President Donald Trump announced on Jan. 7 plans to ban institutional investors from buying up homes and renting them back to Americans. This is a huge policy change that will benefit young Americans and working-families. My father is laser focused on driving down the price of housing so every American has an opportunity to live the American Dream!!!! https://t.co/pvomV2Yx2z— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) January 7, 2026 You’ll Own Something and Be Happy Corporate landlord Blackstone’s stock plunged nearly 5% on the move to make housing more affordable. Trump’s goal is to lower house prices and prevent Wall Street outbidding the rest of us with their unfair access to cheap capital. And it’s something a lot of Americans have wanted, from the MAGA base to Bernie Bros. Home ownership has long been a bipartisan goal, as it promotes family formation, promotes community involvement, and lets people build a nest egg. A recent study found the average net worth of an American homeowner is close to $400,000. The average net worth of an American renter is $10,000. Ten grand makes for a thin retirement. The problem, of course, is Americans can no longer afford houses that skyrocketed in price to almost 40% under Biden. Toss in Federal Reserve rate hikes that doubled mortgage rates and, according to Bankrate, the median monthly mortgage payment, which doubled from $1,242 a month in 2019 to $2,207 in 2024. This then bled to rents—landlords have mortgages too. Meanwhile, wages for twentysomethings—who should be starting a family—actually went down under Biden. And have only made back part of the lost ground. This put institutional buyers in the spotlight, who have spent decades quietly hoovering up millions of homes to rent. The buying accelerated dramatically during COVID’s low rates—at one point in 2022 institutions were buying one in four single family homes. Banning institutional banners will lower prices. But not by much considering they make up just a couple percent of home purchases. So going by price elasticities you might get a 3-5% drop in home prices—possibly closer to 10% in sunbelt cities where institutions are most active. But this comes with a roughly equivalent 3-5% rise in rents if Blackstone drops the rental business, where price elasticities are similar. So, slightly cheaper houses, and slightly higher rent. Both nudge people into owning. At the expense of people with poor credit or no downpayment who will pay more rent. Moreover, we’re talking 3-5% when houses went up 40% and housing costs doubled. Buyers need a lot more. Since he took office in January 2025, Trump’s been trying everything. He’s tried to cut closing costs, promoted simplified local building codes, removed tariffs on construction materials, proposed opening federal land to housing. Additionally, just this week, he deployed $200 billion from government-controlled mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to lower mortgage rates. In the Big Beautiful Bill, he added tax relief for builders, which is already helping multi-family construction. He even floated 50-year mortgages, which lower payments at the cost of paying your mortgage when you’re 92. And, of course deportations, which have opened over a million houses and are finally lowering rent prices, especially in deportation-heavy cities like Austin. What’s missing is the two biggest drivers of house prices: inflation, which is driven by federal deficits. And mass deregulation in home-building, including environmental mandates, zoning, and rent control the National Association of Homebuilders estimates can add $94,000 to the cost of a home. For these, he needs Congress. Along with local governments like New York or San Francisco, where rent control has led to over a hundred thousand empty units despite citywide shortages and nosebleed rents that delivered New York to Comrade Mamdani. Affordability and inflation have been the top voter concern all year, and prediction markets currently have 77% odds the GOP loses the House in the midterms. Given Congress won’t meaningfully cut inflationary spending or regulation in areas like healthcare and insurance, housing costs are the last man standing. Trump’s doing what he can, but Congress has to do the heavy lifting if they want to keep their seats. The post Trump Bans Institutional Homebuys appeared first on The Daily Signal.

NEWSFLASH: Cellphone Footage From Agent Destroys Liberal Narrative

Apple News failed to link to a single right-leaning media outlet among its top 20 daily articles during the month of December. Out of the 620 opportunities analyzed at approximately 10:00 a.m. each day by the Media Research Center, Apple News whiffed every single time.  Instead, dozens of times Apple News published articles from leftist outlets like The Washington Post, NBC News and NPR and center outlets like Reuters, The Wall Street Journal and the BBC. You have to go all the way back to Nov. 5 of last year to find the last time Apple News deigned to link to a single right-leaning site. That story was from British outlet The Telegraph covering the atrocities taking place in Sudan: "In Sudan's genocide, Only Those Who Pay Survive." Ironically,  Apple hid the article behind the Apple News+ paywall and only paid subscribers could read the full article.  MRC researchers previously exposed Apple News for its blatant bias when in November the app only linked to one article from a right-leaning outlet out of the 560 articles that MRC researchers examined throughout the month.  After reviewing the results through the end of December, it is clear that the omission of right-leaning sources was not accidental. None of the top 20 articles featured by Apple News for the month of December came from a right-leaning media outlet when observed at approximately 10:00 a.m.each day.  News aggregators, which are tools or platforms that gather articles from multiple media sources into a single place either through algorithmic selection or human curation, are a growing source for people to get their news. According to a report from the Reuters Institute, “engagement with traditional media sources such as TV, print, and news websites continues to fall, while dependence on social media, video platforms, and online aggregators grows,” particularly in the United States.  Apple News has said that it uses editors to select its top stories, making its overt suppression of right-leaning outlets even more troublesome. Methodology: During the time period Dec. 1, 2025 - Dec. 31, 2025, MRC researchers examined the top 20 news stories featured on Apple News each day at approximately 10:00 AM EST. Researchers used the AllSides media bias ratings, which categorize an outlet as “left,” “lean left,” “center,” “lean right” or “right” to determine the overall bias presented by Apple News and analyzed the results. Free speech is under attack! Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

It is well known that the media likes to make themselves the main character of every story they can, but Tuesday’s PBS American Experience documentary about the atomic bombings on Japan took things to a whole new level. The main takeaway for PBS’s assembled cast of BlueSky historians is not that the narrative we tell ourselves about the necessity of the bombs is true, but rather that it is a coping mechanism to hide any moral guilt from a 1946 John Hersey article documenting the bombs’ aftermath. Naturally, PBS did not have anyone on to defend the orthodox view. Instead, PBS gave us Vincent Intondi, a man whose website describes him as “the preeminent authority on the intersection of race and nuclear weapons.” Intondi lamented, “The American public took the narrative, hook, line, and sinker, and said, ‘Okay, this is—we trust the government that this is what was needed. Thank God we got it and it wasn't, you know, another country, and that we have this, and it was the right thing to do.’" Fellow historian Alex Wellerstein followed, “And this is a remarkably resilient narrative to the point where, if you tell somebody this narrative, they'll say, ‘Right, that's the story, right?’ And no, that didn't get really solidified until 1947. So, like, quite a ways after Hiroshima. And in many ways, it's not true.” According to Wellerstein, the real purpose behind dropping the bombs was to show the Soviet Union who the big man on campus was, “There was no deep deliberation over whether to use the bomb. There was no deep concern about the Japanese victims. The plan was to bomb and invade, not one or the other. The bombs weren't used to end the war promptly. The bombs were used to scare the Soviet Union into submission. They were not the last salvos of World War II, but the first salvos of the Cold War.”     This is false, and therefore something to keep in mind for the next time PBS complains Republicans are allegedly trying to teach kids fake history. Elsewhere in the documentary, PBS’s cast said that Truman’s public desire for the Soviets to enter the war was contrary to his private desires because he did not want Japan to be divided like Germany. In his book Hell To Pay—which deals extensively with the Soviet role and U.S.-Soviet cooperation in the Pacific War—D.M. Giangreco debunks the idea: President Truman flatly rejected [Stalin’s] proposal [for an occupation zone on Hokkaido] as being contrary to agreements made earlier that year at the Yalta Conference, and Stalin immediately dropped his demands. There would be no Soviet landings, and unlike in Germany, Japan would not become a divided nation during the long ‘cold war’ to follow. However, this idea clouded the entire documentary so that later when discussion shifted to Hersey’s article, Wellerstein claimed the orthodox narrative was the product of “a number of people associated with the Manhattan Project—James Conant, the president of Harvard, General Groves, Secretary of War Stimson—they collaborate and produce this multiple-authored article that's going to come out under Stimson's name, and it's going to be the official 'Why we dropped the atomic bomb.'" He added, “The United States built this weapon because it was afraid of the Nazis. It didn't really want to use this weapon, but Truman had this choice in front of him. Do we invade Japan?” Even PBS acknowledged at the beginning of the documentary that the Nazis were working on a similar program and scientists who fled the regime were terrified of Hitler getting such a bomb. However, fellow historian Michael Gordin huffed, “There is a very elaborate narrative that such an invasion would have been enormously destructive of American lives, and even more destructive of Japanese lives. And so the atomic bomb was a merciful way to end the war with the fewest casualties possible. And that's a way of trying to erode the moral clarity that Hersey is putting forward.” Detailing the aftermath of an atomic bombing may tug at Gordin’s heartstrings, but it is simply and objectively true that an invasion would have cost more American and Japanese lives. Journalism Prof. Mitchell Stephens also downplayed this inconvenient truth, “Similar to the Hersey piece, Harper’s hyped it heavily, and it gained a very wide audience. Newspapers reprinted parts of it. A lot of people basically said, ‘Well, we've, we've had our doubts, but this settles it. Now that we understand why the bomb was used, we don't have to hear about people raising moral issues' or something.” Wellerstein agreed, “This becomes the definitive way to attack the criticisms, by saying, "It was the lesser of two evils. We agree it's really cruel, but they put us in that position, and we had no alternative." Debates about the atomic bombs have been going on since they were dropped, but one thing that PBS’s side of the argument has never been able to convincingly explain away is that the god-king emperor of Japan himself said in his famous radio address that the atomic bombs were what compelled Japan to accept the Allies’ terms. Here is a transcript for the January 6 show: PBS American Experience 1/6/2026 10:19 PM ET VINCENT INTONDI: The American public took the narrative, hook, line, and sinker, and said “Okay, this is—we trust the government that this is what was needed. Thank God we got it and it wasn't, you know, another country, and that we have this, and it was the right thing to do." ALEX WELLERSTEIN: And this is a remarkably resilient narrative to the point where, if you tell somebody this narrative, they'll say, "Right, that's the story, right?" And no, that didn't get really solidified until 1947. So, like, quite a ways after Hiroshima. And in many ways, it's not true. There was no deep deliberation over whether to use the bomb. There was no deep concern about the Japanese victims. The plan was to bomb and invade, not one or the other. The bombs weren't used to end the war promptly. The bombs were used to scare the Soviet Union into submission. They were not the last salvos of World War II, but the first salvos of the Cold War. … WELLERSTEIN: So a number of people associated with the Manhattan Project: James Conant, the president of Harvard, General Groves, Secretary of War Stimson, they collaborate and produce this multiple-authored article that's going to come out under Stimson's name, and it's going to be the official "Why we dropped the atomic bomb." The United States built this weapon because it was afraid of the Nazis. It didn't really want to use this weapon, but Truman had this choice in front of him. Do we invade Japan? MICHAEL GORDIN: There is a very elaborate narrative that such an invasion would have been enormously destructive of American lives, and even more destructive of Japanese lives. And so the atomic bomb was a merciful way to end the war with the fewest casualties possible. And that's a way of trying to erode the moral clarity that Hersey is putting forward. MITCHELL STEPHENS: Similar to the Hersey piece, Harper’s hyped it heavily, and it gained a very wide audience. Newspapers reprinted parts of it. A lot of people basically said, "Well, we've, we've had our doubts, but this settles it. Now that we understand why the bomb was used, we don't have to hear about people raising moral issues" or something. WELLERSTEIN: This becomes the definitive way to attack the criticisms, by saying, "It was the lesser of two evils. We agree it's really cruel, but they put us in that position, and we had no alternative."

Sparks flew on Friday’s (pre-recorded) episode of The View as ABC co-host Ana Navarro called out co-host Sunny Hostin for her support of Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro. All week, Hostin was proclaiming that America’s arrest of Maduro was “illegal” and “unlawful.” Since Navarro wasn’t on the show for most of the week, it was her first chance to counter, demanding to know if Hostin’s solution was to return the dictator to power. The tension between Navarro and Hostin was simmering throughout their first Hot Topics segment. The show was kicked off by Hostin and fill-in moderator Joy Behar suggesting there was some kind of cognitive dissidence between Republicans cheering Maduro’s arrest while opposing the idea of taking over Greenland (Click “expand”): BEHAR: Also another question , why are they okay against Greenland but not about Venezuela? HOSTIN: That was my question because, I mean, his comments were forceful. They were strong. You know, Greenland is not owned by the United States, nor should it be owned. It's not for sale. BEHAR: Neither is Venezuela. HOSTIN: Neither is Venezuela nor is its oil ours. “I love you,” Navarro noted before ripping Hostin’s false equivalency between Venezuela and Greenland/Denmark. “But let's look at some facts,” she said. “Venezuela is a dictatorship. Greenland is not. Denmark is our ally. Greenland is our ally. We have military bases and operations in Greenland. Denmark is part of NATO as we are, so we are part of one big alliance. Venezuela is a place where they kill, jail, and torture the opposition, where they repress human rights.”   Ana Navarro actually confronts Joy Behar and Sunny Hostin on their false equivalency between Venezuela/Maduro and Greenland: "NAVARRO: But let's look at some facts. Venezuela is a dictatorship. Greenland is not. Denmark is our ally. Greenland is our ally. We have military bases… pic.twitter.com/iu9JNPfsPf — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) January 9, 2026   Navarro went on to make the point that they lose creditability by conflating the two, but Hostin wasn’t having it and started shouting: NAVARRO: My point is we cannot make an equivalency between Greenland and Venezuela. So let's just not. We lose a point if we do that. HOSTIN: No, we don't! The law is the law! It is an unlawful thing that we did in Venezuela and it would be unlawful for us to do it in Greenland. The two clashed again when Hostin started screaming about the U.S. taking Venezuelan oil. Navarro shouted back that the Venezuelans wanted to sell the oil to America Because Maduro stole it. Their yelling drowned out the rest of the cast (Click “expand”): HOSTIN: So you think it's okay that we took the oil? FARAH GRIFFIN: If I could get in here just real quick NAVARRO (to Hostin): Do I think it's okay? Venezuelans think it's okay that we're taking the oil because Maduro stole it. HOSTIN: Do you think that's legal?! BEHAR: Hey, guys. NAVARRO: It doesn't matter. HOSTIN: THE LAW DOESN'T MATTER! NAVARRO: It’s already done! With what we have invested we have to make sure it is successful! BEHAR: Hold on! Ana! We’re on television! FARAH GRIFFIN: I'm eight months pregnant. Can we have a chance to speak?   Navarro argues that it don't matter if the U.S. gets Venezuelan oil as long as the Venezuelan people are okay with it. Hostin has a MELTDOWN and starts screaming over everyone: HOSTIN: So you think it's okay that we took the oil? NAVARRO: Do I think it's okay? Venezuelans think… pic.twitter.com/PmzGj1hPBJ — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) January 9, 2026   Hostin couldn’t control her rage, even snapping at other co-hosts for making the point it was good that a murderous dictator was out of power. Possibly annoyed with getting sounded over earlier, co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin made the point that so-called “international law” was unenforceable as Hostin wanted it: HAINES: To me, again, I also am okay with the Venezuela -- maybe not how it was handled but I see the difference -- HOSTIN: Everybody's okay with breaking the law. HAINES: No. FARAH GRIFFIN: International law is only enforceable if it's enforced. We're not enforcing it in Ukraine. Despite hearing the truth, Hostin was still whining about international law not being followed. Navarro, seemingly having had enough of her co-host, demanded to know if her solution was to just hit Maduro with a return to sender stamp and ship him back to Venezuela: NAVARRO: Well Sunny, it's theoretical. We already plucked the guy out so right now we have invested billions of dollars and months HOSTIN: So, we're just going to continue the crime? NAVARRO: Well, what do you think should we do, return him to Venezuela? Return him? Is that what you think we should do? Spinning her wheels, Hostin suggested, “he should be tried in the International Criminal Court. I don't think the United States has jurisdiction over him.”   Navarro calls out Hostin, asking if she thinks we should return Maduro to power: HOSTIN: The law should never be a moot point. NAVARRO: Well Sunny, it's theoretical. We already plucked the guy out so right now we have invested billions of dollars and months - HOSTIN: SO, we're… pic.twitter.com/EHThEwbrTR — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) January 9, 2026   Hostin’s suggested made no sense. Her argument all week was that the arrest itself was illegal; earlier in the segment she even called the arrest a “kidnapping.” After finally getting called out that the ultimate conclusion to what she was complaining about would lead to Maduro getting reinstalled as dictator, she had to quickly pivot. According to her own argument, the ICC couldn’t even try him because the arrest was “illegal.” Clearly, Hostin was not used to getting serious pushback to her lunacy. To twist the knife just a little bit, Farah Griffin chimed in just before the commercial to note that Hostin’s new idea was a terrible one too: “I don't think the International Criminal Court is consistent in how we prosecute crimes because Russia is still in Ukraine and nobody is holding them to any international standards! You see all over the world!” The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View January 9, 2026 11:03:16 a.m. Eastern (…) JOY BEHAR: So, will more Republicans speak out, or is that it? SARA HAINES: I sure hope so. BEHAR: Also another question , why are they okay against Greenland but not about Venezuela? SUNNY HOSTIN: That was my question because, I mean, his comments were forceful. They were strong. You know, Greenland is not owned by the United States, nor should it be owned. It's not for sale. BEHAR: Neither is Venezuela. HOSTIN: Neither is Venezuela nor is its oil ours. Yet, we went in, we took the president – I called it a kidnapping because I believe that's what it is – and we took the head of state of Nicaragua -- not Nicaragua, sorry. ANA NAVARRO: I wish. HOSTIN: Venezuela and take the oil and are going to put the money -- I think they're going to put the money in offshore accounts. So how is that okay but Greenland isn't? [Crosstalk] NAVARRO: Okay. I love you but making a comparison between. HOSTIN: I know you disagree. It's unlawful. NAVARRO: But let's look at some facts. Venezuela is a dictatorship. HOSTIN: Yeah. NAVARRO: Greenland is not. HOSTIN: Yeah. NAVARRO: Denmark is our ally. Greenland is our ally. We have military bases and operations in Greenland. Denmark is part of NATO as we are, so we are part of one big alliance. Venezuela is a place where they kill, jail, and torture the opposition, where they repress human rights. BEHAR: So is Russia! So is North Korea! NAVARRO: Okay, yeah. [Crosstalk] My point is we cannot make an equivalency between Greenland and Venezuela. So let's just not. We lose a point if we do that. HOSTIN: No, we don't! The law is the law! It is an unlawful thing that we did in Venezuela and it would be unlawful for us to do it in Greenland." (…) 11:05:21 a.m. Eastern NAVARRO: Here's my issue though, I don't consider the Venezuela mission accomplished or a victorious mission until every single political prisoner is released. ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: And there's free and fair elections. NAVARRO: Until there’s free and fair elections. Until there are no foreign hostages. Until there is democracy and freedom. HOSTIN: So you think it's okay that we took the oil? FARAH GRIFFIN: If I could get in here just real quick NAVARRO (to Hostin): Do I think it's okay? Venezuelans think it's okay that we're taking the oil because Maduro stole it. HOSTIN: Do you think that's legal?! BEHAR: Hey, guys. NAVARRO: It doesn't matter. HOSTIN: THE LAW DOESN'T MATTER! NAVARRO: It’s already done! With what we have invested we have to make sure it is successful! BEHAR: Hold on! Ana! We’re on television! FARAH GRIFFIN: I'm eight months pregnant. Can we have a chance to speak? [Laughter] (…) 11:07:44 a.m. Eastern HAINES: To me, again, I also am okay with the Venezuela -- maybe not how it was handled but I see the difference -- HOSTIN: Everybody's okay with breaking the law. HAINES: No. FARAH GRIFFIN: International law is only enforceable if it's enforced. We're not enforcing it in Ukraine [Crosstalk] HAINES: As we’ve said all week here, two things can be true. We cannot like how it was handled but I do want a better life for the Venezuelans and everything that's happening there. HOSTIN: I don’t think Trump cares about the Venezuelans! HAINES: Greenland is an ally. And I think that Denmark is an ally and we do not betray our friends. That is what -- FARAH GRIFFIN: That is what China does. China bullies its friends. We don't do that. NAVARRO: Let me put a pin in this, on the Venezuela issue. Look, I think the question of whether it was legal is a legitimate question and concern that should be debated and answered. HAINES: Yes. NAVARRO: But today as we sit here, January 8th it's already a moot point because it already happened and we picked the guy - BEHAR: Today’s the 9th. NAVARRO: So, we’re not going to – The 9th. It's already -- HOSTIN: The law should never be a moot point. NAVARRO: Well Sunny, it's theoretical. We already plucked the guy out so right now we have invested billions of dollars and months HOSTIN: So, we're just going to continue the crime? NAVARRO: Well, what do you think should we do, return him to Venezuela? Return him? Is that what you think we should do? HOSTIN: I think that he should be tried in the International Criminal Court. I don't think the United States has jurisdiction over him. FARAH GRIFFIN: I don't think the International Criminal Court is consistent in how we prosecute crimes because Russia is still in Ukraine and nobody is holding them to any international standards! You see all over the world! BEHAR: Trump will take Greenland, open a casino, and then bankrupt it. We'll be right back.

Friday morning on NBC’s Today, correspondent Maggie Vespa misled viewers by telling them from the scene of anti-Immigration Customs and Enforcement (ICE) protests in Minneapolis, Minnesota that, a day earlier at the White House, Vice President JD Vance stated “without evidence” that the woman who died when she hit an ICE officer with her (which was confirmed Friday afternoon in a video released by Alpha News) was a radical leftist. Vespa made the claim despite there having been reporting more than 12 hours earlier by the New York Post that said Good “was an anti-ICE ‘warrior’ and was part of a group of activists who worked to ‘document and resist’ the federal immigration crackdown in Minnesota.” Here was how Vespa framed the Vice President’s remarks, including the “without evidence” lie: NBC's Maggie Vespa on the @TodayShow: “The Trump administration defending his actions, including Vice President JD Vance in a rare appearance in the White House Briefing Room saying without evidence that [Renee] Good was radicalized....white local officials, including the city's… pic.twitter.com/5EHqKA6OAd — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 9, 2026 Vespa returned in the second hour to double down in peddling this disinformation: “The Trump administration defending Ross’s actions with Vice President JD Vance saying without evidence that good was ‘radicalized.’” For the record, here was Vance’s full back-and-forth with O’Donnell: NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell: “Is there a risk with you describing her as a deranged leftist, talking about very specific facts of these events when an investigation is just beginning? Are you preempting a thorough investigation by drawing such conclusions? And have you received any… pic.twitter.com/dOi24X5MEV — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 8, 2026   Back over in reality, here was what Post reporters Steven Vago, Chris Nesi and Natalie O'Neill said early Thursday evening (click “expand”): Good, who moved to the city last year, linked up with the anti-ICE activists through her 6-year-old son’s woke charter school, which boasts that it puts “social justice first” and prioritizes “involving kids in political and social activism,” multiple local sources said. “She was a warrior. She died doing what was right,” a mother named Leesa, whose child attends the same school, told The Post at a growing vigil where Good was killed Wednesday. “I know she was doing the right thing. I watched the video plenty of times but I also know in my heart the woman she was, she was doing everything right.” (....) Just as many others did in the lefty enclave, Good sent her son to Southside Family Charter School, a K-5 academy opened in 1972 that from its inception has been “unabashedly dedicated to social justice education,” according to co-founder Susie Oppenheim. It was through her involvement in the school community that Good became involved in “ICE Watch” — a loose coalition of activists dedicated to disrupting ICE raids in the sanctuary city. To quote MRC Bulldog Award winner Ben Shapiro, facts don’t care about your feelings. To see the relevant NBC transcript from January 9, click “expand.” NBC’s Today January 9, 2026 7:06 a.m. Eastern LAURA JARRETT: To Minneapolis now. A second night of protests th amid new questions about the ICE officer’s shooting of a woman behind the wheel of her car. NBC’s Maggie Vespa joins us with that story. Maggie, good morning. 07:06:37 AM Reporter: Hey, Laura. Good morning. Yeah, following more explosive protests overnight police actually closing several blocks around the intersection where Wednesday’s fatal shooting happened, trying to keep the peace as the Trump administration vows immigration raids will continue. Overnight tensions rising nationwide, amid the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown crowds gathering in cities across the country including New York, Columbus, Dallas, LA, and Minneapolis where the fatal shooting of a woman by an ICE agent kicked off a nationwide response. The officer who killed 37-year-old, mother of three Renee Good now identified as Jonathan Ross. DHS telling NBC News Ross was seriously injured in a traffic stop here six months ago when he tried to arrest an undocumented, convicted sex offender who dragged Ross 50 yards with his car. Six months later, this fateful moment. Police say Good was blocking the road with her SUV. You can see officers approach, Ross stepping in front of it. Good reverses before accelerating forward while turning. That’s when authorities say Ross fired multiple shots. The Trump administration defending his actions, including Vice President JD Vance in a rare appearance in the White House Briefing Room saying without evidence that Good was radicalized Pressed by NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell — KELLY O’DONNELL [TO VANCE]: Is there a risk with you describing her as a deranged leftist, talking about very specific facts of these events when an investigation is just beginning? [SCREEN CUT] VICE PRESIDENT JD VANCE: Well, first of all, the Department of Justice is going to investigate this in this case. [SCREEN WIPE] You have a woman who was trying to obstruct a legitimate law enforcement operation. [SCREEN WIPE] I can believe that her death is a tragedy while also recognizing it’s a tragedy of her own making. VESPA: — while local officials, including the city’s mayor, dispute the Trump administration’s narrative and some expressing frustration with the investigation. GOVERNOR TIM WALZ (D-MN): It feels very, very difficult that we will get a fair outcome and I say that only because people in positions of power have already passed judgment. VESPA: So amid all of the unrest, new overnight, The New York Times reporting the Trump administration now plans to deploy more than 100 U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents here to the Minneapolis area, with the acting ICE director saying operations here will continue. (....) 8:05 a.m. Eastern VESPA: Amid more protests overnight, police for a time closing this intersection and several blocks around it, pushing the media back, pushing the public back, trying to keep the peace and Minneapolis was far from alone. We saw protests across the country including in New York, Columbus, Dallas and LA, all in the wake of Wednesday’s fatal ICE Shooting in Minneapolis. The officer who shot and killed 37-year-old mother of three, Renee Good, now identified as Jonathan Ross. The Trump administration defending Ross’s actions with Vice President JD Vance saying without evidence that good was “radicalized.” Meanwhile the acting ICE director saying operations here will continue, and new overnight, The New York Times reporting the administration is sending more than 100 customs and border protection agents here to the area. Minnesota Governor Tim Walz blasting the administration for refusing to pull back and authorizing Minnesota’s National Guard to be ready to support local law enforcement here through the weekend.

As protests continue to escalate, new footage has surfaced that captures the interactions between Renee Good, her romantic partner, and the federal agent who shot Good in self-defense.The video shows Good behind the wheel of a red SUV with a second woman, believed to be Good's romantic partner, standing outside the red SUV and taunting the agent as he walks around the car with his cell phone recording. The footage was obtained by Alpha News.'What the press has done in lying about this innocent law enforcement officer is disgusting.'"That's OK, we don't change our plates every morning, just so you know. It'll be the same plate when you come talk to us later," the second woman tells the agent as he records their license plate."That's fine. U.S. citizen," she adds. "You want to come at us? You want to come at us? I say go get yourself some lunch, big boy."Then the agent orders the driver out of the car."Get out of the car. Get out of the f**king car!" he says.The second woman instead tries to get back into the car as Good quickly puts the car into reverse before gunning straight for the officer.Shots ring out, and the agent yells in surprise."F**king bitch," he adds.Many commenters of the video pointed out that the woman looks straight at the agent when she swerves into him.Among those was Vice President JD Vance, who scolded the media for their coverage of the incident."What the press has done in lying about this innocent law enforcement officer is disgusting. You should all be ashamed of yourselves," he wrote.RELATED: Two people shot by federal officers in Portland only a day after lethal ICE shooting Vance was reiterating earlier criticism of the media."Everybody who has been repeating the lie that this is some innocent woman who was out for a drive in Minneapolis when a law enforcement officer shot at her — you should be ashamed of yourselves. Every single one of you."Donald Trump Jr. added in response to the video: "This video proves that he was right and they were all full of s**t as usual!!!!"Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

People who know me know I don’t have much patience for fancy talk. In Chester County, when a meth dealer sets up shop next to a school, we don’t hold a town hall about his “socioeconomic anxiety.”We don’t send a strongly worded letter. We kick down the door, put him in handcuffs, and shut the operation down.By arresting a narco-terrorist masquerading as a president, Donald Trump didn’t break the law. He restored order.For the last 20 years, America forgot that simple rule. We acted like social workers trying to “fix” the world’s worst neighborhoods while they picked our pockets.Last weekend, that stopped.President Trump’s decision to go into Venezuela and extract the dictator Nicolás Maduro wasn’t just a military operation. From where I sit as a 30-year lawman, it looked like the biggest drug bust in history.It was also a master class in overwhelming force.For years, Washington has acted like a terrified homeowners’ association. Too scared to enforce the rules. Too worried about offending the neighbors — even the ones throwing rocks through our windows.Our governments let China buy the house across the street. They let Iran park its van in the driveway. They let Maduro turn Venezuela into a trap house for every cartel and terrorist west of the Atlantic.And yet for two centuries, this hemisphere had a “No Trespassing” sign on the lawn. We called it the Monroe Doctrine. It was the original neighborhood watch rule: Foreign powers with bad intentions don’t get to cozy up to corrupt regimes in our back yard.For too long, we let that sign fade while our enemies set up shop.Early Saturday morning, the sheriff in the White House decided it was time to back the warning with a warrant — and missiles.RELATED: Venezuela was the stage. China was the target. Photo by Liu Bin/Xinhua via Getty ImagesTrump didn’t ask the U.N. for a permission slip. He didn’t check whether Europe felt “comfortable” with the plan. He recognized a threat inside his jurisdiction — and he neutralized it.The media is now crying about “international norms.” That makes me laugh. In my line of work, the only norm that matters is the bad guys go to jail and good citizens sleep safely.And let’s be clear about the charges. I don’t care whether the poison was cocaine, meth, or fentanyl. If you played any role in trafficking drugs that end up in the United States, you’re part of the conspiracy. Period.Some people might ask why a sheriff in rural South Carolina cares about a dictator 2,000 miles away.Here’s why: The decisions made in Maduro’s palace didn’t stay in Caracas. They ended up in the veins of our neighbors and in the wreckage of families right here in Chester County.I see that damage every day. For years, sheriffs across this country have begged Washington to stop the flow at the source. It’s about time a president acted against a head of state who deliberately created a welcoming environment for criminal networks that kill Americans.By arresting a narco-terrorist masquerading as a president, Donald Trump didn’t break the law. He restored order.I expect this to be only the beginning. And I hope it sends a message — from cartel bosses to street-level runners: Pay attention. If the United States is willing to break down the door of a sitting dictator, imagine what it is willing to do to you.The era of impunity is over.And one last thing for those insisting this was all about oil or money. For years, Americans bought energy from countries that hate us because we were too polite to use what we have at home. Those days are ending.RELATED: From Monroe to ‘Donroe’: America enforces its back yard again Photo by Jim WATSON / AFP via Getty ImagesIf Venezuelan crude ever flows to American refineries again, it won’t just lower gas prices. It will tell every dictator on earth that their leverage is gone.As Americans, we’ve spent too long hating to lose more than we love to win. Our foreign policy has been driven by fear — fear of bad press, fear of escalation, fear of diplomatic friction. We played not to lose.You don’t build a safe community — or a strong nation — by playing defense. You build it by loving to win. By making bold, decisive moves that protect your people.This operation was a win.So to the hand-wringers: relax. The world isn’t ending. It’s getting cleaned up.The sheriff is back on the beat, the bad guy is in handcuffs in the back seat, and for the first time in a long time, the good people can set off a few fireworks.Welcome to the new neighborhood.

A Michigan father is accused of firing a gun outside his son's middle school earlier this week after being denied entry, which prompted a lockdown.Police in Romulus — which is about a half hour southwest of Detroit — said Shawntez Marshaun Gregory, 44, just before 10 a.m. Tuesday, drove to Romulus Middle School, approached the front doors, and told the school secretary through the intercom, "I am here to get my son. I want my son now!"'This case is every parent’s nightmare.'Police said the secretary recognized Gregory as someone who'd been barred from school property and reportedly displayed unstable behavior in the past — and that in this instance, he was "extremely upset" and had a gun.With that, police said the secretary called 911 and put the school on lockdown. The secretary then heard gunshots, dropped to the floor, and told 911 he was trying to gain entry to the school by "shooting at the locks," police said.Police said arriving officers took Gregory into custody, recovered a gun, and found seven spent rounds.Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy charged Gregory with multiple felonies, including false report or threat of terrorism; intentional threat to commit act of violence against school, school employees, or students with specific intent to carry out or overt act; carrying a concealed weapon; possession of a weapon in a weapons-free school zone; reckless use of a firearm; and two counts of felony firearm in connection to the incident, WXYZ-TV reported.Prosecutors told the station that Gregory was about a foot away from the building when he fired the gun seven times — but not directly at the school.“This case is every parent’s nightmare," Worthy said in a statement, WXYZ said, adding that no one was harmed.What's more, in regard to police saying the secretary recognized Gregory as someone who'd been barred from school property, it turns out he had a no-trespassing order from the school and was not allowed near his son since Gregory also has been accused of attempting to kidnap him, the station said.RELATED: Mom 'barged into' third-grade classroom, threatened and cursed out teacher, blocked door preventing teacher, students from leaving: Report Then came Gregory's arraignment on Thursday at 34th District Court, WXYZ said.With Judge Lisa Martin presiding, WDIV-TV reported that Gregory swore 14 times, told the judge to get a real job, put his fingers in his ears, and said it was the “the fakest s**t I’ve seen in my life.” He also refused to answer the judge's questions, WXYZ said.During the virtual hearing, Martin asked Gregory to state his name for the record, and he replied by saying, “Nope, good f**king bye. Don’t need to talk to me, quit f**king playing with me," WDIV replied.RELATED: Dad enters HS classroom, confronts student for allegedly bothering his daughter. Dad now charged for making threats, assault. As bond was being discussed, WDIV said Gregory stated, “This is the fakest s**t I’ve seen in my life. ... You’re going to actually act like this, huh? That s**t is fake. Sorriest s**t and racist in my life. Bunch of racists doing stuff. So I’m done. I’m done talking. We can go, and I can go back and get ready to go back home now. I’m done playing around.”Gregory then verbally attacked the judge, WDIV said: “You are one of the dumbest black person [sic] I’ve seen in my life, about the dumbest [expletive] I’ve seen in my life. I hate to say that because it’s some racist right here. I hate to say that, though, but don’t waste my time. There’s a racist right here, so don’t waste my time, no more. Tired of f**king with all of y’all. So don’t waste my time.”The judge then adopted the police department’s recommendation and remanded Gregory without bond, WDIV said.“Why don’t you get a real job?" Gregory added to the judge, according to WDIV. "Go get a real job."Gregory remained Friday in the Wayne County Jail.His next court appearance is scheduled for Jan. 20, WDIV reported.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Late-night hacks didn’t get the memo.Sure, Democrats have been using the Epstein card for the better part of the year. Whenever President Donald Trump does anything they don’t like, which is anything, period, they claim it’s a distraction from the Epstein files.Pratt wouldn’t be the first reality-show star to make waves in politics. Turns out that guy was a natural, in between McDonald’s shifts …Because — all together now — the walls are closing in.Except the Biden administration had access to said files for four years and never released them. Because, as we know, if there were incriminating details about Trump within them, Team Biden would have kept them safely tucked away from sight.Sure, Jan.Except now the “distraction from the Epstein files” defense is even sillier than ever. Why? We’ve already seen some of those files, and so far the only politician whose reputation suffered a hit was President Bill Clinton.So what happened when Team Trump expertly corralled the criminal Venezuelan strongman Nicholas Maduro in a lightning strike they’ll make a movie about some day?Team Late Night said the stunning raid was … no, really … a distraction from the Epstein files.Kimmel. Fallon. Colbert.Same talking points. Same complete lack of shame …The timing couldn’t be better.Move over, TimOur political culture is teeming with jackasses, from code-switch princess Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) to Minnesota’s soon-to-be-unemployed Gov. Tim Walz (D). That title might be too mild for former MSNBC anchor Keith Olbermann.Now, the professionals are coming back to stake their claim to the moniker.A fifth “Jackass” movie is heading our way this June. The surprise project finds 50-something Johnny Knoxville and friends returning to their painful shtick that started on MTV too many years ago to count. OK, the show debuted in October 2000.The boys have done everything from covering their bathing-suit areas with bees to literally sticking together courtesy of superglue.What’s left? Maybe they can watch CNN for 24 hours straight without losing what’s left of their concussed minds …Smear factorOne of the best running jokes in “This Is Spinal Tap” involves the group’s drummer. Or drummers, to be more precise. Sadly, playing the skins for the heavy metal band meant putting your life on the line. Literally. Think spontaneous combustion and choking on someone else’s vomit.And, even more strange, a bizarre gardening accident.On that scale, it’s a miracle that Foo Fighters guitarist Pat Smear is still with us. The 66-year-old rocker “smashed the s**t out of his foot” while gardening, at least according to the band’s Instagram account.The Foo Fighters did star in the horror comedy “Studio 666,” so they have a healthy sense of humor. Did they turn a generic accident into a Tap-like riff?Either way, he’ll be replaced on the current tour until his bones heal up. Let’s hope the band cranks it up to 11 upon his return …From 'The Hills' to his honor?Reagan. Ventura. Schwarzenegger. Franken. Trump. Pratt?Reality-show veteran Spencer Pratt has been a thorn in the side of California Democrats following last year’s devastating Palisades fires. Pratt saw both the devastation left by poor land management and the feeble rebuilding efforts in his state.Now, he’s doing something about it.Pratty announced he’ll be running against Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass in the city’s next election."Let's make LA camera ready again!" he posted.Pratt doesn’t have any real political experience, but could he be any worse than the current clown car running roughshod over the state? And, to be fair, he wouldn’t be the first reality-show star to make waves in politics. Turns out that guy was a natural, in between McDonald’s shifts …RELATED: BURN NOTICE: 'Hills' heel Spencer Pratt to run for Los Angeles mayor Photo by MEGA/GC ImagesMcCarthy's 'View' rueJenny McCarthy has singled out “The View,” and it ain’t pretty.The model turned actress recalled her time on the feminist talk show on “The Katie Miller Podcast,” noting how its tone morphed during her one-year stint with the ABC chatfest.She joined the gaggle to talk pop culture and other frothy subjects. Instead, the show took a political turn. No thanks, she said at the time.And now, too."They've asked me to come back for, like, reunion shows," McCarthy said. "I was like, over my dead body would I ever step foot in that place."Here’s betting Meghan McCain has a similar take on any reunion talk.