As the Trump administration continues to insist that states beef up election security, Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose is defending his role in sending voter data along to the federal government.

In May 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice began requesting that states hand over statewide voter registration lists. The lists contain information such as names, addresses, driver’s license information, and Social Security numbers that can be used to spot ineligible voters and remove them from the rolls.

Ohio is one of 12 states that have complied with the DOJ’s request so far. The department has sued another 29 states for denying the information.

In an interview with The Daily Signal, LaRose said Ohio has an interest in preventing voter fraud and “decided it was the right thing to do.”

“I believe the federal law requires us to share this data with the Department of Justice, so I did it,” LaRose said Friday. “Ohio is maintaining our voter rolls more accurately and more thoroughly than almost any other states, probably any other state in the country.”

While the secretary said he’s not afraid of being sued, he met with Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon and her staff to ensure Ohio’s sensitive voter data “was going to be transmitted securely” and used only for “lawful purposes.”

States that have refused to comply argue that voter roll data is highly sensitive, and that it can be stolen for purposes of identity theft, harassment, or to access financial or government records.

LaRose said the federal government is bound by protection requirements he called “very stringent,” and added that any official who misused such data would be held criminally liable.

“I’m not going to bemoan any of our other Republican states that decided not to share this data, because, in some cases, they have state law that says they may not,” LaRose said.

At the same time, the secretary acknowledged he has a “responsibility to the people of Ohio” to guarantee data would be handled securely.

Earlier this month, Ohio Democratic state Rep. Allison Russo filed a records request to identify the types of data LaRose sent to the federal government, and to seek transparency on the EleXa program Ohio uses for voter integrity.

EleXa is a multi-state election integrity network used to replace the Electronic Registration Information Center, or ERIC, which more than two dozen states have used to manage voter roll accuracy since 2019.

“Government use of personal information relies on public trust, and Ohio has a compelling interest and obligation in protecting individuals’ privacy and personal information,” Russo said in a statement.

“Secretary LaRose often mentions election integrity when making decisions, but election integrity must include securing voter information in a way that does not undermine privacy, enable manipulation, or erode confidence in our elections. Protecting this data is essential not only to prevent abuse, but to preserve the public’s trust that the democratic process is fair, secure, and worthy of participation.”

Russo’s office also maintained that data on 8 million Ohio voters was transferred to the DOJ “without clear legal authority for the agency’s request.”

LaRose insisted it should not be controversial to share such data, arguing that Social Security numbers come from the federal government, and that the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles “routinely” exchanges data with the federal government for taxes and other reasons. In addition, he said Ohio quit the ERIC program because it “proved unfixable.”

As for lawsuits, Ohio’s secretary of state said he predicts the U.S. Supreme Court will ultimately rule that states must share data with the federal government under both the Federal Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act.

Democrats want to talk about rhetoric, but they cannot escape one damning fact. Regardless of who uses what words, the bullets have only flown in one direction. In the wake […]

The post Watch: Democratic Congressman Appears to Blame Trump for Repeat Assassination Attempts appeared first on The Western Journal.

CNN postponed an anti-Trump documentary called Imperial Presidency due to another left-winger allegedly attempting to assassinate him.

The post Nolte: CNN Forced to Postpone ‘Imperial Presidency’ After Another Left-Winger Allegedly Tries to Kill Trump appeared first on Breitbart.

The Centurion 11 promises a classic 1911 experience at a budget price—but does it actually hold up?

The post Century Arms’ Centurion 11: Can A $400 1911 Be A Good Buy? appeared first on The Truth About Guns.

Former President Barack Obama posted on X in response to the attempted shooting of President Donald Trump at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. The post began with a familiar formula:

“Although we don’t yet have all the details about the motives behind last night’s shooting…”

And yet—almost instantly—the moral framing is already in place.

It’s a bit like a disciplined defense in football—the Left defends every blade of grass.

Nothing is conceded. No ground is given—not even in the first moments, when facts are still emerging. Every inch of interpretation is contested immediately.

This is the toolkit of an elite communicator—skills that helped get him to the top—deployed with the confidence that perception can be shaped at scale. He is using these tools to condition Americans.

Built into the former president’s comments is deflection. He is attempting to sever any link between rhetoric and consequences—because if that link takes hold, it constrains what can be said next.

The potential cause-and-effect is so politically costly that it’s easier to obscure it than to reckon with it.

Scions of the Left like the former president guide perception. They set boundaries. They create permission structures for how events are interpreted.

In modern political communication, uncertainty about facts rarely slows down the narrative. If anything, it accelerates it. A lack of clarity creates space, and that space gets filled quickly, often before the public has time to process what actually happened.

That is clearly a strategic move.

Language like Obama’s doesn’t confront emerging conclusions head-on. It redirects them. It encourages hesitation at the precise moment people are forming judgments, subtly shifting the focus from what’s visible to what might still be unknown.

“Don’t jump to conclusions.” “Motives are unclear.” “Let’s see more facts.”

It sounds measured.

But the practical effect is to interrupt momentum—to slow the natural formation of judgment and replace it with uncertainty that can be shaped over time.

And that delay matters. Because once initial reactions are softened, interpretation becomes more fluid—and easier to guide.

This isn’t aimed at people who are already certain. It’s aimed at those who feel tension but aren’t sure how to resolve it. The language offers an escape hatch: a way to stay in that uncertainty without committing one way or the other.

And it doesn’t just influence supporters—it complicates the response from critics.

It forces critics to defend what moments earlier felt obvious—while opening them up to being dismissed as premature or politically motivated.

The field tightens around the interpretation of events. Reality becomes contested terrain.

This broader communication model—narrative first, facts later—is at the core of what’s explored in “You Don’t Know Barack: Exposing Obama.” The myth, the image, the carefully managed story of this man is compared to the underlying record.

First as a candidate and then as president, Obama refined this model of communication, and its influence didn’t end with his presidency.

There’s another layer here that matters just as much: Obama understands his influence.

He knows that when he speaks, millions of people take cues from him. For many, his words still carry real weight.

That brings responsibility. Because when someone with that level of authority emphasizes uncertainty, he isn’t just describing a lack of information. He’s shaping how that lack of information is interpreted. He’s setting the tone for how others respond.

At this point, that pattern is well established. The outcomes are predictable. The effects are known.

We were told his presidency would unify the country.

Instead, the years that followed saw deepening cultural and political fractures that continue to define American life. Whether by design or by effect, the gap between rhetoric and reality widened.

Even his legacy projects reflect that divide. The Obama Presidential Center in Chicago has been praised in elite circles but criticized locally as out of touch, with real concerns about displacement.

Image over impact and narrative over substance. That pattern holds.

And it brings us back to moments like this.

Language at this level isn’t passive. It shapes perception. It defines what people feel permitted to believe—or question.

You don’t get to indulge this kind of framing, normalize it, and elevate those who deploy it and then act surprised when the downstream effects are confusion and distrust.

When clarity is repeatedly softened into ambiguity, people stop trusting their own judgment.

And when truth itself feels negotiable, the consequences are inevitable.

Those paying attention can see it clearly: this is the craft of a master operator—calculated, disciplined, and rooted in a cynical approach that has long disguised division as something else.

Not caution.

Not restraint.

But design.

We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. 

This Wednesday could be one of the most consequential days in the Federal Reserve's recent history.

The post Breitbart Business Digest: A Big Week for Powell, Warsh, and the Supreme Court appeared first on Breitbart.

Most justices seemed unconvinced Monday that law enforcement’s use of Google data to track a bank robber violates the Constitution.

The case stemmed from the prosecution of Okello Chatrie, who conditionally pleaded guilty in 2022 to robbing a Midlothian, Virginia, credit union. He reserved his right to make the case for suppressing evidence if it was illegally obtained.

His lawyer, Adam Unikowsky, argued to the high court Monday that a court-approved geofence warrant used to identify and apprehend him violated the Fourth Amendment. The warrants were to compel third-party companies such as Google to search customer locations from multiple devices in a finite area during a finite time, in this case, being the time of the robbery.

Chatrie was reportedly sentenced to 12 years for taking $195,000 from the bank. Law enforcement argued it exhausted other leads in its investigation before resorting to a geofence warrant.

Chief Justice John Roberts asked Unikowsky on Monday, “If you don’t want the government to have your location history, you just flip that off. You don’t have to have that feature on your phone. So what’s the issue?”

Unikowsky replied it was not implied consent.

“I just don’t agree that one should have to flip off one’s location history, as well as other cloud services, to avoid government surveillance,” he said.

Roberts responded, “If you don’t want someone to peer in your window, you can close your window or the shades.”

Justice Samuel Alito said, “I’m struggling to understand why we are hearing this case.” He noted that the debate is about a Google feature that no longer exists.

“We are all free to write law review articles on this fascinating subject, but that seems to be what you’re asking for,” Alito said.

The attorney responded, “All we’d ask for in this case is, if the court finds a Fourth Amendment violation, to reverse and send it back for the Fourth Circuit to consider the good faith issue in view of this court’s guidance.”

The plaintiff did seem to get some sympathy from Justice Sonia Sotomayor, on the liberal wing of the court. She noted that Google documents, Google calendars, and other information can be obtained by law enforcement.

“If this is consent, that means the government can seek those documents for any reason, not just the commission for crime,” Sotomayor said.

“So that means the government, a police officer, randomly decides, I don’t like that person. Let me just go look at their life to see if I can find the crime. That would be okay,” Sotomayor continued.

Unikowsky replied, “Correct.”

Arguing for the Trump administration, Deputy Solicitor General Eric Feigin said ruling with the plaintiffs would constitute an “unprecedented transformation of the Fourth Amendment into an impregnable fortress.”

“In doing so, he would make that fortress so impregnable that not even a judge’s warrant, for even a moment of the public location of someone who, again, affirmatively opted to allow Google to have those records and to access them, would be available to law enforcement,” Feigin added. “That’s a debilitating and counterintuitive reading of the Fourth Amendment that would impede the investigation of kidnappings, robberies, shootings, and other crimes.”

Over the weekend King Charles called President Trump to make sure the events of this week were still secure following the attempted assassination attempt at the White House Correspondents Dinner. Today, President Trump and First Lady Melania Trump welcomed King Charles and Queen Camilla to the White House.  Video Below: Today: President Trump and the […]

The post President Trump and First Lady Melania Trump Welcome King Charles and Queen Camilla to the White House appeared first on The Last Refuge.

U.S. — On the heels of yet another attempted act of political violence being used for laughs by late-night talk show hosts, Americans expressed a deep longing for the good old days when comedians were funny and didn't wish death on people.

Monday on “The Alex Marlow Show,” commentator Link Lauren talked about the Biden administration. Lauren said, “I think the Republicans could do a better job right now of painting the picture of how dire things were under Joe Biden and

The post Link Lauren: Republicans Failing to Paint Picture of How Dire Things Were Under Biden/Harris appeared first on Breitbart.

Monday on “The Alex Marlow Show,” commentator Link Lauren talked about the Bidens. Lauren said, “I couldn’t think of anything that would turn gay men off more. If you’re watching a sexy show and the guys are going at it,

The post Gay Commentator Roasts Bidens, Praises Trump: Nothing Turns Off Gay Men More Than Dr. Jill appeared first on Breitbart.

Monday on “The Alex Marlow Show,” commentator Link Lauren talked about the monarchy. Lauren said, “If you don’t care about the royals or the royal family or the monarchy, let me tell you why Meghan Markle is a cautionary tale

The post Link Lauren: Why the Monarchy Should Matter to Americans appeared first on Breitbart.