President Trump’s fraud crackdown just moved into one of the biggest money pipelines in Washington: federal student aid. The target is a scam most Americans have probably never heard of, but taxpayers have been paying for it anyway. They are called “ghost students.” Fake or stolen identities get used to enroll, trigger aid, and vanish once the money goes out. Now the Trump administration says it is putting real-time screening directly into FAFSA. The Department of Education announced Monday that the new tool is now built directly into the federal student aid application process. Applicants who display a certain level of fraud risk will now be required to present government-issued identification. That means suspicious applications can be stopped before Pell Grants and federal loans are released. According to the Department, the effort could save taxpayers more than $1 billion during this year’s FAFSA cycle. The agency is also reviewing previously submitted 2026-27 FAFSA forms with the new screening technology. Fox News Digital had more on the Trump administration’s new crackdown: Americans deserve education. Fraudsters deserve nothing. That line came from a senior White House official, and it is hard to improve on it. Because this is not just some paperwork problem. According to the Department of Education, key verification safeguards were removed during the COVID-19 pandemic under Biden. The Department says less than 1 percent of students were required to verify their identity after submitting FAFSA at the time. That is exactly the kind of opening fraud rings look for. The Department says those policies helped leave schools exposed to fake applicants, stolen identities, AI bots, and criminal networks using the student aid system like an ATM. Vice President JD Vance is now chairing the White House Task Force to Eliminate Fraud, and this FAFSA move is part of that wider effort. The numbers are not small. The Department says earlier fraud-fighting moves have already saved taxpayers more than $1 billion. It also says improved data-sharing with the Social Security Administration helped stop more than $30 million from going to dead people. Another post-screening change prevented more than $10 million in improper Pell Grant payments. And the Department says it has partnered with Homeland Security to make sure illegal aliens no longer receive federal student aid funds. Inside Higher Ed reported that applicants flagged as high-risk may have to complete a live automated identity check using a government-issued ID. Low and moderate-risk applicants are expected to see no change in the process. The outlet also noted that colleges have been struggling with ghost student fraud for years, especially as scammers use online systems and stolen identities to siphon aid money meant for real students. That is the point here. Real students need help paying for school. Real families need relief. Real taxpayers deserve to know their money is not being shoveled out to bots, scammers, and fake identities. This is what government is supposed to do: protect the people who play by the rules and shut the door on those who don’t.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis unveiled a new congressional map that would likely give Republicans four additional seats in the House of Representatives. “Florida got shortchanged in the 2020 Census, and we’ve been fighting for fair representation ever since,” DeSantis told Fox News Digital. “Our population has since grown dramatically, and we have moved from a Democrat majority to a 1.5 million Republican advantage. Drawing maps based on race, which is reflected in our current congressional districts, is unconstitutional and should be prohibited,” he continued. FIRST ON FOX: Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis unveiled a new congressional redistricting map proposal, which adds four GOP seats to the Sunshine State. "Florida got shortchanged in the 2020 Census, and we’ve been fighting for fair representation ever since," DeSantis said. pic.twitter.com/a2G6B61PJX — Preston Mizell (@MizellPreston) April 27, 2026 Fox News shared further: Currently, the Florida delegation to Congress is represented by 20 Republicans and seven Democrats, with an eighth Democratic seat vacant following the resignation of former Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick. The redistricted map proposal comes after Virginia recently approved a constitutional amendment that would allow the state to redraw Virginia’s congressional districts and flip four GOP seats to the Democratic side. Virginia’s new proposed map was praised by Democrats, including Gov. Abigail Spanberger and former President Barack Obama. “Virginia voters have spoken, and tonight they approved a temporary measure to push back against a President who claims he is ‘entitled’ to more Republican seats in Congress,” Spanberger said in a statement. “Virginians watched other states go along with those demands without voter input — and we refused to let that stand. We responded the right way: at the ballot box.” Fifty-one and a half percent of Virginia voters approved the amendment last week. Projections show 10 seats that likely will be won by Democrats, and just one by a Republican to represent the entirety of Virginia in Congress. However, the Virginia referendum will face legal challenges before the 2026 midterm elections. A Virginia judge ruled the referendum unconstitutional and blocked the state from certifying the results. Virginia’s current attorney general, Jay Jones, said he would appeal the decision. “RIGGED ELECTION” – President Trump Comments On Virginia Redistricting Referendum, Judge Rules Proposed Amendment Unconstitutional "Our new map for 2026 makes good on my promise to conduct mid-decade redistricting and it more fairly represents the makeup of Florida today," DeSantis told Fox News Digital. Florida state lawmakers will gather for a special session next week to consider the proposed congressional map. NBC News: Ron DeSantis and Florida Republicans prepare for next round of 2026 redistricting fight Florida is set to become the eighth state to redraw maps ahead of the 2026 midterms as lawmakers meet in a special session next week.https://t.co/hFsVK1jELe — Politics & Poll Tracker

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) said on Monday that he will introduce legislation to move forward the construction of the White House ballroom. “I’m dropping a bill tomorrow. Let’s build the Ballroom,” Paul said. I'm dropping a bill tomorrow. Let's build the Ballroom. https://t.co/vlQTY1l3ub — Senator Rand Paul (@SenRandPaul) April 27, 2026 More from the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee: The NCPC thoroughly reviewed the project earlier this month, and Chairman Paul voted in favor of approval. Considering the assassination attempt at this year’s White House Correspondents’ Dinner, the legislation will allow the ballroom to proceed without requiring additional taxpayer funds and will establish an expedited congressional review process for major White House projects going forward. “Following the security scare at the Correspondents’ Dinner, it is clear we need efficient, responsible processes to address White House infrastructure needs,” Paul said. “As HSGAC Chairman and an NCPC Commissioner, I have personally reviewed and supported this project. My bill cuts through the unnecessary legal delays getting in the way of the East Wing Modernization project. This bill ensures the ballroom can move forward using private funding, protects taxpayers, and creates a faster approval pathway for critical improvements while maintaining congressional oversight. I will ask to pass my bill by unanimous consent tomorrow,” he continued. “We were there front and center. That venue wasn’t built to accommodate an event with the line of succession for the U.S. government. After witnessing last night, drop the TDS and build the White House ballroom for events exactly like these,” Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) said. We were there front and center. That venue wasn’t built to accommodate an event with the line of succession for the U.S. government. After witnessing last night, drop the TDS and build the White House ballroom for events exactly like these. pic.twitter.com/eeUBnlSe5y — U.S. Senator John Fetterman (@SenFettermanPA) April 26, 2026 Meanwhile, preservationists are pressing forward with their lawsuit against the $400 million project, declining a request by the Justice Department to withdraw the complaint. Preservationists are pressing ahead with their lawsuit against President Trump's planned $400 million White House ballroom, declining a request by the Department of Justice to withdraw the complaint. https://t.co/IkPJ9jz8Si — ABC News (@ABC) April 27, 2026 The Associated Press explained further: Trump and other conservatives have made a renewed push for the ballroom in the wake of Saturday’s media dinner shooting, arguing it exposed the difficulties in ensuring presidential security at large events outside the White House grounds, and urging the National Trust for Historic Preservation to drop its lawsuit. Top Justice officials said the government would ask a court to dismiss the lawsuit “in light of last night’s extraordinary events” if the Trust did not voluntarily drop it. Trust attorney Gregory Craig declined that request, writing to the Justice Department that the legal issues at the heart of the lawsuit are unchanged. “What Saturday’s awful event does not change is that the Constitution and multiple federal statutes require Congress to authorize construction of a ballroom on White House grounds, and that Congress has not done so,” Craig wrote. A spokesperson for the Justice Department did not immediately return a message seeking comment. The preservation group sued in December, a week after the White House finished demolishing the East Wing to make way for a ballroom that Trump said would fit 999 people. Trump says the project is funded by private donations, although public money is paying for a below-ground bunker and security upgrades. In its lawsuit, the Trust argued that Trump had overstepped his authority by moving forward with the project without first getting approval from key federal agencies and Congress. A federal appeals court has allowed Trump to continue the project, ruling a day after a lower court judge continued to block above-ground construction on the site and scheduling a June 5 hearing to review the case.

As technology advances at a speed matched only by the expansion of the federal government, conservatives on Capitol Hill have been busy pushing back against perceived encroachment into the personal lives of American citizens. One particularly contentious issue has been over the topic of “kill switches” installed into motor vehicles, which advocates say would add another layer of security. Critics on the right see it as a blatant example of Big Government overreach. But one of those lawmakers confirmed this week that their efforts weren’t enough to defeat a proposal that recently came up for a vote in the House of Representatives. NewsNation reported on the intraparty squabble earlier this year: Automotive “kill switches” have Republicans divided. Fifty-seven House Republicans sided with most Democrats Thursday in a vote to keep the Biden-era “kill switch” rule, which shot down Kentucky Republican Rep. Tom Massie’s efforts to “kill” the “kill switch.” Massie proposed an amendment to repeal the mandate that requires new cars to be able to shut off if it detects drunk driving. “Federal law says new cars after 2026 must monitor drivers and shut down if the car disapproves. Your dashboard should not be judge, jury, and executioner,” Massie wrote on X. The move to vote against Massie’s amendment has angered fellow conservatives, including Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. Here’s what the Florida governor had to say on the matter back January: The idea that the federal government would require auto manufacturers to equip cars with a “kill switch” that can be controlled by the government is something you’d expect in Orwell’s 1984, and yet… https://t.co/B1KtC5gNbb — Ron DeSantis (@RonDeSantis) January 23, 2026 And Massie kept up the dystopian theme in his post this week: Automobile kill-switches are coming soon to car dealerships near you. I teamed up w/ Scott Perry & Chip Roy to defund this Orwellian mandate, but too many colleagues (Republican & Democrat) voted against us, so the federal mandate for every new car after 2026 is still in place. https://t.co/16KZ3NYq7h — Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) April 27, 2026 Newsweek also covered the debate and even included this handy reference guide to see whether your representative was among the House Republicans who voted in favor of the Biden-era kill-switch technology: Mark E. Amodei (Nevada) Don Bacon (Nebraska) Stephanie Bice (Oklahoma) Gus Bilirakis (Florida) Mike Bost (Illinois) Ken Calvert (California) John R. Carter (Texas) Tom Cole (Oklahoma) Mario Diaz-Balart (Florida) Neal Dunn (Florida) Chuck Edwards (North Carolina) Jake Ellzey (Texas) Randy Feenstra (Iowa) Randy Fine (Florida) Brian Fitzpatrick (Pennsylvania) Chuck Fleischmann (Tennessee) Vince Fong (California) Andrew Garbarino (New York) Carlos A. Gimenez (Florida) French Hill (Arkansas) Jeff Hurd (Colorado) Brian Jack (Georgia) John James (Michigan) David Joyce (Ohio) Thomas Kean Jr. (New Jersey) Mike Kelly (Pennsylvania) Jen Kiggans (Virginia) Kevin Kiley (California) Young Kim (California) Kimberlyn King-Hinds (Northern Mariana Islands) Darin LaHood (Illinois) Nick LaLota (New York) Mike Lawler (New York) Frank Lucas (Oklahoma) Nicole Malliotakis (New York) Celeste Maloy (Utah) Brian Mast (Florida) Dan Meuser (Pennsylvania) Max Miller (Ohio) Mariannette Miller-Meeks (Iowa) Tim Moore (North Carolina) Blake Moore (Utah) James Moylan (Guam) Greg Murphy (North Carolina) Dan Newhouse (Washington) Zach Nunn (Iowa) Hal Rogers (Kentucky) Maria Elvira Salazar (Florida) Mike Simpson (Idaho) Elise Stefanik (New York) Glenn Thompson (Pennsylvania) Mike Turner (Ohio) David Valadao (California) Derrick Van Orden (Wisconsin) Rob Wittman (Virginia) Steve Womack (Arkansas) Ryan Zinke (Montana) Still not sure what the fuss is all about? Here’s a breakdown of why so many liberty-loving Americans are against it:

Former President Barack Obama is receiving backlash over his recent comments on the White House Correspondents’ Dinner shooting. Obama on Sunday released a statement on X, regarding the shooting, and claimed that there is currently no motive for the shooter, Cole Allen. However, when Obama released his statement, Allen’s manifesto, which made it clear he was targeting President Trump and members of his Cabinet, had already been released. Fox News provided more details on Obama’s response to the shooting: Former President Barack Obama sparked an online firestorm over the weekend after his X post discussing the “motive” of the White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner shooter went viral. “Although we don’t yet have the details about the motives behind last night’s shooting at the White House Correspondents Dinner, it’s incumbent upon all us to reject the idea that violence has any place in our democracy,” Obama posted on X on Sunday evening, roughly 24 hours after President Trump and top officials were whisked out of the Washington Hilton Hotel when shots rang out from a man who stormed security during the White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner. “It’s also a sobering reminder of the courage and sacrifice that the U.S. Secret Service Agents show every day. I’m grateful to them — and thankful that the agent who was shot is going to be okay.” Obama’s post has been viewed nearly 52 million times and sparked outrage from conservatives, who pointed to a manifesto left by the shooter and other details of the attack that they say show the motive was to harm Trump and his Cabinet. “Let’s not pretend to be this clueless about motive, @BarackObama,” EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin posted on X. “The attempted assassin put out an anti-Trump manifesto about wanting to kill Trump Admin officials, minutes before trying to storm a ballroom filled with the President, VP, Cabinet, and many others from his Admin.” Former FBI Co-Deputy Director Dan Bongino simply replied, “Are you kidding?” “There is a manifesto, and this is why you are the problem,” Rep. Abe Hamadeh, R-Ariz., posted on X. Here was Obama’s post: Although we don’t yet have the details about the motives behind last night's shooting at the White House Correspondents Dinner, it’s incumbent upon all us to reject the idea that violence has any place in our democracy. It’s also a sobering reminder of the courage and sacrifice… — Barack Obama (@BarackObama) April 26, 2026 Full Text: Although we don’t yet have the details about the motives behind last night’s shooting at the White House Correspondents Dinner, it’s incumbent upon all us to reject the idea that violence has any place in our democracy. It’s also a sobering reminder of the courage and sacrifice that U.S. Secret Service Agents show every day. I’m grateful to them – and thankful that the agent who was shot is going to be okay. Here was the backlash: Stop lying. We know the full motive. The shooter wrote a manifesto. The shooter wanted to kill President Trump and his cabinet. Why are you lying? — DataRepublican (small r) (@DataRepublican) April 26, 2026 Glad to see you reject the idea of political violence, but I see no reason to lie about his motivation, given that he shared his motivation quite clearly. He wanted to kill Trump and admin officials because he believed some of the unhinged lies put forth by left-wing extremists. — Mollie (@MZHemingway) April 26, 2026 We literally have the entire manifesto and know exactly why he did it. pic.twitter.com/qdMvJzUrtc — Matt Van Swol (@mattvanswol) April 26, 2026 Maybe Obama should have read the manifesto, which was released by Newsweek: Hello everybody! So I may have given a lot of people a surprise today. Let me start off by apologizing to everyone whose trust I abused. I apologize to my parents for saying I had an interview without specifying it was for “Most Wanted.” I apologize to my colleagues and students for saying I had a personal emergency (by the time anyone reads this, I probably most certainly DO need to go to the ER, but can hardly call that not a self-inflicted status.) I apologize to all of the people I traveled next to, all the workers who handled my luggage, and all the other non-targeted people at the hotel who I put in danger simply by being near. I apologize to everyone who was abused and/or murdered before this, to all those who suffered before I was able to attempt this, to all who may still suffer after, regardless of my success or failure. I don’t expect forgiveness, but if I could have seen any other way to get this close, I would have taken it. Again, my sincere apologies. On to why I did any of this: I am a citizen of the United States of America. What my representatives do reflects on me. And I am no longer willing to permit a pedophile, rapist, and traitor to coat my hands with his crimes. (Well, to be completely honest, I was no longer willing a long time ago, but this is the first real opportunity I’ve had to do something about it.) While I’m discussing this, I’ll also go over my expected rules of engagement (probably in a terrible format, but I’m not military so too bad.) Administration officials (not including Mr. Patel): they are targets, prioritized from highest-ranking to lowest Secret Service: they are targets only if necessary, and to be incapacitated non-lethally if possible (aka, I hope they’re wearing body armor because center mass with shotguns messes up people who *aren’t* Hotel Security: not targets if at all possible (aka unless they shoot at me) Capitol Police: same as Hotel Security Hotel Employees: not targets at all Guests: not targets at all In order to minimize casualties I will also be using buckshot rather than slugs (less penetration through walls) I would still go through most everyone here to get to the targets if it were absolutely necessary (on the basis that most people *chose* to attend a speech by a pedophile, rapist, and traitor, and are thus complicit) but I really hope it doesn’t come to that. Objection 1: As a Christian, you should turn the other cheek. Rebuttal: Turning the other cheek is for when you yourself are oppressed. I’m not the person raped in a detention camp. I’m not the fisherman executed without trial. I’m not a schoolkid blown up or a child starved or a teenage girl abused by the many criminals in this administration. Turning the other cheek when *someone else* is oppressed is not Christian behavior; it is complicity in the oppressor’s crimes. Objection 2: This is not a convenient time for you to do this. Rebuttal: I need whoever thinks this way to take a couple minutes and realize that the world isn’t about them. Do you think that when I see someone raped or murdered or abused, I should walk on by because it would be “inconvenient” for people who aren’t the victim? This was the best timing and chance of success I could come up with. Objection 3: You didn’t get them all. Rebuttal: Gotta start somewhere. Objection 4: As a half-black, half-white person, you shouldn’t be the one doing this. Rebuttal: I don’t see anyone else picking up the slack Rebuttal: The United States of America are ruled by the law, not by any one or several people. In so far as representatives and judges do not follow the law, no one is required to yield them anything so unlawfully ordered. I would also like to extend my appreciation to a great many people since I will not be likely to be able to talk with them again (unless the Secret Service is *astoundingly* incompetent.) Thank you to my family, both personal and church, for your love over these 31 years. Thank you to my friends, for your companionship over many years. Thank you to my colleagues over many jobs, for your positivity and professionalism. Thank you to my students for your enthusiasm and love of learning. Thank you to the many acquaintances I’ve met, in person and online, for short interactions and long-term relationships, for your perspectives and inspiration. Thank you all for everything. Sincerely, Cole “coldForce” “Friendly Federal Assassin” Allen PS: Ok now that all the sappy stuff is done, what the hell is the Secret Service doing? Sorry, gonna rant a bit here and drop the formal tone. Like, I expected security cameras at every bend, bugged hotel rooms, armed agents every 10 feet, metal detectors out the wazoo. What I got (who knows, maybe they’re pranking me!) is nothing. No damn security. Not in transport. Not in the hotel. Not in the event. Like, the one thing that I immediately noticed walking into the hotel is the sense of arrogance. I walk in with multiple weapons and not a single person there considers the possibility that I could be a threat. The security at the event is all outside, focused on protestors and current arrivals, because apparently no one thought about what happens if someone checks in the day before. Like, this level of incompetence is insane, and I very sincerely hope it’s corrected by the time this country gets actually competent leadership again. Like, if I was an Iranian agent, instead of an American citizen, I could have brought a damn Ma Deuce in here and no one would have noticed shit. Oh and if anyone is curious is how doing something like feels: it’s awful. I want to throw up; I want to cry for all the things I wanted to do and never will, for all the people whose trust this betrays; I experience rage thinking about everything this administration has done. Can’t really recommend it! Stay in school, kids.