Days before the Senate is set to delve into the Justice Department’s potentially politicized conduct during the Biden administration, two ousted FBI agents involved in the “Arctic Frost” operation sued the Trump administration. The two special agents, identified in the lawsuit as John Doe 1 and John Doe 2, worked from November 2022 to June 2023 on an investigation of Donald Trump’s challenge to the 2020 election. The probe obtained phone records and other data on members of Congress, raising separation of powers questions.  The plaintiffs claim that FBI Director Kash Patel fired them after members of Congress released Arctic Frost records last year. Both termination letters cited “poor judgment and a lack of impartiality in carrying out duties,” a claim their complaint argued was “pretextual.” They filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The fired agents assert their First Amendment rights were violated because they were fired for a perceived political affiliation, and that their Fifth Amendment rights were violated because they were fired without due process.  Republican lawmakers challenged the “Arctic Frost” investigation as one of several areas of perceived weaponization of the Justice Department under Attorney General Merrick Garland and President Joe Biden.  On Tuesday, the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Federal Courts, Oversight, Agency Action, and Federal Rights is holding a hearing titled “Arctic Frost: A Modern Watergate.” The hearing will draw parallels between the two, since both Arctic Frost and the Watergate scandal involved government snooping against political opponents.  The committee last year released a set of documents that show the special counsel Jack Smith’s team collected cellphone data from nine Republican senators and one Republican House member in the investigation, dubbed “Arctic Frost.” The committee also released 197 subpoenas that Smith’s investigative team issued in 2023 as part of its case against Trump, which also seemed to encompass numerous people and organizations in Trump’s orbit, many only loosely connected to the 2020 election dispute. The lawsuit by the two FBI agents makes their case in part by diminishing their own roles in the investigation, saying, “John Doe 1’s contributions to Arctic Frost were largely administrative and ministerial.” Similarly, John Doe 2 claims to have “played a supporting role, handling tasks such as recording interviews when requested by lead agents or prosecutors, arranging for transcription services for recorded interviews, and keeping track of interview logs and records.” The lawsuit even claims that U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro of the District of Columbia made a failed effort to save John Doe 2’s job.  “No internal investigation, notice, or hearing preceded their firings,” the complaint states. “Nor were Plaintiffs presented with any evidence purportedly supporting their firings or given an opportunity to appeal.”  The post Ousted FBI Agents Sue Before Senate Prepares to Uncover New Details of ‘Arctic Frost’ appeared first on The Daily Signal.

House Republicans are activating the grassroots to pressure the Senate to pass the SAVE America Act. The Senate is currently engaged in an extended debate of the voter integrity legislation called for by President Donald Trump. The bill includes requiring proof of citizenship to vote and nationwide voter ID. Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., is also heading up an effort to amend the bill to include other administration priorities such as protecting women’s sports from biological males who claim to be female. Trump, Republicans in the House, and grassroots conservatives have been pushing the Senate to use the talking filibuster, a process that would circumvent the 60 vote cloture rule, to pass the bill. The extended Senate debate, however, is not a talking filibuster, and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., has argued Republicans do not have the votes to make the talking filibuster successful. The slow progress has led House members to host events with grassroots leaders to discuss the need for this legislation and pressure the Senate. Rep. Randy Fine, R-Fla., hosted one of these events with activist Scott Presler on Wednesday. Fine’s virtual town hall attracted over 9,000 viewers. Some of the viewers included other conservative activists, such as Nick Sortor. Fine said Presler, “made a huge impact in our elections last year,” and “is somebody who understands perhaps better than anybody what the grassroots wants because he talked to so many folks last year about the election and got a real first-hand view on the importance of honesty and integrity in our elections.” Presler told the audience that the SAVE America Act “is what the American people voted for in the 2024 election, and now we demand and expect action,” pledging to “not rest until it is on President Trump’s desk.” “To anyone saying that it isn’t happening, no, it is happening,” Pressler said of voter fraud. “This dilutes the American voice, the minority voice, the veteran voice, the people’s voice. “Ultimately, I hope the Senate can get its act together,” Presler added. “If they are unable to pass legislation, we may lose our House majority.” Presler stressed the sense of urgency: “I am on the ground every single day, and this is the single most important thing that people care about,” Presler said. Other members in attendance, including Rep. Burgess Owens, R-Utah, Rep. Brandon Gill, and Rep. Rich McCormick, R-Georgia, also stressed the need for the SAVE America Act. “I agree with everything that Scott said here,” Gill stated. “When voters give us power, they expect us to deliver. When we make promises on the campaign trail, they expect us to deliver.” “Voters do not care about our cane old Senate rules. They just want the SAVE America Act signed into law,” Gill continued. Owens echoed Gil’s remarks and called on Republican voters to make their voices heard with senate republicans. “This is a fight that needs to be picked by Thune,” Owens said. “We need to highlight those senators who will not vote for, especially Republicans,” Owens added. “Every Republican should be put on record time and time again until they are hearing from all people in their state and are pushed to do something very reasonable.” “Every excuse that they use is garbage,” Owens said of Democrat and Republican opposition to the SAVE America Act. “We know the Democrats are using this as a way to cheat their way to the top. Democrats rely on bad laws to keep this up, to fake that 90% of their state votes one way. “ After the live stream, Fine and McCormick hinted to The Daily Signal that Wednesday’s livestream was not the last effort from House Republicans and grassroots activists to pressure the Senate into passing the bill. “Passing the SAVE America Act is not optional—it’s essential,” Fine told The Daily Signal. “We will not have a country if this does not pass. We cannot allow foreigners to determine the fate of our country.” “We must get this commonsense legislation across the finish line to secure our elections and require photo ID nationwide as soon as possible,” Rep. McCormick told The Daily Signal. On a separate call with The Daily Signal, Fine reiterated that he and at least 12 other Republican members will “not vote for any Senate legislation until the SAVE America Act is passed.” The post House Activates GOP Grassroots to Put Pressure on Senate to Pass SAVE America Act appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Operation Epic Fury continues to dominate the headlines as the United States and Israel pummel the Iranian regime. But the defining issue for American voters hits closer to home: concern about their personal finances. With the midterm elections approaching in seven months, recent polling reveals that the economy remains the issue most likely to influence the outcome of federal and state races.  It was 34 years ago, in the aftermath of another Middle East conflict in Iraq, when then-candidate Bill Clinton‘s political adviser James Carville famously said, “It’s the economy, stupid.” Clinton, a Democrat governor, defeated incumbent President George H.W. Bush that November. For most Americans, everyday concerns—gas, groceries, and rent—matter far more than foreign conflicts or political drama, according to pollster Scott Rasmussen. When the economy is strong, voters are content. When it falters, anxiety rises and the party in power pays the price.  Economic Anxiety Rising   New polling from Napolitan News Service suggests that anxiety is growing. Americans are increasingly pessimistic about their own financial situation, with rising gas and grocery prices making it harder to make ends meet.  Get today's biggest stories in under 8 minutes.@ScottWRasmussen covers:1) Some really bad news on the economy2) New numbers on perceptions in Iran3) A look at how deep partisan polarization has become. Is it warranted? pic.twitter.com/0peVC57mOt— Napolitan News Service (@NapolitanNews) March 18, 2026 According to the latest data, 38% of voters rate the economy as poor, up three points from last week. Meanwhile, 40% say the economy is good, a sharp 12-point drop. Even more concerning for incumbent Republicans, 53% of voters believe the economy is getting worse, compared to just 23% who say it is improving. Rasmussen warned that these numbers should not be underestimated. Only 24% of Americans say their personal finances are improving, while 39% report they are getting worse. That gap signals deepening dissatisfaction.  Lacking Economic Confidence Rasmussen’s latest polling data resembles the economic sentiment leading up to the 2024 election, when economic frustration played a key role in Donald Trump’s victory. Following that election, optimism rebounded. By mid-2025, the number of Americans who felt their finances were improving nearly matched those who felt they were worsening.  That progress, however, was disrupted by the longest-ever government shutdown in November and December, which eroded confidence. While sentiment improved again after the government reopened and economic messaging refocused, the stability proved fragile.   More than a third (36%) of voters say the country is currently in a recession, up 5 points from 2 weeks ago.https://t.co/5Rl1fwvxfm1,000 RV by @ScottWRasmussen pic.twitter.com/7e6QrIg5SG— Napolitan News Service (@NapolitanNews) March 19, 2026 Over the past 10 months, confidence has remained relatively steady. Voters who reported their personal finances improving remained comparable to those who reported their personal finances worsening.   Today, there is a 15-point gap between those two numbers—the worst since Trump’s election.  A key factor appears to be instability with foreign conflicts, particularly the war with Iran, which has driven up gas prices. For many Americans living paycheck to paycheck, higher fuel costs quickly ripple into every aspect of daily life, leaving less money for everyday essential.  Narrow Window Before November   The political challenge is clear: Bad news erodes confidence quickly but rebuilding that confidence takes time. Rasmussen estimates it could take up to six months for economic sentiment to recover from the current downturn, placing any potential rebound close to the midterm elections.  That leaves Republicans with a narrow window to act, he noted. They must address voters’ concerns, stabilize economic conditions, and restore confidence before the political consequences set in.  If they fail, the outcome could be decisive. As Rasmussen noted, if current trends hold through November, Democrats are likely to regain control of the House of Representatives and potentially the Senate.   Improving personal finances could shift the balance—but without change, Republicans face a steep uphill battle.  The lesson is simple, Rasmussen said: Voters respond to their personal financial reality. When they feel worse off, their trust in political leaders declines. For Republicans, the question is whether they can win it back before it’s too late. The post Rising Gas Prices Put Republicans on the Defensive With Voters appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Democrats and their media allies are suddenly wrapping themselves in the First Amendment like it’s a campaign prop. As California Gov. Gavin Newsom sues Fox News for $787 million in defamation over its coverage of a phone call with President Donald Trump, Jimmy Kimmel blasts the FCC for an “attack on free speech” after his show was suspended amid controversy over remarks about Charlie Kirk’s assassination—with affiliates preempting episodes and over 1,600 complaints flooding the agency.  My new book “Clinton Hoax, Obama Coup” reveals the mother of all hypocrisies: In 2012, the media didn’t need lawsuits or regulators. They censored themselves—deliberately vanishing a presidential confession from national TV and refusing to report it at all—to protect Barack Obama and hand him a second presidential term. Just days after jihadists butchered Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans in Benghazi, Obama sat on CBS’s Late Show with David Letterman and personally pushed the administration’s grotesque hoax: blaming the terror attack on a ridiculous YouTube video. “Extremists and terrorists used [the video] as an excuse to attack a variety of our embassies, including the consulate in Libya,” Obama declared on air. The very next day, the National Counterterrorism Center director testified under oath: It was a straight-up terrorist attack. No protest. No video. Premeditated jihadist slaughter. Yet here’s the real scandal: Not a single major outlet reported what Obama actually said about Benghazi on Letterman. The Washington Post, LA Times, CBS, NBC, and Wall Street Journal all covered the appearance—but every headline magically fixated only on Obama slamming Romney’s “47%” remark. The Benghazi confession? Completely erased from their coverage. They didn’t just ignore it; they actively censored it by pretending it never happened. Then came the physical vanishing act. CBS and the official Letterman YouTube archives still serve up plenty of clips from that night—including Obama ripping Romney. But the exact moment the President pinned Benghazi on the video? Poof—gone. A third-party uploader posted the full interview on September 19, 2012. It racked up 165,000 views. Time Magazine even embedded the full video … before it was wiped.The Lex Luger account got terminated for bogus “copyright infringement.” The Washington Post’s own link to the full interview now dead-ends in a 404 error. This was cold-blooded self-censorship on two levels. First, the broader media refused to report the most damaging part of the interview at all. Second, the network that aired it made the evidence disappear. Plenty of other full Letterman episodes with presidents and celebs remain online. But this one—catching Obama red-handed pushing the Benghazi hoax right before Election Day—got erased.  And here’s the explosive question no one has answered: Did the Obama administration  quietly pressure CBS and the rest of the media to kill the clip and refuse to report it? We may never know for sure, but the coordinated silence and sudden disappearance scream coordination at the highest levels. No subpoenas. No FCC complaints. Just quiet, ruthless deletion to prop up the “al-Qaeda on the run” campaign fairy tale. As “Clinton Hoax, Obama Coup” lays bare in devastating detail, the rot went straight to the top. CIA Deputy Director Mike Morell personally scrubbed intelligence talking points of al-Qaeda references. (The same Mike Morell who later orchestrated the Hunter Biden laptop “Russian disinformation” letter to help Biden win.) In the 2012 second presidential debate, Romney held a political nuke he never detonated: Obama’s September 18 Letterman interview—six days after Benghazi—where the president personally blamed the attack on an “extremely offensive video” that “caused great offense” and was used by “extremists and terrorists” as an “excuse.” Romney likely never knew it existed. The blackout held and Obama cruised to victory. The hysterical screaming from Newsom, Kimmel, and others in the media today only exposes their breathtaking hypocrisy. When conservative media drops facts they hate, Democrats sprint to court demanding hundreds of millions. When a liberal late-night host feels heat, they cry “tyranny!” But back in 2012, when their guy needed a damaging confession erased—both from reporting and from the record—CBS and the entire media did the dirty work themselves. This is the proven blueprint for how the permanent ruling class shields itself from accountability. My new book Clinton Hoax, Obama Coup rips the lid off the entire machine, from the erased Letterman tape to the intelligence community’s repeated election interference. The tape—and the reporting on it—may be gone forever. But the evidence in these pages cannot be erased. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post How the Media Erased Obama’s Damning Benghazi Confession to Re-Elect Him appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Does President Donald Trump’s war with Iran poll well with Americans? The answer is complicated. On Friday, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt amplified new Politico polling, which shows 81% of self-identified MAGA Republicans approve of Trump’s military action in Iran. Leavitt previously touted the same group’s 100% approval of Trump in an NBC News poll. “As I’ve said repeatedly, Americans trust President Trump as their Commander-in-Chief and support his efforts to eliminate terrorist threats and keep us safe,” Leavitt stated in a Friday post on X. “There is no ‘MAGA fracturing,’ no matter how many times the media tries to claim otherwise.” As I’ve said repeatedly, Americans trust President Trump as their Commander-in-Chief and support his efforts to eliminate terrorist threats and keep us safe. There is no “MAGA fracturing,” no matter how many times the media tries to claim otherwise. https://t.co/6Hy3gCzxUW pic.twitter.com/J8pfzbZGq3— Karoline Leavitt (@PressSec) March 20, 2026 The poll suggests the strikes have 43% support among Americans overall, and 61% support among non-MAGA Trump supporters. But the polling also goes into more granular detail on how Americans and the president’s core base interpret the conflict in light of his 2024 campaign’s anti-war stance. The survey asked whether Trump broke his pledge to not start new wars if elected. Across the board, Americans view Trump’s Iran posture as a shift. A total of 62% of all respondents said Trump’s decision to launch strikes broke his pledge. Out of this bloc, 37% said it did so “unnecessarily” and 25% said it was “necessary given the change in circumstances.”  Only 19% said Trump’s decision to launch strikes had not broken his campaign pledge, and 18% didn’t know. Among the MAGA Republicans of whose support Leavitt boasts, a 55% majority characterized the war as breaking a campaign pledge—with 36% saying it was necessary, and 19% saying it was unnecessary. Meanwhile, 37% said it did not break a pledge. Additionally, 61% of non-MAGA Trump supporters thought the war broke a promise. White House spokesman Davis Ingle told The Daily Signal in a statement, “What matters most to the American people is having a Commander-in-Chief who takes decisive action to eliminate threats and keep them safe, which is exactly what President Trump is doing with the ongoing successful Operation Epic Fury. He added, “President Trump campaigned proudly on his promise to deny the Iranian regime the ability to develop a nuclear weapon, which is what this noble operation is seeking to accomplish. The President does not make these incredibly important national security decisions based on fluid opinion polls, but on the best interest of the American people.” This article has been updated with comment from the White House The post Do Trump’s Iran Strikes Poll Well? Opinions Differ. appeared first on The Daily Signal.