Chinese leader Xi Jinping has unleashed yet another seismic purge in the People’s Liberation Army, removing two of its highest-ranking commanders: Vice Chairman of the Central Military Commission Gen. Zhang Youxia and CMC member Gen. Liu Zhenli. Announced in late January 2026, this move has reduced the once seven-member CMC—China’s supreme military authority—to just two: Xi himself as chairman and the remaining vice chairman, Gen. Zhang Shengmin.

Since seizing power in 2012, Xi has justified wave after wave of dismissals under the banner of “anti-corruption.” Early purges were widely seen as tools to eliminate rivals and consolidate control. After abolishing presidential term limits in 2018, many assumed the storm had passed. Instead, it has intensified, now targeting those Xi himself elevated—especially in the military.

Mao Zedong’s famous dictum that “political power grows out of the barrel of a gun” underscores the PLA’s centrality to Chinese Communist Party rule. The CMC oversees all branches of the armed forces, and the party’s general secretary has always doubled as its chairman to guarantee loyalty. For generals, the vice chairmanship represents the pinnacle of a career.

Unlike Mao or Deng Xiaoping, who fought the revolutionary war, Xi has no military combat experience. This outsider status has fueled persistent insecurity, particularly the fear of a coup. Between March 2023 and now, Xi has dismissed more than 20 senior generals, including two former defense ministers and multiple CMC vice chairmen—all on corruption charges.

Zhang Youxia’s recent fall is especially striking. A “princeling” like Xi (son of a revolutionary general), he enjoyed decades of close ties and was long considered untouchable. As the PLA’s highest-ranking uniformed officer and a key Xi ally, Zhang helped enforce loyalty and suppress dissent. Zhang’s purge, alongside Liu’s, signals that no one is safe—not even the most trusted.

The PLA Daily, the military’s official outlet, accused that Zhang and Liu had “seriously betrayed the trust and expectations of the party central committee and the CMC,” and had “fostered political and corruption problems that undermined the party’s leadership.”

But the official announcement hasn’t prevented numerous rumors and speculations surrounding Zhang’s downfall, and even the Wall Street Journal has entered the fray, alleging Zhang leaked information about China’s nuclear weapons to the U.S. and accepted bribes for personnel decisions. However, I find the WSJ’s claims dubious at best. As the highest-ranking general, Zhang already possesses significant wealth and stands at the apex of a power structure. Why would he jeopardize everything he has for a bit more money?

Another prevailing rumor suggests that Zhang was against invading Taiwan, leading Xi to replace him with a general more inclined toward aggression. However, those who spread such narratives fail to grasp a fundamental truth: In a system where the party commands the gun, no general can defy an order to attack Taiwan—disobedience would mean instant destruction.

Only Xi knows the actual reason for Zhang’s downfall. Speculating or spreading baseless rumors is unproductive. Nevertheless, without delving into Xi’s motivations, two clear implications arise from this latest incident.

First, a Chinese invasion of Taiwan is highly unlikely before summer 2026—and possibly well beyond. The PLA is in profound disarray. Officers who rose under Zhang now face uncertainty; self-preservation trumps operational boldness. Replacing leaders is one thing, but rebuilding trust and cohesion across ranks takes time. Soldiers won’t risk their lives for commanders who could vanish tomorrow. Xi, ever calculating, must recognize that launching a complex amphibious assault amid internal fear and distrust would court disaster.

Taiwan thus gains precious breathing room. Yet it lives on borrowed time. Xi has repeatedly vowed “reunification” in his lifetime, and the PLA’s centennial on Aug. 1, 2027, looms as a symbolic deadline for decisive action—whether through blockade, coercion, or war. Only a dramatic external shift (e.g., regime change in a key energy supplier like Iran via U.S. action) might force delay.

Second, Xi’s relentless purges reveal a stark truth: Despite ruling over 1.4 billion people, he may be the loneliest figure in Zhongnanhai (a compound where the most senior CCP leaders live). Absolute power breeds absolute isolation. The more he amasses control, the deeper his paranoia grows, eroding trust in everyone around him.

Those who are close to Xi may come to a troubling realization: a dictator will abandon all human connections—love and friendship included—in the ruthless pursuit of absolute power. In such an environment, flattery and obedience become essential for survival. Honest advice on military readiness, economic challenges, or strategic mistakes has become too risky. No one dares to challenge him, even as he moves toward potential disaster. They will not pull him back from the edge; in fact, they may quietly hope that he stumbles.

History offers a chilling parallel in the death of Josef Stalin. On the night of Feb. 28, 1953, Stalin collapsed from a stroke but lay unattended for hours. His guards, terrified after years of purges, hesitated to check on him. When they finally entered his room the following evening, he was on the floor, soaked in urine, paralyzed yet alive.

Many of Russia’s best doctors had been executed or exiled due to Stalin’s purges. Stalin’s inner circle, including the notorious secret police chief Lavrentiy Beria, reportedly stalled in calling for medical help, terrified of being the next victims of a purge if Stalin survived. Ultimately, after five days of agony, Stalin succumbed on March 5, a grim testament to the toxic fear he instilled in everyone around him.

Nature’s justice is merciless: The tyrant who trusts no one and is willing to attack everyone else will eventually be abandoned by all when he needs them most.

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

The post The Loneliest Man in Zhongnanhai: Xi Jinping’s Purges and the Price of Absolute Power appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The widespread fraud from Minnesota’s Feeding Our Future children’s lunch assistance program, coupled with the fraudulent health care centers exposed by Nick Shirley in December, has captured the full attention of congressional Republicans in recent weeks.

“I understand the outrage taxpayers r feeling about massive fraud in gov programs in Minnesota and other states, while honest hardworking families are struggling to buy groceries or pay for childcare,” Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, wrote on X.

Since the fraud first surfaced last year, senators ranging from Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., as well as House members like Rep. Randy Fine, R-Fla., have unveiled efforts to identify and reform fraudulent welfare assistance programs.

These measures, as stated by Rachel Sheffield, a research fellow at The Heritage Foundation, in an interview with The Daily Signal, “could help ensure that the U.S. welfare system is safeguarded against fraud,” and provide “greater federal oversight” over the programs.

“We’ve known for some time that programs defrauded in Minnesota were lacking proper scrutiny,” Sheffield added. “What happened in Minnesota unfortunately proved that in a massive way.”

‘Americans Are Being Robbed’

Angered by the Feeding Our Future scandal, Fine and Paul introduced legislation that would stop the allocation of tax dollars to noncitizens enrolled in welfare programs.

“Americans are being robbed,” Fine claimed.

Fine’s recently introduced bill, the No Welfare for Non-Citizens Act, would “prohibit aliens from receiving federal public benefits.”

Fine also noted that the bill could curb the Congressional Budget Office’s projection that $177 billion will be administered to noncitizens from 2024 to 2034.

“[Lawful noncitizens and illegal immigrants are] getting free handouts at the expense of American taxpayers,” which he called “insane” and “immoral.”

In the Senate, Paul introduced the End Welfare For Non-Citizens Act, which would “end the appropriation of taxpayer-funded benefits” by cutting off and reforming programs such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Medicaid, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, and other federal benefits, subsidies, or services to refugees, asylees, or immigrants present in the United States without legal status.

“Washington shouldn’t run the welfare state on autopilot while the national debt soars past $38T,” Paul wrote on X on Friday.

“If we want a sustainable safety net and responsible stewardship of taxpayer dollars, this bill is a must-pass,” he added in a previous statement.

Fine and Paul did not respond to The Daily Signal’s request for comment.

Emergency Taskforce

As chairman of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, Cassidy announced on Monday that he will spearhead a task force alongside Sens. Ashley Moody, R-Fla.; Jon Husted, R-Ohio; Roger Marshall, R-Kan.; Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla.; Tim Scott, R-S.C.; and Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., to hold those who abuse federal assistance accountable.

The task force will comprise three subgroups, which will identify fraud in health, education, or labor and pensions assistance programs.

“Our tax dollars are supposed to help American families, not line the pockets of fraudsters,” Cassidy told Fox News Digital. “[We] are committed to rooting out this fraud and ensuring Americans’ tax dollars are used responsibly.”

The members of the task force did not respond to The Daily Signal’s request for comment.

$5.16 Billion in Refugee Assistance

On Tuesday, Paul introduced an amendment to a “minibus” funding bill that would prevent $5 billion from being administered to the existing refugee welfare system.

“Billions were ripped off from taxpayers through the refugee system. Washington’s response is to quietly send more money,” Paul wrote on X on Wednesday. “My amendment says no. Investigate the fraud, fix the abuse, then talk about funding.”

The amendment, however, failed in the Senate on Friday.

The post Congress Places Minnesota’s Rampant Fraud Center Stage appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Before Minneapolis became a national flashpoint, before the protests and the nightly footage of chaos, something far more consequential was already underway: a sweeping fraud scandal involving billions of taxpayer dollars. 

Federal investigators were digging into large-scale abuse of public programs, raising serious questions about who allowed it, how long it went on, and where the money went. These were not isolated mistakes or paperwork errors. They were allegations of systemic fraud involving federal funds and activity that crossed jurisdictions, the kind of case that requires federal investigation. 

Because the alleged misconduct involved federal dollars and potential criminal networks operating across state lines, federal law enforcement had a responsibility to step in. That work was already in motion when events on the ground began to escalate. 

Two people lost their lives during confrontations with federal officers. Those deaths were tragic, and ongoing investigations will determine exactly what occurred in those moments. But they do not erase the larger reality: Minnesota remains in the middle of a massive fraud investigation that has not been resolved and should not be abandoned.  

What has been lost in the aftermath is focus. Chaos—much of which is highly organized, paid for, and planned—has clouded the fraud and corruption. 

Recent polling shows Americans clearly reject chaos—blocked streets, threats, and disorder—and support the rule of law. The chaos in Minneapolis has clouded rather than clarified the truth. 

And the havoc began because of billions in fraud. The scale of that fraud matters.  

About 65% of Minnesotans say government fraud is “somewhat” or “very” widespread, according to polling conducted in July 2025, months before explosive allegations blew up on social media and all over the news in January.  

Billions are still unaccounted for. Multiple federal investigations are ongoing. Serious questions about oversight, accountability, and failures of state systems have yet to be fully answered.  

Federal law enforcement officers—sworn professionals tasked with enforcing laws passed by Congress—stepped in. Their mission does not change because it becomes uncomfortable or politically inconvenient. 

“America First” policies are most effective when federal and local authorities are allowed to work together. We must expand lawful cooperation mechanisms like the 287(g) Program, which allows trained state and local officers to work directly with federal authorities on immigration enforcement. The Department of Homeland Security has massively expanded 287(g) agreements in President Donald Trump’s second term, but unfortunately, many state sanctuary policies prevent more agreements from being signed. 

The consequences of those sanctuary policies couldn’t be clearer. Compare Minnesota mayhem to the Florida framework. In Florida, a 287(g) partnership and joint federal and local operation led to more than 10,000 arrests in just eight months, the largest joint immigration enforcement operation in Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s history. 

When state and local governments choose not to cooperate with federal authorities, investigations become harder, risks increase, and outcomes worsen for everyone involved, as we have witnessed in Minneapolis. Federal officers are forced to operate with less support, less information, and fewer options, conditions that increase volatility rather than reduce it. But when local and federal law enforcement coordinate together, they can operate more efficiently and communities stay safer—by reducing disorder and by focusing on illegal immigrants involved in crimes. 

Minnesota can and must handle two realities at once: restoring order in the streets and continuing to pursue accountability in one of the largest fraud scandals in the state’s history. The latter cannot be allowed to fade into the background simply because the moment has grown more volatile. 

The fraud did not disappear. The questions did not go away. Accountability is still owed to Minnesotans. 

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

The post Minnesota’s Fraud Crisis Didn’t Go Away. It Just Got Harder to See.   appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Conservatives could look at today’s incredibly fractured media environment and wonder why anyone would need to worry about the elite media, considering their trust numbers are in the basement (except among liberals) and their audiences keep eroding.

But just breathe the media air any day, and what we used to call the “dominant media” still dominates in setting the political agenda—in determining what everyone talks about. There was an old maxim that the media can’t tell you what to think, but they’ll tell you what to think about.

This again came to mind when MS NOW host Nicolle Wallace interviewed Oliver Darcy, whose current business is energetically trying to reinforce the ideological rigor of the leftist press. Wallace told Darcy, “I still think that story selection is the most power we have, what you decide to shine a light on, especially now in the second Trump term.”

Right now, that dominant story is the allegedly heroic resistance in Minneapolis to federal attempts to enforce the immigration laws. The daily narrative is that Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents are murdering innocent protesters in the streets. It’s not just choosing the subject. It’s the tone and tenor of the coverage. When it’s 93% negative against ICE on the evening newscasts, it’s a combination of time and tone intended to transform public opinion.

The media’s pollsters will announce that President Donald Trump’s approval rating on immigration is slipping. They do polls to see if their journalism is having the intended political effect.

Trump sent ICE into Minneapolis after it became apparent there was massive welfare fraud, and federal prosecutors convicted dozens of Somalis. That story was not selected for national distribution for months and months, and when it surfaced, they buried it again under the ICE story.

Negative angles against the local Democrats—most especially the hot takes of Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey—are disparaged. Right after Wallace touted the media’s power of story selection, she also raised the power of language—“maybe the second most important thing, how we talk about them.”

Reporters platform Democrats and leftists, blurring the terms of the moment, calling illegal immigrants “our neighbors,” our “immigrant community,” and describing opposition to deportation as “keeping people safe.” Deportation equals “terrorizing” Minneapolis.

The elitist media reject the language of Team Trump—calling the protesters “left-wing agitators” and deeming it hate speech. But Walz can call ICE “Trump’s personal Gestapo” and Frey can tell ICE to “get the f— out of Minneapolis,” and that isn’t treated as regrettable or hateful or inaccurate. Instead, TV hosts helped Frey talk about how all the left-wing agitation is “about love.”

When you spit in the face of ICE and call them something like “mother-couplers” and kick out their taillights, feel the love. Wallace used her language powers to describe Alex Pretti (who did all these things) as a “nonviolent bystander.”

When an ex-Trump aide blamed Walz and Frey for creating the rhetorical environment for shooting deaths, CNN host Jake Tapper accused him of hating the First Amendment: “You have more of a problem with that than you have with people killing American citizens.” That’s using your language aggressively.

We know what liberal journalists would like to call this kind of journalism: “shared facts.” As in, conservatives can’t accept facts that everyone should accept, that everyone supposedly used to accept when there was a much weaker conservative media. ICE personnel are Nazis, and their unglued opponents are angelic. Accept it, or you spread “misinformation.” This kind of arrogance still needs to be exposed and resisted.

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

The post The Elitist Media Still Impose a Dominant Partisan Narrative appeared first on The Daily Signal.

I’ve been spending a lot more time with my young children this week, and while they make it harder for me to get my work done, they bring incalculable joy to my life. Social science data suggests that I’m far from alone—marriage and fatherhood make men happier and more fulfilled.

Social scientists have long reported a strong correlation between involved fathers and various measures of children’s success in life—from better social and emotional development to escaping poverty. But fatherhood isn’t just good for the kids—it also helps the dads.

The 2022 General Social Survey found that men ages 18-55 report the highest levels of happiness when they’re married with children.

More than a third (35%) of men who are married with children said they were “very happy,” while almost half (49.3%) said they were “pretty happy,” and less than a sixth (15.7%) described themselves as “not at all happy.” By contrast, married men without kids are less likely to be “very happy” (29.8%) and more likely to be “not at all happy” (20.2%). The numbers get worse for single men, with and without kids.

“When it comes to men in their prime today, married fathers are the happiest,” Brad Wilcox, a professor of sociology at the University of Virginia and senior fellow at the Institute for Family Studies, told The Daily Signal in an interview Friday.

“Married dads typically live with their kids, so they have the benefit of staying with their kids, seeing their kids experience life,” Wilcox explained. “Married mothers whose husbands are more actively engaged with their children are happier in their marriages,” likely making the fathers happier, too.

“Happier marriages are powerfully linked to your overall satisfaction in life,” the professor added.

He also noted that married fatherhood changes a man in subtle ways.

While pregnancy and childbirth obviously affect women’s hormones, studies have also suggested that men, when they’re married to the mother of their children, also change.

Fathers “experience hormonal changes in pregnancy and they experience more hormonal changes the more they care for their infant or their toddler,” Wilcox explained. “It’s not just like married fatherhood domesticates men from a cultural vantage point—it’s also the case that being with your children physically seems to domesticate men, as well.”

This leads to a decrease in testosterone, with an associated decline in aggressiveness. The professor suggested the trade-off is very much worth it.

“Married fathers are the happiest guys out there, and that suggests that this transition into family for men, even if it’s associated with declines in testosterone, is not a bad thing,” he noted.

Married men with children also tend to work harder and make more money to support their families. Women’s pay has increased in recent years, but married men with children still make more money than single men.

Something is just right about a man getting married and raising kids.

There’s nothing like lifting my 3-year-old son in the air and watching him giggle, or helping my 6-year-old daughter learn to spell increasingly more complicated words. As I type these words, she’s drawing pictures of her favorite characters from “KPop Demon Hunters,” and proudly showing me her handiwork. Raising children reminds me of simple joys and helps me appreciate the life I have.

Of course, they’re a handful, and I don’t know what I’d do without my amazing wife to help comfort my boy when he has a tantrum, or to keep track of my daughter’s school schedule.

Not a day goes by that we don’t have some mess or accident, and there’s always something to worry about, but the joy the kids bring us makes every struggle worth it.

I don’t just believe that marriage and family help men thrive because I’ve read it in a paper or seen a convincing spreadsheet—I know it deep in my bones.

None of this is to downplay the issues that lead some to delay marriage and parenthood, and I know not everyone has the opportunities I’ve had. But I cannot stress enough how valuable it is to settle down and to raise children—and I think both American policy and culture should prioritize stable marriages and more children.

It won’t just help the kids—it will help the parents to thrive, as well.

The post Involved Fatherhood Isn’t Just Great for the Kids—It’s More Fulfilling for Dads, Too appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Alex Barbir arrived to smoke rising from burned homes in the Nigerian village of Zike. More than 50 Christians were killed in an attack on the community the night before.

“As soon as we were driving into the village … you can feel the tension of the atmosphere,” Barbir said.

Fulani militants are reported to have been behind the attack on the Zike community in North-Central Nigeria in April 2025. The scene, according to Barbir, was like nothing he had ever witnessed, with “a mass grave of 50 or 60 people just thrown in the dirt in a hole.”

These places of devastation, of persecution, are the exact locations Barbir runs toward.

As the founder of Building Zion, 28-year-old Barbir seeks out the places “in the fire” where others “really just don’t go.” He brings a message of hope through the Gospel of Jesus Christ, rebuilds homes and churches that have been destroyed, or even builds new schools for communities.

One week after first visiting Zike, Barbir returned with supplies to rebuild about 18 of the homes and structures that were destroyed in the attack.

A man stands by a burned home after the attack on the Zike community in North-Central Nigeria in April 2025. (Alex Barbir) Damage in the Zike community immediately after the attack. (Alex Barbir) The same structures rebuilt and repaired after the attack. (Alex Barbir)

Building a home from the ground up in Nigeria costs about $1,200 to $1,300, according to Barbir.

It is estimated that more than 50,000 Christians have been killed in Nigeria since 2009, and about 7,000 during the first half of 2025 alone.

Boko Haram and the Islamic State have historically carried out many of the attacks on Christians, but more recently, Fulani militias, an ethnic group in Northern Nigeria, have also begun attacking Christian communities in the African nation.

The scale of the persecution and genocide has drawn international attention, leading President Donald Trump to designate Nigeria a Country of Particular Concern last year.

Alex Barbir (center) prays with Nigerians in the Zike community after the attack last April. (Barbir)

Barbir, a Georgia native and graduate of Liberty University, had a desire to serve the Lord and others through mission work since his time in college. He figured it would be something he did later in life when finances and plans were more “put together.” But, feeling challenged to take a leap of faith, he founded the ministry in 2023.

“The primary mission is, one, to reach the unreached with the Gospel, but two, to be able to bring hope to the persecuted church, and we specifically use construction to do that,” he explained.

Since launching, Barbir has worked in about half a dozen nations, including Sudan, Burundi, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. And despite not having a construction background, Building Zion constructed about 70 homes in 2025.

“I kind of just learned along the way,” the ministry founder said, adding that he works alongside local residents on each project.

Barbir has already returned to Nigeria this year, where multiple projects to build schools and churches are underway. He plans to travel to Burma and Sudan later this year while also overseeing building projects in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

The work of Building Zion, a name meant to depict the organization’s Biblical foundation and practical approach to serving others, is supported through donations from individuals and churches.

For anyone who would consider supporting the work of Building Zion, Barbir asked that they pray for the work of the ministry, consider giving a financial gift to support the building projects, or even join the group in the field as they construct buildings and minister to persecuted Christians or those who have never heard the name of Jesus.

The post Running Into the ‘Fire’: How One Man Brings Hope to Persecuted Christians in Nigeria appeared first on The Daily Signal.

In a wide?ranging interview with The Daily Signal, CNN legal analyst and author Elliot Williams revisits one of the most polarizing criminal cases in modern American history—the 1984 New York City subway shooting involving Bernhard Goetz.

Williams documents the story in his new book, “Five Bullets: The Story of Bernie Goetz, New York’s Explosive ’80s, and the Subway Vigilante Trial That Divided the Nation,” which was published this month.

The book examines how Goetz, widely dubbed the “subway vigilante,” shot four black teenagers on a New York City subway train. One victim was left paralyzed and brain?damaged. The incident ignited fierce national debates over crime, race, gun rights, media bias, and vigilantism—arguments that still resonate decades later.

Williams, a former Justice Department and Immigration and Customs Enforcement attorney, said the case drew his attention because of the many issues that endure today.

“Goetz’s story is remarkable in that it ties together so many issues—particularly ones I’ve thought about in some way or another for my entire career: race, crime, media bias, and violence,” he told The Daily Signal.

A City on Edge

Williams places the shooting in the broader context of New York City in the 1980s, a period marked by soaring crime rates, fiscal instability, and a pervasive sense of fear.

“Pretty much the main headlines in a newspaper today are about fights between law enforcement and people in cities,” Williams noted, “but just take a step back and think about the homicide rate—2,000 people a year, roughly at that point.”

By comparison, he said, present-day New York City sees roughly a quarter of that number annually.

Crime, graffiti, and urban decay dominated public perception in the 1980s, reinforced by cultural depictions of a city in crisis.

Against that backdrop, Goetz’s actions struck a deep nerve.

“A lot of people felt, ‘This guy finally did what needed to be done because the police can’t keep us safe,’” Williams said. “The incident just touched a lot of people and really sort of polarized the city.”

What Happened on the Train

Williams carefully distinguishes between what is known and what remains disputed about the shooting.

“What we know for a fact,” he said, “ is there’s a downtown two express train. One of the guys approached [Goetz] and either asked for money or demanded money. To this day, no one has said definitively which of the two it was.”

Goetz, who was carrying an unlicensed revolver, fired on all four teenagers. Afterward, he fled to New Hampshire before turning himself in to authorities.

Despite the incident, Goetz was embraced by many New Yorkers as a symbol of resistance to crime.

Media, Fear, and Narrative

Williams emphasized the role media—especially tabloids—played in shaping public reaction.

He pointed specifically to the New York Post, which had recently been acquired by Rupert Murdoch, and its emphasis on sensational coverage.

“When people are scared, they turn to the news, get more scared, and turn to the news again,” Williams said.

In an era before cable news and social media, tabloid headlines dominated public consciousness, reinforcing a sense of fear that shaped how the case was understood.

Despite a recorded statement in which Goetz said he wanted to hurt the teenagers as much as possible, he was acquitted of all felony charges.

“The defense took a  gamble,” Williams said, describing the decision to play the confession for the jury. “They thought that if we can play this for the jury and have them get a sense of the fear that he felt, we can actually probably get a couple of them to vote to acquit.”

The strategy worked.

Political Implications

Williams’ book also explores how the case became a springboard for several prominent political figures, including Rudy Giuliani and Al Sharpton, who were both in their early 40s at the time.

“They were ambitious,” Williams said. “They wanted to build names for themselves—and they did.”

The case also elevated Curtis Sliwa and the Guardian Angels and provided the National Rifle Association with a potent public symbol.

“He was as perfect a face, at least on paper, for the NRA’s new mission as anybody else could have been,” Williams said, though the organization later distanced itself from Goetz personally.

Williams noted that New York City’s gun laws at the time were far stricter than those in surrounding areas, a disparity the NRA sought to frame as a civil rights issue.

An Unrepentant Man

Williams also interviewed Goetz himself, an encounter he described as unsettling.

“He’s unrepentant,” Williams said. “It was never, ‘This is a tragedy.’ It was, ‘Those guys needed to be shot … I don’t care if that kid’s paralyzed.’”

Williams said he expected at least some reflection.

“Anytime someone’s paralyzed and brain-damaged, it’s kind of a tragedy,” he said. “And there’s just none of that from him.”

Williams said the case remains a mirror for American anxieties about crime, race, self?defense, and trust in institutions.

“I thought maybe this would be good to revisit in 2026,” he said, “and just see how ripe the subject matter still is for us today.”

As debates over public safety, media narratives, and gun rights continue to dominate national discourse, “Five Bullets” offers a reminder that many of today’s fiercest political arguments were forged underground—on a subway train in a city gripped by fear.

The post Revisiting the Subway Vigilante: How a 1984 Shooting Still Resonates Today appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Taxpayers can expect “substantial refunds” due to tax cuts in President Donald Trump’s “One Big, Beautiful Bill,” Treasury Secretary Counselor Joseph Lavorgna said.

The bill’s provisions included no taxes on overtime pay, no taxes on tips, and reduced Social Security taxes.

“We think there could be substantial refunds coming,” Lavorgna, counselor to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, told The Daily Signal. “I’ve seen some private sector estimates that are well over a hundred billion dollars, so when people file their taxes, they’re gonna get substantial monies back.”

“That’s gonna help rejuvenate the economy,” he said.

Internal Revenue Service data shows that the average refund in 2025 was $2,939.

Refunds this year could be as much as 30% more than last year, according to some economists.

Lavorgna advised Americans to change their withholding allowance so that they can keep that extra money.

“They also want to change their withholding so they can get their money in 2026 and not have to wait for another refund to come in 2027,” he said, adding that people should talk to their tax adviser to make sure they can fully benefit from the refunds.

The refunds will particularly impact “those hardworking Americans that get paid overtime,” Lavorgna said, or those working in the service industry who are earning commission from tips.

“It could be waiters, waitresses, bartenders, other service type providers,” he said. “It could be YouTubers, podcasters, the gig economy type of workers that receive tips.”

“The numbers are gonna be sizable,” he continued, “and we wanna make sure people get their money and then adjust their withholding, as I said, to make sure they get the full amount in 2026.”

The post ‘Substantial Refunds’ Coming to Taxpayers Soon, Senior Treasury Official Says appeared first on The Daily Signal.

“Dry January” is almost over—the annual reset when people swear off alcohol for a month, whether for health, discipline, curiosity, or recovery. 

While some are opting to detox from alcohol during the month of January, something bigger is happening beneath the surface: An entire generation is quietly walking away from alcohol altogether. 

A 2025 Gallup poll found that only 50% of young adults ages 18-34 reported they drink—down from 72% two decades prior. And yet, alcohol still sits at the center of modern social life—networking events, happy hours, girls’ nights out, and dating culture. If you don’t drink, you’re expected to explain yourself. 

In a culture that normalizes constant consumption, slipping into sipping habitually can be like a frog in slowly boiling water; you don’t notice the danger until alcohol starts stealing your clarity, your relationships, your peace, and eventually your purpose. 

Ericka Andersen knows this song and dance all too well. She joins this week’s “Problematic Women” to make the case for sobriety in a culture so hellbent against it.  

Andersen, the author of “Freely Sober: Rethinking Alcohol Through the Lens of Faith,” shares the story of her personal relationship with alcohol and how she leaned not only on facts, but also on her faith, to find her way out. 

The post Why the Next Generation Is Ditching Alcohol appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Serious crises in oil-producing countries are pushing markets to finally price in geopolitical risk. As of Jan. 21, West Texas Intermediate crude is over $60 per barrel, reflecting only the faintest acknowledgement of unrest in Iran despite weeks of escalating protests, estimates of 3,000 to 20,000 people dead, and a complete internet blackout.

Recognizing geopolitical risk cannot come soon enough.

Amid continued violence and uncertainty in Iran, Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine, and Russia’s export of crude oil to China, acknowledgement of market risk is long overdue. It should refocus investment where the rule of law, freedom, and transparency prevail: right here at home.

The United States must continue to invest and maintain U.S. oil and gas production to improve energy security for the United States and its allies. Complacency risks American energy dominance, economic and national security, and geopolitical leverage.

For those who have been paying attention to geopolitics–a focus of the American Energy Institute and PetroNerds—these global realities are unsurprising.

The stock market and the oil market have largely ignored geopolitical risk over the past year. An extreme lack of attention to geopolitics, plus an abundant crude supply, much of which is coming from the sanctioned nations of Russia, Iran, and Venezuela, have resulted in downside bets on oil prices. 

Global players shaping risk in oil markets are intertwined and working with each other, supplying weapons and trading illicit and sanctioned crude, moved by Russia’s shadow fleet, helping to distort market signals and transparency. 

From Russia’s war in Ukraine to escalating tensions in Asia, and ongoing uncertainty in Iran and Venezuela—there is no shortage of risk.

This month alone, the United States captured Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro, a man and nation with significant ties to China and Russia. The same weekend, North Korea launched test missiles and China ratcheted up drills around Taiwan. Iran, a regime that has long fomented regional chaos with its oil money, began using extreme force to quell nationwide protests, instituting internet blackouts to prevent outsiders from seeing the true carnage on the ground. 

Each of these events should have added risk to the market and led to rising oil prices, especially given that Russia, Iran, and Venezuela are major oil producing countries, producing roughly 15 mbd (million barrels per day) combined. 

However, the U.S.is the largest oil producer in the world, producing nearly 14 mbd of crude oil.

A modest rise in oil prices should be welcomed in the U.S. as it would promote stability and investment in U.S. shale. Investing in U.S. shale provides economic growth, jobs, export revenue, and American energy dominance. It also reinforces energy security at home and abroad, supplanting unstable foreign production from nations like Iran.

Moreover, the U.S. consumer can handle modestly higher oil prices, which would support both the U.S. oil patch and the broader American economy, given that the U.S. is the largest crude oil producer and exporter in the world. 

As the global leader in oil, natural gas production and oil exports—producing as much oil as Russia and Iran combined—the U.S. has an obligation to continue to lead in energy. 

Geopolitical instability and inhumane and illicit crude oil coming from sanctioned nations makes U.S. oil production and continued investment in U.S. oil that much more critical.

U.S. crude oil production is produced under the rule of law with transparent production and transportation data. In contrast, Russia and Iran conceal how much oil they produce and sell their crude oil at extreme discounts to China. 

Last weekend, I watched the Newcastle refinery in Wyoming transform local Rockies crude into products that power lives across the country, a reminder that energy is the foundation of modern life, economic stability, and national security. Continued global unrest should be a clarion call to the energy market and investors to focus on production and investment in the U.S., where the rule of law, free markets, and efficiencies in the U.S. shale patch drive not only returns and profitability but U.S. energy security and global energy security.

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

The post The United States Must Maintain Oil Investment Amid Global Instability appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Last year, Democrats largely stood by Virginia Attorney General candidate Jay Jones, who wished death on the children of his political opponent. Now, they’re carrying water for anti-Immigration and Customs Enforcement agitators who invaded a church service and traumatized children.

Make no mistake: When agitators invaded Cities Church in St. Paul, Minnesota, on Jan. 18, they weren’t engaged in peaceful protest. They were committing an atrocity.

Agitators stood up and burst in during the middle of service, chanting, “Who shut this down? We shut this down!”

According to the Justice Department’s charging document, the agitators blocked the walkways, so terrified parishioners could not escape. They blocked the staircase to Sunday School, so parents could not get to their children.

They screamed in the faces of crying children. One agitator allegedly told a child, “Do you know your parents are Nazis, they’re going to burn in hell?”

At least one father told investigators that his children were traumatized. One of them said to him, “Daddy, I thought you were going to die.”

Agitators targeted Cities Church because they claim one of its pastors also led ICE’s office in St. Paul, as if this connection justified terrorizing innocents and depriving their fellow Americans of their right to worship God in their own church building.

The Justice Department has charged some of the agitators with two major criminal violations: conspiracy against rights under the Ku Klux Klan Act and a violation of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, or FACE Act, which also protects access to churches. These agitators allegedly prevented their fellow Americans from exercising their rights to practice their religion, a federal crime.

Yet the agitators might have engaged in activity that could constitute state or local crimes, such as trespassing, false imprisonment, and even kidnapping.

Are these the people Democrats really want to be defending?

Democrats Carry Water for Church Invaders

While some Democrats—like Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz—issued halfhearted statements that they do not support the invasion of a church, others stood up for the church invaders, demanding their release.

Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey called the arrests of three ringleaders a “gross abuse of power,” and called for the immediate release of Nekima Armstrong—who admitted to leading the church invasion.

The NAACP also demanded Armstrong’s release, claiming she had been peacefully protesting and that “the only reason the FBI and [the Department of Homeland Security] arrested them is that they didn’t like what they had to say.”

On Friday, Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., posted a photo of herself with Armstrong and others, claiming that they were “lawful protesters” and condemning the “brutal treatment of nonviolent protesters.”

Carrying Water for Don Lemon

More Democrats condemned the arrests of former CNN anchor Don Lemon and independent journalist Georgia Fort, who had claimed they entered the church merely to cover the agitation as journalists.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said the Trump administration “is behaving no differently from the police states and authoritarian regimes across history—they’ve arrested a journalist for the crime of doing his job.”

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., condemned their arrests as “a disgraceful affront to the First Amendment and a corrupt weaponization of the criminal justice system.”

“There is zero basis to arrest Don Lemon, and he should be freed immediately,” Jeffries added. He said Lemon was a “law-abiding” journalist “reporting on DHS brutality in Minnesota.”

Gov. Gavin Newsom, D-Calif., suggested that this arrest echoes Russian President Vladimir Putin’s attacks on journalists.

“Don Lemon and Georgia Fort were taken into custody by federal agents for doing exactly what journalists are supposed to do: report the truth,” Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Texas, a candidate for U.S. Senate, wrote in a Friday press release. “This is censorship by an authoritarian government.”

Reps. Dan Goldman, D-N.Y.; Katherine Clark, D-Mass.; Shontel Brown, D-Ohio; Ami Bera, D-Calif.; and others shared similar sentiments.

Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., condemned Trump for “arresting journalists doing their jobs.” Omar condemned Lemon’s arrest as a “clear violation of the Constitution.”

“Arresting a journalist is a blatant attempt to intimidate,” Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., wrote on X. “Don Lemon has been on the ground in Minnesota like hundreds of others doing the vital work of covering Trump’s lawlessness and chaos.”

Here’s the thing, Senator Booker: Don Lemon wasn’t “covering Trump’s lawlessness and chaos.” He was “covering” the horrific invasion of a church service, and it certainly seems to me that he was abetting it.

Renee Carlson, who represents Cities Church as general counsel for True North Counsel, said it well:

The First Amendment does not allow premeditated plots or coordinated actions to violate the sanctity of a sanctuary, disrupt worship, and intimidate small children. There is no “press pass” to invade a sanctuary or to conspire to interrupt religious services.

Lemon’s job as a journalist does not give him carte blanche to engage in trespassing.

At the very least, it could be argued that Lemon joined an orchestrated effort to invade a church service, disrupt the service, and prevent people from exercising their First Amendment right to the free exercise of religion. He is innocent until proven guilty, but it sure seems to me like he violated the FACE Act.

By downplaying the church invasion as a “protest,” and Lemon’s role as mere reporting, Democrats are minimizing an atrocity.

Shame on every Democrat for minimizing the horrific church invasion and carrying water for the invaders. Do you think they would ever let it rest if conservative agitators had invaded a mosque in the middle of prayers?

The post Democrats Carry Water for Agitators Who Invade Church Services and Traumatize Children appeared first on The Daily Signal.

In this wide-ranging edition of “Victor Davis Hanson: In His Own Words,” guest host Jack Fowler sits down with Elizabeth Spalding, chairman of the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, to confront the forgotten truths of communism’s deadly legacy.

From Hollywood’s willful blindness to the rise of socialism at home, Spalding explains why communism and socialism share the same DNA—and why freedom still needs defending.

Subscribe to Victor Davis Hanson’s own YouTube channel to watch past episodes.

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

The post ‘We Were Anti-Nazi, but Not Anti-Communist’: Hollywood’s ‘Come to Jesus’ Moment That Never Was appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Daily Signal President Rob Bluey sparred with media analyst Oliver Darcy on NBC News over the arrest of former CNN anchor Don Lemon, who is facing federal charges related to a church invasion in Minnesota.

Lemon was on the scene with approximately 40 anti-Immigration and Customs Enforcement protesters who disrupted Sunday’s service at Cities Church in St. Paul. Attorney General Pam Bondi announced Friday that Lemon and others were charged with two counts of criminal conspiracy.

Bluey argued that Lemon participated in a “premeditated” disruption of Christian worship rather than legitimate journalism.

The exchange with Darcy centered on whether Lemon, who was indicted by a grand jury for his role in the church invasion, deserves First Amendment protection as a journalist or should face accountability for disrupting religious worship.

“Let’s stop calling it a protest. It was an invasion of a church service,” Bluey told NBC News anchor Tom Llamas. “Those people have the right to worship Jesus Christ, which they were doing, and Don Lemon was part of the group, premeditated, outside of that protest.”

Bluey pointed to video evidence showing Lemon meeting with organizers and activists before the church disruption, noting that Lemon “had advance knowledge of this” and “was not wearing any sort of press badge.”

Darcy, however, characterized the case as “an escalation of Donald Trump’s attacks on the press,” arguing that the administration is “weaponizing the federal government to go after perceived critics, whether it’s journalists, whether it’s universities or whether it’s law firms.”

The Church Disruption

Approximately 40 people entered the church Sunday during the incident. Children reportedly felt terrorized, one woman broke her arm, and the pastor repeatedly asked Lemon and others to leave. According to the indictment, Lemon was allegedly blocking the door, preventing congregants from exiting.

Llamas, the NBC News anchor, acknowledged that people have a right to worship safely.

“There should be a safe place in this country where you can go and you can worship whoever your God is,” Llamas said, “and these people clearly were there for a church service and it was disrupted and that can’t be lost in this conversation either.”

Cities Church responded to the news of Lemon’s arrest in a statement first provided to The Daily Signal.

“We are grateful that the Department of Justice acted swiftly to protect Cities Church so that we can continue to faithfully live out the church’s mission to worship Jesus and make him known,” said Jonathan Parnell, the church’s lead pastor.

Renee Carlson and Doug Wardlow, the attorneys for True North Legal who represent Cities Church, added:

“The freedom to worship God without fear of violence and intimidation is a fundamental right that defines who we are as Americans. True North Legal and Cities Church are grateful that the Department of Justice is committed to upholding that freedom and is holding the agitators who invaded the church accountable.”

Selective Targeting or Accountability?

Darcy suggested the Trump administration was selectively targeting Lemon over the incident, noting that Trump had pardoned people convicted of violating the FACE Act in other contexts.

“I don’t even think Rob would deny that Don Lemon has gotten under Trump’s skin,” Darcy said, calling the prosecution “obviously selective targeting.”

Bluey countered by highlighting that media targeting isn’t unique to Trump, pointing to his own news organization’s experience.

“It was during the Biden administration when The Daily Signal had its press credentials revoked by the White House,” Bluey noted. “This is something that I don’t think you can pinpoint just because it’s Donald Trump.”

When asked whether prosecuting Lemon was worth Department of Justice resources given other pressing national issues, Bluey said the administration wants to “hold people accountable.”

“I think that they feel too many times in the past individuals like Don Lemon haven’t had that level of accountability,” he said. “So I think they’re trying to set an example here.”

Who Qualifies as a Journalist?

The debate also touched on the increasingly blurred lines of who qualifies as a journalist in the digital age, when anyone with a smartphone can document events and publish content.

Darcy acknowledged the difficulty: “The term journalist is pretty broad. I think in Don Lemon’s sense, though, given that he has had a 30-plus-year career, he was a top anchor at CNN, I think it would be very difficult to say that he is not a journalist.”

Bluey, however, pointed out that “Don Lemon was hardly the only person in that church who had a camera out and was documenting the event.”

“What makes Don Lemon any different from anybody else who could call themselves part of the media?” Bluey asked.

The case is expected to proceed to a preliminary hearing, where probable cause will need to be established before a judge. Lemon is represented by high-profile attorney Abbe Lowell.

The post Daily Signal President Clashes With Ex-CNN Analyst Over Don Lemon Arrest appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Indiana lawmakers are on the verge of reshaping the teaching profession, to the benefit of teachers and students, and could set an example for the rest of the country.

State policymakers are considering a proposal that would exempt some teaching candidates from the Praxis test (a standardized test commonly used by educators to evaluate potential teachers). The provisions in the Indiana proposal would help to streamline the process used by working professionals outside of education as they use alternative routes to enter the classroom.

These provisions are backed by research. A study of freshly minted teachers in New York City found that student performance during a teacher’s first two years of employment is a better indicator of teaching effectiveness than a teacher’s certification status. 

For decades, in fact, educators have said that the certification process spends too much time on “how-to courses” instead of classes reinforcing subject matter expertise. Research from North Carolina that used data including the results from 75 percent of all students in the state in grades 3-5 found that even having a graduate degree was not an indicator of a teacher’s abilities.

To state the obvious, teacher effectiveness matters. Research finds more effective teachers can help students learn the equivalent of a year and a half of instructional content, while less effective teachers only give students the equivalent of a half a year’s worth of learning.

Critics may claim that some instruction on how to impart knowledge must be necessary for adults who want to reach children. But research cannot determine the best way for aspiring teachers to be effective, whether it is through teacher colleges or direct experience.

So, while there is no fool-proof method for training teachers, the evidence indicating that teachers can be highly qualified without certification suggests lawmakers should be considering more alternative ways for professionals to access the teaching pipeline.

Lawmakers recently removed the provisions providing this flexibility but still have time reconsider.

The proposal has other crucial components that respond to pressing needs in Indiana schools. The version of the proposal considered in the state House of Representatives added the Classical Learning Test, or CLT, to the list of assessments for which Indiana standards should prepare students. This test is more rigorous than the SAT and includes longer reading selections from classical works of literature as part of the reading comprehension section. The math portion of the CLT deals with logic and reasoning in addition to algebraic methods of problem solving.

State lawmakers in Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, and Florida, among others, allow students to use education savings accounts to pay for CLT tests, and Florida policymakers adopted the test as an approved admissions assessment for state universities in 2023. As of February 2026, applicants to U.S. military academies can submit CLT test scores as part of their application.

Furthermore, the Indiana proposal improves state academic standards by adding instruction on the “success sequence” to K-12 students. Coined by social scientists more than a decade ago, the phrase success sequence refers to the consistent research findings that demonstrate positive outcomes for individuals who finish high school, enter the workforce or pursue a terminal degree, and get married before having children.

Research finds that 97 percent of individuals from the Millennial generation who followed the success sequence were not poor when they reached adulthood. In fact, among black Millennials who followed the success sequence, 80 percent of the individuals in a report from 2022 were in middle- or higher-income brackets.

Teachers should inform students that following these basic steps may hold significant benefits in life for them. In my latest book, “The Polarization Myth: America’s Surprising Consensus on Race, Schools, and Sex,”my nationally representative survey of parents and the general public found that 50 percent of respondents from the general public were in favor of teaching the success sequence to students (compared to 30 percent who were opposed) and 53 percent of parents were in favor (28 percent opposed).

Indiana lawmakers could make pivotal improvements to K-12 learning in this proposal. Policymakers should consider the benefits to families, students, and teachers that would come from including all of the proposal’s original provisions.

The post Indiana Set to Deliver Huge Transformation for Teaching Profession appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The Senate passed legislation to fund the government by a 71-29 vote on Friday, setting the stage for what is expected to be a brief, partial government shutdown over the weekend.

The deal, if passed by the House and signed by President Donald Trump, will fund a number of federal agencies and buy time for negotiating disagreements on immigration law enforcement.

The package includes funding for the state department, financial regulators, as well as agencies overseeing war, education, labor, health, and housing. Additionally, the package provides a two-week funding extension for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

Five Republicans joined 24 Democrats in voting no on the bill. Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, Rick Scott of Florida, Mike Lee of Utah, and Rand Paul of Kentucky.

Johsnon, Lee, Paul, and Scott have previously criticized the earmarks in the package.

Democrats demanded a separate vote on homeland security after the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti, 37, in Minneapolis, Minnesota during an interaction with federal officers. 

The Friday vote means that negotiations on immigration law enforcement will continue in the coming weeks.

On Thursday, leadership’s first attempt to pass a six-bill funding package failed to muster even a simple majority. 

All Democrats and eight Republicans voted against bringing the previous version of the package to a final vote, with Democrats making demands on homeland security and some Republicans expressing dissatisfaction with the bills.

In order to overcome disagreement, Senate Republican leadership crafted a “time agreement” with the consent of all 100 Senate offices.

 A time agreement is an expedited process under which the Senate sets the terms for debate and agrees to limitations on amendments.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., came to the Senate floor Friday and announced the agreement, which was advanced by unanimous consent.

Amendments Get Democrats on Record on Key Issues

The time agreement’s structure allowed for seven amendment votes.

Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky’s amendment to block billions of dollars in assistance for refugees failed by a 37-62 margin.

Republican Sen. Mike Lee of Utah’s amendment to strip the bill of earmarks also failed when it was tabled by a 58-42 margin, and Sen. Eric Schmitt of Missouri’s amendment to block funding for the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) failed in a voice vote.

Democrats also had amendments. Sen. Jeff Merkley of Oregon’s amendment to rein in the presidents’ ability to rescind funding failed 47-52.

Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont who caucuses with Democrats, introduced an amendment to cut ICE’s funding increase in the July budget reconciliation bill failed 71-29.

A Fast Turnaround

The Senate’s rapid deal-making was unexpected in some circles.

Shortly after the failed Thursday vote, the Daily Signal asked Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., if he expected the Senate could come to a deal within 24 hours.

Fetterman replied, “Geez, I mean, this is the Senate. Are you crazy? I mean, I would love that, but that would be a new experience for my three years here when something normal could happen.”

Ahead of the time agreement, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., announced he was placing a hold on a deal unless he received guarantees of future votes on legislation.

Graham’s demands were a vote on a legislation to criminalize state and local officials’ non-compliance with immigration law, as well as a vote on legislation to protect senators’ ability to sue the federal government if their records are subpoenaed without notice in a noncriminal investigation.

After the announcement time agreement, Graham said in a statement that leadership had granted his requests.

Weekend Shutdown

The bill will now head back to the House of Representatives for passage before it can be sent to the president’s desk. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., told a USA Today reporter on Friday that the “earliest floor action we could have is Monday.”

Johnson acknowledged that “we may inevitably be in a short shutdown situation” but that “the House is going to do its job.”

The post Senate Passes Funding Package After Wrangling, Government to Partially Shut Down for Weekend appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Americans should not be surprised by the House Democratic leader’s threat to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, says the chair of the House border security subcommittee.

“If you remember, just two years ago, Republicans conducted a very thorough investigation, and we impeached [DHS] Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas for failure to perform his duties,” Rep. Michael Guest, R-Miss., said. “And so, should we be surprised that now we’re seeing Democrats try to come in and impeach the current Homeland Security secretary?”

Guest serves as chairman of the House Subcommittee on Border Security and Enforcement, and is a member of the Committee on Homeland Security.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., on Tuesday called on Trump to fire Noem, adding that if he did not, “we will commence impeachment proceedings in the House of Representatives.”

Jeffries’ threat comes after a Border Patrol agent shot and killed Alex Pretti, 37, on Jan. 24, and an ICE agent shot and killed Renee Good, also 37, on Jan. 7 amid anti-ICE protests in Minneapolis.

Almost immediately after Pretti’s death, Noem referred to Pretti as a “domestic terrorist,” and DHS claimed in a post on X that he “wanted to do maximum damage and massacre law enforcement.”

Video of the incident appears to conflict with Noem’s account. Facing backlash for her comments, Noem told Fox News host Sean Hannity on Thursday that she and her team were working with the “best information we had at the time.”

Jeffries’ impeachment threat, according to Guest, was predictable “regardless of who served” as the DHS secretary, adding, “the Democrats saw what Republicans did, and I think that they are trying to mirror our desire to impeach Secretary Mayorkas.”

Jeffries’ office did not respond to The Daily Signal’s request for comment.

House Republicans voted to impeach Mayorkas in February 2024, accusing him of failing to secure America’s border and enforce immigration laws. The Democrat-controlled Senate never voted to convict Mayorkas on the House charges.

Guest believes “the bulk” of Republican lawmakers will continue to support Noem as homeland security secretary as long as “she has the support of the president and the administration.”

The agency will continue to enforce the laws Congress has passed, DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin told The Daily Signal when asked about Jeffries’ impeachment threat.

McLaughlin says Congress should change U.S. immigration laws if lawmakers disagree, and accused politicians of defending “criminals” who “attack the men and women who are enforcing our laws.”

“It’s time they focus on protecting the American people, the work this Department is doing every day under Secretary Noem’s leadership,” McLaughlin said.

Guest acknowledges there is a difference of opinion on the issue of interior immigration enforcement even among GOP members of Congress.

Following Pretti’s death, some Republican lawmakers have called for a “softer approach to interior enforcement” that would only focus on the arrest of illegal aliens “who have criminal convictions or who have orders of removal by the immigration court,” Guest explains.

Still, many GOP lawmakers want a “broader population” of illegal aliens apprehended.

“I think we can find that middle ground,” Guest said.

While the administration should not “completely remove agents from Minnesota” because “you have to continue to remain steadfast in your mission,” Guest added, “I don’t see it as a retreat if the administration were to decide to redeploy those officers to other cities across the country.”

The post The Real Reason Democrats Are Threatening Noem Impeachment, One Member Says appeared first on The Daily Signal.

COLUMBUS, OHIO—Republican Vivek Ramaswamy knows what he and his ticket are up against when it comes to countering the dangerous rhetoric from Ohio Democrats.

“I think that the problem with the modern Democratic Party is that they are effectively condoning this type of behavior repeatedly,” Ramaswamy told The Daily Signal, in reference to a plan to “kill Donald Trump” from Democrat Elliot Forhan, who is running for attorney general.

Ramaswamy also criticized his own opponent, Democrat Amy Acton.

“If you look at the … approach that our opponents to this race have taken … led by Amy Acton, in some ways, it sets the wrong tone, the wrong tone of unnecessary, often toxic, vitriolic, combativeness that unfortunately perpetuates more of this type of ugly rhetoric,” Ramaswamy added.

“The good news is I’m confident the three of us here, we’re going to win our election, and we’re going to lead with a positive tone that unites our state, rather than dividing people based on this … fractious rhetoric. And so, I’m less worried about what the other side is going to do going forward, and more on how we’re going to offer such a positive vision that it dilutes their poison to irrelevance,” he continued.

Ramaswamy was joined by Senate President Rob McColley, his pick for lieutenant governor, as well as Forhan’s Republican opponent, Auditor Keith Faber.

Just before Ramaswamy spoke at a Young Republican meeting on Wednesday, Forhan sent shockwaves by announcing his plan to “kill Donald Trump” by convicting the president of a capital crime. Despite backlash, Forhan told The Daily Signal he is staying in the race.

This attorney general race has been one to watch, thanks to Forhan‘s controversial statements. Faber told The Daily Signal that Forhan “was looking for attention” and “got a lot of it.”

The Republican continued to denounce Forhan’s rhetoric as “vile,” while giving a call to action.

“I encourage everybody to turn down the rhetoric. It is about making sure we keep everybody safe. I encourage people to follow the law. You’re running to be the attorney general,” Faber said, drawing a contrast to New York’s attorney general.

“Frankly, you need to be less like Letitia James and looking for a crime to justify the punishment you want to oppose and more like, candidly, a statesman. [Forhan’s] striking out on all those accounts,” he continued.

Unlike New York, Ohio voted for Trump three times. Trump won the state with increased margins each election, McColley reminded, suggesting Forhan’s rhetoric makes him “out of touch with Ohio.”

The Acton campaign did not respond to The Daily Signal’s multiple requests for comment.

The post EXCLUSIVE: Ohio Ticket Has More to Say on Dem Looking to ‘Kill Trump’ appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The Senate—with a possible government shutdown looming—has crafted a deal to break a funding logjam between Republicans and Democrats, but ahead of the deal being clinched, Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham demanded a guarantee of votes on two legislative priorities.

Graham, R-S.C., sought opportunities to vote on legislation to criminalize local officials disobeying federal immigration law, as well as legislation allowing senators and conservative organizations to sue the federal government for wiretapping them.

When the clock strikes midnight on Friday, the federal government’s discretionary spending authority for key agencies will expire, triggering a lapse in appropriations that could cause a government shutdown.

The Senate failed to muster support for a six-bill funding package Thursday, as all Democrats opposed ending the debate on the package, and several Republicans joined in to express their dissatisfaction with the process as well.

In order to get to a funding deal, senators came to an agreement with all members on an expedited process for passing five of the six spending bills, as well as a two-week funding extension for the Department of Homeland Security. This process will involve seven amendments votes.

The extension of DHS funding would buy time for further negotiations on immigration issues, which have been the major sticking point for Democrats.

With his “Arctic Frost” amendment, Graham is attempting to maintain parts of a provision that the House tried to gut in the package it sent to the Senate. 

The current provision, signed into law as part of a spending package in November, is meant to address the surveillance of the GOP senators in special counsel Jack Smith’s Arctic Frost investigation into alleged attempts to overturn the result of the 2020 presidential election.

Specifically, the current law allows senators to sue the Department of Justice for at least $500,000 for each instance their data is seized or subpoenaed without notice. 

House members have slammed this as a conflict of interest for senators, who could potentially make millions of dollars off the legislation.

With his demands, Graham has led a one-man battle against the House to keep parts of this framework.

“To the House, I don’t appreciate what you did; to [Speaker] Mike Johnson, you jammed us,” Graham said to a group of reporters Friday. “You better never do that again, because what I’m going to do is introduce legislation, and I’m going to challenge you to take it up.”

Graham’s new version would, according to him, address House members’ concerns about senators profiting off the law, while also expanding protections to political organizations if their records are subpoenaed without notice in a noncriminal investigation.

He told reporters he cleared his modified version with the Senate ethics committee and that he wanted leadership to “find out a time when” it “fits into the amendment process.”

For his legislation to criminalize sanctuary city politicians’ noncompliance with immigration law, Graham told reporters he wanted it to be an amendment vote for the DHS bill.

“When I’m told I get those two things, I lift my hold,” he told reporters. “If I don’t, I’m going to be all night on the floor.”

After Graham’s speech, Senate Republican leadership sent out a “hotline” email requesting unanimous consent from all senators on a framework that would allow for seven amendments to be considered on the floor.

Leadership ultimately got unanimous consent on the framework, and Graham told reporters that his requests for votes were granted.

The post Sen. Graham Receives Concessions After ‘Hold’ on Senate’s Funding Deal appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Legislation to defund non-governmental organizations in Afghanistan that have allegedly been hijacked by the Taliban has cleared the Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and is headed to the chamber’s floor for a full vote, despite having been voted against by Democrats.

The legislation was introduced after the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction reported in 2021 that the Taliban stole around 70% of the over $10.72 billion administered to NGOs in Afghanistan in 2021. $3.83 billion of which stemmed directly from U.S. taxpayers.

“Putting money in the hands of the Taliban is a slap in the face to every service person who served in Afghanistan, ” committee chairman Sen. Jim Risch, R-Ida., said in a statement. “It is the wrong thing to do. It is just common sense to keep our taxpayer money out of the hands of terrorist organizations.”

If passed, the No Tax Dollars for Terrorist Act would defund organizations such as the Afghan Fund and require the State Department to identify and oppose nations that continue to allocate financial resources to them.

In 2022, the Heritage Foundation stated that the foreign-aid establishment of government bureaucrats, United Nations experts, contractors, and aid agencies has “utterly failed” to “help Afghans gain any semblance of self-sufficiency,” which has left behind a “failed state and Asia’s poorest country,” as a result.

The legislation, originally introduced by Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., passed the U.S. House of Representatives in July of 2025, before being introduced in the Senate by Sen. Tim Sheehy, R-Mont., last summer.

“Hundreds of billions of dollars in taxpayer funds were wasted, leaving the Afghan people to scavenge for food to survive while the Taliban reestablishes the country as a global terrorist hub,” Heritage researchers added.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., has not indicated when he will bring the legislation to a floor vote. However, Burchett, Host of the Shawn Ryan Show and Navy Seal Veteran Shawn Ryan, who teamed up with Burchett to draft the legislation, and other conservative voices have urged the public to apply public pressure to force a vote on the legislation.

“Call your Senator, thank him for the support, and encourage him to get it to the floor,” Burchett said on X. “Not one more week delay. Let’s put this bad chapter of our fiscal mismanagement to rest.”

Burchett and Ryan did not respond to The Daily Signal’s request for comment.

The post Will the Senate Vote to Protect Taxpayer Dollars From the Taliban? appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Federal immigration agents on Thursday arrested illegal aliens convicted of a third-degree sex offense, manslaughter, and arson, as the Department of Homeland Security continues to deal with backlash over enforcement operations in Minnesota.

“These thugs have no place in our communities,” DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said, adding, “70% of ICE arrests are of illegal aliens charged or convicted of a crime in the U.S. This statistic doesn’t even include foreign fugitives, terrorists, and gang members who lack a rap sheet in the U.S.”

Authorities on Thursday arrested two Mexican nationals, Darwin Vazquez-Ramos, who has been convicted of a third-degree sex offense, and Israel Sanchez-Jimenez, who has been convicted of gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated in Los Angeles, according to DHS.

Darwin Vazquez-Ramos (DHS) Israel Sanchez-Jimenez (DHS)

Authorities also arrested Colombian Yonatan Galvez-Marin, who has been convicted of manslaughter in New York City; Phong Nguyen, who is from Vietnam and has been convicted of arson in Texas; and Mohammed Amin Zakariah, a Ghana native who has been convicted of identity theft in North Carolina.

Phong Nguyen (DHS) Mohammed Amin Zakariah (DHS) Yonatan Galvez-Marin (DHS)

“With every arrest, we are making America safe again,” McLaughlin said.

The arrests come as the department faces backlash after a Border Patrol agent shot and killed Alex Pretti, 37, on Jan. 24, and an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent shot and killed Renee Good, also 37, on Jan. 7 amid anti-ICE protests in Minneapolis.

ICE is “doing its work around the country, and we’re not getting news around the country,” Lora Ries, director of the Border Security and Immigration Center at The Heritage Foundation, told The Daily Signal.

“We have to get the cause and effect right here,” Ries continued. “ICE is not the cause; the Radical Left, these rioters, and their funders and organizers are the cause of what’s coming out of Minnesota.”

Investigations have uncovered multiple agitator organizations operating in Minneapolis.

Comunidades Organizando el Poder y la Acción Latina, for example, is a “major player” in organizing anti-ICE protests, according to The Daily Signal’s Tyler O’Neil. The New York Times reports that the group is “on the front lines of anti-ICE operations.”

Despite opposition and protests, ICE operations are continuing in Minneapolis under the leadership of border czar Tom Homan.

Homan, at President Donald Trump’s request, is taking over for Customs and Border Protection commander Greg Bovino, following the two fatal shootings by immigration enforcement agents. Homan is reporting directly to Trump, according to the president.

“I didn’t come to Minnesota for photo ops or headlines,” Homan said. “I came here to seek solutions, and that’s what we’re going to do.”

Homan has met with multiple state and local leaders, including Gov. Tim Walz and Mayor Jacob Frey, since arriving in Minneapolis and says there will be a reduction of federal immigration officers in the Twin Cities if local authors agree to “commonsense cooperation” with ICE.

The post EXCLUSIVE: ICE Arrests Illegal Aliens Convicted of Manslaughter, Arson appeared first on The Daily Signal.