This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Media corporations across America long have opposed, privately and publicly, President Donald Trump. Negative stories? Every day. Reports on his successes? A rarity.
But now a federal appeals court has cleared the path for a lawsuit brought by Trump over a last-minute polling before the 2024 election that exhibited a lot of suspicious factors, and it literally tried to give a huge boost to failed Democrat nominee Kamala Harris.
The polling was done by J. Ann Selzer for The Des Moines Register, and claimed Harris held a three-point edge over Trump in Iowa, 47% to 44%.
It was pushed to the headlines just two days before the election.
And it was a "stunning" reversal from shortly before, when Trump was confirmed to have a four-point lead.
According to a documentation from Americafirstreport.com, "Released just days before voters headed to the polls, the numbers lit up cable news and social media, painting a false picture of momentum for the Democratic ticket in a reliably red stronghold. In reality, Trump crushed Harris by more than 13 points, his widest margin in Iowa yet and the biggest Republican presidential win there since Ronald Reagan's era."
Trumps court filing in Polk County District Court charged that the defendants, Selzer, the Register and others, of "brazen election interference" through a "leaked and manipulated" poll intended to sway undecided voters.
"The complaint lays out a pattern of suspicious shifts: sample sizes skewed toward urban areas, questionable weighting that favored younger and minority respondents, and a sudden leak to friendly outlets that amplified the Harris lead without scrutiny," the report said.
Now the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has cleared the way for the defamation lawsuit to proceed in state court.
"This move strips away what Trump's lawyers called a shield of 'unlawful gamesmanship' by the defendants, forcing them to face accountability where the wrongs took place," the report said.
The report pointed out that the huge fail by Selzer, who strangely decided to abandon polling days after this was released, "smacks of something more coordinated, especially given the timing and the media echo chamber that treated it as gospel despite her spotted track record…"
The report noted, "Her polls have always tended to favor whoever she personally supports."
The defendants had tried to move the case from state to federal court, but Trump's lawyers argued that the federal venue move was a delay tactic as state law governed the claims.
The 8th Circuit agreed.
The report noted this case, ultimately, "could crack open doors to similar suits against pollsters nationwide reminding the press that free speech doesn't license fraud."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
U.S. Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., is urging Republicans to "nuke the filibuster" in order to prevent future government shutdowns.
The Democrat who often speaks against the leadership of his party appeared on Fox News Saturday, telling anchor Kayleigh McEnany the Senate should slice out an exception to the current filibuster rule regarding government funding, making it "almost impossible" to halt operations.
"Well, I just know that two things must be true in this situation right now," Fetterman said.
"SNAP depends on 2 million Pennsylvanians to feed themselves, and I believe it's about 40 million Americans across the nation. That's a big deal right now."
And now we all realize that a lot of the premiums are going to go up, and we might want to address that too. We can support those two things, but I think it's fundamentally wrong, regardless, to shut our government down for those things. The Republican side has their priorities; we have our priorities. I think we have to agree that our government must be open."
McEnany asked the senator: "You think it's time for Republicans to nuke the filibuster and end this thing?"
Fetterman responded: "I think I broached that before. I think it's entirely appropriate. I would remind all of us – the Democrats – we wanted to nuke the entire filibuster. I'm referring to right now carving out this specific situation. I'm not talking about eliminating the entire filibuster.
"It's really not much different than about the en bloc nominees, and I think that was appropriate to do in that situation as well, too. Carving out the filibuster now would make it almost impossible to shut our government down in the future, regardless if it's the Democrats or the Republicans doing these things. We should remove our own power to shut this down in this way."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The first lawsuit has been filed, by a Virginia couple, over President Donald Trump's plan to gift the American people a badly needed $300 million ballroom, to be used for state dinners and the like, at the White House complex by replacing the East Wing.
And it's being done essentially without breaking laws because the White House, and the Supreme Court building and Capitol building are exempt from many standard procedures.
According to published reports, "The Trump administration's decision to demolish the East Wing of the White House without consulting preservation agencies and organizations is a reflection in part of the unusual position the building has in historical preservation law."
It explained that Trump's work with a local planning commissioner means that approval is a foregone conclusion.
Sara Bronin headed the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation for Joe Biden, and found, "There's a sense that protections on one of the country's most important buildings should have been a lot stronger from the start. And as we look to what is going to happen next, including plans for construction, I do think we need to get a better understanding about every step that the White House didn't take this time and must take next time."
Democrats have erupted in rage, again, this time over the construction of the ballroom, which is being paid for with private dollars, and the plan is that it won't cost taxpayers anything.
The East Wing's demolition was begun this week, and leftists in the party erupted with all sorts of snark, but most entirely ignored the previous destruction and construction that other presidents, like Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, did to the actual White House, not just a wing.
The White House was built from 1792 to 1800, is owned by American people and overseen by the National Park Service.
The East Wing, which held offices, dates to about the 1940s.
Priya Jain of the Society of Architectural Historians said past White House changes have gone through public review procedures, but a provision in the rules allowed Trump's plan to be on the fast track.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt has explained the administration wasn't required to submit plans for demolition, but that a construction plan would be provided.
A 1952 law requires approval from a local planning board, the National Capital Planning Commission, which now is being run by a White House staff secretary, Will Scharf.
Donors have been revealed to include Google LLC, Blackstone Inc., OpenAI, Coinbase Global Inc., Palantir Technologies Inc. and Lockheed Martin Corp., among others, with donations being handled through the Trust for the National Mall, a nonprofit.
Rep. Jared Huffman, D-Calif., has tried to interfere, demanding, "This project represents one of the most substantial alterations to the White House in modern history. The decisions were made in complete secrecy and undertaken without public disclosure or proper consultation."
Democrats are questioning the demolition, the construction plans, the donors and much more.
A lawsuit filed by Charles and Judith Voorhees, in federal court in Washington, submits claims that the administration did not secure "legally required approvals or reviews" for the work.
Hillary Clinton has joined that agenda, claiming, "It's not his house. It's your house. And he's destroying it."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The New York Knicks have unleashed the riot act on Zohran Mamdani.
The NBA basketball team is not with him. They are not supporting him. And they may be taking him to court.
A report at Fox News explains Mamdani's campaign, he's running for New York mayor, has been using a logo similar to the team's.
"The NY Knicks have sent NYC Mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani a cease-and-desist letter for using the NY Knicks logo to promote his candidacy. The Knicks want to make it clear that we do not endorse Mr. Mamdani for Mayor, and we object to his use of our copyrighted logo. We will pursue all legal remedies to enforce our rights," the team stated.
The report explained Mamdani posted the logo on social media, claiming, "This is our year. This is our time. #NewYorkForever."
The image, later deleted, was of Madison Square Garden.
The report said Mamdani is the favorite in the political race, even though as a member of the Democratic Socialists of America his platform is filled with boilerplate communism, such as his idea of "seizing the means of production."
He's also for government housing, government-run grocery stores, government control of land, and prompted a comment from President Donald Trump with his agenda.
"Finally happened," Trump wrote. "Zohran Mamdani, a 100% Communist Lunatic, has just won the Dem Primary, and is on his way to becoming Mayor."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The driver in a deadly big rig that killed three in a crash in California had been caught sneaking into the United States illegally in 2022, but then released under Joe Biden's open borders policies and practices.
A report from Fox News cites federal law enforcement sources in revealing that Jashanpreet Singh, 21, encountered Border Patrol agents in the El Centro Sector in California in March 2022.
Then he was released into the interior of the country, as per Biden's practices, pending an immigration hearing.
Online reports said the driver, now "suspected of killing three people in a DUI crash on the 10 freeway in Ontario, CA," was revealed to be "an Indian illegal alien."
He is in custody now in San Bernardino County, where Immigration and Customs Enforcement has placed a detainer on him.
"Police say Singh was speeding and under the influence, never hitting his breaks, when he crashed into slow moving traffic on the freeway, causing a devastating and deadly chain reaction crash that killed 3 people. The victims have not been identified yet," the report said.
The horrific violence was caught on dashcam video, and also injured multiple people.
"Police say Singh never hit the brakes before slamming into the traffic jam, citing toxicology tests that confirmed impairment," Fox reported.
And the Department of Homeland Security affirmed he does not have a lawful immigration status.
The report noted he was released under Biden's "alternatives to detention" practice, "one of several instances Fox News has documented where illegal immigrants released pending hearings went on to commit a crime."
It's not the first such scenario. An illegal alien driving a big rig in Florida caused a crash that also killed three several weeks ago.
WND reported initially on the video confirming the truck driver simply plowed into traffic in front of him with no apparent effort to slow down.
The evidence:
Reported the X member who posted the video: "I'm sure this wreck has nothing to do with the 25% of CDLs in Gavin Newsom's California being improperly issued…"
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The U.S. Department of War on Wednesday announced a newly approved Pentagon press corps after most media outlets balked at a new policy reporters had been asked to sign that would restrict their access to personnel in the mammoth building.
Chief Pentagon Spokesman Sean Parnell posted to X about the development, saying the new press pool includes more than 60 reporters, "representing a broad spectrum of new media outlets and independent journalists." Parnell said the new system will help "circumvent the lies of the mainstream media."
The War Department came under withering criticism when Secretary Pete Hegseth announced the new policy, one that included tighter restrictions on what reporters cover and who they could talk to in the Pentagon without approval.
The Pentagon Press Association called the new set of rules an "unprecedented message of intimidation."
According to the U.K.'s Independent, only one media organization agreed to sign on to the policy: One America News. Included in those outlets that refused to sign are Fox News and Newsmax.
Dozens of reporters handed in the badges and walked out of the Pentagon en mass last Wednesday, carrying their belongings with them.
Thomas Antony responded to the announcement on X, taking issue with Parnell's characterization that the previous press corps "self-deported."
Said Antony: "They didn't self-deport; they were pushed out for refusing to let the Pentagon pre-approve their stories. This isn't a new press corps. It's a compliant one. What happens when the only news you get is government-approved?"
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The Steele dossier, that collection of wildly false claims about President Donald Trump that was funded by supporters for twice-failed Democrat presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton and used by Democrats to undermine Trump's presidency, is coming back to bite.
It was the CIA, through an officer, that drafted an annex containing a summary of the dossier, which actually came from a hired former British agent. And it was John Brennan, then CIA chief, who decided to include information from the dossier in an "Intelligence Community Assessment." And it was Brennan who overruled senior CIA officers who opposed the inclusion of that material.
The circumstance now is that, after Brennan "made numerous willfully and intentionally false statements of material fact" about the dossier when testifying under oath to the House Judiciary Committee, he's being referred to the Department of Justice for investigation and possible prosecution.
The letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi, from Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, the chairman of the committee, said, "We write to refer significant evidence that former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) John Brennan knowingly made false statements during his transcribed interview before the Committee on the Judiciary on May 11, 2023. While testifying, Brennan made numerous willfully and intentionally false statements of material fact contradicted by the record established by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) and the CIA.
"Under 18 U.S.C. § 1001, a witness commits a crime if he 'knowingly and willfully . . . makes any materially false . . . statement or representation' with respect to 'any investigation or review, conducted pursuant to the authority of any committee . . . of the Congress[.]' Congress cannot perform its oversight function if witnesses who appear before its committees do not provide truthful testimony. Making false statements before Congress is a crime that undermines the integrity of the Committee's constitutional duty to conduct oversight," the letter said.
Government records from the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the CIA reveal that Brennan's false testimony included: "denying that the CIA relied on the discredited Steele dossier in drafting the post-2016 election Intelligence Community Assessment; and … testifying when he told the Committee that the CIA opposed including the Steele dossier in the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA)."
This scenario was detailed on Jordan's letter:
On January 6, 2017, the CIA, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and National Security Agency published a declassified version of an Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) titled Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections. The ICA stated, among other things, that Russia 'developed a clear preference' for President Trump and 'aspired to help' him win the election. This conclusion—now known to be false—was based in part on the Steele dossier, which 'was referenced in the ICA main body text, and further detailed in a two-page ICA annex.' The Steele dossier was a series of reports containing baseless accusations concerning President Trump's ties to Russia compiled and delivered to the FBI in 2016 by former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele. Subsequent investigations confirmed that the Clinton campaign and the DNC paid Steele via the law firm Perkins Coie and opposition research firm Fusion GPS to provide derogatory information about Trump's purported ties to Russia, which resulted in the discredited dossier. In July 2025, the Trump Administration declassified numerous documents showing that the ICA's main findings were false and that the Obama Administration knowingly fabricated the findings for the purpose of undermining the Trump Administration.
Further, evidence now confirms "Brennan falsely testified to the Committee. During a transcribed interview on May 11, 2023, Brennan stated that 'the CIA was not involved at all with the [Steele] dossier.'"
Brennan's claims, the letter charged, "cannot be reconciled with the facts."
And Brennan's claim the CIA was "very much opposed to having any reference or inclusion of the Steele dossier in the Intelligence Community Assessment" was undermined by "multiple sources that reveal Brennan's support for including the dossier in the ICA."
The letter continued, "The HPSCI report and the CIA memorandum confirm not only that the Steele dossier was used as a basis for the ICA, but that Brennan insisted on its inclusion. This stands in stark contrast with Brennan's testimony to HPSCI that the dossier was not used in drafting the ICA. Brennan's testimony is also contradicted by the ICA itself, which references the dossier in the main body of the assessment and summarizes material from the dossier in an annex."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
President Donald Trump has won the latest fight brought against his anti-crime and pro-national security agenda, with a court ruling that he is allowed to dispatch National Guard troops to Portland, Ore., to oppose rampant crime.
It was a three-judge panel at the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that lifted a lower court's order that blocked Trump from exercising his authority.
"After considering the record at this preliminary stage, we conclude that it is likely that the President lawfully exercised his statutory authority under 10 U.S.C. § 12406(3), which authorizes the federalization of the National Guard when 'the President is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States,'" the judges wrote.
They cited multiple violent attacks on federal operations in Portland, including at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement office, arsons, assaults on federal officers and more.
Before the ruling was released Monday, rioters over the weekend staged their latest assault on the government, with several people arrested, for assault, harassment, and more.
Further, the ruling pointed out that there's been a "lack" of support for federal authorities from Portland's police, and that the Federal Protective Service has had to "rely almost exclusively on ICE and SRT for assistance in preventing violent protesters from attacking officers and the facility in which they work."
A politically active lower court judge had blocked Trump from deploying both in Oregon and other states.
Trump, earlier, had said, "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. Thank you for your attention to this matter!"
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
WEST PALM BEACH, Florida – The U.S. Secret Service has discovered a "suspicious" hunting stand with a direct line of sight to where President Donald Trump exits Air Force One at Palm Beach International Airport.
"USSS spotted a suspicious stand near the AF1 zone in Palm Beach," said FBI Director Kash Patel on Sunday. "The FBI is investigating."
The stand was located on Thursday, and Patel says it has not yet been connected to any specific individual.
"Prior to the president's return to West Palm Beach, USSS discovered what appeared to be an elevated hunting stand within sight line of the Air Force One landing zone," Patel told Fox News Digital.
"No individuals were located at the scene. The FBI has since taken the investigatory lead, flying in resources to collect all evidence from the scene, and deploying our cell phone analytics capabilities."
Anthony Guglielmi, chief of communications for the Secret Service, indicated his agency is "working closely" with the FBI as well as Palm Beach County law enforcement.
He said agents came upon the hunting stand during "advance security preparations" prior to Trump's arrival in South Florida.
"There was no impact to any movements and no individuals were present or involved at the location," Guglielmi told Fox News.
"While we are not able to provide details about the specific items or their intent, this incident underscores the importance of our layered security measures," he added.
A law-enforcement source told Fox News Digital the stand appeared to have been set up "months ago."
This new probe comes weeks after Ryan Routh was found guilty of attempting to assassinate Trump from a sniper's nest as Trump was playing golf in West Pam Beach.
And on July 13, 2024, Trump was struck in the ear by a bullet during a campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania.
Some reaction online to the suspicious stand includes:
"Whoever set that stand up isn't hunting deer that close to an airport. The planes would scare the deer off. That stand was set up for one reason. To take out Trump. Needs to be fingerprinted and traced to where it was purchased."
"That's not just 'suspicious,' that's terrifying. Security isn't a luxury – it's survival when it comes to a … president. Hope the agencies stay sharp and prevent anything before it even begins."
"Protect POTUS at all costs! They're never going to stop trying and we're not even a year into his presidency."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
John Bolton, formerly an official in President Donald Trump's first term who after he was removed from his post unleashed vicious criticism of the president, has pleaded not guilty to a long list of serious charges.
He was indicted by a federal grand jury on multiple counts of mishandling classified materials.
He was accused of transmitting and retaining national defense information, "over allegations he sent 'diary-like entries' to two relatives about his day-to-day as Trump's adviser and kept classified records at his home in a Maryland suburb after leaving the position," said the Hill.
"Not guilty, your honor," Bolton said during a court appearance in Greenbelt, Md., on Friday.
The report noted, "Bolton is the third of President Trump's proclaimed foes to face federal charges from his Justice Department."
He is facing 18 counts.
He agreed to surrender his passport to counsel and was ordered released after processing. The next hearing in the case is set for Nov. 21.
A federal grand jury in Maryland indicted Bolton, who served during Trump's first term from April 2018 to September 2019.
The Daily Caller News Foundation revealed documents with "confidential" and "secret" markings "were found inside Bolton's Washington, D.C. office during an Aug. 22 Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) raid, including some with references to weapons of mass destruction, according to a September court filing. Federal agents searched Bolton's Maryland home that same day but did not find classified materials at the location."
"These materials, many of which are documents that had been previously approved as part of a pre-publication review for Amb. Bolton's book, were reviewed and closed years ago," Bolton's attorney Abbe Lowell previously has said.
The DOJ resumed investigating him for possibly infringing the law over Bolton's book, which he used to level scathing criticism at Trump.
Previously indicted were ex-FBI chief James Comey for allegedly lying to Congress, and Democrat New York Attorney James over alleged mortgage fraud.