This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson said Monday "there should probably be conditions" on federal aid to California in the wake of catastrophic wildfires that have left at least 24 people dead in the Golden State.
"I think there should probably be conditions on that aid. That's my personal view," said Johnson, a Republican from Louisiana.
"We'll see what the consensus is. I haven't had a chance to socialize that with any of the members over the weekend because we've all been very busy, but it'll be part of the discussion, for sure."
"I think we've got to have a serious conversation about that," Johnson added.
"Obviously, there has been water resource management, forest-management mistakes, all sorts of problems, and it does come down to leadership, and it appears to us that state and local leaders were derelict in their duty, and in many respects. So, that's something that has to be factored in."
The Really American political organization called Johnson's comments "deplorable," saying on X: "REMINDER: There were ZERO conditions placed on aid that went to Florida or North Carolina after Hurricanes Helene and Milton. To suggest there should be for Californians is deplorable."
"The new Republican-led Congress is already off to a horrible start."
President-elect Donald Trump has given congressional Republicans the green light to negotiate the state and local tax (SALT) deduction as part of a new tax relief package, with the goal of giving relief to some Americans while not giving tax breaks to the wealthy.
Trump met with blue state GOP lawmakers from the House SALT Caucus, who oppose the current $10,000 SALT deduction cap.
The cap hurts residents of states with higher state and local tax rates, as well as those with higher incomes.
"I think it was productive and successful," Rep. Nicole Malliotakis (R-NY) said of the meeting. "The president supports our efforts to increase the SALT deduction. He understands that mayors and governors in blue states are crushing taxpayers and wants to provide relief from the federal level."
Trump knows he needs to find the sweet spot between giving relief to squeezed middle-class taxpayers and avoiding relief for the wealthy who people perceive don't really need it.
"He gave us a little homework to work on, a number that could provide our middle class constituents with relief from the high taxes imposed by our governor and mayor, and at the same time, you know, something that can build consensus and get to [a 218-vote majority]," Malliotakis said.
"I think we pretty much know that it's not going to be a complete lifting of the SALT cap. There’s not an appetite within Congress or even among American taxpayers to lower taxes for the ultra-wealthy.
"Our efforts are really targeted to middle-class families, and that's what we're focused on in trying to achieve the right balance."
But Trump recognizes that some of his constituents were ill-served by the SALT cap, and he has spoken previously about making that right.
He posted on Truth Social last September that he would "get SALT back, lower your taxes, and so much more."
The negotiation is part of a massive reconciliation bill that needs to please nearly every Republican in order to pass without any Democrat support.
The Republican majority in the Senate is bigger than that in the House, which is only two seats until at least April.
Monday on his Verdict podcast, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) suggested that a good compromise to the SALT issue could be ending the marriage penalty on the deduction.
Currently, the cap is $10,000 whether filing single or married joint. Making the married joint cap $20,000 would equalize the cap for married couples while not extending tax relief to those with very high incomes in most cases.
President-elect Donald Trump announced his intent to unveil the mystery surrounding unusual drone sightings across New Jersey and other regions, stirring both concern and intrigue nationwide. Reports have surfaced of unidentified aerial activities instigating anxiety amongst governors and prompting widespread speculation about their origins.
Trump vowed to offer clarity on the drone phenomena shortly after assuming office, amidst heightened concerns from state leaders and the public, the Daily Mail reported.
During an assembly at Mar-a-Lago with Republican governors, Trump confirmed his commitment to addressing the drone issue. He disclosed plans to deliver a detailed report the day after his administration takes office. Expressing hope that the drones were part of United States operations, Trump acknowledged the possibility that they might serve national defense purposes.
The mysterious appearances have raised questions since late December when stories of lights darting across skies began circulating. Government officials have offered little information, further fueling speculation over the drones' origins. Trump acknowledged observing drones himself, particularly above his Bedminster, New Jersey property.
The Republican governors voiced their discontent over the federal government's inaction. Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin remarked on the impact of these drone incursions on his state, which hosts vital military installations like the Marine Corps base at Quantico. Youngkin emphasized the severity of repeated incursions over protected airspace, deeming it unacceptable that nothing has been clarified.
Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry lamented that drones had been flying over crucial infrastructures like nuclear power plants, criticizing the FAA for withholding powers that could allow states to counter these flights. Landry shared that the issue remains unresolved due to bureaucratic delays. Wyoming Governor Mark Gordon voiced a similar dissatisfaction, highlighting the mysterious flights over infrastructural facilities in his state.
Trump urged for transparency in a future revelation, suggesting that the drones might involve national defense efforts that didn't warrant public secrecy. Nevertheless, he stressed the importance of resolving these speculations post-inauguration.
For weeks, Trump has sought to reassure citizens amid widespread conjecture and suspicion regarding the drones' source. Many Americans have been left in suspense regarding what these devices are and who controls them. In December, Trump publicly addressed the topic, urging outgoing President Joe Biden to divulge any known information about the airborne activities.
Trump argued that the government's evasiveness in sharing drone information is surprising and lamented the lack of communication on the matter. He indicated his administration would promptly address these issues, dedicating resources to uncover the truth about the drones, highlighting that "for some reason," the public has been left uninformed.
Trump reassured the governors that he would focus on the drone issue once in office, mentioning that they would need to wait until after January 21 to receive the anticipated report. His assertion that details would emerge swiftly after the inauguration reflects his intention to begin addressing the issue immediately.
By committing to investigate and publicize his administration’s findings, Trump seeks to address the concerns of different states that have faced drone-related challenges. The governor of Wyoming pointed out the lack of proper mechanisms to track or handle these occurrences, prompting state officials to urge federal intervention.
In advancing the resolve to clarify the mysterious drone activities, Trump has indirectly called on various federal agencies, implicated implicitly through governor comments, to collaborate and ensure a transparent revelation of the origins of these drones. The drones' association with national defense remains speculative without official confirmation.
The public and local officials look forward to possible revelations regarding the drone sightings after the presidential transition is complete. Until then, communities remain on alert, with local authorities continuing to observe the skies amid growing security concerns.
As questions persist, eager anticipation surrounds Trump’s plan to demystify these occurrences, potentially reshaping public confidence and regional security protocols. As inauguration day approaches, the public awaits not only a shift in leadership but possibly long-awaited explanations that have lingered in discussion for months.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
JERUSALEM – Middle East/Israel Morning Brief
U.S. residents of Judea and Samaria sue Biden over sanctions
A pair of Israeli-Americans recently filed a lawsuit against the Biden administration alleging that it had improperly imposed sanctions on them under an executive order intended to combat "extremist settler violence" in Judea and Samaria.
Matthew Mainen, a lawyer representing the plaintiffs on behalf of the National Jewish Advocacy Center, told JNS that the case, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, raises basic questions about the rights of U.S. citizens to due process under the law.
American citizens have a right to be heard and to challenge the government before the government takes action against them or deprives them of some interest," Mainen said. "The Biden administration, with what appears to be zero due diligence, did just that."
In February, U.S. President Joe Biden Biden issued executive order 14115, "on imposing certain sanctions on persons undermining peace, security and stability in the West Bank," which was intended to combat "extremist settler violence" in Judea and Samaria that the Biden administration had determined to be undermining a path to a two-state solution.
The text of the order says that it could be applied to any "foreign person" that the Biden administration determines to be undermining peace and security in the "West Bank," but makes no provisions for U.S. nationals.
In first, U.S., U.K., Israel conduct joint strikes on Yemeni targets
Arab media outlets reported an unprecedented military operation Friday, marking the first coordinated strikes by U.S., U.K., and Israeli forces since the escalation of regional hostilities. According to international sources, the operation comprised three waves of strikes targeting critical infrastructure across Houthi-controlled territories, Israel Hayom reported.
The operation, totaling approximately 30 strikes, focused on several strategic locations: underground military installations in the Amran governorate, military complexes in Sanaa, a power generation facility south of the capital, and the strategic western ports of Al-Hudaydah and Ras Issa.
A mass pro-Hamas demonstration took place in Sanaa concurrent with the military operation. Participants rallied behind the Shia-Zaidi terrorist movement's ideological slogan, chanting "Death to America, Death to Israel, Curse upon the Jews, Victory for Islam." Eyewitness documentation captured smoke plumes rising from multiple strike locations across the capital.
Congress hits ICC officials in response to Netanyahu, Gallant war crimes arrest warrants
The U.S. House on Thursday approved H.R. 23, the Illegitimate Court Counteraction Act, a bill imposing sanctions on International Criminal Court officials in response to the court's issuance of an arrest warrant last year against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and then-defense minister Yoav Gallant, reported the Jewish Press.
The bipartisan vote, 243-140, demonstrated continued majority support in Congress for Israel's military response to the October 7, 2023, Hamas atrocities, even as most House Democrats opposed the measure. Forty-five Democrats supported the legislation. Last summer, 42 Democrats supported a similar bill.
U.S. Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, who authored the bill, issued a statement saying, "This bill is about protecting America and our allies' sovereignty from a rogue, globalist court. The ICC investigating and issuing arrest warrants for the sitting Prime Minister of Israel is a blatant assault on a critical ally's sovereignty amid an existential fight against Hamas. Make no mistake, if the ICC is allowed to target Israel unchecked, they will go after American service members and veterans again in the future."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A lawsuit over whether parents are allowed to know about what their schools are telling their children is going to continue.
Officials with the Thomas More Society say that U.S. District Court Judge Roger T. Benitez in California has denied in a court order all Motions to Dismiss in Mirabelli v. Olson.
That lawsuit challenges "Parental Exclusion Policies" adopted by schools that specifically prevent parents from knowing about some of their own children's activities in school.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta and members of the California Department of Education and the Escondido Union School District had demanded the case be thrown out.
They had claimed that their rules limiting what parents are allowed to know was "just a suggestion" so there was nobody really harmed by their agenda.
However, Benitez found that the parents "enjoy standing and have stated plausible claims upon which relief can be granted."
"The Supreme Court has long recognized that parents hold a federal constitutional Due Process right to direct the health care and education of their children," the judge said.
"The Defendants stand on unprecedented and more recently created state law child rights to privacy and to be free from gender discrimination."
Paul Jonna, special counsel with the society, explained, "We are incredibly pleased that the Court has denied all attempts to throw out our landmark challenge to California's parental exclusion and gender secrecy regime. Judge Benitez's order rightly highlights the sacrosanct importance of parents' rights in our constitutional order, and the First Amendment protections afforded to parents and teachers."
The judge said, "By concealing a child's gender health issues from the parents, parents are precluded from exercising their religious obligations to raise and care for their child at a time when it may be highly significant. [T]he teachers make out a plausible claim for relief under the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause."
The judge added, "This Court concludes that, in a collision of rights as between parents and child, the long-recognized federal constitutional rights of parents must eclipse the state rights of the child.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The Department of Defense reportedly ignored data showing a high degree of herd immunity to COVID-19 among military service members, clearing the path for tyrannical enforcement of an ineffective, unproven and hazardous vaccination mandate.
First reported in December, a series of eight interim reports provided by a whistleblower reveals the Department of Defense's participation in a longitudinal SARS-CoV-2 (coronavirus) seroprevalence study of 29,000 military service members between May 2020 and June 2021. To avoid being released outside of DOD, each document is marked "For Official Use Only" or "Controlled Unclassified Information."
As noted in the Gateway Pundit report, "A seroprevalence study can be a helpful indicator of the development of herd immunity, which occurs when a large portion of a population becomes immune to a disease through infection or vaccination, making it difficult to spread."
Thanks to the whistleblower, the public is now aware that the military likely achieved herd immunity as early as June 2021, months prior to Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin's now-rescinded 2021 COVID-19 shot mandate. Tens of thousands of service members were negatively affected, and treating the data on military herd immunity seriously could have resulted in a decision not to impose the vaccine mandate, which unnecessarily exposed thousands to a problematic vaccine they didn't need, while forcing many more out of the military for refusing "the jab."
WorldNetDaily interviewed Nick Kupper, a retired Air Force veteran who experienced the COVID-19 era while in service and is now a member-elect of the Arizona House of Representatives, set to assume office on Tuesday, Jan. 13.
Long before the military's rollout of the COVID-19 shot mandate, Kupper was familiar with tests to detect the presence of antibodies in the blood. He had already used such testing to acquire medical exemptions for a handful of vaccines required by the Air Force. "Although I was never against vaccines, I had the right amount of antibodies for some of them, so I didn't feel the need to put something in my body if I didn't need it," he told WND.
Kupper suspects he may have had COVID-19 in July 2020, but admitted he was not interested in being tested for the virus at this time. Coincidentally, in the months to follow, he donated blood at a facility that also tested for COVID-19 antibodies. He had none.
However, following a short period of illness with a typical COVID symptoms like body aches in January 2021, COVID antibodies were indeed present in his blood the next time he donated in February. Donating blood in May, his blood tested positive for antibodies once again. Seeking another antibody test in July to quantify the presence of neutralizing antibodies in his blood, he discovered that he had "a ton." A third blood test confirmed the same.
With Defense Secretary Austin's shot mandate coming into play in August 2021, Kupper went to an immunologist to begin the process of seeking an exemption. Previously, he said, medical exemptions had only required evidence of immunity based on serologic tests or documented infection. But for the so-called COVID-19 vaccination, he was shocked to discover that he would not be provided with an exemption.
"My bosses won't let me [grant an exemption]," Kupper was told by the immunologist. Added Kupper, "He was the one person on the entire base who's qualified to make that decision, but he wasn't allowed to do so."
With that, in September 2021, he filed for a religious accommodation request. Like thousands of other service members, the request was denied and he was set to be separated. Coincidentally, on the same day he was ordered to separate from the Air Force, Kupper was given a letter of reprimand for sharing his story with Tucker Carlson . Less than a week later, due to a legal injunction for Air Force members, he was able to retire after nearly 19 years of honorable service.
In a worst-case scenario, according to the agency's own Interim Report #8, DOD should have been made aware that both the seroprevalence rate and presence of neutralizing antibodies in service members was on a clear path to herd immunity sometime between June 2021 and November 2021. Yet the findings of the DOD's study weren't shared publicly until August 2023.
Kupper was not surprised, he said, considering it "par for the course of everything DOD was doing at the time." More than that, he said, "It pisses me off." Admittedly, he is most frustrated about "how the government, military and supposed leaders can disobey the law and refuse to right the wrongs they've done."
To retrieve more information related to the Department of Defense's SARS-CoV-2 Seroprevalence Study, this reporter submitted a Freedom of Information Act request on Dec. 18. A case number has been assigned, but an estimated completion date has not been provided.
During his second term in the White House, President-elect Donald Trump will take extended measures to not be involved in his real estate empire or other Trump Organization business.
According to CNN, the news that Trump will virtually fully separate from his business ventures is part of a new ethics plan devised by the Trump Organization.
Trump and the company have appointed an outside ethics adviser to monitor "major company actions" while Trump is in the White House for the next four years.
The Trump-owned company laid out the plan as part of a larger plan to make sure the incoming president avoids any conflicts of interests while in the White House.
The Trump Organization has vowed not to enter into any new deals with foreign governments "and voluntarily donate to the US Treasury any profits from foreign governments that it can identify flowing into its hotels and other properties."
The plan largely mirrors a previous version of the company's ethics plan during Trump's first term in the White House.
The outlet noted:
In a statement, the Trump Organization noted that the incoming president is not required either by federal law or the US Constitution to remove himself from his business interests. Even so, Eric Trump said, the company “is dedicated to not just meeting but vastly exceeding its legal and ethical obligations during my father’s Presidency.”
Eric Trump, the company's executive vice president, has also stated that the Trump Organization will continue to pursue foreign business while his father is in office.
Prominent Republican lawyer William Burck was hired by the company, according to Eric Trump, to monitor transactions as they relate to potential ethics concerns and to avoid any potential ethics issues.
For the president's part, he'll only have "limited" access to the company's financials while he's serving in the Oval Office. His businesses will remain in a trust that will be managed by his children.
Eric Trump posted a statement on his X account welcoming Burck as the adviser who will make sure the Trump Organization is in line with its ethics goals.
"I am proud to announce William Burck, Global Co-Chair of Quinn Emanuel LLP, to serve as the Trump Organizations outside Ethics Advisor during my father’s term as the 47th President of the United States," the younger Trump wrote.
I am proud to announce William Burck, Global Co-Chair of Quinn Emanuel LLP, to serve as the Trump Organizations outside Ethics Advisor during my father’s term as the 47th President of the United States. pic.twitter.com/jYtsMkbZsG
— Eric Trump (@EricTrump) January 10, 2025
There's no reason to believe that Eric Trump and his company will have any issues, whatsoever.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
That Minnesota is a far-left state politically is no surprise, especially after the recent nationwide exposure of its governor, Tim Walz, as Kamala Harris' No. 2 on the Democrat presidential ticket this year.
His radical transgender and pro-abortion agendas, his alignment with China's ideologies, his questionable behaviors and wild claims, all were revealed to the alarm of many who were not previously familiar with his extremism.
The state's leftism actually runs back decades, after it established itself as the only state in the nation to vote against Ronald Reagan for president.
And now the state's questionable agenda regarding the U.S. Constitution has been further revealed by a lawsuit that charges the midwestern state has taken it on itself to decide people's constitutional rights.
It is a lawsuit by Liberty Justice Center that charges Minnesota officials have insisted they can decide the Second Amendment rights of individuals.
The fight is over two truckers who may need to drive through the state, but are banned by the state from carrying firearms in their trucks for protection.
"David McCoy is a full-time, long-haul trucker who lives in the sleeper compartment of his eighteen-wheeler. He has a Texas License to Carry that permits him to bear arms in many states across the country. Jeffrey Johnson is also a full-time, long-haul trucker, with both a Florida Concealed Weapons License and Georgia Weapons Carry License. Even though both men have lawfully issued firearm licenses, they are currently prevented from carrying firearms for self-defense while in Minnesota because the state prohibits carrying a firearm for self-defense, in public or in one's vehicle, without a Minnesota Permit to Carry or a permit recognized by the state," the legal team explained.
The state decides which firearms permits from other states it will recognize, and it now excludes Texas, Georgia, and Florida, and some two dozen other states.
"Due to this law, neither Mr. McCoy nor Mr. Johnson can exercise their constitutional right to bear arms for self-defense due to fear of prosecution, which could jeopardize the credentials needed for their profession," the institute reported.
The new lawsuit argues that Minnesota's permitting law "deprives nonresidents of their Second Amendment right to bear arms. The lawsuit asks the court to find the law unconstitutional and order the state of Minnesota to honor firearm permits issued by all other states."
"Minnesota's refusal to honor other states' lawfully issued firearm permits places an unreasonable burden on the Second Amendment rights of individuals like Mr. McCoy and Mr. Johnson who regularly cross state lines in the course of their work," explained Loren Seehase, a lawyer for the center.
"There is no other constitutional right that individuals are prohibited from exercising until they've obtained permission from the state. No one loses their right to free speech or freedom of religion by simply driving from Texas to Minnesota—so why should they lose their right to self-defense?"
Big Tech mogul Mark Zuckerberg admitted that the Biden administration bullied people at his company to censor information on his platform, Breitbart reported. The Meta CEO made these remarks on the The Joe Rogan Experience podcast released Friday.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, censorship was at an all-time high. Now Zuckerberg has confirmed what many suspected: President Joe Biden's administration was behind it.
Zuckerberg said that "people in the Biden administration" pushed the company "super hard" to shut down dissent over the vaccines even if it was "true" information. "These people from the Biden administration would call up our team and scream at them and curse," Zuckerberg said.
Zuckerberg said that he was trying to do the right thing during the pandemic but soon realized it was top-down censorship. "Now, I’m generally pretty pro rolling out vaccines," Zuckerberg told Rogan.
"I think, on balance, the vaccines are more positive than negative, but I think that while they’re trying to push that program, they also tried to censor anyone who was basically arguing against it. And they pushed us super hard to take down things that, honestly, were true," Zuckerberg revealed.
"They basically pushed us and said, ‘Anything that says that vaccines might have side effects, you basically need to take down," Zuckerberg said. Rogan asked who was the "they" he was referring to.
"It was people in the Biden Administration," Zuckerberg confirmed. "I wasn’t involved in those conversations directly," he was quick to point out.
"These people from the Biden administration would call up our team and scream at them and curse," the 40-year-old executive said. Zuckerberg said they would also demand he take down memes that joked about class action lawsuits about the vaccine in a decade.
This revelation on Rogan's program comes on the heels of Zuckerberg's announcement that Facebook will no longer use fact-checkers. "We’re going to get back to our roots and focus on reducing mistakes, simplifying our policies, and restoring free expression on our platforms," he said on Tuesday, according to the New York Post.
"As we work to promote free expression, I think that will help build trust to do this work in places where there’s less concern about the bias of our team," Zuckerberg added. He admitted this was to fix the mistakes of the past.
"What started as a movement to be more inclusive has increasingly been used to shut down opinions and shut out people with different ideas. It’s gone too far," Zuckerberg concluded.
This is quite an about-face for the Meta mogul, whose change of heart came after President-elect Donald Trump won in November. He was seen dining with Trump at Mar-a-Lago in late November, and Meta donated $1 million to his inaugural fund.
Zuckerberg is finally doing the right thing, but the censorship and bullying should never have happened in the first place. Trump's election has been a game changer, and that's most evident when people like Zuckerberg are falling in line.
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis (R) has confirmed that he will "absolutely not" be appointing himself to replace Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL).
During an event in Jacksonville, Florida, on Friday, media asked DeSantis if he was planning on appointing himself to Rubio's seat and leaving his place in Florida's governor's mansion.
Rubio has been nominated by President-elect Donald Trump to be his secretary of state and it's up to DeSantis to name Rubio's replacement.
DeSantis told reporters, "Absolutely not. It's funny, you know, these people write these things … and anytime they're talking about anything I'm doing, they're just making it up, right?"
DeSantis appears content with remaining in Florida after a failed presidential campaign in the 2024 GOP primary. The sentiment is that DeSantis isn't ready for national politics and needs to stay in Florida for a few more years.
DeSantis was emphatic in his statement that he would not replace Rubio and didn't mince words in calling out media rumor mills that suggested he was planning on leaving for the Senate.
DeSantis continued by saying, "I mean, they'll talk to someone because [they'll] say, 'Oh, someone familiar with the governor's thinking.' Understand, that means they don't know what the hell they're talking about. That means somebody is saying, 'Well, I know how the governor thinks. He's probably saying this.' So they try to do grist for the mill."
Essentially, there was never any solid indication of DeSantis appointing himself and it was pure rumor peddling by the mainstream media.
DeSantis ended off by saying, "I was never in consideration for that. Trust me, we're doing well here, and we're going to continue to do that. And so, it was never something that I considered."
DeSantis's failed presidential campaign did genuine damage to his stock nationally and he seems to understand that fact. DeSantis was seen as a rising star prior to the GOP primary and some still see him that way but he needs to keep up the good work in Florida.
Under DeSantis's watch, Florida has become a successful state that has attracted thousands of new migrants from failing blue states. If he can continue pushing Florida to succeed until his term is over, he will be in a great position to run in 2028.
As for who will end up replacing Rubio in the Senate, the latest a replacement will be named is January 20th, the day of Trump's inauguration as the 47th President of the United States.
DeSantis explained, "I told people we would [fill Rubio's seat] in the first half of January, and I think we're probably on course to do that, but clearly we will have somebody in place ready to go on Jan. 20. I think it's important."
Another announcement will likely come in the next week ahead of Trump's inauguration as it's critical that the GOP have its full Senate complement while nomination hearings are underway.