Bessent is another stellar member of the President's cabinet. Not only is this group far more intelligent than any in recent memory, I think Trump's example of pushing back against the DNC press, and not allowing them to frame the narrative, has freed up his cabinet to speak candidly, calling down foolish questions.

quote:

Originally posted by downtownv:
If I recall, she was a huge Chris Christie supporter in the 1016 primarys.

I'm not sure about the 1016 primarys...
When Æthelred the Unready, king of England, died after a 38-year reign, he was succeeded by his son Edmund II "Ironside", without a primary. When Edmund II himself died later in 1016, that same year, Cnut took control of the whole of the Kingdom of England, also without a primary.

But in 2016 Ann Coulter predicted Trump would be the Republican nominee long before anyone else. She campaigned with Trump.

quote:

Originally posted by downtownv:
If I recall, she was a huge Chris Christie supporter in the 1016 primarys.

"... a huge Chris Christie..."

Is there another kind?

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
In 2016 Ann Coulter predicted Trump would be the Republican nominee long before anyone else. She campaigned with Trump.

That is a fact. She was on liberal talk show, maybe Maher, and was mocked mercilessly for it. She may have actually said that in 2015 after he announced.

EDIT: Yes, she did it on June 19th, 2015 on Bill Maher's Leftwing show. Her only caveat was "among those who have announced they are running". She called it a full year before Trump wrapped up the nomination. And she did it in a studio full of Marxists. Courageous.




.

Later, in 2016, she was campaigning for Trump.

Ann Coulter: In Trump We Trust | Real Time with Bill Maher

Mike Waltz is done.

https://www.breitbart.com/poli...al-security-council/

Stephen Miller on gender-affirming care child mutilation:

quote:

"If a five year old or a six year old goes to school, or a seven year old goes to school, and the teacher tries to turn the boy into a girl, or the girl into a boy. That is child abuse, and this administration is treating that as child abuse."

https://x.com/townhallcom/status/1917932599626052022

quote:

Originally posted by oddball:
Mike Waltz is done.

https://www.breitbart.com/poli...al-security-council/

Kind of done, now he's being nominated to be the new UN ambassador, which previously was slated to go to Elise Stefanik. As you may remember, she withdrew to preserve her seat in the house, because NYS was playing election games for her replacement.

UPDATE: President Trump confirmed Mike Waltz will not serve as National Security Advisor and is instead nominated as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio appointed as interim NSA.


National Security Adviser Mike Waltz and his deputy Alex Wong will be ousted Thursday from their roles at the National Security Council, according to reports.

Reports from CBS News, Fox News, and Politico state that Waltz and Wong will be leaving their posts, and that President Donald Trump’s chief of staff, Susie Wiles, is having conversations with National Security Council staff.

Waltz came under scrutiny after he put together an encrypted Signal group chat that mistakenly included the Atlantic‘s Jeffrey Goldberg, which inadvertently disclosed discussions with top Trump administration officials about plans to strike Houthi targets in Yemen.

One source familiar with the situation told CBS News that the president believes that enough time has passed since the controversy that Waltz and Wong’s departure can be framed as part of a reorganization and that he initially resisted efforts to remove his national security adviser to avoid the appearance of bowing to outside pressure.

“Wong served in the first Trump administration as deputy special representative for North Korea and also as deputy assistant secretary for East Asian and Pacific Affairs at the State Department. In announcing his appointment, Mr. Trump said that Wong helped negotiate his summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un,” CBS News wrote.

Politico wrote that the ouster could happen any moment but is not necessarily final.

“Names for a replacement have been discussed around the West Wing for weeks, but the plans to remove Waltz potentially as soon as this week gained steam in recent days, according to two of the people and another person close to the White House,” the outlet continued.

Politico noted, citing sources familiar with this matter, a lead pick could be Steve Witkoff, Trump’s Special Envoy to the Middle East who is leading negotiations with Russia, Iran, and Hamas in Palestine.

Waltz represented a camp that was more hawkish towards Iran as the administration as resumed U.S. negotiations with the Iranian regime over how to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Waltz, along with Secretary of State Marco Rubio, are highly suspicious of Iran and remain skeptical of the chances of diplomacy with the Middle Eastern country.
On the obverse side, Witkoff, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, and Vice President JD Vance have all asserted that the U.S. should explore diplomatic solutions with Iran. Vance remains highly involved in Iran policy discussions.

https://www.breitbart.com/poli...al-security-council/

Victor Davis Hanson: Donald Trump Brought a Plan. The Left Brought Hysterics

'FRAUD AT SCALE': Elon Musk exposes shocking waste that makes people 'numb'

quote:

Originally posted by 41:
Victor Davis Hanson: Donald Trump Brought a Plan. The Left Brought Hysterics

As always, very good insight by VDH. Thank you for posting this, 41.


.

Yeah yeah, a judge will block it. They can block my balls.

https://x.com/gatewaypundit/st.../1918139354062508160



By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

Section 1. Purpose. National Public Radio (NPR) and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) receive taxpayer funds through the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB). Unlike in 1967, when the CPB was established, today the media landscape is filled with abundant, diverse, and innovative news options. Government funding of news media in this environment is not only outdated and unnecessary but corrosive to the appearance of journalistic independence.

At the very least, Americans have the right to expect that if their tax dollars fund public broadcasting at all, they fund only fair, accurate, unbiased, and nonpartisan news coverage. No media outlet has a constitutional right to taxpayer subsidies, and the Government is entitled to determine which categories of activities to subsidize. The CPB’s governing statute reflects principles of impartiality: the CPB may not “contribute to or otherwise support any political party.” 47 U.S.C. 396(f)(3); see also id. 396(e)(2).

The CPB fails to abide by these principles to the extent it subsidizes NPR and PBS. Which viewpoints NPR and PBS promote does not matter. What does matter is that neither entity presents a fair, accurate, or unbiased portrayal of current events to taxpaying citizens.
I therefore instruct the CPB Board of Directors (CPB Board) and all executive departments and agencies (agencies) to cease Federal funding for NPR and PBS.

Sec. 2. Instructions to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. (a) The CPB Board shall cease direct funding to NPR and PBS, consistent with my Administration’s policy to ensure that Federal funding does not support biased and partisan news coverage. The CPB Board shall cancel existing direct funding to the maximum extent allowed by law and shall decline to provide future funding.

(b) The CPB Board shall cease indirect funding to NPR and PBS, including by ensuring that licensees and permittees of public radio and television stations, as well as any other recipients of CPB funds, do not use Federal funds for NPR and PBS. To effectuate this directive, the CPB Board shall, before June 30, 2025, revise the 2025 Television Community Service Grants General Provisions and Eligibility Criteria and the 2025 Radio Community Service Grants General Provisions and Eligibility Criteria to prohibit direct or indirect funding of NPR and PBS. To the extent permitted by the 2024 Television Community Service Grants General Provisions and Eligibility Criteria, the 2024 Radio Community Service Grants General Provisions and Eligibility Criteria, and applicable law, the CPB Board shall also prohibit parties subject to these provisions from funding NPR or PBS after the date of this order. In addition, the CPB Board shall take all other necessary steps to minimize or eliminate its indirect funding of NPR and PBS.

Sec. 3. Instructions to Other Agencies. (a) The heads of all agencies shall identify and terminate, to the maximum extent consistent with applicable law, any direct or indirect funding of NPR and PBS.

(b) After taking the actions specified in subsection (a) of this section, the heads of all agencies shall identify any remaining grants, contracts, or other funding instruments entered into with NPR or PBS and shall determine whether NPR and PBS are in compliance with the terms of those instruments. In the event of a finding of noncompliance, the head of the relevant agency shall take appropriate steps under the terms of the instrument.

(c) The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall determine whether “the Public Broadcasting Service and National Public Radio (or any successor organization)” are complying with the statutory mandate that “no person shall be subjected to discrimination in employment . . . on the grounds of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex.” 47 U.S.C. 397(15), 398(b). In the event of a finding of noncompliance, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall take appropriate corrective action.

Sec. 4. Severability. If any provision of this order, or the application of any provision to any agency, person, or circumstance, is held to be invalid, the remainder of this order and the application of its provisions to any other agencies, persons, or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

Sec. 5. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

DONALD J. TRUMP

THE WHITE HOUSE,
May 1, 2025

Oh no! Everyone on Sesame Street will be living in a trash can, not just Oscar!

I think I’ve figured out part of the Executive Order rationale.

There are multiple parts:

1. It shows President Trump is doing what he promised. That’s the obvious part.

2. It’s caused the idealogical leftists to expose themselves, particularly in the Judicial Branch.

3. Any Executive Branch employee who acts contrary to an EO can be fired for insubordination.

Trump has created his own version of Drudge, this aggregator site is from the White House website

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wire/

quote:

Originally posted by oddball:
Trump has created his own version of Drudge, this aggregator site is from the White House website

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wire/

I can’t find the article now, but earlier this morning I saw a DailyMail article stating that Drudge had filed a lawsuit against President Trump for $1Trillion damage.

Won’t work, I hope.

quote:

Originally posted by oddball:
Trump has created his own version of Drudge, this aggregator site is from the White House website

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wire/

This is an outstanding idea by the Trump Admin. A webpage source for aggregating vetted news articles/reporting (put another way...Unbiased AND Accurate!) right on the WhiteHouse.gov website. Even deranged Trump/America Hating Leftists with ulterior motives might click on some of the content/links and get exposed to some unbiased info while looking for things to be angry about. More Winning!

quote:

Originally posted by Pipe Smoker:

quote:

Originally posted by oddball:
Trump has created his own version of Drudge, this aggregator site is from the White House website

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wire/

I can’t find the article now, but earlier this morning I saw a DailyMail article stating that Drudge had filed a lawsuit against President Trump for $1Trillion damage.

Won’t work, I hope.

Here's thelink to the Daily Mail article --> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/me...report-launches.html

quote:

Drudge Report owner threatens Trump with '$1 TRILLION lawsuit' after White House launched copycat news site

By ALEX HAMMER FOR DAILYMAIL.COM
Published: 13:49 EDT, 1 May 2025 | Updated: 16:28 EDT, 1 May 2025

The founder of conservative news website Drudge Report said that he's mulling a $1 trillion lawsuit against the Trump administration after it launched its own aggregation site that looks suspiciously similar.

The White House Wire, launched on Wednesday, includes a collection of positive stories about Trump as he continues his barrage of attacks on mainstream media.

The site, which features pro-Trump stories from the White House itself and right-leaning outlets like Fox News and Daily Caller, has the same look as Drudge Report - boasting large, all-caps headlines at the top of the page.

'I'm considering a $1 trillion lawsuit!' Drudge Report creator Matt Drudge told Status News, in what the publication called a sarcastic 'jab at Trump’s habit of filing outlandish legal claims against the media.'

The Drudge Report met the moment by blaring out its own headlines in large type.

'TRUMP LAUNCHING HIS OWN DRUDGE REPORT USING TAXPAYER DOLLARS!' read one.

'IT TAKES AN ENTIRE WEST WING TO COMPETE WITH DRUDGE' read another.

'It's a place for supporters of the president's agenda to get the real news all in one place,' a White House official anonymously told Axios of the new site.

It is 'part of the Trump administration's effort to provide transparency and institute policies that put America first,' the official added.

It also represents Trump's latest effort to circumvent mainstream media, after going after legacy new organizations ranging from ABC News to the Associated Press.

On Wednesday, Trump hinted that The New York Times could be his next target, after suing CBS and ABC, from which he scored a $16 million settlement.

He has also launched probes into NBC, PBS, and NPR, while punishing mainstream outlets like the Associated Press by excluding its journalists from the White House press pool.

The Drudge Report, meanwhile launched in 1995. Within 13 years, its traffic surpassed that of The New York Times.

Following Trump's first win in 2016, the president referred to Drudge as a 'great gentleman' and even hosted him at the White House.

However, the Drudge Report became increasingly critical of Trump, growing more oppositional through the years.

Fox News contributor Dan Bongino launched his own Drudge ripoff, The Bongino Report, in retaliation to the shift.

The site insisted it would be 100 percent pro-Trump.

'Drudge has abandoned you,' Bongino tweeted at the time, 'We never will.'

Honestly this is just plain stupid...AND quite revealing about both the author (journalist?), and the Daily Mail. The article fails to mention that Matt Drudge, the 'founder' of the Drudge Report, is no longer the 'owner' of the Drudge Report as he sold it back in the 2018/2019 time frame. Further, there are already numerous news aggregation websites out there at this point, and including the Bongino Report! Also, the only similarities between the Drudge Report and the news aggregator 'wire' page on WhiteHouse.gov, would seem to be that it has a white background, and a small section that happens to have three columns!

Excellent news on our Second Amendment Rights as President Trump has promised to protect them and here is a great example on something AG Pam Bondi has just done.

"We have talked several times before about what can the new and improved DOJ do to undo much of the damage done to American’s Second Amendment Rights under the last administration? Today, Washington Gun Law President, discusses a matter out of Hawaii, in Wolford v. Lopez, but the big news is that the United States Department of Justice has filed an amicus brief wherein they are advocating for the Supreme Court to accept this case and furthermore, are in support of lawful and responsible gun owners throughout the State of Hawaii. This is a huge, huge development that could present a very bright future."