INVESTIGATIONS

Wait, What? If There Was No Epstein Client List Then Why Did NY Courts Refuse The Gateway Pundit’s Request for the List Based on an Anonymous ‘John Doe’ Who Was On the List?

July 6, 2025 Ogghy Filed Under: Gateway Pundit, INVESTIGATIONS

Why did the courts deny The Gateway Pundit a copy of Epstein’s client list based on an anonymous John Doe who was on the list?

On Sunday night the Department of Justice and FBI released a document that concluded that notorious child predator Jeffrey Epstein did not have a “client list” and that he was not murdered but committed suicide.

The FBI released a video that shows an empty hallway in what they insist proves Epstein committed suicide.

The FBI memo says there is no evidence that Epstein blackmailed powerful political figures.

Additionally, the memo suggests that no further Epstein records will be released.

Here is a copy of the letter that was released by the DOJ and FBI on Sunday night.

page 1

page 2

This latest development in the Epstein case came as a complete shock to millions of Americans who have been following the story of this notorious ped0file of the rich and famous.

But this is a completely different story we were told by the courts back in 2022.

In July 2022, The Gateway Pundit reported on our legal efforts to unseal the list of Jeffrey Epstein’s sex clients – the men and women with whom Epstein traded sex with minors for favors or money or both.

Stunningly, at that time in 2022, no media outlet in the country had petitioned the Court to unseal the identities of Epstein’s Clients.

It was almost like corporate media was protecting the disgusting sexual abusers, simply because the victims alleged Epstein’s clients consisted of powerful businessmen, politicians, former presidents and prime ministers, and other world leaders.

Back in July 2022, The Gateway Pundit lawyers Marc Randazza and Jay Wolman of the Randazza Legal Group, along with GP General Counsel John Burns filed a motion to intervene in the Guiffre v. Maxwell case in the United States District Court for the District of New York.

GP asked the Court to unseal all records identifying Epstein’s sex clients.

TGP lawyers moved to intervene in the Ghislaine Maxwell case in the Southern District of New York.

However, in August 2022, something truly bizarre and unexpected happened.

An anonymous John Doe—literally styled by his lawyer as “John Doe”—filed an objection to TGP unsealing the sex client list … and the Court SIDED WITH THE JOHN DOE over the interests of the press and public to know what happened in one of the most remarkable court cases in US history.

What possible reason could John Doe have for not wanting the Epstein Sex Client List exposed?

We were very curious about Mr. John Doe. Who is this person and why is he the lone person fighting to keep the Epstein client list hidden from public view? What is his connection to Epstein? Why did the court side with this anonymous and powerful power player?

We were unsuccessful in our appeal and further attempts to gain access of the Epstein client list.

This brings us to today… How can the courts deny our request for the Epstein client list in 2022 based on the wishes of an anonymous John Doe and then today the DOJ tells us there is no Epstein client list?

Something is not adding up!

The post Wait, What? If There Was No Epstein Client List Then Why Did NY Courts Refuse The Gateway Pundit’s Request for the List Based on an Anonymous ‘John Doe’ Who Was On the List? appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

The Constitutional Case That DESTROYS Liberal Claims About Trump’s Immigration Authority

July 6, 2025 Ogghy Filed Under: Gateway Pundit, INVESTIGATIONS

President Trump and the border Patrol. Photo courtesy of The White House

Liberal politicians and mainstream media outlets have repeatedly claimed that President Trump lacks the authority to enforce immigration law or deploy ICE agents to remove illegal aliens.

These claims are completely demolished by over 130 years of constitutional law, Supreme Court precedent, and explicit congressional authorization.

The Constitution provides MULTIPLE sources of authority for immigration enforcement. Article I, Section 8, Clause 4, known as the Naturalization Clause, states, “The Congress shall have Power… to establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization…” and the Supreme Court has ruled this gives Congress sweeping power over immigration policy, which the President must then enforce. Article I, Section 8, Clause 18, the Necessary and Proper Clause, declares “To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers…”

This enables Congress to pass laws necessary to enforce immigration authority, including creating ICE and authorizing enforcement operations! Article II, Section 1 vests ALL “executive power” in the President, and the Supreme Court has repeatedly confirmed this includes immigration enforcement as a core executive function that cannot be stripped away by liberal resistance.

Article II, Section 3 contains the “Take Care Clause,” which doesn’t just allow but REQUIRES that the President “shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.”

This is a constitutional command, not a suggestion. When Congress passes immigration laws, the President has a constitutional duty to enforce them.

In Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that the Take Care Clause requires the President to enforce congressional statutes “and repudiates any notion that he may dispense with the law’s execution,” as President Biden did. Every immigration law passed by Congress MUST be enforced, period.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed that immigration control is an inherent sovereign power. In Nishimura Ekiu v. United States from 1892, the Court declared, “It is an accepted maxim of international law that every sovereign nation has the power, as inherent in sovereignty, and essential to self-preservation, to forbid the entrance of foreigners within its dominions.”

In Harisiades v. Shaughnessy from 1952, the Court ruled that the “traditional power of the Nation over the alien” is “a power inherent in every sovereign state.”

Most recently, in Trump v. Hawaii from 2018, the Court reaffirmed that “For more than a century, this Court has recognized that the admission and exclusion of foreign nationals is a ‘fundamental sovereign attribute exercised by the Government’s political departments.’”

Article VI establishes federal supremacy in immigration matters. The Supreme Court has held that states cannot independently regulate immigration because it is exclusively a federal power.

This same principle means that federal immigration enforcement, when conducted pursuant to federal law, supersedes any conflicting state or local policies.

The Immigration and Nationality Act, passed by Congress and signed into law, gives immigration officers sweeping powers. Section 287(a) gives ICE agents the power to interrogate any alien about their legal status, arrest without a warrant for immigration violations, patrol borders and conduct searches, and serve administrative warrants.

Section 287(g) DESTROYS Sanctuary City Arguments by explicitly authorizing ICE to partner with state and local law enforcement. As of July 2025, ICE has 777 active agreements with agencies across 40 states, and that number keeps growing.

For over 130 years, the Supreme Court has made one thing clear: immigration is an exclusive federal power.

In U.S. v. Curtiss-Wright (1936), the Court recognized the president’s inherent authority over foreign affairs and borders, no act of Congress needed.

In Arizona v. United States (2012), the Court ruled that federal law preempts state immigration laws because immigration is a sovereign federal function. This appears to invalidate the concept of sanctuary cities and states.

The Court created the “plenary power doctrine,” giving Congress full authority over immigration. In Kleindienst v. Mandel (1972), the Court upheld Congress’s unlimited power to regulate alien entry.

In Demore v. Kim (2003), it ruled that immigration laws can treat aliens differently than citizens, so standard constitutional challenges don’t apply.

Congress just approved $170 billion for immigration enforcement in 2025. That includes $45B for detention, $29.9B for ICE operations, $46.5B for the wall, and $13.5B for state/local reimbursements. You don’t get record funding for something that’s illegal.

This isn’t new. Clinton demanded stronger enforcement in his 1995 State of the Union. The 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act had bipartisan support.

So did the Secure Fence Act of 2006. Immigration enforcement has always been American policy. Trump’s just the first to actually enforce it.

Liberal legal arguments collapse under basic facts. Due process applies to how removal is done, not whether ICE can arrest or detain.

Many illegal aliens can be removed through expedited procedures without full hearings, including those who overstay visas, are caught at the border, arrive without proper documentation, or have been previously deported and returned illegally.

Immigration is a federal matter. Article VI’s Supremacy Clause makes that law binding nationwide. Liberals keep suing, and losing. Courts have upheld ICE’s authority, executive enforcement, detention, and removal.

Section 287(g) allows voluntary state cooperation, but the federal government doesn’t need it. States can’t block ICE. Local officials don’t have veto power over federal law.

The post The Constitutional Case That DESTROYS Liberal Claims About Trump’s Immigration Authority appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Flaws in 150 Years of Global Temperature Data Blow Holes in Global Warming Narrative

July 6, 2025 Ogghy Filed Under: Gateway Pundit, INVESTIGATIONS

Photo: U.S. Forest Service firefighters battle a California wildfire. Text added by Antonio Graceffo. Original image in the public domain.

As justification for their climate crisis hysteria, liberals keep insisting that average global temperatures have risen, with the most commonly cited figure being a 1.1°C to 1.3°C (2.0°F to 2.3°F) increase since the pre-industrial era (1850–1900). The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), however, begins its “reliable” records in 1880 and reports an increase of about 1.1°C (2.0°F) since then. Even NOAA acknowledges the limitations of early data, stating, “Earth’s surface temperature has risen about 2 degrees Fahrenheit since the start of the NOAA record in 1850.”

But these claims rest on flawed foundations. Ninety-six percent of U.S. temperature stations fail to meet NOAA’s own siting standards and are often surrounded by development, resulting in inflated readings from the urban heat island effect. The transition from mercury thermometers to digital sensors between the 1980s and 2000s introduced discontinuities in the data, right during the period of supposed accelerated warming. Early measurements were geographically concentrated in Europe and North America, ignoring vast regions, especially the 71% of the planet covered by oceans.

Measurement errors of ±0.5°C often exceed the very climate signals being used to justify sweeping policy changes. Worse still, much of the raw data has been adjusted or “homogenized” using subjective assumptions that can introduce as much bias as the trends being studied. These problems, taken together, undermine the precision required to detect the small temperature changes that underpin today’s aggressive climate agenda.

Approximately 96 percent of temperature stations used to measure climate change fail to meet the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s own standards for “acceptable” and uncorrupted placement. This finding comes from Anthony Watts’ Surface Stations Project, documented in multiple studies including “Corrupted Climate Stations: The Official U.S. Surface Temperature Record Remains Fatally Flawed.”

Watts and his team of volunteers found stations “located next to the exhaust fans of air conditioning units, surrounded by asphalt parking lots and roads, on blistering-hot rooftops, and near sidewalks and buildings that absorb and radiate heat.” Even more troubling, data from properly sited stations show “a rate of warming in the United States reduced by almost half compared to all stations.” This suggests that a significant portion of reported warming may be artificial, created by poor measurement practices rather than actual climate change.

One of the most persistent flaws in the temperature record is the urban heat island effect. Many weather stations originally placed in rural areas during the 1800s and early 1900s are now surrounded by urban development. Cities generate heat through concrete absorption, reduced vegetation, and dense human activity, producing temperature readings that are consistently 2–5°F warmer than nearby rural areas. This is not speculation, it’s basic physics.

Urban surfaces retain heat differently than natural landscapes, and as development grew around these stations, they began measuring the heat of human expansion rather than natural climate conditions. The result is an artificial warming trend unrelated to global climate change.

Economist Ross McKitrick’s peer-reviewed research, published in journals like Climate Dynamics, exposes another troubling trend: socioeconomic signals in temperature data. If these measurements were purely reflecting climate, no such patterns should exist. Instead, McKitrick found correlations between economic growth and recorded warming, indicating that long-term temperature trends may be partially driven by the development occurring around measurement sites, not by the climate itself.

Perhaps the most damning analysis comes from Stanford researcher Patrick Frank, whose statistical analysis reveals that “the average annual systematic measurement uncertainty is ±0.5°C, which completely vitiates centennial climate warming at the 95% confidence interval.” In practical terms, this means the measurement errors are larger than the climate changes being measured. Frank concludes that “we cannot reject the hypothesis that the world’s temperature has not changed at all.”

The transition from analog mercury thermometers to digital electronic sensors is one of the most significant discontinuities in the 150-year global temperature record. Before digitalization, temperatures were measured using mercury-in-glass thermometers, read manually by observers at specific times each day. In contrast, modern digital systems use electronic sensors that continuously sample temperatures, have different thermal response characteristics, and rely on automated data processing. This means the measurements taken with digital systems are dramatically more accurate and more complete than those collected manually using mercury thermometers.

In the United States, digital sensors began replacing analog instruments in the 1980s, rendering direct comparisons with earlier U.S. records unreliable. Globally, digital systems weren’t widely adopted until the 1990s and 2000s, making comparisons between U.S. and international temperature data invalid prior to full global standardization.

Early temperature records suffered from severe geographic bias. Measurements were heavily concentrated in Europe and North America, with vast regions including most oceans, polar areas, Africa, and Asia having sparse or no data. Ocean temperatures, covering 71% of Earth’s surface, were particularly poorly measured before the 1950s. This creates a fundamental sampling problem. Scientists attempting to calculate “global” temperature averages were actually working with data from a small fraction of the planet, then extrapolating to represent the entire Earth. The assumption that well-documented European and North American weather patterns represent global conditions is scientifically questionable.

To address acknowledged measurement problems, scientists apply extensive “corrections” and adjustments to raw temperature data through a process called homogenization. However, these adjustments involve assumptions and subjective decisions that can introduce their own biases.

Different research groups using different adjustment methods arrive at different temperature trends from the same raw data. The magnitude of these adjustments is often comparable to the climate signals being studied. When the corrections applied to data are as large as the trends being measured, the measurements lose all meaning.

Regardless of accusations that “climate deniers” are rejecting science, the implications of these flaws are serious. Trillions of dollars in policy decisions are being based on temperature records in which measurement errors exceed the very climate trends they claim to show.

The post Flaws in 150 Years of Global Temperature Data Blow Holes in Global Warming Narrative appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Gang of foreign nationals gets away with jewelry store heist; a month later they try again — but this time cops are ready

July 6, 2025 Ogghy Filed Under: INVESTIGATIONS, The Blaze

Police in Glendale, Calif., said they responded to a burglary on May 27 at Bidrussian Jewelry and discovered that a hole had been cut through the roof of the business, and an unknown amount of jewelry had been stolen.

No suspects were in custody at the time, police said.

Police said all of the apprehended suspects are foreign nationals believed to be involved in similar crimes in their own countries and in the United States.

Detectives then set out to identify possible suspects, police said, adding that with assistance from local agencies they began surveillance on the group.

Finally on Sunday evening, police said investigators got a lead indicating that the suspects were preparing to target another jewelry store — this time Rodeo Jewelers in the city of La Verne.

Turns out, it was the same M.O.

The suspects tried to gain entry to the store through the roof, police said, but this time law enforcement was ready for them.

Eight suspects were observed at the scene, police said, adding that seven were successfully apprehended with the assistance of local agencies, including the La Verne Police Department, Claremont Police Department, Glendora Police Department, and deputies from the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s San Dimas Station.

The status of the eighth suspect isn’t clear.

Police said the suspects used signal jammers and cut wires to the location during the incident.

Image source: Glendale (Calif.) Police

Police said all of the apprehended suspects are foreign nationals believed to be involved in similar crimes in their own countries and in the United States.

The arrested males appear below in a composite photo from Glendale police. According to KTLA-TV, they are: (top row, L to R) Edson Gonzalez, Victor Iturriaga Lopez, Cristian Gonzalez Aburto, Jose Millafil; (bottom row, L to R) Luka Pazitiani, Vera Matias, Javier Sepulveda.

Image source: Glendale (Calif.) Police

Police said all of them were in Glendale Police custody as of Tuesday.

Those with information regarding this case can contact the Glendale Police Department’s Burglary Unit at 818-548-3127.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

PBS’s Barron-Lopez Teams Up With Liberal ‘Non-Partisans’ to Bash Trump’s Budget Bill

July 6, 2025 Ogghy Filed Under: INVESTIGATIONS, Newsbusters

As President Trump’s big budget bill neared a crucial vote in the Senate on Monday, PBS News Hour’s most biased reporter, Laura Barron-Lopez, covered only one side of a critical part of the bill federal health care spending on Medicare and Medicaid.

The sole guest for the segment not only represented a liberal health group, KFF (previously known as the Kaiser Family Foundation), but misleadingly assured viewers that the group was “nonpartisan.” As “nonpartisan” as you can be while still publishing policy briefs titled “10 Key Data Points About the Experiences of LGBT+ Women and Their Access to Care” which use the term “cisgender” unironically.

Amna Nawaz, co-host: Recent changes made by Senate Republicans to President Trump’s budget bill would cut roughly $1.1 trillion in health care spending over the next decade. That’s according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. Our White House correspondent, Laura Barron-Lopez, is here now with more on the bill’s impact for millions of Americans.

Barron-Lopez emphasized the negative.

Laura Barron–Lopez: Amna, that Congressional Budget Office estimate also found the bill would result in 11.8 million people losing health insurance by 2034, the vast majority of those cuts hitting Medicaid. To discuss this, I’m joined by Larry Levitt, executive vice president for health policy at the nonpartisan KFF….So the Senate Republicans made a number of changes recently to this bill, and this bill would make the largest cuts to Medicaid in the history of the program. If Republicans end up passing it, what is the real-world impact for people who could lose coverage?

Levitt’s no “nonpartisan” source. His new op-ed at the New York Times states “Democrats will be able to point out that Republicans have just voted for the biggest health care cutbacks ever.”

Larry Levitt: That’s right. This would be the biggest cut to Medicaid, in fact, the biggest cut to health care in history. And that number that the Congressional Budget Office has put out, that 11.8 million more people would be uninsured, really tells the story here. I mean, it’s low-income kids. It’s adults who are working, but don’t have health insurance through their jobs. It’s people with disabilities. It’s seniors who need help paying their Medicare premiums or who are in nursing homes. Medicare does not cover nursing home or long-term care, so it’s really Medicaid that ends up picking up the slack there….

Barron–Lopez: President Trump and Republicans have repeatedly claimed that part of this is about kicking undocumented migrants off of Medicaid. Today, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt claimed that that would total some 1.4 million undocumented people. What’s the reality here? And are undocumented immigrants eligible for Medicaid?

Levitt: No, the reality is undocumented immigrants are not eligible for any federally funded program, whether that’s Medicaid, Medicare, or the Affordable Care Act….

The phrase they’re looking for is “illegal immigrants.”

Barron-Lopez worked overtime to minimize any potentially potent GOP talking points about fraud in federal medical spending, inviting her liberal guest to neutralize the problem of health care fraud.

Barron–Lopez: As Republicans are trying to message and sell these cuts to Medicaid, the Trump administration announced today that it filed criminal charges in health care fraud schemes involving more than $14.6 billion. Where does health care fraud typically occur? And can you put today’s announcement in context for us?

Levitt: ….That fraud is generally perpetrated by rogue health care providers who are billing for services that they don’t provide. Fraud in Medicaid is not being perpetrated by individual enrollees trying to get access to health care. Republicans have tried to frame the cuts in this reconciliation bill as eliminating fraud, waste, and abuse. But there is just not a trillion in fraud, waste, and abuse in Medicaid. And, in fact, there is very little in this bill that would actually go after the kind of fraud that the Justice Department announced today.

Despite such coverage pressing down on the “No” side, the bill squeaked through the Senate on Tuesday 51-50 on a tie-breaking vote by Vice President Vance.

This wholly anti-Trump budget segment was brought to you in part by Raymond James.

A transcript is available, click “Expand.”

PBS News Hour

6/30/25

7:33:29 p.m. (ET)

Amna Nawaz: Recent changes made by Senate Republicans to President Trump’s budget bill would cut roughly $1.1 trillion in health care spending over the next decade. That’s according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

Our White House correspondent, Laura Barron – Lopez, is here now with more on the bill’s impact for millions of Americans.

To discuss this, I’m joined by Larry Levitt, executive vice president for health policy at the nonpartisan KFF.

Mr. Levitt, thanks so much for joining us today.

Larry Levitt, Executive Vice President For Health Policy, KFF: Thanks for having me.

Laura Barron – Lopez: So the Senate Republicans made a number of changes recently to this bill, and this bill would make the largest cuts to Medicaid in the history of the program. If Republicans end up passing it, what is the real-world impact for people who could lose coverage?

Larry Levitt: That’s right. This would be the biggest cut to Medicaid, in fact, the biggest cut to health care in history.

And that number that the Congressional Budget Office has put out, that 11.8 million more people would be uninsured, really tells the story here. I mean, it’s low-income kids. It’s adults who are working, but don’t have health insurance through their jobs. It’s people with disabilities. It’s seniors who need help paying their Medicare premiums or who are in nursing homes. Medicare does not cover nursing home or long-term care, so it’s really Medicaid that ends up picking up the slack there.

I mean, this would roll back many of the gains that the Affordable Care Act or Obamacare has succeeded in reducing the number of people with health insurance. And many more people would find themselves uninsured and without access to health care.

Laura Barron – Lopez: President Trump and Republicans have repeatedly claimed that part of this is about kicking undocumented migrants off of Medicaid. Today, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt claimed that that would total some 1.4 million undocumented people.

What’s the reality here? And are undocumented immigrants eligible for Medicaid?

Larry Levitt: No, the reality is undocumented immigrants are not eligible for any federally funded program, whether that’s Medicaid, Medicare, or the Affordable Care Act.

Some states have used their own money to provide health care to undocumented immigrants, and there was a proposal in this bill to cut off federal funding, to reduce the amount of federal funding for Medicaid to those states to effectively penalize them for using their own funds to cover undocumented immigrants.

Laura Barron – Lopez: As Republicans are trying to message and sell these cuts to Medicaid, the Trump administration announced today that it filed criminal charges in health care fraud schemes involving more than $14.6 billion.

Where does health care fraud typically occur? And can you put today’s announcement in context for us?

Larry Levitt: Yes, I think this action by the Justice Department really illustrates what kind of fraud we see in programs like Medicaid. That fraud is generally perpetrated by rogue health care providers who are billing for services that they don’t provide.

Fraud in Medicaid is not being perpetrated by individual enrollees trying to get access to health care. Republicans have tried to frame the cuts in this reconciliation bill as eliminating fraud, waste, and abuse. But there is just not a trillion in fraud, waste, and abuse in Medicaid. And, in fact, there is very little in this bill that would actually go after the kind of fraud that the Justice Department announced today.

Laura Barron – Lopez: I want to drill down a little bit more on the changes that Senate Republicans have made to this bill. First, one change puts a new cap on taxes for medical providers. This cap is something that GOP senators like North Carolina’s Thom Tillis strongly oppose.

And that Republican Senator Tillis called the Medicaid cuts a betrayal. He said that President Trump was being advised by amateurs. What are provider taxes exactly and how do they help states pay for Medicaid cuts?

Larry Levitt: Yes, this gets super complicated super fast, and I will try to explain it simply.

States put taxes on hospitals to help fund their share of Medicaid expenses. And states in turn use that revenue to then increase the rates they pay hospitals for care they provide to Medicaid enrollees to ensure those rates are adequate. And because the federal government shares in the cost of Medicaid, that brings additional federal money into states.

So really the bottom line is these taxes on hospitals, which sounds like something hospitals wouldn’t like, are actually a way of ensuring that hospitals get adequate rates to provide care for Medicaid enrollees. And that’s especially true in rural areas. And many rural hospitals are operating right on the edge. And without these taxes, without adequate rates for providing care under Medicaid, those hospitals could go under.

Laura Barron – Lopez: This bill already created work requirements for Medicaid for the first time in the program’s history, but the Senate added even stricter work requirements. What are those and what effect could they have?

Larry Levitt: That’s right.

And work requirements are the biggest source of cuts in this bill. And it’s an idea that I think resonates with a lot of people that people should have to work in order to qualify for public benefits like Medicaid. The reality is, most Medicaid enrollees are already working. About two-thirds of them are working. And if you look at the kind of exemptions that people would qualify for, in fact, 92 percent of adults on Medicaid are either working or would likely qualify for an exemption.

But this work requirement would still save a lot of money and kick millions of people off of Medicaid, not because they’re not working or not qualified for an exemption, but because they would fail to navigate the paperwork, the red tape they would have to go through to report their work on, potentially as often as a monthly basis.

Laura Barron – Lopez: Larry Levitt of KFF, thank you for your time.

Larry Levitt: Thank you.

President Trump Responds to Elon Musk Creating His Own Political Party: ‘I Think it’s Ridiculous’ (VIDEO)

July 6, 2025 Ogghy Filed Under: Gateway Pundit, INVESTIGATIONS

President Donald Trump has responded to Elon Musk creating a new political party, saying, “I think it’s ridiculous.”

Trump was asked about Musk’s effort on Sunday, just hours after the X owner formally filed a statement of organization with the Federal Election Commission to launch his “America Party,” as The Gateway Pundit reported earlier in the day.

“I think it’s ridiculous to start a third party,” Trump said. “We have a tremendous success with the Republican Party. The Democrats have lost their way, but it’s always been a two-party system, and I think starting a third party just adds confusion.”

Trump noted that third parties have “never worked.”

“So, he can have fun with it, but I think it’s ridiculous,” Trump concluded.

WATCH:

Trump calls Elon’s third party “ridiculous.” Adding that it will create “confusion.” pic.twitter.com/Me6pVttAg2

— Disclose.tv Clips (@disclosetvclips) July 6, 2025

Musk’s party has already received fierce mockery online as the treasurer and custodian of records for the “America Party” was revealed to be Vaibhav Taneja, an Indian man who has served as Tesla’s Chief Financial Officer since August 2023. Musk was born in South Africa.

H-1B Party: South African Elon Musk Launches ‘America Party’ with Indian Treasurer

Musk claims the America Party will serve as a centrist force, targeting two or three Senate seats and eight to ten House districts to act as a deciding vote on contentious laws. He claims it will represent the “80% in the middle,” referring to voters who are disillusioned with both Democrats and Republicans. However, specifics on its platform remain vague. He has hinted at themes prioritizing debt reduction, deregulation, and tech innovation — all of which would benefit him.

The day before the filing, Musk wrote, “One way to execute on this would be to laser-focus on just 2 or 3 Senate seats and 8 to 10 House districts.”

“Given the razor-thin legislative margins, that would be enough to serve as the deciding vote on contentious laws, ensuring that they serve the true will of the people,” Musk continued.

One way to execute on this would be to laser-focus on just 2 or 3 Senate seats and 8 to 10 House districts.

Given the razor-thin legislative margins, that would be enough to serve as the deciding vote on contentious laws, ensuring that they serve the true will of the people.

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 4, 2025

The tension between Trump and Musk boiled over in early June when the X owner criticized the One Big Beautiful Bill legislation on his social media platform, prompting the president to fire back by labeling Musk a “big-time drug addict” and hinting at his ketamine use for depression. Trump also threatened to slash billions in federal contracts and subsidies for Musk’s companies, including Tesla and SpaceX, a move that sent Tesla’s stock plunging 14% in a single day.

Musk retaliated by suggesting Trump’s impeachment, alleging without evidence that Trump’s name appears in unreleased Jeffrey Epstein files, and even threatening to decommission SpaceX’s Dragon spacecraft, though he later backed off.

The party’s registration with the FEC was filed on July 6, 2025, listing its headquarters at 1 Rocket Road, Hawthorne, California, the address of Musk’s SpaceX.

Musk is named as the sole candidate, although, as a South African-born citizen, he is ineligible to run for president.

The post President Trump Responds to Elon Musk Creating His Own Political Party: ‘I Think it’s Ridiculous’ (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Anti White Legislation Proposed in California Taps University System For Verifying Student Reparations

July 6, 2025 Ogghy Filed Under: Gateway Pundit, INVESTIGATIONS

According to Campus Reform, The California State University system “could soon be required to verify whether students descend from enslaved Americans under a bill advancing in the state legislature.”

The bill known as 437 advanced in the Senate authored by state Senator Akilah Weber directed CSU to establish a process by which genealogical eligibility for reparations could be verified.

The bill passed in the Senate and was now set for a hearing in the Assembly. As Campus Reform points out “while the bill does not mandate that CSU directly implement reparations screening, Weber’s office told Campus Reform that the university system would help develop methods the state could use to verify lineage.”

CSU as of now has not put out an official statement about these proposed reparations. S.B 437 is part of a full package of reparations-related legislation.

Sadly, California is not alone in their reparations as part of so called ‘higher education’. In 2022 Harvard pledged $100 million to a “Legacy of Slavery” fund.

This was not enough for Howard University’s Knight Chair of race and Journalism who argued this was insufficient and told The New York Times magazine “A true investment would be hundreds of millions more,”

This is proof yet again that the race hustlers will never be satisfied no matter what crazy initiatives liberal universities take.

Reparations are clearly a bad and fundamentally unjust idea.

Harvard like CSU is pandering and engaging in prejudiced behavior and yet despite this its still not enough for some.

Ultimately Americans overwhelmingly agree reparations are unfair and predjucial. This proposal would be cruel and unAmerican.

American universities must be purged of DEI and racial division.

The post Anti White Legislation Proposed in California Taps University System For Verifying Student Reparations appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

WATCH: Joy Reid Suggests Democrats Could Denaturalize and Deport Melania Trump, ‘She’s Outta Here’

July 6, 2025 Ogghy Filed Under: Gateway Pundit, INVESTIGATIONS

Fired MSNBC host Joy Reid suggested on her new YouTube show that Democrats could denaturalize and deport Melania Trump if her party comes back into power.

Reid also suggested deporting the president’s children during her interview with Democrat Squad member Rep. Pramila Jayapal on Thursday.

The duo was discussing comments made by President Donald Trump during his visit to Alligator Alcatraz in Florida last week. He stated that he is open to deporting American citizens.

“They’re not new to our country. They’re old to our country. Many of them were born in our country. I think we ought to get them the hell out of here, too, if you want to know the truth,” he said. “So maybe that will be the next job.”

Mediaite reports, “His remarks followed a memo issued by a lawyer for the Department of Justice, which gives U.S. Attorneys broad discretion over whether to initiate denaturalization proceedings against criminal defendants. This week, Trump also threatened New York Democratic mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani, who, the president baselessly alleged, may be ‘here illegally.’ Mahmdani, who is a Muslin of South Asian descent, was born in Uganda.”

Reid took issue with Trump’s comments and suggested that the First Lady could be targeted “if we ever get a Democratic president.”

“If you give the president of the United States monarchical-like powers to say, ‘I don’t like your views, I don’t like your take on issues, I don’t that you’re too liberal, you’re not conservative enough, I’m just gonna take away your naturalized citizenship,’ well… if we ever get a Democratic president, they could say, ‘I don’t like Melania Trump. She wasn’t born here. She was born in Slovenia. She is a naturalized citizen. She’s outta here.’”

Reid also took aim at the president’s children and their late mother.

“And by the way, Ivana Trump, the late Ivana Trump, who’s buried in the golf course in New Jersey in Donald Trump’s golf club, she wasn’t an American citizen. And three of her children are Don Jr., Eric, and Ivanka,” Reid said.

The far-left YouTuber continued, “And maybe the next Democratic president says, ‘You know what? I don’t like the Trumps. And so we’re gonna denaturalize all of the Trump children, whose mother was a foreigner at the time.’”

Reid also noted that Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s grandfather had been ordered to be deported to Cuba, but did not go.

“This opens a huge door, Congresswoman, because that means that any future president can decide that they don’t like the Trumps and don’t want them here and want Melania gone. And they could just denaturalize and deport her, and she’d be outta here.”

WATCH:

Joy Reid claims Trump’s immigration policies could lead to Melania Trump being denaturalized and deported.

“If we ever get a democratic president they could say I don’t like Melania Trump she wasn’t born here she’s born in Slovenia she is a naturalized citizen she’s out of… pic.twitter.com/aJuMYcrEZZ

— Jeff Charles, The Nullifier (@jeffcharlesjr) July 5, 2025

The post WATCH: Joy Reid Suggests Democrats Could Denaturalize and Deport Melania Trump, ‘She’s Outta Here’ appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Go woke, go MEGA broke — this luxury company’s sales just plummeted 97%

July 6, 2025 Ogghy Filed Under: INVESTIGATIONS, The Blaze

2025’s Pride Month went out with a glorious whimper. Many didn’t even notice it happened at all. Compared to previous Junes when rainbow-drenched hordes of people screamed their sexual fetishes in the streets, this June was pretty quiet.

The truth is, Pride Month “is diminishing,” says Blaze Media senior politics editor Christopher Bedford. “Except for Jaguar.”

Last fall, the luxury car company released a bizarre commercial featuring “nothing but androgynous, strange people cavorting in dresses.” Their product — you know, cars — didn’t make the cut. Zero Jaguar vehicles were featured in the advertisement that was intended to launch their nonbinary rebranding campaign.

But that’s not all Jaguar did. As part of its “Reimagine” campaign aimed at transitioning into an all-electric, ultra-luxury brand by 2025, the company discontinued nearly all of its beloved previous models. In other words, “They got rid of all … the amazing stuff,” Bedford says.

And Jaguar is paying sorely for it. This April, it registered just 49 cars in all of Europe — a 97.5% drop from 1,961 sales in April 2024.

“Go woke, go broke,” Bedford says.

Through the entire campaign, from its weird “Copy Nothing” commercial to its discontinuation of the very models that made it a sought-after brand, Jaguar has hit the “self-destruct” button, says Matthew Peterson, Blaze News editor in chief and co-host of “Blaze News: The Mandate.”

“Everything about Jaguar was refuted,” he says. “Who do you think buys Jaguars?”

The company “used to be synonymous with British engineering, and now it’s gay,” Bedford says.

Thankfully, Jaguar’s refusal to abandon the path of wokeness is becoming a rarity among big companies these days. Most have walked back the pandering and virtue signaling and returned to doing practical business, which doesn’t include shoving DEI and LGBTQ+ agendas down consumers’ throats.

While “the wokeness is still present and accounted for,” we’re witnessing the beginning of the “end of all this nonsense,” Peterson says.

To hear more of the conversation, watch the episode above.

Want more from ‘Blaze News | The Mandate’?

To enjoy more provocative opinions, expert analysis, and breaking stories you won’t see anywhere else, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

It’s time to end the WHO’s secret grip on American health care

July 6, 2025 Ogghy Filed Under: INVESTIGATIONS, The Blaze

It’s common sense: Local challenges should be confronted and solved locally whenever possible. Protecting Americans’ health is no exception.

Yet few realize that the World Health Organization still exerts influence over American health care, even as the United States has taken steps to separate from it. Earlier this year, a presidential executive order initiated the process of withdrawing the U.S. from the WHO, citing concerns that the organization prioritizes politics over science and public accountability.

The future of all health care should be patient-centered, not controlled by slow-moving, politically driven bureaucracies.

There is no question that leaving the WHO was and still is an important step forward for American patients, but there is much more work to be done before the organization’s foreign influence is extracted from our health care landscape and families can fully access the treatments that are best for them.

The next critical step? Detach the U.S. medical insurance coding system from the WHO’s model to ensure that it gives patients access to all medical procedures, from lifesaving precision oncology options to restorative, cutting-edge reproductive health therapies.

Unfortunately for patients, U.S. diagnostic codes are modeled after the WHO’s bulky and inherently limited insurance coding protocol. These codes play a pivotal role in determining patients’ access to care, provider reimbursement, and clinical outcome reporting. In the 1990s, the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics began to establish ICD-10-CM codes, which conform to the WHO’s framework governing how health care providers bill diagnoses. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services likewise developed ICD-10-PCS codes — which mirror WHO coding protocol — for use in inpatient hospital settings.

Just one of the many problems with each of these coding systems is that they are slow to adapt to medical advancements. Restorative reproductive medicine, for example, is a comprehensive approach to solving underlying fertility complications at the core. RRM seeks to heal human reproduction systems metabolically, hormonally, and otherwise. Already, it has helped thousands of couples struggling with infertility to have children.

The CDC and CMS bureaucracies have historically failed to recognize and cover evidence-based reproductive treatments like RRM that address the root causes of infertility, leaving families seeking such treatments — such as natural family planning/fertility awareness-based methods — to cover the costs themselves or resort to in-vitro fertilization to achieve pregnancy.

At its core, inadequate diagnostic coding for RRM discourages many providers from relying on RRM to heal patients at all because they know that code limitations will prevent them from being reimbursed through insurance.

Unfortunately, the ICD-10 codes doctors are forced to use do not accurately represent the nuanced hormonal, structural, and immune-related causes of infertility such as polycystic ovary syndrome, endometriosis, and luteal phase defects that so often prevent pregnancy.

Even Current Procedural Terminology codes developed by the American Medical Association do not reflect modern fertility-preserving surgical interventions such as laparoscopic restoration of fallopian tubes, excision of endometriosis, or varicocele repair.

Instead, doctors who wish to deliver comprehensive treatments such as these are tied into relying on non-specific or “unlisted” codes, leading to denials of coverage and limited patient access to restorative procedures, which, if covered, would be far more cost-effective than artificial reproductive technologies like IVF.

Perhaps even worse for American patients and doctors alike is the fact that unclear coding undermines transparency and accurate reporting in these vital areas of medicine. Failing to differentiate between RRM’s and IVF’s distinct clinical approaches, ethical frameworks, and long-term health implications limits transparency in outcome reporting while obscuring the true effectiveness and cost-efficiency of restorative treatments.

Each of these coding challenges points to a dire need for an evidenced-based, patient-centered, common coding lexicon nationwide.

The good news is that we have ample evidence that these coding changes are possible and effective. My organization, which facilitates common-sense, cost-saving therapies for our members, already allows providers to bill for effective treatments so often inaccessible through traditional insurance companies.

The federal government would be wise to do the same. The future of all health care should be patient-centered, not controlled by slow-moving, politically driven bureaucracies that rely on outdated, foreign billing and coding restrictions.

💹 Market Headlines

INVESTIGATIONS

President Donald Trump has responded to Elon Musk creating a new political party, saying, “I think it’s ridiculous.”

Fired MSNBC host Joy Reid suggested on her new YouTube show that Democrats could denaturalize and deport Melania Trump if her party comes back into power.

Want more from ‘Blaze News | The Mandate’?