President Donald Trump has revoked his invitation to Canada to join his new Board of Peace overseeing Gaza. “Dear Prime Minister Carney,” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Thursday, “Please let this Letter serve to represent that the Board of Peace is withdrawing its invitation to you regarding Canada’s joining, what will be, the most prestigious Board of Leaders ever assembled, at any time.”   The Board of Peace was initially announced as a body of world leaders that would help facilitate peace and new leadership in Gaza following the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. However, Trump has indicated the board may play a larger role in global affairs.   “I think we can spread out to other things as we succeed with Gaza, we’re going to be very successful in Gaza,” Trump said Thursday. “We can do numerous other things. Once this board is completely formed, we can do pretty much whatever we want to do.”   Trump will chair the board, and appointed leaders include U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff.   So far, leaders in 20 nations have agreed to join the board, including Albania, Argentina, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Belarus, Bulgaria, Egypt, Hungary, Indonesia, Israel, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Mongolia, Morocco, Pakistan, Paraguay, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan and Vietnam.  No other permanent member of the United Nations Security Council has yet agreed to join the board, Reuters reported, with critics of the plan alleging it could undermine the work of the U.N. Permanent board members must each provide $1 billion in funding, according to Trump. Trump’s decision to revoke Canada’s invitation follows public controversy between Trump and Canada’s prime minister Mark Carney.   Carney delivered a speech to global leaders at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland on Tuesday implying that the U.S. was at the center of a “rupture” in the world order. Then, on Wednesday, Trump delivered a speech at the large event of global leaders and addressed Carney directly.   “Canada lives because of the United States. Remember that, Mark, the next time you make your statements,” Trump said.  President Trump to Mark Carney at Davos: “Canada lives because of the United States. Remember that, Mark, the next time you make your statements." pic.twitter.com/6s1mCvV6Cg— Virginia Allen (@Virginia_Allen5) January 21, 2026 The post Trump Disinvites Canada From Board of Peace appeared first on The Daily Signal.

FIRST ON THE DAILY SIGNAL—The Department of Health and Human Services is officially moving to roll back a Biden-era policy of taxpayer-funded abortion travel for unaccompanied illegal alien children in the U.S., The Daily Signal can first report. The Office of Refugee Resettlement, within the HHS Administration of Children and Families division, is making regulatory changes “to address how abortion services are facilitated or funded for unaccompanied alien minors,” an HHS official told The Daily Signal. The changes “could eventually limit federal involvement in abortion for minors in government custody, particularly vulnerable children under federal care,” the official said. The news comes on the morning of the 53rd annual March for Life, a national gathering of pro-lifers in Washington, D.C. to advocate for the right to life for the unborn. On Nov. 10, 2022, the Biden administration originally proposed the “Unaccompanied Children Program Foundational Rule,” requiring the Office of Refugee Resettlement to “ensure unaccompanied children have access to medical care, including transportation across state lines” for procedures including “family planning services, and medical services requiring heightened ORR involvement.” Under that rule, the office allowed for minors in federal custody to have abortions, including out-of-state travel for abortions from states with abortion restrictions.  A senior ORR official told The Daily Signal in an interview that the new rule will bring HHS policy in alignment with the Hyde Amendment, a longstanding federal policy prohibiting taxpayer-funded abortions in health care appropriations. President Donald Trump signed an executive order last January to implement that policy across federal agencies. “HHS remains committed to protecting unborn life and ensuring taxpayer funds are used ethically and lawfully,” the official said. “Today’s actions strengthen protections for healthcare providers, align department policies with federal law, and ensure federally funded research reflects ethical limits established by Congress.” The administration told The Daily Signal in October that it had planned to alter the rule to comply with the Hyde Amendment. Trump’s Office of Refugee Resettlement has submitted its changes to the Office of Management and Budget’s Regulatory Information Service Center. The official hopes that the revisions will move through the office and advance in the rule making process within the next few weeks. HHS aims for the rule to last beyond the Trump administration. “This measure closes the funding loopholes that were introduced under the Biden administration,” the official said. “We’re not going to use any taxpayer dollars directly or indirectly for abortion services, except where it’s expressly authorized by law.” “Our goal is to save lives both for these young children that are coming across the border, that are pregnant,” the official said, “and to save the lives of their unborn babies.” While the official expects “legal maneuvering” from the Left, HHS is “prepared to fight that if it happens.” “The president has committed to protecting unborn children,” the senior official said, “and the agencies have followed through with mplementing the president’s executive order.” “We are going to continue to protect life, and that’s exactly what we are doing,” the official continued, “and we’re happy that this is coming out before the March of Life. We’re happy that we are protecting these onboarding children and allowing them to come into the world.” The post EXCLUSIVE: HHS Advances Rule Ending Taxpayer-Funded Abortion Travel for Alien Children appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Leftist media outlets take an extremely opportunistic approach to covering the intersection of religion and politics. They’re appalled at religion when it impedes their agenda, but they gush over religious figures when they align with their talking points. On Jan. 19, New York Times religion reporter Ruth Graham penned a story headlined “Top Catholic Clerics Denounce U.S. Foreign Policy.” Three Catholic cardinals—Blase Cupich of Chicago, Joseph Tobin of Newark, and Robert McElroy of Washington, D.C.—put out a statement critical of President Donald Trump’s international policies. “Our country’s moral role in confronting evil around the world, sustaining the right to life and human dignity, and supporting religious liberty are all under examination,” the cardinals contended. “And the building of just and sustainable peace, so crucial to humanity’s well-being now and in the future, is being reduced to partisan categories that encourage polarization and destructive policies.” The line about “partisan categories” is amusing, since the Times and Rachel Maddow and the rest are delighting in how this statement fits their category. It’s puzzling to argue that Trump messing with tyrants in Venezuela and Iran is somehow not taking on “evil.” Opposition to any military action is at the forefront of their message, and religious liberty and the right to life are subordinated. The Times never used words like “liberal” or “leftist” or “progressive” to describe these three prelates, or for Pope Leo, whom they cite as their inspiration. But go back four years, and Ruth Graham and the Times took an entirely different approach. On June 20, 2021, the labels were flying. The headline was “In Rift With Biden, a Dramatic Show of Force by a Conservative Catholic Movement.” Graham and her colleague Elizabeth Dias began by asserting, “Pope Francis and President Biden, both liberals, are the two most high-profile Roman Catholics in the world.” But forget the pope, it’s “now a conservative movement that decides how the Catholic Church asserts its power in America.” Including headlines, the word “conservative” appeared 15 times. In this story, they mourned their heroes Cardinal Cupich and Cardinal Tobin—“leading U.S. allies of Pope Francis”—were “ultimately drowned out” as the bishops voted to draft a policy that could restrain the offering of the Eucharist to Catholic politicians like Joe Biden, who energetically opposed church teaching on abortion and other moral issues. This was lamented as “polarizing the Catholic faithful,” something the Times did not say about the Trump-bashing statement. On Inauguration Day 2021, the president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Archbishop Jose Gomez of Los Angeles, put out a welcoming statement to Biden, but underlined “our new President has pledged to pursue certain policies that would advance moral evils and threaten human life and dignity, most seriously in the areas of abortion, contraception, marriage, and gender.” At the time, the Catholic News Agency reported Cardinal Cupich wanted “a more supportive, clearly pro-Biden statement, and that he spent most of Wednesday trying to get the support of other bishops to come up with an alternative statement.” In other words, he was “polarizing the Catholic faithful” on Biden’s behalf. Cardinal Cupich put out a four-tweet attack on Gomez for an “ill-considered statement” that didn’t seek enough “collegial consultation,” leading to “internal institutional failures” when the bishops should “take up the work of healing our nation in this moment of crisis.” In other words, it’s impolite and divisive to confront a pro-abortion, pro-transgender Catholic president, but years later, church leaders can attack non-Catholic President Trump while claiming they’re against “partisan categories.” This is blatantly partisan advocacy, which is why the leftist media applaud it so enthusiastically. COPYRIGHT 2026 CREATORS.COM We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal.    The post Guess When Catholic Cardinals Are Touted for Their Moral Authority? appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Former special counsel Jack Smith couldn’t answer how much in tax dollars went to confidential sources in his nearly two-year investigation of President Donald Trump.  House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, pushed Smith on the topic during the committee hearing on Thursday. Jordan noted that at least $20,000 went to a single source to review video and photos of the Jan. 6, 2021 breach of the U.S. Capitol, as part of Smith’s investigation into the incident. Smith answered that he couldn’t remember if there were more such expenses. “What I want to know is how much of that $35 million of taxpayer money did you give to confidential human sources?” Jodan asked. “We know you gave $20,000 to someone.” Smith said the $20,000 was a payment from the FBI to a confidential source, that he approved. “My recollection regarding the $20,000, which is not a payment from me, I was approving a payment by the FBI to a confidential human source, who was reviewing video and photography,” Smith said.   Jordan asked the identity of the source, but Smith said he did not know. President Joe Biden’s attorney general, Merrick Garland, appointed Smith as special counsel to investigate Donald Trump over his challenge to the results of the 2020 election and his potentially unlawful possession of classified information.  Smith ultimately secured indictments against Trump in both investigations. Republican lawmakers grilled Smith on Thursday over his securing warrants to review congressional phone records without telling judges whom he was investigating. Jordan asked Smith how many payments went to confidential sources, to which Smith responded that he did not know. Jordan noted that Smith had information from multiple government agencies, the Republican National Committee, and members of Congress.  “Why did you have to pay people for information?” Jordan asked. “My recollection and understanding is the payment, the $20,000 that I approved, was for a confidential human source to assist in the review of video and photographic evidence showing people who were attacking the Capitol,” Smith said.  The post What Jack Smith Didn’t Say About Paid Confidential Informants appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The Daily Signal’s Virginia Correspondent Joe Thomas is out with a new podcast breaking down Virginia Democrats’ effort to redistrict the commonwealth.  Now that Democrats are fully in control of the commonwealth, they are moving forward with a plan that could add four Democrat seats and ultimately determine the balance of power in Washington after the 2026 midterms.  Thomas called the move, which could change the Virginia congressional delegation from six Democrats and five Republicans to 10 Democrats and just one Republican “reactionary.”  The Democrat redistricting proposal would allow the Democrat-controlled government to redraw their districts if a red state decides to redistrict. “If another state changed their districts, Virginia could invoke this constitutional amendment to recreate theirs.”  ?“Now, what’s happened in Virginia is that they’ve pulled some rabbits out of the hat,” Thomas said.  “In Virginia, the law says that in order to amend the Virginia Constitution, you have to pass the amendment through both the House and Senate,” Thomas explained. The governor is not involved in that process, though Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger has said she backs the effort.  But, to amend the constitution, the Virginia legislature has to wait until after an election cycle, and the amendment “has to pass another general assembly session and then be brought to the voters,” Thomas continued.  In a special session late last year, however, “Virginia budget Speaker Don Scott used the parliamentary procedure to convene another meeting of that same special session in December to pass the constitutional amendment for a second time, just days before the culmination of Virginia’s 2025 election cycle.”  If voters approve of the proposed amendment to the constitution, it would “?overturn an election that went down 65% in favor of a non-partisan redistricting commission that each 10 years would redraw Virginia’s districts based on population shifts,” Thomas said.   The Democrats’ proposed 10-1 map look to stretch districts such as VA-1, VA-10, and VA-11.  “They’re all along what is called the Blue Crescent in Virginia, that [go] from the  Washington, D.C. suburbs all the way down to the Hampton Roads,” Thomas said of these districts.  But stretching these districts to the west and south is not without risk, Thomas claimed.  “What they’re going to do with these districts is they’re going to take these 20% and 40% Democrat districts by election results, stretch them to the point of breaking,” Thomas said. The 10-1 map would “stretch them to the point where they’re going to be right at the edge of being maybe 52%, maybe 53% Democrats by election results, historically.”  “And that’s the peril in this,” Thomas added. “They’re putting themselves in a position of taking all of those safe districts along the Blue Crescent from Northern Virginia” and “stretching them to the point of them being perilously close to a 50-50 split.”  A Republican with a good ground game in these new districts could prove redistricting was more trouble than Virginia Democrats bargained for.  The post Virginia Democrats’ Redistricting Power Grab, Explained appeared first on The Daily Signal.