Bondi Defends DOJ’s Rollout of Epstein Files

Former Attorney General Pam Bondi defended the Justice Department’s handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files Friday, telling House investigators that the department fulfilled its legal obligations under the Epstein Files Transparency Act and delivered an unprecedented level of public disclosure.

Bondi appeared before the House Oversight Committee for a closed-door interview as lawmakers continue investigating the federal government’s handling of the Epstein case, the release of related records, and what information may still remain undisclosed.

In opening remarks obtained by multiple outlets, Bondi argued that the Justice Department had gone further than any previous administration in making Epstein-related records available to the public.

“Justice and transparency have been delivered,” Bondi told lawmakers, adding that the department released all materials required under federal law.

Bondi acknowledged that errors occurred during the document release process, specifically referencing redaction mistakes that resulted in some victim information being improperly disclosed.

She described the release effort as an enormous undertaking involving the review of millions of pages of records.

“We demonstrated an unprecedented commitment to transparency in the Department’s search for, collection, and review of the Epstein files,” Bondi said, noting that approximately three million pages of material were ultimately released.

According to testimony details reported after the interview, Bondi told lawmakers she delegated oversight of the document release process to then-Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, who now serves as acting attorney general.

The hearing marked Bondi’s first extensive public defense of the department’s actions since she left office in April.

She arrived at the Capitol wearing a bandage on her neck following recent treatment for thyroid cancer.

Republican members focused heavily on determining whether additional records could legally be released.

House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer said lawmakers want answers about what documents remain withheld and whether further disclosures are possible.

“We’re going to try to determine whether or not there can be more documents legally turned over,” Comer said before the interview. “I want every document. I don’t want anything held back.”

Democrats, however, used the hearing to criticize Bondi’s refusal to discuss conversations involving President Donald Trump.

According to lawmakers present, Bondi declined to answer questions about communications with Trump, citing executive privilege concerns and longstanding protections surrounding conversations between presidents and senior administration officials.

Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-N.M.) accused Bondi of withholding information that could shed light on the administration’s handling of the Epstein records.

Other Democrats complained that the hearing was conducted behind closed doors and was not videotaped for public release.

The dispute over Trump’s connection to the Epstein investigation surfaced repeatedly during the hearing.

Democrats argued Bondi had an opportunity to publicly address questions surrounding Trump’s relationship with Epstein but declined to do so.

Those criticisms come as recently released Justice Department records have painted a different picture than many of Trump’s political opponents have alleged.

One document released earlier this year reportedly showed Trump was among the first individuals to alert Palm Beach authorities to concerns about Epstein’s conduct.

According to records cited during the investigation, Trump contacted Palm Beach Police Chief Michael Reiter in 2006 while Epstein was under investigation and allegedly remarked, “Thank goodness you’re stopping him; everyone knows he’s been doing this.”

The documents also reportedly state that Trump told investigators he had encountered Epstein in the presence of teenage girls and immediately distanced himself from the situation.

Bondi also addressed questions surrounding convicted Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell.

According to sources familiar with her testimony, Bondi said she opposes any pardon for Maxwell and believes she should spend the remainder of her life in prison.

Maxwell is currently serving a 20-year federal sentence after being convicted of sex trafficking offenses tied to Epstein’s operation.

The hearing comes nearly 15 months after Bondi first pledged to release Epstein-related records, and months after Congress passed the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which requires the DOJ to disclose investigative materials.

No prior administration had done so.

Fox Wins Lawsuit Against Tarlov Brought by Hunter Biden Whistleblower

A New York judge threw out Tony Bobulinski’s $30 million defamation suit against Fox News co-host Jessica Tarlov and ordered Bobulinski to pay Tarlov’s legal bills.

“Before the Court is Tarlov’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim and motion for attorney’s fees under New York’s anti-SLAPP law. For the reasons that follow, the motion to dismiss is granted. And because the Court concludes that the mandatory fee-shifting provision of New York’s anti-SLAPP law applies in federal court, Tarlov’s motion for attorney’s fees is also granted,” District Judge J. Paul Oetken said in his decision.

A spokesperson for Fox News said in a statement, “FOX News is pleased with the court’s landmark decision, which not only dismissed Tony Bobulinski and Stefan Passantino’s meritless allegations against Jessica Tarlov, but also marks the first federal court decision to award attorney’s fees under New York’s anti-SLAPP statute.”

Bobulinski, who used to work with Hunter Biden, sued Tarlov in March for something she said in January on the popular show “The Five,” where she is a co-host. In a conversation with Judge Jeanine Pirro, Tarlov said, “Okay, a Trump Super PAC paid for Tony Bobulinski’s lawyers’ fees.”

As promised, Bobulinski’s lawyer Jesse Binall wrote Fox Corp. a letter the next day demanding that Tarlov retract her statement and issue an apology. He also said that he would “immediately file a defamation lawsuit against Fox and Ms. Tarlov if this lie is not retracted by Ms. Tarlov on-air today.”

The next day, Tarlov talked about the comments on the radio and gave more information: ” I would like to clarify a comment I made yesterday during our discussion of Tony Bobulinski’s appearance at the congressional hearing. During an exchange with my colleagues about the hearing I said that Mr. Bobulinski’s lawyers’ fees have been paid by a Trump super PAC as recent as January. What was actually said during the hearing was that the law firm representing Mr. Bobulinski was paid by a Trump PAC. I have seen no indication those payments were made in connection with Mr. Bobulinski’s legal fees and he denies that they were.”

Binall sent an additional letter demanding a second “complete retraction and apology.”

Fox News soon replied, “I am responding to your letter of March 22, 2024, to Jeff Taylor concerning the correction that Jessica Tarlov made on “The Five” on March 21, 2024. Her correction was accurate, and we will not be issuing any further correction.”

After that, Bobulinski and his lawyers sued Tarlov and asked for $30 million in damages for compensation, special, and punitive reasons, as well as costs and attorneys’ fees.https://twitter.com/TheWrap/status/1861563215244861606

 

At the time of the lawsuit, Fox News again defended Tarlov, saying, “Jessica Tarlov’s March 21st statements were accurate and made it clear that she was not aware of anything to suggest that payments from a Trump PAC to Elections, LLC were made in connection with Tony Bobulinski’s legal fees. We are sticking to our choice not to make any more corrections, and we will fight these false claims with all our might.”

The court shot down Bobulinski on all points.

Judge Oetken concluded, “Bobulinski also fails to adequately allege that Tarlov’s statements tended to injure him in his capacity as a businessman. The New York Court of Appeals has held that, for a statement to qualify as defamation per se under the professional conduct exception, the statement must specifically reference conduct that is incompatible with a person’s profession, ‘rather than a more general reflection upon the plaintiff’s character or qualities.’”

Young Dem Wins South Carolina House Seat In Lindsey Graham’s Backyard

A 24-year-old Democrat scored a sweeping victory in Senator Lindsey Graham’s home turf, winning a seat in the South Carolina House of Representatives.

“This victory is definitely not mine alone,” Scott said in a victory speech

It is a district that then-Vice President Kamala Harris won in the 2024 presidential election, as noted by The Daily Beast.

This victory is definitely not mine alone,” Scott said in a victory speech posted to his Facebook page

“This victory is definitely not mine alone,” Scott said in a victory speech posted to his Facebook page. “It belongs to all of the people of District 50… I want to say thank you from the bottom of my heart for your vote of confidence. ”

His victory was hailed by the Democratic National Committee’s chairman, Ken Martin

“As long as Trump and MAGA Republicans peddle an out-of-touch agenda that puts

His victory was hailed by the Democratic National Committee’s chairman, Ken Martin

His victory was hailed by the Democratic National Committee’s chairman, Ken Martin.

“As long as Trump and MAGA Republicans peddle an out-of-touch agenda that puts billionaires’ interests first and takes away health care from millions of Americans, they will continue to sink and lose,” DNC chairperson Ken Martin said in a statement.

Scott’s victory comes as Graham has taken some heat for a visit this week to Ukraine where some of his comments were seen as counterproductive to President Donald Trump’s policies involving the war-torn country.

Graham heaped praise on Ukraine for the drone attack, saying in an X post, “The

Graham heaped praise on Ukraine for the drone attack, saying in an X post, “The

In a video shared on X, the senator stated that Congress is prepared to take action against Russia, regardless of whether President Trump supports it

Graham heaped praise on Ukraine for the drone attack, saying in an X post, “The ever-resourceful Ukraine used creative drone warfare tactics to successfully attack Russian bombers and military assets used to kill Ukrainian citizens and destroy their country.”

from “playing its cards.”

Graham suggested that if Russia agreed to a ceasefire and participated in negotiations, it would prevent the U. S. from “playing its cards.”

In an interview on NewsNation’s Cuomo, Bannon accused Graham of giving

That led former Trump strategist and current War Room podcast host Steve Bannon to sharply criticize the senator’s actions during his visit to Kyiv

In an interview on NewsNation’s Cuomo, Bannon accused Graham of giving Ukrainians “false hope” by meeting with President Volodymyr Zelensky and implying that the U

In an interview on NewsNation’s Cuomo, Bannon accused Graham of giving Ukrainians “false hope” by meeting with President Volodymyr Zelensky and implying that the U. S. supports Kyiv’s dramatic drone strike on Russia’s strategic bomber fleet, The Hill reported.

“We can’t have Lindsey Graham, and particularly Zelensky, leading us into a third world war with a deep strike into Russia,” Bannon told host Chris Cuomo.

During the interview, Cuomo repeatedly pressed Bannon to justify his demand

During the interview, Cuomo repeatedly pressed Bannon to justify his demand

During the interview, Cuomo repeatedly pressed Bannon to justify his demand.

“I don’t understand how you could want to jail a U. S. senator because he’s saying something you don’t like,” the NewsNation host said, adding, “That sounds like the worst of the deep state and lawfare.”

So maybe he’s wrong, but why do you say throw him in jail

He’s giving the Ukrainians false hope,” Bannon argued

“No, it’s absolutely — what he’s doing over there right now is stirring it up. He’s giving the Ukrainians false hope,” Bannon argued. Cuomo countered: “But it’s not illegal.”

So maybe he’s wrong, but why do you say throw him in jail?” Cuomo asked

“Two things ought to happen: Either cancel his passport and don’t let him back in the country, or put him in jail if he comes back,” Bannon responded, adding, “The attack was audacious. ”

Cuomo then said that while he did not necessarily disagree with Bannon’s

Cuomo then said that while he did not necessarily disagree with Bannon’s

“It was brilliant. But the problem is it gets us involved in a conflict that no one in the United States wants to be part of,” he added.

Cuomo then said that while he did not necessarily disagree with Bannon’s assessment, he did not see eye to eye with him regarding detaining Graham

That’s my only point,” he told Bannon

“I’m just saying you can’t be throwing people in jail because you don’t like what they say. That’s my only point,” he told Bannon. “I’m not saying that you’re wrong about where this might lead and how dangerous it is.”

This article may contain commentary which reflects the author’s opinion.

Judge Rejects Challenge To $5M-Per-Resident Reparations Fund As Premature

Judge Joseph Quinn of the San Francisco Superior Court said that a lawsuit against the city’s race-based reparations fund is too early and upheld a demurrer against the suit.

A demurrer is an objection that says the evidence presented was not enough for the judge to review.

“We are disappointed by the Superior Court’s ruling, but remain undeterred. The government cannot use taxpayer money to administer funds for programs that discriminate based on race.

The next step will be to either amend the complaint or appeal,” a Pacific Legal Foundation spokesperson told Fox News.

The Pacific Legal Foundation was also given leave to amend by Quinn. This meant that they could fix any mistakes in their case.

A group of people from the Pacific Legal Foundation, some San Francisco residents, and the Californians for Equal Rights Foundation sued the city of San Francisco over an ordinance that sets up a fund for Black residents.

The lawsuit says the ordinance is racist because it lets taxpayer money go into the fund and not other funds.

The plaintiffs said that a win would keep taxpayers from having to pay for a race-based program run by the government and set limits for other cities that want to use similar policies.

Reports say that Quinn wasn’t persuaded by claims that the reparations plan is racist.

He said that there isn’t enough proof yet to know if using the program would have racial effects.

“Both the United States and California Constitutions forbid this,” the nonprofit says in its complaint.

“Government may not allocate benefits, opportunities, or burdens according to race or lineage,” the nonprofit added in its complaint.

“This is a taxpayer standing challenge at the pleading stage against an ordinance that assigns a public agency, a taxpayer-funded agency, with the responsibility of administering a fund for an unlawful purpose,” said Andrew Quinio, an attorney with the Pacific Legal Foundation.

“How do you know that?” Quinn asked, pushing back on the claim that reparations would be distributed unlawfully.

According to Courthouse News, “Quinn and Quinio had a rousing back-and-forth about taxpayer standing and other issues. Quinn asked whether ‘a possibility that something race-conscious is going to happen’ was enough to bring a claim.”

“Quinio said yes, it was sufficient,” the outlet reported.

“‘No, it’s not,” Quinn replied.

“‘There’s no authority for that.’ He noted that if that were true, ‘then we would have thousands of taxpayer actions, challenging all kinds of laws that citizens disagree with because something might happen under that law.’”

Quinn is said to have said that the plaintiffs would have to show that the ordinance was illegal in every way it could be used to properly challenge it, as long as the plan had one option that wouldn’t be based on race.

Jerry Brown, who used to be the Democratic governor of California, chose Quinn.

Fox News Digital asked San Francisco officials and Californians for Equal Rights for comments, but they did not respond.

In December, Democratic Mayor Daniel Lurie signed an ordinance that sets up a reparations fund.

One day, each of the city’s eligible Black residents could get up to $5 million to make up for alleged discrimination and displacement in the past.

The Board of Supervisors passed the law in December, and Lurie signed it two days before Christmas.

The law set up the framework for the fund, but it didn’t give money or guarantee payments.

The fund can use donations from individuals, foundations, and other non-city sources.

Taxpayers would need a law, a clear source of funding, and the mayor’s approval for any reparations payments that they pay.

This article may contain commentary which reflects the author’s opinion.

Mexican president states that Trump is not

The tone was measured, legalistic, and unmistakably threatening.

In Tehran, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi denounced the strike as “outrageous” and “criminal,” insisting that Iran retained the right to respond in self-defense. Although his remarks were framed in diplomatic language, the warning carried a clear message. His statement that Iran “reserves all options” was widely interpreted as a signal that retaliation remained on the table, raising fears of a broader and potentially dangerous escalation.

Across Europe, the reaction was far less celebratory. While leaders in Washington and Jerusalem described the operation as a major success and a significant setback for Iran’s nuclear ambitions, many European officials viewed the situation with deep concern.

Diplomats warned that the crisis could push the region closer to a wider conflict and undermine years of international efforts aimed at preventing confrontation. Discussions in major European capitals focused on the risk of miscalculation and the possibility that tensions could spiral beyond anyone’s control.

At the United Nations, representatives carefully weighed every statement, aware that even a single poorly chosen word could further inflame an already volatile situation. As governments assessed their next steps, uncertainty spread across the international community. The world once again found itself watching closely, waiting to see whether the coming days would bring restraint, retaliation, or a dangerous new chapter in the conflict.

Senate Passes Bill To Crack Down On Smuggling Of U.S. Chips To China

U.S. Senate passes bipartisan legislation, led by U.S. Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD), to establish a whistleblower reward program to fight illegal exports of semiconductors. The bill has been forwarded to the U.S. House of Representatives for action.

“I look forward to working with our colleagues in the House to get this important legislation through Congress and to President Trump’s desk to be signed into law,” said Sen. Rounds, who in April 2025 sponsored the Stop Stealing our Chips Act, S. 1473, alongside lead cosponsor U.S. Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA).

If signed into law, the bill would amend the Export Control Reform Act to establish a whistleblower reward program at the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) at the U.S. Commerce Department to boost reporting of illegal exports and to halt the flow of American-made semiconductors smuggled into China.

“I am pleased that the Stop Stealing our Chips Act has passed the Senate,” Sen. Rounds said.

“The United States has taken extensive measures to prevent American-made semiconductors from falling into the wrong hands, particularly China; however, China continues to smuggle these chips into their country,” Rounds added.

As the use of artificial intelligence (AI) continues to accelerate, he pointed out that this development creates “a grave national security concern.”

“Our legislation would strengthen BIS’s export control enforcement by rewarding whistleblowers with credible information on illegal actions to come forward,” said Sen. Rounds.

According to a bill summary provided by Rounds’ staff, the legislation would require BIS to establish a public, secure platform for whistleblower submissions of reports, create a fund to pay whistleblower rewards and operate the program, funded by fines from export control violations, and provide confidentiality guarantees and anti-retaliation protections to protect whistleblowers.

The law would require that whistleblowers who provide original information that leads to the imposition of fines on offenders would be eligible for between 10 percent and 30 percent of the fines collected, with exceptions for known terrorists and criminals and federal workers operating within the extent of their employment.

Whistleblowers should receive status updates every 30 days, and credible reports should result in formal inquiries within 60 days.

Any remaining money from the fines would be remitted to the U.S. Treasury, the report states.

This comes after President Donald Trump’s high-stakes summit in China earlier this month.

Trump announced that Chinese President Xi Jinping agreed to purchase 200 Boeing jets during their high-level meeting in Beijing.

In an exclusive interview with Fox News host Sean Hannity, Trump described his discussions with Xi as “very good” and stated that the commitment from China exceeded Boeing’s expectations.

Terms of the announced agreement, such as the type of aircraft ordered and delivery timelines, were not disclosed, Fox Business noted.

Trump arrived in China on Wednesday with a delegation of prominent American business leaders to meet with Chinese officials and executives.

The trip marks Trump’s first visit to the country since 2017 and occurs amid rising tensions over trade, artificial intelligence, Taiwan, and the repercussions of the war with Iran.

Boeing CEO Kelly Ortberg was among the executives in the delegation. He recently stated that the trip represents “a meaningful opportunity” for the aircraft maker.

Although Ortberg declined to specify the number of aircraft being discussed during a recent analyst call, he expressed strong confidence that if Trump and Xi reach an agreement, it will likely include some aircraft orders.

Some reports noted that China was initially interested in buying 500 of the 737 Max aircraft from Boeing.

“I am proud to announce the site of the NATIONAL GARDEN OF AMERICAN HEROES. This magnificent exhibition of statues will be located in West Potomac Park, which we are transforming into one of the World’s most beautiful public spaces,” Trump began.

This article may contain commentary which reflects the author’s opinion.

🚨BREAKING: Pope Leo will NOT visit the USA during Donald Trump’s presidency.

If you’re asking whether the claim is true, the available reporting suggests a more nuanced picture.

• The Vatican has officially confirmed that Pope Leo XIV does not plan to visit the United States in 2026. Vatican spokesman Matteo Bruni said, “The pope will not be going to the United States in 2026.”
• However, the stronger claim that he will not visit the U.S. at any point during President Donald Trump‘s presidency has not been officially announced by the Vatican. Reports citing unnamed Vatican sources have suggested that a visit during Trump’s term is unlikely or that the pope “may never” visit while Trump is president, but those reports are based on anonymous sources rather than an official Vatican decision.

So the most accurate summary is:

 Confirmed: Pope Leo XIV is not visiting the United States in 2026.
 Not officially confirmed: That he will never visit the U.S. during Trump’s presidency. That remains speculation based on reports and unnamed sources.

There has also been reported tension between Pope Leo and the Trump administration over immigration, foreign policy, and other issues, which has fueled speculation about future travel decisions.

Well, It Looks Like Biden-Harris Funded Terrorist Organizations

They’ve been gone now for a year and a half, but the corruption and systemic hatred the Biden-Harris administration had for our country continue to rear their ugly heads.

Allegations have emerged that the Biden-Harris administration may have funneled millions of dollars to non-governmental organizations (NGOs) connected to terrorist groups.

These taxpayer dollars have reportedly been sent to groups that are anti-Israel and supportive of terrorism, which can only be seen as a betrayal of the American people:

The House Judiciary Committee released a memo on Friday that details what it says is a pattern of neglect and abuse of taxpayer funds during the Biden administration. These funds, according to the memo, went directly and indirectly to anti-Israel protests and terrorist-linked NGOs.

The funds were disbursed through the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), the State Department and other federal agencies.

Not sure we needed another example of why President Trump shut down USAID, but we just got one. Here are the committee’s key findings:

• U.S. nonprofit Rockefeller Brothers Fund provided nearly $4 million to radical, anti-Israel groups, including some with alleged ties to terrorist organizations; 

• USAID grantee and tax-exempt organization, the Tides Network, provided over $1 million to anti-Israel groups, including some with ties to terrorist organizations; 

• U.S. nonprofits, the Jewish Communal Fund, and its grantees, Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors and PEF Israel Endowment Funds, may be violating section 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status by funding radical anti-Israel groups; 

• Israeli nonprofit, Movement for Quality Government, has failed to cooperate with the Committee’s inquiry concerning its funding of anti-Israeli-government NGOs; 

• According to a 2023 audit, Israeli nonprofit and U.S. government grantee Abraham Initiatives failed to comply with anti-terrorism procedures.

The Tides Network is linked to a prominent figure in American leftist and anti-Israel activism: George Soros.

Although Soros did not found the Tides Network, the organization often serves as a conduit for his financial contributions to far-left causes. Additionally, it is associated with a wide range of anti-Israel and anti-American initiatives.

This isn’t the first investigation conducted by the House Judiciary Committee. A memo from 2025 revealed that the Committee was already examining the questionable spending of taxpayer money, specifically through USAID.

That memo, as background for the House probe, said:

In 2023, Israel experienced widespread protests over the plan of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government to reform the Israeli judicial system. The Biden-Harris Administration openly opposed the proposed reforms, with former President Joe Biden saying that Israel “cannot continue down this road.”

Media reports subsequently revealed that some U.S. taxpayer money, in the form of grants, had been funneled through various American and Israeli NGOs to fund these protests in part. The use of federal grants for such purposes risks harming America’s relationship with one of its closest allies and undermines core civil liberties. 

Let’s be clear about what this is. Some of this spending comes dangerously close to offering aid and support to organizations that oppose the ideals and principles of the United States.

Under the Biden administration, USAID funded NGOs that are provided support not only to anti-Israel groups but also to groups linked to terrorist organizations.

Additionally, there is the connection to the Soros family, which has opposed many of the core values that the United States has stood for over the past couple of generations.

Is anyone going to pay for this with their freedom? Well, you know how that goes. But there is some good news.

USAID is no more, so there goes yet another conduit between taxpayer money and Democrat-aligned groups who hate America.

Navy Identifies Two Aviators K!lled in Growler Jet Crash001!

The U.S. Navy has identified the two aviators killed in a fighter jet crash near Mount Rainier as Lt. Cmdr. Lyndsay P. Evans and Lt. Serena N. Wileman, both 31 and from California.

According to the United States Navy, the pair were flying an EA-18G Growler assigned to Electronic Attack Squadron 130—known as the “Zappers”—when the aircraft went down during a training mission east of the mountain.

Search crews later located the wreckage in a remote, steep, and heavily wooded area at around 6,000 feet elevation. The operation initially began as a search-and-rescue effort but was later shifted to recovery after officials confirmed both aviators had died.

Evans was recognized for her role in a historic moment during Super Bowl LVII, where she participated in the first all-female military flyover, commemorating 50 years of women serving as Navy aviators.

Wileman, who joined the squadron in 2021, had earned several honors during her service, including the National Defense Service Medal and the Combat Action Ribbon.

Officials say the cause of the crash remains under investigation. In the meantime, the Navy emphasized that its focus is on supporting the families of the fallen aviators and the broader Growler community during this difficult time.

Trump’s AG Pick Is Going to Make It Impossible For Democrats To Weaponize DOJ Against Him

Several top Democrats, including a few of them who are running for the presidency in 2028, have made no secret about it. They plan on launching new lawfare against President Donald Trump and as many of his administration as they can if the regain power. They don’t want to see him breathe a breath of free air after his next term is over.

That’s what domestic terrorists do. They use the power of the state to prosecute and persecute their political opponents. They can’t win on superior ideas, so if they manage to lie their way back into power, they will use that power to go after Trump. They’ve already said as much.

To that end, Trump’s pick to replace Pam Bondi as head of the Justice Department wants to ensure political prosecutions don’t happen anymore. They began under Biden, and acting Attorney General Todd Blanche knows that more will be coming if a Democrat wins the White House. So he’s making sure they can’t do it:

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche says he is already working on ways to prevent what he believes could be another round of politically motivated prosecutions targeting President Donald Trump after he leaves office.

Blanche made the remarks during an interview with NewsNation released Thursday, just hours after Trump announced he would formally nominate him to become the nation’s next attorney general on a permanent basis. …

During the interview, NewsNation host Katie Pavlich referenced Blanche’s previous claim that Trump likely would have faced prison time had he lost the 2024 election.

Pavlich also pointed to comments from prominent Democrats who have suggested members of the Trump administration could face investigations or prosecution if Democrats regain control of the White House.

Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, for example, told The New York Times earlier this year that officials who broke the law should face both criminal and civil consequences.

Pavlich asked Blanche whether he believes Democrats could attempt to target Trump, his family, administration officials, or even federal law enforcement personnel after the president leaves office.

Blanche did not hesitate.

“I believe it’s a possibility that the Democrats will go after President Trump, his family, anybody that knows him, anybody that worked for him,” Blanche said.

“I think they’ve proven that to be true.”

He then revealed that efforts are already underway to prevent such actions from occurring in the future.

“And what can we do about it?” Blanche asked. “We can just keep on exposing when we learn about the weaponization that happened for many years. We can keep on exposing it and putting roadblocks in place so it never happens again.”

He didn’t elaborate on what the “roadblocks” would look like, but whatever they are, they will have to be strong and final enough to withstand what we know is coming from the next Democrat president.

I know Trump’s Justice Department has attempted to prosecute a couple of people who went after him during his first administration. And I suppose you could call that ‘weaponizing’ the Justice Department. But if these individuals broke the law trying to “get” Trump, then they should have to answer for that. After all, former Trump national security adviser John Bolton just pleaded guilty to mishandling classified information.

The difference between the Biden and Trump DOJ is that the Biden DOJ literally fabricated ‘crimes’ to ‘go after’ Trump. And based on what losers like Pritzker have said, the next Democrat president will do the same thing.

Good on Blanche for trying to prevent that.

Here We Go: FBI Raids Soros-Backed Left-Wing Org And We’re All In For It

It’s no secret that billionaire dung stain George Soros hates America. Like every other left-wing Western commie, he’s been working to bring down our country for decades. It’s all been under the guise of “muh free speech,” of course, but I’ve suspected for years that the guy is funding illegal activities and nefarious anti-American groups.

But no one has done anything about it. I suspect that’s because Soros ‘owns’ a fair share of politicians on both sides of the aisle. I’ll never forget that chummy photo of him and Sen. John McCain, RINO-AZ, from back in the day:

How can you be chummy with a guy who has spent his entire adult life trying to destroy our country – and still claim you’re a Republican?

Anyway, the days of Soros ‘getting away with it’ appear to be over:

Federal investigators raided a Soros-funded voter mobilization group on Thursday as part of a reported ongoing fraud investigation.

FBI agents raided the headquarters of the Ohio Organizing Collaborative (OOC) on June 11 and deployed across the state to question members of the organization, sometimes bearing subpoenas or demanding to seize electronic devices, MS Now reported. A day later, multiple sources familiar with the events told CBS News that the operations were part of a fraud-related investigation.

The raid marks the latest flashpoint in the Trump administration’s expanded use of federal law enforcement to scrutinize alleged voter fraud and election-related misconduct, a push cheered by conservatives who have long argued such cases were under-enforced and condemned by Democrats and voting rights groups who say the effort risks turning the FBI into a political weapon against liberal voter registration operations.

OOC is a nonprofit organization that works closely with the Democratic Party in Ohio on voter mobilization and registration efforts. It is especially active in ballot referendums, tapping its vast donor network that includes the Soros family’s philanthropies, to do so.

‘Voter mobilization’ and ‘registration.’ Naturally.

The DOJ wouldn’t comment to Fox News: “Search warrants are authorized by a judge and anything said by any organization or others in the media is unfounded speculation, as the target of any investigation is not privy to the search warrant affidavit until after indictment,” said a spokesperson.

More:

The group previously spent $250,000 in 2023 to oppose a GOP-led effort to block the right to an abortion from being enshrined in Ohio’s constitution and spent a further $300,000 against a Republican redistricting effort a year later. …

The Soros family’s Foundation to Promote Open Society gave OOC roughly $1.9 million between 2019 and 2020. In 2021, Open Society Action Fund gave an additional $1 million to OOC’s sister organization, the Ohio Organizing Campaign, followed by another $1 million donation in 2023.

Federal Judge Blocks NYC Bankruptcy Sale In Major Blow to Mamdani

A federal judge has temporarily blocked Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s attempt to stop the bankruptcy sale of more than 5,000 rent-subsidized apartments across New York City, posing an early challenge to the socialist mayor’s housing agenda.

Bankruptcy Judge David Jones of the Southern District of New York recently ruled that the city could not intervene in the ongoing sale of properties owned by Pinnacle Group, one of the city’s largest landlords.

The company declared bankruptcy in May after defaulting on $560 million in loans, and the Mamdani administration has claimed it owes the city $12. 7 million in unpaid housing code fines.

Mamdani had directed the city’s Law Department to intervene, arguing the deal could worsen housing instability for thousands of tenants living in subsidized apartments.

But Judge Jones rejected the city’s motion, saying the bankruptcy auction must move forward

Pinnacle, owned by billionaire Joel Wiener, controls more than 140 buildings and 9,000 units across the five boroughs.

Court filings show Summit Real Estate Holdings has offered $450 million to buy roughly 90 of the company’s properties.

Completion of the bankruptcy auction process will bring financial stability along with the opportunity to stabilize services, outcomes which we would expect the City would not want to disrupt,” said Ken Fisher, an attorney representing Pinnacle

City lawyers argued in filings that Summit might not have enough money to fix the buildings, warning that “continuing losses and mounting expenses might lead to additional bankruptcies or reorganizations, a state of financial and social chaos potentially worse than the current situation. ”

Tenant groups opposing the sale say Pinnacle has neglected maintenance and allowed conditions to deteriorate, while others fear the new owners could raise rents or further reduce oversight.

The battle over Pinnacle’s holdings became a flashpoint during the mayoral race, where Mamdani campaigned on preserving rent subsidized housing and protecting low income tenants

The court defeat also adds political strain for Mamdani as he defends his choice of Cea Weaver to head the Mayor’s Office to Protect Tenants.

Weaver has faced criticism for past posts describing homeownership as “a weapon of white supremacy. ”

She later apologized, calling the comments “poorly phrased and not reflective of my work.”

Mamdani also got bad news this week on his “racial equity plan. ”

Mamdani is “moving the goalposts” on poverty in the nation’s largest city with his newly unveiled racial equity plan to justify a massive expansion of government intervention, a top city policy analyst warns.

Mamdani released his “Preliminary Citywide Racial Equity Plan” in early August, which was promptly criticized by President Donald Trump’s Justice Department

Santiago Vidal Calvo of the Manhattan Institute, who told Fox News that the report’s claim that 62% of New Yorkers can’t make it in the city on a “true cost of living” is all a ploy to call a crisis that must be solved with more government.

“What he’s essentially doing is moving the goalposts,” Vidal Calvo explained.

He’s essentially saying that what the federal government qualifies as somebody below the poverty line — which is essentially like $34,000, $35,000 a year

Those might be like 2024 numbers, but it’s pretty close to that — we’re essentially moving the goalposts so anybody under $160,000 with children cannot afford to live in New York City,” Calvo added.

The “reality” of the situation, Vidal Calvo says, is that you “don’t make a place more affordable by making people earn more,” but instead the city needs to “ask the right questions” about policies that drive wage growth and new housing development.

“So the issue here is that we are focusing on a problem that the socialists in City Hall want to believe — that if you give people more money, they essentially can access more things,” Calvo said.

The high cost of living in New York City is driven by several factors, including housing, which is an area where Vidal Calvo says City Hall needs to “encourage more housing being built around the city.”

Mamdani is also in hot water after backstabbing NYC residents with more price hikes.