While Democrats used Congress’s vague laws to expand the federal government’s role under the executive branch, Musk is merely using them to shrink the agencies as a presidential designee.
INVESTIGATIONS
Watch Elizabeth Warren Contradict Elizabeth Warren About the Importance of Court Rulings (D)epending on What’s at Stake (VIDEO)
There is an old saying that if it weren’t for double standards, liberals wouldn’t have any standards at all. Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts is the living embodiment of that statement.
In recent years, Warren and many other Democrats have waged an almost daily war on the legitimacy of the U.S. Supreme Court. Now that they want to stop everything that Trump is trying to do, they are relying on courts to do it and saying that anyone who would undermine the legitimacy of those courts is a threat to democracy.
Watch the side-by-side video of Elizabeth Warren below. The first half is from last year, the second half is from this month.
The courts are either undermining or saving democracy, it all depends if Elizabeth Warren agrees with their rulings.
Strangely, Warren isn’t currently calling for the creation of a code of ethics to remove judges like she was last year. pic.twitter.com/KHE4lK7Z3c
— MAZE (@mazemoore) February 11, 2025
That second half is from an appearance Warren made on the Rachel Maddow show this week.
The Hill reported:
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said the Trump administration is putting the nation “on the edge of a constitutional crisis” following a series of sweeping executive orders and funding freezes targeting federal agencies.
“We’ve got our toes right on the edge of a constitutional crisis here. But here’s the thing: It may be the case that Donald Trump is so full of confidence that he thinks he can wave his wand, and whatever he wants to happen will happen,” Warren said during a Monday appearance on MSNBC’s “The Rachel Maddow Show.”…
“My view right now is the courts are where we are hanging on to our constitutional structure,” Warren told Maddow. “They still have the power to hold everybody else in this country in contempt if they do not follow lawfully issued court orders.”
Here’s another example of this liberal logic. It’s AOC in 2023, telling CNN that the Biden administration should ignore a SCOTUS ruling, simply because the Democrats didn’t like it.
“The Biden Administration should ignore the court” – AOC, 2023 pic.twitter.com/fHF4PAykQT
— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) February 11, 2025
The Democrats are like two year-olds throwing a tantrum in the cereal aisle of the grocery store when they don’t get what they want. All they care about is power and control.
The post Watch Elizabeth Warren Contradict Elizabeth Warren About the Importance of Court Rulings (D)epending on What’s at Stake (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.
Red-state Republicans say ‘can’t’ but mean ‘won’t’ on immigration reform
Republicans must decide whether they truly want to end illegal immigration or not. Now is the time to eliminate every incentive that allows illegal immigrants to remain undetected in our communities. If Republicans believe that approach is too harsh, they should have the courage to say so. Instead, across the country, they are gutting enforcement bills that would effectively stop illegal immigration and deter migrants from entering red states under Democratic administrations.
While offering convoluted arguments against commonsense measures, they refuse to admit the obvious: They want illegal immigrants who aren’t in jail to remain here as a source of cheap labor for their donors.
For many, the pledge to end illegal immigration was nothing more than a campaign slogan. Now, they dismiss enforcement measures as ‘unrealistic’ or too ‘disruptive.’
Ending illegal immigration does not require complex logistics. If you fail to pay a speeding ticket, the state will catch up with you. Now, imagine your very presence in the country is illegal. With proper enforcement, no one could interact with law enforcement, government agencies, or civil society without being discovered and turned over to ICE.
The problem isn’t a lack of resources — it’s a lack of will. If red states fully enforced immigration laws, they could permanently end illegal immigration within their borders.
In Florida, Gov. Ron DeSantis introduced several bills aimed at, in his words, “ending illegal immigration as we know it.” One proposal sought to criminalize illegal entry into the state, authorize judges to offer jail time as an incentive for self-repatriation, and require all state and local law enforcement agencies to participate in the 287(g) program. That program would allow officers to work directly with ICE, not only to remove criminal aliens in jail but to act as ICE deputies and deport all illegal immigrants they encounter.
Had this proposal passed, it would have made it nearly impossible for most illegal immigrants to live functional lives in Florida. That is precisely why the state’s Republican establishment opposed it.
The special session DeSantis called was filled with political maneuvering, largely aimed at weakening his influence. However, the real motive became clear when state Sen. Joe Gruters, the author of a competing Republican-backed bill, complained in an email to a constituent about DeSantis’ push for “street-level enforcement.” That was exactly DeSantis’ goal and exactly why the establishment opposed it.
Many Republicans are quietly working to limit immigration enforcement — without admitting it — by restricting efforts to only criminal aliens. They want the rest to remain as a cheap labor force for their donors. The counterproposal from legislative leaders not only gutted DeSantis’ street-level enforcement provision but also stripped his existing authority to work with ICE, handing that power to the agriculture commissioner, who had previously opposed E-Verify and supported benefits for illegal immigrants.
Despite their public rhetoric, many Republicans have not abandoned their insatiable appetite for cheap labor. Florida’s political dynamic is unique in that establishment Republicans were also frustrated with DeSantis for defeating the marijuana industry’s ballot initiative. However, this resistance to full-scale state immigration enforcement is appearing across the country. Even in deep-red states, strong enforcement bills are being gutted in committee or never making it to the floor.
Last week, establishment Republicans in Montana and Wyoming weakened key enforcement bills that would have implemented street-level immigration enforcement.
Montana’s HB 278 initially required all law enforcement officers to make a reasonable attempt — when practicable — to determine the immigration status of anyone lawfully stopped or detained, such as for a traffic violation. If lawmakers were serious about deterring illegal immigration and making it impossible for undocumented individuals to remain in the country, verifying immigration status during encounters with state officials would be a logical step.
The bill even included an exception allowing officers to forgo the status check if it would interfere with an ongoing investigation. Despite this, the House Judiciary Committee weakened the bill by changing “shall” to “may,” effectively making the provision optional and stripping it of its enforcement power.
Similarly, Wyoming state Sen. Cheri Steinmetz introduced a comprehensive immigration enforcement bill, SF 124. The proposal required local law enforcement officers to check immigration status during street-level policing. It also mandated that all state agencies verify legal status before granting any state benefits, prohibited individuals from transporting, harboring, or shielding illegal immigrants from law enforcement, and required employers to report illegal workers.
However, a Republican-controlled committee completely gutted the bill, removing its key enforcement mechanisms.
If lawmakers truly want to end illegal immigration and push undocumented individuals to leave the country, they must pass strong enforcement bills at the state level.
Trump has already voiced frustration over the slow pace of removals, which is why states need policies that make it impossible for illegal immigrants to remain and function in the United States. Either Republicans want to solve the problem, or they don’t.
For many, the pledge to end illegal immigration was nothing more than a campaign slogan. Now, they dismiss enforcement measures as “impractical,” “unrealistic,” or too “disruptive.”
In life, there are always “can’ts” and “won’ts.” When it comes to ending illegal immigration, watch for Republicans to claim they can’t enforce strict policies — when in reality, they simply won’t.
Mr. President, stop woke banks from targeting conservatives and Christians
One of the greatest threats to freedom facing Americans today is the weaponization of the financial system.
President Donald Trump is well-positioned to solve this problem, and it is essential that he do so, before more people and groups fall prey to this highly immoral practice.
Over the past several years, banks and other financial institutions have used their power to punish politicians, organizations, and everyday Americans with whom they disagree on social or political issues.
Unfortunately, Christians and conservatives have been two of the groups most often victimized by these authoritarian strategies.
For example, in 2023, JPMorgan Chase, one of the largest banks in the United States, unexpectedly chose to close the account of the National Committee for Religious Freedom, a nonprofit organization dedicated to advancing religious liberty.
According to NCRF Chairman Sam Brownback, a former U.S. senator and governor of Kansas, the local Chase branch first refused to give the organization any details about the decision to close the account, other than that Chase’s corporate office made the decision.
Conservatives and Christians have faced mistreatment by major financial institutions, many of which now openly align with left-wing values.
In a Newsweek article about the incident, Brownback and Jeremy Tedesco, senior counsel at the Alliance Defending Freedom, a nonprofit Christian law firm, explained that Chase provided conflicting explanations for closing the NCRF’s account. According to them, a representative from Chase’s corporate office initially stated that the bank might reinstate the account if NCRF disclosed a list of donors who contributed 10% or more of its operating budget. The bank also asked NCRF to reveal its criteria for selecting political beneficiaries.
NCRF refused, citing concerns over donor privacy and skepticism that Chase imposed similar requirements on other nonprofits.
Brownback and Tedesco noted that Chase later changed its explanation multiple times. At one point, the bank acknowledged that Brownback’s background as a politician led to increased scrutiny and unusual demands.
They believe Chase targeted NCRF because of its ideological views. The bank’s failure to offer a reasonable alternative explanation supports that conclusion.
The NCRF isn’t the only conservative-aligned organization that has faced mistreatment by the financial system in recent years. Numerous conservative activists and organizations have reported being de-banked or threatened with account closures — including Trump’s businesses and family members.
Less than two weeks after the January 6, 2021, riots at the U.S. Capitol, Deutsche Bank announced it would stop doing business with Trump and his companies. At the time, Deutsche Bank had worked with Trump for two decades.
In her 2024 memoir, former first lady Melania Trump said her bank also closed her accounts and later refused to open one for her son, Barron. She believes the decision was politically motivated and violated her and her son’s civil rights.
In 2023, Bank of America unexpectedly closed accounts belonging to a Memphis-based church and its ministry partner Indigenous Advance, citing concerns over the organizations’ “risk tolerance” policies.
Alliance Defending Freedom reviewed the case and determined that Indigenous Advance is not a dangerous organization. Its mission is “to serve impoverished Ugandans, helping them meet their basic needs and sharing the gospel with them,” and apparently, “this was too much for the bank,” according to ADF.
Moms for Liberty, a nationwide conservative organization, claims that it had its PayPal account unjustifiably frozen multiple times before the group decided to close it altogether.
While some of these account closures by financial institutions in recent years may have been mistakes, it seems unlikely that all or even most were coincidences. The many well-documented cases of conservative and Christian groups losing their accounts suggest a broader pattern.
The evidence indicates these weren’t mistakes. Instead, conservatives and Christians have faced mistreatment by major financial institutions, many of which now openly align with left-wing values.
Even more concerning, the problem may be more widespread than it appears. In most cases, banks aren’t required to provide customers with specific reasons for account closures. Without recourse, many affected individuals and groups struggle to prove they were targeted for their beliefs.
This issue isn’t about politics or favoring one religion over another. Large financial institutions should not be allowed to discriminate unjustly. Banks should treat all law-abiding customers equally, offering services based on financial standing — not social, environmental, or political factors.
President Trump can take action through federal regulatory agencies like the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. He has the authority to issue rules requiring nationally chartered banks to treat all customers fairly, regardless of their political or religious views. On the campaign trail, he repeatedly promised to do just that.
At a January event in Davos, Trump publicly criticized major banks, including Bank of America and JPMorgan, for discriminating against conservatives. Despite these statements, his administration has yet to implement policies to stop banks and other financial institutions from engaging in such practices.
Mr. President, what are you waiting for? Now is the time to act. Put an end to discriminatory and reckless banking practices before more innocent Americans suffer the consequences.
BAD FAITH: ABC’s Rachel Scott Accuses Elon Musk of Corruption, Posting ‘Misinformation’
In the early days of the Second Trump Administration, it appeared that ABC World News Tonight had taken time to reflect and reconsider their ways, toning things down from their wild subservience to Joe Biden. Well, the time for reflection has ended. And based on the network’s hysterical coverage of all things DOGE and Elon Musk, it appears that they’re back to their old ways.
Anchor David Muir has reverted to long, overwrought introductions that may as well be a brief of the upcoming report. In this case, the report was mostly correspondent Rachel Scott trying (but failing) to gotcha Musk on corruption and conflicts of interest. Absent actual corruption, Scott resorted to nasty yet familiar framing: BILLIONAIRE BAD (click “expand” to view transcript)!
RACHEL SCOTT: Musk, the world’s richest man, with billions of dollars in federal contracts, has been given enormous power. His Department of Government Efficiency already accessing at least 15 agencies.
Mr. Musk, The White House says that you will identify and excuse yourself from any conflicts of interest that you may have. Does that mean that you are in effect policing yourself? What are the checks and balances that are in place to ensure there’s accountability and transparency?
ELON MUSK: Well, we actually are trying to be as transparent as possible. In fact, our actions– we post our actions to the DOGE handle on X and to the DOGE website. So all of our actions are maximally transparent. In fact, I don’t think there’s been — I don’t know of a case where an organization’s been more transparent than the DOGE organization. So — the kind of things we’re doing are, I think, are very simple and basic. These are not individual judgment decisions. These are about simply having simple checks and balances in the system itself to ensure taxpayer money is spent well. So it’s got nothing to do with, say, a contract with some company of mine, At all.
SCOTT: But if there is a conflict of interest, when it comes to you yourself, for instance, you’ve received billions of dollars in federal contracts when it comes to the Pentagon, for instance, which I know the president has directed you to look into.
MUSK: Yeah.
SCOTT: Are you policing yourself in that? Is there any sort of accountability, check and balance in place that would provide any transparency for the American people?
The whole point of this frame is to establish Musk as the problem rather than a part of the solution. This is why both “billionaire” and “power” are uttered in the same paragraph.
This is also why Scott peppered Musk with questions about potential conflict questions. Musk addressed those concerns and explained the rationale behind the cuts and why it is so important to arrest our national debt.
Before closing out her interview with another nasty frame, Scott maliciously characterized Musk’s quick corrections to flawed communication as spreading “misinformation”:
SCOTT: As Musk’s team tears through government agencies, Musk today acknowledging he has sometimes posted misinformation about their findings.
MUSK: Well, first of all, some of the things that I say will be incorrect and should be corrected, so, nobody’s going to bat 1,000. I mean, any- we will make mistakes, but we’ll act quickly to correct any mistakes.
Expect more such Musk-deranged hysteria as DOGE continues to spread across the whole of government.
Click “expand” to view the full transcript of the aforementioned report as aired on ABC World News Tonight on Tuesday, February 11th, 2025:
DAVID MUIR: We turn now to that remarkable scene at The White House just a short time ago. Elon Musk standing in the Oval Office. President Trump sitting behind the Resolute Desk and it was Elon Musk who held court for more than half an hour. How Musk describes what it is the Trump White House is doing, defending his access to at least 15 government agencies and counting. Elon Musk was asked if he’s being transparent, if he’s policing himself, and if there’s a conflict of interest, given Musk’s own company has contracts with the Pentagon. Our Rachel Scott asking many of the questions.
RACHEL SCOTT: Tonight, an extraordinary scene playing out in the Oval Office. President Trump sitting at the Resolute Desk, and standing next to him, Elon Musk and his young son. Holding court for roughly a half an hour.
REPORTER: Your detractors, Mr. Musk…
ELON MUSK: My de- what?
REPORTER: …including a lot of Democrats…
MUSK: I have detractors?
REPORTER: You do, sir.
MUSK: I don’t believe it.
REPORTER: …say that you’re orchestrating a hostile takeover of government, and doing it in a nontransparent way. What’s your response to that criticism?
MUSK: Well, first of all, you couldn’t ask for a stronger mandate from the public. The public voted — we have a majority of the public vote- voting for President Trump. We won the House, we won the Senate. The people voted for major government reform. And a lot of times, you know, people, they don’t get what they voted for, but in this presidency, they are going to get what they voted for, and that’s what democracy is all about.
SCOTT: Musk, the world’s richest man, with billions of dollars in federal contracts, has been given enormous power. His Department of Government Efficiency already accessing at least 15 agencies.
RACHEL SCOTT: Mr. Musk, The White House says that you will identify and excuse yourself from any conflicts of interest that you may have. Does that mean that you are in effect policing yourself? What are the checks and balances that are in place to ensure there’s accountability and transparency?
ELON MUSK: Well, we actually are trying to be as transparent as possible. In fact, our actions– we post our actions to the DOGE handle on X and to the DOGE website. So all of our actions are maximally transparent. In fact, I don’t think there’s been — I don’t know of a case where an organization’s been more transparent than the DOGE organization. So — the kind of things we’re doing are, I think, are very simple and basic. These are not individual judgment decisions. These are about simply having simple checks and balances in the system itself to ensure taxpayer money is spent well. So it’s got nothing to do with, say, a contract with some company of mine, At all.
SCOTT: But if there is a conflict of interest, when it comes to you yourself, for instance, you’ve received billions of dollars in federal contracts when it comes to the Pentagon, for instance, which I know the president has directed you to look into.
MUSK: Yeah.
SCOTT: Are you policing yourself in that? Is there any sort of accountability, check and balance in place that would provide any transparency for the American people?
MUSK: Well, all of our actions are fully public. So, if you see anything, you say, like, wait a second, hey, Elon, that seems like maybe that’s, you know, there’s a conflict there, It’s not like people are going to be shy about saying that. They’ll say it immediately.
SCOTT: Including you, yourself?
MUSK: Yes. Transparency is what builds trust. Not simply somebody asserting trust. Not somebody saying they’re trustworthy, but transparency, so you can see everything that’s going on. And you can see, am I doing something that benefits one of my companies or not? It’s totally obvious.
DONALD TRUMP: And if we thought that, we would not let him do that segment, or look in that area. If we thought there was a lack of transparency or a conflict of interest.
SCOTT: But I followed up.
You have received billions of dollars in contracts from the Pentagon, and the president’s directing you to look into the Department of Defense- is that a conflict of interest?
MUSK: Which we definitely need to do and are going to do, at the president’s request.
SCOTT: Does that present a conflict of interest for you?
MUSK: No, because you have to look at the individual contract and say- first of all, I’m not the one, you know, filing the contract. It’s people at SpaceX.
SCOTT: Musk and Trump have complained several of their plans are stalled in the courts, raising concerns the administration may defy a judge’s orders. Today, the president told me that won’t happen.
If a judge does block one of your policies, part of your agenda, will you abide by that ruling? Will you comply with that order?
TRUMP: Well, I’ll always abide by the courts and then I’ll have to appeal it. But then, what he’s done is, he’s slowed down the momentum.
SCOTT: As Musk’s team tears through government agencies, Musk today acknowledging he has sometimes posted misinformation about their findings.
MUSK: Well, first of all, some of the things that I say will be incorrect and should be corrected, so, nobody’s going to bat 1,000. I mean, any- we will make mistakes, but we’ll act quickly to correct any mistakes.
SCOTT: And David, there in the Oval Office, it was clear just how powerful Elon Musk is in this White House. And tonight, we’re learning he’s about to be even more powerful. The president signing an executive order that directs all federal agencies to work with Musk and his team to cut staffing and limit hiring. It also gives Musk the broad authority to decide which positions in this federal workforce should or should not
MUIR: All right. Rachel Scott right there in the briefing room tonight. Rachel, thank you.
BREAKING: President Trump Welcomes Home American Marc Fogel, Newly Released From Captivity in Russia (VIDEO)
President Trump just welcomed Marc Fogel back into the United States after he was released from captivity in Russia where he has been held since 2021.
This is something which Trump did repeatedly in his first term and now he is making it happen again.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio played a big role in this behind the scenes.
FOX News reports:
Freed American hostage Marc Fogel lands in US after prisoner swap with Russia
Marc Fogel, an American who had been detained in Russia since 2021, landed back in the U.S. on Tuesday.
Fogel, a history teacher who was working at the Anglo-American School in Moscow, returned to the U.S. after his release from Russia following talks with the Trump administration.
He was serving a 14-year sentence after his arrest in August 2021 at a Russian airport for possession of drugs, which his family said was medically prescribed marijuana.
Fogel was seen in a picture posted by the White House on social media smiling and raising his fist while wrapped in an American flag as he walked off the plane on U.S. soil.
Watch below:
WATCH: President Trump welcomes Marc Fogel outside of the White House pic.twitter.com/ullkBllrtB
— RSBN (@RSBNetwork) February 12, 2025
This is America first.
MARC FOGEL IS BACK!!!
PROMISES MADE, PROMISES KEPT!!! pic.twitter.com/ZMceoU0OfA
— The White House (@WhiteHouse) February 12, 2025
‘PROMISES MADE, PROMISES KEPT!’ President Trump greets freed American hostage Marc Fogel as he lands back in US after being detained in Russia since 2021. pic.twitter.com/5y74bInkLQ
— Fox News (@FoxNews) February 12, 2025
Fogel called President Trump a hero.
“I’m so happy to be back here.”
American teacher Marc Fogel calls Pres. Trump “a hero” as he meets with the president at the White House after being released by Russia. Fogel had been detained in Russia since being arrested on drug charges in 2021. https://t.co/6bR6TSZxKF pic.twitter.com/C9nx1riLvS
— ABC News (@ABC) February 12, 2025
This is fantastic. This is the Trump Effect.
The post BREAKING: President Trump Welcomes Home American Marc Fogel, Newly Released From Captivity in Russia (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.
Joe Rogan Says Democrats Are Going to Keep Losing People Because ‘They’re Not Course-Correcting at All’ (VIDEO)
Joe Rogan recently suggested that Democrats are going to keep shedding people because they are not course-correcting at all.
This is absolutely right. Since the 2024 election, Democrats have not paused for a single minute to consider why so many voters have fled their party. They have not expended an ounce of energy trying to figure out where they went wrong and what they need to change in order to get back in tune with voters.
It’s almost like they’re incapable of doing so, because that would require them to admit that they were wrong and Donald Trump was right. They just can’t do it and Rogan says this is going to lead them off a cliff.
Partial transcript via Real Clear Politics:
JOE ROGAN: They’re going to keep shedding people. They’re not going to correct course. This is a buffalo drop. Do you know those buffalo jumps? No. You know what? The Native Americans used to… One of the ways to hunt Buffalo was to get them to the edge of a cliff and just run at them, and they just fall off the other edge of the cliff. Then people are waiting on the bottom, and they butcher them and eat them. We’re in that pile of buffalo.
BRIDGET PHETASY: We’re all being run off the cliff.
JOE ROGAN: Yeah. They’re going to go off the cliff. There’s no way they’re not. They’re not course-correcting at all. They’re saying stupid stuff. It’s all nonsense.
Their understanding of social media and the dynamics that you set up by having completely state-controlled mainstream media where they only said the narratives that you guys wanted. They all said it in step, so you could watch different programs repeat the exact same words, the exact same phrases. We know they got talking points. We don’t trust you anymore. We don’t trust the New York Times. We don’t trust the Washington Post. We don’t trust CNN or any other MSNBC, where they’re all full with propaganda.
That’s why the internet rose. It’s not because there was some sort of a right-wing conspiracy and heavily funded. No, you guys suck. You’re not real people. Nobody wants to hang out with Brian Stelter.
Watch the clip below:
NEW: Joe Rogan rips into the Democratic Party and legacy media, warning they will keep losing supporters as they double down on ‘stupid sh*t’ and refuse to ‘course correct.’
“We were right about the general election. That red wave happened. The Democratic Party is going to keep… pic.twitter.com/9zaJ7GTKq2
— KanekoaTheGreat (@KanekoaTheGreat) February 10, 2025
When you boil this down, it’s not even a political issue, it’s an issue of common sense. Democrats don’t seem to have any and it could lead to the demise of their party.
The post Joe Rogan Says Democrats Are Going to Keep Losing People Because ‘They’re Not Course-Correcting at All’ (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.
MSNBC Wildly Says DOGE Could ‘Literally Cause Global Financial Panic’
MSNBC’s ongoing fixation on Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has shown no signs of abating. On Monday night’s episode of The 11th Hour, a panel hosted by Stephanie Ruhle continued what seems to have become a nightly ritual of railing against Musk and DOGE, and casually alleged, without any evidence, that DOGE’s actions could cause America to default on its national debt, and touch off a global economic crisis.
Ruhle began by mentioning a statement against DOGE’s recent actions by five former Treasury secretaries, and commented that, although all five were Democrats rather than Republicans, the views they expressed, “did not sound partisan to me at all.”
Dan Nathan of CNBC agreed: “Yeah, I think they’re focused on the- sanctity of our Treasury, right? And when we think about- what do they do? They’re issuing treasury bonds. That is the bedrock of the global financial system, right?”
According to Nathan, DOGE was possibly going to shut down payments to America’s lenders and cause America to default on the debt:
So, if you have- this organization, DOGE, which is just an appointed organization that really doesn’t know how these operations work, and they shut down payments- it could be any sort of payments- then you have folks lose confidence in the U.S. Treasury, right? And if that happens- they default on some of these payments- they could have a downgrade by the rating agencies. And what happens is that- that could- like- literally cause global financial panic, if that were to happen.
In essence, Nathan charged that DOGE was somehow threatening to make the U.S. Treasury default on its debt, with grave worldwide consequences. He did not actually cite any evidence for this allegation, just a vague, unsubstantiated blanket assertion that the organization “doesn’t know how these operations work,” whatever that was supposed to mean.
Ruhle then turned to Heather Long of The Washington Post, and expressed incredulity that even with “everything Dan just laid out,” about “everything that’s happening around DOGE- they seem- the markets are- keep on trucking.”
Long agreed, and went even further, saying that Wall Street was not taking the threat of DOGE seriously enough. “I think it’s one of the biggest- questions out there- that we haven’t seen- really- any panic yet from Wall Street,” she lamented. “I think what’s happening is- on Wall Street- it’s sort of the same with tariffs- they’re really looking line by line at what is actually coming out from the administration, versus the warnings.”
She too pushed the conspiracy theory that DOGE would lead to an American dept default:
But I would say they are severely underpricing the risk of that scenario that Dan just laid out, that some 20-something-year-old who’s fiddling around with the code suddenly prevents a payment from not going out. And we have a technical default by the United States government, that has long standing replications [sic]- to- going forward for this nation.”
So, now they had a purely hypothetical, purely conjectural, fairly elaborate and quite specific scenario by which DOGE supposedly could destroy the world’s economy, and were wondering why Wall Street was not cringing in terror at the possibility. There was one problem, though. They continued to offer no actual evidence for their dire predictions, and, to all appearances, made up this entire scenario on the spot, right out of thin air.
To read the transcript, click “expand”:
MSNBC’s The 11th Hour
02/10/2025
11:23 PM
[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: IN NYT OPED FIVE FORMER TREASURY CHIEFS SAY DOGE EFFORT UNDERMINES CONSTITUTION]
STEPHANIE RUHLE: Dan, what I just heard from Larry Summers did not sound partisan to me at all. It was a scary, stark warning, and it’s a big deal to get five treasury secretaries to sign off on something together. But none were Republicans.
DAN NATHAN (CNBC CONTRIBUTOR, RISK REVERSAL CO-FOUNDER, ON THE TAPE PODCAST HOST): Yeah, I think they’re focused on the- sanctity of our treasury, right? And when we think about- what do they do? They’re issuing treasury bonds. That is the bedrock of the global financial system, right?
So, if you have- this organization, DOGE, which is just an appointed organization that really doesn’t know how these operations work, and they shut down payments- it could be any sort of payments- then you have folks lose confidence in the U.S. Treasury, right? And if that happens- they default on some of these payments- they could have a downgrade by the rating agencies. And what happens is that- that could-like- literally cause global financial panic, if that were to happen.
It did happen once in 2011- you remember that- Global markets, stocks, currencies, everything- they went haywire for a bit, you know? So- those are the things, I think, that- you look at those five Treasury secretaries- they remember what it’s like to keep things together. That is their job, to affect- like- the president’s economic policy. But it’s a broader thing than just that coming from the executive branch. They really understand where the US economy sits and what are the most important pillars of that is.[sic]
RUHLE: Heather, everything Dan just laid out, everything the five Treasury secretaries did- how come the market doesn’t seem to be- care? The market freaked out at the thought that Donald Trump was going to impose major tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and China. But this- everything that’s happening around DOGE- they seem- the markets are- keep on trucking.
[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: TRUMP IMPOSES 25 % TARIFFS ON STEEL AND ALUMINUM]
HEATHER LONG (WASHINGTON POST ECONOMICS COLUMNIST): I agree with you. I think it’s one of the biggest- questions out there- that we haven’t seen- really- any panic yet from Wall Street. I think what’s happening is- on Wall Street- it’s sort of the same with tariffs- they’re really looking line by line at what is actually coming out from the administration, versus the warnings.
But I would say they are severely underpricing the risk of that scenario that Dan just laid out, that some 20-something-year-old who’s fiddling around with the code suddenly prevents a payment from not going out. And we have a technical default by the United States government, that has long standing replications [sic]- to- going forward for this nation.
(…)
Ft. Bragg Is Officially Back as Hegseth Kicks George Floyd Renaming to the Curb
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth reversed the DEI-triggered name change of a North Carolina military base in Fayetteville, renaming Fort Liberty back to Fort Bragg.
In 2023, former President Joe Biden changed the name as part of a sweeping initiative to rename military bases named after Confederate leaders.
The move was one of many cowardly actions Biden took to bend the knee to Black Lives Matter mobs who rioted nationwide in the wake of the 2020 death of George Floyd.
Previously, the base was named after Confederate General Braxton Bragg.
On Monday, Hegseth changed the name back to Fort Bragg, but in honor of a different Bragg.
“The new name pays tribute to Pfc. Roland L. Bragg, a World War II hero who earned the Silver Star and Purple Heart for his exceptional courage during the Battle of the Bulge,” Pentagon press secretary John Ullyot said in a statement.
“Bragg is back!” the Defense Secretary declared in an X post Monday after signing the directive.
Bragg is back! I just signed a memorandum reversing the naming of Fort Liberty back to Fort Bragg. pic.twitter.com/EGgZNHK72x
— Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth (@SecDef) February 11, 2025
Just to underscore how wasteful performative leftist cancel culture is, it cost taxpayers $8 million to rename Fort Bragg, according to the New York Post.
On the campaign trail last year, President Donald Trump vowed to reverse Biden’s absurd name change.
“Should we turn the name Fort Liberty, back to Fort Bragg?” Trump asked attendees at a MAGA rally in North Carolina in October 2024.
“Right, so here’s what we do: We get elected, I’m doing it,” he promised.
The BLM-fueled renaming frenzy — as well as the group’s disgraceful destruction of historical monuments — was part of an insidious crusade to erase American history.
For Columbus Day, leftist rioters vandalized the Abraham Lincoln statue outside the Chicago History Museum. Though Lincoln is regarded as one of the greatest American leaders for his role in leading the Union during the Civil War, leftists now call him a white supremacist.
In… pic.twitter.com/WI0neNdW88
— Andy Ngo (@MrAndyNgo) October 14, 2024
The Falls Church School Board voted to take Thomas Jefferson‘s name off of Thomas Jefferson Elementary. The school announced it in the tweet below and then deleted the tweet when people criticized the decision. Just a monumental display of cowardice all around. Truly impressive. pic.twitter.com/JJyuJxYYNn
— Matt Walsh (@MattWalshBlog) December 9, 2020
With Trump back in office, there has been a dramatic cultural shift toward the right after years of left-wing hysteria and extremism.
While Democrats and other Trump-haters disingenuously whine and moan about the changes he’s making, the president’s soaring approval numbers tell the real story.
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.
The post Ft. Bragg Is Officially Back as Hegseth Kicks George Floyd Renaming to the Curb appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.
Super Bowl FORCES women, feminism, and flag football on sports fans
NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell has made one thing crystal clear: No matter how much the country rejects the feminist agenda, it’s here to stay — at least as long as he’s in charge.
The most recent example of Goodell’s dedication to feminism is the NFL’s use of the Super Bowl to advertise flag football in recent years, the latest being a commercial that aired this year calling for making girls’ flag football a varsity sport in all 50 states.
The commercial features a young black woman getting into an altercation with a white male, aptly named “Chad,” who in classic bully style approaches the young woman and says, “Girls don’t play football.”
She then hurls a football at his friend and yells, “Think fast,” and it hits him “right in the Jimmy Johnson.” The commercial proceeds to show a flag football tryout, in which a different white guy, named “Brad,” is going up against her, while a lone black man sits in the bleachers cheering her on.
Shocker, she wins — and Jason Whitlock of “Fearless” is anything but amused.
“Are you kidding me?” Whitlock asks. “The obvious messaging, and this is how little they think of us black men — who’s the cheerleader? Little black dude in the Afro, in the sunglasses, cheerleading all this madness. It’s the black man sitting out there supporting his queen as she takes on the evil white man, Brad.”
“They couldn’t put it any more in your face. They hate you, they hate us, with a biblical worldview. The black man is being reshaped, and has been reshaped, to think that the black woman is going to save him,” he continues.
“This is a shirking of responsibility. This is men surrendering their balls to the matriarchy. Anybody that doesn’t get it has no understanding of biblical truth. This is just facts,” he says. “You can fall into your delusion if you want.”
Want more from Jason Whitlock?
To enjoy more fearless conversations at the crossroads of culture, faith, sports, and comedy with Jason Whitlock, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.