THE NEWS

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., didn’t use the free government tax-filing system she had spent years promoting when it became available in her state, records show.As far back as 2016, Warren pushed for a free IRS online tax preparation and filing service, a precursor to what became Direct File. The senator touted it as a way for taxpayers to save time and money. When Direct File launched a pilot program serving Massachusetts for the 2024 tax-filing season, however, Warren’s publicly released tax return indicated that she opted to use a private accountant instead.Warren was ineligible to use Direct File during the 2024 tax-filing season because she chose not to take the standard deduction that year. The standard deduction under the program is a restriction critics say illustrates why the program was too limited to serve many taxpayers.”The Direct File pilot program has been a huge win for taxpayers,” Warren said in April 2024. “This year, thousands of taxpayers saved hours of their time and the $150 typically spent on TurboTax and other junk filing fees — money that could be spent on groceries or rent … I’m excited to continue to work with the IRS and the Treasury Department to permanently extend and expand this free and easy tax filing solution for Americans.”HAWLEY, WARREN TEAM UP TO BACK TRUMP, CRACK DOWN ON DEFENSE CONTRACTOR PAYOUTSWarren has characterized herself as one of the top legislative architects of the Direct File system.”For years, Senator Warren has been the Direct File program’s biggest champion — yet her own tax returns show she hired a private accountant,” David Williams, president of the Taxpayer Protection Alliance (TPA), a right-of-center fiscal advocacy group, told Fox News Digital. “Direct File was ill-equipped to handle investment, property and interest income — limiting the tax credits and deductions Americans deserve. At its core, the government would not have any incentive — as the tax preparer, collector, and auditor — to maximize those deductions,” he added. The Trump administration moved to suspend Direct File in 2025, and the IRS later told states the program would not be available for the 2026 filing season.Even after her own return showed she used a private accountant and not Direct File for the 2024 tax-filing season, Warren continued to push for the system. On April 15, Tax Day 2026, Warren took a recently-introduced bill to the Senate floor seeking to revive the program. “Filing your taxes should be easy and free … Let’s save people time and money, and show the American people that government can work for them,” Warren said.SEN WARREN UNLOADS ON TRUMP’S FED NOMINEE KEVIN WARSH IN EXPLOSIVE HEARING SHOWDOWNUsage of the Direct File was low during the 2024 tax-filing season, with only 161,042 of the estimated 19 million eligible Americans submitting returns through it, according to an IRS report.Among those who did use the service, however, 90% rated their experience as “excellent” or “above average,” according to the IRS. Large majorities of respondents reported that Direct File was easy to use and had high quality customer service support.The TPA, however, says that 25% of Direct File users rated their experiences negatively, citing its analysis of user responses obtained via a Freedom of Information Act request.THE SIMPLE TAX HABIT THAT COULD SAVE YOU THOUSANDS OVER YOUR LIFETIMECritics of Direct File, such as conservative economist Stephen Moore, have argued that allowing the IRS, which has an incentive to maximize tax revenue, to prepare taxes for Americans creates a conflict of interest and that the program isn’t truly free, given its administrative costs. Proponents like the left-of-center advocacy group Public Citizen, meanwhile, argue that eliminating filing costs could save taxpayers billions of dollars per year at a relatively minor public expense.Firms such as Intuit and H&R Block lobbied aggressively to kill Direct File, which many believed would cut into their profits.Warren’s office did not respond to multiple requests for comment sent Monday.

Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman is being courted by Republicans ahead of the midterm elections in a pursuit that could determine control of the U.S. Senate.
Accoridng to Politico, Republican operatives are working to try and lure Fetterman across the aisle and bolster their Senate majority ahead of the midterms.
Their report states:

Trump has made the sell, offering his patented total and complete endorsement plus a financial windfall to the Pennsylvanian. A handful of Senate Republicans are also gently feeling out Fetterman and responding to his concerns over the prospect of defecting from the Democratic Party, multiple high-level GOP officials tell me.
If Fetterman does flip, according to officials who were given anonymity to talk about sensitive matters, it will be thanks in large part to his deepening friendship with a pair of senators and their high-profile spouses: Sen. Dave McCormick (R-Pa.), and his wife Dina, and Sen. Katie Britt (R-Ala.), and her husband, Wesley.
…
Trump, who knows a thing or two about party switching, has also gotten in on the action. He’s told one GOP senator he prefers Fetterman making the full conversion to Republican, according to a source familiar with the conversation.
And Trump has said, if Fetterman does, he’d reciprocate. In his typical unsubtle fashion, the president conveyed as much to Sean Hannity in March and asked Hannity to play intermediary.

Fetterman has so far played down the idea and maintained he would be a “shitty Republican.”
“I’m not changing,” Fetterman said. “I’m a Democrat, and I’m staying one. “
“I’d be a shitty Republican,” he later added.
However, the report notes that Fetterman has refused to consider joining the GOP; he is not pushing back against suggestions that he may serve as an independent.
The 56-year-old was first elected to his seat in 2022 after defeating a Republican and now serves as Trump’s Administrator for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.
Since his election, he has taken a number of positions that have infuriated the Democratic grassroots.
These have included wholesale support for Israel, allowing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials to carry out their duties and pushing back against the far-left.
Last month, several leading Democrats publicly called for his ouster after he voted to confirm Markwayne Mullin, who was Trump’s choice for Secretary of Homeland Security.
He has since maintained that his vote was “rooted in a strong, committed, constructive working relationship with Senator Mullin for our nation’s security.”
Democrats Demand Ouster of Sen. John Fetterman After He Votes to Advance Markwayne Mullin as DHS Secretary

The post REPORT: Republicans Working to Flip Sen. John Fetterman — Could Receive Trump Endorsement and Financial Backing appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

The Left is all about freedom of choice unless you make a choice they don’t like. Then they bring the full power of government down on you.
Try being parents in a progressive state who don’t want their son Johnny turned into Susie behind your backs. You just might lose custody, as has happened in some places.
Nearly half the states – those governed by Democratic quacks like Minnesota’s Tim Walz – have criminalized counseling aimed at helping minors overcome unwanted LGBTQ feelings.
On March 31, the U.S. Supreme Court restored some sanity, striking down Colorado’s “conversion therapy” ban as violating a Christian counselor’s First Amendment rights.
In California, the progressive state government ordered crisis pregnancy centers to place ads directing clients to abortion clinics. The Supreme Court stopped this assault in its Becerra ruling in 2022.
Another case in point is New Jersey’s attempt to bully a crisis pregnancy chain by forcing it to reveal its donors. Thankfully, the U.S. Supreme Court put the kibosh on the plan, ruling 9-0 on Wednesday that First Choice Women’s Resource Centers has a First Amendment right to sue the state.
New Jersey Attorney General Matthew J. Platkin, a progressive Democrat, had ordered First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, a chain of five crisis pregnancy centers, to turn over its donor list. He demanded names, phone numbers and addresses of the people who had given money to the facilities, which provide ultrasounds, diapers and other baby needs, along with counseling.
First Choice refused the demand, for good reason. When Democrats obtain lists, they use them to target and punish donors.
After California voters approved a constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman in 2008, contributors to the Prop. 8 campaign were harassed after their names, addresses and donation amounts were posted on Google Maps.
Some people were vilely harangued and others lost their jobs. Brendan Eich, founder of the internet browser Mozilla Firefox, was ousted by his own progressive board in 2014 after they learned that he had donated six years before to the Proposition 8 campaign.
This kind of retaliation is why the Supreme Court later ruled in Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta in 2021 that charities and nonprofits have a First Amendment right to not disclose their donors to the government.
Even earlier, in 1958, the Supreme Court ruled in NAACP v. Alabama that people have the right to anonymously support and associate with organizations. Otherwise, the Democrat-spawned Ku Klux Klan and other hate groups could harass them.
The progressive urge to override individual rights in the name of centralized progress came into vogue in the early 20th century, along with the eugenics movement.
Anchored by atheism, progressivism is utterly incompatible with the Declaration of Independence, as Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas explained in a clear-as-crystal essay recently in The Wall Street Journal.
The Declaration says that “unalienable rights” come from God, not flawed men. Progressivism is a steady march toward a Godless, collectivist future, wrapped in good intentions.
By rejecting God and relying instead on government as the source of all rights, progressivism paved the way for “the most awful century the world has ever seen,” Thomas wrote. “Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, and Mao all were intertwined with the rise of progressivism, and all were opposed to the natural rights on which our Declaration was based.”
In the 1910s, progressivism was embraced by Woodrow Wilson’s Democratic Party, which re-segregated the military, drafted Jim Crow laws and glorified the Klan.
After Republicans voted in higher percentages than Democrats to enact the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, Democrats under President Lyndon Johnson concocted the “Great Society.”
This grand, progressive welfare scheme almost immediately reversed all the considerable gains made by black Americans. Marriage-based families gave way to single-parent households dependent on the welfare state. Once-stable communities fell into urban decay, drug dealers and gangs.
But progressives were fat and happy. They had hooked enough people in their free stuff army to guarantee generational voting success.
Today’s progressives are still at it, encouraging dependency and faith in government, not God. This includes wolves in sheep’s clothing like Texas U.S. Senate candidate James Talerico and Kentucky’s Gov. Andy Beshear.
Like former President Barack Obama, the two Democrats twist the Bible to justify abortion, LGBTQ activism and redistribution of income.
Getting back to the New Jersey case, it exemplifies the cultural chasm in our country. One side sees life and marriage as sacred; the other, based on moral relativism, thinks it’s all negotiable.
Like other crisis pregnancy charities, New Jersey’s First Choice chain is an alternative to abortion. Mr. Platkin, a “rising star” in the Democratic Party according to NewJersey.com, implausibly insists that he just wants to make sure that women aren’t misled into believing that the centers also provide abortions. A gentleman, riding to the rescue.
Mr. Platkin hasn’t demanded donor lists from Planned Parenthood and other abortionists. But then, why should he? He worked with them to target First Choice. And, they’re making millions doing the devil’s work of killing unborn babies, donating some of it back to Democrats.
It’s the angels at First Choice whom Mr. Platkin was hoping to put out of business. Trying to save babies’ lives and help women avoid possible injuries and lifelong regret is their passion.
As Adam West in the old TV version of “Batman” would say, “What criminals!”
This column was first published at the Washington Times.

In thinking about Cole Tomas Allen, the man charged with attempting to assassinate the president at the White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner, I keep coming back to historian Hannah Arendt’s phrase “the banality of evil.”
Arendt, who covered the trial of Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem, expected the chief architect of the Holocaust to be a monster with blood dripping from his fangs. That he was a monster is undeniable, but in many ways, he was rather ordinary, even bland.
Some are surprised by Mr. Allen’s vanilla ice cream plainness. The man who described himself as the “Friendly Federal Assassin” is well-educated, with degrees in mechanical engineering and computer science. He has no documented history of mental illness.
Those who knew him professionally said he seemed like a nice guy.
Evil and education have no connection. In Germany, the less educated, such as farm workers, were the least likely to join the Nazi Party, while the Einsatzgruppen, the mobile killing units that preceded the death camps, were often composed of professionals, including lawyers, accountants and teachers.
Mr. Cole’s manifesto is extreme, but no more so than the rhetoric of many in the Democratic Party’s leadership and mainstream media. He referred to President Trump as a “pedophile, rapist and traitor,” which, come to think of it, sounds like many of the “undocumented” aliens his predecessor allowed to enter the country illegally.
Was Mr. Cole brainwashed? If he was, then he brainwashed himself.
The Friendly Federal Assassin chose to believe certain things: that Mr. Trump and members of his Cabinet had the blood of innocents on their hands, such as “fishermen” (in reality, Venezuelan drug smugglers), and were plotting to destroy democracy.
In every generation, political killers have chosen to believe certain things that allowed them to rationalize their evil. The Jacobins, who presided over the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution, believed aristocrats were conspiring with foreign monarchs to overthrow the republic, so the guillotine was an instrument of national survival.
The Bolsheviks justified their liquidation of the kulaks (relatively prosperous peasant farmers) as counterrevolutionaries. The Nazis claimed that Jews were plotting to destroy Germany and rule the world and that mass murder was the only way to stop them.
Mao Zedong believed that for communism to succeed in China, certain classes had to be eliminated, including intellectuals during the Cultural Revolution.
Once upon a time, society believed in sin – that the human heart could be corrupted in ways that led to acts of depravity. Sometime in the 20th century, psychology replaced theology.
It didn’t work.
Humanity hasn’t gotten better in the era of psychoanalysis, group therapy and “I’m OK – You’re OK.” Even with all the bloodshed of past religious wars, the 20th century showed mass murder motivated by ideology unparalleled in the course of history.
Rather than improving the human condition, by leaving God out of the equation, the modern era has shown a proliferation of evil: genocide, gulags and supersonic jihad. As we have moved away from biblical morality, we have gotten ever closer to the abyss.
Western religion teaches humility. Cole Allen’s manifesto and conduct reek of monumental arrogance. Because he believed the president and the president’s Cabinet to be guilty of certain crimes, he took it upon himself to be judge, jury and executioner.
Christianity says the sword of justice is in the hand of the state, not your hand. The attack on the White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner reflects a nihilism increasingly in vogue.
For the left, political violence is increasingly the option of first resort. If you believe George Floyd’s death was the result of police brutality, then burn down a city. If you think the Palestinians are oppressed, then attack Jews on college campuses or drive your car into a synagogue. If you are opposed to the enforcement of our immigration laws, then assault federal agents.
The choice is simple: You can obey the laws of God or act as if you are God.
Cole Allen is symptomatic of a condition. He is part of an army of moral anarchists that includes the killers of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson and Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk, the attempted assassin who shot President Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania, and killed Corey Comperatore, and the millions who applaud their foul deeds.
Call it what it is. It isn’t political activism or mental illness. It’s evil, pure and simple – a sickness of the soul.
This column was first published at the Washington Times.

The COVID Playbook Returns: Energy Rationing & The Politics Of Crisis Control

Authored by Chris MacIntosh via Doug Casey’s International Man,

This recent headline from New Zealand should itself send chills down your spine…

“Government reveals details of fuel crisis rationing plan – and who will be prioritized.”

Anytime the pointy shoes get to decide who will and who will not get something, you must realise that you’re about to get royally screwed.

The uncomfortable parallels between the Convid response and the proposed fuel rationing plan cannot be ignored.

On the surface, the Fuel Response Plan looks more restrained than Covid. It’s incremental, it defers to markets in early phases, and it explicitly frames escalation as a last resort. Officials are at pains to say Phases 3 and 4 are unlikely. Then again, we saw the same BS with the Covid scam. This is deliberate positioning.

The architecture of this plan is strikingly familiar…

The Structural Parallels

Escalating powers are dressed as prudent planning.

Covid began with “two weeks to flatten the curve.” The fuel plan begins with “monitor and inform.” In both cases, the framework is designed to normalise the existence of extraordinary powers before they’re used.

Phases 3 and 4 — rationing, purchasing limits, directed distribution — are legally and politically pre-legitimised by their inclusion in a published plan. The plan doesn’t just prepare for a crisis; it prepares the public to accept an intervention they haven’t yet been asked about. Most notably there is no consultation mechanism.

This is pure top-down central planning. The illusion of democracy should be well and truly shattered. Sadly, I suspect the sheep will fall for it… again.

Ministerial discretion is the operative mechanism. The Fuel Security Ministerial Oversight Group decides when to move between phases, guided by six criteria — none of which are automatic triggers. Ministers “will consider a broad range of information” and “assess the full picture.”

This is identical to the Covid Alert Level system, where Ashley Bloomfield and Jacinda Ardern effectively held unchecked discretion over the country’s movement. The criteria provide political cover, not genuine constraint. It was a smokescreen, and so is this.

Consultation theatre. Phases 3 and 4 are labelled “under consultation” — but consultation with whom, on what timeline, with what veto power?

Covid’s “consultation” with business groups and regional authorities was largely performative. There is no reason to expect this to be different.

Where It’s Actually Worse

The priority bands are socially explosive.

Band A through E create a formal hierarchy of citizens. Very undemocratic, of course — but hey, who’s asking questions? It’s a crisis, dammit.

Emergency services and defence get uncapped supply. General retail consumers are last. This is defensible in an emergency — but it also means that in a sustained disruption, ordinary people rationing school runs and commutes are subsidising the uninterrupted operation of government and defence.

During Covid, economic pain was at least notionally shared. Here, it is explicitly stratified by decree.

“Economically important services” is wide open. Band B includes “critical transport services” and “food supply and primary production during time-critical periods.” Who defines time-critical? Who decides which freight is critical? If I’m a small guy distributing food from wholesalers to local delis, do I get priority? I highly doubt it. Nope — it’s going to be like Convid. A chosen few.

This is the same stupid bureaucratic discretion grant that, under Covid, would have been used to favour large incumbents — supermarket chains, major logistics operators — while small operators fought for scraps. Nothing in this document prevents that.

No exit criteria. The plan says measures “will be lifted as soon as conditions allow.” Covid said the same.

New Zealand maintained some of the most restrictive border policies in the developed world for nearly two years. “As soon as conditions allow” means as soon as Ministers decide conditions allow — which is no constraint at all.

Where It’s Genuinely Better

Honestly, the only thing I could find in this plan that is mildly positive is there isn’t (yet) any attempt to manufacture social solidarity through emotional appeals. I suspect that’ll change, along with the inevitable propaganda.

The Core Problem

The fundamental lesson not learned from Covid is this: emergency frameworks, once built, are hard to dismantle and easy to expand.

New Zealand’s Covid apparatus — the legislation, the enforcement culture, the public health bureaucracy’s authority — outlasted any reasonable emergency by 12–18 months, and left lasting damage to civil liberties norms, small business viability, and trust in institutions.

This fuel plan creates an analogous apparatus. The ministerial group, the priority bands, the directed distribution powers — these don’t disappear when the crisis ends. They become baseline infrastructure for the next emergency, whatever it is.

Now I want to touch on something related: the steady creep of fascism we’ve seen globally. Convid was a major push in that direction, and I see the potential ideas currently floated by the pointy shoes as yet another step into that cesspool.

The Framing Question

Most commentary will describe this plan as pragmatic emergency management. That framing should be rejected immediately.

Emergency frameworks are not politically neutral. They encode assumptions about who owns resources, who allocates them, who gets protected, and who bears the cost.

When you map the fuel plan’s architecture against economic models honestly, the result is uncomfortable.

Economic Fascism Is the Model

Economic fascism, stripped of its wartime aesthetic, is a specific and coherent system: private ownership is preserved in form, but the state directs resource allocation, sets priorities, and determines winners and losers.

The large private firm and the state apparatus become functionally indistinguishable. Property rights exist on paper while operational autonomy does not.

Let’s map that against the proposed fuel plan…

Fuel companies retain ownership of their infrastructure and stocks — but government directs who they supply, in what priority, under what conditions.
Industry “coordination” is the mechanism, meaning large incumbents with government relationships are at the table; small operators are not.
Crony capitalism is taken to a new level.
The priority bands — Band A through E — are not market outcomes. They are state-directed allocation dressed up in administrative language.
This is not a market. It is directed private enterprise — which is the operational definition of economic fascism.

The Middle Class Obliteration Mechanism

Remember Covid measures? The middle class got raped — most still don’t even know it … they just realise they’re poorer than before.

The “priority bands” tell you everything. Let’s work through them:

Band A: Government, defence, courts, corrections, hospitals. The state itself, fully protected. Surprise, surprise.
Band B: Large logistics operators, supermarket supply chains, international aviation. These are not small businesses. These are large corporates with existing government relationships. Keep in mind Air New Zealand was partly nationalised during Convid. That it has lost money every year since is no surprise and entirely ignored. I expect in this ensuing crisis we’ll see more state ownership take place. Public-private partnerships is how it’ll be sold to the peasants.
Band C: Public transport, essential infrastructure. Again, largely state-owned or state-contracted entities.
Band D: “All other commercial and business fuel uses.” This is where the small business owner, the tradesman, the independent courier, the rural contractor sits. They are fourth in line, behind the state and its preferred corporate partners.
Band E: General retail. The ordinary citizen. Last.
The middle class — small business owners, independent operators, tradespeople, rural producers outside “time-critical” periods — get what’s left after the state and its large corporate partners have filled their stomachs and wallets. This is not an accident of design. It is the design.

The Ideological Laundering

What makes this particularly effective as a system is that it operates entirely within the language of liberal democracy. There is no ostensibly visible expropriation. There is no nationalisation. Property rights are seen to be formally respected. The language is technocratic — “assessment criteria,” “ministerial oversight,” “phase transitions.”

But the functional outcome — state-directed resource allocation favouring large corporates and government entities, with the small business owner and individual citizen at the back of the queue — is indistinguishable from what you would design if you were deliberately trying to hollow out the economic middle.

The Conclusion Nobody Will Print

The fuel plan is not a fascist document. It is not even a particularly radical one by contemporary standards. That is precisely what makes it worth scrutinising carefully.

It is the latest iteration of a governance model that has been quietly consolidating for decades: the state and large capital as co-administrators of the economy, with small business and the individual citizen positioned as residual claimants on whatever resources remain after the primary beneficiaries have been served.

Call it economic fascism, corporate statism, or crony capitalism — the label matters less than the mechanism. And the mechanism is, once again, hiding in plain sight inside a document described as emergency planning.

Editor’s Note: If Chris is right, the fuel plan is not just about energy. It is another warning sign that governments are preparing to manage future crises by controlling access, rationing resources, and deciding who gets protected first. That has serious implications for your money, your freedom, and how you prepare. To better understand the economic, political, and cultural forces now colliding — and what you could do to stay one step ahead — read our special report, Clash of the Systems: Thoughts on Investing at a Unique Point in Time.

Read the special report here.

Tyler Durden
Mon, 05/04/2026 – 18:25

Amsterdam has reportedly become the first capital city in the world to ban public ads for meat and fossil fuels — wiping burgers, gas-powered cars, and airline promotions from billboards, tram stops and metro stations.Since May 1, the Dutch capital and tourist hotspot’s advertising landscape has undergone a dramatic shift. Ads once showcasing chicken nuggets, SUVs, and budget flights have been replaced with promotions for museums and concerts, according to BBC News.Local politicians say the sweeping move is part of an aggressive climate agenda, with goals to reach carbon neutrality by 2050 and cut meat consumption in half, the outlet reported.‘MEAT-CENTRIC’ MEALS LIKE THANKSGIVING CONTRIBUTE TO A CLIMATE CRISIS: BLOOMBERG”The climate crisis is very urgent,” Anneke Veenhoff from the GreenLeft Party said. “I mean, if you want to be leading in climate policies and you rent out your walls to exactly the opposite, then what are you doing?”But critics argue the policy crosses a line — calling it an overreach that attempts to engineer personal choices, according to BBC News.The Dutch Meat Association blasted the ban as “an undesirable way to influence consumer behavior,” warning that meat provides essential nutrients and should remain visible and accessible, the outlet reported.Meanwhile, travel industry leaders say the restrictions unfairly target businesses. FLARING CLIMATE PROTESTS BECOMING MORE CONFRONTATIONAL AS FREE SPEECH TESTED GLOBALLYThe Dutch Association of Travel Agents and Tour Operators called the ban on airline advertising a disproportionate blow to commercial freedom, according to BBC News.Supporters, however, are framing the policy as a broader cultural shift — even comparing meat ads to cigarette campaigns of decades past.”Because if I look now back at like old pictures, you have Johan Cruyff,” Hannah Prins, a paralegal at Advocates for the Future, told the outlet. “The famous Dutch footballer. … He would be in advertisements for tobacco. That used to be normal. He died of lung cancer.”Prins added, “I don’t think it’s normal to see murdered animals on billboards. So I think it’s very good that that’s going to change.”CLIMATE GROUPS SUE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION OVER EPA’S BOMBSHELL DEREGULATION DECISIONOther Dutch cities — including Haarlem, Utrecht and Nijmegen — have rolled out similar restrictions, while cities across Europe continue pushing to curb fossil fuel advertising, BBC News reported.Meanwhile, in the United States, federal officials have taken a markedly different approach to food policy. The Department of Health and Human Services earlier this year unveiled updated dietary guidance featuring an inverted food pyramid. The top of the pyramid, now the wider part of the structure, is built on meat, fats, fruits and vegetables, while whole grains are at the narrow bottom.Fox News Digital’s Angelica Stabile contributed to this report.

President Donald Trump’s new nominee for surgeon general is exposing divisions in the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement, the health-focused coalition elevated inside the administration by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.”The new surgeon general nominee, Dr. Nicole Saphier, may have a great pro-life testimony, but she gets an F when it comes to all things MAHA,” said Turning Point USA health and wellness podcaster Alex Clark — a comment shared by other MAHA activists like Kelly Ryerson, an anti-pesticide advocate also known online as “Glyphosate Girl.””DOGE the Surgeon General!!! We want medical freedom!!!! If not Casey – we take no one!” added Vani Hari, also known online as “Feed Babe” and a prominent figure inside the MAHA movement. She recently told The Atlantic that failing to confirm Means would “ruin the soul of MAHA.”TRUMP SURGEON GENERAL NOMINEE CONFIRMATION HEARING POSTPONED AS SHE GOES INTO LABORAfter Trump’s initial pick for surgeon general, Dr. Janette Nesheiwat, was withdrawn in 2025, Trump selected Casey Means, a Stanford-trained physician, wellness author and entrepreneur, and vocal MAHA proponent who was close to Kennedy as he helped develop the Trump administration’s health agenda. Means’ nomination was withdrawn Thursday, and she was replaced with radiologist and former Fox News contributor Dr. Nicole Saphier amid a stalled confirmation process leading up to the eventual pivot.Trump announced that Means’ nomination would be withdrawn from his Truth Social platform Thursday and replaced with Saphier amid the stalled confirmation process, in part caused by Means’ pregnancy during the process and the need for extensive vetting, a source familiar with the nomination told Fox News Digital. Minutes before Trump announced the pivot to Saphier on his social media platform Truth Social, Trump called Means “a strong MAHA Warrior, at the recommendation of Secretary Kennedy, who understands the MAHA Movement better than anyone.” Kennedy also praised Means as news was coming down that she would be replaced by Saphier. Meanwhile, the pair also lambasted moderate U.S. Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., Chairman of the Senate’s powerful health committee in charge of getting the surgeon general nomination approved, for allegedly sabotaging Means’ nomination.RFK JR. ‘WRONG’ ABOUT VACCINATIONS, GOP SENATOR SAYSDelays and concerns about Means’ qualifications and views on vaccines, among other things, slowed down the process, until, according to a source familiar with the confirmation process, it was determined that not enough support would be garnered to secure Means’ appointment. Saphier has been described by Trump as “an INCREDIBLE COMMUNICATOR” who “will do great things for our Country,” and Kennedy has also publicly supported Saphier’s nomination. But MAHA activists became alarmed by the decision to withdraw Means’ nomination.Clark described Saphier as a “catastrophic mistake” at a time when the MAHA coalition is “very fragile.””She is one of the most pro-vaccine advocates in medicine, even defending Hep B on the first day of life,” Clark wrote on X. “My position isn’t to replace Dr. Saphier. It’s to completely DOGE the Surgeon General role. If we don’t, we risk accelerating the loss of one of the most activated voting blocs the GOP is already watching slip away.””Doge the SG!!!!” Hari said in a post on X Sunday, lamenting that the pivot is just “more of the same.””We’re seeing a system that protects itself,” she added, according to The Washington Post. “A system that says it wants change but recoils the moment real change shows up.”REMOVING ONE FOOD INGREDIENT FROM YOUR HOME IS FIRST STEP TO ‘DOING MAHA,’ INFLUENCER SAYS”I am so proud of Casey, and the way she conducted herself during this process,” her brother, Calley Means, another early leader within the MAHA movement said on X before laying into Cassidy. “I am also proud to work for the Trump admin, who has marshaled the disruptive MAHA message and driven victories against dark forces personified by Bill Cassidy.”Fox News Digital reached out to Saphier for comment on the criticism that she is not skeptical enough of vaccines, but did not hear back. White House spokesperson Kush Desai said Saphier has been “an outspoken voice” against “intrusive COVID-19 mandates, the politicization of science, and the federal government’s role in America’s chronic disease epidemic.””She will be a powerful asset … to deliver on every facet of (the president’s) MAHA agenda.”Others aligned with the MAHA world appeared less concerned with Means’ departure, such as the Independent Medical Alliance, which is anti-pesticide, promotes questions about vaccine efficacy and supported two of Kennedy’s picks for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s vaccine advisory panel.TRUMP FDA NOMINEE TURNS VACCINE QUESTION ON DEM, RECALLING CONTROVERSIAL BIDEN DECISIONDr. Joseph Varon, the group’s president and chief medical officer, said Saphier was “exactly who America needs,” describing her as “a real doctor, treating real patients, who has the spine to tell the truth even when it’s unpopular.”Dr. Robert Malone, a leading contrarian to COVID-19 vaccine mandates and lockdown measures and a supporter of the broader MAHA movement, described Saphier as “moderate-MAHA” in a blog on his Substack.Malone also attempted to assuage fears Saphier is too pro-vaccine.”This is the part MAHA readers care about most, and it is the part where Saphier’s record is most genuinely mixed,” Malone wrote on his blog. “She is pro-individual-vaccine on the merits. She is supportive of parental autonomy on schedule. She is critical of universal pediatric mandates absent benefit data. She is explicitly sympathetic to MAHA’s vaccine-safety-surveillance reform agenda,” he continued. “She is not, in any reading I can construct from the documentary record, an anti-vaccine voice in the medical-freedom register that, say, Children’s Health Defense operates in. She is also not, in any reading I can construct, a CDC-establishment-defending voice of the kind Cassidy is looking for.”Kennedy, known for being a vaccine skeptic, faced backlash when he attempted to make formal changes to the U.S. childhood vaccine schedule — changes ultimately blocked by the courts. Fox News Digital reached out to MAHA Action, whose founder Tony Lyons fought against moderate GOP Senators, like Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Lisa Murkowski, R-Ak., who were not supportive of Means’ nomination, but did not receive a response in time for publication.

Barack Obama poses with Mark Hamill to give an update on his presidential center on Monday. Credit: @ObamaFoundation X screenshot
Former President Barack Obama is getting dragged online after using “Star Wars Day” to showcase his ghastly presidential center with woke actor Mark Hamill aka “Luke Skywalker” joining him.
As TGP readers may know, fans of the space saga use May 4 every year to celebrate the creation of the franchise and their favorite characters.
“Star Wars Day” has also become a popular cultural event with sports teams, politicians, and the International Space Station participating.
Obama, though, used the moment to provide an update on the center. But he forced viewers to endure an incredibly cringeworthy and lie-filled exchange with Hamill first.
In the video, Obama is seen bragging about himself while pretending he’s speaking about ordinary people. Then, he has the audacity to claim that his presidential center is absolutely not for his legacy, “but a gateway to yours.”
“The Obama Presidential Center is much more than a museum,” he adds. “It is an entire campus built to empower you.”
Hamill acts like an idiot throughout and provides even more cringeworthy dialogue.
WATCH:

May the Fourth be with YOU, from the Obama Presidential Center.
Opening June 19. @BarackObama @MarkHamill pic.twitter.com/OzhhUzD789
— The Obama Foundation (@ObamaFoundation) May 4, 2026

OBAMA: Happy Star Wars Day from the Obama Presidential Center.
HAMILL: I have a very good feeling about this.
OBAMA: Mark, I am glad you are here, I want to tell you about someone…A young person born into ordinary circumstances, but restless…A kid with big dreams, a bit of a rebel.
HAMILL: I like where this is going.
OBAMA: They join a scrappy group of underdogs and set out to change things.
HAMILL: By blowing up a giant space laser?!
OBAMA: Mark, this isn’t about you…This is about them (pointing to the camera)
This isn’t a monument to my legacy, this is a gateway to yours.
The Obama Presidential Center is much more than a museum. It is an entire campus built to empower you.
A place to come together, get inspired, and become a force…For change. See what I did there.
HAMILL: Strong, the dad jokes are.
OBAMA: That’s perfect!
The video reveals toward the end that tickets to visit the presidential center go on sale on May 6. It is scheduled to open on June 19.
X users completely roasted Obama and Hamill in the comments. Many also noted how similar the building is to The Death Star.

Looks like a giant trash can.
— Gunther Eagleman (@GuntherEagleman) May 4, 2026

Is Mark Hamil drunk or high in this video? pic.twitter.com/2WTHYyzRxd
— Brian Kennedy (@Brian_Kennedy) May 4, 2026

pic.twitter.com/fqDaGpSR2m
— Just a guy like you… (@RegularTxGuy) May 4, 2026

pic.twitter.com/PYE1Z88cCu
— Pepe Dutch (@PepeDutch17) May 4, 2026

Mark Hamill’s career if he didn’t get the role of Luke… pic.twitter.com/P0R1lMCKcM
— Sum Facet (@SumFacet) May 4, 2026

Funny how you’re standing with Luke Skywalker in front of the Death Star!
That is one ugly f*cking building! pic.twitter.com/Pw7LwUt94t
— Mighty Magnet (@TheMightyMagnet) May 4, 2026

So…people have to buy very expensive tickets to an ugly albatross masturbatory “center” in a neighborhood that Barry has not visited in years?
Also, this is Mark Hamill’s first paying gig in decades?
No Kings/Ruling class evil “royalty:” pic.twitter.com/xqMhLIO9ZU
— Will Hayes (@FreeWillHayes) May 4, 2026

Cool. That building looks like an even more hideous Death Star.
— Pat Mcdonaldson (@pat_mcdonaldson) May 4, 2026

Obama’s giant trash can opens soon, no force in the galaxy can save its ugliness
— Joe (@Azpl431227) May 4, 2026

The post Barack Obama Hawks His Hideous Presidential Center on “Star Wars Day” Alongside Mark Hamill in Absolutely Cringeworthy Video and The Replies are Brutal appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.