Schiff is well known for his lies about Donald Trump. But now he’s telling all.

And Adam Schiff finally admitted something that is raising eyebrows.

California Senator-elect Adam Schiff isn’t holding back when it comes to the Democratic Party’s disastrous performance in this month’s election, placing the blame squarely on the party as a whole for Vice President Kamala Harris’ stunning defeat.

Speaking on NBC’s Meet the Press Sunday, host Kristen Welker confronted Schiff with his overly optimistic prediction just weeks before the election, when he confidently claimed Harris would win “overwhelmingly.”

Now, Schiff admitted that while Harris had a chance, the party faced insurmountable challenges.

“I think Joe Biden’s decision to step aside and pass the torch is the right decision,” Schiff said.

“It gave us a chance to win, not a guarantee. I thought she could win. I thought she could win in all the battleground states.”

Schiff attributed President-elect Donald Trump’s victory to what he called an “anti-incumbent wave” sweeping the nation, which he said worked against both progressives and conservatives.

He pointed to the party’s association with the status quo as a major liability.

“That was too much to overcome. I think the principal issue is the economy,” Schiff explained.

“And over years and decades, it has gotten more and more difficult for people working full-time to make a living. Until we resolve that challenge to the economy, we may find the presidency is easier to get than it is to keep.”

Welker pressed Schiff on whether he agreed with former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who recently blamed President Biden for dooming the party by staying in the race too long before bowing out.

Schiff sidestepped directly criticizing Biden but acknowledged broader failings within the party.

“Look, I think the entire Democratic Party bears the responsibility,” Schiff responded.

“Myself included. And the former president…they mounted an effective campaign. You have to give them credit for that. The challenge we have is we need to put forward a bold vision of how we’re going to move the economy forward, make the economy work for every American. To me, the existential question is if you, working hard in America, can you still earn a good living, and too many people doubt that that’s possible.”

Schiff’s remarks come amid a period of intense soul-searching for Democrats, as party leaders scramble to explain Harris’ loss.

Some blame Biden for clinging to the race too long, while others fault Harris herself for failing to effectively address Biden’s perceived mental decline.

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders pointed a finger at the party’s abandonment of the working class, while other Democrats have criticized the party’s embrace of “woke” progressive ideologies, which they argue alienated middle-class, blue-collar voters.

Former President Barack Obama has also faced scrutiny, with reports suggesting he worked behind the scenes over the summer to push Biden out of the race—efforts that may have sown division within the party.

As Democrats look ahead, Schiff’s remarks signal the need for a hard reset.

With finger-pointing rampant, the party must reckon with its identity crisis and redefine its platform to reconnect with voters who have turned their backs on its message.

Whether the party can recover in time for future elections remains an open question.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

The GOP is set to clean house. And it isn’t going to be pretty for everyone.

Now the D.C. Swamp is freaking out after Republicans moved to abolish this agency.

Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD) took a bold step Thursday in introducing legislation to abolish the Department of Education, delivering on a long-held Republican vision and aligning with President-elect Donald Trump’s commitment to overhaul the federal role in education.

The bill, aptly named the “Returning Education to Our States Act,” seeks to transfer key functions of the Department of Education to other federal agencies, restoring control over education policy to state and local governments.

Rounds emphasized that local communities—not distant Washington bureaucrats—are best equipped to make decisions for their students.

“The federal Department of Education has never educated a single student, and it’s long past time to end this bureaucratic department that causes more harm than good,” Rounds said in a statement.

“We all know local control is best when it comes to education. Everyone raised in South Dakota can think of a teacher who played a big part in their educational journey. Local school boards and state Departments of Education know best what their students need, not unelected bureaucrats in Washington, D.C.”

Created under President Jimmy Carter in 1979, the Department of Education centralized federal influence in a way many conservatives view as detrimental to student success. Rounds’ bill proposes reverting to a pre-1979 system, decentralizing education programs and placing them in agencies better suited to manage them:

• Disability programs would transfer to the Department of Health and Human Services.
• Career training initiatives would shift to the Department of Labor.
• International research and training programs would fall under the State Department.
• Student loans and grants would become the responsibility of the Department of the Treasury.
• American Indian education programs would move to the Department of the Interior.

President-elect Trump campaigned on a promise to “drain the government education swamp” and put an end to taxpayer dollars being used to promote ideological agendas in schools.

Earlier this week, he named Linda McMahon as his choice for Secretary of Education, highlighting her focus on school choice and parental rights.

“As a strong supporter of school choice and parental rights, there is no one better to expel the woke agenda in our education system and put our children first,” Trump said of McMahon.

Republicans have long advocated for the elimination of the Department of Education, a pledge first championed by President Ronald Reagan.

With unified Republican control of the House, Senate, and White House come January, Rounds’ legislation has its best chance yet of becoming law.

“For years, I’ve worked toward removing the federal Department of Education,” Rounds said.

“I’m pleased that President-elect Trump shares this vision, and I’m excited to work with him and Republican majorities in the Senate and House to make this a reality. This legislation is a roadmap to eliminating the federal Department of Education by practically rehoming these federal programs in the departments where they belong, which will be critical as we move into next year.”

While Democrats are unlikely to back the measure in the current Senate, Republicans remain optimistic that this long-overdue reform is on the horizon.

The push to end the Department of Education is more than a symbolic gesture—it’s a commitment to returning education to the hands of parents, teachers, and local communities, where it belongs.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

Donald Trump and his allies aren’t holding back. They’re ready to enact a much needed overhaul of the federal government.

And the upcoming Trump administration unveils a new plan to squash this evil Leftist group into the ground.

Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy revealed their strategy Thursday to address federal overspending, focusing on expenditures they argue are misused or unauthorized by Congress—including funds allocated to Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider.

In a Wall Street Journal op-ed titled Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy: The DOGE Plan to Reform Government, Musk and Ramaswamy outlined their approach to curtail wasteful spending. “Skeptics question how much federal spending DOGE can tame through executive action alone,” they wrote. “They point to the 1974 Impoundment Control Act, which stops the president from ceasing expenditures authorized by Congress. Mr. Trump has previously suggested this statute is unconstitutional, and we believe the current Supreme Court would likely side with him on this question.”

The two continued by explaining how DOGE, short for the “Department of Government Efficiency,” could help reduce overspending even without relying on the contested interpretation of the 1974 statute. “DOGE will help end federal overspending by taking aim at the $500 billion plus in annual federal expenditures that are unauthorized by Congress or being used in ways that Congress never intended, from $535 million a year to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and $1.5 billion for grants to international organizations to nearly $300 million to progressive groups like Planned Parenthood.”

The DOGE plan is part of a broader effort endorsed by former President Donald Trump, who recently announced Musk and Ramaswamy as co-leaders of the proposed department.

Trump praised their commitment to streamlining government operations, saying, “Together, these two wonderful Americans will pave the way for my Administration to dismantle Government Bureaucracy, slash excess regulations, cut wasteful expenditures, and restructure Federal Agencies.”

Planned Parenthood in the Spotlight

Planned Parenthood, long a focus of federal funding debates, received $670.4 million in government funding last year, up from $633.4 million the previous year. The organization also reported $2.3 billion in net assets and $1.9 billion in total revenue, according to its latest annual report.

While best known for its abortion services—392,715 abortions were performed by Planned Parenthood between 2021 and 2022—the organization has also expanded its “gender-affirming” healthcare offerings. In 2022, 45 affiliates across the U.S. provided hormone therapy, with some sources suggesting the organization may be one of the largest providers of transgender healthcare in the country.

Mara Keisling, executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality, noted in a 2017 interview, “It’s possible they’re the largest provider of trans health in the country. We don’t know for sure. But it’s certainly among the biggest, if not the biggest.”

Planned Parenthood’s shifting priorities come amidst changes in abortion access following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. According to Melanie Israel of the Heritage Foundation, the organization has announced layoffs and plans to pivot resources toward services like STD testing, contraception, and gender-affirming care.

A Divisive Debate

The op-ed’s publication coincided with President Joe Biden awarding the Presidential Medal of Freedom to former Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards.

Biden commended Richards for her work advancing reproductive rights, stating in an X post, “Through her work to lift up the dignity of workers, defend and advance women’s reproductive rights and equality, and mobilize Americans to exercise their power to vote, she has carved an inspiring legacy.”

Richards, who led Planned Parenthood from 2006 to 2018, is credited with significantly increasing the organization’s abortion numbers during her tenure.

According to the Washington Stand, the annual number of abortions performed by Planned Parenthood rose by nearly 70,000 under her leadership, with an estimated four million unborn lives lost during her tenure.

Musk and Ramaswamy’s plan reflects an emerging conservative push to reexamine federal funding priorities, particularly with the notorious abortion mill that is Planned Parenthood.

Taxpayer funds should certainly not be going to an organization that ends the lives of countless unborn children. It’s past time for the government to cease funding with this evil group.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

Biden isn’t in his right mind. But even he should know this looks bad.

Because Joe Biden set the White House on fire with one stunning action.

President Joe Biden’s decision to award the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Cecile Richards, the former head of Planned Parenthood, has sparked fierce backlash from pro-life advocates, who condemn her legacy as one defined by millions of abortions under her leadership.

Richards served as Planned Parenthood’s president from 2006 to 2018, a tenure during which nearly four million abortions were performed according to a fact sheet from Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, which analyzed the organization’s annual reports.

At a White House ceremony on November 20, Biden praised Richards for her “absolute courage,” calling her a champion of freedom. On social media, he lauded her as a leader who “fearlessly leads us forward to be the America we say we are — a nation of freedom.”

He added in a post on X: “Through her work to lift up the dignity of workers, defend and advance women’s reproductive rights and equality, and mobilize Americans to exercise their power to vote, she has carved an inspiring legacy.”

Pro-life voices, however, strongly disagreed. Lila Rose, president of Live Action, blasted the honor in a post on X:

“Cecile Richards presided over the abortions of 3.9 million babies as president of Planned Parenthood. She belongs in jail. Not in the White House receiving the Presidential Medal of Freedom.”

Richards, who succeeded Gloria Feldt as Planned Parenthood president, earned a reputation for turning the organization into what she proudly called the “largest kick-butt political organization.”

Yet, under her leadership, non-abortion health services declined, while both abortions and taxpayer funding saw sharp increases.

Reports from Live Action revealed that Planned Parenthood’s annual government funding surged by 67% during Richards’ tenure, jumping from $336.7 million in 2006 to $563.8 million in 2018. Simultaneously, the annual number of abortions rose by nearly 15%, climbing from 289,750 to 332,757.

Her presidency also became embroiled in controversy. The Center for Medical Progress (CMP) accused Planned Parenthood of illegally selling fetal organs, a scandal that erupted after a CMP video showed Dr. Deborah Nucatola, a medical director for the organization, casually discussing the harvesting of fetal organs during abortions.

Richards later apologized for Nucatola’s “tone,” though the allegations continued to cast a shadow over her leadership.

Critics have pointed to numerous other scandals, including allegations of Medicaid fraud, failure to report child sexual abuse, and falsely claiming to provide mammograms.

Live Action also highlighted internal accusations of racism within Planned Parenthood, as well as Richards’ defense of the organization’s founder, Margaret Sanger, despite Sanger’s well-documented white supremacist views.

Pro-life advocates argue that Richards’ legacy is far from the inspiring narrative Biden portrayed. Some went as far as to frame her recognition as a grim reflection of America’s abortion culture.

“She has been given a medal for killing the most number of Americans,” wrote one critic on X.

Carole Novielli, writing for Live Action, echoed that sentiment: “An America that allows and even promotes the killing of innocent preborn human beings is not truly free, nor can it claim to stand for freedom when it unjustly robs children of their right to life.”

While Biden celebrated Richards as a champion of rights and equality, pro-life advocates contend her leadership represents a tragic chapter in America’s history, marked by the loss of millions of unborn lives.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

The Left is in hysterics. They don’t control Congress or the presidency anymore.

And now Democrats went fully deranged in Congress for one boneheaded reason.

Congress descended into another bout of “Trump Derangement Syndrome,” according to House Republicans, during a heated battle Thursday over legislation aimed at stripping tax-exempt status from nonprofit groups providing material support to terrorists.

The bill, once sailing through Congress with bipartisan support, hit a wall of resistance following Donald Trump’s recent election victory. Democrats, now wary of granting additional powers that they fear Trump could misuse, reversed their earlier backing of the measure.

“With Trump’s election, the conditions have changed,” said Rep. Lloyd Doggett, a Texas Democrat who supported the bill in committee. “The dangers of granting additional power to him are far outweighed by any benefits from this bill.”

Despite the backlash, the bill narrowly passed the House on a 219-184 vote, with 15 Democrats joining nearly all Republicans. However, its future in the Senate looks uncertain as Democratic opposition grows and time runs short in the legislative calendar.

Republicans were quick to slam the Democrats’ flip-flop, accusing them of letting Trump hysteria cloud their judgment. Rep. Claudia Tenney (R-NY), a key sponsor of the bill, blamed the shift on “Trump Derangement Syndrome.”

“By the way, there’s no vaccine and no cure that we know of right now for that, which is obvious from what we’re seeing,” she quipped.

The legislation targets nonprofits funding terrorism, with Republicans arguing it’s outrageous for taxpayer money to indirectly support such activities.

“If a nonprofit organization is funding terrorism, you lose your tax-exempt status,” said Rep. Jason Smith (R-MO), chairman of the Ways and Means Committee. He cited a U.S. nonprofit that funded a journalist working with Hamas who held a hostage in his home, yet still retains tax-exempt status.

The bill empowers the Treasury Department and IRS to revoke tax exemptions for nonprofits providing material support to terrorist groups, closing a loophole that currently applies only to the terrorist organizations themselves. Protections are included for hostages, ensuring they aren’t penalized for missing tax filings while in captivity.

A previous version of the bill passed the House overwhelmingly in April on a 382-11 vote and cleared the Ways and Means Committee unanimously on September 11. But last week, 144 Democrats blocked it on the expedited calendar, and this week that opposition swelled to 183.

Rep. Jason Smith called the reversal “insanity,” while Democrats pointed to Trump as a key factor in their opposition.

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), who initially supported the measure, said she now fears Trump could misuse the law. “Republicans are fixated on giving unchecked powers to the Trump administration,” she said, adding that Trump could target environmental groups as “ecoterrorists” or shutter hospitals providing “reproductive care.”

Rep. Donald Beyer (D-VA), another early supporter, admitted he was swayed by advocacy groups’ concerns. “We have all woken up to the potential, not just because of Donald Trump but because the nonprofits that could be affected by it are aware of its impact,” he said.

Critics of the bill include heavyweights like the ACLU, NAACP, Planned Parenthood, and CAIR, which dubbed it the “nonprofit killer bill.”

“This bill dangerously weaponizes the Treasury against nonprofit organizations and houses of worship — Christian, Jewish or Muslim — that dare to support Palestinian and Lebanese human rights or criticize Israel’s genocidal actions,” said Robert S. McCaw, CAIR’s government affairs director.

The ACLU accused Republicans of choosing “fear over freedom,” while opponents argued the bill lacks safeguards, leaving nonprofits vulnerable to abuse by a president or Treasury secretary.

Republicans countered that the bill includes protections, such as allowing nonprofits to remedy violations, appeal designations, or challenge them in court.

For now, the bill’s fate hangs in the balance, with Democrats’ resistance raising questions about whether bipartisan cooperation on anti-terrorism measures can survive the shadow of Trump’s presidency.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

The Left has been caught. Now their strategy is to deflect over and over again.

And now Senate Republicans are in an uproar after this top Biden official refuses to testify.

FBI Director Chris Wray and Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas came under bipartisan fire Thursday after they declined to publicly testify before the Senate Homeland Security Committee.

Instead, the Biden administration officials sought a classified, closed-door briefing—an unusual request that outraged lawmakers from both parties, who said it undermines government transparency and breaks long-standing precedent.

Mayorkas was set to face tough questions, particularly over allegations that FEMA instructed workers to bypass homes displaying support for Donald Trump during disaster relief efforts in Florida.

At least 20 homes were reportedly skipped, prompting Republican senators, including Rand Paul (KY) and Katie Britt (AL), to demand accountability from the DHS chief.

Committee Chair Sen. Gary Peters (D-MI) sharply criticized the request to avoid public testimony, calling it “without merit” and unprecedented.

“Americans deserve transparent, public answers about the threats we face. Secretary Mayorkas and Director Wray’s refusal to speak publicly about their department’s work will only increase the concerns that many Americans have about our nation’s security at a challenging time, flout the Committee’s efforts to conduct responsible oversight, and will deal a serious blow to trust in our government,” Peters said.

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) did not hold back, calling for Wray’s resignation and urging immediate Senate action.

“Secretary Mayorkas and Director Wray’s refusal to testify publicly today in the Senate is an outrage — and a brazen attempt to avoid oversight for the political abuses at FEMA, the FBI and more. I look forward to Director Wray’s resignation,” Hawley declared.

In a follow-up post, he escalated his criticism:

“This is Mayorkas & Wray giving the middle finger to the American people. They are REQUIRED BY LAW to testify. And now they’re saying it’s good enough to post something on a website? Both are unfit for office. The Senate should subpoena them immediately and hold them in contempt.”

The FBI and DHS responded with statements defending their decision, insisting that a closed-door setting was necessary.

The FBI said its leaders “have testified extensively in public settings about the current threat environment” and argued that “the Committee would benefit most from further substantive discussions and additional information that can only be provided in a classified setting.”

The DHS noted that Mayorkas has already “testified 30 times during his tenure” and maintained that it “takes seriously its obligation to respond to Congressional requests for testimony.”

Despite these justifications, the refusal to testify in public has only fueled suspicions on Capitol Hill, with lawmakers warning that such actions erode public trust and hinder their ability to provide effective oversight at a time when national security and government accountability are under heightened scrutiny.

And why shouldn’t they? These are bureaucrats that should be held accountable to us.

Instead they act as if their kings and we’re just living in their kingdom.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

The Left is in panic mode. They can’t seem to agree on anything after losing big time on election day.

And now the Democrat Party is collapsing after the mainstream media completely betrayed them.

A recent New York Times report titled “For Minority Working-Class Voters, Dismay With Democrats Led to Distrust” sheds light on why many minority and working-class voters turned their backs on the Democratic Party and embraced President-elect Donald Trump in the 2024 election.

Traditionally, Democrats have relied on strong support from minority and working-class voters, but Trump shattered expectations by making historic gains among Black, Hispanic, and blue-collar Americans this election cycle.

The Times revealed that interviews conducted over the past year with Latino, Black, and Asian American voters across the nation consistently highlighted a common theme: disillusionment with how the Democratic Party has failed to address their concerns.

Daniel Trujillo, an East Las Vegas barbershop owner, captured this sentiment when he described how he and many of his customers see the Democrats today.

“Democrats flipped,” he told the Times. “They went from being for the working class to, if you’re not college-educated and have money, you’re not worthy.”

Trujillo praised the GOP’s shift in focus under Trump, saying, “The right turned blue-collar and went full border-control, strong-economy and law-and-order. Who doesn’t want that?”

For many voters, the Democratic Party’s warnings about Trump being a “threat to democracy” fell flat compared to more immediate concerns, particularly skyrocketing costs of living.

David Paiz, a 52-year-old maintenance worker in Las Vegas who moved from California to escape high expenses, views Trump’s election as a pivotal moment.

“There’s a lot of things that I want to do, that we want to do for our sons, for their future, to prepare them for success,” Paiz told the Times.

“But with the current administration, I didn’t see that happening. Now that Trump’s going to be our new president, I see a lot more opportunities.”

Other voters expressed similar frustrations, linking their struggles with affordability directly to Democratic leadership. Walter Mendoza, a 30-year-old financial adviser in Allentown, Pennsylvania, emphasized the strain on families like his.

“People can’t afford nothing,” Mendoza told the newspaper. “So I’m voting for somebody who could more manage the country better.”

Mendoza hopes that under Trump’s leadership, Americans will no longer be stuck living paycheck-to-paycheck and will finally be able to enjoy “a couple nice things.”

The Times report also noted that many minority working-class voters found the Democratic Party’s priorities to be disconnected from their daily struggles.

Issues like abortion and debates over transgender rights, they said, seemed irrelevant compared to their immediate needs. Words like “condescending” were used by some to describe the party’s tone.

Trump’s landslide victories in all seven battleground states this election reflect this growing shift. According to a Fox News Voter Analysis, 63% of voters who identified as “falling behind financially” backed Trump over Kamala Harris.

The president-elect also made significant strides with key demographic groups, gaining six points with Hispanic voters and eight points among voters under 30.

For minority working-class voters, Trump’s message of economic opportunity and prioritizing working families resonated deeply, marking a shift that could reshape the political landscape for years to come.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

The Biden-Harris administration have opened up our country to an invasion. But their complicity is worse than ever imagined.

And now a shocking report from the border is dropping jaws across the country.

The Biden administration’s controversial “parole” program, intended to manage the influx of migrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela (CHNV), has come under intense scrutiny after an explosive report by the House Judiciary Committee.

Among the most damning revelations: s*x traffickers may be exploiting the program to sneak illegal immigrant women into the U.S. — a grim indictment of a system riddled with fraud and mismanagement.

The report, first shared with *The Washington Times*, exposes a litany of alarming failures.

Sponsors for parolees have included welfare recipients, individuals tied to criminal activity, and even other illegal immigrants.

Shockingly, Homeland Security officials admitted they lack the capability to verify criminal records of potential sponsors. Some were even approved despite admitting that part of their income came from illegal activities.

“This oversight has uncovered how the Biden-Harris Administration’s willingness to cast aside the best interests of Americans has enabled fraud, undermined national security, and endangered public safety,” the report states.

It paints a picture of an administration more focused on facilitating mass migration than ensuring the safety of American citizens or migrants themselves.

Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas originally touted the CHNV program as a way to manage the surge of Venezuelan migrants by encouraging them to bypass the border and fly directly into U.S. airports.

However, critics say the program has done little but incentivize illegal migration, with migrants entering as inadmissible aliens — lacking legal status and subject to deportation.

The Judiciary Committee’s findings are staggering:

• At least 336 recipients of welfare benefits were approved as sponsors. The report said sponsors are supposed to prove they can support migrants without them becoming dependent on the government.
• 21 applications were approved for sponsors who admitted at least some of their income came from illegal sources. Homeland Security told the committee that the department thought legal sources provided “sufficient income.”
• Homeland Security can’t say how many sponsors have criminal records beyond their financial entanglements.

Among the most troubling issues is the sheer scope of fraud within the sponsorship system. Venezuelan gang members, stolen identities, and even the passport number of former First Lady Michelle Obama were reportedly used in applications.

Over 80,000 sponsors were noncitizens, including DACA recipients, asylum-seekers, and parolees with tenuous legal status.

The issue of s*x trafficking emerged after analysts discovered numerous sponsorship applications filed from a single IP address, including 18 applications for female migrants, six of whom were under 18.

Homeland Security has failed to monitor sponsors adequately, relying instead on a “complaint line” that has yet to yield any meaningful oversight.

The consequences have been dire. In one case, a Haitian parolee was arrested for raping another migrant in a taxpayer-funded shelter in Massachusetts. Emilio Gonzalez, former head of USCIS under President George W. Bush, did not mince words about the program’s failings:

“The premise of the program is to get as many people into the U.S. as possible, away from Congress’ and the public’s eye.”

Despite its flaws, the program has been wildly popular among migrants, with over 3 million sponsorship applications filed.

By the end of fiscal year 2024, more than half a million migrants had arrived under CHNV, and 400,000 were granted work permits, placing them in direct competition with American workers.

Republicans, including President-elect Donald Trump, have vowed to shut down programs like CHNV and restore integrity to the immigration system. Trump’s return to the White House promises a stark contrast to the Biden administration’s open-border policies.

Trump’s stricter approach would prioritize securing the border, ending fraud-ridden initiatives, and holding agencies like USCIS and Customs and Border Protection accountable for their failures.

Meanwhile, Democrats like Rep. Jerrold Nadler remain skeptical of Trump’s plans, dismissing them as unlikely to succeed.

“I won’t be holding my breath,” Nadler quipped during a Judiciary Committee hearing on the treatment of illegal immigrant children.

With over 531,000 migrants already in the U.S. under CHNV and more flooding in, the stakes couldn’t be higher.

As the Biden administration’s missteps continue to pile up, Trump’s commitment to ending the chaos offers hope for Americans demanding secure borders and accountability.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

The Left has been letting millions flood into this country. That looks poised to end.

And now Trump’s border czar went on Fox News and all hell is breaking loose.

Tom Homan, President-elect Donald Trump’s pick for border czar, made it clear Tuesday night that the new administration will take a no-nonsense approach to illegal immigration, vowing that no illegal alien in the U.S. will be safe from deportation once Trump returns to the White House in January.

In an interview on Fox News, Homan took aim at Democrat politicians who have pledged to obstruct federal immigration enforcement, even when it comes to deporting dangerous criminal illegal aliens.

His message was blunt: sanctuary policies and obstruction won’t stand under the Trump administration.

“Out of the gate, we’re concentrating on public safety threats and national security threats,” Homan explained.

“What politician, whether you’re a mayor or governor, is saying, ‘No, I want public safety threats to remain in my community’? I mean, give me a break.”

Homan slammed Democrats for enabling sanctuary policies that ultimately harm immigrant communities by protecting criminals.

He pointed out that when ICE officers are forced to enter communities to apprehend dangerous individuals, they often encounter other illegal aliens who then face deportation as well.

He rejected the idea of mass amnesty as a solution to the border crisis, warning it would only exacerbate the problem. “This country is showing over and over again that if you don’t have consequences, they’re going to keep coming,” Homan said.

“Amnesty means millions of them are going to come saying, ‘Look, I can cross the border illegally, I can lose my case in front of an immigration judge, and I still get to stay.’”

Homan didn’t mince words about the illegal aliens already in the country, emphasizing that their unlawful entry constitutes a crime under U.S. law and that they must be removed. “The law is clear. We’ll give you a due process,” he said.

“You can have your day in court, but when you’re ordered removed, you’re going to leave and we’re going to make you leave.”

Homan’s firm stance aligns perfectly with Trump’s America First agenda. His unwavering message is that illegal immigration undermines the rule of law and creates chaos.

“It’s not okay to cross this border. It’s a crime,” Homan said.

“Every illegal alien that crossed that border committed a crime, and it’s not okay for you to be in this country illegally.”

He drove the point home with a relatable analogy:

“I don’t go 200 miles an hour to come to this interview tonight because I don’t want a ticket. I don’t lie on my taxes because I don’t want to get tax evasion. Well, it’s not okay to be in this country illegally. So if you’re in the country illegally, you got a problem.”

Homan’s tough-on-illegal-immigration approach is a stark contrast to the Biden administration’s border failures, which have resulted in record illegal crossings and weakened national security.

Under Trump’s leadership, Homan is poised to restore order at the border and send a strong message: in America, the law matters.

Migrants are self-deporting ahead of @realDonaldTrump's inauguration. @RealTomHoman suggests they all pack their bags now. pic.twitter.com/bnJCejXfei

— Jesse Watters (@JesseBWatters) November 20, 2024

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

Biden-Harris are acting as if they’re trying to fabricate a crisis. Is it because they’re trying to sabotage the incoming president?

Because the White House pushed us one step closer to war in a completely reckless move.

President Biden has reversed course on a policy he once deemed “reckless,” authorizing the shipment of antipersonnel land mines to Ukraine—a decision that underscores a significant shift in his stance on the controversial weapon.

A U.S. official told The New York Post that while the administration has previously supplied Ukraine with anti-tank mines, it will now provide “non-persistent antipersonnel land mines (APLs)” as part of its military aid package.

The official emphasized that these devices differ from Russia’s indiscriminate land mines, as they are designed to deactivate after a set time frame, ranging from 4 hours to 2 weeks, theoretically minimizing long-term risks to civilians.

This policy change, coming on the heels of Biden’s decision to approve the use of American-made long-range missiles against Russian targets, is aimed at halting Russian advances along the Ukrainian front lines.

“APLs, which can be rapidly deployed, are designed to blunt the advances of ground forces, and, as such, will significantly support Ukraine’s defense against Russian advances in its sovereign territory, particularly in the east, especially when used in concert with the other munitions that the United States provides Ukraine,” the official explained.

The Washington Post first broke the news of the Biden administration’s decision, which reflects the urgent need to counter Russia’s relentless assaults on eastern Ukraine.

“Russia is attacking Ukrainian lines in the east with waves of troops, regardless of the casualties that they’re suffering,” a U.S. official said, noting that these mines are tailored to stop such offensives.

The official added that Ukraine had pledged not to deploy the mines in densely populated areas.

This move marks a stark departure from Biden’s earlier rhetoric.

In 2020, Biden criticized then-President Donald Trump for supporting the strategic use of land mines, calling the policy “another reckless act” that would “put more civilians at risk of being injured by unexploded mines.”

As president, Biden also rolled back a Trump-era policy in June 2022, restricting the U.S. military’s production and deployment of land mines and limiting their use to the Korean Peninsula.

“President Biden is committed to continuing the United States’ role as the world’s leader in mitigating the harmful consequences of anti-personnel landmines worldwide,” White House National Security Council spokesperson Adrienne Watson stated at the time, condemning the “devastating impact” land mines have had in Ukraine.

Yet Biden’s latest decision echoes a pattern of reversals.

He previously prohibited Ukraine from using U.S.-supplied ATACMS missiles to strike inside Russian territory, only to later authorize their deployment.

Now, with land mines added to the arsenal, the administration appears to be walking back its earlier commitments in response to mounting pressure from the battlefield.

Critics are likely to question the consistency of Biden’s policies and whether these shifts reflect a coherent strategy or reactive decision-making.

While the administration claims the mines will only be used to bolster Ukrainian defenses in the east, this dramatic reversal is certain to reignite debate over the ethical and strategic implications of their use in modern warfare.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

The aftermath of the election has hit hard for many Leftist news outlets. They’re currently wallowing in misery over Trump’s victory.

And MSNBC headquarters are on fire thanks to this latest post-election report.

Far-Left Viewers Abandon MSNBC’s Morning Joe After Hosts Visit Trump at Mar-a-Lago

MSNBC’s Morning Joe has seen a steep decline in viewership since co-hosts Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski disclosed on Monday that they traveled to Mar-a-Lago to meet with President-elect Donald Trump. The controversial visit and its fallout have triggered backlash from across the political spectrum, as well as a significant ratings dip.

The revelation, shared live on air, surprised many of the show’s regular viewers. Scarborough and Brzezinski explained they went to Trump’s Palm Beach estate to “restart communications” with him. However, their audience appeared unconvinced. According to Nielsen data reported by Mediaite, viewers began tuning out shortly after the announcement.

Between 7 a.m. and 8 a.m. Eastern, Morning Joe’s viewership dropped 17%, from 839,000 to 694,000. Among the highly valued 25-54 age demographic, the decline was even steeper, plunging 38%, from 113,000 to 70,000 viewers. Ratings improved slightly during the 8 a.m. hour, climbing to 775,000, but dipped again to 770,000 by 9 a.m.

Backlash From All Sides

The fallout extended far beyond viewer metrics. Liberals and conservatives alike criticized the co-hosts, accusing them of hypocrisy. The pair, who have been vocal Trump critics, were denounced for what some perceived as opportunism.

One anonymous former Morning Joe guest told The New York Post that Scarborough “gives opportunism a bad name,” calling him a “hollow man” driven solely by a desire for success and status.

Jon Stewart, host of The Daily Show, mocked the duo for meeting with Trump after previously likening him to a threat to democracy. Similarly, former Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley accused the co-hosts of attempting to curry favor with Trump to boost their ratings.

Criticism also came from MSNBC’s competitors. Ana Navarro and Sunny Hostin of ABC’s The View questioned the journalistic ethics of the meeting, with Hostin remarking that it wasn’t necessary to “kiss his ring” to cover him accurately.

MSNBC insiders reportedly shared similar sentiments. Staffers anonymously called the meeting an act of “cowardice” and labeled it “disgusting but frankly unsurprising.”

Despite the backlash, Scarborough defended their decision, stating that they’re “here to report on him and to hopefully provide you insights that are going to better equip all of us in understanding these deeply unsettling times.”

Broader Ratings Challenges for MSNBC

The ratings trouble for Morning Joe mirrors a larger trend at MSNBC, which has struggled since Trump’s election victory. The network’s primetime viewership has dropped 54%, with its daily average falling to 736,000 viewers—a drop from 1.1 million the previous month.

This marks a sharp contrast from Election Day, when MSNBC’s coverage, anchored by Rachel Maddow, drew an average of 6 million viewers, outperforming CNN’s 5.1 million, according to Nielsen.

Changes on the Horizon

The controversy surrounding Morning Joe coincides with major shifts at MSNBC’s parent company, Comcast. On Wednesday, Comcast announced plans to spin off NBCUniversal’s cable channels, including MSNBC, CNBC, and others, as part of a reorganization influenced by the ascent of digital streaming.

The move will separate some entertainment and news properties while retaining key assets like the Peacock streaming service, theme parks, and film studios. Comcast shares rose 1.7% in premarket trading following the announcement.

As MSNBC grapples with internal backlash, external criticism, and declining ratings, Morning Joe faces tough questions about how to improve their ratings as they try to reengage communications with Donald Trump after falsely claiming he’s a threat to democracy.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

Democrats want to infiltrate Capitol Hill with their insane ideologies. But Republicans are ready to fight back.

And the GOP House Speaker put the hammer down on this radical Leftist in Congress.

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) made his stance clear following the election of Sarah McBride, the first transgender-identifying biological male to Congress.

Addressing reporters on Tuesday, Johnson firmly stated, “A man cannot become a woman,” emphasizing his adherence to scripture and traditional definitions of gender.

Speaking to the media, Johnson said he wanted to clarify his position on the transgender issue after being asked about it during a gathering earlier in the day.

“Let me be unequivocally clear,” the Speaker said. “A man is a man and a woman is a woman. And a man cannot become a woman.”

SPEAKER JOHNSON: "Let me be unequivocally clear. A man is a man and a woman is a woman. And a man cannot become a woman." pic.twitter.com/jkSobuonXb

— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) November 19, 2024

This statement follows a controversial move by Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC), who recently introduced legislation aimed at restricting McBride from using women’s bathrooms in the Capitol.

The proposed bill would mandate that House members and staff use single-s*x facilities corresponding to their biological s*x within the Capitol and adjacent office buildings.

Mace defended her position passionately, drawing on her own experiences as a survivor of s*xual violence. “I’m not going to stand for a man, someone with a p*nis, coming into a women’s locker room,” Mace told reporters. “That’s not okay. I’m a victim of abuse myself. A r*pe survivor.”

She continued, “I have PTSD from the abuse I’ve suffered at the hands of a man. And I know how vulnerable women and girls are in private spaces. So, I am absolutely, a hundred percent, going to stand in the way of any man who wants to be in a women’s restroom. I will be there fighting you every step of the way.”

I never thought we would need a sign for this, but women's restrooms are for BIOLOGICAL women. Not men. pic.twitter.com/42lOMhqHFT

— Rep. Nancy Mace (@RepNancyMace) November 19, 2024

POLITICO reported that Johnson addressed the issue directly with his GOP colleagues, telling the conference that trans-identifying biological males would not be permitted to use women’s restrooms in the U.S. Capitol. According to Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), Johnson assured members, “There’s not going to be any biological men using our restrooms.”

Greene echoed Johnson’s sentiments, calling the idea of biological men in women’s spaces “pretty aggressive.”

Prominent voices outside Congress have also joined the debate. Podcast host Megyn Kelly criticized those opposing Mace’s proposal, voicing her concerns about maintaining boundaries in women’s spaces.

“Women have a right to know when they go into a bathroom, no men will be in there,” Kelly wrote on X (formerly Twitter). “Why should members of Congress or female Hill staffers have to sacrifice this security so that men pretending to be women can feel better?”

What’s pathetic about it @deanbphillips? Women have a right to know when they go into a bathroom, no men will be in there.
Why should members of Congress or female Hill staffers have to sacrifice this security so that men pretending to be women can feel better? https://t.co/tLRyqedvt6

— Megyn Kelly (@megynkelly) November 19, 2024

This entire topic shouldn’t be as large of a debate as it has been. As Mike Johnson simply put it, biological men are men and biological women are women.

And biological men should stay out of women’s restrooms and biological women should stay out of men’s restrooms. That shouldn’t be a controversial statement, but for the radical Left it is.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.