President Donald Trump has achieved a major breakthrough in achieving peace between Israel and Gaza.
On Friday, the terrorist organization Hamas announced that they had accepted major portions of Trump's peace proposal. Most importantly, Hamas agreed to release the remaining 48 hostages, around 20 of them believed to be alive.
Hamas has also supposedly agreed to give up power and disarm in return for Israel withdrawing the IDF in stages from the Gaza strip.
However, not everything is set in stone yet as Egypt and Qatar, who are acting as intermediaries, have confirmed that there are still minor issues that need further negotiation.
Minor details and negotiations aside, this is the closest that Israel and Hamas have come to agreeing on a peace deal since this devastating war started on October 7th, 2023, when Hamas launched a brutal terror attack.
This announcement of Hamas accepting the major points in Trump's peace deal represents a giant victory for Trump's international diplomacy and a delivery on his promise to bring an end to this war.
Of course, there is still a lot of pressure on Hamas, as Israel has accepted the deal despite the major concessions they were forced to make. The international community has also rallied behind this agreement.
Trump took to Truth Social, warning Hamas, "An Agreement must be reached with Hamas by Sunday Evening at SIX (6) P.M., Washington, D.C. time. Every Country has signed on! If this LAST CHANCE agreement is not reached, all HELL, like no one has ever seen before, will break out against Hamas. THERE WILL BE PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST ONE WAY OR THE OTHER."
Essentially, Hamas has absolutely no choice and this peace deal represents both the best deal they can get and a deal that they really don't deserve.
Hamas's barbaric terrorism is well documented, and they really should be annihilated, but concerns about innocents caught in the crossfire are being weighed heavily.
The people of Gaza have been savaged by this war between Israel and Hamas and the death toll, though greatly exaggerated by Hamas, is undoubtedly brutal. Furthermore, millions are suffering famine and deprivation as a result of the blockade.
Trump has forced Israel to make painful concessions to achieve peace, but if Hamas backs out, total annihilation and the deaths of more innocents will undoubtedly follow.
Some have complained that this deal still favors Israel too strongly but that ignores the reality that Israel holds all the cards in this situation. It is Hamas who has been holding the people of Gaza hostage as human shields for the past two years.
Trump seems confident that common sense will win out in the end even as Sunday's deadline rapidly approaches. Should this go off without a hitch, it will represent a giant accomplishment for the Trump administration.
It was under a year ago that Democrats screeched about Trump's supposed inability to navigate international diplomacy even as former President Joe Biden watched this devastating war rage with no significant action to end it.
Hopefully, wrapping up the war in Gaza will allow the Trump administration to focus on the brutal war between Russia and Ukraine that has also raged on for far too long.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) gave a dire warning to her fellow Democrats about what she thinks will happen if they give in to Republicans to end a government shutdown without having their demands for $1 trillion in new spending on healthcare met, saying on MSNBC that "there are going to be people that are going to die" without the spending.
Warren threw out a litany of scenarios that she believes would happen under the Republicans' spending plan, which the party called a "clean continuing resolution" that would maintain current spending levels.
She said,
They’re trying to find anything to talk about around the shutdown, to blame it on Democrats so they don’t have to talk about the two thirds of seniors who are in nursing homes, a lot of them with serious health problems, half of them with Alzheimer’s, who can just be pushed out on the street under the Republican bill.
They don’t want to talk about those brand new babies and their mamas who will lose access to health care. They do not want to talk about your neighbor who counts on a home health aide, and who counts on having a wheelchair in order to try to live independently and can lose all of that.
They don’t want to talk about the tens of millions of families who are receiving notices this month saying, here’s where your health care premiums were already too high. Here’s where they’re going to be, thanks to the Republicans.
In reality, Democrats are demanding that $1 trillion in cuts enacted in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act in July, which was done as a budget reconciliation without Democrat support, be reversed.
The cuts from the OBBBA prevented illegal immigrant asylees and parolees from getting health care subsidies and Medicaid, which was happening before that bill was passed. This is what Republicans mean when they say that Democrats are demanding that illegal immigrants get health care, and they are not wrong about that--it would happen if Democrats get what they want.
Because of some delays, some of the cuts from the OBBBA have only taken effect on October 1, which is why Democrats are claiming that they are new cuts (they are not).
Of course, Democrats in their usual fashion have tried to muddy the waters enough that the average American voter has a hard time understanding the issue, since they don't want to be blamed for shutting down the government over their demands, which are unreasonable for a party out of power.
Warren continued,
They’re going to be people who are going to have to make decisions about whether to make rent or pay for health insurance. They’re going to be people who are just going to let their health insurance go. They’re going to be people who are going to die because of these decisions. And that more than anything else, the Republicans don’t want to talk about. They rather shut down the government than help Americans who are just trying to get their costs under control. I think that is a fight worth fighting, and the Democrats are organized to do it right now.
Warren is not wrong that costs have gone up for some people under the OBBBA. It's possible that it could result in someone's death if they can't get treatment because they can't afford health insurance.
This has been a problem long before the OBBBA. It's an ongoing debate whether health care should be paid for by private citizens and businesses, or provided by the government at a huge cost in taxes. The current system is pretty generous in providing for those in need, but won't satisfy those who think health care is a universal right.
The bottom line here is that Democrats are trying to advance their agenda despite having very little power--a result of the will of the people in the last election. We will see who blinks first, but right now it doesn't look like either side is willing to budge an inch.
President Donald Trump put forward a 20-point plan for peace in Gaza that has been approved by not only the Muslim and Arab world, but the Palestinian Authority, with the only holdout being Hamas.
The plan would free all remaining Israeli hostages, disarm Hamas and remove it from power in Gaza, and even allow a Palestinian State if Hamas and the Palestinian Authority fulfill conditions it sets.
If Hamas does not agree to the plan, it will find itself without much if any support in the region and Israel will continue to fight against it in Gaza.
Trump spent much of his time at the UN General Assembly meeting last week gathering support for the plan.
After he held a joint press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday, the foreign ministers of Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the UAE, Indonesia, Pakistan, Türkiye, Qatar, and Egypt released a joint statement that affirmed Trump's efforts and pledged their support in implementing the plan.
Turkey and the Palestinian Authority, both of which opposed Trump's peace plans previously, also indicated that they were on board with the plan.
So far, Hamas has said it rejected the demand for it to disarm, but has not responded to the plan as a whole.
Trump would like to expand the Abraham Accords to develop Gaza into a hub of trade and commerce similar to Dubai, if investors get involved in the region.
After two-plus years of bombardment from Israel, the area will need a lot of rebuilding.
According to Axios, the peace plan grew out of a failed attack by Israel on Doha, Qatar in order to assassinate Hamas leaders there.
The attack drew outrage from the Arab world at first, but Trump advisors Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff noticed the unity among the Arab nations and wondered if that could turn into an impetus for ending the war.
At a summit in New York the week before the UN General Assembly meeting, the Arab nations slammed Israel, but their ire cooled when Witkoff presented the peace plan.
The next step was for Israel to get on board. After Netanyahu balked at first, Trump reportedly told him to "take it or leave it," but if he didn't take it, he would lose U.S. support for the war.
The details of the agreement are not yet set in stone, but Israel agreed to it with a few changes and now it's up to Hamas to do the same.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Gavin Newsom, California's far-left Democrat governor, is known to have presidential aspirations.
If he chooses that path, one of issues on which he will face a grilling will be economics.
And a new study has revealed it won't look good.
It's because since he imposed a $20-an-hour minimum wage for fast food workers in his state, California has lost close to 20,000 such jobs.
"That's nearly 25% of the country's fast-food job losses during that same period, according to an analysis of quarterly data released this month from the Bureau of Labor Statistics," charged a report in the Washington Examiner.
"These grim statistics should be a wake-up call for Newsom and other policymakers pushing for drastic wage hikes that will cause unintended consequences," said Rebekah Paxton, if the Employment Policies Institute.
The Examiner report noted Newsom "was all smiles two years ago when he signed the FAST Recovery Act, creating a $20 minimum wage for fast-food workers in his state. He called the legislation a win-win-win that would benefit restaurant owners, their employees, and customers alike."
But it's actually left behind "big losses."
Besides job losses, there have been staff cuts, huge menu price increases and a turn to automation, the report said.
"California made national headlines when two large Pizza Hut franchises laid off more than 1,200 in-house delivery drivers to cut costs, while others, such as Mod Pizza and Foster's Freeze, decided to close up shop entirely," the report noted.
Paxton said, "Newsom's $20 wage has turned out to be nothing more than a boost to his own ego at the expense of fast food workers. His consistent claim that the law is a 'win' is out of touch with reality, and lawmakers looking to mirror his job-crushing policies should think twice."
Further, the analysis found even workers who kept working lost.
"The law has cost nontipped restaurant workers 250 hours of work annually, according to the EPI analysis, which represents $4,000 in lost income under the state's previous minimum wage for fast-food workers."
And, according to the American Cornerstone Institute, it's hit small businesses hardest.
"Unlike their multinational competitors, small businesses have a tougher time absorbing the increased costs of labor, leading to further consolidation of capital in the hands of the largest corporations. In the same manner, a state-wide minimum wage doesn't make sense when applied uniformly across a state as big as California. The costs of living in somewhere like San Francisco, for example, are much higher than in the rural parts of the state, where one can live much more affordably. To force the businesses in both areas to adhere to the same wage rates does not make sense and exerts profound distortions on local economies."
Then there's the damage to consumers, who are paying prices 13% higher because of Newsom.
University officials in the state have challenged the findings, saying fast-food employment hasn't fallen, work hours weren't changed and prices went up only 2.1%.
Whistleblower and President of the Air Marshal Association John Casaretti has called on President Donald Trump and Congress to separate the Federal Air Marshal Service (FAMS) from the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) in order to better protect air travelers from terrorist attacks, according to Breitbart.
“Everything the air marshals did around 2007 onwards was all through the lens of the TSA bureaucracy. TSA only cares about screeners,” Casaretti said. “They don’t have any deep experience with law enforcement. Unfortunately, the air marshals were listening to them. All of the policies were made by them, and bad policy after bad policy ensued. When it came to intelligence, when it came to hiring, standards were lowered.”
He continued, “They made the Air Marshal Service a career path for TSA screeners, so incredibly, where we started out as these high-speed anti-terrorism agents … to be a career path for TSA airport screeners. It actually blows my mind to this day, and it really needs to be changed.”
Casaretti spoke to Matthew Boyle about his recent Breitbart News op-ed titled “It’s Time to Reset the Federal Air Marshal Service,” which addressed his part in the shutdown of the Quiet Skies program in June
His whistleblowing about the program was a key reason for its shutdown, going all the way back to 2018.
The program had undercover air marshals “following ordinary U.S. citizens not suspected of a crime or on any terrorist watch list and collecting extensive information about their movements and behavior.”
One of the targets of surveillance was then-presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard, who is now DNI director handling national intelligence.
According to DHS, Quiet Skies "since its existence has failed to stop a single terrorist attack while costing US taxpayers $200 million a year.”
“The program, under the guise of ‘national security,’ was used to target political opponents and benefit political allies,” DHS stated in a press release.
“The American public would be better served if these [air marshals] were instead assigned to airport screening and check-in areas so that active shooter events can be swiftly ended, and violations of federal crimes can be properly and consistently addressed,” Casaretti argued.
He went on to say that the risk of terrorism “is greater right now than it ever has been before, certainly greater than pre-9/11. Every intel analyst with eyes on this is saying, ‘Hey, we’re in trouble. Something’s going to happen.’ And I’m trying to sound the alarm here because we’ve been saying this, as far as something’s going to happen, and why the air marshals need to improve for years."
Legislation to separate FAMS and TSA is in the beginning stages in both the House and Senate, with language having been drawn up, but it is still in legislative review before it can be introduced to the floor.
That means it's probably going to be a while before anything can happen.
Meanwhile, the risk of an incident is great, and everyone knows it.
Vice President J.D. Vance said Sunday on Fox News that Russia needs to "wake up and accept reality" that it can't win the war on Ukraine.
“We want peace here,” Vance said Sunday on Fox News. “We have been actively pursuing peace from the very beginning of the administration, but the Russians have got to wake up and accept reality here.”
Vance may have been alluding to comments made last week by President Donald Trump in which he said he thought Ukraine could actually win the war and regain all of its territory, even Crimea which has been under Russian control since 2014.
“After getting to know and fully understand the Ukraine/Russia Military and Economic situation and, after seeing the Economic trouble it is causing Russia, I think Ukraine, with the support of the European Union, is in a position to fight and WIN all of Ukraine back in its original form,” Trump posted on his Truth Social platform Tuesday.
This messaging is different from what Trump and Vance have said in the past, as far as whether Ukraine could win back Crimea.
He had previously said that territorial concessions by Ukraine would have to be part of any peace agreement.
More than 250,000 Russian soldiers have died since the war began two-and-a-half years ago in February 2022. Ukraine's military losses are estimated at 60,000 to 100,000, with civilian losses numbering more than 14,000.
These estimates date back to June, so they are undoubtedly higher now.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has refused to meet with the U.S. about the war in recent months.
“A lot of people are dying,” Vance said. “They don’t have a lot to show for it. How many more people are they willing to lose? How many more people are they willing to kill for very little, if any, gain in the military advantage on the ground there?”
No doubt, Putin's pride is preventing him from throwing in the towel and making a peace deal.
Even a deal that resets things back to how they were before the war would be seen as a defeat for him.
Still, Vance's question has got to be eating at Putin. As bad as things are, they could get a lot worse for Russia if Europe and the U.S. continue to back Ukraine as they have been doing all along.
Billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk's name appeared in the latest batch of documents from the estate of convicted human trafficker Jeffrey Epstein.
Democrats on the House Oversight Committee released the latest batch of documents from the Epstein estate and Musk's name was one of a few high-profile names that were mentioned. Of course, there were more names that went unreleased, but Democrats clearly saw it as a political opportunity to highlight Musk's name.
Alongside Musk, billionaire Peter Thiel, the CEO of data mining company Palantir, was also mentioned as having a meeting scheduled with Epstein that never took place.
Oversight spokesperson Sara Guerrero stated, "It should be clear to every American that Jeffrey Epstein was friends with some of the most powerful and wealthiest men in the world. Every new document produced provides new information as we work to bring justice for the survivors and victims."
It's well known that Epstein knew anyone who was anyone, the real question is who was actually connected to Epstein's sordid crimes. In that sense, these new documents do little to explain what kind of connection existed between Musk, Thiel, and Epstein.
Over the past decade, it's become apparent that Epstein was an aggressive networker who did everything in his power to build relationships with other rich and powerful individuals.
Epstein;s connections to President Donald Trump are well known as the two often crossed paths in New York's elite circles. Democrats have often pointed to this fact to try and establish some kind of deeper connection.
Of course, Epstein and Trump had a falling out in 2004 over alleged bad behavior on the part of Epstein. So a connection between Epstein and another powerful figure doesn't tell that much on its own.
The new files show that Musk was scheduled to visit Epstein’s island in December 2014. Peter Thiel had a meeting scheduled in 2019. Most surprisingly, Stephen Bannon, a key Trump ally, was set to meet with Epstein in 2017.
However, the files had little to offer aside from those scheduled meetings. It's looking like this release was a publicity stunt to get these names associated with Epstein in a sensational news cycle.
Republicans on the House Oversight Committee blasted Democrats for selectively releasing names and withholding the names of Democrat officials who were mentioned in the Epstein files.
A spokesperson stated, "They are intentionally withholding documents that contain names of Democrat officials, and the information they released today is old news. We are focused on delivering transparency and accountability for the survivors, and will release documents in full."
It isn't even clear if Elon Musk actually met with Epstein in 2014, and seeing as how Democrats didn't release that information, it seems likely that planned meeting fell through.
Democrats are desperately trying to pin Epstein on the GOP despite the fact that Epstein's strongest relationships were with Democrats like former President Bill Clinton. Democrats spent the better part of two decades covering that relationship up.
It was Trump who knew that Epstein was no good for business decades ago but Democrats are doing everything in their power to cover that inconvenient fact up.
An intense conversation between President Donald Trump and First Lady Melania Trump was reportedly about the escalator incident at the U.N. summit.
Cameras caught the president pointing his finger at the first lady, who responded by shaking her head during the exchange, filmed through the windows of Marine One as it landed at the White House.
It took next to no time for the mainstream media to take these images and run with them as signs that Donald and Melania are at each other's throats, an accusation that has been floated for the past decade despite the ironclad nature of the couple's relationship.
However, lipreading experts have confirmed that the couple was having an animated conversation about the viral escalator incident at U.N. headquarters in Manhattan the day before.
Clearly, neither Donald nor Melania was happy about the incident, which Trump has blamed on the U.N., along with a series of other incidents that Trump suspects were intentional acts of sabotage to make him look bad.
Forensic lip reader Jeremy Freeman told The Daily Mail that, "From my interpretation, I don’t think Donald Trump was having a go at Melania Trump — but at the shenanigans at the U.N."
Trump was furious about the incident with the escalator, which stopped suddenly and could have caused a disastrous situation for both the president and his wife, as well as the entourage.
Trump later posted to social media that, "It’s amazing that Melania and I didn’t fall forward onto the sharp edges of these steel steps, face first. It was only that we were each holding the handrail tightly or, it would have been a disaster."
Another lip reader, Nicola Hickling, believes that Donald Trump was being protective of Melania in the moment caught on the helicopter. She claimed that Trump was saying, "I can’t forgive them, they tried to hurt you," in the moment caught as Marine One was landing.
Trump is famously protective of Melania Trump, and it's understandable that he would be absolutely furious if some staffer at the U.N. had gotten her hurt by suddenly shutting down an escalator.
Trump cited a report from The Times of London that U.N. staffers had been joking about switching off the escalator in order to make Trump walk to the hall to give his speech.
This prompted Trump to throw accusations of deliberate sabotage at the U.N., which is no friend of the Trump family. Trump's speech at the U.N. was essentially a diatribe of Trump tearing into the U.N. for being an ineffective and corrupt organization.
While the Trump's relationship appears to be as strong as ever, Trump's relationship with the U.N. has never been worse. Trump has long looked at the U.N. as a corrupt and ineffective organization that leeches off American financial support, and recent events have confirmed those views.
Trump ripped into the U.N.'s general assembly, citing how the organization and its many participating nations, mostly from Europe, had failed to assist the U.S. in any meaningful foreign policy.
While Trump has been putting in overtime achieving peace deals and ending international conflicts, the U.N. has done nothing but spend money.
The U.N. is a useless organization, and it's long past time that American dollars stop facilitating the organization that is comprised of ungrateful countries that hate America.
No matter how hard one tries, it's never really possible to erase something from the internet.
The latest example: footage of would-be President Donald Trump assassin Thomas Crooks dry-firing a weapon in his bedroom that quickly disappeared off the internet after he was killed by a Secret Service sniper were unearthed and posted on Candace Owens's podcast on Wednesday.
Cell phone video showed a handgun lying neatly atop Crooks's made bed, then progresses to him picking it up and taking a tactical stance as he dry-fires it at a real or imaginary target off-camera.
A second, shorter video showed Crooks again dry-firing the weapon, this time looking even more menacing than before.
Crooks, 20, shot President Donald Trump in the ear during a Butler, Pennsylvania, campaign rally in August 2024.
The bullet was intended to kill Trump, but only grazed his ear when he turned his head at the last minute.
Crooks's digital footprint showed that he had been obsessed with assassinations, mass shootings, guns, and explosives.
As far back as 2019 when he was only about 15 years old, he made violent comments on YouTube videos.
Despite frequent internet searches on these topics and his comments, Crooks had not come to the attention of the FBI or other law enforcement before the assassination attempt.
Based on this information, it seems as though Crooks's motive was infamy or the ability to accomplish an assassination of his own, not any particular ill will toward Trump.
His violent comment in 2019 pertained to chopping the heads off anti-Trump Democrats, which makes one wonder why he would target Trump at all.
It may have just been a case of opportunity knocking when Trump decided to do a rally in Butler, near Crooks' home outside Pittsburgh.
The chance to act on his obsession was just too tempting to pass up, I guess.
Given that he is dead, we may never know what motivated him to try killing Trump.
As the five-year deadline approaches, the Justice Department appears ready to pursue a perjury indictment against former FBI Director James Comey for his congressional testimony, Fox News reported.
The case revolves around whether Comey misled lawmakers in September 2020 about his management of the FBI's probe into Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election, with a grand jury in Virginia now reviewing the matter for potential charges.
Back in 2016, the FBI opened an investigation into possible Russian interference in the U.S. presidential election, an effort that drew sharp scrutiny for its handling under Comey's leadership.
That probe, known internally as Crossfire Hurricane, examined alleged ties between Donald Trump's campaign and Russia, setting off years of political tension.
Trump, who won the election, repeatedly denounced the inquiry as a "Russia hoax" and a "rigged witch hunt" that harmed America's relations with Russia.
From his perspective, figures like Comey and former CIA Director John Brennan had politicized intelligence agencies to target his presidency, a claim that resonated with many skeptical of bureaucratic overreach.
In May 2017, Trump fired Comey, later stating he had done the country "a great service" by removing him from the FBI helm.
Trump's critics saw the dismissal as obstruction, but supporters viewed it as a necessary step to restore trust in law enforcement institutions long plagued by perceived biases.
The investigation then shifted to special counsel Robert Mueller, who after extensive review found no sufficient evidence of criminal conspiracy between Trump's campaign and Russia.
During Trump's first term, the Justice Department tapped special counsel John Durham to examine potential FBI mishandling in the Crossfire Hurricane operation.
Durham's findings led to charges against three lower-level FBI officials and highlighted serious bureau errors, though he concluded no illegal actions by top leaders like Comey.
Yet, those revelations fueled ongoing debates about accountability, reminding us that even well-intentioned probes can veer into problematic territory without proper oversight.
Fast forward to Sept. 30, 2020, when Comey testified before Congress about his role in the 2016 Russia investigation, statements now at the heart of the perjury allegations.
The U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Virginia is overseeing the current case, with the statute of limitations expiring next Tuesday under federal law's five-year window.
DOJ officials are nearing a decision on prosecution, as a source noted, with uncertainty lingering over which specific parts of Comey's testimony might trigger charges.
Trump has lambasted Comey for years, accusing him of dishonesty in handling the probe and related issues.
"I think they're very dishonest people. I think they're crooked as hell," Trump said in July about Comey and Brennan. "And maybe they have to pay a price for that."
Such pointed remarks, while blunt, underscore a broader conservative frustration with what many see as selective enforcement in Washington, where accountability often seems reserved for the politically inconvenient.