This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Teton County, Wyoming, is one of America's enclaves for the elite.
Figures from 2019 confirm that residents there had the highest average incomes per capita of any county in the U.S., at $252,000.
Property owners include Bill Gates, of Microsoft billions.
As of the fourth quarter of 2021, the median home price in the county, meaning half of the homes were priced higher, was $1,060,093.
Nevertheless, homeowners there don't like a county governmental "shakedown" any more than people in other locations.
A report from the Pacific Legal Foundation reveals homeowners Trey and Shelby Scharp are suing in federal court over "excessive and unlawful permit fees the county demanded before allowing them to build a home."
The foundation explained, "Their lawsuit argues that Teton County's 'workforce housing' fees only increase the cost of housing for homeowners, are completely unrelated to their permit, and violate well-established Supreme Court precedents prohibiting governments from extorting money from property owners."
Austin Waisanen, a lawyer for the foundation, explained, "The Scharp family was required to pay a 'workforce housing' fee, despite being told they could not build rental housing on their property. These fees don't make housing cheaper for anyone; they just drive up costs to create housing,"
He continued, "The Constitution is clear that governments cannot compel homebuilders to pay excessive fees for problems they do not create."
The "workforce housing" fee assessed against the Scharps was $25,000, the report said.
While the fee is intended to "help" the workforce in the county that includes Jackson Hole, the county also blocked the Scharps from including a rental unit on their property, a plan that "would have directly helped address worker housing."
Defendants named are the county's board of commissioners.
The court filing, in U.S. district court in Wyoming, explains, "When a local government imposes a condition on land use permits that requires the payment of money or the dedication of real property—what the law terms an 'exaction'—it must make an individualized determination that the condition is related both in nature and extent to the impact of the proposed land use. … Local governments bear the burden of showing that an exaction bears an 'essential nexus' and 'rough proportionality' to the public impacts of a proposed land use. Together, the nexus and proportionality tests ensure that an exaction is necessary to mitigate a proposed land use's impact, and that the scale of an exaction is no larger than necessary. An exaction which lacks either an essential nexus or proportionality is unlawful, and nothing more than an 'out-and-out plan of extortion.'"
The legal filing charges that the Scharps' construction of new home "does not have any negative impact on housing affordability in Teton County."
It added, "Basic principles of economics show that building a new home increases the supply of available housing and therefore mitigates—not aggravates—housing affordability in Teton County."
Ironically, the family ran into trouble with the county because they planned a 3,700 square foot home with options to rent out an existing cabin on the property, as well as the basement of the new construction.
The county vetoed their plans for providing "too much" rental space.
The case seeks a court ruling that the county standards violate the doctrine of unconstitutional conditions and a judgment that their rights were violated by the process. They also seek economic damages and an injunction against the county's fee scheme.
There's so much at stake for President Donald Trump's "big, beautiful bill," and it goes beyond extending tax cuts and no tax on overtime and tips.
According to the Daily Wire, Republicans are cheering hard for the full passage of the bill, as it will mean the end of federally-funded transgender procedures for both children and adults, assuming the bill makes it to the president's desk.
Reports noted that Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) was at the forefront of extending a provision in the bill to cut off federal funds for transgender procedures for adults in addition to children, which was already covered in the bill.
Thanks to Crenshaw's efforts, Medicaid, the Affordable Care Act, and the Children’s Health Insurance Program will no longer cover transgender procedures.
Calling it the "lobotomy of our generation," Crenshaw doubled down in his fight to ban such procedures from receiving federal funding, even coining the provision the "Crenshaw amendment."
"The Crenshaw Amendment will become law — and it’s long overdue," Crenshaw told The Daily Wire.
He added, "Gender transition procedures are the lobotomy of our generation. So-called ‘gender-affirming care’ isn’t healthcare—it’s fringe science with no proven benefit and massive risks."
We did it. We got my provision into the Big Beautiful Bill. NO MORE Medicaid, CHIP, or ACA funding for GENDER TRANSITIONS on minors. I’ve been fighting this issue for YEARS but we could never get the votes to make it law. Now we will.
Evil keeps losing. We keep winning. pic.twitter.com/Rwr8pclFdr
— Dan Crenshaw (@DanCrenshawTX) May 13, 2025
The Daily Wire noted:
The provision was secured by an amendment to Section 1903(i) of the Social Security Act, prohibiting funding for medically unnecessary procedures. This would mean funding would no longer go toward things like removing the breasts of women who identify as men or crafting pseudo male or female genitalia for transgender-identifying individuals.
As we now know, the bill passed the House by a narrow margin, and Crenshaw's amendment was included.
Social media users reacted to Crenshaw's amendment and his announcement.
"Great! Also, can we cut some of this spending longer-term?" one X user wrote.
Another X user wrote, "Great. I support that, but what I care more about is cutting spending. . . . could you, you know, maybe focus on the thing that's going to destroy our country -- our debt?"
Only time will tell if Senate Republicans can muster the support needed to clear the upper chamber.
Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) have created a long list of establishment enemies, and in the process, generated mountains of legal actions against the organization.
According to The Hill, in a lawsuit that seeks documents and information about DOGE operations, U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Roberts temporarily paused discovery.
Roberts played ball with the Trump administration, which had requested a temporary administrative stay, "which temporarily lifts a judge’s order allowing limited discovery into whether DOGE is an 'agency.'"
The key issue is that if DOGE is found to be an official agency, then it, like every other agency, would be subject to complying with Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.
Chief Justice Roberts received the request by default, as he handles emergency requests that come out of Washington D.C.
The Hill noted:
The pause will last until the court decides whether to wipe two lower court rulings letting discovery move forward, which Roberts could himself decide or refer to the full court.
Attorneys for the government, including Solicitor General D. John Sauer, argued that DOGE is not subject to complying with FOIA requests, instead describing the organization as a "presidential advisory body" housed within the Executive Office of the President.
Sauer went on to argue that he believes the judge allowed deep levels of discovery to determine whether or not DOGE is required to submit to FOIA requests.
The Hill added:
He suggested that U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper, an appointee of former President Obama, ordered DOGE to submit to “sweeping, intrusive” discovery just to determine if it is, in fact, subject to FOIA, which lets the public request information from the government.
Sauder said, "That order turns FOIA on its head, effectively giving the respondent a win on the merits of its FOIA suit under the guise of figuring out whether FOIA even applies."
The high court intervened after a lower D.C. court ruled last week that the discovery process could continue.
The lawsuit was brought against DOGE by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW).
Dozens of other lawsuits have been filed with similar intentions.
Only time will tell where this particular lawsuit goes.
President Donald Trump and his administration continue to clean out the halls of Washington D.C. with a new round of dismissals, suspensions and reassignments.
According to Newsweek, the Trump administration made quite an overhaul at the National Security Council by dismissing dozens of workers, placing others on administrative leave, and issuing reassignments for some.
The shake-up at the White House's NSC came in the wake of the exit of Mike Waltz as the head of the agency in the wake of the Signal chat scandal that caused some level of embarrassment for the administration.
As it stands, Secretary of State Marco Rubio is the acting adviser of the NSC until a replacement can be confirmed by the Senate.
President Trump and his administration are undertaking a massive reorganization of the NSC, which will include firings, suspensions and recalling some of the employees back to their home stations, reports noted.
The overhaul has been described as a sort of "liquidation" of the agency.
Newsweek noted:
NSC Chief of Staff Brian McCormack informed members of the NSC that they had 30 minutes to remove their belongings and exit the building, which is located next to the White House.
Dennis Wilder, a former top NSC official in George W. Bush's administration, told the FT there was "no question that the NSC in the Biden administration had become bloated and was high-handedly trying to implement foreign policy rather than doing its traditional role of co-ordinating the implementation by the rest of the national security establishment."
A major part of the overhaul is that the Trump administration believes the NSC is riddled with those who aren't in line with Trump's agenda.
Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio are apparently behind the massive changes, according to Fox News.
The outlet noted:
A White House official involved in the planning said Trump and Rubio are driving the change in an attempt to target Washington’s so-called "Deep State."
"The NSC is the ultimate Deep State. It's Marco vs. the Deep State. We're gutting the Deep State," a White House official told Axios.
The NSC is actually located within the White House, and it functions to serve the president's office, guiding it on national security, military and foreign affairs matters.
The NSC will still exist, though massively shrunk down in size.
A vast majority of Trump's supporters are in favor of gutting the agency, along with several others.
Only time will tell how the new level of efficiency will serve the government and the American people.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Radically pro-abortion? Check. An extremist on the LGBT issues, especially body mutilations for kids? Check. A long series of blatantly anti-Christian attacks on people of faith? Check, and check again. Specifically trying to hurt parents? Check. Orchestrated attacks on President Donald Trump. Again, check.
So what else is needed in a state that has gone so far left that some of its agenda points are being shunned even by California?
Of course, gun control.
That's exactly where Colorado has gone with a new law that now is being condemned as a "grotesque misuse of government power."
And, a report from the Rocky Mountain Voice explained officials in one Colorado county now have asked the Department of Justice to move against the latest leftism.
The state already has called abortion a "constitutional" right. It pushes for the LGBT agenda to the point of repeatedly losing at the Supreme Court. Its lawmakers considered a plan that could have been used to eliminate parental rights if they "deadnamed" a child. And the all-Democrat state Supreme Court tried to skew the 2024 presidential election with its attempt to remove Trump from the ballot.
The gun issue is a reach as far as any.
The report said, "Would you need a perfect GPA to speak your mind or worship freely? Mesa County officials say Colorado's new gun law is treating the Second Amendment that way – and they've asked the U.S. Department of Justice to intervene."
Commissioners in a three-page latter have urged the feds to review Senate Bill 25-003, calling it a "grotesque misuse of government power."
That's because it "effectively imposes a discriminatory test on anyone wishing to lawfully own or carry a firearm.
The law, which takes effect in August 2026, requires residents to complete state-approved firearms training, score 90% on a written exam and obtain conditional approval from their sheriff's office every five years in order to receive or renew a permit."
Commissioner JJ Fletcher explained to the Rocky Mountain Voice the county was left with no choice, when leftists in Denver ignored public concern.
"I feel strongly… that our constitutional rights as citizens have been violated by SB3," Fletcher said. "It violates our residents' civil rights. We want to have the ability to exercise our Second Amendment rights."
The commissioners pointed out things the leftists in the legislature apparently could not see: "As a nation, we do not require citizens to pass an exam to speak freely under the First Amendment, or to vote under the Fourteenth or Fifteenth Amendments. Yet, in Democrat-controlled Colorado, the right to keep and bear arms is being conditioned upon financial means, test-taking proficiency, and the ability to navigate government bureaucracy."
In fact, the letter charges the Democrat majority in Colorado's government with having re-enacted earlier American history, when the nation used "poll taxes, literacy tests, and voter intimidation imposed by Democrats in the post-CIvIl War South."
"Today, state policymakers have enacted a disturbingly similar framework – not to block voting, but to obstruct the constitutional right to self-defense," the commissioners wrote.
Further, the commissioners warn the state likely is in violation of "District of Columbia v. Heller, McDonald v. City of Chicago, and New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen."
"Those all affirm that the right to bear arms is individual and that states cannot impose excessive or arbitrary restrictions," the letter explained.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
President Donald Trump has said over and over he wants to eliminate the federal Department of Education.
That bureaucracy hands out money and sets rules, but actually it is local school boards and state agencies that manage much of the decision-making in the education industry.
But the department still exists, and while it still has offices and staff, it is making changes.
Those include a whole new set of priorities for its grant programs.
A report at PJMedia documents how Linda McMahon, Trump's education secretary, has called for "evidence-based literacy, expanding education choice, and returning education to the states."
The report noted, "The federal government was never constitutionally supposed to be involved in running education, and its involvement has contributed to the crisis of crashing test scores, woke indoctrination, dysfunctional youth, and much more."
"Discretionary grants coming from the Department of Education will now be focused on meaningful learning and expanding choice, not divisive ideologies and unproven strategies," McMahon said.
"It is critical that we immediately address this year's dismal reading and math scores by getting back to the basics, expanding learning options, and making sure decisions in education are made closest to the child."
Various changes are possible: "Expansion of charters, innovative school models, K-12 open enrollment, dissemination of information on choice options, implementation of ESAs, home based education, concurrent enrollment programs, career preparation, postsecondary distance education, skills-based education, apprenticeships, work-based learning, accelerated learning and tutoring, etc.," the report said.
The report noted that the priorities are "a major change from the Biden-Harris administration, which obsessed over implementing woke diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) standards into our school system, worsening an already severe educational crisis. Race-baiting doesn't teach kids anything useful or help them improve their grades — quite the opposite."
The department announcement confirmed what many Americans already knew, the problems from the Biden administration, such as:
"Pushing student racial diversity through diversity plans, admissions policies, and technical assistance;
Also, embedding DEI in educational subjects and programs such as civics, STEM, and career and technical education;
And, focusing on diversity amongst educators instead of sound teacher preparation;
Also, promoting social emotional learning; and
Supporting divisive school diversity and social justice policies."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Another scandal from the era of Joe Biden in the White House has been uncovered in a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing, and Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., was left stunned.
That was by the fact that the Biden administration handed out a "staggering" $93 billion in loans and commitments during the final 76 days of Biden's tenure, apparently without even reviewing a business operating plan or a project review.
A report at PJMedia documents Kennedy's reaction when Energy Secretary Christopher Wright dropped the bombshell.
"The 76-day period you're talking about, that's the period between the time that President Trump was elected and President Biden left office. Is that right?" Kennedy demanded.
"That is correct," Wright said.
"How do you do due diligence on one loan, much less $93 billion?" Kennedy asked.
"I think it's probably pretty clear it wasn't done in many cases. There were commitments made from businesses that provided no business plan, no numbers about their own financial solvency, or how this project actually worked," Wright confirmed.
Kennedy continued, "So, so you're telling me that the Department of Energy in the 76-day period before their boss was gonna leave office, gave or loaned money to, to entities that had no business plan?"
Yes, Wright affirmed.
"No financials?" Kennedy asked.
"Correct. I've come in with great concern about how this institution, this great American institution, has been run and how American taxpayer money has been handled," Wright explained.
A review now is under way, he confirmed.
Wright also confirmed he could not provide assurance that none of the recipients lied.
And Kennedy asked about fraud.
"Is it conceivable that some of these folks… came to you with a half-baked idea?" he said
"Very conceivable. In fact, I've seen such plans … that didn't have a business plan — just a promise to develop one later," Wright said.
Wright assured the senator he would be turning down wasteful projects and referring those who acted inappropriately to the Department of Justice.
The money handed out during those 76 days was more than double to loan total from the previous 15 years, the report said.
Medicaid will no longer pay for so-called gender affirming care thanks to GOP-led legislation, Newsmax reported. The "big, beautiful bill" passed in the House on Thursday included the eleventh-hour addition banning federal funding for the controversial medical care.
An earlier version of the bill prohibited treatments for children under Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program. It bars these federal programs from paying for hormone treatments, puberty blockers, and bodily mutilations for gender-confused minors.
A manager's amendment later added to the bill extended the prohibition to recipients regardless of age. The final bill passed 215-214, with all Democrats and just two Republicans voting against it.
Andy Harris, chairman of the House Freedom Caucus, skirted the issue by voting "present." Predictably, the left was not pleased with this provision and its implications.
The passage of this bill already triggered leftists as it codified much of President Donald Trump's agenda. However, it's particularly offensive to people like Caleb Smith, director of LGBTQI+ policy at the Center for American Progress, because of the transgender care issue
Smith claims that the expansion is proof that banning gender affirming care outright was the goal all along. "The bans on coverage for trans medical care were made so much worse, really, in the eleventh hour of this bill," Smith said in a statement.
"And what a display of how it's really not just about youth. It's never just been about youth; It's always been about curtailing access to medical care and bodily autonomy. All they had to do was strike ‘under 18' from the bill, and now it's everybody," Smith went on.
"There's a wildly strong case for this to be discrimination — it is discrimination. It really clearly violates equal protection because what we're saying, essentially, is that if you are a cisgender man and you want access to testosterone, you can have it, but if you are a transgender man and you want access to testosterone, ‘Sorry, we're not going to cover that,'" Smith claimed.
This argument about discrimination would be credible if the treatments being proposed weren't about genital mutilation and chemical castration, but it's not. There's no reason these should be part of medical treatments, let alone those paid for by the American people, as some Republicans have pointed out.
Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) was the one who pushed through the ban for children after speaking out against it for years. "The Crenshaw Amendment will become law — and it's long overdue," Crenshaw said.
"Gender transition procedures are the lobotomy of our generation. So-called ‘gender-affirming care' isn't healthcare — it's fringe science with no proven benefit and massive risks," Crenshaw asserted.
He touted his addition to the bill in a video posted to X, formerly Twitter, on Wednesday. "Just a year ago, few believed we could put a stop to the radical gender ideology being pushed on kids—especially the kind masquerading as medicine, funded with your tax dollars. But now, we’re about to do exactly that," he said in the caption.
Just a year ago, few believed we could put a stop to the radical gender ideology being pushed on kids—especially the kind masquerading as medicine, funded with your tax dollars. But now, we’re about to do exactly that.
The Crenshaw Amendment in President Trump’s One Big… pic.twitter.com/cRlvCfZeeW
— Dan Crenshaw (@DanCrenshawTX) May 21, 2025
The issue of transgender medicine has been divisive, but limiting government spending on it is long overdue. These procedures are barbaric and ghastly, and it's about time someone put the brakes on them, even if it's just through cutting some of the funding.
Former first lady Michelle Obama mused about what it would be like to be a "single girl" staying with Airbnb CEO and co-founder Brian Chesky, Fox News reported. This comment comes as divorce rumors continue to swirl about a possible split.
Michelle Obama has been trying to ride the wave of her former first lady fame with the creation of her new podcast and other endeavors. Part of that has been talking about her relationship with her husband, former President Barack Obama.
Amid constant chatter that hints at a possible divorce, which Michelle Obama has repeatedly denied, the former first lady seems intent on adding fuel to the fire. She did so during a discussion with Chesky on her "IMO" podcast, which she hosts with her brother Craig Robinson, released Wednesday.
.
During the podcast, Chesky shared how he was now offering his home as an Airbnb. "Starting today, my home is now on Airbnb (yes, this is my actual home and I’ll be there when guests are here)," he posted to X, formerly Twitter, on Nov. 22, 2022.
He said his weekend bookings are popular and that he offers guests homemade chocolate chip cookies among other amenities. "We will work out together and train until total muscle failure (after we’ve eaten lots of cookies)," Chesky said.
Michelle Obama was very eager for this experience, noting that she had not had his homemade cookies even though she and Barack Obama are longtime friends with Chesky. Chesky quipped that she would have to book with him for that perk.
Michelle Obama's answer was crafted in a way that perhaps reveals a little too much about her state of mind. "I have to say, Brian, if I'm a single girl out there, and I find out that Brian Chesky is single, and I can, like, stay in his house..." Michelle Obama teased.
Chesky said that Barack and Michelle Obama have tried to play matchmaker for him in the past. "I'm very invested in Brian’s love life," the former first lady confirmed.
Although Michelle Obama was being playful with Chesky, the context of this remark matters. There have been several reports that her marriage is on the rocks as she opens up about her life.
The most compelling evidence came after Michelle Obama did not attend the funeral of former President Jimmy Carter with her husband, nor did she accompany him to President Donald Trump's inauguration, USA Today reported. Her explanation was just that she didn't want to.
"My decision to skip the inauguration – or my decision to make choices at the beginning of this year that suited me – were met with such ridicule and criticism. People couldn't believe that I was saying no for any other reason," the former first lady said.
"They had to assume that my marriage was falling apart," Michelle Obama added. She later claimed, "If I were having problems with my husband, everybody would know about it."
It's unclear whether Michelle Obama unconsciously fuels these rumors or if it's some sort of publicity strategy. Whatever the case may be, it seems there's no shortage of instances that seem to suggest that there may be trouble in the Obama marriage.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio has been cleaning house at the National Security Council at the direction of President Donald Trump.
Rubio has been on a mission to purge the 'deep state' from important government boards and councils, as well as fundamentally reshape certain government bodies to fight the shadow government that has been running Washington D.C. for decades.
President Trump has made the National Security Council an important target for reform. The Council is a notoriously bureaucratic institution staffed by career officials who oppose Trump's agenda.
One unnamed White House official stated, "The NSC is the ultimate Deep State. It's Marco vs. the Deep State. We're gutting the Deep State."
Of the 350 staff, about half have been cut and moved to other agencies to reduce the influence of the NSC and the bureaucrats who have enjoyed unchallenged rule for years.
In a statement to Axios, Rubio explained, "The right-sizing of the NSC is in line with its original purpose and the president's vision. The NSC will now be better positioned to collaborate with agencies."
Over the past years, the NSC has become instrumental in carrying out policies instead of its original advisory role. Because of the NSC's multi-layered committee system, the organization is completely inefficient in executing policy as opposed to advising.
Another White House official pointed this flaw out by stating, "That's the bottom-to-the-top approach that doesn't work. It's going away. All those things feeding up to principals are the unnecessary piece."
Purging the NSC and reforming it is crucial to President Trump's mission to reshape American foreign policy.
In contrast to past presidents, Trump's foreign policy prioritizes American interests, global peace, and stability. An example of this policy is Trump's decision to lift sanctions on Syria to encourage stability in the region, despite the fact that Syria's leader is classified as a terrorist.
The mission for Rubio is to reshape government to immediately and quickly respond to the orders of President Trump. If Trump wants it done, it needs to be done, instead of being filtered through four layers of committees staffed by career bureaucrats.
Rubio is flexing his power in cleaning up government agencies, and one staffer told Axios, "Marco is the one in charge and calling the shots."
When Trump nominated Rubio to be his Secretary of State, some were concerned that he wouldn't have the fortitude to be ruthless in making cuts. However, it appears that Rubio has proven to be a warrior for Trump's agenda and is determined to dismantle the 'swamp.'
The NSC isn't the only corrupt government body that Rubio has had a hand in dismantling. Rubio has been hard at work for months destroying the corrupt money laundering scheme that was USAID.
Americans who voted for Trump in November ought to be excited by the work that the Trump administration is doing to cut down and burn Washington D.C.'s corrupt bureaucracy.