Tensions have continued to flare between protestors and ICE agents in Chicago and its environs, though a scene that unfolded on Friday made headlines due to the abject pettiness it embodied for many.
As Breitbart reports, staffers at a municipal building in suburban Broadview, Illinois, prevented Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem from entering the premises in order to use the bathroom facilities therein, a denial that was caught on video.
Highlighting what occurred, Noem took to X to describe her experience, also using the incident to underscore her disdain for Democrat Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker and his vocal opposition to the Trump administration's activities within his state.
“My team and I were just blocked from accessing the Village of Broadview Municipal Building in Illinois. We were stopping for a quick bathroom break,” Noem wrote.
The DHS secretary continued, “This is a public building. The Village of Broadview receives at least $1 million in federal funding every year.”
“This is how JB Pritzker and his cronies treat our law enforcement. Absolutely shameful, Noem concluded.
Her message also included video footage of the episode recorded by conservative commentator Benny Johnson.
The Greater Chicago area has been the scene of heightened tensions amid the recent immigration enforcement push conducted by the federal government.
A nerve-wracking situation unfolded again on Saturday when U.S. Border Patrol agents shot a woman -- who was armed herself with a semi-automatic weapon -- after a mob of demonstrators attempted to swarm the federal officers.
The scene took place on Chicago’s south side and was said to involve the ramming of ICE vehicles, which were then boxed in by 10 cars.
The Department of Homeland Security stated, “The officers exited their trapped vehicle when a suspect tried to run them over, forcing the officers to fire defensively.”
Assistant DHS Secretary Tricia McLaughlin noted that the woman in question “was named in a CBP intelligence bulletin last week for doxing agents and posting online ‘Hey to all my gang let’s f**k those mother f**kers up, don’t let them take anyone.”
Regardless of the protest efforts or the vindictive attitudes of local bureaucrats, the Trump administration is showing no signs of retreat when it comes to its Illinois enforcement initiative, and it has signaled an imminent increase in support for federal agents on the ground.
According to WLS, President Donald Trump is seeking to federalize 300 members of the Illinois National Guard in order to safeguard “federal officers and assets” amid continued ICE raids in and around Chicago, with the White House declaring that it “will not turn a blind eye to the lawlessness plaguing American cities,” whether Pritzker and others are on board or not.
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito said he's not interested in overturning the Obergefell ruling that legalized same-sex marriage even though he dissented in the original decision, NBC News reported. The justice said this after Friday, even as a case that would challenge the ruling is pending.
The 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision changed the definition of marriage, but Alito stated during remarks at a Washington, D.C., academic conference that he believes it should remain as previously decided. "In commenting on Obergefell, I am not suggesting that the decision in that case should be overruled," he clarified.
Leftists have celebrated Supreme Court precedents like Obergefell and Roe v. Wade as ironclad and untouchable. However, the 2022 Dobbs. v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization upended that viewpoint after it abolished the fiat abortion rights conferred by Roe.
A case that could have a similar impact to Obergefell is currently making its way through the Supreme Court, although its success is uncertain. Still, Alito said that wasn't an aim he was after anyway, which is a curious thing to admit before rendering a decision.
Alito decided it was required to give reassurances that the decision that unraveled abortion rights would not be repeated when it comes to the prospect of returning marriage to its natural and historical definition. "As I said in my opinion for the court in Dobbs, more than once, nothing in Dobbs was meant to disturb that decision," Alito said.
The conservative justice said he's a "working judicial originalist," which means that he "strives to achieve originalist aims while working within the framework of our legal system," The Hill reported. He used the Obergefell case as an example after the Supreme Court found that the 14th Amendment's "broad assurance of equality for all" must apply to something that would have been unthinkable to the framers.
While conceding that this was unlikely to be the original intent of the amendment, Alito said that the precedent was nevertheless untouchable. "Obergefell is a precedent of the court that is entitled to respect afforded by the doctrine of stare decisis," Alito claimed, as if all precedent is forever just by virtue of being decided once.
"And as I said in my opinion for the court in Dobbs, more than once, nothing in Dobbs was meant to disturb that decision," Alito explained. The justice said that his flexibility in upholding a decision he objects to was a better alternative to strict originalism.
"A conscientious judge has no choice but to do what the law requires. But we do not have an asinine or idiotic constitution, so an originalist judge should not cavalierly or happily embrace results that defy common sense," Alito warned.
While the Supreme Court certainly takes precedent into account, there have been several instances where it has overruled previously settled laws, even before the modern example of the Dobbs decision. In issues such as slavery and segregation, the high court has righted its wrongs in later decisions.
Regardless of Alito's reassurances, there's a chance that the case before the court that involves a former Kentucky county clerk's right to refuse to certify same-sex marriages could be the catalyst to reverse Obergefell apart from Dobbs, Fox News reported. In 2015, Kim Davis, who identified as a devout Christian, refused to officiate a wedding between David Ermold and David Moore and was forced by a lower court to pay $360,000 for their legal expenses.
Davis's attorney, Mat Staver, believes his client will win and that the decision will likely follow the high court's reconsideration of Obergefell based on the facts of the case alone. "The First Amendment should be an absolute defense to Kim Davis," Staver asserted.
"And secondly, we're asking the Supreme Court to overturn Obergefell, the 2015 decision that ultimately caused this problem in the first place. For them not to review the matter, I think, is terrible for Kim Davis and also terrible for the country because they've damaged the Constitution, and only the court can fix it," Staver contends.
The decision that legalized gay marriage was made erroneously, and the precedent it set deserves to be reconsidered on that basis. Alito may wish to be diplomatic and show impartiality by supporting it in theory, but the truth is that a bad decision should be rectified no matter how unpopular it is to say so.
U.S. District Judge Michael Simon has recused himself from a lawsuit over President Donald Trump's policy of sending the National Guard to Oregon, the Washington Examiner reported. The Obama-nominated judge was randomly assigned to the case and is married to Rep. Suzanne Bonamici (D-OR), who publicly opposed the policy.
Trump has been sending troops to beleaguered cities where local law enforcement is either unable or unwilling to maintain law and order. Because Democrats have painted themselves into a corner when it comes to this issue, Bonamici dutifully opposed the idea and said the president should "rescind" that order.
This forced the Department of Justice to have the case reassigned as Simon recused himself. "JUST IN: DOJ suggests Judge Simon recuse from the Oregon National Guard case because he's married to @RepBonamici, who has vocally opposed the deployment," Politico reporter Kyle Cheney posted to X, formerly Twitter, along with an image of the legal document.
JUST IN: DOJ suggests Judge Simon recuse from the Oregon National Guard case because he's married to @RepBonamici, who has vocally opposed the deployment. https://t.co/BfrUkAng8t pic.twitter.com/hR50pPw8rA
— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) October 2, 2025
One of the many pitfalls of Democratic rule in a given city is that it turns the community into a nightmare for the people who live there. Lately, the violence and chaos are being directed at Immigration and Customs Enforcement facilities, and Trump is attempting to turn the tide on that with the National Guard.
As Fox News reported, Trump did the same in Portland, Oregon to secure the ICE facility. "At the request of Secretary of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem, I am directing Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, to provide all necessary Troops to protect War ravaged Portland, and any of our ICE Facilities under siege from attack by Antifa, and other domestic terrorists. I am also authorizing Full Force, if necessary."
With that aim, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth signed a memo on Sept. 28 noting that "200 members of the Oregon National Guard will be called into Federal service effective immediately for a period of 60 days." Just the day before, Bonamici made her position known on the Bluesky social media platform.
She said Trump was "lying" after she conducted her own visit to the facility and was unfazed by what she saw. "I was at the ICE facility two days ago and saw a few peaceful protesters, not a 'siege,'" the lawmaker claimed.
Bonamici went on to sign a letter in protest addressed to Trump, Hegseth, and Noem. "This unilateral action represents an abuse of executive authority, seeks to incite violence, and undermines the constitutional balance of power between the federal government and states. We urge you to rescind this decision, and withdraw any military personnel and federal agents you have recently sought to deploy."
According to the Oregon Department of Justice, the state's Attorney General Dan Rayfield and the City of Portland filed a temporary restraining order against the Trump administration on Sept. 29. The intent was to prevent Hegseth from deploying the National Guard to restore order in the city as outlined in his memo.
“The facts are egregious. The President’s response to federalize 200 National Guard members for 60 days is not about keeping people safe – it’s about chasing headlines at the expense of our community," Rayfield said.
The lawsuit stated that doing so would violate the Constitution and "multiple federal laws," arguing that the president could only do so "in cases of invasion, rebellion, or when federal laws cannot otherwise be executed. None of those conditions exist in Oregon," the lawsuit said.
“Putting our own military on our streets is an abuse of power and a disservice to our communities and our service members. The Guard is made up of our neighbors and friends, not political props. Oregon is our home — not a military target," Rayfield said. Unfortunately, violent protests are par for the course in Portland, as some fear a particular escalation at ICE facility demonstrations.
Portland's resistance to help from the National Guard continues to perpetuate the same poor decisions that have turned the city into a war zone, even as Bonamici insists that all is well there. At least Judge Simon has acknowledged his conflict of interest because of her remarks, but it may be difficult to find another judge who isn't biased in favor of anarchy in that area.
The U.S. Supreme Court refused to grant President Donald Trump's emergency request for permission to fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook despite accusations that she lied on applications to obtain mortgages, Breitbart reported. In its decision on Wednesday, the high court ruled that Cook will stay on until at least January, when the case will be heard by the court.
The Department of Justice filed the emergency order after a lower court issued an earlier injunction against the firing. None of the nine justices dissented from the decision, leaving Cook in place on the Board of Governors while the allegations are investigated.
Because of this, Cook will be able to vote at the October 28-29 meeting, where the Feds will set policy, including a possible cut to interest rates, and another on December 9-10. The Fed refused to slash interest rates when Trump was first elected and only backed off by half a percentage point in September.
This decision comes after Trump attempted to fire Cook in August over allegations of potential mortgage fraud, which is within his rights when it is "for cause." However, there's no explanation in the standard as to whether such conduct is enough for the president to remove her from her 14-year term as defined by law. In appealing the case to the Supreme Court, lawyers for the Trump administration argued that the Fed's "uniquely important role" in the U.S. economy only heightens the government’s and public's interest in reviewing the case.
As the New York Post reported, the allegations against Cook stem from mortgage documents allegedly claiming both her home in Massachusetts and in Atlanta were her primary homes, and an investigation by Bill Pulte, director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, allegedly found. This designation would mean a lower interest rate for the loan.
Armed with that allegation, Trump moved to fire Cook. However, Cook has denied these allegations, and later loan documents surfaced proving that Cook's 2021 home purchase in Atlanta was indeed designated as a vacation home at the time of application, thus contradicting earlier claims that she failed to disclose this fact.
Cook sued Trump, and Trump appealed the initial decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, which decided the case last month in a 2-1 decision, upholding the lower court's ruling. This decision then sent the matter to the Supreme Court.
Still, the underlying accusation has yet to be adjudicated, and therefore the allegations stand as reason to dismiss her, the administration claimed. Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued on Trump's behalf Thursday at the Supreme Court, citing the gravity of such claims against Cook, Fox News reported.
"Put simply, the president may reasonably determine that interest rates paid by the American people should not be set by a governor who appears to have lied about facts material to the interest rates she secured for herself — and refuses to explain the apparent misrepresentations," Sauer noted. However, a president removing a member of the Fed's board of governors is unprecedented in its 112-year history and thus will receive additional scrutiny.
In a post to X, formerly Twitter, legal expert and GOP strategist Mike Davis made the case that firing Cook is a straightforward decision within the president's rights. "The Supreme Court blinked," Davis charged before explaining his theory that Cook indeed committed mortgage fraud based on Pulte's initial investigation and therefore deserves to be fired.
"Lisa Cook is one of the seven governors on the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Among other tasks, the Fed 'conducts the nation’s monetary policy, promotes financial system stability, [and] supervises and regulates financial institutions.' 'The Federal Reserve is committed to upholding the highest ethical principles to strengthen public confidence in the impartiality of its decision-making processes,'" Davis cited as a standard.
"There is clear evidence that Lisa Cook committed mortgage fraud when she lied about her principal residence to secure a lower interest rate. Even if Lisa Cook fraudulently secured this mortgage before her current Fed appointment, she is still benefiting from the lower interest rate each month. (Did she pay off the mortgage before she started?) President Trump fired her for cause under the relevant statute," Davis contends.
The Supreme Court blinked.
Lisa Cook is one of the seven governors on the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
Among other tasks, the Fed "conducts the nation’s monetary policy, promotes financial system stability, [and] supervises and regulates financial… pic.twitter.com/sh5dNy9fGq
— 🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸 (@mrddmia) October 1, 2025
Without a clear indication one way or the other that Cook lied on her mortgage application, it should at least be within Trump's purview to suspend her from the board while investigations proceed if not outright fire her. There's a case to be made for safeguards against political interference, but this is a serious accusation that should disqualify Cook from the board if true.
Secretary of War Pete Hegseth made it clear that service members "should do the honorable thing and resign" if they object to the changes to military standards announced this week, Fox News reported. Hegseth's plan is to emphasize war readiness while eliminating the "woke" priorities that typically dominate America's fighting force and undermine combat readiness.
Hegseth called a meeting of his top generals to Quantico Marine Corps Base in Virginia on Tuesday to announce the new standards. The Army National Guard veteran stated that the Department of Defense and everything associated with that title is "dead." At the same time, the War Department will focus on "preparing for war and preparing to win," Hegseth said.
"If the words I’m speaking today are making your heart sink, then you should do the honorable thing and resign. We would thank you for your service. But I suspect the overwhelming majority of you feel the opposite. These words make your hearts full," Hegseth said.
The left has used the military as a proving ground for its most insane and damaging initiatives, but Hegseth said those days are over under his watch. He has already fired several high-ranking officers before summoning all of his top leaders to this meeting to lay out his new plans.
In his address to all generals and flag officers ranked one star and above, Hegseth said he was reversing the "decay" caused by an emphasis on diversity, equity, and inclusion that has weakened forces through lowered standards. "We became the woke department. But not anymore," Hegseth said during his 45-minute address.
"No more identity months, DEI offices, dudes in dresses, no more climate change worship. No more division, distraction or gender delusions. No more debris. We are done with that," the Secretary of War said.
Hegseth also stated that the standards that have fallen by the wayside in recent years, for everything from physical fitness to grooming, will be restored. The secretary noted that a "male level" of physical fitness would be required for any combat positions, and he was willing to accept that it might result in fewer women being assigned to those roles.
"If women can make it, excellent. If not, it is what it is," Hegseth said. "Weak men won’t qualify either. We’re not playing games," Hegseth said.
The secretary wants a new "warrior ethos" in all branches of the military, which means reverting to 2015 standards for combat readiness. Now, Hegseth will require twice-yearly fitness tests that will be gender-neutral, meaning no breaks for women, regardless of rank, all the way up to four-star generals. These 10 directives also mean fewer seminars and more hands-on training for the troops, and stricter grooming standards, such as prohibiting long hair and beards, will also be enforced again.
Hegseth also promised that basic training will once again be "scary, tough, and disciplined" to whip new recruits into top physical shape. "Standards must be uniform, gender-neutral, and high. If not, they’re just suggestions. And suggestions get our sons and daughters killed," Hegseth noted while also denigrating those who call these practices "bullying" and "hazing" rather than war readiness.
The secretary also decried the charges of "toxic leadership" for such toughness. "Real toxic leadership is promoting people based on immutable characteristics or quotas instead of merit. If that makes me toxic, then so be it," Hegseth said. The secretary promised to trim the bureaucracy and make the armed forces leaner and more effective to demonstrate "peace through strength" in the world.
To our enemies, FAFO. If necessary, our troops can translate that for you perfectly," Hegseth said. "Today is another Liberation Day, the liberation of America’s warriors in name, indeed, and in authorities. You kill people and break things for a living. You are not politically correct and don’t necessarily belong always in polite society. You are warriors," Hegseth concluded before closing with a prayer.
This is precisely what America's military needs to once again assert its strength, both for the sake of our allies and our enemies. Leftists have done so much damage with their woke agenda everywhere, but it has been particularly problematic in the armed forces, and now Hegseth is going to fix it.
Michael Waltz was confirmed as the U.S. Representative to the United Nations General Assembly in a vote on Monday, the Washington Examiner reported. Waltz was previously confirmed as the ambassador to the U.N. on Sept. 19, but a second vote was required to designate him as the representative for the U.S. for the yearly gathering in New York City last week.
Waltz, a former Florida congressman, was nominated for the ambassadorship in May. He previously served as President Donald Trump's national security adviser, but was removed from the position after a journalist from The Atlantic was accidentally included in a Signal group chat about potential military action.
CSPAN producer Craig Caplan recounted Monday's vote on X, formerly Twitter, on Tuesday. "54-45: Senate confirmed Michael Waltz to be U.S. Representative to the U.N. General Assembly. Democrats Fetterman, Kelly and Shaheen voted Yes; Paul was the only Republican to vote No. Senators confirmed him earlier this month to serve as U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. & U.S. Rep. to the U.N. Security Council," the post explained.
54-45: Senate confirmed Michael Waltz to be U.S. Representative to the U.N. General Assembly. Democrats Fetterman, Kelly and Shaheen voted Yes; Paul was the only Republican to vote No. Senators confirmed him earlier this month to serve as U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. & U.S. Rep.… pic.twitter.com/vSTc0BJUq8
— Craig Caplan (@CraigCaplan) September 30, 2025
The Signal controversy had leftists champing at the bit for another Trump-era scandal, but Waltz made quick work of their attacks by revealing that it was he who should take the blame, according to the BBC. "I take full responsibility," Waltz said in March.
"I built the group," he said, adding that the whole debacle was "embarrassing." The journalist who was added to the chat was The Atlantic's Editor-in-Chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, who said in an article about the incident that the messages pertained to forthcoming strikes in Yemen and included details such as timing, targets, and weapons.
The messages were sent two hours before the strike took place, and the leftist news outlets and others like it made it seem like this mistake was a breach of national security like none other. For Waltz's part, he explained that he was not aware of exactly how it happened, as he didn't have Goldberg's phone number programmed into the app, which enables users to send encrypted messages.
"We've got the best technical minds looking at how this happened. I can tell you for 100% I don't know this guy," Waltz said. He went on to say that he would enlist Tesla founder Elon Musk, who was the head of the Department of Government Efficiency at the time, for help with the technology aspect.
Waltz later concluded that contacts from his phone were potentially caught up by Signal, which might explain how it carried over to the app. "Well, if you have somebody else's contact, then somehow it … gets sucked in. It gets sucked in," he explained. This seemed to take the momentum away from what Democrats were gearing up to make into a scandal.
With Waltz confirmed for the U.N. General Assembly, it was time for him to come to Trump's defense once again, this time because of some coincidental "glitches" that happened as world leaders gathered at the UN Headquarters. As Fox News reported, an escalator carrying the president and First Lady Melania Trump abruptly stopped once they got on, and a teleprompter stopped working just as Donald Trump was about to speak.
The president recovered gracefully from both incidents, but he believed they were intentional, and Waltz added that there was yet a third mixup when an audio broadcast of his speech switched from English to Portuguese without explanation. "The whole thing is unacceptable. The whole thing stinks," Waltz said.
"There’s 150 world leaders there, and this only happens to him, not once, not twice, but three times," Waltz added. The ambassador explained that the Secretary-General and the Secret Service were investigating the apparent acts of sabotage.
"As the ambassador, I said, you’ve got to open your doors, and some people were kind of shoulder-shrugging at this. This could have been incredibly serious. It’s insulting, and it’s right here on American soil," Waltz said.
Judging from the way Waltz handled the Signal controversy and the mishaps at the UN General Assembly, he was undoubtedly the right man for the job. People in government don't always get things right, but they seldom own up to it when they don't, which sets Waltz apart.
President Donald Trump plans to build 10 miles of border wall near San Diego points of entry after waiving environmental regulations, according to Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.
Noem declared the area near San Diego a place of high illegal entry, with almost a million illegal immigrants attempting to cross over those areas between 2021 and January of 2025.
The area is also a major zone where drugs come into the United States.
More than 2,465 pounds of marijuana, 9,873 pounds of cocaine, 565 pounds of heroin, 29,675 pounds of methamphetamine and 4,016 pounds of fentanyl were seized at the port of entry during the same time period.
The sector ranges from the Pacific Ocean east to Border Monument 231. Noem had to waive 30 laws to enable the construction.
Near the Tecate and Otay Mesa ports of entry, the 30-foot wall will have anti-climb features.
Part of the $46.5 billion appropriated by Congress for border wall construction through 2029 as part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act will be used for the wall.
“President Trump is delivering on the mandate given by the American people to secure our southern border,” CBP Assistant Commissioner Hilton Beckham said.
Pro-immigration forces can't understand why Trump wants to build more of the border wall when immigration is at an all-time low due to Trump's strict policies.
“Border crossings are at historic lows, yet the Trump administration is declaring a bogus emergency,” The Center for Biological Diversity advocate Laiken Jordahl said.
But Trump is smart enough to know that he won't always be the one in charge.
If a Democrat gets elected as president or if Republicans lose a majority in Congress, the messaging could change and border encounters and crossings are likely to rise substantially.
Investing now for future prevention is the smart thing to do.
Democrats know it, and Trump does, too.
Upon his nomination to the role of FBI director, Kash Patel vowed to clean house and eliminate left-wing bias perceived to have taken hold among agency leadership in recent years.
It appears that Patel is making good on that promise amid reports that the FBI has fired a number of agents who were seen kneeling during a 2020 Black Lives Matter protest in the nation’s capital, as Breitbart explains.
Details of the dismissals were reported by the Associated Press, which cited three individuals familiar with the situation.
According to the outlet, the firings impacted agents who had been reassigned in the spring, and though the total number of affected employees was not disclosed, sources suggested it was somewhere around 20.
The agents in question were photographed taking a knee during the aforementioned demonstration, an event which followed the police-involved death of George Floyd, which sparked destructive protests in cities across the country.
Images of federal agents kneeling in apparent solidarity with sometimes-violent demonstrators sparked outrage at the time, though some observers took a more charitable view of their decision.
Those defending the agents’ conduct suggested that kneeling amid the protests was a means of de-escalating what had regularly become dangerous scenarios over the course of that summer.
The administration’s prior decision to reassign the agents at issue was viewed as part of President Donald Trump’s push to rid federal agencies, particularly those involved in law enforcement and intelligence matters, of woke ideology, and the dismissals have amplified the voices of White House critics.
Not surprisingly, the FBI Agents Association has weighed in, blasting the agents’ firings and suggesting that litigation and congressional investigation are in order.
“As Director Patel has repeatedly stated, nobody is above the law. But rather than providing these agents with fair treatment and due process, Patel chose to again violate the law by ignoring these agents’ constitutional and legal rights instead of following the requisite process,” the union said in a statement.
The union also declared, according to NPR, “Patel’s dangerous new pattern of actions are weakening the Bureau because they eliminate valuable expertise and damage trust between leadership and the workforce, and make it harder to recruit and retain skilled agents -- ultimately putting our nation at greater risk.”
The FBI, for its part, did not offer comment on what were described as personnel matters, and the specific identities of fired agents were not immediately available.
These dismissals come amid a broader personnel reshuffling at the FBI under Patel, with a series of top-level officials also facing ouster in recent weeks, as Fox News explains.
Three former agents recently filed suit over their own respective job losses, alleging that current agency leadership has exhibited blatant disregard for the law to exact retribution on behalf of the president, but whether those claims will eventually prevail in court, only time will tell.
Four sources close to the matter claim that top military brass is crafting plans to strike at Venezuelan drug traffickers at the source in the South American nation, NBC News reported. This would escalate action already taken by President Donald Trump's administration against the illicit drug trade that funnels its poison from Venezuela into the U.S.
Two of the sources were familiar with the specific discussions, while the other two had knowledge of the planning effort, suggesting that these strategic moves are indeed moving forward. All parties requested that the news outlet keep them anonymous, as these plans are not intended for public consumption.
The strikes would be targeted but represent another level of engagement as they would take place within Venezuela. There have already been three military strikes against Venezuelan boats that allegedly were carrying drugs and nefarious individuals that Trump said were dangerous to Americans.
🚨Alert: Drone strikes against Venezuela Coming! According to an NBC News exclusive, the US is preparing options for military strikes against Venezuelan drug trafficking targets, with plans centered on drone strikes against El Presidente and his regime in Caracas. They assure… pic.twitter.com/gveDPTpReV
— US Homeland Security News (@defense_civil25) September 27, 2025
Sources indicate that although the White House hasn't made any official plans for attacks, the military campaign could be initiated within the next several weeks, based on current discussions. They would likely be drone strikes focused on the cartels' leadership and members, as well as the locations where these drugs are refined and manufactured.
This comes as Trump believes that Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro hasn't done enough to keep the cartels from exporting illegal narcotics to the U.S., which was the justification for the previous boat strikes. The attacks were successful, as evidenced by drugs found in the water following one particular strike, according to the nearby U.S. Embassy and officials in the Dominican Republic.
At this point, further military action is a theoretical possibility, but recent movements of military resources into the area suggest something bigger is on the horizon, Fox News reported. "Whether we see more consequential strikes will depend more on political calculations in Washington than on operational capability," said Geoff Ramsey, a senior fellow at the international affairs think tank, the Atlantic Council.
"The administration could use the strikes as occasional shows of force, or it could escalate into a more systematic campaign. But the risk of doing so would be that we could destabilize Venezuela and spark an internal armed conflict with no clear endgame," Ramsey warned.
What begins as a strike against the drug trade could carry a "real risk of escalation" if Maduro believes his nation's sovereignty is under attack. It could also spark off a "cycle of retaliation" from the Venezuelan government, but that might be a risk Trump is willing to take to combat the growing drug problem.
As NBC News noted, a U.S. military official has noted that more than 4,000 personnel and eight warships have been deployed to the area. Several F-35 fighter jets have also arrived in Puerto Rico, suggesting that forces are preparing for an event in the region.
"You don’t move that many resources down there without looking at all options," one source said. It's unusual to allocate such a significant number of military resources to one area while leaving others vulnerable without a clear plan. "You can’t keep that kind of firepower in the Caribbean forever," the source said.
Moreover, Trump has a history of pursuing Maduro over Venezuela's role in sending drugs such as fentanyl and cocaine into the U.S. As Trump's first term was wrapping up in 2020, his Justice Department slapped the Venezuelan president with charges related to the Venezuelan drugs and gangs.
There's some suggestion that part of the objective in sending military assets and initiating drone strikes is to destabilize Maduro's power. This is an objective Secretary of State Marco Rubio has also supported, according to those close to the administration, and could serve Trump's purposes of keeping the U.S. safe while ousting a terrible leader.
Nobody is eager for war at this time, but cutting off the drug problem at its source by initiating some drone strikes seems like a risk worth taking. Venezuela is a nation overrun with drugs and crime that's run by a dictator, and regime change may be necessary to make life better for its citizens as well as Americans.
Former FBI Director James Comey faces a maximum of five years in prison if found guilty on charges stemming from allegedly making false statements to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee and obstructing justice, News Nation reported. Comey testified before the committee on September 30, 2020, regarding the FBI's investigation into Russian collusion in the 2016 election.
A grand jury indicted Comey on Thursday, finding that he allegedly falsely denied that he "authorized someone else at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports" about the 2016 case during the campaign. Trump was accused of colluding with Russia to help him win the 2016 election, a charge which later proved to be patently false.
Attorney General Pam Bondi celebrated the indictment with a post to X, formerly Twitter, on Thursday. "No one is above the law. Today’s indictment reflects this Department of Justice’s commitment to holding those who abuse positions of power accountable for misleading the American people. We will follow the facts in this case," Bondi wrote.
No one is above the law. Today’s indictment reflects this Department of Justice’s commitment to holding those who abuse positions of power accountable for misleading the American people. We will follow the facts in this case.
— Attorney General Pamela Bondi (@AGPamBondi) September 25, 2025
According to Fox News, Comey will be arraigned on Oct. 9 in front of District Judge Michael S. Nachmanoff. The criminal investigation began in July to uncover whether Comey had lied to Congress after Trump was embroiled in the FBI's "Crossfire Hurricane" investigation.
Special counsel Robert Mueller looked into the investigation and found in March 2019 that there was no proof of any collusion or conspiracy between Trump and the Kremlin. Armed with that information, Special Counsel John Durham was appointed to investigate the origins of the investigation that dogged Trump throughout the 2016 campaign and into his presidency.
As many suspected, Durham concluded that the FBI "failed to act" on doubts despite a "clear warning sign" that Hillary Clinton's campaign made the FBI the "target" of a scheme to "manipulate or influence the law enforcement process for political purposes" during the campaign. This all but proved the entire investigation was a politically motivated witch hunt that was used in an effort to keep Trump out of the White House.
Still, Comey claims that he is the victim of political targeting, having been allegedly held accountable for only a small part of the injustice. "My family and I have known for years that there are costs to standing up to Donald Trump, but we couldn’t imagine ourselves living any other way," Comey claimed in a video post to Instagram.
"We will not live on our knees, and you shouldn’t either," he went on. "My heart is broken for the Department of Justice, but I have great confidence in the federal judicial system, and I’m innocent, so let’s have a trial and keep the faith," Comey later concluded.
As Comey makes himself a martyr, the media dutifully reports his indictment as an example of Trump targeting his political enemies. However, as Ari Fleischer, former White House press secretary under George W. Bush, expertly demonstrated in a post to X Friday, this is a blatant double standard from the press.
"I don’t know if James Comey is innocent or guilty, but I do know that when the Biden DoJ indicted Trump aides Peter Navarro and Steve Bannon, the WP and NYT treated it as straight news, not as Biden going after his opponents. But now, it’s all about Trump getting his enemies," Fleischer pointed out.
Contrast it with these headlines today: pic.twitter.com/NZC3OAwlbD
— Ari Fleischer (@AriFleischer) September 26, 2025
The media consultant shared screenshots of several headlines from the news outlets when then-President Joe Biden's administration started going after Trump's former aides and associates. In another post in the thread, Fleischer shared headlines from the story about Comey's indictment, where those same outlets called it part of his plan to "prosecute foes" and called Comey a "longtime Trump target."
The left tried to destroy Trump with investigations, prosecutions, and smears in the media thanks to people like Comey. If he's guilty, Comey deserves to serve every day of his sentence for what could have amounted to election interference and, at the very least, for trying to destroy Trump's reputation