This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

On the eve of Election Day in New York City, President Donald Trump urged citizens of the Big Apple to vote – not for Republican Curtis Sliwa, but for Democrat-turned-Independent Andrew Cuomo, as he does not wish "Communist Candidate Zohran Mamdani" to be the next mayor.

"A vote for Curtis Sliwa (who looks much better without the beret!) is a vote for Mamdani," Trump said Monday on Truth Social.

"Whether you personally like Andrew Cuomo or not, you really have no choice. You must vote for him, and hope he does a fantastic job. He is capable of it, Mamdani is not!"

Trump gave a lengthy explanation for his plea, saying: "If Communist Candidate Zohran Mamdani wins the Election for Mayor of New York City, it is highly unlikely that I will be contributing Federal Funds, other than the very minimum as required, to my beloved first home, because of the fact that, as a Communist, this once great City has ZERO chance of success, or even survival!

"It can only get worse with a Communist at the helm, and I don't want to send, as President, good money after bad. It is my obligation to run the Nation, and it is my strong conviction that New York City will be a Complete and Total Economic and Social Disaster should Mamdani win.

"His principles have been tested for over a thousand years, and never once have they been successful. I would much rather see a Democrat, who has had a Record of Success, WIN, than a Communist with no experience and a Record of COMPLETE AND TOTAL FAILURE.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A federal appeals court is scheduled on Monday to hear about the discrimination used by the University of Maine system against a Christian church which won a bid to purchase disused school property, but then was rejected because of its beliefs.

A report from Liberty Counsel, which is working on behalf of Calvary Chapel Belfast, explained the lower court claimed that it was fine for the school system to cancel the church's winning bid "despite evidence of religious animus and numerous irregularities in the bidding process."

"Calvary Chapel Belfast rightfully won the University of Maine System's first bidding process, and the appeals court will have the chance to ensure the university honors that bid," explained Liberty Counsel chief Mat Staver. "The church participated in the bidding process in good faith, but UMS then unlawfully rescinded their winning bid due to its religious beliefs after community backlash but under the excuse of procedural deficiencies. Such discrimination is unlawful, and an injunction is necessary to restore the church's bid award and stop these unconstitutional actions."

The fight started several years ago, when in November 2024, the church fought back when school officials rescinded the winning bid for the Hutchinson Center.

The rescission was because of "public, legislative, and donor outcry over" the Christian beliefs of the church.

The church sought an injunction, and Liberty Counsel argued on its behalf that UMS officials deviated from their bidding procedures, accepted invalid appeals form the losers, and "cited relocating an Internet hub from the building as a 'cost-avoidance deficiency' as the reason for rescinding the initial award."

Liberty Counsel explained, "Subsequently, UMS held a second, rigged bidding process that awarded the building to a secular bidder."

Despite evidence, the legal team noted, Stacey Neumann, a judge, rejected the request for an injunction.

Pending now is the argument from Liberty Counsel that "decisions from at least four other appeals courts make clear that when adverse government actions follow in sequence after 'bigoted community opposition,' any 'direct and circumstantial evidence' of discriminatory intent is 'valid.'"

All that's needed for problems to occur is for the government decisionmaker to "knowingly act on the objections" of those who are intentionally discriminating.

"The record shows that [UMS] acted in the wake of extraordinary religiously motivated opposition from UMaine donors, faculty, alumni, and the disappointed bidders," wrote Liberty Counsel. "By granting an appeal from a losing bidder that was highly 'infected' with religious animus, as well as overruling its own procurement experts, and disregarding the competitive negotiated procurement process, UMS made a decision that resulted in religious discrimination," the legal team said.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A new report has documented how California has declared war on Christian parents, calling them a danger to children, yet endorsing adults who promote to kids the ideology of removing their private parts because they are the ones who are "safe."

It's all over the transgender ideology, which promotes giving chemicals to children and mutilating their bodies surgically in the mistaken assumption that a boy can become a girl, or vice versa. In fact, being male or female is embedded in the human body down to the DNA level and doesn't change.

The report is posted at Revolver, which cited California's new law, SB 407, which requires foster parents to push the leftist ideology to children they have in their care.

The idea was from state Sen. Scott Wiener, a Democrat who has been described as "California's most dangerous lawmaker."

He is "a whole 'nother level of fetish and perversion," the report states.

Previously he helped decriminalize "loitering for prostitution" in the state, so predators and pimps now can target vulnerable girls more easily.

The report explains the new law, signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, "requires all prospective and current foster parents to demonstrate the 'capacity, ability, and willingness' to affirm a child's self-identified sexual orientation or gender identity as part of the licensing and recertification process."

That means Christians who for years have served the neediest of California's children, those in foster care, now are being excluded.

"But it's perfectly 'safe' for kids to be in a home with foster parents who encourage them to remove their private parts. That makes sense …," the report said.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

President Donald Trump's work on the White House includes, as Democrats have raged, a new ballroom.

To seat some 999 people for state functions, it essentially will replace the East Wing, and the hundreds of millions of dollars in costs are being funded by donors – not taxpayers.

The leftists immediately erupted, like California Democrat Rep. Eric Swalwell, with wild ideas that Democrat presidential hopefuls must pledge to take a wrecking ball to what will be a federal building on day one.

But evidence now confirms that Trump's ability to renovate in style is online.

He posted images a finished bathroom in the Lincoln Bedroom suite in the White House.

He said, "I renovated the Lincoln Bathroom in the White House. It was renovated in the 1940s in an art deco green tile style, which was totally inappropriate for the Lincoln Era. I did it in black and white polished Statuary marble. This was very appropriate for the time of Abraham Lincoln and, in fact, could be the marble that was originally there!" he posted online.

See the results:

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

The report said a Trump administration official confirmed the two nations have an "understanding" and China is not going to "impose the rare earth controls that they proposed."

And China is buying shiploads of soybeans, a development that will please American farmers.

"We have a deal. Now every year we'll renegotiate the deal," Trump said on Air Force One. "All of the rare earth has been settled, and that's for the world."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

President Donald Trump's nominee to lead the Office of Special Counsel withdrew his name "due to a vicious witch hunt orchestrated by far-left outlets desperate to derail President Trump's agenda to drain the swamp."

What they had done was claim that he had been accused of sexual harassment.

The result is a $150 million defamation lawsuit by Paul Ingrassia against Politico and a reporter, Daniel Lippman.

A report in the Gateway Pundit, for whom Ingrassia served for a time as a contributor, revealed the development.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

While President Donald Trump continues his trade-focused mission in the Far East, the commander in chief is irked by what he calls "fake ads" showing his polling levels "at low levels," and is now urging a ban on such commercials.

Shortly after arriving in Japan on Monday, Trump posted a lengthy message on Truth Social, stating: "After winning THREE Elections, BY A LOT, I am now getting the best Polling Numbers that I have ever received.

"People see how strong the Economy is, the Trillions of Dollars of Investment pouring into our Country, the Record Setting Strong Border (After years of millions of criminals pouring through it, totally unvetted and unchecked!), ending 8 wars in eight months, no men playing in women's sports, no transgender for everyone, rapidly falling Energy prices, and much more!

"Despite all of this, the Radical Left Losers are taking fake ads, not showing REAL Polls, but rather saying that I'm Polling at low levels.

"These are the people that I've been beating for years, and am continuing to do so, but by even bigger margins. These ads should not be allowed to run because they are FAKE!

It was not immediately clear to which specific ads about polling Trump was referring.

Just last week, as WorldNetDaily reported, Trump pulled the plug on trade negotiations with Canada, where the economy relies in significant ways on the United States, over what he called a "FAKE" ad that appears to be trying to influence the U.S. Supreme Court's looming decision on tariffs.

Further, that Canadian ad may actually misrepresent President Ronald Reagan, whose words it uses.

Trump responded to that spot, saying: "The Ronald Reagan Foundation has just announced that Canada has fraudulently used an advertisement, which is FAKE, featuring Ronald Reagan speaking negatively about Tariffs. The ad was for $75,000,000. They only did this to interfere with the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court, and other courts. TARIFFS ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO THE NATIONAL SECURITY, AND ECONOMY, OF THE U.S.A. Based on their egregious behavior, ALL TRADE NEGOTIATIONS WITH CANADA ARE HERBY TERMINATED. Thank you for your attention to this matter! President DJT."

The Hill explained, "Trump in August announced a 35 percent tariff on all Canadian goods, though products covered under the 2020 U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement were exempt. Canada is one of the United States' top trading partners, and their economies are heavily intertwined when it comes to certain products. But Trump has repeatedly argued the U.S. does not need Canadian goods, and that Canada is far more reliant on America for its economy."

In fact, the Reagan Foundation confirmed the ad manipulated Reagan's words, and it announced it was reviewing its legal options"

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

More and more evidence is coming out that all was not right with the Joe Biden administration.

The newest evidence comes from a letter signed by House Judiciary Committee chief Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and others.

It informs FBI Director Kash Patel that Biden's FBI "used a security-clearance process to potentially retaliate against a whistleblower, and even tried to interrogate his wife while denying her repeated requests for an attorney."

A report at Fox News outlines the allegations of egregious conduct.

The attack was on Special Agent Valentine Fertitta and his wife, in 2024.

The report noted Fertitta had revealed details of the FBI's misuse of "law-enforcement authorities," for which the Biden administration pushed for his "security clearance evaluation" to be extra long.

"During that time, the FBI made attempts to interrogate his wife, Emily Fertitta, and asked her to participate in a two-day interview," the report said.

She asked for her lawyer to be present, and the DOJ essentially said no.

"Documents available to the Committee show that SecD investigators denied Mrs. Fertitta the right to receive advice from an attorney during her interview and the opportunity to review FBI guidelines regarding the interview process beforehand," Jordan's letter warned.

She was told "policy guides, manuals, and an agenda or outline concerning the interview will not be provided."

Further, the administration warned her: "'An attorney may not be able to give you advice during the interview, nor ask any questions or prevent you from answering your questions during the interview. Essentially, he/she will just sit there silently."

The report noted such demands went "against the standard process for security clearance evaluations."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Democrat California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who is under fire this week for granting commercial driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, is now making no secret he's interested in following Donald Trump as the next American president.

Appearing on "Sunday Morning" on CBS, Newsom answered positively when asked about his White House ambition.

"Yeah, I'd be lying otherwise. I'd just be lying. And I'm not – I can't do that," Newsom said.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Leftists often complain that President Donald Trump doesn't follow court rulings. Actually he does. The facts are that it was Joe Biden who openly defied a Supreme Court rejection of his plan to transfer to taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars in student loan debt, for them to repay, rather than the people who actually borrowed the money.

Now another case has developed in which leftists are actively rejecting, and trying to get around, a decision from the high court.

It's happening in Wisconsin, and the fight has been profiled by the Federalist.

In the original fight, the Supreme Court unanimously said, regarding Catholic Charities, that the state was refusing to provide the charitable organization a tax-exempt status, like other organizations had, in a discriminatory fashion.

In the months since, the Democrat-led government there now has been trying to reimpose that punishment on Catholic Charities, and claims it is not discrimination because it wants to add the same punishment to a long list of additional charities.

"This is an organization that's trying to help people and trying to do it as efficiently as possible. They have limited resources. They want to use them well. You'd think the state would want to partner with that as opposed to targeting it," Becket Fund for Religious Liberty Attorney Colten Stanberry told the Federalist.

The report charged, "Amid leftists' ongoing judicial coup against the Trump administration, America's propaganda media have fomented baseless fears that President Trump is going to 'defy' or 'ignore' a decision from the U.S. Supreme Court if it rules on a case in a way he doesn't like. But if these so-called 'defenders of democracy' are concerned about government officials 'ignoring' court rulings as they claim, where is their outrage about Democrat-led Wisconsin's apparent bid to sidestep SCOTUS in a prominent religious liberty decision issued earlier this year?"

Catholic Charities Bureau is an arm of the Diocese of Superior in Wisconsin and works with many groups, some of which are funded through government contracts.

The facts are that neither employees nor recipients are required to hold a particular religion.

The fight is over state demands that Catholic Charities pay for the state's unemployment system, which the faith organization opposed doing. State officials claimed then the religious group was not religious enough.

The Supreme Court's ruling said it was, warning, "When the government distinguishes among religions based on theological differences in their provision of services, it imposes a denominational preference that must satisfy the highest level of judicial scrutiny. Because Wisconsin has transgressed that principle without the tailoring necessary to survive such scrutiny, the judgment of the Wisconsin Supreme Court is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion."

Now, the report said, Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul, a Democrat, has suggested eliminating the exemption entirely, punishing all faith groups that are involved in such activities in the state.