Blog

Don’t Blame ICE For Enforcing The Law. Blame Democrats For Breaking It

It’s apparently “cruel” to enforce immigration law, at least that’s what the left has been telling us for months now.

“Trump’s cruel immigration machine is still tearing families apart,” Jordan Foster, Dylan Gee, and Dina Francesca Haynes wrote for MSNBC.

California Democrat Scott Peters said in June that ICE raids are “cruel and wasteful.” ICE agents, according to Peters, “took away four undocumented dishwashers and line cooks.”

“Instead of targeting real threats, this administration is carrying out a cruel agenda that will disrupt our economy, further erode trust in law enforcement, and sow chaos and fear,” Peters continued.

It’s the same narrative we hear time and time again, that enforcing immigration law is inherently “cruel” — not because the laws have changed, but simply because the laws are being enforced.

Gustavo Arellano — whose father was an illegal alien — wrote for the Los Angeles Times that “There’s no nice way to deport someone. But Trump’s ICE is hosting a cruelty Olympics.”

“The Trump presidency has amply proven he has no interest in skirting meanness and cruelty,” Arellano wrote. “This administration is never going to roll out the welcome mat for illegal immigrants. But the least they can do [is] deal with them as if … well, as if they are human.”

The National Immigration Law Center called ICE raids and arrests harmful.

“The only coherent policy goal of this administration when it comes to immigration is its relentless pursuit of cruelty — no matter what the cost and no matter what else is impacted. The strategy is clear: to cultivate so much suffering and fear, through real and threatened violence, that immigrants choose to abandon their communities and lives in the United States.”

But the “harm” and the “cruelty” these critics decry are nothing more than the enforcement of laws, laws that Democrats themselves ignored, which got us to this exact point.

Those who enter the country illegally are subject to removal. But Democrats spent years looking the other way entirely on all border and immigration laws, and in doing so sought to condition the American people to see enforcement of the law as “cruel.” Thus, when the law is finally applied, the left falls back on emotional blackmail.

Keep reading

DHS Refers Chicago “NO KINGS” Rioter to DOJ After Calls for Cold-Blooded Murder of ICE Agents: “We Will Hunt You Down, We Will Find You”

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has officially referred a suspect during the “No Kings” protest for prosecution by the Department of Justice (DOJ) after that individual was captured on video threatening agents of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) with cold-blooded murder.

The individual incited violence while surrounded by other protesters chanting anti-law-enforcement and anti-border-agents slogans, as captured by Christopher Sweat, Co-Founder & CEO of Graystak Media.

“You gotta grab a gun. We gotta turn around the guns on this fascist system. These ICE agents gotta get shot and wiped out. This same machinery that’s on full display right there has to get wiped out,” the unhinged man screaming during the “No Kings” protest Saturday.

The individual alleged to have made the threatening comments has been identified by online users as Moises Bernal Puentes, an Adult Education Manager at Chicago’s Wilbur Wright College, American Greatness reported.

However, The Gateway Pundit has not independently verified this claim.

On Monday, Rep. Mary Miller (R-Ill.) urged the Department of Justice to launch an investigation into Puentes’ alleged “criminal threat.”

“Sickening. A staff member at Wilbur Wright College is calling for ICE agents to get “shot” and “wiped out.” This is a criminal threat that should be investigated,” she wrote, tagging the DOJ.

Keep reading

Watch Margaret Hoover’s Justice Kennedy Interview To See Why Trust In Media Is At Record Lows

If anyone is wondering why Americans’ trust in corporate media to report the news fairly and accurately is at the lowest level in recorded history, then watch PBS Firing Line host Margaret Hoover’s interview with retired Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy.

Released last Friday, the roughly half-hour-long exchange was supposedly intended to focus on Kennedy’s recently released memoir about his life and time serving on the nation’s highest court. It’s very clear after watching the discussion, however, that Hoover had other plans in mind.

From beginning to end, it’s glaringly apparent that Hoover’s entire goal in speaking with Kennedy was to use the conversation as an opportunity to discredit the current Supreme Court and try and bait the retired justice into attacking Donald Trump, whose presidency she falsely portrayed as an authoritarian regime with no respect for the rule of law.

In her first query, Hoover asked Kennedy how he sees his “role” as a retired justice at a moment “when the rule of law is being tested and the courts are under attack.” The “question,” of course, isn’t really a question, but an accusation dressed up as a question.

Borrowing a trick used by fellow media hacks like CBS’s Norah O’Donnell, Hoover is dishonestly insinuating that it’s Trump who is “testing” the law like no president before him, and that his criticisms of lower courts for issuing overreaching edicts represent an unprecedented attack on the judiciary. It’s probably safe to assume that this insinuation doesn’t include Democrats like Joe Biden and Chuck Schumer actually threatening SCOTUS, left-wing anarchists picketing outside Republican-appointed justices’ homes, or a trans-identifying leftist attempting to assassinate Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

While this was only the first “question,” feigning ignorance about Democrats’ egregious conduct and actions would go on to become a prominent feature of Hoover’s style throughout the rest of the interview.

While quoting from Kennedy’s book about the need for all branches of government to exercise their powers in accordance with the Constitution, the CNN contributor said matter-of-factly to Kennedy, “In recent weeks, we have seen the Department of Justice indict two of the president’s political enemies after he publicly demanded it,” and “We’ve seen National Guard troops be sent to states over governors’ objections. The president has repeatedly pushed the limits of the law.”

“Is the executive branch exercising its powers to the extreme?” Hoover asked, while completely ignoring how Biden’s Justice Department attempted to imprison Trump before the 2024 election, sought (and acquired) jail time for former Trump officials, targeted and arrested Christians and pro-lifers, and much more.

The Firing Line host similarly lied by omission when she asked Kennedy about what would happen “if one of the branches — for example, the executive branch — doesn’t choose to follow the Supreme Court?”

“I don’t know that we’ve ever had this,” Hoover said, insinuating that Trump is going to “defy” SCOTUS if it rules on a case in a way he doesn’t like.

Well, as much as it would disappoint Margaret to learn, America actually has “had this” happen — under Biden. When the Supreme Court declared the Biden administration’s student loan bailout to be unconstitutional, the administration tried time and again to sidestep the ruling, disregarding the high court’s decision without a second thought.

Yet, for all her supposed newfound respect for the Supreme Court, Hoover tried her best to discredit it.

Keep reading

Graham Linehan Cleared After Heathrow Arrest as CPS Drops Case After Free Speech Controversy

Graham Linehan, the Irish writer best known for Father Ted and The IT Crowd, says police have now confirmed he will face no further action following his controversial arrest at Heathrow Airport last month.

The 57-year-old comedy creator had been arrested by armed officers after landing in London from Arizona, accused of using social media to incite violence, a claim now dropped by the Crown Prosecution Service.

Linehan’s arrest became a flashpoint in a growing concern over the decline of free speech in modern Britain.

What might have been a brief police encounter instead exposed a deeper problem: the creeping normality of criminal investigations into words rather than actions.

The image of an airport surrounded by armed officers confronting a comedy writer for tweets struck many as absurd, even dystopian.

In a post on X, Linehan announced that “the police have informed my lawyers that I face no further action in respect of the arrest at Heathrow in September,” adding that “after a successful hearing to get my bail conditions lifted (one which the police officer in charge of the case didn’t even bother to attend) the Crown Prosecution Service has dropped the case.”

Keep reading

The Hidden Risks of the Digital Euro

The European Central Bank has presented the digital euro as a symbol of financial autonomy and modernization. But, much like the Chinese model that seems to inspire ECB President Christine Lagarde, what is at stake is not just technology: it is the risk of turning a payment instrument into a mechanism of control over every citizen’s transactions. Across the Atlantic, the United States took the opposite path: it legalized stablecoins and banned a centralized digital dollar, strengthening freedom and competition instead of state control.

On September 26, the European Central Bank announced what had long been anticipated: it will conduct new experiments on what can be achieved with the digital euro.

This project, presented as an achievement of financial autonomy, has now been accelerated after the United States Congress approved the so-called GENIUS (“Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins”) Act, which authorizes stablecoins currencies pegged to stable assets, usually the dollar. At the same time, Congress also approved a prohibition on the Federal Reserve from creating an official digital dollar, ensuring that innovation remains decentralized and outside the direct control of the State.

In Brussels, the reaction was the opposite. The fear that these dollar-linked digital currencies could trigger a “digital dollarization” of the European economy served as justification to accelerate the digital euro. But instead of strengthening the diversity of existing solutions, the European Union is moving forward with a project directly controlled by the ECB. The narrative is one of “financial sovereignty,” but in practice it risks increasing citizens’ dependence on central power and undermines competition in the financial sector, especially when the Chinese model appears to serve as reference.

The ECB insists that the digital euro will be just another payment option, coexisting with cash. But President Lagarde has repeatedly praised the Chinese model, which looks very much like a declaration of intent. Even if it begins with promises of voluntarism, the reality is that models of this kind rarely remain optional for long. China’s case is illustrative: the digital yuan was presented as a complement to physical cash and a voluntary choice, but it quickly became a mass-use instrument, encouraged by the State and integrated into nearly all daily transactions.

In 2023, in cities such as Shanghai and Shenzhen, public salaries and subsidies were being paid through the digital yuan. After the 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics, its use expanded to such an extent that it became virtually impossible to avoid. In just five years, the digital yuan became unavoidable in many Chinese cities, with public wages, subsidies, and taxes processed exclusively this way.

By recording in real time all transactions through the People’s Bank of China, the government monitors in detail who buys, what, where, and when. This level of surveillance opens the door to direct conditioning of citizens’ behavior. Features such as “programmable money,” with an expiration date that forces people to spend within a certain timeframe instead of saving, have already been tested.

Added to this is the risk of social exclusion: those who do not join the system or lack access to the necessary digital tools are, in practice, shut out from a growing part of the economy. State incentives make adhesion inevitable if public salaries, subsidies, and even transport are processed via digital money; the space for private alternatives shrinks progressively.

In such a model, financial freedom ceases to exist: every payment ultimately depends on state approval.

Although official EU platforms highlight numerous advantages of the digital euro, such as lower cost payments, privacy protected by European law, and structures to prevent cyberattacks. One unavoidable question remains: Why is this system necessary at all? At present, the private sector offers multiple secure and reliable digital payment options.

Since the market already provides safe and efficient alternatives, the only possible incentive to develop this system lies in control through the centralization of power, at the expense of privacy while weakening the private banking system. In essence, the digital euro is not a technological advance, but a serious step backward in terms of freedom and privacy.

Keep reading

Woke California Sheriff Who Gave Her Lover a Job and Demanded $10 Million for “Racial Discrimination” is Kicked Out of Office

A woke and corrupt California Sheriff from one of the state’s wealthiest counties made ignominious history last week, thanks to her actions. Not even crying racism could save her.

As the AP reported, the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously on October 14 to kick Sheriff Christina Corpus out of office. The vote was a unanimous 5-0 decision.

This is the first time in California history that a county sheriff has been removed from office.

Corpus was furious following the decision and slammed the board.

“You may remove me from office, but you will not erase the truth,” she stated at the meeting.

“I may lose my title, but I will never, ever lose my purpose,” Corpus added.

Corpus’s removal comes after retired Superior Court Judge James Emerson found cause to remove Corpus after a two-week trial. This trial uncovered evidence showing just how scandalous her two-plus years in office were.

From the AP:

Emerson found that Corpus had “a close personal relationship outside the boundaries of a professional working relationship” with a subordinate, unlawfully ordered the arrest of the president of the sheriff’s deputies’ union, and retaliated against a captain who refused to conduct the union president’s arrest because he believed it violated state law.

The Daily Mail notes that Judge LaDoria Cordell released a 408-page report showing that Corpus had a romantic relationship with Victor Aenlle, who was her chief of staff. He made more than $246,000 a year working for her.

A separate 59-page report compiled by the law firm Keker, Van Nest & Peters went into further detail. The firm discovered through its investigation that Corpus and Aenlle were seen kissing and that he gave her luxury boots and money for $12,000 earrings.

The report also confirmed Corpus refused to perform her duties, obstructed investigations, and coddled Aenlle, who had never bothered to complete deputy training.

Rather than accept responsibility, Corpus decided to cry racism and sue San Mateo County for $10 million for “racial discrimination.” She claimed they were targeting her for being a “Latinx” woman.

But San Mateo residents were not impressed. As The Daily Mail reported, a vote held in March found that 84% wanted her out of office.

The vote approved Proposition A, which gave the board of supervisors the authority to fire Corpus.

Keep reading

The Left’s ‘stolen-land’ rhetoric threatens private property

Left-wing “land acknowlegements” could be having real-world consequences for property owners in Canada. And the United States may be next.

It began as a polite ritual. Before meetings or ceremonies, institutions began acknowledging that their buildings sit on land once inhabited by Indigenous peoples: “We recognize this is the unceded territory of the [tribe name].” The practice, with roots in Australia as far back as the 1970s, was picked up in Canada following the 2015 Truth and Reconciliation Commission report and moved quickly from Canada to left-leaning universities, city councils and churches in the 2020s. Many saw it as a mere courtesy. But beneath the symbolism lies deeper political movement that could erode the very foundation of private property.

In Canada, that shift is already underway. A British Columbia Supreme Court ruling this year suggested that even privately owned, fee-simple land might rest on “defective and invalid” title if an Aboriginal title still exists. For a nation built on English common-law property rights, that’s quite a statement. As columnist Kevin Klein warns in the Winnipeg Sun, Ottawa’s silence on the issue is turning Crown land — once considered secure — into “conditional land.” If the Crown’s title is conditional, how long before yours is?

Land acknowledgements may sound harmless, but they prepare the rhetorical ground for these legal arguments. Once governments, universities, and corporations declare publicly that their property sits on “stolen land,” they’ve already accepted the premise that they don’t actually own it. Activists then insist that recognition demands restitution — and suddenly the issue moves from ceremony to court.

That’s what’s happening in Canada, where some judges now treat Indigenous land claims as concurrent with existing titles. For investors, homeowners, and farmers alike, that’s a recipe for uncertainty — and eventually, seizure of land.

The Left insists this is “reconciliation,” not revolution. But the outcome is the same. Private property rights are fundamental to Western liberty. If property is always subject to retroactive moral judgments or undefined shared stewardship, ownership loses to temporary permission.

In the United States, land acknowledgements have also run rapid, typically in the same academic and bureaucratic circles that look askance at capitalism and private property.

None of this means ignoring history or dismissing past injustices, just refusing to let symbolic guilt erode the legal system. Reconciliation should not come at the cost of the rule of law. Governments must make clear that while we honor history, property rights remain absolute under modern law.

The growing unease north of the border is a warning to America: beware the moral language that undermines legal foundations. Today’s “land acknowledgement” may be tomorrow’s title challenge. And once you concede the premise that your land isn’t really yours, it may not be for long.

Keep reading

Virginia Democrat Donor Shouts Racist Slurs at Winsome Earle-Sears — at His Son’s Football Game

Can you imagine letting your hate consume you so much that you would shout something racist at a politician you don’t agree with — and potentially embarrass your son at his football game? That didn’t bother Scott Pogorelc.

At the James Madison University football game on Saturday, Pogorelc shouted at Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears (R-Va.), who is the GOP nominee in Virginia’s race for governor, to “Go back to Haiti” and called her a “traitor.” And someone caught the racist dolt on camera.

Classy, amirite? For the record, Earle-Sears was born in Jamaica, not Haiti, and she’s an American citizen.

Pogorelc is also the father of one of JMU’s players. His son is a senior offensive lineman, and regardless of his politics, I can’t help but think that James Pogorelc might think that his dad is embarrassing.

Keep reading

White House Slams TMZ Report Claiming Donald Trump Considering Commutation of Sean “Diddy” Combs — Calls It “Completely Fraudulent”

The White House struck back at a fake news report from TMZ alleging that President Donald Trump was “seriously considering” commuting the prison sentence of disgraced rap mogul Sean “Diddy” Combs.

According to TMZ’s October 20 exclusive, a “high-ranking White House official” claimed Trump was “vacillating” and could sign a commuting order for Combs’ 50-month sentence as early as this week.

But the White House rejected the claims outright.

The news outlet reported:

According to our source, the President is “vacillating” on a commutation. We’re told some of the W.H. staff are urging Trump not to commute the sentence. But, our source states the obvious — “Trump will do what he wants,” and we’re told Trump could set Diddy free as early as this week.

Diddy is serving a 50-month prison sentence for violating the Mann Act. He’s served 13 months, and with credit, he could get out in around 2 years — but none of that matters if Trump commutes his sentence.

[…]

We know almost immediately after Diddy was sentenced earlier this month, his legal team was in touch with a high-ranking White House official who has the ear of the President regarding a commutation or pardon. Just days later, Trump told the media he was aware of the ask.

A White House spokesperson described the TMZ story as “entirely false,” accusing the outlet of circumventing standard procedures, Daily Mail reported.

“There is zero truth to the TMZ report, which we would’ve gladly explained had they reached out before running their fake news,” the spokesperson told the Daily Mail. “The president, not anonymous sources, is the final decider on pardons and commutations.”

Keep reading

‘Make Assassinations Great Again’: Leftist Demonstrators Call For Murder Of Trump

The “No Kings” protesters are not satisfied with the concept of persuading people to adopt their political views; instead, they want to kill their opposition and then celebrate the death the way they lauded Charlie Kirk’s murder. It sounds like a harsh accusation until you read the signs protesters made and carried during Saturday’s “No Kings” events.

Many were straight calls for murder, and others were so vile that they call into question the sanity of anyone comfortable carrying such words — like the woman with the sloppy cardboard sign scrawled with a marker: “Which one heals faster? (A) Trump’s ear (B) Erika’s heart,” referring to Charlie Kirk’s widow.

There was also this menacing woman, acting out the moment a bullet hit Charlie Kirk’s neck. By Monday morning it was widely reported that she is a public school teacher at Chicago’s Nathan Hale Elementary School, which abruptly shut down its website and X account.

Keep reading