Four people are dead after the stolen vehicle they were riding in careened into a Cleveland, Ohio, neighborhood, Cleveland.com reported. The crash happened early Wednesday morning, turning the 2014 Hyundai Sonata into an unrecognizable pile of rubble.
The driver of the sedan reportedly lost control and slammed into two trees and a parked vehicle. Police were still working to identify the people in the car long after the crash was cleared.
Mike Vielhaber, a journalist for WEWS, shared photos of the crash site to X, formerly Twitter, just after 5 a.m. on Wednesday. He captioned the post, "CFD did no cutting on this car. The roof and doors were stuck to a tree... Again 4 dead."
That should say CFD did no cutting on this car. The roof and doors were stuck to a tree and you can see the tow have to pull those pieces off the tree. They are behind the back half on the first tow that picked up the pieces. Again 4 dead. pic.twitter.com/JhRJIrqVUx
— Mike Vielhaber (@MVielhaber) March 12, 2025
Initial reports noted that the passengers, two males and two females, appeared to be teenagers. There were no personal belongings in the vehicle at the time of the crash.
The driver was found inside the car while the three other passengers were thrown from the vehicle on impact. The Medical Examiner’s Office later identified the victims as 14-year-old Tamera Davis, 14-year-old Kalise McGee, and 18-year-old Eddy Deandre Bonner, WJW-TV reported.
The last to be identified was 19-year-old Caurie Williams. It's unclear which of the teens was the driver at the time of the crash.
Cleveland Police Chief Dorothy Todd said the condition of the car indicates an extremely high rate of speed. "This is an absolute tragedy to have more young people killed in this type of tragic accident," Todd said.
The Hyundai was stolen on Feb. 27 and was not part of a police chase. Rather, WJW-TV indicates that the teens may have been racing the vehicle prior to the deadly crash.
These young people are dead because they made the decision to commit a crime, whether stealing a car or simply driving recklessly at high speeds. That doesn't mean they deserved to die, but it does mean that Cleveland's crime problem has victims on all sides.
Taking a joyride in stolen cars appears to be a popular pastime if an earlier report from WJW-TV is any indication. On Monday, three luxury vehicles were brazenly stolen from a local dealership and driven right through the window and a gate.
John Negus, owner of Larchmere Imports, said he's never seen anything like it in his 30 years in the business. "And, they went to where all the keys were stored," Negus said, incredulous.
"Pretty amazing when somebody blows the front of your building out with a car that you own. Hard to imagine that it could be worse," he added. There's no indication that the teens who died had any connection to this crime, but it speaks to a larger problem.
Teenagers are known to do things that are dangerous and destructive. However, moving away from stiff criminal penalties that deter crime and keep the peace has made lawbreaking irresistibly attractive.
The Trump administration has escalated ICE enforcement, achieving more arrests in a short span than those executed throughout 2024.
The administration alleges the Biden-era ICE statistics were falsified to give a misleading impression of immigration enforcement.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) under President Donald Trump has swiftly intensified its activities, reportedly surpassing the total arrests made during the entire 2024 period in just a few months. This development comes amid allegations from the Trump administration that the Biden administration had misrepresented ICE arrest data.
Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons has been vocal about accusations that the previous administration's statistics were inaccurately reported. According to a comprehensive internal ICE review, many instances classified as arrests during Biden's presidency were, in reality, cases where individuals were processed but subsequently released.
Lyons claims that the Biden administration was "cooking the books" to manipulate public perception. "They were purposely misleading the American people," Lyons stated, emphasizing the alleged misclassification of processed individuals as official arrests.
In the fiscal year 2024, ICE recorded 113,431 arrests, though a majority were classified as "pass-through" arrests. Such arrests often involved minimal enforcement actions, contrasting significantly with current measures.
Since the Trump administration commenced, there have been 32,809 ICE arrests from January 20 to March 10, 2025, nearly matching the 33,242 immigration-related enforcement actions completed at large in FY 2024. Officials have clarified that recent operations are focused strictly on enforcement rather than brief or symbolic actions.
The recent ICE numbers highlight that 14,111 of those detained were previously convicted, with 9,980 facing ongoing criminal charges. Furthermore, over 1,150 suspected gang members were apprehended, a sharp increase from the 483 arrests of such individuals in the comparable period the previous year.
Officials assert that the current enforcement strategy involves substantive actions on each case. "We are empowering [ICE agents] to do their jobs," Lyons reiterated, aligning with the administration's philosophy that ICE operations should reflect direct intervention rather than administrative exercises.
The Trump administration has reversed several policies from Biden's tenure, increasing military presence at borders, limiting asylum, and conducting raids in predetermined sanctuary cities. These strategies aim to enhance both the frequency and depth of enforcement actions by federal authorities and have been linked to reduced encounters at U.S. southern borders.
A significant procedural change undertaken by the Department of Homeland Security was the replacement of the CBP One app with a new system called CBP Home. This tool is designed to facilitate orderly self-deportations and assist with immigration procedures, reflecting broader efforts to streamline immigration management.
"This is actual immigration enforcement, not enforcement theater," an official said, referring to the administration's elimination of pass-through approaches. The strategic departure marks a renewed commitment to enforcing immigration laws uncompromisingly.
With immigration issues consistently at the forefront of political discourse, the ongoing approach of the Trump administration continues to generate debate about both the morality and efficacy of ICE operations.
Lyons noted, "After four years of not being allowed to effectively do their jobs, our agents and officers are excited to get to work." This statement reflects sentiments among some ICE agents who felt their capacity to execute duties was previously undermined.
As the administration moves forward, statistical data relating to arrests and enforcement actions will likely remain closely scrutinized by stakeholders on both sides of the immigration debate. Observers are keen to analyze how these evolving dynamics might influence broader policy discussions and implementation moving forward.
ICE's role remains a critical component in immigration policy, entangled with the narratives of national security, human rights, and economic implications. As developments progress, the administration's reforms will contribute significantly to shaping the American immigration landscape.
As President Trump moves to end the Obama "climate" revolution, a historic environmental regulation is coming under fresh scrutiny.
As reported by Just the News, bombshell e-mails show how Obama's Environmental Protection Agency put politics before science when it published the 2009 "endangerment finding", which kicked off nearly two decades of aggressive climate rules.
In 2012, attorney Chris Horner of the libertarian Competitive Enterprise Institute learned that Obama EPA officials, including director Lisa Jackson, were using aliases to communicate through email.
Those communications, which are heavily redacted and obtained by Horner through the Freedom of Information Act, show Obama EPA officials moving quickly to transform the agency into a sweeping regulator of the national economy.
At the time, the EPA was eagerly responding to the Supreme Court's divided ruling in Massachusetts v. EPA, which directed the EPA to determine if greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare. Just a week after President Obama was sworn in, EPA director Jackson - who went by the pseudonym "Richard Windsor" - began meeting with legal experts such as Lisa Heinzerling, a professor of law at Georgetown University, who wrote the briefs in Massachusetts v. EPA.
A January 30, 2009, briefing attended by Heinzerling and eco-lawyer David McIntosh was titled, “Response to the Endangerment Issue from Mass v. EPA.” On February 26, Heinzerling emailed Jackson and McIntosh to say that the endangerment finding could be finalized by August or September, and regulations on car emissions could come sooner.
"You are at the forefront of progressive national policy on one of the critical issues of our time. Do you realize that?” Georgetown law professor Lisa Heinzerling wrote Jackson on Feb. 27, 2009. “You’re a good boss. I do realize that. I pinch myself all the time.”
Until March of 2009, Jackson and Heinzerling discussed a memo to the president on the endangerment finding in emails "still being kept hidden from public view," Just the News reported.
Publicly, the EPA downplayed its plans. In a February 2009 interview with the New York Times, Jackson said the science was still under review and no final decision had been made.
"We here know how momentous that decision could be,” Jackson said. “We have to lay out a road map.”
A year after the Bush administration's "Johnson memo," which found no endangerment from carbon emissions, the Obama administration had finalized its own conclusion that greenhouse gases endanger public health.
The so-called endangerment finding has been at the heart of most progressive climate regulation since then, but President Trump has pledged to turn the page on what he calls the "Green New Scam."
Trump's EPA director, Lee Zeldin, said this week that the agency will review the endangerment finding as part of a sweeping effort to curtail climate rules that have inflated the cost of everything from cars to home heating.
"We are driving a dagger through the heart of the climate-change religion and ushering in America's Golden Age," Zeldin said in an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal. "Today is the most consequential day of deregulation in American history."
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has given a tongue-in-cheek diagnosis of President Trump's robust constitution, marveling at the president's ability to lose weight while consuming Big Macs and Diet Coke.
Kennedy, the nation's top public health official, said Trump "lost 30 pounds" even with "all the crap that he eats."
The comment came during an interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity at a Steak n Shake restaurant.
"I saw him yesterday, and I think he's lost 30 pounds," Kennedy told Hannity.
“He looks great," Hannity responded. "And he told me, he’s not using … for example, if he has a burger now, he usually doesn’t have it with a bun,” Hannity said.
"Oh, I didn’t know that he was actually changing his diet," Kennedy said.
Trump is famously fond of fast food - he even did a stint at McDonald's while campaigning for re-election last year.
Kennedy marveled at Trump's remarkable "genetic system," which has allowed the president to consume a diet most people would consider unhealthy while slimming down - and maintaining an extraordinary stamina level for a 78-year-old.
"I have to say this … and even with all the — can I say — crap that he eats," Kennedy said before Hannity cut him off.
A critic of ultra-processed food, Kennedy has made reducing chronic disease a top priority at the Health and Human Services Department, which he leads.
Already, the leader of the "Make America Healthy Again" movement has begun targeting unhealthy ingredients like food coloring, and he has said poor people on food stamps - who tend to have worse health outcomes - should not be able to buy junk foods like soda with government assistance.
“I’m not going to take them away from people, but we shouldn’t be subsidizing them,” Kennedy told Hannity. "We shouldn’t, as you said, 10 percent of food stamps, which are federally funded, taxpayer-funded program … is going to the poorest neighborhoods.”
Despite his conscientious mindset about nutrition, Kennedy was famously pictured eating McDonald's with Trump on the president's campaign plane last year.
As Kennedy quipped, eating fast food is an inevitable part of traveling with the Donald.
"Campaign food is always bad, but the food that goes onto that airplane is, like, just poison," Kennedy said at the time. "You have a choice between — you don’t have the choice. You’re either given KFC or Big Macs."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
President has Tesla showroom come to him, buys car at full price
Vowing to catch those who recently have attacked and vandalized Tesla dealerships around the nation – and declare them "domestic terrorists" – President Donald Trump today appeared with Elon Musk outside the White House at a temporary showroom, and paid full price for one of the vehicles.
As he spoke to media alongside Musk, Trump explained that the vandals are "harming a great American company."
Said Trump, "Those people are going to have a lot of problems when we catch them. … They're bad guys. They're the same guys who screw around with our schools and universities" – a reference to recent pro-Hamas protests at Columbia and other campuses.
Speaking about Musk, Trump labeled the world's richest man "an incredible patriot," and added, "I don't even know if he is a Republican!" Musk has taken heat since Trump's inauguration for his work at DOGE, the Department of Government Efficiency.
The president affirmed to reporters that he was paying full price for the red Tesla Model S parked outside the South Portico of the White House. Responding to Fox News White House correspondent Peter Doocy, Trump stated, "I know [Musk] would give me a discount, but honestly I don't want to ask for one."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
President Donald Trump announced when he took office that the official policy of the U.S. government would be to recognize two sexes, male and female, a move that disrupted the pro-transgender ideology in many venues, including in American government programs and offices.
And he may even have had an influence overseas.
A report from the Christian Institute cites a Yougov polling that shows advocacy for "trans" rights across Great Britain has decreased "across the board."
The survey interviewed some 2,000 adults on issues ranging from medical "treatments" to men demanding to participate in women's sports, and the presence of males in intimate areas for women, such as locker rooms.
It revealed a majority say that certain "trans" rights actually are "a genuine risk of harm" to women.
And across the board, in all age groups, opposition to allowing people to legally "change" their sex has increased.
Actually, following the science, no one can "change" their sex since being male or female is embedded in the human body down to the DNA level, but activists in the campaign dress, act and portray themselves as the sex they are not.
The report added, "Opposition among the young has actively grown," and is up 16 points to 36%.
"The survey found that almost two in five Britons personally know someone who identifies as transgender, with noticeable differences across generations: 'While 53% of 18-24 year olds say they know someone transgender, this falls with each successive age group, reaching 26% of those aged 65 and above,'" the report said.
While activists have demanded, over and over, making it easier to obtain a "gender recognition certificate," actually few members of the surveyed public support that concept.
Not even one in five said that should be easier, while 63% said it should not.
"Similarly, 70% of Britons agree that the approval of doctors should be a compulsory part of gaining a GRC, and 66% say the requirement to live as the affirmed gender for a minimum of two years before being approved should be kept," the report said.
One of the more contentious issues, "transitioning" children, found the public's view one-sided.
"When it comes to treatments for under-16s, 75% say puberty blockers should not be allowed, with 78% saying the same of hormone treatments," the report said.
Doing a "gender reassignment surgery" on a child, which actually is a body mutilation, was opposed by 87%.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Retail mega-giant Amazon has taken action after blatant anti-Semitism was revealed inside its operations.
That's according to a report from the American Center for Law and Justice, which described how a client was attacked and hurt.
The legal team called the actions "a significant victory" against anti-Semitism.
"Our client, an author, received a shocking package from Amazon, as we discussed here previously. Upon opening her order of 10 books (published through Kindle Direct Publishing), our client discovered that the books about her father, a Holocaust survivor, had been blatantly defaced with anti-Semitic hate scrawled in thick black ink across the pages throughout. This deliberate act of harassment was not only personally distressing to our client, but it also represented a direct attack on her faith and Jewish identity. Every copy had been defaced with anti-Semitic slurs and threatening messages like 'Zionism kills Jews' and 'From the River to the Sea Palestine Will be Free.' The statements defaced the personal memoir she had written about her father's experience of the Holocaust," the organization revealed.
The author, not identified in the report, contacted Amazon and originally nothing happened.
But the ACLJ dispatched a demand letter, "calling for accountability and appropriate remedies," the ACLJ said.
"It was apparent that an Amazon employee became aware that the book was a memoir of a Holocaust survivor. They then wrote egregiously offensive, threatening, and outrageous comments with full knowledge of the particular type of customer who would receive these messages. Given this knowledge, no reasonable person would expect our client to endure these racially abusive comments without emotional distress." The ACLJ reported.
Amazon ultimately responded, with acknowledgement of the "unacceptable nature" of the incident, a replacement order, at no cost, of 50 books along with the refund of the original purchase, a promise of an internal investigation, and more.
"The company informed us that if the person involved could be found, Amazon would terminate that individual," the ACLJ reported. "In their February 5 response letter, Amazon explicitly stated that 'Amazon does not tolerate any form of hate speech' and emphasized that 'the actions described in your letter are not representative of Amazon's policies or values.'"
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
'When you mess with our children, all other issues instantly become trivial. It is primal'
Progressives long ago took over teachers' unions and many school districts. They have their own ideologies and agendas, mostly far-left and extreme such as promoting the transgender segment of the LGBT lifestyle choices,, and fight parental rights in a multitude of ways.
They threaten catastrophes should moms and dads suddenly be assigned vouchers that would allow them to choose a private school over a public school. Parents, they charge, should not even necessarily be allowed to speak about the teachers' agendas, and have silenced them at school board meetings.
One radical, now former, school board member in Iowa claimed, "The purpose of a public ed is to not teach kids what the parents want. It is to teach them what society needs them to know. The client is not the parent, but the community."
And that agenda, if unchanged, according to a constitutional expert suddenly sharing his own feelings on the issue, will lead to a revolution of untold magnitude.
"Progressives' shock over the results of the last election could prove a prelude to what is coming if they continue down this road. There is no more powerful identity than that of a parent. When you mess with our children, all other issues instantly become trivial. It is not just passionate. It is primal," explained Jonathan Turley, the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University.
He's considered a constitutional expert, having testified before Congress on the subject, having represented Congress in court on related issues, and much more. He's also a parent.
"Many politicians are terrified of defying the far-left teachers unions. They and these 'experts' have no inkling of what is coming," he said.
His comments were prompted by a wild decision from the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that parents don't have the right to know if a school is indoctrinating their child into a transgender lifestyle choice.
That, he said, "could become the defining issue for many in the coming years. It is also a type of cultural war over what many of us view as a natural right over the raising of our children."
The 1st Circuit case was brought by Marissa Silvestri and Stephen Foote against Baird Middle School in Ludlow, Mass., "after they learned that school administrators did not inform them that their 11-year-old child had self declared as 'genderqueer' and that teachers and staff were using a new name and new pronouns for the student."
That all was concealed from them. In fact, school employees secretly "arranged for changes in everything from the use of male bathrooms to the exclusive use of the child's new name in class," he reported.
"In a truly Orwellian line, the [appeals] judges declared, 'As per our understanding of Supreme Court precedent, our pluralistic society assigns those curricular and administrative decisions to the expertise of school officials, charged with the responsibility of educating children,'" Turley noted.
"Most of us must have missed that memo. Few would believe that sending our children to a public school means we have transferred the most fundamental parental rights to 'experts' on rearing our children. We understand that schools need to maintain certain standards and conduct. However, changing the gender of a child is a bit more weighty than requiring a school uniform or stipulating nutritional choices in school lunches," he said.
Further "The Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment guarantees citizens that no state shall 'deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.' There is no part of our lives more valuable to most of us than our children."
He shared, "I remember when we had our first child and were escorted out of the hospital by a nurse. After helping my wife to the car, I turned around and was handed a swaddled bundle with a baby inside. The nurse then walked away as I stood there in a moment of utter panic. We were given a small human being at the curbside with the level of preparation of a Starbucks latte. I stood there looking at my son Ben with the same level of confidence that I would have had if handed a small nuclear device and then tasked with defusing it. You soon realize that you are all in."
And that's the difference, he said.
"Our children had us at hello. The moment that bundle was put in my arms, I changed. I was a dad and all of the prior priorities in my life suddenly became irrelevant. No one told me at the hospital carport that he was ours until he is old enough to be turned over to the expertise of public school officials. The fact is, by the time our kids go to school, we are the experts of that child. While teachers clearly have important training and expertise, they do not know that child. Not really. They were not there to perform monster inspections at 3 a.m. or to wrestle with a goat who decided to eat his favorite blankie at a petting zoo. They do not know that look when he is panicked or that curious smile when he is near tears. These experts took Child Development 101. We have a Ph.D. in our kids, a developmental dissertation on late-night fevers, sibling fights and orthodontic bills."
He said the Foote case needs to be moved up to the U.S. Supreme Court, for a ruling on a trend among education industry personalities who are making parents more and more alarmed.
"Faced with declining educational achievement and rising social agendas, many families are leaving public schools and others are demanding school choice in the form of vouchers. At the same time, there is growing support for a Parents Bill of Rights. The Trump administration can work with Congress to condition federal funding on schools' respect for parental rights, even if the courts do not protect such rights," he said.
"There is no greater natural right than the right to control the upbringing of our children. This right was not granted to us by the grace of the state. It rests with us as human beings. It is part of a panoply of natural rights embraced by the framers − a commitment made nearly 250 years ago in our Declaration of Independence," he said.
Eric Trump, son of former President Donald Trump, made headlines with a forceful defense of his family's integrity despite mounting legal scrutiny.
According to Newsbreak, during a Fox News appearance, Eric claimed his family has "never done anything wrong," even as they face over a hundred subpoenas acquired over the past seven years.
The statement comes amid ongoing debates on Trump’s controversial handling of military aid to Ukraine amidst the conflict with Russia.
Eric Trump emphasized his family's honor, describing them as "a good family" and maintaining they have conducted themselves appropriately against the numerous legal challenges faced.
In an attempt to reinforce his stance, Eric further highlighted his clean personal record, claiming he has never even been ticketed for a traffic violation. He also took the opportunity to share cryptocurrency investment advice, addressing the public and investors alike, affirming his innocence amidst heightened public interest.
Interviews and personal accounts have continued to underscore family frictions. Michael Cohen, a former Trump attorney, offered insights into Donald Trump’s family dynamics. Cohen revealed that Donald was not in favor of Eric marrying Lara, despite their eventual union. The discontent, spanning several years, involved derogatory comments about Lara's appearance from Eric’s siblings, Donald Jr. and Ivanka.
Meanwhile, Donald Trump's foreign policy decisions have sparked criticism, particularly his approach to the ongoing crisis in Ukraine. During his presidency, he halted essential military and intelligence aid to Kyiv, a decision that remains contentious. In a separate recent discussion on Fox News, the elder Trump pondered Ukraine's ability to endure the conflict, attributing part of the quagmire to weakness in dealings with Moscow.
"Well, it may not survive anyway," Donald remarked, assessing Ukraine's predicament. He further elaborated on the bilateral nature of the conflict and suggested that under his administration, the clash might have been averted, concluding with, "and it happened so now we’re stuck with this mess."
While Eric stands firm in his family's defense, these domestic revelations paint a complex picture of internal disputes. Despite opposition, Eric and Lara went ahead with their marriage, suggesting a strong personal commitment that eventually won out over familial objections.
Throughout Donald Trump's turbulent political career, familial bonds have often come under the spotlight. As legal pressures build, such domestic considerations add layers to the ongoing narrative surrounding the Trump family.
The statements from Eric and revelations by Cohen offer different viewpoints, touching both personal family matters and larger national issues impacting the Trump legacy. While Eric steadfastly portrays his family as wronged yet principled, the ebbs and flows of his claims against public and media scrutiny underscore the family's complex relationship with the public eye.
For many observers, these developments reflect a dynamic intersection of personal and political narratives. Trump critics and supporters alike continue to dissect this duality in understanding both the Trump family's private discourse and its public declarations.
Seemingly, the Trump family's saga evolves as their past and present actions are measured against existing and new narratives, leaving many awaiting the potential outcomes of the legal proceedings still in motion. As the family persists in addressing these challenges, their attempts to separate personal beliefs and public actions remain a focal point of ongoing discussion.
As these narratives continue to unfold, one point remains clear: the Trump family remains at the epicenter of public attention, whether through Eric's assertive declarations of innocence or Donald's contentious political legacies.
The House locked in a big victory for President Trump on Tuesday, with nearly all Republicans voting to approve a spending bill that would free the president to prioritize his agenda.
The 217-213 vote fell along party lines, with one Republican, Thomas Massie (Ky.), breaking with the party. The continuing resolution (CR) funds the government at current spending levels until the end of the fiscal year on September 30.
The continuing resolution hikes defense spending by $6 billion, while reducing non-defense spending by $13 billion compared to 2024 levels. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) will receive an additional $485 million to carry out Trump's deportations.
Contrary to Democratic messaging, the bill does not affect Social Security, Medicare, or Medicaid.
“They either have an issue with reading comprehension,” House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said of Democrats, “or they are attempting to run one of the most shameful misinformation campaigns that we have seen in our lives.”
The continuing resolution enables Trump to postpone the appropriations process, which places more restrictions on how government money can be spent, until the next fiscal year begins in the fall. Republicans backed the continuing resolution for basically the same reason that Democrats opposed it: they fear the bill gives Trump and Elon Musk too much discretion on spending, enabling their slash-and-burn campaign against government bloat.
“It is not a simple stopgap that keeps the lights on and the doors open,” said Rep. Rosa DeLauro, the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee. “This is Republican leadership handing over the keys of the government, and a blank check to Elon Musk and to President Trump.”
While budget hawks on the right are typically opposed to CRs, Republican holdouts were convinced after an intense lobbying effort from Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance.
The remarkable show of Republican unity behind Trump put a target on the lone GOP dissenter, Thomas Massie, whom Trump called a "grandstander."
"HE SHOULD BE PRIMARIED, and I will lead the charge against him,” Trump wrote.
While it's part of the standard Democratic playbook to blame conservative Republicans for government shutdowns, the usual roles have been reversed.
Some Democrats fear they will lose critical leverage if they agree to keep the government open. Only one House Democrat, Jared Golden (Me.), voted in favor of the CR.
"Here’s the bottom line,” Johnson said in a Tuesday press conference. “If Congressional Democrats refuse to support this clean CR, they will be responsible for every troop who misses a paycheck, for every flight delay from reduced staffing at TSA, and for every negative consequence that comes from shutting down the government.”
Senate Democrats must now decide whether to help pass the spending bill ahead of a deadline Friday - or take the blame for a shutdown.
Republican Rand Paul (Ky.) has already said he's voting no, so at least eight Senate Democrats would need to cross the aisle to get the bill on President Trump's desk.