This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A Christian-run bakery is under attack by one of the political subdivisions of the state of Colorado, which has established in recent years a long list of acts of "hostility" to members of the faith.
That "hostility" designation actually came from the U.S. Supreme Court, which rejected the leftist state's anti-faith agenda in a fight over the messaging on cakes produced by a popular different bakery.
The state has tried to same scheme against a web designer, and now is attacking the speech of counselors in a related fight.
But the newest blaze that has erupted in the state is over a French bakery in Jefferson County, just west of Denver itself.
A report at the Federalist notes that it is a zoning authority that has ordered an end to the bakery that has proven popular in its community.
The report explains the bakery, Et Voila!, opened up in the Lookout Mountain community, overlooking Golden.
It is, the report said, "a must-visit destination for hikers, mountain bikers, and tourists from all over the globe."
The restaurant is run by three French immigrants, husband-and-wife team of Eric and Rachel Defour and Rachel's sister, Ruth.
"The Dufours want to share their love for authentic French cuisine with the Lookout Mountain community, creating a welcoming space for locals and visitors. They also count on the bakery's financial success to support their nonprofit, Serving Alongside Ministry (SAM), which provides counseling services for Christian organizations and leaders globally," the Federalist explained.
They sold their home and spent almost a year changing a storage building into a clean and inviting space.
Their work consumes their time, as the bakery is open six days a week, with chores beginning at 1 a.m., long before the opening at 7 a.m.
They knew they had to live nearby, as Colorado winters can be intimidating, with snowfall measured in feet, so they arranged temporary living facilities adjacent to the restaurant, two trailers that were customized to match the bakery's designs and colors.
Enter the Jefferson County zoning inspectors, who are insisting that the bakery site is not available for any residential use – ever.
And county officials there have refused to accommodate the community's needs for a restaurant with a variance, despite evidence that enforcing their ruling would cause the business to close.
The Dufours now are appealing for help on Change.org, which has gathered thousands of signatures praising the bakery and challenging the zoning.
The report also noted CNBC has rated Colorado at "D+" for the cost of doing business, and a "C-" for business friendliness, and as the county is facing a $30 million budget shortfall, its intention appears to be "destroy a thriving business and a cherished community hub simply to enforce its zoning ordinance."
Colorado, the state, already has lost at the Supreme Court its war against another bakery over the owner's refusal to spout state-approved LGBT messaging in violation of his own faith. Same results, from the same Supreme Court, in the state's war against a web designer. Still pending is the state's demand that counselors say only state-approved words in counseling clients.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Former special counsel Jack Smith, the lawyer appointed by Joe Biden's attorney general, Merrick Garland, to run several lawfare cases against President Donald Trump, was doing everything exactly right, according to his lawyers.
They have submitted a letter defending Smith, who now is being investigated on allegations he violated the Hatch Act while creating charges to file against Trump.
The Hatch Act prevents federal employees from engaging in partisan political actions while being paid by taxpayers.
Smith came under investigation after Sen. Tom Cottyon delivered a referral to the Office of Special Counsel regarding Smith's politicized cases. The accusations are that Smith ran his cases in ways to harm Trump's 2024 election campaign.
Smith filed charges against Trump based on his handling of classified documents and for his actions on January 6, 2021, which Smith claimed was an attempt to overturn the 2020 election.
Both cases since have been dismissed.
But the New York Post noted an email confirms the Hatch Act Unit, which enforces a law restricting government employees from engaging in political activities, has begun reviewing Smith.
"Jack Smith's actions were clearly driven to hurt President Trump's election, and Smith should be held fully accountable," said Cotton, the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, in a statement to the Post.
Smith indicted Trump on 37 federal counts in Miami in June 2023 for lawfully storing presidential records at his Mar-a-Lago estate which was protected by Secret Service agents. Ironically, this was developing at the same time it was revealed Joe Biden had boxes and boxes of secret government documents stored in an office, his home, even his unsecured garage, but no action was taken against him.
That case against Trump later was dismissed because Smith's appointment as special counsel was improper.
In the second case in Washington D.C., Jack Smith indicted Trump on four counts: Conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights.
That's even though evidence about the protest-turned-riot on that day confirmed that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi admitted liability for the events, and Trump had urged his fans to protest "peacefully."
Smith's lawyers now have claimed, "We are aware of no court decision, prior Office of Special Counsel finding, or other authority interpreting the Hatch Act to prohibit prosecutors from investigating allegations of criminal conduct committed by former public officials or candidates for public office, or prosecuting those cases when the facts and law so dictate."
A report at the Gateway Pundit described how Smith "lashed out" at the Office of Special Counsel" for its investigation.
Smith's lawyers claim he made his decisions "based solely on the evidence."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
President Donald Trump has delivered a verdict on Lisa D. Cook, a governor for the Federal Reserve who now is facing accusations of mortgage fraud.
His conclusion: She'll be fired if she doesn't resign.
WND reported only a day earlier that Cook was the third major Democrat personality in recent weeks to face mortgage fraud claims.
It was the U.S. Federal Housing FHFA that alleged, in a criminal referral to the Department of Justice, that Cook committed mortgage fraud by designating both an out of state condominium as well as a Michigan residence as her primary "home," at the same time.
Shortly later, the condo allegedly was offered for rent.
The government statement said, "When someone commits mortgage fraud, they undermine the faith and integrity of our System. It does not matter who you are – no one is above the law. We have sent a Criminal Referral to the Department of Justice with regard to the allegations against Ms. Cook, and the DOJ should go wherever the facts may lead them."
Earlier cases were assembled against Letitia James, the attorney general for New York whose massive mortgage fraud case against President Donald Trump's companies collapse in a heap of smoldering ashes this week when her $500 million plus judgment against Trump was trashed by an appeals court.
She was accused of wrongly claiming the location of her "primary residence."
Then it was Adam Schiff, the Democrat senator from California who pushed hard at the false claims of the Russiagate conspiracy theory over which Trump was impeached – and acquitted.
He apparently claimed two residences as his "primary" at the same time.
The Gateway Pundit noted Special Prosecutor Ed Martin is currently investigating Cook for mortgage fraud and falsifying bank statements.
Martin also asked Fed Chair Jerome Powell to remove Cook from her post.
The report noted, "According to housing regulator Bill Pulte's criminal referral, Lisa Cook committed mortgage fraud by lying on her mortgage application and falsifying bank statements when she designated her out-of-state Atlanta condo as her 'primary residence'—just two weeks after taking a loan on her Michigan home, which she also claimed as her 'primary residence.'"
Cook claimed she now is being "bullied" into leaving her post, which she said she won't do.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
President Donald Trump on Thursday renewed his call for freedom for "Patriot" Tina Peters, a former Colorado county elections official jailed by the leftists in the state on their charges of election interference.
She was indicted, convicted, and jailed for allegedly releasing one inactive password to an elections system several years ago.
However, the Democrat government there handed a free pass to Jena Griswold, the Democrat secretary of state in the one-party government after she oversaw her office's publication online of hundreds of current passwords.
Griswold earned the backing of the Democrat political machine in her failed attempt to remove President Donald Trump from the 2024 presidential ballot, a move that was approved by her own all-Democrat state Supreme Court but reversed by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Continuing the "torture" of Peters will bring bad things to Colorado, Trump promised.
"FREE TINA PETERS, a brave and innocent Patriot who has been tortured by Crooked Colorado politicians, including the big Mail-In Ballot supporting the governor of the State. Let Tina Peters out of jail, RIGHT NOW. She did nothing wrong, except catching the Democrats cheat in the Election. She is an old woman, and very sick. If she is not released, I am going to take harsh measures!!!"
While Peters was convicted under state law, and Trump cannot pardon her in that case, the president does have the power, through the executive branch control of the federal government's grants, allocations of federal resources and much more, to make her jailors uncomfortable.
The Gateway Pundit noted she was sentenced to nine years in prison last October after she was accused of breaching the Mesa County election systems and leaking Dominion voting machine passwords.
The report said, "But Peters contends that her office had the Dominion machine passwords, which is what Maricopa County successfully argued when they were subpoenaed for Dominion passwords during the Arizona Election audit in 2021."
During her sentencing, Matthew Barrett, the judge handling her state case, attacked her political speech, and denied her bond.
Peters' legal team has appealed her case to federal court, challenging the First Amendment violations and asking them to decide whether Tina Peters is being unlawfully imprisoned for her political speech.
Trump recently has added to his agenda of making America great again the discontinuation of "Highly Inaccurate, Very Expensive, and Seriously Controversial VOTING MACHINES, which cost Ten Times more than accurate and sophisticated Watermark Paper."
The Post Millennial reported what Peters actually was accused of was providing someone with a security pass to review her county's elections system after she developed suspicions about the veracity of the voting system's conclusions.
Colorado Attorney General Philip Weiser, another activist Democrat, has asked the judge to dismiss Peters' petition to be released on bond pending the appeals process. Weiser, while claiming "No one is above the law," also has been completely inactive regarding any charges against Griswold for her involvement in released passwords.
KREX television in Colorado said Trump already demanded Peters' release in May, writing, "Tina is an innocent Political Prisoner being horribly and unjustly punished in the form of Cruel and Unusual Punishment."
The Department of Justice already has warned Colorado it is examining its prosecution, because there are "reasonable concerns" with the state's attack on Peters.
WND previously reported that Peters "was a conservative in the far-left state, where the all-Democrat state Supreme Court partisanly tried to remove Donald Trump from the 2024 ballot. Where virtually all of the top state leaders in the governor's office and legislature are virulently anti-Trump."
Further, it's where "leftists in population centers like Denver and Boulder openly advocate for Americans' rights to be violated in order to protect illegal alien criminals. Where abortion was made a state constitutional "right" and the state constitution's protection for voters against massive overtaxing plans routinely is undermined. For example, Democrat lawmakers, faced with constitutional limits on raising 'taxes,' routinely hike them anyway and then simply call them 'fees.' For example, state residents who license vehicles and pay taxes have to pay a 'fee' for roads and bridges. Visitors to the state using the same roads and bridges don't pay that 'fee.'"
Complete Colorado noted at the time there are multiple "missteps" by Griswold that now could come under review.
Colorado Republican Party Chairwoman Brita Horn said, "Our secretary of state gaslights voters with her 'Gold Standard' narrative while she oversees leaked passwords. She has no one to blame but herself and her irresponsible team for the investigation. We need the truth about what happens in her department, and in our elections."
Previously, Griswold earned infamy among elections officials by sending postcards to some 30,000 non-residents, telling them how to register to vote.
In what may end up being related, Judicial Watch said Griswold's office gave out incorrect numbers for those removed from the state's registration lists due to address changes. The watchdog organization wanted its lawsuit over the dispute reopened because of the wrong numbers, but a leftist judge in the left-leaning federal court system in Colorado refused permission.
Even earlier, Trump pointed out, "Radical Left Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser ignores illegals committing Violent Crimes like Rape and Murder in his State and, instead, jailed Tina Peters, a 69-year-old Gold Star mother who worked to expose and document Democrat Election Fraud. Tina is an innocent Political Prisoner being horribly and unjustly punished in the form of Cruel and Unusual Punishment. This is a Communist persecution by the Radical Left Democrats to cover up their Election crimes and misdeeds in 2020. The same Democrat Party that flies to El Salvador to try to free an MS-13 Terrorist, is cruelly imprisoning, perhaps for life, a grandmother whose brave and heroic son gave his life for America. Colorado must end this unjust incarceration of an innocent American. I am hereby directing the Department of Justice to take all necessary action to help secure the release of this 'hostage' being held in a Colorado prison by the Democrats, for political reasons. FREE TINA PETERS, NOW!"
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
In a statement posted on X Wednesday, the Department of Homeland Security criticized the media's use of the term "undocumented immigrant," emphasizing that the appropriate terminology is "illegal alien."
The post, which includes several media headlines using the wokier term, reads, "'Undocumented immigrant' is the immigration equivalent of 'they/them.' DHS has no interest in the left's open borders pronouns. 'Alien' is the technical legal term, and that is what DHS will use. 'Illegal' is the only way to correctly describe lawbreakers. Next thing you know you will be calling burglars 'undocumented houseguests.'"
Fox News reports that federal law includes multiple references to the term "illegal alien" or "alien" in describing persons who incur into the U.S. illegally or without proper documentation.
In 8 U.S.C (U.S. Code) 1182 and 1227 – provisions dealing with admission and removal of foreign nationals – the terms "inadmissible aliens" and "deportable aliens" are used.
In federal statute delineating employment and public benefits, 8 U.S.C. 1324(a) and 8 U.S.C. 1611 describe the "unlawful employment of aliens" and "aliens ineligible for federal public benefits.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A Christian revival has begun surging across the United Kingdom, according to multiple reports, with a new documentation showing that those ages 18-24 are leading the way.
"After decades of Christianity declining in Britain – falling to such an extent that the 2021 census found that Christians had become a minority in England and Wales amid the rise of atheism and Islam — there appears to be an indication of a trend reversal and possible revival of the faith in the United Kingdom," according to a report at Breitbart.
And GB News documented how a YouGov tracker of religious belief found people in that age group who professed belief in God rose from 16% in August of 2021 to 45% in January of this year, a stunning 181% explosion in survey numbers that normally move by single digits.
That report described the change as possibly the "most significant generational shift in decades."
Figures from YouGov also found that among those ages 25-49, belief has risen a more modest, but still significant, 21% to 33$.
And church attendance is up, with 56% responding that they attend church at least once a month.
The report noted Naomi Boden, 13, who describes herself as a Christian with a strong faith, told the People's Channel: "Problems in the world are becoming greater, people are looking for somewhere to turn with their problems."
Attending church saw its largest increase among young men, from one in 25 to one in five.
GB News said, "Father Damian Feeney, of Holy Trinity in Ettingshall, told GB News that his Wolverhampton Church is also experiencing a surge among young people."
"Very often it is after a period of absence: those brought up in a church environment may well associate returning to the faith with a more general getting their lives back on track," he said, adding, "The spur and motivation to explore the faith afresh may come from [secularism, uncertainty, or global challenges] but it should be clear that every individual will have their own story, their own journey. My personal view is that secularism seems simply too one-dimensional and beige, with little by way of excitement or mystery, but I would say that, wouldn't I?"
Among the churches, attendance at Anglican churches was down, while Roman Catholic church attendance was up, as was the Pentecostal congregations.
The report notes "hostility" and "apathy" to Christianity seen among older generations are being replaced by "openness" in Generation Z.
Breitbart wrote, "This perhaps belies the folly of the move by church leadership, notably former Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby, pushing woke ideology in an apparent attempt to court young people. Before resigning in disgrace earlier this year over accusations of failing to investigate child sex abuse, Welby had been a leading advocate of 'social justice' causes such as the Marxist Black Lives Matter movement, going so far as to launch a campaign to purge churches of colonial-era statues and monuments as well as starting a church reparations fund for historical ties to slavery."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
CNN's numbers guy Harry Enten says there's been a "complete flip" among Ukrainians in how they want the war with Russia to end, with a vast majority now wanting the war to end as soon as possible, rather than fighting to win.
In July, polling by Gallup indicated 69% of Ukrainians wanted "a negotiated end to the war as soon as possible," while only 24% supported their country "continuing to fight until victory."
"There have been some absolutely major shifts. The idea that Ukraine is going to achieve complete victory – that idea has collapsed within Ukrainian society," Enten explained Monday.
"What are we talking about here? Ukrainians on the war versus Russia? You go back to 2022, the start of the war: fight until Ukraine wins. Look at this – the vast majority, about three quarters, 73%, agreed with that position. Negotiate to end the war as soon as possible? Only 22%."
"Look at where we are now. It's a complete flip. It's the inverse," Enten added.
"Now, 69% want to negotiate to end the war as soon as possible, compared to just 24% who want to fight until Ukraine wins. That's a 49-point drop in this position."
When asked by anchor John Berman what he suspected sparked the remarkable change, Enten replied: "Well, I think one of the big reasons why opinions have changed is this idea that this war is going to end anytime soon? Uh-uh, Ukrainians don't think it will."
"Take a look here – Ukrainians on the war ending within a year. Just 25% say that it is likely. Look at this: 68%, 68% say it is unlikely that the war will in fact end in a year."
"And you'll notice, John, this 68% looks a heck of a lot like this 69% who say that they want to negotiate to end the war as soon as possible," he concluded.
On Monday, ahead of his White House meeting with European leaders, President Donald Trump posted on Truth Social: "I've settled 6 Wars in 6 months, one of them a possible Nuclear disaster, and yet I have to read & listen to the Wall Street Journal, and many other who truly don't have a clue, tell me everything that I am doing wrong on the Russia/Ukraine MESS, that is Sleepy Joe Biden's war, not mine. I'm only here to stop it, not to prosecute it any further. It would have NEVER happened if I was President.
"I know exactly what I'm doing, and I don't need the advice of people who have been working on all of these conflicts for years, and were never able to do a thing to stop them.
"They are 'STUPID' people, with no common sense, intelligence, or understanding, and they only make the current R/U disaster more difficult to FIX. Despite all of my lightweight and very jealous critics, I'll get it done – I always do!!!"
Earlier in the day, Trump said: "I am totally convinced that if Russia raised their hands and said, 'We give up, we concede, we surrender, we will GIVE Ukraine and the great United States of America, the most revered, respected, and powerful of all countries, EVER, Moscow and St. Petersburg, and everything surrounding them for a thousand miles, the Fake News Media and their Democrat Partners would say that this was a bad and humiliating day for Donald J. Trump, one of the worst days in the history of our Country.'
"But that's why they are the FAKE NEWS, and the badly failing Radical Left Democrats. Thank you for your attention to this matter!!!"
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A newly filed friend-of-the-court brief in the legal battle over sending taxpayer cash to abortion industry giant Planned Parenthood, over the objections of taxpayers, Congress and the president, warns just exactly how dangerous is the precedent the abortionists want.
They are, in fact, endorsing a system in which court judges would be able to allocate tax money to their pet causes, thereby violating the "constitutional separation of powers" that allows only Congress that power.
It is the American Center for Law and Justice that has filed the arguments in the legal fight over the law of the land – adopted by Congress and signed by the president, that no tax money should go to Planned Parenthood.
Then there is a single pro-abortion judge, Indira Talwani, who claimed the power of Congress and is insisting that tax money be handed over to the abortionists.
"Our brief makes a fundamental point that Planned Parenthood desperately wants to obscure: There is no constitutional right to government subsidies. The Supreme Court established this principle decades ago and has reaffirmed it consistently, even during the Roe v. Wade era," the ACLU reported.
"When Americans elect representatives who prioritize protecting life over funding abortion providers, those policy choices must be respected. The Constitution does not transform every legal activity into a taxpayer-funded entitlement, and courts cannot conscript unwilling taxpayers to subsidize practices they find morally objectionable."
It explained, "Planned Parenthood's argument ignores a critical reality that the Supreme Court has acknowledged: Money is fungible. When the government provides funding to an organization for one purpose, those funds free up other resources that can be redirected toward activities the government prefers not to support."
The brief to the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals defends Congress' constitutional authority to decline to fund abortion providers like the industry giant.
"This case, Planned Parenthood Federation of America v. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., represents far more than a dispute over government funding – it strikes at the heart of our constitutional separation of powers and America's commitment to protecting life," the organization confirmed.
It was Talwani, in a Massachusetts court, who is insisting that Planned Parenthood get all of the money it requests from taxpayers, hundreds of millions of dollars.
"This judicial activism represents nothing less than a direct assault on the will of the American people and their elected representatives in Congress, who voted to stop forcing taxpayers to subsidize abortion," the legal team noted.
"When Congress exercises its constitutional authority to direct taxpayer dollars away from organizations that perform abortions, it reflects the deeply held values of millions of Americans who believe their tax dollars should not subsidize the taking of innocent life."
In the case of Planned Parenthood, when it gets Medicaid payments for "family planning services, that money allows the organization to redirect other funds toward performing abortions. Congress has every right – indeed, the responsibility to taxpayers who oppose abortion – to prevent this indirect subsidization of abortion providers."
The congressional action, it explained, "involves no punishment whatsoever."
"Planned Parenthood remains free to operate, employ staff, and provide services. No one is barred from working there or prohibited from seeking their services. Congress has simply decided not to pay for its activities with taxpayer dollars – a decision well within legislative authority. Every time Congress makes funding choices – supporting some activities while declining to fund others – it could face similar challenges if Planned Parenthood's theory prevailed. This would transform every appropriations decision into potential constitutional litigation, undermining the democratic process and separation of powers," the ACLJ argued.
But maybe most troubling is the assault in the case on "constitutional separation of powers."
"The Appropriations Clause could not be clearer: 'No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.' This power belongs exclusively to Congress, not to courts or executive agencies."
But the abortion industry leader is demanding courts order Congress to spend money "it has explicitly declined to appropriate."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A newly declassified government document has revealed the active efforts on the part of the FBI and the Department of Justice to shut down an investigation into the alleged pay-to-play scheme assembled by the Clinton Foundation while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state for Barack Obama.
It is Just the News that revealed the actions at the time, heading into the 2016 election, when the family foundation run by the Clintons solicited "contributions" and "donations" – totaling hundreds of millions of dollars – from various groups that had business pending before the federal bureaucracy, which Hillary Clinton ran.
The report explained Kash Patel, now FBI director, found a "bombshell" memo from 2017 that chronicled the "extensive political obstruction that career agents in three cities faced from their own bosses and the Obama Justice Department during the 2016 election as they probed whether Hillary Clinton engaged in a pay-to-play corruption scheme."
The government documents show Sally Yates, then deputy attorney general, ordered, "Shut it down!"
It was federal agents in New York City, Little Rock, Arkansas, and Washington, D.C., who "tried to get the help of federal prosecutors to determine whether or what crimes occurred while Hillary Clinton served as secretary of state, most notably, because at that time, her family foundation solicited hundreds of millions of dollars from foreign and U.S. interests with business before her department," Just the News documented.
The timeline is from a Department of Justice lawyer assigned to the FBI by then FBI chief James Comey, who now is under congressional investigation himself for pushing the scandalous, and false, Russiagate conspiracy theory to hurt Trump.
The document was secured by top aides to Patel, along with corroborating internal emails, and was accessed by Just the News.
"Together, they make clear that both the DOJ and former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe placed significant impediments in front of agents who believed they had evidence to justify a public integrity criminal case," the report said.
In fact, the report noted, early in 2016 the DOJ said it would "not be supportive of an FBI investigation."
McCabe's own order, the report said, was that "no overt investigative steps" were allowed, and other roadblocks soon surfaced into the issue that the foundation did, in fact, get massive donations during that time period, donations that promptly plunged when Hillary Clinton's attempt to gain control of the Oval Office failed.
"Patel's discovery of the memo and related emails comes at a sensitive time as Attorney General Pam Bondi has approved the use of a strike force and a grand jury to investigate whether law enforcement and intelligence abuses over the last decade amounted to a criminal conspiracy to protect Democrats like Clinton and Joe Biden while inflicting harm on Trump and his followers," the report explained.
The report said there was no explanation over Yates' order to close it down, or the statement from New York federal prosecutors they would not "support" such an investigation.
The documents show that agents "were thwarted" from their investigation into the Clinton Foundation's antics, "no matter where" they turned, the report said.
The report noted there was a meeting of multiple FBI and DOJ officials, not identified, and the talk was about opening an investigation. One official authorized three offices to begin looking but "to not take any investigative steps until the matter was discussed with DOJ."
A report from special counsel John Durham later said one part of that investigation started because of the likelihood an industry was engaged with "a federal public official in a flow of benefits scheme, namely, large monetary contributions were made to a non-profit, under both direct and indirect control of the federal public official, in exchange for favorable government action and/or influence."
Durham's conclusion eventually was that all three of the branches were considering investigations on that basis, that foreign governments made, or offered, contributions to the Clinton Foundation in exchange for favors from Clinton.
However, McCabe's instructions were that nothing happened without his approval, and the orders sent to agents that they were not allowed to look for confidential sources on the issue. The investigations eventually were killed.
Comey also later stepped in to help Hillary Clinton in another dangerous scandal, that of putting government secrets on an unsecure and private computer server in her home, when he called her "careless" but claimed "no reasonable prosecutor" would pursue the charges.
Another special prosecutor later found Comey's actions supporting Clinton were "insubordinate."
The report charged, "The differences in how the Justice Department and FBI handled cases related to Clinton and Trump were stark — publicly exonerating Clinton for her mishandling of classified information when using a private email server as secretary of state and not even allowing the Clinton Foundation investigation to get off the ground, while launching a sprawling and baseless Russia collusion inquiry into the Trump campaign and the candidate (and then the president) himself."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
President Trump posted to Truth Social today that special envoy Steve Witkoff had just had a "highly productive" meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin as the administration continues to negotiate an end to the Russia-Ukraine war.
Trump wrote: "My Special Envoy, Steve Witkoff, just had a highly productive meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Great progress was made! Afterwards, I updated some of our European Allies. Everyone agrees this War must come to a close, and we will work towards that in the days and weeks to come. Thank you for your attention to this matter!"
Recently, the president has expressed frustration with Putin over U.S. efforts to end the war. Last month, Trump gave Putin a 50-day deadline to reach a ceasefire deal, and then reduced it to 10 days. That was eight days ago.
Trump's punishment for failure was to impose sanctions and secondary tariffs on nations that purchase Russian oil and gas.
Reportedly, the meeting between Putin and Witkoff, held at the Kremlin, lasted about three hours.