The U.S. Supreme Court is diving into a constitutional showdown over former President Donald Trump’s bold move to oust a Federal Trade Commission member.
This case, set for arguments on Monday, centers on Trump’s dismissal of FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter, a Democrat, before her term was due to end in 2029, challenging decades of precedent on presidential power over independent agencies.
Let’s rewind to March, when Trump decided to give Slaughter the boot, along with another Democrat on the FTC, citing policy differences rather than the legally required “cause” like inefficiency or malfeasance.
A 1914 law clearly states that FTC commissioners can only be removed for specific reasons, not just because a president dislikes their stance on Big Tech or corporate mergers.
Independent agencies like the FTC, National Labor Relations Board, and others have long enjoyed tenure protections, shielding their heads from political whims— a principle upheld since the 1935 Humphrey’s Executor v. United States ruling.
That precedent declared the FTC’s role more legislative and judicial than purely executive, justifying restrictions on presidential removal power, but Trump’s team argues it’s time to rethink that outdated carve-out.
The Justice Department, defending Trump’s action, leans on the “unitary executive” theory, claiming the president should have unchecked authority over the executive branch, including firing agency heads at will.
They argue the modern FTC wields massive executive power, far beyond what was envisioned in 1935, making tenure protections an unconstitutional handcuff on presidential control.
Slaughter’s legal team counters that the constitutionality of removal limits doesn’t hinge on the scope of an agency’s authority— a point worth chewing on before tossing out nearly 90 years of settled law.
Washington-based U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan blocked the dismissal in July, rejecting Trump’s claim that tenure protections infringe on his power, a decision later upheld 2-1 by the D.C. Circuit in September.
Yet, the Supreme Court, in a split decision with its liberal justices dissenting, allowed Slaughter’s removal to stand temporarily while agreeing to hear the case— a move that hints at where the 6-3 conservative majority might lean.
Critics, including Democratic senators and antimonopoly advocates, have cried foul, suggesting Trump’s firings aimed to silence dissent within the FTC against corporate giants— a charge that raises eyebrows about executive overreach.
This isn’t just about one commissioner; it’s a test of whether the Humphrey’s Executor precedent, already narrowed in recent decades, will survive or crumble under a court skeptical of bureaucratic insulation.
A related case on Trump’s attempt to remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, set for arguments on January 21, shows this battle over presidential power isn’t a one-off— it’s a pattern.
With a ruling expected by June, the nation watches as the Supreme Court weighs whether to uphold congressional safeguards or hand presidents a sharper tool to shape agencies, for better or worse. Let’s hope the balance of power doesn’t tip too far from the Constitution’s intent.
President Donald Trump just scored a historic win as the first-ever recipient of the FIFA Peace Prize!
The New York Post reported that on Friday, Trump was honored for his remarkable efforts in fostering global unity during a prestigious ceremony ahead of the 2026 World Cup draw in Washington, D.C.
The award, presented by FIFA President Gianni Infantino, recognized Trump’s “exceptional and extraordinary actions” in promoting harmony worldwide, a nod to his tireless work on the international stage.
It’s a refreshing change to see a leader celebrated for bridging divides rather than pandering to divisive cultural trends. Let’s hope this sets a precedent over the usual progressive posturing.
During the event, Infantino handed Trump a gold medal, which the president proudly placed around his own neck, along with a striking gold trophy engraved with his name and depicting hands holding up the world. The symbolism couldn’t be clearer—Trump as a unifying force in a fractured era.
The FIFA Peace Prize, officially titled “FIFA Peace Prize – Football Unites the World,” was introduced just last month as an annual honor by soccer’s global governing body.
Trump, long known to share a rapport with Infantino, was widely tipped to be the inaugural winner, despite claiming he had no official heads-up about the accolade.
“I don’t know that I’m getting it. I haven’t been officially noticed,” Trump remarked, adding a touch of humility before accepting the honor. Such candidness cuts through the polished nonsense we often hear from leaders dodging accountability.
The ceremony drew a notable crowd, including Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum, though they stayed seated while Trump danced to a lively rendition of “YMCA.” It’s a small but telling moment—Trump’s energy stands in contrast to the stoic detachment of some counterparts.
Trump didn’t shy away from making waves, using his platform to suggest American football needs a rebrand since soccer truly embodies the term “football” globally.
“This is football – there is no question,” he declared with characteristic boldness. It’s a quirky but pointed jab at cultural disconnects that often go unchallenged.
Behind the lighthearted moments, Trump emphasized the gravity of his mission, tying the award to his broader efforts to end conflicts and protect lives. It’s a reminder that beneath the showmanship, there’s a focus on tangible results over empty virtue signaling.
Interestingly, Infantino has previously argued that Trump deserved the Nobel Peace Prize for brokering a cease-fire in Gaza, though that honor went to Venezuelan opposition leader Maria Corina Machado this year. Trump, for his part, remains unfazed, focusing on his record of settling multiple conflicts—eight, by his count.
Questions arose about whether accepting the FIFA Peace Prize aligns with Trump’s recent hardline stance on Venezuelan drug trafficking, including threats to strike land-based operators and noting risks to Colombian counterparts.
Trump insisted there’s no conflict, framing his actions as life-saving rather than contradictory. It’s a tough balance, but prioritizing security isn’t the same as abandoning peace.
Since early September 2025, the U.S. military has targeted numerous vessels allegedly involved in drug trafficking off Venezuela and Colombia, with significant casualties reported. Critics might seize on this to question the “peace” narrative, but defending national interests against criminal networks is hardly warmongering.
Trump’s acceptance speech underscored his commitment to global stability, a stark contrast to the chaos often fueled by unchecked progressive policies. “The world is a safer place now,” he asserted with conviction. That’s the kind of leadership that cuts through the noise of endless cultural debates.
The FIFA Peace Prize isn’t just a trophy—it’s a recognition of Trump’s unapologetic approach to tackling the world’s toughest issues, from wars to crime. While some may scoff at the optics, dismissing this as mere pageantry ignores the real impact of his negotiations and resolve.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem just dropped a bombshell that’s reshaping America’s borders.
The Daily Caller reported that on Thursday, Noem unveiled a bold expansion of travel restrictions, barring entry from more than 30 countries as part of the Trump administration’s push to safeguard national security and public safety.
Earlier this year, in June, President Donald Trump signed a proclamation restricting entry from a dozen nations, including Afghanistan, Iran, Libya, and Somalia, citing inadequate security protocols and heightened terrorism risks in those regions.
Other countries on that initial list, such as Haiti, Yemen, and Sudan, were flagged for similar concerns about unstable governance and vetting challenges.
The administration argued these measures were necessary to pressure foreign governments into stepping up their cooperation on security matters, ensuring travelers don’t pose a threat to American soil.
Fast forward to Noem’s latest announcement, and the list of restricted countries has ballooned to over 30, though she kept the precise figure under wraps.
“I won’t be specific on the number, but it’s over 30. And the President is continuing to evaluate countries,” Noem told host Laura Ingraham on “The Ingraham Angle.”
Well, that’s a lot of nations on the no-fly list, and while clarity is lacking, it’s clear the administration isn’t playing around when it comes to perceived risks—though some might wonder if blanket bans are the sharpest tool in the shed.
Noem didn’t mince words when explaining the rationale, pointing to governance issues in the affected countries as a core concern.
“Listen, if they don’t have a stable government there, if they don’t have a country that can sustain itself and tell us who those individuals are and help us vet them, why should we allow people from that country to come here to the United States?” she pressed on “The Ingraham Angle.”
Her point hits a nerve—why take chances on unverified travelers when the stakes are so high?—yet critics might argue this approach risks painting entire populations with too broad a brush.
The Trump administration doubled down on the urgency of these restrictions by highlighting recent violent incidents tied to individuals from high-risk areas.
One case involved Mohamed Sabry Soliman, an unauthorized migrant who entered during the prior administration and was later arrested for attacking a pro-Israel demonstration in Boulder, Colorado.
Another chilling event occurred less than two weeks before that, when 31-year-old Elias Rodriguez fatally shot two Israeli embassy staffers in Washington, D.C., shouting political slogans as he was apprehended—incidents like these fuel the administration’s argument for tighter borders, though they also stoke heated debates about fairness and effectiveness.
In a bold move that’s got Washington buzzing, President Donald Trump has pardoned a Democratic congressman who dared to challenge the previous administration’s border policies.
Breitbart reported that President Trump announced a full and unconditional pardon for Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-TX) and his wife, Imelda, who faced bribery charges from the Biden Department of Justice since May 2024.
The saga began over two years before the indictment, when a search warrant was executed on the Cuellars’ home in Laredo, raising eyebrows about the timing and intent behind the investigation.
Was this a genuine pursuit of justice or a political hit job? The question lingers like a Texas summer heatwave.
The Biden DOJ accused the Cuellars of taking over half a million dollars in bribes from an energy company based in Azerbaijan, a charge that smells of overreach to many conservatives. If true, it’s serious—but why the delay in action after the initial search?
Cuellar, a South Texas Democrat, isn’t your typical progressive cheerleader, often breaking ranks to criticize policies he sees as harmful to his constituents. His vocal opposition to the Biden administration’s border approach made him a target, or so the narrative goes. And Trump seems to agree.
Posting on Truth Social, Trump didn’t mince words, blasting the indictment as a weaponized attack by a desperate administration. He even shared a heartfelt letter from Cuellar’s daughters, Christina and Catherine, pleading for clemency. It’s a rare glimpse of bipartisan empathy in a polarized age.
“For years, the Biden Administration weaponized the Justice System against their Political Opponents, and anyone who disagreed with them,” Trump declared on Truth Social. He pointed to Cuellar’s border policy critiques as the likely trigger for this legal ordeal. If that’s not a chilling effect on free speech, what is?
Trump went further, calling the prosecution of both Henry and Imelda Cuellar “un-American” and a sign of the radical left’s dangerous agenda. It’s a familiar refrain for those who see the DOJ as less about justice and more about settling scores.
The pardon itself was framed as a direct rebuke to such tactics, with Trump adding, “Henry, I don’t know you, but you can sleep well tonight — Your nightmare is finally over!” That’s the kind of flourish that resonates with supporters who view Trump as a defender against bureaucratic overreach.
Cuellar’s daughters, Christina and Catherine, didn’t hold back in their letter, suggesting their father’s independence and honesty on border security may have sparked the investigation. It’s a poignant reminder that behind every headline are real families caught in the crossfire of political games.
“We also believe that our father’s independence and honesty may have contributed to how this case began,” they wrote. “He has never been afraid to speak his mind, especially when it comes to protecting the people of South Texas and securing the border from the policies of the previous administration.”
Their words cut through the noise, painting Cuellar as a principled man rather than a partisan pawn. It’s hard not to feel a twinge of sympathy, even if one questions the bribery allegations’ merits.
This pardon isn’t just about one congressman; it’s a signal flare to those who fear speaking out against prevailing narratives. If criticizing flawed border policies can land you in legal hot water, what’s next for dissent in America?
Trump’s decision also underscores a growing conservative concern: that federal agencies are being used to silence opposition, whether Republican or Democrat. Cuellar, an unlikely ally, becomes a case study in why many on the right distrust the current system.
MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow just predicted that the GOP will push for Secretary of War Pete Hegseth's resignation, a move that could shake up the Department of Defense.
On Tuesday, December 2, 2025, during her show “Deadline,” Maddow tackled a troubling report about alleged misconduct by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth tied to drug boat strikes in the Caribbean Sea, forecasting that Republican lawmakers will soon call for his resignation over the escalating controversy.
Let’s unpack this with a clear head, because the progressive media machine loves to spin a narrative faster than a fidget spinner.
Maddow didn’t hold back, questioning the very foundation of the military actions in question with a tone that suggests she’s already written the obituary for Hegseth’s tenure.
She mused, “I don’t understand why we’re going to war with Venezuela, and I’m not sure the administration is even bothered to try to come up with anything, even internally coherent,” as reported on MSNBC’s “Deadline.”
While it’s fair to ask tough questions about foreign policy, Maddow’s framing seems to ignore the complex reality of drug trafficking threats—perhaps she’d prefer we send the Coast Guard with a polite “please stop” instead of decisive action?
The core of the issue, as Maddow sees it, is a report alleging impropriety in how Hegseth has overseen operations targeting suspected drug boats in the Caribbean.
Her criticism implies a reckless approach, but let’s be honest—defending national security isn’t a game of patty-cake, and sometimes tough calls must be made against dangerous cartels.
Still, if the allegations hold water, conservatives must demand accountability, not because we’re swayed by MSNBC’s outrage, but because integrity in leadership isn’t negotiable.
Maddow went further, painting a picture of needless violence in the operations, as if the military is playing target practice with innocent fishermen.
She questioned, “So what are we doing there in the first place? Why are we blowing out of the water and killing people in boats with outboard motors, some of which aren’t even pointed towards the United States, let alone verified to have drugs on them?” as aired on “Deadline.”
Her rhetorical flourish might score points with the anti-military crowd, but it sidesteps the harsh truth that drug smuggling isn’t a harmless hobby—though, admittedly, transparency on targeting protocols would go a long way to ease public concern.
Perhaps the most striking part of Maddow’s segment was her bold prediction that Hegseth’s days as Secretary of Defense are numbered.
She didn’t mince words, stating on “Deadline” that this situation is “a catastrophe” and that Republican lawmakers will ultimately demand his resignation after digging into the matter.
While it’s tempting to dismiss this as left-leaning wishful thinking, conservatives should take note—if the facts reveal a failure in judgment, loyalty to principle must trump loyalty to any one figure, no matter how aligned with the cause.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem is requesting a travel ban to be placed on as many as 32 nations that send criminal immigrants to the U.S., Fox News reported. The announcement came on Monday following a meeting with President Donald Trump after two National Guard members were shot last week.
"I just met with the President. I am recommending a full travel ban on every damn country that's been flooding our nation with killers, leeches, and entitlement junkies," Noem wrote in a post to X on Monday.
"Our forefathers built this nation on blood, sweat, and the unyielding love of freedom—not for foreign invaders to slaughter our heroes, suck dry our hard-earned tax dollars, or snatch the benefits owed to AMERICANS. WE DON'T WANT THEM. NOT ONE," Noem concluded.
I just met with the President.
I am recommending a full travel ban on every damn country that's been flooding our nation with killers, leeches, and entitlement junkies.
Our forefathers built this nation on blood, sweat, and the unyielding love of freedom—not for foreign…
— Kristi Noem (@KristiNoem) December 1, 2025
The inciting incident involved a shooting that occurred on the day before Thanksgiving in Washington, D.C. Law enforcement officials believe that two West Virginia National Guard troops, who were placed there as part of Trump's crackdown on crime in the nation's capital, were allegedly shot by Afghan immigrant Rahmanullah Lakanwal, The Hill reported.
U.S. Army Spc. Sarah Beckstrom, 20, died from her wounds on Nov. 28, while U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe, 24, is in serious condition. Following the shooting, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) put an indefinite halt to immigration applications from Afghans.
This followed a June memo that restricted migration from 19 nations, including Afghanistan, Burundi, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Cuba, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Laos, Libya, Myanmar, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sudan, Togo, Turkmenistan, Venezuela, and Yemen. "During my first Administration, I restricted the entry of foreign nationals into the United States, which successfully prevented national security threats from reaching our borders and which the Supreme Court upheld," Trump said in the memo issued June 4.
The president recalled that in a memo on the first day of his second term, he "stated that it is the policy of the United States to protect its citizens from aliens who intend to commit terrorist attacks, threaten our national security, espouse hateful ideology, or otherwise exploit the immigration laws for malevolent purposes," Trump continued. He said the government would now be "vigilant" that visas would not be issued to aliens who "intend to harm Americans or our national interests" going forward.
He and Noem had compiled a list of nations that were sending immigrants who did not align with American values. "Many of these countries have also taken advantage of the United States in their exploitation of our visa system and their historic failure to accept back their removable nationals," Trump wrote. The total list of countries now banned hovers around 32, CNN reported.
Any time Trump has spoken of measures to prevent such crimes, he has received pushback from the left about it. Democrats. Rather than being outraged that people coming into the U.S. are committing crimes against people, they are worried that keeping them out of the country is the real problem.
According to the UK Guardian, this was the same reaction the first time Trump announced his plan that detractors called "reckless" and "racist" in June. Meanwhile, Trump has said that the decision was made with "foreign policy, national security, and counter-terrorism goals" in mind.
"Trump’s reckless first term travel ban all over again," California Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff said at the time. "Just like before, Trump’s expanded ban on travelers from around the world will not improve our national security and will only further isolate the US from the rest of the world," Schiff claimed.
"Bigotry is not a national security strategy," he added. This has never been about bigotry and instead has been about keeping out people from adversarial nations and places where it's difficult to find information on newcomers.
America has enough crime and criminals without importing more from other nations. The left has never come up with another solution except to push for more of the same, and it's time that Republicans take the lead to prevent this from happening.
When Joe Biden let 76,000 Afghans into the U.S. under Operation Allies Welcome in 2021 after he disastrously pulled the U.S. military out of the country and left it under Taliban control, he didn't vet them very well.
Turns out, over 5,000 Afghan nationals who were allowed to resettle in the U.S. were flagged by the Department of Homeland Security for national security concerns, and now President Donald Trump wants them gone following the shooting of two National Guard troops by an Afghan national let in as part of that program.
Trump ended Temporary Protected Status for Afgan nationals earlier this year, but an estimated 885 of those flagged by DHS are still here, according to DHS Secretary Kristi Noem.
She posted about the problem on X on Sunday.
The Biden Administration created one of the worst national security crisis in American history with the abandonment of Afghanistan. Biden let into our country nearly 100,000 unvetted Afghan aliens — figuring out who they were and their intentions when they were already on… pic.twitter.com/DhWUs2E28g
— Secretary Kristi Noem (@Sec_Noem) November 30, 2025
"The Biden Administration created one of the worst national security crisis in American history with the abandonment of Afghanistan," she wrote. "Biden let into our country nearly 100,000 unvetted Afghan aliens — figuring out who they were and their intentions when they were already on American soil."
She added, "Trump has been working every day since January 20 to clean up this unmitigated national security crisis."
Trump now wants a review on the vetting protocols for foreign nationals let into the U.S. seeking asylum from 19 "high risk" countries, as well as all asylum cases approved by the Biden administration.
The review was precipitated by the alleged actions of Rahmanullah Lakanwal, the suspect arrested for shooting Sarah Beckstrom, 20, and Andrew Wolfe, 24.
Beckstrom later died from her injuries, and Wolfe is still in serious condition after surgery.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said the DOJ would seek the death penalty for Lakanwal.
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) told the New York Post that he had tried to raise the issue of unvetted Afghans for "years" but no one paid attention.
“I spent years calling attention to the weak vetting standards in Operation Allies Welcome, despite considerable pushback from the Biden administration and many of my colleagues in Congress,” Republican Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley told the Post. “Sadly, this past week’s tragedy in Washington only validates my concerns further.”
Incidents like these fit in perfectly with much of the Democrats' agenda to destabilize the U.S. by whatever means necessary so that people will think government is the answer to everything. Good for Trump for reversing the damage as much as he can.
The tragic shooting last week of National Guard members deployed to Washington, D.C., has sparked renewed concerns about the lack of vetting conducted on foreign nationals admitted into the United States during the Biden administration.
Now, amid news that the accused D.C. attacker is an Afghan national who entered the country as part of former President Joe Biden’s “Operation Allies Welcome” scheme in 2021, Secretary of State Marco Rubio has announced a pause on visa issuance for anyone traveling on Afghan passports, as Breitbart reports.
It was on Wednesday that 29-year-old Rahmanullah Lakanwal, the aforementioned Afghan national, allegedly ambushed members of the West Virginia National Guard who were deployed to the nation’s capital.
The attack took the life of Spc. Sarah Beckstrom and left U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe critically injured.
Reporting has since revealed that Lakanwal was initially vetted by the CIA amid Biden’s chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan, and he ultimately secured asylum approval earlier this year under Donald Trump’s administration.
The scenario has revived past concerns about insufficient vetting of Afghans said to have provided aid and support to U.S. troops during their time overseas, prompting the State Department to issue a statement declaring that it has, as Fox News notes, “IMMEDIATELY paused visa issuance for individuals traveling on Afghan passports.”
The declaration continued, “The Department is taking all necessary steps to protect U.S. national security and public safety.”
Not surprisingly, critics of the administration have already weighed in, voicing the belief that the State Department action is unlawful.
Among those expressing frustration was a representative from AfghanEvac, a group focused on the relocation and resettlement of Afghan allies who worked collaboratively with U.S. troops prior to the American military’s exit from their country.
The group’s president, Shawn VanDiver, opined, “It appears Secretary Rubio is attempting to shut down the Afghan Special Immigrant Visa program in direct violation of federal law and standing court orders.”
VanDiver went on, “He is seemingly acting at the direction of President Trump and Stephen Miller, and there is no doubt this is the outcome they have been driving toward for months.”
He added, “They are using a single violent individual as cover for a policy they have long planned, turning their own intelligence failures into an excuse to punish an entire community and the veterans who served alongside them.”
Naysayers aside, the administration appears to be standing firm on the subject of rooting out any arrivals who, like Lakanwal, may have nefarious motives and the capacity to do great harm, with Trump himself observing that “when it comes to asylum, when they’re flown in, it’s very hard to get them out. No matter how you want to do it, it’s very hard to get them out. But we’re going to be getting them all out now.”
Rubio, reacting to the tragedy and the actions the administration is now taking, stated plainly, “The United States has no higher priority than protecting our nation and our people,” and that is a sentiment with which few could easily disagree.
Any Lucia Lopez Belloza was deported to her native Honduras after attempting to board a flight from Boston to Texas to surprise her family for Thanksgiving, ABC News reported. A federal judge blocked the 19-year-old college student's deportation, but she was removed from the U.S. anyway.
Lopez Bella had entered the U.S. illegally as an 8-year-old with her family. While trying to board her flight to her Texas home to see her relatives a decade later, Lopez Belloza was singled out by airport authorities because of the deportation order.
Her attorney, Todd Pomerleau, said his client was detained and arrested at the airport over the order. A federal judge ruled that the government could not remove Lopez Belloza from the U.S. or anywhere outside of Massachusetts, but the government ignored that edict and moved Lopez Belloza to Texas and sent her Honduras the following day.
"She thought she was going to go home, see her family, fly back, take her finals, and now she's sitting in Honduras," Pomerleau said. While the establishment media is using her story to show the cruelty of President Donald Trump's Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, it's not the whole story.
On this surface, this is a tragic story about government officials gone rogue and the plight of a young woman on her way to a bright future. Instead, it's another illustration of the dangers of ignoring immigration enforcement for decades and the human cost of reversing course when the need arises.
The order to deport Lopez Belloza was issued in 2015, but the failure to act allowed her to plant roots in a place she shouldn't have been allowed to enter in the first place. Moreover, as Mass Daily News noted in a post to X on Thursday, the media spin about this unfortunate situation ignores some glaring realities.
The Boston Globe captioned Lopez Belloza's story as an unfortunate situation for someone who "had received a scholarship to study in Massachusetts, and dreamed of opening a tailor shop with her dad," the Globe claimed. "When immigration agents detained her at Logan airport, everything changed," the outlet said ominously.
Mass Daily News noted that what the Boston Globe left out decimates two major talking points on the issue. "Any Lucia Lopez Belloza is an illegal immigrant with a deportation order from 10 years ago. The president 10 years ago? Barack Obama," the social media post said.
And the part that Boston Globe didn’t put in their headline:
Any Lucia Lopez Belloza is an illegal immigrant with a deportation order from 10 years ago.
The president 10 years ago?
Barack Obama. https://t.co/Y6TkaI7MRD
— Mass Daily News (@MassDailyNews) November 27, 2025
Illegal immigration has created so many pitfalls, but so has the legal immigration system. As part of his Thanksgiving post to Truth Social, Trump announced his plan to "permanently pause migration from all Third World Countries to allow the U.S. system" to alleviate some of the problems caused by such an influx.
The president blamed former President Joe Biden for allowing illegal immigraiton as well as "Sleepy Joe Biden’s Autopen" letting in migrants who burden the federal government and social safety net. Trump wants to "remove anyone who is not a net asset to the United States, or is incapable of loving our Country, end all Federal benefits and subsidies to noncitizens of our Country, denaturalize migrants who undermine domestic tranquility, and deport any Foreign National who is a public charge, security risk, or non-compatible with Western Civilization," Trump wrote.
"These goals will be pursued with the aim of achieving a major reduction in illegal and disruptive populations, including those admitted through an unauthorized and illegal Autopen approval process. Only REVERSE MIGRATION can fully cure this situation. Other than that, HAPPY THANKSGIVING TO ALL, except those that hate, steal, murder, and destroy everything that America stands for — You won’t be here for long!" Trump concluded.
Immigration in the U.S. is a mess, thanks to decades of poor leadership from Democrats and spineless Republicans. Trump now has many problems to sort out because of it, and he's not afraid to do that even if it creates some unfortunate situations, as it did for Lopez Belloza, or outrages opponents.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
An organization that advocates for judicial integrity is charging that a Georgia prosecutor who orchestrated part of the Democrats' lawfare agenda against President Donald Trump "belongs in jail."
The comments concerned Fulton County, Ga., District Attorney Fani Willis, a Democrat who hired her paramour with tax funding to organize a long list of organized crime charges against Trump and more than a dozen other people.
That case recently was thrown out by a judge who ruled it actually isn't against the law to challenge an election result.
Now Mike Davis, founder and president of the Article III Project, released a comment about Willis.
"Fulton County DA Fani Willis must face accountability for her clear corruption and unlawful weaponization of her office against President Trump and his supporters," he said. "She severely harmed a lot of good people with her bogus prosecutions for the non-crime of objecting to a presidential election, which is allowed by the Electoral Count Act of 1887 and the First Amendment.
"That's why Democrats didn't face charges for objecting to Republican presidential wins in 1968, 2000, 2004, and 2016. Fani Willis took our country to the brink. She belongs in prison." Davis said.
His organization works to defend constitutionalist judges and responds to leftist agendas for the courts, like the often-suggested court-packing in which a political party would simply install enough judges of their own ilk to control the outcomes of cases.
Davis previous was chief counsel for nominations to Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, on the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary.
The demise of Willis's activism against Trump came just days ago, when a judge tossed the claims.
The filing from Willis, in 2023, wildly claimed Trump and 18 others were part of an organized crime ring, charging them with counts under the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.
Then the scandals started appearing, and her paramour, whom she hired with tax money to create the charges, was ordered off the case. Then she was ordered off the case. And her office was ordered off the case.
And now the case is being dismissed entirely.
A judge quickly granted the request from Pete Skandalakis, the chief of the Georgia Prosecuting Attorney's Council, who appointed himself to take over the prosecution when he couldn't find another prosecutor willing to work on Willis' claims, to dismiss.
Skandalakis explained the depth of the Willis' failure, which was, along with Jack Smith's now-dead federal claims, just part of the Democrats' organized lawfare against Trump that now has been revealed to have ascended to the highest levels of the Barack Obama administration and included secret federal government spying on the private telephone calls of multiple members of Congress. It all was triggered by an organized attempt by the failed Hillary Clinton campaign to falsely tie Trump to Russia.
"The criminal conduct alleged in the Atlanta Judicial Circuit's prosecution was conceived in Washington, D.C., not the State of Georgia. The federal government is the appropriate venue for this prosecution, not the State of Georgia. Indeed, if Special Counsel Jack Smith, with all the resources of the federal government at his disposal, after reviewing the evidence in this case and considering the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Trump v. United States, along with the years of litigation such a case would inevitably entail, concluded that prosecution would be fruitless, then I too find that, despite the available evidence, pursuing the prosecution of all those involved in State of Georgia v. Donald Trump, et al. on essentially federal grounds would be equally unproductive."
He filed a 22-page "Motion to Nolle Prosequi," a Latin term that simply means the prosecutor is unwilling to continue the case.
"Comes now, the state, by and through Peter J. Skandalakis, District Attorney Pro Tempore, and after a thorough examination of the case file, consideration of applicable statutory and case law, and prior to submission to a jury, the State hereby moves for entry of a Nolle Prosequi for the following reason: to serve the interests of justice and promote judicial finality (see exhibit A).For all remaining defendants, this disposition meets the criteria for the Georgia Crime Information Center to Restrict access to the criminal history for this arrest pursuant to O.C.G.A. 35-3-37(h)(2)(A).THIS the 26th day of November…"
That resulted in him being removed, then Willis removed, and her office disqualified.
It was Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee who gave prosecuting attorneys 14 days to assign a new prosecutor to the charges, and just hours before the deadline, Skandalakis appointed himself.
WND has reported the case has involved scandal after scandal after scandal for Georgia. Willis hired her paramour to help develop the case, spending hundreds of thousands of dollars of tax money on him. The two apparently took exotic vacations together, and Willis claimed she paid him back her share … in cash.
A report at the Washington Examiner said the "sweeping racketeering" case had been suspended by uncertainty for weeks now.
The case claimed Trump and others tried to overturn the state's 2020 presidential election.
Trump posted to Truth Social Wednesday afternoon, saying, "LAW and JUSTICE have prevailed in the Great State of Georgia, as the corrupt Fani Willis Witch Hunt against me, and other Great American Patriots, has been DISMISSED in its entirety. This Illegal, Unconstitutional, and unAmerican Hoax was perpetrated against our Nation by Fani and her Low I.Q. Lover, Nathan Wade, at the direction of Crooked Joe Biden and his 'Handlers.' …
"The Deranged Democrats did all they could to viciously attack me, my supporters, and our MAGA Movement, for telling the TRUTH — THE 2020 ELECTION WAS RIGGED AND STOLEN, and they committed Crime after Crime as they weaponized our Law Enforcement and Justice System against HONEST AND LOVING Americans but, we have fought back and won both in the Courts and Politically with our Historic, Country saving, Landslide Victory of November 5, 2024."