Attachment 2577237

Donald Trump Jr. posted a photo to Instagram of President Donald Trump throwing a sex toy off the roof of The White House onto a Women's National Basketball Association (WNBA) game

By Anjali Thakur

Donald Trump Jr recently shared a photoshopped image of his father, US President Donald Trump, throwing a green sex toy onto a WNBA court from the White House roof during a live game. The meme, emerging amid a strange wave of sex toys being thrown onto WNBA courts, sparked a wave of mixed reactions across social media platforms.

The post was captioned simply, “Posted without further comment,” alongside several laughing emojis.

Instagram divided over the post

Reactions to the meme were sharply divided. While some users found it hilarious, dubbing Trump Jr’s Instagram account “the greatest ever,” others slammed it as disrespectful and immature. One critic commented, “I’m Don Trump Sr for for life but this kind of stuff is classless it and it screams “my daddy is the president and I don’t know to act.”

Attachment 2577238

The third user was blunt, stating, “No funny at all … I’m looking at the comments seriously, do you honestly think this is funny and this is America is back?"

“I don’t understand. I know it’s a supposed joke but the President throwing a green d*ldo at young female basketball players is funny how?,” the fourth user asked on Instagram.

The fifth wrote, “Like seriously, were you high when you posted this … sober up yet? Please take this down it’s stupid !”

.



Judge Who Hid Illegal from ICE Gets Worst News of Her Career










Sep. 30, 2025
By Martin Walsh

Judge Hannah Dugan, who is accused of helping a criminal alien evade justice, won’t be able to hide behind her black robes to escape accountability under the law.

Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Dugan’s motion to dismiss charges based on “judicial immunity” was rejected by a federal judge.

U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman ruled that Dugan is not entitled to judicial immunity and found that the actions she is accused of fall outside the protection normally afforded to judges acting in their official capacity.

“Ultimately, as the Supreme Court has stated, ‘the official seeking absolute immunity bears the burden of showing that such immunity is justified for the function in question,’” Adelman wrote in the ruling. “I cannot say as a matter of law that the defendant’s alleged conduct falls within even this more limited version of immunity.”


Dugan was indicted in April following an incident on April 18 at the Milwaukee County Courthouse. Prosecutors allege that Dugan became aware of plainclothes Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents waiting in the courthouse to detain a defendant in her courtroom, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, a foreigner facing three misdemeanor battery charges.

According to the indictment and surveillance footage reviewed by authorities, Dugan confronted the agents in a courthouse hallway, advised them they needed a judicial warrant to make the arrest, and directed them to the chief judge’s office.


Prosecutors say she then conducted the matter off the record instead of holding a scheduled hearing and allowed Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to exit the courtroom through a rear entrance, allegedly to avoid ICE detection.

Despite these efforts, Flores-Ruiz was arrested by ICE agents later that day.


Dugan’s legal team filed a motion arguing that she was acting in her judicial capacity and was therefore immune from prosecution.

Her attorneys claimed that the charges against her violate the Tenth Amendment and the constitutional principle of separation of powers, asserting that the federal government does not have the authority to criminally charge a state judge for courtroom decisions made while discharging judicial duties.

The defense further argued that judicial immunity extends to all judicial acts short of criminal behavior wholly unrelated to the judge’s duties, such as bribery or intentional violations of constitutional rights, neither of which Dugan is accused of.


Adelman rejected those arguments, writing, “There is no basis for granting immunity simply because some of the allegations in the indictment describe conduct that could be considered ‘part of a judge’s job.’”

He concluded that the specific actions alleged—interfering with a federal arrest, misleading agents about legal requirements, and facilitating a physical escape—go beyond the normal scope of protected judicial activity.

The ruling does not determine Dugan’s guilt or innocence but allows the case to proceed. A hearing on the matter is scheduled for Oct . 3 in federal court.


Both federal prosecutors and Dugan’s defense attorneys have stated that they would like to begin trial proceedings before the end of the year. No trial date has yet been set.

The case has drawn national attention due to its unusual nature. While tensions between local and federal authorities over immigration enforcement have become more common in recent years, it is rare for a sitting judge to face criminal charges for obstructing federal agents in the line of duty.

The outcome of this case could have broader implications for how courts interpret the boundaries of judicial immunity in relation to federal law enforcement.


Flores-Ruiz remains in ICE custody pending immigration proceedings, according to officials. The Milwaukee County District Attorney’s office has not commented on whether the local criminal charges against him are still active.

If convicted, she could face fines or imprisonment, though the specific penalties will depend on the outcome of trial proceedings. The U.S. Attorney’s Office has declined to comment further on the pending case.


------------------

From Conservative Brief
Link: https://conservativebrief.com/judge-...m=ProTrumpNews




.

.


REPORT: Dem candidate spends anti-drug money pushing kids to be LGBTQ



Takes opioid settlement cash to transport children to center offering 'medical transition' seminars


By Bob Unruh
September 29, 2025





Some of the money given to officials in Pennsylvania as part of a settlement with opioid makers is being used to take children to LGBT indoctrination classes.

It is a report in the Free Beacon that explains how Democrat House candidate Bob Harvie, a county commissioner, manages a local fund distributing money from the drug makers settlement.

"While the money is supposed to go toward 'Prevention, Treatment and Recovery' services, Harvie used some of it to transport kids as young as 14 to an 'LGBTQ-youth' center that offers 'medical transition' seminars," the report said.

It was the Bucks County commissioners, a board headed by Harvie, that handed out $13,500 to Planned Parenthood Keystone for "Expanding Services and Transportation" to the Rainbow Room, a local center that caters to gay and trans youth, the report said.

The Delaware Journal said the cash handout was actually used to take students to Rainbow Room events.



BREAKING: Dem House Candidate Used Funds Meant for Recovering Opioid Addicts To Transport Kids to an ‘LGBTQ+ Youth’ Center Offering ‘Medical Transition’ Seminars

“Bob Harvie (Pa.), a county commissioner in Pennsylvania, oversees a local fund that distributes millions of dollars… pic.twitter.com/tHimHdVDhK

BREAKING: Dem House Candidate Used Funds Meant for Recovering Opioid Addicts To Transport Kids to an ‘LGBTQ+ Youth’ Center Offering ‘Medical Transition’ Seminars

“Bob Harvie (Pa.), a county commissioner in Pennsylvania, oversees a local fund that distributes millions of dollars… pic.twitter.com/tHimHdVDhK

— Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) September 29, 2025

— Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) September 29, 2025



PA Democrat Congressional Candidate Bob Harvie used taxpayer funded grants to take kids to an lgbtq center which taught about s*x, m*sturbation, and transitioning

There’s a word for people who take other people’s kids to talk about s*x pic.twitter.com/nOLj26Li6h

🚨PA Democrat Congressional Candidate Bob Harvie used taxpayer funded grants to take kids to an lgbtq center which taught about s*x, m*sturbation, and transitioning

There’s a word for people who take other people’s kids to talk about s*x 🚩 pic.twitter.com/nOLj26Li6h

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) September 29, 2025

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) September 29, 2025



The report noted that such facilities promote events about the "Fun facts, weird history, busting myths, breaking stigma" on topics like "SEX ED NIGHT MASTURBATION."

"The Rainbow Room hosted a 'Queer Prom,' where attendees as young as 13 were given goody bags with condoms, lubricant, and dental dams, used to prevent the transmission of sexually transmitted diseases during oral sex," the report explained.

Just recently it promoted a seminar "meant to teach kids as young as 14 'the basics of transgender identities, social transition, medical transition, and more!'"

Harvie currently is a Democrat candidate running against Republican Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, who won his last race by 10 points.

Further complicating Harvie's legitimacy as a candidate is the fact he and other Democrat Bucks County officials voted last year to defy state law and count invalid mail-in ballots during an election recount.

"The Rainbow Room's sexually explicit programming has been a hot-button issue for years in Bucks County, a northern suburb of Philadelphia. In addition to local news coverage of its controversial activities, state senator Doug Mastriano (R.) proposed a bill in 2023 to classify drag shows as an 'adult oriented business' after learning the Rainbow Room hosted a drag show for children," the report said.


----------------------

From WorldNetDaily
Link: https://www.wnd.com/2025/09/report-d...money-pushing/






.

.




HUGE WIN: Tech Giant Agrees to Pay $24.5 MILLION Settlement to President Trump









Sep. 29, 2025
by Kaley


Wow, this is amazing…


In a gigantic victory for President Trump, Youtube has just agreed to pay him a whopping $24.5 million settlement in his lawsuit over the suspension of his account.


Check it out:

🚨 BREAKING – BIG TRUMP WIN: YouTube agrees to pay $24.5 MILLION to settle a lawsuit over the company suspending President Trump's account following January 6th.

This is an ADMISSION it was overt political, unjustified censorship. VICTORY. pic.twitter.com/afcmIfULbs

🚨 BREAKING - BIG TRUMP WIN: YouTube agrees to pay $24.5 MILLION to settle a lawsuit over the company suspending President Trump's account following January 6th.

This is an ADMISSION it was overt political, unjustified censorship. VICTORY. pic.twitter.com/afcmIfULbs

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) September 29, 2025

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) September 29, 2025



Essentially, the White House just got a $24.5 million donation…

The majority of the money will be reportedly be used to fund President Trump’s new White House ballroom!

🚨 BREAKING: YouTube to pay $24.5M to settle lawsuit brought by Trump over the suspension of his account.

Trump is using the money to fund the ballroom at the White House. Incredible.

“Trump’s share of the settlement—$22 million—will go to the nonprofit Trust for the National… pic.twitter.com/j1WRxmRpfo

🚨 BREAKING: YouTube to pay $24.5M to settle lawsuit brought by Trump over the suspension of his account.

Trump is using the money to fund the ballroom at the White House. Incredible.

“Trump’s share of the settlement—$22 million—will go to the nonprofit Trust for the National… pic.twitter.com/j1WRxmRpfo

— johnny maga (@_johnnymaga) September 29, 2025

— johnny maga (@_johnnymaga) September 29, 2025




BREAKING: YouTube to pay $24.5M to settle lawsuit brought by Trump over the suspension of his account.

Trump is using the money to fund the ballroom at the White House. Incredible.

“Trump’s share of the settlement—$22 million—will go to the nonprofit Trust for the National Mall, earmarked for the construction of a Mar-a-Lago-style ballroom Trump is building at the White House”


President Trump sued Youtube, Meta (Facebook), and Twitter/X in 2021 after they banned his accounts following the January 6th Capitol protests.

Meta and X have both already agreed to pay out huge settlements of their own.

And now, Youtube’s settlement marks the triumphant end of that lengthy court battle!



The Wall Street Journal has more:

YouTube has agreed to pay $24.5 million to settle a 2021 lawsuit that President Trump brought against the company and its chief executive over its suspension of Trump’s account after that year’s riot at the U.S. Capitol, according to court papers.

The settlement makes YouTube, which is owned by Alphabet’s Google, the final Big Tech company to settle a trio of lawsuits Trump brought against social-media platforms in the months after he left the White House. Meta Platforms agreed in January to pay $25 million, most of it to a fund for Trump’s presidential library, and X agreed to pay $10 million, much of it going directly to Trump, The Wall Street Journal previously reported.

Google executives were eager to keep their settlement smaller than the one paid by rival Meta, according to people familiar with the matter. Trump’s share of the settlement—$22 million—will go to the nonprofit Trust for the National Mall, earmarked for the construction of a Mar-a-Lago-style ballroom Trump is building at the White House, according to the court documents. The White House has said the ballroom, expected to cost $200 million, would be funded by donations from Trump and “other patriot donors.”

A further $2.5 million will go to the other plaintiffs on the case, a group that includes the American Conservative Union and writer Naomi Wolf. The settlement doesn’t mention attorney fees.


This is wonderful news.


However, as you know, censorship of conservative accounts and videos on platforms like Youtube remains a widespread issue — this site included!

We are too dangerous for them!


Here’s an idea:

DJT collecting checks from legacy media and woke tech companies is hilarious.

People need to follow and file civil action suits.

— The Narrator  (@Fight_Club_Lad) September 29, 2025

What are your thoughts?


------------------

From WLT Report
Link: https://wltreport.com/2025/09/29/hug...m_campaign=PTN





.

Attachment 2577066

"It is not about the law," the Minnesota senator said of the indictment of the former FBI director.

By Cheyanne M. Daniels

Sen. Amy Klobuchar on Sunday accused the White House of seeking “vengeance” following the appointment of Lindsey Halligan as the top federal prosecutor in Virginia and the subsequent indictment of former FBI director James Comey.

In an interview with Margaret Brennan on CBS’ “Face the Nation,” Klobuchar said she plans to speak with Republican colleagues on the Justice Committee, of which is she a ranking member, about Halligan’s appointment and Comey’s indictment.

“When I questioned Attorney General [Pam] Bondi during her confirmation hearing, she assured me that politics would not play a role, that they would make independent decisions,” the Minnesota Democrat said. “That’s not what this is. This is a vengeance prosecution. It is not about the law.”

Halligan was sworn in as interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia after the former attorney, Erik Seibert, resigned after pressure from the White House. Seibert had also failed to bring charges against New York Attorney Letitia James despite urging from President Donald Trump.

Two days after she was sworn in, Halligan — who has no prosecutorial experience but represented Trump in the criminal case brought by special counsel Jack Smith over his hoarding of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago a — filed charges against Comey.

The two charges stem from the fromer FBI director’s testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2020 about the bureau’s investigation into possible connections between Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and Russia.

Notably, the charges came after Trump called on Bondi to prosecute his perceived political enemies, including Comey.

“What I see, this as a former prosecutor myself, this is weaponizing the Justice Department,” Klobuchar said on Sunday.

For his part, Comey, who Trump fired in 2017, expressed disappointment in the DOJ but confidence in the justice system.

“My family and I have known for years that there are costs to standing up to Donald Trump, but we couldn’t imagine ourselves living any other way. We will not live on our knees, and you shouldn’t either,” Comey said. “My heart is broken for the Department of Justice, but I have great confidence in the federal judicial system, and I’m innocent, so, let’s have a trial.”

Attachment 2577065

If a government shutdown wasn’t already exceedingly likely, President Donald Trump might have made it a near certainty Monday night.

By Meredith Lee Hill

The president posted a vulgar AI-generated deepfake video to his Truth Social slamming the top Democratic leaders — Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries — just hours after he hosted the two for an Oval Office meeting.

The video depicts Schumer and Jeffries as if speaking to reporters following the meeting, but the fabricated audio has Schumer saying Democrats “have no voters anymore, because of our woke, trans bullshit” and that “if we give all these illegal aliens health care, we might be able to get them on our side so they can vote for us.”

That appears to be a crude reference to a shutdown talking point pushed by Speaker Mike Johnson and other GOP leaders noting that one Democratic demand is to reverse health care provisions in the recently enacted GOP megabill — including provisions aimed at excluding noncitizens from public benefits.

Jeffries is depicted in a sombrero and mariachi music plays in the background. Trump sat down with the top House Democrat for the first time ever Monday.

Jeffries appeared to reply on X: “Bigotry will get you nowhere. Cancel the Cuts. Lower the Cost. Save Healthcare. We are NOT backing down.” Schumer in his own reply said, “If you think your shutdown is a joke, it just proves what we all know: You can’t negotiate. You can only throw tantrums.”

After looking over the video, one senior GOP aide granted anonymity to speak candidly said, “This might top the last shutdown.” That’s a reference to the 2018-2019 shutdown under Trump that lasted a record 35 days.

Attachment 2577063

Conservative media outlets suggested undercover federal agents incited the insurrection. U.S. President Donald Trump amplified that claim.

By Anna Rascouët-Paz

In late September 2025, a rumor began to spread that, contrary to the assertions of former FBI Director Christopher Wray, the federal law enforcement agency had sent agents undercover in the crowd of protesters on Jan. 6, 2021, in Washington, D.C. and the agents then incited the violence that resulted in the U.S. Capitol riot.

For example, a Sept. 25 X post (archived) claimed "275 undercover agents" were in the crowd of Jan. 6 rioters:

Embedded Tweet

The claim appeared elsewhere on X as well as on Reddit. Further, Snopes readers emailed asking to confirm whether the rumor was true.

The claim was not new. Snopes identified posts from 2024 making the same claim. This rumor circulated widely in an attempt to find attenuating circumstances for Jan. 6 rioters convicted of crimes, including trespassing, assaulting police officers and seditious conspiracy.

This time, however, the rumor stemmed from reports by conservative news outlets The Blaze and Just the News, both published on Sept. 25, 2025.

Citing one anonymous congressional source, The Blaze said the FBI had admitted to sending "274 plainclothes agents" in the Jan. 6 crowd. It also reported that 26 FBI informants also joined the crowd, four of whom entered the Capitol.

Just the News linked to an "after-action report" it said it had obtained and also reported that 274 agents were in the crowd.

The reports appeared to suggest that the long-standing rumor that undercover FBI agents had incited the violence was true. Two days later, on Sept. 27, President Donald Trump relayed the claim on Truth Social, in a post that has since been deleted (archived):

Attachment 2577064

In the post, Trump called Jan. 6 a hoax. He also said these claims directly contradicted Wray's testimony.

After Jan. 6, 2021, a House subcommittee on Jan. 6 began to conduct an investigation. This subcommittee disbanded in January 2023 after 18 months of work. However, in early September 2025 the House voted to open a new subcommittee chaired by Rep. Barry Loudermilk, a Republican from Georgia, to reinvestigate the matter, including the conclusions of the first subcommittee. The new subcommittee included Democrats.

Snopes reviewed the after-action report published by Just the News, which did not support the claims in the outlet's story. We could not identify who The Blaze's anonymous source was, therefore we could not confirm its report. We have contacted both the FBI and the new House subcommittee and we will update this report should they respond.

However, we found a Sept. 26, 2025, post on X (archived) by the new subcommittee on Jan. 6, which included the apparent screen capture of a spreadsheet:

Embedded Tweet

The row concerning the deployment of FBI agents during Jan. 6 read:

Deployment date: 1/6/2021

Position type: Agents

Event: 1/6 incident

Field Office/HQ Division: WFO [Washington Field Office]

Total Personnel Count: 274

Notes: This number includes agents that responded to the Capitol grounds as well as inside the Capitol, the pipe bombs, and the red truck that was believed to contain explosive devices as well as CDC/ADCS.


While the number matched the reports by The Blaze and Just the News, the notes did not corroborate the claim that the FBI agents were undercover.

While the exact number of FBI agents deployed had not been publicly reported before, the allegations that the FBI and its former director, Wray, had attempted to keep it secret did not hold up, either. For example, a December 2024 report by the Department of Justice's Office of the Inspector General acknowledged that in light of the intelligence the FBI was gathering on the Jan. 6 protest, "hundreds of highly trained specialized teams" would "be meeting DC."

It falls under the FBI's responsibility to support a law enforcement response for crowd control should the circumstances call for it, as this DOJ report explained. However, the same report said the investigation had revealed no proof this had been the case. "We found no evidence in the materials we reviewed or the testimony we received showing or suggesting that the FBI had undercover employees in the various protest crowds, or at the Capitol, on January 6," the report said.

Instead, the FBI deployed agents after the riot began. The report read:

Indeed, after the Capitol was breached by rioters on January 6, the FBI was in a position to deploy tactical assets to help clear the Capitol of protesters and to help USCP secure the perimeter around the Capitol Complex. The FBI told Congress that its posture for January 6 preparations was "extraordinary," and we found that the FBI effectively carried out its tactical support function on January 6.

Citing the DOJ report, The Blaze's story included one sentence that appeared to seed doubt. "Depending how one reads 'undercover' agents versus 'plainclothes agents,' both statements could be true," it read.

It is important to note that most FBI agents do not wear uniforms in the field, unlike local law enforcement. Instead, most wear civilian clothes, except for tactical teams, who instead may wear tactical gear. As a rule, the dress code is business casual. The Blaze's and Just the News' reports did not cite "undercover" agents, but plainclothes agents, which is consistent with FBI standards for dress.

In sum, despite suggestions by these two news outlets and the now-deleted post by Trump, there was no evidence that the FBI agents deployed on Jan. 6 were undercover. We could not independently confirm the number, though it is in line with the DOJ report published in December 2024.

.



This is a reckoning of James Comey’s own making — and Dems for weaponizing justice system first

Former FBI Director James Comey in a frame grab from a video feed as he is sworn in remotely from his home during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing exploring the bureau’s investigation of the 2016 Trump campaign and Russian election interference in Washington, on Sept. 30, 2020. REUTERS

By Miranda Devine
Published Sep. 28, 2025, Updated Sep. 29, 2025

In the wake of James Comey’s indictment, Democrats like Sen. Richard Blumenthal and Rep. Eric Swalwell are issuing dark warnings with a straight face that “what goes around comes around” and that anyone who cooperates with Donald Trump’s “vengeance prosecutions” will face retribution when Dems are back in charge.

But their threats fall on deaf ears because they started it. Democrats long ago weaponized the justice system against their political opponents.


Let us count the ways.

On President Joe Biden’s watch, Trump faced four separate indictments with 88 criminal charges; more than 1,500 Trump supporters were arrested and over-prosecuted in the J6 investigation; Trump advisers Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro were jailed for contempt of Nancy Pelosi’s J6 star chamber; Trump adviser Roger Stone was arrested at dawn in a heavy-handed SWAT raid; Comey entrapped Trump national security adviser Gen. Michael Flynn; the DOJ, FBI and IRS covered up Biden corruption and jailed whistleblowers Gal Luft and Alexander Smirnov. To name a few.

Conservatives of every stripe were under legal assault. The FBI spied on school board meetings and Catholics at Latin Mass.

FBI agents were subjected to politically motivated loyalty tests to weed out those suspected of supporting Trump.

Biden pressured AG Merrick Garland to investigate Trump and lay off his son — only he did it through anonymous leaks to the New York Times rather than out in the open on Truth Social.



‘Unforgivable’

“James Comey deserves our utter contempt for the damage he did to our system of justice along with the rule of law in America,” says Flynn.

Like Comey, Flynn was charged with making false statements to government officials during an official proceeding, Flynn to the FBI, Comey to Congress.

In January 2017, days after Trump took office, Comey sent two FBI agents to visit Flynn, the newly appointed national security adviser, to question him about legitimate phone calls he had with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak after the election.

Flynn was charged with making false statements to the FBI, which he denied, but when prosecutors threatened to charge his son, he pleaded guilty.

“I sent them [the agents],” Comey bragged of his violation of policy, in an on-stage interview with MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace.

“Something I wouldn’t have done or got away with a more organized administration, in the George W. Bush administration, for example, or the Obama administration,” he said. “[But] I thought: It’s early enough, let’s just send a couple of guys over.”


The audience laughed.

For Flynn, a military veteran and patriot, of whose advice Trump never got the benefit, Comey’s idle abuse of power led to years of torment.

He lost his house, his business, and most of his savings fighting the case before Trump pardoned him.

“What he did to my family, the Trump administration and to the people of America is unforgivable,” says Flynn. “He should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.”

Another Trump intimate, Stone, was charged with the same offenses as Comey: making false statements to Congress and obstruction of a congressional proceeding, like Flynn over fake Russia collusion allegations.

Yet, unlike Comey, Stone wasn’t afforded the genteel route of turning himself in to authorities at his leisure.

In the predawn darkness of Jan. 25, 2019, a heavily armed FBI SWAT team stormed Stone’s house with a CNN camera crew in tow to capture his distress as he and his wife were marched outside in their pajamas at gunpoint. Stone lost his home, his savings, his insurance and even his car in the endless legal saga, which also only ended when Trump pardoned him.

“There is no better example of the two-tiered justice system,” says Stone.

“The judge issued a broad gag order preventing me from defending myself in public, arguing that my public defense could ‘taint the jury pool’ which, of course, does not explain why she left the gag order in place after my conviction, and after I was sentenced,” he says, wondering, “Why is there no gag order on James Comey?”


Justice ‘hot and cold’

Good question. As soon as he was indicted last week, Comey posted a self-righteous, self-pitying video on Instagram declaring his innocence and posing as a resistance hero.

“My family and I have known for years that there are costs for standing up to Donald Trump, but we couldn’t imagine ourselves living any other way. We will not live on our knees,” he said.

Navarro, another senior adviser in Trump’s first administration, was jailed last March for four months for defying a congressional subpoena from the J6 committee, the first time in 40 years that anyone has been sent to jail for contempt of Congress.

Like Stone, Navarro wants to know why Comey is being treated with kid gloves in contrast to his own brutal arrest in 2022 at Reagan National Airport as he boarded a plane for Nashville.

Navarro was handcuffed, shackled in leg irons, strip-searched and thrown in a jail cell.

“How come Comey is allowed to self-surrender when they sent five armed FBI agents to take me down?” he asked.

“My message to the Republican National Convention the day I got out of prison was simple: If we don’t hold them accountable, they will do it again,” says Navarro, who just published a book about his ordeal: “I Went To Prison So You Won’t Have To.”

“They include not just Comey but [Barack] Obama, [Hillary] Clinton, [James] Clapper, [Lisa] Page, [Peter] Strzok, [Rod] Rosenstein and the FBI agent who put me in leg irons, Walter Giardina,” he says. “No martyrs among them, only perpetrators.”

He could have added other devious former coup plotters, such as CIA Director John Brennan, New York AG Letitia James and Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff, who are currently under investigation.

Bannon is another former Trump adviser attacked with Democratic lawfare who, like Navarro, was jailed for contempt of Congress.

He describes the Comey indictment as merely “an appetizer for a full meal we are going to ram down the throat of the Deep State.”

“The internal enemies of our country better lawyer up because justice is being served in the best way possible — cold and hard.”


Back when the shoe was on the other foot, the same Democrats and their media handmaidens who are now hyperventilating about Comey getting the start of his just deserts, couldn’t wait to get to a microphone to say: “No one is above the law.”

Even when the FBI conducted an armed raid on the home of a former president — Trump’s Mar-a-Lago — and rifled through Melania Trump’s underwear drawer, Dems just smirked and said: “We believe in the rule of law.”

So spare us the outrage.



Tit-for-tat indictments


The indictment of Comey is only “unprecedented” in the sense that Republicans have not played the game before.

Now they’re on the field and it’s scorched earth time.

Expect more indictments as soon as this week.

The indictment of Comey is only “unprecedented” in the sense that Republicans have not played the game before.

Now they’re on the field and it’s scorched earth time.

Expect more indictments as soon as this week.


It’s not revenge. It’s accountability. It’s a necessary squaring up, evening the ledger, building deterrence.

As Trump said last week: “You can’t let this go on. They are sick, radical left people, and they can’t get away with it.”



-----------------------

Source: New York Post
Link: https://nypost.com/2025/09/28/opinio...-system-first/






.

.




“I Think We’re Headed to a Shutdown” – Vance SLAMS Schumer, Democrats For Trying to Hold Americans Hostage to Fund Healthcare for Illegal Aliens (VIDEO)








Sep. 29, 2025
By Cristina Laila

Top Democrat and Republican lawmakers met with President Trump and Vice President JD Vance to discuss a stopgap bill that will avert a government shutdown.

Two stopgap bills have stalled in the Senate over the last two weeks because Democrats are blocking President Trump’s agenda.

The government will shut down on Wednesday because the Democrats are seeking $1.5 trillion in spending that will fund healthcare for illegal aliens and sex reassignment surgery for children.

Democrat Minority Leader Chuck Schumer came out of the meeting on Monday claiming he tried to guilt-trip President Trump by bringing up a child with cancer.

“I told him how I met a mother who was crying because her daughter has cancer…and what has happened with healthcare with what they have done, she’s gonna watch her daughter suffer and maybe die. And he seemed to understand the magnitude of this crisis,” Schumer said.


WATCH:

BREAKING: Chuck Schumer says he tried to guilt-trip President Trump in the Oval Office, bringing up a child with cancer while demanding Trump back his spending plan that funds illegal alien healthcare and trans surgeries for kids.

“I told him how I met a mother who was crying… pic.twitter.com/ggDLgCJ8rx

🚨 BREAKING: Chuck Schumer says he tried to guilt-trip President Trump in the Oval Office, bringing up a child with cancer while demanding Trump back his spending plan that funds illegal alien healthcare and trans surgeries for kids.

"I told him how I met a mother who was crying… pic.twitter.com/ggDLgCJ8rx

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) September 29, 2025

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) September 29, 2025



Vice President JD Vance came out of the meeting and slammed Schumer and Democrat lawmakers in remarks to reporters outside of the White House.

“I think we’re headed to do a shutdown because the Democrats won’t do the right thing,” Vance told reporters.

“Democrats want a $1.5 trillion spending package that funded free health care for illegals. We told them that was absurd, and now they’re willing to shut down the government over it. It’s unacceptable,” he said.

“You will hear a lot from Democrats about the fact that American health care policy is broken…every single thing that they accuse about being broken about American health care is policy that Democrats have supported for the past decade,” Vance said as Speaker Mike Johnson nodded in agreement.

“So if they want to talk about how to fix American health care policy, let’s do it. I’d love to do it. The Senate Majority Leader would love to do it. Let’s work on it together, but let’s do it in the context of an open government that’s providing essential services to the American people. That’s all that we’re proposing to do, and the fact that they refuse to do that shows how unreasonable their position is,” Vance added.


WATCH:

BREAKING: JD Vance tells Democrats to SHOVE IT, says a shutdown is coming.

“I think we’re headed to do a shutdown because the Democrats won’t do the right thing.”

“Democrats want a $1.5 TRILLION spending package that funded free health care for illegals. We told them that… pic.twitter.com/Tf4fp3rMeF

🚨 BREAKING: JD Vance tells Democrats to SHOVE IT, says a shutdown is coming.

"I think we're headed to do a shutdown because the Democrats won't do the right thing."

"Democrats want a $1.5 TRILLION spending package that funded free health care for illegals. We told them that… pic.twitter.com/Tf4fp3rMeF

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) September 29, 2025

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) September 29, 2025


--------------------

From The Gateway Pundit
Link: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/202...slams-schumer/






.

.



Obama Presidential Center’s $470 Million Pledge To Protect Taxpayers Is Nearly Empty








By Jon Dougherty
Sep. 29, 2025

When the Obama Foundation won approval to build the Obama Presidential Center on 19.3 acres of Chicago’s Jackson Park, it promised a $470 million reserve fund to protect taxpayers if the project failed.

But new tax filings show the foundation has deposited just $1 million into that endowment and has not made additional contributions in years, prompting critics to warn the shortfall could leave Chicagoans liable for hundreds of millions of dollars.

The endowment was a condition of the city agreement that transferred control of the parkland to the foundation as construction of the center proceeded. City officials and foundation representatives did not immediately respond to requests for comment, Fox News reported.

“The foundation ultimately secured the public land for just $10 in 2018 under a 99-year deal,” said the outlet.

When former President Barack Obama and former First Lady Michelle Obama turned the first sod at the site in September 2021, the Obama Foundation had deposited just $1 million — roughly 0.21% of the $470 million reserve it pledged — into the required endowment, and that amount has not increased since, according to recent filings.

With construction proceeding slowly and project costs rising from an initial estimate of $330 million to at least $850 million, critics say the lack of progress on the endowment raises the prospect that Chicago taxpayers could be left responsible if the center’s finances sour, Fox reported.

The foundation’s most recent tax return also shows volatile year-to-year revenue, fundraising shortfalls and unfulfilled donor commitments, underscoring concerns about the project’s financial footing.

Illinois GOP Chair Kathy Salvi called the development an “abomination,” saying Democrats’ deal with the foundation risks exposing local taxpayers to large liabilities.

“It should come as no surprise that the Obama Center is potentially leaving Illinois taxpayers high and dry — it’s an Illinois Democrat tradition,” Salvi told Fox News Digital. “Democrats in this state, when not going to prison for corruption, treat taxpayers like a personal piggy bank giving sweetheart deals to their political benefactors.”

Richard Epstein, a University of Chicago law professor emeritus who also teaches at New York University, has long warned about the endowment and advised the local nonprofit Protect Our Parks in its legal efforts to block construction of the Obama Presidential Center.

Epstein says the foundation’s failure to fund the reserve vindicates his long-standing contention that the city should not have ceded the large swath of Jackson Park to the project, Fox reported.

“They put a million dollars into a $400 million endowment, so it’s endowed. That gets you in jail as a securities matter,” Epstein told Fox News Digital. “An endowment means that you have the money in hand. But they have nothing. They just have the same $1 million that they put in in 2021 as far as I can tell. So, I regard this as something of a public calamity.”

An endowment is a fund designed to generate sufficient interest annually to cover operating expenses without using the principal, thereby eliminating the need for taxpayer assistance.

“Without an endowment, they’ll have to scramble every year to cover $30 million in operating costs,” Epstein said. “The whole point of an endowment is to avoid that volatility. They just haven’t endowed it. Of that I’m 100% sure.”

Epstein argues that if the foundation or center fails, the public could be burdened with costs for traffic rerouting, environmental impacts, or even the expenses of an incomplete building.

“Nobody knows exactly who is responsible for what if the project is abandoned or incomplete,” he told Fox. “There is a risk that the public will then have to bear that loss because the foundation won’t have the money.”

Epstein said the city has effectively looked the other way, labeling the foundation “compliant” on the endowment despite only $1 million ever being deposited — a sign, he argued, that officials never intended to enforce the requirement.


-------------

From Conservative Brief
Link: https://conservativebrief.com/obama-pledge-95555/





.

Attachment 2576915

By emptywheel

As I mentioned here, ABC reported that the lie charged in the Jim Comey indictment pertains to whether he authorized Dan Richman to share information anonymously, not whether he authorized Andrew McCabe to do so.

Sources told ABC News that “PERSON 1” is Clinton and “PERSON 3” is Richman, a longtime law professor who — as ABC News previously reported — met with federal prosecutors last week after being subpoenaed in the matter.

Charlie Savage has the best piece on the likely theory of the indictment. I’d like to expand on that to explain why I think it more likely we’ll obtain proof that Kash Patel lied to Congress as a result of this prosecution than that Jim Comey did.

As you read the following remember that Kash assured the Senate Judiciary Committee — including in this exchange with Mazie Hirono — that he would not “go[] backwards” to investigate Jim Comey.

Senator Hirono (02:18:49):

Do you plan to investigate James Comey, who’s on your list?

Kash Patel (02:18:54):

I have no intentions of going backwards-

Except it appears that Kash did precisely that.

The indictment appears to accuse Comey of authorizing Dan Richman to serve as a source for this article on the Hillary and Trump investigations, especially this passage about the SVR document purporting to report that Loretta Lynch had told Amanda Renteria she would intervene to protect Hillary (the charge the grand jury rejected was also focused on these SVR documents, which I explained here).

During Russia’s hacking campaign against the United States, intelligence agencies could peer, at times, into Russian networks and see what had been taken. Early last year, F.B.I. agents received a batch of hacked documents, and one caught their attention.

The document, which has been described as both a memo and an email, was written by a Democratic operative who expressed confidence that Ms. Lynch would keep the Clinton investigation from going too far, according to several former officials familiar with the document.

Read one way, it was standard Washington political chatter. Read another way, it suggested that a political operative might have insight into Ms. Lynch’s thinking.

Normally, when the F.B.I. recommends closing a case, the Justice Department agrees and nobody says anything. The consensus in both places was that the typical procedure would not suffice in this instance, but who would be the spokesman?

The document complicated that calculation, according to officials. If Ms. Lynch announced that the case was closed, and Russia leaked the document, Mr. Comey believed it would raise doubts about the independence of the investigation.

[snip]

But some time after that meeting, Mr. Comey began talking to his advisers about announcing the end of the Clinton investigation himself, according to a former official.

“When you looked at the totality of the situation, we were leaning toward: This is something that makes sense to be done alone,” said Mr. Steinbach, who would not confirm the existence of the Russian document.

Former Justice Department officials are deeply skeptical of this account. If Mr. Comey believed that Ms. Lynch were compromised, they say, why did he not seek her recusal? Mr. Comey never raised this issue with Ms. Lynch or the deputy attorney general, Sally Q. Yates, former officials said.

Importantly, Richman was a named source for the story, which will make it hard to prove that Comey authorized Richman to serve as an anonymous source. (Hilariously, Pat Fitzgerald’s meticulous mapping during the Scooter Libby trial of the difference between an “anonymous” source and a “background” source might, by itself, defeat this case.)

As part of an investigation into the sources for this story (which targeted Jim Baker closely), John Durham seems to have discovered either details of how the FBI authorized people to weigh in on stories or that Dan Richman served as a cut-out for Comey, I’m not sure which.

The reopened Arctic Haze investigation was biased against Comey

That discovery led DOJ to reopen a bunch of investigations into 2017 stories pertaining to the Russian investigation, documented in these filings, which I wrote up here.

As part of that, DOJ investigated whether Richman was the source for the SVR details in the April 2017 NYT story. Before closing the investigation, DOJ asked Comey for the phone he used at the time, and found nothing relevant.

[redacted] on June 29, 2021, Comey provided consent, via his counsel, for the FBI to conduct a limited search of his Apple iPhone. The FBI conducted a forensic examination of the telephone. The examination indicated the telephone contained four voicemail messages, four instant messages, two email messages, and 51 images from December 1, 2016 to May 1, 2017. None of this material contained information relevant to this investigation.

They also interviewed Richman, who among other things, told the FBI that, “Comey never asked him to talk to the media” (though it appears earlier, as described in redacted passages, he may have said Comey did).

The substance of the November 2019 Richman interview confirmed that Comey had told Richman bits about the SVR documents, but that when Mike Schmidt came to Richman and asked him about it in January 2017, Schmidt already knew more about the documents than Richman did.

On November 22, 2019, the Arctic Haze investigative team interviewed Richman. According to Richman, Comey and Richman talked about the “hammering” Comey was taking from the media concerning his handling of the Midyear Exam investigation. Richman opined Comey took comfort in the fact Richman had talked to the press about his feelings regarding Comey’s handling and decision-making on the Midyear Exam investigation. Richman claimed Comey never asked him to talk to the media.

According to Richman, he and Comey had a private conversation in Comey’s office in January 2017. The conversation pertained to Comey’s decision to make a public statement on the Midyear Exam investigation. Comey told Richman the tarmac meeting between Lynch and Clinton was not the only reason which played into Comey’s statement on the Midyear Exam investigation. According to Richman, Comey told Richman of Lynch’s characterization of the investigation as a “matter” and not that of an investigation. Richman recalled Comey told him there was some weird classified material related to Lynch which came to the FBI’s attention. Comey did not fully explain the details of the information. Comey told Richman about the Classified Information, including the source of the information. Richman understood the information could be used to suggest Lynch might not be impartial with regards of the conclusion of the Midyear Exam investigation. Richman understood the information about Lynch was highly classified and it should be protected. Richman was an SGE at the time of the meeting.

According to Richman, he and Schmidt had a conversation shortly after the meeting with Comey in or around January 2017. Richman claimed Schmidt brought up the Classified Information and knew more about it than he did. Richman was pretty sure he did not confirm the Classified Information. However, Richman told the interviewing agents he was sure “with a discount” that he did not tell Schmidt about the Classified Information. Richman did not know who gave Schmidt the Classified Information. Richman acknowledged he had many discussions with Schmidt about the article as an SGE and even after he resigned as an SGE. Richman acknowledged he contributed more to the article than what was attributed to him by name. Richman also stated he knew Schmidt talked to numerous other government sources for information on the article. [my emphasis]

DOJ ultimately decided they couldn’t charge either Comey or Richman, because even if Richman were a source, he would be a confirmatory source, which DOJ had never charged (they claim, though I think that’s incorrect).

They did some more interviews but — and this may sink EDVA’s case even if everything else doesn’t — they only interviewed people who would have a motive to protect Comey, not those with a motive to slam him.

After discussing the status of investigative leads and resources available with the U.S. Attorney’s Office and Department of Justice’s National Security Division (DOJ NSD), the FBI investigative team was directed to interview only those officials who might have had a motive to protect Comey. Therefore, the FBI only interviewed eight of these officials who consisted mainly of former FBI officials. All of these officials denied providing the Classified Information to the New York Times. [my emphasis]

At a time when they could have charged this, Bill Barr’s DOJ assumed that the original detailed sources for the SVR story must be Comey allies.

There are at least two reasons why that was a dumb theory.

First, as the DOJ IG Report on this that investigators read — but didn’t explain in the unredacted parts of the case file — Comey and people around him believed the claims in the document were “objectively false” Comey even alluded as such in his 2018 OGR testimony (also cited in this closing document) — which Kash Patel would know personally. “So far as I knew at the time, and still think, the material itself was genuine, which is a separate question, though, from whether it was what it said was accurate.”

This entire passage is premised on the document being true.

More importantly, the sources for it are pissed off that Jim Comey announced the end of the Hillary investigation himself.

Plus, there’s no mention that one of these two SVR documents said that Jim Comey was going to throw the election for the Republicans. If someone were really familiar with the documents themselves, rather than just discussions of them, you’d expect they would suggest that maybe Comey was overcompensating out of worry that he would be deemed partial to Republicans.

The blind spot about that part of the SVR documents, notably, is replicated in the HPSCI document on which Kash was the original author.

HPSCI simply leaves out the Jim Comey allegation in one of the SVR reports, which if true, would explain why Putin wouldn’t have to (and didn’t) dump damning intel close to the election: Because Putin believed that “Comey is leaning more to the [R]epublicans, and most likely he will be dragging this investigation until the presidential elections,” something that turned out to be true. In other words, they cherry pick which Russian spy products they choose to parrot, one of the sins they accuse the ICA team of, but they do so with years of hindsight that made clear how foolish that was.

The entire right wing, including the current FBI Director, have vast blindspots about these documents (Kash even seems to believe they’re not fabricated!!). And those blindspots appear to have been replicated in the investigative choices for that investigation. That means the selective prosecution of this prosecution is built on top of the selective investigation of the Richman investigation.

Nevertheless, the investigation was closed without charging Richman for confirming classified details.

Kash did look backward

Where this becomes proof that Kash lied to the Senate Judiciary Committee, claiming that “I have no intentions of going backwards” to investigate Comey is that there’s no reason to reexamine the issue (except that Comey answered a question focused on Andrew McCabe on which the statute of limitations has not yet expired).

The leak itself, if it could be pinned on Comey and Richman, could not be charged. Bill Barr did not reopen the investigation after seeing Comey’s September 2020 testimony, even though he remained busy trying to discredit Crossfire Hurricane.

While investigators this time around are chasing a parallel theory that the FBI covered up their focus on SVR documents that only exists in the fevered imaginations of people like Kash (that is, if Comey actually lied about any of this it would be material to their fevered conspiracy theories in the other part of the investigation), it would not have been material at the time, because Ted Cruz was seeking a gotcha about his fevered imagined conflict between McCabe and Comey’s testimony. The underlying 2017 question from Grassley incorporated Richman, but if Cruz’s did, there’s no hint of that. He explicitly focused on McCabe.

Nor would it be material to the Durham investigation. The Durham Report actually says that Comey refused to be interviewed, pointing instead to testimony just like this. So if there’s something in this exchange that would be usable, Durham didn’t do so.

Nevertheless, somehow, the FBI decided to go revisit this gotcha question from five years ago, which — even if Comey were lying — would not change the public understanding of Comey’s self-righteous justifications for his decisions in the Clinton investigation one bit. Outside the fevered imagination of people like Kash, or the decision to look backward to investigate a guy listed on your enemies list, there’s no reason you get to these files.

Now, Comey may have opportunity to ask Kash, under oath, how the FBI decided to go unpack the closing file for an investigation closed over three years earlier — which is why I say we may get proof that Kash lied to SJC.

But the only new information that I could conceive of that would lead the FBI to reconsider this is if the FBI spied on the NYT and found materials from Mike Schmidt saying that Richman was his source and Comey told him to leak it. Which, if it happened, would be a ten times bigger scandal than we’ve already got.

I would be shocked if Comey didn’t ask for some explanation — other than the revenge to which Trump confessed publicly — behind the predication of this investigation. I would be unsurprised if Judge Michael Nachmanoff, who is presiding over the case, offered him that opportunity.

And if he does, Kash is going to be stuck trying to make up some excuse that doesn’t amount to a confession he lied, as a private citizen, to SJC as part of his effort to get the job he’s using to weaponize government against Trump’s enemies.

Kash Patel wrote a book in 2023 targeting Jim Comey.

When asked whether he intended to use the FBI Director position to investigate Jim Comey, Kash claimed, under oath, that he had no intentions of going backward to do so.

And then he proceeded to do just that.

The evidence that Comey lied to the Senate Judiciary Committee is paper thin.

The evidence that Kash lied to the Senate Judiciary Committee is abundant.

Attachment 2576913

Funding authorization for a federal program providing flood coverage to millions of Americans across the country is set to expire on September 30, unless Congress extends it before the looming deadline.

By Giulia Carbonaro

The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), provides $1.3 trillion in flood coverage to about 4.7 million policyholders among homeowners, renters, and businesses.

If the program is allowed to expire, as the standoff between Republicans and Democrats in Congress remains unsolved as of Monday morning, millions could be affected—including homeowners who would not be able to get coverage at a time when disaster season is intensifying.

"Allowing the NFIP to expire will move us in the wrong direction at the worst time," said the Insurance Fairness Project in a statement shared with Newsweek.

America’s Flood Insurance Gap

Flooding is one of the most frequent and most costly natural disasters facing the nation, according to federal authorities, threatening both areas at high-risk as well as those at moderate-to-low-risk.

A 2024 study by the Joint Economic Committee found that flooding costs the nation between $179.8 and $496 billion each year. Nearly one-third (32 percent) of NFIP flood insurance claims, according to federal data, come from outside high-risk flood areas.

Crucially, flood coverage is not included in traditional home insurance policies, which means that many homeowners all across the country go without. According to federal data, 99 percent of U.S. counties have been impacted by flooding since 1999. However, only 4 percent of homeowners have flood insurance.

In this environment, FEMA and the NFIP can be hugely important to homeowners affected by flooding. The program, set up in 1968 and backed by taxpayers, offers up to $250,000 for homes and $500,000 for nonresidential buildings to those living in one of the roughly 22,600 communities adhering to standards set by NFIP and FEMA.

But the program only covers a fraction of the costs Americans often face after a natural disaster. The cost of flood insurance in the private market, meanwhile, has risen in recent years, becoming unaffordable for many.
Another Blow to FEMA and NFIP

Congress’ failure to extend NFIP could make this dire situation even worse. "For years now, dysfunction in meeting September 30 deadlines has created uncertainty for NFIP and delays in disaster relief just as disaster season is intensifying," said Jordan Haedtler, a spokesperson for the Insurance Fairness Project, in a statement shared with Newsweek.

"Federal cuts to FEMA and NOAA have already inflicted huge costs on communities and threatened the availability of insurance throughout the country," he said. "A lapse in the NFIP would make our climate-driven insurance and housing affordability crisis even worse."

First, new flood insurance policies will not be issued, and existing policies will not be eligible for renewal. NFIP policies that were entered into before September 30 will remain in effect until the end of their one-year term.

Second, real estate transactions in flood plains, according to the Insurance Fairness Project, will be frozen.

Third, the NFIP’s ability to borrow from the U.S. Treasury will be slashed from $30.425 billion to $1 billion, significantly limiting the program’s ability to pay claims in the event of a major disaster.

The program has been in debt for a long time now. While the program had a $16 billion debt forgiven in 2017, its total debt has once again ballooned to over $22.5 billion. Earlier this year, it borrowed $2 million from the U.S. Treasury to help cover claims linked to Hurricanes Helene and Milton.

A major hurricane has yet to make landfall this year. However, this has been a devastating year in terms of flooding in America. The National Weather Service has already issued more than 4,000 flash flood warnings so far in 2025, setting a record in U.S. history. More than 130 people, including many children, died in Texas this summer when the Guadalupe River burst its banks.

A Looming Government Shutdown

The nation is facing a government shutdown at midnight on Tuesday, unless Republican and Democrat leaders in Congress and the Senate agree to a deal that would allow the funding bill to move forward and be signed into law.

The two parties have found themselves at odds over what to include in the funding bill. Democrats want the stopgap bill to include health care protections, including extensions of enhanced premium tax credits under the Affordable Care Act set to expire by the end of 2025. Republicans want to pass the bill without these Obamacare tax credits, and have refused to make concessions to Democrats for the past several weeks.

President Donald Trump is set to meet with top Democratic and Republican congressional leaders at the White House on Monday to find a way to keep the government funded and running. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-LA, and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., are set to attend.

"President Trump has once again agreed to a meeting in the Oval Office," Jeffries and Schumer said in a joint statement issued on Saturday. "As we have repeatedly said, Democrats will meet anywhere, at any time and with anyone to negotiate a bipartisan spending agreement that meets the needs of the American people. We are resolute in our determination to avoid a government shutdown and address the Republican health care crisis. Time is running out."

.



JUST IN: Pete Hegseth Officially Sends Troops Into Portland








by Kaley
Sep. 29, 2025

Under orders from President Trump, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth has just officially ordered National Guard troops to Portland, OR.

They will be deployed there for 60 days in order to crack down on the liberal hellscape.


Check it out:

BREAKING: Secretary of War Pete Hegseth has officially ordered National Guard troops into Portland for the next 60 days pic.twitter.com/jeeRT02yAm

BREAKING: Secretary of War Pete Hegseth has officially ordered National Guard troops into Portland for the next 60 days pic.twitter.com/jeeRT02yAm

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) September 28, 2025

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) September 28, 2025


Yesterday, President Trump announced that he was directing Hegseth to deploy the National Guard:

"At the request of Secretary of Homeland Security, @Sec_Noem, I am directing @SecWar, Pete Hegseth, to provide all necessary Troops to protect War ravaged Portland, & any of our ICE Facilities under siege from attack by Antifa, & other domestic terrorists…" – President Trump pic.twitter.com/UEyeCWoqHY

"At the request of Secretary of Homeland Security, @Sec_Noem, I am directing @SecWar, Pete Hegseth, to provide all necessary Troops to protect War ravaged Portland, & any of our ICE Facilities under siege from attack by Antifa, & other domestic terrorists..." - President Trump pic.twitter.com/UEyeCWoqHY

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) September 27, 2025

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) September 27, 2025



BREAKING: President Trump has directed Secretary of War Pete Hegseth to deploy U.S. military troops to protect ICE facilities under nightly siege by Antifa in Portland, Oregon.

Trump wrote on Truth Social: “At the request of Secretary of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem, I am… pic.twitter.com/KjCyOvKXbx

BREAKING: President Trump has directed Secretary of War Pete Hegseth to deploy U.S. military troops to protect ICE facilities under nightly siege by Antifa in Portland, Oregon.

Trump wrote on Truth Social: “At the request of Secretary of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem, I am… pic.twitter.com/KjCyOvKXbx

— RedWave Press (@RedWave_Press) September 27, 2025

— RedWave Press (@RedWave_Press) September 27, 2025



The troops are authorized to use “full-force,” if necessary.


However, as expected, Oregon is already pushing back with a lawsuit against the Trump administration.

Reuters has more:

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Sunday ordered 200 Oregon National Guard troops to be deployed under federal authority while the state filed a lawsuit challenging President Donald Trump‘s move to send military forces into the Democratic-run city of Portland.
The Republican president on Saturday announced plans to send troops into Portland, saying they would be used to protect federal immigration facilities against “domestic terrorists” and that he was authorizing them to use “full force, if necessary.”
Trump’s deployments of military forces into other municipalities led by Democrats, including Los Angeles and Washington, D.C., have spurred legal challenges and protests.
Oregon’s suit was filed against Trump, Hegseth and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem in federal court in Portland on Sunday by Democratic Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield. The suit accused Trump of exceeding his powers.
“Citing nothing more than baseless, wildly hyperbolic pretext – the President says Portland is a ‘War ravaged’ city ‘under siege’ from ‘domestic terrorists.’ Defendants have thus infringed on Oregon’s sovereign power to manage its own law enforcement activity and National Guard resource,” the lawsuit said.
The lawsuit stated that protests against the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency in Portland have been small and relatively contained since June.
Trump’s planned deployment caught many at the Pentagon by surprise, six U.S. officials told Reuters, speaking on condition of anonymity. On Sunday, Hegseth signed a memo ordering 200 Oregon National Guard troops deployed under federal authority. The memo was made public as an attachment to Oregon’s lawsuit.



The White House is responding to Oregon’s lawsuit, defending Hegseth’s action as both fully legal and long overdue.

Per CBS News:

In response to the lawsuit, White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson told CBS News Mr. Trump “is using his lawful authority” to send troops to Portland, saying that troops are being sent to protect federal assets and personnel “following months of violent riots where officers have been assaulted and doxxed by left-wing rioters.”

Local officials, including Gov. Kotek and Portland Mayor Keith Wilson, have pushed back on Mr. Trump’s comments and plans to send troops to the city.

“When the president and I spoke yesterday, I told him in very plain language that there is no insurrection or a threat to public safety that necessitates military intervention in Portland or any other city in our state, despite this, and with all evidence to the contrary, he has chosen to disregard Oregonian safety and ability to govern themselves,” Kotek said at a virtual news conference on Sunday.

She said that there have been some demonstrations near a federal facility, but Portland police and federal officials there are capable of handling the situation.

“And when people cross the line … there’s unlawful activity, people are being held accountable,” Kotek said.

The governor called the deployment of troops unlawful and said that it will make residents less safe.


Send in the troops!

It’s a really bad time to be an Antifa terrorist…

What do you think?


----------------------

From WLT Report
Link: https://wltreport.com/2025/09/28/jus...oops-portland/







.

Attachment 2576910

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump has had one refrain in recent days when asked about the looming government shutdown.

By SEUNG MIN KIM

Will there be a shutdown? Yes, Trump says, “because the Democrats are crazed.” Why is the White House pursuing mass firings, not just furloughs, of federal workers? Trump responds, “Well, this is all caused by the Democrats.”

Is he concerned about the impact of a shutdown? “The radical left Democrats want to shut it down,” he retorts.

“If it has to shut down, it’ll have to shut down,” Trump said Friday. “But they’re the ones that are shutting down government.”

In his public rhetoric, the Republican president has been singularly focused on laying pressure on Democrats in hopes they will yield before Wednesday, when the shutdown could begin, or shoulder the political blame if they don’t. That has aligned Trump with House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., who have refused to accede to Democrats’ calls to include health care provisions on a bill that will keep the government operating for seven more weeks.

Those dynamics could change Monday, when the president has agreed to host Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., Johnson and Thune. Democrats believe the high-stakes meeting means the GOP is feeling pressure to compromise with them.

Still, Republicans say they are confident Democrats would be faulted if the closure comes. For Trump, the impact would go far beyond politics. His administration is sketching plans to implement mass layoffs of federal workers rather than simply furloughing them, furthering their goal of building a far smaller government that lines up with Trump’s vision and policy priorities.

This time, it’s the Democrats making policy demands

The GOP’s stance — a short-term extension of funding, with no strings attached — is unusual for a political party that has often tried to extract policy demands using the threat of a government shutdown as leverage.

In 2013, Republicans refused to keep the government running unless the Affordable Care Act was defunded, a stand that led to a 16-day shutdown for which the GOP was widely blamed. During his first term, Trump insisted on adding funding for a border wall that Congress would not approve, prompting a shutdown that the president, in an extraordinary Oval Office meeting that played out before cameras, said he would “take the mantle” for.

“I will be the one to shut it down,” Trump declared at the time.

This time, it’s the Democrats making the policy demands.

They want an extension of subsidies that help low- and middle-income earners who buy insurance coverage through the Obama-era health care law. They also want to reverse cuts to Medicaid enacted in the GOP’s tax and border spending bill this year. Republican leaders say what Democrats are pushing for is too costly and too complicated to negotiate with the threat of a government shutdown hanging over lawmakers.

Watching all this is Trump. He has not ruled out a potential deal on continuing the expiring subsidies, which some Republicans also want to extend.

“My assumption is, he’s going to be willing to sit down and talk about at least one of these issues that they’re interested in and pursuing a solution for after the government stays open,” Thune said in an Associated Press interview last week. “Frankly, I just don’t know what you negotiate at this point.”

Back and forth on a White House sit-down

At this point, Trump has shown no public indication he plans to compromise with Democrats on a shutdown, even as he acknowledges he needs help from at least a handful of them to keep the government open and is willing to meet with them at the White House.

Last week, Trump appeared to agree to sit down with Schumer and Jeffries and a meeting went on the books for Thursday. Once word got out about that, Johnson and Thune intervened, privately making the case to Trump that it was not the time during the funding fight to negotiate with Democrats over health care, according to a person familiar with the conversation who was not authorized to discuss it publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity.

Not long after hearing from the GOP leaders, Trump took to social media and said he would no longer meet with the two Democrats “after reviewing the details of the unserious and ridiculous demands being made by the Minority Radical Left Democrats.” Republicans privately acknowledge Trump’s decision to agree to a meeting was a misstep because it gave Democrats fodder to paint Trump as the one refusing to negotiate.

“Trump is literally boycotting meeting with Democrats to find a solution,” Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., wrote on the social media site X before Trump reversed course again and agreed to meet with the leadership. “There is no one to blame but him. He wants a shut down.”

It was not immediately clear what led Trump over the weekend to take a meeting he had once refused. Schumer spoke privately with Thune on Friday, pushing the majority leader to get a meeting with the president scheduled because of the approaching funding deadline, according to a Schumer aide. A Thune spokesman said in response that Schumer was “clearly getting nervous.”

Another reason why Democrats suspect Trump would be fine with a shutdown is how his budget office would approach a closure should one happen.

The administration’s strategy was laid out in an Office of Management and Budget memo last week that said agencies should consider a reduction in force for federal programs whose funding would lapse, are not otherwise funded and are “not consistent” with the president’s priorities. A reduction in force would not only lay off employees but also eliminate their positions, triggering yet another massive upheaval in the federal workforce.

Jeffries argued that Trump and his top aides were using the “smoke screen of a government shutdown caused by them to do more damage.”

.




Vice President Vance ROASTS Lunatic Left: “Democrats Want to Take from American People In Order to Give Taxpayer-Funded Healthcare to Illegal Immigrants”








by Jim Hoft Sep. 28, 2025

Democrats are threatening to shut down the government this week unless Republicans spend billions in taxpayer money to pay for healthcare for illegal immigrants.

Democrats think this is a winner.

And you wonder why the left’s approval ratings are in the cellar!

Vice President J.D. Vance spelled this out on FOX News Sunday.

Martha MacCallum: Last question, Vice President. This government shutdown issue looming next week, how do you see this? And are you opposed to a shutdown, or do you think there would be advantages to that potentially?

Vice President J.D. Vance: Well, look, we don’t want to shut down the government, Martha, but it’s really up to the Democrats.

Under our system, you need 60 Senate Democrats to vote for the clean, continuing resolution that the President and House Republicans have put forward.

I think it’s preposterous, Martha. I think the American people really should pay attention to the fact that Democrats are threatening to shut down the entire government because they want to give hundreds of billions of dollars of health care benefits to illegal aliens. I’ve never seen anything like it. I’ve never seen a political party actually advertising the fact that they want to shut down every essential function of government, and they want to use that as leverage so that they get more money for illegal alien health care benefits.

It’s such a stark contrast between Republicans who are trying to put the interests of the American people first, and Democrats who I think would want to take money from the American people to give benefits to illegal aliens.

We don’t want to shut down the government. But if Democrats refuse to just pass this clean, continuing resolution, that’s exactly what’s going to happen. I think the Democrats are going to bear the responsibility for it.

Martha MacCallum: All right, we’ll see what happens. Vice President Vance, thank you very much. Good to have you with us on Fox.


Via Rapid Response 47.

The contrast could not be more clear: Republicans are trying to keep the government open and put the interest of Americans first.

Meanwhile, Democrats want to take from the American people in order to give taxpayer-funded healthcare to illegal immigrants. pic.twitter.com/cGlqrF1Cip

The contrast could not be more clear: Republicans are trying to keep the government open and put the interest of Americans first.

Meanwhile, Democrats want to take from the American people in order to give taxpayer-funded healthcare to illegal immigrants. pic.twitter.com/cGlqrF1Cip

— JD Vance (@JDVance) September 28, 2025

— JD Vance (@JDVance) September 28, 2025



--------------------


From The Gateway Pundit
Link: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/202...emocrats-want/






.

.




US Ready to Replace All Russian Gas and Oil in Europe: Secretary Wright Warns EU of Moscow Dependency, Trade Agreement Compliance, and Trump's Peace Agenda Against Putin







By Joana Campos, Sep. 28, 2025

US Energy Secretary Chris Wright delivered a strong message to Europe in a recent Fox News interview, asserting that his country is prepared "today" to fully displace the natural gas from Russia entering the continent, as well as all refined petroleum products from Moscow.

US says it can replace all Russian gas and oil in Europe — “we’re ready to serve their needs,” says Energy Sec. Wright

He doesn't mention that it will cost the Europeans 3 times as much and have to be transported halfway around the world. pic.twitter.com/roRbDtGC5b

— Chay Bowes (@BowesChay) September 24, 2025

«America is ready today to displace all the Russian gas entering Europe, and also all Russian refined petroleum products… We have the capacity. "We are prepared to meet your needs," the official declared.


This statement did not come out of nowhere. Wright, a petroleum engineer with decades of experience in the energy industry, led a six-day tour across Europe. He visited Milan, Italy, to participate in GasTech 2025 , where he delivered a keynote speech on Trump's commitment to increasing gas exports. There, he emphasized how US gas strengthens global stability, lowers prices, and provides a reliable alternative to “adversarial” sources like Russia.

At today’s U.S. Secretaries’ Press Conference at Gastech 2025, Secretary Chris Wright, 17th Secretary of Energy, United States, shared his perspective on America’s role in global energy markets:

“We are massively focused on growing America's energy production. The more energy we… pic.twitter.com/HBomlzpmt9

— Gastech Exhibition & Conference (@GastechEvent) September 10, 2025

From Milan, Wright traveled to Brussels, Belgium, to meet with members of the European Parliament and the European Commission. In those discussions, I have highlighted the benefits of transatlantic energy alliances.

I have urged an end to Europe's dependence on Russian oil and gas, criticizing policies that raise costs and hinder long-term agreements within the EU.

The context is critical. Since Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Europe has drastically reduced its reliance on Moscow's energy. Previously, Russia supplied 45% of the EU's gas; in the first eight months of 2025, that figure dropped to 12%, while US liquefied natural gas (LNG) imports rose to 26%, surpassing Norway as the top supplier.

However, the shift is not complete. In the second quarter of 2025, 8% of the EU's gas still arrived via Russian pipelines. Additionally, Russian LNG imports hit record levels in 2024, with 20 billion cubic meters delivered through the TurkStream pipeline and 32 billion in LNG shipments.

Hungary and Slovakia, reliant on the Druzhba pipeline, import around 100,000 barrels daily of Russian crude, with Budapest increasing its dependence from 61% pre-invasion to 86% in 2024. Wright tied this offer to Donald Trump's peace agenda.»

They are working in Europe to displace Russian energy, perhaps not as quickly as we'd like. The United States is prepared today to replace all the Russian gas entering Europe, as well as all Russian refined petroleum products.

That's why I spent six days there meeting with European leaders, assuring them we have the capacity and are ready to meet their needs; and the president's agenda is peace—and to achieve peace, we must leave Putin without resources," he explained on Fox News.

This strategy is not new for the Trump administration. In July 2025, the EU and US signed an even trade agreement: the European bloc committed to purchasing $750 billion in US oil, gas, and nuclear fuel by the end of 2028.

Wright views this as a framework to triple US imports, which already reached €76 billion in 2024. But Trump has toughened his stance. In his September 23, 2025, address to the United Nations General Assembly, he lashed out at the EU for "funding a war against itself" by continuing to buy Russian energy. “They must immediately cease all energy purchases from Russia,” he demanded.

He has conditioned new sanctions on Moscow to NATO fully cutting those ties. The pressure worked. On September 19, the European Commission proposed moving up the end of Russian LNG imports from December 31, 2027, to January 1, 2027.

This is part of the 19th sanctions package, which includes designating 118 vessels of Russia's "shadow fleet" and banning reinsurance for listed tankers. This energy offensive by Trump is a strategic masterstroke. It reinforces US dominance in global markets, weakens Putin's war funding—which generates €1.1 billion annually from the EU alone—and forces Europe to choose: reliable allies or an aggressor using gas as a weapon.


The contrast with the Biden era is clear. Under Trump, fossil fuel production will rise by 3 million barrels of oil equivalent daily, with a focus on gas. This not only secures jobs in Texas and Louisiana but also exports "freedom gas."

Let us reflect: How much longer will Europe fund Putin's aggression while preaching democracy? The European left, with its green obsession, has raised costs and delayed the Russian cut-off, leaving allies like Ukraine bleeding.


Trump, with conservative pragmatism, offers not charity but a deal: peace through economic strength. If the EU chooses to keep buying from Moscow, it not only betrays Kyiv but also mortgages its sovereignty to a dictator.

It's time for Europe to wake up: energy dependence is a chain, and the US holds the key.


--------------------

Source: Gateway Hispanic
Link: https://gatewayhispanic.com/2025/09/...ssian-gas-oil/






.

Attachment 2576908

Miller allegedly "plagiarized" from Adolf Hitler's propaganda chief, Joseph Goebbels.

By Nur Ibrahim

On Sept. 21, 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump and members of his administration, including White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, spoke at a memorial service for the late conservative activist Charlie Kirk. The Turning Point USA co-founder was shot dead Sept. 10 during a Utah college speaking event. Police later arrested a suspect, Tyler Robinson.

In the aftermath, Republicans such as U.S. Vice President JD Vance sought to paint the shooting as a result of "left-wing extremism" even though investigators have not connected the suspect to any left-wing groups, as of this writing.

Miller, an architect of Trump's most exclusionary immigration policies who has has been accused of expressing white nationalist rhetoric, also spoke at Kirk's memorial. Many online compared his words to those of Joseph Goebbels, Nazi leader Adolf Hitler's propaganda chief. According to one post, Miller "plagiarized" his speech from a 1932 Goebbels address titled "The Storm is Coming":

Stephen Miller's speech at Charlie Kirk's memorial was essentially plagiarized. See if you can spot the similarities.

The Storm is Coming by Joseph Goebbels (1932)

"So our dead comrade Horst Wessel wrote, and we are fulfilling his prophesy. The others may lie, slander, and pour their scorn on us — their political days are numbered."

"They promised you, workers, citizens and creative Germans, a Reich of freedom and beauty and dignity."

"People, rise up, and storm, break loose!"

"You are the witnesses, the builders, the will-bearers of our idea and our worldview."

"Well, we the people have awakened! We have risen against oppression, 15 million people have joined in an army of revenge."

"You, men, women and comrades, are the bearers, witnesses, builders and finishers of this unique people's uprising… We have served the truth, and only the truth. For twelve years, they have insulted and outlawed and slandered and persecuted us."


Miller's and Goebbels' speeches have rhetorical similarities, including the use of "storm" imagery, the call to people to "rise," the exhortations to "build," and the idea of seeking vengeance for the death of a key figure in their movements. Miller did not plagiarize Goebbels' speech word for word, but some similarities exist. Furthermore, Democrats and watchdog groups have accused Miller of frequently promoting and repeating neo-Nazi and white nationalist views.

While we cannot outright confirm that Miller copied Goebbels' speech, we can observe the similarities. Whether Miller intended for such similarities to appear can only be confirmed by Miller himself. We have reached out to The White House to learn more about Miller's inspirations for the speech. A spokesperson did not respond to our queries and questioned the basis for writing such an article.

Below, we analyze the language of Miller's speech and compare it to Goebbels' "The Storm is Coming," which Goebbels delivered in Berlin just weeks before the Nazis would win elections to become the largest German political party.

Miller began his speech with a reminder of Kirk's death and the "righteous fury" that would result (emphasis ours):

The day that Charlie died the angels wept. But those tears had been turned into fire in our hearts. And that fire burns with a righteous fury that our enemies cannot comprehend or understand.

In his 1932 speech, Goebbels referenced Horst Wessel, a member of the Nazi paramilitary forces whom Communists fatally shot in 1930. Nazi propaganda turned him into a martyr, as he had also written song lyrics that later became a Nazi Party anthem. Goebbels used Wessel's death to call for revenge against the enemies of the Nazi Party (emphasis ours):

Our campaign spreads to all of Germany, and once again the ears hear, the eyes see, the heart beats faster and the senses clear:

"The day of freedom and prosperity is coming!"

So our dead comrade Horst Wessel wrote, and we are fulfilling his prophecy. The others may lie, slander, and pour their scorn on us — their political days are numbered.


Like the title of Goebbels' speech "The Storm is Coming," Miller frequently referenced a "storm" in response to Kirk's death (emphasis ours):

When I see [Kirk's widow] Erika and her strength and her courage, I'm reminded of a famous expression: "The storm whispers to the warrior that you cannot withstand my strength, and the warrior whispers back, I am the storm."

Erika is the storm. We are the storm. And our enemies cannot comprehend our strength, our determination, our resolve, our passion.


Goebbels stated in the 1932 speech: "Together we share the words of the poet: 'People, rise up, and storm, break loose!'"

Goebbels continued by heralding the ascent of Hitler, who he said represented millions of workers and farmers. He then exhorted listeners directly: "You are the witnesses, the builders, the will-bearers of our idea and our worldview."

Miller, too, referenced the idea of building (emphasis ours):

Our lineage and our legacy hails back to Athens, to Rome, to Philadelphia, to Monticello. Our ancestors built the cities. They produced the art and architecture. They built the industry.

[…]

We are the ones who build. We are the ones who create. We are the ones who lift up humanity. You thought you could kill Charlie Kirk. You have made him immortal. You have immortalized Charlie Kirk. And now millions will carry on his legacy. And we will devote the rest of our lives to finishing the causes for which Charlie gave his last measure of devotion. You cannot defeat us. You cannot slow us. You cannot stop us. You cannot deter us.


Both speeches called for revenge, with Goebbels stating (emphasis ours):

Well, we the people have awakened! We have risen against oppression, 15 million people have joined in an army of revenge. They who accepted their nice suits from the Sklareks [Jewish brothers involved in a Berlin financial scandal] can hardly imagine that an honest German worker will spend his starvation wages for a decent brown shirt.

Miller stated (emphasis ours):

The light will defeat the dark. We will prevail over the forces of wickedness and evil. They cannot imagine what they have awakened.

They cannot conceive of the army that they have arisen in all of us because we stand for what is good, what is virtuous, what is noble. And to those trying to incite violence against us, those trying to foment hatred against us, what do you have? You have nothing. You are nothing. You are wickedness. You are jealousy. You are envy. You are hatred. You are nothing. You can build nothing. You can produce nothing. You can create nothing.

Miller's speech also referenced civilization and the West: "You have no idea how determined we will be to save the civilization, to save the West."

Whether Miller directly drew from Goebbels' speech is pure speculation, though both relied on propaganda's rhetorical tools that political figures have used throughout history. Criticism of Miller over his alleged history of promoting white nationalist and neo-Nazi views, as well as his restrictive immigration policies, is necessary context.

.



Jim Comey Has a History of Lying – He Once Used WaPo as a Vehicle to Push a Lie








September 28, 2025 by Joe Hoft


Fired FBI Director James Comey has a history of lies. In one instance he used the WaPo to promote his lie.


In May of 2019, Comey wrote an Op-ed for Deep State WaPo (Washington Post). He couldn’t help it. He manufactured a lie in his report and was outed by George Papadopoulos.

…Former FBI Director and Dirty Cop James Comey unleashed on President Trump in an Op-ed at the far left Washington Post.

Only a far left publication would put an oped from James Comey in its publication.

Regardless, and not unexpectedly, Comey lied throughout his hit piece:

Comey lied about the timing of the DNC ‘hack’.

In WP op-ed, @Comey says that @GeorgePapa19 knew about Russian DNC hack 'seven weeks before we [FBI] did.' Would be news to Mueller. https://t.co/fkaAoUm9GV pic.twitter.com/mNWaPI0o3G

— Byron York (@ByronYork) May 28, 2019

Comey claims that former Trump campaign volunteer George Papadopoulos knew about Russian leaks weeks before the FBI did. This is a lie since the asset from the FBI, Stefan Halper, was the one who leaked this information to Papadopoulos. Also, this is not supported by Comey partner in crime, Robert Mueller’s report.

Papadopoulos had some choice words for Comey – calling him a nut. He also tweeted in response, that Comey’s own asset, Joseph Mifsud, provided him that information.

Comey is a nut. He says I knew about the “DNC hacking” 7 weeks before it happened? I never heard the word DNC or Podesta until the summer. By the way, Jim, your OWN ASSET, Joseph Mifsud, provided me that info about “Clinton and the Russians.” New investigations have launched!

— George Papadopoulos (@GeorgePapa19) May 28, 2019

We gave Comey a bit of a break, noting: No big deal for Comey, his partner in crime Mueller also stated Mifsud was a Russian in his report. This too was a lie as we now know Mifsud was a Western asset.

Jim Comey is not someone anyone should ever trust.


--------------

From Joe Hoft
Link: https://joehoft.com/jim-comey-has-a-...to-push-a-lie/





.

Attachment 2576906


President Donald Trump filled his first 100 days back in office with the same relentless lying and inaccuracy that was a hallmark of his first presidency and his 2016 and 2024 presidential campaigns.

By Daniel Dale

Some of Trump’s 2025 false claims were about consequential policy matters, others about trivial personal fixations. Some were sophisticated distortions about obscure subjects, others obvious fictions about issues average Americans experience in their daily lives. Many were ad-libbed or posted on social media, but many were scripted into prepared remarks.

Aside from the staggering frequency and the trademark brazenness, what stood out was how repetitive Trump’s lying was. Though he regularly sprinkled in some fresh deception, he deployed a core batch of favored falsehoods again and again – undeterred by the fact that many of these claims had been publicly debunked for months or even years.

Here is a list of 100 separate false claims from Trump since his inauguration on January 20, fact-checked concisely with hyperlinks to more information. This is not a comprehensive list of the president’s false claims during this period (there were well over 100 in all) or a count of how many total times he was inaccurate (he uttered many of these 100 claims over and over again).

Inflation

1. Falsely claimed in April that grocery prices “are down” and “WAY DOWN.” Grocery prices had continued to increase since he took office – and the jump from February to March, about 0.49%, was the biggest one-month increase since October 2022.

2. Falsely claimed in April that “the cost of eggs has come down like 93, 94% since we took office.” The consumer price of eggs hit a record high in March, and while they might well have fallen in April, the decline certainly wasn’t 93% or 94%; wholesale egg prices had fallen roughly 52% since the week Trump took office.

3. Falsely claimed April 17 that gas prices had fallen to $1.98 per gallon in two states the day prior. In fact, no state’s average gas price was below $2.70 per gallon the day prior, according to data from AAA – and of the tens of thousands of individual stations tracked by the firm GasBuddy, not a single one was selling for under $2.19 per gallon that day.

4. Falsely claimed there was “no inflation” during his first presidency. Inflation was relatively low, but it existed; prices rose about 8% from the beginning of Trump’s term to the end. And year-over-year inflation was 1.4% in the month he left office, January 2021.

5. Falsely claimed President Joe Biden’s administration had the highest inflation “in the history of our country.” Trump could have fairly said the year-over-year US inflation rate hit a 40-year high under Biden in June 2022, when it was 9.1%, but that was not close to the all-time record of 23.7% , set in 1920. Trump’s claim was also wrong if he was claiming there was record cumulative inflation over the course of Biden’s presidency. It was about 21%, compared to about 49% during President Jimmy Carter’s term.

6. Falsely claimed the price of bacon “quadrupled” during Biden’s presidency. Federal statistics show the average price of a pound of sliced bacon in December 2024, Biden’s last full month in office, was up about 19% since January 2021, the month Biden was inaugurated; the average price in January 2025, Biden’s last partial month in office, was up about 21% since January 2021. Neither was close to the 300% increase Trump claimed.

7. Falsely claimed the price of apples doubled during Biden’s presidency. Federal statistics show the price of apples increased by about 7% between the month Biden was sworn in as president and December 2024; it was about an 8% increase between January 2021 and January 2025. Neither was close to the 100% increase Trump claimed.

Trade, the economy, taxes

8. Falsely claimed that, before he came back to office, “We were losing $2 trillion a year on trade.” The total US deficit in goods and services trade in 2024 was about $918 billion; if you count only goods trade and ignore the services trade at which the US excels, it was about $1.2 trillion, still far shy of Trump’s figure. (And economists widely reject Trump’s notion that a trade deficit, the difference between the value of US imports and exports in a given year, is a loss.)

9. Falsely claimed in early April that the US was already taking in $2 billion, $3 billion, or even $3.5 billion per day in tariff revenue. The actual figure was in the hundreds of millions at most, not $2 billion, and it’s important to note that US importers, not foreign exporters, pay the tariff revenue.

10. Falsely claimed the US has a “$350 billion” trade deficit with Mexico. Federal statistics show the 2024 deficit with Mexico in goods and services trade was about $179 billion; it was about $182 billion in goods trade alone.

11. Falsely claimed, after an interviewer reminded him that not a single tariff deal with another country had been announced yet, “I’ve made 200 deals.” He simply had not done so, and his supposed explanation for this assertion – “The deal is a deal that I choose…We are a department store, and we set the price” – did not substantiate it.

12. Falsely claimed, while touting the supposed benefits of tariffs, that Honda “just announced” it is building “a really big plant in Indiana.” Honda subsequently told CNN: “Honda did not announce plans for a new plant in the U.S. at this time.” Reuters, citing anonymous sources, had reported that Honda was planning to build its next-generation Civic hybrid in Indiana rather than Mexico as originally planned, but the report did not say Honda was building a new factory.

13. Falsely claimed “the United States was proportionately the wealthiest it has ever been” from 1789 to 1913, when tariffs made up a higher percentage of federal revenue, and that 1870 to 1913, before the reintroduction of the federal income tax, was “the richest period in the history of the United States, relatively speaking.” Trump didn’t explain what he meant by “proportionately the wealthiest” or “the richest…relatively speaking,” but economists say that by any standard measure, the US is far wealthier today than it was in the early 20th century and prior; per capita gross domestic product is now many times higher than it was then.

14. Falsely claimed he signed “the largest tax cut in history” during his first presidency. Expert analyses have found his 2017 tax cut law was not the largest in US history, either in percentage of gross domestic product or in inflation-adjusted dollars.

Ukraine and Russia

15. Falsely claimed Ukraine started the war with Russia, saying, “You should’ve never started it. You could’ve made a deal.” Russia started the war, annexing Ukraine’s Crimea region in 2014 and then launching a full-scale invasion in 2022.

16. Falsely claimed the US had provided “$350 billion” in wartime aid to Ukraine. There is no basis for this figure. According to the Kiel Institute for the World Economy, a German think tank that closely tracks wartime aid to Ukraine, the US had committed about $135 billion in wartime military, financial and humanitarian aid to Ukraine through February 2025 (at current exchange rates) and actually allocated about $130 billion of that sum.

17. Falsely claimed Europe had provided $200 billion less in aid to Ukraine than the US had. In fact, the Kiel Institute data shows that Europe – the European Union plus individual European countries – had committed and allocated more total wartime military, financial and humanitarian aid to Ukraine than the US had through February; in aid allocated, it was about $157 billion for Europe to about $135 billion for the US.

18. Falsely claimed he was clearly speaking “in jest” when he said during his 2024 campaign that he would end the war in Ukraine by “day one” of this presidency. Trump made the pledge at least 53 times in 2023 and 2024 in an entirely serious context and tone, often declaring he would end the war even before his inauguration.

19. Falsely claimed in February that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was “down at 4% approval rating.” An approval survey conducted from late November to early January found 63% of Ukrainians either approved fully or tended to approve of Zelensky’s actions as president; another survey, conducted in February, found that 57% of Ukrainians said they trusted Zelensky.

20. Falsely claimed Zelensky admitted “half of the money we sent him is ‘MISSING.’” Zelensky had made no such admission; rather, he had taken issue with inflated claims about how much US cash Ukraine had received, saying he doesn’t know where all the professed additional money has gone and that perhaps these higher figures are correct “on paper,” according to a translation by the news outlet Ukrainska Pravda.

21. Falsely claimed in mid-March that “AT THIS VERY MOMENT, THOUSANDS OF UKRAINIAN TROOPS ARE COMPLETELY SURROUNDED BY THE RUSSIAN MILITARY.” There was no encirclement of thousands of Ukrainian troops at the time, according to Ukrainian leaders, independent analysts, journalists, and, Reuters reported, US intelligence.

22. Falsely claimed that after Democratic senator and former House member Adam Schiff made up an account of Trump’s controversial 2019 phone call with Zelensky, “they found out that there was a tape of the conversation.” There is still no known US recording of that Trump-Zelensky conversation; the Schiff comments Trump was criticizing were exaggerations of a rough written transcript of the call, which was released before Schiff delivered his rendition of it.

23. Falsely claimed Russia’s Nord Stream 2 pipeline “was dead” when he left office in January 2021 because he had “stopped it.” It wasn’t dead. Trump signed sanctions related to the project into law in December 2019, when the pipeline was already about 90% complete, and the state-owned Russian company behind the project announced in December 2020, the month before Trump left office, that construction was resuming.

Immigration

24. Falsely claimed the US is the only country that grants birthright citizenship. Dozens of other countries, including Canada and Mexico, also grant automatic citizenship to people born on their soil.

25. Falsely claimed he had “571 miles of border wall” constructed during his first presidency. Federal statistics show 458 miles were built during those four years. (And the majority of them replaced previous barriers, though Trump’s replacement barriers were generally much more formidable.)

26. Falsely claimed “I completed the wall, what I was doing,” but then had wanted to build “an extension” before Biden halted construction. Trump’s phrasing here was a bit confusing, but he did not complete the wall. The 458 miles of construction fell far short of the 1,000 miles he campaigned on building, and when he left office, there were about 280 miles where wall construction had been planned but not executed.

27. Falsely claimed that his first full month back in office in 2025 had “the lowest level of illegal border crossings ever recorded.” It was the lowest number recorded since the early 1960s, but not the lowest “ever recorded.”

28. Falsely claimed that, as shown on a chart he frequently displayed at rallies, the US had the lowest level of illegal immigration ever when he left office in January 2021. In fact, the spot that the chart deceptively highlights as a historic low point was April 2020, when Trump still had more than eight months left in his term and when global migration had slowed to a trickle because of the Covid-19 pandemic. After hitting a roughly three-year low (not an all-time low) in April 2020, migration numbers at the southern border increased each month through the end of Trump’s first term.

29. Falsely claimed “21 million” migrants were allowed into the country by the Biden administration, “not even including the gotaways” who evaded detection. Through December 2024, the last full month under Biden, the country had recorded under 11 million nationwide “encounters” with migrants during that administration, including millions who were rapidly expelled from the country. Even adding in so-called gotaways who evaded detection, estimated  by House Republicans as being roughly 2.2 million, there’s no way the total is 21 million.

30. Falsely claimed foreign leaders “all over the world” emptied their jails and mental health facilities to somehow “dump” people from those facilities into the US as migrants during the Biden administration – adding that in “some countries” it was “a complete emptying of their prison system.” Trump and his allies have never provided proof that this happened in any country, let alone in many countries as he has claimed, and an expert on prison systems around the world said she knows of nothing like it.

31. Falsely claimed former Vice President Harris was the Biden administration’s “border czar.” In reality, the White House always rejected that label; Biden gave Harris a more limited immigration-related assignment in 2021, asking her to lead diplomacy with El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras in an attempt to address the conditions that prompted their citizens to try to migrate to the US.

32. Falsely claimed he “came up with” the term “caravan” in reference to migrants. He didn’t, as CNN and others noted when he previously claimed to have coined the phrase.

Foreign affairs

33. Falsely claimed he thwarted a plan from the Biden administration to spend $50 million on condoms for Hamas in Gaza, then falsely claimed it was $100 million. The tale was fictional at either figure. When Trump ally Elon Musk was challenged about the claim after it was debunked, Musk conceded that “some of the things that I say will be incorrect, and should be corrected.”

34. Falsely claimed of hostages in Gaza: “Biden got none back, by the way, just so you understand: none, zero.” Leaving aside the question of who deserves more credit for the ceasefire-for-hostages deal secured by representatives of both Trump and Biden in the final days of Biden’s presidency, Hamas released 105 hostages during a brief 2023 truce brokered in part by the Biden administration about a year before Trump’s election victory.

35. Falsely claimed there was “peace all over the world” when he left office in 2021. There were dozens of active armed conflicts at the time.

36. Falsely claimed of South Korea’s cost-sharing payments related to the US military presence in that country: “They began these Military payments during my first term.” In fact, the cost-sharing deals with South Korea began in 1991.

37. Falsely claimed Biden “terminated the deal” with South Korea. In fact, Trump’s cost-sharing deals with South Korea had expired by the time he left office, and Biden proceeded to make new ones in 2021 and 2024 - both of which included South Korean spending increases.

38. Falsely claimed the US has a deal to defend Japan in which “we pay all the money; they don’t pay anything.” Japan provides billions of dollars per year in support for the US military presence in the country.

39. Falsely claimed, “NATO was gone until I came along.” Experts on NATO say there is simply no basis for his assertion that the alliance was vanishing before he took office.

40. Falsely claimed Iran was so “broke” during his first presidency that “they weren’t giving any money to Hamas or Hezbollah.” Trump’s own administration acknowledged in the last year of that presidency that Iran was continuing to fund terror groups including Hezbollah. The funding did decline in the second half of the term, when the Iranian economy struggled because of Trump’s sanctions, but the cash for Hamas and Hezbollah never ceased during that presidency, four experts told CNN in 2024.

41. Falsely claimed he “got rid of” the ISIS terror group in just “three weeks” even though “people” had told him it would take five years. The so-called ISIS “caliphate” was declared fully liberated more than two years into Trump’s presidency, and the group continues to operate today.

42. Falsely claimed the US left “tens of billions of dollars worth” of military equipment to the Taliban when Biden pulled US troops out of the country in 2021. The Defense Department has estimated that this equipment surrendered by the Afghan forces had been worth about $7.1 billion – a chunk of the roughly $18.6 billion worth of equipment provided to the Afghan forces between 2005 and 2021.

43. Falsely claimed “38,000 people died, from our country, building the Panama Canal.” Experts say that figure is not close to accurate. While the century-old records are imprecise, they show about 5,600 people died during the canal’s American construction phase between 1903 and 1914 and that the vast majority of those people were from the Caribbean. The late historian David McCullough found that “the number of white Americans who died was about 350.”

China

44. Falsely claimed that “we have a deficit with China of over $1 trillion.” Federal statistics show the 2024 trade deficit with China in goods and services trade was about $263 billion. Even if you count only trade in goods, the 2024 deficit with China was about $295 billion, still not close to Trump’s figure.

45. Falsely claimed Biden is responsible for the trade deficit with China supposedly worsening to more than $1 trillion, saying Biden let it “get out of hand.” In fact, the 2024 deficit of about $263 billion was lower than the deficit in every year of Trump’s first presidency.

46. Falsely claimed the US took in “hundreds of billions of dollars from China” – that “they paid” – because of the tariffs he imposed during his first presidency. US importers, not foreign exporters like China, make the tariff payments, and study after study has found that Americans bore the overwhelming majority of the costs.

47. Falsely claimed no previous president had taken in even “10 cents” in revenue from tariffs on China. The US has generated revenue from tariffs on imports from China since 1789, and it was generating billions per year from such tariffs during the Obama administration.

48. Falsely claimed, “Above all, China is operating the Panama Canal.” It isn’t; Panama is. Trump could have raised legitimate questions about China’s influence in the canal area, but “operating the canal” went too far.

49. Falsely claimed that during his first presidency, he successfully pressured China into completely ceasing its purchases of oil from Iran. China’s oil imports from Iran did briefly plummet under Trump in 2019, the year the Trump administration made a concerted effort to deter such purchases, but they never stopped – and then they rose sharply again, up to hundreds of thousands of barrels per day, while Trump was still president.

Europe

50. Falsely claimed Europe doesn’t “take anything” sold by the US. While the European Union certainly has some trade barriers that impede the sale of US products there, federal statistics show the EU bought about $649 billion worth of US exports in 2024 – very far from nothing.

51. Falsely claimed, of Europe, that “they don’t take our farm products.” The US government says the EU was the fourth-largest export market for US agricultural exports in 2024, buying a record $12.8 billion worth, despite some agricultural trade barriers.

52. Falsely claimed the US has a trade deficit with the EU of “$350 billion.” Federal statistics show the 2024 deficit with the EU in goods and services trade was about $161 billion; it was about $237 billion in goods trade alone.

53. Falsely claimed of the EU, “They don’t take our cars,” adding that “we don’t have a car that’s been sold to the European Union.” According to a March 2025 report from the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association, “164,857 US-made cars were exported to the EU in 2024,” valued at about $8.8 billion at current exchange rates. Some of these are vehicles made by European automakers at plants in the US, and while US automakers have often struggled to gain popularity in Europe, it’s not true the EU categorically rejects US-made vehicles.

54. Falsely claimed the EU has a trade barrier that makes it impossible to sell US cars there – a test in which “they drop a bowling ball on the top of your car from 20 feet up in the air, and if there’s a little dent, they say, ‘No, I’m sorry, your car doesn’t qualify.’” There is no EU car safety test involving bowling balls and no requirement for cars to not experience even minor damage when a large object strikes them.

55. Falsely claimed the EU was “formed for the purpose of taking advantage of the United States.” Experts on the history of the EU have told CNN such claims are “preposterous” and “could not be more wrong or inaccurate,” noting US presidents consistently supported European integration efforts that were intended to stabilize the continent and promote prosperity.

Canada

56. Falsely claimed Canada imposes low tariffs on merely “the first little carton of milk” exported by the US, but then US exports get hit with tariffs “up to 275, 300%.” In reality, in Trump’s US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), Canada guaranteed that tens of thousands of metric tons of imported US milk per year, not merely a single carton, will face no tariffs at all – and the US is not even close to hitting its tariff-free milk quota, so US exports aren’t being hit with the high tariffs at all.

57. Falsely claimed he had Canada’s dairy-tariff situation “well taken care of” at the time he left office the first time, “but under Biden, they just kept raising it.” In fact, Canada did not raise its dairy tariffs during the Biden administration; the tariffs Trump is denouncing were left in place by his own USMCA.

58. Falsely claimed the US has a $200 billion trade deficit with Canada. Federal statistics show the 2024 deficit with Canada in goods and services trade was about $36 billion; it was about $71 billion in goods trade alone.

59. Falsely claimed Canada is “ONE OF THE HIGHEST TARIFFING NATIONS ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD.” Canada is a relatively low-tariff country on the whole, just 102nd-highest on a World Bank list of 137 countries’ trade-weighted average tariff rates in 2022 – and had a lower average (1.37%) than the US (1.49%) that year, the most recent for which data is available. (During this Trump presidency, Canada has announced new retaliatory tariffs on the US in direct response to Trump’s own new tariffs on Canada.)

60. Falsely claimed, of Canada, that “they don’t take our agricultural product for the most part”; he mentioned dairy, then said, “A little bit they do, but not much.” This is false even with Trump’s qualifiers. Canada was the world’s second-largest buyer of US agricultural exports in 2024, according to the US Department of Agriculture, purchasing about $28.4 billion worth. While Canada does limit foreign access to its dairy, egg and poultry markets in particular, the USDA notes on its website that “almost all” US agricultural exports to Canada face zero tariffs or quotas.

61. Falsely claimed Canada prohibits US banks. US banks have been operating in Canada for well over a century, and well-known US banks like Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Citigroup and US Bank operate there today. While Canada’s tight regulations have discouraged many foreign banks from opening retail branches in particular, Canada does not forbid the presence of foreign banks.

Environment and energy

62. Falsely claimed people concerned about climate change say “the ocean is going to rise one-eighth of an inch in the next 300 years.” The global average sea level is rising more per year than Trump claimed these “climate lunatics” say it will rise over 300 years; NASA reported in 2024 that the global average sea level rose about 0.3 inches from 2022 to 2023.

63. Falsely claimed the January wildfires in Los Angeles happened as a result of California’s Democratic leaders refusing to send the city sufficient water “because they were protecting a smelt,” an obscure fish species in Northern California. Experts on California water policy have explained that efforts to protect the smelt had nothing to do with the fires and did not impede the firefighting effort.

64. Falsely claimed “I broke into Los Angeles” and “I invaded Los Angeles” to provide the city with much-needed water, in late January and early February, “and the water is now flowing down.” The 2 billion-plus gallons of water Trump had released from two dams in California’s Central Valley agricultural hub did not actually go to Los Angeles; the water was directed to a dry lake basin elsewhere in the Central Valley – more than 100 miles north of Los Angeles.

65. Falsely claimed some of California’s water flows down from Canada. It doesn’t; the Columbia River that begins in Canada flows into the Pacific in Oregon.

66. Falsely claimed the Paris climate agreement cost the US “trillions of dollars that other countries were not paying.” The US has never spent or committed anywhere close to trillions of dollars in connection to the accord; Biden pledged to pay $11.4 billion per year toward international climate financing upon taking office, but Congress appropriated less than even that.

67. Falsely claimed Biden imposed a mandate “where everybody has to have an electric car.” Biden did make a legislative and regulatory push to get automakers to reduce emissions and adopt electric vehicles, but there was never a mandate requiring American consumers to have electric cars; the tailpipe rules for automakers the Biden administration unveiled in 2024 aimed to have electric vehicles make up 35% to 56% new vehicles sold in 2032.

68. Falsely claimed the Biden administration “ended up spending $9 billion on eight” charging stations for electric cars. That didn’t happen. As FactCheck.org and others have noted, Trump was distorting news articles about the slow pace at which $7.5 billion in federal funds allocated for electric charging have been spent. The articles reported that, as of March 2024, only eight charging stations had been built under the program; the articles did not say that these stations had themselves cost the entire $7.5 billion, let alone $9 billion.

69. Falsely claimed “they’re opening up coal plants all over Germany.” Germany closed 18 coal plants in 2024, its government told The Associated Press, and is not opening any new ones; the country has formally committed to phasing out coal by 2038 at the latest. It is true that Germany temporarily revived some idled coal plants after Russia slashed natural gas exports following its 2022 invasion of Ukraine, but those plants were taken offline again in 2024.

Gender, health, education, media

70. Falsely claimed two gold medalists in women’s boxing at the Olympics in Paris last year were men who “transitioned.” Neither champion had transitioned; as the International Olympic Committee noted, both were born as female, raised as female and have always competed in women’s events. Even the discredited boxing authority that controversially disqualified the women from a 2023 competition, vaguely claiming a test had found they had unfair competitive advantages, did not allege they had transitioned.

71. Falsely claimed “20 years ago, Autism in children was 1 in 10,000,” much rarer than today’s prevalence of about 1 in 31 children. Public statistics from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) show that the prevalence of autism in 2004 was 1 in 125 children.

72. Falsely claimed that “we lose 300,000 people a year to fentanyl, not 100 (thousand), not 95 (thousand), not 60 (thousand) like you read.” There is no basis for Trump’s “300,000” figure; the US has never had 100,000 reported deaths involving synthetic opioids like fentanyl in a 12-month period, let alone 300,000, and while experts say there may well be an undercount, it is not nearly as high as Trump said.

73. Falsely claimed the US ranks dead last, 40th out of 40 countries, in international education rankings. The White House couldn’t identify any education rankings where the US ranked 40th out of 40 countries; FactCheck.org and PolitiFact have noted that even among the wealthy, developed countries of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, the US ranks well above average in reading and science and below average but still far from last in math.

74. Falsely claimed that while Democratic governors closed schools during the Covid-19 pandemic, some governors “kept them open 100% of the time,” adding, “South Carolina did. Tennessee did.” The Republican governor of South Carolina ordered school closures in 2020, while the Republican governor of Tennessee recommended school closures that year (and the state’s school districts complied).

75. Falsely claimed, while alleging that CNN and MSNBC cover him too negatively, that “what they do is illegal.” It is not.

Elections and Trump’s popularity

76. Falsely claimed the 2020 election was “totally rigged.” There is no basis for the claim. Trump lost a legitimate election to Biden.

77. Falsely claimed Democrats “tried” to “rig” the 2024 election he won. There is no basis for this claim, either.

78. Falsely claimed his 2020 vote total, “almost 75 million votes,” was incorrect. The votes were counted and reported accurately, and Trump’s vote total – about 74.2 million – is his actual total.

79. Falsely claimed “Biden didn’t get 80 million votes” in 2020. Biden did; in fact, he got 81,283,501 votes.

80. Falsely claimed he got “much more than 80 million votes” in the 2024 election. Trump received about 77.3 million votes.

81. Falsely claimed his 2024 vote total is “actually much more than” the reported total, since unspecified people “cheated like hell.” Trump’s official vote total is his actual vote total, and there is no evidence of cheating by vote counters or by his Democratic foes.

82. Falsely claimed he won Wisconsin “three times.” He won it twice, in 2016 and 2024, but lost it in 2020.

83. Falsely claimed, “We’re the only country in the world that has mail-in voting.” Various other countries, including Canada, Germany, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and Spain, allow some or all voters to vote by mail, though the specifics of their policies vary.

84. Falsely claimed a commission chaired by Democratic former President Jimmy Carter concluded that “if you have mail-in voting, you’re going to have massive fraud.” Though the commission Carter co-chaired in 2005 was generally skeptical of mail-in voting, saying absentee ballots were “the largest source of potential voter fraud,” it didn’t say massive fraud was inevitable with mail-in voting; in fact, it highlighted an example of successful all-mail elections, in Oregon, and offered recommendations for making the use of mail-in ballots more secure.

85. Falsely described the Biden administration as election cheaters, saying that “the only thing they’re good at, really, is cheating” and that “anybody that cheats that much and that well is not stupid.” This is nonsense.

86. Falsely claimed in a February 11 social media post that “California just stopped counting their votes on the 2024 Presidential Election.” While California does take notably long to finish its vote counts, its elections chief certified the 2024 presidential election results on December 13, nearly two months prior to Trump’s post, and individual California counties certified their own presidential results on December 3.

87. Falsely claimed on February 21, while speaking about California and the presidential election, that “they were voting a week and a half ago.” Nobody anywhere in the country was still voting in the November 2024 presidential election in February 2025.

88. Falsely claimed “I won youth by 36 points” in the 2024 election. He didn’t say how he was defining “youth,” but the claim that Trump won youth by 36 points is clearly false; CNN exit polls showed Harris beat him among voters ages 18-24, 25-29 and 30-39. (There is an ongoing debate among experts about how exactly young people voted, but Trump certainly did not win them by 36 points.)

89. Falsely claimed his “poll numbers” are the highest “that any Republican president has ever had.” There was no reasonable basis for the claim; his approval rating, in the 40s and 50s at the time he made it, was not even close to the best of all time for a Republican president. President George W. Bush hit 92% shortly after the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, and President George H.W. Bush hit 89% at the end of the Gulf War in 1991.

90. Falsely claimed, while talking about the 2024 campaign, “We never had empty seats, it’s amazing.” There were empty seats at numerous Trump rallies in 2024, including one where he made the boast that “we never have an empty seat.”

91. Falsely claimed that when he was hours late to a 2024 rally in Michigan because he was taping a podcast interview with Joe Rogan, “Not a person left…not a person left.” Videos from the rally showed people leaving before Trump arrived; reporters from CNN and other outlets estimated that hundreds of people left.

The January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol

92. Falsely claimed the perpetrators of the Capitol riot “didn’t assault.” They did, as video after video and trial after trial made clear. The Justice Department has said more than 140 officers were assaulted on January 6 and that more than 170 people pleaded guilty to such assaults.

93. Falsely claimed the January 6 rioters “had no guns.” Multiple rioters were armed with guns.

94. Falsely claimed rioter Ashli Babbitt “was innocently standing there, they even say trying to sort of hold back the crowd,” when she was shot by a Capitol Police officer. Video evidence shows Babbitt was shot as she was trying to climb through a broken window to the Speaker’s Lobby outside the House of Representatives.

95. Falsely claimed the House select committee that investigated the attack on the Capitol “deleted and destroyed all of the information that they collected.” The committee preserved a large volume of evidence, though there has been a long-running dispute between Republicans and Democrats over the preservation of certain committee records.

96. Falsely claimed Democratic former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is “on tape” admitting that she had rejected his offer of 10,000 National Guard troops to protect the Capitol on January 6, 2021. There is no evidence Pelosi turned down or even received such an offer, and she has repeatedly rejected, not confirmed, Trump’s story about what happened. Pelosi was recorded by her daughter expressing frustration with Capitol security that day and saying, “I take responsibility for not having them just prepare for more” – not saying she had turned down a Trump offer of 10,000 troops or that, as Trump has also wrongly claimed, she was in charge of Capitol security.

Federal government

97. Falsely claimed Biden made a last-minute push before Trump returned to office to hire people with significant disabilities as air traffic controllers. The Federal Aviation Administration pilot program he was referring to was actually a years-old initiative launched during Trump’s own administration in 2019.

98. Falsely claimed “money is being paid to many” of the more than 10 million people listed in the Social Security database as being 120 years old or older. Social Security already stops payments to people listed as being age 115 and older. As a government watchdog noted in a 2023 report and the Trump-appointed acting commissioner of the Social Security Administration noted in a February 2025 statement, someone not being marked as deceased in the database doesn’t mean they’re actually receiving checks.

99. Falsely claimed that when a federal employee didn’t respond to the initial Elon Musk email blast asking them to list accomplishments from the previous week, “Usually that means that maybe that person doesn’t exist, or that person doesn’t want to say they’re working for another company while being paid by the United States government.” That’s not true; there were explanations for the early non-responses other than improper moonlighting or someone not existing while being paid as a federal employee. For one, leaders at multiple federal agencies had told their employees not to respond to the email.

100. Falsely described the special counsel investigation into Biden’s handling of classified documents, saying Biden was “essentially found guilty” and adding that “nobody knows what the ruling was.” Biden was not found guilty, “essentially” or not, and there was no judicial “ruling” at all; Biden was not even charged with a crime. The special counsel who was appointed to look into Biden’s handling of classified documents, Robert Hur, wrote in a public report that “the evidence does not establish Mr. Biden’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt” and that “several defenses are likely to create reasonable doubt as to such charges.”

.





Honest Americans Knew What Happened on Jan 6 – It Was a Setup to Overshadow the 2020 Stolen Election








September 28, 2025 by Joe Hoft


Americans knew the 2020 Election was stolen. They showed up to protest the steal and were setup in a plot ran by corrupt actors in our government and labeled violent insurrectionists.

Corrupt actors in Congress, the Biden Administration, Globalists, China, corrupt actors in the government and more worked together to create a narrative that President Trump’s supporters were violent. Not one single incident was recorded at Trump rallies in 2020 leading up to Jan 6. 1.1 million attended Trump rallies compared to less than 2,000 at Biden “rallies”. But they set Americans up and claimed good Americans praying in the Capitol were violent.

Our corrupt Government provokes attacks against the the American People! J6 was peaceful.

Christopher Wray announced he’s resigning as FBI head, the DOJ reveals that the FBI had 26 undercover assets on the Capitol grounds on J6.

Police cuff an FBI’s undercover asset, then bring him to a side room where they uncuffed him and fist bumped him.

Our corrupt Government provokes attacks against the the American People! J6 was peaceful.

Christopher Wray announced he's resigning as FBI head, the DOJ reveals that the FBI had 26 undercover assets on the Capitol grounds on J6.

Police cuff an FBI’s undercover asset, then bring… pic.twitter.com/ZT6YG9nQkp

— Freedom4Family🇺🇸 (@4familyfreedom4) December 22, 2024

Wray targeted innocent grandmas for Jan 6 but didn’t give a damn about real terrorists at the Capitol.

FBI Director Christopher Wray is obsessed with targeting Trump supporters who were at the Capitol on Jan 6, 2021, but claimed he did not know that a terrorist group called “Global Intifada” organized the illegal occupation of the Cannon House Office Building on Oct 18th.

Not only is Mayorkas willingly breaking our laws allowing terrorists to flood into our country, Wray is not investigating or arresting actual terrorists that illegally entered the Capitol complex!

FBI Director Christopher Wray is obsessed with targeting Trump supporters who were at the Capitol on Jan 6, 2021, but claimed he did not know that a terrorist group called “Global Intifada” organized the illegal occupation of the Cannon House Office Building on Oct 18th.

Not… pic.twitter.com/NczB7IGyfS

— Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene🇺🇸 (@RepMTG) November 16, 2023

Here is more on Wray dodging questions (not answering) about Jan 6. He didn’t want to tell the truth. Julie Kelly shared this last year.

As we await the DOJ IG report on Jan 6 and potential resignation of FBI Director Chris Wray, let's take a stroll down memory lane to watch Wray's changing story about use/presence of FBI informants on Jan 6: pic.twitter.com/Cot5H2QHZl

— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) December 11, 2024

The real criminals stole the election and then created the Jan 6 nightmare in their effort to crush President Trump and the American people. It only made us stronger!


--------------

From Joe Hoft
Link: https://joehoft.com/honest-americans...olen-election/







.