CartoonDems

 

Trump: Dems Cry Corruption to Hide Their Own in Blue States

President Donald Trump accused Democrats of "threatening Republicans with knowingly false accusations and charges" to deflect from "massive" corruption and crime in blue states.

In a pair of Truth Social posts Thursday morning, Trump lashed out at Democrat leaders, accusing them of using allegations of corruption against his administration to distract Americans from wrongdoing in Democrat-controlled states, including Minnesota and California.

"The Democrat Party, lead [sic] by one of the most Corrupt and anti-American groups of political leaders and hacks in the history of our Country, and even the World, is doing everything in their power to get away from MASSIVE BLUE STATE CORRUPTION by saying, over and over again, that the Trump Administration is corrupt," Trump wrote.

He accused Democrats of repeatedly using accusations against his administration as a political strategy to divert attention from what he described as widespread theft involving taxpayer money.

Trump specifically singled out Minnesota and California, alleging "TREMENDOUS & UNPRECEDENTED theft" in those states.

The president also revisited Democrats' efforts during his first administration to obtain his personal tax returns, arguing that the investigation ultimately failed to uncover wrongdoing.

"After one year of intense work, these brilliant Democrat inspired accountants FOUND NOTHING except that I paid my taxes and did everything right," Trump wrote.

He characterized the scrutiny of his finances as part of a broader campaign by Democrats to undermine him and other Republicans.

"Now, in order to deflect from MASSIVE BLUE STATE CORRUPTION & CRIME, they are at it again, illegally threatening Republicans with knowingly false accusations and charges," Trump wrote.

He also blamed Democrat tactics for Republicans' losses in last week's midterm elections.

"Other than cheating, this is how they won the Midterms," Trump said.

Trump's latest accusations come as Democrats prepare to take control of Congress in January following their midterm victories.

Incoming House Oversight Committee Chair Robert Garcia, D-Calif., has promised investigations into the Trump administration, while Trump and Attorney General Todd Blanche have warned against politically motivated investigations and impeachment efforts.

The president's criticism of blue-state fraud comes amid documented scandals. In Minnesota, federal authorities announced new Medicaid fraud charges in October involving more than $21 million in alleged losses.

California also has faced scrutiny over fraudulent pandemic unemployment payments and other government spending.

Trump additionally defended his decision to forgo his presidential salary, saying he had sacrificed millions of dollars while serving in the White House.

"THE DEMOCRATS ARE CORRUPT AND EVIL, and I am the exact opposite!" Trump declared.

He ended with a warning to fellow Republicans: "Fight hard, Republicans, or you won't have a Country left!"

Charlie McCarthy ✉

Charlie McCarthy, a writer/editor at Newsmax, has nearly four decades of journalism experience covering news, sports, and politics.

© 2026 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

 

Ilhan Omar’s Citizenship Nightmare Just Got Worse, and Tom Emmer Says DOJ Is ‘Finalizing’ It

Incoming House Minority Whip Tom Emmer (R-MN) on Wednesday night said that the Justice Department is "finalizing" its review of Rep. Ilhan Omar's (D-MN) birth date, and that it is just one of "four different things" being looked at in the federal probe.

Pressed on whether House Republicans would need a vote to expel his Minnesota colleague if she's indicted, Emmer told Newsmax it won't be necessary.

"I don't think we're going to need to," he said. "I think Ilhan Omar, she's a dishonest, anti-American individual who has lied about her age for years."

"What I'm saying is the birth date is an administrative procedure, and once it's established that she was over the age of 18 when she claimed to be a minor, she's no longer a citizen of the United States," Emmer claimed. "And when she's no longer a citizen, she's not entitled to serve in Congress."

No denaturalization case has been filed, and revoking citizenship typically has to go through a court, so Emmer's theory is just that – a theory. Omar has denied the allegations and has not been charged.

As RedState reported in October, Omar's congressional staff asked the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library in May 2019 to change her listed birth year from 1981 to 1982 — a one-year shift that makes her derivative-citizenship story work.

The request came several months after she was elected to Congress, and shortly after a video from a political opponent went viral questioning whether she had accurately stated her age.

Embedded tweet continues:

... that whole year and one year is the difference between her citizenship story working and not. "For derivative citizenship, two things have to be true — one, her father had to naturalize; and two, she still had to be a minor." That one year matters a lot.

For years, the 1981 date had appeared in the library's records, on Wikipedia, and in media reports, including during her time in the Minnesota House.

“On May 17, 2019, Library staff were informed by Rep. Omar’s congressional staff that her birth year was incorrect and requested that we change it to 1982,” the library director later confirmed in writing, noting that her staff was also working to update Wikipedia and the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress.

Omar has long said she received derivative citizenship through her father when he naturalized in 2000 and that she was still a minor then, but a 1981 birth year would have made her 18 or 19 that year, disqualifying her as a minor.

Emmer did not expand on the other three things being investigated regarding Omar. The Washington Post reported that a federal investigation into possible false statements on immigration paperwork is focused in part on her birth date and related citizenship documents, an inquiry that recently included a search of her Washington residence and subpoenas issued to family members.

“HSI was just looking at her file top to bottom,” a Trump administration official told the outlet.

The congresswoman handily won reelection in last week's midterms and taunted the Trump administration during her victory speech.

"When they decided that they were going to come for me, they thought that they were going to find someone who was going to cower," Omar said. "They thought they were going to find a community that was going to live in fear. They thought that if you attacked me and you silenced me, that my community wouldn't show up and vote."

Winning more than 76 percent of the vote in one of the country's bluest congressional districts is fine, and her fiery comments will stir up the base, but it doesn't change her predicament.

Credit: redstate.com 

 

White House Fires Back at Democrats' 'Lawyer Up' Threat With a Legal Warning of Its Own

White House Counsel Will Scharf warned House Democrats this week not to overreach, saying their subpoenas need a legitimate legislative purpose. His letter went to Democrat Rep. Robert Garcia of California (CA-42), who is seeking the House Oversight gavel and had a two-word message for the Trump administration as Democrats won the House: “Lawyer up!”

My colleague Nick Arama covered what came next. Garcia went after White House Chief of Staff Stephen Miller. Scharf, citing a Nov. 7 MS NOW interview, says the congressman also discussed contacts with state attorneys general and using the committee to gather information for possible prosecutions.

Scharf’s letter is dated Monday, Nov. 9, and became public Wednesday, Nov. 11. He opens with Watkins v. United States and Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP. The first dealt with the limits of congressional investigations. The second dealt with subpoenas for a president’s personal records.

"The Supreme Court has held that '[i]nvestigations conducted solely for the personal aggrandizement of the investigators or to ‘punish’ those investigated are indefensible.' Watkins v. United States, 354 U.S. 178, 187 (1957). Congressional investigations must further a legitimate legislative task; Congress cannot employ them to exercise powers of criminal prosecution assigned to the Executive and the Judiciary."

In Mazars, the House sent subpoenas to Trump’s accounting firm and two banks. It wanted his financial records. The Court said the House had to look elsewhere if it could reasonably get the information it needed. Lawmakers couldn’t make Trump’s finances a “case study” for a law that would apply to everyone. If Congress really did need his records, the subpoena had to be limited to what it needed for that work.

On page three of his letter, Scharf warns that threats intended to drive executive branch officials from public service could cross into criminal conduct. Iowa Solicitor General Eric Wessan also weighed in on the issue Wednesday.

Garcia said Wednesday that Trump had something to hide. As he saw it, the administration was using the Justice Department to scare the committee off. He said Congress gets its authority from Article I.

“Congress has wide latitude to conduct investigations and oversight, an authority inherent in the power to legislate. The American people voted overwhelmingly for us to pass laws to root out corruption and abuse.”

In Eastland v. United States Servicemen's Fund, the group that sued said a Senate subcommittee was using a subpoena to harass it. The Court held that the senators were protected by the Speech or Debate Clause because issuing the subpoena was part of their legislative work. The accusation of harassment didn’t take that protection away. That may explain why Scharf spends his letter on what Garcia has said. The White House can call him out for talking about prosecutions. Once there’s a subpoena to fight over, what counts is what the committee asks for and why it needs it.

Dana Bash asked Garcia on CNN whether Stephen Miller had committed a crime. Garcia pointed to Miller’s role in shaping the administration’s policies but failed to mention a specific offense. If the committee wants him under oath, Garcia should be able to say what it needs to learn from him and what legislation his answers could inform. The questions the Court asked in Mazars are worth asking here, too. Could Congress get the same answers elsewhere? Is the committee asking for more than it needs? The White House should press for those answers before anyone is ordered to appear. A policy fight with Miller is a poor substitute for explaining what Congress needs his testimony to do.

Editor’s Note: Every single day, here at RedState, we stand up and FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT against the radical Left and deliver the conservative reporting our readers deserve.

Credit: redstate.com 

 

The Incoming House Dem Majority Might Be Interesting. No, I Don't Mean That in a Good Way.

The incoming House Democrat majority will be nearly 260 seats. It’ll take years to chip away, but with the right messaging and fight, we’ll rebuild. We’ve been here before. Meanwhile, the danger of Democrats overreaching is sky-high, along with a band of rebels who do not care for institutional deference. That is to say, the whole ‘wait your turn and respect the hierarchy’ could be thrown in the trash, paving the way for a rambunctious bunch that could give Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) fits (via Axios):

House Democrats' incoming freshman class is barely a week old and already threatening to defy party leaders in ways most of their incumbent colleagues wouldn't dare.

Why it matters: It's a dynamic House leaders may have to learn to live with as they integrate a massive group of new members who were swept into office on a wave of populist, anti-establishment anger.

"My class is huge not because of ... the Democratic Party and its brand but despite it," said Rep.-elect Don Leonard (D-Ohio). "Many of us are outsiders who didn't come up through the machine, don't buy into the conventions."

Congressional Progressive Caucus chair Greg Casar (D-Texas) told Axios: "Any members that are new and have just run their elections are going to be very close to where the voters are, and we know the voters are very upset."

[…]

Things get more spotty when gauging Jeffries' support among incoming freshmen, some of whom have openly declined to commit to supporting his leadership.

That includes members of the informal progressive "Bloc," including Reps.-elect Darializa Avila Chevalier (D-N.Y.), Melat Kiros (D-Colo.), Claire Valdez (D-N.Y.), Adam Hamawy (D-N.J.) and Chris Rabb (D-Pa.).

"As far as I've heard, Jeffries is the only one running," said progressive Rep.-elect Randy Villegas (D-Calif.). "But ... I think we need to see some prioritization of some legislation, particularly around health care, foreign policy and immigration."

Some incoming and sitting House Democrats have been flooded with calls and emails urging them not to elect Jeffries speaker, Axios previously reported.

The intrigue: It's not just progressives hesitating to throw their full-throated support behind Jeffries. The list also includes some moderates in districts President Trump carried by double digits in 2024.

Jeffries is likely to clinch the 218. I just don’t see that not happening, especially given how touchy Democrats are about history and race. The New York Democrat will be put to the test, as he likely wants to impeach Donald Trump, just not now. Given these signs, he might face a rebel caucus that will ignore him. Will some of these bills be whack job city? Who knows — but some of these Democrats from deep-red districts can’t and won’t be Antifa. Annie Andrews from South Carolina and, dare I say, James Talarico might also walk a fine line, as they’re from deep-red bastions. 

Who knows. But if discipline wins out, we could be on a long journey through the wilderness. 

Editor's Note: Do you enjoy Townhall's conservative reporting that takes on the radical Left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.

Join Townhall VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.

 

Here's What Caused a CNBC Host to Laugh a Dem. Rep. Off the Set

Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-CA)

 

 was laughed off the set of CNBC’s Squawk Box when he tried to gaslight the hosts into believing the Trump White House weaponized the Department of Justice (DOJ). That’s a flat-out lie. The politicization of the DOJ began under Obama and peaked under Joe Biden. We know about Arctic Frost, Plasmic Echo, and the ongoing surveillance operations against the Trump family and its officials. 

It’s why co-host Joe Kernen had a good laugh:

KERNEN: “Congressman, if we lived in a perfect world, I’d be nodding.”

“But do I need to mention Merrick Garland? Do I need to mention Eric Holder? Janet Reno? Loretta Lynch, who was on the plane with Bill Clinton?”

“I mean, come on.”

“I love you, congressman. But you delivered that with a straight face, which is what I liked.”

Aguilar had nothing. He called it a conspiracy theory and tried to pivot to costs.

AGUILAR: “If you want to talk about 12 year old conspiracy theories about planes, that’s fine. Joe, the American people are getting crushed with costs.”

Kernen wasn’t done.

KERNEN: “Eric Holder was Obama’s wingman.”

This is what happens when you only watch MSNBC.

Credit: townhall.com 

 

HUD official Craig Trainor appointed acting DOJ civil rights chief, replacing Harmeet Dhillon

 

President Donald Trump has tapped Craig Trainor, a top official at the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), as Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division.

Since October 2025, Trainor has served as assistant secretary for fair housing and equal opportunity at HUD where he directed enforcement of civil rights statutes that HUD manages throughout the United States.

In an X post on Tuesday, Attorney General Todd Blanche announced the appointment of Trainor while thanking him for his “dedicated service” to the U.S. and President Donald Trump.

“I am pleased to announce that President Trump has appointed Craig Trainor as Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division,” Blanche wrote. “Since October 2025, Craig has served as the Senate-confirmed Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, where he oversaw nationwide enforcement of HUD civil rights statutes. Craig was also the principal architect of HUD’s civil rights enforcement policies, which cut the Biden-era fair housing case backlog in half. I thank Craig for taking on this critical role and for his dedicated service to the American people and President Trump.”

 

I am pleased to announce that President Trump has appointed Craig Trainor as Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division. Since October 2025, Craig has served as the Senate-confirmed Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, where he oversaw…

— Attorney General Todd Blanche (@AGToddBlanche) November 11, 2026

The Trump administration did not disclose if the position was permanent.

Harmeet Dhillon previously held the position as Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division at the Department of Justice (DOJ) before she resigned on November 5^th. 

Credit: oann.com 

Mamdani Signs COPA, Triggering Lawsuits Over Property Rights

 Mayor Zohran Mamdani just signed the Community Opportunity to Purchase Act — COPA — into law. What looked like a long‑running policy fight in City Hall is now real law. That means owners of some apartment buildings will face a new, government‑run right of first refusal before they can sell on the open market. Expect lawsuits. Lots of them.

What COPA actually does

COPA forces owners of certain multifamily buildings to notify the city and HPD‑certified nonprofits before they can finish a sale. The law sets a formal clock: a short statement‑of‑interest window, followed by a longer offer period — adding up to roughly 145 days of first‑dibs time — and a matching right that can last up to a year. City officials say the law targets “distressed” or regulated buildings and narrowed the pool to about 2,100 properties from much larger earlier drafts. There are exemptions for small owner‑occupied buildings, some foreclosure or bankruptcy sales, and other narrow cases, but the basic point is clear: private sales now run through an extra city checkpoint.

Why lawsuits are the next act

Legal experts warned this week that COPA invites constitutional challenges. Courts have already said the government can’t quietly take control of private property without paying for it — see Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid and related takings law. City lawyers raised red flags during negotiations, and real‑estate firms predicted “protracted litigation” over takings, due process, and HPD’s rulemaking power. The law doesn’t take effect for a year, but the real fight begins now: landlord groups, small‑owner associations, lenders and trade groups are all lining up to press their cases in state and federal court.

Who wins and who pays?

The mayor and Council sell COPA as an anti‑displacement tool that gives community groups a chance to preserve affordable housing. That’s a fine goal in theory. But the bill contains no automatic, ready‑to‑use acquisition fund; certified nonprofits will still need money to buy buildings, and taxpayers could be asked to cover subsidies later. Meanwhile, owners who are short on cash or caught up in mortgage trouble face added legal and timing headaches. Small landlords warned the law will depress sale values and make refinancing harder. If COPA’s promise is affordable housing, its price may be delayed bank loans, lower home values, and lengthy court fights.

What to watch next

HPD must now write rules and publish a list of certified entities, which is where the rubber hits the road. Expect pre‑enforcement legal challenges, requests for injunctions once HPD issues guidance, and swift filings from landlord groups. This signing turns political theater into administrative reality — and into legal liability for the city. If you care about property rights, market stability, or who gets to control your neighborhood, keep an eye on HPD’s rulemaking and the first lawsuits that will try to stop this experiment before it becomes the new normal.

Credit:  https://patriotpowerednetwork.com

Russia’s Ambassador Alexander Darchiev Dies; Washington Demands Answers

Russia’s ambassador to the United States, Alexander Darchiev, has died suddenly at 66, Moscow announced on November 11, 2026. The Russian Foreign Ministry offered a flowery tribute but no facts — no cause, no place, no details. In plain terms: the Kremlin loses its top diplomat in Washington at a tense moment for U.S.-Russia relations, and the rest of the world is left to wait for answers.

What we know — and what we don’t

The basic facts are short and stark. The Russian Foreign Ministry said Ambassador Alexander Darchiev “passed away suddenly” at age 66 and praised him as “an outstanding diplomat” and mentor. Darchiev, a career Russia watcher on North America, had been posted to Washington after President Vladimir Putin tapped him during a period of renewed engagement with President Donald Trump. Beyond formal condolences from Moscow, officials have offered no further information on cause or location of death.

Why this matters for U.S.-Russia relations

This is not just trivia for diplomatic junkies. Darchiev was Moscow’s point person in Washington while talks over sensitive issues — including Ukraine-related talks and broader security arrangements — were trying to find a fragile footing. Losing an ambassador midstream can slow communications, stall negotiations, and create an awkward gap where informal channels used to be. For an administration that has sought to reopen lines with Russia, this sudden vacancy is a practical problem and a political one.

Operational and political fallout

Practically speaking, the embassy will be run by a chargé d’affaires until Moscow names a replacement. Politically, the U.S. should insist on transparency about what happened. If the death occurred on U.S. soil, American authorities may have been involved; if it occurred in Russia or elsewhere, Moscow should still release details. There’s nothing wrong with asking clear questions — diplomats expect protocol, and the American people deserve candor when foreign officials die under unexplained circumstances.

A conservative checklist for Washington

Here’s how a serious, sober U.S. government should react: demand a full accounting from the Russian Foreign Ministry; ask the Russian Embassy in Washington to name the chargé d’affaires and disclose funeral plans; and be ready to press for medical or investigative reports if warranted. All this while maintaining necessary caution in any ongoing talks. Darchiev defended Kremlin policy on Crimea and the war in Ukraine — he was no neutral mediator. That makes transparency more important, not less. No one should confuse condolences with a waiver of scrutiny.

In the end, this sudden death is a reminder that diplomacy runs on people as much as policy. The Kremlin’s tribute won’t answer practical questions, and it certainly won’t resolve the larger strategic challenges between the United States and Russia. Washington should be respectful, but not gullible — insist on facts, protect American interests, and don’t let an unexplained vacancy be a blank check for rushed diplomacy. After all, when details are missing, speculation rushes in — and speculation rarely helps national security.

Credit:  patriotpowerednetwork.com

 

CartoonDems