President Trump revealed the reason why he severed ties with Jeffrey Epstein, saying the disgraced financier stole workers from Mar-A-Lago.
Trump's past friendship with Epstein is back in the spotlight as the White House confronts backlash over its handling of the Epstein files.
Democrats have seized on the issue, and Trump's critics in the "fake news" media have hammered the story non-stop.
Much of the recent reporting on Trump and Epstein has done little more than rehash old details of their past friendship, which ended well before Epstein's first arrest in 2006.
It has long been known that Trump and Epstein socialized for some years before they had a falling out in 2004, reportedly over real estate.
While answering questions in Scotland on Monday, Trump repeated his assertion that the Epstein story is a "hoax" that has been blown up "way beyond proportion" by his enemies. But Trump nevertheless offered some new details about his relationship with Epstein and the way it unraveled.
"That’s such old history, very easy to explain, but I don’t want to waste your time by explaining it," Trump said.
The president explained that Epstein became "persona non grata" after hiring some of Trump's employees.
“He hired help. And I said ‘Don’t ever do that again.’ He stole people that worked for me,” Trump continued. “I said, ‘Don’t never do that again.’ He did it again. And I threw him out of the place, persona non grata. I threw him out, and that was it. I’m glad I did, if you want to know the truth.”
Addressing claims in the Wall Street Journal that he was named in the Epstein files, Trump said his predecessors would have released the files if they contained anything incriminating about him.
"Those files were run by the worst scum on earth... If they had anything I assume they would have released it. The whole thing is a hoax," Trump said.
"They can easily put something in the files that's a phony," Trump added, invoking the fake Trump-Russia dossier that was used to derail his first term.
Even if Trump is named in the files, that does not imply that he was involved in any wrongdoing.
Trump was one of several high-profile people who flew on Epstein's private jet, including Bill Clinton, who Trump alleged went to Epstein's infamous island "28 times."
"Bill Clinton went there, supposedly, 28 times ... And many other people that are very big people. Nobody ever talks about them," Trump said.
“I never had the privilege of going to his island. And I did turn it down,” Trump added.
“But a lot of people in Palm Beach were invited to his island. In one of my very good moments, I turned it down. I didn’t want to go to his island.”
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A conservative who launched a joke at Hillary Clinton fans during the 2016 election, telling them to avoid the lines and vote online, which of course was impossible, was the target in a war from Joe Biden's administration as soon as he took office.
Ultimately, his case was thrown out, and now he's striking back with a lawsuit for damages.
A report at Revolver explains it is Douglass Mackey who revealed on Donald Trump Jr.'s show that he is suing the U.S. government.
The report explains, "Back in 2020, right after Joe Biden was installed in the White House, one of the very first things his weaponized DOJ did was launch a political hit job on Douglass Mackey, a conservative influencer who dared to mock Hillary Clinton with a satirical meme during the 2016 election. The meme was obviously a joke and clearly protected speech. But that didn't matter. What mattered was the message it sent: mock the regime, and we'll destroy your life. So, that's exactly what the Biden regime did."
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals just recently ended the Biden administration's war against Mackey by vacating his conviction.
Revolver reported, "Many also believe the Mackey case was a test run. Because if they could twist a meme into a federal crime and throw a young guy in prison, could they also go after a former president? Turns out, yes. They could. And they did."
The report also noted Mackey was "bringing in some serious firepower," as his lawyer is James Burnham, who previously was general counsel to President Donald Trump's DOGE.
Revolver explained in the Trump Jr. interview, Mackey's attorney "made it clear that securing compensation for the damages Mackey endured will be priority number one, and those damages total in the millions in legal fees, lost opportunities, defamation, and untold stress and hardship."
Also possible? Suing DOJ attorneys in their personal capacity and filing misconduct complaints against them.
Also they will work with Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate how the case could come about, "who originated it, and whose heads need to roll for it."
When the 2nd Circuit ruling was announced, it tossed Mackey's conviction for election interference.
WND reported the joke by Mackey triggered a conviction for "election interference."
But he appealed to the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to reverse the decision, arguing that if the government's case against him stands, the results necessarily would criminalize not just political misinformation and satire, but also "lies about also whether and for whom to vote. Such a sprawling political speech code is in the teeth of every applicable canon for reading criminal laws, and grossly offends the First Amendment."
There were claims Mackey tricked some 5,000 people into voting by text or social media, even though there was no process to accommodate those attempts.
WND also reported that a "progressive activist told Trump supporters to vote by text, but she was not prosecuted.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
PALM BEACH, Florida – Why did President Donald Trump end his friendship with fellow Palm Beacher Jeffrey Epstein years ago?
The commander in chief answered that question Tuesday, saying the convicted pedophile "stole" female staffers from his spa at Mar-a-Lago.
Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One, Trump said Epstein hired away numerous spa workers despite being repeatedly told not to. He said some of the gals were young women, including then-17-year-old Virginia Giuffre.
"Everyone knows the people that were taken and it was the concept of taking people that work for me is bad," Trump said.
"But that story has been pretty well out there, and yes, they were [young women] … People were taken out of the spa, hired by [Epstein]. In other words, gone. And other people would come and complain 'this guy is taking people from the spa,' I didn't know that. And when I heard about it, I told him, 'Listen, we don't want you taking our people, whether it was spa or not [the] spa.' I don't want him taking people, and he was fine. Then not too long after that, he did it again and I said, '[You're] out of here.'"
When a reporter asked if Giuffre was one of the employees hired away from the spa, Trump responded: "I don't know. I think she worked at the spa. I think so, I think that was one of the people, yeah.
"He stole her. And by the way, she had no complaints about us, as you know. None whatsoever."
The president noted the hiring spree by the disgraced financier was "the end" of his time at Mar-a-Lago.
"I don't want to say any number, you're talking about a number of years ago. But yeah, he took people and I said, 'Don't do it anymore, they work for me.'
"And he took beyond that, he took some others. And once he did that, that was the end of him."
In April, Giuffre reportedly committed suicide at age 41. She previosuly asserted Epstein's associate Ghislaine Maxwell recruited her to perform sex acts.
She told the BBC in December 2019 that Prince Andrew sexually abused her three times at Epstein and Maxwell's homes when she was 17, an allegation which the prince denied.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
An anti-Trump federal judge who already had been described as a threat to the rule of law now is the target of a complaint filed by the Department of Justice accusing him of undermining the nation's judiciary.
Attorney General Pam Bondi explained the complaint over "misconduct" by James Boasberg, a federal judge who once wildly ordered the administration of President Donald Trump to turn around airplanes that already were in international airspace to return the illegal alien criminals they were deporting to America, involved his "making improper public comments about President Trump and his administration."
These comments have undermined the integrity of the judiciary," she confirmed.
A DOJ official confirmed, "Judge Boasberg first tried to persuade Chief Justice Roberts and other federal judges that the Trump administration would not follow court orders, despite having no basis for his belief. Then he acted on his baseless belief again and again in litigation over which he was presiding. Judge Boasberg violated the Canons of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, including the requirement that he 'promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.'"
The Washington Examiner said the official complaint, for "misconduct," against Boasberg charged him with those "improper public comments" about the administration.
Boasberg has fought the administration's agendas, including that for securing the borders and deporting illegal aliens, especially criminals, for months.
He once ordered two jets carrying deported illegals to be returned, without addressing the fact of whether those jets, already in international airspace, would have fuel to return.
WND has reported it was the Federalist that obtained access to comments Boasberg made at a recent judicial conference undermining the president.
He disparaged the president, even though he's required to be neutral on issues and people in his court, where Trump is a defendant in a number of cases brought by activists trying to undermine his agenda for America.
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche later described Boasberg as a "threat to the rule of law" for using his own agendas in his court rulings to try to control the decisions of the Executive Branch.
A report at the Washington Examiner said Blanche was responding to Boasberg's comments and said, the judge was in "serious breach of the judicial oath and a threat to the rule of law."
"This memo confirms that at least some federal judges were predisposed against the Trump administration," Blanche wrote. "Every litigant, regardless of politics, is entitled to a fair forum."
The report noted, "Other senior DOJ officials, including Chad Mizelle, called the report 'very troubling' and said it 'perhaps explains the completely lawless order issued by Judge Boasberg (which was unsurprisingly stayed by the D.C. Circuit).'"
The judge's misbehavior was revealed by the Federalist which confirmed investigative reporter and senior legal correspondent Margot Cleveland uncovered the fact that Boasberg, based in Washington, D.C., complained to Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts that his colleagues were "concern[ed] that the Administration would disregard rulings of federal courts leading to a constitutional crisis."
Boasberg is the chief judge in the judicial district and has been at center of a judicial campaign to prevent Trump's agenda to secure the American borders and deport illegal aliens, those who are in the United States illegally, and often have committed subsequent crimes.
Further, Boasberg also was at the center of activism before President Trump's first term when Trump was under attack in the fabricated Russiagate conspiracy theory launched by the Hillary Clinton campaign and others with lies about Trump campaign collusion with Russia.
Boasberg was chosen for his job by leftist Barack Obama, who now is just one subject of a congressional investigation into a vast conspiracy that developed in Washington targeting Trump.
Boasberg, in fact, when sentencing an ex-FBI lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith, who admitted doctoring a 2017 email regarding Deep State's work against Trump, refused to give him any prison time but told him to do community service.
Boasberg ruled against Trump in one deportation dispute and told him to order airplanes carrying illegal aliens out of the United States to turn around mid-air and come back.
The White House responded that the jets, carrying the "terrorist alien" individuals, already had left U.S. airspace and the judge had no jurisdiction there.
Federal judges already have heard hundreds of claims by those wanting to stop Trump's agenda to remove unneeded personnel from federal payrolls, stop handing billions of tax dollars to unfriendly foreign interests and more.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Lee Zeldin, President Donald Trump's chief for the Environmental Protection Agency, has announced plans to remove the foundation on which trillions of dollars of environmental rules are based.
He has announced a proposal that would remove the "endangerment" finding, from back in 2009, that claimed greenhouse gases like carbon monoxide and methane actually "threaten" the public's health.
That concept is the base assumption on which myriad environmental rules, regulations and requirements are based.
A report at Fox Business explains the Barack Obama-era finding "serves as the legal foundation for a host of climate regulations stemming from the Clean Air Act."
Affected will be chemical plants, utilities, steel mills and more.
"With this proposal, the Trump EPA is proposing to end 16 years of uncertainty for automakers and American consumers," Zeldin confirmed in a statement. "In our work so far, many stakeholders have told me that the Obama and Biden EPAs twisted the law, ignored precedent, and warped science to achieve their preferred ends and stick American families with hundreds of billions of dollars in hidden taxes every single year."
He announced the looming change during an interview with the "Ruthless" podcast, calling the move against the green precedent one that will drive "a dagger into the heart of the climate change religion."
An estimated $54 billion spending for Americans each year will be saved because mandates like Joe Biden's forcing expensive electric vehicles on Americans will be scaled back.
"A lot of people are out there listening, they might not know what the endangerment finding is. If you ask congressional Democrats to describe what it is, the left would say that it means that carbon dioxide is a pollutant, carbon dioxide is an endangerment to human health. They might say methane is a pollutant, methane is an endangerment to human health," Zeldin said.
He said that's actually inaccurate.
"The Obama administration said that carbon dioxide, when mixed with a bunch of other well-mixed gasses, greenhouse gasses, that it contributes to climate change. How much? They don't say … they say that climate change endangers human health, so because of these different mental leaps… then there were all sorts of vehicle regulations that followed."
The announcement marked the beginning of a process through which the precedent actually will be dumped.
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi filed an official complaint on behalf of the Justice Department alleging U.S. District Court Chief Judge James Boasberg committed misconduct by trying to influence other judges against President Donald Trump.
The complaint was written by Bondi’s Chief of Staff Chad Mizelle at her direction and addressed to the Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Sri Srinivasan.
"The Department of Justice respectfully submits this complaint alleging misconduct by U.S. District Court Chief Judge James E. Boasberg for making improper public comments about President Donald J. Trump to the Chief Justice of the United States and other federal judges that have undermined the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary," Mizelle wrote.
Boasberg is the presiding judge in the high-profile case involving illegal immigrants sent to CECOT prison in El Salvador.
He ordered the Trump administration to turn planes containing migrants around while they were in midair, but that didn't happen and Boasberg has talked about holding DOJ lawyers in contempt for not following his order.
Trump and his team have claimed that the order did not come in time to stop the planes, but that did not satisfy Boasberg.
The complaint focused on two occasions when the DOJ says Boasberg damaged the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.
"On March 11, 2025, Judge Boasberg attended a session of the Judicial Conference of the United States, which exists to discuss administrative matters like budgets, security, and facilities. While there, Judge Boasberg attempted to improperly influence Chief Justice Roberts and roughly two dozen other federal judges by straying from the traditional topics to express his belief that the Trump Administration would 'disregard rulings of federal courts' and trigger 'a constitutional crisis,'" the complaint read regarding the first occasion.
"Although his comments would be inappropriate even if they had some basis, they were even worse because Judge Boasberg had no basis—the Trump Administration has always complied with all court orders. Nor did Judge Boasberg identify any purported violations of court orders to justify his unprecedented predictions," it argued.
"Within days of those statements, Judge Boasberg began acting on his preconceived belief that the Trump Administration would not follow court orders," the complaint continued. "First, although he lacked authority to do so, he issued a temporary restraining order preventing the Government from removing violent Tren de Aragua terrorists, which the Supreme Court summarily vacated."
"Taken together, Judge Boasberg’s words and deeds violate Canons of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, and, erode public confidence in judicial neutrality, and warrant a formal investigation."
The DOJ wants Boasberg to face an inquiry by a special investigative committee, which will be tasked with determining whether he engaged in "conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts."
Bondi also wants him taken off the case of the Venezuelan migrants deported to El Salvador "to prevent further erosion of public confidence while the investigation proceeds."
It's the second complaint Bondi's DOJ has filed against a federal judge who seemed to be targeting Trump, and there will probably be more where that came from, given the number of judges who seem to be doing the same.
President Trump's CIA director John Ratcliffe is preparing to release more evidence uncovering Hillary Clinton's role in starting the Russiagate hoax.
Ratcliffe said he will release the "underlying intelligence" from the investigation led by Special Counsel John Durham, who examined the FBI's reliance on Clinton campaign materials linking Trump and Russia.
"What hasn’t come out yet and what’s going to come out is the underlying intelligence,” Ratcliffe told Fox News' Sunday Morning Futures.
It has long been known that Clinton's 2016 operation paid for the notorious, bogus Steeler dossier that the FBI used to spy on Trump campaign aide Carter Page. Around the same time the FBI launched its Crossfire Hurricane probe into Trump's campaign, the intelligence community intercepted Russian intelligence about a Clinton-backed effort to link Trump and Russia.
Former CIA director John Brennan briefed President Obama and his top national security officials, including FBI director James Comey, on the Clinton "plan," which according to Durham, was never considered by the FBI in its analysis of evidence connecting Trump and Russia.
“In the summer of 2016, U.S. intelligence intercepted Russian intelligence talking about a Hillary Clinton plan, a Hillary Clinton plan to falsely accuse Donald Trump of Russia collusion, to vilify him and smear him with what would become known infamously as the — as the Steele dossier,” Ratcliffe told Sunday Morning Futures.
Ratcliffe declassified information about the Clinton plan in October 2020, when he was Trump's ODNI director. Ratcliffe noted at the time that the accuracy of the Russian intelligence was unknown, but Ratcliffe did share Brennan's handwritten notes about the "‘alleged approval by Hillary Clinton on July 26, 2016 of a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisors to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by Russian security services.’”
Ratcliffe told Sunday Morning Futures that the Clinton plan was effectively verified by Clinton's campaign manager, Robby Mook, who testified in 2022 that Clinton personally approved efforts to spread false claims tying Trump and a Russian bank.
Durham found that the FBI's investigation was seriously flawed and guided by institutional groupthink against Trump, but Durham fell short of alleging a criminal conspiracy and his probe did not result in the reckoning that many anticipated.
The underlying intelligence in Durham's report will soon be made public, Ratcliffe said, and it will make clear once and for all that Clinton fabricated the Trump-Russia narrative that derailed Trump's first term.
“And what that intelligence shows, Maria, is that part of this was a Hillary Clinton plan, but part of it was an FBI plan to be an accelerant to that fake Steele dossier, to those fake Russia collusion claims by pouring oil on the fire, by amplifying the lie and bearing the truth of what Hillary Clinton was up to," Ratcliffe said.
Clinton has long been scrutinized over her efforts to link Trump and Russia, but recently declassified documents shared by intelligence director Tulsi Gabbard have cast the net wider, implicating President Obama and his national security team in advancing the false "collusion" narrative.
While years have gone by since the events of Russiagate, the statute of limitations for the "conspiracy" has not run out, Ratcliffe said.
“There is no doubt in my mind that the people that we just talked about conspired. They conspired against President Trump. They conspired against the American people,” Ratcliffe said.
President Trump is furious at White House officials for mishandling the Jeffrey Epstein case, but Trump is reluctant to fire anyone and create a bigger "spectacle" for critics to grab ahold of, according to a report.
A political storm over the Epstein files has now consumed the White House for three weeks, angering Trump and members of his team who believe it is becoming a distraction from the president's successes.
“This is a pretty substantial distraction,” one White House source told the Washington Post.
"While many are trying to keep the unity, in many ways, the DOJ and the FBI are breaking at the seams. Many are wondering how sustainable this is going to be for all the parties involved — be it the FBI director or attorney general.”
The controversy exploded over the July 4th weekend, when the DOJ published a memo concluding that Epstein died by suicide in his prison cell and that he did not keep a secret client list.
The findings sparked backlash from members of Trump's own base, many of whom felt blindsided after Trump officials had appeared to tease that new information was forthcoming. Critics have piled on attorney general Pam Bondi in particular, who hinted at a "truckload" of explosive documents.
“Everything’s going to come out to the public,” she told Fox News' Sean Hannity in early March. “The public has a right to know. Americans have a right to know.”
Trump has stood by his embattled attorney general through the Epstein drama, which has yet to die down despite Trump's repeated pleas for supporters to move on from what he calls a "hoax" being stoked by his enemies.
"He [Trump] does not want to create a bigger spectacle by firing anyone," the White House source told the Washington Post.
In an effort to quiet the storm, Trump earlier this month directed Bondi to seek the release of grand jury materials in the case. One of those requests has been denied by a federal judge in Florida.
Democrats pounced on a recent report in the Wall Street Journal that said Trump was told his name appeared in the Epstein files. Trump was reportedly told this by Bondi during a routine briefing that was not dedicated to the subject.
Simply being mentioned in the government's files on Epstein does not imply wrongdoing, but Democrats have exploited the issue to attack Trump, who severed ties with Epstein years ago.
After Trump announced a major trade deal between the U.S. and Europe on Sunday, he was asked by a reporter if the effort was expedited to drive Epstein out of the headlines.
The question left Trump visibly irritated.
"Oh, you’ve got to be kidding me with that,” Trump said.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
John Brennan, who was Barack Obama's CIA chief, has been confirmed through declassified government documents to have been an essential part of a grand conspiracy by Democrats against Donald Trump, then a candidate for president and even while he was president, according to a constitutional expert.
Jonathan Turley, who has testified as an expert on the Constitution before Congress, even representing members in those disputes, now concludes that Brennan's own words ""will remain an indictment of his role in history."
The scheme targeting Trump, launched by Obama and aided by Brennan as well as then-FBI head James Comey and DNI James Clapper, falsely alleged a Trump campaign conspiracy with Russia, among other false claims made in Democrat fabrications like the Steele dossier.
"Back in 2016 and in the years that followed, this must have seemed to Brennan like just another CIA operation with 'plausible deniability.' After all, he knew that he had the Biden administration and the media watching his back. Of course, the public would ultimately reject these hit jobs, not only reelecting Trump but also giving Republicans full control of Congress," Turley explained.
"Brennan may be protected from perjury charges by the five-year statute of limitations. However, he is likely to be called again before Congress and asked the same questions. Even if he is not criminally charged, his past statements will remain an indictment of his role in history," he explained. " What is now clear is that high-level officials dismissed intelligence and evidence in order to create and spread the Russian collusion conspiracy as widely as they could. Their politicization of intelligence was raw and wrong. It succeeded only because it was an 'all-hands-on-deck' effort, from the Obama White House to the CIA, the FBI, and the media."
He noted that evidence now shows Obama, Brennan and others "knew in advance about the planned political hit job," which in fact was twice-failed Democrat candidate Hillary Clinton's conspiracy to launch rumors linking Trump to Russia in order to divert the public's attention from her own email scandal, where she put government secrets on a private, unsecured server in her home.
The scheme involved altering official government documents that concluded Russia essentially was a nonplayer in the election, to the false conclusion that it colluded with Trump's campaign.
"Keep in mind that Obama's ordering of the new assessment was occurring at the very end of his term. There was a rush to complete the report before Trump took office after defeating Hillary Clinton. The effort seeded the Russian collusion hoax that would consume much of Trump's first term," Turley said.
In interviews, he noted, "Brennan continued to deny prior knowledge" of the Democrat-funded Steele dossier with its false allegations against Trump.
Brennan even accused Trump of 'reason, in a televised statement.
"Whatever professional integrity Brennan had left after that, he set it aside in joining more than 50 former intelligence officials in signing a now-infamous letter dismissing the Hunter Biden laptop story before the 2020 presidential election as likely 'Russian disinformation.' Joining him on the letter was former Obama Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, who says that he has now 'lawyered up' in anticipation of potential criminal allegations. The laptop, of course, was later found to be authentic and incriminating for Hunter Biden," Turley wrote.
The evidence against Brennan, and others, now comes from those declassified documents that contradict Brennan's own sworn statements to Congress.
While Brennan claimed the dossier's allegations were a minor subpoint, actually he demanded that those allegations be included in official intel community observations about Trump.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A pro-abortion judge who owes her position to Barack Obama, a radical advocate for abortion, has ruled American taxpayers must give hundreds of millions of dollars each year to abortion-industry giant Planned Parenthood.
The ruling, from Indira Talwani, for now halts a portion of a law that was adopted by Congress and signed into law by President Donald Trump.
An appeal, of course, is in the works.
But meanwhile, officials with Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America pointed out how Talwani made her decision based on lies, even citing those lies in her court opinion.
"An activist judge just issued a ruling full of falsehoods about abortion giant Planned Parenthood in a desperate effort to keep forcing taxpayers to prop up Big Abortion," explained Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of SBA Pro-Life America.
"Every day this order stands, Planned Parenthood continues to rake in millions of our tax dollars, fueling thousands of unborn lives ended daily and putting women at unacceptable risk of serious harm and even death. Women have better and more comprehensive alternatives with community health centers outnumbering Planned Parenthood facilities 15 to 1. We look forward to the Trump administration swiftly stopping this lawfare and restoring the historic victory secured through the One Big Beautiful Bill."
The SBA organization noted where Talwani strayed far from the truth:
A report at the Washington Examiner said Talwani "permanently" blocked the bill cutting off Medicaid funding to Planned Parenthood.
The ruling replaces a preliminary injunction she had insisted on imposing earlier.
Talwani claimed in court documents that defunding Planned Parenthood "will result in the closure of clinics that inevitably will have 'adverse health consequences where care is disrupted or unavailable.'"
She alleged there could be an "increase" in unintended pregnancies if Planned Parenthood is not paid hundreds of millions of dollars annually by taxpayers.
She complained absent that tax money, there would be a decrease in access to contraceptives and that would produce a "corresponding increase in the number of unintended pregnancies" and therefore that "will likely result in an increased number of abortions."
Federal law already prohibits using taxes for abortions, but pro-life organizations long have pointed out that money that subsidizes other operations by Planned Parenthood also subsidizes its abortion procedures.
The abortion industry leader reported grabbing about $800 million in federal tax money during fiscal 2023-2024.
It sued over the democratically created legislation.
Talwani's ideological ruling already has drawn criticism from the Department of Justice, where chief of staff Chad Mizell called her "lawless."
Lila Rose, president of the anti-abortion organization Live Action, said in a statement that the ruling from Talwani, appointed by Obama in 2014, "is a blatant act of judicial overreach."
"Congress passed the One Big Beautiful Bill with clear language and intent to stop the forced taxpayer funding of abortion," Rose said. "This unelected judge has decided that her personal pro-abortion agenda matters more than the law."
The Constitution actually doesn't mention abortion, as was pointed out when the faulty Roe Supreme Court decision was overturned several years ago. That left the regulation to the states, under their laws. Federal cash handouts, of course, are under the Constitution left to Congress.