Democrats are betting higher gas prices will do what they cannot: weaken President Donald Trump’s advantage on national security. Their hope is that voters will fixate on the cost of a fill-up and forget why energy markets reacted to the Iran conflict in the first place. It is the same desperate strategy Americans have seen before. When they cannot win the bigger argument on national security, they retreat to the issue of costs and pray that short-term frustration will outweigh the far more serious stakes of American security and credibility. 

The Democrat strategy is not subtle. Quinnipiac found that 65% of voters blame Trump at least somewhat for the recent rise in gas prices due to the Iran war, and Democrats think they have found their midterm jackpot issue. They hope if they can keep the conversation centered on pain at the pump, voters will forget their failures on the border, inflation, crime, and foreign policy. 

Former Vice President Kamala Harris is already blaming Trump for pain at the pump, calling it the “direct result” of his Iran policy.  

They are betting that temporary frustration will outweigh the larger truth Americans see: The world is dangerous, our enemies exploit weakness, and real leadership sometimes requires force even when markets react in the short term. Iran threatens global shipping lanes and destabilizes the world. 

However, voters are not convinced that weakness is strength or that retreat is leadership.  

We have seen this before. After Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, oil prices and gasoline costs rose as the Persian Gulf crisis shook global energy markets. Americans felt the pain, but history did not judge that moment by gas prices alone. It judged whether the United States had the strength to confront aggression at a critical moment. America led a coalition, drove Saddam out of Kuwait, and restored deterrence in the Gulf. President George H. W. Bush’s approval surged during and immediately after the Gulf War, rising from 64% before the war to 89% after victory. 

That history matters now because it exposes the Democrats’ biggest strategic flaw: they confuse costs with failure. National security decisions can carry economic consequences, but the real question is whether those costs are helping restore deterrence, protect global order, and make hostile regimes think twice before testing American resolve. Democrats refuse this debate because it exposes their weakness. Their playbook is to frame strength as escalation, deterrence as recklessness, and American power as a problem rather than a solution. 

Kamala Harris’ attack reveals how poorly the Democrats are misreading the electorate. They assume higher gas prices will immediately trigger voter backlash without asking what caused the increase, what alternatives exist, and what weakness costs the country. Gallup polled Americans in the war’s opening phase, from March 2-18, and found only 2% named gas prices as the nation’s top problem. 

Recent Fox polling reveals that voter concern about gas prices is high, but concern about inflation is even higher.

Voters are not looking at the pump in isolation. They are looking at energy costs against the questions of affordability, deterrence, and American strength. 

Voters cannot miss the hypocrisy. Democrats spent four years excusing historic inflation when it suited their politics. They backed policies that weakened confidence in American energy, from killing Keystone XL to pausing new federal oil and gas leases, ignored warnings about instability abroad, and dismissed deterrence as exaggerated concerns.  

Now, as the Iran war has temporarily pushed up gas prices, they want to pose as defenders of working families. They offer no real alternatives; they only hope short-term pain will erase the memory of their own failures. Voters are smarter than that. 

The truth is Democrats want a gas-price panic because they cannot beat Trump on security. While the real debate is about Iran, deterrence, and American resolve, they would rather turn it into a referendum on a gas receipt than on leadership. But Americans know temporary pain is not the same as strategic failure. A party that confuses the two proves only one thing: it never understood strength in the first place. 

The post Democrats Want a Gas Price Panic Because They Cannot Beat Trump on Strength  appeared first on The Daily Signal.

A group dedicated to helping “LGBTQ+ migrants” in Boston is flailing after conservative media drew attention to its program distributing “wellness” grants to migrants, which the group claimed was taxpayer funded.

After The Daily Signal reached out for comment, the group deleted its press release claiming to combat “disinformation,” and announced a pause in the program. The City of Boston, for its part, confirmed that it awarded a grant to the group, but explicitly stated that no taxpayer funds may be used for the program.

“OUTnewcomers, a grassroots LGBTQ+ migrant justice organization based in Greater Boston, announces the temporary pause of its wellness initiative, Project Belonging Matters,” the group posted in a press release after The Daily Signal reached out for comment Thursday.

OUTnewcomers claimed that the organization and its founder, Sal Khan, “received multiple death threats and threats of being reported to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement following the project’s public launch.”

The group does not suggest it checks documentation to ensure that migrants are legal when dispersing services.

The LGBTQ+ Migrants’ ‘Wellness’ Program

The organization launched the program on Tuesday with posts on Facebook and Instagram.

“Get $250-$500 for your well-being,” a poster states, advertising “Wellness Support for LGBTQ+ Migrants in Boston.”

The poster states four different potential uses for the funding: “Yoga & Meditation,” “Creative Healing,” “Peer Support,” and “Gym Memberships.” The poster says the program will give priority to “low-income, trans & isolated LGBTQ+ migrants in Boston,” with the proviso that “all funds must be used within the City of Boston.”

Combating ‘Disinformation’

After Mass Daily News and the Daily Mail reported on the program, OUTnewcomers published a press release countering what it called “disinformation” that “endangers LGBTQ+ migrants” in Boston.

The organization claimed the news outlets “did not follow ethical reporting standards,” but only suggested that the outlets wrongfully reported the $250-$500 payments.

“Our City of Boston-funded program is modest and need based,” the organization wrote. “It provides small vouchers of $50 or less to eligible LGBTQ+ migrants living in Boston to access limited wellness supports such as haircuts, acupuncture, or massage. The program is also intended to support local Boston businesses that welcome LGBTQ+ and migrant clients and workers.” (emphasis original)

The press release stated that the “hate-driven disinformation” “directly endangers” Khan and “puts vulnerable community members at greater risk.”

The Daily Signal reached out to the organization, seeking to clarify the size of the grants available and to verify whether the City of Boston funded them.

OUTnewcomers declined to comment to The Daily Signal and asked that The Daily Signal never contact the organization again.

Pausing the Program

After The Daily Signal reached out, OUTnewcomers removed the press release from its website and replaced it with the release announcing the pause.

“While we remain deeply committed to this work, the safety of our community must come first,” Khan, the organization’s founder, said in a statement on the pause. “We are taking this pause to assess risks and ensure that we can continue our mission in a way that protects those we serve.”

Boston’s Response

A spokesperson for the City of Boston confirmed that Beantown taxes had funded OUTnewcomers, but noted that none of the grant money may be allocated to the program in question.

“No funds have been distributed or directed for those purposes,” the spokesperson told The Daily Signal in a statement Thursday. “This organization received a $7,500 grant through a city program to support mental health services. Those funds were not designated for and may not be used for the voucher program referenced.”

The city’s budget for fiscal year 2026 allocated the funds, but the grant was cut from the fiscal year 2027 budget.

The post Boston LGBTQ Activist Group Flailing After Conservative News Reports on ‘Wellness’ Grants to Migrants, Funding Yoga, Haircuts appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Editor’s note: This is a lightly edited transcript of today’s video from Daily Signal Senior Contributor Victor Davis Hanson. Subscribe to our YouTube channel to see more of his videos.

This is Victor Davis Hanson for The Daily Signal.  

The Left is making quite a deal of attention to what they call the anti-MAGA right, that is former staunch supporters of Donald Trump that have now parted ways with him. And the names that they fixate on, the Left, Marjorie Taylor Greene, who resigned from Congress after a big fight with Donald Trump over the Epstein files and the [Iran] War. 

Tucker Carlson, the former, Fox host, news host, and now has become a fierce Trump critic. Megyn Kelly, who had a very successful Fox show herself and then went to NBC and now has a very successful podcast, and she seems to have parted ways with Donald Trump over the same issues as Marjorie Taylor Greene and Tucker Carlson. 

Then, of course, Joe Rogan has expressed disappointment. Perhaps he is now not in the MAGA fold. Candace Owens has been a virulent critic. Steve Bannon, I don’t know what his status is but there’s a group of people. And then further to the right, of course, there’s the Groypers and Nick Fuentes and all those people.

But what was their beef? The first thing that seems to really bother them is the current war. I shouldn’t say the first thing. The first thing that bothered some of them was the summer 2025 attack by the United States for about 25 hours on the nuclear facilities in Iran. It was a one-off. Tucker Carlson said this was unnecessary. 

It could lead to World War III. It didn’t. It did retard the progression of nuclear acquisition. Then new information came in that, they had much more ballistic missiles than had been anticipated. And there may have been other areas where they had stored nuclear material. So then that reopened negotiations this year to remove those peacefully. 

They didn’t work. And so then the United States began, at the end of February, bombing, and now we’re in the sixth week and they feel that is a forever war and an endless war.

But it’s a very funny forever war, isn’t it? I mean, if you look at it, there’s been tragically 13 Americans killed, but it’s not 4,000 or 5,000 as we’ve seen in Iraq and Afghanistan. 

7,000 total, perhaps another 20,000 casualties. It’s an air war, almost exclusively an air war except for the rescue of the pilot, and it’s completely asymmetrical. We have destroyed, as people have said, their navy, except for their patrol boats, which I think will be destroyed shortly if they try to interrupt traffic any further in the Strait [of Hormuz]. 

We’ve destroyed their air force. We’ve destroyed their missile defense. We’ve taken out the first and second tier of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the regular army, the theocrats, and even some of the politicians. So their command and control is in disarray, and we have suffered really no major downfall other than politics. 

The future of that war is entirely political. I mean, the United States is at liberty to do what it wants, whatever the military feels is necessary to disarm Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and to stop its ballistic missile potential.

But it’s a political question. Just a question of what’s the effect on the world economy? 

What’s the effect on the American economy, and more importantly, how does that affect the midterms and the future of the Trump presidency? But people are conflating those and suggest that militarily it’s a defeat. That’s absurd.

What else did this new group of critics, this new old group of critics, get angry about? Trump tweeted that if, Iran had not met these conditions, and were not going to negotiate then he would, destroy their civilization. 

It was pretty poorly worded. And they felt that this was beneath him, beneath the United States. They joined the Left in saying that this was out of outrageous. The Left took him literally, not figuratively, but I don’t think anybody believed he meant all of the Iranian people.

And we know that because, of course, as I had said earlier, no president has avoided dual-use civilian targets as much as Trump. We didn’t do it in World War II. We hit every civilian target we could from power plants to highways to water facilities to oil production in Germany and Japan. 

We did it again in Korea. We did it certainly in Vietnam. We took out all the bridges in the Danube in the 1999 bombing under [Bill] Clinton. And of course we knocked out the power grid of Belgrade, a million and a half people several times. We did the same thing in Libya. We denied we did it, but we hit civilian ships, we hit port facilities, we hit TV stations. 

Trump hasn’t done that except for one bridge, so he didn’t really, I mean, his record shows that he doesn’t believe he wants to destroy the civilization. In fact, it’s just the opposite, and I think his critics know that, or he wouldn’t have said, help is on the way. Help is on the way. 

The whole subtext of this entire campaign is while regime change is not the primary agenda, he hopes that by weakening and humiliating this theocracy, then the people will rise up. And that is why he’s selected targets that would allow them to rise up and not hurt the people. 

So was it an overstatement? Yes, but they should know better what he meant. Of course he did, because his deeds prove what he meant. 

So what’s going on here? I think part of the problem is in the intimacy that some people on the Right have cultivated and developed with Trump. In other words. If you’re going to campaign with Trump, if you’re gonna be a regular visitor at Mar-a-Lago with Trump, if you’re gonna be an intimate of the family and if you’re gonna work with him and you’re a news person, then you feel… It’s apparently Steve Bannon felt that way. 

Maybe Tucker feels that way. Maybe Megyn feels that way. Maybe Marjorie Taylor Greene felt that way. But if you feel that you have a special relationship, then you feel downcast or betrayed because not only your president, but your friend and associate that you’d helped, didn’t quite agree with you, but that it’s always better to have some distance so you can be empirical. 

And if you’re empirical, then the question is: What’s the alternative to Donald Trump’s MAGA agenda, because if you look at the border, it’s closed. If you look at illegal immigration, he has deported 500,000 criminals. Another million have self-deported, and he is in the process of probably finishing another 500,000 deportees. 

We should have two million. We’ve never done that before.

If you look at energy right now, the United States has never produced so much oil and gas, and we’re right on the verge of a nuclear energy renaissance, and we’re going in Alaska. We’re going offshore. We’re trying to get more oil and gas in California. For all practical purposes, at least for now, DEI is dead. 

No other president would’ve done that, this reverse racism or this tribal chauvinism that has so plagued the nation. Donald Trump ended that. He has put the universities on notice that they cannot continually defy civil rights laws and Supreme Court decisions. No one did that before. 

As far as transgenderism, they’re on the defensive now. The idea that biological men will dominate female sports and men with biological male characteristics will dress among women is over. 

So what I’m getting at is this: All of these critics agree with what Donald Trump has done on 80% of the issues. At least their record says they do. So why on one particular issue, in which you disagree, and it’s very doubtful that you can categorize this a forever or endless war. 

It’s much more in the flavor of the Venezuela, the [Qasem] Soleimani, the [Abu Bakr] al-Baghdadi, the ISIS bombing. It is not anything near fighting house to house in Fallujah or going into hostile villages in Helmand province. 

We’re not on the ground. We’re not fighting on the jihadist turf. We’re using our strength, air power and a distance from to mitigate casualties and inflict greater damage on the theocracy. 

It’s not a forever, endless war, and they know that.

So if you are apostates from the whole Trump agenda because of your disagreement about this one particular issue, and you feel that he betrayed you because you categorize it a forever or endless war, which he promised to avoid, then you’re nullifying the entire agenda. 

And what is the alternative? A Kamala Harris agenda? I don’t know, an Eric Swalwell agenda. A Gavin Newsom agenda that’s antithetical to everything these people have stood for and lobbied for and advanced for. 

And so if you sit out the midterms, or you oppose Trump de facto, whether you know it or not, you are favoring the alternate agenda. 

And that agenda is something that, at least in your recent positions, you have adamantly opposed. 

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

The post One Disagreement, Total Revolt? Victor Davis Hanson Calls Out MAGA’s New ‘Defectors’ appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Ten House Republicans and one independent voted with Democrats on Thursday to allow more than 350,000 Haitian immigrants stay in the United States for another three years.

In a 224-204 vote, the House passed a bill that would require the Homeland Security secretary to designate Haiti for temporary protected status (TPS).

Haitians have had the designation in the United States since 2010, but the Trump administration has tried to terminate TPS, only to be blocked by federal courts.

The result of today’s vote was made possible by Republicans who broke with GOP leadership and voted yes on the measure.

“Who needs Democrats whenever you have a Republican tool vote for amnesty?” Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, told The Daily Signal just after the vote.

“The House just voted to codify, effectively, President Biden’s open-border policies for the Haitians,” he continued.

On Wednesday, six Republicans voted with Democrats to bring the measure to the floor. Even with pushback from the House Freedom Caucus, four more joined in breaking rank.

The six Republicans who voted to bring the bill to the floor included Reps. María Elvira Salazar and Carlos Giménez of Florida, Reps. Mike Lawler and Nicole Malliotakis of New York, Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska, and Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania.

On Thursday, Republican Reps. Mike Turner and Mike Carey of Ohio, Rich McCormick of Georgia, and Mario Díaz-Balart of Florida joined them, along with independent Rep. Kevin Kiley of California. When votes were finalized, cheers could be heard outside the House chamber.

“Voters elected us to help the president mass-deport illegal aliens who are in our country,” Gill continued, noting that the president specifically called out the Haitian immigrant community as needing reform during the 2024 election.

“You don’t turn around and give those very same people we were voted to deport amnesty,” Gill said. “It’s just a great way to just piss in the face of our voters who elected us to actually keep our community safe and secure.”

Gill noted that 91% of Haitians protected under TPS originally came into the United States illegally, and 69% came during the Biden administration.

“It’s unacceptable to see some Republicans breaking ranks to advance this Democrat-led bill, betraying the mandate voters gave them and delivering de facto amnesty,” a Heritage Action spokesperson told The Daily Signal.

“Heritage Action will not support amnesty—no exceptions,” the spokesperson continued.

“That is what this bill is,” Gill told The Daily Signal. “It is de facto amnesty for people who came into the country illegally.”

The post 10 Republicans Break Ranks to Keep Protected Status for Haitians appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Editor’s note: This is a lightly edited transcript of today’s edition of “Victor Davis Hanson: In His Own Words” from Daily Signal Senior Contributor Victor Davis Hanson. Subscribe to Victor Davis Hanson’s own YouTube channel to watch past episodes. 

Jack Fowler: So, Victor, you had shared with me a long thread off of X by Miad Maleki, I think. I’m sorry if I mispronounced your name, sir. And it’s 10 points about the success, the economic success, of the blockade, the U.S. blockade. Would you like to take that on, my friend? 

Victor Davis Hanson: I liked that article because it was analytical and empirical. 

What he was saying were certain aspects that people had forgotten. They are receiving in their aggregate income about, was it $430-something million a day, Jack, in oil? 

Fowler: Yeah. 

Hanson: Oil, petrochemicals, and … 

Fowler: Let’s just to say the collective economic damage— 

Hanson: Yes. Collective, is that $435 million. 

And you can see how, because everything they have, from washing machines to tires, that has to be imported, and you can stop everything if you control the Strait of Hormuz. And everybody talks about, well, they have the Caspian Sea, or they have a port on the other side of the strait, like the Gulf of Oman. 

No. He points out that those are very minuscule areas of oil export. The big enchilada is Karg Island. Unfortunately for the Iranians, it’s way deep in the Persian Gulf. So they came up with the idea, they want to blockade that, fine. And they say, “We’re only going to let pro-Iranian ships in,” fine. They don’t have the wherewithal to enforce that. If they send out their narcotic-like PT boats, the warthogs, they can destroy them. 

If they try to blanket the Gulf States and Israel with missiles, [Donald] Trump will lay the blow… He will just take out their dual-use generation and stuff, and that will stop that very quickly. So, what Trump basically did, Jack, is he said, OK, blockade—hmm, good idea, but you’re the wrong people blockading it. We’re going to have a blockade, but we’re going to borrow your idea that it’s selective. So we’re going to flip it upside down. You say nobody but pro-Iranian people can come in. We’re going to say nobody but anti-Iranian are going to come in. So any ship—and they’re going to have a problem with China because that’s 80% of the ships coming in to get the oil will be Chinese, but they’re going to have to turn back. 

That’ll be explosive if they try to do it. I think eventually Trump will do it, and China will get angry and we’ll see what happens. But we have the wherewithal to stop it.

And a couple things are going to happen, as he points out. They don’t have the storage capacity just to keep pumping oil and add it into Karg Island big fuel storage depots, or into ships that are idle there. At some point, very quickly, in a matter of days, they’re going to fill all those things up.

And as he points out, with oil wells, if you just shut them down, they have to be maintained and they get water seepage. And it’s very hard and expensive to reboot them. 

It’s a very intricate process. And he said they’re not going to be able to have any petrochemical or oil income because they’re not diversified with their ports like the Saudis are or the Emirates.

And he made another good point, and I had written about that this morning, but I wrote it a couple of days ago, that they don’t understand the Gulf. They think it’s going to be forever 20% of the world’s oil leaves. And therefore, they are critical, because you’ve got to go close to their shore, and they’re going to interfere. And they just keep talking about that. 

And while they’re talking, they don’t see the world is changing, and it’s changing rapidly.

The Saudis now export most of their oil to the Red Sea. If the Houthis get orders to stop it, well, Trump bombed them for 56 days, and the Israelis and the Americans can shut down their power, their water, everything, if they try that. They’re going to build probably another pipeline to the Red Sea. 

They’re talking about building one across the desert through Jordan to Haifa, or near Jerusalem. They’re talking about expanding the one that already exists in the Gulf of Oman, where you could get the oil before you got near the Strait.

And at the same time, they think that nobody will touch their oil because it’s critical to the world price. Maybe, maybe not, one or 2 million barrels a day, but Ukraine and Russia are talking about a ceasefire. 

You put Russian oil at full capacity on the market. You put Venezuela, which is increasing every day, a little bit, their oil output, and Trump says he is going to have another million barrels. You could say to the Iranians, “as long as your regime is in power, you’re not going to export any oil—not today, not six months from now.” 

And the world economy would make the necessary adjustments, is what the writer is saying.

He’s basically telling us that it’s a political challenge to Donald Trump. They have counted on the Left to embolden them. So their strategy is to indulge in accrued stereotype of the Middle East. They want to do a rug deal. And they want to barter and barter and barter and feign anger, and back and forth. 

And they want that to draw that out for three to four to five months. And they want the economy to stall, the world economy, and then they want the Left to come in and take the House and take the Senate and cut off funds and stop the war. 

I don’t think that’s going to happen. That’s their strategy. But what he’s trying to argue is that strategy requires a quiet population that can be intimidated, as it is now, but permanently so, and it requires some economic viability to survive. And they already can’t afford food, they can’t afford gas, they’re under attack, they’ve lost probably a half a billion dollars, half a trillion dollars in weapons and infrastructure that was accrued over 47 years. 

They can’t rebuild that, and they can’t give money to the Arab terrorists, there are three or four proxies, five proxies in Syria and Iraq and Lebanon and Gaza and Yemen, without angering further the population. 

As I said in this article, it’s one thing to tell the population, “Well, you don’t like us, but we restored the Iranian credibility. Everybody’s afraid of us. We’re the terror master.” And now the people are saying, “No, you’re not the terror masters of the Middle East. You’re a paper tiger. You’re buffoons. 

“They’ve wiped you out. We’re going down the toilet with you. This is what you did. Nobody’s afraid of you anymore. You’re a bunch of clowns.”

That is fatal to a dictatorship, to be humiliated and to be an object of ridicule. 

So he points all of that out, I think, quite successfully, as did Michael Duran, who always has important things to say. He says seven myths about the Iranian war. 

So I guess to sum up, the Left is in a bubble, and it’s all frenzied because Trump is under such criticism by Tucker Carlson or Megyn Kelly or Candace Owens, and they say, oh, the MAGA movement’s blowing apart. And everybody’s saying it’s lost. And they don’t look at the situation, you know. They don’t look at the actual military. It’s the most asymmetrical war in memory. 

And Trump can adjudicate when it starts and when it ends. And if he wants to take up the Iranian challenge, it’ll be very interesting when American warships go through there and they’ve completely demined the area, this week, and tankers follow them. And they start to bring in those little mosquito boats and see what happens. 

I think you’ll see a whole fleet of warthogs in the air, and they will blast them out of the water. And I think they’ll hit any missile within two or three minutes. They’ll know where it was launched, they’ll take that out. 

But they’re not going to stop there. They’re going to tell them, OK, you’re broke now. You’ve got $400 million in economic damage plus, per day. Wait till you don’t have any power. And that will really shake up things.

And somebody said, well, that would be inhumane. Well, then talk to Bill Clinton, because he shut down the power grid at Belgrade almost for a day or two every week, he did. And talk to Barack Obama. He shut down television stations in Libya, shut down the ports. He tried to do a lot of stuff. Which he said he didn’t do. So there’s a long tradition of dual-use targeting. 

Fowler: Yeah. I mean, outside of war, we shut down the United States during COVID. 

Hanson: I will say something more controversial. I really like The Wall Street Journal, but I’m getting very, very disappointed. I look at the headline stories in the news section, and I can’t distinguish them from The New York Times. It’s all doom and gloom. Trump did this and this, this is this. Then I say to myself, at least the editorial page—I really like Dan Henninger, Barton Swaim. Is that it? He’s very— 

Fowler: Don’t forget Bill McGurn. 

Hanson: Don’t forget Bill. Yeah, but I love Bill McGurn. I like Holman Jenkins, Kimberly, of course. But today, Gerald Baker, whom I really like, he’s a very brilliant guy, but he has succumbed to the pessimism of the news stories. And he’s basically saying that war is lost or it’s not going well. And it’s just anti-empirical, to say that, given the great difference in damage. 

I can see that he’s upset with Trump’s exclamations, but that doesn’t disguise the fact that we’ve done so much damage to this Iranian military. And the economic damage hasn’t even taken its full toll yet. But it’s now at a crisis point, and they know it, and that’s why they wanted to negotiate. 

And their idea— 

Fowler: Inflation is nearly 50% there. 

Hanson: Yeah, they’re broke, and everybody said it was brilliant—nobody imagined they would close it. Now, they knew they were going to try that, but they don’t have the naval facilities to close it. Not against the US Navy. And all they’re going to do is say, well, we’re going to close it. And the Americans said, well, we weren’t going to do that, but because you gave us the idea, or you think it’s OK, we’ll do it. 

But none of your friends are coming in, and all of your enemies are. And they’re all going to get oil from the Arab exporters. But they’re not going to get any from you. 

And so it’s going to flip back on them.

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

The post ‘Paper Tiger’ Exposed: Victor Davis Hanson on Trump’s Strategy Crushing Iran appeared first on The Daily Signal.

House Republicans held a press conference Wednesday to promote what they described as tangible benefits families are seeing from the Working Family Tax Cuts, arguing the legislation has delivered relief to everyday Americans and marked an end to “Bidenomics.”

“After four years of Bidenomics, we said enough,” House Republican Conference Chairwoman Lisa McClain said. “So we passed the Working Family Tax Cuts.”

McClain accused Democrats of mismanaging taxpayer dollars, saying they “advocate for waste, fraud, and abuse,” while asserting Republicans had provided meaningful relief to working families.

House Majority Leader Tom Emmer echoed those remarks, saying additional tax relief is forthcoming.

“When Biden took office, the economy was in ruins,” Emmer said. “For the last 15 months we’ve worked hard to bring it back.”

“When Republicans govern, the American people win,” he continued. “And our work isn’t finished. We still have more to do.”

Emmer added that “every single Democrat” voted against the tax cuts and accused the media of spreading false claims about the bill, but said Republicans were still able to secure its passage.

House Majority Whip Steve Scalise said the legislation disproved Democratic claims that only wealthy Americans would benefit.

“For the first time in a long time, families are seeing the benefit of the federal government,” Scalise said, rejecting what he called “lies” that the cuts would primarily help billionaires and millionaires. “In reality, it’s hardworking families.”

To underscore their claims, Republicans invited a guest speaker to describe how the tax cuts affected her personally.

Amber Benamati, a Metallus steelworker from New Philadelphia, Ohio, told attendees the Working Family Tax Cuts had delivered “real results for everyday Americans.”

“No taxes on overtime and no taxes on tips are real relief for working-class families,” she said.

She also praised President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans for getting the bill signed into law last July despite Democratic opposition.

The post Republicans Champion End of ‘Bidenomics’ on Tax Day appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth gave an update on his war on Iran’s economy Thursday, pressuring its leaders to negotiate with Americans or suffer kinetic strikes in addition to the current blockade on Iran-linked ships.

“For as long as it takes, we will maintain this blockade. … But if Iran chooses poorly, then they will have a blockade and bombs dropping on infrastructure, power, and energy,” Hegseth said.

Since April 13, the United States has shifted from a strategy of military destruction to one of economic pressure in order to encourage an outcome in negotiations with Iran intermediated by Pakistan.

“The war department will ensure that Iran never has a nuclear weapon,” said Hegseth. “We prefer to do it the nice way through a deal led by our great vice president and negotiating team, or we can do it the hard way.”

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dan Caine joined Hegseth, and stressed that the United States was not blocking the Strait of Hormuz with a literal cordon of ships across, but rather targeting ships connected to Iranian commerce.

“This blockade applies to all ships regardless of nationality heading into or from Iranian ports. The U.S. action is a blockade of Iran’s ports and coastline, not a blockade of the Strait of Hormuz.”

He added that the U.S. “will actively pursue any Iranian-flagged vessel” in regions such as the Pacific.

Caine told reporters that the military is “ready to resume major combat operations at literally a moment’s notice.”

Hegseth also mentioned Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent’s sanctions campaign against Iran, known as “Operation Economic Fury,” saying it is “maximizing economic pressure.”

The post Hegseth: Blockade Will Force Iran to Negotiate or Perish appeared first on The Daily Signal.

“It seems that you eventually need a socialist to clean up the mess.”

That’s what the self-avowed socialist New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani thought was a clever answer to Margaret Thatcher’s famous line about the problem with socialism being that you run out of other people’s money.

He said it at his “first 100 days” bash on Sunday.

Maybe the quip makes sense to the young, woke voters in Mamdani’s base who think that they transcend history (or more likely don’t know anything about it). Perhaps they believe just as many previous generations of leftists did that True Socialism hasn’t been tried.

But it’s become clear after Mamdani’s first 100 days in office that the “New Era” he’s promised doesn’t look much different than the old era, and his ambitious agenda is quickly running into the hard reality that even in New York, wealth is finite.

The city didn’t instantly implode the moment Mamdani walked into office, though that’s a low bar for success. New York is much bigger than one man, even a very powerful one.

Yet, there are warning signs that not only will Mamdani’s leadership produce poor results, but that Gotham is looking at long-term deterioration if he governs as promised.

If there is one thing socialists have truly perfected over the years, it’s exploiting voter dissatisfaction—whatever the cause—and creating a mess of historic proportions.

No Free Bus

One of the signature promises of Mamdani’s campaign was that he would bring free buses to all residents in the city. That clearly isn’t happening this year and may never happen at all.

“Mamdani’s highly-touted demands for free buses has fallen to the wayside in both state and city budget proposals,” the New York Post reported in early April.

New York City Comptroller Mark Levine has warned that New York faces an over $7 billion deficit between this year and next and it looks like the bus was a casualty of that budget gap. It didn’t help that the state relies on the revenue.

The best Mamdani could come up with was a limited, pilot program. Hardly a revolution.

And that’s almost certainly a good thing.

Kansas City, Missouri tried a free bus program with federal COVID-19 relief money. What a scam that whole “pandemic relief” thing turned out to be, right? Once the federal money ran out, the local funding also quickly dried up. According to local residents, the New York Post reported, the buses became “unreliable, filthy, rolling homeless shelters.”

$30 Million Grocery Store … By 2029

Another one of Mamdani’s big promises was that he would open a government-run grocery store in each of New York City’s five boroughs, because you can’t truly experience the warmth of collectivism without a good old-fashioned bread line, right?

Mamdani announced during his first 100 days speech that the city would move forward with this awful idea by building a single store in East Harlem for $30 million and would finish all the stores by 2029 despite planning to burn through nearly half of the $70 million budget on this single location.

It’s a staggering amount of money to pay for a single store that will surely cost more to operate than it could ever make in profit.

But it makes total sense if you understand that Mamdani’s revolution is just to put the Democrat governing model on steroids.

I’ll make a few predictions here.

That dollar amount is just the beginning of the money that will be dumped into this project that is unlikely to even finish by 2029.

The money isn’t just being used to build the store, it’s to pay for all the union jobs and officials working on it. This will be New York City’s Grocery Store to Nowhere. Like the California “ghost” bullet train, the whole project is a cover to make sure the right people get paid rather than a serious project to create a functioning supermarket.

Disorder Increasing, Crime on Subway

While crime has generally been falling in New York and around the nation, there are worrying signs that urban disorder will drastically increase under Mamdani.

Mamdani blew his first serious test of governing when a big snowstorm pummeled New York shortly after he took office. Initially Mamdani insisted that the homeless encampments wouldn’t be torn down and that the city’s homeless population wouldn’t be forced to go into shelters.

The mayor eventually backtracked on the city’s homeless sweeps but at least a dozen people died of exposure in the brutally cold temperatures.

Perhaps more worrying is the potential for crime to spike back up again. There was a major surge in violent crime on public transit in the first few months of the year. Robberies are up by 21% compared to last year, according to NYPD data.

There have also been a few high-profile violent crimes that highlight all that’s wrong with the Left’s governing philosophy. In March, an illegal alien shoved 83-year-old Air Force vet Richard Williams and another man onto the subway tracks. Williams later died of his injuries.

In April, a machete-wielding manic calling himself “Lucifer” stabbed three people before being shot and killed by police.

It seemed that at least a few of Mamdani’s diehard supporters were more upset with the NYPD than the man taking a hatchet to fellow New Yorkers.

If you wonder why it is that American cities have a crime problem, look no further than the mentality of that X post.

Springtime for Radicals

One final note about Mamdani’s early returns must be made.

On top of the poor policy decisions thus far, the new mayor has additionally surrounded himself with a collection of extremists and other sordid people.

Some of these radicals are serving in an official capacity, like his Marxist housing czar Cea Weaver who publicly dreamed about impoverishing white, middle-class homeowners. The city’s new racial equity plan hardly dispels the notion that this is Mamdani’s goal too.

Mamdani invited anti-Israel activist Mahmoud Khalil to the governor’s mansion for Ramadan. The Syrian-born Khalil faces deportation by the Trump administration that has accused him of being a Hamas supporter.

That’s hardly surprising given that Mamdani’s wife has a growing record of supporting antisemites and pro-Palestinian terrorists on social media. Mamdani insists she is a “private person.”

One way or another it suggests that Mamdani has no desire to moderate or “normalize” in his time as mayor.

There are other nodes of power in New York City that will contain Mamdani, some will encourage him, but it’s increasingly clear that however things shape out in coming years the city will be worsened by his leadership. 

The post Mamdani’s First 100 Days: There’s No Such Thing as a Free Bus appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Birth rates in the U.S. continue to fall, according to the latest data from the Centers for Disease Control.

U.S. birth rates have been steadily declining for more than a decade now, and the total fertility rate (the number of births a woman is projected to have over her lifetime) has continued to hit new lows for several years.

The preliminary data released this month from CDC suggest the downward trend in fertility continued in 2025. The birth rate dropped from 53.8 births per 1,000 women in 2024 to 53.1 in 2025, and the total number of births declined by 22,534.

Some media outlets and scholars say the drop in birth rates is good news, and that it is driven by declining teen births as well as by women in their 20s delaying relationships and motherhood until they are more financially and emotionally prepared. They argue births will be made up for down the road.

The reality is not so rosy though. Teen births did decline, but the overall drop in the birth rate is driven mostly by a declining share of Americans marrying and forming families at all. Declining births among women in their 20s are not being made up for later on either, as marriage is delayed ever further into the life course.   

Examining the change in birth rates by age: 

• Birth rates among teen-aged young women dropped, particularly among older teens (ages 18-19);
• The largest decreases in birth rates were among women in their 20s; and
• Birth rates among women age 30 and over increased, or in some cases remained steady (among women ages 45-54).

Yes, it is true that teen birth rates fell, which is good news, particularly when we are talking about minor-aged teens. But teen births are too small a share of total births these days to move the needle of the overall birth rate much at all. This is especially the case if you look only at births to minor-aged teen women, the group we should be most concerned about.

Teen births peaked in the early 1990s, after rising for several years. Since then, they have declined drastically, a positive and remarkable reversal. Today, teen births are a small fraction of U.S. births.

In fact, if we had only seen the declines in teen births while the birth rates among other women had remained stable (no decreases among women in their 20s and not even increases among women ages 30 and above), the overall birth rate would have remained nearly stable. 

What is happening is that an ever-increasing share of people are failing to marry and have children when they are in their prime childbearing years. With every passing year, the age of marriage increases, fewer people are marrying, and that leads to fewer children born. Delayed marriage reduces the likelihood of ever marrying. Researchers project that roughly one-third of Gen Z will not have married by age 45 and may never marry at all. 

Married couples are much more likely to have children. The average number of children born to married couples has been steady for about three decades, although with some dip in the last few years. The drop in the birth rate is primarily driven by a decline in marriage rates.

While there has been a bump in births among women ages 30 and older—indicating that some of the decline in births to young women are delayed births rather than births foregone—the increase in births among women 30 and older are not enough to make up for the declines in births among younger women.

There are more consequences to declining marriage than fewer births, too.

Marriage is a good in itself. Marriage is one of the strongest factors associated with adult happiness and is also connected with increased household income, better health, and greater psychological well-being for adults.

Children raised in married-parent families also do better on these outcomes, as well as several others: greater educational attainment, lower delinquency rates, reduced likelihood of abuse.  

While there are some silver linings in the new birth rate data then, including declining teen births, the underlying story is much bleaker. It’s a story of declining marriage and family formation. This comes at great cost—including a shrinking future generation.

The post Teen Births Are Falling—But America’s Birth Crisis Runs Much Deeper appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Members of the House Freedom Caucus are urging colleagues to oppose extending Temporary Protected Status for Haitian migrants ahead of a final House vote Thursday, citing concerns about public safety.

Several House Republicans, along with now-independent Rep. Kevin Kiley of California, joined Democrats in voting to bring a bill to the floor extending TPS for Haitians. Rep. Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., secured 218 signatures to force consideration of the bill.

The Department of Homeland Security in November 2025 announced that it would terminate Haiti’s TPS designation. The move revoked legal protections for more than 350,000 Haitians to ?live and work in the U.S., Reuters reported.

“It is outrageous that six Republicans joined all Democrats to advance a vote extending Temporary Protected Status for illegal alien Haitians by another three years,” Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, told The Daily Signal.

Republican Reps. Maria Elvira Salazar and Carlos Gimenez of Florida, Reps. Mike Lawler and Nicole Malliotakis of New York, Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska, and Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania all joined Democrats on the vote.

Heritage Action, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization who champions conservative members like Roy, told The Daily Signal, “It’s unacceptable to see some Republicans breaking ranks to advance this Democrat-led bill, betraying the mandate voters gave them and delivering de facto amnesty.”

Roy pointed to the case of Rolbert Joachin, a Haitian national who entered the United States under the Biden administration. He applied for and was granted TPS after receiving a final order of removal in 2022, but was recently charged in the killing of a Florida gas station worker. Joachin pleaded not guilty to charges of homicide and property damage, the Fort Myers News-Press and Naples Daily News reported Wednesday.

The alleged attack, which Roy said was a byproduct of a “reckless decision” from the Biden administration, was captured on surveillance video.

”Americans are still grappling with the devastating consequences of the Biden border crisis, including the brutal murder of a Florida mother allegedly by a Haitian illegal alien reportedly allowed to remain here under TPS on President Biden’s watch,” Roy added.

Rep. Josh Brecheen, R-Okla., said the push to extend TPS reflects a broader pattern of prioritizing illegal immigrants over American citizens.

Roy and Brecheen also argued that repeatedly renewing Temporary Protected Status undermines the program’s original intent as a temporary humanitarian measure.

“TPS was first granted to Haitians following an earthquake in 2010, and today, 16 years later, it is still in place,” Brecheen told The Daily Signal. “Sixteen years is not temporary.”

“Temporary should mean temporary, and it is long past time these illegal aliens return to their home country for good,” Roy added.

Rep. Randy Fine, R-Fla., told The Daily Signal he opposes any congressional effort he views as granting amnesty, including the Haitian TPS bill.

“I will never vote for amnesty,” Fine said. “I don’t care if you got here last week, last month, last year, or 30 years ago.”

In a prior interview with The Daily Signal, Fine argued that enforcing immigration laws would lower costs for Americans.

“It’s not just about political values or reducing crime,” Fine said. “It’s about making housing more affordable, reducing health care costs, shrinking the size of our education system, and making insurance affordable.”

The post EXCLUSIVE: Freedom Caucus Members Slam TPS Extension for Haitians appeared first on The Daily Signal.

WASHINGTON, April 16 (Reuters) – President Donald Trump announced on Thursday that Lebanon and Israel had agreed on a 10-day ceasefire, as optimism grew that the Iran war may be nearing an end.

Trump said in a social media post that the ceasefire would start at 5 p.m. EST, aiming to halt a conflict between Israel and the Iran-aligned Lebanese group Hezbollah that was reignited by the U.S.-Israeli war against Iran.

He said he had held “excellent conversations” with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Lebanese President Joseph Aoun.

“These two Leaders have agreed that in order to achieve PEACE between their Countries, they will formally begin a 10 Day CEASEFIRE at 5 P.M. EST,” he said. “Both sides want to see PEACE, and I believe that will happen, quickly!”

Trump said he had directed Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dan Caine to work with the two countries to achieve lasting peace.

The war with Iran spilt into Lebanon on March 2, when Hezbollah opened fire in support of Tehran, prompting an Israeli offensive in Lebanon just 15 months after the last major conflict.

BREAKTHROUGH ON ‘STICKY ISSUES’ BETWEEN U.S. AND IRAN

Hopes of a deal between Iran and the United States have also been growing after nearly seven weeks of war.

A security source said a Pakistani mediator had made a breakthrough on “sticky issues,” although Tehran said the fate of its nuclear program had not been resolved.

The United States and Pakistan have been talking up prospects for a deal after nearly seven weeks of war, with Trump saying the accord would open the Strait of Hormuz, through which a fifth of the world’s oil and gas supply flows. 

Closure of the strait has caused the worst oil price shock in history and forced the International Monetary Fund to downgrade its outlook for the global economy, warning prolonged conflict could push the world to the brink of recession. 

Pakistan’s army chief and Field Marshal Asim Munir, an important figure in mediation efforts, arrived in Tehran on Wednesday to try to prevent a renewal of the conflict after talks in Islamabad that ended without a deal.

A senior Iranian official told Reuters on Thursday the trip had led to greater hopes for a second round of talks and an extension of a two-week ceasefire, but said fundamental differences remain over its nuclear program.

The war began with U.S.-Israeli attacks on Iran on February 28, triggering Iranian attacks on Iran’s Gulf neighbours and reigniting the Israel-Hezbollah conflict.

Thousands of people have been killed, mostly in Iran and Lebanon. Soaring energy costs have rattled investors and policymakers globally.

Originally published by Reuters.

The post Trump Says Israel and Lebanon Agree on Ceasefire, Optimism Grows on Ending Iran War appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The news that Rachael Rollins has filed to run for Suffolk County district attorney again should send chills down the spine of anyone concerned with the safety, integrity, and future of Boston’s communities.

Rollins’ tenure as district attorney was marked not by justice, but by a radical prosecutorial philosophy that prioritized ideology over public safety, culminating in a disgraceful resignation after a damning federal report.

As Boston faces the prospect of Rollins’ return, it is critical to examine her record, her policies, and the grave implications for the city and the nation if we ignore the lessons of her past.

Rollins Tenure as DA

When Rachael Rollins first assumed office as Suffolk County District Attorney in 2018, she immediately made waves by publishing “The Rachael Rollins Policy Memo,” an unprecedented document that listed 15 crimes for which prosecution would generally be declined.

The memo was a blueprint for radical non-prosecution, fundamentally altering the role of the district attorney from enforcing the law to selectively ignoring it.

Among the offenses Rollins chose to overlook were trespassing, shoplifting, larceny, disorderly conduct, disturbing the peace, receiving stolen property, driving offenses, breaking and entering, malicious destruction of property, threats, minor in possession of alcohol, drug possession, resisting arrest, and even resisting arrest if the underlying charge was one of the other 14 listed crimes.

This sweeping policy sent a message: accountability for criminal behavior was optional, not mandatory, in Suffolk County.

Rollins’ approach wasn’t merely a departure from tradition—it was a rejection of the very purpose of prosecution.

The memo’s rationale, couched in the language of social justice, ignored the tangible consequences for victims and communities. Instead of deterring crime, it emboldened offenders, fostered lawlessness, and undermined the public’s confidence in the justice system.

Her memo was not a nuanced exercise in prosecutorial discretion—it was a wholesale abdication of responsibility.

By refusing to prosecute crimes like shoplifting and larceny, Rollins effectively gave a green light to petty theft and property crime. The decision to decline prosecution for breaking and entering and malicious destruction of property signaled to would-be criminals that they could violate the sanctity of homes and businesses with impunity. Even offenses like drug possession, resisting arrest, and threats were swept under the rug, eroding the deterrent effect of the law and leaving victims without recourse.

The consequences were predictable. Businesses faced soaring losses from theft, neighborhoods wrestled with rising disorder, and police officers found themselves demoralized and constrained by policies that made enforcement futile.

Rollins’ memo wasn’t just misguided, it was dangerous. It demonstrated a fundamental misunderstanding of the district attorney’s role: to protect the public, not to experiment with unproven theories that put communities at risk.

Biden Makes Her U.S. Attorney

The radical prosecutorial philosophy embodied by Rollins didn’t end with her tenure as district attorney.

In a move that should have alarmed anyone paying attention, President Joe Biden nominated Rollins to serve as U.S. attorney for the district of Massachusetts.

This was a clear signal that the administration favored the George Soros-backed model of rogue prosecution—a model that prioritizes non-enforcement, ideological activism, and disregard for the rule of law.

The Senate confirmation process was contentious, with many senators raising concerns about Rollins’ record and suitability for federal office.

Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., gave a seven-minute speech at her Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, essentially echoing what we had been saying for years about Rollins. 

Ultimately, Rollins was confirmed only after Vice President Kamala Harris broke a 50-50 Senate tie, underscoring the divisive nature of her nomination.

This episode was not just a political drama but a warning. When the highest levels of government are willing to embrace radical prosecutors, whose records are marred by controversy and failure, the consequences for American justice are profound.

Egregious Ethical Lapses and Resignation

Rollins’ tenure as U.S. attorney was short-lived, but not before she became the subject of one of the most damning ethics investigations in recent memory.

On May 17, 2023, the U.S. Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General and the Office of Special Counsel released a report detailing Rollins’ serious ethical lapses and violations of the Hatch Act. The report described Rollins’ conduct as “among the most egregious ever investigated,” highlighting her misuse of official resources, improper political activity, and flagrant disregard for federal ethics rules.

The findings were unequivocal.

Rollins had abused her position, undermined the integrity of the office, and violated the trust placed in her by the public.

The report was not just a critique—it was an indictment of her judgment, temperament, and fitness for public service. The severity of the violations left no room for ambiguity: Rollins was unfit to serve as a prosecutor, let alone at the highest levels of federal law enforcement.

In the wake of the DOJ and Office of Special Counsel report, Rollins resigned in disgrace, leaving a legacy of controversy and ethical failure. Her departure was met with relief by those who had witnessed the erosion of prosecutorial standards under her leadership. For the citizens of Massachusetts and Boston, the episode was a painful reminder of the risks posed by radical prosecutors who place ideology above law, and ambition above integrity.

Public reaction was swift and critical. Community leaders, law enforcement officials, and policy advocates called for a return to prosecutorial standards that prioritize safety, accountability, and ethics. The damage done by Rollins’ tenure was not easily repaired, but her resignation offered an opportunity to restore trust and reaffirm the principles that should guide the office of the district attorney.

Suffolk County—and Boston—deserves a real district attorney, not more of the same failed soft-on-crime polices. The citizens of Suffolk County deserve a prosecutor who puts their safety first, who respects the rule of law, and who embodies the integrity the office demands.

The post Rachael Rollins’ Return: A Warning for Boston and American Justice appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The Justice Department under President Joe Biden didn’t just target pro-lifers for prosecution—it outsourced much of the detective work to pro-abortion activist groups, and even appears to have agreed to help them raise money.

These groups acted like deputized secret police, compiling dossiers on pro-life activists—including personal details like addresses and the names of their children—reporting on their activity to the DOJ, and laying out the roadmap for legal charges against them.

These eye-opening revelations come from the Justice Department under President Donald Trump, which released an exhaustive report Tuesday outlining the way the previous administration weaponized the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act to target pro-life protesters. The revelations build on the research from my book, “The Woketopus: The Dark Money Cabal Manipulating the Federal Government,” fleshing out the exact way in which far-left activist groups dictated policy in the Biden administration.

The report doesn’t just reveal the previous administration’s extreme bias against pro-lifers, but also how abortion activist groups effectively carried out law enforcement functions on the government’s behalf, without any democratic accountability.

The National Abortion Federation

As I noted in “The Woketopus,” the Biden Justice Department appears to have adopted the mindset of the National Abortion Federation, which tracks threats, violence, and incidents of “stalking” at abortion facilities across the country. Little did I know, the federation hadn’t just inspired the Biden administration’s mindset but fed information on potential targets to a federal task force.

Attorney General Merrick Garland resurrected the National Task Force on Violence Against Reproductive Health Care Providers, which he charged with investigating potential FACE Act violations. The task force, mostly staffed by career attorneys from the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, developed a close working relationship with the National Abortion Federation.

Sanjay Patel, the task force director, worked with NAF’s security team, and he described the team’s director, Michelle Davidson, as an “MVP” in bringing incidents to his “attention, often in real time, which usually result in an investigation/ prosecution.” Patel regularly communicated with NAF, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and the Feminist Majority Foundation.

By contrast, Patel and his task force mostly kept pro-life groups at arm’s length. According to the report, the Biden DOJ even refused to hand over evidence to pro-life defendants, evidence the office shared with pro-abortion activists.

Dossiers on Pro-Lifers

According to the report, Patel “monitored” pro-life activists for years before charging them. The National Abortion Federation sent him “security reports” or “dossiers” on pro-life activists.

For instance, NAF sent the Justice Department a 135-page report on an Operation Save America convention in June 2021, complete with a conference schedule, lodging, and multi-page dossiers on “anti-choice individuals,” many of whom President Trump would pardon after the Biden DOJ brought FACE Act charges against them. The dossiers contained personal information, such as addresses, photographs of the pro-lifers with their spouses and minor children, names of associates and affiliated ministries, and even driver’s license numbers.

The guide’s information about prior arrests ultimately formed the basis for later FACE Act charges.

The National Abortion Federation informed Patel “in real time” about ongoing protests, “often before local law enforcement could fully respond,” the report states. “At his request, NGOs compiled evidence that ultimately gave rise to search warrants and charges.”

In other words, NAF provided surveillance of pro-life activists, tipped the DOJ off to their activities, and even provided roadmaps for charging documents.

The report even notes that, in the Biden administration, federal prosecutors tried to screen out jurors based on religion. In one email, a prosecutor complained of “a very Catholic magistrate on duty this week” who “was very particular about the bond conditions and not infringing on [defendants’] First Amendment rights.”

Helping Activists Raise Money

Even before Patel worked with abortion groups to target pro-lifers, he had agreed to serve as a reference to help the National Abortion Federation raise money.

In December 2020, NAF’s Security Director Tara Gannon asked Patel if one of his colleagues would agree to be a reference, as the federation was seeking a grant from the Lisa and Douglas Goldman Fund. While Patel first asked his colleague if she would be a reference, he later agreed to do so himself.

NAF sought the grant to “help cover the costs of security activities within our department,” including “travel costs to provide member training—active shooter, bomb threats, domestic violence in a reproductive health setting, etc.”

The fund awarded NAF a $100,000 grant in 2022 for the “Security and Safe Access Program, to help reproductive health clinics and providers counter anti-abortion harassment and violence.”

What Does This Mean?

While law enforcement can and should receive and investigate tips from the public, this report shows that Biden’s Justice Department went much further than following up on reports about wrongdoing.

Throughout its four years, the Biden administration outsourced much of its thought work to the infrastructure of the Left, deputizing radical activist groups that occasionally acted like agents of the state. These activist groups, bankrolled by the Left’s dark money network, called many of the shots in the federal government. This vast influence campaign acted like an octopus, weaving its woke tentacles to control the levers of the federal bureaucracy.

While President Trump has done yeoman’s work to dismantle this influence network, the Left’s infrastructure remains. In fact, many of the woke bureaucrats I exposed in The Woketopus have moved from government back to the leftist NGOs from whence they came. In other words, the Woketopus remains a threat, and a potential future Democrat administration may seek to resurrect the same cozy relationship with the Left.

The post OUTSOURCING JUSTICE: How the Biden DOJ Deputized Abortion NGOs to Target Pro-Lifers appeared first on The Daily Signal.

A recent report that police were called to the home of gubernatorial candidate Amy Action during a 2019 “domestic dispute” is raising questions as the election race heats up in Ohio.

Over the weekend, NBC News reported that Ohio’s former health director shattered a mirror pulled off the wall during a “verbal argument” with her husband.

Acton, who ran the Ohio Department of Health at the time, admitted to Bexley, Ohio, police that she had been drinking. The police report stated the verbal argument was over “her extended work hours” and that there was no evidence of physical violence.

That incident is sparking chatter in Ohio and elsewhere as she runs for governor.

Ohio Republican Party Chairman Alex Triantafilou told The Daily Signal it’s a story that will “be in the minds of the voters.”

The story not only attracted the attention of many Ohioans, but also Donald Trump Jr., who referred to Acton on X as a “Leftwing psychopath.”

Vivek Ramaswamy, who is running for governor as a Republican, reposted Trump’s comment to his account, as did his pick for lieutenant governor, state Sen. Rob McColley.

NBC News reported that Acton’s campaign “disputed and sought to clarify several elements of the police report,” pointing out that she had one drink at dinner. During the incident, Acton “bumped into a wall hanging which fell,” the campaign told NBC News.

ABC News 5 spoke with Acton’s pick for lieutenant governor, David Pepper, who called the public reaction “sort of a desperate attempt to try and tear Amy Acton down.” Pepper characterized the situation as “a simple argument.”

Matt Dole, a crisis public relations consultant, told The Daily Signal that the Acton campaign so far has delivered “a brutally bad crisis communications response.”

He specifically took issue with the lack of transparency from the Acton campaign, noting that Pepper is taking the one responding.

“The first rule of crisis communications is to be transparent, because the cover-up becomes worse than the original crime,” Dole said.

He added that he would have advised Acton to share the story on the day she was announcing her run for governor, so “when it came out, it wouldn’t have been a big deal.”

Gov. Mike DeWine, R-Ohio, whom Acton worked under as health director, apparently did not know about the incident prior to the news report.

“Governor DeWine was unaware of both the 2019 incident and associated police report involving Dr. Acton,” Dan Tierney, the governor’s spokesperson, said in a statement. “The governor holds his staff to the highest standards of conduct. Given that the allegations in the report are deeply troubling, Governor DeWine would have expected Dr. Acton to have at that time promptly disclosed this to him, and he is very disappointed that it did not occur.”

DeWine told ABC News 5, “I don’t know what happened. I was not there. The only thing that I have said is that I wish she had reported that to us, just the police coming to a house, whatever the facts are.”

Pepper said he did not see a need for Acton to have made the dispute public. “I think most people, when they have a private personal argument with their spouse, aren’t necessarily telling their boss about that,” he said.

Dole said in not disclosing it, “she has now made it an issue in this campaign.”

“If she had disclosed it to DeWine or disclosed it on the day she announced, it would not be an issue in the campaign,” Dole predicted.

The Acton campaign has not responded to The Daily Signal’s request for comment.

Triantafilou told The Daily Signal that Acton “should have” told DeWine, and that “Ohioans should be very alarmed” she didn’t.

“The question is, what else is she hiding from Ohioans at this point,” he added.

Triantafilou also took the opportunity to praise the likely Republican nominee.

“We think we’ve got a far better candidate in Vivek Ramaswamy,” Triantafilou said. “Our candidate is working extraordinarily hard, is going to be very well-funded, and I think there ought to be a robust conversation here about who ought to lead Ohio.”

Dole said Acton’s response speaks to her experience: “All of this points to what we know of Amy Acton. She is not a politician, and she is not ready for prime time.”

The post Amy Action ‘Domestic Dispute’ Report Stirring Up Ohio Governor’s Race appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Another amnesty push is happening on Capitol Hill, yet the sponsors of the DIGNIDAD (Dignity) Act of 2025 are attempting to market it as not an amnesty bill.

“America last” Republicans like Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar, R-Fla, the original co-sponsor of the bill and daughter of Cuban immigrants, refuse to recognize what the American people mandated the Trump administration to do—carry out mass deportations.

For starters, the acronym of the bill name is in Spanish, which is not the official language of the U.S.. Naming an amnesty bill in a foreign language is a slap in the face to Americans, and a Member of Congress legislating on behalf of the illegal immigrant population is disloyal to America.

The DIGNIDAD Act has been drafted to give legal status to at least 13 million illegal immigrants who have been in the U.S. for many years because removing them or encouraging them to self-deport is supposedly unkind and a threat to their dignity as a human person. However, the dignity of the American citizen was never accounted for as this bill was drafted (or, frankly, any time amnesty is considered).

Failing to mass deport is already tacit amnesty, but codifying amnesty in legislation is a direct contradiction of immigration law and only encourages the next wave of illegal immigration.

There are multiple types of amnesty in the DIGNIDAD Act. First, “DREAMer” amnesty would be granted to the estimated 2.5 million illegal aliens who entered the U.S. as minors. Under this amnesty, the person would be given 10 years of conditional status, then full permanent residence would be available to them, the precursor to U.S. citizenship.

Second, the act establishes the Dignity Program, which would give around 11 million illegal aliens who have been in the U.S. since before Dec. 31, 2020—prior to Biden’s border crisis—amnesty. Illegal aliens benefiting from this receive renewable legal status, work authorization, and the ability to travel in and out of the U.S. as they please. The only condition is that they check in every two years.

Third, amnesty is given to illegal alien spouses and children of U.S. citizens.

In addition to amnesty, the bill inhibits use of information provided in DIGNIDAD benefit applications from being used for immigration enforcement. This would repeat a terrible policy from the 1986 amnesty law that only fostered fraud.

The bill would prevent immigration enforcement actions from occurring in or near an overbroad list of “protected areas,” including places where children gather, where ceremonies like weddings occur, medical health facilities, and courthouses, among others.

The DIGNIDAD Act wouldn’t just gut immigration enforcement; it would also increase and expand legal immigration benefits. The bill would double employment-based visas and codify the foreign student-to-employee pipeline by allowing all “temporary” foreign students to remain permanently in the U.S.. It would codify the Optional Practical Training program, which incentivizes employers to hire foreign graduates instead of American graduates, and allow STEM Ph.D. and medical students to self-petition for both temporary and permanent visas.

America’s immigration system is for Americans, but the DIGNIDAD Act is for the rest of the world.

The current push for this bill is to put conservatives on defense, opposing amnesty, instead of being on offense, advocating for mass deportations and other, better legislation that would actually enforce our immigration laws and prevent noncitizens from voting in our federal elections.

The DIGNIDAD Act defies the will of the American people. That is undignified.

The post Americans Want Mass Deportations, Not Amnesty appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Police in Fairfax County, Virginia, confirmed Thursday that they found former Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax dead in his home in an apparent murder-suicide.

“I’m here to confirm the identity of our shooter in this murder-suicide that happened several hours ago as former Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax,” Fairfax County Police Chief Kevin Davis said in a press conference Thursday morning. “Fairfax shot and killed his wife inside of their home and then shot and killed himself.”

“This has been an ongoing domestic dispute surrounding what seems to be a complicated or messy divorce,” he added.

The couple’s teenage son and daughter were at home at the time, police said.

Davis said the shooting was “certainly a traumatic event for those children to live through.”

Fairfax served as Virginia’s lieutenant governor from 2018 to 2022, alongside Gov. Ralph Northam.

Two women accused Fairfax of sexual assault in 2019. Vanessa Tyson accused Fairfax of forcing her to perform oral sex in 2004. Meredith Watson accused him of raping her in 2000, when both were at Duke University. Both accusers are black, as was Fairfax.

Fairfax compared the accusations to lynching, and denied the accusations in both cases. He married his wife Cerina in 2006.

This is a breaking news story and may be updated.

The post BREAKING: Former Dem Lt. Gov. Found Dead in Apparent Murder-Suicide, Police Confirm appeared first on The Daily Signal.

FIRST ON THE DAILY SIGNAL—Sen. Steve Daines, R-Mont., will introduce bipartisan legislation Thursday to codify key aspects of first lady Melania Trump’s “Fostering the Future” initiative.

The move comes after the first lady made a rare trip to Capitol Hill on Wednesday, where she addressed members of the House Ways and Means Committee and urged Congress to put her foster care initiatives into law.

“New legislation for the foster care community is a moral imperative,” Trump told the committee.

Daines, along with co-sponsor Sen. Maggie Hassan, D-N.H., will bring the Foster Youth Education and Workforce Opportunity Act to the Senate.

The bill incorporates language from a November presidential executive order expanding educational opportunities for children in the foster care system, and it creates additional workforce pathways for those transitioning out of care.

“One of the greatest gifts that we can give our children is the opportunity to succeed,” Daines told The Daily Signal.

“Unfortunately, foster youth aging out of the system often lack access to the education and workforce training needed to build a career, especially in rural states like Montana,” he added.

Each year, more than 20,000 children age out of the foster care system and face barriers to employment and education. By their mid-20s, former foster youth earn roughly 50% less than their peers.

The legislation would expand education and training vouchers from $5,000 to $12,000 annually and allow the funds to be used more flexibly for apprenticeships and technical education. The bill also targets challenges in rural states, including transportation gaps and complex application processes.

“My goal is to prepare these individuals to secure entry-level jobs, become financially independent, and eventually innovate, create new businesses, and generate employment opportunities,” Trump said during the committee hearing.

“Our bill will support the first lady’s efforts to improve pathways to success for America’s foster youth and set them up for a bright future,” Daines said. “I’ll fight to get it across the finish line.”

Daines noted that companion legislation has been introduced in the House by Reps. Nathaniel Moran, R-Texas; Max Miller, R-Ohio; Dwight Evans, D-Pa.; and Judy Chu, D-Calif.

The post EXCLUSIVE: Daines Introduces Bipartisan Bill to Codify First Lady’s Foster Care Initiatives appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., introduced legislation on Wednesday he says would end what he calls Washington’s “culture of corruption, secrecy, and self-protection.”

The Stopping Wasteful Allowances for Lawmaker Wrongdoing and Ensuring Legal Liability Act would prohibit the use of taxpayer dollars to settle sexual harassment and other misconduct claims involving members of Congress and senior staff.

“For decades, the swamp in Washington, D.C., has protected its own—letting corrupt politicians bury misconduct behind closed doors while sticking taxpayers with the bill,” Gosar wrote in a press release. “That ends now. If a member of Congress or professional staff breaks the law or abuses their position, they should pay the price themselves, not the American people, and not in secret.”

Gosar introduced the bill after Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., was accused by multiple former staffers of sexual harassment, and, in one instance, rape. Critics have accused the prevailing Congressional environment of shielding Swalwell from his allegations.

The measure is co-sponsored by Reps. Andy Biggs of Arizona, Lauren Boebert of Colorado, Tim Burchett of Tennessee, Buddy Carter of Georgia, Randy Fine of Florida, and Anna Paulina Luna of Florida. It would eliminate what critics have described as a congressional “slush fund” used to resolve misconduct claims with public money.

Under the bill, lawmakers and certain congressional staff would be required to certify under oath that they did not use taxpayer funds to settle claims. The legislation would bar the use of federal dollars for such settlements and require those found liable to pay all costs out of pocket, with no reimbursements, campaign funds, or pass-throughs.

In February, Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., introduced a similar effort, which would have ended the taxpayer “slush fund.” Her effort overwhelmingly failed.

Gosar’s proposal would also create a public, searchable database listing lawmakers and staff who settled claims or were found liable, including the amount paid and the nature of the misconduct, while maintaining protections for victims. In addition, the bill would disclose all taxpayer-funded settlements dating back to 1995.

The legislation further requires that allegations involving potential criminal conduct be referred directly to the Department of Justice, prohibiting nondisclosure agreements or internal resolutions that prevent referral. Those who attempt to circumvent the law would face enhanced penalties, including double damages and mandatory ethics investigations enforced by the attorney general.

“This is about ending the two-tiered system in Washington, D.C., where politicians play by their own rules,” Gosar said. “The SWALWELL Act restores accountability, enforces transparency, and makes it clear: If you betray the public trust, you will be exposed, and you will pay for it.”

The post House Introduces SWALWELL Act to Deliver a ‘Blow’ to DC’s Corruption ‘Culture’ appeared first on The Daily Signal.

President Donald Trump has made an endorsement ahead of the Ohio Republican primary in a key House district that could help decide which party controls Congress.

The president on Tuesday announced on Truth Social that he was endorsing Air Force veteran and former CIA officer Eric Conroy for Ohio’s 1st Congressional District.

He drew a strong contrast between Conroy and Democratic incumbent Rep. Greg Landsman, noting that “Eric Conroy is one of the strongest Republican Candidates in the Country, whereas the current Congressman, Greg Landsman, is a weak Radical Left Democrat, who puts our Country, and Safety, LAST. Eric, on the other hand, will ALWAYS put Ohio, and America, FIRST.”

Conroy pinned Trump’s endorsement on X as he thanked the president for the “honor” of his support.

“I am honored to have President Trump’s endorsement,” Conroy also said in a statement. “The President fights every day for the forgotten men and women of this country, and I will do exactly that every day in Congress for the commonsense, hardworking people of southwest Ohio.”

That same day, Conroy reposted on X the announcement of a joint House Republican leadership endorsement from Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La.; House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La.; House Republican Conference Chairwoman Lisa McClain, R-Mich.; and House Majority Whip Tom Emmer, R-Minn.

Conroy was previously endorsed by Sens. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., and Bernie Moreno, R-Ohio.

On Wednesday afternoon, Conroy touted his fundraising success as proof of his leadership.

“Winning this seat isn’t about making a statement — it’s about having the resources, the record, and the toughness to take the fight to Greg Landsman and win,” Conroy said in a statement. “These numbers prove this campaign has what it takes.

“Republicans can’t afford a charity case asking Washington to save us in the fall.  There are too many races competing for money. We need a candidate who can raise the money, lead the charge, and force national groups to invest in this race.”

Though Landsman was once seen as enjoying a healthy advantage in the race, redrawn maps for 2026 have given Republicans a stronger position than in previous years.

Trump lashed out against Landsman and his record, calling the congressman “a true Radical Left Extremist who does not represent the Values of Southwest Ohio and the Great City of Cincinnati.” He cited the lawmaker’s positions on borders, men playing in women’s sports, LGBT issues, and defunding police.

“Sadly, Greg also voted against the Biggest Tax Cut in History, and fought ferociously against my America First Trade Policies, most specifically TARIFFS, which charge other Countries for access to our Markets while protecting our important Industries, and strengthening our Supply Chains,” Trump added.

Conroy took aim at Landsman’s liberal record as well.

“Greg Landsman voted against the largest tax cut in American history, he wants to defund ICE, supported defunding the police, and voted to allow transgender men to compete in girls’ sports. Landsman’s radical agenda is out of touch with Southwest Ohio,” the candidate said.

Last week, however, the Cook Political Report changed Ohio’s 1st Congressional District race from “Toss-Up” to “Lean D.”

The Daily Signal reached out to Landsman’s campaign regarding Trump’s post and endorsement of Conroy. The campaign did not immediately return a request for comment.

The president also announced other endorsements in key House races, including in California’s 48th Congressional District, Georgia’s 1st and 10th Congressional Districts, Nebraska’s 2nd Congressional District, New Mexico’s 2nd Congressional District, Washington’s 3rd Congressional District, and Nevada’s 1st and 3rd Congressional Districts.

The post Trump Makes Endorsement in Key House Race appeared first on The Daily Signal.

As Americans grapple with painful prices at the pump amidst a global oil crisis, some Alaskan lawmakers seem intent on making that pain even worse. The 49th state is debating a tax increase on certain oil and gas companies, a measure that will make energy even more expensive and chill investment.

The state Senate shoehorned this tax hike via a Democrat-sponsored amendment into a House bill that covers a royalty agreement with Marathon Petroleum Corporation. The amendment would impose a top marginal tax rate of more than 9% on privately held oil companies, as opposed to publicly traded ones like ExxonMobil or Marathon.

It’s a messy change to Alaska’s tax system that would impose significant costs on privately held energy producers, called S corps, which have strict limits on the number of owners or shareholders. They’re often much smaller than their publicly traded brothers, the C corps. The tax hike would impose the higher taxes of C corps onto certain S corps in Alaska.

Of course, the state Senate didn’t bother vetting the knock-on effects of such a change and no one provided any empirical modeling of the economic impact. Members of Alaska’s legislature aren’t even sure which companies in the state would be impacted—further evidence that this change hasn’t been adequately contemplated.

Rewriting Alaska’s corporate tax code would create tremendous uncertainty in the oil sector, which already faces significant structural challenges, including declining production from mature fields, limited lease availability, and the high costs associated with exploration and development.

After years of stagnation and decline, oil production is finally projected to increase, with the U.S. Energy Information Administration forecasting growth in 2026. But that forecast is not a foregone conclusion.

Oil and gas investment is highly sensitive to policy changes, particularly for S corps that are very responsive to tax treatment when financing capital-intensive projects like oil development.

Imposing new taxes on these entities risks undermining the very investment needed to sustain and grow Alaska’s energy output and their economy. The solution to a so-called revenue shortfall is not to hike taxes, but to encourage investment.

This change would do exactly the opposite. It not only makes investment in Alaska’s oil sector less profitable, but it makes it riskier. By rewriting part of the corporate tax code to target specific companies, it’ll make other businesses and industries worry if they’ll be next to face a tax hike.

The fact is that incentives matter. If you tax something more, you get less of it. Higher taxes on energy producers organized as S corps would reduce economic activity in the sector, meaning less energy production and less domestic investment. That’s exactly the opposite of what the nation needs right now and will only exacerbate high prices at the pump.

Alaska should be encouraging exploration and production, while fast-tracking new projects. A larger energy sector is the best way to increase tax revenue, as opposed to strangling less economic activity with higher taxes.

The irony here is that the Alaska legislature previously rejected this proposal—just last year.

Fortunately, the House also just rejected the Senate’s offending amendment, but there’s still a chance the tax hike gets shoehorned back into legislation and ends up on the governor’s desk.

Everyone, from the Alaska legislature and governor to the American people broadly, should understand the effects we can expect from this kind of tax increase. Investment and production will fall, putting further upward pressure on energy prices. Employment in the oil and gas industry will suffer and economic growth in Alaska will be hamstrung.

All this negative fallout would be bad enough during normal times with relatively low oil prices, but it’s substantially worse with today’s elevated prices stemming from the Iran war.

Alaskan lawmakers would do well to remember the fragility of both the global energy sector abroad and the American consumer here at home before upending the tax code.

The post Will an Alaskan Tax Hike Make the Oil Crisis Worse? appeared first on The Daily Signal.