Tag: politics

Burchett Plans to Block Socialist Chevalier from Congress over Flag Desecration Post

Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN) said he plans to block New York Democratic Socialist Darializa Avila Chevalier from being seated in Congress if she wins the Nov. 3 election, citing a resurfaced post in which she said she wiped her hand on an American flag.

Burchett told the New York Post he intends to make the move when the new Congress convenes in January, using a simple-majority vote to prevent newly elected lawmakers from being seated before they take the oath of office.

The Tennessee Republican argued the flag comment is disqualifying for anyone about to swear the oath.

“You take an oath to uphold the Constitution, and and [sic] you’re pretty much disavowing it right there. I just think we’ve lost our compass,” he said.

Burchett called the comment an affront to his own family’s military service. His father was a World War II Marine, and his maternal uncle, Roy Hicks, was wounded shortly after D-Day battling German forces in the Normandy hedgerows. The congressman keeps the flag that covered Hicks’ coffin in his Knoxville office.

“I’m looking at a 48-star flag that hung on my uncle’s casket and [he] died fighting the Nazis, and then see somebody going to get elected to Congress in New York who said they use that flag for a napkin,” he said.

Burchett said he will offer the motion whether Republicans hold the House or fall into the minority. The congressman flew with President Donald Trump on Air Force One to Tennessee last week.

Chevalier, who faces Republican Jomo M. Williams in the general election, made the comment in a December 2019 post on X that has since been deleted: “I forgot to get napkins so I just wiped my hand on the American flag behind me.” She later said she regretted it.

The 32-year-old Democratic Socialist upended five-term Rep. Adriano Espaillat in the primary for the 13th Congressional District, covering northern Manhattan and the western Bronx, after an endorsement from New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani. She co-founded a group that once described itself as “fighting for the total eradication of Western civilization,” and maintained a deleted account that hyped communism and Marxism. Asked whether she is a communist, she said, “I’m not. I’m a democratic socialist.”

The plan faces long odds. GOP operative John Feehery, a former senior House leadership aide, said the chamber could not function under such a standard.

“If we refused to seat folks in Congress who said things that we strongly disagreed with, nobody in the House would be seated,” Feehery said.

The Constitution makes each chamber the judge of its members’ elections and qualifications. The Supreme Court ruled in 1969 that the House had exceeded its authority in excluding Rep. Adam Clayton Powell (D-NY), who had been duly elected and met the constitutional qualifications for office.

Keep reading

DOJ Hits Gallego’s PAC with Grand Jury Subpoena in Slush Fund Probe

The Justice Department subpoenaed Sen. Ruben Gallego’s (D-AZ) leadership PAC as part of a federal criminal investigation into the Arizona Democrat’s use of campaign cash to fund a luxurious lifestyle, according to a copy of the subpoena obtained by POLITICO.

The grand jury subpoena went out Aug. 21 to Gallego’s Juntos PAC, POLITICO reported Saturday. Its existence had not been reported before. It sought records tied to “activities on or about” Sept. 9, 2025. It also demanded the statements Gallego gave the Senate Ethics Committee during its own misuse-of-funds probe, the one the panel dismissed in June.

A spokesman for the senator said the PAC turned over everything it was asked for.

“The leadership PAC has complied with and responded to the Trump DOJ subpoena because it has nothing to hide,” spokesman Jacques Petit told the outlet. Petit did not say whether Gallego himself, his family, or any of his staff had also been subpoenaed.

The subpoena states that it relates to an “ongoing criminal investigation” and that the records will be handed to a grand jury. Its deadline was Sept. 4.

The probe grew out of reporting on how the senator spent donor money. POLITICO documented a string of family trips to Disneyland, Disney World, Miami, and Chicago. It also found more than $18,000 in childcare reimbursements since 2019, including $400 that went to his mother-in-law. One source put it bluntly, calling the account his “personal slush fund.”

The record also pulls in disgraced former Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA). The two established a joint committee in October 2022, the “Swallego Victory Fund,” and used it the following year to buy Super Bowl LVII tickets in Glendale, Arizona. CBS News reported the fund burned through more than $37,000 on tickets and meals before being terminated, sending roughly $7,600 to each of their campaigns.

The California Democrat left Congress in April, abandoning a run for governor as multiple women came forward with misconduct accusations. He has denied the allegations.

The subpoena builds on earlier reporting. Breitbart News noted in June that federal prosecutors moved in a day after the Ethics Committee wrapped its inquiry, a sequence the senator’s office dismissed as “politically motivated.” Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) filed the complaint that prompted the Senate ethics inquiry.

Keep reading

Far Left UK Green Party Wants The Words ‘Mother’ And ‘Father’ Erased

The Green Party is going to war against language, having decided the words “mother” and “father” are no longer fit for its members.

Ahead of its conference in Brighton this weekend, Zack Polanski’s party has circulated an ‘Inclusive Terminology Guidance’ telling activists to drop “mothers and fathers” for “parents and carers”, and warning that the wrong vocabulary can create “unwelcoming or exclusionary” environments and feed into bullying and harassment under the party’s own code of conduct.

The Telegraph reports that the document, already in use as equalities training, brands a run of ordinary English “unacceptable”, then tells members what to say instead. ‘Sexual preference’ is out because it “implies that attraction is a choice”. ‘Transsexual’ is out because it “does not encompass non-binary people”. ‘Homosexual’ is discouraged for the same reason.

‘Lunatic’ and ‘nutter’ are non-compliant because they “reinforce negative stereotypes and stigma about mental health”. ‘Elderly’, ‘youngster’, ‘able-bodied’, ‘sex-change’, ‘female politician’ and ‘lady doctor’ are all on the discouraged list. Gendered job titles go too: ‘chair’, not ‘chairman’; ‘police officer’, not ‘policeman’.

The race section is the same project in different clothes. Members are steered toward “global majority”, described as an umbrella for people of Black, Asian, Brown, Indigenous and Latin American heritage, on the grounds that these groups are most of the world’s population and are “often minoritised” in countries such as the UK.

‘Brown’ should be “used with caution,” while “racially minoritised” is preferred because it “emphasises that minority status is created by social and power structures, rather than being inherent”. “Black, Asian and minority ethnic” is to be handled carefully, because “many people are uncomfortable with grouping diverse experiences under a single label”.

Keep reading

Clinton-Era Laws Passed 30 Years Ago Enabled Trump’s Anti-Immigrant Agenda. Here’s How We Turn the Page.

The more the American public sees of President Donald Trump’s hardline, anti-immigrant policies in action — the deaths, military-style invasions of neighborhoods, and mass detention and deportations — the more his approval on the issue drops.

If this trend sounds familiar, it’s because a similar wave of disapproval played out in Trump’s first term. Despite that backlash, Trump returned to office embracing even more extreme measures.

We must finally confront and uproot the core of the U.S.’s anti-immigrant underbelly, which is largely reflected in the racially motivated notion of criminalization.

Trump was not the first politician to exploit the concept of criminality, and he certainly won’t be the last. Criminalizing narratives are deeply planted in the American psyche, and they have commonly acted as the vessel through which white supremacist rhetoric and policy are ingrained into our culture and laws.

In the late 1980’s, criminalization went mainstream in the form of racist dog whistles, particularly those hinging on vile anti-Blackness deployed by politicians seeking to activate white voters. In the decades since, conservative and liberal leaders alike more purposefully extended this criminality framework to immigration — so much so that it’s now perhaps the primary driver of the public immigration debate.

Consider how Americans of all political stripes are often presented with the binary choice of supporting the “right” type of immigrant. In this oversimplification, immigrants fall into categories like “good” or “bad,” “legal” or “illegal,” “deserving” or “undeserving.”

Trump did not invent these narratives. They’ve underpinned both major parties’ politics of immigration for several decades, despite their basis in fiction and fear-mongering rather than evidence and compassion, or the fact these narratives are weaponized against non-white immigrants who for centuries have disproportionately faced restrictive and punitive policies for the act of seeking relief in this country.

But Trump’s partisan opposition, despite its massive opportunities in the face of unpopular, hardline policies, has repeatedly failed to capture the public’s long-term support on immigration. Too often, Democrats repackage the same old criminalizing narratives — often in softer terms, but always in line with the oversimplified good-or-bad thinking. This lack of imagination is reflected in the nearly annual bipartisan votes to increase funding for federal enforcement agencies like Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection, as well as Democratic leaders’ messaging and policies.

Take, for example, former President Barack Obama’s push to deport “felons, not families”; Joe Biden squandering his mandate to reverse the cruelty of Trump’s first term by continuing many Trump policies, like Title 42 and the backing of for-profit immigrant detention; or Kamala Harris, in her presidential bid, focusing much of her immigration rhetoric on “securing” the border.

It’s a toxic cycle: The public rightfully disapproves of the atrocities of anti-immigrant policies; in response, liberals roll out unimaginative plans hinged on outdated narratives; and finally, in the vacuum created by the lack of any tangible, pro-immigrant vision, the right recaptures the public’s attention with fear mongering and a sensationalist focus on crime and the border.

Keep reading

More of Connecticut’s AI Law Takes Effect. Lawmakers Already Say It Doesn’t Regulate Enough

More provisions of Connecticut’s artificial intelligence (AI) law, Public Act 26-15, take effect today (Oct. 1), with broader workplace requirements scheduled to begin next year. 

While Connecticut is still implementing the law, legislators are already considering another round of AI regulations. Legislative leaders want tougher rules for AI developers, while labor unions are seeking additional protections for workers affected by the technology. 

Connecticut could be writing another set of AI rules before the largest provisions of its current law have had a chance to take effect. 

What Takes Effect October 1 

The first change concerns large layoffs. Under the federal Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act, certain employers must give advance notice of a mass layoff or plant closing. Starting today, an employer sending that notice to Connecticut’s Department of Labor must also disclose whether the layoffs are related to its use of AI or another technological change. 

The requirement does not prevent a layoff. It could, however, give the state a better record of where technology is changing employment. 

Employers also remain responsible for discriminatory employment decisions made with automated technology. If a company uses software to screen applicants, it cannot dismiss a discrimination claim by saying the computer made it do it. 

For consumers, companies that make generative AI systems with more than 1 million monthly users and sell subscriptions in Connecticut must spell out key terms, including limits on use and whether they can reduce or cut off access. Customers must accept those terms in writing when they sign up or renew.

Large AI providers face another rule. When technically and commercially reasonable, they must include information that helps identify certain images, audio and video as computer-generated. 

State agencies can still put AI to work, but they must follow state standards when using it to deliver public assistance or perform work that could significantly affect residents’ rights, safety or welfare. Agencies authorized to purchase AI must complete an impact assessment.

Software helping staff answer routine questions is one thing. Software involved in a family’s benefits is another. 

Keep reading

Pharma Spent Record $456.9 Million Last Year on Lobbying — With No Signs of Slowing Down

Big Pharma set a new record for lobbying spending in 2025 — and 2026 is shaping up to be another year of big spending, as the industry seeks to influence U.S. healthcare policy.

The pharmaceutical and health industry combined spent $456.9 million on lobbying expenses in 2025, according to OpenSecrets, up 16.7% from 2024. According to The Boston Globe (citing STAT), it was the largest-ever single-year increase in lobbying spending.

This spending was part of what OpenSecrets called a “record” $868 million in lobbying outlays by the healthcare sector in 2025.

Big Pharma’s leading trade group — the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) — led the way, spending nearly $38 million on lobbying last year, a 22% increase from 2024, according to Politico. PhRMA was joined by “nine of the 13 U.S. drugmakers on the Fortune 500,” who reported “their highest spending in at least a decade” on lobbying.

There are no signs of a slowdown. OpenSecrets data show the pharmaceutical industry has reported $245.7 million in lobbying expenses so far this year, part of the $459.3 million the health sector overall has spent in 2026.

PhRMA spent a reported $19.8 million in lobbying expenses in 2026, ranking third among business and trade organizations this year — a position it also held in 2025, when it spent $38.19 million.

Among drugmakers, Eli Lilly has spent over $7 million on lobbying this year. Pfizer has spent $6.62 million, and Merck has spent $6.58 million.

According to OpenSecrets, PhRMA’s record spending bucked the overall trend, in which “some of Washington’s biggest spenders, such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Realtors, cut back from their 2024 lobbying expenditures.”

Keep reading

Abdul El-Sayed Top Staffer Quits Campaign—Shares Disturbing Truth About “Manufactured Man”–“Pushed multiple staff to tears”–“Immature”–“Cartoonishly fake masculinity” and “Loves to fart in public”

Jordan Domingue, a top staffer who worked two of Abdul El-Sayed’s campaigns has quit the Democrat’s U.S. Senate race and is now talking. What he describes is a candidate who has faked his way through public life, right down to the “physician” title. This is a lengthy article, but every American needs to understand, from an insiders perspective, how dangerous this man would be if elected to the U.S. Senate.

In a post on X, Jordan Domingue outlines his decision to defect from Abdul’s campaign after working first on his failed gubernatorial campaign and again on his current Senate campaign.

“His foreign policy was driven by a desire to invoke what seemed like misplaced revenge.”

I protected Abdul for two years, I worked as his personal assistant/executive protection lead on his campaigns. I departed two jobs early from working abroad, moved to Michigan twice, and took paycuts averaging 50,000k.

I took his lovely wife to the hospital for visits when she was pregnant. His youngest daughter called me Mr. Jorjan. I painted him an original piece of artwork for his birthday.

I was happy to do and experience all of this. For his gubernatorial run he never mentioned foreign policy. During his senate run, his foreign policy was driven by a desire to invoke what seemed like misplaced revenge.

When I finally realized he didn’t actually care about civilians and peace, everything I had previously ignored or excused made it obvious to who he was and that I was on the wrong side.

Jordan Domingue’s profile on X reads more like that of a Republican: USMC Combat Veteran – International Security Professional – Bjj Brown Belt – Lockheed Liberal – Anti DSA – Democratic Field Organizer – Rugged Individual

Keep reading

The American Public Has Turned on Israel. Washington Doesn’t Care.

For decades, American support for Israel was a bipartisan consensus. It was believed that only fringe figures, kooks, or antisemites would question the close bond between the two nations, and that this was a relationship forged on the grounds of mutual geopolitical interests.

Well, after years of Israel conducting a mass slaughter of innocent civilians in Gaza, and after having successfully convinced President Donald Trump to launch a disastrous war in Iran, American public opinion has taken a turn. According to a Marquette Law School survey from September 2026, 59 percent of American adults have an unfavorable view of Israel, compared to only 29 percent who say they have a favorable view of the country. This is a shocking collapse from where Israel’s support was just years ago.

The policy emanating from the U.S. government, however, has not reflected this change. In fact, our political leaders and media figures have decided that now is the time to showcase their undying loyalty to Israel in a very transparent fashion.

On September 29, the Senate voted on a resolution introduced by Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA), and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), that sought to force the State Department to report to Congress on the killing of U.S. citizens by Israeli settlers in the West Bank. The resolution was rejected with a 47-51 vote, with Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) being the only member of the GOP to buck party lines and support the resolution.

Besides Paul, every Senate Republican – as well as Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) – voted against transparency on the issue of American citizens being killed overseas by violent settlers. What could the possible justification be for such a vote?

Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT), who voted “nay”, claims that the resolution was “another cynical ploy by Democrats to isolate our closest ally in the region.”

Not really a substantive rationale for opposing transparency on American civilians being attacked and killed abroad.

The GOP isn’t the only place where loyalty to Israel remains unshaken. Mike Huckabee, the U.S. ambassador to Israel, has again made statements that, at first glance, seem almost comically deranged.

In a recent virtual appearance at the “Pray Vote Stand Summit,” Huckabee was asked to identify the greatest threat facing Israel (as if that should be the primary concern of a U.S. official). He responded by saying that Israel’s most pressing danger does not come from a regional enemy, but from the collapse in support among the American populace.

“I think the greatest threat to Israel,” Huckabee explained, “is that they would be abandoned by those who should be their natural allies. Let me begin with the United States. We get more from Israel than we give to Israel, but most Americans don’t know it.”

“What I’m seeing happen in Europe, their turning against Israel and against the Jewish people,” Huckabee added. “This is setting up for a real challenge and a conflict not between countries, but between heaven and hell, light and darkness, truth and lies.”

“Some of the nations… have created for themselves a disastrous future by saying, yeah, we’re going to curse Israel. Well, based on Genesis 12, I don’t recommend it.”

Huckabee is implying here that by withholding support for Israel, European nations – and those who would do the same in America – have enacted a curse upon themselves and their countries. Huckabee’s position, therefore, is that we can never withdraw support for Israel, regardless of whether or not it’s in our nation’s interests. In doing so, he fears, we would be sentencing ourselves to hell.

Huckabee has articulated this stance before, so it comes as little surprise that he would make such an outlandish statement. Yet one can’t help but be startled by the fact that this man – delusions and all – is a government official.

A core source of Israeli influence is the neoconservative media. A cast of pro-Israel characters have been busy over the last few years doing damage control, attempting to reverse the draining of American support for Israel.
Mark Dubowitz, CEO of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), is one of the most prominent advocates for a close U.S.-Israel relationship. He published an article in FDD on September 6 discussing the risk of Israel becoming financially isolated on the global stage. In his piece, he gave the Israeli government advice on how to prepare for such a scenario. One of his recommendations was deeply concerning:

“Israel and the United States should deepen their military, technological, intelligence and economic integration,” Dubowitz said, “to such an extent that inflicting financial harm on Israel would also carry a significant cost for Washington.”

Dubowitz went on to reiterate this message, saying in an interview later that month that Israel has “got to make the relationship deeper.”

“You’ve got to make Israel so valuable… that weaponizing that financial relationship against Israel is going to impose costs on the United States.”

Keep reading

Schumer says he won’t quit as Dem Senate leader post-midterms, warns GOP may ‘steal the election’

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is adamant that he will remain in charge of upper chamber Democrats following next month’s midterms — and has issued an inflammatory warning that Republicans could attempt to “steal the election.”

“I am running for re-election for leader,” Schumer insisted to Politico in an interview published Wednesday. “Period.”

The Brooklyn native, 75, added that Democrats are “totally unified” and have the “edge” in their battle to regain the Senate after two years in the minority.

“It’s 50-50. We’re right on the edge of winning. Two things could have us lose. One, they steal the election,” Schumer told Semafor in a separate interview, also published Wednesday.

“The second thing is money. They have obscene amounts of money,” he continued. “All we need is enough to be able to answer the s— they’re going to throw at us, and we’re doing well there.”

A rep for Schumer did not immediately respond to a request to clarify the senator’s “steal the election” comment.

The Republican National Committee currently has about $126 million cash on hand, compared to the Democratic National Committee’s $16.9 million cash on hand and $17.6 million debt.

“Here’s how I sum up the election in one sentence: Can an enormous Republican advantage in dollars defeat an enormous Democratic advantage in candidates and in political climate?” Schumer added to Semafor. “I think we win.”

Keep reading

Trump DOJ Opens Investigation Into Texas Democrat PAC After Operative Caught on Tape Bragging About a “Roundabout” Way of “Paying People” for Votes

The Justice Department has opened an investigation into Texas Majority PAC after a viral undercover video showed a since-fired organizing manager spelling out what he called a “roundabout way of paying people for their votes” ahead of the midterms.

A source familiar confirmed the probe on Wednesday. The investigation was first reported by Fox News Digital, which said two sources familiar with the matter confirmed the department is looking at the Democrat operation that dumps millions into flipping Texas blue.

The footage that forced the feds’ hand was released by Townhall on September 16. Sky McAdams, then an organizing manager for Texas Majority PAC, sat down with an undercover journalist and walked through the loophole he said the group uses to skirt federal election law while boosting Democrat U.S. Senate candidate James Talarico.

“We are paying people $25 to attend a one-hour Zoom class to learn why voting is important and why the Republicans are causing all of these bad things,” McAdams said on the tape. “So it’s like a roundabout way of paying people for their votes, essentially.”

He did not stop there. McAdams told the undercover reporter you cannot hand someone cash and say, “Here’s $25, go vote for me.” What you can do, he said, is pay them to sit through a class. “And then the class just talks about the importance of… It’s a little gray.”

He named the program. “It’s called the Paid Relational Program.” He added that he thought “Rally Texas” was the official name. Then he said the quiet part out loud: “If I was a Republican, I would be pissed. I would be like, that’s shady as f**k.”

The Gateway Pundit reported the tape the day it dropped. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, the Republican Talarico is trying to beat, did not mince words.

Keep reading