Random

    Featured

    Home Featured
    Featured posts

    Trump Signs Executive Order To Support America’s Military Families

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    1
    President Donald Trump monitors U.S. military operations in Venezuela, from Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida, on Saturday, January 3, 2026.

    President Donald Trump signed an executive order Monday establishing a new White House commission dedicated to improving life for America’s military spouses and families.

    Surrounded by military spouses in the Oval Office, Trump described the initiative as “long overdue” and said supporting families at home is essential to maintaining a strong and prepared fighting force.

    “America cannot have the strongest military in the world without the love and devotion of our remarkable military spouses,” Trump said during the signing ceremony, according to the Department of War.

    The executive order creates the President’s Military Spouse Commission, which will advise Trump on challenges involving employment, housing, health care, education, child care and support during military deployments.

    The commission will be chaired by Jennifer Hegseth, the wife of Secretary of War Pete Hegseth. Its membership will include the spouses of the military service secretaries, members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, senior enlisted leaders and the secretary of Homeland Security.

    Together, the commission’s members have more than 400 years of experience as active-duty military spouses, Trump said.

    Military families routinely move to a new duty station every two or three years, often forcing spouses to leave jobs, transfer professional licenses, find new schools and secure child care in unfamiliar communities. Deployments can also leave spouses managing households and raising children alone for months at a time.

    Those disruptions have produced significant economic consequences.

    The Pentagon’s 2024 Active Duty Spouse Survey found that the unemployment rate among civilian military spouses was 20%—several times higher than the national rate.

    Spouses who had experienced a permanent change-of-station move during the previous year faced 136% higher odds of being unemployed, according to the survey. Having children younger than six increased the odds of unemployment by 68%.

    Jennifer Hegseth said the commission’s members will bring decades of personal experience to the effort, including firsthand knowledge of the difficulties families encounter as they move between military installations.

    Secretary Hegseth argued that addressing those concerns directly affects military performance.

    “If that warfighter knows that their family is good to go, they will go the extra mile, which is what our nation asks,” he said.

    Under the order, the commission will communicate directly with military spouses, identify recurring concerns and develop practical policy recommendations for the president. It is expected to meet monthly at the White House and submit a report at the end of each fiscal year.

    Members will serve without compensation, although they may receive reimbursement for travel. The Department of War will provide administrative, technical and financial support using existing appropriations.

    The commission is scheduled to operate for two years unless Trump extends it.

    The initiative builds on policies Trump pursued during his first term to expand federal employment opportunities for military spouses, improve the portability of professional licenses and encourage remote and flexible work.

    It also follows approximately $9 billion in military and family quality-of-life funding included in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act signed by Trump in July 2025, according to the Department of War.

    The White House said the new commission reflects Trump’s belief that military families are inseparable from military readiness.

    “Thriving military families mean a more resilient fighting force and thus a stronger and more secure America,” the executive order states.

    END THE INDOCTRINATION OF AMERICA’S STUDENTS – your input is urgent.

    Trump Reignites Feud with McConnell Calling for His ‘Immediate’ Ouster

      By
      Madeleine Jackson
      -
      4
      Mitch McConnell, Kevin McCarthy, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer attend medal ceremony via Wikimedia Commons

      Donald Trump has reignited his feud with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) once again calling for Republicans to oust him from the leadership position.

      In a statement Wednesday, Trump described the Kentucky Republican as a “pawn” for Democrats and insisted Republicans should choose another lawmaker to lead.

      “Mitch McConnell is not an Opposition Leader, he is a pawn for the Democrats to get whatever they want,” Trump said in his statement. “He is afraid of them, and will not do what has to be done. A new Republican Leader in the Senate should be picked immediately!”

      The two Republicans previously enjoyed a friendly and professional relationship for much of Trump’s time in the White House however, the two broke ties after McConnell infamously turned on Trump following the Jan. 6th Capitol riot. Since then Trump has repeatedly attacked the Senator and called for his immediate ouster.

      Trump’s most recent attack on McConnell follows comments last week made by the Senate Minority Leader regarding the “quality” of some Republican Senate candidates- many of whom were personally chosen and endorsed by the former president.

      “I think there’s probably a greater likelihood the House flips than the Senate. Senate races are just different — they’re statewide, candidate quality has a lot to do with the outcome,” McConnell said.

      In Wednesday’s statement, Trump accused McConnell of giving the “Radical Left the Trillions and Trillions of Dollars that they constantly DEMAND” and faulted him for failing to stop passage of the landmark tax, climate and healthcare law known as the Inflation Reduction Act.

      Kamala Harris Blames Trump For Border Crisis In First Solo Interview

      By
      Patrick Houck
      -
      6
      Kamala Harris via Wikimedia Commons

      Kamala Harris, who has been a key figure in the Biden administration’s handling of immigration, discussed the ongoing border crisis during a taped interview with MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle. In the interview, which aired Wednesday, Harris acknowledged that the immigration system is broken but expressed confidence in her vague plan to fix it. She once again reiterated her support for a “pathway to citizenship.”

      “When I’m elected president, if the American people give me the opportunity, I will bring back the bill and sign it into law,” Harris told Ruhle. She emphasized the need for a comprehensive plan, not only to strengthen border security but also to provide avenues for immigrants to gain citizenship.

      However, Harris’s remarks continue faced criticism. Mediaite’s Colby Hall pointed out that simply repeating cliché talking points in a sit-down interview with a friendly host is unlikely to change public perception that Harris tends to avoid difficult press engagements like the plague:

      Hall noted in a column published Wednesday morning that Ruhle announced her interview just days after appearing on Real Time with Bill Maher and openly advocating on behalf of Kamala Harris, or more to the point, against Donald Trump.

      In another part of the interview, Harris seemed to struggle when asked about the economic concerns of middle-class Americans, yet again referencing her own middle-class upbringing. She also appeared uncertain when questioned about her plan to raise corporate tax rates, especially if Republicans take control of the Senate – a detail that would greatly affect her ability to push forward left-wing economic policies.

      Harris’ performance in the interview left many wondering whether her administration’s immigration and economic agendas have been fully thought out.

      READ NEXT: Prominent Dem Hits Back Hard: Delivers Fiery Response To Major Legal Development

      With early voting now underway, we have to know: Are YOU still with us? Please submit your responses below before the Early Voting Cutoff to complete the 2024 Voter Verification Questionnaire!

      Judge Greenlights Trump Push to Tighten Mail-In Voting Rules

        By
        Madeleine Jackson
        -
        2
        Missvain, CC BY 4.0 via Wikimedia Commons

        A federal judge on Thursday refused to block President Donald Trump’s executive order targeting mail-in voting, handing Democrats an early defeat in a growing legal battle over election security and ballot access.

        According to The Hill, U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols — a Trump appointee — ruled that Democrat groups and voting rights activists moved too soon in asking the court to stop the order before the federal government has actually implemented it.

        “Given that the Executive Order does not command Plaintiffs to do anything, and that no agency has yet acted pursuant to the Order in a way that could harm Plaintiffs, they have not suffered any harm at present,” Nichols wrote in his ruling.

        The executive order, signed by Trump on March 31, directs the Department of Homeland Security to create lists of adult U.S. citizens in every state. Under the order, the U.S. Postal Service would only deliver mail ballots to individuals appearing on those citizenship lists.

        Democrats and voting rights organizations argued the move could disenfranchise millions of voters and claimed Trump lacks constitutional authority to regulate federal elections through executive action.

        They also warned that the administration plans to rely on Social Security Administration data that may contain inaccuracies, potentially preventing eligible voters from receiving ballots.

        Nichols, however, said those concerns remain speculative for now because the administration has not yet finalized or implemented the system.

        “The Court recognizes that the Postal Service may ultimately issue a final rule that directly affects Plaintiffs or their members,” Nichols wrote, adding that Democrats could renew their request for an injunction later if the order begins causing specific harm.

        Trump has defended the executive order as a necessary step to enforce existing federal voting laws and strengthen election integrity.

        The order gives states and individuals opportunities to correct errors on the citizenship lists before federal elections, with updated data required to be sent to states within 60 days of Election Day.

        The ruling marks an early courtroom victory for Trump as Democrats continue challenging several election-related actions from his administration.

        Trump has repeatedly argued that mail-in voting creates opportunities for fraud, while election officials and voting experts maintain that widespread voter fraud remains rare.

        Still, mail voting has become a flashpoint in national politics since the 2020 election, with Democrats generally embracing expanded absentee voting while Republicans push for tighter safeguards and voter verification requirements.

        Official RNC May Audit: Do you still support the MAGA Agenda? Update your RNC profile NOW and stand with President Trump.

        Fani Willis Requests Top Georgia Court Reconsider Disqualification From Trump Case

          By
          Madeleine Jackson
          -
          4
          Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

          Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis (D) asked Georgia’s top court to review her disqualification from the election subversion case against President-elect Trump and several allies.

          In a petition filed late Wednesday to the Supreme Court of Georgia, Willis said the state’s midlevel appeals court “overreached” its authority in “all directions” when it decided she should be removed from the prosecution over her past romantic relationship with a top prosecutor on the case.

          “No Georgia court has ever disqualified a district attorney for the mere appearance of impropriety without the existence of an actual conflict of interest,” Willis’s office wrote. “And no Georgia court has ever reversed a trial court’s order declining to disqualify a prosecutor based solely on an appearance of impropriety.” 

          Georgia’s Court of Appeals disqualified Willis and her office from the 2020 election case last month in a 2-1 decision over her inappropriate romance with former special prosecutor Nathan Wade.

          The state’s high court, controlled by justices appointed by Republican governors, must first decide whether to take up the appeal at all.

          Even if the court hears Willis’s appeal and rules in her favor, she may not have a chance to resurrect the case until 2029 — after Trump has left office — since legal experts agree sitting presidents cannot be criminally prosecuted.

          If it lets the appeals court’s ruling stand, the case would be handed off to the Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council of Georgia, a nonpartisan state agency. The agency could then send the case to another district attorney’s office, which would decide whether to proceed, appoint a special prosecutor or handle the case itself.

          Willis’s case is one of the remaining criminal prosecutions against Trump. 

          Supreme Court Narrows Key Obstruction Law Used In Jan. 6 Prosecutions

            By
            admin
            -
            1
            Duncan Lock, Dflock, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

            In a pivotal 6-3 decision on Friday, the Supreme Court made it more challenging to charge Jan. 6 defendants with obstruction, a ruling that could impact scores of cases.

            The ruling was notably not split along ideological lines, underscoring its significance.

            Key Justices and Their Stances

            Office of U.S. Senator Roger Wicker, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

            Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, appointed by President Biden, joined the majority in Friday’s landmark decision, in sharp contrast to her strong words against Idaho‘s abortion ruling, which she bitterly criticized as a setback for “pregnant patients.” (RELATED: Supreme Court Allows Emergency Abortions To Resume In Idaho)

            In a surprising move, Justice Amy Coney Barrett broke away from her conservative peers and sided with the minority.

            Case Spotlight: Joseph Fischer

            The decision directly involves Joseph Fischer, a former police officer from Pennsylvania. Fischer, who participated in the U.S. Capitol riot, faces an obstruction charge among several other accusations, including assaulting a police officer and disorderly conduct.

            Fischer’s appeal specifically targeted the obstruction charge under Section 1512(c)(2). His defense argued that this statute, originally crafted to tackle evidence tampering following the Enron scandal, was being misapplied to his actions on Jan. 6.

            They asserted that the law’s intended scope was being overly stretched to cover protest activities​. On the other hand, the government argued that the statute’s broad language was deliberate, designed to address various obstruction forms, including those that disrupt official proceedings like the certification of electoral votes​​.

            Understanding Section 1512(c)(2)

            Section 1512(c)(2) penalizes those who “corruptly” obstruct, impede or interfere with official congressional investigations, carrying a maximum sentence of 20 years. The Justice Department utilized this statute to prosecute individuals whose actions postponed the Electoral College vote count on Jan. 6. However, Fischer and many others contended that the Biden administration‘s DOJ had repurposed the law from its original focus on document tampering to now include those involved in the Capitol riot.

            My debate against Crooked Joe last night was a total BLOWOUT! Please chip in NOW before the most critical End-of-Quarter DEADLINE!

            The Hill further reports:

            The Supreme Court’s decision could have profound implications on the Justice Department’s years-long prosecution of the Capitol attack.

            More than 350 rioters were charged with obstructing an official proceeding after mobbing the Capitol on the day Congress was set to certify now-President Biden’s win against Trump. Several members of the extremist Proud Boys and Oath Keepers groups were convicted of the charge, including the leaders of each group, Enrique Tarrio and Stewart Rhodes.

            Though most also faced other felony counts, 50 rioters were sentenced with the obstruction law as their only felony, according to Prelogar.

            Jackson signaled in a separate opinion that she believed it is possible for Fischer and the other defendants to still be prosecuted under the charge.

            “That issue remains available for the lower courts to determine on remand,” she wrote.

            Broader Implications

            The Supreme Court ruling may not only influence Fischer’s case but numerous other Jan. 6 defendants. It may even extend its impact to former President Trump, who faces related legal challenges.

            Article Published With The Permission of American Liberty News.

            Report: Top HHS Spokesman Out After Clashing With RFK Jr.

              By
              Madeleine Jackson
              -
              5
              By Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America - Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., CC BY-SA 2.0,

              Just in…

              The top communications official at Health and Human Services has stepped down after just weeks on the job — as it was revealed he clashed with Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. over the deadly measles outbreak gripping Texas, according to multiple reports.

              Thomas Corry, the assistant secretary of public affairs, who has only been on the job for a few weeks, announced he was quitting Monday, according to Politico.

              This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.

              DeSantis Opens ‘Deportation Depot’ in Florida a Day After Alligator Alcatraz Court Victory

              By
              Madeleine Jackson
              -
              0
              Ron DeSantis via Gage Skidmore Flickr

              Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has opened “Deportation Depot” migrant detention center in Florida, a follow-up to the embattled “Alligator Alcatraz.”

              “Deportation Depot” is located about 45 miles away from Jacksonville in the community of Sanderson, at the site of the Baker Correctional Institution.

              The facility has the capacity for 1,500 detainees, Fox News reported. As of Friday, a little over 100 migrants had been moved there.

              DeSantis said last month that he moved to begin work on a new facility to fulfill an urgent need for more shelter for illegal migrants as they’re rounded up by ICE agents throughout the state.

              “There is a demand for this,” DeSantis told reporters at the time. “I’m confident that it will be filled.”

              The opening of the new facility came a day after the $250 million “Alligator Alcatraz” was granted a rare win by an appeals court.

              The detention center was ordered to ship out all detainees and close within 60 days. The ruling by Judge Kathleen M. Williams stemmed from a lawsuit filed by the Friends of the Everglades and the Miccosukee Tribe that accused the Sunshine State of violating the National Environmental Policy Act.

              A stay on Williams’ ruling was granted by a three-judge panel in Atlanta on Thursday, pending an appeal. “Alligator Alcatraz” can continue holding detainees for now.

              In a video posted on his X account Thursday, DeSantis declared: “The mission continues on immigration enforcement.”

              Until yesterday, “Alligator Alcatraz” faced a series of legal and PR losses, with some detainees alleging mistreatment.

              I SURVIVED an assassin’s bullet — now I fight for YOU. Chip in $15 and STAND WITH TRUMP!

              FBI Arrests ‘Anti-Trump’ Gunman Who Shot ABC Studio After Kimmel Suspension

              By
              Madeleine Jackson
              -
              2

              The FBI arrested the “anti-Trump” gunman who fired three shots into a local ABC studio after late-night host Jimmy Kimmel was suspended last week just hours after he posted bail in California.

              FBI Director Kash Patel on Monday morning posted on X that Hernandez-Santana was taken into custody “under a federal hold for interference with licensed broadcasts.”

              He added: “Targeted acts of violence are unacceptable and will be pursued to the fullest extent of the law.”

              Anibal Hernandez-Santana, the 64-year old suspected shooter, was arrested by the FBI on Saturday, one day after he opened fired on ABC 10 in Sacramento in a drive-by shooting. Hernandez-Santana had posted $200,000 bail earlier on Saturday before he was arrested by the FBI for “violating a statute that says no one can interfere with any communication of any station licensed by the U.S. Government,” KCRA 3 reporter Peyton Headlee reported on Sunday.

              The suspect is now facing federal charges and is ineligible for bail, according to Mediaite.

              The suspect is now facing federal charges and is ineligible for bail.

              Variety, over the weekend, reported Hernandez-Santana’s X account contained “a steady stream of anti-Trump commentary.”

              “Where is a good heart attack when we need it the most?? Please Join in my thoughts and prayers for the physical demise of our fearful leader,” Hernandez-Santana posted last Thursday.

              His attorney, Mark Reichel, told KCRA 3 that Hernandez-Santana is being overly scrutinized because of his anti-Trump posts.

              “If you look at his social media, they’re going to say, ‘Boy, it sure shows that he’s liberal and left wing.’ So you think they’re going to overlook something like that? I don’t think so,” Reichel said.

              The shooting happened during the early hours of Sept. 19, a day after a protest was held in front of ABC 10 following Kimmel’s suspension. About 15 people showed up for the protest, the Sacramento Bee reported.

              Kimmel had his show pulled after he implied the person who shot Charlie Kirk was a Trump supporter.

              This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.

              From Erika Kirk: The torch Charlie lit still burns — now it’s in our hands. [STAND WITH US TODAY]

              Trump Calls To Impeach Democrat Leader Over Supreme Court Comments

              By
              Madeleine Jackson
              -
              2
              By The White House - https://www.flickr.com/photos/202101414@N05/54581054338/, Public Domain,

              President Donald Trump is turning up the heat on House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries — and floating a move that isn’t even constitutionally possible.

              In a fiery Truth Social post Sunday night, Trump demanded to know why the New York Democrat isn’t being impeached after branding the U.S. Supreme Court “illegitimate” over its latest Voting Rights Act ruling.

              “Hakeem Jeffries, a Low IQ individual, said our Supreme Court is ‘illegitimate.’ After saying such a thing, isn’t he subject to Impeachment?” Trump wrote. “I got impeached for A PERFECT PHONE CALL. Where are you Republicans? Why not get it started? They’ll be doing this to me! President DONALD J. TRUMP.”

              The post quickly ignited backlash — and confusion — since members of Congress aren’t subject to impeachment under the Constitution. Instead, lawmakers can only be expelled by a two-thirds vote of their chamber.

              Still, Trump’s message was clear: he wants Jeffries gone.

              The clash comes days after the Supreme Court’s 6–3 decision striking down Louisiana’s second majority-Black congressional district, ruling it was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.

              Chief Justice John Roberts described the district as a “snake” drawn along racial lines, while Justice Samuel Alito called the map an “unconstitutional gerrymander” and framed the ruling as an “update” to how courts interpret the Voting Rights Act.

              Trump praised the decision, calling it the “kind of ruling I like.”

              Jeffries, meanwhile, unloaded on the high court.

              “Today’s decision by this illegitimate Supreme Court majority strikes a blow against the Voting Rights Act and is designed to undermine the ability of communities of color all across this country to elect their candidate of choice,” he said.

              “It’s an unacceptable decision, but not an unexpected decision,” Jeffries added. “Because this isn’t even really the Roberts Court. It’s the Trump Court.”

              He also accused the ruling of helping Trump “scheme to suppress the vote and rig” upcoming elections.

              Trump wasn’t having it — and fired back with his impeachment call, even as constitutional reality undercuts the demand.

              Jeffries brushed off the attack with a short jab of his own on X: “Jeffries Derangement Syndrome,” a play on Trump’s long-used “Trump Derangement Syndrome” line.

              The ruling has sparked outrage across liberal media circles, with commentators like Al Sharpton, Abby Phillip, and legal analyst Paul Butler slamming the decision and arguing it shows the court does not “respect” the rights of minority voters.

              But for Trump, the focus isn’t the ruling — it’s the rhetoric.

              And he’s making it clear he wants Republicans to escalate the fight.

              Trump’s demand — even if constitutionally misplaced — comes at a time when expulsion threats are no longer theoretical on Capitol Hill.

              Just weeks ago, Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) resigned from Congress as sexual misconduct allegations mounted and colleagues began weighing an expulsion vote.

              “I am aware of efforts to bring an immediate expulsion vote against me and other members,” Swalwell said at the time. “Expelling anyone in Congress without due process… is wrong. But it’s also wrong for my constituents to have me distracted from my duties. Therefore, I plan to resign my seat in Congress.”

              Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-Texas) stepped down the same week under similar pressure, with both lawmakers facing potential removal by their colleagues.

              Most recently, Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-Fla.) announced she is resigning from the House of Representatives after Republicans vowed to force a vote to expel her from the chamber for committing a bevy of violations involving financial misconduct. 

              “Rather than play these political games, I choose to step away so I can devote my time to fighting for my neighbors in Florida’s 20th District,” she wrote on social media. “I hereby resign from the 119th Congress, effective immediately.”

              “This fight is far from over,” Cherfilus-McCormick, who was indicted by a grand jury last year for allegedly stealing COVID-19 emergency funds, added in her statement. 

              The House Ethics Committee found “clear and convincing evidence” in March that the Florida Democrat misused federal disaster relief money that was improperly paid to her family’s healthcare company, among other misconduct. 

              She is facing 53 years in prison as part of a separate criminal indictment.

              Turning Point is funding the largest ballot-chasing operation in U.S. history to win key battleground states. Our grassroots army is already in the field for 2026 and beyond. But they can’t stay there without your support. Donate today to help win the midterms, protect the America First movement, and keep conservatives in power.
              123...111Page 1 of 111
              © Great America News Desk 2022