The State of Colorado is removing a portrait of President Donald Trump from his first term in office after the president posted about it over the weekend and demanded that it come down. Colorado Democrats, who control the state legislature, said that they would oblige Republicans’ request to remove the portrait. “If the GOP wants to spend time and money on which portrait of Trump hangs in the Capitol, then that’s up to them,” the Democrats said. Trump demanded on Sunday night that Colorado Governor Jared Polis take down the portrait and replace it with one that was a better representation of him. “Nobody likes a bad picture or painting of themselves, but the one in Colorado, in the State Capitol, put up by the Governor, along with all other Presidents, was purposefully distorted to a level that even I, perhaps, have never seen before,” Trump said. “The artist also did President Obama, and he looks wonderful, but the one on me is truly the worst,” Trump said. “She must have lost her talent as she got older.” The portrait that Trump was referring to was hung in the Colorado State Capitol in August 2019. “In any event, I would much prefer not having a picture than having this one, but many people from Colorado have called and written to complain,” Trump continued. “In fact, they are actually angry about it!” Trump also took aim at far-Left Colorado Democrat Governor Polis in the post. “I am speaking on their behalf to the Radical Left Governor, Jared Polis, who is extremely weak on Crime, in particular with respect to Tren de Aragua, which practically took over Aurora (Don’t worry, we saved it!), to take it down,” Trump said. “Jared should be ashamed of himself!” In a lengthy post on Truth Social President Trump says he dislikes this portrait of him hanging in the CO Capitol. He followed up the post with several other portraits of himself. “Nobody likes a bad picture or painting of themselves, but the one in Colorado, in the State… pic.twitter.com/eVw9Apirwl — Libbey Dean (@LibbeyDean_) March 24, 2025

If this is true, this is wild

They showed a relentless commitment to the film's failure with every choice they made

'Immediate review of law firms'

'Exceeded all bounds of human decency'

The Supreme Court doomed a lawsuit from Trump donor Steve Wynn Monday, declining to revisit the defamation case New York Times v. Sullivan (1964). Wynn, a casino developer, resigned as CEO and chairman of the board of his company Wynn Resorts amid sexual assault allegations in 2018—allegations he denied. He had previously served as vice chairman of President Trump’s 2017 inaugural committee and as finance chair of the Republican National Committee. The allegations came amid the #MeToo movement. Wynn sued the Associated Press in 2018, after AP published an article about the sexual assault claims of Halina Kuta, now 78. She had claimed that Wynn, now 82 raped her and she gave birth to their daughter in a gas station restroom in the early 1970s. The Supreme Court did not give any explanation for refusing to take up the case Monday. The case traces back to a police report Kuta filed against Wynn in January 2018, and the Associated Press’s article about the claim, published a month later. Police said that too much time had elapsed for them to examine Kuta’s claim that Wynn had assaulted her in 1973 or 1974. Wynn sued the AP, a reporter, and Kuta, for defamation. The casino magnate claimed that the story failed to include details that undercut Kuta’s claims, The Hill reported. The AP did not name Kuta in its original reporting, but she agreed to be named in later reporting. Clark County District Judge Ronald Israel ruled in 2020 that Kuta had defamed Wynn, and the judge awarded him $1 in nominal damages. “I find that Mr. Wynn’s testimony is credible and Ms. Kuta’s testimony lacks veracity in numerous areas,” the judge said, the AP reported at the time. He found that Kuta, who represented herself in the trial, “knowingly made a false report” to police. Kuta acknowledged in court that she asked Wynn to pay her $150 million to settle the case. Wynn testified that he never met Kuta. The accuser claimed that she—rather than Wynn’s then-wife, Elaine Wynn—was the mother of Wynn’s daughter Kevyn. Kuta also claimed that she was the model for Pablo Picasso’s painting, “Le Reve,” or “The Dream,” which Wynn owns. “You’d have to be delusional not to understand that they were lies and fabrications of the worst order,” Wynn testified in the 2020 trial. “What I’m asking for is to have this miserable fiction finally called for what it is, a miserable fiction.” The judge noted a birth certificate showing that Kevyn Wynn was born in 1967 to Steve and Elaine Wynn at a Washington, D.C., hospital—several years before Kuta claimed she had been raped. Picasso painted “Le Reve” in 1932, more than a decade before Kuta had been born. However, the Nevada Supreme Court cited the state’s anti-SLAPP law—which protects people from defamation claims in order to promote public debate—in dismissing the suit in February 2024, which Wynn then appealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court’s dismissal comes after President Trump and multiple Supreme Court justices have called for revisiting the key defamation precedent New York Times v. Sullivan. Justice Clarence Thomas publicly dissented when the Supreme Court refused to hear a defamation case against the Southern Poverty Law Center in 2022, writing that the case of Coral Ridge Ministries justified reconsidering the precedent. Justice Neil Gorsuch has also called for the precedent to be overturned. The post Supreme Court Rejects Trump Donor’s Defamation Lawsuit Against the Associated Press appeared first on The Daily Signal.

PANAMA CITY, Panama—A Chinese cultural center on the outskirts of Panama City was busy with people coming and going on a Wednesday afternoon in March, a reminder of China’s long history in the region.   The first Chinese immigrants arrived in Panama in 1854 to help build the railroad to connect the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. Groups of Chinese continued to migrate to Panama in the 1800s and to help with large constructions projects, including the Panama Canal.   Today, the concern from President Donald Trump and some other policy leaders is that China’s influence in the region has extended far beyond culture and is aimed at “increasing Chinese government presence” in the Latin American country, according to Victoria Coates, vice president of the Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy at The Heritage Foundation.   During his inauguration speech on Jan. 20, Trump said, “China is operating the Panama Canal. And we didn’t give it to China. We gave it to Panama, and we’re taking it back.”    When Trump returned to office in January and saw the ways China was building infrastructure around the Panama Canal and that a Hong Kong based company was operating ports on either side of the canal, “He said, ‘No, this can’t go on,’” Coates told The Daily Signal.   The Hong Kong conglomerate CK Hutchison recently agreed to sell port holdings on both ends of the Panama Canal to BlackRock, an American global asset manager.   The situation in Panama involving China’s influence is critical to the “national security interest of the United States,” Coates said, adding, “There is no need for China to be here.”   The security of the canal is vital to the U.S. as American military vessels use the Panama Canal to move between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans.   “We have a long history of partnership with Panama,” Coates said, adding that the U.S. has “a very friendly president in President [José Raúl] Mulino right now, so I think it’s a great time to really build that relationship and make sure the United States’ national security interests are protected.”   China and the Canal  The Panama Canal has drawn increased attention in the news following Trump’s claim that China is “operating” the canal.  Today, about 8,500 people work at the canal, none of whom are Chinese, according to Miguel Lorenzo, vice president for infrastructure and engineering at the Panama Canal.   “I need to be completely clear with the facts,” Lorenzo told The Daily Signal while standing just outside one of the command centers overlooking the canal’s locks. “I think there’s eight non-Panamanian people who work in the canal,” he said, adding, “There’s a Colombian. There’s a couple of Americans that are still working for the canal. The other one, I think, is Chilean. No Chinese.”   In 2015 or 2016, Lorenzo said, the canal had “one construction contract with a Chinese contractor,” but “it turned out not to be a good experience” and has since ended. “As far as supplies go, we do get some things that come from China. It’s unavoidable,” he said.   Over the years, China has engaged in infrastructure projects around the canal—and continues to do so.   Panama established diplomatic ties with China in 2017, and the following year, Panama announced that China Communications Construction Co. Ltd. and China Harbour Engineering Co. Ltd. had won a bid to construct a fourth bridge over the Panama Canal.    In February, the BBC reported that the China Railway Tunnel Group Co. is building an extension to the Panama City Metro under the south side of the canal.  History of the Canal  The French started construction of the Panama Canal in the 1880s, long before the U.S. took over the massive engineering project in 1904. The canal, which connects the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean, was completed in 1914.   The canal created opportunity for an economic boom in America because goods could now travel more easily and quickly between the East and West coasts of the U.S.  The U.S. operated the canal for decades, but over time, the Panamanians began to view American control of the canal as an infringement on their sovereignty. In 1977, President Jimmy Carter signed a treaty with Panama to gradually transfer control of the 51-mile canal to the nation it bisects, and on Dec. 31, 1999, Panama assumed full control of the canal.  What’s the Big Deal With the Panama Canal?President Donald Trump says he wants the canal back in the hands of the U.S. for economic and national security reasons, but the president of Panama says ownership of the canal is not open for negotiation. The Daily Signal's… pic.twitter.com/cmrqtCBjbp— The Daily Signal (@DailySignal) March 21, 2025 Originally only two locks, the canal was later expanded to add a third lock lane that is longer and wider. A complex system of switches and levers operated the canal until the early 2000s, when a digital system was put in place to run the canal.   Operation of the Canal Between 36 and 38 ships pass through the canal each day, the majority of which are commercial container ships.   Container ships are “our bread and butter,” Lorenzo told The Daily Signal, adding that about 60% of the ship that pass through the canal are commercial container ships.   “And then the second segment of the market, that it’s probably about 30-35%, is energy,” he said.  Military ships, including U.S. Navy ships, also use the canal.   Traveling from one side of the canal to the other takes about 10 hours, but saves vessels between 10 and 22 days from having to traverse down and around Cape Horn at the tip of South America.   The lock system on the canal operates like stair steps through multiple lock chambers. Each chamber holds millions of gallons of water. Water levels are raised and lowered to bring each ship above sea level to meet the water level of the Gatun Lake before lowering the ship back down.   The lock system at the Panama Canal operates like stair steps. There are multiple lock chambers within each lock and it takes about 10 minutes for 27.5 million gallons on water to enter a chamber, raising it to the level needed for ships to move between each chamber. pic.twitter.com/M6x4xpHh2n— Virginia Allen (@Virginia_Allen5) March 21, 2025 When at its lower level, the water in the lock chamber is about 40 to 45 feet deep, and 70 feet deep when the water level is raised all the way to the top. When raising or lowering the water levels in a lock chamber, 27.5 million gallons of water are moved in about 10 minutes, Lorenzo explained.   The original locks are 110 feet wide and can accommodate ships up to 106 feet wide, leaving only 24 inches of space on each side of the vessel.   When a ship is ready to traverse the canal, the ship’s captain steps aside, and a specially trained canal pilot enters the ship with a crew of about 20 who will guide the vessel from one end of the canal to the other.   ?The Panama Canal is an incredible engineering feat to behold. Each lock chamber in this part of the canal is 1,000 feet long by 110 feet wide. The largest ships that can enter through this lock are 106 feet wide, giving only 24 inches of space on each side. pic.twitter.com/4j6GHmgFWk— Virginia Allen (@Virginia_Allen5) March 21, 2025 The post Panama Canal: A Short History of Its Operation and Chinese Interest In It appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Hide your wallets, taxes could be going up after Christmas! One of President Donald Trump’s greatest economic accomplishments of his first term, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, expires at the end of this year. Only 6% of Americans are aware that these tax cuts could be stripped away, and if they disappear, that’s a major problem for families and the Republican Party. With historically high inflation rates and the sharp increase in energy and food costs gifted to us by the Biden administration, Americans have been struggling to get by these last few years. Since the end of Trump’s first term, the average price of milk has risen 36%, ground beef has gone up 42%, gas is up 45%—and that’s not even half an average grocery list. Trump understood that in order for our economy to thrive once again, he had to cut taxes. He got to work by wrangling the GOP to introduce the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, and miraculously, got it through both chambers of Congress in 2017. While it’s common knowledge that tax cuts bring a boon to the economy as consumers with more money in their pockets reinvest it into the marketplace, the remarkable growth in business investments and in the labor market (including increased jobs and increased mobility within existing jobs) from the act surprised everyone. Wages alone were $1,400 above trend in 2018—and that was just the first year of implementation. It didn’t just stop there. The act cut taxes in every income group, so every individual tax rate got a break. The average cut received in 2018 was $1,400, which meant you could get a  PlayStation 5 Pro, take your girlfriend out to a nice dinner, and still have something left over—everyone wins! The most significant benefit families received from the tax cuts was the doubling of the Child Tax Credit from $1,000 to $2,000 per child. Trump understood a fundamental truth—that our country cannot succeed without American families thriving economically. He ensured that families with children would receive this much-needed economic relief under his administration.  Some critics have claimed that $2,000 isn’t a lot of money or pointed out that it’s “just $1,000 more, what good will it do anybody?” Let’s ignore these naysayers and put this historic achievement into perspective. In 2023, 44% of American parents reported not being able to cover an emergency expense of $400, and nearly 30% of all American households were reported to be living paycheck-to-paycheck (requiring over 90% of their income to cover basic necessities). When money is that tight, $2,000 can be the difference between a family breaking even on their bills or breaking the bank. In day-to-day terms, that $2,000 is the equivalent of roughly 6,700 diapers or about 622 gallons of gas (about 32 full tanks in a minivan and 48 for a smaller vehicle). Any growing family can certainly appreciate that. But that’s not all this legislation has done. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, “The Child Tax Credit lifted 4.3 million people?including 2.3 million children?above the poverty line in 2018.” If you want to talk about life-changing policy, this certainly qualifies. With new majorities in the House and Senate in 2025, Republicans should seize the moment and make this tax break on our families a permanent fixture in our tax code.  This shouldn’t be a tough lift since the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is a key part of Trump’s pro-family agenda. Vice President JD Vance recently spoke at the Conservative Political Action Conference about the importance of making life more affordable for families and called for Congress to include the renewal of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act in the budget reconciliation package currently under discussion in both the House and the Senate. With the support of an executive branch that has already put so much energy into reducing wasteful spending, there is little excuse for not supporting a measure that reinvests some of that wealth back into the American people. If Make America Great Again is the message to rally behind, renewing the act should be an easy task to fulfill. Most Americans certainly agree. According to polling, 79% of voters believe that failing to extend the act will hurt middle-class families. And, importantly, the strongest element of the Republican base is the American family. According to an American Enterprise Institute report, it’s married families who consistently vote red. In fact, the biggest determining factor of whether a congressional district will swing red is the presence of families. Republicans must do their duty to their constituents and fight for the extension of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Both the well-being of American families and the GOP’s political future depend on it. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post Keep the Trump Tax Cuts So American Families Can Thrive appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Sure, No One Likes The Tariffs, But...

Former CNN senior media reporter Oliver Darcy suggested Sunday on his newsletter site Status American democracy was teetering and a descent into authoritarianism was afoot. Even though his unhinged outlook on life appears permanent, this new reason was legacy media outlets having refused to join the Associated Press in using “Gulf of Mexico” instead of Gulf of America (and instead vague uses of “the gulf”) to avoid the Trump White House’s ire. The headline and subhead will have you cackling or rolling your eyes (or both): “Gulf of Fear; When news anchors tiptoe around the name Gulf of Mexico, it’s not just semantics—it’s a glimpse at how the press starts to flinch under political pressure.” The miserable liberal tool started off on an incendiary note, comparing President Trump renaming the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America to communist China in that they consider Taiwan as “a province” and such an actual Orwellian policing of language is obviously “not about semantic,” but “wielding influence and asserting dominance.” Darcy went right for the miserable wine mom vote in Northern Virginia with a doomsday scenario: “In the United States, that kind of top-down dictation might feel like a distant threat” since there’s “free speech safeguarded by the First Amendment.” This was where the Gulf of America comparison came into full view as Darcy declared the ocean splashdown from space of NASA astronauts Suni Williams and Butch Wilmore in a SpaceX capsule “demonstrated” legacy TV networks are “far less adversarial and far more compliant than the breathless promos these networks air hyping themselves as fearless truth-tellers.” There we go again with the comical audience out there who believe the liberal media are actually subservient and pro-Trump. His research of broadcast and cable coverage “revealed an alarming reality: not one of the outlets could muster up the courage to simply refer to it as the Gulf of Mexico.” “Instead,” he grimly shared, “television news organizations tied themselves in knots, performing linguistic gymnastics to stay out of Donald Trump’s crosshairs, while also tiptoeing around audiences who would have surely been incensed to see them bend the knee and call it the ‘Gulf of America.’” He cited examples, ranging from “the Gulf” to “off the coast of Florida” to “the Florida Gulf coast.” The former conservative-turned-ardent progressive seemed particular miffed at CNN’s Jake Tapper for having used “Gulf of America” and “Gulf of Mexico” and then NBC’s Tom Costello for using Gulf of Mexico before flipping to simply “the Gulf.” Darcy whined this was all “an act of submission” to dictator Trump and anything but “a fairly harmless concession” because “Trump made it clear that he will punish news organizations that do not fall in line on the matter when he banned The Associated Press...for refusing to bend the knee.” He lectured his fellow lefties this was worth raising hell publicly over because, otherwise, it’s an open question what they’ll do when the President vis-à-vis Greenland and Panama. It sure seemed like he wanted this otherwise unifying event and marvel of modern science to be some sort of last stand for the liberal media: “When the battle is over what words are permitted to be used, cute linguistic gymnastics amount to a surrender. Words are the front lines of truth, and once they’re ceded, it becomes far easier for strongmen like Trump to shape reality.” This real-life Chicken Little closed by deeming last Tuesday a “significant” and “uncomfortable...crack in the Fourth Estate's foundation” and willingness to accept “authoritarianism...through softened language and adjusted maps.” In essence, Darcy suggested America has made way for the country to join history’s list of dangerous, evil regimes to grow, as evidenced by....whether you say “Gulf of Mexico” or “Gulf of America.”