Imagine your Thanksgiving table packed with political heavyweights, and guess who’s snagging the prime seat? A fresh poll from the Daily Mail and JL Partners crowns Donald Trump as the most desired guest for Americans’ holiday feasts, beating out familiar faces like Barack Obama, as the Mail reports. It’s a win for the MAGA crowd, though not without some eyebrow-raising caveats.
This survey of 1,246 registered U.S. voters, with a slim 3% margin of error, paints a fascinating picture of holiday preferences amid the usual partisan squabbles.
Trump grabbed 24% of the 841 responses, leaving Obama in the dust at 15%, while Kamala Harris and JD Vance trailed in third and fourth spots, respectively. For conservatives tired of the progressive agenda dominating dinner chatter, this feels like a small victory. Yet, let’s not carve the turkey just yet -- most Americans still aren’t eager to host Trump for the holiday.
When it comes to picking a single politician to share cranberry sauce with, Trump remains the undisputed champ. But the mood shifts when scenarios get more personal or collaborative. It’s as if folks admire his boldness from afar but aren’t ready to pass him the mashed potatoes.
Take the couples’ matchup: respondents had to choose between dining with Donald and Melania Trump or Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau paired with Katy Perry. A hefty 35% picked neither, 32% went for the Trumps, and 26% opted for the Canadian duo. Clearly, Trump’s charisma doesn’t always translate to a plus-one setting.
“A whopping 35 percent of all respondents said ‘neither,’” notes the Daily Mail and JL Partners poll. That’s a polite but firm rejection of both pairings, suggesting Americans might just want their turkey without a side of international drama. For conservatives, it’s a reminder that even Trump’s star power can’t win every room.
Then there’s the question of what role Trump might play at Thanksgiving beyond just showing up. The poll dug into which tasks Americans would trust him with, and the results are a bit of a roast. Spoiler: don’t expect him to whip up a pie.
A staggering 45% wouldn’t trust Trump to handle dessert, marking it as his least trusted gig. He also flunked in house decorating and table-setting duties, areas where folks seem to doubt his flair. It’s a funny mental image -- Trump wrestling with a tablecloth while the left chuckles from the sidelines.
“Americans would least trust Trump with making dessert, with 45 percent saying they would not have faith in him to do it at all,” the Daily Mail and JL Partners poll reveals. That’s a brutal verdict for a man known for bold moves, though perhaps conservatives can argue he’s better suited to leading the charge than baking it. Still, it stings to see such skepticism.
On the flip side, Trump shines when it comes to speaking roles, with the most trust placed in him to deliver the Thanksgiving toast. Carving the turkey came in as his second-strongest suit, showing Americans prefer his voice over his kitchen skills. For MAGA supporters, this aligns perfectly with his knack for commanding attention.
Media personalities also got their moment in the poll, with Ben Shapiro leading at 24% as a dream guest, followed closely by Candace Owens at 23% and Tucker Carlson at 18%. Among Republicans, Laura Ingraham edged out Carlson for top media pick, though Shapiro oddly landed as the least desirable for 22% of GOP respondents. It’s a curious split -- conservative voices are loved, yet not universally embraced even among their own.
These preferences highlight a broader trend: Americans, especially on the right, crave voices that challenge the woke narrative at their holiday tables. Shapiro and Owens resonate for their sharp takes, though the GOP’s mixed feelings toward Shapiro suggest not everyone’s ready for his brand of debate over pumpkin pie.
Thanksgiving often gets billed as a time to ditch partisan bickering, but this poll shows politics still sneaks into guest lists. Trump’s top billing as a solo guest is a nod to his enduring appeal among those fed up with establishment fluff. Yet the reluctance to invite him in other contexts hints at a nation still wrestling with his larger-than-life persona.
For conservatives, this data is a mixed bag worth chewing on alongside the holiday feast. Trump’s lead over Obama feels like a cultural pushback against years of progressive dominance, even if most wouldn’t open their doors to him. It’s a subtle reminder that admiration doesn’t always mean an invite.
So, as families gather this season, the question lingers: Would you save a seat for Trump? The poll suggests many would, but only if he sticks to toasting and skips the kitchen. For those on the right, it’s a chance to celebrate a small win while acknowledging the complex dance of politics at the dinner table.
President Donald Trump on Tuesday rejected the idea of extending Obamacare subsidies for two years, but said that extensions may be necessary in order to get a deal in place that could replace the existing system.
Trump told reporters on Air Force One that he would rather not give any extensions of the premium tax credits, which subsidize the cost of health insurance for families making under a certain amount of income.
But he might be open to a deal that agrees to replace Obamacare with a more free-market solution to health insurance in exchange for a subsidy extension until the new plan can be implemented.
“I don’t want to extend them for two years. I’d rather not extend them at all,” he said.
“Some kind of extension may be necessary to get something else done because the unaffordable care act has been a disaster,” he added, however.
Trump said he would release his own plan for health insurance soon.
“I like my plan the best: Don’t give any money to the insurance companies, give it to the people directly,” he said. “Let them go out and buy their own health care plan. And we’re looking at that, if that can work. We’re looking at that. That’s sort of taking off.”
Behind-the-scenes reports said that his plan would give people the money directly instead of paying insurance companies.
Obamacare enrollees who choose to downgrade to a high deductible plan could get part of the subsidy in an HSA, according to reports of the plan.
Without a subsidy extension, costs for existing enrollees could more than double, on average, at a time when most income-earners are stretched thin because of inflation over the last few years.
Trump said that there are a number of Democrats negotiating with him on a new plan, but declined to name any names.
“I can’t tell you who,” he said. “A lot of Democrats want this plan to happen. They would love to see the money go to the people and the people go out and get their own health care. And there would be nothing like it.”
The problem is, when Obamacare came into being, it amounted to a massive payout to the insurance companies and caused rates to skyrocket. Now, there's no good way to bring them back down.
The system is pretty much broken, and I don't know if Trump's plan will fix anything or just make it even worse.
Tragedy struck Colorado with the untimely death of a state senator in a horrific highway crash that has left the community reeling, as Breitbart reports.
On Wednesday night, Colorado State Sen. Faith Winter, a Democrat, lost her life in a devastating five-vehicle accident on Interstate 25 in Centennial, near Dry Creek Road, while at least three others sustained injuries.
Winter, 45, a mother of two, represented Broomfield and was in the final stretch of a 12-year tenure as a state lawmaker when this catastrophe unfolded.
The crash scene painted a grim picture, with photos revealing an overturned vehicle among the wreckage, a stark reminder of the violence of the collision.
Authorities from the Arapahoe County Sheriff’s Office reported that the exact cause of the multi-car pileup remains under investigation as of Wednesday evening, leaving more questions than answers for now.
After the accident, a section of I-25 near Dry Creek Road was shut down for several hours, only reopening just before midnight, as responders worked through the chaos.
Senator Winter’s family released a heartfelt statement, confirming her passing and expressing their profound grief over the loss of a beloved figure.
“It’s with the deepest sadness that the family of Senator Faith Winter confirms she passed away this evening,” the statement read. While they appreciate the public’s support, they’ve requested privacy during this painful time, a plea that deserves respect even if one disagrees with her political stances.
Gov. Jared Polis also weighed in on social media, offering condolences and praising Winter’s advocacy on issues like family policies and environmental causes.
“Our state is shaken by the loss of Senator Faith Winter, and I send my deepest condolences to her children, loved ones, friends, and colleagues across our state,” Polis wrote.
“Faith was a fierce advocate for hardworking Coloradans, women, and families, and our climate,” he continued, highlighting her long history of public service. While Polis lauds her progressive efforts, it’s worth noting that not all Coloradans aligned with her approach, especially on climate policies that often sparked debate over economic impacts.
Still, in a moment like this, political differences take a backseat to the human loss felt by her community and family, a reminder that life transcends partisan lines.
Senator Winter’s passing is a blow to Colorado, not just for her constituents but for anyone who values dedication in public service, even if her policies leaned toward a progressive agenda that some might question.
The injuries to at least three others in the crash underscore the broader toll of this tragedy, a ripple effect of pain on a quiet highway night.
As investigations continue into what caused this deadly collision, the state mourns a leader gone too soon, and one can only hope for clarity and healing for all affected by this heartbreaking event.
Another day, another wild claim from the mainstream media that’s got the White House rolling its eyes. President Donald Trump is reportedly mulling over firing FBI Director Kash Patel, or so says a recent MS NOW report that’s been met with a swift and sharp rebuttal. Let’s dive into this latest dust-up and separate fact from fiction.
The crux of this story is a clash between a sensational MS NOW piece alleging Trump’s frustration with Patel and a White House denial branding it as pure fabrication.
On Tuesday, MS NOW dropped a bombshell report asserting that President Trump was considering ousting FBI Director Kash Patel in the near future. The outlet leaned on three unnamed sources to fuel their narrative of discontent within the administration.
The report painted a picture of frustration, claiming Trump and his inner circle were fed up with negative headlines tied to Patel. Allegations swirled around Patel’s handling of FBI resources, including scrutiny over a security detail for his girlfriend and use of a government jet. MS NOW even suggested squabbles with other Trump loyalists were adding to the tension.
Going further, MS NOW claimed Trump and his aides were eyeing a replacement, naming top FBI official Andrew Bailey as a potential successor. Their sources hinted that Patel’s position was precarious, though they admitted Trump could easily shift course in the coming weeks. It’s the kind of speculative reporting that raises eyebrows—where’s the hard evidence?
“Trump and White House aides have confided to allies that the president is eyeing removing Patel and is considering top FBI official Andrew Bailey as the bureau’s new director, according to the three people,” MS NOW reported. If true, this would be a seismic shake-up, but unnamed sources and vague timelines make this feel more like gossip than gospel. The conservative instinct to question such narratives kicks in—show us the receipts.
Enter the White House, which didn’t just push back—it bulldozed the story with a full-throated denial. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt took to social media platform X to call the report “completely made up,” dismissing it as yet another example of agenda-driven journalism. It’s a familiar refrain for those weary of media overreach.
Leavitt didn’t stop at words; she shared a photo of Trump and Patel together, taken right in the Oval Office when the story broke. She recounted Trump laughing off the headline as “totally false” and snapping the picture to show support for Patel. This isn’t just a denial—it’s a public show of confidence that undercuts the entire premise.
“This story is completely made up,” Leavitt posted on X, driving the point home. For those of us skeptical of progressive-leaning outlets, this kind of direct rebuttal from the administration feels like a much-needed reality check. Why trust anonymous whispers over a firsthand account?
MS NOW, however, isn’t backing down despite the White House’s pushback. Correspondent Ken Dilanian went on air to double down, even joking that their story might have ironically secured Patel’s job by prompting this public support. It’s a cheeky spin, but does it hold water?
Dilanian claimed texts from FBI sources affirmed his reporting, saying he was “spot on” with the story. He reiterated that not just top Justice Department officials but also the White House and Trump himself were annoyed by Patel’s bad press. It’s a bold stance, but without named sources, it’s hard to take as more than speculation.
Adding a layer of complexity, Dilanian noted that Bailey, the alleged replacement, only joined the FBI recently and must clear a legal 90-day threshold before even being eligible for the director role. This tidbit raises questions about the feasibility of MS NOW’s claims—did they jump the gun on this narrative?
Amid the back-and-forth, a White House spokesperson described Patel as “a critical member of the president’s team,” praising his efforts to restore integrity to the FBI. This official stance aligns with the photo and Trump’s reported reaction, painting a picture of loyalty rather than discord. It’s a reminder that not every headline reflects reality.
For many conservatives, this saga is just another example of media outlets pushing divisive stories to undermine Trump’s administration. The focus on Patel’s supposed missteps feels like a distraction from the broader mission to reform federal agencies long criticized for bias. Shouldn’t the conversation be about results, not rumors?
Ultimately, this clash leaves readers to decide who to trust—the White House’s direct evidence or MS NOW’s shadowy sources. While the progressive media may relish stirring the pot, the administration’s response offers a counterpoint that’s hard to ignore. In a world of spin, sometimes a picture with the president speaks louder than anonymous whispers.
Imagine a government so emboldened it sidesteps constitutional protections to snoop on its political rivals. That’s the unsettling picture emerging from newly revealed documents about Special Counsel Jack Smith’s actions under the Biden administration. It’s a story that raises serious questions about power, accountability, and the rule of law.
This controversy centers on Smith’s pursuit of telecommunications records from Republican lawmakers during the Arctic Frost investigation, despite stark legal warnings about constitutional risks.
The Arctic Frost probe, aimed at political opponents of President Joe Biden, specifically targeted members of Congress who challenged his administration. Internal Department of Justice emails, dating back to exchanges on May 16-17, 2023, reveal discussions about subpoenaing toll records of GOP lawmakers for specific periods in early 2021. Senators like Chuck Grassley and Ron Johnson have blown the whistle on what they see as a calculated overreach.
Legal advisors within the DOJ flagged significant concerns, pointing to the Speech and Debate Clause as a potential barrier. Principal Deputy Chief John D. Keller noted litigation risks tied to accessing lawmakers’ legislative communications, citing D.C. Circuit precedent. Yet, disturbingly, the advice seemed to be brushed aside as Smith’s team pressed forward.
Keller himself downplayed the risk, suggesting it would be minimal since the lawmakers likely wouldn’t face charges. Minimal risk or not, isn’t the Constitution worth more than a casual shrug? This kind of logic feels like a dangerous game when it comes to fundamental protections.
The scope of this effort is jaw-dropping, with Grassley claiming at least a quarter of his Republican Senate colleagues were targeted. Names like Mike Lee, Ted Cruz, Lindsey Graham, and Jim Jordan pop up in the emails as specific focuses. These lawmakers, many vocal allies of former President Donald Trump, weren’t even notified their records were being sought, thanks to nondisclosure orders.
The Arctic Frost investigation, per internal correspondence, sought to “freeze out” Trump supporters who questioned election integrity after 2020. It’s no secret Biden’s victory leaned heavily on mail-in ballots during the COVID-19 crisis, but targeting lawmakers for scrutinizing that process feels like a step too far. This wasn’t just oversight—it smells like a partisan agenda.
Senator Ron Johnson didn’t mince words, calling it a “massive partisan dragnet” meant to kneecap the Republican Party. “Jack Smith conducted a massive partisan dragnet aimed at crippling the Republican Party and eliminating political opposition,” Johnson posted on X. If even half of that is true, it’s a chilling misuse of federal power.
Senator Mike Lee, another target, echoed the outrage, promising accountability. “Those responsible for this will soon be required to testify under oath,” Lee stated on X. Hearings, he assured, are on the horizon, and one can only hope they shed light on this shadowy operation.
Grassley has been relentless in exposing what he sees as a flagrant disregard for constitutional norms. “Ultimately, the Biden DOJ threw the Constitution to the wind in seeking information about my colleagues,” he remarked. That’s a gut punch of a statement, and it’s hard to argue when the emails show such clear warnings being ignored.
The legal concerns weren’t just whispers—Keller explicitly referenced case law allowing legislators to challenge third-party subpoenas under the Speech and Debate Clause. Yet Smith’s team signed off anyway, betting on minimal blowback. Is that confidence or sheer arrogance?
The list of targeted lawmakers reads like a who’s who of conservative voices: Tommy Tuberville, Marsha Blackburn, Josh Hawley, and more. These aren’t random picks; they’re consistent thorns in the side of progressive policies. Targeting them without notification feels less like justice and more like a political hit list.
Trump himself has long criticized the Biden administration for what he calls a weaponization of government. This latest revelation only fuels that narrative, painting a picture of an administration willing to bend rules to silence dissent. It’s a charge that deserves scrutiny, not dismissal.
As more documents surface, thanks to figures like former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi sharing with Johnson and Grassley, the brazenness of Smith’s actions becomes harder to ignore. Grassley noted that the deeper one digs, the worse it looks. If this is just the tip of the iceberg, what else might be lurking beneath?
The core issue here isn’t just about phone records—it’s about whether the DOJ under Biden prioritized political vendettas over constitutional duty. With hearings promised and senators vowing to hold those responsible accountable, the Arctic Frost saga is far from over. Let’s hope the truth, not partisan spin, wins out in the end.
Brace yourselves, patriots—wild rumors of the Justice Department turning on its own have just been slapped down hard.
The actual headline is a federal probe targeting Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) for allegedly manipulating mortgage rules by claiming two homes as primary residences for financial perks, while officials like Ed Martin and Bill Pulte remain clear of scrutiny, contrary to some media spin.
Let’s start at the beginning of this tangled web. Last year, reports surfaced showing Schiff listed properties in Maryland and California as his "principal residence" in various filings, potentially scoring better loan terms and tax breaks. Freddie Mac rules, however, allow only one such designation.
Evidence points to this dual claiming in several years, including 2009, 2011, and 2013, with contradictory filings for each home. It wasn’t until 2020 that Schiff updated his Maryland property to "secondary residence," a belated fix that raises questions.
Step in Bill Pulte, Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) Director, who took decisive action. He submitted a criminal referral to the Justice Department, alleging Schiff might have broken federal laws like wire fraud by falsifying records for favorable rates on his Maryland home from 2003 to 2019.
Pulte didn’t hold back on the gravity of the issue. "As regulator of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banks, we take very seriously allegations of mortgage fraud or other criminal activity," he declared in the referral. Such misconduct, he warned, could rattle the U.S. mortgage market’s stability.
Fast forward to the recent media frenzy. Outlets like the Associated Press and CNN pushed stories implying a grand jury was investigating Chief Pardon Attorney Ed Martin and Pulte for chasing Schiff’s alleged fraud. What a distracting sideshow that turned out to be!
A source with insider knowledge of the probe quickly debunked this narrative. "Ed Martin and Bill Pulte are not being investigated by a grand jury," the source insisted. The focus, including a subpoena to activist Christine Bish, remains on Schiff’s mortgage documents alone.
Chad Mizelle, former chief of staff to Attorney General Pam Bondi, piled on with a pointed rebuttal to the media claims. "Completely wrong," he said, suggesting the Justice Department is simply tightening its case against Schiff to avoid courtroom surprises. This isn’t a betrayal of their own—it’s strategic groundwork.
On the other side, Schiff isn’t taking this lying down. He’s branded the accusations as mere political retaliation and even launched a legal defense fund. But shouldn’t a public figure’s financial dealings be squeaky clean to begin with?
Pulte’s referral lays out damning specifics against Schiff. By allegedly listing both homes as primary, the senator reportedly gained lower interest rates and a $7,000 tax cut in California. That’s not a minor oops—it’s a potential abuse of the system.
Bish, who previously filed an ethics complaint against Schiff, was also pulled into the investigation with a subpoena. However, it’s strictly about gathering records tied to the mortgage fraud claims, not some broader conspiracy against Justice Department figures.
Why should everyday Americans care about this drama? Allegations of mortgage fraud by a prominent official erode trust in a system already bogged down by bureaucratic excess and progressive policies that often seem to shield the powerful.
Pulte’s caution about the housing market’s vulnerability hits home. If proven, Schiff’s actions could signal that the rules bend for the elite, a frustrating reality for citizens who follow them to the letter.
Ultimately, this saga is about fairness and accountability. When public servants are accused of gaming financial systems, it’s not just a scandal—it’s a blow to the stability many families depend on for their American dream. Let’s keep the focus on facts, not woke distractions.
In a shocking act of violence just steps from the heart of American power, two West Virginia National Guard members were gunned down in a targeted ambush near the White House on the eve of Thanksgiving.
This brazen attack unfolded as the nation prepared for a holiday of gratitude, leaving two brave service members in critical condition and a suspect in custody.
The incident occurred on November 26, 2025, when the Guardsmen, part of a deployment of approximately 2,200 troops from multiple states in Washington, D.C., were patrolling near the White House.
According to the Metropolitan Police, the assailant emerged from around a corner, raised a firearm, and opened fire on the unsuspecting Guardsmen in what was clearly a deliberate strike.
The suspect, identified as 29-year-old Rahmanullah Lakanwal, an Afghan national who entered the U.S. after the Afghanistan withdrawal under humanitarian parole, was quickly subdued by law enforcement and taken into custody.
Authorities are now probing this chilling event as a potential act of international terrorism, raising urgent questions about security protocols and vetting processes for those entering the country under such policies.
President Donald Trump, speaking from Mar-a-Lago in Florida where he had traveled prior to the attack, condemned the shooting as a “savage attack” on the nation’s heroes.
“These two patriots were wearing the uniform of our country, patrolling the streets of our capital,” Trump declared, highlighting their selfless duty to protect against all threats, foreign and domestic.
His words carry a weight of righteous anger, and rightly so—when those who defend our freedoms are targeted, it’s an assault on every American value we hold dear.
Following the shooting, the White House was placed under immediate lockdown, a stark reminder of the vulnerability even in our most guarded spaces.
Trump has ordered the Department of Homeland Security to deploy an additional 500 troops to D.C., a move echoed by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, who insisted that such violence will not weaken the city’s commitment to safety.
Hegseth’s point about the historic drop in crime rings true, but this incident is a gut punch—proof that evil doesn’t take a holiday, even as we strive for a safer capital.
Vice President JD Vance, speaking from Fort Campbell during the incident, called on all people of faith to pray for the wounded Guardsmen, describing them as the “sword and shield” of America.
West Virginia Governor Patrick Morrisey, after initially misreporting the Guardsmen’s condition, corrected the record to confirm they remain in critical condition, urging prayers for their families and the Guard community.
As the nation holds its breath for these brave souls, let’s remember that while progressive policies may falter in their execution, our resolve to honor and protect those who serve must never waver.
President Donald Trump is pausing the processing of all Afghan migrants after it was discovered that an Afghan national shot two National Guardsmen near the White House in D.C. on Wednesday.
"Processing of all immigration requests relating to Afghan nationals is stopped indefinitely pending further review of security and vetting protocols," the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services announced.
The person arrested for the shooting, Rahmanullah Lakanwal, 29, entered the United States in 2021 under the Biden-era initiative Operation Allies Welcome, according to Just the News.
In speaking to condemn the shooting, Trump blamed his predecessor, Joe Biden, for his lax immigration policies.
"We must now reexamine every single alien who has entered our country from Afghanistan under Biden, and we must take all necessary measures to ensure the removal of any alien from any country who does not belong here or add benefit to our country," he said.
The New York Times reported that Lakanwal drove across the country from his home north of Seattle, where he lives with his wife and five children, and had a plan to attack the Guard troops.
A .357 revolver was used in the shooting. Lakanwal allegedly shot one guardsman, then shot again after he fell, before shooting the second guardsman.
The soldiers, Andrew Wolfe and Sarah Beckstrom, ages 20 and 24, are in critical condition after surgery.
Apparently, Lakanwal worked with the CIA in Afghanistan in 2021 and was part of the withdrawal of Afghan allies when the U.S. withdrew from that area.
Jeanine Pirro said that the U.S. would seek the death penalty for Lakanwal if the guard troops didn't survive.
Pirro also said Lakanwal is being charged with three counts of assault with intent to kill while armed, as well as possession of a firearm during a crime of violence.
She also defended the presence of National Guard troops in Washington, D.C., saying that their presence helped form “the line that separates a civilized society from a barbaric one.”
A judge has ruled to block the continued deployment, saying it was probably illegal, but Trump is fighting to keep the troops there.
The nonpartisan group #AfghanEvac said that Lakanwal's case “appears to be a tragic outlier — not a pattern."
A federal judge in Colorado has limited Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents' authority to arrest illegal immigrants without a warrant to only those who pose an obvious flight risk, Fox News reported. The lawsuit is yet another attempt to limit what President Donald Trump's administration can do in its crackdown on illegal immigration.
The ruling from U.S. District Senior Judge R. Brooke Jackson came on Tuesday. The judge said that current federal law stipulates that immigration officials must have reason to believe that a person is in the U.S. illegally and that the suspect is likely to flee before a warrant can be issued.
The case was brought by the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado. The activist group joined attorneys representing four people who were arrested by ICE despite having no warrant issued against them when they were detained during a sweeping immigration crackdown.
Some of those were allegedly asylum seekers, and the lawsuit claims that the agents targeted Latinos without regard for their immigration status. The judge claimed that the plaintiffs in the case each had strong ties to their communities and were well-established, and therefore could not be deemed flight risks.
As Trump tries to get the illegal immigration problem under control, leftist forces are stacked against him and his administration. Tricia McLaughlin, spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security, said Jackson engaged in an "activist ruling" against the agency.
"Allegations that DHS law enforcement engages in 'racial profiling' are disgusting, reckless, and categorically FALSE," McLaughlin said in a statement. This is not the first time for such a ruling, as another case in California was similarly decided against the administration.
That court ruled that agents were not allowed to target people based on language, race, location, job, or other factors, after agents had been conducting random stops. In September, the Supreme Court rolled back that restraining order imposed in California, and McLaughlin sees the same happening.
"The Supreme Court recently vindicated us on this question elsewhere, and we look forward to further vindication in this case as well," McLaughlin said. There has been no formal announcement that the administration will appeal, but DHS Secretary Kristi Noem has never been one to back down.
While the left attacks ICE's mission in the courts, the rhetoric thrown against the men and women who do the job has become increasingly more hostile. Noem believes this has led to an increase in violence against the agents, and she's not about to leave any stone unturned in making sure they stay safe.
In a post to X on Monday, Noem shared the dire statistics about the impact of those who smear ICE agents and make accusations against them. "Over the past 10 months, Democrat politicians have compared ICE to Nazis, the Gestapo, and slave patrols, fueling a 1,153% increase in assaults," Noem wrote.
"From January 21, 2025, through November 21, 2025, there have been 238 reported assaults against ICE law enforcement. There were only 19 during the same period last year. President Trump and I will always stand with the men and women of @ICEgov who risk their lives every single day to arrest the worst of the worst," Noem pledged.
Over the past 10 months, Democrat politicians have compared ICE to Nazis, the Gestapo, and slave patrols, fueling a 1,153% increase in assaults.
From January 21, 2025, through November 21, 2025, there have been 238 reported assaults against ICE law enforcement. There were only…
— Secretary Kristi Noem (@Sec_Noem) November 24, 2025
On Wednesday, it became clear that it was more than just the ICE agents who were putting their lives at risk to make America safer while the left actively works against them. According to the Associated Press, two National Guard soldiers were shot in Washington, D.C., steps from the White House, where they have been sent to clean up crime. Trump pledged 500 more troops to help.
Government agents must balance the rights of the accused with the need to do their jobs. However, these attacks against law enforcement and especially ICE agents, whether in the form of several court cases and even physical violence, jeopardize their mission and make Americans less safe.
The Ohio House has passed a bill called the "Charlie Kirk Act" to allow schools to teach about the positive contributions of Christianity to the U.S. in history classes.
The bill passed along party lines, with all Republicans voting for it and all Democrats voting against it.
It was intended to remind teachers that teaching about different religions including Christianity from a historical and cultural perspective is not a violation of the First Amendment.
“It’s essential that we highlight the positive influence religion has had throughout our history – uniting communities, enriching our shared values, and safeguarding our First Amendment rights as Americans to speak and worship freely,” bill co-sponsor Michael Dovilla said after its passage.
Not all religious leaders and clergy support the bill, with some thinking church and state should be completely separated.
Some also feared that the bill would encourage teachers to ignore potential negative effects of religion, such as the way Christianity was used in the South to uphold slavery for a time.
In addition, the Ohio Council for the Social Studies said the bill was redundant and narrow, but Dovilla disagreed.
“It’s essential that we highlight the positive influence religion has had throughout our history,” he said. “Uniting communities, enriching our shared values, and safeguarding our First Amendment rights as Americans to speak and worship freely.”
The bill does not prevent teachers from covering topics that show the negatives of religion, it only encourages the positive to also be included.
“This bill does not impose a belief system, it simply allows teachers and professors to include historical truths that have too often been neglected,” Gabe Guidarini, chairman of the Ohio College Republican Federation, said.
Students should learn “how faith shaped the resolve of the pilgrims, guided our Founders’ convictions, inspired movements that provided us the liberties we enjoy today, and informed the moral fabric that has bound our republic together since its birth,” he added.
It's clear that the left wants only the negative parts of religion, if any, to be highlighted in schools.
They think we should worship at the altar of the federal government, which they think provides everything that people need.
In truth, taking religion out of schools and the public square has done nothing but make it worse. Hopefully, this bill will help Ohioans realize the positive impact of Christianity and how important faith was to building America.