President Donald Trump announced Friday morning that the Strait of Hormuz is open. “IRAN HAS JUST ANNOUNCED THAT THE STRAIT OF IRAN IS FULLY OPEN AND READY FOR FULL PASSAGE,” he wrote on TruthSocial. “THANK YOU!” A few minutes later, Trump posted that the Strait was “COMPLETELY OPEN AND READY FOR BUSINESS AND FULL PASSAGE.” The Iranian foreign minister, Seyed Abbas Araghchi, confirmed this on X, saying that yesterday’s ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon was connected to the strait’s reopening. “In line with the ceasefire in Lebanon,” he said, “the passage for all commercial vessels through Strait of Hormuz is declared completely open for the remaining period of ceasefire, on the coordinated route as already announced by Ports and Maritime Organisation of the Islamic Rep. of Iran.” Since Monday, the United States had maintained a blockade of ships connected to Iranian commerce. Trump added on Friday that “THE NAVAL BLOCKADE WILL REMAIN IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT AS IT PERTAINS TO IRAN, ONLY, UNTIL SUCH TIME AS OUR TRANSACTION WITH IRAN IS 100% COMPLETE.” “THIS PROCESS SHOULD GO VERY QUICKLY IN THAT MOST OF THE POINTS ARE ALREADY NEGOTIATED,” he wrote. The Strait of Hormuz is a key waterway for the global oil trade. About 25% of world seaborn oil trade transits the straight, according to the International Energy Agency, with 80% of it destined for Asia. About 19% of the world’s liquefied natural gas transits the strait as well. Bangladesh, India, and Pakistan imported almost two-thirds of their liquefied natural gas supplies via the Strait of Hormuz in 2025, making them particularly vulnerable to Iran’s actions. Oil prices fell sharply in late trading as Trump announced the ceasefire. West Texas Intermediate crude, the domestic benchmark, fell by more than 9% to around $102 per barrel, The New York Times reported. Trump announced April 7 that Iran agreed to open the Strait of Hormuz, but the crucial waterway remained heavily disrupted by the conflict. The post BREAKING: Trump Gives Major Update on Strait of Hormuz appeared first on The Daily Signal.

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani intends to keep one of his most controversial campaign promises: city-owned grocery stores. In his 100-day address on Sunday, he announced the first socialist supermarket will be up and running in East Harlem in 2027. The only thing slower than Mr. Mamdani opening the store next year will be the checkout line once it finally opens—and that’s assuming the shelves aren’t empty. The mayor plans to manage five government-run stores by the end of his first term, one located in each of New York City’s five boroughs, that will be run for no profit with the objective of keeping prices artificially low for a select basket of staples (e.g. bread, milk, eggs). Addressing food affordability in an already expensive city is important, but this “solution” is central planning dressed up as compassion. Rather than addressing the web of city regulations, labor costs above national averages, and high real estate expenses that inflate prices for small grocers, the mayor suggests government intervention. This could harm small businesses by crowding them out. Private grocery stores operate on thin profit margins of only 1 to 3% while simultaneously navigating labor costs and theft. Owners are not “greedy capitalists,” whatever communists might say. The incentive to maximize profits actually facilitates competition and naturally drives prices down. When a public option enters the market with artificially low prices and no barriers to entry, mom-and-pop shops get pushed out. In a free market system, private grocers outperform public options. When asked about the private sector’s natural advantage over his socialist marts, Mamdani stated, “I look forward to the competition. May the most affordable grocery store win.” However, the city will be funneling tens of millions of taxpayer dollars into stores that do not pay rent or property taxes—hardly fair competition. Taxpayer-funded stores will distort the market and create surges in demand that the government is ill-equipped to handle. The lesson here is that the productive private sector outperforms the unproductive public sector. For example, take the notoriously slow and cost-inefficient government-run postal service or Department of Motor Vehicles; now, imagine the government in charge of food supply. Not only would shoppers face long lines and stores face food shortages, but the city will have spent tens of millions of dollars that it cannot afford. Estimated costs are projected at $30 million for the first grocery market, nearly half of the mayor’s original $70 million budget for five. As valuations for these Marxist marts keep rising, so does the burden to taxpayers—this at a time where New York City has a $7 billion budget gap over the next two years and nearly $100 billion in total debt. The reality is that nothing is truly free in a socialist system. Everything is paid through higher taxes, larger deficits, or hidden costs passed to consumers. Such reckless spending is never prudent, especially on policies that fail in both principle and practice. Cities like Erie, Kansas or Baldwin, Florida left taxpayers on the hook for inefficient, government-run grocery stores that created scarcity and failed to alleviate food unaffordability. Each municipal government found the public store too difficult and too costly for taxpayers to operate. The Soviet Union infamously nationalized food production and distribution as a part of its centralized economy—to the detriment of its citizenry. Shortages, empty shelves, rationing, and bread lines were unfortunate outcomes of the failed socialist experiment. Compare that to the American grocery experience of full shelves and food variety, all made possible by free markets. Despite the obvious dichotomy between pro-growth free enterprise and restrictive nationalization, Mayor Mamdani still believes his government-owned bodegas can do business better. Soviet Russia, Communist China, and Socialist Cuba followed the same script, promising affordability through central planning but delivering scarcity, corruption, and poverty. New Yorkers are about to learn the hard way what millions already discovered in the last century: socialist “solutions” to everyday problems fail spectacularly. Private grocers already feed millions of New Yorkers daily without government interference. Mayor Mamdani’s city-run stores would distort the market and impose higher costs on taxpayers, leaving residents worse off. If a government-owned grocery store does open in the Big Apple in 2027, New Yorkers will experience the real costs of “free” socialist proposals: they charge residents once in taxes and once at the register. The post Mamdani’s First Marxist Mart Expected to Open Next Year appeared first on The Daily Signal.

A group dedicated to helping “LGBTQ+ migrants” in Boston is flailing after conservative media drew attention to its program distributing “wellness” grants to migrants, which the group claimed was taxpayer funded. After The Daily Signal reached out for comment, the group deleted its press release claiming to combat “disinformation,” and announced a pause in the program. The City of Boston, for its part, confirmed that it awarded a grant to the group, but explicitly stated that no taxpayer funds may be used for the program. “OUTnewcomers, a grassroots LGBTQ+ migrant justice organization based in Greater Boston, announces the temporary pause of its wellness initiative, Project Belonging Matters,” the group posted in a press release after The Daily Signal reached out for comment Thursday. OUTnewcomers claimed that the organization and its founder, Sal Khan, “received multiple death threats and threats of being reported to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement following the project’s public launch.” The group does not suggest it checks documentation to ensure that migrants are legal when dispersing services. The LGBTQ+ Migrants’ ‘Wellness’ Program The organization launched the program on Tuesday with posts on Facebook and Instagram. “Get $250-$500 for your well-being,” a poster states, advertising “Wellness Support for LGBTQ+ Migrants in Boston.” The poster states four different potential uses for the funding: “Yoga & Meditation,” “Creative Healing,” “Peer Support,” and “Gym Memberships.” The poster says the program will give priority to “low-income, trans & isolated LGBTQ+ migrants in Boston,” with the proviso that “all funds must be used within the City of Boston.” Screenshot Combating ‘Disinformation’ After Mass Daily News and the Daily Mail reported on the program, OUTnewcomers published a press release countering what it called “disinformation” that “endangers LGBTQ+ migrants” in Boston. The organization claimed the news outlets “did not follow ethical reporting standards,” but only suggested that the outlets wrongfully reported the $250-$500 payments. “Our City of Boston-funded program is modest and need based,” the organization wrote. “It provides small vouchers of $50 or less to eligible LGBTQ+ migrants living in Boston to access limited wellness supports such as haircuts, acupuncture, or massage. The program is also intended to support local Boston businesses that welcome LGBTQ+ and migrant clients and workers.” (emphasis original) The press release stated that the “hate-driven disinformation” “directly endangers” Khan and “puts vulnerable community members at greater risk.” After @MassDailyNews and @DailyMail reported on the program, OUTnewcomers released this press release. The group claimed it was "rejecting disinformation" and suggested that the $250-$500 number is inaccurate. ?2/8 pic.twitter.com/6rwSLewEHY— Tyler O'Neil (@Tyler2ONeil) April 16, 2026 The Daily Signal reached out to the organization, seeking to clarify the size of the grants available and to verify whether the City of Boston funded them. OUTnewcomers declined to comment to The Daily Signal and asked that The Daily Signal never contact the organization again. Pausing the Program After The Daily Signal reached out, OUTnewcomers removed the press release from its website and replaced it with the release announcing the pause. “While we remain deeply committed to this work, the safety of our community must come first,” Khan, the organization’s founder, said in a statement on the pause. “We are taking this pause to assess risks and ensure that we can continue our mission in a way that protects those we serve.” Boston’s Response A spokesperson for the City of Boston confirmed that Beantown taxes had funded OUTnewcomers, but noted that none of the grant money may be allocated to the program in question. “No funds have been distributed or directed for those purposes,” the spokesperson told The Daily Signal in a statement Thursday. “This organization received a $7,500 grant through a city program to support mental health services. Those funds were not designated for and may not be used for the voucher program referenced.” The city’s budget for fiscal year 2026 allocated the funds, but the grant was cut from the fiscal year 2027 budget. The post Boston LGBTQ Activist Group Flailing After Conservative News Reports on ‘Wellness’ Grants to Migrants, Funding Yoga, Haircuts appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Democrats are betting higher gas prices will do what they cannot: weaken President Donald Trump’s advantage on national security. Their hope is that voters will fixate on the cost of a fill-up and forget why energy markets reacted to the Iran conflict in the first place. It is the same desperate strategy Americans have seen before. When they cannot win the bigger argument on national security, they retreat to the issue of costs and pray that short-term frustration will outweigh the far more serious stakes of American security and credibility.  The Democrat strategy is not subtle.?Quinnipiac found that 65% of voters blame Trump at least somewhat for the recent rise in gas prices due to the Iran war, and Democrats think they have found their midterm jackpot issue.?They hope if they?can keep the conversation centered on pain at the pump, voters will forget their failures on the border, inflation, crime, and foreign policy.  Former Vice President Kamala Harris?is already blaming Trump for pain at the pump, calling it the “direct result” of his Iran policy.   They are betting that temporary frustration will?outweigh the?larger truth Americans see: The world is dangerous, our enemies exploit weakness, and real leadership sometimes requires force even when markets react in the short term. Iran threatens global shipping lanes and destabilizes the world.?  However, voters are not convinced that weakness is strength or that retreat is leadership.   We have seen this before. After Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, oil prices and gasoline costs rose as the Persian Gulf crisis?shook?global energy markets. Americans felt the pain, but history did not judge that moment by gas prices alone. It judged whether the United States had the strength to confront aggression at a critical moment. America led a coalition, drove Saddam out of Kuwait, and restored deterrence in the Gulf. President George H. W. Bush’s approval surged during and immediately after the Gulf War, rising from 64% before the war to 89% after victory.?  That history matters now because it exposes the Democrats’ biggest strategic flaw: they confuse costs with failure.?National security decisions can carry economic consequences, but the real question is whether those costs are helping restore?deterrence, protect global order, and make hostile regimes think twice before testing American resolve. Democrats refuse this debate because it exposes their weakness. Their playbook is to frame strength as escalation, deterrence as recklessness, and American power as? a problem rather than a solution.?  Kamala Harris’ attack reveals how poorly the Democrats are misreading the electorate.?They assume higher gas prices will immediately trigger voter backlash without asking what caused the increase, what alternatives exist, and what weakness costs the country. Gallup polled Americans in the war’s opening phase, from March 2-18, and found only 2% named gas prices as the nation’s top problem.?  Recent Fox polling reveals that voter concern about gas prices is high, but concern about inflation is even higher.?  Voters are not looking at the pump in isolation. They are?looking at energy costs against the questions of affordability, deterrence, and American strength.?  Voters cannot miss the hypocrisy. Democrats spent four years excusing historic inflation when it suited their politics. They backed policies that weakened confidence in American energy, from killing Keystone XL to pausing new federal oil and gas leases, ignored warnings about instability abroad, and dismissed deterrence?as exaggerated concerns.   Now, as the Iran war has temporarily pushed up gas prices, they want to pose as defenders of working families. They offer no real alternatives; they only hope short-term pain will erase the memory of their own failures. Voters are smarter than that.?  The truth is Democrats want a gas-price panic because they cannot beat Trump on security. While the real debate is about Iran, deterrence, and American resolve, they would rather turn it into a referendum on a gas receipt than on leadership. But Americans know temporary pain is not the same as strategic failure. A party that confuses the two proves only one thing: it never understood strength in the first place.?  ?  The post Democrats Want a Gas Price Panic Because They Cannot Beat Trump on Strength?  appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Ten House Republicans and one independent voted with Democrats on Thursday to allow more than 350,000 Haitian immigrants stay in the United States for another three years. In a 224-204 vote, the House passed a bill that would require the Homeland Security secretary to designate Haiti for temporary protected status (TPS). Haitians have had the designation in the United States since 2010, but the Trump administration has tried to terminate TPS, only to be blocked by federal courts. The result of today’s vote was made possible by Republicans who broke with GOP leadership and voted yes on the measure. “Who needs Democrats whenever you have a Republican tool vote for amnesty?” Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, told The Daily Signal just after the vote. “The House just voted to codify, effectively, President Biden’s open-border policies for the Haitians,” he continued. .@DailySignal: "Members of the House Freedom Caucus are urging colleagues to oppose extending Temporary Protected Status for Haitian migrants ahead of a final House vote Thursday, citing concerns about public safety.'Temporary should mean temporary, and it is long past time…— Rep. Chip Roy Press Office (@RepChipRoy) April 16, 2026 On Wednesday, six Republicans voted with Democrats to bring the measure to the floor. Even with pushback from the House Freedom Caucus, four more joined in breaking rank. The six Republicans who voted to bring the bill to the floor included Reps. María Elvira Salazar and Carlos Giménez of Florida, Reps. Mike Lawler and Nicole Malliotakis of New York, Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska, and Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania. On Thursday, Republican Reps. Mike Turner and Mike Carey of Ohio, Rich McCormick of Georgia, and Mario Díaz-Balart of Florida joined them, along with independent Rep. Kevin Kiley of California. When votes were finalized, cheers could be heard outside the House chamber. “Voters elected us to help the president mass-deport illegal aliens who are in our country,” Gill continued, noting that the president specifically called out the Haitian immigrant community as needing reform during the 2024 election. “You don’t turn around and give those very same people we were voted to deport amnesty,” Gill said. “It’s just a great way to just piss in the face of our voters who elected us to actually keep our community safe and secure.” Those on TPS become another expense that taxpayers have to fund, as the majority receive some form of welfare.@chiproytx pic.twitter.com/7IppBss3Tw— Heritage Action (@Heritage_Action) April 16, 2026 Gill noted that 91% of Haitians protected under TPS originally came into the United States illegally, and 69% came during the Biden administration. “It’s unacceptable to see some Republicans breaking ranks to advance this Democrat-led bill, betraying the mandate voters gave them and delivering de facto amnesty,” a Heritage Action spokesperson told The Daily Signal. “Heritage Action will not support amnesty—no exceptions,” the spokesperson continued. “That is what this bill is,” Gill told The Daily Signal. “It is de facto amnesty for people who came into the country illegally.” The post Gill Blasts Republicans Who Voted to Keep Protected Status for Haitians appeared first on The Daily Signal.