Former President Barack Obama, once a literal superstar among leftists, appears to be losing his momentum after major setbacks in preserving his legacy, including issues with his presidential library and museum, The Daily Caller reported. The project is over budget and has taken five years to commence due to lawsuits and concerns about its impact on the neighborhood.
Obama was the king of cool when he was in the White House, but times have certainly changed since the 2010s. This won't bode well for the notoriously haughty former president, as he watches his legacy project crash and burn on the South Side of Chicago.
The multimillion-dollar project has many problems, but the most fundamental is that it's an eyesore. Commentator Benny Johnson interviewed people on the street, who shared their thoughts about the ugly building, with some describing it as a "prison," a " block of marble," and a "mausoleum."
I asked Chicago residents what Obama’s new presidential library looks like.
Number one response: “A prison”
Other answers:
- Garbage can
- a Rock
- Block of Marble
- Tardis
- Mountain
- ATC Tower
- Mausoleum
- a JailTotally Humiliating.
What do you think it looks like? pic.twitter.com/mT5kZseX09— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) August 20, 2025
Not only is this building aesthetically unappealing, but it has also come with a myriad of problems from planning to construction. The sad, gray tower, which gobbled up 19 acres in the city, has displaced residents as it drives up rents and property values in the community, which is now undergoing gentrification.
There are also ballooning costs and underfunding in the project, which could be passed on to taxpayers. The president's libray and museum was first announced in 2015 with an original estimate at $300 million, but that figure increased to $500 million by the time the plans were finalized in 2017.
It took another four years before they finally broke ground, due to several lawsuits and continued pushback from residents worried about the impact on their neighborhood. By the time, the price tag had more than doubled from the original figures, coming in at $700 million.
These increased costs come as a funding shortfall appears to be developing, which could potentially put a strain on local taxpayers who will be expected to foot the bill despite promises that it would be fully funded. The 2021 budget revealed that operating costs are expected to exceed $40 million in the first year alone.
The original target for the Obama Foundation endowment to cover these costs was set at $470 million. Now it appears that the organization would need between $800 million and $1 billion to fully fund the library and museum. Unfortunately, the Obama Foundation has raised only a fraction of the amount originally estimated and has collected only $1 million of the pledged money for the endowment.
Kamala Harris's disappointing showing in the 2024 presidential election was more than a loss for the then-vice president; it was a significant setback for all those who got behind her. Obama joined the chorus of Democrats claiming that Joe Biden was fit to run for reelection. In the final push for the White House, Obama inserted himself into the race in the hopes of bolstering her chances of winning. It did not.
According to Fox News, this triggered the Democratic Party to take an honest look at Obama and his true legacy, which included the election of President Donald Trump as his successor. Heavy hitters, including the former president, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, didn't move the needle for Harris despite their combined gravitas.
"I think there are going to be big demands for a greater reckoning," Julian Epstein, Democratic strategist, told the news outlet. "The Democratic politburo – Obama, Pelosi, Schumer, Jeffries, and others – all participated in the obvious lie that Biden was capable of a second term, in the anti-Democratic move to install a wholly untested Vice President Harris," Epstein said.
"And in lacking the courage for the past four years to stand up to a progressive left whose policies are far out of touch with most voters. They all failed the test of leadership in this respect," the political strategist added.
Obama was thought to be the pinnacle of success and was expected to usher in a new era of Democratic dominance in America. Instead, he gave us Trump and has continued to suffer several blows to his legacy as people, even in his own party, figure out that he was a terrible president.
Pundit Dan Abrams said Sunday on "ABC News This Week" that he thinks there's a 95% chance that former FBI Director James Comey will be acquitted on both of the felony charges he was indicted on last week.
Abrams hearkened back to when the DOJ almost indicted Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe for lying about the same conversation in 2019, but they didn't do so.
Furthermore, the DOJ inspector general interviewed both McCable and Comey at that time, and thought Comey's version of events was more credible than McCabe's.
Abrams said, “When you talk about Andrew McCabe, for example, the Department of Justice inspector general looked into that, listened to what McCabe said, listened to what Comey said, and said we find Comey’s account more credible than McCabe’s. And what makes that particularly interesting is that they almost indicted McCabe back in 2019 for lying about the same conversation. They couldn’t get a grand jury to indict, and now they’re going to indict James Comey for that? So I don’t think that’s what this is about. I think, in the end, this is about another conversation.”
Abrams went on to say that he didn't think most in the Trump administration even thought Comey would be convicted.
To that, he added his own belief that a conviction was extremely unlikely.
He said, “I’m going to go out on a limb here and say, I don’t even think that many in the Trump administration believe they’re going to get a conviction. I think that there’s a 95%-plus chance that there won’t be a conviction. That it’ll either get dismissed by a judge, there’ll be a hung jury, there’ll be an acquittal."
He seemed to suspect that there was another motive at work behind the indictment, but he didn't know what it was.
"I’m not certain that that’s the end goal here," he said, speaking of a conviction. "And that’s what makes this so unusual. Because typically, a prosecutor’s office will not bring a case unless they think they can win it.”
It's clear that Trump would want to go after Comey in any way he can.
After all, Comey was behind a lot of the actions that targeted Trump and tried to get him discredited, investigated and eventually, pursued criminally.
Is Trump doing the same thing he has accused his opponents of doing--engaging in a political prosecution of Comey?
Maybe he figures he might as well do it if the other side is doing it.
Or is he trying to get justice for the way Comey obviously wronged him?
President Donald Trump campaigned in part on a pledge to secure accountability for those who weaponized federal agencies in recent years, and last week’s indictment of one of his longstanding foes has been greeted by many supporters as a promising start.
As Just the News reports, former FBI Director James Comey, now facing criminal charges of making false statements to Congress, placed himself in legal peril by holding firm in 2020 testimony to prior denials of questionable conduct related to leaks of classified information.
The actions of the former FBI director were previously scrutinized amid the agency’s earlier Arctic Haze and Tropic Vortex leak inquiries.
Though details of Comey’s actions were reviewed by former U.S. Attorney John Durham, the controversial ex-FBI chief never faced criminal charges -- until this week.
This week, it was announced that a federal grand jury handed up two charges against Comey -- one for making a false statement and another for obstruction -- both stemming from claims that Comey misled lawmakers in September 2020 when he reiterated a prior 2017 denial of having approved a leak of information to the media regarding the Trump-Russia collusion probe or Hillary Clinton-linked investigations.
The indictment at hand claims that Comey “did willfully and knowingly make a materially false, fictitious, and fraudulent statement in a matter within the jurisdiction of the legislative branch of the Government of the United States by falsely stating to a U.S. Senator during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing….”
At issue was Comey’s reiteration of his prior statement that he had not “authorized someone else at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports’ regarding an FBI probe concerning “PERSON 1,” an individual whose identity was not included in the indictment.
The 2017 exchange that laid the groundwork for Comey’s later testimony came during a May 2017 Judiciary Committee hearing in which Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) asked whether the witness had “ever been an anonymous source in news reports about matters relating to the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation.”
Comey flatly replied, “Never,” prompting Grassley to continue his line of questioning.
The senator then asked Comey if he had “ever authorized someone else at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports about the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation,” to which the longtime bureaucrat said, “No,” and when asked if details of the same had been declassified and shared with journalists, he replied, “Not to my knowledge.”
Though his exchange with Grassley is beyond the reach of the statute of limitations, Comey was again questioned on the topic in 2020 by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX).
When asked about testimony from former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe indicating that such leaks did occur and that Comey authorized them, he said, “I stand by the testimony you summarized that I gave in May of 2017.”
Though many of the president’s supporters certainly hope that Comey’s own statements will be his undoing as the criminal case against him progresses, at least one prominent legal commentator has cast doubt on federal prosecutors’ ability to make these charges stick.
As The Hill reports, Fox News contributor Andy McCarthy has already gone on record saying, “I don’t think there’s a case, noting, “If you look closely at what McCabe said, what McCabe said was that he directed a leak to the Wall Street Journal and told Comey about it after the fact. So it’s true that Comey never authorized it in the sense of OKing it before it happened.” Whether his take on the situation ultimately proves correct or Comey ultimately receives the legal reckoning millions believe is long overdue, only time will tell.
President Donald Trump demanded that Microsoft, which has several government contracts handling sensitive data, "immediately terminate" Lisa Monaco as president of global affairs, the New York Post reported. Monaco was a former deputy attorney general under President Joe Biden and played a key role in prosecuting Trump and other January 6 defendants.
The president said Friday that Monaco is a "menace to U.S. National Security" in part because she's privy to "Highly Sensitive Information" in her position. Although it would not normally be appropriate for a president to interfere in a private corporation, Monaco's position in the company and her history of actively working against Trump call into question her fitness to continue.
The 57-year-old served as White House homeland security and counter terrorism adviser under then-President Barack Obama from 2013 to 2017. She joined the Biden administration and served as the second-in-command at the Department of Justice from 2021 to 2025.
During that time, she was involved in several legal actions against Trump, including the classified documents case and Special Counsel Jack Smith's investigation into election interference. Trump views this as evidence that Monaco has a proven vendetta against him and should be removed from Microsoft in light of its role in U.S. government technology.
The president posted to his Truth Social account on Friday, making his case against Monaco. He called her "Corrupt and Totally Trump Deranged." He cited her work under Biden, who, along with then-Attorney General Merrick Garland, were all the architects of the worst ever Deep State Conspiracies against our Country (RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA, the January 6th Hoax, the Illegal Raid on Mar-a-Lago, the Biden 'Autopen' Scandal, the Documents Witch Hunt, and more!)," Trump charged.
"Monaco has been shockingly hired as the President of Global Affairs for Microsoft, in a very senior role with access to Highly Sensitive Information. Monaco’s having that kind of access is unacceptable, and cannot be allowed to stand. She is a menace to U.S. National Security, especially given the major contracts that Microsoft has with the United States Government," Trump went on.
"Because of Monaco’s many wrongful acts, the U.S. Government recently stripped her of all Security Clearances, took away all of her access to National Security Intelligence, and banned her from all Federal Properties. It is my opinion that Microsoft should immediately terminate the employment of Lisa Monaco," Trump called on the tech giant.
"Thank you for your attention to this matter! President DJT," he concluded his post against Monaco. Whether Microsoft will comply with his request is still unknown.
If Monaco were doing her job as a prosecutor against Trump in a straightforward way, perhaps his case against her would be less compelling. However, her role is now in question with Smith is being investigated by GOP Sen. Tom Cotton, who contends that the prosecution was indeed politically motivated, though the former special prosecutor denies it.
This comes as Trump's Justice Department indicted former FBI Director James Comey for making false statements about the Russia collusion scandal, which was the first to be pinned on Trump after he got into the political arena in 2016. Comey has maintained his innocence, but it's yet another in a line of actions that give credence to Trump's claim that all of his prosecutions were politically motivated.
Meanwhile, many have argued that Microsoft is too close for comfort to the government, and this conflict underscores one of the reasons why that might be the case. The massive tech company is also facing renewed concerns about its potential monopoly, as it is under a Federal Trade Commission antitrust investigation that began under the Biden administration.
The FTC, supported by Democrats and Republicans, contends that the company has an outsized market share in artificial intelligence, cloud storage, and the Office suite of software. In a business decision that may bolster the government's case, Microsoft often bundles its Office, cloud services, and cybersecurity solutions for high-priced contracts, including those with government agencies.
There is too much coziness between the government and big tech, especially when it comes to the way Trump was treated by these companies for years. It seems there are too many anti-Trump leftists with too much power, and it's time someone calls them out for this.
President Donald Trump's administration has directed agencies to use the opportunity of an upcoming government shutdown to push through massive layoffs, Breitbart's John Nolte reported. An Office of Management and Budget memo has directed such action if Congress fails to reach a budget deal by September 30.
"The White House has already instructed federal agencies to plan for mass firings if Democrats shut down the government. So, let’s all do our part to encourage Democrats to shut down the government," Nolte quipped. If this goes through, it would send shockwaves through Washington, D.C. and Democrats could bet blamed.
Democrats have refused to pass a budget without inserting their own agenda items, including healthcare for illegal immigrants and other leftist pet causes. The official memo directs that "Federal programs whose funding would lapse and which are otherwise unfunded" in a government shutdown should "use this opportunity to consider Reduction in Force (RIF) notices for all employees in programs, projects, or activities" if they lack funding sources or "is not consistent with the President’s priorities."
As Nolte points out, in times past, these employees would be "furloughed during government shutdowns and then brought back after a deal is reached—which made all Normal People wonder why we need unnecessary bureaucrats at all? "This time, Trump's administration intends to answer that question by encouraging agencies ot cut staff.
Nolte believes Trump has crafted a winning strategy to trip up his political opponents. "This is powerful leverage for Trump because Democrats love bureaucrats because bureaucrats 1) vote Democrat and 2) make up the Deep State that constantly foils the will of Normal People when a Republican is in office," the author pointed out.
"So why won’t Democrats vote to fund the government? After all, it’s a simple process. The Republicans offered an easy-peasy clean continuing resolution, which essentially says the government will carry on spending like it has for the next seven weeks," Nolte continued.
That did not satisfy Democrats' pathological need to spend more. "According to Republicans, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) counter-offered with a demand for $1.4 trillion in new spending that, among other things, reinstates free health care for illegal aliens and funding for far-left NPR and PBS, and also pays to mutilate little kids to appease the left’s demonic trans godz," Nolte said.
Trump is fed up with the demands and flat-out refused further meetings with the Democratic Party's leadership. "After reviewing the details of the unserious and ridiculous demands being made by the Minority Radical Left Democrats in return for their Votes to keep our thriving Country open, I have decided that no meeting with their Congressional Leaders could possibly be productive," Trump said of his decision.
The president named some of these offensive additions, including "…free healthcare for Illegal Aliens (A monumental cost!), force Taxpayers to fund Transgender surgery for minors, have dead people on the Medicaid roles, allow Illegal Alien Criminals to steal Billions of Dollars in American Taxpayer Benefits, try to force our Country to again open our Borders to Criminals and to the World, allow men to play in women’s sports, and essentially create Transgender operations for everybody," Trump wrote in a post to Truth Social. Now, it's up to Democrats to walk back those demands.
By recommending government layoffs in the event of a shutdown, Trump has maneuvered Democrats into a checkmate situation. "Trump can’t lose here," Nolte asserts about the president's plan. It appears he has his political adversaries right where he wants them.
"Democrats will be blamed for the shutdown. Bureaucrats will be fired (tee hee)," Nolte pointed out.
"On the other hand, if Democrats cave and vote for the continuing resolution, their base will be furious. Additionally, these insane demands from Democrats have already been made public, which will haunt them going into the midterms," Nolte added.
"Hopefully, Democrats will cave on the shutdown and Trump will fire all these people anyway. That would be awesome. Hey, if you’re not necessary, you’re not necessary. In the real world, once you become unnecessary, you lose your job. It has certainly happened to me, and I see no reason why federal bureaucrats paid for with our tax dollars should be immune," Nolte concluded.
Democrats like to try to scare the public with threats of a government shutdown, and they believe they can score political points by pinning the blame on Republicans when they do. However, people have grown tired of these hysterical predictions and would likely welcome some government downsizing, which leaves Democrats in quite a tough spot.
Gov. Gavin Newsom is warning that President Donald Trump may try to "rig the midterm elections" and suspend the 2028 presidential election, Fox News reported. The California Democrat made this statement on "The Late Show with Stephen Colbert" on Tuesday, but did not provide any evidence to support his assertion.
Trump had a decisive win in the 2024 presidential election, and Democrats are surely looking to the future since they have no talent waiting in the wings. Newsom seems to have White House aspirations of his own, which is likely why he's pushing this baseless theory about Trump to whip up their base.
The governor boasted about his work helping Democrats rebuild for the 2026 midterms and that he's "raising awareness around how Donald Trump is trying to rig the midterm elections," Newsom told Stephen Colbert. Then Newsom went on to make the most insane claim of all about Trump's future plans.
Nevertheless, Newsom pushed the most patently absurd theory that Trump will somehow make sure that there is no election to replace him, even as the president will be an octogenarian and the U.S. Constitution forbids him from running for reelection. "I fear that we will not have an election in 2028," Newsom claimed.
"I really mean that in the core of my soul. Unless we wake up to the code red, what’s happening in this country — we wake up soberly to how serious this moment is," he added. Colbert's studio audience heartily cheered over Newsom's suggestion as the segment ended for a commercial break.
Of course, by the time the 2028 presidential election rolls around, Trump will be 82 years old and will have served a combined eight years as president which really pushes the bounds of believability. It's quite clear that the real motivation for this nonsense from Newsom likely stems from what he said earlier in the interview about his efforts to rehabilitate the Democratic Party and encourage political discussion with some on the right.
"I think it’s important to have those civil engagements. I think it’s important to dialogue. It’s important to learn from your opponents, and it’s important to reconcile your weaknesses," Newsom said of his willingness to speak with conservatives, including Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk, whom he interviewed shortly before the 31-year-old political activist was assassinated.
"As a Democratic Party, we have a lot of work to do to make up for our failures in the past. We got crushed in this last election, and now we are in a position where we are struggling to communicate, we’re struggling to win back now the majority in the House of Representatives," Newsom said.
Newsom is correct about the state of the Democratic Party, but rather than solving the root problems, the governor spent time earlier in the interview attacking Trump. "A lot of anxiety, a lot of stress, a lot of folks that honestly don’t know if we’re going to get our country back, and I get it," Newsom explained.
"This guy is flooding the zone. He’s dominating the narratives. Facts don’t seem to matter, and Democrats, frankly, have had a difficult time pushing back," Newsom added.
The governor sympathized with Democrats who "feel this weakness that dominates our brand and our party." However, Newsom believes the answer to this is more resistance against Trump, which is arguably what has ruined their party, as it has failed to coalesce around any other mission besides opposing the president.
"And I think what people appreciate is that we’re willing to fight and not only fight symbolically by having a little bit of fun but fight substantively. We have 41 lawsuits against the son of a b----. We’re pushing back, and we’re winning," Newsom bragged, clearly anticipating its effect as an applause line.
Newsom stands out as one of the few politicians who are so ambitious yet so terrible in his job as governor. His tough talk and warnings about a rigged election sound eerily similar to Trump's legitimate gripes, but Newsom's strategy to become Democrats' Trump will surely backfire once the campaigning becomes serious.
Accused assassin Tyler Robinson will remain in the jail's "special housing unit" after his mental health evaluation has been completed, Fox News reported. Robinson is being held on aggravated murder and other charges after allegedly gunning down Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University on Sept. 10.
Kirk died at the hands of his alleged assassin, who, by all accounts, fired a single shot at the 31-year-old. He was later pronounced dead at the hospital, and Robinson has been charged with his killing as well as a felony weapons charge, two counts of witness tampering, and another charge for committing a violent offense with a child present.
Robinson was taken to the special housing for an evaluation, and he will remain there even as the Utah County Sheriff's Office confirmed that the screening was completed. "Robinson has been seen by our medical and mental health staff," Sgt. Ray Ormond told Fox News Digital on Tuesday.
"Due to patient privacy regulations, I'm not able to [go] further into that. Robinson will stay in our special housing unit for the time being," Ormond said. There's no word on the particular results of the mental health screening that may be keeping Robinson there, and Ormond wouldn't disclose whether Robinson will stay there for good. "That's not set in stone, and his housing location may change down the road."
One of the reasons an inmate may stay in such a unit is because of concerns about his mental health or ability to get along in the general population. As the sheriff's office previously noted, Robinson was being kept there so officers could "keep an eye on him," which could suggest mental illness or other concerns.
The department further explained that a person might stay on "special watch" due to suicidal comments or ideation, violence, or other behavioral issues, and even the type of crime the inmate is accused of committing. Robinson has not made any suicidal threats that the sheriff's department is aware of, but authorities have not specified any additional reason why he's being so closely monitored.
While the public isn't being told much about his current condition, there's a good chance that his mental state will come up as part of the trial. Former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani speculates that the authorities' decision to leave Robinson in the special housing unit "suggests that he should not be housed with the general population," which hints at mental health issues, she told Fox News Digital.
"A full mental health evaluation will be conducted by his defense team to try to negotiate a plea deal to save his life, to put on an insanity or diminished capacity defense during the guilt phase, which is challenging under Utah law, or to put on evidence of mitigation during the death penalty phase," Rahmani added. Based on what is known about Robinson thus far, making the case that he's mentally ill will not be a far leap.
According to the New York Post, Robinson had a "furry fixation" and was living with Lance Twiggs, a 22-year-old gender-confused man who was transitioning to be a woman. Robinson reportedly had an account on FurAffinity.net, which features all sorts of disturbing images, including "sexualized images of cartoon animal characters," and possibly committed the crime for political motivations.
While authorities are mum on Robinson's possible suicidal tendencies, the 22-year-old suspect was wearing a suicide prevention vest during his first court hearing on Sept. 16 via video conference, which might suggest a motive for his continued residence in the special unit, as People noted last week. A still from that hearing was shared to X, formerly Twitter, by TheBlaze Media, showing a stone-faced Robinson wearing the vest with its velcro restraitns.
Alleged Charlie Kirk assassin Tyler Robinson in his first court appearance: pic.twitter.com/MjwhCnXP1k
— TheBlaze (@theblaze) September 16, 2025
Although Robinson turned himself in to the authorities, he pleaded not guilty to the charges set by the state. The accused assassin is facing the death sentence in Utah, but as Newsweek noted, questions about Robinson's frame of mind or mental health during the alleged crime could take that option off the table.
Attorneys could assert that Robinson committed the crime while under "extreme emotional distress" as a mitigating factor. Utah law explains it as a situation where "a person acts under the influence of extreme emotional distress when he is exposed to extremely unusual and overwhelming stress that would cause the average reasonable person under the same circumstances to experience a loss of self-control and be overborne by intense feelings, such as passion, anger, distress, grief, excessive agitation, or other similar emotions."
Whatever the reasons for monitoring Robinson, there are still many questions left open about the alleged killer's motives and whether he had help in planning the attack. This was an unspeakably horrific crime committed in front of spectators that day and the millions who watched on social media, and careful steps must be taken to ensure justice is done.
The U.S. Secret Service thwarted what could have been a significant attack on telecommunications systems in New York City during the UN General Assembly meeting this week, the New York Post reported. Officials announced on Tuesday that they had found several devices capable of jamming 911 calls and disabling cell towers throughout the Big Apple.
The agency found "more than 300 co-located SIM servers and 100,000 SIM cards across multiple sites," stemming from an investigation beginning this spring. “The potential for disruption to our country’s telecommunications posed by this network of devices cannot be overstated,” Secret Service Director Sean Curran said.
Matt McCool, who is the special agent in charge of the New York field office for the Secret Service, said the impact would have been profound. The devices had the capacity to plunge the city into a communications gridlock comparable to what followed the 9/11 attacks with cell service and 911 networks jammed.
Due to the timing of the findings, the Secret Service is investigating whether the attack was specifically targeted at the UN General Assembly. Officials are not saying who is responsible for these devices and networks, but it's clear some foreign criminal networks may have been using them to send encrypted messages.
The Department of Homeland Security released a video on X, formerly Twitter, featuring McCool's remarks about the investigation's findings. "Today, the @SecretService announced the dismantling of a network of electronic devices—located within 35 miles of the United Nations General Assembly—used to carry out a wide range of telecommunications attacks," the caption read.
"The U.S. Secret Service’s protective mission is all about prevention, and this investigation makes it clear to potential bad actors that imminent threats to our protectees will be immediately investigated, tracked down, and dismantled," the post explained. McCool's video shared information about the aim and scope of the investigation.
Today, the @SecretService announced the dismantling of a network of electronic devices—located within 35 miles of the United Nations General Assembly—used to carry out a wide range of telecommunications attacks.
The potential for disruption to our country’s telecommunications… pic.twitter.com/frh4scsVAF
— Homeland Security (@DHSgov) September 23, 2025
The top agent explained that the Secret Service was sharing the findings "as a matter of public interest, given the timing, amount, and concentration of material recovered during a recent Secret Service Protective Intelligence investigation." McCool said "multiple telecommunications-related imminent threats directed towards senior U.S. government officials" earlier this year prompted the Secret Service to conduct a "protective intelligence investigation" of the threat.
"This was a difficult and complex effort to identify the source of fraudulent calls and their impact on the Secret Service protection mission. During that period, we leveraged technical assistance and support of federal partners, including Homeland Security Investigations, the Department of Justice, and the Director of National Intelligence," as well as the New York Police Department, McCool said.
The probe uncovered the vast network "capable of carrying out nefarious telecommunications attacks," McCool said. "These Devices allowed anonymous encrypted communications between potential threat actors and criminal enterprises, enabling criminal organizations to operate undetected. This network had the potential to disable cell phone towers and essentially shut down the cellular network in New York City," he added.
McCool said that "the timing, location, proximity, and potential for significant disruptions to the New-York Telecom system" prompted the Secret Service's rapid response. "To be clear, these recovered devices no longer pose a threat to the New York Tri-State area," McCool said.
"We will continue working towards identifying those responsible and their intent, including whether their plan was to disrupt the UN General Assembly and communications of government, and emergency personnel during the official visit of world leaders in and around New York City. Forensic examinations of the equivalent of 100,000 cell phones' worth of data are underway," McCool assured the public.
The top agent also made it clear that these were "cellular communications between foreign actors and individuals that are known to federal law enforcement" and therefore already on their radar. "Given the sensitivity and complexity of this investigation, we are not able to go into specifics at this time," McCool added, noting that the Secret Service's investigation will continue.
The Secret Service has saved New York City from a consequential attack with its investigation and swift action. Unfortunately, one neutralized threat does not mean that the the city or the nation are safe from such attacks in the future.
Although a Florida federal judge threw out President Donald Trump's defamation lawsuit against the New York Times and book publisher Penguin, Trump responded to the action by saying, "I'm winning" against mainstream media outlets.
Judge Steven Merryday of Tampa, who was appointed by George H. W. Bush, tossed Trump's suit on Friday, calling it “decidedly improper and impermissible" because the filing spent most of its 85 pages talking about Trump's foes and accomplishments and also contained "superfluous allegations."
“As every lawyer knows (or is presumed to know), a complaint is not a public forum for vituperation and invective — not a protected platform to rage against an adversary,” Merryday wrote.
“A complaint is not a megaphone for public relations or a podium for a passionate oration at a political rally or the functional equivalent of the Hyde Park Speakers’ Corner,” he added, referring to a famed spot for free speech in London.
Trump responded to a question from ABC's Jonathan Karl about the lawsuit's dismissal by saying, “I’m winning, I’m winning the cases."
He then addressed Karl, saying, “You’re guilty, Jon, you’re guilty. ABC is a terrible network, a very unfair network, and you should be ashamed of yourself. NBC is equally bad. I don’t know who’s worse.”
Merryday did say that Trump could file an amended lawsuit within 28 days that was more concisely focused on the complaints against the Times, four of its reporters, and Penguin.
Trump had only filed the lawsuit on Monday. The amended suit would be limited to 40 pages, Merryday said.
Trump has been in the process of suing a number of media outlets for defamation. He has already gotten settlements from two of the biggest--hence the meaning of his comment about "winning."
In December, ABC settled with him for $15 million over comments George Stephanapolous made about him being a rapist after a civil judgement against him that found him liable of sexual abuse, but not rape.
In July, CBS settled with him for 16 million over the selective editing of comments by then-Vice President and presidential candidate Kamala Harris the previous October, which he argued could have impacted the election.
The money will go to his presidential library, since he is a billionaire and seemingly doesn't need it.
There's every possibility that he will win against the Times as well, once his lawyers get to the point.
The Times would only say through a spokesperson, “We welcome the judge’s quick ruling, which recognized that the complaint was a political document rather than a serious legal filing.”
The subject of H1-B visas has long been a controversial one, particularly amid the Trump administration’s efforts to prioritize American workers and realign the country’s immigration system.
To that end, on Friday, Trump signed a proclamation requiring an annual visa fee of $100,000 for high-skill foreign workers, as Breitbart reports, sparking criticism from former Biden-era officials and near panic from tech industry giants.
The president’s proclamation is set to bring about a noteworthy increase in visa fees for this category of worker, taking it from $215 to $100,000.
H1-B visas are designed to facilitate entry for high-skilled foreign workers suited for jobs American employers suggest are difficult to fill.
Detractors of the program argue that it is a conduit for overseas job seekers who are willing to work for wages well below those otherwise commanded by American workers.
Trump Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick stated that the Friday move will almost certainly result in the issuance of significantly fewer such visas, because the economics of the proposition for employers are now dramatically changed, and it will not make financial sense for many companies in the way it once did.
Lutnick explained, “If you’re going to train people, you’re going to train Americans. If you have a very sophisticated engineer, and you want to bring them in …then you can pay $100,000 a year for your H1-B visa.”
Though Trump’s move has garnered support from those who have fought against the widespread use of H1-B visas in recent years, others, including Doug Rand, a Biden-era U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services official, vehemently disagreed.
Declaring the increased fee “ludicrously lawless,” Rand added, “This isn’t real policy – it’s fan service for immigration restrictionists.”
“Trump gets his headlines, and inflicts a jolt of panic, and doesn’t care whether this survives first contact with the courts,” Rand stated.
Immigration lawyers and representatives from tech companies jumped into panicked action on Friday, as Politico noted, advising clients and workers traveling abroad to return stateside ahead of midnight on Sunday, when the new policy was slated to take effect.
The White House, for its part, took action to tamp down the hyperbole, assuring all parties involved that the proclamation does not impact those with a current visa and will only apply to future applicants in the February visa lottery who are currently outside the country.
As has been the case with virtually every headline-making order issued by Trump thus far in his second term, lawsuits opposing the H1-B changes are already reportedly in the works.
With some complaining that ambiguities in the order have left many open questions regarding implementation, it seems clear that the emergence of additional administration guidance – not to mention litigation – is almost certainly on the horizon.