Record Number of Americans Think the Country Is on the ‘Right Track’

/in , , , , , , , , , , , /by

For the first time ever, Rasmussen Reports released polling that revealed a positive increase in Americans who believe the country is on the “right track.” Roughly 47% feel this way — the highest it’s been in about two decades — leaving researchers at a loss for words. The question is this, “Washington Watch” guest host Jody Hice posed on Friday’s “Washington Watch,” “Is there a specific reason for the change?” If so, what could it be?

In September, 2024, only 28% of surveyed Americans felt the country was on the “right track.” Last year was also the first time since 2022 the number of pessimistic Americans fell below 70%. Even then, a solid 65% still believed America was on the “wrong track.” Concerning the most recent findings, Rasmussen’s chief pollster Mark Mitchell, who also joined Friday’s show, explained that a lot of what this data highlights is “an incredible environment out there for public opinion.”

“I never predicted anything like this would happen,” he said. As Mitchell went on to explain that the tide is turning in “this red team, blue team dichotomy,” politically speaking. “[R]ight now,” he explained, “it looks like … an existential crisis for D.C.,” especially for the “unelected powers that have been doing what they want. … [T]hey’ve lost the ability to control … and Americans are the happiest they’ve ever been.”

As for the “right” or “wrong track” discussion, Hice asked, “Is this purely political? Is it economic? What do we mean when we’re saying, ‘Is America on the right track?’” According to Mitchell, it’s simply an “additional measurement of happiness.” He pointed out that the question is intentionally straightforward, “and the reason it’s so powerful is just because everybody asks it” — most Americans care about the state of their country to some extent. “[W]e have so much history,” he added, “and the fact that [the positive results have] never been above 50% in all of our polling history is kind of sad, because you’d want, in a representative democracy, to try and maximize that number.”

With positive feelings at an all-time high, Mitchell continued to explain that Americans don’t seem to understand the scope of this change. Ultimately, “this could be a fundamental reformation of all kind of politics.” In fact, these eye-catching statistics come after President Donald Trump “received his highest approval rating ever, with 53% of respondents approving of his work to this point.” In addition to this, “70% of participants — regardless of whether they support Trump — agree that the president is doing what he promised to do.”

And as Mitchell pointed out, this also comes as many mainstream “news outlets … gaslit too much … pushed it too far and … completely lost their power.” President Trump, he stated, has “carte blanche in a way I don’t think any politician in my lifetime has.”

During the biblical worldview segment of Friday’s “Washington Watch,” Director of the Center for Biblical Worldview David Closson also weighed in on this topic. “[T]he way I look at it,” Closson said, “is I think this is … vindication or validation, so to speak, for the first month or so of the Trump presidency. … [T]he average American appreciates … seeing strong leadership in the Oval Office.” Even though “we’re still early in the first 100 days,” it seems clear that the findings coming out of Rasmussen likely reflect how a “lot of the policies and decisions that [the Trump administration is] making are resonating with the American people.”

If that’s true from a conservative point of view, Hice asked what it means from a biblical worldview. “[C]ertainly Christians’ understanding of the ‘right track’ would be different from someone else,” he stated. “[A]re we on the right track from a Christian or biblical worldview?”

“Well,” Closson responded, “that’s a deeper level question.” Ultimately, “as Christians, we don’t just say the nation is on the right track because of economic indicators or political power, or even cultural trends. … As Christians, we want the nation to be aligning with God’s moral order.”

Closson referred to Proverbs 14:34, which says that “righteousness exalts a nation.” As such, “for Christians … to kind of get excited that the nation is on the right track, we would want to see a nation where justice is being upheld. We would want to see a nation where life is protected, where religious liberty and the ability to live out our faith is protected, [and] where truth is promoted.” If America is to be “on track” biblically, Closson contended, then it’s going to be “where we see those things happening.”

He added, “[W]e want to see return to creation order.” But right now, “creation order is being inverted, [and] we’re seeing moral confusion … [and] moral compromise.” From a Christian worldview, those are “indications that a nation is on the wrong track.” However, Closson highlighted how when it comes to the Trump administration, it’s good to look “at the logic embedded in some of these executive orders.” For instance, Trump has signed orders “protecting life … [and] defining sex according to biology, according to creation order.” What’s most interesting about these developments, he suggested, is that “not only has there been a vibe shift” to conservativism, but that at the same time, “we are kind of getting back on track in a way that’s consistent with the moral order.”

As for whether America is on the right track biblically, Closson said the best thing to do is to pray. “I would just encourage … us to be praying for kings and for officials in high places, that we may lead a godly and dignified life in every way,” he said. “There’s a lot going on. … [And] President Trump and the folks that are around him here in D.C. and state legislatures … are getting very busy … introducing legislation.” As Christians, “[we should] be praying for all of our leaders to make decisions that honor God, promote human flourishing.

“[T]his is a great time to be praying,” he concluded, “because there’s so much to be praying about.”

AUTHOR

Sarah Holliday

Sarah Holliday is a reporter at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

PERKINS: What Does God Have to Do with Government?

‘You’re Fired!’ Trump Admin. Dismisses Thousands from Federal Workforce

Conservative Women 3x Happier than Liberals Thanks to Church Attendance, Marriage: Study

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Why are European globalist elites hyperventilating about Trump’s efforts to end the war in Ukraine?

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

INTRO: NATO’s super-expensive proxy war against Russia has finally run its course, ending in complete and utter failure. Instead of being weakened, Russia is stronger now than when the war started three years ago. This disastrous outcome exposes the insanity of European elites and may result in the obliteration of post-World War II norms in which the U.S. pays for, and if necessary fights, Europe’s wars.

European globalist elites are screeching like crazed hyenas over being left out of President Trump’s peace talks seeking an end to the bloody Russia-Ukraine border war.

They are so distraught over the prospect that this 3-year-old extremely costly war could be winding down, without their permission, that they’ve called an “emergency meeting” in Paris this week to discuss how they can keep the war going in the absence of further U.S. participation in the killing.

Despite all of the financial and military assistance from the West, Ukraine has not been able to defeat Russia. And let’s be frank, it never will. This is not just my opinion but the opinion of the few honest military men who still exist on the European continent who haven’t drunk from the vile, blood-stained cup of perpetual war-making.

Take, for example, the former chairman of the NATO military committee, Harald Kujat.

The retired German Air Force general surmised that after three years of conflict, the Ukrainian army lies in ruins, despite the billions invested in it, the weapons supplied, the training of personnel and the unprecedented assistance from the West. The U.S. alone has invested some $200 billion in the failed effort to deal Russia a black eye via the Ukrainian proxy.

General Kujat emphasized that Zelensky failed to take advantage of the opportunity that presented itself, and he will not have another chance. But really, it was the U.S. and Europe who failed in the war, not Ukraine, which was never Russia’s equal on the battlefield and never will be.

The German general believes the continuation of military action with the aim of “finishing off Russia” as proposed by some delusional Western politicians who still clamor for Russia’s defeat, will only lead to an even greater humiliation for Ukraine.

Kujat was quoted by European media as saying:

“It is time for our politicians and media to take note of the bitter truth that for three years, despite enormous financial and material support from the U.S. and European allies, as well as training and modern weapons systems, Ukraine has not been able to achieve military success. And that such a possibility, if it ever existed, no longer exists.”

The Russian online journal, Military Review, stated:

“For our part, we note that there is a group of countries in Europe that want Russia to be defeated. It is headed, as you might guess, by Great Britain and France. There is also a bunch of countries yapping along, but of a lower status. The most important question now is whether they will dare to go against the USA.”

That, of course, was a reference to the new American administration of Donald J. Trump, who campaigned on a promise to end the war in Ukraine and seems to have stepped up his efforts in recent days to do exactly that.

But now the war-mongering Europeans are barking about wanting a seat at the table to negotiate the terms of peace between Russia and Ukraine. Trump seems to sense that allowing the Europeans in on these peace talks would enable them to throw down deal-breakers at every opportunity, for London and Paris really don’t want peace with Russia. They want an extension of the war for as long as it takes to ramp up their own forces to invade what they hope will be a weakened Russia.

Why should they get any say in the peace process when they have expressed zero interest in peace until now, when Trump comes into the picture demanding it?

London, Paris, and to a lesser extent Berlin, want a say in how the terms of peace will be drawn between Russia and Ukraine. These countries want equal footing with the U.S. but they want the U.S. to foot the majority of their defense bills.

In short, they want to use U.S. military power for their own geo-political advantage while shouldering only a fraction of the financial burden.

With the ascension of the Trump administration, that day is over. Even Ukrainian President Zelensky is prodding the Europeans to step up and put their money where their mouth is.

Addressing the Munich conference, Zelensky called for the creation of a new “Army of Europe” amid rising concern that Washington may no longer be willing to play the fool.

Zelensky stated: “We can’t rule out the possibility that America might say no to Europe on issues that threaten it.”

The Ukraine leader said per the AP that “three years of full-scale war have proven that we already have the foundation for a united European military force. And now, as we fight this war and lay the groundwork for peace and security, we must build the armed forces of Europe.”

Good luck. I say go for it.

Zelensky claimed that such an army would not represent “replacing” the NATO alliance but it’s rather “about making Europe’s contribution to our partnership equal to America’s.”

He added that:

“A few days ago, President Trump told me about his conversation with Putin. Not once did he mention that America needs Europe at the table. That says a lot. The old days are over when America supported Europe just because it always had.”

Of course, we all knew this day would come, when Europe seeks to raise its own continent-wide army. French President Emmanuel Macron has called for that for years. Maybe the time is finally ripe for such a move. Why should the U.S. shoulder the burden for Europe’s defense?

And here’s the bigger question: What if Europe isn’t looking for “defense,” but rather something more akin to an aggressive “offense?”

Europe is filled with wealthy countries. They need to man up. And when they do start to foot their own defense bill, their taxpayers will likely realize that their politicians have been lying to them. Russia is not interested in taking them over. Russia just wants to be respected as the sovereign nation and global superpower that it is and will no longer be bullied by the West, dictated to in terms of where and how much of its own natural resources it can sell on the global market and at what price.

Russia wants open markets for its oil and gas and other resources. It does not want the responsibility of governing European countries.

Throughout its history, whenever Russia experimented with imperialism, it did not turn out well for them. Putin understands this. Besides, he has been in office for 24 years and has not once tried to storm his troops into any NATO country. The entire basis for the Western European case against Putin lies in his intolerance of Ukraine joining the NATO alliance.

Having a militarized Ukraine on Russia’s border has always been unacceptable in Moscow’s eyes, and the West knows it. Characterizing him as a military threat to Poland, the Baltics, and Western Europe seems irrational at best, fear-mongering propaganda at worst.

And if Europe is so intent on stirring up fear among its people of the Russian bear, you have to wonder if maybe it’s Europe that would like to make war against the bear, rather than the other way around.

Perhaps that’s what this European Army is really all about. Not defense, but offense.

Whatever the purpose, the cost of building up a capable European army would bring an end to many of the social programs, early retirements and cushy work schedules so many Europeans have grown accustomed to, and see it as part of their birthright.

If President Trump plays his cards right, he’ll call the Europeans’ bluff and let’s see where they take this idea of a European Army.

©2025 . All righs reserved.

Please visit LeoHohmann.com: Investigative reporting on globalism, Christianity, Islam, Judaism and where politics, culture and religion intersect.

Democrats and USAID Spending: Is USAID ‘Pushing Ideologies’ and Are ‘Democrats’ Finished?

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Russ Vought, former Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), has recently made bold claims regarding the role of government institutions in shaping political agendas. Vought’s statements have sparked debate over several pressing political issues, particularly government waste and ideological influence. He has argued that Elon Musk’s actions challenge the political establishment, referring to a group he terms “Democrats,” and that USAID is wasting taxpayer dollars on ideological programs. This article aims to unpack these claims, critically examining their potential implications for politics and governance.

The term “Democrats” seems to be a blend of “OMB” (Office of Management and Budget) and “Democrats,” likely designed to create a negative connotation. By coining this term, Vought implies that the Democratic Party’s influence on the OMB results in inefficient and partisan decision-making. The OMB plays a crucial role in overseeing federal spending, and its influence over budget decisions often leads to partisan debates. In the current political climate, government spending has become a focal point, with sharp divisions between those who advocate for expansive government programs and those who seek to reduce waste and increase accountability. Vought’s use of “Democrats” reflects his stance against what he views as unchecked spending, particularly from a Democratic-led OMB.

Elon Musk, a tech mogul and influential figure, has become a lightning rod for political discourse. Vought’s claim that Musk’s actions challenge the “Democrats” alludes to Musk’s outspoken critiques of government waste and inefficiency. His tweets and public statements often draw attention to what he perceives as the misallocation of public funds, particularly in the space and technology sectors. This scrutiny could put government officials in a difficult position as defending controversial spending becomes increasingly “indefensible” in the public eye. The term “indefensible” here refers to the growing difficulty of justifying expenditures perceived as wasteful or lacking clear benefit to the public. Political opponents often use this term to erode trust in government institutions, amplifying criticisms of wasteful spending.

The reference to “DOGE” in Vought’s claims could be interpreted as a nod to the cryptocurrency Dogecoin, which Musk has endorsed. Musk’s relationship with Dogecoin and his criticisms of financial waste tie into broader discussions of government inefficiency. As a symbol of countercultural anti-establishment sentiment, DOGE reflects Musk’s broader critique of bureaucratic systems. If Vought’s reference is indeed to the cryptocurrency, it highlights a belief in more transparent and market-driven solutions to inefficiency. Government waste, a term often used to describe mismanagement or unnecessary spending, has been a perennial issue in U.S. politics. Examples such as excessive defense contracts or bureaucratic redundancies are commonly cited as evidence of waste. Reducing waste, however, is a complicated challenge, as it requires both efficiency in government programs and transparency in spending—areas where many critics feel current policies fall short.

USAID (United States Agency for International Development) distributes foreign aid to promote development and address global challenges. Vought’s claim that USAID is “pushing ideologies” refers to the perception that some programs prioritize specific political or social values over practical aid. For instance, USAID’s involvement in promoting human rights, democracy, and gender equality could be viewed by some as ideological or partisan, particularly in countries where such values are not universally accepted. Foreign aid has long been a tool for the U.S. to promote its political ideals. Still, Vought’s criticism suggests that taxpayer money should be used solely for humanitarian purposes without imposing a political agenda. This raises the broader question of whether U.S. aid should be neutral or justified in promoting specific values abroad.

The claims made by Russ Vought, particularly regarding government waste, ideological influence in foreign aid, and the challenge to the political establishment by figures like Elon Musk, have significant political consequences. These accusations tap into broader concerns over government accountability, fiscal responsibility, and partisan influence in public institutions. By framing the OMB and USAID as wasteful and ideological, Vought seeks to rally opposition to the current political order, particularly among conservative and fiscally conservative voters. The challenge for the “Democrats” is to respond to these criticisms while demonstrating the value and integrity of their policies.

In conclusion, these claims reflect a growing political divide over government spending and accountability. The ongoing debate about the role of government institutions in shaping policy will likely evolve as both political figures and the public demand greater transparency and efficiency. As the political discourse surrounding these issues deepens, the stakes for both parties remain high, with significant implications for the future of U.S. governance.

©2025 All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: What is USAID? How it works and what could happen if Trump and Musk shut it down

Autopsy of Democrat Party Suicide

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Victor Davis Hanson is a national treasure. Here’s his autopsy on the Democrat party’s suicide.

How To Commit Democratic Party Suicide

By: Victor Davis Hanson, February 10, 2025:

American Greatness

The Democratic Party is polling about 31 percent approval, a near-historic low.

Despite enjoying a huge lead in fundraising, legacy media favoritism, and incumbency, in the 2024 election, Democrats lost the White House to Donald Trump. Ever since, they have offered nothing new, no novel agenda, no innovative policies—nothing other than screaming that they are loudly against everything and anything that the president is for.

In the past, what did they accomplish by following their prior two impeachments with attempts to de-ballot Trump? Who thought sending an FBI swat team to raid Trump’s home or waging five lawfare civil and criminal suits and issuing 91 felony indictments against him would win over the public?

Was conducting a media barrage of Hitler-Trump invectives, or lowering the bar of demonization that likely led to two assassination attempts of Trump a good way to win an election?

Apparently not, given the Democrats have now lost the presidency, the House, and the Senate. The Supreme Court is conservative. They have no power to subpoena anyone; they cannot block any nomination. Much of their old administrative state control is eroding. All the main issues—the economy, energy, border security, illegal immigration, crime, DEI/woke, and foreign policy—poll against the Democrats. The more they shouted that biological men must be able to compete as transgendered females in women’s sports, the more that 80% of the public disagreed, women were turned off, and the absurd idea was exploded by Trump.

The power of the administrative state, the legacy network news, print media, and Silicon Valley’s social media and search engines, the billions that poured into the Biden and Harris campaign all went for naught.

The efforts of moderators to warp debates, of network news to edit out unfavorable Harris or Biden comments, of leftists to cancel, deplatform, ostracize, censor, and shadow ban their enemies have failed. More likely to succeed now are numerous lawsuits against leftwing media for chronic defamation and censorship.

Given that collective meltdown, what would a sane Democratic Party do?

If they were stable, then they might renounce political suicide and perhaps return to something akin to the Clinton efforts of 1992 and 1996. Then the once self-destructive Democrats finally gave up on disastrous out-of-touch McGovernism, Carterism, an Dukakism. Instead, they began to embrace legal-only immigration, secure borders, balanced budgets, support for law enforcement, and meritocracy.

The result?

After twelve years in the wilderness (1980-1992), the Democrats regained power for the next 16 of 24 years—only in the second term of Barack Obama to go full radical Jacobin and soon lose it.

The current self-destructive obsessions with DEI/woke racialism, bi-coastal talk-down elitism, boutique transgenderism, and nonstop America Lastism all came to fruition during the Biden years. A shameless conspiracy to use an enfeebled John Biden as a prop to masque an otherwise unpalatable radical, neo-socialist agenda ensured the MAGA counterrevolution.

But instead of postmortem autopsy and introspection, since Election Day, the Democrats have doubled down on their veritable collective self-destruction.

On immigration, after wiping out the border and allowing in 12 million illegal aliens, including more than 500,000 suspected felons, they seem deliberately to be alienating public opinion even further.

So, thousands of leftists swarm and block the freeways of Los Angeles to protest the deportations of criminals. And how exactly?

By enraging middle-class commuters, while burning the flag of the country that they demand must allow them to stay, while chauvinistically waving the flag of the country to which under no circumstances they wish to return?

New Jersey Democratic governor Patrick Murphy idiotically virtue-signaled that he would defy the law, as he bragged that he was harboring an illegal alien living above his garage.

Then, when apprised that such performance-art showboating was a felony, in theory entailing a long prison sentence, the now buffoonish governor changed his narrative that the occupant of his garage was not really illegally living above his garage.

Democratic governors and mayors vie, bragging that they will be foremost in breaking the law by impeding the efforts of the federal immigration services to find and deport illegal aliens—for now, half a million criminals. Other activists are tipping off criminal illegal-alien gang leaders to avoid US government efforts to apprehend such dangerous criminals.

Is that the way to win back the working classes? By ensuring that the felons of M-13, Norteños, Sureños, and Tren de Aragua can flee and put in danger fellow American police officers?

Elon Musk has been appointed by Donald Trump to create a new government agency, DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency), to find waste, fraud, and abuse in the government spending of taxpayers money.

He and his young team of tech standouts have exposed shocking waste and fraud, but mostly insanity, in the USAID’s $50 billion of foreign aid grants.

Why are Americans paying for overseas drag shows or gay and trans advocacy in culturally imperialist fashion in traditional and conservative societies abroad? Why are we paying eight percent of the budget of the hardcore left-wing BBC? Is that a way back to the White House?

Do Politico, the New York Times, or the Wuhan gain-in-function virology lab and birthplace of COVID-19 really need millions of dollars of taxpayer dollars?

Do Democrats really think the middle class will hate Elon Musk for exposing that their government may well have handed the communist Chinese the necessary cash to birth a manufactured killer virus that took one million American lives?

Is that a winning strategy—to scream in Congress that Musk is a Nazi, a dictator for showing that Biden’s USAID under leftist Samantha Power was a clearing house to enrich and empower well-off leftist organizations that only weakened their own country abroad?

Do we really wish to spend $20 million to bequeath a woke Sesame Street to Middle East television?

Is it smart to gin up hatred of Elon Musk, who revolutionized space travel, the auto industry, and social media?

Is the Democrats’ message something like “We hate Elon Musk and will stop his free internet service to Americans ruined by fires and hurricanes and abandoned by their government?”

Or do Democrats despise Musk for providing free internet to Ukrainians battling for their lives against Russians?

Or is the key strategy to loathe Musk for crafting a risky rescue mission to save the lives of American astronauts virtually abandoned by the incompetent Biden government space program?

For Democratic officials to scream that Musk has no right to ferret out fraud is historically ignorant. He was selected by the president with the same powers that such appointees enjoy that are by statute not required to be approved by the Senate. The DOGE head is as legitimate as the National Security Advisor, who likewise needs no confirmation but also serves at the wishes of an elected president and likewise can do nothing without his approval.

Is Musk’s position in the Trump administration new?

Hardly.

Musk certainly has more legitimate legal authority via his DOGE position than that of FDR’s in-house informal advisors—such as Harry Hopkins—who from within the White House directed much of World War II foreign policy with the Soviets.

Financier Bernard Baruch held no major position for years under Woodrow Wilson and FDR and yet rebooted America’s wartime economy in two wars.

DOGE head Musk is more akin to FDR’s appointed war production board—similar to the likes of the unelected and unconfirmed Henery Ford, Henery Kaiser, and William Knudson, with the caveat that the latter three exercised far more power than does Musk.

During the confirmation hearings on Trump’s cabinet and agency nominations, Democratic senators did not question nominees like Pete Hegseth, Pam Bondi, and Kash Patel so much as scream, interrupt, and insult them on live television.

Rather than ask the nominees questions about their policies and agendas, almost all the interrogatives were ad hominem.

All this came from a party that oversaw the greatest weaponization of our government in modern history while leaving us with two theater wars abroad, a scary and dangerous DEI/woke destruction of meritocracy, hyperinflation, $7 trillion more in debt, 12 million illegal aliens, the erasure of the border, and a vast shortfall in military recruitment.

During the recent Democrat Party convention elections, the voting turned into a virtual DEI tutorial on why the public is repulsed by Democrats.

The Party’s carnival-like elections were overseen by race/gender/orientation censors. In incomprehensible, jargon-filled lectures, they droned on about the correct quotas—trans, non-binary, female, black, Hispanic, Native American—that would override simple democratic voting.

When one looks for sanity among the Democrat Senate and House leaders, there is only madness to be found. Sen. Corey “Spartacus” Booker is back again, now screaming and playacting as if he were Winston Churchill willing to fight Trump-Hitler on the beaches, hills, fields, etc.

Rep. Al Green was wheeled out on spec to bellow and bluster that he was introducing articles of impeachment—is it for the fourth, fifth, or sixth time against Trump?

House Minority Leader Hakim Jefferies boasts he will fight Trump “in the streets”—alongside whom? The despised Antifa? The utterly corrupt and discredited BLM?

I doubt Rep. Jefferies himself will replay the 2020 summer of destruction. More likely he will parrot Kamala Harris’s 2020 bragging of the then ongoing four months of violent protests: “They’re not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they’re not gonna stop after Election Day, and they should not.”

Maxine Waters is back, trying to trump her earlier threats to birddog and harass Trump supporters in her usual racialist fashion.

AOC—the supposed future of the Jacobins—drones that Musk is “one of the most unintelligent billionaires” she has met. This putdown comes from the nincompoop who claimed Trump’s low unemployment rate was due only to people holding two jobs.

Does AOC think catching a rocket with a mechanical arm is proof of dumbness, and the rants of Mazie Hirono and Elizabeth Warren display wisdom?

What the Democrats don’t realize is that they staged a French-style cultural, political, and economic revolution and tried to destroy their enemies by weaponizing government and the media—and they have now lost.

This current counter-revolution is a return to centrist normalcy and just beginning. It is deemed wild only by feral Democrats, whose high crimes and misdemeanors, and various conspiracy theories over the years of their madcap rule are now being revealed every day.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

Social Security Paying Benefits to a Mind Blowing 8,952,476 People Aged 110 to 369 Years Old

CBS 60 Minutes Promotes End to Free Speech, Blames Holocaust on Free Speech

DEEP STATE PANIC: D.C. Internet Web Searches Erupt in “BleachBit,” “Wipe Hard Drive,” “Offshore Bank,” “Criminal Defense Lawyer” “RICO Laws”

DHS Secretary Kristi Noem Fires over 400 Employees at the Department of Homeland Security

VICTORY LAP: Trump Attends Daytona 500, Says the Spirit of NASCAR Will ‘Fuel America’s Golden Age’

RELATED VIDEOS:

Palantir CEO on DOGE: Critics of Elon Are Fighting Progress—And It Will Destroy Them

Democrat Leader in the Arizona Senate admits that they want to use noncitizens to cheat in elections

Secretary of Homeland Securtiy Kristi Noem’s warning to criminal illegal aliens

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Gaza Needs to be Rebuilt, and So Do the Minds of Gazans

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Elliott Abrams notes that it is Donald Trump who wants to provide a better life for the people now in Gaza, by arranging for their removal while the Strip itself is cleared of rubble. Whether they then return, or remain in the Arab states where he hopes they can be resettled, they will be much better off than if they are forced, by their Arab brothers, to remain in Gaza, obstacles to its reconstruction. But along with physical reconstruction in Gaza, the people now in Gaza require mental reconstruction, after two decades of enduring the murderous despotism of Hamas. More of Abrams’ discussion of the need for this other “reconstruction” can be found here: “‘Gaza Shall Be Forsaken,’” by Elliott Abrams, Commentary, March 2025:

…Trump’s plan tacitly understands another reason Gaza has never developed into the Singapore that Shimon Peres dreamed of, and that is the condition of the society that has developed in Gaza in the past two decades of Hamas control. Economic and political development require both sound government and a culture in which the polity can advance. One look at Haiti is a reminder of that obvious point. Trump’s plan accepts that development will not happen in the current Gaza situation, where society is permeated by corruption, brutality, hatred, and terror….

Perhaps 10 years of living without Hamas in a variety of countries would transform Gazans, too. Some would stay in the places to which they moved, while others would want to go “back” to the new Gaza—but this time not as UN-certified permanent “refugees” from the naqba of 1948. This time, as people with options for a decent life who chose to live in Gaza because it offered economic opportunity and peace.

It’s fanciful, and very, very unlikely. But it’s a better, truer, understanding of what led to Gaza’s current situation and what could possibly lead out of it than decades of “peace processing” and UN resolutions, which in the end have produced terrorism, war, and misery.

Trump is treating Gaza as a physical place and its people as suffering humans, which is more than has ever been done by any Arab League resolution condemning Israel and calling it a war crime to allow Gazans to move away. “We will not allow the rights of our people… to be infringed on,” declared Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, who has not permitted an election in 19 years. Trump’s scheme would “undermine the core of the Palestinian national project,” said Algeria, which is true if the core of that project is endless violence aimed at destroying Israel. An Arab League statement said Trump’s proposal would “threaten the region’s stability” which is also true if, by stability, is meant the 77 years of refusal to accept Israel in peace as a Jewish state.

Gaza is, as Trump called it, a “hellhole,” and history suggests it will remain so. Not because of anything the Israelis did. They left it in 2005 with an open possibility for a better future. Not because of Donald Trump, who in his first weeks in office offered a different future and asked Arab governments to think for once about Gazans as people rather than cannon fodder in the struggle against Israel. But it is apparently still easier to dream on about the “two-state solution” and the “right of return,” and far easier to scream about Israeli crimes and Palestinian victims, than to let the Jews live in peace. Until that changes, “Gaza shall be forsaken.”

It’s not enough to improve the physical conditions of the Gazans by removing the rubble and rebuilding the Strip. That will require their leaving what will become an enormous “construction site,” and to move to other Arab states while the reconstruction takes place. Then they should be given the freedom to choose whether to remain where they are, or to return to Gaza. But they must also be allowed to improve their mental condition, free from Hamas’ rule, whether in Gaza, should they return, or even in the places in Arab countries where they had been allowed to settle and choose to remain. The hold of the terror group on the Gazans has to be broken.

Without that change in their mental makeup, the Gazans will use their energies not to further their own wellbeing, but to return to making war on the Jewish state — that is, remaining in a condition of endless “terrorism, war, and misery.” It is Trump who has shown a real interest in improving the lot of the Gazans; those who oppose his plans are revealing their indifference to the rubble-strewn conditions in which the Gazans now live, and their desire to keep using the Gazans as cannon fodder in the endless, wasteful, and doomed-to-fail campaign to destroy Israel and to replace it “from the river to the sea” with “Palestine.”

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

France, Arabs to Counter Trump Gaza Plan With Proposal to Keep Making Same Mistake Again

The Mother of Freed Hostage Liri Albag on What Her Daughter Endured

World’s First Gay Imam Shot After Lesbian Wedding

ISIS Member in Syria Wants to be Repatriated to a French Prison

UK: Hundreds charged with online ‘speech crimes’ under Online Safety Act, including for spreading ‘fake news’

Israeli brigadier general warns: released jihadi prisoners will wage jihad and build militias in Judea and Samaria

Germany: Munich jihadi screamed ‘Allahu akbar’ when arrested, repeated Islamic profession of faith

RELATED VIDEO: Israeli Arab Yoseph Haddad Makes Entire Austrian Parliament Speechless

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

USAID funded Boko Haram Slaughter of Christians in Nigeria

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Last week we reported how USAID, a federal agency operating under the auspices of the U.S. State Department, funded Islamic terrorism that killed more than 1,000 U.S. soldiers.

We have an update now that suggests Washington’s funding of Islamic terror groups was much more widespread than originally thought.

And the targets included more than just U.S. soldiers.

Adamu Garba, a chieftain and politician of Nigeria’s All Progressives Congress, has affirmed the allegations that the United States Agency for International Development, USAID, was funding Boko Haram, ISIS and other Islamic terrorists organizations known for murdering Christians.

Boko Haram is known for infiltrating the Muslim nomadic Fulani herdsman, who have conducted a reign of terror against Christians for years in Northeastern Nigeria, burning down the Christians’ homes, killing their men, and often kidnapping and raping their daughters.

A 2018 report by Voice of the Martyrs states:

“In June, the New York Times reported that more than 300,000 people have been displaced as a result for the Fulani militant attacks. Over 500 people have been killed by the militants in 2018 alone. The Fulani often attack in the middle of the night with no warning. The militants tend to surround villages, trap the locals inside their houses, and burn the homes. Their victims have no time to prepare or run.”

Now we have a Nigerian political figure, Adam Garba, coming out and saying that most of the money for these Islamic militants originates from USAID.

Garba says funds from USAID were used to purchase weapons for Boko Haram, the Islamic State’s West Africa Province (ISWAP), and other terrorist groups.

In a video he posted on his X page under the title “TERRORISM AS A FOREIGN POLICY TOOL: Terrorism and USAID Funding,” Garba questioned how USAID spent $824 million last year in Nigeria and yet nobody among the announced recipients saw any benefits of that funding.

Apparently, Garba was triggered to come forth with his statements after hearing about Pennsylvania Republican Congressman Scott Perry’s comments last Wednesday that USAID was funding foreign terrorist groups.

During a February 12 DOGE subcommittee hearing titled: “The War on Waste: Stamping Out the Scourge of Improper Payments and Fraud,” Congressman Perry alleged that $697 million in foreign aid was being steered through USAID to Boko Haram, ISIS, and al-Qaeda.

For example, Perry said there is no record of USAID using $136 million to build 120 schools in Pakistan, as Congress intended the money to be used.

Garba said: “I mentioned this before that Boko Haram, ISWAP, and most of these terrorists, the weapons they get are actually funded by some clandestine foreign operators, they are the ones supplying them weapons.”

He added that:

“The exposé about USAID has confirmed that Boko Haram and all these terrorists are getting their weapons through the funding from USAID. Just last year, USAID spent $824 million in Nigeria, where did the money go to?”

The Nigerian government said the money was spent on child care mortality and education, but little if any of it apparently went for those priorities.

Garba stated:

“When did the money come in, where did it go to? These monies go to the funding of Boko Haram and kidnappers that are used to kill and destroy our land, that is the operation. A US Congressman has confirmed this statement, the Congressman made a speech by saying that Boko Haram, bandits, and terrorists operating in the Sahel are mostly funded by USAID.”

Because of President Trump, Garba said terrorism could be defeated in Nigeria and if this happens Africa could be in a position to thrive. He said Trump is exposing the entire global corruption network, and this is just the tip of the iceberg.

Garba explained:

“More is going to be released among the African elites, most of them in collaboration with criminals to destroy our land, are soon going to be exposed and we will reclaim our country and continent for the betterment of our people and future.”

He cited Daljir Media in Somalia as stating:

“With Donald Trump at the helm of the US government, is the terrorism era in Africa about to come to an abrupt end? Or will the British intelligence continue to dominate the US intelligence and foreign policy to the detriment of the US.”

That’s a legitimate question. Has the United States ever fully decoupled itself, at the highest elite levels of banking/finance and with the Five Eyes intelligence operations, from the British Crown? Or, are they still joined as one in an Anglo-American death cult that seeks to export the culture rot of abortion, LGBTQ trans filth, perpetual war and other depopulation schemes? All while at the same time funding Islamic terror to kill Christians and any others who refuse to go along with their planned one-world beast system.

©2025 . All rights reserved.

Please visit LeoHohmann.com: Investigative reporting on globalism, Christianity, Islam, Judaism and where politics, culture and religion intersect.

The Troika That’s Dismantling The Big Government Democrat’s Frauds, Waste and Abuses

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

On this President’s Day we the people are seeing three men who are dedicated to Makeing America Heathy Again, Making America Great Again and Making Government Efficient Again.

This troika of men and our new Excutive Branch are working day and night to stop the big government swamp. The big government swamp lives on fraud, waste and abuse of we the people’s money.

Today we are seeing Demcrats fighting in Congress, in the courts and on the streets to stop the big government swamp from being drained of their swamp creatures.

American’s must go to the Department of Government Efficiency’s (DOGE) presence on X daily to understand what they are doing and how Democrats are working to spread lies to try to stop them.

Here are just a few examples on what is on DOGE:

First, here is misinformation told by Democrat Senator Tim Kaine on Fox News on February 16, 2024:

Democrat Senator Tim Kaine lying on Fox News

The Lie:

Kaine: “Yesterday the DOGE guys post classified information on their website, and they had to realize, ‘Oh, we didn’t realize that agency was a classified agency.’ You shouldn’t let people rampage through offices that have classified information.”

The Truth:

This is inaccurate. The referenced “classified information” is actually public FedScope data, posted publicly by OPM (Office of Personnel Management) in March 2024.

Click here to view an infographic on the Social Security database on people receiving Social Securty benifits.

It shows:

3,936,311 people aged 130-139 years old receiving Social Security benefits
3,542,044 people aged 140-149 years old receiving Social Security benefits
1,345,083 people aged 150-159 years old receiving Social Security benefits
121,807 people aged 160-169 years old receiving Social Security benefits
6,087 people aged 170-179 years old receiving Social Security benefits
695 people aged 180-189 years old receiving Social Security benefits
448 people aged 190-199 years old receiving Social Security benefits
879 people aged 200-209 years old receiving Social Security benefits
866 people aged 210-219 years old receiving Social Security benefits
1,039 people aged 220-229 years old receiving Social Security benefits
1 person aged 240-249 years old receiving Social Security benefits
1 person aged 360-369 years old receiving Social Security benefits

TOTAL: 8,955,261

These are the numbers of people in each age bucket with the death field set to FALSE! 

DOGE found that the:

  • Treasury processed 116 million paper checks in FY2024.
  • In FY2023, $25 billion in tax refunds were delayed or lost due to returned or expired checks.
  • Treasury maintains a physical lockbox network to collect checks for tax (IRS), passport (State Department), etc. It costs approximately $2.40 per check to maintain this lockbox network.
  • Deleting paper checks would save at least $750 million per year.

DOGE found that U.S. taxpayer dollars were going to be spent on the following items, all which have been cancelled:

  •  $10M for “Mozambique voluntary medical male circumcision”
  • $9.7M for UC Berkeley to develop “a cohort of Cambodian youth with enterprise driven skills”
  • $2.3M for “strengthening independent voices in Cambodia”
  • $32M to the Prague Civil Society Centre
  • $40M for “gender equality and women empowerment hub”
  • $14M for “improving public procurement” in Serbia
  • $486M to the “Consortium for Elections and Political Process Strengthening,” including $22M for “inclusive and participatory political process” in Moldova and $21M for voter turnout in India
  • $29M to “strenghening political landscape in Bangladesh”
  • $20M for “fiscal federalism” in Nepal
  • $19M for “biodiversity conversation” in Nepal
  • $1.5M for “voter confidence” in Liberia
  • $14M for “social cohesion” in Mali
  • $2.5M for “inclusive democracies in Southern Africa”
  • $47M for “improving learning outcomes in Asia”
  • $2M to develop “sustainable recycling models” to “increase socio-economic cohesion among marginalized communities of Kosovo Roma, Ashkali, and Egypt”

Get the picture? And this is just the tip of the iceberg.

This week will witness the Kash Patel vote on the Senate floor to become the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigations.

We know that of the 14,000 FBI agents that 5,000 of them were assigned to target those Americans who were holding a peaceful protest at the U.S. Capital on January 6, 2020.

This is what we the people voted for. Stop the big government waste, fraud and abuses and restore our Constitutional Republic.

The new Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. has promised to Make America Healthy Again.

President Trump has promised to Make America Great Again.

And Elon Musk’s DOGE is Making Government Efficient Again.

A brilliant troika indeed.

Gird your loins, there’s much, much more to come.

©2025 All rights reserved.

How USAID Laundered Money to the Taliban

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

UN pooled accounts. Pallets of cash. And a covert cash printing operation.

Freedom Center Investigates has a new article on how USAID laundered money to the Taliban.

I believe it’s an important article, but I also thought it might be a good idea to have a briefer more visual explainer of how the scheme worked. SIGAR, the government’s Afghan war watchdog, already provided a good visual breakdown of some of the scheme.

But let’s start here.

1. In 2021, Afghanistan’s central bank, controlled by the “financier of the IEDs” that had killed over 1,000 U.S. soldiers, began tweeting pictures of shipments of blue bags of hundred dollar bills as “humanitarian aid”.

Australia’s ABC even featured a photo of the blue bags on the tarmac at Kabul International Airport containing $40 million. One of several such shipments.

Where was the money coming from? Us.

2. Here’s how I break it down in ‘USAID’s Taliban Money Laundering Scheme’.

USAID put the money into pooled UN accounts which it did not control allowing it to deny sending money to the Taliban.

3. The UN bought and shipped billions in hundred dollar bills to Afghanistan. Then deposited them in a private bank and transferred money to ‘non-profits’ on the ground. This let the UN deny it was giving money to the Taliban.

4. The non-profits then exchanged the money with ‘Afghanis’ from a Taliban-controlled bank.

Here are SIGAR’s graphics for this arrangement.

Figure 1 – Request, Purchase , and Transport of UN Cash Shipments.

Figure 2 – Conversion Process of U.S. Dollars to Afghanis.

Now here’s where things get crazy.

5. The Afghani currency was being printed on behalf of the Taliban through the Biden administration. So we were behind the shipment of both dollars and Afghanis to the Taliban. The dollars were traded for Afghanis. And the Taliban got to prop up their currency and come away with a huge supply of dollars.

Now that you know how it worked, please read and share USAID’s Taliban Money Laundering Scheme where I delve into some of the implications of this arrangement.

The David Horowitz Freedom Center will continue fighting for accountability at USAID and every government agency that engaged in corruption and money laundering.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

After Belgian Elections, a Move Rightward Promises to be Less anti-Israel

Greece: Muslims stab two Israelis in Athens

Should the Arabs be Given a 23rd State?

Memo to Palestinians: Statehood is Not a Right

Texas: Muslim cleric announces construction of new Muslims-only enclave near Dallas

Australia: Vial of morphine allegedly found in hospital locker of Muslim nurse who boasted of killing Jews

UCLA Finally Suspends SJP After Trump Antisemitism Task Force Launch

RELATED VIDEO: David Wood vs. Robert Spencer Debate: Did Muhammad Exist?

EDITIORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Ukraine-Russia war debacle may spell end of American taxpayers’ funding of European-Globalist warmongering cartels in London and Paris

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

NATO’s super-expensive proxy war against Russia has finally run its course, ending in total failure. This may result in the obliteration of post-World War II norms in which U.S. fights Europe’s wars. 

European leaders are screeching and hollering over being left out of President Trump’s peace talks seeking an end to the bloody Russia-Ukraine border war.

Despite all of the financial and military assistance from the West, Ukraine has not been able to defeat Russia. And let’s be frank, it never will.

This is the opinion of the former chairman of the NATO military committee, Harald Kujat.

The retired German Air Force general surmised that after three years of conflict, the Ukrainian army lies in ruins, despite the billions invested in it, the weapons supplied, the training of personnel and the unprecedented assistance from the West. The U.S. alone has invested some $200 billion in the failed effort to deal Russia a black eye via the Ukrainian proxy.

General Kujat emphasized that Zelensky failed to take advantage of the opportunity that presented itself, and he will not have another chance. But really, it was the U.S. and Europe who failed in the war, not Ukraine, which was never Russia’s equal on the battlefield and never will be.

The German general believes the continuation of military action with the aim of “finishing off Russia” as proposed by some delusional Western politicians who still clamor for Russia’s defeat, will only lead to an even greater humiliation for Ukraine.

Kujat was quoted by European media as saying:

“It is time for our politicians and media to take note of the bitter truth that for three years, despite enormous financial and material support from the U.S. and European allies, as well as training and modern weapons systems, Ukraine has not been able to achieve military success. And that such a possibility, if it ever existed, no longer exists.”

The Russian online journal, Military Review, stated:

“For our part, we note that there is a group of countries in Europe that want Russia to be defeated. It is headed, as you might guess, by Great Britain and France. There is also a bunch of countries yapping along, but of a lower status. The most important question now is whether they will dare to go against the USA.”

That, of course, was a reference to the new American administration of Donald J. Trump, who campaigned on a promise to end the war in Ukraine and seems to have stepped up his efforts in recent days to do exactly that.

But now the war-mongering Europeans are barking about wanting a seat at the table to negotiate the terms of peace between Russia and Ukraine. Trump seems to sense that allowing the Europeans in on these peace talks would enable them to throw down deal-breakers at every opportunity, for London and Paris really don’t want peace with Russia. They want an extension of the war for as long as it takes to ramp up their own forces to invade what they hope will be a weakened Russia.

Why should they get any say in the peace process when they have expressed zero interest in peace until now, when Trump comes into the picture demanding it?

London, Paris, and to a lesser extent Berlin, want a say in how the terms of peace will be drawn between Russia and Ukraine. These countries want equal footing with the U.S. but they want the U.S. to foot the majority of their defense bills.

In short, they want to use U.S. military power for their own geo-political advantage while shouldering only a fraction of the financial burden.

With the ascension of the Trump administration, that day is over. Even Ukrainian President Zelensky is prodding the Europeans to step up and put their money where their mouth is.

Addressing the Munich conference, Zelensky called for the creation of a new “Army of Europe” amid rising concern that Washington may no longer be willing to play the fool.

Zelensky stated: “We can’t rule out the possibility that America might say no to Europe on issues that threaten it.”

The Ukraine leader said per the AP that “three years of full-scale war have proven that we already have the foundation for a united European military force. And now, as we fight this war and lay the groundwork for peace and security, we must build the armed forces of Europe.”

Good luck. I say go for it.

Zelensky claimed that such an army would not represent “replacing” the NATO alliance but it’s rather “about making Europe’s contribution to our partnership equal to America’s.”

He added that:

“A few days ago, President Trump told me about his conversation with Putin. Not once did he mention that America needs Europe at the table. That says a lot. The old days are over when America supported Europe just because it always had.”

Of course, we all knew this day would come, when Europe seeks to raise its own continent-wide army. French President Emmanuel Macron has called for that for years. Maybe the time is finally ripe for such a move. Why should the U.S. shoulder the burden for Europe’s defense?

And here’s the bigger question: What if Europe isn’t looking for “defense,” but rather something more akin to an aggressive “offense?”

Europe is filled with wealthy countries. They need to man up. And when they do start to foot their own defense bill, their taxpayers will likely realize that their politicians have been lying to them. Russia is not interested in taking them over. Russia just wants to be respected as the sovereign nation and global superpower that it is and will no longer be bullied by the West, dictated to in terms of where and how much of its own natural resources it can sell on the global market and at what price.

Russia wants open markets for its oil and gas and other resources. It does not want the responsibility of governing European countries.

Throughout its history, whenever Russia experimented with imperialism, it did not turn out well for them. Putin understands this. Besides, he has been in office for 24 years and has not once tried to storm his troops into any NATO country. The entire basis for the Western European case against Putin lies in his intolerance of Ukraine joining the NATO alliance.

Having a militarized Ukraine on Russia’s border has always been unacceptable in Moscow’s eyes, and the West knows it. Characterizing him as a military threat to Poland, the Baltics, and Western Europe seems irrational at best, fear-mongering propaganda at worst.

And if Europe is so intent on stirring up fear among its people of the Russian bear, you have to wonder if maybe it’s Europe that would like to make war against the bear, rather than the other way around.

Perhaps that’s what this European Army is really all about. Not defense, but offense.

Whatever the purpose, the cost of building up a capable European army would bring an end to many of the social programs, early retirements and cushy work schedules so many Europeans have grown accustomed to, and see it as part of their birthright.

If President Trump is smart, he’ll call the Europeans’ bluff and let’s see where they take this idea of a European Army.

©2025 All rights reserved.

Please visit Leo’s Newsletter substack.

The Global Spy Ring of the KGB

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

The title “The Global Spy Ring” is the term that I have been using a number of times in my columns. It describes how the KGB secretly recruits spies globally. Election of the President Donald J. Trump has changed the global climate and America on the way to end wars. There are two wars discussed: Russia-Ukraine War and Hamas-Israel War. In fact, there are three wars in the world: Russia-Ukraine War, Hamas-Israel War, and the Democrat Party War against Republicans. Those three wars have been waged by Russia against Western civilization on three different continents: Europe, Asia (Middle East), and America. The war started 70-80 years ago and never ended. Do you know that President of Palestinian people Mahmoud Abbas is a student of Moscow? The title of his dissertation was The Secret Relationship Between Nazism and Zionism. History matters.

​Comrade Stalin has begun this war to implement his ideology of Soviet Socialism around the globe. The war used a variety of methods, involving a combination of military and Intel agencies. I have been writing and describing how this war affected the Dems of America for 43 years. As  Trump’s desire to end the Russia-Ukraine war in peace negotiation, the knowledge of Russia is imperative. Considering the events described in this column, Putin’s return to G-7 is premature, and Ukraine’s NATO membership should be on the table, Putin afraid of it the most. Putin is a devoted disciple of the Stalin/Andropov plan to implement the ideology of Soviet Socialism across the world. The war in Ukraine was started for a reason: There will never be the Greater Russian Empire without Ukraine, the largest country in Europe with exceptionally fertile soil.

Putin waged the war against Ukraine in the traditions of Stalinism, Ukraine  is now a ‘Killing Field’ with destruction of the Ukrainian cities. Putin is also using Stalin’s Doctrine involving a combination of Military and Intel agencies in the war. Vladimir Putin is a leader of the KGB and the Father of a current FSB with the same strategy, mission, and agenda. In Putin’s Russia the Soviet system and the weaponized FSB are still deciding the fate of people. Knowing Putin, I have been writing about it and using the term KGB, describing the activity of Russian Intel for 43 years. Vice President JD Vance is right talking about “threat from within,” that is why all those years, I was warning America about infiltrated and overturned to socialism Truman’s party that became a Socialist Mafia, or Socialist Cabal…

America doesn’t know Comrade Stalin and his ideology of Soviet Socialism, which I called Soviet Fascism. America doesn’t know Vladimir Putin, a leader of the KGB and the Father of a current FSB with the same strategy, mission, and agenda. America missed a piece of Russian history in the 20th century and doesn’t know Stalin’s ideology of Soviet Socialism, the Soviet people called it—Stalinism. The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 has eliminated only Socialist economy, the Soviet System of the weaponized Law Enforcement not being touched and Vladimir Putin was catapulted to the Russian Presidency. Russia has now an old Soviet System and Crony Capitalist economy. None on the radio or TV channels discussing that. Here is an example:

The anchor of Media-Buzz has no a remotest idea of Russian intel infiltrated into the American government including the FBI. His show on Fox News, 2/9/25 demonstrated the lack of the issue for all its participants. None of them knew and mentioned Russian Intel. The same lack of knowledge has been seen within the army of Dems’ critics of Musk and his DOGE. That incompetence could’ve been eliminated years ago by properly investigating bad actors. As a former Soviet attorney writing about Russian Intel for years and sending my columns to Rep. Jordan for 4-5 years, I asked him to find out who in the FBI submitted my name to the FISA Court to make me a Foreign Agent. Unfortunately, Rep. Jordan ignored my request…

​I believe it was a Russian spy within the FBI who acted against me—only Russians could grasp the value of my writings and wanted to eliminate the threat of Russian infiltration into the FBI. Finding this Russian spy would open the chain of Russian infiltration into the FBI prior to 2002 and after that. Making me a Foreign Agent in 2002, the FBI got probable Cause to sabotage and banned my writings. As a result, America and especially Dems are not familiar with the Russian Intel and its war against the West. I can’t accuse all Dems in treason, some of them are just unaware of the enemy. America still doesn’t know that the attacks of 9/11 had been orchestrated and supervised by the Russian Intel. This is the reason I have to continue describing the Russian Intel, particularly the KGB’s Mafia/Army-Evil Doer, I started in my column: The Russian KGB Tactics in the 21st Century America.

Trump faces backlash on his plans by the Democrats. You will hear from Trump and Musk about massive abuse and fraud of the previous governments and the Dems’ constant resistance to them. The Democrats-agitators protesting Elon Musk and Trump’s actions concerning USAID are acting in the protocol of Socialist modus operandi: lies, deceit, fabrication and fraud. By the way, Nancy Pelosi is very nervous watching Elon Musk demanding access to a computer of the Treasury Department’s Payment System. Elon Musk and his DOGE are on the right path requiring access to the Treasury computer, he needs the access to obtain the evidence…

​Musk is about to expose an International Fraud, a crime committed by the leaders of the Dems’ party in 20th century, which is the Dems leaders’ collusion with Russian Intel. Today, the Democrat party is the Russian proxy like Cuba, Iran, and Venezuela. Be ready for a violent resistance by the Dems to cover-up the evidence—19 Dems’ states sue over DOGE. They want to prevent DOGE’s access to financial documents, because those documents are the evidence of that collusion. If you read my columns titled A Global Spy Ring, you will get an essence of that collusion, managed by the KGB’s Mafia/Army-Evil Doer…

​The money, the USAID has been sending to foreign countries were received by the members of the Global Spy Ring—the contract addresses in foreign countries were the members of the KGB’s Mafia/Army, previously recruited. It was an International Money Laundering—a Gigantic Fraud! The money of the American people has been paying for agitating people and spreading the ideology of Soviet Socialism globally. Please, remember the Soviet/Russian protocol: Recruitment, Infiltration, and implementation of the ideology and system of Soviet Socialism.

That exact protocol I noticed in August 2021 in Biden’s America.  The shameful surrender of Afghanistan by President Biden in August 2021 is still upsetting our memory. In August 2021, I have written my opinion about the shameful surrender: “ Although it is painful to read, the Afghan events gave me an additional impulse to research and open up a global can of worms. I’ve been writing about a Global Spy Ring run by Putin for the last 20-25 years. You can find several of my columns with this title. I recognized the Soviet Style lies, deception, and fraud many years ago, but Biden’s team added to that typical Soviet propaganda, slogans and symbols. Look at the picture-image of Biden, sitting alone in a big office in a pose of the Thinker by Rodin … This bronze sculpture represents the creative mind at work. This is the Stalinist propaganda methods creating a cult of Biden’s personality. What a fake! A typical fake of the KGB: to prize a senile Biden with creative mind!”

“The plan of orderly exit wasn’t designed in D.C. and actually didn’t exist. The plan of disorderly withdrawal was designed in Moscow’s Kremlin and sent to Biden’s staff, several members of which are the KGB agents. The other members of his staff belong to Obama’s holdovers and the Deep State, which is the same. The demented Biden was drilled on Putin’s disorderly withdrawn to implement it. He did. The Biden State Department or Military leadership had never constructed their own plan of orderly retreats. I am not sure they knew that Al-Qaeda and ISIS are still in Afghanistan.

Here is the disturbing summary of the war in Afghanistan: “The world is again focusing on Afghanistan and our incredible loss. After spending $273 million per day for over 7,200 days, and losing more than two American soldiers per week for 1,036 weeks. “This nation’s train wreck of a withdrawal—a smashup of betrayal, falseness, weakness, capitulation and futility that the whole world can see—is another epoch-defining event… “

​Please, remember: Biden had the same staff since 2013-2014, when he attempted to suffocate the young Ukrainian democracy, helping Putin. Biden wasn’t senile at the time and I was reporting you about the events in Ukraine in my several columns at the time. I think that some in the Biden staff were connected to the KGB’s Mafia/Army. I suspect Sussan Rice, but I have no ability to investigate the connection, it is the job of the FBI, which made me a Foreign Agent in 2002 to sabotage and ban my writings. I hope you now agree with me: “knowledge of Russia and its Intel is mandatory!” I am the only author who researched the KGB. You can learn about the KGB’s Mafia-Army that runs the Democrat party. Please Click Here

Don’t forget the American weaponry and ammunition for $Billions left to the Taliban. President Trump is right calling for accountability and accusing the Biden administration of handing over U.S. military assets to the Taliban following the 2021 withdrawal. I can add to that: Russia used U.S. weaponry in Ukraine. Read my columns about Russia’s long-term connection with the Taliban and other Islamic terrorist groups.

In the falsehood of intellectual dishonesty, Democrats’ administrations together with the Deep State have been weaponizing our justice and criminal systems, like they destroy our border defense system, our educational system and the courts, all courts including the FISA Court that unlawfully made me a Foreign Agent and prevented you from learning the truth.… Everything has changed…

It is a new day in America and it is a new day in the world. President Donald J. Trump wants to end all wars and save human lives, regardless of race, ethnicity or color. He is returning fundamental values to humanity, which is not an easy task. I hope that my columns and books will help him in his courage’s mission to change America and the world…

©2025 All rights reserved.

To be continued www.simonapipko.com and at www.drrichswier.com/author/spipko/

This Could Curtail States From Suing Over Trump’s Executive Orders

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Attorneys general in left-leaning states have been crowding into courtrooms to sue the Trump administration. This spectacle, the growing tangle of hastily issued injunctions preventing the enforcement of presidential executive orders, might lead some to think that they are observing the reverse side of a familiar pattern—one in which the party that lost a national election sends its state-level proxies into federal court to harass the party that won the White House.

Since 2010, states have sued the federal government with increasing frequency. But the apparent similarity in strategy does not mean that those lawsuits have similar merit or that they meet with the same sort of reception in the courts.

My colleagues have already explained why the states are not entitled to the judicial injunction stopping the Trump administration from pausing foreign aid and other federal spending. So, let’s look at another feature that will be common to the cases present and future that democratic attorneys general will bring over the next four years: standing.

Standing is the concept that governs who can sue in court. For a plaintiff to invoke the court’s assistance against a presidential action, he must come with his own concrete injury, separate and apart from the general dismay he, and like-thinking citizens, may feel over the policy’s merit.

“The undifferentiated public interest in executive officers’ compliance with the law” creates no “‘individual right’ vindicable in the courts,” the Supreme Court said in Secretary of the Interior v. Defenders of Wildlife in 1992. A general right of grievance-based litigation would release a flood of cases, turning the courts into virtual managers of the executive branch. Thus, standing looms large in state lawsuits against the federal government.

Take the student loan forgiveness fight as an example. In the fall of 2022, six states sued to halt President Joe Biden’s plan to transfer $430 billion in student loan debt to taxpayers. From the outset, judges focused on whether the states—or any party—had a legal right to challenge to policy in court.

When the states filed suit, judges elsewhere had already thrown out several cases for want of standing, and the Biden administration had curtailed its policy to keep other would-be plaintiffs out of court. Thus, a district judge initially tossed out the states’ case as well, concluding that none of them had standing to challenge the loan transfer.

The appellate court restored the case when it concluded that Missouri likely had standing due to its state-run entity that serviced loans affected by the Biden order. At the Supreme Court, the justices did not assume that any party had standing, and ultimately, they dismissed the companion case, Department of Education v. Brown, because they found that the plaintiffs in that case (individual borrowers) lacked standing to sue.

Contrast that consistent, searching inquiry into standing with the treatment it receives in recent litigation by states with left-leaning attorneys general. One case led by New York is meant to hamper the Department of Government Efficiency from reviewing payments information held by another government agency, the Treasury Department.

The states claim that access to sensitive information by DOGE staffers violates federal privacy laws. If one assumes that claim has merit, one is still left asking what business is that of the states? What law appoints them as enforcers of federal privacy regulations? And why aren’t judges asking the states that question before complying with their demands for a court injunction?

Naturally, it is not privacy that interests the states. Instead, they are hoping to throw up another roadblock to Trump’s economizing efforts that might reduce the federal funds subsidizing their local welfare programs—programs so extensive that their own tax bases could not support them.

Loss of funding at least looks more like a traditional injury, but does it necessarily give them standing? As my colleagues detail, federal funding pauses are not unusual, and the statutory deadlines for disbursing the funds are still months away. That should lead one to ask: Can there ever be a legally recognizable financial injury when the disbursements, which have not been cancelled, could still be made timely under the law?

The judges presiding over the state cases are curiously uncurious about these questions, though the questions define the very limit of judicial authority under Article III of the Constitution. Instead, the judges appear eager to be of service to the likes of Letitia James, New York’s attorney general, offering her injunctions and restraining orders against Trump initiatives more or less on demand. Often, they issue these orders ex parte, meaning that the Trump administration has had no opportunity to defend its decisions.

In fairness to the lower courts, the high court has sent conflicting signals on when states have standing. Certain Supreme Court justices seem inclined to limit standing after the concept was vastly expanded in Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency. Unfortunately, those retrenchment efforts to limit standing seem to succeed only when the issue before the court is considered a conservative one.

For instance, during the first Trump administration, the court had no difficulty concluding that liberal states had an adequate injury and, therefore, standing to sue over the citizenship question that was added to the 2020 census. Lower federal courts also were willing to countenance Hawaii’s and Washington state’s claims of injury when the very remote effects of a temporary migration ban might have affected enrollments at state universities.

And yet when Texas sought relief from the Biden administration’s contempt for immigration law and the ensuing flood of illegal migrants, the court solemnly declared that “the States’ suit here is not the kind redressable by a federal court.”

Conservatives looking on in frustration should not wish for too dramatic a correction. Another administration unfriendly to them will eventually come, and then the states must have some viable means of arresting those real instances of federal overreach.

But for now, it serves neither the executive branch nor the judiciary for critical doctrines like standing to be inconsistently applied. If a disparity in treatment becomes too apparent, it would be unsurprising if the president felt less obliged to abide by judicial constraints.

AUTHOR

Jack Fitzhenry

Jack Fitzhenry is a legal fellow in The Heritage Foundation’s Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies.

RELATED ARTICLES:

5-4: Two Republican-Appointed Supreme Court Justices Agree With Democrat Appointees in Allowing Trump Sentencing to Proceed

Biden’s Statement on the Equal Rights Amendment Is Straight From the Land of Make-Believe

Donald Trump Is Emphatically Correct About Birthright Citizenship

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now

VIDEO: Secretary of State Marco Rubio in Israel to press for hostages’ release, Phase II of Gaza truce

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Secretary of State Rubio’s visit follows President Donald Trump’s proposal to relocate Gazans out of the Gaza Strip. 

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio touched down in Israel on Saturday night for his first visit to the Jewish state since being confirmed as America’s top diplomat.

Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar greeted Rubio on the tarmac at Ben-Gurion Airport. The two men are slated to tour the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial in Jerusalem on Sunday. Rubio will also meet with high-ranking officials, including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

“Secretary Rubio’s engagements with senior officials will promote U.S. interests in advancing regional cooperation, stability and peace,” State Department Spokeswoman Tammy Bruce said in a press statement ahead of the visit.

“The trip will center on freeing American and all other hostages from Hamas captivity, advancing to Phase II of the ceasefire agreement in Gaza, and countering the destabilizing activities of the Iranian regime and its proxies,” the statement continued.

Rubio’s trip follows U.S. President Donald Trump’s proposal to relocate Palestinians out of the Gaza Strip, after which the coastal area would be turned over to American control for reconstruction.

On Thursday, Rubio said in an interview that any plan allowing Hamas to rule Gaza would be unacceptable to Israel and ineffective in resolving the conflict. He added that Trump was willing to take the lead on rebuilding Gaza, as no other viable plans have been proposed.

Rubio‘s trip also comes amid Israel’s ceasefire agreement with the Hamas terrorist group and the release of hostages held in the Strip. The truce is “tenuous” because Hamas is a terrorist organization responsible for violence against civilians, Rubio told journalist Chris Cuomo by phone on NewsNation on Tuesday.

The secretary of state on Monday described Hamas as an “evil” and “monstrous” organization that must be wiped out.

“This is an evil organization. Hamas is evil. It’s pure evil. These are monsters. These are savages. That’s a group that needs to be eradicated,” he said during an interview on talk radio channel SiriusXM Patriot.

Rubio will also travel to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates over the next three days.

WATCH: Secretary of State Marco Rubio in Israel to press for hostages’ release, Phase II of Gaza truce

RELATED ARTICLES:

What is Trump planning for the Houthis?

A Muslim Blogger Just Exposed the Truth About Gaza

Shipment of 2,000-pound bombs from U.S. arrives in Israel

EDITORS NOTE: This JNS – Jewish News Syndicate column with video is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg Funding Billions Into Anti-Trump Lawfare Against President Trump and Elon Musk

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Mark Zuckerberg funneled two billion into a foundation that’s bankrolling lawsuits against President Donald J. Trump. So Zuckerberg sicced the New York  Times on the investigative reporter who broke the story.

WATCH: Mark Zuckerberg is funding the lawfare against President Trump and Elon Musk

Natalie Winters
@nataliegwinters

Zuckerberg is crying to the @nytimes instead of demanding the left-wing foundation he gave $2 billion to stop bankrolling lawfare against President Trump.

They argue his $2 billion donation “does not mean that he actually donated any funds to Protect Democracy” since “more than 1,000 other people have accounts there and could be responsible for funding it.” Emphasis on *could be* and what a pathetic excuse. Even for him.

Why would you even want to be marginally associated with a group that has filed multiple lawsuits against President Trump if you actually support his agenda? You should be disavowing this, full stop.

Instead of running to the New York Times for cover, you should be demanding the Silicon Valley Community Foundation’s leadership cease funding groups that are actively suing President Trump. And btw, it wasn’t just Protect Democracy.

This foundation has funded the ACLU, Brennan Center, Planned Parenthood, SPLC, and many other radical left-wing groups, including those behind the efforts to keep President Trump off the ballot in 2024. And the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative has given hundreds of millions of dollars to explicitly left-wing causes (including rigging election administration…) I look forward to digging into all these entities now!

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED VIDEO: Representative Byron Donalds: The U.S. Government wasted nearly $3T on improper payments

POST ON X:

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Rewiring American Power — Bureaucracy

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

The clock struck 2 AM on Jan 21, 2025.

In Treasury’s basement, fluorescent lights hummed above four young coders. Their screens cast blue light across government-issue desks, illuminating energy drink cans and agency badges. As their algorithms crawled through decades of payment data, one number kept growing: $17 billion in redundant programs. And counting.

“We’re in,” Akash Bobba messaged the team. “All of it.”

Edward Coristine’s code had already mapped three subsystems. Luke Farritor’s algorithms were tracing payment flows across agencies. Ethan Shaotran’s analysis revealed patterns that career officials didn’t even know existed. By dawn, they would understand more about Treasury’s operations than people who had worked there for decades.

This wasn’t a hack. This wasn’t a breach. This was authorized disruption.

While career bureaucrats prepared orientation packets and welcome memos, DOGE’s team was already deep inside the payment systems. No committees. No approvals. No red tape. Just four coders with unprecedented access and algorithms ready to run. “The beautiful thing about payment systems,” noted a transition official watching their screens, “is that they don’t lie. You can spin policy all day long, but money leaves a trail.” That trail led to staggering discoveries. Programs marked as independent revealed coordinated funding streams. Grants labeled as humanitarian aid showed curious detours through complex networks. Black budgets once shrouded in secrecy began to unravel under algorithmic scrutiny.

By 6 AM, Treasury’s career officials began arriving for work. They found systems they thought impenetrable already mapped. Networks they believed hidden were already exposed. Power structures built over decades revealed in hours. Their traditional defenses—slow-walking decisions, leaking damaging stories, stonewalling requests—proved useless against an opponent moving faster than their systems could react. By the time they drafted their first memo objecting to this breach, three more systems had already been mapped.

“Pull this thread,” a senior official warned, watching patterns emerge across DOGE’s screens, “and the whole sweater unravels.” He wasn’t wrong. But he misunderstood something crucial: That was exactly the point. This wasn’t just another transition. This wasn’t just another reform effort. This was the start of something unprecedented: a revolution powered by preparation, presidential will, and technological precision.

The storm had arrived. And Treasury was just the beginning.

THE FOUNDATION

“Personnel are policy.”

For decades, this principle, articulated by conservative strategist Troup Hemenway, remained more theory than practice. Previous administrations spent months, even years, trying to staff key positions. Trump’s first term saw barely 100 political appointees confirmed by February 2017. Every delay meant another victory for the permanent bureaucracy.

But this time was different.

While media focused on campaign rallies and political theater, a quiet army was being assembled. In offices across DC, veteran strategists mapped the administrative state’s pressure points. Think tanks developed action plans for every agency. Policy institutes trained rapid deployment teams. Former appointees shared battlefield intelligence from previous administrations’ failures.

By Inauguration Day, over 1,000 pre-vetted personnel stood ready—each armed with clear objectives, mapped legal authorities, and direct lines to support networks. This wasn’t just staffing; it was a battle plan decades in the making.

“This is the new normal,” Vice President JD Vance declared from his West Wing office, studying real-time data flows across agency systems. “He’s having the time of his life,” he added, referring to the President’s relentless drive. “We’ve done more in two weeks than others did in years.”

The secret wasn’t just speed—it was precision. Instead of waiting for Senate confirmations, the transition team prioritized non-Senate-confirmed positions. While Democrats prepared for traditional confirmation battles over cabinet posts, an army of aligned personnel was already moving into place. Strategic positions were identified. Legal authorities were mapped. Support networks were established.

“We don’t have a lot of time,” the President reminded his team daily. “Four years is a lot of time in political life but it’s not a long time in real life.”

This urgency drove innovation. When DOGE’s young coders breached Treasury’s payment systems, pre-positioned legal teams neutralized resistance within hours. When career officials tried revoking system access, they discovered DOGE’s authority came from levels they couldn’t challenge. When leaks surfaced, rapid-response units fed counter-narratives to alternative media almost instantly. “When you look at the people surrounding the president,” Vance noted, “we’re trying to make it sort of easy for him to do what he wants to do in government. When you have the entire team firing on all cylinders you can get a lot done.”

The permanent bureaucracy never saw it coming. They were prepared for resistance. They were ready for protests. They had plans for leaks and legal challenges. But they had no defense against an opponent who had spent years preparing for this moment.

This wasn’t just about filling seats—it was about building a machine designed to transform American governance. Every position mattered. Every appointment carried weight. And behind it all stood a president counting down not years or months, but weeks and days, driving his team forward with relentless energy.

The foundation was set. And the revolution was just beginning.

THE SPREAD

USAID fell next. No midnight raids this time. No secret algorithms. Just a simple memo on agency letterhead: “Pursuant to Executive Authority…”

Career officials panicked—and for good reason. Created by Executive Order in 1961, USAID could be dissolved with a single presidential signature. No congressional approval needed. No court challenges possible. Just one pen stroke, and six decades of carefully constructed financial networks would face sunlight. “Pull this thread,” a senior official warned, watching DOGE’s algorithms crawl through USAID’s databases, “and a lot of sweaters start unraveling.”

The resistance was immediate—and telling. Career officials who had barely blinked at Treasury’s exposure now worked through weekends to block DOGE’s access. Democratic senators who had ignored other moves suddenly demanded emergency hearings. Former USAID officials flooded media outlets with warnings about “institutional knowledge loss” and “diplomatic catastrophe.”

But their traditional defenses crumbled against DOGE’s new playbook. While bureaucrats drafted memos about “proper procedures,” the young coders were already mapping payment flows. While senators scheduled hearings, pre-positioned personnel were implementing new transparency protocols. While media allies prepared hit pieces, DOGE’s algorithms exposed decades of questionable transactions.

The scale was breathtaking:

EPA climate initiatives? Not just mapped—found unauthorized programs in 47 states. Education’s DEI maze? Not just exposed—revealed coordination across 1,200 programs. Intelligence community black budgets? Not just traced—uncovered patterns hidden for 30 years. “The administrative state runs on two things,” a senior advisor explained, watching patterns emerge across DOGE’s screens. “Control of information and money flows.” His eyes tracked new connections forming in real-time. “We’re not just exposing their networks—we’re rewriting their DNA.”

The cracks began showing in unexpected places. A career EPA director, tears streaming: “Everything we built…” A USAID veteran, hands shaking: “They’re inside all of it…” A Treasury lifer, closing his office: “They move faster than we can think.”

Across Washington, officials who had weathered every reform since Reagan began quietly updating LinkedIn profiles. A Deputy Director: “Open to opportunities.” An Agency Chief: “Exploring new challenges.” A Bureau Head: “Time for change.”

DOGE’s algorithms weren’t just programs—they were archaeology tools, excavating decades of buried networks. Each data point connected to another. Each discovery revealed new targets. Each pattern exposed larger systems.

“It’s beautiful,” one of the coders whispered, watching connections form across his screen. “Like watching a galaxy map itself.”

For the permanent bureaucracy, this wasn’t just change. It was an extinction-level event. Their power came from controlling who got paid, when they got paid, and what they got paid for. Now those controls were evaporating like dawn burning away darkness.

The pattern was devastating in its simplicity:

  • Map the money flows
  • Deploy aligned personnel
  • Expose the networks
  • Restructure the systems

By the time bureaucrats drafted objections to one breach, three more had already occurred.

The revolution wasn’t just spreading. It was accelerating.

THE IMPACT

The first bulldozer arrived in Springfield, Ohio at 6 AM on a Tuesday. By noon, three blocks of notorious potholes were filled. Local news crews arrived to find not just construction crews, but data analysts with laptops, mapping every dollar spent against real-time progress.

This wasn’t just road repair. This was revolution in action.

A woman grabbed the analyst’s arm, tears in her eyes. “Twelve years,” she whispered. “Twelve years I’ve been calling about these potholes.” He turned his laptop, showing real-time data flows. “Look,” he said. “Your tax dollars. Actually working.” She stared at the screen. “My God,” she whispered. “It’s really happening.” Across America, funds once lost in administrative mazes suddenly found their way to actual problems needing solutions. In rural Tennessee, broadband expansion projects long buried under bureaucratic red tape broke ground overnight. In Michigan, water treatment plants received upgrades that bureaucrats had studied for decades but never approved.

The transformation was measurable. In just two weeks:

  • Tens of thousands of redundant programs identified
  • Billions in waste exposed
  • Hundreds of unauthorized initiatives halted
  • Countless local projects unleashed

But the real metric? Trust in government rising for the first time in 50 years.

The revolution spread with surgical precision:

  • Real-time tracking replaced quarterly reports
  • Algorithmic oversight replaced review boards
  • Local solutions replaced federal mandates
  • Results replaced process

“He’s done more in two weeks than Biden did in four years and Obama did in eight,” Vance noted from his West Wing office. “But this isn’t just about speed. This isn’t just about tech. This isn’t just about personnel. It’s all three, perfectly aligned.”

For ordinary Americans, the impact was undeniable. Roads repaired. Schools revitalized. Water purified. But more importantly, something else was being restored: trust.

For the first time in generations, people saw their government not as an obstacle but as a tool for positive change. The permanent bureaucracy had long operated on a simple assumption: presidents come and go, but they remain. That assumption now lay shattered, replaced by a new reality: when preparation meets presidential determination, nothing is permanent. “They thought we’d slow down,” Vance said, studying real-time data flows across agencies. “They thought we’d get bogged down in process. They thought we’d play by their rules.”

He smiled. “Instead, we’re just getting started.”

THE NEW DAWN

The sun rises early in Washington. On this morning, its first rays caught the classical columns of the Treasury building, casting long shadows across streets still quiet. But inside, beneath the marble and granite, screens still glowed blue. DOGE’s algorithms never sleep.

“The administrative state was built over decades,” a senior advisor explained, watching new patterns emerge across the displays. “Built to resist change. Built to outlast presidents. Built to preserve power.” He paused, tracking a particularly interesting data flow. “But they never imagined this. They built walls against political attacks. Defenses against media exposure. Shields against congressional oversight.” “They never prepared for algorithms that could map everything. For personnel pre-positioned everywhere. For a president who counts every week like it’s his last.”

The numbers tell the story: In Treasury—networks mapped, waste exposed, systems rewired At USAID—decades of hidden flows revealed, power structures dismantled Across agencies – redundancies eliminated, authorities realigned, missions refocused.

But numbers aren’t the whole story.

Imagine, changes, coming to a community near you:

Springfield, Ohio, potholes that plagued residents for twelve years actually disappeared overnight. Rural Tennessee, where children can finally connect to high-speed internet their parents were promised decades ago. In Michigan, people truly drink clean water while bureaucrats’ memos about “studying the problem” gather dust. This isn’t just reform. This isn’t just change. This is American governance reimagined.

“The pace is going to be the same,” Vice President Vance declared this week. “It’s just the priorities that are going to change.” The permanent bureaucracy built their administrative state over decades, brick by bureaucratic brick. They thought it would last forever. They thought it was too big to map, too complex to understand, too entrenched to change.

They were wrong.

Four young coders with laptops proved that. One thousand pre-positioned personnel proved that. A president counting weeks proved that. The sun continues rising over Washington. Classical columns still cast their shadows. But inside those buildings, everything has changed. The administrative state finally met its match: preparation plus presidential will plus technological precision.

This isn’t the end of the story. This is just the beginning.

The revolution isn’t just continuing. It’s becoming the new normal.

And for those who thought the D E E P S T A T E would rule forever?

They’re about to learn what happens when smart strategic minds meet determination. When preparation meets opportunity. When a new generation decides it’s time for change.

The storm isn’t just gathering. It’s here to stay.

The sun continues rising over Washington. But now, for the first time in generations, it illuminates something new:

A government that works.

A bureaucracy that serves.

A system that delivers.

The revolution isn’t just beginning.

It’s already won.

©2025 All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: Representative Byron Donalds: The U.S. Government wasted nearly $3T on improper payments

Please visit the Arizona Today substack.

Biden’s HHS Left Taxpayers on the Hook for $22.6 BILLION for Giveaways to Illegals for Cars, Homes, Startup Businesses

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

You don’t hate them enough. More evidence of why the Democrats has been so defensive about DOGE and Mr. Musk exposing the enormous reckless and corrupt spending.

HHS splurged more than $22B on grants for migrants — including cash for cars, home loans and startups

By Josh Christenson, NY Post, Feb. 13, 2025:

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) ramped up grants for migrants from 2020 to 2024 — which included cash assistance to buy cars, homes and even build credit for startup businesses, according to a shocking watchdog report that found taxpayers were left on the hook for $22.6 billion.

HHS’ Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) — which came under fire last year for having lost track of 32,000 migrant kids in the US — handed out the high sum to a host of nonprofits, effectively acting as a “giant magnet” for those crossing the US border and claiming asylum, auditors from the money monitor OpenTheBooks revealed exclusively to The Post.

Tasked with settling migrants, asylum seekers and other refugees in America, ORR drastically increased the number of noncitizens eligible to receive funding over the bulk of President Joe Biden’s term, with more than $10 billion shelled out to grant-receiving organizations just in fiscal year 2023.

That coincided with all-time records being set for southern border crossings into the US, with 2.4 million apprehensions by Customs and Border Protection over the same period.

Non-governmental groups bilked taxpayers for up to $1.7 billion in services including dollar-for-dollar matching savings plans for cars, homes, college educations or startups; small-business loans of up to $15,000; loans to repair credit history of up to $1,500; “cultural orientation,” “emergency housing support,” legal assistance and Medicaid care.

Some programs were only available to migrants or refugees who had been living in the US for several years, who were employed or who were making around double the federal poverty level or less, among other stipulations.

The most funding, however, was spent on unaccompanied migrant children, with $12.4 billion obligated over the five years — even as federal whistleblowers were calling out ORR for placing many of the 291,000 kids in their care with unvetted and at times abusive sponsors.

“The Shining City on a Hill, with its walls and doors, makes room for legal immigrants and legitimate refugees and asylum seekers, but the ORR has made a mockery of that vision in recent years,” OpenTheBooks CEO John Hart told The Post.

“ORR is part of a troubling trend of using nonprofit groups as ideological proxies. Vast sums are being outsourced to evade accountability and prop up an immoral, exploitive system that is hurtful to both American citizens and people in other countries who are longing for a better life.”

Thursday’s report comes after the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) came under fire for sending around $80 million — subsequently clawed back by the Trump administration Tuesday — to put migrants up in New York City hotels and provide other services.

More than $2.6 billion went out the door in fiscal year 2020, $2.3 billion in fiscal year 2021, $3.3 billion in fiscal year 2022, $10 billion in fiscal year 2023 and $4.2 billion in fiscal year 2024.

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

10 Bills That Would Codify Trump’s Executive Orders into Law

TREASON: USAID Funded Fabricated Evidence Used to Impeach President Trump

Skyrocketing healthcare budget for illegal immigrants haunts blue state taxpayers.

Radical Obama-Appointed Rogue Judge John McConnell Jr. Who Ordered Trump to Unfreeze Inflation Act, Owns Stock That Received $75 Million From the Act

One of Biden’s Final Appointments, First Federal Muslim Judge Judge Amir Ali Overrules Trump’s Foreign Aid Freeze, Tax Dollars to Jihad To Flow Again

Republican Rep. Brandon Gill Starts Petition To ‘Deport’ Rep. Ilhan Omar

Universities Toughen Penalties Against Students for Justice in Palestine, Antisemitic Activity on Campus

RELATED VIDEO: Representative Byron Donalds: The U.S. Government wasted nearly $3T on improper payments

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permisison. ©All rights reserved.