News

Politico Propagandist Suggests Somalis Use Lethal Force Against Reporters Exposing Fraud
News

Politico Propagandist Suggests Somalis Use Lethal Force Against Reporters Exposing Fraud

/

Rob Schmitt and Sebastian Gorka criticized a Politico article and its promotion on social media during a discussion that also featured video from a former Department of Homeland Security whistleblower, arguing that the reporting normalized violence while downplaying what they described as large-scale fraud involving taxpayer funds and potential links to terrorism.

Schmitt opened the exchange by citing a post from a Senior Legal Affairs reporter for Politico, which referenced Stand Your Ground laws in the context of journalists investigating alleged Somali-run scam operations in Minneapolis.

“This is the Senior Legal Affairs reporter for Politico posting on x at some point, the amateur effort to knock on doors of home daycares intersects with robust Stand Your Ground laws,” Schmitt said.

“What is being exposed right now is so dangerous for the left, for the Democrat Party, for the people that this fake reporter supports, that he’s essentially hoping that one of these Somali refugees running one of these scam operations in Minneapolis, I guess, shoots reporters that are going to knock on the door.”

Gorka responded by rejecting the comparison drawn in the article and accusing the outlet of distorting self-defense laws.

“Yeah, I’m going to have to take your word for it. Rob that’s an actual real quote from one of these fake news outlets, the idea that you’re conflating what a burglar breaking into your house and being allowed to use deadly force against that burglar, as opposed to a young reporter who is getting to the bottom of billions of dollars of built taxpayer funding,” Gorka said.

He went on to argue that the real wrongdoing lay with those allegedly misusing public funds.

“If there are any burglars in this story, it’s not the young, fearless journalist; it’s the Somali community members who are stealing your taxpayer funds, my taxpayers’ funds, and had signs for their learning centers where they can’t even spell the word learn grammatically correctly,” Gorka said.

Schmitt returned to the Politico reporter’s role, questioning the intent behind the reporting and its political implications.

“This is a Senior Legal Affairs reporter for Politico? And does anything indicate better that the threat that this reporting, that this story has on all the institutions that this he claims to be a reporter, he’s not a reporter. He’s not a reporter. He’s a propagandist for the left in this country, for the Democrat Party,” Schmitt said.

He added that the exposure of alleged fraud threatened broader support for government programs.

“Who is going to want to vote for more government and for bigger safety nets when they see that all of our money is just being lit on fire and just dumped into refugees coming here and scamming us out of billions of dollars?” Schmitt asked.

Gorka argued that the language used in the article amounted to a call to violence.

“Well, look, I think there’s two things that need to be said. Number one, that article that quote, unquote legal expert is doing what the left always does, which is normalizing violence,” Gorka said.

“That’s a dog whistle talking about, stand your ground, legal authorities, that’s about the use of deadly force.”

He framed the issue as one that should concern Americans regardless of politics.

“There can’t be anybody in America who who agrees with what we’re witnessing in these reports,” Gorka said.

“If you’re just a normal human being and you go, hang on a second, this is just wrong. This is my money.”

Schmitt then introduced video from a former Minnesota DHS whistleblower, noting past warnings about the misuse of funds.

“You’re talking about counterterrorism reports for the last month of Somali fraud funds being sent to Al Shabaab,” Schmitt said.

“You have a former Minnesota DHS whistleblower that said, seven years ago, talking about this same issue.”

In the clip, the whistleblower described concerns investigators had following terrorist attacks overseas.

“Every time there was a terrorist attack, Paris, San Bernardino, France, Paris, even the Syrian war, we would as investigators, We would get together the day after the attack, and we would think we would ponder amongst ourselves, how much Minnesota taxpayer dollars was being used to fund that war, that attack, what bought that gun? Where that money come from?” the whistleblower said.

Reacting to the clip, Schmitt called the statement alarming.

“That’s an unbelievable statement from seven years ago, and it makes you realize just how much of this money could have been going to these places,” he said, asking how authorities planned to determine where the funds ended up.

Gorka responded by citing current enforcement efforts and recent arrests. “I’ll quote, I think it was on a news program earlier today on Newsmax, where I saw the Secretary Noem at DHS state, unequivocally, this is going to be one of the largest investigations at DHS,” Gorka said, referring to investigations into alleged fraud involving immigrants and taxpayer funds.

He also referenced a recent case. “Recent arrest in Texas of somebody who has now been charged with material support to ISIS for trying to wire $38 to ISIS,” Gorka said, adding that the broader concern involved “potentially millions of dollars leaving America from those fraudulent entities to fund terrorist organizations abroad.”

“So we have only just begun,” Gorka said.

“We are on the case, and people will face justice.”

WATCH:

Obama Admin Helped Overthrow Ukraine’s Democracy, Took Control of Intel Services: Mike Benz
News

Obama Admin Helped Overthrow Ukraine’s Democracy, Took Control of Intel Services: Mike Benz

/

Jack Posobiec and Mike Benz argued in a recent exchange that the 2014 Maidan Revolution in Ukraine was not an organic popular uprising but a U.S.-backed color revolution that illegally removed the country’s democratically elected president and placed Ukraine under direct Western intelligence influence.

The discussion focused on the removal of President Viktor Yanukovich, who was elected in 2010, and the subsequent installation of a new Ukrainian government following mass protests in Kyiv’s Maidan Square. Posobiec framed the events as a coordinated effort involving U.S. political figures, intelligence agencies, and allied interests hostile to Russia.

“You’re walking through how this Maidan revolution really was a George Floyd style US government-backed color revolution that saw elements of John McCain and Democrats and George Soros all working together to again,” Posobiec said.

“And I just want to be very clear about this. I mean, very, very clear about this to everybody out there that whether or not you liked or supported Vijanikovich, the previous president of Ukraine. He was a democratically elected president of the country. He was elected by the people of Ukraine, and there was no legal process to remove him from power.”

Posobiec continued by asserting that Yanukovich was forced out through U.S. intervention rather than constitutional means.

“He was ousted, he was forced to step down and flee the country by elements of the US government, all in the name of democracy,” he said.

Posobiec linked the events to broader U.S. foreign policy under the Obama administration, citing what he described as open hostility toward Russia from then-President Barack Obama and then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

“Just that basic understanding that the US government under Obama, at the time, working with Hillary, was targeted and openly stating their hostility towards Russia,” Posobiec said.

He added that this context raised questions about subsequent Russian actions.

“Then when you see the response from Russia, you have to really ask yourselves, was this unprovoked, or perhaps, was there something that caused them to react this way?”

Turning to the aftermath of the Maidan uprising, Posobiec questioned the role of U.S. intelligence in shaping Ukraine’s future governance.

“So the Maidan revolution takes place, the US government gets their hooks in US intelligence bends. What happens next in Ukraine?” he asked.

Benz responded by pointing to reporting from The New York Times that he said detailed how Ukraine’s post-Maidan leadership and intelligence apparatus were directly influenced by U.S. and British officials.

According to Benz, the selection of Ukraine’s new leadership occurred immediately after Yanukovich’s removal.

“Well, so on the topic of the intelligence state, the New York Times actually published that the very night of the very morning after the Maidan Square toppled Viktor Yanukovich and installed Yat Sen Yook in Ukraine,” Benz said.

He claimed that the new leader was chosen through Western intervention rather than by Ukrainian voters.

“He was not elected the new head of state was literally selected in a joint phone call by Victoria Nuland and Geoff Pyatt, who, in very explicit terms, picked the next president of Ukraine, not the Ukrainian people,” Benz said.

Benz described a subsequent New York Times report that examined the rebuilding of Ukraine’s intelligence services after the change in government.

He said the article detailed how Western intelligence agencies moved quickly to take control of Ukraine’s security infrastructure following the overthrow.

“But the very next day, the New York Times, as it as they published in a piece, I believe it was last year or two years ago, they published a reconstruction of Ukraine’s intelligence state,” Benz said.

He explained that the report described the condition of Ukraine’s intelligence headquarters immediately after the events in Kyiv.

“What they said is that the new head of Ukrainian intelligence walked into the building of Ukraine’s Intelligence Center, the day after the coup was complete, and the lights were off, and documents were scattered everywhere,” Benz said.

According to Benz, the newly installed intelligence chief’s first actions involved direct coordination with Western intelligence services.

“And the first thing he did is he placed two phone calls, one to the chief the CIA chief of station, and one to the MI6 chief of station in Ukraine,” Benz said.

Benz concluded that a joint intelligence partnership was established immediately following Yanukovich’s removal.

“And a three-way partnership was struck the very day after the coup to rebuild Ukraine’s intelligence state from the ground up as a three-way partnership between Ukraine, the CIA, and MI6,” he said.

“So not only did the Obama administration and the British government overthrow the democratically elected Government of Ukraine,” Benz added, “but then they immediately took control through the CIA and MI6 of the intelligence services in Ukraine from the ground up.”

WATCH:

X Used in Real Time to Fight Civil Rights Violations with Harmeet Dhillon at the Helm
News

X Used in Real Time to Fight Civil Rights Violations with Harmeet Dhillon at the Helm

/

Attorney Kurt Schlichter and Justice Department official Harmeet Dhillon discussed what they described as a shift in how the Department of Justice responds to emerging issues, particularly those first exposed through social media, pointing to faster investigations and direct action based on online reporting rather than traditional media cycles.

Schlichter said he has been struck by how quickly the DOJ now reacts when an issue gains attention online, calling the approach a significant departure from past practices.

“I’ve been so impressed at how how responsive you are in your division to things that are happening, kind of in the social media world, things that have become visible and kind of erupt,” Schlichter said.

He cited situations in which online reporting quickly prompted federal scrutiny.

“It becomes a thing on social media, and then suddenly the DOJ, is there, going, Yes, we’re aware of this. Now we’re investigating. That’s kind of revolutionary to be that responsive,” he said.

Dhillon agreed and said the shift reflects a willingness by some officials to engage directly with information sources outside traditional media channels.

“Well, I think that’s correct. I mean, there are couple of reasons for that,” she said.

Dhillon argued that many in the legal profession are reluctant to engage online.

“First of all, lawyers are kind of Fuddy duddies about using the internet and being engaged,” she said.

Dhillon noted that she and Schlichter are unusual in combining legal careers with an active social media presence.

“You know, you and I are among the few on the right who have been both successful lawyers and also very actively engaged on social media,” she said.

She explained that her online activity predates her DOJ role. “I have a big social media following from before I joined the DOJ, about 1.5 million plus followers online.”

According to Dhillon, social media provides real-time information that legacy outlets no longer deliver efficiently.

“I do find it a very valuable tool, because you have to keep up,” she said.

“Today, I don’t actually watch television very much. I’m not, you know, I don’t have the TV on in the background, because TV is like 12 to 24, hours behind what’s really happening.”

Dhillon said independent online journalists now drive many of the most important leads. “When the modern day journalist heroes, who are the Nick Shirley’s, and you know the Matt Taibbi and some of these others who you know right or left, they’re the ones who are getting the leads and sharing the stories in real time,” she said. “Those are the ones I pay attention to.”

She added that online accounts can also surface issues involving public institutions.

“Where we get our attention on something, or libs of Tiktok is also a great source for some of our issues involving schools or employment,” Dhillon said.

Dhillon acknowledged that opening investigations based on online information has drawn criticism but defended the practice.

“We do open up investigations based on internet leads, and I am proud of that,” she said.

“I got mocked a little bit by prior pearl clutching DOJ officials and even some former Republican members of Congress.”

She rejected the idea that online engagement is unserious. “I think it’s quote, unquote not serious to be online and engaging with the public. Well, I think it is serious,” Dhillon said.

“I think it is a public calling and a duty.”

Dhillon pointed to a specific case where online reporting led to immediate results without litigation.

“Sometimes simply tweeting about something or writing a letter stops it dead in its tracks,” she said.

“I stopped a ridiculous DEI program in Asheville, North Carolina by reading about it online, responding to a internet journalist whistleblower, sending a letter, and boom, no shots fired in court because they simply stopped what they were doing.”

She said that outcome illustrates what citizens should expect from federal officials.

“That is really effectiveness in action, and that’s what people should expect from their government officials,” Dhillon said.

WATCH:

Ex-Investigator Says Minnesota Fraud Was Buried from the Top Despite Warrants
News

Ex-Investigator Says Minnesota Fraud Was Buried from the Top Despite Warrants

/

A former federal investigator is raising serious questions about Minnesota’s handling of fraud investigations, alleging that state leadership intervened to halt cases that had already advanced to the point of search warrants and extensive evidence collection.

Speaking during a News Nation segment, Jeremy Christenson said investigations he worked on disappeared without prosecutions, despite what he described as substantial investigative progress.

The host pressed Christenson on how cases he investigated could simply vanish.

“You said these cases, you investigated them. Nothing happened. They went into thin air. No prosecutions. How do you think this played out? What happened here?” the host asked.

Christenson said the investigations were never federal prosecutions, despite his role as a federal agent, and emphasized that control rested with the state.

“Well, like I said, I was assigned to a state task force. Let me be clear, this wasn’t a federal task force. This was run by the state of Minnesota Department of Human Services, and so they ran it,” he said.

According to Christenson, the decision to stop the cases came from higher levels within state government.

“And my personal belief is that the the powers to be higher up in the state of Minnesota just didn’t want the case to move forward, and therefore it just went away,” he said.

Christenson said the level of investigative activity made the outcome difficult to explain.

“I mean, we don’t go out and serve search warrants. Do collect tons of evidence, do surveillance, do all this? I mean, search warrants are your last line investigation when you’re getting ready to go forward with charges,” he said.

He detailed the scope of the work that had already been completed.

“We had served multiple warrants, I mean, just immense amount of documents and so forth. We seized and and then all of a sudden, the task force just went away. That just does not make any sense,” Christenson said.

He reiterated that the cases were meant to be handled locally, not federally.

“And again, we declare it during this time, this was a local case, and a local prosecution was not a federal case, even though I was assigned as a federal agent to the task force,” he said.

The host asked whether the failure occurred at the local or state level.

“So do you think the safeguard broke down at the local level or the state level,” the host asked.

“Yes, absolutely,” Christenson replied.

“There’s no question in my mind that the powers to be higher up within the state of Minnesota shut this down. No question in my mind whatsoever.”

The host followed up by asking why state officials would stop the investigation rather than address the issue earlier.

“Why do you think that is why do you think they’ve been they did that instead of investigation now getting worse and opening up years later?” the host asked.

Christenson said there was no legitimate justification for disbanding the task force and suggested consequences for those involved.

“Because they the there was no reason to disband that task force,” he said.

“I’m confident the person that was in charge of that task force was actually chastise.”

He added that speaking out may have come at a professional cost.

“I think if that person ever comes forward, they may have some enlightening experiences working for the state, because that my understanding was that things didn’t go well for that person’s career, based on this case,” Christenson said.

The discussion turned to comments made by Gov. Tim Walz, who said he had spent years cracking down on fraud.

“Governor Tim Walz responded today. He said he spent years cracking down on fraud. Of course, he’s referring cases to law enforcement, shutting down high risk programs. You just laughed. Tell me what you think came of his investigations,” the host said.

Christenson said he has little confidence in state-led efforts and instead pointed to federal involvement.

“That investigation, my only saving grace right now is that HSI stepping in and doing this investigation, the state’s not capable of doing this,” he said.

He questioned the state’s ability to handle the matter fairly.

“They don’t have the integrity to complete investigation fair and impartial,” Christenson said.

Christenson expressed confidence in federal investigators now involved.

“I have a tremendous confidence in my HSI colleagues that are now actively working with this,” he said.

“I think we’re hopefully get some resolution with this, because I trust my HSI colleagues, as long as they get the good support from the US Attorney’s Office.”

He concluded by drawing a stark contrast between federal and state outcomes.

“I think we might see some resolution on the federal side with this, under the state side, I absolutely see no resolution with the state Minnesota,” Christenson said.

“They don’t have the for with all to handle investigation like this and to be fair and impartial.”

WATCH:

‘People Will Be in Handcuffs’: Karoline Leavitt Unloads on Tim Walz Over Minnesota Fraud
News

‘People Will Be in Handcuffs’: Karoline Leavitt Unloads on Tim Walz Over Minnesota Fraud

/

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said the Trump administration has significantly intensified federal enforcement actions in Minnesota, citing what she described as years of fraud allowed to persist under Gov. Tim Walz’s leadership.

Leavitt said the administration’s actions span multiple federal agencies and include criminal investigations, funding cutoffs, and immigration enforcement.

“Governor Walz is completely incompetent. He always has been, and President Trump has long called him out for his incompetence and his poor leadership in the great state of Minnesota,” Leavitt said.

Leavitt credited independent journalist Nick Shirley with bringing national attention to the issue, saying his reporting played a key role in accelerating federal involvement. “I want to commend Nick Shirley for his incredible video in real journalism that went viral this past week,” she said.

“He epitomizes what New Media looks like and that’s exactly why we, at the White House, under President Trump’s direction, have embraced new media journalists like Nick Shirley.”

According to Leavitt, Shirley’s work has been recognized directly by the administration.

“We’ve welcomed them in to the White House press pool. We invited Nick Shirley to brief the President of the United States at an Antifa roundtable earlier this year,” she said.

Leavitt said the alleged fraud in Minnesota has been under scrutiny by the Trump administration since the beginning of the president’s term, but that recent reporting led to a surge in federal resources.

“This fraud in Governor Waltz’s state in Minnesota is something the Trump administration has been working on since day one,” she said.

“And since Nick Shirley’s journalism really brought this issue further to light, we have surged resources across the board to the state.”

She emphasized that enforcement actions are ongoing and escalating.

“So I want your audience to understand this is a top priority for the administration,” Leavitt said.

Leavitt said the Department of Justice is actively pursuing criminal cases.

“The Department of Justice, as we speak, is continuing to execute search warrants and subpoenas,” she said.

“People will be in handcuffs as a result of the fraud that Governor Walz has allowed to occur for the for many, many years.”

She also detailed Department of Homeland Security operations currently underway in Minnesota.

“The Department of Homeland Security is conducting door to door investigations on the ground at potential fraud sites,” Leavitt said.

“And they’re also, of course, conducting continued deportations of illegal aliens in Minnesota’s communities.”

Leavitt said the administration is also prepared to use additional legal tools when warranted.

“We’re also not afraid to use denaturalization,” she said.

“That’s a tool at the President and the Secretary of State’s disposal, and it’s one this administration has previously used before.”

She said financial pressure is being applied through federal funding restrictions.

“I know the Health and Human Services Department has also announced we are cutting off all childcare funding to the state of Minnesota until we get to the bottom of this fraud,” Leavitt said.

Leavitt added that multiple agencies are reviewing state benefit programs. “The Department of Labor is investigating their unemployment insurance program,” she said.

“The Department of USDA Agriculture Secretary Rollins, weeks ago, sent a letter to Governor Walz, demanding he turn over every single name of SNAP recipients on the books in Minnesota.”

According to Leavitt, those actions prompted legal pushback from the state.

“And the Minnesota Attorney General actually sued the Trump administration for that,” she said.

WATCH:

One Year Later: The Results of Gavin Newsom’s Fast Food Minimum Wage Hike Are In
News

One Year Later: The Results of Gavin Newsom’s Fast Food Minimum Wage Hike Are In

/

Reason Magazine reporter Bess Byers outlined the economic consequences of California’s fast food minimum wage law while highlighting comments from Gov. Gavin Newsom defending exemptions built into the legislation.

The law, known as AB 1228, raised wages for fast food workers and created a new regulatory structure, but Byers said the results have included job losses, restaurant closures, and higher prices.

“What happens when the minimum wage goes up? Well, California is getting an experiment in that right now. Just ask Gavin Newsom,” Byers said.

She explained that the law was pitched as a way to ensure fast food employees were paid fairly but quickly produced unintended consequences.

“California wanted to make sure fast food employees earn their fair share, and that’s when 557,000 workers across 30,000 restaurants got an economic reality check,” she said.

Byers said AB 1228 imposed a government-mandated pay increase that moved hourly wages from $16.21 to $20 over three years.

“AB 1228, implemented a government mandated pay raise for all fast food workers from 1621 to $20 per hour,” she said.

The law also includes ongoing increases and a new regulatory body.

“The bill requires annual wage increases of 3.5% and creates a special fast food Council within the government,” Byers said.

According to Byers, that council has broad authority for several years.

“This council holds the power to set fast food wages until January 1, 2029 when the Council and its authority allegedly end, because government programs always end,” she said.

Byers also pointed to a long list of exemptions that shielded certain businesses from the wage mandate.

“If you’re worried about this impacting your favorite restaurant? Well, casual dining restaurants, buffets, smaller fast food chains, donut shops, snack shops, grocery stores, concession stands, most delis, restaurants within a grocery establishment, restaurants connected to an airport, hotel, Event Center, theme park, museum or gambling establishment and Panera Bread are all exempt from the law,” she said.

She described one exemption as unusually specific and said it was pushed by Newsom.

“Apparently, there’s this weirdly specific exemption for restaurants that sell bread as a standalone menu item if it weighs at least half a pound after cooling and Gavin Newsom pushed for that,” Byers said.

Byers said the exemption benefited Panera Bread and its major franchise owner.

“You see, Gavin Newsom went to high school with Greg Flynn. Greg Flynn owns the Flynn Restaurant Group. They own 2300 chain restaurants across the US and other second largest Panera franchisee in the world,” she said. Byers noted Flynn’s political support.

“Flynn has donated more than $220,000 to Newsom’s campaign since 2017 and 100 grand of that was to defeat the recall. So for some totally unknown reason, he really wants this guy in office,” she said.

When questioned about the exemption, Newsom defended it as part of legislative negotiations.

“I mean, that’s part of the sausage making. That was part of 257 the original bill, and there was part of the negotiation. It’s the nature of negotiation,” Newsom said.

Byers said the economic effects of the law became clear after it took effect. She cited comments made after passage of the bill.

“After the bill passed, assembly member Chris Holden said: ‘the rest of the country is watching what’s happening in California.’ And yeah, that’s an understatement,” she said.

She detailed business closures and layoffs following implementation of the law.

“One year after implementing the so called FAST Act, we are finally seeing its effects, and they are exactly what you would expect,” Byers said.

“Rubio’s coastal grill closed 48 locations across the state. MOD Pizza closed five and Pizza Hut laid off all 1200 delivery drivers,” she said.

Byers said the employment data showed significant losses. “In total, fast food employment decreased by 2.7% which cost California 18,000 jobs,” she said.

She added that remaining workers also felt the impact.

“Restaurants replaced employees with digital kiosks, and those who did keep their jobs saw their hours decrease by almost two months per year,” she said.

According to Byers, even mainstream outlets have acknowledged the negative effects.

“AB, 1228, is such a disaster, even CNN admits it’s debatable,” she said. She contrasted California’s experience with the rest of the country.

“Job numbers at the same time as Gavin Newsom’s California lost fast food jobs, the sector has grown in the rest of the nation,” she said.

Byers concluded that consumers have also borne the cost. “To be fair, though, Newsom is responsible for some exceptional growth,” she said.

“Fast food prices are up more than 13% since the law took effect.”

WATCH:

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by Reason Magazine (@reasonmagazine)

Mass. Gov. Under Fire as Former Migrant Shelter Director Blows the Whistle on Cover Up
News

Mass. Gov. Under Fire as Former Migrant Shelter Director Blows the Whistle on Cover Up

/

A former Massachusetts migrant shelter director accused Gov. Maura Healy of presiding over widespread crime, financial waste, and systemic coverups inside state-funded migrant shelters, saying the experience was “the biggest mistake” of his life and calling for the governor to be held criminally accountable.

John Featherston, who previously ran a migrant shelter in Massachusetts, made the allegations during an exchange with Nate Friedman, describing what he said were unchecked crimes, taxpayer-funded waste, and directives from state leadership that discouraged law enforcement from intervening.

“My name is John Featherston. I’m a former migrant shelter director in Massachusetts. It was the biggest mistake of my life, the biggest mistake of my life,” Featherston said.

When Friedman asked directly whether he believed Gov. Healy should face prosecution, Featherston did not hesitate.

“I believe Maura Healy should go to jail for the rest of her life for the crimes that she’s committed,” he said.

Featherston argued that once migrants were brought into Massachusetts under the governor’s policies, the state assumed responsibility for their safety and conduct.

“Yes, the governor’s first priority is to protect the people. Once they came to Massachusetts because she invited them, she was responsible for them,” he said.

He accused the administration of concealing serious crimes.

“She’s covered up rapes, she’s covered up crimes. She’s covered up sex trafficking, she’s covered up drug dealing that we’re not even talking about the financial piece at its capacity,” Featherston said.

According to Featherston, financial waste was rampant inside the shelter system.

He described a facility housing roughly 550 people across 150 rooms, with four individuals per room.

Despite vacancies, he said the state continued to bill taxpayers for unused space.

“Back a year ago, I would have 10 empty rooms, but the state would still get billed $180 a night for those 10 empty rooms,” he said.

“They would still get billed for the meals in those rooms too.”

Featherston characterized the system as government-funded housing with no private accountability.

“So there is a tremendous amount of waste and or fraud, but this is government subsidized housing. There’s no other way to describe it,” he said.

“Your taxpayers, the taxpayers, are paying for everything that goes inside these four walls. So it’s not private property.”

He said public scrutiny intensified after disturbing incidents became national news.

“The fact that they’re this defensive a year after this has become like a national story, because a man you know, impregnated his own daughter, and these in the shelter, it’s quite obviously they got something to hide,” Featherston said.

Featherston described shelters as environments plagued by violence and criminal activity.

“So there’s a lot of domestic violence inside these shelters,” he said.

“It’s called it’s a cultural thing. A lot of Haitian men don’t have a lot of respect for women, it seems like. So there’s often a lot of physical violence. There’s a lot of women on women violence in these shelters.”

He also said prostitution and drug dealing were common. “So the police would come all the time,” he said.

“You know, when I had reports of like, sex trafficking, you know, they would come, you know, drug dealing, they would come. A lot of prostitution in that parking lot.”

Featherston claimed police were discouraged from enforcing the law due to directives tied to the governor’s office.

“I would talk to police officers, and I’d be like, Hey, I know this car is not registered. I know it’s not insured. What are you going to do about it?” he said.

“If it was you, I’d arrest you. If it’s them, I just let it go.”

According to Featherston, officers cited political pressure.

“Why? Well, the governor wants this, and the governor has come down and given us a mandate that, you know, we don’t give the migrants a hard time, and we don’t, you know, arrest them because they don’t have driver’s license. We just give them stern talking,” he said.

Featherston also criticized media coverage, saying the public has been kept in the dark.

“You don’t know what’s going on, because the legacy media is quite obviously afraid of the governor,” he said.

“The governor has told them, Don’t report on this.”

He said local outlets failed to report on conditions inside the shelters.

“You don’t see these stories by the local media. You only see them by the national media and guys like you, you know, doing the real journalism,” Featherston said.

He concluded by accusing state leadership of abandoning vulnerable Americans in favor of migrant programs.

“We’ve lost our way. We’ve lost our way,” he said.

“We’re not taking care of veterans. We’re not taking care of low income seniors, but we’re giving everything free to migrants.”

WATCH:

‘Dems Are Literally Seizing Private Property and Violating the Bill of Rights’: Carl Higbie
News

‘Dems Are Literally Seizing Private Property and Violating the Bill of Rights’: Carl Higbie

/

Conservative commentator Carl Higbie accused New York’s government of effectively raising property taxes without legislative action by revaluing buildings, a practice he said has dramatically increased tax burdens for private property owners while allowing elected officials to deny responsibility.

Higbie said the tactic relies on reassessing property values rather than formally increasing tax rates, which he argued allows politicians to claim they never voted to raise taxes.

“New York socialist governance has raised taxes for private ownership over the last many years here in Manhattan, but very craftily, by raising the assessment on the building, not the actual tax rate, so they can go back on their reelection campaigns and say, no, no, I never, I never raised taxes on you,” Higbie said.

He described how the process works, using a hypothetical example to illustrate the impact on property owners.

“Here’s how they’re doing. Check this out. Let’s say your building was previously worth, I don’t know, $40 million, it’s a building in New York City. Okay, you’re paying taxes on that assessed value now, without passing a law or having a hearing or anything, some bureaucrat with a clipboard just shows up and says, Hmm, yeah, I think this building is now worth $80 million now your tax burden has doubled without them raising the taxes through the legislature,” Higbie said.

According to Higbie, the reassessments are carried out administratively, without public debate or approval from voters.

“But rather simple stroke of a pen in a dark office by somebody that was never elected,” he said.

Higbie argued that these actions are not random but strategically targeted.

“And they’re conveniently doing it to buildings that they want to buy. And by they, I mean big government, perhaps in districts they need more Democrat votes,” he said.

He contrasted what he described as Democratic tactics with Republican restraint on procedural norms.

“You see this game while Republicans, look the Republicans are out there. Let’s not break governmental norms like tossing the filibuster or something, while Republicans are whining about that, Democrats are literally seizing private property and violating the Bill of Rights so they can move voters into their needed districts,” Higbie said.

Higbie also criticized the broader tax structure in New York City, arguing that high taxes are used to fund expansive social programs while discouraging productivity.

He pointed to the scale of public assistance and local taxation.

“Districts and cities like New York, where half of New York City is also on Medicaid as well, funded by more taxes like the nearly 9% city in sales city and state sales tax or congestion tax or dog tax or income tax, or whatever surcharge fee or license they can gin up, paid for by people who do produce in order to transfer that wealth to buy votes,” he said.

He argued that Democratic leaders justify these policies by claiming they are necessary to address inequality, but said the outcomes show otherwise.

“But here’s the issue left. Just keep saying they need to fix, they need to do all these like social programs, in order to fix the inequity problem, or it will get worse,” Higbie said.

“The problem is they’re already doing this in places like New York, but then everything’s all just getting worse anyway, not better.”

Higbie said critics who point out these trends are dismissed rather than debated. “But then when I point that out, they’re like, You’re a racist,” he said.

He concluded by arguing that voters continue to support policies that drive residents out of major cities.

“And the majority of voters who elect people like ma’am Denny never stop to think, hey, maybe what Democrats are doing doesn’t work, and that’s why everybody is leaving places like New York. Nope. They never understand that,” Higbie said.

WATCH:

Somalians Allegedly Placed Bounties on Nick Shirley’s Head After He Exposed Them
News

Somalians Allegedly Placed Bounties on Nick Shirley’s Head After He Exposed Them

/

Independent journalist Nick Shirley said he is facing serious personal threats after reporting on what he alleges is widespread fraud involving billions of dollars in Minnesota, warning that the backlash has escalated to the point where his safety is now at risk.

Shirley discussed the situation during an exchange with Donald Trump Jr., describing an atmosphere of anger and retaliation following his reporting.

Shirley said the exposure of the alleged fraud has enraged those who benefited from it for years.

“They’re so mad. They’re so, the Somalians are so mad,” Shirley said.

He described a sense of long-standing complacency among those now facing scrutiny.

“Because, can you imagine, for years you’re at the dinner table talking with your family about how everything’s good? Oh, we don’t need to worry, because the government and whatnot.”

According to Shirley, a large share of those implicated were receiving public assistance while also generating substantial revenue.

“I mean, 81% of these people are on welfare,” he said.

“But on top of that, they’re collecting millions of dollars for these companies, tax exempt, by the way, especially the daycares.”

Shirley said the realization that the alleged scheme is being exposed has triggered intense backlash.

“So can you imagine how mad they are now,” he said.

“Like, that’s why they’re right now, there’s like, people are so upset, like, there’s like bounties on me here in Minnesota, because people are so upset, as far as the fraud that’s being exposed.”

He said the anger reflects a broader frustration among the public as well.

“Because they know their time’s up, and they know everyone’s just sick and tired of this happening inside their own state and across America,” Shirley said.

Donald Trump Jr. asked Shirley to elaborate on the nature of the threats.

“What have some of those threats been?” he asked.

Shirley said the threats have gone beyond online harassment and raised serious safety concerns.

“Yeah, there was apparently, like, a bolo that they used,” he said.

“That’s the word that some people told me. It was on me.”

He said he has been advised to limit what he shares publicly due to the severity of the situation.

“And I can’t reveal too much because, just because I don’t want to reveal but, like, yeah, very, lots of messages, death threats, obviously, on social media,” Shirley said.

Shirley said the threats have affected his daily life and ability to move freely.

“And then just not the most safe thing for me to be moving around freely, right now,” he said.

WATCH:

104-Year-Old WWII Veteran Sparks ‘USA’ Chants With National Anthem
News

104-Year-Old WWII Veteran Sparks ‘USA’ Chants With National Anthem

/

A 104-year-old World War II veteran brought an NHL crowd to its feet Saturday night after delivering a national anthem performance that turned a routine pregame ceremony into a moment of remembrance and patriotism, as reported by the Gateway Pundit.

Dominick Critelli, a longtime New York Islanders fan, took center ice at UBS Arena in Elmont, New York, holding a soprano saxophone rather than a microphone.

Instead of singing “The Star-Spangled Banner,” Critelli played it, recreating a tradition he once carried out overseas during World War II, according to News 12 Long Island.

As the final notes echoed through the arena, the crowd erupted into sustained applause and chants of “USA,” a moment that was captured on video and quickly spread across social media.

Critelli later explained that the performance was not about personal recognition but about honoring the men he served with during the war who never returned home.

“That’s why I go to these places, I want to do it, I want to represent them, to do something for them. That’s all I can do for them,” Critelli told the news station.

Critelli said he has been playing music for more than 90 years. His military service, however, remains the defining chapter of his life.

According to the NHL, Critelli spent 151 days in combat during World War II and survived some of the war’s most dangerous operations.

He lived through the Battle of the Bulge and flew missions behind enemy lines, delivering critical supplies to American troops who had been cut off from support.

His service earned him the European-African-Middle Eastern Campaign Medal with three Bronze Stars, as well as the American Theater Medal, the World War II Victory Medal, and a Good Conduct Medal.

According to the New York Post, Critelli was born in Italy, a background that gave him a personal view of the war’s consequences in Europe.

“I love this country,” Critelli told the outlet.

“If I hadn’t come home to this country, I’d be stuck with Mussolini,” he added.

Critelli now lives in Floral Park, New York, and continues to make public appearances to honor fellow veterans and fallen service members.

His anthem performance was met with an emotional response inside the arena, with fans standing, clapping, and chanting as he finished the song.

The tribute also appeared to set the tone for the Islanders on the ice. Following Critelli’s performance, New York defeated its cross-state rivals, the New York Rangers, 2-0.

The moment served as a rare instance where sports, history, and patriotism converged in front of a national audience.

For many in attendance, the performance was a reminder of the sacrifices made by members of the Greatest Generation and the enduring legacy of those who served.


Scroll to Top