This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Tina Peters, the embattled former county clerk in the radically left state of Colorado – run by a homosexual governor and dominated by Democrats in the legislature – who was jailed by extremists there for protecting presidential election records, has gone to social media and has gotten blunt with the U.S. Department of Justice.
"Why is the DOJ defying Trump's demands? Get off you're a—- and get me out!" she posted.
The attacks on her came amid the scandalous revelations about voting system insecurities in the presidential election. She was accused, among other things, of allowing a voting system password to be online.
Incidentally, Jena Griswold, Colorado's Democrat secretary of state and a key player in the prosecution of Peters, was confirmed to have posted online hundreds of election system passwords, but she was never charged.
Peters was sent to prison for years.
And she's fed up:
Her statement said:
UPDATE FROM TINA PETERS: 364 Days of Injustice As I approach 365 days in this hellhole—tomorrow marks one full year, and Friday is the anniversary of the day they shackled me and dragged me out of the courtroom—my chest hurts just thinking about it. It's seared into my mind. I've been deprived of everything everyone else takes for granted: going to a restaurant, driving somewhere, flying, being with whoever I want, seeing my granddaughter, visiting my mother who'll be 97 next month. All of that, gone.
Where is everybody? I did what I was supposed to do—legally—to expose their crimes. Who has my back now? Where are the people who benefited? Has it been decided that I will be made the SACRIFICIAL LAMB to give the networks something to rally behind? The President has demanded my release four times—twice on Twitter, twice verbally. Why is the DOJ defying Trump's demands? Get off you're a—- and get me out! This is not right.
The state never had jurisdiction to indict, prosecute, or imprison me because of the Constitution, the Supremacy Clause, and Immunities Clause. I was protecting federal election records. Colorado violated federal law by locking me up. The federal government could come in right now, pluck me out, and say, "No, you're violating her constitutional rights. She was performing a federal duty." Send in the marshals—get me! Not just because I'm a whistleblower, but because they had no right to do this. This is straight-up lawfare.
I'm a political prisoner suffering cruel and unusual punishment, just like Tore called out in her amicus brief. How many whistleblowers, reports, and proofs do we need? We have already proven it all—yet here I am, in a medium-security prison with murderers, the worst of the worst. People serving life for gruesome murders, featured on Dateline and 20/20. I was just in the gym with one—she's sweet to me, but that's the reality I'm living every day. For what? Protecting elections?
The same biased judges who denied my bond with no explanation will drag out any appeal for years. They're not normal; they were put in place illegally, selected by benefactors in these blackmail rings like Epstein and P. Diddy. They collect their dues. Forget the appeal—optics don't matter. Just do it, and deal with the court later. And the prosecutor calls me a danger to society? A flight risk?
Meanwhile, they let out a criminal with 39 convictions, 25 felonies, who then murdered that poor little girl. Her father's been yelling about it on Fox News every day—bring that up. It just validates I'm a political prisoner in a state that could be criminally prosecuted for this. Something's got to break. Go to http://tinapeters.us to see the filings and the latest. And if you can support me, I need your help. I cannot pay my attorneys and my appeal still has a very long time to go. If you can help please donate at http://Tinapeters.us —Tina Peters
WND previously reported on the case involving Peters, a grandmother, Gold Star mom and election watchdog.
Trump, in fact, has described Peters as a "brace and innocent Patriot" being tortured by "Crooked Colorado politicians.'
The report said, "Tina Peters, once the trusted Mesa County clerk, now faces a staggering nine-year prison sentence, convicted of crimes her own prosecutors essentially admit she didn't commit. Her 'crime'? Daring to protect election records in the wake of the contentious 2020 presidential election, a fight that has left her career and life in tatters, her freedom stolen and her name smeared by a corporate press eager to paint her as a villain."
The report noted within the prosecution's own claims is a "stunning admission."
She's serving nine years for "attempting to influence a public servant," "conspiracy to commit criminal impersonation" and "first-degree official misconduct."
But her appeal explains the district court erred in denying her immunity under the Supremacy and Privileges or Immunities Clauses and her actions were lawful efforts to preserve federal election records.
Further, David Underwood, a prosecution witness, testified that Peters, as the county's chief election official, had the sole authority to decide who could access the voting system for a software upgrade known as the "Trusted Build."
And Danny Casias, another witness, could not identify any decision he was influenced to make due to alleged deceit by Peters.
The prosecution's own statements, her lawyers charge, document how she acted within her authority and lacked the intent to deceive.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A terrorist rammed a vehicle into people at a synagogue in the United Kingdom, jumped out and started stabbing people, and shortly later was shot and killed by police.
The suspect in the attack outside the Manchester Heaton Park Hebrew Congregation Synagogue, not yet identified, reportedly was wearing a suspected suicide belt.
Police there said the attack on Yom Kippur, a holy day in the Jewish calendar, left multiple victims hospitalized in serious condition.
Some agencies were reporting at least two victims had died.
The suspect was confirmed dead, a process that was delayed by "suspicious items on his person," which gave the appearance of a bomb belt.
Rabbi Daniel Walker had barricaded worshippers inside the building after the suspect crashed into the gate and began stabbing "anyone and everyone," described the Daily Mail.
"One witness described him moving from victim to victim in a 'robotic' manner 'like he had a job to do' – targeting 'anyone' wearing a kippah," the report said.
Video shared on social media appeared to show armed police officers pointing guns at a man on the ground as one screamed to onlookers: "Everybody else, get back. If you're not involved, move back, get away… he has a bomb, go away."
Some online videos showed the suspect starting to get up, but falling back after another shot. And they showed a victim on the street in a poll of blood.
Police sources told the Mail it was "too early" to determine the attacker's motivation.
Police stated that they were "called to the Heaton Park Hebrew Congregation Synagogue, on Middleton Road, Crumpsall, at 9.31am by a member of the public, stating he had witnessed a car being driven towards members of the public and one man had been stabbed."
Police explained a man "believed to be the offender," was shot.
The attack was just the latest a long list of attacks of houses of worship around the world in recent months. In America, multiple Christian facilities have been targeted by violent extremists.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
"I love America. Warts and all and with no apologies. I love her land, people, culture, history, literature, poetry – all of it"" So begins Michael Finch's new book, "A Time to Stand: The Dire Hour to Defend American Beauty," a collection of essays that serve as a testament of one man's deep and abiding love for his homeland. It is a love rooted in recognition of America's unique place in history as the world's foremost defender of human liberty, individual rights, the rule of law, limited government, free enterprise, and freedom of thought. Indeed, these are precisely the principles to which Mr. Finch, as the longtime president of the David Horowitz Freedom Center, has passionately devoted so much of his life.
But in recent decades, this beloved land has been afflicted by what Finch calls a "cultural crisis" and a "rot in our soul," as evidenced by a proliferation of "people adrift, alone, lost connections, rising drug addiction, mental illness, depression." Observing how these hallmarks of spiritual atrophy manifest themselves visibly on the streets of urban America, Finch writes that "the 'uglification' of American culture" is now routinely emblematized by "massive amounts of trash, filth, … burned buildings, graffiti, [and] boarded-up businesses."
The cities where such totems of societal decline abound are almost all controlled politically by leftists, whose "insatiable lust for power" Finch decries. The power they crave is one that aims to "reshape, remake and reeducate the reactionaries, the retrograde, the masses" – all in pursuit of the "utopian ideal" of an "ever-progressive heaven upon this earth." Finch observes that, tragically, the hearts of countless well-meaning, unsuspecting people have been charmed and captivated by the Left's fanciful, grandiose pledge to "make perfect what is flawed" and "cure all that ails" the presumably benighted masses.
"How easily we succumb," the author laments, "seduced and drawn into these illusions" – illusions that commonly ensnare those who eschew religious faith and seek instead to fill the spiritual void in their souls with a devotion to leftwing political crusades. Such individuals are especially vulnerable to what Finch identifies as the very enticing "false virtue" of charlatans professing "to be like God, indeed to be God" – and thereby proclaiming their own right "to rule … by force of might." It is a drama, he explains, that has been reenacted many times throughout human history, where "the cleansing blood of the innocents" rages like a river across the landscape of "a world decimated and barren" – and where "the guilty are never held to account" for their "unspeakable crimes."
With specificity, Finch identifies particular monstrous evils that the Left has inflicted on our nation in modern times. He observes, for instance, that in the "grievance culture" of the Left, "race has become an industry" premised upon a venomous "hatred of white people." He further notes that a denial of reality – even biological reality – has infected the leftist mind: "We can't even discuss certain things anymore," Finch writes. "What is a man, what is a woman?" The very fact that such questions need to be addressed at all, leaves the author feeling as though he is living in an unrecognizable, alien land:
"I don't even begin to understand what this sexual identity crisis is all about. Just to say this, incurs wrath. Something isn't right, or maybe I am just getting too old. Our hearts cry out, not in judgment, but for the lost souls, the confused and depressed, the anxiety and pain that so many feel."
These are not the words of a scold shouting condemnations from a rooftop, but rather, of a gentleman extending grace and compassion to people who are obviously – and needlessly – afflicted by a psychological burden born of social contagion.
Finch further observes that the Left has expended inconceivably enormous energies on the task of tearing down and delegitimizing America's founders, its founding doctrines, its history, and its institutions. As a result of those efforts, "all that was once held true and right has been torn and ripped and attacked as ghosts of an evil past." "What had built this nation into a city on the hill and beacon," he elaborates, "is now ridiculed as nothing, nothing but a graveyard wavering on the guilty carcass of a cancerous beginning and the Founders' dreams that we are now taught are nothing but nightmares."
Many profoundly destructive ramifications have grown out of the timorous self-doubt and self-flagellation that the Left's contempt for our country has spawned in the hearts of so many Americans. People who do not believe in their own nation's goodness, righteousness, and moral legitimacy, will certainly be disinclined to defend it in any meaningful way. We saw this deplorable mindset in action during the Biden years, when the President and his entire administration steadfastly refused to protect the sanctity of America's borders – intentionally permitting what Finch calls an "invasion" by countless thousands of illegal aliens who entered the country unobstructed, month after month after month. "The complete negligence by the Biden administration" was "beyond criminal," Finch declares in one of his essays, decrying the "full scale anarchy" of "a border land in chaos," dominated by "lawless and armed gangs" conducting a veritable reign of terror.
And for what purpose did Biden and his cohorts permit those millions of illegals to make a mockery of America's immigration laws? Clearly, the objective was to import millions of newcomers who, they hoped, would eventually coalesce into a massive, reliable Democrat voting bloc. Such diabolical schemes prompt Finch to remind us: "There is a reason our Founding Fathers agonized about what would happen with freedom in a society without virtue."
But Finch's work goes far beyond merely identifying, analyzing, and decrying the various crises that afflict America and its people. He is prepared also to engage in, and help lead, a passionate battle of ideas against the enemies of our nation. "We will not be sold, enslaved and controlled by utopian dreams of radical minds and from tyrant's grasp of these poisoned serpents," he writes, exhorting his fellow countrymen to join him in the "fight for our honor, our family, our homes, our flag, our heritage and God-given rights."
During his more than 20 years as a leader at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, Finch has been a staunch, indefatigable general in the battle to save America by proudly articulating the principles of conservatism and laying bare, in blunt and unapologetic tones, the toxic agendas of the Left. Finch's comrade-in-arms, the late David Horowitz, gave voice to this mission when he said: "Over the years people would refer to my Freedom Center as a 'think tank' and I would correct them, 'No, it's a battle tank,' because that is what I felt was missing most in the conservative cause – troops ready and willing to fight fire with fire."
In 2015, Finch himself was quick to recognize the greatness that lay within one extraordinary, rising political figure who openly relished the opportunity to "fight fire with fire" by speaking plainly and boldly about the weightiest of issues: Donald Trump. Finch understood that Trump represented a welcome change from the many Republicans who seemed to believe that they only stood a chance of winning their party's presidential nomination if they presented themselves to the public as mealy-mouthed milquetoasts whose every utterance was delivered in measured, inoffensive tones.
When Trump's detractors in 2016 argued that he was too crude, undisciplined, and politically incorrect to win the White House, Finch used his pen to mount an impassioned defense of Trump and make the case for his election. "I will come right out and say it," he wrote in an October 2016 essay that is reprinted in "A Time to Stand." "I could give a damn what Donald Trump says in private. … [T]he false piety on display by so many Republicans and conservatives is nothing more than a symptom of the wussification of America and the American male and the selling out of our liberty. … George Patton, Ulysses S. Grant, Sam Houston, Andrew Jackson and so many others were hardly saints. … Patton wouldn't last five minutes in today's army of political correctness. … But how many American lives and the lives in the German camps did he save by steamrolling into Germany months ahead of schedule? We are not electing a Pope – we need a leader. Conservatives fall into the trap of thinking that with a pious perfect Christian who is a moral saint, we are guaranteed the traits necessary to lead our country in a time of crises. I am sorry – they are not one in the same."
At its heart, "A Time to Stand" is both a battle cry and a love song to one's country. A blend of patriot and poet, Finch possesses the rare ability to articulate the urgency of the fight to save America from the Left's depredations, while giving voice, just as eloquently, to the warm and tender emotions that have made his life here so very joyful. "Gaze at a Thomas Cole painting," he writes, "listen to a Samuel Barber composition, walk along the wide Missouri River, get lost in the poems of Walt Whitman, study the life of George Washington, stand in the fields at Antietam, recite Abraham Lincoln's second Inaugural, and don't dare apologize for any of it. Not a thing. Not a darn minute of our history needs to be sullied like the haters of our great nation are doing today."
"A Time to Stand" is a book that will warm the hearts of all who love America, and rouse the patriotic spirits of those who wish to help defend it.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A federal court has ruled in favor of free speech in a fight that was created by an attack by the city of Louisville, Kentucky, on a local photographer.
The city had decided to impose its religious viewpoint and ordered the photographer, Chelsey Nelson, to use her artistic talents to promote anti-Christian same-sex wedding ceremonies "if she photographers and blogs about weddings between one man and one woman," the biblical standard.
Leftist city officials even had tried to order her to be silent on such issues, claiming that they could forbid her and her studio from explaining to clients and potential clients her beliefs.
The ADF, representing Nelson, called the ruling from the federal court in Kentucky a "victory" for free speech.
Louisville, under the ruling, now will be held accountable for violating the First Amendment.
"Free speech is for everyone. As the U.S. Supreme Court held two years ago in 303 Creative v. Elenis, Americans have the freedom to express and create messages that align with their beliefs without fear of government punishment," said her lawyer, Bryan Neihart. "For over five years, Louisville officials said they could force Chelsey to promote views about marriage that violated her religious beliefs. But the First Amendment leaves decisions about what to say with the people, not the government.
"The district court's decisions rests on this bedrock First Amendment principle and builds on the victory in 303 Creative."
That was an earlier case where Colorado officials tried the same leftist stunt, and failed. They claimed that the web designer behind 303 Creative could be forced to promote LGBT ceremonies if she did websites for weddings that followed the Christian model of one man and one woman.
Colorado repeatedly has launched state attacks on the Christian faith, including its years-long campaign against Jack Phillips, of Masterpiece Cakeshop, who refused to submit to leftist religious beliefs promoted by the government of Democrat Gov. Jared Polis, a homosexual, and promote LGBT weddings with his cake artistry
When the state lost that fight at the Supreme Court, the justices scolded the leftist state for its "hostility" to Christians. Subsequently, its taxpayers have been forced to hand over millions of dollars to cover the damages from the state's losing cases.
"The government can't force Americans to say things they don't believe, and state officials have paid and will continue to pay a price when they violate this foundational freedom," Nelson said. "The freedom to speak without fear of censorship is a God-given constitutionally guaranteed right."
The case went to court in 2019 "because Louisville's law prohibited Nelson from expressing her views on marriage on her studio's website and threatened to compel her to create photographs and blogs celebrating a message about marriage she does not believe," the lawyers explained.
"The district court kept a permanent bar in place that prevents Louisville from enforcing its law against Nelson in this way. The court also ordered Louisville to pay Nelson nominal damages for restricting her speech. Nominal damages are a type of compensation that remedy past harm, prevent future misconduct, and vindicate constitutional freedoms," the ADF reported.
The court earlier had ruled that the First Amendment protects Nelson's freedom to create photographs and blog postings promoting her own religious faith about marriage.
The city had taken its fight to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit.
"While the case was on appeal, the U.S. Supreme Court decided 303 Creative v. Elenis, a monumental decision that held that government officials cannot force artists to create speech they disagree with. The Sixth Circuit returned the case to the district court after 303 Creative and other developments but otherwise kept the decision 'in place,'" the ADF explained.
Now the district court has affirmed its original decision.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A new result from Gallup's polling shows that Americans' trust in the media, simply to report news fully, accurately and fairly, has plummeted.
It revealed a record-low 28% said they trust the media a great deal or fair amount to do that job.
And social media immediately went snarky.
"Alternative headline: '28% of Americans are stupid,'" said one. Another; "Coincidentally, 28% of Americans are retards."
A commentary at Twitchy said, "When it comes to credibility, the legacy media has been working on sawing off the same branch they're sitting on for decades now, and that limb finally has snapped off and is plunging toward the ground with the MSM still clinging to it."
It continued, "Along the way, the public trust in media has been dropping right along with them."
It cited the media's service to one political party "as propagandists."
That 28% figure is down three points from just a year ago, and down from 40% just five years ago.
The Hill confirmed, "A total of 7-in-10 adults expressed skepticism in the news media, indicating they have 'not very much' trust in news outlets or 'none at all.'"
The report added, "Trust in media has never been particularly high among those in the GOP, Gallup found, noting the number of Republicans who indicated they trusted media outlets has not risen above 20 percent since 2015, the year President Donald Trump first ran for the White House."
Gallup's analysis said, "With confidence fractured along partisan and generational lines, the challenge for news organizations is not only to deliver fair and accurate reporting but also to regain credibility across an increasingly polarized and skeptical public."
The results come at a time when vast majorities of Americans in various groups get most of their news from social media, online sources and the like.
Also, it comes after a time frame of years in which legacy media have been caught over and over pushing the Democrats' political agenda, as reflected by multiple huge settlements the organizations have paid out recently to President Donald Trump, who sued over their bias.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A renowned constitutional expert, Jonathan Turley of George Washington University, has called out a list of federal judges for inserting politics into their judicial rulings, which are supposed to be following the Constitution and the law, not necessarily the Democrat party.
Turley, whose commentary is valued online and in publications, by Congress where he has testified as an expert, and even by members of Congress who have chosen his representation, cited a recent opinion from William Young, who recently released his ruling about the pursuit of the administration of President Donald Trump to secure America's borders.
His opinion, finding the administration "in violation of the First Amendment over visa denials," was "bizarre," Turley concluded.
"With all due respect to Judge Young (who warrants considerable respect after his remarkable career), the captioning and conclusion are improvisational, impulsive, and injudicious. The court injected a political dialogic element in an opinion with sweeping implications for our constitutional system."
Young, relying on a quote from former Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas, a Joe Biden appointee, said that the speech of illegal aliens in America, and those who may be pursuing entry into the United States, is protected by the First Amendment.
The Trump administration had sought to enforce deportation orders against those non-citizens radicalizing American college campuses with their pro-Palestinian riots.
Young also quoted his own wife as an authority, as she claimed Trump "seems to be winning. He ignores everything and keeps bullying ahead."
The judge claimed that "perfectly captures" Trump's public approach to power.
He found that Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Secretary of State Marco Rubio "deliberately and with purposeful aforethought" used immigration powers to chill noncitizens' free speech.
The ruling undoubtedly will end up before at least one appellate court before it is concluded.
The judge claimed that his decision now "limits the government's ability to use deportation threats to stifle speech and reinforces academic freedom on U.S. college campuses."
And he wasn't finished, insisting on another hearing when he will purport to decide a "remedy."
But he stepped over the line, Turley explained.
"The bizarre captioning and conclusion in this case is another such example. It only served to undermine the opinion itself and the legal points raised by the court. It may have been cathartic, but it was also tedious and prejudicial. It has a certain chest-pounding element that is neither necessary nor compelling for a court to insert into an opinion," he explained. "Judge Young would be wise to issue a corrected opinion without the novel captioning and conclusion . . . and simply send a postcard to this curious penpal."
It was because the judge, in his opinion, included an image of a scrawled, disjointed question, "Trump has pardons and tanks.. .. What do you have?" which purportedly was from that "penpal."
The judge responded to "Dear Mr. or Ms. Anonymous…" with a comment about having the Constitution. Then he finished his opinion with an invitation to stop in at the courthouse to see where "burns the lamp of liberty."
Turley cited other political judges.
"Take District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan, an Obama appointee who had previously presided over Trump's election interference case. Chutkan was criticized for failing to recuse herself from that case after she made highly controversial statements about Trump from the bench. In a sentencing hearing of a Jan. 6 rioter in 2022, Chutkan said that the rioters 'were there in fealty, in loyalty, to one man — not to the Constitution.' She added then, '[i]t's a blind loyalty to one person who, by the way, remains free to this day.' That 'one person' was still under investigation at the time and, when Trump was charged, Chutkan refused to let the case go," he explained.
Then she took politics further into her courtroom, insisting in a proclamation that the pardons from Trump for January 6 protest offenders could not change the "tragic truth" of those events.
"Chutkan's colleague Judge Beryl Howell, also an Obama appointee, lashed out at Trump's actions, writing, "[T]his Court cannot let stand the revisionist myth relayed in this presidential pronouncement," he said.
Those comments, and the rants from "other judges," have been undermining "the integrity of the court system," he warned.
In fact, there have been multiple cases in which judges have given every appearance of being in cooperation with the prosecution against Trump, such as Arthur Engoron in his help to New York Attorney General Letitia James in her failed fraud case against Trump and his companies.
Engoron delivered a $500 million penalty to Trump at James' insistence, a decision that has been thrown out by an appellate court because it violated the Constitution.
Ironically, James herself now is under federal investigation for mortgage fraud. She's accused of lying on federal forms in pursuit of special, lower, interest rates for her own loans.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
President Donald Trump confirmed that he now can do things "that are irreversible" to cut government costs after Democrats in Congress refused to give up their spending spree demands.
The government entered a partial shutdown at midnight after the party failed in its insistence that the GOP agreed to hand out $1.5 trillion to Democrats' favorite people.
The trigger for the shutdown was the Democrats refusal to go along with a short-term spending program in the Senate, which was supported by Republicans, and even a Democrat or two.
"We can do things during the shutdown that are irreversible, that are bad for them, and irreversible by them," the president confirmed.
The Congressional Budget Office estimated 750,000 federal workers would be furloughed each day, amounting to about $400 million in compensation that is delayed.
That compensation is not paid routinely, but seldom is it lost entirely as Congress almost always grants makeup pay when a shutdown concludes.
Individual agencies and programs that were funded from the president's "Big, Beautiful Bill" just weeks ago maintain their funding.
Members of Congress will continue to be paid.
Republicans are keeping the Senate in session to hold repeated votes on the plan that already has been adopted in the House, where Democrats unsuccessfully opposed it.
Minority Democrats in the Senate successfully shut down the government as the GOP majority needs a few Democrat votes to reach the 60-vote filibuster threshold.
A new New York Times/Siena College survey revealed that only a minority of Democrat voters, 47%, support the closure.
"[Sen. Chuck Schumer's] being held hostage by the liberal wing of the party after he did the right thing in March. He was severely punished," Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso, R-Wyo., "They're not thinking ahead of the impact and the damage it's going to do to the American people."
The Washington Examiner reported the deadlock happened because of "Democratic demands to extend expiring enhanced Obamacare subsidies" as well as massive benefits for illegal aliens in the country.
"In a sign of growing division among Democrats, caucus members Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV) and Angus King (I-ME) joined Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) in siding with Republicans," the report noted.
GOP leaders have suggested that eventually there will be enough pressure on Democrats that the needed handful of votes will break with Schumer's shutdown agenda.
Trump already had plans in place, promising to use the time to further shrink the federal workforce and government spending by worker layoffs and rollbacks for government programs.
The expiring enhancement of Obamacare credits was due to the Democrats' own writing of legislation during the COVID-19 panic, when they were created.
"There isn't any substantive reason why there ought to be a government shutdown. This is something that has been done routinely, as I said, 13 different times when the Democrats had the majority. But we are not going to be held hostage for over $1 trillion in new spending on a continuing resolution," Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said ahead of the vote.
Fox reported, "President Donald Trump and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) now have wide discretion over what federal services will remain active."
Democrats insisted on blaming the GOP for the shutdown, demanding additional spending of about $1.5 trillion, including a complete reversal of many components of the "Big, Beautiful Bill" and Congress adopted just weeks ago.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A longtime liberal lawyer who has support Democrats for, well, decades, now is pledging his support for Republicans during the 2026 midterm elections.
It was Alan Dershowitz, whose fame in legal circles is unparalleled.
Defendants to whom he contributed advice at different times include O.J. Simpson, Jeffrey Epstein, Julian Assange, Harvey Weinstein, and even Donald Trump.
His new announcement has just made social media.
"I'm going to be supporting the Republicans in the midterm elections," he said.
He continued, "I'm hoping the Republicans maintain control … both of the House and the Senate. The last thing I want is Chuck Schumer to be head of the Senate or Liz Warren to be chairperson of a committee or AOC to be chairperson of a committee."
He explained, "The Democrats not only have lost my votes, but they have made me an enemy."
He blamed the party for having essentially "moved away from American values, Israeli values and values of decency."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The federal government went into a partial shutdown mode on Wednesday after Democrats demanded an extraordinary $1.5 trillion in spending for a wide range of their constituencies, including Obamacare subsidies, illegal aliens and leftist propaganda.
And one of the first consequences was an $18 billion hit to the state represented by Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., who led the battle for the shutdown.
The New York City projects affected by the White House punching the pause button also hit in the district represented by Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., another advocate for the massive spending agenda.
A report at the Daily Mail noted that those who are "leading the obstruction against Trump's agenda."
The "hardball" announcement came from Russell Vought, director of the Office of Management and Budget, who said the projects were blocked immediately to prevent funds "flowing based on unconstitutional DEI principles."
President Trump, meanwhile, has discussed his opportunity for a renewal of the cuts made to the federal workforce early in his term by the Department of Government Efficiency.
Tens of thousands of jobs were eliminated as unnecessary.
Vought was scheduled to meet with House Republicans about those plans.
He is responsible for about 3 million workers, and his agency decides which government jobs are essential, and continue to get funding during a shutdown, and which do not.
The publication reported, "Vought previously warned agencies to get ready for a 'reduction in force notices for all employees,' specifically highlighting departments and programs that he referred to as 'not consistent with the president's priorities.'"
The OMB memo just days ago said agencies needed to have a list of layoff options for workers "whose salaries aren't paid using the Big Beautiful Bill, obligatory funds. This also included 'programs and projects' that are not consistent with 'the president's priorities.'"
Trump repeatedly has spoken of options that the administration has during a shutdown that can create impacts that are "irreversible."
Trump said, "A lot of good can come down from shutdowns. We can get rid of a lot of things that we didn't want."
House Speaker Mike Johnson, whose body approved a resolution extending government spending only to see it defeated by Democrats in the Senate, said the shutdown will last until Democrats decide to end it.
Leftist labor unions already are threatening to sue over any job reductions.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Students attending a football game for the University of Colorado, well known as a party school at least partly because its location in far-left Boulder, Colorado, and its proximity to ski resorts for students to reach during winter months, chanted a slogan.
It was highly critical of CU's opponent in the game, Brigham Young University.
In fact, they said, "F— the Mormons."
And that display of hate and religious bigotry is costing the school $50,000.
The students will be punished, the school said, if they can be identified.
Channel 7, a Denver broadcast outlet, said the Big 12 Conference announced not just the fine but a "public reprimand" for the school.
Shortly after the chant, CU officials condemned the words and called the behavior "deeply disappointing," and then conference commissioner Brett Yormak announced the punishment.
He said "hateful and discriminatory language" has no home in the league.
CU's coach claimed the derogatory slurs are "not indicative of who we are, our student body. Our kids are phenomenal, so don't indict us just based on a group of young kids that probably was intoxicated and high simultaneously."