Search Results

Last year now-former Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell announced he would not run for Majority Leader – or as we thought of him in that role, “Impediment in Chief” to governing America according to conservative principles. Now, the ailing McConnell has announced he will not run for reelection. In a floor speech which coincided with his 83rd birthday, McConnell (R-Ky.) recounted how his journey from interning for former Sen. John Sherman Cooper (R-Ky.) to leading the Republican conference for 18 years fulfilled “a childhood dream.”   “Seven times, my fellow Kentuckians have sent me to the Senate. Every day in between I’ve been humbled by the trust they’ve placed in me to do their business right here,” McConnell said in the address, as reported by The New York Post. “Thanks to Ronald Reagan’s determination, the work of strengthening American hard power was well underway when I arrived in the Senate,” he went on.   “But since then, we’ve allowed that power to atrophy. And today, a dangerous world threatens to outpace the work of rebuilding it. So, lest any of our colleagues still doubt my intentions for the remainder of my term: I have some unfinished business to attend to.”   McConnell’s one contribution to conservative governance was his vigorous campaign to completely remake the US Supreme Court by creating a conservative majority during the first Trump administration with the installation of three justices — after having blocked Merrick Garland’s appointment under President Barack Obama. Beyond that Mitch McConnell’s legacy – at least among conservatives – is as the “Impediment in Chief” to reining-in federal spending and governing America according to constitutional conservative principles. When the Tea Party first came into being – foreshadowing the MAGA Movement, “Republican Leader” McConnell raised and spent millions in lobbyist cash to defeat Tea Party-backed Republicans, in some case allowing seats to fall to Democrats, rather than populist Republicans. McConnell was the architect of practically every spending bill over the past two decades and his appetite for pork barrel spending, and the example that set for other Republican Senators contributed mightily to our current $37 trillion national debt and our multi-trillion-dollar deficits over the past decades.   Crucial to getting this spending spree passed was a strategy of government by crisis in which every spending vote was postponed until the last minute before the government technically ran out of money, or Congress was set to adjourn. And Mitch McConnell didn’t just spend, he also used all of his considerable power and energy to kill any legislation that might stop the ruinous onslaught on the Treasury, for example by killing the popular Cut, Cap and Balance plan to balance the budget, and crafting phony budget “cap” legislation that was routinely waived. As bad as Mitch McConnell has been he still occasionally surprises conservatives by doing the right thing, as he did yesterday when he voted in favor of Kash Patel to head the FBI. We are glad to see him go, but we wish Mitch McConnell nothing but sunny days in his retirement. However, we invite conservatives in Kentucky to get to work NOW to find a conservative candidate to fill that seat, lest Mitch McConnell’s still considerable influence in the Blue Grass State allow a member of his anti-conservative political operation to draft-in behind him. 2024 Election MAGA Agenda Mitch McConnell retirement federal budget budget caps Cut, Cap and Balance Government shutdowns Supreme Court 2026 Kentucky Senate election

President Donald Trump has begun his second term with two bold peace initiatives. First, to negotiate an end to the Russia – Ukraine war, and America’s open checkbook in support of Ukraine’s military and civilian budget. And second, to negotiate an agreement with the Russians and the Red Chinese to reduce military expenditures by half. The President’s unerring sense of the mood of the American people – that Americans have tired of the vast sums of their money, and lives of their loved ones, spent on endless and unwon wars – certainly captures the political moment. What’s more, the establishment military leadership and its associated defense – national security complex have squandered much of their public credibility and goodwill by throwing themselves wholeheartedly into Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, transgender ideology and other unpopular Cultural Marxist causes. American voters seem ready for a change in how we maintain our national security and Donald Trump has boldly provided them with one. One hundred years ago we saw a similar convergence of American public sentiment and world events, and it is worth reviewing how events unfolded then to instruct our actions today. The Western democratic countries, and particularly the American people, came out of World War I sickened by the slaughter, outraged by the burden of the war debt, and resolved to avoid any more foreign entanglements and wars. Idealistic business leaders, such as Edward William Bok, campaigned for America to lead efforts to achieve world peace. Bok created the American Peace Award because he thought the American government was not doing enough to promote world peace. The award offered a $100,000 prize to the person submitting "the best practicable plan by which the United States may co-operate with other nations for the achievement and preservation of world peace." The first half of the prize was awarded upon the selection of the plan by a jury, and the remainder upon acceptance by the United States Senate or showing "sufficient popular support". The 1924 American Peace Award received plans from thousands of applicants, however, on January 8, 1924, the Chicago Daily Tribune reported, "Bok Peace Plan Given a Subzero Senate Welcome.”* But that may have been because the United States government was already working on its own peace plans. In 1921 the United States convened the Washington Naval Conference, arguably the first international disarmament conference, to limit the naval arms race and to work out security agreements in the Pacific area. In a proposal that presaged President Trump’s bold suggestion that the United States, Russia and Red China half their military spending, U.S. Secretary of State Charles Evans Hughes opened the Conference with a proposal to scrap almost 1.9 million tons of warships belonging to the great powers. This bold disarmament proposal astonished the assembled delegates, but it was ultimately enacted in a modified form. The Five-Power Naval Limitation Treaty, which was signed by the United States, Great Britain, Japan, France, and Italy on February 6, 1922, and a number of other international agreements  grew out of the Washington Naval Conference. Less than a decade later the Japanese, having been treated as a second-class power in the allocation of capital ships, demanded equality with the United States and Great Britain. When the Western powers refused to renegotiate the treaty, the Japanese gave notice they renounced the limits in the treaty and the arms race recommenced in earnest. The United States was left far behind as the Japanese quickly built the world’s two largest battleships and what was, at the beginning of World War II, the world’s most effective aircraft carrier force with which they attacked Pearl Harbor, the Philippines, Dutch East India, Singapore, Ceylon and Australia. Several years after the Washington Naval Conference, French Minister of Foreign Affairs Aristide Briand published an open letter in April of 1927 containing a proposal for a peace pact as a bilateral agreement between the United States and France to outlaw war between them. According to Milestones in the History of U.S. Foreign Relations, “Though the suggestion had the enthusiastic support of some members of the American peace movement, U.S. President Calvin Coolidge and Secretary of State Frank B. Kellogg were less eager than Briand to enter into a bilateral arrangement. They worried that the agreement against war could be interpreted as a bilateral alliance and require the United States to intervene if France was ever threatened. To avoid this, they suggested that the two nations take the lead in inviting all nations to join them in outlawing war.” On August 27, 1928, fifteen nations met in Paris and signed the Kellogg-Briand Pact. Signatories included France, the United States, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, India, Belgium, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Germany, Italy and Japan. Later, an additional forty-seven nations followed suit, so the pact was eventually signed by most of the established nations in the world. The U.S. Senate ratified the agreement by a vote of 85–1, though it did so only after making reservations to note that U.S. participation did not limit its right to self-defense or require it to act against signatories breaking the agreement. Sometimes called the Pact of Paris for the city in which it was signed, the pact was one of many international efforts to prevent another World War, but it had little effect in stopping the rising militarism of the 1930s or preventing World War II. Indeed, through the Mukden Incident  in China it was effectively abrogated by Japan just three years after it was signed. Between World War I and World War II the world’s democratically elected leaders, and leading figures in civil society, strove to guarantee peace between nations by building international consensus and signing international agreements. However, these agreements all failed when challenged by totalitarian governments that were not bound by democratic processes. When dictators, such as Adolf Hitler, at the head of command economies chose to pursue war, no paper treaty could restrain them. Ultimately, what the failure of the interwar peace and arms control treaties demonstrates is that the only American policy that has prevented a general war and preserved peace over the long term is what Ronald Reagan called “Peace through Strength.” And central to the success of that strategy was the restraint to deploy our strength only when our civilization, borders and citizens were threatened. We applaud President Trump for his apparent return to restraint in engaging in foreign military adventures, but only by displaying strength and demonstrating the resolve to protect and defend our civilization, borders and citizens can the peace be maintained in a world where dictators at the head of command economies are our most potent enemies.   George Rasley is editor of Richard Viguerie's ConservativeHQ.com  and is a veteran of over 300 political campaigns. A member of American MENSA, he served on the staff of Vice President Dan Quayle, as Director of Policy and Communication for then-Congressman Adam Putnam (FL-12) then Vice Chairman of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee's Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs, and as spokesman for retired Rep. Mac Thornberry, former Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee and member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. * The prize was awarded in February 1924 to Dr. Charles Herbert Levermore, who was secretary of the World's Court League, the League of Nations Union, and the New York Peace Society, and former president of Adelphi College. Levermore's plan suggested the United States adhere to the Permanent Court of International Justice and should extend its cooperation with the League of Nations, the United States not being a member of the League. 2024 Election government shutdown Democrats DOGE Department of Government Efficiency Social Security numbers Social security ages DOGE research Social Security Fraud Social Security Trustees Social Security Trust Fund Social Security solvency Illegal immigration taxation of social security benefits U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer

A new organization, the State Leadership Initiative (SLI), led by dynamic young conservatives Noah Wall and Nate Fischer aims to make Red States the driving force behind our country’s next Golden Age. Wall and Fischer's see returning control of federal programs to the states as the central goals of building Economic Dynamism, Financial Strength and Digital Sovereignty. But why focus on Red or Republican States? It turns out Red States may be drowning in as much or more bureaucracy as some Democrat states. In an interview with Shawn Fleetwood of the Federalist, the SLI leaders explained, in modern times, state governments are largely “considered [to be] almost an afterthought,” and have effectively become “clients of the federal government” when it comes to key implementing policies and programs.   “Most of the action takes place on the federal level, but that’s not how it’s supposed to be historically,” Wall said. “States were supposed to play the important role in leading and guiding their residents and their communities to advance their values. … They were designed to be distinct and separate from [the federal government].” Conversations between Wall and Fischer about how states — particularly those controlled by Republicans — can “distinguish themselves” in the current system led to examinations of existing state governments, their policies, regulations, and more. What they soon discovered, according to Wall, is that “the current state of red states is that they are effectively blue states with lower taxes.”   As an example provided to the Federalist, the SLI president cited figures from an August 2024 analysis  by George Mason University’s Mercatus Center, which ranked states according to their total number of regulatory restrictions. The study found that, as of 2023, several Republican-run states were more regulated than those run by Democrats.   Red states such as Texas (5th) and Louisiana (10th), for example, were ranked higher on the list than blue states like Colorado (12th) and Maryland (21st).   Wall also noted figures from the American Legislative Exchange Council’s “Rich States, Poor States” 2024 report , which found higher numbers of public sector employees in numerous GOP states than in Democrat ones. Taken from the U.S. Census Bureau, the 2022 data shows that red states such as Wyoming, Kansas, and Nebraska boast more public employees per 10,000 residents than blue states like New York, Vermont, and California.   Speaking with The Federalist, SLI Co-Founder Nate Fischer attributed Republicans’ failure to address these expansive bureaucracies in their states to the “managerial system that pervades our institutions.” He specifically cited colleges as an example of this dynamic, in which leftists capture an institution and then status quo Republicans accept it without pushback.   “Politics ends up producing red states [that] have largely accepted the same form of regime as all these other institutions that have drifted left,” Fischer said. In “blue states, [Democrats] have a structure that enables their aggressive pursuit of their political agenda. In many cases, Republicans kind of have a structure that is fundamentally opposed to their agenda. So, most of the time [Republicans] will stick to kind of easy policies on the margins [rather than enacting substantive changes].”   The first prong of this plan is to form leadership teams in each of the group’s initial target states: Florida, Indiana, Texas, West Virginia, and Wyoming. SLI is currently in the process of staffing these teams, Wall and Fischer explained to the Federalist.   This includes working alongside groups such as the State Freedom Caucus Network to pass legislation critical to dismantling these red states’ overzealous bureaucracies and cutting wasteful spending. Wall specifically noted how freedom caucus legislators oftentimes don’t possess the resources and support enjoyed by the establishment, and that SLI intends to provide that backup through its collaborative partnerships with other conservative organizations.   “Right now, there’s very little infrastructure that will stand up and publicly support the legislators that are out there” fighting for our interests, Wall said. “When legislators are willing to stand up to do the right thing, there needs to be a support network there to back them up.”   The Heritage Foundation and Heritage Action, Center for Renewing America, and the Job Creators Network are among several organizations that SLI will partner with to accomplish its mission.   Speaking of the organization’s launch and mission, Heritage Foundation President and SLI Board Member Kevin Roberts told The Federalist that the creation of SLI sends a message that “the era of [conservatives] playing defense is over,” and that “it’s time to go on offense.”   If you are ready to go on offense in your state, go to https://stateleadership.org/ to connect with the State Leadership Initiative and click here to donate  to support their crucial mission. 2024 Election MAGA Agenda DODE Department of Government Efficiency Treasury Account Symbol TAS Code Elon Musk 4.7 trillion missing U.N. USAID Humanitarian aid Afghan currency Pooled U.N. Accounts Ukraine

President Trump recently proposed to meet with Russian and Chinese dictators Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping to agree to cut the three nations’ military expenditures by half.   At a time when Xi’s regime is engaged in a whole-of-society People’s War against the United States – and rapidly building up the means of making it a shooting one – dramatic reductions in such spending would clearly be desirable. Ditto its subsidizing of Russia’s war in Ukraine and Putin’s resulting weapons binge. Fortunately, we don’t have to gut our own national security to achieve these laudable goals. Fox Nation’s Maria Bartiromo just confirmed that Wall Street is “underwriting the enemy” by investing in Chinese companies – including many working for the CCP’s military. Such funds also enable the PRC to buy Russian energy.   We can, and must, cut off this insane underwriting unilaterally –and now. 2024 Election MAGA Agenda New Institute for the American Future Frank Gaffney Early Warning IAF Save America's Military Coalition Sovereignty Coalition Save the persecuted Christian's coalition Gitmo Panama Canal Jimmy Carter China Chinese arson Mike Waltz TikTok

I know you are watching with shock as Elon Musk and the Trump Administration are revealing the gigantic amount of corruption and outright theft the Left has used to fund their attack on American society. It’s way worse than even I suspected!   As you know, over the years I have been reporting to you how the radical Green movement, with billions of dollars in its war chests, has pushed the lie of climate change to scare people into voluntarily surrendering our liberties – for the planet.   Scare tactics, deception, outright lies. That’s been the game plan. They set themselves up as the “Compassion Cartel.” Anyone who disagreed with them was just a crazy conspiracy theorist.   It’s worked because they’ve been relentless. No matter how often we have been able to prove there is no man-made warming destroying the planet, the scam goes on.   How could we counter their lies when the money poured in from all directions.   Grant money through the EPA, HUD, and Department of Transportation flooded every community and state as the NGOs and land trusts pressured or even bribed local and state elected officials to take the money.   Now we find that USAID was even paying the news media to reinforce the lie. That’s how they were able to block articles and true scientific reports from anyone who opposed the climate change scam.   Add to that more billions of dollars from USAID to go into the education system to indoctrinate our children to reinforce the propaganda in the classrooms.   And to make sure the gravy train would never end, they provided more funds for election fraud to keep the criminals in control.   Incredibly, it’s now discovered that even George Soros, who has been credited with using his personal billions to buy politicians and State Attorneys General across the nation, has received massive funding from USAID!   In George Soros’ drive to buy the American judicial system, the election process, and candidates, he risked nothing. He’s done it all with your tax dollars! Diabolical!   IN FACT, THE WHOLE DESTRUCTION OF AMERICAN SOCIETY HAS BEEN PAID FOR WITH YOUR TAX DOLLARS – AS YOU SUFFER TO MAKE ENDS MEET!   USAID is just one of the direct reasons why the Left has dominated politics, making conservative groups less effective for so many years.  Your tax dollars have poured into their war chests.   Meanwhile, the many dedicated patriot groups like my American Policy Center (APC) have struggled to survive with just the small voluntary gifts folks like you are able to give.   But now the truth is out!   Through it all, for over thirty-five years of dedicated activism, I have never backed down. I’ve known the evil we faced and have done everything I can to expose it.   Now, finally, we have the opportunity to turn it all around. Trump is shutting off the illegal flow of money. That’s wonderful.   Trump and Musk’s DOGE agency have exposed the theft and are working to shut down the massive flow of our tax money to these liars. BUT – as I have warned many times, we are up against a dedicated evil force determined to control us. They will not stop. We cannot back off and just let Trump do his thing. If that happens he will lose.   You and I must stay focused – especially at the local and state level. Many local elected officials have been convinced that sustainable climate policies are a must and will continue to impose these policies. The NGOs still have huge bank accounts. They will keep up the pressure.   Author Tom DeWeese  is President of the American Policy Center and National Grassroots Coordinator for CFACT (Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow) working to help local activists organize into Freedom Pods ( www.CFACT.org ). He is also the author of three books, including Now Tell Me I Was Wrong, ERASE, and Sustainable: the WAR on Free Enterprise, Private Property, and Individuals. To support the work of APC click here , or, if you prefer, you can mail a check to APC’s address at 53 Main Street, #3640, Warrenton, Virginia, 20188-3640.   PS - That means every dollar you are now able to donate to American Policy Center  will go much further toward victory. Your gift will now be worth a whole lot more than it has since the Left started robbing the U.S. Treasury to fund their attack on our liberties. 2024 Election MAGA Agenda DODE Department of Government Efficiency Treasury Account Symbol TAS Code Elon Musk 4.7 trillion missing U.N. USAID Humanitarian aid Afghan currency Pooled U.N. Accounts Ukraine

Thunderous applause for Donald Trump at the Super Bowl, the first sitting president to attend the country’s biggest game. The president’s greatest gift may be his understanding of people. In personal settings, he looks you directly, listens and connects with other human beings. When millions of Americans celebrate together for the big game or the Daytona 500, he is there. What’s more, he understands the media and, unlike most other Republicans I’ve worked with over the years, dares to go where no politician has gone before. Mr. Trump presses into the media, unafraid to take them on, to confront their condescending and sanctimonious questions, speaking frankly and forcefully.   The president made a career of being a celebrity and a television star, not a natural endeavor for a New York real estate mogul. However, Mr. Trump understands that if he can connect and communicate directly with the people, the people will be with him.   After his passing a few months ago, I looked up a few of the compelling Phil Donahue shows, the precursor to cable news networks. In 1987, Mr. Trump was looking Mr. Donahue right in the eye, not ruffled by his hyperbolic questions, but calmly explaining what the bureaucrats at City Hall were doing to him and his businesses, taxing him more, regulating his hotels, doing everything in their power to make his life miserable. Sound familiar?   The show was a master class in Media 101. Mr. Trump wasn’t afraid to go into the belly of the beast where he knew he would be attacked; he wasn’t afraid of taking his message directly to the audience and the American people, knowing that they, too, have experienced government harassment and meddling in their daily lives.   Mr. Trump did the same during his presidential campaigns, speaking directly to the American people through podcasts, social media posts and traditional media outlets, where he made his case despite the snarky and smug attitudes of the media, which have made a blood sport out of exploiting any scandal in his orbit.   Now, as president, he has brilliantly named Cabinet secretaries who can do the same. While qualified in their fields of expertise, these secretaries are seasoned and savvy media professionals who can take on the media and communicate this administration’s message directly to the American people the way their boss does.   The second Trump administration feels much different from the first one for this reason: His team is on the same page with the president, and they know how and are not ashamed to communicate it. The confirmed secretaries and White House team have already been out in force. This includes Marco Rubio, Kristi Noem, Stephen Miller, J.D. Vance and Karoline Leavitt.   With the first major crisis of the administration, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, former Fox News contributors, were immediately out in public conveying sympathy for the families and moving the story forward, assuring the American people that they would get to the bottom of this tragedy and fix it so it wouldn’t happen again.   There is no longer reason to be ashamed, afraid or acquiescent to the media’s narrative. We now know the majority of the American people are with us and want information we can provide.   As a messaging strategist, media coach and a lifelong journalism student, I find these are heady days.   Conservatives have complained about media bias and an intentional squeezing out of our ideas and policies with good reason. The answer, however, is not to bury our heads in the sand but to proudly project what we believe and how our policies will help the American people in their daily lives.   “A platform of bold unmistakable colors, not pale pastels,” media-savvy Ronald Reagan said in his 1976 convention speech, which set the course for his presidential victory in 1980.   That means taking a page from Mr. Trump’s playbook: going on CNN, CBS, NBC and ABC, talking to The Washington Post and The New York Times and more. For more than 10 years, these outlets have tried to tear Mr. Trump apart with every tool in their arsenal, and it has failed. A CBS News poll shows the president’s approval rating at 53%. His hard work and ability to communicate it are paying off.   The media serve a great purpose in informing and reporting the news to the American people in a country that cherishes free speech. Since Watergate, however, the media have taken an adversarial role toward the chief executive to uncontrollable heights.   Perhaps during this Trump administration, the media, which thrive on salacious details, innuendo and leaks to keep the story going and ratings high, can do a little more introspection about their role. Going up against a master in media has not gone well. Perhaps a little more understanding of people and less contempt for their views would go a long way.   Author Diana L. Banister  is a communications specialist and media strategist, a former Trump administration official and executive consultant with Sovereign Global Solutions. This article first appeared in the Washington Times  and appears here with the kind permission of the author. 2024 Election government shutdown Democrats DOGE Department of Government Efficiency Social Security numbers Social security ages DOGE research Social Security Fraud Social Security Trustees Social Security Trust Fund Social Security solvency Illegal immigration taxation of social security benefits U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer

President Trump's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and Treasury Department, working with the Federal Reserve, have revealed that around $4.7 trillion in U.S. Treasury payments were issued without critical coding, making the transactions “almost impossible” to trace, Elon Musk announced in a post to X. According to The New York Post’s reporting, “the transactions were reportedly missing the Treasury Account Symbol, or TAS, an identification code which links a Treasury payment to a budget line item, according to DOGE, which described the use of such code as a ‘standard financial process’.” In the wake of the discovery, the Trump Treasury Department and DOGE announced that the use of the TAS code will now be mandatory.   “As of Saturday, this is now a required field, increasing insight into where money is actually going,” DOGE said, thanking the Treasury Department for its “great work” implementing the change,” The New York Post reported. Now, the question is, where did that $4.7 trillion go? Principled limited government constitutional conservative Rep. Tim Burchett has one idea – it came back to Washington DC. And our friend Daniel Greenfield suggested another place some of it went – to the Taliban and other American enemies that Biden was funding through the UN and USAID. In an article for the Gatestone Institute  Mr. Greenfield explained how, under the guise of humanitarian needs, $1.7 billion was provided to the UN, which used some of the money to buy dollars to fly into Afghanistan, to trade for Afghan currency, which the U.S. had also arranged to have printed on behalf of the Taliban.   The cash is not provided to the Taliban or DAB by the UN, but by the groups funded by the UN.   During the intermediate step, DAB held "auctions" of the dollars which elements linked to the Taliban, including the Haqqani network allied with Al Qaeda, reportedly "win." The auctions prop up the Afghan currency and keep the Taliban in power.   Putting the money into UN pooled accounts allowed USAID to claim that they "do not provide assistance to or through the Taliban", they just put money into "pooled UN accounts..." You can see why Treasury officials might want to leave the Treasury Account Symbol, or TAS, off transactions like those. And then there is the matter of the whereabouts of all the money sent to Ukraine, which Ukrainian President Zelensky says has not been received. If President Zelensky is right, then there’s around $98 billion missing – it would probably be handy not to have a Treasury Account Symbol, or TAS, on those payments. But then again, maybe Zelensky’s numbers may be a little off. There are $4.7 trillion reasons why those Treasury Account Symbols, or TAS, are missing, and incompetence is only one of them. 2024 Election MAGA Agenda DODE Department of Government Efficiency Treasury Account Symbol TAS Code Elon Musk 4.7 trillion missing U.N. USAID Humanitarian aid Afghan currency Pooled U.N. Accounts Ukraine

President Trump's DOGE has uncovered what might be the biggest fraud in history. It turns out there are FAR more “eligible” social security numbers than there are citizens in the USA. DOGE has discovered there are almost 395 million social security numbers in the database versus around 335 million citizens.   DOGE also found there are more than 20 million in the database over the age of 100, and more than 15 million over age of 110. But it gets better. Among those 15 million over the age of 110 are about 5 million between the ages of 140 and 170, and even over 1,000 who are between 220 and 229 years old. According to the DOGE research, there are 394.9 million Social Security numbers in the system, despite the U.S. population being about 335 million. The number of individuals eligible for Social Security is estimated at 310 million, leaving a discrepancy of 85.9 million. You would think that Democrats, always ready to claim to be “protecting Social Security” are apoplectic that DOGE is even looking at Social Security, let alone discovering potential fraud that could bankrupt the system. At a February 10, 2025, rally outside the Social Security Administration's Maryland headquarters, Democrat lawmakers and Leftwing advocates warned that the federal agency responsible for benefits for retired and disabled Americans could be among DOGE's next targets.   "Keep your hands off our Social Security, because this has nothing, nothing to do with government efficiency," Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., said at the rally. NBC News 4 Los Angeles reported that according to the latest projections from the Social Security Trustees, the trust fund used to pay retirement benefits is projected to be depleted around 2033 if no legislative action is taken to address the issue. If Congress doesn't act by 2033, the fund's reserves will become depleted and continuing program income will be sufficient to pay 79% of scheduled benefits. So, contrary to Democrat Senator Van Hollen’s hysterical claims, DOGE’s research has everything to do with government efficiency and keeping Social Security solvent. NBC News 4 Los Angeles further noted, during his campaign, President Donald Trump repeatedly promised that he would not touch Social Security benefits. He reiterated that promise last week, according to reports, while also alleging that illegal immigrants are committing benefit fraud.   "The president remains committed to his promise not to touch [Social Security]," while also doubling down on his promise to end taxation of benefits, a White House official said in an emailed statement to CNBC. "Any work from DOGE is to find fraud, which they've successfully done," the official wrote, according to NBC News 4 Los Angeles reporting. NBC News 4 Los Angeles added the usual “fact check” Leftwing media always give Trump. “without providing evidence of any fraud,” conveniently ignoring the 15 million Social Security recipients over the age of 110. After 20 Democrat state Attorneys General filed suit Leftist U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer issued a midnight temporarily restraining order (TRO) stopping DOGE team members from accessing Treasury Department systems and data. The Trump administration has filed a motion to vacate a restraining order prohibiting DOGE access to Treasury payment systems. What’s astonishing about the Democrats’ lawsuit and Lefty Judge Engelmayer’s TRO it wasn’t about the fraud, it was done through an ex parte order blocking Treasury officials from accessing their own department's data.  No warning. No chance to respond. No opportunity to present evidence. Which prompted us to wonder, what if the Democrats’ panic isn’t about the money going out through fraudulent payments to 200-year-old Social Security beneficiaries? Social Security numbers are used as identifiers for a whole host of government programs and activities, including registering to vote. What if the fraud Democrats are really worried about protecting isn’t the billions going out of the Treasury in monetary fraud, but the loss of access to 15 million potential votes that could be harvested to swing elections their way? The Capitol Switchboard is (202-224-3121), we urge CHQ readers and friends to call their Senators and Representative to demand they support DOGE’s efforts to root out Social Security fraud and get to the bottom of why Social Security payments are going to millions of recipients whose age is beyond the known human life span. PS – and while you have your legislators’ office on the phone, tell them you demand they impeach US District Judge Paul Engelmayer for his outrageous breach of the Constitution’s separation of powers in this case. 2024 Election government shutdown Democrats DOGE Department of Government Efficiency Social Security numbers Social security ages DOGE research Social Security Fraud Social Security Trustees Social Security Trust Fund Social Security solvency Illegal immigration taxation of social security benefits U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer

In an emergency appeal, Justice Department lawyers have asked the high court to lift a federal judge’s order temporarily blocking special counsel Hampton Dellinger from being fired. The case is Dellinger V. Bessent .   “Until now, as far as we are aware, no court in American history has wielded an injunction to force the president to retain an agency head,” wrote acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris.   An appeals court had earlier declined on procedural grounds to lift the order first imposed by DC US District Senior Judge Amy Berman Jackson, which will expire Feb. 26. The Justice Department's filing obtained by The Associated Press asks the conservative-majority court to lift a judge's court order temporarily reinstating Hampton Dellinger as the leader of the Office of Special Counsel.   Dellinger has argued that the law says he can only be dismissed for problems with the performance of his job, none of which were cited in the email dismissing him.   Dellinger in his suit pointed to layoffs of federal workers to claim that his work was “needed now more than ever.”   The special counsel, whose term expires in 2029, had filed a lawsuit against Trump and other administration officials for being dismissed “without proper cause” and via a Feb. 7 email from the White House.   “On behalf of President Donald J. Trump, I am writing to inform you that your position as Special Counsel of the US Office of Special Counsel is terminated, effective immediately. Thank you for your service,” wrote Sergio Gor, director of the White House presidential personnel office.   Biden nominated Dellinger — who worked as a partner at the same law firm as the ex-president’s troubled son Hunter — to lead the federal watchdog office in late 2023 after having served in the DOJ.   In February 2024, Democrats confirmed Dellinger to lead the special counsel’s office in a party-line vote.   The Supreme Court will be able to respond to the filing as early as Tuesday after returning from the Presidents’ Day holiday.   The Office of Special Counsel (OSC) is an allegedly “independent agency” tasked with investigating and prosecuting workplace misconduct in the executive branch and is not to be confused with special counsel Jack Smith’s office or other independent prosecutorial offices. The brief references some of the dozen or more cases where judges have slowed Trump's agenda, including by ordering the temporary lifting of a foreign aid funding freeze and blocking workers with Elon Musk's so-called Department of Government Efficiency team from accessing Treasury Department data for now.   The executive branch has argued since the Carter administration that the Office of Special Counsel is the kind of job where the president should have the power to hire and fire, and letting the order in Dellinger's case stand could "embolden" judges to issue additional blocks in the roughly 70 lawsuits the Trump administration is facing so far, the Justice Department argues. 2024 Election MAGA Agenda Pam Bondi Special Counsel Hampton Dellinger Dellinger V. Bessent Judge Amy Berman Jackson Office of Special Counsel Proper Cause Sergio Gor Hunter Biden Workplace Misconduct

Today's Secure Freedom Minute  with Frank Gaffney: U.S. government and business leaders have long promoted the glories of “globalization.” With its reliance on low-cost foreign producers, notably in Communist China, to supply critical materials, components, and equipment, the integration of markets and national interests seemed not only desirable economically but strategically sound. In fact, this model resulted in the wholesale destruction of America’s industrial base and a dangerous dependence on a hostile power for everything from medicine to advanced electronic products. An alarming webinar on Friday documented that even the U.S. military now is critically reliant on our enemy, the Chinese Communist Party.   The Wall Street Journal reports today that many businesses are finally moving en masse to production facilities outside of China. Unfortunately, so are the Chinese. We must actually decouple from the CCP, not simply transfer our fraught dependencies to its companies doing business in new locations. 2024 Election MAGA Agenda New Institute for the American Future Frank Gaffney Early Warning IAF Save America's Military Coalition Sovereignty Coalition Save the persecuted Christian's coalition Gitmo Panama Canal Jimmy Carter China Chinese arson Mike Waltz TikTok

Vice President J.D. Vance’s speech at the Munich Security Conference shocked European leaders and the DC establishment when he chastised European governments for their extreme censorship laws and violations of basic civil liberties. Vance’s call for European governments to stop terrorizing the free thoughts, speech, and even silent prayers of their citizens put insidiously authoritarian European governments on notice that America’s clear moral leadership on the world stage is back. The full text and video of Vice President Vance’s historic speech follows:   One of the things that I wanted to talk about today is, of course, our shared values. And, you know, it’s great to be back in Germany. As you heard earlier, I was here last year as United States senator. I saw Foreign Secretary David Lammy, and joked that both of us last year had different jobs than we have now. But now it’s time for all of our countries, for all of us who have been fortunate enough to be given political power by our respective peoples, to use it wisely to improve their lives. And I want to say that I was fortunate in my time here to spend some time outside the walls of this conference over the last 24 hours, and I’ve been so impressed by the hospitality of the people even, Of course, as they’re reeling from yesterday’s horrendous attack. And the first time I was ever in Munich was with my wife, actually, who’s here with me today, on a personal trip. And I’ve always loved the city of Munich, and I’ve always loved its people. I just want to say that we’re very moved, and our thoughts and prayers are with Munich and everybody affected by the evil inflicted on this beautiful community. We’re thinking about you, we’re praying for you, and we will certainly be rooting for you in the days and weeks to come. We gather at this conference, of course, to discuss security. And normally we mean threats to our external security. I see many, many great military leaders gathered here today. But while the Trump administration is very concerned with European security and believes that we can come to a reasonable settlement between Russia and Ukraine, and we also believe that it’s important in the coming years for Europe to step up in a big way to provide for its own defense, the threat that I worry the most about vis a vis Europe is not Russia, it’s not China, it’s not any other external actor. What I worry about is the threat from within. The retreat of Europe from some of its most fundamental values: values shared with the United States of America. I was struck that a former European commissioner went on television recently and sounded delighted that the Romanian government had just annulled an entire election. He warned that if things don’t go to plan, the very same thing could happen in Germany too. Now, these cavalier statements are shocking to American ears. For years we’ve been told that everything we fund and support is in the name of our shared democratic values. Everything from our Ukraine policy to digital censorship is billed as a defense of democracy. But when we see European courts cancelling elections and senior officials threatening to cancel others, we ought to ask whether we’re holding ourselves to an appropriately high standard. And I say ourselves, because I fundamentally believe that we are on the same team. We must do more than talk about democratic values. We must live them. Now, within living memory of many of you in this room, the cold war positioned defenders of democracy against much more tyrannical forces on this continent. And consider the side in that fight that censored dissidents, that closed churches, that cancelled elections. Were they the good guys? Certainly not. And thank God they lost the cold war. They lost because they neither valued nor respected all of the extraordinary blessings of liberty, the freedom to surprise, to make mistakes, invent, to build. As it turns out, you can’t mandate innovation or creativity, just as you can’t force people what to think, what to feel, or what to believe. And we believe those things are certainly connected. And unfortunately, when I look at Europe today, it’s sometimes not so clear what happened to some of the cold war’s winners. I look to Brussels, where EU Commission commissars warned citizens that they intend to shut down social media during times of civil unrest: the moment they spot what they’ve judged to be ‘hateful content’, or to this very country where police have carried out raids against citizens suspected of posting anti-feminist comments online as part of ‘combating misogyny’ on the internet. I look to Sweden, where two weeks ago, the government convicted a Christian activist for participating in Quran burnings that resulted in his friend’s murder. And as the judge in his case chillingly noted, Sweden’s laws to supposedly protect free expression do not, in fact, grant – and I’m quoting – a ‘free pass’ to do or say anything without risking offending the group that holds that belief. And perhaps most concerningly, I look to our very dear friends, the United Kingdom, where the backslide away from conscience rights has placed the basic liberties of religious Britons in particular in the crosshairs. A little over two years ago, the British government charged Adam Smith Conner, a 51-year-old physiotherapist and an Army veteran, with the heinous crime of standing 50 meters from an abortion clinic and silently praying for three minutes, not obstructing anyone, not interacting with anyone, just silently praying on his own. After British law enforcement spotted him and demanded to know what he was praying for, Adam replied simply, it was on behalf of the unborn son. He and his former girlfriend had aborted years before. Now the officers were not moved. Adam was found guilty of breaking the government’s new Buffer Zones Law, which criminalizes silent prayer and other actions that could influence a person’s decision within 200 meters of an abortion facility. He was sentenced to pay thousands of pounds in legal costs to the prosecution. Now, I wish I could say that this was a fluke, a one-off, crazy example of a badly written law being enacted against a single person. But no. This last October, just a few months ago, the Scottish government began distributing letters to citizens whose houses lay within so-called safe access zones, warning them that even private prayer within their own homes may amount to breaking the law. Naturally, the government urged readers to report any fellow citizens suspected guilty of thought crime in Britain and across Europe. Free speech, I fear, is in retreat and in the interests of comedy, my friends, but also in the interest of truth. I will admit that sometimes the loudest voices for censorship have come not from within Europe, but from within my own country, where the prior administration threatened and bullied social media companies to censor so-called misinformation. Misinformation, like, for example, the idea that coronavirus had likely leaped from leaked from a laboratory in China. Our own government encouraged private companies to silence people who dared to utter what turned out to be an obvious truth. So, I come here today not just with an with an observation, but with an offer. And just as the Biden administration seemed desperate to silence people for speaking their minds, so the Trump administration will do precisely the opposite, and I hope that we can work together on that. In Washington, there is a new sheriff in town. And under Donald Trump’s leadership, we may disagree with your views, but we will fight to defend your right to offer in the public square. Agree or disagree? Now, we’re at the point, of course, that the situation has gotten so bad that this December, Romania straight up cancelled the results of a presidential election based on the flimsy suspicions of an intelligence agency and enormous pressure from its continental neighbours. Now, as I understand it, the argument was that Russian disinformation had infected the Romanian elections. But I’d ask my European friends to have some perspective. You can believe it’s wrong for Russia to buy social media advertisements to influence your elections. We certainly do. You can condemn it on the world stage, even. But if your democracy can be destroyed with a few hundred thousand dollars of digital advertising from a foreign country, then it wasn’t very strong to begin with. Now, the good news is that I happen to think your democracies are substantially less brittle than many people apparently fear. And I really do believe that allowing our citizens to speak their mind will make them stronger still. Which, of course, brings us back to Munich, where the organisers of this very conference have banned lawmakers representing populist parties on both the left and the right from participating in these conversations. Now, again, we don’t have to agree with everything or anything that people say. But when political leaders represent an important constituency, it is incumbent upon us to at least participate in dialogue with them. Now, to many of us on the other side of the Atlantic, it looks more and more like old entrenched interests hiding behind ugly Soviet era words like misinformation and disinformation, who simply don’t like the idea that somebody with an alternative viewpoint might express a different opinion or, God forbid, vote a different way, or even worse, win an election. Now, this is a security conference, and I’m sure you all came here prepared to talk about how exactly you intend to increase defense spending over the next few years in line with some new target. And that’s great, because as President Trump has made abundantly clear, he believes that our European friends must play a bigger role in the future of this continent. We don’t think you hear this term ‘burden sharing’, but we think it’s an important part of being in a shared alliance together that the Europeans step up while America focuses on areas of the world that are in great danger. But let me also ask you, how will you even begin to think through the kinds of budgeting questions if we don’t know what it is that we are defending in the first place? I’ve heard a lot already in my conversations, and I’ve had many, many great conversations with many people gathered here in this room. I’ve heard a lot about what you need to defend yourselves from, and of course that’s important. But what has seemed a little bit less clear to me, and certainly I think to many of the citizens of Europe, is what exactly it is that you’re defending yourselves for. What is the positive vision that animates this shared security compact that we all believe is so important? I believe deeply that there is no security if you are afraid of the voices, the opinions and the conscience that guide your very own people. Europe faces many challenges. But the crisis this continent faces right now, the crisis I believe we all face together, is one of our own making. If you’re running in fear of your own voters, there is nothing America can do for you. Nor for that matter, is there anything that you can do for the American people who elected me and elected President Trump. You need democratic mandates to accomplish anything of value in the coming years. Have we learned nothing that thin mandates produce unstable results? But there is so much of value that can be accomplished with the kind of democratic mandate that I think will come from being more responsive to the voices of your citizens. If you’re going to enjoy competitive economies, if you’re going to enjoy affordable energy and secure supply chains, then you need mandates to govern because you have to make difficult choices to enjoy all of these things. And of course, we know that very well. In America, you cannot win a democratic mandate by censoring your opponents or putting them in jail. Whether that’s the leader of the opposition, a humble Christian praying in her own home, or a journalist trying to report the news. Nor can you win one by disregarding your basic electorate on questions like, who gets to be a part of our shared society. And of all the pressing challenges that the nations represented here face, I believe there is nothing more urgent than mass migration. Today, almost 1 in 5 people living in this country moved here from abroad. That is, of course, an all time high. It’s a similar number, by the way, in the United States, also an all time high. The number of immigrants who entered the EU from non-EU countries doubled between 2021 and 2022 alone. And of course, it’s gotten much higher since. And we know the situation. It didn’t materialize in a vacuum. It’s the result of a series of conscious decisions made by politicians all over the continent, and others across the world, over the span of a decade. We saw the horrors wrought by these decisions yesterday in this very city. And of course, I can’t bring it up again without thinking about the terrible victims who had a beautiful winter day in Munich ruined. Our thoughts and prayers are with them and will remain with them. But why did this happen in the first place? It’s a terrible story, but it’s one we’ve heard way too many times in Europe, and unfortunately too many times in the United States as well. An asylum seeker, often a young man in his mid-20s, already known to police, rammed a car into a crowd and shatters a community. Unity. How many times must we suffer these appalling setbacks before we change course and take our shared civilization in a new direction? No voter on this continent went to the ballot box to open the floodgates to millions of unvetted immigrants. But you know what they did vote for? In England, they voted for Brexit. And agree or disagree, they voted for it. And more and more all over Europe, they are voting for political leaders who promise to put an end to out-of-control migration. Now, I happen to agree with a lot of these concerns, but you don’t have to agree with me. I just think that people care about their homes. They care about their dreams. They care about their safety and their capacity to provide for themselves and their children. And they’re smart. I think this is one of the most important things I’ve learned in my brief time in politics. Contrary to what you might hear, a couple of mountains over in Davos, the citizens of all of our nations don’t generally think of themselves as educated animals or as interchangeable cogs of a global economy. And it’s hardly surprising that they don’t want to be shuffled about or relentlessly ignored by their leaders. And it is the business of democracy to adjudicate these big questions at the ballot box. I believe that dismissing people, dismissing their concerns or worse yet, shutting down media, shutting down elections or shutting people out of the political process. protects nothing. In fact, it is the most surefire way to destroy democracy. Speaking up and expressing opinions isn’t election interference. Even when people express views outside your own country, and even when those people are very influential – and trust me, I say this with all humor – if American democracy can survive ten years of Greta Thunberg’s scolding you guys can survive a few months of Elon Musk. But what no democracy, American, German or European will survive, is telling millions of voters that their thoughts and concerns, their aspirations, their pleas for relief, are invalid or unworthy of even being considered. Democracy rests on the sacred principle that the voice of the people matters. There is no room for firewalls. You either uphold the principle or you don’t. Europeans, the people have a voice. European leaders have a choice. And my strong belief is that we do not need to be afraid of the future. Embrace what your people tell you, even when it’s surprising, even when you don’t agree. And if you do so, you can face the future with certainty and with confidence, knowing that the nation stands behind each of you. And that, to me, is the great magic of democracy. It’s not in these stone buildings or beautiful hotels. It’s not even in the great institutions that we built together as a shared society. To believe in democracy is to understand that each of our citizens has wisdom and has a voice. And if we refuse to listen to that voice, even our most successful fights will secure very little. As Pope John Paul II, in my view, one of the most extraordinary champions of democracy on this continent or any other, once said, ‘do not be afraid’. We shouldn’t be afraid of our people even when they express views that disagree with their leadership. Thank you all. Good luck to all of you. God bless you. 2024 Election government shutdown Democrats DOGE Department of Government Efficiency U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer District Judge John McConnell Jr. funding freeze FACA Deep State Mass deportation tariffs U.S. trade trade partners trade agreements free trade labor and environmental practices foreign subsidies manufacturing goods

The deadline President Trump created for the release of all hostages seized by the terrorist organization Hamas is less than twenty-four hours away. He suspects they may have been starved, tortured and raped to death.   Mr. Trump left up to Israel the decision to let “all hell break loose” if Hamas doesn’t comply. Its government has agreed to do so. Predictably, the jihadists and their enablers will do everything possible to buy more time on humanitarian grounds. Actually, the humane thing is for Israel to be allowed finally to “finish the job.” The decisive defeat of Hamas and the recovery of the remaining hostages, dead or alive, will foreclose the idea of effectively permanently incarcerating all Gazans in a “demolition zone” and ensure their swift relocation to far better lives elsewhere.   Secure Israel’s victory – and ours, starting at high noon on Saturday. 2024 Election MAGA Agenda New Institute for the American Future Frank Gaffney Early Warning IAF Save America's Military Coalition Sovereignty Coalition Save the persecuted Christian's coalition Gitmo Panama Canal Jimmy Carter China Chinese arson Mike Waltz TikTok