Blog

Georgia Man with Severe TDS ARRESTED After Video Shows Him Tearing Down Trump Banner, Then Opening Fire on Business Owner

A Georgia man has been arrested and extradited to North Carolina after a shocking incident caught on camera showed him tearing down a pro-Trump banner at a small business, and then opening fire on the property owner who confronted him.

According to the Swain County Sheriff’s Office, 39-year-old Benjamin Michael Campbell of Atlanta is facing multiple felony charges, including assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill or inflict serious injury, discharging a firearm within an enclosure to incite fear, and willful and wanton injury to personal property for his role in the September 6th confrontation outside the Paddle Inn Rafting Company, WLOS reported.

The Gateway Pundit previously reported that the encounter began when business owner Mark Thomas noticed suspicious activity on his security cameras.

Thomas told News 13 he saw a Jeep slam on its brakes outside his rafting business before a man, later identified as Campbell, jumped out, crossed the road, and ripped down a large Trump 2024 banner hanging on his property.

Thomas, watching in real time, grabbed his rifle and stepped out onto his porch. He says he fired two warning shots into the air to deter the vandal. Instead of fleeing, Campbell allegedly opened fire from the roadway, sending bullets toward the business owner’s property in a dangerous exchange of gunfire.

By the time deputies arrived, the suspect’s vehicle was gone.

On September 30, Swain County deputies coordinated with the Cobb County Police Department in Georgia to locate Campbell.

Search warrants were executed on two residences and the vehicle used during the shooting.

After gathering evidence, Campbell was taken into custody and extradited back to Swain County, North Carolina, where he now faces prosecution. He is currently being held on a $70,000 bond.

Keep reading

Judge blocks sanctions on boys who objected to female in locker room, rejects district’s Hail Mary

Awealthy suburban D.C. school district belatedly justified its 10-day suspensions of two boys for complaining about a female who identifies as a boy recording them in their locker room, by claiming they had harassed the female student “over weeks and months.”

That wasn’t enough for U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema to reinstate suspensions by Virginia’s Loudoun County Public Schools, which she paused Sept. 16 shortly after the anonymous Christian boys sued.

The President Clinton nominee granted the boys’ preliminary injunction motion at a hearing Friday, shielding the 11th graders throughout litigation from punishment and a disciplinary notation on their record that could sink their college applications. 

One left LCPS after suing but “the threat of discipline remains” if he returns, their lawyers at America First Legal Foundation and Founding Freedoms Law Center wrote in their motion for preliminary injunction. (Brinkema asked last month why he should remain a plaintiff.)

Brinkema didn’t give her reasoning in Friday’s bench order, but AFL lawyer Ian Prior told the media she cited serious constitutional questions, the harm of removing their educational experience and the timing of the “permanent mark on their records.” The judge will issue an order with her reasoning but didn’t give herself a deadline.

“We’re extremely pleased” suspensions are off the table throughout litigation, Prior said. They expect to succeed on all counts – likelihood of success is a factor supporting preliminary injunctions – but need to win only one, he stressed. 

It’s arguing discrimination by religion, because a Muslim student who complained about the female wasn’t punished, and sex, for LCPS telling the boys to find a different place to change but not the female student. LCPS also violated the boys’ constitutionally protected free speech and misused its Title IX probe and findings “as a pretext for viewpoint discrimination.”

Keep reading

Report: Illegal Immigrants Collected $7 BILLION in Medicaid Payments

Washington is once again at a standstill, but this shutdown is not about budget math or routine partisan squabbles.

At its core, the fight centers on one question that should be obvious: Should Medicaid, a safety-net program designed for low-income Americans, be stretched to cover illegal immigrants? 

Democrats have answered yes, Republicans no—and the standoff has left taxpayers caught in the middle.

The fight began with the passage of the Big Beautiful Bill earlier this year. One of its most important provisions closed a Medicaid loophole that allowed states to pass the cost of illegal immigrant health care onto federal taxpayers. 

That reform required states to fund those services themselves instead of exporting the bill nationwide. 

Democrats are now demanding that this provision be undone, and their refusal to compromise has kept the shutdown going.

California illustrates how large the abuse has become. 

In 2023, the state set aside $3.9 billion in Medicaid funds for medical services for illegal immigrants. 

Because the federal government typically reimburses around 70% of Medicaid spending, taxpayers across the country ended up footing most of that bill. 

To squeeze even more money from Washington, California raised provider taxes on hospitals and nursing homes, then cycled the revenue back through inflated Medicaid payments. 

On paper, the state appeared to spend billions more. In reality, it was a budgetary trick designed to capture federal dollars and shift costs to the rest of the country.

New York followed the same playbook, allocating $2.4 billion in 2024 to extend full Medicaid benefits to illegal immigrants under 65. 

Illinois expanded coverage to noncitizens over 42. 

The strategy is consistent: inflate Medicaid spending, collect federal reimbursements, and redirect money to people who are not legally eligible. 

Keep reading

Bureau of Prisons currently has 4,497 ‘unresolved’ employee misconduct cases, GAO reveals

Anew Government Accountability Office (GAO) report found that the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) has failed to fully communicate its “employee misconduct” policies and procedures and about 37% of the 12,153 cases that are open as of February 2025 have been unresolved for 3 years or longer.

In its September 2025 report, GAO notes that while BOP updated its Standards of Employee Conduct in June 2024 and continues to offer training, the agency does not systematically collect or use feedback from staff about that training. The omission limits BOP’s ability to refine the design and effectiveness of its misconduct prevention efforts, according to the report.

Training material sub-par

The audit also points out shortcomings of BOP’s orientation handbooks. “BOP uses orientation handbooks and signs posted in facilities to inform incarcerated individuals how to report certain employee misconduct. However, the handbooks and signs discuss sexual misconduct rather than a broader range of allegations, such as contraband and physical abuse,” read the report. 

“Developing a communication strategy to fully inform incarcerated individuals about employee misconduct offenses that affect their health and safety could increase awareness about the standards BOP is trying to uphold and help ensure facility safety and employee accountability”, GAO added.

The watchdog found that while BOP tracks allegations of employee misconduct, the agency does not sufficiently analyze data trends over extended periods of more than two years. There are currently 4,497 unresolved cases.

“BOP increased staff and took other steps to reduce its employee misconduct caseload, but about 37 percent of the 12,153 cases open as of February 2025 had been unresolved for 3 years or longer. BOP’s approach to investigating and disciplining employee misconduct does not include establishing milestones or designating responsibilities to key officials,” the report read.

“Implementing a comprehensive plan with these elements would help BOP allocate the resources necessary for investigating and disciplining employee misconduct cases, achieve desired results, and enhance safety and efficiency,” the GAO also reported.

The GAO said in the report that the BOP remains on its “High‑Risk List,” given that “staffing gaps and leadership stability continue to be central concerns and affect BOP’s ability to monitor persistent issues such as employee misconduct.”

Keep reading

Foreign Billionaire Pours Millions Into U.S. Politics to Push Radical Green Agenda

For more than a decade, British billionaire hedge-fund manager Christopher Hohn has quietly funneled hundreds of millions of dollars into American politics. 

Federal law strictly prohibits foreign nationals from directly or indirectly influencing U.S. elections, yet Hohn has become one of the most aggressive violators of that rule.

Through his London-based nonprofit, the Children’s Investment Fund Foundation (CIFF), Hohn poured more than $553 million into U.S. organizations between 2014 and 2023. 

These dollars didn’t go toward charity; instead, they went toward advancing radical left-wing policy campaigns: climate protests, anti-fossil-fuel litigation, and efforts to ban natural gas stoves. 

Much of this money flowed through the Arabella Advisors dark-money network, which bankrolls progressive activism nationwide.

CIFF’s ties raise even deeper concerns. The group has close connections to Communist China. 

Its CEO sits on the International Green Development Coalition, a program tied to China’s Belt and Road initiative. 

The coalition’s work is overseen by top officials in the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). 

In fact, Hohn’s foundation has even honored CCP figures with “Friendship Awards,” further signaling its alignment with Beijing’s agenda.

While Democrats in Washington turn a blind eye, a foreign billionaire with ties to the CCP has been allowed to bankroll groups that shape America’s energy policy. 

By funding climate litigation and pressure campaigns, Hohn’s foundation has worked to dismantle U.S. energy independence, leaving America weaker and more reliant on foreign adversaries.

Democrats rail against supposed “foreign interference” in U.S. elections, but they have no problem cashing checks from foreign billionaires who bankroll their policy goals. 

From California to Washington, D.C., progressive nonprofits fueled by CIFF money have radicalized debates on climate and social justice, all while operating under the radar with little oversight or regulation.

Keep reading

SCOTUS To Decide If Free Speech Applies To Biology-Affirming Therapists And Their Clients

n Oct. 7, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in Chiles v. Salazar. This is the latest in a seemingly unending series of cases from Colorado that my colleagues at Alliance Defending Freedom have argued. The cases stem from the state’s apparent aversion to the First Amendment.

Not content with their failed attempts to coerce speech from artists like Jack Phillips of Masterpiece Cakeshop or Lorie Smith of 303 Creative, and not deterred by clear rebukes from the Supreme Court in those cases, the state of Colorado has set its sights on professional counselors.

The law in question bans specific, voluntary counseling conversations, silences the viewpoint disfavored by the government, and leaves struggling youth and their parents with only one government-approved option. Colorado’s law bans counselors like Kaley Chiles from helping minors realign their thoughts and feelings with their biological sex — even when that is the young person’s goal for counseling.

Counseling that affirms so-called “gender transition” is fine by Colorado. Counseling that affirms biological reality is fined by Colorado, up to $5,000 per offense, and could include the loss of licensure.

This is not just an esoteric debate for law school faculty lounges; children’s health and well-being are at stake. Colorado’s defense of this blatant viewpoint discrimination and government censorship hinges on the contention, without a hint of irony, that the state is regulating conduct, not speech. How do Kaley Chiles and her clients engage in the “conduct” of talk therapy without it being speech? Perhaps a high-stakes game of charades? The notion would be laughable if the consequences were not so serious.

If government places an authoritarian thumb on the scale, allowing only one viewpoint, invading the vulnerable space between counselor and client, and dictating one outcome, the victims are children and their families. If the Supreme Court does not protect the speech of counselors like Kaley Chiles and her clients, children in Colorado and more than 20 other states with similar censorship laws will be trapped on a one-way journey to the perils of “gender transition.”

The eventual destination is one of irreversible physical damage, potential sterilization, and a lifetime of being a patient. Our nation’s struggling youth deserve compassionate counseling directed by their goals with assistance from loving parents and professionals, not a government-sponsored pathway to chemicals and surgeries that can leave permanent mental and physical scars.

Adding rhetorical insult to injury is the fact that under Colorado’s law, counseling clients to align their feelings with their biology is deemed “conversion therapy,” while counseling a client to transition from his or her sex to the opposite sex is “gender affirming care.” The assault on common sense and the English language may pale in comparison to the harm suffered by Chiles and her clients, but the First Amendment protects speech because words matter, truth matters, and any attempt by government to silence citizens matters.

Keep reading

New Evidence Emerges Against Indicted Democrat Mayor of New Orleans in Corruption Case

A superseding federal indictment has unveiled new evidence against New Orleans Mayor LaToya Cantrell, a Democrat already facing corruption allegations, and former NOPD officer Jeffrey Vappie. 

Prosecutors now claim the two engaged in a years-long fraud scheme that misused city funds to conceal their romantic relationship and bankroll luxury travel.

According to the filing, Cantrell and Vappie exchanged more than 15,000 WhatsApp messages, photos, and audio clips in just eight months. 

During that period, they coordinated at least 14 domestic and international trips, racking up more than $70,000 in travel expenses billed to the city.

Vappie allegedly claimed on-duty hours during the trips, while serving on Cantrell’s executive protection detail, even though prosecutors say much of the travel was personal.

The indictment goes further, alleging that Cantrell and Vappie used WhatsApp not just for personal communication but also to intimidate subordinates, harass a private citizen, delete records, and mislead investigators. 

Federal prosecutors say the pair attempted to obstruct justice by concealing evidence and offering false testimony to a federal grand jury.

Cantrell herself is accused of abusing her office to protect Vappie from scrutiny. 

Prosecutors allege she pressured then-Interim NOPD Superintendent Michelle Woodfork to halt an internal probe into Vappie, despite findings that raised concerns. 

Cantrell also allegedly demanded Vappie’s reassignment to her security detail, even after red flags had been raised, and concealed responsive WhatsApp records from a grand jury subpoena.

The 18-count indictment represents an escalation of a case that has dogged Cantrell for months, combining allegations of fraud, obstruction, and misuse of public funds. 

While Vappie previously entered a not-guilty plea, Cantrell has consistently denied wrongdoing and accused her critics of political motivation.

Still, the mounting evidence paints a damaging picture for the city’s top official. 

The indictment details patterns of excessive travel, manipulation of police resources, and alleged efforts to sidestep accountability. 

For residents of New Orleans, the charges revive long-standing concerns about corruption in City Hall and misuse of taxpayer money.

Cantrell, who first took office in 2018, has faced growing criticism in recent years over crime, public safety, and fiscal management.

 This latest legal development adds to those pressures, with prosecutors signaling they intend to make the mayor’s conduct central to the corruption case.

If convicted, Cantrell could face severe penalties, and the scandal could reshape the political landscape in New Orleans, where faith in city leadership has already eroded.

Keep reading

DHS arrests college professor with alleged Antifa ties for bringing a loaded gun to anti-ICE protest

college professor at Northeastern Illinois University, who believes Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents are Nazis, was arrested in Chicago in late September after allegedly bringing a loaded gun to an anti-ICE protest.

Elias Cepeda, who is suspected of having ties to Antifa, and who is listed as a faculty member in the English department of the Chicago university, was arrested on Sept. 26 carrying a loaded gun along with multiple rounds of ammunition during President Donald Trump’s Operation Midway Blitz operation, according to the New York Post. 

“Elias Cepeda has suspected ties to the domestic terrorist organization ANTIFA and has a history of glorifying violence against—and the killing of—our brave law enforcement,” said Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security Tricia McLaughlin in a statement.

“Violent individuals like Cepeda are putting the public and our law enforcement’s lives in danger. Just two days after the horrific attack on ICE in Dallas, Cepeda brought a loaded gun and multiple magazines to our ICE facility in Chicago,” McLaughlin added.

“Thank God law enforcement intervened and arrested Cepeda before he could have potentially shot or killed anyone. Let this serve as a stark warning to any individual who wishes to do our law enforcement harm or any ANTIFA terrorist: President Trump and Secretary Noem will fight every day to protect and defend the men and women who keep our country safe from violent extremists and criminal illegal aliens alike.”

Cepeda already had a history of social media posts urging violence against ICE, while describing federal agents as Nazis and referencing Antifa. 

Keep reading

Rabid Leftist Who Spat on Ed Martin and Kicked US Marshals Will Avoid Prison Time After Biden Judge Sentences Her to ‘Time Served’

The rabid leftist who spat on DOJ official Ed Martin and kicked US Marshals will avoid prison time after a Biden-appointed federal judge sentenced her to ‘time served.’

The Justice Department sought 18 months in prison for Emily Sommer, the unhinged leftist who spat on Ed Martin and kicked US Marshals earlier this year.

Judge Jia Cobb, a Biden appointee, sentenced Sommer to four months time served. Sommer was sentenced to fourth months time served, home confinement and probation, rather than prison time.

In May, the Justice Department charged Emily Gabriella Sommer for assaulting Ed Martin.

Sommer was charged with violation of 18 U.S.C. § 111 (Assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers and employees of the United States).

In June, the DOJ asked the Court to detain Emily Sommer pending trial because she threatened Ed Martin and Jeannine Pirro in a series of X posts.

Emily Sommer was put in a DC jail after threatening a neighbor with a crowbar. She also physically attacked US Marshals after being removed from the courtroom in May.

“Sommer became agitated during her initial appearance in court on May 22 upon learning the prosecutor’s office intended to seek a more serious version of the assault charge that requires forcible contact and carries a maximum sentence of up to 8 years in prison. While in holding after being removed from the courtroom, Sommer allegedly spit and kicked on two U.S. Marshals. A second superseding indictment was filed in June with two additional assault counts for the incident,” WUSA 9 reported.

Sommer pleaded guilty to three counts of assault for spitting on Ed Martin and assaulting US Marshals.

Keep reading

Kentucky Man Jailed Over Halloween Decorations That Depicted Local Public Officials Being Hanged

A Kentucky man was arrested over the weekend after placing Halloween decorations in his front yard that depicted fake bodies labeled with titles of local government officials.

According to WKYT-TV, a 58-year-old Powell County man named Stephan Marcum was taken into custody Saturday after being accused of terroristic threatening.

People passing by the man’s home in the community of Stanton saw a Halloween display they found rather haunting.

Commonwealth Attorney Miranda King reported the scene to the Kentucky State Police.

The decorations included body bags marked with the titles of local officials, although no names were on the effigies.

According to an arrest citation, Marcum was taken into custody not long after.

“This is something you just don’t see every day,” Powell County Judge Executive Eddie Barnes, whose title was on one of the bags, told WKYT.

Even though Barnes was not named in the display, he said he was bothered.

“At first I didn’t know what to think about it because I actually drove by and [saw] it in his yard and I’m thinking, you know, ‘Wow, you know, that’s kinda harsh,’” Barnes said.

Barnes said he has known Marcum for decades.

The judge told WKYT he views Marcum as someone who can be “a good person,” and was confused by the Halloween display.

University of Kentucky Political Science Associate Professor Stephen Voss told WKYT that Marcum’s display was not protected by the First Amendment.

“If you’re actively threatening someone in a terrorizing way, that may not be covered by the general right to free expression,” Voss said.

“I think we’re seeing a little bit less tolerance for violent communication or violent imagery because there seems to be a greater risk people will enact it or carry it out,” he added.

WKYT reported that Marcum was held at the Powell County Detention Center on a $5,000 bond.

Police said the Halloween decorations were collected and taken to a nearby Kentucky State Police station.

Keep reading