The US has plenty of enemies. And now they’ve got their crosshairs trained.

And now the Pentagon is sounding the alarm on a secret weapon that is terrifying D.C.

The United States has imposed sanctions on the Islamic Republic of Pakistan over its clandestine development of ballistic missiles, which U.S. officials believe are designed as a deterrent against America.

This move marks a sharp escalation in tensions between the two nations and reflects growing U.S. concerns about Pakistan’s military ambitions.

The sanctions target four entities under Executive Order (E.O.) 13382, which focuses on curbing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their delivery systems.

The U.S. State Department, in its announcement, emphasized the seriousness of Pakistan’s actions and their implications for regional and global security.

Deputy National Security Adviser Jon Finer, speaking at an event last week, underscored the U.S. perspective on Pakistan’s missile development.

“Just looking at a map and looking at ranges, you know, we believe that this is fundamentally focused on us,” Finer said, according to The Wall Street Journal. His remarks highlighted the perceived strategic threat posed by Pakistan’s long-range ballistic missile program.

Pakistan, however, was quick to dismiss the U.S. concerns. The government called the fears “irrational” and described the idea that their missile program threatens the United States as “ludicrous.”

Islamabad framed the sanctions as unjustified and an overreaction, asserting that its military developments are defensive in nature.

Adding to the complexity, The Wall Street Journal reported on Pakistan’s shifting military strategy in recent years.

As Pakistan deepens ties with communist China, its traditional rival, India, is aligning more closely with the United States. This growing divide has reshaped strategic calculations across South Asia.

“In that situation, Pakistan’s hard-liners, Pakistan’s hawks, think they need to think beyond just today and tomorrow,” explained Husain Haqqani, a former Pakistani ambassador to the U.S.

“They have to think about what happens if there is a global conflict in which India is aligned with the U.S. and Pakistan is considered as a partner of China.” Haqqani’s insights reflect the geopolitical chess game intensifying in the region.

The sanctions also cast a spotlight on Pakistan’s reputation as a precarious and volatile nuclear power.

Military and national security experts from both Democratic and Republican administrations have long warned about the dangers posed by the South Asian nation.

With a sizable stockpile of nuclear weapons, persistent political instability, and governance influenced by Islamists, Pakistan presents unique challenges to global security.

Its associations with radical Islamic groups and the presence of terrorist organizations within its borders further exacerbate these risks.

This latest development underscores the fragile balance of power in South Asia and the broader implications for U.S. foreign policy.

As alliances shift and rivalries deepen, the United States’ sanctions against Pakistan could have far-reaching consequences for regional stability and its ongoing competition with China.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

The Left is losing some of its biggest voices. Their radicalism comes with a price.

And now Bill Maher jumped across the aisle with a devastating attack on Democrats.

Liberal comedian Bill Maher didn’t hold back as he criticized his own side for the growing trend of cutting off family members during the holidays over political disagreements.

Maher’s candid remarks came during Sunday’s episode of his “Club Random” podcast, where he and fellow comedian Jay Leno reflected on the late entertainment icon Sammy Davis Jr. and his controversial embrace of President Richard Nixon.

Leno brought up how Davis was labeled a “traitor” by Hollywood liberals after famously hugging the Republican president. The moment, which caused an uproar at the time, became the jumping-off point for Maher to address the political tribalism that has taken root today.

“It’s so funny you mention that because, like today, we live in this time when you’re not allowed to have friends from the other side or cross lines politically,” Maher said to Leno.

“And I forgot that there’s an example of that way back when, a guy who crossed lines politically. ‘Ooh, the worst thing you could ever do — be friends with a Republican. Ahh! Call 911!’”

Maher didn’t stop there, launching into a tirade against what he sees as the left’s intolerance. “This is what I f—ing hate about the left,” he vented.

“And they’re not going to get me over to the Trump side, which they think they will sometimes, but just the idea that, you know, ‘cut your family off for Thanksgiving if they voted for the wrong guy.’ F— off, you f—s.” He added that Sammy Davis Jr.’s experience of being ostracized for hugging Nixon was an early warning sign of the same divisive mindset that persists today.

This isn’t the first time Maher has sounded the alarm about political polarization.

During a monologue on his HBO show “Real Time” last month, Maher took aim at Yale University chief psychiatry resident Dr. Amanda Calhoun, who told MSNBC’s Joy Reid it was acceptable to cut off family members who voted for Donald Trump and to avoid spending holidays with them.

Her comments, Maher argued, exemplify the growing trend of political purity tests.

“Oh, how pure. It’s like not letting certain people sit with you on the bus,” Maher quipped, juxtaposing her stance with a photo of civil rights icon Rosa Parks.

His sarcasm underscored his disdain for the idea of isolating loved ones over political choices. “Think about that, a mental health professional advising people to isolate during the holidays. And don’t forget to drink too much and put on weight.”

Maher then turned the mirror on the broader issue of polarization and what he sees as the solution: communication. “You know who I really wouldn’t want to have Thanksgiving dinner with? This overly educated i.e. extremely stupid, Ivory Tower academic,” he said.

“But I would, because if we ever want this nation to heal, this is what we have to do: force ourselves to reach out and find out why someone feels the way they do, and make the choices they make without prejudging them a monster. And they must do the same for you.”

The comedian’s remarks stand out in an era when political divisions seem to cut deeper than ever.

His plea for tolerance and understanding, while couched in his signature brash humor, carries a serious message about the need to bridge divides rather than deepen them.

For Maher, the path forward doesn’t involve retreating into ideological echo chambers or cutting ties with those who hold opposing views.

Instead, he advocates for uncomfortable but necessary conversations—something he believes both sides of the aisle need to embrace if the nation has any hope of mending its fractures.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

Many around the country have asked for term limits. This isn’t going to make anyone feel better.

Because this high profile politician was exposed for living in a retirement home.

Rep. Kay Granger, R-Texas, has been living in a retirement facility, a source told Fox News on Sunday, pushing back on claims from a local news outlet that she was in a memory care unit.

The 81-year-old congresswoman, who is retiring at the end of her term, has faced mounting questions about her prolonged absence from Capitol Hill, having last cast a vote on July 24 and missing over 54% of votes this year.

The *Dallas Express* recently investigated Granger’s extended absence, citing a constituent who claimed the congresswoman was residing in a memory care facility in Texas.

The report gained traction among other outlets, but a source close to Granger told Fox News this was inaccurate.

According to the source, Granger is indeed in a retirement facility that offers memory care services but clarified she is not in the memory care unit itself.

Addressing concerns about her health, Granger released a statement to Fox News acknowledging she has been dealing with “unforeseen health challenges” that have complicated her ability to travel to Washington.

“As many of my family, friends, and colleagues have known, I have been navigating some unforeseen health challenges over the past year,” Granger said.

“However, since early September, my health challenges have progressed, making frequent travel to Washington both difficult and unpredictable. During this time, my incredible staff has remained steadfast, continuing to deliver exceptional constituent services, as they have for the past 27 years.”

Despite her reduced presence in the House, Granger made a notable return to Capitol Hill in November for the unveiling of her portrait as Appropriations Committee Chairwoman.

The event was attended by Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., who both praised her service during a reception that followed.

Granger, who has served in the House since 1997 and was the first female mayor of Fort Worth, chose not to seek re-election, with this term marking the end of her congressional career.

Granger’s extended absence has drawn criticism, particularly from Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., who took to X to condemn what he described as a “sclerotic gerontocracy.”

“Kay Granger’s long absence reveals the problem with a Congress that rewards seniority & relationships more than merit & ideas,” Khanna wrote.

“We need term limits. We need to get big money out of politics so a new generation of Americans can run and serve.”

Khanna has been vocal on the issue of aging lawmakers, previously calling for Sen. Dianne Feinstein to step down due to health concerns before her passing in September 2023.

Granger’s situation underscores the challenges facing Congress, particularly as a slim Republican majority relies heavily on attendance for legislative victories.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

Senator Fetterman has been a surprise to say the least. He was billed as a radical, but has since joined Republicans on some key issues.

And now John Fetterman betrayed Democrats with these shocking comments about Trump.

Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman urged Democrats to take a step back and “chill out” over President-elect Donald Trump’s every move, signaling his own pragmatic approach to Trump’s upcoming second term.

Speaking on ABC News’ This Week on Sunday, Fetterman made it clear he wasn’t rooting against Trump and believed the constant alarm from his party was counterproductive.

“Well, it’s like I’ve been warning people like, you got to chill out, you know, like the constant, you know, freak out. It’s not helpful,” Fetterman told host John Karl.

He advised his fellow Democrats to “pack a lunch” and adopt a calmer, more measured perspective, emphasizing that Trump hadn’t even taken office yet.

The 55-year-old senator also expressed hope for Trump’s presidency. “I hope, I hope, because I’m not rooting against him,” Fetterman said.

“If you’re rooting against the president, you are rooting against the nation. And, and I’m not ever going to be where I want a president to fail.”

His comments reflected his willingness to prioritize national unity over party politics, a stance that has earned him both praise and criticism within his party.

Fetterman’s moderate tone has often set him apart from many in his party.

Known for his independent streak, he has been outspoken in his support for Israel and has resisted harshly criticizing Trump, actions that have sometimes drawn ire from progressive colleagues.

On Sunday, he went a step further, acknowledging Trump’s political skills.

Calling him a “singular political talent,” Fetterman referenced the former president’s defiant display of strength after surviving a sniper attack during a campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania.

“I mean, that’s a political talent, it’s undeniable,” Fetterman remarked.

He also pushed back against Democrats, including Vice President Kamala Harris, who labeled Trump a fascist during the campaign.

“Because you put a lot of Democrats, especially in my state, that I know, and I happen to love people that are going to vote for Trump, and they are not fascists,” he said.

Fetterman argued that terms like fascism aren’t part of everyday Americans’ vocabulary, adding:

“I think people are going to decide who is the candidate that’s going to protect and project, you know, my version of the American way of life, and that’s what happened.”

Additionally, Fetterman noted the impact of billionaire Elon Musk’s endorsement of Trump, suggesting it played a key role in Trump’s victory.

“I really believe that it mattered,” he told Karl, acknowledging Musk’s influence in shaping the political landscape leading up to Trump’s return to the White House.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

Donald Trump is getting his revenge. He’s not letting Joe Biden off the hook.

And Trump takes Biden to court in a move that has the White House crumbling.

President-elect Donald Trump filed a legal motion Thursday night, urging a federal judge to halt what his team has described as the Biden administration’s alleged “fire sale” of border wall materials.

Trump’s legal team claims the actions are part of a broader effort to undermine the former president’s signature border security initiative before he returns to office.

In a filing submitted to Judge Drew Tipton of the Southern District of Texas, Trump’s lawyer, John Sauer, called for an investigation into claims that segments of the southern border wall are being removed and auctioned off for as little as $5. Sauer pointed to a report alleging that these sales are happening in secrecy, with the materials hauled away under cover of night.

The incoming president expressed serious concern about the actions, with Sauer stating in the 22-page document that such alleged practices could unlawfully interfere with Trump’s executive authority.

Sauer wrote, “If the current Administration is selling off border-wall materials at rock-bottom prices, imposing financial losses on the United States in an attempt to defeat the pro-wall policy of President Trump, it is unlawfully encroaching on the incoming Administration’s exercise of the Executive Power.”

He further urged the court to take immediate action, stating, “The Court should order an immediate stop of all such sales and perform a searching examination of the Government’s conduct — by ordering formal discovery if necessary — to ensure compliance with the Constitution, the law, and the Court’s orders.”

According to a report by the Daily Wire, the Biden administration has been selling unused border wall segments through GovPlanet, an online marketplace for federal equipment.

The outlet also reported that construction materials were being removed from three border stations with the intent to complete the operation “before Christmas.” A Border Patrol agent corroborated these claims, stating that the materials were being relocated and sold at rapid speed.

Sauer criticized the administration’s alleged tactics, saying, “That is material that should be used in future border construction, including under President Trump once he takes office in a month — and the people who purchase the material know that.”

He called for the court to closely examine the situation, warning that these actions could reflect an intentional disregard for legal orders.

Trump also addressed the issue directly during a press conference at Mar-a-Lago last week, where he described the alleged sale as an “almost criminal act.”

Speaking to reporters, he implored President Biden to cease the sales immediately. “I’m asking today, Joe Biden, to please stop selling the wall,” Trump said. “We’re going to use that to create a strong barrier.”

He emphasized the financial implications of the alleged actions, noting, “It’s very expensive, and now it’s about double the price of what it would have been six years ago and the administration is trying to sell it for five cents on the dollar, knowing that we’re getting ready to put it up.”

Trump spokesperson Steven Cheung also weighed in, stating to the New York Post, “Any attempt by Biden officials to obstruct President Trump’s plan to build the Border Wall is unlawful, unconstitutional, and possibly criminal, as our brief argues.”

Cheung further accused the Biden administration of having a “catastrophic open-border policy” and called for heightened judicial scrutiny of its actions.

With just weeks remaining before Trump’s inauguration, his legal team is ramping up efforts to preserve materials they deem essential for resuming construction of the border wall.

This latest filing underscores the intensity of the battle over immigration policy, setting the stage for a contentious legal and political fight in the weeks to come.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

Joe Biden has destabilized this country and the world. But now it’s all out in the open.

Because the White House was exposed for sending thousands of American troops into this foreign nation.

The Biden administration’s Pentagon just admitted a major blunder — and it’s a bombshell revelation.

On Thursday, the Department of Defense disclosed that the number of U.S. troops in Syria is more than double what the government has been reporting.

Instead of the previously stated 900, the actual count stands at 2,000 troops — a force that has apparently been in place “for a while.”

Pentagon spokesperson Maj. General Patrick Ryder finally addressed the glaring discrepancy during a press conference, confessing:

“We have been briefing you regularly that there are approximately 900 US troops deployed in Syria.”

Then came the stunning admission: “I learned today that in fact there are approximately 2,000 US troops in Syria,” Ryder said, visibly uncomfortable.

This isn’t a trivial error — it’s an alarming oversight. According to Ryder, the additional forces are considered “temporary rotational forces” tasked with addressing “shifting mission requirements.”

But how long has this larger presence been in place? Ryder avoided giving a straight answer, vaguely stating, “My understanding is that it’s been for a while, so clearly before the fall of the Assad regime. So, yeah.”

When pressed further, Ryder admitted the increased deployment has been ongoing “at least a matter of months.”

Yet, no clear timeline or justification was offered for this significant troop surge, leaving the American public once again in the dark.

Adding to the murkiness, Ryder described the troops as primarily U.S. Army forces “focused on the defeat of ISIS mission.”

But even this explanation seemed to lack clarity. “Many of our deployments will fluctuate from time to time,” Ryder said, adding it was “his decision” to share the updated numbers.

The Biden administration’s Pentagon couldn’t even provide a solid reason for the ballooned troop count, with Ryder offering only vague assurances that these weren’t part of normal “relief in place” operations.

Instead, he suggested that these forces had been operating in and out of Syria without proper transparency.

This debacle comes as Syria’s former strongman Bashar al-Assad fled the nation, leaving behind a country in chaos.

While Biden’s team scrambles to control the narrative, the glaring question remains: why has the administration been misleading Americans about the true scale of our involvement in Syria?

This is yet another example of the Biden administration’s failure to provide transparency and accountability in military matters.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

Biden is no where to be found. His absence comes at the worst time possible.

And Joe Biden has gone missing and the Democrats’ response to the news will completely shock you.

President Joe Biden’s decision to remain out of the spotlight while Congress scrambles to finalize a spending bill to keep the government running past Friday seems to have raised few concerns among Democrats, according to a report.

“Biden has remained conspicuously absent outside a brief statement issued by his press secretary — and for now, Democrats said there was little clamor for him to return,” Politico reports.

The article followed a dramatic day in Washington, marked by Elon Musk and President-elect Donald Trump derailing what would have been the first bipartisan spending bill in years.

Despite the urgent need to prevent a government shutdown, Politico noted that “no one seemed to be looking to Biden for answers — and the lame-duck president gave no indication he had any desire to provide them.”

California Democratic Rep. Mark Takano confirmed the sentiment, saying, “I haven’t gotten any message from President Biden, or heard of anything that he’s saying.”

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries was equally reserved, stating that he’s only been in “close contact with the administration” but refraining from confirming any direct communication with Biden himself.

As Politico observed, “Democrats appeared largely fine with Biden taking a back seat.” Even during a caucus meeting among House Democrats, Biden’s stance on the funding deadlock wasn’t a topic of discussion.

Instead, members reportedly referred to Elon Musk as “President Musk” in a pointed acknowledgment of his outsized influence in the unfolding crisis.

Biden’s allies are arguing that his silence is intentional, part of a “strategic decision” designed to place Trump at the center of the blame for any potential government shutdown.

The strategy, they contend, could weaken Trump politically before he even assumes office.

Nevertheless, the report revealed that Democrats have only communicated with White House staff during this period, with no confirmation of direct input from the president.

On Wednesday, Biden spent the day at his Wilmington, Delaware, residence while the bipartisan spending bill failed.

He stayed there through Thursday, maintaining a low profile with no events on his public schedule.

Politico framed the president’s absence as emblematic of a larger reality: “[T]he president’s absence highlights a jarring reality that officials in both parties said has become clear since the November election: While Biden technically still runs the country, Trump — and increasingly Musk — are the real captains now.”

Democrats, meanwhile, are reportedly pinning their hopes on shifting blame for a potential shutdown onto Trump and “President Musk.”

The Politico report came on the heels of a Wall Street Journal exposé, which revealed that some of Biden’s staff had observed signs of his weakening stamina as early as 2021, during the initial months of his presidency.

This raises questions about how much the media and White House staff covered up Joe Biden’s cognitive decline throughout his term.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

The radical Left isn’t hiding it anymore. They’ve made their true feelings known about Donald Trump.

And the hosts of The View dream about another Trump assassination attempt on live TV.

During a recent episode of The View, host Whoopi Goldberg, with some input from cohost Joy Behar, floated an unusual theory involving Elon Musk and Vice President-elect JD Vance. The duo suggested that the pair might be planning a takeover to seize control of the White House.

On Thursday’s broadcast of the ABC talk show, Goldberg questioned Musk’s growing influence on policy as the inauguration of President-elect Donald Trump draws near.

“I’ve been saying it for a while. I’ve been saying that Elon Musk believes he’s president. I do,” Goldberg remarked, pointing to the broader conversation about “who is in charge.”

Behar chimed in, adding her own take. “Well, you’ve been calling him vice president,” she said, to which Goldberg replied, “I called him vice president, I called him president, because I don’t know what JD is doing. I hardly ever — I don’t — I don’t remember the last time we even talked about JD.”

Behar speculated further: “He’s planning the presidency when they get rid of Trump.”

Goldberg then took it a step further, asking, “So you think it’s Musk — Musk-Vance?”

“It’s possible,” Behar responded.

Goldberg ended the segment with a pointed comment aimed directly at Trump — though she notably avoided using his name, a habit she has maintained. Addressing him as “You-Know-Who,” she quipped, “Hey, You-Know-Who, stay away from the stairways.”

ABC News moderators Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar claim Elon Musk and JD Vance are planning to kill Trump and usurp control of the government together as Musk/Vance.
"[Trump] stay away from the stairways." – Whoopi pic.twitter.com/bMRmOSwdrk

— Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) December 19, 2024

When the show returned after a commercial break, Goldberg appeared to walk back her remarks, clarifying that her comment was not meant to suggest any harm toward Trump.

“Okay, I need to clean something up,” she stated. “Because my cat lays in wait for me on my stairs all the time and that’s what I was referring — I was thinking of that, I wasn’t trying to indicate that they were actually standing there with their legs out, hoping he would trip.”

Cohost Sunny Hostin backed up Goldberg’s explanation, adding, “No one wants anything done to the president.”

“It was light-hearted and it’s the holidays, come on,” Goldberg continued. “My goodness!”

Hostin reiterated, “We did not mean that anybody should hurt the president.”

The segment quickly drew criticism online. Some noted that The View falls under ABC’s news division, raising questions about the show’s editorial oversight.

Critics also highlighted a recent $15 million settlement ABC reached over false on-air statements made by This Week anchor George Stephanopoulos. The anchor had erroneously claimed that President-elect Donald Trump had been found “liable for r*pe” in the E. Jean Carroll case.

Commentators didn’t hold back on social media. Chad Gilmartin wrote, “Fresh off a $15 million defamation settlement, ABC allows The View to fantasize about assassination plots against President-elect Trump.”

Stephen L. Miller echoed the sentiment, writing, “The View falls under ABC’s network news division. Will just keep reminding you of that.”

As The View continues to straddle the line between entertainment and political commentary, moments like these remind everyone just how unhinged the the radical Leftist hosts really are.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

The Biden immigration policy has brought this nation to its knees. It runs deeper than you could ever imagine.

And now an alarming report from the southern border is raising eyebrows across the country.

A new study from the Center for Immigration Studies highlights a glaring oversight in the push for more immigration to address workforce shortages: millions of U.S.-born men who have given up on work entirely.

These sidelined Americans, particularly those with lower levels of education, represent a massive untapped labor force that’s being ignored in favor of foreign workers.

The numbers paint a stark picture. One in six U.S.-born men aged 20 to 64 is not part of the labor force—meaning they don’t have a job and aren’t looking for one.

For men without a high school diploma, the situation is even bleaker: nearly 25% are absent from the workforce, a sharp increase from just 18% in 2000 and a dramatic rise from 9% in 1970.

These are the same individuals most likely to compete with low-skilled immigrants for jobs, according to Steven A. Camarota, the study’s author.

“If the argument is that we don’t have enough of those workers, what that ignores is all the people on the economy’s sidelines who themselves are overwhelmingly people who don’t have a college education,” Camarota told The Washington Times.

Generous welfare programs and shifting cultural norms may also be contributing to the crisis, incentivizing men to abandon the workforce. Camarota estimated that if U.S.-born men were working at the same rates as they did in 2000, the labor force would have 4.4 million additional workers.

But their absence isn’t just an economic problem—it’s a social one. Men who are out of the workforce are more likely to struggle with issues like poverty, mental health problems, obesity, drug overdoses, suicides, and reckless alcohol use. These challenges create a vicious cycle that keeps many from returning to work.

“The social problems contribute to what happens to these men,” Camarota explained. “If we could get more of them back into the labor force, especially ones in their 20s, that would help head off a lot of these problems, or mitigate them.”

While the problem of jobless men isn’t new—some historians even link it to the motivations behind the Crusades—Camarota’s suggestion that immigration exacerbates the issue is highly contentious.

Immigration advocates argue that migrants are critical to the economy. Groups like America’s Voice claim immigrants represent one in six workers and play a vital role in sustaining social programs.

The Economic Policy Institute (EPI), a left-leaning think tank, even credits the Biden administration’s surge in migration with preventing higher inflation, asserting that immigration’s impact on wages is “neutral” or “slightly positive.”

But critics, like Tom Homan, President-elect Donald Trump’s incoming border czar, offer a starkly different view. Homan shared an anecdote about a roofing contractor who was forced to lay off 20 U.S. workers because he couldn’t compete with companies paying migrant laborers significantly less.

“That happens every day across this country, a thousand times,” Homan said.

Camarota agreed that meaningful change requires more than just coaxing men back into the labor force. Reforms to welfare and disability systems, job training programs, and higher wages are necessary. Crucially, he argued, reducing immigration must be part of the solution.

“We’re not getting everybody back in the labor force,” Camarota admitted. “The question is can we do better, and I think we can, but we never will as long as we have the immigration.”

Interestingly, women have been stepping up to fill workforce gaps. In the early 1960s, nearly half of women aged 18-64 were out of the labor force. Today, that number has dropped to just over a quarter, reflecting a historic shift in workforce participation.

The debate over immigration and labor is far from settled. But as millions of American men remain on the sidelines, policymakers may need to take a hard look at whether the focus on immigration is ignoring a homegrown solution.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

The U.S. House has done something truly stunning. And the GOP can’t believe it.

As a secret vote out of Congress has Republicans ringing every alarm bell.

The House Ethics Committee secretly voted to release the findings of the investigation they conducted into s*xual misconduct allegations against former Congressman Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), according to a recent report by CNN.

The vote, reportedly held in December, follows years of controversy surrounding Gaetz, who has been accused of engaging in s*xual misconduct, including allegations of involvement with an underage partner.

Gaetz has consistently denied the claims, characterizing them as politically motivated and noting that the Justice Department chose not to pursue charges after its investigation.

The document from the Ethics Committee is expected to be released later this month, despite earlier attempts by House Republicans to block its publication.

In November, Gaetz resigned from Congress after being named President-elect Donald Trump’s pick for attorney general — a nomination he withdrew just eight days later amid Senate Republican concerns tied to the allegations.

The 42-year-old firebrand addressed the issue on Wednesday following CNN’s report. In a tweet, Gaetz reiterated his denial of the allegations while acknowledging some aspects of his past behavior. “The Biden/Garland DOJ spent years reviewing allegations that I committed various crimes. I was charged with nothing: FULLY EXONERATED,” he wrote.

Gaetz claimed the Ethics Committee relied on “witnesses” that the Justice Department had previously deemed not credible and criticized the lack of opportunity to defend himself.

“I’ve had no chance to ever confront any accusers. I’ve never been charged. I’ve never been sued,” he wrote.

He also addressed rumors about his personal life, admitting to youthful indiscretions but firmly denying any criminal conduct.

“In my single days, I often sent funds to women I dated – even some I never dated but who asked. I dated several of these women for years. I NEVER had s*xual contact with someone under 18,” Gaetz stated.

Reflecting on his past, Gaetz admitted, “My 30’s were an era of working very hard – and playing hard too. It’s embarrassing, though not criminal, that I probably partied, womanized, drank and smoked more than I should have earlier in life. I live a different life now.”

House Republicans previously voted along party lines to block the report’s release, with House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) arguing that Gaetz’s resignation made its publication unnecessary.

However, the Ethics Committee appears to have reversed course, signaling the report will soon become public.

Gaetz, who now works as a host for the conservative network One America News, remains defiant, framing the investigation as a continuation of partisan attacks against him.

Whether the forthcoming report will cast new light on the long-running controversy remains to be seen.

But overall, it’s looking as though Donald Trump dodged a bullet with Gaetz deciding to withdrawal his name from the attorney general nomination.

The release of this report would’ve only caused headaches for Trump during the Senate confirmation process for Matt Gaetz.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

MSNBC is heavily on the side of the Democrats. But after the 2024 elections, the network is starting to change it’s tune.

And MSNBC’s Joy Reid stabs the Democrat Party in the back during a mind blowing betrayal.

Joy Reid Slams Democratic Leadership for Failing to Embrace Younger Voices

MSNBC host Joy Reid didn’t hold back on Tuesday, sharply criticizing the Democratic Party for clinging to its longest-serving leaders while sidelining younger stars like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y. Reid argued that this resistance to change is emblematic of a deeper problem within the party.

“[The] gerontocracy seems like it’s intractable,” Reid remarked. “I recall when Barack Obama was elected, he kind of pushed aside the DNC and created his own organization because I think there is a frustration with the sort of creaky way the DNC operates.”

The issue of age and leadership has become an increasingly heated topic for Democrats. Multiple party governors have declined to say whether age limits should be imposed on future presidential candidates.

The discussion gained urgency after President Biden stepped aside from the Democratic nomination in July, following internal concerns about his age.

His withdrawal was widely seen as a factor in Vice President Kamala Harris’s eventual defeat as the Democratic nominee in the 2024 election.

Reid further criticized the party’s outdated methods and decision-making structure, describing it as dominated by “donors and consultants and people who are locked in the old ways of doing things.”

She added, “They want to advertise on TV. Look, I am for TV, I love TV, I work on TV, but they don’t want to do the sort of new world media. But then AOC is so good at it.”

Rep. Ocasio-Cortez, often celebrated for her ability to connect with younger voters through social media platforms like Instagram, recently lost out on a leadership role on the influential House Oversight Committee.

The position went to 74-year-old Rep. Gerry Connolly, D-Va., with the decision reportedly influenced by 84-year-old former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

This perceived resistance to generational change has left some Democrats frustrated. “Kamala Harris represented the generational change that base Democratic voters demanded, and yet when you go to the House and Senate, no generational change,” Reid pointed out. “Does that make sense to you?”

The party remains divided on how to address concerns about age. California Gov. Gavin Newsom downplayed the idea of age limits, telling The New York Times, “It’s not a time of life, it’s a state of mind,” and calling the concept of limits “absurd.”

Newsom had previously defended Biden’s age in 2023, saying it was not an issue.

Although many Democrats rallied behind Biden in the early stages of the 2024 campaign, fears over his ability to defeat Donald Trump intensified after a rocky debate performance in June.

Pressure from Pelosi and other party leaders ultimately led Biden to withdraw, but Harris’s elevation to the top of the ticket failed to unite the party, culminating in her loss to Trump in the general election.

As the Democrat Party looks ahead, the tension between maintaining institutional loyalty and embracing fresh leadership continues to weigh heavily on its future.

In fact, many aren’t sure if there really is much of a future for the Democrat Party, especially after it’s begun to implode after Donald Trump’s 2024 election victory.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

The Swamp is in desperate need of draining. This GOP lawmaker may finally have the solution to it.

And the Washington, D.C. Swamp is on fire after this Republican senator announces a new bill to drain it.

Sen. Joni Ernst Proposes Bill to Relocate 30% of Federal Workforce Nationwide

Senator Joni Ernst (R-IA) has introduced a bold new legislative proposal aimed at redistributing federal agency workforces currently centralized in Washington, D.C.

The Decentralizing and Reorganizing Agency Infrastructure Nationwide to Harness Efficient Services, Workforce Administration, and Management Practices Act—or the DRAIN THE SWAMP Act—seeks to relocate at least 30% of federal employees headquartered in the nation’s capital to various locations across the United States.

“Actions speak louder than words, and bureaucrats have sent a resounding message that they don’t want to work in Washington,” Ernst explained. “In the Christmas spirit, I am happy to make their wish reality by relocating them. DOGE has a lot of work to do and draining the swamp is a great place to start.”

Under the proposed legislation, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) would oversee the effort to decentralize federal agency workforces, ensuring the reassignment of a significant portion of employees to regions across the country.

For those employees who remain in Washington, remote work would be eliminated, requiring full in-office attendance. Additionally, the bill mandates the sale of unused or underutilized federal office space, ensuring all office facilities operate at full capacity.

This initiative builds upon Ernst’s earlier legislative efforts, including a bill targeting the relocation of 30% of the Small Business Administration (SBA) workforce.

The rationale behind the SBA bill was rooted in data showing that even with full in-person attendance, only two-thirds of the agency’s Washington, D.C., headquarters capacity would be utilized. Ernst is now applying that framework to the broader federal workforce.

The proposed relocations aim to “promote geographical diversity, including consideration of rural markets,” and to “ensure adequate staffing throughout the regions of the Administration, to promote in-person customer service,” as stated in the bill. Ernst argues that redistributing federal employees would bring them closer to the communities they serve, fostering a stronger connection to the public.

“If mom-and-pop shops had the work ethic of SBA bureaucrats, they would be forced to close immediately,” Ernst said in support of her SBA proposal.

She emphasized the need for federal agencies to emulate the customer-first approach of small businesses, stating, “Connecting with an agency employee should not be a rare occurrence worthy of celebrating. There is no better way to fix the broken culture at the SBA than to bring them closer to the people they serve so that they perform more like a family business and less like a bloated bureaucracy.”

Ernst has long championed initiatives aimed at curbing government waste. Through her work with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), she has consistently pushed for reforms to streamline federal operations.

Earlier this month, during the first DOGE caucus meeting, Ernst released a detailed report highlighting the financial and operational impacts of telework in federal agencies.

According to the report, telework has surged since the COVID-19 pandemic, with only 6% of federal workers now reporting to the office full-time and one-third working entirely remotely.

The report pointed to concerning trends, including instances of workers engaging in non-work-related activities while on the clock. It also detailed the financial burden of maintaining underused office spaces, estimating that the federal government spends $8 billion annually on leasing and maintaining office buildings and an additional $7.7 billion on energy costs.

Moreover, it noted the existence of nearly 8,000 vacant government buildings and over 2,000 partially empty facilities.

By decentralizing federal workforces and reducing excess office space, Ernst’s DRAIN THE SWAMP Act seeks to address these inefficiencies while fostering a more geographically diverse federal workforce. The proposal reflects her broader mission to make government more efficient, accountable, and connected to the people it serves.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.