 |
Legal setbacks at the Supreme Court — including visible skepticism from justices about the administration's bid to limit birthright citizenship — are being cited by Reuters, CNN, and other outlets as a central factor in President Donald Trump's decision to fire Attorney General Pam Bondi on Thursday. Conservative legal scholar John C. Yoo — the Emanuel S. Heller Professor of Law at University of California, Berkeley School of Law; nonresident senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute; and former Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel official who clerked for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas — told commentators Trump may have concluded "he needs new lawyers" after watching key cases play out unfavorably. Reuters reported that justices from across the ideological spectrum pushed back hard on the administration's constitutional arguments on birthright citizenship, suggesting a possible loss that could embarrass the White House and frustrate Trump's core immigration agenda. In reporting on the firing, NBC News cited administration sources saying Trump was unhappy with Bondi's handling of high‑profile legal matters, including the Epstein records controversy, which critics said contributed to repeated courtroom setbacks. CNN reported that Trump had privately discussed replacing Bondi with
Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin, reflecting
frustration with how the Justice Department's legal strategies have
fared under her leadership.
The Washington Post editorial board argued Bondi's tenure was marked by repeated legal missteps and losses that eroded confidence in her ability to defend Trump's positions in court. The Guardian wrote that Bondi's downfall stemmed in part from her perceived inability to make significant legal progress on Trump's priorities and from mishandling politically sensitive legal issues, reinforcing speculation that legal performance influenced the firing. Bondi's departure was announced by Trump on social media, where he called her a "Great American Patriot," according to Reuters and CBS News, even as news outlets noted the timing came immediately after the Supreme Court hearing on birthright citizenship. Legal analysts from Lawfare and other outlets suggested Trump's broader dissatisfaction with how his Justice Department has represented his executive power and immigration agenda in federal courts likely informed his choice to install a new legal team. As acting attorney general, Todd Blanche — a former Trump personal lawyer — will lead the department amid continued litigation over immigration, executive authority, and constitutional challenges, |
Conservative Blogger
Friday, April 3, 2026
High Court Setbacks May Have Led to Bondi Firing
New: Rhode Island Democrats Fan the Flames With Explanation on Why They Oppose Iryna Zarutska Mural
 |
I think it's safe to say that Rhode Island Democrats have not covered themselves in glory with the way they have responded to a mural of Iryna Zarutska that was being painted on the side of a building in Providence. RedState reported Monday on how the city's woke mayor, Brett Smiley, had called for the mural of the murdered 23-year-old Ukrainian refugee to be removed on grounds that it was "divisive." "I continue to encourage our community to support local artists whose work brings us closer together rather than further divides us," Smiley proclaimed in his original statement, citing the alleged "misguided, isolating intent of those funding murals like this across the country" (read: Elon Musk). As we also documented, the owners of the LGBTQ club that had allowed the mural to be put up had to issue multiple statements due to the outcry, first to reassure the community that they were, in fact, Democrats who didn't support President Trump, and then later to confirm they would be bending the knee to the mob and having the rendering removed. Not surprisingly, Smiley is doubling down on his own divisive rhetoric, admitting in two local interviews that the funding from Musk was the impetus behind his call to have the mural removed. He also
claimed that there was never a mandate from him that it be taken down,
even though he knows full well and good that making public comments
voicing his displeasure, along with what he felt should be done about
it, undoubtedly would fuel the fire and make the flustered club owners
feel they had no choice.
Also unmentioned in a lot of reporting on this story is the fact that the mayor is gay and married, a fact that could have pushed the bar owners to act out of a misguided sense of loyalty: Honestly, it's just gaslighting on steroids for him and anyone else opposed to the mural to cite it creating "division" as a reason for it to come down, because they are the ones who created the division in the first place. Further, I suspect there was division over the George Floyd murals that went up in Providence, too, but we didn't see any calls from city or state Democrats for those to come down, did we? I'm not sure whose comments were worse, though. The mayor's or this clown's:
As the Rhode Island GOP pointed out, this is not about art. It's about selective outrage. But it's also about priorities - and Rhode Island Democrats continue to tell us what theirs really are: Not the victims of violent crime, but rather the need for Democrats to try and squelch any and all debate about how their dangerous soft-on-crime policies that lead to repeat offenders being let back out onto the streets create more victims like Iryna Zarutska. Editor’s Note: Hollywood, academia, and liberal elites are out of touch with the average American. |
Report: Our 'Ally' France Just Made Another Incredible Move Regarding the Strait of Hormuz
 |
The Gulf countries were trying to advance a resolution drafted by Bahrain in the United Nations Security Council that would allow the use of force to defend their shipping in the Strait of Hormuz. The resolution:
Now that would seem simple, and primarily defensive, to be able to protect yourself and get through.
But the effort was effectively stymied on Thursday by three countries. You could probably guess two of them - Russia and China. But the third was ridiculous: France. They opposed any authorization of military action or use of force, according to a diplomat and a senior U.N. official.
Macron said use of force was "unrealistic" because it would "take an inordinate amount of time" and expose people to threats from the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). I don't like to use pejoratives, but throughout writing this, I kept thinking of the term "cheese-eating surrender monkeys" when it comes to France. How do you behave this way, with such a weak-kneed response to dealing with a terrorist regime, even when your own interests are involved? And they don't even want to authorize the Gulf states to be able to defend themselves, because...it might be violent. Unbelievable. Of course, the Gulf states don't need the U.N. to act. It should be a world effort, but the U.N. is so ineffective, I wouldn't bet they can get this through. READ MORE: Trump Zings Macron - but Macron's Iran Response Is the Real Joke There was also a coalition meeting of nations, including some of our European allies.
But the gathering made plain they wanted a ceasefire before they would consider going further. They did say they would reject the effort by Iran to potentially collect tolls for letting ships through, so I suppose that's something if they stick to it.
President Donald Trump may be thinking that if he gets the objectives of Operation Epic Fury done and/or they agree to a ceasefire, this coalition can then act. This is not a complicated process if you have the will to put it into place; it should be an international effort to keep it clear. The only question is, do they have the will? |
A Foolish NATO Was a Big Loser in the Iran War
 |
NATO members are not legally required to join any member's military operations that are not formally sanctioned by the alliance or not aimed at protecting the homelands of the membership. But they often do just that. Some NATO members joined the Americans in Afghanistan and Iraq on the theory that, in the post-9/11 environment, the Taliban and Saddam Hussein were dangers to all Western security. They followed the precedent set by America's 1999 intervention in the distant Balkans, leading a three-month NATO campaign to dismantle Slobodan Milosevic's often bloody ambitions of a Greater Serbia. The U.S. also joined the 2011 U.N.-approved, and French- and British-inspired, NATO "coalition of the willing" bombing campaign in Libya. That effort proved a seven-month misadventure – especially since the targeted Libyan strongman Muammar Gaddafi had given up his nuclear weapons program and was desperately trying to cut a deal with the West. When NATO members in the past have operated unilaterally to defend their own national interests, they have often called on the U.S., as NATO's strongest member, for overt help. For nearly 40 years, the U.S. had offered logistical, intelligence, reconnaissance, refueling, and diplomatic support to the French in their unilateral and postcolonial efforts to protect Chad from Libya and, later, Islamists. During the 1982 Falklands War, a solitary Britain faced enormous logistical challenges in steaming halfway around the world to eject Argentina from its windswept and sparse islands. U.S. aid was critical to the effort. So America stepped up to help with intelligence, reconnaissance, the supply of some two million gallons of much-needed gasoline, and crucial restocking of Britain's depleted Tomahawk missiles. The American tilt to Britain prompted anger from most Latin American nations of the shared Western hemisphere, as well as from many Hispanic American citizens at home. No matter – President Ronald Reagan rightly saw the importance of solidarity with a NATO member and a long-time American ally. So he gave Britain a veritable blank check for American aid. Currently, America has not asked NATO members to help bomb Iran – even though Europe, not the U.S., was in range of Iranian ballistic missiles, and soon perhaps nuclear-tipped ones as well. Europeans are far more vulnerable to Iranian-inspired Islamic terrorism. They are more reliant on foreign oil from the Middle East, some of it passing through the Strait of Hormuz. All the U.S. had initially asked for was basing support in disarming a common Western enemy that, for nearly half a century, has slaughtered American diplomats and soldiers and tried to kill a U.S. president and secretary of state. But most NATO members could not even offer tacit help. Some damned the U.S. effort as either illegal or unnecessary. The American public watched the British waffle for days over permitting Americans to use their Diego Garcia base. The Spanish banned American use of their NATO bases and airspace. The Italians refused a request from American bombers to land and refuel at a Sicilian NATO base. Many NATO heads of state rebuked the U.S. to their domestic audiences while, in typical two-faced fashion, publicly offering empty verbal support for the U.S. effort. The NATO response to an Iranian missile aimed at fellow NATO member Turkey was anemic. Even worse was the pathetic British reaction to another Iranian missile launch at a British base at Akrotiri, Cyprus. Yet a successful American effort in neutering a theocratic Iran was clearly of benefit to Europe. So is preventing the international waters of the Strait of Hormuz from becoming a toll booth run by the Iranian mullahs. Such passivity was in sharp contrast to the five-year-long Ukraine War on the borders of Europe. Ukraine was not in NATO. Ukrainian politicos and ambassadors had sometimes played an intrusive, partisan role in the 2016, 2020, and 2024 American presidential elections. Nonetheless, there were urgent European requests for the U.S. to honor the spirit of NATO solidarity and to get across the Atlantic as quickly as possible to protect the territorial integrity of Europe. Yet continental Europe is not intrinsically weak. The combined population of the European Union and European NATO members is around 450 million – a population more than 100 million greater than that of the U.S. These same European nations enjoy an aggregate annual GDP of more than $22 trillion, 10 times the size of the Russian economy. European diffidence comes on top of the perennial American effort to harangue NATO members to honor their 2 percent of GDP defense commitments – especially in the case of deadbeat Spain and Canada, who for years welched on their pledges. Trump's harangues were not what was undermining NATO. Instead, he ripped off a happy-face scab and exposed a festering wound of increasingly anti-American hypocrisy beneath. If you wanted to wreck the alliance, there would be no better way than to follow the duplicitous examples of Western European NATO members. Victor Davis Hanson is a distinguished fellow of the Center for American Greatness. He is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and the author of "The Second World Wars: How the First Global Conflict Was Fought and Won," from Basic Books. You can reach him by emailing authorvdh@gmail.com. |
Todd Blanche: ActBlue Allegations a 'Priority' of New DOJ
 |
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche suggested that the Department of Justice is investigating ActBlue after a New York Times report said that ActBlue might have lied to Congress about vetting foreign donations. Blanche told TV show host Jesse Waters: "That's a priority of this administration and this DOJ. It's something that a lot of people
have been worried about it for a very long time. You can rest assured
that it includes the Department of Justice and it includes me." 🚨 BREAKING: Todd Blanche indicates the DOJ is ACTIVELY INVESTIGATING ActBlue getting foreign donations and lying about it
|
Trump: 'Great American Patriot and a loyal friend' Bondi transitioning from AG to a new position
 |
President Donald Trump has released a statement following former Attorney General Pam Bondi’s transition to an “important new job in the private sector.” In a Truth Social post, Trump described Pam Bondi as a “great American patriot and a loyal friend” who has “faithfully served” as attorney general. He also highlighted what he characterized as key achievements during her tenure, including a drop in murders to their lowest level since 1900 and her “tremendous job” overseeing what he called a “massive crackdown on crime.” The president concluded his post by revealing that she will be transitioning to a “much needed” and important job in the near future. For the time being, Todd Blanche will step in to serve as Acting Attorney General.  10:15 AM – President Donald Trump has removed Attorney General Pam Bondi from her position and is eyeing several possible candidates to replace her. The president has maintained his fondness for Bondi, having long praised her publicly. This removal suggests that, despite alleged dissatisfaction with certain cases in the Department of Justice (DOJ), Trump could offer her another position within his administration. White House sources suspect that Trump is unsatisfied with the
criminal investigations of perceived political opponents of his since
Bondi took the helm. Several investigations have opened since Bondi
became attorney general in February 2025, but many have not led to
successful prosecutions.
A federal grand jury rejected the DOJ’s probe into New York Attorney General Letitia James’ alleged home insurance fraud. A federal judge has also dismissed indictments last year against former Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Director James Comey. DOJ investigations involving Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, Senator Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Representative Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), and six congressional Democrats dubbed the “seditious six” following a social media video urging service members to disobey orders—as well as other individuals—have not resulted in any charges to date. Trump recently removed Kristi Noem from her position as Department of Homeland Security (DHS) secretary and filled the role with Markwayne Mullin. He tapped Noem, however, for the newly-created position, Special Envoy for the Shield of the Americas, a new multinational security initiative. |
Rosie O'Donnell's Trump Tantrum Exposed as Leftist Indoctrination
 |
Rob Finnerty didn’t mince words when he reacted to Rosie O’Donnell’s tale about her daughter being upset over President Trump — calling it exactly what millions of Americans have watched the left cultivate for years: full-blown Trump Derangement Syndrome. The Foxes of Hollywood lecture hardworking families while expecting no pushback, and Finnerty’s show held that mirror up to their hollow, performative outrage. Rosie O’Donnell is no stranger to the spotlight or to airing family matters publicly, and she’s a mother to multiple grown children — the very people the celebrity class claims to protect while simultaneously politicizing them. Her family life has been in the tabloids and lifestyle pages for years, which makes these cable-TV confessions more than just private sorrow; they’re political theater with real consequences. What Finnerty rightly exposed is the dangerous pipeline from celebrity grievance to child indoctrination: show a child constant venom toward a democratically elected leader and no one should be surprised when that child grows up with a reflexive hatred of half the country. The left brands this emotion as moral righteousness while refusing to admit they are turning children into political weapons, not free-thinking citizens. Americans who work for a living know the
cost of turning every dinner-table disagreement into a televised moral
crusade. Parents who raise children to judge and shame will soon find
their kids unable to hold real jobs, serve in the military, or cooperate
with neighbors who don’t share their political catechism. This is
cultural rot, and conservatives should call it what it is. If Rosie’s daughter truly is distressed about President Trump, the pity is that a national leader’s policies have been reduced to emotional trauma theater for the elite media. Real resilience comes from teaching kids how to evaluate policies and put country over partisan tantrums — not from handing them playbooks written by celebrities who live sheltered, pampered lives. Finnerty doing his job to point that out was a service to every parent who wants their child taught citizenship, not catechism. Hardworking Americans deserve a media that reports, not preaches, and a culture that equips children to think rather than to scream. Let Rosie and her friends keep their choked-up confessions in Hollywood circles if they must, but conservatives will keep fighting to make sure public schools, dinner tables, and communities remain places of common sense, faith, and patriotism — not recruitment centers for the next generation of permanent outrage. |
Feds Uncover $50 Million Medicare Fraud in California's Sham Hospices
 |
Federal agents punched a hole in a growing web of corruption this week when they arrested eight people accused of running health-care and hospice fraud schemes that prosecutors say stole roughly $50 million from taxpayers. Americans who pay taxes to support Medicare deserve better than scammers and sham hospices turning end-of-life care into a cash grab. The scope of the operation, authorities said, reached into multiple Southern California communities with alleged sham hospices billing Medicare for patients who were not terminally ill, and federal prosecutors have already charged a larger group in the sweep. Feds and the Justice Department were blunt in their language about systemic failure and organized rip-offs in the very counties that Democrats brag about as progressive havens. Predictably, Gov. Gavin Newsom tried to pivot and paint the federal action as political theater instead of accepting responsibility for the regulatory vacuum that let this flourish. His office pointed to past state measures and license revocations, but Californians rightly wonder why whistleblowers and auditors couldn’t stop millions from being siphoned off long before a federal takedown became necessary. This crackdown comes on the heels of
long-standing law-enforcement attention to another corrosive industry:
birth tourism and so-called maternity hotels that coach foreign tourists
how to game our visa and medical systems to secure a U.S. passport for
their newborn. The broader debate about birthright citizenship is
heating up, and even prominent media figures are admitting there are
real problems that deserve serious policy answers rather than lectures
from coastal elites. For conservatives and every patriotic American, this is validation of what we’ve said for years: lax oversight, sanctuary attitudes, and politicized enforcement invite abuse. It’s not enough for Sacramento to posture about investigations while taxpayers get robbed; aggressive prosecution, prison time for fraudsters, and real oversight reforms are the remedies voters demand. If Democrats want to defend this status quo, they should run on it in November. Otherwise, hardworking Americans expect leaders who put accountability before optics, secure our borders, and stop letting entitlement systems become slush funds for organized crooks. |
Thursday, April 2, 2026
Dimon: US Confronting Greatest Geopolitical Risks Since WWII
 |
The United States is confronting the most simultaneous risks in more than 80 years, facing a convergence of political tensions, financial vulnerability, and technological disruption, JPMorgan Chase Chairman and CEO Jamie Dimon warned in a new interview. Further, Dimon told Axios CEO Jim VandeHei on "The Axios Show" that artificial intelligence could soon accelerate economic and security threats. "There's more geopolitical risk than we've seen since World War II," Dimon said, adding that American business leaders have not done enough to address national challenges. "We in business made a mistake in not getting more involved earlier," he said. "I do not think the problems of society will be fixed by politicians alone." Dimon pointed to a wide range of risks, including tensions with China, Russian aggression, the potential for escalation involving Iran, and the threat of nuclear weapons. He also highlighted domestic concerns such as political dysfunction, unsustainable U.S. debt, and broader economic uncertainty. A central concern is the rapid advancement of artificial intelligence, which he said could displace large numbers of workers in the medium term while significantly increasing cybersecurity risks. "AI makes cyber, and these [AI agents] make cyber, far worse," Dimon said. He added that he's been briefed on an unreleased AI model from Anthropic that could dramatically enhance the ability of hackers or foreign adversaries to carry out large-scale attacks, underscoring his concern about "rogue AI" and cyber threats. Dimon also warned about vulnerabilities in private credit markets, suggesting financial risks could emerge alongside geopolitical and technological pressures. While some CEOs have been criticized for hesitating to speak candidly, Dimon downplayed the idea that the fear of President Donald Trump is the primary reason. Still, his measured tone when addressing political leadership reflected broader unease among business leaders, VandeHei noted.
"We're so tough on our politicians," Dimon said. "We just annihilate them, and I just think it's wrong." Meanwhile, looking ahead, Dimon said the U.S. political system may benefit from an independent candidate, though he ruled out entering politics himself. "I do get asked, but I'm not sure I'm suited to it," he said. Despite the long list of risks, Dimon expressed confidence in the nation's underlying strength. "We still have the most prosperous nation the world's ever seen [and] the best military. We're in a great position, and we have issues," he said. "You can't fix problems when you don't acknowledge them." Dimon also weighed in on disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, suggesting that elite circles continued to associate with him after his 2008 plea deal because they either did not grasp the severity of his crimes or chose to overlook them. "I think some people, they'll do anything to be in the inside club or something like that," he said. "The government knew a lot," Dimon continued. "Why didn't the government do something about it? All those years, he was abusing those young women. They knew." JPMorgan reached settlements totaling hundreds of millions of dollars in 2023 related to its past banking relationship with Epstein. |
-
How many times do we need to say this? If you’re here illegally and get caught, you’re going back. It’s the la...
-
The problem with the courts is the same as the problem with many of our other institutions. Called the Skins...
-
CNN’s Scott Jennings once again took liberals to the cleaners on the Abrego Garcia case, the ‘Maryland man...
