Is Trump’s Alien Disclosure Directive a Distraction?

Is it a coincidence that the president is directing government agencies to release information about aliens exactly as public frustration over revelations in the Jeffrey Epstein files are boiling over? Is it a coincidence this is happening when pressure continues mounting on his Justice Department to release the three million files they’re illegally holding onto? Is it a coincidence we’re hearing about aliens just as the president is on the verge of making a unilateral decision to catapult the country into war against a struggling nation that poses no imminent threat to the United States?

Short of President Donald Trump admitting so, it’s difficult to tell. But probably not. As soon as Trump announced the alien disclosure move, the internet en masse arrived at the same conclusion. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) was among the many who sensed what’s likely happening.

“They’ve deployed the ultimate weapon of mass distraction,” Massie said in an X post Thursday night, “but the Epstein files aren’t going away… even for aliens.”

Trump posted his announcement two hours earlier, around 7 p.m. Thursday night, saying, “Based on the tremendous interest shown, I will be directing the Secretary of War, and other relevant Departments and Agencies, to begin the process of identifying and releasing Government files related to alien and extraterrestrial life, unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP), and unidentified flying objects (UFOs), and any and all other information connected to these highly complex, but extremely interesting and important, matters.”

Keep reading

Trump’s $2,000 Tariff ‘Dividend Checks’ Go Up in Smoke

President Trump’s promise to send Americans $2,000 “tariff dividend” checks appears all but dead after the Supreme Court struck down a key pillar of his trade agenda Friday, the New York Post reports.

In a 6-3 ruling, the high court found Trump exceeded his authority by using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose sweeping tariffs tied to trade imbalances and fentanyl smuggling.

While the decision could save households hundreds of dollars on the goods marked up by tariffs — it also wipes out the revenue stream that would have funded the proposed rebate checks.

Before the ruling, the average U.S. household was projected to pay an extra $1,300 to $1,700 in 2026 due to tariffs, according to the Yale Budget Lab.

With the IEEPA tariffs now halted — though others remain in place and Trump has vowed to impose a new 10% global tariff effective Friday — that burden could fall roughly in half to about $600 to $800, John Ricco, associate director of policy analysis at the Budget Lab, told CNBC.

Still, experts cautioned that consumers may not see full relief.

“I’m actually shocked that the number wasn’t a little higher on the financial burden to the average American household than $1,000,” Erik Rosica, sales supervisor at OEC Group New York, told the Post.

“I do agree that the impact of reversing them would hopefully halve it — but again, that’s only if people lower their prices,” he added.

Rosica noted that companies may be reluctant to cut prices, particularly on higher-ticket goods, even if tariff pressures ease.

Keep reading

Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker Demands $8.6B in Tariff Refunds from Trump

Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D) demanded that President Donald Trump give the people of the state a total of $8.6 billion in refunds after the Supreme Court struck down Trump’s global tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).

In a letter addressed to Trump that Pritzker posted to X, Pritzker described Trump’s tariffs as having “wreaked havoc on farmers,” having “enraged our allies,” and increased the cost of groceries.

Pritzker explained that he was demanding “a refund of $1,700 for every family” in the state, and that because there were roughly 5,105,448 households in the state, the total came to $8,679,261,600.

“Your tariffs wreaked havoc on farmers, enraged our allies, and sent grocery prices through the roof,” Pritzker wrote. “This morning, your hand-picked Supreme Court Justices notified you that they are also unconstitutional.”

Pritzker added: “On behalf of the people of Illinois, I demand a refund of $1,700 for every family in Illinois. There are 5,105,448 households in my state, bringing the total damages you owe to $8,679,261,600.”

Keep reading

5 Takeaways From Supreme Court’s Rejection of Trump’s Global Tariffs

The Supreme Court on Feb. 20 struck down many of President Donald Trump’s tariffs, stating they violated an emergency powers law he invoked last year.

The president previously declared a national emergency under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, saying the tariffs were needed to stem the flow of illegal drugs and to combat “large and persistent” trade deficits with foreign nations.

The act generally gives the president the power to regulate imports to address emergencies, but debate ensued over what that meant in practice.

Writing for the 6–3 majority, Chief Justice John Roberts rejected Trump’s arguments, saying that the law’s phrasing did not clearly authorize tariffs.

Tariffs enacted under other laws are not affected by the ruling.

Tariffs Not Authorized Under Emergency Law

Roberts said Trump rested his claim of tariff authority on the words “regulate” and “importation” in the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which gives the president authority to act.

“The President asserts the independent power to impose tariffs on imports from any country, of any product, at any rate, for any amount of time,” Roberts said. “Those words cannot bear such weight.”

Keep reading

The US is on the brink of a major new war that Trump has not even bothered explaining

President Trump has spent two months ordering a rapidly expanding and now-massive military buildup near Iran, with a focus on the Persian Gulf and nearby permanent U.S. military bases in close proximity to Iran (Iran, of course, has no military bases anywhere near the U.S.). The deployment includes aircraft carriers and other assets that would enable, at a minimum, an extremely destructive air campaign against the whole country.

The U.S. under both parties has been insisting for two decades that it must abandon its heavy military involvement in the Middle East and instead “pivot to Asia” in light of a rapidly rising China. Yet in the midst of those vows, Trump has now assembled the largest military presence in the Middle East since 2003, when the U.S. was preparing to invade Iraq with overwhelming military force.

One of the most striking and alarming aspects of all of this is that Trump — outside of a few off-the-cuff banalities — has barely attempted to offer a case to the American public as to why such a major new war is necessary. This unilateral march to war resembles what we saw in the lead-up to the bombing of Venezuelan boats, culminating in the U.S. invading force that abducted (“arrested”) the country’s President, Nicolas Maduro, and took him and his wife to a prison in New York.

In the weeks preceding the Venezuela operation, we heard a carousel of rationales. It was all necessary to stop the flow of dangerous drugs into the U.S. We needed to free the repressed Venezuelan peoples from their dictator. Trump’s embrace and expansion of the Monroe Doctrine — now dubbed the Donroe Doctrine — meant that we cannot tolerate communist regimes in “our region.”

But as soon as Maduro was removed, all of those claims disappeared. Contrary to the expectations of many, the U.S. left in place Maduro’s entire regime rather than replacing it with the pro-US opposition (a wise move of restraint in my view, but one that negates the “liberation” rhetoric). Discussions of the drug trade from Venezuela (a source of drugs for the U.S. that was always minor if not trivial, and did not include fentanyl) have completely disappeared. The only real outcome seems to be that the U.S. has more control over that nation’s oil supply, and barrels of it are now being shipped to Israel for the first time in many years.

In sum, we were given a low-effort smorgasbord to enable supporters of Trump’s actions toward Venezuela to mount arguments in favor of the operation, but there was no systematic attempt to convince the country at large. There was not even a live television address to the nation beforehand to explain it. And the role that Congress played was close to non-existent. All of that is similar to what we are seeing now concerning a far riskier, more dangerous, and complex war with Iran.

Keep reading

Vietnam War veterans sue to block Trump’s proposed ‘Triumphal Arch’ monument in DC

A group of Vietnam War veterans has filed a federal lawsuit seeking to block President Donald Trump’s proposed “Independence Arch,” a massive monument planned for Memorial Circle between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington National Cemetery.

The lawsuit, filed Thursday, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, argues the 250-foot structure would obstruct the historic line of sight between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington House at Arlington National Cemetery.

The plaintiffs say that the view was intentionally designed to symbolize national unity following the Civil War and has remained unobstructed for nearly a century.

According to the complaint, the proposed arch would be “as tall as 250 feet,” more than double the height of the Lincoln Memorial, and would be positioned directly on the ceremonial axis connecting the two memorials.

Keep reading

Trump officials plan to build 5,000-person military base in Gaza, files show

The Trump administration is planning to build a 5,000-person military base in Gaza, sprawling more than 350 acres, according to Board of Peace contracting records reviewed by the Guardian.

The site is envisioned as a military operating base for a future International Stabilization Force (ISF), planned as a multinational military force composed of pledged troops. The ISF is part of the newly created Board of Peace which is meant to govern Gaza. The Board of Peace is chaired by Donald Trump and led in part by his son-in-law Jared Kushner.

The plans reviewed by the Guardian call for the phased construction of a military outpost that will eventually have a footprint of 1,400 metres by 1,100 metres, ringed by 26 trailer-mounted armored watch towers, a small arms range, bunkers, and a warehouse for military equipment for operations. The entire base will be encircled with barbed wire.

The fortification is planned for an arid stretch of flatlands in southern Gaza strewn with saltbush and white broom shrubs, and littered with twisted metal from years of Israeli bombardment. The Guardian has reviewed video of the area. A source close to the planning tells the Guardian that a small group of bidders – international construction companies with experience in war zones – have already been shown the area in a site visit.

The Indonesian government has reportedly offered to send up to 8,000 troops. Indonesia’s president was one of four south-east Asian leaders scheduled to attend an inaugural meeting of the Board of Peace in Washington DC on Thursday.

The UN security council authorized the Board of Peace to establish a temporary International Stabilization Force in Gaza. The ISF, according to the UN, will be tasked with securing Gaza’s border and maintaining peace within the area. It is also supposed to protect civilians, and train and support “vetted Palestinian police forces”.

It is unclear what the ISF’s rules of engagement would be if there is combat, renewed bombing by Israel, or attacks by Hamas. Nor is it clear what role the ISF is meant to play in disarming Hamas, an Israeli condition to proceed with Gaza’s reconstruction.

While more than 20 countries have signed up as members of the Board of Peace, much of the world has stayed away. Although it was set up with the UN’s approval, the organization’s charter appears to grant Trump permanent leadership and control.

Keep reading

Unmasking The Muslim Brotherhood Ties Inside Ohio’s General Assembly

In a highly anticipated move, the Trump administration designated factions of the global Muslim Brotherhood as terrorist organizations last month, an executive action with profound implications extending beyond the Middle East to America’s heartland. Astonishingly, a Somali-American legislator from Ohio, State Rep. Munira Abdullahi, D-Columbus, continues to serve as a national leader for the Muslim American Society (MAS), a registered nonprofit that federal prosecutors have identified as the “overt arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in America.”

Abdullahi’s involvement with MAS dates back to at least 2012, when she served as a youth director in Columbus and later as a national program director. The organization’s youth programs have been marred by scandals nationwide, including an incident in Philadelphia where children were taught songs about beheading Israeli Jews, and a fundraiser selling merchandise glorifying Hamas and Hezbollah terrorists. Upon her election to public office in 2022, Abdullahi appeared to distance herself from MAS, updating her LinkedIn profile to indicate she no longer worked for the group.

However, her ties persisted and deepened. Now heading MAS-Columbus and part of the organization’s national leadership, she leverages her elected status to host events featuring ultra-conservative preachers and pro-Hamas activists. Though MAS officially claims independence from the broader Sunni Islamist movement, a 2004 Chicago Tribune investigation exposed how its early leaders decided to conceal their Muslim Brotherhood affiliations while aiming to “convert Americans to Islam and elect like-minded Muslims to political office.”

Campaign finance records underscore this connection: in 2022, Abdullahi received a $1,000 contribution from an MAS colleague and later donated $2,400 from her campaign to MAS-Columbus.

Keep reading

Global Warming Claim: CO2 CAN’T Hold Heat — and Real Scientists Have Known This for Ages

President Donald Trump recently reversed the Obama-era “endangerment finding,” which had identified CO2 as a public-health threat. Global-warming alarmists consider this a step backwards. But, says a man with actual hands-on experience working with so-called greenhouse gases, it’s a step toward sanity.

In fact, writes James T. Moodey on Sunday, “Real scientists have known the truth about global warming for decades.”

What’s more, “There’s an easy test to disprove global warming,” he states at American Thinker. “I did it myself.”

Moodey then elaborates, providing some background on climate-change alarmism’s origins:

The groupthink started in 1994 as a political movement to ban fossil fuels at our country’s first climate change bureaucracy, Southern California Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). A local professor wrote a rule for them that became known as “cap and trade.” It required our factories to reduce combustion of natural gas by an average 75 percent over five years. I owned a Weights and Measures gas-physics test-and-repair facility. The air quality district chose my company to test the factories’ gas-physics instruments for accuracy once per year. We witnessed the closing of over 1,200 factories because of that rule.

We were skeptical of the rule’s assumptions, so we tested carbon dioxide. It cools twenty degrees in less than four minutes. It cannot possibly retain heat from day to day (global warming). It does not cause any warming.

Of course, this may or may not be definitive. After all, a given researcher could always be missing something. But the scientific establishment wasn’t interested in finding out.

That is, Moodey brought his findings to a 2014 Heartland Institute conference. He was rebuffed — even by those on “his side.” As he relates:

I offered to build the test bench for a respected professor, who said to me, “We believe that carbon dioxide causes warming; we just don’t know exactly how or how much.” I walked away thinking, “That is the most unscientific statement I have ever heard.”

Moodey says he then realized that tackling all of academia was fruitless. He was astounded at the “groupthink.”

What he encountered, too, was something late author Michael Crichton warned of: “consensus” (pseudo)science. As Crichton put it in a 2003 Caltech speech:

Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he … has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world.

In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus. There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus.

Crichton later added that talk of consensus is a red flag. It “is invoked only in situations where the science is not solid enough,” he explained. “Nobody says the consensus of scientists agrees that E=mc2. Nobody says the consensus is that the sun is 93 million miles away. It would never occur to anyone to speak that way.”

Not anyone, that is, except global-warming alarmists.

Keep reading

Trump Directs USDA to Make More Glyphosate, Signals Liability Protection for Pesticide Makers

President Donald Trump late Wednesday signed an executive order intended to boost domestic production of glyphosate.

Glyphosate is the active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup weedkiller. Bayer, which acquired Monsanto in June 2018, is facing tens of thousands of lawsuits from people alleging Roundup caused them to develop cancer.

Trump’s order also grants legal immunity to domestic manufacturers of products containing glyphosate when manufacturers are ordered, under the Defense Production Act of 1950, to produce the products.

The Defense Production Act is used in national emergencies to compel the production of materials or supplies necessary for national security.

Bayer is the only company producing glyphosate in the U.S. However, U.S. farmers also import the chemical from China, Reuters reported.

The executive order also applies to elemental phosphorus, used in weapons production, electronics and batteries. Elemental phosphorus is also used to make glyphosate.

Trump said elemental phosphorus and glyphosate-based herbicides are scarce materials critical to national defense, and that inadequate domestic production poses an imminent threat to military readiness and food security.

“Glyphosate-based herbicides are a cornerstone of this Nation’s agricultural productivity and rural economy,” he said.

The order directs U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins to create rules for increasing the supply of phosphorus and glyphosate.

Keep reading