Erika Kirk, widow of the late conservative firebrand Charlie Kirk, has had enough of the wild theories swirling around her husband’s tragic assassination.
In a powerful moment during a CBS News town hall, Erika Kirk publicly called out Candace Owens, a former Turning Point USA employee, for peddling unfounded conspiracy narratives about Charlie’s death and baseless financial accusations against the organization he founded.
Charlie Kirk, a titan of the conservative youth movement, founded Turning Point USA, a group dedicated to promoting traditional values on college campuses.
Tragically, Charlie was assassinated in September, leaving behind a legacy of bold ideas and a grieving widow, Erika, who now leads the organization.
The day after his death, Candace Owens, once considered a close friend with a bond described as sibling-like, posted a nearly 25-minute video honoring Charlie’s career and principles.
But in the months since, Owens has veered into troubling territory, spreading unverified claims about the circumstances of Charlie’s murder and alleging fraud within Turning Point USA’s finances.
Erika Kirk isn’t standing for it, and her frustration boiled over during the CBS News town hall, set to air Saturday at 8 p.m. ET/PT.
“Stop. That’s it. That’s all I have to say. Stop,” Erika declared, her words a raw plea to halt the damaging speculation (CBS News).
It’s a gut punch of a statement—three words carrying the weight of grief and exasperation, aimed squarely at shutting down narratives that tarnish her husband’s memory.
On top of the conspiracy theories, Owens’ financial accusations against Turning Point USA have been met with hard evidence to the contrary.
Last week, the Treasury Department sent Erika a letter confirming that none of the tax-exempt entities under her oversight are under IRS investigation, debunking the fraud claims outright.
A senior Treasury official didn’t mince words, stating, “The IRS is able to provide this type of information upon request by the taxpayer. And in this case, it’s hideous that malicious lies and smears obligated [Erika Kirk] to make the request” (CBS News).
That official’s comment stings, highlighting how baseless rumors can force a widow to defend her husband’s legacy while still mourning his loss.
The CBS News town hall, with an extended version airing on CBS News 24/7 on Sunday at multiple times and available on their YouTube channel, will dive deeper into Erika’s journey through faith, grief, and her vision for the American right.
Adding to the poignancy, Charlie’s posthumous book, “Stop, in the Name of God: Why Honoring the Sabbath Will Transform Your Life,” was released just days before the town hall, a final testament to his enduring voice in conservative thought.
Tensions between the United States and Venezuela just hit a boiling point with the seizure of a massive oil tanker off Venezuela’s coast.
The incident, confirmed by President Trump, is the latest in a string of aggressive moves by the administration against Nicolás Maduro’s regime, drawing sharp criticism from lawmakers worried about a slide toward military conflict.
Let’s rewind to the start of this high-stakes drama, where the U.S. executed a daring operation to seize what Trump called a “very large tanker” near Venezuelan waters. Attorney General Pam Bondi took to X to showcase a video of the operation, crediting the FBI, Homeland Security Investigations, the U.S. Coast Guard, and the Pentagon for carrying out the warrant. The claim? This vessel was hauling sanctioned oil tied to Venezuela and Iran, allegedly fueling illicit networks that support foreign terrorist groups.
But this isn’t a standalone stunt—since early September, the Trump administration has authorized 22 strikes on suspected drug-trafficking boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific, with a tragic toll of at least 87 lives lost. Last month, the State Department slapped the label of “foreign terrorist organization” on Cartel de los Soles, a drug network supposedly led by Maduro himself.
October brought another bombshell when Trump admitted he greenlit CIA operations inside Venezuela, while the Pentagon beefed up its presence in the U.S. Southern Command with warships, Marines, fighter jets, and spy planes. Two U.S. fighter jets even buzzed the Gulf of Venezuela as part of a broader pressure campaign. It’s clear the administration isn’t playing patty-cake with Maduro.
Yet, not everyone in Washington is cheering from the sidelines. Democratic senators like Chris Coons of Connecticut and Mazie Hirono of Hawaii, alongside Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), voiced serious concerns on Wednesday about this tanker seizure and the looming specter of war. A poll showing most Americans oppose military action in Venezuela only adds fuel to their unease.
Sen. Rand Paul didn’t mince words, telling NewsNation’s Hannah Brandt, “It sounds a lot like the beginning of a war.” Well, Senator, if the shoe fits—escalating from sanctions to seizures and strikes does smell like a march toward conflict, and conservatives who value restraint over endless foreign entanglements might agree.
Paul wasn’t done, adding, “If you want war, the president should come to Congress, like the Constitution dictates, and he should ask Congress for a declaration of war.” That’s a fair jab at unchecked executive power—something even right-leaning folks can nod to when bureaucracy sidesteps accountability.
Meanwhile, some Republican senators seemed caught off guard by the tanker news. Josh Hawley of Missouri told NewsNation, “I will look into it,” while Roger Marshall of Kansas admitted it was “news to me,” though he did stress the need to push back on Venezuela and expressed concern about the drug cartel running the country. It’s a bit embarrassing when lawmakers are playing catch-up on a story this big.
The bipartisan pushback gained traction last week when Sen. Paul, joined by Democratic Sens. Tim Kaine of Virginia, Adam Schiff of California, and Chuck Schumer of New York, filed a war powers resolution. Their goal? To stop the administration from dragging the U.S. into a Venezuelan conflict without congressional approval—a move that respects the Constitution over impulsive saber-rattling.
Let’s not ignore the bigger picture: the Trump administration’s focus on Maduro is rooted in real issues, from drug trafficking to sanctioned oil schemes that allegedly fund terrorism. But the question remains whether this aggressive posture risks more American lives and treasure in a region already steeped in chaos. Conservatives can support a strong stance without endorsing a blank check for war.
President Trump himself seems confident, telling Politico on Monday that “Maduro’s days are numbered.” That’s a bold prediction, but without a clear endgame, it’s hard not to wonder if we’re just poking a hornet’s nest.
The seizure of this tanker is a win for those who want to see the U.S. flex its muscle against rogue regimes, but it’s also a reminder of the fine line between strength and overreach. Lawmakers on both sides are right to demand oversight—blindly trusting any administration to navigate such waters is how we end up in quagmires.
So, where does this leave us? The U.S. has made its point loud and clear, but with public opinion wary of military action and Congress pushing back, the administration might need to rethink its next move. A conservative approach would prioritize national security without losing sight of the costs—both human and fiscal—of escalation.
In a striking blow to progressive challenges, a D.C. Circuit panel has upheld Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s controversial military transgender ban, the Hill reported.
A 2-1 ruling on Tuesday dissolved an administrative stay, clearing the path for Hegseth’s policy to exclude servicemembers whose gender identity differs from their birth-assigned sex, following years of legal battles and a Supreme Court nod in May.
The saga began with the Trump administration’s executive order, directing military leaders to restrict transgender individuals from service, citing readiness and deployability concerns.
This policy faced immediate pushback, with District Court Judge Ana Reyes, a Biden appointee, slapping an injunction on it in March, arguing against its fairness.
However, the D.C. Circuit panel countered that the lower court failed to grant Hegseth the deference owed to military judgments, a stance bolstered by prior Supreme Court approval.
Government attorneys defending Hegseth pointed to the Mattis Policy, crafted under former Defense Secretary James Mattis, which prioritized a lethal, ready force through phased restrictions on transgender troops.
Adding weight to the argument, the Trump administration leaned on a 2021 study estimating that up to 40 percent of those diagnosed with gender dysphoria could be non-deployable due to mental health challenges within two years of diagnosis.
A 2025 literature review further noted that transgender individuals face significantly higher rates of psychiatric diagnoses, including mood and anxiety disorders, with suicide attempt rates far exceeding those of others.
While these stats are sobering, one wonders if they’re being wielded more as a shield than a sword—does readiness truly hinge on exclusion, or is this a cultural skirmish dressed in data?
In the majority opinion, Judges Gregory Katsas and Neomi Rao defended the policy, stating, “The Hegseth Policy likely does not violate equal protection.”
They added, “We doubt that the policy triggers any form of heightened scrutiny,” arguing that judicial restraint is paramount when military decisions are at stake, especially with Supreme Court precedent on their side.
Contrast that with the dissent from Judge Cornelia Pillard, who lamented, “The majority’s decision makes it all but inevitable that thousands of qualified servicemembers will lose careers they have built over decades.”
Pillard didn’t hold back, charging that the policy repays dedicated service with “detriment and derision,” a poignant jab at what she sees as a cold, calculated dismissal of loyalty.
Her words sting with truth for many, yet the counterargument remains: can the military afford to prioritize individual feelings over collective readiness, especially when data suggests real operational risks?
Ultimately, this ruling isn’t just a legal win for Hegseth; it’s a signal that the judiciary may continue to defer to military expertise over progressive ideals, leaving transgender servicemembers in a precarious spot as the policy takes hold.
Nebraska State Senator Dan McKeon of Amherst finds himself in hot water over an alleged indiscretion at a Lincoln party that’s got everyone talking.
This saga centers on McKeon being charged with disturbing the peace, a Class III misdemeanor, after an incident at an end-of-session gathering this spring, initially cited as public indecency before a downgrade by the Lancaster County Attorney.
The trouble reportedly started at that spring bash in Lincoln, where a legislative staffer accused McKeon of inappropriate contact, prompting a Nebraska State Patrol investigation.
The Patrol got wind of the complaint in early September, and by late October, they issued McKeon a citation for public indecency, a heftier Class II misdemeanor.
Fast forward to this week, and court documents reveal a softer charge of disturbing the peace, carrying a max of three months in jail or a $500 fine, compared to six months or $1,000 for the original accusation.
Lancaster County Attorney Pat Condon made the call to downgrade, stating that disturbing the peace fit the bill better, though he’s keeping mum on the specifics of his reasoning.
McKeon’s attorney, Perry Pirsch, isn’t shy about calling this a win, claiming it matches McKeon’s side of the story that nothing untoward happened beyond a poorly timed joke and a pat on the back.
“This is consistent with his testimony [that] he only told a bad pun and patted her on the back,” Pirsch said, adding, “There was nothing sexually charged about it or even based on gender.”
Now, Pirsch is advising McKeon to plead no contest, accepting penalties without admitting guilt, a move he says will let McKeon “put the matter behind him and focus on the upcoming legislative session.”
But don’t think this is just a courtroom drama—the Nebraska Legislature is digging into the matter with its own internal probe, while the Executive Board has already shuffled McKeon’s office space to a different spot.
The Board met recently to chew over disciplinary steps but held off on a vote until all members could weigh in, with another meeting possibly as soon as this weekend.
Adding fuel to the fire, the staffer who raised the alarm might pursue a civil lawsuit, with her attorney, Kathleen Neary, confirming they’re moving forward with administrative filings as required by law.
State bigwigs, including Governor Jim Pillen, have urged McKeon to step down since the citation hit the news, but the Republican senator, elected to the nonpartisan Legislature, is digging in his heels and refusing to budge.
Look, in a world where progressive agendas often rush to judgment, it’s worth pausing to consider if a bad joke and a misplaced pat warrant a career-ender, though no one’s excusing behavior that crosses a line of basic respect.
McKeon’s arraignment is set for Wednesday in Lancaster County Court, and while he’s got a family and 30 years of marriage on his bio, the court of public opinion—often harsher than any judge—will be watching if this incident defines his tenure or becomes a footnote in a culture overly eager to cancel.
Congress is finally cracking open the vault on one of the biggest mysteries of our time: where did COVID-19 really come from?
The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), a massive military funding bill, has tucked within its 3,100 pages a bold mandate for the Trump administration’s intelligence agencies to declassify information about the virus’s origins, zeroing in on the Wuhan Institute of Virology and China’s alleged efforts to muddy the waters.
Let’s rewind to 2019, when SARS-CoV-2 first reared its ugly head in Wuhan, China, home to a lab known for risky gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses. The Chinese government quickly dismissed any lab leak speculation, instead peddling wild tales of the virus sprouting from a U.S. military base. Meanwhile, early theories from scientists and media pointed to a Wuhan "wet market," a narrative some now claim was pushed to sideline other possibilities.
Six years into this global mess, the Trump administration is doubling down on getting answers. Evidence from non-U.S. intelligence, including a recent German report suggesting an accidental lab release, keeps pointing to Wuhan, yet much of America’s own intel remains under lock and key.
During the prior administration, efforts to unveil the truth hit a brick wall, even with the signing of the COVID-19 Origin Act of 2023. Reports suggest key findings were buried, leaving Congress and the public in the dark. It’s no wonder frustration has been brewing on Capitol Hill.
Enter the NDAA’s Section 6803, which tasks Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard with leading a sweeping review alongside all 18 U.S. spy agencies. This isn’t just a peek behind the curtain—it’s a two-pronged probe into the virus’s roots, including Wuhan’s research and funding, as well as China’s alleged obstruction of investigations.
Gabbard, who set up the Director’s Initiatives Group earlier this year to tackle declassification of public interest issues like COVID-19, is now mandated to release declassified intel publicly and provide unredacted reports to congressional committees. Her office is even interviewing whistleblowers to piece together the puzzle.
“DNI Gabbard remains committed to declassifying COVID-19 information and looks forward to continued work with Congress to share the truth about pandemic-era failures with the American people,” a spokesperson for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence told Just the News. Well, isn’t that a breath of fresh air in a world choked by secrecy?
Contrast that with China’s stance, which last week doubled down with, “We firmly oppose all forms of political manipulation,” clinging to a flawed 2021 WHO report influenced by Beijing. Sorry, but when you’re censoring journalists and blocking access to lab data, that’s not exactly the hallmark of transparency.
Back in 2021, U.S. intelligence assessments showed a split—some agencies leaned toward a lab origin with varying confidence, while others clung to a natural spillover theory. The FBI and Department of Energy, for instance, pointed to a lab incident, though much of this was kept hushed until recently.
Sen. Rand Paul has been relentless, subpoenaing multiple agencies for records on taxpayer-funded research and pressing Gabbard for intel tied to Wuhan and gain-of-function experiments. If there’s smoke, he’s determined to find the fire.
Then there’s the Republican-led Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus, which concluded that a lab leak is the most likely scenario, accusing both China and certain U.S. figures of orchestrating cover-ups. It’s a damning charge, but one that aligns with growing skepticism about early narratives.
Even the WHO, criticized for its cozy ties with China, admitted to lacking hard data on Wuhan labs and facing stonewalling from Beijing on health records. Trump’s decision to pull the U.S. out of the organization, citing its mishandling of the crisis, feels more vindicated by the day.
Let’s not forget the EcoHealth Alliance, which funneled U.S. funds to Wuhan for bat virus research, even pitching ideas for viruses eerily similar to SARS-CoV-2. When funding was denied by the Pentagon, evidence suggests the work may have continued anyway—raising eyebrows about oversight.
So here we stand, with the NDAA lighting a fire under the intelligence community to reveal what it knows. Will we finally get clarity on whether this pandemic was a tragic accident or something more sinister? One thing’s certain—Americans deserve the unvarnished truth, no matter how uncomfortable it may be for some in power.
President Trump is shaking up the national parks calendar with a bold move that’s got the left clutching their pearls. The administration has revamped the fee-free entry days for 2026, swapping out certain progressive-favored holidays for dates that celebrate American pride and presidential legacy, including Trump’s own birthday on June 14. It’s a decision that’s sparking debate, but isn’t that just par for the course?
Starting January 1, 2026, the Department of the Interior is rolling out a sweeping overhaul of national park access, from fee structures to free entry days, all aimed at prioritizing American taxpayers while modernizing the system.
Let’s break it down: the 2025 fee-free days, like Martin Luther King Jr. Day and Juneteenth, are off the list for 2026. So are National Public Lands Day and the National Park Week kickoff. Instead, the new calendar includes Trump’s birthday (conveniently also Flag Day), Constitution Day, the 110th anniversary of the National Park Service, and Theodore Roosevelt’s birthday.
Adding to the mix, broader federal holidays like Presidents’ Day, Memorial Day, and a three-day Independence Day weekend join the free-entry lineup for 2026. Veterans Day, thankfully, remains untouched as the only carryover from 2025. It’s a shift that screams red, white, and blue, but not everyone’s waving the flag over it.
Critics from the civil rights crowd and Democratic lawmakers are crying foul, claiming this move sidelines holidays tied to Black American history. “Let’s be clear here: both MLK Jr. Day and Juneteenth were free entry days last year,” said Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, D-Nev. Well, senator, change isn’t always comfortable, but prioritizing national unity over niche observances might just be the reset we need.
On the flip side, the administration argues this is about fairness and accessibility for everyday Americans. “President Trump’s leadership always puts American families first,” said Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum. And let’s be honest—focusing on holidays that unite rather than divide feels like a breath of fresh air after years of culture-war calendar games.
Beyond the calendar kerfuffle, the Interior Department is dragging park access into the 21st century. America the Beautiful passes—whether annual, military, senior, fourth-grade, or access—are going fully digital, available for purchase and display via Recreation.gov. Visitors can activate them instantly and even link them to physical cards if they’re feeling nostalgic.
To keep lines moving, updated validation tools and fresh training for park staff are being introduced. The goal? Streamline the visitor experience so families aren’t stuck waiting while rangers fumble with paperwork.
Even the annual pass gets a patriotic glow-up with new artwork for both digital and physical versions. It’s a small touch, but one that reminds us these parks are a treasure worth celebrating. Who doesn’t love a little extra red, white, and blue?
Now, let’s talk money—the fee structure is getting a patriotic tweak too. U.S. residents still pay $80 for the annual pass, but international visitors will shell out $250, and nonresidents without a pass face an extra $100 per person at 11 top-tier parks. It’s a smart way to ensure foreigners chip in more for maintenance while keeping costs down for Americans.
The revenue from these higher nonresident fees will fund facility upgrades, maintenance, and better visitor services across the system. Even motorcycle riders get a win—passes now cover two bikes instead of one. That’s more freedom on the open road, and who can argue with that?
Still, the fee-free day changes remain the hot-button issue, with some arguing it’s a slight to history. But isn’t it time we focused on shared American milestones over divisive dates? The left may grumble, but celebrating what binds us—Constitution Day, Independence weekend—feels like a step toward unity.
Look, no one’s denying the importance of historical struggles, but parks should be a place for all Americans to come together, not a battleground for cultural agendas. Trump’s birthday on the list might raise eyebrows, but tying it to Flag Day doubles down on national pride.
The broader overhaul—digital passes, staff training, fee adjustments—shows a commitment to making parks more accessible and sustainable. If international visitors pay a bit more to keep Yosemite pristine, that’s a trade-off worth making.
At the end of the day, this is about ensuring our national treasures reflect the values of the majority, not just the loudest voices. The 2026 changes may not please everyone, but they’re a bold attempt to put American families and shared heritage front and center. Let’s give it a chance before we cry foul.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
PALM BEACH, Florida – President Donald Trump is making another pitch for Major League Baseball pitching legend Roger Clemens to be inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame immediately as officials vote Sunday on admitting new members.
"These highly respected owners, executives, writers, and, most importantly, Hall of Famers, should do the right thing by finally putting Roger Clemens, known as 'The Rocket,' in the Hall!" Trump exclaimed Saturday on Truth Social.
The Hall's 16-member Contemporary Era Committee is convening this weekend at the Winter Meetings in Orlando, Florida.
Clemens is among eight players considered for the honor along with Barry Bonds, Carlos Delgado, Jeff Kent, Don Mattingly, Dale Murphy, Gary Sheffield and Fernando Valenzuela.
"Roger is clearly one of the Greatest Pitchers of All Time," Trump continued, "with amazing achievements that include winning 354 Games, seven Cy Young Awards (A Record, by a lot!), and playing in six World Series, winning two. 'The Rocket' is second only to another All Time GREAT, Hall of Famer Nolan Ryan, in most strike-outs.
"Roger Clemens is the only pitcher who has won 300 games to not have the honor of being enshrined in the Hall of Fame, which is a total travesty!
"The only reason he is not is because of rumors and innuendo, which were not proven. He never tested positive and, when the Obama DOJ went after him in a criminal case claiming that he did take steroids, Roger, who has always denied taking any drugs, was FULLY ACQUITTED OF ALL CHARGES.
"'The Rocket,' a nickname he earned very early in his career because of his blazing fastball, was just as dominant before those erroneous allegations were leveled against him. I sincerely hope that the Committee uses its great judgment (Roger's opponents never proved a thing against him, and he may have the best pitching record, all told, in the History of Baseball!), and the Baseball Commissioner has the Strength, Wisdom, and Power to do the right thing, and put Roger Clemens in The Baseball Hall of Fame, IMMEDIATELY!"
As WorldNetDaily previously reported, Trump went to bat for Clemens in August, saying, "354 Wins – Put him in NOW. He and his great family should not be forced to endure this 'stupidity' any longer!"
"This is going to be like Pete Rose where, after over 4,000 Hits, they wouldn't put him in the Hall of Fame until I spoke to the Commissioner, and he promised to do so, but it was essentially a promise not kept because he only 'opened it up' when Pete died and, even then, he said that Pete Rose only got into the mix because of DEATH."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The Supreme Court is taking up the fight in Michigan over a house that a county essentially stole.
Officials in Isabella County actually took control of a 3,000-square-foot home originally purchased by Scott Pung and evicted his descendants.
All for a tax bill for which Pung had obtained an ongoing exemption.
So the bill never should have existed.
It is the Pacific Legal Foundation that explained when Pung first bought the house, he "secured a tax exemption for a supplemental property tax."
It was an ongoing exemption, and when Scott died in 2004 and his wife in 2008, his son, Marc, took control of the house.
"Under Michigan law, the tax exemption continued automatically as long as family members lived in the home. Marc lived there with his wife and young child. No additional paperwork was required," the legal team explained.
That wasn't enough, however, for Patricia DePriest, a local tax assessor.
"Despite clear statutory language protecting the Pungs, she retroactively denied the exemption for several previous years, arguing that Scott's heirs should have resubmitted paperwork," the foundation explained.
At the Michigan Tax Tribunal, an administrative law judge ruled for the family, and still that didn't make any difference to DePriest.
"When asked during a subsequent hearing about the administrative law judge's ruling that the family didn't need to file additional paperwork, she replied defiantly: 'I don't care what he says; the law says that you do,'" the report said.
That tax had accumulated to about $2,000, something the family legally didn't owe.
But the county demanded foreclosure and took the $200,000 dwelling in 2015, selling it for $76,000.
"The county kept all the money and evicted Marc, his wife, and their young child from the family home.
"When government takes more than it is owed to settle back taxes, it's home equity theft. In 2023, the Supreme Court deemed the practice unconstitutional in Tyler v. Hennepin County, which PLF brought to the Court," PLF noted.
So the Pungs sued and a trial court held that the government violated the Constitution by taking more than it was owed. But rather than pay the Pungs for what had been wrongly taken, the court held that the county only had to hand over the windfall the government had taken at the Pungs' expense—the surplus proceeds from a poorly run auction, the report said.
"The government should never have foreclosed on the Pungs to collect a debt that was improperly imposed. The Pungs deserve payment for what was taken—a $200,000 home minus any 'debt.' The Eighth Amendment also prohibits excessive fines, including destroying $118,000 in equity to collect $2,242 that was never owed in the first place. The penalty far outweighs any alleged wrongdoing."
Now it will be up to the Supreme Court to decide how the confiscation by the county for a tax bill that was wrongly assessed should be handled.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A former Drug Enforcement Administration official who rose to the rank of deputy chief of the Office of Financial Operations under Barack Obama has been raided by the FBI and now is facing charges of conspiring to launder millions of dollars for a Mexican drug cartel.
The United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York identified the suspect as Paul Campo, who along with a friend, Robert Sensi, was indicted on charges of "narcoterrorism, terrorism, narcotics distribution, and money laundering."
The announcement was made by Jay Clayton, the U.S. attorney for the district, and Terrance C. Cole, the chief of the DEA.
"As alleged, Paul Campo and Robert Sensi conspired to assist CJNG, one of the most notorious Mexican cartels that is responsible for countless deaths through violence and drug trafficking in the United States and Mexico," said U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton. As part of that support, the defendants laundered hundreds of thousands of dollars they believed to be CJNG drug proceeds, agreed to launder millions more, and even agreed to use their financial expertise to facilitate cocaine trafficking right here in New York City.
"By participating in this scheme, Campo betrayed the mission he was entrusted with pursuing for his 25-year career with the DEA. CJNG is a violent and corrupting criminal enterprise that New Yorkers want broken. I commend the extraordinary efforts of the DEA in aggressively pursuing CJNG and those who support their deadly and corrupt efforts, no matter who they may be."
CJNG is the Jalisco New Generation Cartel, or Cartel de Jalisco Nueva Generacion.
Federal authorities charged:
CJNG is a Mexico-based transnational criminal group overseen by Nemesio Ruben "El Mencho" Oseguera-Cervantes that controls a significant portion of the narcotics trafficking trade. CJNG illicitly transports cocaine, methamphetamine, fentanyl, and other controlled substances into the United States. CJNG also engages in money laundering and other criminal activities, including acts of violence and intimidation. On February 20, 2025, the United States Secretary of State designated CJNG as a Foreign Terrorist Organization under Section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
PAUL CAMPO worked for the DEA for approximately 25 years, first as a Special Agent in New York and eventually rising to become a high-level DEA official, specifically the Deputy Chief of the Office of Financial Operations. CAMPO retired from DEA in or about January 2016.
In late 2024, ROBERT SENSI began meeting with a confidential source working at the direction of law enforcement ("CS-1"), who was posing as a member of CJNG. SENSI told CS-1 that he had a friend who used to be in charge of DEA's financial operations who could assist CJNG by laundering narcotics proceeds and providing CS-1 with sensitive DEA information about sources and investigations.
After these initial meetings, CAMPO and SENSI together met with CS-1 on several occasions. During these conversations, CAMPO and SENSI agreed to launder money for CS 1 by, among other things, converting cash into cryptocurrency and making investments in real estate. CAMPO and SENSI further advised CS-1 about fentanyl production and explored procuring commercial drones and military-grade weapons and equipment for CJNG, including AR-15 semi-automatic rifles, M4 carbines, M16 rifles, grenade launchers, and rocket-propelled grenades. As part of these discussions, CAMPO and SENSI often boasted about and relied heavily on CAMPO's prior federal law enforcement experience and expertise regarding financial investigations and drug cartels.
Regarding the drones, in one meeting, CS 1 explained to CAMPO, "what we do with the drones, we put explosives and we just send it over there, boom"; in another conversation, CS 1 asked SENSI how much C-4 explosive the drones could carry, to which SENSI responded, in sum and substance, approximately six kilograms, which is enough to "blow up the whole f—— . . . I don't want to say."
As part of the scheme, CAMPO and SENSI agreed to launder approximately $12,000,000 of CJNG narcotics proceeds; laundered approximately $750,000 by converting cash into cryptocurrency; and provided a payment for approximately 220 kilograms of cocaine on the understanding that the payment would trigger the distribution and sale of the narcotics worth approximately $5,000,000, for which CAMPO and SENSI would (i) receive directly a portion of the narcotics proceeds as profit; and (ii) receive a further commission upon the laundering of the balance of the narcotics proceeds.
Cole said, "The indictment of former Special Agent Paul Campo sends a powerful message: those who betray the public trust—past or present—will be held to account to the fullest extent of the law. The alleged conduct occurred after he left DEA and was unrelated to his official duties here, but any former agent who chooses to engage in criminal activity dishonors the men and women who serve with integrity and undermines the public's confidence in law enforcement. We will not look the other way simply because someone once wore this badge. There is no tolerance and no excuse for this kind of betrayal."
Campo and Sensi each face a count of conspiring to commit narcoterrorism, which carries a mandatory minimum sentence of 20 years.
Other charges are conspiring to distribute and possess with intent to distribute cocaince, conspiring to provide material support and resources to CJNG, a desginated foreign terrorist organization, and money laundering.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
President Donald Trump has labeled the far-left governor of Colorado, homosexual Jared Polis, a "SLEAZEBAG" for keeping an "elderly woman" in prison.
Trump's comments targeted the case of Tina Peters, a former Mesa County clerk, "who was unfairly convicted of what the Democrats do, cheating on Elections."
In fact, the leftist court system in Colorado, which is run entirely by Democrats in the executive branch, through the Democrat-majority legislature and into the all-Democrat state supreme Court, which is so far left its members unsuccessfully tried to remove Trump from the 2024 presidential ballot, convicted Peters of nine counts for her acts of trying to preserve records from the 2020 vote.
Trump said, "The SLEAZEBAG Governor of Colorado, Jared Polis, refuses to allow an elderly woman, Tina Peters, who was unfairly convicted of what the Democrats do, cheating on Elections, out of jail! She was convicted for trying to stop Democrats from stealing Colorado Votes in the Election.
"She was preserving Election Records, which she was obligated to do under Federal Law. She has now served more than one year in jail, and has eight years to go. On top of everything else, she is a cancer 'survivor.' This lightweight Governor, who has allowed his State to go to hell (Tren de Aragua, anyone?), should be ashamed of himself. FREE TINA!"
The Washington Examiner explained Trump decided to "scold" Polis over the case involving alleged "unauthorized" access to the county's election system.
Interestingly, the Democrat secretary of state in Colorado, Jena Griswold, allowed hundreds of election systems passwords to be posted on the Internet, and she was given a pass over her behavior.
It was District Juge Matthew Barrett who had claimed, while sentencing Peters to years in prison, she "abused" her position.
"I am convinced you would do it all over again if you could. You're as defiant as any defendant this court has ever seen," Barrett ranted in extra-judicial comments at the time. "You are no hero. You abused your position, and you're a charlatan."
The Examiner documented, "Peters was found guilty on 'three counts of attempting to influence a public servant, one count of conspiracy to commit criminal impersonation, first-degree official misconduct, violation of duty, and failing to comply with the secretary of state.""
Peters has maintained her innocence.
Trump is not allowed to pardon her, as he has done for others, because her charges were state counts.
WND previously reported that the Department of Justice already has asked the federal Bureau of Prisons to research paths for Peters to be moved out of state custody and into a federal facility.
Long has there been the suspicion that the Democrat state's actions against Peters over her concerns about the 2020 election integrity were "oriented more toward inflicting political pain that toward pursuing actual justice or legitimate governmental objectives."
It was the office of Deputy Attorney General, led by Todd Blanche, that dispatched an email to Bureau of Prisons Director William Marshall, calling on the BOP to do the necessary research.
"At the request of the Deputy Attorney General, please have the Bureau of Prisons explore any and all avenues within BOP's authority to seek and request the transfer of Ms. Tina Peters from the Colorado Department of Corrections to a federal BOP facility," the DOJ instructed.
"We ask that BOP send out a request to Colorado as soon as possible and that BOP begin preparations for any possible transfer into federal custody."
In fact, Trump several times has called for the state to "FREE TINA PETERS," describing her as "a brave and innocent Patriot who has been tortured by crooked Colorado politicians, including the big Mail-In Ballot supporting the governor of the State."
Of course, evidence of vast levels of serious misbehavior remains in the state, and not just in the halls of state government in Denver. Records show the sheriff's office in one foothills county, Gilpin, had to pay out $700,000 some years ago for maintaining in official records references to a black resident as "N—– Roy." And Todd Vriesman, a state judge in that same county, recently had a case overturned because he violated the U.S. Constitution by clearing his courtroom out and sealing the doors, thereby depriving a defendant of a public trial.
Further, Colorado leftists repeatedly have used government power there to attack Christians, trying to deprive them of their constitutionally protected religious and speech rights, in cases that have ended up before the Supreme Court, and which the state has lost.