This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Being used to 'surveil American citizens and harass Chinese citizens who have fled the Communist regime'

China's Communist regime has established secret police stations inside the United States and they are being used to "surveil American citizens and harass Chinese citizens who have fled the Communist regime."

And a couple of American lawmakers are working on a new plan that would put them out of business.

It is in a report at the Federalist that the threat to America is profiled.

And also the work of U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., on the Expel Illegal Chinese Police Act introduced just weeks ago, along with the companion House effort by Rep. Ashley Hinson, R-Iowa.

"No foreign government has the right to operate secret police stations on American soil. The Chinese Communist Party's actions undermine international norms and human rights by circumventing legal extradition processes and engaging in intimidation tactics. This legislation sends a clear message: the United States will never tolerate illegal operations that violate our sovereignty and intimidate individuals living within our borders," Cotton explained.

Hinson added, "The Chinese Communist Party should have never been able to operate police stations in the U.S. to surveil American citizens and harass Chinese citizens who have fled the Communist regime. … Senator Tom Cotton and I are working to end these illegal intimidation tactics that undermine U.S. sovereignty and finally hold the Chinese Communist Party accountable for such egregious violations."

The bill would authorize actions that would target those running the police stations with "financial sanctions, visa restrictions, and asset freezes."

The report explains the Chinese regime's strategies already have created issues.

One Chinese citizen, Quanzhong An, already has been handed 20 months in prison for "acting on behalf of the Chinese government to intimidate individuals living in the U.S., the report said.

"This case highlights the urgent need for strong measures to protect individual freedoms and uphold national sovereignty against the covert policing tactics employed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)," the report explained.

In the past, the Federalist confirmed, Chinese Communists even have sent "undercover police" to foreign nations "to forcibly repatriate individuals labeled as 'criminals' by any means necessary."

Part of the pressure schemes included subjecting the individuals' relatives, still back in China, "to harassment, jail, torture and other mistreatment."

"In countries like Vietnam and Australia, Chinese agents have simply abducted their prey," the report said.

The police stations, estimated to number 100 around the world, including in the U.S., ostensibly are for various "services" for Chinese individuals.

"Their actual purpose is far more insidious: to monitor, intimidate, and silence overseas Chinese individuals, while aiding China's efforts to capture alleged fugitives globally," the report said.

There already have been prosecutions in the U.S. of individuals for helping the illegal policing activities, and their suspects' defense was that they "believed they were assisting a company or an individual in collecting debts, unaware that the Chinese government was involved."

And the Department of Justice has indicted 40 Chinese officers and members of the Cyberspace Administration of China for their actions.

"These cases demonstrate the lengths the PRC government will go to silence and harass U.S. persons who exercise their fundamental rights to speak out against PRC oppression. … These actions violate our laws and are an affront to our democratic values and basic human rights," the DOJ confirmed.
The report pointedly notes during Joe Biden's tenure in the White House, he "never demanded that China stop its illegal policing on U.S. soil."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

'Any spark could trigger a full-scale uprising – and these resistance networks are prepared to channel protest into full-scale revolution'

Although "Nowruz," the Iranian New Year that began on the first day of spring, March 21, supposedly marks a moment of renewal and reflection, this year it marks something far more consequential: the unraveling of the brutal theocratic Tehran regime's decades-long strategy for survival.

In his New Year's address, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei drew a telling parallel between the year 1403 in the Iranian calendar (2024-2025) and the year 1981 (1360), stating:

"The year 1403 was full of turmoil … like the challenges we faced in 1360 (1981) – difficult and painful time for us."

In 1981, facing mass protests and the fragility of its newly established rule, the new regime of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini responded with brute force – opening fire on peaceful demonstrators and executing thousands of political prisoners. That year marked a turning point that allowed the Islamic Republic to violently consolidate power, even though – just hours after newly elected U.S. President Ronald Reagan gave his inaugural address on Jan. 21, 1981– Iran released the 53 American hostages it had held captive for 444 days.

So in his reference to 1981, Iran's current leader, Khamenei, is signaling his regime's deep anxiety that history may soon repeat itself – but with a different outcome.

3-pillar strategy in ruins

Following the Iran-Iraq War of 1980, the Iranian regime anchored its long-term survival strategy on the creation of three deterrent pillars:

* A sophisticated ballistic missile program

* A network of proxy forces across the region

* A covert nuclear weapons program

To build these pillars, the regime siphoned the nation's wealth – impoverishing over 80% of the population. The nuclear program alone is estimated to have cost Iran more than $2 trillion.

Yet, by the end of the Iranian Year 1403 (March 2025), two of the three pillars have crumbled:
Proxy forces including Hezbollah, Hamas and the Houthis have been pushed to the sidelines. Financial support is faltering while battlefield relevance has sharply declined. And missile capability has been exposed as ineffective. In response to Israeli strikes, Iran's highly publicized "Sadegh-1" and "Sadegh-2" missiles failed to demonstrate real destructive power.

This leaves only one leg standing: Iran's nuclear program – and the world is no longer willing to tolerate it.

A hard deadline

Today, both the United States – under President Donald Trump's leadership – and Europe are united in demanding that Iran abandon its nuclear ambitions with enforceable guarantees. Trump's two-month ultimatum is about to expire. By July, the "snapback" mechanism under the U.N. framework may automatically be reactivated, reinstating global sanctions on Iran.

So Tehran faces a critical choice: Abandon its nuclear program and negotiate, or brace for targeted airstrikes.

And while President Trump has said he does not seek war, any military operation to dismantle Iran's nuclear infrastructure – much of which lies buried deep underground – would not be short, clean or easy. If it begins, it could continue all the way to the edge of regime collapse.

This is why both Tehran and the international community prefer a diplomatic solution – including indirect talks. Iran seeks negotiations, not to reform, but to buy time while using Europe as a political buffer, as it did in the 2015 nuclear deal.

The real threat comes from within

But beyond all this foreign pressure, the regime faces an even greater threat from within.

With a collapsing economy and widespread poverty, Iran is a powder keg. The fall of Bashar al-Assad in Syria has eliminated Tehran's so-called "strategic depth," and the true battlefield has shifted to within Iran.

Thousands of resistance units affiliated with the National Council of Resistance of Iran, or NCRI, are active across the country. These groups are not foreign-funded or exiled movements. They are embedded in local neighborhoods and cities, drawn from within Iranian society itself.

Despite an intense climate of surveillance, they successfully carried out 33 operations in Tehran and 22 other cities, setting fire to IRGC centers and symbols of the clerical regime during the Fire Festival Campaign.

Any spark could trigger a full-scale uprising – and these resistance networks are prepared to channel protest into full-scale revolution.

The high number of executions in the Iranian year 1403 (2023-2024) – with over 1,150 recorded cases – reflects a desperate attempt by the regime to instill fear in society. However, these acts of repression have not silenced the public; on the contrary, they have further fueled the growth of the resistance. Under such conditions, many analysts are now speaking of the regime as being at a "tipping point." In other words, the transition to a secular republic with human rights is no longer a dream; it has become an attainable goal. The year "1403" was the year the regime found itself surrounded, and now all eyes are on "1404" – that is, 2025 – a year that could mark a historic turning point for Iran.

What Tehran wants in return

Tehran is now maneuvering for survival. Its demands in any negotiation are twofold:

1. Partial relief from sanctions to stabilize its crumbling economy.

2. Political cover from the West to marginalize the NCRI and other opposition groups that pose the only real threat to its rule.

But there is a catch.

To repair its economy and prevent unrest, Tehran must allow a degree of reform: easing repression, curbing mass arrests and creating conditions that allow for investment. In doing so, the regime would necessarily open limited political space – which, in turn, risks unleashing pent-up dissent and igniting the very uprising it fears most.

The regime is trapped. What it needs to do to survive economically will accelerate its political demise.

Forty-five years of repression cannot be buried under layers of censorship and bullets forever. If the lid of control is loosened, even slightly, the voices of millions will rise. The opposition is organized. The international community is alert. The people are ready.

The endgame

The Tehran regime has learned from the experience of Iran's last Shah before the revolution, and therefore absolutely refuses to allow any political openness or path for internal reform. On the other hand, like Libya's Muammar Gaddafi, it is not willing to give up its nuclear project, which is tied directly to the regime's survival. As such, backing down from the nuclear program would be like drinking a poisoned chalice. This is basically how Ayatollah Khomeini described accepting the ceasefire in the Iran-Iraq War … as "drinking poison."

However, at that time, Khomeini was able to preserve his rule by massacring 30,000 political prisoners and terrorizing Iranian society – preventing it from holding him accountable for six years of a fruitless war that caused one million deaths and injuries and cost hundreds of billions of dollars.

But such a genocide is beyond Khamenei's current capacity – and Iranian society will not allow it to happen.

So Iran's Year 1403 (2024-2025) has not been a repeat of 1981.

Instead, it has been the beginning of the end.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Dancing burning cyber trucks spotted at anti-Musk demonstration

Making the rounds on social media is video highlighting a new costume worn by some protests of Tesla and its founder, Elon Musk.

The footage shows people dancing in burning cyber truck costumes, made mostly of cardboard, apparently honoring the "virtue" of those who have set Tesla vehicles on fire across the nation in recent weeks.

Verbiage accompanying the video notes, "This Is The Reason Why Nobody Will Ever Take The Democrat Party Serious Again."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
'To engage in conduct that advises anyone to defy court orders and kidnap their child would be contrary to our biblical, Christian, and professional ethics'

A legal fight has involved nine years in the courts. And 25 depositions. And 186,000 documents. And 6,800 pages of transcripts.

And the conclusion from a federal judge is that Liberty Counsel, a prominent legal team that routinely works on a multitude of civil and religious rights issues, had no involvement in a lesbian's fight over custody of a child.

Judge William K. Sessions III ruled that Liberty Counsel did not "engage in, aid, or abet any conspiracy" over a situation that developed when one woman, Lisa Miller, left the lesbian lifestyle choice, and took with her her child.

The other half of the duo, Janet Jenkins, sued over custody of the child and Miller was represented for a time by Liberty Counsel.

Then, however, things took a strange turn, resulting in Jenkins' lawsuit, to which she, years later, added Liberty Counsel, demanding the stunning sum of $200 billion in damages.

Liberty Counsel chairman Mat Staver explained, "Liberty Counsel never did anything wrong and this ruling is a complete and total exoneration. To engage in conduct that advises anyone to defy court orders and kidnap their child would be contrary to our biblical, Christian, and professional ethics. This frivolous lawsuit by the Southern Poverty Law Center was pure lawfare designed to destroy Liberty Counsel. The truth has prevailed."

The unusual circumstances developed during a time when leftists still were assembling their program for same-sex marriage, a status later granted in a questionable ruling, by the U.S. Supreme Court.

At the time, before the Supreme Court ruled, Miller and Jenkins entered into a "civil union" in Vermont. Then Miller dissolved that civil union, but the courts awarded Jenkins rights to a then 2-year-old girl as a "legal parent" and gave her visitation.

Miller complied for a time, but then the child reported abuse.

The Liberty Counsel involvement happened when Miller dissolved her union to Jenkins and moved to Virginia, where the fight put the laws of Virginia, which did not recognize civil unions, against the laws of Vermont, which did.

"The Vermont court eventually ordered visitation rights to Jenkins. Miller complied until Isabella complained of abuse," Liberty Counsel explained.

However, while legal cases were under way in two states, Miller "suddenly fled with Isabella to Nicaragua. When Liberty Counsel became aware, it informed the court and sought to withdraw from the case," the report said.

The legal team explained it was a "complete and total victory" in the civil case that "falsely alleged Liberty Counsel advised a former client to flee … ."

Lawyer Rena Lindevaldsen had been added to the lawsuit by Jenkins at the same time Liberty Counsel was added, and the ruling from the judge exonerated her, too.

Further, Sessions noted the lawsuit also was barred by the statute of limitations.
Other people eventually were identified as having helped Miller flee with her daughter, and they were indicted.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
'This case illustrates a disturbing pattern we're seeing with increasing frequency'

Los Angeles County has reversed a beach use policy it adopted that discriminated, unlawfully, against churches.

The American Center for Law and Justice announced the "crucial victory" in its battle to protect religious liberties.

"The ACLJ continues to fight for religious liberty across the nation, from small towns to major cities. This victory reminds us that when we stand firm and take decisive legal action, we can successfully defend the constitutional rights of believers everywhere," the legal team said in an announcement about the dispute.

"This case illustrates a disturbing pattern we're seeing with increasing frequency. Government officials at all levels – federal, state, and local – continue to test the boundaries of their authority by implementing policies that marginalize people of faith and religious organizations.

"Whether it's limiting beach permits in California, denying funding to faith-based schools in the Midwest, or censoring religious speech in public forums across the country, the assaults on religious liberty have become more frequent and brazen."

It was earlier this year, the Church of the Beach contacted the ACLJ. The legal team explained for 18 years, this ministry has conducted peaceful worship services on Redondo Beach, providing a spiritual community for beachgoers and local residents alike.

Some 120 people gather on Sunday mornings to worship, many specifically choosing the setting because they've had difficult or negative experiences in traditional church settings.

The beach, therefore, is a "crucial component of their ministry's outreach to those who might never step foot in a conventional church."

Its members ensure gatherings don't obstruct pathways or block traffic, and even have relocated when events are on the beach.

Then last year the county adopted its "troubling" policy that targeted religious activities, limiting faith organizations to only six permits per year while imposing no such limits on other groups.

Last month, the ACLJ sent a demand letter to the county, outlining the policy's violations of the First Amendment.

A response from the county Department of Beaches, just days ago, conceded, "DBH acknowledges that its Beach and Harbor Use Licensing Policy and other policies pertaining to access to beach use, on its face and in application, must be content neutral and applied in the same manner regardless of the religious or non-religious nature of the activity."

The result is that the county promised to "immediately withdraw the temporary policy to limit permits for religious activities."

All permits now will be handled the same way, it said.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Defendant told he'd get 'decades' in jail unless 'he claimed he was working with President Trump on overthrowing the government'

A new report documents how the Department of Justice under Joe Biden suborned perjury by J6ers in order to "get" President Donald Trump.

The scandal revolves around the Jan. 6, 2021, protest turned riot at the Capitol in which an unarmed protester was shot at point blank range and killed by a scandal-plagued Capitol police officer.

Biden's DOJ spent thousands of hours and millions of dollars tracking down every single person who appeared on any video that day and arrested them, sometimes using SWAT tactics, for offenses that included trespassing.
They then added charges that later were ruled by the Supreme Court to be inappropriate, and demanded the maximum sentences – or even more, with one judge, James Boasberg, insisting there should be new laws with harsher penalties than what he was allowed to use.

The tactics all aligned with the Democrats' claim that the so-called "insurrection" was organized and orchestrated by Trump.

Now a report at the Gateway Pundit explains how the DOJ "threatened and punished" J6 participants if they didn't implicate Trump in "insurrection."

"Arrests were made by the corrupt and communist DOJ and FBI after the riots at the Capitol on Jan 6. Many of the men and women who were arrested were placed in jails for years often times alone and in solitary confinement for being at the Capitol on that day," the report, from Joe Hoft, explained.

"Some were in solitary confinement for weeks and months. They weren't allowed to speak to others. They were beaten and they were treated worse than the U.S. treats prisoners of war. The worst crimes committed by the government (DOJ, FBI, Prison system, and courts) were forcing them to lie about President Trump being involved in a seditious act on Jan 6. Some key Jan 6ers were told if they lied they would receive lesser sentences, if they didn't lie in corrupt courts they would be sentenced for decades, if not the rest of their lives."

He explains individual cases, such as that of Jake Lang, arrested and "told to lie about President Trump so it could be used in the 2nd corrupt and criminal impeachment of President Trump. Lang refused to comply and spent the next four years in jail."
Another case involved Stewart Rhodes of Oath Keepers, who was informed "he would be sentenced to decades for his non-crimes on Jan 6 or he could get much less time if he claimed he was working with President Trump on overthrowing the government. He would not lie and was sentenced to decades in prison."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Maine residents are more aligned with President Donald Trump than their own governor over the concept of men, even those who say they are women, participating in womens 'athletics.

Trump has declared that the U.S. government recognizes two genders, male and female, and has worked to halt the promotion of the vast range of alternative sexual lifestyle choices. He issued an executive order to bar males from girls' and women's competitions.

Maine's governor, Janet Mills, has insisted on defying Trump, and the federal Office of Civil Rights in the Health and Human Services Department, and pushing for those making those lifestyle choices to participate where they choose.

Fox News has pointed out Maine's refusal to follow the rules has left the state in "noncompliance with Title IX" and the state has been referred to the Justice Department for possible prosecution.

Now the results of a polling by the University of New Hampshire reveal that Mills is off base, when it comes to her voters.

The poll confirms that some two-thirds of the state's residents, 64%, believe transgender athletes "definitely should not" or "probably should not" participate in girls' and women's sports.

"Only 29% of Maine residents believed that transgender athletes 'probably should' or 'definitely should' compete against girls and women in sports," the report said.

Even among Democrats whose party has promoted the transgender ideology extensively during the tenure in Washington of Joe Biden, only 56% endorsed men who call themselves women in women's sprots.

Half of the poll's respondents said the enforcement of those standards should be at the federal level, another 41% said it should be up to the states.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Colleges and universities across America have an estimated $837 billion stashed away for a rainy day if they want, in their endowments.

And Republicans in Congress are eyeing that trove as a possible source for tax revenue for the nation.

Reports say that Harvard alone has about $49 billion stashed away, and the University of Texas some $45 billion.

But members of the GOP have talked about raising the tax on those assets significantly, to help bring in revenue to balance the tax cuts they intend to create in a "sweeping fiscal overhaul," according to a report in the Washington Examiner.

"I love it. We should do it," U.S. Rep. Troy Nehls, R-Texas, said in an interview with the publication about taxing endowments.

The report explained the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, during President Donald Trump's first term, set an excise tax of 1.4% on the investment income of universities if their endowments exceed $500,000 per student.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

PALM BEACH, Florida – President Donald Trump is opening up about his thought process in agreeing to having dinner with one of his fiercest political critics, Bill Maher.

In a message posted on Truth Social Sunday night, Trump indicated: "I got a call from a very good guy, and friend of mine, Kid Rock, asking me whether or not it would be possible for me to meet, in the White House, with Bill Maher, a man who has been unjustifiably critical of anything, or anyone, TRUMP.

"I really didn't like the idea much, and don't like it much now, but thought it would be interesting. The problem is, no matter how much he likes your Favorite President, ME, he will publicly proclaim what a terrible guy I am, etc., very much like the Democrats at my recent Address to the Joint Session of Congress, where I stated, correctly, that no matter what I said or did, they wouldn't stand, they wouldn't applaud, they wouldn't smile or laugh and, certainly, they wouldn't be in any way 'nice.'

"Who knows, though, maybe I'll be proven wrong? In any event, I'm doing a favor for a friend. I look forward to meeting with Bill Maher, Kid Rock and, I believe, even the Legendary Dana White will be present. It might be fun or, it might not, but you will be the first to know!"

Maher himself is looking forward to the dinner at the White House, telling Chris Cuomo:

"I'm doing it because, first of all, it was presented as … maybe this is a beginning to heal America. Now, I don't have some sort of complex where I think I can heal America. I can't! OK, let's get that clear. I'm not going to be healing America.

"But if two guys who've been at each other for so long, I mean, it's kind of a Nixon-to-China thing. I have the credential. There was nobody who was harder on Trump, or more prescient about the fact that he wasn't going to leave office voluntarily than I was. I feel like I have the credentials.

"But they also respect me because I'm honest abut the woke train to Crazytown. And I don't shrink from that, and I've also lost a lot of fans for that. The woke people have left the building and I'm willing to make that sacrifice. But it does give you a certain credibility."

"First of all it's an honor to be invited to the White House," Maher explained. "I'm impressed by it a lot. I'm impressed the f*** out of it. I get to go to the White House. And yes, that is the structure of this dinner.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A toddler has been targeted by, and kicked out of, a nursery school, for being "transphobic."

A report at Fox News explained the child was 3 or 4, but the school was not identified, in the documentation about the dispute.

It had been the Telegraph that confirmed the disciplinary action was taken by school officials because the little child allegedly was "transphobic."

While the actual definition of such a word would mean an unreasoning fear of transgenders or their agenda, the contemporary application often means no more than someone who objected to, criticized or rejected the transgenderism that is surging among leftists.

A Department of Education official said in the report that "all pupils and staff should feel safe and protected at school and should never face violence or abuse."

It's not the first such case, the report said, as 94 students at primary schools in the U.K. have been suspended or "permanently excluded for transphobia or homophobia."