The West should be a tight-knit community. But some people just want a free lunch.

Now a US ally admitted they’ve been stealing from Americans for years.

Strengthening American Leadership in Global Security

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, in a BBC interview on July 18, 2025, acknowledged the United States’ call for Europe to bolster its defense contributions, admitting, “We know we have to do more on our own and we have been free-riders in the past. They’re asking us to do more and we are doing more.”

This shift, prompted by U.S. President Donald Trump’s push for NATO allies to take greater responsibility, underscores America’s pivotal role in driving global security standards.

Merz, who met Trump three times and speaks weekly, noted, “I think President Trump is on the same page; we are trying to bring this war to an end.”

The U.S. has leveraged its influence to secure Germany’s commitment to increased defense spending, exemplified by Merz’s constitutional amendment to fund a stronger military, aligning with America’s strategic vision to counter threats like Russia’s aggression in Ukraine while maintaining robust transatlantic alliances.

Enhancing U.S.-Led Defense and Economic Ties

The U.S. has catalyzed a new UK-Germany friendship treaty, signed during Merz’s visit to London, which strengthens defense collaboration and economic ties, including joint production of Typhoon Eurofighter jets and Boxer armored vehicles.

Merz announced plans for a missile with a 2,000km range, stating Ukraine would receive “substantial additional support in long-range fire,” reinforcing America’s leadership in coordinating NATO support for Ukraine.

The treaty also addresses irregular migration, with Germany agreeing to criminalize storing small boats for illegal Channel crossings, a response to a BBC investigation and aligned with U.S. priorities for secure borders.

These efforts complement Trump’s broader strategy, including a 30% tariff threat on EU exports from August 1, 2025, pushing allies like Germany to negotiate trade deals that benefit American workers and industries, as Merz acknowledged, “My observation is that the president himself is seeing the challenges and that he is willing to come to an agreement. He gets it.”

America’s Strategic Pivot and Global Influence

Merz’s observation that the U.S. is “moving away from Europe and turning to Asia” reflects America’s strategic recalibration under Trump, prioritizing global threats while urging allies to share defense burdens.

Despite Merz’s earlier claim that Trump was “largely indifferent to the fate of Europe,” U.S. Vice-President JD Vance’s blunt remarks at the Munich Security Conference, as noted by Canan Atilgan of the Konrad Adenauer Foundation, spurred Germany to act decisively.

The U.S. has driven the formation of the E3 alliance (UK, Germany, France), fostering economic growth and security cooperation, while initiatives like a London-Berlin rail link and youth exchanges strengthen cultural ties.

With the U.S. federal deficit projected at $1.9 trillion for 2025 by the Congressional Budget Office, America’s insistence on fair burden-sharing ensures taxpayer funds are used efficiently, reinforcing its leadership in promoting global stability and prosperity through strategic partnerships.

Joe Biden’s administration was a train wreck. But the details are far worse.

Now Karine Jean-Pierre is forced to answer for this Biden cover-up

Congressional Probe Targets Biden Aides’ Actions

The House Oversight Committee has scheduled testimony from former Biden administration officials, including ex-White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, to investigate allegations of a coverup regarding former President Joe Biden’s mental acuity.

Jean-Pierre, set to testify voluntarily on September 12, 2025, alongside former Senior Deputy Press Secretary Andrew Bates (August 21) and former Special Assistant Ian Sams (September 5), faces scrutiny over their roles in defending Biden’s cognitive abilities.

Former Chief of Staff Jeff Zients, who managed the White House from February 2023 to January 2025, is slated for September 18.

Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY) is examining whether these aides concealed Biden’s mental decline and misused the presidential autopen for executive decisions, a probe amplified by President Donald Trump’s directive to the Justice Department to investigate potential concealment from the American public.

Questionable Defenses of Biden’s Capacity

Jean-Pierre, Bates, and Sams, all career Democratic operatives, repeatedly downplayed concerns about Biden’s mental sharpness, despite public incidents raising doubts.

Jean-Pierre, whose tenure as press secretary was widely criticized, dismissed videos of Biden’s stumbles as “cheap fakes” in June 2024, following his apparent freeze at a Hollywood fundraiser.

In June 2022, she claimed, “Oh, my gosh, he’s the President of the United States, you know, he – I can’t even keep up with him,” in a CNN interview with Don Lemon.

Bates defended Biden’s foreign policy acumen after a faltering NATO summit press conference in 2024, while Sams shielded Biden during the House GOP’s impeachment inquiry and dismissed Special Counsel Robert Hur’s February 2024 report on Biden’s memory lapses.

These defenses, now under scrutiny, raise questions about the Biden administration’s transparency, fueling skepticism about its handling of critical governance responsibilities.

Autopen Allegations and Broader Implications/

The investigation focuses on whether Biden’s aides used the presidential autopen to enact decisions without his full approval, particularly for pardons.

Biden insisted to the New York Times, “I made every single one of those. And — including the categories, when we set this up to begin with,” denying misuse.

However, emails obtained by the Times suggest Biden set pardon standards but did not approve each individual case, casting doubt on his claim:

“And so — but I understand why Trump would think that, because obviously, I guess, he doesn’t focus much. Anyway, so — yes, I made every decision.”

Key witnesses, including Biden’s physician Dr. Kevin O’Connor and Jill Biden’s aide Anthony Bernal, have invoked their Fifth Amendment rights, avoiding testimony.

The Left knows they can’t win with things as they are. Now they’re coming up with ideas.

And Democrats planned a Congressional takeover with this sly trick.

California Democrats’ Push to Redraw Districts

California Democrats are strategizing to redraw the state’s congressional districts, aiming to challenge the Republican Party’s narrow House majority, a move prompted by reports of Texas Republicans pursuing similar redistricting efforts.

Governor Gavin Newsom, reacting to Texas Governor Greg Abbott’s directive to discuss redistricting in a special legislative session, remarked, “They’re playing by a different set of rules.”

On Wednesday, California’s Democratic congressional delegation met with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) to explore ways to flip seats, according to Punchbowl News.

This aggressive push reflects a calculated effort by Democrats to manipulate electoral boundaries for political gain, potentially undermining the fairness established by California’s independent redistricting process.

Circumventing Voter-Approved Redistricting Rules

In 2010, California voters passed Proposition 20, transferring redistricting authority to an independent commission to ensure impartiality.

However, Democrats are now exploring two avenues to bypass this system, as reported by Punchbowl News.

Newsom outlined one option: calling a special legislative session to propose a voter referendum to “pause” or rescind the commission’s powers, requiring a costly special election to sway public opinion.

He suggested including a conservative-friendly measure, like voter ID requirements, to attract GOP voters.

The second approach involves redrawing districts and arguing that the state constitution does not explicitly prohibit mid-decade redistricting, a move Newsom called “a novel legal question” but one likely to trigger lawsuits.

These tactics echo past Democratic efforts, as ProPublica reported in 2011, when party operatives influenced the supposedly nonpartisan commission, raising concerns about their commitment to transparent electoral processes.

Targeting GOP Seats Amid Legal Hurdles

Democrats are reportedly targeting Republican-held districts, including those of Reps. Ken Calvert, Kevin Kiley, Darrell Issa, Young Kim, David Valadao, and Doug LaMalfa, with Rep. Mark Takano (D-CA) stating, “We want our gavels back. That’s what this is about.”

However, the Voting Rights Act poses a significant obstacle, as it protects majority-Latino districts from changes that could dilute their representation.

California Assemblymember Leticia Castillo, a former Democrat turned Republican, criticized her former party, saying:

“The games they play aren’t working and the more people get educated on what’s going on, the more they’re going to fight back.”

The world stage is getting dangerous. Who knows how this will end.

Now Americans are freaking out after Russia threatened preemptive strike.

America’s Firm Stand Against Russian Aggression

Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev’s call for “preemptive strikes” against the West, reported by Reuters via Tass, underscores the urgency of America’s robust response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Medvedev stated, “The statements of Western politicians on this topic are complete nonsense. We need to act accordingly. To respond in full. And if necessary, launch preemptive strikes.”

In contrast, President Donald Trump has taken decisive action, announcing on Monday a 100% secondary tariff on nations purchasing Russian oil unless Moscow agrees to a peace deal within 50 days.

This bold move, coupled with the U.S. facilitating Patriot missile deliveries to Ukraine via NATO allies, reflects America’s commitment to countering Russian aggression while prioritizing national interests, with Trump ensuring, “They’re already being shipped. They’re coming in from Germany and then replaced by Germany. And in all cases, the United States gets paid back in full.”

Strategic Deployment of U.S. Military Support

Trump’s announcement that Patriot missiles are en route to Germany for transfer to Ukraine highlights America’s proactive role in bolstering NATO’s support for Kyiv.

Although a German defense ministry spokesman told SRF, “I cannot confirm that anything is currently on the way. That is not known to me,” plans for a Ukraine Defense Contact Group meeting on Monday aim to finalize delivery details.

The urgency of these shipments has impacted other nations, with Switzerland’s defense ministry noting a delay in its own Patriot battery deliveries, stating, “The United States Department of Defense has informed the (Swiss Defense Ministry) that it will reprioritize the delivery of Patriot systems to support Ukraine, focusing on ground-based air defense.”

America’s prioritization of Ukraine’s needs demonstrates its resolve to strengthen global security against Russian threats, even as Medvedev labeled NATO’s actions a “full-scale war,” claiming:

“What is happening today is a proxy war, but in essence it is a full-scale war (launches of Western missiles, satellite intelligence, etc.), sanctions packages, loud statements about the militarization of Europe.”

Balancing Diplomacy and Pressure

Despite Trump’s strong measures, including reports of discussions with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy about potential strikes on Moscow—dismissed by the White House as “out of context”—some allies have questioned the 50-day timeline.

Zelenskyy expressed concern to the New York Post, stating, “Fifty days, for us, is just – every day is scary. Putin has wasted President Trump’s time. I would very much like to see the United States, the Congress and the president put some pressure on this situation with sanctions and so the sooner, the faster it can be done, the better.”

He added, “We would certainly like to speed up this process. We, for our part, will work to provide more information [to Trump], more arguments for strong sanctions against Russia.” EU leaders also noted the prolonged diplomacy’s lack of battlefield results.

Cuomo is trying to fix his image. But he’s going down in flames.

Now Andrew Cuomo got dragged through the coals for making this creepy video.

Ill-Chosen Words Fuel Public Backlash

Andrew Cuomo, the former New York governor who resigned in 2021 amid sexual harassment allegations from over a dozen women, faced renewed criticism after a poorly worded comment about his struggling New York City mayoral campaign.

In a Wednesday interview with the Daily News, Cuomo, running as an independent in the Democratic primary, outlined his strategy, stating, “better use with social media, reaching out to more young people and touching more people.”

The phrase “touching more people” quickly drew sharp rebuke online, with critics highlighting its insensitivity given his past.

Critics Highlight Past Allegations

The backlash was led by Lindsey Boylan, a former aide who was the first to accuse Cuomo of sexual harassment, including unwanted kissing and inappropriate comments.

Boylan tweeted, “Don’t touch any more people,” adding, “We’ve all paid enough for your touching,” referencing the scandal that forced Cuomo’s resignation.

Social media users echoed her sentiments, with one stating, “We really don’t need him touching more people; that’s why he had to resign last time.”

Another user remarked, “In a sane society, Andrew Cuomo saying he’s going to ‘reach out to more young people and touch more people’ would be taken as a public safety emergency.”

A third simply advised, “Should probably avoid saying that Andrew.” These reactions reflect the lingering distrust surrounding Cuomo’s public image, complicating his mayoral bid.

Cuomo’s Team Defends Amid Ongoing Controversy

Cuomo’s spokesperson, Rich Azzopardi, responded to the criticism by attacking Boylan’s credibility, stating:

“She is not credible and it’s sad she continues to spread these false accusations.” The defense highlights the campaign’s effort to dismiss past allegations as it seeks to rebuild Cuomo’s political career.

However, the former governor’s choice of words has reignited scrutiny of his 2021 resignation, which followed a state attorney general’s report substantiating claims of harassment from multiple women.

With the mayoral race heating up, Cuomo’s remarks have drawn attention to his past rather than his platform, posing a significant hurdle as he attempts to reconnect with voters through social media and younger demographics.

Most Americans want illegal immigrants deported. But it comes at a cost.

Now a terrifying report exposed rampant violent attacks threatening ICE.

Surge in Assaults on ICE Officers

The Department of Homeland Security reported a staggering 830% increase in assaults against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers from January 21 to July 14, 2025, compared to the same period in 2024.

In a Tuesday press release, DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin stated:

“Brave ICE law enforcement are risking their lives every day to keep our communities safe from the worst of the worst criminals. ICE law enforcement are succeeding to remove terrorists, murderers, pedophiles and the most depraved among us from America’s communities, even as crazed rhetoric from gutter politicians are inspiring a massive increase in assaults against them. It is reprehensible that our officers are facing this threat while simply doing their jobs and enforcing the law.”

Political Rhetoric and Its Impact

The Trump administration has pointed to inflammatory statements from Democratic leaders as a catalyst for the increased violence against ICE officers.

On Monday, the president’s rapid response team highlighted remarks from figures like House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), who urged people to resist the administration “in the streets” and called for unmasking ICE agents despite known threats to their safety.

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) described protesters obstructing ICE operations, sometimes violently, as “inspiring,” while labeling agents “deranged.”

Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-NJ), recently charged with “forcibly impeding and interfering with federal officers” in Newark, encouraged supporters to “shut down the city,” declaring, “we are at war.”

Minnesota Governor Tim Walz (D-MN) compared ICE agents to the “modern-day Gestapo,” and Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) criticized agents for wearing masks to protect their identities, likening them to “some 1800s bank robber or some KGB officer in Russia.”

These statements have fueled hostility and endangered agents working to secure communities.

Support for ICE Amid Rising Threats

In response to the unprecedented attacks, Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons and Border Czar Tom Homan have defended officers’ decisions to conceal their identities for safety, with Lyons stating, “Our agents face real threats to themselves and their families, and we support measures to protect them.”

ICE’s intensified operations, backed by significant funding from the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” signed on July 4, 2025, have led to the arrest of thousands, including those involved in serious crimes, as part of President Trump’s deportation agenda.

Despite these efforts, the agency faces mounting resistance, with a 700% increase in assaults reported earlier by DHS on X, aligning with the broader trend of escalating violence.

It’s been smooth sailing for the most part. But this could make or break Donald.

Because he has been struck with the largest test of his presidency.

Growing Tensions Over Epstein Investigation Handling

The handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case by President Donald Trump’s administration has sparked significant discontent among his MAGA supporters, with some drawing parallels to the political fallout from former President Joe Biden’s Afghanistan withdrawal.

A Rasmussen Reports poll shared with the Washington Examiner reveals that 56% of respondents reject the FBI and Justice Department’s claim that Epstein, a convicted sex trafficker who died in 2019, did not maintain a “client list.”

Additionally, 47% believe Epstein was murdered in his Manhattan jail cell, compared to 31% who accept the official ruling of suicide. The Justice Department’s July 7, 2025, memo, which found no evidence of a client list or blackmail and reaffirmed Epstein’s suicide, has fueled skepticism among Trump’s base, who expected greater transparency based on campaign promises.

Mixed Messaging and Public Distrust

The administration’s conflicting communications have intensified public and supporter scrutiny.

While the Justice Department and FBI concluded their review with no new actionable evidence, a simultaneous court filing with Judicial Watch indicated the Epstein case remains open, with additional documents still being uncovered.

This contradiction prompted Rasmussen Reports to post on X, “Congratulations again to the PR geniuses at The Justice Department,” highlighting perceived inconsistencies.

Prominent conservative figures, including Charlie Kirk, Megyn Kelly, and Steve Bannon, have publicly urged Trump to fulfill his pledge for full disclosure, with some speculating about connections to high-profile Democrats.

The lack of clarity has contributed to a broader erosion of trust, with 68% of likely voters in the Rasmussen poll believing “dozens of powerful and wealthy offenders” should face justice, compared to only 16% who view the case as closed.

Political Repercussions and Declining Approval

The Epstein controversy has coincided with a dip in Trump’s approval ratings, which Rasmussen Reports notes have shifted from a positive balance at the start of July 2025 to 47% approval and 51% disapproval.

This decline follows a turbulent period marked by Trump’s tariff announcements, which negatively impacted the stock market, though he had previously enjoyed positive sentiment after strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites and the passage of his “big, beautiful bill.”

Pollster Mark Mitchell described the situation as a potential “Waterloo moment,” warning, “If it keeps going, this is his Afghanistan.”

Trump has attempted to downplay the issue, stating at a July 8 Cabinet meeting, “Are you still talking about Jeffrey Epstein? This guy’s been talked about for years,” and calling questions about it “a desecration” amid other national priorities like the Texas floods.

Despite these efforts, the ongoing debate, amplified by allies like Kelly, who noted on X that “huge swaths of the party” oppose Attorney General Pam Bondi’s handling, suggests the issue continues to challenge Trump’s administration.

The Left is willing to stoop to any low. And it’s only getting worse.

Because a Democrat Congressman doxxed ICE agent and now they could end up behind bars.

ICE Defends Operation Amid Congressional Interference

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) accused Democratic Congressman Salud Carbajal of participating in a “violent mob” that obstructed agents during a criminal search warrant execution at Glass House Farms in California.

ICE reported that the operation resulted in the arrest of 319 illegal immigrants and the rescue of 14 children from potential forced labor, exploitation, and trafficking.

The agency alleged that Carbajal not only joined protesters who hurled rocks at agents, injuring one, but also “doxed” an ICE employee by sharing their business card with the crowd.

ICE stated on social media, “May the congressman’s constituency always remember he chooses violence over the rule of law,” emphasizing their commitment to upholding immigration laws despite resistance.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem further noted that agents faced gunfire during the operation, underscoring the dangerous conditions ICE officers endure to protect communities.

Carbajal’s Account and Community Tensions

Congressman Carbajal offered a contrasting narrative, claiming he was at the marijuana farm to monitor “federal operations” after receiving a “flood of calls” about ICE’s “aggressive behavior.”

He criticized the agency for “using unnecessarily aggressive and militarized tactics against local farm workers and peaceful protesters,” calling the scene “appalling” and asserting, “This is not how we keep our communities safe.”

Carbajal, who identified himself as a member of Congress but was denied entry to the operation, shared an ICE press aide’s business card with a reporter, according to The Santa Barbara Independent.

He also alleged that ICE used smoke grenades and a flash grenade that injured a young girl.

In response to ICE’s accusations, Carbajal dismissed claims of “doxxing” and “violent mobs” as “a blatant attempt to distort what occurred,” arguing they were deflection tactics to avoid accountability.

Rising Challenges for ICE Operations

The incident reflects broader tensions as ICE intensifies efforts to meet President Trump’s mass deportation goals.

The agency reported a 700% increase in assaults on its officers, attributing this to escalating anti-ICE sentiment fueled by actions like those of Carbajal and other critics.

For instance, a New Jersey congresswoman was recently charged with assaulting an ICE employee during a detention center visit, and anti-ICE activists have increasingly attempted to disrupt arrests by spreading rumors and doxxing officers, who now conceal their identities with masks for safety.

Despite these challenges, ICE remains steadfast in its mission to combat illegal immigration and protect public safety, as evidenced by the Glass House Farms operation.

The Left likes to play the race card. But now they are the ones showing their true colors.

Because a high profile CNN guest devolved into a racist rant you don’t want to miss.

Heated Exchange on CNN’s NewsNight

During a Monday broadcast of CNN’s “NewsNight” with host Abby Phillip, a panel discussion took a contentious turn when Ana Navarro referenced a fellow panelist’s race in dismissing his critique.

The clash began when conservative commentator Brad Polumbo challenged Navarro’s claim that President Donald Trump’s second term constituted a “reign of terror,” calling her statement “hyperbolic.”

Navarro responded, “It might be hyperbolic for you as a white man, it’s certainly not hyperbolic for me as a Latino.”

Polumbo quickly countered, “Oh, okay, so we’re being racist now,” highlighting the racial framing of Navarro’s remark.

Navarro’s Defense and Panelist Pushback

Navarro attempted to deflect accusations of bias, insisting:

“No, I’m not being racist,” and clarifying, “I’m not dismissing your opinion. I’m telling you that what the Latino community, the brown community, in America — a lot of them disagree with you.”

Polumbo challenged her generalization, noting, “the Latino community was not a monolith.”

When Navarro asked if he felt insulted by her identifying him as a “white man,” Polumbo responded, “When you invoke it to dismiss my opinion.”

This back-and-forth highlighted Navarro’s reliance on broad community perspectives, which some view as sidestepping individual arguments in favor of group-based narratives.

The exchange grew heated as Navarro’s framing appeared to prioritize identity over substantive discussion, drawing criticism for escalating the debate unnecessarily.

Moderator Steps In to Diffuse Tension

Host Abby Phillip intervened to de-escalate, stating:

“I just want to make a point that, Brad, all she’s saying is that her view of the situation is different from yours. I don’t think that’s an insult.”

Phillip’s attempt to reframe Navarro’s comment as a difference in perspective aimed to steer the conversation back to civility.

However, Navarro’s initial dismissal of Polumbo’s opinion based on his race sparked a broader debate about the role of identity in political discourse.

WATCH:

Ana Navarro dismisses opinion of CNN panelist because he is a white man.

"It might be hyperbolic for you as a white man." pic.twitter.com/dVlVw6gTUb

— Thomas Hern (@ThomasMHern) July 15, 2025

The Left likes to grandstand. But sometimes they are forced to sit down and shut up.

Now Tom Homan silenced a heckler in a heated exchange caught on camera.

Tom Homan’s Unwavering Defense of ICE

At the Turning Point USA Student Action Summit in Tampa, Florida, Border Czar Tom Homan delivered a powerful defense of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers, standing firm against a disruptive protester.

When a heckler interrupted his speech, brandishing a doctored photo of Homan with gang signs and mockingly asking if he was an “MS-13 member,” Homan responded with characteristic grit:

“I got a question for you: Why don’t you come up here and hand me that picture, right? Bring it.”

As security escorted the protester out amid chants of “USA, USA” from the energized crowd, Homan called out the detractor’s cowardice, stating, “They got morons like this all over the country. This guy ain’t got the balls to be an ICE officer. He hasn’t got the balls to be a Border Patrol agent. This guy lives in his mother’s basement.”

Confronting Anti-ICE Protests with Courage

Homan didn’t hold back in addressing the anti-ICE protests outside the Tampa event, delivering a resolute message:

“You want some? Come get some. I’m tired of it. For the men and women of ICE, I deserve your respect. And Tom Homan isn’t going anywhere. Tom Homan isn’t shutting up.”

His defiance reflects his unwavering support for ICE agents facing a 700% surge in attacks over the past year, as reported in a recent Fox News interview.

Homan highlighted the dangerous consequences of inflammatory rhetoric, particularly from Democrats, noting, “The rhetoric against the men and women of ICE is skyrocketing, especially by members of Congress. We have senators, we have congresspeople that compare ICE to the Nazis, compare ICE to racists, and it just continues.”

He pointed to remarks from figures like Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, who called ICE agents “modern-day Gestapo,” and Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson, who likened them to “secret police,” arguing such rhetoric fuels violence against officers upholding the law.

Championing Law Enforcement and National Security

Homan’s fiery speech at the summit reaffirmed his dedication to executing President Trump’s immigration policies, promising “the biggest deportation operation this country has ever seen.”

His resolve comes as ICE targets illegal immigrants, many suspected or convicted of violent crimes, amid a historic low in border crossings—down 89% from the 2021-2024 average, according to DHS statistics.

“The only thing that surprised me, you don’t have purple hair and a nose ring. Get out of here, you loser. And, hey, if you’re such a bada**, meet me off stage in 13 minutes and 50 seconds,” Homan taunted the heckler, adding, “I guarantee you he sits down to pee. Guaranteed.”

WATCH:

🚨 JUST IN: Tom Homan DEMOLISHES a heckler interrupting his speech at TPUSA

HOMAN: “This guy doesn't have the balls to be an ICE officer!"

"The ONLY thing that surprises me is that he doesn’t have purple hair and a nose ring"

"I GUARANTEE you this guy sits down to pee” 🤣🔥 pic.twitter.com/tEQEyGICS3

— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) July 12, 2025

The Left still can’t believe Trump is in office. And they’re becoming completely unhinged.

Now a ex-CNN commentator pushed a wild election integrity conspiracy.

Questioning the Integrity of the 2024 Election

Former CNN commentator Angela Rye has raised bold concerns about President Donald Trump and the Republicans, alleging they stole the 2024 election and may attempt to manipulate the 2026 midterms.

On her “Native Land Pod” podcast, Rye expressed deep skepticism: “I think me and [Tiffany Cross] really might feel a way about telling y’all how many days are left till the midterms because I don’t really know this thing’s going to damn happen.”

She added, “Even if they are going to happen, are they going to cheat like they did, I still feel like they did, in the 2024 election? I don’t have data. I got a gut feeling, but I’m going to tell you about the Black woman and the Holy Ghost. We be spot on.”

While lacking concrete evidence, Rye’s remarks reflect a passionate defense of electoral fairness, suggesting Trump’s leadership has emboldened efforts to safeguard the democratic process.

Doubts Cast on Future Electoral Fairness

Rye’s co-host, former MSNBC host Tiffany Cross, echoed concerns about the state of democracy, questioning the likelihood of free and fair elections.

“Even if they did, okay it’s here now,” Cross stated.

“Like what, they’re not going to say ‘okay takesies backsies we stole it.’ Like they have already instituted this authoritarian regime, and I don’t know any post-industrialized country that has come this far into authoritarianism and turned around.”

Cross argued that systemic issues, particularly for Black Americans and women, have long undermined electoral integrity, stating, “So why we think all of a sudden we’re going to have free and fair elections in this country for midterms, which we’ve never really had, as Black folks know all too well and, as women know all too well.”

Her comments highlight a broader distrust in the system, while aligning with Trump’s narrative of exposing and confronting electoral vulnerabilities to ensure stronger protections.

Calls for Vigilance Amid Mixed Perspectives

While some liberal commentators, including Joy Reid, James Carville, Don Lemon, Charlemagne Tha God, and Kathy Griffin, have suggested the 2024 election was tampered with and the 2026 midterms could face similar risks, others urge continued engagement.

Former Florida gubernatorial candidate Andrew Gillum defended the importance of maintaining faith in the electoral process, arguing for active participation despite past outcomes.

Reid, however, expressed skepticism on Wajahat Ali’s Substack:

“Whenever Democrats say to me, ‘this is the reason we have to coalesce for 2026,’ I always add to the end of their sentence, ‘Yeah, assuming we actually have free and fair elections.’ I think it’s insane, honestly, to just assume we’re going to have normal elections next year.”

Rarely to we get the intimate details from high-level officials. But that’s not the case this time.

Because a Supreme Court Justice revealed what keeps them up at night in fear.

Jackson’s Democracy Concerns Spark Controversy

Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, speaking at an Indianapolis Bar Association event on Thursday, shifted from answering light-hearted questions about books and music to a grave concern, stating that “the state of our democracy” keeps her up at night.

The Biden-appointed justice, known for her frequent dissents, elaborated, “I’m really very interested in getting people to focus and to invest and to pay attention to what is happening in our country and in our government,” earning applause but no chance to clarify specific worries.

Her remarks prompted swift backlash on X, with critics questioning her impartiality, one user stating, “What keeps me up [at] night is knowing that we have unqualified Justices like Jackson on the SCOTUS.”

The comments fueled debate about her role on the high court, especially given her pattern of outspoken dissents that have drawn scrutiny from colleagues and the public alike.

Critics Challenge Jackson’s Judicial Approach

Jackson’s assertion that her role includes offering “a slightly different perspective, or a different take on something” intensified accusations of judicial activism.

One X user remarked, “She’s functionally an activist, not a judge,” while another called her dissents “pretty embarrassing,” comparing them to “a substack post” rather than legal rulings.

This week, Jackson stood alone in dissenting against an 8-1 Supreme Court order greenlighting President Donald Trump’s federal workforce cuts, a stance critics cite as evidence of her divergence from judicial consensus.

Her tendency to write separate dissents, even when not the lead dissenter, has positioned her as a polarizing figure, with detractors arguing her emotional rhetoric undermines the court’s commitment to constitutional fidelity.

Sharp Rebuke from Fellow Justices

Jackson’s dissent in a recent birthright citizenship case, where she warned that “our beloved constitutional Republic will be no more,” drew a pointed rebuke from Justice Amy Coney Barrett.

In the majority opinion, Barrett wrote, “We will not dwell on Justice Jackson’s argument, which is at odds with more than two centuries’ worth of precedent, not to mention the Constitution itself,” adding that Jackson’s stance appeared to embrace an “imperial Judiciary.”

This criticism, coupled with Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s rare disagreement with Jackson in the workforce reduction case, shows the tension within the court.

Critics on X seized on these rebukes, with one stating, “Her unprofessionalism is an embarrassment to the bench,” suggesting her approach risks eroding the court’s collegiality and credibility.

Public Outcry Questions Court Impartiality

The reaction on X amplified concerns about Jackson’s public comments, with one user asserting, “Impartial judges committed to faithful application of the law don’t make incendiary comments like this in public.”

Her remarks about democracy, combined with her history of dissenting in high-profile cases, have led some to argue she prioritizes personal views over legal restraint, potentially undermining public trust in the Supreme Court.