On Tuesday, tech billionaire Elon Musk unleashed his ire at the House-passed version of the “One Big, Beautiful Bill,” which has the blessing of his former boss, President Donald Trump. The massive bill, which is now being considered by the Republican-led Senate, contains many provisions in line with Trump’s second-term agenda, but also is estimated to add trillions of dollars to the national debt, already nearing $37 trillion. “I’m sorry, but I just can’t stand it anymore,” Musk said in a post on X. “This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it.” He added in another post, “It will massively increase the already gigantic budget deficit to $2.5 trillion (!!!) and burden America (sic) citizens with crushingly unsustainable debt.” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt shrugged off the critique when a reporter asked how “mad” Trump will be when he finds out what Musk said about the legislation. “Look, the president already knows where Elon Musk stood on this bill. It doesn’t change the president’s opinion. This is ‘One Big, Beautiful Bill’ and he’s sticking to it,” Leavitt said. After the bill narrowly passed through the GOP-controlled House last month, Trump hailed it as “arguably the most significant piece of Legislation that will ever be signed in the History” of the United States. However, the president has given his blessing to GOP senators, some of whom have also raised objections to the bill in its current form, to “make the changes they want.” Musk, who just ended his stint as a special government employee helping to oversee the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) initiative, made waves last week after he expressed concerns about the bill inflating the federal deficit that has already blown past $1 trillion in recent years. “I was like — disappointed to see the massive spending bill, frankly, which increases the budget deficit, not just decrease it. And it undermines the work that the DOGE team is doing,” Musk told “CBS Sunday Morning” in an interview. Musk also said that when the bill came along, he thought “everything” accomplished by DOGE would get “wiped out” in the first year. He also said, “I think a bill can be big or it can be beautiful, but I don’t know if it can be both. My personal opinion.” Russ Vought, the director of Trump’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB), delivered on Sunday a counterargument to Musk’s warning about the deficit. “I love Elon,” Vought told CNN anchor Dana Bash in a “State of the Union” interview. “This bill doesn’t increase the deficit or hurt the debt. In fact, it lowers it by $1.4 trillion. What some of the watchdogs have done is, they have used CBO’s artificial baseline, which doesn’t allow and assume that current tax law will be extended because of sunsets that are in the law.” Vought added later, “When you assume the extension of the president’s tax relief from 2017, this budget or this bill, and it’s really a reconciliation bill — it’s not really a budget bill. It is using a budget process. This is a $1.4 trillion over 10 years deficit reduction. It’s $1.6 trillion in mandatory savings. Obviously, we have a little bit of spending in there as well for border and defense. But that is the biggest mandatory savings package that we have seen since 1997. It’s very historic.” The White House is poised to send its first rescissions package of the year to Congress as early as Tuesday, aiming to claw back spending for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and National Public Radio (NPR) — programs that Republicans view as being wasteful and partisan. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) has listed rescissions as being one of two actions the House will take based on findings from DOGE, in addition to using the appropriations process to “swiftly implement” Trump’s proposed 2026 budget. Earlier on Tuesday, Trump singled out Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) for criticism in a dispute over how the “One Big, Beautiful Bill,” claiming the lawmaker “has very little understanding of the BBB, especially the tremendous GROWTH that is coming.” Paul said on CNBC that he opposes legislation as it stands because it aims to raise the debt ceiling by several trillion dollars, but is “pretty much open to compromise on everything else in the bill.”

Newark’s Democratic mayor, Ras Baraka, filed a lawsuit Tuesday against interim U.S. Attorney for New Jersey Alina Habba after she charged him with trespassing at a federal immigration facility last month. Baraka claims that Habba and Homeland Security Investigations supervising agent Ricky Patel, who was the lead officer in charge of arresting the mayor last month, violated his Fourth Amendment rights against “false arrest and malicious prosecution.” Baraka’s suit also accuses Habba of defamation. Habba charged Baraka with trespassing at a federal immigration facility during an altercation on May 9, but later dropped the charge. Habba “acted as a political operative, outside of any function intimately related to the judicial process, and in her individual personal capacity,” the lawsuit says. Patel “in this matter acted outside the scope of his employment and in his individual capacity.” Baraka is one of six Democrats running in the primary to be the next governor of New Jersey. Baraka is campaigning as an action-oriented progressive in the crowded primary. The super PAC supporting his candidacy, One New Jersey United, has already begun funding ads highlighting his May 9 arrest. The lawsuit’s filing coincides with the first day of early voting ahead of the June 10 primary for the New Jersey governor’s race. Get 40% Off New DailyWire+ Annual Memberships The mayor arrived at Delaney Hall, used by Immigration and Customs Enforcement to house illegal immigrants, at the invitation of Democratic congressmen who wanted to inspect the facility as part of their congressional oversight authority. Baraka stood outside the facility while the assembled crowd began to call for him to be let inside, according to the lawsuit. Baraka was later invited inside the gate of Delaney Hall by a guard who wanted to “calm the crowd,” the suit says. Patel later approached Baraka and directed him to leave. Baraka did not initially follow the order, but stayed to argue with Patel. After finally leaving the property, Baraka was arrested and handcuffed “in an effort to effect maximum humiliation,” the lawsuit says. On Monday night, Habba dismissed Baraka’s expected lawsuit in a post on X. “‘Shocking’ leak from Mayor Baraka’s team: He is planning to sue the Feds,” Habba wrote. “My advice to the mayor – feel free to join me in prioritizing violent crime and public safety. Far better use of time for the great citizens of New Jersey.”

After two horrific attacks in under two weeks — both perpetrated by anti-Israel terrorists who either claimed they’d acted on behalf of Gaza or shouted “free Palestine” as they carried out their violent acts — conservative pundits are drawing a hard line directly through the “Free Palestine” movement to the increasingly violent attacks on American Jews. Fox News contributor Guy Benson made the case during a Monday appearance on Fox News’ “Special Report,” where he explained that the disturbingly violent acts — such as Mohamed Sabry Soliman fire-bombing adults and children at a pro-Israel demonstration or Elias Rodriguez gunning down two young Israeli Embassy staffers without provocation — were not outliers. Instead, he said they were the manifestation of loud calls across American college campuses to “globalize the intifada” and to stop Israel “by any means necessary.” WATCH: ? @guypbenson speaks the PLAIN, HONEST TRUTH: “Hamas supporters aren’t just burning American flags in our streets. They’re now burning Americans in our streets!” “The pro-Palestine movement is a VIOLENT movement!” “Two students at Harvard in 2023 physically assaulted a Jewish… pic.twitter.com/16hjxyvnrG — Townhall.com (@townhallcom) June 3, 2025 “I saw an observer yesterday note, ‘Hamas supporters aren’t just burning American flags in our streets. They’re now burning Americans in our streets!'” Benson began. “When we hear these chants of ‘Globalize the Intifada,’ ‘by any means necessary,’ ringing out in our cities, on our campuses at these hate rallies, this is what it actually looks like in practice.” “It looks like a governor’s mansion, torched in the middle of the night with a Jewish leader sleeping upstairs with his family,” Benson continued, referencing the arson attack against Governor Josh Shapiro during Passover. “It looks like two employees of the Israeli Embassy in this city, our capital city, murdered in cold blood at a Jewish museum. And it looks like these elderly Jewish Americans fire-bombed at a peaceful rally on behalf of releasing hostages in Colorado.” Get 40% Off New DailyWire+ Annual Memberships “The pro-Palestine movement is a VIOLENT movement!” he concluded. “Their rhetoric is violent, they justify violence, they celebrate violence, and increasingly, they are engaging in violence not just over there, here in the United States. It’s a disgrace, and it has to stop.” Benson also called out the media coverage of the attacks, adding, “If a right-wing movement had burned down a governor’s mansion, murdered two foreign diplomats & firebombed kids and elderly people at a peaceful protest — in the span of a few weeks — what would the coverage look like? What sort of ‘national conversation’ would we be having?” If a right-wing movement had burned down a governor’s mansion, murdered two foreign diplomats & firebombed kids and elderly people at a peaceful protest — in the span of a few weeks — what would the coverage look like? What sort of “national conversation” would we be having? — Guy Benson (@guypbenson) June 2, 2025 CNN Republican pundit Scott Jennings took things a step further, saying during an appearance on “The Lead” with Jake Tapper that the pro-Palestinian movement in the United States was effectively a domestic terror organization. WATCH: What more do we need to see before we acknowledge this “free Palestine” movement is nothing more than a domestic terror organization? We are in a FIGHT for the future of Western civilization and we need to come to grips with it — and fast. pic.twitter.com/cHgHTL2lM4 — Scott Jennings (@ScottJenningsKY) June 2, 2025 “This is horrific,” he said of the fire-bombing attack in Boulder. “What more do we need to see, Jake, before we realize this ‘free Palestine’ movement is nothing more than a domestic terror organization?” “The rise of antisemitism in America, the rise of the number of people who have come to America who hold anti-American views, anti-Western views, and antisemitic views — and are now willing to act on it – it is absolutely outrageous,” Jennings continued. “And I think as a society, we need to understand. We are dealing with domestic terrorism, it’s growing more violent by the day, and if we don’t deal with it, these kinds of things are going to keep happening in cities all over the place. It’s awful, and we need to come to grips with the fight that we’re in right now in America, a fight for the future of our country and the future of western civilization.”

According to Special Counsel John Durham’s scathing 306-page report, the FBI’s handling of the Trump-Russia investigation demonstrates serious flaws in procedure and judgment, calling into question the bureau’s integrity in politically sensitive cases. The investigation began after Trump campaign associate George Papadopoulos claimed knowledge of Russian “dirt” on Hillary Clinton. The FBI heavily relied on the unverified Steele dossier for surveillance applications. Despite identifying significant procedural errors, the report found no evidence of a “deep state conspiracy.” FBI Rushed Investigation With Insufficient Evidence The Durham report delivers a stark assessment of the FBI’s decision to initiate an investigation into alleged collusion between Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign and Russia. According to the special counsel’s findings, the bureau launched its probe after Trump campaign associate George Papadopoulos claimed knowledge of Russian “dirt” on Hillary Clinton. However, Durham concluded the FBI moved forward without consulting Russia experts and without sufficient predication, raising serious questions about the motivations behind the investigation. The 306-page document criticizes the FBI for ignoring or dismissing evidence that contradicted the collusion premise, demonstrating what Durham described as “confirmation bias” throughout the investigation. This approach led the bureau to pursue a politically sensitive investigation that would ultimately fuel years of national division and controversy, despite having a questionable foundation from the start. DURHAM REPORT: The report finds the FBI failed in its responsibility to the public and never should have launched the Trump-Russia probe. pic.twitter.com/c28S4MqKte — @amuse (@amuse) May 16, 2023 Reliance on Unverified Steele Dossier Perhaps most concerning in Durham’s findings was the FBI’s heavy reliance on the now-discredited Steele dossier for securing surveillance warrants. The report highlights how the bureau used these unverified allegations in Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) applications against former Trump aide Carter Page. Christopher Steele’s dossier, which contained salacious and unverified claims about Trump, failed to substantiate a “single substantive allegation,” according to the report. This reliance on unverified information in court applications represents a significant breach of protocol in intelligence-gathering operations. The Justice Department has since acknowledged serious errors in these FISA applications, which allowed the government to conduct surveillance on an American citizen connected to a presidential campaign based on information that wasn’t properly vetted. "The DOJ and FBI failed to uphold their mission of strict fidelity to the law. That's what the Durham Report found… The FBI broke all procedures and had politicized hacks all throughout the FBI, whose stated goal was to take down Donald Trump."pic.twitter.com/5sDX0z2Wss — Citizen Free Press (@CitizenFreePres) May 21, 2023 Impact on FBI Credibility and Congressional Action The Durham report’s findings come at a critical time as Congress debates the renewal of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which allows for surveillance of foreign communications. Republicans have seized on the report to push for significant reforms to the FBI’s surveillance authorities, while some Democrats have joined in calling for increased limitations on the bureau’s access to foreign surveillance data. “It is essential that Congress codify clear guardrails that prevent future FBI abuses and restore the public’s trust in our law enforcement institutions,” said Rep. Mike Turner, highlighting the bipartisan concern over the report’s findings. Limited Legal Outcomes Despite Serious Findings Despite the lengthy investigation and damning procedural criticisms, Durham’s investigation resulted in just one conviction, with two other cases ending in acquittals. This limited legal impact has frustrated those who believed the investigation would uncover a broader conspiracy. The report did not substantiate claims of a “deep state conspiracy” or establish definitive political bias against Trump, though it clearly documents serious procedural failures. The FBI has responded by implementing corrective measures to prevent similar issues in the future, including enhanced procedures to ensure accuracy in surveillance applications and improved oversight of confidential sources. However, questions remain about whether these reforms go far enough to address the institutional problems identified in the report. Sources: Durham report takeaways: A ‘seriously flawed’ Russia investigation and its lasting impact on the FBI Senior DOJ Officials Didn’t Know Database Allowed FBI To Bury Existence Of Russiagate Documents

Imagine being 17 years old and qualifying for the US Open

'Why are you wearing masks?'

'Greenpeace France activists borrowed the statue of Emmanuel Macron'

One piece of advice for Democrats: You should smile more

'Illegally in our country'