President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Friday returning the name of the Department of Defense to the Department of War, Breitbart reported. The president had previously hinted at this move, which would restore the original name for the agency to convey more about the mission.
Trump had signaled this could happen in earlier discussions and had referred to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth as his "secretary of war." The new order directs Hegseth to make the necessary moves to make the name change permanent through not only the executive office, but also the legislative process as needed.
It will also apply the change to signage, letterhead, and other public mentions of what will now be the U.S. Department of War. One of those changes includes a briefing room becoming the "Pentagon War Annex" over its previously defanged "public affairs briefing room."
The move is meant to restore both the name and the original purpose of the agency, as Trump explained in remarks in August. "Everybody likes that we had an unbelievable history of victory when it was the Department of War. Then we changed it to Department of Defense," Trump noted.
Hegseth hinted at the change in a recent Fox & Friends interview on Fox News, explaining that it's a mindset shift as much as it is a renaming. "We won WWI, and we won WWII, not with the Department of Defense, but with a War Department, with the Department of War," Hegseth said.
"As the president has said, we’re not just defense, we’re offense. We’ve reestablished at the Department the warrior ethos. We want warriors, folks that understand how to exact lethality on the enemy," Hegseth continued.
"We don’t want endless contingencies and just playing defense. We think words and names and titles matter. So, we’re working with the White House and the president on it. Stand by," he promised last week.
The Department of War existed until 1949, when changes were made in response to the National Security Act of 1947, which changed the agency's moniker to the more vague and non-threatening Department of Defense. It remains to be seen whether Trump will need congressional approval for the name change, but the president believes he has the authority to make it happen.
"We're just going to do it. I'm sure Congress will go along if we need that. I don't think we even need that," Trump said on Aug. 25.
After much speculation and several hints from the administration, Trump signed off on the order, which is his 200th since taking office. The move was celebrated by several conservatives, including Turning Point CEO Charlie Kirk, who shared video of the historic moment on X, formerly Twitter, on Friday.
"For his 200th official executive action as 47, President Trump officially restores the original name 'Department of War' to the Department of Defense. Pete Hegseth will now be referred to as the Secretary of War," Kirk captioned the post.
🚨 For his 200th official executive action as 47, President Trump officially restores the original name "Department of War" to the Department of Defense.
Pete Hegseth will now be referred to as the Secretary of War 🔥 pic.twitter.com/l6E3soEN9v
— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) September 5, 2025
While the left will likely attempt to trivialize this, the renaming is in line with Trump's effort to return America and its institutions to prominence. On his first day in office, Trump signed an executive order Restoring Names That Honor America's Greatness to "promote the extraordinary heritage of our Nation and ensure future generations of American citizens celebrate the legacy of our American heroes."
Trump's latest move sends the message that the U.S. will once again celebrate its history and legacy of great strength in war. The president is right that the offensive stance is vital to retain not only in the new name for the Department of Defense, but also in its mission if the U.S. hopes to remain a world superpower.
Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said during a Senate Finance Committee hearing on Thursday that the previous administration of Joe Biden manipulated abortion pill safety data, resulting in an apparent 22 times higher risk for serious complications than had been reported.
During questioning by Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) on the Trump administration's health care agenda, the ongoing safety review of mifepristone, the first drug in a two-drug abortion regimen used by most women who seek abortions, was addressed.
In April, a study was released that showed nearly 11%, or one in nine women who take mifepristone, have a complication serious enough to seek emergency medical care.
Those complications included sepsis, infection, hemorrhaging, and other adverse events occurring within 45 days following the abortion.
Lankford pointed out that since Biden loosened the restrictions on abortion pills in the wake of Roe V. Wade's overturning, "there’s all kinds of issues that are happening now on it."
The abortion drugs are now available without a prescription to make them easier to get, except when state laws prohibit them.
“So the question was: you’d said that there would be a review on that, just to be able to look at it, to make sure we’re following all safety protocols. Do you know a timing on that review?” Lankford asked.
Kennedy said the review was “progressing apace," according to FDA Commissioner Marty Makary.
“We’re getting data in all the time, new data that we’re reviewing. And we know that during the Biden administration, they actually twisted the data to bury one of the safety signals with a very high safety signal around 11 percent,” Kennedy Jr. alleged, referring to the April study. “So we’re going to make sure that doesn’t happen anymore. We’re producing honest science and gold standard science on that. I’ll keep you abreast of where we are.”
The new study looked at more than 865,000 pill abortions that used mifepristone and were done between 2017 and 2023.
Kennedy called the study results "alarming" when he was questioned about them in May.
The use of abortion drugs has increased dramatically in recent years. Back in 2017, 39% of all abortions were done with medication, but in 2023, the most recent year data was available, 63% of abortions were done with medication.
That doesn't even account for abortions outside the U.S., or in cases where the pills were obtained through underground networks in states where they are banned.
Mifepristone works by blocking the action of progesterone, which causes the unborn child to die of starvation inside the womb. The second drug, misoprostol, then causes contractions so that the unborn child is expelled.
In a bold legislative initiative, U.S. Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene and Thomas Massie, alongside Democrat Ro Khanna, have declared their intention to disclose the names of individuals linked to Jeffrey Epstein should a new bill mandating the release of related files pass, as the Daily Mail reports
The proposed bill, which seeks bipartisan support, aims to bring transparency to the ongoing Epstein case by compelling the release of withheld information.
The announcement emerged amid widespread bipartisan concern over the limitations of information concerning Epstein's associates and their activities. Despite the Department of Justice previously unveiling a document cache related to Epstein, legislators and the public alike have voiced dissatisfaction with the extent and scope of these disclosures.
At a recent press conference, Greene and Massie, along with Khanna, vocalized their support for legislation initially proposed by Khanna. This bill, if passed, would force Attorney General Pam Bondi to release the Epstein files in their entirety to the public.
Amid this legislative push, the issue of constitutional immunity surfaced. Citing this rule, both Greene and Massie expressed their preparedness to use their privilege of legislative immunity -- which permits open speech on the House Floor without legal backlash -- to publicly name implicated parties.
In their statements, the representatives underscored the gravity and potential risk involved in naming high-profile individuals linked to the Epstein scandal. Greene highlighted the significant power disparities that could threaten the legal and financial stability of those who come forward against influential figures.
Recent releases by the House Oversight Committee, which consisted of 34,000 pages connected to Epstein, have not met expectations. Massie pointed out that much of this report was redundant and heavily redacted, rendering it ineffective in providing new insights or clarity.
This frustration coincides with actions from Epstein survivors as well. Lisa Phillips, representing a group of abuse survivors, intimated that they might release names themselves if the government continues to fail in its disclosures. This collective sentiment underscores a pervasive demand for accountability and transparency.
Massie's commitment was clear as he discussed a strategy to advance the bill despite current challenges, noting a discharge petition requiring 214 signatures -- just four shy of the target -- to force a vote on the bill.
While some politicians see a path forward in transparency, others dismiss the urgency or legitimacy of the matter. President Donald Trump labeled the ongoing controversy as a mere distraction orchestrated by Democrats, disconnected from his administration's achievements.
Contrasting sharply with Trump's statements, Massie rebuffed the notion of the case as a hoax. He emphasized the authenticity of the survivors' experiences and the injustice of ongoing protection afforded to perpetrators.
The political narrative surrounding the Epstein files splits significantly, with Trump distancing himself from the implications of the disclosures while others in Congress stress the imperative of addressing the victims' truth.
The legislative trajectory remains uncertain, but the proposed bill represents a significant stride towards resolving some of the opacity surrounding the Epstein scandal. With potential revelations on the horizon, the coming weeks could prove pivotal.
The discourse at the congressional level mirrors a larger societal confrontation with issues of power, abuse, and the accountability of high-profile individuals in criminal enterprises.
As Congress navigates these turbulent waters, the world watches, awaiting clear outcomes from a saga that has captured global attention. The decisions made in the upcoming sessions will likely resonate far beyond the halls of Congress, affecting legal precedents, privacy issues, and public trust in political and justice systems.
President Donald Trump is reportedly considering a federal ban on transgender individuals owning guns -- sparking backlash from gun rights groups, including the National Rifle Association.
The controversial proposal comes after a series of mass shootings perpetrated by transgender individuals, including the recent massacre at a Minnesota Catholic school where two children were murdered.
Some inside the administration see the proposal as a way to squeeze Democrats, who have spent years calling for "common sense" gun control.
Many Democrats already support red flag laws that allow guns to be taken from unstable individuals without due process, but it is doubtful that they would support treating gender dysphoria like a dangerous illness.
"Democrats have called for common sense gun laws for a long time -- this seems pretty common sense to me,” a Justice Department source told Breitbart News.
While once widely viewed as a mental disorder, gender dysphoria has largely been normalized in recent years, with a shift towards social "affirmation" and medical intervention.
The shooting at Annunciation Catholic Church in Minneapolis has reopened a debate about dysphoria and how it should be treated, with some arguing there is a pattern of transgender people disproportionately committing gun violence.
Robin Westman, the man behind the shooting at Annunciation Catholic Church, expressed remorse about transitioning in his twisted manifesto.
Leftist trans advocates insist that there is no link between transgenderism and gun violence, citing data that shows trans individuals commit a small number out of hundreds of mass shootings each year.
But some say this approach uses too broad a definition of the term "mass shooting," which most people associate with premeditated acts of violence meant to inflict maximum suffering on innocents - even children. These atrocities are relatively rare, but trans people have been linked with several of them in recent years, despite comprising a small percentage of the population.
The massacre in Minneapolis was eerily similar to one in Nashville two years ago, where a woman, identifying as a male, murdered three Christian schoolchildren and three adults.
While some argue that Trump's hypothetical ban is long overdue, it is certain to face stiff constitutional challenges and has already met backlash from gun rights groups, including the National Rifle Association (NRA.)
“The NRA supports the Second Amendment rights of all law abiding Americans to purchase, possess and use firearms,” the organization said. "NRA does not, and will not, support any policy proposals that implement sweeping gun bans that arbitrarily strip law-abiding citizens of their Second Amendment rights without due process.”
President Donald Trump is defending Robert F. Kennedy Jr. after a contentious Senate hearing where he was pressured to resign by Democrats and even faced criticism from some Republicans over his leadership at the Health and Human Services Department.
Thursday's Senate hearing of the Finance Committee was guaranteed to be explosive after Kennedy fired the director of the CDC, Susan Monarez, who accused Kennedy in an op-ed of pressuring her to rubber-stamp anti-vaccine policies, a charge Kennedy rejected by calling her a liar.
As expected, Democrats painted Kennedy as a menace to public health, accusing him of undermining access to vaccines for deadly diseases and putting children in danger.
"I don't see any evidence that you have any regrets about anything you've done or plans to change it," said ranking member Ron Wyden (D-OR). "And my last comment is, I hope that you will tell the American people how many preventable child deaths are an acceptable sacrifice for enacting an agenda that I think is fundamentally cruel and defies common sense."
Kennedy was defiant throughout, blasting his critics as liars and shills for big pharmaceutical companies.
While it was no surprise to see Democrats dogpile Kennedy, he also faced scrutiny from a handful of Republicans who expressed concern about the extent of his plans to shake up public health policy, particularly on vaccines.
“In your confirmation hearings, you promised to uphold the highest standards for vaccines,” said Republican Sen. John Barrasso (WY) “Since then, I’ve grown deeply concerned.”
Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy (LA), who was a key vote to confirm Kennedy to his role, accused Kennedy of "effectively" taking away COVID vaccines, which had been available on a walk-in basis at most pharmacies.
Kennedy insisted that anyone who wants a COVID shot can still get one despite new FDA rules that may require healthy people under 65 to get a doctor's prescription first. The insurance landscape is also unclear because insurance companies follow the recommendations of an influential CDC panel whose members Kennedy purged and replaced, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP).
During a shouting match with Michael Bennet (D-CO), Kennedy said he does not "anticipate" any changes to the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine at ACIP's upcoming meeting. Kennedy said he agrees with an ACIP official he handpicked who called the COVID mRNA shots dangerous, especially for young people.
"Senator -- senator -- are you saying the mRNA vaccine has never been associated with myocarditis or pericarditis?" Kennedy asked Bennet.
While casting doubt on the safety of the COVID shots, Kennedy agreed that Trump should get the Nobel Prize for developing them through Operation Warp Speed. Trump's role in developing the shots has long been controversial with his own base, and the president recently called on Big Pharma to "justify" the success of COVID drugs.
When asked about Kennedy's combative performance, Trump said he did not watch it, but he appreciates that Kennedy is "different."
"He means very well. And he's got some little different ideas. I guarantee a lot of the people at this table like RFK Jr., and I do, but he's got a different take, and we want to listen to all of those takes," the president said.
"But I heard he did very well today," Trump added. "It's not your standard talk. I would say that, and that has to do with medical and vaccines. But if you look at what's going on in the world with health and look at this country also with regard to health, I like the fact that he's different."
In a surprising turn of events, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) has publicly distanced herself from former President Donald Trump, criticizing his handling of the Jeffrey Epstein scandal.
Greene has called for greater transparency with the Epstein files and criticized Trump for neglecting meetings with Epstein's victims.
Historically a staunch Trump supporter, Greene recently expressed displeasure with Trump's refusal to engage with the victims of Jeffrey Epstein. This issue came to a head when she requested that Trump host these victims at the White House—an invitation Trump did not acknowledge.
Joining forces with Reps. Thomas Massie (R-TX) and Ro Khanna (D-CA), Greene co-sponsored legislation to release the Department of Justice's files on Epstein to the public. Despite warnings from the White House deeming support for this legislation as a hostile act, Rep. Greene remained undeterred.
In her conversation with CNN's Manu Raju, Rep. Greene stated, "This isn't a hostile act towards the administration," asserting her commitment to transparency and accountability in the Epstein case.
Greene's advocacy extends to a direct appeal to Trump, encouraging him to reconsider his stance and meet with Epstein's victims to acknowledge their suffering and seek justice.
Amid these calls for action, Trump instead prioritized international relations, meeting with the president of Poland during the crucial period when a dialogue on the Epstein scandal was sought by Greene and others. During this meeting, Trump explicitly dismissed the Epstein files legislation as irrelevant and a distraction from his administration's successes.
Trump equated the ongoing demands for the Epstein files to the controversy surrounding the assassination of President Kennedy, suggesting a pattern of dissatisfaction no matter the extent of disclosures provided.
Following Trump's refusal to meet with the victims, Greene joined a press conference organized by Massie and Khanna, which featured about a dozen Epstein victims sharing their stories.
At the press conference, Greene did not mince words. She criticized the Department of Justice under Trump for its opacity and called for the truth to be revealed by federal agencies, including the FBI, the DOJ, and the CIA.
Her statements at the conference underscored the need for truth and justice, advocating on behalf of the victims. "The FBI, the DOJ, and the CIA hold the truth. And the truth we’re demanding comes out," she declared, emphasizing the significance of transparency.
Highlighting the broader implications, Greene stated, "This should never happen in America, and it should never be a political issue that divides us," marking a notable shift from her typical alignment with Trump's policy positions.
Greene's stance represents a significant departure from her previous unwavering support for Trump, reflecting a broader schism within parts of the Republican Party over issues of justice and transparency.
Such a stance not only brings attention to the Epstein scandal but also pressures other political leaders to take a stand on matters involving high-profile figures and federal transparency.
Her participation and vocal criticism at the press conference illustrate a critical turning point, suggesting that her political alignment might be shifting towards more bipartisan and victim-centered justice initiatives.
A CNN commentator called Minnesota Governor Tim Walz a "complete piece of ****" after the Democrat was caught publicly musing about President Trump suffering an untimely death.
During a broadcast of CNN's The Arena, commentator Scott Jennings ripped Walz's remarks as "absolutely crazy" and beneath a public official.
"I used to say he was the biggest buffoon in American politics, but it’s worse now. No political official, no elected official should be walking around saying, well, I’m hoping we wake up one day and the president of the United States has died. Crazy. absolutely crazy.”
Jennings was reacting to Walz indulging false hopes of Trump's demise that swept the left during the Labor Day weekend.
With a wink and a nudge, Walz reminded his fellow Democrats that the president will someday meet the fate of all mortals.
"You get up in the morning and you doom scroll through things and although I will say this, you woke up the last few days thinking there might be news," Walz said.
"Just saying, just saying. There will be news sometime, just so you know. There will be news."
"@Tim_Walz, mocking President Trump’s health is a new low, even for you," GOP House Majority Whip Tom Emmer, who represents Minnesota’s 6th Congressional District, posted on X. "Wishing ill on others doesn’t make you a leader—it makes you small. Minnesotans deserve better."
Pro-Trump account Johnny MAGA noted that Walz's morbid commentary came just after children were massacred at a Catholic school in the state Walz runs.
"Tim Walz tells supporters to remain hopeful that Trump will die soon," Johnny MAGA posted on X. "Schoolchildren were just shot in church last week in Tim’s state — and this is what he’s thinking about I can’t even put into words how disgusting this deranged freak is."
Walz became nationally known as the running mate to failed presidential candidate Kamala Harris, who lost decisively to Trump in last year's presidential race.
At the time, Walz was widely portrayed in the liberal media as an affable, folksy Midwesterner, but his policy record and strange, bug-eyed mannerisms were indicative of a thinly veiled radical.
His wife, Gwen Walz, infamously admitted to savoring the smell of burning tires during the George Floyd riots that erupted on her husband's watch five summers ago.
Tim Walz's latest troubling remarks are another reminder of the violent rage that lurks behind the mask of smiley, progressive "empathy."
Thank goodness voters rejected this freak at the ballot box.
Notorious lefty congresswoman Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) is facing a rebuke from Congress over a provocative speech condemning the United States and Israel, with some accusing her of supporting terrorism.
At a pro-Palestine conference in Detroit, Tlaib described America as an evil "empire" and charged her fellow lawmakers with supporting a "genocide" in Gaza, where thousands of Palestinians have died in Israel's military offensive against Hamas.
While Israel has faced backlash from Democrats and a handful of Republicans, most members of Congress still support arming Israel, making Tlaib part of a radical fringe.
She appeared to relish that fact in her speech at the People's Conference for Palestine, where she denounced her colleagues as "sellouts" and "warmongers."
Other speakers at the Palestine event were even more extreme, with some dabbling in overt Hamas sympathy or calling for government officials who support Israel to be "neutralized," according to the Jerusalem Post.
Tlaib's speech echoed common sentiments on the far left, where Israel and the United States are often linked as partners in a brutally oppressive "empire."
Tlaib said the United States was built on "slavery, genocide, rape and oppression," and she urged Palestine supporters to put their faith in radical action rather than American institutions.
"Outside of the decaying halls of the empire in Washington, D.C., we are winning. They are scared," she said.
Tlaib, who is of Palestinian descent, was previously censured in November 2023 for her use of anti-Israel rhetoric in the wake of the October 7 atrocities perpetrated by Hamas.
After her latest tirade, Georgia Republican Buddy Carter introduced a resolution censuring Tlaib for "vilifying her colleagues, endangering the lives of Jewish people, and celebrating terrorism."
"Her conduct is beneath that of a civilized person, let alone a member of Congress. I am calling on the House of Representatives to censure her remarks and put Democrats on notice for enabling and cheering on antisemitism in their own party," Carter told Fox News Digital.
Tlaib brushed off the threat as an attempt to silence "the world," which she apparently believes speaks through her.
Tlaib is far from the only Democrat in Congress who appears to identify more with ethnic kinfolk in distant lands than the United States, which Tlaib supposedly represents, at least in theory.
Chicago-born congresswoman Delia Ramirez (D-Il) recently told a crowd in Mexico that she feels more tied to Guatemala than America, leading critics to label her a traitor.
Never-before-seen footage from outside Jeffrey Epstein's jail cell has been released after Pam Bondi said the minute of tape went "missing."
While the "missing minute" appears to contain nothing remarkable, it is not yet clear why it was not included with 11 hours of footage the Justice Department released in July to prove that nobody except Epstein entered his cell before he died.
The new video was included with an evidence dump containing over 33,000 pages that the House Oversight Committee shared on Tuesday.
The "missing" footage depicts the common area in the Special Housing Unit (SHU) of Epstein's jail, the Metropolitan Correctional Center.
The new video appears to show Epstein being escorted to a shower stall to make an unmonitored phone call around 7 p.m., CBS reported.
Roughly an hour later, Epstein is seen returning to his cell, although the staircase to his cell block is only partly visible. The "missing minute" from 11:59 p.m. to midnight appears to be uneventful. Epstein was found dead the next morning.
Bondi had previously explained that the video went "missing" because of a routine process at Epstein's jail.
"There was a minute that was off that counter, and what we learned from Bureau of Prisons was every year, every night, they redo that video," Bondi told reporters. "Every night is reset, so every night should have that same missing minute."
Negligence and other problems within the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) have long been cited by the government as factors in Epstein's shocking death.
Epstein was not being monitored properly just before he died, despite a previous suicide attempt at the jail. The government later said it lost surveillance footage from outside his cell during the attempt.
Because of a security camera malfunction, video was only recorded on one surveillance camera inside the Special Housing Unit on the night Epstein died.
Since Attorney General Bill Barr was in charge, the Justice Department has said the limited footage proves that Epstein killed himself, a finding Bondi officially backed in a controversial memo this summer. The DOJ also said there is no evidence that Epstein possessed an incriminating "client list" of powerful figures.
Bondi's conclusions, and the DOJ's refusal to release the complete Epstein files, sparked a right-wing backlash that has largely quieted, although a handful of Republicans have continued to press the issue, joining Democrats who have accused Bondi and President Trump of a nefarious cover-up.
The House Oversight Committee's 33,000-page release has been dismissed by Democrats as a ruse, as most of the material was previously public.
A top priority for Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is a renewed focus on the U.S. military's warfighting capabilities and warrior ethos, paired with the rollback or elimination of extraneous and unnecessary ideals and programs that detract from these efforts.
That includes the recent cancellation of the U.S. Army's Command Assessment Program, which factored in potential social biases and psychological evaluations over merit and performance in the consideration of candidates for command positions, according to Fox News.
The secretary declared "Good riddance" to the news that the generally unpopular feelings-over-facts Biden-era program had been ended.
First rolled out across the Army in 2020 and more broadly implemented thereafter, per Fox News, CAP was intended to reduce "conscious and subconscious biases" and utilize "peer assessments and behavioral analysis" when selecting candidates for promotion to command positions.
The program was finally made official in January 2025 by former Army Secretary Christine Wormuth, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, just days before President Donald Trump took office, after which she was replaced by current Army Secretary Dan Driscoll.
In August, Driscoll paused CAP and conducted a review of the new promotion program that ultimately led to its elimination.
In reaction to the news that CAP had been cancelled, Defense Secretary Hegseth wrote on X, "Good riddance. Promotions across @DeptofDefense will ONLY be based on merit & performance."
His post included a screenshot of a Military Times article on the subject that was headlined: "Army cancels Biden-era promotion program aimed at eliminating bias."
The article noted that CAP "relied heavily on peer evaluations and behavioral analysis" in the selection process for promotions, rather than the prior system that focused on a "series of performance factors," and further highlighted that a "stated goal" of the program was "protecting minorities from bias."
According to a doctrinal document on CAP published in January, "The battery of psychometric assessments employs several different instruments to measure cognitive capacity, emotional intelligence, conscientiousness, self-awareness, and other behavioral traits."
The document also admitted that the promotion selection process was subjective instead of objective, as it acknowledged, "Though not completely hidden, assessing intellect through casual observation is highly subjective and contextual."
The Military Times reported that while CAP was heralded by Army leadership during its brief run under former President Biden, it was not particularly popular with the troops and led to a reduction in officer candidates seeking promotions.
Indeed, in 2024, 54% of Army officers declined to take part in CAP, a record high non-participation rate, as compared to the 40% average in 2019 before the program's introduction.
With CAP scrapped, the Army has now reverted to the previous system known as the Centralized Selection Board/List, or CSL, which primarily focuses on candidates' merit and performance when under consideration for promotion to a command position.