Blog

Adam Schiff Has Finally Found a Trump Tax Cut He Agrees With – For Totally Selfish Reasons

When you think of Trump tax cuts and Democrats, the first thing that comes to mind is Democrats complaining that the tax cuts only benefit the rich. For good measure, they typically say not only the rich, but Trump’s rich buddies, as if he is doing a favor just for a select few, powerful, connected people.

Well, now California Senator Adam Schiff has finally found a Trump tax cut idea that he likes. It’s all about a tax incentive to save jobs in Hollywood. In other words, a tax cut that would benefit a very select group.

And make no mistake, Schiff likes this idea because that is where a ton of his support comes from. When Schiff was a member of the House, Hollywood was in his district. These are his people.

FOX News reports:

One of President Donald Trump’s most persistent political foes has found common ground with him in their shared push to save Hollywood.

Trump wants to incentivize film and television production in Hollywood after years of job loss and other states and countries enticing projects to leave what has been the heart of entertainment in the U.S. for more than a century.

And Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., who once led the first impeachment against Trump and has maintained a strong opposition to him since he retook office, is on board with the idea.

“I am in strong agreement with the President,” Schiff said on X. “Congress should immediately take up and pass a federal film tax incentive to bring back these good-paying jobs that we’ve lost to other countries.”

“Let’s work together — Republicans and Democrats — to get this done, and bring the movie magic back to America,” he continued.

Hollywood’s stature as an entertainment colossus has taken a hit over the last few years following the COVID-19 pandemic and the burst of the streaming bubble.

The industry has lost 49,000 jobs since 2022, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Keep reading

Clyburn Calls For Packing The Court With “Baker’s Dozen” To Flip Cases

On NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC) added his voice to expand the Supreme Court to a “baker’s dozen,” or thirteen members to allow Democrats to add justices who agree with him and Democratic members on how the law must be interpreted.

In the meantime, as discussed earlier, court packing is being pushed as the new litmus test for any Democratic candidates. Clyburn’s “baker’s dozen” is a telling description of an effort to bake in partisan views on a Court expanded to create an instant liberal majority. In defending this hostile takeover of the Court, Clyburn bizarrely insisted that the failure to do so might lead to a return to antebellum conditions when blacks were being given fewer rights than whites.

When asked by host Kristen Welker whether he supports the call of former Vice President Kamala Harris to pack the Court, Clyburn responded:

“Yes, I do. I think that we are in a position now that calls for some significant actions taken by the Congress and we ought to expand. Thirteen is a pretty good number. A baker’s dozen would be a good number to have on the court. And I would hope we would get people on the Court who will follow the constitutional underpinnings of this great nation of ours.”

Clyburn then made the sensational claim that, without taking over the Court, blacks could be returned to virtual slave conditions. He added:

“The 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments have been interpreted different ways over the years. And we had in the Warren Court an interpretation of those amendments that I thought would be set for the future of the country. We have now a Supreme Court that has decided to reverse course and take this country back, I say, to those rulings of Justice Taney that said that no black man has any rights that a white man must respect.”

So, while recognizing that interpretations have evolved, Clyburn now demands a takeover of the Court because he disagrees with the current interpretations. It was fine when interpretations aligned with his views, but opposing viewpoints are intolerable and warrant packing the Court with reliable liberal votes. Other Democrats have demanded packing the Court to reverse immigration rulings.

The unhinged rhetoric reflects the importance of taking over the Court by Democrats who view the institution as a barrier to carrying out a radical agenda, including proposals that are considered unconstitutional. Liberal professors and pundits have identified a court takeover as essential to, as one law professor put it, guaranteeing that the Democrats never lose another national election. As former Attorney General Eric Holder and Democratic strategist James Carville have made clear, it is about power and guaranteeing its retention.

Of course, these figures know that it will take a great deal to get Americans to trash core institutions and values. Polls have long shown that a majority of citizens oppose efforts to pack the Court. FDR’s infamous court-packing plan in the 1930s has been widely panned in history, but is now being used as a model by many Democrats to achieve short-term political goals.

In order to overcome this fealty to our constitutional system, citizens must be very angry or very afraid. That is why the rage rhetoric is increasing as we approach the midterm elections. In the last election, the prediction was the imminent end of democracy. Now it is the return to slavery conditions in the United States.

One can disagree with the Court without suggesting that these justices are effective racists or want to return the nation to pre-Civil War slavery conditions. The suggestion that the Court would return this country to the Dred Scott period from before the Civil War is deeply offensive to the conservative justices, including Justice Clarence Thomas, who is African American. It is an absurd suggestion and shows contempt not just for the Court but for Black voters.

Keep reading

SNAP Junk Food Bans in Two States on Hold Due to Court Rulings

The battle over SNAP benefits might be being waged from state to state, but federal courts are part of the action, too.

Two states that had planned restrictions on the foods that can be purchased by those using Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program cards have put the moves on hold after a federal court ruled in favor of SNAP recipients in a case covering five other states, Newsweek reported Monday.

Six states still have restrictions in place.

SNAP, formerly known as “food stamps,” is a federally funded program administered by the individual states. It is overseen by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Some states restrict its use from purchasing junk food, such as sodas, candy, and some juices and energy drinks. Others have plans to do so.

The states that already have restrictions that are unaffected by the ruling, according to the grocery tracking website Greenchoice, are Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas, and Utah.

South Carolina and North Dakota were only days away from implementing similar bans beginning Sept. 1 when Judge Amy Berman Jackson, an Obama appointee on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, struck down restrictions that had already been in place in Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Tennessee, and West Virginia.

Keep reading

FDA Approves Moderna XFG COVID Vaccines 81 Days Before Teen/Adult Safety Study, 126 Days Before Children’s Study

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved Moderna’s new XFG-formulated COVID-19 vaccines on August 27, 81 days before a human study specifically designed to evaluate the safety and immune response of the new formulations was scheduled to begin.

Pfizer’s XFG COVID vaccine formulation was approved on the same day, equally without safety data for its new formulation.

FDA approved the 2026–2027 formulas for Moderna’s SPIKEVAX and mNEXSPIKE vaccines, which are claimed to contain genetic instructions corresponding to the alleged JN.1-lineage XFG subvariant.

But FDA’s own Aug 27 approval letters show that a Phase 3b/4 human study specifically evaluating the “Immunogenicity and Safety of MNEXSPIKE and SPIKEVAX 2026-2027 Formula” is not scheduled to begin until November 16.

The first interim results are not due until March 26, 2027.

For younger children eligible to receive the new SPIKEVAX formulation, a separate human safety and immunogenicity study is scheduled to begin even later.

In other words, FDA approved Moderna’s new XFG vaccines first.

The human studies specifically evaluating the new formulations come afterward.

The regulatory pathway allows FDA to rely on claimed evidence from previously licensed formulations rather than require a new human safety trial of every updated formulation before approval.

But that raises consequential health, informed-consent, regulatory, and accountability questions:

  • How can FDA determine that a newly reformulated vaccine is safe before formulation-specific human safety data exist?
  • What evidence justifies carrying earlier safety findings forward to a changed product?
  • And why is FDA requiring a Phase 3b/4 study specifically to evaluate the new formulas’ “Safety” only after Americans are permitted to receive them?
  • And most fundamentally, if FDA is approving a newly reformulated vaccine before human safety data specific to that formulation exist, is the agency fulfilling its responsibility to independently establish that products are safe before Americans receive them, or shifting that uncertainty onto the public and collecting the answers afterward?

Congressional committees have confirmed that the FDA “is not meeting important federal safety requirements to protect its employees and the public while also failing to prioritize scientific data quality delivered from FDA laboratories.”

You can contact the FDA here.

And Moderna here.

Keep reading

9/11 Cancer Rates Have Ballooned Over 4,000 Percent – Survivors Now Account for More Cases Than First Responders

The towers are gone in all but memory, but the death brought to New York City 25 years ago on 9/11 continues to impact the city, leaving a trail of victims.

As the nation prepares to mark the 25th anniversary of the terrorist attack, cancer deaths linked to the attack on New York City’s World Trade Center have risen 1,680 percent in a decade.

Cancer certifications among Manhattan workers and residents who were not among the decimated ranks of first responders soared from 3,204 in 2015 to 57,044 this year, the World Trade Center Health Program said, according to the New York Post.

“Sadly, we lose roughly two clients a day and see a new cancer certification every 50 minutes,” lawyer Michael Barasch, whose firm represents thousands of people enrolled in the World Trade Center Health Program, said.

Keep reading

Inside Israel’s Torture Camps: Abuse, Secrecy and Impunity

After October 7, 2023, Israel expanded and reorganized a system of military detention facilities used for people detained in the Gaza Strip. Thousands of Palestinians passed through facilities under the direct control of the Israel Defense Forces, brought there for registration, interrogation and decisions about further incarceration. But what was officially intended as a temporary stage quickly turned into prolonged detention; the Israeli military itself later acknowledged that, because of the unprecedented number of detainees and overcrowding in regular prisons, many remained in military camps far longer than anticipated.

Behind the barbed wire, accounts of abuse quickly piled up. Released detainees described routine blindfolding, shackling, beatings, dog attacks, starvation, sleep deprivation, denial of medical care and sexual violence. These abuses were independently documented by Amnesty International, the UN human rights office and later UN special mechanisms. In May 2024, the Israeli military conceded that Sde Teiman and Anatot are military lockups where Palestinians are held indefinitely without trial or charges under the “Unlawful Combatants” law. Two years later, the system is still operating.

Geopolitics Prime has assembled a comprehensive picture of this system, drawing on survivor testimonies, legal documents, internal military correspondence and findings from human rights organizations and UN mechanisms.

Keep reading

Trump Lawyer Alina Habba Reveals Jack Smith SENT the FBI To Her New Jersey Home To Intimidate Her: “I Was Subpoenaed as a Lawyer — It’s Crazy”

President Trump’s former attorney Alina Habba revealed that disgraced Biden-era Special Counsel Jack Smith sent FBI agents directly to her New Jersey home and subpoenaed her as part of his sprawling investigation targeting Trump and his legal team.

Habba dropped the bombshell during an appearance on The Benny Show while discussing House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan’s criminal referral of Smith to the Justice Department.

“Jack Smith sent the FBI to my house. What are you talking about? You don’t even know that,” Habba told host Benny Johnson.

“The FBI came knocking on my door in New Jersey. I mean, people don’t know that,” she continued. “But yeah, I was subpoenaed as a lawyer. It’s crazy.”

Habba said Smith wanted to question her as part of what she described as one of the anti-Trump “hoaxes.”

Johnson appeared stunned that Smith’s team would send federal agents to the private home of one of President Trump’s attorneys.

Habba added that she generally avoided discussing the episode publicly because she did not want the attention.

Keep reading

CNN Forced to Issue ‘Clarification’ After Allowing VA Governor Abigail Spanberger to LIE About Trump

CNN recently allowed Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger to blatantly lie on the air, claiming that Trump’s executive order on mail-in ballots would negatively affect members of the U.S. Military serving overseas.

Today, Wolf Blitzer offered a ‘clarification’ on the topic, admitting that what Spanberger said was not true.

It’s too bad that they didn’t have the ability to fact-check Spanberger in real time, but you know the media. They always give Democrats the benefit of doubt.

FOX News has details:

On Friday’s installment of “The Situation Room,” Blitzer sat down with Democratic Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger to discuss the lawsuit the commonwealth filed alongside other blue states to block President Donald Trump’s executive order from March to curb mail-in voting, which was slapped with a 14-day temporary restraining order last week by a federal judge.

“The continued attacks that we’re seeing from the Trump administration is really just an effort to get people fearful, to get people to stay home, and, in many cases, to eliminate what is a valid, safe, secure way for people to be able to have their voices heard and to vote,” Spanberger said.

“And in Virginia, you have a lot of military personnel who totally rely on mail-in ballots if they want to be able to express their opinions,” Blitzer told the governor.

“That’s true,” Spanberger replied. “It’s members of the military service, of our diplomatic service, intelligence services, people serving overseas in service to our country who get their ballots mailed to them at the various postings throughout the world.”

However, Blitzer made a “quick note of clarification” at the end of Monday’s program in reference to his exchange with Spanberger.

“We discussed legal challenges to the Trump administration’s directives for the Postal Service on mail-in voting. A comment I made suggested that U.S. military and overseas voters’ ballots would be impacted by these directives. I want to be clear right now: those ballots are exempt from the Postal Service’s new rules implementing the president’s March executive order,” Blitzer told viewers.

Keep reading

Justice Kavanaugh Demands Michigan Sec of State Benson Answer After 2 Democrat Canvassers Block Citizenship Petition Backed by 87% of Likely MI Voters

America’s dirtiest Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson and her right hand man, Bureau of Elections Director Jonathan Brater, have done everything within their power to ensure non-citizens are not only placed on Michigan’s voter rolls, but that once they are on the voter rolls, there is no way to discover them.

Last week, on Monday, August 4, hundreds of Michigan residents packed the Michigan Board of Canvassers meeting in Lansing to defend the validity of the Americans for Citizens Only Voting petition which was turned in several months ago with an astounding 709,841 signatures, 59.1% over the threshold of the minimum to make the ballot, which was only 446,198.

ACVM did not sneak this petition in at the last minute. The petitions landed on March 4, 2026 — more than four months before the July 6 filing deadline and eight months before Election Day. The Bureau of Elections sat on those 709,841 signatures for five and a half months. Staff did not release the 1,000-signature sample until July 24. The staff report calling the petition 17 signatures short did not come out until August 17. That is 166 days after the boxes were delivered, and it left the campaign 17 days to fight challenges, chase affidavits, and get in front of the Board of State Canvassers on August 24.

By then the clock was already killing the measure. Ballots have to be locked for the November 3 election. ACVM asked the Michigan Supreme Court to move. When that court sat on the case, the group went to Justice Kavanaugh on August 31 and asked for an order by September 3 — because the Board of State Canvassers meets September 4 to finalize the ballot. Five and a half months of silence, then a two-week scramble to save a proposal that had cleared the first staff count. That is how Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson and her fellow Democrat activists keep a citizenship amendment off the ballot without ever taking a vote on the merits.

The Michigan Board of Canvassers was asked to review the signatures pulled from the “random sampling” that the Board of Elections Director Jonathan Brater’s staff deemed unacceptable because, according to the staff members, the signatures on the petition didn’t match the signatures they had on file. Many audience members could be heard remarking that their signatures have changed over the years, suggesting this was a completely unfair practice. The intense scrutiny given to each signature by the amateur signature sleuths was especially difficult to watch, given that only 6 years ago, Michigan’s top election official, Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, told her clerks to ignore signature matching when accepting absentee ballots and assume the signature matched.

The attorneys working with ACVM were able to obtain 23 affidavits from the sampling of 1,000 that MI Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson’s Board of Elections “staff members” rejected, to prove that the signatures they called into question were indeed, valid signatures. The attornies provided 19 affidavits by the 10 am Saturday deadline and an additional 4 more on Saturday (the time of the delivery is unclear).

Keep reading

The Number That Should Keep Every American Parent Up At Night

Washington’s spending addiction just reached a new record. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the federal deficit for the fiscal year ending on September 30 will hit a stunning $2.1 trillion. This number, confirmed in the CBO’s August monthly budget review, is the highest deficit recorded outside of the years of emergency COVID spending.

The numbers say something that neither political party wants to broadcast. Even with the economy improving, federal spending jumped 5% while revenue only grew 3%. Adding to the structural imbalance, interest on the national debt jumped by 14% compared to the previous year. Spending on defense, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid is also up. The government borrowed $431 billion in the month of July alone — an average of $6 billion every single day.

“We’ve borrowed an astounding $1.8 trillion this fiscal year, with $431 billion in the month of July alone, equating to nearly $6 billion per day,” said Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. “We’re on track to surpass $2 trillion in borrowing this fiscal year despite not being in a recession. That is not normal.”

The CBO’s original estimate was $1.9 trillion — revised upward by $200 billion largely because the Supreme Court struck down tariff authorities in February, cutting expected revenue by $250 billion. About $100 billion has already been refunded to companies under court orders. Even with new tariffs imposed since, the fiscal math still does not add up.

The Medicaid waiver system shows just how embedded the waste is. Congress baked a budget-neutrality requirement — Section 71118 — into last year’s reconciliation law, requiring that starting January 2027, no Medicaid waiver can be approved without a certification it will not increase federal spending. States have spent years exploiting these waivers to extract billions beyond what their programs justify. A 2014 Government Accountability Office audit found $778 million in excess spending on a single Arkansas Medicaid waiver — money the Obama administration used to bribe the state into expanding Obamacare.

Keep reading