Hard-left Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) spoke about dismantling the Department of Homeland Security at a town hall on Wednesday night, escalating her criticism of federal immigration enforcement. An audience member asked, “How do we get ICE out of America?” “What I will say is that there is a [sic] easier conversation happening today than six, seven years ago, when I got to Congress, about what we need to do with ICE, which is to abolish it,” Omar replied. “There is a lot of conversation about what the dismantlement [sic] of the Department of Homeland Security should look like, because right now, the agencies that are put together — do not have accountability in the way that that formation exists. And it’s very important for us — if we’re not going to go back, to pre-2002, in looking at how these agencies used to operate, without this level of brutality that we are seeing — then we need to figure out a different system, and that can work for people where little children are not afraid of federal agents trying to carry out the duties they were designated to carry out but instead ended up terrorizing whole communities.” Ilhan Omar says Democrats don’t just want to abolish ICE, they’re already planning how they will dismantle DHS entirely. OMAR: “There is a lot of conversation about what the dismantlement of the Department of Homeland Security should look like.” pic.twitter.com/XxPXUUuSPq — RNC Research (@RNCResearch) February 19, 2026 The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was created in the wake of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, marking the most significant federal reorganization since 1947. The coordinated attacks killed nearly 3,000 people and injured more than 6,000. The Islamic extremist attack on America was orchestrated by Osama bin Laden and the al-Qaeda network. The attacks involved 19 hijackers — primarily Saudi nationals — seizing four commercial aircraft. Two planes struck the World Trade Center in New York City, and a third hit the Pentagon. A fourth crashed in Pennsylvania after passengers attempted to retake control from the hijackers. The attacks exposed critical vulnerabilities in domestic intelligence and aviation security, prompting President George W. Bush to establish the Office of Homeland Security just one month later. In 2002, the Homeland Security Act formally authorized the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which began operations on March 1, 2003. The new department consolidated 22 federal agencies and roughly 180,000 employees under a single umbrella to centralize: Counterterrorism: Addressing the specific threat of radicalized extremism. Border Security: Unifying the CBP and ICE to monitor points of entry. Intelligence Sharing: Bridging the gaps that allowed the 9/11 plot to go undetected. Emergency Response: Integrating FEMA for disaster resilience. Today, DHS employs about 260,000 people. While it was created in response to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, its mission has expanded to include cybersecurity as well as responsibilities related to election integrity. Despite ongoing political debates over immigration and asylum policies, the DHS remains the federal government’s central agency for integrated homeland defense, ensuring the United States is better prepared for both foreign and domestic threats.

A coalition of more than a dozen Republican attorneys general is demanding that a taxpayer-funded scientific organization scrub a politically biased climate change chapter from its official manual, according to a letter obtained by The Daily Wire.  Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen sent a letter to the National Academy of Sciences President Marcia McNutt on Thursday demanding that she “take action” to remove a section on “climate science” from the “Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence: Fourth Edition.” Knudsen notes that the chapter was authored by two leftist activists who have advocated ending the use of fossil fuels.  “This partisanship is especially troubling since taxpayer money provided by the federal government is the largest source—more than $200 million—of the National Academies’ budget,” the attorneys general wrote. “Taxpayer money should not be used for political causes, particularly by an entity that Congress created to provide independent and objective scientific reports.” The letter was also sent to the incoming president of the National Academy of Sciences, Neil Shubin. McNutt chairs the governing board of the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, which co-produced the manual with the Federal Judicial Center as a handbook for federal judges. Earlier this month, the judicial center removed the climate chapter from its version of the book after more than two dozen Republican attorneys general warned it could improperly influence their decisions.   “Like the Federal Judicial Center, the National Academies should immediately remove the climate science chapter from all available versions of the Fourth Edition to stop any continued claims of ‘political pamphleteering,’” they wrote.  The chapter in question was co-authored in part by Jessica Wentz, a fellow at Columbia Law School’s Sabin Center for Climate Change Law. In an amicus brief opposing the development of an oil drilling project in Alaska, Wentz wrote that “the world needs to phase out fossil fuels as rapidly as possible in order to avert potentially catastrophic levels of global warming and climate change.” The other co-author of the chapter is Radley Horton, a professor at Columbia University’s Climate School. Horton, who has previously trained judges on climate litigation, has said that “it’s absolutely critical that there be a global effort to do everything we can to dramatically draw down emissions.” Those acknowledged in the chapter included Michael Burger, who is representing Honolulu in litigation against energy companies, and Michael Gerrard, who has advocated for “decarbonization” through climate-related lawsuits.  In 2020, Gerrard wrote that “litigation” was needed to advance climate action.  “Until and unless elections bring to power a president, a Congress, and local officials who will take the necessary measures, litigation is needed to inhibit those who will try to move backwards, spur on those with good intentions, help implement the policies set by wise Congresses past, and continue the quest for redress for victims,” he wrote.  Both Gerrard and Burger are part of Columbia’s climate change law center.  The Republican attorneys general argued that the views of the authors and reviewers skewed the chapter in one direction.  “Not surprisingly given the strong biases of its authors, reviewers, and sources, the climate science chapter presents as settled the very methodologies that plaintiffs rely on to impose liability on fossil-fuel defendants. The chapter presents this science as authoritative without acknowledging contrary views or disclosing the many conflicts of the authors, reviewers, and sources. Ethics experts have noted that these issues raise serious ethics concerns,” they wrote.   The National Academy of Sciences was allocated $133 million in federal funding for fiscal year 2025 and has been awarded $13.9 million so far this fiscal year. It frequently receives grants from the Department of Transportation, the Pentagon, and the National Science Foundation. Other states that signed onto the letter included Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Idaho, Iowa, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, West Virginia, and Wyoming. The effort was also backed by American Energy CEO Jason Isaacs and Will Hild of Consumers’ Research.  “Judicial education must explain scientific method, not normalize litigation strategies or launder contested theories as settled fact,” Isaacs told The Daily Wire. “When taxpayer-funded institutions elevate one side of active lawsuits without disclosing conflicts, that undermines confidence in the courts and the rule of law.” Hild said the academy should “pull this biased climate chapter and stop using taxpayer resources to push a radical political agenda.”

In a major shift in European foreign policy, the Council of the European Union formally announced on Thursday that it has added the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) to the EU terrorist list. The decision follows a preliminary political agreement reached by the Foreign Affairs Council in late January and marks a definitive end to months of internal diplomatic friction. The designation triggers an immediate suite of restrictive measures under the EU’s counterterrorism sanctions regime. Effective Friday, all funds, financial assets, and economic resources belonging to the IRGC within EU member states will be frozen. Furthermore, EU operators are now strictly prohibited from making any funds or economic resources available to the group. This move expands the EU terrorist list to include 13 individuals and 23 groups and entities. It’s official: the EU has finally designated #Iran‘s regime’s IRGC as a terrorist organization. #IRGCterroristshttps://t.co/G7Y3ERj75z pic.twitter.com/49eNrOVbXs — Jason Brodsky (@JasonMBrodsky) February 19, 2026 The path to this decision was fraught with contention. As recently as late January, reports indicated that France, Spain, and Italy had voiced legal reservations, effectively stalling the designation, which requires unanimous consent from all 27 member states. Critics, including Dutch MEP Bart Groothuis, had publicly blasted the holdouts, citing the IRGC’s role in crushing internal dissent and its involvement in extraterritorial operations, such as the targeting of synagogues in Germany. The IRGC, which serves as the “praetorian guard” for Iran’s Supreme Leader, has been accused by international observers of extreme brutality. Reports from earlier this year suggested that IRGC and Basij forces used live ammunition against peaceful demonstrators, with some estimates citing over 15,000 deaths in January alone. Beyond Iran’s borders, the IRGC’s Quds Force has long been viewed by Western intelligence as a primary driver of state-sponsored terrorism. The EU’s legal framework for this designation, rooted in Common Position 2001/931/CFSP, is distinct from UN-led sanctions against Al-Qaeda or ISIL. By utilizing its autonomous sanctions regime, the EU has now aligned its policy with the United States, Canada, Israel, and several Gulf nations that had previously designated the IRGC as a terrorist organization. In a statement accompanying the regulation, the Council noted that “competent authorities” had provided the necessary legal basis for the listing, satisfied that the entity was involved in terrorist acts. The regulation was signed in Brussels by Council President Marilena Raouna and is set to be binding across all member states upon publication in the Official Journal.

The Dublin-based rock band U2 just released a tribute song dedicated to Renee Good, the anti-ICE activist who was killed during an altercation with ICE officers in Minneapolis last month. The song “American Obituary,” part of the six-track EP “U2 Days of Ash,” debuted on Wednesday, according to The New York Post.  “Renee Good born to die free/American mother of three/ Seventh day January/ A bullet for еach child, you see,” the lyrics say in part. “The color of her eyе/ 930 Minneapolis/ To desecrate domestic bliss/ Three bullets blast, three babies kissed/ Renee the domestic terrorist???” The refrain says: “What you can’t kill can’t die/ America will rise/ Against the people of the lie/ I love you more/ Than hate loves war.” U2 lead singer Bono described the new release as a “song of fury… but more than that a song of grief” in a statement published on the band’s digital fanzine, which is called “Propaganda.” “Not just for Renee but for the death of an America that at the very least would have had an inquiry into her killing… for her family as well as the credibility of law enforcement and the critical role they play in keeping the peace, keeping the citizenry safe,” the singer said.  He also tried to explain why he, an Irishman, is involving himself in American politics. “U2’s been banging on about America most of our artistic life… this is a country we love and has loved us back. Amazingly,” Bono said. “Americans for the most part have given U2 and me in particular permission to mouth off… And on this stuff I think people know that I’ve been an equal opportunity pest on the left as well as the right.” Despite these attempts to justify the song, the Irish recording artist got blasted on social media. “It appears Ireland has stronger illegal immigration laws than the U.S. Maybe U2 could sing a song about that,” an X user replied. “As an American, I can comfortably say, I don’t give a sh** what any band thinks…especially a foreign band,” another commenter agreed. “No songs dedicated to all the victims killed by illegal aliens …. Hmmm,” another observed. This is the second recently released mainstream “protest song” dedicated to anti-ICE sentiment. Far-left activist singer Bruce Springsteen released “Streets of Minneapolis” in January after spending one day writing it. That song was also mocked online. 

Nearly a third of Republican voters

GOOD NEWS! ... NYT ALLEGES DEMOCRAT LEADER LEARNED LESSON FROM LAST YEAR ... CALLS ON MEMBERS NOT TO DISRUPT TRUMP'S SOTU AGAIN NEXT WEEK ... WE'LL SEE! ... NYT: Democrats Plan to Counter Trump’s Speech to Congress With Rally

Yet the triumphant Left never imagined a Trump reelection.

REUTERS–The number of Americans filing new applications for unemployment benefits fell more than expected last week, consistent with a stabilizing labor market. Initial claims for state unemployment benefits dropped 23,000 to a seasonally adjusted 206,000 for the week ended February 14, the Labor Department said on Thursday. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast 225,000 claims for the latest week. Last week’s drop marked a signficant decline in claims since they jumped to 232,000 at the end of January. Minutes of the Federal Reserve’s January 27-28 policy meeting published on Wednesday showed the “vast majority of participants judged that labor market conditions had been showing some signs of stabilization.” Still, concerns over downside risks to the labor market remained. The minutes also noted some policymakers “pointed to the possibility that a further fall in labor demand could push the unemployment rate sharply higher in a low-hiring environment or that the concentration of job gains in a few less cyclically sensitive sectors was potentially signaling heightened vulnerability in the overall labor market.”  The claims data covered the week during which the government surveyed employers for the nonfarm payrolls portion of February’s employment report. Job growth accelerated in January, though nearly all the employment gains came from the healthcare and social assistance sector. Policymakers and economists say immigration policies were constraining job growth. Lingering uncertainty from import tariffs remained a drag on hiring while artificial intelligence was also adding another layer of caution, economists said. The number of people receiving unemployment benefits after an initial week of aid, a proxy for hiring, increased 17,000 to a seasonally 1.869 million during the week ended February 7, the claims report showed.  The so-called continuing claims suggested that laid-off workers were experiencing difficulties finding new positions. The median duration of unemployment is near four-year highs. The lack of hiring has significantly impacted recent college graduates, who because of no or limited work history, cannot file for unemployment benefits and are not captured in the claims data. Originally published by Reuters The post US Weekly Jobless Claims Fall More Than Expected Amid Labor Market Stability appeared first on The Daily Signal.

I never imagined that an interfaith worship service would require courage to attend. But on Sept. 7 what was meant to be a sacred gathering of Jews and Christians praying side by side turned into an ordeal showing how antisemitism looks in America today: loud, aggressive, and terrifying. We planned the service carefully and respectfully. Multiple synagogues and churches agreed to come together at the Legacy International Center, a Christian venue known for hosting worship and standing with Israel. Rabbis and pastors prepared prayers. We sang in Hebrew and English, accompanied by a church praise band and an African American gospel choir. We didn’t advertise publicly; we invited only our distribution list. Nearly 500 people registered. I believed we had chosen a safe space. Then, just before the doors opened, a staff member pulled me aside and said, “They’re here.” Outside, agitators dressed in black and wearing face masks had gathered on the sidewalk, waving Palestinian flags. They laid dolls across the driveway so that guests had to drive over them while agitators screamed “baby killers” at them through megaphones. This wasn’t protest. It was intimidation, and it was aimed squarely at people coming to worship. My friend Ruth and her husband experienced it immediately. As they drove in, sirens blared and chants echoed through bullhorns. Disruptors swarmed the driveway, some holding signs with swastikas, others blocking cars with their bodies. When Ruth stopped, a masked woman jumped onto the hood of her car, banging on the windshield and screaming. Ruth was genuinely afraid for her life. Stephanie’s experience was no better. Her car was surrounded. An agitator announced her arrival and called her “super racist” and “super hateful” over a bullhorn. Another screamed at her to get out and fight. Someone struck her window and tried to shove a sign inside her car. The hostility was so overwhelming that many guests drove away altogether. Over 100 guests who registered did not attend. Marca tried to ask the agitators to leave private property. Instead, four or five people surrounded her, jammed bullhorns inches from her face, and filmed her aggressively. She escaped only because a friend physically intervened to shield her. The police did nothing to stop it. Even inside the worship venue, we were not spared. Drums pounded and sirens wailed throughout the service, intentionally attempting to drown out prayers and sermons. People left with ringing ears that lasted for days. When my friend Jake politely asked the agitators to quiet down so we could worship, they surrounded him, forced him toward a busy street, and followed him screaming, “Go back to Israel!” and “You’re a Nazi, you’re a baby killer!” The actions of those who harassed, trespassed, and sought to drown out our speech and religious liberty went far beyond anything protected by the First Amendment. The First Amendment offers no protection to those physically interfering with religious worship or intimidating religious worshipers by seeking to drown out beliefs they despise. Afterward, the harassment continued online. The agitators targeted guests on Instagram for being Jewish, posting photos and trying to reveal their identities. Disruptors used CodePink channels to threaten us, promising, “we will not give them a moment of peace.”   This is what antisemitism looks like today. It is not confined to history books or distant places. It is rampant in San Diego and across the country, often masquerading as political activism while using the oldest tools of hatred: intimidation, dehumanization, inversion, and collective blame. The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism, adopted by the U.S. government in 2019, describes exactly what we experienced: hatred expressed through rhetoric and physical acts, directed at Jewish individuals and religious institutions, and at those who stand with them. Our free exercise of religion was deliberately obstructed. Our Christian allies were targeted too, punished for their solidarity. The consequences have been devastating. Since that day, our Alliance has been unable to hold another event. People are afraid to attend. Our membership list has been compromised. Churches that once stood ready to partner with us now fear for their congregations. We are now seeking legal protection through a federal lawsuit, for the simple right to gather, pray, and worship without fear. I have also testified before President Donald Trump’s Religious Liberty Commission in the hope that I can help raise more awareness to the hatred we face. No one in America should have to run a gauntlet of hate to attend a religious service. If we accept this as normal, we signal that intimidation works and that our Jewish communities—and those who stand with them—are fair game. I refuse to accept that. Interfaith worship should be a sign of hope, not a trigger for terror. Standing together today is how we ensure that people of faith, of all faiths, can worship in peace tomorrow. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post Interfaith Worship Should Be a Sign of Peace, but Leftist Agitators Brought Terror appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Amidst reports that the United States is close to a major war with Iran, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth said his job is to make sure the military is capable of backing up the president.  “We have enormous capabilities, unlike anyone else in the world, and I think the big difference between this department and others is that we unlock and unleash our war fighters to get the job done should they have to,” Hegseth said in response to a question from The Daily Signal in St. Louis, Missouri.   “But our hope is that we never have to use that,” he added. “The president is a negotiator looking for a deal. It would be wise for Iran to see that deal.” JUST IN: I asked @SecWar about the Axios report saying a massive military operation in Iran is coming soon."We would never reveal what we may or may not do. We have enormous capabilities, unlike anyone else in the world, and I think the big difference between this Department…— Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell (@TheElizMitchell) February 19, 2026 Axios reported Wednesday that President Donald Trump is close to waging a war with Iran, and that a U.S. military operation in Iran would likely be a massive, weeks-long campaign that would look more like full-fledged war than the recent operation in Venezuela.  While Iranian leaders want to reach a nuclear deal with the U.S., they are also rushing to prepare for war if negotiations fail, the Wall Street Journal reported. The U.S. could be ready to launch a “sustained” bombing campaign on Iran in the near future, the New York Post reported. “The world has seen over the last year plus what the president is willing to do,” Hegseth said. “When he speaks, they should listen, and when he says Iran’s not going to have a nuclear weapon, and they should negotiate that. He means it, and our job at the Department of War is to have the capabilities to back him up.”  The Trump administration has one message to Iran: come to the table and make a deal, Hegseth said.  “Two people will make this decision: the Iranians could step up and make a real deal,” Hegseth said, “and ultimately President Trump will decide if it’s a good enough deal for the American people.”  On Tuesday, Trump advisers Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff had a three-hour meeting with Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi in Geneva, Switzerland. Hegseth echoed the message of other Trump administration officials that the talks yielded progress.  Vice President Vance told Fox News’ Laura Ingraham that the talks “went well” in some ways, but “in other ways it was very clear that the president has set some red lines that the Iranians are not yet willing to actually acknowledge and work through.” The Daily Signal asked Hegseth about Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei suggesting Iran could sink a U.S. war ship.  Hegseth also responded to Iranian Ayatollah Ali Khamenei saying Iran could sink U.S. ships. “I feel very good about the capabilities of our warships,” he told @DailySignal. “Very good.” pic.twitter.com/Qnl5Y4mJEP— Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell (@TheElizMitchell) February 19, 2026 “I feel very good about the capabilities of our warships,” Hegseth said. “Very good.” The war secretary spoke to reporters following a stop on his “Arsenal of Freedom” tour in St. Louis, Missouri, to visit a Boeing facility.  Hegseth addressed some of Boeing’s 18,000 employees in St. Louis and asked them to build more planes at a faster pace. “When we unleash American industry, America wins,” Hegseth said. “When we compete, we win. When we innovate, we win. When we move fast, we win.”  The post Hegseth Responds to Reports War With Iran Is Imminent appeared first on The Daily Signal.