https://www.newsmax.com/politi...dkt_nbr=0105025ud89x

Trump: Revoke ABC, NBC's FCC Licenses for Dem Bias

Continuing his crusade against leftist mainstream media outlets ABC and NBC for being "simply an arm of the Democrat Party" and a "threat to our democracy," President Donald Trump is renewing the threat of revoking their broadcast licenses.

"Why is it that ABC and NBC Fake News, two of the absolute worst and most biased networks anywhere in the world, aren't paying millions of dollars a year in license fees," Trump wrote in the second of two Truth Social posts. "They should lose their licenses for their unfair coverage of Republicans and/or conservatives, but at a minimum, they should pay up BIG for having the privilege of using the most valuable airwaves anywhere at anytime!!!

"Crooked 'journalism' should not be rewarded, it should be terminated!!!"

That post followed a prior one making a call to the Federal Communications Commission.

"Despite a very high popularity and, according to many, among the greatest 8 months in presidential history, ABC & NBC Fake News, two of the worst and most biased networks in history, give me 97% bad stories," Trump wrote in the first of a scathing Truth Social rebuke Sunday night. "If that is the case, they are simply an arm of the Democrat Party and should, according to many, have their licenses revoked by the FCC.

"I would be totally in favor of that because they are so biased and untruthful, an actual threat to our democracy!!! MAGA," Trump said.

Trump previously hailed his "poll numbers" Sunday night.

"Except what is written and broadcast in the Fake News, I now have the highest poll numbers I've ever had, some in the 60's and even 70's," Trump wrote. "Thank you. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!"

Trump has repeatedly accused mainstream outlets of unfair coverage and has escalated attacks on media institutions since returning to office. While presidents cannot directly revoke broadcast licenses — which are granted by the FCC to local affiliates, not national networks — Trump's remarks highlight his ongoing efforts to root out bias in media that are acting as "simply an arm of the Democrat Party."

FCC Chair Brendan Carr said in April, while license revocation is an extreme punishment — what he termed the "regulatory death penalty" — it remains within the FCC's toolkit for broadcasters who fail to serve the public interest.

"Broadcasters have a very unique position in the market when it comes to other entities," he said. "They are licensed by the FCC. When you license someone to operate, you're necessarily prohibiting others from using those airways. Because of that, they have a public-interest obligation. And I think over the years, the FCC has largely stepped back from enforcing the public interest standard.

"I don't think that's correct. I think given the unique benefits that come from a federal broadcast license, it's important for the FCC to actually hold these entities accountable to the public interest.

"And there's a lot of rules and regulations that flow from that news distortion is a piece of it, and I believe that the FCC should be vigorously enforcing the public interest."

While not direct responses to Trump's comments, these statements suggest Carr would consider revocation only under severe circumstances, though the legal and constitutional hurdles for such actions remain high.

^Good! Might want to go after The Weather Channel as well. They have this on the televisions in the hallways and it is always doom and gloom attributed to climate change. Paul Simon once sang: "I get the news I need from the weather report." I don't think he was talking about TWC.

FCC revocation of broadcast licenses is quite uncommon and has never occurred with major broadcast networks. While I share the frustration and disgust of President Trump and many citizens, it's simply not going to happen that ABC, NBC, et al are at even the slightest risk of losing their broadcast license.

I checked with Grok on the historical number of FCC revocations and it could not provide me a figure. It did cite ten instances, most of which were FM radio stations.

Here's an excerpt from Grok's lengthy response, which I think will give you an idea of the FCC's attitude on the matter.

Rarity of Revocations: The FCC considers license revocation a “death penalty” for broadcasters and uses it sparingly. Most enforcement actions result in fines, admonitions, or consent decrees rather than outright revocation. For example, Sinclair Broadcasting faced a $48 million fine in 2020 but avoided license revocation despite allegations of misconduct.

First Amendment Considerations: Recent cases, such as the 2023 petition against Fox’s WTXF-TV in Philadelphia, show the FCC’s reluctance to revoke licenses based on content due to First Amendment protections. The FCC dismissed the petition, citing that revocations typically require clear rule violations or adjudicated felonies, not editorial decisions.

President Trump knows that these networks are in no danger of losing their license. He's just getting some payback by sticking a finger in their eye, and it's fun to watch.

quote:

Originally posted by Lefty Sig:

Hard to believe he's done this much in the first 1/8 of his term.

Realistically, he has about 18 months to implement his agenda. Fortunately, he knows that and, even more fortunately, the man has the drive and stamina to get it done. And he possesses the "I don't give a damn what the critics say." strength that career politicians on the Right do not possess.

.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/...QOjUpE5y7j7oJC6xc%3D

Trump Proposes Renaming Department of Defense to Its Original Name

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, standing behind the president, said the name change is on the way.

President Donald Trump proposed on Aug. 25 that his administration rename the Department of Defense to its previous name, the Department of War.

“Pete, you started off by saying ’the Department of Defense.' And somehow it didn’t sound good to me,” Trump said in the Oval Office, speaking to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, after signing executive orders on fighting crime, including in Washington.

“Defense. What are we, defense? Why are we defense? It used to be called the Department of War, and it had a stronger sound. And, as you know, we won World War I, we won World War II, we won everything. Now we have a Department of Defense. We’re defenders. I don’t know.”

Hegseth, standing behind Trump, said the name change is on the way.

“That’s coming soon, sir,” he told Trump.

Trump said that “Department of War” sounds better than “Department of Defense.”

“Defense? I don’t want to be Defense only. We want defense, but we want offense too, if that’s OK,” he said, adding that “as Department of War, we won everything, we won everything. And I think we’re going to have to go back to that.”

Trump touted bringing an end to conflicts between India and Pakistan and the Congo and Rwanda.

This was not the first time Trump had suggested changing the Defense Department back to its previous name.
“You know it used to be called secretary of war,” Trump told reporters on June 25 at the NATO summit in the Netherlands. “Maybe for a couple of weeks we’ll call it that because we feel like warriors.”

He introduced Hegseth as “secretary of war.”
“Then we became politically correct and they called it secretary of defense,” Trump said. “Maybe we’ll have to think about changing it. But we feel that way.”

Prior to becoming defense secretary, Hegseth called for changing the Defense Department back to its old name.
“Sure, our military defends us. And in a perfect world it exists to deter threats and preserve peace,” he wrote in his 2024 memoir, “The War on Warriors—Behind the Betrayal of the Men Who Keep Us Free.”

“But ultimately its job is to conduct war. We either win or lose wars. And we have warriors, not ‘defenders. Bringing back the War Department may remind a few people in Washington, D.C., what the military is supposed to do, and do well.”

The Defense Department was called the Department of War when it was established in 1789. In 1947, President Harry Truman changed the name after merging it with the Navy Department. He signed the National Security Act, which established the position of secretary of defense. It also established the National Security Council, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the U.S. Air Force.

I've always thought the name "Department of Kicking Ass" had a nice ring to it. But "Department of War" is also good.

I’m all in favor of changing the name back, but “Department of War” sounds odd to me. In all of the histories I’ve read I don’t recall its ever having been referred to as anything except as the War Department. I suppose it’s no different than using Department of Defense or Defense Department, or two names for the Department of State, but it will take some time for me to get used to Department of War.

Then there’s the abbreviation. Colorado has a government agency called Parks and Wildlife that was originally Department of Wildlife: DOW and which is still commonly used. I guess there’d be nothing wrong with referring to the War Department as the Department of Wildlife.

It Will Stun You': Miller Warns D.C. Crime Manipulation Is Worse Than Previously Known

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/...-crime-data-n2662322

Speaking from the Oval Office Monday morning, Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller gave additional details about how the Washington, D.C. Metropolitan Police Department was cooking the books on data in order to make the argument crime was "going down."

"When we share the results, it will stun you," Miller said. "There are even accusations that murders and homicides were reported as accidents not murders. This is how severe the manipulation of the crime data has been in this city. It will all be uncovered and it will all be brought to light."

The Department of Justice launched an investigation into manipulated crime stats last week, with U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro leading the way. The inquiry comes after a police commander was suspended for allegedly cooking the books.

"A D.C. police commander is under investigation for allegedly making changes to crime statistics in his district. The Metropolitan Police Department confirmed Michael Pulliam was placed on paid administrative leave in mid-May. That happened just a week after Pulliam filed an equal employment opportunity complaint against an assistant chief and the police union accused the department of deliberately falsifying crime data, according to three law enforcement sources familiar with the complaint," local NBC 4 Washington reports. "The union claims police supervisors in the department manipulate crime data to make it appear violent crime has fallen considerably compared to last year."

The D.C. police union says false reporting is a regular occurrence and that local data cannot be trusted.

Many of you know Bill Shipley, who used to post great stuff at The Conservative Treehouse during the Russia!! hoax. He now has his own Substack, again posting as shipwreckedcrew. Currently he is writing about the revelations from Kash Patel about a whistleblower within the House Select Committee on Intelligence. The whistleblower (WB for short) reported that Schiff pushed staffers to leak information related to the Russa hoax. Schiff had hoed to be director of CIA if Clinton had been elected.
Anyway, shipwrecked crew has a great post up detailing FBI reports from at least two whistleblowers. As he notes, Kash himself was the target of very foul play by Schiff when Kash, along with Kevin Nunes, exposed the Russia collusion as a hoax. How perfect it will be if Kash's finding those "burn bags" in the FBI headquarters seals the fate of Schiff and all the dirty rotten scoundrels behind the conspiracy to destroy Trump.

Link: Shipwreckedcrew's port o'call Substack

Trump might want to go after Fox News as well as they called the 2020 election for Biden despite overwhelming evidence of the steal. It was only a few months ago the Murdoch was attempting to smear Trump with an Epstein story in the WSJ.

quote:

President Donald Trump proposed on Aug. 25 that his administration rename the Department of Defense to its previous name, the Department of War.

It has been my observation - and probably not the only one - that we haven't won a war since renaming that department. (There have been a few tactical victories, but nothing that made a lasting, positive change.)

quote:

Originally posted by TigerDore:

quote:

Originally posted by Lefty Sig:

Hard to believe he's done this much in the first 1/8 of his term.

Realistically, he has about 18 months to implement his agenda. Fortunately, he knows that and, even more fortunately, the man has the drive and stamina to get it done. And he possesses the "I don't give a damn what the critics say." strength that career politicians on the Right do not possess.

.

My hope, and I genuinely feel this will happen, is that Trump will make sure there is no Democrat steal in 2026 by pushing enough Republican states to gerrymander more seats to offset any losses. We control the supreme court and I believe they will block any Democrat attempt to gerrymander in response. At most Democrats will turn out to protest but the national guard deployments will curb most of the larger gatherings.

quote:

We control the supreme court

"We" do not "control" SCOTUS.

.

By we I mean a conservative majority.

^^^^^
Lisa Cook, the crook.

https://www.newsmax.com/ruddy/...dkt_nbr=010504l0oa9e

Ruddy: Trump's 'Talk Therapy' Works for Peace

In psychotherapy, one of the cardinal rules is simple: It's better to talk than not to talk.

Dialogue opens channels for understanding, and more often than not, solutions follow.

President Donald J. Trump has applied this principle to global diplomacy with remarkable success.

Nowhere is this clearer than in the ongoing crisis in Ukraine.

For sure, Trump's version of "talk therapy" has been a defining hallmark of his foreign policy, one that emphasizes direct engagement — even with adversaries — instead of the sterile silence that too often prevails.

The evidence of success with this strategy is compelling.

Trump has shown that breakthroughs begin not with ultimatums but with conversations.

Time and again, he has proved that speaking candidly, directly, and frequently is not a weakness, but a strength.

When Trump entered the scene with his second term, Russia and Ukraine weren't even at the same table.

Years of frozen hostility, punctuated by violence, had left the two nations with nothing but distrust and the bloodshed of over 1 million dead and wounded.

Under the Biden administration, diplomacy had ground to a halt.

Trump's first achievement was simple but hugely significant: He got both sides talking.

Today, Russian and Ukrainian officials meet and communicate with a regularity that was unthinkable before.

While a comprehensive peace deal hasn't materialized overnight — and no one should expect instant success in a conflict of this sort — the fact that dialogue exists at all is a monumental step forward.

Contrast this with the Biden years.

Contact between President Joe Biden and Russia's Vladimir Putin was virtually nonexistent, and that diplomatic frostiness trickled down to lower levels of engagement.

Silence, in this case, was not golden; it only deepened the gulf between the two sides.

Trump, by comparison, believes firmly in direct action and conversation.

After all, how can you strike an agreement if the parties won't even speak to each other?

Ukraine is not the first time Trump has relied on direct dialogue as a tool of statecraft.

Consider the near-perpetual conflict between India and Pakistan. While the region remains fraught, Trump's efforts helped de-escalate a crisis and potential nuclear conflict.

Pakistan was so appreciative of Trump's intervention, it has even nominated him for the Nobel Peace Prize.

Or take the Abraham Accords, one of the most remarkable achievements in modern Middle Eastern diplomacy.

By bringing Israel and several Arab nations to the table, Trump demonstrated that old hostilities could be set aside when dialogue was encouraged.

These agreements reshaped the landscape of the region, creating new opportunities for trade, security, and peace that would have seemed impossible just a few years earlier.

Even in the case of Iran, where Trump's outreach was met with rigid resistance, the principle of engagement held.

Trump repeatedly extended the opportunity for serious talks, but Tehran stubbornly refused to budge.

Their intransigence is now a cautionary tale for Putin and others: When Trump offers a deal, it is often the best chance to escape further isolation, or in the case of Iran's nuclear program "obliteration."

Trump has made no secret of his friendly approach with Russia.

He has presented Putin with what some describe as an "unbelievable deal."

The terms are bold: Russia keeps the land it stole, will likely see billions in frozen assets unlocked, and she regains full membership in the G7.

Putin's response, however, has been to retreat into the fog of history.

Instead of grabbing onto the here and now, he says an agreement must address the "historical roots" of the problem.

Not surprisingly, he traces Russia's grievances back to A.D. 862, when the Russia state began its initial formation with Kyiv as a power center.

It's an extraordinary stretch, one that reveals Putin's tendency to cloak aggression in the language of antiquity.

But Trump knows that Putin responds not only to words, but to strength.

Conversations must be coupled with leverage.

Last week, Trump signaled on the "Todd Starnes Show" that within two weeks he will have clarity on whether Putin is serious about peace.

If Putin fails to respond in a reasonable way, Trump clearly has alternatives, including bolstering Ukraine militarily — removing restrictions on advanced weaponry and stepping up arms deliveries.

Only changing the balance of power on the battlefield, I believe, will bring Putin to the negotiating table in earnest.

Trump's foreign policy is built on a simple but profound insight: People, and nations, resolve issues by talking them through. Psychotherapists know it, ordinary people know it, and now, thanks to Trump, global leaders are learning it too.

Whether in Ukraine, the Middle East, or South Asia, Trump has shown that dialogue is not weakness but wisdom.

His "talk therapy" approach may not yield instant cures, but it is a path to healing a fractured world.

Time and again, Donald Trump has demonstrated his talk approach works, even more so because it is backed up with action.

Fed governor Lisa Cook says she will not resign, the Washington Post reports, citing a statement from Cook.

“President Trump purported to fire me ‘for cause’ when no cause exists under the law, and he has no authority to do so,” Cook said through a spokeswoman: WaPo

“I will continue to carry out my duties to help the American economy as I have been doing since 2022,” Cook said

Fed Governor Cook Hires Hunter Biden's Lawyer As Trump 'Firing' Puts Powell Back In The Hot Seat

Update (0830ET): Mainstream media is abuzz this morning with the news of Trump's firing of Fed Governor Cook over her alleged mortgage cheating. Given that she has apparently refused to leave, this puts The Fed (and in particular Chair Powell) in an awkward position.

As Jim Bianco explains in a brief post on X:

If they allow her to continue with her duties as Fed Governor, starting this morning, and the courts find that the President does have the authority to fire her, even if it's months later during an appeal, anything she does on behalf of the Fed as a Governor starting today will not be valid.

And the Fed could be held responsible for allowing a non-employee to continue to act like an employee.

Restated, if the Fed allows her to stay and continue to be a Governor, and the court rules that Trump can fire her (again, even if it is later in an appeal), then Jay Powell has potentially committed a "for-cause" offense for which he could be fired.

(allowing a non-Fed employee to make decisions and policy on behalf of the Federal Reserve.)

Additionally, Cook has hired former first son Hunter Biden’s lawyer, Abbe Lowell, to represent her.

In a statement, Lowell vowed to take “whatever actions are needed” to stop what he described as Trump’s “illegal action.”

https://www.zerohedge.com/poli...er-opening-fed-board