BIG Professional Announcement [WATCH]

      Amanda Head: Who’s Your Pick For 2024 – Trump or DeSantis?

      6

      As Americans continue to wait for official midterm results to trickle in Republicans are already diving themselves into two camps: Ron DeSantis or Donald Trump.

      Who are you siding with?

      Watch Amanda break it down below.

      Trump To Pardon Pro-Life Activists Prosecuted Under FACE Act

        0
        Washington D.C., USA - January 22, 2015; A Pro-Life woman clashes with a group of Pro-Choice demonstrators at the U.S. Supreme Court.

        President Donald Trump has signaled that he plans to pardon pro-life activists who were convicted under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act during the Biden administration, according to a report from The Daily Wire. The move is expected to provide immediate relief to individuals who have faced significant prison sentences for their involvement in anti-abortion protests.

        Understanding the FACE Act

        Enacted in 1994, the FACE Act is a federal law designed to protect access to reproductive health services, including abortions. It prohibits the use of force, threats or physical obstruction to interfere with individuals seeking or providing such services.

        Violations of the FACE Act carry severe penalties, ranging from fines to imprisonment, depending on the circumstances and whether the offender has a prior record. While the law’s primary intent is to safeguard access to clinics, it has also been applied to prosecute pro-life activists accused of obstructing clinic entrances or engaging in threatening behavior.

        Controversial Applications and High-Profile Cases

        Over the years, the FACE Act has sparked significant controversy, with critics arguing that it disproportionately targets pro-life advocates. They claim the law infringes on First Amendment rights, penalizing peaceful protests rooted in religious or ideological beliefs.

        – Advertisement –

        One high-profile example involved Mark Houck, a Catholic pro-life advocate charged under the FACE Act in 2022. Houck’s case stemmed from an altercation with a Planned Parenthood volunteer, which he passionately argued was an act of self-defense. A jury later acquitted him, but the case became a rallying point for pro-life groups, who argued it exemplified federal overreach and selective enforcement.

        Critics of the FACE Act also highlight what they perceive as inconsistent enforcement. While the law has been rigorously applied to defend the pro-choice movement, pro-life advocates claim that incidents involving vandalism or harassment at pregnancy resource centers and churches are often overlooked.

        Who Is Being Pardoned?

        If the pardons move forward, several pro-life activists currently in prison will see immediate relief. Among those expected to be pardoned are:

        -Lauren Handy: 57 months

        -John Hinshaw: 21 months

        – Advertisement –

        -Jonathan Darnell: 34 months

        -Herb Geraghty: 27 months

        -Jean Marshall: 24 months

        -Joan Bell: 27 months

        – Advertisement –

        -Paulette Harlow: 24 months

        -Bevelyn Williams: 41 months

        -Heather Idoni: 24 months

        -Calvin Zastro: 6 months

        These individuals were convicted for participating in demonstrations at abortion clinics in Tennessee, Washington, D.C. and New York, which prosecutors argued constituted violations of the FACE Act:

        The D.C. protest involved a group of pro-life protesters singing songs, praying, locking arms in front of the facility’s staff entrance, and attaching themselves with ropes and chains to block doors inside the infamous Surgi-Clinic in October 2020, a late term abortion facility. In Tennessee, a group of pro-life Christians gathered in a hall outside the Carafem Health Center in Mt. Juliet where they sang hymns, prayed, and urged women not to get abortion in March 2021.

        Many of the defendants have already been imprisoned for over a year with many more months yet to serve.

        “I would love to be home with my family,” 59-year-old Heather Idoni said in September. “I would love to hold my new grandson.”

        Idoni was sentenced to two years in prison over the D.C. protest and was given another eight months to serve concurrently from the Nashville protest.

        Broader Implications

        Trump’s decision to pardon these activists underscores a sharp divide in how federal laws like the FACE Act are interpreted and enforced. For pro-life advocates, the move represents a correction to what they view as unjust and politically motivated prosecutions. For others, it raises questions about the balance between protecting access to health care and safeguarding free speech rights.

        Poll Reveals How Likely Trump Verdict Is To Sway Voters

          3
          Gavel via Wikimedia Commons Image

          Nothing can slow Donald Trump down now…

          A recent report found that Trump’s criminal hush money trial is unlikely to deter voters as he awaits a verdict.

          The NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist national poll showed 67% of registered voters nationally wouldn’t be swayed by a guilty verdict against Trump, while 15% said it would make them more likely to vote for him. Another 17% said a guilty verdict would make them less likely to vote for Trump.

           The 12-member jury is currently on day two of deliberations after the prosecution and defense concluded their closing arguments on Tuesday.

          According to the Washington Examiner, among Republicans surveyed in the poll, 25% said a guilty verdict would make them more likely to vote for the former president, while 10% said it would make them less likely to vote for him. Only 7% of Democrats said a guilty verdict would make them more likely to vote for Trump, and 27% said it would make them less likely to vote for Trump.

          Among coveted independent voters, 15% said a guilty verdict would make them more likely to vote for Trump, and 11% said it would make them less likely.

          In contrast, 76% of all voters said a not-guilty verdict wouldn’t affect their votes.

          The best-case scenario for Trump is acquittal however experts have noted outcome is unlikely as it would require all 12 jurors to find him innocent. The most realistic path for the defense is a hung jury, in which at least one juror dissents.

          The former president is expected to appeal if he is found guilty. A conviction would not keep him from running for a second term.

          Navy Seal Who Killed Bin Laden Blasts U.S. Navy’s Woke Recruitment Tactic

          0
          President Donald J. Trump is presented with a 10th Combat Aviation Brigade challenge coin following an air assault and gun rain demonstration at Fort Drum, New York, on August 13. The demonstration was part of President Trump's visit to the 10th Mountain Division (LI) to sign the National Defense Authorization Act of 2019, which increases the Army's authorized active-duty end strength by 4,000 enabling us to field critical capabilities in support of the National Defense Strategy. (U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Thomas Scaggs) 180813-A-TZ475-010

          Things have gone too far.

          After the U.S. Navy confirmed it hired an active-duty drag queen to recruit candidates the Navy Seal who was a part of the team that killed Osama bin Laden couldn’t help but share his reaction to the news.

          “Alright. The U.S. Navy is now using an enlisted sailor Drag Queen as a recruiter. I’m done,” Robert O’Neill, who said that he fired the shot that killed bin Laden in 2011, tweeted. “China is going to destroy us. YOU GOT THIS NAVY. I can’t believe I fought for this bulls***.”

          “You’re doing it wrong, @USNavy,” he added. “Talk to someone [who’s] actually done something! Not yeomen with t*** and a D***!”

          Yeoman 2nd Class Joshua Kelley, who performs as a drag queen named “Harpy Daniels,” revealed in a November TikTok video that he would serve as the Navy’s first “digital ambassador.” 

          “From joining to 2016 and being able to share my drag experience on my off time with my fellow sailors has been a blessing,” Kelley wrote on Instagram in November when he announced his Digital Ambassador appointment.

          “This experience has brought me so much strength, courage and ambition to continue being an advocate and representation of queer sailors!” he told his more than 8,000 followers. “Thank you to the Navy for giving me this opportunity! I don’t speak for the Navy but simply sharing my experience in the Navy! Hooyah, and let’s go Slay!”

          In his Instagram video, Kelley said he is “being the representation of people who were oppressed for years in the service.”

          According to The Military Times, the U.S. Army missed its fiscal 2022 goal by 15,000 soldiers while the other branches of the U.S. military, with the exception of the Space Force, “barely made quota or had to pull extensively from their pools of delayed-entry applicants.”

          Trump Issues Pardon To Athlete Convicted After Record-Breaking Run

            0
            Donald Trump via Gage Skidmore Flickr

            President Donald Trump has issued a full pardon to Michelino Sunseri, an endurance athlete who was convicted last year for descending the Grand Teton via a “restricted” trail during a record-breaking run. Sunseri’s case had become a flashpoint in the debate over federal overreach and the growing tendency of unelected bureaucrats to criminalize harmless behavior.

            Sunseri reacted to the news with relief on Monday, writing on Facebook:
            “IT’S FINALLY OVER. The trail trial of the century is officially over. In a twist even Hollywood couldn’t write, I woke up this morning to find out I’ve been given a PRESIDENTIAL PARDON from Donald J. Trump — over the Grand Teton FKT and my use of the Old Climber’s Trail.”

            A Record Run Turned Legal Battle

            In September 2024, Sunseri ascended and descended the 13,775-foot Grand Teton in an astonishing 2 hours and 50 minutes, setting a new fastest-known time. But instead of celebrating the athletic achievement, federal authorities charged him days later for taking a “prohibited” route—the Old Climber’s Trail—during his descent.

            Although the trail has long been used by climbers and is not inherently unsafe, the National Park Service classified it as “restricted,” and Sunseri was prosecuted under rules that critics say lack proper legal grounding.

            A Case of Bureaucratic Overreach?

            The Pacific Legal Foundation, which took up Sunseri’s defense, argued that the federal government had overstepped its authority. According to PLF, the regulations used to charge Sunseri were created by low-level park staff—not by Congress or any properly authorized rulemaking process.

            “We are thrilled that Michelino’s nightmare is over,” said PLF attorney Michael Poon. “But we’re not done fighting unconstitutional regulations that let unelected officials criminalize harmless conduct. We stand ready to help other Americans facing similar prosecutions.”

            This theme—federal agencies creating de facto laws without accountability—has become a major concern among conservatives, especially as executive-branch rulemaking grows in scope and impact. Sunseri’s case, many argue, is a prime example of ordinary Americans being punished by faceless, unaccountable bureaucrats.

            Sunseri: “They Tried to Make an Example of Me”

            Sunseri was convicted last September despite his defense showing that many climbers had used the same trail over the years. He said officials seemed determined to “make an example” of him rather than apply common sense.

            “This case was a massive waste of taxpayer money and government energy from the start,” Sunseri said. “Unfortunately, instead of working with me, the system tried to make an example of me. I know this pardon might get swept up in politics in this heated time, and that’s unfortunate—because this particular case is about fairness and common sense.”

            Hush Money Judge Stops Trump Jurors From Disclosing Responses To Employer Questions

              0
              Gavel via Wikimedia Commons Image

              Judge Juan Merchan ruled on Thursday morning that the media is not allowed to publish the jurors’ responses to questions 3a and 3d on the juror qualification questionnaire.

              The questions ask: “Who is your current employer and who is your previous employer?”

              The ruling comes as the seated jury in former President Donald Trump’s hush money trial fell to six as a sworn juror expressed concerns about her identity being made public by the media.

              The juror told Judge Merchan:

              “Aspects of my identity have already been out there in the public, yesterday alone I had friends colleagues and family push things to my phone questioning my identity as a juror.”

              A number of people observing the jury selection process (voir dire) have expressed similar concerns about the intense political climate.

              Merchan proceeded to address members of the press in the courtroom: “We just lost what probably would’ve been a very good juror.”

              Though the judge agreed with Trump’s lawyers that having that information is essential, the court will redact it from the public record.

              Merchan also instructed journalists to refrain from revealing any information regarding the physical appearance of the jurors.

              Jury selection continues. Twelve New Yorkers and six alternates need to be selected.

              This article was republished with permission from American Liberty News.

              Here’s What’s Inside The Senate’s Version Of Trump’s Bill

                2

                In a major victory for the America First agenda, Senate Republicans united early Tuesday morning to pass President Donald Trump’s monumental “big, beautiful bill.” This sweeping legislation is designed to supercharge the economy, empower hardworking Americans, and invest in national security and border integrity — delivering on promises that put American citizens first.

                Lower Taxes for Workers and Families

                At the heart of this landmark bill is an extension of President Trump’s historic 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. By preventing a looming 22% tax hike, this measure protects working families and preserves the economic momentum that has already lifted millions out of hardship.

                The bill includes powerful new deductions targeted directly at middle- and working-class Americans. Waitstaff and service workers will now be able to deduct taxes on up to $25,000 of their tipped wages — a major relief for everyday heroes in the hospitality sector. Additionally, up to $12,500 in overtime pay will be deductible, rewarding Americans who go the extra mile.

                Seniors, too, receive long-overdue recognition, with an additional $6,000 tax deduction to help them keep more of their hard-earned retirement savings. And for all Americans who rely on their vehicles to work and live, a new deduction for car loan interest will help ease the burden of rising costs.

                Relief for High-Tax States

                Responding to Republican leaders from high-cost states, the bill temporarily raises the cap on state and local tax (SALT) deductions to $40,000 for five years. This move is a win for taxpayers in places like New York and California who have long been punished by state-level tax-and-spend policies.

                This provision empowers conservative representatives from blue states to continue fighting for their constituents while advancing America First priorities.

                Restoring Responsibility to Medicaid

                True to conservative values, the bill restores accountability to Medicaid by introducing commonsense work requirements. Able-bodied adults without children, aged 18 to 64, will need to work at least 80 hours a month, pursue education, or participate in community service to continue receiving benefits.

                These reforms aim to encourage independence and self-reliance while protecting resources for the truly vulnerable.

                Acknowledging rural healthcare challenges, the bill doubles a critical stabilization fund to $50 billion, ensuring that rural hospitals stay open and continue serving their communities.

                Strengthening SNAP and Combating Dependency

                The bill also tightens rules for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), requiring work or community engagement for able-bodied adults without dependents. This move reflects a deeply held belief that government aid should be a temporary safety net, not a way of life, and encourages recipients to return to the workforce.