U.S. District Judge Michael Simon has recused himself from a lawsuit over President Donald Trump's policy of sending the National Guard to Oregon, the Washington Examiner reported. The Obama-nominated judge was randomly assigned to the case and is married to Rep. Suzanne Bonamici (D-OR), who publicly opposed the policy.
Trump has been sending troops to beleaguered cities where local law enforcement is either unable or unwilling to maintain law and order. Because Democrats have painted themselves into a corner when it comes to this issue, Bonamici dutifully opposed the idea and said the president should "rescind" that order.
This forced the Department of Justice to have the case reassigned as Simon recused himself. "JUST IN: DOJ suggests Judge Simon recuse from the Oregon National Guard case because he's married to @RepBonamici, who has vocally opposed the deployment," Politico reporter Kyle Cheney posted to X, formerly Twitter, along with an image of the legal document.
JUST IN: DOJ suggests Judge Simon recuse from the Oregon National Guard case because he's married to @RepBonamici, who has vocally opposed the deployment. https://t.co/BfrUkAng8t pic.twitter.com/hR50pPw8rA
— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) October 2, 2025
One of the many pitfalls of Democratic rule in a given city is that it turns the community into a nightmare for the people who live there. Lately, the violence and chaos are being directed at Immigration and Customs Enforcement facilities, and Trump is attempting to turn the tide on that with the National Guard.
As Fox News reported, Trump did the same in Portland, Oregon to secure the ICE facility. "At the request of Secretary of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem, I am directing Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, to provide all necessary Troops to protect War ravaged Portland, and any of our ICE Facilities under siege from attack by Antifa, and other domestic terrorists. I am also authorizing Full Force, if necessary."
With that aim, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth signed a memo on Sept. 28 noting that "200 members of the Oregon National Guard will be called into Federal service effective immediately for a period of 60 days." Just the day before, Bonamici made her position known on the Bluesky social media platform.
She said Trump was "lying" after she conducted her own visit to the facility and was unfazed by what she saw. "I was at the ICE facility two days ago and saw a few peaceful protesters, not a 'siege,'" the lawmaker claimed.
Bonamici went on to sign a letter in protest addressed to Trump, Hegseth, and Noem. "This unilateral action represents an abuse of executive authority, seeks to incite violence, and undermines the constitutional balance of power between the federal government and states. We urge you to rescind this decision, and withdraw any military personnel and federal agents you have recently sought to deploy."
According to the Oregon Department of Justice, the state's Attorney General Dan Rayfield and the City of Portland filed a temporary restraining order against the Trump administration on Sept. 29. The intent was to prevent Hegseth from deploying the National Guard to restore order in the city as outlined in his memo.
“The facts are egregious. The President’s response to federalize 200 National Guard members for 60 days is not about keeping people safe – it’s about chasing headlines at the expense of our community," Rayfield said.
The lawsuit stated that doing so would violate the Constitution and "multiple federal laws," arguing that the president could only do so "in cases of invasion, rebellion, or when federal laws cannot otherwise be executed. None of those conditions exist in Oregon," the lawsuit said.
“Putting our own military on our streets is an abuse of power and a disservice to our communities and our service members. The Guard is made up of our neighbors and friends, not political props. Oregon is our home — not a military target," Rayfield said. Unfortunately, violent protests are par for the course in Portland, as some fear a particular escalation at ICE facility demonstrations.
Portland's resistance to help from the National Guard continues to perpetuate the same poor decisions that have turned the city into a war zone, even as Bonamici insists that all is well there. At least Judge Simon has acknowledged his conflict of interest because of her remarks, but it may be difficult to find another judge who isn't biased in favor of anarchy in that area.
Rep. Madeleine Dean cornered House Speaker Mike Johnson to charge that President Donald Trump was "unhinged" in his remarks to military leaders on Tuesday, the UK Daily Mail reported. The Pennsylvania Democrat ensured the interaction took place in front of reporters and cameras in the halls of Congress.
War Secretary Pete Hegseth called a meeting of military leaders to Quantico, Virginia, to roll out some much-needed tweaks to military policy. Trump addressed the group, and, as usual, many of his critics didn't like what he had to say, including Dean.
The 66-year-old congresswoman attempted to score political points by complaining to Johnson, who seemed unfazed by her claims. "The president is unhinged. He is unwell," Dean told Johnson. The House Speaker fired back, "A lot of folks on your side are, too." Journalist Aaron Rupar shared a clip of the exchange on X, formerly Twitter, on Friday.
MADELEINE DEAN: The president is unhinged. He is unwell.
MIKE JOHNSON: A lot of folks on your side are too
DEAN: Oh my god, please. That performance in front of the generals?
MIKE JOHNSON: I didn't see it
DEAN: It's so dangerous! Our allies are looking elsewhere. Our enemies… pic.twitter.com/WNvZRo638S
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) October 2, 2025
Although Johnson's retort was a sharp one and indeed true, Dean continued with her line of attack against Trump even as the expression on Johnson's face demonstrated that he had no desire to hear what she had to say about it. "That is so dangerous,” Dean told Johnson.
"You know I serve on Foreign Affairs and Appropriations. This is a collision of those two things," Dean said. Of course, Johonson is well aware of what committees Dean serves on, but she ticked off her resume just in case anyone watching at home wasn't sure who she was.
"Our allies are looking elsewhere. Our enemies are laughing. You have a president who is unwell," Dean said.
What did Trump say that was so outrageous that Dean had to confront Johnson with it? Well, as the New York Times reported, it was a pretty typical Trump speech where he attacked his political enemies and complained about his opposition, at least until one throwaway line that Dean and other Trump critics glommed onto.
"I told Pete, we should use some of these dangerous cities as training grounds for our military," Trump said to Hegseth. The Times found this so objectionable that it repeated the line in italics for maximum effect.
While Dean and others try to pretend that Trump was speaking out of turn, the truth is that the president has been forced to deploy the National Guard to Democratic-run cities because of conditions there. The president recently ordered 200 troops to the city of Portland, Oregon, after chaos had erupted at the Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility, Fox News reported.
"It's been a consistent battle every night with Antifa in Portland," Todd Lyons, acting ICE director, said Wednesday of the state of things in Portland. "We've called on local and state officials to help, but we just haven't seen the help." The troops will help, but in the meantime, it's a war zone.
"We’re out there every night battling people that are bringing sticks, bats, shields, throwing their own CS grenades at us. So it's not a peaceful situation," Lyons added. His fears are well-founded as a facility in Dallas, Texas, was attacked on Sept. 24 by a lone gunman.
During that attack, two detainees were shot and killed, while a third was wounded, before the shooter took his own life. This kind of violence and anger directed at ICE agents in America is certainly reminiscent of a battlefield abroad, which makes Trump's "training ground" remark seem quite accurate.
The left has tried every line of attack on Trump, including claiming that he's suffering from cognitive decline or some other age-related malady based on something he's said. And, like all of the rest of the attacks, Trump will surely survive this one and prove them wrong no matter what Dean or anyone else has to say about him.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) gave a dire warning to her fellow Democrats about what she thinks will happen if they give in to Republicans to end a government shutdown without having their demands for $1 trillion in new spending on healthcare met, saying on MSNBC that "there are going to be people that are going to die" without the spending.
Warren threw out a litany of scenarios that she believes would happen under the Republicans' spending plan, which the party called a "clean continuing resolution" that would maintain current spending levels.
She said,
They’re trying to find anything to talk about around the shutdown, to blame it on Democrats so they don’t have to talk about the two thirds of seniors who are in nursing homes, a lot of them with serious health problems, half of them with Alzheimer’s, who can just be pushed out on the street under the Republican bill.
They don’t want to talk about those brand new babies and their mamas who will lose access to health care. They do not want to talk about your neighbor who counts on a home health aide, and who counts on having a wheelchair in order to try to live independently and can lose all of that.
They don’t want to talk about the tens of millions of families who are receiving notices this month saying, here’s where your health care premiums were already too high. Here’s where they’re going to be, thanks to the Republicans.
In reality, Democrats are demanding that $1 trillion in cuts enacted in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act in July, which was done as a budget reconciliation without Democrat support, be reversed.
The cuts from the OBBBA prevented illegal immigrant asylees and parolees from getting health care subsidies and Medicaid, which was happening before that bill was passed. This is what Republicans mean when they say that Democrats are demanding that illegal immigrants get health care, and they are not wrong about that--it would happen if Democrats get what they want.
Because of some delays, some of the cuts from the OBBBA have only taken effect on October 1, which is why Democrats are claiming that they are new cuts (they are not).
Of course, Democrats in their usual fashion have tried to muddy the waters enough that the average American voter has a hard time understanding the issue, since they don't want to be blamed for shutting down the government over their demands, which are unreasonable for a party out of power.
Warren continued,
They’re going to be people who are going to have to make decisions about whether to make rent or pay for health insurance. They’re going to be people who are just going to let their health insurance go. They’re going to be people who are going to die because of these decisions. And that more than anything else, the Republicans don’t want to talk about. They rather shut down the government than help Americans who are just trying to get their costs under control. I think that is a fight worth fighting, and the Democrats are organized to do it right now.
Warren is not wrong that costs have gone up for some people under the OBBBA. It's possible that it could result in someone's death if they can't get treatment because they can't afford health insurance.
This has been a problem long before the OBBBA. It's an ongoing debate whether health care should be paid for by private citizens and businesses, or provided by the government at a huge cost in taxes. The current system is pretty generous in providing for those in need, but won't satisfy those who think health care is a universal right.
The bottom line here is that Democrats are trying to advance their agenda despite having very little power--a result of the will of the people in the last election. We will see who blinks first, but right now it doesn't look like either side is willing to budge an inch.
In a striking development, the complete text of a letter from the late conservative activist Charlie Kirk to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has surfaced, offering insight into Kirk’s intricate perspective on Israel.
The letter, released by the New York Post, reflects Kirk’s profound respect for Israel while pressing for a significant shift in its public communication approach, amid a heated dispute over his views following his tragic death on Sept. 10 in Utah.
The narrative starts on May 2, when Kirk, a well-known conservative figure, wrote a detailed seven-page letter to Netanyahu.
In this correspondence, he conveyed a strong personal bond with Israel while sounding the alarm on fading support among younger Americans.
He pointed out the growing wave of hostility on social media platforms and in college environments.
Kirk urged swift action to address these troubling trends.
On Sept. 10, tragedy unfolded as Kirk was fatally shot during a speaking engagement in Utah.
After his passing, Netanyahu spoke publicly on Fox News, citing portions of Kirk’s letter and mentioning a planned trip to Israel that would never occur.
The Israeli leader referenced Kirk’s statement about defending Israel as a Christian, igniting a firestorm of debate among conservative circles.
On Sept. 15, conservative commentator Candace Owens, a friend of Kirk, criticized Netanyahu’s depiction of the letter during her podcast.
She accused him of skewing its essence by omitting context, particularly regarding Kirk’s worries about Israel’s impact on American politics and free speech.
Owens insisted that the full document be made public to clarify its message.
Subsequently, the New York Post disclosed the entire letter, giving readers access to Kirk’s complete viewpoint.
Analysts like Gideon Askowitz and Nathan Livingstone responded, claiming the text refuted Owens’ interpretation and underscored Kirk’s genuine fondness for Israel.
In a post on X dated Oct. 1, Askowitz described the letter as overflowing with admiration, despite its pointed critique of specific shortcomings.
Sean "Diddy" Combs faces up to 20 years in jail after a judge declined to overturn his conviction, Fox News reported.
The 55-year-old hip hop mogul will be sentenced Friday after U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian said the prosecution "proved its case many times over." Combs had asked the judge for a new trial and to toss out his convictions on two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution. He faces up to 10 years for each count.
"That by itself might be enough to dispose of Combs’s challenge. But the other factors don’t do much to help Combs either," the judge wrote.
Combs was acquitted of the most serious charges of racketeering and sex trafficking, which could have sent him to prison for life.
Prosecutors had accused Combs of running a criminal enterprise that involved forcing women to engage in degrading sex acts with male escorts. He was found guilty on two lesser counts for transporting his ex-girlfriends to engage in prostitution.
During Combs' eight-week trial, his lawyers acknowledged the rapper engaged in physical abuse, but they insisted the key prosecution witnesses, Cassie Ventura and a woman who went by the pseudonym "Jane," had consented to sex sessions that Combs often filmed, which were called "freak-offs."
Combs was convicted under a century-old human trafficking law, the Mann Act, which made it a crime to transport women and girls across state lines for prostitution and other "immoral" purposes.
Ahead of the trial, Combs' attorneys tried to dismiss the charges by arguing the Mann Act has "racist origins." The original broad wording of the law was at one time used to prosecute interracial couples, but it was later amended to primarily target sexual exploitation, particularly of children.
After Combs was found guilty, his attorneys sought to beat the convictions by characterizing Combs as a voyeur or pornographer. The verdict, they said, violates Combs' First Amendment rights.
"We are talking about adults having a threesome, bringing another adult into their private sex life," Alexandra Shapiro, one of Combs’ defense lawyers, told Subramanian at a hearing.
Ultimately, the defense's various arguments failed to convince the judge.
“Illegal activity can’t be laundered into constitutionally protected activity,” the judge wrote, dismissing Combs' free speech argument.
Combs' lawyers have asked for 14 months in prison, saying the time he has already served is enough punishment.
Prosecutors have sought over 11 years in jail, arguing the penalty should reflect Combs' lack of remorse and his years of abusive behavior.
Vice president J.D. Vance accused Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) of shutting down the federal government to protect his job, saying Schumer caved to pressure from his liberal base in order to stave off a primary challenge.
On the first full day of the shutdown, Vance told reporters at the White House that Schumer is afraid of being replaced by progressive upstart Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Fox News reported.
"But the reality here, and let’s be honest about the politics, is that Chuck Schumer is terrified he’s going to get a primary challenge from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez," Vance said. "The reason why the American people’s government is shut down is because Chuck Schumer is listening to the far-left radicals in his own party because he’s terrified of a primary challenge."
The federal government shut down on Wednesday night after Democrats refused to pass a Republican-backed "clean" continuing resolution.
Democrats, led by Schumer and House minority leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-Ny.), have refused to budge until Republicans agree to extend enhanced Obamacare subsidies. Republicans say they are willing to discuss the issue once the government is back open.
Schumer's new, confrontational approach is a shift from earlier this year, when he bucked his own party to help Trump pass a funding bill in March.
At the time, Schumer was criticized by the left-wing base, which accused him of handing leverage over federal spending to Trump, but Schumer said shutting down the country would give Trump even more power.
Schumer's fears may be coming true as Trump uses the new shutdown to fire federal workers and withhold funding from blue cities and states.
For years, Democrats opposed shutdowns and criticized Republicans who used them as leverage to demand spending cuts. But now it's the Democrats who are embracing a strategy of brinkmanship, while Republicans lament all of the government services that have been suspended.
"Our troops are not getting paid starting today because of the Chuck Schumer wing of the Democratic Party," Vance said.
"We have people who require food assistance, low-income Americans who require food assistance, who will not get it unless we reopen the government, thanks to Chuck Schumer and his wing of the Democratic Party."
Vance and other Republicans have also knocked Schumer for prioritizing healthcare for illegal aliens, a claim Democrats have vehemently denied.
While Democrats insist that illegal aliens cannot receive federal health benefits, Vance has argued that federal dollars indirectly subsidize Medicaid programs in blue states that cover illegal aliens.
"When the government gives billions of dollars to New York for Medicaid, that frees up state money in New York that can then be spent on illegals," he wrote on X.
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick believes that Jeffrey Epstein was part of a blackmail conspiracy, contradicting the findings of FBI director Kash Patel and other Trump administration figures.
During an appearance on the New York Post podcast Pod Force One, Lutnick, who was Epstein's neighbor, recalled a disturbing tour of Epstein's infamous New York mansion.
Lutnick said he quickly realized Epstein was bad news and vowed never to return after the financier showed him a massage room.
"And what happened in that massage room, I assume, was on video," he continued. "This guy was the greatest blackmailer ever, blackmailed people. That's how he had money."
Lutnick alleged that high-profile people who associated with Epstein, like Bill Gates and Prince Andrew, knew what Epstein was up to and "participated."
A spokesperson for Gates told The New York Post in a statement: “This is absolutely false. Gates met with Epstein to discuss philanthropy and nothing else.”
Gates was one of several powerful figures who continued to associate with Epstein even after he became a sex offender.
Lutnick's claims are at odds with the findings of the Justice Department, which concluded in July that Epstein died by suicide and did not have a "client list" of people who could face criminal charges.
Months later, Democrats are still hammering the controversy to accuse Trump and his White House of a sinister cover-up.
At a fiery congressional hearing in September, the FBI's Patel said there is "no credible evidence" that Epstein trafficked girls to anyone other than himself. Patel did not rule out the possibility of other people being involved in Epstein's crimes but insisted "all credible information" is already public.
"There is no credible information, none – if there were I would bring the case yesterday – that he trafficked to other individuals," Patel said.
Patel also cast blame at former federal prosecutor Alex Acosta, who reached a controversial plea deal with Epstein in 2008. Acosta's involvement was the "original sin" in the case, Patel said.
Acosta defended the plea agreement to lawmakers last month, citing problems with evidence that he said would have jeopardized a conviction.
Epstein was sentenced to 18 months but ended up serving just 13 months in prison, with work-release privileges allowing him to leave jail for up to 12 hours a day, six days a week.
Commenting on the light punishment, Lutnick alleged that Epstein handed over compromising videos of powerful figures in exchange for a slap on the wrist.
"I mean, he's a serial sex offender. How could he get 18 months and be able to go to his office during the day and have visitors and stuff? There must have been a trade," Lutnick said.
The U.S. Supreme Court refused to grant President Donald Trump's emergency request for permission to fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook despite accusations that she lied on applications to obtain mortgages, Breitbart reported. In its decision on Wednesday, the high court ruled that Cook will stay on until at least January, when the case will be heard by the court.
The Department of Justice filed the emergency order after a lower court issued an earlier injunction against the firing. None of the nine justices dissented from the decision, leaving Cook in place on the Board of Governors while the allegations are investigated.
Because of this, Cook will be able to vote at the October 28-29 meeting, where the Feds will set policy, including a possible cut to interest rates, and another on December 9-10. The Fed refused to slash interest rates when Trump was first elected and only backed off by half a percentage point in September.
This decision comes after Trump attempted to fire Cook in August over allegations of potential mortgage fraud, which is within his rights when it is "for cause." However, there's no explanation in the standard as to whether such conduct is enough for the president to remove her from her 14-year term as defined by law. In appealing the case to the Supreme Court, lawyers for the Trump administration argued that the Fed's "uniquely important role" in the U.S. economy only heightens the government’s and public's interest in reviewing the case.
As the New York Post reported, the allegations against Cook stem from mortgage documents allegedly claiming both her home in Massachusetts and in Atlanta were her primary homes, and an investigation by Bill Pulte, director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, allegedly found. This designation would mean a lower interest rate for the loan.
Armed with that allegation, Trump moved to fire Cook. However, Cook has denied these allegations, and later loan documents surfaced proving that Cook's 2021 home purchase in Atlanta was indeed designated as a vacation home at the time of application, thus contradicting earlier claims that she failed to disclose this fact.
Cook sued Trump, and Trump appealed the initial decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, which decided the case last month in a 2-1 decision, upholding the lower court's ruling. This decision then sent the matter to the Supreme Court.
Still, the underlying accusation has yet to be adjudicated, and therefore the allegations stand as reason to dismiss her, the administration claimed. Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued on Trump's behalf Thursday at the Supreme Court, citing the gravity of such claims against Cook, Fox News reported.
"Put simply, the president may reasonably determine that interest rates paid by the American people should not be set by a governor who appears to have lied about facts material to the interest rates she secured for herself — and refuses to explain the apparent misrepresentations," Sauer noted. However, a president removing a member of the Fed's board of governors is unprecedented in its 112-year history and thus will receive additional scrutiny.
In a post to X, formerly Twitter, legal expert and GOP strategist Mike Davis made the case that firing Cook is a straightforward decision within the president's rights. "The Supreme Court blinked," Davis charged before explaining his theory that Cook indeed committed mortgage fraud based on Pulte's initial investigation and therefore deserves to be fired.
"Lisa Cook is one of the seven governors on the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Among other tasks, the Fed 'conducts the nation’s monetary policy, promotes financial system stability, [and] supervises and regulates financial institutions.' 'The Federal Reserve is committed to upholding the highest ethical principles to strengthen public confidence in the impartiality of its decision-making processes,'" Davis cited as a standard.
"There is clear evidence that Lisa Cook committed mortgage fraud when she lied about her principal residence to secure a lower interest rate. Even if Lisa Cook fraudulently secured this mortgage before her current Fed appointment, she is still benefiting from the lower interest rate each month. (Did she pay off the mortgage before she started?) President Trump fired her for cause under the relevant statute," Davis contends.
The Supreme Court blinked.
Lisa Cook is one of the seven governors on the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
Among other tasks, the Fed "conducts the nation’s monetary policy, promotes financial system stability, [and] supervises and regulates financial… pic.twitter.com/sh5dNy9fGq
— 🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸 (@mrddmia) October 1, 2025
Without a clear indication one way or the other that Cook lied on her mortgage application, it should at least be within Trump's purview to suspend her from the board while investigations proceed if not outright fire her. There's a case to be made for safeguards against political interference, but this is a serious accusation that should disqualify Cook from the board if true.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) is warning that people “are going to die” if Republicans don’t give in to Democrats’ demands, including free healthcare for illegal immigrants, Breitbart reported. A partial government shutdown went into effect on Wednesday at midnight after lawmakers from both parties failed to reach a deal.
Whenever a government shutdown is on the table, both parties claim the other is to blame, using it to rile up their respective voter bases. This time has been no different as Warren appeared on MSNBC’s The Briefing on Wednesday to slam Republicans over their positions and make the most hyperbolic predictions.
The Massachusetts Democrat dutifully pulled at heartstrings to make her point about the Republicans' refusal to give in to Democrats' demands, including increased spending on healthcare. She had a sympathetic ear with host Jen Psaki, who didn’t push back on anything Warren said as she spewed her talking points.
Warren used the Democrats' old standby lie that Republicans don't care about Americans and thus refused Democrats' demands. "They’re trying to find anything to talk about around the shutdown, to blame it on Democrats so they don’t have to talk about the two-thirds of seniors who are in nursing homes, a lot of them with serious health problems, half of them with Alzheimer’s, who can just be pushed out on the street under the Republican bill," Warren claimed.
"They don’t want to talk about those brand new babies and their mamas who will lose access to health care," said Warren, suddenly caring about babies she'd usually want dead as a pro-abortion politician. "They do not want to talk about your neighbor who counts on a home health aide, and who counts on having a wheelchair in order to try to live independently, and can lose all of that," Warren went on.
"They don’t want to talk about the tens of millions of families who are receiving notices this month saying, here’s where your health care premiums were already too high. Here’s where they’re going to be, thanks to the Republicans," the Massachusetts Democrat continued.
"They’re going to be people who are going to have to make decisions about whether to make rent or pay for health insurance. They’re going to be people who are just going to let their health insurance go. They’re going to be people who are going to die because of these decisions," Warren dramatically predicted.
"And that, more than anything else, is what the Republicans don’t want to talk about. They rather shut down the government than help Americans who are just trying to get their costs under control. I think that is a fight worth fighting, and the Democrats are organized to do it right now," Warren said, completely mischaracterizing the fight.
Like all Democrats, Warren decided that an impassioned speech about all of the horrible things Republicans are doing to the American people was the way to go. Unfortunately for her, what she had to say was all a lie as the truth is that Republicans wouldn't agree to the healthcare spending because they realized it was, in large part, another entitlement for illegal immigrants, Fox News reported.
Just before the shutdown, Republicans charged that Democrats were more interested in giving "free healthcare for illegal immigrants" rather than keeping the government operating for priorities such as paying members of the military. Democrats held out and were willing to let the current budget expire because Republicans wouldn't go along with their handouts to migrants.
Last week, Vice President J.D. Vance said as much in a post to X, formerly Twitter. "Democrats are about to shut down the government because they demand we fund healthcare for illegal aliens," Vance wrote. He was backed up by House Speaker Mike Johnson, who also said Sunday that Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer just wanted to "reinstate free healthcare for illegal aliens paid by American taxpayers."
On Tuesday, President Donald Trump reiterated the truth as the deadline loomed large. "They want to have illegal aliens come into our country and get massive healthcare at the cost to everybody else, and we don't have it. And that’s, I would say, the number one reason that they want to strike is to get illegal immigrants’ healthcare," Trump said.
Warren can make these exaggerated predictions and heartrending emotional appeals all she wants, but the truth is out there for anyone with eyes to see. Democrats don't care about the poor or the downtrodden; they just care about giving more free stuff to illegal aliens in hopes that they will someday become Democratic voters.
President Donald Trump put forward a 20-point plan for peace in Gaza that has been approved by not only the Muslim and Arab world, but the Palestinian Authority, with the only holdout being Hamas.
The plan would free all remaining Israeli hostages, disarm Hamas and remove it from power in Gaza, and even allow a Palestinian State if Hamas and the Palestinian Authority fulfill conditions it sets.
If Hamas does not agree to the plan, it will find itself without much if any support in the region and Israel will continue to fight against it in Gaza.
Trump spent much of his time at the UN General Assembly meeting last week gathering support for the plan.
After he held a joint press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday, the foreign ministers of Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the UAE, Indonesia, Pakistan, Türkiye, Qatar, and Egypt released a joint statement that affirmed Trump's efforts and pledged their support in implementing the plan.
Turkey and the Palestinian Authority, both of which opposed Trump's peace plans previously, also indicated that they were on board with the plan.
So far, Hamas has said it rejected the demand for it to disarm, but has not responded to the plan as a whole.
Trump would like to expand the Abraham Accords to develop Gaza into a hub of trade and commerce similar to Dubai, if investors get involved in the region.
After two-plus years of bombardment from Israel, the area will need a lot of rebuilding.
According to Axios, the peace plan grew out of a failed attack by Israel on Doha, Qatar in order to assassinate Hamas leaders there.
The attack drew outrage from the Arab world at first, but Trump advisors Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff noticed the unity among the Arab nations and wondered if that could turn into an impetus for ending the war.
At a summit in New York the week before the UN General Assembly meeting, the Arab nations slammed Israel, but their ire cooled when Witkoff presented the peace plan.
The next step was for Israel to get on board. After Netanyahu balked at first, Trump reportedly told him to "take it or leave it," but if he didn't take it, he would lose U.S. support for the war.
The details of the agreement are not yet set in stone, but Israel agreed to it with a few changes and now it's up to Hamas to do the same.