Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) is accusing President Trump of seeking to start a civil war. The California Democrat, a longtime adversary of Trump, said the early flood of presidential policies may appear haphazard on their surface. But there’s a unifying theory behind them, she said: Trump wants to incite violence. “This president is putting us […] The post 86 Year Old Rep. Maxine Waters Claims Trump Seeks Civil War appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt went off on activist judges on Friday for cutting President Donald Trump off at the knees as he seeks to use his executive powers to the fullest legal extent possible. Leavitt made the remarks outside of the White House when asked about a court ruling from a federal judge that ordered that the administration rehire thousands of workers with probationary status. Leavitt said that the administration would respond by “fighting back” through appealing and using the full weight of the White House Counsel’s Office and lawyers in the federal government “who believe that this injunction is entirely unconstitutional.” “You cannot have a low-level district court judge filing an injunction to usurp the executive authority of the President of the United States,” Leavitt said. “That is completely absurd!” “And as the executive of the executive branch, the president has the ability to fire or hire,” she continued. “And you have these lower-level judges who are trying to block this president’s agenda. It’s very clear.” Leavitt called attention to the disparities in how the Trump administration has been treated versus how the previous Biden administration had been treated by highlighting the number of injunctions each has faced. “In one month, in February, there have been 15 injunctions of this administration and our agenda,” Leavitt said. “In three years under the Biden administration, there were 14 injunctions.” “So it’s very clear that there are judicial activists throughout our judicial branch who are trying to block this president’s executive authority,” she added. “They are led by partisan activists who are trying to usurp the will of this president and we’re not going to stand for it.” Leavitt posted the clip on X where she added: “The Executive Branch cannot properly function if activist liberal judges can unilaterally block presidential actions over the entire country.” “If a federal district court judge wants executive powers, they can try and run for President themselves,” she said. “The Trump Administration will immediately fight back against these absurd and unconstitutional orders.” WATCH: The Executive Branch cannot properly function if activist liberal judges can unilaterally block presidential actions over the entire country. If a federal district court judge wants executive powers, they can try and run for President themselves. The Trump Administration will… pic.twitter.com/7QARlW9dwS — Karoline Leavitt (@PressSec) March 14, 2025

Donald Trump has fired nearly 50% of the staff of the Department of Education, sending waves of shock and outrage through 50% of the staff of the Department of Education. And maybe a few other people; I’m not sure. The president took the drastic step of canning 13-thousand DOE employees after finding out that — one — the DOE has been spending more than $250 billion a year which is some 4%of all federal spending and — two — American students’ math and reading skills have plummeted into an abyss of mental darkness and — three — there is not really a clause in the Constitution that allows the president to have DOE employees executed, but only in the make-believe Constitution that Elon Musk doodled on a stall in a White House restroom as a joke. So firing these people turned out to be the best Trump could do. Outraged Democrats held a protest in a broom closet in the Capitol, and spoke with a reporter from the Associated Press who was hiding there from Karoline Leavitt lest she strike again. Democrat congressman Fidel Mohammed Jihad Mao Mohammed Jihad told the reporter, “This assault on our beloved education department has angered every single American in this broom closet. Trump is trying to ruin our schools and trap our children in ignorance and poverty — and that’s the job of the Teachers Unions, so not only is he a tyrant, he’s actually a scab as well. Democrats should take to the streets to protest this action just as soon as they finish protesting the disempowerment of sexual psychopaths and drastic cuts to a vast network of waste and fraud that has taken us years of work to build. Trump is destroying America or, anyway, our version of America which, okay, isn’t “America” America, but we still call it America, so when we say Trump is destroying America, that is technically something that almost sounds true.” Teachers Union President Randi Weingarten also protested the job cuts. Appearing in an interview on CNN after rising from a flaming crevice in the earth in a yellow cloud of sulfurous smoke, Ms. Weingarten said “The Department of Education has spent literally hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars doing the all-important work of buying union support for Democrats. This money is carefully doled out to ensure that every child in America has a teacher whose union representative is driving a Mercedes after doing an hour of paperwork to prove their schools are following a federal recipe for success that has already raised the reading skills of eighth graders to a third grade level. Trump’s secret plan is evil, and believe me, I know something about evil. I mean, just look at me. Look at my golden eyes. Trump’s plan is to allow poor minority students to choose their own schools. That’s insane! These children are languishing in a seething hell of illiteracy, damning them to a jobless future in which their only consolation will be the false comfort of drugs and children born out of wedlock ultimately leading to yet another generation of crushing poverty. They’re not educated enough to choose their own schools. We need to keep spending taxpayer’s money until they’re completely ignorant. Then at least when they have school choice, they might choose public schools.” WATCH: The Andrew Klavan Show As if Trump’s cuts to the DOE weren’t bad enough, the president further outraged educators by arresting and threatening to deport a Palestinian Columbia student who led illegal demonstrations on college campuses in support of Hamas and who belongs to an organization dedicated to “the total eradication of western civilization.” CNN Anchorwoman Shapely Nudnick objected to the move, saying, “Just because a man shuts down a university and persecutes Jewish students to support mass-murdering terrorists, that doesn’t make him a bad person. I’m afraid by having him arrested, this administration is distracting federal law enforcement officers from their important work of investigating parents who want to keep pornography out of elementary schools and spying on Catholics who attend Latin Mass.” With that, the anchorwoman was surrounded by a sulfurous cloud of yellow smoke and dragged down into a flaming crevice in the earth, where she joined the Teacher’s Union. * * * This excerpt is taken from the opening satirical monologue of “The Andrew Klavan Show.” The views expressed in this satirical article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire. Andrew Klavan is the host of “The Andrew Klavan Show” at The Daily Wire. Follow him on X: @andrewklavan Klavan is the bestselling author of numerous books, including the Cameron Winter Mystery series. The fourth installment, “A Woman Underground.” His most recent nonfiction release is “The Kingdom of Cain: Finding God in the Literature of Darkness.” (May 2025, Zondervan/HarperCollins).

'We should not be paying'

'He hires, fires, and directs what they do'

When Erin Brewer was 6 years old, she and her older brother were accosted by two grown men. She was raped. Her brother was not.   Brewer called herself a boy for the next several years because, she said, she felt vulnerable as a girl. She wore her brother’s hand-me-downs, used the boys bathroom at school, and asked her friends to call her “Timothy.” At home, her mother told her she could pretend to be a boy. Only when her school counselor stepped in did she start to feel strong as a girl and accept her body.  “She did her best to help me accept myself as a girl, and I am so thankful that I lived in a time when that was the normal way that a transgender identity was treated,” the 58-year-old mother of three told The Daily Signal.   A current case before the U.S. Supreme Court could decide whether counselors like the one who helped Brewer can do the same for others and advise minors in therapy against “transitioning” genders.   The court granted review Monday for Chiles v. Salazar, a case in which Kaley Chiles, a licensed professional counselor in Colorado, sued Patty Salazar in her official capacity as executive director of the Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies. Chiles said she wants to help her clients talk through problems like gender identity without being forced to promote transgender ideology.   Colorado law prevents counselors from advising their young clients against gender transition by banning what it calls “conversion therapy” for minors. The law defines conversion therapy as any practice or treatment that attempts to “change behaviors or gender expressions or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attraction … toward individuals of the same sex.” The same law, however, protects “assistance to a person undergoing gender transition.”  Chiles challenged the constitutionality of the law in federal court, saying it violated her First Amendment right to free speech. After the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit upheld Colorado’s law, attorneys from Alliance Defending Freedom, a Christian law firm, filed a petition with the Supreme Court in November.   “What’s at stake here are the free speech rights of counselors,” Cody Barnett, legal counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom, told The Daily Signal. “They want to be able to offer the counseling that many parents and children across the country desperately need and want. But that’s the exact type of counseling that Colorado says is illegal, and instead, Colorado says the only counseling that can be offered is one that … aligns with Colorado’s view of gender and sexuality and forces counselors to parrot that for the state.”   Barnett noted that the state law applies in only one direction.  “What could happen here is that you have someone who is born a boy, decides they want to transition into being a girl, and then they regret that choice,” Barnett said. “This law forbids a counselor from helping them go back to getting comfortable with their natural body.”  Court documents from the lawyers for the state argue that so-called conversion therapy harms minors and that professional health care is fundamentally different from an average person’s speech under the First Amendment.  “Unlike laypersons, those who choose to practice as health professionals are required … to provide treatment to their patients consistent with their field’s standard of care,” the brief said. “Petitioner’s claim would undercut states’ long-standing ability to protect patients and clients from harmful professional conduct.”  According to Barnett, the conversion therapy tactics referenced by the state in this case do not reflect Chiles’ work as a therapist. The therapy Chiles offers is speech protected under the First Amendment, Barnett said, not conduct. Judge Harris Hartz of the 10th Circuit affirmed this assessment in his dissenting opinion in the court’s ruling.  “[T]he First Amendment never cares whether ‘professionals [are] speaking,’” Hartz said in his dissent. “Otherwise, government bureaucrats could alchemize almost any professional’s speech into conduct that can be silenced.”  The Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies declined The Daily Signal’s request for comment and cited the ongoing litigation.  More than 20 other states have similar laws prohibiting so-called conversion therapy. A favorable decision for Chiles could remove such restrictions on counselors across the nation who want to help children like Brewer.  Brewer said she supports Alliance Defending Freedom’s effort to protect the work of counselors like the one who helped her growing up.  “I often wish I could get in touch with her,” Brewer said of her school counselor. “She may not even be alive anymore. I wish there was some way to tell her how much I appreciate what she did.”  The post Supreme Court to Decide if Counselors Can Advise Minors Against ‘Gender Transition’ appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Will It Be Legal to Assault Police Officers in Illinois Soon?

The Gavin Newsom Backlash is Still Building Steam

During the “By the Way” segment on Friday’s CBS Mornings Plus, CBS environmental correspondent David Schechter decried the Trump Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under Administrator Lee Zeldin by giving away the game on the climate alarmists by reupping a line that’s been deployed for at least five decades, which is we have “less than ten years” to save Earth from climate change. Co-host Adriana Diaz twice teased his appearance and spelled doom about what deregulation at the EPA would mean, ominously wondering “what” the “big changes at the EPA” “could cost you” as the “administration...mak[es] good on the President’s campaign promise to roll back climate protections.”     With the liberal media, any and all regulations are nearly always seen as a benefit and for our own good, not a hassle. “[O]ne of the things the EPA will now, ‘reconsider’ is what its press release calls a burdensome greenhouse gas reporting program where thousands of companies have to submit their emissions levels. Zeldin said the agency would try to undo a total of 31 environmental regulations from rules governing wastewater to emission standards. The Trump administration has also...revealed plans to shut down the EPA’s Environmental Justice Division,” she added. Schechter came out swinging with the apocalyptic analysis that Zeldin has changed “the way we interface with the environment” as the EPA has decided it has “nothing” to do with “the environment or ensuring “we have clean air and...clean water.” He continued with the claim Zeldin doesn’t want to “talk about the environment and why we need to keep it clean and why climate change has become such an existential threat with increased floods and fires and droughts and how the EPA has a role in trying to make sure that we control that and contain that.” Moments later, he dropped the tiresome claim about having less than a decade or we’re goners: I think the biggest risk is that we have a small window to deal with climate change, really. It’s getting smaller and smaller, less than 10 years, to sort of level out and reduce our emissions and we had and have currently a lot of rules that deal with that. To throw those all out would undo a lot of progress that’s been made to try to reach these new standards for our country and for the world. And we will lose our opportunity to really get ahead of this problem or even stay current with the problem. Co-host Tony Dokoupil next summarized Zeldin’s view of the EPA as “if companies save money by not having to report a bunch of things that are a waste of time, they can take that saved money and make the energy process cleaner.” Schechter was obviously not having it because, you can’t trust non-governmental parties to behave (click “expand”): SCHECHTER: I don’t know if, I guess if that’s your reading of that claim, I think that’s an interesting way to look at it. You know, companies, corporations, many of them do, do the right thing and do spend a lot of time on their environmental issues and reporting and things like that, but, you know, the government’s job is to set a level playing field, if that’s how you view the government’s job, to set a level playing field with regulations so that everyone is following the same rules. Some companies do get in trouble when they get ahead of their competitors and they have rules that are maybe more stringent than what their competitors have. And then the market kind of catches up to them and they take a lot of criticism for being too far ahead of the pack. So, you know, having stoplights and roads and, you know, rules of the road, is what keeps everybody sort of moving in the same direction. That’s the idea of the EPA. That’s the power of the EPA. And to say we care about the earth and we care about clean water, that’s what we’re going to do, is one thing, but to look at what they did and want to cut 31 important regulations is really what you should be looking at. DOKOUPIL: It’s interesting. Yeah, but this is the claim from the EPA press release. Hundreds of millions of dollars saved could better be used, “to improve and upgrade environmental controls to have a noticeable impact and improvement on the environment.” We’ll see what happens. DIAZ: Yeah. SCHECHTER: Yeah. DIAZ: And if companies take it upon themselves to try to make that environmental improvement without the regulations. This Friday segment actually capped three days of rage at CBS. Rolling back to Thursday, senior White House and campaign correspondent Ed O’Keefe appeared on both CBS Mornings and the Plus editions to say the EPA will now be “rolling back...regulations” that said “greenhouse gasses are bad for public health[.]” And, on Tuesday, CBS Evening News co-anchor Maurice DuBois said the agency was doing away with red tape “aimed at protecting public health and fighting climate change.” Co-anchor John Dickerson commiserated with former Obama EPA official Matthew Tejada a half-hour later on CBS Evening Plus. Tejada went full doomsday and fearmongerer by saying Zeldin’s announcement was “taking us back to the 1960s, from before the times when we had regulations that actually cleaned up our water, protect people from across our country, from cancer-causing agents in our air, actually cleaning up legacy contamination sites that people had been living on top of for generations.”     Tejada further vented the Trump administration will “tak[e] us back to that time when we didn’t have regulation” in which Americans won’t be “healthier” as they’re purposefully “allowing polluting industries” to “hav[e] absolutely unfettered ability to pour their pollution into our communities[.]” Always a pompous partisan, Dickerson invited Tejada to go further (click “expand”): DICKERSON: And Matthew, one of the announcements today said the agency is, quote, “reconsidering the 2009 engagement finding.” Help us understand what that means. TEJADA: Yeah, that was the endangerment finding. That was the finding that basically unlocked the authorities of the Environmental Protection Agency and our federal government to start combating climate change. We have seen repeatedly how our climate is changing on a regular basis and having devastating consequences, not just in our country, but across the world, how it is causing hundreds of billions of dollars in damages every single year. They’re taking us back to not even square one, to the one decision that allowed us to start to make the slightest progress that was then supercharged during the last administration through the Inflation Reduction Act, another regulatory progress that we made recently. It is taking us back in time, just like all these other decisions are taking us way back to an era when we were suffering from pollution in every part of this country. DICKERSON: And let me ask you now, finally, Matthew, about the environmental justice offices. Remind us about — define environmental justice for us and what you think will now happen as a result of these policies. TEJADA: So environmental justice has worked for decades to make sure that every part of our country, especially those parts of our country that have not had the power to keep pollution out of their community and to bring in the positives of a clean environment, of green space, of natural resources. Those are black and brown communities. Those are indigenous communities. Those are low-income white communities. Those communities that have not had a power to actually be protected from environmental pollution. The environmental justice program at EPA worked every single day to make sure that those communities felt heard by their government and to bring their voices back into government to make it respond and serve those people too. And they are gutting that program today as we speak. To see the relevant CBS transcripts, click here (for March 12’s CBS Evening News Plus) and here (for March 14’s CBS Mornings Plus).

Shell corporations were once the hot topic on the edge of everyone’s tongue, but now the verbiage has shifted slightly to “shell nonprofits” — and, of course, the American taxpayers are footing the bill. Dan Andros, managing editor at CBN, has been looking into these “shell nonprofits,” and he isn’t too thrilled with what he’s uncovered. “Democrats and sort of progressive-aligned individuals within politics are setting up these nonprofits, and then the government will rush a bunch of money to them, and then nobody knows what’s going on,” Andros tells Stu Burguiere on “Stu Does America.” One example is the Justice Climate Fund, which Andros reports received $940 million without any IRS tax filings and no clear leadership information. Another one, Power Forward Communities, received $2 billion despite reporting only $100 in revenue from the previous year. “So you wonder what’s going on here, and it sure looks like what’s happening is because Harris and Biden funneled this money quickly, about $20 billion, to all these different groups. And it was a part of this EPA climate fund, which people have labeled this thing a slush fund,” Andros explains. “It was $370 billion allocated from the Inflation Reduction Act, which, this is really going to cut down on inflation, Stu, here by taking hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer money and just funneling it,” he continues. “They get funded, they throw up some solar panels, and then it goes bankrupt once they can’t fund it anymore.” “It’s a fascinating scam,” Stu says. “Might very well be legal, we should point out, within the constraints of the law, by the way. This is why you don’t pass laws like the Inflation Reduction Act.” Want more from Stu?To enjoy more of Stu's lethal wit, wisdom, and mockery, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.