Hold onto your hats, folks—President Donald Trump just notched another legal victory in a battle over what his team calls blatant election meddling in Iowa.
This saga centers on a lawsuit against Iowa pollster J. Ann Selzer and The Des Moines Register, alleging fraudulent polling that painted Trump as trailing Kamala Harris just days before he crushed it in Iowa with a double-digit win, Fox News reported.
Let’s rewind to the beginning: a poll by Selzer, released a mere three days before the election, showed Trump down by three points to Harris in Iowa—a state he’s carried three times in a row.
Compare that to a September survey from the same source, which had Trump ahead by four points, and you’ve got a eyebrow-raising seven-point swing that smelled fishy to many.
The media lapped it up, hyping the poll as a historic signal of Midwest momentum shifting toward Harris—only for the actual results to reveal Trump winning by over 13 points, the first double-digit victory in Iowa since 1980.
Trump’s legal team didn’t hold back, accusing Selzer and The Des Moines Register of “brazen election interference” with a poll they claim was designed to undermine his campaign in the final stretch.
Initially, Trump pushed to have the case heard in Iowa State Court, but the defendants shifted it to federal court, where a judge denied his request to move it back.
Enter the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit, which overruled that decision on Friday, denying Selzer’s appeal and sending the lawsuit right back to state court as Trump wanted.
The 8th Circuit even granted Trump’s petition for a writ of mandamus earlier, instructing a district judge to dismiss the federal case without prejudice, paving the way for a state court refiling.
The defendants tried for further relief with the 8th Circuit, but their petition was shot down, leaving them to face the music in Iowa’s state system.
Polly Grunfeld Sack, USA TODAY Co. Chief Legal Officer, wasn’t shy in her response: “Although we are disappointed that the appellate court has allowed President Trump to avoid the inevitable dismissal of his complaint in Federal Court, running away to state court will not change the outcome of this meritless case.”
Well, Polly, that’s a bold prediction, but let’s see if Iowa’s courts agree—after all, dismissing a case tied to a poll so wildly off the mark might not be the slam dunk you think in a state that clearly backed Trump.
A spokesman for Trump’s legal team fired back with equal vigor: “President Trump is committed to holding those who traffic in deception and fake news to account. The Des Moines Register and Gannett knowingly ran a phony poll from the now disgraced Democrat pollster Ann Selzer in an underhanded attempt to interfere in the election and defraud the country into believing Kamala Harris was winning the state of Iowa and nationwide, mere hours before she lost Iowa and the overall election by an overwhelming margin to President Trump.”
That’s a hefty charge, and while some might scoff at the “fake news” label, a poll this far off does raise questions about whether it was more about narrative than numbers—something conservatives have long warned against in media-driven agendas.
Meanwhile, Selzer herself has stepped away, announcing her retirement from election polling to chase “other ventures” shortly after the election, leaving many to wonder if this lawsuit played a role in her exit. It’s hard not to see this as a quiet admission that something went awry, even if no one’s saying it out loud.
Brace yourselves, folks—President Donald Trump just dropped a policy bombshell that’s shaking up Minnesota like a Midwest tornado.
On a dramatic Friday evening, Trump took to Truth Social to announce the abrupt end of deportation protections for Somali nationals in Minnesota through the termination of the Temporary Protected Status (TPS) program, Fox News reported.
This TPS program, for those not in the policy weeds, has long allowed Somali individuals to reside and work in the U.S. due to dangerous conditions back in Somalia. Minnesota, home to a significant Somali community, now faces a seismic shift as these protections vanish “effective immediately.” It’s a bold move, and the ripple effects are already being felt.
Trump didn’t mince words when he made his stance clear on the social platform, pointing fingers at what he sees as rampant issues in the state. “Minnesota, under Governor [Tim] Walz, is a hub of fraudulent money laundering activity,” he declared, as reported on Truth Social. Well, that’s quite the accusation—calling out a governor for allegedly turning a blind eye to financial shenanigans.
But the president didn’t stop there with his digital megaphone. He also claimed, “Somali gangs are terrorizing the people of that great State, and BILLIONS of Dollars are missing,” per his Truth Social post. If true, that’s a gut punch to law-abiding Minnesotans who just want safe streets and accountable governance.
Let’s unpack this a bit, because those are hefty charges. Trump’s decision to scrap TPS seems rooted in a belief that Minnesota has become a hotspot for crime and corruption under current leadership. It’s a classic tough-on-crime approach, though one wonders if the brush is too broad for such a complex issue.
Now, to be fair, Minnesota hasn’t exactly been a poster child for fiscal integrity lately. The state has grappled with major fraud scandals, like the Feeding Our Future scheme, where hundreds of millions in COVID-19 relief funds were reportedly embezzled. That’s not pocket change—it’s a staggering betrayal of public trust.
Adding fuel to the fire, a recent report from the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank, alleges that some of this stolen money found its way to the Somali terror group Al-Shabaab. Researchers Ryan Thorpe and Christopher F. Rufo claim to have uncovered a tangled web of deceit involving programs like Medicaid Housing Stabilization Services. If their findings hold water, this isn’t just fraud—it’s a national security concern.
Thorpe and Rufo further assert that federal counterterrorism sources confirmed millions in pilfered funds were funneled back to Somalia, directly benefiting Al-Shabaab. That’s a chilling thought for any American who values safety over unchecked policy loopholes. It’s no surprise Trump seized on this as justification for his abrupt TPS decision.
Still, let’s take a breath and consider the human side of this policy shift. Many Somali nationals in Minnesota have built lives here under TPS, fleeing genuine peril in their homeland. Upending their status overnight raises questions about fairness and due process, even if the fraud allegations are proven.
On the flip side, if taxpayer dollars are indeed vanishing into criminal or terrorist hands, that’s a problem no administration can ignore. Trump’s supporters will likely see this as a decisive stand against a broken system. Critics, though, might argue it’s a sledgehammer approach when a scalpel could suffice.
The fraud claims, especially those tied to Al-Shabaab, are serious enough to warrant deep scrutiny, not just soundbites. If the Manhattan Institute’s investigation is accurate, Minnesota’s oversight failures have consequences far beyond state lines. It’s a wake-up call for tighter controls, no matter who’s in charge.
So, where does this leave Minnesota’s Somali community and the state as a whole? The sudden end of TPS means uncertainty for many who’ve called this place home, often contributing through work and culture. It’s a tough pill to swallow, even if the policy intent is to curb crime.
For Trump’s base, this is likely a red-meat win—tackling fraud and security with no apologies. Yet, one can’t help but wonder if there’s a way to address the bad actors without casting a net over an entire group. Precision, not pageantry, might be the smarter long-term play.
At the end of the day, Minnesota’s challenges—fraud, crime, and now this TPS termination—are a microcosm of broader national debates on immigration and accountability. Trump’s latest move is a lightning rod, sure to spark heated discussion from all sides. Let’s hope the conversation stays grounded in facts, not just feelings, as the state navigates this uncharted territory.
In a powerful display of resolve, President Donald Trump welcomed 17 freed Israeli hostages and their families to the White House on Thursday, marking a significant moment in his administration’s efforts to broker peace in the Middle East, as Just the News reports.
This gathering, held one month after Trump played a key role in securing their release from Hamas, underscored his 20-point plan to end Israel’s prolonged conflict with the group, a deal that also saw Israel release over 1,900 Palestinian prisoners.
These hostages, the last living ones freed by Hamas after a grueling two-year war, represent a hard-fought victory for diplomacy over destruction.
Just a day before the White House event, the former hostages met with high-ranking U.S. officials, including special envoy Steve Witkoff, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Attorney General Pam Bondi, and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.
These discussions likely set the stage for the emotional and symbolic meeting with Trump, where personal stories of survival took center stage over bureaucratic handshakes.
Among those present was Matan Angrest, captured while defending the Nahal Oz outpost, whose ordeal Trump highlighted as a testament to enduring strength.
Trump didn’t mince words, telling Angrest and the group, “You’re not a hostage anymore. Today you’re heroes,” adding, “We love you all, and our country loves you all. You’re amazing people."
Let’s unpack that -- calling them heroes isn’t just rhetoric; it’s a rejection of the victimhood narrative so often peddled by progressive circles, instead honoring individual grit and national pride.
Angrest’s story, in particular, moved Trump, who noted the severe beatings the young defender endured, yet marveled at his recovery with a nod to his robust spirit.
Twins Gali and Ziv Berman, also among the freed, presented Trump with a mezuzah from their home in Kibbutz Kfar Aza, a community devastated by horrific events on Oct. 7, 2023.
Their accompanying letter explained, “This mezuzah was lovingly removed from the door of Gali's room in our home... a community that endured unspeakable horrors,” and thanked Trump for his role in their survival.
That’s not just a gift; it’s a profound gesture, a reminder that faith and resilience outlast even the darkest of times—something the left’s endless focus on grievance often overlooks.
Trump’s broader remarks to the group emphasized inspiration beyond any single community, framing their courage as a universal call to perseverance.
The administration’s facilitation of this release deal, tied to a comprehensive plan to halt the conflict, shows a commitment to results over empty promises -- a refreshing change from years of diplomatic gridlock.
As this White House meeting proves, Trump’s approach prioritizes real outcomes for real people, not just headlines, offering a model of leadership that cuts through the noise of woke posturing with tangible hope.
Could the Bush dynasty be staging a quiet coup to reclaim the Republican Party from Donald Trump’s iron grip?
Whispers are growing that former President George W. Bush and his allies are crafting a strategy to steer the GOP back to their vision once Trump exits the White House, according to recent reports.
Let’s rewind to the public tensions first noted years ago. Back in 2019, Bush didn’t hold back, calling Trump’s foreign policy an “isolationist United States” that was “destabilizing around the world” and “dangerous for the sake of peace,” as reported by John Binder of Breitbart News. Some might say that’s a bold critique from a leader who oversaw wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, where over 4,500 Americans died, including more than 3,500 in combat.
By 2021, Bush’s reservations about Trump remained evident. In a CBS News interview with Norah O’Donnell, he suggested Trump “lacked the ‘humility’ necessary to be an effective leader,” per Breitbart News. That’s a subtle jab that could rile a party now shaped by Trump’s bold persona.
Despite these public remarks, Bush has reportedly opted for silence on current criticisms. Sources indicate he’s steering clear of direct attacks on Trump, even as some former aides grumble about the MAGA movement’s dominance. It’s a calculated move—why stir the pot when you can wait for the right moment?
Behind the scenes, however, plans may already be in motion. Reports hint that Bush and his family are quietly working to influence the GOP’s future direction once Trump’s time is up.
The Daily Mail has stoked speculation with talk of a “shadow Republican Party” poised to emerge when Trump steps aside. This hidden network, with ties to influential figures nationwide, could be the Bush family’s trump card.
An unidentified former Bush official added fuel to the fire, noting Trump “knows that there’s no third term option.” That’s a stark reminder for MAGA supporters hoping for an endless Trump era.
The same official also pointed out that Vice President JD Vance “has a head start” among potential Republican contenders for 2028. Yet, they predicted a “big open field” within the party for that race, hinting the Bush camp sees room to maneuver.
Some notable figures are pushing Bush to take a more active role now. Former RNC Chairman Michael Steele has urged Bush to engage in party matters, claiming he has “a voice that would resonate with a lot more Americans.”
Still, rumors remain just that—unconfirmed speculation. The idea of a Bush resurgence might excite some longing for pre-MAGA days, but it could alienate a base loyal to Trump’s unfiltered style.
The notion of ending the so-called “Bush Exile,” as the Daily Mail describes it, sparks interest. Could a family once at the heart of Republican power reclaim the party from a movement that’s reshaped it?
For now, any Bush family plans stay in the realm of whispers and backroom talks. If they’re indeed plotting a return, it’s a long-term strategy avoiding the limelight.
What’s undeniable is that the Republican Party faces a pivotal moment. Will it hold fast to Trump’s populist surge or revert to the steady conservatism of the Bush years?
Only time will reveal the outcome, but if these reports hold any truth, the battle for the GOP’s identity is just beginning. The clash of old guard and new energy promises a fascinating struggle ahead.
Brace yourself for a Capitol Hill exodus that’s shaking up the political landscape as a staggering 36 House members pack their bags and call it quits ahead of next year’s midterm elections, Fox News reported.
This wave of retirements, spanning both Democrats and Republicans, signals a deeper frustration with the toxic partisanship and gridlock that have come to define Congress,
The retirements kicked off with announcements earlier this year, including from notable figures like moderate Republican Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska, a retired Air Force general who’s battled through nine tough races in his Omaha district over the past decade.
Bacon, who revealed this summer he won’t seek a sixth term, summed up his disillusionment with a blunt confession to Fox News Digital: "The fire wasn’t there anymore."
Let’s unpack that—when a seasoned fighter like Bacon, who’s weathered countless political storms, admits the spark is gone, it’s a glaring red flag about the state of our legislative arena.
He’s not alone; with 21 Republicans and 15 Democrats bowing out, the tally reflects a bipartisan discontent, though the GOP feels the heavier hit as they scramble to defend a slim House majority.
While some departing Democrats, like former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi at 85, carry decades of service, the majority of retirees are surprisingly younger, fed up with the nastiness that’s infected Capitol Hill.
Take Republican Rep. Jodey Arrington of Texas, just 53 and chair of the House Budget Committee, who told Fox News Digital he views public office as "a temporary stint in stewardship, not a career."
That’s a refreshing nod to the Founding Fathers’ vision, but it also stings—when even rising stars see more value outside Congress than in it, what’s left for those still grinding through the partisan muck?
Then there’s Democratic Rep. Jared Golden of Maine, only 43, who penned a raw op-ed in the Bangor Daily News lamenting the "increasing incivility and plain nastiness" pervading politics.
Golden’s words cut deep, especially for those of us who long for a return to principled debate over petty name-calling, but they also highlight how progressive and far-right agendas have turned compromise into a dirty word.
Former Democratic Rep. Annie Kuster of New Hampshire echoed this, noting to Fox News Digital that working across the aisle became "much more difficult" over her 12 years, as moderate GOP allies vanished.
Even major legislative victories, like the passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act this summer—a cornerstone of President Donald Trump’s second-term domestic agenda—haven’t convinced some Republicans to stay.
David Wasserman of The Cook Report pointed out that many GOP members feel they’ve made their mark with this bill and now see "opportunities to be more impactful elsewhere," a sobering take on Congress’s diminishing allure.
Yet, amidst the gloom, Bacon offers a flicker of hope, telling Fox News Digital, "When folks move on, new people move in, and I know there’s good people out there," a reminder that fresh faces might just shake off the partisan cobwebs.
Tragedy struck Utah Valley University (UVU) with the assassination of Charlie Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA (TPUSA), during a campus event, raising serious questions about security failures.
The heartbreaking incident unfolded on Sept. 10 when Kirk was fatally shot while debating attendees at a TPUSA event, only to be followed by stunning revelations of ignored warnings from his security team, the Daily Caller reported.
Days before the tragedy, on Sept. 8, Brian Harpole of Integrity Security Solutions, who led Kirk’s security detail, flagged a critical vulnerability to UVU Police Chief Long.
Harpole specifically warned about student access to a rooftop near the event location at the Sorenson Center building, a spot disturbingly close to where Kirk would be speaking.
He urged either restricted access to the roof or permission for one of his team members to stand guard there, a reasonable request for any high-profile event.
Chief Long’s response, according to Harpole, was a casual assurance of “I got you covered,” a promise that now rings hollow in the wake of disaster.
On the day of the event, the alleged assassin exploited that very rooftop access Harpole had flagged, using it as a vantage point for the attack before escaping by dropping off the roof.
Video footage captured the suspect’s daring getaway, a chilling reminder of how preventable this might have been with basic precautions.
Authorities moved quickly after the shooting, arresting 22-year-old Tyler Robinson early on Sept. 12, accusing him of the fatal attack on Kirk.
Harpole’s frustration with UVU’s police response is palpable, as he shared correspondence with Chief Long that seems to show a tragic dismissal of legitimate concerns.
“On Monday before, this correspondence went to Chief Long. ‘Hello, Chief Long. We received this message today from the student group. There is a student roof access pretty close to where CK will be set up at the Utah Valley,’” Harpole recounted, painting a picture of proactive concern met with inaction.
“He comes back and his last correspondence was, ‘I got you covered.’ What else am I to do when a command level person from an accredited police department says, ‘I’ve got this area’?” Harpole added, a question that cuts to the heart of this preventable loss.
Shawn Ryan, reacting to Harpole’s revelations, couldn’t hide his shock, exclaiming, “Holy shit,” a sentiment many share as the details emerge.
UVU has remained silent, offering no immediate comment when reached by the Daily Caller News Foundation, leaving the public to wonder if accountability will ever surface. Isn’t it time for institutions to prioritize safety over optics, especially when conservative voices like Kirk’s are so often targeted in today’s hyper-polarized climate?
The assassination of Charlie Kirk isn’t just a loss for TPUSA; it’s a stark warning about the dangers of complacency in securing public events. If a simple post at a stairwell, as Harpole suggested, could have saved a life, why wasn’t it done? This tragedy demands answers, not excuses, and conservatives across the nation are watching to see if justice—and change—will follow.
Hold onto your weather maps, folks—Janice Dean, the beloved senior meteorologist and “Fox & Friends” host, is taking a much-needed breather from the Fox News spotlight.
Dean announced on Wednesday via social media that she’s stepping back from both her on-air duties and online presence to focus on health challenges that demand rest and recovery, the New York Post reported.
At 55, Dean has been a fixture at Fox News since 2004, bravely navigating her career while managing multiple sclerosis (MS), a diagnosis she received just a year after joining the network.
Multiple sclerosis, for those unfamiliar, is a tough neurological condition that messes with the brain, spinal cord, and optic nerves, often damaging the protective myelin sheath and disrupting nerve signals.
Symptoms can range from balance issues to muscle spasms and tingling limbs, and while there’s no cure, treatments can help manage the progression—something Dean has faced head-on since her early days of overwhelming fatigue and numbness.
Back then, she chalked up her exhaustion and odd sensations to a grueling work schedule, but persistent problems pushed her to seek answers from doctors and neurologists, leading to her life-changing diagnosis.
Since then, Dean hasn’t just coped—she’s become a fierce advocate for the MS community, openly sharing her struggles and triumphs to inspire others battling this unpredictable disease.
Her latest announcement didn’t detail the specifics of her current health woes or how long she’ll be off the air, but it’s clear she’s prioritizing healing over hustle—a choice any sensible person can respect.
“I’m ok, but I’ve had some health issues that require rest and time to heal,” Dean shared on Facebook, adding a nod to Fox News for their supportive stance during this hiatus.
She also mentioned a recent trip to Rome with her husband, Sean, as a spiritual reset, a reminder that sometimes stepping away is the first step toward coming back stronger.
“The trip to Rome with [husband] Sean was a good place to start healing spiritually, and now I have to get back to feeling healthy and strong,” Dean wrote on Facebook, proving she’s tackling this with both heart and grit.
Now, let’s be real—while the progressive crowd might spin this as just another “personal journey” fluff piece, Dean’s transparency cuts through the noise of today’s over-sanitized, woke culture that often hides real struggles behind hashtags.
Her honesty about needing a break isn’t weakness; it’s a refreshing slap to the face of a society obsessed with non-stop productivity, showing that even high-profile conservatives value family and health over relentless grind.
Dean’s fans have rallied around her, flooding her posts with encouragement, and she’s taken the time to thank them, proving that community—real, not virtual—still matters in a world drowning in digital likes.
Here’s the bottom line: Janice Dean will return, and when she does, expect her to bring the same no-nonsense energy that’s made her a trusted voice at Fox, all while reminding us that strength isn’t just in showing up, but in knowing when to step back.
Imagine tuning into a high-stakes congressional hearing only to learn a lawmaker was texting a notorious figure like Jeffrey Epstein for real-time advice. That’s the bombshell dropped by newly released records from Epstein’s estate, exposing a curious exchange with Democratic Virgin Islands Delegate Stacey Plaskett during a 2019 testimony by former Trump attorney Michael Cohen. It’s a plot twist that raises eyebrows about influence and propriety in the halls of Congress.
These records, unveiled by the House Oversight Committee this month, paint a picture of Epstein messaging Plaskett as she sat on a panel grilling Cohen, with suggestions that appear to shape her line of questioning.
Let’s rewind to February 27, 2019, when Cohen’s testimony gripped the nation with revelations about the Trump Organization. Epstein, watching intently, fired off texts to someone on the panel—context and timestamps, as reviewed by The Washington Post, point squarely to Plaskett. It’s unsettling to think a figure with Epstein’s dark history had a direct line to a sitting delegate during such a pivotal moment.
In one exchange, Epstein nudged Plaskett to dig into “other henchmen” at the Trump Organization, as if scripting her next move. “Hes [sic] opened the door to questions re who are the other henchmen at trump org,” he texted, per the released documents. That’s not just a casual chat—it’s a playbook suggestion from a man whose own scandals were about to explode.
Plaskett’s reply? “Yup. Very aware and waiting my turn,” she shot back, showing she was dialed in and ready to act, according to the records. It’s hard not to wonder if this was just friendly banter or something more coordinated.
When Cohen name-dropped Rhona Graff, a Trump aide, Epstein pounced, texting Plaskett to call her the “keeper of secrets.” Sure enough, Plaskett soon pressed Cohen on Graff by name, mirroring Epstein’s tip. That kind of synchronicity doesn’t exactly scream independent thought.
Beyond the professional nudges, Epstein’s messages veered into the personal, complimenting Plaskett’s outfit and even asking if she was chewing on camera. She clarified it was just a nervous habit, chewing the inside of her mouth since middle school. It’s a quirky detail, but one that underscores how familiar this exchange seemed for a public hearing.
Epstein also inquired how long Plaskett would stick around at the hearing, as if keeping tabs on her schedule. For a man with no official role in Congress, that level of interest feels like overreach. It’s a reminder of how blurred lines can get when powerful figures mingle with elected officials.
Epstein’s ties to the Virgin Islands, where he owned two private islands, add another layer of discomfort to this story. He donated to various politicians, Plaskett included, as reported by Business Insider. That financial link, even if legal, casts a shadow over these interactions.
After reports of these texts surfaced on a recent Friday evening, Plaskett’s office pushed back, claiming she received messages from “staff, constituents and the public at large,” Epstein among them, during the hearing. They framed it as routine communication, nothing out of the ordinary. But let’s be honest—Epstein wasn’t your average constituent dropping a friendly note.
Her team also leaned on her background as a former prosecutor, emphasizing her work on sexual assault and trafficking cases. They insisted she welcomes any information to uncover truth. That’s a noble stance, but it sidesteps why someone with Epstein’s baggage was a go-to source during a live hearing.
Then there’s the messy aftermath of Epstein’s 2019 arrest on federal sex-trafficking charges. Plaskett’s office initially resisted returning his campaign contributions, only relenting under public pressure. It’s a flip-flop that doesn’t inspire confidence in where her priorities lie.
In 2023, Plaskett found herself named in a lawsuit by six Epstein accusers, alleging Virgin Islands officials either benefited from or enabled his trafficking network. That suit was dismissed with prejudice earlier this year, closing the legal chapter. Still, the association lingers like a bad aftertaste.
What’s the takeaway from this tangled web? These texts reveal a troubling coziness between a lawmaker and a man whose crimes would soon shock the world, all while she questioned a key witness on national television. It’s not illegal, but it’s a stark reminder that optics matter in public service.
Conservative voices often rail against the progressive elite for questionable alliances, and this incident fuels that fire without needing to exaggerate. Plaskett may have had pure intentions, but leaning on Epstein’s input—however minor—during a hearing is a misstep that undermines trust. In an era where accountability is demanded, this is a story that deserves scrutiny, not a shrug.
Hold onto your hats, folks—Indiana’s Republican-dominated state Senate just threw a curveball by refusing to redraw congressional maps, even with President Donald Trump breathing down their necks.
This bombshell decision, announced on Friday, means the Hoosier State won’t be reshuffling its districts before the 2026 midterm elections, despite intense White House lobbying, the New York Post reported.
The saga kicked off months ago when pressure started mounting from Trump and his team, pushing Indiana lawmakers to craft new maps that would tilt heavily in favor of Republicans for the upcoming congressional races.
Vice President JD Vance even made two trips to Indianapolis to twist some arms, while legislative leaders got a personal sit-down with Trump in the Oval Office.
Despite holding a supermajority in both chambers, Indiana Republicans—whose congressional delegation currently stands at seven to two over Democrats—found themselves split on the issue.
Some party members argue that with Democratic states sporting near-total blue delegations, Indiana should play hardball and aim for an all-Republican map, while others worry about the political fallout or question the ethics of such a move.
Governor Mike Braun, a fellow Republican, tried to force the issue last month by calling for a special session to get a vote on new districts.
Instead of a special session, lawmakers opted for an unusual move—starting the 2026 regular session early in December—but that plan has now been scrapped by the Senate.
Senate President Pro Tem Rodric Bray dropped the hammer on Friday, declaring that his caucus simply doesn’t have the votes to push redistricting through, with more than 15 of the 40 Republican senators standing in opposition.
“Over the last several months, Senate Republicans have given very serious and thoughtful consideration to the concept of redrawing our state’s congressional maps,” Bray stated. “Today, I’m announcing there are not enough votes to move that idea forward, and the Senate will not reconvene in December.”
Well, there you have it—Bray’s statement is a polite but firm slap to the administration’s ambitions, signaling that even in a red state like Indiana, not every Republican is ready to march lockstep with a gerrymandering agenda that could alienate voters.
State Sen. Kyle Walker, another Republican, echoed this sentiment on Thursday, noting that “the overwhelming majority of his constituents are against” redistricting, which guided his decision to oppose it. Talk about listening to the folks back home—Walker’s stance shows that grassroots voices can still cut through the noise of D.C. power plays.
While the Indiana House reportedly has the votes to support new maps, it remains uncertain if they’ll even convene in December without the Senate on board, further dimming the prospects of a redraw before the early February filing deadline for congressional races.
Across the country, the stakes are high—Democrats need just three seats to flip control of the U.S. House, and redistricting battles are heating up in states like Texas, Missouri, North Carolina, and Ohio on the Republican side, while California and Virginia see Democratic efforts to redraw lines.
Back in Indiana, this Senate decision might just be the final nail in the coffin for now, as U.S. Rep. Andre Carson, a Democrat from Indianapolis, celebrated the news, suggesting it’s game over for redistricting—at least until the political winds shift again. For conservatives who value fair play over short-term gains, this pause might be a quiet victory against overreach, even if it frustrates some in the party’s upper echelons.
In a heartbreaking turn of events, a 32-year-old Chinese migrant met a grim fate while in ICE custody, raising urgent questions about the treatment of those detained by the federal government.
The story of Chaofeng Ge, found dead in a Pennsylvania detention center, has ignited a firestorm of concern over facility conditions and government transparency, as his family battles for answers through a lawsuit against ICE and Kristi Noem's Department of Homeland Security, as the Daily Mail reports.
Ge, who had entered the U.S. without authorization, was first intercepted by Border Patrol agents near Tecate, California, back in November 2023, charged with inadmissibility for lacking proper entry documentation.
By January 2024, Ge faced another arrest in Lower Paxton Township, Pennsylvania, accused of unauthorized access to someone else’s device, a charge to which he later pleaded guilty.
On July 31, 2024, he received a sentence of six to twelve months, with credit for time served, but his story took a darker turn just days later.
Tragically, on Aug. 5, 2024, Ge was discovered hanging in a shower stall at Moshannon Valley Processing Center at 5:20 a.m., with staff unable to revive him despite efforts ending 40 minutes later.
Official complaints paint a chilling picture: Ge was found with his hands and legs tied behind his back, a detail that fuels suspicion about how such a death could occur under supervision.
His family calls the circumstances mysterious, pointing to alleged isolation due to language barriers -- Ge spoke Mandarin, but staff reportedly made no effort to communicate or provide mental health support.
While some might scream “systemic failure” in a rush to push a progressive narrative, one must ask why basic decency couldn’t bridge a language gap in a taxpayer-funded facility.
Yanfeng Ge, Chaofeng’s brother, has taken legal action, suing ICE and DHS for stonewalling requests for records about the death, despite a Freedom of Information request filed on Sept. 9, 2024.
Yanfeng’s frustration is raw as he stated, “There is still so much left unknown about the circumstances of his death.”
That’s a fair grievance -- when a life ends in custody, shouldn’t the government prioritize clarity over bureaucratic dodging?
ICE Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin noted that “all in-custody deaths are tragic, taken seriously, and are thoroughly investigated by law enforcement,” but where’s the tangible follow-through for the Ge family?
No outreach from GEO Group, the private operator of the detention center, and no records released yet -- hard not to see this as a sidestep of accountability rather than a commitment to transparency.
While oversight is crucial, especially in facilities holding unauthorized migrants, this case begs the question: if the system can’t protect or even explain a death in custody, what’s the point of all the tough-on-borders rhetoric?