This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Former U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr, who served during President Donald Trump's first administration, is calling out federal district judges for trying to "usurp" the president's authority and responsibility to deal with national security
A report at Fox News explained Barr said, "The president is absolutely right to be frustrated and concerned about the way the courts are handling this."
His comments came on the topic of deporting illegal alien criminals, which Trump has been pursuing. At least one judge, James Boasberg, has tried to halt those deportation's by claiming the illegal aliens must be given hearings, despite a federal law allowing Trump's actions.
Boasberg also has tried to demand secret national security information from the White House, which responded with a "no."
Barr explained to Fox that Boasberg's ruling goes beyond the judge's authority and interferes with the president's constitutional powers.
"The Constitution gives the president the power to make the judgments about how we deal with foreign nationals when we are animated by national security concerns. It's his call, not a district court judge's call."
Boasberg previously had established a record of leftist activism from the bench, including demanding more severe penalties than the law allowed for J6 protesters.
An appeals court heard arguments on a White House request to overturn Boasberg's demands on Monday, and the judges appeared divided with Patricia Millett taking the leftist approach, insisting that, "Nazis got better treatment under the Alien Enemy Act than has happened here."
Barr explained part of the issue is the nationwide injunctions coming like confetti from local judges.
"Even where it's appropriate for the court to play its traditional role of safeguarding the liberties of American citizens, we have this phenomena of nation-wide injunctions where the lowest level judge, district judges, try to bind the entire nation and bind the president in their initial decision. That is not what we have meant by the judicial power under our Constitution," he said.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
President Donald Trump on Tuesday issued an order that all of the government's files on the FBI's Crossfire Hurricane investigation nine years ago be made public.
That was the FBI's attempt to undermine Trump's first, successful, campaign for president.
Commentator Charlie Kirk explained its significance:
BREAKING: President Trump has just signed a Presidential Memorandum ordering the immediate declassification of all FBI files relating to the Crossfire Hurricane investigation which kicked off the Russia hoax 9 years ago. This is a big deal. Our own FBI tried to sabotage a presidential candidate based on an absurd conspiracy theory, then sabotaged that same candidate after he was elected, then coordinated a Deep State-directed censorship campaign to throw him out of office. The only way we can hope to fix this is with total transparency. All the FBI's dirty laundry MUST be made public."
Another commenter was to the same point, only more succinct: "President Trump orders the immediate declassification of all FBI files on Crossfire Hurricane, the infamous 'Russian Collusion' investigation. These documents could finally expose Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama for committing treason against a sitting president."
In fact, conspiracy rumors created by Democrats and their hired lawyers included a wild list of unrealistic claims in documents like the now-discredited Steele Dossier, which leftists quoted as if it were the truth.
Fox News reported that Trump cast doubt on the willingness of the media, which joined the Democrats wholeheartedly in the conspiracy against Trump, to review the facts.
"You probably won't bother because you're not going to like what you see. But this was total weaponization. It's a disgrace. It should have never happened in this country. But now you'll be able to see for yourselves. All declassified," he said.
The report noted the FBI opened the unsubstantiated investigation on July 31, 2016, a counterintelligence scheme that claimed to seek if Trump or his campaign members were colluding with Russia.
The report noted, "The opening of the investigation came just days after a July 28 meeting during which then-CIA Director John Brennan briefed then-President Barack Obama on a purported proposal from one of Hillary Clinton's campaign foreign policy advisors 'to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security service.'"
Clinton was the Democrat nominee for president that year, and failed in her second attempt at the office. She later claimed, wildly, that the election was stolen from her.
Then-FBI Director James Comey subsequently pushed the Steele Dossier, a compilation of salacious lies about Trump. It was fabricated by Christopher Steele and was commissioned by Fusion GPS, in the pay of Hillary Clinton's campaign.
But what was found was that the weaponized government agency has pursued improper surveillance of Trump staff members.
A subsequent review confirmed that the FBI, under Obama, had zero evidence to even begin an investigation. It also found the FBI was the "target" of a Clinton conspiracy to "manipulate" law enforcement for political purposes.
A book by climate alarmist Al Gore was spotted on a bookshelf in the background of a video Usha Vance, wife of Vice President J.D. Vance, posted ot Instagram, the UK Daily Mail reported. The Second Lady was speaking about an upcoming trip to Greenland when eagle-eyed viewers noticed the controversial reading material.
The 1992 book Earth in the Balance, penned by the former vice president, was noticeably placed behind Usha Vance as she spoke about the trip. The Second Lady didn't mention anything about the book she perhaps unknowingly had on the shelf as she eagerly shared news about the trip.
Usha Vance noted she'd be visiting during the nation's famed dogsled races. "I’m also coming to celebrate the long history of mutual respect and cooperation between our two nations and to express hope that our relationship will only grow stronger in the coming years," the second lady said.
View this post on Instagram
The radical climate agenda is extremely unpopular among conservatives, as is the movement's godfather, Al Gore. He's known for making outlandish predictions that don't come true while jetsetting on carbon-spewing private planes to continue with the rhetoric.
As with his other work, the book spotted behind Usha Vance was filled with hyperbolic language that would be laughable if not for the fact that some took it as a serious call to action. When called out on it years later, Gore doubled down with the craziest metaphor of all, according to a Fox News report from 2007.
"The planet has a fever. If your baby has a fever, you go to the doctor," he told then-Rep. Joe Barton(R-TX). "If the doctor says you need to intervene here, you don't say 'I read a science fiction novel that says it's not a problem.' You take action," Gore added.
Gore peppered his climate alarmist screed with all kinds of silliness, but he went a step further with a strawman attack on Michael Crichton's State of Fear novel. The popular author, who has since passed away, illustrated the climate hysteria by using Gore-like activists as the villains in his 2004 fiction.
People who see that the second lady has Gore's book are inclined to conclude that she believes the drivel he's been spewing for decades, but there's no indication one way or the other. Notably, she was a registered Democrat until 2014, when she married J.D. Vance.
While some may be focusing on old books Usha Vance keeps on her shelf, the vice president had his eye on Greenland's strategic location. President Donald Trump has repeatedly expressed a desire to acquire the island nation, which surely plays into J.D. Vance's visit.
As Reuters reported, the vice president posted about his intentions for the visit. "Looking forward to visiting Greenland on Friday," J.D. Vance captioned a video accompanying the post.
"A lot of other countries have threatened Greenland, have threatened to use its territories and its waterways to threaten the United States, to threaten Canada, and of course, to threaten the people of Greenland. So we are going to check out how things are going there," the vice president said in the video.
"Unfortunately, leaders in both America and in Denmark, I think, ignored Greenland for far too long," J.D. Vance added. Greenland is located between the U.S. and Europe and could serve as a staging ground for counterattacks from places like Russia and China.
Usha Vance has not made her opinions known, but it's irrelevant. The American people elected Trump and J.D. Vance, and they trust that they will carry out the conservative agenda just as promised. So far, they have done just that, independent of their wives' reading preferences.
During a recent podcast interview, former First Lady Michelle Obama expressed her surprise at the controversy that surrounded her school lunch initiative, Breitbart reported.
Obama believed her initiative to improve nutrition in schools would be non-controversial, but it faced significant opposition and was ultimately altered under President Trump's administration.
Michelle Obama discussed the contentious nature of her school lunch program on the "Not Gonna Lie" podcast hosted by Kylie Kelce. The initiative was introduced as part of her broader "Let's Move" campaign, which launched in 2010 with the goal of promoting healthier lifestyles among children. Obama explained that she expected initiatives focusing on healthier school meals and increased physical activity to be universally accepted and nonpartisan.
Obama remarked on her strategic efforts to align her agenda with the priorities of the previous administration, seeing school nutrition as a common-sense issue that should transcend political divisions. She noted, "There’s no way that anyone is going to take issue with trying to make school lunches healthier, getting kids more active."
The former First Lady was candid about her misjudgment. "Just trying to make the next generation healthier than ours and, boy, was I wrong," she stated, drawing parallels with current administrative ideas, particularly those voiced by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Despite being designed to enhance nutrition standards and make food labeling more approachable, the school lunch program was criticized. Critics accused Obama of trying to implement a "nanny state" approach by dictating dietary choices for children.
Obama reflected on the political climate that fueled the controversy. "It became a partisan issue," she recalled. "People were telling me that I’m trying to control what our kids are eating."
Initially, the program aimed to introduce healthier meals in schools, yet it attracted criticism from students who posted unappetizing meal photos online. This negative reaction illustrated the broader opposition the initiative faced.
Under President Donald Trump's administration, the program saw significant rollbacks beginning in 2017. These changes reintroduced certain items, such as chocolate milk, back into school menus. Sonny Perdue, who served as Trump’s Secretary of Agriculture, emphasized the importance of "flexibility in menu planning."
Perdue argued that allowing schools to individually tailor meals could help reduce waste. "Schools want to offer food that students actually want to eat," he stated, emphasizing that nutrition was futile if meals simply ended up being discarded.
Further changes came in 2020 when the Trump administration announced additional rollbacks on the nutrition standards set by Obama. The administration sought to address concerns over food waste while striving to provide appealing meal options for students.
Obama’s initial proposal focused on creating lasting health benefits. Nevertheless, the short-term pushback it received highlighted a significant division in how nutritional policy was perceived by different political factions.
Despite the challenges, Obama maintained her belief in the program's overarching goals. She highlighted achievements such as enhanced nutrition standards, which aimed to foster awareness among young Americans about healthful eating.
Looking to the future, Obama expressed hope that conversations surrounding child nutrition would evolve beyond the partisan conflicts that characterized past debates. Her experience serves as a reminder of how policy ideas, regardless of intent, can get entangled in political discourse.
Elon Musk is under fresh scrutiny over a leaked video of the Tesla CEO performing an unusual party trick for President Trump's guests.
In the short video, an intensely focused Musk can be seen silently balancing his silverware on the tips of his fingers at an exclusive Mar-A-Lago event. Musk's behavior led to criticism online with some calling it childish or odd.
Musk appears to be seated with Shivon Zillis, the mother of four of his kids, as Trump engages in a conversation nearby.
Musk, meanwhile, is completely zoned in on playing with his fork and spoon. He chimed in on X to confirm what he was up to.
"A fork and two spoons balanced on the tip of my finger," he wrote.
The Tesla CEO's eccentric behavior has received publicity on numerous occasions and has caused some headaches for Trump - including an incident where Musk was accused of making a Nazi salute on the day of Trump's inauguration.
Despite their very different personalities, Trump and Musk have been working as a tag team on a historic effort to slash the size of government, making Musk a top target in the U.S. political scene. The world's wealthiest man is at the center of Democratic talking points about "oligarchy" as the party struggles to find its way out of a post-election slump.
The viral clip of Musk's balancing act led to more criticism, with some labeling it "weird" and others seeing it as evidence of his eccentric "genius."
"I also did that kind of thing when I was 5," one user wrote.
"He probably thinks this makes him look like an engineer," another wrote.
On a more serious note, Musk has been on the receiving end of a violent political backlash. The Justice Department has declared recent arson and vandalism incidents against Tesla as acts of domestic terror.
With many of Musk's critics speculating about his drug use, Musk has admitted to taking ketamine, a potent hallucinogen, to control feelings of depression.
"If you use too much ketamine, you can’t really get work done. I have a lot of work, I’m typically putting in 16-hour days," Musk told Don Lemon in an interview.
"So I don’t really have a situation where I can be not mentally acute for an extended period of time.”
Despite working sixteen-hour days, Musk clearly still knows how to have fun.
President Trump ordered the state of Colorado to remove an unflattering and "purposefully distorted" painting of him from the state's Capitol.
The awkward picture has been hanging in the Capitol Rotunda in Denver since 2019. In a post on Truth Social, Trump shared a photo of the painting, which he described as "truly the worst."
"Nobody likes a bad picture or painting of themselves, but the one in Colorado, in the State Capitol, put up by the Governor, along with all other Presidents, was purposefully distorted to a level that even I, perhaps, have never seen before," Trump wrote.
The same artist who made the Trump painting, British-born Sarah Boardman, also painted the picture of Barack Obama hanging next to it.
"The artist also did President Obama, and he looks wonderful, but the one on me is truly the worst," Trump wrote. "She must have lost her talent as she got older," Trump wrote.
Trump said he spoke with the Democratic governor, Jared Polis, about taking the picture down. The president also knocked Polis over his handling of the Tren de Aragua gang, which came to national attention last year after occupying an apartment complex in the Denver area. Polis infamously dismissed the gang takeover - which was captured on video - as a product of the "imagination."
"In any event, I would much prefer not having a picture than having this one, but many people from Colorado have called and written to complain," Trump said.
"I am speaking on their behalf to the Radical Left Governor, Jared Polis, who is extremely weak on Crime, in particular with respect to Tren de Aragua, which practically took over Aurora (Don’t worry, we saved it!), to take it down. Jared should be ashamed of himself!"
When the painting went up in 2019, the Colorado Springs-based artist said wasn't influenced by her personal feelings about Trump, according to Newsweek.
"My portrait of President Trump has been called thoughtful, non-confrontational, not angry, not happy, not tweeting. In five, 10, 15, 20 years, he will be another president on the wall who is only historical background and he needs to look neutral," she said at the time.
A spokesperson for Governor Polis responded to Trump with sarcasm.
"Gov. Polis was surprised to learn the President of the United States is an aficionado of our Colorado State Capitol and its artwork," Polis' spokesperson wrote.
While Polis is busy firing back at the president, Coloradans continue to feel the impact of the migrant crisis in their state.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The Indian media is celebrating Prime Minister Narendra Modi's recent visit to the U.S. as a landmark moment in international relations, trade, and technological collaboration. Yet, behind the diplomatic pleasantries and ambitious promises, there are profound implications that should concern every American worker. While the official narrative describes a mutually beneficial partnership, the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII), a powerful lobbying group with deep ties to India's government, is revealing a different reality, one where the biggest winner is India, while the American workforce is left to bear the consequences.
CII is not merely applauding this agreement; they are declaring victory. They have openly stated that this partnership will boost India's manufacturing, attract foreign direct investment, and create jobs, in India. Missing from their extensive coverage of this visit is any substantial mention of job creation for American workers or a commitment to strengthening U.S. industry or really any benefits for America. This omission is not accidental. It is a clear indication of what this deal is truly about, cementing India's rise as a global technology and economic powerhouse, financed in part by the American taxpayer.
As I have learned through CII's many articles and reports, this was not a sudden shift in U.S.-India relations, but rather a well-coordinated and orchestrated effort spanning over two decades, and now, it appears to be paying off exactly as intended.
For years, CII has meticulously positioned India as the ideal destination for U.S. investment, offshoring, and technology partnerships, using a strategic combination of corporate influence, policy lobbying, and diaspora leverage to embed itself deep within American economic and political systems. Every report, every initiative, and every policy recommendation they have put forward has been part of a long-term playbook designed to transform India into the dominant global leader in technology, manufacturing, and trade, with U.S. wealth, jobs, and innovation fueling that rise.
This latest agreement is not just another trade deal, it is the culmination of years of calculated maneuvering that has led to India's growing dominance in critical sectors like AI, semiconductors, cybersecurity, and defense technology. While American workers have endured waves of job losses, mass layoffs, and declining wages, India has steadily positioned itself as the primary beneficiary of U.S. corporate outsourcing, workforce displacement, and technology transfers.
This is not a coincidence. This is the result of a carefully executed strategy, one that CII and its network of industry insiders have worked toward for decades. And now, with this latest agreement, they are reaping the rewards of their efforts while Americans pay the price.
For years, Americans have been told that China is the greatest threat to our jobs, industries, and technological leadership. While Washington remains fixated on Beijing, India has methodically positioned itself as the next major global competitor, using strategic partnerships, outsourcing, and workforce displacement to advance its own economic agenda. The difference is that while China's rise has been met with bipartisan scrutiny, India's expansion has been largely facilitated by U.S. policy, American investment, and corporate influence.
A Closer Look at the U.S.-India Tech Agreement, Who Really Benefits?
This deal is being framed as a step toward strengthening America's technological and economic security, but the details suggest otherwise. The U.S.-India COMPACT framework and TRUST initiative focus on key industries, AI, semiconductors, cybersecurity, quantum computing, and defense technology, that are not just critical to economic growth, but to national security. The question that must be asked is why the U.S. is actively helping India expand its capabilities in these fields, rather than prioritizing investment in the American workforce.
The CHIPS Act passed to revitalize semiconductor manufacturing in the U.S., was designed to secure supply chains and reduce dependence on foreign production. Yet, this agreement simultaneously provides India with the means to expand its own semiconductor industry, positioning it as a direct competitor to American manufacturing. If the goal is to strengthen America's independence in semiconductor production, why are we simultaneously bolstering another country's ability to dominate the same industry?
The agreement also paves the way for increased AI and cybersecurity collaboration, with initiatives such as the Autonomous Systems Industry Alliance (ASIA) and INDUS-X defense collaboration. These programs will train and develop India's tech workforce with U.S. expertise, resources, and funding, ensuring that India's position in the global AI and defense technology sector continues to grow. This is not a theoretical concern, India has openly stated its ambition to lead in AI, semiconductors, quantum computing, and telecommunications. With American investments and training, that ambition is quickly becoming a reality.
The Impact on American Workers, More Offshoring, More Displacement
One of the most glaring concerns is what this agreement means for American jobs. The U.S. has already experienced the devastating effects of offshoring and workforce displacement through trade deals that prioritized foreign labor markets over domestic employment. This deal sets the stage for even greater job losses, particularly in technology, engineering, manufacturing, and cybersecurity.
The H-1B visa program has already led to the widespread replacement of American tech workers with lower-wage foreign labor, primarily from India, the same country where our jobs, technology, and intellectual property are being aggressively offshored.
Major corporations like Google, Microsoft, and Amazon have been at the forefront of lobbying for more visas, enabling them to flood their U.S. workforce with Indian nationals while simultaneously cutting American jobs. At the same time, these companies are rapidly expanding their operations in India, investing billions into new tech hubs, engineering centers, and AI research labs, all while scaling back hiring in the United States.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
In response to a letter from U.S. President Donald Trump, Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei stated: "Some people inside the country keep bringing up the issue of negotiations, asking, 'Why don't you negotiate with the U.S.?' I want to be clear: If the goal of negotiations is to lift sanctions, that will not happen. Instead, it will only tighten the noose and increase the pressure."
That was March 12. Two days later, former President Hassan Rouhani, who served two terms between 2013 to 2021, responded to Khamenei's remarks, warning: "The situation is extremely critical, and the more we move forward, the harder and worse it becomes."
Rouhani further emphasized that negotiations should not be seen as a personal stance of Khamenei, stating: "We argue over whether to negotiate or not. But what kind of debate is this? Then we attach it to the idea that the supreme leader opposes negotiations. The truth is, that the supreme leader is not fundamentally against negotiations. Under current conditions, he may reject them today, but in a few months, given new circumstances, he might support them."
Seeing negotiation as a way out, Hassan Rouhani is deeply concerned about the rising tide of public anger. Four decades of clerical rule have left a nation simmering with frustration – anger that, like a ticking time bomb, threatens to detonate beneath the regime.
Khamenei is more aware than anyone of the existential threats facing his rule. He knows economic collapse and widespread hunger – now affecting more than two-thirds of Iran's population – have pushed the country to the brink of a massive uprising. He also understands that this time, the regime is up against more than just spontaneous protests. Thousands of resistance units across Iran are waiting for the right spark to ignite a nationwide rebellion, one that would drive the regime toward its downfall.
For the past decade, these units – established by the People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran, or MEK, the regime's sworn enemy – have spread into every neighborhood, town, and city. Despite the regime's extensive surveillance networks and security forces, the opposition has managed to carry out 60 anti-repression operations across Iran in March alone, relying on their deep social base.
Khamenei is also fully aware that this time, the international community – particularly Europe and the U.S. – stands united in its efforts to curb Iran's nuclear ambitions and regional influence.
In their latest statement, G7 members declared: "Iran is the primary source of instability in the region and must never be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. Iran must change course, de-escalate tensions, and choose diplomacy."
The recent U.S. attack on the Houthis at Trump's direction was another strong warning to Khamenei intended to bring him to the negotiating table.
Khamenei knows negotiations will inevitably force him into a step-by-step retreat. First, he will have to abandon Iran's nuclear program. From there, his authority will begin to erode, like a crumbling, decaying structure. This collapse will only deepen the rifts within the regime, pitting rival factions against each other in an all-out power struggle. Under such conditions, and due to the presence of major organized resistance within Iran, Ali Khamenei prefers to avoid negotiations, even at the cost of potential attacks on his nuclear facilities. The fall of Khamenei's rule is no longer a possibility – many see it as a foregone conclusion.
In a nation that has endured 45 years of repression and bloodshed at the hands of violent, dictatorial religious fanatics, tensions have reached a breaking point. Iran today is a powder keg, and Ali Khamenei's authority – already weakened by internal dissent following Syria's collapse – hangs by a thread. Once it unravels, the "wolves" within the regime will turn on one another. And when that moment of weakness arrives, the final uprising will not just be possible. It will be inevitable.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
PALM BEACH, Florida – President Donald Trump is not thrilled, to say the least, about a portrait of himself on display in Colorado's Capitol.
In a message posted on Truth Social Sunday night, Trump said: "Nobody likes a bad picture or painting of themselves, but the one in Colorado, in the State Capitol, put up by the Governor, along with all other Presidents, was purposefully distorted to a level that even I, perhaps, have never seen before.
"The artist also did President Obama, and he looks wonderful, but the one on me is truly the worst. She must have lost her talent as she got older.
"In any event, I would much prefer not having a picture than having this one, but many people from Colorado have called and written to complain. In fact, they are actually angry about it!
"I am speaking on their behalf to the Radical Left Governor, Jared Polis, who is extremely weak on Crime, in particular with respect to Tren de Aragua, which practically took over Aurora (Don't worry, we saved it!), to take it down. Jared should be ashamed of himself!"
Two minutes after his original complaint, Trump posted his own new official photographic portrait on Truth Social.
"That's a dumb picture, but hey, is it as bad as anything Hunter Biden did? No, he didn't blow art through a straw."
In a statement to 9NEWS Sunday night, a spokesperson for the governor said, "Gov. Polis was surprised to learn the President of the United States is an aficionado of our Colorado State Capitol and its artwork.
"The State Capitol was completed in 1901, and features Rose Onyx and White Yule Marble mined in Colorado, and includes portraits of former Presidents and former governors. We appreciate the President and everyone's interest in our capitol building and are always looking for any opportunity to improve our visitor experience."
The Trump portrait was painted by Sarah A. Boardman, a British-born artist based in Colorado Springs.
At the painting's unveiling ceremony, Boardman indicated she was trying to match the classical realist style of Lawrence Williams, the artist who had painted all 43 previous presidential portraits, and who died in 2003.
She said it took approximately four months to paint Trump, basing it on a photo approved by the Capitol Building Advisory Committee.
"My portrait of President Trump has been called thoughtful, non-confrontational, not angry, not happy, not tweeting," Boardman said at the time, according to Time magazine.
"In five, 10, 15, 20 years, he will be another president on the wall who is only historical background, and he needs to look neutral."
Watch local news coverage of the painting's unveiling during Trump's first term:
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A tax-writing member of Congress has recommended that the Internal Revenue Service revoke the tax-exempt status of a nonprofit linked to failed Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, an election denier who long after the votes were counted still claimed she won.
A report at Fox News noted the organization founded by Abrams, New Georgia Project, recently was fined $300,000 for violating state election laws, as determined by the Georgia Ethics Commission.
Rep. Jason Smith, R-Mo., and the chief of the House Ways & Means Committee, described the punishment as "the largest penalty in the Ethics Commission's history and possibly the largest ethics fine ever issued in the United States."
His comments, the report said, came in a letter to IRS Commissioner Melanie Krause.
At issue in the case was the organization's failure to reveal some $4 million in campaign contributions and more than $3 million spending during the time it backed Abrams' failed 2018 run for governor.
"As you know, under Internal Revenue Code Section 501(c)(3), organizations are strictly prohibited from participating in or intervening in any political campaign on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for public office," the member of Congress explained. "The IRS may revoke an organization's tax-exempt status or assess excise taxes for certain types of violations if it determines the organization is noncompliant as it relates to political campaign intervention."
Abrams started the group in 2013 and apparently left sometime in 2017.
A New Georgia Project affiliated group, the New Georgia Project Action Fund, accepts donations that are not tax-exempt, and it is allowed to endorse.
Smith charged, 'The New Georgia Project's intervention in the 2018 election cycle in support of Stacey Abrams and other candidates' campaigns amounts to a clear violation of their tax-exempt status."
He said that's cause for the group to lose the privilege of being tax-exempt.
He said, "it is clear that the New Georgia Project crossed the line into prohibited activity by intervening in the 2018 election cycle on behalf of Stacey Abrams and several other candidates."
It's not only the controversy that has been linked to Abrams recently.
WND reported when it was revealed she was behind one of the more egregious spending schemes that happened with tax money during Joe Biden's administration.
In her program, taxpayers bought new appliances for residents of a Georgia town so their energy bills would do down.
In an MSNBC interview, she said, the "program" was to lower costs for residents of De Soto, Georgia.
It was in 2023 and 2024, she said, "We worked in a tiny town in south Georgia to demonstrate that by replacing energy inefficient appliances with efficient appliances you can lower your costs," she said.
That's what happened when EPA-controlled tax funding went to that enterprise, she said. One woman's electricity bill was halved to $98 because she was given new appliances, by taxpayers.
The EPA then said such a program should be expanded.
Added another, "This is a ridiculous theft! Of course new appliances are more energy efficient! My household saved money for new washer, dryer, refrigerator, and our energy bills WERE less. BUT…the EPA has no business 'giving' my tax $ to others for this purchase. She needs be prosecuted."