Featured posts

    News

    Home News

    Republican Mega-donor Rebukes ‘Corrupt’ Trump Admin.

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    1
    Image via Pixabay free images

    Ken Griffin, the billionaire founder of Citadel and one of the Republican Party’s most influential donors, delivered a sharp warning this week about the direction of the Trump administration, accusing it of ethical lapses and raising concerns about government pressure on corporate America.

    Speaking Tuesday at a Wall Street Journal–hosted conference in West Palm Beach, Griffin said the administration has blurred the line between public service and private enrichment.

    “This administration has definitely made missteps in choosing decisions or courses that have been very, very enriching to the families of those in the administration,” Griffin said. “That calls into question: is the public interest being served?”

    Griffin emphasized that public trust depends on leaders acting with integrity and restraint.

    “One of the things that you want to believe is that those who serve the public interest have the public interest at heart in everything they do,” he added.

    Concerns Amid New Reporting on Trump Family Finances

    Griffin’s remarks come as new reporting has intensified scrutiny of the Trump family’s business dealings. According to recent coverage, Trump and his sons reportedly received a $500 million investment connected to the United Arab Emirates for their cryptocurrency venture shortly before Trump’s second inauguration.

    Separately, The New York Times reported last month that Trump and his family have earned at least $1.4 billion since returning to office—a figure the paper described as a conservative estimate.

    The White House rejected Griffin’s criticism. Spokesman Kush Desai told the Financial Times that the administration’s record speaks for itself:

    “The only special interest guiding the Trump administration’s decision-making is the best interest of the American people. The fact that major stock indexes have hit multiple all-time highs, real wages have grown, and inflation has cooled since President Trump took office is proof that this administration is delivering for every American.”

    A Free-Market Conservative Pushback

    Griffin, who donated tens of millions of dollars to Republican candidates in 2024 but declined to formally endorse Trump, has increasingly positioned himself as a free-market conservative skeptical of government overreach and protectionism. He has been especially critical of tariffs, warning they place the U.S. economy “on a slippery slope to crony capitalism.”

    That concern extends to what Griffin sees as an unhealthy dynamic between Washington and the private sector.

    “Griffin said the dynamic has generated concerns that the US would enter a continuous cycle of corporate leaders needing to pander to whomever is in power, instead of relying on the success of their business,” the Financial Times reported.

    Griffin put it more bluntly during the conference:

    “Most CEOs just don’t want to find themselves in the business of having to in some sense suck up to one administration after another to succeed in running their businesses.”

    President Trump is conducting an audit of MAGA voters and NEEDS a response from you! Time is ticking! [Record your response HERE]

    GOP Congressman Issues Warning To Trump Admin Official: ‘Come And Take It’

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    3
    By Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America - Jeanine Pirro, CC BY-SA 2.0,

    Republican Florida Rep. Greg Steube issued a forceful response to comments from Jeanine Pirro, President Donald Trump’s nominee for U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, after she warned that anyone carrying a firearm in Washington, D.C., should expect to be arrested.

    During a Monday night interview with Fox News host Martha MacCallum, Pirro took a hard line on guns in the nation’s capital while discussing efforts to remove repeat offenders and illegal firearms from the streets.

    “You bring a gun into the District, you mark my words, you’re going to jail. I don’t care if you have a license in another district and I don’t care if you’re a law abiding gun owner somewhere else. You bring a gun into this District, count on going to jail, and hope you get the gun back! And that makes all the difference,” Pirro warned.

    Her remarks immediately drew criticism from gun-rights advocates and several Republican lawmakers, including Steube, who pointed out that lawful concealed carry is permitted in Washington, D.C., including for non-residents.

    “I bring a gun into the district every week, @USAttyPirro. I have a license in Florida and DC to carry. And I will continue to carry to protect myself and others,” Steube wrote on X. “Come and Take it!”

    MacCallum defended Pirro’s position during the interview, arguing that tougher enforcement changes behavior. “It’s amazing how accountability works, and people think if they actually get arrested they might have to do time and they might get taken off the street, it sorta puts a little bit of a different message in people’s heads.”

    Republican Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie also pushed back, noting that D.C. law allows permitted carry and has done so for years.

    “The District of Columbia has been ‘shall issue’ since 2017 when the requirement that you must have a ‘good reason’ to carry a handgun was struck down. Non-residents can obtain a permit in DC — don’t ask me how I know,” Massie said in a post on X.

    In a separate post, Massie questioned Pirro’s rhetoric more broadly, writing, “Why is a ‘conservative’ judge threatening to arrest gun owners?”

    The National Rifle Association clapped back at Pirro on Tuesday, writing on social media, “Now is the time for Congress to pass HR 38, the National Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act. Your right to self-defense should not end simply because you crossed a state line or into Washington, D.C.”

    The backlash surprised many conservatives, given the Trump administration’s long-standing and vocal support for Second Amendment rights.

    Facing growing criticism, Pirro addressed the controversy in a video posted Tuesday to X, emphasizing her support for gun ownership and constitutional rights.

    She said she is a “proud supporter of the 2nd amendment” and a gun owner herself, noting that she previously keynoted a National Rifle Association convention. Pirro stressed that her comments were aimed at criminals, not law-abiding citizens.

    “However, you need to be responsible. And every responsible gun owner that I know makes sure they understand the laws where they are going and understand whatever registration requirements there might be,” Pirro said. “President Trump’s goal here, and my goal as well, is to make sure we take guns out of the hands of criminals.”

    She added, “There is a reason that we have the lowest homicide rate in reported history. We’re taking guns off the street — illegal guns — in the hands of criminals, who want to use those guns to victimize law-abiding citizens. There is a big difference here. If you are responsible, you follow the laws, you are not going to have a problem with me.”

    Pirro’s clarification appeared aimed at reassuring conservatives that her tough-on-crime stance is focused on illegal firearms and repeat offenders—not Americans lawfully exercising their Second Amendment rights.

    Tuesday morning, Pirro attempted to quell the outrage with a post on X.

    The House GOP HQ is pledging 35X IMPACT that could completely turn the tides for our House majority and bring the radical left to their knees. But time is running out! We’d hate for you to miss this critical opportunity. [Donate HERE]

    Bill O’Reilly Flips Out When Host Says Trump ‘Backing Down’ After Shooting

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    0

    Veteran broadcaster Bill O’Reilly forcefully pushed back Monday night against claims that President Donald Trump is “backing down” following violent unrest in Minneapolis after a Border Patrol–involved shooting that sparked protests and national controversy.

    The confrontation unfolded during NewsNation’s On Balance with Leland Vittert, where O’Reilly accused the host of adopting left-wing media framing by suggesting Trump had retreated under political pressure.

    The unrest began Saturday after Border Patrol agents shot Alex Pretti during a federal immigration enforcement operation in Minneapolis. As video of the incident circulated online, activist groups and Democratic officials immediately accused federal authorities of misconduct, triggering protests that quickly escalated into disorder.

    As is often the case in fast-moving, emotionally charged incidents, early claims about the shooting were disputed. Trump administration officials initially described Pretti as a dangerous suspect, while critics accused the government of spreading false narratives. Multiple videos later emerged that fueled further debate over what exactly occurred.

    President Trump responded first with a blunt social media statement condemning lawlessness, defending federal officers, and criticizing Democratic leadership in Minnesota for what he has long argued is a refusal to enforce federal immigration law. As tensions grew, Trump administration officials—including Border Czar Tom Homan—shifted toward de-escalation, engaging with local leaders to restore order.

    That shift became the flashpoint of the exchange between O’Reilly and Vittert.

    During the interview, Vittert referenced O’Reilly’s recent commentary criticizing Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, drawing a historical comparison that sparked sharp disagreement:

    LELAND VITTERT: You write “Who is the modern John C. Calhoun,” about Walz, “a despicable South Carolina senator who actually wanted the Civil War to happen.”

    Do you think Walz wants the Civil War to happen and therefore should be arrested as though he was a southern governor or something in the early or late 1850s?

    O’Reilly responded by arguing that state officials who openly defy federal law should face scrutiny under existing statutes:

    BILL O’REILLY: I think there is evidence that should be examined, and you might be able to charge Walz with insurrection under the, if you want me to read it to you, I got it right here. It fits Walz to a tee.

    Pressed on whether such action would be good for the country, O’Reilly emphasized order and de-escalation—values long central to conservative governance:

    LELAND VITTERT: Would that be good for America?

    BILL O’REILLY: I don’t care. Look, anarchy is the worst thing that could happen, the worst. Right now, in this present moment, de-escalation is the best thing that can happen. So Homan meeting with Frey has my 100% endorsement. Walz calling Trump, vice versa, 100%.

    O’Reilly argued that cooperation does not mean capitulation—and that enforcing federal law remains non-negotiable:

    BILL O’REILLY: But that doesn’t excuse what has happened and is happening, which is a rebellion against the United States law passed by Congress, by a state under the governance of Walz and a city where Frey runs.

    If you continue, and I say you in a general sense, to allow states and cities to not enforce federal law, you don’t have a country. It goes! Okay? Everybody should understand.

    The interview reached its most heated moment when Vittert suggested Trump was “backing down” in response to public pressure:

    LELAND VITTERT: So then why is Trump backing down?

    O’Reilly erupted at the framing, accusing the host of echoing legacy media talking points:

    BILL O’REILLY: Now here’s the second part of the story. He’s not backing down! He’s trying to defuse. Why would you say he was backing down?! Do you want a CNN contract?!

    He’s backing down! He’s defusing the way he should!

    A SECURE MESSAGE FROM JD VANCE: Patriot — I keep my word. I told Republican leaders I’d deliver your response, and I’m not backing down. My next meeting is coming up fast, and I need your answers before I walk in. Complete the GOP Leadership Survey now.

    Barron Trump ‘Saved’ Woman’s Life With Heroic Call To Police

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    0

    A woman testified in an English court on Wednesday that Barron Trump “saved” her life after he realized she was being violently attacked and immediately called police, according to multiple reports.

    Metro UK reported jurors at Snaresbrook Crown Court in London heard a dramatic emergency call in which President Donald Trump’s son told operators, “I just got a call from a girl I know. She’s getting beaten up.”

    According to testimony, Barron Trump contacted authorities after FaceTiming the young woman, a friend of his, expecting a normal call but quickly realizing she was witnessing an assault in real time.

    “I just saw a ceiling and could hear screaming. I could see a guy’s head on the phone, and then the camera turns to her crying and getting hit,” Trump told operators. The call was placed from the United States.

    The Daily Mail identified the accused as 22-year-old Russian national Matvei Rumiantsev, who allegedly “was jealous of the American’s relationship with the woman and flew into a rage when he tried to phone her earlier that evening.”

    Jurors were told Rumiantsev later went to the woman’s home and repeatedly punched her. Prosecutors also allege he kicked the woman in the stomach and used degrading language during the video call with Barron Trump, calling her a “whore” and a “slut.”

    During her testimony Wednesday, the woman praised Trump for acting quickly.

    “He helped save my life,” she said. “That call was like a sign from God at that moment.”

    Jurors also heard an exchange between Trump — who was reportedly 18 years old at the time — and the police operator, who pressed him for details about his connection to the victim as officers were dispatched.

    Here is that back-and-forth:

    Operator: “Can you stop being rude and actually answer my questions. If you want to help the person, you’ll answer my questions clearly and precisely, thank you.”

    Barron Trump: “I met her on social media. She’s getting really badly beat up and the call was about eight minutes ago, I don’t know what could have happened by now.”

    He added a moment later, “So sorry for being rude.”

    Trump reportedly told authorities it took him a few minutes to locate the correct phone number for British police. He placed the call at 2:23 a.m. London time, or 9:23 p.m. ET.

    Rumiantsev is facing serious charges, including assault, two counts of rape, intentional strangulation, and perverting a court of justice, according to The Daily Mail.

    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!

    Trump Launches Board Of Peace

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    2
    President Donald Trump gestures to the crowd after delivering remarks at the House GOP Member Retreat, Tuesday, January 6, 2026, at the Donald J. Trump- John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

    President Trump and his administration on Thursday unveiled a new “Board of Peace” initiative aimed at rebuilding and stabilizing Gaza, rolling out the framework during the World Economic Forum in Davos with leaders from more than 20 countries — a list that notably did not include many major European Union allies.

    The White House said countries agreeing to join the board include Argentina, Belarus, Morocco, Vietnam, Pakistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kosovo, Hungary, Egypt, Turkey, Qatar, Jordan, Indonesia and Saudi Arabia, among others.

    Still, the administration’s initial member list immediately drew pushback from at least one European country after Belgium was mistakenly included.

    “Belgium has NOT signed the Charter of the Board of Peace. This announcement is incorrect,” Belgian Deputy Prime Minister Maxime Prevot wrote in a post on X. “We wish for a common and coordinated European response. As many European countries, we have reservations to the proposal.”

    The confusion highlighted a broader challenge for the new initiative: while Trump’s team appears to be moving quickly to secure international backing, many European governments face legal or political hurdles that prevent them from signing on immediately — even if they see value in the proposal.

    Finnish President Alexander Stubb said in an interview with CBS News that Finland and other European nations may be unable to join at first because they need parliamentary approval.

    “One is that this is an international organization which, basically, then needs parliamentary approval. So, you know, we are liberal democracies. We can’t come here and say, ‘okay, here’s the statute,’” Stubb said.

    Stubb also said European leaders want the effort more closely tied to the United Nations, reflecting a common preference among Western governments for U.N.-anchored peace and reconstruction missions.

    “The other one is that we want to link it even more closer to the U.N. So I think, for instance, that the Gaza peace board is based on a U.N. mandate, which is really good. So now we just need to make sure that some of the other mandates can be put into the U.N. as well. But we’ll see what the other Europeans do and what we do together. I think it’s a good initiative,” he said.

    Trump, along with senior officials in his administration, presented the Board of Peace as a concrete attempt to move beyond endless diplomatic statements and toward a rebuilding plan for Gaza — a territory devastated by war, with large-scale destruction to housing, utilities, and basic infrastructure.

    In remarks and presentations shared during the ceremony, the administration laid out a vision that included major construction and investment proposals, including an airport, data centers, workforce housing and new tourist attractions along Gaza’s coastline.

    Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and a key figure in past Middle East diplomacy, spoke during the Board of Peace ceremony and showed slides illustrating phased redevelopment concepts and what the administration described as a “master plan” approach.

    Kushner argued that a long-term economic transformation is essential if Gaza is ever to have lasting stability, framing the plan as a way to create jobs, attract investment and give residents a real chance to build prosperous lives.

    “We do not have a plan B,” Kushner said. “We have a plan. We signed an agreement. We are all committed to making that agreement work. There’s a master plan.”

    Kushner added that he hopes Gaza can ultimately become a “destination” with strong industry and opportunity “where people can thrive,” echoing Trump’s longstanding push for economic development as a lever for peace.

    The initiative comes at a moment when the Middle East remains under intense pressure from continuing conflict, rising humanitarian needs, and deep questions over Gaza’s governance after the war. One of the central issues facing any reconstruction effort is who will administer Gaza’s border crossings, security, public services, and economic recovery while preventing the territory from returning to instability or serving as a launchpad for future violence.

    A Palestinian official named to the newly formed National Committee for the Administration of Gaza, Dr. Ali Sha’ath, announced the reopening of the Rafah Crossing — Gaza’s main entry and exit point to and from Egypt. The Rafah Crossing has served as a critical route for aid delivery, medical evacuations, and civilian travel, and its reopening would mark a significant development for the enclave’s immediate humanitarian situation.

    The Trump administration also signaled it expects the Board of Peace to expand beyond its initial signatories, pointing to internal legal procedures in other countries as one reason more allies were not yet included.

    During the signing ceremony, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the administration anticipates additional nations will join as their governments complete domestic approval processes.

    “Many others who are going to join, you know, others either are not in town today or they have to go through some procedure internally in their own countries, in their own country, because of constitutional limitations, but others will join,” Rubio said.

    For now, the Board of Peace initiative is being positioned by the White House as a step toward a post-war pathway for Gaza, with Trump’s team betting that a mix of security guarantees, regional buy-in, and economic rebuilding can eventually change the trajectory of one of the world’s most volatile flashpoints.

    JD Vance has a BIG meeting with Republican leadership coming up and wants to hear from YOU! What are the key issues facing America in 2026? Complete the  Republican Leadership Survey and make your voice heard!

    Republican Issues Impeachment Warning Over Trump’s Greenland Proposal

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    2
    The White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

    A Republican Congressman signaled he would move to impeach President Donald Trump if he follows through on his threat to invade Greenland and take it by force.

    In an interview with the Omaha World-Herald, Rep. Don Bacon (R-NE) said he personally would “lean toward” voting to impeach the president if he were to follow through on threats to take over Greenland.

    “I’ll be candid with you. There’s so many Republicans mad about this,” Bacon told the paper. “If he went through with the threats, I think it would be the end of his presidency.”

    Bacon, a swing state Congressman who is known to split from his Republican colleagues, has become even more outspoken against Trump since announcing he is leaving Congress at the end of the current term.

    “It’s about whether the United States intends to face a constellation of strategic adversaries with capable friends — or commit an unprecedented act of strategic self-harm and go it alone,” McConnell said. He added that, “following through on this provocation would be more disastrous for the President’s legacy than withdrawing from Afghanistan was for his predecessor.”

    On Wednesday in the Oval Office, Trump snapped at a reporter who confronted him about a potential invasion.

    “It sounds like you would potentially acquire Greenland by force,” the reporter said.

    “No, you’re saying that. I didn’t say it,” Trump said. “You’re telling me that that’s what I’m going to do — you don’t know what I’m going to do.”

    Watch:

    In a speech on the Senate floor Wednesday, former Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) warned that President Trump’s talk of seizing Greenland by force threatens to “incinerate” the nation’s long-standing ties with NATO allies.

    McConnell declared that burning the treaty organization that formed after World War II to contain Soviet aggression would be an “unprecedented act of strategic self-harm.”

    “Unless and until the president can demonstrate otherwise, then the proposition at hand today is very straightforward: incinerating the hard-won trust of loyal allies in exchange for no meaningful change in U.S. access to the Arctic,” McConnell said on the Senate floor, delivering one of the strongest statements criticizing the Trump administration’s talk about potentially seizing Greenland by force.

    He warned that following through on the “ill-advised threats” from the administration would “shatter the trust of allies.”

    “Following through on this provocation would be more disastrous for the President’s legacy than withdrawing from Afghanistan was for his predecessor,” he said.

    Watch:

    He pointed to polling showing that just 17 percent of Americans think trying to take control of Greenland is a good idea and that 68 percent of Americans view the NATO alliance favorably.

    Sen. John Kennedy needs something rarer than hen’s teeth in Washington: Your honest opinion. Before the election, he wants to hear from real Americans. Share your thoughts below.

    Former Special Counsel Jack Smith to Testify Publicly About Trump Criminal Probes

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    1

    Former Special Counsel Jack Smith is expected to appear publicly before Congress later this month to answer questions about his high-profile investigations into President Donald Trump—a development Republicans say is long overdue as concerns grow over the Justice Department’s handling of politically charged cases.

    Smith, who was appointed by then-Attorney General Merrick Garland in 2022, will testify before the House Judiciary Committee on January 22, according to an announcement made Monday night by Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH).

    The upcoming hearing follows Smith’s closed-door interview with House lawmakers last month, where he reportedly claimed he had proof “beyond a reasonable doubt” that Trump conspired to overturn the results of the 2020 election—an assertion likely to draw close scrutiny from Republicans, who have argued that the federal government has repeatedly applied one set of standards to Trump and another to Democrats.

    Smith’s testimony is expected to focus on the two major investigations he previously led: one involving Trump’s alleged actions following the 2020 election, and another involving the handling of classified records after Trump left office.

    “Jack has been clear for months he is ready and willing to answer questions in a public hearing about his investigations into President Trump’s alleged unlawful efforts to overturn the 2020 election and his mishandling of classified documents,” Smith’s attorney, Lanny Breuer, said in a statement to NBC News.

    Smith testified for roughly nine hours in the closed-door session, but has since pushed to make his remarks public. According to the report, Smith later demanded that House Republicans release the “full videotape” of his nine-hour testimony.

    Both the transcript and video were released a week later, after Republicans said the public deserved transparency about an investigation that many conservatives view as a continuation of Washington’s long-running legal campaign against Trump.

    In his closed-door testimony, Smith reportedly claimed he had proof “beyond a reasonable doubt” that Trump committed a crime related to efforts to challenge the 2020 election outcome. Supporters of Trump, however, have argued that contesting election procedures and raising objections—especially through legal channels—is not unusual in American politics and has occurred in disputed elections in the past, including challenges by Democrats to Republican victories.

    Smith also addressed his classified-documents case, claiming his office uncovered evidence that Trump “willfully retained highly classified documents after he left office in January 2021, storing them at his social club, including in a bathroom and a ballroom where events and gatherings took place.”

    The documents investigation centered on materials stored at Mar-a-Lago, Trump’s Florida residence and private club. Republicans have questioned whether Trump was treated fairly compared to other officials who were also found to have mishandled classified materials, arguing that selective enforcement undermines public trust in the justice system.

    Smith’s public appearance on January 22 is likely to intensify debate over whether the Justice Department and federal prosecutors have been used as political weapons—particularly as the country heads deeper into a contentious election cycle and voters demand answers about government power, transparency, and equal justice under the law.

    House GOP just rolled out the OFFICIAL America 250 Membership & you’ve been selected for a coveted spot on the roster. This celebration will be remembered for DECADES – and we want you to have a front row seat to it all. We’re asking a select group of TOP PATRIOTS to answer the following questions and join the House GOP’s official America 250 Membership.[Respond HERE]

    Kimmel Targets Trump During Critics Choice Awards Acceptance Speech

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    0

    Late-night host Jimmy Kimmel used his acceptance speech at Sunday’s Critics Choice Awards to take another swipe at President Donald Trump after his ABC program won Best Talk Show, continuing a yearslong feud that has made Trump a frequent target of Kimmel’s monologues.

    “A FIFA Peace Prize would have been better, but this is nice, too,” Kimmel joked from the stage, referencing FIFA President Gianni Infantino’s decision to award Trump the first-ever FIFA Peace Prize in early December. “Most of all, I want to thank our president, Donald Jennifer Trump, without whom we would be going home empty-handed tonight.”

    Kimmel went on to mock Trump directly, adding, “Thank you, Mr. President, for all the many ridiculous things you do each and every day. It’s been a banner couple of weeks, and we can’t wait to get back on the air tomorrow night to talk about them.”

    Trump and Kimmel have clashed publicly for nearly a decade, with the comedian routinely criticizing Trump’s policies, personality, and supporters on his show. Trump, in turn, has repeatedly dismissed Kimmel as a partisan entertainer and “ratings-challenged” host who uses political outrage to stay relevant.

    Kimmel’s remarks came after a turbulent year for his show. In September 2025, ABC briefly suspended Kimmel following controversial comments he made about conservative activist Charlie Kirk. The suspension sparked backlash from free-speech advocates on the right, who argued the network selectively enforces standards when conservatives are involved. Kimmel returned to the air just days later.

    During his acceptance speech, Kimmel thanked his wife, his producers, and members of the entertainment industry who supported him during the suspension.

    “Thanks to all the writers and actors and producers and union members, many of you who are in this room, who supported us, who really stepped forward and reminded us that we do not take free speech for granted in this city or in this country,” Kimmel said. “Your actions were important. We appreciate that.”

    Critics have noted the irony of Kimmel invoking free speech while routinely advocating for deplatforming or censorship of conservative voices.

    Kimmel also reflected on the year during his final episode of 2025, growing emotional as he thanked viewers for their loyalty.

    “It has been a hard year. We’ve had some lows. We’ve had some highs — for me, maybe more than any year of my life, but all of us,” he said through tears. “This year you literally pulled us out of a hole, and we cannot thank you enough personally, professionally…”

    Even in his closing message, Kimmel appeared unable to resist another jab at Trump and his supporters.

    “There is still much more good in this country than bad,” he told viewers, “and we hope that you will bear with us during this extended psychotic episode that we’re in the middle of.”

    President Trump has not publicly responded to Kimmel’s latest remarks, though allies have frequently criticized Hollywood figures for using award shows as political soapboxes while claiming to speak for “the country.”

    House GOP just rolled out the OFFICIAL America 250 Membership & you’ve been selected for a coveted spot on the roster. This celebration will be remembered for DECADES – and we want you to have a front row seat to it all. We’re asking a select group of TOP PATRIOTS to answer the following questions and join the House GOP’s official America 250 Membership.[Respond HERE]

    Democrats Attempt To Label Trump’s Venezuela Operation ‘Impeachable Offense’

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    5

    Democrats and Republicans have split sharply over President Donald Trump’s decision to carry out strikes in Venezuela that resulted in the capture of President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, with a growing number of Democratic lawmakers calling the operation unconstitutional and some openly urging impeachment.

    Progressive Democrats have led the backlash, accusing the administration of launching an illegal military action without congressional authorization. Several lawmakers argue that the operation amounts to an invasion of a sovereign nation and violates both the Constitution and the War Powers Act.

    “Many Americans woke up to a sick sense of déjà vu,” Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) a member of the House’s progressive “Squad,” wrote on X over the weekend. “Under the guise of liberty, an administration of warmongers has lied to justify an invasion and is dragging us into an illegal, endless war so they can extract resources and expand their wealth.”

    Ramirez called for Congress to pass a War Powers Resolution introduced by Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., aimed at blocking further military action against Venezuela, and said Trump “must be impeached.”

    Omar’s resolution seeks to reassert Congress’ constitutional authority over war-making and would require the administration to halt hostilities unless lawmakers explicitly approve them.

    Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) echoed those concerns, criticizing Trump for bypassing Congress to launch what he described as a war with Venezuela. Goldman said the administration failed to provide lawmakers with “any satisfactory explanation” for the strikes.

    “This violation of the United States Constitution is an impeachable offense,” Goldman said in a statement. “I urge my Republican colleagues in the House of Representatives to finally join Democrats in reasserting congressional authority by holding this president accountable.”

    Other Democrats struck a more cautious tone. Rep. April McClain Delaney (D-Md.) stopped short of naming Trump but wrote on X that “invading and running another country without a congressional declaration of war is an impeachable offense,” while also questioning whether impeachment is the most effective strategy. “Whether it makes sense to pursue impeachment as the best strategy to end this lawlessness is a tactical judgment that our Caucus needs to seriously deliberate,” she wrote.

    In California, Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) a gubernatorial hopeful, said he would not rule out supporting impeachment when asked by reporters, according to the Pleasanton Weekly.

    Progressive candidates running for office also weighed in. Kat Abughazaleh, a Democrat seeking an open House seat in Illinois, called Trump a “war criminal” in a post on Bluesky and demanded Congress “halt this conflict and impeach” the president.

    Still, Democrats are not unified in their opposition. A number of more centrist lawmakers have either defended the administration’s actions or argued that the removal of Maduro serves U.S. national security interests. Some Democrats have described the operation as a targeted effort to remove a destabilizing authoritarian leader rather than the start of a broader war, while others have said the administration should now work with Congress to define limits and next steps.

    Republicans, for their part, have largely rallied behind Trump. GOP leaders characterized the operation as a decisive blow against a longtime adversary of the United States and a win for regional stability.

    Senior Republicans have also pushed back on claims that the administration violated the Constitution, arguing that the action was a limited law enforcement or counterterrorism operation rather than a traditional military engagement requiring prior congressional approval.

    While impeachment calls are growing among progressives, Democratic leadership has so far stopped short of endorsing that approach

    Democrats just filed articles of impeachment against Pete Hegseth — and he could be removed if we don’t act. Hegseth is a God-fearing, America First patriot who made our country safer under President Trump — and that’s exactly why the Left wants him gone. We’re demanding 1,000,000 signatures before MIDNIGHT to show Pete he is NOT alone. STAND WITH PETE. ADD YOUR NAME NOW.

    Trump Files $5B Defamation Lawsuit Against BBC

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    2
    Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    President Donald Trump has filed a $5 billion defamation lawsuit against the BBC over its deceptive editing of a speech delivered by Trump on Jan. 6, 2021.

    The lawsuit was filed in a federal court in Miami. In the 46-page filing, Trump’s team argues the edit gave the “mistaken impression” he called for violence on that day.

    “This instance of doctoring–in the form of distortion of meaning and splicing of entirely unrelated word sequences–is part of the BBC’s longstanding pattern of manipulating President Trump’s speeches and presenting content in a misleading manner in order to defame him, including fabricating calls for violence that he never made,” the lawsuit states.

    “The BBC, faced with overwhelming and justifiable outrage on both sides of the Atlantic, has publicly admitted its staggering breach of journalistic ethics, and apologized, but has made no showing of actual remorse for its wrongdoing nor meaningful institutional changes to prevent future journalistic abuses,” it continues.

    The footage used in the broadcaster’s Panorama documentary spliced together two separate clips, creating the impression Trump told supporters: “We’re going to walk down to the Capitol… and I’ll be there with you. And we fight. We fight like hell.”

    The two clips are separated by 55 minutes in Trump’s original speech, and the documentary also left out Trump’s explicit calls for supporters to protest “peacefully and patriotically.”

    Speaking in Washington DC, the president accused the broadcaster of “putting terrible words in my mouth that I didn’t say” and claimed the BBC “may have used AI” in its investigative Panorama show. He later added: “They actually have me speaking with words that I never said, and they got caught… Let’s call [it] fake news.”

    In a statement to The New York Times, Trump’s legal team said: “The formerly respected and now disgraced BBC defamed President Trump by intentionally, maliciously and deceptively doctoring his speech in a brazen attempt to interfere in the 2024 presidential election.”

    The fallout has already triggered resignations at the top of the BBC, including director general Tim Davie and BBC News CEO Deborah Turness.

    The BBC later issued an apology to Trump for his portrayal in the documentary:

    “[W]e accept that our edit unintentionally created the impression that we were showing a single continuous section of the speech, rather than excerpts from different points in the speech, and that this gave the mistaken impression that President Trump had made a direct call for violent action,” the statement said.

    “The BBC would like to apologize to President Trump for that error of judgement. This programme was not scheduled to be re-broadcast and will not be broadcast again in this form on any BBC platforms,” it added.

    Trump’s latest lawsuit follows a string of high-profile legal battles against U.S.-based media outlets, including The New York Times and Wall Street Journal.

    Turning Point is on the front lines for America First. Help power the grassroots movement to elect real conservative fighters. Donate NOW to save America — one precinct at a time.
    123...13Page 1 of 13
    © Great America News Desk 2022