Democrats in Virginia have learned nothing from the outcome of the November elections. Even though voters overwhelmingly rejected the radical abortion ideology of Kamala Harris and other Democrats last fall, legislators in the Commonwealth continue to double down on the issue. In the opening week of the legislative session, Democrats voted to advance a constitutional amendment that would permit abortion at any point during pregnancy, for any reason, and to even remove common sense health protections for women and children, including parental consent. 

It’s a strong reminder for Virginia voters, like myself, when looking ahead to the high-stakes elections later this year. Out of all of the issues to focus on, it speaks volumes that Democrats chose expanding abortion from six months to all nine months to be one of the first votes of the Virginia House of Delegates.

Thankfully, however, we the voters have a say in bringing these out-of-touch, extreme politicians back to reality. In order for the amendment to make it to the ballot, the General Assembly must pass it again in next year’s session, meaning that we have an opportunity in November to vote out lawmakers who are pushing abortion at any time, for any reason.

That’s why we must send a clear message to reject this extremism.

This also comes at a time when the Democrat party wants to federally enshrine abortion nationwide, even though voters have clearly signaled they are not buying their brand of abortion radicalism. If Virginia legislators succeed in putting this form of abortion on the ballot, however, the Commonwealth could become one of the most radical states in the country for abortion and by far — become one of the most radical regions in the world, on par with communist countries like China and Vietnam. This goes to show just how beholden they are to their ideology, and how out of touch they are with the interests of Virginians.

Virginia already has one of the most extreme abortion laws in the country, which allows abortions for any reason up to the third trimester, well after the time a baby can survive outside of the womb. I’m currently in my eighth month of pregnancy. I’ve been seeing my baby’s face and unique movements on 3D/4D ultrasound for months now. She’s a living human being who wakes me up with her early morning kicks and who moves with approval when I consume our morning breakfast of apple juice and avocado toast. But sadly, many of the leaders in my own state, don’t recognize her life as worthy of protecting. Under Virginia’s proposed amendment, a baby in the womb, just like my little girl, could be aborted at any time, for any reason, even though she is more than likely to survive if I delivered early. 

Why are Virginia Democrats not satisfied with up to seven months’ worth of abortion-on-demand?

Sadly, it’s not just babies in the womb who will lose rights from the consequences of Virginia’s broad amendment, women will as well. This amendment also would strip health and safety regulations on abortion businesses and even take away informed consent laws.

Virginia could quickly become like Ohio and Michigan, where women are forced to endure the disastrous effects of extreme and broad abortion amendments. Right now, pro-abortion advocates are pushing to remove informed consent laws, 24-hour waiting periods, and the requirement for women to be seen by a licensed physician before obtaining an abortion — all under ballot measures the voters were deceived into approving. They’re also pushing for taxpayer-funded abortion.

CELEBRATE #47 WITH 47% OFF DAILYWIRE+ MEMBERSHIPS + A FREE $20 GIFT

Oftentimes, we only think of abortion in terms of the rights of the child, but these measures strip away incredibly important health, financial, and informed consent laws that impact pregnant women and all taxpaying Americans.

If Virginia Democrats stay their course, all of us in the Commonwealth will be forced to endure the consequences of a broad and extreme ballot measure that allows unfettered access to abortion up to birth. That is not in line with the values of Virginians and does not belong anywhere near the top priorities of our government. Instead, legislators should focus on common sense measures that build out the state’s support network for women, children, and families.

Virginians must send a clear message to their legislators that late-term abortion for any reason is too extreme for us and our children.

* * *

Emily Erin Davis is a mom and the Vice President of Communications for Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America.

The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

Democrats in Virginia have learned nothing from the outcome of the November elections. Even though voters overwhelmingly rejected the radical abortion ideology of Kamala Harris and other Democrats last fall, legislators in the Commonwealth continue to double down on the issue. In the opening week of the legislative session, Democrats voted to advance a constitutional amendment that would permit abortion at any point during pregnancy, for any reason, and to even remove common sense health protections for women and children, including parental consent. 

It’s a strong reminder for Virginia voters, like myself, when looking ahead to the high-stakes elections later this year. Out of all of the issues to focus on, it speaks volumes that Democrats chose expanding abortion from six months to all nine months to be one of the first votes of the Virginia House of Delegates.

Thankfully, however, we the voters have a say in bringing these out-of-touch, extreme politicians back to reality. In order for the amendment to make it to the ballot, the General Assembly must pass it again in next year’s session, meaning that we have an opportunity in November to vote out lawmakers who are pushing abortion at any time, for any reason.

That’s why we must send a clear message to reject this extremism.

This also comes at a time when the Democrat party wants to federally enshrine abortion nationwide, even though voters have clearly signaled they are not buying their brand of abortion radicalism. If Virginia legislators succeed in putting this form of abortion on the ballot, however, the Commonwealth could become one of the most radical states in the country for abortion and by far — become one of the most radical regions in the world, on par with communist countries like China and Vietnam. This goes to show just how beholden they are to their ideology, and how out of touch they are with the interests of Virginians.

Virginia already has one of the most extreme abortion laws in the country, which allows abortions for any reason up to the third trimester, well after the time a baby can survive outside of the womb. I’m currently in my eighth month of pregnancy. I’ve been seeing my baby’s face and unique movements on 3D/4D ultrasound for months now. She’s a living human being who wakes me up with her early morning kicks and who moves with approval when I consume our morning breakfast of apple juice and avocado toast. But sadly, many of the leaders in my own state, don’t recognize her life as worthy of protecting. Under Virginia’s proposed amendment, a baby in the womb, just like my little girl, could be aborted at any time, for any reason, even though she is more than likely to survive if I delivered early. 

Why are Virginia Democrats not satisfied with up to seven months’ worth of abortion-on-demand?

Sadly, it’s not just babies in the womb who will lose rights from the consequences of Virginia’s broad amendment, women will as well. This amendment also would strip health and safety regulations on abortion businesses and even take away informed consent laws.

Virginia could quickly become like Ohio and Michigan, where women are forced to endure the disastrous effects of extreme and broad abortion amendments. Right now, pro-abortion advocates are pushing to remove informed consent laws, 24-hour waiting periods, and the requirement for women to be seen by a licensed physician before obtaining an abortion — all under ballot measures the voters were deceived into approving. They’re also pushing for taxpayer-funded abortion.

CELEBRATE #47 WITH 47% OFF DAILYWIRE+ MEMBERSHIPS + A FREE $20 GIFT

Oftentimes, we only think of abortion in terms of the rights of the child, but these measures strip away incredibly important health, financial, and informed consent laws that impact pregnant women and all taxpaying Americans.

If Virginia Democrats stay their course, all of us in the Commonwealth will be forced to endure the consequences of a broad and extreme ballot measure that allows unfettered access to abortion up to birth. That is not in line with the values of Virginians and does not belong anywhere near the top priorities of our government. Instead, legislators should focus on common sense measures that build out the state’s support network for women, children, and families.

Virginians must send a clear message to their legislators that late-term abortion for any reason is too extreme for us and our children.

* * *

Emily Erin Davis is a mom and the Vice President of Communications for Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America.

The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

“}]] 

The post Virginia Democrats Push To Enshrine Abortion After The Sixth Month appeared first on Spin Politico.

Notably, California’s leadership has been criticized by even legacy media for a number of outrageous actions. For example, L.A. Democratic Mayor Karen Bass has been accused of ignoring warnings of the forecasted high winds and fire threat, opting to leave town for a taxpayer-funded trip to Africa. The mayor also cut the fire department budget by $17.5 million just months before the fires broke out.

Businessman Rick Caruso, a Democrat who lost the 2022 mayoral race by nine percentage points, has publicly said that firefighters’ hands were tied by leadership and fire hydrants in the area were “bone dry.”

CELEBRATE #47 WITH 47% OFF DAILYWIRE+ MEMBERSHIPS + A FREE $20 GIFT

“We’ve had decades to remove the brush in these hills that move so quickly,” Caruso said. “You’ve got to have water. And my understanding is the reservoir was not refilled in time and in a timely water to keep their hydrants going … it’s all about leadership and management that were seeing a failure of. And all of these residents are paying a price for that.”

According to Fox 11’s Rick Caruso, Los Angeles fire hydrants are out of water because the county refused to refill the reservoirs. pic.twitter.com/2wgQJzdwXg

— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) January 8, 2025

Democrat Governor Gavin Newsom is also taking criticism in the wake of the historic fires, specifically for the lack of water to fight them. One of California’s top water supply systems has been heavily regulated over concerns about two specific fish populations. When President-elect Donald Trump was serving as president back in 2019, he tried to pump more water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta but was stonewalled. 

Folks online were quick to criticize Burr for neglecting to go after those in power. “Bill Burr lost all his credibility in less than 60 seconds,” comedian Tim Young bluntly wrote on X. 

Bill Burr lost all his credibility in less than 60 seconds. https://t.co/Gyk7piyCJ1

— Tim Young (@TimRunsHisMouth) January 16, 2025

Related: Bill Burr Goes Full A**hole

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

Notably, California’s leadership has been criticized by even legacy media for a number of outrageous actions. For example, L.A. Democratic Mayor Karen Bass has been accused of ignoring warnings of the forecasted high winds and fire threat, opting to leave town for a taxpayer-funded trip to Africa. The mayor also cut the fire department budget by $17.5 million just months before the fires broke out.

Businessman Rick Caruso, a Democrat who lost the 2022 mayoral race by nine percentage points, has publicly said that firefighters’ hands were tied by leadership and fire hydrants in the area were “bone dry.”

CELEBRATE #47 WITH 47% OFF DAILYWIRE+ MEMBERSHIPS + A FREE $20 GIFT

“We’ve had decades to remove the brush in these hills that move so quickly,” Caruso said. “You’ve got to have water. And my understanding is the reservoir was not refilled in time and in a timely water to keep their hydrants going … it’s all about leadership and management that were seeing a failure of. And all of these residents are paying a price for that.”

According to Fox 11’s Rick Caruso, Los Angeles fire hydrants are out of water because the county refused to refill the reservoirs. pic.twitter.com/2wgQJzdwXg

— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) January 8, 2025

Democrat Governor Gavin Newsom is also taking criticism in the wake of the historic fires, specifically for the lack of water to fight them. One of California’s top water supply systems has been heavily regulated over concerns about two specific fish populations. When President-elect Donald Trump was serving as president back in 2019, he tried to pump more water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta but was stonewalled. 

Folks online were quick to criticize Burr for neglecting to go after those in power. “Bill Burr lost all his credibility in less than 60 seconds,” comedian Tim Young bluntly wrote on X. 

Bill Burr lost all his credibility in less than 60 seconds. https://t.co/Gyk7piyCJ1

— Tim Young (@TimRunsHisMouth) January 16, 2025

Related: Bill Burr Goes Full A**hole

“}]] 

The post Bill Burr Says LA Fire Response Has Been ‘Great’, Mocks Critics As ‘F***ing Idiots’ appeared first on Spin Politico.

Daily Wire host Michael Knowles was interviewed by CBS Mornings co-host Tony Dokoupil for a segment that aired Thursday morning, dissecting President-elect Donald Trump’s huge success among men in the 2024 election. 

In the segment, Dokoupil talked to conservative and liberal political commentators and strategists to investigate how Trump made massive gains among Latino men and men under 30. Among Latino men of all ages, Trump saw an 18-point swing in his favor in 2024, while 18-29-year-old men swung toward Trump by 8 points. 

“Trump appealed to men because he appealed to men,” Knowles told the CBS Mornings co-host. “He actually campaigned to try to win their votes.” 

“When Kamala was campaigning, such as it was for young men, she sent out her husband to describe masculinity as toxic. Not a great way to win people over,” Knowles added. “She sent out Barack Obama to harangue black men who didn’t want to vote for her.” 

CBS played clips of second gentleman Doug Emhoff criticizing the “trope out there that you gotta be tough and angry and lash out to be strong” and then played a clip of former President Obama scolding black men for not “feeling the idea of having a woman as president.” 

“This is not the way to win the hearts and minds of young men,” said Knowles. 

“Knowles feels the Left has utterly lost its way on gender,” Dokoupil narrated. 

.@tonydokoupil: “Trump is normal.”@michaeljknowles: “Paradoxically so.”

Michael Knowles has to explain to the mainstream media why Donald Trump was able to connect with men on @CBSMornings. pic.twitter.com/KdAvCnunfZ

— Daily Wire (@realDailyWire) January 16, 2025

Knowles argued that it’s not only men that the Left is losing. 

CELEBRATE #47 WITH 47% OFF DAILYWIRE+ MEMBERSHIPS + A FREE $20 GIFT

“It’s no wonder they’ve turned men away, but it’s no wonder that they’ve turned women away either,” the Daily Wire host added. “Because women don’t want girly men. Women want men to be like men.”

“There were distinctions between the roles of men and women in the past that always had exceptions, but nevertheless were defined,” he continued. “But now in the name of equality, we seek to deny any distinction. I think what men want and what women want, for that matter, is just to return to a kind of normal society where we can have our traditional way of life and not be constantly taken aback by all sorts of ideological matters. And I think Trump, in his own way, offered that.” 

“Trump is normal,” Dokoupil quipped. 

“Paradoxically so,” Knowles replied. 

After the segment aired, CBS Mornings co-host Gayle King praised Knowles for pointing out that “Trump appealed to men because he appealed to men.” 

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

Daily Wire host Michael Knowles was interviewed by CBS Mornings co-host Tony Dokoupil for a segment that aired Thursday morning, dissecting President-elect Donald Trump’s huge success among men in the 2024 election. 

In the segment, Dokoupil talked to conservative and liberal political commentators and strategists to investigate how Trump made massive gains among Latino men and men under 30. Among Latino men of all ages, Trump saw an 18-point swing in his favor in 2024, while 18-29-year-old men swung toward Trump by 8 points. 

“Trump appealed to men because he appealed to men,” Knowles told the CBS Mornings co-host. “He actually campaigned to try to win their votes.” 

“When Kamala was campaigning, such as it was for young men, she sent out her husband to describe masculinity as toxic. Not a great way to win people over,” Knowles added. “She sent out Barack Obama to harangue black men who didn’t want to vote for her.” 

CBS played clips of second gentleman Doug Emhoff criticizing the “trope out there that you gotta be tough and angry and lash out to be strong” and then played a clip of former President Obama scolding black men for not “feeling the idea of having a woman as president.” 

“This is not the way to win the hearts and minds of young men,” said Knowles. 

“Knowles feels the Left has utterly lost its way on gender,” Dokoupil narrated. 

.@tonydokoupil: “Trump is normal.”@michaeljknowles: “Paradoxically so.”

Michael Knowles has to explain to the mainstream media why Donald Trump was able to connect with men on @CBSMornings. pic.twitter.com/KdAvCnunfZ

— Daily Wire (@realDailyWire) January 16, 2025

Knowles argued that it’s not only men that the Left is losing. 

CELEBRATE #47 WITH 47% OFF DAILYWIRE+ MEMBERSHIPS + A FREE $20 GIFT

“It’s no wonder they’ve turned men away, but it’s no wonder that they’ve turned women away either,” the Daily Wire host added. “Because women don’t want girly men. Women want men to be like men.”

“There were distinctions between the roles of men and women in the past that always had exceptions, but nevertheless were defined,” he continued. “But now in the name of equality, we seek to deny any distinction. I think what men want and what women want, for that matter, is just to return to a kind of normal society where we can have our traditional way of life and not be constantly taken aback by all sorts of ideological matters. And I think Trump, in his own way, offered that.” 

“Trump is normal,” Dokoupil quipped. 

“Paradoxically so,” Knowles replied. 

After the segment aired, CBS Mornings co-host Gayle King praised Knowles for pointing out that “Trump appealed to men because he appealed to men.” 

“}]] 

The post Michael Knowles Appears On CBS Mornings To Explain Trump’s Massive Success Among Men appeared first on Spin Politico.

Scott Bessent, the nominee for Treasury Secretary in the Trump administration, shut down the ranking Democrat’s claims about tariffs during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Finance Committee on Thursday.

Bessent was grilled by lawmakers, including Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), who accused President-elect Donald Trump of having “no plan and no strategy” for imposing tariffs on foreign goods, asserting that Americans will “get clobbered” with additional taxes.

“I believe these tariffs, you can call it whatever you want in terms of trying to gussy it up, they’re going to be paid for by our workers and small businesses,” Wyden told Bessent. “All through the campaign we heard they weren’t, that foreign countries were going to pay it. I think that’s baloney. It’s going to be paid for by workers and small businesses.”

“Senator, I would respectfully disagree,” Bessent responded. “The history of tariffs and tariff theory, optimal tariff theory, does not support what you’re saying.”

Treasury Secretary Nominee Scott Bessent SHUTS DOWN Democrat lies about President Trump’s tariff policy pic.twitter.com/ISxaPIwKtA

— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) January 16, 2025

“If we were to say, use a number that has been thrown around in the press of 10%, then traditionally the currency appreciates by 4%, so the 10% is not passed through,” he said. “Then we have various elasticities — consumer preferences may change, and finally, foreign manufacturers, especially China, which is trying to export their way out of their current economic malaise, they will continue cutting prices to maintain market share.”

Wyden dismissed Bessent’s explanation as an “academic view of it” and repeated that middle-class Americans would get “clobbered” by tariffs.

Elsewhere during the hearing, Bessent emphasized that what would actually hurt Americans is not renewing the 2017 Trump tax cuts.

Not doing so would be an “economic calamity” and cause a “gigantic middle-class tax increase,” Bessent said.

CELEBRATE #47 WITH 47% OFF DAILYWIRE+ MEMBERSHIPS + A FREE $20 GIFT

“Traditionally with these sudden stops, it falls on working Americans,” he said. “We saw the power of these tax cuts in ’18, ’19, and going into January of ’20 before they were interrupted by Covid and they great success that we had.”

During his exchange with Wyden, Bessent also warned that China is focused on energy, not clean energy.

“Just so we can frame this for everyone in the room, China will build 100 new coal plants this year. There is not a clean energy race. There is an energy race,” Bessent said.

Over the last three decades, Bessent has been successful as the chief investment officer at George Soros’ hedge fund. He founded several firms and taught economic history at Yale, his alma mater.

He would also be the first openly gay Treasury Secretary.

Bessent is from South Carolina and was introduced by Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who urged Senate Democrats to vote for him based on his qualifications, not politics.

“If your goal is to play like the election didn’t happen, then I guess you’ll vote no,” Graham said.

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

Scott Bessent, the nominee for Treasury Secretary in the Trump administration, shut down the ranking Democrat’s claims about tariffs during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Finance Committee on Thursday.

Bessent was grilled by lawmakers, including Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), who accused President-elect Donald Trump of having “no plan and no strategy” for imposing tariffs on foreign goods, asserting that Americans will “get clobbered” with additional taxes.

“I believe these tariffs, you can call it whatever you want in terms of trying to gussy it up, they’re going to be paid for by our workers and small businesses,” Wyden told Bessent. “All through the campaign we heard they weren’t, that foreign countries were going to pay it. I think that’s baloney. It’s going to be paid for by workers and small businesses.”

“Senator, I would respectfully disagree,” Bessent responded. “The history of tariffs and tariff theory, optimal tariff theory, does not support what you’re saying.”

Treasury Secretary Nominee Scott Bessent SHUTS DOWN Democrat lies about President Trump’s tariff policy pic.twitter.com/ISxaPIwKtA

— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) January 16, 2025

“If we were to say, use a number that has been thrown around in the press of 10%, then traditionally the currency appreciates by 4%, so the 10% is not passed through,” he said. “Then we have various elasticities — consumer preferences may change, and finally, foreign manufacturers, especially China, which is trying to export their way out of their current economic malaise, they will continue cutting prices to maintain market share.”

Wyden dismissed Bessent’s explanation as an “academic view of it” and repeated that middle-class Americans would get “clobbered” by tariffs.

Elsewhere during the hearing, Bessent emphasized that what would actually hurt Americans is not renewing the 2017 Trump tax cuts.

Not doing so would be an “economic calamity” and cause a “gigantic middle-class tax increase,” Bessent said.

CELEBRATE #47 WITH 47% OFF DAILYWIRE+ MEMBERSHIPS + A FREE $20 GIFT

“Traditionally with these sudden stops, it falls on working Americans,” he said. “We saw the power of these tax cuts in ’18, ’19, and going into January of ’20 before they were interrupted by Covid and they great success that we had.”

During his exchange with Wyden, Bessent also warned that China is focused on energy, not clean energy.

“Just so we can frame this for everyone in the room, China will build 100 new coal plants this year. There is not a clean energy race. There is an energy race,” Bessent said.

Over the last three decades, Bessent has been successful as the chief investment officer at George Soros’ hedge fund. He founded several firms and taught economic history at Yale, his alma mater.

He would also be the first openly gay Treasury Secretary.

Bessent is from South Carolina and was introduced by Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who urged Senate Democrats to vote for him based on his qualifications, not politics.

“If your goal is to play like the election didn’t happen, then I guess you’ll vote no,” Graham said.

“}]] 

The post Tariff Theory ‘Does Not Support What You’re Saying’: Treasury Nominee Clashes With Dem Senator appeared first on Spin Politico.

On Thursday, a majority of House Democrats once again voted against legislation that seeks to ensure immigrants who commit sex crimes or domestic violence can be deported from the United States.

The bill, called the “Violence Against Women by Illegal Aliens Act,” passed with the support of 213 Republicans and 61 Democrats. Another 145 Democrats and no Republicans voted against it. Fifteen other lawmakers did not vote.

Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) introduced the legislation for the new session of Congress after her bill was passed last year by the GOP-led House but never got a vote in the Democrat-controlled Senate. The last time around, 158 House Democrats voted against the bill.

Just walked off the floor – after HR30 passes the House for a second time – 145 Democrats have a lot of explaining to do after being given a second chance to protect women and girls from illegals who r*pe, m*lest and m*rder them. pic.twitter.com/lm9oP6ibcr

— Rep. Nancy Mace (@RepNancyMace) January 16, 2025

“Just walked off the floor – after HR30 passes the House for a second time – 145 Democrats have a lot of explaining to do after being given a second chance to protect women and girls from illegals who r*pe, m*lest and m*rder them,” Mace said on X.

The bill states that it would “amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to provide that aliens who have been convicted of or who have committed sex offenses or domestic violence are inadmissible and deportable.”

It also contains provisions that apply to crimes of stalking, child abuse, child neglect, child abandonment, or violating the portion of a protection order “against credible threats of violence, repeated harassment, or bodily injury” to the protectee.

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, argued the bill was redundant when it came to cracking down on foreign national criminals and would “set back” efforts to protect victims because it could be used against these survivors if they are immigrants who resist their abusers.

Ranking Member @RepRaskin delivers his floor statement for H.R. 30—the so-called “Preventing Violence Against Women by Illegal Aliens Act” that would harm survivors of domestic violence and does nothing to keep survivors safe. pic.twitter.com/9WAtjnU8Av

— House Judiciary Dems (@HouseJudiciary) January 16, 2025

“Jamie Raskin isn’t telling the truth when he says my bill to deport r*pists, p*dophiles and m*rderers will set women back,” Mace shot back on X. “No. What sets women back are those on the Left that don’t want to deport the worst of the worst – those committing violence against women.”

Similar to other House bills that are getting a second chance in the new Congress, Mace’s legislation is once again heading to the Senate, which is now under Republican control.

“This commonsense solution should be an overwhelmingly bipartisan effort, but the American people must know only 28% of House Democrats voted to protect women from these predators,” House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) said in a statement.

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

On Thursday, a majority of House Democrats once again voted against legislation that seeks to ensure immigrants who commit sex crimes or domestic violence can be deported from the United States.

The bill, called the “Violence Against Women by Illegal Aliens Act,” passed with the support of 213 Republicans and 61 Democrats. Another 145 Democrats and no Republicans voted against it. Fifteen other lawmakers did not vote.

Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) introduced the legislation for the new session of Congress after her bill was passed last year by the GOP-led House but never got a vote in the Democrat-controlled Senate. The last time around, 158 House Democrats voted against the bill.

Just walked off the floor – after HR30 passes the House for a second time – 145 Democrats have a lot of explaining to do after being given a second chance to protect women and girls from illegals who r*pe, m*lest and m*rder them. pic.twitter.com/lm9oP6ibcr

— Rep. Nancy Mace (@RepNancyMace) January 16, 2025

“Just walked off the floor – after HR30 passes the House for a second time – 145 Democrats have a lot of explaining to do after being given a second chance to protect women and girls from illegals who r*pe, m*lest and m*rder them,” Mace said on X.

The bill states that it would “amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to provide that aliens who have been convicted of or who have committed sex offenses or domestic violence are inadmissible and deportable.”

It also contains provisions that apply to crimes of stalking, child abuse, child neglect, child abandonment, or violating the portion of a protection order “against credible threats of violence, repeated harassment, or bodily injury” to the protectee.

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, argued the bill was redundant when it came to cracking down on foreign national criminals and would “set back” efforts to protect victims because it could be used against these survivors if they are immigrants who resist their abusers.

Ranking Member @RepRaskin delivers his floor statement for H.R. 30—the so-called “Preventing Violence Against Women by Illegal Aliens Act” that would harm survivors of domestic violence and does nothing to keep survivors safe. pic.twitter.com/9WAtjnU8Av

— House Judiciary Dems (@HouseJudiciary) January 16, 2025

“Jamie Raskin isn’t telling the truth when he says my bill to deport r*pists, p*dophiles and m*rderers will set women back,” Mace shot back on X. “No. What sets women back are those on the Left that don’t want to deport the worst of the worst – those committing violence against women.”

Similar to other House bills that are getting a second chance in the new Congress, Mace’s legislation is once again heading to the Senate, which is now under Republican control.

“This commonsense solution should be an overwhelmingly bipartisan effort, but the American people must know only 28% of House Democrats voted to protect women from these predators,” House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) said in a statement.

“}]] 

The post 145 Dems Vote Against Mace’s Bill To Deport Immigrants For Sex Crimes, Domestic Violence appeared first on Spin Politico.

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has confirmed through a spokesman that she will not attend President-elect Donald Trump’s inauguration on Monday.

Pelosi, who attended Trump’s inauguration back in 2017, did not give a reason for skipping out on the swearing-in ceremony.

Notably, the Democrat broke her hip in December and soon after had hip replacement surgery. Still, Pelosi, using a walker, attended a ceremony for the late former President Jimmy Carter earlier this month and also attended a joint session of Congress to ratify Trump’s win on January 6.

Pelosi has attended 11 presidential inaugurations in total, according to ABC News.

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Trump and Pelosi have traded barbs at one another for years. In 2023, for example, Pelosi said Trump looked like a “scared puppy” when heading into a courtroom.

“I wasn’t in the courtroom, of course, but when I saw Trump coming out of his car…I saw a scared puppy,” Pelosi said on MSNBC airwaves. “He looked very, very, very concerned about [his] fate. I didn’t see any bravado, or confidence, or anything like that. He knows. He knows the truth: That he lost the election, and now he’s got to face the music.”

CELEBRATE #47 WITH 47% OFF DAILYWIRE+ MEMBERSHIPS + A FREE $20 GIFT

Many legal scholars and Trump supporters view the lawsuits and prosecution of the president-elect as mere lawfare meant to harm him politically.

Trump returned fire, posting on Truth Social, “[Pelosi] said something about me, with glee, that was really quite vicious. ‘I saw a scared puppy,’ she said, as she watched me on television, like millions of others, that didn’t see that. I wasn’t ‘scared.’ Nevertheless, how mean a thing to say! She is a Wicked Witch whose husband’s journey from hell starts and finishes with her. She is a sick & demented psycho who will someday live in HELL!”

In addition to Pelosi skipping the inauguration, former first lady Michelle Obama also confirmed she won’t attend. Like Pelosi, no reason was given, though a source claims Mrs. Obama doesn’t want to fake a smile for the cameras.

Related: Here’s Why Michelle Obama Is Reportedly Skipping Trump’s Inauguration

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has confirmed through a spokesman that she will not attend President-elect Donald Trump’s inauguration on Monday.

Pelosi, who attended Trump’s inauguration back in 2017, did not give a reason for skipping out on the swearing-in ceremony.

Notably, the Democrat broke her hip in December and soon after had hip replacement surgery. Still, Pelosi, using a walker, attended a ceremony for the late former President Jimmy Carter earlier this month and also attended a joint session of Congress to ratify Trump’s win on January 6.

Pelosi has attended 11 presidential inaugurations in total, according to ABC News.

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Trump and Pelosi have traded barbs at one another for years. In 2023, for example, Pelosi said Trump looked like a “scared puppy” when heading into a courtroom.

“I wasn’t in the courtroom, of course, but when I saw Trump coming out of his car…I saw a scared puppy,” Pelosi said on MSNBC airwaves. “He looked very, very, very concerned about [his] fate. I didn’t see any bravado, or confidence, or anything like that. He knows. He knows the truth: That he lost the election, and now he’s got to face the music.”

CELEBRATE #47 WITH 47% OFF DAILYWIRE+ MEMBERSHIPS + A FREE $20 GIFT

Many legal scholars and Trump supporters view the lawsuits and prosecution of the president-elect as mere lawfare meant to harm him politically.

Trump returned fire, posting on Truth Social, “[Pelosi] said something about me, with glee, that was really quite vicious. ‘I saw a scared puppy,’ she said, as she watched me on television, like millions of others, that didn’t see that. I wasn’t ‘scared.’ Nevertheless, how mean a thing to say! She is a Wicked Witch whose husband’s journey from hell starts and finishes with her. She is a sick & demented psycho who will someday live in HELL!”

In addition to Pelosi skipping the inauguration, former first lady Michelle Obama also confirmed she won’t attend. Like Pelosi, no reason was given, though a source claims Mrs. Obama doesn’t want to fake a smile for the cameras.

Related: Here’s Why Michelle Obama Is Reportedly Skipping Trump’s Inauguration

“}]] 

The post Nancy Pelosi Will Not Attend Trump’s Inauguration appeared first on Spin Politico.

Transgender advocates are big mad about Hollywood’s buzziest new trans-centric film.

The musical crime thriller “Emilia Pérez” recently swept the Golden Globes, bringing home four statuettes for Best Motion Picture – Musical or Comedy, Best Foreign Language Film, Best Song, and Best Supporting Actress for Zoe Saldaña.

This was after earning the second most nominations in Golden Globes history, including the first Best Actress nomination for a transgender-identifying actor that went to the film’s lead, Karla Sofía Gascón.

Now the movie is generating a lot of Oscars buzz after getting a whopping 11 BAFTA nominations in mid-January.

Maybe this shouldn’t be surprising since the narrative follows a Mexican drug cartel leader who fakes his own death to undergo gender transition surgery and live a new life. Considering Hollywood’s obsession with radical left-wing gender theory, it would make sense for this movie to be heaped in praise.

Instead, it’s gotten a ton of backlash for being inauthentic and, interestingly enough, transphobic.

While director Jacques Audiard likely scored points for finding a trans-identifying actor to play the titular role, in the end, that wasn’t enough: Transgender advocates hated “Emilia Pérez.”

GLAAD, a non-profit that advocates against defamatory coverage of gay, lesbian, “queer” and transgender-identifying people, called it a “profoundly retrograde portrayal of a trans woman” and “a step backward for trans representation.”

NPR journalist Reanna Cruz, who uses they/them pronouns and self-identifies as “queer and trans,” also complained about the transgender representation, saying it made those individuals look like “liars.”

“The entire time I was watching it I had a really weird feeling in my stomach because to me it seemed like the filmmaker was painting trans women as liars,” Cruz said. “Liars and people that can’t tell the truth and they don’t know who they are. And the songs kind of lean into that. Where half of the songs you have Emilia singing ‘Who am I?’ or talking about ‘I was a he and now I’m a she.’”

A “queer media” writer for the website them.com said “Emilia Perez” had no good qualities. “I was ready to find something to like about it — or at the very least, something I would hate so much it would be one of those so-bad-it’s-good movies. But it was neither. I hate, hate, hate this film,” Fran Tirado wrote.

Transgender representation wasn’t the only concern. Another major issue critics had was over the film’s authenticity.

“Emilia Pérez” follows cartel kingpin Juan “Manitas” Del Monte (Gascón), who petitions attorney Rita Mora Castro (Saldaña) for help with staging his death. The entirety of the events are set in Mexico, but the movie’s director is French. The Spanish-language movie was filmed in France. And Audiard? He doesn’t even speak Spanish.

The director also admitted to not doing much research before making the film. “I didn’t study [Mexico] much,” Audiard said during an interview that’s been circulating on X. “What I needed to know I already knew a little bit.”

There’s been much backlash to the film on social media, especially from Mexican viewers who say the portrayal of their country is inaccurate and damaging, particularly when it comes to the portrayal of drug cartels. Viewers also lamented the fact that none of the cast members were Mexican, reigniting a familiar argument about casting actors in roles that don’t match their nationality. 

CELEBRATE #47 WITH 47% OFF DAILYWIRE+ MEMBERSHIPS + A FREE $20 GIFT

“This is a message to the Academy: Mexico hates Emilia Pérez. It is a racist, Eurocentric mockery. Nearly 500,000 are dead, and France decides to make a musical with no Mexicans in the crew or cast,” one popular X post says.

Another user on X agreed, writing, “Emilia Pérez is a case study in how to combine every cliché, ignorance, and lack of respect toward one of the most serious humanitarian crises of our time. Poorly acted, with a weak script, and a disastrously executed musical.”

“It just doesn’t make sense. A French guy making a movie without really knowing what happens in Mexico, simply unbelievable. Bad acting, dialogues, story doesn’t make sense and so on. Please, for your own good, don’t watch it,” one reviewer wrote.

Another agreed, writing, “I am Mexican and I found it completely disrespectful. It looks like a bad comedy made to entertain and promote stereotypes raised from an ignorant perspective of the country they want to represent on screen.”

“Only Murders in the Building” actress Selena Gomez also caught heat for her Spanish speaking skills. “CODA” actor Eugenio Derbez spoke out publicly about her Spanish pronunciation during a podcast appearance in December, saying, “Selena is indefensible.”

Derbez added, “I was there [watching the movie] with people, and every time a scene came [with her in it], we looked at each other and said, ‘Wow, what is this?’”

Gomez responded to the criticism via TikTok, saying, “I understand where you are coming from. I’m sorry I did the best I could with the time I was given. Doesn’t take away from how much work and heart I put into this movie.”

Derbez later apologized to Gomez, saying his “careless comments” went against “everything I stand for.”

“There’s no excuse. I was wrong, and I deeply admire your career and your kind heart,” he said. 

But plenty of other critics share his feelings.

Despite all the backlash, many critics who do not write for “queer media” and industry bigwigs loved “Emilia Pérez.” Kevin Maher from The Times said, “This mad musical is one of the year’s best films,” while Stephanie Zacharek from Time said it was “fierce and glorious, a radical act of the imagination with kindness in its heart.”

New York Times critic Manohla Dargis agreed, writing, “It’s Gascón’s performance that centers and grounds the story.”

“Titanic” director James Cameron also had rave reviews. “What I saw that blew me away was Emilia Pérez. I have seen it three times now,” Cameron said in December. “It’s just not like any other film that’s ever been made, you know? I mean, I think it’s bold, it’s daring, it’s a vision. It’s beautifully executed. It’s a beautiful piece of filmmaking.”

“Emilia Pérez” currently has a 76% critics rating and a 38% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes. It is expected to take home some prizes at the British Academy Film Awards and later at the Oscars in March, despite the fact that audiences – even those who you’d think would be cheering for a trans-centric storyline – really, really don’t like it. 

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

Transgender advocates are big mad about Hollywood’s buzziest new trans-centric film.

The musical crime thriller “Emilia Pérez” recently swept the Golden Globes, bringing home four statuettes for Best Motion Picture – Musical or Comedy, Best Foreign Language Film, Best Song, and Best Supporting Actress for Zoe Saldaña.

This was after earning the second most nominations in Golden Globes history, including the first Best Actress nomination for a transgender-identifying actor that went to the film’s lead, Karla Sofía Gascón.

Now the movie is generating a lot of Oscars buzz after getting a whopping 11 BAFTA nominations in mid-January.

Maybe this shouldn’t be surprising since the narrative follows a Mexican drug cartel leader who fakes his own death to undergo gender transition surgery and live a new life. Considering Hollywood’s obsession with radical left-wing gender theory, it would make sense for this movie to be heaped in praise.

Instead, it’s gotten a ton of backlash for being inauthentic and, interestingly enough, transphobic.

While director Jacques Audiard likely scored points for finding a trans-identifying actor to play the titular role, in the end, that wasn’t enough: Transgender advocates hated “Emilia Pérez.”

GLAAD, a non-profit that advocates against defamatory coverage of gay, lesbian, “queer” and transgender-identifying people, called it a “profoundly retrograde portrayal of a trans woman” and “a step backward for trans representation.”

NPR journalist Reanna Cruz, who uses they/them pronouns and self-identifies as “queer and trans,” also complained about the transgender representation, saying it made those individuals look like “liars.”

“The entire time I was watching it I had a really weird feeling in my stomach because to me it seemed like the filmmaker was painting trans women as liars,” Cruz said. “Liars and people that can’t tell the truth and they don’t know who they are. And the songs kind of lean into that. Where half of the songs you have Emilia singing ‘Who am I?’ or talking about ‘I was a he and now I’m a she.’”

A “queer media” writer for the website them.com said “Emilia Perez” had no good qualities. “I was ready to find something to like about it — or at the very least, something I would hate so much it would be one of those so-bad-it’s-good movies. But it was neither. I hate, hate, hate this film,” Fran Tirado wrote.

Transgender representation wasn’t the only concern. Another major issue critics had was over the film’s authenticity.

“Emilia Pérez” follows cartel kingpin Juan “Manitas” Del Monte (Gascón), who petitions attorney Rita Mora Castro (Saldaña) for help with staging his death. The entirety of the events are set in Mexico, but the movie’s director is French. The Spanish-language movie was filmed in France. And Audiard? He doesn’t even speak Spanish.

The director also admitted to not doing much research before making the film. “I didn’t study [Mexico] much,” Audiard said during an interview that’s been circulating on X. “What I needed to know I already knew a little bit.”

There’s been much backlash to the film on social media, especially from Mexican viewers who say the portrayal of their country is inaccurate and damaging, particularly when it comes to the portrayal of drug cartels. Viewers also lamented the fact that none of the cast members were Mexican, reigniting a familiar argument about casting actors in roles that don’t match their nationality. 

CELEBRATE #47 WITH 47% OFF DAILYWIRE+ MEMBERSHIPS + A FREE $20 GIFT

“This is a message to the Academy: Mexico hates Emilia Pérez. It is a racist, Eurocentric mockery. Nearly 500,000 are dead, and France decides to make a musical with no Mexicans in the crew or cast,” one popular X post says.

Another user on X agreed, writing, “Emilia Pérez is a case study in how to combine every cliché, ignorance, and lack of respect toward one of the most serious humanitarian crises of our time. Poorly acted, with a weak script, and a disastrously executed musical.”

“It just doesn’t make sense. A French guy making a movie without really knowing what happens in Mexico, simply unbelievable. Bad acting, dialogues, story doesn’t make sense and so on. Please, for your own good, don’t watch it,” one reviewer wrote.

Another agreed, writing, “I am Mexican and I found it completely disrespectful. It looks like a bad comedy made to entertain and promote stereotypes raised from an ignorant perspective of the country they want to represent on screen.”

“Only Murders in the Building” actress Selena Gomez also caught heat for her Spanish speaking skills. “CODA” actor Eugenio Derbez spoke out publicly about her Spanish pronunciation during a podcast appearance in December, saying, “Selena is indefensible.”

Derbez added, “I was there [watching the movie] with people, and every time a scene came [with her in it], we looked at each other and said, ‘Wow, what is this?’”

Gomez responded to the criticism via TikTok, saying, “I understand where you are coming from. I’m sorry I did the best I could with the time I was given. Doesn’t take away from how much work and heart I put into this movie.”

Derbez later apologized to Gomez, saying his “careless comments” went against “everything I stand for.”

“There’s no excuse. I was wrong, and I deeply admire your career and your kind heart,” he said. 

But plenty of other critics share his feelings.

Despite all the backlash, many critics who do not write for “queer media” and industry bigwigs loved “Emilia Pérez.” Kevin Maher from The Times said, “This mad musical is one of the year’s best films,” while Stephanie Zacharek from Time said it was “fierce and glorious, a radical act of the imagination with kindness in its heart.”

New York Times critic Manohla Dargis agreed, writing, “It’s Gascón’s performance that centers and grounds the story.”

“Titanic” director James Cameron also had rave reviews. “What I saw that blew me away was Emilia Pérez. I have seen it three times now,” Cameron said in December. “It’s just not like any other film that’s ever been made, you know? I mean, I think it’s bold, it’s daring, it’s a vision. It’s beautifully executed. It’s a beautiful piece of filmmaking.”

“Emilia Pérez” currently has a 76% critics rating and a 38% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes. It is expected to take home some prizes at the British Academy Film Awards and later at the Oscars in March, despite the fact that audiences – even those who you’d think would be cheering for a trans-centric storyline – really, really don’t like it. 

“}]] 

The post Trans Advocates Can’t Stand Pro-Trans Golden Globe Winner ‘Emilia Pérez’ — Here’s Why appeared first on Spin Politico.

Far-Left MSNBC host Joy Reid falsely claimed Wednesday night that Daily Wire editor emeritus Ben Shapiro was funded by an oligarch.

During MSNBC’s coverage of President Joe Biden’s farewell address, Reid claimed that Shapiro and other conservatives were being propped up by a hidden group of wealthy oligarchs. Reid made the comment after Biden used his speech to claim that there was a rising American “oligarchy” endangering the country.

“And these oligarchs, they’ve always been there. Who do you think was paying for, you know Rush Limbaugh? He was a very wealthy man. Fox is owned by an oligarch. Who do they think is funding the Ben Shapiro [Show] and other podcasts?” Reid claimed. 

“The oligarchy has been hidden in the background the whole time and Biden is this pivot president as America is hurtling toward sort of falling in love with these rich tech gods, these tech bros,” Reid added, seeming to take a shot at Trump ally Elon Musk, who is promising to bring reform to the government. 

Reid was mocked online for the claim, including by Daily Wire co-founder Jeremy Boreing, who pointed out Shapiro helped to create The Daily Wire, which generated over $200 million in revenue last year.  

“In which Joy Reid – who reportedly makes over $3M a year – claims Ben Shapiro is funded by an oligarch when, in fact, the company he helped create generated well over $200M last year in advertising and subscription revenue (plus a few razor sales!),” he said. “Joy Reid lives in such a bubble she doesn’t know there is an actual audience for conservative ideas, and she is so economically illiterate she doesn’t know how value is created.”

In which Joy Reid – who reportedly makes over $3M a year – claims Ben Shapiro is funded by an oligarch when, in fact, the company he helped create generated well over $200M last year in advertising and subscription revenue (plus a few razor sales!).

Joy Reid lives in such a… pic.twitter.com/ci9vvFdZTv

— Jeremy Boreing (@JeremyDBoreing) January 16, 2025

“Daily Wire creates value, and we’re always working to create more,” he added. “Still, if there are any oligarchs out there who would like to fund us, I can only say we may not be very good, but we’re real expensive…”

CELEBRATE #47 WITH 47% OFF DAILYWIRE+ MEMBERSHIPS + A FREE $20 GIFT

Reid made her claims when reacting to Biden’s assertions that the United States was being taken over by an “oligarchy.” 

“Today, an oligarchy is taking shape in America of extreme wealth, power, and influence that literally threatens our entire democracy, our basic rights and freedoms, and a fair shot for everyone to get ahead,” Biden claimed. “We see the consequences all across America. And we’ve seen it before, more than a century ago.”

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

Far-Left MSNBC host Joy Reid falsely claimed Wednesday night that Daily Wire editor emeritus Ben Shapiro was funded by an oligarch.

During MSNBC’s coverage of President Joe Biden’s farewell address, Reid claimed that Shapiro and other conservatives were being propped up by a hidden group of wealthy oligarchs. Reid made the comment after Biden used his speech to claim that there was a rising American “oligarchy” endangering the country.

“And these oligarchs, they’ve always been there. Who do you think was paying for, you know Rush Limbaugh? He was a very wealthy man. Fox is owned by an oligarch. Who do they think is funding the Ben Shapiro [Show] and other podcasts?” Reid claimed. 

“The oligarchy has been hidden in the background the whole time and Biden is this pivot president as America is hurtling toward sort of falling in love with these rich tech gods, these tech bros,” Reid added, seeming to take a shot at Trump ally Elon Musk, who is promising to bring reform to the government. 

Reid was mocked online for the claim, including by Daily Wire co-founder Jeremy Boreing, who pointed out Shapiro helped to create The Daily Wire, which generated over $200 million in revenue last year.  

“In which Joy Reid – who reportedly makes over $3M a year – claims Ben Shapiro is funded by an oligarch when, in fact, the company he helped create generated well over $200M last year in advertising and subscription revenue (plus a few razor sales!),” he said. “Joy Reid lives in such a bubble she doesn’t know there is an actual audience for conservative ideas, and she is so economically illiterate she doesn’t know how value is created.”

In which Joy Reid – who reportedly makes over $3M a year – claims Ben Shapiro is funded by an oligarch when, in fact, the company he helped create generated well over $200M last year in advertising and subscription revenue (plus a few razor sales!).

Joy Reid lives in such a… pic.twitter.com/ci9vvFdZTv

— Jeremy Boreing (@JeremyDBoreing) January 16, 2025

“Daily Wire creates value, and we’re always working to create more,” he added. “Still, if there are any oligarchs out there who would like to fund us, I can only say we may not be very good, but we’re real expensive…”

CELEBRATE #47 WITH 47% OFF DAILYWIRE+ MEMBERSHIPS + A FREE $20 GIFT

Reid made her claims when reacting to Biden’s assertions that the United States was being taken over by an “oligarchy.” 

“Today, an oligarchy is taking shape in America of extreme wealth, power, and influence that literally threatens our entire democracy, our basic rights and freedoms, and a fair shot for everyone to get ahead,” Biden claimed. “We see the consequences all across America. And we’ve seen it before, more than a century ago.”

“}]] 

The post ‘Economically Illiterate’: Joy Reid Slammed After Saying Ben Shapiro Is Funded By Oligarch appeared first on Spin Politico.

President-elect Donald Trump announced Thursday that he is appointing multiple legendary Hollywood actors as “special ambassadors” to Hollywood.

Those special ambassadors will be Jon Voight, Mel Gibson, and Sylvester Stallone, Trump said. All three actors are conservative and have appeared publicly with Trump or praised him publicly in the past. Stallone, for example, praised Trump as “the second George Washington” while introducing him at the America First Policy Gala in Palm Beach in November.

“It is my honor to announce Jon Voight, Mel Gibson, and Sylvester Stallone, to be Special Ambassadors to a great but very troubled place, Hollywood, California,” Trump wrote in a Thursday Truth Social post. “They will serve as Special Envoys to me for the purpose of bringing Hollywood, which has lost much business over the last four years to Foreign Countries, BACK—BIGGER, BETTER, AND STRONGER THAN EVER BEFORE!”

(Photo by Stephane Cardinale/Corbis via Getty Images)

“These three very talented people will be my eyes and ears, and I will get done what they suggest,” Trump added. “It will again be, like The United States of America itself, The Golden Age of Hollywood!”

The actors’ support for Trump is particularly significant given the strong anti-Trump sentiment voiced by many Hollywood progressives, such as George Clooney, who embrace politicians like former President Barack Obama.

“When George Washington defended his country, he had no idea that he was going to change the world,” Stallone said of Trump in November. “‘Cause without him, you can imagine what the world would look like. Guess what, we got the second George Washington.”

Gibson, who has been pictured with Trump on a number of occasions in the past, shared that he was voting for Trump in October, telling paparazzi of Kamala Harris: “I know what it’ll be like if we let her in. And that ain’t good. Miserable track record. No policies to speak of. She’s got the IQ of a fence post.”

Voight has been a strong Trump supporter, since Trump first announced his candidacy in 2015, and has compared Trump to Richard the Lionheart and Abraham Lincoln.

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

President-elect Donald Trump announced Thursday that he is appointing multiple legendary Hollywood actors as “special ambassadors” to Hollywood.

Those special ambassadors will be Jon Voight, Mel Gibson, and Sylvester Stallone, Trump said. All three actors are conservative and have appeared publicly with Trump or praised him publicly in the past. Stallone, for example, praised Trump as “the second George Washington” while introducing him at the America First Policy Gala in Palm Beach in November.

“It is my honor to announce Jon Voight, Mel Gibson, and Sylvester Stallone, to be Special Ambassadors to a great but very troubled place, Hollywood, California,” Trump wrote in a Thursday Truth Social post. “They will serve as Special Envoys to me for the purpose of bringing Hollywood, which has lost much business over the last four years to Foreign Countries, BACK—BIGGER, BETTER, AND STRONGER THAN EVER BEFORE!”

(Photo by Stephane Cardinale/Corbis via Getty Images)

“These three very talented people will be my eyes and ears, and I will get done what they suggest,” Trump added. “It will again be, like The United States of America itself, The Golden Age of Hollywood!”

The actors’ support for Trump is particularly significant given the strong anti-Trump sentiment voiced by many Hollywood progressives, such as George Clooney, who embrace politicians like former President Barack Obama.

“When George Washington defended his country, he had no idea that he was going to change the world,” Stallone said of Trump in November. “‘Cause without him, you can imagine what the world would look like. Guess what, we got the second George Washington.”

Gibson, who has been pictured with Trump on a number of occasions in the past, shared that he was voting for Trump in October, telling paparazzi of Kamala Harris: “I know what it’ll be like if we let her in. And that ain’t good. Miserable track record. No policies to speak of. She’s got the IQ of a fence post.”

Voight has been a strong Trump supporter, since Trump first announced his candidacy in 2015, and has compared Trump to Richard the Lionheart and Abraham Lincoln.

“}]] 

The post Trump Appoints A-List Stars As Ambassadors To Hollywood appeared first on Spin Politico.

Scott Bessent, the nominee for Treasury Secretary, told lawmakers on Thursday that extending the 2017 Trump tax cuts is the most important economic issue for the incoming Trump administration to address.

The comments came as Bessent was grilled during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Finance Committee.

Treasury Secretary nominee Scott Bessent: “If we do not renew and extend [the Trump tax cuts], then we will be facing an economic calamity, as always with financial instability, that falls on middle and working class people.” pic.twitter.com/DghKQFPJgO

— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) January 16, 2025

“This is the single most important economic issue of the day,” Bessent said. “This is pass-fail.”

“If we do not fix these tax cuts, if we do not renew and extend, then we will be facing an economic calamity, and, as always, with financial instability, that falls on the middle- and working-class people,” he said. “We will see a gigantic middle-class tax increase. We will see the child tax credit halved. We will see the deductions halved.”

In economic terms, it could be a “sudden stop,” Bessent said.

“Traditionally with these sudden stops it falls on working Americans,” he said.

CELEBRATE #47 WITH 47% OFF DAILYWIRE+ MEMBERSHIPS + A FREE $20 GIFT

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 was one of President-elect Donald Trump’s signature accomplishments during his first term.

During his campaign, Trump promised to renew the tax cuts should he be elected. He also called for other tax policies, including no tax on tips and ending taxes on Social Security benefits.

“We saw the power of these tax cuts in ’18, ’19, and going into January of ’20 before they were interrupted by COVID and the great success that we had,” Bessent said during Thursday’s hearing.

Democrats have claimed that the tax cuts benefit the wealthy more than the middle class, but in 2022, the Congressional Budget Office said tax revenue was actually expected to increase by hundreds of billions of dollars following the tax cuts.

Bessent said the country’s economic problem is spending.

“We do not have a revenue problem in the United States. We have a spending problem,” he told the senators.

The Biden administration has issued many expensive executive orders, such as multiple student loan forgiveness actions.

Over the last three decades, Bessent has been successful as the chief investment officer at George Soros’ hedge fund. He founded several firms and taught economic history at Yale, his alma mater.

He would also be the first openly gay Treasury Secretary.

Bessent is from South Carolina and was introduced by Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who urged Senate Democrats to vote for him based on his qualifications, not politics.

“If your goal is to play like the election didn’t happen, then I guess you’ll vote no,” Graham said.

​[#item_full_content]  

​[[{“value”:”

Scott Bessent, the nominee for Treasury Secretary, told lawmakers on Thursday that extending the 2017 Trump tax cuts is the most important economic issue for the incoming Trump administration to address.

The comments came as Bessent was grilled during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Finance Committee.

Treasury Secretary nominee Scott Bessent: “If we do not renew and extend [the Trump tax cuts], then we will be facing an economic calamity, as always with financial instability, that falls on middle and working class people.” pic.twitter.com/DghKQFPJgO

— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) January 16, 2025

“This is the single most important economic issue of the day,” Bessent said. “This is pass-fail.”

“If we do not fix these tax cuts, if we do not renew and extend, then we will be facing an economic calamity, and, as always, with financial instability, that falls on the middle- and working-class people,” he said. “We will see a gigantic middle-class tax increase. We will see the child tax credit halved. We will see the deductions halved.”

In economic terms, it could be a “sudden stop,” Bessent said.

“Traditionally with these sudden stops it falls on working Americans,” he said.

CELEBRATE #47 WITH 47% OFF DAILYWIRE+ MEMBERSHIPS + A FREE $20 GIFT

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 was one of President-elect Donald Trump’s signature accomplishments during his first term.

During his campaign, Trump promised to renew the tax cuts should he be elected. He also called for other tax policies, including no tax on tips and ending taxes on Social Security benefits.

“We saw the power of these tax cuts in ’18, ’19, and going into January of ’20 before they were interrupted by COVID and the great success that we had,” Bessent said during Thursday’s hearing.

Democrats have claimed that the tax cuts benefit the wealthy more than the middle class, but in 2022, the Congressional Budget Office said tax revenue was actually expected to increase by hundreds of billions of dollars following the tax cuts.

Bessent said the country’s economic problem is spending.

“We do not have a revenue problem in the United States. We have a spending problem,” he told the senators.

The Biden administration has issued many expensive executive orders, such as multiple student loan forgiveness actions.

Over the last three decades, Bessent has been successful as the chief investment officer at George Soros’ hedge fund. He founded several firms and taught economic history at Yale, his alma mater.

He would also be the first openly gay Treasury Secretary.

Bessent is from South Carolina and was introduced by Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who urged Senate Democrats to vote for him based on his qualifications, not politics.

“If your goal is to play like the election didn’t happen, then I guess you’ll vote no,” Graham said.

“}]] 

The post Extending Trump Tax Cuts Is ‘Single Most Important Economic Issue,’ Treasury Nominee Says appeared first on Spin Politico.