Blog

Review of 50–60 MILLION Records Uncovers Thousands of Ineligible Registrations Including Non-Citizens Who VOTED — 300,000 DEAD People Still Listed

Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon has revealed that a massive DOJ review of between 50 and 60 million voter records has uncovered hundreds of thousands of ineligible registrations, including over 300,000 DEAD people still listed as active voters and tens of thousands of non-citizens who have already cast ballots in federal elections.

As The Gateway Pundit has reported extensively, Dhillon’s team has been waging war on dirty voter rolls since President Trump took office.

Back in December 2025, we told you how an initial review of just 47.5 million records found 260,000+ dead voters and thousands of illegals registered to vote.

Now the numbers are even worse, and we’re only looking at a fraction of the states that actually cooperated.

Harmeet Dhillon:
We have run some records for some states. So, I think we’ve run something between 50 and 60 million voter records so far. And, you know, during this president’s tenure, we have found hundreds of thousands of people who shouldn’t be on the voter rolls—people who are dead, people who have moved, and duplicate registrations.

We have also found, separately, noncitizens on the voter rolls. And so now we’re doing our due diligence to identify the extent to which they may or may not have voted.

And sometimes people are enrolled on the voter rolls. We’ve just seen some crazy videos from California that show homeless people being used to sign petitions and register to vote or sign affidavits. You could sign ballots for somebody else and fill them in.

And that’s easy when you have a system where there’s no voter ID, right? Where ballots are being mailed to outdated voting lists.

This is not a fiction or a fantasy. Los Angeles County, in 2017, agreed in a lawsuit with Judicial Watch that there were over 1.1 million people in that county alone who should not have been on the voter rolls.

Keep reading

US to embed Palantir AI across entire military: Report

The Pentagon has designated Palantir’s Maven artificial intelligence system as an official program of record, in a move that will lock in the weapons-targeting technology long term across ‌the US military, Reuters reported on 21 March.

The move was announced in a letter from Deputy Secretary of War Steve ​Feinberg issued to senior Pentagon leaders and US military commanders on 9 March.

Feinberg wrote that embedding Palantir’s Maven Smart System would provide the military “with the latest tools necessary to detect, deter, and dominate our adversaries in all domains.”

Maven is the US military’s main AI system, analyzing data from satellites, drones, radars, sensors, and reports. It uses AI to interpret data and swiftly identify and strike targets like enemy vehicles, buildings, and weapons.

The White House claims US warplanes have hit more than 7,800 targets since the war on Iran began just three weeks ago.

“It is imperative that we invest now and with focus to deepen the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) across the Joint Force and establish AI-enabled decision-making as the cornerstone of our strategy,” Feinberg wrote.

During a presentation at a Palantir event earlier this month, Pentagon official Cameron Stanley illustrated how the Maven program identifies targets.

“When we started ⁠this, it literally took hours to do what you just saw,” he said.

Keep reading

HHS Changes Voicemail to Domino’s Pizza to Mock Taxpayers Demanding End to NIH Kitten and Beagle Experiments

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is facing backlash after a “rogue employee” allegedly changed the agency’s public voicemail to a Domino’s Pizza recording, trolling taxpayers who flooded the lines demanding an end to ongoing NIH-funded cat and dog torture experiments.

White Coat Waste Project, the bipartisan watchdog group that has long exposed wasteful government animal testing, urged supporters to call HHS this week over continued funding for cruel kitten experiments at a taxpayer-supported lab at the University of Missouri, which was covered by The Gateway Pundit.

Instead of reaching agency officials, callers heard: “Thank you for calling Domino’s Pizza.”

WCW Senior Vice President Justin Goodman exposed the sick “prank” during a Senate hearing on Wednesday.

“Torturing puppies with our tax dollars isn’t funny, but people at HHS apparently think it is,” Goodman said.

Keep reading

This Democrat Claims To Be Moderate, But Backs Huge Firearms Crackdowns on Law-Abiding Americans

Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington’s Third District has portrayed herself as a working class moderate Democrat. Recent stories have shown that the congresswoman is anything but, with former acquaintances claiming that she is “cosplaying as a poor person.” Her history on the Second Amendment has shown that cosplay has ventured into her policy stances as well.

During a 2022 candidate debate, Gluesenkamp Perez laid out the first steps toward restricting gun ownership for constituents by preventing adults between the ages of 18 and 20 from exercising their constitutional rights.

“I’m a pragmatist,” Gluesenkamp Perez stated. “I think the first reasonable thing is to increase the age of purchase to 21, because kids are just not as old as they used to be.”

Gluesenkamp Perez’s statements echo the 2020 Washington State Democrat Party platform that the congresswoman adopted. Some “reasonable” measures that Democrats proposed include: ending open carry in Washington, a mandatory waiting period on firearms purchases, mandatory registration and licensing, a volume limit on firearms and ammunition ownership, a sweeping “assault weapons” ban, a ban on magazines with a capacity greater than 10, mandatory liability insurance for firearms owners, the criminalization of 3-D printed firearms, and ending reciprocity for concealed carry licenses for states who wouldn’t adopt these radical restrictions.

Keep reading

Five More Somalis Plead Guilty in $14.6 Million Minneapolis Feeding Our Future Fraud Case

Five additional defendants, all Somali, have pleaded guilty to wire fraud in one of the largest pandemic fraud cases in U.S. history, the Minneapolis Feeding Our Future scandal that stole hundreds of millions of dollars meant for hungry children during COVID.

Ikram Yusuf Mohamed, 42, her husband Shakur Abdinur Abdisalam, 46, her sister Aisha Hassan Hussein, 29, Sahra Sharif Osman, 43, and her mother Fadumo Mohamed Yusuf, 59, each entered guilty pleas this week, according to the U.S. Department of Justice.

The group ran fake food distribution sites under the Feeding Our Future nonprofit umbrella and submitted phony claims for hundreds of thousands to over a million meals that were never served.

They used fake attendance rosters, inflated invoices through a related company, and paid kickbacks to cover their tracks.

Prosecutors say the five stole and laundered a total of $14.6 million in federal Child Nutrition Program funds, money that was supposed to feed kids during COVID but instead funded personal luxuries like rent, furniture, vacations, dining out, and DoorDash orders.

Each defendant’s company received more than $1 million in taxpayer money.

  • Ikram Yusuf Mohamed opened multiple sites that pulled in over $6.9 million, hid her role by using family names, created Star Distribution LLC for fake invoices ($4.9 million direct and $1.4 million more), and demanded over $1.3 million in kickbacks.
  • Shakur Abdinur Abdisalam ran Inspiring Youth & Outreach LLC, falsely claimed over 1 million meals, received $1.5 million, and paid a $21,000 kickback.
  • Aisha Hassan Hussein ran United Youth of MPLS LLC, claimed 1.3 million meals, received $2.2 million, and paid a $166,000 kickback.
  • Sahra Sharif Osman ran Youth International Club LLC, claimed nearly 700,000 meals, received $1.4 million, and paid a $7,500 kickback.
  • Fadumo Mohamed Yusuf ran Active Mind’s Youth LLC, claimed over 500,000 meals, received $1 million, and paid a $38,500 kickback.

All five pleaded guilty before U.S. District Judge Nancy E. Brasel.

Each faces up to 20 years in prison.

Keep reading

Federal Appeals Court Seems Skeptical of Reciprocity Argument

A three-judge panel on the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals appears to be skeptical of the arguments used by an over-the-road truck driver challenging Minnesota’s refusal to recognize his Florida and Georgia carry permits. During oral arguments on Wednesday, at least two of the three judges on the panel seemed to have a hard time with Jeffrey Johnson Sr.’s contention that requiring him to get a non-resident permit before he can carry in Minnesota is an unreasonable burden on his Second Amendment rights. 

From Courthouse News:

“If Minnesota can require all of its residents to get a permit, why would it violate the Second Amendment by requiring others to?” U.S. Circuit Judge Steven Grasz, a Donald Trump appointee, asked.

U.S. Circuit Judge Ralph Erickson agreed, piling on to the questioning against Johnson’s attorney, Ryan Morrison.

“Is it your position that, having conceded that the Minnesota permitting process is appropriate for Minnesota residents … that Minnesota must enact a statute that allows reciprocity, or else they’re in violation of the Second Amendment?” Erickson asked. “Do you have a case that says that anywhere in the world?”

The George W. Bush appointee continued with his concern about Morrison’s argument, finding it absurd that those outside of Minnesota shouldn’t be held to the same standard as residents.

“So you have greater rights as a nonresident than as a resident?” Erickson asked. “It just says, if you want to go into Minnesota, you just got to follow the Minnesota permitting process.”

The answer to Erickson’s question is arguably “yes”; non-residents do have greater rights, or at least more leeway, than residents of a particular state. Attorneys Chuck Michel, Anna Barvir, and Kostas Moros raised that point in an amicus brief filed in Gardner v. Maryland, which is another case dealing with the lack of reciprocity.

As the three noted, there’s a national tradition of exempting “travelers” from carry restrictions that states impose on residents that dates back to at least the late 1600’s. 

Keep reading

BEYOND PARODY: Connecticut Democrats Pass Bill Requiring Photo ID to RECYCLE CANS But Won’t Support the SAVE America Act

Democrats in the state of Connecticut oppose the SAVE America Act because they don’t support the idea of having to show a photo ID in order to vote, but they recently passed a law in the state that requires photo ID to recycle aluminum cans.

You could not make this up.

Like some other states, Connecticut gives a ten cent return on empty containers instead of five cents, so people have been crossing into the state to recycle there and cash in on the higher return. The fix for this was photo ID.

But they won’t do this for voting.

FOX News reports:

Connecticut Dems demand IDs to recycle cans but reject GOP efforts to verify citizenship at polls

Connecticut Democrats recently rushed through an emergency anti-fraud law requiring bottle redemption centers to collect a copy of a person’s driver’s license when they cash in more than 1,000 cans or bottles in a day — a document demand that Republicans say undercuts the party’s attacks on voter-ID rules.

Earlier this month, an emergency certification bill, SB 299, was introduced by top Democratic leaders in the state’s legislature. It was later passed in both chambers in late February and was signed by Gov. Ned Lamont, a Democrat, on March 3.

It requires people wishing to recycle cans for money to present a copy of their driver’s license, put in place because the state has had issues with non-residents crossing its border to take advantage of its higher return rate of 10 cents a can instead of five cents. The issue was reportedly causing the state to lose significant revenue…

“In Connecticut, it seems that they are committed to securing recycling, but not to securing elections,” said Anna Pingel, America First Policy Institute’s Campaign Director for Secure Elections. “Requiring photo ID to collect cash from recycling but opposing photo ID to cast a vote tells you everything you need to know about the hypocrisy of politicians fighting against commonsense legislation like the SAVE Act. What is more important to safeguard—bottles or ballots?”

Both of Connecticut’s senators voted against the SAVE America Act.

Keep reading

EU Admits X’s Open Data Skews Disinformation Findings While Fining Platform for Restricting Researchers

The EU’s own diplomatic service has published a report admitting that X makes its data more accessible to researchers than other major platforms, and then used that admission to brand X the primary channel of “foreign information manipulation and interference” against the bloc.

The European External Action Service (EEAS) put this in writing. The media ran with the conclusion and buried the caveat.

The fourth annual FIMI Threats report, released this month, found that “88% of instances were concentrated on the platform X. The presence of CIB networks, the ease of creation of fabricated accounts, but also more straightforward access to data, explains this concentration.

Most of the major social media platforms restrict access to data that would allow for assessing the magnitude of information manipulation activities.”

Keep reading

MSNOW’s Rachel Maddow Eulogizes Robert Mueller by Doubling Down and Insisting That RussiaGate Was Real 

Rachel Maddow, the queen of the Russia collusion hoax, was brought onto MSNOW tonight to react to the death of former FBI director Robert Mueller, who led the pointless investigation that came up with nothing.

According to Maddow, Mueller confirmed her anti-Trump conspiracy theories. She actually doubled down on the hoax during the segment. Maddow made a fortune pushing this lie to her audience and yet she has never been forced to apologize or faced consequences of any kind.

She even suggests that Mueller’s findings were shut down by then attorney general Bill Barr, who she claims outmaneuvered Mueller politically.

Mediaite has details:

Maddow joined The Weekend: Primetime on Saturday to share her thoughts on Mueller, hours after he died at the age of 81. The MS NOW veteran was complimentary of Mueller overall, but said his two-year probe into Trump failed to land a devastating blow because Barr “outplayed” Mueller.

“There’s a reason on a day like this, we need to remind people what was in Mueller’s report — what were the results of his investigation — and that’s because of a failure on his part,” Maddow said. “That is because once his investigation and his report were concluded, he was just wildly outmaneuvered by a really serpentine Attorney General named Bill Barr, who played really dirty pool when it came to the handling and release of the information from Mueller’s investigation.”

She continued:

I don’t know if he was blindsided by it or if he thought Barr was a good guy and would be a straight shooter on this, but Barr absolutely buried him in terms of in terms of the impact of of that report. And given the way that bill Barr became attorney general, Mueller and his team should have seen that coming.

If they did see it coming, they should have come up with a way to outmaneuver Barr while he was outmaneuvering them, and they didn’t.

Keep reading

The State Will Always Socialize The Cost Of War

War is often sold to the public as an act of national will: decisive, necessary, and under control. The bill arrives later, in a quieter form. It shows up in insurance markets, shipping rates, emergency guarantees, higher fuel prices, and sudden policy reversals designed to keep the economic damage from spreading too far or too fast. That is what is now happening with the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran. The fighting is not only destroying lives and widening instability. It is also revealing something more familiar about the American state: when private actors no longer want to bear the risk of a war Washington helped ignite, Washington moves to spread that risk across everyone else.

The clearest example came when maritime war-risk premiums in the Gulf surged, in some cases by more than 1000%, as ships and cargoes moved through a combat zone centered on one of the world’s most important energy chokepoints. This is what markets do when governments create danger: they start pricing reality honestly. Insurance underwriters do not care about speeches about resolve or credibility. They care about missiles, mines, damaged hulls, and the odds that a vessel will not make it home intact. Once those odds change, the market does what it is supposed to do. It becomes expensive to move goods through a war.

But the American state does not like that kind of honesty, because honest prices expose the real cost of intervention. So instead of letting war become unaffordable to the people escalating it, Washington stepped in. The U.S. International Development Finance Corporation announced a maritime reinsurance facility covering losses up to roughly $20 billion on a rolling basis, and later named Chubb as the lead insurance partner. In plain English, the government decided that if the private market was no longer willing to carry the full risk of this war, the state would help carry it instead. That is not a side effect of interventionism. It is one of its operating principles. Risk is privatized on the way up, then socialized when the numbers stop working.

The same pattern is visible in energy policy. As the war tightened shipping and pushed oil prices above $100 a barrel, Washington issued a thirty-day waiver allowing purchases of stranded Russian oil at sea to stabilize markets. That move was not just an emergency adjustment. It was an admission. The administration was effectively saying that one war had already become costly enough to require loosening pressure in another theater. A foreign policy that presents itself as hard and disciplined suddenly becomes very flexible when gasoline, shipping, and inflation begin threatening domestic politics. The slogans remain moralistic. The mechanics turn transactional overnight.

This is what statism looks like in practice. It does not simply bomb another country and call it security. It also rearranges the economic landscape at home and abroad so that the political architects of the war do not face the full consequences of their decisions. The cost is pushed outward onto taxpayers who did not authorize the war, consumers who will pay more for energy and goods, and trading systems that now have to absorb new shocks because Washington and Israel chose escalation over restraint. The state does not merely fight. It conscripts logistics, insurance, credit, and public balance sheets into the campaign.

Keep reading