America’s adversaries are resurrecting Cold War-era drone technology into AI-enhanced swarm weapons capable of striking the U.S. homeland, according to a chilling new intelligence assessment that exposes how cheap commercial tech is fueling a deadly threat. Cold War Technology Meets Modern Threats The Defense Intelligence Agency’s 2025 Worldwide Threat Assessment reveals adversaries are transforming early unmanned aerial vehicle concepts from the 1950s-1980s into sophisticated weapons systems. These updated platforms exploit advances in artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and commercial drone proliferation to create swarms capable of overwhelming traditional U.S. defenses. The assessment warns these threats will probably increase as hostile nations leverage low-cost technology originally developed during the Cold War for reconnaissance into lethal strike capabilities targeting American military installations and critical infrastructure. A fixed-wing UAV acting as a “mother drone” for anti-air FPV interceptors — now this is battlefield evolution. Carries a swarm of FPV units designed to hunt down and destroy enemy UAVs mid-air. Sky warfare is changing pic.twitter.com/HlM0744AJJ — Bandera Fella *-^ (@banderafella) May 29, 2025 Adversary Coalition Shares Weapons Technology Iran deployed over 12,000 troops and unmanned aerial vehicles to Russia between 2024 and 2025, while North Korea shipped missiles and artillery to support Moscow’s military operations. This weapons-sharing axis extends to China, which expanded its nuclear warhead stockpile beyond 600 and reorganized People’s Liberation Army forces under the Central Military Commission in 2025. Russia’s collaboration with these revisionist powers enables the transfer of weapons of mass destruction technology, creating a coordinated challenge to American security. The DIA identifies this tech-sharing network as a fundamental shift in how adversaries threaten U.S. interests both abroad and domestically. Homeland Vulnerability to Drone Swarms Intelligence analysts assess that unmanned systems pose direct risks to the American homeland due to their inexpensive production costs and ease of operation. Commercial drone markets fuel adversary capabilities, allowing state and non-state actors to conduct surveillance or strikes against U.S. infrastructure with minimal investment. These systems converge with AI enhancements to create autonomous swarms that complicate attribution and overwhelm defenses designed for traditional threats. The assessment highlights that cyber exfiltration from Chinese operations since 2024 further aids adversary military advantages, eroding America’s technological edge while border security gaps potentially enable adversaries to exploit migration routes for infiltration. China’s Nuclear Expansion and Military Modernization China’s nuclear arsenal growth represents a strategic shift toward enhanced counterstrike doctrine, with projections estimating 1,000 warheads by 2030. The People’s Liberation Army underwent significant realignments in 2025, strengthening aerospace and cyberspace forces while anti-corruption probes in March 2025 targeted nuclear procurement officials, including General He Weidong. These internal purges signal tensions within China’s military modernization efforts even as Beijing projects power in the South China Sea. Combined with Russia’s hypersonic missile development and North Korea’s intercontinental ballistic missile tests capable of reaching the U.S. mainland, this multi-front threat environment demands urgent congressional attention to defense appropriations and homeland security measures. Defense Gaps and Future Implications The convergence of unmanned systems with hypersonic missiles and nuclear expansion creates long-term defense challenges that could erode U.S. security by 2030. Traditional missile defense architectures struggle against swarm tactics that exploit numerical superiority and distributed attack vectors. Short-term risks include heightened surveillance of military bases and infrastructure by inexpensive drones, while long-term implications involve adversaries achieving parity or superiority in critical technologies. This undermines deterrence and forces policymakers to reconsider investment priorities in counter-drone systems, cyber defenses, and border security. The assessment underscores bipartisan alarm within Congress as lawmakers confront rapid technological shifts that favor agile, low-cost adversary platforms over expensive legacy systems. Sources: Curtis McGiffin – Global Security Review 2025 DIA Statement for the Record – House Armed Services Committee

The failed Harris campaign’s vetting team questioned whether Minnesota Governor Tim Walz had operated as an agent of the Chinese Communist Party during the 2024 vice presidential selection process, raising serious concerns about the judgment of Democrat leadership in choosing candidates with extensive foreign entanglements. Campaign Questioned Chinese Communist Party Connections Kamala Harris’s campaign team directly confronted Walz during the 2024 vetting process about whether he had ever served as an agent of the Chinese Communist Party. The questioning stemmed from Walz’s documented history of teaching in China during the late 1980s, shortly after the brutal Tiananmen Square crackdown, and his subsequent pattern of leading student groups on educational trips to the communist nation. Campaign officials conducted intensive scrutiny of these foreign entanglements, which spanned decades before Walz entered politics. The concerns were significant enough that aides felt compelled to ask direct questions about a potential CCP agency. Antisemitic Questions Targeted Jewish Candidate Simultaneously The vetting controversy extended beyond Walz to Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro, whom Harris aides questioned about whether he was an “agent of the Israeli government.” Shapiro, who spent time on an Israeli kibbutz and volunteered on an Israeli army base, characterized these questions as offensive invocations of antisemitic “dual loyalty” tropes. Deborah Lipstadt, the Biden administration’s special envoy to combat antisemitism, explicitly identified the questioning as “classic antisemitism.” The parallel scrutiny of both candidates reveals a pattern where Harris’s team appeared more concerned with foreign government connections than with recognizing offensive questioning that undermined American citizens’ loyalty based on their backgrounds and religious identities. Campaign Dismissed Concerns Despite Red Flags Despite raising serious questions about Walz’s China connections, campaign officials ultimately concluded his ties “reflected his background in education rather than political or intelligence activity.” This rationalization enabled Harris to select Walz as her running mate, even after the vetting team raised serious concerns warranting direct questions about a Chinese government agency. The compressed timeline following Joe Biden’s withdrawal from the race put pressure on rapid vetting, but the decision to proceed with Walz despite these red flags demonstrates questionable judgment. For conservatives concerned about foreign influence and national security, the willingness to dismiss extensive China connections as merely educational raises troubling questions about Democrat priorities. Failed Campaign Faces Post-Election Scrutiny The Harris-Walz ticket lost decisively to President Donald Trump in the 2024 general election, and details of the controversial vetting process only emerged publicly through CNN reporting in January 2026. Shapiro has documented his experience in an upcoming memoir, characterizing the questions as offensive and noting his Jewish identity and pro-Israel positions appeared to draw particular scrutiny. The revelations damaged relationships between Harris’s campaign and Shapiro’s team, with Shapiro’s aides dismissing Harris’s post-election claims as “simply ridiculous.” The vetting controversy now stands as another example of the failed judgment that characterized the unsuccessful Democrat campaign, compounded by the apparent willingness to employ antisemitic questioning while simultaneously dismissing legitimate concerns about Chinese Communist Party connections. Sources: REPORT: Kamala Harris Had Concerns That VP Pick Tim Walz Was a Chinese Government Agent Harris Aides GRILLED Tim Walz Over China Ties Kamala Harris Aides Grilled Tim Walz Over China Ties

Beneath the glittering facade of a $400 million ballroom project, President Trump is demolishing and rebuilding the White House’s nuclear bunker, a classified operation that officials argue is so critical to national security that construction cannot pause even for standard oversight. Dismantling History for Nuclear Preparedness The Presidential Emergency Operations Center once sheltered Vice President Cheney during the September 11 attacks and served as the secure planning site for Biden’s 2023 Ukraine trip. Now it exists only in memory. White House sources confirm with high confidence that demolition crews have eliminated all subterranean structures from the 1940s era, clearing ground for what officials describe as mission-critical upgrades. The original PEOC, commissioned in 1941 as America’s first presidential bomb shelter, evolved into a sophisticated command facility with secure communications, living quarters, and supplies designed for extended occupancy during nuclear emergencies. Eight decades of technological advancement rendered its infrastructure obsolete. The removal was no minor renovation. Everything went, from reinforced walls to communication systems, replaced by construction that White House Director of Management and Administration Joshua Fisher characterizes as addressing future needs through capabilities of a top-secret nature. The timing coincides with Trump’s second-term East Wing reconstruction project, announced as a venue for state dinners and public events funded entirely through private donations. What appeared initially as architectural vanity reveals dual purposes when excavation reaches below ground level. National Security Overrides Transparency Fisher’s December 2025 appearance before the National Capital Planning Commission offered rare public acknowledgment of what remains deliberately obscured. He referenced top-secret elements justifying why demolition proceeded before standard approvals, a deviation from typical regulatory sequences that govern federal construction in the nation’s capital. The commission, responsible for planning compliance oversight, effectively deferred to executive authority when classifications entered discussion. Court filings submitted last week make the administration’s position explicit: stopping underground work would compromise both national security and the public interest, language that insulates decisions from external scrutiny. The strategic bundling of surface and subsurface projects creates political cover while complicating accountability. Private donors fund the ballroom’s aesthetic grandeur while taxpayers finance bunker specifications that remain undisclosed. No cost estimates for the classified portions have entered public record, nor have architectural plans beyond generalities about nuclear resistance and enhanced functionality. This opacity follows precedent—previous PEOC upgrades occurred without detailed disclosure—but the scale of complete demolition and rebuilding marks new territory. The American public funds protection for leadership continuity yet learns details only through leaked fragments and carefully parsed official statements. Operational Realities During Construction White House operations continue despite the underground transformation, though not without disruption. Staff relocations accompanied the October 2025 demolition start, and contingency evacuation protocols account for the bunker’s temporary absence. Sources familiar with security planning note that alternative secure facilities exist within the broader Washington area, ensuring presidential protection remains uncompromised during the construction window. The classified nature of these arrangements prevents specific disclosure, but the administration’s willingness to demolish existing shelter implies confidence in interim solutions and timeline management. The project’s convergence with Trump’s second term raises questions about priorities and legacy. Combining personal architectural ambitions with infrastructure modernization demonstrates pragmatic resource leveraging, yet the secrecy surrounding costs and capabilities fuels speculation about preparedness motivations. Global tensions and nuclear threat assessments presumably inform timing, though officials offer no public analysis connecting current geopolitical conditions to construction urgency. The bunker will serve presidents beyond Trump’s tenure, making the investment a long-term national security asset rather than individual benefit, assuming completion meets promised nuclear survivability standards. Implications for Governance and Preparedness This reconstruction entrenches a troubling norm: using classification to shield executive actions from oversight while accessing taxpayer resources for undisclosed purposes. National security justifications carry weight, particularly regarding continuity-of-government facilities designed for worst-case scenarios, but the principle of informed consent suffers when costs and specifications remain hidden behind top-secret designations. The National Capital Planning Commission’s deferral illustrates how security claims override regulatory checks, concentrating decision-making authority without corresponding accountability mechanisms. Short-term operational disruptions fade, but precedents for opacity persist. Long-term, a modernized bunker enhances America’s capacity to maintain leadership functionality during nuclear or catastrophic events, a capability that justifies significant investment given existential stakes. The 1940s infrastructure that served eight decades required replacement, and delaying upgrades until crisis conditions emerge would constitute negligence. Whether the current approach balances legitimate security needs with appropriate transparency remains contested. Defense contractors specializing in hardened facilities likely benefit from related classified work, though specific contracts and technologies remain beyond public view. What persists is certainty that beneath Washington’s ceremonial architecture, preparations for unthinkable scenarios advance regardless of who occupies the offices above. Sources: https://economictimes.com/news/international/us/is-trump-building-a-secret-white-house-bunker-reports-fuel-nuclear-shelter-speculation/articleshow/126851563.cms https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-white-house-makeover-underground-bunker-b2904108.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_Emergency_Operations_Center

Norway warns 13,500 property owners that their homes, cars, and land could be seized by the military in wartime, exposing the fragility of property rights under globalist NATO pressures amid Russian threats. Requisition Notices Hit Norwegian Homes Norwegian armed forces began sending formal notices on January 20, 2026, to approximately 13,500 property owners nationwide. These documents inform recipients that buildings, vehicles, boats, land, machinery, and industrial equipment may be requisitioned during war. The campaign started with a quiet military announcement on January 19. Officials describe them as preparatory measures to inventory civilian resources essential for national defense. Two-thirds represent renewals of previous notifications, valid for only one year. Serious Security Threats Drive Action General Anders Jernberg, head of the Armed Forces’ Logistics Organisation, stated that Norway is confronting its most serious security situation since World War II. Society must prepare for crises and potential war, he emphasized. This assessment stems from Russia’s rehabilitation of Soviet-era bases and nuclear arsenal buildup on the Kola Peninsula, near Norway’s 198-kilometer land border. Retreating Arctic ice opens new shipping lanes and resources, intensifying competition with Russia and China. Modern warfare demands civilian infrastructure support. Defence Minister Tore Sandvik highlighted Russian tests of hypersonic missiles, nuclear-powered torpedoes, and warheads aimed not just at Norway but also the UK, Canada, and the US. These developments justify the broad asset scope in notices, from housing to transport. Transparency through warnings contrasts with surprise seizures, allowing owners to understand their obligations without the constraints of peacetime restrictions. NATO Reinforcements and Regional Panic UK Marines conduct exercises at Viking Camp in northern Norway, planning 1,500 personnel deployment in spring 2026, rising to 2,000 by 2027. This NATO effort counters Russian dominance in the Arctic, where Norway anchors surveillance operations. In November 2024, Sweden, Finland, and Norway distributed civil defense booklets on nuclear survival, signaling coordinated Nordic readiness. Property owners in strategic rural areas face the highest impact, with potential effects on markets and insurance. Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre reaffirmed NATO solidarity amid US tariff tensions, stressing threats have no place among allies. The campaign normalizes civil-military coordination, enabling swift mobilization. Public awareness rises, shifting discourse to defense priorities over globalist distractions. Americans watching see echoes of overreach: governments eyeing private property under war pretexts erode sacred ownership rights conservatives cherish. Norway warns citizens of wartime property seizures as Arctic tensions rise among global powers READ: https://t.co/tguZ3EZipqhttps://t.co/tguZ3EZipq — WION (@WIONews) January 20, 2026 Property Rights Under Siege While officials insist notices impose no peacetime limits, they establish wartime seizure precedents. This psychological shift burdens owners administratively and heightens anxiety in border communities. Businesses with machinery or vessels prepare for disruptions. Economically, valuations and planning adjust to defense realities. Politically, it bolsters NATO posture but risks escalating tensions with Russia. Under President Trump’s strong leadership, America prioritizes secure borders and property protections—lessons Europe learns the hard way against aggressors. Sources: Norway Sends Wartime Warning Letters to Thousands of Property Owners – Euro Weekly News Norwegians will receive letters confiscation property case war – Izvestia Thousands of Norwegians are expected to receive letters from the military – Telegrafi

A sitting U.S. Senator has collected a paycheck for nearly two decades while skipping every single meeting of one of America’s most sacred institutions—and now his colleagues want him gone. The Phantom Board Member Senator Bernie Sanders has achieved something remarkable during his tenure on the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum’s governing board since 2007: perfect attendance in reverse. Official museum records reveal Sanders has missed every single meeting during his 18-year appointment, despite the council convening just twice annually. This extraordinary absence record has prompted approximately a dozen board members to demand Senate leadership replace the Vermont independent. The timing of this revelation coincides with Sanders’ September 2025 statement accusing Israel of committing genocide in Gaza, where he declared the intent was clear and the conclusion inescapable. Board members now argue his public positions directly contradict the museum’s educational mission while his ghost-like presence mocks the institution’s gravity. Sen Bernie Sanders has served on the US Holocaust Memorial Museum's board for 18 years, but hasn't attended a single meeting- inspiring another bipartisan push to oust him. Sanders was appointed in 2007 to the Holocaust Memorial Council, and has not bothered himself to walk… pic.twitter.com/5Rnt16w55E — Robbie Mouton (@mcgmouton57) January 20, 2026 Bipartisan Frustration Erupts The removal effort represents a rare moment of unity between Trump and Biden appointees on the 55-member Holocaust Memorial Council. Alex Heckler, a Biden appointee and Democratic activist, stated Sanders’ beliefs and public statements do not reflect the museum’s mission, emphasizing this constitutes common sense rather than partisan politics. His assessment carries weight given other Democratic appointees, including former Biden selections Susan Rice and Doug Emhoff, attended meetings as recently as last year. Trump appointee Jimmy Resnick captured the frustration bluntly, questioning why Sanders occupies a seat someone else would actually use. The sentiment reflects broader board member bewilderment at Sanders’ complete disengagement from an institution located just two miles from his workplace in the U.S. Capitol. Holocaust Memory Under Siege Board members frame Sanders’ removal as urgent given rising global antisemitism and Holocaust distortion campaigns. Jonathan Burkan, a Trump appointee serving dual terms, argues Jewish elected officials should attend at least one meeting during a two-decade tenure, particularly after October 7th events intensified antisemitic incidents worldwide. Museum Chairman Stuart Eizenstat has disputed genocide characterizations targeting Israel, maintaining such extreme language fuels violent antisemitism. Daniel Huff, another Trump appointee supporting removal, emphasized the museum’s careful stewardship of genocide terminology to preserve Holocaust memory. Sanders’ public embrace of genocide accusations against Israel directly undermines this institutional responsibility, creating an untenable contradiction between board member advocacy and museum mission. Senate Leadership Faces Precedent Decision The removal letter now sits before Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, who must decide whether to initiate replacement proceedings. This decision carries implications beyond Sanders’ case, as other Senate appointees including Jacky Rosen and Tim Scott also maintain poor attendance records. Schumer’s choice will establish whether non-participation consequences extend beyond public embarrassment to actual removal. The broader context reveals institutional governance questions about congressional appointees to federal boards. Sanders’ case demonstrates how symbolic appointments can become problematic when appointees treat prestigious positions as resume decorations rather than meaningful responsibilities requiring engagement and alignment with institutional missions. Sources: The Yeshiva World – Fraud: Bernie Sanders Has Missed Every Holocaust Museum Board Meeting For 18 Years Jerusalem Post – Holocaust Museum Board Member Bernie Sanders Reportedly Hasn’t Shown Up to Meeting in Almost 2 Decades WABC Radio – Bernie Sanders Skipped Every Holocaust Museum Board Meeting Israel Hayom – Trump Appointees Push to Remove Sanders From Holocaust Museum AOL – Bernie Sanders Skipped Every Meeting in 18 Years on Holocaust Museum Board VIN News – Report: Sanders Missed All Holocaust Museum Board Meetings Over 18 Years