Latest

    Law Enforcement

    Home Law Enforcement

    Trump Cites Correspondents’ Dinner Shooting To Push White House Ballroom: ‘Cannot Be Built Fast Enough’

    By
    Patrick Houck
    -
    2
    Donald Trump via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump said Saturday night’s shooting at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner highlights the urgent need for a new White House ballroom, declaring the project “cannot be built fast enough” as he renewed his push for the controversial proposal.

    The remarks came after a gunman, later identified as Cole Thomas Allen, 31, of Torrance, California, attempted to breach the event at the Washington Hilton, where Trump and senior officials were present. The suspect was apprehended, and a federal officer was injured but survived, officials said.

    Trump Links Incident to Security Concerns

    Following the incident, Trump criticized the Hilton as insufficiently secure and argued that hosting such events off White House grounds creates vulnerabilities.

    In a post and subsequent comments, Trump said the attack would not have happened if the event had been held in a secure facility at the White House.

    “This event would never have happened… It cannot be built fast enough,” Trump said, referring to the proposed ballroom.

    He emphasized that the planned venue would include enhanced security features such as bulletproof glass and protections against drones, all within the perimeter of the White House complex.

    The Ballroom Project

    Trump has been pushing for the construction of a large, high-security ballroom on White House grounds — a project estimated to cost hundreds of millions of dollars and, according to him, funded by private donors and major corporations.

    The proposed facility would be designed to host large-scale events currently held offsite, including the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, and would be significantly larger than existing event spaces on the grounds.

    Plans call for a 90,000-square-foot structure replacing the temporary tents often used on the South Lawn. The design includes a 22,000-square-foot banquet hall capable of seating up to 1,000 guests, along with enhanced security features such as bulletproof glass and a glass-enclosed bridge connecting it to the main residence.

    Reported donors include major technology companies such as Amazon, Apple, Meta, and Google, as well as individuals like Jeff Yass.

    Trump has also said the ballroom would sit above a larger underground complex being constructed by the military. That portion, expected to include medical and security facilities, would be funded through federal appropriations.

    Legal and Political Hurdles

    The project has faced legal challenges and scrutiny over whether proper approvals were obtained.

    • A federal judge previously halted parts of construction pending congressional authorization
    • Preservation groups have raised concerns about the impact on the White House complex
    • An appeals court has allowed some work to continue while the case proceeds

    Despite those hurdles, Trump and his allies have framed the ballroom as a necessary modernization tied to national security.

    Broader Reaction

    The shooting has intensified debate around the project.

    Some lawmakers — including critics of Trump — have acknowledged security concerns highlighted by the incident. Others argue the ballroom is unnecessary or improperly authorized, questioning both its scale and cost.

    What Comes Next

    The investigation into the shooting remains ongoing.

    At the same time, the legal battle over the ballroom is expected to continue, with a key court hearing anticipated in the coming months.

    Trump, however, appears unlikely to back down — positioning the project not just as a legacy item, but as a direct response to a preventable security failure.

    READ NEXT: Acting AG Reveals Who Suspect Was Targeting At WH Dinner

    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]

    GOP Split Emerges Over Potential Maxwell Pardon In Epstein Investigation

    By
    Patrick Houck
    -
    4

    A Divided Republican Conference

    Republicans on the House Oversight Committee are facing an internal divide over a sensitive and politically risky question: whether Ghislaine Maxwell, the convicted associate of Jeffrey Epstein, should be considered for a presidential pardon in exchange for cooperation with investigators.

    The discussion has largely taken place behind closed doors, but it reflects a broader tension between uncovering new information and maintaining public confidence in the justice system.

    Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) acknowledged the split, noting that some Republicans believe Maxwell could provide valuable testimony about Epstein’s network if offered clemency. Still, Comer made clear he is not among them.

    • He warned that a pardon “looks bad” politically and ethically
    • He emphasized Maxwell’s central role in the underlying crimes
    • He argued that granting leniency could undermine trust in the investigation

    Comer summed up his position bluntly, describing Maxwell as one of the most culpable figures in the case.

    Democrats Firmly Opposed

    Democrats on the committee are unified in rejecting any potential deal.

    Ranking Member Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) strongly criticized the idea, arguing that offering clemency to Maxwell would be offensive to victims and damaging to the integrity of the investigation.

    Key concerns raised by Democrats include:

    • The impact on survivors of Epstein’s abuse
    • The credibility of any testimony obtained through a pardon
    • The risk of public perception shifting toward a “cover-up”

    Garcia warned that even considering such an arrangement could erode confidence in the process and send the wrong signal about accountability.

    Maxwell’s Leverage and Conditions

    Maxwell is currently serving a 20-year sentence for her role in Epstein’s trafficking operation. So far, she has declined to cooperate with congressional investigators under existing conditions.

    Her legal team, however, has signaled a willingness to engage if circumstances change.

    According to her attorney:

    • Maxwell would be willing to testify “fully and honestly”
    • Any cooperation would be contingent on clemency
    • She is positioned as a key source of information about Epstein’s network

    Her attorney has also claimed that Maxwell could shed light on the involvement, or lack thereof, of high-profile figures, including former presidents. Those assertions have not eased skepticism among lawmakers.

    The Political and Legal Stakes

    President Donald Trump has not ruled out the possibility of granting clemency, leaving the issue open and politically charged.

    The debate highlights a difficult tradeoff:

    • Potential benefit: New details about Epstein’s network and associates
    • Potential cost: Perceived erosion of justice and accountability

    For many lawmakers, the question is not just what Maxwell might reveal, but whether the price of that information is too high.

    Why This Matters

    At its core, the disagreement reflects a broader challenge facing investigators and policymakers:

    • How far should the government go to obtain critical information?
    • Can justice and transparency be balanced in a case with this level of public scrutiny?

    There is no clear consensus, and the path forward remains uncertain.

    What are your thoughts? Should a pardon be considered if it leads to new information about Epstein’s network? Share your perspective in the comments below.

    READ NEXT: Case Against Leading Trump Opponent Abruptly Dropped

    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.

    DOJ Slams Alleged DC Pipe Bomber’s Bid To Claim Trump Pardon

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    1
    Tyler Merbler, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

    The Justice Department is forcefully pushing back against a striking legal claim from the man accused of planting pipe bombs in Washington, D.C., on the eve of Jan. 6 — that he was effectively pardoned by President Trump.

    In a court filing Friday, prosecutors urged a federal judge to reject Brian Cole Jr.’s attempt to have his charges thrown out, calling his argument flatly incompatible with the “clear and unambiguous terms” of Trump’s sweeping Jan. 6 clemency order.

    Cole, who was arrested in December 2025 after years of investigation, is accused of placing two pipe bombs outside the Republican and Democratic National Committee headquarters on Jan. 5, 2021 — just hours before rioters stormed the U.S. Capitol.

    The devices never detonated, but the FBI has said they were functional and viable, raising the stakes of a case that remained unsolved for nearly five years.

    Earlier this year, Cole’s lawyers made a bold move: They argued that his actions were “inextricably and demonstrably tethered” to the events of Jan. 6 — and therefore covered by Trump’s mass pardon of people tied to the attack.

    They pointed to the broad language in Trump’s order, which applies to offenses “related to” events at or near the Capitol, and noted that Cole allegedly traveled to Washington for an election protest tied to the same political moment that fueled the riot.

    But the Justice Department isn’t buying it.

    “The defendant ignores that the proclamation expressly limited relief to individuals who had been ‘convicted of,’ or had a ‘pending indictment’ for, offenses related to the events at or near the United States Capitol on January 6,” U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro wrote.

    That distinction, prosecutors argue, is decisive.

    When Trump’s pardon took effect on Jan. 20, 2025, Cole had not yet been charged — putting him outside the scope of the order entirely.

    “The defendant belonged to neither category, and so the proclamation has no bearing on this case,” Pirro wrote.

    Cole was indicted weeks later, in January 2026, on charges including interstate transportation of explosives and malicious attempt to use them.

    Prosecutors also made clear that even a broader reading of the pardon wouldn’t help him.

    “Even if the Court somehow found, notwithstanding its text, that the proclamation could apply to this case,” Pirro wrote, the Justice Department’s interpretation should still prevail as a “consistent, reasonable” reading by the agency tasked with enforcing it.

    The clash sets up a high-stakes test of how far Trump’s Jan. 6 pardons can stretch — and whether conduct that happened before the riot, but is arguably connected to it, can fall under their umbrella.

    For now, the Justice Department’s position is blunt: Not this case. Not this defendant.

    READ NEXT: Congressman’s Sudden Death Upends Key Race

    Police Officer Chance Bretches was awarded a Lifesaving Medal with Valor for rescuing someone from a burning vehicle…But now radicals are trying to ruin his life just for doing his job. Officer Bretches and his family need your help.[Support Police Officers HERE]

    FBI Director Kash Patel Sues The Atlantic For $250M

    By
    Patrick Houck
    -
    0
    Image via gage Skidmore Flickr

    WASHINGTON — FBI Director Kash Patel has filed a $250 million defamation lawsuit against The Atlantic and one of its reporters, accusing the publication of running what he describes as a “malicious” and false report about his conduct in office.

    The lawsuit, filed Monday in federal court in Washington, D.C., centers on a weekend article that alleged Patel engaged in excessive drinking, erratic behavior, and unexplained absences while leading the FBI.

    Patel has denied the allegations, calling them “categorically false” and claiming the article relied heavily on anonymous sources with political bias.

    In the complaint, Patel’s legal team argues that The Atlantic knowingly published false information or acted with reckless disregard for the truth — a standard known as “actual malice,” which public figures must prove in defamation cases.

    His attorneys also say the outlet was warned prior to publication that the claims were untrue but proceeded anyway.

    The Atlantic report cited multiple unnamed sources who claimed Patel’s alleged behavior raised concerns inside the FBI and Justice Department.

    Among the allegations:

    • Frequent intoxication
    • Missed or rescheduled meetings
    • Periods of being unreachable during critical moments

    The magazine’s article, titled “The FBI Director Is MIA,” cited more than two dozen anonymous sources who described a series of troubling incidents.

    According to the report, Patel is alleged to have engaged in “conspicuous inebriation” at high-profile clubs in Washington, D.C. and Las Vegas. Officials cited in the article also claimed Patel, 46, has had “unexplained absences” and has frequently delayed or rescheduled meetings and briefings following what were described as “alcohol-fueled nights.”

    In one instance, the report states Patel was so unresponsive behind locked doors that his security detail requested “breaching equipment” — typically used by SWAT teams — to gain entry and check on his condition.

    The article also described an episode in which Patel reportedly believed he had been fired after being unable to log into his FBI computer system, later discovering the issue was due to a technical error.

    Fox News continues:

    The lawsuit states The Atlantic, and its staff writer, Sarah Fitzpatrick, must be held “accountable for a sweeping, malicious, and defamatory hit piece published on April 17, 2026.”

    It continued, “Defendants are of course free to criticize the leadership of the FBI, but they crossed the legal line by publishing an article replete with false and obviously fabricated allegations designed to destroy Director Patel’s reputation and drive him from office.”

    Fitzpatrick reported, among other claims, that Patel has been difficult to wake up by his security team on multiple occasions because he was seemingly intoxicated.

    Patel vowed over the weekend to sue The Atlantic for the story. He told Fox News Digital, “The Atlantic’s story is a lie. They were given the truth before they published, and they chose to print falsehoods anyway. I took this job to protect the American people and this FBI has delivered the most prolific reduction in crime in US history. Fake news won’t report it, and their toxicity will never erode nor stop our mission.”

    The Atlantic and Fitzpatrick have defended the article, saying it was based on extensive reporting and multiple sources.

    READ NEXT: Fox News Stars Pound Vulnerable Republican Over Bombshell ‘Undocumented’ Vote

    Hero policeman Salvatore Oldrati was named Officer of the Year after stopping an armed suspect and now liberals want to ruin his life. His family is facing an uphill battle and crushing legal bills. Stand with the men and women who protect us. [Help Police Officers HERE]

    Greene Questions Details Of Trump Assassination Attempt

    By
    Patrick Houck
    -
    2
    Marjorie Taylor Greene -Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America, via Wikimedia Commons

    Former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene has raised questions about the circumstances surrounding the 2024 assassination attempt against President Donald Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania, adding to growing debate within fringe circles over the incident.

    Greene suggested in comments and social media posts that aspects of the shooting remain unclear, pointing to what she described as unanswered questions about how the attack unfolded and how security failures occurred.

    Her remarks come despite official investigations concluding that the incident involved a lone gunman who opened fire at a campaign rally, grazing Trump’s ear before being killed by law enforcement.

    As Mediaite reports:

    Authorities identified 20-year-old Thomas Crooks as the sole shooter in the incident that injured Trump and two others. 50-year-old rally-goer Corey Comperatore, who was seated behind Trump, was killed, and Crooks was killed by authorities.

    Since then, some MAGA stalwarts have joined other critics in calling for detailed information on the investigation into the shooting.

    Greene retweeted a lengthy post by Trisha Hope, a self-described “J6 Activist,” in which she questioned the shooting and the legitimacy of the famous photo of a bloodied Trump with his fist in the air yelling, “Fight, fight, fight!”

    Greene called Hope’s post an “Extremely important post worth the read and consideration.”

    While Greene has amplified claims circulating online that question whether the full details of the incident have been disclosed, no evidence has been presented to support those theories.

    Her remarks reflect a broader pattern among some political figures and commentators, including Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens, who have expressed skepticism about the investigation’s findings.

    Authorities have described the Butler shooting as a targeted assassination attempt carried out by a single attacker. The incident resulted in Trump being injured and at least one rally attendee killed, prompting a large-scale federal investigation involving the FBI and other agencies.

    Subsequent congressional hearings also examined security lapses that allowed the shooter to access the rally site, with bipartisan calls for greater transparency and accountability from the Secret Service.

    There is no indication from federal authorities that the official conclusions of the investigation are being reconsidered.

    However, the renewed attention on the Butler incident suggests it will remain a subject of political debate as the 2026 election cycle continues.

    READ NEXT: House Dems Make Shameless Move Against Key Trump Official

    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.

    Man Arrested With Body Armor, Rifle Painted Like Toy Near Trump Golf Course

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    9
    Police image via Pixabay free images

    Deputies in Los Angeles stopped what could have turned into a far more dangerous situation near a Trump-owned golf course.

    Authorities arrested a 36-year-old Arizona man after he was spotted running through traffic near Trump National Golf Course in Rancho Palos Verdes while armed with multiple weapons, including a loaded rifle painted to resemble a toy.

    According to the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, the suspect — identified as Sean Steiner of Glendale, Arizona — had been seen earlier hiking in the area with a duffel bag, step stool, and rifle before entering traffic along Palos Verdes Drive South around 5 p.m. on March 29.

    When deputies arrived, they found the rifle had been painted green and purple and marked with the phrases “HA HA HA HA” and “Why so serious?” — a reference to the Joker character from Batman. The tip had also been painted orange, “resembling a toy gun,” according to authorities.

    What may have looked theatrical was anything but harmless.

    “Not only was the rifle loaded with a round in the chamber and a full magazine inserted… he admitted he had just fired one of the pistols near the landslide area to ‘get some anger out,’” the sheriff’s Lomita Station said in a statement.

    Deputies also discovered two loaded handguns, high-capacity magazines, and additional ammunition. Steiner was wearing a ballistic vest capable of stopping rifle rounds.

    “Let that sink in,” authorities wrote. “An armed individual, firing a weapon, walking through traffic and trails… in a populated area.”

    Sean Steiner, right, is accused of multiple firearm-related felonies after Los Angeles deputies say they arrested him near a Trump-owned golf course with a semiautomatic rifle painted to look like a toy. He is also accused of firing a handgun in the brush nearby before running into traffic. (Lomita Sheriff’s Station via Fox News)

    The situation underscores how quickly a volatile scenario can escalate — and how critical early reporting can be. Officials credited witnesses who called in the suspicious behavior before anyone was injured, emphasizing the importance of the public safety mantra: “if you see something, say something.”

    Steiner now faces multiple felony firearm charges. He was booked March 29 and released on bond April 1.

    While investigators say Steiner had little prior criminal history beyond minor offenses, the incident raises broader concerns about armed individuals near high-profile locations — particularly those associated with President Donald Trump.

    It also echoes another alarming case: Ryan Routh, who was previously arrested after allegedly hiding in bushes near a Trump golf course while armed. That case, like this one, highlighted the persistent security risks surrounding prominent political figures and the critical role of vigilant law enforcement.

    Police Officer Chance Bretches was awarded a Lifesaving Medal with Valor for rescuing someone from a burning vehicle…But now radicals are trying to ruin his life just for doing his job. Officer Bretches and his family need your help.[Support Police Officers HERE]

    Trump-Backed Candidate Vows To Pardon Cop Convicted Of Manslaughter In Death Of Fleeing Suspect

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    0

    A Trump-endorsed Republican running for New York governor is making a bold promise: he’ll pardon an NYPD sergeant sent to prison over a split-second decision that turned deadly.

    Bruce Blakeman made the pledge outside City Hall, throwing his support behind former Sgt. Erik Duran—now facing three to nine years behind bars for the 2023 death of a fleeing suspect.

    “I took this job to save lives,” Duran told a judge at sentencing. “I felt terrible once I saw Eric Duprey crash.”

    Duprey, 30, had just sold drugs to an undercover officer and sped off on a motorized scooter when Duran—working in plainclothes—grabbed a nearby cooler and hurled it.

    The cooler struck Duprey. He lost control. Moments later, he was dead.

    Prosecutors wanted even more time—pushing for a five- to 15-year sentence—but Bronx Judge Guy Mitchell said the case should send a message.

    “They had enough to investigate and catch him on a different day,” Mitchell said. “The distinction is that the deceased will no longer be seen again by his family.”

    The ruling stunned police advocates, who say the conviction punishes a cop for making a high-pressure call in the line of duty.

    “It wasn’t only Sgt. Duran… Every law enforcement officer who makes a split-second decision… was also on trial,” said Vincent Vallelong, head of the NYPD Sergeants Benevolent Association, calling it “one of the darkest days” for the force.

    Duran—believed to be the first NYPD officer in decades imprisoned over a duty-related death—has already been fired and is expected to appeal.

    Blakeman, currently Nassau County executive and a former Port Authority official during 9/11, is now turning the case into a campaign flashpoint as he takes on Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul.

    With Trump’s backing and a law-and-order message, the race is quickly becoming a referendum on policing, prosecution—and where New York draws the line.

    READ NEXT: Congressman’s Sudden Death Upends Key Race

    Police Officer Chance Bretches was awarded a Lifesaving Medal with Valor for rescuing someone from a burning vehicle…But now radicals are trying to ruin his life just for doing his job. Officer Bretches and his family need your help.[Support Police Officers HERE]

    Trump Floats Deploying National Guard To Help Fix Airport ‘Mess’

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    0
    Image via Pixabay

    President Donald Trump announced he is considering deploying the National Guard into America’s airports as he urged Americans to “blame Democrats” for the security “mess” at some travel hubs.

    Taking to his Truth Social platform in the morning, Trump accused Democrats of cheering for “our Country to do badly” and “fail.”

    He then thanked the “patriots” of ICE, and floated the possibility of sending in the National Guard “for more help.”

    A little over an hour later, Trump doubled down, fawning over the agency for “helping people with bags, even picking up and cleaning areas.”

    “I am so proud of our ICE Patriots!” he posted. “They were unfairly maligned by the Lunatic Democrats for years, and now, at the Airports, in addition to what they are supposed to be doing, they are helping people with bags, even picking up and cleaning areas. They are so proud to be there!”

    He added: “The fact is, they shouldn’t have to do this, but they are rehabbing a fake image given to them by Radical Left Democrat politicians. The Public is loving ICE, so the Democrats, unwittingly, did us a favor — They are Great American Patriots, they just happen to have much larger, and harder, muscles than most — which is what they’re supposed to have. Thank you to ICE for the GREAT job you are doing. America very much appreciates it!”

    The partial government shutdown affecting DHS funding and the TSA has been going on for over 40 days, with little end in sight. Lawmakers are scrambling to end the partial government shutdown ahead of a planned two-week recess as both Democrats and Republicans find fault with a compromise plan.

    President Trump indicated earlier this week that he was open to funding the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) without new money for federal immigration enforcement.

    As a result of the stalemate, some airports have been plagued with hours-long security lines and canceled flights.

    President Donald Trump warned last week that he could deploy Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents to U.S. airports to arrest illegal immigrants if Democrats refuse to meet his budget demands to end the shutdown. Republicans have pushed for full Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding, while Democrats have advocated for narrower measures that would fund agencies like the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) without supporting immigration enforcement operations.

    On Wednesday, George Soros-backed Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner threatened to arrest agents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) deployed to the city’s airport to help with security amid Transportation Security Administration (TSA) staffing shortages. 

    “This is how it works. You commit crimes within the jurisdiction that is the city and county of Philadelphia, I prosecute you. That is how it works. No, I don’t take a phone call from president saying, ‘Let them go.’ No, the president cannot pardon you,” Krasner said during a Wednesday press conference.

    “I’ll say it again. The president cannot pardon you. And yes, I will put you in handcuffs and I will put you in a courtroom and, if necessary, I will put you in a jail cell if you decide to make the terrazzo floor of this airport, anything like what you did in the streets of Minneapolis, which involved the criminal homicide of unarmed, innocent people. We are not having that,” he added.

    Without directly commenting on Krasner’s remarks, the White House lambasted separate comments from Krasner as he stood in front of a “Wooder Ice” mural for a video message.

    Backed by ominous music, Krasner said Philadelphians enjoy Water Ice because it “doesn’t break the law [nor] bother us at an airport.” The “Rapid Response 47” team called Krasner’s video “sick and deranged,” adding, “If you don’t like it, Larry, tell your fellow Democrats to fund DHS.”

    People with severe psychiatric illness shouldn’t be sent to jail. It’s time to rebuild real mental health institutions focused on treatment, accountability, and compassion. If you agree, stand with Vivek Ramaswamy and make your voice heard. SIGN HERE.

    Trump FCC Chair Confirms He’s Started ‘Enforcement Proceedings’ Against The View

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    1
    By The White House - https://www.flickr.com/photos/191819781@N02/53626268079/, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=147209317

    Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr confirmed Wednesday that the agency has opened enforcement proceedings involving ABC’s daytime talk show The View, citing concerns over whether the program qualifies for an exemption under federal “equal time” rules for political candidates.

    Carr made the comments during an appearance on Fox News’ The Ingraham Angle, where he discussed recent scrutiny surrounding political interviews on broadcast television and the FCC’s role in ensuring fairness during election cycles.

    “Disney has a program called The View,” Carr said. “And they’ve been asserting the position that The View is what is known as ‘bona fide news’ in the statute. If you are bona fide news, you don’t have to give candidates equal air time.”

    “But Disney and The View have not established that that program is, in fact, bona fide news,” Carr added. “We’ve started enforcement proceedings, taking a look at that.”

    Investigation Comes Amid Colbert Controversy

    Carr’s remarks came after late-night host Stephen Colbert claimed CBS lawyers discouraged The Late Show from airing an interview with Texas State Rep. James Talarico, a Democrat running in the state’s U.S. Senate primary.

    Colbert suggested the network was concerned about new FCC guidance regarding the equal-time rule, which requires broadcasters using public airwaves to provide equal opportunities to opposing political candidates.

    “This was Democrat-on-Democrat violence,” Carr told Fox News host Laura Ingraham. He argued CBS did not block the interview outright, but instead warned that airing it could trigger equal-time requirements for other candidates.

    “CBS was very clear that Colbert could run the interview that he wanted with that political candidate,” Carr said. “They just said, you may have to comply with equal time… But instead of doing that, they claimed that they were victims.”

    CBS later issued a statement denying it barred the interview.

    “The Late Show was not prohibited by CBS from broadcasting the interview with Rep. James Talarico,” the network said. “The show was provided legal guidance that the broadcast could trigger the FCC equal-time rule for two other candidates… and presented options for how the equal time for other candidates could be fulfilled.”

    Carr Says FCC Will Hold Broadcasters Accountable

    Carr framed the enforcement action as part of a broader effort to prevent what he described as legacy media influence over elections and public opinion.

    “The equal-time rule at its core is about stopping legacy media from picking winners and losers in elections,” Carr said. “It’s so that the American people can decide.”

    He added that the FCC intends to ensure broadcasters follow existing law.

    “We’re going to enforce the law and hold broadcasters accountable,” Carr said. “The days that these legacy media broadcasters get to decide what we can say, what we can think, who we can vote for are over.”

    Carr did not confirm reports suggesting the investigation into The View was triggered by the show’s own interview with Talarico earlier this year, but reiterated that the agency is reviewing whether the program legitimately qualifies as “bona fide news” under federal statute.

    Carr also said the FCC would continue administering the equal-time rule in accordance with current law, particularly as political campaigns intensify ahead of upcoming elections.

    “Perhaps Colbert and other establishment Democrats want to put the thumb on the scale… but we’re going to enforce the law,” he said.

    Learn America’s true story with the FREE DVD Box Set: The Great American Story: A Land of Hope. As we approach America’s 250th anniversary, it’s vital the next generation learns the full truth — our founding principles of liberty and what makes America great. Request your free $100 DVD box set today and share it with your family or small group. Claim your FREE copy now.

    Dan Bongino Returns To Fox News Following Time In Trump Admin

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    0

    Dan Bongino is officially back at Fox News.

    After nearly a year as deputy director of the FBI under President Donald Trump, Bongino has returned to Fox as a contributor, according to a Monday afternoon report from The New York Times media reporter Michael Grynbaum.

    His comeback was announced during the Monday night episode of Sean Hannity’s show at 9:00 p.m. ET.

    Dan Bongino via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    Grynbaum noted that Bongino has expressed regret at times about stepping away from his former life in media. Just weeks into the FBI role, he admitted on Fox & Friends that he missed what he left behind.

    “I gave up everything for this,” Bongino said at the time.

    First Appearance Back Focuses on High-Profile Disappearance

    Bongino’s first major appearance after returning centered on the disappearance of Nancy Guthrie, the mother of NBC Today co-host Savannah Guthrie.

    Speaking on Hannity Monday night, Bongino outlined three troubling possibilities in the case, emphasizing that investigators are still operating with very limited evidence.

    “The first [possibility] would be, obviously, it’s a kidnapping. That was an intended kidnapping for a ransom payment…” he said.

    He then explained a second scenario — that the situation may have spiraled out of another crime entirely.

    “The second possibility would be this was just a crime that went awry. Someone was at the house, maybe it was a burglary, maybe something went bad, and you’ve got some bad actors committing another crime unrelated — in other words, requesting a ransom for something you didn’t do just to take advantage of a situation like this.”

    Bongino’s third possibility raised an even more unsettling idea: that the disappearance may not involve a kidnapping at all.

    The third possibility, he said, is that Guthrie’s disappearance could have resulted from a medical emergency or another non-criminal event that was later misunderstood or misrepresented.

    Bongino Highlights Lack of Evidence

    Bongino pointed to the complete absence of digital and forensic indicators — no DNA, no license plate hits, no cellphone activity, and no surveillance leads — as a major reason investigators are struggling.

    He explained that when authorities cannot locate someone within the first few days, it can suggest either extremely sophisticated perpetrators or something else entirely.

    “The story you’ve been told, or you may have believed may not be the story,” he said.

    While Bongino declined to push one theory more strongly than the others, he emphasized that the lack of proof-of-life communication is unusual for legitimate ransom kidnappings.

    He also referenced commentary from veteran FBI Special Agent Lance Leising, noting that real ransom cases typically involve rapid contact and early confirmation that the victim is alive — patterns missing here.

    Multi-Agency Search Continues

    Nancy Guthrie vanished from her Arizona home earlier this month, triggering a multi-agency investigation that now includes the FBI.

    As the search intensified, Savannah Guthrie issued an emotional public plea, describing the situation as an “hour of desperation.”

    Authorities are also investigating an alleged ransom note tied to the disappearance, though the deadline referenced in the note passed Monday night without proof of life or resolution.

    Back to Media — and Still on Rumble

    Bongino will continue hosting his podcast on Rumble, which he recently rebooted after leaving the FBI in December.

    Fox News anchor Laura Ingraham said at the time she wasn’t surprised by Bongino’s departure, noting that he “loved his lucrative media life” and wanted to “get back to it.”

    President Trump joined Bongino’s first show back on Rumble.

    The president made headlines during his appearance when he said Republicans should “nationalize” the voting process in order to block “crooked” Democrat-led states from allowing illegal immigrants to vote.

    “These people were brought to our country to vote, and they vote illegally,” Trump said. “And it’s amazing the Republicans aren’t tougher on it. The Republicans should say, ‘We want to take over, we should take over the voting in at least 15 places.’”

    The White House initially sought to soften Trump’s remarks, but the president doubled down on Tuesday, arguing that federal intervention could be warranted if states fail to administer elections fairly.

    “If states can’t count the votes legally and honestly, then somebody else should take over,” Trump said. “The federal government should get involved.”

    Trump framed his argument as a response to what he described as “corruption” at the state and local level, particularly in more than a dozen states he has criticized in recent months.

    In response, Sen. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) said he plans to introduce a Senate resolution on Monday denouncing any effort by a president to “nationalize” or “take over” state-run election systems ahead of the 2026 midterms.

    Learn America’s true story with the FREE DVD Box Set: The Great American Story: A Land of Hope. As we approach America’s 250th anniversary, it’s vital the next generation learns the full truth — our founding principles of liberty and what makes America great. Request your free $100 DVD box set today and share it with your family or small group. Claim your FREE copy now.
    123...6Page 1 of 6
    © Great America News Desk 2022