President Trump’s Justice Department set out to do something no administration had tried before: build a formal process to compensate Americans hit by government weaponization and lawfare. A federal judge in Virginia just put that effort on ice. U.S. District Judge Leonie M. Brinkema, a Bill Clinton appointee, entered an order on May 29, 2026 enjoining the DOJ and Treasury from creating or operating the Anti-Weaponization Fund while a legal challenge gets briefed. That means no transferring money into the fund, no considering claims, and no disbursing a single dollar until the court rules. The hearing is reset for Friday, June 12, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. The order landed in Eastern District of Virginia case 1:26-cv-1399, brought by Andrew Floyd and other plaintiffs against the Department of Justice and other defendants. The anti-Trump crowd online wasted no time celebrating the freeze. Judge Leonie Brinkema in EDVA has enjoined Trump’s 1776 slush fund from going into operation for now. pic.twitter.com/SSxLsu50RT — Joyce Alene (@JoyceWhiteVance) May 29, 2026 The court order lays out exactly what is paused and on what schedule. Before the Court is plaintiffs’ Expedited Motion for Briefing Schedule, which requests an expedited briefing and hearing schedule for its pending Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, or in the alternative, a preliminary injunction with expedited briefing and a stay under 5 U.S.C. 705. Defendants opposed that request and asked for additional time to respond. The court denied plaintiffs’ expedited briefing request and granted defendants more time, but still ordered that defendants are enjoined from taking any further action pursuant to the creation or operation of the Anti-Weaponization Fund. The order says that includes transferring money to the fund, considering any claims submitted to the fund, and disbursing any funds from the fund. It also says the pause is needed to ensure that no funds are irreversibly disbursed while the plaintiffs’ motion is pending. Defendants must file opposition by June 5, plaintiffs must reply by June 10, and the hearing is reset to June 12, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. So the fund is frozen, not killed. Brinkema gave both sides a briefing calendar and set the real fight for June 12. The DOJ announced the fund on May 18, 2026 as part of the settlement in President Donald J. Trump v. Internal Revenue Service. That case grew out of the leak of more than 400,000 tax returns, including the Trump family’s, by a bad actor inside the IRS. The Justice Department explained what the fund was built to do and how the settlement worked. The U.S. Department of Justice announced that as part of the settlement agreement in President Trump v. Internal Revenue Service, the Attorney General established The Anti-Weaponization Fund. DOJ said the fund would provide a systematic process to hear and redress claims of others who suffered weaponization and lawfare. The department said President Trump, Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump, and the Trump Organization filed suit after the leak of their tax returns. Per the settlement, the plaintiffs receive a formal apology but no monetary payment or damages of any kind. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said the machinery of government should never be weaponized against any American, and that the department intended to make right the wrongs that were previously done while ensuring this never happens again. DOJ said the fund will receive $1.776 billion from the judgment fund, report quarterly to the Attorney General, protect private information, avoid fraud, and stop processing claims no later than December 1, 2028. Note who walks away with nothing. President Trump, President Trump Jr., Eric Trump, and the Trump Organization get a formal apology and zero dollars in damages. The $1.776 billion was set aside to redress other Americans, drawn from the judgment fund, with anything left over reverting to the federal government when the fund stops processing claims no later than December 1, 2028. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent made the administration’s case plainly. @SecScottBessent on the Anti-Weaponization Fund – “@POTUS Trump is a great American who has endured more than 10 years nonstop harassment and weaponization from federal and state government actors. A bad actor at the IRS leaked more than 400,000 tax returns, including the Trump… pic.twitter.com/rAQhRFsAD1 — liten drage (@DrageLiten) May 28, 2026 The fight now moves to June 12, when Brinkema decides whether the freeze holds. The administration’s plan to give weaponization victims a real path to redress is still on the table, and the DOJ still has to defend it in court. What are your thoughts? This is a Guest Post from our friends over at WLTReport. View the original article here.

By now you’ve almost certainly heard that Bret Michaels and Martina McBride have backed out of performing at the Freedom250 concert celebrating America’s 250th birthday. It’s been all over the news today: Slew of musicians back out of Freedom 250 concert: Bret Michaels, Martina McBride and more https://t.co/tmmDtY4sX6 pic.twitter.com/2e19powzIp — New York Post (@nypost) May 29, 2026 I have a couple thoughts… First thought: WHO? Seriously, this is the best we could get, two washed up musicians who’s fame hit it’s peak back when the calendar year still started with a 19 instead of a 20? Lame! I’m glad they’re not coming, we can do much better. But the second thought I had was: Did the same person write both of their statements? In other words, is this orchestrated? I’ll show you what I mean… Here is McBride’s statement: pic.twitter.com/Ono3zPi54Z — Martina McBride (@martinamcbride) May 29, 2026 FULL TEXT: I would like to talk to you and clear the air. I will not be performing at the Great American State Fair on June 25th. I was presented with an opportunity to perform at a nonpartisan event but that turned out to be misleading. I asked lots of questions and was assured this was a nonpartisan event that was meant to celebrate ALL 50 states. In my mind I thought this was a great way to celebrate the states and also bring people together in the way that only music can. I saw it as just a bigger version of so many state fairs I have performed at over the years, celebrating community and what makes each state special. Sounds fun, right? Wholesome even. Yesterday things started changing and what we were told is, in fact, not what is happening. I’ve spent my entire career singing songs about real people with real issues. I’ve been blessed with the opportunity to be a voice for those who have felt like they didn’t have one. It greatly upsets me that any fan who has been moved by my music may now feel like I’m abandoning the meaning behind those songs. I assure you, that is not the case. I appreciate every single fan who has reached out. I hope to get back to the DC area very soon. -MM Bret Michaels posted a longer statement here, but pay particular attention to the part I bolded: Hello to all my awesome friends & fans, I wanted to jump on here real quick and talk about the upcoming Freedom 250 event in Washington, D.C. When this opportunity was originally presented to my team, it was described as a celebration of our country through music and a chance to honor our veterans, active military, first responders, teachers and hardworking Americans from all walks of life. As the son of a veteran, and coming from a family that has proudly served, that is something I have always been honored to support. As many of you know, I’ve spent my entire career bringing people together through music, positivity and good vibes. My shows have never been about politics. They’re about giving people a place to come together, have a great time and forget about life’s stresses for a few hours. Unfortunately, what was presented to us as a celebration of our country has evolved into something much more divisive than what I agreed to be a part of. Concerns have also been raised regarding the safety of my fans, band, crew, family and myself, including threats that are completely unfounded and unforgivable. Because of that, I have made the difficult decision to step away from this performance. This isn’t about politics. It’s about staying true to what I’ve always believed in. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. That’s one of the freedoms our veterans fought for and something I’ve always respected. But as a father, friend and bandmate, I have to take threats and safety concerns seriously. I believe in our country, in the freedoms we’re afforded, and in the idea that for over 250 years we have gone through both highs and lows together and remained resilient. Music is a universal language that unites us, not divides us. Just like it did when I entertained a record-breaking crowd of over 100,000 at the St. Louis Arch for an Independence Day celebration with people from across the country who came together to honor our freedoms through music. The focus was on the music, the fans and celebrating together. I will continue to proudly support our veterans, active military members, teachers, first responders and the organizations that serve them, just as I always have. I also want my amazing fans in Washington, D.C. to know that I love you all, and I fully intend to come back and perform in our nation’s capital under circumstances where the focus can remain on what it should be – the music and the fans. In the meantime, we’ll keep the Live & Amplified Tour rocking, and I look forward to seeing all of you out on the road soon. This is said with much love, gratitude, and respect. Your friend, Bret (A lead singer with long texting issues) I ran it through AI to see if it was just me or if the two are remarkably similar and AI called it “unusually parallel”: Both statements follow a very similar narrative structure: Initial good-faith acceptance A: “When this opportunity was originally presented…” B: “I was presented with an opportunity…” Description of what they believed the event represented A: Celebration of country, veterans, first responders, etc. B: Nonpartisan celebration of all 50 states. Personal values statement A: Bringing people together through music, positivity, good vibes. B: Music bringing people together; celebrating community. Pivot / reversal A: “Unfortunately… has evolved into something much more divisive…” B: “Yesterday things started changing…” Assertion that reality differs from what was promised A: Event evolved into something different. B: Event turned out to be misleading. Decision not to perform A: “I have made the difficult decision to step away…” B: “I will not be performing…” Appeal to fans and unity A: Music brings people together. B: Music brings people together. That sequence is unusually parallel. Specific Language Similarities Several phrases jump out: Statement A Statement B “presented to my team” “presented with an opportunity” “celebration” “celebrate” “bringing people together through music” “bring people together in the way that only music can” “My shows have never been about politics” “I was assured this was a nonpartisan event” “something much more divisive” “what we were told is not what is happening” The strongest overlap is the recurring “music brings people together” theme appearing at the exact same place in the narrative. Two huge losers, but they probably didn’t write either of those statements, and if I had to guess they didn’t make those decisions either. My hunch?  They were told “you’re not going”. This is a Guest Post from our friends over at WLTReport. View the original article here.

A Kenyan High Court judge on Friday temporarily blocked an attempt by the United States to establish an Ebola quarantine facility in Kenya to house Americans. White House officials said earlier this week that a 50-bed facility would be operational by Friday for American citizens who have been exposed to or infected with the illness. “A Kenyan court has suspended the setup of an Ebola quarantine centre for Americans in Kenya pending the hearing of the application by civil society body Katiba institute,” Kenyan journalist Waihiga Mwaura said. Breaking: A Kenyan court has suspended the setup of an Ebola quarantine centre for Americans in Kenya pending the hearing of the application by civil society body Katiba institute.#FocusOnAfrica @BBCAfrica pic.twitter.com/2ZLJonAcS5 — Waihiga Mwaura (@WaihigaMwaura) May 29, 2026 More from The New York Times: It was unclear how long the suspension would last, but a further hearing about the case is expected on Tuesday. The civil society group, the Katiba Institute, said it wanted to compel the Kenyan government — which has not confirmed the existence of a deal to accept American citizens — to disclose details of any such arrangement. U.S. officials said on Thursday that the 50-bed quarantine unit would house American citizens exposed to the Ebola virus. The facility would be set up at a military air base in Laikipia, an area about 100 miles north of Nairobi, the Kenyan capital, and was expected to be operational by Friday, the officials said. In a phone interview, Nora Mbagathi, the executive director of the Katiba Institute, said: “No one is saying that we are against international collaboration and support when it comes to tackling that crisis. But there are procedures and processes in the Constitution and they are there for a reason.” Tommy Pigott, a State Department spokesman, said on Thursday that the United States would commit $13.5 million to Ebola preparation efforts in Kenya. That statement came after a phone call between President William Ruto of Kenya and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, but it did not mention the quarantine facility. “International solidarity is vital, particularly in times of multiple crises. As a key regional gateway, financial hub, and host to major international organisations, Kenya remains vigilant and committed to swift, coordinated action to protect regional health security following the Ebola outbreak in neighbouring countries,” Ruto said. “At State House, Nairobi, I met Ambassadors, development partners, multilateral agencies, and key stakeholders to apprise them of Kenya’s preparedness, exchange views on the regional situation, and mobilise collective action to contain the spread of the Ebola Virus Disease. I am pleased that surveillance and screening measures have been intensified across 26 Points of Entry, with more than 58,000 travellers screened and all suspected cases tested so far returning negative. In addition, 17 isolation centres have been identified across the country,” he continued. “We are also mobilising support with development partners for affected countries and frontline response institutions, including the World Health Organization, the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, and the United Nations system, to strengthen surveillance, emergency response and healthcare preparedness, laboratory systems, and cross-border coordination,” he added. International solidarity is vital, particularly in times of multiple crises. As a key regional gateway, financial hub, and host to major international organisations, Kenya remains vigilant and committed to swift, coordinated action to protect regional health security following… pic.twitter.com/Y898UmKs8F — William Samoei Ruto, PhD (@WilliamsRuto) May 28, 2026 “The number one priority of our foreign policy is to protect the American people. We cannot and will not allow any cases of Ebola to enter the United States,” Rubio said. Watch below: Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that the US must prevent any cases of Ebola from entering the country from the Democratic Republic of Congo, where an outbreak has already caused a suspected 220 deaths and 900 cases https://t.co/79QC8Ex7kZ pic.twitter.com/xZTamwpQTY — Reuters (@Reuters) May 27, 2026 CBS News shared further: The Kenyan court said Friday that “a conservatory order is hereby issued restraining the respondents from establishing … any Ebola exposure, quarantine, isolation or treatment facility in Kenya.” Another organization, the Law Society of Kenya, has also filed a constitutional petition against the proposed Ebola quarantine center, but there was no immediate ruling on that Friday. “Kenya appears to have been selected as an alternative containment site, thereby externalizing infectious disease risk management to the Republic’s territory,” Katiba said in its legal challenge. The Kenyan government has 48 hours to respond to the petition. Watch additional coverage below:

Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt signed legislation to raise the monthly cap on direct raw milk sales for dairy producers. Senate Bill 2028 raises the cap from 100 gallons to 1,500 gallons per month. The bill also allows the ability for dairy farmers to advertise their raw-dairy products on their farm. Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt recently signed a bill that allows dairy farmers to sell up to 1,500 gallons of raw milk directly to their consumers, a major increase from only 100 gallons. The bill also allows the ability for dairy farmers to advertise their raw-dairy products on… pic.twitter.com/nhKKfc6U0l — The Regenaissance (@_Regenaissance) May 28, 2026 AGDAILY has more: Stitt, who is a Republican nearing the end of his second and final term, is a strong supporter of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s Make America Health Again movement. He celebrated the bill’s signing in a social media video while drinking a glass of milk. “To all the raw milk-drinkers out there: Fantastic,” Stitt said. “Tastes like freedom.” For months, MAHA backers have elevated raw milk as an almost magical elixir with the power to improve health and combat ailments. The movement also demonizes pasteurization and downplays its importance in public health. “Under this new law, we’re trusting Oklahomans to make their own informed decisions without government getting in the way,” said state Sen. Jonathan Wingard, who co-sponsored the legislation. “This will make it easier for consumers to find and support local dairies that sell raw milk. Small family farms are the lifeblood of rural Oklahoma. Raising the sales limit on raw milk and legalizing advertising of this particular product gives consumers the freedom to make their own dietary choices while providing new opportunities for dairy producers to expand their homegrown businesses,” Wingard added. NEW: Gov Kevin Stitt signs a bill allowing farmers to sell raw milk. SB2028 What the Bill Does: Incidental sales volume increase. Under current Oklahoma law, incidental on-farm sales of raw milk are capped at 100 gallons per month. SB2028 raises that ceiling to 1,500 gallons… pic.twitter.com/KQLjjajTdc — OKIE PATRIOT 76 (@okiepatriot_76) May 13, 2026 KOSU shared further: The bill sailed through the House of Representatives and unanimously passed the full Senate. Another measure addressing commercial milk did not make it to Stitt’s desk. Senate Bill 2071 would get the state in-line with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration regulations. It’s a request bill from the Oklahoma Department of Agriculture Food and Forestry (ODAFF). Every few years, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration reviews ODAFF’s food safety division. In the past two reviews, state agriculture officials said the FDA recommended for the state to align with federal food safety rules regulating milk from all hoofed animals. Without the change to state regulations, officials said, the FDA could take away Oklahoma’s Grade A status, meaning no milk or milk products could leave the state. But the timeline is unclear. Bryce Boyer, ODAFF’s director of communications, said the department appreciates the legislature considering the bill and looks forward to the decision from the FDA. “This status is what allows Oklahoma milk and milk products to leave the state,” Boyer wrote in an email.

President Trump’s Federal Communications Commission just forced one of the most powerful broadcasters in the country into a fight it had been trying to frame as a First Amendment emergency. ABC still had to file the paperwork. The Associated Press reported that ABC-owned television stations turned in early license-renewal filings on May 28, 2026, while blasting the FCC’s review as unlawful, arbitrary, and unconstitutional. WABC in New York filed an objection alongside its renewal paperwork, and seven other ABC-owned stations filed similar objections. The stations affected by the review include Los Angeles, San Francisco, Houston, New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, Fresno, and Durham. Those renewal windows had been years away under the ordinary schedule. The FCC moved the deadline forward after a broader dispute with Disney’s ABC, including agency scrutiny of Disney’s diversity practices and other broadcaster obligations. ABC’s position is that the early review is unconstitutional pressure on disfavored editorial voices. Carr’s response points in the opposite direction: broadcasters using public airwaves have a public-interest obligation, and a regulator does not have to accept corporate answers that it considers deficient just because the company owns a major network. That is the fight now on the table. ABC filed, but it wants the filing treated like evidence of government overreach. Carr is treating it like the normal consequence of holding a federal broadcast license while the agency is investigating whether the licensee is meeting its obligations. This did not start with ABC. It started with an FCC order. The FCC’s Media Bureau order DA 26-416 directed Disney’s ABC to file renewals for its licensed TV stations within 30 days, by May 28. The order tied the early-renewal demand to the agency’s investigation and the Communications Act’s public-interest standard. It directed Disney’s ABC to file renewals for its licensed TV stations within 30 days, which set the May 28 deadline. In plain English, the FCC was not treating the broadcast license like a private corporate entitlement. It was treating the license like permission to use public airwaves, with obligations attached. The order is important because it shows the deadline did not appear out of nowhere on the day ABC objected. The agency had already put Disney’s ABC on a clock and required the company to bring its stations into the renewal process early. That is the part ABC’s constitutional panic leaves out. The federal regulator asked a giant media company to file paperwork and answer for its conduct under the same public-interest framework that comes with a broadcast license. The public-interest standard is the whole point. ABC wants to call all of this censorship. But filing a renewal application and answering questions is not censorship. It is accountability. Carr also said something that cuts through ABC’s free-speech framing. According to AP, he said Disney filed those renewal applications only after the FCC told the company that its earlier responses to the agency’s investigation were deficient. That is the part ABC would rather you not dwell on. The early review is not a fishing expedition. It followed answers the agency found lacking. For years the legacy broadcasters got to define the terms. They decided what counted as fair, what counted as a public service, and what counted as out of bounds. The FCC under Carr is no longer letting a corporate broadcaster grade its own homework. ABC can object all it wants. It still filed. What are your thoughts?