'Donald Trump is creating fear and terror'

'I'm still unsure whether we technically broke an immigration law'

'You just can't allow that'

Last month in Arizona a young man profited unexpectedly from choosing honesty over greed after finding a lost wallet. 14-year-old Cody Chalmers found the wallet while riding his bike in Chandler on May 2nd, finding 300$ cash and credit cards inside. But even though he was in the middle of saving money for an electric […] The post Arizona Teen Returns Lost Wallet Containing $300, Receives Electric Bike He Had Been Saving for appeared first on Good News Network.

As Senate Republican leadership rushes to pass the “big, beautiful” budget reconciliation bill, the math to get to a GOP consensus in both houses of Congress has suddenly gotten much harder.  The “big, beautiful bill,” a 10-year budget package, is the main legislative vehicle for delivering on President Donald Trump’s campaign promises and can be passed by a simple majority in the House and Senate alike. The bill would provide funding for border security and deportations, while also extending Trump’s first-term 2017 tax cuts before their expiration at the end of the year. But various factions have drawn red lines on issues such as overall spending levels, benefits reforms, tax policy, and Biden-era green energy policies. These competing interests and varied interpretations of the new Republican movements’ priorities could threaten the bill’s passage. One way or another, something’s got to give, and lawmakers’ “red lines” will have to be redrawn. Here are the main players putting their foot down on nonnegotiable issues. Senate Republicans: Don’t Touch Medicaid Taxpayer-funded health care, which makes up a massive share of the federal budget, has become an electrified “third rail” in American politics, as Republicans’ attempt to repeal Obamacare preceded a demoralizing electoral defeat in the 2018 midterms. For Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., winning over Medicaid-reform skeptics is essential for passing the budget reconciliation bill. Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo. (Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images) As of now, there are enough Republicans calling for a moderation of Medicaid reforms to have a say over whether or not the bill passes.  Among the most outspoken GOP senators warning against aggressive Medicaid restructuring are Josh Hawley of Missouri, Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Jim Justice of West Virginia, and Jerry Moran of Kansas. To be sure, the full number of Republicans expressing nervousness and reservations about Medicaid reforms goes well beyond those five. It’s one of the trickiest issues to resolve, as Medicaid reforms make up an almost $1 trillion portion of the House bill’s projected 10-year spending cuts. Green Energy Republicans One of the deals that won over the fiscal hawk House Freedom Caucus to support the package in May was a last-minute agreement to speed up the expiration of Biden-era green energy tax credits and subsidies. Now, a large group of Republicans—which overlaps with the Medicaid defenders—is calling for those expiration dates to be eased.  Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., is among the most outspoken of those senators, and has argued that scrapping green energy incentives would harm the business environment.  He has called changes to these incentives “void of any understanding of just how these supply chains work.” Sens. John Hoeven, R-N.D., and Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., have also suggested tweaking the House’s work of undoing green energy incentives. Freedom Caucus Won’t Support Watered-Down Bill Passing a heavily amended bill through the Senate is one thing, but subsequently getting it back through the House of Representatives again would be a Herculean task. The House Freedom Caucus—composed largely of Republicans who view the national debt as a dire crisis—has signaled it will not support a Senate bill that undoes last-minute House deals on repealing Biden green energy policies and implementing more aggressive Medicaid reforms. “We Stand Firm—No Senate Rollbacks of Conservative Wins,” the caucus said in a recent statement posted to X. “The House Freedom Caucus Board will stand united holding the line. The American people didn’t send us here to cave to the swamp — they sent us here to change it.”https://t.co/cCgih3Gb4Z— House Freedom Caucus (@freedomcaucus) June 7, 2025 “We want to be crystal clear: if the Senate attempts to water down, strip out, or walk back the hard-fought spending reductions and … Green New Scam rollbacks achieved in this legislation, we will not accept it.” Senate Fiscal Hawks There are at least four Senate Republicans who have voiced concerns about overall deficit levels in the big, beautiful bill: Sens. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, Rick Scott of Florida, Rand Paul of Kentucky, and Mike Lee of Utah. That’s yet another bloc in the Senate that could have a say over whether the bill passes. These senators all demand a steep increase in spending cuts, but have not yet coalesced around a plan to negotiate for that goal as a united front.  Johnson wants the process to be redone, with the bill split into multiple parts. One bill would bank savings, extend tax cuts, and raise the debt limit, while another would be a “forensic analysis” that would bring the federal budget back to an inflation-adjusted, pre-COVID-19 pandemic spending level. Johnson seems serious about it, too. “I recommend they don’t dare me,” he told The Daily Signal when asked what he would do if Senate leadership simply dared him to vote against a bill that would fulfill Trump’s campaign promises.  “Work with me, and let’s do something that can pass, something that I can support.” Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call via Getty Images) Paul, meanwhile, also wants spending reductions and has voiced skepticism over the Trump administration’s expensive funding requests for border wall construction.  Paul’s main sticking point seems to be the debt limit, which he thinks is being raised too high. “I think it’s a terrible idea to do this,” he has said of raising the debt ceiling by $5 trillion. “You can say it doesn’t directly add to the debt, but if you increase the ceiling $5 trillion, you’ll meet that.” Lee, on the other hand, has said “there’s still time to fix” the bill by making it more conservative, and is pushing for more cost-saving provisions, such as an amendment to sell off federal lands. That provision was thrown out of the House bill. SALT Caucus No Senate Republicans like SALT deductions.  A SALT deduction allows residents in high-tax states to deduct their state and local taxes on their federal tax returns. Under Trump’s first-term 2017 tax cuts—set to expire at the end of the year—taxpayers can deduct up to $10,000 on their returns under SALT.  Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., raised the SALT cap to $40,000 to appease blue-state Republican holdouts—one of the last-minute deals that ensured the bill’s passage through the House. Some of the SALT advocates are now saying they will reject any bill that alters that agreement. Warning for Trump billSenate GOP moving to gut deal cut between NY Rs and Johnson.“If the Senate changes the SALT deduction in any way, I will be a NO, and I'm not going to buckle on that. And I know in speaking to my other colleagues, they will be a no as well,” Lawler warns pic.twitter.com/Wsac0wZsCr— Manu Raju (@mkraju) June 8, 2025 “If the Senate changes the SALT deduction in any way, I will be a no, and I’m not going to buckle on that. And I know in speaking to my other colleagues, they will be a no as well,” Rep. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., warned in a recent CNN interview. Is There an Alternative? Given the complicated calculus of writing a bill that can please both the Senate and the House, some members are looking for new pay-fors that will provide more flexibility. Tillis, for example, told The Daily Signal that improving the auditing of Medicare and Medicaid could unearth big savings. “There are enormous savings to be had if we create programs and we provide people technology and infrastructure to do it. If you just do nothing more than leverage the analytics programs that CMS has, and you get a good program office in there, you can very quickly drive out savings,” he said, referring to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.” CNBC: You think that's gonna go through — telling the Federal Reserve that can't pay interest to banks anymore?TED CRUZ: For nearly 100 years, until the financial crisis, the Fed paid no interest on reservesCNBC: It was put in place to ensure the stability of the financial… pic.twitter.com/ujirfd6oVq— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) June 5, 2025 Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, has also proposed radical monetary reform, such as having the Federal Reserve cease paying interest on bank reserves. “For most of the history of the Federal Reserve, they did not pay interest on reserves held by banks,” Cruz has said. “And so eliminating that would save a trillion dollars over 10 years.” .@LindseyGrahamSC tells @DailySignal that making the big, beautiful bill more conservative in the senate would help ensure passage in the House pic.twitter.com/UthyZw2hme— George Caldwell (@GCaldwell_news) June 5, 2025 The ball is in the Senate’s court to come up with some plan that delivers the savings House fiscal hawks are demanding, while also settling disagreements on controversial benefits reforms. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., has suggested that the Senate can find a way to make the bill more fiscally conservative than the House’s version. “I think the Senate making the bill more fiscally responsible will actually help with the House,” he told The Daily Signal on Friday. The post Fractious Factions: Why Passing ‘Big, Beautiful Bill’ Through Senate Will Be Difficult appeared first on The Daily Signal.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. George Orwell’s 1984, the literary equivalent of a klaxon screaming “WARNING: TOTALITARIANISM AHEAD!”, has now been fitted with… a warning. A preface, to be precise, from the hand of one Dolen Perkins-Valdez, who informs readers that the book’s protagonist, Winston Smith, holds views about women that are “despicable.” Apparently, the fictional character in a novel about mind control, censorship, and the slow boiling of individual thought in the stew of state propaganda has now committed the gravest sin of all: he failed to pass a 2025 HR sensitivity seminar. This is the 75th-anniversary edition of 1984. That’s three-quarters of a century of warning bells, wake-up calls, and high-school essays on why Big Brother is bad. And now we’re being told by the publisher, Berkley Books, that the book needs a moral escort to make sure no one gets the wrong idea. The irony is now wearing neon body paint and dancing in the street. Perkins-Valdez opens her commentary with an admission: she read the book and tried to “enjoy the novel on its own terms.” Good for her. That’s usually how reading works. But then she hits a snag: the line, “He disliked nearly all women, and especially the young and pretty ones.” At this point, she confesses she might’ve given up on the book entirely had she read it earlier in life. Wear Your Support With This “1984 Was Not Supposed To Be an Instruction Manual” Shirt Yes, Winston Smith, whose life is orchestrated by telescreens, secret police, and public hangings, who is quite literally erased from existence for thinking unauthorized thoughts, is now being written off as a problematic figure for…insufficient gender positivity. Perkins-Valdez also writes that “a sliver of connection can be difficult for someone like me to find in a novel that does not speak much to race and ethnicity,” noting the absence of black characters. Let’s not forget: this is fiction. A warning. A nightmare. The literary equivalent of being screamed at by a man in a trench coat under a flickering streetlamp. It’s meant to scare the living hell out of you. It’s not that Winston Smith is a misogynist. It’s that the entire book is about a society where even noticing the difference is illegal. The whole plot is a lesson in what happens when the state starts dictating what is acceptable to think and say. And now, we’ve appended a preface that effectively tells readers what’s acceptable to feel. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Orwell’s 1984 Gets a Trigger Warning appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. New Jersey lawmakers are advancing a bill that would automatically enroll anyone who receives a vaccine into a statewide digital database, eliminating the current requirement for consent and igniting a broader conversation about data privacy and state control over personal health information. We obtained a copy of the bill for you here. The measure, labeled S1956, recently cleared the Senate Health, Human Services and Senior Citizens Committee with a 5-3 vote, split strictly along party lines. Democrats voted in favor, while Republicans stood opposed. If enacted, the bill would overhaul the New Jersey Immunization Information System, a centralized vaccine tracking program, by shifting it from a partly voluntary system to one of full automatic enrollment. Currently, only those born after January 1, 1998, are included by default unless a parent or guardian files an opt-out request. Everyone else must provide direct consent to be added. The proposed legislation would dissolve these age-based rules, placing anyone receiving a vaccine into the system automatically, regardless of birthdate or prior enrollment. The push to expand the registry stems from a pandemic-era executive order issued by Governor Phil Murphy, enacted shortly before the FDA gave emergency authorization to the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine. That temporary directive is now on track to become a lasting statute as Murphy approaches the end of his term and cannot seek reelection. While the bill does not impose vaccine requirements or restrict medical and religious exemptions, it includes a controversial provision: during any public health emergency, or when an outbreak or the threat of one is declared, the health commissioner could suspend the ability to opt out. The language authorizes denial of opt-out requests for specific vaccines and designated timeframes, raising alarms among privacy advocates. Supporters, including bill sponsor Senator Joseph Vitale, argue that automatic enrollment will streamline public health operations and improve outreach. Vitale maintains that tracking vaccine data more efficiently can help officials identify gaps and respond more effectively. But others see the bill as a step toward unchecked surveillance under the guise of health protection. As the bill moves to the full Senate, concerns continue to mount over whether the state’s expanded role in data collection signals a shift away from personal autonomy and toward institutional control, with limited mechanisms for opting out, especially when health officials can revoke that option at will. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post New Jersey Proposes a Vaccine Registry No One Asked For appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

FBI Offers $50,000 Reward for Information on Man Throwing Rocks at ICE Vehicles

The left has claimed that it’s impossible to be racist against any majority group for years, and unfortunately, as DEI has gone mainstream, those in power have seemed to agree.That is, they’ve agreed until now.Last week, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled in favor of a straight woman who had twice lost positions to gay employees. The New York Times reports that the woman claimed “an appeals court had been wrong to require her to meet a heightened burden in seeking to prove workplace discrimination because she was a member of a majority group.”“Who you have sex with, you can’t discriminate based on that, you can’t discriminate based on the color of your skin,” BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales explains. “I wish that they would add political party to that, because we all know there’s nothing worse than a Democrat who is discriminating against conservatives.”“They do it all the time,” she adds.BlazeTV contributor Matthew Marsden points out that being racist toward majority groups is still worded as “reverse discrimination.”“I know, and that’s the irony of it all. Just discrimination. There’s no reverse racism,” Gonzales agrees.“It was always dumb,” BlazeTV contributor Eric July chimes in. “Discrimination is discrimination, racism is racism or what have you now. My argument on this is that there shouldn’t even be any laws that are against any of that stuff.”“Let people do with their private property whatever the hell they want. If that means discriminating against me because I’m black, put a sign out there, I don’t give a s**t. I know not to give you any money,” he adds.Want more from Sara Gonzales?To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred take to news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Democrat Rep. Maxine Waters of California angrily denounced the Trump administration after she was denied entry into a detention center while the Los Angeles ICE riots raged on. Waters tried to cite her congressional authority of oversight when she approached the door of the Metropolitan Detention Center in downtown L.A., but a law enforcement officer rebuffed the 86-year-old and slammed the door shut as she grabbed at it. 'I pled with the National Guard, which was heavily armed, not to use their weapons against peaceful demonstrators who were simply exercising their rights to freedom of speech and protest.' "Hello, hello, hello!" she said to a California National Guard officer at the door, which was secured with plywood. "I just came to use my congressional authority to check on [SEIU union President] David Huerta." "Ma’am, our lobby is secure right now to all visitors," the officer said to her before closing the door on her. Video of the interaction went viral on social media. A separate video shows her also addressing some of the Guard troops providing security outside. "This is Trump and his outrageous attempt to not only target our sanctuary city, but to frighten us and intimidate us. This is wrong, and I hope that none of you will use those guns to shoot anybody," she told them, "and allow them to make your service a service when you're killing people." Huerta was arrested just as the rioting began on Friday evening during a protest against ICE deportations. His union immediately claimed that he was merely expressing his First Amendment right to "observe and document" law enforcement activity. RELATED: Fiery footage shows radicals in LA savagely attack law enforcement on second night of violent riots Photo by FREDERIC J. BROWN/AFP via Getty Images Waters released a statement about the incident at the detention center soon afterward. "Today, I came to the Metropolitan Detention Center to exercise my constitutional rights as a Member of Congress to check on the safety and conditions of SEIU California President David Huerta, who was arrested by ICE," she wrote."I pled with the National Guard, which was heavily armed, not to use their weapons against peaceful demonstrators who were simply exercising their rights to freedom of speech and protest," she added. "All people deserve to be treated with dignity and due process under the law. Peaceful, nonviolent demonstrations are critical to protecting our constitutional rights!" Huerta was also reportedly injured when he was arrested. On Monday, prosecutors said he was going to be charged with conspiracy to impede an officer. RELATED: Los Angeles descends into chaos after police chief says officers will not aid ICE agents; Trump sends National Guard troops Photo by Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images The riots raged on throughout the weekend, with violent protesters attacking federal agents, as well as the Los Angeles Police Department officers who eventually came to their aid. Several cars were lit on fire, including some Waymo autonomous cabs. Some in the mainstream media have been lambasted on social media for trying to downplay the rioting after President Donald Trump said he would activate the National Guard. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!