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.
Planned Parenthood, the giant in America's abortion industry with hundreds of millions of dollars in annual revenue, is being sued by the state of Missouri for deceiving American women about the safety of an abortion chemical it provides.
"For years, Planned Parenthood Federation of America has been lying to Americans about the risks of abortion pills," charges the legal filing against the abortionists, according to the claim brought in federal court in Missouri by the state itself.
"Planned Parenthood tells Missourians that the abortion pill is 'safer than many other medicines like penicillin, Tylenol, and Viagra. … That is brazenly false. A single dose of the abortion pill regularly lands woman in the emergency room."
In fact, the case documents that "up to 4.6% of women who take a single dose of 'mifepristone'" will end up in the emergency room.
The lawsuit explains, "Planned Parenthood is lying about the abortion pill to cut costs and boost revenue. Most physicians are not interested in working for Planned Parenthood—in part because of what the New York Times reports as a pattern of 'botched care' at Planned Parenthoods across the country that has put Planned Parenthood in a 'crisis.' Katie Benner, Botched Care and Tired Staff: Planned Parenthood in Crisis, New York Times (Feb. 15, 2025). Indeed, a Planned Parenthood facility in Columbia, Missouri, was recently shut down by the health department because the facility was using moldy abortion equipment. Working for Planned Parenthood carries reputational risk. Unable to hire enough physicians, Planned Parenthood schemes for shortcuts. Because it is easy for untrained, nonphysicians to deliver abortion pills, Planned Parenthood has successfully increased the proportion of abortions that occur by abortion pill. Now, two-thirds of all abortions occur by pill, a significant increase from 2017, when the abortion pill was used in just over one-third of abortions. To induce women to obtain the abortion pill, Planned Parenthood lies to women, concealing from them the high risks posed by the abortion pill."
Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey the abortion corporation is in violation of the state's Merchandising Practices Act.
It got to that position by "systematically" misleading women, the case charges.
"The national Planned Parenthood organization is actively endangering the lives of women and girls across the country by spreading lies and disinformation about the powerful chemical abortion drug," Bailey charges.
Bailey's court action seeks more than $1.8 million in civil penalties for daily violations of Missouri law, up to $1,000 in damages or restitution for every Missouri woman Planned Parenthood provided abortion pills to in the past five years, reimbursement to the state for Medicaid and other taxpayer-funded emergency care resulting from abortion pill complications and a court order halting Planned Parenthood Federation of America from continuing to promote these falsehoods in Missouri.
In March, Bailey had previously issued a cease-and-desist order to Planned Parenthood formally prohibiting the abortion giant from performing chemical abortions in the state citing the company's "uncontroverted track record" for disregarding Missouri health and safety laws.
Liberty Counsel founder Mat Staver said, "Comparing chemical abortion drugs to Tylenol is offensive and deceptive. Chemical abortions harm women physically and emotionally and cruelly kill defenseless children in the womb. The abortion industry has an agenda of death that disregards the life of unborn children and the health of their mothers."
Bailey added, "Planned Parenthood's false advertising has a national reach, including targeted claims against Missouri women. The organization uses its website to make dangerous claims, such as calling the chemical abortion drug mifepristone, 'safer than many other medicines like penicillin, Tylenol, and Viagra.'"
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.
In just the last fiscal year, Democrat Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell charged more than $288,000 on her taxpayer-funded credit card, including transactions in 31 states, multiple foreign trips, and Disney World.
Campbell's office charged a whopping $288,146.26 to state-issued procurement cards, called P-cards, between July 1, 2024, and June 30, 2025. Besides the travel expenses, charges for catered office parties were also included.
One of the most egregious abuses of taxpayer dollars was a trip to France that cost $13,627--nearly $9,000 for luxury chauffeur services and over $2,000 for air travel.
The office also spent $10,286 to rent overflow space at a hotel for an annual cyber crimes conference in April and over $1,000 on several occasions for office parties and events.
Campbell's actions have caught the attention of Republican lawmakers in the state, who have decried her liberal use of taxpayer funds for non-necessary items.
According to the Boston Herald, they are complaining that Campbell has spent thousands of dollars on hotels in Washington, D.C. since President Donald Trump took office as her office has repeatedly sued the Trump administration over his policy advancements.
Campbell claims that she is fighting against Trump's "illegal" attacks on people's rights and freedoms and said her spending was a "small price to pay" in order to do so.
She is also spending a sizeable chunk of her $83 million overall budget fighting Trump in the courts--spending that is mirrored by many of the other Democrat state AGs.
Republicans are further angered that she has not completed an ordered audit and seems to be dragging her feet.
Maybe that's because she knows what the auditors will find and is trying to delay the inevitable as long as possible to avoid accountability.
Many taxpayers have had to cut back on their expenses in the wake of inflation that has nearly doubled the costs in some sectors of the economy, so it is especially painful to be stuck footing the bill for lawmakers who feel no similar compunction to keep their own expenses in check.
Furthermore, all across the United States, billions and billions of dollars are being spent by states and the federal government to fight each other.
Staffing costs, court costs, travel costs, and all of it paid for by the tax dollars of the citizens of the United States.
It seems like such a waste of time, money and resources that could be going to building up our great country rather than tearing it down.
President Donald Trump made many promises on the campaign trail and, so far, his record of keeping those promises -- or attempting to -- is virtually pristine.
The only force that has caused Trump a problem in moving forward with many of his bold policies has been the federal judiciary. Multiple judges, mostly Democrat-appointed, have worked overtime to stop the president from implementing his agenda.
Luckily, the conservative majority Supreme Court has handed Trump and his administration enough wins to overcome the activist judiciary, and the wins keep coming.
As The Hill noted, the high court has given Trump its blessing to move forward with a number of firings at major agencies, allowing Trump to continue his mission to slash government waste.
The outlet reported that the Trump administratoin has brought more emergency appeals to the Supreme Court in his first six months than President Joe Biden did in six months.
While left-leaning outlets portray that as a negative, it's actually the opposite, as the high court has been Trump's only recourse on a number of major issues, especially when it comes to dismantling or reducing bloated government agencies, and also on immigration.
The Hill noted:
Trump’s Justice Department filed its 21st emergency application on Thursday, surpassing the 19 that the Biden administration filed during his entire four-year term.
Kannon Shanmugam, who leads Paul Weiss’s Supreme Court practice, weighed in on the number of emergency appeals filed by the Trump administration.
“The numbers are startling," Shanmugam said at a recent Federalist Society event.
The Hill added:
Trump’s Justice Department asserts the burst reflects how “activist” federal district judges have improperly blocked the president’s agenda. Trump’s critics say it shows how the president himself is acting lawlessly.
Shanmagum suggested that Congress could be at fault.
"There are a lot of reasons for this growth, but I think the biggest reason, in some sense, is the disappearance of Congress from the scene,” Shannagum said.
Regardless, thank goodness for the Supreme Court's willingness to override the Democrat-appointed activist judges who continue to try and hamstring Trump's agenda.
Without the high court on Trump's side, things would already look a lot different, and not in a good way.
Several of President Donald Trump’s Cabinet-level picks drew initial scrutiny for their seemingly unconventional nature, but his choice to lead the Pentagon was -- and remains -- especially controversial to some.
Now, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is drawing scrutiny from the left once more for his decision to remove the first female head of the U.S. Naval Academy, a personnel change critics suggest is part of a larger pattern of anti-female bias, as The Hill reports.
At issue is the recent ousting of Vice Adm. Yvette Davis from the role of superintendent at the Annapolis, Maryland, service academy, a position she was the first woman in history to fill.
As The Hill notes, Davis’ removal is the most recent in a string of similar adjustments that has seen no fewer than five senior military members transitioned out of powerful roles.
Combined with what detractors suggest is Hegseth’s broader bias against women in the military, these changes have created for some an alarming trend that could harm unity and inclusiveness in ranks of the armed forces.
Obama-era Defense Secretary Leon Panetta argued, “It’s hard not to come to the conclusion that it’s going to weaken our military force by undermining the role of women who have become, I believe, an intrinsic part of our military capability.”
Panetta continued, “Just to remove commanders from their positions without cause sends a clear signal that this is not about merit, it’s not about performance, it’s about the fact that they’re women. It’s the only conclusion you can come to.”
However, supporters of Hegseth would assuredly point to a host of high-profile Pentagon departures that include plenty of men as support for the argument that it is not gender bias but rather a desire for transformational change that is driving the personnel decisions.
In the wake of a series of damaging information leaks, Hegseth took steps to remove senior advisor Dan Caldwell earlier this year, with Darin Selnick and Colin Carroll soon to follow, as The Hill noted separately.
It was not long after that John Ullyot, a former press assistant to Hegseth, was shown the door, a move also believed to have been related to leak concerns.
Former Pentagon team lead for the Department of Government Efficiency Yinon Weiss announced his departure from the Defense Department earlier this month, raising eyebrows yet again about Hegseth’s personnel upheaval.
Senior staffer Justin Fulcher, another senior staffer and adviser to Hegseth, also left his position this month, and though he suggested that he only intended to stay at the Pentagon for six months, rumors about the true reasons for his departure and his involvement in probes of prior leaks persisted.
Though Hegseth has been under fire for much of his tenure atop the DoD, with Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) going so far as to say that he regrets voting for his confirmation, the secretary has received support from a seemingly unlikely source, namely, former Vice President Mike Pence, as The Hill separately reported.
Certainly no friend of Trump’s, Pence stepped forward to defend his choice to lead the Pentagon, saying of the criticism Hegseth has received, “I don’t think it’s fair. I’ve known Pete Hegseth a long time – he’s someone who’s worn the uniform. I’m told that we’re exceeding goals in every branch of our armed forces, and so all of that is welcome news and positive,” and that is an assessment with which it is hard to disagree.
Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) just got hit with a massive fine for breaking House ethics rules related to her infamous appearance at the 2021 Met Gala.
The House Ethics Committee ordered the leftist star to pay $2,000 after an investigation found that she broke House rules when underpaying for certain gifts and apparel, constituting a violation of ethics rules.
The Committee's report found that AOC “paid under fair market value for clothing and accessories,” and was ordered to pay $2,733 to vendors for the additional value of her" clothing, including the infamous dress that ironically read, "Tax the rich."
Nothing screams socialism and working class awareness like attending the Met Gala with the nation's elites and wearing a dress worth thousands that most Americans could never afford.
AOC's appearance at the Met Gala was a prime example of nauseating "champagne socialism" that many rich leftists are involved in. Enjoying lavish lifestyles while pretending to be warriors of the working class.
The report explained, "The Committee determined that Representative Ocasio-Cortez’s conduct was inconsistent with House Rules, laws, and other standards of conduct with respect to her acceptance of certain goods and services associated with her attendance at the 2021 Met Gala, and her delay in making appropriate payment for their receipt."
This outcome represents a cathartic moment of justice for conservatives who had to witness AOC's outrageous stunt and watch her get away with it for years.
The report continued by saying, "While the Committee did not find that Representative Ocasio-Cortez’s violations were knowing and willful, she nonetheless received impermissible gifts and must bear responsibility for the other conduct that occurred with respect to the delays in payment."
The "fair market value" of AOC's entire Met Gala outfit came out to an astounding $3,724.04. Talk about bouguisie excess and materialist signalling.
What's worse is that AOC only paid $990.76, which suggests that this extremely expensive outfit was presented mostly as a gift, which is what got the House Ethics Committee involved amid conservatives' fuming outrage.
The ticket to the Met Gala alone was worth $35,000, which prompted the American Accountability Foundation to lodge an ethics complaint against the self-styled far-leftist AOC.
AOC's "Tax the rich" dress was designed by Aurora James, of Brother Vellies, a luxury fashion brand. There is no industry more materialistic and capitalist than high-fashion, and yet AOC saw no irony in wearing a dress with that message.
AOC doesn't seem to understand that she is "the rich," as are the rest of the nation's elite, who attend the Met Gala every year to engage in the typical self-congratulatory celebrations of not being one of the masses.
Socialism is a revolting anti-American ideology on its own, but fashionable champagne socialism is an altogether different monster. It's long past time that AOC be recognized for the fraud that she truly is.