BLOCKBUSTER 224 - 200 VOTE - Democrats Are Never Coming Back from This
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. House of Representatives approved its farm bill on Thursday with a vote of 224-200, marking the furthest advancement of such legislation in Congress since the last reauthorization in 2018. The bill includes comprehensive revisions to food and agriculture initiatives within a budget-neutral framework, addressing concerns from agricultural states about rising production costs, farm bankruptcies, and economic instability.
The successful vote followed weeks of pressure from Republicans in farming districts and advocacy organizations that stressed the need for updates to the 2018 policies. House Agriculture Chair G.T. Thompson (R-Pa.) had noted earlier in the week that producers are facing some of the toughest times since the 1980s farm crisis. Support from moderate and rural Democrats proved crucial for Republicans to secure the necessary votes for policy wins in agriculture-heavy regions ahead of the midterms.
“Although it’s not perfect, it’s something I plan to support,” Rep. Gabe Vasquez (D-N.M.) said in an interview ahead of the vote. “Overall, I think it’s a good bill. Clearly, we need to revisit some very serious concerns that many of us have, including myself, as it pertains to cutting some food assistance that we’ll be able to revise once we’re in the majority here in the House.”
Republican leaders had agreed earlier in the week to include a proposal allowing year-round E15 fuel sales, a move that drew opposition from senators in oil-producing states. To resolve the impasse, leaders separated the E15 provision for a standalone vote on May 13. As a result, the House farm bill cannot be forwarded to the Senate until that date.
The Senate has not yet introduced its version of the farm bill or set a schedule for consideration. Senate Agriculture Committee Chair John Boozman (R-Ark.) has indicated plans to remove some of the more controversial elements from the House package to build support for 60 votes. Boozman told reporters he aims to advance the legislation in “weeks, not months.”
Bipartisan negotiations on farm bills have historically stalled over issues such as climate-smart agriculture programs and funding for nutrition assistance. The Republican One Big Beautiful Bill Act earlier eliminated $187 billion from the nation’s largest food aid program and $65 billion from farmer support programs, moves that angered Democrats but enabled a budget-neutral agricultural bill this year.
Separately, House Republican leaders are also working to pass legislation that would fund all Department of Homeland Security agencies except immigration enforcement components. The measure could end the department’s 76-day partial shutdown. Speaker Mike Johnson has been consulting with members of his conference who prefer to delay action until a separate party-line plan funds agencies such as Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Border Patrol.
The Senate passed the partial DHS funding bill in March, but House GOP leaders have held off sending it to President Donald Trump for more than a month amid internal holdouts. The White House and some House Republicans are now urging Johnson to move the bill before lawmakers depart for a scheduled weeklong recess. While canceling the break remains an option, it is considered unlikely.
The farm bill vote reflects ongoing partisan divisions over agricultural policy, rural economic support, and the balance between fiscal restraint and program funding. The legislation’s future in the Senate remains uncertain given policy disagreements and the need for broader consensus. Observers note that the outcome could influence midterm positioning in rural districts, where agriculture remains a key economic driver. Both parties continue to emphasize the importance of supporting farmers while managing federal spending priorities.
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard Found The 'Smoking Gun' - Gabbard Has Just Revealed a Plot to Divert Ukraine Aid To...
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has declassified an intelligence summary that raises questions about whether U.S. taxpayer funds intended for Ukraine may have been part of a broader scheme to benefit Democratic political operations and then-President Joe Biden. The allegation is now under review after Gabbard requested a deeper examination of the underlying records by officials at the U.S. Agency for International Development.
The declassified document is a summary of raw intelligence intercepts collected by U.S. agencies in late 2022. Officials who reviewed the material said the allegation did not appear to receive significant follow-up inside the government at the time. According to the summary, the alleged plan involved using foreign aid channels as a political pipeline. The report claims Ukrainian officials and unspecified U.S. personnel working through USAID in Kyiv discussed funding an infrastructure project that would serve as a cover for redirecting money.
The summary states that the plan would provide hundreds of millions of U.S. taxpayer dollars to fund an infrastructure project for Ukraine that would be used as a cover to send approximately 90 percent of funds allocated to the Democratic National Committee to support Joe Biden’s reelection campaign. It further notes that the project would be funded initially, even though at some time in the future the project would be disapproved as unnecessary. At that point, the money would already be allocated and impossible to return or use for a different purpose.
The summary said the alleged plan relied on subcontracting layers to make tracking funds difficult. Officials said two American subcontractors were referenced in the intercepts, but their names remain redacted in the declassified version. The plan included details of how subcontractors would be funded through U.S. companies so that how the funds were spent and allocated would be difficult to track. Additionally, contracts would be executed that would be difficult to verify.
Gabbard asked officials at USAID to conduct a review of contracts, payments, and internal communications tied to the claims. The effort could lead to a criminal referral to the Federal Bureau of Investigation if supporting evidence is found. Officials familiar with the matter said Gabbard’s team has not identified evidence that the Biden administration fully investigated the claims at the time. Those officials said the intercepts are also not tied to Russian disinformation efforts.
The allegations come at a sensitive time for Ukraine as President Volodymyr Zelenskyy continues negotiations with envoys from President Donald Trump aimed at ending the war with Russia. Ukraine has faced ongoing scrutiny over corruption concerns even as it receives continued Western support. The declassified summary has prompted calls for greater transparency in how foreign aid is monitored and accounted for by U.S. agencies.
Separately, President Trump commented over the weekend that Gabbard has a “softer” stance than he does on Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon. He added that he still has confidence in his director of national intelligence. “I would say that I am very strong on the fact that I don’t want Iran to have a nuclear weapon because if they had a nuclear weapon they’d use it immediately. I think she’s probably a little softer on that issue, but that’s okay. Some people are,” Trump told reporters on Air Force One. “Most people aren’t. Most people are saying thank you very much for doing what you did.” When asked whether he still has confidence in Gabbard, Trump responded, “Yeah, sure. I mean she’s a little bit different in her thought process than me, but that doesn’t make somebody not available to serve.”
The developments reflect ongoing debates over foreign aid oversight, intelligence handling, and the intersection of national security policy with domestic political considerations. The declassified summary has not been independently verified in full, and no formal charges have been filed based on its contents. The review requested by Gabbard is expected to examine whether any improper diversion occurred and whether existing safeguards were sufficient to prevent such activity.
Legal and policy experts note that foreign aid programs have historically faced scrutiny for accountability, particularly during periods of rapid disbursement such as the response to the war in Ukraine. The Biden administration had defended its aid packages as critical to countering Russian aggression and supporting a key partner. The current review could influence future congressional oversight of similar assistance programs.
As the situation develops, Congress and the executive branch continue to monitor Ukraine-related funding and intelligence matters closely. The declassified summary adds to the public record on how aid was managed and whether any irregularities occurred. Further updates are anticipated as the USAID review proceeds and any potential referrals are evaluated by federal authorities.
'SICK!' - Senate Democrat Arrested for Threatening President Trump...
WASHINGTON, D.C. — An Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, man running as a Democrat for the U.S. Senate has been arrested on accusations of making threats to kill President Donald Trump and a member of Congress. Raymond Chandler was taken into custody Friday morning by FBI agents in Pittsburgh, along with the United States Secret Service.
Court documents filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania outline the alleged threatening statements authorities say Chandler made. According to the affidavit, Chandler reportedly left an unidentified member of Congress a voicemail on April 18 in which he asked the person to think about how 1,000 people would “pull you out of your house and they slit your throat and they slit your daughter’s throat and they slit everyone’s throat.” The affidavit states he followed that up by saying this must happen because “wealth concentration has gotten so bad in this country.”
The filing also notes that on April 29, Chandler left another voicemail to an unidentified member of Congress, saying, “I want you to put that firearm to the President’s head, and I want you to pull the trigger and I want you to kill him.” He then described President Trump as “a liar among all liars. He’s a great deceiver. He’s the antichrist.”
The congressmember’s representatives eventually reached out to authorities after Chandler’s voicemails became increasingly violent in rhetoric aimed at Trump, members of Congress, and ICE. Just hours before his arrest, Chandler posted a YouTube video as part of his campaign for the U.S. Senate seat in Pennsylvania. In the video, titled “It’s Time to Tax the Billionaires,” he announced his intention to challenge Senator John Fetterman in the 2028 election.
His campaign website outlines a range of progressive priorities, including taxing billionaires, expanding social programs, regulating Big Tech, and abolishing ICE—positions that are widely discussed within the Democratic Party. The arrest has drawn attention to the broader issue of threats against public officials and the security challenges faced by those in high office.
The incident comes amid heightened concerns about political violence following the recent attempted breach at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. Cole Tomas Allen, 31, of Torrance, California, remains in custody facing charges including attempted assassination of the president after allegedly trying to reach the ballroom where Trump was attending the event with Cabinet officials and journalists. Prosecutors have described Allen’s actions as a clear attempt to assassinate the president and target high-ranking administration members.
Federal authorities continue to investigate Chandler’s case. The FBI and Secret Service have not released additional details beyond confirming the arrest. Legal experts note that threats against the president and members of Congress are taken extremely seriously under federal law, often leading to swift protective measures and prosecution.
The developments reflect ongoing challenges related to political rhetoric, public safety, and the protection of elected officials. Both parties have condemned threats of violence, emphasizing the need for civil discourse in the political process. The case is expected to move through the federal court system in the Western District of Pennsylvania, where Chandler faces potential charges tied to the alleged threats.
As the investigation proceeds, attention remains focused on ensuring the safety of public servants and addressing the root causes of such incidents. The arrest of a candidate in a high-profile Senate race adds another layer to the national conversation about political extremism and accountability. Further updates are anticipated as court proceedings advance and more information becomes available from federal authorities.
Trump Tells Them Look Out The Window Right Before He Destroyed...
WASHINGTON, D.C. — President Donald Trump stated during a Monday press conference that he ordered the destruction of a newly constructed bridge in Iran after U.S. negotiators reported that Iranian counterparts had broken a previous agreement aimed at ending the conflict. U.S. forces carried out the strike last Thursday on the B1 Bridge in the city of Karaj, described as one of the largest infrastructure projects in West Asia and scheduled to open later this year.
Iranian sources reported that civilians were gathered nearby marking the final day of Nowruz celebrations when the strike occurred. Initial accounts indicated at least eight people were killed and approximately 100 others injured, though independent verification of casualty figures has been limited. Trump told reporters he had been informed the Iranians were reneging on the deal and instructed negotiators to tell them to “look out their window and watch.” He said the bridge was destroyed within 10 minutes of his order.
The president shared video of the strike on his Truth Social platform, writing that the bridge was “never to be used again” and warning Iran that “much more” could follow if a deal was not reached. He described the action as part of broader U.S. and Israeli operations that he said had destroyed Tehran’s military capabilities and were nearing completion of core strategic objectives.
U.S. military officials described the bridge as a legitimate target because it would have allowed Iran to transport weapons and other war-making capabilities to the western part of the country. Democrats and left-wing media outlets, however, have criticized the strike as a potential war crime under provisions of international law and the Geneva Convention, which prohibit the deliberate targeting of civilian infrastructure.
The strike occurred amid ongoing tensions and a temporary ceasefire that the Trump administration has described as holding, with no direct exchanges of fire between the U.S. and Iran since April 7. A senior administration official told the Associated Press that hostilities had terminated for purposes of the War Powers Resolution. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth argued that the ceasefire paused the 60-day clock under the resolution.
Iran has rejected U.S. ceasefire demands, including a requirement to fully reopen the Strait of Hormuz to civilian tanker and shipping traffic. Iranian officials have threatened to impose fees on ships using the strait and have claimed to carry out fresh strikes on a ship in the Gulf and Saudi industrial facilities linked to U.S. firms. A senior Iranian source told Reuters that Tehran would only begin talks on a lasting peace after the U.S. and Israel end their strikes, provide guarantees they will not resume, and offer compensation for damages.
Trump has set a deadline tied to reopening oil transit through the Strait of Hormuz, warning that failure to comply could trigger large-scale strikes on Iranian infrastructure, including bridges and power plants. He has repeatedly stated that American forces will hit Iran “extremely hard” over the next 2–3 weeks if necessary, while also expressing openness to negotiations.
The developments have intensified partisan divisions in Washington. Senate Democrats have attempted multiple times to force a War Powers Resolution vote to end U.S. involvement, arguing that the operations lack congressional authorization. Republicans have largely supported the president’s actions, emphasizing the need for decisive leadership on national security.
The bridge strike comes amid a series of U.S.-Israeli operations that the administration says have degraded Iran’s military capabilities. Iranian state media has framed the attacks as unlawful and criminal, while condemning the targeting of civilian infrastructure. The incident has also raised concerns about civilian casualties during a major cultural holiday period.
As the situation evolves, attention remains focused on whether the current ceasefire can lead to a longer-term agreement or if further military action will be required. The administration has maintained that its objectives are being met and that Iran must choose between continued conflict or a negotiated resolution that serves U.S. interests and regional stability.
The episode underscores ongoing debates over executive authority in military matters, the role of Congress under the War Powers Resolution, and the balance between national security imperatives and humanitarian considerations. Both sides of the political aisle continue to monitor developments closely as the May 1 deadline under the War Powers Resolution approaches.
Mitch McConnell's Replacement Revealed After Senate Vote - President Donald Trump Notified
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The top three Republican candidates vying to replace longtime U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell took the stage Monday night at the Henry Clay event center in downtown Louisville for the first Republican primary debate. McConnell, a Republican who has represented Kentucky in the Senate since 1985, announced earlier this year that he would not seek reelection in 2026 after more than 40 years in office, creating the first open Senate seat in the state in years.
Rep. Andy Barr, former Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron, and businessman Nate Morris are competing in the Republican primary, which is among this year’s most competitive races. All three candidates expressed strong support for President Donald Trump, hoping to secure his endorsement in a state that Trump carried overwhelmingly in the past three presidential elections.
The debate provided voters an opportunity to hear the candidates discuss their positions on key issues and outline their priorities as the Republican primary campaign intensifies. At one point, the candidates were asked about Trump’s military actions against Iran and at what point Congress should become involved.
Barr, who voted against a recent War Powers Act resolution seeking to limit the president, stated that the president has the legal authority as commander in chief to defend the country, while Congress has the power to declare war but not to prevent the president from advancing national security. He argued that the resolution would have sent a dangerous signal and been a gift to adversaries, adding that the objectives are being achieved.
Cameron took a similar stance, contrasting Trump’s decisive action with what he described as the red lines and disastrous evacuation from Afghanistan under previous administrations. He expressed gratitude for Trump’s leadership on Iran and referenced actions against Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, calling Trump on the right track for national security.
Morris said it was simple: he trusts President Trump because of the results he has delivered for the American people and stands by him 100 percent. He described Trump’s approach as surgical and tactical in dealing with foreign governments and emphasized the need for a senator willing to vote with the president and have his back on foreign policy.
The candidates were also asked about Trump’s aggressive enforcement of immigration laws. Cameron said people in neighborhoods want to sleep soundly in their homes and highlighted the importance of deporting violent criminals. He called for withholding federal funding from sanctuary states and cities.
Morris advocated for a full moratorium on new immigration until every illegal immigrant who entered under the previous administration is deported, stating that the country was invaded and all must go back, with no taxpayer money given to illegals.
Barr said he has tripled ICE funding and supported the toughest border security in history because the American people must be protected first.
The debate highlighted the candidates’ alignment with Trump on both foreign policy and immigration, key issues in a state where Trump has dominated recent presidential elections. McConnell’s retirement has opened the race, drawing significant interest as Republicans seek to maintain their hold on the seat. The primary is expected to be competitive, with the winner likely to face a Democrat in the general election in November.
Political observers note that the candidates’ unanimous support for Trump’s positions reflects the political reality in Kentucky, where Trump has carried the state by wide margins. The debate comes as the Republican primary campaign ramps up, with voters evaluating the contenders on their ability to carry forward conservative priorities.
The open seat has drawn national attention, as it represents one of the few truly competitive opportunities in the Senate map for 2026. All three candidates positioned themselves as strong conservatives who would back Trump’s agenda if elected. The debate was the first of what is expected to be several forums before the primary.
May you like
The results of the Kentucky primary could have implications for the balance of power in the Senate. Republicans currently hold the majority, and maintaining or expanding that edge remains a central goal heading into the midterms. The candidates’ emphasis on national security and border enforcement mirrors broader Republican messaging nationwide.
Further debates and campaign events are anticipated in the coming months as the primary season progresses. The winner of the Republican primary will be heavily favored in the general election given the state’s political leanings, making the primary the most critical contest for the seat.
