News

DHS Releases Data on Staggering Number of Illegal Aliens No Longer in America
News

DHS Releases Data on Staggering Number of Illegal Aliens No Longer in America

/

President Donald Trump’s deportation initiative has led to the removal of more than two million illegal aliens from the United States since January, according to new data released by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

The report indicates that approximately 600,000 deportations are on track to be completed within the first year of the administration’s nationwide enforcement effort.

DHS officials stated that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and other federal agencies have arrested more than 457,000 illegal aliens so far in 2025.

The department described the surge in arrests and removals as part of President Trump’s pledge to restore national security and enforce immigration law after years of limited federal action.

“Federal agents have made historic progress to carry out President Trump’s promise of arresting and deporting illegal aliens who have invaded our country,” DHS spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement.

She credited the initiative to “jumpstarting an agency that was vilified and barred from doing its job for the last four years,” referring to the restrictions placed on immigration enforcement under the previous administration.

According to DHS data, roughly 493,000 individuals have been formally deported since the start of President Trump’s second term, while another 1.6 million have left voluntarily, a process the agency classifies as “self-deportation.”

McLaughlin said that the administration’s policy has sent a clear message to those entering the country illegally: “Illegal aliens are hearing our message to leave now or face the consequence. Migrants are now even turning back before they reach our borders.”

The figures represent a major shift from enforcement levels under Joe Biden.

ICE reported approximately 271,000 deportations during the final year of the Biden-Harris administration, and 142,000 in 2023.

DHS has also stated that for four consecutive months, no newly apprehended border crossers have been released into the United States — a milestone that officials called a sign that “the era of open borders is over.”

The intensified enforcement has focused heavily on major sanctuary jurisdictions including Los Angeles, Chicago, and Portland, Oregon, where federal agents have faced both physical and political resistance. DHS reported that assaults against ICE officers have increased by 1,000% in 2025.

In recent months, agents have been targeted in multiple attacks, including three ambush incidents in Texas.

In one case, 29-year-old Joshua Jahn opened fire at an immigration facility in Dallas, killing two migrants awaiting deportation before being taken into custody.

Violent confrontations have also occurred in Chicago.

Earlier this week, rioters clashed with federal agents outside an ICE facility in Broadview, Illinois.

The same night, agents operating on Chicago’s South Side were attacked by a mob that surrounded their vehicles and attempted to block their exit.

According to reports, Chicago police were instructed to “stand down” during the incident, though the department has denied issuing such an order.

The confrontation remains under investigation.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has vowed that enforcement efforts will continue to expand throughout 2026, emphasizing coordination with federal, state, and local partners.

Officials said the department is preparing additional resources for major urban areas where illegal immigration and organized criminal activity remain concentrated.

Despite court challenges to several enforcement measures, DHS said it intends to continue executing the administration’s directives.

“This is just the beginning,” McLaughlin said, reaffirming the department’s commitment to prioritize deportations and border security.

The administration’s data marks the largest enforcement operation in decades and signals a significant shift in U.S. immigration policy under President Trump’s leadership.

Virginia Dem Senator Donated K to AG Candidate Who Wished Death on His Opponent’s Kids
News

Virginia Dem Senator Donated $25K to AG Candidate Who Wished Death on His Opponent’s Kids

/

Virginia Democratic Sen. Mark Warner’s campaign contributed $25,000 to the attorney general campaign of Jay Jones, who is now facing bipartisan backlash following reports of violent remarks he allegedly made about a Republican lawmaker.

According to campaign finance disclosures, the donation was made in August through Warner’s campaign committee, Mark Warner for U.S. Senate.

In addition, a joint fundraising page for Warner and Jones remains active on the Democratic Party’s fundraising platform, ActBlue.

The controversy surrounding Jones intensified after reports surfaced revealing that he compared former Virginia House Speaker Todd Gilbert, a Republican, to Adolf Hitler and Pol Pot.

In the same comments, Jones allegedly said that if given two bullets, he would “use both” to shoot Gilbert in the head.

He also reportedly stated that Gilbert and his wife should have to watch their “fascist” children die.

Jones later apologized for the comments but has refused to drop out of the race for attorney general.

Sen. Warner called the remarks “appalling” and “inconsistent with the person I’ve known,” according to Virginia Mercury.

However, Warner has not yet commented on whether he plans to ask for the return of his campaign donation or if he believes Jones should withdraw from the race.

On Monday, a second report surfaced accusing Jones of privately suggesting that “if more police officers were killed, they would shoot fewer people.”

Jones has denied making that statement.

Republicans across the country, including President Donald Trump, have urged Jones to withdraw from the race, calling his comments “violent” and “unacceptable.”

Despite the growing backlash, no major Democratic officials have rescinded their endorsements.

Warner, who serves as vice chair of the Senate Finance Committee, has long positioned himself as a critic of political violence.

He has repeatedly condemned acts of extremism, including the January 6 Capitol riot and the 2017 Charlottesville protests.

In a statement issued last month with fellow Virginia Democrats Sen. Tim Kaine and Rep. Eugene Vindman, Warner said, “The rise in political violence—which has inflicted tragedy upon the families of Republican activist Charlie Kirk and Minnesota’s House Speaker Emerita Melissa Hortman, a Democrat, and her husband Mark, and many other Americans on both sides of the aisle—is disturbing and unacceptable. We are unified in our condemnation of these attacks. It is critical to the safety of all Americans and the health of our democracy that we are able to approach our political differences with respect and without resorting to violence.”

While Warner criticized Jones’s comments, he has stopped short of calling for Jones to step aside.

Kaine has stated that Jones should remain in the race and “let voters decide.”

Vindman also reaffirmed his support for Jones over the weekend in a post on X.

Republican officials have accused Warner and other Democrats of hypocrisy for maintaining their support.

“Mark Warner has endorsed, donated to, and fundraised with Jay Jones, but won’t say whether he still supports him to be Virginia’s Attorney General after Jones called for the murder of a political opponent and his children,” said National Republican Senatorial Committee Regional Press Secretary Samantha Cantrell in a statement.

“As Americans continue to grapple with Charlie Kirk’s assassination, the answer should be easy. Jay Jones is not fit for office and Mark Warner should rescind his support and call for him to step aside immediately.”

The controversy adds to a growing list of challenges for Democrats in the state, as Republicans seek to capitalize on the fallout from the remarks in the final weeks before the election.

Bombshell Declassified Documents Released: Ukraine Worried About Biden Family Corruption
News

Bombshell Declassified Documents Released: Ukraine Worried About Biden Family Corruption

/

Newly declassified intelligence memos reveal that then–Vice President Joe Biden’s team intervened in February 2016 to block the CIA from distributing a report to policymakers about how senior Ukrainian officials viewed his son’s business dealings.

The move, described by a senior CIA official as “extremely rare and unusual,” came directly from Biden’s national security advisor, according to documents reviewed by Just the News.

“I just spoke with VP/NSA and he would strongly prefer the report not/not be disseminated,” Biden’s Presidential Daily Brief briefer told the CIA.

The report in question summarized Ukrainian officials’ private reactions to Biden’s December 2015 visit to Kyiv, during which he met with then–President Petro Poroshenko.

At the time, Biden was overseeing U.S. policy toward Ukraine following the Maidan Revolution and Russia’s annexation of Crimea.

The CIA report shows Ukrainian officials were frustrated with Biden’s visit, saying he failed to engage in substantive discussions with Poroshenko and other leaders.

NEW YORK, USA – Sep 20, 2016: US Vice President Joe Biden during a meeting with President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko in New York

Those same officials “privately mused” about U.S. media attention on Hunter Biden’s business ties in the country.

“These officials viewed the alleged ties of the U.S. Vice President’s family to corruption in Ukraine as evidence of a double-standard within the United States Government towards matters of corruption and political power,” the intelligence summary stated.

The CIA memo noted that Ukrainian officials “expressed bewilderment and disappointment” over the visit, expecting the vice president to address policy matters that were instead avoided.

It was during that December 2015 trip that Biden pressured Poroshenko to dismiss his prosecutor general, Viktor Shokin, threatening to withhold a $1 billion U.S. loan guarantee if the demand was not met.

At the time, Shokin was investigating Burisma Holdings, the Ukrainian energy firm where Hunter Biden had joined the board in May 2014.

Internal correspondence shows that then–U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt had warned Biden’s team that the U.S. viewed Burisma as corrupt.

Pyatt later told successor Marie Yovanovitch that Hunter Biden’s position “undercut the anti-corruption message the VP and we were advancing in Ukraine,” aligning with Ukrainian perceptions cited by the CIA.

Despite public claims that Shokin was corrupt, both the State Department and the European Union had assessed that his reform progress was sufficient to justify continuing financial support to Ukraine.

Just the News reported in 2023 that Biden “called an audible” aboard Air Force Two en route to Kyiv, deciding unilaterally to demand Shokin’s removal.

The newly released memos came to light after a CIA database review initiated in late 2024.

Officials who reviewed the report confirmed that it met dissemination standards at the time before Biden’s office intervened.

“Such information would have been useful to those dealing with U.S.-Ukraine policy,” one senior CIA official told Just the News, noting that the feedback represented the genuine views of high-ranking Ukrainian figures.

The same official emphasized that it was “extremely rare and unusual” for a political office outside the intelligence community to intervene in a dissemination decision.

He added that standard procedure leaves such judgments to the intelligence community, without outside political influence.

The documents do not clarify how Biden’s office became aware of the CIA report prior to its intervention.

CIA Director John Ratcliffe, confirmed by the Senate in January, said the agency’s current focus includes addressing prior instances of politicization.

“Mr. President, the CIA is being restructured at your direction to focus on our core mission and to eliminate the political – the well-documented politicization that has taken place in the intelligence community from bad actors in the past to focus on our core mission and to Make America Safe Again,” Ratcliffe said during an April Cabinet meeting.

According to a senior CIA official, Ratcliffe considered Biden’s 2016 intervention part of the politicization he has sought to address and authorized the release of the document to ensure transparency within the agency.

The disclosure marks one of several recent efforts by intelligence leadership to reveal internal findings from prior administrations.

White House Fires Back at Kamala Harris Over ‘Cackle’ and Vulgar Trump Remarks
News

White House Fires Back at Kamala Harris Over ‘Cackle’ and Vulgar Trump Remarks

/

The White House responded Tuesday to former Vice President Kamala Harris after she made vulgar remarks about members of President Donald Trump’s administration during a stop on her book tour in Los Angeles, referring to officials as “motherf**kers” and “crazy,” as reported by The New York Post.

Speaking Monday at the “A Day of Unreasonable Conversation” summit in Los Angeles, Harris claimed that the Trump administration is “trying to make people feel like they’ve lost their minds.” She added, “When in fact, these motherf**kers are crazy,” prompting loud cheers from the audience.

Following her comments, White House spokesperson Kush Desai fired back, referencing Harris’ well-known laugh that has been the subject of widespread criticism.

“Kamala Harris should listen to an audio recording of her cackle of a laugh before calling anyone crazy,” Desai said in a statement to TMZ when asked about her remarks.

Harris’ laughter has drawn ridicule for years, including during her failed 2024 presidential campaign. Critics often pointed to her distinctive laugh as a nervous response or a deflection tactic.

Vice President Kamala Harris greets the crowd in Jenison Field House on the Michigan State campus Sunday, Nov. 3, 2024.

During the 2024 presidential debate, Harris laughed off accusations from President Trump that she was aligned with Marxist ideology.

Her husband, former second gentleman Doug Emhoff, even referenced her laugh during his remarks at the 2024 Democratic National Convention, telling attendees that it was one of the things that drew him to her.

“She called me back and we talked for an hour. We laughed — you know that laugh! I love that laugh,” Emhoff said.

Democratic presidential nominee Vice President Kamala Harris is joined on stage by second gentleman Doug Emhoff after she delivered an acceptance speech during the final day of the Democratic National Convention at the United Center.

Harris is currently promoting her memoir, 107 Days, which details her short-lived presidential campaign. The Los Angeles appearance was one of several West Coast stops on her tour.

Her recent comments mark the second time in as many days that she used vulgar language to describe political opponents. Speaking at an event in San Francisco on Sunday, Harris criticized what she described as conservative “scapegoating” of the American public.

“Part of this moment requires us to also debunk some of this stuff they’re trying to sell the American people: to scapegoat, instead of owning up to the responsibility that the powerful have to have some level of concern and care, if not just basic f**king curiosity for the well-being of other people,” Harris said.

The White House’s response adds to the growing tension between Harris and the Trump administration since her departure from office.

Her remarks have drawn swift criticism from political observers, with many noting the contrast between her public image and the coarse language she used in front of a friendly audience.

Harris’ office has not yet issued a response to the White House’s comments or to requests for additional clarification about her remarks in Los Angeles or San Francisco.

Mark Halperin Rips Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries for Weak Shutdown Leadership
News

Mark Halperin Rips Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries for Weak Shutdown Leadership

/

Political analyst and journalist Mark Halperin sharply criticized Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, describing the two Democratic leaders as ineffective and dismissed even within their own party amid the ongoing government shutdown, as reported by The Gateway Pundit.

During his Friday broadcast of The Morning Meeting, Halperin named Schumer and Jeffries his “losers of the week” following their unsuccessful meeting with President Donald Trump earlier in the week.

U.S. Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick, D-Florida, and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-New York, at The Ben West Palm in downtown West Palm Beach, Fla., on February 20, 2023.

The two Democratic leaders met with the President at the White House on Monday in an attempt to negotiate a short-term spending bill to avoid a shutdown but failed to reach an agreement.

Halperin said the pair have lost credibility not only with the public but with fellow Democrats and even members of the press who traditionally defend their party.

“Never in my career have I seen two leaders so dismissed, not just by the media, which normally loves Democrats, but privately by Democratic members of the House and Senate,” Halperin said.

“People are just rolling their eyes and throwing their hands up and saying, ‘There’s nothing we can do. We’re not going to depose them now, but they are not leading us,’ in the view of Democrats saying that ‘they’re not leading through this confrontation.’”

Halperin continued, “I’ve never seen the senior Democrats in both chambers — or Republicans — I’ve never seen attitude like this.”

His remarks come as the budget standoff continues, with President Trump maintaining that his administration will not sign a deal that fails to address government spending and immigration priorities.

Schumer and Jeffries, meanwhile, have been attempting to frame the shutdown as Republican-led, though Halperin’s comments reflect frustration from within their own ranks over how the situation has been handled.

According to The Daily Caller, Halperin’s assessment signals growing discontent among Democrats who see little strategic direction from their leadership. The media’s muted defense of the party during the crisis, he added, further indicates that confidence in Schumer and Jeffries has eroded.

The exchange between the White House and Democratic leadership this week failed to produce progress on a continuing resolution, leaving federal agencies partially shuttered as negotiations remain stalled.

While previous shutdowns often resulted in significant political backlash for Republicans, early polling and commentary suggest Democrats may not escape blame this time.

Halperin’s blunt criticism highlights a broader divide inside the Democratic Party as rank-and-file members grow frustrated with what they perceive as ineffective leadership and outdated political tactics.

President Trump Goes Scorched Earth on Senator Blumenthal, Demands Investigation Over Vietnam Service Lies
News

President Trump Goes Scorched Earth on Senator Blumenthal, Demands Investigation Over Vietnam Service Lies

/

President Donald Trump is calling for an official investigation into Senator Richard Blumenthal, the Connecticut Democrat long accused of fabricating his record of military service in the Vietnam War, as reported by The Gateway Pundit.

Trump’s renewed criticism came Tuesday evening following a fiery Senate Judiciary Committee exchange in which Attorney General Pam Bondi confronted Blumenthal over his past false claims about serving in Vietnam.

WASHINGTON – February 22, 2025: President Donald Trump arrives at the White House South Lawn on Marine One after his visit to CPAC.

“Sanctimonious Richard ‘Da Nang Dick’ Blumenthal, perhaps the biggest ‘joke’ in the United States Senate, is at it again!” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

“Dick lied until the midpoint of his political career, convincing everyone, in particular the Fake News Media, that he was a great ‘War Hero’ who lived on the precipice of death in the jungles of Vietnam.”

According to Trump, Blumenthal “would talk about his life in the military in almost every speech,” describing “violent and long battles” that never actually happened.

Trump added, “He was found out to be a FRAUD. The soldiers in his so-called ‘platoon’ came forward and said that they had no idea who this guy was. He was revealed, broke down and admitted, tears flowing from his eyes, that he LIED.”

Blumenthal, now 78, has faced scrutiny for years over his misleading statements about military service. Records show that he received five draft deferments before joining the Marine Corps Reserve in 1970, where he served stateside and never deployed to Vietnam.

When the truth came to light, Blumenthal claimed he had “misspoken” and said he meant to say he served “during the Vietnam era.”

“It should be investigated, and Justice should be sought,” Trump continued.

“Right now there is a Congressman sitting in prison for lying about his past during a campaign. Well, those lies were nothing compared to those of Richard ‘Da Nang Dick’ Blumenthal, perhaps the greatest phony in the history of the United States Senate. He should be allowed to speak no longer!”

Trump’s comments followed a heated moment between Bondi and Blumenthal during Tuesday’s hearing. The senator suggested that Bondi had engaged in an improper arrangement to benefit a former law partner.

Bondi forcefully rejected the accusation. “I cannot believe that you would accuse me of impropriety when you lied about your military service!” she said. “You lied to be elected a US Senator.”

Bondi, who previously served as a prosecutor before being confirmed as Attorney General, continued, “Don’t you ever challenge my integrity. I have abided by every ethics standard. Do not question my ability to be fair and impartial as Attorney General.”

Blumenthal did not respond publicly to the renewed controversy or to Bondi’s remarks during the session.

The Connecticut Democrat has held his Senate seat since 2011 and has repeatedly brushed off criticism of his false Vietnam claims, despite military veterans and political opponents arguing that his statements constituted stolen valor.

The calls for an investigation come as Trump continues to spotlight issues of accountability among members of Congress, particularly those accused of misleading the public about their personal records or policy conduct.

Trump Considers Insurrection Act as Democrat Cities Descend Into Violence
News

Trump Considers Insurrection Act as Democrat Cities Descend Into Violence

/

President Donald Trump said Monday that he is open to invoking the Insurrection Act to federalize National Guard units in certain states if violence continues to escalate but noted that, so far, doing so has not been necessary.

Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office, the president said the option remains on the table to ensure public safety amid rising clashes between protesters and federal immigration authorities in several cities.

“So far, it hasn’t been necessary, but we have an Insurrection Act for a reason. If I had to enact it, I’d do that,” President Trump said when asked under what conditions he would use the 19th-century law.

“If people were being killed and courts were holding us up or governors or mayors were holding us up, sure, I’d do that,” he continued.

“I mean, I want to make sure that people aren’t killed. We have to make sure that our cities are safe.”

The Insurrection Act, passed in 1807, allows the president to deploy U.S. military forces domestically to restore order during times of civil unrest or insurrection.

The statute has been invoked 30 times in U.S. history, most recently in 1992, when President George H.W. Bush authorized troops to respond to the Los Angeles riots.

President Trump’s comments follow his recent authorization to deploy National Guard units to Chicago, Illinois, and Portland, Oregon — two cities that have seen ongoing conflicts between left-wing protesters and immigration enforcement officers.

However, the administration’s attempts to expand those deployments have been slowed by multiple court orders and lawsuits from state officials.

On Sunday, a federal judge issued a temporary injunction blocking the deployment of National Guard units to Portland for a second time.

The most recent order affected units from California and Texas, while an earlier ruling had already barred the use of the Oregon National Guard in the city.

In addition to Oregon, the states of California and Illinois have also filed lawsuits against the Trump administration, challenging the legality of federalizing their National Guard members without state approval.

In Illinois, a federal judge gave the administration until Wednesday at midnight to respond to the state’s complaint and scheduled a court hearing for Thursday.

Despite the ongoing legal disputes, President Trump reaffirmed his commitment to improving safety in cities experiencing high levels of violent crime and political unrest.

He cited Washington, D.C., as an example of how coordinated National Guard efforts can restore order and reduce crime.

“We have no choice but to do this,” Trump said, referencing his broader national public safety strategy.

“Portland has been on fire for years.”

The president added that he views ongoing unrest and resistance to federal authority in certain cities as a form of organized lawlessness.

“I think that’s all insurrection. I really think that’s really criminal insurrection,” he said.

The White House has identified three cities — Portland, Chicago, and Memphis, Tennessee — as top priorities in its current federal safety initiative.

The plan includes increasing cooperation between federal law enforcement and local agencies to address violent crime and to safeguard federal personnel and property.

President Trump’s remarks come amid heightened tensions between federal officials and Democratic governors who have accused the administration of overreach.

Legal experts expect the current lawsuits to determine how far the federal government can go in asserting control over National Guard deployments within individual states.

As legal proceedings continue, the president has maintained that his administration’s actions are aimed solely at ensuring the safety of American citizens.

“We have to protect people,” he said.

“We can’t allow lawlessness to continue unchecked in our cities.”

Democrats Flip in Blue New Jersey, Endorse GOP’s Jack Ciattarelli for Governor
News

Democrats Flip in Blue New Jersey, Endorse GOP’s Jack Ciattarelli for Governor

/

Republican Jack Ciattarelli is emerging as a serious contender in the New Jersey governor’s race, where he is locked in a close contest with Democratic Representative Mikie Sherrill.

The race has drawn national attention as both parties see the Garden State contest as one of the most competitive gubernatorial battles of the year.

Recent polling indicates the race is within the margin of error, with Ciattarelli gaining support in traditionally Democratic regions.

The former state assemblyman, who narrowly lost to outgoing Democratic Governor Phil Murphy in 2021, has picked up new endorsements that suggest momentum is shifting in his favor.

On Sunday, Ciattarelli secured public backing from two North Hudson County officials — North Bergen Commissioner Allen Pascual and West New York Commissioner Marcos Arroyo — both Democrats.

Their endorsements mark a significant development in a region long considered a Democratic stronghold.

“When Democrats in Hudson County are standing with us, you know change is coming,” Ciattarelli said after the announcement.

“This isn’t about party lines — it’s about fixing New Jersey, and I’m the only candidate with a plan to get it done.”

The endorsements were first reported by the New York Post and confirmed by Ciattarelli’s campaign.

In addition, The New Jersey Globe reported that former Hudson County Democratic Chairman Anthony Vainieri Jr. is expected to endorse Ciattarelli in the coming days.

Political observers note that bipartisan endorsements in Hudson County are rare and may signal growing dissatisfaction among local voters with the state’s current leadership.

Ciattarelli has campaigned heavily on issues such as property tax relief, small business support, and education reform, themes that have resonated with voters frustrated by the state’s high cost of living and ongoing fiscal challenges.

Representative Mikie Sherrill, Ciattarelli’s Democratic opponent, has faced scrutiny during the campaign over questions about her personal finances and past controversies.

Reports have highlighted that Sherrill’s net worth increased by several million dollars since her election to Congress.

In addition, past records from the U.S. Naval Academy show she did not participate in her class graduation ceremony following a cheating investigation during her time at Annapolis.

Sherrill has also drawn criticism for declining to condemn Assata Shakur, a former member of the Black Liberation Army convicted of murdering New Jersey State Trooper Werner Foerster in 1973.

Shakur escaped from prison in 1979 and fled to Cuba, where she lived in exile until her death last month.

The combination of these issues has given Ciattarelli an opening in a state where Democrats have dominated statewide elections for more than two decades.

His campaign has emphasized restoring trust in government and addressing long-term economic issues that many voters say have worsened under Democratic leadership.

Ciattarelli, a former small business owner and longtime fixture in New Jersey politics, has framed his campaign as a grassroots effort focused on bipartisan problem-solving.

“We’re building a coalition of Republicans, independents, and Democrats who know this state can do better,” he said at a campaign stop in Bergen County last week.

Political analysts point out that Ciattarelli’s narrow loss to Murphy in 2021 demonstrated that a Republican path to victory in New Jersey remains viable, particularly when Democratic turnout is lower in non-presidential election years.

With Sherrill facing growing criticism and Ciattarelli consolidating bipartisan support, the race is shaping up as one of the most closely watched contests heading into the fall.

The New Jersey gubernatorial election is scheduled for November, and both campaigns are expected to intensify outreach efforts in the coming weeks as early voting approaches.

Kamala Comes Unglued, Makes Bogus Claim About Her Landslide Loss to Trump
News

Kamala Comes Unglued, Makes Bogus Claim About Her Landslide Loss to Trump

/

Kamala Harris raised attention during a public appearance in Houston, Texas, after declaring that the 2024 presidential election between her and President Donald Trump was “the tightest, closest presidential election in the 21st century.”

Harris made the remark Saturday during an event promoting her new memoir 107 Days at the Hobby Center for Performing Arts, which seats 2,650 people.

The event featured moderator Carlos Eduardo Espina, a self-described community organizer and immigrant rights activist.

Mediaite reported that Harris appeared animated throughout the program, often standing up, gesturing to the audience, and raising her voice for emphasis.

She described her short-lived presidential campaign as “unprecedented,” citing the roughly three-month period between her nomination and the general election.

“Here’s the other thing that is quite unprecedented — and, it was the tightest, closest presidential election in the 21st century,” Harris told the crowd.

“He does not have a mandate! That is not a mandate! That is not a mandate!”

Audience members responded with applause and cheers, with one person shouting, “And he never did!” in apparent reference to President Trump.

Harris continued, at one point joking that Espina was so energized by her remarks that he “had to get up and celebrate.”

However, Kamala’s claim about the 2024 election being the closest of the century does not align with official results.

President Trump won all major swing states and became the first Republican since 2004 to carry the national popular vote.

His winning margins in key battleground states were significantly larger than those of Joe Biden’s in 2020.

For example, Biden carried Arizona by 10,457 votes in 2020, while Trump won the same state by more than 187,000 votes in November 2024.

Trump also secured comfortable victories in states including Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia, and Wisconsin, which had previously been decided by narrow margins.

Following her defeat, Harris chose not to enter the California gubernatorial race and instead launched a national book tour for 107 Days, recounting her campaign and the 2024 election cycle.

Her memoir has drawn attention within Democratic circles for its candid commentary on internal party politics and rival figures.

According to several Democratic insiders, Harris’s tour is being closely watched as an informal test of her potential political future.

Party strategists have said the tour could serve as a way for Harris to gauge interest in a possible comeback campaign or future role in the Democratic Party.

The book reportedly contains pointed criticism of several prominent Democrats, including Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, who served as her running mate in the 2024 race.

Harris wrote that Walz was selected “as a last resort” after she determined that former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, her preferred choice, would not be viable as a presidential running mate due to concerns over his sexual orientation.

Harris also took aim at Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro, describing him in the book as overly self-assured and politically ambitious.

Shapiro later responded in an interview, saying Harris would “need to answer” for her involvement in what he called the Democratic Party’s failure to address Joe Biden’s cognitive decline during his final year in office.

Harris’s next stop on her book tour is scheduled for Chicago later this month, where she is expected to discuss her tenure as vice president, her 2024 campaign, and her reflections on national politics following her defeat.

Armed Citizens Stop Far More Active Shooters Than the FBI Said, New Report Reveals
News

Armed Citizens Stop Far More Active Shooters Than the FBI Said, New Report Reveals

/

A decade-long review by the Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC) said armed citizens have stopped active shootings at least 10 times more often than reflected in commonly cited federal tallies, arguing that defensive actions by private individuals are significantly undercounted in official and media summaries.

In an update released Monday and shared with Washington Secrets, the center reported that good Samaritans halted 36% to 62% of active-shooter incidents from 2014 through 2024, compared with 3.7% in the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s published reports.

The CPRC attributed the gap to definitional limits and classification choices in federal data.

The group said the FBI’s approach excludes situations where an armed citizen displays a firearm but does not fire, even when the display stops an attack.

The center also said certain cases were categorized as being stopped by “professionals” when the individuals were unpaid or volunteer security, which the CPRC counted as armed citizens.

“The FBI defines an active shooter as one or more individuals actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a public place, not involving gang violence or some other crime such as robbery. Such an incident could be something as minor as one person being shot at and missed up to a mass public shooting. While the FBI includes cases where civilians stop active shooters, the news media frequently relies on the limited number of these cases to argue that such interventions are rare,” said the report.

“Evidence compiled by the Crime Prevention Research Center shows that the sources the media relied on undercounted the number of instances in which armed citizens have thwarted such attacks by an order of more than ten, saving untold numbers of lives.

Of course, law-abiding citizens stopping these attacks are not rare.

What is rare is national news coverage of those incidents,” added Lott’s report, shared Monday with Washington Secrets.

John R. Lott Jr., the center’s president, said the new findings expand on a 2022 analysis and were compiled from incidents that met federal criteria for active-shooter events over the ten-year period.

According to the CPRC, there were at least 561 active-shooter cases between 2014 and 2024. In those, the center said, armed citizens stopped 202 incidents.

By comparison, the FBI listed 374 active-shooter incidents in the period and reported that 14, or 3.7%, were stopped by an armed citizen.

The CPRC said its audit identified 42 active-shooter incidents the FBI overlooked and 145 others it said were missed.

The organization wrote that its intent was to present a fuller accounting of defensive interventions by civilians rather than to criticize federal officials, and it urged a wider discussion of how such encounters are categorized.

The report also addressed concerns frequently raised about permitting more civilians to carry firearms.

“News outlets often raise concerns that allowing concealed handgun carry will result in innocent bystanders being shot or in police accidentally shooting permit holders,” said the report.

For example, it added, “All the experts interviewed by the Washington Post and New York Times argue that stopping these attacks should be left to the police.”

Lott’s update cited a PoliceOne survey indicating that 86% of law enforcement officers disagreed with the premise that more legally armed citizens are inherently dangerous in these situations.

The report said that while police are responsible for responding to active-shooter incidents, response times can leave gaps that civilians sometimes fill when violence begins.

To that point, the report quoted firearms trainer and author Massad Ayoob: “When a life-threatening crisis strikes and seconds count, the real first responders are the citizens present.”

The CPRC’s findings arrive amid continuing debate over how to measure and present data on active-shooter incidents.

The center and federal law enforcement use similar base definitions for an “active shooter,” but the CPRC argued that differing inclusion rules can change outcomes, especially when a would-be attacker is deterred without shots being fired or when volunteers rather than sworn officers intervene.

The report said it reviewed cases across the country and included events in public places that met the FBI’s criteria and were not tied to other crimes such as robberies or gang-related violence.

The CPRC said its upper-range estimate of 62% reflects incidents in which an armed citizen was present in venues where civilian carry was allowed, while the lower bound reflects overall incidents nationwide.

The organization argued that both figures suggest private defensive actions play a larger role in ending attacks than previously reported.

The findings are expected to factor into policy discussions over concealed carry, venue security, and training for both civilians and law enforcement.

The report stated that its analysis is intended to inform those debates by documenting instances in which civilians acted and by clarifying why some cases may not appear in official summaries.

According to the CPRC, better harmonization of definitions and classifications would allow for more consistent tracking of how active-shooter incidents end and who stops them.

As the discussion continues, the CPRC’s update presents a contrasting view to federal summaries on the frequency of civilian defensive interventions and calls attention to how methodological choices can shape public understanding of active-shooter responses over the past decade.


Scroll to Top