News

CNN Corners Michigan Democrat on His Defund the Police Flip Flop [WATCH]
News

CNN Corners Michigan Democrat on His Defund the Police Flip Flop [WATCH]

/

It is never a good sign for a Democrat candidate when even CNN decides to call them out. That is precisely what happened this week to Abdul El Sayed, the far-left favorite running in Michigan’s Democrat Senate primary.

The man who once proudly waved the Defund the Police banner now wants voters to believe he never said it, and CNN came armed with proof to the contrary, as reported by Red State.

El Sayed’s campaign has been trying to polish his radical image as the race heats up. But when CNN’s Manu Raju rolled the tape during a Sunday interview, things got uncomfortable fast.

Raju asked why El Sayed had repeatedly denied ever calling for police defunding when there were multiple videos and tweets from 2020 showing otherwise.

Flustered, El Sayed launched into an incoherent response about libraries, Iraq, and excess military hardware.

“You fixate on the word ‘defund,’ but what I’m talking about is war material that we made too much of during the war in Iraq,” he said.

“We had to sell it to local police departments.” It was a performance that looked more like verbal gymnastics than a straightforward answer.

The Democrat hopeful then tried to spin it as a semantic misunderstanding. He claimed that defunding did not actually mean taking money away from law enforcement.

It supposedly meant reallocating funds to things like social work or after-school programs.

Unfortunately for him, Americans heard the Defund the Police crowd loud and clear in 2020 as they demanded massive cuts to police budgets across major cities.

The exchange highlighted two big problems for El Sayed’s campaign. First, his record shows that he did support defunding law enforcement when it was trendy on the far left.

Second, he is now trying to run from that record, knowing that Michigan voters want stronger police support, not weaker. The phony rebranding is not fooling anyone.

CNN, usually a safe haven for Democrats, did not let him off easy.

Raju pressed again, pointing out that in past interviews, El Sayed had explicitly said police budgets should be reduced to fund community resources.

That is the very definition of defunding, no matter how he tries to dress it up.

This embarrassment comes on top of another credibility issue. El Sayed was recently caught calling himself a “physician,” despite not holding a valid medical license in Michigan or New York.

Former MSNBC host Mehdi Hasan grilled him over the misleading title, pointing out that without a license, one is not legally considered a physician. His dismissive response only made him look more arrogant and untrustworthy.

The pattern is clear. Whenever cornered about his record or résumé, El Sayed dodges and plays word games.

He acts as though voters are too ignorant to understand the plain meaning of his past statements.

But the “Defund the Police” slogan is not one that people easily forget. They saw cities like Minneapolis, Los Angeles, and Oakland cut funding, fire officers, and suffer surging crime as a result.

Democrats know the slogan is political poison now. They are desperate to rewrite history and pretend it was all just about “reform.”

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez made it brutally clear years ago, saying:

“Defunding police means defunding police.”

Those words were not taken out of context. They were a demand from the left to strip police of budgets and power. El Sayed was part of that movement until it became inconvenient.

Michigan voters remember what happened when politicians chose ideology over safety. The spike in violent crime after police budget cuts in blue cities was not a coincidence.

Families want safer neighborhoods, not lectures on “reimagining public safety.” The backlash to the Defund movement is one reason Republicans remain competitive in Michigan despite the state’s blue tilt.

El Sayed’s effort to hide his true position only proves how out of touch his ideology really is. Instead of acknowledging the obvious failure of the Defund agenda, he lashes out when confronted with his own words.

Watching him squirm as even CNN demands answers says everything about how far he has fallen from the spotlight he once craved.

Democrats can repackage their message however they want, but voters have long memories. They saw who cheered during the summer of 2020 while police officers were assaulted and precincts burned.

They know who demanded budget cuts in the name of “justice.” Abdul El Sayed cannot erase his fingerprints from that movement, no matter how many interviews he gives or tweets he deletes.

If El Sayed keeps unraveling under friendly fire from establishment media, Republicans could have an even stronger path to victory in Michigan’s Senate race.

The only thing more damaging than bad policy is a candidate who cannot tell the truth about it.

Armed Man Taken Into Custody After Security Scare At U.S. Capitol [WATCH]
News

Armed Man Taken Into Custody After Security Scare At U.S. Capitol [WATCH]

/

A man armed with a gun was arrested Monday morning at the North Barricade of the U.S. Capitol, quickly prompting a security lockdown and sending police across the complex into high alert.

The situation unfolded in one of the most tightly secured places in the country, but even a single suspicious individual near the Capitol walls is enough to set Washington buzzing.

According to the U.S. Capitol Police, the man was taken into custody without further incident, though the immediate area around the barricade was shut down for several hours as officers began investigating.

An alert went out to congressional staffers and support personnel warning them to avoid the site until further notice.

Those alerts have become almost routine in a city where “heightened security” seems to be the permanent status.

Officials have not yet released the suspect’s name, the exact type of firearm he carried, or his motive for being near the Capitol with a weapon.

The arrest took place just before noon, adding fresh tension to an already sensitive security environment surrounding the Capitol grounds.

WATCH:

The Capitol Police confirmed that the area would remain closed as investigators worked through the details.

That means a familiar pattern of caution has returned to the heart of America’s political institutions.

Every suspicious package or armed suspect triggers a response measured in battalions rather than individual police units.

Washington insiders know that a single incident like this easily ignites whispers across political offices.

Some liberal commentators are already using the situation to push for more strict gun control measures, even before any facts have been confirmed.

Meanwhile, conservatives question whether Capitol officials are overreacting to isolated cases to maintain a narrative of constant danger.

Capitol Police have not indicated that any lawmakers were directly threatened or in danger during the lockdown.

Still, the arrest comes amid an ongoing elevated security posture across multiple federal buildings in the city following years of threats and policy failures that have shaken public trust.

For many Americans, this constant drumbeat of “security alerts” feels like the government has lost its sense of perspective.

Law enforcement agencies remain on edge, particularly after the last several years of partisan tension and politically motivated violence.

Every flashpoint near the Capitol tends to reinforce that anxious political mood that Washington cannot seem to escape.

For many conservatives, it is not lost that concern for real national security often takes a back seat while bureaucrats manage optics.

Even basic questions remain unanswered.

Was the suspect protesting, confused, or dangerous?

Did he make any threats, or was this another case of an overzealous patrol stopping someone in the wrong place at the wrong time?

So far, Capitol Police are keeping details close to the vest, insisting more information will come once the investigation concludes.

This new arrest again highlights what many have said for years.

The Capitol complex, with its concrete barriers and layers of checkpoints, has grown more fortified than ever, but increased security has not necessarily brought more confidence or clarity.

Instead, it has created an atmosphere of unease among those who work there and watch their government from afar.

Recent incidents involving unknown individuals around the Capitol have intensified scrutiny of law enforcement strategies.

Some officers privately express frustration that even routine detentions now become sensational national news events.

With politics keeping the national temperature high, everything unfolding near the Capitol quickly spirals into controversy.

As of Monday afternoon, authorities have not released any additional updates about the identity of the suspect or the circumstances of the arrest.

To those following federal security issues, that kind of delay often signals either bureaucratic hesitation or a politically sensitive angle yet to be addressed.

Inside Washington, the incident will likely serve as another opportunity for lawmakers to revisit debates about Capitol security budgets, police powers, and surveillance procedures.

Whether it leads to any meaningful change is anyone’s guess.

For now, staffers return to work, a little warier, behind fences and checkpoints that now feel permanent.

The gun arrest at the barricade might fade from headlines soon, but it amplifies a familiar theme in the nation’s capital.

The government’s seat of power looks more like a fortress each year, while confidence in leadership continues to erode. In the political class, security theater persists as the easiest way to show control, even when the real threats remain misunderstood or unstated.

CNBC’s ‘Worst States’ List Accidentally Becomes a Love Letter to Red America
News

CNBC’s ‘Worst States’ List Accidentally Becomes a Love Letter to Red America

/

It is always amusing when liberal media giants accidentally praise the very people they intend to insult.

This week, CNBC stepped right into that trap with their latest “10 Worst States to Live In for 2026” list.

The outlet’s editors clearly hoped to shame conservative states for refusing to bend to the left’s woke demands.

Instead, they revealed just how thriving, confident, and unapologetically free red America really is.

The so-called worst states on CNBC’s list were almost exclusively Republican strongholds. Each one regularly ranks among the best places to do business, has solid economic growth, and attracts new residents fleeing high-tax blue states.

The reason is simple. Red states value family, freedom, and faith, all the things the liberal media cannot stand.

The network’s “key points” read like a college activism pamphlet rather than a serious business ranking. They evaluated states on environmentalism, so-called inclusiveness, free healthcare access, and union strength.

In other words, CNBC’s version of “quality of life” is code for leftist social priorities that have nothing to do with how real people live.

Take Oklahoma. CNBC attacked the Sooner State for protecting unborn life and for not mandating higher minimum wages.

They complained that state law prevents local governments from creating higher rates. In the eyes of liberal media, letting taxpayers keep more of what they earn and defending pro-life values somehow makes a state unbearable.

Next came Alabama, another target of the network’s moral scolding. CNBC cited the lack of “paid sick leave” mandates and public accommodation laws for special interest groups.

What they call discrimination, most Alabamians would describe as personal responsibility and respect for small businesses.

Georgia, the home state of the author from PJ Media, earned a solid F from CNBC. That failing grade is a badge of honor.

“Georgia still remains a state where there is no place for hate,” Governor Brian Kemp said earlier this year. He signed a bill protecting religious freedom, which the left immediately smeared as “discrimination.”

CNBC accused the Peach State of offering “minimal worker protections” and of being “one of the least inclusive states.” Translation: Georgia refuses to go woke.

Tennessee took top honors, or rather bottom honors in CNBC’s view, for having the supposed audacity to promote family values during Pride Month.

The report sneered at Governor Bill Lee for signing a resolution designating June as “Nuclear Family Month.”

That statement celebrated “one husband, one wife, and any biological, adopted, or fostered children.”

The resolution described this as God’s design and the foundation of society. That was apparently too unbearable for CNBC’s editors.

Tennessee also prohibits local governments from creating their own anti-discrimination ordinances and enforces biological truth in public restrooms.

For the liberal crowd at CNBC, that makes the Volunteer State a horror show. For most Americans, it represents moral sanity.

The irony is that CNBC’s “worst states” are actually the same ones where people from around the world come to experience genuine community and hospitality. Visitors from Europe who traveled to the South for the World Cup last year found good food, kindness, and safety.

Those travelers did not see the hateful dystopias the media insists exist. Instead, they found people proud of their heritage and comfortable in their own skin.

While CNBC clutches its pearls and faints over red states, those states keep booming. Their economies are stronger than most of the blue states the network adores.

Their schools are improving, businesses are growing, and families are putting down roots. These are the places where parents can raise children without rainbow flags hanging from every government building.

The left’s obsession with forcing every state to conform to its social experiments backfires every time. By ranking conservative-run states as “the worst,” CNBC only proves that freedom, faith, and family success trigger the woke establishment.

The network’s obsession with “inclusiveness” and “reproductive rights” shows how detached these so-called business journalists are from the heart of America.

If CNBC wants to believe that life in New York or California is paradise while people in Tennessee, Georgia, and Oklahoma are miserable, that is their delusion.

But Americans are voting with their feet. Census data shows the population in red states growing fast while blue strongholds lose residents and tax revenue. The marketplace of freedom decides what quality of life really means.

In the end, CNBC’s list was supposed to embarrass conservative states. Instead, it became a glowing advertisement for them.

These Republican-led states are thriving, their people are happy, and they refuse to be shamed into submission by network pundits sitting in Manhattan offices.

When the left attacks conservative America, you can be sure somewhere, freedom is winning.

Pete Hegseth Goes to War Against Deep State Leakers With New Task Force [WATCH]
News

Pete Hegseth Goes to War Against Deep State Leakers With New Task Force [WATCH]

/

War Secretary Pete Hegseth announced Monday that the Department of Defense and the Department of Justice have established a joint task force aimed at identifying and prosecuting individuals responsible for leaking sensitive government information, as reported by The Gateway Pundit.

The announcement, made July 13, comes as the Pentagon moves to strengthen its response to unauthorized disclosures involving national security matters.

According to Hegseth, the new initiative will expand the Defense Department’s ability to investigate leaks and coordinate enforcement efforts with the Justice Department.

The Hill reported that the task force will focus on identifying individuals who improperly disclose sensitive information and pursuing criminal prosecution when warranted.

As part of the new policy, Hegseth said the Defense Department’s Office of General Counsel (OGC) will have authority to request and receive information, records, and support from across the Pentagon in connection with investigations involving leaks to the news media.

Under the directive, every Defense Department component and employee will be required to prioritize those requests.

Hegseth said any taskings issued by the Office of General Counsel must receive a “full and complete” response within two days after the request is submitted.

In a video lasting approximately two and a half minutes that was posted on X, Hegseth said unauthorized disclosures pose a direct threat to the nation’s military and security operations.

“Leaked information risks lives. These new tools and processes will greatly assist us in protecting our joint force. The security of our nation cannot be a bargaining chip for those who seek momentary headlines,” Hegseth said.

He also warned that individuals entrusted with classified information who violate that responsibility will face legal consequences.

“Access to confidential and secret information is a sacred trust, and those who betray that trust will be met with the full force of the law.”

The task force represents a formal partnership between the Pentagon and the Justice Department as the administration seeks to increase accountability for unauthorized disclosures involving defense-related information.

According to The Hill, the Office of General Counsel will oversee requests for records and investigative support across the Defense Department, with mandatory cooperation required from Pentagon personnel.

The expedited two-day response requirement is intended to accelerate leak investigations and improve coordination between the department’s legal office and federal law enforcement.

The announcement follows ongoing concerns within the federal government over unauthorized disclosures of sensitive information.

Leak investigations have periodically been launched by multiple administrations, but Hegseth said the Pentagon is implementing additional tools and procedures designed to strengthen enforcement.

The new initiative takes effect immediately, according to Hegseth’s announcement.

The Defense Department’s updated process is intended to ensure that requests made through the Office of General Counsel receive prompt attention while allowing investigators to gather records and information needed to identify the source of unauthorized disclosures.

Hegseth’s announcement was accompanied by a social media post highlighting the creation of the task force and its mission to prosecute individuals who leak sensitive national security information.

The announcement comes as federal authorities continue efforts to investigate unauthorized disclosures involving government operations.

Rubio Rips Into International Criminal Court as Trump Team Moves to Crush Its Power [WATCH]
News

Rubio Rips Into International Criminal Court as Trump Team Moves to Crush Its Power [WATCH]

/

Marco Rubio is drawing a firm line between Washington and the International Criminal Court as the Trump administration moves to curtail any authority the foreign tribunal claims to have over American citizens.

The White House is making it clear that American sovereignty is not up for negotiation and that the ICC’s ambitions to hold U.S. officials or troops accountable under its globalist agenda will meet strong resistance.

Rubio, speaking alongside senior administration officials, denounced the ICC as a radical, unaccountable institution that seeks to expand its reach far beyond its mandate.

He made it clear that the administration is ready to take aggressive steps to block the court from asserting jurisdiction over Americans.

“Using all the tools at our government’s disposal, working beside every ally with whom we can make common cause, we will dismantle the ICC, brick by brick, if necessary,” Rubio declared.

Rubio continued with an emphatic defense of national sovereignty.

“The International Criminal Court seeks to become the unaccountable arbiter of a new global law, empowered to prosecute and arrest our citizens at will and existentially threaten American sovereignty,” he said.

“We will teach the ICC the full meaning of American resolve.”

WATCH:

His statement set the tone for an administration that views international oversight of its personnel as a political weapon rather than a tool of justice.

The administration’s stance reflects a continuation of long-standing U.S. opposition to the ICC.

The United States has never joined the court precisely because of concerns about political bias and the threat it poses to American military operations.

Now the ICC is once again igniting tension by targeting officials from Israel, one of Washington’s closest allies, prompting the White House to take action.

In response to what they view as a direct challenge, administration officials are weighing a series of tough measures.

These include sanctions, visa bans, and financial penalties aimed at individuals involved with the ICC’s latest investigations.

The goal is to make it clear that attempts to exert authority over the United States or its allies come with real consequences.

Washington has also been reaching out to allied governments to discourage cooperation with the court.

The argument is simple: sovereign nations do not answer to an unelected global body that lacks democratic accountability.

The administration believes that the ICC has crossed a line by venturing into politically motivated probes rather than focusing on genuine atrocities by rogue regimes and terrorist groups.

The ICC, predictably, has fired back, claiming that American measures threaten its so-called independence.

In other words, the court wants to enjoy immunity from criticism even as it meddles in the internal affairs of powerful nations.

This latest tension follows a familiar pattern, given that the United States has clashed with the ICC repeatedly over its attempts to investigate American actions in Afghanistan.

That Afghanistan probe became a flashpoint under the previous iteration of the court.

It accused U.S. personnel of possible wrongdoing during the war, despite the lack of evidence of systematic crimes and ignoring the reality of combat against Taliban insurgents.

American officials saw it as a politically driven move that insulted the sacrifices made by U.S. troops in a brutal conflict.

No formal cases were ever brought against Americans, but the mere existence of the investigation soured relations between Washington and the ICC.

The Trump administration at the time responded decisively with sanctions and travel restrictions on ICC figures who pursued what many saw as a partisan attack on the American military.

Rubio’s comments signal that this doctrine of confrontation still stands strong.

Conservatives have long argued that the ICC represents the worst tendencies of global bureaucracy.

It demands authority without accountability, seeking to police the world while remaining answerable to no nation or electorate.

This administration’s challenge is a direct rejection of that mindset and an affirmation of American exceptionalism in the face of creeping internationalism.

For Rubio and many within the administration, the issue is not about avoiding justice, but about ensuring that justice remains rooted in elected governments, not in faceless panels overseas.

The ICC’s repeated targeting of democratic allies such as Israel only reinforces the suspicion that the court’s motives are more political than moral.

It is a perception that fuels calls for reform or outright rejection of the body’s legitimacy.

In the end, the fight over the ICC is far bigger than one dispute about jurisdiction.

It is about defending the right of nations to govern themselves, protect their service members, and decide how to hold their own officials accountable.

The Trump administration’s resistance sends a clear message to those who would erode sovereignty in the name of global governance.

The administration’s renewed effort to weaken the ICC is not a retreat from justice but a rebuke of unrestrained globalism.

Rubio’s firm stand signals that the days of letting foreign tribunals lecture the United States are over.

Once again, American leadership is asserting that its laws and its people are not subject to the whims of an international bureaucracy. In Washington’s eyes, that is not radical, it is common sense.

U.S. Drone Boats Smash Iranian Targets in Historic First Strike
News

U.S. Drone Boats Smash Iranian Targets in Historic First Strike

/

For the first time in history, the U.S. military has unleashed autonomous attack sea drones in combat — and the debut was nothing short of devastating.

The strikes targeted Iran directly, marking a bold escalation after weeks of tit-for-tat clashes following Iranian aggression in the Strait of Hormuz.

Central Command confirmed that these sophisticated unmanned boats, called Corsairs, successfully struck Iran’s prized naval repair facility at Bandar Abbas.

According to CENTCOM, “Yesterday, using multiple one-way attack surface drones, CENTCOM forces successfully struck a submarine and ship maintenance facility in Iran.”

The statement went on to confirm that “three Corsair unmanned surface vessels hit the port at Bandar Abbas Naval Base,” dealing a heavy blow to Tehran’s maritime military infrastructure. The impact degraded Iran’s ability to sustain attacks on commercial shipping, a major source of global economic pressure.

Bandar Abbas wasn’t the only Iranian target to feel the sting of American precision. Across the weekend, U.S. forces coordinated air, ground, and sea strikes on dozens of locations across southern Iran, including Qeshm Island.

CENTCOM officials confirmed that over 300 Iranian military-linked targets were destroyed as part of the campaign. The message from Washington was unmistakable: attacks on civilian tankers will not be tolerated.

The deployment of drone boats marks a new chapter in technological warfare for the United States.

The Corsair, designed by Saronic Technologies out of Austin, Texas, operates as a one-way strike system capable of acting like a precision-guided explosive torpedo. These high-speed surface vehicles can navigate independently using artificial intelligence and can be directed toward enemy ships or installations with pinpoint accuracy.

In a statement on Monday, Saronic Technologies echoed CENTCOM’s acknowledgment of the Corsair’s combat debut.

“We’re proud that our technology supported this mission,” the company said. The sense of pride is well-earned — this operation was not merely a tactical victory but a historic leap forward in maritime combat technology.

This was not the first time the Corsair had been used in Middle Eastern operations. Just last month, one of the same sea drones helped rescue the crew of an AH-64 Apache helicopter that crashed off Oman’s coast.

Still, this weekend’s strike marked the first instance of the drones being used as offensive weapons, demonstrating their flexibility and reliability across mission types.

Experts note that Ukraine’s success using unmanned surface vessels against Russian ships likely accelerated the Pentagon’s interest in operational testing.

American capabilities, however, are far more advanced, integrating real-time battlefield intelligence, targeting data, and network coordination through CENTCOM’s regional command nodes. In effect, the U.S. Navy has just deployed the next frontier of unmanned warfare.

The implications of the strike are both tactical and psychological. Iran’s power projection from the Strait of Hormuz to the Arabian Sea relies heavily on maintaining naval and logistics infrastructure at Bandar Abbas.

By hitting that target, CENTCOM didn’t just destroy hardware — it crippled Tehran’s operational confidence. The regime now faces the reality that American forces can strike its critical infrastructure with no risk to U.S. personnel.

While the Left will inevitably whine on cable panels about “escalation risks,” the truth is that deterrence requires strength, not softness.

President Trump’s clear policy of striking back hard when American interests are threatened has given the U.S. operational edge and restored credibility in the Gulf. For years, Iran operated under the belief that Washington would hesitate to respond. That illusion is officially over.

Pentagon sources indicated that the Corsair fleet, fielded earlier this year, is just the beginning. Additional classes of unmanned sea platforms are expected to come online, increasing America’s ability to conduct deep precision strikes with minimal exposure.

In an era where manned naval operations come with high risk, the Corsair offers flexibility, reach, and massive defensive potential.

Inside U.S. military circles, the strike has been viewed as a technological and tactical triumph. Commanders in the War Department have long sought to integrate autonomous warfare into maritime strategy.

The past weekend’s success at Bandar Abbas is now seen as proof that those investments are paying off in a real-world combat environment.

It’s a development long awaited by many veterans and strategists frustrated by bureaucratic hesitation. Under War Secretary Pete Hegseth’s direction, modernization efforts have finally connected to live operational success.

The Corsair attack isn’t just another headline — it’s a statement about American warfighting superiority in the 21st century. When the United States decides to strike, it strikes hard.

If Iran was hoping for hesitation, it got obliteration instead. And for the first time, the Navy’s newest unmanned warriors led the charge — from the sea.

WATCH BELOW:

Trump Allies Revive Birthright Citizenship Battle With Banks’ New ‘Invaders’ Bill [WATCH]
News

Trump Allies Revive Birthright Citizenship Battle With Banks’ New ‘Invaders’ Bill [WATCH]

/

Senator Jim Banks of Indiana is picking up where President Trump left off by reigniting the fight to end birthright citizenship for the children of illegal immigrants and foreign “birth tourists.”

His new bill, the Citizenship Act, takes direct inspiration from a recent Supreme Court ruling and a sharply argued opinion by Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

While the Court struck down Trump’s previous executive order, Kavanaugh’s partial dissent offered a roadmap for Congress to take legislative action.

Now Banks is answering that call with a bold plan to define the children of those who unlawfully enter the country as the offspring of “invaders.”

Banks told Fox News Digital he would introduce the legislation the moment the Senate opened on Monday.

The bill’s language aligns squarely with Trump’s own executive order, which had defined illegal border crossings as a literal “invasion.”

Citing the Constitution’s guarantee that the federal government protect every state from invasion, Banks’ proposal directly ties the issue to national sovereignty, much to the outrage of Democrats and left-leaning advocacy groups already labeling it as “extreme.”

The Indiana Republican’s effort comes after the Supreme Court’s ruling in Trump v. Barbara, where Chief Justice John Roberts joined the Court’s liberal bloc to block Trump’s executive order.

Roberts relied heavily on an 1898 precedent, United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which granted citizenship to children born on U.S. soil.

However, Banks argues that the same case actually left the door open for exceptions, including children of those who fall under the legal definition of “invaders” or “alien enemies.”

Justice Kavanaugh’s opinion hinted at this very loophole.

WATCH:

Though he agreed that Trump’s executive action conflicted with current federal law, he made clear that Congress could amend the statute to provide more explicit limits.

Banks took that as a green light. “The Supreme Court’s birthright citizenship decision was an unprecedented assault on American sovereignty,” Banks said.

“We must do whatever it takes to save our country.”

The Citizenship Act would not alter the Constitution nor contest the interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Instead, it changes federal law to redefine which noncitizens are covered, explicitly removing children of those entering the United States illegally or for birth tourism.

The bill revokes the automatic citizenship that such children currently receive and reaffirms Congress’s constitutional role in establishing uniform rules of naturalization.

Banks emphasizes that his proposal simply codifies Trump’s constitutional authority to defend the nation’s borders.

“I’m leading the Citizenship Act to reverse the effects of this consequential ruling and ensure the millions of illegal aliens that invaded our country can’t continue to exploit our immigration system,” he declared.

The language deliberately echoes Trump’s “invasion” terminology, which has become a rallying cry among conservatives furious about the border crisis.

The legislation also highlights the growing influence of foreign actors in exploiting birthright citizenship.

It cites how Chinese Communist Party networks encourage “birth tourism” where expectant mothers travel to the United States solely to give birth, securing instant citizenship for their newborns.

In Banks’ view, that practice exemplifies how American generosity has been twisted into a loophole for foreign advantage.

The bill also nods to certain Mexican nationalist narratives that frame mass migration northward as a reclamation of territory lost in the 1840s.

WATCH:

Legal scholars on the right view the Citizenship Act as a strategic response that uses liberal judicial logic against itself.

By relying on the very case Roberts cited against Trump, Banks is daring the Court to reexamine the conditions of who is “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States.

Justice Horace Gray’s 1898 ruling excluded diplomats, hostile occupiers, and others not obligated to the government’s authority.

Banks’ bill argues that illegal border crossers fall precisely into that excluded category since they defy the nation’s sovereignty.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in a concurrence in a separate 2025 case, U.S. v. CASA, admitted that “children born of alien enemies in hostile occupation” are not entitled to birthright citizenship.

What she carefully stopped short of doing, however, was labeling illegal immigrants as such “invaders.”

Banks’ measure goes that final step. If passed, it would mark a historic shift in how Congress interprets the Fourteenth Amendment and the Immigration and Nationality Act.

The senator also anchors his bill in the Founders’ intent.

James Madison wrote in 1788 that Congress, not the individual states, held the authority to establish a uniform rule of naturalization.

Banks argues that his bill simply restores that original constitutional order.

He says it is both a legislative and moral duty to defend American citizenship from dilution by those who enter unlawfully.

Critics on the left have predictably reacted with hysteria, calling the effort xenophobic and unconstitutional.

Yet much of the conservative base sees it differently. To them, Banks’ proposal is long overdue.

They view it as a chance to restore integrity to a system they believe has been abused for decades by individuals crossing the border, not to contribute, but to collect benefits funded by American taxpayers.

As the Citizenship Act readies for introduction, Trump and his allies are putting pressure on Senate Republicans to act swiftly.

Trump himself has publicly scolded GOP lawmakers for failing to fight hard enough on the issue.

Banks, already seen as one of the most loyal Trump allies in the Senate, seems eager to prove that he is not just talking tough but taking legislative action.

If the bill gains traction, it could mark one of the biggest political fights of the year, testing where each senator stands on the meaning of American citizenship itself.

For conservatives, it is about restoring the essence of national identity.

For Democrats, it will likely become another talking point about “compassion” and “diversity,” words that many Americans now associate with chaos at the border.

ICE Officers Fatally Shoot Man Who Tried To Ram Agents During Maine Immigration Operation [WATCH]
News

ICE Officers Fatally Shoot Man Who Tried To Ram Agents During Maine Immigration Operation [WATCH]

/

Federal immigration officers in Maine were forced to open fire Monday morning when a Colombian national tried to run them down with a car during an active immigration enforcement operation.

The man, later identified by neighbors as 26-year-old Joan Sebastian Guerrero, was struck and died after being rushed from his vehicle, according to local reports.

The situation unfolded in Biddeford during a Department of Homeland Security operation tied to an illegal alien with a deportation order.

WATCH:

Agents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement were conducting surveillance when the suspect fled the scene in a car.

Instead of stopping as ordered, the driver attempted to flee and then turned the vehicle in the direction of the officers.

Federal officials confirmed that one ICE officer fired his weapon after fearing for public safety.

DHS said emergency medical personnel were called immediately, but the suspect later died from his injuries.

WATCH:

Video shared online appeared to show the wounded driver being dragged from the car and handcuffed as officers secured the scene.

Witnesses said the suspect appeared to drive straight toward an ICE agent.

Eighteen year old Lucas Scott told reporters he watched the vehicle accelerate as officers shouted commands before hearing multiple gunshots.

He described hearing about four shots, adding that the car was clearly being used as a weapon against law enforcement.

WATCH:

Another witness reported that the driver exited the car bleeding and claimed he had been trying to stop.

Ring camera footage from a nearby residence reportedly captured five or six gunshot sounds.

The windshield of the suspect’s car showed clear bullet holes, and law enforcement officials were seen surrounding the area with weapons drawn.

 

Local police confirmed their only involvement was securing the perimeter after the ICE operation turned violent.

The reaction from Maine’s political establishment came quickly, and predictably, leaned into blaming ICE rather than the illegal driver who created the danger.

Senator Angus King told media outlets that Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin initially informed him the man was the subject of a warrant, before later clarifying that there was no warrant.

The confusion added to the outrage from state officials, eager to criticize federal enforcement efforts.

Maine’s Democrat Governor Janet Mills wasted no time condemning federal officers, calling the event “disturbing and infuriating.”

She accused immigration authorities of recklessness, claiming their operations across the country are “haphazard.”

Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows joined the chorus, promising to “remain tough” on immigration enforcement following the shooting.

Bellows told CNN host Jake Tapper that ICE agents and Trump era policies should be held accountable.

As usual, left wing activist groups rushed out statements portraying the suspect as a victim and community member rather than a man who had just attempted to plow through law enforcement personnel.

Organizations like Presente Maine and the Maine Immigrants Rights Coalition released a joint statement lamenting his death and describing him as a neighbor whose “life was cut tragically short.”

The groups framed the shooting as part of a pattern of oppression rather than an act of self defense by federal officers trying to protect the public.

WATCH:

Even New York City’s radical Mayor Zohran Mamdani weighed in from hundreds of miles away, calling ICE “a murderous agency” and repeating the left’s favorite chant to “abolish ICE.”

It is a familiar pattern: every time agents are forced to defend themselves, progressive politicians and activists turn the narrative inside out, suggesting immigration law enforcement is the true villain.

Locals in Biddeford noted that ICE had been active in recent weeks, tracking down illegal migrants with deportation orders.

One resident said he witnessed agents chasing workers off a roof nearby days earlier, describing a scene where several individuals abandoned their tools to escape.

The growing tension between immigration enforcement and local officials mirrors the national divide over border security under the current administration’s approach.

The federal agency confirmed that the DHS Inspector General’s Office will review the shooting.

For now, however, the scene remains another example of the difficulty faced by officers tasked with carrying out immigration laws in an environment where state and local politicians prefer to vilify them rather than support them.

While activists hold rallies and demand ICE’s abolition, the harsh reality remains that immigration enforcement is both lawful and necessary.

WATCH:

When an individual uses a vehicle to endanger citizens and officers, lethal force is a last resort, not a political statement.

WATCH:

The Biddeford incident highlights the increasing hostility directed toward those who put their lives on the line to enforce the nation’s laws.

This case will likely be used by anti enforcement politicians as another talking point against ICE, though the facts tell a much simpler story.

Officers in Maine responded to a direct threat from a suspect trying to use his car as a weapon.

In any other context, that would be recognized as a justified act of self defense.

Instead, the left is turning a violent encounter into another moral crusade against border security.

For the men and women of ICE, this incident is one more reminder of how thankless the job has become.

They are expected to defend the border, arrest criminals, and uphold federal law, all while enduring nonstop political hostility from those who benefit from chaos at the border.

The message from Maine’s leadership sends a chilling signal to law enforcement throughout the country. In today’s political climate, following the law may now be considered a crime.

Steve Hilton Exposes Legal Chaos Blocking Police From Clearing LA Homeless Camps [WATCH]
News

Steve Hilton Exposes Legal Chaos Blocking Police From Clearing LA Homeless Camps [WATCH]

/

The streets of Los Angeles have turned into a living picture of Democrat failure.

GOP candidate Steve Hilton recently took a guided walk through Skid Row, a segment of the city many residents try to ignore.

What he found confirmed what most Californians already know but are rarely allowed to say out loud: bureaucracy, activist lawsuits, and radical nonprofits have tied the hands of police officers who want to restore order.

Los Angeles officials keep claiming they are making progress on homelessness, yet the tents keep multiplying across sidewalks, freeway ramps, and parks.

The city spends nearly one billion dollars a year attempting to “solve” the crisis, but the results make it hard to spot where those tax dollars actually go.

The only thing that seems to grow steadily is the pile of cash spent on experts, consultants, and legal battles.

When Hilton toured Skid Row, he saw police who are literally legally barred from clearing encampments, even when the tents spill into traffic or pose immediate public health hazards.

Officers know these makeshift camps are magnets for drug abuse, violence, and disease, yet the city’s own policies forbid them from enforcing the law.

The reason, he discovered, is as absurd as it is dangerous.

Thanks to a web of activist lawyers and judges sympathetic to “homeless advocates,” encampments are now treated as personal property zones.

That means anyone camping illegally on a public sidewalk can claim their tent and trash pile as “belongings,” giving them legal cover to stay put indefinitely.

It is an extension of radical left ideology that has infected California’s legal system and paralyzed those trying to clean up the mess.

WATCH:

Leading this legal offensive is the Los Angeles Community Network, or LA CAN.

This activist group has made it their mission to sue the city every time it tries to restore a shred of order.

What started as a supposed human rights organization has turned into a powerful blockade against common sense.

They have discovered that endless litigation is more profitable than actually helping people find housing or treatment.

This insanity has been playing out for years.

Another organization, the LA Alliance for Human Rights, actually sued the city to force officials to take action against rampant street camps.

That legal battle has been running since 2020, with the city coming up short time after time.

Instead of following through on cleanups and shelter plans, Los Angeles politicians offer vague statements and more “task forces.”

The irony is thick.

A nonprofit claims to protect the rights of the homeless while blocking any attempt to move them into safer conditions.

Local Democrats like Mayor Karen Bass then hide behind these same organizations, pretending their hands are tied.

Conveniently, the money continues to flow to advocacy groups and city departments, while neighborhoods deteriorate and crime grows.

During Hilton’s tour, residents and workers in the area shared stories of harassment, theft, and public drug use.

Yet the response from the city has been to issue “sensitivity training” instead of enforcement.

Law-abiding citizens have no recourse when their sidewalks are taken over, while criminals and addicts receive taxpayer-funded protection through these activist lawsuits.

LA CAN insists that its crusade is about protecting individual dignity. In reality, it appears motivated by keeping the cash pipeline open.

As one example, the organization runs the “Freedom Singers,” a performance group of formerly homeless members that appears on national television.

The cause certainly looks noble, but the real purpose is fundraising and publicity.

It is the textbook pattern of a nonprofit culture thriving on crisis rather than solving it.

Steve Hilton’s message through all this chaos is clear.

California’s ruling class and their activist friends have constructed a system where failure is rewarded.

Bureaucrats get bigger budgets, while the city becomes less livable. Advocacy groups rake in donations while blocking any policy that could actually reduce homelessness.

It is a perverse incentive loop built by Democrats and sustained by their media allies.

What Hilton exposed is not simply a homeless crisis, but a political racket.

The empty promises from leaders like Gavin Newsom and Karen Bass are not mistakes; they are the design.

Progressivism demands permanent problems to justify permanent spending. That is why Los Angeles remains trapped in an endless cycle of decay, despite having some of the highest taxes in the nation.

Residents of California deserve better than this theater of compassion that produces only misery.

The only way to break it is to cut off the legal lifelines that shield activists from accountability and restore basic law enforcement authority to the police.

Until then, California’s most famous city will continue to drown in tents, needles, and lawsuits, all protected in the name of “justice.”

Steve Hilton’s walk through Skid Row revealed what every voter should know before the next election.

The homeless crisis is not unsolvable; it is simply unallowed to be solved by the very people who created it.

And that is the true madness of life under liberal control in Los Angeles.

Records Show Walz Pardon Board Cited Immigration Concerns Before Convicted Child Abuser Was Deported
News

Records Show Walz Pardon Board Cited Immigration Concerns Before Convicted Child Abuser Was Deported

/

Documents reviewed by Fox News Digital show that members of the Minnesota Clemency Review Commission recommended a full pardon for Laotian national Tue Lue Vang largely because of concerns that he faced deportation, despite his conviction for repeatedly sexually abusing a child over several years, as reported by Fox News.

The commission voted 4-2 to recommend clemency for Vang, a 42-year-old illegal immigrant who had been convicted of criminal sexual conduct.

According to the documents, commissioners supporting the recommendation repeatedly referenced the immigration consequences Vang faced if he was not granted a pardon.

Walz Grants Pardon to Illegal Migrant Who Sexually Assaulted 10-Year-Old Girl

The recommendation was later approved by the Minnesota Board of Pardons, which consists of Gov. Tim Walz, Attorney General Keith Ellison, and Minnesota Supreme Court Chief Justice Natalie Hudson.

The board granted Vang a full pardon on June 10, effectively clearing his criminal record as he was facing removal proceedings.

Commissioner Zach Lindstrom acknowledged the difficulty of the case while explaining his support for the recommendation.

“Very tough case, but the kids not having a father is not in the best interest of society,” Lindstrom wrote, referring to Vang’s six children.

Commissioner Artika Roller also cited immigration issues in supporting clemency, writing, “The applicant stated the need for clemency related to immigration issues.”

Vang entered the United States through California in 1994 and later received legal status during the Clinton administration. Court records show that between 2002 and 2004, when Vang was between 18 and 20 years old, he repeatedly had sexual intercourse with a girl beginning when she was 10 years old. The abuse occurred in St. Paul, Minnesota, in Ramsey County.

Fox News Digital reported that documents from the case stated the victim “did not understand what Vang was doing, so she let him.”

As time passed, she confided in friends, who later testified she was “angry and sad” about what had happened. The records also state that Vang once offered the victim $10 to remain silent.

Ramsey County Assistant Attorney Tami McConkey formally opposed the pardon.

While Ramsey County District Court Judge Sara Grewing did not take a position on the request, McConkey argued against granting clemency.

According to her filing, prosecutors had originally offered Vang a dispositional departure because the then-12-year-old victim faced pressure from family members not to cooperate with law enforcement following his arrest.

Vang ultimately received a 12-year prison sentence, but the sentence was stayed in favor of 30 years of supervised probation that included one year of local confinement.

He served approximately eight months at the county correctional workhouse before being released and was discharged from probation early in 2019.

McConkey also cited additional aggravating factors, including that the abuse continued over an extended period, that Vang transported the victim to his residence during one incident, and that no protection was used.

According to a criminal complaint reviewed by Fox News Digital, Vang told investigators after his arrest:

“I made a mistake, but this is a minor thing. It is a cultural thing in Thailand to marry and have sex with girls as young as 12.”

The complaint also states, “Vang stated [the victim] should be arrested also because she was as much at fault.”

McConkey further wrote:

“while Mr. Vang expresses shame and regret about what his children experience when they learn of the offense, he does not share any thoughts or insight about what the victim must have gone through.”

Several commissioners nevertheless cited the victim’s support for clemency as part of their recommendations.

Commissioner Nadine Graves wrote:

“The victim supports this pardon. His [Vang’s] wife stayed and has forgiven. He also has immigration concerns. He has remorse and was discharged from probation.”

Graves also wrote that Vang “retracted his prior statement about this being a result of culture. He admits this was wrong then and will always be wrong.”

Lindstrom likewise noted, “applicant’s wife supports” and “victim supports” a pardon.

Commissioner Perry Moriearty wrote:

“Despite the extraordinary severity of the underlying offense, there is substantial evidence of rehabilitation, remorse, and acceptance of responsibility.”

He also noted that Vang “is facing deportation” and “victim supports.”

In his clemency application, Vang wrote, “I carry deep shame and regret for the harm I caused.”

He explained that he had been detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in December and was subject to a final removal order.

He also wrote that if deported, he “would be sent to a place entirely unfamiliar to me, with no family, no home, and no future.”

Vang added, “My fear is that, if deported, my children will grow up without a father, like I did,” and “I will do all that I can to be here and to protect them from the outcomes of my deportation.”

Following the pardon, Homeland Security Acting Assistant Secretary Lauren Bis criticized the decision.

“Governor Tim Walz’s decision to pardon an illegal alien convicted child rapist so he can remain in our country is disgusting,” Bis said.

“These are the criminal illegal aliens he and his Minnesota sanctuary politicians are protecting.”

Despite the pardon, the Trump administration proceeded with Vang’s removal. Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced Friday that he terminated Vang’s legal status, resulting in his deportation to Laos.

Rubio told Fox News Digital, “Americans should never have to live in fear that foreign sex predators — shielded from deportation by their own elected officials — could endanger them or their children.”

“That’s why I terminated his legal status in the United States,” Rubio continued. “Vang has now been removed from our country and will never pose a threat to any American ever again.”


Scroll to Top