There already have been a lot of suspicions expressed that the fundraising giant ActBlue, which has delivered billions of dollars to leftists in the Democrat party, has been stepping outside the law.

In fact, Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., the chief of the House Oversight Committee, already has confirmed that, “We’re investigating ActBlue the same way we investigated the Bidens. … We’re starting with the suspicious activity reports — bank violations that flag financial crimes. And let me tell you, the evidence is overwhelming.”

There have been claims of money-laundering, massive piles of cash being funneled from overseas into Democrat campaigns, and more.

Now it looks like some answered could be coming.

A report at the Washington Examiner confirms President Donald Trump is signing a memorandum calling for a crackdown on “straw donors” and foreign money in American campaigns.

The publication said it obtained a fact sheet that instructs Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate and “take appropriate action” on allegations about the organization, which even has been accused of taking contributions from terrorists.

Specifically the review is to cover illegal “straw” or “dummy” contributions, the report said.

It cites congressional investigations that documented “significant fraud schemes” involving ActBlue and donations made through the organization just ahead of the 2024 election that came “from foreign internet protocol addresses using prepaid cards” that could involve illegal behavior.

The payment processor is used by Democrats at multiple ranks and is credited with having processed more than $16 billion in donations to leftists.

It fell into disarray, however, this year, the report said, when the New York Times “reported on March 5 that at least seven senior staffers resigned in late February, including its top legal officer. The reason for the exodus is not yet known.”

Republicans have charged that it accepted donations on credit cards without verification, raising the risk of fraud. And it allows contributions through PayPal, Google Pay, or Venmo, and other payments forms that cannot be traced.

JUST IN: President Trump will be signing an order today cracking down on Democrats’ ActBlue, per Politico

GREAT! ActBlue is nothing more than a MONEY LAUNDERING platform the Dems use to commit widespread fraud.

There are countless cases of donations being made in other… pic.twitter.com/BDzyVAQBVA

— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) April 24, 2025

ACTBLUE BUSTED: DONATIONS MADE IN MY NAME—TO KANSAS?!

This is criminal identity theft, plain and simple.

How did ActBlue get my name, attach it to donations I never made, and funnel cash to candidates in Kansas—a place I’ve never even been?

The records don’t lie: this… https://t.co/IsdIztlw7B pic.twitter.com/4Nfdoj6oKj

— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) April 24, 2025

BREAKING: President Donald Trump is about to take major action against ACTBLUE, the Democrats’ fundraising arm – POLITICO

THIS. IS. HUGE.

Trump is set to sign a memorandum targeting foreign contributions in American elections.

AG Pam Bondi is reportedly to be involved in… pic.twitter.com/3bFBkCvMZM

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) April 24, 2025 >

Trump’s fact sheet said he is “taking action to address malign actors and foreign nationals who seek to illegally influence American elections, undermining the integrity of our electoral process.”

Several attorneys general from states also have begun investigating.

BREAKING: Rep. James Comer and the FBI to bring CRIMINAL CHARGES against those behind ActBlue, The Largest Money Laundering Scheme in U.S. history:

“We are going forward with our investigation. Their lawyers are leaving… This will be the end of the Democratic Party.” pic.twitter.com/6OOXyGjyr4

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) March 13, 2025

Earlier, the Gateway Pundit published a transcript of an interview with Benny Johnson in which Comer “laid out a damning case against the far-left fundraising juggernaut, accusing it of funneling billions in suspicious cash – potentially from foreign adversaries – into Democrat coffers under the guise of ‘grassroots’ donations.”

The report said the investigation is being accompanied by “chaos” inside ActBlue, where “key executives are resigning, lawyers are jumping ship, employees are getting locked out of their computers….”

Johnson, a conservative commentator, pointed out, “When the lawyers flee, you know you’re cooked.”

Comer’s committee actually started investigating “after discovering a flood of small-dollar donations from untraceable sources, many from elderly Americans who were unaware their names were being used to funnel cash into the Democrat machine,” the report said.

LEFT: James O’Keefe exposed Democrats using thousands of addresses to launder fake political donations through ActBlue

RIGHT: Democrat Jasmine Crockett received a $16,000 donation from a 67 year old retired couple with no income. They didn’t make the donation

MONEY LAUNDERING pic.twitter.com/vtPt9b0z5D

— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) March 13, 2025

Comer said his work had been obstructed under the Joe Biden administration by his appointee, Janet Yellen, who “would not reply to my request” for information about “suspicious activity reports.”

One of those circumstances, evidence has shown, was an 80-year-old woman living in a rent-controlled apartment in Virginia who had made 22,619 donations in 500 days – totaling more than $800,000.

Since the death of Pope Francis on Easter Monday, social media has been filled with expressions of loss and mourning, as well as opinions – both positive and negative – about Francis’ time on the Throne of Peter. The deceased pontiff is being heralded for his warmth and generosity of spirit, particularly as directed at the poor and otherwise marginalized: migrants, victims of wars and members of the LGBT community.

At the same time, Francis’ actions often stunned those who saw them less as outreach and more as alienation of the faithful and confusion of everyone else: his decision to reconstitute the John Paul II Pontifical Institute on Marriage and the Family and the removal of most of its leadership; the suggestion in his encyclical “Amoris Laetitia” that divorced and remarried or cohabiting couples are not in violation of Church teaching; his appointment of a pro-abortion activist to the Pontifical Academy for Life; his severe restrictions on the Latin Mass (a worship practice expanded and promoted by his predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI); his demonstrable lack of understanding about capitalism and free commerce, and his fixation on the environment.

Unsurprisingly, opinions are definitely split about who the College of Cardinals should select as the next pope. Francis named 108 of the existing 135 cardinals under the age of 80 who can vote in the papal conclave, which suggests to some that the next pope is likely to have a more progressive bent, along the lines of Francis’ own. Other observers insist that the next pope needs to bring clarity to the waters muddied by Francis’ oft-impromptu remarks, and to emphasize salvation through Christ’s teachings rather than via contemporary policy initiatives.

Of course, the cardinals are not going to pay any attention to what anyone says on social media or elsewhere; they are going to do whatever it is that they do. And everyone else should stop warning that the selection of this man or that one as pope is going to destroy the Catholic Church, much less Christianity more broadly speaking.

Christ Himself said that the gates of Hell would not prevail against His Church. But He never said it would be led by the Vatican. His followers were attacked and persecuted by Rome. He Himself was crucified by a representative of Rome. And yet it was Christ’s little group that triumphed over the Roman empire. It was an irony only God could produce that the seat of the Catholic Church would come to be in Rome. (At least, most of the time.)

Even so, we should be careful about assuming that the preservation of Christ’s church succeeds or fails depending upon what happens at the Vatican. Like millions of other Christians, I will pray for a leader of the Catholic Church who is brave enough to proclaim Christ’s truth, instead of serving as a mouthpiece for the world’s power brokers, another man who pretends that salvation comes from politics (like the “right” attitudes about the location and rotation of the sun and planets, anthropogenic climate change or manufactured mass migration).

That is the same error that was made in Christ’s day; many of those who rejected Him did so because they assumed the Messiah would come with earthly power, political power. When He did not, they ignored and denounced Him. Still others feared Him because He threatened their earthly power. Then, as now, those in power could whip the ignorant mobs into a frenzy demanding the death of an innocent man.

It has been so ever since.

Consider, however: This country – the United States – was founded, in part, by many Protestants who fled Europe because of the stranglehold the Catholic Church had on European politics for centuries prior, and to escape the bloody battles between religious factions that controlled governments. “Believe this way or burn.”

The United States became the most prosperous country in the history of humanity because of its emphasis upon individual virtue. Our Constitution rejects the notion of government control by use of religion. It is based upon the premise of individual liberty, but founded upon the understanding that people’s evil impulses must be restrained by their own morality and religion – Judeo-Christian morality and religion. That is why John Adams proclaimed that, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

It is no coincidence that the erosion of Judeo-Christianity’s influence on American society has been accompanied by the breakdown of families, the corrosion of our culture, rising crime – and corresponding calls for ever-larger government, with its insatiable demand for taxes, inevitable corruption, skyrocketing debt and hopeless incompetence.

There are important lessons here. Christ’s church will prevail, not because of earthly power or political control, but because of the love for Christ that can be stirred in individual human hearts. He is the Way, the Truth and the Life, and all who seek Him humbly will find Him. We are Christ’s Church.

Am I saying that the pope is not important? No. He is the successor to Peter, whom Christ appointed to lead His Church. The pope can – and should – manifest Christ’s love, instruct on God’s laws for humanity and lead people to Him. But a weak or venal pope can lead people astray or cause them to fall away. So yes – I will pray for a pope who is a godly leader. But I will also trust in Christ’s promise that His Church will not be destroyed. And that means that we must, each of us, take up our own crosses and follow Him. We must seek the Truth and speak it, whether the pope does or not.

Salvation is not to be found in politics – or popes.

If it hasn’t been made clear enough by now, President Donald Trump and his administration have unfinished business from his first term.

That feeling is especially acute at the State Department. The first Trump administration’s plans to revive the American system were undermined by leakers and turncoats who sought to preserve the status quo. Such was the case at the State Department: When Trump proposed transformative cuts in 2017, the president faced resistance not just from deep state actors but from his own political appointees and Republicans in Congress.

The four-year interregnum of President Joe Biden culminated in Trump’s return to Washington more powerful and more popular than ever. The mandate victory exposed just how wrong the establishment was in thinking the American people wanted Trump-lite—the American people wanted full-bodied Trump.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has brought that message to Foggy Bottom. On Monday, Rubio announced the most aggressive reorganization of the State Department in modern American history. This “comprehensive reorganization plan,” Rubio said in a statement, “will bring the department into the 21st Century.”

Today is the day. Under @POTUS’ leadership and at my direction, we are reversing decades of bloat and bureaucracy at the State Department.

These sweeping changes will empower our talented diplomats to put America and Americans first. pic.twitter.com/CGWz3JrYwu

— Secretary Marco Rubio (@SecRubio) April 22, 2025

Prior to Rubio’s arrival in Foggy Bottom, the State Department had 734 different offices, many with redundant tasks and responsibilities. Now, Rubio aims to decrease that number to 604 with the closure of 132 offices, according to a report from The Free Press. The nearly 20% reduction in State Department offices will come with the elimination of 700 civil service and foreign service employees.

Beyond the closure of 132 offices, 137 offices will be consolidated into other divisions of the agency. Furthermore, the elimination of 700 foreign and civil service roles is just the tip of the iceberg, as Rubio has instructed his undersecretaries to produce plans within 30 days to slash their staff by 15%.

SCOOP: The Trump administration is launching the biggest shake-up at the State Department in decades, @TheFP has learned.

?? Closing 132 offices
??Undersecretaries to reduce personnel by 15%
??Moving 137 offices
+More pic.twitter.com/krPa8pnddw

— Gabe Kaminsky (@gekaminsky) April 22, 2025

Some of the offices Rubio is looking to downsize employ thousands of people, thanks to the rapid growth of state department staffing over the last few decades. Prior to World War II, the State Department employed about 1,000. By 1946, the State Department had grown to 17,000 employees, somewhat understandable to meet the needs of the war and its aftermath.

Today, the State Department employs around 80,000 people between foreign service, civil service, and locally employed staff. Cold War hires? No. In the year 2000, State Department employees numbered just over 30,000.

In 25 years, the agency has nearly tripled in size. All the while, the Department of Defense has played an increasingly important role in international diplomacy at the expense of the State Department. Core State Department functions and efficacy have been undermined, due in no small part to over bureaucratization and left-wing capture that has diverted oodles of taxpayer dollars to liberal pet projects.

Rubio himself described the department as “bloated, bureaucratic, and unable to perform its essential diplomatic mission in this new era of great power competition”:

Over the past 15 years, the Department’s footprint has had unprecedented growth and costs have soared. But far from seeing a return on investment, taxpayers have seen less effective and efficient diplomacy. The sprawling bureaucracy created a system more beholden to radical political ideology than advancing America’s core national interests.

Trump has long recognized this truth, which in part explains why Trump chose a complete outsider in Rex Tillerson, the former chairman of ExxonMobil, as his first secretary of state.

In the early days of Trump 1.0, the administration proposed a 28% cut to the State Department budget, with a $25.6 billion budget between the State Department and USAID. The proposal, Tillerson told State Department employees in an email at the time, “acknowledges that U.S. engagement must be more efficient, that our aid be more effective, and that advocating the national interests of our country always be our primary mission.”

Those deep cuts failed to materialize, and Democrats were not solely to blame. Republicans in Congress opposed the plan, as well. Then-Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said he was “not in favor” of the cuts. The late Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., also said he was “very much opposed.” Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., went further, claiming Trump’s State Department cuts were “dead on arrival” and that “it would be a disaster.” Even Rubio expressed concerns at the time.

Graham’s prediction turned out to be true: Republicans in Congress failed to deliver on the cuts that would have assisted Trump’s reform efforts. By 2021, the State Department saw a 2,000-person drop in foreign service staffers and still fewer reductions in civil service staff, but this was mostly credited to attrition and retirements.

Now, Rubio is prepared to go farther than anyone in the first Trump administration—much less Rubio himself—imagined in 2017.

“We are facing tremendous challenges across the globe,” Rubio’s statement said. “To deliver on President Trump’s America First foreign policy, we must make the State Department Great Again.”

Rubio’s reforms have the potential to be bigger and better than the deal struck between Senator Jesse Helms, R-N.C., and then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright (with one Senator Joe Biden playing a major role, as well) in the late Clinton years. The deal, which saw the State Department re-absorb the United States Information Agency (USIA) and the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency (ACDA), marked the last time the State Department absorbed a major bureaucratic entity before it reabsorbed USAID in February.

The Helms-Albright agreement provides powerful testimony because it was ultimately Congress who delivered on the deal when it passed The 1998 Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act.

As Rubio institutes his reforms and DOGE identifies waste, fraud, and abuse at the State Department to streamline department processes, it will be up to Congress to protect what could be Rubio’s legacy at Foggy Bottom.

[Editor’s note: This story originally was published by The Daily Signal.]

Alan Schoenfeld is the lawyer hired by school officials in Montgomery County, Maryland, to defend their agenda to select explicit sex books and force children as young as three or four years old to study them.

And he got triggered when a Supreme Court justice, Neal Gorsuch, expressed observations that would be typical, given the material at hand.

Schoenfeld interrupted and objected, multiple times, when Gorsuch was explaining his perception of the book, “Pride Puppy,” which formerly was used in the district but apparently now isn’t.

The fracas arose during this week’s oral arguments in a lawsuit brought by Muslim, Christian and Jewish parents against the district’s decision to force that indoctrination on children, and refuse parents their rights to opt their kids out of such offensive material.

The district does allow opt-outs for other objectionable subjects, but refused to allow parents the same rights in this situation.

Hear the confrontation:

Watch the latest video at foxnews.com

A report at Fox News explained Gorsuch was asking Schoenfeld about the book “that tells the story of a family celebrating Pride Day when their dog gets lost.”

It leads readers to hunt for and identify items starting with the letters of the alphabet, incorporating words promoting the LGBT agenda.

Responding to Gorsuch’s question, Schoenfeld confirmed “Pride Puppy” was used for pre-kindergartners, but no longer is.

“That’s the one where they’re supposed to look for the leather and things – and bondage – things like that,” Gorsuch said.

Schoenfeld, clearly upset, interrupted. “It’s not bondage. It’s a woman in a leather…”

Gorsuch brought up another logical observation: “Sex worker?”

“No. That’s not correct. No,” said Schoenfeld.

Gorsuch said, “Gosh, I read it…drag queen?”

Schoenfeld said the leather reference actually is to a leather jacket, but confirmed, “one of the words is drag queen.”

A lawyer for the plaintiff parents said the school is violating the First Amendment by denying parental requests to opt their children out of indoctrination subjects that ‘contradict their religious beliefs.”

The Specialty Equipment Market Association (SEMA), representing over 7,500 American automotive businesses, delivered a message of support to President Donald Trump’s trade agenda.

In a letter sent Monday, SEMA praised Trump’s leadership and commitment to restoring America’s industrial strength.

“We write to commend you and your administration for your commitment to restoring the greatness of American manufacturing,” wrote SEMA President and CEO Mike Spagnola. “Your return to the White House has given significant hope to our industry.”

The automotive specialty parts aftermarket is a powerhouse of American innovation. Contributing $337 billion annually to the economy and supporting over 1.3 million jobs, the industry consists of manufacturers, distributors, and retailers of motor vehicle parts and accessories.

SEMA was one of the loudest supporters of Trump’s decision to revoke former President Joe Biden’s de facto electric vehicle (EV) mandate.

“On day one of his new administration, President Trump reclaimed the nation’s freedom of vehicle choice, proclaiming the authority of the United States of America, rather than so-called United States of California, to set national policies,” Spagnola said.

While SEMA’s letter made clear they support the president’s use of tariffs to bring jobs back to America, they warned the transition period has been challenging, especially for smaller operations that don’t have the capital reserves or volume pricing power of multinational giants.

“For many specialty automotive businesses that manufacture their products in America, they are forced to source components used in their products from international suppliers, because there are no domestic manufacturers or none that will produce components in smaller volumes that meet their needs,” Spagnola continued in the letter. “For businesses in this position, they have no choice but to source components from abroad.”

Rather than backing down, they are asking for temporary, targeted relief.

“Our primary request is that American automotive parts manufacturers, including our members, be provided a transition period to re-shore their manufacturing, as well as some form of economic relief to assist in that transition,” Spagnola indicated. “That relief could include tariff exemptions for things like molds, tooling, and machinery brought back to the U.S., as well as tax incentives to offset the associated costs.”

SEMA emphasized they believe in Trump’s vision and want to be on the front lines of making it a reality, they just “need a bridge to assist with the transition.”

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

The European Commission fined Meta and Apple combined roughly $800 million in total Wednesday and ordered sweeping changes to their business practices under the bloc’s Digital Markets Act.

The Commission levied penalties of $566 million and $226 million against Apple and Meta respectively, marking the first enforcement action under the European Union’s landmark tech competition law. The move comes as Brussels enters delicate trade negotiations with the Trump administration, which previously characterized such fines as a “source of revenue for countries that have failed to cultivate economic success of their own.”

“Today’s decisions send a strong and clear message,” Teresa Ribera, EU commissioner for competitiveness, said in a press release. “The Digital Markets Act is a crucial instrument to unlock potential, choice and growth by ensuring digital players can operate in contestable and fair markets. It protects European consumers and levels the playing field. Apple and Meta have fallen short of compliance with the DMA by implementing measures that reinforce the dependence of business users and consumers on their platforms.”

Today, we’ve fined Apple and Meta for breaching the #DMA.

Apple restricts developers from informing customers about offers outside the App Store, while Meta doesn’t give consumers the choice of a service that uses less of their personal data.

More info: https://t.co/dhK04KI4sn pic.twitter.com/xxz7D56ohN

— European Commission (@EU_Commission) April 23, 2025

The Commission accused Apple of blocking app developers from informing users about cheaper offers outside its App Store, which regulators said harmed consumers and restricted competition. Meta was fined over its “consent or pay” model for Facebook and Instagram users in Europe — forcing users to either consent to having their personal data harvested for targeted advertising or pay a monthly subscription to access the platforms without ads. Such regulations on data collection do not exist in the U.S.

Meta confirmed it would appeal in a statement to the Daily Caller News Foundation. Apple also said they would appeal, according to multiple reports, but did not respond to the DCNF’s request for confirmation.

The penalties — nearly $800 million combined — are substantially lower than earlier EU fines for antitrust violations, such as its $4.8 billion fine against Google in 2018 over the alleged use of Android to cement the company’s search engine dominance. The Commission appears to have tempered the financial blow to avoid provoking President Donald Trump, who has already threatened a 20% reciprocal tariff on European goods and warned more could follow if Brussels maintains its aggressive posture toward American tech companies.

“Regulations that dictate how American companies interact with consumers in the European Union, like the Digital Markets Act and the Digital Services Act, will face scrutiny from the Administration,” a fact sheet for the president’s memorandum on the subject reads. “Rather than position their own companies and workers for success, foreign governments have been taxing the success of America’s companies and workers.”

Still, the EU’s message was clear: comply or pay.

Apple and Meta are required to comply with the Commission’s decisions within 60 days, otherwise they risk periodic penalty payments,” the EU press release says. “The Commission continues its engagement with Apple and Meta to ensure compliance with the Commission’s decisions and the DMA more generally.”

Meta countered that the EU is weaponizing regulation to “handicap” U.S. firms under the guise of consumer protection.

“The European Commission is attempting to handicap successful American businesses while allowing Chinese and European companies under the different standards,” Joel Kaplan, Meta chief global affairs officer, wrote in a statement. “This isn’t just about a fine; the Commission forcing us to change our business model effectively imposes a multi-billion-dollar tariff on Meta while requiring us to offer an inferior service.”

My statement on the European Commission’s blatantly discriminatory decision targeting Meta’s personalized ads business model: pic.twitter.com/evw4HVg1F3

— Joel Kaplan (@joel_kaplan) April 23, 2025

Similarly, an Apple spokesperson said the fines are “yet another example of the European Commission unfairly targeting Apple in a series of decisions that are bad for the privacy and security of our users, bad for products, and force us to give away our technology for free,” in a statement to Reuters.

The Digital Markets Act, implemented in 2022, imposes a long list of obligations on so-called “gatekeepers” — Big Tech firms deemed dominant in the digital marketplace. Under the law, Apple must now allow alternative app stores and direct communication between developers and users. Meta, meanwhile, must overhaul its data monetization and advertising model or face further penalties.

The fines come amid increasing skepticism in Washington over Europe’s regulatory crusade. But while the Trump administration has blasted the EU for “extorting” American companies, it has simultaneously backed similar antitrust enforcement against Big Tech firms at home — continuing a Federal Trade Commission probe against Meta and two antitrust cases against Google over advertising tech and search dominance.

Additionally, Apple was forced to revise its U.S. App Store rules after a years-long battle with Epic Games, which resulted in a federal court ruling that found Apple’s anti-steering practices — the same conduct now under fire in Brussels — violated California competition law.

The administration’s focus on the EU also omits strikingly similar actions taken by U.S. allies in Asia. Japan enacted legislation in June targeting Apple and Google’s dominance over app stores and payment systems, while South Korea’s telecoms regulator found both firms guilty of anti-competitive behavior in 2021 and is still weighing millions in fines as of October, according to The Korea Times.

Still, the optics are hard for the White House to ignore. As the Commission touts its crackdown on U.S. tech, the Trump administration seemingly sees in Brussels a unique pattern of protectionist hostility cloaked in progressive legalese — and a lucrative way to generate revenue without taxing European voters.

Editor’s note: This article has been updated to reflect confirmation from Meta that it intends to appeal the fine.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

The World Economic Forum, which runs an annual gathering of elites in Davos, Switzerland, says its board has given its unanimous support for an independent investigation into allegations of misconduct by founder Klaus Schwab.

The statement from the Geneva-based think tank and event organizer late Tuesday came after a report published by the Wall Street Journal cited a whistleblower letter alleging financial and ethical misconduct by Schwab, 87, and his wife, Hilde.

And there it is

Klaus Schwab’s sudden resignation from WEF wasn’t voluntary

A whistleblower exposed his family using millions of WEF dollars for their personal gain and the WEF Board started investigating

This scumbag is finally getting the long overdue justice he deserves… pic.twitter.com/kEmze5P0BE

— DC_Draino (@DC_Draino) April 23, 2025

The newspaper reported that the allegations were sent in an anonymous letter to the board last week and included claims that the Schwab family mixed their personal affairs with Forum resources.

Klaus Schwab’s interim replacement says you don’t have the right to fill your swimming pool or wash your car.

He wants to ration your daily water usage.

Why are the WEF types such controlling psychopaths? pic.twitter.com/QcX6ECidSU

— Kat Kanada (@KatKanada_TM) April 23, 2025

This week, the stock market yo-yoed wildly, taking investors on a roller coaster of stunning lows and sudden highs. Rarely has investment been so gut-churning. And the reason for the turbulence is obvious: the Trump administration’s continuing mixed signals over its trade war.

When that trade war was first announced, on April 2 (“Liberation Day”), the Dow Jones Industrial Average immediately plummeted nearly 4%; the day after, 5.5%. After President Donald Trump put a hold on the vast majority of tariffs the following week, it recovered nearly 8%. The following day, as markets realized that Trump would retain massive tariffs on China and highly elevated tariffs on many of our allies, it dropped again 2.5%.

The DJIA remained volatile but close to even for a few days – and then to open this week, it dropped almost 2.5% again, thanks to Trump’s apparent threats to fire Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell. And then, on Tuesday, it rose again, 2.7% – this time based on Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s leaked statements implying that the United States would come to a trade agreement with China (a sentiment seconded by Trump), as well as Trump’s statements that he would not be firing Powell.

What is the purpose of recapping this potted history? To understand a simple lesson: Volatility in policy results in market volatility. Market volatility results in lack of investor confidence. And lack of investor confidence results in economic disaster. Typically, stock prices and bond yields work in inverse, since people flee to safety from stocks to bonds, driving down yields. Yet even as the Dow Jones is off approximately 13% from its high just after Trump’s inauguration, bond yields have been climbing as well – meaning that investors are showing lack of confidence in investing in American assets.

Now, taking on China is an admirable goal. And trade is certainly a chief weapon the United States could use in containing Chinese aggression across the world. But to wage a successful trade war on China would require certain preliminary steps: negotiation of strong and stable trade relationships with allies to box in China, rather than a declaration of trade war on everyone; time to reshore critical national security industries and resources, and to solidify non-Chinese supply chains; a military buildup capable of deterring Chinese action against Taiwan, which – based on the destruction or capture of semiconductor giant TSMC – could plunge the entire world into a depression and easily leave China itself at a technological advantage over the West. The Trump administration did not do this preliminary groundwork. And so the White House has been forced to punch holes in its own tariff regime, from exempting Apple products and semiconductors to unilaterally abandoning tariffs on erstwhile allies to deploying Bessent to pledge to lower tariffs on China itself.

Impulsive decision-making can be an asset in foreign policy; it’s often smart to keep our enemies on their toes, unsure of what comes next. But in economic policy, impulsivity and unpredictability lead to chaos. And it’s far easier for the markets to lose trust in policymakers than to regain it. China must be contained, and Trump has been singularly transformative in forcing the world to face up to that fact. But if he wishes to truly defeat China in the economic sphere, it’s time for solid, understandable and methodical policy that achieves the goals Trump has correctly set forth.

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard referred two intelligence community professionals to the Department of Justice for criminal prosecution Wednesday over alleged leaks of classified information, Fox News Digital has learned.

An ODNI official told Fox News Digital that the intelligence community professionals allegedly leaked classified information to the Washington Post and the New York Times. A third criminal referral is “on its way” to the DOJ.

#BREAKING: Tulsi Gabbard has just referred MULTIPLE intel leakers to the DOJ for criminal prosecution

“These deep-state criminals leaked classified information for partisan political purposes to undermine President Trump’s agenda.”

LOCK THEM UP! SET AN EXAMPLE @AGPamBondi! pic.twitter.com/CiSfsnqMWu

— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) April 23, 2025

The official told Fox News Digital that intelligence community professionals should take the move “as a warning.”

An analysis of this week’s Supreme Court arguments in a Maryland fight over a school’s decision to teach sexually deviant behaviors to children and not allow parents to opt their kids out of those classes has concluded that Justice Ketanji Jackson is “either the dumbest or most evil member” on the court.

Dumbest might be in ascendance, as this was the same individual who, during her Senate confirmation hearing, was unable to tell inquiring senators what is a “woman.”

A recording of her revealing her agenda was posted online:

Wow.

Like the dog returning to its vomit, so Justice Jackson returns to this idea that “we don’t know that these books aren’t just sitting on the shelves.”

The Montgomery County Public Schools policy couldn’t be clearer—the kids must be taught these books.

When @becketfund… pic.twitter.com/BExNVBpDbG

— Tyler O’Neil (@Tyler2ONeil) April 22, 2025

An analysis at RedState explained that should have been a “red flag.”

On the court, she’s been reliably a “left-wing vote,” it said.

“There is no level of partisanship she won’t stoop to in order to defend a Democrat viewpoint, and that was on display again in recent oral arguments surrounding parental rights,” it said.

“While a majority of the court seemed to be leaning toward affirming that obvious right, Jackson showed she’s either the dumbest or most evil member of the court,” it said.

It pointed out that she wasn’t even “aware” of the fact that the fight is over Montgomery County School District’s actions, which “require” the books to be taught.

She argued that perhaps those books are just “sitting on the shelves,” meaning that a temporary injunction to affirm the parents’ rights would be inappropriate.

The analysis notes that Jackson does come across “as vapid and ill-equipped,” … or “the other option is that she’s just evil, and the rest is an act.”

“Returning to the core issue, why is it this important for public schools to talk about topics that violate the religious principles of some parents?” the analysis noted. “Does LGBTQ ideology really trump religious liberty? It doesn’t, but Jackson thinks it does, and that’s a scary proposition. Imagine a court with a few more justices in her mold, and where that would leave the country.”

It explained, “Justice Brett Kavanaugh brought some sanity to the discussion by pointing out how absurd Jackson’s arguments were.”

Justice Kavanaugh with the most important point of the day:

“They’re not asking you to change what’s taught in the classroom. They’re only seeking to be able to walk-out so their children aren’t exposed to things that are contrary to their own beliefs.”pic.twitter.com/03p4RKl6RT

— Matt Whitlock (@mattdizwhitlock) April 22, 2025

This woman should have never been put on the High Court. Teaching kids they can change their gender is not only morally wrong but it’s biologically and scientifically incorrect.

This is indoctrination and has nothing to do with inclusivity or inclusion. pic.twitter.com/cyKpG8vRIc

— Therealrob (@Therealrobx) April 22, 2025