WASHINGTON—White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Wednesday that President Donald Trump’s administration has “an interest in finding leakers” when questioned about the consequential Supreme Court leak during a press briefing.

Leavitt addressed a question from The Daily Wire on the May 2022 leak of the draft decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the case that eventually overturned Roe v. Wade. Justice Samuel Alito has said the leak made the justices targets of assassination.

“I know generally speaking the president has an interest in finding leakers and he believes it is unacceptable,” Leavitt said.

Leavitt pointed out that the Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has “taken tough action at her agency on leakers.”

“Leaking is unacceptable to this president and to the leaders across the board in this cabinet, especially when it puts people in harm’s way,” Leavitt added.

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

WASHINGTON—White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Wednesday that President Donald Trump’s administration has “an interest in finding leakers” when questioned about the consequential Supreme Court leak during a press briefing.

Leavitt addressed a question from The Daily Wire on the May 2022 leak of the draft decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the case that eventually overturned Roe v. Wade. Justice Samuel Alito has said the leak made the justices targets of assassination.

“I know generally speaking the president has an interest in finding leakers and he believes it is unacceptable,” Leavitt said.

Leavitt pointed out that the Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has “taken tough action at her agency on leakers.”

“Leaking is unacceptable to this president and to the leaders across the board in this cabinet, especially when it puts people in harm’s way,” Leavitt added.

“}]] 

The post ‘Leaking Is Unacceptable’: White House Addresses Dobbs Leak Three Years Later appeared first on Spin Politico.

There are a number of ways to illustrate the unusual degree of responsiveness of the current Trump administration, especially as compared to their predecessors. You could, for example, point to how the White House struck a deal with El Salvador to house illegal alien gang members, and then deported those gang members in a matter of days — before a federal judge could stop them. Similarly, the White House ended Hunter Biden’s Secret Service detail within about 24 hours of discovering that he still had one. President Trump also announced he was invalidating Joe Biden’s pardons, just a couple of days after an investigation revealed that Biden’s signature was being rubber-stamped with an Autopen on pretty much every document he signed while in office. These are the kinds of quick, decisive actions that — whether you agree with them or not — are not typical of most administrations.

But maybe the clearest example of the level of responsiveness we’re getting from the White House came last night, when the administration released more than a thousand of the so-called “JFK Files” on the internet, totaling more than 30,000 pages. These are declassified files relating to the assassination of President Kennedy that have never been seen before, and that should never have been classified in the first place.

On Monday, during a visit to the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, Trump announced that he would be disclosing these files within 24 hours. He said he was going to make good on his promise, which he first outlined in an executive order in January, to ensure the, “complete release of records relating to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.” Watch:

True to Trump’s word, this is exactly what began to take place on Tuesday night. Attorneys with the National Security Division of the DOJ pulled an all-nighter, going through various documents. They responded to Trump’s directive immediately. And yesterday, many of these files were released. Apparently more files are coming today, and what we have isn’t the final set of documents.

Even so, there is some new information here that’s worth talking about. But the first thing you notice, as you look through the materials, is how obscenely over-broad our classification system is. One of the previously-classified documents, for example, is an article from the magazine “Ramparts,” which hasn’t been published since the 1970s.

Kennedy Files

The article may be difficult to read, but it states, “The day after the assassination, [CIA agent] Gary Underhill left Washington. … A small clique within the CIA was responsible for the assassination, he confided, and he was afraid for his life and would probably have to leave the country. Less than six months later Underhill was found shot to death in his Washington apartment. The coroner ruled it a suicide.”

There’s no independent verification in these JFK Files, that I’ve seen at least, that corroborates any of this. It’s just a copy-paste from a publicly available article in some magazine that no one’s heard of. But it was marked “SECRET,” and CIA employees were told not to copy it.

This is the kind of thing that might seem trivial, but recall that the DOJ attempted to imprison Donald Trump for allegedly storing “classified” information at Mar-a-Lago. If the intelligence agencies are going to abuse their classification authority to such an extent, then they shouldn’t be able to prosecute political candidates for storing materials that are supposedly “classified.” That seems like a fair compromise, going forward. But the ideal solution is to do what the Trump administration is doing, which is to declassify everything they can. Most of it, as we’re finding out, simply isn’t that interesting. And it’s certainly not worth jailing people over.

That said, as you dig through the JFK files — and again, this is all preliminary, because there’s so much to go through — you do begin to find some interesting information. Some of this was already out there, in some capacity, but now we have a bunch of mostly un-redacted documents in one place. For instance, in mid-December of 1963, shortly after Kennedy’s assassination, the CIA issued a telegram about Castro’s attitude toward the United States. It’s two pages long:

Kennedy Files

Kennedy Files

The telegram begins by quoting a “high-level Cuban diplomat in Western Europe” — someone who the CIA has deemed highly reliable — as saying that Castro was “very upset” about the fact that Kennedy had been replaced. That’s because, “TOP CUBAN LEADERSHIP WAS SURE PRESIDENT KENNEDY WOULD NOT INVADE CUBA,” and also because Cuba determined that Kennedy’s economic blockade of Cuba would not overthrow Castro’s regime. 

Then the telegram concludes with this line: “ACCORDING TO CUBAN GOVERNMENT LEADERS, CASTRO WANTS TO WAIT AND SEE WHAT PRESIDENT JOHNSON SAYS AND DOES ABOUT CUBA, AND GIVE HIM AN OPPORTUNITY TO IMPROVE, IF HE FEELS SO INCLINED, RELATIONS BETWEEN THE TWO COUNTRIES.”

In other words, the perception of Cuba’s government — even after the Bay of Pigs — was that Kennedy would never attempt a full-scale invasion. At the same time, they weren’t so sure that Kennedy’s replacement — or the CIA — would be as reluctant. And as you read further in the JFK files, that seems like a reasonable concern.

Kennedy Files

Some of the documents, for example, show that Cuban diplomats immediately concluded that the CIA had killed Kennedy: “If the Yankees or CIA assassinated Kennedy to resume the assault on Cuba, then a third world war would start.” Then there are statements from an American official indicating that assets connected to a CIA agent had spread “misinformation” about Cuba’s involvement in the assassination. So no one involved in the scenario believed the lone gunman theory, at any point.

Meanwhile the CIA was drawing up various plans to attack Cuba — plans that presumably had a better chance of being implemented with Kennedy out of the way. Take a look at this previously classified file, in which the CIA talks about their plans to destroy crops in Cuba:

Kennedy Files

If the document is a little difficult to read, it states: “Plans for inducing the failure of crops will be submitted by 15 February. These plans will envisage both the use of controlled assets who can be infiltrated and exfiltrated, and the provision of encouragement and guidance to the resistance, so that it will undertake acts of sabotage, some of which are to be directed against crops, particularly rice.” Separately, the CIA discussed efforts to sabotage Cuba’s nickel supply using various methods, including “open attack.”:

Kennedy Files

They also discuss the use of “torpedos and mines” as well as attacks on “primary and secondary sources of Cuban nickel.” These attacks would apparently be carried out by “external assets.” Additionally, the CIA wrote about efforts to deploy a large number of spies to Cuba, while pretending they’re students.

Kennedy Files

Then there’s this noteworthy passage, in which the CIA admits that it’s staged “mass demonstrations” all over the region.

Kennedy Files

So they pretty much orchestrated mass demonstrations at will, in nearly a dozen countries. And reading that memo, it’s not hard to conclude that the CIA never stopped doing this. You’re not crazy for concluding that, any time you see a mass protest movement anywhere in the world, there’s a very good chance that the CIA was involved. Think about the so-called “Orange Revolution” in Ukraine that led to conflict with Russia that, as we all know, has ended in open warfare.

Moving on through the Files, there’s also this previously classified memo from June of 1961. It was written by Arthur Schlesinger, a close advisor to JFK:

Kennedy Files

Kennedy Files

This is a memo that’s already been discussed publicly in other contexts. But the idea of the memo — which was written just a couple of years before Kennedy was murdered — was that the CIA has essentially gone rogue. They’re running their own foreign policy. And therefore, according to Schlesinger, the CIA should be split up. Again, you can maybe see why this was classified at the time. But the idea that it should’ve been hidden for decades is obviously absurd. There was never any reason to hide information like this from the public for so long.

There are many more files no one has been able to review at this point. Again, it’s too much information at the moment and some of the information is still incomplete.

Summing up his findings on this first batch of files, the writer Gerald Posner wrote:

I don’t see the tax files of Lee Harvey Oswald or Jack Ruby. Nothing yet on the some of the grand jury proceedings from New Orleans’ District Attorney James Garrison’s miscarriage of justice. Maybe I’m running on empty and missing them, but they are not popping up. … There are some files I have been looking forward to, one called Special Intelligence Package. It includes 37 blank pages and might tell us more about what Mexican intelligence sent to the CIA about Oswald after the assassination. I don’t see that in today’s release. There are other CIA documents I was hoping to see, maybe they will be in tomorrow’s release.

We’ll obviously be awaiting those documents and reviewing them when they become available. The same is true for the next release of the Epstein files that we’ve been promised. But already, based on what’s been released so far, it’s clear that the Trump administration has truly been — as they promised — extraordinarily transparent. In fact, you can make the case that Trump is possibly the single most radically transparent politician in American history, even aside from these document releases. I’ve already lost track of the number of times he’s taken questions from the press since being inaugurated. You don’t get the sense that Trump cares to hide anything from the public.

The contrast between him and Biden on this point couldn’t be more stark. In fact, it’s not just a contrast with Biden. The reflex of every public official in my lifetime has been to hide things and lie even when there’s no obvious strategic benefit in it. On the other hand, Donald Trump, without being prompted, will walk out to the press and announce a historic de-classification document dump. And then the next day, his administration will deliver it.

Can we expect to learn from these documents, with certainty, who exactly killed JFK? Probably not. It’s simply been too long, if we’re being honest. At the same time, at this point, there’s no reason to believe that the Trump administration is responsible for hiding that information from the public. And that’s significant, for a lot of reasons. We have far more insight into how our intelligence agencies operate than ever before. As a result, we can assume that these agencies are now probably a lot less likely to even think about assassinating domestic political targets — because if they do that, they run a very high risk of exposure. They certainly run a higher risk of exposure than they did under the Biden administration, when assassins were taking potshots at Trump, and the federal government didn’t even pretend to care. This is the value of transparency. And, less than three months into his term, as much as it probably drives the CIA crazy, Donald Trump is delivering it.

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

There are a number of ways to illustrate the unusual degree of responsiveness of the current Trump administration, especially as compared to their predecessors. You could, for example, point to how the White House struck a deal with El Salvador to house illegal alien gang members, and then deported those gang members in a matter of days — before a federal judge could stop them. Similarly, the White House ended Hunter Biden’s Secret Service detail within about 24 hours of discovering that he still had one. President Trump also announced he was invalidating Joe Biden’s pardons, just a couple of days after an investigation revealed that Biden’s signature was being rubber-stamped with an Autopen on pretty much every document he signed while in office. These are the kinds of quick, decisive actions that — whether you agree with them or not — are not typical of most administrations.

But maybe the clearest example of the level of responsiveness we’re getting from the White House came last night, when the administration released more than a thousand of the so-called “JFK Files” on the internet, totaling more than 30,000 pages. These are declassified files relating to the assassination of President Kennedy that have never been seen before, and that should never have been classified in the first place.

On Monday, during a visit to the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, Trump announced that he would be disclosing these files within 24 hours. He said he was going to make good on his promise, which he first outlined in an executive order in January, to ensure the, “complete release of records relating to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.” Watch:

True to Trump’s word, this is exactly what began to take place on Tuesday night. Attorneys with the National Security Division of the DOJ pulled an all-nighter, going through various documents. They responded to Trump’s directive immediately. And yesterday, many of these files were released. Apparently more files are coming today, and what we have isn’t the final set of documents.

Even so, there is some new information here that’s worth talking about. But the first thing you notice, as you look through the materials, is how obscenely over-broad our classification system is. One of the previously-classified documents, for example, is an article from the magazine “Ramparts,” which hasn’t been published since the 1970s.

Kennedy Files

The article may be difficult to read, but it states, “The day after the assassination, [CIA agent] Gary Underhill left Washington. … A small clique within the CIA was responsible for the assassination, he confided, and he was afraid for his life and would probably have to leave the country. Less than six months later Underhill was found shot to death in his Washington apartment. The coroner ruled it a suicide.”

There’s no independent verification in these JFK Files, that I’ve seen at least, that corroborates any of this. It’s just a copy-paste from a publicly available article in some magazine that no one’s heard of. But it was marked “SECRET,” and CIA employees were told not to copy it.

This is the kind of thing that might seem trivial, but recall that the DOJ attempted to imprison Donald Trump for allegedly storing “classified” information at Mar-a-Lago. If the intelligence agencies are going to abuse their classification authority to such an extent, then they shouldn’t be able to prosecute political candidates for storing materials that are supposedly “classified.” That seems like a fair compromise, going forward. But the ideal solution is to do what the Trump administration is doing, which is to declassify everything they can. Most of it, as we’re finding out, simply isn’t that interesting. And it’s certainly not worth jailing people over.

That said, as you dig through the JFK files — and again, this is all preliminary, because there’s so much to go through — you do begin to find some interesting information. Some of this was already out there, in some capacity, but now we have a bunch of mostly un-redacted documents in one place. For instance, in mid-December of 1963, shortly after Kennedy’s assassination, the CIA issued a telegram about Castro’s attitude toward the United States. It’s two pages long:

Kennedy Files

Kennedy Files

The telegram begins by quoting a “high-level Cuban diplomat in Western Europe” — someone who the CIA has deemed highly reliable — as saying that Castro was “very upset” about the fact that Kennedy had been replaced. That’s because, “TOP CUBAN LEADERSHIP WAS SURE PRESIDENT KENNEDY WOULD NOT INVADE CUBA,” and also because Cuba determined that Kennedy’s economic blockade of Cuba would not overthrow Castro’s regime. 

Then the telegram concludes with this line: “ACCORDING TO CUBAN GOVERNMENT LEADERS, CASTRO WANTS TO WAIT AND SEE WHAT PRESIDENT JOHNSON SAYS AND DOES ABOUT CUBA, AND GIVE HIM AN OPPORTUNITY TO IMPROVE, IF HE FEELS SO INCLINED, RELATIONS BETWEEN THE TWO COUNTRIES.”

In other words, the perception of Cuba’s government — even after the Bay of Pigs — was that Kennedy would never attempt a full-scale invasion. At the same time, they weren’t so sure that Kennedy’s replacement — or the CIA — would be as reluctant. And as you read further in the JFK files, that seems like a reasonable concern.

Kennedy Files

Some of the documents, for example, show that Cuban diplomats immediately concluded that the CIA had killed Kennedy: “If the Yankees or CIA assassinated Kennedy to resume the assault on Cuba, then a third world war would start.” Then there are statements from an American official indicating that assets connected to a CIA agent had spread “misinformation” about Cuba’s involvement in the assassination. So no one involved in the scenario believed the lone gunman theory, at any point.

Meanwhile the CIA was drawing up various plans to attack Cuba — plans that presumably had a better chance of being implemented with Kennedy out of the way. Take a look at this previously classified file, in which the CIA talks about their plans to destroy crops in Cuba:

Kennedy Files

If the document is a little difficult to read, it states: “Plans for inducing the failure of crops will be submitted by 15 February. These plans will envisage both the use of controlled assets who can be infiltrated and exfiltrated, and the provision of encouragement and guidance to the resistance, so that it will undertake acts of sabotage, some of which are to be directed against crops, particularly rice.” Separately, the CIA discussed efforts to sabotage Cuba’s nickel supply using various methods, including “open attack.”:

Kennedy Files

They also discuss the use of “torpedos and mines” as well as attacks on “primary and secondary sources of Cuban nickel.” These attacks would apparently be carried out by “external assets.” Additionally, the CIA wrote about efforts to deploy a large number of spies to Cuba, while pretending they’re students.

Kennedy Files

Then there’s this noteworthy passage, in which the CIA admits that it’s staged “mass demonstrations” all over the region.

Kennedy Files

So they pretty much orchestrated mass demonstrations at will, in nearly a dozen countries. And reading that memo, it’s not hard to conclude that the CIA never stopped doing this. You’re not crazy for concluding that, any time you see a mass protest movement anywhere in the world, there’s a very good chance that the CIA was involved. Think about the so-called “Orange Revolution” in Ukraine that led to conflict with Russia that, as we all know, has ended in open warfare.

Moving on through the Files, there’s also this previously classified memo from June of 1961. It was written by Arthur Schlesinger, a close advisor to JFK:

Kennedy Files

Kennedy Files

This is a memo that’s already been discussed publicly in other contexts. But the idea of the memo — which was written just a couple of years before Kennedy was murdered — was that the CIA has essentially gone rogue. They’re running their own foreign policy. And therefore, according to Schlesinger, the CIA should be split up. Again, you can maybe see why this was classified at the time. But the idea that it should’ve been hidden for decades is obviously absurd. There was never any reason to hide information like this from the public for so long.

There are many more files no one has been able to review at this point. Again, it’s too much information at the moment and some of the information is still incomplete.

Summing up his findings on this first batch of files, the writer Gerald Posner wrote:

I don’t see the tax files of Lee Harvey Oswald or Jack Ruby. Nothing yet on the some of the grand jury proceedings from New Orleans’ District Attorney James Garrison’s miscarriage of justice. Maybe I’m running on empty and missing them, but they are not popping up. … There are some files I have been looking forward to, one called Special Intelligence Package. It includes 37 blank pages and might tell us more about what Mexican intelligence sent to the CIA about Oswald after the assassination. I don’t see that in today’s release. There are other CIA documents I was hoping to see, maybe they will be in tomorrow’s release.

We’ll obviously be awaiting those documents and reviewing them when they become available. The same is true for the next release of the Epstein files that we’ve been promised. But already, based on what’s been released so far, it’s clear that the Trump administration has truly been — as they promised — extraordinarily transparent. In fact, you can make the case that Trump is possibly the single most radically transparent politician in American history, even aside from these document releases. I’ve already lost track of the number of times he’s taken questions from the press since being inaugurated. You don’t get the sense that Trump cares to hide anything from the public.

The contrast between him and Biden on this point couldn’t be more stark. In fact, it’s not just a contrast with Biden. The reflex of every public official in my lifetime has been to hide things and lie even when there’s no obvious strategic benefit in it. On the other hand, Donald Trump, without being prompted, will walk out to the press and announce a historic de-classification document dump. And then the next day, his administration will deliver it.

Can we expect to learn from these documents, with certainty, who exactly killed JFK? Probably not. It’s simply been too long, if we’re being honest. At the same time, at this point, there’s no reason to believe that the Trump administration is responsible for hiding that information from the public. And that’s significant, for a lot of reasons. We have far more insight into how our intelligence agencies operate than ever before. As a result, we can assume that these agencies are now probably a lot less likely to even think about assassinating domestic political targets — because if they do that, they run a very high risk of exposure. They certainly run a higher risk of exposure than they did under the Biden administration, when assassins were taking potshots at Trump, and the federal government didn’t even pretend to care. This is the value of transparency. And, less than three months into his term, as much as it probably drives the CIA crazy, Donald Trump is delivering it.

“}]] 

The post What We Learned From The JFK Files appeared first on Spin Politico.

President Donald Trump has informed Iran that it has two months to accept a nuclear deal that halts its ambitions for a nuclear weapon or else the U.S. military will end it for them.

Axios reported that Trump made his deadline clear to the Islamic regime in the letter he sent to Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, although it was not clear from the report whether the countdown began when the letter was delivered or when negotiations with the Trump administration begin.

Trump envoy Steve Witkoff delivered the letter to United Arab Emirates President Mohammed Bin Zayed in Abu Dhabi several days ago.

The following day, an official representing Zayed traveled to Tehran to deliver the letter to Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi.

Khamenei responded by claiming that the U.S. was trying to “deceive the world’s public opinion” and suggesting that negotiations will never happen with the Trump administration.

Iran held negotiations with the Biden administration for years but nothing ever came from it and Iran was able to amass large stockpiles of 60% enriched uranium that can be easily enriched to the 90% uranium that is needed to build a nuclear missile.

“With regard to nuclear weapons… After all, they keep saying: ‘We will not let Iran obtain nuclear weapons,’” he said last week. “If we wanted to build a nuclear weapon, America would not be able to stop us.”

“If the objective of negotiations is to address concerns vis-à-vis any potential militarization of Iran’s nuclear program, such discussions may be subject to consideration. However, should the aim be the dismantlement of Iran’s peaceful nuclear program to claim that what Obama failed to achieve has now been accomplished, such negotiations will never take place.”

A crude nuclear weapon can be constructed using 60% enriched uranium but the device would be far too big to put on a missile and thus would have to be delivered via a bomber aircraft, a boat, or a truck.

The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD) says that Iran already has enough 60% enriched uranium to make roughly seven nuclear weapons and noted that enriching uranium to that threshold “represents about 95 to 99 percent of the technical effort to make 90 percent enriched uranium.”

Trump has made clear that he is not seeking a military confrontation with Iran and would prefer that a deal be made.

“I would rather negotiate a deal,” he said last week. “I’m not sure that everybody agrees with me, but we can make a deal that would be just as good as if you won militarily. But the time is happening now. The time is coming up. Something’s going to happen one way or the other. I hope that Iran and I’ve written them a letter saying, I hope you’re going to negotiate, because if we have to go in militarily, it’s going to be a terrible thing for them.”

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

President Donald Trump has informed Iran that it has two months to accept a nuclear deal that halts its ambitions for a nuclear weapon or else the U.S. military will end it for them.

Axios reported that Trump made his deadline clear to the Islamic regime in the letter he sent to Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, although it was not clear from the report whether the countdown began when the letter was delivered or when negotiations with the Trump administration begin.

Trump envoy Steve Witkoff delivered the letter to United Arab Emirates President Mohammed Bin Zayed in Abu Dhabi several days ago.

The following day, an official representing Zayed traveled to Tehran to deliver the letter to Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi.

Khamenei responded by claiming that the U.S. was trying to “deceive the world’s public opinion” and suggesting that negotiations will never happen with the Trump administration.

Iran held negotiations with the Biden administration for years but nothing ever came from it and Iran was able to amass large stockpiles of 60% enriched uranium that can be easily enriched to the 90% uranium that is needed to build a nuclear missile.

“With regard to nuclear weapons… After all, they keep saying: ‘We will not let Iran obtain nuclear weapons,’” he said last week. “If we wanted to build a nuclear weapon, America would not be able to stop us.”

“If the objective of negotiations is to address concerns vis-à-vis any potential militarization of Iran’s nuclear program, such discussions may be subject to consideration. However, should the aim be the dismantlement of Iran’s peaceful nuclear program to claim that what Obama failed to achieve has now been accomplished, such negotiations will never take place.”

A crude nuclear weapon can be constructed using 60% enriched uranium but the device would be far too big to put on a missile and thus would have to be delivered via a bomber aircraft, a boat, or a truck.

The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD) says that Iran already has enough 60% enriched uranium to make roughly seven nuclear weapons and noted that enriching uranium to that threshold “represents about 95 to 99 percent of the technical effort to make 90 percent enriched uranium.”

Trump has made clear that he is not seeking a military confrontation with Iran and would prefer that a deal be made.

“I would rather negotiate a deal,” he said last week. “I’m not sure that everybody agrees with me, but we can make a deal that would be just as good as if you won militarily. But the time is happening now. The time is coming up. Something’s going to happen one way or the other. I hope that Iran and I’ve written them a letter saying, I hope you’re going to negotiate, because if we have to go in militarily, it’s going to be a terrible thing for them.”

“}]] 

The post Trump Gives Iran Deadline To Reach Nuclear Deal appeared first on Spin Politico.

The Democrats continue to just flail around.

It is truly amazing and amusing to watch them flail.

Chuck Schumer, the Senate minority leader, wrote a book about anti-Semitism. I usually don’t do “as a Jew,” but, as a Jew myself, the answer is no, Chuck.

You do not get to speak as a Jew about how you’re fighting anti-Semitism while you green-lit the Iran nuclear deal, made room for every anti-Israel, anti-Semitic person in your party, and refused to condemn the worst excesses of your own party.

The answer is no. Absolutely not.

Schumer had to postpone his book tour. Hilariously enough, the reason wasn’t that he has no moral leg on which to stand speaking about anti-Semitism. The reason he had to postpone his book tour is that so many Democrats are ticked off at him over green-lighting the continuing resolution.

That shows where violence is on the American spectrum these days, when even the Senate minority leader, a Democrat leftist, can’t face his own constituents in New York. Politico reported, “Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is postponing scheduled book tour events this week for ‘security reasons,’ as he faces intense backlash from the party base in the wake of last week’s government funding vote.”

That’s pretty incredible. When Right-wingers cancel events these days, they are doing so because of the violent Left. When Schumer cancels an event, it’s because of the — wait for it  —  violent Left.

I wonder, who is violent? I was told only the Right was violent, that the Right has a violence problem.

WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show

Schumer had planned several event stops to promote his new book, “Anti-Semitism in America: How I Did It.”

Just kidding.

His book is actually titled, “Anti-Semitism in America: A Warning.”

But none of this stopped Schumer from appearing on “The View.”

I have to admit: I am jealous that Schumer appeared on “The View.” It has been a lifelong dream for me.

I have a wonderful life. I’ve gotten so many things I want out of life, and I hope to get many more. And it’s a great life. But one of my unfulfilled aspirations as a human being is to be on “The View.”

It would make some of the best TV ever. Granted, it would be like intellectually clubbing a baby seal, but amazing TV.

Yet it was Schumer who was invited. Not because he’s a woman — I mean, I don’t know the answer to that, as only he can identify — but he was invited to talk about all of this.

He explained why he had not signed on to the filibuster of the continuing resolution: “There’s no exit strategy. How do you get out of a shutdown? Guess who determines it? Trump. Musk. DOGE. They’re the only ones, and one of the Republican senators told one of the Democratic senators, ‘You get us, you get us in this? We’re staying in for six months, nine months, a year till we decimate the entire federal government.’”

That’s not a horrible explanation as to why he voted in favor of the continuing resolution; if the government shut down, Trump would have the ability to decide who the essential workers are, and then fire a bunch of people. So that’s actually a pretty good explanation.

But host Sunny Hostin was having none of it. She ripped into Schumer. She was really irate because, as she sees it, what if Trump says “black”? You have to say “white.” If Trump says “day,” you have to say “night.” That’s how it works. 

“Governor Pritzker’s chief of staff Anne Caprara has said the following,” Hostin stated. “The fight going on in the Democratic Party right now is not between hard left, right, and moderate, it’s between those who want to fight and those who want to cave and it gives me no pleasure to say this to you because we are friends, but I think you caved. I think you and nine other Democrats caved. I don’t think you showed the fight this party needs right now because you’re playing by a rule book where the other party has thrown that rule book away.”

“True,” Schumer replied.

“So in my view what you did in supporting that GOP partisan bill that Democrats had no input in, you cleared the way for Donald Trump and Elon Musk to gut Social Security, to gut Medicare,” she continued. “Why did you lead democratic senators to play by that book that the Republicans are not playing by?

So, that’s the battle inside the Democratic Party.

Get out the popcorn.

But if you thought that Schumer was on the reasonable side of the Democratic Party, I beg to differ. He mocked Americans who want to keep their money, saying, “And you know what their attitude is? ‘I made my money all by myself. How dare your government take my money from me? I don’t want to pay taxes.’ Or, ‘I built my company with my bare hands. How dare your government tell me how I should treat my customers, the land and water that I own, or my employees.’ They hate government. Government’s a barrier to people, a barrier to stop them from doing things. They want to destroy it.”

He raised his fists, saying, “We are not letting them do it, and we’re united.”

The fists of uniting. Go, go, Power Rangers.

I would like to point out that I agree with everything he accused Americans. Our team built our entire company. The government did not help us. The government provided the basic law and order necessary to the preservation of private property in the United States, and the protection of free speech. That’s everything the government provided.

We built it, not Chuck Schumer. He’s not entitled to our money. Schumer is not entitled to money I have earned on behalf of my family.

He is not entitled. I don’t think many Americans believe that Schumer is entitled to that money, or that he’s likely to use it in good ways.

The Democrats cannot help themselves.

And watching Schumer flail about and castigate Americans while his party is lost in space is pretty darn amusing.

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

The Democrats continue to just flail around.

It is truly amazing and amusing to watch them flail.

Chuck Schumer, the Senate minority leader, wrote a book about anti-Semitism. I usually don’t do “as a Jew,” but, as a Jew myself, the answer is no, Chuck.

You do not get to speak as a Jew about how you’re fighting anti-Semitism while you green-lit the Iran nuclear deal, made room for every anti-Israel, anti-Semitic person in your party, and refused to condemn the worst excesses of your own party.

The answer is no. Absolutely not.

Schumer had to postpone his book tour. Hilariously enough, the reason wasn’t that he has no moral leg on which to stand speaking about anti-Semitism. The reason he had to postpone his book tour is that so many Democrats are ticked off at him over green-lighting the continuing resolution.

That shows where violence is on the American spectrum these days, when even the Senate minority leader, a Democrat leftist, can’t face his own constituents in New York. Politico reported, “Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is postponing scheduled book tour events this week for ‘security reasons,’ as he faces intense backlash from the party base in the wake of last week’s government funding vote.”

That’s pretty incredible. When Right-wingers cancel events these days, they are doing so because of the violent Left. When Schumer cancels an event, it’s because of the — wait for it  —  violent Left.

I wonder, who is violent? I was told only the Right was violent, that the Right has a violence problem.

WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show

Schumer had planned several event stops to promote his new book, “Anti-Semitism in America: How I Did It.”

Just kidding.

His book is actually titled, “Anti-Semitism in America: A Warning.”

But none of this stopped Schumer from appearing on “The View.”

I have to admit: I am jealous that Schumer appeared on “The View.” It has been a lifelong dream for me.

I have a wonderful life. I’ve gotten so many things I want out of life, and I hope to get many more. And it’s a great life. But one of my unfulfilled aspirations as a human being is to be on “The View.”

It would make some of the best TV ever. Granted, it would be like intellectually clubbing a baby seal, but amazing TV.

Yet it was Schumer who was invited. Not because he’s a woman — I mean, I don’t know the answer to that, as only he can identify — but he was invited to talk about all of this.

He explained why he had not signed on to the filibuster of the continuing resolution: “There’s no exit strategy. How do you get out of a shutdown? Guess who determines it? Trump. Musk. DOGE. They’re the only ones, and one of the Republican senators told one of the Democratic senators, ‘You get us, you get us in this? We’re staying in for six months, nine months, a year till we decimate the entire federal government.’”

That’s not a horrible explanation as to why he voted in favor of the continuing resolution; if the government shut down, Trump would have the ability to decide who the essential workers are, and then fire a bunch of people. So that’s actually a pretty good explanation.

But host Sunny Hostin was having none of it. She ripped into Schumer. She was really irate because, as she sees it, what if Trump says “black”? You have to say “white.” If Trump says “day,” you have to say “night.” That’s how it works. 

“Governor Pritzker’s chief of staff Anne Caprara has said the following,” Hostin stated. “The fight going on in the Democratic Party right now is not between hard left, right, and moderate, it’s between those who want to fight and those who want to cave and it gives me no pleasure to say this to you because we are friends, but I think you caved. I think you and nine other Democrats caved. I don’t think you showed the fight this party needs right now because you’re playing by a rule book where the other party has thrown that rule book away.”

“True,” Schumer replied.

“So in my view what you did in supporting that GOP partisan bill that Democrats had no input in, you cleared the way for Donald Trump and Elon Musk to gut Social Security, to gut Medicare,” she continued. “Why did you lead democratic senators to play by that book that the Republicans are not playing by?

So, that’s the battle inside the Democratic Party.

Get out the popcorn.

But if you thought that Schumer was on the reasonable side of the Democratic Party, I beg to differ. He mocked Americans who want to keep their money, saying, “And you know what their attitude is? ‘I made my money all by myself. How dare your government take my money from me? I don’t want to pay taxes.’ Or, ‘I built my company with my bare hands. How dare your government tell me how I should treat my customers, the land and water that I own, or my employees.’ They hate government. Government’s a barrier to people, a barrier to stop them from doing things. They want to destroy it.”

He raised his fists, saying, “We are not letting them do it, and we’re united.”

The fists of uniting. Go, go, Power Rangers.

I would like to point out that I agree with everything he accused Americans. Our team built our entire company. The government did not help us. The government provided the basic law and order necessary to the preservation of private property in the United States, and the protection of free speech. That’s everything the government provided.

We built it, not Chuck Schumer. He’s not entitled to our money. Schumer is not entitled to money I have earned on behalf of my family.

He is not entitled. I don’t think many Americans believe that Schumer is entitled to that money, or that he’s likely to use it in good ways.

The Democrats cannot help themselves.

And watching Schumer flail about and castigate Americans while his party is lost in space is pretty darn amusing.

“}]] 

The post Democrats Flail, Schumer Fails appeared first on Spin Politico.

Little people actors said they will be protesting Disney studios after they opted to use CGI for the seven dwarfs instead of hiring them for the upcoming live-action remake of “Snow White” that hits theaters on March 21.

Speaking to the Daily Mail, actress Ali Chapman — who stands 3ft 8in tall — said ‘The whole point of Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs is right up there in the title.”

“The seven dwarfs were the stars of the original 1937 film which is a classic loved by millions of people,” she added. “Disney has made a live-action film and instead of giving seven talented little people the chance to shine they’ve scrapped us completely and used CGI instead.”

“It’s a total travesty and there are a lot of angry little people actors and actresses out there,” Chapman continued. “People are flying in from all over the world to tell Disney this isn’t acceptable.”

Chapman’s husband Matt McCarthy, who stands 4ft 1in tall, also slammed the studio and said that “We’ve been totally shut out but we’re not going down quietly.”

Dozens of Little People Actors Prepare to Protest Outside Disney Studios in Los Angeles Over the Controversial Replacement of Dwarfs with CGI in Snow White Remake https://t.co/u9lY2KyOCU pic.twitter.com/lVo2SxdIoV

— TDPel Media News (@TDPelNews) March 16, 2025

“It’s hard enough in Hollywood,” Matt added. “Everyone’s trying to make their dreams come true. When you’re a little person opportunities are few and far between. I was born to play Dopey the dwarf. It’s my dream role but Disney never gave me a chance.”

“There were seven great parts right there but Disney decided to go with freaking cartoons,” Chapman continued, noting the CGI. “Shame on them!”

Jordanna James — who is 3ft 11in tall — said “’Hollywood is trying to erase us. Everyone goes on about wokeism and inclusion and yet we are constantly overlooked and kept in the shadows. It’s hard enough to go out in the real world and be seen. We exist. Let us have the same opportunities as other people.”

Famed “Elf” and “Game of Thrones” star Peter Dinklage previously made headlines when he slammed the “Snow White” remake when news surfaced that it was in the works.

“It makes no sense to me,” Dinklage said. “You’re progressive in one way, but then you’re still making that f***ing backward story about seven dwarfs living in a cave together.”

Not long after his comments, Disney announced it wasn’t going the traditional route, “to avoid reinforcing stereotypes from the original animated film … “

Images then surfaced on social media of full grown adults playing the characters, as previously reported. A backlash then ensued and Disney ended up using CGI to create the dwarf characters.

Related: ‘Snow White’ Star Rachel Zegler Apologizes After Backlash For Attacking Trump Voters

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

Little people actors said they will be protesting Disney studios after they opted to use CGI for the seven dwarfs instead of hiring them for the upcoming live-action remake of “Snow White” that hits theaters on March 21.

Speaking to the Daily Mail, actress Ali Chapman — who stands 3ft 8in tall — said ‘The whole point of Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs is right up there in the title.”

“The seven dwarfs were the stars of the original 1937 film which is a classic loved by millions of people,” she added. “Disney has made a live-action film and instead of giving seven talented little people the chance to shine they’ve scrapped us completely and used CGI instead.”

“It’s a total travesty and there are a lot of angry little people actors and actresses out there,” Chapman continued. “People are flying in from all over the world to tell Disney this isn’t acceptable.”

Chapman’s husband Matt McCarthy, who stands 4ft 1in tall, also slammed the studio and said that “We’ve been totally shut out but we’re not going down quietly.”

Dozens of Little People Actors Prepare to Protest Outside Disney Studios in Los Angeles Over the Controversial Replacement of Dwarfs with CGI in Snow White Remake https://t.co/u9lY2KyOCU pic.twitter.com/lVo2SxdIoV

— TDPel Media News (@TDPelNews) March 16, 2025

“It’s hard enough in Hollywood,” Matt added. “Everyone’s trying to make their dreams come true. When you’re a little person opportunities are few and far between. I was born to play Dopey the dwarf. It’s my dream role but Disney never gave me a chance.”

“There were seven great parts right there but Disney decided to go with freaking cartoons,” Chapman continued, noting the CGI. “Shame on them!”

Jordanna James — who is 3ft 11in tall — said “’Hollywood is trying to erase us. Everyone goes on about wokeism and inclusion and yet we are constantly overlooked and kept in the shadows. It’s hard enough to go out in the real world and be seen. We exist. Let us have the same opportunities as other people.”

Famed “Elf” and “Game of Thrones” star Peter Dinklage previously made headlines when he slammed the “Snow White” remake when news surfaced that it was in the works.

“It makes no sense to me,” Dinklage said. “You’re progressive in one way, but then you’re still making that f***ing backward story about seven dwarfs living in a cave together.”

Not long after his comments, Disney announced it wasn’t going the traditional route, “to avoid reinforcing stereotypes from the original animated film … “

Images then surfaced on social media of full grown adults playing the characters, as previously reported. A backlash then ensued and Disney ended up using CGI to create the dwarf characters.

Related: ‘Snow White’ Star Rachel Zegler Apologizes After Backlash For Attacking Trump Voters

“}]] 

The post ‘Total Travesty’: Dwarfs To Protest ‘Snow White’ After CGI Used Instead Of Actors appeared first on Spin Politico.

NFL clubs could be making three possible new rule changes for the upcoming season when the owners convene for their annual league meeting starting on March 30.

In several posts on X from the NFL Football Operations account, the Green Bay Packers, Detroit Lions, and Philadelphia Eagles have proposed changes to rules — with at least two of them having the potential to dramatically change the game.

The first is ending the so-called “tush push” rule which is a modified version of the quarterback sneak that the Eagles made popular during the 2022 season.  The rule change, proposed by the Packers, “would prohibit an offensive player from pushing a teammate who was lined up directly behind the snapper and receives the snap, immediately at the snap.”

While the change doesn’t include the term “tush push” that is exactly what the rule would affect, Yahoo noted.

The Philadelphia Eagles have used the play more successfully than any other team and it is no surprise that an NFC team has proposed to end it after the Eagles became Super Bowl LIX champions.

Ahead of the Annual League Meeting, @NFL clubs are proposing three rule changes for the 2025 season. A 1 /3

The @packers propose changing Rule 12, Section 1.
Read how it’s currently written: https://t.co/mvZcnttJVm pic.twitter.com/a0p2R3Uxqa

— NFL Football Operations (@NFLFootballOps) March 19, 2025

The second rule, proposed by the Lions, would “eliminate an automatic first down” as a “penalty for defensive holding and illegal contact.”

The third has been proposed by the Eagles and that would be to adopt the two possession approach for overtime that was used during the playoffs but not during the regular season.

This change would grant “both teams an opportunity to possess the ball regardless of the outcome of the first possession, subject to a 15-minute overtime period in the regular season.”

During the regular season, under the current rules, the team that possesses the ball first in overtime can end the game with a touchdown.

The Lions have also proposed a change to the playoff seeding that would’ve definitely made a difference in this year’s playoffs, which resulted in the Minnesota Vikings having to take a road trip to play the Los Angeles Rams, despite having a better overall record than the Rams.

The change would “amend the current playoff seeding format to allow wild card teams to be seeded higher than division champions if the wild card team has a better” overall regular season record.

These are just proposals and will have to be voted on by all the NFL owners at the upcoming meeting before being implemented. That meeting takes place from March 30 to April 2. 

Replace: NFL To Replace Chains With Tech To Measure First Downs

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

NFL clubs could be making three possible new rule changes for the upcoming season when the owners convene for their annual league meeting starting on March 30.

In several posts on X from the NFL Football Operations account, the Green Bay Packers, Detroit Lions, and Philadelphia Eagles have proposed changes to rules — with at least two of them having the potential to dramatically change the game.

The first is ending the so-called “tush push” rule which is a modified version of the quarterback sneak that the Eagles made popular during the 2022 season.  The rule change, proposed by the Packers, “would prohibit an offensive player from pushing a teammate who was lined up directly behind the snapper and receives the snap, immediately at the snap.”

While the change doesn’t include the term “tush push” that is exactly what the rule would affect, Yahoo noted.

The Philadelphia Eagles have used the play more successfully than any other team and it is no surprise that an NFC team has proposed to end it after the Eagles became Super Bowl LIX champions.

Ahead of the Annual League Meeting, @NFL clubs are proposing three rule changes for the 2025 season. A 1 /3

The @packers propose changing Rule 12, Section 1.
Read how it’s currently written: https://t.co/mvZcnttJVm pic.twitter.com/a0p2R3Uxqa

— NFL Football Operations (@NFLFootballOps) March 19, 2025

The second rule, proposed by the Lions, would “eliminate an automatic first down” as a “penalty for defensive holding and illegal contact.”

The third has been proposed by the Eagles and that would be to adopt the two possession approach for overtime that was used during the playoffs but not during the regular season.

This change would grant “both teams an opportunity to possess the ball regardless of the outcome of the first possession, subject to a 15-minute overtime period in the regular season.”

During the regular season, under the current rules, the team that possesses the ball first in overtime can end the game with a touchdown.

The Lions have also proposed a change to the playoff seeding that would’ve definitely made a difference in this year’s playoffs, which resulted in the Minnesota Vikings having to take a road trip to play the Los Angeles Rams, despite having a better overall record than the Rams.

The change would “amend the current playoff seeding format to allow wild card teams to be seeded higher than division champions if the wild card team has a better” overall regular season record.

These are just proposals and will have to be voted on by all the NFL owners at the upcoming meeting before being implemented. That meeting takes place from March 30 to April 2. 

Replace: NFL To Replace Chains With Tech To Measure First Downs

“}]] 

The post NFL Owners Looking At Three Possible New Rule Changes For 2025 Season appeared first on Spin Politico.

“Snow White” actress Rachel Zegler complained about being asked to “prove” she was of Latin descent before being cast in the 2021 Steven Spielberg film, “West Side Story.”

The 23-year-old celebrity discussed the experience during a newly published interview with Allure magazine. “There’s confusion because I don’t have a single ounce of Latin in my name,” Zegler told the outlet. 

“When I was in the running for Maria in ‘West Side Story,’ they kept calling to ask if I was legit. I remember thinking, ‘Do you want me to bring my abuelita [grandma] in? I will. I’ll bring her into the studio if you want to meet her,’” she continued.

The actress complained how “a bunch of white executives” insisted she “prove” her “identity to them.”

Zegler is from Hackensack, New Jersey. Her grandmother immigrated from Colombia to the United States in the 1960s, while her father is Polish. 

“It’s an interesting experience being part of that diaspora in the current climate we live in,” she told Allure. “But I love being Colombian.”

Many social media users questioned Zegler being cast as the lead role in Disney’s live-action remake of their classic fairytale “Snow White,” but the actress said she scored the role because of her singing ability. 

“The reality is, I was given a chance because I could sing,” she said. “My only prayer for the future of diversity and inclusion is that we invest in and nurture talent no matter what they look like.”

Zegler went on to say how she believes it’s “so important for the next generation” to see “Snow White” because it has a theme of good versus evil.

“To realize there’s nothing wrong with choosing to do what’s right and that it doesn’t have to be with anger or a clenched fist,” the actress said.

“Anger can be a powerful emotion, but it doesn’t bring the brightest future,” Zegler continued. “Snow White chooses kindness and still makes change. Power takes many forms. I hope we’ll see a new dawn of kindness and acceptance in the next couple of years. And people don’t see the need to use hate to cause further division.”

Zegler was also criticized previously for mocking the original storyline and describing Prince Charming as a “stalker.” She also made it clear the live-action story she was part of would have nothing in common with the “weird” original 1937 love story.

“[Snow White]’s not going to be saved by the prince. She’s not going to be dreaming about true love. She’s dreaming about becoming the leader she knows she can be,” she said during a 2023 interview.

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

“Snow White” actress Rachel Zegler complained about being asked to “prove” she was of Latin descent before being cast in the 2021 Steven Spielberg film, “West Side Story.”

The 23-year-old celebrity discussed the experience during a newly published interview with Allure magazine. “There’s confusion because I don’t have a single ounce of Latin in my name,” Zegler told the outlet. 

“When I was in the running for Maria in ‘West Side Story,’ they kept calling to ask if I was legit. I remember thinking, ‘Do you want me to bring my abuelita [grandma] in? I will. I’ll bring her into the studio if you want to meet her,’” she continued.

The actress complained how “a bunch of white executives” insisted she “prove” her “identity to them.”

Zegler is from Hackensack, New Jersey. Her grandmother immigrated from Colombia to the United States in the 1960s, while her father is Polish. 

“It’s an interesting experience being part of that diaspora in the current climate we live in,” she told Allure. “But I love being Colombian.”

Many social media users questioned Zegler being cast as the lead role in Disney’s live-action remake of their classic fairytale “Snow White,” but the actress said she scored the role because of her singing ability. 

“The reality is, I was given a chance because I could sing,” she said. “My only prayer for the future of diversity and inclusion is that we invest in and nurture talent no matter what they look like.”

Zegler went on to say how she believes it’s “so important for the next generation” to see “Snow White” because it has a theme of good versus evil.

“To realize there’s nothing wrong with choosing to do what’s right and that it doesn’t have to be with anger or a clenched fist,” the actress said.

“Anger can be a powerful emotion, but it doesn’t bring the brightest future,” Zegler continued. “Snow White chooses kindness and still makes change. Power takes many forms. I hope we’ll see a new dawn of kindness and acceptance in the next couple of years. And people don’t see the need to use hate to cause further division.”

Zegler was also criticized previously for mocking the original storyline and describing Prince Charming as a “stalker.” She also made it clear the live-action story she was part of would have nothing in common with the “weird” original 1937 love story.

“[Snow White]’s not going to be saved by the prince. She’s not going to be dreaming about true love. She’s dreaming about becoming the leader she knows she can be,” she said during a 2023 interview.

“}]] 

The post Rachel Zegler Complains ‘White Executives’ Asked Her To ‘Prove’ Her Ethnicity For ‘West Side Story’ appeared first on Spin Politico.

WASHINGTON—White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt slammed the former leadership of the United States Institute of Peace for “physically” barricading themselves in the building to prevent “political appointees of this administration” from assuming control.

Leavitt was responding to a question from The Daily Wire on the antics of USIP’s former leadership.

“We were made aware of this story by individuals at DOGE and Elon Musk’s team and also at the State Department who were unable to access this building,” Leavitt explained to The Daily Wire during a briefing at the White House on Wednesday.

“It became very clear that there was a concerted effort amongst the rogue bureaucrats at the United States Institute of Peace to actually physically barricade themselves, essentially, inside of the building to prevent political appointees of this administration who work at the direction of the president of the United States to get into the building.”

Leavitt noted that staff “barricaded the doors,” disabled “telephone lines, internet connections, and other IT infrastructure within the building.”

WATCH: 

Two @realDailyWire questions at today’s briefing:

1. What’s going on at USIP, where (we reported) the former president refused to surrender his crown to DOGE?

2. Why hasn’t SCOTUS tracked down the Dobbs leaker, and does WH have interest in finding out who that leaker was? pic.twitter.com/2TDzHFZfAk

— Mary Margaret Olohan (@MaryMargOlohan) March 19, 2025

“They distributed fliers internally encouraging each other to basically prevent these individuals from accessing the building,” she added. “I use this to say, this is what DOGE and this is administration is facing. It is a resistance from bureaucrats who don’t want to see change in the city. President Trump was elected on an overwhelming mandate to seek change and implement change, and this is unacceptable behavior.”

Leavitt’s comments come after The Daily Wire published a report Tuesday evening highlighting the behavior of George Moose, the former head of USIP, who refused to allow DOGE officials to enter the building even though he had already been told that he was no longer the head of USIP.

When the new president, Kenneth Jackson, and the rest of his group were finally able to get into the building on Monday, they found things in turmoil. The shades were drawn, with white noise playing when they arrived. USIP employees were using walkie talkies to communicate within the building, according to the person who was with Jackson.

As of Tuesday, none of the phone systems in the building were working, nor were the elevators, and the internet was down, The Daily Wire reported.

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

WASHINGTON—White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt slammed the former leadership of the United States Institute of Peace for “physically” barricading themselves in the building to prevent “political appointees of this administration” from assuming control.

Leavitt was responding to a question from The Daily Wire on the antics of USIP’s former leadership.

“We were made aware of this story by individuals at DOGE and Elon Musk’s team and also at the State Department who were unable to access this building,” Leavitt explained to The Daily Wire during a briefing at the White House on Wednesday.

“It became very clear that there was a concerted effort amongst the rogue bureaucrats at the United States Institute of Peace to actually physically barricade themselves, essentially, inside of the building to prevent political appointees of this administration who work at the direction of the president of the United States to get into the building.”

Leavitt noted that staff “barricaded the doors,” disabled “telephone lines, internet connections, and other IT infrastructure within the building.”

WATCH: 

Two @realDailyWire questions at today’s briefing:

1. What’s going on at USIP, where (we reported) the former president refused to surrender his crown to DOGE?

2. Why hasn’t SCOTUS tracked down the Dobbs leaker, and does WH have interest in finding out who that leaker was? pic.twitter.com/2TDzHFZfAk

— Mary Margaret Olohan (@MaryMargOlohan) March 19, 2025

“They distributed fliers internally encouraging each other to basically prevent these individuals from accessing the building,” she added. “I use this to say, this is what DOGE and this is administration is facing. It is a resistance from bureaucrats who don’t want to see change in the city. President Trump was elected on an overwhelming mandate to seek change and implement change, and this is unacceptable behavior.”

Leavitt’s comments come after The Daily Wire published a report Tuesday evening highlighting the behavior of George Moose, the former head of USIP, who refused to allow DOGE officials to enter the building even though he had already been told that he was no longer the head of USIP.

When the new president, Kenneth Jackson, and the rest of his group were finally able to get into the building on Monday, they found things in turmoil. The shades were drawn, with white noise playing when they arrived. USIP employees were using walkie talkies to communicate within the building, according to the person who was with Jackson.

As of Tuesday, none of the phone systems in the building were working, nor were the elevators, and the internet was down, The Daily Wire reported.

“}]] 

The post Leavitt Slams ‘Resistance From Bureaucrats Who Don’t Want To See Change’ After Daily Wire Story appeared first on Spin Politico.

A video clip of Hilaria Baldwin snapping at her husband, actor Alec Baldwin, has gone viral, with viewers shocked that she would speak to her spouse that way in public.

Hilaria was talking to Extra at the grand re-opening of Planet Hollywood in NYC last week alongside Alec when the incident took place. The couple was discussing whether a second season of their newly released reality show, “The Baldwins,” was going forward.

I almost feel bad for Alec Baldwin… pic.twitter.com/7mv3JPjaN7

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) March 19, 2025

The interviewer asked if fans could expect season two and Hilaria did not answer right away. This led to Alec joking, “The Hilaria Show.”

“No, I think we are going to see, you know, we’re going to see how it feels to be out there,” Hilaria said.

“It’s gonna be great. You’re a winner,” Alec cut in, to which Hilaria said, “Oh my God. When I’m talking, you’re not talking.”

“I’m sorry,” the “30 Rock” actor said. Hilaria responded by holding her hands up and repeating, “When I’m talking, you’re not talking.”

Addressing the interviewer, the 41-year-old former yoga instructor quipped, “This is why we’ll just have to cut him out of the show.”

“No, I mean I think this is a really raw show and it’s very real and we took a lot of chances and we’ll see where it leads us,” Hilaria added. “We’ll see what it feels like to have it be out there and then we’ll see if people like it, that’s another thing too, you know.”

At another point in the interview, Hilaria accused her husband of “distracting” her as he jokingly interrupted the interview.

She said, “Oh my God, you’re distracting me right now. Now you’re just doing that, why? Why are you distracting me?”

Baldwin apologized and said, “I’m just captivated by your beauty.” 

The actor called her “beautiful” again, which made Hilaria turn around and say again, “Oh my God! Stop, you’re annoying me. Stop. It’s not cute. No, he’s distracting me.”

Viewers on social media have questioned Hilaria’s behavior and comments. 

“Wow. That was so demeaning and immature,” one commenter on X wrote. “I don’t like the guy but he was trying to compliment her and she treated him like a child.”

“What world am I living in where I feel bad for Alec Baldwin?!?!?!?!” another person joked.

“Nope … marry a Hollywood feminist and this is what you get,” a third reply said. “No masculine man would put up with this sh** but no feminine woman would behave like this either. They deserve each other. Typical liberal marriage.”

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

A video clip of Hilaria Baldwin snapping at her husband, actor Alec Baldwin, has gone viral, with viewers shocked that she would speak to her spouse that way in public.

Hilaria was talking to Extra at the grand re-opening of Planet Hollywood in NYC last week alongside Alec when the incident took place. The couple was discussing whether a second season of their newly released reality show, “The Baldwins,” was going forward.

I almost feel bad for Alec Baldwin… pic.twitter.com/7mv3JPjaN7

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) March 19, 2025

The interviewer asked if fans could expect season two and Hilaria did not answer right away. This led to Alec joking, “The Hilaria Show.”

“No, I think we are going to see, you know, we’re going to see how it feels to be out there,” Hilaria said.

“It’s gonna be great. You’re a winner,” Alec cut in, to which Hilaria said, “Oh my God. When I’m talking, you’re not talking.”

“I’m sorry,” the “30 Rock” actor said. Hilaria responded by holding her hands up and repeating, “When I’m talking, you’re not talking.”

Addressing the interviewer, the 41-year-old former yoga instructor quipped, “This is why we’ll just have to cut him out of the show.”

“No, I mean I think this is a really raw show and it’s very real and we took a lot of chances and we’ll see where it leads us,” Hilaria added. “We’ll see what it feels like to have it be out there and then we’ll see if people like it, that’s another thing too, you know.”

At another point in the interview, Hilaria accused her husband of “distracting” her as he jokingly interrupted the interview.

She said, “Oh my God, you’re distracting me right now. Now you’re just doing that, why? Why are you distracting me?”

Baldwin apologized and said, “I’m just captivated by your beauty.” 

The actor called her “beautiful” again, which made Hilaria turn around and say again, “Oh my God! Stop, you’re annoying me. Stop. It’s not cute. No, he’s distracting me.”

Viewers on social media have questioned Hilaria’s behavior and comments. 

“Wow. That was so demeaning and immature,” one commenter on X wrote. “I don’t like the guy but he was trying to compliment her and she treated him like a child.”

“What world am I living in where I feel bad for Alec Baldwin?!?!?!?!” another person joked.

“Nope … marry a Hollywood feminist and this is what you get,” a third reply said. “No masculine man would put up with this sh** but no feminine woman would behave like this either. They deserve each other. Typical liberal marriage.”

“}]] 

The post Clip Of Alec Baldwin Getting Berated By His Wife Goes Viral: ‘When I’m Talking, You’re Not Talking’ appeared first on Spin Politico.

Ukraine has accepted a partial ceasefire with Russia on Wednesday after a “very good phone call” between President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Zelensky.

The call came one day after a similar conversation between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin, and centered on many of the issues previously discussed in that call. Putin rejected an unconditional ceasefire offered by American and Ukrainian negotiators earlier this month, but did accept an offer to restrict attacks on energy infrastructure in both countries. Further negotiations will be conducted in Saudi Arabia, and will include discussions on potentially expanding the partial ceasefire to include the Black Sea as an intermediate step to a full ceasefire.

“I had a positive, very substantive, and frank conversation with President of the United States Donald Trump,” Zelensky said in a statement posted to X, the platform formerly known as Twitter. “We believe that together with America, with President Trump, and under American leadership, lasting peace can be achieved this year.” 

Trump also seemed optimistic about the ongoing peace talks, and said that he and Zelenskyy had a “very good phone call”, a far cry from the explosive confrontation between the two leaders last month during a joint press conference in the Oval Office.

“Much of the discussion was based on the call made yesterday with President Putin in order to align both Russia and Ukraine in terms of their requests and needs,” Trump posted on Truth Social. “We are very much on track, and I will ask Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and National Security Advisor Michael Waltz, to give an accurate description of the points discussed.”

Rubio and Waltz put out a joint statement shortly afterward, describing the conversation as “fantastic” and offering up additional details, including Ukrainian requests for additional air defense systems, prisoner exchanges, and the thousands of missing Ukrainian children allegedly abducted and taken into Russia.

Trump and Zelensky also discussed Ukraine’s energy supply, including its nuclear power plants. Trump proposed American investment in and ownership of parts of Ukraine’s grid, apparently following a similar train of thought to the previously proposed minerals deal, which would have created an American economic interest in Ukraine and potentially put America contractors in the way of future Russian aggression.

The risk of killing American civilians or harming American interests could act as a deterrent in lieu of a traditional security guarantee. “American ownership of those plants would be the best protection for that infrastructure and support for Ukrainian energy infrastructure,” the joint statement from Rubio and Waltz read. 

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

Ukraine has accepted a partial ceasefire with Russia on Wednesday after a “very good phone call” between President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Zelensky.

The call came one day after a similar conversation between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin, and centered on many of the issues previously discussed in that call. Putin rejected an unconditional ceasefire offered by American and Ukrainian negotiators earlier this month, but did accept an offer to restrict attacks on energy infrastructure in both countries. Further negotiations will be conducted in Saudi Arabia, and will include discussions on potentially expanding the partial ceasefire to include the Black Sea as an intermediate step to a full ceasefire.

“I had a positive, very substantive, and frank conversation with President of the United States Donald Trump,” Zelensky said in a statement posted to X, the platform formerly known as Twitter. “We believe that together with America, with President Trump, and under American leadership, lasting peace can be achieved this year.” 

Trump also seemed optimistic about the ongoing peace talks, and said that he and Zelenskyy had a “very good phone call”, a far cry from the explosive confrontation between the two leaders last month during a joint press conference in the Oval Office.

“Much of the discussion was based on the call made yesterday with President Putin in order to align both Russia and Ukraine in terms of their requests and needs,” Trump posted on Truth Social. “We are very much on track, and I will ask Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and National Security Advisor Michael Waltz, to give an accurate description of the points discussed.”

Rubio and Waltz put out a joint statement shortly afterward, describing the conversation as “fantastic” and offering up additional details, including Ukrainian requests for additional air defense systems, prisoner exchanges, and the thousands of missing Ukrainian children allegedly abducted and taken into Russia.

Trump and Zelensky also discussed Ukraine’s energy supply, including its nuclear power plants. Trump proposed American investment in and ownership of parts of Ukraine’s grid, apparently following a similar train of thought to the previously proposed minerals deal, which would have created an American economic interest in Ukraine and potentially put America contractors in the way of future Russian aggression.

The risk of killing American civilians or harming American interests could act as a deterrent in lieu of a traditional security guarantee. “American ownership of those plants would be the best protection for that infrastructure and support for Ukrainian energy infrastructure,” the joint statement from Rubio and Waltz read. 

“}]] 

The post Ukraine Accepts Partial Ceasefire After ‘Very Good Call’ Between Zelensky And Trump appeared first on Spin Politico.