Latest

    News

    Home News

    ‘Decoy’ Senate Candidate Under Investigation Over Alleged Voter Confusion Scheme Targeting Trump-backed Candidate

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    0
    President Donald J. Trump visits the El Arepazo Doral restaurant, Monday, March 9, 2026, in Miami, Florida. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

    A Senate candidate nicknamed “Decoy Dan” is under investigation by Alaska election officials amid allegations that he entered the race to confuse voters and siphon support from Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan, a key ally of President Donald Trump.

    Alaska Lt. Gov. Nancy Dahlstrom announced Monday that the state has opened a formal investigation into Daniel James Sullivan Jr., a Petersburg resident who recently launched a campaign for the U.S. Senate while sharing the same first and last name as the incumbent senator.

    The probe will determine whether Sullivan’s candidacy was filed in “good faith” or whether it was part of a deliberate effort to mislead voters ahead of Alaska’s Aug. 18 primary election.

    “The Division of Elections has a fundamental obligation to protect the integrity of Alaska’s elections and ensure voters are not deceived about the identity of the candidates on their ballot,” Dahlstrom said in a statement announcing the investigation.

    In a letter sent to Sullivan, Dahlstrom said state officials are examining what she described as “credible allegations” that the candidate entered the race to exploit voter confusion by sharing both the name and party affiliation of the sitting senator.

    “There are credible allegations that you declared your candidacy in coordination with another candidate and campaign out of intention to confuse and manipulate voters by capitalizing on the fact that you share a first and last name with the incumbent senator and have selected the same political party affiliation,” Dahlstrom wrote.

    The controversy erupted after Daniel J. Sullivan switched his candidate filing to Republican shortly before entering the race, placing him on the ballot alongside Sen. Dan S. Sullivan, the Republican incumbent seeking a third term in the Senate. Critics say the move intensified concerns that voters could mistakenly support the wrong candidate.

    The National Republican Senatorial Committee has also weighed in, urging Alaska election officials to reject the candidacy. In a letter to state election authorities, NRSC General Counsel Blake Murphy argued that the filing appears designed to “confuse voters and undermine confidence” in the election process.

    Sen. Sullivan’s campaign has accused Democrats of orchestrating the effort to benefit former Democrat Rep. Mary Peltola, who is mounting a high-profile challenge in one of the nation’s most closely watched Senate races. Republicans currently hold a narrow Senate majority, making the Alaska contest a key battleground in the fight for control of the chamber.

    “Everybody in Alaska knows I’m Dan Sullivan-R,” the senator said last week. “He’s purposely trying to trick my constituents.”

    Peltola’s campaign has flatly denied any involvement.

    “Our campaign has no involvement with either Sullivan campaign,” spokesman Harry Child told The Associated Press.

    The Alaska Democratic Party has likewise denied any connection to the candidate.

    For his part, Daniel J. Sullivan insists his campaign is legitimate and rejects claims that he is serving as a political decoy.

    “I have every right to run for whatever office I’m qualified for, and I’m qualified for this office,” Sullivan told the AP. “I think I’m doing what most Americans would think would be a patriotic thing to do when you’re unsatisfied with the status quo.”

    The challenger, a retired teacher and former U.S. Forest Service employee, said he has had “zero, none, zilch” contact with Peltola’s campaign or Democratic operatives and maintains that running for office was entirely his own decision.

    The unusual dispute has drawn national attention because of the stakes involved. Sen. Sullivan, who has represented Alaska in the Senate since 2015, has been endorsed by President Donald Trump and is viewed as a crucial Republican incumbent in the battle for Senate control. Trump previously praised Sullivan for supporting his agenda and backed his reelection efforts.

    Under Alaska’s election system, all candidates appear on the same primary ballot regardless of party, with the top four finishers advancing to the general election. While candidates will be identified by their middle initials on the ballot, Republicans argue that the presence of two Republican candidates named Dan Sullivan could still create significant voter confusion.

    State officials have not yet announced whether Daniel J. Sullivan will ultimately be allowed to remain on the ballot. The investigation remains ongoing.

    Former Border Patrol Chief Exploring 2028 White House Run

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    1

    Former U.S. Border Patrol Commander Greg Bovino has launched an exploratory committee as he considers a potential run for president in 2028, according to a report from NewsNation.

    Bovino, who retired from the Border Patrol in March after nearly three decades of service, confirmed to NewsNation that his effort is currently exploratory but said he could move forward with a formal campaign if conditions align.

    The exploratory committee has launched the website Bovino2028.com as part of the effort.

    During President Donald Trump’s administration, Bovino emerged as one of the most visible federal officials involved in immigration enforcement operations. While in charge, he coordinated large-scale enforcement actions in major cities and became a prominent advocate for stronger border security measures and interior immigration enforcement.

    Throughout his career, Bovino held leadership roles along the southern border and was widely recognized within Customs and Border Protection for his operational experience. Supporters credit him with helping oversee some of the most aggressive immigration enforcement initiatives in recent years, while also serving as a key public spokesman for border security efforts.

    According to The Daily Beast, Bovino stated that if elected president, he would take a hands-on approach to immigration enforcement and deportation operations.

    Since leaving government service, Bovino has remained active on social media, where he continues to advocate for expanded immigration enforcement and mass deportation policies. He has also been critical of what he views as a less aggressive approach by some current administration officials.

    Bovino has publicly criticized Department of Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin, White House border czar Tom Homan, and other administration figures over immigration policy and enforcement decisions. He argues that the federal government should pursue stronger action to address illegal immigration and improve border security.

    His criticisms have drawn attention because they come from a former senior Border Patrol official who played a prominent role in implementing immigration enforcement operations during Trump’s second administration.

    While Bovino has not formally entered the presidential race, the launch of an exploratory committee marks the first significant step toward a potential White House campaign. His prospective candidacy would likely center on border security, immigration enforcement, public safety, and law-and-order policies—issues that have defined much of his career in federal law enforcement.

    No official campaign announcement has been made, and Bovino has not provided a timeline for a final decision on whether he will seek the Republican nomination in 2028.

    We don’t have to guess what the Democrats will do if they win in November; they already told us. Fill out this quick survey and let the President know if he can count on you.

    Trump Admin Moves To Revoke Citizenship Of 17 Criminals

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    5
    President Donald J. Trump hosts a Rose Garden Club dinner in honor of Police Week in the White House Rose Garden, Monday, May 11, 2026. (Official White House Photo by Molly Riley)

    The Trump administration is launching a new crackdown on naturalized citizens accused of gaming America’s immigration system, moving to strip citizenship from 17 foreign-born criminals ranging from child sex offenders to multimillion-dollar fraudsters.

    The Justice Department is expected to announce Monday that it has filed denaturalization actions against a group of naturalized citizens who allegedly lied, concealed serious crimes, or committed fraud while obtaining U.S. citizenship.

    “U.S. citizenship is a privilege, not a right for people who obtained it through deception,” Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said as the administration unveiled its latest effort to purge what officials describe as bad actors who abused the naturalization process.

    Among the most shocking cases is Haitian-born Jean Claude Alfred, 68, who federal officials say was sexually abusing his minor daughter while applying to become an American citizen.

    According to the Justice Department, Alfred denied committing any crimes during his citizenship application process despite allegedly abusing his daughter during that same period. He was later convicted by a Florida jury on charges including attempted sexual battery of a child in a familial relationship and lewd assault on a minor.

    The Daily Wire reported that another target is Colombian-born Fernando Cristancho, a Roman Catholic priest sentenced to 22 years in prison after pleading guilty to sexually grooming and abusing a young parishioner between the ages of 11 and 13. Federal officials allege Cristancho concealed his criminal conduct from immigration authorities while seeking naturalization.

    The administration is also seeking to denaturalize Delmas Garcia, a Cuban-born woman convicted in a massive healthcare fraud scheme that prosecutors say generated more than $36 million in false insurance claims.

    Garcia admitted operating dozens of physical therapy clinics in Florida that billed insurers for treatments that were either medically unnecessary or never provided at all.

    Also on the list is Andrea Marroquin, the daughter of a notorious Colombian drug trafficker. Prosecutors allege Marroquin concealed a fraudulent marriage and used drug money inherited from her father to carry out a series of illicit real estate transactions in Miami before becoming a U.S. citizen.

    The latest actions are part of a broader Trump administration push to dramatically expand denaturalization efforts nationwide.

    Last year, the Justice Department directed federal prosecutors to prioritize cases involving individuals who obtained citizenship through fraud, misrepresentation, or concealment of serious criminal activity. The New York Times reported that USCIS was subsequently instructed to increase referrals of potential denaturalization cases, with reports indicating the agency was expected to identify between 100 and 200 new cases each month.

    The administration argues the initiative is aimed at restoring integrity to the naturalization system and ensuring citizenship is reserved for immigrants who follow the law.

    “The Trump administration is taking action to correct these egregious violations of our immigration system,” Blanche said in a previous announcement unveiling a separate round of denaturalization cases involving terrorism suspects, war criminals, sex offenders, and fraudsters.

    Critics have accused the administration of vastly expanding a legal tool that historically was used only sparingly. For decades, denaturalization cases averaged roughly a dozen filings annually, but federal officials now say hundreds of potential cases are under review.

    Under federal law, citizenship can be revoked if prosecutors prove it was obtained illegally or through willful misrepresentation of material facts during the naturalization process. The government carries a high burden of proof and must convince a federal court that citizenship was fraudulently secured.

    For the Trump administration, however, the message is straightforward: if someone lied their way into American citizenship, the government intends to take a second look.

    And for some of the nation’s worst criminals, that second look could mean losing the very citizenship they worked to obtain.

    We don’t have to guess what the Democrats will do if they win in November; they already told us. Fill out this quick survey and let the President know if he can count on you.

    White House Fight Night In Jeopardy As Virginia Residents Sue To Stop Trump’s UFC Spectacle

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    2
    White House image via Wikimedia Commons

    President Trump’s plan to turn the White House lawn into the world’s most exclusive fight venue is facing a legal takedown attempt just days before the first punch is thrown.

    Two Virginia residents have filed a federal lawsuit seeking an emergency injunction to stop UFC Freedom 250, the blockbuster mixed martial arts event scheduled for June 14 on the White House South Lawn as part of America’s 250th birthday celebration.

    The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court against the National Park Service and the Department of the Interior, alleges the Trump administration ignored federal permitting requirements, skipped mandatory environmental reviews and improperly approved a private sporting event on federally protected grounds.

    The plaintiffs — retired Air Force Sgt. Paul Romano of Springfield, Virginia, and civic activist Susan Douglas of Alexandria, Virginia — are represented by the Public Integrity Project. They argue the White House South Lawn and nearby federal property are subject to strict regulations that generally prohibit commercial sporting events without congressional authorization and environmental review.

    “This is fundamentally a private, commercial, corrupt use of our most sacred national monuments for private gain,” attorney Brendan Ballou, who represents the plaintiffs, told reporters.

    At the center of the dispute is the administration’s reliance on special exemptions tied to the nation’s semiquincentennial celebrations. The lawsuit contends UFC Freedom 250 is less a patriotic celebration and more a lucrative marketing opportunity for the UFC and its business partners.

    Court filings specifically cite President Trump’s close relationship with UFC CEO Dana White and point to Trump’s reported purchase of up to $50,000 in stock of TKO Group Holdings, the publicly traded parent company of the UFC. The complaint also names Paramount-Skydance CEO David Ellison among individuals who could potentially benefit from the event.

    The lawsuit further alleges that a massive steel structure being erected on the South Lawn required congressional approval because of its location on federal property. Plaintiffs also argue environmental reviews required under federal law were never completed before construction began.

    The challenge arrives as crews continue building the event site, which includes a 5,000-seat arena surrounding the UFC octagon. Large viewing screens are also planned for the nearby Ellipse, where organizers have discussed accommodating tens of thousands of additional spectators.

    The White House quickly dismissed the lawsuit.

    In a statement, administration officials called the case an “obstructionist, baseless, and dilatory” effort designed to derail a properly permitted celebration, arguing the UFC card is no different than other events historically hosted on White House grounds.

    Dana White has previously defended the event as a patriotic showcase tied to America’s 250th anniversary, insisting the UFC is not expecting to profit from the spectacle despite reports that production costs could reach tens of millions of dollars.

    The historic event is expected to feature UFC lightweight champion Ilia Topuria defending his title against Justin Gaethje, with additional championship bouts planned for what would be the first major professional sporting event ever staged on White House grounds.

    For now, the fight remains on schedule.

    Enough is Enough: America’s education system is in serious trouble and our children need your help! Support conservative victories in classrooms, communities, and school boards nationwide. Help the 1776 Project PAC and join the fight to save America’s classrooms!

    Appeals Court Majority Appears Sympathetic To Challenge Against Trump’s White House Ballroom

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    3

    A federal appeals court panel appeared inclined Friday to side with opponents of President Donald Trump’s proposed White House ballroom, raising new questions about whether the administration can move forward with the long-planned project without explicit authorization from Congress.

    During oral arguments before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, two judges repeatedly pressed administration attorney Michael Roth on whether existing federal law gives Trump the authority to construct a new ballroom on White House grounds.

    The case stems from a lawsuit brought by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which argues that a federal statute prohibits new buildings on federal land in Washington, D.C., unless Congress specifically approves them.

    A lower court judge previously halted above-ground construction, agreeing that Congress had not clearly authorized the project. The appeals court temporarily allowed work to continue while it considers the case.

    The administration argues that Congress has already provided sufficient authority through laws allowing alterations and improvements to the White House and through statutes governing the National Park Service’s management of federal property.

    But Judge Brad Garcia, a Biden appointee, appeared unconvinced.

    “Promote the use of the National Park Service equals express authority to erect buildings?” Garcia asked Roth during the hearing.

    “Yes, that’s our position,” Roth replied, arguing that lawmakers would have understood the law to grant that authority when it was enacted.

    Garcia later suggested Congress intentionally retained control over major changes to the White House itself.

    “It sure cares a lot about what is done to the White House, and so it’s going to retain more of a leash on the kinds of activities the president can undertake,” Garcia said.

    Judge Patricia Millett, an Obama appointee, also raised concerns about the administration’s interpretation of the law, signaling that at least two members of the three-judge panel may be sympathetic to the preservation group’s arguments.

    The lone Trump appointee on the panel, Judge Neomi Rao, focused instead on whether the National Trust has legal standing to sue. The organization’s case relies in part on a member who regularly visits the area around the White House and argues the project would alter the historic character of the site.

    “She says that she’s going to walk past the White House maybe once a month. She doesn’t really say anything specific,” Rao said, questioning whether that constitutes a concrete injury under federal law.

    The challenge comes as Trump has increasingly sought congressional support for the project after legal obstacles slowed construction efforts.

    The president originally proposed financing the ballroom through private donations, presenting the project as a way to modernize White House event space and reduce reliance on temporary structures for large state functions. Administration officials have also emphasized that portions of the work involve security upgrades that they argue should proceed regardless of the lawsuit.

    The legal battle reflects a broader debate over who ultimately controls changes to federal property. The Constitution grants Congress authority over federal lands and buildings, a point repeatedly emphasized by attorneys representing the preservation group.

    “That’s what the constitutional framework requires, which is that you do go to Congress, because Congress controls federal property,” attorney Thaddeus Heuer told the court.

    The courtroom skepticism toward the administration comes amid growing political resistance on Capitol Hill. Earlier this week, Senate Republicans stripped a proposed $1 billion funding provision for the ballroom from a larger reconciliation package. Separately, six Republican senators joined Democrats in supporting an amendment that would have explicitly barred the project from moving forward without congressional approval.

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

    Arizona Attorney General To Pursue New Indictment In 2020 Election Case

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    2
    Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes is taking another shot at prosecuting several allies of President Donald Trump after the Arizona Supreme Court declined to revive her earlier indictment.

    Mayes’ office confirmed Thursday that prosecutors will present the case to a new grand jury, according to Politico.

    The decision comes after a significant setback for Mayes, a Democrat, whose original case was thrown out over questions about how prosecutors presented the law to grand jurors.

    At the center of the dispute was whether prosecutors properly provided the grand jury with the exact language of the statute defendants were accused of attempting to violate. A lower court found they had not. On Tuesday, the Arizona Supreme Court declined to overturn that ruling, effectively ending the original indictment.

    Rather than abandon the case, Mayes is now moving forward with a fresh grand jury presentation.

    The original indictment targeted several high-profile Trump allies, including former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, constitutional attorney John Eastman, and a group of Republican activists who served as alternate electors in Arizona following the 2020 election.

    Trump himself was not charged, although prosecutors identified him as an unindicted co-conspirator.

    Mayes’ office alleged that Trump allies participated in a scheme to challenge Arizona’s 2020 election results through an alternate-elector effort. Prosecutors argued the plan involved fraudulent and forged documents that were ultimately sent to Congress.

    The Arizona case is one of several prosecutions brought by Democratic officials in the aftermath of the 2020 election.

    Many of those cases have encountered major legal obstacles.

    In Georgia, the election-interference case against Trump and several co-defendants was thrown into uncertainty after Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis was disqualified from the prosecution.

    At the federal level, former Special Counsel Jack Smith’s election-related case against Trump was dismissed after Trump won the 2024 presidential election and returned to office.

    In Michigan, a judge dismissed criminal charges against a group of alternate electors after determining they were not the primary architects of the alleged effort.

    Cases involving alternate electors remain active in Nevada and Wisconsin.

    With Arizona’s highest court refusing to reinstate the original indictment, Mayes now faces the challenge of persuading a new grand jury that the case should move forward. Whether a second attempt succeeds remains to be seen, but the legal battle over the 2020 election continues to play out in courtrooms across the country.

    Vivek Ramaswamy is ready to make real, impactful change but he can’t do it alone. Help Vivek fight Big Government and restore common sense leadership. Chip in $1 and become part of Ohio’s political revolution!

    Trump Foe Bolton Expected To Plead Guilty In Classified Docs Case: Reports

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    1
    The White House from Washington, DC, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

    Former National Security Adviser John Bolton — one of President Trump’s most relentless critics — is expected to plead guilty in his classified documents case, according to multiple reports Thursday.

    ABC News reported that Bolton is expected to enter a guilty plea, citing sources familiar with the matter. CNN separately reported that the former Trump adviser is expected to plead guilty to one count of illegally retaining sensitive national security documents and pay a staggering $2 million fine.

    If finalized, the plea would mark a stunning downfall for the hawkish former ambassador who spent years publicly blasting Trump after leaving the White House.

    Bolton surrendered to federal authorities in October 2025 after being hit with Espionage Act charges tied to his alleged handling of classified materials.

    Prosecutors accused Bolton of keeping and sharing highly sensitive national security information, including diary entries documenting his day-to-day activities as Trump’s national security adviser.

    According to the indictment, the notes detailed classified briefings, meetings and government operations. CNN reported that prosecutors alleged Bolton shared some of those entries with his wife and daughter.

    Federal agents raided Bolton’s Maryland home in August 2025, seizing documents marked “secret,” “confidential” and “classified,” along with electronic devices and files, according to court records.

    The former Trump adviser denied wrongdoing after the indictment, accusing Trump of pursuing a politically motivated vendetta.

    But now, according to reports, Bolton appears poised to change course.

    The reported plea deal has not yet been publicly confirmed by Bolton or the Justice Department.

    Bolton served as Trump’s national security adviser from 2018 to 2019 before the relationship imploded in spectacular fashion. Since then, he has become one of the president’s most vocal Republican critics, frequently attacking Trump in interviews, books and television appearances.

    The expected guilty plea would represent a remarkable twist for the longtime Washington insider.

    Enough is Enough: America’s education system is in serious trouble and our children need your help! Support conservative victories in classrooms, communities, and school boards nationwide. Help the 1776 Project PAC and join the fight to save America’s classrooms!

    Trump To Nominate Todd Blanche As Attorney General

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    1
    President Donald Trump holds a press conference with Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche in the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room on Friday, June 27, 2025. (Official White House Photo by Molly Riley)

    President Donald Trump announced Wednesday night that he plans to nominate acting Attorney General Todd Blanche to permanently lead the Department of Justice, a move that will require Senate confirmation.

    Speaking during a dinner event in the White House Rose Garden, Trump told attendees that he would direct his team to begin the formal nomination process on Thursday.

    “I wanted to see how he’s received, you know, we put him as acting, and he’s done a very good job, but I’ve known him a long time,” Trump said in a pre-recorded interview with Pod Force One that aired Wednesday.

    White House Deputy Chief of Staff Dan Scavino later shared video of Trump’s announcement on social media. Trump said he intended to make Blanche the “permanent attorney general.”

    Blanche, who previously served as Trump’s personal attorney, became acting attorney general after Trump removed former Attorney General Pam Bondi from the position in April. Before taking over as acting AG, Blanche served as deputy attorney general.

    The longtime Trump ally represented the president during his 2024 New York criminal trial involving allegations that business records were falsified to conceal hush-money payments. Trump was convicted on all 34 counts in that case before winning reelection later that year.

    Trump had hinted at the nomination earlier this week. When asked Tuesday whether Blanche would remain attorney general, the president replied, “I think he will.”

    The nomination comes as Blanche faces scrutiny over the Justice Department’s controversial $1.8 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund,” which was promoted as a mechanism to compensate individuals whom the administration claimed had been unfairly targeted by government actions.

    After weeks of criticism from lawmakers and public controversy, Blanche told Congress on Tuesday that the department was “not moving forward with the fund,” according to ABC News.

    The decision followed opposition from several Senate Republicans, some of whom reportedly warned that the proposal could jeopardize support for Trump’s broader legislative agenda and create political liabilities ahead of the midterm elections.

    Despite Blanche’s announcement, Trump appeared uncertain about the fund’s future after a federal judge temporarily blocked the initiative.

    “I’d have to ask the lawyers. I don’t know,” Trump said when asked whether the plan was permanently dead.

    “The weaponization fund, as far as I’m concerned, was a beautiful thing,” he added.

    As acting attorney general, Blanche has also drawn attention for overseeing the indictment of former FBI Director James Comey over a social media post featuring seashells that the Justice Department alleged constituted a threat against the president.

    Blanche has repeatedly rejected suggestions that he would use the Justice Department to target Trump’s political opponents.

    His nomination could face questions in the Senate despite Republicans’ 53-47 majority. While most GOP senators are expected to support Trump’s choice, several Republicans have previously broken with the president on high-profile issues, potentially complicating the confirmation process.

    Blanche also made headlines last year when he personally interviewed convicted Jeffrey Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell. According to reports, Maxwell told Blanche she had never witnessed Trump engage in illegal conduct during her association with Epstein. Following the interview, the Department of Justice transferred Maxwell to a lower-security federal prison facility.

    If confirmed, Blanche would become the permanent head of the Justice Department after serving several months in an acting capacity

    Enough is Enough: America’s education system is in serious trouble and our children need your help! Support conservative victories in classrooms, communities, and school boards nationwide. Help the 1776 Project PAC and join the fight to save America’s classrooms!

    Trump-endorsed Feenstra Concedes To MAHA-backed Lahn In Primary Upset

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    0
    President Donald J. Trump visits the El Arepazo Doral restaurant, Monday, March 9, 2026, in Miami, Florida. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

    A Republican primary battle in Iowa just delivered a major surprise—and a setback for President Donald Trump’s endorsement power.

    According to Fox News, Rep. Randy Feenstra (R-Iowa), who received Trump’s endorsement just days before Election Day, conceded Tuesday night after losing the GOP gubernatorial primary to political newcomer Zach Lahn.

    Lahn, a farmer and businessman backed by allies of the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement, ran on an “Iowa First” platform and overcame what many considered long odds to defeat one of the state’s most recognizable Republican figures.

    The upset is likely to fuel debate inside conservative circles about the growing influence of MAHA-aligned activists and outsider candidates within the Republican coalition.

    Feenstra entered the race with significant advantages. The congressman represented Iowa’s 4th District, enjoyed a fundraising edge, had support from prominent Iowa Republicans—including former Gov. Terry Branstad—and secured a late endorsement from Trump, who praised him as “MAGA all the way” and gave him his “Complete and Total Endorsement.”

    But it wasn’t enough.

    With 99% of votes counted, Lahn held roughly a 1,600-vote lead over Feenstra, according to The Associated Press election tracker cited by Fox News.

    Despite the loss, Feenstra quickly rallied behind his opponent.

    “I just called Zach Lahn, and said, ‘Hey, you got to carry this torch. We got to keep this state red. You got to make sure you beat Rob Sand.’ And I’m all in to help him out,” Feenstra told supporters on election night, according to video shared by Iowa News Now reporter Skylar Tallal and cited by Fox News.

    Lahn’s campaign received backing from MAHA Action, a political organization aligned with the Make America Healthy Again movement. He was also endorsed by the political arm of Turning Point USA, the influential conservative organization founded by the late Charlie Kirk.

    On his campaign website, Lahn describes himself as a father, farmer, and businessman committed to putting Iowa interests first.

    The race opened after Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds announced she would not seek another term, creating Iowa’s first open gubernatorial contest in two decades.

    Lahn now advances to a potentially competitive general election matchup against Democratic State Auditor Rob Sand, Iowa’s only Democratic statewide officeholder. Sand, who advanced through the Democratic primary unopposed, has built his reputation around government accountability and anti-corruption efforts.

    Political handicappers have already signaled that the race could be one of the most closely watched gubernatorial contests in the country. Fox News noted that the Cook Political Report recently shifted the race from “Lean Republican” to “Toss Up,” while Inside Elections continues to rate it “Lean Republican.”

    Trump Confirms Heated Call With Netanyahu Over Lebanon Strikes

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    1
    ChatGPT Image Jun 3, 2026, 09_53_45 AM

    President Donald Trump has confirmed reports that he sharply confronted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over Israel’s military operations in Lebanon, acknowledging that he used profanity during a tense phone call as concerns mounted over the potential collapse of U.S.-Iran peace negotiations.

    The call, first reported by Axios journalist Barak Ravid, reportedly occurred after Netanyahu ordered Israeli forces to strike Hezbollah targets in Beirut’s Dahieh district, an escalation that threatened to derail ongoing diplomatic efforts between Washington and Tehran.

    According to Axios, citing U.S. officials and another source briefed on the conversation, Trump referred to Netanyahu as “crazy” and demanded, “What the f— are you doing?” during the call. The report also claimed Trump reminded Netanyahu of U.S. support, allegedly telling the Israeli leader, “I helped you stay out of jail.”

    Senior officials in Netanyahu’s office disputed portions of the Axios account, calling it “inaccurate” and denying some of the personal remarks attributed to Trump.

    However, Trump later confirmed key details of the exchange during an interview with New York Post columnist Miranda Devine on her Pod Force One podcast.

    “Now Axios reported that you had a phone call with Bibi Netanyahu, the prime minister of Israel, in which you were angry with him. You said, ‘Are you effing crazy? What are you effing doing? I helped you stay out of jail.’ Is that true?” Devine asked.

    “I did,” Trump replied.

    The president downplayed suggestions that he was furious with Netanyahu, instead describing himself as frustrated by Israel’s continued military actions against Lebanon.

    “I wouldn’t say angry. I was a little bit perturbed at his constantly fighting with Lebanon,” Trump said. “You know, at some point I said, ‘Bibi we gotta stop this, we gotta stop it.’”

    Despite the confrontation, Trump emphasized that his relationship with the Israeli prime minister remains strong.

    “But I have a very good relationship. We’ve done well together,” Trump added. “He always says we could never have done it, but everybody knows that we could have never done it without the United States. But we’ve worked very well together.”

    “I like Bibi a lot and I’ve worked very well with him,” he continued. “We had where, you know, where I’m a wartime president, he’s a wartime prime minister. Very important part of the world, and I think we’ve done, you know, very well.”

    Watch the full interview on YouTube:

    The reported dispute came amid growing concerns that renewed Israeli strikes in Lebanon could jeopardize diplomatic progress with Iran. Iranian officials accused Israel of violating a ceasefire agreement brokered by Washington and Tehran in April and threatened to suspend negotiations with the United States.

    Following his conversation with Netanyahu, Trump announced on Truth Social that Israeli forces would pull back from Beirut and that troops heading toward the Lebanese capital “have already been turned back.”

    “Likewise, through highly placed Representatives, I had a very good call with Hezbollah, and they agreed that all shooting will stop — That Israel will not attack them, and they will not attack Israel,” Trump wrote.

    The incident has also sparked political commentary in the United States. During an appearance on CNN’s OutFront, Democrat strategist David Axelrod said Trump’s frustration with Netanyahu was understandable.

    “It doesn’t sound like a very friendly call,” Axelrod said.

    Axelrod argued that Netanyahu’s actions had complicated both Israel’s international standing and Trump’s political position at home.

    “I think that the president — his analysis is not wrong,” Axelrod said. “Bibi Netanyahu has done tremendous damage, in my view, to Israel and to Israel’s standing in the world.”

    Axelrod also suggested Trump may be particularly frustrated because the conflict has become a domestic political liability.

    “What he’s mad about is Bibi has created a huge political problem for him, because the economy is the thing that is on the minds of Americans, and he has made it worse,” Axelrod added.

    While the exchange highlights growing tensions over the conduct of the regional conflict, Trump’s public comments suggest that, despite the unusually blunt language, he continues to view Netanyahu as a close ally even as he pushes for de-escalation in Lebanon.

    Enough is Enough: America’s education system is in serious trouble and our children need your help! Support conservative victories in classrooms, communities, and school boards nationwide. Help the 1776 Project PAC and join the fight to save America’s classrooms!
    123...138Page 1 of 138
    © Great America News Desk 2022