Month: March 2026

War Secretary Pete Hegseth and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Air Force General Dan Caine will hold a press briefing this morning as war in Iran continues. 

This comes as the conflict in Iran enters its second week since the February 28 Operation Epic Fury strikes that killed Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and dozens of senior Iranian officials.

Iran has since chosen Ali Khamenei’s son, 56-year-old Mojtaba Khamenei, to lead the country as Supreme Leader.

During a press conference on Monday, Trump did not rule out killing the new Supreme Leader of Iran, adding that he believes the younger Khamenei will “lead to just more of the same problem for the country.”

Trump also told reporters on Monday that the US has struck “over 5000 targets to date,” but is leaving “some of the most important targets for later, in case we need to do it.”

“If we hit them, it’s going to take many years for them to be rebuilt, having to do with electricity production and many other things, so we’re not looking to do that if we don’t have to,” he added. “We are waiting to see what happens before we hit them. We could take them all out in one day.”

WATCH:

Additionally, as The Gateway Pundit reported, US B-52 Bombers have arrived in the UK after Hegseth and Caine announced last week plans to expand inland into Iranian territory to bring “death and destruction from the sky all day long.”

JUST IN: B-52 Bombers Deployed to UK as US Operations Expand Inland and Deeper into Iranian Territory, Hegseth Vows “Death and Destruction from the Sky All Day Long”(VIDEO)

Meanwhile, questions still surround the timeline of the war, with US Central Command requesting enough support for 100 days or more, but Trump describing the war on Monday as a “short-term excursion” that will end “very soon.”

Uncertainty also remains in the oil markets as Iran has threatened to target any vessel in the Strait of Hormuz. In response, President Trump on Monday night threatened to hit Iran “TWENTY TIMES HARDER than they have been hit thus far” if they do “anything that stops the flow of Oil within the Strait of Hormuz.” He further threatened to take out the “easily destroyable targets that will make it virtually impossible for Iran to ever be built back, as a Nation, again,” adding, “Death, Fire, and Fury will reign upon them.”

This statement led crude oil prices to fall almost immediately:

If Iran does anything that stops the flow of Oil within the Strait of Hormuz, they will be hit by the United States of America TWENTY TIMES HARDER than they have been hit thus far. Additionally, we will take out easily destroyable targets that will make it virtually impossible for Iran to ever be built back, as a Nation, again — Death, Fire, and Fury will reign upon them — But I hope, and pray, that it does not happen! This is a gift from the United States of America to China, and all of those Nations that heavily use the Hormuz Strait. Hopefully, it is a gesture that will be greatly appreciated. Thank you for your attention to this matter! President DONALD J. TRUMP

The press briefing is scheduled to begin at 8 am ET.

Watch live below:

The post WATCH LIVE: War Secretary Pete Hegseth and General Dan Caine Hold Press Briefing as Iran War Enters Second Week, Trump Threatens to Hit Iran “TWENTY TIMES HARDER Than They Have Been Hit” – 8 AM ET appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

A federal appeals court has slapped down a lower court’s injunction that restricted the use of force by immigration agents in Chicago, ruling that the district judge had improperly made her court an overseer of executive branch operations in the city.

The decision stems from ongoing legal battles over “Operation Midway Blitz,” an immigration enforcement initiative in the Chicago area that has sparked large protests and riots.

U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis, who was appointed by Barack Obama, had issued multiple orders limiting agents’ tactics, including the use of tear gas and absurdly requiring daily court appearances by Border Patrol Commander Gregory Bovino.

The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 ruling on Thursday, overturned Ellis’s injunction, describing it as “constitutionally suspect” and criticizing the dismissal of the underlying lawsuit.

The case originated from a class action lawsuit filed in October by protesters, journalists, and religious leaders against Department of Homeland Security officials, including Bovino.

Plaintiffs alleged First Amendment violations, Fourth Amendment violations arising from the use of excessive force, and other claims related to the protests.

Ellis granted a preliminary injunction on November 6, restricting riot control weapons like tear gas unless there was an immediate threat, mandating body cameras, and requiring visible identification for agents, a dangerous demand given that the left has been working hard to dox and harass ICE agents and their families.

The activist judge also accused Bovino of lying under oath about what happened during the protests, including his claim that he was hit by a rock before deploying tear gas in Little Village.

The appeals court had previously intervened, staying Ellis’s order for daily reports from Bovino in October and halting the preliminary injunction in November, calling it “overbroad” and an infringement on separation of powers.

In January, the plaintiffs moved to dismiss the lawsuit after agents were withdrawn, but Ellis expressed concerns about dismissing the lawsuit due to ongoing enforcement threats and a related shooting in Minneapolis.

The Chicago Tribune reports:

The majority was particularly critical of Ellis for dismissing the lawsuit “without prejudice” even though the parties didn’t ask for it, leaving the door open for plaintiffs to refile the case at some point down the road.

“Because the district court dismissed this case without prejudice — against the plaintiffs’ unopposed request for a dismissal with prejudice — any class members or the lead plaintiffs could refile these claims tomorrow,” the majority opinion stated. “They could ask the district court to reinstate a near-identical preliminary injunction, adopting the facts and legal reasoning from the district court’s order.”

The majority opinion said they “can help avoid that pitfall by vacating the order that depends on these conclusions.”

Bovino was reassigned the next month.

The new ruling by the 7th Circuit vacated the injunction after the lawsuit’s dismissal.

The post Appeals Court Slaps Down Obama-Appointed Chicago Activist Judge for Overstepping in Trump Immigration Enforcement Battle appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Culture

The End of the War-Hero Writer

Expect no great man of letters to emerge from the bloodied fields of Iran.

Modern warfare does not a good movie make. Nor a good book, I suspect. Drones zipping about like flies and being chased by other drones and interceptors are not the same as John Wayne charging with his Marines onto the beach at Iwo Jima, not to mention Gary Cooper as Sergeant York picking off the Germans on the Western Front. Old-style warfare tended to get the creative juices flowing throughout history. Papa Hemingway and Scott Fitzgerald became stars following the First World War, with their war-background books, as did Norman Mailer, Irwin Shaw, and James Jones following the Second World War. 

It is no longer fashionable among my friends to disparage or praise writers because no one reads any more. It used to be different. As the last century unfolded, writers became famous, publicized like movie stars, with lifestyles to match. They had license to drink more, make love to more women, and engage in public arguments galore. Overnight writers had become super stars, and I for one was drawn to them like the proverbial moth to you know what. 

I was lucky to meet the three great postwar writers, Mailer, Shaw, and Jones (all three had seen combat), the latter only once when I spent a whole day interviewing him in Paris. Norman and Irwin became friends of mine, and I remember Norman telling Irwin Shaw, “Irwin—you, physical courage. Me—moral courage.” The Young Lions, The Naked and the Dead, and From Here to Eternity were three great novels that captured the American fighting man. A German, Erich Maria Remarque, had captured the public’s attention with his magnificent All Quiet On The Western Front following the First World War. The young German soldier Paul had feelings and doubts and aspirations and was like most of those on the opposite trenches for four long years. Irwin’s young German in Lions, Christian Diestl, also had dreams and decent feelings, and Shaw was criticized and insulted for showing a German to be normal—needless to say, from those back home who had never experienced combat or been in a war, that is. The French and Italians did not produce any earth-shaking volume about the war for obvious reasons. Nor did the Brits, funny enough, except for the “Sword of Honor” trilogy of Evelyn Waugh. 

I have read all or most of Evelyn Waugh’s novels, and greatly enjoyed them. I never met the man who died 60 years ago this Easter. But I’ve known many of his acquaintances, including Auberon Waugh, his first born, who was a fellow columnist at the Spectator with me for many years until his death 15 years or so ago. Bron, as we all called him, was as mischievous as his father, but was not a hater of humanity, unlike his old man. Waugh junior disliked Americans to a degree that he would write columns describing some obese young American tourist and her oversized shoes. Bron himself was no beauty. Overweight, bald, with tufts of hair jutting over his ears, he wore tiny glasses on the tip of his nose. While doing his military service, he managed to shoot himself with his jammed Brent gun, and suffered from his wounds for the rest of his life. I once reminded him it was a Brit who had shot him, not a Yank, but it was no use. Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry Taki diagnosed his anti-Americanism as pathological envy.

His father Evelyn was far worse as a person. Separating the writer from the writing is important. As a person he was a grumpy, drunken, social climber, a practicing homosexual who had seven children by his second wife, a brave soldier and a vicious gossiper, who wrote the most exquisite pared-down prose. Go figure, as they say. The nice man theory of literary merit is nonexistent. In our emotional era of cancelling and shouting down anyone that offends us, Waugh would have been a goner, along with his work. Waugh senior’s books were a delight. Brideshead Revisited, Vile Bodies, A Handful of Dust, Decline and Fall, Black Mischief, Scoop and others were full of characters shown with clarity and elegance in all their absurdities. Yet Waugh’s predilection for grotesque rudeness and condescension to anyone below his social status, especially any foreigner, was what betrayed Waugh’s insecurity of having been born not of the upper classes. He was the most awful of men and the most delightful of writers. 

I’ve gone on too long about Waugh because compared to him, my three American novelists, Mailer, Shaw and Jones, were angels of compassion and understanding. Shaw and Mailer were terrific womanizers, chasing the fairer sex non-stop, whether they were married or not. Jones was more of a homebody and loved his wife Gloria dearly. As did Shaw love Marian, but just couldn’t stop going after every woman he came across. No wonder I wanted to become a writer. 

Now if anyone is reading this with literary ambitions, don’t waste your time going to the Middle East. Only machines are doing the fighting and pilots you cannot see or meet. Drones are rather hard to capture on paper and endear them to your readers. Give it up and become an influencer instead.

The post The End of the War-Hero Writer appeared first on The American Conservative.

Foreign Affairs

Wars Abroad Lead to Suppression at Home

Supporters of the assault on Iran were quick to smear critics as traitors.

President George Washington’s often-read but rarely heeded Farewell Address includes a passage that has remained perennially relevant in American life. Reflecting on the domestic costs of entangling alliances, Washington warned 

Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second [reinforce] the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots, who may resist the intrigues of the favorite, are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people to surrender their interests.

Washington’s warning proved prophetic in the mid-20th Century as the United States shirked its traditional nonaligned foreign policy, and supporters of overseas crusades have consistently used these campaigns abroad to manufacture enemies at home. This conflation of foreign enemies with their alleged American supporters has come at a high cost to liberty and civility, essential components for a republic of self-governing individuals.

This conflation is occurring again today, as supporters of President Donald Trump’s war on Iran have taken to accusing opponents of siding with the enemy. Setting the tone for this new wave of slander, Fox News pundit Laura Ingraham waved away substantive concerns about the war and declared, “The real conflict here is between those who believe America is good and those who believe fundamentally that it is corrupt and evil.” 

Ingraham, of course, is not alone. In the months leading up to the war, another Fox News host, Mark Levin, used his platform to viciously condemn noninterventionists, comparing them to enemy sympathizers and modern-day Nazis. Finally, even less incendiary supporters of the war have set up a false binary where a preference for caution is tantamount to aiding America’s enemies. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA), in a complete abdication of his Constitutional duties, voiced opposition to an upcoming War Powers Resolution vote, saying, “It plays right into the hands of the enemy.” Johnson’s intervention worked, and last week Congress failed to reassert its authority to declare war. 

Given the fraught history of accusations that war skeptics aid the enemy—and the ramifications of such accusations on domestic life—it would behoove Americans to be on guard against the presence and persistence of this phenomenon. 

Such false binaries and baseless accusations have a long and shameful history within the United States, one that has shaped policy and led to the suppression of dissent. During the nadir of modern American civil rights that accompanied World War I, the specter of enemies within led to egregious legal curtailments of basic liberties and inspired waves of vigilante violence. Before American entry into World War II, interventionists cultivated an environment of fear and paranoia that buttressed illegal wiretapping and domestic espionage against Americans whose only crime was wanting to keep out of the war.

Even when such accusations and slander do not manifest in civil rights violations by the government, they nevertheless artificially circumscribe public opinion on foreign policy to the detriment of American society. As the U.S. entered World War II after Pearl Harbor, a wave of prominent newspapers throughout the country fired noninterventionist writers and editors, thereby constricting the reach of formerly mainstream opinions on war and peace. 

Throughout the Cold War, the fear of communism and similar false binaries greased the skids for the formation of a permanent warfare state. During Vietnam, supporters of the war used the spectacle of a largely left-wing anti-war movement to negatively polarize grassroots conservatives into supporting it. And throughout the Global War on Terror, the logic of “you’re either with us or against us” permeated American politics. Washington’s acquisition of security dependents throughout the Cold War has resulted in an outdated alliance structure depicted as a league of democracies who fight against autocracies—more binary thinking that corrodes public discourse.

We do not know how the current war will end. We do not know whether the slander against war critics will manifest in violations of civil rights as it has in the past, although, given President Trump’s recent track record, there is ample reason for alarm. Regardless of how things shake out, if you oppose this war, do not be intimidated by this slander. If you are one of those Americans who are unsure what to make of the war, do not allow this slander to sway your mind.

Finally, if you support this intervention, do not forget the unseen costs that come with overheated pro-war rhetoric. Our republic cannot survive if every foreign adventure becomes a domestic purge.

The post Wars Abroad Lead to Suppression at Home appeared first on The American Conservative.

Foreign Affairs

Is an Off-Ramp With Iran Possible?

It’s not too late for a diplomatic resolution.

(Wikimedia Commons)

Militarily speaking, the United States has a lot to be proud of. The war in Iran, now over a week old, has blown up plenty of buildings, killed a whole crop of senior Iranian officials—most notably the Iranian Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei—and destroyed a significant chunk of the Islamic Republic’s military capacity. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Dan Caine have provided several updates at the Pentagon lauding the Trump administration’s brilliance, marveling at the U.S. military’s technological superiority, and bragging about Iran’s inability to control its own airspace. Senior Israeli military officials are just as bombastic; on March 5, Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir claimed that 80 percent of Iran’s air defenses were destroyed and 60 percent of its missile launchers were taken out of action.

But the Iranians aren’t going down without a fight. Although Iran is unquestionably the weaker party in this war, the country’s leadership is treating it as an existential conflict that requires a total-war strategy. To date, Tehran has calculated that expanding the conflict into other states, chief among them Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Qatar, is not only appropriate as a method of retaliation but also the best way to compel Trump to eventually sue for peace. The idea is to press the Gulf States, all of whom want to get back to business as usual, into lobbying the Trump administration for a ceasefire. Whether or not the gambit works, the Iranians risk ruining the very detente they established with the Gulf over the last several years by sending missiles into hotels, oil fields, gas terminals, and ships transiting the Strait of Hormuz.

Right now, it’s difficult to envision an off-ramp to the war. Based strictly on public remarks, the Trump administration doesn’t appear all that interested in sitting down with the Iranians, either directly or indirectly, to find a way out. Trump is talking about a full-blown Iranian capitulation, or, in his words, “unconditional surrender,” which could either be a negotiating ploy on his end or a genuine statement of intent. If it’s the latter, then the war will go on for weeks, if not months, because the Iranian regime is not going to simply throw up its hands and give up, no matter how lopsided the military balance is. Nor has the regime, or what’s left of it, decided to grant Trump his wish to pick its next supreme leader, which made about as much sense as giving the Iranians veto power over who wins the 2028 U.S. presidential election. 

Even so, it’s far too early to eliminate diplomacy from the picture. Trump is fickle, unpredictable, and malleable, and he doesn’t like to take any of his options off the table. Although he may be sounding  more like George W. Bush with every passing day, nobody can say with absolute certainty that “dealmaking Don” won’t make an appearance. Depending on the regime’s ability to sustain retaliation across the Gulf, its ability to stay unified internally, and the U.S. military’s capacity to keep its air defense interceptors stocked, diplomacy could switch from unlikely today to at least plausible in the future. Add in fluctuating price increases in world energy markets, and it’s possible that Trump could begin to see an exit ramp in a more favorable light. At the time of writing, Brent crude prices have increased by nearly 25 percent since the war began, cracking over $100 a barrel for the first time in nearly two years. Natural gas futures have nearly doubled in the same timeframe. None of this is particularly great for Trump, whose party could possibly lose one (or both) houses of Congress in the midterm elections this year.  

The economic pain is only going to get worse. Kuwait, which produces about 2.5 million barrels of oil a day, is now reducing oil production due to a lack of storage capacity. Meanwhile, Qatar’s energy minister has said that crude prices could rise to an astounding $150 a barrel, which will be felt by Americans when they’re filling up their tanks. For the Iranians, this is precisely what the strategy entails—make Americans feel the economic consequences of their government’s actions, drive a wedge between Washington and its Gulf Arab partners, and send the message that all of these consequences will compound even further as long as the war continues. Trump, who obsesses about gas prices, could very well take the bait. 

Of course, all of this is purely hypothetical right now. It could also be a waste of ink if Trump insists on changing the Iranian regime from the inside out. Over the last 48 hours, Trump has given a slew of interviews pontificating about who Khamenei’s replacement might be and demanding that he personally sign off on the next candidate. (In the end, the Iranians did not consult him and installed Khamenei’s son, Mojtaba.) If this feels like the very regime change he lambasted during his previous presidential campaigns, that’s because it is. What Trump seems to be after is not merely degrading Iran’s ballistic missile stockpile, preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, or wiping out Tehran’s ability to project power against its neighbors, but a wholesale transformation of the Iranian government and a complete 180-degree shift in Iranian foreign policy. To think the regime would cater to these demands even as it’s under military pressure is delusional. The first, second, and third priority of the regime is to keep itself in power, and bowing to Trump’s diktats would bring the exact opposite result. 

The question, then, becomes what a potential negotiated deal could look like. Some of the Trump administration’s demands—Iran can never have a nuclear weapon—are reasonable and in keeping with longstanding U.S. policy. Others, like Iran being essentially gutted of its defense capabilities, cutting all ties with its proxy networks in the Middle East and agreeing to become the Persian Gulf’s version of post-Maduro Venezuela are obviously desirable but unrealistic given Tehran’s own objectives. 

We also need to ask whether Tehran would be responsive to more diplomacy with Trump. Casual observers who see Iranian military bases, government buildings, and mobile missile launchers getting blown up on the news may scoff at this question. But we need to remember that Iran has been burned by Trump at least three times before. The first time was in May 2018, when Trump withdrew Washington from the 2015 nuclear deal. The second was last June, when Trump permitted Israel to begin a 12-day bombing campaign against Iran despite having scheduled the sixth round of nuclear negotiations with Iranian officials days later. The third was last week, when the Trump administration chose to unleash a second, more comprehensive air campaign only days after U.S. and Iranian negotiators met in Oman for talks, which Iran’s Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi, called serious. Given this track record, the regime will view any outreach by the White House as suspect.

Last June, Trump essentially made Israel swallow a ceasefire. The U.S. objectives back then were straightforward and easily explained to the American public: destroy, or at least heavily damage, Iran’s three major nuclear facilities. Once that goal was met, Trump declared victory, patted himself on the back for a job well done, and pressured Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to stop his own airstrikes.

Today, the situation is markedly different. U.S. objectives are wishy-washy and change by the hour; rumors of U.S. ground troops deploying into Iran are beginning to percolate; and Trump appears to want to end the Iranian problem once and for all. If this is the case, then there’s no off-ramp to consider.

The post Is an Off-Ramp With Iran Possible? appeared first on The American Conservative.

Democrats are going all in for James Talarico, the supposedly Christian candidate for U.S. Senate in Texas, who can’t stop talking about how much he loves abortion and trans kids. His beliefs are way outside of the mainstream.

Conservative writer and political analyst Mollie Hemingway of The Federalist talked about Talarico’s candidacy during an appearance on FOX News over the weekend and noted that Talarico is so far left that he would struggle to win an election in San Francisco, let alone Texas.

It’s an excellent point, but people in Texas cannot just assume Talarico will lose. Conservatives have to show up at the polls to keep this radical out of office.

Partial transcript via The Federalist:

“People always think, ‘Maybe we can turn Texas blue.’ And they just nominated someone [James Talarico] who led the fight to trans children at the state legislature, who believes that abortuaries should be in every federal courthouse in the country, and that abortionists should be federal employees. And he said that God is nonbinary. It would be difficult to elect this person in San Francisco. The idea that you would put someone in Texas with these views … it’s going to be very difficult for Democrats”

Watch the clip below:

Hemingway: “[Democrats] always think, ‘Maybe we can turn Texas blue.’ And they just nominated someone [James Talarico] who led the fight to trans children at the state legislature.” pic.twitter.com/LmLnuPJQkD

— The Federalist (@FDRLST) March 9, 2026

By the way, when we say that Talarico loves trans kids, that is not an exaggeration. Watch this:

UNEARTHED: Texas Democrat U.S. Senate candidate James Talarico says he loves trans kids as much as his family.

HOST: “Something that you love that’s not family or friends?”

TALARICO: “Trans children.” pic.twitter.com/zOoGkQnAb6

— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) March 9, 2026

Talarico uses his faith almost exclusively for politics. Pay close attention to him when he talks. The only time he brings up his Christian faith is when it can be used as a political weapon against the right or to advance the views of the radical left.

The post Mollie Hemingway on James Talarico: ‘It Would be Difficult to Elect This Person in San Francisco’ (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

President Trump held a press conference on Monday, where he spoke about the new leader of Iran and did not rule out killing Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s son, Mojtaba Khamenei, who has been chosen to succeed the elder Khamenei. 

This comes amid reports that Mojtaba Khamenei may already be in the crosshairs of Israel, which has already threatened to kill whoever is chosen as supreme leader.

At the start of the press conference, Trump outlined his requirements for a new leader of Iran, saying he’s not going to approve of someone who will remain peaceful for future presidents.

WATCH:

Trump: We’re ahead of our initial timeline by a lot. I would say that we probably would not have thought after a month we’d be here, in addition to the fact that we’ve taken out the leadership twice and maybe three times. And we, as you know, we want to be involved. We don’t want another president that maybe wouldn’t be willing to do what I’m willing to do for the good of the world, for the good of our nation, to be stuck with the situation in five years or 10 years from now.

So, we think they should put a president in or the head of the country in that’s going to be able to do something peacefully for a change. They’ve been doing this for 47 years, killing people for 47 years.

Later, Trump was asked if he had to take Khamenei out, and he did not rule it out. “I don’t want to say that, but, you know, I was disappointed because we think it’s going to lead to just more of the same problem for the country,” he said.

WATCH:

Reporter: Do you have to take him out? Does he have a target on his back? How can there be an Iran with another Ayatollah?

Trump: Well, I don’t want to say that, but, you know, I was disappointed because we think it’s going to lead to just more of the same problem for the country. So, I was disappointed to see their choice.

As The Gateway Pundit reported, Ali Khamenei’s son, 56-year-old Mojtaba Khamenei, was chosen by Iran’s clerical establishment to lead Iran after Ali Khamenei was killed in Operation Epic Fury late last month.

Trump weighed in on Sunday, saying Khamenei is “not going to last long.”

“He’s going to have to get approval from us,” Trump said.

MORE:

Trump Says Iran’s ‘New Supreme Leader’ Mojtaba Khamenei ‘Is Not Going to Last Long’ Without U.S. Approval After U.S.-Israeli Strikes Obliterate His Tyrant Father and Regime Thugs

The post (VIDEO) Trump Asked if He’s Planning to Take Out Khamenei’s Son After He’s Selected as Iran’s New Supreme Leader appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Gavin Newsom’s wife runs a non-profit charity called The Representation Project, which promotes films that examine gender stereotypes and related issues.

These films are shown in California schools and Ms. Newsom has made a very comfortable living as a result. Financial filings suggest that she has pocketed upwards of $3.7 million in recent years through her ‘charity’ work.

Gavin Newsom is running for president in 2028. If he won, this woman would be the First Lady.

Now we probably know which issues she would use that position to promote.

The New York Post reports:

Gavin Newsom’s wife pushed weird gender films into California classrooms — while paying herself a fortune

Gov. Gavin Newsom’s wife Jennifer Siebel Newsom is a filmmaker whose documentaries have been seen by millions — but that didn’t happen purely because of talent.

Siebel Newsom leaned on her powerful hubby and his education board to push preachy flicks about “toxic masculinity” into classrooms, casting her husband as an enlightened Democratic savior — all while raking in up to $300,000 annually through her nonprofit, The Representation Project, and for-profit outfit Girls Club Entertainment.

“I turned the lens on boys and men and looked at the boy crisis in America and how we were failing our boys and men with this sort of rigid notion of toxic masculinity,” Siebel Newsom said about one of her films in an interview.

Newsom is featured as a humble-bragging talking head in Siebel Newsom’s films “Miss Representation” and “The Great American Lie” alongside a cadre of lefty activists, Democratic politicians and academics hammering viewers with progressive totems like raising the minimum wage as a cure for gender inequity.

Must be nice to make that kind of money.

Gavin Newsom’s wife and her firm pocketed $3.7M from her ‘gender stereotypes’ charity, unearthed IRS filings reveal…days after her sanctimonious rant at the press https://t.co/gYH43ulSsu

— Daily Mail US (@Daily_MailUS) March 9, 2026

We know this woman is an ideologue. Here she is from just last month.

Wow—

Jenifer Siebel Newsom—CA’s First Partner and Gov’s wife— scolds California Capitol press corps for not asking on topic questions at a Planned Parenthood press conference.

“You don’t seem to care.”

Most of the journalists in the room —repping AP to NY Times —were women. pic.twitter.com/I59M0Kvl0j

— Ashley Zavala (@ZavalaA) February 11, 2026

She is obviously very ideologically aligned with her husband.

Regarding the issue of gender and kids, the American people made it very clear in the 2024 election that they want no part of this, especially in schools and sports.

The post REPORT: Gavin Newsom’s Wife Has Made a Fortune Through Non-Profit That Pushes ‘Gender’ Films in California Classrooms appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Are you up for a laugh? New polling from NBC News finds that ICE is more popular than Democrats. That is just hilarious.

This is the same poll that is full of bad news for Gavin Newsom and Kamala Harris.

And keep in mind, ICE is polling better than Democrats after a months-long effort by Democrats and their media allies to smear ICE and ICE agents, calling them murderers, Nazis, the Gestapo, and on and on.

The New York Post reports:

Democrats viewed less favorably than GOP and ICE — and only Iran does worse: poll

The Democratic Party has a lower net favorability rating than its Republican rivals, President Trump and even the much-maligned Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), according to a stunning new poll of registered voters.

The NBC News survey found that 30% of respondents had “very positive” or “somewhat positive” views of Democrats, while 52% had “very negative” or “somewhat negative” views of Democrats, for an overall net rating of -22.

The alarmingly low score still represents a recovery for the party from its low point of a -28 net rating in March 2025 (27% positive, 55% negative).

By contrast, Trump scored a -12 favorability rating (41% positive, 53% negative) and the Republican Party recorded a -14 favorability rating (37% positive, 51% negative).

Despite heavy messaging by Democrats against ICE in recent months, the NBC survey found 38% had positive views of that agency compared to 56% with negative views — for a net rating of -18, still better than the opposition party could manage.

In fact, only the nation of Iran (-53 rating, 8% positive, 61% negative) drew a lower net rating than Democrats of the 14 name-tested people and entities.

Just amazing.

A recent NBC poll found ICE more popular than the Democratic Party. https://t.co/lVehYLykAl. It barely edged out Iran in popularity. As Democrats push airports toward a shutdown during peak Spring break travel, they could soon lose not just to Iran but Ebola in future polls…

— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) March 9, 2026

I got news for ya

Gas station sushi is more popular than the Democrat Party @DNC

— Salty Texan (@texan_maga) March 9, 2026

So Democrats want to abolish ICE, but ICE polls better than they do. Does that mean that we should abolish the Democrat Party instead?

The post OOF! NBC News Poll Finds ICE is More Popular Than Democrats appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

The National Park Service has just announced that fireworks are returning to Mount Rushmore this year for Independence Day.

This is great news and the timing is perfect, considering that the country is celebrating its 250 year anniversary this year.

Tickets to the event at Mount Rushmore are going to be auctioned off to the public starting next week.

Just the News reports:

National Park Service announces return of Independence Day fireworks to Mount Rushmore

The National Park Service announced Monday the return of Independence Day fireworks to Mount Rushmore for the U.S.’s 250th anniversary, following a five-year absence.

The fireworks will be launched Friday, July 3, NPS said. A lottery will be held April 8–12 for public tickets for the event.

“In partnership with the State of South Dakota, we are excited to reinstate a spectacular fireworks show as the highlight of Mount Rushmore’s Independence Day commemoration,” Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks Dr. Jenifer Chatfield said.

“We invite the public to enjoy the show and reflect on our nation’s remarkable journey and the great patriotic leaders who established, preserved and expanded our country’s destiny.”

“In just a few short months, our nation will throw the biggest birthday party ever for the United States of America,” South Dakota Gov. Larry Rhoden (R) said. “South Dakota is the freest state in a nation founded on the principles of freedom, so it is only fitting to celebrate in our backyard. We look forward to celebrating at the iconic Mount Rushmore National Memorial!”

As you may recall, this kept getting rejected under the Biden administration.

National Park Service rejects request for July 4 fireworks at Mount Rushmore https://t.co/vWL3JJxsu7 pic.twitter.com/yc4LiB5xm6

— The Hill (@thehill) March 13, 2021

As the Gateway Pundit reported in 2023, the Biden administration blocked fireworks at Rushmore for three straight years.

Democrats don’t like expressions of patriotism. Studies have shown that such events make people more likely to vote Republican.

The post GREAT NEWS: National Park Service Announces Fireworks Returning to Mount Rushmore for Independence Day appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.