Latest

    Government

    Home Government

    Appeals Court Allows Trump Administration to Continue Third-Country Deportations

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    0

    A federal appeals court ruled Monday that the Trump administration may continue swiftly deporting migrants while a legal challenge to the policy proceeds.

    In a 2–1 decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit allowed the deportations to continue and moved to speed up the timeline for the next stage of the case. The panel issued its order without an accompanying explanation.

    The Trump administration has expanded the use of “third-country removals” as part of its broader immigration crackdown, deporting migrants to nations other than their countries of origin. The administration has reached agreements with several countries — including Cameroon, South Sudan and Eswatini — to accept deportees.

    The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has defended the policy as a way to remove individuals it describes as particularly dangerous.

    In court filings, the administration has also argued that federal judges lack the authority to intervene in how immigration enforcement policies are carried out.

    The majority on the three-judge panel included Judge Jeffrey Howard, nominated by former President George W. Bush, and Judge Seth Aframe, a nominee of former President Joe Biden. Judge Lara Montecalvo, also nominated by Biden, dissented.

    The ruling lifts limits imposed by U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy, another Biden nominee, who is overseeing a class-action lawsuit filed last year by four noncitizens challenging the deportation policy.

    Murphy ruled last month that the administration could not deport migrants to third countries without first attempting to send them to their country of citizenship or another country with which they have ties.

    “It is not fine, nor is it legal,” Murphy wrote in his decision.

    His order required immigration authorities to first attempt deportation to a migrant’s country of citizenship or the country normally designated for removal. If that effort failed, Murphy said migrants must be given a “meaningful opportunity” to challenge their deportation once a third country is selected.

    Murphy delayed the implementation of his ruling to allow the appeals court time to weigh in. The 1st Circuit’s order keeps his decision on hold while the appeal moves forward.

    Trina Realmuto, executive director of the National Immigration Litigation Alliance, which represents the migrants, said the group welcomed the expedited timeline.

    “While the order unfortunately delays implementation of the decision, we appreciate that the First Circuit ordered a swift resolution of the merits of the government’s appeal,” Realmuto said.

    The dispute has already reached the Supreme Court once. Last year, the Trump administration successfully appealed to the high court after Murphy imposed earlier limits on the policy.

    In a statement following Monday’s ruling, a DHS spokesperson said the court’s decision supports the administration’s position.

    “The Biden Administration allowed millions of illegal aliens to flood our country, and the Trump Administration has the authority to remove these criminal illegal aliens and clean up this national security nightmare,” the spokesperson said. “If these activist judges had their way, aliens who are so uniquely barbaric that their own countries won’t take them back, including convicted murderers, child rapists and drug traffickers, would walk free on American streets.”

    URGENT MISSION: 35 brave House GOP members are in JEOPARDY! Today ONLY, you can donate ANY amount and it will go DIRECTLY to fending off attacks on our 35 brightest MAGA fighters in Congress in these vulnerable districts! [Rush Donation HERE]

    Trump Allies Plan Senate Floor Protest To Pass SAVE America Act

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    0

    President Trump’s allies are preparing to turn the Senate floor into a political pressure cooker this week.

    Their target: the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE America) Act — a bill requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote.

    Their strategy: keep the Senate debating it for as long as possible.

    That plan sets up a major test for Senate Majority Leader John Thune, who is under intense pressure from Trump and the MAGA base to drag the fight out and force Democrats to defend their opposition in public.

    Republicans are keeping their exact floor strategy under wraps. But one thing is clear: they’re expecting long days, late nights, and a drawn-out showdown.

    “This is about exhausting Democrats,” one Republican strategist said bluntly. “The point is pain.”

    The goal, he added, is simple: force a public confrontation and see who cracks.

    “Is this going to be a fistfight or not? How bloody is Thune going to make this?”

    Sen. Mike Lee, one of the bill’s leading champions, says Trump wants Republicans to go all-in. Lee has even pointed to the Senate’s legendary two-month battle over the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as a model.

    “What I want to do is maximize the time we debate it,” Lee said.

    Back in 1964, he noted, supporters faced a 32-vote cloture deficit when the bill arrived in the Senate. Sixty days later, they had the votes. Lee believes extended debate can work the same way here — by raising public pressure and forcing reluctant lawmakers to reconsider.

    Meanwhile, Trump is watching closely. The former president has already warned he won’t sign other legislation until the SAVE Act reaches his desk. Whether he’s satisfied with the Senate fight, Lee said, depends on one thing: whether Republicans “gave it everything we have.”

    But there’s a catch.

    Thune is already warning that the votes simply aren’t there for some of the more aggressive tactics Trump’s allies want — including forcing Democrats into a “talking filibuster.”

    Some Republicans are wary anyway. A talking filibuster could backfire by allowing Democrats to force politically painful amendment votes — including votes on restoring Medicaid cuts or extending Obamacare subsidies. So instead of forcing Democrats to hold the floor indefinitely, Thune appears likely to let Republicans do the talking — keeping the bill on the floor long enough to turn the debate itself into a political weapon.

    Democrats say they’re ready.

    “We’re prepared for every possible scenario,” Senate Leader Chuck Schumer (D) said Sunday.

    His caucus views the SAVE Act as a major threat to voting rights. Some Republicans believe Democrats could filibuster the bill for weeks — or even months — by introducing a constant stream of amendments. Which is why the next few days may not just be about passing legislation.

    They may be about staging a Senate spectacle.

    As Lee put it:

    “This bill needs to stay on the floor for as long as it takes.”

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

    Judge Blocks Fani Willis From Fighting Multi-Million Legal Fee Demand In Trump Case

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    0
    Image via Pixabay free images

    A Fulton County, Georgia, judge ruled Monday that District Attorney Fani Willis cannot participate in a legal dispute over President Donald Trump and his co-defendants’ efforts to recover millions of dollars in legal fees from her failed racketeering case against them.

    In an order issued Monday, Judge Scott McAfee said that because Willis had already been “wholly disqualified” from the prosecution, she could not take part in the dispute over approximately $16.8 million in legal fees sought by Trump and the other defendants. Earlier this year, Trump requested that Willis’ office reimburse him more than $6.2 million in attorney fees and related costs.

    McAfee’s ruling marks another victory for Trump in his long-running conflict with Willis, whom he previously described as a “rabid partisan” engaged in a “witch hunt” during the prosecution.

    The defendants—who were originally charged by Willis with conspiring to illegally overturn the 2020 election results in Georgia—are seeking reimbursement under a state law passed in 2025. The law allows defendants to recover legal fees in cases where prosecutors are disqualified.

    In his ruling, McAfee noted that Fulton County itself could become involved in the matter, since any reimbursement would come from the county’s budget. However, Willis’ attorneys argued in court filings that she should still be allowed to participate in the proceedings.

    “Without intervention by the District Attorney, any award would violate basic fundamental notions of due process by denying her an opportunity to be heard or even challenge the reasonableness of the claimed attorney fees before it is taken from her budget,” the lawyers wrote.

    Trump’s lead attorney, Steve Sadow, praised the decision in a statement.

    “Judge McAfee has properly denied DA Willis’ motion to intervene in POTUS’ action for reimbursement of attorney fees because her disqualification for improper conduct bars Willis and her office from any further participation in this dismissed, lawfare case,” Sadow said.

    Willis originally brought a sweeping Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) case against Trump and 18 co-defendants in August 2023. Prosecutors alleged that the group conspired to interfere with Georgia’s 2020 presidential election results. Over time, however, the case narrowed significantly due to plea deals and the dismissal of several charges.

    The most significant setback for the prosecution came in 2024, when the Georgia Court of Appeals disqualified Willis from the case. The court determined that an undisclosed romantic relationship between Willis and her lead prosecutor, Nathan Wade, created a conflict of interest.

    Following her disqualification, responsibility for the case shifted to the Georgia Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council. The council’s director, Peter Skandalakis, ultimately moved to dismiss the case, and McAfee approved the request.

    “In my professional judgment, the citizens of Georgia are not served by pursuing this case in full for another five to ten years,” Skandalakis said.

    READ NEXT: Megyn Kelly Blasts Lindsey Graham After Senator Threatens 4 Countries In 24 Hours

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

    House GOP Moves To Censure Congressman After Interrupting Trump Speech – Again

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    3
    Ted Eytan from Washington, DC, USA, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

    A new effort is underway among House Republicans to censure Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) after he was removed from President Donald Trump’s primetime address for the second consecutive year.

    Green was ejected from Trump’s State of the Union address Tuesday night just minutes after the president entered the House chamber. As Trump approached the podium, Green stood holding a sign that read, in all capital letters, “Black people are not apes.” He remained standing with the sign visible as the president began speaking, prompting intervention by the Sergeant at Arms.

    Rep. Mike Rulli (R-Ohio) told Fox News Digital on Wednesday that he is seeking support for a formal censure resolution against Green.

    “His shenanigans at the State of the Union were uncalled for,” Rulli said. “We can’t really put up with that kind of conduct in Congress. Something had to be done.”

    Rulli added, “I’m looking for as many co-sponsors from our conference as possible. And I’m reaching across the aisle for anyone over there that was embarrassed by their own guy.”

    According to the text of Rulli’s resolution, first obtained by Fox News Digital, Green’s actions constituted a “breach of conduct.” The resolution further notes that it “was the second time in less than a year that the Representative from Texas had to be removed from the chamber by the Sergeant at Arms due to unpatriotic disruptions that violated numerous House rules related to decorum.”

    This is not the first time Green has faced formal rebuke from the House. In March 2025, the House of Representatives voted to censure him after he disrupted a previous presidential address by waving his cane and shouting over Trump as the president attempted to deliver his remarks. Ten Democrats joined Republicans in passing that resolution.

    Green has long been one of Trump’s most vocal critics in Congress. During Trump’s first term, Green repeatedly introduced articles of impeachment against the president, beginning as early as 2017. His efforts, which cited allegations ranging from obstruction of justice to rhetoric he characterized as discriminatory or inflammatory, were unsuccessful and did not advance out of the House. While Democrats later pursued separate impeachment proceedings that led to two Senate trials, Green’s early impeachment resolutions did not gain sufficient support within his own party to move forward.

    Following his removal Tuesday night, Green defended his actions.

    “I refuse to tolerate this level of hate that the president is in fact putting into policy. We must take a stand against this level of invidious discrimination,” Green told reporters.

    “I wanted him to know, and I wanted them to see it and hear it. Up close. But judging from the expression on his face, he got the message. He saw it,” Green said.

    Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) stopped short of committing to a vote on Rulli’s latest censure resolution but indicated he would allow members to decide.

    “Al Green was removed pretty quickly. I don’t know if censure is going to be appropriate. I’ll let our colleagues decide that,” Johnson said. “The point of a censure, is to bring someone to the House floor and bring shame upon them for their actions. I think they showed the American people shame already.”

    It’s Don Jr. To the world, he’s President Trump — to me, he’s just Dad. That’s why I’m personally inviting you to the MAGA Presidential Circle — our closest team of trusted patriots. Don’t wait. Accept your invitation by answering a few quick questions today!

    Supreme Court Rules On Trump Tariffs

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    0

    The Supreme Court on Friday delivered a significant blow to President Donald Trump’s trade agenda, ruling that he cannot use a national emergency law to impose sweeping tariffs on most U.S. trading partners without clearer authorization from Congress.

    In a 6–3 decision, the justices struck down Trump’s so-called “Liberation Day” tariffs, which included a 10% global import duty and higher “reciprocal” tariffs targeting certain nations. Trump has argued the policy was essential to protecting American industry and described it as “life or death” for the U.S. economy.

    At the center of the case was Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a statute designed to give presidents broad authority to respond to “unusual and extraordinary threats” after declaring a national emergency.

    In April, Trump declared the nation’s growing trade deficit a “national emergency,” and his administration cited that declaration as the legal foundation for imposing the tariffs.

    Supporters of the policy argued the tariffs were necessary to counter unfair foreign trade practices and to defend American workers from decades of global economic imbalance. However, the Supreme Court ruled that IEEPA does not provide the president with unilateral power to impose tariffs on such a broad scale.

    While the law allows presidents to “regulate…importation” during emergencies, it does not explicitly mention tariffs — a key point raised repeatedly during oral arguments held in November.

    Several justices, including some appointed by Trump, questioned whether Congress intended IEEPA to serve as a tool for taxation-like powers, traditionally reserved for lawmakers.

    Administration lawyers argued that regulating imports through tariffs is effectively the same as other emergency economic actions such as sanctions or embargoes. But the Court appeared unconvinced that the statute provides sufficient guardrails for such a sweeping policy.

    The Supreme Court took up the case after multiple lower courts blocked the tariffs.

    Earlier this year, the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled unanimously that Trump does not have “unbounded authority” under emergency law to impose tariffs. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld that decision, pressing the administration on why Trump relied on IEEPA rather than more specific tariff statutes passed by Congress.

    Those laws typically include limits, timelines, and congressional oversight — restrictions the administration sought to bypass through emergency authority.

    The Justice Department urged the Court to allow the tariffs to remain in place, warning that denying tariff authority under IEEPA could leave the United States vulnerable to foreign retaliation and without “effective defenses” in global trade disputes.

    Trump has long maintained that persistent trade deficits represent a serious economic threat and that strong executive action is necessary when Congress fails to respond quickly.

    The ruling represents not only a setback for Trump’s trade strategy but also a major decision defining the limits of presidential power in economic emergencies.

    It’s Don Jr. To the world, he’s President Trump — to me, he’s just Dad. That’s why I’m personally inviting you to the MAGA Presidential Circle — our closest team of trusted patriots. Don’t wait. Accept your invitation by answering a few quick questions today!

    White House Fires Newly Appointed US Attorney

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    0

    The Trump administration on Wednesday removed a newly appointed U.S. attorney in New York’s Northern District just hours after federal judges selected him for the post.

    Donald Kinsella was appointed by district judges to serve as U.S. attorney in New York’s Northern District following the departure of John A. Sarcone III, who had been acting in the role. Sarcone stepped aside after a judge blocked him from further involvement in an investigation concerning New York Attorney General Letitia James, ruling that he was not lawfully serving in the office when certain subpoenas were issued.

    Shortly after Kinsella’s appointment, he received an email from a White House official stating that he was being removed from the position. In comments to The New York Times, Kinsella said he was uncertain whether the email legally constituted his dismissal and indicated he would consult with the district judges who appointed him before taking further action.

    Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, however, signaled that the administration considered the matter settled. Responding to a social media post from a TimesUnion reporter who first broke the story, Blanche wrote that Kinsella was officially “fired.”

    The episode reflects a broader, ongoing clash between the White House and the federal judiciary over the appointment and service of U.S. attorneys.

    In December, Alina Habba, President Trump’s former personal attorney, was removed from her post as New Jersey’s top federal prosecutor after a federal appeals court upheld a lower court ruling that found she had been unlawfully serving in the position.

    Similarly, in November, a court determined that Lindsey Halligan, the president’s selected prosecutor for the Eastern District of Virginia, had been “unlawfully appointed.” That ruling led to the dismissal of charges against former FBI Director James Comey and Attorney General Letitia James.

    Halligan left the U.S. attorney’s office in January after a judge criticized her repeated references to herself as U.S. attorney in court filings, calling it a “charade of Ms. Halligan masquerading as the United States attorney.”

    READ NEXT: Is There A Way Around The Filibuster For The SAVE Act?

    It’s Don Jr. To the world, he’s President Trump — to me, he’s just Dad. That’s why I’m personally inviting you to the MAGA Presidential Circle — our closest team of trusted patriots. Don’t wait. Accept your invitation by answering a few quick questions today!

    GOP Congressman Floats Prospect Of Contempt Charges For Pam Bondi

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    3
    Image via Pixabay

    Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) suggested this week that holding Attorney General Pam Bondi in contempt remains an option as Congress presses the Justice Department over its handling of the long-awaited Epstein files.

    Massie, who helped author legislation requiring the release of government records tied to convicted sex predator Jeffrey Epstein, said lawmakers are still not receiving full access to unredacted documents — despite the deadline set by Congress.

    Appearing Tuesday on CNN’s The Source with Kaitlan Collins, Massie accused the Justice Department of failing to deliver what the law requires and raised concerns that redactions appear inconsistent and unjustified.

    “We have not had access to totally unredacted files,” Massie said, adding that names such as Epstein associate and former Victoria’s Secret CEO Leslie Wexner have been blacked out “for no apparent reason.”

    Massie said the DOJ’s refusal to acknowledge gaps in its production makes it difficult for Congress — and the public — to trust that the full truth is being released.

    “If they’ll admit that they’re making mistakes and that their document production is not done, I could trust them,” Massie said. “But I can’t trust them if they say… this is it, there’s no more.”

    The Kentucky Republican noted he would have limited time to question Bondi when she appeared Wednesday before the House Judiciary Committee, warning that stronger measures could follow if answers are not forthcoming.

    Massie first raised the possibility of using Congress’s “inherent contempt” powers against Bondi in a weekend interview, calling it the most direct way to force compliance.

    “The quickest way… to get justice for these victims is to bring inherent contempt against Pam Bondi,” he said.

    Still, Massie acknowledged the challenge of pursuing contempt charges against the nation’s top law enforcement official, noting that referrals often run through the same department under scrutiny.

    “You know, it’s hard to refer a contempt charge… on an attorney general to the attorney general,” Massie said. “This is the problem that you run into.”

    Instead, he suggested Congress may need to compel testimony from individuals named in the documents, similar to efforts already underway by the House Oversight Committee.

    Bondi’s appearance on Wednesday quickly turned tense as Democrats confronted her over the Justice Department’s redaction process — particularly allegations that some victims’ identities were improperly exposed while other information, including references to powerful individuals, was withheld.

    Watch:

    Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) pressed Bondi to apologize directly to Epstein survivors seated in the hearing room, accusing the DOJ of mishandling sensitive records.

    Bondi declined to issue a direct apology for the department’s release process, offering general sympathy for victims but defending the DOJ’s actions. The exchange escalated into a sharp back-and-forth, with Bondi accusing Jayapal of engaging in “theatrics.”

    Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) struggled to bring the room back to order as lawmakers debated whether the Justice Department has been transparent — or selective — in what it has released.

    URGENT MISSION: We just launched a 50k goal that EXPIRES tonight at midnight. Will you step up and RUSH a donation NOW to save our Majority? One donation helps 29 districts! WIN THEM ALL [Rush Donation HERE]

    Trump Signs Bill To End Partial Government Shutdown

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    0
    By The White House - https://www.flickr.com/photos/202101414@N05/54325633746/, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=159707159

    Just in…

    President Trump has signed a bill to end a partial government shutdown after the funding legislation was held up by lawmakers over the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) immigration recent enforcement efforts.

    The bill funds DHS for the next 10 days, with a new deadline set for that agency’s funding to expire on Feb. 13 as Democrats demand for increased oversight of Trump’s Immigration Customs Enforcement and Border Protection.

    Surrounded by a swath of Senate and House Republicans, including Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), Trump lauded the bill’s passage, which also includes funding until Sept. 30 for the departments of Energy, Defense, Treasury, State, Labor, Transportation, Heath and Human Services, Education and funding to the judicial branch and independent agencies.

    Watch:

    This story is breaking news. Check back for updates.

    URGENT MISSION: We just launched a 50k goal that EXPIRES tonight at midnight. Will you step up and RUSH a donation NOW to save our Majority? One donation helps 29 districts! WIN THEM ALL [Rush Donation HERE]

    House Panel Uncovers ‘Substantial Evidence’ In Fraud Probe Into Florida Democrat

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    1

    The House Ethics Committee has found “substantial reason to believe” that Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-Fla.) violated multiple federal laws, House rules, and ethical standards, according to a report released Thursday.

    The bipartisan panel said its investigative subcommittee is formally “bringing the charges” against Cherfilus-McCormick, citing potential violations of campaign finance laws and regulations, criminal statutes tied to campaign finance misconduct, the Ethics in Government Act, the Code of Ethics for Government Service, and several House rules.

    The findings come as Cherfilus-McCormick already faces serious legal trouble. In November, a federal grand jury indicted the congresswoman on charges that she stole $5 million in Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) funds and used a portion of that money to bankroll her political campaign.

    Prosecutors allege that in July 2021, Cherfilus-McCormick and her brother received a $5 million overpayment from FEMA while their health care company was working under a FEMA-funded staffing contract related to COVID-19 vaccinations. At the time, Cherfilus-McCormick was serving as the company’s CEO.

    Rather than returning the money, federal authorities claim the congresswoman and her brother conspired to keep it, routing the funds through multiple bank accounts in an effort to “disguise” their source.

    According to the Ethics Committee report, investigators uncovered evidence that aligns closely with the criminal indictment—and, in some cases, points to broader misconduct.

    “The ISC’s [Investigative Subcommittee] investigation has revealed substantial evidence of conduct consistent with the allegations in the indictment, as well as more extensive misconduct as laid out in the following Statement of Facts in Support of Alleged Violations related to violations of federal laws and regulations, as well as ethical standards,” the report said.

    Cherfilus-McCormick forcefully denied wrongdoing and criticized the committee’s process.

    “Today’s action was taken without giving me a fair opportunity to rebut or defend myself due to the constraints of an ongoing legal process,” she said. “I reject these allegations and remain confident the full facts will make clear I did nothing wrong. Until then, my focus remains where it belongs: delivering for my constituents and continuing the work they sent me to Washington to do.”

    The investigative subcommittee detailed the scope of its work, noting it reviewed more than 33,000 documents, conducted 28 witness interviews, sent 30 requests for information, issued 59 subpoenas, and met 12 times across the 118th and 119th Congresses.

    The report also highlighted Cherfilus-McCormick’s lack of cooperation in the later stages of the investigation. While she initially produced some records, the congresswoman ultimately invoked her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination after being subpoenaed for documents and testimony.

    Donate to Turning Point TODAY. Your urgent support helps us win one precinct at a time. Give $100 or more and receive Charlie’s book How We Win as our thank-you gift. Donate NOW to help save America.

    Trump Threatens Canada With 100% Tariffs

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    1

    President Donald Trump on Saturday warned Canada that it could face steep consequences if it deepens trade ties with China, including a potential 100% tariff on Canadian imports entering the United States.

    “If Canada makes a deal with China, it will immediately be hit with a 100% Tariff against all Canadian goods and products coming into the U.S.A. Thank you for your attention to this matter!,” Trump wrote in a post on his social media platform.

    Trump did not specify which agreement he was referencing. However, Canada and China reached an agreement last Friday that would reportedly have Canada scale back its 100% tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles in exchange for lower Chinese tariffs on Canadian agricultural products.

    Canadian officials quickly pushed back on the idea that the country is pursuing broader economic alignment with Beijing. Dominic LeBlanc, the Canadian minister responsible for Canada–U.S. trade, released a statement Saturday insisting that “there is no pursuit of a free trade agreement with China,” while emphasizing Canada’s relationship with Washington.

    “Canada and the United States have built a remarkable partnership in the economy, in security, and in rich cultural exchange,” LeBlanc said, calling the U.S.-Canada relationship a “remarkable partnership.”

    His statement added, “The new Government of Canada is strengthening the Canadian economy through a plan that consolidates our national strength and bolsters our trade partnerships around the world.”

    Trump’s latest warning comes amid renewed scrutiny from Republicans and conservatives over Canada’s willingness to do business with the Chinese Communist Party while continuing to rely on U.S. markets and security guarantees. The post followed another social media message Trump shared the day before, in which he criticized Canada’s reported stance toward his proposed “Golden Dome” missile defense initiative and blasted Ottawa’s trade engagement with China.

    Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney addressed Trump’s criticism Thursday, arguing that Canada’s identity and strength are independent of the United States, even as the two countries remain close allies.

    “Canada and the United States have built a remarkable partnership in the economy, in security, and in rich cultural exchange,” Carney said. “But Canada doesn’t live because of the United States. Canada thrives because we are Canadian.”

    The clash also comes after Trump was asked last Friday whether he was concerned about Canada growing closer to China during Carney’s visit. At the time, Trump signaled he was not opposed to Canada pursuing trade deals—as long as U.S. interests are protected.

    “That’s what he should be doing. It’s a good thing for him to sign a trade deal. If you can get a deal with China, you should do that,” Trump said.

    In Saturday’s post, Trump referred to Carney as “governor” rather than prime minister—a term he previously used for former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, tying it to his long-running suggestion that Canada should become the 51st U.S. state.

    The warning also comes after Trump recently walked back tariffs he had threatened to impose on European allies who resisted his proposals involving Greenland. Trump said he and NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte have “formed the framework of a future deal with respect to Greenland.”

    Senator Kennedy wastes no time and gets straight to the point. Democrats are pulling out the big guns in 2026 and the GOP needs YOUR help to fight them off. Complete the 2026 Voting Record Assessment before its too late!
    123...12Page 1 of 12
    © Great America News Desk 2022