News

CBS News Blasted for One-Sided Anti-Trump ’60 Minutes’ Hit Piece
News

CBS News Blasted for One-Sided Anti-Trump ’60 Minutes’ Hit Piece

/

Media analyst Howie Kurtz criticized CBS’s “60 Minutes” over what he described as a one-sided report targeting a Trump administration policy involving Venezuelan prisoners, arguing the segment failed to include any voices defending the policy it attacked.

Kurtz said the network’s handling of the piece raised serious questions about fairness and balance, particularly given the absence of policy advocates or administration supporters in the broadcast.

“I think that CBS will have even more of a black eye if it doesn’t eventually run this story,” Kurtz said.

“But look, I watched a bootleg copy of the CBS segment, and it is totally one sided. It is totally anti Trump and the guests included beside the two Venezuelan prisoners from Human Rights Watch from the Human Rights Center at Berkeley, and nobody defending the Trump policy, not an advocate, not an activist.”

Kurtz argued that if CBS intended to present a critical report, it had an obligation to include opposing viewpoints, even if that required holding the story until such voices could be included.

“And so it seems to me that if Bari Weiss wanted to weigh in, she should have gone to one of the five screenings,” he said.

“And just briefly, rich stories get held all the time.”

He cited past newsroom practices to illustrate his point.

“Mike Wallace once called me and said that Don Hewitt, the producer, told him that his story wasn’t ready and that he needed a voice such as mine,” Kurtz said.

“I came on right at the top, just before the stopwatch.”

A Fox News anchor pressed the issue of whether journalists should delay a story to secure responses from those being criticized.

“You know, even, even if, let’s say, your boss comes to you, you’ve had trouble getting comment from the administration, which was the claim here,” the anchor said.

“Then if your boss comes to you and says, I’ve got the phone numbers of the people who have put this policy in place, which we are critical of in this piece. Wouldn’t you want to hold it off and then be able to say, okay, ask the people who put this policy in place to defend it at that point. I mean, shouldn’t you want to do that?”

Kurtz responded that while it would be preferable to have administration officials on camera, he believes the White House intentionally declined to participate and that CBS should not use that refusal as a reason to kill or reshape a story.

“Yeah, but I think the White House made a deliberate decision not to provide a guest, and I think Bari Weiss may have made too much of that,” Kurtz said.

“Because you need to. You’re sure if they can get somebody on camera, it would be it would really help the peace and maybe this will die down.”

He then referenced internal correspondence from the show’s own staff to drive home his argument.

“But the correspondent Sharon Alfonsi wrote in an internal note, if the administration’s refusal to participate becomes a valid reason to spike a story, then we have effectively handed them a kill switch for any reporting they find inconvenient,” Kurtz said.

“So it gives the Trump White House veto power, in effect, simply by deciding not to play.”

The Fox News anchor agreed that administration voices should be sought whenever possible.

“Yeah, absolutely,” the anchor said.

“But if you had the opportunity to maybe appeal directly to the people who are making this policy, you’d want them on the show, right?”

Kurtz said he agreed, but added that reports indicate CBS may have excluded relevant responses that were already provided off camera.

“Absolutely, of course,” he said.

“But Axios is reporting that there were comments provided by the White House, by the State Department and homeland security, obviously not on camera, that weren’t used. If that’s true, it’s inexplicable.”

Kurtz also criticized what he said were omissions within the “60 Minutes” report itself, particularly regarding criminal histories.

“And just to look at the fairness of the piece that 60 Minutes wanted to air,” he said.

“Correspondent Sharyn Alfonsi, who I just mentioned, said nearly half of the 252 Venezuelans sent to El Salvador had no criminal history, and then just dropped it. No mention of the other half who obviously do have a criminal history.”

He added that the segment also criticized a visit by Kristi Noem to a notorious prison without including any response from her.

“And the segment criticized a Kristi Noem visit to that notorious prison,” Kurtz said.

“No comment at all from her side.”

WATCH:

Federal Task Force Probes Missing Billions in LA Homeless Funds as Indictments Mount
News

Federal Task Force Probes Missing Billions in LA Homeless Funds as Indictments Mount

/

Federal investigators are examining the disappearance and misuse of billions of dollars intended to address homelessness in Los Angeles County, following revelations that large sums of taxpayer money remain unaccounted for and have allegedly been diverted for personal use.

The issue was discussed in an on-air exchange between journalist Elizabeth Vargas and U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli, who detailed the scope of the problem and the ongoing federal response.

According to Vargas, a massive portion of the funds sent to Los Angeles County over several years cannot be properly traced.

“Point $3 billion sent to LA County over four years is completely unaccounted for. That’s $2.3 billion that could have been used to clean up this or find housing for people who live like this,” Vargas said.

“Taxpayers have forked over 10s of millions, if not hundreds of millions, of dollars to fix it, and people are stealing it.”

Essayli said the lack of accountability surrounding homelessness spending has been a long-standing issue that went largely unchecked until recently.

“It’s unbelievable. And you know, it’s probably been going on for a very long time, but unfortunately, no one’s really looked at it until recently,” Essayli said.

“Before this position, I was in the state legislature, and we would ask a lot of questions about the billions of dollars being spent every year to solve homelessness, and we can all see with our eyes and ears that it wasn’t being solved, and the money wasn’t going to the people we needed it most.”

Essayli explained that one of his first actions after taking office as U.S. Attorney in Los Angeles was to establish a dedicated task force focused on fraud and corruption tied to homelessness funding.

“So one of the first things I did after being appointed as the US Attorney here in LA was to create the homeless fraud and corruption Task Force,” he said.

“We’re starting from the bottom up, and we began brand new investigations with the IRS and the FBI, and it’s already culminated in two separate indictments, and I can assure you that more will come.”

Vargas pointed to details from the indictments already announced, highlighting the nature of the alleged misuse.

“In the two indictments you’ve announced thus far, in one case, somebody was taking this money that was meant to build homes for the homeless and spending it on things like tickets to Coachella concert, jewelry and a Beverly Hills mansion,” Vargas said.

Essayli described the allegations as emblematic of what can happen when massive sums are distributed without strict oversight.

“It’s frankly outrageous, and this goes to show, when you hand out billions of dollars with little to no oversight, there are people out there that will take advantage,” he said.

“And that’s always been, our suspicion is that there’s been very little oversight or accountability to the individuals who receive this money.”

He said most of the funding is routed through nonprofits or developers who claim the money will be used to build housing, but federal investigators have found otherwise in the cases already charged.

“And what we saw in these just these two investigations, that’s not where the money went, and it was used to pay one individual’s American Express Bill,” Essayli said.

“In these two cases, represent over a $50 million loss, and that’s again, scratching the service surface.”

Essayli stressed that the investigation is far from over and that federal agencies are aggressively pursuing additional leads.

“We have many more investigations open that I cannot get into, but we are going to follow the money,” he said.

“We’re going to follow every dollar, and we want to make sure the money went to its intended objective, which is to assist the homeless, and if any of it was diverted for personal use or other use that wasn’t authorized, we intend to criminally prosecute those individuals.”

He detailed the breadth of the ongoing efforts.

“And like I said, we have multiple, multiple ongoing investigations. We have the IRS conducting the financial review. We have the FBI going out and conducting interviews. We’re issuing subpoenas. We’re doing search warrants. There is a lot happening that the public cannot see right now,” Essayli said.

Vargas questioned how such large-scale misuse could persist for years without detection.

“How did this go unnoticed for so long?” she asked.

Essayli attributed the lack of scrutiny to California’s political environment and the absence of meaningful checks on spending.

“This is a problem we saw in the legislature. When you have a state like California that frankly enjoys a super majority controlled by one political party, there’s very little checks and balances in the system to hold that accountability, and there’s really, again, never been any oversight,” he said.

He added that recent political changes at the federal level have altered the enforcement landscape.

“But now you have the federal government, the election was won by the opposite party, and you have an election that has consequences,” Essayli said.

“And now you have prosecutors in the federal government that are independent and are going to take an objective look.”

WATCH:

Senate Filibuster Killing Common Sense Election Security: Byron Donalds
News

Senate Filibuster Killing Common Sense Election Security: Byron Donalds

/

Rep. Byron Donalds criticized the U.S. Senate for failing to act on the SAVE Act, legislation passed by the House more than seven months ago that aims to secure federal elections by ensuring that only U.S. citizens are allowed to vote.

The issue was raised during a Newsmax segment in which host Carl Higbie questioned why the Senate has not taken up the bill, despite the House having already acted.

“235, days since the House passed the Save Act, which would secure our elections. The constitution is clear. You can provide some integration and some framework for our elections, voter ID, things like that, but the Senate is not moving on it. What is going on here?” Higbie said.

Donalds responded by placing the blame squarely on the Senate’s procedural rules and leadership, saying the chamber has become a roadblock to legislation that already has support in the House.

“The Senate doesn’t work. I’ve been very clear on this one, the filibuster is a major hurdle to getting common sense policy through both chambers of Congress here in Washington, DC, the Save act is common sense,” Donalds said.

The SAVE Act was passed by the House with the stated goal of reinforcing election integrity by clarifying that only U.S. citizens are eligible to vote in federal elections.

Donalds argued that regardless of partisan disagreements, the Senate should at least allow the legislation to come to a vote.

“It should go up for a vote. If Democrat senators want to vote it down, let them be on the record for it, but for it to not even get a vote in the Senate makes no sense,” he said.

Donalds said frustration over stalled legislation is growing on Capitol Hill, particularly among lawmakers who see House-passed bills languish indefinitely once they reach the Senate.

“And this is actually one of the big issues we’re having here on Capitol Hill. A lot of people are upset. They’re saying, Well, why isn’t Congress doing more?” Donalds said.

He explained that concerns about Senate inaction can even affect which bills House leadership chooses to bring to the floor, creating a bottleneck in the legislative process.

“I will tell you, a lot of policy ideas that are filed in the house don’t even get to the floor because leadership is concerned. I don’t agree with them, but they’re concerned about things just going to sit in the Senate and not getting any action,” Donalds said.

Despite those concerns, Donalds said the House should continue passing legislation and sending it to the Senate, forcing senators to take clear positions on key issues.

“I think we should continue to do our jobs here in the house, send bills over to the Senate, but the Senate has got to start voting for things,” he said.

Donalds specifically named election-related measures he believes should be brought up for votes, even if Democrats oppose them.

“If Democrats want to vote things down, like the Save Act, or if they want to vote down voter ID in federal elections, or if they want to vote down simple common sense, things like making sure that illegals are not counted for the purpose of setting congressional districts that should all be voted for in the United States Senate, and if Democrats vote no, let the American people see that clearly,” Donalds said.

Higbie agreed with the need to put senators on the record before closing out the segment.

“Yeah, and get them on the record like you said. Well, Congressman Byron Donalds, we appreciate it,” Higbie said.

WATCH:

Scott Adams Destroys Gavin Newsom’s 2028 Hopes Just by Reading His Resume
News

Scott Adams Destroys Gavin Newsom’s 2028 Hopes Just by Reading His Resume

/

Commentator Scott Adams delivered a sweeping critique of California Gov. Gavin Newsom, questioning how Newsom could plausibly seek the presidency given what Adams described as widespread mismanagement, regulatory overreach, and failed policies in the state.

Adams focused heavily on California’s finances, arguing that by the time of upcoming midterms, voters would have a clearer picture of what he characterized as massive losses tied to both theft and mismanagement.

“How in the world could Governor Newsom ever become president under the context of by the midterm we’re going to know a lot more about all the 100 billions of dollars that were stolen in his state, but not just stolen, also mismanaged, because it’s kind of hard to tell what is stolen was mismanaged,” Adams said. “It might end up being the same thing by the midterms.”

He pointed to California’s energy policies as another major liability, warning of dramatic increases in gas prices that he attributed almost entirely to state regulations rather than market forces.

“Some experts are saying that the cost of gas in California could reach as high as 10 to $12 per gallon, and that that cost would be almost entirely because of California mismanagement, and almost entirely because California is what I call a hoax, hoax driven government,” Adams said.

According to Adams, regulations framed as climate protections created opportunities for fraud while driving up costs for consumers.

He argued that California’s approach could not realistically affect global climate outcomes but did have concrete economic consequences.

“So the reason gas will cost so much is a variety of regulatory things that were designed to protect the climate from catastrophe,” Adams said.

“Now there was no chance it was ever going to protect the climate from catastrophe, because one state couldn’t do that anyway. But what it did do is it created this gigantic umbrella for fraud.”

Adams also cited a reported 20 percent reduction in refinery capacity, blaming excessive regulation for refinery closures.

“We got a 20% decrease in capacity when January hits because two refiners just said that we’re out. Too much regulation. We’re out,” he said.

He argued that these outcomes would make it difficult for Newsom to defend his record nationally, especially as other states do not face similar conditions.

“And you can directly tie the cost to California believing incorrectly the hoax that we were in an existential crisis that could somehow be fixed by California alone doing things that other states were not doing,” Adams said.

Adams went on to list what he described as multiple policy “hoaxes,” beginning with climate policy and extending to energy price gouging claims.

“But what Governor Newsom and other Democrats blamed the problem on was price gouging by the oil companies,” Adams said.

“Price gouging, when it was looked into, audited, there was no price gouging, found that was a hoax.”

He continued by criticizing California’s positions on border security, homelessness, and reparations.

“How about when there was a border crisis in California? What did California say? California said there’s no border crisis. Hoax number three,” Adams said.

Addressing homelessness, Adams rejected the idea that housing construction alone could solve the problem.

“There was never any chance that that would make a difference,” he said, adding that the issue involved deeper challenges beyond housing availability.

Adams also criticized reparations discussions in California.

“So we’ve got a state that’s trying to pay reparations when California never had slaves,” he said.

“None of the people lived here were victims of California slavery. It’s a complete hoax.”

He further referenced federal stimulus spending, arguing California handled pandemic-era funds differently from other states.

“So apparently, after the pandemic, there were all these stimulus funds that came from the federal government, and every other state used the government funding to pay down their debt, except California,” Adams said.

According to Adams, that decision could lead to higher payroll taxes on businesses.

“So, the result will be that the Californian businesses are going to be hit, apparently, with some enormous payroll tax to compensate For the fact that California was the only, only mismanaged state,” he said.

Adams also cited high-profile infrastructure spending, including funds allocated to a high-speed rail project that has not been completed.

“I haven’t even gotten into the, what $50 billion for the bullet train that never happened,” he said.

He concluded by suggesting Republicans may view Newsom as a vulnerable candidate and are content to wait.

“But it feels like the smartest people in the Republican Party, by now, they must have figured out that Newsom is the weakest candidate they could possibly run,” Adams said. “So I feel like the Republicans are saying, Hold. Will do Yes, wait until he gets nominated. We’ll take him out.”

WATCH:

New Bill Pushes to Cut Welfare From BOTH Legal and Illegal Immigrants: Randy Fine
News

New Bill Pushes to Cut Welfare From BOTH Legal and Illegal Immigrants: Randy Fine

/

Rep. Randy Fine is advancing legislation that would prohibit both legal and illegal immigrants from receiving welfare benefits in the United States, arguing that immigration should be rooted in freedom, opportunity, and shared American values rather than access to government assistance.

Fine outlined his position while explaining the motivation behind the bill, saying the current system incentivizes people to come to the United States for taxpayer-funded benefits rather than to contribute to the country’s economy and civic life.

“If you want to immigrate to the United States for freedom and opportunity, that’s one thing,” Fine said.

“But the problem is you’ve got too many people coming here for free stuff, which is why I’ve introduced a bill that would ban all legal immigrants from welfare, not just illegal, but legal, because you should not be coming here and then asking our children and our grandchildren to go into debt, to give you free things.”

The proposed legislation would extend existing restrictions beyond illegal aliens and apply them to legal immigrants as well, cutting off access to welfare programs.

Fine said the goal is to ensure that immigration policy does not place long-term financial burdens on future generations of Americans.

According to Fine, the bill is intended to reinforce the principle that immigration should be based on self-sufficiency and a willingness to contribute, not reliance on government aid.

“If you want free stuff, stay home,” he said.

Fine emphasized that his position is not opposed to immigration itself, but rather to what he described as abuse of the welfare system by individuals who do not share American values or intend to assimilate.

“And so if you want to come here for freedom and opportunity, if you love America, if you share our values, if you want to go to work and you want to add value, that’s a discussion that we can have,” Fine said.

He drew a sharp contrast between immigrants who seek to build a life through work and those he argues are motivated by government benefits and ideological opposition to the country.

“But if you hate America, if you want to change America, if you don’t share our values, and you don’t want to assimilate, and you’re just here to see how much free stuff you can get stay where you’re from,” Fine said.

WATCH:

‘Deport Them All. Zero Tolerance. The Compassion Has Run Dry’: Tomi Lahren
News

‘Deport Them All. Zero Tolerance. The Compassion Has Run Dry’: Tomi Lahren

/

Conservative commentator Tomi Lahren delivered a forceful statement criticizing the release of illegal aliens who commit crimes and are later released without notification to federal immigration authorities, arguing that the practice has led to preventable violence and eroded public trust.

Lahren said she was reacting to details about cases in which individuals in the country illegally were arrested for crimes and then released back into communities without Immigration and Customs Enforcement being notified.

She argued that the policy decisions behind those releases prioritize illegal aliens over public safety and have consequences for American citizens and local residents.

“I’m fuming after listening to you read all of that. You read it very well. I’m so angry,” Lahren said.

“And every American out there, I don’t care if you’re Democrat, Republican, Independent, you don’t care. This should infuriate you. If you have a pulse. This should infuriate you.”

She continued by focusing on the broader policy implications, saying the repeated release of illegal aliens accused of crimes creates a cycle of violence that could be avoided if authorities coordinated with federal immigration officials.

“This should infuriate you the fact that we have dangerous illegal aliens in this country who are being arrested for crimes and then let out,” Lahren said.

“They don’t notify ICE because they want to coddle the illegals, and then guess what? They go out and they commit more heinous crimes. They take the lives of Americans and others in the community.”

Lahren argued that Democratic leaders have consistently defended policies that allow for such releases, often framing illegal immigration in economic terms.

She rejected that argument, saying it ignores the public safety risks highlighted by repeated criminal cases.

“If Democrats want to make this argument that we need guest workers and we need people to be landscapers and all of this, and they’re just hard working people, well, you’ve lost all of our compassion for those people, because you side with these people over and over and over again,” she said.

According to Lahren, that pattern has fundamentally changed how many Americans view the issue, shifting the debate from selective enforcement to broad frustration with illegal immigration policy.

“So then our compassion in totality has run dry, because now we want everyone out because we’re fed up,” she said.

Lahren also addressed comments made by Jasmine Crockett, referencing remarks Crockett made about a deceased individual.

She tied those remarks to Crockett’s political ambitions in Texas, arguing that voters should take them seriously as they consider future elections.

“And Joey the fact that Jasmine Crockett wants to be a senator from Texas, and she’s calling this poor girl a random dead person,” Lahren said.

“Well, Texas, you got a big decision to make, and I hope you make the right one.”

WATCH:

DC Police Sued for Blocking Lawful Firearm Registration, Including AR-15s
News

DC Police Sued for Blocking Lawful Firearm Registration, Including AR-15s

/

The Civil Rights Division’s Second Amendment section has filed what officials describe as a landmark lawsuit against the Metropolitan Police Department in Washington, D.C., challenging the department’s refusal to register certain lawful firearms for residents of the district.

The lawsuit targets the District of Columbia’s prohibition on registering an entire category of firearms commonly labeled as assault rifles, including the AR-15, which is widely owned across the United States.

According to the filing, the policy prevents law-abiding citizens from registering firearms that are otherwise legal under federal law, effectively barring possession within the district.

The legal action was announced by Harmeet Dhillon, who said the case marks the beginning of a broader effort by the Civil Rights Division to confront firearm restrictions it views as inconsistent with the Second Amendment.

“Hi. I’m here with an important update from the Civil Rights Division, Second Amendment section, which today filed a landmark lawsuit against the DC Metro Police Department for its refusal to register lawful firearms of law abiding citizens here in the district, namely the entire category of so called assault rifles, including the nation’s most popular rifle, the AR 15, are not permitted for registration here in the district, and our lawsuit will put a stop to that,” Dhillon said.

The lawsuit focuses on the District’s registration system, which requires residents to register firearms with local authorities.

Under current policy, the Metropolitan Police Department does not permit the registration of firearms it classifies as assault rifles, regardless of whether the owner is otherwise eligible to possess a firearm.

The complaint argues that this approach unlawfully blocks residents from exercising their rights by refusing to process registrations for a broad class of commonly owned firearms.

Dhillon said the case reflects a shift in enforcement priorities within the Civil Rights Division under Attorney General Pam Bondi.

She indicated that the lawsuit against the District of Columbia is not an isolated action but part of a larger strategy to address similar restrictions in other jurisdictions.

“We’re just getting started here in the Civil Rights Division under Attorney General Pam bondi’s leadership, there are many more important lawsuits planned to take aim at restrictions on our lawful Second Amendment rights throughout the country,” Dhillon said.

The announcement signals that the Civil Rights Division intends to play a more active role in Second Amendment litigation, particularly in areas where state or local governments impose categorical limits on firearm ownership.

By focusing on registration practices rather than individual criminal cases, the lawsuit seeks to challenge regulatory systems that, according to the division, function as de facto bans on commonly owned firearms.

The AR-15, referenced directly in the lawsuit, is among the most popular rifles in the United States and is legal to own under federal law.

Supporters of the lawsuit argue that prohibitions on registering such firearms in the District of Columbia place residents at a disadvantage compared to citizens in other parts of the country and conflict with constitutional protections.

The case is being closely watched by legal observers because it could establish a precedent for how federal civil rights authorities address local firearm regulations.

If successful, the lawsuit could compel changes to registration policies in the District and influence similar challenges elsewhere.

Dhillon concluded her announcement by addressing the timing of the filing during the holiday season.

“Stay tuned and everyone have a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year,” she said.

WATCH:

Sean Duffy Puts Blue States on Notice: Stop Giving Illegals CDLs or Lose Funding
News

Sean Duffy Puts Blue States on Notice: Stop Giving Illegals CDLs or Lose Funding

/

United States Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy criticized the Biden-Harris administration and several Democrat-led states for allowing illegal aliens to obtain commercial driver’s licenses, arguing that the practice poses a serious risk to public safety and violates long-standing federal rules meant to keep American roads safe.

Duffy said the issue centers on basic safety standards that have existed for years and are not tied to any single administration.

He argued that allowing individuals who cannot meet those standards to operate large commercial vehicles endangers lives.

“On this front again, she’s working on getting illegals out of trucks and out of the country, as well as everyone who’s here illegally out of the country,” Duffy said.

“But again, these are simple rules. These rules are not made up by the Trump administration. I didn’t make them up. These are rules that are set up to make sure our roads are safe.”

Duffy emphasized that commercial drivers must be able to communicate in English and complete required training before being allowed to operate heavy vehicles on public roads.

“And so if you can’t speak English, if you haven’t gone through the proper training courses, you shouldn’t behind, be behind the wheel of a big rig,” he said.

“These are 80,000 pound vehicles that can be incredibly dangerous when things go wrong.”

He blamed the situation on federal immigration policies under Joe Biden, combined with decisions by liberal governors to prioritize employment for illegal aliens over public safety.

“The problem is, is that you had, you had Joe Biden that let 10s of millions of people into the country, and then you have liberal governors who said, well, they got to work, so let’s give them commercial driver’s licenses and put them on the American roads, endangering the safety of the American people,” Duffy said.

Duffy referenced a fatal incident involving an illegal alien driver to highlight the real-world consequences of these policies.

“You mentioned this individual who is he was driving a motor coach from China, illegal and, you know, taking the lives of good American folks,” he said.

“We want to do this right.”

He acknowledged that his authority to directly enforce these standards across states is limited, explaining that the Department of Transportation does not function as a law enforcement agency capable of conducting on-the-ground checks nationwide.

“And I don’t have a law enforcement at USDOT, so I can’t go in across the states and do these checks after rely on the state’s law enforcement to help me out,” Duffy said.

However, Duffy said the federal government does have significant leverage when states refuse to comply with federal safety rules, particularly through transportation funding.

“But what I can do, Brian, is I can pull their money,” he said.

“That’s the leverage that I do have.”

Duffy explained that federal law requires states be given time to come into compliance, but warned that continued defiance would have consequences.

“And as long as they don’t comply, there’s statutory rules by which I have to abide by,” he said.

“I have to give them, you know, time to comply with our rules. But if they don’t, I guarantee you that the federal taxpayer is not going to fund their roads and bridges and their systems when they’re putting illegals on the roads and endangering the lives of the American people.”

He also pointed out that commercial driver’s licenses issued in certain states effectively grant nationwide driving privileges, increasing the scope of the problem.

“And you know this, if you get a driver’s license in Colorado, New York or California, you don’t stay in those states,” Duffy said.

WATCH:

Trump Approves Plan for Two Mega Battleships to Rebuild Naval Strength
News

Trump Approves Plan for Two Mega Battleships to Rebuild Naval Strength

/

President Donald Trump announced that he has approved a plan for the U.S. Navy to begin construction on two new battleships, which he described as the largest and most powerful ever built by the United States.

Trump made the announcement while discussing his role as commander in chief and his long-standing interest in reviving the construction of large-scale naval vessels.

He said the new ships will exceed the size and power of historic American battleships and represent a major advancement in naval capability.

“As Commander in Chief, it’s my great honor to announce that I have approved a plan for the Navy to begin the construction of two brand new, very large, largest we’ve ever built battleships,” Trump said.

Trump compared the planned vessels to some of the most well-known battleships in U.S. naval history, including the Iowa, Missouri, Wisconsin, and Alabama.

He said the new ships will surpass those earlier models in both size and combat capability.

“You know you used to build the Iowa, the Missouri, the Wisconsin, the Alabama, many others, we had big battleships,” Trump said.

“These are bigger, but they will have 100 times the there’ll be 100 times the force, the power, and there’s never been anything like these ships.”

According to Trump, the idea for building new battleships dates back to his first term, when he questioned why the United States had moved away from constructing large, heavily armed naval vessels.

He said the design process for the new ships has been underway for an extended period as a result of that push.

“These have been under design consideration for a long time, and it started with me in my first term, because I said, why aren’t we doing battleships like we used to?” Trump said.

Trump emphasized that the new battleships will set a new standard globally, describing them as unmatched in speed, size, and lethality.

He said they will significantly outperform any previous battleship design.

“And the these are the best in the world,” Trump said.

“They’ll be the fastest, the biggest and by far, 100 times more powerful than any battleship ever built.”

He again referenced historic battleships to illustrate the scale of the new vessels, noting that while earlier ships were similar in size to one another, the new design represents a substantial leap forward.

“So if you look at the Iowa, the Missouri, Wisconsin, Alabama, and others,” Trump said.

“But they’re they were similar in size, some a little bit bigger than the others, but if you take the biggest one, it’s 100 times more powerful.”

Trump said the new battleships will be slightly longer and significantly larger overall, with expanded capacity compared to previous generations of ships.

“They’re longer by a little bit. But they’re bigger, they’re bigger ships, but they hold much more,” he said.

WATCH:

Anti-ICE Karens Following Agents Get a Surprise When They Stop and Confront Them
News

Anti-ICE Karens Following Agents Get a Surprise When They Stop and Confront Them

/

A video circulating widely on social media shows an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent issuing a warning to two young women who were allegedly following federal agents in their vehicle during immigration enforcement activity.

The footage, which has been shared across multiple platforms, has drawn attention as ICE continues to increase its presence in Columbus, Ohio.

The account that originally posted the video to X stated that the encounter occurred in Columbus.

While the exact date of the incident has not been independently confirmed, the video emerged amid reports of increased ICE activity in central Ohio and public protests related to immigration enforcement.

In the video, two women are seen inside a car that appears to be traveling near ICE agents.

One of the agents approaches the vehicle after apparently noticing that they were being followed.

When the driver partially lowers her window, the agent issues a firm verbal warning.

“This is your one warning. If you follow us again, we’re going to stop you, break your window, rip you out, and arrest you,” the agent can be heard saying in the footage.

After the warning is delivered, the driver attempts to respond by saying that she has questions, but the interaction ends shortly thereafter.

The video does not show any further action taken by the agents, and no arrests are depicted in the clip.

The footage has circulated as ICE agents continue to be a visible presence in Columbus.

According to reporting from the Columbus Dispatch, Immigration and Customs Enforcement has ramped up operations in the city, resulting in increased sightings, arrests, detentions, and counterprotests over several days.

“Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents continue to have an increased presence in central Ohio following several days of sightings, arrests, detentions and counterprotests,” the Columbus Dispatch reported in an article detailing the situation.

The newspaper outlined what is currently known about the agency’s activities and addressed questions about the role of local law enforcement in relation to federal immigration operations.

According to statements cited by the Dispatch, the Columbus Police Department is not assisting ICE with immigration-related enforcement.

Columbus Police Chief Elaine Bryant and Mayor Andrew Ginther said on Dec. 18 that local police are not providing assistance to ICE for immigration enforcement actions.

The report stated that Columbus police directives do not allow officers to investigate individuals solely based on immigration status.

Officers are also not permitted to assist in operations that are exclusively focused on immigration enforcement.

Additionally, Columbus police are not sharing immigration-related information with ICE, according to Bryant.

The Dispatch further reported that these policies are part of existing departmental directives governing how city officers interact with federal agencies on immigration matters.

The video involving the ICE agent and the two women surfaced against this backdrop of heightened activity and public attention.

While the clip does not show what occurred prior to the agent approaching the vehicle, the warning suggests that the agent believed the women were following federal officers during official duties.

The agency has previously stated that its officers carry out enforcement actions based on federal immigration laws enacted by Congress and are tasked with carrying out those laws as written.

The video continues to circulate as immigration enforcement remains a subject of public debate, particularly in cities where local governments have emphasized limits on cooperation between municipal police and federal immigration authorities.

In Columbus, city officials have reiterated that while ICE operates independently, local law enforcement is bound by city policies that restrict participation in immigration-focused enforcement activities.

As ICE operations continue in central Ohio, encounters between agents and members of the public have drawn increased scrutiny, both online and on the ground.

The warning captured in the video has become part of the broader discussion surrounding immigration enforcement, public protests, and the interactions that occur during federal operations in local communities.


Scroll to Top