Home Blog

Trump cancer update leaves Americans waiting with bated breath

Prudent Politics
-
0
Trump cancer update leaves Americans waiting with bated breath

It can strike at any time. No one is safe.

And now a Trump cancer update left Americans waiting with bated breath.

Every so often, in the middle of a political season filled with insults and outrage, a piece of genuinely good news breaks through. This weekend it came from the Trump family, as Vanessa Trump, the former wife of Donald Trump Jr., announced that she has beaten breast cancer.

She shared the news in a short video posted on Friday, Oct. 23, to the Instagram account of her daughter, Kai Trump. “And it came back clear, so I am finally cancer free,” Vanessa said in the clip. She followed it with a simple “Love you” before hugging her 19-year-old daughter, who was wearing a cast after injuring her wrist during a golf match earlier this year.

Kai opened the video by explaining why the two decided to go public with the details. “My mom was diagnosed with breast cancer in April. So we thought we’d share her story and how she was diagnosed and how she overcame it,” Kai said. The brief clip is part of a longer video set for release Saturday on Kai’s YouTube channel.

The longer conversation is also a service to others. Mother and daughter sat down with Dr. Nicole Saphier to talk about Vanessa’s diagnosis, treatment and recovery, as part of Breast Cancer Awareness Month. Kai said the goal is to learn more about prevention and early detection, and she described the video as a look at “proactive steps toward our health.”

That is worth emphasizing, because this is where a celebrity announcement can do real good. Millions of American women put off screenings because they are busy, scared or unsure whether they need one. A famous family talking openly about how a diagnosis was found and treated can nudge someone to make the appointment they have been avoiding. Early detection saves lives, and any public figure willing to say so deserves credit.

Vanessa, 48, first revealed the diagnosis in a statement on Instagram in May. “I’ve recently been diagnosed with breast cancer,” she wrote. “While this isn’t news anyone expects, I’m working closely with my medical team on a treatment plan.” She thanked her doctors for a procedure earlier that week and added, “I am staying focused and hopeful while surrounded by the love and support of my family, my kids, and those closest to me.”

The announcement came with a request that plenty of people can understand. “I kindly ask for privacy while I focus on my health and recovery,” she wrote. By most accounts, she got it. Aside from a June update in which she said she was beginning the second phase of her treatment after recovering from surgery, she kept the details private until she had good news to share.

Her family responded to the original news the way families do. Ivanka Trump, her former sister-in-law, wrote publicly, “Praying for your continued strength and a swift recovery. Love you mama.” Vanessa has also had the support of her boyfriend, golf legend Tiger Woods, who has been by her side throughout her treatment.

Vanessa and Donald Trump Jr. were married from 2005 to 2018 and have five children: Kai, Donald III, Tristan, Spencer and Chloe. Whatever happened between the two of them, the family has plainly remained close, and the children have been a central part of her story. Watching a teenager and her mother share a hug on camera after months of uncertainty is the kind of thing that cuts across every political line.

There is a lesson in the way this was handled, too. Plenty of public figures treat illness as a branding opportunity or a political prop. The Trump family did the opposite. They shared news only when there was news to share, gave a medical professional a place in the conversation and pointed viewers toward screening and prevention rather than toward themselves.

It would be easy to turn this into a political story, and some people undoubtedly will. But this is not a story about parties or elections. It is a story about a mother who faced a frightening diagnosis, followed her doctors’ advice, endured surgery and treatment, and came out the other side.

Cancer is still one of the most feared words in the English language, and for good reason. Behind every recovery are doctors, nurses, family members and a patient with the strength to keep going. Behind many of them, as well, is an appointment someone made when they could have put it off.

If you have been meaning to schedule a screening, this weekend would be a good time. In the meantime, congratulations to Vanessa Trump and her family on the news they have worked so hard to hear.

Barack Obama hits the campaign trail again in a stunning move out of left field

Prudent Politics
-
0
Barack Obama hits the campaign trail again in a stunning move out of left field

Obama won’t just go away. He loves power too much.

Now Barack Obama hit the campaign trail again in a stunning move out of left field.

Politics produces strange alliances, but few are as awkward as the one on display in Michigan this weekend. Former President Barack Obama is scheduled to rally Saturday with Democratic Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed, a candidate who once wrote in print that Obama “was not the right choice.” The rally is meant to shore up a constituency Democrats cannot win Michigan without: Black voters.

Obama formally endorsed El-Sayed earlier this month and filmed a campaign ad, which began running Oct. 12, urging his supporters “to support Abdul El-Sayed for the United States Senate.” The rally, which Fox News reports will begin at 5:00 p.m. and feature Democratic gubernatorial nominee Jocelyn Benson, is designed to encourage attendees to cast early ballots for the Democratic ticket.

The reason for the effort is not hard to find. A poll conducted by Fox News Digital in late September found that just 77% of Black voters supported El-Sayed, a figure well below where Democrats typically perform with that group. In a state where Black turnout can decide a close race, that number should worry any Democrat. Low turnout or defections to the GOP among African Americans, as Fox puts it, could seriously endanger the party’s path to control of the Senate.

The weakness is not new. During the Democratic primary, El-Sayed performed strongly among Arab American voters but narrowly defeated Rep. Haley Stevens after polls showed her drawing stronger support from Black Democrats. Rather than healing in the weeks since, the concern has followed him into the general election against Republican Mike Rogers, who has argued that El-Sayed is vulnerable with two traditionally Democratic blocs.

Then there is the history. In a 2012 Huffington Post essay, El-Sayed accused Obama of failing to live up to the progressive rhetoric on which he campaigned. “I realize that I have little hope because there has been less change,” El-Sayed wrote. “But I have to say now what I’ve been holding in throughout his campaign and what I think all of us have to admit: Obama was not the right choice — he just wasn’t the wrong one.”

He did not stop there. The essay went on to criticize the then-president for perpetuating war, violating civil liberties and carrying out more deportations than any previous president. Those are not minor policy disagreements. They are the same complaints that many of El-Sayed’s supporters on the left level against the political establishment he is now courting.

Since then, El-Sayed has softened his tone, noting that it is possible to disagree with someone while still admiring them and praising how Obama operated under the circumstances he inherited. Plenty of candidates evolve, and a few years can change a perspective. But voters are entitled to wonder whether the change was a conviction or a campaign tactic.

Conservative commentator Jason Rantz did not hide his view. On a CNN panel he said El-Sayed was setting aside his criticisms of Obama because he was in a desperate electoral position and needed to “try to bring in black voters.” Rantz is not a neutral observer, but the political logic of his point is hard to miss: the candidate who once dismissed Obama is now relying on him.

Fox News Digital spoke with more than a dozen Black voters in Detroit, and the reactions were mixed. Undecided voters largely agreed that Obama remains a leader within the Democratic Party, yet they generally did not put much weight on his endorsement. One voter named Mercedes put it bluntly: “Honestly, it’s a turn-off just because I’ve seen too many candidates use him just to manipulate the Democratic vote.”

Another undecided voter acknowledged Obama’s symbolic power while questioning his record. “What he’s been able to do is from an image standpoint, as far as ‘hope,’ he drove the point there,” the voter said. “But as far as really giving back to the community, minority owned businesses, and everyone across the board, I don’t really think he really got there for me … he really hasn’t swayed me one way or another.”

Others raised the question of the flip itself. “Yeah, I don’t understand how you can endorse somebody that was kind of the opposition when you were in office,” a voter named Juanita said. “I mean, that doesn’t make sense.” She also made a point that campaign managers should take to heart: “I don’t want to be pushed to vote for him because somebody else is backing him.”

Not everyone sees a problem. One voter described the shift as “a flip flop,” but also as “an opportunity to pretty much highlight those things and how he’s actually changed and why their objectives may align now.” Kandia Milton, a government affairs professional with deep ties to Detroit’s African American community, said claims that El-Sayed lacks appeal with Black voters are misguided. In her words, “Detroiters, once they understand his background, understand what he stands for and all the things that he’s done in the past, you see greater enthusiasm for his campaign and his candidacy for Senate.”

It is worth being careful about what this proves. A few voters in Detroit do not speak for the whole electorate, and even some who already voted early for El-Sayed told Fox that Obama’s backing meant little to them. That can be read as a lack of enthusiasm, or as a sign that those voters had already made up their minds.

What the episode does show is the limit of celebrity endorsements. Voters, especially working-class ones who have heard promises from both parties for decades, tend to judge candidates by what they have done for their own communities. A former president’s blessing can draw a crowd. Convincing undecided voters is a different task, and it falls to the candidate himself.

With a tight race and a short calendar, the El-Sayed campaign cannot count on Obama’s name to close the gap. Michigan voters, Black and white, are looking for someone who will answer for the past, explain the present and show up for them after Election Day. Saturday’s rally may fill a hall, but it will not answer the question that undecided Detroit voters are asking: why did the man who said Obama was not the right choice decide he was right all along?

Smoking gun could prove Ilhan Omar’s worst nightmare

Prudent Politics
-
0
Smoking gun could prove Ilhan Omar’s worst nightmare

Omar is in hot water. And this may be the end of the road for her.

Now a smoking gun could prove Ilhan Omar’s worst nightmare.

A social media post that Rep. Ilhan Omar removed seven years ago has resurfaced at the worst possible moment for her, just as federal investigators examine questions surrounding her identity and immigration records. The post, a Father’s Day message from June 2013, appeared to refer to her father by a different name than the one used in later public records.

“Happy Father’s Day to my aabo Nur Said, I am forever grateful to Allah for giving me the best father …,” Omar wrote in the 2013 post. She deleted it the morning of Sept. 19, 2019, the same year questions about her immigration records first gained attention.

The name matters because of what other records say. Several documents, including a memorial post by the Congressional Black Caucus marking her father’s death in 2020, refer to him as “Nur Omar Mohamed.” The deleted post uses “Nur Said,” a name that also resembles the name of her former husband, Ahmed Nur Said Elmi.

That resemblance is the root of a rumor that has dogged Omar for years: that her former husband was actually a relative. Omar and her office have repeatedly denied it. A spokesperson told Fox News Digital that she has “repeatedly and unequivocally denied” the “baseless, disgusting conspiracy theory” that she married her brother. Asked on MS NOW whether her one-time husband might have been a “distant relative,” Omar replied, “Not to my knowledge.”

Before anyone leaps to a conclusion, a few cautions are in order. Somali names generally consist of a person’s given name, their father’s given name and their paternal grandfather’s given name, so overlapping names are common. As Fox itself notes, the similarity between names alone does not establish a family relationship. Fox also says it has not independently verified what Omar’s father’s name was.

Omar’s side has an explanation for the post. A statement allegedly attributed to her spokesperson and recirculated online said “Nur Said” was her father’s childhood nickname and that he maintained a public page using the name. The statement said the tweet was deleted because Omar and her family had received threats. That explanation is plausible, and it should be tested against the facts, not waved away.

The post resurfaced after federal agents searched Omar’s Washington home on Oct. 12 as part of an ongoing criminal investigation into possible false statements on immigration and naturalization documents. An archived version of the post, first reported by the Daily Caller in 2019, has been revived by the search and the questions that followed.

There is also the matter of her name. Recent court documents tied to the search warrant identify Omar as “Ilhan Nur Said Elmi, a.k.a. Ilhan Abdullahi Omar.” Fox notes that the filing does not explain why the name appears or establish that she used a false identity. Two people familiar with the investigation told Fox that “Ilhan Nur Said Elmi” may be her legal name, a characterization her office has disputed.

Omar answered the question directly when Fox pressed her. “Ilhan Abdullahi Omar, you know it,” she said. “It’s Ilhan Abdullahi Omar.” Her marriage to Elmi ended in divorce in 2017, and she later legally married Ahmed Hirsi in 2018.

A former Minnesota federal immigration judge told Fox that if investigators prove Omar knowingly used a false name on federal forms, the conduct could be brought into question under the federal false-statements statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1001. Whether that law applies would depend on the specific documents, the materiality of any alleged misstatement and the evidence of intent. In other words, even a name discrepancy does not automatically become a crime.

That is the standard the public should apply. Immigration paperwork from the 1990s, filled out for a family arriving from a war-torn country, can contain errors, variant spellings, nicknames and informal naming practices that confuse bureaucrats to this day. Prosecutors would have to show something more: that false information was knowingly provided and that it mattered.

At the same time, a member of Congress who has spent years lecturing the country about immigration cannot expect her own file to be off limits. Voters are entitled to clear answers about her name, her history and her paperwork, and a federal investigation is a legitimate way to get them if it is carried out fairly and based on evidence.

Omar has called the probe a political attack. The Justice Department did not respond to Fox’s request for comment. As the grand jury process unfolds, the best course for everyone, her critics included, is patience. A deleted tweet is a clue, not a conviction.

For now, what we have are unanswered questions: why the post said what it said, why the records differ, and what investigators believe the documents show. Americans who followed the legal immigration process, with all its forms and fees, will be watching to see whether the answers are given in a courtroom, with evidence, or only on cable news.

Democrat calls Elon Musk and Donald Trump a name that will have them fuming

Prudent Politics
-
0
Democrat calls Elon Musk and Donald Trump a name that will have them fuming

Trump and Musk are constantly under attack by the left. It’s getting old at this point.

And a Democrat called Elon Musk and Donald Trump a name that will have them fuming.

Rep. Adam Smith of Washington state just reminded everyone why so many Americans have tuned out the permanent Washington class.

On a recent episode of CNN’s “The Arena,” the Democrat went nuclear, labeling both President Donald Trump and Elon Musk “fascists” in a moment that captured the raw panic gripping the left.

Host Kasie Hunt opened the segment with breaking news from the Wall Street Journal.

She told viewers, “This is actually just in, some breaking news. So I’ll read it to you. The Wall Street Journal is reporting this. We here at CNN are still working on it, but they report this. Elon Musk ordered the slowdown of a military-grade version of Starlink that’s relied on by Ukraine. That, of course, is satellite internet. A decision that sparked panic in Kyiv and confusion inside the Trump administration, U.S. officials and people familiar with the matter said.”

“One of the people also claimed that Musk and Trump discussed the matter prior to the decision to throttle Starlink. But of course, this only comes from one source, according to the Journal. Some U.S. officials say Musk acted unilaterally and that Trump didn’t specifically order any retribution against Ukraine. What’s your reaction to this?”

Smith framed the reported Starlink adjustment as a deliberate move by Trump and Musk to kneecap Ukraine. In his telling, the only possible explanation was some dark alliance with Vladimir Putin.

“It certainly seems like, you know, Musk and Trump decided to weaken Ukraine and put them in a weaker position,” Smith stated.

“Now why? I mean, I guess they would argue, well, we want to force them to the bargaining table. But again, I think it’s just, you know, Trump siding with Putin and Musk being part of it. And look, do I want to use the F word here? I don’t know. Autocrat certainly. Probably fascist, okay? Trump and Musk are fascists, okay? They think strong men — and certainly in Musk’s case, preferably strong white men should rule the world.”

There it is. The F-word. Dropped casually on national television by a sitting member of Congress against the elected president and the man who runs the most advanced private space and communications enterprise on Earth.

No evidence of coordination with Moscow. No proof that Trump ordered anything. Just the familiar progressive reflex: disagree with endless escalation in Ukraine and you must be a fascist.

The Starlink story itself remains contested. The Journal’s account rests heavily on anonymous sources. Some U.S. officials insist Musk made the call on his own and that the White House never directed any punishment of Kyiv.

That detail gets buried under the outrage. What matters to Smith and his media partners is the narrative that Trump and Musk are the villains for even considering limits on American technology flowing into a grinding European war.

This is the same political class that spent years insisting the American people had no right to question open borders, no right to question endless foreign aid packages, and no right to question the wisdom of pouring resources into a conflict with no clear endgame.

Now that voters rejected that approach, the response is name-calling at the highest volume.

Key voting metric suggests a terrible night for Republicans this November

Prudent Politics
-
0
Key voting metric suggests a terrible night for Republicans this November

Our country can’t afford to let the Left take power. But it’s not looking good.

And now a key voting metric suggests a terrible night for Republicans this November.

The first big numbers of the 2026 midterms are in, and they carry a message Republicans should read carefully. Democrats are running up lopsided majorities of the early vote, carving out a clear majority of the ballots cast so far, according to the New York Post. Among early and mail-in voters, 54% were Democrats, 30% Republicans and 16% independents or “other.”

That is a 24-point gap in party registration among ballots already in the bank. Nobody should pretend it is meaningless, and nobody should pretend it settles anything. Both statements are true, and understanding why is the key to what Republicans do over the next sixteen days.

Start with the scale. According to NBC News, more than 9.1 million mail-in and early in-person votes had been cast nationally, with about 6.6 million by mail and 2.5 million in person, and 55 million mail ballots requested or sent. That sounds big until you remember that roughly 112 million votes were cast overall in the 2022 midterms and about 57 million of them before Election Day. We are looking at a small slice of the electorate.

Next, consider who votes early by mail. In recent years, mail voters have been much more Democratic, while early in-person voters have been more evenly split or Republican-leaning. So a snapshot dominated by mail ballots is going to look blue before the red-leaning in-person and Election Day votes arrive. Analysts have cautioned that early data is an incomplete picture for exactly this reason.

That said, the enthusiasm gap is real in places that matter. In North Carolina, 201,609 people voted early in person on the first day, a jump of nearly 47% from the first day of early in-person voting in 2022. Registered Democrats outvoted registered Republicans by nearly 28 points that day, up from a 2-point advantage on the first day of early voting in 2024, according to state election board data cited by CNN. Through Saturday, the state had accepted more than 500,000 ballots, about 38% more than at the same point four years ago.

In Iowa, Democrats have made 67% of ballot requests, up from 54% at this point in 2024. In North Carolina, 42% of ballot requests came from Democrats, up from 36% two years ago. Those are not rounding errors. They suggest that the president’s opponents are motivated, organized and in a hurry to vote.

Not all of the news is bad for Republicans. In North Carolina, mail-in ballots are lagging, with 40,273 accepted compared to 57,723 at this point in 2022, a decrease of 30.2%. More Republicans are also voting early than in the past, as party organizations urge supporters to use legally available early voting rather than hand that portion of the electorate to Democrats. The old assumption that Republicans vote only on Election Day is eroding.

That shift is one of the smartest changes in GOP strategy in years. For a long time, many conservative voters distrusted mail voting and, in many cases, had good reasons to ask for strong verification and chain-of-custody rules. But refusing to participate in a legal voting method does not make it go away; it just means the other side gets a head start. Voting early in person, where it is available, lets Republicans bank their ballots, avoid long lines, and free up volunteers to chase down the people who still have not voted.

Pay attention, too, to the one clear Democratic advantage: organization. The party’s turnout machine has had years to build a habit of early and mail voting among its base, especially older voters who find it convenient. Republicans are catching up, but catching up means working the phones, knocking on doors and driving neighbors to the polls.

This is also where populist energy can make a difference. The voters who elected a president promising to put working Americans first are the same voters who sometimes feel that their ballots will not change anything. They need to hear the opposite. In a year when margins in the House and Senate are thin, a few thousand votes in the right district can decide who controls Congress.

There are a few practical takeaways. If your state offers early in-person voting, use it, and bring a neighbor. If you are mailing a ballot, follow your state’s rules to the letter, since signature and deadline mistakes can disqualify otherwise valid votes. If you have already voted, call the friend who always says he will get to it later. Election Day is November 3, and sixteen days is not very long.

And keep your skepticism in proportion. Early vote totals have misled both parties before. A candidate who looks to be losing in October can win in November, and a candidate who looks like a lock can stumble. The numbers describe where the race stands today, not where it will end.

What they do tell us is that Democrats are not waiting, and Republicans cannot afford to. The 54-30 split is a wake-up call, not a verdict. The only way to make it a footnote is to show up.

Ilhan Omar is in deep trouble according to this Trump official

Prudent Politics
-
0
Ilhan Omar is in deep trouble according to this Trump official

Omar is anti-American. Her statements prove that.

And Ilhan Omar is in deep trouble according to this Trump official.

Federal investigators have been digging into Rep. Ilhan Omar for some time, according to Tom Homan.

The news of the probe came out Monday, though many details stay under wraps.

Omar’s residence in Washington, DC, faced a raid by Department of Homeland Security agents. That move points toward questions tied to immigration enforcement. A Department of Justice official laid out the basics of what happened.

“Today in the Washington, DC, area, Homeland Security Investigations executed a judicially authorized search warrant secured by the Department of Justice,” the official said when speaking with Fox News Digital.

“This enforcement action is part of an ongoing federal investigation.”

Homan confirmed the long-running nature of the case when speaking with Fox News. He made clear that officials already knew the matter had been active.

“There was a warrant executed this morning, so I’ll leave it at that,” he stated.

“The specifics of the investigation, I think I need to turn that over to [Attorney General] Todd Blanche or [DHS Secretary] Markwayne Mullin.”

Homan’s comments line up with the DOJ statement and show the Trump administration treating the matter as a serious law enforcement priority rather than a sudden political stunt.

Border security and immigration integrity sit at the heart of the president’s agenda, and any probe involving a sitting member of Congress draws heavy attention for good reason.

Omar wasted little time casting the raid as pure politics. She claimed the Trump team was going after her for her views and past statements.

“I’m ok. Make no mistake: this is an attempt to target political enemies and weaponize federal law enforcement,” she stated.

“For ten years, Trump has targeted me with baseless lies and smear campaigns. This is just the latest escalation in his campaign of political intimidation. I will not be silenced.”

Her statement follows a familiar pattern from progressive Democrats who face scrutiny: cry foul, accuse the other side of weaponizing government, and insist on personal martyrdom.

The Pentagon is on lockdown after suffering a terrible attack

Prudent Politics
-
0
The Pentagon is on lockdown after suffering a terrible attack

America’s military is strong. But our enemies are striking where it hurts.

And now the Pentagon is on lockdown after suffering a terrible attack.

The men and women who serve this country were promised that Washington would look after them. This week brought a harsh reminder of what happens when it doesn’t. A breach at the Pentagon’s Defense Manpower Data Center exposed Social Security numbers and sensitive personnel records tied to millions of people, and anyone connected to the military community needs to take it seriously.

A War Department official told CyberGuy that 2.76 million living individuals and 294,000 deceased individuals were affected. Depending on the person, the exposed information can include Social Security numbers, names, dates of birth, contact information and military personnel details. That is a long list of the very data points a criminal needs to impersonate someone.

The department’s account of how it happened is short. A DMDC information system experienced unauthorized access to personally identifiable information by a small number of unauthorized users between October 2025 and July 2026. The official said DMDC immediately remediated the vulnerability after discovering it, and that the department has no indication the accessed information has been misused. Those words offer limited comfort when you consider the timeline: roughly nine months of potential exposure.

The files involved contained unencrypted personally identifiable information. Think about what that means. In an era when a teenager’s gaming account gets better protection than a service member’s Social Security number, a federal personnel system left sensitive records sitting without encryption. That is a failure of basic discipline, and Americans who foot the bill for the Pentagon’s enormous budget have every reason to be angry about it.

The exposed information varies by person, but according to the Pentagon it can include Social Security numbers, names, dates of birth, contact information, sex and race, and military personnel information, including occupational specialties. The military details are what make this breach unusually sensitive, since the records may reveal far more than basic identity.

DMDC is no small operation. It maintains more than 60 million records covering military personnel, civilian employees, contractors, family members, retirees and veterans. It supports benefits, identity verification and other Defense Department programs. In other words, plenty of people who left active service years ago, and plenty of spouses and children, may still have information stored in these systems.

If you were affected, you should receive a letter. People whose information was accessed are being notified by postal mail through the department’s contracted provider, Identity Theft Guard Solutions, or IDX. Do not toss it in the trash. The notice should explain what was affected and what protection is being offered. According to the official, IDX is providing notification, credit monitoring and identity restoration support. Questions can go to response.idx.us/DMDC or 1-855-744-4556.

Be wary of scammers. Criminals love a headline breach, and they will send fake notices, texts and emails pretending to be the Defense Department or a credit monitoring company. Do not click links in unexpected messages. Verify through the official IDX contact details or the postal notice you actually received.

The reason a Social Security number is so dangerous is that it lasts. As Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson put it, “A credit card number has an expiration date. Your Social Security number usually stays with you for life.” You can cancel a card in five minutes. You cannot cancel your identity, which is why a breach like this can follow a service member for decades.

So what should you do? Start by enrolling in the free monitoring if you are eligible. Eligible individuals may receive 12 months of free credit monitoring and identity restoration support through IDX. Keep in mind that monitoring usually alerts you after something has happened. It does not stop an attempt from being made.

Second, consider freezing your credit with Equifax, Experian and TransUnion. A freeze restricts access to your credit file and can make it much harder for someone to open a new account in your name. You can lift it temporarily when you need to apply for credit. Third, a fraud alert is a lighter option that tells lenders to take extra steps to verify your identity.

Fourth, watch your existing accounts and turn on transaction alerts. Fifth, turn on two-factor authentication for email and financial accounts. Sixth, consider an IRS Identity Protection PIN, a six-digit number that helps prevent someone else from filing a federal tax return using your Social Security number. Tax-related identity theft can slip past your credit report entirely, which is why this one matters for anyone whose number was exposed.

Finally, remember that the clock does not stop when the free year ends. Stolen personal information does not become harmless after twelve months. Keep checking credit reports, tax notices and benefit statements long after the monitoring period is over.

This is where a bigger question belongs. Knutsson asked it plainly: “If the government loses information as sensitive as your Social Security number, should it be responsible for protecting your identity for longer than one year?” Most veterans and military families would say the answer is obvious. A government that demands so much of those who serve, and that holds their most sensitive data, owes them far more than a one-year subscription and a form letter.

Until Washington fixes the way it handles that data, the burden falls on the very people who already gave so much. Protect yourself now, and keep pressing your representatives to demand accountability from the officials who let this happen.

Donald Trump torches Democrat for betraying him after receiving this huge favor

Prudent Politics
-
0
Donald Trump torches Democrat for betraying him after receiving this huge favor

Trump is more bipartisan than people give him credit for. But how is that repaid?

Now Donald Trump torches Democrat for betraying him after receiving this huge favor.

President Trump has never been shy about naming the people he believes crossed him, and this week he trained his fire on a Texas Democrat who, in his telling, accepted a lifeline and then went right back to the party that wanted him locked up. In a lengthy Truth Social post Wednesday, Trump called Rep. Henry Cuellar “a loser” and threw his full weight behind the Republican trying to unseat him.

The backstory matters. Trump pardoned Cuellar and his wife last year while the couple faced charges tied to bribery and money laundering. Cuellar, who has served in the House since 2005, is now seeking another term, and the president made clear he is not pleased with how the congressman handled the gift of a pardon.

“In any event, I did the pardons, and made no deal, where a crooked politician would have, but I thought there would be a good chance that Cuellar, who was persecuted by Democrats because they didn’t like him, would have routinely gone over to the Republican Party — the people that saved him from years in prison,” Trump wrote. In plain English: the president says he asked for nothing in return and expected, perhaps naively, that gratitude would lead to a party switch.

That did not happen, and Trump let the Texas voters know exactly how he feels about it. “In any event, the man running against him, Tano Tijerina, is a STAR and, hopefully, will WIN! We call that payback for a disloyal and ungrateful person, a person whose life has been saved only to go back into the clutches of the people that tried so hard to destroy him. Henry Cuellar is a LOSER who, right now, should be serving a longterm jail sentence with his wife in a top level penitentiary,” Trump declared.

It is classic Trump: unvarnished, personal and designed to be impossible to misread. The president continued with a long pitch for the challenger. “Tano, a legendary Baseball Star, Great Athlete, respected County Judge, and fine person, will hopefully beat Cuellar so that people can show how bad it is when you are recognized and humiliated as being one of the most disloyal political people on Earth!” Trump wrote. He closed the thought with a note of pride about what he did not do: “I am very proud of the fact that I didn’t make a deal with Cuellar, which I easily could have, but relied on his character, which turned out to be a faulty one.”

The challenger is Webb County Judge Tano Tijerina, the Republican nominee in Texas’ 28th Congressional District. Tijerina wasted no time amplifying the president’s message on X. “Everyone in South Texas knows anything after Hello coming from Henry Cuellar is a lie. President Trump just confirmed that,” he wrote. Expect that line to show up in plenty of South Texas campaign material before November.

Trump posted the message before delivering similar remarks at a rally in San Antonio, so the attack was not a late-night impulse. It was a deliberate message aimed at voters in a border district where Republicans see a real chance to flip a seat that has been held by the same Democrat for two decades.

There is a history here that gives the president’s frustration some context. When Trump announced the pardon, he argued that President Biden had weaponized the justice system against a member of his own party. According to an earlier Truth Social post, Trump claimed Biden “used the FBI and DOJ to ‘take out’ a member of his own Party after Highly Respected Congressman Henry Cuellar bravely spoke out against Open Borders, and the Biden Border ‘Catastrophe.'” He added that Biden went after the congressman and “even the Congressman’s wonderful wife, Imelda, simply for speaking the TRUTH.”

That framing is worth remembering, because it was Trump himself who cast the case as political persecution. Conservatives who cheered the pardon at the time on grounds of fairness are now watching the recipient tout his Democratic credentials rather than express any particular debt to the man who spared him a trial. Whether that frustrates you or strikes you as an ordinary feature of a pardon with no strings attached depends on what you think a pardon is for.

The president’s critics will say a pardon should never come with an expectation of loyalty, and in the strictest legal sense they are right. Trump himself stresses that he made no deal. His point is political rather than legal: he believes Cuellar owes the Republican Party his thanks, and he is making sure voters in Texas know it.

Cuellar, for his part, has tried to carve out a reputation as a Democrat who breaks with his party on important issues. He has criticized open border policies and has even rejected the agenda of the Democratic Socialists of America, saying the socialists are trying to use his party. That independent streak is the reason Trump believed he might cross the aisle, and the reason South Texas Democrats have kept sending him back to Washington.

Fox News Digital reached out to Cuellar’s campaign for comment Thursday. Absent a response, the congressman will have to answer for himself on the campaign trail why he remains a Democrat after accepting a pardon from a Republican president, and whether voters in his district want a representative whose party leaders are pouring resources into defeating the very person who spared him a trial.

Whatever happens in November, the episode is a vivid reminder of how Trump views politics: as a world of loyalty and consequences, where favors are remembered and slights are never forgotten. For Tijerina, that translates into the full-throated backing of the most powerful Republican in the country. For Cuellar, it means the toughest campaign of his career, against an opponent with the president’s endorsement and a very personal grievance from the man who pardoned him.

Hollywood star makes a surprising endorsement that’s left Democrats flabbergasted

Prudent Politics
-
0
Hollywood star makes a surprising endorsement that’s left Democrats flabbergasted

Most Hollywood stars are leftists. That isn’t shocking at all.

But this Hollywood star made a surprising endorsement that’s left Democrats flabbergasted.

In a stunning break from Hollywood’s usual loyalty to the left, leftist supporter Debra Messing has thrown her weight behind Republican Bruce Blakeman in the race for New York governor.

The Will & Grace actress stood with the GOP candidate and delivered a clear message of support that has caught the attention of anyone paying attention to the state’s downward spiral.

Messing said to Blakeman, “You are what we need more than anything.”

The comment came during a fundraiser in Manhattan, where the two discussed the urgent need for new leadership in Albany.

Blakeman, positioned next to Messing in a clip that was gathered by the New York Post, praised her commitment.

“She is trying as hard as she can to save New York and make sure it’s safe for Jewish people to live in this community, and to live in this state,” he stated.

Messing did not hold back in her own remarks.

“I am so grateful that you are running. You are what we need more than anything,” she said.

Her words carried the weight of someone who has watched her state change for the worse and decided enough was enough.

She went further in describing the damage she has witnessed.

“The decline in this city over the last four years has been so exponential and devastating,” Messing stated.

“Economically, socially, and on every level. And, obviously, we’ve lost so much business here. People are leaving the city.”

Those observations match what ordinary New Yorkers have been saying for years while Democratic leaders dismissed their concerns.

The Pentagon ordered a massive withdrawal after facing a disturbing threat

Prudent Politics
-
0
The Pentagon ordered a massive withdrawal after facing a disturbing threat

Our country needs to protect itself. Even if it means doing the unthinkable.

And now the Pentagon ordered a massive withdrawal after facing a disturbing threat.

America’s heavy bomber presence in Europe just took a significant hit, and the reason behind it should alarm anyone tracking just how far Iran’s shadow war against the United States has already spread. All U.S. Air Force bombers stationed at RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire, England — America’s only European forward operating location for heavy strategic bombers — have been returned to their home bases in the United States following a suspected terror plot that officials say may be connected to Iran.

A U.S. official confirmed to Fox News that roughly a dozen B-1 bombers were among the aircraft removed from the base. “We can acknowledge now that all U.S. bombers that were deployed to RAF Fairford have re-deployed to their home stations in the United States,” the official said. That’s a remarkable statement given how central Fairford has been to American strategic bomber operations in Europe, including missions that have directly targeted Iranian sites in the ongoing conflict.

The Pentagon was quick to stress that pulling the bombers out of the UK doesn’t represent any reduction in America’s actual strike capability. “The Airmen that operate America’s bomber force, including B-1s, B-2s, and B-52s, remain ready to deliver precision global strike capabilities — including through operations that launch and recover from the continental United States — anywhere, anytime,” the official said. Whatever comfort that statement offers, the underlying decision to relocate an entire bomber fleet out of a forward-operating European base speaks volumes about how seriously officials are taking the threat that triggered it.

That threat came into focus last Sunday, when U.K. officials discovered three suspicious vehicles containing fuel accelerants near RAF Fairford. “We can confirm that no improvised explosive devices were found. However, a quantity of petrol was recovered,” officials said at the time. Authorities quickly began investigating potential ties to Iranian state proxies, and a British-Iranian dual national was ultimately arrested “on suspicion of preparation of terrorist acts.”

Secretary of State Marco Rubio didn’t hedge on the question of foreign involvement, stating plainly that the suspected plot “clearly involves the hands of a foreign actor.” President Trump went further during remarks to reporters last week, telling them the incident may have been connected to Iran — a country the United States has been at war with since February. That’s a direct, unambiguous statement from the sitting president linking a terror plot against a critical American military installation on allied soil to an active enemy combatant nation.

A total of six people were ultimately arrested in connection with the incident, including five British nationals in their early twenties. In a development that will likely frustrate security-minded Americans and Britons alike, all six suspects have since been released on bail while the investigation continues. U.K. officials attempted to explain that decision, stating, “I understand why this development will have come as a surprise to many, but I’d like to reiterate that it was an investigative decision, and one which is grounded in experience and careful consideration of policing powers.” Whatever the legal rationale, releasing individuals suspected of plotting an attack against a critical American bomber base on bail, even temporarily, is the kind of decision that deserves continued public scrutiny as the investigation unfolds.

This isn’t an isolated incident existing in a vacuum either. RAF Fairford has served as a key hub for American strategic bomber operations throughout the broader conflict with Iran, including missions that have directly struck Iranian targets. That makes the base an obvious and understandable point of vulnerability, and it raises serious questions about whether Iranian proxies or sympathizers have been specifically scouting and targeting the installation precisely because of its operational significance to the American war effort.

Experts have been warning for weeks that Iran’s broader shadow war campaign could take an increasingly dangerous turn as the conflict grinds on, and this incident fits that pattern disturbingly well. Rather than confining its response to conventional military channels, Tehran and its proxy networks appear increasingly willing to pursue covert sabotage and terrorism operations against American and allied assets stationed well outside the immediate conflict zone — including, apparently, on British soil against one of NATO’s most important shared military assets.

For American taxpayers and military families, the temporary relocation of an entire bomber fleet out of a key forward operating base represents a tangible, real-world cost of this shadow war, regardless of how quickly or smoothly the Pentagon insists it can still project strike power from the continental United States if needed. Forward basing exists for a reason — it reduces response times, extends operational reach, and signals American resolve to adversaries watching closely. Pulling that capability back, even temporarily and even while maintaining that readiness remains unaffected, is not a cost-free decision.

This story remains very much a developing one, with the underlying investigation into the suspected plot still ongoing and the six arrested suspects currently free on bail rather than in custody. Americans should expect continued scrutiny of exactly how close this plot came to succeeding, what additional security vulnerabilities it may have exposed at other American installations stationed on allied soil, and whether the decision to release the suspects on bail will hold up as more details about the alleged conspiracy come to light. As the broader war with Iran continues, this episode serves as a stark reminder that the battlefield isn’t confined to the Middle East — it extends to wherever American military assets and personnel are stationed around the globe.

Voting fraud scandal raises eyebrows in this Democratic state

Prudent Politics
-
0
Voting fraud scandal raises eyebrows in this Democratic state

The Left pretends election integrity isn’t needed. But it’s obvious it is.

Because a voting fraud scandal raised eyebrows in this Democratic state.

New Jersey’s ongoing noncitizen voter roll scandal just got a lot more concrete, and it’s landing right in the middle of Democratic Gov. Mikie Sherrill’s escalating standoff with the Trump administration. Federal agents this week arrested Sanata Coulibaly, a Senegalese national, on charges of illegally voting in multiple elections while not a U.S. citizen — a case that hands the administration exactly the kind of hard evidence it’s been demanding from Trenton for months.

DHS and FBI agents jointly executed the criminal warrant in Hudson County, an area stretching from West New York to Bayonne just across the river from Manhattan. According to the criminal complaint, Coulibaly cast ballots in four separate elections while she was not yet a U.S. citizen: the November 2018 midterm, the July 2020 primary, the November 2020 general election, and the 2024 general election. That’s not a single clerical mistake or a one-time confusion at the polls — that’s a documented pattern spanning six years and four separate election cycles.

The complaint alleges Coulibaly first arrived in the United States from Senegal on a B-1 nonimmigrant visa around 1993, later becoming a lawful permanent resident. According to prosecutors, she registered to vote through a paper application submitted to the Hudson County superintendent of elections in Jersey City, falsely certifying on that application that she was a U.S. citizen. It gets worse from there: prosecutors allege that when Coulibaly later applied for U.S. citizenship, she falsely stated on her N-400 naturalization application that she had never registered to vote or voted in a federal election — a direct, documented lie to federal immigration officials designed to cover her tracks.

DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin didn’t hold back when announcing the arrest. “This alien from Senegal has been charged with procurement of citizenship or naturalization unlawfully and voting by an alien after allegedly voting in three general elections in New Jersey,” Mullin said. He then delivered a pointed message aimed squarely at Democratic officials who have downplayed the scope of noncitizen voting in the state: “Sanctuary politicians can try to claim that this kind of voter fraud isn’t happening, but it’s very real and is a serious threat to our country.”

This arrest doesn’t exist in a vacuum — it’s the latest chapter in a controversy that’s been building in New Jersey for months. Back in July, Sherrill revealed that a software error in the state’s motor vehicle system had improperly registered roughly 6,600 people who had identified themselves as noncitizens. The state’s own subsequent review found that fewer than 400 of those improperly registered individuals had actually cast ballots, a figure Sherrill’s administration has leaned on to downplay the severity of the problem. But Coulibaly’s case involves someone who wasn’t merely improperly registered by a software glitch — she allegedly voted deliberately and repeatedly while affirmatively lying about her citizenship status on official documents.

Following the July revelation, New Jersey resisted federal demands to turn over its full voter rolls, opting instead to conduct its own internal investigation rather than cooperate fully with federal oversight. That resistance has become a genuine flashpoint in Sherrill’s broader relationship with the Trump administration, which has separately pushed back against her state’s policies restricting cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. Sherrill signed Executive Order 12 shortly after taking office in January specifically to limit certain immigration enforcement activities on state property, a move that has drawn sustained criticism from federal officials working to enforce immigration law.

DHS Secretary Mullin has previously warned that the scope of New Jersey’s noncitizen voter problem could be far larger than the state has acknowledged, estimating that as many as 35,000 noncitizens may remain registered on New Jersey’s voter rolls. That’s a staggering number if accurate, and it stands in sharp contrast to the comparatively modest figures Sherrill’s administration has publicly cited. When a state’s own numbers and the federal government’s estimates diverge by that much, voters deserve a full, transparent accounting rather than a defensive posture from Trenton.

Coulibaly’s case is far from an isolated incident nationally either. It’s part of a broader federal election-integrity push that has already produced election-related charges against 16 people across several states just this month alone. That pace of enforcement suggests the Justice Department is treating noncitizen voting as a genuine, ongoing problem deserving sustained investigative resources rather than a one-off political talking point.

This case also arrives on the heels of another related development: four separate noncitizens were previously charged with illegally voting in the 2020, 2022, and 2024 federal elections, also in New Jersey. Taken together, these cases paint a picture of a state voter registration system that has repeatedly failed to catch ineligible voters across multiple election cycles, raising legitimate questions about the adequacy of New Jersey’s verification processes and the state government’s willingness to address the problem head-on rather than minimize it.

Fox News Digital reached out to Sherrill’s office for comment on the Coulibaly arrest, though as of publication no response had been provided. That silence, following a pattern of resistance to federal voter roll requests and downplaying of the software error’s scope, is unlikely to reassure New Jersey voters who want confidence that their state’s elections are being conducted with proper safeguards against ineligible voting.

Election integrity shouldn’t be a partisan issue. Every American, regardless of political affiliation, has a stake in ensuring that only eligible citizens are casting ballots in elections that determine the direction of their communities, their state, and their country. Sherrill’s administration has had months to get ahead of this story by fully cooperating with federal voter roll verification efforts and being transparent about the true scope of noncitizen registration in New Jersey. Instead, the pattern so far has been resistance, minimization, and now a federal arrest that undercuts the state’s own more modest characterization of the problem.

As this case moves through the federal court system, expect the Trump administration to continue pressing New Jersey and other Democrat-led states for full access to voter registration data, and expect continued political friction between Trenton and Washington over exactly how serious this problem actually is. Coulibaly’s alleged four-election voting history, and the false statements she reportedly made to cover it up, offer a concrete, documented example of precisely the kind of vulnerability the administration has been warning about all along.

DHS sends sobering warning to southern border cartels

Prudent Politics
-
0
DHS sends sobering warning to southern border cartels

America is under siege. But we’re fighting back.

And now DHS sent a sobering warning to southern border cartels.

The cartels running drugs and human smuggling operations across America’s southern border are increasingly turning to a new tool: fleets of surveillance drones watching U.S. Border Patrol agents and military personnel. The Department of Homeland Security isn’t backing down, issuing a stark public warning this week after more than 300 hostile cartel drones were detected along the border in just over a month.

According to the Department of War, 378 cartel drones were detected at the southern border between August 22 and this past Thursday. Of those, U.S. forces turned back 75, engaged 15, and captured one. That comes on top of previous reporting that the War Department’s Joint Task Force – Southern Border took down approximately 100 suspected cartel drones in August alone. The scale of this aerial surveillance operation being run by criminal cartels should alarm anyone who still thinks of border security purely in terms of foot traffic and vehicle checkpoints.

DHS isn’t mincing words about what these drones actually represent. In a pointed statement posted on X, the department declared that “hostile surveillance of American personnel ends here,” directing an unusually direct warning straight at the cartels themselves: “To the Cartels, your drones are failing, your tactics are being exposed, and you have no advantage. @CBP and @DeptofWar will keep taking them down.” That’s not the language of an agency playing defense — that’s a clear statement of intent from a government finally treating cartel operations as the paramilitary threat they actually are.

Jeffrey Stalnaker, deputy chief patrol agent for Border Patrol, explained to Fox News exactly why these drones matter so much to cartel operations. Rather than using them primarily for smuggling contraband, cartels are deploying drones mainly for reconnaissance, replacing the human lookouts they once relied on to monitor Border Patrol movements. “They’re watching when our soldiers and our agents are coming into the field, where they’re working, and then that allows them to plan how they’re going to send individuals north from Mexico into the United States illegally, trying to circumvent us between the ports of entry,” Stalnaker said.

In other words, cartels have effectively built their own real-time intelligence network to track American law enforcement movements and time their smuggling operations accordingly. That’s a level of sophistication that should put to rest any lingering notion that these are unsophisticated criminal outfits rather than organized paramilitary operations with genuine tactical capability.

In response, the Department of War and DHS are ramping up their own counter-drone capabilities, deploying detection and interception technology while partnering with private companies to develop new tools specifically designed to counter the growing cartel drone threat. For the past three weeks, the U.S. military has been running exercises in the desert outside Yuma, Arizona, testing an array of new anti-drone equipment ranging from specialized guns to drone-capturing technology and unmanned aerial vehicles of its own.

Brigadier General Jason Rueschhoff, director of operations for U.S. Northern Command, emphasized that American forces are staying ahead of this evolving threat rather than playing catch-up. “We are developing capability at a pace that is keeping ahead of our enemy and that’s really important and that’s what happens here,” Rueschhoff said. That’s an important distinction, because cartel drone tactics are reportedly evolving rapidly, and federal officials have acknowledged that while anti-drone measures at the border have succeeded so far, the cartels aren’t standing still either.

There’s a more ominous dimension to this story too. While officials say lethal cartel drones have not yet been encountered at the southern border, some cartel drones are known to be capable of lethal use, a chilling reminder of how battlefield drone tactics developed in conflicts overseas have steadily migrated into the hands of criminal organizations operating just south of American territory. The FBI has separately warned that battlefield-style drone attacks reaching American soil is “only a matter of time,” underscoring why the current investment in counter-drone technology at the border isn’t merely precautionary — it’s addressing a threat that’s already knocking on the door.

Every drone takedown operation is being carefully coordinated with the Mexican military and border authorities, according to a senior War Department official, specifically to prevent any interference or unintended clashes between forces operating on either side of the border. That kind of binational coordination matters enormously, both for operational safety and for maintaining the broader security relationship between the two countries as cartel violence and technology continue to escalate.

Administration officials have been quick to tout the broader results of this more aggressive posture toward cartel operations. A senior official praised President Trump’s direct use of military force against cartel threats during a recent press call, stating plainly, “The president directed, the Department of War executed, the first ever plan and strategy to use direct military force to defend the homeland from this threat.” The official credited that strategy with producing dramatic results: “The effects have been spectacular, and we’ve seen the largest and steepest reduction in U.S. casualties inflicted by the cartels in American history.”

That claim deserves scrutiny and continued verification over time, but if accurate, it represents exactly the kind of tangible security outcome that years of softer border enforcement policy failed to deliver. Treating cartel drone surveillance networks as a genuine paramilitary threat, rather than a nuisance to be tolerated, reflects a fundamental shift in how the federal government approaches border security under the current administration.

For years, cartels have operated with a level of technological sophistication and operational freedom that should have alarmed policymakers far sooner than it did. The fact that criminal organizations were able to build out drone reconnaissance networks capable of monitoring American federal agents in real time, without triggering a serious military and technological countermeasure until now, speaks to just how far border enforcement had fallen behind the actual threat landscape. DHS’s blunt warning to the cartels this week, backed by real counter-drone capability and a rapidly expanding detection network, is exactly the posture the moment demands.

123...183Page 1 of 183

2024 Copyright © All rights reserved.

Quick Links

Must Read

Popular Articles