No one ever accused Schumer of being sharp. Now it’s on full display.

And Chuck Schumer utterly humiliated himself with one braindead statement.

Schumer’s Selective Poll Play: Cherry-Picking Data to Bash Trump

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) is wielding polls like a political weapon, eagerly spotlighting surveys that cast President Donald Trump in a negative light while brushing off dismal numbers about his own leadership.

This blatant double standard, first flagged by NBC’s Frank Thorp V on X, unfolded during a Tuesday press conference where Schumer and fellow Senate Democrats aimed to paint Trump’s second term as a disaster, dubbing it “100 days of chaos.”

Schumer kicked off the event with a gleeful jab at Trump’s approval ratings. “The polls this week show Trump has the lowest 100-day approval rating since they started polling 80 years ago. The lowest! Even worse, 72% of Americans think it’s likely that Trump’s handling of the economy will walk us directly into a recession,” he declared, leaning hard into data that fit his narrative.

The New York Democrat’s enthusiasm for polls was palpable as he framed Trump’s leadership as a looming economic catastrophe, rallying his party around the anti-Trump cause.

Schumer’s Hypocrisy Exposed: Dismissing His Own Poll Woes

But Schumer’s love affair with polls vanished when the spotlight turned to his own unpopularity. Barely 20 minutes later, CNN’s Manu Raju confronted him with a stinging question:

“There’s a poll out today that has your approval ratings lower than any other congressional leader at 17%. Are you concerned that you may be a liability for your party?” Suddenly, Schumer’s tone shifted. “Polls come and go,” he replied dismissively. “Our party is united. We’re on our front foot. We’re stepping forward, going after Trump and having real success.” The hypocrisy was stark—polls were gospel when slamming Trump but meaningless when they exposed Schumer’s own failures.

Schumer’s leadership has been under fire, especially after he refused to back a GOP stopgap bill to prevent a partial government shutdown earlier this year. The decision sparked a crisis of confidence among some Democrats, who see Schumer as increasingly out of touch. Even Minority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), the Senate’s second-ranking Democrat, signaled a shift last week, announcing he would not seek re-election in 2026.

“In my heart, I know it’s time to pass the torch,” Durbin said, a subtle rebuke of Schumer’s entrenched leadership. Yet Schumer remains defiant, insisting to CNN that he’s “staying put.”

Trump Fights Back: Dismissing Fake News and Leading Strong

Meanwhile, President Trump is shrugging off the same polls Schumer clings to, focusing instead on his America First agenda. Just before hitting the 100-day mark of his second term, Trump took to Truth Social to set the record straight.

“The Polls from the Fake News are, like the News itself, FAKE! We are doing GREAT, better than ever before,” he posted on Monday. Trump’s dismissal of biased surveys resonates with his base, who see him as a fighter against a rigged system orchestrated by Democrats and their media allies.

Schumer, undeterred by his own unpopularity, continues to claim his party is winning the narrative war.

“I’m fighting the fight every day, as is our caucus, in a united and successful way, as you have seen by your poll and other polls,” he said.

“We’re showing America how bad Trump is, and showing that Republicans who embrace Trump do so at their peril.” But with Trump’s unwavering support among conservatives and Schumer’s leadership crumbling under scrutiny, it’s clear who’s truly on the defensive. As Trump forges ahead, Schumer’s selective poll obsession only underscores his desperation to undermine a president whose resilience continues to defy the left’s attacks.

The Left is stooping to dangerous lows. And they don’t care who they hurt in the process.

Now a top Trump official called out this Democrat Governor for inciting a riot.

### Tensions Rise as Miller Slams Pritzker’s Provocative Rhetoric

Stephen Miller, President Donald Trump’s Deputy Chief of Staff, sharply criticized Illinois Governor JB Pritzker on Monday, warning that the Democrat’s recent comments could be interpreted as a call to violence.

Speaking to reporters outside the White House, Miller highlighted Pritzker’s fiery remarks at a New Hampshire event, escalating concerns about the growing normalization of aggressive political rhetoric amid an already volatile climate.

### Pritzker’s Call to Action Sparks Outrage

At the McIntyre-Shaheen 100 Club Dinner on Sunday, Pritzker urged Democrats to mobilize against Republicans with unrelenting pressure.

“Never before in my life have I called for mass protests, for mobilization, for disruption, but I have now. These Republicans cannot know a moment of peace. They have to understand that we will fight their cruelty with every megaphone and every microphone that we have. We must castigate them on the soapbox and then punish them at the ballot box,” Pritzker declared.

Miller responded bluntly, stating, “What I would say is that his comments, if nothing else, could be construed as inciting violence.” For Republicans, such rhetoric risks inflaming an already tense political landscape, particularly given Trump’s survival of two assassination attempts and multiple foiled threats.

Miller drew a stark connection between Pritzker’s words and the potential for real-world consequences, pointing to recent left-wing attacks on property, such as vandalism targeting Tesla dealerships.

“Once you tolerate, and once you allow for attacks on property, you’re just a step away from throwing Molotov cocktails into people’s homes,” he warned, emphasizing the dangerous progression from property damage to violence against individuals.

### Rhetoric Fuels a Dangerous Divide

Miller also condemned the broader trend of normalizing political violence, citing former Washington Post reporter Taylor Lorenz’s disturbing comment that she felt “joy” at the execution of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in New York.

He argued that inflammatory rhetoric, like Pritzker’s, fosters an environment where such sentiments thrive. Additionally, Miller accused Pritzker and other Democratic governors of defying federal authority on issues like illegal immigration, where the federal government holds clear supremacy.

“I’ve never seen anything like it,” he said, framing their actions as a direct challenge to national governance.

For conservatives, Miller’s remarks underscore a troubling pattern of Democratic rhetoric that not only undermines law and order but also emboldens dangerous behavior, threatening both public safety and political stability.

WATCH:

Stephen Miller (@StephenM) on Gov. JB Pritzker: "His comments, if nothing else, could be construed as inciting violence." pic.twitter.com/9LZ642LS4H

— CSPAN (@cspan) April 28, 2025

They aren’t sending their best. That’s been Trump’s claim this whole time.

And now an illegal immigrant was arrested after an unprecedented attack on this Trump official.

Trump’s Ironclad Commitment to Border Security Shines in Noem Case

A chilling robbery targeting Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has spotlighted President Trump’s unwavering resolve to tackle crime perpetrated by illegal migrants, reinforcing his pledge to make America’s streets safe again.

The arrest of a Chilean career criminal who stole Noem’s Gucci bag during a family Easter outing underscores the urgent need for Trump’s aggressive immigration enforcement policies, which have galvanized his supporters nationwide.

Mario Bustamante-Leiva, a 49-year-old illegal migrant from Santiago, was apprehended Saturday after allegedly swiping Noem’s $3,000 luxury bag—containing her driver’s license, passport, DHS badge, and apartment keys—while she dined at Capital Burger in Washington, DC. Sources told The Post that Bustamante-Leiva, a known member of a vast East Coast robbery network, has a rap sheet dating back to a 2015 theft spree in London.

A second illegal migrant suspect, nabbed in Miami, awaits deportation as charges are finalized, showcasing the Trump administration’s swift and decisive action.

“Thank you to @SecretService @ICEgov and our law enforcement partners for finding and arresting the criminal who stole my bag on Easter Sunday as I shared a meal with my family at a Washington DC restaurant,” Noem declared on X. “This individual is a career criminal who has been in our country illegally for years,” she continued, amplifying Trump’s message that unchecked illegal immigration fuels crime.

“Unfortunately, so many families in this country have been made victims by crime, and that’s why President Trump is working every single day to make America safe and get these criminal aliens off of our streets.”

Trump’s Law-and-Order Vision in Action

The incident, captured on security footage showing a masked Bustamante-Leiva expertly lifting the bag, highlights the sophistication of these criminal operations and the necessity of Trump’s zero-tolerance stance. US Attorney Ed Martin downplayed the likelihood that Noem was targeted for her role, noting the allure of her “nice-looking purse.”

“It was frankly … a nice-looking purse. This was not an amateur. This was a person, a thief, that knew how to do this. You could see how he scouted the room out,” Martin told NBC News. The theft, just a mile from the White House, underscores the boldness of criminals operating under the radar—until Trump’s policies intervene.

Martin emphasized the administration’s commitment to ensuring justice: “President Trump’s direction to us is we charge these folks that are here illegally and we prosecute them, as well as deport them when need be, you know, as soon as that can happen,” he told NBC.

“What I can tell you is he won’t be back on the streets of America.” This promise of prosecution and deportation resonates with Trump’s base, who see his leadership as a bulwark against the chaos of open borders.

Crushing Criminal Networks with Trump’s Resolve

Bustamante-Leiva’s prior arrest in London for stealing nearly £28,000 in goods reveals a pattern of criminality that flourished due to lax immigration enforcement before Trump’s return to power.

Now, with ICE spearheading the case, both suspects face permanent expulsion from the US, a testament to Trump’s promise to rid the nation of criminal threats. The arrests have energized conservatives, who view this as a victory in the broader fight to secure the border and protect American families.

Noem’s experience, a stark reminder of the pervasive threat posed by illegal migrant crime, has further solidified support for Trump’s agenda. As law enforcement continues to dismantle robbery networks under his guidance, this case stands as a powerful example of how Trump’s policies are restoring safety and order to America, one deportation at a time.

The war in Ukraine has claimed more lives than we even know. It’s clear it can’t go on forever.

And now Trump sent Vladimir Putin a shocking ultimatum that left foreign leaders speechless.

Trump’s Bold Call to End Ukraine Conflict

President Donald Trump has taken a firm stance against Russian President Vladimir Putin’s ongoing aggression in Ukraine, expressing skepticism about Putin’s commitment to peace as the war, now in its third year, continues to devastate the region. In a series of fiery posts on Truth Social, Trump channeled the frustration of his supporters, who see his leadership as critical to resolving global conflicts and restoring American strength on the world stage.

On Saturday, following a deadly Russian missile strike on Kyiv that killed 12 and injured 90, including children, Trump voiced his outrage. “There was no reason for Putin to be shooting missiles into civilian areas, cities and towns, over the last few days,” he wrote, fresh from a meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the Vatican for Pope Francis’ funeral. His words resonate with his base, who admire his no-nonsense approach to foreign leaders and his focus on protecting innocent lives.

“It makes me think that maybe he doesn’t want to stop the war, he’s just tapping me along, and has to be dealt with differently, through ‘Banking’ or ‘Secondary Sanctions?’ Too many people are dying!!!” Trump added, hinting at the kind of tough economic measures his administration has championed to rein in adversaries.

His supporters see this as a stark contrast to the perceived weakness of past administrations, rallying behind his proactive stance.

A Vision for Peace Amid Chaos

Trump’s comments come as hopes for a peace deal remain elusive, despite his repeated campaign promises to end the war within 24 hours of taking office—a pledge that energized his base and underscored his reputation as a dealmaker.

Describing the war’s toll as “worse than anything since World War II,” Trump reiterated his urgency for resolution in a Thursday post: “I am not happy with the Russian strikes on KYIV. Not necessary, and very bad timing. Vladimir, STOP! 5,000 soldiers a week are dying. Let’s get the peace deal DONE.”

The Kyiv attack, which occurred just before Special Envoy Steve Witkoff’s fourth trip to Moscow, has only heightened Trump’s resolve. Over Easter, he expressed optimism that a deal could be reached, noting that it would pave the way for “big business with the United States of America.”

His vision for economic cooperation post-conflict aligns with his America First agenda, which prioritizes leveraging peace for prosperity—a message that resonates strongly with his supporters.

Trump’s Saturday meeting with Zelenskyy in Rome, their first since a tense Oval Office encounter in February, was described by White House Communications Director Steven Cheung as “a very productive discussion.”

While details were sparse, the meeting signals Trump’s hands-on approach to diplomacy, a hallmark of his presidency that his base credits for keeping America out of new wars.

Blaming Biden and Obama for the Mess

In true Trump fashion, the president didn’t hold back in assigning blame for the war’s origins, pointing the finger at his predecessors. “This is Sleepy Joe Biden’s War, not mine,” he raged on Truth Social.

“It was a loser from day one, and should have never happened, and wouldn’t have happened if I were President at the time. I’m just trying to clean up the mess that was left to me by Obama and Biden, and what a mess it is.”

Trump’s criticism of Biden and Obama—whom he holds responsible for Russia’s annexation of Crimea—strikes a chord with conservatives who view his foreign policy as a corrective to years of Democratic missteps.

By framing the Ukraine conflict as a inherited disaster, Trump reinforces his narrative of being the leader America needs to restore order and strength globally, a message that continues to galvanize his supporters as he pushes for peace on his terms.

Respect for our Constitution is in the gutter. But not everyone has given up.

And now a Republican Senator schooled a Democrat governor for signing this unconstitutional law.

Senator Lee Calls Out Washington’s Unconstitutional Loan Program

Utah Senator Mike Lee, a steadfast defender of constitutional principles, has sharply criticized a new Washington state law signed by Democrat Governor Bob Ferguson that prioritizes “black, indigenous, and people of color” for forgivable homeownership loans.

Labeling the measure “lawlessness,” Lee took to X to declare, “The Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause prohibits this. It’s not even a close question. This is lawlessness.”

His incisive critique underscores the bill’s violation of equal protection, spotlighting a troubling trend in progressive policies that favor race-based preferences over fairness.

House Bill 1696, an amendment to the 2023 Covenant Homeownership Program, expands eligibility for down payment and closing cost assistance while offering loan forgiveness for low-income, first-time homebuyers who are descendants of pre-1968 Washington residents impacted by historical redlining.

Lee’s condemnation highlights the bill’s discriminatory framework, which he argues flouts the Constitution’s guarantee of equal treatment under the law.

Washington’s Race-Based Policy Sparks Controversy

The Covenant Homeownership Program, launched by Washington Democrats in 2023, was billed as a remedy for “historically marginalized communities” affected by pre-1968 real estate discrimination, as noted by Julie Barrett of Conservative Ladies of America. “The state contracted with a commission to administer the program to determine how the funds were going to be used and how they were going to be disbursed,” Barrett explained.

HB 1696 tweaks the program by raising the income eligibility threshold to 120% of the area median income (AMI) and allowing full loan forgiveness after five years for those at 80% or below AMI, provided they are descendants of residents adversely affected before the Fair Housing Act of 1968.

Bill sponsor Rep. Jamila Taylor defended the measure, stating, “Homeownership is a gateway to building generational wealth, and it was largely closed to Black Americans and people of color for most of our country’s history. Buying a home is tough right now. Bringing more diversity into the pool of homeownership builds stronger communities and is another solution in solving the current housing crisis in our state.” When pressed on whether applicants needed to prove personal harm from racially restrictive covenants, Taylor responded, “What do you mean affected? If the person was a resident in the state prior to 1968 they were affected because they were part of a racial class.”

Ferguson’s Signing Ignites Constitutional Debate

Governor Ferguson, in signing HB 1696, framed it as a step toward equity: “Washington state’s covenant homeownership program provides down payment and closing cost assistance for low income, first-time home buyers. Lawmakers create a program to address the disproportionate impacts of racial redlining in Washington state.

House Bill 1696 modifies the program by adjusting the area median income threshold for program eligibility, introducing loan forgiveness and modifying the oversight committee membership. This modification will create more opportunities to close the racial home ownership gap, which is a very important goal for all of us here in Washington state.

We so appreciate everybody who made this legislation possible. Like every legislation it’s challenging; this one has its share of challenges, as we know … I’m pleased to sign this legislation into law.”

Yet, Senator Lee’s forceful rebuke cuts through the rhetoric, exposing the bill’s legal vulnerabilities. By prioritizing certain racial groups, the program risks running afoul of the Fourteenth Amendment, a point Lee, a constitutional scholar, argues is indisputable.

His stand amplifies a growing call for policies that unite rather than divide, reinforcing his reputation as a principled voice against government overreach and discriminatory practices.

The president and the media don’t have a great relationship. And it doesn’t look like anyone wants to make amends.

Because Trump shut down an interview after being asked one idiotic question.

Trump Doubles Down on Bold Canada Proposal

President Donald Trump is unwavering in his provocative call for Canada to join the United States as its 51st state, dismissing suggestions that he’s merely jesting.

In a candid exchange with Time magazine, Trump pushed back against a journalist’s skepticism: “You’ve talked about acquiring Greenland, taking control of the Panama Canal, making Canada the 51st state.

Maybe you’re trolling a little bit on that [last] one.” The president shot back, “Actually, no, I’m not.” His resolute stance underscores a vision that challenges conventional geopolitics, sparking debate about America’s role on the global stage.

Trump’s remarks, part of a wide-ranging Time interview, highlight his knack for bold ideas that disrupt the status quo. While local resistance in Canada dims prospects for immediate change, Trump’s persistence signals a strategic rethinking of U.S.-Canada relations, rooted in economic and security concerns.

Economic and Security Arguments Fuel the Debate

Delving into the rationale, Trump framed Canada’s integration as a solution to what he sees as an imbalanced relationship. “Canada is an interesting case. We lose $200 to $250 billion a year supporting Canada,” he told Time.

Recalling a conversation with former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, whom he dubbed “Governor Trudeau,” Trump recounted, “And I asked a man, who I called Governor Trudeau, I said, ‘Why? Why do we think we’re losing so much money supporting you? Do you think that’s right? Do you think that’s appropriate for another country to make it possible, for a country to sustain?’ and he was unable to give me an answer, but it costs us over $200 billion a year to take care of Canada?”

Trump argued that the U.S. subsidizes Canada’s military and economy while gaining little in return.

“We’re taking care of their military. We’re taking care of every aspect of their lives, and we don’t need them to make cars for us. In fact, we don’t want them to make cars for us. We want to make our own cars. We don’t need their lumber. We don’t need their energy. We don’t need anything from Canada. And I say the only way this thing really works is for Canada to become a state.” His comments reflect a push for American self-reliance, a hallmark of his administration’s agenda.

Canadian Sentiment and a Generational Divide

Public opinion in Canada remains largely opposed to Trump’s proposal, though cracks in resistance are emerging, particularly among younger generations. Polls by Leger Marketing and Angus Reid Institute in December and January showed meager support—13% and 10%, respectively—for joining the U.S.

An Ipsos survey found 80% of Canadians would “never” vote to merge, but support rose to 30% when American citizenship and full asset conversion were offered.

Notably, among Canadians aged 18 to 34, 43% backed the idea under those conditions, hinting at a generational openness that could give Trump’s vision traction over time.

While Canada’s new Prime Minister Mark Carney has yet to face Trump’s annexation rhetoric directly, the president’s reduced mentions of the idea since Carney’s ascent suggest a tactical pause.

Still, Trump’s unapologetic clarity—“I’m really not trolling,” he told Time—ensures this audacious proposal will continue to stir conversation, challenging both nations to reconsider their shared future.

You don’t always get what you want. But some people have never been told “no” before.

And now Donald Trump blindsided Democrats with this brutal reality check.

Trump Champions Pragmatic Path to Peace

President Donald Trump is steering a bold course to end the Ukraine-Russia conflict, expressing openness to Russia retaining control of Crimea as part of a broader ceasefire agreement. In a sweeping interview with Time magazine, Trump emphasized a practical approach to resolving the war, noting Crimea’s long-standing ties to Russia.

“If Crimea will stay with Russia—we have to only talk about Crimea because that’s the one that always gets mentioned. Crimea will stay with Russia. And Zelensky understands that, and everybody understands that it’s been with them for a long time,” Trump said.

He added, “It’s been with them long before Trump came along. Again, this is Obama’s war. This is a war that should have never happened. I call it the war that should have never happened.”

Trump’s candid remarks, part of Time’s cover story on his first 100 days, reflect his determination to tackle global crises with clear-eyed realism. Named Time’s 2024 Person of the Year for his remarkable political resurgence and decisive electoral triumph over Kamala Harris, Trump is leveraging his mandate to push for peace where his predecessors faltered.

Obama’s Legacy Haunts Ukraine Crisis

The roots of the conflict trace back to 2014, when Vladimir Putin annexed Crimea during Barack Obama’s presidency amid Ukraine’s political turmoil. Obama’s failure to counter Russia’s move drew sharp criticism, with many arguing his dismissive stance on Moscow’s ambitions set the stage for today’s war.

Trump, seizing on this, has framed the conflict as a preventable tragedy born of Democratic missteps. His administration is now working tirelessly to broker a ceasefire, aiming to halt a war that erupted in 2022 with Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.

Trump’s frustration with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky surfaced this week after Zelensky rejected a U.S. proposal acknowledging Russian control over Crimea. Responding to a Wall Street Journal report on Zelensky’s Kyiv press conference, Trump took to Truth Social:

“This statement is very harmful to the Peace Negotiations with Russia in that Crimea was lost years ago under the auspices of President Barack Hussein Obama, and is not even a point of discussion.”

He warned, “It’s inflammatory statements like Zelenskyy’s that makes it so difficult to settle this War. He has nothing to boast about! The situation for Ukraine is dire — He can have Peace or, he can fight for another three years before losing the whole Country.”

Trump Urges Restraint Amid Escalating Tensions

As negotiations falter, Trump has balanced his push for peace with criticism of both sides. Following Russia’s deadly missile strikes on Kyiv, which killed twelve and injured 90, Trump called out Putin directly.

“I am not happy with the Russian strikes on KYIV. Not necessary, and very bad timing. Vladimir, STOP! 5000 soldiers a week are dying. Lets get the Peace Deal DONE!” he posted on Truth Social. Zelensky, cutting short a South Africa trip to address the attacks, suggested Russia’s aggression was a tactic to pressure U.S. negotiators.

With Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Trump has signaled readiness to walk away from talks if Russia and Ukraine remain entrenched.

The ongoing deadlock, coupled with Zelensky’s resistance and Putin’s escalations, underscores the complexity of the crisis. Yet Trump’s unwavering focus on a deal—rooted in a clear-eyed view of historical realities like Crimea’s status—positions him as a leader determined to deliver stability where others have failed.

Trump Derangement Syndrome is alive and well. But this administration is done putting up with it.

And now Marco Rubio laid down the law on the mainstream media for this major lie.

Rubio and Witkoff Slam Politico’s Sanctions Report as Baseless Fiction

In a fiery rebuttal, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Special Envoy Steve Witkoff have categorically denied a Politico report alleging they discussed easing sanctions on Russian energy assets. The duo labeled the anonymously sourced story “totally fictitious” and “fake crap,” igniting a broader clash with the outlet over its credibility.

“This is false,” Rubio and Witkoff declared in a joint White House statement.

“Neither of us have had any conversations about lifting sanctions on Russia as part of a peace deal with Ukraine. This is just totally fictitious and irresponsible reporting from Politico, a fifth-rate publication. If they have an ounce of journalistic integrity, they will fully retract this piece of fiction.”

The Politico article, published Thursday, cited “five people familiar with the discussions” claiming Witkoff was a “main proponent” of lifting sanctions, including those on Russia’s Nord Stream 2 pipeline.

It further suggested Rubio was at odds with such efforts, highlighting tensions between U.S. energy export advocates and those seeking better relations with Russia. A Politico spokesperson, however, stood firm, insisting the outlet’s reporting was accurate.

Political Allies Rally Against Politico’s Claims

The report drew swift condemnation from prominent figures. “There isn’t even a kernel of truth to this story – Politico was played by their ‘sources’ yet again,” Witkoff posted on X. “It’s embarrassing that they print this type of fake crap.”

Donald Trump Jr. echoed the sentiment, blasting the outlet on X: “More bulls— from the liars at Politico smearing Marco Rubio and Steve Witkoff with pure fake news. How do they get away with continuing to run these fake stories????”

Utah GOP Sen. Mike Lee took a pointed jab, writing, “I hope Politico has good defamation insurance coverage. Or maybe I don’t.”

White House spokesperson Anna Kelly piled on, calling Politico a “C-rated tabloid, fraught with poor sourcing and a TDS epidemic, pretending to be serious news.” She dismissed the story as one of “many pathetic tall tales” debunked by facts.

Energy and Peace Talks at a Crossroads

The controversy unfolds against the backdrop of delicate U.S.-led negotiations to end the Russia-Ukraine conflict, where energy remains a pivotal issue.

Sanctions on Russia’s Nord Stream 2 pipeline, first imposed under the Trump administration, were briefly lifted by President Joe Biden before being reinstated following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Recent proposals reportedly include U.S. control over Ukraine’s nuclear plants and natural gas pipelines to offset military aid costs.

Tensions in the talks have escalated. A U.S.-brokered truce preventing attacks on energy infrastructure recently collapsed, and Vice President JD Vance warned that the U.S. could abandon ceasefire efforts without a deal. President Trump, in a Truth Social post, criticized Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy for rejecting Crimea’s annexation as part of a resolution. “We are very close to a Deal, but the man with ‘no cards to play’ should now, finally, GET IT DONE,” Trump said.

As the White House navigates these high-stakes discussions, Rubio and Witkoff’s clash with Politico underscores the fraught intersection of diplomacy, energy policy, and media scrutiny. Fox News Digital’s request for White House comment went unanswered by publication time.

America has an identity crisis. And even many who say they serve our country are working against it.

Now a US Army mole is thrown behind bars for selling US secrets to this foreign enemy.

Former Army Analyst Sentenced for Leaking Secrets to China

A former U.S. Army intelligence analyst, Korbein Schultz, 25, of Wills Point, Texas, was sentenced to seven years in prison on Wednesday for passing sensitive military information to an individual he believed was linked to the Chinese government.

Schultz’s actions, which spanned from May 2022 to his arrest in March 2024, involved transmitting dozens of classified documents in exchange for approximately $42,000, despite clear signs that his contact was tied to Beijing.

Schultz pleaded guilty in August 2024 to charges including conspiracy to collect and transmit national defense information, unlawful export of controlled data to China, and accepting bribes.

Court documents reveal he provided his Chinese contact with critical materials, including his Army unit’s operational order for NATO deployment in Eastern Europe, lessons from the Russia-Ukraine conflict applicable to Taiwan’s defense, and technical manuals for the HH-60 helicopter, F-22A fighter aircraft, and Intercontinental Ballistic Missile systems.

He also shared insights into Chinese military tactics, U.S. military exercises in South Korea and the Philippines, and details on U.S. satellite and missile defense systems like the High Mobility Artillery Rocket System and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense.

A Calculated Betrayal

The scheme began when Schultz, shortly after receiving his Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information clearance, was approached via a freelance work platform by an individual posing as a client from a geopolitical consulting firm.

This person, later identified as a Chinese national, initially requested analyses on U.S. military capabilities, focusing on Taiwan and the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

Over time, the demands grew more specific, targeting non-public, highly classified materials. The conspirator emphasized the need for “exclusiveness” and “CUI and better,” according to court documents.

Fully aware of the national security risks, Schultz accessed restricted U.S. government databases to download and send at least 92 sensitive documents.

He also attempted to recruit a fellow Army intelligence analyst, assigned to the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, into the conspiracy. Discussions with his Chinese contact about recruiting others were deliberate, with plans to proceed in a “nice and slow fashion,” per court records.

Justice Department Vows Vigilance

Attorney General Pamela Bondi condemned Schultz’s actions, stating, “The Justice Department remains vigilant against China’s efforts to target our military and will ensure that those who leak military secrets spend years behind bars.”

FBI Director Kash Patel echoed this sentiment, noting that service members are a “prime target” for China. “This sentencing is a stark warning to those who betray our country: you will pay a steep price for it,” Patel said.

“The People’s Republic of China is relentless in its efforts to steal our national defense information, and service members are a prime target. The FBI and our partners will continue to root out espionage and hold those accountable who abandon their obligation to safeguard defense information from hostile foreign governments.”

The smoke and mirrors can’t hide what’s going on anymore. And the highest court in the land is going in for the kill.

Because this Supreme Court Justice slammed Democrats for one sickening act.

Supreme Court Scrutinizes Maryland School’s LGBTQ Book Policy

In a lively Supreme Court session this week, Justice Neil Gorsuch engaged in a spirited back-and-forth with Alan Schoenfeld, the attorney for Montgomery County Public Schools, over the use of a children’s book, Pride Puppy!, in a case that pits parental rights against school curriculum choices.

The dispute centers on whether parents should be allowed to opt their children out of reading LGBTQ-themed storybooks in public schools.

Pride Puppy!, a 32-page rhyming alphabet book, follows a family’s joyful day at a Pride parade, where their dog gets lost amid the festivities. Described by its publisher as “affirming and inclusive,” the book invites young readers to spot items corresponding to each letter of the alphabet while celebrating the vibrancy of the Pride community. It was once part of the district’s pre-kindergarten curriculum.

“And they’re being used in English language instruction at age 3?” Gorsuch asked.

“‘Pride Puppy!’ was the book that was used for the pre-kindergarten curriculum. That’s no longer in the curriculum,” replied Schoenfeld.

“That’s the one where they’re supposed to look for the leather and things – and b*ndage – things like that,” Gorsuch responded.

“It’s not b*ndage. It’s a woman in a leather…”

A “s*x worker?” asked Gorsuch.

“No. That’s not correct. No,” replied Schoenfeld.

“Gosh, I read it…drag queen?” said Gorsuch.

Schoenfeld clarified that the leather was simply a woman in a leather jacket and noted that “one of the words is drag queen.”

Parental Rights vs. School Authority

The case, Mahmoud v. Taylor, brought by religious parents, argues that the school district’s refusal to allow opt-outs for certain LGBTQ-themed books violates the First Amendment. Eric Baxter, representing the parents, told the justices that the district’s policy forces young children to navigate moral messages that may conflict with their family’s beliefs.

Baxter highlighted inconsistencies in the district’s approach, noting that exemptions are granted for other religious objections, such as books depicting the Muslim Prophet Muhammad. “When the books were first introduced in August of 2022, the board suggested they be used five times before the end of the year,” he said. “One of the schools, Sherwood School, in June for Pride Month said that they were going to read one book each day.”

Initially, the district permitted opt-outs for religious reasons but reversed this policy by March 2023, citing logistical challenges and concerns about absenteeism.

Other Books Fuel the Debate

Beyond Pride Puppy!, the court discussed other books at the heart of the controversy. Prince & Knight, a modern fairy tale for ages 4 to 8, tells of two men who fall in love after defeating a dragon and later wed. Another book, Uncle Bobby’s Wedding, explores a young girl’s perspective on her uncle’s decision to marry another man.

As the justices weigh the balance between educational mandates and parental rights, the outcome of this case could reshape how schools handle sensitive curriculum materials. A ruling is anticipated by late June.

The Democrat Party is fracturing. There’s no telling where this all will end.

Now a former Biden official jumped ship to team up with the Trump administration.

Trump Administration’s Antisemitism Push Gains Support, Sparks Debate

Deborah Lipstadt, a prominent figure in combating antisemitism during the Biden administration, has expressed cautious optimism about the Trump administration’s efforts to address the issue.

Speaking to the New Yorker, Lipstadt, who recently returned to Emory University, highlighted the urgency of tackling antisemitism while raising concerns about the approach’s intensity and potential repercussions.

A Continued Fight Against Antisemitism

Lipstadt, who served as the Biden administration’s special envoy to monitor and combat antisemitism, welcomed the Trump administration’s focus on the issue.

“I’m pleased that they’re addressing it, because that’s what I did for the past three years, which was to really push the Biden Administration to seriously address it. So I am very, very pleased that it’s on their agenda,” she told the New Yorker. Her comments reflect a hope that the momentum she helped build will persist, even as she transitions back to academia at Emory University, as announced in December.

The Trump administration’s actions, particularly its scrutiny of universities, have resonated with some communities. “I also think there are many Jews, and some non-Jews, too, but many Jews who are disappointed by how universities have behaved since October 7th, and they see a strong – to use Passover terminology – a strong hand being used,” Lipstadt said.

She acknowledged the relief felt by many at this forceful stance but cautioned, “Now, whether that hand is being used properly or not raises certain questions about what’s happening,” adding, “a lot of people were relieved to see this forceful approach. I think, in many respects, it’s going too far.”

Universities Under Fire

Lipstadt pointed to a systemic failure among higher education institutions in addressing antisemitism, particularly since the events of October 7th. “Look, the universities failed to address this seriously. And by failing to address this seriously, they failed the Jewish students on campus.

They dismissed their grievances. They created an inhospitable atmosphere. We’re now seeing the fruits of that failure,” she told the New Yorker. She expressed concern that the current debate risks weaponizing antisemitism.

“What disturbs me so much is that the debate will now become over whether antisemitism is being used as a weapon to fight against people we don’t like. Antisemitism should not be a cudgel,” she noted.

Lipstadt emphasized that the focus should remain on combating antisemitism itself, not targeting institutions broadly.

“The fight should be against antisemitism and not against the institutions. The institutions opened the door. Most universities failed miserably to address this, and we’re seeing the consequences of that now,” she said. Her remarks underscore the need for a balanced approach that prioritizes student safety without escalating into broader conflicts.

Navigating a Complex Path Forward

As the Trump administration presses universities to act, Lipstadt’s insights highlight both the necessity and the challenges of addressing antisemitism effectively. Her call for a focused, non-partisan effort reflects a desire to protect Jewish students while avoiding the politicization of a critical issue.

The ongoing debate, she warns, will test whether these efforts can unify rather than divide, as campuses grapple with the consequences of past inaction and the implications of a newly assertive approach.

Rumors have been circulating for years. But now the evidence is in.

And a picture of Michelle Obama proves what everyone already knew.

Obamas Appear Together at DC Restaurant Amid Divorce Rumors

On April 19, 2025, former President Barack Obama and former First Lady Michelle Obama dined together at Osteria Mozza, a high-end Washington, DC, restaurant, marking a joint appearance at the same venue where Barack was spotted alone in January amid swirling divorce rumors.

The couple’s dinner at the upscale Italian eatery, known for its $175 dry-aged bistecca alla Fiorentina and “California-style” pasta, drew attention from diners who clapped and cheered as they descended a central stairway, per a clip posted on the Washingtonian Problems Instagram account on April 21, 2025. Barack Obama, 63, briefly waved to the crowd as they exited, a moment that contrasted with earlier speculation about their 30-year marriage.

Solo Visit Fueled Marriage Gossip

Barack Obama’s solo dinner at Osteria Mozza in January 2025, days before President Donald Trump’s inauguration, intensified rumors of marital strife.

His casual entrance without Michelle, 61, who skipped both former President Jimmy Carter’s funeral and Trump’s inauguration, prompted widespread chatter on social media and in tabloids about the couple’s relationship.

That visit, which also drew a loud welcome from diners, came at a peak of speculation, with some questioning whether the Obamas were headed for a split. The couple’s recent joint appearance at the same restaurant appeared to counter those narratives, though it did little to fully quell ongoing public curiosity about their personal lives.

Michelle Obama Responds to Speculation

In an April 2025 interview on Sophia Bush’s “Work in Progress” podcast, Michelle Obama addressed the divorce rumors, attributing them to her decisions to decline high-profile event invitations. “The interesting thing is that, when I say ‘no,’ for the most part people are like, ‘I get it, and I’m OK,’” she said, adding:

“And that’s the thing that we as women struggle with — disappointing people. So much so that people, they couldn’t even fathom that I was making a choice for myself, that they had to assume that my husband and I are divorcing.” Her comments framed her absences as personal choices, though they did not directly address the public’s perception of tension in the marriage.

Public Reaction Draws Attention

The crowd’s enthusiastic response at Osteria Mozza, with diners applauding the Obamas’ entrance, highlighted their continued visibility in public life. The Instagram video captured the moment, showing Barack acknowledging the crowd as they left the restaurant.

This reaction, similar to the one during his January solo visit, underscores the couple’s ability to command attention, whether together or apart. However, the warm reception also amplified scrutiny of their appearance, as observers noted the deliberate choice to dine at a location previously tied to divorce rumors, raising questions about the intent behind the outing.

Appearance Stirs Ongoing Debate

The Obamas’ decision to dine at Osteria Mozza together, revisiting a restaurant linked to one of the most intense periods of divorce speculation, has kept their personal lives in the spotlight. While their joint presence contrasted with Barack’s earlier solo outing, it has not fully silenced questions about their marriage.

Michelle’s podcast remarks aimed to reframe her absences as independent decisions, but the couple’s high-profile dinner has fueled further discussion about whether the appearance was a calculated move to address gossip. As the Obamas remain prominent figures, their actions—whether dining together or skipping events—continue to spark public debate about their relationship and motivations.