President Trump’s economic success rests on the passage of his one “big, beautiful bill.” We’ve been talking about this for months, and the timeline on the “big beautiful bill” is still somewhat in doubt, because it has to pass through the House, a version has to pass through the Senate, and then there’s going to be reconciliation between the House bill and the Senate bill. Whatever you see in the House bill might not end up in the final bill. Massive controversy is already breaking out in the House over where the cuts in spending are going to come from. Many House Republicans are calling for cuts to make up for the loss in revenue to the federal government that occurs when taxes are not increased. As you know, conservatives have been discussing the Laffer Curve for 50 years. Economist Art Laffer pointed out that if you’re looking for the proper rate of taxation, it can’t be zero because then the government has no money to spend. But it also can’t be 100 because then the government has no money to spare; no one will actually go out and do business if they are going to have all of their money removed by the federal government.  The Laffer Curve suggests there is a point at which, if you tax people more, then you will actually end up with declining government revenues as a result, because people will simply work less to avoid the top tax bracket, or something similar. There’s certainly truth to that, although it’s unclear where exactly the inflection point is with regard to the Laffer Curve. But it has been long-standing conservative economic dogma that if you increase taxes, you will end up quashing economic growth because you’re taking money away from the more efficient private sector and sticking it in the public sector, where it gets doled out by a bunch of politicians to their favorite pet projects. In addition, how you look at government revenue differs between conservatives and people on the Left. People on the Left believe that the government basically owns your money and then allows you to keep some of it. Conservatives believe you own your money, but you have to give some of it to the government to provide public services.  When it comes to discussing what government revenue looks like, the real discussion that should be had — and the one no one will ever have —  is what the proper role of government in our lives actually is. Why is it that our government is spending $6-7 trillion a year at the federal level? This was not the case when the United States was founded. The original expenditures by the federal government at the beginning were absolutely minimal. It stayed that way except for times of war, such as the Civil War, all the way up through the end of World War I. Then, government spending began to grow slowly. Later, with FDR, it exploded all out of proportion. Now we have roughly $7 trillion being spent every single year. That’s what’s racking up the national debt. Thus, there are a couple of different takes on what should be done. A traditional classical conservative might say, we need to cut massive reams of government spending by pushing it all back down to the states. If the states wish to do things like Medicare and Medicaid, then the states can do that, but it shouldn’t be up to a taxpayer from Montana to pay for the health care of a guy from California because he’s 70 years old.  There’s the Republican Party position, which is “let’s cut around the edges,” and the Democratic Party position, which is “let’s never cut anything ever for the rest of time.” The latter two positions are the ones the American people have opted for.  That’s what a lot of the debate is concerning this current GOP tax bill. Inside the Republican caucus, there are a bunch of Republicans who believe that cutting spending in any way, shape, or form is detrimental to Republican electoral chances. The American people don’t want it. Polling basically says there’s truth to that, as the American people will say they don’t want the government to be so big and provide so many services, but when you ask them which services they would like to cut, they start to scratch their head and really have no idea what the answer could be to that question.  Then there are traditional Republicans who say, “Listen, if we’re ever going to get to anything more like a big restructuring of government, you have to start somewhere or we are going to plunge off the debt cliff.” So all of this is manifesting in the debate over the current “big, beautiful bill” in the Republican House. There’s no question that spending is going to continue to increase. The only question is whether the rate of the increase is going to be slightly slower or slightly faster. There is a debate inside the Republican Party between people who sort of side with Democrats, saying, “We’ll never cut any welfare spending ever, ever, forever because the American people don’t like it,” and people who say, “We need to restructure some of this, we’re going to hit the fiscal cliff sooner than humanly possible.” Then there’s the third group that says the federal government has no role in virtually any of this. In the end, President Trump is going to put his boot down and force a bunch of reluctant Republicans to support whatever the “big, beautiful bill” is.  But then you go to the Senate, where the Republican majority is not particularly large. You could easily see some of the “moderate” Republican senators, like Lisa Murkowski in Alaska or Susan Collins in Maine, drop off. If the bill is not conservative enough, you could see people from the opposite side drop off. The markets right now have a tax cut already priced in. They believe it’s going to happen. If this tax cut does not happen, if somehow this whole thing falls apart, it’s a disaster for the Trump administration. If Trump pulls this off, it’s a major act of political magic by his administration, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, and House Speaker Mike Johnson. By the way, it is pretty amazing that the United States is so addicted to spending that even talking about work requirements for welfare is incredibly controversial. That is the mark of a country that has been high on its own supply for far too long. We are an unserious country if we refuse to come to a reckoning with the reality that is our $37 trillion national debt.  In the meantime, there is magic to be done.

On Thursday, the GOP-led House Judiciary Committee announced that it received bombshell evidence that suggested Pfizer executives pushed to delay full testing for their company’s COVID vaccine until after the 2020 election. British drugmaker GSK informed the panel that Philip Dormitzer, a former Pfizer executive who became a senior scientist at GSK, told colleagues at GSK that “in late 2020, the three most senior people in Pfizer R&D were involved in a decision to deliberately slow down clinical testing so that it would not be complete prior to the results of the presidential election that year.” The Judiciary Committee, led by Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH), said that it had sought information from GSK after The Wall Street Journal reported in March that U.S. prosecutors were looking into a tip from the company that came in “soon” after President Donald Trump won a second term in 2024. The Journal noted that Trump, who lost to Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential contest, “for years has claimed that Pfizer sat on the positive results of clinical trials, which could have reflected well on his management of the pandemic and reassured voters as they headed to the polls. There has never been evidence to support the accusation, and the development of the Covid vaccines is widely viewed as a medical miracle, coming faster than any other vaccine in history.” :rotating_light: HUGE :rotating_light: New Information Suggests Senior Pfizer Executives Conspired to Delay COVID-19 Vaccine Clinical Testing to Influence 2020 Election. One exec was so scared about this being investigated that he asked to be relocated to Canada! MASSIVE SCANDAL uncovered by @Jim_Jordan. pic.twitter.com/pZKLAz1Wmx — House Judiciary GOP :us::us::us: (@JudiciaryGOP) May 15, 2025 As relayed by the Judiciary Committee, GSK responded to the panel’s inquiry in mid-April. In another part of the reply given to congressional investigators, GSK said Dormitzer had requested a transfer over concerns about what the new Trump administration might do to him. “In November 2024, shortly after the election, Dr. Dormitzer approached a representative from the GSK human resources team to speak about a potential relocation abroad. As the human resources representative recalls, in their meeting, Dr. Dormitzer was visibly upset; he requested that he be relocated to Canada due to concerns that he could be investigated by the incoming Trump Administration over his role in developing Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine,” GSK said. “According to the human resources representative, when asked what prompted his request, Dr. Dormitzer made a comment to the effect of: ‘Let’s just say it wasn’t a coincidence, the timing of the vaccine.'” The Journal reported in March that GSK and Pfizer, who are rivals in the pharmaceutical industry, have sued each other over patent rights tied to vaccines. Dormitzer, who has since left GSK, provided a statement to the newspaper. “My Pfizer colleagues and I did everything we could to get the FDA’s Emergency Use Authorization at the very first possible moment,” Dormitzer said. “Any other interpretation of my comments about the pace of the vaccine’s development would be incorrect.” The House panel sent a letter to Dormitzer requesting documents and a transcribed interview by May 29. Pfizer Chairman and CEO Albert Bourla was the recipient of another letter that sought records by the same date. In response to a request for comment, a Pfizer representative told The Daily Wire that the company received the letter asking about the allegations in the Wall Street Journal report and “will respond directly” to the House Judiciary Committee. Pfizer also provided a statement that said: “The COVID-19 vaccine development process was driven by science and guided by the U.S. FDA back in 2020. We have consistently and transparently reiterated the facts and the timeline of the tireless work of scientists, regulators, and thousands of clinical trial volunteers who made the vaccine possible. Theories to the contrary are simply untrue and being manufactured.” The Judiciary Committee emphasized that it is “unclear which Pfizer R&D employees were involved with Dr. Dormitzer in the decision to delay the clinical testing,” but did note that he “represented to GSK that Pfizer’s CEO was not aware of the delay.” A GSK spokesperson declined to comment. Jordan (R-OH), a close ally to Trump, posted on X in response to the information obtained by his panel: “Did Pfizer executives conspire to delay COVID-19 vaccine testing to influence the 2020 election? Based on our oversight, it sure looks like it.”

Florida GOP Governor Ron DeSantis made Florida the second state to ban fluoride in public water, following Utah, which banned it in May 2023. Gov. Ron DeSantis signed SB 700, which prohibits “the use of certain additives in a water system which do not meet specified requirements.” The law goes into effect July 1. “There’s risks associated for pregnant women, for young people, for kids,” DeSantis said as he signed the bill. “Yes, use fluoride for your teeth, that’s fine, but forcing it into the water supply is basically forced medication on people. They don’t have a choice; you’re taking that away from them.” “It raises a larger issue,” he continued. “I think we saw a lot of this with COVID, that we had to fight back against. They had certain views: you should wear a mask when you’re outside in 95-degree temperatures, (no, thank you) but that’s what they were saying, that kids should get a COVID mRNA shot even though we still don’t have data to this day to justify doing that.” “They tried to push a lot of policies on people,” he recalled. “I think some of these people think that they know better for you than you do for yourself. They think because they have medical training or they have this that they should just be able to decree how we live our lives. That proved disastrous during COVID. A lot of the things they were advocating not only didn’t work, they caused a lot of harm.  … When we made sure that the schools were open, I got sued by the teachers’ union, saying ‘close the schools’ … Fauci was saying, ‘This is irresponsible.’ … They had these kids locked out for a year to a year-and-a-half … so we fought back against it.” “I think fluoride is a good example because what they’re basically saying is that they’re ignoring any studies that have shown that there could be issues,” he contended. “They say. ‘Well, it’s good for your teeth so we should just force it.’” “And you shouldn’t have a choice in that?” he asked incredulously. “We certainly now in our society in 2025 have the ability to deliver fluoride through toothpaste and all these other things. You don’t get to force it and take away people’s choices. The whole crux of the issue is you should be able to make decisions on the basis of informed consent.”

A Spirit Airlines passenger posted a video which has since gone viral showing cockroaches crawling around on the inside of the aircraft, which prompted a response from airline reps. Symoné Beez originally shared the post to X on May 11. “Never again will I fly [Spirit Airlines],” she wrote in the video caption. “I’ve flown over 500,000 miles on Delta and have never in my life seen roaches on a plane this is crazy.” Never again will I fly @SpiritAirlines . I've flown over 500,000 miles on Delta and have never in my life seen roaches on a plane this is crazy. pic.twitter.com/gIIMHpsOG9 — Symoné B. Beez (@SymoneBeez) May 11, 2025 One video showed a brown roach crawling up the back of a chair from the back seat pocket as another airline passenger murmured in the background. Another clip showed a roach crawling up the plane’s wall. The next day, Beez posted a follow up that said, “Update I was given a $60 [Spirit Airlines] credit… I won’t be flying Spirit again one and done for me lol.” The airline passenger posted a photo of the letter she received with the voucher. It said, “We sincerely apologize for what happened on your recent trip. We care about your satisfaction and want to make this right. Please accept our apologies along with this voucher for future travel to any of our destinations.” She also responded to commenters who said cockroaches were commonly seen on planes. “All the people saying roaches are common on planes are lying LMAO I’ve flown 550,000 miles with  Delta. I’ve never even seen an ant on Delta let alone two big a** roaches in first class,” Beez wrote. Spirit Airlines responded to the video by issuing a statement saying the company was “aware of the video” and their “maintenance team thoroughly inspected the aircraft involved and addressed the issue.” “We maintain high standards of cleanliness across our fleet and want all of our guests to feel comfortable when traveling with us,” a spokesperson told People. The clip of the crawling roaches has 8 million views on X as of Thursday. Many commenters weighed in on the situation, including those who stated they were airline employees. “I’ve deada** never seen a roach on a plane and been on all different kind of planes except Spirit,” one person noted. “[I]t’s not common, but it’s not unheard of,” another person replied. “I worked for a major airline for years. those planes don’t get deep cleaned like you’d think, and people (travelers and employees) can bring from home all kinds of stuff. roaches, bedbugs, etc. I’ve seen roaches in both DCA and PHL.” “I used to work for a major airline and have flown internationally and domestically. I have never seen so much as an ant on a plane. Spirit is just ridiculous. They’re so awful that I forfeited my return ticket on them. I ate it & paid another carrier more because, NO,” someone else wrote.

'It's just a fact'

'Will you apologize?'

'collecting bags of cash from multiple houses'

'Now the entire country knows that Brown is bloated'

Without hesitation, a woman rescued a shark tangled up in fishing rope, using her bare hands. Charity Clark was paddle-boarding with her friends near Big Pine Key off the coast of Florida, on March 26, when they noticed a crab trap buoy behaving unusually before spotting the white outline of a shark. The shark was upside […] The post Woman Rescues Shark Entangled in Fishing Line With Her Bare Hands as Friend Shoots Incredible Video appeared first on Good News Network.

Sen. Bill Cassidy on Thursday urged parents and school choice advocates to continue efforts to promote the educational benefits of charter schools, with an emphasis on children with special needs. Cassidy, R-La., who chairs the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, hosted a hearing on the charter school movement, “Chartering Excellence: A Policy Briefing on Charter School Innovation.” The hearing shed light on ways to increase access to charter schools for students across the country.  Cassidy opened the hearing by discussing how he’s the father of a special-needs child and acknowledging that his wife was a participant on the panel as the founder of a charter school. The Louisiana senator cited the passion a mother has for getting her child the help he or she needs.  “[S]he’s going to make sure that her child has the best opportunity her child has to learn, and yet we put institutional barriers … in front of that mother achieving the best for her daughter, for her son,” he explained. The Louisiana lawmaker said he saw his role as helping that mother remove those barriers. “We’re going to pretend the status quo is good, when for decades the status quo has been bad and even declining. And I say that because a country is only the sum of its people, and if the people are well educated, achieving their potential, that country achieves its potential,” Cassidy said. The committee also heard from Diana Diaz-Harrison, the deputy assistant secretary for special education and rehabilitative services at the Department of Education. Diaz-Harrison, who founded a charter school network in Arizona for children with autism, has been brought into the Trump administration to expand school choice for families with disabled children. “The administration also brought me on board because charter schools are extremely important for all children, but in particular for children who learn differently, it is hard to have a specialty in a generic environment,” she said.  Diaz-Harrison explained that she became involved in the charter school movement through her own son, who has autism. “[A] choice is not a choice if it doesn’t exist,” she said, explaining that a school for children in Arizona with special needs did not exist when she looked for an appropriate learning environment for her son.  She told lawmakers that the new presidential administration was all-in for school choice. “[T]his administration is fully committed to empowering education entrepreneurs who in many cases are also the parents who have skin in the game,” the education official noted.  The deputy assistant secretary expressed gratitude for the opportunity to put her charter school experience to work for the American people. “[S]o many people in the state of Arizona supported me, and to think that I was a mom with a dream, and now I have a position that can really help shape policy for all children in the United States of America is a dream come true,” Diaz-Harrison said.  The panel subsequently discussed the many advantages of charter schools. “It’s tailored to the individual child,” explained Lorenzo Romero, president of BASIS Educational Ventures, for which he oversees the financial management and growth strategy of more than 45 BASIS-affiliated charter schools in Arizona, Texas, Louisiana, and Washington, D.C. Laura Cassidy, the senator’s wife and the founder of Louisiana Key Academy Public Charter School, compared the lack of school choice to giving patients with various forms of cancer the same chemotherapy treatment. “Charter schools have the ability to identify gaps,” David Taylor, superintendent and CEO of Dayton Early College Academy in Dayton, Ohio, said, referring to market failures in adequately educating all children. The panelists identified onerous regulations and a lack of funding as the most significant challenges facing the charter school movement. Nevertheless, despite the myriad challenges, the movement has only grown in recent years as parents have moved heaven and earth for their children. The Heritage Foundation recently published a classical school database, which encompasses some charter schools, and includes a total of 894 schools. The post Senate Panel Hearing Spotlights Charter Schools for Special-Needs Kids appeared first on The Daily Signal.