Clinton and Trump have never liked each other. That’s why no one can believe this happening.

Because Hillary Clinton made jaws drop after giving Donald Trump a massive compliment.

Clinton’s Surprising Nobel Peace Prize Endorsement for Trump Amid Ukraine Talks

In an unexpected turn, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, a long-standing critic of President Donald Trump, stated she would nominate him for a Nobel Peace Prize if he successfully negotiates an end to the Russia-Ukraine war without territorial concessions to Russia. The remarks, made on the August 15, 2025, episode of the “Raging Moderates” podcast, come as Trump engages in high-stakes talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska, aiming to resolve the three-year conflict.

Clinton’s Conditional Support for Trump’s Peace Efforts

During the podcast with host Jessica Tarlov, Clinton outlined her criteria for supporting Trump’s nomination: “Honestly, if he could bring about the end to this terrible war, if he could end it without putting Ukraine in a position where it had to concede its territory to the aggressor, could really stand up to Putin — something we haven’t seen, but maybe this is the opportunity — if President Trump were the architect of that, I’d nominate him for a Nobel Peace Prize.”

She emphasized her goal of preventing “capitulation to Putin,” aligning her support with a resolution that upholds Ukraine’s sovereignty.

Clinton’s offer is notable given her history of sharp criticism of Trump, including her 2016 campaign remarks labeling his supporters a “basket of deplorables” and questioning his fitness for office, citing his praise for Putin and temperament.

As recently as February 2025, she described his administration as “dumb” and “feeble” in a New York Times op-ed, and in October 2024, called him “more unhinged” than during their 2016 race.

Trump’s Diplomatic Push and Global Context

Trump’s summit with Putin at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage on August 15, 2025, marks his first face-to-face meeting with the Russian leader since his first term. Trump expressed optimism about the talks, estimating a 25% chance of failure and telling reporters on Air Force One that he would let Ukraine decide on territorial swaps, per Al Jazeera.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, absent from the summit, has firmly opposed ceding land to Moscow.

The Nobel Peace Prize has been a long-standing aspiration for Trump, who has criticized former President Barack Obama’s 2009 award and received nominations from leaders in Pakistan, Israel, Cambodia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan for his mediation in various conflicts, including the Abraham Accords and ceasefires between India-Pakistan and Israel-Iran.

However, a prior nomination by Ukrainian lawmaker Oleksandr Merezhko was withdrawn in June 2025 due to stalled peace talks and perceived leniency toward Russia.

Broader Implications and Public Reaction

Clinton’s remarks reflect a pragmatic acknowledgment of the potential for a diplomatic breakthrough, despite her past critiques of Trump’s foreign policy.

Posts on X highlight mixed sentiments, with some praising Trump’s deal-making potential and others questioning Clinton’s motives, suggesting her endorsement may be an attempt to reframe her legacy. The talks’ outcome remains uncertain, with Politico reporting that Russia and Ukraine are “nowhere close” to an agreement.

The summit and Clinton’s statement have drawn global attention, as a successful deal could reshape perceptions of Trump’s foreign policy and bolster his administration’s focus on assertive diplomacy.

America has been spending beyond its means for decades. But things have reached a tipping point.

And now the US government is on the verge of bankruptcy according to a shocking new report.

U.S. NATIONAL DEBT SOARS PAST $37 TRILLION AMID CONTROVERSIAL SPENDING BILL

The U.S. national debt has officially exceeded $37 trillion, raising alarm among fiscal watchdogs and lawmakers who warn the country’s unchecked borrowing is jeopardizing future economic stability.

The figure, reported this week by the Treasury Department, comes years ahead of previous projections and has sparked debate over whether recent legislation is easing or accelerating the fiscal crisis.

The Congressional Budget Office had projected in January 2020 that the gross debt would not surpass $37 trillion until after fiscal 2030. However, the COVID-19 pandemic triggered massive government stimulus spending under both the Trump and Biden administrations, and this year, President Trump and congressional Republicans passed the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” expected to add more than $4 trillion to the national debt over the next decade.

“Thanks to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the debt just officially passed the $37 trillion mark,” Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky wrote on X. Massie was one of only two House Republicans to oppose the bill in July.

LAWMAKERS AND WATCHDOGS WARN OF UNSUSTAINABLE SPENDING

Trump and his allies argue that the legislation will generate long-term economic growth, citing tax cuts, increased military and border spending, and Medicaid eligibility changes. The administration also points to aggressive tariff policies as a source of revenue, which have raised nearly $130 billion this year—more than double last year’s total at this point.

Critics counter that tariffs act as hidden taxes on U.S. consumers and could slow economic growth. “It has been proven, that even at this late stage, Tariffs have not caused Inflation, or any other problems for America, other than massive amounts of CASH pouring into our Treasury’s coffers,” Trump wrote Monday on Truth Social.

Fiscal experts remain unconvinced. Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, said:

“Spending and revenue are woefully out of balance — to the tune of nearly $2 trillion annually and rising — and instead of addressing this imbalance, Congress keeps choosing to make things worse.”

MacGuineas warned that the U.S. is on track to spend $1 trillion this year on interest payments alone. “Interest is now the second-largest item in the budget, surpassing the entire defense budget as well as Medicare,” she said.

Michael A. Peterson, CEO of the Peter G. Peterson Foundation, noted that the U.S. debt now exceeds the combined economies of the 20-country Eurozone and China. Meanwhile, the Government Accountability Office has repeatedly flagged the long-term unsustainability of the debt, highlighting potential consequences such as higher borrowing costs, stagnant wages, and higher consumer prices.

“BREAKING: National debt just hit $37 TRILLION. Not just a number but a bill our kids can’t afford to pay,” Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina, a Republican running for governor, wrote on X. Social media users quickly responded with criticism, including “community notes” reminding her of her support for the Trump bill that is expected to worsen the debt.

ACCELERATING GROWTH OF DEBT

The U.S. debt has been climbing at unprecedented speed. According to one congressional monitor, the debt is growing by $59,361.77 per second, reaching $34 trillion in January 2024, $35 trillion in July 2024, and $36 trillion in November 2024. Experts warn the pace of borrowing and interest costs is unsustainable without immediate reform.

Americans are entitled to their beliefs. But that’s not what some activists on the bench think.

And now a federal court threw out the First Amendment and set up a Supreme Court showdown.

A federal appeals court has ruled that the Little Sisters of the Poor, a Catholic religious order serving the elderly poor, must once again include contraception coverage in their employee health plans, overturning conscience protections established under the Trump administration. The ruling reignites one of the most visible and prolonged religious liberty battles of the past decade.

The Little Sisters have fought the federal contraception mandate since 2011, when the Obama administration’s Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) first required nearly all employers to provide birth control coverage under the Affordable Care Act. The mandate included drugs and devices the Catholic Church considers morally objectionable, except when used strictly for medical treatment unrelated to contraception.

LONG LEGAL HISTORY

The case quickly became a flashpoint in the national debate over the limits of religious freedom and the scope of government mandates. With legal representation from the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, the Sisters challenged the mandate in multiple courts, arguing it forced them to violate their beliefs or face ruinous financial penalties.

“The Court sided with Pennsylvania and New Jersey in their years-long effort to force the Little Sisters of the Poor to provide contraceptive and abortion coverage in their healthcare plans,” Becket stated Aug. 13. “Today’s ruling keeps that effort alive, and the Little Sisters have vowed to appeal the decision.”

Becket stressed the Sisters’ charitable mission: “The Little Sisters of the Poor are an order of Catholic nuns who have cared for the elderly poor for nearly 200 years. They have been in court for over fourteen years, fighting for protection from the contraception mandate which requires them either provide services like the week-after pill in their healthcare plan or pay tens of millions of dollars in fines.”

PREVIOUS SUPREME COURT VICTORIES

The order’s legal journey has included multiple trips to the U.S. Supreme Court. In 2016, the justices unanimously sent the case back to lower courts, effectively shielding the Sisters from the mandate at that time.

The following year, the Trump administration issued new federal rules granting religious and moral exemptions to groups like the Little Sisters.

That policy quickly faced challenges from several Democratic-led states, with Pennsylvania and New Jersey leading the charge. In 2020, the Supreme Court upheld the Trump-era exemptions, granting the Sisters a significant—though temporary—victory.

“But,” Becket continued, “Pennsylvania and New Jersey have continued to fight in court to strip the Little Sisters of that protection.”

ONGOING NATIONAL DEBATE

Supporters of the contraception mandate argue it is a matter of health care equity, ensuring women have access to comprehensive reproductive services regardless of their employer’s beliefs.

Religious liberty advocates counter that forcing faith-based organizations to cover such services amounts to government overreach and an erosion of First Amendment protections.

Becket’s latest statement minced no words about the implications: the court “blessed an out-of-control effort by Pennsylvania and New Jersey to attack the Little Sisters and religious liberty.”

The nuns plan to appeal the Aug. 13 decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, ensuring that this high-profile case—symbolizing a broader national conflict over the balance between religious conscience and state mandates—will continue into yet another round.

In politics, everything is forever. You only have to remember Howard Dean to know that’s true.

And now a top Democrat contender blew up his career with one brainless slip of the tongue.

Beto O’Rourke’s Inflammatory N-zi Comparisons Stir Controversy

Former Texas Representative Beto O’Rourke’s provocative comparison of the Trump administration to N-zi Germany during a podcast appearance with California Governor Gavin Newsom has drawn sharp criticism, casting a shadow over his political judgment as his Powered by People PAC faces legal scrutiny for allegedly funding Texas Democrats’ efforts to obstruct state redistricting.

O’Rourke’s Extreme Rhetoric on “This is Gavin Newsom” Podcast

On August 13, 2025, O’Rourke joined Newsom on the “This is Gavin Newsom” podcast, where he praised Texas Democrats who fled to New York and Illinois to block a quorum during a redistricting session, calling them some of the “very last lines of defense” of democracy. He then drew a stark parallel between current Republican actions and the rise of Adolf Hitler’s regime. “I can only imagine the history books written 100 years from now looking at the people of 2025,” O’Rourke said.

“It’s the way, you know, you and I when we were in school, we’re looking at the people in Germany in 1933. That guy’s named chancellor in January of that year. In 53 days, he has destroyed German democracy.”

He continued, “The parliament or the congress, their legislature, passed these enabling laws just like the Republicans are doing in Congress today that said anything you want, you go out and do it. And he goes from being this buffoonish, clownish thug who can barely hold power to the undisputed master and dictator of the German people. And I know this s— doesn’t repeat, but it sure as hell rhymes.”

O’Rourke’s hyperbolic language risks alienating voters who view such comparisons as inflammatory and disconnected from substantive policy debate.

Pattern of Controversial N-zi Analogies

O’Rourke has a history of equating President Donald Trump’s policies with N-zi Germany, a tactic that has drawn backlash for its lack of nuance. In 2019, he criticized Trump’s family separation policy at the border, stating, “Now, I might expect someone to describe another human being as an infestation in the Third Reich. I would not expect it in the United States of America.”

He later defended this, saying, “Calling human beings an infestation is something that we might’ve expected to hear in N-zi Germany… Describing immigrants — who have a track record of committing violent crimes at a lower rate than native-born Americans — as rapists and criminals. Seeking to ban all Muslims — all people of one religion — what other country on the face of the planet does that kind of thing?”

In 2021, despite Trump’s 2020 election loss, O’Rourke warned that the U.S. could mirror N-zi Germany within a decade, further fueling perceptions of his rhetoric as divisive and alarmist.

Legal Scrutiny of O’Rourke’s PAC Amid Redistricting Standoff

O’Rourke’s comments come as his Powered by People PAC faces investigation for allegedly funding Texas Democrats’ travel to avoid a quorum, a move aimed at stalling Republican-led redistricting efforts.

On August 13, 2025, Fox News Digital reported that Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) urged the Justice Department to probe whether the PAC violated federal election and public corruption laws by covering airfare, lodging, and fines for the lawmakers.

This follows a similar call from Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who sought O’Rourke’s arrest for defying a court order against such fundraising.

Both Hunter and Melania try to stay out of the spotlight. But now they’ve locked horns.

And Hunter Biden and Melania Trump went head to head in a showdown no one expected.

Hunter Biden’s Defiant Response to Melania Trump’s Defamation Threat

Hunter Biden’s brash dismissal of First Lady Melania Trump’s $1 billion defamation threat over claims linking her to Jeffrey Epstein has intensified a high-profile legal dispute, casting further scrutiny on Biden’s penchant for controversial statements and questionable judgment. The Trump administration’s swift response underscores its commitment to protecting the First Lady’s reputation against what it calls baseless and harmful allegations.

Biden’s Reckless Claims and Refusal to Retract

In a Thursday interview on “Channel 5 with Andrew Callaghan,” Hunter Biden scoffed at Melania Trump’s demand to retract comments suggesting Jeffrey Epstein introduced her to President Donald Trump, responding with a smug, “F–k that. That’s not going to happen.” The remarks, made in an earlier episode of the same YouTube series, cited discredited author Michael Wolff and a 2019 New York Times report, alleging, “According to his biographer, Jeffrey Epstein introduced Melania,” and claiming Trump and Epstein were “very close friends for a very long period of time.”

Biden doubled down, asserting, “What I said was what I have heard and seen, reported and written, primarily from Michael Wolff, but also dating back all the way to 2019 when the New York Times, I think … reported that sources said that Jeffrey Epstein claimed to be the person to introduce Donald Trump to Melania at that time.”

The First Lady’s attorney, Alejandro Brito, condemned these statements as “false, defamatory, disparaging, and inflammatory” in an August 6, 2025, letter, warning that failure to retract by August 7 would prompt a lawsuit seeking over $1 billion for “overwhelming financial and reputational harm.”

Biden’s refusal, coupled with his cavalier attitude, risks escalating the matter into a costly legal battle, especially given his reported “significant debt in the millions of dollars range” from struggling art sales and mounting legal fees, as disclosed in court documents.

Trump Administration’s Robust Defense of Melania’s Reputation

The Trump administration has taken a firm stance against what it views as malicious falsehoods, with Melania’s legal team successfully securing retractions from outlets like The Daily Beast, which apologized last month for publishing similar claims, and Democratic strategist James Carville, who scrubbed a podcast episode speculating about an “Epstein connection.” Brito labeled Wolff a “serial fabulist” and accused Biden of exploiting the Epstein controversy for attention, stating:

“Given your vast history of trading on the names of others – including your surname – for your personal benefit, it is obvious that you published these false and defamatory statements about Mrs. Trump to draw attention to yourself.”

President Trump and Melania have consistently maintained they met in 1998 at a New York Fashion Week party hosted by modeling agent Paolo Zampolli, a narrative detailed in Melania’s memoir, where she wrote, “I found myself drawn to his magnetic energy.”

Legal and Financial Risks for Biden Amid Public Backlash

Biden’s provocative stance, including his taunting offer for a deposition—“If they want to sit down for a deposition and clarify the nature of the relationship between Jeffrey Epstein … I’m more than happy to provide them the platform”—may backfire, given the high legal threshold for public figures in defamation cases but also his own precarious financial state.

His comments, which echo retracted claims and rely on dubious sources, have drawn criticism for sensationalism, with posts on X noting the Daily Beast’s retraction as evidence of their inaccuracy.

Critics argue Biden’s behavior exemplifies a pattern of leveraging high-profile names to deflect from his own controversies, potentially alienating voters who value accountability.

WATCH:

The southern border has been a bone of contention for years. Now everything has changed.

Because Border Patrol uncovered an unprecedented reality at the border that is dropping jaws.

Trump’s Border Policies Deliver Historic Security Gains

President Donald Trump’s unwavering commitment to border security has yielded unprecedented results, with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) reporting a third consecutive month of zero catch-and-release at the U.S. border.

In July 2025, Border Patrol recorded just 4,601 arrests along the southern land border, shattering the previous record of 6,100 set in June and a stark contrast to the 56,000 apprehensions in July 2024 under the prior administration.

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) logged only 24,628 unauthorized entries across all borders, including airports and waterways, down from over 170,000 in July 2024. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem hailed the achievement:

“History made, again. The numbers don’t lie — this is the most secure the border has ever been. No more excuses. No more releases. We’ve put the cartels on defense and taken our border back.”

Trump’s bold measures, including a declared border emergency and robust interior enforcement, have fundamentally shifted the dynamics, deterring migrants and crippling smuggling cartels.

Swift Deportations and Targeted Enforcement Cripple Illegal Crossings

Of the 4,601 southern border apprehensions, approximately half faced expedited removal, ensuring rapid deportation, while 1,200 others had prior deportation orders reinstated for quick ousters.

Another 380 opted for “voluntary return,” avoiding formal deportation, and 526 were detained with immigration court summonses. This efficient, no-nonsense approach underscores Trump’s resolve to restore law and order.

Trump’s policies have particularly slashed illegal immigration from beyond Mexico. In July 2024, over 60% of the 56,000 southern border apprehensions were non-Mexican; in July 2025, only 33% of the 4,601 were from outside Mexico, a testament to Trump’s targeted enforcement.

Unaccompanied Alien Children (UACs) dropped dramatically to 452, compared to 5,600 in July 2024 and peaks of 18,000 monthly under Biden’s first year, highlighting Trump’s success in curbing vulnerable migrations.

The northern border also reflects Trump’s impact, with just 554 apprehensions in July 2025, down from over 3,000 the previous year, ensuring comprehensive security across all frontiers.

Trump’s Tariffs and Drug Seizures Bolster Economic and Public Safety

Beyond securing the border, Trump’s policies are fortifying America’s safety and economy. CBP reported an 86% surge in heroin seizures and a 30% increase in fentanyl seizures, dealing a blow to cartels and protecting communities from deadly drugs.

Meanwhile, Trump’s tariffs have generated $140.8 billion in customs duties, taxes, and fees since January 20, strengthening the nation’s financial foundation without burdening taxpayers.

The divide between Republicans and Democrats has never been wider. But still there are some who bridge the gap.

Now a top Democrat is under fire after breaking ranks to join forces with Trump.

Trump Delivers on Promise with Swift Action Against DC Crime

In a display of decisive leadership, President Donald Trump has mobilized federal resources to bolster safety in the nation’s capital, with DC Metropolitan Police Chief Pamela Smith expressing eagerness to “work together” on implementing his directive to federalize her 3,400-officer force.

This comes just hours after 850 federal agents hit the streets Monday night, marking a strong start to Trump’s vow to transform Washington into the safest and most beautiful city on Earth.

Smith and DC Mayor Muriel Bowser, a Democrat, met Tuesday morning at the Justice Department with new overseers, including DEA chief Terry Cole, who will supervise the MPD. Bowser told reporters she aimed to explore “how to make the most of the additional officer support,” as the White House surges personnel from agencies like Border Patrol, FBI, DEA, and US Park Police.

National Guard troops will also patrol, enhancing visibility even without arrest powers.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt updated reporters Tuesday afternoon: “last night, approximately 850 officers and agents were surged across the city,” resulting in “they made a total of 23 arrests.”

She detailed: “These arrests consisted of homicide, firearms offenses, possession with intent to distribute narcotics, fare evasion, lewd acts, stalking, possession of a high-capacity magazine, fleeing to elude in a vehicle, no permits, driving under the influence, reckless driving and a bench warrant.” Leavitt highlighted the seizure of “six illegal handguns” and affirmed, “this is only the beginning.”

Federal Surge Yields Immediate Results Under Trump’s Vision

Leavitt pledged ongoing intensity: “Over the course of the next month, the Trump administration will relentlessly pursue and arrest every violent criminal in the district who breaks the law, undermines public safety and endangers law-abiding Americans.”

She echoed Trump’s campaign promise: “He is going to make our nation’s capital the most beautiful and safe city on Earth, just like he promised on the campaign trail.”

Despite past tensions with Trump over policing during his first term, Bowser now focuses on effective deployment: “We have more police, and we want to make sure we use them,” ensuring National Guard and federal agents are “being well used … to drive down crime.”

Smith, optimistic post-meeting with Cole, stated outside the Justice Department: “I think this is going to be a good effort.” She emphasized federal aid in removing “illegal guns” from streets and addressing “pockets of crime we would like to address,” adding, “We are here to work together with our federal partners.”

Trump’s Monday move to federalize the MPD, enabled for up to 30 days under the 1973 Home Rule Act, showcases his commitment to law and order amid limited DC self-governance. Extension beyond a month requires congressional approval, providing a framework for sustained improvements.

Trump’s Bold Move Exposes Flaws in Local Crime Reporting

In announcing the federalization, Trump referenced recent high-profile crimes and dismissed Bowser’s claims of violent crime at 30-year lows, citing a scandal last month where MPD leaders allegedly pressured commanders to falsify data.

This initiative not only addresses immediate threats but also restores trust in accurate reporting, aligning with Trump’s track record of fulfilling promises to protect Americans and revitalize the capital under strong, unified leadership.

The Russia-Ukraine war has been a meat grinder. Many had hopes it would end soon.

But Vladimir Putin pulled an ace from his sleeve that has left even Trump shocked.

Russian Forces Surge Ahead in Eastern Ukraine Amid Diplomatic Momentum

In a bold maneuver that could bolster Russia’s position ahead of high-stakes talks, Russian troops have launched a rapid incursion near the coal-rich town of Dobropillia in eastern Ukraine.

This advance appears timed to intensify leverage on Kyiv to consider territorial concessions, just as U.S. President Donald Trump prepares for a pivotal meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, where Trump’s deal-making prowess might finally pave the way for peace after years of stalemate under previous leadership.

According to Ukraine’s respected DeepState war map, Russian forces have pushed forward at least six miles northward in dual thrusts over recent days, aiming to solidify control over the Donetsk region.

This marks one of the most significant gains in the past year, with advances near three villages tied to the Ukrainian hubs of Kostyantynivka and Pokrovsk—areas Moscow seeks to surround by capitalizing on Ukraine’s troop shortages.

“The situation is quite chaotic, as the enemy, having found gaps in the defense, is infiltrating deeper, trying to quickly consolidate and accumulate forces for further advancement,” DeepState reported on its Telegram channel.

Trump’s upcoming summit in Alaska on Friday could address a potential resolution, with unverified reports suggesting Putin has signaled interest in Kyiv relinquishing remaining Donetsk territories not yet under Russian hold—highlighting Trump’s opportunity to negotiate a strong, America-first deal.

Ukrainian Defenses Tested as Reinforcements Mobilize

With no official word from Moscow on the push, Ukraine’s military chief Oleksandr Syrskyi has directed additional forces to counter infiltrating sabotage units, as stated by army spokesperson Andriy Kovalov to Interfax-Ukraine: “to detect and destroy enemy sabotage groups that penetrate the line of defense.”

Kovalov noted Russia’s tactic of leveraging superior numbers for small-group infiltrations, with 35 failed attempts to dislodge Ukrainian positions, resulting in substantial Russian casualties.

Another Ukrainian military voice, Viktor Trehubov, minimized the incursion, insisting it falls short of a true breakthrough.

Finnish analyst Pasi Paroinen from the Black Bird Group described the escalation as swift, with Russian elements penetrating up to 10 miles in three days: “Forwardmost Russian units have reportedly reached the Dobropillia – Kramatorsk road T0514 and Russian infiltration groups have also been reported near Dobropillia proper,” he posted on X.

Tatarigami_UA, a veteran Ukrainian officer behind Frontelligence Insight, contextualized the move: “In both 2014 and 2015, Russia launched major offensives ahead of negotiations to gain leverage. The current situation is serious, but far from the collapse some suggest.”

Former Kremlin advisor Sergei Markov attributed the progress to “a partial collapse in the front” from Ukraine’s manpower deficits, calling it “a gift to Putin and Trump during the negotiations” that might compel Kyiv to yield land rather than risk losing all of Donetsk through prolonged fighting.

Trump’s Negotiation Edge Amid Frontline Warnings

To fully claim Donetsk, Russia would need to seize key “fortress cities” like Sloviansk, Kramatorsk, Druzhkivka, and Kostiantynivka. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has firmly opposed territorial giveaways, insisting on a “just” peace. However, Bohdan Krotevych, ex-chief of staff for the Azov brigade and a National Guard lieutenant colonel, sounded the alarm on X: “The line of combat engagement as a fixed line does not actually exist,” describing the sector as “a complete mess” and urging Zelensky to act.

As Trump heads into talks with Putin, his track record of tough negotiations positions him uniquely to broker a resolution that protects U.S. interests, potentially ending the conflict that dragged on under Biden’s watch and restoring stability through decisive leadership.

Donald Trump and the media have never gotten along. Now it’s heating up big time.

And Trump ribbed reporters in the press room in a hilarious exchange caught on camera.

Trump’s Wit Shines at Packed White House Briefing

President Donald Trump showcased his trademark humor and focus on results during a lively White House press event Monday, deftly sidestepping a reporter’s suggestion to build a “big, beautiful briefing room” while emphasizing his commitment to enhancing the nation’s capital.

Amid a standing-room-only briefing, Trump tackled pressing matters, including deploying 800 National Guard troops to support Washington, D.C.’s Metropolitan Police Department in combating crime—a bold move to restore safety.

The overflowing crowd prompted a journalist to remark, “This is the most people we’ve ever seen in this briefing room.” Trump, seizing the moment, turned to his dynamic press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, asking, “Is this the largest crowd that you’ve ever seen?”

Leavitt confirmed, “This is definitely the most packed briefing, and I think all of you would agree. I think that’s why we need to build a ballroom.”

Trump’s Ballroom Project Elevates White House Prestige

When Real America’s Voice correspondent Brian Glenn jumped in, asking, “You’re building a big, beautiful ballroom. Could we build a big, beautiful briefing room? Updated with technology, more seats!” Trump’s response was classic:

“No, I don’t want to do that. I don’t want you to be comfortable. No, I don’t want to make life comfortable.” The room erupted in laughter, showcasing Trump’s ability to connect with humor while staying focused on priorities that serve the nation.

The ballroom initiative, a cornerstone of Trump’s plan to elevate America’s global standing, will create a dedicated space for hosting world leaders, state dinners, and grand ceremonies.

Leavitt previously explained, “The White House is currently unable to host major functions honoring world leaders in other countries without having to install a large and unsightly tent approximately 100 yards away from the main building’s entrance.” The 90,000-square-foot addition, designed to seat 650 guests and blend seamlessly with the White House’s classical architecture, is set to be “a much-needed and exquisite addition,” reflecting Trump’s commitment to excellence.

Trump’s Leadership Reclaims White House Grandeur

By personally driving the ballroom project, funded without taxpayer dollars, Trump demonstrates his business acumen and dedication to restoring the White House’s stature as a global symbol of American strength.

The initiative addresses a long-standing logistical shortfall, ensuring the U.S. can host dignitaries with the dignity they deserve—no more makeshift tents. His refusal to cater to media demands for a lavish briefing room further cements his focus on what truly matters: practical solutions and national pride.

Trump’s ability to balance humor, decisive action, and visionary projects like the ballroom sets him apart, reinforcing his leadership as he tackles crime in D.C. and elevates America’s image on the world stage.

🚨REPORTER: "Can we build a big beautiful briefing room?"

TRUMP: "No. I don't want to do that. I don't want you to be comfortable. I don't want to make life more comfortable."

LMAO 😂😂😂 pic.twitter.com/cGNK1dRylX

— Autism Capital 🧩 (@AutismCapital) August 11, 2025

Trump likes to make deals. But you have to see the forest through the trees.

And now Donald Trump slammed a world leader for making a completely unreasonable demand of him.

Trump’s Firm Stance on Ukraine Peace Negotiations

President Donald Trump expressed strong disagreement with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Monday, following Zelensky’s dismissal of a proposed territorial exchange with Russia as a means to conclude the ongoing conflict—a bold move by Trump aimed at swiftly restoring stability in the region.

Speaking to journalists in the White House Briefing Room, Trump highlighted his frustration while emphasizing his vision for a pragmatic resolution. “I get along with Zelensky, but, you know, I disagree with what he’s done, very, very severely disagree. This is a war that should have never happened,” Trump said.

“I was a little bothered by the fact that Zelensky was saying, ‘Well, I have to get constitutional approval.’ I mean, he’s got approval to go into war and kill everybody, but he needs approval to do a land swap, because there’ll be some land swapping going on. I know that through Russia and through conversations with everybody — for the good of Ukraine,” he added. “Russia has occupied a big portion of Ukraine. They’ve occupied some very prime territory. We’re going to try to get some of that territory back for Ukraine.”

Trump’s approach reflects a determined effort to broker a deal that could benefit Ukraine by reclaiming key areas, showcasing his negotiation skills in international diplomacy.

Zelensky’s Rejection and the Proposed Land Exchange

Zelensky firmly opposed the idea over the weekend, stating on Saturday that “Ukrainians will not gift their land to the occupier,” and adding, “Any decisions made against us, any decisions made without Ukraine, are at the same time decisions against peace. They will bring nothing. These are dead decisions; they will never work.”

The concept of a land swap emerged from Trump’s discussions last Friday, ahead of his announced summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska later this week. Reports indicate Putin conveyed to Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff a willingness to halt the war in return for control over the Donbas region in eastern Ukraine, where Russian forces have seized substantial territory amid ongoing Ukrainian resistance.

“Putin, I believe, wants to see peace, and [Ukrainian President Volodymyr] Zelensky wants to see peace,” Trump said at the White House last Friday.

He elaborated that there would be “some swapping” of territories between Russia and Ukraine.

“It’s very complicated, but we’re going to get some back and we’re going to get some switched … to the betterment of both.”

Trump’s proactive proposal aims to facilitate a balanced outcome, potentially ending the bloodshed while advancing Ukraine’s interests through strategic adjustments.

Upcoming Summit and Trump’s Mediation Role

Although Zelensky has not been invited to the initial Alaska meeting, Trump has conditioned the talks on Putin’s commitment to subsequent discussions with the Ukrainian leader. In recent statements, Trump has directed pointed criticism toward Putin for attacks on civilian areas, while now urging Zelensky to embrace flexibility for peace.

“We’re going to have a meeting with Vladimir Putin, and at the end of that meeting, probably in the first two minutes, I’ll know exactly whether or not a deal can be made,” Trump said on Monday. “Ultimately, I’m going to put the two of them in a room. I’ll be there, or I won’t be there, and I think it’ll get solved.”

This hands-on involvement by Trump positions him as a key architect of potential resolution, leveraging his influence to drive a swift and equitable end to the war.

The Democrat Party is fracturing. And it’s not pretty.

Now Bernie Sanders undercut Kamala Harris with a brutal takedown out of nowhere.

Sanders’ Sharp Rebuke of Harris’ Campaign Strategy

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders delivered a pointed assessment of Kamala Harris’ unsuccessful 2024 presidential run, highlighting her excessive dependence on billionaire advisors who, he argued, diverted her from championing the interests of everyday American workers—a misstep that underscored deeper flaws in her approach.

During an appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union” with anchor Dana Bash on Sunday, Sanders elaborated on a remark he made at a rally in West Virginia.

WATCH:

“How do you run for president and not develop a strong agenda which speaks to the economic crisis facing working families?”@SenSanders says that one reason Kamala Harris lost in 2024 was because “she had too many billionaires telling her not to speak up for the working class.” pic.twitter.com/QRnwxO8znQ

— State of the Union (@CNNSOTU) August 10, 2025

Bash played a clip from the event where Sanders addressed the crowd: “One of the reasons, in my view, that Kamala Harris lost this election is she had too many billionaires telling her not to speak up for the working-class of this country.”

“Ouch,” Bash responded, pressing him for more details.

Exposing the Influence of Wealthy Elites on Harris’ Agenda

Sanders stood firm, clarifying his stance while exposing what he saw as a troubling elite sway over Harris’ decisions. “Well, no, I think, I mean, I don’t think that that’s — I like her, she’s a friend of mine, but her core consultants, you know, were heavily influenced by very wealthy people,” Sanders explained.

“How do you run for president and not develop a strong agenda which speaks to the economic crises facing working families? You know, more income and wealth inequality today than we’ve ever had. You have 60% of our people living paycheck to paycheck. You’ve got a health care system which is broken and dysfunctional, and despite spending so much, we’re the only major country not to guarantee health care to all people. How do you not talk about these issues?”

“She talked about affordability —” Bash interjected.

Sanders pushed back, criticizing the superficiality: “Well, but in a vague — I don’t want to rehash that campaign, but I think the clue to Democratic victories is to understand that you’ve got to stand unequivocally with the working class of this country. You need an agenda that speaks to the needs of working people.”

This critique painted a picture of a campaign detached from the real struggles of ordinary Americans, prioritizing affluent influences over substantive policy.

Contrasting Sanders’ Pre-Election Support for Harris

Interestingly, Sanders’ current disapproval marks a notable reversal from his position just two months prior to the election, when he defended Harris as being “pragmatic” for concealing her more radical, Marxist-leaning views in an effort to appeal to voters and secure victory—a strategy that ultimately backfired and revealed inconsistencies in her messaging.

The White House is usually busy with tariff deals and immigration enforcement. Now they want someone specific in cuffs.

Because President Trump announced a $50 million bounty on the last person imaginable.

Trump Escalates Fight Against Maduro’s Drug Empire

On Thursday, President Donald Trump’s administration announced a $50 million reward for information leading to the arrest of Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro, doubling the previous bounty to intensify pressure on a key threat to U.S. national security.

Attorney General Pam Bondi, in a video posted on X, condemned Maduro’s ties to criminal networks, stating, “Maduro uses foreign terrorist organizations like [Tren de Aragua], Sinaloa and Cartel of the Suns to bring deadly drugs and violence into our country.”

WATCH:

Today, @TheJusticeDept and @StateDept are announcing a $50 MILLION REWARD for information leading to the arrest of Nicolás Maduro. pic.twitter.com/D8LNqjS9yk

— Attorney General Pamela Bondi (@AGPamBondi) August 7, 2025

Seizing Assets and Targeting Narco-Terrorism

The Drug Enforcement Administration has seized 30 tons of cocaine tied to Maduro’s associates, including nearly seven tons directly linked to him, which Bondi noted is “a primary source of income for the deadly cartels based in Venezuela and Mexico.”

These drugs, often laced with fentanyl, have fueled a crisis costing “countless American lives.”

Since Maduro’s 2020 indictment in the Southern District of New York for charges including narco-terrorism and weapons violations, the Department of Justice has confiscated over $700 million in assets, including two private jets and nine vehicles.

Trump’s leadership builds on his first term’s $15 million bounty, later raised to $25 million under President Joe Biden, with Thursday’s increase signaling a relentless pursuit of justice.

Trump’s Resolve to End Maduro’s Reign of Terror

Bondi emphasized that Maduro, described as “one of the largest narco-traffickers in the world,” remains a direct threat to U.S. security.

“The DOJ has seized over $700 million of Maduro linked assets, including two private jets, nine vehicles and more.

Yet Maduro’s reign of terror continues,” she said, vowing that “under President Trump’s leadership, Maduro will not escape justice, and he will be held accountable for his despicable crimes.”

Trump’s bold strategy not only targets Maduro but also aims to disrupt the cartels’ financial networks, reinforcing his administration’s focus on border security and combating the opioid epidemic.